SVX Network Forums Live Chat! SVX or Subaru Links Old Lockers Photo Post How-To Documents Message Archive SVX Shop Search |
IRC users: |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
For all you "MAC" people
Hi everyone, All you Mac fans, and people with an interest in new computer stuff, were probably impressed with the new I-Mac with the 20 inch monitor. I had heard rumers about what Apple was going to call this new model. I can now confirm that Apple will not call it the"BIG MAC". Take care, BOBB
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
__________________
Lwin M. Maung (Member # 147) Current SVX: • NONE Previous SVXes: •1994 LE Barcelona Red 107k • 1992 LS-L Pearl White 143k • 1994 LSi Bordeaux Pearl 220k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 184k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 145k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 102k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 123k Other current cars:•2001 Jeep Grand Cherokee Black If at first you don't succeed, CHEAT!
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
HEY EVERYBODY...this thread is what we call a TIMEBOMB cause it involves MacIntosh computers...so everyone get back...cause it's going to blow!
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Mac's suck, PC all the way!!
*hides in bomb shelter * Anyone wanna bet on how many posts it will take before someone types up a 3 page post on why one is better then the other?
__________________
[/COLOR][/COLOR]-Scott My Locker 2014 Grey Ford Fusion 2.0 EcoBoost Bought: 12-5-14 2005 Silver Legacy GT Ltd 5mt. Bought: 3-3-07 Sold: 12-5-14 1996 Brilliant Red L (AWD). Bought: 6-14-04 - Sold: 3-3-07 - 15.370 @ 89.65 1992 Claret/black LS #4086 (GF's). Bought: 6-30-04 - Sold: 7-29-07 1994 Pearl White LSi Bought: 2001? Sold: 2004? |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Macs vs PCs
By Dan Kaufman A lot has happened during the past 18 years. The Cold War ended, mobile phones appeared, Diff'rent Strokes went off the air and Lara Croft became a sex symbol. Yet during this time the battle over which are better, PCs or Macs, continued to rage. This hasn't been a mere argument, either. People from both camps became evangelical, created countless newsgroups and websites advocating their views - Mac Sucks is a typical one - and when Steve Jobs announced Microsoft would invest in Apple at 1997's MacWorld Expo, the crowd booed, hissed and some even turned their back on him. For some people, computers aren't a tool - they're a religion. Well, Icon has had enough from both sides. We've decided it's time to take a stand and pick a winner - and for those who will inevitably disagree with our conclusion, remember: violence is not the solution. To critique both platforms we have used the following criteria: ease-of-use, software, performance, stability, style and design, and last, cost. We have awarded points out of 10 for each category and totalled them to find the winner. Because we have compared the platforms from a home user's perspective, we looked at the OS X (10.2) operating system for Apples and Windows XP Home Edition for PCs. We used a variety of computers for this feature but primarily focused on the 15- and 17-inch G4 iMacs and the Acer T300 desktop PC because we deemed them to be average, mid-range systems. Ease-of-use Macs have always been known for their ease of use but they've certainly lost their lead. "Today the two interfaces are so close it's a toss-up what's easiest," says Dr Jakob Neilsen, one of the world's leading usability experts. "The PC has made huge progress from a crummy, substandard design that only a nerd could love to a decent user interface. In contrast, the Mac has made very little progress from a decent and restrained user interface to a decent and flashy user interface." We'd have to agree. OS X initially seems easier to use, especially with its large "Dock" at the bottom of the screen that clearly shows some of the major applications available, but OS X can also be frustrating. For example, there's no specific place where you can always, without fail, find a specific application to load. It could be in the Dock, or in the Applications folder, or on the Desktop, whereas all Windows applications can be found from the Start menu, in addition to being found elsewhere. Neilsen says Windows XP has another advantage, provided you have a flat-panel display: its ClearType technology that displays text more crisply. "It takes advantage of the fact that each 'pixel' on a flat panel is actually three smaller pixels for red, green and blue, and ClearType manages each of these sub-pixels separately. The effect is stunning and almost approximates the clarity of printed text," Neilson says. "Users can read text about 10 per cent faster after turning ClearType on. Since the two platforms are so similar, ClearType makes the difference to me." However, ClearType has to be activated manually (it's buried deep within Control Panel/Appearance and Themes/Display/Appearance/Effects) and most PC users aren't aware it even exists - and without it we found the Mac easier to read. Also, as Neilsen says, many Mac applications such as iPhoto are easier to use than their PC equivalents. As such, we have to call it a draw. PC: 7/10 Apple: 7/10 Software PCs certainly have more software than the Mac but what's important is whether the particular titles you want are available - and the Mac has most application areas well covered. With office software, for example, the Mac not only has a version of Microsoft Office called MacOffice but also AppleWorks, an office-like suite that comes free on iMacs. Internet applications such as web browsers, instant messaging and email are plentiful, as are utilities such as anti-virus packages. An area in which Macs once excelled is graphics and video editing but PCs have largely caught up. In fact, Adobe recently decided to release the latest version of its Premiere video-editing software only on the PC. However, games are a different matter. The Mac has a number of titles but it's nowhere near as well catered for as the PC. More niche areas, such as voice recognition, are limited on the Mac. The voice-recognition package Dragon NaturallySpeaking, for example, is available only on the PC. As such, the PC wins when it comes to software availability. PC: 9/10 Apple: 7/10 Performance The question of which platform is the fastest has always been contentious. Last year, for example, Adobe claimed PCs were faster than Macs by running After Effects, Illustrator and Photoshop operations on both a single-processor Dell 2.53GHz Pentium 4 and a 1.25GHz dual-processor Power Mac G4. Apple, however, argued that the problem was with those particular applications and that some tasks could perform faster on a Mac with different software. This year Apple claimed its new Power Mac G5 (which uses a 64-bit processor codeveloped with IBM) was the world's fastest personal computer and outperformed 3GHz Dell machines using Pentium 4 and Xeon processors. Within hours, criticism surfaced that the benchmarks and testing procedure were slated against PCs. For average home users, however, these arguments are largely academic because most don't make the most of the processor speed they already have. "At the end of the day, applications are not catching up as fast as the hardware," says Andy Woo, a hardware analyst at Gartner. "Hardware, speed and power are not as critical anymore." To play the devil's advocate, we ran a number of matching applications on both platforms, including Macromedia's Dreamweaver and Fireworks, Warcraft III, Microsoft Office, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets and, for the most part, we couldn't tell the difference. That's not to say there wasn't any. The animation and graphic detail in the PC version of Harry Potter were slightly better while an operation in Fireworks (rotating a 472KB JPEG image) was noticeably faster on our test PCs. We ran the latter test on a Pentium 4 2.66GHz Acer T300 with 512MB RAM, a Pentium 4 1.7GHz Dell Dimension with 384MB RAM, a 1.8GHz Pentium 4-M BenQ laptop with 256MB RAM, and a 1GHz G4 iMac with 256MB RAM. The iMac was the slowest, taking 6.4 seconds, while the Dell, our slowest PC, took 2.4 seconds. It should also be noted that even some Mac users acknowledge that the G4 processors are lagging behind Intel's. The Mac-oriented site Bare Feats, for example, has benchmarked both and shows the Pentium 4 is faster. Since it's also easier to boost a PC's speed by upgrading the graphics card or processor, we've made it the winner in this category. PC: 9/10 Apple: 8/10 Stability Both XP and OS X crash less than previous versions but it's the latter that has the better reputation because it is based on the stable UNIX operating system. Most studies find this. In PC Magazine's 2003 Service and Reliability Survey, for example, Mac OS X crashed less for users than Windows XP (as well as other Windows versions), while ConsumerReports.org's 2003 survey showed that Apples crashed less than PCs from other companies (although Dell came a close second). A survey last year by the Australian Consumers Association (ACA) had similar results. "Apple stood out for reliability with 86 per cent of owners reporting no repairs in the past 12 months," says Jessica Ross, editor of Computer Choice, an ACA publication, "but, mind you, Dell came in at 83 per cent and IBM at 82." Macs are also more secure than PCs because most viruses are created for PCs. "Whereas there are tens of thousands of viruses for the PC platform, there are only hundreds of viruses for the Mac," says Paul Ducklin, head of technology at the anti-virus firm Sophos. However, Ducklin says virus writers may target Macs more as they increase in popularity, and that macro viruses, which work through Microsoft Office, work on both platforms. We acknowledge Macs aren't perfect - one of our test iMacs crashed on the second day - but Apple still wins this category. PC: 6/10 Apple: 9/10 Style and design Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there's no doubt more attention was put into the iMac's design than into any desktop PC. First, the iMac is extremely compact - the main unit is encased in a small base that also supports the flat screen via a chrome arm that allows you to raise, tilt and rotate the screen more easily than any monitor we've seen. The arm is also strong enough to act as a handle. Apple also intended the iMac to be thought of more as an appliance than a computer. Its all-in-one design makes it easier to set up and instead of looking like a box with slots and protruding buttons, the dome-shaped base has a smooth front with the optical drive merely an outline. Until you press the keyboard's eject button you almost wouldn't notice it. Last - and, admittedly, this is subjective - we believe the iMac looks more elegant than any desktop PC we've seen. PC: 4/10 Apple: 9/10 Cost Macs have a reputation for being expensive but this isn't necessarily so. For operating systems alone they're actually cheaper - OS X 10.2 costs $229 while Windows XP Home is $463. Comparing the cost of full desktop systems is harder, but if you're buying a brand-name PC you probably won't pay less. For example, the new 15-inch iMac (which was just announced at the time of writing) is $2299 while an Acer T300 with a 15-in LCD monitor and similar specs (that is, 256MB RAM and an 80GB hard-drive) is $2420. There are, however, exceptions. For example, you can buy a Dell Dimension with roughly the same specs for several hundred dollars less (this is because Dell sells directly to consumers rather than through retail outlets). Another option is to buy a "no-name" PC from a local store, although the support and overall quality is sometimes not as good. As such, the PC won this category, albeit by a small margin. PC: 9/10 Apple: 8/10 And the winner is ... The Mac - but not by much. We've given it a score of 48 out of 60, while the PC received 45. The Mac won primarily because of its design and if it had kept its lead in usability, the margin would have been greater. Also, its performance suffered slightly but this is likely to be remedied by the new G5 processors. However, we do believe PCs are better suited for games and running specific software titles. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...676145670.html
__________________
-Steve Member #895(the member formerly known as BurgundyBeast) 01' MSM Lexus IS300 |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks for the cleartype tip. Wow, what a difference
__________________
Andy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If I would be a young man again and had to decide how to make my living, I would not try to become a scientist or scholar or teacher. I would rather choose to be a plumber or a peddler in the hope to find that modest degree of independence still available under present circumstances. -- Albert Einstein, The Reporter, November 18 1954 |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
It's probably true that a MAC running OSX is better for a home user than a PC running Win XP (although you have to take account that home users do not want to spend $$$ on software, and there is much more free/cheap/pirate software for the PC).
However, I'm the sysadmin geek working for a company that develops software for the telecoms industry. We've got all sorts of kit including Macs, PCs, and more expensive kit from Sun, HP, Silicon Graphics, DEC, Tandem etc. As a computer nerd, I find that the most useful machine to have is PC hardware running Linux. Phil. (exec /usr/local/bin/flamesuit) |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
If you think that's good
Quote:
__________________
-Steve Member #895(the member formerly known as BurgundyBeast) 01' MSM Lexus IS300 |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Not this again
__________________
Lwin M. Maung (Member # 147) Current SVX: • NONE Previous SVXes: •1994 LE Barcelona Red 107k • 1992 LS-L Pearl White 143k • 1994 LSi Bordeaux Pearl 220k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 184k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 145k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 102k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 123k Other current cars:•2001 Jeep Grand Cherokee Black If at first you don't succeed, CHEAT!
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
MAC is a network address.
A 'Mac' is a type of computer, made by Apple. MacIntosh is... I have no idea. Anyway, I'm not even getting in this debate. I own both, and I prefer the mac, though I like the flexibility of the PC. If you bash macs, its because you haven't used one much. The only thing I don't like about PCs is windows. It's a ****ty O/S, and it makes things difficult when they don't need to be difficult. - Rob BTW: Why wasn't quartz mentioned? It's apple's version of cleartype or whatever the heck ms calls it. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Lwin M. Maung (Member # 147) Current SVX: • NONE Previous SVXes: •1994 LE Barcelona Red 107k • 1992 LS-L Pearl White 143k • 1994 LSi Bordeaux Pearl 220k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 184k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 145k • 1992 LS-L Liquid Silver 102k • 1992 LS-L Ebony Pearl 123k Other current cars:•2001 Jeep Grand Cherokee Black If at first you don't succeed, CHEAT!
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Reason
Hi Lwin, The main and only reason I started this thread was to get in the part about "BIG MAC". I don't post on any other sites, so it was here or nothing. I didn't want a new PC/MAC war. And Rob, were do you think "MAC" came from? How about "MACINTOSH". The original name for the new Apple computers. Macintosh, a type of apple. Fortunately they didn't carry on. I don't think i want a Granny Smith model computer. Take care, BOBB
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
<<Macs have a reputation for being expensive but this isn't necessarily so. For operating systems alone they're actually cheaper - OS X 10.2 costs $229 while Windows XP Home is $463>>
WTF??? Where did he get his data? You can get either Panther or XP Pro for about $150. Must be an old article. Doug
__________________
1992 LS Touring (6/91) - Currently undergoing a five speed swap Black over Claret with spoiler; 235,000 miles; Mods: 2002 Legacy 5 speed, ACT Pressure Plate, Excedy Clutch, Short Throw Shifter, Aussie Powerchip 1992 LS Touring (6/91) Black over Claret with 2.5" setback spoiler; 202,000 miles; Mods: B&M Cooler 1994 LSi (4/93) Bordeaux Pearl; 198,000 miles; Mods: Weight reduction. 1969 Mustang GT Convertible 1970 Mustang Convertible 2000 Ford Excursion Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua. My Locker |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|