The other major problems that come into play when you are dealing with excessive clockrates is heat and power consumption. As you wind up the clockrate to get more performance out of an architecture like the Pentium, heat and power usage increase exponentially. The other problem with this, is the Law of Diminishing Returns. As the clockrate winds higher and higher, the gains in processor speeds become less and less.
As for power consumption, a pentium 4 running at 2.8 ghz will be using 68.4 watts of power. The G5 running at 1.8 ghz by contrast, will only be using 42 watts. This is why Apple can get away with smaller case designs, and with using smaller, quieter fans in their computers. Whereas a pentium 4 powered Gateway may sound like a wind tunnel, an Apple iMac can get away with being nearly silent. In the case of my older 400 Mhz G3 powered iMac, it doesn’t even have a fan. The processor used in the computer has low enough power consumption to allow the case to be cooled by convection, without a fan. Not even a small one on the processor itself.
In the new Pentium M processors for notebooks, Intel actually reworked the architecture to allow them to lower the clockrate, and it actually outperforms the older Pentium 4 laptop processors at a lower clockrate.
That is one of the advantages of running a processor that makes more efficient use of power. In laptops for instance, you can get a Dell Inspiron 500m notebook that, using an Intel Centrino chipset, and at weight of 5 lbs, gets battery life of up to 4 hours. An Apple iBook, using a low power consumption G3, will get 5 hours for a 12 inch model (5 lbs), or with the 14 inch model, get a 6 hour battery life while the laptop weighs in at 5.9 lbs.
Having choice is hostile? Customizing is a bad thing? How long have you even used Linux? What distro was it? There are versions like Lycoris and Lindows that are geared for someone who isn’t as advanced or proficient with computers. I kind of get the feeling that before you even sit down and use a computer that’s not made by Apple your mind is already made up. You seem to obsess over the most trivial things that an average user wouldn’t even notice. You give one breathtakingly picayune detail that you dislike in OpenOffice, then quickly make generalizations about all open source software without citing any further examples. Apple even offers X11 to users of OS X. I’ll certainly concede that the Gimp is nowhere near the level of Adobe Photoshop. Of course, the Gimp is free and Photoshop costs six-hundred bucks. Considering the average user is just going to crop or resize pictures and maybe do some minor retouching, Gimp is a suitable choice and accomplishes these pretty easily. I’ve never coded a day in my life and I love Linux. As I mentioned earlier, I know people who know little about computers and use it.
When the point of customization is to overcome the inconsistency of the interface, yes.
Generally off and on for several months at a time, using various releases, most recently Red Hat 8.0 and Suse 8.0.
Thanks for the backhanded insult. I am an extremely advanced and experienced and proficient user of computers.
Funny, then, that for years I only bought Dells.
Only because they have no eye for detail.
You want others? I can go back and dig up others. The OO.o one jumped to mind because it still frustrates me when I use that program on my Mac.
That is neither here nor there. X11 is not a standard UI for average users. It’s there only to facilitate the porting of high end Unix apps for corporate and institutional customers.
No, Photoshop Elements is the suitable choice, and only costs $99. The Gimp is nice, but its no Photoshop for pros, and isn’t as suited for non-pros as Photoshop Elements.
Yeah, it’s really a pain in the ass when I have to physically rotate my monitor upside down because Kmail only displays everything that way. Gnome is even worse, as mischievous little gnomes periodically dash out from all corners of the desktop, randomly switching files and icons in a horrid usurping of our eternal quest for consistency and uniformity. The hostility is even more unbearable. Last night Tux got drunk again and started calling me a stupid motherfucker, like my father used to. As his hatefilled procession of evil continued, he whizzed all over my Pan newsgroup headers, before proceeding in a mad dash to desktop three, where he used Gaim under my screen name to tell my ex-girlfriend I have syphilis and how she should “really get that checked out.” Linux, a chaotic void of hostility and surreal inconsistency.
Yeah, you’re so advanced you want your OS to hold your hand through even the most simplistic task, make all your decisions for you and patronize you. But, of course, you’re “Mr. fix it” who sweeps in with your magical “boot disk” whenever one of your friends’ Wintels won’t start and saves the day. Am I right? I wouldn’t consider it an insult as much as a lighthearted observation deduced from your responses in this thread. In all fairness and seriousness; however, I am willing to concede that you do probably spend more time in front of a computer than I do.
And for years I only used Windows. Before that, in college I predominately used Macs. By your logic, this makes me completely objective and non-biased, right?
If by “eye for detail” you mean “borderline obsessive compulsive disorder” then we’re good to go. That seriously isn’t a joke or an insult. In particular, I’m referring to the XP vs. X link you posted. I can say with a high level of confidence when a person finds his or herself sitting in front of two operating systems, dragging windows, clicking on icons and running system tools in an effort to compare them, there’s a pretty good chance that various areas of this person’s life are somewhat compromised.
If you really wish, but I was under the impression we’d shoot the shit about actual issues as opposed to “this blasted widget is two centimeters too far to the right!” By the end of the day, it won’t even really matter. You’re happy with your Mac and I’ll continue to embrace Linux and KDE. I’m fond of Macs and even though I can’t really justify buying one, it’s good to know there’s an option outside of Intel/AMD if I ever desire to walk down that road.
I like KDE OK. I know Mac users who have even installed it and run KDE in the XFree86 or X11 environments and pretty much ignore Aqua. If I had PC hardware I’d put more time into learning my way around it. I have to agree that there are still areas of user-hostility (I still haven’t convinced my VPC copy of Red Hat to display to 1024 x 768), but then I find even bigger pockets of user-hostility within Microsoft Word.
On my Mac under X, I prefer WindowMaker to KDE and I use the XFree86 environment as an ancillary environment while still using Aqua environment applications.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spectrum * That is neither here nor there. X11 is not a standard UI for average users. It’s there only to facilitate the porting of high end Unix apps for corporate and institutional customers.
[QUOTE]
Actually, X11 isn’t a UI at all. It’s a display and input device framework, on top of which many (more than 20) window managers (think: “desktops”) have been built over the past 15 years or so. Some of these window managers use interface layers like GNOME or KDE to simplify the progamming, and give some uniform look and feel to the system.
There are exceptionally simple and good interfaces, if you like simple and good. There are amazingly tweakable ones, as well. If you say you dislike GNOME or KDE because of the myriad of… well, options, then you’re really disliking the window manager you’re using under GNOME or KDE. From your commentary, I’d guess you played with Sawfish, which is known for being infinitely configurable, to the chagrin of many new to (and familiar with, yes) it’s ways.
For those seeking zen-like purity, I’d recommend Black Box. For those seeking a windows-like environ, I’d sugest KDE. For those wanting to get under the hood, I’d suggest Sawfish. For those wanting something out of a sci-fi flick, I’d siggest Enlightenment.
Agreed. GIMP, however, is infinitely more extensible by mortal hyoomans than Photoshop (Elements, or Full), due to its multiple language scripting interfaces, making it a fun and useful toy for those who revel in image manipulation. Someone needing only to crop, rotate, and remove red-eye from a photo should need neither; most camera-dump applications include those basics.
Also, it’s free. Free is a very strong selling point for those to whom $99 is still a lot of money. There are indeed ways to make GIMP simpler to use, and the 2.x versions have a vastly improved interface, in my opnion (which might possibly count, because I’ve spent years developing software under multiple platforms, and one of my specialties happens to be Human-Computer Interaction and usability design).
Beyond this, there’s the whole Windows app versus Mac App world. The same app on the two platforms will be identical, but there are about five common image editing applications for the PC, versus one for OSX.
Linux isn’t for everyone. Neither is OSX. Neither is Windows. And to get really rude about it, they’re not religions, and they need no defenders. They’re commercial products (linux included to some degree, there, too) intended to make money. Pick the one best suited to your task, and go with it.
As for me, I don’t care for OSX. I find that for every nicety it has, I’m getting limited in some other way, sometimes painfully.
Case in point,I was working on my dad’s G4 tower (running OSX Jaguar) trying to work around the fact that the last (as in ‘final’)version of the OSX driver for a 2-year-old HP printer only supports USB connections, even though it’s common practice to throw the printer in question behind a network print spooler (also made by HP). The Windows and HP-supplied Unix drivers handle this fine, but the OSX one doesn’t. Not Apple’s fault, don’t want you to think I blame them for the problem; HP doesnt support OSX on discontinued models. This is most likely because it forces you to buy another printer.
Now, knowing what I do about OSX, BSD, and the Unix world, and knowing that OSX uses CUPS as its printing backend, I know that I should be able to drop the printer’s PPD file into the drivers folder, add a line in the config file which basically says “the printer named foo uses the driver bar and is located at the network address baz”, and restart the service, and all should be good and happy. It worked with CUPS under Linux and FreeBSD both, in the exact same manner, btw).
Unfortuntely, because Apple’s interface to printer management doesn’t understand everything that its backend can handle, the tool barfs violently and kills the daemon, and twice, the whole OS.
So, here I have the power and stability of Unix, and the inability to access it without royally pissing off the UI to the point that the machine kernel-panics.
All in all, computers are tools to me. I purchase a machine based on the task at hand. Sometimes that task isn’t going to be performance related, such as pre-press work. I’d never be caught dead turning down a Mac for pre-press. Video and audio editing, the difference isn’t what it once was; Windows tools are better in many cases in my experience for audio editing, because of the myriad of options and plug-ins that exist there, but not for similar Mac suites. As for video editing, the only things I’ve worked with have been consumer-grade apps like Premeire, which is identical on both platforms, as far as I’ve seen.
Most of the time though, Intel hardware wins, simply for the bang-for-the-buck comparison between the machines, as well as the flexibility (PCs are upgradable down to the motherboard, whereas Macs are expandable, but not upgradeable to the bare chassis; most PC users won’t ever swap motherboards out though). From this, comes the extension that
Macs now hold 3% of the market share, down from a one-time high of about 8%; this from Google Answers. Apparently, the budget crisis has significant impact on the PC market; the premium price on an Apple was what Wired mistakenly viewed as an education factor (remember that poll, about how those educated in Ivy League schools were more likely to own a Mac than the general populace? Of course, the same thing can be said about Gucci handbags, Jaguars, or stock portfolios).
So… back to the “computers are tools” drift…
Once we allow ourselves to look at computers as tools, and not as an extension of our being, it becomes apparent that not every tool fits every job. Having mre than one machine makes this distinction easier; I personally own six computers, none of which are currently Macs. Two are servers, running Linux (one a fileserver with an 8-drive RAID (740GB total) running Gentoo which will soon be Debian, one a dhcp, web-app, and database server with Redhat). One is a firewall machine, also running Linux. One is a Sparcstation 4 running FreeBSD, formerly SunOS 4.1.3. One is a desktop workstation, running WindowsXP and Gentoo Linux, depending on what I’m working on (dual booting).
I like WindowsXP for a couple of things, like the simple file management, networking, and software (entertainment and productivity, both). I like Linux for the ability to get under the hood, and for developing server or database-driven applications. I don’t use Macs not because I hate Apple, but because for what I use a computer for, Macs aren’t the logical choice for me. If I did other things with computers, they might well be.
I’m certainly happy for those who like Macs and use them, because overall, they like what they use. I don’t have to use it, so it’s not up to me to say what’s better for them.
If you ask me what’s better, I’ll tell you “whatever you find most pleasing to use”, because the metrics of HCI are not going to change the mind of someone who finds a particular facet of an application or interface appealing. Aesthetics tend to override functionality a lot of the time with computers, because most people (all platforms) like “cool-looking” over “simple”, as they extend their personality onto their computer (just look at desktop wallpaper, the screensaver, custom icons and sounds, and the like).
In my current gig (which has sysadmin facets), I have users who are still using a version of Eudora from five years ago, because it’s what they know, and it does what they need. Kudos to them. They’ve left marketing behind, and stuck with what they need a machine for.
As for the OP, figure out what you want to do, HONESTLY, and that will tell you what you want to buy. Here’s a possible checklist of add’em up values for you, if you really need a place to begin, I try to be objective here, but of course some might think I’m being biased. I’m assuming Windows XP as the OS here for the PC machine, because if you’re asking others what to buy, you probably aren’t considering Linux anyway (and yes, this is a good thing… even though I use and enjoy Linux, I firmly believe it’s not for everyone yet).
So, let’s play “Who Has The Edge?”:
Price: Apple=1, PC=3
Price/Performance as a Ratio: Apple=0, PC=3
Hardware Appearance: Apple=3, PC=1
Hardware Durability: PC=2, Apple=1
Hardware Function: PC=2, Apple=2
Desktop OS Look-and-feel: Apple=3, PC=1
Desktop OS Functionality: Apple=1, PC=3
Desktop OS Unity: Apple=3, PC=2
Productivity Software: Apple=2, PC=2
Video Editing: Apple=2, PC=2
User Community Support: Apple=2, PC=2
Image Editing Software: Apple=2, PC=3 (number of apps is the only difference)
Entertainment Software: Apple=1, PC=3
Free Software: Apple=1, PC=3
General Quality of Free Software: Apple=3, PC=2
“Helper” Applications: Apple=1,PC=3
Unity of Interface in apps: Apple=3, PC=2
Simple and to the point versions of apps: Apple=3, PC=2
Expandability, Normal: Apple=2, PC=2
Expandability, Extreme: Apple=1, PC=3
Third-Party Support and Expansion: Apple=1, PC=2
Is it Time-Proof: Apple=2, PC=3
Can I Use It For Other Things After I Buy A New Machine: Apple=1, PC=3
Latest Features: Apple=2, PC=2
So, add up the numbers for the itmes which are important to you, and you will have numbers that are, all in all, totally useless. The point of this all is, figure out, really, what you want to do with a computer. Then, shop around for those features as if you already owned a PC or an Apple, and figure out which one suits your needs and wallet.
I am sitting at my desk as we speak, with a G4 tower and a newer dual Xeon win 2k box before me. I like them both, but I prefer the Wintel box.
I can live with either interface - the tiny details that one has are offset by the tiny details the other shows. If you look at them long enough you can perceive anything as an advantage.
I do like the way you can drag a file onto a specific application icon in the Mac and that application will open the file. You can’t do that on a PC, you must right click and select “open with…” which wouldn’t be so bad if it actually distinguished between versions of the same software (for example Photoshop 6.0 and 7.0 ) - it just lists “Photoshop” twice and you have to guess.
I like the way in windows you can just click once to hide all windows and go to your desktop. When I’m working on a project I tend to save all of the current files on the desktop because it’s quicker, and the ability to jump right there is great.
Like I said, IMHO both OS’s work just fine. Win 2k is extremely stable, as is OSX. Win NT sucked, but then OS9 sucked royally.
My issue is with the software, once again. I am a creative professional - I’m an industrial designer. While the Mac is beautifully designed, you can’t design a mac on a mac. You can design a mac on a PC though (or a Unix machine - I believe Apple uses Unix boxes).
The software I use on pretty much a daily basis includes Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark (or InDesign), Word, Powerpoint, Project, Rhino 3D and Solidworks. Sometimes I use Alias Wavefront and ProEngineer.
The last 4 programs I listed are just not available for the Mac, and they run like garbage on Virtual PC.
I get a bit pissed off when I hear people talk about the Mac as being the “creative professionals” platform of choice. I sculpt in 3D, developing things for mass production. Pretty creative, but not really easy to do on a mac.
I’ve also done a decent bit of video editing and Avid is still the industry standard in film and TV work. Final Cut Pro is a nice program though.
Video special effects are generated either on Unix boxes or Intel machines. Lord of the Rings - Intel I’m afraid.
Photoshop in my experience is exactly the same on either platform, except for the fact that on the Windows version you can tile all the open windows within the app, on the Mac you’ve never been able to do this - I don’t know why.
I like em both - Macs sure have nicer industrial design (although Sony makes a nice case) but you can indeed do more on a PC.
Hold down option and command and click on the Desktop on your Mac (or the Finder icon). All programs other than the Finder will be hidden. You can do that when jumping between any program. Very conventient for when you’re at work, posting on the Web, and your boss walks in. Command-option click on the Photoshop icon, and there’s nothing but Photoshop on screen, instantly.
You can also option-click without the command key to hide just the program you are moving from.
Okay, that’s one form of creative profession that’s not Mac-centric or dominated. Most of the others – particularly graphic design and pre-press print design, which is what I find most people mean when they say “creative professional” – are. It depends on where you draw the line. Some could argue that programming a computer is a “creative” profession, but I wouldn’t.
I’ve used Avid workstations, and they really rock. However most of the video editing people I know either use Final Cut or would like to.
In terms of functionality, yeah. Though on the Mac, Photoshop benefits from ColorSync.
I wouldn’t consider it an insult as much as a lighthearted observation deduced from your responses in this thread. In all fairness and seriousness; however, I am willing to concede that you do probably spend more time in front of a computer than I do.