On 9/3/06, Andrew Crystall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3 Sep 2006 at 20:01, Dave Land wrote: > On the contrary, there may well be better words for it, such as "better > informed about the current state of the Macintosh line than you seem to > be." Or, "not just shooting his mouth off without being in possession of > the facts." Okay, you're supporting the direct comparison of component lifetime vs unprotected time connected to the internet without catching nastyware? Just to be clear. > From the page: > > The brilliantly redesigned Mac Pro enclosure accommodates up to > four drives and 2TB of storage; offers 8 DIMM slots to fill with > up to 16GB of RAM; provides up to two SuperDrives. You also have > four PCI Express slots, and more I/O ports - including two > additional ports up front. That's nice. I can't change the motherboard, there are seriously limited drivers avaliable for graphics cards, sound cards...forget it, and so on. And when I upgrade, I can't take much of it with me, with a Mac, compared to a PC. There are no options just to get a new Motherboard and RAM, if everything else would still be useful. > Marketing hype aside, I think if you actually look, you'll see that > not only > do Macs come equipped with a lot that you'd have to _add_ to most > PCs, Like what? Remember I build my own PC's, so that's not something I'm bothered about. The premium for pre-assembly is a direct strike against Mac's for me. > And > you'll > find that opening up a Mac and accessing all that expandability is a > darn > sight easier than most PCs: Entirely based on case choice. My case is very well designed and I have no issues working with it. > > Blithering. Retard. > > Don't be so hard on yourself: lots of Windows users are uninformed > about how > far the Mac has progressed. Yes, it's only 60% more expensive, as I said. Only. Given another, what, twenty years, it might even become avaliable for sale in a form I'd consider buying - one that dosn't tying me to a specific base box. And "hard on myself", right. I'm REALLY enthused about getting a mac when all its zealots seem unable to stop themselves from taking cheap potshots about the superiority of their machines when I have zero dogma and are interested in precisely what they do - and how friendly and helpful the community are (which is why I picked SuSe Linux over Red Hat, for reference). Given a lot of the professional programs I run are DirectX/.NET based, and will not run on a Mac without installing Windows (and no, I'm not a good coder and am not prepared to port them), there is absolutely no reason for me to consider one. And no, I'm not changing profession just so I can use a Mac.
I wonder if anyone has two machines, a Mac and a PC? That way you could use whichever one seems to be doing best whatever you want to do. I used to have a Linux machine and a Windows machine side by side on my computer desk. I used both of them. Right now I've got both Linux and Windows running on my PC, and I use both sides of the machine every day. When our computers get past the horse and buggy stage, we won't have to do all this switching around. Everybody's machine will do everything. All it takes is software. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] *********************************************************** Do you play World of Warcraft? Let me know. Maybe we can play together. *********************************************************** All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
