Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
HFS+ is light years behind what a proper filesystem should be. OS X security lags behind Windows by years, never mind *nix.

HFS+ is light years ahead of NTFS (The well... "Not Totally Fragmented System" unlike Fat32 which is super fragmented very quickly) so if it's light years behind what it 'should' be, then Windows is only that much worse. XFS would be nice, though, but imperceptible to an average Mac user either way.

There are three kinds of people. The smart folks use *nix.
The business folks and sane people use Windows. Then there are idiots who can't think for themselves and need something that doesn't require a positive IQ value to use... so they use OS X.

Your post pretty much TROLLS at this point by insulting every single Mac user on this forum with the idiot comment, but I find it particularly ironic given that OSX IS certified UNIX and not just *nix (i.e. aka not 'really' unix but we wish we could use the term but cannot without getting sued so we'll put an asterix in front of it rather than pay for the valid license). The idea of "sane" people using Windows with its "more security" is regularly targeted by every hacker, thief and scammer on the planet. You absolutely MUST use anti-malware with Windows which will consume CPU cycles (booting becomes particularly slow on automatic update mode with something like AVG but annoys you to death if you manually update) or your time (manual) or both (hey, your system contains a key logger and you better check your bank records since you did online banking the other day and the thief now has your logon). Yeah, that's totally 'sane'.

Again, we have the UNIX comparison. You say the "smart" people use *NIX, yet OSX is UNIX and perhaps that is why it hasn't needed all the claptrap security bolt-ons and Windows Updates that Windows is so infamous for. Frankly, one could make a valid point about Apple hardware costing too much, but one could always make a Hackintosh. They could also argue that Windows is better for gaming, but then one could argue that consoles are better suited for that purpose these days anyway (besides any Mac can boot into Windows these days for such a purpose or even run it in virtualization and Linux is nearly as easy to install as well.

Thus, the "troll argument" (which pretty much equals name calling and nothing else to support the 'argument') is shown to be so much bullcrap garbage. But then what can what expect from a troll other than BS? And if he's not a troll then he's about as ignorant as they come in terms of computer knowledge.
 

Renzatic

Suspended
You absolutely MUST use anti-malware with Windows which will consume CPU cycles (booting becomes particularly slow on automatic update mode with something like AVG but annoys you to death if you manually update) or your time (manual) or both (hey, your system contains a key logger and you better check your bank records since you did online banking the other day and the thief now has your logon). Yeah, that's totally 'sane'.

That might've been true in the past (or if you're dumb and use Norton or something), but these days, active virus scanners barely take up any CPU cycles. MSE eats up 0.5% of one CPU while active, and consumes roughly 50-150 MB ram. That's not much. And since it's built to integrate with the OS, all the updates are handled behind the scenes. It only bothers you when it has a good reason to.

Though with it being a Microsoft program designed to protect Windows users from people wanting your credit cards, it makes me wonder how long it'll be before someone finds a way to exploit the hell out of it. Anything will break given enough time and pressure. It's kinda sad thinking it's only a matter of time before MS starts playing security patch hopscotch with the hackers in an attempt to keep one step ahead of them.
 
Aug 26, 2008
1,339
1
Windows simply doesn't work. OS X does. My iMac G4 still works normally after 10 years. I NEVER reinstalled it. All I did was upgrading to Tiger, then to Leopard and will work for another 10 years. My 2008 PC was so bad I had to reinstall Windows 6 times. 6 TIMES! Not a single reinstall lasted even a year. This is a shame, I had a pro graphic card inside that burnt BECAUSE of Windows. I replaced my graphic card and it started to make scary sounds when powering off. So, I HAD to destroy it in parts, and hopefully never use it again. Windows is getting worse, and worse. I hope one day people will realize that their using a system that sucks, and they will switch to Mac.

They will sell their computers for cents, Windows will become an collector's system, like these other "unknown" systems. Pay 300$ for a ****** system? No way. Pay 20$ for an new, advanced system that will be usable for years? Of course I will. Why you think Apple sell they new systems for cheap? Because there's so many people that buy it that if every person that buys the system will give me 1 cent, I would be rich. As for Windows, it's so bad there's like 3 people that buy legitime copies of Windows. Everyone else pirate them. Prepare for Microsoft's death.

Yep that's why they sell 400 million copies of Windows a year, and the entire world basically runs Windows, including huge enterprises with mission critical data and software. Yes indeed, Windows doesn't work!

That's why it has better multi-threading than OSX, great memory management and the most advanced graphics in the world.

Microsoft sucks so bad their software sadly runs circles around Apples, and it's pulling in record profits every quarter.
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
That might've been true in the past (or if you're dumb and use Norton or something), but these days, active virus scanners barely take up any CPU cycles. MSE eats up 0.5% of one CPU while active, and consumes roughly 50-150 MB ram. That's not much. And since it's built to integrate with the OS, all the updates are handled behind the scenes. It only bothers you when it has a good reason to.

This is not my experience. My Windows only machine takes an extra 2 minutes plus to boot with the latest AVG on automatic updates as opposed to it being on manual. It might not interfere with running programs, but it keeps the hard drive seeking in random while in operation, preventing things from loading efficiently. Sure, it doesn't have to be this way, but the past has shown some of these programs to be a nuisance themselves (e.g. Norton in particular used to completely screw computers up, IMO). And yes that computers is a few years old with conventional hard drives, not SSD, etc. Just because newer computers mask things better doesn't mean anti-malware isn't a PITA. Windows still needs updates all the time for security. The registry still ends up slowing the machine boot times down as you add more and more programs, etc. OSX suffers from none of these "advancements" the poster was inferring.

----------

Yep that's why they sell 400 million copies of Windows a year, and the entire world basically runs Windows, including huge enterprises with mission critical data and software. Yes indeed, Windows doesn't work!

That's why it has better multi-threading than OSX, great memory management and the most advanced graphics in the world.

Microsoft sucks so bad their software sadly runs circles around Apples, and it's pulling in record profits every quarter.

This is only shows that profits often have NOTHING to do with performance or quality but rather ingrained market share leftover from a time when Microsoft did anything and everything to ensure the largest share of the market. DIRT CHEAP prices had a lot to do with it as well.

To put it more succinctly, just because Kraft sells a butt load of Kraft Singles "cheese food" that doesn't mean it's a quality cheese. If anything, mass adoption often means very average quality at best. Ford and Chevy always sold a lot of cars. They weren't necessarily good quality either, let alone high performance.
 

sidewinder3000

macrumors 65816
Jan 29, 2010
1,182
1,283
Chicagoland
not the same

No need to wait. Just buy Android phone. Jelly Bean UI's flatness with transparency and multidimensional reactive design is genius.

sorry. i've seen jelly bean, and it's nice. but i prefer the iPhone: functionally, aesthetically, and as an ecosystem. to me, "best" isn't derived from more features and more complication. it has to do with an overall design centered approach that's focused on me, not my phone. one that's calm and centered, not reactive and scattershot.

and btw, trumpeting android's originality is a bit rich, considering the entire foundation which it's built on is a rip off. all tech companies borrow ideas. and while apple and microsoft are both guilty (windows was the original heist of the century), samsung is the new king of the blatant, bold faced rip-off, with google earning second runner up. google is a brilliant company, and i like a lot of their sevices, but they are spread too thin right now, and it shows.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.