Intel loves MAC commercial.

David on 16/2/2006 at 21:02

OSX is awesome.

My computing time is currently split about 50/50 between Windows and OSX, it is mostly Mac at work and Windows at home, although I have Windows and Mac machines in both environments.

I'll add to what Abysmal said, which is all true! My Trash bin on my work machine is around 5GB and comprises some 20,000 files and yet I can browse it like a regular directory with 30 or 40 files. It sorts, reorders and searches them almost instantly - and my work machine isn't even a monster - it's a G4 733MHz with 768MB of SD RAM.

I love how everything works on Mac, install software or hardware and it just works - no pissing about. I also love the UI guidelines that mean the preferences for any application are in the same place, every single time, in every single app.
There seems to be a lot more care taken when laying out applications for OSX.

I'm also seriously impressed with the performance of the system when I've got god-knows how many programs open. A typical day will see Photoshop, Go Live, Firefox, Safari and Mail open and in use for most of the day as well as network browsers and whatnot - and I don't think you'd get acceptable performance out of a similarly specced Windows system.

This isn't to say I don't like Windows - I happen to think XP is a pretty decent OS from Microsoft and, as I have indicated, a significant amount of my computing time is spent using it. But damn, OSX is awesome.

Vigil on 16/2/2006 at 21:26

But it's for pretentious aesthetes! And it costs too much! And Apple insults us with their ads! And there aren't any games! And there's no viruses because lol noone uses Macs! And I love my PC!
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

mopgoblin on 16/2/2006 at 22:55

Quote Posted by Shug

And with that in mind, WinXP is a pretty-easy-to-use software package that can run games, a web browser, photoshop, a music player and various warez-seeking devices. That's pretty much the extent of home users right there

I've been using Windows since version 3.1, and it always amazes me how difficult XP is to use compared to previous versions. Nothing is in a logical place, and you can't do anything without going through at least three screens/panels/dialogs of useless (and often irrelevant) options and obvious information. In fact, after many years of using Windows, I even found <em>Linux</em> easier to use for most purposes within a day or two of installing it.

SithLord2001 on 17/2/2006 at 01:56

I hated Mac OS X 9 and I haven't used a Mac since...but I must say Apple must have something going for them considering Intel is making processors for them now (even though I prefer AMD) and Windows is going to a more Mac like GUI with Vista....I am not an Apple fan but again they must be doing something right.

Swiss Mercenary on 17/2/2006 at 02:25

It's not Intel making processors for them. It's Apple realising that they lost the hardware war, and are making OS X work on PCs.

As for the going, it's the shineyness. I doubt that MS will take a hint in Vista from all the things David's praising OS X for.

Vigil on 17/2/2006 at 09:47

Quote Posted by Swiss Mercenary

It's not Intel making processors for them. It's Apple realising that they lost the hardware war, and are making OS X work on PCs.

No, not really. Apple will continue making Macs, they will just have intel processors inside them - a Mac being rather more than just a PowerPC CPU, and a PC being rather more than just an Intel CPU. Apple had been tossing around the idea of a move to Intel for several years now, and among other things there had been consistent availability problems with the PowerPC chips (IBM, who manufactures the processors, apparently haven't been able to meet demand). To the best of my knowledge Apple have no plans to distribute OSX separate from the hardware.

So while they are migrating their software to the same processor architecture as PCs use, it isn't so that they can market the Mac OS or software on PCs, and they have no intention of exiting the hardware market.

Swiss Mercenary on 18/2/2006 at 01:19

Oh, and here I thought they finally got ashamed of themselves for charging a 200% overhead for third party parts.

My bad.

Shug on 18/2/2006 at 05:36

Quote Posted by MorbusG

If you use XP at home, then you'll need to administer it. :)

Hahaha

HAHAHAH

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

Also the setting up of a linux installation is enough to make WinXP the os of choice amongst the general public; I can't comment on OSX having never used it

Uncia on 18/2/2006 at 11:22

I dunno. Desktop installs tend to detect everything at install time, so the first time you boot into them most things are already functioning. No need to spend an hour hunting down and installing drivers.
Now, for the hardware that doesn't work for however... ;)

descenterace on 18/2/2006 at 11:56

General rules for a simple Linux setup:

Use Intel NICs.
Use Creative sound hardware (although most AC97-compatibles are hassle-free).
Use nVidia graphics hardware.
Use an nForce mainboard.

Precompiled kernels generally have built-in support for the above. Also, don't expect to get your mainboard sensors working.