Mac, Windows, Linux...

[Unintentionally_Blank]

@IAmNotSpartacus

Um, yeah, the asking about dual Nehalems was rhetorical. For some reason you felt it fair to compare the processing time of an 8 core system against a 2 core system. That’s a pretty stupid comparison.

Of course, you’re limited to 4 gigs of memory per application…

I am not sure if this is a whoosh or not. Bolding is mine. It must be that “new math” I keep hearing about

Sorry, I misread your original statement. And I don’t recall comparing the processing time of a Core 2 Duo anything to a Nehalem.

So…got many apps dealing with MORE than 4 Gig? You’re picking pretty far down the checklist of nitpicks.

Funny thing is: For every person who agonizes over every last detail, there’s ten that blindly just hand over the Credit card and pay the price. I’m not limiting it to Apple either. Look at XPS and the Alienware stuff mentioned upthread.

Someone has no problem dropping the coin on multiple $400 cards to play crisys (and that’s about it.) and you’re okay with that, but someone spends a little more on an aluminum enclosure on their laptop, and they’re mentally incompetent?

Using your numbers, the difference in laptops is, what $300 apart? That doesn’t pay for better support, having multiple tech center locations in most large cities, and not talking to India if you have a problem?

It can be easily demonstrated that Apple costs more, what you can’t seem to wrap your head around is that there is added value for that added cost.

Again: I can’t convince you, you can’t convince me, so what’s the point?

[cmyk]

@IAmNotSpartacus

Um, yeah, the asking about dual Nehalems was rhetorical. For some reason you felt it fair to compare the processing time of an 8 core system against a 2 core system. That’s a pretty stupid comparison.

Of course, you’re limited to 4 gigs of memory per application…

The only reason I brought up the core issue, is that this is how chip makers are getting around the GHz limitation. Except, more cores aren’t going to do much for those that don’t really need all that raw horsepower (assuming their apps are even written to take advantage of them). Apple knows most of its professional user base crunch huge numbers and are including technologies like Grand Central Dispatch and even OpenCL to take advantage of as much silicone as it can, developers willing. It’s this forward thinking that I like about Apple, and is worth every penny.

Again, you’re application is only limited to 4 GBs, if it’s a 32 bit app. If it’s 64 bit, it can use up to a paltry 16 Billion GBs.

[cmyk]

@control-z

Most computer use is pretty mundane stuff, web browsing, e-mail, etc. If a web page comes up in 1 second on my PC and the same web page comes up in 1 second on your Mac, and we’re both looking at 24" widescreen LCD displays of similar quality, why should I pay $1000+ to get a Mac that does the same thing I paid $500 for? For that matter I don’t know why people pay $2000 for a top-of-the-line PC. It doesn’t pay to be on the cutting edge of technology.

Some people like the pretty hardware. And, of course, OSX.

I agree though, if all you’re doing is surfing the internet, and sending email, the brand of computer and OS isn’t gonna make much of a difference. At all.

But, mostly everyone uses a machine in their business. If I have to sit behind my rig 8 to 20 hours a day, you bet your sweet ass it’s going to be a rig I love to use, because that’s when the small (and sometimes not-so-small) differences becomes a huge deal.

[Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party]

GCD and OpenCL isn’t really an example of forward thinking on Apple’s part. Everybody knows which way the wind’s blowing, when it comes to the number of cores, and everybody is working on solutions to it. GCD is just Apple’s equivalent of Microsoft’s .NET Parallel Extensions (which is far broader in its scope than GCD).

[cmyk]

@cmyk

…to take advantage of as much silicone as it can, developers willing.

Ha. Silicone. Should be silicon. Shows where my head is at.

[IAmNotSpartacus]

@Unintentionally_Blank

Sorry, I misread your original statement. And I don’t recall comparing the processing time of a Core 2 Duo anything to a Nehalem.

You’re correct, I was confusing cmyk’s statement as yours and I apologize for that.

So…got many apps dealing with MORE than 4 Gig? You’re picking pretty far down the checklist of nitpicks.

So??? It’s a nitpick, right? Isn’t that the point of this thread?

Funny thing is: For every person who agonizes over every last detail, there’s ten that blindly just hand over the Credit card and pay the price. I’m not limiting it to Apple either. Look at XPS and the Alienware stuff mentioned upthread.

I don’t see any XPS or Alienware owners out here making justifications for their overpriced computer. For some reason Mac owners can’t just admit they paid more for their computer than they should have.

Someone has no problem dropping the coin on multiple $400 cards to play crisys (and that’s about it.) and you’re okay with that, but someone spends a little more on an aluminum enclosure on their laptop, and they’re mentally incompetent?

I’m OK with that? Really? Where did I say that? Would you mind not fabricating comments and putting words in my mouth so you can respond to a comment that never existed?

BTW, there are single video cards that run Crysis fully maxed can be had for $150 nowadays, no Crossfire necessary. It’s not last year anymore. The *nix/Windows market can actually take advantage of the latest and greatest hardware.

Using your numbers, the difference in laptops is, what $300 apart? That doesn’t pay for better support, having multiple tech center locations in most large cities, and not talking to India if you have a problem?

No, it’s a $450 difference, and the Mac is deficient in just about every respect except weight and LCD size. Several critical categories find the Mac completely outclassed.

Less power for more money, which is the same tired old story with Macs. The $300 difference you refer to is when you add the 3 year warranty that covers accidental, physical and liquid damage… an offering Mac does not seem to have. If you think giving up a faster processor, more memory, better video card, better optical drive is worth the trade of spending 15-20% more and getting only a 1.5" larger display and 1.5lbs less weight is a good value, well, you must be a Mac user!

It can be easily demonstrated that Apple costs more, what you can’t seem to wrap your head around is that there is added value for that added cost.

Your perception of added value is just that, a perception. Stop conflating your opinions with facts.

Again: I can’t convince you, you can’t convince me, so what’s the point?

I find it ironic you ask me this after making a long-winded post, instead of you asking yourself this before posting.

This is an internet message board, right? Is there really any other reason?

[cmyk]

I have to run, and maybe it’s my opinion, but the construction of the Macs are bar-none. Check out the unibody frame of the MacBooks alone.

Take a look inside (and out) of the Mac Pros.

[Unintentionally_Blank]

@IAmNotSpartacus

I don’t see any XPS or Alienware owners out here making justifications for their overpriced computer. For some reason Mac owners can’t just admit they paid more for their computer than they should have.

I’m OK with that? Really? Where did I say that? Would you mind not fabricating comments and putting words in my mouth so you can respond to a comment that never existed?

What I’d like from you is an admission that there are overpriced PCs as well as overpriced Macs. Can we agree on that?

@IAmNotSpartacus

BTW, there are single video cards that run Crysis fully maxed can be had for $150 nowadays, no Crossfire necessary. It’s not last year anymore. The *nix/Windows market can actually take advantage of the latest and greatest hardware.

Not the point. Overpayment for the new hotness is a constant. Just because you can pick up last years model at pennies on the dollar does not mean Apple is the only company overcharging for hardware.

@IAmNotSpartacus

If you think giving up a faster processor, more memory, better video card, better optical drive is worth the trade of spending 15-20% more and getting only a 1.5" larger display and 1.5lbs less weight is a good value, well, you must be a Mac user!

Not true. Just because something is unimportant to YOU does not make it unimportant. You’re casually neglecting things like much better battery life and a more protective chassis. Ask a full time businessman what 1.5+ lbs translates to. Ask him what a 5-8 hour battery life translates to.

@IAmNotSpartacus

Your perception of added value is just that, a perception. Stop conflating your opinions with facts.

Ditto. We’ve demonstrated lots of reasons why we prefer what we’ve selected. Preference. Hmmm. Preference.

@IAmNotSpartacus

I find it ironic you ask me this after making a long-winded post, instead of you asking yourself this before posting.

This is an internet message board, right? Is there really any other reason?

Point taken.

[beowulff]

What I find ironic is how Windows users call Mac users Zealots and Fanboys, and yet they are the ones shouting the loudest about how Macs suck!

I prefer OS X, and Apple machines over generic PCs, but if a friend wants to buy a computer, I don’t question his intelligence if he decides on getting a PC - I just tell him I won’t do tech support on it.

It’s also been my experience that the people who know the least about computers are the ones who are the most ardent supporters of Microsoft. Most of the software guys I know use Macs…

[Digital_Stimulus]

@Redwing

I prefer closed source unix for DB servers, linux for front ends and mid tier, Windows for user management and printing.

That’s about right (although it doesn’t give Apple its deserved props). I was in grad school for AI, working with mobile robots, but I’m now the IT guy (sysadmin is just part of it) at a small research institution. I use Linux (Debian personally, Ubuntu at work), but have to maintain and support Windows and Macs also.

Each platform has some incredibly annoying “features”, but each is outstandingly good in some areas. It’s all about the cost/benefit quotient – ISTM that most people will never have to factor more than one or two things into it, and so remain comfortably ignorant of other considerations. And justifiably so, in most cases – as a UNIX-phile, I just apply the adage use best tool for the job.

Holy wars need to be reserved for the ancient arguments, really: ed, vi, or being a pussy.

Indeed…although I do insist on vim, not vi. Does that make me a pansy?

[Superfluous_Parentheses]

@Dr.Love

I see your point, but how many people actually have 20K of software on their home PCs? Business people (generally) don’t argue on the internet about their choice of OS.

What are you then? Jesus. I’ve got about $2000 worth of necessary software on my $1000 macbook and though I could theoretically run most of it on windows, I wouldn’t want to. The stuff that I actually run 90% of the time is free, and runs very well on both Linux and OSX, and can be made to run, sort of, some of the time, on Windows.

In case you haven’t noticed, the poll is “Do you prefer Mac, PC/Windows, Some flavor of Linux, or Something Else?” - not, “Which is the best” or “Which OS users are the stupidest”.

[Dr.Love]

@Superfluous_Parentheses

What are you then? Jesus. I’ve got about $2000 worth of necessary software on my $1000 macbook and though I could theoretically run most of it on windows, I wouldn’t want to. The stuff that I actually run 90% of the time is free, and runs very well on both Linux and OSX, and can be made to run, sort of, some of the time, on Windows.

What am I? Human, I guess… Do you mean what do I do for a living? Grad student. By “business peopole” I mean more along the lines of business owners, i.e., those purchase the computers and software for maybe hundreds of employees, not just “people who are employed.”

$2K of software is more reasonable. But you have to buy 9 more copies of everything you own to fall into the $20K category that I don’t think most people fall into.

[cmyk]

To no one in particular:

There are valid reasons to prefer any OS over another. Everyone has their own special scenario and reasons. You may think less of a person for those reasons, but if their reasons are valid and rational, that only makes you a major douche.

[Superfluous_Parentheses]

@Dr.Love

What am I? Human, I guess…

Apologies for getting a bit aggressive. I got a but fed up with the amount of bickering in this thread.

In the end, nobody really cares about the OS. What matters to most people is a) the applications they can run on it, b) the general user interface “feel” and c) the stability of the system as a whole. The OS itself has only a limited influence in any of those. The best an OS can do for c) is keep a crashing program from bringing down the machine or taking other processes with with it. a) and b) are much more marketing / design / standardizing issues.

[Chronos]

Quoth cmyk:

I agree though, if all you’re doing is surfing the internet, and sending email, the brand of computer and OS isn’t gonna make much of a difference. At all.

Actually, that’s all my mom uses the computer for, and a couple of years ago she finally gave up on Windows completely and had me help her pick out a Mac, since Windows wasn’t adequate for her needs. Oh, it was fine while it worked, but it didn’t take long before it got to the point where she was spending more time dealing with scumware than she was actually using the computer. So she got a $600 Mac system, and considered it money well spent, because not having to deal with scumware any more was worth $600 to her.

[AHunter3]

@cmyk

To no one in particular:

There are valid reasons to prefer any OS over another. Everyone has their own special scenario and reasons. You may think less of a person for those reasons, but if their reasons are valid and rational, that only makes you a major douche.

I would mostly agree with this.

I admitted (way upthread) that back when PCs looked like this when they were running,

COMMAND NOT FOUND
ABORT, RETRY, FAIL
A:\

---

… I was indeed one of “those Mac users” who said there simply wasn’t any valid reason anyone could conceivably prefer that piece of crap to a Macintosh. But the quality gap back then was a freaking chasm. (And I was younger, to be sure).

All of the operating systems with defenders in this thread are impressive things in their own right, worthy of respect even if I’m quite partial to the one I like best, and I would not diss any of them in any serious fashion.