Why Apple and Folly Go Hand-in-Glove

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Why not compare the iPod to other mp3 players, zipdrives, or other devices with similar technology?

It's a joke!


[edit on 05/5/15 by GradyPhilpott]

Ah lol. I'm glad you weren't serious. It's hard to get that feeling on such emotionless mediums as the internet.

Apple has shipped new Macs with Tiger installed and hardware upgrades that are enough to make me think twice. This one in particular:

reviews.cnet.com...

Anyone who wants to argue whether M$ Windows or Apple's OS is better needs to understand what OS X is. First, it is NOT the crappy OS it used to be. OS X is primarily based on Unix (FreeBSD) which they code named Darwin. It's simply fantastic...and open source. You can download the source code for OS X (Darwin), Quicktime Streaming Server, and other open source software Apple uses here:

developer.apple.com...

Unix is far superior for networking, hands down. Unix was developed from the get go that way, whereas Windows was not...in fact the backbone of the internet itself is Unix. Everything about Mac OS X, including the OS itself, is open source (free). Microsoft's Windows is not only closed to the public, it may become subscription based

Now I used to be all about Windows, but that's only because I didnt understand what my options were growing up. I'm sure it was specifically engineered that way. As a kid (actually until not that long ago) I viewed Macintosh as absolute crap. Why? I purely based my opinion on the experience I had with Mac OS in a school setting! Of course it was crap. The computers, regardless of OS or hardware, are never optimized in a k-12 setting. However, that is how myself and the good majority of the people I know have been exposed to Mac OS

As for Unix and Linux. I think the majority of our culture, *until properly educated*, view them as a hacker's dream and a user's nightmare.

In a nutshell I think the vast majority of Windows users just dont understand their options; they don't realize Mac OS X and Linux variants match Windows in performance and ease of use. And believe me they DO! I would certainly agrue Unix exceeds in performance.

Besides Mac is pretty:




Lucid Lunacy
Ex-Windows user
Linux System Administrator

[edit on 063131p://19u33 by Lucid Lunacy]

I've used UNIX quite a few times before, though admittedly only from the non-GUI version my father uses for work purposes and found it quite powerful. Dos like. I rather miss DOS. In anycase, this has nothing to do with my question... What would one do if you wanted to play a large number of games on said systems? How many are compatible?

Strange as I know a lot about computers but games on anything other than a microsoft run machine happens to be one of the areas I'm lacking in!

There are Linux Emulators that can mimic a Windows environment without the hassle of actually having a Windows machine. It's called Mime I think. You should be able to play most games with that utility if memory serves me correctly(my buddy uses it, been a while since i've been there)

But will that not slow the computer down? Running a high end 3D game is rather demanding, I can't imagine running through such an emulator would be good for performance...

Originally posted by Slashpepper
But will that not slow the computer down? Running a high end 3D game is rather demanding, I can't imagine running through such an emulator would be good for performance...

Well it may not play the bleeding edge in games, it's continually getting patched and Support for Linux amoung GOOD game companies is growing as Linux grows. It didn't slow my buddies comp down, but then again he has an Overclocked Goliath of a machine with Liquid cooling and all that crap. Remember I'm not speaking from experience just what I remember.

Apple makes quality machines, and from what I understand, they are the platform of choice for visual artists and movie editors. But the reason I'll never switch from PC's is the price factor. I like the freedom to build my own machine from scratch, and to upgrade components individually as they become obsolete, instead of having to buy a whole new box each time. I remember when Apple experimented with open hardware licensing, a friend of mine still has a "StarMac," a generic G3 if I recall, but it didn't last due to Apple relying on its hardware sales, at the time, more than software/ipod sales. Also, Macs just can't compete (yet) in the gaming field.

By the way, speaking of casettes, anyone seen this cool little addon:







Now you can have the best of both worlds!

-koji K.

[edit on 19-5-2005 by koji_K]

[edit on 19-5-2005 by koji_K]

Even though I've never built a computer and I quite possibly will never do so, I like PCs because I know that if push came to shove, I could swap out a component if one goes bad and upgrading memory is something almost everyone can do. I like the fact that if I want a bigger monitor, I just have to go buy one and plug it in.

If I want better speakers, it's the same thing--mice, keyboards, you name it, the variations are as vast as your imagination, the market and your bank account. Apple could do the same thing if it wanted to, but no. If Apple wanted it, you could run a Mac OS on your PC, but no. Apple doesn't want it that way. They want to control all factors and make you pay a premium for it. The Mac Mini opens the door, but you have a sealed box and limited flexibilty.

People often complain about Microsoft and Bill Gates and their monopolistic habits, but if Jobs and Apple were the only game in town, there would be a lot fewer choices for consumers and I don't think that's a good thing.

[edit on 05/5/19 by GradyPhilpott]

Being able to build your own machine from scratch is one of the few advantages the PC world has over the Mac. I've only done one, and I intend to build at least a few more for clients as a paid project but also for my own personal use, mainly as a SETI/music/movie house. 300 bucks isn't much to pay for some of the things you can get, especially if you specialize.