See, I am a PC and a Mac. I defend Microsoft constantly when people bash them for everything. I like all the PCs I've ever had. Never had a bad one, nor a bad Windows installation. Windows just works for me I guess.
This is the first time I defended Mac. On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:16 AM, James Rankin wrote: > Guess we are all Mac or PC then. kinda like Elvis or Beatles. > Schwarzenegger or Stallone. Newcastle or Sunderland. On and on it > can go. > > Or it's like girlfriends. I think mine is great, but only because I > have had time to explore her feature set and ignore all her little > foibles. other people's mileage would probably vary :-) > > 2008/12/18 TJ <[email protected]> > The fact that I can run Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, and > Illustrator at the same time makes ME feel like it's more > optimized. I can also run Firefox with 15-20 tabs open at all > times, plus my mail client, my FTP client, some utility apps, a chat > program, etc > > What are you talking about? I do this NOW! On a PC, circa 2001, 2G > of RAM and I see no major problems at all! Really. I am not > understanding this. > > I'll tell you my experience with a friend at a Mac Store.... This > is a mid-40's year old business man who runs a very successful > business - he's no dope. He walks over to a Mac and begins going > through the menus, the programs, opens up apps and clicks around a > lot - keeps saying "isnt this cool?" and I just let him go on and > on. I probably heard "isnt this cool" about 1/2 dozen times before > I looked at him and asked "isnt WHAT cool? What EXACTLY is cool > John?" and with that, he looked at me and said "forget it. you're > just dont understand". > > Well, he's right! I DO NOT understand. If I did that with my PC, > he'd think I was psycho or something. > > This is what I dont get. The machines are the same. The hardware > is the same. The components are the same. The MEMORY is the same. > > Ah, forget it. I've got work to do. > > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Eric Brouwer <[email protected]> > wrote: > The fact that I can run Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, and > Illustrator at the same time makes ME feel like it's more > optimized. I can also run Firefox with 15-20 tabs open at all > times, plus my mail client, my FTP client, some utility apps, a chat > program, etc. All at the same time. Never even a slight hesitation > in performance of any kind. I can barely run DW and PS together on > my PC. > > I LIKE PCs. Like the majority of us here, I make my money ON and > WITH PCs. For my network administration stuff, I use an IBM > ThinkPad running Vista. I even defend Vista. I don't have a > fraction of the problems the masses like to report. It's a decent > OS, in MY opinion. > > BUT, I enjoy the Mac experience a great deal more. Physics aside, > yes, I do think the Mac "moves 1s and 0s" around faster. If you > want me to say it, I'll say it. I PREFER the Mac experience to my > Windows experience because of it's performance. > > How is my defense of Macs, saying their optimized, less accurate > than the statement that they're simply generic white boxes? > > And I didn't realize Mac was the only OS burdened with updates. I > could have sworn I've had to run updates on my PC once or twice in > the past. > > On Dec 18, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Ken Schaefer wrote: > >> OK – let's get back to basics here. Unless you believe in the Jobs >> RDF, then Macs still obey basic laws of physics. They don't move 1s >> and 0s around any faster than other electronic devices. They use >> the same graphics cards, hard drives, memory, LCD displays, CPUs >> and chipsets and so on that are available in every other brand. The >> design might be good, but I don't see what they have over similarly >> priced competitors (even Dell's getting into decently looking >> hardware these days). >> >> So, please explain, in some more detail, what exactly you find >> "optimised"? I have two Macs here at home (just for my own use), >> and plenty of others I come into contact with. I can't say I've >> seen anything spectacular about them (except that I need to install >> 100MB of updates each month). >> >> There's one thing to say "I prefer the way the OS works – it suits >> the way I think". It's another thing to say that an OS magically >> gets more Hz out of a CPU... >> >> Cheers >> Ken >> >> From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, 19 December 2008 12:16 AM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: OT - Anyone VM a Mac Leopard OS on a PC? >> >> I was a COMPLETE anti-Mac zealot up to June of this year. Then I >> was forced to work on them at my new job. Now I'm begging for one >> of my own. I admit, there still seems to be a lot of voodoo and >> black magic going on in the Macs, but they run amazingly well. I >> can run far more apps with better response on a Mac of "lesser" raw >> tech specs than I can on any PC. >> >> Granted, I can't speak about the mac performance vs. a *nix based >> computer as I don't have the experience. Also, my experience with >> Macs is their G5 and Power Books, not the Macbook, mini, nor iMac. >> Far more expensive, to be sure, but a much better all around >> experience for me. >> >> So yes, in my experience, the Macs are very optimized IMHO. They >> just seem much more dialed in out of the box. >> >> On Dec 17, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Ken Schaefer wrote: >> >> >> Huh? I haven't noticed anything particularly optimised about the >> two Macs (one Macbook and one Mac Mini) I have at home, that I >> can't get in other brands... >> >> Cheers >> Ken >> >> From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Thursday, 18 December 2008 5:02 AM >> To: NT System Admin Issues >> Subject: Re: OT - Anyone VM a Mac Leopard OS on a PC? >> >> Agreed. Apple's are FAR from generic white boxes. They are HIGHLY >> optimized, extremely efficient architectures. >> >> On Dec 17, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Jonathan Link wrote: >> >> >> >> It's not whitebox, it's branded, that brand is Apple. When I >> purched my MBPro, I spec'ed similary equipped notebooks from HP, >> Dell and Lenovo. Apple was more expensive than some, less than >> others, and I had the option of running a true UNIX as was >> mentioned earlier. >> >> Apple is a Tier 1 manufacturer just as HP, Dell and Lenovo are. >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:11 PM, <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> "Joseph L. Casale" <[email protected]> wrote on 12/17/2008 >> 11:13:17 AM: >> >> >> > >Yes, but Apple is all about total control - if you limit the OS to >> > only running hardware you produce, then you absolutely know that it >> > is *guaranteed* to work with any hardware your customer owns, and > >> > you can spend your software time and resources in other directions, >> > rather than finding ways to make it run on any hardware ever >> > invented (which is part of MS's problem). >> > > >> > >That's the theory, as I see it, anyway. >> >> > This was exactly my point in the old justification towards the >> > expense of the platform. >> Sorry; I haven't been following the whole thread ... >> >> > Now its whitebox intel run-of-the mill stuff? Does this _still_ >> apply? >> It does if they say so. :-) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Eric Brouwer >> IT Manager >> www.forestpost.com >> [email protected] >> 248.855.4333 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > Eric Brouwer > IT Manager > www.forestpost.com > [email protected] > 248.855.4333 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eric Brouwer IT Manager www.forestpost.com [email protected] 248.855.4333 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
