Results 21 to 30 of 39
Thread: New PC/Mac.......which?
-
14th November 2008, 12:46 #21Originally Posted by Daniel
If you want to convert to a Mac but still have legacy Windows programs that you need to use you can buy virtualisation software that allows you to run a virtual Windows machine inside the Mac. VMWare Fusion and Parallels being the main examples of this type of software.
-
14th November 2008, 13:52 #22
- Join Date
- Sep 2001
- Location
- Here
- Posts
- 25,044
- Like
- 0
- Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Andrewmcm
"Macs just work"? So do PCs. There's a lot of rubbish talked about Vista's unreliability, incompatibilty, bloat and speed, almost all of which are RTFM issues.
In my opinion Microsoft dropped a ball in releasing it slightly too early - there were some glitches that SP1 solved - and a lot of hardware manufacturers bundled it on wholly unsuitably-specced machines.
Add this to the perceived annoyance of UAC by people who didn't understand it, and the frustratingly slow indexing of files (once only) and you can perhaps appreciate why Vista quickly gained a poor reputation.
On a halfway sensible machine Vista zipps along happily. I'm running 32-bit Home Premium on a Dell laptop with a mere 2GB RAM (sorry Daniel!) and it's lightning fast.
"Faffing about with 3rd party software"? All of my old hardware worked instantly with no driver updates; the one and only piece of software which didn't was so creaking and old that I'd have replaced it anyway (an MP3 editor, since you ask). I understand that there were a few early issues with incompatible hardware but that's down to lazy manufacturers, not Microsoft.
Anyway, it's horses for courses. If a Mac does what you want it to, and you can find the software which fits your needs, then go for it. Likewise a PC. I honestly don't know why the subject so often creates such polarisation!Useful F1 Twitter thingy: http://goo.gl/6PO1u
-
14th November 2008, 14:08 #23
Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I still use PCs a lot and find them useful for most things. Almost all of my work is done on supercomputers, so I need native Unix shells and X-windows - PCs do that kind of thing quite badly so Macs fit the bill on that score. Of course I could always buy a PC laptop and put Linux on it, but I'm too lazy to mess around with different Linux distributions...!
-
14th November 2008, 14:40 #24
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Location
- On the Welsh Riviera
- Posts
- 38,844
- Like
- 2
- Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Andrewmcm
Most if not all PC's on sale these days will support 64 bit from a hardware perspective anyway. I'm most annoyed that Windows 7 isn't 64 bit only. It really is silly and will only result in headaches for people in the futureRule 1 of the forum, always accuse anyone who disagrees with you of bias.I would say that though.
-
14th November 2008, 15:03 #25
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Location
- On the Welsh Riviera
- Posts
- 38,844
- Like
- 2
- Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman
Before I installed Vista 64 on my PC I just downloaded all the drivers and after I did my install all I did was plug my flash drive in, install the drivers, do some updates and I was firing on all cylinders.
Originally Posted by Dave Brockman
I'm really hanging out for Solid State Drives getting cheaper. Can't wait till I can throw a cheap and fast drive in my PC. If you're happy with a Mac then good but a Windows PC/Laptop if specced properly will do the same job and be just as reliable if not moreso for less money and will be more versatile which is a big thing for me. With a little extra money spent on your case and monitor it can look as nice as a Mac too.
I saw a Macbook air the other day and it just felt flimsy and somewhat pointless to be honest. Why would I need something so pointlessly thin?Rule 1 of the forum, always accuse anyone who disagrees with you of bias.I would say that though.
-
14th November 2008, 19:46 #26
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- Birmingham
- Posts
- 2,171
- Like
- 0
- Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel
You say RAM is cheap these days but that depends on your idea of cheap, it might be too much for me, and I'd be surprised if I could fit 4gig into my PC which was a very cheap one over a year ago.
-
17th November 2008, 21:51 #27
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Location
- On the Welsh Riviera
- Posts
- 38,844
- Like
- 2
- Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by SleeperOriginally Posted by Sleeper
If you've bought a desktop in the last 2 years I'd be very surprised if you couldn't put 4gb of DDR2 in it.
You don't seem to grasp the fact that "saving" RAM does nothing positive for the performance of your PC. In fact switch aero off and switch off prefetch and all that happens is your applications will load slower, Vista won't look as good as it could and you can tell impressionable people who will take your word for it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfetch#SuperFetch
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ed,1532-6.html
Superfetch kicks buttRule 1 of the forum, always accuse anyone who disagrees with you of bias.I would say that though.
-
18th November 2008, 14:05 #28
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Posts
- 10,143
- Like
- 2
- Liked 33 Times in 27 Posts
Personally, I'll wait for Windows 7. Past experience with Vista (from Beta & RTDs to Home Premium/Business) has brought me to this point.
In some ways, it reminds me of Millenium Edition (ME), except that this took 6 years to develop, only to become the resources hog stemming from the basic problem: too much code.
7 will be to Vista what XP was to 2000/ME; the product that should've came forth in the first place, but was pushed aside for loftier reasons.Defend mediocrity... because excelence is just too hard to achieve. :p
-
18th November 2008, 14:22 #29
- Join Date
- Feb 2001
- Location
- On the Welsh Riviera
- Posts
- 38,844
- Like
- 2
- Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by veeten
I really don't think Windows 7 will be any better in terms of resources and speed as most of the early reports are bad. I would love to beta test it but I don't have a spare hard drive to chuck it on.
http://www.dailytech.com/Report+Benc...ticle13405.htm
There is one key difference between Vista and ME. Vista works for me, perhaps it could have been better but it works. ME on the other hand does not work at all. Everytime I've sat down in front of a PC with ME it has broke in some way shape or form.
One would hope that Windows 7 is better than Vista but I doubt there will be any major changes and the main things people are critical of (the interface and RAM hungriness) will stay.Rule 1 of the forum, always accuse anyone who disagrees with you of bias.I would say that though.
-
18th November 2008, 22:08 #30
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Posts
- 10,143
- Like
- 2
- Liked 33 Times in 27 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel
remember this is a pre-beta, which is not the same as a full functioning OS.Defend mediocrity... because excelence is just too hard to achieve. :p
'I left home at 12 to chase my F1 dream - now I'm in danger of losing my job'. Logan Sargeant moved from the United States to Europe aged just 12 to kickstart his path to Formula One, but after just...
2024 Formula 1 Preview &...