Re: TI-H: OT: And the felling blow...
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: OT: And the felling blow...
>Internet & Networking
>
> 1.Windows 98 integrates flawlessly with the Internet-indows
>intergrates with IE. And NOTHING else. Ridiculous, an OS does NOT need
>to be dependant on the browser.
Apple has the same thing, but as Microsoft didn't, Apple reliazed that it
was junk. Look at CyberDog.
> 2.Windows 98 supports Internet Channels; Mac-OS does not- I've
>seen channels. I don't want it.But yeah, this is true...
WTH are those? I get by without them, so they must not be necessary.
> 3.Windows 98 makes Internet access powerful with Broadcast
>Architecture- Interesting...but it obviously needs a few more years, so
>I don't think it's all that valid.
I know. They can flood a cm network with their SMB broadcast packets
giving away information about the computer. :)
> 4.Windows file extensions allow greater control and work flawlessly
>with the Internet- This is pure BS. Much as I want all my files to end
>in .exe or .wav, I'd prefere to have my Mac take care of it.
Your mac does! When you download a file with .wav, it sets the file
creater and type to a very common program (soundapp) so it can be opened in
that, or any other program.
> 5.Windows integrates with ActiveX technology, giving power to your
>desktop- Hype Hype Hype
I installed ActiveX and didn't like it one bit.
>
> 6.Windows supports mult-linking modems; Mac-OS does not- "The
>original modems could only transmit up to 2400 baud - a small text
>document would take over aminute to download! " My original modem was a
>300 baud, to nitpick...Anyway, this is all well and good, but my Mac
>broke the 56 k wall with my cable modem. I don't need two of those, let
>me tell you. Now, I spend my tiem waiting for servers, not my modem.
>Telephone modems are dying, at least the standard ones, like 56k. Also,
>Macs CAN do this, if they want. It just needs 3rd party software.
>Windows users need to get a separate pack for this anyway.
Very well stated. It sounds like the mac in this thing was stock, and the
pc...full of the users junk and purchased programs.
>
> 7.Networking is more powerful with Windows- "AppleTalk is an old
>slow and inefficient format.
Of course its old! It was developed in 1983 t0o connect computers at
230kbps. What did PCs have at that time? I bet they didn't have 230k
UARTS.
>It is not used in any professional
>setting." Hmm...is NASA a "professional setting" Cuz their networks are
>based on Appletalk. And Macs can connect to any network as well.
>Advanced path capabilities? BULL. And I DARE you to set up a PC network,
>then a Mac. Better, ask someone who has done both which is easier. This
>is ridiculous.
I bet they had the mac running PhoneNet and the PC running 100bt on a
switch. If they had the mac running on the 100bt network...
> 8.PCs are much better at handling three-dimensional graphics &
>virtual reality
I'd like to see an example. :)
> 9.Windows is far more stable than Mac-OS
Which MacOS? If you count unstable as doing what you need it to do and not
giving a generic "General Fault" error, then yes the MacOS is unstable.
>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/9295/pc-advantage/index.html-
>The page uses a QuickTime Plug for Gods' Sakes! APPLE TECHNOLOGY! The
>first in Multimedia. And here's a few other facts, from a more reliable
>source then this random webpage.
Thats because the video extensions Apple programmed run better on IBMs than
intels or microsofts.
>• The Windows 95 logo (created with Freehand)
>• IBM's Aptiva point-of-purchase materials and the boxes they ship in
>• Intel's "Flying Pentium" ads
Many intel www site graphics are created on macs. Open the gifs up in a
hex viewer and check out the program used to create them.
>• The graphics for Microsoft Network
>• The newspaper and magazine ads for IBM, Gateway, Dell — and Microsoft
>• Windows 95 packaging
>
>Note: From "Macworld® Mac® Secrets®" by David Pogue and Joseph Schorr —
>a wonderful must-have book.
References: