Mac vs. PC(pic)

[patrickl]

Wait! Those retards in Redmond miscalculated! 1,2,3,95,98,2000,XP,Vista.... Windows 9!

Actually it's Win 3, NT 3, NT 4, NT 5 (2000), NT 5.1 (Xp), NT 6 (Vista) ...

[patrickl]

Lol, I looked for some benchmarks and apparently Vista is faster on a Mac Pro than OS X 

That's no benchmarks! Its just some opinion.

And why is Vista running so good, because the MacPro is the best PC.

Yet OS X is worse than the apparently "crappy" Vista on the same hardware.

[patrickl]

To be honest I hate all the graphic nonsense so I switch to the classic (Windows 2000) look of the interface.

This one always gives me a chuckle. Certainly this is a factor in why Macs are so popular - the interface doesn't 'look clunky, but 'artful' ' .

Well as the Mac Pro guy actually said, he liked the Vista interface better than whatever he had running on OS X too.

Anyway, I don't want "artful", but I want "business". I don't want shiny buttons and see through effects. No "form over function" for me.

[Blanka]

Anyway, I don't want "artful", but I want "business". I don't want shiny buttons and see through effects. No "form over function" for me.

That sentence is just plain asking for OSX. Tiger looks dull plain here. As a bonus you get more screen estate, as all the buttons and other eye-candy are bigger in Vista.

[patrickl]

Anyway, I don't want "artful", but I want "business". I don't want shiny buttons and see through effects. No "form over function" for me.

That sentence is just plain asking for OSX. Tiger looks dull plain here. As a bonus you get more screen estate, as all the buttons and other eye-candy are bigger in Vista.

Not when you use the classic (Windows 20000) theme in Vista.

[DrumAnBass]

Yet another reason I am a Mac user - Tron Guy:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPON5i7Iivw[/youtube]

[2600]

I use all of them with a fair amount of regularity, and Firefox & iTunes are the only apps I run on all platforms. I am looking forward to Apple launching a 64bit version of OSX, as all of their 1st party applications are reported to be migrating to 64bit as well. If MAME64 is any indication, the boost on my system will be fairly noticeable, and one of the rare moments when a software upgrade nets me better CPU performance. I wish there were more 64bit apps for me to throw on Vista as well - The hardware advances are really outpacing the software advances these days.

FYI, Leopard is 64-bit and Tiger had limited 64-bit support.

[protokatie]

Ahh the good ol' days. I still miss my C64, and GEOS was the bomb back then

[boykster]

Wait! Those retards in Redmond miscalculated! 1,2,3,95,98,2000,XP,Vista.... Windows 9!

Actually it's Win 3, NT 3, NT 4, NT 5 (2000), NT 5.1 (Xp), NT 6 (Vista) ...

eh, forgot Windows 1 and 2...yes, there were Windows 1.x and windows 2.x releases

And it does get funky when the NT kernel and win9x kernel paths split.

[boykster]

Ahh the good ol' days. I still miss my C64, and GEOS was the bomb back then

I loved GEOS on my C=64.....that was teh kewl!

[DrumAnBass]

Hehe I was a major GEOS user back in the day too; doing my reports for high school in different fonts with illustrations etc, printing em on my dot matrix printer for hours on end... Ah man those were the days ;-)

[Dartful Dodger]

A better Mac vs. PC(pic) wound be to have the title say Mac vs. PC(2004-2008)
Use the same PC pic but on the Mac side have that computer sitting on top of a pile of 3 older gimicky computers with a $4000x4 price tag under it.

What drove me away from Macs was that every year they'd release a new operating system that made the older operating system obsolete and you couldn't upgrade to it because it was to big to run the previous year's computer.

My first Mac was an OS 7 and I was upset with Microsoft because it seemed that Windows was trying to bend over backwards to make Macs incompatible with PCs.  The next year Mac OS 8 was released and Macintosh was trying to bend me over forwards.

I can still run most of the newer programs on a Win98 machine.