Apple vs PC

[PeteAtoms]

Linux Ubuntu is really good, I've tried it, its just a shame few people use it.

The ONLY reason I don't use it is because I can't figure out how to get Steam/games and my webcam to work on it. Actually, I may install it this weekend and start dual-booting between XP and Ubuntu. . .

It does everything pretty much out of the box and I've never found the need to do any CLI stuff.

 

[Zelig]

The ONLY reason I don't use it is because I can't figure out how to get Steam/games and my webcam to work on it. Actually, I may install it this weekend and start dual-booting between XP and Ubuntu. . .

It does everything pretty much out of the box and I've never found the need to do any CLI stuff.

XP is really dated at this point; I would recommend any modern OS over XP.

 

[PeteAtoms]

XP is really dated at this point; I would recommend any modern OS over XP.

Why though? IIRC, they still do updates for XP, and when they stop then I'll definitely need to switch (I guess). But I don't feel the need to upgrade at this point.

 

[MobBoss]

You certainly need to know far more about PCs than you do any other product to make use if it. A large percentage of the public can't even successfully use PCs without constant help.

This simply isnt true. Most of your off-the-shelf type of PC laptops are already pre-loaded with all the software you need to be productive, and plug-n-play tends to make setting up printers or other devices fairly easy.

PCs can do everything a Mac can do and more and are far less expensive. For your average user its a no-brainer of which to choose to buy.

 

[Formaldehyde]

People actually use that crap software which comes "pre-loaded" on their overpriced PCs they don't build themselves? And if you really want to save money, a far better solution is to build your own desktop system.

And you snipped off the rest of my quote:

This was particularly true before GUI PCs came along which were innovated by ... Apple.

As Shane pointed out in the Steve Jobs thread, everybody has benefited from the great innovations which Apple pioneered, especially PC users.

Granted, by following in Apple's footsteps and stealing the ideas of others yet again, Microsoft has finally made great strides to make the PC actually usable by those who aren't experts in using their "tool", such as plug-and-pray hardware. But this has been a long and arduous process which is neverending. Microsoft ships a new patch to their bugware on an all-too-frequent basis.

And with every new patch and upgrade come even more bugs because they can't possibly test all the combinations of hardware and software. They don't even try in the vast majority of cases. They just wait for people to tell them what they now broke with their latest release.

 

[Zelig]

Why though? IIRC, they still do updates for XP, and when they stop then I'll definitely need to switch (I guess). But I don't feel the need to upgrade at this point.

It's slow, ugly, and lacking in features.

I generally wouldn't recommend upgrading a pre-2006 computer from XP, but any computer post-2006 should have at least 4gb of RAM and be running a current version of Windows.

 

[Formaldehyde]

XP was also the last version which could be easily pirated. It should remain quite popular for quite some time for that reason alone.

 

[Lillefix]

It's slow, ugly, and lacking in features.

I generally wouldn't recommend upgrading a pre-2006 computer from XP, but any computer post-2006 should have at least 4gb of RAM and be running a current version of Windows.

Better than Vista at least.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I use 64-bit Vista with 8GB. it is light years ahead of XP. I finally have a PC that can walk and chew gum at the same time.

 

[Lillefix]

I thought almost nothing worked on the 64-bit version. The 32-bit was decent, but I remember everyone complained about the 64 bit because nothing was compatible with it. Drivers didn't work and so on. It has changed?

 

[Formaldehyde]

It never was a real problem. The beta had lots of issues because the drivers weren't there yet, but all that was pretty much resolved by the time it finally released. Of course, many apps still come only in 32-bit variants. And 64-bit Explorer still can't work with Flash, which is really pathetic. But at least the OS is no longer constrained to 4 GB. With a quad core CPU you can actually multitask now in a reasonable fashion.

 

[Zelig]

Better than Vista at least.

I've gone on at length in the computer talk forums here about how Vista was a good OS, and the public and media perception of it is wrong.

I thought almost nothing worked on the 64-bit version. The 32-bit was decent, but I remember everyone complained about the 64 bit because nothing was compatible with it. Drivers didn't work and so on. It has changed?

I've been running 64-bit operating systems since 2005, and can't think of anything interesting that doesn't work on 64-bit Vista/Win7 now.

I switch from 64-bit XP to 64-bit Vista when Vista was released, and that was an immediate, huge improvement.

 

[MobBoss]

People actually use that crap software which comes "pre-loaded" on their overpriced PCs they don't build themselves? And if you really want to save money, a far better solution is to build your own desktop system.

MS Office is crap software?

and I do agree building your own system is a great way to save money. Can you build your own Mac?

As Shane pointed out in the Steve Jobs thread, everybody has benefited from the great innovations which Apple pioneered, especially PC users.

I wouldnt disagree with that. But in the Mac vs PC war, the Mac lost for a lot of obvious reasons.

 

[Renner]

I've been using Vista 64-bit since 2007, Vista's release was rough but it matured rather quickly. Its certainly much better than XP which is rather archaic nowadays.

 

[Lillefix]

I switch from 64-bit XP to 64-bit Vista when Vista was released, and that was an immediate, huge improvement.

There was a 64 bit XP? Perhaps that's the one I was thinking about. I was recently on a kind of product presentation thing with Schneider Electric and Siemens because of my job. Both the presenters used XP

 

[Formaldehyde]

MS Office is crap software?

You pay for that. I don't know of any vendor that freely offers it unless they factor it into the price. MS doesn't give that away any more than they do their OS.

And Open Office is just as good and is completely free.

I wouldnt disagree with that. But in the Mac vs PC war, the Mac lost for a lot of obvious reasons.

The entire "war" is really nonsensical. Both platforms have their advantages and disadvantages which are readily apparent. It is just another Ford vs Chevy, Coke vs Pepsi, McDonalds vs Burger King partisan "war".

 

[IglooDame]

The ONLY reason I don't use it is because I can't figure out how to get Steam/games and my webcam to work on it. Actually, I may install it this weekend and start dual-booting between XP and Ubuntu. . .

It does everything pretty much out of the box and I've never found the need to do any CLI stuff.

I'd recommend Linux Mint as being slightly better than Ubuntu, on that basis.

I've gone on at length in the computer talk forums here about how Vista was a good OS, and the public and media perception of it is wrong.

And I've responded at length about how I found the perception to be justified.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

It is just another Ford vs Chevy

If they are compared to cars, it seems to me like Macs are like Aston Martin or a similar brand of car and PCs like all other cars, including the bad, cheap ones.

I never used a Mac, so I don't know how well they work, but when hearing people talk about them Macs come off as something that never goes wrong, has no faults, value for money and does everything you want from it and more, especially if you are into making music or graphics. The only advantage PCs used to have was games, but that's not true anymore now that almost every game now has a Mac version or a way to get it to work on a Mac. Sometimes they make it sound like the Mac is some kind of holy relic with magical properties.

 

[Dirichlet]

You pay for that. I don't know of any vendor that freely offers it unless they factor it into the price. MS doesn't give that away any more than they do their OS.

Hmm? Hereabouts the standard Pre-Fab PC Software package is Windows, Office, some DVD-burn software and player software (usually PowerDVD). Ok, sometimes it's just the Starter Edition of Office.

And Open Office is just as good and is completely free.

Having worked with both I disagree. Since I usually do mathematical stuff I use Latex most of the time, so I am not really passionate about it. But since they introduced the new UI I find MS-Office to be superior in most regards.

The entire "war" is really nonsensical. Both platforms have their advantages and disadvantages which are readily apparent. It is just another Ford vs Chevy, Coke vs Pepsi, McDonalds vs Burger King partisan "war".

True, but in my experience it's mostly the Mac Users which loudly proclaim the superiority of their products and how Windows is (Linux users do the same). And even Windows Users liked to look down at Vista users, even though it was a huge step in the right direction.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I've never been a fan of anything Apple.

We had a Mac for about a year before it broke down. It was one that my sister won from her school, once they got newer replacements and did not want it anymore. I never really got used to it. I find the inability to right lick extreme annoying. It took me two full days to figure out how to connect it to our home network (a windows desktop and two laptops) to get Internet access.



This thread reminded me that I have been meaning to try Linux. I just installed it on my old laptop. I am posting right now on a trial of Ubuntu while installing the full version. I haven't used it long enough to know how much I like it. Considering that the rightmost two centimeters of this screen is solid black now, I like that the close/minimize/maximize controls are on the left side.