BreakmanX.com

that's where os x wouuld step in. but nooooo, people treat it just as they did the dc..........wwwwhhhhaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You see the more user friendly mandrake is goin out of business.....I thought they were the bomb until i got back on redHat. in a word wow but still can't hold a candle to os x.

mmmk lemme say first that the irony of pc gaming is that the mac is in every way more suited to running games. each mac comes standard with a powerful video card, for the past 4 years, and the system architecture is better designed to handle graphics and such. in addition apple provides handy developer's tools which make it very very easy to write games for the system. the lack of software is the only problem the mac has really. also, i would like to know how you guys got your macs to system crash all the time, my dad's rarely had such problem's and it's had so much software and driver's installed on it it's not even funny.

also, need i remind you that OS 9 is several years old, comparing the stability of outdated software like OS9 to new software windows xp is utter bs. when apple's were running mac os 8.6, probably the most stable user-friendly os to date, microsoft had windows 95, which i recall was buggy as hell.

also i fail to understand why everyone is comparing the benchmarks on G3 processors, which have been discontinued for a few years now. G3 processors were built by IBM and thus are not that great, those are the things that a lot of the old iMacs run off of. The G4's built by motorola are incredibly powerful, as are the nVidia cards (i believe they are either geforce 3 or 4) that come standard in each model.

now for the bashing part OMG THE MAC HAS NO GAMES THAT IS SO GAY THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE COUNTERSTRIKE!!!1111 OMG WTF.

which is a shame cuz even RU's old G3 could handle Counterstrike easily.

on another note, OS 10.2 is the greatest operating system ever, however the immense amount of graphics rendering the operating performs makes it inneffective for anything below a G4 (in other words slow as molasses). it was funny though i have a PIII 450 and i downloaded a mod for the os which gave it a dock like OS X, the graphics for the dock loaded so slow it wasn't even funny, i had to disable it because it wasn't even usable.

btw the most knowledgeable PC gamer's I know say that Intel processors blow nuts, and that AMD's are vastly more powerful.

Intel's processor's don't blow nuts. From the benchmarks in maximum PC; the fastest Intel processor will beat out the fastest AMD. At least until the 64 bit chip comes out.

AMD's chips are much more efficient, and cost less for better performance. (You can get a better proc for less money) But, the top of the line Intel, according to benchmarks, does beat out the top AMD. The Intel proc will cost a hell of a lot more.

I was under the impression that OS9.x and Windows 2000 were released at similar times.

If Macs are such a wonderful gaming platform, why aren't there more games developed for it. I'd think developers would be jumping all over it.

Because 95% of every computer sold runs Windows!!! Jesus it's not that hard to figure out. And this is because back in the day when no one but businesses could afford computers, no one gave a shit which system could run games better. Thus why Windows is dominant.

Well, yeah, I knew that most people had Windows based PCs. It just seems odd to me that the devs wouldn't try to do something to popularize such a superior platform.

The Siege wrote:Because 95% of every computer sold runs Windows!!! And this is because back in the day when no one but businesses could afford computers, no one gave a shit which system could run games better. Thus why Windows is dominant.

So, Windows did business software better?

i just hope *nix breaks m$

Unfortunately, that'll never happen. OSes that rely on command line (even *nix with GUI relies on usage of command line, except for OSX) will never be standard.

Basicly the mac will never be better than the pc

sephiroth_4 wrote:As far as the **hertz myths....it's all about efficiency. The Macs have a very efficient design and cut out alot of the crap that it takes to run instructions. That counts for a lot, but it can't keep up with raw processing power as intel. That is good for what...Seti@home and other grid computing packages like Ubero? Not to mention video and etc. AMD is the same way as far as efficiency but on a different level.
But to conclude, Apple needs to get off Motorola's **** and get on with IBM. It'd be perfect.

Its interesting that he posted this a mere 6 or 7 days before Apple announced the new IBM manufactured G5. lkooking back at the past, the motorolla G4 was faster than the pentium 2s when it debuted at 500MHz. The early G3s killed the 486 and pentium ones in their era. however, shortly after the G4 was released, Intel and AMD ramped up operations and began an all out war. Motorolla, having more of its profits in the embedded chip market (I.E. not personal computers) let the G4 development slow down and stagnate. Realizing their predicament, Apple (back in 2001) began to work with IBM on the next generation chip. What IBM did was to take the core of their fastest, most powerful super-computer chip (the Power 5) used in IBM's mainframes and improve upon it to make the Power PC 970 (what we now call the G5). The 64bit power PC 970 was a long time in coming. But it was finally announced by apple late this past June at the world wide developers conference in San Francisco. With it comes a new, ultra high performance architecture, the fastest of any desktop on the market. and it also comes with an incredibly stylish all aluminum enclosure. The G5 is the fastest 64bit processor made. Its current top speed is 2GHz, which you can buy from apple in a dual-processor configuration. but with the announcement of the G5 came a promise from IBM, that the G5 will be at 3GHz within one year. The G5 is Apple's best hope for developers to start noticing the power and ease-of-use of the mac platform and to seriously begin developing games for it. Panther, The next version of OS X, also previewed at the WWDC, is the competition for Longhorn. The thing is, Longhorn won't be ut until 2005 at least. and Panther will ship before the end of this year.

The stories posteed here about old school imacs are believable. god knows the old imac and OS 9 was not as good a system as the current XP/Linux machines. But when the imac came out, in its own era, it was going up against 266 and 300 MHz pentium IIs running windows 95 and 98. Lets stick to comparing oranges to oranges here.

So, it is true that as of this moment, if your sole purpose in buying a computer is to play games on it, then you should get a PC. But if you want to do most anything else on a computer, (especially enything creative) then you should get a mac. They work better, work longer, are more stable, don't get viruses, and are worth more both monetarily and practically in the long run. Macs are better now than they've ever ben before.

You are a fucking dumbass!!!!!!!!! I can't believe that you just compared a Pentium 2 to a G4. By the way, the pentium 2 did not "debut" at 500mhz. It was more like 233mhz. Ignorance, that is what this all is. Why can't you just shut up because everything you say is wrong. You suck.

Um, Shane... His post is like 2-3 weeks old. He did shut up. So SHUT UP!
Oh, and apollo, yeah, you're wrong. Pentium 2s did debut at like 233Mhz, if not less than that.
[CONFIRMED BY A MAC USER]

I think Galaxies is fixing his head, and teaching him the true nature of the force. (Of computing that is)

Meanwhile, my quasi-little sister Beccie is off building her own PC and drooling over the cases...

Yes, her.

Do you guys know her? I don't think you do... but if you did, you would know how wierd it seems...

That is kind of odd, from what I know about her...
Maybe you should point her to these forums. <grin>

q, you sick fuck, do you even know how old she is? You are a bassist i guess, i mean you know how bassist settle.