[mage]

maybe for graphics and multimedia but other than that macs are still laggin behind.

[objekt404]

aswettla, on Apr 6 2003, 04:13 PM, said:

macs have power. A dule 1 Ghz with 512 memory with OS 10.2 with kick ass. Not to mention that Photoshop is native to OS X

My single AMD 1.67gHz w/1.25gB RAM seems to like PS7 fine....

& I still don't understand the *idea* (myth?) of Photoshop being OSX native. Wasn't It native to OS9? I don't remember Adobe ever mentioning that they completely rewrote the PS Engine (they just keep adding & tweaking). Plus, if Photoshop were OSX Native, we'd be seeing PS for Linux by now... (or atleast BSD).

I kept hearing this last year at PhotoShop World (Mac Nazi Central) & it still doesn't hold water.

[gneato]

The only solution:

If you like Macs, get a Mac.

If you like PCs, get a PC.

If you can't decide which you want more, get a ps2 and go away.

In summation: everyone STFU.

This post has been edited by gneato: 06 April 2003 - 09:58 PM

[Landon]

For the video world, mac is god. I'm not sure if you guys are familiar with DV editing, but apples Final Cut Pro just blows away PC's Premiere, and FCP is like the best you can buy on the "pro-sumer" level.

[objekt404]

gneato, on Apr 6 2003, 11:58 PM, said:

The only solution:

If you like Macs, get a Mac.

If you like PCs, get a PC.

If you can't decide which you want more, get a ps2 and go away.

In summation: everyone STFU.

Yet another *quality* post....

[cyberscribe]

objekt404, on Apr 6 2003, 03:33 PM, said:

... if Photoshop were OSX Native, we'd be seeing PS for Linux by now... (or atleast BSD).

Unfotunately, the Mach64/PPC Kernels and the i3/4/5/686 Kernels are two different worlds. So, saying that because something is carbonized means it should be available on "other" UN*Xes is over-simplifying the matter. Particularly when it comes to graphics there is a lot of low-level, architecture-specific stuff that goes on. I wish the strides in OS X would port to Linux and others systems, but it just ain't the case.

[supersloth]

objekt404, on Apr 6 2003, 02:09 PM, said:

Not to mention its damn near impossible to do ASP on a Mac (ChiliAsp you say? I'd rather do scripting via assembly!)

the real problem there is that your working with asp. thats not a problem with windows or with mac's.


and i like that fact the 'summation' line is spreading.

[cyberscribe]

supersloth, on Apr 7 2003, 06:11 PM, said:

the real problem there is that your working with asp.

*nod* Visual Basic is a plague

Quote

summation line

what ever are you talking about

[jaredigital]

i believe Photoshop was originally created for a Mac OS, but NOT OSX.

in summation, this is the 'in summation' line.

[MarkoDaGeek]

I don’t know about the whole Mac Vs. PC thing, I think both systems have their plus’s, and Every = benchmark I have seen, the Mac wins just as much as the PC, or is not far behind, This bench mark was with a dual 1.25 Mac making a grand total of 2.5 ghz, if the app. were to use full power of the 2nd CPU, Vs. a 3.06 ghz PC, a tad over 500 mhz more then the Apple, now if you look at the apple and the 2.53 ghz Alienware, the apple is a bit slower in a few of the tests, But wins in others. so To call it Slaughtered ?? Not even close. If you take out the 3.06 P4, the Apple did pretty even with the others, It won some, lost others, That just proves the Apple is better in some areas then others, I think of discriminating against Macs like Discriminating against people of color, just because their different doesn’t mean their wrong, Just because their not good at some things but good at others doesn’t mean it’s a bad thing… The Mac will always dominate Some markets, Just like Some people, Of different races will Always Dominate at different sports, and cultures ect. It’s just different, not necessarily wrong or bad. I have grown up with PC’s, I love them, But.. I do plan on buying a Power book at the end of this month.

[jaredigital]

in summation, no one cares what you want to use, as long as it works for you.

[gneato]

jaredigital, on Apr 8 2003, 02:06 PM, said:

in summation, no one cares what you want to use, as long as it works for you.

That's like the best 'in summation' line, ever.

[objekt404]

cyberscribe, on Apr 7 2003, 08:17 PM, said:

objekt404, on Apr 6 2003, 03:33 PM, said:

... if Photoshop were OSX Native, we'd be seeing PS for Linux by now... (or atleast BSD).

Unfotunately, the Mach64/PPC Kernels and the i3/4/5/686 Kernels are two different worlds. So, saying that because something is carbonized means it should be available on "other" UN*Xes is over-simplifying the matter. Particularly when it comes to graphics there is a lot of low-level, architecture-specific stuff that goes on. I wish the strides in OS X would port to Linux and others systems, but it just ain't the case.

Maybe that is something Mac should look into, Linux Support. They're big enough that they might be able to stabalize the community(s).

Sure, they wouldn't own the various Linuxen like OSX, but they could standardize them enough to allow Adobe, Macromedia, etc. to see it as a profitable platform to develop for.

[cyberscribe]

objekt404, on Apr 9 2003, 05:47 AM, said:

Maybe that is something Mac should look into, Linux Support. They're big enough that they might be able to stabalize the community(s).

It's an interesting thought. But as long as they're using PPC architecture, they won't be able to do much good for Intel-based communities. That was how Apple originally shot itself in the foot. And to this day it's still limping along.

In summation, see previous in summation lines.

[kidd0]

/mod-cmd rename thread 6983 "Mac's still own"