Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Why do people insist on attacking Mac?

Oct 14, 2005 1:44AM PDT

It seems to me, after reading several posts, that many peope will attack a Mac computer on instinct rather than fact. Just so you know where I am coming from, I am a Tech. Coordinator for a school that is primarily Mac. I have been using Macs since the Apple IIe was out and Windows since version 3.1. I consider myself fluent on both systems. Both have good points and both have bad. Windows just happens to have more bad. Regardless of my opinion, I keep seeing people attacking the Macs with bogus arguments and just plain silly reasons. It seems like people will turn a Mac on once, look at it, and make a desicion on it's functionality. Or worse, they listen to other people and form an opinion based on what they say without even using a Mac. I will admit, OS 9 was rocky, and the original OSX was too, but do I meed to bring up Windows 2000 or ME? Both companies have been growing and making changes, some better some not. Oh, and BTW all window users, Whether you know it or not, you have been using Mac technology all along. Windows systems were built using Mac Tech. Happy.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Jealousy, maybe
Oct 14, 2005 3:33AM PDT

Some people who, even subconsciously, realize that they made a mistake when they followed the rest of the lemmings, tend to bluster and shout. By attacking the opposition with their FUD, they seem to believe that they can justify their mistake and all will be well.
The Mac bashers where I work, tend to be those that have a lower expectation of what a computer is supposed to do for them and accept the fact that their machine will crash, Plug and Play won't or that reformatting the HD and reinstalling the OS is normal. There are those that will get very upset about virus's, adware and malware infections but will not consider getting rid of the problem and moving to an OS that is inherently more secure and currently has not a single virus that attacks it.

I guess some people are just masochistic and like the pain.


P

- Collapse -
Bad Mac
Oct 14, 2005 5:41AM PDT

People will attack what they dont know or understand. If it was not human nature to do so we would not have organized religion.

- Collapse -
Bad Mac?
Oct 14, 2005 2:42PM PDT

Sounds like Speakeasy Forum. Ever go there? Maybe you do not want to venture into the unknown. Wild posts sometimes. Good Forum.

-Kevin

- Collapse -
My heart has space for both.
Oct 19, 2005 5:14PM PDT

I've been using IBM compatibles for a long time, even had a couple of the 99.9% IBM compatible Tandy computers, hehe. And I've mainly used the Windows platform 'cause I'm a gamer at heart. Better hardware for gaming, better developer support for the hardware that drives games, and better choices of games (though you wouldn't know it sometimes with some of the abysmal ones put out). And to give Windows some credit, it's gotten MUCH better over the years...well, sometimes. Windows ME was fine as a joke, but we've passed that bridge, thank goodness. It was only a matter of time before the companies and consumers were crushed under the weight of the spyware, virus, and goodnessknowswhatelse threats that are prevalent simply because Windows has a higher volume of users (and maybe 'cause Microsoft made it a bit easier than they should have /snicker). Having said that, I enjoy using Windows XP more than I have any other version of Windows, and it's still my gaming PC.

I never really used to like Macs until a bandmate of mine got a Powerbook G4 with OS X. I used to use Macs at school, and was never really impressed with any of the other OS software up to that point, nor was I impressed with the designs of some of their products *groans at early iMac*. But OS X was what started to get me interested in the Macs, apart from some design changes that made them look very slick. A few years later, I'm the proud owner of an iBook, and I couldn't be happier with it. Mac OS X is extremely stable, especially when dealing with troublesome programs. Peripherals are also a breeze to use, much to my surprise. I plugged in a digital camera I've used to take pictures, and automatically my iBook knew what it was, and what to do with it. I had to hunt through a few sites to find drivers so it could work with Windows, but when the camera met my iBook, both of whom had never seen each other before, they got along just like old friends. Both computers co-exist in my home, as I certainly wouldn't use my PC for music production, or really even for watching DVD movies and the like anymore. However, I wouldn't use my iBook for gaming, either. So, I think for those of us who have space in our hearts for both systems, we get the best of both worlds. Happy

- Collapse -
Viruses Hit Windows Irregardless of the Numbers! Games Yea!
Oct 20, 2005 11:50AM PDT

That point comparing number of Winblows installations to number of virus infections has been proven quite wrong. Sad

Within two weeks of the beta release of Microsoft's Vista, numerous viral attacks were reported by developers who had received the OS to test. Proving that the so called new Windows release was not as Secure as Microsoft would have us to believe. It was a test for their new Anti-Virus software as well.

Guess what? It failed miserably to protect the system. Proving just how much Microsoft and company are hated in the world and just how fragile their system will always be. Yes the perfect target. This despite having just a handfull of Vista installations World Wide!

Have you heard of either Mac OS-X or Linux being attacked within weeks of a new release? Not hardly!
News links below, bode of a never ending target for Windows users for decades to come.

http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/08/04/vistaviruses/index.php?lsrc=mwrss

http://news.com.com/First+potential+virus+risk+for+Windows+Vista+found/2100-7349_3-5819428.html

Games Yea!
But it's sad that Microsoft is unwilling to share it's game dominance by porting DirectX to other platforms. Hopefully other companies will follow in Atari/Epics footsteps by providing ports of their games and engine to both Mac and Linux users, along with Windows and the game consoles. Like UT2004 and beyond.

Check it out! UT2004 runs smoother on OpenGL than Direct-X, proving that Direct-X just has more of ''Microsoft's Famous Hot Air''! But sadly Atari/Epic is the only major game software developer large enough to defy the bloated ego of Bill Gates and company.

You seem so tolerant of Microsoft's greed and Omnipotent stature in pc gaming. I on the other hand despise and detest these ignorant self serving pigs and hope one day they step into the pit of quicksand they so rightfully deserve. Happy

- Collapse -
Oh well
Oct 20, 2005 3:17PM PDT

That's okay, I don't mind. As long as I can play the games, I'll be happy. If the positions were reversed, I'm sure we would be complaining about the problems in reverse. After sitting through a couple of plagued MMO releases, I've discovered that people can complain about anything they want, and nothing will change that. Nor should it change, either. We all have a right to complain. But I have a right not to, as well. Happy

And to be perfectly honest, the Mac platform has not been pushing itself as a gaming platform. A performance platform, yes--a gaming platform, no. All monolithic, smothering corporate strategies aside, I didn't get an Apple so I could play UT2004 or World of Warcraft--I got it so I could do something ultimately more important to me, to make music. And quite frankly, i've never had any viruses in my Windows system at all. Ever. So you can take that for what it's worth--and remember that Vista is far from being released. Having said that, I think Apple was prudent in getting OS X right from the get go, so even though their installed base is lower, you still don't see the problems Windows users potentially have. If you're smart, you don't run into any problems on any system.

Regardless of what they all deserve, we're stil here using their products. But, like I said, we all still have a right to complain. Happy Thank you for still setting records straight.

- Collapse -
I Can Appreciate Your Response!
Oct 20, 2005 7:19PM PDT

It is just I don't share it.

My home office setup consists of a G-5 Mac, an AMD 64bit dual core proc (just built it) in a custom gaming case, sharing a Sony 24" Wide Screen, dual input display. The Mac runs 24/7 without complaint for my artwork, and is a jewel to use (just upgraded to Tiger). While I dual boot the AMD PC with both Windows XP Pro and PCLinux OS.

Of course I use the Windows XP for gaming only, and the Linux is my favorite for it's Customization abilities. I mean like in the various desktops, like KDE, Gnome, and most of all Enlightenment. Which I love, along with other "Open Source" software such as the Firefox browser. Which itself can be changed to fit my net surfing habits with "Extensions, Themes, etc". The Linux is every bit as stable as the Mac and with Crossfire Office I am also able to run MS Office and IE if I need to for Active X required Office updates and net sites like one of my bank accounts.

I find it comical using Linux to keep MS Office, IE and other Windows based apps, updated on a fake windows install. Knowing (of course) that if a virus came my way (using IE or Office), it would surely panic inside of the fake windows folders with nothing to infect.

You are very lucky no bugs have ever hit you using windows. I work on and repair Windows installs most everyday either spyware attacks, viruses, worms and rampant infectious deseases, of all sorts. Of course these are in offices where a variety of people are sometimes using and misusing the same computers.

I applaud your long streak of good fortune with a plaqued bugy system, I think belongs in a dumpster. But like you said, we are all intitled to our own opinion.

Best of luck to you and I hope good fortune shines your way always. I just would prefer that we didn't have such preditors running the companies that write our OS software and programs.

- Collapse -
Cool!
Oct 21, 2005 4:18AM PDT

Tiger is VERY slick--I like it way more than the previous releases of Mac OS X. I have a buddy who uses Panther on a PowerBook G4 Titanium, and the advantages are fairly apparent, hehe.

As an aside, how do you like your dual-core AMD setup so far? My Windows box still has an Athlon XP and I was looking to upgrade it fairly soon. As for Linux, I was hoping to learn it sometime soon, but I wasn't sure which one to get. What would you recommend?

- Collapse -
Jobs is a Moron! MacIntel Will Die!
Oct 16, 2005 3:39AM PDT

Don't get me wrong, I am a big Mac fan, but I use many different operating systems including Winblows. But only when I have to, for things like Gaming. I am also becoming a bigger fan of Linux as it continues to refine itself, in spite of diehard linuxphiles. For pure enjoyment and ease of use, I power up my Mac. With it's intuitive interface and sense of elegance it wins hands down over competing distros and OS versions out today.

But the very thought of Steven Jobs turns my stomach! His ego is even more grandiose than that of Bill Gates. He is extremely selfish and that is precisely why the best OS and the best family of users won't be growing in the future.

Closing out the clone market and choosing the Next Step purchase over BeOS were major mistakes that did nothing but put cash in Jobs pocket and help inflat his already bursting ego. As you may remember, Motorolla not only gave birth to ''Altivec'' for Apple, but had their own Mac clone as well. IBM too, were about to begin using the Mac OS on some of their own line of computers. I owned a dual proc ''Power Tower Pro'' (as well as a Power Mac), that scored higher than Power Macs of the time.

I believe that had Jobs allowed the clones to propagate and companies like Motorolla and IBM the license to sell desktops and laptops using Mac OS, Apple would rule the world today. If you were forced to (like IBM was) use a competing companies chips and the tyrancal Microsoft OS, would you have been happy with Apple? Winblows would've been the one with just 3% of the market if Jobs would've Simply Shared. Now thanks to Jobs, Apple is as egocentric as it's boss, and as money hungry and paranoid as Gates and Micro$%#p.

The pay back for Jobs wrongs are precisely why the greatest community of users will suffer the consequence of his egocentric actions. Yes, I'm sure your thinking, ''But they bought Next Step before Jobs came back''! But the desperate decision had already been made, and believe me Jobs had a say so in killing the clones. He just couldn't take the throne till another despot (crackpot) was gone. What a mistake giving him absolute totalitarian rule of the company. It gave him godlike status over all of us that love and use the Mac.

Yeh yeh yeh I know BeOS, what was that. Well for starters the best ground up built kernel ever written and written by former Apple engineers, I might add. It was an object oriented, multimedia OS from the very start with a clean fast 64bit file system that is just now going to be emulated in Vista's WFS.

I run a standing startup now with the outdated BeOS installed on a 3200+ Athlon in under 10 seconds and as soon as I start typing in a search it's found what I'm looking for. It doesn't use a database it is a database. Not that attractive I know, but with pervasive multi-threading, true drag n drop, and a multi meta tagged file structure it was a system just begging for an Apple touch to finish it off. So instead of having one giant idiot back, we would have had a whole group of talented designers back to help put together the operating system of the future.

Yes, we now have the best technologically advanced interface running on top of a unix clone with all the baggage and obese code clutter from it's granpappy days. So in ten years tell me how smart of a dicision it was to choose a Jobs & company with a BSD kernel over BeOS! You tell me then that Jobs and friends made that decision to benefit Apple and not line his pockets and ego! The BeOS was Ideally suited to be back home as the OS of the future. With the engineering talent of Apple and Be, it would have been the consumate OS.

If Jobs would have been willing to share OS-X, we would probably be about ready to kick Micro#*@ps A$$ with an Altivec ''Cell'' processor under the hood as well. You tell me in five years if you're still happy IBM said no to Mr. Steven Jobs ignorant selfish demands. He got paid back in full and the world will pay the price for that. Now we'll be forced to share the same inferior chips with the likes of eMachine, Gateway, HP and Dell!

Running Mac Elegance on a granpappy kernel that my dog will out live, is not a very good decision. If any of you in just five years can tell me your happy with your MacIntel, I'll be happy to eat my words. But I'll put my money on the Cell with Linux being king by then. Hopefully I'm wrong and Jobs will come to his senses and the Apple Mac OS will still be alive. Maybe by then we'll be where we should have been today, with Mac OS running not only on more brands of computers than Microsoft, but the ''Cell'' as well.

Want to know why people hate Mac? Look to it's leader and you should know why. He drove his own company into the ground now it will be Apple!

Happy

- Collapse -
Let's see
Oct 16, 2005 6:13AM PDT

"He drove his own company into the ground now it will be Apple!"

Would that be Next, which was sold for millions? It does not matter who it was sold to.
OR
Would that be Pixar, who seem to be making money hand over fist?

Truly a remarkable rant, but like most rants from those who claim to be "big Mac Fans" devoid of any factual information.

I think I'll join Lampie over at www.evolution.com

P

- Collapse -
Jobs With Pixar Just Further Proves My Point! Read and Weep!
Oct 20, 2005 5:51PM PDT

In regards to your statement concerning ''Pixar''!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

First off, before Jobs was, there was ''Pixar'' , he did not make ''Pixar'' what it is today, he is just the CEO (a stupid one at that) and part of the company that bought it at the right time. I suppose you would give good ole boy ''President Clinton'' credit for the excellent economy during his terms as well, just because he was there at the right time.

''Pixar'' is in a lame duck session of life, all because of Jobs greed and pigheadedness. Perhaps you aren't aware that Pixar has been rendered impotent, without a production studio to market their films. All because Jobs wants everything or nothing, and that is what he is getting with Disney Studios at this time.

Compromise is a comodity that Jobs lacks little of again in this case as well as with IBM and his failure to aquire BeOS at least as a kernel base instead of BSD. For a pitance I might add. Who do you think Disney Studios is and who do you think Jobs is playing in this little drama? Jack or the Giant atop the beanstock? If you don't see it, then your missing what everyone in the world has been witnessing over the last few years. Little Steven Jobs stomping his feet screaming for more money, more power and more control. While the technologies developed by ''Pixar'' in revolutionizing the world of digital animation are rendered extinct by newer, faster, and more ''Open'' processes and equipment.

With his again ''Hubris (or 'hybris' (Greek

- Collapse -
You may know the mac...
Oct 16, 2005 6:21AM PDT

...OS, but your Mac history seems to have a "little" bias.
Your first mistake is thinking of Apple as a software company. They are, and have always been, a HARDWARE company. They happen to sell a very good OS to run their hardware.

Apple was in "circle the drain" mode after the clones ate up the profits Apple had enjoyed to that point. The clones did not add to the customer base as the CEO of Apple (and you) thought it would. All it did was take customers away from Apple.

The board Fired the CEO, but had no replacement. For months they could not find anyone who would fill the position, because no one wanted to take the job of "going down with the ship". Let's face it, nobody wanted the downfall of Apple on their resume, and that's where smart money was betting it was headed.

After the board fired Steve from the company he and Woz created, you can bet they tried all options before asking him back. They even made his title "interem CEO" in the hope that some new option would come up.

His first big move was to stop the bleeding of the clones, by buying back all the clone licenses. His second was the i-Mac. Profits returned.
At that point the board probably could have found a new CEO, but they went with Steve and removed the "interem" from the title. Why?

Just now, as it happens, CNN stated that Apple stock is up about 9.5 times it's price from 2.5 years ago. I'd be insuferably arrogant if I could do that. Like Kid Rock said, "It aint bragging if you back it up.

He may not have gone with your choice for the new kernel, and with your choice things would be different, but you can't argue with the fact that his choice is working.

He started Apple in the Woz's garage. If he's so wrong, and you're so right, go out to your garage, and create "Orange" or "Pear" with Linux or the BeOS.

Can't do it? Stop putting down those who can and did.

As for your distain for Apple's market share, I'll be lazy and quote from another post I made on the subject.

Overall market share covers large market segments where Apple isn?t competing ? including markets where Apple doesn?t want to compete. Fifteen or 20 years ago, personal computers were generally only purchased and used by people who were ?into? computers. Today, however, many computers are purchased for use as generic business machines, modern-day typewriters and adding machines.
PCs are used everywhere, from telemarketing cubicle farms to supermarket checkout registers. The much ballyhooed ?network computer? platform never emerged the way companies like Sun and Oracle had hoped (i.e. ?no Microsoft?), but very cheap PCs are frequently used as little more than network terminals. Apple simply doesn?t make machines that would be good choices for extremely low-end tasks. Apple has concentrated at the high-end of the consumer market.

Mercedes has been making cars for over a hundred years. When have they ever had the leading market share? Porsche? Rolls Royce? Austin Martin? When I think of outstanding automotive engineering, those are the companies that first come to my mind.
Do you think of market share? Enjoy your Ford Taurus. There are a thousand companies that make parts for it! So when is Mercedes due to go out of business? Not any time soon I think. Didn't they buy Chrysler not to long ago??

Market share is important but how you define the market is also important. Mercedes is only a small part of the auto industry but it is a giant in the luxury automobile market. The trick is defining your space correctly."
Your space, as is indicated by your numbers, is not so much like overall automobile market share as it is like overall motor vehicle market share. It?s like counting everything from golf carts to tractor trailers as a single category.

Any company that creates, and markets it's creations and services to its customer base well, regardless of industry pundits and stock analysts, will succeed, thrive, and matter. Maseratti, Bang & Olfson, Rolex, Lear Jet, in fact all of the premium, "niche" companies know this.

On the other hand, if being with the "market share leader" is what's important to you, then enjoy McDonalds and Burger King. Me, I had a wonderful steak last night at this place called Diamond Grill. It must be an absolute failure, it's tiny, only about 30 tables, and just like Apple, it's obviously been right on the edge of failure for the last twenty years because of its tiny market share and higher prices. Just look at how many meals they sell a year vs. McDonalds! After all, food is food, right?

Lampie the Avenger
LOL

- Collapse -
Points Well Taken. But..........
Oct 20, 2005 8:16AM PDT

Ok, so you and the responder before you, hit some good points, but you missed the whole gest of my little heated oratory.

Why couldn't Jobs be honest about the move from IBM to Intel. A company by the way that is the embodiment of mediocre as much as Ford Pinto or a Chevy Nomad. Mass production of processors that fail to hit the marks of performance even Jobs has revered in the likes of IBM G-Series. Don't forget Jobs has chosen the Ford even compared to the likes of AMD's very successful small production of quality chips that outperform those of Intel's Fordish high production ones. Who by the way, are also cheaper.

IBM has always been the Master of Quality and has always produced the very best chips for Apple. Is Jobs now reaching for the status quo? To be just another Dell or Hp or eMachine? Jobs sold out IBM for a Ford, by his actions, that's all there is to it.

Jobs leads us to believe that it is all about the respective companies roadmaps. How is Intel's roadmap better? X86 is the architecture in sight of the end of it's lifecyle, where the opposite is true of IBM especially in light of it's PowerPC (including altivec) based ''Cell'' processor of the future. In case you haven't noticed the future is Now! IBM is manufacturing 65 nanometer chips and is even slated to go to 45 nanometer chips. Meaning cooler, faster is still attainable for a long time to come. IBM still sits on the cutting edge of technology with the ''Cell'' and other enlightened technogies.

If Apple's Jobs and you can't see that, then you have obviously been blinded by the light of the Intel's baseless superiority hype. IBM and Motorolla delivered the goods, including Altivec. What did Apple ever give back to them? Jobs lived on a one way street for a long time and was told to finally take a hike. That's the truth! IBM is just being nice about it by providing an easy way out, allowing Jobs to spread his mis-information about what's been taking place over the last few years.

Jobs is a traitor plain and simple. Not only to IBM, Motorolla Partership, but to us as well. Because your right, Apple has always stood on the forefront of hardware inovation, but not because of it's fearless leader. Much of it's industry leading leaps came without him in charge. Including and certainly not limited to ''USB'' and ''Firewire''!

Back to ''BeOS''! Whose very roots were laid in Apple inovation. They demonstrated a true Multimedia Desktop in 1992, built on a true 64bit file system, with ''symmetric multiprocessing'' and ''pervasive multithreading,'' before Altivec or even Mac OS-X was even dreamed of. All on the backs of former Apple designers, engineers,leaders Steve Sakoman and Jean-Louis Gass

- Collapse -
I don't think I missed it.
Oct 26, 2005 7:06AM PDT

You talk about IBM with a loyalty that usually comes from a paycheck. Was your work effected by the IBM - Intel switch?

My interests in what chip Apple uses are purely selfish. What will it do for my computer, and what will it do for the platform I use.
Because I use a Powerbook, I'm all for faster chips that run cool. IBM has not been able to fill that need, and the Powerbook line is falling behind because of it. Where is the G-5 for Powerbooks that IBM was supposed to have by now? How long should Jobs wait so you no longer consider him a ''traitor''? How long can he wait before people like me consider him one? IBM is not on the ''cutting edge'' when it comes to my computer.

All of the dual processor systems that Apple makes came about because IBM could not make the speed of a single chip keep up with other Mfg's. What should Jobs do, Start making three processor machines? Remember, the dual processor machines were held up because of chip shortages. Three is not an option.

Because I use the OSX platform, I'm all for getting people to switch. A machine that will run both OSX and Windows is a good way to introduce OSX to people who have never used it. How can that be bad?

The fact that there are other choices that Jobs could have made, but didn't, doesn't make his choice wrong. He had both IBM and Motorola making chips but still ran into shortages. He may feel that AMD would give him the same problems. If anyone can keep up with demand, it's Intel.

Every choice at that level is a trade off. While there may be chips that suit your idea of computing and the future, it may not be everyone's. There are good reasons for going with the Intel chips. There are good reasons for going with AMD. Yes, there are also good reasons for staying with IBM. There are also downsides to every one of those choices.
Without sitting in on Apple R&D meetings, and Apple board meetings, I don't have all the info Jobs and the board had when they made the decision. I doubt you do either. Therefore I have to look at Jobs previous track record. You use a Mac. That tells me that you are not against everything Jobs has done. With him being such a ruthless dictator you must believe that the design of your computer was his and his alone. If he designed your computer of choice, he can't be all bad, eh?

By the way, there are European exotic cars that use Ford power. That doesn't make them a Ford. It makes them more reliable. It makes them easier to fix when they do break. It makes them easier to get parts for. Yes, it even makes them cheaper. It still is an exotic car.

Your statement that ''the future is now'' is a little ironic, since your PLAYSTATION 4 is a couple of years away. What will you use until then? I'll decide what to use in 2007 when it comes around. Vaporware is not a valid argument.

I always liked the Chevy Nomad. The 327 small block they put in it made it the worlds hottest ''station wagon''. Surf's up!

Lampie

- Collapse -
Misunderstood Me, Got what you said! Check the PS3 Specs.
Oct 27, 2005 10:22PM PDT

Okay, the PLAYSTATION 4 thing was referring to ten years from now. I said that because Sony has stated that PS4 will be more than 5 years away, but posibly less. I do love my G-5 and no I do not work for IBM. There products are always top notch and Mr. Jobs has always attested to that. I have always held that Apple is a class act that could have survived a clone market with their inovative ideas and quality alone. It's just Steven Jobs personality that rubs me the wrong way at times.

You're right about the decision probably being made years ago, before IBM expanded their production facilities. Also we now know that Apple designed the Mac OS-X to run cross platform from the start. Maybe in preparation for a change when the rumors first started back in 2002-2003.

But, I would still take one of the new dual core, dual processor G-5s over anything on the market at this time. IBM's dual cores with ''Altivec'' just can't be beat by anyone at the moment. The G-5 they gave Microsoft (3.2 ghz each of three cores) will be made in quanities in the millions. The ''Cell'' for Sony (also selling multi-millions) is being manufactured in 65 nano meter technology around a G-5 3.2 ghz processor as well, and here are the tech mouth watering specs for this puppy:
Logo: PLAYSTATION(R)3

CPU

Cell Processor
PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB L2 cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE
* 1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
total floating point performance: 218 GFLOPS

GPU

RSX @550MHz
1.8 TFLOPS floating point performance
Full HD (up to 1080p) x 2 channels
Multi-way programmable parallel floating point shader pipelines

Sound

Dolby 5.1ch, DTS, LPCM, etc. (Cell- base processing)

Memory

256MB XDR Main RAM @3.2GHz 256MB GDDR3 VRAM @700MHz

System Bandwidth

Main RAM 25.6GB/s
VRAM 22.4GB/s
RSX 20GB/s (write) + 15GB/s (read)
SB< 2.5GB/s (write) + 2.5GB/s (read)

System Floating Point Performance

2 TFLOPS

Storage

Detachable 2.5'' HDD slot x 1

I/O

USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
Memory Stick standard/Duo, PRO x 1
SD standard/mini x 1
CompactFlash (Type I, II) x 1

Communication

Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T) x 3 (input x 1 + output x 2)
Wi-Fi IEEE 802.11 b/g
Bluetooth 2.0 (EDR)

Controller

Bluetooth (up to 7)
USB 2.0 (wired)
Wi-Fi (PSP)
Network (over IP)

AV Output

Screen size: 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, 1080p
HDMI: HDMI out x 2
Analog: AV MULTI OUT x 1
Digital audio: DIGITAL OUT (OPTICAL) x 1

Disc Media

CD PlayStation CD-ROM, PlayStation 2 CD-ROM, CD-DA, CD-DA (ROM), CD-R, CD-RW, SACD, SACD Hybrid (CD layer), SACD HD, DualDisc, DualDisc (audio side), DualDisc (DVD side)
DVD: PlayStation 2 DVD-ROM, PlayStation 3 DVD-ROM, DVD-Video, DVD-ROM, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW
Blu-ray Disc: PlayStation 3 BD-ROM, BD-Video, BD-ROM, BD-R, BD-RE
----------------------------------------------------
PS3 Will have twice the system floating point performance of Microsoft's Xbox. Which will still be a beast by any standards.

. Also IBM has announced they will be coming out with a low power processor the first of the year for laptops. ''AMD'' has anounced they too will have one as well. IBM and AMD have been co-operating and sharing technologies (like ''SOI'' Silicone On Insulator - runs cooler). IBM is even selling a Blade Server with AMD Opteron processors since May:

http://www.amdboard.com/ibm.html
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/opteron/LS20_more_info.html
AMD Challenges Intel to a Dual of Duals!
http://www.amd.com/us-en/0,,3715_13368_13369,00.html?redir=CPSW51
AMD Won by Default, Intel never showed!
IBM's next generation ''Cell'' will be out in 2007 on 45 nano meter technology (Intel will still be at 65 nano meters in production). It will be a IBM G-6 based Cell, clocked at 6.4 ghz. and be capable of a phenomenal 5.4 TFLOPS system floating point performance. on 11 SPE cores total. It would take almost 6 of Intels best dual cores right now to equal that kind of system floating point performance. Intels dual core if you read the information are not true dual cores in the sense that they communicate with each other thru solder connections on the motherboard, not directly. That's why both IBM and AMD outperform Intels dual core processors today and more than likely will continue to do so.

Overall IBM is expected to continue to dominate the micro processor world for years to come with it's G-Series family. The end of 2007 will see the arrival of the G-8 and is expected to be well above anything that is even comprehendible in today's world.

Oh yeh, had one of those beer can surf wagons, very fun and although the back of the wagon always full of beer cans, they were almost always empty. phew Glad I survived some of those street races. lol

- Collapse -
Because they can.
Oct 16, 2005 4:01AM PDT

It has been pointed out on this forum and others, that people who use macs have a different type of relationship with their computers than windows users. Many reasons have been put forth as to why, but what's important to this discussion is that most mac users agree. It's more personal.

If you attack a Windows user's decision to use Windows, they don't care. It's like making fun of someone for buying gas at Mobil instead of Texaco. They got the gas at the closest station, or because they had the company creditcard, or whatever. Where is the fun in that?

Attacking a Mac user is more fun. It's kind of like bringing up dinosaurs to a Fundamentalist Christian. It will get you hours of spirited debate, and no doubt some of it will be humorous.

What I don't understand is making the post, stirring up the bee's nest, and then leaving. It seems to me it would be much more fun (and a lot less gutless), to stay and try to defend your post.

Hmmm. I think I'll head over to http://www.landoverbaptist.org/ and have some fun.

Its a JOKE! I'm not trying to start a religious debate here. I'll be happy to do it somewhere else though...

Lampie!

- Collapse -
Because they're afraid!
Oct 28, 2005 3:16AM PDT

I have always felt that the main difference between Windows users and Mac users is brain activity. Mac people like to use their brain, Winblows people don't.

That's probably a little harsh, I guess. A different way to look at it would be 'conformity'. People who buy PCs are conformists - it's what 'everyone else' is buying, it's what they use at work, etc.; whatever the excuse, it is simply the path of least effort. (at least until they try to get it working properly!) They're more than likely going to do nothing but surf & use the computer as a "smart" typewriter, or maybe a little office work. (I'll get to the gamers in a minute) A computer with no brain can do that much.

Mac users on the other hand are usually creative, and non-conformist. They want a computer that can do more than type - they want something that can think and is fun at the same time. They want it for music, video, graphics, that kind of thing. Something a typewriter CAN'T do. Mac users DO 'Think Different', as the ad went.

Of course, the gamers are the monkey wrench in that! I'm a gamer myself, so I know all about the number of games for Winblows vs Mac. I think most gamers would be Mac people if the game companies weren't so biased. I've had every game system put out by Atari, Sony & most of the Nintendos. The main reason I have a playstation is because of the lack of games on the Mac. The game companies make games for the systems with the most users - the conformists. They could make games for the Mac, but that would require the effort of understanding more than one language. But there are getting to be more games for the Mac out there. I've had to keep upgrading my Macs at home just so I can play them! But I know several people that have a Winblows machine at home just to play games on, and have a Mac as their REAL computer. I would, too, except that my house is a designated Microshaft-free zone.

So back to the original subject, of course it makes sense to attack the Mac - humans always attack whatever is different or may make them change (or think). Besides, how can you pick on someone who bought an Edsel BY CHOICE???

- Collapse -
Solid Gamer, Sad Microshaft Uses Criminal Tactics!
Oct 28, 2005 8:06AM PDT

Sad to say I still have Winblows computers, but that's the way I make a living. Macs don't need repair and I'd be like the Maytag repairman, sitting on my duff. Microsoft has always fought dirty and the foiled Monopoly Court Win (backfired). Just proves money and brute force speak loudest in this country. But maybe Microsoft just hates Steven Jobs more than I do. heehee

Most people fail to give Apple credit where credit is due. To the best R&D department in the business. It's all about the company who runs it. Not Steven Jobs management. Pound for pound Apple engineers and design teams are responsible for over 60% of all computer inovation in it's history. From the mouse, graphical interface, usb, firewire, and the list goes on and on. Microsoft is still thiefing features from Mac OS-X and calling them their own for things like Vista's Aeroglass desktop.

Now we will have Microshaft tighting it's grip on the PC gaming world. Further locking the doors on developers abilities to write cross platform games. By attempting to strangle OpenGL API use in new Winblows Vista. They haven't slightest idea what sharing means and want exclusive control to their already monopolized game market with one of the few things they've designed on their own. DirectX!

As much as I hate Intel, maybe teaming up with another overated giant may help us gain some clot. Both Microshaft and Intel fight dirty and Apple could use some street fighting lessons. Only time will tell. But still wish Jobs would have waited till we at least had one PowerPC G-5 "Cell" Mac powerhouse to play PS3 OpenGL games on.

- Collapse -
Glad you posted your comments!
Oct 17, 2005 1:48AM PDT

Im in almost the same boat, though Im not from a tech school I too have been using Mac and Windows forever. I completely agree that both systems have their ups and downs. Windows is cracking at the seams with issues! Mac OS X Tiger on the other hand. Im VERY happy with it! Thanx for making me aware of that windows users using mac technology. I wasnt aware of that!