Mac mini
| Author | Topic: Mac mini |
|---|---|
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 05:42
Profile
Homepage
I started up netscape, and the first thing I saw was the new Mac mini with intel processor of Apple. i think I almost fainted of enthusiasme. I'm curious to know what you people think about this? I'm almost ready to buy it. -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 1468
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 05:47
Profile
Homepage
I think they screwed up by using Intel processors. They should have used AMD's, or at least gave the end user the ability to choose which of the two to use. -------------------- "We can learn a lot from crayons. Some are short, some are dull, some are sharp, some are tall. Some have funny names and they are all different colors, but they all learn to live in the same box." "Happy is the man that has wisdom and gets discernment. For having wisdom as gain is better than having silver as gain and having wisdom as produce is better than gold itself" Proverbs 3:14-3:15 The horrible part about life is, you'll never get out of it alive. Currently boycotting: AngelFire, GameFAQ's, Macintosh PC's Posts: 818 | Registered: Tuesday, July 9 2002 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 4710
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 06:10
Profile
Well, regardless of the processor, the only real problem that I see with the new one is that they went with an integrated graphics chip, although for what it's intended to be used for does not really require stunning FPS. -------------------- Life is short. Use a Mac. Posts: 85 | Registered: Wednesday, July 14 2004 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6489
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 06:44
Profile
Homepage
quote:I agree that the AMD chips are better, but none of the major pre-built computer companies let you choose btween the two. They all have a contract with one or the other. With a few exceptions, Dell and Gateway use Intel chips exclusively, and HP/Compaq use AMD. Personally, I hate macs (and other prebuilt machines for that matter) because of all the proprietary components. I have nothing against MacOS, but I want to be able to build my own machine. [ Wednesday, March 01, 2006 06:46: Message edited by: Tyranicus ] -------------------- "You're drinking liquor because you're thirsty? How nasty is your freaking water?" —Lazarus Spiderweb Chat Room Avernum RP • Summaries • OoC • Roster Shadow Vale - My site, home of the Spiderweb Chat Database, BoA Scenario Database, & the A1 Quest List, among other things. Posts: 1556 | Registered: Sunday, November 20 2005 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 1468
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 07:27
Profile
Homepage
I'm going to have to agree with you there. Regardless of how good or bad the OS is, proprietary and integrated components are bad. -------------------- "We can learn a lot from crayons. Some are short, some are dull, some are sharp, some are tall. Some have funny names and they are all different colors, but they all learn to live in the same box." "Happy is the man that has wisdom and gets discernment. For having wisdom as gain is better than having silver as gain and having wisdom as produce is better than gold itself" Proverbs 3:14-3:15 The horrible part about life is, you'll never get out of it alive. Currently boycotting: AngelFire, GameFAQ's, Macintosh PC's Posts: 818 | Registered: Tuesday, July 9 2002 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 07:52
Profile
Homepage
No offence, but isn't it stunning that the first reply to every topic I saw of this kind (that has nothing to do ith Spiderweb) is always negative? I just noticed that. :) I actually never heard of the AMD chips, but they ARE better then the PowerPC crap they used before. Come on! A mac mini being 4.7 time faster! Isn't that a lot better? A Mac mini having everything the Imac G5 has only FAR smaller. isn't that very nice? @Tyranicus: What I don't understand in your reply is the following: You say that you don't like Mac, but don't mind MacOS. For as far as I know, Mac and MacOS are the same, making your statement a contradictory statement. Did you mean you don't like Apple but do like MacOS, or something completely different? -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 07:59
Profile
Homepage
"Mac" also refers to the computer itself. "I don't like Macs" could mean that one cannot stand the way that the computers themselves are physically assembled. A Mac isn't simply a PC running the Mac OS, after all; the hardware is different, too. Personally, I like not having to put anything together myself; take it out of the box, plug it in, and turn it on, and it works! And by the way, Thralni, please stop spelling -asm words with -asme. In English, "sarcasm" and "enthusiasm" don't have E's on the end. [ Wednesday, March 01, 2006 08:01: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 08:03
Profile
Homepage
I often make that misktake. And I also forgot about the "I like Macs" referring to the computer itself. It is probably like "I hate PCs", right? (Is it PC's or PCs?) -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 08:18
Profile
Homepage
Either, really. An apostrophe after plural acronyms was standard, but I think both are now acceptable and PCs is less ambiguous. —Alorael, who likes Macs and Mac OS. He's willing to accept the chip change as a necessary step, but he'd really be happier if Apple could have just stuck with their old chip, or at least kept Classic around. He still uses it incessantly. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Too Sexy for my Title
Member # 5654
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 08:21
Profile
Edit: I hate you Alorael [ Wednesday, March 01, 2006 08:21: Message edited by: Amelia ] Posts: 1035 | Registered: Friday, April 1 2005 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 1115
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 08:31
Profile
Homepage
Idly, "PC" means "Personal Computer", and should in a true and just society refer not only to Windows and Macintosh computers, but also to Amigas and Commodore 64ks and Linux users and so on. The problem of course being that there's already a short name for Mac users, but "a Windows computer" is pretty bulky. Hence "PC" got co-opted by the Windows people somewhere along the line. -------------------- "Don't take life so serious, son. It ain't nohow permanent." -Porkypine Derakon's Library Posts: 287 | Registered: Thursday, May 9 2002 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 09:22
Profile
Homepage
quote:How do you mean, calssic is still there in 10.4, or do you mean it doesn't wok anymore with the Intel based computers? -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 09:58
Profile
Homepage
Classic doesn't work on Intel Macs. -------------------- Barcoorah: I even did it to a big dorset ram. desperance.net - Don't follow this link Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 10:24
Profile
quote:When IBM entered the personal computer market in the early 80's, they called their machine the 'IBM PC'. Before that, PC wasn't a ubiquitous acronym. They got into the game in a big way quickly, by going with an open architecture: a box full of off-the-shelf components wired together. This meant that the PC design was easy to reverse engineer and clone, and it created the PC-as-built-by-anybody that we know today. For a while such cloned machines were called 'IBM compatible', but sometime in the early 90's, I think, the term 'PC' got detached from the IBM original. Those first IBM PCs were quite impressive machines for their time. They had bigger screens than the Apple II, 16-bit operation instead of the previously standard 8-bit, and they all came with floppy disk drives -- a high-end option previously. And this weird, disk-based operating system to go with them. At least this is my rather sketchy memory from when my relatively wealthy friend got one, and made the rest of us all envious. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 12:26
Profile
Homepage
Most Linux users are using PCs in the IBM PC compatible sense. The others aren't compatible, but I think the real question isn't why PC doesn't apply to Amigas, SparcStations, Macs, and so on but why PC applies to the computers in public libraries, laboratories, and the like. PC no longer stands for personal computer. It is now a recursive acronym for PC computer. —Alorael, who wonders if communicating over the internet means you have an interpersonal computer. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Wednesday, March 1 2006 15:27
Profile
Homepage
By the way, one major reason why Apple is switching to Intel chips is that Motorola has been very unreliable with meeting production deadlines, to the point of delaying new product releases and hurting sales. This is also why AMD isn't a realistic option -- Intel produces chips in large volumes to tight schedules, which is what Apple wants. A faster chip isn't better if it's not available when it's needed. -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 04:01
Profile
Homepage
If there is no classic on the Intel Macs, I'll just play exile on my PC or not at all, and switch to a different webeditor. To be honest, I'd rather have "front row" than Classic. This reminds me, are all Avernums (1,2,3,4,BoA) OS X native, or still not all of them? -------------------- Play and rate my scenarios: Where the rivers meet View my upcoming scenario: The Nephil Search: Escape. Give us your drek! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, March 2 2006 08:06
Profile
Homepage
They're all OS X native now. —Alorael, who hopes never to see the day that he plays BoE with Virtual PC. That would be criminal. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |