Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Vulpine

  • Rank
    New Member

Previous Fields

  • System Specifications:
    Mac Mini
  1. I have to argue that statement, Brandon. While I agree with the legality/illegality statement, before you can run OS X on a regular x86 box, you have to recompile it; you can't just slip the disk in and expect it to work. Linux users have the extended knowhow to do that recompile; very few other users have that capability. Today's average user wants a computer to be easy to use, whether they are elderly, middle-aged, or young. I admit that most of the younger users, especially those that are really heavy into gaming, want the most extreme gaming hardware they can find. Strangely enough, the newest MacPro computers compare favorably with those extremes, up to and including CoreDuo Quad-processor chips and video cards to drive 2, 3 and even 4 displays, with the best single card capable of giving excellent 3D visuals. All of this capability is priced (surprisingly enough) almost the same as your high-end gaming machine. It is no longer true that the Mac is more expensive, as long as you compare the two machines equivalently equipped! Yes, there are cheaper PCs, but they are minimalist at best and quickly come up to the price of a Mac to bring it up to the same capability. The Mac is not just a PC in a shiny box, because the Mac is carefully engineered to provide the highest reliability for the lowest cost. My $500 Mac Mini is just as capable as any $500 PC on the market today, despite being 2 years old. Yes, it is slower; it's older after all. But I do 99% of my internet work, including graphical work, on that little $500 mini.
  2. Well, maybe you're right, Brandon; maybe the Mac OS (not based on Classic, OS3 through OS9 WERE Classic) didn't have PREEMPTIVE multitasking, but the Mac OS did have multitasing long before Windows 95 came out, so Win95 was 10 years late with a decent graphical interface. In fact, when Win95 came out, everybody in the plant where I worked asked ME, a Mac user at the time, how to use it! In all honesty, WinXP is probably the best iteration of Windows to come out of Redmond, EVER. For once the BSOD became a rarity and you didn't have to reinstall the OS every 6 months to maintain reliability. Oddly enough, nearly every feature in XP had been released and proven years before in OS9 and improved even more by the upgrade to OS X. What is Vista? It is an attempt to make Windows look and perform something like OS X, more than 6 years AFTER OS X hit the market. And by everything I've read from reviewers and IT professionals alike say that Vista is a step Backwards in performance, reliability and security. Yes, I own a PC running WinXP. Why? Because at the time Windows was the only way to play some of the great games on the market. But guess what? Because of the change from the PowerPC processors that manufacturers refused to improve, the Mac and OS X are now capable of playing those games, even the world's most popular MMORPG, World of Warcraft, I am replacing my Windows machine with a Leopard Mac, only installing Windows XP to run specific software (not games) not yet ported to OS X.
  3. You just hit a salient nail on the head, Brandon. OS-X uses Apache as part of it's networking protocols, thus by that alone it is more difficult to crack the OS and hit the vulnerabilities that do exist. I'm not saying Apache is the ONLY reason but is definitely ONE of the reasons.
  4. I remember someone commenting about numbers of computers out there and about how Windows holds roughly 80% market share. Hmmm... Did you know that 5 years ago the Mac held only about a 2.5% market share? Did you know that the Mac now holds nearly 10% (something like 8.9 or 9.2, I don't remember the exact number) And, did you know that of a total installed base, the Mac holds nearly 18% of all desktop computers in use today? Sure, the market share may be small, but that's because Mac users don't upgrade every 2-3 years like Windows users do, the useable life of a Mac is between 4-6 years, and the average operational life is more than 10 years! Granted, as it ages it becomes less capable of running the latest games and software, but as an internet machine alone, a 10-year-old Mac is more viable than a 5-year-old PC. People complain about Macs not being able to run modern games. Ok, I'll admit that my 2 year old Mac Mini can't run World of Warcraft very well... even though it's a 1.5Ghz PPC G4. On the other hand, my 1.8Ghz Macbook Pro with an Intel Core2 (not Duo) is running Wow as well as, if not better than, a 2-year-old PC running WinXP Pro with a brand-new video card in it. A lot of people I know, including several corporate IT professionals are switching to Mac simply because they like it better for what it does and how it does it.
  5. ... which means that the 'virtual' and 'actual' clock on the Mac is 4.32Ghz, ne? Even taking the OS out of the picture, actual 'Hardware to hardware' comparisons are much MUCH closer than the video lets on. When taking all aspects of the hardware, including video cards, networking cards and processors, the prices between any two manufacturers is almost identical. Yes, when going for bottom-end so-called 'entry level' machines, you may have more expandability in a Windows machine, but comparing them for what they start with, you will still find them virtually the same. As for a previous comment: Maybe that's a reason WHY the Mac is less vulnerable to viruses. The more hardware you have to accomodate, the more likely you will have holes that can be exploited. The tighter control you have on the hardware, the harder it is to penetrate and do any damage. Oh, and Apple doesn't JUST use proprietary hardware. Surprisingly enough, a Mac can use almost any USB or Firewire device made without even having to install drivers! The driver disks that include Mac software are often just feature enhancements allowing the Mac to access new abilities in the hardware.
  • Create New...