DOS Games Discussion

Gaming department isnt that strong and i agree with you there. I think when the macs go intel it will encourage gaming departments to make games as the porting process will be easier

Wally*Won_Kenobie wrote:Gaming department isnt that strong and i agree with you there. I think when the macs go intel it will encourage gaming departments to make games as the porting process will be easier

Wow.... just wow. Will you PLEASE stop making up information and hopeing that it's correct?

The gaming department is the fastest growing department in computers, and is also what brings in the most money. Todays gaming video cards are more complex and expensive than any other computer part. Its one of the largest hauls of money. Go look it up. Newest Processor: $800. Newest Graphics Card: $1200.

Wally*Won_Kenobie wrote:There is no such thing as a pentium 7 i know but i am refering to the G5 processor here.

2) IF you were to use floppy disks for backup up stuff well you are crazy.. Cds are more reliable if you get the right brand an all

AFIAK windows XP is just a beefed up version of 2000

Dogbreath: If i was to ever buy a packet of floppies again i would die.. Im sticking to USB memory. i would rather have 1 memory stick (128mb) to 88.8 floppy disks

Dramatic, eh?

Who needs 88 floppies? I need 2 for Windows boot disks, half a dozen for drivers, a few for small, older games. When it comes to things that take up very little room, they're perfect. When I needed to get my Pentium up and running it would not have happened without a floppy. The diagnostic software I ran on my old 1.2 gig HD was on a floppy (RIP little failing HD).

It's precisely the small amount of space they have that makes them useful. And without them a lot of older PC's would fast be rendered unusable (How to get my Pentium's CD ROM DOS drivers installed without a newer internet computer that had a floppy drive?).

But I'm getting the impression that with you, this isn't really about the practical uses of a floppy drive as a pissing contest where all that matters is size.

Sovi3t wrote:Who said anything about using floppies for backups? If you were to use it for backups, a good floppy will last you 20 years, a CD 30.

Just because you prefer to use a USB drive doesn't mean you are always able to use it. Many computers are still running W98 or lower... which means your USB drive will either not work at all, or you'll have to carry a drivers CD (...or floppy?) around with you.

Fixing computers requires you to have some floppies because the older computers won't boot up from a USB drive or CD.

Actually, I do believe that most floppy disc manufacturers only warranted their media for like uo to (10)Ten years. Really after that something called bit-rot starts to occur, well actually even sooner then that many times

As for manufacturers of both CD/DVD-R/RW media, well that's being warranted for something like 100+ years.

Now, let me clarify this point; I don't expect these companies to be around of course and even if they are, something new and better will come along before then and I'll just transition my data from the current optical media to the latest optical/solid-state or what ever blank/storage media comes along

Also, this talk about x86 PC's vs MAC is interesting however, you are all missing the one machine which IMHO was the best and set the GOLD STANDARD for micro's:

The AMIGA by Commodore Business Machines

Amiga i cant really remember but i am sure i used it in the primary school days.. Does it have Sticky Bear catching the balls on it?

With the mac you dont require a floppy disk to fix but however is optional.. You can use 1 floppy which boots up into the OS with no real limits excepting it is slow (Mac Os 7.5 lower) same with the Mac OS 8 up but hence you use the install CD which contains Repair tools and again boots to the GUI..

Alternatively, you can boot powerbooks (Laptops whatever) via SCSI disk mode which is rather powerful and allows you to mount the computer onto the other machines desktop via SCSI (Oldern times) Now since that method was so popular it is implemented across all macs and you can boot from firewire..

Kazer0: Mac video cards surely would fit with users gaming standards as they use aTi technology also hold a rather LARGE amount of video memory

Most PC users are still stuck with 32 bit addressing or they have 64 bit chips but really have no use for them as nothing is made for 64 bit these days..

The powermac G5 has a 64 bit processor and also runs on a *non beta* 64 bit OS and runs 64 bit apps if it must..


http://www.apple.com/powermac/ for the G5

and http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics for the graphics thats either a 128mb or 256 mb card that is built into the machine. Since Pcs only have flimsy 64mb intel extreme graphic built in and which M$ trys to make their own drivers for and stuffs the graphics up all together then you have a problem

Wally*Won_Kenobie wrote:Amiga i cant really remember but i am sure i used it in the primary school days.. Does it have Sticky Bear catching the balls on it?

With the mac you dont require a floppy disk to fix but however is optional.. You can use 1 floppy which boots up into the OS with no real limits excepting it is slow (Mac Os 7.5 lower) same with the Mac OS 8 up but hence you use the install CD which contains Repair tools and again boots to the GUI..

Alternatively, you can boot powerbooks (Laptops whatever) via SCSI disk mode which is rather powerful and allows you to mount the computer onto the other machines desktop via SCSI (Oldern times) Now since that method was so popular it is implemented across all macs and you can boot from firewire..

Kazer0: Mac video cards surely would fit with users gaming standards as they use aTi technology also hold a rather LARGE amount of video memory

Most PC users are still stuck with 32 bit addressing or they have 64 bit chips but really have no use for them as nothing is made for 64 bit these days..

The powermac G5 has a 64 bit processor and also runs on a *non beta* 64 bit OS and runs 64 bit apps if it must..


http://www.apple.com/powermac/ for the G5

and http://www.apple.com/powermac/graphics for the graphics thats either a 128mb or 256 mb card that is built into the machine. Since Pcs only have flimsy 64mb intel extreme graphic built in and which M$ trys to make their own drivers for and stuffs the graphics up all together then you have a problem

Ah ha ha, your a joke now. First off, I didnt appreciate having to go to your sources to find a 404, and searching for it myself to prove you wrong.

Your super duper power mac graphics: "Radeon 9650". This is their top of the line model? The 96xx series from ATi is 2 generations behind. And it is, in fact, a card inside the machine. For $2000, a machine with a Radeon 9650 isnt worth anything.

And comparing it to onboard graphics is humiliating. Any decent computer comes with a graphics card installed. And they still cost under $800. The latest graphics cards are all PC, and 2 generations ahead of Macintosh. Infact, 128mb and 256mb cards are getting old for PCs, the high end cards are now 512mb.

My video card in my computer right now is better than your top of the line Mac one, and I paid $10 for it. Low and behold my Radeon 9800Pro 128mb video card.

And you cant say that its so great with ATi, as nVidia is ahead of ATi at the moment with the most advanced technology, their 7800GTX 256mb video card.

Err none of those URLS 404 on me

One of the links works for me, but PowerMac Graphics cannot be found.

Wally*Won_Kenobie wrote:Err none of those URLS 404 on me

I have to agree with Wally on this one, I can get to both links using Maxthon.

I do however have to say that an ATi Radeon 92xx/96xx/97xx/98xx series graphics card is a decent one, albeit a generation behind and soon to be two, it's not really bleeding edge now is it

I prefer the Radeon X700 or X800 Pro graphics cards instead, these can be had for a decent price for sure. Why I purchased the X700 Pro at CompUSA in a retail box for $200.

Kazer0 wrote:
Floppys break easy, sure, but they are damn useful for small files like documents and pictures, as well as small programs for any computer science high school course, or a database or two from any computer buisness course. Almost all computers in schools have floppy drives for this purpose, and my courses even REQUIRED 2 or more floppy disks. No where in any school have I ever come across a CD burner that students could use. Wally, do not make up facts like that. Floppys are still incredibly useful in schools and at home for files like mentioned above. Moreso than a CD or DVD, even if it is rewritable. MACs removing Floppy drives was a horrid idea. I remember we had to stop using the computers in my grade school when we got iMacs. We couldnt save any documents, there was just no way to save them securly.

There was no way to securely save files on the iMac? Are you an idiot?

Since when do you have to store files on a floppy in order for them to be secure?

Kazer0 wrote:As per wally saying Backups on Floppy was a rediculous idea. Welcome to the year 2005 you ditz. You really think were that stupid? We know that backing up on CD is a better option. You dont need to make obvious points in the hope that it will make you seem smarter than you are. If you want to get technical, creating a backup partition is a better idea than using a CD. Look, you lose on that point too.

Welcome to reality, Kazer0! Backing up files on a "backup partition" is a stupid idea. It doesn't protect you from mechanical failure with the drive. For secure and reliable backups, you need to store copies offsite.

Yes, brainiac, you could copy your files to an external hard drive and move your external hard drive around from place to place... but, CDs or DVDs would be much better. Alternatively, backing up files to a remote server would be an even better idea. Although, the server would need to have backups as well.

Wally gets the points -- You get nothing.

Kazer0 wrote:Ah yes, my favorite comment yet. Wally's "A G5 IS SUPER LEET COMPARED TO A PENTIUM 7!!!!". Ha ha, wow. What, are you desperate for points to argue now? Why dont you look up the AMD X2 processor please. 64-bit dual core, which is more than a G5 can boast. Mind you, it does seem faster because Mac OSX (Which is still BSD/Linux, despite what you think) runs on lower resources than Windows. And if your precious Mac OSX is so great, why are Apple switching from IBM/Motorola processors (The makers of the G5/G4/PowerPC, etc) to Intel processors, and releasing Mac OSX x86 edition? Hum, seems the Macs are becoming PCs.

You really need to do your homework, Kazer0! Welcome to the year 2005 you ditz! Firstly, Motorola does not manufacture processors any longer. They sold off their semiconducter business to FreeScale. The PowerPC processors are manufactured by IBM and Freescale, and NOT by IBM/Motorola. So you lose points there too, Kazer0.

Secondly, the switch from PowerPC processors to x86 processors says nothing about how good or bad Mac OS X is. The reality is that Mac OS X runs faster on Intel chips than it does on PPC chips. Get your facts straight, dude!

Kazer0 wrote:And my last points an up point. It was said that arguing this was futule. Well know what? Guess who decides when it gets locked (or unlocked)? Thats right, I do. Last time I checked, I was the head moderator in Hardware back in the day, and still am.

Congratulations on the "head mod" job. Your folks must be quite proud of you. Quick, is that the President calling? Why yes it is, you're getting a medal! Lucky you! We're all just so jealous!

Kazer0 wrote:And yes Wally, despite what you may think, I do know more than you can imaging about Hardware (And software for that matter). I do not claim to know everything, or even a lot, but I know enough to know that almost every point you make is wrong.

Not so fast slick! Wally was right on several points and you were wrong on several points. Next time you wanna call somebody an idiot, look in the mirror!!!

Kazer0 wrote:Now im not saying Macs suck. In fact, they are stable machines, and do great photo/video editing. However, the world of gaming, processing, coding, and overall use belongs in the world of the PC.

Sorry Kazer0, you're wrong here too. The PC beats the Mac in the world of gaming, but that's it! The Mac is just as good as the PC, if not better than the PC, in virtually every other area of computing.

You're not quite as knowledgeable as you profess to be, slick!

Wally's Right wrote:

Kazer0 wrote:
Floppys break easy, sure, but they are damn useful for small files like documents and pictures, as well as small programs for any computer science high school course, or a database or two from any computer buisness course. Almost all computers in schools have floppy drives for this purpose, and my courses even REQUIRED 2 or more floppy disks. No where in any school have I ever come across a CD burner that students could use. Wally, do not make up facts like that. Floppys are still incredibly useful in schools and at home for files like mentioned above. Moreso than a CD or DVD, even if it is rewritable. MACs removing Floppy drives was a horrid idea. I remember we had to stop using the computers in my grade school when we got iMacs. We couldnt save any documents, there was just no way to save them securly.

There was no way to securely save files on the iMac? Are you an idiot?

Since when do you have to store files on a floppy in order for them to be secure?

I like how you said I was wrong, but didn't offer any alternative. Hum, so your saying that if I just saved it on the hard disk on a public computer, it would be secure because its a macintosh? Friend, a floppy is unbelivibly more reliable and secure on public computers verses hard drive saves.

Kazer0 wrote:As per wally saying Backups on Floppy was a rediculous idea. Welcome to the year 2005 you ditz. You really think were that stupid? We know that backing up on CD is a better option. You dont need to make obvious points in the hope that it will make you seem smarter than you are. If you want to get technical, creating a backup partition is a better idea than using a CD. Look, you lose on that point too.

Welcome to reality, Kazer0! Backing up files on a "backup partition" is a stupid idea. It doesn't protect you from mechanical failure with the drive. For secure and reliable backups, you need to store copies offsite.

Yes, brainiac, you could copy your files to an external hard drive and move your external hard drive around from place to place... but, CDs or DVDs would be much better. Alternatively, backing up files to a remote server would be an even better idea. Although, the server would need to have backups as well.

Wally gets the points -- You get nothing.

I said that backing up to a partition was a better idea, I never claimed it was the best. Backing up on a partition is a more secure idea than on a CD. CD's get scratched and cracked, hard drives dont. The chances of your hard disk failing are outnumbered by the chances of a CD being broken. Wally doesn't get any points either way you look at it. I personally would never back up 40gb onto 50 or so CDs.

Kazer0 wrote:Ah yes, my favorite comment yet. Wally's "A G5 IS SUPER LEET COMPARED TO A PENTIUM 7!!!!". Ha ha, wow. What, are you desperate for points to argue now? Why dont you look up the AMD X2 processor please. 64-bit dual core, which is more than a G5 can boast. Mind you, it does seem faster because Mac OSX (Which is still BSD/Linux, despite what you think) runs on lower resources than Windows. And if your precious Mac OSX is so great, why are Apple switching from IBM/Motorola processors (The makers of the G5/G4/PowerPC, etc) to Intel processors, and releasing Mac OSX x86 edition? Hum, seems the Macs are becoming PCs.

You really need to do your homework, Kazer0! Welcome to the year 2005 you ditz! Firstly, Motorola does not manufacture processors any longer. They sold off their semiconducter business to FreeScale. The PowerPC processors are manufactured by IBM and Freescale, and NOT by IBM/Motorola. So you lose points there too, Kazer0.

Secondly, the switch from PowerPC processors to x86 processors says nothing about how good or bad Mac OS X is. The reality is that Mac OS X runs faster on Intel chips than it does on PPC chips. Get your facts straight, dude!

Welcome to this topic. Please explain where I said OSX sucked? I never did. We are talking about Macintosh computers, mostly their hardware. Sorry, but go look up what your posting about. In fact, I said that OSX ran fast because they use less processor power than Windows, and I never said it would run faster or slower on intel chips.

Good job at finding a mistake that still doesnt prove my statement wrong. It doesn't matter wiether Motorola makes the processor anymore, the point was that macintosh switched to x86 based processors. I would have lost as many points in this argument if you had found a speling mistake and claimed that made me wrong.

Kazer0 wrote:And my last points an up point. It was said that arguing this was futule. Well know what? Guess who decides when it gets locked (or unlocked)? Thats right, I do. Last time I checked, I was the head moderator in Hardware back in the day, and still am.

Congratulations on the "head mod" job. Your folks must be quite proud of you. Quick, is that the President calling? Why yes it is, you're getting a medal! Lucky you! We're all just so jealous!

Excuse me? My point was that no one was going to lock this topic just because they were winning/losing the argument. Next time you feel like trying to insult me, think. I dont boast being a moderator in this community at all, in fact I choose not to have the moderator rank. I never say "Do what I command, I run the place", so don't even pretend that you know what your talking about.

Kazer0 wrote:And yes Wally, despite what you may think, I do know more than you can imaging about Hardware (And software for that matter). I do not claim to know everything, or even a lot, but I know enough to know that almost every point you make is wrong.

Not so fast slick! Wally was right on several points and you were wrong on several points. Next time you wanna call somebody an idiot, look in the mirror!!!

On any points that wally was right, I agreed. However, you have yet to show me any points.

Kazer0 wrote:Now im not saying Macs suck. In fact, they are stable machines, and do great photo/video editing. However, the world of gaming, processing, coding, and overall use belongs in the world of the PC.

Sorry Kazer0, you're wrong here too. The PC beats the Mac in the world of gaming, but that's it! The Mac is just as good as the PC, if not better than the PC, in virtually every other area of computing.

You're not quite as knowledgeable as you profess to be, slick!

Actually, PC excels in word processing, servers, software, hardware, functionality, customization, personalization, and business solutions more than Macs do. Like I said, the only thing they are ahead in is stability (Because they are hardware locked machines, and dont have to deal with a large amount of unique hardware configurations), and in photo/graphic/video editing.

I am also aware that you are most likely a member of this community, and one that has a grudge against me. If you want to remain secretive, please do so, I really don't care. But next time, please try and bring points that support the argument, rather than try and nitpick at small things that dont matter, and make points that we're just supposed to believe.

Kazer0 wrote:I like how you said I was wrong, but didn't offer any alternative. Hum, so your saying that if I just saved it on the hard disk on a public computer, it would be secure because its a macintosh? Friend, a floppy is unbelivibly more reliable and secure on public computers verses hard drive saves.

Gee, slick, you must have been working on some really Top Secret stuff in your grade school. National security work for the government, no doubt.

I don't know which iMac models your grade school had/has, but if your grade school had the early iMacs, they came equipped with InfraRed so that files could be transferred wirelessly to other devices like IR equipped noteboks or PDAs. Alternatively, a USB flash drive makes a great storage solution in lieu of floppy disks and/or CD/DVDs.

Of course, later models of iMac did include built-in SuperDrives that allowed the user to save files to CD. I suppose users could have also used the iMac's built-in Ethernet to store files securely on a remote machine. Possibly even a remote PC with a, ghasp, floppy drive.

Need I say more?

No, I probably don't, but I will... Ever heard of encryption, slick?

Kazer0 wrote:I said that backing up to a partition was a better idea, I never claimed it was the best. Backing up on a partition is a more secure idea than on a CD. CD's get scratched and cracked, hard drives dont. The chances of your hard disk failing are outnumbered by the chances of a CD being broken. Wally doesn't get any points either way you look at it. I personally would never back up 40gb onto 50 or so CDs.

Actually, backing up to a partition on the same physical drive that your orginal files are stored on, is not a better idea. It almost defeats the purpose of backing up the files in the first place.

Ideally, files should always be backed up on a separate physical drive or medium and copies should be stored offsite. Natural disasters or fire will not help preserve backup files that are stored onsite. CDs/DVDs are much more portable than hard drives, and DVDs can store much larger volume sizes than CDs. This is, after all, 2005, slick.

Kazer0 wrote:Welcome to this topic. Please explain where I said OSX sucked? I never did. We are talking about Macintosh computers, mostly their hardware. Sorry, but go look up what your posting about. In fact, I said that OSX ran fast because they use less processor power than Windows, and I never said it would run faster or slower on intel chips.

Uh, you said, "If your precious Mac OS X is so great, why..." is Apple switching processors... Well, slick, Apple is not switching processors because of problems with Mac OS X. I mean, your argument doesn't even make sense. You're suggesting that Apple is switching processors because their OS is not so great.

Sorry, slick, you're wrong.

Kazer0 wrote:Good job at finding a mistake that still doesnt prove my statement wrong. It doesn't matter wiether Motorola makes the processor anymore, the point was that macintosh switched to x86 based processors. I would have lost as many points in this argument if you had found a speling mistake and claimed that made me wrong.

Actually, slick, Apple hasn't switched to x86 based processors. They're simply adding x86 processors to their line of Macintosh computers. Apple has not abandoned the PPC processor and has committed to future Macintosh computers based on the PPC architecture.

Kazer0 wrote:Actually, PC excels in word processing, servers, software, hardware, functionality, customization, personalization, and business solutions more than Macs do. Like I said, the only thing they are ahead in is stability (Because they are hardware locked machines, and dont have to deal with a large amount of unique hardware configurations), and in photo/graphic/video editing.

The PC excels in word processing? Please explain. The PC excels in servers? Please explain. The PC excels in functionality? Please explain. The PC excels in personalization? Please explain. The PC excels in business solutions? Please explain.

While your at it, give me a top three reasons list for why the PC is better than the Macintosh in areas of security.

After reading this, I have only one question: Why is Kazer0 so slick?

On a more serious note, this thread seems to be on the verge of full-on flaming. Please try to keep things civil so that this interesting debate can continue (although I doubt we'll have any converts on either side )

can someone get "Wally's Right"'s IP address and compare it to everyone else's?

Or else IPban him unless he stops this cloak and dagger crap.

Dosser: I am not under any circumstances hiding under a cloak..


I have various Ips because of:
a) home computer
b) friends computer
c) Tafe computer
d) anywhere else


I would give myself up if i was going to be banned which isnt going to happen so dont go getting any ideas

That WIRight poster is probably an ex-smiley poster, nothing more.

Sorry Wally, I honestly didn't think it was you, but I don't think it's one of those smilie-guests either: he is way too intelligent for those guys who can't even run 5 words together.

Wally's Right wrote:

Kazer0 wrote:I like how you said I was wrong, but didn't offer any alternative. Hum, so your saying that if I just saved it on the hard disk on a public computer, it would be secure because its a macintosh? Friend, a floppy is unbelivibly more reliable and secure on public computers verses hard drive saves.

Gee, slick, you must have been working on some really Top Secret stuff in your grade school. National security work for the government, no doubt.

I don't know which iMac models your grade school had/has, but if your grade school had the early iMacs, they came equipped with InfraRed so that files could be transferred wirelessly to other devices like IR equipped noteboks or PDAs. Alternatively, a USB flash drive makes a great storage solution in lieu of floppy disks and/or CD/DVDs.

Of course, later models of iMac did include built-in SuperDrives that allowed the user to save files to CD. I suppose users could have also used the iMac's built-in Ethernet to store files securely on a remote machine. Possibly even a remote PC with a, ghasp, floppy drive.

Need I say more?

No, I probably don't, but I will... Ever heard of encryption, slick?

Friend, no one said what would be working on was top secret. Its more of the other jerks deleting your files because they can taht makes it insecure. And what kind of grade school student has a PDA or infared device on them? What kind of high school kid would carry one around? Back then, USB Keys didnt exist, and I dont know any grade school or high school students (Or most university students) that can encrypt files. I especially like how you said it could be transfered to a laptop. Who in their right mind would bother to use the macintosh computer if they had a laptop with them anyways?

Like was said before, most schools do not have CD Burners, and I have yet to go to one that has.

Kazer0 wrote:I said that backing up to a partition was a better idea, I never claimed it was the best. Backing up on a partition is a more secure idea than on a CD. CD's get scratched and cracked, hard drives dont. The chances of your hard disk failing are outnumbered by the chances of a CD being broken. Wally doesn't get any points either way you look at it. I personally would never back up 40gb onto 50 or so CDs.

Actually, backing up to a partition on the same physical drive that your orginal files are stored on, is not a better idea. It almost defeats the purpose of backing up the files in the first place.

Ideally, files should always be backed up on a separate physical drive or medium and copies should be stored offsite. Natural disasters or fire will not help preserve backup files that are stored onsite. CDs/DVDs are much more portable than hard drives, and DVDs can store much larger volume sizes than CDs. This is, after all, 2005, slick.

I say again, I never said it was the best choice, I just said it was a better idea than CDs. but again, you completely ignored that and continued with other idea's. How about we just write the code on paper and put it in a saftey deposit box? Thats a good idea too.

Your perfectly safe saving on anothe partition on another physical drive. Most backups are for repairing from hacked computers, or virus infected computers. In that case, most of the time the other partition will not be infected as well.

Kazer0 wrote:Welcome to this topic. Please explain where I said OSX sucked? I never did. We are talking about Macintosh computers, mostly their hardware. Sorry, but go look up what your posting about. In fact, I said that OSX ran fast because they use less processor power than Windows, and I never said it would run faster or slower on intel chips.

Uh, you said, "If your precious Mac OS X is so great, why..." is Apple switching processors... Well, slick, Apple is not switching processors because of problems with Mac OS X. I mean, your argument doesn't even make sense. You're suggesting that Apple is switching processors because their OS is not so great.

Sorry, slick, you're wrong.[/quote]

Ill give you that one, I meant Macintosh computers, not the actual OS. Good call, now calm down.

Kazer0 wrote:Good job at finding a mistake that still doesnt prove my statement wrong. It doesn't matter wiether Motorola makes the processor anymore, the point was that macintosh switched to x86 based processors. I would have lost as many points in this argument if you had found a speling mistake and claimed that made me wrong.

Actually, slick, Apple hasn't switched to x86 based processors. They're simply adding x86 processors to their line of Macintosh computers. Apple has not abandoned the PPC processor and has committed to future Macintosh computers based on the PPC architecture.[/quote]

Your right, they aren't abandoning it. In fact, they are phasing it out. From every sale in a macintosh computer, IBM makes more money than Apple does. Hence the final reason they decided to switch to Intel.

Kazer0 wrote:Actually, PC excels in word processing, servers, software, hardware, functionality, customization, personalization, and business solutions more than Macs do. Like I said, the only thing they are ahead in is stability (Because they are hardware locked machines, and dont have to deal with a large amount of unique hardware configurations), and in photo/graphic/video editing.

The PC excels in word processing? Please explain. The PC excels in servers? Please explain. The PC excels in functionality? Please explain. The PC excels in personalization? Please explain. The PC excels in business solutions? Please explain.

While your at it, give me a top three reasons list for why the PC is better than the Macintosh in areas of security.[/quote]

Word Processing: A higher amount of fonts, tools, software and plug-ins avalible to PC users than Macintosh users.
Functionality: You can use more and change more of the operating system and how it runs on PCs than OSX.
Personalization: I can choose my OS of choice. I can install any program I wish. I can change the way it looks numerous times.
Business Solutions and Servers: I dont even remember the last time I heard of someone using a macintosh server. Almost all businesses worldwide use a Windows Server package, a Sun Microsystems package, or a UNIX/LINUX/BSD package. All run on x86 hardware.


For the record, I doubt the mystery user is Wally, as the IPs donjt match. As well, there is no reason to ban him, as he hasnt done anything wrong yet, although if he continues to turn the argument into a flame war, he could be.

You're not going to ban me because I'm leaving of my own accord. I only stumbled into this forum through a Google search on the criteria "Quadra 950".

I had no intention of joining this forum or participating in it, I just felt for Wally, who was taking a lot of abuse. My intent was not to flame Kazer0, but to kind of even the score a bit for Wally. Anyway...

Kazer0 wrote:Word Processing: A higher amount of fonts, tools, software and plug-ins avalible to PC users than Macintosh users.
Functionality: You can use more and change more of the operating system and how it runs on PCs than OSX.
Personalization: I can choose my OS of choice. I can install any program I wish. I can change the way it looks numerous times.
Business Solutions and Servers: I dont even remember the last time I heard of someone using a macintosh server. Almost all businesses worldwide use a Windows Server package, a Sun Microsystems package, or a UNIX/LINUX/BSD package. All run on x86 hardware.

Actually, Mac OS X uses postscript fonts which are pretty much the standard in the print industry. One of the strongholds for the Macintosh platform is in print media. i.e. newspapers and magazines, etc. It is very unlikely that the PC can do anything in the field of word processing or desktop publishing, that the Macintosh cannot do.

As for functionality, Mac OS X is built on the BSD Unix variant and, as such, is extremely customizable. I would seriously challenge the suggestion that Windows is more customizable than the Mac OS.

As for personalization, the Macintosh has ports of most, if not all, of the major open source operating systems such as Linux, BSD, BeOS, etc. It is most unlikely that the PC offers more personalization than the Macintosh. Actually, if you look at the recent releases of Mac OS, you'd almost conclude that the OS was designed with personalization in mind.

On the server issue, I'll give you some points there; Apple is just recently making strides in the server market. I don't know if you're familiar with Apple's xserve clusters, but they're kind of cool. They've been getting a fair bit of press too. I'm surprised that you've never heard of them.

kazer0 wrote:For the record, I doubt the mystery user is Wally, as the IPs donjt match. As well, there is no reason to ban him, as he hasnt done anything wrong yet, although if he continues to turn the argument into a flame war, he could be.

You're right, slick. The mystery user is not Wally.

Wally's Right wrote:You're not going to ban me because I'm leaving of my own accord. I only stumbled into this forum through a Google search on the criteria "Quadra 950".

I had no intention of joining this forum or participating in it, I just felt for Wally, who was taking a lot of abuse. My intent was not to flame Kazer0, but to kind of even the score a bit for Wally. Anyway...

Kazer0 wrote:Word Processing: A higher amount of fonts, tools, software and plug-ins avalible to PC users than Macintosh users.
Functionality: You can use more and change more of the operating system and how it runs on PCs than OSX.
Personalization: I can choose my OS of choice. I can install any program I wish. I can change the way it looks numerous times.
Business Solutions and Servers: I dont even remember the last time I heard of someone using a macintosh server. Almost all businesses worldwide use a Windows Server package, a Sun Microsystems package, or a UNIX/LINUX/BSD package. All run on x86 hardware.

Actually, Mac OS X uses postscript fonts which are pretty much the standard in the print industry. One of the strongholds for the Macintosh platform is in print media. i.e. newspapers and magazines, etc. It is very unlikely that the PC can do anything in the field of word processing or desktop publishing, that the Macintosh cannot do.

As for functionality, Mac OS X is built on the BSD Unix variant and, as such, is extremely customizable. I would seriously challenge the suggestion that Windows is more customizable than the Mac OS.

As for personalization, the Macintosh has ports of most, if not all, of the major open source operating systems such as Linux, BSD, BeOS, etc. It is most unlikely that the PC offers more personalization than the Macintosh. Actually, if you look at the recent releases of Mac OS, you'd almost conclude that the OS was designed with personalization in mind.

On the server issue, I'll give you some points there; Apple is just recently making strides in the server market. I don't know if you're familiar with Apple's xserve clusters, but they're kind of cool. They've been getting a fair bit of press too. I'm surprised that you've never heard of them.

kazer0 wrote:For the record, I doubt the mystery user is Wally, as the IPs donjt match. As well, there is no reason to ban him, as he hasnt done anything wrong yet, although if he continues to turn the argument into a flame war, he could be.

You're right, slick. The mystery user is not Wally.

Now you see, posts like this one are more welcome, and you are more than welcome to stay.

For the record, wally takes a lot of abuse because most of the time, he's taking random guesses and hoping that he is right. We aske him to stop and show proof, but he continued, and it got annoying.

Now I never meant to say that Mac OSX was bad, or even useless. I plan on using the Mac OSX x86 version on my laptop when it comes out. However, my posts did not mean that Macintosh couldn't do what the PC could. What was meant was that Macintosh didnt have as many options as the PC. The PC has more software than the Macintosh, which gives the user more choices. The Macintosh does have good software, but not nearly as much options as the PC does. Same for personalization, and functionality, in todays market you have way more options for the PC than you do Macintosh. And as per operating systems, the PC can run pretty much all of them, including OSX. Macintosh may be able to as well, but not likely as smooth as the PC can, especially in x86 based operating systems during emulation.