Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mac Rants

Posted by Hemos on from the it's-gonna-get-toasty dept.

There's a piece by Scott Wasson regarding the claims of Apple, of late, and his...feelings on it. It's a pretty ranty piece, as he says in the beginning, but it's a good discussion starting piece - even tho' I disagree with him to a degree.

4 of 501 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Therein lies the dilemna by balls001 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my case, it has to do with what I do with computers.. Being that I develop web applications, I'd typically have a Linux box, which I do my development on, a Windows box, mostly for testing browsers, and a Mac box, for Photoshop and the like.. Admittedly, I could use Photoshop in Windows, but it's a matter of preference. Additionally, I do DV in my spare time, so Firewire is a must. And then there's the problem of portability.. I can't be carrying 3 machines around with me all the time, laptop or not, and reducing it to 2 by using VMWare is not something I want to do.

    So, with all those things in mind, the perfect platform for me ends up being MacOS X. I get to use all the unix tools I'm used to (in a better GUI), I have IE, Netscape and Mozilla all in the same box, and I have Photoshop and all my DV tools. Throw that into a tiny notebook (the iBook) along with Airport, and I have a pretty kick-ass all-in-one solution.

    The value of a computer depends on an individual's needs.. It just so happens that a typical user can get everything he or she wants in a cheap PC (albeit less aesthetically pleasing), for less than your average Mac.

  2. Quoting John Carmack himself by jfedor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'll be right there trumpeting it when I get a Mac that runs my tests faster than any x86 hardware, but it hasn't happened yet.
    -- John Carmack (2001-06-04)

    -jfedor
  3. Not too off... by Mumbly_Joe · · Score: 5, Interesting
    We write video games for PCs and Macs...

    The Mac Team's machines run our game noticably slower than the guys running hard-hitting Athlons, but I have a (dual) 800Mhz P3, and the G4 450's seem to keep pace with it reasonably on our game builds.

    One thing I will say it this: the Mac GUI feels faster to me than the Explorer Shell on Win2K...

  4. Therein lies the dilemna by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The rant lays out a good question, then. What do you use to gauge value if not Photoshop benchmarks and CPU MHz?

    My first intuitive guess would have to be dollars, but then people have the unfortunate habit of trying to get the absolute damn cheapest product out there, which does nothing for quality and performance.

    We would need a value per dollar metric to compare systems, then. What value?

    Features? That gets hard to compare, as different people value different options, and some people don't even know what features they value until they grow into the system.

    Then there is the hard to even see metric, quality . Fit, finish, durability, ease of use, etc. Short of using a system for a couple of days, most laptops/PCs are superficially the same, until you need to open the box, swap video cards, add a new hard drive, etc.

    Performance? At least you can use time as a measure, but what would you be measuring with time? Photoshop? Office? It would be twisted, but how about comparing a Windows benchmark running under Virtual PC vs a Windows benchmark on a Windows machine? Given that the virtualization would take a performance hit, you could apply some scalar or multiplier to try to normalize the scores.

    I dunno. I know I bought a Mac because it looked good and felt good, and that has no bearing on MHz or performance.

    --

    GPL Deconstructed