Re: Computer Capability - was Re: [OT] [PB]F key shortcuts

2003-04-04 Thread |n|i|c|k| 
My clock was messed up so my message appeared at the end of the list.
here it is

n

>> 
>>> About the only thing that's really demanding on CPUs is the modern
>>> video
>>> game, and, for that I'd rather have a console than a computer any day.
>>> Video
>>> games stress a computer physically and I'd rather pound away on an
>>> attachment to a $300 console than the keyboard on a $2000 laptop
>>> (which does
>>> a worse job of playing games anyway).
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> I both agree and disagree with that statement.  Most of the commen
> applications benifet from higher speeds.  Try running OS X on a 4-5 year old
> computer...It's either slow as hell or just doesnt work.  Even a word
> prossesing program is more complicated and power consuming than whole os's
> of the past.  Although games progress at a much quicker rate than normal
> software, everything else is also progressing.  And leaves computers in the
> dust.  I think the whole future of computing is in upgradibility and the
> slowing of having to scrap your old mac's
> 
> nick
> 

-- 
If I survive this life alive, I'll be very suprised.



-- 
G-Books is sponsored by  and...

 Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com  | Refurbished Drives |
 -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks  |  & CDRWs on Sale!  |

  Support Low End Mac 

G-Books list info:  
  --> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to:  
To unsubscribe, email:  
For digest mode, email: 
Subscription questions: 
Archive: 



---
>The Think Different Store
http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com
---

Re: Computer Capability - was Re: [OT] [PB]F key shortcuts

2003-04-04 Thread |n|i|c|k| 

> 
>> About the only thing that's really demanding on CPUs is the modern
>> video
>> game, and, for that I'd rather have a console than a computer any day.
>> Video
>> games stress a computer physically and I'd rather pound away on an
>> attachment to a $300 console than the keyboard on a $2000 laptop
>> (which does
>> a worse job of playing games anyway).
>> 
>> 


I both agree and disagree with that statement.  Most of the commen
applications benifet from higher speeds.  Try running OS X on a 4-5 year old
computer...It's either slow as hell or just doesnt work.  Even a word
prossesing program is more complicated and power consuming than whole os's
of the past.  Although games progress at a much quicker rate than normal
software, everything else is also progressing.  And leaves computers in the
dust.  I think the whole future of computing is in upgradibility and the
slowing of having to scrap your old mac's

nick


-- 
If I survive this life alive, I'll be very suprised.



-- 
G-Books is sponsored by  and...

 Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com  | Refurbished Drives |
 -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks  |  & CDRWs on Sale!  |

  Support Low End Mac 

G-Books list info:  
  --> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to:  
To unsubscribe, email:  
For digest mode, email: 
Subscription questions: 
Archive: 



---
>The Think Different Store
http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com
---

Computer Capability - was Re: [OT] [PB]F key shortcuts

2003-04-04 Thread Tom Burke 

On Friday, April 4, 2003, at 03:49 PM, Eric D. wrote:

> I really wonder where things'll go. I think that in the next few years 
> we'll
> see a make-or-break situation for computers and OSes.
>
>

[snip]

> About the only thing that's really demanding on CPUs is the modern 
> video
> game, and, for that I'd rather have a console than a computer any day. 
> Video
> games stress a computer physically and I'd rather pound away on an
> attachment to a $300 console than the keyboard on a $2000 laptop 
> (which does
> a worse job of playing games anyway).
>
>

This was a good summary of where we are, and I agree with it. It's 
analogous in many ways to photography (another of my interests); while 
digital cameras are still changing dramatically, there are a whole load 
of SLR users out there using 10, 20, even 30 years old equipment. I own 
a 43-year-old fully-manual Leica, which I even use sometimes, and on 
the occasions when I get the exposure calculation in my head right, the 
pics I get are probably better than from any other camera I own. Most 
of the time, however, I use one of my EOS's but even there I prefer to 
use one that's 14 years old and another one that's about 10 years old. 
The big improvements in camera & lens technologies (aspheric lenses, 
programmed exposure control, autoexposure - and I do recognise that not 
everyone regards all/any of those as 'improvements') have all happened, 
there's little difference between this year's new Canon EOS and last 
year's or the year before's.

Going back to computers, however, one area that might tempt a user 
towards a newer machine might be stuff that we don't do professionally 
but nonetheless do do, occasionally. As a an amateur photographer I 
like to do my own image processing and output the results to my 
photo-quality inkjet printer. There's no doubt that CPU-intensive tasks 
like that benefit from a faster system, and (in the case of Macs) 
specifically from a G4 as against an equivalent-speed G3. There can be 
other benefits from a later machine, too - more ram may available, 
bigger/faster cacheing (though not in the case of the 12" PB), faster 
system bus, and all of these may well produce better performance for 
that sort of usage. So there are benefits from upgrading, though they 
may not be compelling ones.

Tom Burke


-- 
G-Books is sponsored by  and...

 Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com  | Refurbished Drives |
 -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks  |  & CDRWs on Sale!  |

  Support Low End Mac 

G-Books list info:  
  --> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to:  
To unsubscribe, email:  
For digest mode, email: 
Subscription questions: 
Archive: 



---
>The Think Different Store
http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com
---