|
|
Joined:
March 2008
Posts: 355
Location: Wichita, KS | Originally posted by The Wabbit Formerly Known As Waskel:
Iffy, I remember the Timex Sinclair! Did some time share on the Portland State computer in high school (72). VIC20, C64/128, Atari, DOS... Been a long strange trip. I just got my Commodore 128 back from son #1 and set it up in my office. Needs a little work, but I still love that thing. Back in the day, I did a lot of word processing, published a monthly newsletter, and wrote some software. The GEOS operating system made a great machine out of an already good one. Looking back, I'm amazed at what it could do with the technology available at the time. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | Dumb question: You can do bootcamp and run Windows on a Mac. Can you do the opposite and run MacOS on a PC? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | No. But then again, why would you want or need to? What can I do on a Mac that I can't do on a PC?
Seems to me that bootcamp is a tool for Mac users to be able to emulate windows.
Bootcamp, powerpc chipset, OSX... these are all attempts to carve off a bigger percentage of the windows market... and I applaud Apple for it.
They just aren't 'great' enough for me to justify spending 3X+ more money on. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | Originally posted by The Wabbit Formerly Known As Waskel:
No. But then again, why would you want or need to? What can I do on a Mac that I can't do on a PC? I was just curious. Maybe people have personal preferences for certain apps. Like folks use different web browzers. Even programs that have Mac and Win versions (Office or Photoshop for example) people might have a preference for the layout or feel of one vs. the other. You know, do you prefer "Alt-F-S" or "Cmd-S" to save your file ... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12761
Location: Boise, Idaho | You're right Wabbit. Senility has arrived when I can't even get the right decade. I didn't own a TV until 1985 and then we only got one because they were cheaper than computer monitors. Hooked up the 128 to the little 12 inch color TV.
And Dale, I also thought the GEOS software (Berkeley Software??) was great. It did a lot with very little, unlike the bloated stuff of today. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Originally posted by Gallerinski:
I was just curious. Maybe people have personal preferences for certain apps. Like folks use different web browzers. Even programs that have Mac and Win versions (Office or Photoshop for example) people might have a preference for the layout or feel of one vs. the other. You know, do you prefer "Alt-F-S" or "Cmd-S" to save your file ... That could be it, Dave, I don't know. I just use what gets the job done for me.
I prefer "Ctrl-s". |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7247
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | Say what you will about the Commodore 64, but it was a lean mean comput'n machine. I've used them to control quarter-million dollar measurement systems... perform complicated data analysis, and that was in the late 80's... written music, midi, inventory systems...
I just downloaded the Pocket PC C-64 Emulator for my phone... If they built computers today with the same paradigm of lean'n mean that they did for the C-64, we'd be light-years ahead of where we are today.
By the way, for you studio guys... if you want the old-school analog synth sounds, just get a C-64 setup (get a couple, their cheap) and all the Rio Kawasaki software. Just amazing. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2009
Posts: 416
Location: On the Coast - Halfway between SF & OR | Originally posted by Gallerinski:
Dumb question: You can do bootcamp and run Windows on a Mac. Can you do the opposite and run MacOS on a PC?
It's not a dumb question at all; many people have wondered that and many have tried.
There aren't many differences between the actual COMPUTERS, they use similar RAM chips for memory, similar hard drives for storage, and similar processors. Macs are more expensive simply because of numbers. Since Mac stopped licensing their OS to other manufactures, you now must pay a premium (buy one of THEIR computers) to get it. If Mac had allowed PowerComputing and others to continue use of the Mac OS, the prices would probably be similar today.
As I attempted to point out earlier, the discussion here is not between Mac and PC, but between Mac OS and Windows Vista OS; which one is more stable, which is easier for a novice to use out of the box. If I could load Mac OS in a cheaper box, I would - but I can't.
So I'm willing to pay $599 for a Mac Mini instead of $435 for an HP.
I pay no premium for the other software I use (contrary to what has been said in earlier postings), MS Office cost exactly the same for Mac as it does for Windows, Adobe Creative Suite costs exactly the same, etc. USB keyboards, mice, web cams, card readers, and monitors don't care what they are plugged into so long as you have the appropriate OS compatible driver.
Macs are not a speciality device as some tout them to be, they are not good only for specific needs, they are simply a line of computers same as Dell or HP.
In my eyes, a computer's operating system is like any other tool, you can pay less initially and spend time and money and frustration later keeping it functional, or you can pay more on the outset and get on with your life.
To me, the choice is easy. I will recommend Mac OS over Vista every time. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | I don't understand all this talk about frustration. My PC has run flawlessly for years without any life threatening crashes or viruses.....and I am a power user who takes chances all the time.
My studio DAW never has a problem, low latency and ample software add ons.
I don't do stupid things....like visit unknown sites, open emails that are in my spam/jumk folders and I back up regularly.
If I had the above mentioned problems, then I might consider a MAC to see if it was a better way to work but since the majority of problems with both systems is primarily user error, I don't really see the point of the ongoing discussion.
Now.....I am going to go play a Taylor. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2007
Posts: 2711
Location: Vernon CT | Originally posted by 2ifbyC:
fletcher,
I've yet to see anyone flaunt Vista. Now back to the real world...
Geeeze, let's talk wood boxes... :rolleyes: Hey, Anyone want to trade for a Taylor......... ;) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2007
Posts: 843
Location: CA | Amen, Fletcher. No comparison. The savings in 'spyware' and 'virusware' — in terms of $$, time, and RAM — that you don't have to invest for Macs is worth the price of admission alone. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 3145
Location: Marlton, NJ | Originally posted by stephent28:
I don't understand all this talk about frustration. My PC has run flawlessly for years without any life threatening crashes or viruses.....and I am a power user who takes chances all the time.
My studio DAW never has a problem, low latency and ample software add ons.
I don't do stupid things....like visit unknown sites, open emails that are in my spam/jumk folders and I back up regularly.
If I had the above mentioned problems, then I might consider a MAC to see if it was a better way to work but since the majority of problems with both systems is primarily user error, I don't really see the point of the ongoing discussion.
Now.....I am going to go play a Taylor. Amen! (except for the Taylor part).
. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7247
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | Originally posted by stephent28:
I don't understand all this talk about frustration. My PC has run flawlessly for years without any life threatening crashes or viruses.....and I am a power user who takes chances all the time.
My studio DAW never has a problem, low latency and ample software add ons.
I don't do stupid things....like visit unknown sites, open emails that are in my spam/jumk folders and I back up regularly.
If I had the above mentioned problems, then I might consider a MAC to see if it was a better way to work but since the majority of problems with both systems is primarily user error, I don't really see the point of the ongoing discussion.
Now.....I am going to go play a Taylor. That's it in a nutchell (cept for the Taylor bit).
Also Fletch.. I don't think ANYONE, including Microsoft at this point will say that Vista is better than anything... period.. so I don't know why your hung up on that particular Windows entry... A freaking slide rule is better than Vista, so are you saying MAC is only as good as a slide rule?
Bottom line as others have said.. Something is only "better" if it does what you need it do.. if it doesn't, it doesn't. The MAC OS is great for what it does, and Windows is great for what it does. That's all that matters. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | Does anyone really CARE what kind of computer or OS somebody else uses? Or hell what kind of GUITAR for that matter? Coffee? Boxers or briefs?
We all make our choices and have our opinions. I'm more than happy to tell you my preferences on all kinds of stuff. But don't misinterpret that as preaching what YOU should do/use/buy. As they say "Frankly Mildred I don't give a ..."
NOW HOW CAN WE HELP A BROTHER IN NEED ??? OMA bought a new computer. Telling him what YOU would have bought doesn't help, and to me the whole Mac-PC debate sounds like penis envy. I'm no computer geek but it sounds to me like the two credible recommendations are the following:
1. Make sure you have the latest Vista updates, learn to live with it, upgrade to Win7 as soon as available.
2. Downgrade to WinXP, might require some new drivers etc. but it's certainly possible.
Any other suggestions ???
PS - Mac, Takamine, Dunkin Donuts, Briefs |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7247
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | Originally posted by Gallerinski:
D
1. Make sure you have the latest Vista updates, learn to live with it, upgrade to Win7 as soon as available.
2. Downgrade to WinXP, might require some new drivers etc. but it's certainly possible.
Any other suggestions ???
Frankly 1. should NOT be an option.
Any machine designed to run Vista, should do fine with Windows XP Pro without the need of "finding" drivers. We (where I work) and several other large organizations have been buying "Vista" machines since they came out, but we immediately wipe the drives and install Windows XP Pro. The upgrade from Win XP Pro to Windows 7 is MUCH cleaner than from Vista to Windows 7 also.
Also FWIW, I have been using/testing Open Office for a awhile now and have not found anything it will not do. It reads MS Office files just fine and actually has a lot of features that make it much better than MS Office. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | I agree with Miles, except for the drivers issue. There are XP drivers for most all the new hardware, but they are not necessarily on XP/SP3. M$ is not including them because they want you to buy Vista. The vendors do not include them because M$ tells them not to. But they can be found.
As I said somewhere, I spent hours tracking down XP drivers for my daughters "Vista Ready" HP notebook. HP wasn't offering them. They were out there, but I had to hunt for them.
This is more often the case with notebook hardware, as it's generally more proprietary, and I'm not saying it's the case with OMA's machine but at least we know they're out there if he needed them.
Btw, I've taked with OMA and he doesn't seem to be comfortable with reinstalling the OS.
"The upgrade from Win XP Pro to Windows 7 is MUCH cleaner than from Vista to Windows 7 also."
LOL, Miles... nothing reminded me of the disaster that was M.E. like that statement!!! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Originally posted by fletcher:
To me, the choice is easy. I will recommend Mac OS over Vista every time. Fletcher, I don't know who you think you're arguing with. As Dave said, comparing OSX to Vista isn't very flattering to OSX.
I'd recommend just about anything over Vista. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | Just dawns on me, I've never actually USED Vista. Oh well. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Lucky man. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2004
Posts: 13303
Location: Latitude 39.56819, Longitude -105.080066 | Gee, if you can't have a little fun with Taylor in the great PC/MAC debate, where can you?....and just for the record, I finally sold my Taylor DDSM.
PS - PC, Lowden, Seattle's Best, Boxer Briefs |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2009
Posts: 416
Location: On the Coast - Halfway between SF & OR | Originally posted by Mr. Ovation:
Also Fletch.. I don't think ANYONE, including Microsoft at this point will say that Vista is better than anything... period.. so I don't know why your hung up on that particular Windows entry...
Sorry to everyone if I misunderstood the thread. I thought the question was how to live with Vista!
Some posters stated to return the Vista machine and get one that uses an older version of Windows instead.
I posted that I felt returning the Vista machine and getting a Mac was a better idea and that I didn't understand why people were still following the crowd and sticking with Windows when everyone knows their current operating system isn't good.
The 2 additional posts I made were simply trying to return the discussion to OPERATING SYSTEMS (apples to apples) which I though was the point of the thread.
I don't believe I was flaunting anything or acting superior by stating my belief that the current Mac OS offering is superior to the current Windows OS offering. You, Mr. Ovation, seem to state that most everyone feels the same way. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 194
Location: Las Vegas, NV | When I consider current Windows OS offerings, I really don't even consider Vista. In my mind, MS stopped at XP. Vista was such a disaster, I don't know why it would even be considered in a comparison, as that would not even be fair...
As far as Mr. O, I believe one of his last posts stated:"Bottom line as others have said.. Something is only "better" if it does what you need it do.. if it doesn't, it doesn't. The MAC OS is great for what it does, and Windows is great for what it does. That's all that matters."
So, there you go. It depends on what you want to do. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12761
Location: Boise, Idaho | Originally posted by stephent28:
Boxer Briefs TMI |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7247
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | Originally posted by fletcher:
my belief that the current Mac OS offering is superior to the current Windows OS offering. I guess I misunderstood as well. I do this for a living... and have been involved in computer technology professionally since the late 70's. I don't consider Vista the "current Windows OS offering" as such... frankly it's not even on my radar. If I buy a machine, I buy a WinXP Pro disk with it and will continue to do so until WIndows7 is in full production and patched.
As far as "bring back and buy a MAC".. I'm assuming if someone wanted a MAC, they would have bought it in the first place, and just thought that was a bit rude to even suggest, but that's me.
You are correct though... most people completely miss the mark that it's OS vs OS, and in that battle... true stability and bang for buck.. they BOTH fall WAY short. Linux outperforms anything Microsoft or Apple could hope for on most any level.... but again... it depends on what you want to do..
If you have specific applications that run on a specific OS... it doesn't really matter what you prefer... you get what works.
So in that... I think we agree... I just hope OMA got something out of all this :( |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2006
Posts: 10777
Location: Keepin' It Weird in Portland, OR | Gee... I just Love causing family spats. 
But Thank Y'all for the helpful pointers.
Like I said, when I first got XP, I wanted my Windows 98 back.
[Now I want my MTV like it used to be... All music, No commercials!]
I still will have trouble getting drivers for my old crap, but my printer works and that's what counts.
I went to the Vista Forum.... Unlike the Ovation Fan Club, most of it's members dislike Vista!
But I am getting better at this once I turned a bunch of stuff OFF.
But both of my XP computers, XP Home and XP Media Center, came with a bunch of AOL crap on them.
This did not have AOL, just Microsoft crap and Net Zero.
Like someone said, since the MAC OS only goes into Apple products they don't need to use their OS as a marketing gimmick for other crap.
(Kinda like unrelated flyers stuffed in your bank statement or cable bill)
Unfortunately, when they come-out with the next Windows...
Vista is liable to become a dinosaur just like Windows 2000. (Who got that one?)
I think that they invented Vista as pablum for the senior citizen crowd.
Y'know, people my age who cannot program their own VCR and don't own BlueRay.
(Their kids and grandkids Build gaming machines in their free time! :p )
Thanx All! :cool:
But don't let me stop your fun! And Miles has a point for the computer literate.
Get with the Program! All y'all are corporate clones, Linux is the way to Go! :eek: |
|
| |
Totally OT - Vista? Just got it. Any advice for the Old Guy?
