We have used both
Jason
one. Going to the Apple Store doesn't count as using one either. It
took me a whole year to fully switch. I had a 17" laptop from ProStar,
it was 3.4GHZ Extreme Edition, 2GB RAM, Two 60GB HDS on Raid 0, ATI
Radeon 9700, and some other cool features. It was really fast, but it
was too large to carry anywhere. I went out an bought a 12" PowerBook
G4 to replace it, but I didn't use it at first. I only used it every
once in a while. I started to switch once I learned more about where to
find good apps. I started going to Macupdate and Versiontracker, but I
could never find the same quality programs for my ProStar. After about
six months, I started using it for most of the day. I would only use
the ProStar to run photoshop because it was a faster computer. I was
also into gaming, but I spent so much time on the Mac that I ended up
selling the ProStar. I decided that I could play video games on an Xbox
or PS2, and I could put up with a little Photoshop slowness on the
PowerBook. Fast forward, I'm on my second Mac. I have a Mac Pro. I can
dual boot OS X and Windows. I can play games if I want to, and I can
also mess around with Linux. There is nothing you can't do with a Mac.
I've grown up with Windows, I know how to use Windows. I've never had a
virus on Windows. I've never had any problems on Windows. I can
troubleshoot Windows if I have to, but having a Mac is much easier. I
NEVER have to troubleshoot, and overall the quality of the product is
superior. What is hard to understand about quality products? Maybe if
people that didn't have a Mac took the time to use one, they might
realize that they aren't so bad after all.
Overall, I'd have to say having a Mac is like having an iPod. iPods
just work, and so do Macs.
--
Jason
PC Guy
"Jason" <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
news:2007041917544250878-jason@emailnotcom...
Are you confusing "no advantages while costing more" as an argument that
"Macs are bad"?
Jason
How do they cost more?
--
Jason
PC Guy
Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
recently purchased for $750:
- Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
- 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
- 320GB SATA HD
- Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
- CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
- 9 in 1 card reader
- 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
- 10/100 ethernet
- 1 x 16x PCIe slot
- 3 x PCI slots
- Mini tower
Steve de Mena
Interesting story. Somewhat parallels my
experiences. I started with a Mac Mini about one
year ago, after 100 years of Windows experience,
and then added a Mac Pro and then a MacBook Pro.
The MBP Core 2 Duo is now my main machine and I
find myself using Windows apps less and less.
Steve
Jason
You can't but that doesn't matter; I think the closest you could get to
that is the Mac mini. Why is cost so much of an issue for you? Being
able to save money isn't necessarily an indicator of anything. I could
go to Emporio Armani and blow a ton of money, or I could goto H&M and
get a lot of stuff for cheap. Just because someone can bargain shop
doesn't mean that everyone should.
Anyway you totally ignore almost all of my original post about
switching. Have you ever used a Mac for a long period of time? If you
haven't . . . please tell me why.
Not everyone cares about getting the cheapest parts possible, and
making a computer that might not be useful for anything.
--
Jason
Jason
The only time I use Windows is im VMWare now. I got tired of booting
into Windows, and I played games less so I didn't need 3D acceleration.
The only work I do in Windows is C++ homework because I am in computer
engineering. I am leaving computer engineering to pursue a non math
base major. Once I do that, I will have almost no use for Windows.
--
Jason
PC Guy
Yes, it does matter. It matters to a lot of people.
> I think the closest you could get to that is the Mac mini.
Which isn't even close in computing power or expandability.
> Why is cost so much of an issue for you?
Who said it was?
> Being able to save money isn't necessarily an indicator of anything.
It's a sign of intelligence.
> I could go to Emporio Armani and blow a ton of money, or I could goto H&M
> and get a lot of stuff for cheap. Just because someone can bargain shop
> doesn't mean that
> everyone should.
If the Armani gives you some practical benefit over the H&M then it's worth
paying extra for it. If not you'd be a fool to spend the extra money.
> Anyway you totally ignore almost all of my original post about switching.
> Have you ever used a Mac for a long period of time? If you haven't . . .
> please tell me why.
Why would I want to pay more and gain nothing?
> Not everyone cares about getting the cheapest parts possible, and making a
> computer that might not be useful for anything.
I don't see many people advocating the cheapest parts possible. What I do
see them advocating is the lowest cost that meets ones needs. Seems fairly
reasonable to me.
nospam
Why don't you go to a windows advocay group, where your ideas might be
appreciated? You're wasting your time here.
By the way, there is no mac comparable to the above, so no comparison is
possible. If I ever feel the need for
> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
> - 320GB SATA HD
> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
> - 9 in 1 card reader
> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
> - 10/100 ethernet
> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
> - 3 x PCI slots
> - Mini tower
at 750 dollars, I know where to ask. But I don't think I will.
Andy
Jason
I understand what you are saying somewhat, but I don't get why other
people can't choose to pay more for something if they want to. I could
be a millionaire, and I might have tons of money to blow. Why does it
matter if Armani have a practical benefit? If you were poor as dirt,
well yes it makes sense to get the cheaper option.
Why do you think you would gain nothing from a Mac? How do you know you
wouldn't gain anything?
When I switched, I never thought I was going to gain anything. I just
tried out OS X for the sake of trying things out. I've eaten sushi for
the sake of trying things out. I don't sit around saying sushi is bad
because I will gain nothing from eating it; I just tried it once and
now I happen to like eating sushi.
When I bought my mac, the only Mac experience I had was on OS9. I hated
OS9, and I never enjoyed using it. I put OS9 aside, and I said that
maybe this will be different and it was. I never expected to gain more
productivity. I never expected anything except for it to be a different
experience. I knew I had 14 days to return it if I truely hated it. I
wasn't impressed on day 13, but I knew that I wasn't regretting my
purchase either. I ended up keeping it, and now I couldn't be happier
about my computing choice.
--
Jason
PC Guy
They can if they so choose. And if they choose to do so because they gain
something of benefit then I'm not going to tell them not to. If they choose
to do so for the sake of paying more then they're stupid.
> I could be a millionaire, and I might have tons of money to blow. Why
> does it matter if Armani have a practical benefit? If you were poor as
> dirt, well yes it makes sense to get the cheaper option.
There are some people who have so much money that paying more doesn't have
any impact on them. But these people are the exception and not the norm.
> Why do you think you would gain nothing from a Mac? How do you know you
> wouldn't gain anything?
I don't see it offering anything over Windows. If you know of something I'd
be happy to hear. But it has to be some real benefit.
[ snip ]
PC Guy
"nospam" <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote in message news:f08s5p$soh$1...@aioe.org...
I'm not here to be appreciated. I'm here to annoy you Mactards.
> You're wasting your time here.
Not at all. I seem to be achieving my goal quite well as evidenced by your
response.
Jason
I can't really explain it to you. You just have to try Mac OS X for
yourself like I did. Sometimes you just have to take peoples word on it.
--
Jason
PC Guy
Then there's no reason.
> You just have to try Mac OS X for yourself like I did. Sometimes you just
> have to take peoples word on it.
Uh huh. Sure, I'm just going to take the word of a bunch of fanatics.
Jim
Jason <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote:
The folks like PC Guy don't like the fact that those of us who use Macs,
CHOOSE to use them, even though we could have bought a Wintel PC(HP,Dull
and so on). It galls them. They always go for the cheapest things they
can find.
So What!
PC Guy
"Jim" <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote in message
news:jpolaski-7BEFC3...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Another Mac user reaffirms the "tard" in Mactard. I could care less what you
choose dork.
Snit
2007041917544250878-jason@emailnotcom on 4/19/07 2:54 PM:
By and large, people who know both Macs and Windows prefer the Mac. There
are some exceptions, but they are rare.
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
Snit
For similarly equipped machines they don't.
<http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/prices/>
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
Snit
Z-edna_VDu9abLrb...@comcast.com on 4/19/07 3:49 PM:
If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might have a point. I
prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
--
€ The tilde in an OS X path does *not* mean "the hard drive only"
€ Things which are not the same are not "identical"
€ The word "ouch" is not a sure sign of agreement.
Snit
>> Why do you think you would gain nothing from a Mac? How do you know you
>> wouldn't gain anything?
>
> I don't see it offering anything over Windows. If you know of something I'd
> be happy to hear. But it has to be some real benefit.
Here is a partial list: <http://comp.gallopinginsanity.com/>
Not to mention, of course, the post that started this thread.
Steve de Mena
Apple uses the same parts everyone else does. My
October 2006 MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo 160GB hard
drive crashed last week. I treat my laptop
gingerly and was disappointed it failed so early.
Steve
Tim Murray
> I can't really explain it to you. You just have to try Mac OS X for
> yourself like I did. Sometimes you just have to take peoples word on it.
Give it up. I went through this several times with others, and all you can do
is shrug and say, "I don't know -- I just like it better." But what really
kills me is that the worst of them have no experience with Macs.
Jason
You wouldn't care if I told you why I liked it anyway. I can't just
tell you. YOU HAVE TO EXPERIENCE IT. Words can't describe it. Its like
going to edmunds.com to figure out whether or not to get a Lotus Elise
or a Toyota Camry. I doubt reading someones opinions on the car would
really help. If you had a lot of choices to make, sure opinions can
help narrow things down. At this point there are only two choices that
we are discussing; therefore, you should just go out and try it like I
did. I just got up one day and went out and got a Mac. I experienced it
first hand and I liked it. It just feels right. Whats so hard about
that?
--
Jason
whjones
Yet again his argument devolves to childish name-calling instead of
anything resembling a cogent thought. Without even trying it out, PC
Guy, how can you possibly attack the Macintosh platform? Of course, I
used to be just like you - a shill for Redmond. I used to laugh at the
Mac users and at Apple as well. After all, if you control both the
hardware and software, you're just raising the price (the cost of R&D
for both hardware and software) onto the consumers, right? Well, the
flip side of that coin is that when the hardware set is limited and the
software is written specifically to take advantage of said hardware
set, then the union (of the software and hardware) is a much better
product, where the software and hardware work seamlessly with each
other. Of course, you're never going to admit that anything could be
better than your average PC, but then again why should we question what
you post? After al, you really have nothing upon which to base your
rather absurd conclusions, as you have not even taken the time to use
the alternative. You ONLY have experience with PCs, so that is the
only position you CAN take.
Jason
Thank you for helping me out there.
--
Jason
Peter Hayes
> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
> recently purchased for $750:
>
> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
> - 320GB SATA HD
> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
> - 9 in 1 card reader
> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
> - 10/100 ethernet
> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
> - 3 x PCI slots
> - Mini tower
Haven't you forgotten some additional costs, like an OS, perhaps? Plus
the cost of the antivirus software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
cost of the antispyware software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
costs of the ongoing annual subscriptions for your paid-for updates?
Plus the cost of software to actually do any meaningful work with this
heap.
Then there's the derisory resale value of your junk, you'd be hard
pressed to give it away two years down the line whereas a MacMini will
still command good secondhand prices.
--
Immunity is better than innoculation.
Peter
Peter Hayes
> "Jim" <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote in message
> news:jpolaski-7BEFC3...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> >
> >
> > The folks like PC Guy don't like the fact that those of us who use Macs,
> > CHOOSE to use them, even though we could have bought a Wintel PC(HP,Dull
> > and so on). It galls them. They always go for the cheapest things they
> > can find.
> >
> > So What!
>
> Another Mac user reaffirms the "tard" in Mactard.
The use of an ad hominem is clear evidence of a lost argument.
> I could care less what you choose dork.
Has it never occurred to you that perhaps the feeling is reciprocated?
Sandman
noti...@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote:
> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
> > recently purchased for $750:
> >
> > - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
> > - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
> > - 320GB SATA HD
> > - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
> > - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
> > - 9 in 1 card reader
> > - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
> > - 10/100 ethernet
> > - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
> > - 3 x PCI slots
> > - Mini tower
www.apple.com - only they don't sell that slow machines. The Athlon X2
4600+ is so yesteryear it's humiliating. I have the 4800+ in my gaming
PC and I bought that over a year ago.
--
Sandman[.net]
-hh
> "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> said:
> > I could care less what you choose dork.
>
> Yet again his argument devolves to childish name-calling instead of
> anything resembling a cogent thought. Without even trying it out, PC
> Guy, how can you possibly attack the Macintosh platform? Of course, I
> used to be just like you - a shill for Redmond. I used to laugh at the
> Mac users and at Apple as well.
We've all had our bouts of insecurity when growing up.
As well as examples where we lie about our motivations. Afterall, if
PC Guy really didn't care, then he would have no motive to post
anything here. As such, his own *actions* reveal that he is lying.
> After all, if you control both the
> hardware and software, you're just raising the price (the cost of R&D
> for both hardware and software) onto the consumers, right? Well, the
> flip side of that coin is that when the hardware set is limited and the
> software is written specifically to take advantage of said hardware
> set, then the union (of the software and hardware) is a much better
> product, where the software and hardware work seamlessly with each
> other.
Which is all value-added to the consumer, and since that represents
marketplace differentiation worth paying more for, motivates the
consumer base to be more willing to buy your product instead of
treating it as YA commodity. Business 101.
The likes of PC Guy always buy the discount generic can of baked beans
because they know that food = nutrition and a brand that tastes better
isn't ever worth paying extra for.
-hh
nospam
>> Why don't you go to a windows advocay group, where your ideas might be
>> appreciated?
>
> I'm not here to be appreciated. I'm here to annoy you Mactards.
Do you think you know why?
Steve Carroll
wrote:
Nothing... but now you have guys like Clyde (Mayor of R'lyeh) and by extension,
Snit, calling you a 'Maccie' (and Snit's a Mac user). Tim's probably telling you
to "Give it up" because he knows this is the mentality you'll be dealing with
here.
--
"None of you can be honest... you are all pathetic." - Snit
"I do not KF people" - Snit
"Not only do I lie about what others are claiming,
I show evidence from the records".-Snit
"You should take one of my IT classes some day." - Snit
Tim Murray
> Nothing... but now you have guys like Clyde (Mayor of R'lyeh) and by
> extension, Snit, calling you a 'Maccie' (and Snit's a Mac user). Tim's
> probably telling you to "Give it up" because he knows this is the
> mentality you'll be dealing with here.
>
Exactly.
Steve de Mena
> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
>> recently purchased for $750:
>>
>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
>> - 320GB SATA HD
>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
>> - 9 in 1 card reader
>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
>> - 10/100 ethernet
>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
>> - 3 x PCI slots
>> - Mini tower
>
> Haven't you forgotten some additional costs, like an OS, perhaps? Plus
> the cost of the antivirus software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
> cost of the antispyware software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
> costs of the ongoing annual subscriptions for your paid-for updates?
I imagine the OS was included and he just didn't
list it.
Antispyware (Windows Defender) is free.
Antivirus - There are excellent free products like
AG. Commercial products like Norton or McAffee
can usually be gotten for $10 or less after
rebates during sale periods. And they don't "soak
up" CPU cycles. Are you stuck back in 1993?
Steve
Snit
46291062$0$19443$4c36...@roadrunner.com on 4/20/07 12:11 PM:
Do you disagree that malware protection that is actively protecting a
computer slows computers?
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
PC Guy
"whjones" wrote in message news:462867ea$0$5783$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
In an effort to try and get through to mactards I decided to try a new
tactic and employ their "debating" techniques.
> Without even trying it out, PC Guy, how can you possibly attack the
> Macintosh platform?
Like many of the PC advocates here it's not the Macintosh platform that I
enjoy poking fun at. It's the lame users who have:
"never been happier until I switched to a Mac." - Jason
that I enjoy poking fun at.
PC Guy
"Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:1hwv3pk.izkjhn1kw6v2pN%noti...@btinternet.com...
> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Jim" <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote in message
>> news:jpolaski-7BEFC3...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> >
>> >
>> > The folks like PC Guy don't like the fact that those of us who use
>> > Macs,
>> > CHOOSE to use them, even though we could have bought a Wintel
>> > PC(HP,Dull
>> > and so on). It galls them. They always go for the cheapest things they
>> > can find.
>> >
>> > So What!
>>
>> Another Mac user reaffirms the "tard" in Mactard.
>
> The use of an ad hominem is clear evidence of a lost argument.
I learned this trick from the best: Mactards. Are you saying it's not a good
debating technique? Then why do Mactards so frequently employ it?
>> I could care less what you choose dork.
>
> Has it never occurred to you that perhaps the feeling is reciprocated?
No. As I really (and I REALLY mean this) don't care so I haven't given it
any thought.
PC Guy
"Snit" <CS...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
news:C24D947C.7DE1F%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones needs. That's
why I call you Mactards.
PC Guy
> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
>> recently purchased for $750:
>>
>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
>> - 320GB SATA HD
>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
>> - 9 in 1 card reader
>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
>> - 10/100 ethernet
>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
>> - 3 x PCI slots
>> - Mini tower
>
> Haven't you forgotten some additional costs, like an OS, perhaps?
No, OS was included (Vista Home Premium). I didn't include the OS as I want
to focus on the hardware.
> Plus the cost of the antivirus software that soaks up CPU cycles?
No A/V software here. It was one of the first things I removed.
> Plus the cost of the antispyware software that soaks up CPU cycles?
Same as above.
> Plus the costs of the ongoing annual subscriptions for your paid-for
> updates?
AVG is free (if I felt the need to use it).
> Plus the cost of software to actually do any meaningful work with this
> heap.
Mac users don't have to buy any software? Are you serious? That's pretty
cool if the cost of the Macintosh included a license for every piece of
software available for it. That would be a reason to buy one.
> Then there's the derisory resale value of your junk, you'd be hard
> pressed to give it away two years down the line whereas a MacMini will
> still command good secondhand prices.
Computers are tools, not investments.
Snit
>>> I don't see many people advocating the cheapest parts possible. What I do
>>> see them advocating is the lowest cost that meets ones needs. Seems fairly
>>> reasonable to me.
>>>
>> If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might have a point. I prefer
>> to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>>
> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones needs. That's
> why I call you Mactards.
Curious: what did you have for breakfast? Did it merely meet your needs to
keep you alive or did you eat something that brought you some pleasure?
PC Guy
"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> wrote in message
news:mr-CFF557.12...@News.Individual.NET...
> In article <1hwv6dl.cpv6x113iv5lkN%noti...@btinternet.com>,
> noti...@btinternet.com (Peter Hayes) wrote:
>
>> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC
>> > I
>> > recently purchased for $750:
>> >
>> > - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
>> > - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
>> > - 320GB SATA HD
>> > - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
>> > - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
>> > - 9 in 1 card reader
>> > - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
>> > - 10/100 ethernet
>> > - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
>> > - 3 x PCI slots
>> > - Mini tower
>
> www.apple.com - only they don't sell that slow machines. The Athlon X2
> 4600+ is so yesteryear it's humiliating.
This processor, while not cutting edge technology, is plenty fast for my
needs and for many people. I, and many others, would rather have a slower
processor for less money than a faster processor for more money. So I ask
you: Why should I pay more for something that will not benefit me?
> I have the 4800+ in my gaming PC and I bought that over a year ago.
There's more to a computer than the processor. I notice you completely
ignored the fact that my system has 4 times the memory of the Mini (which is
the closest cost system) and a 250GB larger hard disk. Having more of these
two items is more important to me than having the laterst, cutting edge
processor.
Snit
From the facts that piss off trolls:
Computer / industry facts:
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
€ Similarly configured Macs and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same
--
€ Deleting from a *Save* dialog is not a sign of well done design
€ A personal computer without an OS is crippled by that lacking
nospam
> Like many of the PC advocates here it's not the Macintosh platform that
> I enjoy poking fun at. It's the lame users who have:
>
> "never been happier until I switched to a Mac." - Jason
>
> that I enjoy poking fun at.
And do you think you know why?
nospam
> This processor, while not cutting edge technology, is plenty fast for my
> needs and for many people. I, and many others, would rather have a
> slower processor for less money than a faster processor for more money.
> So I ask you: Why should I pay more for something that will not benefit me?
So it is not comparable, even by your own estimation.
-hh
>
> Like many of the PC advocates here it's not the Macintosh platform that I
> enjoy poking fun at. It's the lame users who have:
>
> "never been happier until I switched to a Mac." - Jason
>
> that I enjoy poking fun at.
Other people being happy rankles you, so you lash out in Jealosy.
-hh
PC Guy
Why does it have to be comparable? Why can't it just be "This is what
I need so why pay more?". I'll give you that Macs are very price
competitive for COMPARABLE systems. Hell, I'll even go so far as to
say that in some cases they're LOWER cost than comparable systems. The
problem is not with comparable systems. The problem is that I can't
get a system that meets my needs without having to pay a premium for
it.
PC Guy
wrote:
Has nothing to do with your happiness. It has everything to do with
your willingness to make asses out of yourselves over a piece of metal
and plastic.
Snit
If a skateboard suites my "needs" then why buy a car? That does not mean
the skateboard is sold at a better price. By the way, you never answered my
question:
>> If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might
>> have a point. I prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>>
> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones
> needs. That's why I call you Mactards.
Curious: what did you have for breakfast? Did it merely meet your
needs to keep you alive or did you eat something that brought you
some pleasure?
Can you answer it now?
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
PC Guy
wrote:
>"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> stated in post
>f9ii23pndfbseluju...@4ax.com on 4/20/07 4:16 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:09:52 +0100, nospam <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote:
>>
>>> PC Guy wrote:
>>>
>>>> This processor, while not cutting edge technology, is plenty fast for my
>>>> needs and for many people. I, and many others, would rather have a
>>>> slower processor for less money than a faster processor for more money.
>>>> So I ask you: Why should I pay more for something that will not benefit me?
>>>
>>> So it is not comparable, even by your own estimation.
>>
>> Why does it have to be comparable? Why can't it just be "This is what
>> I need so why pay more?". I'll give you that Macs are very price
>> competitive for COMPARABLE systems. Hell, I'll even go so far as to
>> say that in some cases they're LOWER cost than comparable systems. The
>> problem is not with comparable systems. The problem is that I can't
>> get a system that meets my needs without having to pay a premium for
>> it.
>
>If a skateboard suites my "needs" then why buy a car?
I don't know, why?
>That does not mean the skateboard is sold at a better price.
Sure it does...for what you get.
[ snip ]
Snit
What you snipped and ran from:
>> If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might
>> have a point. I prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>>
> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones
> needs. That's why I call you Mactards.
Curious: what did you have for breakfast? Did it merely meet your
needs to keep you alive or did you eat something that brought you
some pleasure?
Can you answer it now?
In any case, I disagree with your assessment of skateboards and cars. Just
because item A is cheaper than item B does not mean item A is a good deal
(or sold at a better price... a stick of gum for $100 is not a better price
than a new high end car for $200)
--
€ Different version numbers refer to different versions
€ Macs are Macs and Apple is still making and selling Macs
€ The early IBM PCs and Commodores shipped with an OS in ROM
Mayor of R'lyeh
wrote:
>"PC Guy" <p...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Says the guy who lashes out in jealousy at happy SUV owners.
--
Why settle for the lesser evil?
Cthulhu for president 2008
PC Guy
wrote:
Since you "snipped and ran" from what I posted above can I assume your
in agreement with it?
Mayor of R'lyeh
wrote:
You'll find that Maccies will hold their breath, stomp their heels and
scream to High Heaven if you take the logical step of not having the
Mac be the baseline for price comparisons. Getting exactly what you
want, no more, no less, is a foreign concept to Maccies.
nospam
This all started with an argument about comparable systems. Now it seems
to have changed into whatever. Thats fine so long as it is acknowledged.
Andy
nospam
Do you think you know why that bothers you?
Snit
What do you think I snipped and ran from? I responded fully:
----------
What you snipped and ran from:
>> If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might
>> have a point. I prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>>
> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones
> needs. That's why I call you Mactards.
Curious: what did you have for breakfast? Did it merely meet your
needs to keep you alive or did you eat something that brought you
some pleasure?
Can you answer it now?
In any case, I disagree with your assessment of skateboards and cars. Just
because item A is cheaper than item B does not mean item A is a good deal
(or sold at a better price... a stick of gum for $100 is not a better price
than a new high end car for $200)
----------
Snit
scki23tofefvh5kij...@4ax.com on 4/20/07 4:52 PM:
Who does that?
--
€ It is OK to email yourself files and store them there for a few weeks
€ No legislation supercedes the Constitution (unless it amends it)
€ Apple's video format is not far from NTSC DVD and good enough for most
nospam
> You'll find that Maccies will hold their breath, stomp their heels and
> scream to High Heaven if you take the logical step of not having the
> Mac be the baseline for price comparisons. Getting exactly what you
> want, no more, no less, is a foreign concept to Maccies.
>
I wanted an iMac, I got one. I used price comparisons to decide which
one. I've already done all work and consideration to narrow my choices
down to macs, so I don't need to go through all that again each time I
get a new machine. Somewhere in all the millions of permutations of
windows machines I might find a machine I would be equally happy with,
indeed there are probably many, but with windows on all of them there is
not one I would rather have, even if it cost 10 grand and was reduced to
2. Yes I'd take it and sell it right away. This is not prejudice, just
judicious purchasing.
You are not me, and your judicious purchase might well be a windows box.
Andy
PC Guy
OK. Find me a comparable system from Apple to what I posted.
PC Guy
Who said it bothers me?
nospam
There isn't one.
nospam
Does it?
Mayor of R'lyeh
PC Guy
No.
PC Guy
And that's why people continue to claim Apple is more expensive.
Jason
>
> "Peter Hayes" <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:1hwv6dl.cpv6x113iv5lkN%noti...@btinternet.com...
>> PC Guy <pc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
>>> recently purchased for $750:
>>>
>>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
>>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
>>> - 320GB SATA HD
>>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
>>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
>>> - 9 in 1 card reader
>>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
>>> - 10/100 ethernet
>>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
>>> - 3 x PCI slots
>>> - Mini tower
>>
>> Haven't you forgotten some additional costs, like an OS, perhaps?
>
> No, OS was included (Vista Home Premium). I didn't include the OS as I
> want to focus on the hardware.
>
>> Plus the cost of the antivirus software that soaks up CPU cycles?
>
> No A/V software here. It was one of the first things I removed.
>
>> Plus the cost of the antispyware software that soaks up CPU cycles?
>
> Same as above.
>
>> Plus the costs of the ongoing annual subscriptions for your paid-for updates?
>
> AVG is free (if I felt the need to use it).
>
>> Plus the cost of software to actually do any meaningful work with this
>> heap.
>
> Mac users don't have to buy any software? Are you serious? That's
> pretty cool if the cost of the Macintosh included a license for every
> piece of software available for it. That would be a reason to buy one.
>
>> Then there's the derisory resale value of your junk, you'd be hard
>> pressed to give it away two years down the line whereas a MacMini will
>> still command good secondhand prices.
>
> Computers are tools, not investments.
Well actually, Mac users do have a lot of freeware. I can find way more
free things on OS X than on Windows. I espeically hate Windows Mobile.
The people who make Windows Mobile programs think that they all should
be paid for.
--
Jason
PC Guy
Ah hahahahahahahaha! I never thought I would see a Mactard claiming
the availability of software as a positive for the Macintosh given all
we're heard about not needing a bazillion programs when this fact is
brought to the attention of Mactards.
Snit
>>> Computers are tools, not investments.
>>
>> Well actually, Mac users do have a lot of freeware. I can find way more
>> free things on OS X than on Windows.
>
> Ah hahahahahahahaha! I never thought I would see a Mactard claiming
> the availability of software as a positive for the Macintosh given all
> we're heard about not needing a bazillion programs when this fact is
> brought to the attention of Mactards.
The fact there is a lot of freeware for the Mac is a good thing... nothing
inconsistent about saying that and noting one does not need 200 word
processors on the market when only two are generally used.
--
€ OS X is partially based on BSD (esp. FreeBSD)
€ OS X users are at far less risk of malware then are XP users
€ Photoshop is an image editing application
George Graves
(in article <0qKdnaWZc4ZPg7Tb...@comcast.com>):
>
> "whjones" wrote in message news:462867ea$0$5783$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>> On 2007-04-19 14:08:49 -1000, "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> said:
>>
>>>
>>> "Jim" <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote in message
>>> news:jpolaski-7BEFC3...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>>>> In article <2007041919025143658-jason@emailnotcom>,
>>>> Jason <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2007-04-19 18:49:15 -0400, "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> said:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jason" <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:2007041918301075249-jason@emailnotcom...
>>>>>>> On 2007-04-19 18:23:18 -0400, "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Jason" <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:2007041918091316807-jason@emailnotcom...
>>>>>>>>> On 2007-04-19 18:05:34 -0400, "PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Jason" <ja...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:2007041917544250878-jason@emailnotcom...
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't get it why people talk bad about Macs when they haven't
>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>>> one. Going to the Apple Store doesn't count as using one either.
>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>> took me a whole year to fully switch. I had a 17" laptop from
>>>>>>>>>>> ProStar,
>>>>>>>>>>> it was 3.4GHZ Extreme Edition, 2GB RAM, Two 60GB HDS on Raid 0,
>>>>>>>>>>> ATI
>>>>>>>>>>> Radeon 9700, and some other cool features. It was really fast,
>>>>> but >>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>> was too large to carry anywhere. I went out an bought a 12"
>>>>>>>>>>> PowerBook
>>>>>>>>>>> G4 to replace it, but I didn't use it at first. I only used it
>>>>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>>> once in a while. I started to switch once I learned more about
>>>>>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> find good apps. I started going to Macupdate and Versiontracker,
>>>>>>>>>>> but I
>>>>>>>>>>> could never find the same quality programs for my ProStar. After
>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>> six months, I started using it for most of the day. I would only
>>>>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>>>> the ProStar to run photoshop because it was a faster computer. I
>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>>>>> also into gaming, but I spent so much time on the Mac that I
>>>>> ended >>>>>> up
>>>>>>>>>>> selling the ProStar. I decided that I could play video games on
>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>> Xbox
>>>>>>>>>>> or PS2, and I could put up with a little Photoshop slowness on
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> PowerBook. Fast forward, I'm on my second Mac. I have a Mac Pro.
>>>>> I >>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> dual boot OS X and Windows. I can play games if I want to, and I
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> also mess around with Linux. There is nothing you can't do with
>>>>> a >>>>>> Mac.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I've grown up with Windows, I know how to use Windows. I've
>>>>> never >>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> virus on Windows. I've never had any problems on Windows. I can
>>>>>>>>>>> troubleshoot Windows if I have to, but having a Mac is much
>>>>>>>>>>> easier. I
>>>>>>>>>>> NEVER have to troubleshoot, and overall the quality of the
>>>>> product >>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> superior. What is hard to understand about quality products?
>>>>> Maybe >>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>>>> people that didn't have a Mac took the time to use one, they
>>>>>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>>>>>> realize that they aren't so bad after all.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Overall, I'd have to say having a Mac is like having an iPod.
>>>>>>>>>>> iPods
>>>>>>>>>>> just work, and so do Macs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Are you confusing "no advantages while costing more" as an
>>>>>>>>>> argument
>>>>>>>>>> that "Macs are bad"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How do they cost more?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the
>>>>>>>> following >>> PC
>>>>>>>> I recently purchased for $750:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
>>>>>>>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
>>>>>>>> - 320GB SATA HD
>>>>>>>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
>>>>>>>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
>>>>>>>> - 9 in 1 card reader
>>>>>>>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
>>>>>>>> - 10/100 ethernet
>>>>>>>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
>>>>>>>> - 3 x PCI slots
>>>>>>>> - Mini tower
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't but that doesn't matter;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it does matter. It matters to a lot of people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the closest you could get to that is the Mac mini.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which isn't even close in computing power or expandability.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is cost so much of an issue for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who said it was?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Being able to save money isn't necessarily an indicator of anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a sign of intelligence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I could go to Emporio Armani and blow a ton of money, or I could
>>>>>>> goto
>>>>>>> H&M and get a lot of stuff for cheap. Just because someone can
>>>>>>> bargain
>>>>>>> shop doesn't mean that
>>>>>>> everyone should.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the Armani gives you some practical benefit over the H&M then it's
>>>>>> worth paying extra for it. If not you'd be a fool to spend the extra
>>>>>> money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyway you totally ignore almost all of my original post about
>>>>>>> switching. Have you ever used a Mac for a long period of time? If
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> haven't . . . please tell me why.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why would I want to pay more and gain nothing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not everyone cares about getting the cheapest parts possible, and
>>>>>>> making a computer that might not be useful for anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see many people advocating the cheapest parts possible. What
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> do see them advocating is the lowest cost that meets ones needs.
>>>>>> Seems
>>>>>> fairly reasonable to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand what you are saying somewhat, but I don't get why other
>>>>> people can't choose to pay more for something if they want to. I could
>>>>> be a millionaire, and I might have tons of money to blow. Why does it
>>>>> matter if Armani have a practical benefit? If you were poor as dirt,
>>>>> well yes it makes sense to get the cheaper option.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you think you would gain nothing from a Mac? How do you know you
>>>>> wouldn't gain anything?
>>>>> When I switched, I never thought I was going to gain anything. I just
>>>>> tried out OS X for the sake of trying things out. I've eaten sushi for
>>>>> the sake of trying things out. I don't sit around saying sushi is bad
>>>>> because I will gain nothing from eating it; I just tried it once and
>>>>> now I happen to like eating sushi.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I bought my mac, the only Mac experience I had was on OS9. I hated
>>>>> OS9, and I never enjoyed using it. I put OS9 aside, and I said that
>>>>> maybe this will be different and it was. I never expected to gain more
>>>>> productivity. I never expected anything except for it to be a different
>>>>> experience. I knew I had 14 days to return it if I truely hated it. I
>>>>> wasn't impressed on day 13, but I knew that I wasn't regretting my
>>>>> purchase either. I ended up keeping it, and now I couldn't be happier
>>>>> about my computing choice.
>>>>
>>>> The folks like PC Guy don't like the fact that those of us who use Macs,
>>>> CHOOSE to use them, even though we could have bought a Wintel PC(HP,Dull
>>>> and so on). It galls them. They always go for the cheapest things they
>>>> can find.
>>>>
>>>> So What!
>>>
>>> Another Mac user reaffirms the "tard" in Mactard. I could care less what
>>> you choose dork.
>>
>> Yet again his argument devolves to childish name-calling instead of
>> anything resembling a cogent thought.
>
> In an effort to try and get through to mactards I decided to try a new
> tactic and employ their "debating" techniques.
>
>> Without even trying it out, PC Guy, how can you possibly attack the
>> Macintosh platform?
>
> Like many of the PC advocates here it's not the Macintosh platform that I
> enjoy poking fun at. It's the lame users who have:
>
> "never been happier until I switched to a Mac." - Jason
>
> that I enjoy poking fun at.
>
Of course you do. You're jealous because you chose the more popular, but
inferior platform.
Let me show you just ONE reason why I use a Mac: I have a dual 2.0 gigaHertz
G5 tower. I recently bought a High-Definition camcorder (1080i X1920) and I
need to be able to edit the resultant videos. I soon found that these files
are BIG and that what before, looked like a ton of HDD space left on my
computer, gets eaten up by one of these camera downloads pretty quick.
Obviously, I need more HDD space. I found a 500 gigabyte serial ATA drive at
a local computer outlet at a pretty good price, so I bought it. To install it
in my Mac I merely had to:
1) Turn off the computer
2) Pull the ring on the back of the case and remove the side cover.
3) Zip open the static bag, gingerly remove the HDD and slide it into the
open bay in the computer and turn the lock tab 90 degrees.
4) Free, with a gentle tug, the two "nested" cables from their receptacles
just below the drive bay. Plug the free ends of both into the edge connectors
on the drive.
5) Replace the cabinet side.
6) Restart. Get a dialog asking if I want to initialize the unreadable new
disc that the computer has found. Click yes.
7) The Apple Disk Utility launches. Select the new drive from the raw drive
list, choose "Mac OSX extended, Journaled" as the format, choose one
partition, name the partition "Movies", hit "erase". Ten seconds later, A new
HDD named "Movies" pops-up on my desktop.
Total elapsed time - About 3 minutes including reboot time.
hand tools needed - NONE.
Computer tools needed to be purchased in order to be able to edit and add
titles and effects to high-definition, wide-screen camera video: NONE.
Yes, I know. You can do all of this with Windows too. And I'm sure recent
Winboxes support SATA drives. But I'll bet you can't install one with NO HAND
TOOLS - not even a screwdriver! I've seen the HD editing software available
for Windows and, well, good luck!
You might think that Windows is just the bee's knees and I'm happy as a pig
in shit for you. But I *KNOW* when I'm well-off, thank you. If that makes me
a crazed Mac fanatic, then so be it.
nospam
>>>>> Has nothing to do with your happiness. It has everything to do with
>>>>> your willingness to make asses out of yourselves over a piece of metal
>>>>> and plastic.
>>>> Do you think you know why that bothers you?
>>> Who said it bothers me?
>> Does it?
>
> No.
So you post here for entertainment? That's no good, it's not
entertaining to argue with someone who is arguing for entertainment.
I'm bored now....
nospam
> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 01:16:24 +0100, nospam <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote:
>
>> PC Guy wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:55:47 +0100, nospam <nospa...@iol.ie> wrote:
>>>> This all started with an argument about comparable systems. Now it seems
>>>> to have changed into whatever. Thats fine so long as it is acknowledged.
>>> OK. Find me a comparable system from Apple to what I posted.
>> There isn't one.
>
> And that's why people continue to claim Apple is more expensive.
Hardly rational. Better to say Apple has not got what I want.
PC Guy
wrote:
>"PC Guy" <pc...@hotmail.com> stated in post
>8lni2392civnpmqga...@4ax.com on 4/20/07 5:46 PM:
>
>>>> Computers are tools, not investments.
>>>
>>> Well actually, Mac users do have a lot of freeware. I can find way more
>>> free things on OS X than on Windows.
>>
>> Ah hahahahahahahaha! I never thought I would see a Mactard claiming
>> the availability of software as a positive for the Macintosh given all
>> we're heard about not needing a bazillion programs when this fact is
>> brought to the attention of Mactards.
>
>The fact there is a lot of freeware for the Mac is a good thing... nothing
>inconsistent about saying that and noting one does not need 200 word
>processors on the market when only two are generally used.
Arguing that the Mac has more software just demonstrates why people
call you Mactards.
PC Guy
I especially get a kick out of people who lie and say they've
killfiled me when they haven't.
Who cares? I'd be happy to twist a screw driver for a > $1K savings.
And what does toolless installation have to do with WINDOWS?
>You might think that Windows is just the bee's knees and I'm happy as a pig
>in shit for you.
I don't think it's the "bee's knees". I think of it as a tool to get
work done. That's what separates rational people from Mactards.
PC Guy
They have! But when we do Mactards continue to say "well if you look
at COMPARABLE systems..."
Jason
How is OS X not a tool to get work done?
--
Jason
Jason
So you would rather pay for your software then? You just seem jealous
that we have the best of both worlds. I'm running Windows right now,
and you can only run one.
--
Jason
George Graves
(in article <p2oi23pgoust6htr2...@4ax.com>):
You were killfiled. May be yet again.
Maybe you don't value your time and productivity, but some of us do value our
time.
> And what does toolless installation have to do with WINDOWS?
It has to do with PC vs Mac, there, PC Guy.
>> You might think that Windows is just the bee's knees and I'm happy as a pig
>> in shit for you.
>
> I don't think it's the "bee's knees". I think of it as a tool to get
> work done. That's what separates rational people from Mactards.
I also think that the Mac is a tool to get things done. What do you think it
is chopped liver?
But, as I thought, the idea of ease of use, superior tools, superior user
experience, being more productive, wasting less time, etc., etc., means
nothing to you WinScum.
George Graves
(in article <11oi23lic74u2rb66...@4ax.com>):
Never learned to read, eh, PC Guy? He didn't say "more software", he said
"more FREEWARE."
PC Guy
Did I say it wasn't?
PC Guy
Why?
>and you can only run one.
Why would I need more than one?
Jason
I didn't know if you meant thinking OS X is the bee's knees or thinking
OS X is a tool to get work done separates rational people from Mactards.
--
Jason
PC Guy
<gmgr...@comcast.com> wrote:
Amazing how you keep un-killfiling people you killfile. I think you're
nothing more than a liar.
What has this to do with anything? Oh, that's right...this is that
Mactard argument that the Mac is more productive despite a lack of
evidence to support it.
>
>> And what does toolless installation have to do with WINDOWS?
>
>It has to do with PC vs Mac, there, PC Guy.
PC != Windows Mactard Graves.
>>> You might think that Windows is just the bee's knees and I'm happy as a pig
>>> in shit for you.
>>
>> I don't think it's the "bee's knees". I think of it as a tool to get
>> work done. That's what separates rational people from Mactards.
>
>I also think that the Mac is a tool to get things done.
It is, a less practicle tool but a tool non-the-less.
>What do you think it is chopped liver?
>
>But, as I thought, the idea of ease of use, superior tools, superior user
>experience, being more productive, wasting less time, etc., etc., means
>nothing to you WinScum.
WinScum. That's that trademark "avocacy" Mactards are known for.
Jason
How is it less practical if we can run your applications?
--
Jason
Jason
You might not need more than one, but why not have both. Why get a car
that only has a radio when you can get one that has a radio and CD
player?
--
Jason
Snit
I never said the Mac had more software. There is, of course, software for
the Mac which either had no equal on Windows or is simply better or is much
cheaper, such as the iLife suite, Tofu, Automator, iChat AV, OmniGraffle,
Photo To Movie, SaverLab, TextToSound, etc. Heck, I do not even know of
anything like RapidWeaver for Windows, though it might exist.
The opposite is also true, though... for example, I know nothing on the Mac
that is as good as ElectricQuilt.
--
€ Pros aren't beginners in their field (though there are new pros)
€ Similarly configured Macs and Win machines tend to cost roughly the same
€ Some people do use the term "screen name" in relation to IRC
Snit
0001HW.C24EB407...@newsgroups.comcast.net on 4/20/07 6:16 PM:
And I did not even say that!
--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
PC Guy
Oh George I do love it so when you pop your head out of your hole so I
can make a fool of you: Is it your assertion the Macintosh has more
FREEWARE than Windows?
PC Guy
Because to run "my" applications you have to run "my" choice of
operating system.
Jason
But I can run your choice inside mine or side by side with mine.
--
Jason
PC Guy
Because it costs more. How many times does this need to be repeated to
you before it sinks in?
Jason
What is wrong with it costing more if it does more?
--
Jason
PC Guy
I don't care. Why do you need to run my choice if OS X is da bomb?
PC Guy
Nothing. The problem is it doesn't do more.
Jesus
> "Steve de Mena" <ste...@stevedemena.com> stated in post
> 46291062$0$19443$4c368...@roadrunner.com on 4/20/07 12:11 PM:
>
>
>
> > Peter Hayes wrote:
> >> PC Guy <p...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Tell me where I can purchase a Macintosh comparable to the following PC I
> >>> recently purchased for $750:
>
> >>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
> >>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
> >>> - 320GB SATA HD
> >>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
> >>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
> >>> - 9 in 1 card reader
> >>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
> >>> - 10/100 ethernet
> >>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
> >>> - 3 x PCI slots
> >>> - Mini tower
>
> >> the cost of the antivirus software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
> >> cost of the antispyware software that soaks up CPU cycles? Plus the
> >> costs of the ongoing annual subscriptions for your paid-for updates?
>
> > I imagine the OS was included and he just didn't
> > list it.
>
> > Antispyware (Windows Defender) is free.
>
> > Antivirus - There are excellent free products like
> > AG. Commercial products like Norton or McAffee
> > can usually be gotten for $10 or less after
> > rebates during sale periods. And they don't "soak
> > up" CPU cycles. Are you stuck back in 1993?
>
> Do you disagree that malware protection that is actively protecting a
> computer slows computers?
>
> --
> € A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
> € A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
> € Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry
I have avast! Free on my computer and it doesn't noticeably slow down
my computer. I'm very happy with it.
Jesus
> "Snit" <C...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote in message
>
> news:C24D947C.7DE1F%CS...@gallopinginsanity.com...
>
>
>
> > "PC Guy" <p...@hotmail.com> stated in post
> > Z-edna_VDu9abLrbnZ2dnUVZ_jidn...@comcast.com on 4/19/07 3:49 PM:
>
> >> "Jason" <j...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
> >>news:2007041918301075249-jason@emailnotcom...
> >>> On 2007-04-19 18:23:18 -0400, "PC Guy" <p...@hotmail.com> said:
>
> >>>> "Jason" <j...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:2007041918091316807-jason@emailnotcom...
> >>>>> On 2007-04-19 18:05:34 -0400, "PC Guy" <p...@hotmail.com> said:
>
> >>>>>> "Jason" <j...@emailnot.com> wrote in message
> >>>> I
> >>>> recently purchased for $750:
>
> >>>> - Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz)
> >>>> - 2GB (2 x 1GB) DDR2 memory, expandable to 4GB
> >>>> - 320GB SATA HD
> >>>> - Nivid GeForce 6150LE integrated graphics
> >>>> - CD/DVD combo drive which can write dual layer + and - DVDs
> >>>> - 9 in 1 card reader
> >>>> - 5 x USB2, 2 x FW400 ports
> >>>> - 10/100 ethernet
> >>>> - 1 x 16x PCIe slot
> >>>> - 3 x PCI slots
> >>>> - Mini tower
>
> > prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>
> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones needs. That's
> why I call you Mactards.
Word for DOS would meet most people's needs for word processing, but
nobody uses it. Why? Because it's harder to use. Same thing here.
Lots of people love their Macs because they find Macs easier to use
than PCs and they don't have to try and figure out what to do about
security software, etc. There's a reason many PC users fall in love
with their Macs once they switch.
Oh, and please try not to call me a Mactard, as I'm posting from Vista
and don't own a Mac (although I have used Panther, which I liked; and
OS 8, which sucked). I just happen to be a Windows user who can think
rationally and see the possible pros for the Macintosh.
Jesus
*snip*
> > Then there's the derisory resale value of your junk, you'd be hard
> > pressed to give it away two years down the line whereas a MacMini will
> > still command good secondhand prices.
>
> Computers are tools, not investments.
I do agree with this. I tend to suck every bit of life I can from a
PC until the hardware finally gives out. Still got an IBM PS/2 from
1989 sitting around. Runs like a champ in all its 16 MHz 80386
glory. :-)
Snit
>>>> You might not need more than one, but why not have both. Why get a car
>>>> that only has a radio when you can get one that has a radio and CD
>>>> player?
>>>
>>> Because it costs more. How many times does this need to be repeated to
>>> you before it sinks in?
>>
>> What is wrong with it costing more if it does more?
>
> Nothing. The problem is it doesn't do more.
A radio and a CD player does more than just a radio.
--
€ Different viruses are still different even if in the same "family"
€ Dreamweaver and GoLive are professional web development applications
€ Dreamweaver, being the #1 pro web design tool, is used by many pros
Jesus
> On 20 Apr 2007 16:14:23 -0700, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com>
> >> enjoy poking fun at. It's the lame users who have:
>
> >> "never been happier until I switched to a Mac." - Jason
>
> >> that I enjoy poking fun at.
>
>
> >-hh
>
> Says the guy who lashes out in jealousy at happy SUV owners.
>
> --
>
> Why settle for the lesser evil?
> Cthulhu for president 2008
I prefer just setting fire to large tanks of gasoline in my backyard
to driving an SUV myself. It's a complete waste, but I have the
money, so why not use that money to buy gas and set fire to it for no
reason except for entertainment?
Snit
1177122034....@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com on 4/20/07 7:20 PM:
> I have avast! Free on my computer and it doesn't noticeably slow down
> my computer. I'm very happy with it.
I suggest AVG for most folks... it is free and does not slow things down too
much, but anything that is doing constant monitoring of that type will slow
things down some. Run benchmarks with and without.
With that said, speed is certainly not everything for a computer.
--
€ There is no known malware that attacks OS X in the wild
€ There are two general types of PCs: Macs and PCs (odd naming conventions!)
€ Mac OS X 10.x.x is a version of Mac OS
Snit
>>> If all you want to do is *meet* needs, then you might have a point. I
>>> prefer to meet needs well... and exceed them.
>>
>> By definition it's foolish to spend more than what meets ones needs. That's
>> why I call you Mactards.
>
> Word for DOS would meet most people's needs for word processing, but
> nobody uses it. Why? Because it's harder to use. Same thing here.
> Lots of people love their Macs because they find Macs easier to use
> than PCs and they don't have to try and figure out what to do about
> security software, etc. There's a reason many PC users fall in love
> with their Macs once they switch.
>
> Oh, and please try not to call me a Mactard, as I'm posting from Vista
> and don't own a Mac (although I have used Panther, which I liked; and
> OS 8, which sucked). I just happen to be a Windows user who can think
> rationally and see the possible pros for the Macintosh.
Well stated. I am a Mac user and owner who teaches people to use both and
sees the advantage to both.
--
€ Nuclear arms are arms
€ OS X's Command+Scroll wheel function does not exist in default XP
€ Technical competence and intelligence are not the same thing
Jesus
> "Jesus" <rustybucket...@gmail.com> stated in post
> 1177122034.603715.6...@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com on 4/20/07 7:20 PM:
Yes, AVG is nice. avast! Free has some nice features too, though,
like a plugin to specifically scan instant messaging, a plugin to scan
web traffic as it's downloaded (this plugin actually caught a worm
from a web site once and terminated the connection before it was on my
machine), a nice Outlook mail scanning plugin, etc. Check it out at
http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html.
> but anything that is doing constant monitoring of that type will slow
> things down some. Run benchmarks with and without.
I know it will slow it down some... it has to, since it's using up
processor cycles. That's why I said "noticeably". :-)
> With that said, speed is certainly not everything for a computer.
It's pretty close to it when you're dealing with video. If you have a
slow editing computer, you'll end up beating your head against the
wall for large periods of time while the computer either glitches in
real-time or tries to slowly render video for preview.