Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1.    #1  
    Looks like the G4 PowerBook is helping Apple's bottom line. I just read this article posted at CNET News.com:

    http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200...html?tag=mn_hd

    I think I'm going to jump on the Mac bandwagon in July. Rumor has it that Dual processor G4s, in wider varieties, are coming back. I just hope Apple drops the prices!
  2. #2  
    Welcome to the club
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  3. #3  
    i've never been happier with a computer than i am with my mac. in fact the only complaint i could think of making would be paltry memory for base models. get more ram.

    sorry for no caps, my son spilled my beer on my keyboard, and my wife turned it upside down so it's out of commission. i'm using keycaps to ''type'' and then cutting and pasting into my post.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #4  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    i've never been happier with a computer than i am with my mac. in fact the only complaint i could think of making would be paltry memory for base models. get more ram.

    sorry for no caps, my son spilled my beer on my keyboard, and my wife turned it upside down so it's out of commission. i'm using keycaps to ''type'' and then cutting and pasting into my post.
    lol! ah, memories....
    Hmm, I think I still had my Quadra840av when that happened to me.
  5.    #5  
    I'm still not sure whether I will take the plunge or not, but I have been considering Macs some time. The hardware is simply beautiful, and OSX is the best of both worlds...a jaw dropping elegant new interface + the rock solid robust architecture of UNIX (BSD). The odd thing is, I have always been a PC Geek! I've built PCs, configured hardware, partitioned hard drives, installed/upgraded countless Windows installations...you name it, I've done it. But PCs have become rather boring. I blame this on a fixated "PC culture" that is introverted and too obsessed with clock speeds and more power. In the quest for more power, all other aspects to the PC have been pushed by the wayside. Integration between OS/hardware and attention to finer details such as style and design innovation are completely ignored. I find myself asking the same question: Will the PC ever change? Where is this platform headed? Every year we see more of the same: faster PCs. But it's still just the same old beige box! The DELL sytem that I bought over 3 years ago still looks exactly like their latest models (4100). Whenever I bring this issue up with my friends, who are also PC enthusiasts, the response is always the same; "HA HA! Go buy a Mac..Macboy!" So that's it? If I want my hardware to perform well..and look cool I have to turn to Apple? That should tell you there is something seriously wrong with this picture? If we want PCs to continue to remain the center of our digital world, we have to ditch the old way of thinking. No more of this "let them eat cake!" attitude.

    No wonder consumers have turned their attention to other devices such as PDAs. They look cool...and they work!!! What a concept! I believe that any PC maker that continues to build the same old beige box will be dead within 18 months. Don't believe me? Look at Micron, they built excellent PCs, but what it ultimately comes down to is..they were just another box maker. Which system has more public awareness: a Micron PC or an iMac? The iMac may look silly (I'll never buy one!), but everyone knows what it is the moment the see one. Sorry guys, but in the end, looks do matter! Even Microsoft knows this, it's why they are spending so much development effort on the new user interface for WinXP. It's all about the user eXPerience (sorry, couldn't resist). And that's the sad part, Microsoft is finally understanding this, but PC OEMs are still clueless. There are of course a few mild attempts..Compaq's Presario and HP's Pavilion, but these aren't really systems that I can use for professional work. DELL recently tried to escape the beige box look with the Dimension 8100. It doesn't look all that bad, but there are a few tiny problems that go along with P4s:

    1.) Pentium 4 systems come with RDRAM. Meaning; instead of paying $50 for 128MB of ram, your going to pay around $200-300. Nice huh? The days of cheap memory are coming to an end for PC users. Considering that Windows XP will need at least 256MB or Ram, and more, I'd say we are in for a major screw job here!

    2.) THESE THINGS ARE BIG...REALLY BIG! Pentium 4 systems come in big enclosures necessary to accommodate all the hardware bloat, which is a step backward in PC design, IMO. Instead of PCs becoming smaller, stylish, more manageable and expandable, they're getting bigger. Same is true of the Athlon, although not as severe. Has anyone looked at the new HP Pavilions? They are gigantic!

    And then of course there is Microsoft. Oh, Microsoft. As ZDNET columnist (former) Mary Jay Foley put; "If you thought Microsoft's past ant-competitive practices were bad...we aint seen nothin yet!" Microsoft has some screwy ideas that lay ahead for us PC users. An obscure plan called .NET (they're going to have to do a better job explaining what this is, because I'm still confused), Hailstorm (Microsoft Passport on steroids), a mandatory product activation system for Windows XP that will make adding or upgrading hardware a pain in the @***, and even more frightening..."Subscription Computing". Needless to say, I'm more than a little worried. This is why I sometimes wonder if, perhaps, Microsoft should be broken up.

    Damn, this post is long! Any way, sorry to go off topic with my rants, but what the hell..it's Friday. Just thought I'd share my thoughts.
    Last edited by foo fighter; 03/30/2001 at 02:00 PM.
  6. #6  
    I realize that I'm probably in the minority here but I honestly could not possibly care less what my pc looks like. Here at work I've got a bunch of Dell Inspirons which I love in part because when I need to crack one open it's a peice of cake. It's got a simple, funcional case with no frills. I've also got several HP Pavilions and Compaq Presarios which I hate in part because they have added these cheesey plastic bezels in an attempt at style. This junk is nothing but a pain in the **** when you need to upgrade the machine and it looks silly too.
    Mike
    I'd rather be upside down in my kayak than rightside up at my desk.
  7. #7  
    Here at work I've got a bunch of Dell Inspirons which I love in part because when I need to crack one open it's a peice of cake. It's got a simple, funcional case with no frills.
    Have you ever opend a G4 desktop? It will make that Dell look like rubik's cube.

    Let's not forget that, while apple has always been a leader in design, there was a dark time in the early 90's when they were making beige beasts as well. Fortunately, Jobs understands the value of design and has really made the computer fun again.

    While OSX IS a great thing, it remains to be seen as to whether or not is retains Apple's 'user experience' focuse. OSX is NOT your grandma's Mac OS.

    That said, I think a lot of people today ARE wanting more out of a machine (both in hardware and software) AND are willing to invest a bit of time to learn these more advanced tools.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  8. #8  
    Originally posted by homer

    Have you ever opend a G4 desktop? It will make that Dell look like rubik's cube.
    Maybe so, I don't know much about Macs and I certainly don't have anything against them. I've even thought about getting an iMac at home to play around with (by the way, there's no reason I couldn't network it with my pc is there? What protocols can they use?).

    My point was merely that style is fine but absolutely not at the expense of functionality. I think that some of the PC manufacturers like Compaq and HP have made pathetic attempts at style which besides looking silly, also hamper the functionality of the machine.
    Mike
    I'd rather be upside down in my kayak than rightside up at my desk.
  9.    #9  
    Originally posted by homer
    That said, I think a lot of people today ARE wanting more out of a machine (both in hardware and software) AND are willing to invest a bit of time to learn these more advanced tools.
    I agree, and that is the difficult position I'm placed in right now. I'm a power user, but the only real choice I have, on the PC side, is to buy another beige box. There is simply no way in hell I can use an HP Pavilion or Compaq Presario for building web sites or graphics design. These just aren't Professional systems. That leaves me with the DELL Dimension 8100, which would have been a good choice, had it not been for Intel's P4 and it's damn RAMBUS memory!

    So what am I supposed to do? Build my own system? No thanks, I've been down that road before, and frankly it's over hyped. In my opinion, the only reason PC enthusiasts build their own PCs is to prove their level of skill. Well, just because you can slap 6 components together doesn't make you any more technically skilled than a lab rat. I've built 3 systems in last year, and I can't see what's so exciting about the experience. The machines didn't perform any faster than a top of the line DELL or Gateway, and the only part of the assembly process that required care was selecting the correct power supply and fan..big deal. And the enclosures a joke! You haven't seen PCs at their worst until you see a generic Antec box! Wahoo...what a work of art. They look like something from 1993. And don't let anyone tell you that you can save hundreds of dollars by building your own box, it's just not true anymore. Unless your building a REALLY high-end system with dual processors, dual hard drives and other specialized hardware, your going to pay about the same with an OEM.

    Quote from Jupe:
    My point was merely that style is fine but absolutely not at the expense of functionality. I think that some of the PC manufacturers like Compaq and HP have made pathetic attempts at style which besides looking silly, also hamper the functionality of the machine.
    Bottom line: I want style and design, but not by sacrificing expandability and performance.
    Last edited by foo fighter; 03/30/2001 at 03:16 PM.
  10. #10  
    I've even thought about getting an iMac at home to play around with
    Well, G4s are the easiest machines to get into. iMacs, on the other hand, are a royal pain in the ***. That said, Apple never intended for the average iMac user to even want to open their iMac.

    (by the way, there's no reason I couldn't network it with my pc is there? What protocols can they use?).
    This is one bummer about Apple, they never took the time to build-in Windows Neworking protocols. That said, there are a lot of third-party apps that let you do just that.

    The easiest way is if you have a linux or NT server in the house, then you can just run AppleTalk services on that and use it as a file server.

    My point was merely that style is fine but absolutely not at the expense of functionality.
    Good design does not put form before function, nor function before form. Good design making a product both extremely functional and extremely aesthetically pleasing. We (mainly Americans) seem to accept only one or the other. ie, we will accept an ugly product as long as it is functional and we'll except a crappy product as long as it looks great.

    Apple hasn't quite perfected the aesthetic and functional equation, but they are getting damn close...especially with the new G4 powerbook...which is saying a lot seeing as how Apple is an american company. Typically the giants in great product design have fallen outside of the US: BMW, Sony, Ikea, anything 'swiss' etc.

    Apple doesn't make their computer soley on stylistic decisions, which makes them GREAT machines. The cube is really cool (it's so small!) but it also has some great functional advances...mainly the fact that there is no loud fan in the thing and that there is only one cable going from the monitor.

    I think that some of the PC manufacturers like Compaq and HP have made pathetic attempts at style which besides looking silly, also hamper the functionality of the machine.
    Yep. You just defined bad design. That's exactly what they are doing...they are pushing style over everything, which, typically does nothing for the user experience other than looking 'kind of neat.'

    To be honest, Handspring could learn a bit from Apple. I love their PDAs...especially on the functional level, but they could push the style and ergonomics of their devices a bit more.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  11. #11  
    I was one of the people that bought a PowerBook G4 400 during Feb and I really like it. I love how I can move entire application folders (while they're still running) to a different location without a problem. It's taking some getting used to (no network tools like ping or tracerout) but it is truly a joy to use. The keyboard doesn't feel like a laptop keyboard and is laid out pretty well. The LCD screen is so clear and big that it's wider than my Dell's monitor and is easier on the eyes.

    I just installed (easily) an additional 256MB of RAM so I can comfortably move to OS X. I took some flak from my friends on getting a Mac, but I haven't had any problems with it, and the only times I have had to restart were because of IE.

    My new goal is to get my parents to get a Mac so I don't have to help my Dad so much with their PC.
    James Hromadka, TreoCentral Editor
    Houston - EST. 1836
  12. #12  
    Until about two months ago I had been a Macintosh-hater my whole life. I remember taking this class in Differential Geometry in graduate school where I was working with torsion and curvature of torus knots -- I was using a Macintosh with Mathematica to do some plotting and it would take FOREVER. (Part of that is Mathematica's fault.) And all the mac users I knew were artsy-fartsy types who used Macs basically because they were scared by DOS. All that leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.

    Then about two months ago I read the first of many plugs by James here at VC about the Powerbook G4 and checked out the web site. Wow. Then I had a student that did a calculus project on a Mac that was extremely nice. Wow again. Now I am thinking of joining the Dark Side and getting a powerbook the next time I upgrade (which will be pretty soon, since my PC now was bought in 1997).

    The only thing is -- and I ask this because I am Macintosh-challenged and never had to deal with crossing platforms -- I have so much software that is just for the PC... and if I get a mac, how much of that is obsolete? And how about years and years of MS Word documents, course gradebooks on Excel, etc.? Will Mac software auto-convert that stuff? Basically I am wondering if I make the leap into Macs, will my software and applications all be unusable, will I have to spend $$$ on software to make all my current stuff work, or were people at Apple smart enough to consider that and account for it already?

    And foo fighter is right on -- style does count for a lot... how many people bought color Visors instead of graphite for that very reason?
    BertBert
    Mark 12:28-31
  13. utz
    utz is offline
    utz's Avatar
    Posts
    30 Posts
    #13  
    I have to agree with a lot of what's being said in this thread. I am unhapppy with the direction that PCs are heading. Foo Fighter hit it staight on with the comments about processor speed. If I see one more AD for a PC with a 1Ghz processor but a supid 64 MB RAM I am going to puke. The PC industry is going to get a rude awakening. Ten years ago the people with computers were mostly tech oriented, but in the last decade the demografic has shifted. The average computer user now just wants the dang thing to work and could care less about the bells and whistles. I don't thinks Macs will ever gain market share because of prices, but I think when a web pad or other smartly designed product has enough functionality to replace the PC, the PC industry is going hurt.

    Personally I don't no what I will be using in a few years. I already know that WIN98 is my last M$ OS. WinXP will just be too controlling for me. Macs are too expensive and closed for me. Linux is too fragmented right now for me. I hope something changes before I need another computer.

    One more thing to rant about. My den sounds like a dang airport with all those fans running. Another "reason" to upgrade to a fast processors.

    Thats all for now.
    Utz -- (Pronounced 'ootz', it means good, happy, etc. in the Mayan language of Cakchiquel)
  14. #14  
    I have so much software that is just for the PC... and if I get a mac, how much of that is obsolete?
    All of it. They are different OSs, so your windows apps won't run in the MacOS.

    However, you can run Windows on top of the MacOS by using VirtualPC. This works really well, provided you have a newer mac. You can run most productivity apps in Virtual PC without any problems, though you aren't going to be too happy playing your 3-D action games in it.

    And how about years and years of MS Word documents, course gradebooks on Excel, etc.? Will Mac software auto-convert that stuff?
    There's nothing to convert. Just get MS Office for the Mac.

    This is a big decision...trash your current software, or stick with it. Many companies that have both Mac and PC software will allow you to make a platform upgrade, where you pay an upgrade price to get the other OS version.

    However, you will be able to run all of your existing Unix software in OS X. So, when the OSX version of Virtual PC comes out, you, in theory, will be able to run Mac, Linux, Unix, and windows software all on the same machine. Cool.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  15. #15  
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by BertBert

    [ Now I am thinking of joining the Dark Side and getting a powerbook the next time I upgrade (which will be pretty soon, since my PC now was bought in 1997). ]



    It's the WinTel world that's the Dark Side. Only by reverse engineering the Mac OS was micros able to come up with a GUI, which was a poor imitation of the MAC until recently.



    Corporate monopoly and theft=heart of darkness.



    BTW, I use both systems but prefer the MAC. Just loaded OSX : it rocks!
    When I get a little money I buy books; if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
  16. #16  
    Just had to jump into yet another highly polarized Foo Fighter thread ..

    Kill the beige, hurrah for the design! yuep .. going to happen -- With a slow down in the PC sector, you will see companies (such as Micron) exiting the race and the ones remaining trying to differentiate their products -- I mean, right now your basically getting everything under the sun (free scanners, printers, big monitors, huge harddrives, etc..) so style will become more and more important to lure customers to buy a companies machine.

    WinXP -- like it or not, its here to stay and I have been hard pressed to find reviews that bash this operating system .. Foo Fighter is right about the entire design/layout thing -- I haven't had a chance to toy around with XP, but I just hope the friendliness/design doesn't get in the way .. (it does seem like they make it easy to get rid of the eye-candy..)

    Mac OS X -- I'm still out on this one .. I just don't understand how Apple can have a lock on the hardware, have a lock on the OS and still not make the two jive together more fluidly -- I have heard lots of negative information regarding the speed of the OS X interface (mainly file operations and such..) and have heard that the interface in certain situations can lock the user out of the system until it is complete (a la OS 9...) -- granted, it is new and a first release .. just seems like they have a long ways to go ..

    Building your own system -- for general computing use, I agree -- don't bother .. but it does come in really handy for specialized boxes (ie low-cost backup server, down and dirty intranet webserver, etc...) -- In those cases, it is nice to have the option of "cutting the fat" and making a lean and mean optimized machine -- i still think it would be nice to have the option of doing that for the Macintosh side...

    the bottom line .. "Bottom line: I want style and design, but not by sacrificing expandability and performance." -- interesting comment foo -- so basically you want it all ... I dunno .. I think your going to have to get rid of one of those, most likely the expandability that the beige box offers ... just my thoughts anyways..

    Joe
  17.    #17  
    Originally posted by Cerulean
    Just had to jump into yet another highly polarized Foo Fighter thread ..
    Ah, what can I say. I love sparking debates around here. Someone has to be the sacrificial lamb, it might as well be me.

    ...so style will become more and more important to lure customers to buy a companies machine.
    It is bound to happen sooner or later, and I think it could end up being the key that saves OEMs. You only need to look at marketing history to see that design, ultimately, reinvigorates sales. For example, Palm devices didn't really become hot until the Palm V came along. Apple was dead in the water until they unveiled the iMac. And despite the advanced features built into Cell phones, Nokia's 5100 series is still their most popular..simply because it's cheap and comes with color faceplates. The writing is on the wall. If you build it, they will come!

    I haven't had a chance to toy around with XP, but I just hope the friendliness/design doesn't get in the way .. (it does seem like they make it easy to get rid of the eye-candy..)
    I have WinXP Beta 2 on order, and should be receiving the CD within the next couple weeks. I'll let everyone know what my eXPerience is like.

    Not that it's going to run on my old 1998 vintage PII 350 all that well. But at least I will get a hands on feel for new OS. I'm betting XP is going to be Microsoft's best OS yet. The question is...will anyone care?

    ... I dunno .. I think your going to have to get rid of one of those, most likely the expandability that the beige box offers ... just my thoughts anyways..
    I don't quite agree, at least where Macs are concerned. That is precisely why I'm interested in the PowerMac G4, it's sleek, sexy, powerful, and highly (not to mention easily) upgradeable. As for the PC..your right, I'm screwed. I can either take the cute, cuddly, proprietary HPs or Compaqs, or I can go with beige. That's why I'm stuck at this preverbal fork in the road...which way do I go?

    Oh well, at least time is on my side. The longer I wait, the lower prices will go down and performance will go up.
  18. #18  
    It's the WinTel world that's the Dark Side. Only by reverse engineering the Mac OS was micros able to come up with a GUI, which was a poor imitation of the MAC until recently.
    To be fair, Apple ripped of the GUI from Xerox PARC.

    To BOTH Apple's and Microsoft's credit, these new "x" OS's are FINALLY a bit of a departure from the traditional OS conventions we've been using over the last 15 years...it's nice to see something new (and somewhat original) coming out of both of the companies.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  19.    #19  
    Originally posted by homer
    To BOTH Apple's and Microsoft's credit, these new "x" OS's are FINALLY a bit of a departure from the traditional OS conventions we've been using over the last 15 years...it's nice to see something new (and somewhat original) coming out of both of the companies.
    Apple and Microsoft are both doing an excellent job of improving their flagship operating systems. Although I'd have to give the "coolness" award to Apple, Windows XP is no slouch either. One advantage XP will have over OSX is the UI. A small but vocal number of Mac users don't like Aqua. But since that is all part of the OS, there isn't much you can do about. XP, on the other hand, has a "skinning" feature that allows the interface to be customized with different Visual Styles. The default "Luna" theme is hideous, but you can always go with something else, or turn it off altogether.

    Hey Cerulean, if you like WinXP, here is a wallpaper from the new OS I think you'll like. It's pretty cool:
    Attached Images Attached Images
  20. #20  
    Originally posted by foo fighter


    Apple and Microsoft are both doing an excellent job of improving their flagship operating systems. Although I'd have to give the "coolness" award to Apple, Windows XP is no slouch either. One advantage XP will have over OSX is the UI. A small but vocal number of Mac users don't like Aqua. But since that is all part of the OS, there isn't much you can do about. XP, on the other hand, has a "skinning" feature that allows the interface to be customized with different Visual Styles. The default "Luna" theme is hideous, but you can always go with something else, or turn it off altogether.

    Hey Cerulean, if you like WinXP, here is a wallpaper from the new OS I think you'll like. It's pretty cool:
    Schemes have been a part of Mac OS long before there was anything but green and blue on peecee. 9.1 will still use schemes and undoubtedly will follow in OS x.
    When I get a little money I buy books; if any is left, I buy food and clothes.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions