Guest Grimloq Posted April 10, 2006 Share Posted April 10, 2006 Just a quick note I'll leave you lot while I'm on my mom's laptop. I just wanted to let whoever feels like caring know that the reason I'm gonna be scarce is I recently suffered a catastrophic system failure (All software, no hardware, thank God). It went to reformat-requiring proportions. Naturally it was my fault, being stupid and poking around with settings that, even though aren't harmful in any way, apparently blew up Windows. So yeah. *Pastes this stickynote on a random wall and runs off to continue repairing his computer* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black-Cat Posted April 10, 2006 Share Posted April 10, 2006 :P Wow poor guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krystal Posted April 10, 2006 Share Posted April 10, 2006 As a tech support guy, I feel for you. But think of the reformat as a way to cleanse your computer's body and spirit. Also, get a Mac. They are superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inuyasha Posted April 10, 2006 Share Posted April 10, 2006 That's debatable. Though it doesn't crash as often because the software is configured to only run on a single type of hardware. Which is good, though as to whether or not it's "superior" is a matter of how you define superiority. If it's on a crash and glitch basis, then yes. Windows has those because (aside from bad programming) it has to run on multiple hardware configs, and therefore isn't as reliable on some systems as it is on others. However, if it's on a compatibility and development basis, then no. Nobody likes to develop stuff for Apple. Nobody likes beurocracy in that sort of thing. You don't make Mac-compatible software--Apple makes your software Mac-compatible. And besides, they now use Intel processors. PowerPC was good, so you could at least say a Mac had some decent hardware. Intel sucks. Horrible architecture. I prefer Linux. Excellent kernel, but the interface takes a bit to learn. And there're compatibility issues, but it IS free and open-source. Once one of the Linuxes dominates, I think everything'll settle down, and we'll -finally- have a decent, compatible PC OS out there. I hate software failures. They take everything with them, usually. Hardware failures are annoying, but at least you get to keep all your settings and such. Not too much reinstallation or reconfiguring required. Unless you need to mess with the setup, which you usually do. One config I tried with that once caused it to believe there were no Masters or Slaves. Now I know it doesn't like USB Legacy support. But hey--at least Windows is more stable than the OS on the TI calculators. Mine likes to explode weekly, sometimes because I break it, sometimes for no apparent reason at all. -Inuyasha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krystal Posted April 11, 2006 Share Posted April 11, 2006 Though it doesn't crash as often because the software is configured to only run on a single type of hardware. Not true. Macs are, in fact, more stable mainly because it uses a UNIX kernel, which you should know is more important to stability than hardware configurations. See next section. If it's on a crash and glitch basis, then yes. Windows has those because (aside from bad programming) it has to run on multiple hardware configs, and therefore isn't as reliable on some systems as it is on others. OS X was designed from the beginning to be hardware independent, and while some issues can be minimized by limiting the number of hardware configurations, OS X can work on anything (with small code adjustment). Just ask all the people who hacked OS X to work on Intel and AMD before those versions were released. I did it too, and it worked. Nobody likes to develop stuff for Apple. Wow! That's totally and utterly wrong. Here's one friend of mine who loves to develop on Mac. Here's where you can contact thousands of companies and programmers who program Mac software. You don't make Mac-compatible software--Apple makes your software Mac-compatible. I've made Mac-compatible software, and if I can do it, literally anyone could do it. They now use Intel processors. PowerPC was good, so you could at least say a Mac had some decent hardware. Intel sucks. Horrible architecture. Yes, PowerPC was good. However, "sucks" is a very subjective term. Apple didn't switch for the architecture Intel has now (indeed, the P4 was terrible), Apple switched for the architecture Intel WILL HAVE by the end of the year, the "Core" series of chips. The laptop chip that only uses only 35 watts will be 64-bit, dual-core, 45 nm, with up to a 6MB cache. The ultra-low voltage chip uses only 5 watts of power, will be 64-bit as well. It's not even funny how much the desktop and server chips will improve. The "standard" desktop chip will be 64-bit, dual-core, 65 nm, and only use 65 watts, but it will have a performance increase of 40% over the previous generation (Pentium D). On the roadmap as well is the Dunnington, a 32 CORE, 64-BIT CHIP!!! I'm no fan, don't misunderstand, but I go with what's faster. At the very least, a Mac with even a Core Duo (not even the next generation of chips) is 2 to 3 times faster than a G5 with similar hardware configuration. Link. ... Linux. Excellent kernel, but the interface takes a bit to learn. I totally agree. If I wasn't using a Mac, I'd be using Linux. And there're compatibility issues, but it IS free and open-source. Apple does free and open-source too. A lot, in fact. Quick! Name the last Open Source project that Microsoft started or helped. Link Link 2 c Once one of the Linuxes dominates, I think everything'll settle down, and we'll -finally- have a decent, compatible PC OS out there. One of the strengths of Linux is how customizable it is. Remove that, and Linux will loose an important part of what it is. More Mac myths busted at this site and this site. Then there's the ultra-in-depth cross analysis of X vs XP, which can tell you exactly what each OS will do or has in all common situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Grimloq Posted April 14, 2006 Share Posted April 14, 2006 Nobody cares about the 'Which is better, Linux, Windows or Apple?' debate, you guys. I like Windows 2000 - so what? Anyway, it's irrelevant. I'm back up to good working order again. I'll spare you lot the details 'cause I know you don't particularly care. Though this reformat offered me several opportunities to fix previous conflicts, bugs, damages, etc that I couldn't do without a ghosting. Incidentally, because my Project64 folder was one of the things I backed up and copied directly to my HDD, StarFox was officially the first game on my computer. Followed by Tribes. <edit> Also, for the record, every single utility program on my computer is open source/freeware. The only exception is MS Word and MS Powerpoint. Most of them are considerably better than their commercial equivalent, too. </edit> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krystal Posted April 14, 2006 Share Posted April 14, 2006 Nobody cares about the 'Which is better' date=' Linux, Windows or Apple?' debate, you guys.[/quote'] I guess I'm nobody then. Glad you're back up to speed. :oops: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts