Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1.    #1  
    Ok, this was bound to happen, so let the games begin!

    CNET reporter Joe Wilcox seems to prefer OSX over XP:

    http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1272-210...html?tag=bt_pr
  2.    #2  
    Looks like Macromedia will be first to release a major Pro app for OS X, starting with Freehand:

    http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/ne...080452,00.html

    I use Macromedia products every day for my work. If they can deliver Dreamweaver and Fireworks for OS X this quick, I'll be a happy boy!
  3. #3  
    Hmm...

    He seemed to complain the MacOS X wasn't really finished. When was a release of Windows ever 'finished'? When was a release of Linux ever 'finished'.

    He also seemed to think WinXP had the upper hand in that it could run Win2K software and that there wasn't a whole lot of software available for MacOSX. Obviously, he missed the entire fact that you can run all of your MacOS 9 software in OSX.

    Is it me or a lot of the tech writers about as tech-saavy as a potato? The article was fine, but he oversimplified a lot of it (both on the Mac and PC side) and tended to state personal preference as facts at time.

    Anyways...I'm intrigued by both OSes. I'll probably be getting OSX running on a server soon, and will hopefully get around to getting XP running. Has anyone tried XP in Virtual PC, yet? I assume it should work...

    I've also been using Linux a lot more now and have come to appreciate how bad of an OS it is from a user-standpoint. Someone needs to get working on an "X" gui for linux...
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  4. #4  
    With what mac model is Apple going to use to part you from your money, foo?

    -edited to correct poor english
    Last edited by dick-richardson; 03/31/2001 at 04:54 PM.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  5. #5  
    Freehand 10? I'm still trying to figure out the difference between Frehand 8 and 9! Sometimes I wish software companies would just say "it's done...we don't need to add any more features!"

    I have yet to even deal with Photoshop 6. Bloatware at its finest.

    Actually, it will be only a matter of months before most major software is available for native OSX. I guess apple did a really good job of enabling developers to quickly add the necessary code changes to take advantage of OSX.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  6.    #6  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    With what mac model is Apple going to part you from your money, foo?
    I still haven't decided yet, but it looks like the upcoming entry level PowerMac G4 will be my best bet. For my work, I just can't imagine using the Titanium PowerBook G4, although I am thinking of going with a 15" LCD display, so that would be nice. But the $2500 price tag is too rich for my blood. I'd rather stay in $1500 price range.
  7. #7  
    I guess that means you are going to get some other type of 15" display, since Apple's is $700 ($1700 + $700 is pretty close to a TiBook). Could you really do your work on a 15" screen? Personally I wouldn't like working on such a small display (on a desktop).
    <A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>
  8.    #8  
    Originally posted by lennonhead
    Could you really do your work on a 15" screen? Personally I wouldn't like working on such a small display (on a desktop).
    I'm considering a 15" LCD, but I don't know whether I will go that route or not. Right now I'm using a 19" SONY FD-Trinitron CRT (G400), which offers beautiful image color/contrast...but poor geometry. CRT displays always have flawed geometry, and it drives me up the wall. On the flip side, LCDs have perfect geometry, but mediocre color calibration/contrast. 19" CRTs offer a great visual space to work with as well as greater resolution scaling than LCDs. It's a trade off.

    But keep in mind that 15" LCDs are not the equivalent of a 15" CRT. A 15" LCD has the same viewable space as a 17" CRT, and the native resolution of a 19" CRT...1024x768, which is the res I work at.
    Last edited by foo fighter; 03/31/2001 at 05:21 PM.
  9. #9  
    Originally posted by foo fighter
    But keep in mind that 15" LCDs are not the equivalent of a 15" CRT. A 15" LCD has the same viewable space as a 17" CRT, and the native resolution of a 19" CRT...1024x768, which is the res I work at.
    One of the things I really like about my TiBook is that it's resolution is 1152x768. I run CRT monitors at 1024x768, so now I have a wider screen without it being smaller.

    As for the OSX vs XP debate, my home Dell is a PII 450, so I'm not sure how well it would run XP anyway. It runs Win2K fine, and I haven't seen anything in XP that makes me want to upgrade. Besides, I don't like Microsoft's plans for .NET and subscription software or XP's activation code scheme. If Logitech released a new mouse that kicked the Intellimouse's ****, MS could conceivably prevent you from using it with its hardware registration. The activation scheme also smacks of privacy issues.
    James Hromadka, TreoCentral Editor
    Houston - EST. 1836
  10. #10  
    Originally posted by JHromadka
    Besides, I don't like Microsoft's plans for .NET and subscription software or XP's activation code scheme. If Logitech released a new mouse that kicked the Intellimouse's ****, MS could conceivably prevent you from using it with its hardware registration. The activation scheme also smacks of privacy issues.
    This is exactly why I won't go to XP, I'll probably ride out win98se as long as possible, maybe go to Windows 2000 when the need arises,, but that will be it for me, Most likely I'll switch to all Linux, kinda half way there already.. (I already have all this Intel based hardware and don't relish the idea of having to dump it to run OS X) now if Steve Jobs would just get off his high-horse and make an Intel version of OS X, I think my path would be clear.
    "One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’." -- Douglas Adams
  11. #11  
    Originally posted by homer
    He seemed to complain the MacOS X wasn't really finished. When was a release of Windows ever 'finished'? When was a release of Linux ever 'finished'.
    I assume he's referring to the infamous CD-R/DVD issues with OS X. Sure no OS is ever "finished," but one that doesn't fully support its own company's highly publicized bundled CD-RW and DVD drives is "less finished" than one that does.

    Apple keeps making these small but terrible mistakes that get them hammered in the media. No CD-RW support yet in OS X, no floppy drives, only 64MB RAM in the original "supercomputer" g4 cube...

    (Can you run third-party CD burner software like Toast in OS X? Can you do it if you boot up in OS9? I haven't seen X.)
  12.    #12  
    Originally posted by JHromadka
    One of the things I really like about my TiBook is that it's resolution is 1152x768. I run CRT monitors at 1024x768, so now I have a wider screen without it being smaller.
    That certainly sounds appealing to me, but I need to see what my apps would look like on the TiBook's display before I would consider going that route. Aside from that, I would want CD-RW built in. The ability to burn CDs is a deal breaker for me.

    But I have to admit, the TiBook is simply awesome! I think the PowerMac G4 will be my choice though.

    As for the OSX vs XP debate, my home Dell is a PII 450, so I'm not sure how well it would run XP anyway.
    I should be receiving a copy of WinXP Beta 2 in a couple weeks, so I will at least get a chance to kick the tires. But it's not going to perform well on my old PII 350 with 128MB Ram. I could add more memory, but I really can't justify putting more money into this aging box.

    ...besides, I don't like Microsoft's plans for .NET and subscription software or XP's activation code scheme.
    Neither do I. It has me worried over what lies ahead for the PC industry. Microsoft named Hailstorm well, because it's just that...a pelting storm! My advice is..carry an umbrella!

    I still don't know what the hell .NET is, and I don't think Microsoft does either!

    If Logitech released a new mouse that kicked the Intellimouse's ****, MS could conceivably prevent you from using it with its hardware registration. The activation scheme also smacks of privacy issues.
    Ha! Don't give Microsoft any ideas, they may like the sound of your scheme!
  13. #13  
    Apple keeps making these small but terrible mistakes that get them hammered in the media. No CD-RW support yet in OS X
    This was smart of Apple. They either could have released OSX now, as promised, and gotten people to start using it and developers to start writing for it, or they could have pushed the whole thing back another 3 months.

    Either way, they would have been media-bashed. At least this way, they are getting good reviews as well.

    no floppy drives
    I don't know why people see this is a mistake. I haven't used a floppy in about 3 years. If you REALLY want to use one, go by a floppy drive for $50.

    only 64MB RAM in the original "supercomputer" g4 cube...
    yep. That was a mistake. Granted, I can buy my RAM much cheaper than having Apple include it.

    Oh...and Foo, I'd stay away from the new apple CRT monitors. It sounds like you are going with a LCD anyways. The new CRT's are BEATIFUL monitor that also have the added benefit of only having one cable from sticking out the back that provides USB, POWER, and VIDEO.

    However, they ONLY work with apple's new video cards and ONLY in new G4s and Cubes. So, as lovely as they are, I'd stick with a standard Sony. I ended up with a new monitor + cube at work. I wanted to run two monitors, but there aren't any 3rd party cards that support the new monitors, and, apparently, Belkin has an adapter ready to produce, but apple won't let them.

    So, I'm stuck with this REALLY nice monitor sitting on the floor.
    We're all naked if you turn us inside out.
    -David Byrne
  14. #14  
    I've been running XP as my primary operating system for about a week now and it's definitely the most impressive graphical OS I've ever used. Microsoft has included out of the box hardware support above and beyond anything they've ever released before. Even my thrown together computer with esoteric and bargain brand components worked flawlessly. Beyond the improvements in the administration aspects of it, the desktop is very efficient. You can hide the default desktop icons, and it even gives you a reminder when something has been on the desktop for a while and hasn't been used. I haven't gotten a chance to try out beta 2 yet but I'm looking forward to it.
  15. #15  
    I cannot wait to get my Windows XP beta 2 on april.
    Have A Good Day!
    I Love My Prism!
  16. #16  
    Microsoft should do what Apple did: Forget about legacy hardware. While Apple does have a lock on hardware, I'm sure that if Microsoft could stop providing support for legacy hardware and software (such as DOS), it'll start going away. What is the point of having a DOS backbone in Windows? The only point is so some Windows user can feel 1337 by saying he uses a CLI.

    WinXP should be made so that it will run stably on a 500MHz/128MB system.

    With this 256MB requirement, I'm pretty sure Windows 2000 will be my last Windows. While most say 128MB is minimum for it, I'm running perfectly on 96MB.
  17.    #17  
    Originally posted by akur
    I cannot wait to get my Windows XP beta 2 on april.
    I just hope Microsoft ships XP with a wider variety of more attractive themes than the default "Luna"..or should I say, Loony! Seriously, I don't think I could stand to look at that Fisher-Price UI for more than a few minutes.
  18. #18  
    I like luna interface
    it's look cool!

    I don't know why some person like professional theme better than luna theme?
    Have A Good Day!
    I Love My Prism!
  19.    #19  
    Originally posted by cptncelchu
    With this 256MB requirement, I'm pretty sure Windows 2000 will be my last Windows. While most say 128MB is minimum for it, I'm running perfectly on 96MB.
    I have a feeling it may need a little more than 256MB. I've noticed that every tech journalist that has reviewed Beta 2 of XP was supplied with a Notebook PC (running XP), from Microsoft, for testing the OS. Every single one of those portables was equiped with 320MB Ram. If XP needs 256MB, then why are all of these systems outfitted with more? It can't be just a coincidence.
  20. #20  
    foo: If you don't like the 'loony' interface 2 clicks will have you in the classic NT mode.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions