SegaXtreme

Originally posted by gameboy900@Jan 30, 2004 @ 01:45 AM

Meh I could care less about the Mac. It's like all that money and it still won't do everything I'd want.

As for proprietary software if Apple releases another iFucking this or that I will go over there and kill them. It's getting ridicuous. It's like everything they make now has to start with i.

I could go on and on raving about Apple this or Apple that, but we've done it so many times already it's getting quite boring.

Hell if I had the money (which I don't) I'd get that Mac. Take it up the CN Tower, snip a bit of the wire cage off and see what a Mac looks like freefalling over 400M to the ground. Hope nobody would be at the bottom at the time. (But then again I'd drop alot of stuff just to see it go splat from that high up.)

Also Mac's don't get as many viruses (they still get some) because NOBODY FUCKING CARES ABOUT THEM. They'res just not enough of them out there to bother with. Windows is in 90+% of the PC's out there so a virus is likely to cause the most damage on them. If Apple was the leader then Macs would have a billion viruses made for them in an instant.

Home	Forums	What's new	Resources

		gameboy900		Jan 30, 2004
			Meh I could care less about the Mac. It's like all that money and it still won't do everything I'd want. As for proprietary software if Apple releases another iFucking this or that I will go over there and kill them. It's getting ridicuous. It's like everything they make now has to start with i. I could go on and on raving about Apple this or Apple that, but we've done it so many times already it's getting quite boring. Hell if I had the money (which I don't) I'd get that Mac. Take it up the CN Tower, snip a bit of the wire cage off and see what a Mac looks like freefalling over 400M to the ground. Hope nobody would be at the bottom at the time. (But then again I'd drop alot of stuff just to see it go splat from that high up.) Also Mac's don't get as many viruses (they still get some) because NOBODY FUCKING CARES ABOUT THEM. They'res just not enough of them out there to bother with. Windows is in 90+% of the PC's out there so a virus is likely to cause the most damage on them. If Apple was the leader then Macs would have a billion viruses made for them in an instant.

		it290		Jan 30, 2004
			Yeah, but the awesome security track record of Windows and IE hasn't exactly helped out with the virus/worm situation if you know what I'm sayin'. Apple hasn't been super good about security either, but I'd take OS X over Windows in that regard any day of the week. It's all relative though.

		mtxblau		Jan 30, 2004
			The link is dead. Rather, can't connect - is there any alternate link? I wanted a Mac... until I installed SuSe and Kde, and made it look like OS_X. I have to agree with gameboy (that doesn't happen very often) - what's the point of making a virus for Macs? It wouldn't go very far. Windows is worldwide - and if you want to take the internet down, you attack the windows platform. If there was a 50/50 distribution, and there were still more viruses, etc. on Windows machines, then that argument would have a lot more value. Kind of like comparing processors between Wintel and Macs - what's the point? From what I've seen at the Mac store, at most there's only 40% of wintel software ported to Macs. And finally, the Linux thing - I mean, I don't think there are any distros that you can't install next to windows easily. For Suse, I barely did anything. I put the CD in, and an hour later it was ready to go. My close friends (heck, best man and matron of honor at my wedding) both have Macs, and have tried to sell me on buying one for years. I'm simply not seeing why it's better. That's not to say Wintel machines are better - essentially, it's very difficult to compare two completely different machines against each other with no real basis of doing so. Saying Macs are better because they dont' get viruses is like going to the ocean and deciding the world is flat since the horizon doesn't arc. There's simply not enough information to make either assumption. Anyway, I think XP stands for 'experience' since they don't really tell you waht the real processing figures are (comparable speeds, apparently). A marketing ploy, but it sounds better than "Pentium".

		mtxblau		Jan 30, 2004
			Hey, the link works now. Turns out it was a hoax. Email is posted at the front page.

		racketboy		Jan 30, 2004
			link doesn't work for me.... if it was a hoax, why? Does the guy WANT to get flamed?

		antime		Jan 30, 2004
			People troll because it's amusing to see people get their panties in a bunch over dumb things.

		it290		Jan 30, 2004
			Just as a sidenote, the XP in Athlon XP stands for 'xtreme performance'. I have no idea what the XP in Windows XP stands for though (maybe the same?).

		antime		Jan 30, 2004
			eXPerience. They're both just examples of marketing trends, though, just like i-this and e-that.

		Gallstaff		Jan 30, 2004
			Yeah, but the Athlon XP came before Windows XP... so AMD wins.

		Alexvrb		Jan 30, 2004
			No, Microsoft wins. They always win, and if they don't they buy you out and win anyway. The XP in Windows XP stands for eXPensive, or Xtremely Pricey, whichever you prefer.

		Des-ROW		Jan 30, 2004
			Bill Joy prefers Mac OS X

		Pearl Jammzz		Jan 30, 2004
			As does Jesus....

		mal		Jan 30, 2004
			Let's keep it nice, OK?

		racketboy		Jan 30, 2004
			Cloud being a prime example

		Gallstaff		Jan 30, 2004
			Thats why I use windows 2000 Which stands for... 2000

		Curtis		Jan 30, 2004
			About the virus thing...I think a Mac virus would be very effective. Who owns a Mac and runs any kind of antivirus software? How many companies are in a position to keep their virus "patterns" as current for Macs as they do for Wintel boxes? Surely it wouldn't be too hard to write a virus that compromises both Mac based systems and nix based systems. If something like that was ever released into the wild, you're talking about a serious chunk of the internet and* internet infrastructure becoming infected.