| |
Mike Stanley wrote:
>
> Tim Rueger <rueger@io.com> wrote:
> > I'm use a hand-me-down PM6100 (60MHz 601) that I've
> > added memory and an L2 cache to, say $150 total. We also
> > have a substantially more expensive Power Computing box
> > (CPU was about $1400 in '97, we've added other stuff
> > since then).
>
> Ok, so asking for a cheaper machine than a hand-me-down is a bit
> misleading, don't you think? I could just as easily say that
Right, I think it's a bad argument tactic to suggest that Macs are
cheaper than Intel hardware. It just ain't so. But, they are faster,
more reliable, easier to use, easier to maintain, less reliant on MS
(which matters to some), and home to more and better graphics and
multimedia software (still (NT was supposed to turn dig-vid industry but
it's mostly not happening)). But you have to pay a little bit for it.
You are also more limited in your hardware expansion options.
> I hear you. It's what *I* enjoy, though. It's one of the ways I've
> learned as much as I have - by pushing all my equipment and software
> to the limits.
Yeah, Macs are less flexibly configurable as an expense for being easier
and more stable. Thus, they are less interesting to the nity-grity explorer.
> Well, you seem to be implying that the MacOS, and maybe Mac software
> in general, doesn't have patches, service packs, etc. That's simply
> not true. You may choose not to download and install them, but they
> do exist, and are, in some cases, very necessary. Since Windows98
> came out the process of updating one's OS with the latest patches,
> etc, has been a simple button-click process. Not sure if that's
> doable with the Mac yet. And that _doesn't_ require a sysadmin, just
> someone who is willing to click a button every once in a while.
I disagree. On the limited occasions that I have worked to upgrade my
Windows OS 95 ->98 and a service patch to 98, it wasn't that easy.
Maybe it's that easy once you know what you're doing...and thus a
sysadmin. I personally find the MacOS easier to upgrade and undo the
upgrade if I do it wrong.
> I'm the first to admit that the Mac is probably a lot easier (in some
> ways) for a novice to use, but I honestly don't know where you get
> this impression that PC users spend some large percentage (or even any
> percentage) of their time "fixing" their computers.
The people I talk to do. I'm surrounded by them. Of course, many of
them are running multi-boot boxes with linux, WinNT, BSD, OS/2, etc and
goof things up almost on purpose like you admitted to.
> Next I guess you'll tell me that iMac users really can bring a
> computer home and be on the net in 15 minutes. If you did, I'd have
I did. I know others who have.
> to say they could, if they use the built-in Apple-provided connection
> (earthlink or something), but God help them if they choose another ISP
> and don't have any experience setting that stuff up, especially if
OK, everyone I know has done it before. It certainly seems easier than
when I have to help my in-laws with their win98 machine to get and stay networked.
You can have my iBook when you pry it out of my cold dead fingers :-)
--
Sincerely,
Christopher L. Weeks
central Missouri, USA
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Perl rules!
|
| (...) Ok, so asking for a cheaper machine than a hand-me-down is a bit misleading, don't you think? I could just as easily say that Rachael's P2-350 was a hand-me-down for her (since it was) because it used to be my machine. In fact, since it hasn't (...) (25 years ago, 25-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
433 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
