While MS goes bigger, Apple goes faster

[iago]

http://techsearch.cmp.com/blog/archives/2006/07/new_book_enterp.html?loc=software_and_web_development

Microsoft is going for a big, bulky, slow operating system, while Apple is going for a small, efficient, and elegant one.  Even though the guy who wrote that is clearly biased torwards Apple, but nevertheless I agree with his standpoint. 

[rabbit]

Hm.  I'd like to think that Apple is better, but the price continuously deters me.  That, and Macs are harder to upgrade and customize.  Maybe when they get better hardware.  I do like their approach, though.

[iago]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

[deadly7]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

[MyndFyre]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

I would agree with you if I didn't htink tablets are the wave of the future, and Apple doesn't do anything with them.

[iago]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

I would agree with you if I didn't htink tablets are the wave of the future, and Apple doesn't do anything with them.

Maybe.  I'm not sure that I'd ever use a tablet, and a lot of people I talk to are the same way.  But if it's a big market, I'm sure that Apple will be getting a piece of it eventually.

[Kaleeko]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

You can. In fact, I need to do that pretty soon to my mini.

[Blaze]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

You can. In fact, I need to do that pretty soon to my mini.

Although that's hardly what I call upgradable, at least you can do that. 

[MyndFyre]

Some think this will never happen, but I have a feeling that it will. When Microsoft attributes a bunch of its Vista problems to backwards compatibility issues, Apple would not suffer the same when expanding to PC platform.

...except that the *reason* Apple doesn't fight with hardware compatibililty is that Apple is a hardware manufacturer.  I suspect this is a primary reason that OS X isn't going to be (legally) usable by non-Mac-owners.

[deadly7]

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

Nah, you can add stuff to the motherboards too (cards, if the case is big enough).  It's not smart to install it generally, but you can do it.  And it costs way too much.

[iago]

Some think this will never happen, but I have a feeling that it will. When Microsoft attributes a bunch of its Vista problems to backwards compatibility issues, Apple would not suffer the same when expanding to PC platform.

...except that the *reason* Apple doesn't fight with hardware compatibililty is that Apple is a hardware manufacturer.  I suspect this is a primary reason that OS X isn't going to be (legally) usable by non-Mac-owners.

The Intel macs, which are the main future, aren't manufactured by Apple. 

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

Nah, you can add stuff to the motherboards too (cards, if the case is big enough).  It's not smart to install it generally, but you can do it.  And it costs way too much.

I've never seen a card for a laptop, and I can't imagine how a card would work since everything is onboard.  There are, of course, PCMCIA expansion cards, but that's different. 

[rabbit]

I think he was talking about desktops, specifically the G3/G4 PC looking boxes.

[chuck]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

Macs can get HD upgraded, ram upgraded, but not proccessor. There incridebly fast though. My 1.25ghz emac is as fast i will ever need, so who cares about upgrading proccessors?

Anyway, i go and buy 200gb hd today, they only 100$ in N.B. You can even get a 300gb for 130$ :-)

[Kaleeko]

You're right, and that's why I expect macs to more and more dominate the laptop market.  Their laptops look sleek and run fast, and laptops are expensive/unupgradable anyways.

Hardly.  You can upgrade laptops.

Not much.  You can add ram or change a harddrive, but I'm pretty sure you can do that with Macs. 

Macs can get HD upgraded, ram upgraded, but not proccessor. There incridebly fast though. My 1.25ghz emac is as fast i will ever need, so who cares about upgrading proccessors?

Anyway, i go and buy 200gb hd today, they only 100$ in N.B. You can even get a 300gb for 130$ :-)

Unfortunately, my computer runs like crap, now. It's got a 1.42Ghz processor, but trying to run WoW can be dreadfully painful. Not necessarily in instances, but in SW/Lagforge, and especially in PvP, my computer frequently freaks out due to overloading. Ram will hopefully fix that, if I ever get the money. -_- But, I've definitely noticed since I bought it, my macMini has increasingly lost speed.

[chuck]

How much ram do you have? 768mb's of ram is working for me.
Although, i'm not nessecarly used to speed, my previous mac was a 200mhz w/ a sonnet upgrade to (700?)mhz, and had 128mb's of ram. And my linux computer was a Quadra650 (33mhz 64mb's of ram =).
And i dont run games like WoW, i ocasionly use Starcraft, or the halo demo, so i don't know the amount of ram it eats.

Maybe you can try quitting the finder when you play WoW? I found it made my speed in WCIII 2x times faster.

[Kaleeko]

How much ram do you have? 768mb's of ram is working for me.
Although, i'm not nessecarly used to speed, my previous mac was a 200mhz w/ a sonnet upgrade to (700?)mhz, and had 128mb's of ram. And my linux computer was a Quadra650 (33mhz 64mb's of ram =).
And i dont run games like WoW, i ocasionly use Starcraft, or the halo demo, so i don't know the amount of ram it eats.

Maybe you can try quitting the finder when you play WoW? I found it made my speed in WCIII 2x times faster.

512 RAM. I need more. More, more, more.
I just would like to go through WSG, just ONCE, and not miss every battle that I'm told I take part in.
I've never thought about quitting Finder. The problem with that, though, is that I tend to switch to Finder every now and then while I'm playing, and shutting it down and bringing it back up every time would just be a pain in the arse.

[Joe]

I run it on 1024MB of RAM, 2.8GHz non-HT single core. Runs just fine, except I get low FPS thanks to my lack of a graphics card.

[dark_drake]

I run it on 1024MB of RAM, 2.8GHz non-HT single core. Runs just fine, except I get low FPS thanks to my lack of a graphics card.

WoW seemed to actually run a lot smoother than the other MMORPGs I have tried.  The only times I ever slowed down were when I was in IF at peak times.  However, in SWG, it would slow to a slideshow any time I entered Theed or Coronet and sometimes even the Mining Outpost on Dantooine.

[deadly7]

I run it on 1024MB of RAM, 2.8GHz non-HT single core. Runs just fine, except I get low FPS thanks to my lack of a graphics card.

WoW seemed to actually run a lot smoother than the other MMORPGs I have tried.  The only times I ever slowed down were when I was in IF at peak times.  However, in SWG, it would slow to a slideshow any time I entered Theed or Coronet and sometimes even the Mining Outpost on Dantooine.

WTF? Since when do you play WoW?!

[Warrior]

This article is a load of bull. You're comparing an OS obviously in Beta to one not even announced yet? No one knows ANYTHING about Leapord.

[dark_drake]

I run it on 1024MB of RAM, 2.8GHz non-HT single core. Runs just fine, except I get low FPS thanks to my lack of a graphics card.

WoW seemed to actually run a lot smoother than the other MMORPGs I have tried.  The only times I ever slowed down were when I was in IF at peak times.  However, in SWG, it would slow to a slideshow any time I entered Theed or Coronet and sometimes even the Mining Outpost on Dantooine.

WTF? Since when do you play WoW?!

I used to.  Like right after the CU in SWG.  I was upset with SOE and decided to try WoW.  I quit shortly thereafter.  And now, I decided to try it again cause I'm bored.

Edit: Really, though, it's not that bad if you find cool people to hang out with.

[Sidoh]

I used to.  Like right after the CU in SWG.  I was upset with SOE and decided to try WoW.  I quit shortly thereafter.

You decided to quit again then, eh?

 ( He's been playing for the last week or so. )

[dark_drake]

You decided to quit again then, eh?

 ( He's been playing for the last week or so. )

I believe WoW has earned another decent go around with me.  I quit the first time because it just couldn't compare to SWG's former glory, at least in my eyes.  And no, I haven't made up my mind yet.  Maybe if you sent more gold...