Printable View
you just killed your own argument. these people that are still using their 400mhz macs use them for what? the internet and productivity. so of course they dont need faster systems. doesnt mean theyre better. and maybe you didnt research and bought what "sounded good" at the time, but was actually cheap and inferior and am now bitter about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
just say your card sucks. its okay to admit it.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
It does suck, I guess,compared to whatever else is out there, but Im not stupid enough to drop $200 on a card. The card will play 99.9999999% of the games I want to play just fine, and it cost me $60. Im happy.
No, most are ProTools rigs and other sorts of digital production units because they still get the job done well enough to stave off buying a new machine. 400MHz G4 machines were last made five years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne
In addition, they can drop $400 bucks five years later for a processor upgrade so what was 400MHz then is 1.25GHz now.
I see it all of the time and have two such machines in the shop right now.
When comparing macs to windows boxes, it's important to keep in mind that macs don't really need to run anti-virus/anti-spyware software, whereas most windows boxes do. Windows is bad enough as it is, but when you add anti-virus software to the mix, the system will just chug.
I don't use anti-virus software on my PC because I know better than to run shady .exes and I keep up to date with OS security issues.
The average PC user, however, is incapable and/or unwilling to safeguard and manage their systems the way I would, and so they get software to do it for them.
These are the same people that Apple wants to switch over to macs, so for most people, basing their decision on specs alone is just foolish.
I'm not 100% sure what you're arguing here, but I'll tell you my situation. I have a 550MHz Mac sitting here that I'm using. I use it for all of the normal stuff, and then for Photoshop, graphic design, layout work, some video work, among other things. Would I love a better machine? Absolutely. But my little 550MHz machine with the most current version of Mac OSX still runs along just fine, and aside from being a bit pokey, does most of what I want it to do. (Except play recent games, of course.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonmaster Dyne
I'm not sure I'd want to take a 550MHz PC, slap XP on it, and try to do the same things I do now on it.
Huh? A 550 MHz PC can do anything that a comparable Mac CPU would do. XP on my P3-500 ran just fine. Look, I'm all for Macs, but it's silly to say there is something special about the architecture of Apple programs.
I dunno. XP on my 400MHz Gateway SUCKS. P2, though. For PCs, it's about the processor, I guess. So P3 and 150 extra megahertz apparently helps.
In my office, we have a 700MHZ PIII computer that the techs use. We have a partial T1 network and the computer runs beyond slow. I have DSL at the house and it runs 10 times faster on my 2GHZ computer, compared to the 700 MHZ computer on a faster internet service.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Your 700 MHz PC sucks, then. I've been on this school network for years and started with that 500. It's no different now. RAM is the most important issue, but really, if you have that sort of discrepancy and the only difference is the CPU, something is wrong.
=/ I'm running a P3 731 mhz with 384 of ram with xp. It works better than the P4 beside it.