PC v Mac

Hmmm, a place to debate computers. What's one of the biggest debate in technology at the moment?

Thats right... Are you a mac or a pc? And why?

PC > Mac

End of discussion.

Im a PC, but really I sit on the fence on this one. PC's are the best technologically, but Mac OS is the best OS

malta_1990 wrote:PC > Mac

End of discussion.

Dont be boring malta

Mac's better, but I a use a pc

ever heard of a Mac gamer? l0o0o0l =p pc for the win for games=p

Alex Shiell wrote:Im a PC, but really I sit on the fence on this one. PC's are the best technologically, but Mac OS is the best OS

huhwhat.

Its only good because they only need to make it to work on very small variations in hardware. Windows on the other hand is made to work on anything going; thus stability differences (Although when I installed OS X on this PC, it crashed a metric fuckton).

OS X is more idiot friendly; although Vista is very close to that level of foolproofness.

blahblahblah

Vista sucks, OS X sucks, XP 4 lyf.

Glorious Failure wrote:

Alex Shiell wrote:Im a PC, but really I sit on the fence on this one. PC's are the best technologically, but Mac OS is the best OS

huhwhat.

Its only good because they only need to make it to work on very small variations in hardware. Windows on the other hand is made to work on anything going; thus stability differences (Although when I installed OS X on this PC, it crashed a metric fuckton).

OS X is more idiot friendly; although Vista is very close to that level of foolproofness.

blahblahblah

Vista sucks, OS X sucks, XP 4 lyf.

windows doesn't work on anything at all, linux can be installed on a toaster!!!!! and windows is idiot freindly fullstop that's all it's good for being idiot friendly oh and the vast majority of games can be run in linux through wine, oh and if we're talking about hardware then build your own, if laptop get an asus with linux installed

rastari wrote:linux can be installed on a toaster

what about an electric whisk?

Linux is about as user friendly as a sword with no handle; I've had no end of problems with it, and theres no way in hell I'm going to spend many, many hours setting it up and leaning it, just to do exactly what I can do in XP; In some cases, to a lesser ability in Linux.

Also, last I checked, Linux didn't like ATi cards much, so I doubt a toaster would be a suitable vehicle for a linux machine.

depends on what distro there are specific ones for such a purpose and linux has improved in the user freindly department and you can do a hell of a lot more in linux than in windows, it a hell of a lot more secure for a start and there's the fact that you can modify it as much as you like even make your own distro you could make one for electric wisks if you wanted oh and that's without getting into the morality thing

Why has no else noticed that macs are PCs, no one else stopped for a second to remember that PC stands for personal computer? People these days.

John Forseti wrote:Why has no else noticed that macs are PCs, no one else stopped for a second to remember that PC stands for personal computer? People these days.

lolololol...no, actually, the windows operating system bought the rights to the word 'PC'...it was an interesting trial.
Also, i use a PC, and dual-boot...

Mac all the way.

Vista is a very powerful OS. Once you work it in it's far better than XP.

Currently I'm using a Mac though, I have to, the motherboard on my laptop has failed.

um not too be argumentative or anything but well, far better than xp doesn't say much, windows has sucked since 95

I'm sorry good Sir, but you appear to be forgetting about the sublime OS that was '98.

Vista is the best thing to come since 98SE. I've never had a crash or a fault with it nor have many people. ME was a god awful disaster.

PC for me right now, however Macs are getting stronger and stronger, I mainly use my machine(s) for compiling and running services.

Wrote my own OS once, never got anywhere good with it though, it did boot a computer

I think XP is one of the most stable operating systems Microsoft have produced, I have not yet had a chance to test Vista to the degree I'd like though.

Then again there are different systems for different uses.

// Json

98 was very good but i demand a lot out of a os and vista just doesn't cut it, it was released about 6 months too early is far too big and slow, has some serious security issues doesn't really innovate in anyway and microsoft are still sticking by direct x for some god awful reason

Vista isn't big and slow. Computers have moved on, operating systems should move on too.

RAM caching is a new feature of Vista. If it isn't being used, why let it go to waste?

From my point of view, for purely day to day use XP=Vista. There is no advantage to using vista over using XP. Windows 7 should be the first truly major change to the windows OS since 95.

wazcaster wrote:From my point of view, for purely day to day use XP=Vista. There is no advantage to using vista over using XP. Windows 7 should be the first truly major change to the windows OS since 95.

I'd generally agree with that. While Vista is an overall improvement on XP, unless you are upgrading your PC there is no specific need to upgrade.

Teh User wrote:Vista is the best thing to come since 98SE. I've never had a crash or a fault with it nor have many people. ME was a god awful disaster.

I installed wireless drivers on Vista once.

Its more painful than installing them on a hackintosh, of a linux install.

IT BOOTED EVERY TIME TO A BLUE SCREEN. TOOK ME HOURS TO FIX. HOURS. I was most displeased.

And RAM caching is a feature I don't want. =[

Also, why does Vista come on laptops? 90% of laptops cannot handle Vista properly, its just so slow. ;_;

I just got a new laptop for my birthday... with vista on it

vista sucks, I want to change back to xp as soon as possible.