AM:
MXSbc.19662$ snipped-for-privacy@read2.cgocable.net,
Actually Ed, up until 2 years ago, I was living and working in Toronto.
I worked for Computer City for the last 5 years of their existance and our store carried Apple Computers. The service department worked on Apples as well as PCs, that is why I know the breakdown just as often.
I am in full agreement Jim, I am not saying that PCs with WinXP are perfect, just that they are on a par with Apple MACs and feature for feature, cost less to buy. PCs are easier to have serviced becuase their are more technicians. Also aquiring anything to run on them is easier. Even in Toronto, Apple dealers are few and far between. There is not the market to support them.
As I've said in another post, IME XP Pro works very nice, and I am impressed by my Dell Optiplex.
Brian,
In the professional world, if you can't get support for problems, then it's no good. I stopped using Macs years ago because I had one acting as a terminal for a very expensive sound hard disk system and I could not find support at the time to sort out a problem. I've used PCs for my business needs since then and I've had very few problems, and when problems do occur, I can find support quickly.
Jim.
A piece of equipment is only as good as its maintenance or service. That is not even limited to computers.
When did that become true? Admittedly I have not worked on a Mac since '98 but in that year our company (the largest independent supplier of platters for hard disk drives) had 19 inline sputtering systems throughout the world. Each of those sputtering systems had a process gas controller. Each of those controllers was controlled by one (each) IBM XT of either 8086 or of 8088 vintage. As you may know, the 8086 does not even use or support a hard drive. At the same time, the oldest model Mac's currently in use were IIc's and IIe's. I am fairly certain that the 8086 dates the IIc by at least a few years. I know the company purchased them in 1985 (or so) when the company was formed.
My point is simply, if a person, company, or other entity has no reason or need to change, they wont! And it does not matter if it is a Mac or PC. Don't be blinded that because you are in a fine institution of higher learning or large company that is compelled to update everything to stay competitive, that everyone else in the world does the same.
Sorry, I had to upgrade the II series platforms as well as the older PC platforms. However the expansion potential was severely restricted in the Macs. Sort of like built in intentional obsolescence. I have to assume it was by design so business would be forced to purchase new computers every
3-5 years. On the PC side, competition was what drove improvements. As in if you did not make a better video card you would be forced out of business by some other company that did. Apple does not face that kind of pressure. Only the pressure to compete somewhat with the PC crowd.Art
Brian,
I do not think I have ever been to your house... If that is an invite, then sure I would like to see one.
BTW: Windows 3.0 came out when AT 286's were in vogue. I did not have a chance to notice anything other than the OS.
Take care,
Art
I learned BASIC on a Tandy 1000. And Star Trek too...
Yep, if something works don't screw with it. Not to mention that he would have to spend some REAL money to switch out the Interface if he switches to another computer controller. Might be cheaper to purchase a new engraving machine.
Art
Jeff, that is impressive as you are speaking of a laptop. I have three laptops but the oldest is running Win98se. Had an old Toshiba running Win95 but it finally went TU.
Art
Art
That is his problem, if the Tandy goes down for good, he has to scrap the engraver, big time expense to replace it.
It was in a post, but if you're even in Nashville, look me up!
Did anyone see the contest Dell ran last year (or maybe two years ago) for the oldest in-service computer?
The winner was an Altair from a lawyer's office, IIRC.
And the simple rate of producing garbage and chasing one's tail is hardly a measure of performance.
Dan Mitchell ==========
Paul Mc>
Well, Dan, if that is where you are stuck at, you definately have the wrong software for your system. If you are on a MAC, your options are limited, if you are on a PC, drop me an email and I will help get you the correct software so that you can do your necessary task without your current problems.
It is just a question of the correct tools. You may know what you want to do, but not HOW to do it. The tools on the Windows platform all run the full range, from cheap/free utilities that may or may not do what they claim to do. through the consumer level, pro-sumer level all the way to full Professional applications.
No worries, Dan, I can help get you productive.
in article dc6cc.15510$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net, Art Marsh at snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote on 4/4/04 10:32 PM:
The older II and IIC used the "NUBUS" and add on cards were an issue, even then. But it is also true that at that same time, we had ISA, MicroChannel, EISA et al for the PC. And about 4 different, incompatible network topologies: TCP, AppleTalk, Netbios, LANManager, Novell, Banyon, TokenRing, ARCNet, probably more.
Things have settled down a bit. Some PCs are finally abandoning the old 16 bit ISA and it silly restrictions. One of the reasons Macs used to be so much more easily configurable (if you could find the hardware :) was the PC problem of limited interrupts and duplicate I/O register assignments. Heck, the old Dec Unibus was better than that!
Ed
>My point is that 'clock rate' is a very poor measure of computer performance, but that's all that most ever look at. It doesn't matter how fast it runs, if it can't do the job efficiently, or at all.
Many things affect overall speed. Bus speed, hard drive speed, various latencies, and, above all, how well the software is written (not to mention the manuals). That especially includes the operating system. "Ease of use" of both hardware and software is critical to meaningful use of the computer. It's not how many 'cycles' the computer is clocking, but how much work is actually getting done.
If the computer isn't running properly, for whatever reason, it's NOT 'producing' efficiently, if at all. Dependability is a BIG factor in computer 'speed'. A poor power supply that causes intermittent crashes and glitches definitely affects overall computer 'speed'. Both hardware and software 'support' also enter into the overall picture. Time spent on the phone, or on line, seeking assistance, is WASTED time.
Software issues, other than those imposed by the operating system, are not really the fault of the hardware. Those imposed BY the operating system ARE the fault of the hardware, IF the hardware requires use of a poor or inappropriate operating system. Much existing hardware can run more than one operating system, within limits.
And some software is either unique to particular platforms, or runs much better on those platforms. The hardware the will run that software effectively will beat ANY other machine at that task, regardless of clock speed. That's why certain machines, that run certain software (Mac, Windows, Unix, Cobol, Fortran, or whatever) virtually OWN certain job markets.
Dan Mitchell ==========
" snipped-for-privacy@CreditValley.Railway" wrote:
(snip)
Speaking of which, I have heard (rumors?) that Intel's new series processors will de-emphasize clock speed, as they are moving towards a RISC-based processor.
RISC processors do not require the same clock speeds to perform the same work as CISC processors; a point Apple has tried to make for many years now.
If true, this means that Macs and PCs can be even more compared point by point.
That's way/weigh/whey over simplified. You are still doing the same work but, you are doing it with a set of simpler instructions. Usually, the memory references are decoupled from the arithmetic and logical operations. You end up loading and storing as independent operations and do a series of register to register operations in between. ... ok, that's still over simplified and just one aspect of the appeal of RISC.
It puts a greater burden on the compilers to generate reasonable code.
Paul
Oh, goody-goody Does that mean that I will soon be able to get a Motorola CPU for my PC. That would be great, because then I could take it out of the walk-in freezer and put it back in my office. I have an AMD Athlon now that only works properly at sub-arctic temperatures.
As I said, rumor.
There are other factors, too, like data block size, etc.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required