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

Hard headed PC users!!!

ildondeigiocchi

ildondeigiocchi

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Dec 30, 2007
695
0
Montreal
I was checking out videos on youtube about Mac Pros and came upon one where this guy was ranting and raving about how Macs suck and bla bla bla. According to him, Macs cannot have more than 8GB of RAM and can't play Crysis. It amuses me to see how ignorant some people are and how much they can get on your nerves. Aren't you tired of these diehard PC fans who even though you let them have their say get pissed at you. So what we own Macs theyre great!!! On a scale of 1 to 10 how much do those diehard PC fans who hate Macs get you angry? For me its a 10. LOL
 
Tallest Skil said:
People are entitled to their own opinions... even when they're grievously wrong.
Click to expand...

I agree with you and I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion. Look i like both Windows OS and Mac and Mac OS. Each has their strengths and weaknesses. But I just don't get why diehard PC fans have to trash Macs. At the end of the day what have they accomplished. :rolleyes:
 
I know mac fanbois can be bad at times, but nothing is worse than an anti mac fanboi. A lot of them are so ignorant and refuse to take in any information you give them.
 
I think it's funny
You can laugh at them and they think your laughing with them.:D

It makes me feel special. To know not everybody knows what I know about Mac's. Kinda of like, I belong to a special club;)

Anyway, some of these ignorant winblows only fools. Have no business what so ever even touching a mac.
Example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVjCM1ebBMk
 
ildondeigiocchi said:
I agree with you and I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion. Look i like both Windows OS and Mac and Mac OS. Each has their strengths and weaknesses. But I just don't get why diehard PC fans have to trash Macs. At the end of the day what have they accomplished. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The same could be said for the rampant Windows bashing on this board. More often than not those people have very little idea of how to make Windows purr. It makes people look stupid. In general both OSX and Windows have glaring claws, and minor problems, in addition to their respective strengths, much of which is marketing alone. Defending either when faced with obvious flaws is silly.
 
I don't hate people for not liking Macs, they're entitled to their opinions. I do, however, not like ignorant Mac haters who don't bother to put any though into their arguments, but I can say the same for pretty much anybody.
 
wait, so what are windows strengths? I have not missed it or anything about it ever since I switched. I can't even remember what was good about it.

Only thing I can think of is that because most of the people I work with use windows, is that compatability wise its better.
 
m1stake said:
The same could be said for the rampant Windows bashing on this board. More often than not those people have very little idea of how to make Windows purr. It makes people look stupid. In general both OSX and Windows have glaring claws, and minor problems, in addition to their respective strengths, much of which is marketing alone. Defending either when faced with obvious flaws is silly.
Click to expand...
True. ;)

I find, if you look hard enough, you can usually find a gripe or two about anything. Nothings really perfect, especially when dealing with computers. ;) :p
zer0tails said:
wait, so what are windows strengths? I have not missed it or anything about it ever since I switched. I can't even remember what was good about it.

Only thing I can think of is that because most of the people I work with use windows, is that compatibility wise its better.
Click to expand...
I'm not a windows fan boy, but in certain cases, it's the better alternative. Sometimes the only one.

For example, I have two software packages that I use simultaneously with one another (simulation). One of them is windows only. The other, has both a windows and an OS X version (it must be run in a 64 bit OS). Running the windows version in virtualization on OS X isn't an option, as there's too great a likelihood of errors. So both are run under Vista 64.

Others may have their own reasons, but mine was simply a matter of practicality. :p
 
Hey nanofrog-- kind of OT here, but I am interested in your example. If virtualization is subject to error (which I am certainly not contradicting in the least!;)), what would stop your from running your Vista 64bit installation directly on a BootCamp established partition rather than virtualized? Honestly just curious. :confused:
 
Nothing would be wrong with that.

Personal uses for OSX:

I like it, iTunes, handbrake, Internet browsing.

Personal reasons for Windows:

Games, hardware, autoCAD, MS Office

In general, the tired arguments from both camps don't really mean anything or aren't true.
 
sickmacdoc said:
Hey nanofrog-- kind of OT here, but I am interested in your example. If virtualization is subject to error (which I am certainly not contradicting in the least!;)), what would stop your from running your Vista 64bit installation directly on a BootCamp established partition rather than virtualized? Honestly just curious. :confused:
Click to expand...

For me, it's because I don't see BSOD's on any other non-Mac.

The hardware is functionally inferior as well (Yes - I mean the Pro), it's primary advantages being the way it looks and the fact that it is the most silent dual-Xeon machine out there although not by that much, but that's something else.
 
macrem said:
Not even these folks can get it right :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't know what "operating system family share" is.

Yes Windows crashes, but OSX crashes just as rarely, if that's what you're trying to get at. In fact, the only time I've had Windows BSOD on me is after installing faulty hardware.

Sesshi said:
The hardware is functionally inferior as well (Yes - I mean the Pro), it's primary advantages being the way it looks and the fact that it is the most silent dual-Xeon machine out there although not by that much, but that's something else.
Click to expand...

Would you expand on this? I know you do heavy lifting and at least seem to have solid PC know how. Anyway, I have been waiting for the Ci7 Mac Pro to replace a PMG4 from 2001. My main interest is games and lifespan. Yes, I know that I could spend less money and get a better PC for less money, but I like OSX for what it is, the same way I like Windows.

To get to the point, what makes a workstation from Dell or HP better than one from Apple? Obviously I am OK with the trade offs that accompany any Mac, but I am not willing to hack OSX to work. I'm OK with fixing hardware and software issues, but I don't have time to play with OSX every time an update comes out.

To be totally honest though, I think an X58 build and the Mac Pro is still what I want come February or March.
 
sickmacdoc said:
Hey nanofrog-- kind of OT here, but I am interested in your example. If virtualization is subject to error (which I am certainly not contradicting in the least!;)), what would stop your from running your Vista 64bit installation directly on a BootCamp established partition rather than virtualized? Honestly just curious. :confused:
Click to expand...
PM Sent, so we don't hijack the thread. ;)
 
The majority of people that talk like that don't really know what they're talking about.
I've dealt with this many times.
And Mac's not being able to play Crysis isn't the computer's fault, it's the game's.
This is a matter of fact, not opinion.
 
iParis said:
The majority of people that talk like that don't really know what they're talking about.
I've dealt with this many times.
And Mac's not being able to play Crysis isn't the computer's fault, it's the game's.
This is a matter of fact, not opinion.
Click to expand...

I think the only fault you may put on the computer for gaming is the lack of higher-end upgrades for the video card in Mac systems. But, that goes back to various vendors, not really Apple.
 
ildondeigiocchi said:
On a scale of 1 to 10 how much do those diehard PC fans who hate Macs get you angry? For me its a 10. LOL
Click to expand...

0. why in the word would i get angry at someone expressing their opinion about a product? Apple doesnt pay me royalties to defend their products, Steve Jobs doesnt even know who i am and could care less about me, other than when i open my wallet in one of his stores. so no i dont get upset when someone bashes Macs and proclaims PC's are superior because that would just be stupid. The day apple starts giving me a cut of their sales maybe then i will defend Macs and may even get slightly upset. all that matters is that i like the product, it fits my needs. the guy sitting next to me could use whatever he wants and be a cheerleader for it making himself look stupid in the process.
 
m1stake said:
Would you expand on this? I know you do heavy lifting and at least seem to have solid PC know how. Anyway, I have been waiting for the Ci7 Mac Pro to replace a PMG4 from 2001. My main interest is games and lifespan. Yes, I know that I could spend less money and get a better PC for less money, but I like OSX for what it is, the same way I like Windows.

To get to the point, what makes a workstation from Dell or HP better than one from Apple? Obviously I am OK with the trade offs that accompany any Mac, but I am not willing to hack OSX to work. I'm OK with fixing hardware and software issues, but I don't have time to play with OSX every time an update comes out.
Click to expand...

Clearly not better design in terms of visuals - but in simple words, better engineering. Uglier certainly, but more resilient, stable and more flexible without a doubt. Not to mention far better supported.

As a hackintosh platform however, not really viable unless you have very specific needs but then we aren't discussing the relative merits of a hack job against something that's supported.

I don't really have any fundamental issues with OS X when considered in isolation in terms of an OS, apart from the fact that it is almost as underdeveloped a GUI in terms of the functional scope of the OS as a while as it's more readily UNIX-recognisable counterparts. My real issue - the more I used it - is it's viability as a platform for applications for someone who isn't a programmer but has very broad requirements, knows exactly what he's doing and is prepared to spend some time looking for the best tool to do the job. In that respect, I find Vista - and even XP - superior.


For me:

Vista + Dell/HP workstations = vastly more effective working tool than OS X + Pro for me as a designer, engineer, analyst, and general-purpose.

OS X + Pro = really good for running EyeTV, and Garageband for my podcasting.
 
I used to be a Mac Hater, now I own a Pro and a MBP. Of course I still have a bleeding-edge OC'ed C2D running Crossfire to get my gaming on.

But ever since the switch to Intel chips I can accomplish almost everything I want to do using a combination of bootcamp, parallels/Vmware ans OS X, even most gaming.

When Mac's were PowerPC based they kind of sucked because your universe of available options were fairly limited, now though you can have it all in one machine. I love my mac's and would easily go to my MP only if I had to choose one machine only.

While I don't consider myself a rabid mac cultist like some I actually noe endorse mac's for most users in most situations and have converted more than on former PC person over to a mac.
 
Sesshi said:
Clearly not better design in terms of visuals - but in simple words, better engineering. Uglier certainly, but more resilient, stable and more flexible without a doubt. Not to mention far better supported.

My real issue - the more I used it - is it's viability as a platform for applications for someone who isn't a programmer but has very broad requirements, knows exactly what he's doing and is prepared to spend some time looking for the best tool to do the job. In that respect, I find Vista - and even XP - superior.
Click to expand...

Kind of what I expected. I have very few requirements, I don't need a lot of applications. On the OSX side, the only things I would install would be AIM, Handbrake, and possibly Halo if I didn't feel like going through the "hassle" that is booting into another OS. So I'm happy with that.

I'd definitely stick with Vista for my next computer, both the X58 build and dual booting. It was perfectly adequate as far as running my programs and being stable when I started using it in May 2007.

As far as support, I don't need the computer to make money. I like fixing stuff, I don't need support. Basic warranty coverage to replace faulty parts is all I want. Unless the quality has gone down hill a lot, I don't expect any problems. The G4 is about 6 months away from 8 years of service, and it's never had a faulty piece of equipment. There is nothing mission critical about my computers.

Thanks.
 
Both sides have copious amounts of sackriding idiots who will die lonely virgins.

Use what gets the job done and get the hell on with your life. MacOS has great features, and some amazingly stupid crap. Windows has great features, and some amazingly stupid crap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back