From: R&B on 5 Aug 2010 13:49
On 2010-08-05 11:44:56 -0400, bknight(a)conramp.net said:
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 11:28:18 -0400, "R&B"
> <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote:
>> On 2010-08-04 21:39:02 -0400, bknight(a)conramp.net said:
>> PCs are what they are. Dells are fine machines. But it's the
>> operating system, stupid. Windows sucks. It is notorious for locking
>> up, blue screeing, giving driver conflicts, and slowing down due to the
>> weight of all the anti-virus stuff you MUST run.
> I have only had one problem with a virus, ever, and none of the rest
> of those you mention.
It's not viruses that are the problem, Bobby. It's the anti-virus
software you have to run that keeps viruses from being a problem.
Whether it be Norton, McAfee, CA or any one of the dozens of other
Anti-Virus software applications/suites (and I've tried most of them),
they all bog down system performance. They slow the system's
performance well below the speed at which it could run without it. But
do you dare run a Windows machine without anti-virus software? Not if
you have anything between your ears, you don't. But on a Mac, that's
not a problem. Yes, anti-virus software is available for a Mac, and
yes, there've been one or two viruses for Mac since 1984 (yes, one or
two). But ask a hundred Mac users if any of them run anti-virus
software. If you find one who says yes, I'll send Dene over to go down
Look, I know that my case isn't "average." But when you're running
video editing software, or audio production software, or 3D graphics
applications, or some combination of all three (plus other apps running
in the background, like Mail, or Photoshop, or Dreamweaver for
instance), every ounce of system performance is precious. Anti-virus
software just slows everything down, sapping precious resources from
where they're most needed.
And over time, it seems like the Anti-Virus software slows down the
machine even more. The computer will run slower six months from now
than it does today. And six months after that, it will be even slower
still. I've found this to be the case with every single Windows
machine I've ever owned, dating back to my first one that ran Windows
95. (It was also true on the Windows 3.1 machines we had at work.)
> I've also used every Windows OS since '95,
As have I.
Remember, I resisted switching to Mac. I said all the things you're
saying. And I believed them all.
But now that I switched, I see how wrong I was.
You will, too, if you ever switch.
But you won't.
> either on my personal machines or at work. 2000 was not my favorite,
> but still none of the above problems.
If you've never gotten the dreaded blue screen of death while running a
Windows machine, you're the only person in the world who hasn't.
I don't believe you.
> I bought a new Windows machine two years ago and installed NOTHING on
>> it besides Anti Virus and Quick Books. And after two years of using
>> the machine only to do billing on the 1st of the month and to process
>> payments and expenses (I didn't use that computer for anything else),
>> it had slowed to a crawl...until it finally crashed.
>> Every Windows machine I've ever had has slowed down to a crawl after
>> normal use within a year.
> Ever stopped to think it may be you, and not Windows???
I'm the guy everyone calls to resolve their technical support
questions, whether a PC or Mac. And I almost always have the answers.
Besides, what would *I* have done to cause the computer to slow down to
a crawl after only two years of light usage?
>> Of course I'm doing more than just Office tasks. Video, audio, graphics.
>> Macs are just made for that type of work. Windows just labors too much
>> to get through that stuff.
> OK, so you have specific needs. 99% of users don't.
As I said elsewhere, judging a computer's performance based on a power
user's needs is the only way to accurately measure it.
Would you buy a car that only tests well up to 20 MPH? How 'bout 40 MPH?
I didn't think so.
You want a car that you know can be driven at 150 MPH without the
engine falling out, even if you know you might never drive faster than
55 or 60 (or maybe even 70) MPH.
Windows machines are fine if you're just making a quick trip up to the
grocery store or to drop off something at the post office. But God
help you if you have to drive to Seattle and back. They might not make
it over the mountain.
> The two laptops are in great shape, and I never had a problem with
>> And Vista is just a joke. Even Microsoft admits that.
> Its worked fine for me Randy, and please show a site where MS says
> such a thing.
It's common knowledge, Bobby. After Windows XP remained the "current"
operating system on the market for something like six years, Microsoft
replaced Vista with Windows 7 after only a couple of years and massive
numbers of complaints. It was an abysmal failure, especially in the
workplace, where most corporations just skipped Vista altogether and
waited for Windows 7 to update (if they've even updated yet). Everyone
> The big question is, which Windows does Microsoft disown today?
> BS clipped
>>> IMO the Mac is a fine computer, but the ballyhoo and owner rants
>>> about PCs isn't merited as far as my experience goes.
>> Get a Mac and use it exclusively for six months. You'll see.
To each his own.
But you are making yourself sound like something akin to a global
Speaking of which, don't you find it interesting that the same global
warming deniers who used last winter's snowpocalypse as evidence of
global warming's folly are curiously silent about it while we're
experiencing the hottest summer on record? I'm just sayin'.
From: bknight on 5 Aug 2010 14:14
On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:57:51 -0400, William Clark
>In article <f4nl56d3bt6b4iqvl5jv675n7tjqhijjpe(a)4ax.com>,
> bknight(a)conramp.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 11:29:06 -0400, "R&B"
>> <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote:
>> >Because when new ones come out, people want the new stuff that comes
>> >with 'em...instead of sticking with old technology.
>> You can rant, and tout, all you want, but for the casual user, which
>> is the vast majority, PCs work just fine, and the hubris of Mac users
>> is a turn-off.
>No disagreement there. Each to his own.
That has been my position from the beginning, and I don't take kindly
to anyone suggesting that I lied when I say that I've never had a blue
screen I haven't.
I'm perfectly happy with PCS and don't need the snobbery from some Mac
From: Paula on 5 Aug 2010 14:26
> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:57:51 -0400, William Clark
> <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
> >In article <f4nl56d3bt6b4iqvl5jv675n7tjqhijjpe(a)4ax.com>,
> > bknight(a)conramp.net wrote:
> >> On Thu, 5 Aug 2010 11:29:06 -0400, "R&B"
> >> <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote:
> >> >Because when new ones come out, people want the new stuff that comes
> >> >with 'em...instead of sticking with old technology.
> >> >
> >> >Randy
> >> You can rant, and tout, all you want, but for the casual user, which
> >> is the vast majority, PCs work just fine, and the hubris of Mac users
> >> is a turn-off.
> >No disagreement there. Each to his own.
> That has been my position from the beginning, and I don't take kindly
> to anyone suggesting that I lied when I say that I've never had a blue
> screen I haven't.
> I'm perfectly happy with PCS and don't need the snobbery from some Mac
I know a lot of people that have Macs. They are not snobs. What a
Just because someone prefers one OS over another, does that make them
From: MNMikeW on 5 Aug 2010 14:32
"dene" <dene(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote in message
> "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote in message
>> <bknight(a)conramp.net> wrote in message
>> > On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 17:21:35 -0700, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net>
>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -Greg
>> >>> Nonsense - the basic 13" MacBook that I bought my daughter last Fall
>> >>> currently selling at $949, in the campus computer store, given the
>> >>> student discount. She also got a wireless HP printer/scanner thrown
>> >>> and this is also part of the current deal.
>> >>> That includes iSight camera, bluetooth, 802.11n wifi (most of the
>> >>> has wifi access), DVD player/burner, and on-campus repair service.
>> >>> that students can get Office for ~$50 - none of the PC nickel and
>> >>> to set up a usable system.
>> >>> Oh, and the best part of all? No Windoze ;-)
>> >>And higher resale values.
>> > Talk about nonsense. Who ever resold a computer???? :-)
>> > I think the chronic criticisms of PCs is bullshit. I've had only
>> > Dells since '95, in fact we still have one in my home office that I
>> > bought in '98 that's still going strong. I've had 5 desktops and only
>> > one blew up...because of a virus. We've bought new ones for other
>> > reasons though. The rest are still alive. There was the one that the
>> > FBI had me testify about....bought it from a store in Dallas. When I
>> > needed some support from Dell I found out that it was stolen.
>> > The two laptops are in great shape, and I never had a problem with
>> > Vista.
>> > IMO the Mac is a fine computer, but the ballyhoo and owner rants
>> > about PCs isn't merited as far as my experience goes.
>> > BK
>> Well said Bobby. Been working on PC's since their inception. Rarely have
> Me too. My first one, with a dot matrix printer, and vga screen was a
> 286/10. Around 1990, I paid 3k for it.
And you needed a pickup to haul it. I still have some 5" floppys around to
show the kids what the "old" days were like.
> The only problem I've had is an HD crash (years ago) and Windows Millenium
> Edition. I think it was Randy who finally got through to me that it was a
> bonafide POS, hence the upgrade to Win. 2000, which I have to this day.
Yes it was. ME is the only WinOS I skipped.
From: MNMikeW on 5 Aug 2010 14:35
"R&B" <none_of_your_business(a)all.com> wrote in message
> Guess you missed the news recently of Apple's financial reports. They
> passed Microsoft.
The Ipod and Iphone had more to do with that than their Mac line.