MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Yup... Apple should have a "Get a new PSP3 with every purchase of a G5..." or something... That'd be cooler. Or even cooler if they worked 100x harder at getting games to run well on the mac.

As a recent 'Switcher', I can say that the gaming comparison is key - I personnally think that Windows will be cannibalized by their own and other consoles - I am sick of trying to get DirectX to work - in fact my Media Center 2005 box won't run DirectX anymore, so the console and my new PowerBook mean the end of the line for Windows upgrades on my entertainment machines and my small business work machine.

After Orson Scott Card, it's nice to get back to a little non-fiction.

I installed Google Desktop Search on a PC at work today. In a nutshell, it sucks compared to Spotlight. I considered MSN search but it quickly told me that my browser (Firefox) was not compatible. MS bites...

Google Desktop Search still defaults to IE for preferences. The preferences are limited at best. I couldn't find a hot key to select the Search Bar. It took forever to index. And it lacks the refinement of Spotlight.

It's a good thing that I only log about 20 minutes a week in the XP box.

To add to my last comment...

Google Desktop Search is like listening to AM radio when your used to hi-fi.

So Macs aren't as "fast" as they should be? Looks like the MHz myth rears its ugly head...

That always makes me laugh. Games. And I remember when the mac was accused of being just a toy.

Tiger is beautiful, I use it for many hours at night. I really think it is a great operating system.

But I use Windows XP Pro all day. I really like and am very productive using it (I am a designer and spend most of my time in Adobe Creative Suite 2). Definitely search is a weakness in Windows XP, but I use Yahoo Desktop Search, which is essentially a free version of X1. While not as good as Spotlight, I can get almost anything I need to get done using it.

Why does it always have to be a war of the operating systems? Both have their strengths - I am much better off having a PC and a Mac than I would be having just one.

true about the powerbooks etc. the performance isn't worth the premium paid.

"an average consumer wants to play games" - wow, for the first time in my life I'm not average. It seems like every other post: one says "Mac won't make it because it's not a serious business machine", the next says "Mac won't make it because it's not a serious gaming machine". Make your minds up! Me, I'm happy with a number-crunching, picture-editing, audio-recording machine. I don't have time for games (and if I do, it's outdoors, running around).

Let's cut the BS on the fud that Macs cost more than windows machines.
This is before Tiger too!
http://corourke.customer.netspace.net.au/Mac/cost.html

Things should be changing now that Tiger is out. Apple has changed it's APIs with every major release of OS X and that alone has given many developers fits with porting games. Why port a game that could be broken with the next major release. Add in the speed (approx 1/year) with which Apple has updated OS X and you get the picture. By the time you finish your project, it patch city to fix broken APIs.

All of that has FINALLY changed. Apple has 'locked' it's APIs with Tiger and is slowing the update cycle. Add in the improved developer tools, Core Image/Data/Audio/Video and it's time to get the party started. Apple has also hired people to work with nVidia & ATI to improve drivers and performance on the Mac.

Is this going to change the Mac gaming experience tomorrow? No. Will it change things going forward? Yes. Give a little time for the developers to work their magic and you should see some tangible results with future releases. If the developers will invest a little effort in optimizing their code for the Mac the 'pop' could be a real eye opener.

It all comes down to the ability of Software Publishers to make money. Now that they have a real chance to recoup their significant investment in development on a now stable (as in changes- not performance) platform, the software should follow. Prior to Tiger, Mac developers were shooting at a constantly moving target and first tier games are really complex beasts. Meanwhile PC developers were building on a well-known, stable (again as in changes-not performance) and highly optimized foundation in Windows XP. Mac OS X has now matured to a point where developers can concentrate on optimization instead of basic compatibility. That is a huge deal for those writing the code that powers Game engines, etc.

Personally, I'd love to have a small (but not tiny, because you need room for a couple of empty slots), well designed, G5 Mac (single processor).
I like playing games occasionally - state-of-the-art games as well, and Apple still doesn't produce a 'consumer' computer that is as flexible (in this respect) as your average PC.
I believe that such a Mac with all the soft-ware and security advantages of the Apple platform would be a huge success.
I'd pay up to a €1000 for a Mac like that; €1200 with a really excellent video card.
Just dreaming ...

"going back to Windows XP is something of a joke at best"

Starting with Windows XP is an even bigger joke!

The Time Has Come- At Last,

I found your post very interesting - and I hope you're right.

<i>"Dashboard is just the latest in a number of UI improvements that make OSX so much easier and more efficient to use than...."

Anyne know how to "reposition" the main drive's icon position on my desktop at start up? Used to be able to do it with an Applescript on OS9. Please tell me that Uncle Steve hasn't killed that possibility.

could this be? a truly impartial review?

it's close but no cigar, the cost thing is a bit hit and miss, just what are they comparing it with? i'd sooner pay more once with less upgrades and have more time on my hands and less problems than buy a cheap pc and spend shed loads on software and have it play up on my all the time. no i think i've saved plenty of money which i can put into consoles or game based pc upgrades or games should i want to
but the rest of it's ok

didn't upgrades to the latest os cost more for windows than mac?

Larry- "use Windows XP Pro all day. I really like and am very productive using it (I am a designer and spend most of my time in Adobe Creative Suite 2)"


I am also using Adobe Creative Suite 2 but with Tiger on a 4-year old G4 with upgraded ATI video, 1 GB memory and faster HD. It is fast and stable, and I don't have to deal with XP's annoying interface.

Bandit Bill:

Both are jokes, but neither are funny. How can this be?

"are so many intangibles – security improvements and the like – that will never been seen or understood by most consumers"

Honest guv! Just believe it, come on, you know you want to...

$129 for a couple of new features, I'm still in shock... :(

Maccam- I'm using Adobe CS2 Premium on a 3.4ghz Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading and 64bit extensions, with 1gb 533 DDR2 and a 320gb SATA Raid 0 and a256MB NVidia 6800 video card with Windows XP Pro. It's very fast and very stable.

I don't find the Windows XP interface frustrating, maybe since I've been using DOS/Windows since I bought the original IBM PC (which I still have) back in the mid 80's. By the way, Windows interface used to be much more frustrating to use, but has much improved over the years.

However, also bought the original Mac (it had 128k of RAM!), and still have that out in the garage. That machine was such a mindblower when it came out (Actually the Lisa came out first, the Mac improved on that) It's was pretty obvious that MS was trying to copy the Mac when they issued their early releases of Windows (which were horribly pathetic and much worse than the Mac).

"Anyne know how to "reposition" the main drive's icon position on my desktop at start up? Used to be able to do it with an Applescript on OS9. Please tell me that Uncle Steve hasn't killed that possibility."

Turn off the option to display local drives on the desktop. Then add shortcuts to your drives to the desktop. You can position them wherever you like. CDs and external drives will still appear as usual, if you haven't changed the respective settings for those.

Price comparison is a joke. The Macs are fully featured out of the box with some of the best hardware that is out there. If you put together a PC with that same hardware you will find that the price war is negligible. The speed difference is negligible as well. I work with both for twenty years as a desktop support tech.

i love it when people say wonderful things about apple. but only a 9 rating!???! is this guy nuts? tiger is a 10 or an 11!!!
the guy is an obvious idiot.

John Horvatic: "I work with both for twenty years as a desktop support tech."

Macs need repairs????

Apple's pricing is due to the fact that they use high-quality components, such as the aluminium cases in Pro systems. My Powerbook looks list as goos as the day I bought it even though I lug it back and forth to work every day.

Apple also provides some very nice software with that there hardware. Sure it's more expensive. Sure the CPUs aren't as fast at most normal computing operations as x86, but G4 run much cooler and G5 systems have so much more bandwidth they make good little supercomputer clusters.

How many of you need the ultimate-fastest CPU anyway? I do Web development and some light graphics with Dreamweaver and PhotoShop (respectively) all day, every day with my 867MHz G4 and it goes just fine. Tiger gave this little 12" a new lease on life.

I also play enough games to suit my needs. I've got a superdrive and wireless. Did I pay a premium? Yeah, but I got a premium system that is a joy to use every day, all day. And when I go home my wife and kids share it with me. (or share me with it) What a deal!

I freakin love that idea! With the release of the PS3
I have no need for a PC anymore. It's going to make my transition to Mac alot easier. I have the money now all I need to do is make the purchase. I'm thinking a PM-D 2.7



BriAnimations
"Yup... Apple should have a "Get a new PSP3 with every purchase of a G5..." or something... That'd be cooler. Or even cooler if they worked 100x harder at getting games to run well on the mac."

I have never understood why anyone would invest thousands in a computer to play video games, when a stand-alone game system costs about $200. I have always found computer games to be an enormous headache. Granted, ones computer seems like the most obvious machine to play games on, but the stand-alones have always seemed to work better and cost less.

"For many Mac users, going back to XP is something of a joke at best – or at worst, a thoroughly frustrating user experience that one only endures in order to play some decent games"

Anybody see the irony here?

(Hint: Thew new Xbox and PS3 use PPC chips).

- Mark

Gaming on a computer, PC or Mac, is a dying paradigm. Consoles are the future regardless what the nerd Gestapo tells us. I use my Mac to do so much more in my life other than games that using it to play video games seems like such a waste of time.

I'm excited about xBox 360, PS3 and Nintendo because they signal an end to the idea that your personal computer is to be used for games. Consoles have a much greater advantage and make PC gaming obsolete.

Chris writes; "I have never understood why anyone would invest thousands in a computer to play video games,...."

Chris- you just don´t get the games thing.
Kind of like wondering why people want to go see a live football or basketball or any sports event when you can watch it on TV.
Or why go fishing if you can buy fish in the frozen foods dept.
Or why own a Porsche if an old beater Ford will get you there.
Or why own an Apple computer when Windows works just as well to read email.
You either get the games thing or not. (Tip: it´s not about playing solo with yourself - it´s a whole, huge internet world of gaming that you have no clue what is going on out there- clans, challenges, worldwide rankings, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of players on line at once...)

montrex tells us why games suck and he never plays them but yet he has an expert opinion: "Consoles have a much greater advantage and make PC gaming obsolete."

How would you know if you never play them????

Xbox and others are not game consoles, they are gaming computers. These use IBM processor chips, have hard drives, etc, etc, etc.

I just look at the next generation game consoles as specialized computers for gamers.

Why Dell and other PC makers bend over and acccept this intrusion on their hardware territory by Microsoft is a chapter waiting to be played out.

Yeah, kind of like going from XP to 2000, Thats a joke 2.

Or even OS X to 9, thats the biggest joke ever.

Speaking of OS9, I just fired up one of my old computers looking for a file. It has OS 9 on it.
The thing crashed/froze four times before I could find the file. I was running Photoshop.
OS9 was just a total suck os.
(8.6 was okay.)
Wonder how many mac people had such bad experiences with os9 - afraid of osx (all new software needed for the most part) that they switched to pcs, figuring the cost outlay would not be so bad if they made a wrong decision?

Windows XP = Windows "Extra Pathetic"

Feb 19, 09 - 11:53 pm Comment from: williamgeorge

The experiment is officially over. Today I am going back to Windows XP. I really found myself needing to use Windows software. You don’t realize how dependent you get on utilities like Notepad and Microsoft Paint until you no longer have them. I pulled out all my old software to go through it, and see what is compatible…
=======
george
Brisbane Dating