PC or MAC

[Seito4Counter]

apple, macintosh, who cares?

osx is based on unix but its far from open source. An open source os would open them up to every developer in the world. People could use apple software on servers and tailor it to their needs. They would make a lot of cash this way.

 

[Crayola]

Originally posted by milefile
Who gives a **** besides a snobby minority of dorks who think the computers they have are some kind of status symbol?

PC for me.

PC owners use there video card as status symbols. And when you're like me and have 256mb of onboard memory... why the F not?

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by Seito4Counter
apple, macintosh, who cares?

osx is based on unix but its far from open source. An open source os would open them up to every developer in the world. People could use apple software on servers and tailor it to their needs. They would make a lot of cash this way.

Uh, all opensource software falls under the GPL license. Anything under the GPL license must be free and the source code must be available. How would Apple make money?

 

[Seito4Counter]

same way ibm does..

 

[oscarfulz]

PC, i have

 

[Burnout]

Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy


http://www.thehoucks.com/happynowhere/Apple_Switch_Parody_DivX.avi

**F-word warning**
3.2 Mb Divx file

That's funny.

PC.

 

[Event]

 

[Silverzone]

PC. Here and at school.

 

[Crayola]

Originally posted by skylineGTR_guy
Processor intensive yes it's faster but once you take in real world applications that use more than just a processor the mac is left in the dust.

I have three computers, as 750mhz PIII, an 2500+ (running at 2.5ghz ) and a dual processor server rig, guess which one performs best even though the dual server theoretically has more processing power? Thats right, the 2500+. Having dual processors creates higher latency times because there isnt enough FSB bandwidth for 2 processors. My athlons FSB is like 450mhz compared to 400 for the dual processor system.

 

[Takumi Fujiwara]

Originally posted by the_cobbinator
Also, Macs were the first PCs.

Ummm.....No they weren't.

The first prototypes of a "Personal Computer" were built in the 1960s. (Along with early prototypes of LAN, Internet, Word Processing, and more.

The first prodution was the IBM PC, which got its start in the 70s.

If you mean that they "invented" the Graphic User interface, as is a common claim made by Mac lovers, that's not true, either. The GUI was originated by Xerox's PARC laboratory, and was originally offered to IBM, who turned it down, due to the fact that they felt, at the time, that the technology wasn't practical for business use. Apple did, eventually, have to first sucessful GUI system in production, so they do have that to their credit.

 

[VIPFREAK]

Originally posted by the_cobbinator
Also, Macs were the first PCs.

Kinda like how Japanese people start out originally being Chinese.

 

[DoomsDayDevice4]

Have you ever noticed that people that use mac always stick up for them when someone says something bad about them, but PC users don't care if someone says something bad about PC's. This doesn't happen all the time. It's just an observation.