mac and pc sucks!!!!

[the_leander]

I would just say the "gay test" and gay slurs here need to end.. It's disrespectful and wrong and the type of sentiment needs to end.. What you think by what system a gay person might choose here is completely stereotyping people including gay people..

This is highly OFFENSIVE.. I hope someone removes it..

Gays automatically have good aesthetic tastes? Damn I wish someone had told me!

See, this is what you get for never reading the newsletters :p

@bloodline lol

Seriously though, if someone who is gay finds it offensive, then let them complain, doing so on another groups behalf is why this country is in such a mess. We'll speak for ourselves, kthxbai.

[the_leander]

Would this be a bad time to pearoast the butthurt form?

I'm good ta. But have at it if you want :lol:

On a serious note, it's not slurs or even stereotypes that bug me (hell the now deleted thread should have stood as testament to that), it's folk getting offended on other groups behalf.

Hmm, well at least I've found material for my next blog post.

[the_leander]

Therefore, we need to look to the X1000 to conquer the low quality Intel garbage

Given that the chip likely to be in the X1000 is the Titan (what with Apple having recently bought out PA semi), even a current Netbook would give it a hard time in terms of performance...

A mid range VIA Nano would likely level peg it.

Any of the current AMD or Intel desktop part would leave it for dust, including low voltage/mobility versions.  

Add in a lightweight distro like Elive or crunchbang and you've got a system that is every bit as responsive and scalable as OS4.

[the_leander]

Look at the PPC macs, they are of better quality than the intel macs

Citation needed.

[the_leander]

no "joke" like that is harmless. There is an implication there that is inappropriate..

I'm full up at the moment.

[the_leander]

1. Windows is utter crap...is it 25 years worth of computer development in hardware comparable ahead of KS/Wb on the A1000? No!

Karlos primarily uses Linux. Further, the post he was replying to was discussing hardware only. No one mentioned software at all.

2. The PC is so fast only because it needed to run ever more bloated and useless OS releases from Microdorks

The Windows might well have encouraged higher speeds to a degree, but applications have come on just as much. As people come up with new and inventive ways of using computers, the requirements go up.

[the_leander]

Dragonfly has some seriously nifty sounding features like internal clustering support within the kernel in order to help fully utilise mulicore systems.

With AMD releasing magnycore processors any day now, something like that may well come into its own.

[the_leander]

BUT THIS IS THE POINT.  F'en 8 CORES!!!!!!!! RUNNING AT 3,200 MHZ. 16,000 MB OF RAM!!!! AN i5 IS NOW "BASIC".  TO DO WHAT? RUN A FRICKEN GUI?  Play a movie. That plays better on a $149 Bluray player from China.  Play some same old same old FPS.  That works better on a $199 XBOX?

Windows 7 runs comfortably on an Atom based netbook. Computationally that's probably about 1/30th of the power of the above spec. It'll work happily on 1Gb of ram doing day to day things.

Sorry when I read post like yours, and I've read many over the years, and each year the specs get higher and higher, I am convinced that people have lost perspective and have no idea what those specs actually mean.  Here's a little help: you can get the entire text plus pictures of the 32 volume Encyclopedia on ONE  0.6 GB ie 650 MB CD.

And you could probably get just the text on a single 64Mb flash stick, what's your point?

You suggest others need to get perspective, perhaps you aught to look in a mirror.

The PC platform was always about:  "If it ain't running fast enough, buy something faster."  Here's a novel idea:  "Write decent code"

Right, because there is absolutely no possibility that these large apps contain decent code. You do realise that with the example of Photoshop as was given, using layers on massive images will quite quickly run into Gbs of memory in use, right? :rolleyes:

Every time computers get to the stage where they can do just about everything reasonably quickly, someone will come along and add a new piece of software that does something that needs more, take digital video editing as a good recent example. 5 years ago only pros and geeks were editing much video on the PC, now everyone who uploads to youtube will likely chop and paste things together.

[the_leander]

requires more than double that memory space-more likely at least 4 times- just let you make the computer do something?

Right back at ya

You really don't see why its Not A Good Thing that you have 10x hardware resources to do things 3 or 4 x as well, if you are lucky.

There might be, somewhere.  But I doubt it.  Windows is programmed by large committees.  Big apps are probably the same.  Anything done by committee processes is guaranteed to be inefficient.

No becacuse you're the only person thats ever opened more than on layer in photoshop. Layers, are one of the least efficeint ways to image process, but its The Industry Standard, so it must be good, right?

If you can provide a more "resource efficient" way of doing non-destructive image editing that is at least as quick as the current method, be my guest. Right now whilst it is the industry standard, it doesn't make it a bad thing either.  

Professional magazine photographers have been opening up images in photoshop for more than 10 years with a fraction of the RAM.

And having to go slow whenever they hit a very large scale image and/or falling back to analogue methods for truly huge images.

I'm convinced that most shots are taken at higher resolutions than needed, just beascsue they can.

Yeah because hazy out of focus looking billboards look fantastic when you've paid tens of millions of dollars in advertising.

I have a digital publishing and design graphics magazine from 2000.  3 Megapixels cameras were the next big thing.  Now they'll shoot the same photo at 12 megapixels, and complain they don't have enough ram in Photoshop to open it .

Well not updating your computer for 10 years will bring up these sorts of issues. Then again I'd expect that from someone determined to harangue anyone daring to step outside of their 80's timewarp.

In 1998, my school was using G3 imac with firewire to do all that shit-with about a tenth of the hardware specs.

ITT: stefcep2 pulls more numbers out of his backside.

You only think we've come a long way..

And patronises anyone who dares to disagree with him.

Also LOL@ your single semester of programming experience.

[the_leander]

It's just a jump to the left!

AND THEN A STEP TO THE RIGHT!

Damn you sir, damn you straight to hell - I can't get that damn song out of my head now! :lol:

His textbook of choice:

:laughing: