Mac vs PC for IM ?
- Thread starter canucksfan19
- Start date
This is really how the decision should go. A mac is the most expensive machine for what you get in terms of hardware by roughly 30-40%.
Do you
A) really like os x and / or really want to use unix (while not having the patience for linux)?
B) not mind being able to not run all windows apps / games outside of dual booting or virtulization?
C) not mind giving up some ability to customize your hardware.?
If you said yes to those 3 questions or if you strongly dislike windows and can justify the price, buy a mac, otherwise buy a pc.
Done.
Do you
A) really like os x and / or really want to use unix (while not having the patience for linux)?
B) not mind being able to not run all windows apps / games outside of dual booting or virtulization?
C) not mind giving up some ability to customize your hardware.?
If you said yes to those 3 questions or if you strongly dislike windows and can justify the price, buy a mac, otherwise buy a pc.
Done.
please tell me you are joking. You're a farily technical guy, I find it hard to believe that you really think this. Macs are unix. Want something it can do better than Windows can? How about rsync. How about grep. How about I have a php CLI out of the box. And ssh. And everything else that works with the 90 fucking percent of the internet that is unix / linux based. And cygwin is (by comparison only) a piece of shit and linux can be frustrating and time consuming. And macs have less malware. And if you are doing any techinical support for your family or friends you pray they are using a Mac since your job will be much easier and they will call you less.
Yes macs are more expensive, sometimes unjustifiably so, but there is no way to say that there is nothing they do better than PCs. They do a lot better than PCs can.
One last thing, part of the reason macs are more expensive is they aren't sold with bloatware, like just about every pc. All that crap that you spend 1-2 hours removing, that your mom doesn't know how to remove, thats partially subsiding the price of that pc. Apple wouldn't put that crap on their systems even if it lowered the price, because doing so would fuck up the mac experience.
man, you know those things can be done with PCs with some installs from a few open source programs. I definately agree cygwin fucking blows
-Mac is certified UNIX. Not even linux can say this. Mac OSX IS UNIX. This means full support for all POSIX compliant software, including running an Xwindow environment. One can boot from console, and run X and never see the OS X interface, operating on a pure BSD core.
-If you tell me that NTFS is in any way better than HFS+ (w/ ACL), that's a joke. Access times on HFS+ are faster, it doesn't require manual defragging.
-Parallel Computing. OpenCL allowing GPU to be used in parallel with CPU for more processing power. Why do you think most macs have multiple GPUs? Windows 7 does not support parallel computing. Speed.
-True 64-bit support. Windows still hasn't gotten this right. 32 bit drivers are incompatible with Win7 64bit, whereas in OSX they operate in a different layer. Applications are fully 64 bit compliant upon compilation for developers, no extra code to add unless they use special processor architecture calls/extensions. Speed.
-Java on a base OS level, no top layer runtimes, it's built into the OS, and therefore is far faster. Speed.
-$29 for OSX Snow Leopard, 1 edition. 7 has how many editions up to like $300?
Those are just offhand. I'm sure I could do more on a very technical level.
When win7 first launched they were $50 for quite a while. I even got the chance to cash in on the $10 home promotional offer. The highest is $219. A lot of PC's also use SLI.
SLI is not parallel computing. SLI means using two graphics cards for games, and they act like one. Parallel computing is using unused GPU towards real computation, and it behaves as another core with better floating point math.
