NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm thinking about getting a new (laptop or desktop) Mac, instead of a PC. Does anyone have any experience with (the current) Macs? Should I or shouldn't I switch?

I'm asking here cause I'm looking for some kind of 'objective' opinion...




http://www.freewebs.com/ecotopia

Well I was once a mac fanatic and changed when apple screwed up.

I have been playing with panther on a g4 and found it a decent os.

Our graphics guy has one of the new intel macs and he says he likes it. He was using that god awful cube......

If you plan to play any games, forget it. Even with Bootcamp, you lose tons of performance.

If you plan to play any games, forget it. Even with Bootcamp, you lose tons of performance.
What about pinball? I'm fuckin' obsessed with it. Pretty sure it's just a windows thing.. The 'Space Cadet' pinball anyway.

I'm thinking about getting a new (laptop or desktop) Mac, instead of a PC. Does anyone have any experience with (the current) Macs? Should I or shouldn't I switch?

I'm asking here cause I'm looking for some kind of 'objective' opinion...




http://www.freewebs.com/ecotopia
I rate them a solid "meh." For the same prive you could build a much better computer with and do "something" to get Mac OS X on it. I use an eMac every day at school. For the hardware it was, it is an ok compy(eMacs are far to underbuilt for the OS they have to run). Mac OS X is pretty decent. Good for graphics, lousy for networking. Being a Mac and all an idiot could figure OS X out, and have some fun with it.

I had an iBook, and just moved up to a Powerbook and love it, but I don't do much outside surf the internet and write. The OS is gorgeous and doesn't have the holes MS does, and the fact that it's still a small segment of the market means that it's not threatened as often regardless. I don't have the one with the new Intel chip, and I understand you can run XP on it (though why you'd want to is beyond me), but I heartily recommend the Powerbook laptop.

If you plan to play any games, forget it. Even with Bootcamp, you lose tons of performance.
Really where is the loss coming in? I mean I have run it on our macbook pro at work and have not noticed a problem

I had an iBook, and just moved up to a Powerbook and love it, but I don't do much outside surf the internet and write. The OS is gorgeous and doesn't have the holes MS does, and the fact that it's still a small segment of the market means that it's not threatened as often regardless. I don't have the one with the new Intel chip, and I understand you can run XP on it (though why you'd want to is beyond me), but I heartily recommend the Powerbook laptop.
Ohhh its got plenty of holes of its own ... but you are right they are just not being pushed as hard right now

Ohhh its got plenty of holes of its own ... but you are right they are just not being pushed as hard right now
And that's because there's no real upside to creating a Mac-only virus. Which is why I don't understand why anyone would deliberately open themselves up to the multiple ways they can become infected on an MS machine if they don't have to.

And that's because there's no real upside to creating a Mac-only virus. Which is why I don't understand why anyone would deliberately open themselves up to the multiple ways they can become infected on an MS machine if they don't have to.
Because if so many people didn't use MS, then Mac would become a viable target, and that would destroy any advantage gained from moving?
Megh, things like the movements of mass-consumer culture just happen based on the whims of Chinese butterflies, and not becuase of any level of practical consideration.

Because if so many people didn't use MS, then Mac would become a viable target, and that would destroy any advantage gained from moving?
Megh, things like the movements of mass-consumer culture just happen based on the whims of Chinese butterflies, and not becuase of any level of practical consideration.
There's still an advantage to moving--Mac's OS is more stable than XP any day of the week, and has fewer security holes. The advantage is greater now because of the smaller market share, but even if they were more evenly matched in the market, Mac would still be the better bet.

And that's because there's no real upside to creating a Mac-only virus. Which is why I don't understand why anyone would deliberately open themselves up to the multiple ways they can become infected on an MS machine if they don't have to.
Because of convinance

Personaly I find the Mac OS to be too full of holes for my taste as well

There's still an advantage to moving--Mac's OS is more stable than XP any day of the week, and has fewer security holes. The advantage is greater now because of the smaller market share, but even if they were more evenly matched in the market, Mac would still be the better bet.
What makes you think there are less "security holes" one only has to look at the major debachle of the dock bin file holes to see that the holes are there

They may not be exploited by a virus yet but that does not mean they cant be exploited by people

And that's because there's no real upside to creating a Mac-only virus. Which is why I don't understand why anyone would deliberately open themselves up to the multiple ways they can become infected on an MS machine if they don't have to.
Because the person would know that any product they buy wasmade to workwith Windows?

Because the person would know that any product they buy wasmade to workwith Windows?
Though I am sure me and you would be happy with anything that is standard BIN or source compatiable :)

Though I am sure me and you would be happy with anything that is standard BIN or source compatiable :)
Yeah well me+you != normal PC user's. Oh, add Fass to that, too.

Yeah well me+you!=normal PC user's. Oh, add Fass to that, too.
Oh yeah most deffinatly :)

Though I am sure me and you would be happy with anything that is standard BIN or source compatiable :)
You forgot RPM. Lets not forget LSB.

Really where is the loss coming in? I mean I have run it on our macbook pro at work and have not noticed a problem

Got it from Penny Arcade:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/04/19#1145466240

Got it from Penny Arcade:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/04/19#1145466240
The article says that running Windows ona Mac gives you a performance boost over Mac OS X.

Got it from Penny Arcade:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/04/19#1145466240
Your article says that he got a performance BOOST out of Windows on his mac

The oposite of what you stated before

Your article says that he got a performance BOOST out of Windows on his mac

The oposite of what you stated before
Do I hear an eco?

Also, and this ison subject too. Running older apps on a Mac is somewhat of a hassle. You have to boot Classic (which they are dropping support for) and you run there old OS ontop of their new OS.

Do I hear an eco?

Also, and this ison subject too. Running older apps on a Mac is somewhat of a hassle. You have to boot Classic (which they are dropping support for) and you run there old OS ontop of their new OS.
Yup thats what you get for changing the basis of the OS

Just think if windows pulled that shit with as little support for compatibility as apple did... Even CP when running in compatability mode did better then this

Yup thats what you get for changing the basis of the OS

Just think if windows pulled that shit with as little support for compatibility as apple did... Even CP when running in compatability mode did better then this
CP?

CP?
Sorry typo XP

Sorry typo XP
Oh,ok. I wonder how Vista will do compatability wise. It will no longer use the old NT Kernel, but a brand spanking new one! It is going to have a Kernel where internetsecurity was an actual priorety. Odd since they developed NT as a server.

I run a new 20 inch Intel-based iMac with OS 10.4 (Tiger). If you ask me it is far superior to any Pc I've ever used, and takes up a minimal amount of desktop space. Don't worry about "low clockspeeds" either... although the lcockspeeds are technically low (2 GHz) the computer can do more with it, eg, Quake 4 for mac requires 1.8 GHz, whereas it requires much more on a PC. As for games, although they don't come out as early as on PC, their are numerous companies (Aspyr Media for example) that create Mac versions of most PC games. Including Halo, Quake 4, Civilization 4, Black and White, and The Movies.

I run a new 20 inch Intel-based iMac with OS 10.4 (Tiger). If you ask me it is far superior to any Pc I've ever used, and takes up a minimal amount of desktop space. Don't worry about "low clockspeeds" either... although the lcockspeeds are technically low (2 GHz) the computer can do more with it, eg, Quake 4 for mac requires 1.8 GHz, whereas it requires much more on a PC. As for games, although they don't come out as early as on PC, their are numerous companies (Aspyr Media for example) that create Mac versions of most PC games. Including Halo, Quake 4, Civilization 4, Black and White, and The Movies.
My only real problem now with mac hardware is its price

I run a new 20 inch Intel-based iMac with OS 10.4 (Tiger). If you ask me it is far superior to any Pc I've ever used, and takes up a minimal amount of desktop space. Don't worry about "low clockspeeds" either... although the lcockspeeds are technically low (2 GHz) the computer can do more with it, eg, Quake 4 for mac requires 1.8 GHz, whereas it requires much more on a PC. As for games, although they don't come out as early as on PC, their are numerous companies (Aspyr Media for example) that create Mac versions of most PC games. Including Halo, Quake 4, Civilization 4, Black and White, and The Movies.
The Macs can do more with the lower clock because they got Intel chips with the new Yonah (Now called Core-Dou) architecture. Apple is smart and says the won't touch Presler. I've heard they plan on putting a Conroe chip in the Intel PowerMacs. When Conroe is released, it will be the best desktop processor one could buy, even for things like gaming. Power usuage would be competative with an AMD chip.

I'm thinking about getting a new (laptop or desktop) Mac, instead of a PC.


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

If you plan to play any games, forget it. Even with Bootcamp, you lose tons of performance.
The problem is more compatibility of the software or finding any decent and recent games for the Mac. Performancewise its fast as hell, i run UT2004 of maxed out graphics settings on a G5 without any performance loss, with a standard 128MB graphics card.

Macs are only good for multimedia (video/sound editing, etc).

If you want to use this laptop for something other than that, dont get a mac.

I'd get one if I can get Windows XP running on it as dual-boot as I don't want to be running my PC games under emulation at all. I know Apple were trying to make this scenario hard before Bootcamp came out.

first forget getting a mac, they sucketh meaty, meaty wang unless you are a graphics designer or a character on the OC.

If you wanna play any games they its a PC with win XP or forget it, sad but true

if you're not a gamer I'd reccomend finding a good linux distro, personally I favour SUSE10 but try a few out and see what you like

Macs are only good for multimedia (video/sound editing, etc).

If you want to use this laptop for something other than that, dont get a mac.
I've heard (from more than one site) that the new MacBook Pro is the best Windows laptop around. Though much of that is dependant on how heavy of a laptop the user is willing to put up with.

first forget getting a mac, they sucketh meaty, meaty wang unless you are a graphics designer or a character on the OC.

If you wanna play any games they its a PC with win XP or forget it, sad but true

if you're not a gamer I'd reccomend finding a good linux distro, personally I favour SUSE10 but try a few out and see what you like
Bah! SUSE is pure crap. Package Management is not as eay as it should be. Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, or Fedora Core 5 would be much better choices.