Computer Choice

[DL_DB]

I'm just wondering what kind of computer everyone uses? I've seen Macs in the background of a few people's photos, and the file structure in this post seem to be from Mac OS X.

I'm not trying to start any sort of flame war here, I'm just curious.

For the record, I use Mac OS X 10.6, running on both my iMac and Macbook Air. At work I use Windows XP.

[PrincessDragonette]

I have one machine running Vista (going to 7 soon), one XP, and another running Ubuntu (that I'm considering converting into a hackintosh). I love Apple products, they're just a bit out of my price range

[loopy]

I'm running windows 7, its great, and does everything I need it too . I won't post my opinion on apple products

[Guest clinediap]

I'm using Windows 7 right now, and while I do like it, I really love Macs. But, sadly, they're just too expensive for me, for what I actually would use it for. Maybe someday, though...

[redneck diaper boy]

The real world is Windows.

I have worked for many corporations and have never seen any large business using a Mac.

I have a large network (171 PCs). They are all Dells or HPs.

[PrincessDragonette]

The real world is Windows.

I have worked for many corporations and have never seen any large business using a Mac.

I have a large network (171 PCs). They are all Dells or HPs.

I'm sure Apple uses Mac and they're fairly large. Most of your large design firms use Macs as well as any company that does heavy image or video editing/rendering. I only know that because a close friend is the CEO of a large animation company in China.

Besides, this was about personal preference, not a flame war remember?

[hidden]

Warning: anti-mac post. Don't want to read it? That is why I used a spoiler.

The only good thing Macs are good for are for running windows. I have used macs more than once and the OS is crap.

[loopy]

Hidden, Alot of people like OSX, they find it fun and easy to use. The OS is probably the strongest part of the mac experince.... But otherwise they're too expensive.

Macs are used in design industries and the like, simply because people believe they're better for graphics design, which isn't strictly true. Especially now that they're basicly running PC hardware. And you can bet that the backend/other systems will be linux/windows.

[hidden]

Hidden, Alot of people like OSX, they find it fun and easy to use.

Warning: anti-mac post. Don't want to read it? That is why I used a spoiler.

There are things that some like but aren't good for them. I admit that from what I have seen, the hardware looks good but I cannot stand the OS. My dad's lively hood revolves around computers and he wouldn't poke a mac with a 10 foot pole. If you like it, not much I can do about it. I will, however, not recommend them. I do not intend to start a PC/mac war either.

[Bettypooh]

Choice? I don't get one because all my computers have always been second-hand units selected only by their affordability (usually free or nearly so) and I run whatever OS they come with. That they have all been running Windows so far is simply because that's what the vast majority of the world uses If I had a choice I'd choose to have the time to learn and use Linux based mainly on the nice price of free and the concept of non-obsolescence I could switch to Linux now- but I don't have the time or the ambition to do it Yeah, I'm lazy like that If the next PC I get comes with Linux or Mac or Windows or Other then that's what I'll use- beggars can't be choosers you know

Bettypooh

[Pudding]

Mac OSX <3 I...don't think you could pay Puddin' to use something else, fulltime.

[Guest NaughtyAshes]

The real world is Windows.

I have worked for many corporations and have never seen any large business using a Mac.

I have a large network (171 PCs). They are all Dells or HPs.

So Lockheed-Martin and Boeing aren't large businesses?

[Pull-ups man]

Windows XP Home for me although I do have Vista on my computer, but they already came with the whole package and plus Im too lazy to install XP myself

[Knuxie Fawks]

I fix and build computers, and I'm a PC.

[BoTox]

When Mac went intel it was the best thing for them. If the folks at Apple would understand that the OS is NOT the computer and make it available as a stand alone product, I'd give it a try. Until then, I fight for everything Apple used to stand for, an open system where the user can do what they please. Apple today is the antithesis of the way they started. Now, Applies (intentional, people that are Apple bigots) are just more drones that have consumed the elixir of Jobs. There will be a day of macintosh mourning when he finally passes.

I've used a Mac and it isn't for me. I make all my money on a PC and probably could do OK on a Mac full time but I've built up such a bag of tools that it would be like starting over to get the same functionality on a Mac. I'd rather use Linux but half the stuff I need isn't available or the pain to use what is available is too great.

[ldatsea]

Apple isnt GOD but they have a great Stable platform and the hardware is second to non in the following.

1.reliablity my mac is 9 years old and still performs all the tasks i ask it from 3d animation to audio/video editing hasent crashed in 9 years!!!!

2. the hardware has always been revolutionary they are usually the First to incorprate new technology.... i bought my mac becuase at the time it was the only laptop that had an actual video card with 16 megs of ram (laugh now but was amazing back then) all others had intel video with shard memory or maxed out at 4megs of ram .. was the first laptop that could handle 1gig of ram, pcs at the time maxed out at 512...

I own PCS and Macs but WINDOWS makes me spew hate filled cries so often If i could i would only buy a mac....and will be buying a new one this year some time.

[tenderheart]

I'm running a netbook remix of linux right now. I have two other linux systems and this laptop is dual booted with windows 7.Which I've only really used to get the wireless running on linux and to jailbreak some iphones.

[Conatus]

i build my own pc's and run windows (xp pro on older pc's and vista ultimate on my newist computer) because it is the most supported o/s. i used to play with linux back when i was super computer geeky but it is hard to use and very unsupported.

[Guest MunchKitten]

I run sabayon on my desktop (a Gentoo clone thats wicked awesome)

Windows 7 Home premium is also on my desktop for gaming

Crunchbang Linux (a featherweight version of ubuntu) is installed on my laptop. Uses 1.8gb of space, and 64mb of ram at idle.

[PrincessDragonette]

I run sabayon on my desktop (a Gentoo clone thats wicked awesome)

Windows 7 Home premium is also on my desktop for gaming

Crunchbang Linux (a featherweight version of ubuntu) is installed on my laptop. Uses 1.8gb of space, and 64mb of ram at idle.

I'm going to have to try Crunchbang, 64mb @ idle?

[ArtemisEnterri]

Choice? I don't get one because all my computers have always been second-hand units selected only by their affordability (usually free or nearly so) and I run whatever OS they come with. That they have all been running Windows so far is simply because that's what the vast majority of the world uses If I had a choice I'd choose to have the time to learn and use Linux based mainly on the nice price of free and the concept of non-obsolescence I could switch to Linux now- but I don't have the time or the ambition to do it Yeah, I'm lazy like that If the next PC I get comes with Linux or Mac or Windows or Other then that's what I'll use- beggars can't be choosers you know

Bettypooh

Bettypooh, the latest releases of Linux distributions (regardless of name - Fedora, openSuSE, Mandriva, Ubuntu, etc) ALL have a GUI (graphical user interface) with mouse "point and click" control. Linux is not all command lines like it was back in the 90s.

I play with Linux a lot, and it is my favorite OS.

Apple isnt GOD but they have a great Stable platform and the hardware is second to non in the following.

1.reliablity my mac is 9 years old and still performs all the tasks i ask it from 3d animation to audio/video editing hasent crashed in 9 years!!!!

2. the hardware has always been revolutionary they are usually the First to incorprate new technology.... i bought my mac becuase at the time it was the only laptop that had an actual video card with 16 megs of ram (laugh now but was amazing back then) all others had intel video with shard memory or maxed out at 4megs of ram .. was the first laptop that could handle 1gig of ram, pcs at the time maxed out at 512...

I own PCS and Macs but WINDOWS makes me spew hate filled cries so often If i could i would only buy a mac....and will be buying a new one this year some time.

Reliability? Any PC hardware (386 or better, regardless of ram and HD size, and regardless of age) can run a copy of Linux and have uptimes in the multi-month range with zero crashes (unless the user does something bad/stupid), can't ever say the same for ANY version of Windoze (can't even use most versions of the OS on older machines). Linux software updates don't even require a complete reboot, just a simple reload of the affected program only (another thing Windoze can't do - you almost ALWAYS need to reboot for Windoze patches).

IMHO: the price of a Mac is all because of the Apple name. I can hand-build a PC with DOUBLE the cpu speed, ram, and HD size for the SAME PRICE as a Mac.

i build my own pc's and run windows (xp pro on older pc's and vista ultimate on my newist computer) because it is the most supported o/s. i used to play with linux back when i was super computer geeky but it is hard to use and very unsupported.

Conatus, apparently you haven't been keeping up with the times in regards to Linux then. As I mentioned above to Bettypooh, Linux has graphic interface software these days, with multiple "window manager" options (meaning desktop layouts), Windoze only has ONE desktop type (unless you install extra software, which usually costs extra).

I am a PC person, I prefer Linux, but I use Windoze, but only when I absolutely have to. I've been running a machine with openSuSE as a file-server for the rest of the PC's in my house for over 6 years, with uninterrupted uptimes of over 6months straight (no crashes, no reboots - it woulda been longer, but we had a blackout caused by a storm one night).

Another thing Linux has over Windoze: you can "test drive" a copy of Linux WITHOUT reformatting your HD. Almost ALL Linux distributions have the option of a "Live" CD or DVD. You download the ISO image (for FREE, LEGALLY), burn it to a blank CD or DVD, then simply reboot the PC with that disc in the drive. Those "Live" discs are a completely "ready to run" sample of Linux.

I'd be willing to act as a "tech support" for anyone wanting to give Linux a try on their machine... Just PM me, or send me an IM on my Yahoo messenger ID "artemis_enterri".

[abypk82]

I grew up using Windows, and have no desire to learn a new operating system, okay well I started out using DOS, but windows came in second, and I think that's what I'll always use.

[ArtemisEnterri]

I grew up using Windows, and have no desire to learn a new operating system, okay well I started out using DOS, but windows came in second, and I think that's what I'll always use.

There's no learning needed to run Linux, since Linux has a "point and click" style interface just like Windows does.

Linux is FREE to use, unlike Windows which can cost $150 or more each time a new version is released. Plus most applications for Linux are free (like OpenOffice which is a perfect clone of MS Office, and can even open and edit files that were created using MS Office).

The key thing is the number of programmers involved with the software. Windows has a small team of people located at their offices, while the Linux world has people all over the world fixing glitches, adding "tweaks", and basically "road testing" every possible aspect of the software on every possible piece of hardware in existence. Microsoft doesn't care about people whose computers are old, they expect everyone to upgrade to the newest hardware in order to use the newest versions of Windows. Linux can give new life to old computers because it will work on any hardware (no matter how old) that you own.

(And who gave my previous post a negative? I did not say anything rude or inflammatory.)

[Pudding]

"OpenOffice which is a perfect clone of MS Office, and can even open and edit files that were created using MS Office"

No. Just...ick, no :X OpenOffice, much like The Gimp, may be a free alternative to the commercial package, but never ever EVER presume it to be an acceptable (or for anything more than basic use, even adequate) replacement. OpenOffice has very poor handling of Office formats, even the venerable 97/2003 .doc format can be problematic in OpenOffice; imported documents will often come up very screwy and unprofessionally and the font rendering in the suite itself is just..icky GROSS.

[ArtemisEnterri]

"OpenOffice which is a perfect clone of MS Office, and can even open and edit files that were created using MS Office"

No. Just...ick, no :X OpenOffice, much like The Gimp, may be a free alternative to the commercial package, but never ever EVER presume it to be an acceptable (or for anything more than basic use, even adequate) replacement. OpenOffice has very poor handling of Office formats, even the venerable 97/2003 .doc format can be problematic in OpenOffice; imported documents will often come up very screwy and unprofessionally and the font rendering in the suite itself is just..icky GROSS.

I use OpenOffice for Windows on one of my computers while my wife uses MS Office 2007 on hers, and there has never been any formatting issues when I use the same file (by way of shared file server) on both machines. It didn't matter which machine created the file. I've even used OpenOffice to edit my resume file, and it looks the same on both machines.

I'm just wondering, have you used the latest release, or are the above statements based on a previous version? There are ALWAYS glitches in old versions (even MS had glitches in their early programs, you can't argue that point). And OpenOffice is now being produced by Sun (maker of Java) which gives it a better backing than when it was a simple project. The price (of both the OS and the app software) is the key thing to me. Why should I pay nearly $300 for a copy of MS Office (or even $150 to upgrade from an old, non-supported version, to the current one) when can get the same functions and capabilities for no price at all (and legally)?

Look, I'm not trying to turn this thread into a fight, I'm just trying to show that there's more to the computer world than just Mac or Windows (both of which are over priced OS's that force you to pay extra money for applications you want to use (like Office, an accounting app like PeachTree, or audio/video/photo editing, etc). Open Source is not something to be afraid of, it is something people should be embracing, because the programs are updated more often because more people are involved with reviewing and fixing the code. Having more diverse groups of people (and more diverse hardware setups) is a much better thing than a small, closed group of people (using only a specific, pre-defined hardware setup). I have used different versions and distributions of Linux since the early 1990s, and it has come a long way over the years. Just because it isn't made by MS doesn't make it a bad program (or OS). I've had way more problems with every version of Windows than I've ever had with any version of Linux.