 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Platforms PCXboxPlayStationNintendoGames ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games |
Game Forum / Nintendo / GameCube / September 2003Looks like Apple wins again! Eat that simps!!
http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are these silly people going to give up their crusade? > http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ > > Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are > these silly people going to give up their crusade? They's gonna need all new 64 - bit software for this puppy to live up to its promise. News.com (CNET) also points out that by the time they actually get the G5 to market in reasonable numbers, Intel or AMD may have taken the ol' speed title back again, or at least the price/performance title. Most Mac common taters that I have read, are taking this announcement with 2^(n!-1) grains o' salt, wherein n approacheth infinity, and beyond. > http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ > > Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are these > silly people going to give up their crusade? who cares? that thing will be old and replaced in months. > http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ > > Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are these > silly people going to give up their crusade? Most people with macs run virtual pc, or vmware so they can still use Windows and apps. > Most people with macs run virtual pc, or vmware so they can still use > Windows and apps. Yes, what morons. Why not just save the money and buy a PC? I mean, Adobe left Mac for PC as their primary dev target. That should be a sign to the tards. In alt.games.video.nintendo.gamecube, "Someone Else" <doesitreallymatter@hu.com> wasted keystrokes on the following: >> Most people with macs run virtual pc, or vmware so they can still use >> Windows and apps. > >Yes, what morons. Why not just save the money and buy a PC? I mean, Adobe >left Mac for PC as their primary dev target. That should be a sign to the >tards. Just for once I wholeheartedly agree with you. When will people learn that form-over-function is just plain wrong, and not worth extra money? "A floppy drive looks ugly, so let's just remove it".. "Mousebuttons? That would spoil the design of our mice! Let's just make them tiny and awkwardly round shaped. It doesn't matter that it cramps your hands or even causes RSI".. "We don't want those nasty eject buttons on our cd drives, they just don't look good".. They may have been ahead of their time once.. but right now Windows XP is seeing OSX getting smaller in its rearview mirror.  SignatureRemove internal organs to send me spam. But why bother? I don't check this account anyway. The definition of TROLL is applied when someone in a newsgroup posts a topic that is akin to a fishing lure dragging on the bottom of a dank pond or lake. The trouble is, that anything that bites on that lure is typically a nasty, foul smelling bottom feeder that doesn't have the charm, charisma, strength, wit, or appearance to swim near the breakers on high. In this analogy, anyone who posted a comment regarding Apple in a negative or "lesser than" light is suffering from their own complete ignorance and lives by the wit of their own opinion. Terribly sad, too, as an owner of a Mac G4 and a PC - and quite happy with both - that this kind of nyah-nyah behavior still goes on even years after the whole Windows vs. Mac debate proved to be moot and silly. For the original poster, please - at LEAST troll this kind of irrelevant crap elsewhere, like in the alt.pc.rules.the.world newsgroup. They may care. > http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac-G5/ > > Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are these > silly people going to give up their crusade? > In this analogy, anyone who posted a comment regarding Apple in > a negative or "lesser than" light is suffering from their own complete > ignorance and lives by the wit of their own opinion. Right... because we all know that Apple is not "lesser than"... If you're going to respond, at least give a reasoned explanation as to why you think it's as good or better. Typical. > > In this analogy, anyone who posted a comment regarding Apple in > > a negative or "lesser than" light is suffering from their own complete [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > If you're going to respond, at least give a reasoned explanation as to why > you think it's as good or better. Typical. One word for you, dolt: "Duh!" That was the point of my post, which three cornered people like you apparently can't grasp hold of. Neither platform/machine is better. If you are going to respond to "someone else's" response, at least read the entire thread from start to finish, not just the bottom. Too typical. but that is where you are wrong. PC is far superior to mac on almost all levels. you want to know why. Just open your wallet and you will have a visual aid as to the answer. Money is king. period. money trumps everything else in the consumer market. mac is 3% of the market and PC is 96% of the market because they are AFFORDABLE. and not just a little affordable but on a level playing field (equal top line mac to equal top line pc) the mac is on average FIVE TIMES as costly as a PC. I can build an ENTIRE PC for the price of the Mac G4 Processor alone. That is apple's one true failing. they can not or CHOOSE not to compete on the PRICE battle and therfore they will always be the loser in these discussions. their hardware is fine (although quite a bit on the underpeforming side) and their software now that they have dumped the apple OS is fine as well. its their price that kills them every time. I can spend $700 or $3000 dollars. the decision for 96% of the populace is a no brainer. Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > > > In this analogy, anyone who posted a comment regarding Apple in > > > a negative or "lesser than" light is suffering from their own complete [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If you are going to respond to "someone else's" response, at least > read the entire thread from start to finish, not just the bottom. Too typical. > but that is where you are wrong. > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > I can spend $700 or $3000 dollars. the decision for 96% of the populace is a > no brainer. Yup, that's why 96% of the population drive Honda Civics and their ilk. Porsche, Ferrari, Lotus et al are happy with their 4% market share...and their owners are happy with their cars. Apple is more than just an expensive PC. It is a 'luxury PC'. If you think a modded Honda civic is just as good as a Boxster because they've got the same acceleration or something... then go nuts, enjoy your civic. But don't fear for Porsche, or Apple. The availability of cheap & fast Hondas and PCs isn't ever going to ruin them. Some people value the styling, or the silence, and all the other details that make Macs different. Others enjoy not bowing to Microsoft. So what if its only a 4% market share... they're making a profit. > > but that is where you are wrong. > > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > So what if its only a 4% market share... they're making a profit. Not taking side but just wanted to share a few funnies. http://www.ancientspear.com/mac.wmv http://www.wiredvideo.com/clips/av2/applegamer.wmv Ahh but when I pay $400,000 for a ferarri I get a $400,000 car. I get BEST OF absolutel everything. I get INSANE handling and power. HAND Craftmanship and custom tailoring. I GET $400,000 worth. Ferrari would NOT be so happy or sucessful if they sold Honda Civics with a cheap spiffy shell that could outperform a Normal Civic on NO levels. do you SEE the difference. Apple put out PC Equal or Inferior Hardware for a Ferarri price. No wonder you apple guys fight that apples are better. you have to justify that $3,000 price tag. If I paid for a $400,000 SPorts car and got a $10,000 coupe with a shiny shell I would be quite pissed off. a Ferarri will OUTPEFORM a Civic on EVERY SINGLE IMAGINABLE LEVEL except Fuel Economy and Cost. A mac Not only can not outperform a PC but it usually UNDERPERFORMS a PC. do you not get it. THAT IS WHY IT ANNOYS ME SO MUCH. Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > > but that is where you are wrong. > > [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > So what if its only a 4% market share... they're making a profit. > Ahh but when I pay $400,000 for a ferarri I get a $400,000 car. Yes, but give me a Chevelle or Charger and the other $390,000 to put into it... now that would be heaven! > PC is far superior to mac on almost all levels. Bah. The 'whose better' can go on forever as their are too many examples to argue. To put it simply, no one platform dominates everything. > you want to know why. Just open your wallet and you will have a visual aid > as to the answer. > > Money is king. period. money trumps everything else in the consumer market. Time is money. The best example is the digital video editing, which is very well done on the Mac platform. > mac is 3% of the market and PC is 96% of the market because they are > AFFORDABLE. and not just a little affordable but on a level playing field > (equal top line mac to equal top line pc) the mac is on average FIVE TIMES > as costly as a PC. Actually they're in the same ball park. The closest competitors to the G5's are AMD Opterons and they're priced about the same with similar hardware and for about the same performance. > I can build an ENTIRE PC for the price of the Mac G4 Processor alone. Doubtful. > That is apple's one true failing. they can not or CHOOSE not to compete on > the PRICE battle and therfore they will always be the loser in these > discussions. Compare it with price/performance. The PC side should be very familiar with the idea as they've debated it to no end with AMD and Intel. > their hardware is fine (although quite a bit on the underpeforming side) and > their software now that they have dumped the apple OS is fine as well. its > their price that kills them every time. The G4 never had the AMD/Intel competition to drive processor performance sky ward nor the prices into the dirt. Performance of the G4 had the initial moment on top and then never took off. Anyway, the G4's are history as Apple has started moving towards G5's. The performance gap no longer exists. The price gap no longer exists. > I can spend $700 or $3000 dollars. the decision for 96% of the populace is a > no brainer. For $3000 you'd get a nice dual G5, whose only competition performance wise are dual Opteron/Xeon systems at the moment for about the same price. > For $3000 you'd get a nice dual G5, whose only competition performance > wise are dual Opteron/Xeon systems at the moment for about the same price. But aren't PCs more upgradable than Macs? Also there are more software (and hardware too) available for PCs. I had a mac, but am now using a PC. One of the main reasons I chose a PC when I upgraded up computer is because of that. Most of the software and hardware you see out there are made to be compatable with PCs, not Macs. <=[BC]= > > For $3000 you'd get a nice dual G5, whose only competition performance > > wise are dual Opteron/Xeon systems at the moment for about the same price. > > But aren't PCs more upgradable than Macs? Yes and no. It just depends on the Mac (and the PC its being compared to). I will say this: older Macs are generally more expandible than newer machines. Owners of the DayStar Genesis machines know what I mean. > Also there are more software (and > hardware too) available for PCs. I had a mac, but am now using a PC. One > of the main reasons I chose a PC when I upgraded up computer is because of > that. Most of the software and hardware you see out there are made to be > compatable with PCs, not Macs. This is indeed true and can be cited as a strength for the Windows platform. I wouldn't go as far to say its a critical weakness for the Mac platform. Software can be found on either platform to get a job done. Since Apple's has been adopting PC stand ports, the amount of hardware that will work on a Mac has been increasing. For example, most USB mice and keyboards for fine in a Mac. > > For $3000 you'd get a nice dual G5, whose only competition performance > > wise are dual Opteron/Xeon systems at the moment for about the same price. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that. Most of the software and hardware you see out there are made to be > compatable with PCs, not Macs. There are certainly more companies who produce software and hardwarde for PCs, becaues there obviously way more PCs than Macs. Is that a good thing? And is there any general application, peripherphal, or service available for a PC that isn't available for a Mac. It's easier to maintain integratability and compatability when the number of producers and developers is smaller. I have found that peripherals like cards and drives are extremely easy to add to a Mac, much more so than a PC. But that is merely my personal experience... In any event, just because more people make peripherals for PCs doesn't really make them more upgradeable, but the competetion certainly makes them cheaper. Of course, the flip side of tht is that you may just get what you pay for. This makes me curious. They (hardware) have the SAME physical conection and same Power requirements. how exactly is it easier to install in a mac ? hard drive. PC Open case. Plug ribbon cable into hard drive. Plug Power Cable into hard drive. Close case Boot up enjoy new hard drive. I assume the procedure is the same on the mac ? PCI Card. Open case. Slide into slot close case. Boot up and either windows will install automatically you doing nothing but clicking yes install my new gadget or it will ask for the CD and then the same thing happens. I assume this process is the same on the mac ? How exactly is one easier than the other. I see it the opposite. if you install in mac you need to be "aware" of whether it is "mac" compatible or not. but that is market share not design flaw so I will ignore that and assume its not an issue. how is one easier in your experience ? Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > I have found that peripherals like cards and drives are extremely easy to > add to a Mac, much more so than a PC. But that is merely my personal [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > cheaper. Of course, the flip side of tht is that you may just get what you > pay for. well this I can say is not a "flaw" in the mac hardware. this is simple economics. IE 95% pc 3-4% mac. says it all. most do not make hardware etc.. for mac since the market is simply too small for the smaller companies to justify. the bigger companies can out of "convenience" for mac since they make enough money on the PC side to be able to afford to make everybody happy. Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > > For $3000 you'd get a nice dual G5, whose only competition performance > > wise are dual Opteron/Xeon systems at the moment for about the same price. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > <=[BC]= Personally I think OSX is Wonderful Very nice OS (not apple either) its UNIX based. Mac OS sucked so bad even apple abandoned it. My problem is with their hardware. Specifically their PRICES. they cost about 5 times more than they should hence why they have 3% of the market. The day apple mac OSx work on normal PC hardware 2 things will happen. 1 mac will suddenly have an OS just as holey and security problem ridden and crash prone as microsoft does as they try to make it work with nearly infinite hardware set with a nearly infinite quality range. 2nd if they work that out even half as well as microsoft has they will CRUSH microsoft. but they are greedy so it will never happen. Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > The definition of TROLL is applied when someone in a newsgroup > posts a topic that is akin to a fishing lure dragging on the bottom of [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Oh, I want to go live in a hut because houses are so gay. When are these > > silly people going to give up their crusade? > Personally I think OSX is Wonderful Very nice OS (not apple either) its UNIX > based. Hah. Well, it was written b apple coders, for the apple platform, and it cant be run on any other hardware platform, so it's pretty safe to say that it is apple based. > Mac OS sucked so bad even apple abandoned it. > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > these > > > silly people going to give up their crusade? nah. it unix MODIFIED by apple coders. the distinction is important. they simple "ported" it (not sure if that is the right word) for their specific hardware. IE Unix with an Apple shell. Chris Taylor http://www.nerys.com/ > > Personally I think OSX is Wonderful Very nice OS (not apple either) its > UNIX [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > these > > > > silly people going to give up their crusade? |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.