"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:

hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta figured
some of it out. Maybe.

Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than the
typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:
hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta figured
some of it out. Maybe.
Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than the
typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch



I don't see how that could be, as the main ingredients are pretty much
the same quality, and depend more on price. If you buy certified memory,
you are getting something that may be better than uncertified memory.
The drives are the same, the cpu's are the same, the ergonomics are a
lot different.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:
hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta figured
some of it out. Maybe.
Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than
the typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch





I don't see how that could be, as the main ingredients are pretty much the
same quality, and depend more on price. If you buy certified memory, you
are getting something that may be better than uncertified memory. The
drives are the same, the cpu's are the same, the ergonomics are a lot
different.


The CPU's are the same?
Just goes to show how ignorant I am about computers. Last I knew, Apple
had their own CPU's.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:
hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta
figured
some of it out. Maybe.
Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than
the typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch





I don't see how that could be, as the main ingredients are pretty much
the same quality, and depend more on price. If you buy certified memory,
you are getting something that may be better than uncertified memory. The
drives are the same, the cpu's are the same, the ergonomics are a lot
different.


The CPU's are the same?
Just goes to show how ignorant I am about computers. Last I knew, Apple
had their own CPU's.

Eisboch


Intel is now making Apple CPUs.

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:
hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta
figured
some of it out. Maybe.
Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than
the typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch





I don't see how that could be, as the main ingredients are pretty much
the same quality, and depend more on price. If you buy certified memory,
you are getting something that may be better than uncertified memory.
The drives are the same, the cpu's are the same, the ergonomics are a
lot different.


The CPU's are the same?
Just goes to show how ignorant I am about computers. Last I knew, Apple
had their own CPU's.

Eisboch


Intel is now making Apple CPUs.


Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Tim wrote:
hk wrote:
...picked up my Mac today...and despite all my thumbs, I sorta
figured
some of it out. Maybe.
Harry, I know some people that are Mac addicts. They wouldn't use
any
other system.


Software issues aside .... are there any claims or evidence that Mac
hardware is better ... more reliable .... longer lasting ... etc. than
the typical CPUs and components used in PCs?

Eisboch





I don't see how that could be, as the main ingredients are pretty much
the same quality, and depend more on price. If you buy certified
memory, you are getting something that may be better than uncertified
memory. The drives are the same, the cpu's are the same, the ergonomics
are a lot different.


The CPU's are the same?
Just goes to show how ignorant I am about computers. Last I knew,
Apple had their own CPU's.

Eisboch


Intel is now making Apple CPUs.


Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

Eisboch

For you entertainment and knowledge enhancement your might try this site:

http://www.macwindows.com/winintelmac.html

I'm sure they can do a far better job of explaining than I can. I've never
seen a Mac running windows.

My latest experience with a Mac was a few weeks ago when a neighbor lady
asked me try and figure out why here printer from an old Mac would not work.
I couldn't even navigate through the "intuitive" interface. It took me a
couple of days searching the Internet to get educated enough to figure out
that drivers were not available for her version of Leopard(?).

I'm too old to learn something new. My Windows systems serve me just fine.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:05:32 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

It's an emulation and not a strict operating system as I understand
it. Kind an overlay.

Personally, I find Macs very hard to use. It takes a particular mind
set to operate a Mac compared to Windows.

There is nothing "intuitive" about a Mac operating system.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:05:32 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

It's an emulation and not a strict operating system as I understand
it. Kind an overlay.

Personally, I find Macs very hard to use. It takes a particular mind
set to operate a Mac compared to Windows.

There is nothing "intuitive" about a Mac operating system.

About a dozen years ago I worked for a company that standardized the
desktop on Macs. We had PowerBooks at the time. Nice little machines
except with the bomb appeared on the screen. Then it was time to get the
paper clip out.

I had to evaluate some MacOS emulation software that ran on SunOS. We
were trying to reduce the number of systems on developers desktops. It
would have worked if the MacOS emulation would have been able to talk
through the Sun's Ethernet nic. But, Sun had taken over the NIC.

The funny thing was going from a one button Mac mouse to a three button
Sun mouse. I hated those Sun optical mice with the directionally
oriented mouse pads. Slick technology but a pain to use.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:05:32 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

It's an emulation and not a strict operating system as I understand
it. Kind an overlay.

Personally, I find Macs very hard to use. It takes a particular mind
set to operate a Mac compared to Windows.

There is nothing "intuitive" about a Mac operating system.


There are two popular "emulators" that allow XP or Vista to run on a Mac
as a virtual machine, and another program that allows you to boot up
into Mac's Leopard OS, or either XP or Vista.

The Leopard OS is not quite as challenging for those used to the Windows
environment. The proof of that is I have been messing with it for a
while, and I have not created any catastrophes on the new machine.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:05:32 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Well, isn't *that* special.

So, what's the difference between a Mac running Windows (I've read that it
can) and a PC running Windows?

It's an emulation and not a strict operating system as I understand
it. Kind an overlay.

Personally, I find Macs very hard to use. It takes a particular mind
set to operate a Mac compared to Windows.

There is nothing "intuitive" about a Mac operating system.

"Intel-powered" Macs have the potential for booting from Mac OS X or for
Windows XP and Windows Vista. However, you can't just stick a Windows
installation disc into a Mac and expect it to install. You need to first
install Apple's Boot Camp on the Mac. Boot Camp will create a separate
partition on your hard disk for Windows. (Boot Camp installer assistant
"dynamically creates" the Windows partition for Windows, so you won't lose
your Mac data). Boot Camp also provides Windows drivers to support the Mac
keyboard and various hardware and peripherals from within Windows. (Boot
Camp does not provide Windows; you'll need to supply your own copy.)

http://www.macwindows.com/winintelmac.html#bootcamp