Thinking on jumping to a...Mac

engtaz

no, virus are for all OS's, the big difference is everything as far as hardware is controlled by Apple, MS does not control what hardware goes into PC's. If you know the hardware to support you should be able to make a more stable OS.

bobman1235

The virus argument is old and silly - while I'm sure Apple's security is just dandy, if they had the 90% market share that Windows had, I'm sure you'd see just as many viruses for Apple products as you do for Windows. Virus writers will always find security holes where they want to look ; the difference is they only care about products that actually have a significant enough market share.

If you like Apple's interface and style, then fine, but don't make them anything they're not.

Systems

Early B. wrote: »

I was wondering about this with Macs. I've never owned one, and most people swear by them. I like the fact that they are less susceptible to virueses and more stable than Windows. And they always appear to be a couple of steps ahead of Microsoft in terms of innovation and ease of use.
But my question is -- do Macs break down as often as PCs? I assumed that PCs break down more often mainly because of viruses. Is that true?

Recent findings have found that as far as critical patches needed, Windows Vista has had to be critically patched much lower then ALL competitors.

Systems

xsmi wrote: »

Hey kid, lol. Yeah my first modem was 9600k. Unfortunately I used the BBS's for less than honorable purposes. My 55MB hard drive was full of ...um.... well you know what I mean.

My first PC booted to Dos 3.0 by floppy, no HD. Or My C64 that ran an tape drive and then was upgraded to the huge floppy drive. It was wonderful when we learned we could hole punch a 5.25 floppy to make it double sided

My first modem was a 1200 baud modem on my C64 where I browsed the local BBS's. I was using the "internet" before anyone knew what it was. Using "gopher" on my schools Unix box's (that I was learning to program C on) to connect to different universities connected to it.

I rolled out over the first DOS based shipping computers to hundreds of Business’s in Oregon and then several more hundred based in Windows 3.1 when it came out (and people I trained had no fooking idea what a mouse was)

My schools had Apple and then my high school got the first mac. That where MAc really took off, they captured the education market and gained a lot of loyalty.

But in the end, I started with my "PC Sup up" first $2000 purchase of a 386sx 16mhz Px that I bought a DX processor for. I upgraded the ram from 2 megs to 4 megs and even bough video eproms to upgrade the video to 256K!!!
Since then I have literally built my own computers to the effect of at least 30+ in home. Hell, I have 7 in the house right now that are all P4 class or above (to AMD X2 procs and Intel Core 2 Duo’s).
I’m just glad I missed the punch card erra!!


No I run a companies It department. We are full Windows (server 2003). Everything just works… for many many years.. no problems. Don’t have to touch the things, they just run. 99.999 uptime easy. Everything integrates perfectly in the company (AD) and also with the world who sends us every kind of file format you can imagine. The crap just works. I don’t care what people have to say about Microsoft, their crap just works and integrates completely with the world it connect s to.

Just think… about how information technology changes so rapidly… I’m only 34 years old.

You would never catch a mac in this house… at any time in the past 20 years.

fatchowmein

Strong Bad,
The slowness probably has to do with how Photoshop allocates memory in a Windows environment. See http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=320005&sliceId=1
I would try the /3GB switch in your boot.ini file if you're not using a 64bit version of Windows.

"Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000, Windows XP Professional, and Mac OS v10.2.8, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer. The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM.

Important: The 3GB switch is a Microsoft switch and may not work with all computers. Contact Microsoft for instructions before you set the 3 GB switch, and for troubleshooting the switch. You can search on the Microsoft support page for 3gb for information on this switch."

To add the /3gb switch and I'm going to assume you're using XP with service pack 2, right click on My Computer and click on Properties to launch System Properties. Goto the Advanced tab. 3 buttons down is "Settings" under "Startup and Recovery". Click it to launch the Startup and Recovery console. Then, find "To edit the startup options file manually, click Edit." Click the Edit button. This will launch Notepad and open your boot.ini file. You should see something like this.

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /NoExecute=OptIn

At the very end of the line, add a space and "/3gb" without the quotes. Do no hit the return key. Save the file. Reboot. Hopefully, this will speed things up.

Good luck!

BTW, for what its worth, I like Microsoft because their technology puts food on my table and cd's in my player, I like Apple because they're innovative and keep MS on their toes, I like Linux because I love the free concept, but I love Novell Netware because they're soooo stable and dependable. MS is like the girl you married, Apple's your mistress, Linux your free spirit/crazy girl friend, and Netware's your grandmother.

Systems

fatchowmein wrote: »

Strong Bad,
The slowness probably has to do with how Photoshop allocates memory in a Windows environment. See http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=320005&sliceId=1
I would try the /3GB switch in your boot.ini file if you're not using a 64bit version of Windows.

"Photoshop CS2 is a 32-bit application. When it runs on a 32-bit operating system, such as Windows 2000, Windows XP Professional, and Mac OS v10.2.8, it can access the first 2 GB of RAM on the computer. The operating system uses some of this RAM, so the Photoshop Memory Usage preference displays only a maximum of 1.6 or 1.7 GB of total available RAM. If you are running Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2, you can set the 3 GB switch in the boot.ini file, which allows Photoshop to use up to 3 GB of RAM.

Important: The 3GB switch is a Microsoft switch and may not work with all computers. Contact Microsoft for instructions before you set the 3 GB switch, and for troubleshooting the switch. You can search on the Microsoft support page for 3gb for information on this switch."

To add the /3gb switch and I'm going to assume you're using XP with service pack 2, right click on My Computer and click on Properties to launch System Properties. Goto the Advanced tab. 3 buttons down is "Settings" under "Startup and Recovery". Click it to launch the Startup and Recovery console. Then, find "To edit the startup options file manually, click Edit." Click the Edit button. This will launch Notepad and open your boot.ini file. You should see something like this.

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINNT="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /NoExecute=OptIn

At the very end of the line, add a space and "/3gb" without the quotes. Do no hit the return key. Save the file. Reboot. Hopefully, this will speed things up.

Good luck!

BTW, for what its worth, I like Microsoft because their technology puts food on my table and cd's in my player, I like Apple because they're innovative and keep MS on their toes, I like Linux because I love the free concept, but I love Novell Netware because they're soooo stable and dependable. MS is like the girl you married, Apple's your mistress, Linux your free spirit/crazy girl friend, and Netware's your grandmother.

We use Adobe extensively at work. I have Adobe 7.0 pro installed on about 200 computers. We have about 7 copies of Adobe CS2 suite and many random installs after that of the components like in-design and Photoshop.

One consistent variable with Adobe is that their products are true pieces of crap. Absolutely problematic in any way. Don’t work worth crap on X64 (we have tried and tried on our 64x terminal server and the apps have to be severely hacked to get them to work using tools that allow it to be fired off as an admin which in itself causes problems).

People hate Microsoft, Adobe is the devil. I've had to deal with Adobe for years now, nothing but absolute problems.

Adobe Pro's upgrade patch is absolutely friggen ridiculous. Install 7.0 then 7.5 reboot, then 7.7 reboot then 7.8 reboot then 7.9. Half the time the install screws up and you cant upgrade the next patch without logging in a totally different profile. If you chose "no" to "do you wish to reboot" it throws it into this upgrade problem. Just absolutely horrible. I can build a new pc all the way to roll out (scripted software for Symantec and Office) in the same amount of time it takes me to simply put Adobe pro on it.

Die Adobe, Die!

mutelight

I have been a PC user my entire life and used to loathe Apple. Once I got into sound design and used many Dual G5s in studios I decided to take the leap and got myself an Intel Mac. Hands down the fastest most reliable machine I have ever used. The whole idea of them being overpriced is a thing of the past and many PC *ahem* fans like to harp on that point. The fact is, if I were to build an equivalent machine to my current Mac I would have spent more money, plain and simple. The processors alone at the time of purchase were $1,000 a piece and that was after actively searching for the lowest prices online. (Still to this day they are roughly $700+.)

Serious gamer? Absolutely hands down buy a PC since there is an unbelievable amount of hardware support and you can squeeze out every ounce of power for the best gaming performance. Customizations are another great aspect of PCs whether is be performance or aesthetics oriented, absolutely no contest.

Artists? Yes, many people will argue this point but the combination of OS X which is rock solid and highly extensive software support in regards to media creation suites and 3rd party plugin support make Macs king in that area.

I won't lie, I am biased because of my extremely good experiences I have had with my Mac and I recommend them over a PC for what you would use this machine for in regards to Photoshop. The combination of the Core 2 Duo/Xeon Woodcrest, OS X, and Adobe CS3 make a blazing fast combination and I can guarantee you would be impressed.

Oh yeah, I thought I would share this picture I took. Believe it or not there was no photoshop involved.

Demiurge

nm...

mutelight

Demiurge wrote: »

nm...

Alright, no need for a repudiated response. I read your original post and do in fact agree with some of your points. The thing is it seems like you are basing future-proofing and the longevity of Macs off of your girlfriend's laptop. iMacs as well as laptops you obviously cannot expect to expand for more than a few years which is strictly due to hardware restrictions in regards to the ability to upgrade the processor, memory, GPU, etc.

You look on their workstation machines like the Mac Pro and there is plenty of room for improvement. They can be upgraded to 16GB of RAM (which a vast majority of PC motherboards do not support without going for a server motherboard) as well as supporting two physical processors. As of right now the dual quad core workstations are atrociously pricey which there is no denying but if one were to get a quad core system, they could simply purchase two clovertown (quad core) chips when the prices drop and they are fully compatible with the motherboard without any need to upgrade. On top of that you have 4 3Gbps SATA bays for up to 3TB of storage. (That limitation is only because single disk drives are limited to 750GB currently.) In regards to DVD-ROMs and burners as well as BD-ROMs etc. virtually any drive will work as I took one of the DVD drives out of my old PC and dropped it in as a 2nd drive. The only component which is truly limited is the GPU since you must have a specific Mac version of the cards. (Although I have heard it is possible to mod the firmware of the card.)

Basically I am just trying to explain to you how they are nowhere near overpriced let alone "hideously". Also try comparing a MacBook Pro against an equal Dell laptop with the same specs. They are virtually identical in price give or take $50-100 depending on the features/options.

PhantomOG

blah blah blah... so did anyone win? did anyone change their mind?

didn't think so :rolleyes:

Demiurge

mutelight wrote: »

Alright, no need for a repudiated response. I read your original post and do in fact agree with some of your points. The thing is it seems like you are basing future-proofing and the longevity of Macs off of your girlfriend's laptop....

Well, I put nevermind, because it's really not worth it to go on and on. Seems as if the Mac users are taking the comments as bashing what they own. I see it as if you have $3,000 to burn, how do you get the most for your money when looking at a computer?

I know for a fact I can spend that $3,000 on a PC, build it myself, which anyone can do, and get far more for that money than if I just walked into the Apple Store and threw it at them.

Does that make Mac inferior to Microsoft and all of that other ****? NO. It really has nothing to do with Apple Vs. Microsoft. There's more than one OS for the PC, and hell you can run Windows on a Mac.

It's all about options, and Mac gives you very few.

I did all the research, so I'm not basing it off my girlfriend's laptop. There's a whole thread about it. Macs are great, but I couldn't justify the cost to value ratio compared to a PC. Tht's a sweet setup you have, and I would be lying if I said I wish I didn't have one.

PhantomOG wrote: »

blah blah blah... so did anyone win? did anyone change their mind?

didn't think so :rolleyes:

Not quite sure why posts like these always crop up. It's a message board, for having discussions, etc.

Whether or not anyone admits it here or not, discussions like this do get people to think. I know there have been several times I have reflected on a discussion privately and it has certainly altered my opinion and decisions from time to time.

Hell, I was sold on Macs at one point and have constant access to one at home and tooling around with them in the store, I decided they weren't for me.

If this thread solves anything, it's that I hope the OP checks into what's going on with his system. A simple $50 stick of memory could eliminate the problem rather than spending a few grand to replace an already killer system...

PhantomOG

Demiurge wrote: »

Not quite sure why posts like these always crop up. It's a message board, for having discussions, etc.

Yeah, and my *message* was that these discussions usually turn into pissing matches and that usually no one's perceptions are changed. Obviously you felt the same with you initial "nevermind" response. I didn't tell anyone not to express their point of view. Are you telling me not to express mine?

Maybe I should have just stuck with a "nevermind" as well...

bobman1235

I think he was actually telling you yours was ridiculous. I tend to agree.

This place (and the Interweb as a whole) is chock full of pointless discussions, but all of those who participate obviously get something out of it on some level, be it enjoyment or enlightenment, just like you get something out of telling them that their conversation is pointless.

I find it funny that your post was basically telling everyone off, and then you got defensive when you were told off.

mutelight

Well see the difference with this discussion is that Demiurge and I can both respect one another's opinion and where one another is coming from, treating it like a true discussion. Rather than trying to pull the OP into one camp or another I just wanted to clarify a few things from the Apple side, that is all.

In all honesty I think his PC should be more than ample if configured properly. In other words I completely agree with Demiurge and think that some more memory, maybe some registry cleaners or a general tune up to his PC could yeild phenomenal results and it really wouldn't make sense to switch platforms at this point.

Demiurge

Planets just collided because of this.

phuz

OS2 pwns u all!

mutelight

Haha right? That's the the thing though both platforms nowadays offer mounds of power and it would be impossible to declare a winner across the board. They both offer strengths over the other in numerous different aspects and it is up to the consumer to decide what matters most.

mutelight

phuz wrote: »

OS2 pwns u all!

He's got a point...

exalted512

My ram is longer than your ram.
-Cody

Systems

phuz wrote: »

OS2 pwns u all!

The Place I worked at about 3 years ago still uses OS/2 for some main systems. ITS a multi billion a year company world wide and has big brown trucks all over the place. Hell, I know just about everything there it know about it from rebuilding that crap time after time after time. But as an OS.. rock solid. When it first came out, I used to dual boot it with win 3.11.