- 1,188
OSX is less of a resource hog than windows, but windows sucks either way. FreeBsd #1.
Is that the one with the guy who's screaming? If so, I've seen it, and it seems whoever made it was very confused, because it's mostly problems with OS 9, but he mixes in some OS X stuff.
Oh? I've had mine for over a year and a half now, and I haven't had a single problem with it. Well, the battery's lost most of its charge, but it's enough to get by. Can you honestly tell me what makes it useless? I get by fine with it... I have Office v.X installed to do all of my schoolwork (and as a sidenote, PowerPoint presentations look so much better on the OS X version than the XP version that for school presentations, I refuse to use the PCs unless I'm forced to), and haven't had a single problem with compatibility when sending a Word document to someone else. I also have Studio MX installed, and granted, Fireworks takes too long to startup, but otherwise I can do all of my web design just fine. iTunes - wonderful. Safari - Runs in circles around IE in rendering speed, W3C standards support, it has tabbed browsing, Quartz antialiasing...
Very true. I was talking to one GTP member over AIM some time ago while he was at work, and he said Windows was using roughly 20% of the resources for its system-level, um, stuff. On the other hand, OS X typically uses 1-5%. I rarely hit the CPU ceiling, especially since it's good about dumping visual stuff onto the video card.
Huh? I have Microsoft software on my computer, and I'm not what one would call anti-Microsoft... I just happen to think Windows isn't quite as good as OS X, so I pay for OS X. Just because we have a Subaru doesn't make us anti-Honda.
Well, there's part of your problem... that's from OS 9 (or maybe 8), and I'll be the first to admit that I couldn't stand it. I cringe when using our G3, since it still has 8.6 installed. Under Panther, I've only had one crash, and my right click works just fine. As well as my middle click. And my two thumb clicks. And the other middle click. And the two clicks around the scrollwheel.
Well, I see two reasons why they don't do that, both which tie into one central reason: It's better for them to have a monopoly on their hardware.
Okey dokey.
I have to admit though that they might not have actually done anything wrong. I haven't actually looked into all of the alligations and what not, but one thing that comes off the top of my head is the whole IE issue - I think what they did with that is perfectly legal (utilizing their already large Windows base to kill off Netscape by installing IE), and morally I'm not even sure if there's a problem with it. *shrugs*
There's one of those sitting about 8" to the left of my PB17 here, and about 36" away from my G4. A PowerComputing 604/120 that I bought in 1994 or so to replace my 1989 Mac II. It still runs great, though it needs more hard drive space (who'd have thought 800 megs wouldn't be enough?) and I have no plans to upgrade a 10-year-old machine.
Originally posted by Shannon
Neither. Windows is the biggest piece of commerical crap ever and those big glossy Mac icons don't do it for me. As for Linux, well, most of my most used applications won't run on it.
Before you say it again, the company is Apple, the operating system (as well as some of the hardware) is Mac.
Easy. Developers would be able to get their hands on the source code, hence being able to release patches for vulnerabilities. That isn't so much of a problem with Mac, but definately with Windows. XP was released with what, over 1000 bugs (?) with new vulnerabilities being found every day. If it was open source, there would be less and less of all these blaster worms and such floating around.
