notjustjay said:
But do they include such features like what major releases to Mac OS X do, like iChat in 10.2, Expose in 10.3, etc?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Prove the PEECEEers, OSX IS KING
- Thread starter biohazard6969
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But do they include such features like what major releases to Mac OS X do, like iChat in 10.2, Expose in 10.3, etc?
iMacZealot said:
Acutally, we've had a lot more updates than 3.
For example, we've had 10.3.0, 10.3.1, 10.3.2, 10.3.3, 10.3.4, 10.3.5, 10.3.6, 10.3.7, 10.3.8, and soon, 10.3.9 (Apple adds functionality/small upgrades with these updates..and they are seperate from security updates).
And, I think there are about 60 viruses for OS X.
brap said:Are you Timelessblur?
No, really, are you?
Who? , is that supposed to be some kind of jjoke or a person who post here. I've always had the same handle for years.
topicolo said:Amen my brother from another mother
If they're too stubborn or stupid to switch, maybe it's better they stayed on the windows side of the fence.
I want to switch to Mac, but I need money, from my parents of course. Anybody want to help a Window$ user switch to the good side?
brap said:Are you Timelessblur?
No, really, are you?
Hey hey I am insulted I dont do that. I have one account and if it me posting I post under the name Timelessblur and I a least know what I am talking about. Besides their was a reason I was staying out of this tread way to much flame bat and it was taking a lot out of me to not point iGary posted but some else did it for me and in a much nicer way that I would of done it
This guy who for some reason you think is me has some valid points but clearly has quite a bit of missinformation and did not think stuff though. I would like to point out that a lot of PCs out there are running on ingegretted graphic card which is a lot of the lv of the 32 meg 9200 the 9200 is better but not by much.
Now he has a point the G5 imacs need a min a 128 9600XT graphic card in them because it is non upgradble or at least the option to upgrade at least that far but if it upgradeble let them go to the 9800. As for the others they are ment bottom of the line computers.
Timelessblur said:
Ok let's establish that we are comparing current PC's to current Macs , Most newer wintel boxes with intergrated graphics come with the new Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900(PCIe) , which is more powerful than a Radeon 9200 and a bit slower then the Radeon X300. Intel Extreme Graphics 2(AGP) chipset is crap can chokes even at Quake.
on the PC side i really don't see any reason to purchase a non-PCIe desktop , most lowend PC's are using the Intel 915 chipset(PCIe), and AMD low end Sempron is moving to socket 754 which is getting nForce 4(PCIe) support , actually newegg has a socket 754 NF4 motherboard for $71.
Now for the iMac G5 , yes a Geforce 6600(vanilla) 128MB should be bare minimum especially for a $1299-1899 comp, G5's should have a Geforce 6600 GT/Radeon X700 Pro standard for a freakin $2000 machine with only 1 Optical drive slot and very little expandiblity. oh yeah Apple how bout 160GB SATA HD's standard. since evn Compaq and eMachines do that with thier cheap $599 PC's.
mac-er said:
Now, I know there are those smaller updates; those ones that take a third decimal place as you described below, although I didn't factor those in.
Also, they have viruses for OS X? Well, if your information is correct, it doesn't make that much of a difference since there are over one thousand times more viruses in XP than OS X.
jiggie2g said:
The AGP 8x still has a while left in it since they still have not max out it bandwith. I also see no point to getting a socket 754 mobo if you are going to go PCIe since that mobo maxes out at the AMD 64 3500+ and can not run ram in daul channel mode. I still say AGP is a valid mobo for a good computer right now. IF you are going to go PCIe get a socket 939 with a min of a AMD 64 3500.
Mechcozmo said:
i'm fairly sure that there are still no real "virii" in the sense that they are malicious and have the capability to spread.
a few "proofs of concept" have been made but I think none had any bad intentions and most couldnt spread.
Basically, there is nothing circulating on the web that anyone knows about that can harm your mac in the way a virus can, I think there was something that could potentially harm your mac (but no cases of it doing any damage were reported) but that was very minor and a security update months ago corrected the problem.
This is all from memory feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Cheers
Just forward them a virus infected email, then laugh when their computer doesnt work. That proves it pretty well imo.
prouble the only problem i see with what apple did is they done way to many new OS in to small of a time frame and made a killing off of it.GFLPraxis said:
OS life span is normally about 3 years and that is about what they should be. XP is was orginal slated to have been replaces in 2004 (3 years from it release date) XP more or less was replaceing 98 (ME was crap and was per greed and a joke OS) since windows NT and 2000 both where target at bunisses and not the normal user.
XP yeah is starting to show it age and in a year when it is replaced my longhorn it will really be showing it age. But that is beside the point in 4 years apple made 4 OS you had to pay money for to get. (10.0, 10.2,10.3 and 10.4) And that is a lot and it starting to add up. All of apple OS are really young when they are replaced. 10.3 to 10.4 is just semi acceptble but still it young. Apple needs to go back to the 3 year cycle. Year 1 to get everything in good working order with software develpers and bugs in the OS, Year 2 and 3 you had 2 years where everything is in working order Develpers are using the power of the OS and what the new OS added. Then it time to replace it and move to the next one. Right now apple just not giving them enough time for software to come out that can really use the power of the OS.
jiggie2g said:
What's overpriced about them? I bought one a couple of months ago, and it was $4 less than the cheapest 'PC' version (which was a clone, not a true ATI card).
Ok, I have a challenge
I have a Panasonic DVD recorder connected to my TV.
My wife records shows on DVD-RAM.. The Panasonic ( and all other tabletop DVD recorders ) records in a UDF format greater than 1.0.2 ( the only version Mac supports ). They do this on DVD+/- as well as the RAM format, so the fact I use RAM here is irrelevant.
I have a LG 4163B that can read these discs in a firewire case.
I want to find a way that will allow me to edit the video off of those discs ( cutting commercials ) and re-record them onto DVD-R discs.
Now, WindowsXP will read these discs in more advanced the UDF format, and the makers of TMPGEnc, the best MPEG encoder made for Windows, makes a program much like iMovie/iDVD that allows you to edit these tracks, and recompile a DVD image without re-rendering the MPEG stream.
I would love to do this with my Mac. Any challengers on how this can be done?
Two problems need solved :
1. Read the newer, more advanced UDF format.
2. Edit the MPEG files without re-encoding, or at least with very minimal encoding times ~15 minutes for a 2GB disc image.
Anyone up for it?
Max.
P.S. ReadDVD! from Software Architects is not viable as part of the solution, since it cannot read files larger than 4GB, and the tabletop DVD recorders record one file on the DVD 4.2GB in size.
P.P.S As a general Rule, my dual 1.33 G4 gives my Athlon64 3000+ a decent run in performance. I tend to like my Mac MUCH BETTER.
Max.
I have a Panasonic DVD recorder connected to my TV.
My wife records shows on DVD-RAM.. The Panasonic ( and all other tabletop DVD recorders ) records in a UDF format greater than 1.0.2 ( the only version Mac supports ). They do this on DVD+/- as well as the RAM format, so the fact I use RAM here is irrelevant.
I have a LG 4163B that can read these discs in a firewire case.
I want to find a way that will allow me to edit the video off of those discs ( cutting commercials ) and re-record them onto DVD-R discs.
Now, WindowsXP will read these discs in more advanced the UDF format, and the makers of TMPGEnc, the best MPEG encoder made for Windows, makes a program much like iMovie/iDVD that allows you to edit these tracks, and recompile a DVD image without re-rendering the MPEG stream.
I would love to do this with my Mac. Any challengers on how this can be done?
Two problems need solved :
1. Read the newer, more advanced UDF format.
2. Edit the MPEG files without re-encoding, or at least with very minimal encoding times ~15 minutes for a 2GB disc image.
Anyone up for it?
Max.
P.S. ReadDVD! from Software Architects is not viable as part of the solution, since it cannot read files larger than 4GB, and the tabletop DVD recorders record one file on the DVD 4.2GB in size.
P.P.S As a general Rule, my dual 1.33 G4 gives my Athlon64 3000+ a decent run in performance. I tend to like my Mac MUCH BETTER.
Max.
Timelessblur said:
News flash ...have u noticed how fast the Industry seems to be abandoning AGP like it's some unwanted step-child. ATI has made this clear and to a lesser extent so has Nvidia. All video chipset from now on will be PCIe Native with you haveing to wait an extra 2months for the AGP version, if they even feel like bringing it out. as ATI still has no AGP Radeon X300 , X600 or X700Pro and just put out an AGP X800XL only because people begged for it.
Socket 754 is now being used by AMD to replace Socket A (Athlon XP/Sempron) as thier new lowend solution. while i agree with u that it's not a smart buy if ur building a PC , it's still going to prosper in the lowend retail market.
me personally i am a pround owner of a DFI Lanparty UT NF4 Ultra-D and Pencil modded it to do SLI. which is being hailed as the best overclocking motherboard ever made. I've seen Athlon 64's(Venice core) OC'd all the way to 3.4GHZ
on water and 3ghz stable on Air both at stock voltage see Xtremesystems.com/forums.iMacZealot said:
At $120 per upgrade, that's $480 unless you buy all new hardware and get the OS included. So while there have been OS updates, they've come at a cost. And since Mac isn't all that fond of backwards compatibility, much of the software you're running requires an upgrade to the new OS.
I'd call that a draw. I've been using XP without any problems for three years and I haven't had to shell out $120 a year to do it.
Windows users in this thread alone have been referred to as ignorant, stubborn, zombies, and told that they just "dont get it." Do you really have a problem with insulting, invalid responses or do you just have a problem with someone daring to criticize the Mac?
Not quite. It really depends on the user and the use. I run a PC 2.4 ghz with 1 GB of RAM, a RAID array, Geforce 4 w/ 128 MB of RAM, and a DVD+-RW drive. The base system cost $400, $100 less than the Mac mini, and the rest I upgraded. I also run a Mac mini to run FCP. Upgrading the RAM was $150 that I installed myself. The KVM cost $30.
Obviously I can't upgrade the Mac mini like I can the PC, so there is less cost associated, but that's hardly a plus in Apple's favor. To get upgradability beyond RAM, I'd have to spend $1500 for a G5 Power Mac.
Side by side, the cost of operation between the Mac and PC is virtually identical. Both systems are extremely stable and reliable. I've lost no down time on the PC that would be associated with the OS or the base system, although I have had a couple of HDD failures. The PC is more powerful but it cost a little more money (although the base system was roughly comparable and cost a little less).
The idea that Macs somehow magically come out cheaper or even comparable to PCs is simply a fantasy in most cases, particularly in higher end systems and laptops.
My final verdict is that both OS's are great and the choice really depends on what you want to do.
iGary said:
I would have had a few other choice words for you.
One of the deciding factors in making a computer buying selection is user base. One of the reasons I moved from Premiere on the PC to FCP on the Mac is because everyone in my business is using FCP. Premiere also has big problems with 24p footage but I digress. That FCP user base is an important and often underappreciated factor in software/computers because most of the time when you need help, you turn to other users either in real life or on forums like this one.
One of the reasons I've waited this long to get a Mac is because of a) price and b) while I like Macs, I despise the cult of Mac. It's a HUGE turn off. Even in doing research for the Mac, straight answers are extremely difficult to come by. Every tiny bit of software is "great." There are no problems with the OS, because it's "great." FCP is "great." Even Ical is "great"! It's not until it's too late that you discover not everything is really that great. I remember when I first got a Mac, it was a G3 with OS9. I needed it for cross-platform development I was doing, but I looked forward to it. After all, the Mac users kept telling me how stable it was compared to WindBLOWS 98/NT (clever, eh?). Running only Macromedia Director and little else, OS9 crashed ALL THE TIME, at least once a session. And notably unlike WinDOZE 98/NT (clever, eh?), when OS9 went down, it took everything with it. In fact, it took years after Windows for Apple to implement protected memory and pre-emptive multi-tasking. By then, I had given up. Apple sycophancy had cost me time and money.
I really like where Apple is going with OSX and I look forward to some of the features in Tiger (when I finally decide to fork over $120 to upgrade). But I'm disappointed to see that the cult is still as strong as ever. It's too bad.
Timelessblur said:
except NT was windows 4.0...
the order is
3.0
3.1
3.11 + NT4.0 about the same time
95
98
98SE
ME
2000 (NT5.0) + 2k Server family
XP
2003 Server family
omg i hate knowing so much about such an awful system
if people want to show Windoze users how cool macos is just do the expose trick - while holding the shift key!
slow-mo expose! how cool!
jiggie2g said:
Umm hate to break it to you but their have been verson of x300-800 for a while now. my little 9600XT (APG) is better then the x300. the x300-700 are creation of 9600-9800 line so you never will see a verson of x300-700 for AGP line because they have been out for years. and let see the X800 been out longer in AGP than PCIe so has the nvidia line.
Ehm, my father will be switching soon and he is 63 years old. Has been a pc/mac user since the 80ies, but stopped using macs in the 90ies. Now he's bored dealing with viruses when he just wants to write stuff send mails, surf and do some photo editing. He'll take my 12" PB once my new 15" arrives next week.iMacZealot said:
Recently we found his old Mac SE from 1986, it's still working running OS 7.0 with 1 MB Ram. Beeblebrox said:
Indeed, I agree with you on some points. Heck, I hated Apple until they finally made a real OS (based on Unix) and ditched their proprietary crap (ADB, ADC, etc). Apple is now open-source friendly, uses industry standards (USB, DVI, H.264, etc) so even a few Linux/BSD users are switching.
As for the snob elitists, they'll soon be overrun by the millions of new switchers and their Mac minis.
Ummm, not exactly.bigandy said:
Windows 3.11 for Workgroups was the final Pre-95 version. That means that it would coincide with Windows NT 3.1 (release July of 1993) and Windows NT 3.5 (released a short time after that).
As I recall, Windows 95 was released in August of 1995, and the current version of Windows NT was 3.51. Windows NT 4.0 wasn't released until August 1996.
Also, I seem to remember Windows 95 being Windows 4.0/4.1 with Windows 98 being either 4.5 or 4.9 (I didn't use the 95/98 line that much).
Then I'm sorry to have to add to your pain.omg i hate knowing so much about such an awful system