End of an era...No I am NOT talking about Bush

Reply
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Clearwater Bay Road
    Posts
    5,649

    I know many ppl on this thread are ardent mac fan and abhor windows. But, Mac and all those OS that you guys are talking about were available only in western world and may be developed asian countries, whereas windows was available to all and sundry in developing countries like India and frankly where I grew up and studied the only operating systems were DOS and windows (and I think that's it was all over the country) and I am grateful that I had access to windows while I was learning.
    Also, I think that mac machines are still very expensive for everyone to buy, they are double the cost of any windows machine.


  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,907
    Quote Originally Posted by gunsnroses
    Also, I think that mac machines are still very expensive for everyone to buy, they are double the cost of any windows machine.
    Yes and a russian Lada is a lot cheaper than a Mercedes... Yet they can both take you from point A to point B most of the time

  3. #23
    er2
    er2 is offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by gilleshk
    Yes and a russian Lada is a lot cheaper than a Mercedes... Yet they can both take you from point A to point B most of the time
    Big difference between now and then. Nowadays it is a bit more expensive (more than justified except for those new glossy screen and no FW 400 MBPs),but everyone can afford it. Back then Macs were scarily expensive.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    SHEUNG WAN
    Posts
    176

    Why do people still argue about this? The "better" product doesn't always win commercially. Windows earned and has continued to earn more income than it's rivals. Various iterations of Mac OS, Linux, Unix, OS2, BeOS have won good reviews, but none are getting more than 20 percent marketshare now, are they?

    Apple fans are not going to change their minds about Apple being superior.
    Windows fans...ditto.

    Blah...


  5. #25

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,907

    Mercedes has a tiny market share compared to a Ford Escort yet the brand thrives... so does Apple. Sometimes it's not about selling the most items...

    On the other hand, the iPod has cornered a market the same way that Windows did for their operating system. If you talk about pride in your product, I'd rather be Steve Jobs than Bill Gates...


  6. #26

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cramped island
    Posts
    3,672

    Amiga never had backward compatibility issues, they only had 1 amiga and then they tanked out! haha..

    ya the key thing was commercial failure.

    what bill gate was lucky was the PC platform was open architecture and that allowed other manufacturers coming up with cheaper and more widely used version of the PCs...

    apple sticked to keeping its architecture proprietary and that gave the whole personal computer market to PC and William Jr.


  7. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Clearwater Bay Road
    Posts
    5,649
    Quote Originally Posted by gilleshk
    Yes and a russian Lada is a lot cheaper than a Mercedes... Yet they can both take you from point A to point B most of the time
    You are missing the point here. Noone said that windows is better than mac, all one's saying that due to mac being expensive only a select few could afford it, whereas windows made it computing possible for ppl who aren't rich millionaires. Or is it that you only have known rich millionaire type ppl, eh?

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,907

    Interesting you say that because in the public education system in both the US and Canada, Mac has had a significant market share for a long time. Why is that do you think? Because school boards are richer than individuals and they have loads of money to throw down the drain?


  9. #29

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    9,658
    Quote Originally Posted by er2

    At these days I was only familiar with Mac and Win/Dos-Systems. You might be right here and have proven my initial statement wrong. I'd still say that WfW was not a crappy system (at least not to the extend of GWB as CIC).

    If you had no experience with competing OSes at the time of Win3.x, then you should stop being quite so sure of yourself when talking about the OS. If you don't know other OSes, you have no clue whether 3.x was technically good for the times or not, only whether *you* were happy with it.

    You want an example? Easy. Win 3.1 couldn't provide pre-emptive multitasking. OS2 and AmigaOS could. That's pretty fundamental to a good OS, wouldn't you say?

    Come to think of it, I'm not even sure that Win 3.1 was even a proper OS. It was more of a graphical shell smacked on top of DOS, replete with it's crippled memory management model. The fact that you had to reference HIMEM or EMM386 in a bootup config really should have clued you in that the fundamental OS design was a messy compromise.
    Last edited by jgl; 06-11-2008 at 12:35 AM.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,199

    its nice to see that there is as much " mine is better than yours" debates over which os is more superior or just generally slagging off a rival product, just like kids arguing whether super famicom/snes or megadrive back in the early 90's or nowadays, xbox360 or ps3 is better.

    Its also funny to see this debate in comparsions to whether bang and olufsen audio products is classed as true audiophilic products, as virtually all hi fi critics ( magazine and internet) give bad reviews whilst the target market audience rate it as the next messiah, whilst true audiophilic would not touch ( actually more precisely, listen to it) with a barge pole as their prefer less 'aesetical apleasing' products but with better critic reveiws (eg, arcam, linn, marantz, nad, rotel, onkyo)


Reply
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast