Educated? Possibly.

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by eyeluvmyimac, Feb 10, 2003.

  1. eyeluvmyimac macrumors regular

    Oct 27, 2002
    Ok so I'm talking to someone i just met over car forums and when someone mentioned how their comp crashed and they lost everything i made my little switchers post and i get this in response. I just wanted yo uguys to see it and maybe see your thoughts on what he has to say. Please read and respond. Thanks!

  2. kettle macrumors 65816


    May 12, 2002
    England, Great Britain (Airstrip One)
    Re: Educated? Possibly.

    oh I'm sorry, what was the question?
  3. eyeluvmyimac thread starter macrumors regular

    Oct 27, 2002
  4. idkew macrumors 68020


    Sep 26, 2001
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    Can't let the Mac fanboy go...

    You guys should get Macs.

    Unless they have a need for a fast, full featured web browser and a lot of software. Especially if they game which is very common in the 20 something crowd now. All of us that grew up on Nintendo are now financially secure and still into gaming.
    They are still gaming—on their nintendo gamecubes, PS2's... not pcs.
    Or if they're an engineer in which case they won't be able to run anything they need without X11.

    I used to hate macs, and would make fun of the people who bought them.

    Only idiots insult people for the choice of a tool. Computers are nothing more than that. Some tools are better for certain problems than others. Macs are a perfectly valid tool in the context of what they are used for.
    macs are more than a tool. take a look around this site, you will see that. if you still think they are a tool, they are the best tools for many jobs.

    Then I had had WAY MORE THAN ENOUGH of windows and Dell and Gateway (which I've had two of so I feel for you chaz).

    That wasn't a PC issue but a crappy manufacturer issue. Mainstream PC vendors use less than spectacular OEM components that fail. Anyone with half a brain can build their own for far less money, far more performance and significantly better reliability. It's the lack of tech support that is an issue, but that's why we run sites like
    or your computer could just come pre-made and built well. then you don't have to make sure everything works together- someone already did that and tested it a ton.

    I got the new flat panel iMac 15" 800Mhz G4 with superdrive and 60GB HD in march of '02 and i swear to you it was THE ABSOLUTE BEST decision I have made to date.

    Don't make many decisions, do you?

    Only teasing, of course. ok....???

    I've never had it crash ever, and just in case I have a backup stored on an external firewire 120GB La Cie Harddrive.

    Windows 2k and XP are every bit as robust against a hard crash as OS X. Any suggestion to the contrary is merely an expression of ignorance. Windows 95/98/Me on the other hand is terrifying in this regard, just like Mac OS 7/8/9.

    If you use an OS without memory protection, it will crash.

    os x is tons more stable than 9, that is to be expected. it is also more stable b/c it knows exactly what makes up your computer. there are no bugs and incompletely supported add-ons. os x has no driver problems like xp. the security on os x is proactive instead of reactive. lazy software developers can almost bring down the web. apple is not that lazy software developer.

    IEEE 1394 is OS agnostic and your backup solution would work on a PC too, though it's not a particularly good solution. HDD's make for very poor protection. There's a reason all the HDD manufacturers have cut their warranties down to 1 year from 3...

    then use tape or a raid. have multiple startup drives in case of failure... not to mention new firewire 800. twice as fast as usb2.

    I've burned countless DVD's and CD's with the wonderful software that comes free.

    Much like Windows XP...
    not near as elegant or easy

    It really is like professional grade software and never fails me.

    iTunes is indeed a killer app once you turn off that idiotic brushed metal interface.

    The speed is just as good or better than most pc's.

    If by most you're refering to all those people on old machines that haven't upgraded, you're right in raw CPU performance. Of course, throw OSX's ridiculous GUI overhead on top of that and you're still wrong. If you're talking about anything released in the same time fram as your iMac, your comment loses all validity.
    OSX's ridiculous GUI? much better than windows FP (fisher price). who cares about an iMac when we are talking performance? PowerMacs are measures of performance, not iMacs.

    As I'm sure most of you know, mac computers make better use of their speend than intel processors

    Totally untrue. In the simplest sense, a PPC is faster than an x86 chip at equal clock speeds because the PPC has a shorter pipeline. Basically the PPC takes seven steps to accomplish a task. The Pentium 4 takes 20. However, the Pentium 4 is running compared to the PPC's jog. This isn't making better use of speed. This is simply a different philosophy for the design engineer. And since Mot has been totally unable to raise the clock speed of the PPC, thereby letting it run so to speak, Intel has proven its philosophy superior to Mot's.

    Similarly, an Athlon XP 2800+ running at 2.25GHz is roughly equivalent to the 3.06GHz Pentium 4 (depending on the application) for much the same reason.

    Now the IBM PPC is a whole different scenario.

    intel increased their clock for one reason; people thought that more mhz meant a faster computer. that was the philosophy, a philosophy based on earnings instead of performance. while Mot has fallen behind, their processors are some of the best out there in terms of overall performance for a mobile solution. besides, RISC is inherantly superior to CISC.

    thus an 800mhz G4 (mac) is comparable to say a 1.5 ghz intel.

    You're a little off as a 1GHz G4 is typically around a 1.5GHz Pentium 4 (though this isn't true of the Athlon XP), but the point is moot as the Pentium 4 is at 3GHz now.

    once again, compare that to the dual 1.45ghz PowerMacs and you see neirly equal performance to the P4. Plus, I agree more with the quote than your 1ghz number.

    The ONLY drawback is price, but think of it this way.


    Software availability.
    Accessory availability.

    There are more...

    car analogy: you pay more for a porche than a ford. just because that ford can rev higher than that porche, doesnt mean much. its twin turbo and more efficient engine will beat the ford rev for rev. if you want the porche of computers–you buy a mac. if you want a ford. buy a pc. you can also build your own nice car, but that takes a lot of time and energy.

    Sure you can buy two PC's for the price of one mac, but in the time it takes for your one mac to die on you, you would have had to have bought at least three or four pcs.

    Pattently false if you use good components.
    statistically macs do last longer than pcs. macs also cost less to run and troubleshoot, so in the long run, a more expensive computer can become the better deal.

Share This Page