Im on a new G4 at work all the time, and scary enough im kinda starting to like it, am i insane for considering buying one? osx is nice

I would go Mac if it weren't for all the PC stuff I have. I think Mac becomes more appealing everyday.

I've never had a Mac, and also, never had a chance to really work with one until I got the job I have now. It convinced me to buy one. I mainly got it for photo/video stuff, but also to finally have one of my own that I could muck around with. Eventually I'll be getting a more powerful one, but this one is doing just fine for now. OS X is what really convinced me to buy one, without it I would've waited a lot longer, or not have bought one at all.

Mac's have came a long way.. Honestly, running w2k/cygwin/etc just to emulate a unix environment without actually running linux, I've thought about switching to the macs just to be able to get the shell prompt when I want it..
-m

I've found that without *NIX tools in Windows I can't stand using the command line. I keep coming up against limitations in the standard Windows tools.

Mac hardware is very nice though. I've considering getting a Powerbook but running Linux on it. (Okay, I've probably offended a huge number of mac users but anyway )

- Trevor

haha i feel beter now, i would never aboand my PC ever, but want one for video editing, and photoshoping and the likes.

To be honest, if you want the best hardware compatability and want to be able to run the latest games/software then you're going to have to run Windows on a PC. So get one of each

- Trevor

Ditto, and Amen.

oh i have a pc desktop, i don't play games, just do applications. but I'm typing this on my pc

i insane for considering buying one?


Just remember -- if you buy a Mac it'll be different from what you're used to -- therefore it can't possibly be any good!

tanstaafl.

My mom's work (National Geographic) decided to switch to Mac for apparently no reason whatsoever. They're design and layout people had always been working on them, but that's understandable. But my mom doesn't do any of that. She does editing and research, as does her whole apartment. What's more, they gave every single person in the office a freaking G4! And they're all running OS9!

a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?
b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

It doesn't make any sense to me. All I know is, I tried hooking up my mom's printer to it, and the OS made it so unclear as to how to install a new printer, I had to have her call an IT guy. I'm sorry, but installing a USB printer should be pretty obvious. It wasn't.

So yeah, Mac is different, but I'm going to stay on familiar turf. For what I do I don't need a Mac.

>a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?

If they didn't buy Apple monitors, then it may have been because no other Mac is sold without an integral monitor.

>b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

Because they probably wanted boxes that looked nice and didn't care about the OS. There are also a lot of mac zealots who hate OS X. As stated in an earlier post in this thread, it's different to what they're used to.

It will have OS X installed anyway (unless they removed it) so it just needs to be rebooted, although of course then the IT dept may not support it.


> I'm sorry, but installing a USB printer should be pretty obvious. It wasn't.

Mac OS 9 doesn't work like Windows.

a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?

The one-time purchase price is a small part of what it really costs to operate a desktop computer. Even if it is a bit of overkill, businesses sometimes conclude that it is less expensive to support 100 identical higher-end machines that it is to support a mix of different (say 10 high, 30 mid and 60 low-end) machines. It makes them more interchangeable, for example.

b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

Good question. Is it possible that they are running a key app or apps that aren't supported on OSX yet?

Well, it's fairly common in any large corporate environment for software to have to be approved from the top down. Everyone runs OS Z until it's worth the expense to upgrade to OS Y. Makes support issues far easier to handle.

I've got a friend working for an un-named military installation who just got a new 1.8ghz machine running Windows 95. She says it boots very quickly.

Matthew

Well, it's fairly common in any large corporate environment for software to have to be approved from the top down. Everyone runs OS Z until it's worth the expense to upgrade to OS Y. Makes support issues far easier to handle.

Yup. It's easy to forget that when you are a single user who would really like Feature X.

I really feel like PC functionality has hit a plateau. Especially in the current economic environment, it seems like it would be much harder to justify PC hardware/software upgrades if you are running stuff that has been acquired in the past 2-4 years. For general business use, what situation would demand upgrading a 733 Mhz processor? For what purposes would OS9 *not* suffice?

For general business use, what situation would demand upgrading a 733 Mhz processor? For what purposes would OS9 *not* suffice?

Well if that's the case then the manufacturers of these things (and those who sell software for them) need to start sneaking in some planned obsolescence to protect their revenue streams. Nobody likes to release a product that lasts forever... Well, except our beloved empeg guys.

Seriously though, I think that Microsoft et. al release bloated code on purpose so they can help sell more new PC's with faster processors, which will be bundled with new versions of the O/S, which will be obsoleted by new versions of bloated code, which will sell more PC's, which will be bundled with the newer O/S, which will be obsoleted by....

Well if that's the case then the manufacturers of these things (and those who sell software for them) need to start sneaking in some planned obsolescence to protect their revenue streams. Nobody likes to release a product that lasts forever... Well, except our beloved empeg guys.

I probably should have said "for general use *today*'. There always will be some churn in components and software that will force businesses to upgrade. Plus, MSFT and others just stop selling software/OS versions, so you get driven into new software/hardware if you want to add new desktops. I just think that the cycle has gotten longer and slowed down. For a business with no growth plans, it may be *very* long.

Seriously though, I think that Microsoft et. al release bloated code on purpose so they can help sell more new PC's with faster processors, which will be bundled with new versions of the O/S, which will be obsoleted by new versions of bloated code, which will sell more PC's, which will be bundled with the newer O/S, which will be obsoleted by....

Yup. If this not absolutely intentional, they certainly feel the freedom to behave like this. And hardware/chip makers probably egg them on.

I've considering getting a Powerbook but running Linux on it.

Don't bother. OS X should cover all your Unix needs with the addition of an X Server. And they work so well, I have one loaded that gives me seamless integration, including the "Genie" effect of minimizing a Unix X app to the Dock. Running Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

To be honest, if you want the best hardware compatability and want to be able to run the latest games/software then you're going to have to run Windows on a PC

Games yes, software, no. While Windows has a ton of software, many of the programs do the exact same thing. I still haven't been able to run into an issue of specificially needing a Windows program in my quest to switch to OS X for all my non gaming PC use.

Gaming is getting better on the Mac though, so in a few years, I bet the majority of the games will exist on both platforms. Most hit games are eventually ported, but more and more are hitting the shelves ready for either platform.

Yeah. Nearly all non-gaming apps do seem to be coming out for OS X at the same time or a little bit after now that I look at it properly. I don't really play many games anyway so I guess it's a pretty small disadvantage. Who knows, I may some day swap over to using Macs

- Trevor

Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

Is Solaris really that good? I've heard it scales better than Linux on really big iron (say 8-way) but that Linux is overwhelmingly faster on 1- or 2-cpu kit. This was a while ago now, but I heard of a theoretical astrophysics outfit where they had one Solaris machine that ran the (actually quite good) Sun optimising compiler, and everyone else had Sparc Linux machines to actually run the programs on.

Peter

Well... I think Linux is faster on my Ultra but I'm not sure since my configuration is quite a bit different from when I'm booting Solaris and Linux. I haven't done any tests on it so I can't say for sure.
I'm not too impressed with Solaris x86 though. It really doesn't like some of the hardware I've got and freaks out a lot.

- Trevor

Solaris used to be quite slow, but that was many years ago. It's been reasonably fast since 2.5 and seems to have gained speed with each successive release.

Sun's compilers are quite good, but there's no way that I can think of to get a binary compiled for Solaris to run under Linux. Maybe there's some compatibility suite that I'm not aware of, though.

At the same time, Linux will be overwhelmingly faster on old Sparcs. The resources required to simply run Solaris are just too great for anything slower than, say, a Sparc5 (a 1994 or so era machine). That's because Sun's OS changed from what was commonly referred to as SunOS, which was a BSD derivative, to what's commonly called Solaris, which is an SVR4 derivative, and they seem to have kind of tuned their machines in those directions. (Which is really a load of hooey, but it feels that way.)

Solaris x86 is great if you happen to have one of the four machines out of hundreds of thousands that it'll work properly on.

They don't seem to work very hard to make its hardware compatibility very good.

Sounds better than Darwin on x86...

Running Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

I don't know. I run MacOS X on my toilet-seat iBook, and it's close to too slow to use, not because of the CPU (466MHz G3), but (apparently) because it doesn't support the video chip in it very well.

I run Linux on my Beige G3 because I don't need multiple MacOS machines in my house and because I bought it for $75.

Hi Justin,

I did it around 5 months ago. I'm very happy I did it. I bought a iBook (one of the new Pearl ones). I couldn't help to fall in love with it's beauty and the OS X aqua graphics. I haven't had any single problem since then. Everything works great (am I lucky?). Of course leaving the Windows world is not 100% possible but I use my iBook for almost everything 97% of the time. There are much more software than you think for it. The Apple community is great and a much more possitive atmosphere than the windows one, apple users love their Macs and their software and our proud of them. Can you imagine a world without a Registry? Without DLL's? Withone [censored] Visal Basic software? Without bad programed Service Packs? Without XP? without ugly beige boxes? without virus? a world full of creativity and exclusivity? the list of adventeges vs windows is endless. Quantity does not mean quality! yes there is more software for windows but the quality of apple software in general is just better and does what counts at the end of the day.

Can you imagine a world without a Registry? Without DLL's...

Should I take the Aqua pill and see how deep the rabbit hole goes?

Should I take the Aqua pill and see how deep the rabbit hole goes?

ROFL, good one.

no question about it just do it!!!

i'm on a pc and macs seem very appealing to me. i would get one if it weren't for two things:

1) from what i understand, macs are not very easily upgradeable. i am a college student and i stayed under my budget by building my own computer...used some parts from my old one. you can't do this with a mac, correct?

2) i have all of my software for windows. its a big jump. but i understand there is an emulator in which you can run windows based programs on a mac? i haven't done much research so can someone confirm this?

the jump seems too hard...