MAC Haters

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Jzero

3. I use an Apple Pro keyboard on my PC. Best kb ever made.

You'd only say that if you've never used an Omnikey, truly the greatest keyboard ever made.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled flame war.

Sometimes, I use vi AND emacs!

Happy Hacker (it has the control key and the caps lock key in the correct places).

The Omnikey Ultra was completely reprogrammable and you were free to situate the caps and control keys as you pleased. You could also switch it to Dvorak layout.
It also included the F-keys across the top AND the side, all programmable to whatever you pleased.
THAT'S happy hacking!

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Jzero

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Jzero

3. I use an Apple Pro keyboard on my PC. Best kb ever made.

You'd only say that if you've never used an Omnikey, truly the greatest keyboard ever made.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled flame war.

Sometimes, I use vi AND emacs!

Happy Hacker (it has the control key and the caps lock key in the correct places).

The Omnikey Ultra was completely reprogrammable and you were free to situate the caps and control keys as you pleased. You could also switch it to Dvorak layout.
It also included the F-keys across the top AND the side, all programmable to whatever you pleased.
THAT'S happy hacking!

Check out the Happy Hacker Specifically the HH Lite 2!

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve

Originally posted by: Lucky

I would think that he presumed they wouldn't use an even older version of it than the latest. He was overestimating Apple

Or maybe he *gasp* ordered older machines!

Apple claimed these were top of the line. Their top of the line machines use PC100?

No.

 

Under XP I can swap and disable any key I want. I swapped the Win and Alt keys on the Apple Pro and it works just like a PC kb.

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
One button mouse, crawls like a sloth when running basic applications, locks up/crashes several times daily, whereas I have not had a lock-up on my PC since I switched to XP and started using generic NVidia drivers versus the so-called XP compatible ones.

Oh, so that's why you LAG IT UP on battle.net... because of your super-stable fast computer. Biased slut.

Hey, guess what.. every Mac I've used never crashed ever on me. My current Win2k computer crashes all the time. "Personal Experiences" posted by you and others only express your personal biases. Do you get it, or should I explain again?

biased slut? YUP...

How long have you been using Mac's... I will not mention MSOS's because i hate them as much as i hate OSX... two months... EVERYONE, even the hardcore Mac fanatics will admit that any previous OS was unstable and crappy...

Exaggerating does NOT prove your point... compared to earlier macOS's W2K is a dream of stability...

I made that statement to prove the point that one should not listen to the biased people here. My biased comments obviously sounded wrong to PC users just as the PC users' biased comments sound wrong to Mac users. THAT, sir, was my point. BTW, did you read the whole thread? Because I basically said the same thing earlier.

Obviously you have NOT read the entire thread, then you would see that i have already adressed and answered these points...

So if i say that i have never ever experienced a problem with 300 athlon based pc's running slackware... i am wrong? i would not think so... soooo... your statement just shows ignorance... nothing more, nothing less...

Erm... ok, I'll try again. One who is biased against Macs might simply just "say" that he has never had problems with 300 AMD computers. I might not believe you because I might think you're so biased that you might "overlook" some of the problems you have been having. Get it?

Final word: Biased users make biased comments about experiences and those comments should be taken with a grain of salt. If I wasn't clear before, I'm sure I am now.

And yes, I did read the thread.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: SnapIT
Okey, N0cmonkey, this is it, the final test... if you can convince me, i will try it...

Can you choose from a lot of motherboars?

I dont need to. There is a stable and quick brand out there. I choose from between a whopping 2 x86 based motherboards as it is. Anything else I have tried has let me down (for serious machines).

Can you choose a CPU from three (actually two, who am i kidding) manufacturers

There are 2 major manufacturers of PPC processors.

Can you choose which video card you want seated in your AGP slot?

Yes. Between Matrox, nVidia, and ATi. Are there any other reasonable choices?

Can you choose which HDD it will be delievered with (at this point, praise the old macs, SCSI is SUPERIOR!!!!)

I can choose size. I cant choose much of anything else at Dell's site. If I want something different I can install it myself.

Can you choose which case you want it in...

Yes. The case I would want it in is available

It is all about choices...

And with the way I choose to use computers, a Mac is a reasonable choice. I have never *EVER* said Macs were the best choice for everyone. I have only said they are a viable and reasonable choice for some people. I consider myself to be one of the people that can get a use out of a Mac, even though I dont do video or image editing.

i will not argue software as you and I seem to have the same opinions regarding that area...

Macs have more choices

Overall, there are two major considerations when choosing a computer (in my opinion).
1. What do you want to do?
2. What do you know?

Performance comes in third at best to me. Besides building major software projects, running a lot of daemons, and running hardware intensive daemons I dont do anything hardware intensive on my machines.

Would I use a Mac as a major database server? No, thats what Sun is around for
Would I use it as a multi-user shell server? No, there is Linux and FreeBSD for that.
Would I use it as a firewall? Nope, I have OpenBSD.
Would I use it as a webserver? Nope. OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and linux are all better in that area (in my opinion).
Would I use it as a streaming media server? Yes.
Would I use it as a desktop? I cant find much better.
Is Windows 2000 as good of a desktop OS FOR ME? No, it doesnt have the software I want installed by default, that just means a lot more work for me.
Could I use Windows 2k as a desktop OS? Yes, I have to in some situations.

I like a homegrown X86 setup with slackware, but then again, should learn to shut up... As i like the Alpha even better... however, it limit's your choices...

My point was, if you didn't get it (however, considering what you have stated, i am sure that you did) that you can buy all of the best hardware you want for an X86 platform, you can choose between SDR DDR or RBDRAM... do you get my point? you can build your own... and if there is no reason to do so, then why are you arguing that you can actually exchange the parts?

I can pick out hardware and software for a 100% stable system... i do not need to have the hardware assembled...

 

[Jzero]

Check out the Happy Hacker Specifically the HH Lite 2!

I've seen the HH.

Crappy membrane key switches and it only weighs 1.4 lb? Doesn't support Dvorak layout in hardware?

Compare to OmniKey's ALPS mechanical key switches, weighs over 5 lb, supports Dvorak (and any other custom keymap) in hardware, supports typematic settings in hardware, has full sets of F-keys?

I always like the HH b/c it was portable. Otherwise, it seems to be missing a lot of functionality compared to what I want sitting on my desktop. Not to mention, this thing won't slide around on my desk.

My Omnikey Evolution has a built-in touch pad....I don't even have to reach for a mouse....

Omnikey 0wnz all.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
One button mouse, crawls like a sloth when running basic applications, locks up/crashes several times daily, whereas I have not had a lock-up on my PC since I switched to XP and started using generic NVidia drivers versus the so-called XP compatible ones.

Oh, so that's why you LAG IT UP on battle.net... because of your super-stable fast computer. Biased slut.

Hey, guess what.. every Mac I've used never crashed ever on me. My current Win2k computer crashes all the time. "Personal Experiences" posted by you and others only express your personal biases. Do you get it, or should I explain again?

biased slut? YUP...

How long have you been using Mac's... I will not mention MSOS's because i hate them as much as i hate OSX... two months... EVERYONE, even the hardcore Mac fanatics will admit that any previous OS was unstable and crappy...

Exaggerating does NOT prove your point... compared to earlier macOS's W2K is a dream of stability...

I made that statement to prove the point that one should not listen to the biased people here. My biased comments obviously sounded wrong to PC users just as the PC users' biased comments sound wrong to Mac users. THAT, sir, was my point. BTW, did you read the whole thread? Because I basically said the same thing earlier.

Obviously you have NOT read the entire thread, then you would see that i have already adressed and answered these points...

So if i say that i have never ever experienced a problem with 300 athlon based pc's running slackware... i am wrong? i would not think so... soooo... your statement just shows ignorance... nothing more, nothing less...

Erm... ok, I'll try again. One who is biased against Macs might simply just "say" that he has never had problems with 300 AMD computers. I might not believe you because I might think you're so biased that you might "overlook" some of the problems you have been having. Get it?

Final word: Biased users make biased comments about experiences and those comments should be taken with a grain of salt. If I wasn't clear before, I'm sure I am now.

And yes, I did read the thread.

ROFL... and you are not biased.. yeah... right... you pick your pieces out of posts, which you want to answer... answer the one above this... if you can...

 

[SnapIT]

Huh? My post was kinda confusing now that I re-read it... But I think that was supposed to be a semi-compliment?

It is not a semi-compliment, it is a full compliment! To each his own...

If you like your Mac, keep it, if you like your PC, keep it... I use Slackware and *BSD...

I use Open Source programs.... i recommend and use those solutions on an X86 platform, simply because you get more performance for less money... stability using Slackware and *BSD is the same...

However... i still think the Alpha CPU is a better choice... and i would be glad if enough of us did.... I am willing to help the alpha team out, so that it is not discontinued... anyone else?

 

[Chaotic42]

Ah, this reminds me of my college days, in the comp.os.advocacy.ms-windows group.

No one will be able to convince anyone else of their point. Hell, people can't seem to understand that they made multi-buttoned mice for Macintoshes.

Anyway, I like Windows XP. I run it and Debian testing on my dual athlon. It works fine for me. I haven't used a Mac since like OS 8, and it was pretty bad back then.

That's all. This is a funny thread.

 

[Nothinman]

However... i still think the Alpha CPU is a better choice... and i would be glad if enough of us did.... I am willing to help the alpha team out, so that it is not discontinued... anyone else?

That deal's already done. Intel bought a chunk of the IP from Compaq and then Compaq EOL'd the Alpha after EV8 (I think EV8 will get released...), then the final stab was HP buying Compaq (merger my ass) and dropping like 90% of Compaq's products, keeping only the ones that have decent brand recognition. HP-UX and VMS will be ported to IA64, Tru64 will likely be gutted and disposed of along with the Alpha because HP has even EOL'd it's own PA-RISC processors in favor of IA64.

The only good thing I can see coming of this is cheaper Alpha boxes for people who want them after they're replaced with IA64 or Hammer boxes. I've got a PWS 600au (EV56 with 2M cache) running Debian right now, and I'd definately welcome another Alpha box or two =)

 

[Pixelated]

"windows crashes... macs crash... windows/pc's are fast... macs are fast... I can play games on my pc... I can run gfx programs better on my mac..."

blah blah blah blah blah

I don't think anyone, including myself, has proven that one is superior to other. The only thing that is a fact so far is that one is more expensive than the other. So to each their own. Mac lovers can pay more for their system if they wish and us PC lovers will try to leave you alone... maybe.

Oh ya, one more thing:

I know Apple's OS is no gem either. So Come On. Reply see if we can get it up to like 200 replies or something.

pcman2002b, looks like you got what you wished for.

 

[Stark]

I used to service Macs. I would never ever spend money on one of those overprice, underpowerd, pretty hated machines.

 

[miniMUNCH]

In two years Apple, with the help of an avid open source community, has developed an OS that sh!ts on Windows in every way possible...Apple's hardware is a little behind the times incertain aspects, however.

Hello...earth to Jobs...yeah, stop imagining how great you are and get motorola's new chips / DDR into Macs ASAP.

<---long time Windows user...occasional windows programmer and very familiar with the Windows system

 

[gplanet]

question for mac users:

how do you play games like Blizzard's Starcraft and Diablo w/ 1 mouse button? on the PC, you use 1 to move, and one to select stuff. how is it done with just 1 mouse button?

 

[skace]

First off, it was BLATANTLY obvious that he said he used his PS2 for games. Not only that, one does not have to SAY what they use a PS2 for considering it's a gaming console you jackass. Wait! He uses MS Word on his PS2!

Yes, I am aware of the topic of the thread. I guess you're not aware that there are some people who prefer console games over computer games. Also, from what you said, you assume that everyone that owns a computer plays games on it. Not so.

Try again...

Ok, I will try 1 more time. n0cm0nk33's response was to someone who said AND I QUOTE, "Arrrrrgh but what about my games? I can't live without my games!!!". This was in response to n0cm0nk33 spewing crap about never buying closed-source software. It is obvious that he was talking about X86 MICROSOFT based games. In which case, neither the mac, linux, nor a ps2 will help you. Yes, there are a few games and some other ones like a penguin skiing down a mountain, which you can get for those operating systems. But NO WHERE NEAR the microsoft windows platform. The next lan party you go to, walk around the room and look at how many people brought a macintosh, linux machine or ps2 to play in the lan. And if you don't think a lot of people play games here, you are probably in for a rude awakening. I can't believe I'm arguing with someone who is so obviously mac happy that they couldn't even think of a better name than "PowerMac4Ever".

This reply goes doubly for n0cm0nk33, whom decided he would butcher my last reply line by line taking everything out of context and ignoring the main point of the reply by smugly using my use of the word PC as macintosh games (fair enough).

It means that a Mac would run *EVERY FRIGGIN PIECE OF SOFTWARE BETTER* to a Mac user. As in, if you are used to using a Mac, and that is what you know, and that is what you are comfortable with, you will think it runs the software better. It would make perfect sense if you took your time.

Oh yea, and fyi, what runs software better and what you are more comfortable with are 2 COMPLETELY SEPERATE THINGS. Whichever one runs software better can be backed up as a fact via benchmarking, stress testing, what have you. Whether or not you are comfortable with an os running that piece of software, is an opinion based on how much time you've spent on it. Spend enough time on anything and you will eventually get comfortable with it. Humans hate change and love to stick with sh!t if its easier than moving to something better. To completely make sure you understand this, just because you are comfortable with something, it does not make it better at what it does, it only makes it easier for you to use it.

Before you assume anything from that argument, I am not saying that the x86/ms platform runs everything better, I am simply stating that saying something as stupid as "x86/ms runs everything better for an ms user" is a very silly comment. It is practically grasping at straws.

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve

Originally posted by: Lucky

I would think that he presumed they wouldn't use an even older version of it than the latest. He was overestimating Apple

Or maybe he *gasp* ordered older machines!

Apple claimed these were top of the line. Their top of the line machines use PC100?

I've already been through this. I listed which machines used what memory, and only the older imacs and low end notebooks use pc100.

 

[Nothinman]

This whole thread is grasping at straws...

Everyone who thinks Macs suck have either not used one recently or for any real amount of time. OS X kicks XP's ass in nearly every way.

There's no arguing Mac systems are more expensive, you pay for Apple having full control of the hardware and you pay for Apple's QA on the OS and hardware. But they're basically standard hardware, all except the motherboard/cpu, so you can add/replace the PCI cards, memory, disks, etc with cheap 'standard' parts if you want. And technically a G4 with 2M of cache kicks ass, to get a Xeon with 2M of cache you gotta spend ~$1K on just the CPU, now that's cost-effective...

And before you ask, no, I don't own a Mac. I would own a TiBook if they weren't damned expensive though.

 

[TheOmegaCode]

What I don't understand are all the people who are flaming mac's because then they couldn't own an x86 machine? Who says you can't own more than one computer? I have quite a few computers, just no Mac's yet. However, saying an architecture and company sucks, just because you can't use their computers as much for trivial things, is no grounds to say they suck, IMO.
I used to hate Macs too, but then I started having to use them. I mean really having to use them, and not being subjected to them at school (which I bet why most people have a bitter taste in their mouths, I know it's why I did) and I really started to see they aren't bad, just different. I'm not trying to convince anyone to go out and buy a Mac, I'd be a hypocrite if that's what I wanted.

Then again, if you're a conservative white christian, I guess you'll never accept diversity. In which case you can stick to hax0ring you're registry...

 

[PowerMac4Ever]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: PowerMac4Ever

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
One button mouse, crawls like a sloth when running basic applications, locks up/crashes several times daily, whereas I have not had a lock-up on my PC since I switched to XP and started using generic NVidia drivers versus the so-called XP compatible ones.

Oh, so that's why you LAG IT UP on battle.net... because of your super-stable fast computer. Biased slut.

Hey, guess what.. every Mac I've used never crashed ever on me. My current Win2k computer crashes all the time. "Personal Experiences" posted by you and others only express your personal biases. Do you get it, or should I explain again?

biased slut? YUP...

How long have you been using Mac's... I will not mention MSOS's because i hate them as much as i hate OSX... two months... EVERYONE, even the hardcore Mac fanatics will admit that any previous OS was unstable and crappy...

Exaggerating does NOT prove your point... compared to earlier macOS's W2K is a dream of stability...

I made that statement to prove the point that one should not listen to the biased people here. My biased comments obviously sounded wrong to PC users just as the PC users' biased comments sound wrong to Mac users. THAT, sir, was my point. BTW, did you read the whole thread? Because I basically said the same thing earlier.

Obviously you have NOT read the entire thread, then you would see that i have already adressed and answered these points...

So if i say that i have never ever experienced a problem with 300 athlon based pc's running slackware... i am wrong? i would not think so... soooo... your statement just shows ignorance... nothing more, nothing less...

Erm... ok, I'll try again. One who is biased against Macs might simply just "say" that he has never had problems with 300 AMD computers. I might not believe you because I might think you're so biased that you might "overlook" some of the problems you have been having. Get it?

Final word: Biased users make biased comments about experiences and those comments should be taken with a grain of salt. If I wasn't clear before, I'm sure I am now.

And yes, I did read the thread.

ROFL... and you are not biased.. yeah... right... you pick your pieces out of posts, which you want to answer... answer the one above this... if you can...

Did I say I was not biased? Nope. Look at my frickin' ID. POWERMAC4EVER. POWER MAC 4 EVER. I don't know what you're talking about when you say "you pick your pieces out of posts, which you want to answer". I'm not responsible for your assumptions, but it seems like every anti-Mac comment here has gotten a response by n0cmonkey, lucky, me, or others. If I didn't respond to a comment it's because:

1. It was already covered by me or someone else.
2. It's a stupid comment made by a biased user and/or my response would fall on deaf ears.

Again, you don't know me well enough to make the kind of assumption you made. Try again.

 

[Bulk Beef]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the crappy mouse.

 

[LongAce]

Macs looks gay...

 

[ScottyB]

The worst part about macs are the users behind them. Everyone I have met has been smug and rude. If you need to service a PC, yes a x86 computer not a fvkcing PPC which are only considered PCs by Mac users, the tell you stupid sh!t like: "If it was a mac it woudn't have broke." Yeah, Macs are magical computers, which have hardware that doesn't break.

 

[element2k5]

yay 4 a good cause...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: skace

First off, it was BLATANTLY obvious that he said he used his PS2 for games. Not only that, one does not have to SAY what they use a PS2 for considering it's a gaming console you jackass. Wait! He uses MS Word on his PS2!

Yes, I am aware of the topic of the thread. I guess you're not aware that there are some people who prefer console games over computer games. Also, from what you said, you assume that everyone that owns a computer plays games on it. Not so.

Try again...

Ok, I will try 1 more time. n0cm0nk33's response was to someone who said AND I QUOTE, "Arrrrrgh but what about my games? I can't live without my games!!!". This was in response to n0cm0nk33 spewing crap about never buying closed-source software.

Reread my comment, thats not what I said.

It is obvious that he was talking about X86 MICROSOFT based games.

Ok.

In which case, neither the mac,

Virtual pc

linux,

wine, vmware

nor a ps2

Thats fine.

will help you.

Yes, there are a few games and some other ones like a penguin skiing down a mountain, which you can get for those operating systems. But NO WHERE NEAR the microsoft windows platform. The next lan party you go to, walk around the room and look at how many people brought a macintosh, linux machine or ps2 to play in the lan. And if you don't think a lot of people play games here, you are probably in for a rude awakening. I can't believe I'm arguing with someone who is so obviously mac happy that they couldn't even think of a better name than "PowerMac4Ever".

I dont LAN. Thats what Ive said. I keep saying I dont like computer games... Well, I like a couple, but I rarely play them. If you want an x86 machine to play games, great. We all know Macs dont have many games, and are too slow to play most of them. No one has denied that. Atleast, not that I remember. I know I havent.

This reply goes doubly for n0cm0nk33, whom decided he would butcher my last reply line by line taking everything out of context and ignoring the main point of the reply by smugly using my use of the word PC as macintosh games (fair enough).

I do this because when you debate with someone you should take each point and debate it. If you want to solve something anyhow.

It means that a Mac would run *EVERY FRIGGIN PIECE OF SOFTWARE BETTER* to a Mac user. As in, if you are used to using a Mac, and that is what you know, and that is what you are comfortable with, you will think it runs the software better. It would make perfect sense if you took your time.

Oh yea, and fyi, what runs software better and what you are more comfortable with are 2 COMPLETELY SEPERATE THINGS.

Define better than. I think better can be faster, more stable, or even in an environment that you know what you are doing.

Whichever one runs software better can be backed up as a fact via benchmarking,

You can make anything look good with benchmarks.

stress testing,

Stability isnt all that important to me in everything. If my ps2 crashes I dont get all that upset (used as an example, my ps2 doesnt crash ). If I was updating my snort rules and my x86 machine crashed I would be kind of pissed.

what have you.

What have you? Like the user experience maybe?

Whether or not you are comfortable with an os running that piece of software, is an opinion based on how much time you've spent on it.

Not necessarily. Ive spent more time in Windows than Mac OS X, but I feel more comfortable with Mac OS X. User experience and a user being comfortable are important factors in computing.

Spend enough time on anything and you will eventually get comfortable with it.

I dont feel comfortable with Windows, but maybe its just me.

Humans hate change and love to stick with sh!t if its easier than moving to something better.

Better or different? People wont change unless there is a major event to make them change. I know why I first went to Unix-like systems from Windows. I know what inspired me. It was pretty nasty in fact. I moved on to something better. And with the addition of my Mac, I continue to spread out to better things.

To completely make sure you understand this, just because you are comfortable with something, it does not make it better at what it does, it only makes it easier for you to use it.

I think me being comfortable with something, and confident I can fix it when something goes wrong makes my platforms of choice better than others. Yes, its opinion based. Yes, Im biased. But I think "better" is many times an opinionated word.

Before you assume anything from that argument, I am not saying that the x86/ms platform runs everything better, I am simply stating that saying something as stupid as "x86/ms runs everything better for an ms user" is a very silly comment.

I assumed nothing. But I would agree with that statement even if you think its silly. I have given technical reasons why now

It is practically grasping at straws.

Heh.