Macs Suck! - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37

Thread: Macs Suck!

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    185

    Re: platform bigot

    Why all the energy to spread hate for a platform? Any Mac that can run OSX is worth more than any PC running 95/NT by virtue of functionality/looks/and politics.
    Know this..., you may not by thyself in pride claim the Mantle of Wizardry; that way lies only Bogosity without End.

    Rather must you Become, and Become, and Become, until Hackers respect thy Power, and other Wizards hail thee as a Brother or Sister in Wisdom, and you wake up and realize that the Mantle hath lain unknown upon thy Shoulders since you knew not when.

    Share on Google+

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Odessa
    Posts
    268

    Post Learning helps the mind...

    I hate Macs, but they do exist. They are computers. Some people do like them. I feel this is reason enough to keep Mac related forums and articles on AO. My disliking of Mac is my very own opinion. This is the same with those who do like Mac. If it is out there you might as well become familiar with it. It is another step in the learning process. We may not like all products, but study, is for the mind and study everything we should.

    Alive to Learn,
    [gloworange]DISLEX[/gloworange]
    Share on Google+

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    52

    Cool

    Macs, in my humble opinion do suck. I have never liked the interface that seems to be a prevelent style in Macintosh.

    Oh well though, they do process quickly and are great for CGI, CAD, and the like. But I think fall short to the PC market in affordablity, applicaion versatility, and of course who make games for Macs these days.

    I would say keep Mac alive for the sheer reason to keep Microsoft at bay with SOME kind of competition however small.
    (That evil alien Bill Gates is only a few moves away from complete world domination.)
    Those who are awake all live in the same world.
    Those who are asleep live in their own worlds. -Heraclitus

    All Your Base!
    Share on Google+

  4. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    7
    Originally posted by ThePreacher
    Everyone I have talked to who owns a mac is in love with them. They tell me to rush out and get one ASAP. Problem is that my computer does everything I need and want it to do for now. Also why should I pay $2500+ for a top of the line mac when I could build a faster and more powerful PC for less.
    I used to be a PC user for many years. However have now switched over to Mac and have a G4. The G4 is far superior. It takes a little while to adopt to a new Operating system but when you do, you will find it more user friendly and more stable then a Windows platform. The G4 is the First home supercomputer running a 128 bit processor rather than a 64 bit processor like PC. This gives hugh power gains. A 400MHz G4 will kick ass over a 800MHz Pentium 4. The new G4's with twin and faster processors are better again.
    Main advantage is every time PC upgrade and release a new model the last is made redundant. You are left to throw away your RAM, Processor and Motherboard and start again. Where as an old Mac can have the latest Processor adapted to it. Thus you can keep cost down over the long term by only upgrading components as you require them.
    A Mac is also very versitile with programs. True there are not very many games for the Mac but their Graphics and other programs are superior. You can still run all your old PC software on a Mac anyway! I have Virtual PC which runs PC ver Win`98. My old games and apps work without a problem.
    Take a good look at the new Macs before you make up your mind.
    Share on Google+

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    7
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Negative
    [B]
    Huh?

    1. PhotoShop 6.0, filters Artistic/Palette Knife, Artistic/Wrap and Sketch/Water paper on an image:
    Mac G4 867 MHz, 128 RAM: 52 seconds for a tiff-image, 2 minutes 27 seconds for a jpg.
    Now, let's bring in a Packard Bell Pentium IV 1.7 GHZ: 34 seconds for the tiff, 1 minute 37 seconds for the jpg.


    2. Office-document, 485.500 words, 2.889.350 characters, Search and Replace action - 39.160 replacements:
    Mac: 1 minute, 8 seconds
    Packard Bell: 20 seconds

    Point 1:
    Is it fair comparing a 867MHz processor to a 1.7GHz processor.
    Point 2:
    Office is by Microsoft, written for PC and then addapted to run on a Mac. Maybe why it does not run as fast on a Mac but then also refer to (Point 1).
    Microsoft products are often very unstable. They also cause security problems with Mac. A mac without Microsoft products is only susceptable to a few viruses. Add a few Microsoft products and it becomes increasingly susceptable to a few thousand viruses. I don't know why anyone wants the Mac ver of Windows anyway. MSOffice is usefull but only because gready Bill Gates holds the monopoly and there isn't many products to choose which are equivelent.

    Share on Google+

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,429
    Originally posted by McBennet
    The G4 is far superior. (...) A 400MHz G4 will kick ass over a 800MHz Pentium 4.
    Huh?

    1. Comparing MACs and PCs is stupid: there are no benchmarks to compare the speed of both systems, and there aren't that many components you can base your tests on.

    2. Apple keeps saying (you don't work for Apple, do you?) that its most recent G4s are x times faster than the most recent Pentiums. A Belgian magazine wanted to check this out, and did some tests using a good old chronometer.

    Here are the results:

    1. PhotoShop 6.0, filters Artistic/Palette Knife, Artistic/Wrap and Sketch/Water paper on an image:

    Mac G4 867 MHz, 128 RAM: 52 seconds for a tiff-image, 2 minutes 27 seconds for a jpg.

    Pentium III 733 MHz, 128 RAM: 1 minute 44 seconds for the same tiff, 5 minutes 9 seconds for the jpg.

    The Mac is the winner!

    Now, let's bring in a Packard Bell Pentium IV 1.7 GHZ: 34 seconds for the tiff, 1 minute 37 seconds for the jpg.
    OUCH!

    2. Office-document, 485.500 words, 2.889.350 characters, Search and Replace action - 39.160 replacements:

    Mac: 1 minute, 8 seconds
    Pentium III: 1 minute
    Packard Bell: 20 seconds
    OUCH!
    Did I already mention that that Packard Bell costs 1.000 USD less than the G4?
    Share on Google+

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    36
    a few days ago my wife and i were discussing getting laptops, i was willing to get a second-hand x86 linux-able laptop or brand new one, and we had decided to get her an ibm thinkpad 42m or something which we saw in the mall. a few hours later we saw a mac stall in the same mall and now she wants the silver ibook that we saw there. anyway, the point is, i would rather her use mac than windows, and linux is slightly too complicated for her. the mac should be ample for what she wants to do (surf the net, email, make documents). there will be no need to worry about her getting a nasty vbs script/worm/virus or someone trying to portscan if for sub7 or netbus.. so i am all up for it.
    \"If you wish to speak to technical support, please hang up now.\"

    *click*
    Share on Google+

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    7
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Negative
    [B]
    Huh?

    1. Comparing MACs and PCs is stupid: there are no benchmarks to compare the speed of both systems, and there aren't that many components you can base your tests on.

    2. Apple keeps saying (you don't work for Apple, do you?) that its most recent G4s are x times faster than the most recent Pentiums. A Belgian magazine wanted to check this out, and did some tests using a good old chronometer.

    --------------------------------------------
    I was not trying to get into the nitty gritty of which computer is faster for running individual applications. There are many tests done.
    http://www.techtv.com/news/story/0,2...339307,00.html
    Comparing a 733MHz G4 against an out weighted 1.8GHz Windows PC.

    http://www.barefeats.com/pentium.html
    Pentium 4 1.4GHz, Athlon 1GHz, and Dual Power Mac G4/500MHz

    http://content.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980821S0021
    Compare a G3 against an equivilant Pentium II.
    "However, data from Apple and NSTL indicate that because CPU performance is only one of many factors that contribute to system performance, users won't experience nearly the same increase in speed. In tests using Adobe Photoshop, which also stress a computer's memory architecture, disk, and video, Apple claims a 33 percent improvement over a similar 266-MHz Intel PC. NSTL found similar results using its Photoshop test when comparing the G3 to 266-MHz computers, but a 300-MHz G3 finished only about 5 percent faster than a PC using an AMD K6-2 processor."

    I have used both Mac and PC. I dont realy care about benchmark tests. PC may be faster on a few things and Mac on others. I have overall found my Mac better. My main argument was being able to upgrade a Mac. What happens to your Packard Bell which may cost 1.000 USD less than the G4 now! But how much will it cost in a couple of years time when you have to throw it away and buy the Pentium 5 because you cannot upgrade it. While I will put a G5 chip into my existing G4 and add a bit of RAM.
    Mac it is more stable and user friendly. That is why you buy a Mac!

    In your own test you are comparing a Mac G4 867 MHz and Packard Bell Pentium IV 1.7 GHz. I would hope that a processor running over twice the speed would deliver twice the output but it doesn't. It is just running hotter and burning out quicker.
    Share on Google+

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Yes
    Posts
    4,429
    Originally posted by McBennet
    What happens to your Packard Bell which may cost 1.000 USD less than the G4 now! But how much will it cost in a couple of years time when you have to throw it away and buy the Pentium 5 because you cannot upgrade it. While I will put a G5 chip into my existing G4 and add a bit of RAM.
    Well, I'd buy myself a brand new PC with the 1000 USD I saved last time

    In your own test you are comparing a Mac G4 867 MHz and Packard Bell Pentium IV 1.7 GHz. I would hope that a processor running over twice the speed would deliver twice the output but it doesn't. It is just running hotter and burning out quicker.
    Well, no need to shout, man!
    It's not my test, it's a test conducted by a Belgian magazine, using rather unorthodox methods to check Apple's statement about the G4-speed. I'm not a MAC-basher; if I were, I would have left out the results in favor of the MAC...
    Share on Google+

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    689

    Cool

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by mcbennet
    Originally posted by Negative


    In your own test you are comparing a Mac G4 867 MHz and Packard Bell Pentium IV 1.7 GHz. I would hope that a processor running over twice the speed would deliver twice the output but it doesn't. It is just running hotter and burning out quicker.
    I think the point of the post is for those who believe that all macs (regardless of processor speed) are faster than PCs. The other obvious point is that you are going to save a lot of money building a faster, more powerful PC.
    Wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.
    --Ecclesiastes 10:19
    Share on Google+

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 Security News

     Patches

       Security Trends

         How-To

           Buying Guides