carlo.comments: carlo.log → Jan 29th 2004, 09:53 GMT
jeck
· 5 years ago
Sweet Jesus. That is sick.
In a way he's using only the parts of the computer which undoubtedly work rule. The best of both worlds as they say. Maybe it's a gap in the market, that apple may bridge in the future? What's next? A Powerbook with the inner life of a Q20 ?
Hehe....
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
Oh my god. Find him and shoot him now!
He's taking a Dual processor G5 (over £2ks worth of computer), ripping it's guts out and replacing it with a cheap ass Athlon XP??
He needs to be taken out and beaten, hard. I hope someone tells his parents he gave away their £2k gift and replaced it with a £700 PC.
Effendi
· 5 years ago
Asked for a PC and got a Mac - hummm, computer illiterate parents methinks. It would have been kinder just to tell them and let them trade it back in for a kick ass PC.
Either that or get used to a Mac :/
FanBoy
· 5 years ago
Well, knowing a TON of artists and muscians on one side of life, and a TON of gamers on another, there really isn't a whole lot of 'getting used to' a Mac if it doesn't meet your needs. For PC-like functions (gaming being the most common), you're just ass-out with a Mac.
Effendi
· 5 years ago
yeah, I know, just didnt want to offend the Mac lobby ;) I've never got my head round macs predominantly cos they never had any software I wanted to run availiable, mind you I'm semi tempted to try OS X as I am a huge fan of NeXTStep/OPENSTEP. *gazes lovingly at his Color Turbo NeXTStation*. If only I could find the mouse for it! :(
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
[Quote] PC-like functions (gaming being the most common), you're just ass-out with a Mac [Quote]
Actually for most 'PC Like functions' there is software that is either a direct port or equally as capable avialable for the Mac. And given that MacOS X is based on a Unix core and has a X server aviable to it you can also take advantage of the HUGE libary of Unix/X/OSS applications that are out there, a lot of which either have ports for Mac OS X or can be ported with relative ease.
In fact Gaming is really the single area where there is anything you can do on a PC that a Mac can't do equally well or better. And even that is not as true as it used to be. A lot of best selling PC games these days get ported to the Mac after six months or so (Warcraft, NeverWinter Nights to name just two). Macs these days come with hardware that is every bit the equal of modern PC systems, espically since the introduction of the G5.
Now I am not a Mac user, nor do I plan on becoming one (although if I had the free cash I'd buy a 12in iBook / Powerbook in a flash), however I do recognise that for most modern computing tasks the Mac is a valid and solid platform choice. Claiming that you're out of luck with PC-Like functions is just plain wrong.
Zhaneel
· 5 years ago
[Quote] And even that is not as true as it used to be. A lot of best selling PC games these days get ported to the Mac after six months or so [Quote]
And for any gamer, that is six months too long.
Zhaneel
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
The vast majority of PCs on this planet do not exist for use as gaming machines. While that wait might rule out Macs as a platform of choice in your case it does not justify the blanket statement that ' For PC-like functions (gaming being the most common), you're just ass-out with a Mac'. I'd even contend that gaming is by far the least common 'PC-like function'.
I think you'll find that there are many, many more PCs out there running Spreadsheets, word processors, web browsers and other business software (and nothing else) out there than there will ever be used as gaming rigs.
Zhaneel
· 5 years ago
For office machines, Xyleth, I'd agree with you.
In my group of friends, comps are used mainly for Gaming. Yes they have other fuctions (word processing, e-mail, etc.) which are cross platform, but if you are a semi-serious to serious gamer, Macs just won't/don't cut it.
OTOH, for music writing/sound editing, you're better off with a Mac. If you're at all serious about it. For some graphic design stuff too, from what I understand.
So, for a personal computer (Not office machine, not home business machines) I think that the vast majority of computers are used to game. For some people, gaming is the main reason to own a computer, so they prefer PCs.
I think you're dead wrong that gaming is the least common PC-like function. Even those office machines are routinely used to access webgames that you aren't supposed to play at work.
Zhaneel
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
Depends how you define gaming. Most of those webgames are flash or java applets that will run just fine regardless of the OS you're using as long as you have the plugin. You could be using Windows, OS X, Solaris, Linux or heaven knows what else for all they care. You can't really claim that constitutes the primary use of the machine. There is a difference between playing the occasional flash web-game on a work PC that is primarilary used for office tasks and playing Doom3 on a home PC that exists solely to host that kind of game.
Even among home users I'd argue that the number for whom gaming is the prime use of the PC is quite small compared to the total. While it may be common among our age / social groups most people in my experience have mid-range PCs that the mainly use for surfing the web and a bit of e-mail, maybe for telecommuting or doing the odd bit of word processing or running the home budget. This is the kind of person who uses AOL as their ISP. Like it or not those kind of people outnumber us by a fair margin these days.
Besides the reason that most 'big' games don't make it to the Mac on release is purely one of market decisions by the publishers anyway. The G5 platform is eaisly an equal of the P4 / Athlon and probably on a par with the Athlon 64 (better with the upcoming 970FX 90nm die shrink that should let IBM push the G5 towards 3Ghz + while still using less power and dissipating less heat than a P4). The OS is solid and has good OpenGL support built in from the ground up and most Macs ship with at least a Radeon 9x class GPU giving access to all the latest fancy GPU features. There is no reason that modern games cannot be ported to the Mac platform techically.
TBH there isn't much to choose between Macs and PCs in terms of applications these days. Most major packages, even in the Macs traditional homeland of Graphics and sound, have ports to the PC that are just as useable and funtional. And if you're willing to spend the cash the PC platform can provide the same level of build and component quality that you'd expect from a Mac. But it cuts the other way too. For most computing tasks you could drop in a Mac OSX box and with minimal re-training for the new interface the user could carry on as before just as productive and happy as they ever were.
Effendi
· 5 years ago
For music production theres really hardly any difference now between Mac & PC. With ProTools, Cubase and Halion on both, its down to individual choice. My individual choice is PC but then I do mostly development (which makes it a moot point) and gaming, and the Mac just doesnt have the games availiable for it.
Also, I like the fact that I can buy a PC based laptop from several different manufacturers and pick and choose my features rather than the fairly set configs which the Power/iBooks provide.
Zhaneel
· 5 years ago
Xyleth, I never impigned on the Macs ability to play games. You're right, the publishers make the decisions about which platforms. And since the publishers are heavy toward PC, I'm inclined to stay with PCs until that changes. I'm a gamer. I always have been. It is the main reason I have a comp.
You can't discount the games that people play. I didn't say you could only play those Java games on a PC. I said they were somethign tha tyou had to take into account when deciding how much time is spent on various things for computers.
I am not bashing Macs. In fact I have extolled their virtues. But, IMO, there are many differences between Macs and Windows based PCs. It is more than just minimal re-training. I have used Macs. I know how to use several of the OSes. I don't like it. It is not what I'm used to and it would take at least 6 months of use before I would become comfortable with it. I would need to get a two button mouse (not standard) and remap keys (not beginning user). Therefore, it would be more work for me. And I am, fundamentally, lazy.
You are defending something which is not under attack. All of us recognize that Macs are useful. OTOH, there are some things that Macs do better and there are somethings that a Windows based PC do better. Yes, it is dependant on harward to some extent. Yes there are ports for most things. I would maintain that some ports are just not as good, no matter what publishers say.
Zhaneel
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
Actually what I was defending was not the Mac per se but my critisim of FanBoys 'ass outta luck' comment. I have a ingrained dislike for sweeping generlisations that are a) wrong, b) based on incomplete, incorrect or non-exisitant data and c) Not back up by a substanstive argument. Questioning them is kinda a reflex.
[quote[You can't discount the games that people play. I didn't say you could only play those Java games on a PC. I said they were somethign tha tyou had to take into account when deciding how much time is spent on various things for computers.[/quote]
Quite true, but unless said employee is seriously slacking the main use of that PC is office applications, not games. You're argument is kinda like saying my mobile phone is a gaming machine just because I play the occasional game of snake or battleships on it. It may well allow me to play that game, but it is by no means it's primary function.
Zhaneel
· 5 years ago
No, I was arguing that the total amount of time spent on gaming across all comps was higher than you were arguing. Not that the primary use of those comps was gaming.
Zhaneel
Xyleth
· 5 years ago
Ah, fair enough :) Yeah I'd agree to that, users have a habit of sneaking games in when you're not looking ;)
Spam
· 5 years ago
@10:
[Quote] Besides the reason that most 'big' games don't make it to the Mac on release is purely one of market decisions by the publishers anyway. [Quote]
Before the publisher even gets near it, the programmers can ensure that porting to the Mac (or any non-Windows platform) is a Herculean effort by doing one simple thing: using DirectX.
If your game makes heavy use of DirectX, particularly D3D, you'll basically have to rewrite the thing to port it. If you use OpenGL for the renderer, then the game may be portable.
There are other ways to shoot yourself in the foot, like assuming a little-endian architecture, using lots of inline assembly, etc. The most common way to kill portability, though, is D3D.
Lupus
· 5 years ago
I haven't checked recently, but do Macs still rely on a single button mouse as standard? Thats a fairly fundamental design constraint when it comse to porting an interface where 2 or 3 buttons are required for ease of use. E.g. Knights of the Old Republic - button 2 is used all the time for moving the camera, without it the camera interface is horrible. Design issues are often much harder to fix than engine issues.
Carlo Zottmann
· 5 years ago
Yes, the original mice only have one button, but if you connect a standard mouse (two/three buttons, scrolling wheel), it's integrated w/o problems. The extra buttons do the things you expect (opening the context menu etc.), and the wheel does its work as well. So, I still don't get why they still believe a one button mouse is the right tool.
OSX is sooo much sleaker with a standard mouse.
Lupus
· 5 years ago
I find it nigh-on impossible to operate without a wheel mouse now, let alone not having a 2nd mouse button. Its not as if Mac users need insulated from (shock-horror) the complexity of more than one button. Perhaps when computers were a rarity and people didn't know that the left mouse button would be the primary one (sorry all you left-handers out there).
All Comments
In a way he's using only the parts of the computer which undoubtedly work rule. The best of both worlds as they say. Maybe it's a gap in the market, that apple may bridge in the future? What's next? A Powerbook with the inner life of a Q20 ?
Hehe....
He's taking a Dual processor G5 (over £2ks worth of computer), ripping it's guts out and replacing it with a cheap ass Athlon XP??
He needs to be taken out and beaten, hard. I hope someone tells his parents he gave away their £2k gift and replaced it with a £700 PC.
Either that or get used to a Mac :/
Actually for most 'PC Like functions' there is software that is either a direct port or equally as capable avialable for the Mac. And given that MacOS X is based on a Unix core and has a X server aviable to it you can also take advantage of the HUGE libary of Unix/X/OSS applications that are out there, a lot of which either have ports for Mac OS X or can be ported with relative ease.
In fact Gaming is really the single area where there is anything you can do on a PC that a Mac can't do equally well or better. And even that is not as true as it used to be. A lot of best selling PC games these days get ported to the Mac after six months or so (Warcraft, NeverWinter Nights to name just two). Macs these days come with hardware that is every bit the equal of modern PC systems, espically since the introduction of the G5.
Now I am not a Mac user, nor do I plan on becoming one (although if I had the free cash I'd buy a 12in iBook / Powerbook in a flash), however I do recognise that for most modern computing tasks the Mac is a valid and solid platform choice. Claiming that you're out of luck with PC-Like functions is just plain wrong.
And for any gamer, that is six months too long.
Zhaneel
I think you'll find that there are many, many more PCs out there running Spreadsheets, word processors, web browsers and other business software (and nothing else) out there than there will ever be used as gaming rigs.
In my group of friends, comps are used mainly for Gaming. Yes they have other fuctions (word processing, e-mail, etc.) which are cross platform, but if you are a semi-serious to serious gamer, Macs just won't/don't cut it.
OTOH, for music writing/sound editing, you're better off with a Mac. If you're at all serious about it. For some graphic design stuff too, from what I understand.
So, for a personal computer (Not office machine, not home business machines) I think that the vast majority of computers are used to game. For some people, gaming is the main reason to own a computer, so they prefer PCs.
I think you're dead wrong that gaming is the least common PC-like function. Even those office machines are routinely used to access webgames that you aren't supposed to play at work.
Zhaneel
Even among home users I'd argue that the number for whom gaming is the prime use of the PC is quite small compared to the total. While it may be common among our age / social groups most people in my experience have mid-range PCs that the mainly use for surfing the web and a bit of e-mail, maybe for telecommuting or doing the odd bit of word processing or running the home budget. This is the kind of person who uses AOL as their ISP. Like it or not those kind of people outnumber us by a fair margin these days.
Besides the reason that most 'big' games don't make it to the Mac on release is purely one of market decisions by the publishers anyway. The G5 platform is eaisly an equal of the P4 / Athlon and probably on a par with the Athlon 64 (better with the upcoming 970FX 90nm die shrink that should let IBM push the G5 towards 3Ghz + while still using less power and dissipating less heat than a P4). The OS is solid and has good OpenGL support built in from the ground up and most Macs ship with at least a Radeon 9x class GPU giving access to all the latest fancy GPU features. There is no reason that modern games cannot be ported to the Mac platform techically.
TBH there isn't much to choose between Macs and PCs in terms of applications these days. Most major packages, even in the Macs traditional homeland of Graphics and sound, have ports to the PC that are just as useable and funtional. And if you're willing to spend the cash the PC platform can provide the same level of build and component quality that you'd expect from a Mac. But it cuts the other way too. For most computing tasks you could drop in a Mac OSX box and with minimal re-training for the new interface the user could carry on as before just as productive and happy as they ever were.
Also, I like the fact that I can buy a PC based laptop from several different manufacturers and pick and choose my features rather than the fairly set configs which the Power/iBooks provide.
You can't discount the games that people play. I didn't say you could only play those Java games on a PC. I said they were somethign tha tyou had to take into account when deciding how much time is spent on various things for computers.
I am not bashing Macs. In fact I have extolled their virtues. But, IMO, there are many differences between Macs and Windows based PCs. It is more than just minimal re-training. I have used Macs. I know how to use several of the OSes. I don't like it. It is not what I'm used to and it would take at least 6 months of use before I would become comfortable with it. I would need to get a two button mouse (not standard) and remap keys (not beginning user). Therefore, it would be more work for me. And I am, fundamentally, lazy.
You are defending something which is not under attack. All of us recognize that Macs are useful. OTOH, there are some things that Macs do better and there are somethings that a Windows based PC do better. Yes, it is dependant on harward to some extent. Yes there are ports for most things. I would maintain that some ports are just not as good, no matter what publishers say.
Zhaneel
[quote[You can't discount the games that people play. I didn't say you could only play those Java games on a PC. I said they were somethign tha tyou had to take into account when deciding how much time is spent on various things for computers.[/quote]
Quite true, but unless said employee is seriously slacking the main use of that PC is office applications, not games. You're argument is kinda like saying my mobile phone is a gaming machine just because I play the occasional game of snake or battleships on it. It may well allow me to play that game, but it is by no means it's primary function.
Zhaneel
Before the publisher even gets near it, the programmers can ensure that porting to the Mac (or any non-Windows platform) is a Herculean effort by doing one simple thing: using DirectX.
If your game makes heavy use of DirectX, particularly D3D, you'll basically have to rewrite the thing to port it. If you use OpenGL for the renderer, then the game may be portable.
There are other ways to shoot yourself in the foot, like assuming a little-endian architecture, using lots of inline assembly, etc. The most common way to kill portability, though, is D3D.
OSX is sooo much sleaker with a standard mouse.