...

View Full Version : Hi, I'm a PC.. And I'm a PC too?



ghell
05-15-2007, 06:55 PM
Just for a sanity check here... Macs are PCs right? My Commodore 64 is listed as a PC so I'm pretty sure Macs are.

And "PC" in those adverts means Windows right? However, can't a PC run Windows, Unix, MacOS, Linux etc

Do they just have to call it PC to avoid a lawsuit from Microsoft or something?

In which case do they just blast past the fact that Mac is an OS for a PC and advertise it as an alternative for PCs (like how they market iPods as if they were different to MP3 players? I wonder if they will ever do "I'm an iPod and im a MP3 player .. I can connect to iStuff.. I can connect to any 'PC' because I dont use silly proprietory technology") so that they can say that they are better than their competitors which are (also) PCs?

Sorry if this sounds like I'm taking swings at Apple, really I'm just trying to work out where in the world their (false/misleading) advertising comes from:confused:

NancyJ
05-15-2007, 08:41 PM
Yes macs are PCs in the sense that PC stands for personal computer. They're not 'IBM Compatible' PCs... though that's a really outdated phrase, later replaced with 'wintel' - but macs can have intel processors and run windows now too, so yeah, they're basically just PCs like all the others... except 10% more poncy ;)

hmmm, that has me pondering what the gaming performance would be of a top spec mac pro running windows would be. 4x the ram and 2x the processing power of a top spec alienware.... not worth $10k to find out though

bcarl314
05-15-2007, 09:07 PM
Not just that, but go to any MacWorld convention and you'll hear Apple touting that it's a hardware company. They don't make software, except when it runs on their hardware, which only they make, except when they use someone elses, but that doesn't count because they're a hardware company.

Got it?

Yeah, me neither ;)

For the record, I don't think you can run a MacOS on just any PC - it only runs on a Mac. But I may be wrong on that. I know that you can run almost any popular OS on a Mac now (Windows, Linux and OSX) but I don't think the reverse is true.

So yes, I agree with you that a "Mac" is in fact a "PC" and as such their campaign is misleading to the extent that it's technically wrong. But in everyday common parlance a PC is a computer that's running Windows. So from that standpoint, it's not misleading.

NancyJ
05-15-2007, 10:18 PM
If a PC is something that runs windows and a mac is a computer made by Apple, whats a computer made by Apple, running windows called? Or for that matter any computer running linux ;)

VIPStephan
05-16-2007, 01:53 AM
hmmm, that has me pondering what the gaming performance would be of a top spec mac pro running windows would be. 4x the ram and 2x the processing power of a top spec alienware.... not worth $10k to find out though

If I recall correctly it’s more a matter of the graphic card performance which is better on non-Macintosh PCs – at least for games that require a top 3D blahblah thingy (you see, I have no idea :p ) – games like Quake 3 or the like.
One of my favorite games is Transport Tycoon, though (or its open source clones, respectively), which – if there was a Mac OS compatible version – wouldn’t make any difference at all.

As to the terms I think the whole PC and Mac debate is just something for the average user that doesn’t know a sh!t other than switching their computer on and starting their e-mail and/or chat program to easily distinguish their “thing” from “the other computers that only geeks are using”.
Like “I have a PC and open up Explorer to browse through the internet. Mac? I’ve heard of that… But that’s strange and unfamiliar, and I don’t want it! And Unix? What’s that? Never heard of it… That can’t be a PC because doesn’t have Windows… Is that at all possible?” :D

Unfortunately, the personal computer’s rise and distribution is strongly connected with the rise of Microsoft and its popular Windows OS and if I may quote myself from another thread: Once it’s in their head you can’t get it out anymore.
And after all, it’s just shorter to say “This is a Mac and that is a PC” rather than “This is an Apple PC and that is a Windows/MS compatible PC”. However, I also don’t like this way to distinguish because clearly it’s abstracting the original term “PC/personal computer” from its original meaning. I usually say “Windows PC”.

I think that Mac marketing term evolved because there were times where it really looked like Apple just wanted to be different from Microsoft by all means. So they accentuated their difference by calling their computers Macintosh (which evolved to “Mac” later on).

And by the way: The Macs before Intel are internally called PPC - Power PC.

oracleguy
05-16-2007, 03:10 AM
For the record, I don't think you can run a MacOS on just any PC - it only runs on a Mac. But I may be wrong on that.


And now that OS X runs on Intel CPUs, I'd imagine the only thing really stopping someone from running OS X on any old x86 machine is internal safe guards put in by Apple.

I haven't heard if anyone has cracked it so it will run on non-Apple "made" hardware but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens.

Karen S. Garvin
05-16-2007, 08:14 PM
whats a computer made by Apple, running windows called

slow...

I have worked on both Intel-based PCs and Macs for a long time now - running on 25 years on PC and at least 17 for the Mac. Because I work on both systems, I feel qualified to comment on them.

I really don’t like Macs because the hardware user interface is basically awful. Right now I’m typing on a shlocky apple keyboard that can’t keep up with me and makes me punch the keys to get anything at all. I never had problems with carpal tunnel syndrome until I worked with Macs, and that’s the truth The software is ok, but there's not much variety available for the native OS. And Macs aren't crash-proof; neither are they virus-free. Been there, seen that.

Back in the early 1980s there was a fairly big difference in the approach of the operating systems with the DOS vs. GUI interfaces, etc. These days that’s all but disappeared, so it’s a matter mostly of personal preference. Is a Ford or a Chevy better to drive? You’ll find arguements pro and con for both, I expect. Yet there are die-hards who refuse to listen to other’s opinions, or worse, insist that everyone must do things their way.

I work with this idiocy everyday, and the main thing that I have to endure is the incredible arrogance and rudeness on the part of Mac users, who in their daily worship of the god in the machine, seek to make everyone else feel inferior so they can feel good about their own inadequacies. Being a PC user who is stuck on a Mac at work (I have a real nice system at home with a good keyboard...), I get the flak from office workers who just can’t leave well enough alone.

I’m frankly feed up with the politicizing of the choice of computer, for that’s what it is. All systems have some merits; why can’t we allow people to choose what they want? I have to mute those apple commercials, or else I would throw a chair through my TV. I hate that kind of advertising and I refuse to buy into the promulgation of arrogance and intolerance that it promotes.

Just my rant for the day.

NancyJ
05-17-2007, 08:32 AM
If I recall correctly it’s more a matter of the graphic card performance which is better on non-Macintosh PCs – at least for games that require a top 3D blahblah thingy (you see, I have no idea :p ) – games like Quake 3 or the like.
One of my favorite games is Transport Tycoon, though (or its open source clones, respectively), which – if there was a Mac OS compatible version – wouldn’t make any difference at all.

Wow, you're not kidding when you say you have no idea ;) Quake 3 is over 7 years old! But FWIW, the mac pro's have nVidia graphics cards - not the latest in the nForce range but they do offer a quadro card (again, not the top end one) which you dont see offered in a lot of PCs - so they dont do SLi or twin SLi but it looks like they're only behind on graphics through choice. Macs arent gaming rigs so why offer gaming grade graphics cards, I guess is the thinking behind it but the cards appear to be standard PCI-E so in theory theres no reason why you couldnt put in a higher spec card - still wouldnt get SLi (unless they're hiding an extra slot in there) but most games arent equipped to fully take advantage yet anyway.

VIPStephan
05-17-2007, 11:41 AM
Wow, you're not kidding when you say you have no idea ;)

Hey, I’ve never been a geek in school. :p
Yeah, Quake 3 just came to my mind as the example for a game requiring the latest graphic cards (at the time it was current) because that’s the only game of this kind I’ve ever played. And you’re right, that was a couple of years ago.

It can make addicted, though. :)

evo
05-17-2007, 12:01 PM
Quake 3 isn't something to discard because it is fairly old, it's actually still used in benchmarking Graphic Cards, along with other more recent games, including, still, Half Life 2, and the likes.

As for the Mac and PC debate, that itself is somewhat ironic in itself. Macs are good, but it's generally because they focus almost all of the CPU on the specific task at hand. It's why the old G3's crashed so much. The G4's got a little better at the game, but not by a margin. Once the 2nd Gen came out along with G5's with dual core processors, the appeal of a mac increased.

Macs are used for their ability to harness processing power. Granted with the days of old and G3's, all the processing power was harnessed into the given task at hand. It's why they are used in design studios so much.

The bridge between the Windows PC and the Mac PC is closing, and I have to regretfully say the Mac PC is shooting way ahead. The UI on a mac is orientated for a school-kid, but it's effective. The only thing that puts me off now, are the users and community behind the corporation, who think they are immune. The recent competition to see how quickly a Mac could get hacked was an example. I don't think they expected it to happen, nevermind so quickly.

I'm a Windows (XP) PC man. The only thing that could tempt me off is power hungry monster of a mac fitted with a delicious 30" plasma HD mac screen. And that's not gonna happen anytime soon. :)

Karen S. Garvin
05-17-2007, 05:24 PM
The only thing that puts me off now, are the users and community behind the corporation, who think they are immune.

"Pride goeth before a fall."

Seriously, if they would drop the attitude, the machine is ok. Just way overpriced because it's marketed as a "designer" computer. Kind of like how designer jeans cost five times what a standard pair of jeans costs.

As far as the OS, we've had to install about three security upgrades in the last two months. I thought the Mac OS was free of those kind of issues? Apple needs to get it's head out of its a**.

VIPStephan
05-17-2007, 06:22 PM
Wow, you must have had some real bad experiences in the past. Got an ex-boyfriend that owned a Mac? :D

NancyJ
05-17-2007, 07:51 PM
Wow, you must have had some real bad experiences in the past. Got an ex-boyfriend that owned a Mac? :D

Mac users dont date girls ;)

VIPStephan
05-17-2007, 09:00 PM
Oh haahaa…
You wanna say I’m gay, huh? I’ve got that! I ain’t stupid, you know?
Is it my fault that I’m good looking in my speedos? :D

Don’t make me angry, I might start throwing dabbers at ya! :mad:

Graft-Creative
05-18-2007, 12:55 AM
I think that Mac marketing term evolved because there were times where it really looked like Apple just wanted to be different from Microsoft by all means. So they accentuated their difference by calling their computers Macintosh (which evolved to “Mac” later on).
And by the way: The Macs before Intel are internally called PPC - Power PC.

Not sure that's entirely correct - Apple were just following their muse in promoting the WIMP workspace - along with Atari, Amiga, etc.

MS took ages to catch onto WIMP - the early versions of Windows didn't even have drag-n-drop between windows - yet they called it 'Windows'?!

They were heady days back then - people were kinda passionate about which PC/OS they used, and now the Apple Vs. Windows thing seems to have become as relevant as Prada Vs. Primark - i.e. - a tad shallow.

A shame really.

Gary

Karen S. Garvin
05-18-2007, 01:11 PM
Wow, you must have had some real bad experiences in the past. Got an ex-boyfriend that owned a Mac?

Ha, ha. No. I've just had to put up with a bunch of people with serious ego issues. Maybe it's a different mentality in Europe, but here it's like a cult following. I don't belong. ;)

marek_mar
05-18-2007, 04:20 PM
But FWIW, the mac pro's have nVidia graphics cards - not the latest in the nForce range but they do offer a quadro card (again, not the top end one) which you dont see offered in a lot of PCs
nForce is a seriers of motherboard chipsets :p

NancyJ
05-18-2007, 04:51 PM
nForce is a seriers of motherboard chipsets :p

Meh! GeForce - you know what I meant :p damn multitasking went astray again

ghell
05-23-2007, 12:07 AM
And now that OS X runs on Intel CPUs, I'd imagine the only thing really stopping someone from running OS X on any old x86 machine is internal safe guards put in by Apple.

I haven't heard if anyone has cracked it so it will run on non-Apple "made" hardware but I wouldn't be surprised if it happens.Yea I've seen it done, I think there is even a drunken Hak5 segment on it somewhere in series one. My brother wanted to see what all the osx fuss was about (things like ditching magic numbers in favour of extensions?) so he put it on vmware, but of course it doesn't work on vmware because vmware doesn't emulate mac hardware. This wasn't too hard for him to get past, the only thing stopping him were artificial limits that apple put into osx.

Didn't Bill gates used to love using apples or something, I think there are some really really old quotes about it. Also I think theres at least one old windows advert that features an apple in the background on Bill Gates' desk.

I agree with nancy, mac does seem kind of feminine. The graphics cards are probably intended for video encoding etc rather than gaming.

I really want to see that 30" power hungry mac.. but not just any mac, one of those huge CRT iMacs (that are incredibly easy to quickly steal memory out of, should you feel the need)

oracleguy
05-23-2007, 01:02 AM
I agree with nancy, mac does seem kind of feminine. The graphics cards are probably intended for video encoding etc rather than gaming.

Actually I'm not totally sure on this but I don't think the video card has anything to do with video encoding. I believe it is more of a function of the processor(s) and the system memory.

ghell
05-23-2007, 01:29 AM
Actually I'm not totally sure on this but I don't think the video card has anything to do with video encoding. I believe it is more of a function of the processor(s) and the system memory.Graphics cards definitely have something to do with encoding and decoding videos. Of course you can decode on the cpu but if you have a graphics card it will probably try and increase performance by using that as much as possible.

What I really meant was mainly that Macs seem to be targeted at aspiring artists and movie directors (that's right, the slackers of society! :D) so when they select graphics cards they probably have that as more of a priority than playing games.

thesmart1
06-18-2007, 10:35 PM
If a PC is something that runs windows and a mac is a computer made by Apple, whats a computer made by Apple, running windows called? Or for that matter any computer running linux ;)

I think a Mac is a computer made by Apple, no matter what it's running, and a PC is a computer made by another company (like HP/Compaq, Dell, Gateway, etc.), no matter what it's running (Windows, Mac OS, Linux, etc.). This is just my interpretation.



And Macs aren't crash-proof; neither are they virus-free. Been there, seen that.

I work with this idiocy everyday, and the main thing that I have to endure is the incredible arrogance and rudeness on the part of Mac users, who in their daily worship of the god in the machine, seek to make everyone else feel inferior so they can feel good about their own inadequacies. Being a PC user who is stuck on a Mac at work (I have a real nice system at home with a good keyboard...), I get the flak from office workers who just can’t leave well enough alone.

I’m frankly feed up with the politicizing of the choice of computer, for that’s what it is. All systems have some merits; why can’t we allow people to choose what they want? I have to mute those apple commercials, or else I would throw a chair through my TV. I hate that kind of advertising and I refuse to buy into the promulgation of arrogance and intolerance that it promotes.

Just my rant for the day.

In freshmen year at my first high school (which used Macs for everything except CAD), I had to use Macs, and I didn't like them too much. Like Karen said (see quote), Macs crash (and freeze). From my experience, it's impossible to recover a Mac when it freezes; Force Quit does nothing. However, I've been using Windows for years, and I don't see it completely freeze very often; only programs freeze (usually). It just gets incredibly slow. I bring up the Task Manager, check the Processes tab, and stop whatever is slowing down the computer.

Also, I don't really like the UI on Mac. It seems to me like there is a lot of wasted space (like on both sides of the dock).

And, probably the biggest issue: compatibilty. I had a bad experience with this. I had a huge project in a class (still freshmen year) that involved a PowerPoint presentation. I made it on my PC at home and brought it into school. I put it on a Mac, and all my transitions disappeared. Same program, different systems, not compatible.

And Karen mentioned the arrogance and intorlerance of Apple and Apple users. It kinda reminds me of the Republican party. (I don't want to turn this thread into a political discussion, so I won't elaborate on that.) And somehow, at his MacWorld keynotes, Steve Jobs kinda reminds me of Elliot Carver from 007: Tomorrow Never Dies. I'm not sure why...

But anyway, as a Windows user, I have to say that the next system I get is probably going to be Linux. :) And yeah, I don't like the politics of computers either.

Karen S. Garvin
06-19-2007, 03:49 PM
It kinda reminds me of the Republican party.

Mmmm. Reminds me of Democrats. And my family... :(

Aradon
06-19-2007, 04:58 PM
Mmmm. Reminds me of Democrats. And my family... :(

How about political parties in general? :P

And I've noticed a trend over the years that more people are switching to macs. With the advent of the new intel chip, it may indeed be worth switching over to a mac and installing a windows duel boot on it, just to get the best of both worlds..

Then again, that would require more money then I have. Guess I'll stick to the cheap, easy to build PC's that run windows, linux, unix, solaris...

Karen S. Garvin
06-19-2007, 05:04 PM
just to get the best of both worlds.

Well, I honestly don't think there's anything to be gained by owning a Mac, although Mac fans will vehemently disagree with me. Let's just say that every piece of software that I want to own runs just fine on my PC, so why switch horses in mid-stream?

I've got a custom-built system that screams, an EXCELLENT keyboard, a great mouse, drawing tablet, cool UV lights in the box. I mean, what's missing? :cool:

oh, maybe a USB-powered beverage warmer... :p

oracleguy
06-19-2007, 08:33 PM
oh, maybe a USB-powered beverage warmer... :p

I'm pretty sure I've seen those, lol. They make a lot of things that can be powered from USB and some things you wouldn't even think of.

Karen S. Garvin
06-20-2007, 05:28 PM
I have seen them! That's why I need one :D

They also make beverage coolers, for those adult beverages. :D

tyanque
06-21-2007, 11:42 AM
http://www.milkandcookies.com/tag/usbtoy/
lots of usb powered things there :D

Karen S. Garvin
06-21-2007, 02:57 PM
Ohhhh-kaaay... some of those things are a bit more than I wanted to know! :eek: I was thinking about something a bit more... sedate (http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/6984/)... or funky. (http://www.x-tremegeek.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?productID=14961) :cool:

Or so incredibly fun (http://www.x-tremegeek.com/templates/searchdetail.asp?productID=13430). Gee, the more I look, the more stuff I'm finding to clutter my desk with!

fl00d
06-22-2007, 07:48 AM
To me a PC is a personal computer, it doesn't matter what OS it is running. It is still a computer for personal use. Generally I just refer to each of them as either "Windows" or "Mac". Windows meaning the box is a PC running Windows, Mac meaning the box is a PC running a Macintosh OS(Tiger, Panther etc).

2 things I've noticed with each community:

1)Windows users first argument for why Windows is better than Mac.
"Macs suck at gaming." Not true. Granted, they don't quite have as large of a selection as the Windows users do, but that doesn't mean they suck.

2)Mac users never shut up preaching their goodies and facts about why Mac is better than Windows. "No viruses, things don't freeze".

Me, I use Mac and Windows on a daily basis. I have a Windows box in my room, and a Mac right in the hall outside my room. I certainly prefer using one system over the other for specific tasks, but I have no real preference. Although, one thing I love about my Mac is startup. Its so clean and uncluttered. Other then that, my two machines pull even. I prefer coding PHP & MySQL on the Windows whilst I prefer graphic design on the Mac. If I had to choose one box, I'd probably choose the Mac, but then install Windows, so I can have the best of both worlds, you know? :P

ghell
06-22-2007, 09:12 PM
I like the vista startup. It seems even if you have a lot of stuff loading at startup, it just fades to black when you log in and then instantly fades in with everything already there apart from the sidebar gadgets :)

Armondo
06-22-2007, 09:17 PM
the whole apple vs windows fight is all bull shark. i like windows and macs, if all i had to do in life was video editing, internet, and photoshop...i would use a mac, but my needs are much greater. so instead of buying a very expensive (but nice) computer for that, i run windows which can do all of that plus more that i need at a fraction of the cost. what i really wanted was to put osx on my pc box...and use it like that, but it turns out that the folks at apple are greedy sons of peaches and they make it to where osx can only run exclusively on their uber expensive hardware...only because they don't want dell to make mac clones and sell them cheap. i think that it is all bull ship. i don't want to pay $1000s of dollars for a pretty looking box to run a $100 dollar os! i ramped up my VistaXP machine to match the specs on a macbook pro for almost 1/3 of the price!


in a nut shell: i am a cheap ******* and i would like to own a mac and pc...but macs are too expensive to just buy for fun :)

schmalx
07-21-2007, 03:36 AM
things I dislike about macs
-expensive (bang for buck)
-made from laptop parts (emac, imac)
-Ive actually had macs crash more times than my windows pc and i use a windows pc 90% of the time that leaves one question WTF?
-most people that i know that own macs are stupid or school (ie: stupid)

Rachy06
07-21-2007, 03:58 AM
I've never had a mac, and I don't want one... I'm running on vista home premium, 100GB harddrive, 1GB RAM ultra mobile philips laptop at the minute, and it's perfect for what I need it for... moving around alot etc.

VIPStephan
07-21-2007, 11:03 AM
[…] and it's perfect for what I need it for... moving around alot etc.

Well, my MacBook takes care of all that…

I think this discussion won’t lead anywhere anymore. This is like discussing the pros an cons of religion. People will insist in their opinion and there’s no use to dicuss as we all have our preferences. Some people like Apple, some hate it. Well that’s fine. Let’s get on with our lives and rather care about really important issues like saving energy and garbage, paying fair wages to the coffee pickers in South America or Africa, taking the bike or doing a quick walk instead of driving to the supermarket, buying things from small local producers instead of the huge mercenary companies…

webweaver18
07-22-2007, 02:52 AM
From my personal experance working with Macs and windows, I have found that windows rarely ever crashes. I work at a school that is almost a 100% Mac environment and we are constantly have problems with them, it's not uncommon for one of the students to have to restart the computer at least once if not twice because it has crashed. That happens with our MacMini's and even our MacPro will crash about once a week for no reason. Our mac server is about the only thing that does not crash but in the past we have had it randomly delete files for no reason. Now I have a Windows box and I can run it for weeks on end and never have to restart. Now you would think that Mac would get that and try to fix that problem but no, there to snobish about there hardware/software to fix that. Also Windows dose an exlant job at graphic design and video editing.

As far as the new Windows Vista goes if I was forced to have a Mac OS X box or a Windows Vista box I would definetly get a Mac because it does actualy run better then Vista. I think Microsoft messed up big time on that OS. It's biggest problem is that it has so many prossess that start up when you pull it out of the box that it takes like 5 min to load everything. I think when I looked after it stopped loading everything there were about 70 processes running that is way to many, considering that on my Win XP Pro I only have 15 at first start up so it only takes my computer about 30 - 40 seconds to boot and load. That's a 2.9 GHz 600 MB Ram. I say that is pretty fast and that is after running the computer for about 2 years with no real matance done on it.

Any way that is my nickels worth.

ghell
07-22-2007, 10:15 AM
I wasn't really discussing what is better, a non mac or a mac, but apple's misleading marketing of their products. For example macs are usually even powered by processors called "PowerPC" and yet they try to advertise them as better than "PCs". Without PC's mac would have nothing to run on. I suppose its kind of like saying a virutal cpu is better than a physical cpu.

MacOS, OSX, unix, bsd, linux, windows etc all have their places. I was not disputing that :)

By the way you can put OSX on a non-mac machine, though I don't know how legal this is. The only thing stopping you is apple's software, there is no reason why it should not physically run. You only need a CPU that does SSE3 I think. CPU-Z will tell you if your current CPU does. http://www.hak5.org/ has a segment on this somewhere in the first series, though I don't know exactly where. They got OSX onto a gateway notebook. I have seen it actually done on a VMware virtual machine too for testing. I get asked how to do it a lot, I should probably find out which episode it is in.

As for windows vista's speed vs XP, you have to remember that XP was released in 2001. Computers have moved on quite a bit since then. XP was considered by some to use too much when it was released. I have a stock Core 2 Duo E6600 (£115) on an NForce 680i motherboard (£110, though a £50 650i would be just as good if you don't use SLI, or a P35 board etc) and 2GiB of 800MHz 4-4-4-12 ram (£70) and vista boots in under 10 seconds from the end of GRUB to the end of desktop loading (including me typing in my password) for me (not including POST etc as I have it running through GRUB on another hard drive, it has to detect my RAID etc.. that is nothing to do with the OS). I have had vista ultimate x64 since it's release date and it is still running just as fast, which is also a good sign :). The different versions of vista require different specs though. Vista basic should load faster on old hardware. I find it hard to believe that you only have 15 processes running on XP anyway, unless it is a fresh install that you have tweaked and never done anything on, or you are in safe mode.

c_and13_
07-24-2007, 04:47 PM
thats interesting with osx, one of my biggest complaints with mac has always been the propertiery nature of hardware and software....

if the hardware is null and void its an even more tempting platform to run.


all in all, consider me another windows user dying to jump to linux - im just lazy in fixing my wireless drivers and keep praying for more linux software support too....:(

oracleguy
07-24-2007, 05:54 PM
From my personal experance working with Macs and windows, I have found that windows rarely ever crashes.

I can tell you never used Windows 9x or previous. Granted the NT line of Windows is leaps and bounds more stable but it wasn't always that way.


considering that on my Win XP Pro I only have 15 at first start up

I'm skeptical about that number as well. I think a fresh install of XP Pro has about 30 some processes.


That's a 2.9 GHz 600 MB Ram. I say that is pretty fast and that is after running the computer for about 2 years with no real matance done on it.

Well as much as Vista has features that bug me, the reason you noticed such poor performance from Vista is your lack of memory. On my laptop with 2GB of memory it isn't sluggish, granted it is using almost half that memory idling but still. Though I do know if you have only 1GB (or less) of memory, if you disable Aero, that helps quite a bit memory wise.

ghell
07-24-2007, 06:17 PM
all in all, consider me another windows user dying to jump to linux - im just lazy in fixing my wireless drivers and keep praying for more linux software support too....:(What wireless are you using? Most modern distros will run quite well on most wireless and if it doesn't work out of the box, usually the support forum will be able to get you up and running quickly. For example Fedora on an Intel laptop you just need to get ipw2100 2200 3945 or whatever (depending on your laptop) because the drivers are all packed in but the firmware isn't. I think ubuntu is pretty good when it comes to wireless working out of the box.

Anyway, if you haven't tried for a while, it might be worth trying again :)

Daemonspyre
07-24-2007, 07:27 PM
If you are having trouble with Ubuntu and Dell B130 Wireless:

1) Upgrade to 7.04
2) Use Synaptic to REMOVE all NDISWrapper versions.
3) Use Synaptic to INSTALL all Linux headers for your image, and GCC compilers.
4) Download and install the ndiswrapper tarball from http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net
5) Use COMPAQ SP33008 Wireless drivers (links are in http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net)
6) Use the installation instructions from said URL above to install...

Works like a champ.



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum