ZDNet's David Coursey (again) liking Macs...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bengt77, Feb 23, 2004.

  1. Bengt77 macrumors 68000

    Bengt77

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2002
    Location:
    Europe
  2. 1macker1 macrumors 65816

    1macker1

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2003
    Location:
    A Higher Level
    #2
    I'll agree Macs are better for personal use. But uncrashable isn't no where near correct.
     
  3. rueyeet macrumors 65816

    rueyeet

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Location:
    MD
    #3
    Nothing is completely uncrashable, not Windows, a Mac, a *nix box, or whatever. But the Mac OS does seem less prone to the gradual onset of general system instability that you see with Windows after a while of use/installations/etc. And while it's true that a properly configured and maintained Windows installation can be just as stable, virus-free, and secure as OS X, it also takes significantly greater effort and knowledge to achieve this on Windows.
     
  4. srobert macrumors 68020

    srobert

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    #4
    Very well stated rueyeet.
     
  5. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #5
    I've had tons of programs crash on me, but only 2 kernal panics.

    Thats good enough for me.

    When I have an application that locks up I don't let it drag my system to a restart I kill the process.

    Done. :D
     
  6. Powerbook G5 macrumors 68040

    Powerbook G5

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    St Augustine, FL
    #6
    Well he didn't say uncrashable, he just said nearly uncrashable. I have to say that it's a pretty fair label considering my experience with OS X.
     

Share This Page