Mac Owners are smart people.
Posted 07/06/2007 - 21:31
Link
Now that is funny
Matt
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 13/06/2007 - 16:23
Link
OK. I have worked in IT for 20+ years. I have seen the all prevasive WinTel invasion first hand. I taught for 2 years, we had a variety of kit and as a solution looking for a problem I had my subjects devise a series of tests of 'real world' usage that could be appied to all the different peices of kit. The results were predictable. The machines which boasted such and such a clock rate etc etc in the real world performed very badly.
Once you ignored the fact that the DOS based machines crashed, usually when saving you work (which eventually provoked the 'invention' of autosave), they were slower to boot up, slower to perform heavy duty tasks and were the most expensive.
We had an original Mac (mono screen one) which although not as 'powerful' did commendably well as it was far easier to use. The Apple IIe's perofrmed faultlessly, althogh a little slowly.
However the machinary which won hands down? Acorn BBC B's. These has z80 CPU's and and 'extra' 32K of memory so they could run CPN (the networking version on CPM). There was not a single test it did not win. The only time they ever crashed was when I taught machine code programming, where the machine had no defences against sloppy programming.
Thanks for baring with me, and to the point. It is still possible to buy the fruits of this early labour by Acorn (and I run my comany on them). It does not and will never suffer the ignomy of virus attacks (the OS is in ROM), it is still light years ahead of the competion (despite not having a major rework for over 10 years, and it being very amusing to watch Vista struggle to do what I've been doing for more than 15). Now the big question? If your machine does all that you want of it and then some, why do you need to 'upgrade'?
Now I do all of my picture processing using one of the original bitmap editors called AIM, and I've used photoshop (on both Mac's and PC's) and my old application is faster and more accurate. I don't need to mess to much with mine as I'm not a professional artist, but I do need it to process reliably and print faithfully.
Once you ignored the fact that the DOS based machines crashed, usually when saving you work (which eventually provoked the 'invention' of autosave), they were slower to boot up, slower to perform heavy duty tasks and were the most expensive.
We had an original Mac (mono screen one) which although not as 'powerful' did commendably well as it was far easier to use. The Apple IIe's perofrmed faultlessly, althogh a little slowly.
However the machinary which won hands down? Acorn BBC B's. These has z80 CPU's and and 'extra' 32K of memory so they could run CPN (the networking version on CPM). There was not a single test it did not win. The only time they ever crashed was when I taught machine code programming, where the machine had no defences against sloppy programming.
Thanks for baring with me, and to the point. It is still possible to buy the fruits of this early labour by Acorn (and I run my comany on them). It does not and will never suffer the ignomy of virus attacks (the OS is in ROM), it is still light years ahead of the competion (despite not having a major rework for over 10 years, and it being very amusing to watch Vista struggle to do what I've been doing for more than 15). Now the big question? If your machine does all that you want of it and then some, why do you need to 'upgrade'?
Now I do all of my picture processing using one of the original bitmap editors called AIM, and I've used photoshop (on both Mac's and PC's) and my old application is faster and more accurate. I don't need to mess to much with mine as I'm not a professional artist, but I do need it to process reliably and print faithfully.
regards,
Nigel.
Nigel.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
6213 posts
20 years
Winterpeg Manitoba Canada
javascript:emoticon('')