I know you guys are just baiting us but I'll bite anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blur
You know I'm just joking. Windows has definitely made strides recently. I haven't had much experience, however, finding Windows-based systems that use adequate hardware. The programing is probably fine. The big failure for the brand is that it is installed on inferior products. If the hardware were more centrally controlled by Microsoft, I think we'd see better Windows-based systems. Instead, we've got Dell, HP, and seemingly everyone else offering highly modern Windows operating systems with antiquated or otherwise inferior technology. If you have a high-tech* OS, then you should also have a high-tech computer.
*High-tech—technology that is new or superior to any alternative for a given function. High-tech does not necessarily denote high-function or high-feature. For example, two cars have car head units that push 50W to the speakers, have aux inputs, can take CDs, can read MP3s, and has separate treble and bass controls in addition to volume. One was made by JL while the other was made by Jensen. The JL unit is obvious built with superior components, making it high-tech. The Jensen unit is inferior because its technology is of inferior quality. In the case of my Apple-Microsoft discussion, Apple builds the Macintosh computer with superior components to what tends to be used on same-level Dell, HP, or most other Windows-based platforms. You could argue this, but you'd be wrong, as justified by the traditionally longer-lasting Macs.
|
So you're saying if Microsoft behaved more like a monopoly? It's funny because they've tried and failed to do this. They got sued (and lost) over this very topic. And I would love to see some statistics to your whole "Macs last longer" thing. Here's a hint... you won't find them. I can, however see why you would think this. Apples tend to be much more upscale in cost as compared to off-the-shelf PCs. Also, Apples tend to be used longer and PCs thrown by the wayside while still working as most Apple machines are used for basic web/email and not much else. Yea, there's all the graphics folks that swear by their Macs and upgrade more often but they're the minority.
Using your analogy, for the same money as that JL unit you could've gotten another unit that has intergrated LCD screen with nav & DVD playback with just as good of quality without the "JL" logo on it. Yea this doesn't hold up in the car audio world but it really shouldn't hold up in the computer world either. But Apple has managed to convince people otherwise. Point is, for the same price as your apple hardware, I could've gotten a MUCH better PC.
And I hate to break it to you, that Apple hardware is all being made by the same exact companies that make stuff for Dell and everybody else. I guess you missed that whole Apple switching to x86 (Intel) a few years ago. It's funny how they bashed the crap out of x86 just prior to switching to it. Apple may design (even that is limited by the chipsets made by the same companies that everyone else uses) stuff like their motherboards but they're still made by someone like Foxconn or Asus who also make boards for themselves as well as the OEMs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xmicro_SS
Are you serious, WIndows is STILL trying to catch up, get real. Windows is more widely used because it is cheaper and used at the "OFFICE" ............BOOOOOOORRRRRRIIIIIINNNNNGGGGG!
I have been a MAC user since day 1. I am in Printing, we use nothing but.
Remember who sets the bench mark every year, not Windows.
I have yet to have a Virus, I never need to reboot, Never lock up, there is nothing like running through a rock solid Unix base. REAL PROGRAMMERS USE LINUS AND UNIX!
|
Of course you use Apple products in printing... all of the graphics people seem to. I don't know why. It doesn't make sense anymore. Yea, it used to but these days it just doesn't. I guess it's just habit. And maybe you guys like to feel cool and hip and artsy and fight the man by buying such trendy products.
I haven't gotten a virus in years. Probably at least 6. I don't even know the last time I did. And no, I don't run any virus scan other than COMMON SENSE. Don't do stupid crap and you won't get a virus. It's all about numbers... why would malware authors go after 8% of the market when you can go after 90%? It would be stupid for them to go after such a small audience. Most malware doesn't use flaws in Windows as attack vectors but flaws in people's intelligence. And stability? Come on... my Vista box at work hasn't been rebooted in at least a month.
And I guess I'm not a real programmer. I better go tell my boss at work tomorrow that half of the work I've done doesn't exist. Oh and that VIN database? I guess I better just turn off that Dell laptop (yes, it's my old laptop) that is running Windows Server 2008 and Microsoft SQL Server that happens to be hosting it. Since, of course, no real programmer wrote that site or anything. It's all just make believe.
If Mac OSX is so great, why won't Apple let people run it on any hardware? There's no technical reason they don't. It would just shatter your notion that it's so great when you realize that OSX driver support is deplorable. That and Apple would actually have to compete for their hardware sales.