What's wrong with the font? Isn't that Microsofts trademark font?
What's wrong with the font? Supposedly ClearType improves "readability" on LCD monitors by adding sub-pixel rendering to resolve an issue that never existed in the first place. Using a ClearType font with ClearType rendering enabled causes painfully visible green and red hues around characters for many users, and in order to accommodate the sub-pixel rendering, ClearType fonts are crippled natively, with characters appearing either inordinately bold, or inordinately slim when ClearType rendering is disabled.Finray wrote:
What's wrong with the font? Isn't that Microsofts trademark font?
Case in point:
Last edited by mikkel (2010-08-16 08:15:49)
Just wondering, what's people arguments against Mac's when Windows and phone Manufacturers are incorporating more and more features first brought out on Apple products?
mikkel wrote:
I don't get it.
liquidat0r wrote:
mikkel wrote:
I don't get it.
Me either.
Last edited by Finray (2010-08-16 08:36:02)
I once wrote on this very forum "Mac PC" and someone said that doesn't make any sense. Doesn't it?Sydney wrote:
I hate how people use the term PC.
Most people seem to think that PC = A computer with a Windows operating system.
When in reality, a PC is any personal computer with any operating system, Macs are all PCs for fucks sake.
Let me guess, both of you have ClearType rendering enabled?Finray wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/CcoZh.pngliquidat0r wrote:
http://i36.tinypic.com/2cpyel3.pngmikkel wrote:
http://shinn.me/pictures/perm/cleartype.bmp
I don't get it.
Me either.
Price/performance.PrivateVendetta wrote:
Just wondering, what's people arguments against Mac's when Windows and phone Manufacturers are incorporating more and more features first brought out on Apple products?
You're correct. A Mac is a PC. But a Mac isn't an IBM/PC. PC's just easier to say than IBM/PC, so you've caught yourself in a language trap..Sup wrote:
I once wrote on this very forum "Mac PC" and someone said that doesn't make any sense. Doesn't it?Sydney wrote:
I hate how people use the term PC.
Most people seem to think that PC = A computer with a Windows operating system.
When in reality, a PC is any personal computer with any operating system, Macs are all PCs for fucks sake.
Yup.FFLink wrote:
This is just embarrassing and so unnecessary.
Remember the Nintendo vs Sega battle like 20 years ago? Well:killer21 wrote:
Seems a lot like the whole Verizon 3G vs AT&T 3G. It's funny at first but then after awhile, it's like watching two old people fight over a moldy piece of bread...unnamednewbie13 wrote:
MS does better to just stoically shrug off Apple's juvenile attacks.
'Droid does' what Nintendon't...wait...
I never thought the word PC represents one of those first IBM PCs, to me PC was always just that- a personal computer which Mac also is. imounnamednewbie13 wrote:
Price/performance.PrivateVendetta wrote:
Just wondering, what's people arguments against Mac's when Windows and phone Manufacturers are incorporating more and more features first brought out on Apple products?You're correct. A Mac is a PC. But a Mac isn't an IBM/PC. PC's just easier to say than IBM/PC, so you've caught yourself in a language trap..Sup wrote:
I once wrote on this very forum "Mac PC" and someone said that doesn't make any sense. Doesn't it?Sydney wrote:
I hate how people use the term PC.
Most people seem to think that PC = A computer with a Windows operating system.
When in reality, a PC is any personal computer with any operating system, Macs are all PCs for fucks sake.
Regardless of whether or not history and meaning is lost on you, unnamednewbie13 is largely right. "IBM PC Compatible" is a term that shouldn't be foreign to anyone with an interest in computers. That said, the x86 Mac platforms are, from a software perspective, as IBM PC compatible as any other current x86 platform, erasing much of the hardware separation, and making the distinction one of software and branding..Sup wrote:
I never thought the word PC represents one of those first IBM PCs, to me PC was always just that- a personal computer which Mac also is. imounnamednewbie13 wrote:
Price/performance.PrivateVendetta wrote:
Just wondering, what's people arguments against Mac's when Windows and phone Manufacturers are incorporating more and more features first brought out on Apple products?You're correct. A Mac is a PC. But a Mac isn't an IBM/PC. PC's just easier to say than IBM/PC, so you've caught yourself in a language trap..Sup wrote:
I once wrote on this very forum "Mac PC" and someone said that doesn't make any sense. Doesn't it?
Probably.mikkel wrote:
Let me guess, both of you have ClearType rendering enabled?
Any particular drawbacks?
You mean beyond what I posted when you first asked?Finray wrote:
Probably.mikkel wrote:
Let me guess, both of you have ClearType rendering enabled?
Any particular drawbacks?
No hues, I have it enabled.
No drawbacks I guess. MLIA.
No drawbacks I guess. MLIA.
A Windows based x86 machines can also be a Mac.burnzz wrote:
. . . and some people aren't. i like what a Mac can do, if the right software is installed. PC owns Macintosh, for sheer numbers of software titles. and yes, i'm aware that i called a windows based, x86/x64 machine a PC. deal with it.GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
Yeah some people keep forgetting there is world outside of the US....
They are x86 based and can run Windows giving access to all that extra software.
Your reason why PC owns Mac is wrong (because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows). The real reasons PCs are better than Macs are as follows:
Price.
Choice.
Modular upgradability.
Sydney wrote:
I hate how people use the term PC.
Most people seem to think that PC = A computer with a Windows operating system.
When in reality, a PC is any personal computer with any operating system, Macs are all PCs for fucks sake.
an intel based x86 computer that you are calling a mac . . . and has to have windows installed to run windows software . . . good one chiefBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
all modern macs are intel-based x86... and as such all can emulate a windows environment. even from within OSX, with software.burnzz wrote:
an intel based x86 computer that you are calling a mac . . . and has to have windows installed to run windows software . . . good one chiefBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
good one, chief. aren't you supposed to be in IT?
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Last edited by CammRobb (2010-08-16 14:49:15)
A Mac is a hardware platform (an Intel x86 based hardware platform, as they have all been for the past 5 years).burnzz wrote:
an intel based x86 computer that you are calling a mac . . . and has to have windows installed to run windows software . . . good one chiefBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
It is a hardware platform capable of natively running Windows.
A PC is a hardware platform that could run whatever compatible OS you put on it.
The two only differ in price, design and firmware.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-08-16 14:48:10)
yes, and my point isUzique wrote:
all modern macs are intel-based x86... and as such all can emulate a windows environment. even from within OSX, with software.burnzz wrote:
an intel based x86 computer that you are calling a mac . . . and has to have windows installed to run windows software . . . good one chiefBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
good one, chief. aren't you supposed to be in IT?
by running windows to run windows software and calling it a Mac defeats the purpose of calling it a Mac, amirite? a windows pc needsBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
a) windows
b) windows software
and even though you and Bertster insist on saying today's Macs can emulate a windows environment, it's in fact still a Mac. a logo and a big pricetag to emulate a windows environment doesn't make it a Windows PC. we have macs at work that are simply wonderful for running Photoshop, but they can't handle AutoDesk AutoCad 2010. it takes a windows workstation to do that. or any of the other 62 civil engineering applications written in software specifically for windows that we use.
there is a difference.
Since you aren't really "emulating" anything when you run Windows on an Apple-branded computer (unless, of course, you're talking about running it from within OS X), I don't see your point. Windows running on such a machine will run just as well as it would on any other machine of comparable specifications.burnzz wrote:
yes, and my point isUzique wrote:
all modern macs are intel-based x86... and as such all can emulate a windows environment. even from within OSX, with software.burnzz wrote:
an intel based x86 computer that you are calling a mac . . . and has to have windows installed to run windows software . . . good one chief
good one, chief. aren't you supposed to be in IT?by running windows to run windows software and calling it a Mac defeats the purpose of calling it a Mac, amirite? a windows pc needsBertster7 wrote:
(because anything PCs can do in software terms Macs can also do - by running Windows)
a) windows
b) windows software
and even though you and Bertster insist on saying today's Macs can emulate a windows environment, it's in fact still a Mac. a logo and a big pricetag to emulate a windows environment doesn't make it a Windows PC. we have macs at work that are simply wonderful for running Photoshop, but they can't handle AutoDesk AutoCad 2010. it takes a windows workstation to do that. or any of the other 62 civil engineering applications written in software specifically for windows that we use.
there is a difference.
Oh, and "a Mac", to me, is just that. An Apple-branded computer, that they allow their OS to be run on. That doesn't necessarily mean it does.
Last edited by Freezer7Pro (2010-08-16 20:52:49)
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
The definition and usage of the term 'PC' varies depending on who's using it. To me, my TI-85 graphing calculator is a 'PC.' A Macintosh 128K is a 'PC.' But until Apple becomes more transparent with their software, 'PC' is still going to be used to refer to the IBM/PC, in whatever incarnation.mikkel wrote:
Regardless of whether or not history and meaning is lost on you, unnamednewbie13 is largely right. "IBM PC Compatible" is a term that shouldn't be foreign to anyone with an interest in computers. That said, the x86 Mac platforms are, from a software perspective, as IBM PC compatible as any other current x86 platform, erasing much of the hardware separation, and making the distinction one of software and branding..Sup wrote:
I never thought the word PC represents one of those first IBM PCs, to me PC was always just that- a personal computer which Mac also is. imounnamednewbie13 wrote:
Price/performance.
You're correct. A Mac is a PC. But a Mac isn't an IBM/PC. PC's just easier to say than IBM/PC, so you've caught yourself in a language trap.
This is it. It should end here. Most everything before and after this point is only vaguely related to the dis/advantages of using one or the other OS, which you lot have already nullified by finally conceding that it doesn't matter which system you spend your disposable income on because you can run both OSs on whatever hardware!Bertster7 wrote:
The real reasons PCs are better than Macs are as follows:
Price.
Choice.
Modular upgradability.
And now you're just bitching about what a PC really is. It's fucking pointless because whatever agreement you don't inevitably reach isn't going to change its definition as recorded in a dictionary or in societal colloquialism.
In certain applications, choice can become a disadvantage. A lot of people I've convinced to go with custom-built PC's are still coming back to me years later with parts compatibility conundrums on something they've recently slapped together in a shopping cart.