p.2 #1 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
And to make matters worse for your decision, CS4 has been announced..... It will be a 64 bit application, Windows version first, and Mac version later on
p.2 #3 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
So a question for the Mac people.
I am looking at getting a MacBook but looking at the specs:
2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x1GB
160GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Keyboard/Mac OS - U.S. English
AirPort Extreme Card & Bluetooth
I am wondering where is the video card (usually see NVIDIA or similar listed in the comparable PC world) and do I really need it? I don't do gaming but want to know about the speed for photo editing etc.
p.2 #4 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
If its a basic macbook, it doesn't have a video card. It uses Intel's GMA x3100 IGP chipset. If its a pro, then it is an older model (the new ones come with a 200gb hard drive minimum) and has a Nvidia 8600GT video card.
p.2 #5 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
As Andre said up front, it's personal preference. And let's face it guys, regardless of which one is faster the differences are minor and are unlikely to be noticed for most applications we would be using.
I use a PC desktop and a MacBook Pro, so I've had a little experience with both systems. At this point I'd prefer the Mac. As a friend of mine pointed out to me yesterday, Mac simply does things right. Yeah, they cost more - quite a bit more in some cases - but for top of the line laptops there isn't really that much difference. The Dell laptop I was looking at was virtually identical in price to the Mac laptop I bought when equally spec'd. (That was by my specs, not someone else's by the way.)
With the problems I'm having with my PC at the moment, the Mac seems even more appealing to me, but there is that familiarity that is hard to get by with the PC (or Mac, if that is what you are used to.) Aside from the current crashes on Vista I'm dealing with, I actually like the OS. My Mac will crash at times (it hasn't happened in quite a while though) but it is a relatively unremarkable event, starting back up where I left off and even recovering virtually all of my documents as well.
Which is better? Neither, really. I prefer the Mac, Andre and Zachs prefer the PC. Both make great machines. With Windows machines I usually have more problems, but I build them myself and keep adding stuff until they break. Yeah, probably just like all the other people bashing the PC. Since the Mac is a bit proprietary, you just don't have as many of those problems. But you pay for it in the wallet big time. I'm willing to do that for the peace of mind of having something work right, while others are not. For me, the Mac is the best choice, at least for my laptop. I surely don't try to sway anyone to that, other than to say that if you want to pay the price Apple does seem to reward its customers with an excellent product. But I've seen and had some great Windows machines too, and spent a lot less money on them in desktops. Both are tools that can do the job right.
That said, I ask this question: If I am a fanboy, which system is that for?
p.2 #6 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
Taylor Barrett wrote:
If its a basic macbook, it doesn't have a video card. It uses Intel's GMA x3100 IGP chipset. If its a pro, then it is an older model (the new ones come with a 200gb hard drive minimum) and has a Nvidia 8600GT video card.
Thanks. It is the new MacBook (middle of the range of them). It seems to be build in (the chip) and use memory from the RAM. So far what I could find by searching it doesn't seem to be a problem with photo editing but may have an impact with gaming, though real stats seemed elusive.
Btw, it seems that when I spec the same stat for a PC laptop from Dell or HP the price is almost similar (before any programs are added). Gotta go play in a store.
p.2 #8 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
the shape of things to come if the Mac ever reaches critical mass. http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20080327/tc_infoworld/96676
basic rules to the hack: use only what was supplied with the OS
2 minutes from start to finish fully owned thanks to the "superior" safari browser. the previous year it was through QT but that took a little longer
it took to the 3rd day and a relaxation of the rules to finally get through vista. hacked through adobe flash (flash is an add in)
the linux box prevailed because there is no real wide spread software available that the entire community uses.
in reality there is no security
you all better hope that macs don't sell that well because thats the only thing thats keeping you "safe" with their product.
p.2 #9 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
sjms wrote:
the shape of things to come if the Mac ever reaches critical mass. http://news.yahoo.com/s/infoworld/20080327/tc_infoworld/96676
basic rules to the hack: use only what was supplied with the OS
2 minutes from start to finish fully owned thanks to the "superior" safari browser. the previous year it was through QT but that took a little longer
it took to the 3rd day and a relaxation of the rules to finally get through vista. hacked through adobe flash (flash is an add in)
the linux box prevailed because there is no real wide spread software available that the entire community uses.
in reality there is no security
you all better hope that macs don't sell that well because thats the only thing thats keeping you "safe" with their product.
You are absolutely correct. Its unbelievable how many people buy into Apple's hype that their products are more secure. Just take a look at how fast the iPhone was hacked.
p.2 #10 · Quad Extreme with Vista 64 or Mac with dual Quads???
I don't think it's so much of an issue of people "buying the hype" that the Mac is more is more secure but the fact that (presently) the Mac OS has FAR fewer virus/security threats to worry about. Of course, this has a great deal to do with market penetration, but I don't see that changing in a significant way any time soon.
If a hacker set's their sights on the Mac platform, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that they'll succeed.
