the mac vs. pc argument
 

why must the programmers always have this huge "i <3 open source, so macos is sooo much better"


but i swear, this argument goes nowhere fast

thats not a mac vs. pc argument, thats an open vs. closed source argument. pc's can be open source too

------------------
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mledrew/kid.jpg

This is just a modern rock song,
This is just a sorry lament,
We're four boys in our corduroys,
We're not terrific but we're competent.

hello, linux?

macs are so cute and easy to understand

but i'd settle for a commodore over what i have now, which is, you know, nothing.

Do you drive a Jetta, by any chance?

I'm sure she'd like one.

I <3 U.

I'm a Mac girl! But if i was into gaming i'd go with a PC but generally i just love my apples mmmMMMMMMMMmmmm http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/biggrin.gif and that's not just cos of their good looks

I was about to say... I don't know any programmers, (minus a web designer at work, and my boyfriend who is awesome with macs, but doesn't prefer them) who will even touch apple computers.

Like someone said earlier, most programmers I know seem to prefer Linux.

------------------
~*Sarah Kimberly*~

...and the tragic and
romantic ascent...

AIM: Gazing Iscariot

open source has nothing to do with pc mac (as already said)

but macs are far more powerfull. Anyone doing professional audio or video uses a g4 as it dwarfs the PC

I prefer Big Macs Over Process Chicken

That's crap. By definition PCs are kit machines, and no two are alike. Obviously this is what causes compatibility problems, but if you know what you're doing you can create a monster machine, without having to wait for Apple to get around to it for you. The only reason they are used so much professionally is because of the software which has become standard. And I think it's the print industry which uses them the most

PC's and Mac's process information wayyyyyy differently.... monster machine or not no PC will run Cubase, Reason, Reaktor, Pro-tools, Wave Lab, Rebirth, or Logic as smooth as a G4. a 600mhz mac can out perform a 1.5 Ghz PC plain and simple..... and the newer G4's getting up and over the 1ghz level dwarf the performance of a pc.

If you wanna compare souped up computers I got to play on a g4 with dual 1ghz processors, 1 gig of ram, and a 100gig hardrive..... it dwarfed anything any PC could possibly think about doing short of having 2 complete towers.

in the end production, audio, video mac > PC

i can't even imagine what 2 complete souped up macs could do. but as far as advanced but general use goes, i'll always take a pc, but that's really more of a windows thing than a pc thing. multitasking on a mac is annoying, and though they crash less, its more abnoxious when a mac locks up

Yeah, but nobody programs for them, and they're flashy little pieces of crap that appeal to tree huggers and Sierra members. I hate companies that rely upon a cutesy exterior to sell a product; it makes me think the product is shit. Look at windows XP.

The only good thing about Macs, imho, is Darwin and the BSD kernel. I love Berkley Systems Distribution. Go daemon.

Once again, everyone's stupidity is astounding.

It's not about Mac VS. PC, and it's not about Open VS. Closed source, it's about...

ABACUS VS. CALCULATOR.

Abacus wins you shit eating retards. Now shut the fuck up and whine about homework or whatever the fuck you people do.

klfjaklsdjfsjdf alsdk;fj

yeah i'll give you the general use thing. The PC is designed to do normal crap... checking email, playing games, watching pron, etc.

But in the sense of doing a general use ie audio, video, etc its the poopy. The new G4's with dual processors are designed to be more "pc" but few people using the power of a mac care about whacking off to goatse.

man, i wish!

Do you work for them or something? Some recording studios still use Atari STs running Cubase, and some graphics studios still use Amiga towers with Video Toaster setups - go 8MHz machines!

*sigh* this is exactly what i dont like doing.

when messing with high res imaging (yes, i do it on both platforms VERY often) i honestly dont see the speed difference in a newer imac than i do my computer at home(512megs of RAM + 1.4ghz AMD processor)

i *do* admit, however...when it comes to the g4s, nothing will defeat those...photoshop is a dream come true on those machines.


BUT DAMMIT! I HATE THIS ARGUMENT!

Then why did you start this thread you filthy pigfucker? You knew it was going to turn in to this.



[This message has been edited by sickbadthing (edited 05-01-2002).]

well in case you have no sense of perception, you would have noticed i had a http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/icons/icon13.gif thing next to "the mac vs. pc argument" topic title.
you would have also noticed that my final sentence in the topic was "THIS ARGUMENT GOES NOWHERE FAST" THUS! implying that i hate this argument.


you kids could all make your arguments, i wont read it, i certainly wont take interest in it, but oh well..y'know.

You should have bought a P4 if it's for photoshop

You're just mad because I called you a filthy pigfucker.

its true

Somebody mentioned something about how Macs are used in print media, and that's completely true. I'd be willing to bet that there isn't a single major publication in America that still uses PC's for more than 5% of what they have to do.

Just my two cents.

Possimly tr00, but how many people use a mac who aren't working for media places?

One thig I noticed - Macs turn up heaps more in telly show than pc's because they're "cute".

Mac's are pc's for people who don't use PC's.

PCs are currently getting up there with Macs in audio/video/image editing, but Macs had the technology first, which leads me to believe as soon as PCs are fully caught up, Macs will do something bigger and better.

but maybe i'm just biased.