I have also built all of my PC's from scratch. Maybe thats part of the success, I always go for quality components. A good mb is definately worth paying for if you want longevity. The actual computer I am using is yonks(ish) old. The core bits, processor ram and mb is atleast four years old, which is a small millenia in computer worlds.
Its an athlon thunderbird 900mhz with 256mb of ram. 80gig harddrive (uncompressed waves kinda need some space) and a nice zalman flower cooler for quiteness.
This runs XP like a charm, boot up from zero to desktop takes about 1 minute and I have 8 prgrams that load on startup.
I like computer games so macs are a nono, although I dont require mega speed to play the ones I like.
Its an athlon thunderbird 900mhz with 256mb of ram. 80gig harddrive (uncompressed waves kinda need some space) and a nice zalman flower cooler for quiteness.
This runs XP like a charm, boot up from zero to desktop takes about 1 minute and I have 8 prgrams that load on startup.
I like computer games so macs are a nono, although I dont require mega speed to play the ones I like.
motherone said:
I think jason is getting this mixed up with NuBus which Apple did do.
In the end it is about getting work done... i can get an aweful lot more work done on a Mac than a PC... and if you are in any sort of creative endeavor there are significant studies that back that up with real numbers.
dave
Kittle said:
Run Spybot S&D once and tell us if your machine is truely free from garbage. Can't be even if you use common sense on the web.
Running a pc without virusscanner when having broadband internet access is asking for trouble, unfortunately most of the time its other people that benefit from that point of view
I really don't know what the argument against running a free virusscanner is ?!?! Most people I know that were running virusfree for years turned up to be infected with a lot of virusses when I ran a scanner on their pc's.
planet10 said:
Being in the computer industry, I can base my opinions on frist hand experience (I ran the technical operations of an ISP for 4 years before moving on to work for one of the larger Internet backbone providers). I've rarely found that the platform I work on will get in the way of the work that I need to do. I've worked with folks that have sworn by Macs, PCs, Sun boxes, SGI (Irix) boxes, Alphas ... Heck, there was even one ISP that was a competitor that swore by VMS! I think just like audio, this really comes down to personal preference.
Almost all platforms now have hacks/mods/options to use features or impersonate features from other platforms. I've seen plenty of stuff to make windows appear more unix-like, make unix appear more windows-like, and god only knows how many have been done for mac-to-everything-else and vice versa.
Hi,
YOU quite likely can...I however, being far more used to work on PCs very much doubt I'd be as "productive" on a Mac.
Naturally I kind of expect the reverse to be true as well....
If we'd stick to the traditional MS Office apps and assuming two persons having the same skills to work with those, I really fail to see any reason why the one working on the Mac would finnish any sooner.
As for the more serious "under the bonnet" work such as setting up machines on a network, I think that as per Windows 2K it's become child's play to put a bunch of PCs on a network.
I wouldn't have clue where to start on a Mac so this is again a matter of what and where you're used to expect to find the necessary control panels or whatever's needed.
On sheer speed, both disc access and calculation power I suppose the PC would possibly be the more powerful of the two.
For the average customer I think the PC is both the cheaper one to buy and run even if the learning curve may be a little steeper at first.
Cheers,
YOU quite likely can...I however, being far more used to work on PCs very much doubt I'd be as "productive" on a Mac.
Naturally I kind of expect the reverse to be true as well....
If we'd stick to the traditional MS Office apps and assuming two persons having the same skills to work with those, I really fail to see any reason why the one working on the Mac would finnish any sooner.
As for the more serious "under the bonnet" work such as setting up machines on a network, I think that as per Windows 2K it's become child's play to put a bunch of PCs on a network.
I wouldn't have clue where to start on a Mac so this is again a matter of what and where you're used to expect to find the necessary control panels or whatever's needed.
On sheer speed, both disc access and calculation power I suppose the PC would possibly be the more powerful of the two.
For the average customer I think the PC is both the cheaper one to buy and run even if the learning curve may be a little steeper at first.
Cheers,
fdegrove said:
Frank,
Might as well start by supergluing a brick to your hand -- MS Office is really 3rd rate software. If you want to be productive the only thing you are using these for is to get documents people (who have boght into the whole Windows/Office thing) send you out so you can actually use it.
Office and productivity is an oxymoron.
dave
Banned
Joined 2002
jean-paul said:
There is no arguement.. other than why how much it sux to buy a pc and first off install software like that to protect yrou eslf from crap.. then installing adaware to keep the pc from spy ware and people peeking on your files.. I remember working at staples and people were tkaing there brand new computers home to get them infected witin 20 seconds of being on the net.. there was no prevention to this other than having a hardware based firewall first.. It is pretty hard to sell a pc at that time and be honest i was asked to be taken off the floor of selling computers because i hated lying to people..
I hate to rain on your parade, but #1, anyone who is using a broadband connection should have a firewall, irrespective of what systems they are using. Just because a stock windows machines is easier to compromise than a stock mac (primarily because if more people are developing exploits against windows than macs or any other operating systems), doesn't mean that your security is infallible.
I can put money down that if you leave any OS in it's default configuration, whether it be windows, OSX, Linux, Solaris, etc., there will be security exploits that a hacker can try on you.
But, putting yourself in the hackers shoes, do you go for 1% of the market or 95% of the market? I think it's pretty simple to that targeting the larger audience makes things much easier.
Anyhow, it's pretty easy to get windows (even after a fresh install) to be immune to most of the hackers out there simply by shutting down the unneccessary services the first time you boot it up.
I can put money down that if you leave any OS in it's default configuration, whether it be windows, OSX, Linux, Solaris, etc., there will be security exploits that a hacker can try on you.
But, putting yourself in the hackers shoes, do you go for 1% of the market or 95% of the market? I think it's pretty simple to that targeting the larger audience makes things much easier.
Anyhow, it's pretty easy to get windows (even after a fresh install) to be immune to most of the hackers out there simply by shutting down the unneccessary services the first time you boot it up.
jean-paul said:
Run Spybot S&D once and tell us if your machine is truely free from garbage. Can't be even if you use common sense on the web.
Running a pc without virusscanner when having broadband internet access is asking for trouble, unfortunately most of the time its other people that benefit from that point of view
I really don't know what the argument against running a free virusscanner is ?!?! Most people I know that were running virusfree for years turned up to be infected with a lot of virusses when I ran a scanner on their pc's.
If your PC is directly connected to your broadband modem - then yes you are asking for trouble.
But where is this S&D thingy? got a link handy? ... i'll tell you what I get.
However, my linksys has stopped ALL viruses that have come down the pike recently (sqlblaster, sasser, myDoom, etc) -- including a lightening strike that turned it into a 7-port job.
but the common sense factors are what make the most difference.
-keep up with microsofts patches
-delete wierd looking emails
-shut off 'install on demand' for ie
-hit 'NO' whenever a program wants to install something
... and the list goes on.
I ran a virus scanner here at work for a while.. but it slowed my system down SO much that I disabled it. That was 2 years ago.... no virus's on this thing.
For the PC vs Mac argument... its all in what your used to. IMO - the most interesting test would be to take an experienced PC user & experienced Mac user.. give them the same program and see how long it takes to do the same tasks.
And on performance... a few tweaks to your windows services can make a big difference. My laptop boots win2k with 17 processes showing in taskmanager. Its amazing what you can get along without
or just plain dont need.Banned
Joined 2002
Kittle said:
If your PC is directly connected to your broadband modem - then yes you are asking for trouble.
But where is this S&D thingy? got a link handy? ... i'll tell you what I get.
However, my linksys has stopped ALL viruses that have come down the pike recently (sqlblaster, sasser, myDoom, etc) -- including a lightening strike that turned it into a 7-port job.
but the common sense factors are what make the most difference.
-keep up with microsofts patches
-delete wierd looking emails
-shut off 'install on demand' for ie
-hit 'NO' whenever a program wants to install something
... and the list goes on.
I ran a virus scanner here at work for a while.. but it slowed my system down SO much that I disabled it. That was 2 years ago.... no virus's on this thing.
For the PC vs Mac argument... its all in what your used to. IMO - the most interesting test would be to take an experienced PC user & experienced Mac user.. give them the same program and see how long it takes to do the same tasks.
And on performance... a few tweaks to your windows services can make a big difference. My laptop boots win2k with 17 processes showing in taskmanager. Its amazing what you can get along without
ok lets do it.. lets take a 1gig video file from 2 cameras exact same siz file via firewire import them split them map them to chapters and ect ect.. ill use finalcut 4.2 and you use what ever.. then lets see who win's : O )
This billable hours comparison is meaningless, especially since the Mac is much more likely to be used at companies that do billable hours type of work. It has more to do with past history than in any inherent superiority of the platform.
There are advantages and disadvantages for each platform. I prefer PCs mostly because I don't like to dig so deep in my pockets for slow, proprietary Apple hardware.
I still think that Apple would make more money as a software company, porting the OS to X-86.
I like nice white-box non-proprietary PCs I build myself, BTW.
But the superiority of the Mac for "graphics" has been untrue for a very long time. Windows 2000 and XP are very stable, reliable, fast, and provide an excellent platform for a wide variety of high end graphics.
I've posted this elsewhere on DIY (see my logo submissions); for the money it is very hard to beat the Corel Draw 12 suite (about $300) instead of paying more than $1000 for Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop combo.
I've worked at Microsoft in the past, and probably will again. There are many things that they do well, and others that they need to start over from scratch. They often do, and sometimes they don't - I wish they would start over again with Microsoft Word, because the metaphors it uses are ever so wrongheaded and continuing to pile more interface handlers on top of the stinking pile only goes so far. It may look shiny on the surface, but underneath the manure still stinks; the underlying metaphors are simply dysfunctional.
The current problems with PC virii is something that they could have foreseen and done more to prevent, but I will bet that they eventually find solutions for it, because that is the side that their bread is buttered on.
There are advantages and disadvantages for each platform. I prefer PCs mostly because I don't like to dig so deep in my pockets for slow, proprietary Apple hardware.
I still think that Apple would make more money as a software company, porting the OS to X-86.
I like nice white-box non-proprietary PCs I build myself, BTW.
But the superiority of the Mac for "graphics" has been untrue for a very long time. Windows 2000 and XP are very stable, reliable, fast, and provide an excellent platform for a wide variety of high end graphics.
I've posted this elsewhere on DIY (see my logo submissions); for the money it is very hard to beat the Corel Draw 12 suite (about $300) instead of paying more than $1000 for Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Photoshop combo.
I've worked at Microsoft in the past, and probably will again. There are many things that they do well, and others that they need to start over from scratch. They often do, and sometimes they don't - I wish they would start over again with Microsoft Word, because the metaphors it uses are ever so wrongheaded and continuing to pile more interface handlers on top of the stinking pile only goes so far. It may look shiny on the surface, but underneath the manure still stinks; the underlying metaphors are simply dysfunctional.
The current problems with PC virii is something that they could have foreseen and done more to prevent, but I will bet that they eventually find solutions for it, because that is the side that their bread is buttered on.
geewhizbang said:
The studies authors felt it was a strong enuff argument that a shareholder could use it to sue any company suggesting a switch to Windows for lack of fiduciary responsibility.
I've used the same programs on mac & under Windows... the windows UI just gets in the way and can make an otherwise slick program get real kludgy.
dave
Hi,
Well you could run Unix mutants on a X-86 machine if that's what you'd want but hey....dig, dig, dig into the NT kernel and what do you find?
Heaps of crippled Unix code...
Then there is this matter of applications you'll need to run too and as far as I know those Unix machines serve a rather different purpose than just plain jane text editing and spreadsheet stuff....
Now with the GUI of W2K or XP you're bound to find lots of similarities between Mac OsX, someone's been peeping across the fence that's for sure.
Sorry but I fail to see what part of the UI would get in the way of a program unless it's badly written and borrows parts of its functionality straight from the UI.
Which is, by today's standards, a big no-no anyway regardless of platform.
Cheers,
Well you could run Unix mutants on a X-86 machine if that's what you'd want but hey....dig, dig, dig into the NT kernel and what do you find?
Heaps of crippled Unix code...
Then there is this matter of applications you'll need to run too and as far as I know those Unix machines serve a rather different purpose than just plain jane text editing and spreadsheet stuff....
Now with the GUI of W2K or XP you're bound to find lots of similarities between Mac OsX, someone's been peeping across the fence that's for sure.
Sorry but I fail to see what part of the UI would get in the way of a program unless it's badly written and borrows parts of its functionality straight from the UI.
Which is, by today's standards, a big no-no anyway regardless of platform.
Cheers,
You haven't used CorelDraw instead of Illustrator, Planet10.
On one review of Illy, Freehand, and CorelDraw, a battery of tests were attempted with each program.
Using Illy, one test had to be cancelled as it took far to long to do the 100-or so clicks for one repetitive operation the task requried compared to the 3-clicks in CorelDraw.
CorelDraw (this was way back in version 8 days .. we are now on version 12) accomplished every task that Illustrator and Freehand could handle. So much for the superiority of the Mac in graphics.
I have not found that the Windows interface is significantly less efficient click-wise than a Mac.
The lack of right click mouse-button behaviors on a mac is also irritating as all get-out when I have to use a Mac.
It is partly what you are used to. The Mac people, because they are a minority, like to get real religious about why they felt the need to pay 2x as much for a computer 1/2 as fast as a PC. But most of us just want to get things done, and find that there is little software, including most graphics programs, that doesn't ALSO run just fine on a PC, but there is a lot of software for the PC that doesn't run on a mac.
On one review of Illy, Freehand, and CorelDraw, a battery of tests were attempted with each program.
Using Illy, one test had to be cancelled as it took far to long to do the 100-or so clicks for one repetitive operation the task requried compared to the 3-clicks in CorelDraw.
CorelDraw (this was way back in version 8 days .. we are now on version 12) accomplished every task that Illustrator and Freehand could handle. So much for the superiority of the Mac in graphics.
I have not found that the Windows interface is significantly less efficient click-wise than a Mac.
The lack of right click mouse-button behaviors on a mac is also irritating as all get-out when I have to use a Mac.
It is partly what you are used to. The Mac people, because they are a minority, like to get real religious about why they felt the need to pay 2x as much for a computer 1/2 as fast as a PC. But most of us just want to get things done, and find that there is little software, including most graphics programs, that doesn't ALSO run just fine on a PC, but there is a lot of software for the PC that doesn't run on a mac.
geewhizbang said:
I haven't used CorelDraw since V5 or so -- and then it was bad ... and just the other day i was called in to sort out problems with printing a CorelDraw graphic... unlike the ones you sent me which were fine, this one was a complete & utter disaster... exactly the kind of file that gives Corel Draw its bad rep with service bureaus.
We'll have to beg to differ there, i found the 2-button mouse a real PITA.
And it is a myth that Macs cost more... when you compare like quality they are about the same as PCs -- you just can't buy a cheap mac (well you could buy an old one -- old macs are still useful, old PCs make doorstops (perhaps not good ones being as big as they are))
dave
geewhizbang said:
I agree with that. and I like to defend a PC but I do feel mac users are a little bit more strong minded towards their devices.
Someone talked about the boring box a PC comes in. The huge saving you would make over a PC from a MAC would easily leave a nice £50-100 for a very nice stylish case.
I think all posts like this should really stop.
Mac user wont budge, PC users wont either so we might aswell all just agree to disagree about this subject.
Banned
Joined 2002
5th element yu can stop if you want were not... Any what is so hard about doing what do with my mouse. i have a 5 year old logitech Optical first gen modified of course shorter cord and blue led not red. but i still have it after 5 years and i use it on my mac's why scroll and 2 buttons :O ) Pictures ? i can show you ....
I guess the main question to ask a computer user (mac, PC or other) is:
Does it do what you want fast enough?
If so.. its fine.
My desktop is 3 years old (Dual 1.8 xeon).. theres systems out now whos single processor exceeds the sum of my duals. Big Deal. Mine works fine for what I use it for.
But for those who use their PC for bragging rights... well thats a different discussion
and planet10 has a very good point too.
Does it do what you want fast enough?
If so.. its fine.
My desktop is 3 years old (Dual 1.8 xeon).. theres systems out now whos single processor exceeds the sum of my duals. Big Deal. Mine works fine for what I use it for.
But for those who use their PC for bragging rights... well thats a different discussion
and planet10 has a very good point too.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.