|
|
Post by franko on Feb 1, 2007 18:39:05 GMT -5
OK, techies (if you dare admit to being one), help me out. Next week is requisition time. My old notebook is 5? 6? years old, running Windows 2000. Do I say "I need to keep up with the times, I want need a new notebook (benefit: faster, battery that lasts more than 23 minutes) and ger Vista, or do I wait a year for the bugs to be worked out, suffer through with what I have, and wind up being "behind the times"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 1, 2007 18:54:17 GMT -5
Coming to you from Future Shop in Kingston, Franko. I'm currently on a mac and I'd consider buying one in the future. Excellent PC.
So, much so that it reminds me of a lot of the pirated features on Vista. I have to be brief but from what I understand Vista (I was playing with it at work before Christmas ... don't ask how) is just that ... a compilation of pirated programs that Microsoft gained authorization to use for a number of reasons including bailing out certain companies. I don't know the whole story but that's the short skinny from what I heard around the office.
I wouldn't go to Vista right now as the OS is lacking in the security department. However, like all of Microsoft's Windows releases the user will probably be inundated with a plethora of 'upgrades,' which will eventually alleviate the security issues.
Vista will no doubt be the OS of the future but right now there isn't the same amount of hype surrounding it with, say, WIN 95 (Stones song release "Start me Up" or even XP.
I'm holding off for a while and if I hold off long enough who knows ... I may get the real deal ... a Mac.
Cheers.
PS, the staff around here are really lenient.
|
|
|
|
Post by HABsurd on Feb 1, 2007 19:14:14 GMT -5
OK, techies (if you dare admit to being one), help me out. Next week is requisition time. My old notebook is 5? 6? years old, running Windows 2000. Do I say "I need to keep up with the times, I want need a new notebook (benefit: faster, battery that lasts more than 23 minutes) and ger Vista, or do I wait a year for the bugs to be worked out, suffer through with what I have, and wind up being "behind the times"? All batteries lose their ability to recharge with time. If you are happy with the laptop otherwise, why not spend $50 on a new battery? Otherwise, go for a truly modern operating system and get a mac.  (sorry) |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 1, 2007 19:32:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 1, 2007 19:36:19 GMT -5
Vista will no doubt be the OS of the future .... No it won't. People in the know are not touching it. Corporation don't want any part of the "protection" system. Imagine working on a project for six months and your computer telling you that you can't access it because your thing a magio is corrupt? Forget it. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 1, 2007 20:53:35 GMT -5
Dis: I'd really prefer a Mac and wouild grab one if I could. Heck, our IT department at HQ all use Macs and swear by them (as much as they swear). However, most of our guys in Ontario work with PCs (its the price difference as well as Microsoft brainwashing). and I have to know all the ins and outs of their systems for when they run into troubles. So, I'm stuck with a PC, and so will need to eventually upgrade to Vista whether I want to or not.
HA: Vista will indeed become the OS of preference for the next 5 years. Again, price and brainwashing will do it -- and the fact that all new computers will come with it installed. People will eventually just give in (or be forced to). Much like I've been forced to upgrade from 98 (which I had no problems with) to XP because 98 drivers are no longer available.
TotH: replacement batteries are $150 (stinkin' Dell).
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 1, 2007 22:50:49 GMT -5
Maybe get a Vista licence if it comes with your machine, but until we've had at least one service pack, don't even try and use it.
Use Windows XP, it's easy enough to install anywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 1, 2007 22:55:15 GMT -5
Dis: I'd really prefer a Mac and wouild grab one if I could. Heck, our IT department at HQ all use Macs and swear by them (as much as they swear). However, most of our guys in Ontario work with PCs (its the price difference as well as Microsoft brainwashing). and I have to know all the ins and outs of their systems for when they run into troubles. So, I'm stuck with a PC, and so will need to eventually upgrade to Vista whether I want to or not. HA: Vista will indeed become the OS of preference for the next 5 years. Again, price and brainwashing will do it -- and the fact that all new computers will come with it installed. People will eventually just give in (or be forced to). Much like I've been forced to upgrade from 98 (which I had no problems with) to XP because 98 drivers are no longer available. TotH: replacement batteries are $150 (stinkin' Dell). WIN 2000 is still a very stable OS, Franko. We use it at work and it's provides everything we need. I have friends who also use it at home and they're content. XP is pretty good. I use it on mine, Dis Jr's and Dis the Elder's PC's. I have my automatic updates turned on and the upgrades are useful. Something else upgraded XP and Vista Internet Explorers remind of is the Netscape/Firefox browser. More borrowed features I guess. As for Vista's popularity, MS will probably use the same strategy they did for all of their other OS's as well ... by flooding the market with advertising. Won't necessarily be the most stable thing out there but once all the patches are in place it should sell. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 1, 2007 23:06:10 GMT -5
I don't know if Vista will take off. It has no new features of much interest and the huge pain of upgrading (not to mention the expense) is scaring off most organizations. If I were buying a new PC I would try not to get Vista if possible. Microsoft may be stuck in the 20th century. The "new" approach to software is constant improvement delivered electronically (see Google), not a different version every few years on CD.
If people are going to go to the trouble of changing to a new OS, I see no good reason for it to be Vista. Linux and Mac are both viable options.
|
|
|
|
Post by HABsurd on Feb 1, 2007 23:11:01 GMT -5
Dis: I'd really prefer a Mac and wouild grab one if I could. Heck, our IT department at HQ all use Macs and swear by them (as much as they swear). However, most of our guys in Ontario work with PCs (its the price difference as well as Microsoft brainwashing). and I have to know all the ins and outs of their systems for when they run into troubles. So, I'm stuck with a PC, and so will need to eventually upgrade to Vista whether I want to or not. HA: Vista will indeed become the OS of preference for the next 5 years. Again, price and brainwashing will do it -- and the fact that all new computers will come with it installed. People will eventually just give in (or be forced to). Much like I've been forced to upgrade from 98 (which I had no problems with) to XP because 98 drivers are no longer available. TotH: replacement batteries are $150 (stinkin' Dell). Wow, $150 is steep. Not sure how intrepid you are but if you would open up that battery you would most likely find rechargeable AAA lithium ion batteries hooked up with some electronics. You could buy some rechargeable batteries, withe same specs, hook them up and the whole thing would probably cost you $10. It is a bit of a pain though. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 1, 2007 23:14:17 GMT -5
Dis: I'd really prefer a Mac and wouild grab one if I could. Heck, our IT department at HQ all use Macs and swear by them (as much as they swear). However, most of our guys in Ontario work with PCs (its the price difference as well as Microsoft brainwashing). and I have to know all the ins and outs of their systems for when they run into troubles. So, I'm stuck with a PC, and so will need to eventually upgrade to Vista whether I want to or not. HA: Vista will indeed become the OS of preference for the next 5 years. Again, price and brainwashing will do it -- and the fact that all new computers will come with it installed. People will eventually just give in (or be forced to). Much like I've been forced to upgrade from 98 (which I had no problems with) to XP because 98 drivers are no longer available. TotH: replacement batteries are $150 (stinkin' Dell). Wow, $150 is steep. Not sure how intrepid you are but if you would open up that battery you would most likely find rechargeable AAA lithium ion batteries hooked up with some electronics. You could buy some rechargeable batteries, withe same specs, hook them up and the whole thing would probably cost you $10. It is a bit of a pain though. That is the way to go. However, Lithium ion batteries are NOT that cheap. Maybe 30 bucks to do the job but still WAY cheaper then $150. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 1, 2007 23:18:28 GMT -5
I don't know if Vista will take off. It has no new features of much interest and the huge pain of upgrading (not to mention the expense) is scaring off most organizations. If I were buying a new PC I would try not to get Vista if possible. Microsoft may be stuck in the 20th century. The "new" approach to software is constant improvement delivered electronically (see Google), not a different version every few years on CD. If people are going to go to the trouble of changing to a new OS, I see no good reason for it to be Vista. Linux and Mac are both viable options. My XP has crashed 3-5 times in three years. Not exactly Windows 98. Mind you, I use the Windows Task manager often if the program stops responding. Vista is scaring the hell out of me. It is nothing more then a money cow and uber control cow for and by Microcrap. Why would anyone want to be part of that? I wish Google would create a free OS and CRUSH the hell out off Microcrap. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 1, 2007 23:37:52 GMT -5
I don't know if Vista will take off. It has no new features of much interest and the huge pain of upgrading (not to mention the expense) is scaring off most organizations. If I were buying a new PC I would try not to get Vista if possible. Microsoft may be stuck in the 20th century. The "new" approach to software is constant improvement delivered electronically (see Google), not a different version every few years on CD. If people are going to go to the trouble of changing to a new OS, I see no good reason for it to be Vista. Linux and Mac are both viable options. My XP has crashed 3-5 times in three years. Not exactly Windows 98. Mind you, I use the Windows Task manager often if the program stops responding. Vista is scaring the hell out of me. It is nothing more then a money cow and uber control cow for and by Microcrap. Why would anyone want to be part of that? I wish Google would create a free OS and CRUSH the hell out off Microcrap. I need to restart my XP every 2-3 weeks. With previous versions of Windows, it was more like every 2-3 hours. But I dual boot with Linux and I'm reasonably happy with the setup. I'd like to migrate to using Linux as much as possible and Windows as little as possible, but I'm lazy. As for Monoposoft trying to control the world, nothing new there. Add to that the major media/communications companies trying to lock down the internet, and the digital world envisaged by the dominant corporations is a lot different than the one we have now, or the one which would be most beneficial to society. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 2, 2007 0:31:20 GMT -5
My XP has crashed 3-5 times in three years. Not exactly Windows 98. Mind you, I use the Windows Task manager often if the program stops responding. Vista is scaring the hell out of me. It is nothing more then a money cow and uber control cow for and by Microcrap. Why would anyone want to be part of that? I wish Google would create a free OS and CRUSH the hell out off Microcrap. I need to restart my XP every 2-3 weeks. With previous versions of Windows, it was more like every 2-3 hours. But I dual boot with Linux and I'm reasonably happy with the setup. I'd like to migrate to using Linux as much as possible and Windows as little as possible, but I'm lazy. As for Monoposoft trying to control the world, nothing new there. Add to that the major media/communications companies trying to lock down the internet, and the digital world envisaged by the dominant corporations is a lot different than the one we have now, or the one which would be most beneficial to society. There is my fear about the internet. According the our masters, all software and hardware should only talk to each other if the content is approved. Believe it or not, Vista can delete programs that Microsoft deams iligal to have pon your computer. Imagine that, they will CONTROL your content and your SOFTWARE. And if al goes well, they will control the hardware so as to make it IMPOSSIBLE to escape their clutches. Of course, the government LOVES this because it will allow them to shut down this redicilous thing called internet. Somy loive it because it can sharge $100 a movie. The recording industry loves it because they will circumvent our right to record ANYTHHING other then what we create. The lost the VHS fight but they want to get around that by sofrware.hardware control. That is why I will NEVER put Vista on any of my machines. Never. Ever. Come to think of it, I love to see hackers destroy Vista. With Vistas attempt to strangle computers, it's very likely hackers will crack Vista and shut down Vista computers everywhere. GO VISTA HACKERS GO |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Feb 2, 2007 0:51:11 GMT -5
I need to restart my XP every 2-3 weeks. With previous versions of Windows, it was more like every 2-3 hours. But I dual boot with Linux and I'm reasonably happy with the setup. I'd like to migrate to using Linux as much as possible and Windows as little as possible, but I'm lazy. As for Monoposoft trying to control the world, nothing new there. Add to that the major media/communications companies trying to lock down the internet, and the digital world envisaged by the dominant corporations is a lot different than the one we have now, or the one which would be most beneficial to society. There is my fear about the internet. According the our masters, all software and hardware should only talk to each other if the content is approved. Believe it or not, Vista can delete programs that Microsoft deams iligal to have pon your computer. Imagine that, they will CONTROL your content and your SOFTWARE. And if al goes well, they will control the hardware so as to make it IMPOSSIBLE to escape their clutches. Of course, the government LOVES this because it will allow them to shut down this redicilous thing called internet. Somy loive it because it can sharge $100 a movie. The recording industry loves it because they will circumvent our right to record ANYTHHING other then what we create. The lost the VHS fight but they want to get around that by sofrware.hardware control. That is why I will NEVER put Vista on any of my machines. Never. Ever. Come to think of it, I love to see hackers destroy Vista. With Vistas attempt to strangle computers, it's very likely hackers will crack Vista and shut down Vista computers everywhere. GO VISTA HACKERS GO I have a Mac for my recording purposes (voice, etc.)....but I bought a new PC for our other uses. It came with a coupon to use to upgrade to Vista when it comes out. Are you saying that my new PC will still work with Windows XP Home, even though Vista is coming out? |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 2, 2007 1:14:31 GMT -5
I have a Mac for my recording purposes (voice, etc.)....but I bought a new PC for our other uses. It came with a coupon to use to upgrade to Vista when it comes out. Are you saying that my new PC will still work with Windows XP Home, even though Vista is coming out? Of course it will. I am probably going to replace some of my puters this year and I am so pissed at this Vista crap that I am going to run bootleg XP on them. BTW, I never buy Dells and Smells. With a approximatly $1,000 budget, I get top shelf half generation back stuff and build great puters with them. Dells and the like are another five hundred dollars more to get anywhere near the same speed. Here are the current specs of my new puters... Case+ Power Supply - 120 CPU: Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz) Retail - 220 Motherboard: AsusÈY P5B, Socket 775, IntelÈY P965 - 150 Memory: 2-GB (2x512-MB) Generic PC2-4200 - 230 Hard Drive: 320GB Seagate SATA 3.0 Gb/s - 120 Video Card: GeForce 7900 GS 256MB (PCIe) - 220 This will run ciircles around anything that the box stores have. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Feb 2, 2007 1:50:47 GMT -5
Final nail in Vistas coffin......and to prove that it's only thereto make money for Microcrap. Give Vista the middle finger salute....... ~~~~~~~~~~ www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/page11.html~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Conclusion: K.O. For Windows Vista? Windows Vista clearly is not a great new performer when it comes to executing single applications at maximum speed. Although we only looked at the 32-bit version of Windows Vista Enterprise, we do not expect the 64-bit edition to be faster (at least not with 32-bit applications). Overall, applications performed as expected, or executed slightly slower than under Windows XP. The synthetic benchmarks such as Everest, PCMark05 or Sandra 2007 show that differences are non-existent on a component level. We also found some programs that refused to work, and others that seem to cause problems at first but eventually ran properly. In any case, we recommend watching for Vista-related software upgrades from your software vendors. There are some programs that showed deeply disappointing performance. Unreal Tournament 2004 and the professional graphics benchmarking suite SPECviewperf 9.03 suffered heavily from the lack of support for the OpenGL graphics library under Windows Vista. This is something we expected, and we clearly advise against replacing Windows XP with Windows Vista if you need to run professional graphics applications. We are disappointed that CPU-intensive applications such as video transcoding with XviD (DVD to XviD MPEG4) or the MainConcept H.264 Encoder performed 18% to nearly 24% slower in our standard benchmark scenarios. Both benchmarks finished much quicker under Windows XP. There aren't newer versions available, and we don't see immediate solutions to this issue. There is good news as well: we did not find evidence that Windows Vista's new and fancy AeroGlass interface consumes more energy than Windows XP's 2D desktop. Although our measurements indicate a 1 W increase in power draw at the plug, this is too little of a difference to draw any conclusions. Obviously, the requirements for displaying all elements in 3D, rotating and moving them aren't enough to heat up graphics processors. This might also be a result of Windows Vista's more advanced implementation of ACPI 2.0 (and parts of 3.0), which allows the control of power of system components separately. Our hopes that Vista might be able to speed up applications are gone. First tests with 64-bit editions result in numbers similar to our 32-bit results, and we believe it's safe to say that users looking for more raw performance will be disappointed with Vista. Vista is the better Windows, because it behaves better, because it looks better and because it feels better. But it cannot perform better than Windows XP. Is this a K.O. for Windows Vista in the enthusiast space? If you really need your PC to finish huge encoding, transcoding or rendering workloads within a defined time frame, yes, it is. Don't do it; stay with XP. But as long as you don't need to finish workloads in record time, we believe it makes sense to consider these three bullet points: Vista runs considerably more services and thus has to spend somewhat more resources on itself. Indexing, connectivity and usability don't come for free. There is a lot of CPU performance available today! We've got really fast dual core processors, and even faster quad cores will hit the market by the middle of the year. Even though you will lose application performance by upgrading to Vista, today's hardware is much faster than yesterday's, and tomorrow's processors will clearly leap even further ahead. No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor. Although application performance has had this drawback, the new Windows Vista performance features SuperFetch and ReadyDrive help to make Vista feel faster and smoother than Windows XP. Our next article will tell you how they work. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Feb 2, 2007 1:59:39 GMT -5
Thanks, HA.
I'm not up on computers at all.
All I know is...my Mac PowerBook G4 is awesome. Never crashes...no viruses. Nothing.
PC comes burdened with so many extras....firewalls....spamproof....anti-virus....nickel and dime ya ta death stuff.
Thanks again....I'll hold off on the "switch" to Vista.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 2, 2007 4:31:16 GMT -5
BTW, I never buy Dells and Smells. With a approximatly $1,000 budget, I get top shelf half generation back stuff and build great puters with them. Dells and the like are another five hundred dollars more to get anywhere near the same speed. Here are the current specs of my new puters... I'm told that if you buy from Dell over the phone, you can haggle their prices down 30% by telling them you were offered a deal by a competitor. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 2, 2007 4:37:14 GMT -5
I need to restart my XP every 2-3 weeks. With previous versions of Windows, it was more like every 2-3 hours. But I dual boot with Linux and I'm reasonably happy with the setup. I'd like to migrate to using Linux as much as possible and Windows as little as possible, but I'm lazy. As for Monoposoft trying to control the world, nothing new there. Add to that the major media/communications companies trying to lock down the internet, and the digital world envisaged by the dominant corporations is a lot different than the one we have now, or the one which would be most beneficial to society. There is my fear about the internet. According the our masters, all software and hardware should only talk to each other if the content is approved. Believe it or not, Vista can delete programs that Microsoft deams iligal to have pon your computer. Imagine that, they will CONTROL your content and your SOFTWARE. And if al goes well, they will control the hardware so as to make it IMPOSSIBLE to escape their clutches. Of course, the government LOVES this because it will allow them to shut down this redicilous thing called internet. Somy loive it because it can sharge $100 a movie. The recording industry loves it because they will circumvent our right to record ANYTHHING other then what we create. The lost the VHS fight but they want to get around that by sofrware.hardware control. That is why I will NEVER put Vista on any of my machines. Never. Ever. Come to think of it, I love to see hackers destroy Vista. With Vistas attempt to strangle computers, it's very likely hackers will crack Vista and shut down Vista computers everywhere. GO VISTA HACKERS GO I'm not too worried about Vista in that regard. There's a large enough market for machines that can run Linux that someone will always make them, even if the major vendors are bought off. The technical community will not accept an OS that denies them the freedom to which they are accustomed. In other words, if MS gets too heavey-handed, anyone who cares about their freedom will just not use Windows. What is more of a concern is the future of the internet, because the physical networks are owned by large corporations. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 2, 2007 7:10:41 GMT -5
Up to yesterday I was running machines with 98, XP, and 2000. The 98 was upgraded (more like downgraded -- I never had any problems with it -- to XP. We'll see what happens.
I think I'm going to requisition a new computuer but hold off buying one until fall -- or maybe even Christmas. Get it loaded with XP and have Vista as a later upgrade. As I said, eventually I'll have to have it so I know how it operates for when others need my help -- not that I'm a tech guy, but as guys try to do their year-end reporting if something -- anything -- goes wrong with their computer they wind up calling me. Thanks, all.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 2, 2007 7:12:55 GMT -5
BTW, I never buy Dells and Smells. With a approximatly $1,000 budget, I get top shelf half generation back stuff and build great puters with them. Dells and the like are another five hundred dollars more to get anywhere near the same speed. Here are the current specs of my new puters... I'm told that if you buy from Dell over the phone, you can haggle their prices down 30% by telling them you were offered a deal by a competitor. I didn't haggle -- I just said "that's all you'll do for me?" It wasn't. Boy have prices come down. 5/6 years ago I spent $3,500. "Same" machine (as same as they can be, though mine is that much slower etc) today: ~$800. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 2, 2007 7:52:10 GMT -5
Up to yesterday I was running machines with 98, XP, and 2000. The 98 was upgraded (more like downgraded -- I never had any problems with it -- to XP. We'll see what happens. I think I'm going to requisition a new computuer but hold off buying one until fall -- or maybe even Christmas. Get it loaded with XP and have Vista as a later upgrade. As I said, eventually I'll have to have it so I know how it operates for when others need my help -- not that I'm a tech guy, but as guys try to do their year-end reporting if something -- anything -- goes wrong with their computer they wind up calling me. Thanks, all. Very quick note, Franko. Most of the problems with XP have been sorted out. Like most MS OS's though, be prepared to be inundated with upgrades and patch updates. Still looking at a Mac as my next computer though. The one I was on yesterday was slick! Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Feb 2, 2007 9:19:46 GMT -5
As Dis noted, stick with Windows 2000; it remanins the most stable and reliable Micro$oft OS. Alternately you could go with one of the many excellent flavours of Linux.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2007 10:54:07 GMT -5
I don't know, Mr. B, I've been really pleased with Win XP. As for Vista, well, if you're a fan of torrents, file sharing and other things, that's probably not a good thing.
The new Macs are now compatible with most programs available on PC. If you said in the past, "Well, Macs can't run the programs that I'd like to run on PC," you no longer have that excuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 2, 2007 13:02:13 GMT -5
Just got my Win98 machine back . . . a driver was found so I can keep using it. It gives little problem (and occasional blue screen of death but I can deal with it -- I quickly learned to save documents as I go with my first computer -- was finishing up a "presentation" when it [an 8088 with -- get this -- a whole 512 KB RAM -- guys asked me what in the world I was ever going to do with my super-huge 20 MB hard drive and mocked me for spending so much money!] crashed and I lost everything. Now, quick saves and HD backups are the norm) so I'm happy to save the $$$ for what would have been a bit of an upgrade.
As I think of it, I have never (no not once) had a problem with the notebook with Win2000 on it. Not even one crash! Boots quite slowly, though.
As for XP . . . we have 4 computers in our house (yup -- one for everyone but my wife who "has no time for them"); all have XP; not many glitches, htough lets face it, one is too many.
I'd love a Mac myself . . . maybe then I'd look less like the PC geek and more like the young guy on the commercials . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Feb 5, 2007 23:26:32 GMT -5
As Dis noted, stick with Windows 2000; it remanins the most stable and reliable Micro$oft OS. Alternately you could go with one of the many excellent flavours of Linux. I am running XP in my Dell laptop and Win2000 on my desktop....which I screwed up on a dumb download, and am currently trying to install Damn Small Linux in an older laptop or two. I've never used Linux previously, but hope it runs well. I don't have a lot of computer smarts (ya I know..why limit the observation to computers.  , so it'll be a bit of a challenge. If Thunderbird were close to what Outlook brings, I would not have a need for Microsoft Windows at all. I too really don't like the idea of Microsoft digging about in my computer and deleting anything it thinks should be deleted. I don't have any pirate stuff, but if Linux and Open Office can get it done....who needs Microsoft? |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 10, 2007 13:36:44 GMT -5
Requisition made; purchase to be made in the fall in all likelihood: going with a MacBook. Would like a MacBook Pro for screen size, but really can't justify the cost (unless prices drop and I can squeeze another dollar or two from the powers that be).
Will install the "Parallels Desktop" so that I can run the Vista O/S on the side for when I'm called on for tech help as well as the MS Office Suite which now runs on Mac.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 10, 2007 16:21:18 GMT -5
I love that commercial with the techie guy duct taping a web cam to the PC guy. I used to take some much ribbing over using a Mac (heck I even go back to the Apple II) and now the tables are reversed. As has been said, no crashes, no viruses and with the new Intel processors, speed is not an issue any more. I still have my (now getting old) iMac G4 and it's fine for what I do.
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Feb 10, 2007 16:25:51 GMT -5
Will install the "Parallels Desktop" so that I can run the Vista O/S on the side I like the idea that Windows is so dangerous that it needs to be isolated from the rest of the machine. ;D If the popularity of macs really goes up, that could change, to some extent. The thing that used to scare me off of macs was their puny little one button mice. BTW, in my limited experience with Macs, I haven't found them to be any more stable than a typical Windows machine. But I really haven't used a Mac in years. |
|
(sorry)
, so it'll be a bit of a challenge. 