Scioly.org

I personly perfer mac, but you cant download alot of programs on them.

mac simply has a faster, cleaner, better operating system.

Windows
Linux






A trash pile

A macbook pro

Frogger4907 wrote:Windows
Linux






A trash pile

A macbook pro

What are you talking about? Macs are clearly better at holding papers down than a trash pile.

I saw this cartoon of a pc and mac. The mac was saying "nerd", while the pc was saying "pretty boy". Ahaha lollers. -.-

While Windows owns 95% of the market Mac has a reason to be good: they have to compete with Mcrosoft. Mac clearly knows what they're doing with hardware; they just can't be beat. They own all sorts records for smallest, thinest, fastest, etc. Further more they also have a cleaner, more appealing OS and interface. The problem? Microsoft. Mac has a HUGE standing, but it still barely competes with Microsoft. People who are *cough cough* less tech savy just don't want to learn to switch, and big companies don't want to have to go through the hassle. In addition Mac's have a pretty egotistical price tag- microsoft is CHEAP compared to them. But the other side to the same coin is that no big companies use primarily Mac (except apple) and not enough people have macs for anyone to make viruses for it. If you make a virus it's to get a LOT of people, not the few Mac users. Mac is also Unix based which means it's less susceptible by design. Therefore there's less risk for viruses on Macs. But just like with viruses, programmers may not feel as though writing a mac version of a program is worth it, so you may have trouble finding programs, leading to the division that I see: Windows is for the household user that just wants to use their computer while Macs seem to be more for technical people. Not just computer tech people, but also for those in the music and video industry because of it's power.

Of course I have a simple solution: Linux. Free, fast like Mac, easy to use, and little to know risk of viruses. Ubuntu

Apple makes nice, shiny computers that are extremely overpriced. You can build two computers with better specs for the price of one Mac.

brobo wrote:They own all sorts records for smallest, thinest, fastest, etc.

Form factor is basically irrelevant, Windows is just as fast as OSX or Linux.

brobo wrote:Further more they also have a cleaner, more appealing OS and interface.

This is debatable. I find Windows Seven much nicer looking than OSX.

brobo wrote:People who are *cough cough* less tech savy just don't want to learn to switch, and big companies don't want to have to go through the hassle.

Less tech savy? People who want nice pretty pictures use Macs. People who are "tech savy" use Windows or Linux. Big companies don't use them because their application compatibility and management features are a joke.

brobo wrote:Mac is also Unix based which means it's less susceptible by design.

Actually, I believe that I read a report which stated that Windows Seven is now as secure as Unix.

brobo wrote:Of course I have a simple solution: Linux. Free, fast like Mac, easy to use, and little to know risk of viruses.

I wouldn't say that it is easy to use. I tried to install Adobe Flash on it, couldn't figure out how, got someone who managed Linux servers at work on the phone, and still wasn't able to.

I like pc but neither is better
pc are much cheaper and have more software
macs have good hardware and are an essential for artists of any kind
linux is less advanced but everything is free

quadratic wrote:I like pc but neither is better
pc are much cheaper and have more software
macs have good hardware and are an essential for artists of any kind
linux is less advanced but everything is free

Now tell me how Linux is less advanced? Linux is less "pretty", yes, but who needs all the fancy animations and buttons that Windows and Mac has? It is just as powerful if not more than Windows. It is much faster, has all the same features, and is open sourced. There are also many different branches for whatever you need: Ubuntu, Fedora, OpenSUSE, etc. In some ways it's also more secure than windows. So tell me, how is Linux "less advanced"?

TheGenius wrote: Form factor is basically irrelevant, Windows is just as fast as OSX or Linux.

That's debatable, I find Linux MUCH faster than my NEWER windows computer with the same amount of ram.

TheGenius wrote: This is debatable. I find Windows Seven much nicer looking than OSX.

You have to admit though that OSX has less buttons everywhere. On windows it's just buttons all over the place, while OSX is simpler.

TheGenius wrote: Less tech savy? People who want nice pretty pictures use Macs. People who are "tech savy" use Windows or Linux. Big companies don't use them because their application compatibility and management features are a joke.

Take someone who doesn't really understand computers who's been using Windows all their life and set a Mac in front them. People who don't get computers are less likely to make the jump.

TheGenius wrote: Actually, I believe that I read a report which stated that Windows Seven is now as secure as Unix.

Perhaps- but not by design. To make Windows safe you need to put a bunch of antivirus and stuff on. With Linux, new files by default are set to read and write ONLY by users and outside stuff and executing is only allowed by root. In addition the root MUST give permission each time a file is executed if the file tries to do something that requires root access. Windows isn't like that, not by a long shot. I read a report that said that you don't need antivirus on Linux because it would be useless, can you say that about Windows?

TheGenius wrote: I wouldn't say that it is easy to use. I tried to install Adobe Flash on it, couldn't figure out how, got someone who managed Linux servers at work on the phone, and still wasn't able to.

User Error. Also there are plenty of things like that on Windows as well. I got flash working really quickly.

brobo wrote:That's debatable, I find Linux MUCH faster than my NEWER windows computer with the same amount of ram.

RAM isn't everything. Factors such as processor speed, core number, cache size, hard drive speed, and number of background programs also affects speed. Also, if you buy a pre-built computer, OEMs often load them with useless software that slow the computer down.

brobo wrote:You have to admit though that OSX has less buttons everywhere. On windows it's just buttons all over the place, while OSX is simpler.

brobo wrote:Take someone who doesn't really understand computers who's been using Windows all their life and set a Mac in front them. People who don't get computers are less likely to make the jump.

Windows doesn't seem complicated to me, although my experience with OSX is limited.
You seem to be contradicting yourself. You say that OSX is simpler, yet say that people who don't understand computers very well would have more difficulty using them.

brobo wrote:Perhaps- but not by design. To make Windows safe you need to put a bunch of antivirus and stuff on. With Linux, new files by default are set to read and write ONLY by users and outside stuff and executing is only allowed by root. In addition the root MUST give permission each time a file is executed if the file tries to do something that requires root access. Windows isn't like that, not by a long shot. I read a report that said that you don't need antivirus on Linux because it would be useless, can you say that about Windows?

It is by design, as the new kernel introduced in WIndows Vista and imporved upon in Windows Seven is vastly superior to previous ones. You need Administrator privilleges to install, change settings, or other things and have to confirm it each time. My anti-virus software has never detected a virus on my computer in the almost two years I have been using it.

brobo wrote:User Error. Also there are plenty of things like that on Windows as well. I got flash working really quickly.

The point is that there were no help resources available that provided a solution. I might have been able to get help on some forum, but I didn't care enough about it to do that.

Also, are you using Windows XP? A lot of what you are describing sounds like XP.