Posted by In re: The Helix on February 05, 1999 at 02:26:12:
: : 2.Not hardly; Windows allows you to move your start menu (top, bottom, left or right).
This is a good idea... MS took MacOS and imitated it, and changed some things... now some of those things just turned out to be different, some turned out to be a little better in some ways, and some they just screwed up. I would like to be able to minimize windows on a mac, but i'm sure they'll figure that out pretty soon, maybe 8.5.2 or something... I've upgraded my system twice over the past year, first to OS8, and second to 8.5.1... both were improvements over an OS that I already liked to begin with, and was very productive and efficient for me. A pc user could have upgraded from Windows 95 to 98 in that time. Every pc user i've talked to grumbled every once in a while about 95, but had learned to use it adequately... they all hate Windows 98. It's a step in the wrong direction in several cases.
: A single-button mouse is superior? Hardly. I have three buttons (plus two scrolling wheels) on my mouse, and I don't know how I ever managed with even a two button!
I agree that 2 button mouses should be integrated into the mac os. Oh wait, they already are! You can buy a 2 button mouse for mac and configure the second button for command-click, which does the exact same thing as a right click in most mac programs, and now in the OS as well.
: PCs use extensions as compared to File Types and Creators. Ever tried to edit FTs and Creators before on a Mac??
Yes. There are many programs that are very easy to use. Batch Typer, FileTyper, FileBuddy, to name a few. They're all freeware. It's very easy, and I can change as many as I want at a time. There are many different FTs and Creators, true... but they are far more descriptive than extensions. When a you download a file, it is often automatically FT'd and Creator'd based upon the extension.
: You can do the PC equivilant in seconds (ren *.txt *.html, or something like that).
Hmmm, takes me seconds to do it on a mac, too. It's even easier... Drag. Click.
:Well, what extensions does the net use? htm, html, gif, jpg, tiff, mov, ra, ram, txt, cgi, pl, et cetera. Wait, PCs use all of those too. Amazing.
Wow, that's a completely unrelated observation. You must realize, though, that none of this matters, because pc or mac, every file type must be specified to be useful on the net. What do you thing those application type x-/realaudio things are in Netscape or IE? They tell your browser what to do with the files... they also tell your browser what to save them as... FT and Creator taken care of, no sweat. While these filenames are used, they are not lost on a mac. I use these filenames almost as much as the average pc user does. But I'm not confined to them. Incidentally, I can add a .sit to any file or folder on my mac, and the built in stuffit engine compresses the file or folder for me, and as well or better than any other compression scheme. Deleting the .sit extension from an archive automatically decompresses it.
: : 3. Perhaps, but how much control do you have on your mac over your CPU? None. I can overclock my Celeron in a few minutes (as in, quitting all of my programs, restarting, actually overclocking, and starting up again). How do you tell if your CPU is overheating (if, in the unlikely event, it would happen)? Go thru BIOS. How about see how the voltage is? BIOS. System password? BIOS. The list goes on...
ah, but you see... on a mac, you don't have to restart. BIOS is an outdated relic of DOS. On a mac, there are programs to do just that through the main operating system. And it's as easy to overclock a 604e or a G3 as a Pentium or Pentium2.
: : 4. I would NEVER go back to integrated motherboards. The main reason: you can't upgrade one thing without upgrading the entire thing. My video card (Velocity 4400 with NVIDIA's RivaTNT) is one of the best cards out there right now. If I wanted to upgrade that, all I do is shut down my computer, slide off the side panel, unscrew one screw, take it out, and put a new one in. Try upgrading a Mac that easily. How about monitors? It's impossible to replace the monitors on (most) Macs. G3s and iMacs are all-in-one pieces. Your monitor goes out and you're phuct.
Ah, but you misunderstood him, he said "Mac motherboards have all the NECESSITIES built-in." That means that you don't have to have an extraneous sound card or video card to be able to run your computer. I can pop open the cover of my mac, slip in a nice hefty 3D card or professional sound card, close the cover, and boot up, and it actually works... that plug and play thing, ya know. So you know what... it's the same process to upgrade a mac, you don't have to change anything about the motherboard. "It's impossible to replace the monitors on (most) Macs."? What dimension are you talking about? the only current mac with a built in monitor is the iMac. The G3s are minitowers or desktops... they aren't even sold with monitors in most cases. And people don't buy iMacs to be able to upgrade them. Apple will replace the monitors if they die, which won't happen very much at all anyway. It's very easy to hook 3 or more monitors to ANY powermac. Yes, at the same time. So tell me again, specifically, WHY is it hard to replace my monitor?
: : 5. You're on crack, man. Just because you claim that without macs we'd be living in the technological stone age, in no way does that mean technology would not advance without them. Had Edison never been born, the light bulb would have still been invented. Had Alexander Gramm Bell never invented the telephone, we would still have the internet. The only question is when and how. It would be different, but it would still happen. You make macs out as something we should all go out and buy or else we will all perish horribly.
I agree that that statement was pretty out there, but I really haven't seen any innovation on the part of the pc hardware market at all... And that is what computer technology needs, innovation. Maybe things would still happen, but you've gotta admit that Microsoft stole the idea of Windows from the MacOS in the first place. There are other examples as well.
: : Well, in a word: no. See, companies back in the 80s had to choose between apples and PCs. The only reason why apple did so well was because the PC companies weren't working together. Hardware wouldn't be interchangeable, software was incompatible, OSs were all over the place. Apple, on the other hand, was one company that stood out. Had it been Compaq, for instance, that was the trailblazer, it would be the same way. The only difference between apple and the PCs in the 80s is that Apple was it's own company, completely independent of PCs. Had PC companies started to work together earlier, Apple would have been completely wiped out. However, PC companies did not start working together until later on, thus, Apple had the time to strengthen itself more.
Well, you're really talking about two different things, but whatever. As a matter of fact, Apple's doing pretty damn good right about now. Anyone who says that Apple is dying or isn't making a profit is just misinformed. Apple had over $150 million profit in Q1 this year. That's not exactly doing bad.