ArmchairAthlete
Diamond Member
- Dec 3, 2002
- 3,763
- 0
- 0
I'm a gamer so it's a no brainer for me... nope. I'd spend the $$$ on better hardware for my PC or save it.
bigboxes
Lifer
- Apr 6, 2002
- 41,831
- 12,341
- 146
If Apple had 50% of the market then the virus writers would be creating viruses that would exploit the holes in OSX. Also, if Apple opened up to other aftermarket parts then you'd have the same trouble with compatibility and driver issues that Windows does. I would like to see it happen, but it's not all roses. I don't think I would switch to Apple unless I could build own and have choice over parts. And I want my scroll wheel! 
Hmmm...I guess from the sounds of it, all that would need to be done is for the MacOS and all the software to be ported over to the x86 platform. It would be interesting, but I don't really have a problem with the Windows platform at the moment.
I wonder if it would be possible to buy a PC case that is an imitation of a Mac case. That would be interesting.
I wonder if it would be possible to buy a PC case that is an imitation of a Mac case. That would be interesting.
IF apple and PC were at the same price I'd cosider buying an apple...all depends on the applications I'll be using though...if softwares were compatible with the apple and pc I'd get whichever has the best price/perf. ratio....
Current maket analysis says you're wrong. Apache is used more often than IIS by most reports, but there are more IIS issues.
Umm, I don't think they are stopping companies from making parts for Apple machines.
I would like to see it happen, but it's not all roses. I don't think I would switch to Apple unless I could build own and have choice over parts. And I want my scroll wheel!
I used a logitec mouse with a scroll wheel with my iBook for a while. Worked perfectly.
If Apple had 50% of the marketshare, they'd be bigger than Dell, HP, Sony, Gateway, and IBM (who collectively make up the 95% marketshare, as well as other smaller OEMs)
That wouldn't happen even under the best market and pricing conditions.
But anyway, if all else were equal, too many of us are creatures of habit. We're "experts" in our PC land. We're nothings in the world of Apple, therefore we must bash it in pure ignorance and with unsubstantiated malice.
(yes that's sarcasm... sort of. though I think there's some truth to it)
That wouldn't happen even under the best market and pricing conditions.
But anyway, if all else were equal, too many of us are creatures of habit. We're "experts" in our PC land. We're nothings in the world of Apple, therefore we must bash it in pure ignorance and with unsubstantiated malice.
(yes that's sarcasm... sort of. though I think there's some truth to it)
Yeah I'd buy one. They're hella sexy, AND poweful too. Damn dual G5's? That's a hella powerful system. Problem is, that apple gets skimpy with video cards and games. The software is great, and the hardware is amazing, but the gaming can lack.
Originally posted by: VanillaH
list some of the things you can do on macs but not on pcs. try to be serious tho
Use Mac OS X.
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VanillaH
list some of the things you can do on macs but not on pcs. try to be serious tho
Use Mac OS X.
to tell you the truth i dont know a whole lot about it. is it better than say, winXP? and how is better OS gonna help when there arent enough apps to run on it (OS/2 was quite good for its time i heard)
Originally posted by: VanillaH
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: VanillaH
list some of the things you can do on macs but not on pcs. try to be serious tho
Use Mac OS X.
to tell you the truth i dont know a whole lot about it. is it better than say, winXP? and how is better OS gonna help when there arent enough apps to run on it (OS/2 was quite good for its time i heard)
It's really all about personal preference, IMO. If you like Windows XP, then OS X probably can't offer you a whole lot. If you are looking for a reasonably priced and well supported machine running a *nix, then the competition gets sparse. Portables especially.
You can of course buy a Sun machine, but the prices are quite high for anything really worthwhile (the $1k Sun machines are somewhat reasonable, but quite outdated).
Red Hat sells the software, but I doubt they would support the hardware, same goes for SuSE.
Think Apple's prices are high? Check out prices for tadpole SPARC notebooks. Last time I looked they started at $3kUSD.
With Apple, you get hardware and software support from the same vendor. It's important to some people. That's one of the reason we recommend Dell, or Compaq, or Gateway, or whatever to our computer illiterate friends and family.
And there are plenty of applications for Mac OS X. A lot of *nix software will run unmodified (especially with Apple's supported X implimentation). Microsoft has a version of Office available, and OOo apparently has a Mac OS X version. Microsoft also has a version of Windows Media Player for Mac OS X. It sucks, but it probably works well for decent Macs (I have a 500mhz iBook with a 66mhz bus). Mozilla runs just fine, along with some of its children. And Apple actually makes a browser (safari).
Really the only thing "missing" from Mac OS X is games. But I'm not a gamer so it never bothered me. Don't ask me how a non-gamer ended up on Anandtech forums. I think I was *really* bored.
I'd take a Apple. Even if I ended up hating OS X (which I don't. I like OS X alot more then Windows, but like with Windows I try to avoid being dependant on closed source software when ever possible), I still wouldn't throw it away. That's insane.
The G4's and the G5's are great computers. They use top-notch hardware and you don't end up with nasty little things like onboard Realtek or Nvidia networking chipsets that PC's get plagued with. Gastly cheap stuff.
Hell even older G3's used SCSI harddrives by default, till IDE got fast enough.
After all if you don't like OS X you can still put Gentoo, Debian, FreeBSD, NetBSD and a whole host of other operating systems will run great on Apple hardware.
Saying you would refush a free Apple is like saying you want to throw away a new free BMW for a used Corvette because the corvette is faster... When you can have both.
The G4's and the G5's are great computers. They use top-notch hardware and you don't end up with nasty little things like onboard Realtek or Nvidia networking chipsets that PC's get plagued with. Gastly cheap stuff.
Hell even older G3's used SCSI harddrives by default, till IDE got fast enough.
After all if you don't like OS X you can still put Gentoo, Debian, FreeBSD, NetBSD and a whole host of other operating systems will run great on Apple hardware.
Saying you would refush a free Apple is like saying you want to throw away a new free BMW for a used Corvette because the corvette is faster... When you can have both.
konakona
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
while i agree G5's sport a powerful CPU, how is Nforce2 integrated NIC something to be 'plagued with'? if memory serves me right, anand's and tom's benchmarks gave it two thumbs up.
but IDE is plenty darn fast nowadays arent they? sure they got high CPU utilization and all but for most people its not to the point where it bugs them.
When compared to the dreadful realtek type stuff that they probably compared it against, it did well. But it's not nesicarially a virtue.
Give me a nice Intel or 3com nic anyday.
?. That's what Apple uses nowadays,too. So what? They do it to save money just like everybody else.
The componates used in Apples are pretty much exactly the same as what you can get in PC's. The difference is in the fact that if you go out and buy a Dell or a Gateway you can trust that they cut corners and used the cheapest stuff possible.
You can easily build a nicer computer then Apple, for cheaper and get good quality parts.
You can go out and buy other PPC computers that are nicer then Apple's, but they are more expensive. You can go out and buy a Dell that's as fast as a Apple for cheaper, but they use cheaper (as in crappier) parts. You can go out a buy a Dell or a Gateway or a HP that IS nicer AND faster, but they are more expensive.
Anyways, on a side track(nothing realy to do with Apples or PCs, but just a FYI):
The reason SCSI is low-cpu power is because generally the high quality of controller card that is generally provided with them, not any innate superiority of SCSI. SCSI is better because it's faster and more reliable. But that doesn't matter so much anymore.
And? Apple's benchmarks say that their computer is faster than mine.
RealTek is crap. Will it matter for 99% of the people out there? No. I use one in a low bandwidth situation because the bandwidth is limited, my PCI slots are limited, and I have a couple of cycles to spare.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter