pilotdave 0 #26 June 7, 2005 I once went 100 days between reboots in win xp. My mouse crapped out on day 98, but I was too close to 100 to give in. I'd say I typically restart every 3 to 4 weeks. And this computer has been running nearly continuously for the last 7 years. Upgraded the processor, motherboard, and memory a few years ago, but the boot hard drive, power supply, fan, etc, have all been running nearly 24/7 since I started college in 1998. And I don't think I alienate mac users. I upgraded the upload system to be mac compatible. I don't choose what format uploads come in as, unless I'm uploading a file myself. I make either wmv files or divx encoded avi's, whichever is easier for what I'm doing. Usually wmv lately... windows movie maker just makes it too simple to get a nice, highly compressed file with presentable quality. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nate_1979 9 #27 June 7, 2005 QuoteWhat the hell are people doing using their servers to download skydiving movies? Better question is who the hell is still logging onto skydivingmovies.com using Windows 3.1 and OS/2??? Remember the horror of making internet connections in Win 3.1.. ughhhh bla... Ohh yea, Linux rocks Now if only it would do what I needed it too.... FGF #??? I miss the sky... There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #28 June 7, 2005 QuoteAnd I don't think I alienate mac users. I upgraded the upload system to be mac compatible. I hope you don't think I seriously meant to imply you were alienating Mac users. I just like to pick on you MS fans because I know I'm the underdog. (And because I know Macs are better. Sorry if it came across the wrong way. Quote I once went 100 days between reboots in win xp. My mouse crapped out on day 98, but I was too close to 100 to give in. I'd say I typically restart every 3 to 4 weeks. And this computer has been running nearly continuously for the last 7 years. Upgraded the processor, motherboard, and memory a few years ago, but the boot hard drive, power supply, fan, etc, have all been running nearly 24/7 since I started college in 1998. Don't get me wrong, XP is the best version of Windows I've used, and I started with 3.1. Nonetheless, it still has serious shortcomings, especially for the non tech saavy. I feel it compares more in look, feel and functionality to OS 9 than OS X, though. Microsoft just hasn't kept up. Their GUI looks cluttered, and the operating system doesn't have enough control over the software. (ex: Active X). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #29 June 7, 2005 Those operating system stats are from over a 3 year period. Windows 3.1 is SO 2002. About 4 years ago I had a summer job where I had to work on a Sun workstation running a windows 3.1 emulator in solaris. That was like the worst of all worlds. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #30 June 7, 2005 Yeah I fully realize macs are better. It's just the software availability issue that keeps me from ever buying one. Win XP is far from perfect but it's the best windows ever by a HUGE margin. I really like it. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #31 June 7, 2005 QuoteIt's just the software availability issue that keeps me from ever buying one. What software have you been unable to find for Mac? I was not aware that this was a big deal anymore. Even games are becoming more widely available for Mac, and that seems to be their weakest area, as far as applications are concerned. I agree, XP is way better than all previous versions of Windows. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #32 June 7, 2005 Quote Those operating system stats are from over a 3 year period. Windows 3.1 is SO 2002 2002? Try 1994. --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #33 June 7, 2005 QuoteTry 1994. I had it in 92. For Great Deals on Gear Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #34 June 7, 2005 Yes, but Winblows 95 came out in August of '95...so I guess you could say that Win 3.11 was sooo 1994, my bad.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #35 June 7, 2005 Okay, that's pretty obvious logic, now that you've pointed it out. I need more coffee, I guess. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
klingeme 0 #36 July 1, 2005 This supports my PC vs. Mac arguement. The Mac might be more stable, but if you can't get software for it, how much better is it to own. Even if you could get a car that gets 500 miles to the gallon, but no one made the fuel for it, is it worth owning? Mark Klingelhoefer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #37 July 1, 2005 Quote This supports my PC vs. Mac arguement. The Mac might be more stable, but if you can't get software for it, how much better is it to own. I have yet to find any software that I want that is not supported by Mac. Word? -- Started on Mac. Excel? -- First appeared on Mac Office? -- Mac had it first. And the Mac version has more features than the current Win version. Photoshop? -- Again, Windows users had to wait for a port. WinMedPlayer is not what I would consider a good piece of software, but many people are more concerned with size than picture quality. That is their choice. What I can't open with VLC (which, incidentally, is a very nice free media player that plays most anything I throw at it.), I will reluctantly play with WMP, which sucks just as badly on the Mac as it does on the PC. So, I can get pretty much any software I desire for my Mac, money notwithstanding. And, in the rare event I find a piece of software that only runs on a PC, all I have to do is start Windows XP in Virtual PC to run it. Sure, it's gonna be a bit slower, but the time I save on the vast majority of apps that do run on my Mac more than make up the difference. Can you run OS X apps on your PC? If not, then I guess you have far less software available to you than I do with my Mac. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #38 July 1, 2005 QuoteCan you run OS X apps on your PC? If not, then I guess you have far less software available to you than I do with my Mac. Yeah, I'm really missing my ability to run Claris Works. I like the Mac, especially the *nix based OS X. But I'm also a big gamer and Virtual PC won't do squat for MS Flight Sim, X-Plane, Doom 3, HalfLife2, Grand Theft Auto or every other major game that isn't available for the Mac. Now, when someone cracks the new version of the X86 revision of OS X so I can run it on my home built AMD 64 system as a triple-boot between my existing Linux and Win XP operating systems, I'll be all over it.Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #39 July 1, 2005 QuoteYeah, I'm really missing my ability to run Claris Works. Personally, I prefer Office 2004, but to each their own! Fortunately for folks like you, Microsoft has been very attentive to your needs, making sure that Longhorn The Cash Cow is reverse compatible with legacy software such as VisiCalc! http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1786061,00.asp You are right about Macs being inferior gaming machines, but that is changing, as well. BTW X-Plane is available for Mac. So is Doom 3. Not really being a gamer, I can't say how they compare. As for cracking the system so that it will run on a generic x86 box, it might happen, but I wouldn't hold your breath. Apple is not likely to make it easy enough to be practicle. Besides, I can build a loaded G5 iMac for far less (~$800) than a comparable (but still slightly inferior in features) Dell PC. I can already run more than 10 different OSs on my Mac, without any need for extra HDDs. Of course, there is no need, in my case. OS X works great for me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brains 2 #40 July 1, 2005 QuoteYeah, I'm really missing my ability to run Claris Works. I like the Mac, especially the *nix based OS X. But I'm also a big gamer and Virtual PC won't do squat for MS Flight Sim, X-Plane, Doom 3, HalfLife2, Grand Theft Auto or every other major game that isn't available for the Mac. Now, when someone cracks the new version of the X86 revision of OS X so I can run it on my home built AMD 64 system as a triple-boot between my existing Linux and Win XP operating systems, I'll be all over it. HUH??? Never look down on someone, unless they are going down on you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #41 July 1, 2005 QuoteI have yet to find any software that I want that is not supported by Mac. I'll bite....hahaha Try getting into 3D animation... Alias Wavefront, 3DS MAX, Lightwave, Maya....available on almost every platform....but no Apple... And before you start screaming 'maya' Maya was only recently FINALY ported to Mac..after being around for over 10 years already ....with few to no people actualy using it on a Mac) so in that department...yea...Macs are the looser.. But in terms of editing....or whatever other purpoise you can think of... If I hook up a normal mouse (instead of that idiotic 1 button thing of which some people actualy think it is handy) then I realy don't care where I'm working...Mac or PC...both work 100% fine, no crashes..and I use both A LOT. It's not 'hip' to say you're a Mac user...and it's not 'hip' to say you're a PC user If you have valid reasons (cost? hate bill gates? hate those IMac commercials?)....but most people don't have any... It's mostly people that don't actualy USE their system for anyting else but runing their OS and talking about it, that get prety upset and fierce about this crap...and that IS funnyJC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #42 July 1, 2005 QuoteI'll bite....hahaha Try getting into 3D animation...Cool Alias Wavefront, 3DS MAX, Lightwave, Maya....available on almost every platform....but no Apple... And before you start screaming 'maya' Maya was only recently FINALY ported to Mac..after being around for over 10 years already ....with few to no people actualy using it on a MacLaugh) so in that department...yea...Macs are the looser.. I admit I know nothing about 3D animation at this time, so I'll have to take your word for it. QuoteIt's mostly people that don't actualy USE their system for anyting else but runing their OS and talking about it, that get prety upset and fierce about this crap...and that IS funny Umm, the strongest Mac advocates I know are techs and network administrators. I only know one person with a Mac that doesn't use it for anything, and she'd rather talk about guns. And, no, I'm not bothered by the one button mouse. I click with the trackpad, so a second button would be wasted. I do use ctrl click often, though, so I understand why most people prefer a two (or more) button mouse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #43 July 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteIt's mostly people that don't actualy USE their system for anyting else but runing their OS and talking about it, that get prety upset and fierce about this crap...and that IS funny Umm, the strongest Mac advocates I know are techs and network administrators. That is EXCACTLY what I sayd.....they don't use their system for actual work...creativity.....making something...(no offense) All they do is tinker with settings and IP adresses... I love tech people...we'd be nowhere without them... But most 'creative' people, that actualy put systems to good use.....most I know really don't give a rats ass if they are editing on a Mac or PC. Aside from personal taste..there's not much a pc or mac does better then one or another in terms of graphic work... It's mostly tech-nerds that care...and that start yelling that this and that is better because other tech-nerds also say so.. But you proved my point...thanx JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #44 July 2, 2005 QuoteThat is EXCACTLY what I sayd.....they don't use their system for actual work...creativity.....making something...(no offense) All they do is tinker with settings and IP adresses... . . . It's mostly tech-nerds that care...and that start yelling that this and that is better because other tech-nerds also say so.. But you proved my point...thanx First, it is not required to edit video or create music on your computer in order to use it creatively. Fact is, pretty much everyone has a channel through which their creativity shows. If they are on a computer a lot, it will likely show up there, as well. It just may not show up as art. I don't know what point you think I proved, but you should consider rereading my post. The only person I know that does not use their Mac doesn't care. The Mac advocates I know are constantly on their Apple boxes. And make no mistake, the use their computers creatively, networking, video editing, Computer based home theater, and countless other ways. I guess your theory needs revision. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 73 #45 July 3, 2005 QuoteFirst, it is not required to edit video or create music on your computer in order to use it creatively. No...but when you're on a video forum, you might take a wild gues that that's what most people DO use their computer for. Most debates in here about Mac/PC's end up in people claiming 'their' prefered platform is better....and what I'm saying is that If you've used both...you'll know that both are 100% workable solutions...and it doesn't matter WHICH one you use. Creativity is not in the platform...it's in the user.. I'm not putting Macs OR PC's down..... I'm just saying that both Mac/PC 'advocates' need to broaden their severely limited vision and see that there is more stuff out there that works besides their own precious toys... Their strong point of view on the subject is not always based on strong knowledge about what else is out there... Fighting windmills....JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #46 July 3, 2005 QuoteFighting windmills.... Well, duh. You're from Holland. It's really not that vierd. (Hi Mac!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dixieskydiver 0 #47 July 3, 2005 QuoteI suppose it makes sense. I guess it's personal frustration, since Windows Media Player for Mac is the single worst piece of software I've ever used in my entire life, and since the fuckers at MSFT (former coworkers of mine, amusingly) keep the codec locked, it's the only way to play it. Word to that. It's the single most useless piece of shit piece of software in Windows as well. Oh and these video codecs are getting out of control!!! It's getting too complicated for a brother to download some porn these days so he can wax his willy. Dixie HISPA #56 Facil Rodriguez "Scientific research has shown that 60% of the time, it works every time." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #48 July 4, 2005 QuoteIf you've used both...you'll know that both are 100% workable solutions...and it doesn't matter WHICH one you use. I have used both, and I would not say that. PCs are clearly better than Macs for gaming. Apple is improving, but still has tremendous ground to make up. Macs are clearly better for internet use. There are no known viruses for OS X. You would be incorrect to assume it was from their small marketshare. One DZ.commer even posted this challenge. By contrast, Windows machines have a fifty percent chance of being comprimised within twelve minutes of going online, if not properly patched. It's fair to say that anyone reading this forum uses the internet. Total cost of ownership tends to be lower for Macs. The cost of maintenence for the internet concession at one local drop zone went down by about $10,000 annually by replacing four PCs with four macs. And I doubt that it is any coincidence that the fastest/cheapest (per processor) cluster supercomputers are Mac or Power PC chip based. So, no, I don't think they are both 100% workable solutions. Depending on your application, you may have two good options, or maybe only one (other OSs notwithstanding) good one. Nor am I saying that Macs have no issues. They do; they are just Mac issues instead of PC issues, and are much easier to deal with in my experience. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #49 July 4, 2005 QuoteWord to that. It's the single most useless piece of shit piece of software in Windows as well. Oh and these video codecs are getting out of control!!! Have you tried VLC or MPlayer? both are great freeware (or shareware?) media players that will handle most anything thrown ot them. They don't play everything though, so it is still necessary to keep QT and WMP on standby. Rarely should you have to use them, though. For Great Deals on Gear Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
