Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Windows vs. Mac: I'm starting to change.

<< < (34/48) > >>

wraith808:
Oh my.. and someone said there's no Apple bias here  :P
-wraith808 (October 22, 2009, 09:36 AM)
--- End quote ---

Looks as if they were right, doesn't it?
- a no Apple bias
 :)
-Dormouse (October 22, 2009, 10:59 AM)
--- End quote ---

Heh.  I guess I left myself open for that.  But for all of the computers as tools talk, it was proven wrong in the latter part of the thread methinks. ;)  Personally, they'd have to pry my windows out of my cold dead hands... the hardware is another thing :)  As long as I can run Windows on it, it's fine... it's the features (and right now, I want to run OSX and Windows on the same box)

steeladept:
For the cost of the windows OS you can have both mac osx and windows on the same machine with a mac which has bootcamp already in the osx. Macs are made to run windows too, without any extra cost except the windows os.

Somehow I think that's an advantage...doh...

Switch os' almost like switching users, although you do have to reboot to load the other.

Might be able to run both side by side soon, if they haven't already done it.
-cmpm (October 22, 2009, 11:08 AM)
--- End quote ---
With virtualization, we are already there.  You can download ESXi (or equivalent hypervisor), install it, then install as many OS's as your hard drive and memory can handle (right now, it is in the vicinity of 10 OS's on common server specs.  For the 27" iMac mentioned above, I would think 4 should work okay - maybe more).  You can even have them all open at the same time running multiple programs each.

With other solutions, you may even be able to work with them seemlessly.  By this, I mean cut a line out of something open on the Mac, and paste it into a completely different program on the Windows side (or Linux for that matter).  Talk about cross-platform programming!

I am just waiting for a good Client-side Hypervisor so I can shut down the machine(s) gracefully.  Right now, the hypervisor front is still mostly in love with servers only.  They work, but you could do so much more with the hypervisor to make it client-friendly I would think.

EDIT:  I might be slightly off on this assessment, at least with the common hypervisors.  I do not know if there is a good way to install OSX on ANY hypervisor.  The hardware can be virtualized fine, but I don't know enough about OSX as to how to get a copy to install, nor if it will properly install at all.

steeladept:
... the hardware is another thing :)  As long as I can run Windows on it, it's fine... it's the features (and right now, I want to run OSX and Windows on the same box)
-wraith808 (October 22, 2009, 11:19 AM)
--- End quote ---

Hear, hear!  Linux too for me.... :Thmbsup:

urlwolf:
Atwood on PCs vs Macs. Oldie but goodie

tomos:
Atwood on PCs vs Macs. Oldie but goodie
-urlwolf (October 22, 2009, 12:16 PM)
--- End quote ---
the comments are more informative (both sides) and entertaining than the article itself (a good few from this year actually).

there's a link in the comments there for this NSFW article "Announcing the new apple iProduct" - doesnt look NSFW but some of the text is of a delicate nature :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page