What is the comparison for the new mac mini speedwise compared to a PC?

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I dont need to go through some kind of menu just to find the program I want. I just click the icon on the dock and it launches. Pretty organized to me.

Explorer users call that the quick launch bar.

Yea I mean imagine having like 50 different icons on your quicklaunch bar! Is THAT organized?

And I imagine over 50 apps in the start menu. Is THAT organized? :roll:

If your retarded NO! But otherwise YES! It's called the "right click", a thing non existant on the default mac mouse. You right click, hit sort by name and BINGO everything is SORTED by name! The reason why the start menu is superior is just that, it's a menu. If theres a list of tons of programs, I don't mind because ever since IE4 there has been the option to scroll down instead of it "treeing out". The dock is nothing more than a "cute" task bar the resembles the quicklaunch icons on the taskbar of the PC. Admit it, if you want quick access to all your programs with out thousands of icons on your dock or desktop, you only have one option, and that's the startmenu. That, is what made windows what it is today. The introduction of the startmenu in 1995 was a breakthrough plus the support of 32bit applications, but the startmenu was the circle of all the "hype" of Windows 95.

I'm done, you must not have enough applications that would warrant you to want to complain about the dock but I do so I have a reason to complain about it. Before OSX you didn't even have a dock so what's your excuse for users who can ONLY use OS9?

You can right click on the Mac. A comment like that shows you havent had experience with a Mac. You can scroll on a Mac too. Use the scroll wheel. If you want quick access to your apps without thousands of items on the dock, drag the applications folder down to the dock, click it, and your applications folder pops right up. I have many apps, but I dont use all of them much, so I dont keep them in my dock.

Since there was no dock in OS 9, all you had to do was add apps to the Apple menu. You open the folder that belongs to the Apple menu, which contains the programs that are located in the Apple menu, and you just drag the apps you use in that folder. After you are done, close the folder, click the Apple menu, and there you go. You have a menu that acts like the start menu, and contains the apps you use. Also, you can have them in ABC order if you wanted to.

 

[hopejr]

Thin Lizzy: Philippine Mango wants a menu, not a window that pops up, hence his stupid comments, and hence my last post which talks about how you can get a menu instead of a window popping up!!!!

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: hopejr
Thin Lizzy: Philippine Mango wants a menu, not a window that pops up, hence his stupid comments, and hence my last post which talks about how you can get a menu instead of a window popping up!!!!

Ok, I see. 🙂 I just put the Applications folder down into the dock, right clicked, and there you go. You have something similar to the start menu, just like hopejr said so. Works great too. I think I might just keep my Applications folder down there. Thanks for the tip. I never knew about it! 🙂

 

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: hopejr
Thin Lizzy: Philippine Mango wants a menu, not a window that pops up, hence his stupid comments, and hence my last post which talks about how you can get a menu instead of a window popping up!!!!

Ok, I see. 🙂 I just put the Applications folder down into the dock, right clicked, and there you go. You have something similar to the start menu, just like hopejr said so. Works great too. I think I might just keep my Applications folder down there. Thanks for the tip. I never knew about it! 🙂

I've done the same (just after I posted 😛), and I'm going to leave it there too. It's quite handy for those apps I don't use a lot but can't be bothered switching to Finder to get. Now I have the best of both worlds - a dock and a start menu 😀

 

[halfadder]

When you're in the finder, or just on the desktop, Shift-Apple-A will bring up the applications listing.

You can also go Apple Menu -> Recent Applications anytime too.

And there's also the Applications shortcut/alias trick mentioned in the posts above. All three will work with any version of Mac OS X right out of the box.

Or if you want to totally customize the Apple Menu (a la the Start Menu) you can use Fruit Menu. It even lets you change the Apple logo if you want to.
http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/fruitmenu

It's $10, which is 3 trips to Wendy's, but the Unsanity guys are good people and I don't mind paying that. (Ditto for Brian Greenstone and Enigmo)

 

[hopejr]

I've seen that fruitmenu. It's not bad.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

I never wanted to try any of those haxies, because I read in the Apple Discussions that they can cause problems to the OS.

 

[halfadder]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I never wanted to try any of those haxies, because I read in the Apple Discussions that they can cause problems to the OS.

You're not supposed to use superchips in your cars either...

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: halfadder

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I never wanted to try any of those haxies, because I read in the Apple Discussions that they can cause problems to the OS.

You're not supposed to use superchips in your cars either...

🙂 Well, I would probably use a haxie to change the appearance of the OS. I would love to get the OS 10.1 look back! I dont like the brushed metal look much.

 

[Dennis Travis]

Originally posted by: hopejr
Thin Lizzy: Philippine Mango wants a menu, not a window that pops up, hence his stupid comments, and hence my last post which talks about how you can get a menu instead of a window popping up!!!!

Hey Thanks so much for that one. I had tried the Apps in the Dock but never tried right clicking on it! Amazingly simple and looks just like the stupid Winderz Start menu!

Thanks again for that tip.

 

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: hopejr
However, adding extra RAM will increase the performance, allowing OS X to use physical memory instead continuously swapping virtual memory.

I didn't realise the truth behind my statement here! I just added an extra 256MB RAM to my iBook and it flies now! It reacts instantly. It has a slower chip than the Mac mini, so I'm sure the performance increase in one of those would be even more. I can now compare the performance of my iBook to that of my old P4-M 2.2GHz notebook with the same amount of memory (I'm not just saying that. It's true! For normal use, this thing kicks the P4's butt!).

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: hopejr

Originally posted by: hopejr
However, adding extra RAM will increase the performance, allowing OS X to use physical memory instead continuously swapping virtual memory.

I didn't realise the truth behind my statement here! I just added an extra 256MB RAM to my iBook and it flies now! It reacts instantly. It has a slower chip than the Mac mini, so I'm sure the performance increase in one of those would be even more. I can now compare the performance of my iBook to that of my old P4-M 2.2GHz notebook with the same amount of memory (I'm not just saying that. It's true! For normal use, this thing kicks the P4's butt!).

😀 Thats awesome! I remember when my emac only had 128mb of RAM! It ran ok, but it was slow. Adding an extra 128 actually made me see a huge difference in performance. Removing the 128 and putting a 512 stick, I saw an even more performance boost! My emac now flies through many of the apps I use. 🙂

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: hopejr
Whoa, wait a minute!!! If your argument is that you want a menu, then listen to this!! Drag the Applications Folder to the dock. Then, right-click or control-click or hold down the mouse button on the icon, and you get a MENU!!!! It's identical to a start menu then.

Oh, and for OS 9 and below, THE APPLE MENU IS EXACTLY LIKE THE START MENU!!!!

You really tick me off with your comments Philippine Mango! You don't have a clue what you're talking about!

You can organise the Dock or Quick launch bar however you want, and you can still have you "start menu" on OS 9 or OS X!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your a moron period. The apple menu in OS 9 is not the start menu PERIOD, no matter how you want to phrase things it is NOT the start menu. I would rather have things blend in then have a folder in the dock, it's terribly unorganized and stupid. Despite you thinking putting a folder in the dock is a good idea, it's really not.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I dont need to go through some kind of menu just to find the program I want. I just click the icon on the dock and it launches. Pretty organized to me.

Explorer users call that the quick launch bar.

Yea I mean imagine having like 50 different icons on your quicklaunch bar! Is THAT organized?

No more than 50 on the dock, I imagine. But who has 50 apps they use ALL THE TIME?
I've got:
Deepburner
EAC
FB2K
Firefox
Thunderbird
OpenOffice.org Text Document (I use it for all OOo stuff)
PSPad
PuTTY

Anything else I don't use enough, or don't need rapidly enough, to warrant being there, and that stuff is only in the programs menu.
BTW, I'm not an Explorer user, and have a popup for the job, too 🙂

Just because I don't use an application "all the time" doesn't mean I don't want "easy access" to it. I like the start menu because I am able to look for programs that I use but not necessarily all the time and be able to run it. I don't want to have to search through the HDD just to run a program, it also prevents accidental deletion when your clicking on the file (PC's, its the shortcut).

If you want easy access to an app, you leave it in the dock. You dont need to search through your HDD to run a program. You leave it in the dock. If you dont want to accidentally delete an app, make a shortcut. You can make shortcuts to apps on a Mac. The program icon in the dock is a shortcut. :roll:

Problem is your going around in circles, I tell you there is a problem with one thing and then you mention the solution to another but the point was that because 1+2 don't work, there is no solution but you then decide to refer to 1 agian... I told you, if you were to have a lot of applications on the Mac and you wanted quick access but wanted it to be organized at the SAME TIME it would not be possible. If I look at a clean desktop and see more then about 5-10 shortcuts, it is in my opinion UNORGANIZED. Putting a shortcut of the "applications" folder in the dock is stupid and would never want to to that.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: hopejr

Originally posted by: hopejr
However, adding extra RAM will increase the performance, allowing OS X to use physical memory instead continuously swapping virtual memory.

I didn't realise the truth behind my statement here! I just added an extra 256MB RAM to my iBook and it flies now! It reacts instantly. It has a slower chip than the Mac mini, so I'm sure the performance increase in one of those would be even more. I can now compare the performance of my iBook to that of my old P4-M 2.2GHz notebook with the same amount of memory (I'm not just saying that. It's true! For normal use, this thing kicks the P4's butt!).

😀 Thats awesome! I remember when my emac only had 128mb of RAM! It ran ok, but it was slow. Adding an extra 128 actually made me see a huge difference in performance. Removing the 128 and putting a 512 stick, I saw an even more performance boost! My emac now flies through many of the apps I use. 🙂

Yes and there is a reason WHY it ran faster. It's because the mac os uses tons of ram just so you can have a "pretty interface". Just check anand's article and all your questions will be answered. He discusses his first mac which was a fairly expensive machine and that to get a smooth ride, he needed 4GB of ram just for simple tasks. Windows XP will run on 128MB of ram smoothly but when you start using more than 4 programs, you will notice it starting to page to the HDD. 256MB of ram for windows XP is also smooth, just as much as 128MB of ram. The only reason to get more ram on an XP machine (more then 128) is because your running either multiple instances of applications or applications that require more ram. On a mac your constantly getting more and more ram just for a smooth experience.

 

[hopejr]

Who cares about the pretty interface? That's not the reason I like OS X. The pretty interface might be a performance hog if it was in Windows, but OS X depends on the GPU for it, and so doesn't tie up the CPU. You have no clue.
The Apple Menu in OS 9 is like the start menu, no matter how much you want to dispute it. Your problem is that it doesn't have a Windows logo on it and the word "Start". And what's wrong with dragging a folder to the dock? There's an entire section of the dock devoted to folders! It's on the right hand side of the divider line. And it is just like the Programs/All programs menu.
Look if you hate Macs so much, then don't bother thinking about them and just forget they exist. We'll all be happier then.

Oh, and if I'm a moron, what does that make you? I maybe shouldn't say here because I might get banned.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: hopejr
Whoa, wait a minute!!! If your argument is that you want a menu, then listen to this!! Drag the Applications Folder to the dock. Then, right-click or control-click or hold down the mouse button on the icon, and you get a MENU!!!! It's identical to a start menu then.

Oh, and for OS 9 and below, THE APPLE MENU IS EXACTLY LIKE THE START MENU!!!!

You really tick me off with your comments Philippine Mango! You don't have a clue what you're talking about!

You can organise the Dock or Quick launch bar however you want, and you can still have you "start menu" on OS 9 or OS X!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your a moron period. The apple menu in OS 9 is not the start menu PERIOD, no matter how you want to phrase things it is NOT the start menu. I would rather have things blend in then have a folder in the dock, it's terribly unorganized and stupid. Despite you thinking putting a folder in the dock is a good idea, it's really not.

Put more apps in the Apple menu in OS 9, and you got yourself a start menu.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I dont need to go through some kind of menu just to find the program I want. I just click the icon on the dock and it launches. Pretty organized to me.

Explorer users call that the quick launch bar.

Yea I mean imagine having like 50 different icons on your quicklaunch bar! Is THAT organized?

No more than 50 on the dock, I imagine. But who has 50 apps they use ALL THE TIME?
I've got:
Deepburner
EAC
FB2K
Firefox
Thunderbird
OpenOffice.org Text Document (I use it for all OOo stuff)
PSPad
PuTTY

Anything else I don't use enough, or don't need rapidly enough, to warrant being there, and that stuff is only in the programs menu.
BTW, I'm not an Explorer user, and have a popup for the job, too 🙂

Just because I don't use an application "all the time" doesn't mean I don't want "easy access" to it. I like the start menu because I am able to look for programs that I use but not necessarily all the time and be able to run it. I don't want to have to search through the HDD just to run a program, it also prevents accidental deletion when your clicking on the file (PC's, its the shortcut).

If you want easy access to an app, you leave it in the dock. You dont need to search through your HDD to run a program. You leave it in the dock. If you dont want to accidentally delete an app, make a shortcut. You can make shortcuts to apps on a Mac. The program icon in the dock is a shortcut. :roll:

Problem is your going around in circles, I tell you there is a problem with one thing and then you mention the solution to another but the point was that because 1+2 don't work, there is no solution but you then decide to refer to 1 agian... I told you, if you were to have a lot of applications on the Mac and you wanted quick access but wanted it to be organized at the SAME TIME it would not be possible. If I look at a clean desktop and see more then about 5-10 shortcuts, it is in my opinion UNORGANIZED. Putting a shortcut of the "applications" folder in the dock is stupid and would never want to to that.

And how would you keep Windows more organized? Because you have a start menu? Drag the applications folder in the dock, right click, and you got yourself a start menu. Instead of having the little green button that says "Start" you have an icon with a picture of an "A" on it.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: hopejr

Originally posted by: hopejr
However, adding extra RAM will increase the performance, allowing OS X to use physical memory instead continuously swapping virtual memory.

I didn't realise the truth behind my statement here! I just added an extra 256MB RAM to my iBook and it flies now! It reacts instantly. It has a slower chip than the Mac mini, so I'm sure the performance increase in one of those would be even more. I can now compare the performance of my iBook to that of my old P4-M 2.2GHz notebook with the same amount of memory (I'm not just saying that. It's true! For normal use, this thing kicks the P4's butt!).

😀 Thats awesome! I remember when my emac only had 128mb of RAM! It ran ok, but it was slow. Adding an extra 128 actually made me see a huge difference in performance. Removing the 128 and putting a 512 stick, I saw an even more performance boost! My emac now flies through many of the apps I use. 🙂

Yes and there is a reason WHY it ran faster. It's because the mac os uses tons of ram just so you can have a "pretty interface". Just check anand's article and all your questions will be answered. He discusses his first mac which was a fairly expensive machine and that to get a smooth ride, he needed 4GB of ram just for simple tasks. Windows XP will run on 128MB of ram smoothly but when you start using more than 4 programs, you will notice it starting to page to the HDD. 256MB of ram for windows XP is also smooth, just as much as 128MB of ram. The only reason to get more ram on an XP machine (more then 128) is because your running either multiple instances of applications or applications that require more ram. On a mac your constantly getting more and more ram just for a smooth experience.

Who said you needed 4 gigs of RAM for a smooth ride? Anand purchased the G5 with 4 gigs of RAM. He didnt experience the G5 with less than that. So if he did say he needed 4 gigs of RAM to experience a "smooth ride" he doesnt know what he is talking about because he only experienced the G5 with 4 gigs, no less, so its not possible to say "I needed 4 gigs of RAM for a smooth ride."

 

[Dennis Travis]

Anand never said it needs 4GB of ram to be USEABLE. He Stated like he has many times he is a HEAVY Multitasker and runs 20-40 apps all at the same time when he is doing his work. XP needs more than 256 or even 512 to be totally smooth and never swap if you run even half that many apps at the same time. This is what Anand bought and what he later put in the Machine, some as an experiement and other for better performance.

This is the Mac he started with:

Dual 2GHz 0.13-micron G5 CPUs
512MB CAS3 DDR400 SDRAM
160GB SATA HDD
ATI Radeon 9600 (64MB)



Ok, Here is where he talks about the Memory, Do yourselves a favor and read it and show me where he says you need 4GB. He even says as clear as day that anything over 2GB even for his heavy use was of little value but OCZ gave him 4 1Gig modules for testing. I don't know how people read things that are not even said anywhere in the article. He said more about a 256Meg Video Card affecting the smoothness than he did the system Memory!


"The obvious requirement for any OS that caches heavily is a lot of memory; while my system shipped with 512MB of memory, I quickly found the need to upgrade to more. At first, it was 2GB, then 4GB and I even contemplated going up to the 8GB limit; although, with 4GB, I definitely have memory to spare. What I found, however, was that unlike under Windows, the extra memory actually did something under OS X. The more room it had to cache, the more it spread its wings and the better it did. Obviously, there are limitations. For me, beyond 2GB wasn't really necessary (I was mostly testing out a set of 1GB modules that OCZ had sent) and even up to 2GB, I could've probably been fine with somewhere between 1 - 1.5GB without a change in the feel of the system. With enough memory, the I/O bottleneck that I had been used to dealing with for so long isn't gone, but significantly lessened on the Mac. This doesn't apply if you're doing anything I/O intensive, such as running a file server, database (to an extent) or video editing, but for a user like me, the difference is significant - and appreciated. In fact, I'd say that this is one of the things that kept me happy with the system for so long. "

1-1.5 Gigs he probably would have been fine. I run 1Gig in XP Pro but with heavy photoshop and video editing I hit the end sometimes with just those two things going on.

And ANAND, NO WHERE in that article, bashes OSX and in fact loves it and prefers it in many ways to XP. I have read it 20x now and know what he says. He still uses the Dual G5 for his daily work. Do you think Anand is so stupid or Poor that he would use OSX and the G5 if it were a piece of junk?

Read more carefully next time. The real problem is even if anand switched to Macs and never looked back for any reason people who HATE anything not Windows would still come here and say Anand bashed OSX and the Mac and loves Windows more.

 

[hopejr]

Originally posted by: hopejr
Who cares about the pretty interface? That's not the reason I like OS X. The pretty interface might be a performance hog if it was in Windows, but OS X depends on the GPU for it, and so doesn't tie up the CPU. You have no clue.
The Apple Menu in OS 9 is like the start menu, no matter how much you want to dispute it. Your problem is that it doesn't have a Windows logo on it and the word "Start". And what's wrong with dragging a folder to the dock? There's an entire section of the dock devoted to folders! It's on the right hand side of the divider line. And it is just like the Programs/All programs menu.
Look if you hate Macs so much, then don't bother thinking about them and just forget they exist. We'll all be happier then.

Oh, and if I'm a moron, what does that make you? I maybe shouldn't say here because I might get banned.

Maybe I overreacted in this post. But being flamed makes me flame back, even if I vow to ignore someone 😛.

My computer was fine with only 256MB RAM, but because I was running 8+ apps at a time, I needed more RAM. And it's done the job. Now I can run 20+ apps and it's ok. I wouldn't dare do what I'm doing on my iBook on a mid-range PC notebook (note that mine is a low-end Apple notebook). I used to have a mid-range P4-M notebook with 512MB RAM, and I never did the things I do on my iBook on that, it just couldn't handle it. And it was a good computer too.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: hopejr

Originally posted by: hopejr
However, adding extra RAM will increase the performance, allowing OS X to use physical memory instead continuously swapping virtual memory.

I didn't realise the truth behind my statement here! I just added an extra 256MB RAM to my iBook and it flies now! It reacts instantly. It has a slower chip than the Mac mini, so I'm sure the performance increase in one of those would be even more. I can now compare the performance of my iBook to that of my old P4-M 2.2GHz notebook with the same amount of memory (I'm not just saying that. It's true! For normal use, this thing kicks the P4's butt!).

😀 Thats awesome! I remember when my emac only had 128mb of RAM! It ran ok, but it was slow. Adding an extra 128 actually made me see a huge difference in performance. Removing the 128 and putting a 512 stick, I saw an even more performance boost! My emac now flies through many of the apps I use. 🙂

Yes and there is a reason WHY it ran faster. It's because the mac os uses tons of ram just so you can have a "pretty interface". Just check anand's article and all your questions will be answered. He discusses his first mac which was a fairly expensive machine and that to get a smooth ride, he needed 4GB of ram just for simple tasks. Windows XP will run on 128MB of ram smoothly but when you start using more than 4 programs, you will notice it starting to page to the HDD. 256MB of ram for windows XP is also smooth, just as much as 128MB of ram. The only reason to get more ram on an XP machine (more then 128) is because your running either multiple instances of applications or applications that require more ram. On a mac your constantly getting more and more ram just for a smooth experience.

Who said you needed 4 gigs of RAM for a smooth ride? Anand purchased the G5 with 4 gigs of RAM. He didnt experience the G5 with less than that. So if he did say he needed 4 gigs of RAM to experience a "smooth ride" he doesnt know what he is talking about because he only experienced the G5 with 4 gigs, no less, so its not possible to say "I needed 4 gigs of RAM for a smooth ride."

You clearly didn't read the article because he DID experience it with less than 4GB of ram. Reread the article and THEN we can talk. IIRC the system he bought came with 512MB of ram.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: hopejr
Who cares about the pretty interface? That's not the reason I like OS X. The pretty interface might be a performance hog if it was in Windows, but OS X depends on the GPU for it, and so doesn't tie up the CPU. You have no clue.
The Apple Menu in OS 9 is like the start menu, no matter how much you want to dispute it. Your problem is that it doesn't have a Windows logo on it and the word "Start". And what's wrong with dragging a folder to the dock? There's an entire section of the dock devoted to folders! It's on the right hand side of the divider line. And it is just like the Programs/All programs menu.
Look if you hate Macs so much, then don't bother thinking about them and just forget they exist. We'll all be happier then.

Oh, and if I'm a moron, what does that make you? I maybe shouldn't say here because I might get banned.

Yes and if you have noticed, the GPU doesn't do a very good job now does it? All I can say is read anand's article about his mac because he is about 90% right (I agree with anyways). Anyways the GUI is not ONLY GPU dependant! It also requires tons of ram for it to be smooth. All you guys want to do is just justify your purchase and that is that.

 

[Dennis Travis]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

You clearly didn't read the article because he DID experience it with less than 4GB of ram. Reread the article and THEN we can talk. IIRC the system he bought came with 512MB of ram.[/quote]


I just posted that part of the article with quotes. He never said it needs 4Gigs RAM to run decently. Never. OCZ gave it to him to test in 2 pairs. Read the rest of it. I KNOW how to read.

And by the way, Most of my main computers are all PC's.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: Cerb

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
I dont need to go through some kind of menu just to find the program I want. I just click the icon on the dock and it launches. Pretty organized to me.

Explorer users call that the quick launch bar.

Yea I mean imagine having like 50 different icons on your quicklaunch bar! Is THAT organized?

No more than 50 on the dock, I imagine. But who has 50 apps they use ALL THE TIME?
I've got:
Deepburner
EAC
FB2K
Firefox
Thunderbird
OpenOffice.org Text Document (I use it for all OOo stuff)
PSPad
PuTTY

Anything else I don't use enough, or don't need rapidly enough, to warrant being there, and that stuff is only in the programs menu.
BTW, I'm not an Explorer user, and have a popup for the job, too 🙂

Just because I don't use an application "all the time" doesn't mean I don't want "easy access" to it. I like the start menu because I am able to look for programs that I use but not necessarily all the time and be able to run it. I don't want to have to search through the HDD just to run a program, it also prevents accidental deletion when your clicking on the file (PC's, its the shortcut).

If you want easy access to an app, you leave it in the dock. You dont need to search through your HDD to run a program. You leave it in the dock. If you dont want to accidentally delete an app, make a shortcut. You can make shortcuts to apps on a Mac. The program icon in the dock is a shortcut. :roll:

Problem is your going around in circles, I tell you there is a problem with one thing and then you mention the solution to another but the point was that because 1+2 don't work, there is no solution but you then decide to refer to 1 agian... I told you, if you were to have a lot of applications on the Mac and you wanted quick access but wanted it to be organized at the SAME TIME it would not be possible. If I look at a clean desktop and see more then about 5-10 shortcuts, it is in my opinion UNORGANIZED. Putting a shortcut of the "applications" folder in the dock is stupid and would never want to to that.

And how would you keep Windows more organized? Because you have a start menu? Drag the applications folder in the dock, right click, and you got yourself a start menu. Instead of having the little green button that says "Start" you have an icon with a picture of an "A" on it.

I keep mine on classic because I don't like the "frills" of windows XP. When I refer to the start menu, I'm talking about the windows 95 type. I've used macs and frankly for the money, they run considerably slow. Infact they run slower than my Pentium II system, which I can say is a pretty sad thing. Windows is much more smooth because it doesn't have AS much junk cloging the computer up.