Actually, I worship no one but am merely a true capitalist who goes with a market proven product. (Apple has weathered this economy relatively well and better than most, if not all, of its competitors.) Apple has not had to try and buy its way into the hearts of the consumers, nor did they go out and buy out all of their competitors like MS has done over the years. Furthermore, you need to read for comprehension my friend...I told you where I work they buy Dell's and I build my own Win boxes...your rage blinds you. You dog the Dell's, Lenovo's, and probably the HP's of the world, but these are the majority of the computers in the corporate sector. I have never owned a Dell, nor would I buy one for myself. You call those who do not build computers "nimrods who cant (sic) spend (sic) some research on the computer..." I think I know what you are trying to say. I have built many a box, bought my first PC in 1986, blah-blah. I could say just as easily that "nimrods are those who are too lazy to write their own code or do any embedded programming, or nimrods are those who don't know their predicate calculus or Boolean Algebra," but I won't for we all have our personal likes.
Furthermore, I do not own a 2.66 Intel Core 2 Duo. I don't understand where people get off dogging the Apple hardware when it is the same processor that is used in the Win boxes. If one likes style, then you cannot beat a Mac for aesthetics...so why dish those who like the looks of the Mac? Maybe it is because you cannot afford one? If so, then don't begrudge those who can. You boast of the overclocking...well, Apple is boasting the same about their new Xeon being overclocked to 3.3GHz...your point?
Though the mult-threaed capabilities are there, they are far from being the norm...far too much programming for all of those 1000's of apps available for Windows for them to sit down and reprogram the apps to work in parallel. With the new upcoming Mac OS X, Apple has decided to work with the Kronos group and support an OpenCL (multi-threaded apps/Parallel Processing.) This will put the OS advantage in Apple's hands since it is basically open-source, something MS has refused to do in the past...and this will be the death of MS unless they see the light.
Again, the reality is that very few applications are written to run in parallel. Sure we can do some multi-tasking, but true parallel processing is rare indeed. If you don't believe me then test for yourself: http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-concurrency-checker-icchecker-10/ "Most virtualization software today cannot use all 64 processors, much less the 1,024 of the high-end box, and database software, middleware, and applications all have their own limits on scalability."
Apple has made the decesion to go with OpenCL, which will give the programming community direct access to PP capabilities. All the while MS is trying ever so desperately to recover from Vista with Win7. So, while the Mac OS is working towards sytem optimization and continually building upon it Unix kernal, it seems that MS is constantly reinventing the wheel. They are continually building their OSes from scratch, but no problem, Apple will help them with Win7 "Microsoft is also borrowing a few other ideas from Leopard, including Web Clippings (Microsoft calls them "Web Slices"), Apple Data Detectors (which Microsoft calls "Accelerators"), Smart Folders (which lack Leopard's smart query functions, but are nonetheless called "Libraries"), and Apple's Bonjour-style simplified local networking and file and device sharing (which Microsoft refers to as "HomeGroup", pictured below)."
You people who do the name calling should stand back and try to figure out how to port the Mac OS to that fancy rig of yours. Now your are talking genius. For those of us who have been loyal to Windows since 1986 and have decided to finally abandon ship, then you need to realize that is not because of any "fanboy" values, but because we have grown tired of the Windows headaches, tired of the bloat, and tired of a lack of innovativeness. Finally, look at the numbers the retail price of Vista Ultimate 64-bit is $219.95, yet I can get a family pack of Mac OS X for $159...hmmm.
Yea, I have read about the problems with the USSS networks, the viruses, the system attacks...I am sure the system you speak of is what the staff uses. I know that at Norad and other high-security areas they are using mostly Unix. Tell me, is it because of this wonderful Win OS you speak of why the military has locked down many of it bases from accessing the Internet? Finally, if the Feds are using it then that is reason enough for me to jump ship!
I work with both Mac OS and Vista 64-bit CS3 and CS4...the Mac CS3 is about on equal terms with CS4. But, why would you want to buy CS4 when there really is nothing new about it? Wait for CS5, and it will be 64-bit for both and there will be some decent software upgrades (we hope), and maybe Adobe will get the text engine right with Fireworks. But, my speed comparisons are anecdotal and I merely was responding to a question...relax.
Point is, I am happy that the new Mac's are out. Think I will get the 24" 3.09GHz one with the Radeon gpu in a month or so...or maybe wait for Snow Leopard.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram