Apple or PC?

[Marv S]

It seems like the worm/virus issues are often pc specific. Like the last one gets into the XP and Server 2003 systems but if you have win98 there’s no issue.

Do the Apple systems get hit? I don’t hear of it. I also don’t hear of see much of how fast the Apple is vs the P4. It’s usually amd vs intel

Anyway, what would the downside be to getting an Apple these days? I know software selection is more limited, but aren’t all the important things like graphic, movie editing, word processing, and spreadsheet apps. available for an Apple? Which software would you want that isn't available for an Apple?

Vinage old question, but what's the current take on it? Thx.

[NOITALL]

I'd rather risk viruses than use a mac

[_Mark_]

If I had the money, I'd get a new G5. Unix stability/control, Mac usability.

[Nameless]

Apple has such a small market share, that a virus is very very very very rare. From OSX up, the core is Unix (notice that unix based virus' are also almost non existant).


The current G5 is the highest speed personal computer right now, not counting anything OC'd.

If 99.9% of the public, a PC is the only way to fly. If you have a need for high-end video editing or digital studio work, then you may want to look into an apple. If you just run the normal junk, then a PC is going to be far cheaper and less of a PITA to maintain.


I own both, and work on both. Feel free to ask questions.

MM

[Nameless]

As far as software goes, more and more things are being ported over since the OS is now based on unix. MUCH easier to code and distribute than the old FS.


Hell, I can play Everquest on a mac now [img]/images/graemlins/laughing.gif[/img]

MM

[SRT Mike]

If you have XP, it will auto-update whenever these stupid script viruses come out. Run Norton antivirus and it will do it as well. Macs are not immune to viruses, especially when you start installing MS tools with script functionality and all that BS!

I'd always take a PC with XP and NAV over any mac anyday.

[SeriousEric]

Apple for show, PC for go.

[AUSTIN]

Mac for graphics and things like that. PC for everday, user friendly use.








Austin

[SeriousEric]

Originally Posted by SRT Mike

I'd always take a PC with XP and NAV over any mac anyday.

Brunt - You ever do any XP device driver development? What's the deal with the XP tree of the '03 DDK not allowing you to build drivers with visual C++ ver 6.0? Seems like it wants me to go to .net. I don't mind doing that for apps, I just didn't want to screw with it for driver development. BTW the w2k tree of the DDK works fine. WTF?

[Nameless]

I'm not a big fan of the .net framework. I like the layout of VB6 and VC++ 6.0 much better than the new shit.


However, the C# language is pretty cool.

MM

[SRT Mike]

Originally Posted by SeriousEric

Brunt - You ever do any XP device driver development? What's the deal with the XP tree of the '03 DDK not allowing you to build drivers with visual C++ ver 6.0? Seems like it wants me to go to .net. I don't mind doing that for apps, I just didn't want to screw with it for driver development. BTW the w2k tree of the DDK works fine. WTF?

I haven't done any driver development since I did it in x86 assembler - so we're talking a long way back here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But I can't say I'm too surprised to hear it. Microsoft has been pushing .net a LOT and even going so far as to cripple functionality that was there before to get folks to herd along to the .net pastures.

Too bad - I wouldn't want to write a device driver in .net either!

[SeriousEric]

Originally Posted by SRT Mike

I haven't done any driver development since I did it in x86 assembler - so we're talking a long way back here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But I can't say I'm too surprised to hear it. Microsoft has been pushing .net a LOT and even going so far as to cripple functionality that was there before to get folks to herd along to the .net pastures.

Too bad - I wouldn't want to write a device driver in .net either!

I don't think the driver architecture has changed for the .net environment. I think it's still a WDM model, I just find it weird they won't let you build from the xp side of the tree using C++ 6.0. I'll bet it's a marketing ploy to force you to buy .net.

Also noticed that despite all the Java-like machine independence layering of .net that .net C++ applications often run faster than the old 6.0 stuff. They seem to have done something well there.

[Matt]

Linux.

It recently received approval from the government to be used on system they operate.