I think I'm switching to Wintel. :(
Psmith
eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
crowd. Here's why.
GUI:
Overall, the OS9 GUI was the pinnacle of intuitiveness and
functionality; OSX is a retrograde step in both regards, to the point
that I would say overall the Win GUI is now at functional parity with
the mac (there are differences of course, but advantages and
disadvantages to both sides).
Furthermore, OSX is s-l-o-w. On a G4/867 with 768 megs of RAM, there is
simply no excuse for this kind of sluggishness. Win2k is certainly no
speed demon, but it is faster than this. I seem to remember NextStep
running pretty quickly on a 040/25 with 8MB. And in terms of the GUI,
the functionality between NextStep and OSX is very close.
Also, with Win2K MS has finally come up with a clean, robust
installation/setup process which is as good as (and in some ways even
better than) OSX. I had to install windows on a few machines recently,
ranging from really old ones to brand new ones. This would be the first
time I've done an installation of Windows. At first I tried
Win98SE...damn, talk about a nightmare. I won't go into details except
to say it exceeded even the nightmare scenario that any die-hard Mac
advocate would put forth. So I tried Win2k...and everything just
worked. I was able to do complete installs starting with disk
formatting, and everything worked very smoothly...all the hardware was
properly recognized automatically, even on the old machines. And the
web-based Windows Update feature worked more robustly and completely
than Software Update on OSX. The Add/Remove programs control panel
worked well, even with obscure shareware stuff. It is sad that such
things as "uninstall scripts" are required at all, and the Mac is
certainly better in that you don't have to deal with the dll crap. But
the Win uninstaller seems robust enough now that it is a non-issue.
Finally in the looks department...which is not that important of course,
but man does not live by bread alone. To be frank, OSX looks toylike
and childish. Toylike icons, bouncing pictures in the dock, large
obtuse letters, etc. OS9 used to be clean, crisp, simple, and efficient
in space and time; windows used to look like a clod in comparison. But
now, I could say the same things about Windows 2000 in comparison to
OSX...except the wrong way around. :(
OS:
OS9's OS was clearly crap, so we'll leave that out of the picture. I
prefer OSX to Win2K in this regard, because it is unix. Sadly, this
fact is only thing really keeping me with the Mac. How ridiculous is
that--given what the Mac is supposed to be. But, I can get cygwin for
Win2k, and that probably evens the scales. The kernel isn't the same,
but I really don't give a damn about that aside from the speed
issue--and the OSX GUI is slower anyway so what does it matter if the
kernel is faster.
Apps:
Remember Fetch? Newswatcher? NiftyTelnet? Astarte Toast anyone? Used
to be that a lot of apps were just *better* on the Mac, which was
partially due to the common OS9 GUI framework. Now there seem to be
plenty of nicely written apps for the PC. Again, helped by the fact
that the Win GUI has reached parity with the Mac. Are there really any
apps anymore that are Mac-only or are better done on the Mac?
Hardware:
This is the issue that was really the last straw for me. I recently
decided to get a new 3D video card to replace my GeForce3. I haven't
been in touch with hardware, so I looked it up at tomshardware.com, and
it looks like the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro is the shit. So I go to
clubmac.com, look up "radeon"...all they have is the radeon 9000. What
the hell, the 9700 has been out for a while now right? So it's time for
a google search: "ATI Radeon 9700 Macintosh". The first link is a
Macworld article from July, proclaiming the MWNY announcement of the
9700, claiming a fall release. No other search results for places to
buy it. What the hell. So I get on some forums, and sure enough it's
"Release date for Radeon?" here and "Where's my 9700?" there. I could
say "What an unbelievable load of crap", but of course it's not
unbelievable at all. I am familiar enough with the score. If the 9700
ever actually comes out on the Mac, it will (1) be absurdly late, (2) be
extremely overpriced, (3) have buggy, inefficient, crappy, slow drivers
with major functionality missing, and (4) have no better performance
than the old card released a year ago on the PC. And that story is
repeated with every other aspect of the hardware. Frankly, I'm sick of
it.
Furthermore, it appears to be much easier these days to build-your-own
PC. First of all there's tomshardware.com if you are unfamiliar with
the component brands and their capabilities. Then there's Win2k which
looks like it will recognize most everything...and what it doesn't
recognize is easy enough to install manually.
So bottom line is, what do I do now. Linux is out. Unix is great, but
X Windows blows goats as a GUI except for the xhosting capability...plus
no app support. Maybe Linux with the Win emulator, but somehow I doubt
that will work well for regular usage. WinXP...damn, I feel terrible to
think I am considering an OS with all that big brother PITA registration
crap. Win2k looks fine, but it is older and I hate to run an older OS
that might soon lose support. OSX on Intel maybe? If it ever came out,
and there was driver and app support to go with it, that would be
good...but I am not holding my breath for any of that.
Anyway, if y'all got this far, thanks for reading the treatise. Or
should I say confession, or perhaps "invocation of the muse" would be
best. :)
D. Icktip
> Overall, the OS9 GUI was the pinnacle of intuitiveness and functionality;
New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
> worked very smoothly...all the hardware was properly recognized
> automatically, even on the old machines. And the web-based Windows Update
> feature worked more robustly and completely than Software Update on OSX.
That's funny. Most times around here we have to re-run Windows Update
many times as it will just not install something for some reason and not
really tell you why. Not to mention the convoluted way you have to
download some updates and not otheres combined (2k SP-3 and IE6 at the
same time - no way)
> The Add/Remove programs control panel worked well, even with obscure
> shareware stuff. It is sad that such things as "uninstall scripts" are
> required at all, and the Mac is certainly better in that you don't have to
> deal with the dll crap. But the Win uninstaller seems robust enough now
> that it is a non-issue.
No, the Win uninstaller is not. I've lost count how many programs simply
"loose" their uninstall scripts in Windows and you just have to hope that
just deleting the files/dir will be OK. It's still up to each vendor to
write the uninstall capability.
> but man does not live by bread alone. To be frank, OSX looks toylike and
> childish. Toylike icons, bouncing pictures in the dock, large obtuse
> letters, etc. OS9 used to be clean, crisp, simple, and efficient in space
Have you seen XP? Personally, I LOVE the OSX interface.
> the Win GUI has reached parity with the Mac. Are there really any apps
> anymore that are Mac-only or are better done on the Mac?
Video editing, photo editing...
> in touch with hardware, so I looked it up at tomshardware.com, and it
First mistake. Tom has a nice site, but a lot of times it's just a paid
advertisement for whatever he likes at the time...
> Furthermore, it appears to be much easier these days to build-your-own PC.
> First of all there's tomshardware.com if you are unfamiliar with the
> component brands and their capabilities. Then there's Win2k which looks
> like it will recognize most everything...and what it doesn't recognize is
> easy enough to install manually.
Again, first mistake - Toms is a nice site, but I'd _NEVER_ follow his
reccomendations.
Edwin
> It is a sad day folks. I've been a Mac fan since my Plus in the late
> eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
> crowd. Here's why.
>
Give in to your hate... strike your Mac down... and then your journey to
the Dark Side will be complete...
Darth EdWIN
Cyclical
----------
In article <auf9kh$6jdq5$1...@ID-56786.news.dfncis.de>, Edwin <ze...@aiur.org>
wrote:
Super Twerp..more like! :+)
Psmith
> New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
What's "switcher"?
Anyway, I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I've always thought the
classic Mac UI is excellent (aside from some side issues that can easily
be avoided, like Launcher). Extremely smooth, fast, intuitive, and
functional. Until OSX, that is. I welcome a kernel with pre-emptive MT
and protected memory, of course (about damn time)...but I wish they had
kept the classic-style UI. I never really got into the NeXT UI, either
when it was in a Black Box or now.
One nice thing about the OSX UI is the ability to order/layer windows
both by window *and* by application. In this is combines the best of
OS9 and Windows. But they could have incorporated that functionality
into OS9 as well.
> That's funny. Most times around here we have to re-run Windows
> Update many times as it will just not install something for some
> reason and not really tell you why. Not to mention the convoluted
> way you have to download some updates and not otheres combined (2k
> SP-3 and IE6 at the same time - no way)
My experience is pretty limited on this, but I have not had problems. I
have only used it with freshly installed systems, so maybe that explains
it. Still, I am generally anally careful about keeping installs clean
and orderly, whether Mac or PC...and I think this is still necessary to
maintain a clean robust system whether on Mac or PC. In fact, even
though I am anally careful with my OSX system, I still occasionally get
errors with software update (most usually when used in conjunction with
quicktime update).
> No, the Win uninstaller is not. I've lost count how many programs
> simply "loose" their uninstall scripts in Windows and you just have
> to hope that just deleting the files/dir will be OK. It's still up
> to each vendor to write the uninstall capability.
That's true. I guess it should be surprising that I have not had
problems with any of the shareware stuff I've downloaded (and I've
downloaded a large amount of this so far, some of it quite old). What
are some apps that lose uninstallability? That's the worst of Windows
for sure...pretty incredible that they haven't gotten away from the mess
of each program installing conflicting dll's into a shared directory.
> Have you seen XP? Personally, I LOVE the OSX interface.
Actually I haven't seen XP. Only Win2K. Perhaps I should check that
out before making a hasty decision.
> Video editing, photo editing...
Are we talking about the really hi-end, or consumer-level stuff? There
seems to be quite a bit of selection at the consumer level (granted, not
that that means anything).
> Again, first mistake - Toms is a nice site, but I'd _NEVER_ follow
> his reccomendations.
Hmm, OK. He does do a lot of objective tests... Why not use those as a
recommendation? Are there any alternatives?
Psmith
> Give in to your hate... strike your Mac down... and then your journey
> to the Dark Side will be complete...
Nicely done. At several levels. :D
D. Icktip
> What's "switcher"?
One who switched from Windows to Mac.
> My experience is pretty limited on this, but I have not had problems. I
> have only used it with freshly installed systems, so maybe that explains
> it. Still, I am generally anally careful about keeping installs clean and
> orderly, whether Mac or PC...and I think this is still necessary to
> maintain a clean robust system whether on Mac or PC. In fact, even though
> I am anally careful with my OSX system, I still occasionally get errors
> with software update (most usually when used in conjunction with quicktime
> update).
My big gripe with Windows Update is that it makes you download things
separeately (DirectX, IE, SP's, etc). Why it can't just download
everything and then install on boot is beyond me. Instead, you have to
download, reboot, redownload, reboot, etc.
OSX makes it simple- click and download - the updater does things in the
proper order.
> large amount of this so far, some of it quite old). What are some apps
> that lose uninstallability? That's the worst of Windows for sure...pretty
> incredible that they haven't gotten away from the mess of each program
> installing conflicting dll's into a shared directory.
Really depends - I've seen things from McAfee to Norton and Office loose
this. It really depends on what was installed/uninstalled and how they
were installed/uninstalled.
> Are we talking about the really hi-end, or consumer-level stuff? There
> seems to be quite a bit of selection at the consumer level (granted, not
> that that means anything).
Consumer stuff. Blew through 2 PC's trying to get editing (video)
working. Ended up having Pinnacle's tech support tell me that it probably
would _NEVER_ work on my chipset/mobo/camera combination... No thanks. In
2 years I got exactly 1 movie from my PC. In less than a year, I've made
3 DVD's from my Mac.
> Hmm, OK. He does do a lot of objective tests... Why not use those as a
> recommendation? Are there any alternatives?
www.anandtech.com - OK, but he is a little cockey for my tastes. Other
than that, I dono - I've been in the business long enough to know what's
good and not good... Ask if you want to know what's good.
Bob S
"D. Icktip" <Michae...@dell.com> wrote:
> Again, first mistake - Toms is a nice site, but I'd _NEVER_ follow his
> reccomendations.
Some of of my peecee buddies call it "Tom's Science Fiction Page."
--
Cheers,
Bob S
Dell Computer: World's leading manufacturer of big, black, heavy laptops.
Bob S
Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
> It is a sad day folks. I've been a Mac fan since my Plus in the late
> eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
> crowd.
Oh well. You can always switch back if you don't like it.
George Graves
I do understand as I have had similar thoughts of late. I recently had
to re-initialize my Windows HD and re-install everything, and I took the
opportunity to -just for the hell of it- you understand, to install all
of the hardware drivers for all of my peripheral hardware. They were all
available, and they (mostly) all worked. My USB film scanner works fine
under Windows - but under OSX, there is STILL no driver for it even
though its a CURRENT MODEL, and I have to boot back into OS9 to use it.
Same with my great HP ScanJet IIc SCSI flatbed scanner. There is a
shareware driver for it under OSX, and it worked at one time, but it
works no longer Adaptec says its the scanner driver's problem, the
driver manufacturer says its Adaptec's OSX SCSI board driver. Again, I
have to boot back into OS9 to scan from that too. It works fine in
Windows though. But my laser PostScript printer, which works so well on
both my Macs conneced via my Ether 'network' in my office, won't work
with the PC and nobody seems to be able to figure out HOW to make it
work. Ditto getting the PC to talk to my Mac. They just don't see each
other and nobody seems to know why. This gives me pause about the same
old Windows bullshit. Also, Windows' GUI is nowhere near as good or as
consistent or as logical as OSX's. And while I will give you that Aqua
is NOT as good a GUI (IMHO) as is Classic Mac's, it's still light years
ahead of Windows, which is actually worse (again, IMHO) in many areas
than the GUI in Win98/ME. Microsoft has always been a two steps forward,
three steps back sort of affair, and that's not changed. Add to that the
fact that WinXP has STILL not fixed the inability of Windows to work
well with PostScript files, and there just isn't any 'there,' there. So
I'm going to have to stay with Mac for at least another iteration of
both. But I can see the day when finally, after a gargantuan struggle,
Windows will become 'good enough.' For me, its not there yet. Now the
only question is: given the length of gestation for Windows to get to
where it now is, will I live long enough to see it become "good enough?"
Only time will tell.
--
George Graves
George Graves
Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
> "D. Icktip" <Michae...@dell.com> wrote:
>
> > New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
>
> What's "switcher"?
>
> Anyway, I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I've always thought the
> classic Mac UI is excellent (aside from some side issues that can easily
> be avoided, like Launcher). Extremely smooth, fast, intuitive, and
> functional. Until OSX, that is. I welcome a kernel with pre-emptive MT
> and protected memory, of course (about damn time)...but I wish they had
> kept the classic-style UI. I never really got into the NeXT UI, either
> when it was in a Black Box or now.
That's what I wanted as well: BSD with the Classic environement running
on it. But instead, Lil' Stevie gave us Aqua. Love the PMT, love the
bullet-proof robustness of OSX, but have to say that while still better
than XP, Aqua gives up a LOT to the Classic Mac GUI.
There is a lot of consumer grade stuff for Windows. Unfortunately (and I
wish I had some of the links still) there are numerous horror stories
around, including some written by "PC Magazine staff", about how
difficult it is to get any of this stuff to work well under Windows. One
article written by one of the PC magazine's hardware gurus had him
resorting to editing his kid's school video project by hand because he
couldn't get the Windows/PC stuff to work correctly.
--
George Graves
James Boswell
>
> Actually I haven't seen XP. Only Win2K. Perhaps I should check that
> out before making a hasty decision.
Windows XP UI seems to have been designed by someone on loan from Fisher
Price..
http://chryx.shacknet.nu/xpluna.jpg
Luckily you can turn it off and go back to having a Win95-98-Win2k type
look..
WTF does it say about Microsofts confidence in their UI designers if they
have a "okay, we know it sucks, but hey, you can turn it off!" option?
-JB
Woofbert
> Furthermore, OSX is s-l-o-w. On a G4/867 with 768 megs of RAM, there is
> simply no excuse for this kind of sluggishness.
Have you upgraded to Jaguar?
--
Woofbert, Chief Rocket Surgeon, Infernosoft
Woofbert's Law on Learning Linux: When attempting to learn Linux,
study it thoroughly before you begin.
Ari Ukkonen
> It is a sad day folks. I've been a Mac fan since my Plus in the late
> eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
> crowd. Here's why.
Don't do it. Resistence is not futile. Don't give into the dark side. I
recently switched from Windows XP to a mac running Jaguar.
> GUI:
>
> Overall, the OS9 GUI was the pinnacle of intuitiveness and
> functionality; OSX is a retrograde step in both regards, to the point
> that I would say overall the Win GUI is now at functional parity with
> the mac (there are differences of course, but advantages and
> disadvantages to both sides).
OS9 the pinnacle of intutiveness? How is OS X so different from OS 9
other than having a dock instead of the menu on the right of the screen?
> Furthermore, OSX is s-l-o-w. On a G4/867 with 768 megs of RAM, there is
> simply no excuse for this kind of sluggishness. Win2k is certainly no
> speed demon, but it is faster than this. I seem to remember NextStep
> running pretty quickly on a 040/25 with 8MB. And in terms of the GUI,
> the functionality between NextStep and OSX is very close.
Are you running 10.1.x or Jaguar? If Jaguar, did you do a clean install?
I'm running 10.2.3 on a G4 700 with 1 GB ram and I don't find it
sluggish at all. My P3 with 256MB, on the other hand, becomes quite
sluggish when the swapping starts on a modest load.
You might want to consider that Windows has a very inefficient memory
management system so you are going to see a lot swapping eventually and
memory will become fragmented.
All the CPU power in the world does not mean a damn thing if the code
you are executing keeps on going in and out of the swap file and you
eventually have to reboot to from memory fragmentation.
> Also, with Win2K MS has finally come up with a clean, robust
> installation/setup process which is as good as (and in some ways even
> better than) OSX. I had to install windows on a few machines recently,
> ranging from really old ones to brand new ones. This would be the first
> time I've done an installation of Windows. At first I tried
> Win98SE...damn, talk about a nightmare. I won't go into details except
> to say it exceeded even the nightmare scenario that any die-hard Mac
> advocate would put forth. So I tried Win2k...and everything just
> worked. I was able to do complete installs starting with disk
> formatting, and everything worked very smoothly...all the hardware was
> properly recognized automatically, even on the old machines. And the
> web-based Windows Update feature worked more robustly and completely
> than Software Update on OSX. The Add/Remove programs control panel
> worked well, even with obscure shareware stuff. It is sad that such
> things as "uninstall scripts" are required at all, and the Mac is
> certainly better in that you don't have to deal with the dll crap. But
> the Win uninstaller seems robust enough now that it is a non-issue.
Take a look at the size of the WINNT directory sometime and watch it
grow (even if you uninstall apps). The uninstallers do not always remove
everything. The .NET framework has the promise of having simple Mac-like
installation and uninstall by simply dragging the folder to the trash.
> Finally in the looks department...which is not that important of course,
> but man does not live by bread alone. To be frank, OSX looks toylike
> and childish. Toylike icons, bouncing pictures in the dock, large
> obtuse letters, etc. OS9 used to be clean, crisp, simple, and efficient
> in space and time; windows used to look like a clod in comparison. But
> now, I could say the same things about Windows 2000 in comparison to
> OSX...except the wrong way around. :(
Good luck getting new machines with Windows 2000. Soon it will not be
supported. Toy like? What about the Luna interface?
> OS:
>
> OS9's OS was clearly crap, so we'll leave that out of the picture. I
> prefer OSX to Win2K in this regard, because it is unix. Sadly, this
> fact is only thing really keeping me with the Mac. How ridiculous is
> that--given what the Mac is supposed to be. But, I can get cygwin for
> Win2k, and that probably evens the scales. The kernel isn't the same,
> but I really don't give a damn about that aside from the speed
> issue--and the OSX GUI is slower anyway so what does it matter if the
> kernel is faster.
Try Jaguar.
> Apps:
>
> Remember Fetch? Newswatcher? NiftyTelnet? Astarte Toast anyone? Used
> to be that a lot of apps were just *better* on the Mac, which was
> partially due to the common OS9 GUI framework. Now there seem to be
> plenty of nicely written apps for the PC. Again, helped by the fact
> that the Win GUI has reached parity with the Mac. Are there really any
> apps anymore that are Mac-only or are better done on the Mac?
I'm using MT-Newswatcher for OS X right now. Look on Versiontracker.com.
What about those iApps?
> Hardware:
>
> This is the issue that was really the last straw for me. I recently
> decided to get a new 3D video card to replace my GeForce3. I haven't
> been in touch with hardware, so I looked it up at tomshardware.com, and
> it looks like the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro is the shit. So I go to
> clubmac.com, look up "radeon"...all they have is the radeon 9000. What
> the hell, the 9700 has been out for a while now right? So it's time for
> a google search: "ATI Radeon 9700 Macintosh". The first link is a
> Macworld article from July, proclaiming the MWNY announcement of the
> 9700, claiming a fall release. No other search results for places to
> buy it. What the hell. So I get on some forums, and sure enough it's
> "Release date for Radeon?" here and "Where's my 9700?" there. I could
> say "What an unbelievable load of crap", but of course it's not
> unbelievable at all. I am familiar enough with the score. If the 9700
> ever actually comes out on the Mac, it will (1) be absurdly late, (2) be
> extremely overpriced, (3) have buggy, inefficient, crappy, slow drivers
> with major functionality missing, and (4) have no better performance
> than the old card released a year ago on the PC. And that story is
> repeated with every other aspect of the hardware. Frankly, I'm sick of
> it.
GeForce 4Ti is not good enough? I don't give a damn about benchmarks or
Quake FPS. What I care about is usability and overall performance. When
those fast PCs start swapping in the middle of a game scene, those
benchmarks don't mean shit when the FPS drops down to 5 FPS or 0 FPS if
it freezes from a memory leak. LOL. How much speed do you really need?
Even PC users are not upgrading so often because their speed is
sufficient for what they want to do. Memory is more important than CPU
speed.
> Furthermore, it appears to be much easier these days to build-your-own
> PC. First of all there's tomshardware.com if you are unfamiliar with
> the component brands and their capabilities. Then there's Win2k which
> looks like it will recognize most everything...and what it doesn't
> recognize is easy enough to install manually.
Yeah, you can build you own but if it breaks, you are SOL. :) Even PC IT
shops go with big vendors such as IBM and Compaq and get the Prosumer
lines because of a better TOC than those cheap consumer models you see
in the newspaper ads.
> So bottom line is, what do I do now. Linux is out. Unix is great, but
> X Windows blows goats as a GUI except for the xhosting capability...plus
> no app support. Maybe Linux with the Win emulator, but somehow I doubt
> that will work well for regular usage. WinXP...damn, I feel terrible to
> think I am considering an OS with all that big brother PITA registration
> crap. Win2k looks fine, but it is older and I hate to run an older OS
> that might soon lose support. OSX on Intel maybe? If it ever came out,
> and there was driver and app support to go with it, that would be
> good...but I am not holding my breath for any of that.
Good luck. I'm heading out of the darkness and you are going into it. If
you have to use PC's at work, why inflict yourself with them at home?
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
> > New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
> What's "switcher"?
He switched from Wintel to the mac recently.
<snip>
> > Video editing, photo editing...
> Are we talking about the really hi-end, or consumer-level stuff? There
> seems to be quite a bit of selection at the consumer level (granted, not
> that that means anything).
Umm. Apple's Final Cut Pro IIRC received an oscar. Then there is Shake
ofcourse.
--
Ari Ukkonen
Jim Polaski
<gmgraves-7988D8...@newssvr13-ext.news.prodigy.com>,
George Graves <gmgr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <psmith-4D7E31....@rcache1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
>
> > "D. Icktip" <Michae...@dell.com> wrote:
> >
> > > New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
> >
> > What's "switcher"?
> >
> > Anyway, I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I've always thought the
> > classic Mac UI is excellent (aside from some side issues that can easily
> > be avoided, like Launcher). Extremely smooth, fast, intuitive, and
> > functional. Until OSX, that is. I welcome a kernel with pre-emptive MT
> > and protected memory, of course (about damn time)...but I wish they had
> > kept the classic-style UI. I never really got into the NeXT UI, either
> > when it was in a Black Box or now.
>
> That's what I wanted as well: BSD with the Classic environement running
> on it. But instead, Lil' Stevie gave us Aqua. Love the PMT, love the
> bullet-proof robustness of OSX, but have to say that while still better
> than XP, Aqua gives up a LOT to the Classic Mac GUI.
So what George. Things like Fruit Menu, cheap shareware, give you that
OS 9 look back, since you don't want to do the work, little though it
may be, of learning the GUI of OS X
Frankly, I have a hard time going back to 9 because X is so easy. Now
that isn't to say there aren't things I'd like different. But OS 9 has
had some 18 years of refinement since it's basic version came with the
first Mac in 1984. Give Mac OS X that long.
BEsides, OS X has the same stuff, just in some different places. A lot
of folks complain about not having the App Switcher that 9 has. Yet, the
Dock is the same thing, just implemented a bit differently and gives you
the same functionality. I can also cmd-tab though runnign apps just like
9. I can't keep a non running app in the switcher in 9, which I can to
in X, nor can I have a folder, web page, or other things as I can in the
dock. Too manhy folks get hung up on inconsequential small stuff. And
don't forget, you and I do the same things, save for the fact that I
probably do more imaging and you do more page work. But I also Ad'd a
Magazine for some 12 years too. So I think much of what we do is more
based in similarity than difference.
--
Regards,
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do while expecting that he will get nothing in return!"
Macintosh for productivity. Linux for servers. Palm/Visor for mobility. Windows to feed the Black Hole in your IT budget
Windows-the computer you need, Macintosh-The computer you Want!ant!iÐк
Tim Smith
Transfinite Number of Monkeys wrote:
>: Windows XP UI seems to have been designed by someone on loan from Fisher
>: Price..
>
> Indeed.. We usually refer to XP as "Windows 2000, Cartoon Edition".
You want to see cartoony interfaces...take a look at iChat.
--Tim Smith
ZnU
Ari Ukkonen <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote:
It was an Emmy: http://www.apple.com/hotnews/articles/2002/08/emmy/
Apple got another Emmy for FireWire. It's safe to say Apple knows a
thing or two about DV, I think. Incidentally, FCP just landed its first
major commercial feature film.
--
"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in
Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you
can't get fooled again."
-George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
James Boswell
>
> You want to see cartoony interfaces...take a look at iChat.
Microsoft win in the cartoony chat programs stakes as well!
http://research.microsoft.com/vwg/projectsheets/comicchat.htm
-JB
Psmith
discussion.
Bottom line is, I've changed my mind. I'm going to stick with the Mac
for now. What the earlier poster said about "2 steps ahead, 3 steps
back" in reference to switching to Windows seems to hit the mark just
right. It looks like there's a lot of things I take for granted on the
Mac, and I know from experience that once I actually start using
Windows, all sorts of frustrating gui and app stupidities start coming
out of the woodwork. Plus I do a fair amount of video editing and
production work at the hobbyist level, and it looks like switching those
tasks to a PC would be a serious mistake. And now that I've seen the
pictures...god damn, XP is amazingly ugly. What the fuck were they
thinking.
I am not running Jaguar yet. Actually, I am waiting for my new HD to
arrive, at which point I will be taking advantage of the empty drive to
format my old drives and do clean installs of everything. I am glad to
hear of the GUI speed improvement from the replies here, and so I will
reserve judgement on speed issues until I upgrade.
I did spend quite a bit of time at anandtech.com, to the point that I
think I now have a clue about DIY PCs. For about $1300, I can build a
complete PC with a 3 GHz P4 and a 650 MHz bus and an ATI 9700 Pro and a
gig of RAM and fairly complete motherboard functionality (gigabit
ethernet, usb 2, multiple ide/ata channels, sound). But I still
want/need OSX for real work, so this machine would only be useful to me
for games. While I might get a hard-on thinking about all those huge
numbers and about running JK2 1920x1600 FSAA at 300 fps, the truth of
the matter is that I actually don't play that many games. So even at
$1300 this is not worth it for me. Probably. :) I might just build it
anyway, just to see if it is as seamless and trouble-free a process as
it looks. Pretty good excuse for satisfying throughput-lust, anyway.
Jedi Knight 2, Fallout 2, Warbirds 3...these are all available on the
Mac already and frankly that kind of game selection is enough for
me...and my Mac can play those games quite well, though certainly not as
well as the $1300 PC above. It just irritates me that I can't have the
best of both worlds, hardware and OS. What I would really like to see
is OSX on Intel. From a larger perspective, I think this may be a good
move for Apple as well. I believe a number of large companies
(including mine, 5k employees) are hesitating to move to XP because of
the registration bullshit. That leaves a slight vacuum that Apple may
be able to fill, if it can port Jaguar and get developers to port apps.
That might allow them to break from their dependence on selling
hardware. Oh well. Probably won't happen. :(
ZnU
"James Boswell" <Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
What the hell are they thinking? Is this really the sort of thing
Microsoft spends its billions of research dollars on?
Edwin
Bo...@NoSpam.Com says...
> In article <psmith-AB0296....@rcache1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
>
> > It is a sad day folks. I've been a Mac fan since my Plus in the late
> > eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
> > crowd.
>
> Oh well. You can always switch back if you don't like it.
You can check out of the Hotel California anytime, but you can never
leave...
Edwin
Edwin
aukk...@shaw.ca says...
> In article <psmith-AB0296....@rcache1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
>
> > It is a sad day folks. I've been a Mac fan since my Plus in the late
> > eighties...but I think it might be time to hang it up and join the
> > crowd. Here's why.
>
> Don't do it. Resistence is not futile. Don't give into the dark side. I
> recently switched from Windows XP to a mac running Jaguar.
Are you sure you're not really a Faux Convert?
That's a Mac user/fan who needed to get a PC for one reason or another
(job, school, playing games, etc.), and who then declares himself to have
"switched from the PC," the next time he buys a Mac, even though he still
needs/uses his PC.
Edwin
James Boswell
> In article <auhg6b$fd2$1...@knossos.btinternet.com>,
> "James Boswell" <Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Indeed.. We usually refer to XP as "Windows 2000, Cartoon
>>>> Edition".
>>>
>>> You want to see cartoony interfaces...take a look at iChat.
>>
>> Microsoft win in the cartoony chat programs stakes as well!
>>
>> http://research.microsoft.com/vwg/projectsheets/comicchat.htm
>
> What the hell are they thinking? Is this really the sort of thing
> Microsoft spends its billions of research dollars on?
Apparently so, that was actually bundled with Internet Explorer 3 !
-JB
George Graves
Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
> In article
> <gmgraves-7988D8...@newssvr13-ext.news.prodigy.com>,
> George Graves <gmgr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <psmith-4D7E31....@rcache1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
> > Psmith <psm...@crap.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "D. Icktip" <Michae...@dell.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > New switcher and OS9 is butt-ugly compared to even XP...
> > >
> > > What's "switcher"?
> > >
> > > Anyway, I guess this is a matter of opinion, but I've always thought the
> > > classic Mac UI is excellent (aside from some side issues that can easily
> > > be avoided, like Launcher). Extremely smooth, fast, intuitive, and
> > > functional. Until OSX, that is. I welcome a kernel with pre-emptive MT
> > > and protected memory, of course (about damn time)...but I wish they had
> > > kept the classic-style UI. I never really got into the NeXT UI, either
> > > when it was in a Black Box or now.
> >
> > That's what I wanted as well: BSD with the Classic environement running
> > on it. But instead, Lil' Stevie gave us Aqua. Love the PMT, love the
> > bullet-proof robustness of OSX, but have to say that while still better
> > than XP, Aqua gives up a LOT to the Classic Mac GUI.
>
> So what George. Things like Fruit Menu, cheap shareware, give you that
> OS 9 look back, since you don't want to do the work, little though it
> may be, of learning the GUI of OS X
Why do you think that I have not "learned" the GUI of OSX? I have seen
you post this to me several times now in different threads. Can you not
accept that SOME people find the Aqua GUI not as useful as the Classic
Mac GUI?
> Frankly, I have a hard time going back to 9 because X is so easy. Now
> that isn't to say there aren't things I'd like different. But OS 9 has
> had some 18 years of refinement since it's basic version came with the
> first Mac in 1984. Give Mac OS X that long.
My point is why throw that 18 years out the window when 20 million users
already know and ostensibly like the older interface? Seems gratuitous
to me.
> BEsides, OS X has the same stuff, just in some different places. A lot
> of folks complain about not having the App Switcher that 9 has. Yet, the
> Dock is the same thing, just implemented a bit differently and gives you
> the same functionality.
It just isn't as good. The switcher showed you the open apps instantly,
because the open apps were the only ones there. Now you see every app in
the dock (in the default mode) and have to look for the little black
carats to see which ones are running. Granted you can strip the dock
clean so that only running apps show up on it, and in that mose, it is
just like the Switcher, but only then.
> I can also cmd-tab though runnign apps just like
> 9. I can't keep a non running app in the switcher in 9, which I can to
> in X, nor can I have a folder, web page, or other things as I can in the
> dock.
I think having non-running stuff in the dock confuses the issue. I don't
have ANYTHING in the dock but running apps and minimized windows. I do
not use the dock to launch stuff from.
> Too manhy folks get hung up on inconsequential small stuff. And
> don't forget, you and I do the same things, save for the fact that I
> probably do more imaging and you do more page work. But I also Ad'd a
> Magazine for some 12 years too. So I think much of what we do is more
> based in similarity than difference.
Probably, but that doesn't mean that we see the Aqua interface the same
way. I can live with it, it's OK, it's just that I didn't ask for Aqua,
was perfectly happy with the Classic interface, and just prefer it,
thank you.
--
George Graves
wild bill mehlhorn
shit - you won' t feel any better when you find out that virtual PC -
you're way out of PC hell won't, can't, doesn't emulate the goddamn 3D
card. I'm not very technically proficient but according to Connectix,
asking the Mac to emulate the PC 3D card is asking too much.
SOOOO now Daddy has his all Mac household and a child who can't play
her f**king games. So I have to move the Mac somewhere else in the
house and either get the HP running again of by a new PC. This arc has
been unbelievebly aggravating. I was psyched about the E-Mac - great
deal from Small Dog and now the rest of the family just stares at it.
I searched for hacks to work with Virtual PC to read the 3D card as a
PC card but forget it- too much emulation to ask.
Anyone want to buy a brand new EMAC with superdrive? I gotta go get a
another PC
Barry Feldman
In article <MPG.18766505e...@news.CIS.DFN.DE>, Edwin
John C. Randolph
ZnU wrote:
>
> In article <auhg6b$fd2$1...@knossos.btinternet.com>,
> "James Boswell" <Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Indeed.. We usually refer to XP as "Windows 2000, Cartoon Edition".
> > >
> > > You want to see cartoony interfaces...take a look at iChat.
> >
> > Microsoft win in the cartoony chat programs stakes as well!
> >
> > http://research.microsoft.com/vwg/projectsheets/comicchat.htm
>
> What the hell are they thinking? Is this really the sort of thing
> Microsoft spends its billions of research dollars on?
Well, that and dancing paper clips...
-jcr
Ari Ukkonen
I don't need/use my PC for anything other than watching TV and sometimes
the odd game that I had already purchased months ago. Are you saying
that all those Mac users who also have PC's are faux mac users? The eMac
is my main machine at home and I don't plan on investing any more money
on the PC as all future peripherals, games etc... will be for the mac.
At the office, I have a PC ofcourse but I do not plan on doing any work
from home (but if I did, I could use my OS X MS Remote Desktop client to
connect to Terminal server.
If I get a 5.1 USB soundcard and one of those USB PVR devices soon, I
can sell/giveaway my PC and get an XBOX for certain games. My iPod is
the mac version btw.
My next System purchase might be either an iBook or a Dual G4.
> Edwin
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
wild bill mehlhorn <wild...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> when you have a 5 year old and a new emac that replaced an HP piece of
> shit - you won' t feel any better when you find out that virtual PC -
> you're way out of PC hell won't, can't, doesn't emulate the goddamn 3D
> card. I'm not very technically proficient but according to Connectix,
> asking the Mac to emulate the PC 3D card is asking too much.
>
> SOOOO now Daddy has his all Mac household and a child who can't play
> her f**king games. So I have to move the Mac somewhere else in the
> house and either get the HP running again of by a new PC. This arc has
> been unbelievebly aggravating. I was psyched about the E-Mac - great
> deal from Small Dog and now the rest of the family just stares at it.
>
> I searched for hacks to work with Virtual PC to read the 3D card as a
> PC card but forget it- too much emulation to ask.
>
> Anyone want to buy a brand new EMAC with superdrive? I gotta go get a
> another PC
Why don't you get an XBOX or PS2 for games? Your old HP is not going to
perform as well as an XBOX.
>
> Barry Feldman
--
Ari Ukkonen
Tim Smith
Ukkonen wrote:
> Why don't you get an XBOX or PS2 for games? Your old HP is not going to
> perform as well as an XBOX.
I'm curious why you say "XBOX or PS2" rather than saying "XBOX or PS2 or
GameCube"?
--Tim Smith
Tim Smith
George Graves wrote:
> It just isn't as good. The switcher showed you the open apps instantly,
> because the open apps were the only ones there. Now you see every app in
> the dock (in the default mode) and have to look for the little black
> carats to see which ones are running. Granted you can strip the dock clean
> so that only running apps show up on it, and in that mose, it is just like
> the Switcher, but only then.
I find it particularly annoying when I'm typing in one app, and want to
switch to another with cmd-tab. A fair amount of the time, I overshoot, and
have to cmd-tab all the way around. I overshoot because when you hold down
alt and repeatedly hit tab, it steps through the open apps, and since they
are interspersed with non-open apps on the dock, the selected item can move
a different amount with each tab press.
The did make a major improvement in Jaguar, in that when you cmd-tab from
app X to app Y, the next time you cmd-tab, it starts at app X, so you can
easily cmd-tab back and forth between two apps. My guess is that this is by
far the most common case, so it is nice that they finally optimized for that
case.
--Tim Smith
Patrick Nihill
A lot of people seem to perceive the Gamecube - or any console by Nintendo
for that matter - as being for children, while the other two are the
"adult" choices. This is a pity, as some of the best games around at the
moment are for Gamecube, such as Mario Sunshine and Super Metroid.
--
Pa Nihill
wild bill mehlhorn
play Barbie Ice Skating is what I need.
(what's with the last post trying to talk common sense on this thread?)
In article <slrnb0qsgr.gdj...@tzs.net>, Tim Smith
ZnU
<gmgraves-016067...@newssvr17-ext.news.prodigy.com>,
George Graves <gmgr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <jpolaski-7D948A...@netnews.attbi.com>,
> Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
[snip]
> > I can also cmd-tab though runnign apps just like
> > 9. I can't keep a non running app in the switcher in 9, which I can to
> > in X, nor can I have a folder, web page, or other things as I can in the
> > dock.
>
> I think having non-running stuff in the dock confuses the issue. I don't
> have ANYTHING in the dock but running apps and minimized windows. I do
> not use the dock to launch stuff from.
Having non-running apps in the Dock is *enormously* useful for less
sophisticated users. They don't have to deal with the file system, and
they can use exactly the same mechanism for launching apps that they use
for switching apps. The way to set a system up for such users in OS 9
was to stick aliases for commonly used app on the desktop for launching,
and for switching, well, this sort of user almost never figured out the
Applications menu, in my experience. Even when it was explained to them
repeatedly.
As for my personal Dock habits, I have about ten apps that I keep open
more than 90% of the time. These have permanent homes in my Dock, since
they'd almost always be there anyway, and this way when I want one I
don't have to think about whether or not I've bothered to launch it
since last logging in; I always head for the same place.
[snip]
ZnU
> In article <gmgraves-016067...@newssvr17-ext.news.prodigy.com>,
> George Graves wrote:
> > It just isn't as good. The switcher showed you the open apps instantly,
> > because the open apps were the only ones there. Now you see every app in
> > the dock (in the default mode) and have to look for the little black
> > carats to see which ones are running. Granted you can strip the dock clean
> > so that only running apps show up on it, and in that mose, it is just like
> > the Switcher, but only then.
>
> I find it particularly annoying when I'm typing in one app, and want to
> switch to another with cmd-tab. A fair amount of the time, I overshoot, and
> have to cmd-tab all the way around.
You can cycle backwards with command-shift-tab.
Ari Ukkonen
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
For the following reasons:
1. GameCube uses a proprietary mini-disc format
2. GameCube cannot play DVDs (see reason 1).
3. PS2 has the largest library of games.
4. XBox has the best gfx and sound of all the consoles.
5. Both XBOX and PS2 can run home brew games/linux (Xbox must be modded).
6. Both XBOX and PS2 have network adapters available.
>
> --Tim Smith
--
Ari Ukkonen
George Graves
ZnU <z...@acedsl.com> wrote:
> In article
> <gmgraves-016067...@newssvr17-ext.news.prodigy.com>,
> George Graves <gmgr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <jpolaski-7D948A...@netnews.attbi.com>,
> > Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > I can also cmd-tab though runnign apps just like
> > > 9. I can't keep a non running app in the switcher in 9, which I can to
> > > in X, nor can I have a folder, web page, or other things as I can in the
> > > dock.
> >
> > I think having non-running stuff in the dock confuses the issue. I don't
> > have ANYTHING in the dock but running apps and minimized windows. I do
> > not use the dock to launch stuff from.
>
> Having non-running apps in the Dock is *enormously* useful for less
> sophisticated users. They don't have to deal with the file system, and
> they can use exactly the same mechanism for launching apps that they use
> for switching apps. The way to set a system up for such users in OS 9
> was to stick aliases for commonly used app on the desktop for launching,
> and for switching, well, this sort of user almost never figured out the
> Applications menu, in my experience. Even when it was explained to them
> repeatedly.
I use 'Launch Items-X,' to launch applications. This is a contextual
menu that I access via right-click on that two-button mouse which
Windroids insist Macs can't and don't use.
--
George Graves
Tim Smith
>> > Why don't you get an XBOX or PS2 for games? Your old HP is not going to
>> > perform as well as an XBOX.
>>
>> I'm curious why you say "XBOX or PS2" rather than saying "XBOX or PS2 or
>> GameCube"?
> For the following reasons:
> 1. GameCube uses a proprietary mini-disc format
> 2. GameCube cannot play DVDs (see reason 1).
Not really relevant to suitability as a gaming system, though.
> 3. PS2 has the largest library of games.
However, as Mac users are fond of pointing out, *number* of titles is not as
important as *quality* of titles. When I was deciding which current
generation console to get, I looked through the game lists for them all, and
there were surprising few PS2 titles that seemed interesting. I'm not into
sports or racing games, and that seems to be a huge chunk of the PS2
catalog.
> 4. XBox has the best gfx and sound of all the consoles.
So why include PS2?
> 5. Both XBOX and PS2 can run home brew games/linux (Xbox must be modded).
> 6. Both XBOX and PS2 have network adapters available.
Network adapters are available for GC, too.
--Tim Smith
ELVIS2000
wrote:
>So what George. Things like Fruit Menu, cheap shareware, give you that
>OS 9 look back, since you don't want to do the work, little though it
>may be, of learning the GUI of OS X
So what - other apps give you an ersatz os9 look in Windows as well.
Hardly a good argument for the merits of an OS, don't you think - the
ability of 3rd party software that allows you to change it?
If it were - WinXP would win hands down.
lol-
jw
ELVIS2000
<Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>WTF does it say about Microsofts confidence in their UI designers if they
>have a "okay, we know it sucks, but hey, you can turn it off!" option?
MS recognizes different strokes for different folks. I use the
"classic" interface - finding Luna ugly as all hell.
jw
ELVIS2000
LOL - never seen this before.
Question - if Apple came out with this would it be revolutionary?
jw
ELVIS2000
wrote:
> My P3 with 256MB, on the other hand, becomes quite
>sluggish when the swapping starts on a modest load.
A P3 with 256MB is old tech - and not even available anymore.
ELVIS2000
>pictures...god damn, XP is amazingly ugly. What the fuck were they
>thinking.
Again - this can be turned off in the OS. As well as many other
interface tweaks, effects, etc.
jw
ELVIS2000
<wild...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>when you have a 5 year old and a new emac that replaced an HP piece of
>shit - you won' t feel any better when you find out that virtual PC -
>you're way out of PC hell won't, can't, doesn't emulate the goddamn 3D
>card. I'm not very technically proficient but according to Connectix,
>asking the Mac to emulate the PC 3D card is asking too much.
What a spoiled kid. Tell the little fuck that daddy didn't do his
homework and she will have to deal with it.
jw
Tim Smith
> WTF does it say about Microsofts confidence in their UI designers if they
> have a "okay, we know it sucks, but hey, you can turn it off!" option?
It says that they understand the purpose of a UI, which is to allow the user
to comfortably and accurately operate the software. This means that when
you have two interfaces, X and Y, then even if Y is way better for new
users, X might well be better for users that already know X. So, when
introducing a better interface, the right thing to do is make the old
interface available, if technically and financially feasible, as an option.
What does it say about Apple's confidence in their UI designers if they had
to force people to switch from the classic interface to Aqua?
--Tim Smith
James Boswell
> In article <aufqob$fd9$1...@helle.btinternet.com>, James Boswell wrote:
>> WTF does it say about Microsofts confidence in their UI designers if
>> they have a "okay, we know it sucks, but hey, you can turn it off!"
>> option?
>
> It says that they understand the purpose of a UI, which is to allow
> the user to comfortably and accurately operate the software. This
> means that when you have two interfaces, X and Y, then even if Y is
> way better for new users, X might well be better for users that
> already know X. So, when introducing a better interface, the right
> thing to do is make the old interface available, if technically and
> financially feasible, as an option.
Here's the thing, the old UI and the new UI are functionally the same, but
the new one looks like a cartoon whilst the old one doesn't...
-JB
Ari Ukkonen
ELVIS2000 <el...@nyc.com> wrote:
Really? I had no idea. :) It's good enough for the games I have now,
watching DVDs and other crap but for real work, I use my eMac 'cause it
has alot more power and RAM. That old antiquated PC cannot even go past
half a gig of PC100 RAM.
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
The funny thing is that even a P4 2.8 Ghz will slow to a crawl if a
memory leak occurs and swapping starts in the middle of a game.
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <aukkonen-D56366...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net>, Ari
> Ukkonen wrote:
> >> > Why don't you get an XBOX or PS2 for games? Your old HP is not going to
> >> > perform as well as an XBOX.
> >>
> >> I'm curious why you say "XBOX or PS2" rather than saying "XBOX or PS2 or
> >> GameCube"?
> > For the following reasons:
> > 1. GameCube uses a proprietary mini-disc format
> > 2. GameCube cannot play DVDs (see reason 1).
>
> Not really relevant to suitability as a gaming system, though.
I would beg to differ. A standard DVD can store more information than
the GameCube mini discs and you can mix DVD video with the game action.
> > 3. PS2 has the largest library of games.
> However, as Mac users are fond of pointing out, *number* of titles is not as
> important as *quality* of titles. When I was deciding which current
> generation console to get, I looked through the game lists for them all, and
> there were surprising few PS2 titles that seemed interesting. I'm not into
> sports or racing games, and that seems to be a huge chunk of the PS2
> catalog.
That is why I also included XBOX, there are fewer games but many are of
high quality.
> > 4. XBox has the best gfx and sound of all the consoles.
> So why include PS2?
Because PS2 has a higher number of games and the ones available for it
might appeal to some more than what XBOX has to offer.
> > 5. Both XBOX and PS2 can run home brew games/linux (Xbox must be modded).
> > 6. Both XBOX and PS2 have network adapters available.
>
> Network adapters are available for GC, too.
That's fine but it hardly is anything more than a game console. If the
games available for it are what you are into, then go ahead and get it.
James Boswell
No, but it would almost certainly be less lame in implementation.
Not that such an accomplishment is difficult or anything ;)
-JB
Unknown
power failure...hurumph!
Robert Oukaki
news:aukkonen-371E63...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
Ari, do you read what you post? You started off argueing that a P3 with
256MB of RAM is NOT old tech, and finished the post indicating that it is
'old antiquated' hardware. Which is it?
R. Oukaki.
Ari Ukkonen
"Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Have you never seen sarcasm or a smiley?
Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good enough
for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No home user or
office worker "needs" a P4.
And you say that I have reading comprehension problems?
>
> R. Oukaki.
--
Ari Ukkonen
WinMan
Ari shows yet again how stupid he is. The superior Pent 4 will benefit
anyone thats edits home video on their machines. And that is quiet a
few PC users out there.
Robert Oukaki
Ok, I missed the smiley, whatever. I do find it interesting that you still
manage in what sentence to claim that your P3 is adequate for your needs,
then still piss and moan that it's too old to do the things your new Mac
does. Just how old is your P3 that it can't take 0.5GB of memory? (I ask
cause my Athlon 1.3GHz is running at 512MB of RAM and still has one memory
slot open, and yes I know the P3 is Intel, but I also know that most decent
quality boards do come with 3 or more memory sockets).
R. Oukaki
Eric Roush
wild bill mehlhorn <wild...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Let me put it this way - any piece of shit on this planet that will
> play Barbie Ice Skating is what I need.
>
> (what's with the last post trying to talk common sense on this thread?)
>
Solution 1: Put the old HP clunker in the kid's room; after all, it's a
kid's computer!
Solution 2: When no one is looking, drop the Barbie disc on the floor.
Step on it. Grind your foot some. When Barbie no longer
runs on kid's computer, replace with "Backyard Soccer".
--
Eric Roush edr...@acpub.duke.edu
This sig. brought to you by Red Wrigglers, the Cadillac of Worms.
Mayor of R'lyeh
wrote:
>In article <DGNP9.4059$o32.2622@FE05>,
What about 3D hobbyists? What speed should they be 'happy' with
considering that there is something faster and affordable out there?
The Ayatollah Mohsen Mujtahed Shabestari, who is
supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's personal
representative to Iran's Azerbaijan province, is
upset with three U.S. religious figures:
Jerry Falwell, who has called the prophet Mohammed
"a terrorist"; Pat Robertson, who claims Islam is a
religion of violence seeking to "dominate and destroy"
; and Franklin Graham, the son of televangelist Billy
Graham, who says Islam is "a very evil and wicked
religion." Shabestari is seeking to disprove these
false notions by calling for the three to be killed.
From Reason Magazine
Iain D Broadfoot
>
> Ari shows yet again how stupid he is. The superior Pent 4 will benefit
> anyone thats edits home video on their machines. And that is quiet a
> few PC users out there.
>
i would have thought more ram and a faster GPU would benefit them
exponentially more...
iain
Steve Hix
Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> What does it say about Apple's confidence in their UI designers if they had
> to force people to switch from the classic interface to Aqua?
That they recognize that a lot of people tend to be more than a
bit conservative about learning new things?
Apple isn't "forcing" anyone to change...there are still people
using MacOS 6.x, after all.
Ari Ukkonen
Mayor of R'lyeh <ev5...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 03:36:24 GMT, Ari Ukkonen <aukk...@shaw.ca>
> wrote:
> >Have you never seen sarcasm or a smiley?
> >Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good enough
> >for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No home user or
> >office worker "needs" a P4.
> >
> >And you say that I have reading comprehension problems?
> What about 3D hobbyists? What speed should they be 'happy' with
> considering that there is something faster and affordable out there?
computer fast enough to run the software and get the job done. Want is
very subjective. :)
These days, the bottleneck is not so much the CPU but the gfx subsystem,
memory subsystem (speed and/or size of) and finally HD speed.
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
> > Have you never seen sarcasm or a smiley?
> > Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good enough
> > for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No home user or
> > office worker "needs" a P4.
> Ok, I missed the smiley, whatever. I do find it interesting that you still
> manage in what sentence to claim that your P3 is adequate for your needs,
> then still piss and moan that it's too old to do the things your new Mac
> does. Just how old is your P3 that it can't take 0.5GB of memory? (I ask
For what I use my PC for, it is enough. However, my needs for image and
sound/video editing, require more memory and power than what my PC can
provide.
I suppose that I could get an Athlon system but I don't really need one
and I don't have any interest in getting another XP system because my
time is valuable and I factor that into the TCO of my home systems.
> cause my Athlon 1.3GHz is running at 512MB of RAM and still has one memory
> slot open, and yes I know the P3 is Intel, but I also know that most decent
> quality boards do come with 3 or more memory sockets).
The mobo (old 1 U server) has two slots which will take up to 256 MB
PC100 sticks. From what I have seen of P4 mobos, they only have two
sockets giving a maximum of 2 GB ram. I noticed that most Athlon boards
do have 3 slots for a maximum of 3 GB ram.
I've filled two of the three PCI slots (WinTVGo and GeForce2MX 400 64MB)
since this server board did not have a wired AGP slot (just onboard
Intel AGP chipset).
> R. Oukaki
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
"WinMan" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Ari Ukkonen wrote:
> > In article <DGNP9.4059$o32.2622@FE05>,
> > Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good
> > enough for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No
> > home user or office worker "needs" a P4.
> >
> > And you say that I have reading comprehension problems?
> >>
> >> R. Oukaki.
> Ari shows yet again how stupid he is. The superior Pent 4 will benefit
> anyone thats edits home video on their machines. And that is quiet a
> few PC users out there.
First of all, I was talking about home users, not video hobbists. Only
an idiot would waste their valuable time on trying to get a PC solution
to work for home video instead of getting a Mac.
Let's see....
1. Take Home video with Digital Vidcam
2. Plug into mac and edit video with iMovie.
3. Transfer video back to vidCam or (on a Superdrive mac) import into
iDVD and burn to DVD-R
Whineman, you must not value your time 'cause you waste so much of it on
your PC posting here in a group about macs and trying to get your PC to
work with peripherals.
--
Ari Ukkonen
Mayor of R'lyeh
wrote:
>In article <3e0fcc2b$0$17652$272e...@news.execpc.com>,
> Mayor of R'lyeh <ev5...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 03:36:24 GMT, Ari Ukkonen <aukk...@shaw.ca>
>> wrote:
><snip>
>> >Have you never seen sarcasm or a smiley?
>> >Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good enough
>> >for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No home user or
>> >office worker "needs" a P4.
>> >
>> >And you say that I have reading comprehension problems?
>> What about 3D hobbyists? What speed should they be 'happy' with
>> considering that there is something faster and affordable out there?
>Again, this is a question of want vs. need. What they need, is a
>computer fast enough to run the software and get the job done. Want is
>very subjective. :)
Well if you want to take that argument to its logical end none of us
needs 99% of what we have. 8)
>These days, the bottleneck is not so much the CPU but the gfx subsystem,
>memory subsystem (speed and/or size of) and finally HD speed.
Rendering a 3D scene is 100% CPU.
James Boswell
> still manage in what sentence to claim that your P3 is adequate for
> your needs, then still piss and moan that it's too old to do the
> things your new Mac does. Just how old is your P3 that it can't take
> 0.5GB of memory? (I ask cause my Athlon 1.3GHz is running at 512MB
> of RAM and still has one memory slot open, and yes I know the P3 is
> Intel, but I also know that most decent quality boards do come with 3
> or more memory sockets).
He's probably referring to the Intel i815E chipset, which is "capped" at
512MB of memory on the board, no matter how many free slots it has.
-JB
James Boswell
>> subsystem, memory subsystem (speed and/or size of) and finally HD
>> speed.
>
> Rendering a 3D scene is 100% CPU.
My Geforce 4 Ti disagrees with that statement.
Doing physics for a 3D Scene OTOH (which is increasing now, UT2003's Ragdoll
physics for one) needs cpu grunt.
-JB
wild bill mehlhorn
they will not be including classic in OSX. I read that in Macworld.
Now that's going to take balls because I work with engineers in
recording studios around NY and they all have Macs and they are all in
classic mode. The only time I see any of the new ones with OSX up is
when they are doing office stuff, mail, notes, internet. My daughters
games won't run in classic mode in OSX but do run in 9.2.2. I can
imagine what happens with the recording apps. this is not a problem
that is going to be easily solved.
But for Apple to expand past their 5% share, or whatever it is, these
people don't matter. They are the choir.
In article <sehix-2244AE....@news.dsldesigns.com>, Steve Hix
Josiah Fizer
I think its safe to assume that the poster was speaking of rendering a scene in 3D-Strudio or a similar program. Not playing Doom 3.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Steve Hix
wild bill mehlhorn <wild...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Not true - Apple has announced that at some point in the near future
> they will not be including classic in OSX. I read that in Macworld.
So? They're not including MacOS 7 with systems now, either.
Again, that is future, it is not yet accomplished fact.
> Now that's going to take balls because I work with engineers in
> recording studios around NY and they all have Macs and they are all in
> classic mode.
Pro music software on OS X has only just begun to appear. Give them
another three months and there will be little reason to use Classic,
much less reboot into MacOS 9.
> The only time I see any of the new ones with OSX up is
> when they are doing office stuff, mail, notes, internet. My daughters
> games won't run in classic mode in OSX but do run in 9.2.2. I can
> imagine what happens with the recording apps. this is not a problem
> that is going to be easily solved.
New music apps are beginning to show up in OS X; it takes a little
while. Look for lots of announcements and initial shipments in the
next few weeks. Even from Digidesign.
James Boswell
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:23:48 +0000 (UTC), "James Boswell"
> <Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>>> These days, the bottleneck is not so much the CPU but the gfx
>>>> subsystem, memory subsystem (speed and/or size of) and finally HD
>>>> speed.
>>>
>>> Rendering a 3D scene is 100% CPU.
>>
>> My Geforce 4 Ti disagrees with that statement.
>>
>> Doing physics for a 3D Scene OTOH (which is increasing now, UT2003's
>> Ragdoll physics for one) needs cpu grunt.
>>
>>
>> -JB
>>
>
> I think its safe to assume that the poster was speaking of rendering
> a scene in 3D-Strudio or a similar program. Not playing Doom 3.
Probably, but my Ti4200 does "render 3d scenes" and it most certainly isn't
the CPU
It looks like that'll be changing soon at the rate graphics hardware is
developing anyways ;)
Any bets on the timeframe videocards start getting physics coprocessors on
them to offload the cpu even more?
-JB
Robert Oukaki
> In article <wGPP9.2476$3o3.2141@fe02>,
> "Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > "Ari Ukkonen" <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> > news:aukkonen-97E88F...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
> > > Have you never seen sarcasm or a smiley?
> > > Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good
enough
> > > for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No home user
or
> > > office worker "needs" a P4.
> > Ok, I missed the smiley, whatever. I do find it interesting that you
still
> > manage in what sentence to claim that your P3 is adequate for your
needs,
> > then still piss and moan that it's too old to do the things your new Mac
> > does. Just how old is your P3 that it can't take 0.5GB of memory? (I
ask
>
> For what I use my PC for, it is enough. However, my needs for image and
> sound/video editing, require more memory and power than what my PC can
> provide.
>
> I suppose that I could get an Athlon system but I don't really need one
> and I don't have any interest in getting another XP system because my
> time is valuable and I factor that into the TCO of my home systems.
TCO for your home systems? Please explain how you calculate the total TCO
for home use. I'ld be interested in seeing how the numbers work out
(nothing too specific)
> > cause my Athlon 1.3GHz is running at 512MB of RAM and still has one
memory
> > slot open, and yes I know the P3 is Intel, but I also know that most
decent
> > quality boards do come with 3 or more memory sockets).
>
> The mobo (old 1 U server) has two slots which will take up to 256 MB
> PC100 sticks. From what I have seen of P4 mobos, they only have two
> sockets giving a maximum of 2 GB ram. I noticed that most Athlon boards
> do have 3 slots for a maximum of 3 GB ram.
You haven't looked hard enough. I took one look on the ASUS home page and
just picked a P4 MOBO at random...here's the link
http://usa.asus.com/mb/socket478/p4b533/overview.htm# ... notice the
number of memory sockets. The ones you were looking at were the RDRAM based
ones.
> I've filled two of the three PCI slots (WinTVGo and GeForce2MX 400 64MB)
> since this server board did not have a wired AGP slot (just onboard
> Intel AGP chipset).
Also notice that any of their boards, have more like 5 PCI slots... But
then again, ASUS, ABIT and many others are quality Mobo manufacturers.
Take care.
Robert Oukaki
> First of all, I was talking about home users, not video hobbists. Only
> an idiot would waste their valuable time on trying to get a PC solution
> to work for home video instead of getting a Mac.
I guess Adobe Premiere and Pinnacle Studio (windows version) cater to the
idiots then.
> Let's see....
> 1. Take Home video with Digital Vidcam
> 2. Plug into mac and edit video with iMovie.
> 3. Transfer video back to vidCam or (on a Superdrive mac) import into
> iDVD and burn to DVD-R
Did all that (except burn to a DVD-R) just fine on my PC. Please explain
why your method is better. I did add an extra step though, and converted my
final movie to divx (you know the encoder is available for the PC platform,
so we can do that) right out of Premiere.
R Oukaki
Robert Oukaki
news:aup6o2$cte$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
> > Ok, I missed the smiley, whatever. I do find it interesting that you
> > of RAM and still has one memory slot open, and yes I know the P3 is
> > Intel, but I also know that most decent quality boards do come with 3
> > or more memory sockets).
>
> He's probably referring to the Intel i815E chipset, which is "capped" at
> 512MB of memory on the board, no matter how many free slots it has.
James,
thanks for the input. Hadn't thought of that.
R. Oukaki
Josiah Fizer
Even then he's wrong. My Intel P4 board has four RDRAM slots.
>> I've filled two of the three PCI slots (WinTVGo and GeForce2MX 400 64MB)
>> since this server board did not have a wired AGP slot (just onboard
>> Intel AGP chipset).
>
>Also notice that any of their boards, have more like 5 PCI slots... But
>then again, ASUS, ABIT and many others are quality Mobo manufacturers.
>
>Take care.
>
>
>
>
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
Edwin
aukk...@shaw.ca says...
> In article <qdPP9.128$mL3....@newsfeed.avtel.net>,
> "WinMan" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> > Ari Ukkonen wrote:
> > > In article <DGNP9.4059$o32.2622@FE05>,
> > > Where did I argue that a P3 was not old tech? I said it was good
> > > enough for what I still use a PC for. I have no need for a P4. No
> > > home user or office worker "needs" a P4.
> > >
> > > And you say that I have reading comprehension problems?
> > >>
> > >> R. Oukaki.
> > Ari shows yet again how stupid he is. The superior Pent 4 will benefit
> > anyone thats edits home video on their machines. And that is quiet a
> > few PC users out there.
> First of all, I was talking about home users, not video hobbists. Only
> an idiot would waste their valuable time on trying to get a PC solution
> to work for home video instead of getting a Mac.
All those with successful home PC video solutions take note!
> Let's see....
> 1. Take Home video with Digital Vidcam
> 2. Plug into mac and edit video with iMovie.
> 3. Transfer video back to vidCam or (on a Superdrive mac) import into
> iDVD and burn to DVD-R
Hmm... the same process as on the PC... just with other software besides
iMovie...
> Whineman, you must not value your time 'cause you waste so much of it on
> your PC posting here in a group about macs
This is a group to compare Macs to other types of computers. So Winman
isn't "wasting his time," he's doing what this group exists for.
> and trying to get your PC to
> work with peripherals.
You MacZealots swallow Apple's advertising hype hook, line, and sinker.
Edwin
D. Icktop
news:MPG.187a6144a...@news.CIS.DFN.DE:
>> > Ari shows yet again how stupid he is. The superior Pent 4 will
>> > benefit anyone thats edits home video on their machines. And that
...drivel snipped...
> All those with successful home PC video solutions take note!
Which are few and far between. It used to be hard to get it right on
the PC. And, FYI - the Piss4 is not a benefit to video editors. Heck, I
edited video on my K62/350...
> Hmm... the same process as on the PC... just with other software
> besides iMovie...
With my PC it was Load software, render, reboot, as the software got
corrupt while playing the results. Continue, with a few other reboots.
Then, if the final render was OK, you would have to reboot before exporting
to tape and *HOPING* it would go without a glitch. Unfortunately, that
rarely happened. (this, despite superfast disks that were about 1.5x faster
than the DV standard.
With the iMac it's edit and export.
> You MacZealots swallow Apple's advertising hype hook, line, and
> sinker.
Yup, and after 2 PC's trying to do it, it works BEAUTIFULLY!
Ari Ukkonen
"Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Ari Ukkonen" <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:aukkonen-C06CFC...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
>
> > First of all, I was talking about home users, not video hobbists. Only
> > an idiot would waste their valuable time on trying to get a PC solution
> > to work for home video instead of getting a Mac.
>
> I guess Adobe Premiere and Pinnacle Studio (windows version) cater to the
> idiots then.
No, they have their purpose, but they are not really geared towards home
users with a digivid cam but rather people who do video production as a
"hobby". Too many bells and whistles.
I know someone who has all that great equipment but he does not ever
create videos with it. I wonder why? Too much of a pain to use perhaps?
> > Let's see....
> > 1. Take Home video with Digital Vidcam
> > 2. Plug into mac and edit video with iMovie.
> > 3. Transfer video back to vidCam or (on a Superdrive mac) import into
> > iDVD and burn to DVD-R
>
> Did all that (except burn to a DVD-R) just fine on my PC. Please explain
> why your method is better. I did add an extra step though, and converted my
> final movie to divx (you know the encoder is available for the PC platform,
> so we can do that) right out of Premiere.
Can you play DIVX on anything other than a computer? No? That's like a
mac users keeping videos in Quicktime format.
> R Oukaki
>
--
Ari Ukkonen
Josiah Fizer
There are several DVD players that supprot DiVX as well as players for the Playstation2 and XBox. Recoridng in DiVX on CD is faster then
burning DVDs, costs less too.
Ari Ukkonen
<snip>
> > I suppose that I could get an Athlon system but I don't really need one
> > and I don't have any interest in getting another XP system because my
> > time is valuable and I factor that into the TCO of my home systems.
> TCO for your home systems? Please explain how you calculate the total TCO
> for home use. I'ld be interested in seeing how the numbers work out
> (nothing too specific)
When I have to spend time troubleshooting a system instead of using it
or doing something else, I bill myself based on my wage at work. My time
off work is that valuable to me. I view my home machines as tools or
appliances, not a hobby to waste time on.
<snip>
> > The mobo (old 1 U server) has two slots which will take up to 256 MB
> > PC100 sticks. From what I have seen of P4 mobos, they only have two
> > sockets giving a maximum of 2 GB ram. I noticed that most Athlon boards
> > do have 3 slots for a maximum of 3 GB ram.
>
> You haven't looked hard enough. I took one look on the ASUS home page and
> just picked a P4 MOBO at random...here's the link
> http://usa.asus.com/mb/socket478/p4b533/overview.htm# ... notice the
> number of memory sockets. The ones you were looking at were the RDRAM based
> ones.
I was looking on the web at one particular site with mobos from
Abit,ASUS and several others.
> > I've filled two of the three PCI slots (WinTVGo and GeForce2MX 400 64MB)
> > since this server board did not have a wired AGP slot (just onboard
> > Intel AGP chipset).
>
> Also notice that any of their boards, have more like 5 PCI slots... But
> then again, ASUS, ABIT and many others are quality Mobo manufacturers.
FYI. My mobo was a good "1U server" mobo at its time, an Intel CA810E
which is a MICRO ATX board. I got a great deal on it at a dot com
firesale.
> Take care.
--
Ari Ukkonen
WinMan
> In article <mI0Q9.35165$0E2.31858@FE06>,
> "Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Ari Ukkonen" <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>> news:aukkonen-27D093...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
> <snip>
>>> I suppose that I could get an Athlon system but I don't really need
>>> one and I don't have any interest in getting another XP system
>>> because my time is valuable and I factor that into the TCO of my
>>> home systems.
>> TCO for your home systems? Please explain how you calculate the
>> total TCO for home use. I'ld be interested in seeing how the
>> numbers work out (nothing too specific)
>
> When I have to spend time troubleshooting a system instead of using it
> or doing something else, I bill myself based on my wage at work. My
> time off work is that valuable to me. I view my home machines as
> tools or appliances, not a hobby to waste time on.
>
Win XP is the most reliable OS ever used by the consumer. Only a total
idiot would think it problematic. You strike me as a person that would
spend hours messing around with an XP system trying to get it to work while
all the time the problem was being caused by a bad disk or RAM.
Steve Mackay
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote in message
news:MPG.187a6144a...@news.CIS.DFN.DE...
WOW, ain't that the pot calling the kettle black, with all your AGP8x
propaganda. You are byond clueless.
Ari Ukkonen
> > When I have to spend time troubleshooting a system instead of using it
> > or doing something else, I bill myself based on my wage at work. My
> > time off work is that valuable to me. I view my home machines as
> > tools or appliances, not a hobby to waste time on.
> Win XP is the most reliable OS ever used by the consumer. Only a total
> idiot would think it problematic. You strike me as a person that would
> spend hours messing around with an XP system trying to get it to work while
> all the time the problem was being caused by a bad disk or RAM.
really strong shit you are smoking the Whineman. :)
Would you like me to list the Windows update install log? :)
--
Ari Ukkonen
WinMan
> In article <kr2Q9.130$mL3....@newsfeed.avtel.net>,
> "WinMan" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> Ari Ukkonen wrote:
>>> In article <mI0Q9.35165$0E2.31858@FE06>,
> <snip>
>>> When I have to spend time troubleshooting a system instead of using
>>> it or doing something else, I bill myself based on my wage at work.
>>> My time off work is that valuable to me. I view my home machines as
>>> tools or appliances, not a hobby to waste time on.
>> Win XP is the most reliable OS ever used by the consumer. Only a
>> total idiot would think it problematic. You strike me as a person
>> that would spend hours messing around with an XP system trying to
>> get it to work while all the time the problem was being caused by a
>> bad disk or RAM.
> The most reliable consumer OS? LOL. My HD and RAM are fine. That is
> some really strong shit you are smoking the Whineman. :)
>
> Would you like me to list the Windows update install log? :)
No I want you to work even harder and list the thousands of problems fixed
in OS 10 since its release. Don't include stalling because it isn't fixed
yet.
Robert Oukaki
> In article <9M0Q9.35186$0E2.29496@FE06>,
> "Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > "Ari Ukkonen" <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> > news:aukkonen-C06CFC...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
> >
> > > First of all, I was talking about home users, not video hobbists. Only
> > > an idiot would waste their valuable time on trying to get a PC
solution
> > > to work for home video instead of getting a Mac.
> >
> > I guess Adobe Premiere and Pinnacle Studio (windows version) cater to
the
> > idiots then.
> No, they have their purpose, but they are not really geared towards home
> users with a digivid cam but rather people who do video production as a
> "hobby". Too many bells and whistles.
So, are you saying that production people are now starting to use the PC
platform?
> I know someone who has all that great equipment but he does not ever
> create videos with it. I wonder why? Too much of a pain to use perhaps?
Why don't you ask them? I've used Premiere, and only looked at the online
help once (to figure out how to do Titles). If you can't figure it out,
you've got real issues.
> > Did all that (except burn to a DVD-R) just fine on my PC. Please
explain
> > why your method is better. I did add an extra step though, and
converted my
> > final movie to divx (you know the encoder is available for the PC
platform,
> > so we can do that) right out of Premiere.
>
> Can you play DIVX on anything other than a computer? No? That's like a
> mac users keeping videos in Quicktime format.
No, but I can just as easily take it from my DV camera (once it's edited)
and make people some VHS tapes with it. The DiVx version is only for
people who do have a computer. Sure I could spend the $200 for DVD writer,
but I'll wait a while for the standards to shake out.
R. Oukaki
Robert Oukaki
news:Xns92F499427B7F...@66.134.198.18...
> > besides iMovie...
> With my PC it was Load software, render, reboot, as the software got
> corrupt while playing the results. Continue, with a few other reboots.
> Then, if the final render was OK, you would have to reboot before
exporting
> to tape and *HOPING* it would go without a glitch. Unfortunately, that
> rarely happened. (this, despite superfast disks that were about 1.5x
faster
> than the DV standard.
Sounds like you had a misconfigured PC. I had my PC running Premiere
yesterday pretty much all day (didn't feel like editing the movie in one
sitting, so I took breaks), and exported it to both my DV Camera and Divx
without any problems.
R. Oukaki
Robert Oukaki
> In article <mI0Q9.35165$0E2.31858@FE06>,
> "Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > TCO for your home systems? Please explain how you calculate the total
TCO
> > for home use. I'ld be interested in seeing how the numbers work out
> > (nothing too specific)
>
> When I have to spend time troubleshooting a system instead of using it
> or doing something else, I bill myself based on my wage at work. My time
> off work is that valuable to me. I view my home machines as tools or
> appliances, not a hobby to waste time on.
I'm still waiting on the TCO thing. I have 2 servers running in the house
(1 WINXP, 1 LINUX). Both have been running for 189 days now, with no
intervention on my part. Apart from the recent mem/sound upgrade, I haven't
'tinkered' with my 1.3 Athlon either. I'm wondering why you claim all this
troubleshooting when I have 5 machines in one house (2 are company DELL
laptops) and none require troubleshooting.
> > You haven't looked hard enough. I took one look on the ASUS home page
and
> > just picked a P4 MOBO at random...here's the link
> > http://usa.asus.com/mb/socket478/p4b533/overview.htm# ... notice the
> > number of memory sockets. The ones you were looking at were the RDRAM
based
> > ones.
>
> I was looking on the web at one particular site with mobos from
> Abit,ASUS and several others.
As I said, you weren't looking hard enough, or assumed I didn't know better.
> > Also notice that any of their boards, have more like 5 PCI slots... But
> > then again, ASUS, ABIT and many others are quality Mobo manufacturers.
> FYI. My mobo was a good "1U server" mobo at its time, an Intel CA810E
> which is a MICRO ATX board. I got a great deal on it at a dot com
> firesale.
You make the claim, so explain to me what makes this a 'good "1U server"
mobo'. The fact that its Intel made is not a good answer as their boards
tend to be very limited in ability and overpriced.
R. Oukaki
James Boswell
> which is a MICRO ATX board. I got a great deal on it at a dot com
> firesale.
Nobody with brains would put a MicroATX i810 board in a 1u server, it'd be
entirely unsuited for the task.
-JB
James Boswell
>> which is a MICRO ATX board. I got a great deal on it at a dot com
>> firesale.
>
> You make the claim, so explain to me what makes this a 'good "1U
> server" mobo'. The fact that its Intel made is not a good answer as
> their boards tend to be very limited in ability and overpriced.
Intel boards are generally very reliable.
an i810 based board likely isn't even remotely intended for 1u racks tho'
-JB
Alan Baker
"WinMan" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
I'm still waiting to see this infamous "stalling" behaviour...
WinMan
All you have to do is use virtually any program. Apparently you don't
notice it while using a newreader because your natural brain stalls are
an order of magnitude greater.
Alan Baker
"WinMan" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Sorry. Wrong on all counts.
But then that can't be a new experience for you. <g>
ELVIS2000
wrote:
>Really? I had no idea. :) It's good enough for the games I have now,
>watching DVDs and other crap but for real work, I use my eMac 'cause it
>has alot more power and RAM. That old antiquated PC cannot even go past
>half a gig of PC100 RAM.
Pont being - you should compare current tech with current tech.
Comparisons to an ass-old P3 is not valid.
jw
Edward Dodge
Hmmm... even my old-ass G3 from '97 can accommodate a full gig and a
half of RAM. That's from PII days.
--
Edward Dodge
/Independent Digital Consultant/
David C. Fritzinger
What model of G3 is that? I thought the limit for the Beige G3 desktops
was 384 MB. What was the limit for Beige towers?
Dave Fritzinger
Alan Baker
The limit for the Beige G3 desktops was strictly physical. IIRC, there
was insufficient clearance to put DIMMs larger than 128MB in the slots.
But a little work with some tin snips could fix that. <g>
Ari Ukkonen
Ummm. You cannot fit a full ATX board in a 1U half depth server case. So
you are calling the people at Rackable Systems idiots? These servers
were often sold to Telcos for densely packed racks because you could put
them back to back in the racks. When I bought this, the P4 mobos were
just coming out and were very expensive.
> -JB
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
"James Boswell" <Jamesb...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
It is perfectly suited to be within a cluster where you have failover on
the machine level. Show me a board from that era which would fit within
a 1U half depth case.
These were designed for lowend servers, high density clusters in telco
and other situations requiring racks full of servers in a small space.
> -JB
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
> > I know someone who has all that great equipment but he does not ever
> > create videos with it. I wonder why? Too much of a pain to use perhaps?
> Why don't you ask them? I've used Premiere, and only looked at the online
> help once (to figure out how to do Titles). If you can't figure it out,
> you've got real issues.
really sounds like intuitive software. Maybe you should just get one of
those title generator boxes instead. :)
> > Can you play DIVX on anything other than a computer? No? That's like a
> > mac users keeping videos in Quicktime format.
>
> No, but I can just as easily take it from my DV camera (once it's edited)
> and make people some VHS tapes with it. The DiVx version is only for
> people who do have a computer. Sure I could spend the $200 for DVD writer,
> but I'll wait a while for the standards to shake out.
Standards to shake out? DVD-R is the standard for consumer DVD players.
Support for any of the other formats, may come in addition to that one
in the future but they are not supported by DVD player out there now or
players sold over a year ago.
>
> R. Oukaki
--
Ari Ukkonen
Ari Ukkonen
ELVIS2000 <el...@nyc.com> wrote:
I don't give a flying f*ck about current tech. I'm talking about what I
have. I'm not trying to compare macs and PCs in general.
PS. Point is spelled with an "i".
> jw
--
Ari Ukkonen
Robert Oukaki
> In article <lh3Q9.20$dw2.12@fe08>,
> "Robert Oukaki" <R_Ou...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > "Ari Ukkonen" <aukk...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> > news:aukkonen-F8DA41...@shawnews.gv.shawcable.net...
> > > I know someone who has all that great equipment but he does not ever
> > > create videos with it. I wonder why? Too much of a pain to use
perhaps?
> > Why don't you ask them? I've used Premiere, and only looked at the
online
> > help once (to figure out how to do Titles). If you can't figure it out,
> > you've got real issues.
> You had to look at online help to figure out how to do Titles? LOL. That
> really sounds like intuitive software. Maybe you should just get one of
> those title generator boxes instead. :)
Easy there sunshine. If it had been some 'simple' progam like iMovies or
MovieMaker titles would have been easy enough (not too many options to
search through) but this being a little bit more advanced (you know with
bells and whistles and such), there's a lot of menus to go through, and a
slight learning curve. Once you figure out the process for it though, it's
pretty straight forward. Of course, I'm sure in your eyes Adobe and every
other non Apple branded software is crap.
> > > Can you play DIVX on anything other than a computer? No? That's like a
> > > mac users keeping videos in Quicktime format.
> >
> > No, but I can just as easily take it from my DV camera (once it's
edited)
> > and make people some VHS tapes with it. The DiVx version is only for
> > people who do have a computer. Sure I could spend the $200 for DVD
writer,
> > but I'll wait a while for the standards to shake out.
> Standards to shake out? DVD-R is the standard for consumer DVD players.
> Support for any of the other formats, may come in addition to that one
> in the future but they are not supported by DVD player out there now or
> players sold over a year ago.
DVD-R...how about DVD+R, DVD-RW, DVD+RW. I guess since the only standard is
DVD-R, Sony must be off their rocker to come out with a drive that supports
all four (why bother if one will do). Get over yourself slick, some of us
do more than just make DVDs for movie making.
R. Oukaki
Edward Dodge
The Beige DT (or any Beige G3 for that matter) will do 3X256 for 768
according to spec. You can run 3 512MB sticks for 1.5 gig if you
want. Also: there is no OS limitation on memory like there was in
the WinOS at the time.