Windows is buggy and slow lets buy a Mac

[pyrre]

And yet, the machine that sells the most games is the lowly wii and DS, with crap graphics.
 
For most normal users, "pc game" means little silly flash games. The developers have mostly seen the writing on the wall. Corporations don't care about anecdotal evidence. They care about who buys the product. Why does it take a (for the time) cutting edge game like Crysis 4 months to sell a million copies, when a Mario game on a glorified gamecube can do exceed 2 million in its first month?
 

Excuse me, but the most played game in the world right now is "pet society" on facebook. With just over 60 million users.
And it is flash based....

[pyrre]

My point was that I don't want to be bothered by the OS while I'm working.
moto

 
What exactly do you mean by being bothered by the OS....?
 
I have used XP for quite some time now.
Win2K and 98SE before that.
But i have never "been bothered" by those OS.
In my experience they have done what i wanted them to do...
 
I have worked on one mac in my life.
A powermac G4 1.8GHz, 768ram. and an Nvidia videocard. (dont remember the version) and OS x, when os x was released....
 
In my hones oppinion i have never worked with a slower computer in my life. The OS was very slow to respond. and video editing was a PITA...
Using the final cut software...
For this reason, and price.... i will neve buy a mac for main computer.
 
My pc, at the same time was a P4 3.2GHz with 2GIG ram. and Nvidia gfx...
And of course win xp...
 
Using vegas video 4.0 i could do the same i could on the mac... at 1/3 of the price. including software license...

[skurk]

I have worked on one mac in my life.
A powermac G4 1.8GHz, 768ram. and an Nvidia videocard. (dont remember the version) and OS x, when os x was released....

Yes, OSX 10.0 and 10.1 was very slow.

In my hones oppinion i have never worked with a slower computer in my life. The OS was very slow to respond. and video editing was a PITA...
Using the final cut software...
For this reason, and price.... i will neve buy a mac for main computer.

Well, to be fair, that was proably 10 years ago.  What if I said "I didn't like Windows 2000, so I will never buy a PC for main computer", what would you say?

[ElPolloDiabl]

Windows 7 added hardware acceleration to the gui. I don't think Mac has.

[the_leander]

Windows 7 added hardware acceleration to the gui. I don't think Mac has.

OSX has had 3D compositing since 10.2 courtesy of Quartz Extreme.

[jj]

Cant be bothered to read  this thread but just thought would say, drop both and go with ubuntu

[scuzzb494]

Windows just gets worse and worse and worse. In all honesty the problem lies in trying to bolt on security to an operating system that ignored it from the get go. XP opened the port without security then bolted the Security Patch to it later. Since then Microsoft have been preoccupied with security to the extreme that it now seriously interferes with the use of the computer.

Take 'Find Files Folder' on a Win98 machine that took a blink of an eye to scan a machine compared with say XP and the process just takes for eveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer. Same goes for changing sharing privileges  etc. Everytime Windows has to scroll a long file list, check a directory etc there is this security process that is instigated that slows things down. Talking to folk that have used Vista and 7 say the security hurdles are even more intense.... My XP machine is slower than my Win98 machine by a mile and this computer at work is a pain in the....

The Mac is fine but I really don`t like the interface. Sadly.

I am dead in the water with MS from XP cus I just wont sign up to a wholly internet dependant system. Sadly the PS3 is now also internet dependant to play games. A world gone mad....

Saying that I guess we are at the dawn of a new era post OS reliance and MS are doomed anyway when apps can simply run from a browser. Looking forward to that day.

scuzz

[skurk]

Cant be bothered to read  this thread but just thought would say, drop both and go with ubuntu

Yes, Linux, what a brilliant suggestion.

I started using Linux back in 1995, and kept that as my main OS until 2004 when I switched to OSX.

I recently got a new job where I had to use Linux (Ubuntu Karmic), and I must say I was very disappointed that Linux had not come any further when it comes to end-user experience.

First off, I had to install kernel sources and compile nv drivers to get the graphics card running.  That alone is a trivial task, but not something that belongs in a "desktop ready" environemnt.

Later I discovered that the audio kept disappearing, so I had to lsof to figure out which process that locked the sound.  For some reason, kpdf did that.  Killing the process unlocked the sound so I could play mp3's again.

I also had major problems getting the CPU scaling module to work, so I left it as-is, running at full speed.

The next day the updates were installed with a new kernel, so I had to recompile the graphics drivers all over again.

I eventually got it running, but dammit, I don't want to deal with this kind of crap just to use the OS.

None of this would ever happen on Mac (hell, not even on Windows) systems. I know it is unfair to blame the Linux name (which is a kernel) for this, but it is stuff like this that ruins the "Linux experience" for most people.

Sorry mate, but Linux just isn't ready for the desktop yet.  It's a brilliant server OS, though.

[KThunder]

can't be bothered to read your post...something about linux

just kidding linux is good. i hooked my micrsoft hating brother on in and now he only uses linux. mostly madrake. he hates apple too. linux can take some manhandling though.

to me they are all just operating systems i can do nothing with almost any os, i can install it and maintain it and make it pretty; but its not the os that creates. It's the person using the computer.
argueing os's is like argueing grades of gasoline. as long as it has the basics covered the os shouldnt make that much of a difference. people have created cool art and music on amigas, and others have produced crap on dual core monsters.

[Colani1200]

Yes, Linux, what a brilliant suggestion.

First off, I had to install kernel sources and compile nv drivers to get the graphics card running.

Eh? The NV driver is open source and comes preinstalled with Ubuntu. If you mean the proprietary NVIDIA, this one can be installed with restricted-manager.

Later I discovered that the audio kept disappearing, so I had to lsof to figure out which process that locked the sound.  For some reason, kpdf did that.

kpdf? So I assume you were using Kubuntu? Unfortunately, the KDE implementation from Ubuntu is rather poor. If you insist on KDE, better use a different distro (e.g. OpenSUSE). For Ubuntu, using the Gnome or XFCE flavor is the best choice.

I also had major problems getting the CPU scaling module to work, so I left it as-is, running at full speed.

This is supposed to work out of the box. Are you sure your CPU supports CPU scaling? If yes, check your BIOS settings. Performing a BIOS update might help aswell. If your BIOS is really broken, you may be out of luck.

The next day the updates were installed with a new kernel, so I had to recompile the graphics drivers all over again.

See above. Compiling stuff yourself or installing stuff without using the repositories will likely get you into trouble sooner or later.

[pyrre]

Yes, OSX 10.0 and 10.1 was very slow.



Well, to be fair, that was proably 10 years ago.  What if I said "I didn't like Windows 2000, so I will never buy a PC for main computer", what would you say?

I swapped for W2K in 2001. and for XP in 2004/2005
Only reason i swapped for 2k was  drivers were no longer written to 98se.
And again, lack of drivers were the reason to swap to XP. This time it was DirecX 9.... and games support.

-------------------------------------------------------

My first real encounter with mac was in 2005. and many people said that the mac i was about to use was a "state of the art" mac. and macs could not be better at that time... (apart form more ram)
And it was a os x... version unknown...

-------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough if you make your decision judged by the os you try...
It is the os you are supposed to work with.. no matter whats under the bonnet...
Win 2000 was far from the easiest os to learn.
And the transmission from 2K - Xp was harsh... i hated XP in the beginning.


---------------------------------------------------------------

As far as games go with mac....
I was playing WOW and EVEonline at that time... and at least wow worked on the mac. eve was said to work later on. but i don't know that....
Never tried wow on the mac though...

[pyrre]

Cant be bothered to read  this thread but just thought would say, drop both and go with ubuntu

I have ubuntu on my laptop. it is a great os. for linux, it is easy to use.
Works great for web, mail, facebook, etc....

But it sucks for gaming. Have tried it in my pc.
Getting games to work, specially new games ain't easy.
And when they work. it works at half the speed of windows, at half the GFX settings of windows.

[skurk]

See above. Compiling stuff yourself or installing stuff without using the repositories will likely get you into trouble sooner or later.

I ran Ubuntu Karmic but switched from Gnome->KDE.  And yes, I know CPU scaling works on this system (it ran Windows earlier)

But you missed the point - this kind of pinching, poking and tweaking shouldn't be necessary.

[Colani1200]

I ran Ubuntu Karmic but switched from Gnome->KDE.

On your running installation without a reinstall (Kubuntu)? I am surprised it worked at all.

And yes, I know CPU scaling works on this system (it ran Windows earlier)

Check the points I mentioned in my previous post.

But you missed the point - this kind of pinching, poking and tweaking shouldn't be necessary.

You missed the point aswell: Normally it isn't necessary.

[pyrre]

Take 'Find Files Folder' on a Win98 machine that took a blink of an eye to scan a machine compared with say XP and the process just takes for eveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeer.

How big was the disks at W98 times?
compared to disks today?
(i have 3tb in my computer....)
I cannot support that statement, i feel it quick and responsive. compared to the size of my disks, and the size of todays files...

Same goes for changing sharing privileges etc. Everytime Windows has to scroll a long file list, check a directory etc there is this security process that is instigated that slows things down.

What?
I use my pc as media server sharing my files on the network. Using an xBox (the first one) with XBMC as media center... I see no evidence of your statement. even browsing files shared on the network from another computer while i play movies on the tv is swift... And yet even copying files while watching movies on my TV....
I use "simple file sharing"... BTW....

And browsing a couple of thousand pictures in a folder is no problem, even on network.
Oh, i use windows commander as my main filemanager. (the most likelyhood to Dopus i could find)

My XP machine is slower than my Win98 machine by a mile and this computer at work is a pain in the...

What computer are you using?
Cpu, ram, videocard...+++?

I have an old P III 1.4 GHz with xp as media server....
gigabit Ethernet. no problems with it. (it has though 1.5 gig ram)

----------------------------------------

I do like how things are going.
Ubuntu linux... just need some driver developing.

And google os may be interesting...

[skurk]

On your running installation without a reinstall (Kubuntu)? I am surprised it worked at all.

No, simply "sudo apt-get install kde" (IIRC, and maybe a couple of others) and change the session upon graphical login.  No black magic involved.

You missed the point aswell: Normally it isn't necessary.

Hey, I'm just telling my experience from the year 2010.  This shouldn't happen, and yet somehow it did.