.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to Conservationist.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="Conservationist:802872"][QUOTE="the_reverend:802836"] Macs used to be better for audio, graphic design, etc... Macs were all about building their own hardware, had nice powerpc processors, the g4 had 128-bit (2x64bit) cache channels, etc... then they stopped and started letting in outside hardware. that's where they ran towards failure. PCs are just more prolific. if you want the equivalent in a Mac to a PC, you spend 1.5-2x as much and can't run 1/2 the programs you need to do what you want. [b]The only good thing is that 10.x is unix based, but you can get everything that you want to do on a mac to work almost as well on a linux machine for free.[/b] [/QUOTE] I could not have said it better myself. Macs seem good until you look deeply at what's going on. The old way Apple did things -- proprietary hardware -- was cool for the reason Rev mentioned: fascism. They had quality control. Unfortunately, it meant that everything was more expensive, and they had a few stinkers. Since Gassee and the open Mac, they've steadily been heading toward standards as a way of cutting cost. Now they've found a way to get people to buy PC hardware at many times its normal price, which is why the Street loves 'em: high margin, low risk.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.020 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][