Yes, if a programmer makes programs for Windows, he’ll obviously send .exe to a Windows user, an OSX programmer will send .app/.dmg to an OSX users, but that’s quite obvious isn’t it? A tennis player won’t go and tennis on a bowling track, now would he.
Sounds like a lot of fun to me.
Same to me tbh, people should do it more often.
This is such a massive pile of bullshit I have to plug my nose to even look at it.
Windows 7…isn’t…less…stable.
Maybe xp and probably Vista, but most definitely not 7.
Looks nice and functions well? I think you meant to say Windows 7. Ugly, problematic, effort-draining operating system, you were talkign about osx right??
Windows 7 is undeniably more attractive(I won’t bother to explain because it’s pretty obvious, but if you really want an explanation ask and I’ll give it). You mac people go on and on about how amazing apple workflow is when mac’s workflow can’t come anywhere near Windows 7’s. There is one major flaw with osx that it has always had and it always will have: no taskbar. The start bar is insanely useful. Steve Jobs is busting his ass trying to find a way to make up for all the functionality of the start bar osx lacks with things like expose but a start bar just can’t be replaced.
Say I want to know what kind of windows I have open and how many. On mac I use expose to display a preview of the windows, on Windows 7 I use my eyes to look at the taskbar.
My point is, using expose interrupts your task. You can’t use expose and be typing at the same time. But you can look at the start bar and type at the same time.
Then there’s aero shake, snap and peek. On osx if you want to make a window take up half your screen you move the window to the side and then resize it. On windows you drag the window to the edge of the screen and it does the rest for you.
Half? HALF? My word, how extraordinary. However, for us unlucky souls in Australia, I only ended up paying about $AUD200 more for my Macbook Pro than my parents did my previous laptop.
Time Machine really isn’t like system restore; system restore restores system files and settings, without changing any of your files. Time Machine is just an automatic backup maker, which takes all, some or even just a few of your files and stores them on a remote HDD.
Give me one example of where Windows has a program that Mac does not have the SAME program or an equivalent.
Eh? I have 4 GB of DDR3 ram in this laptop at the moment…All the old Macbooks/Pros came with DDR2, like all the old PCs did…the ram isn’t different…
I had a lot of stability issues with all the Windows products; they crash often - its hardly rare, and just because you haven’t had a lot of crashing issues doesn’t mean the rest of us haven’t.
WTF? You mean, like, that list of all your apps that is in no way available in Mac? What about, oh gee, I dunno, the APPS FOLDER. With all of your APPS. Like the start menu contains all of your PROGRAMS. You can even arrange the APPS folder in a LIST, like the START MENU.
And if you’re talking about pinning applications, you can do that to the dock. If you’re talking about that Spotlight look-alike on Windows, you can just use the real thing on Mac.
And no, Windows 7 is not more attractive. But that’s far too subjective and there’s no way your subjectivity is even going to let you amit that OS X looks anything but truly horrid.
Or you could just look at the dock for the little light underneath the application which shows that its open. Expose is very useful for moving through a large amount of open windows, which isn’t something that you can readily do in Windows.
One word: Meh. The extra second it takes me to resize a window to the size I want or press the green + button is hardly enough to make me start hating Mac.
Natively? How about Steam? 
[COLOR=‘Black’]“B-b-b-but CrossOver”…that’s not really native, is it? I mean, I might as well say Windows is better because I can run OSX software with PearPC…
I could say the inverse for you. “Just because you have had a lot of crashing issues doesn’t mean the rest of us have.” Seriously. Crashing is something that almost never happens if you know how to use a PC. If you don’t know how to use a PC and install buggy-as-hell programs, then…GIGO.
You didn’t adress his point at all. lrn2read.
He said that Macs use DDR2 ram, and that that ram is more expensive. But there is no difference between Mac ram and normal laptop ram, and what’re more I said that the current range of Macbook Pros use DDR3 ram, contrary to his assertion. Hence I saw his point, dismissed it and moved on.
And what, pray tell, would be the point of having a Mac version of Steam when the majority of Steam’s games don’t run natively in Mac? If you want games, you have to use WINE or Crossover, or the more bloated alternatives of Parallels or even BootCamp.
And since you asked, PearPC is actually the equivalent of Parallels, where the Mac operating system can be run inside Windows by emulating the software. WINE is a program that allows programs to run natively, not through an emulator, hence the recursive anagram: Wine Is Not an Emulator.
no, what i said is that hardware with the mac stamp of approval on it is absurdly overpriced. i sated that the DDR2 ram was overpriced because it is currently so outdated.
You completely failed at addressing my point.
I’m so lost. There IS NO SPECIAL MAC RAM; its just standard DDR3 SDRAM in the latest Mac, or standard whatever that your old Mac is using.
DDR2 ram is overpriced, but no more so than any old ram. Given that the new line of Macbooks (that came out a good long while ago) come with DDR3 ram, I don’t see your line of argument. At all.
And yes, Mac hardware is more expensive. But, as I stated a long while previously, for me in Australia the difference wasn’t that great, and I saved the money on software anyway.
XP nuff said.
Actually i saw this advertised by a Mac publication several hours ago, granted the newest line of Macbooks use DDR3, they’ve only been using it for about the last 6 months. the majority of Mac users didn’t go buy a new Macbook the second they came out.
That was kind of my point?
I already had 2 macbooks that had 4GB ddr3, they were both slower than my HP laptop that uses DDR2 and the same graphics card.
But that exactly the same for PCs though, isn’t it. When new innovations come out, like DDR3, only those that immediately go out and buy a new PC can enjoy the fruits of this new technology. Anyone with anything less than brand new has to be content with yesterday’s tech, in this case, DDR2.
Its been bandied around a lot in this thread. If a game isn’t released natively on Mac OS X, then use Wine and Crossover. If Wine and Crossover don’t work for you, then use Parallels. If Parallels doesn’t work for you, then use BootCamp. There are options, but its just something that every prospective Mac owner needs to take into account. I did, and I use my Windows gaming rig to play all the games I could ever want, with Wine picking up the rest.
And so your argument is that Mac hardware is slower by the sole virtue of the fact that its not a PC? You do know that Apple doesn’t produce any of the actual components in their computers; they’re all just assembled by them. But, then again, Asus, Lenovo and Toshiba don’t manufacture their own components either.
And the type of memory is hardly the major deciding factor on whether or not a laptop is fast. And slower at what, pray tell?
There is special mac RAM; it’s identical to every other RAM stick out there, except it costs waayyyyy more and comes with your mac. He’s saying mac RAM is way overpriced.
BTW all those options cost money and time and according to most mac fanboys pirating is for fags too lazy to get a job.
Reminds me of something I heard somewhere.
There’s a brand that sells 3 types of sausages. One sausage is cheap and marketed as low quality to be sold to the poor. Another is decent priced and marketed as decent quality for the middle class. The final sausage is extremely expensive and marketed as the best sausage money can buy. In truth, each sausage is exactly the same except for their label and price tag. You mac RAM or mac hardware in general isn’t any better, Steve Jobs just slapped an expensive price tag on it and told you it was for people who wanted a good computer.
None of which will work very well. They’ll be slow, you’ll have to boot them up, they won’t run all games, they will have glitches, etc.
…because Apple refuses to allow it…
Yep. And I can jailbreak my iPod Touch, using a separate program, too. The point is, you asked what Windows can do that Mac can’t. Really, nothing…but then again, Windows can do everything that Mac can as well using special software as well, so it’s kind of a moot point, don’t you think?
Huh? I thought he was talking about replacement RAM. Oh well. Whatever. Its been dealt with.
You’ve clearly never used them. I can play Half Life 2 and the rest of the Orange Box games perfectly, with no more start up time than there is for Steam and the games on windows.
True, newer games don’t work as well, but there’s no way in hell I’d be playing those on my laptop anyway. I tried Fallout 3 on my old PC…shudder.
Huh? Its not that Apple refuses to allow ports, its that developers haven’t been developing games for Mac.
True…?
I’m not taking sides here, but comparing previous gen prices to current gen prices is an ill conceived bit of logic.
Also I noticed this a ways back:
Even though it’s a ways back I thought I should add some real numbers to baseless claims. According to a study by Square Trade Apple reliability is comparably high. The study discussed the failure rates over 2 and three year periods. Overall they were 4th, so I wouldn’t say it’s a guaranteed win. Unfortunately, they fall behind Sony, Toshiba, and Asus. Sony and Asus, okay to accept as designer brands similar in business profile to Apple, however it’s a tough pill to swallow seeing Toshiba win as a full force company coming in third in total laptop sales. Apple is ahead by a ways in terms of support quality though…consumer ratings.
I’m gonna put my bit in here saying that unfortunately Apple hovering around a 5% total market share (OS wise I mean) is hard to argue it’s growth is going to change much. However, I would put forth that both Windows and OSX accomplish the target goal of their design. Windows is superior at mass general function. OSX is far more capable for ‘buy it, use it’ and ‘create’.