Switch to Mac?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I'm getting ready for a new computer soon and was wondering why I shouldn't
switch to Mac? Between the cute little comp.sci. hackers and spy monkeys
this Windows stuff is getting tedious. My biggest reason for staying PC has
been games but since the biggest thing after Deus Ex has been...what? Half
Life 2? ...that's all changing. Tell me again why I shouldn't go Mac.
Thanks --ned

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:

>If you want to pay twice as much for the hardware ...

Not any more: http://www.apple.com/ca/macmini/

Joe

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:15:14 GMT, Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> wrote:

>>If you want to pay twice as much for the hardware ...
>
>Not any more: http://www.apple.com/ca/macmini/

Much as the Mac Mini is a very neat machine for certain applications,
with a 9200 and a Mac OS, gaming isn't one of them.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Joe62 wrote:

> Have you seen this thing? It's like a computer from the future.

Well, insofar as it's minimalist and excellently designed as all Apple
stuff is. Apart from that it's just a Mac with no monitor or
keyboard/mouse.

--
|
| The New World Order ... Keep You Simple, Stupid.
|

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 05:15:14 GMT, Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> wrote:

>>If you want to pay twice as much for the hardware ...
>
>Not any more: http://www.apple.com/ca/macmini/

Sorry, I forgot to put this in my previous post, you could easily put
together a PC of that spec (not size unfortunately) for half the
price.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Only gaming has kept my from Mac. The Mini-Mac has me sorely tempted.
> Have you seen this thing? It's like a computer from the future.

Why not a PowerBook or iBook? Don't have to worry about a separate
monitor/keyboard/mouse. Remember the Cube? I see the same demise for the Mac
mini.

> If Mac gets just a little popular, so that most major games got ported,
> I'll
> switch.

Steve Jobs was talking "more games on the Mac" circa GeForce 3 cards. Ain't
gonna happen with less than 10% market share, unfortunately. Maybe Apple can
create their own games...iGames.

- f_f

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Joe62 <NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> Spake Unto All:

>>If you want to pay twice as much for the hardware ...
>
>Not any more: http://www.apple.com/ca/macmini/

LOL! Apple XBox.

Yeah, you can get half the hardware for the same amount of money
too...


>Joe

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>> Only gaming has kept my from Mac. The Mini-Mac has me sorely tempted.
>> Have you seen this thing? It's like a computer from the future.
>
>Why not a PowerBook or iBook? Don't have to worry about a separate
>monitor/keyboard/mouse. Remember the Cube? I see the same demise for the Mac
>mini.
>
>> If Mac gets just a little popular, so that most major games got ported,
>> I'll
>> switch.
>
>Steve Jobs was talking "more games on the Mac" circa GeForce 3 cards. Ain't
>gonna happen with less than 10% market share, unfortunately. Maybe Apple can
>create their own games...iGames.
>
>- f_f
>


Good one!


-pw
remove astericks (*) from e-mail address
(use paulwilliamson at spamcop dot net)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <066pu05ocrilqjv24s317t9uuvp5lkmejl@4ax.com>, Joe62
<NOSPAMjmcginn@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote:
>
> >If you want to pay twice as much for the hardware ...
>
> Not any more: http://www.apple.com/ca/macmini/
>
> Joe

That's $499 in real money 🙂

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

--
Dan Stephenson
Photos and movies from US Parks and all over Europe:
http://homepage.mac.com/stepheda

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:20:32 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>Sorry, I forgot to put this in my previous post, you could easily put
>together a PC of that spec (not size unfortunately) for half the
>price.

I disagree. Remember that to get equivalent real-world performance,
assuming at least double clock-speed on the PC you're building.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Joe62" <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> wrote in message
news:lcptu09j20uvchj96lbav3927oon63rl9e@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:20:32 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
> wrote:
>
> >Sorry, I forgot to put this in my previous post, you could easily put
> >together a PC of that spec (not size unfortunately) for half the
> >price.
>
> I disagree. Remember that to get equivalent real-world performance,
> assuming at least double clock-speed on the PC you're building.

So all it really seems to come down to at this point, in this group of
"elite" PC users anyway, is games, and if thats all the PC has going for it
against the Mac... Thanks for your input. I think I'll post the same
question in the Dell ng but am still reluctant to post in a Mac group
because of their legendary ardour which, BTW, is something, umm, 'foreign'
to Billy and his pals and should also be tossed into the equation.--ned

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:15:48 GMT, "One Punch Mickey"
<fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Joe62 wrote:
>
>> Have you seen this thing? It's like a computer from the future.
>
>Well, insofar as it's minimalist and excellently designed as all Apple
>stuff is. Apart from that it's just a Mac with no monitor or
>keyboard/mouse.

How upgrade able is that thing ?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Joe62 <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> Spake Unto All:

>>Sorry, I forgot to put this in my previous post, you could easily put
>>together a PC of that spec (not size unfortunately) for half the
>>price.
>
>I disagree. Remember that to get equivalent real-world performance,
>assuming at least double clock-speed on the PC you're building.

Double performance in what, and as measured how? Except Photoshop?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> So all it really seems to come down to at this point, in this group of
> "elite" PC users anyway, is games, and if thats all the PC has going for
> it
> against the Mac... Thanks for your input. I think I'll post the same
> question in the Dell ng but am still reluctant to post in a Mac group
> because of their legendary ardour which, BTW, is something, umm, 'foreign'
> to Billy and his pals and should also be tossed into the equation.--ned

There are software and drivers to consider, too. You'd be hard-pressed to
find Mac software in a place like BestBuy or even Wal-Mart. Most third-party
Mac software has a Windows equivalent (except for the apps Apple makes, like
Final Cut Pro). Also, when OS X came out it took months for companies like
Canon and Epson to develop printer drivers for their equipment, especially
older models.

I have a Dell and a Mac G4 at work. The Dell gets turned on every day since
most folks around here use PC's. I fire up the Mac once or twice a month. I
actually like using both platforms, but a PC offers more bang for a
consumer's buck.

- f_f

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 06:55:22 -0500, no@nowhere.com wrote:

>How upgrade able is that thing ?

Probably not at all internally except for maybe the HD. Everything
else would have to be via USB or Firewire.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"faster_framerates" <nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:csols1$6av$1@news.tamu.edu...
> > So all it really seems to come down to at this point, in this group of
> > "elite" PC users anyway, is games, and if thats all the PC has going for
> > it
> > against the Mac... Thanks for your input. I think I'll post the same
> > question in the Dell ng but am still reluctant to post in a Mac group
> > because of their legendary ardour which, BTW, is something, umm,
'foreign'
> > to Billy and his pals and should also be tossed into the equation.--ned
>
> There are software and drivers to consider, too. You'd be hard-pressed to
> find Mac software in a place like BestBuy or even Wal-Mart. Most
third-party
> Mac software has a Windows equivalent (except for the apps Apple makes,
like
> Final Cut Pro). Also, when OS X came out it took months for companies like
> Canon and Epson to develop printer drivers for their equipment, especially
> older models.
>
> I have a Dell and a Mac G4 at work. The Dell gets turned on every day
since
> most folks around here use PC's. I fire up the Mac once or twice a month.
I
> actually like using both platforms, but a PC offers more bang for a
> consumer's buck.
>
> - f_f
>
Does one unit require more maintence than the other??
--ned

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:21:40 +0100, Mean_Chlorine
<mike_noren2002@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Double performance in what, and as measured how? Except Photoshop?

Pretty much anything (except I can't say for games, don't have a lot
of experience running Mac games): opening programs and general
operations. Photoshop is the best example though since it's both
memory and CPU intensive, and it does tasks long enough to measure
with a stopwatch. It gives the system a real workout.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:21:22 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:

>Probably not at all internally except for maybe the HD. Everything
>else would have to be via USB or Firewire.

Memory you can do yourself too, but yeah that's about it.

Then again I find that upgradability is a totally oversold and
over-rated element of PCs. Usually by the time I want to upgrade what
I need is a new CPU/motherboard/graphics ... or in other words a new
computer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Joe62 <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> Spake Unto All:

>>Does one unit require more maintence than the other??
>
>PC, no question. That's a huge advantage of Mac, you can just use it
>forever with no maintenance.

That does not correspond with my experience. If you're ever going to
encounter infinite amounts of bizarre mystery configuration errors,
it's on a mac. And it's not exactly gotten better since the switch to
a unix-based core.

Also noone has pointed out that Mac OS 10 is slow as molasses, slow to
a degree windows users simply would not believe, and an orgy in stupid
design decisions.

That the majority of software, including parts of the OS, is run in
_emulation_ is no doubt part of the reason for the mac sluggishness.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Joe62 <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> Spake Unto All:

>>Double performance in what, and as measured how? Except Photoshop?
>
>Pretty much anything (except I can't say for games, don't have a lot
>of experience running Mac games): opening programs and general
>operations.

Hm. No. MacOS 10 is horribly slow compared to WinXP.

> Photoshop is the best example though since it's both
>memory and CPU intensive, and it does tasks long enough to measure
>with a stopwatch. It gives the system a real workout.

No, it's Mac software ported to the PC. That's why it's slow on the
PC. It's like using Microsoft Office for a benchmark - do you think
the PC or the Mac would win that one?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Does one unit require more maintence than the other??
> --ned

Both OS X and Windows XP offer automatic updates via your online connection
at no charge. OS X is built upon Unix and is the only operating system I
have never crashed (programs have crashed within it, but you can gracefully
close them if the OS recognizes a problem). Windows requires frequent
virus/worm/etc. security updates with your anti-virus application of choice.
Conversely, there are not many Mac viruses around, but they have existed in
the past (mostly worms) pre-OS X.

As far as physical maintenance, I don't see much of a difference. It seems
to me Apple is gearing their computers to accept and connect to external
devices more and more (FireWire burners, hard drives, etc.) whereas most
tech geeks want all of those goodies contained in their PC boxes. Less of a
mess of cables and power supplies that way (and I prefer it all
self-contained myself).

HTH,

f_f

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

>>>Does one unit require more maintence than the other??
>>
>>
>> PC, no question. That's a huge advantage of Mac, you can just use it
>> forever with no maintenance.

Not necessarily. My coworker has had font problems galore. She probably has
too many anyway, so we ordered her Extensis Suitcase to manage them.

Hardware-wise, her motherboard battery went out after two-and-a-half years
and now her fancy, shmancy Cinema Display is on the fritz (probably due to
the G4's power supply wigging out). The non-DVI, "oval" Mac monitor
connection draws power from the tower and therefore the monitor doesn't have
an external power cord.

- f_f

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"faster_framerates" <nothanks@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:csr4v7$i53$1@news.tamu.edu...
> >>>Does one unit require more maintence than the other??
> >>
> >>
> >> PC, no question. That's a huge advantage of Mac, you can just use it
> >> forever with no maintenance.
>
> Not necessarily. My coworker has had font problems galore. She probably
has
> too many anyway, so we ordered her Extensis Suitcase to manage them.
>
> Hardware-wise, her motherboard battery went out after two-and-a-half years
> and now her fancy, shmancy Cinema Display is on the fritz (probably due to
> the G4's power supply wigging out). The non-DVI, "oval" Mac monitor
> connection draws power from the tower and therefore the monitor doesn't
have
> an external power cord.
>
> - f_f
>
>
Thanks a lot, -f_f. You're the kind of person I was hoping would respond.
I like the idea of a Mac but have used a PC for almost 15 years and have
come to enjoy trying different software and problem solving, something I
would miss going Mac. Maybe I should consider a Mac laptop as a secondary
music, art, writing toy just to get a feel for it...
Thanks again for your input. --ned

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> Thanks a lot, -f_f. You're the kind of person I was hoping would
> respond.
> I like the idea of a Mac but have used a PC for almost 15 years and have
> come to enjoy trying different software and problem solving, something I
> would miss going Mac. Maybe I should consider a Mac laptop as a secondary
> music, art, writing toy just to get a feel for it...
> Thanks again for your input. --ned

If you've got the money, I'd say go for it! I'd like to own a PowerBook
myself whenever my wife is hogging our pieced-together PC, but, as a grad
student and new parent, funds are limited. It would be nice to simply write
or design or surf while sitting on the couch.

Mac OS X is an elegant operating system and kinda neat to use, quite
honestly. It's rock solid, but takes some time to navigate around. Since
you're a novice, I'd find a nice reference book you can agree with at Barnes
& Noble that will walk you through Apple's "Think Different" mentality of
computing. For instance, to eject a "mounted" disc (and there are several
ways these days), you drag the icon to the Trash. Huh?

Take a friend's PowerBook or iBook for a test drive.

- f_f

 

[jayhawker]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Mean_Chlorine wrote:

> Thusly Joe62 <jmcginnNOSPAM@radicalREALLYNOSPAM.ca> Spake Unto All:
>
>
>>>Double performance in what, and as measured how? Except Photoshop?
>>
>>Pretty much anything (except I can't say for games, don't have a lot
>>of experience running Mac games): opening programs and general
>>operations.
>
>
> Hm. No. MacOS 10 is horribly slow compared to WinXP.
>
>
>>Photoshop is the best example though since it's both
>>memory and CPU intensive, and it does tasks long enough to measure
>>with a stopwatch. It gives the system a real workout.
>
>
> No, it's Mac software ported to the PC. That's why it's slow on the
> PC. It's like using Microsoft Office for a benchmark - do you think
> the PC or the Mac would win that one?
>

Mac. MS wrote MS Office from the ground up for the Mac. Overall, it's
a better product. Macs are easier to write for.

Switched over two years ago. Had been using PCs for years, but got sick
of the BS. Hardware conflicts, software conflicts, flat out horrible OS
programming. PC users have just accepted that all those hiccups are normal.

The lack of software scare tactic is a joke. It comes down to games.
95% of computer users will find software for what they want to do for
either system. They will also find a glut of programs that either fail
to work, or load their sytems with assorted malware for Windows.

What are these magic programs that Mac users are being deprved of?

Jayhawker