Mac

True, the GPU plays a role but that card is quite outdated as well ...

I do have a brand-spanking-new iMac i7. While it is much faster, I have to say I'm not really blown away .... but maybe I just expected too much.

I think one of the problems is that computer speed is always lagging behind other development .... especially concerning video editing and compression.

 

No but I believe amongst those of us apple customers who had problems and didn't have the money to get apple to fix it, most of us got dick all assistance from apple outside the warranty.

And you know what irritates me about it all. I would have saved 250EU if I had waited another month before buying my faulty mac, and that money would have covered a three year warranty.

I know many will disagree, but this is how I see it.

Apple = cunts

 

You're right. They have super tough policies.

Thanks to Steve.

 

I just seem to spend 50% of my time looking at this-



2GHz processor?

+ I'm too busy using it to be bothered trying to work out why the fuck it's going so slow al the time. i think it's these two ext HDs I am using TBH

 

Run Activity Monitor and see.

 

Activity monitor shows nothing untoward, and in any case if there is something running in the background I've got no clue what it could be as I'm not a computer whizz kid. I didn't buy a mac to end up constantly doing fucking system maintenance on it anyway...

 

Sorry, but during the time frame I was referring to, the '90's, the Motorola chips did provide better floating point performance than Intel cpu's. It is floating point calculations that are important in graphic rendering.
The support for large monitors with a high bit depth is a function of whatever video chipset and vram being employed, not the cpu.

I worked with an AutoCAD, 3d-StudioMax & Adobe reseller in the 90's and we tested different hardware configurations and operating systems for both specific mechanical design/graphic work and daily business application environments.
Time and again, the Power PC hardware would edge out the Intel in the area of graphics (in Adobe products) and Intel surpassed in business apps and AutoCAD.
Simply had to do with the cpu architecture.
So my opinions are based on what I personally witnessed, not some tech sheets or promo ads.

Again, I was talking strictly about the difference's in the hardware's capabilities, not how stylish the case is or the OS.

Your right, now Windows apps can run native on Macs, because they are using Intel cpu's and architecture, and Windows is compiled for x86 instructions.
Before on a PowerPC based system they had to run in an x86 emulation environment. Guess I should have been more clear about that.

You seem to miss the point that as far as the hardware is concerned, Macs are essentially the same as PC's now. End of story. Any real differences between the two beyond the OS is a thing of the past.

I will agree that the Mac OS is inherently more stable, has less virus vulnerabilities and such.
But you do understand the reason why don't you?
It's because when considering the whole of computer usage and marketplace, hardly anybody uses them, and they are still proprietary machines. What that means is that they have to write the OS to work with much, much fewer hardware configurations than Windows.

You do understand that more choices in applications and flexibility of hardware configurations is exactly why Windows is less stable than Mac OS, and why the PC is more popular don't you?

It's a catch-22 situation. If you want a more stable computing environment with much fewer choices of applications and hardware configurations, then buy a Mac.

If you want more choices in applications and hardware configurations with the trade-off of OS stability, go with a PC.

Comes down to personal preference and what you are going to use it for.
It really is just that simple.

 

Exactly why I prefer PC's. If something takes a shit, I open the case, hop to the store, pick up a new part, slap it in, configure and get back up and running. As I stated earlier, the proprietary hardware the Mac used is the reason the IBM-PC model took the lion's share of the marketplace early on.

 

Solution: buy the right parts, build the machine, then slap OS X on it.

Welcome to Hackintosh.

 

:2thumbsup:

 

I don't think you will find any evidence that people bought Macs back then for the floating point performance or graphics performance.

I remember that for years, multiple monitors just worked on the Mac, but there were all sorts of problems on PCs with extended desktops and having more than 2 monitors.

Well, my brother worked for ATI during that time and he reports that the Mac was always slower. Beginning around 1997, all Macs had graphics cards.

And it's been like that since about 2005, so you are living in the past.

I am not missing the point, because you are minimizing the OS advantage which is huge.

 

fuck mac.

my wife's 2003 Acer laptop is still my living room home entertainment machine.

 

Then my computer will looks like shit + work properly. Bonus.

 

News: Apple has topped all computer makers in the annual American Customer Satisfaction Index report for the eighth year in a row, adding to its lead over rivals.

 

To avoid quoting:

There once was an advantage in instructions per clock cycle, so that even slower PPC chips (measured in MHz) could do more than x86 chips. There was an advantage in floating point calculations.

This changed, as well as the power and heat specs of PPC chips becoming totally unacceptable for personal computer use. Apple saw it coming and made the switch, just as PC hardware REALLY pulled ahead of the stagnated PPC hardware.

And the hardware is irrelevant, as long as it works and works faster and runs osx. Apple has a great advantage using PC compatable hardware, and no loss whatsoever. Malware for windows will not run, any more than it would on a PPC mac. The OS is what you have to write a virus for, the hardware doesn't have anything to do with it at all. Even if you wrote it in machine language, it would have to play nice with the OS.

So: macs are faster, more compatable, easier for apple to design (giving more time for software design) and the software is what matters.

Imagine trying to sell a G5 without an OS.... And it has quartz floating point calculation capabilities and it's all silver and shit and and and it's got a top of the line card from your choice of ATI or nvidia and.... it doesn't do anything!

Nobody bought a mac because of PPC, literally nobody. They bought macs because of the OS that ran on them, and that's why they continue to buy macs.

 

That's just it, Apple is a software company, they sell software in nice shiny hardware boxes. It's very nicely polished, very specific software designed to do the tasks that APPLE wants them to do. Reduced instruction small pipeline processors are fine for doing very SPECIFIC tasks. That was fine for apple until more flexibility was needed for more powerful OS versions and applications. PC's were designed for much broader applications and software. More instructions, longer pipelines looked bad under a specific spotlight with no regard for CPU instruction optimization (megahertz myth video). That video is so narrow and deceptive the animation even has the Intel CPU running at half speed! Once they realized they needed this more versatile processor for new software, that was it for PPC. Right, Mac users don't care, they just want their brand top of the line status. "I only buy the best and Mac's are the Cadillac of computers"... or what the fuck ever they want to believe as they use their mac to read email, Facebook, youtube and slide their little widgets around.

 

Sorry, this is total bullshit. You just made it up. Apple went with Motorola because Motorola promised their G3, G4, and G5 would be much faster than they turned out to be. Apple got tired of their broken promises and went with Intel. You don't seem to be aware that most computer-savvy Linux geeks are now choosing Macs. PCs are losing market share. Also, most college freshmen are choosing Macs.

 

I know dozens of 'computer savyvy linux geeks', I worked in IT, computer hardware and console repair for over 15 years, I'm A+ and CCNA certified. None of the guys I know have or are the least bit interested in Macs!

 

You don't get out much, do you? At nearly every non-Microsoft tech conference for the last few years, there have been more people using Macs and iPads than PCs.

Here's a photo of the Facebook team that developed messaging