(Maddogjew

Hmmm. Maybe folks folks would like windows and PC based machines more if they knew how to use them properly.)

*******

I guess I appreciate a computer that doesn't blame the user for why it decided not to work.

We have XP in the house, and it's better than ME and whatnot, but how could it not be? It's still a pain in the ass -- sometimes it works, sometimes it half-works, but when it doesn't, it's a flip of the coin whether you'll figure out if it's some driver you need, or some conflict, etc. And of course it's the user's fault that the machine doesn't work like, say, the Mac does. Most of the time, for anything besides simple stuff, my roomies end up using my Mac.

I've plugged in 2 printers, music keyboards, camcorders into the Mac -- they've all worked instantly and perfectly. The programs that come with the Mac for free are better than what I wasted money on in my Windows days. Life's too short to tinker and fidget with a machine that's erratic and badly designed in the first place.

It's like if your TV only changed channels when it felt like it -- if you choose to put up with it, that's totally fine. But it's not how it should be, it certainly shouldn't be excused, and it definitely shouldn't be blamed on the user.

SpyVsSpy: definitely shouldn't be blamed on the user.


Then why do I never have problems with my own machines crashing? I have four PCs and I don't have any problems with any of them. Now if I let me 9year old niece get on one, she will make it have problems. I see it all the time in my shop. I fix PCs for a living. The people who are clueless are the ones who have problems or they bought cheap shiatty machines to begin with.

wow, so did anyone rtfa to comment on it?? or is it just a big flame war?

/submitter sure was prescient!
//submitter
///first approved submission

The fact that you fix PCs for a living, isn't that a clue? Should all computer owners be expected to fix PCs for a living before they are called "clueless?"

Do you know how to fix your car, TV, plumbing, etc? Should by any stretch of the imagination should you be expected to? And even if you were, does that excuse bad programming, design, shoddy software, etc, all trademarks of the Windows world?

If your 9 year old niece used a Mac, she'd have no problem, doesn't that say something?

Anyway, not interested in a Mac/PC war, just giving my experience. I understand some people like PCs and use them, sometimes by choice, sometimes by force of their work, game availability, etc. But I'll never understand this defense of Windows continual legacy of piss-poor design, sludgy, stuttering performance, and half-assed construction.

SpyVsSpy: Do you know how to fix your car, TV, plumbing, etc?


Well, it's funny you should ask that because yes, I do.

But I'll never understand this defense of Windows

I'm defending X86 hardware, not windows.

Well, fine then. You've skipped the whole point of my comments, so we'll agree to disagree.

I like how on Fark there's always this selective cherry-pick answering of questions, whether it's computers, politics, music, etc.

Whatever.

If you dig the PC experience, then keep on keeping on.

Peace ...

LANshark

So, mac peeps, how's OSX running on your G3's? That's kind of the arguement at hand. A 4 year old Mac is no better suited to run today's apps than a 4 year old PC.

OS X is running fine on all the G3 iMacs and towers I come across. And I come across some. It runs just fine on the older iBooks and Powerbooks as well. If anything, it's the amount of memory that can be stuffed into the old machine that can't keep up. Some old iBooks for instance only have one extra slot for RAM with some built into the logic board. That limitation will make the machines obsolete before the OS does. The recent software works, but without sufficient memory Phtoshop CS 2 get jerky. It still works though. You just can't open the entire creative suite , Quark and Final Cut and expect it to be as smooth as a G5 tower.

On the other hand, try loading XP on a 1999 wintel box. Have fun scrounging drivers and trying to find that old floppy install for the network card.

Every 10 posts theres someone who claime he can build a better machine for $500 or something providing they pirate the OS and use their old video card. I've always wanted to ask these people why they don't build their cars that way. I bet you could take your mom's old subaru, drop in a rebuilt engine, get some used tires, redo the upholstery yorself, repair the body, repaint and whatnot. Why don;t you do that?

Because it's a pain in the ass and you never stop dicking with it is why. The gaskets will leak and the CV joints will have to be replaced next month. It never ends. If you're a motorhead who likes doing it and has all the tools, just knock yourself out and save a few bucks. If it makes you feel superior you can even mock your friends and family for not doing the same.

The rest of us will spend a few bucks more and buy something a little more reliable. We might even just buy a new Mac Mini for $500 and make your argument totally moot.

Geeze... I leave for work, and the thread explodes.

Just a bit of info for the "Macs never break" crowd. I work in a repair shop which fixes Macs and PCs, and we have a pretty even queue on both sides of the shop. Though I have to say Apple is the only company I've seen that routinely has to recall parts for defects (I believe iMac G5 power supplies started going out 4 months after release) Don't believe me? Google "Apple Recall."

You just don't see that in the PC world. Reason being is if you release a product that is defective and has to be recalled, people just switch to another manufacturer. While you're fixing the problem, your competitor taking all your business. With Apple, their users just gripe and complain until the problem is fixed, and then go on to buy their next mac some time down the road. No market pressure, no need to make sure it works before leaving the shop.

And before you start bashing me over the head with windows bugs, I'm talking about hardware. Microsoft is guilty of the same thing, because there's no competition.

charliex

twitch:
Reinstall OSX (MA 08/01, MA 08/02,p19))
Corrupt files in the OSX Library folders can cause a start-up crash. Although you can spend time trying to track them down and remove them, it's often easier to reinstall OSX

Or you can rename the Library and the OS will make a new one. That's a good troubleshooting tool. Try removing or renaming a portion of your WinX folder and see what kind of boat anchor your machine turns into.

Stop farking refering ot Mac OSX as an operating system. IT ISN"T....this is like saying xorg + KDE is an operating system. Mac OSX is a WINDOW MANAGER!11

a couple of problems here..

xorg + KDE is certainly not an OS. Mac OS X most certainly is. The window manager you are referring to can is generally called Aqua (including Quartz compositor, QuickTIme, openGL, etc). The lower level system that the interface runs on is the BSD layer, called Darwin. Darwin is an open source project that anyone can download and modify. It will run on your PC if you're man enough. you can find a bug in darwin and craft a virus that will shut our smug faces up for good!111un

So, mac peeps, how's OSX running on your G3's? That's kind of the arguement at hand. A 4 year old Mac is no better suited to run today's apps than a 4 year old PC.
the GF's iBook (tangerine, 1999 :) runs panther well enough. it has 576 MB Ram to help it along. it has Airport but the battery is finished.

/imac G5
/emac G4
/G4 tower at work
/new 15" powerbook from work
//so that's where the money went

Yadda yadda yadda... I don't doubt the many benefits of Mac ownership, but I do have to take issue with the people claiming that their PCs are unreliable.

If your PC isn't every bit as reliable as a Mac there are generally only two reasons:

1. You do not know how to use/maintain your computer. It's kind of like buying a new car, then redlining every shift and never changing the oil, and calling it junk when it breaks down. It is easy to keep a decent quality PC running flawlessly for whatever apps you want if you just take a little time to teach yourself how.

2. You bought a junk computer. I.E. pretty much any off the shelf Comp-USA/Best Buy thing. The poor quality of the large name brand computers is probably the number one reason for PCs reputation of unreliability. The quality of the components used makes a big difference in the performance and reliability of the end product, and unfortunately 99% of the ready to go computers at any big box store are the PC equivalent of the Kia Rio.

You'd be far better off by getting your PC at a reputable local Mom n Pop place that will build it to your specs, or just putting the damn thing together yourself. It's really much easier than you think and you will save tons of cash. Try that with a Mac.

Dell sucks
they make cheap pieces of crap made out of refurbished parts which is why they have a high failure rate
but since they are so cheap they sell well
A used dell might as well be garbage since it probibly does not have much life left in it before it starts to self-destruct

If you want a good home PC then build it youself
dont buy one from any of the major names. They all suck (esspecially dell)

Bottom Line: Porn looks better on a Mac. It's the Gamma, baby!

Priest_to_the_Exanimate - On the other hand, try loading XP on a 1999 wintel box. Have fun scrounging drivers and trying to find that old floppy install for the network card.

Once again... wrong. I'm running XP Pro on a 1999 Wintel box right now.

I'm beginning to think Mac guys have deep-seated need to believe this crap... maybe to justify the price tag on the Mac's, maybe because of insecurity about Mac's small market share... I don't know. Whatever it is, it's bizarre...

This thread is really reminding me of the conversations I used to have with the aformentioned roommate...

"Mac's are waaay better than PC's..."

"Whatever man, use what you like... That's what's important... Neither one is really any better than the other."

"Yeah... I know you're right. That's really the important thing, it makes sense....

...but Mac's are way better than PC's..."

Guys... give it up. All the crap you're spouting about the horrible unreliability and the constant crashing and the immediate obsolescence of PC's is just that, crap. It's not true. If you're using a PC and it's crashing every 10 minutes... Yes, you probably should be using a Mac. So buy one, be happy about it, and quit trying to convince yourself and the world that your dick is bigger because of it.

kingwank
I am kinda more a /. but I do have to say, you possibly are now more skilled at the art of learning new systems. In school you learn how things are done, and with the spending worked into the budget you get the cheapest deal for your learning tools, so you learn on what they got. My education was done mostly on windows. The school got a better deal on them AND there is a conservative movement in the administration to move the education to fit the tasks outside, in the real world. This shiat is better then the dog eating it crap. So, it is now like the real world. Productivity down, frustration up.

/

Seriously only stupid people have problems with their computer. Jesus christ an eight year old could do it better than some of you whiners.

Can I ask why anyone gives a crap what sort of computer anyone else uses? Or would that be a stupid question?

Personally, I've never used a computer before - I hear they are good for things.

~ elroy

Apple Earns PC Magazine Readers Choice Awards

PC Magazine reports, Once again, Apple achieves scores that are far and away the highest for all vendors in our survey, earning Readers Choices in both desktops and notebooks. For Apple, in both the desktop and notebook sections of the survey, every single score is significantly better than the industry average for Windows machines. No exceptions.

Obviously tha above article should be discounted because of
PC Magazine's obviouse anti-PC bias, yes?

See the whole article @......
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1851295,00.asp

bmasso - Obviously tha above article should be discounted because of PC Magazine's obviouse anti-PC bias, yes?

Not discounted, no... Taken with a grain of salt because it's a survey of readers? Yes.

I notice you didn't include the second paragraph...

"The company's scores are so high there's some concern that they can't be completely trusted: that Apple users are so passionate almost fanatic about the company and its products, they're not quite as objective as other computer owners."

That's a reasonable concern... I mean c'mon, you're on Fark and you're holding up a reader's poll as some kind of evidence... Do you know how many online polls, surveys and contests have been rigged through this very site? and Mac users aren't exactly known for maintaining completely level-headed, even-handed appraisals on the subject

Still, the article does go on to say that Mac's are good computers... which they are, and which I think few people would disagree with.

Now, if only Apple could just help their users over this bizarre, dichotomous inferiority-superiority complex they seem to struggle with.

Computers are tools (like some of the users) and you just pick the right one for the job. It's not a religion and it's not a lifestyle choice any more than your TV, car, or DVD player. Seriously people, get a grip.

I hope we're done using apple.com advertisements as proof that macs are faster, better, more popular, etc. The page the O_o linked to shows a comparison between a $2300 uniproc Dell vs. $3250 - $4250 dualproc Macs on one of Mac's killer apps (Photoshop CS). Switch to a similarly priced dual core dell and try again (if you can get the dell to cost that much).

Priest_to_the_Exanimate Have fun scrounging drivers and trying to find that old floppy install for the network card.
*cough* *cough* bullshiat *cough* Microsoft includes with Windows 2000/XP a metric crapload of drivers for antiquated components. Hell if I still had the ability to cram a proprietary ISA hardisk controller into my Athlon64 box, XP would have at least a compatible (though maybe not optimised) driver. Of course I can put xp on my 6 y/o Slot A Athlon 700 with ISA ports so that compatibility with antiquated equipment makes sense.

For all the car referencesMac is a Honda Civic covered in Bling with the hood welded shut. (Since it does have Darwin under there you can always jack it up on a hoist crawl up underneath and screw with it from that side if you know what you're doing or don't have the instinctive warning bell in your head saying "I don't belong here") PC's are everything else. Some are crap loaded with plastic luxaries (i.e. Kia or Daewoo) some are ugly as sin but get the job done (a Mercury Tracer Hatchback) and if you spend almost as much as the Mac people you get something that looks cool and runs right too.

And you don't need to be a PC technician to run a PC. A simple primer on not screwing with something you don't understand is typically suficient. Yes Windows puts all kinds of neat little settings in places that a simple right click will get you to; your car also has a lever to pop the hood open and I don't see you rearranging the spark plug wires on it. If it works, leave the damn thing alone and it will continue to work.

I am genuinely looking forward to seeing the first Photoshop that's shipped to run natively on Mac OS X86. Let's see the Apple vs. Dell comparisons then. 4Ghz IA64 Mac vs. the same 4Ghz IA64 chip in a Dell.

Now my anecdote to prove that stupid people buy more than just computers. I used to work as a service writer in an autoshop. One day I had someone drive up in a loudly knocking T-bird. She thought the oil light meant to change the oil in the next week or two. I consulted the mechanic on duty as to the proper level of tact and decorum to use in the situation and on his recommendation I told her that the negligent damage she caused to her car basically totaled it and the cheapest repair option would be to buy another car. I don't think it helped her engine much when she spun out of the driveway.

PS if you install a hacked OSX86 on a nForce4 Ultra Mainboard with an Athlon64(Venice/SSE3) and a Geforce graphics card. You won't get drivers for anything except for your spiffy little Mx518 8 button mouse.
See its funny 'cus the only thing that works right on Mac OS for a non devkit PC is an 8 button mouse.

Bah.. you all are boring.

Of all the usual arguments which get trotted out in these threads i always wait with gleeful anticipation for one particular gem. Imagine my delight when xalres anointed us with his own excellent version of the timeless classic:

Hey, once Mac gets off it's ass and starts getting first run games I might switch but right now it seems like a toy, a VERY expensive toy.

Bravo! You Sir (or Madam) win. If only more people saw things your way the world would be a much funnier place for the rest of us.

/I don't want a toy, i want something to play games on!

Twitch OSX

You still didn't say what you thought of the whole Apple switch to intel chips. I mean aren't your beloved Apple computers going to come nothing more then a Dell running OS X? ANd Apple's holding their value and lasting longer then a PC kinda goes out the window when they are using slightly modified but identical components. I still think it is BS now that they last any longer I mean do they have magic elves making motherboards that are better then Abit or DFI?

technicolor-misfit :

re: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1851295,00.asp

>bmasso - Obviously tha above article should be discounted because
>of PC Magazine's obviouse anti-PC bias, yes?

>>Not discounted, no... Taken with a grain of salt because it's a
>>survey of readers? Yes.

>>I notice you didn't include the second paragraph...

>>"The company's scores are so high there's some concern that
>>they can't be completely trusted: that Apple users are so
>>passionate almost fanatic about the company and its
>>products, they're not quite as objective as other computer
>>owners."

And I notice that you then ignored the 3rd paragragh, the one where they (if half-heartedly) acknowledged that that arguement fails......

""Still, there's solid evidence that Apple computers may actually be worthy of devotion. There's little doubt, for instance, that the company builds unusually reliable products.""

and....

""Tempting as it may be to suspect that Apple owners are prone to exaggerate when asked subjective questions, they are much less likely to exaggerate the number of times a system needs repairs.""

Which is EXACTLY what this survey tried to measure.

So - to repeat - "UNUSUALLY reliable products". Heh. I could live with that. More than one PRO-PC post on this thread has disparaged off-the-shelf chain-brand PeeCees as crap, Well, it only makes sense that when price is the main sticking point for the majority of consumers, a few corners will be cut.

>>That's a reasonable concern... I mean c'mon, you're on Fark
>>and you're holding up a reader's poll as some kind of evidence...

Well, it would appear to some that a poll of reader satisfaction could reasonably be assumed to be some measure of READER SATISFACTION.
And since the body of respondents would appear to be readers of PC Magazine why do you automatically assume that the pro-mac respondents responses were coming from an anti-Wintel bias instead of their actual experiences owning Macs?

Any vote COULD be rigged - but from that it doesn't automatically follow that if you don't like the results than it MUST have been rigged.

Unless - of course - you're a (Dont-MoveOn.Org) Democrat.

technicolor-misfit

Once again... wrong. I'm running XP Pro on a 1999 Wintel box right now.

I didnt say it couldn't be done. I said it's a pain in the ass finding all the drivers. I may be a dick but my life is easier that yours when it comes to making old machines work.

Carry on smartly now.

kaikara :

>>You still didn't say what you thought of the whole Apple switch
>>to intel chips. I mean aren't your beloved Apple computers going
>>to come nothing more then a Dell running OS X?

My understanding is that Apple picked their THREE sequential CPU lines
(1) 6502 - Apple ][
(2) 68000 - Lisa / Early Macs
(3) PowerPC - Current Macs
based upon THEIR beliefs in those chip family's current power/price/etc ratios AND future numbers. Each switch was NOT an affirmation the the previous CPU's were "all a bunch of crap". No more than you owning a P4-dual-core machine means that you believe that all previous Intel or AMD chips were such too.

They have now decided that they lack faith in IBM (et al)s ability/comitment to keep pace with FUTURE PowerPC chips. Based at least partly on recent failures to provide promised speed-goals and power-consumption-reductions in the architecture.

Which (IMHO) shows a willingness to THINK rather than to knee-jerk.

Think of it like THIS analogy - sports teams. Even if you are a FANatic of one particular team - any reasonable person will aknowledge that the 1990/1995/2000/2005/2010 teams are NOT THE SAME TEAM. Simularily, the 1990/1995/2000/2005/2010 line-ups of Intel (or AMD or Motorolla or IBM) are NOT the same. That doesn't mean that if you believe that the Yankees (f.e.) will be so-so by 2010 that you must ALSO believe that they were so-so in all the other years as well.

Apple says they looked ahead - and weren't convinced that IBM would produce the specs they wanted/needed.

>>ANd Apple's
>>holding their value and lasting longer then a PC kinda goes out
>>the window when they are using slightly modified but identical
>>components. I still think it is BS now that they last any longer I
>>mean do they have magic elves making motherboards that are
>>better then Abit or DFI?

In the 80's I had a friend who owned not only an Apple (Apple ][) but also a Japple (Japanese) (illegal) clone, a Twapple (Taiwonese), and a Krapple (South Korean). Those last three were dirt cheap - - but always gave him lots of problems with crashes. GOOD Quality Control is difficult when the components are TOO generic - and lowest bidder always wins.

And holding value is NOT just a subjunctive measure - it's a real-world measure. BMWs don't retain value better than Yugos just because BMW owners SAY so, they do so because when you re-sell them someone ELSE thinks so - and is willing to put their money down to back that.

And PeeCee makers do not really use "identical components". Not in an age where you have available 40+ different sound cards available - just to cite ONE fer instance. No more than Car manufacturers do.

Lifted From : http://www.crazyapplerumors.com/

"Craaaaazy Apple Users Actually Like Their Computers.

In a survey conducted by PC Magazine, Apple scored better in every single category than the computer industry average, including "Smells Nice" and a category no one was able to explain called simply "Ass."
But while Apple did extraordinarily well in the survey, PC Magazine made a point of noting that Apple users most likely cannot be trusted to be objective because...

(waiiiiiiiit for iiiiiiiiiiiit!)

... they like their computers so much.



The company's scores are so high there's some concern that they can't be completely trusted: that Apple users are so passionate almost fanatic about the company and its products, they're not quite as objective as other computer owners.

Editor-in-Chief Michael J. Miller said "Clearly, the extent to which Apple customers like their computers makes them unreliable in judging how much they like their computers."

While Dell received much lower marks, PC Magazine partly excused this because, according to the magazine, many respondents use Dell's computers at work, where their experience is generally less satisfying.
"Many Mac users are communists," Miller noted. "And while they're out there on their communes near Reed or Brandeis, hopped up on goofballs and having sex with multiple partners, sure they're going to rate their computers highly. They're going to rate getting hit in the head with a ball peen hammer highly. That's what junked-up commie nympho pinkos do.

"The Dell user, however, struggles mightily as a cog in the great wheel of capitalism - a mighty, and worthy struggle, but also one that puts you in contact with IT people who are, generally, reclusive trolls that prefer to sit sullenly in the dark than interact with other humans. Again, that's a generalization.

"So, in summation, Dell users god-fearing capitalists, Mac users slutty atheistic commies.

"Um... what was the question again?"

It is worth noting, though, that the discomforts of the business environment does not explain Dell's extremely low score on "Ass."

While many in the Macintosh community took great umbrage at PC Magazine's characterization of Mac users, it is undeniable that some Apple customers are indeed crazy communist whores who should not be relied upon for an opinion about the time of day, let alone which computer system has fewer viruses, is less crash-prone and doesn't look like crap.

Like that one guy in Wyoming.

You know who I'm talking about.

Crazy Larry."

When my photographer friend asked his boss why they use macs, he said: Are you kidding? we have work to do! We dont have time for a hobby.
That about sums it up i think

cskrat

For all the car referencesMac is a Honda Civic covered in Bling with the hood welded shut

The hood only seems welded shut because you don't know where the hood latch is. Call me if you want to buy a clue.

bmasso - And I notice that you then ignored the 3rd paragragh, the one where they (if half-heartedly) acknowledged that that arguement fails......

I don't read that so much as them completely dismissing the idea that Mac users may be a bit overzealous and somewhat less than objective when evaluating their computers... It reads to me a little more like... "Yeah, the numbers look suspect and are probably blown somewhat out of proportion because of Mac user's zealotry."

In fact, this snippet about the poll (found on a Mac site) seems to pretty much confirm that:

For the first time, we've removed Apple from the mix when calculating these relative weightings. Whether because Apple's products are truly so much better than everyone else's or because Apple's customers are so passionate about their products, the company scores so high that it's like the class genius blowing the curve.

From: NZMac.com

I also don't think it's a coincidence that Alienware, another company with a reputation for appealing to brand name and style conscious consumers, posts large numbers too.

And you're right, they do go on to say that they're good computers... You're also right that I didn't post it. I only summarized it, not because I was ignoring it, but because I said it myself. It's what I've said all along.

Again... my ultimate point is simply that PC's and Mac's are both good computers, each offering their own unique benefits and drawbacks.

Priest_to_the_Exanimate - I didnt say it couldn't be done. I said it's a pain in the ass finding all the drivers.

But still wrong... when I put XP Pro on this machine, I did it while watching TV... I put the disk in, clicked 'Next" a half a dozen times, and in 10-15 minutes it was done. Everything but my scanner worked just fine... and my scanner, a Visioneer 6100 USB, was about 7 years old, one of the first usb scanners on the market.

The fact that it didn't work was more of a failing on Visioneer's part, as they chose not to support that model for XP. If I'd wanted to, yeah I could probably have found a driver for it... but as it was pretty long in the tooth, and I had been thinking of getting a USB 2 scanner to replace it anyway, I didn't bother.

So, that's one very, very old econo-brand device that wasn't supported. No hours and hours of hunting down tons of drivers.

Twitch OSX

As for your system not being spanked by mine from what i could find of comparable benchmarks that only system that would come close to mine (2.7ghz X2) would be a dual 2.7 G5. And to do that it would be at a cost of 3,799.00 (off of apple's site) for a dual G5, 2GB of RAM, 6800GT (best card on there - mine is a 7800gtx). And that doesn't even include a monitor. I could probably put mine together for lets me be nice and say 2000. So 1799 to run OS X - sounds like a good deal to me. And i say again - i can choose what hardware i want, what OS i want to run, what exactly i want to do with the system without any restrictions.

check link for testing and benckmarks between the two

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php? t=142113&page=2&highlight=dual+processor

specifically post 32. I like part myself since you mac zealots are always going on about how fast photoshop is in comparison. This is them running a specific test and filter in photoshop check the link for details.

Dual 2.7ghz G5 = 36sec
Athlon X2 4400+­26ghz = 31.25sec
Athlon X2 440­0­+27gh­z = 28sec

ouch.