Debate and Discussion

mac vs pc
mykill at 12:33PM, May 12, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
The previous attempt at this thread included a poll, which is a no no.

The poster is also behind the times. Macs are switching to intel processors, and the macs already so updated can run Windows - extremely well according to reports. So now the fact that much software is windows only is no longer a reason to buy a PC.

I'm biased to Mac. Here are my reasons.

No viruses or spyware. Because the OS is a minority OS. But also because the Darwin BSD Unix Kernal is open source. As soon as a virus is established in theory, the open source kernal is patched by the open source community.

Open Source, The most powerful free software in the world is open source, almost all of it can be compiled to run in X-windows on OSX.

The OSX operating system is clear and elegant, doing things like setting up networking or a webserver are very very simple. The command line is available for shell scripting, but this is never necessary.

Windows is insulting and too complex at the same time. The automated scripts are too simple and too limited in application and seem to be designed for toddlers.

Mac OSX doesn't slow down over use. The Windows experience I understand is that a new machine is snappy and fast - but 3 months later the performance is sluggish.

Mac OSX enjoys the benefit of a console. The operating system is designed for specific hardware, and therefore always works correctly.

Windows is designed for all hardware, and is therefore bloated and inefficient - incapable of exploiting many hard ware specific features from the kernal.

Because OSX was stuck with slow processors for so long, the operating system has become a jewel of efficiency in ways Windows can never be. For example, the videocard handles ALL graphics, taking strain of the main processor. Windows hasn't figured this out yet. The bottom line tho - OSX is a speed demon on intel hardware.

Expense: Mac for a long time has been the expensive foreign car of computing, using non standard parts and commanding a premium price. This has changed. I'm running a Mac Mini, cost me $500, runs Photoshop, Illustrator, Word, Flash, Painter and all the software I need -well. It even plays World of Warcraft well.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
ozoneocean at 12:57PM, May 12, 2006
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
You know… I'd lock this just because it's one of those interminable internet things that comes down to who is the biggest fanboy for their system.
But I think that's for Zwuh to decide on.

I think the idea of Mac VS Windows PC is silly. People will buy: 1). The best they can afford 2). Whatever someone convinces them is best.
Where do Macs and Windows PCs fit in there?

If there is a real argument here, it's: “Major market holder VS Minority market holder, what strategies can each use to maintain and improve that market share, and would change to the status quo actually be desirable or beneficial to the consumer?”.
Or: “Which sales/computing model is better: a Socialist style with enforced uniform high quality, but limited choice and generally high prices, or a Democratic style with multiple choice, varied quality, and varied prices?”

Your argument intro just sounds like a Mac add.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:23PM
gigatwo at 6:26PM, May 12, 2006
(online)
posts: 308
joined: 1-6-2006
I'm with the penguin. I could care less. If ut2004 works, which it does, then I have no need to use anything else. Plus, the GIMP doesn't freeze (although if you wanna run any adobe software you've gotta buy crossover office), and I can use svg wallpapers. I'm not sure if OSX can do that, but I'm sure as hell that windows can't.

Really, I've got everything I need.

-The GIMP (since I'm not a pro)
-Blender 3d (cause it's awsome)
-UT2004 (again)
-Amarok
-Firefox
-A bunch of media players aside from amarok
-Azureus

Inkscape doesn't have pressure sensitivity, so I'm not gonna put that on the list. It'll probably be worthy in its later years.




Obvious flaws:

-you've gotta know your terminal commands
-tablets need to be configured (just a change in a file, but it isn't automatic)
-ATI cards don't have as good drivers for linux as nvidia does (I got lucky)
-Having multiple desktops is only semi-helpfull
-If you're running ubuntu/kubuntu, you've gotta use the sudo command by default to use root access. You can create a root account through that, though.
-You've gotta pay to use anything with direct X (thar'd be microsoft software) open GL works fine.
-most games don't run on linux, unless you've got wineX. Wine (free works with a good number of openGL rendered games, though)


As far as windows vs mac goes, I like OSX, but I'm more aqquainted with windows. I've got 30 gb's for that (200 for tux). It depends on what you want to do. I just like free stuff and security. For a lot of games, I use windows. My art is on linux, as well as basically everything graphics wise. I'm not sure why. Windows had a lot of viruses and ended up running extemely slow, so the only interwebness I do on that is gaming. Linux barely has any viruses. I'm sure there are some, but none really have been recorded or widespread.

Although it's said that the perfect graphics setup is windows on a mac. (I don't have a mac, so I haven't had the chance to try this. It's possible though.)
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:35PM
SpANG at 6:33PM, May 12, 2006
(online)
posts: 3,105
joined: 1-1-2006
No viruses or spyware.


http://www.tuaw.com/2006/05/01/cnn-reports-on-mac-virus/

.: SpANG! :.
“To a rational mind, nothing is inexplicable. Only unexplained.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:51PM
Aurora Moon at 11:50PM, May 12, 2006
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
Ozone is right. arguing about which is better is just silly as an bunch of gaming fanboys agruing about which is better, the latest X-box or ps3….

snice I'm an gamer, I also fruent another board that's devoted to gaming… so I hear this sort of talk all the time and it's getting tired.

The way I see it, a lot of people have different needs and tastes on how they feel things should be run.
So one system may not be for them, so they may tend to go for a different system.

That's just how it works. no system is really the “best” over another system in cases like this. you just goes with what is more “natural-feeling” to you..
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
mykill at 5:04PM, May 13, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
oops
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
mykill at 5:07PM, May 13, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
Mac OSX is not great. It is minimally adequate.

Here's why every windows user should participate in a class action lawsuit against Microsoft.

If you are buying an Operating system, you have a right to expect that operating system to be complete, finished and whole - and for OS updates to enhance your OS, not fix an error that shouldn't have been, or finish an incomplete OS. As Microsoft has done.

If an OS producer cannot gaurantee that their product is secure, they have no right to keep their source code private and secret. Gaming systems are secure, Sony and Nintendo, even X-Box have the right to those trade secrets. But businesses that run on Windows, if Microsoft can't make the operating system secure and stable, release the source code so a companies software engineers have a fighting chance.

If a piece of software is compromised with a virus, you have a right to expect the damage to be limited to that software. If Internet Explorer is compromised, the very windows kernal is compromised. Microsoft almost seems to be intentionally making an OS to be hacked.

If you are going to bundle software with your OS, it's nice if it doesn't suck.

Microsoft has refused to take the steps necessary to make Windows a good experience for everyone: Make a clean break with the past (Win98 software may not or will not run at all), enforce a strict hardware profile.

Microsoft has done this already, and successfully, with it's best OS - Windows CE for handhelds.

Mac is great because it is adequate, and Windows is not.

When I used PCs I'd say - it doesn't matter the computer, it's what the user can do with the software. This is still true. But life is unnecessarily hard for the Windows user.

And I Love Linux. It's just redundant when using OSX. Really. Think of OSX as a commercial KDE or Gnome, because that is exactly what it is. The kernal is open source unix. I can install KDE and Gnome on my mac if I wanted to.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
Terminal at 9:42PM, May 13, 2006
(online)
posts: 5,505
joined: 1-6-2006
Mac vs PC is silly if you ask me. Trying out both. I'd say they are both shitty. Each has their differences.

To me, it does not matter. I take what I can get. Even if it is subpar.

.: Myxomatosis :.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:09PM
mykill at 11:32PM, May 13, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
For a sub 1000 computer the mac mini is very competitive. So the choice is relevant.

The new Macs allow you to run windows as well. I think it's their master plan, as the windows partition goes to hell and the osx partition stays healthy and productive - my attitude may become mainstream.

If you want a browser that is a liability to your operating systems kernal, if you prefer WMA music files that won't work on most mp3 players, if you enjoy having not one, not two, not thee, not four, but 5 places spyware can start at boot from (including the registry), if you enjoy reformatting your hard drive because of viruses or just because the OS is sluggish … A windows PC can deliver all of that and more.

The mac works, the free software (Itunes, Imovie,Ichat, dashboard, automater, garageband, Ical, Iphoto) -all of it is excellent and useful, it's very stable (BSD Unix), it's open source (the Darwin Kernal), I've never encountered spyware or a virus in my experience with OSX. In addition to commercial software like the adobe suite I also run Blender and Open Office (Neo Office) - and have the option of compiling almost any open source software for the X11 window manager.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
Aurora Moon at 1:44AM, May 14, 2006
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
um, I have windows xp and I've never had problems that you listed, mykill.

I would guess it's because I have progams that protects my comptuer from all that.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:09AM
mykill at 4:21AM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
Win XP: the Internet Explorer browser is still a liability. I'm glad Microsoft changed their tune and will allow their media player to play mp3s without converting them to wma and no way to turn them back. The XP machine probably is sluggish and you've just not noticed because the change has been so gradual. Having no spyware or virus issues strongly suggests you don't download many games, videos, music or porn - nor do you burn cds into music* -nor do you have friends who do such things and email you regularly.


(* Sony has promised to remove the windows only spyware from their music cds, but in practice this seems to only apply to brand new cds - the market is already flooded with Sony spyware music cds).

The macintosh OSX does play many games very well, but in practice, only the top 10% of games get released for OSX. The new macs that run windows will give mac users a windows partition to play any game they wish - that's about all windows is good for.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
jude_boi at 6:36AM, May 15, 2006
(offline)
posts: 47
joined: 2-23-2006
Personally, I prefer the PC. But i really don't care what other people like, at least when it comes to computers.

But I do have some trouble with the Mac suddenly shutting down programs on me all of sudden. But that happens to PC's, too.

No viruses for Macs? Well, uh dur! How many people use Macs compared to PCs? And if Macs becoem the new preferred buy, then viruses will be designed to destroy these programs, too.

And both can use Microsoft programs.

Hmm…

In conclusion, from personal experience, the only reall big difference between PC's and Macs is the space they take up, the Mac being self contained and the PC being a tower and a monitor. Oh, and price might be, but I haven't really been checking that lately.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:11PM
mykill at 12:23PM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
jude_boi
Personally, I prefer the PC. But i really don't care what other people like, at least when it comes to computers.

But I do have some trouble with the Mac suddenly shutting down programs on me all of sudden. But that happens to PC's, too.

No viruses for Macs? Well, uh dur! How many people use Macs compared to PCs? And if Macs becoem the new preferred buy, then viruses will be designed to destroy these programs, too.

And both can use Microsoft programs.

Hmm…

In conclusion, from personal experience, the only reall big difference between PC's and Macs is the space they take up, the Mac being self contained and the PC being a tower and a monitor. Oh, and price might be, but I haven't really been checking that lately.

Maybe you didn't notice? On a Mac, the application crashes. On a PC, the application crashing often takes down the operating system as well.

It's not that Macs don't ever have viruses written for them, they do. (Unix being a popular internet backbone, it is sensible for real hackers to learn to hack Unix, and OSX is Unix). The main difference is that the OSX kernal is open source.

Why is open source relevant?

Let's say a virus writer writes two viruses, one to attack OSX unix and another to attack WinXP - and releases them online.

Microsoft keeps their kernal a closely gaurded secret, they will not acknowledge that a virus exists until they have a patch for it. Until then the virus can rampage freely. Anti virus software can be very good, but it can only be so good since the Microsoft kernal is unknown, being a trade secret and all - making anti virus companies work in the dark.

Macintosh uses an open source kernal named Darwin. The moment a hacker writes a virus to attack OSX, any software company or individual programmer can write a patch to address the vulnerability, almost instantly -sometimes before Apple is even aware of it. Usually OSX is patched as soon as a theory of virus attack is formed, the virus itself never had a chance.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
SpANG at 2:19PM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 3,105
joined: 1-1-2006
Here's why every windows user should participate in a class action lawsuit against Microsoft.

If you are buying an Operating system, you have a right to expect that operating system to be complete, finished and whole…

Do what now? :twisted:

.: SpANG! :.
“To a rational mind, nothing is inexplicable. Only unexplained.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:51PM
mykill at 4:03PM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
SpANG!
Here's why every windows user should participate in a class action lawsuit against Microsoft.

If you are buying an Operating system, you have a right to expect that operating system to be complete, finished and whole…

Do what now? :twisted:

Do you think you don't buy the operating system that comes installed on a new PC? It's part of the cost, the operating system isn't free. No one runs a registered Windows operating system without paying Microsoft. Just because Dell or another OEM bought Windows from Microsoft to bundle with its computer hardware - doesn't mean you're getting it free - they pass the cost on to you, the customer.

Your computer would be a few hundred dollars cheaper if it came with Linux or no operating system installed. HP experimented with that by the way - cheaper computers with no operating system. I feel every OEM should be required to give you the less expensive option of no operating system or an open source operating system instead of costly Windows.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
gigatwo at 7:07PM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 308
joined: 1-6-2006
I think Spang is talking about pirating. He's got a point too. A lot of people do that with windows. Although I'm pretty dure the most common trick is to borrow someone else's CD and use a crack on the validation system.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:35PM
SpANG at 7:40PM, May 15, 2006
(online)
posts: 3,105
joined: 1-1-2006
actually I do like the IDEA of linux (open source and all). It just seem so foreign to me.

Maybe when it gets a little friendlier looking. :wink:

.: SpANG! :.
“To a rational mind, nothing is inexplicable. Only unexplained.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:51PM
mykill at 12:33PM, May 16, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
Actually, one of the very best things you can do for windows security, is to install Linux on your computer too, as part of a dual boot system. Use the linux partition for all of your e-mail, web browsing and downloading - and you Windows partition will be much more secure.

I reccomend Mandriva linux - It's is VERY friendly and easy to install. A basic gnome or kde desktop windowing system is also friendly and a very similar windowing system to windows.

You need 5-20 gig of spare hard drive space, and you're ready to install Linux along side your WindowsXP.

http://www.mandriva.com/en/downloads

download the ISO images and burn them to CD. Then boot with the first CD in the CD tray, the installation is very easy and it walks you thru such tasks as partitioning your hard drive safely.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
mykill at 12:41PM, May 16, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
If only 1 piece of software on your computer is legitimate and registered, it should be your operating system.

Why?

Because you HAVE TO UPDATE, and it's easy to get caught by Microsoft that way.

Because You NEED installation CDS to fix Windows, find a driver, reinstall Windows, or to reformat the hard drive and reinstall Windows.


Because you want to cash in on the class action lawsuit against Microsoft for selling an incomplete and sabotaged operating system.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
PhatScurl at 6:13PM, May 16, 2006
(offline)
posts: 391
joined: 4-22-2006
BEHOLD ALL!! FOR THE WAR IS OVER! NO LONGER SHALL THERE BE VIOLENCE! NO LONGER SHALL BILL GATES OWN YOUR 5OU7!!
New Macs now have an Intel chip, meaning they now run Windows XP, course, Windows has yet to place a Mac on their computers…so i guess Mac's are just ultimately superior without flaw now.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:43PM
gigatwo at 7:26PM, May 16, 2006
(online)
posts: 308
joined: 1-6-2006
PhatScurl
Windows has yet to place a Mac on their computers.

Wait, but windows has nothing to do with whether a pc can run a mac. Microsoft doesn't control that. A pc with Tux or FreeBSD is still the same standard pc as one with windows. I'm just saying, if you look at that statement it seems kind of strange. If you're running mac on a pc, then you aren't using a windows computer, now are you? (dual booting is an exception)
I'm not trying to be a bastard, I'm just pointing out that widows comps are just pcs running wondows. Microsoft has no (direct) controll over what type of operating system a pc can run. If it were up to them, Windows would be the only OS compatable with the system bios.

Actually,it is entirelly possible to put OSX on a pc. It's been done, but I doubt it ran very smoothly. (I think it was ported to a pcfreindly version, so it's gotta be flawed)
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:35PM
jude_boi at 6:27AM, May 17, 2006
(offline)
posts: 47
joined: 2-23-2006
mykill
jude_boi
Personally, I prefer the PC. But i really don't care what other people like, at least when it comes to computers.

But I do have some trouble with the Mac suddenly shutting down programs on me all of sudden. But that happens to PC's, too.

No viruses for Macs? Well, uh dur! How many people use Macs compared to PCs? And if Macs becoem the new preferred buy, then viruses will be designed to destroy these programs, too.

And both can use Microsoft programs.

Hmm…

In conclusion, from personal experience, the only reall big difference between PC's and Macs is the space they take up, the Mac being self contained and the PC being a tower and a monitor. Oh, and price might be, but I haven't really been checking that lately.

Maybe you didn't notice? On a Mac, the application crashes. On a PC, the application crashing often takes down the operating system as well.

It's not that Macs don't ever have viruses written for them, they do. (Unix being a popular internet backbone, it is sensible for real hackers to learn to hack Unix, and OSX is Unix). The main difference is that the OSX kernal is open source.
Hey hey, I didn't say that no viruses were ever created for thje Mac. It's just it's not as popular a system as the PC. So therefore, what system do you think will there be more viruses for? :!:

And from experience, the Mac has been a total piece of poo. However, the PC has proven to be very crappy as well. But not as crappy as the Mac. This is personal experience. It doesn't bode for everyone.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:11PM
ozoneocean at 12:12PM, May 23, 2006
(online)
posts: 24,789
joined: 1-2-2006
Was this ever intended to be a real debate or simply a “Bash Windows, Buy Mac Instead thread”? Because it seems like the latter. You can do that just as easily in the Top Drawer.
mykill
If only 1 piece of software on your computer is legitimate and registered, it should be your operating system.
Nope, you can get around all of that in a few minutes.
-MY OS is legit. But I've set up nonlegit Windows on a couple of PCs and they run great, they update fine, they continue to get around all checks.
That's not a debate point, just correcting misinformation.
mykill
Maybe you didn't notice? On a Mac, the application crashes. On a PC, the application crashing often takes down the operating system as well.
Again, misinformation… I've had Macs crash on me totally because of applications, just as Windows PCs have in the past. My current two PCs have never done that.
I occurs to me that none of your anti-PC Windows arguments comes from direct current experience… Rather most of it comes from hearsay. That’s not a good way to approach any argument if you want to be taken seriously…

A lot of people's ideas here are flawed. Even the idea that Macs take up less room! You can by Macs that don't take up much room, you can by better ones that take up more room. It's the same with PCs. And how is using Linux any better of an experience than it was when we used DOS and BASIC and stuff like that, because that's what is sounds like… nasty consoles.

I could develop a nasty anti-Mac tirade based on a horrible experience I had doing a large video editing project over the course of several weeks on networked OS-8 Macs… With the amount of work I lost constantly , crashes, Photoshop 4 running like dog’sballs and taking 10 minutes just to rotate an image by a single degree… Or a large print formatting job I was doing using a couple of Windows PCs, an OS-9 Mac and an OS-X Mac and how the OS-9 Mac held up the whole project causing huge delays (it was the only comp with Quark so I HAD to use it)…
But I know that wouldn’t be fair. The ultimate cause of most of my Mac problems has usually been the limitations of the hardware I had to work with at the time, not the OS, similarly with Windows PCs. The main difference is it’s easier and cheaper to address that trouble in a PC. –The main strength of the Windows model.
My most positive experiences with Macs have always been with connecting Mac compatible peripherals and Mac networking. That always works like an absolute dream. –The main strength of the Mac Model.

This “debate” still seems like a good candidate for locking to me…
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:23PM
isukun at 3:02PM, May 23, 2006
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
This argument has come up before, multiple times, and mostly started by mykill. Also, I've seen all the same arguments from him before on these boards (although possibly before the crash). People pointed out that many of them were outdated or false back then, too.

.: isukun :.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:03PM
mykill at 2:17PM, May 30, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
I work on the only Mac in an office full of XP machines I'm routinely asked to troubleshoot. So it's not entirely heresay. I am biased by the fact the only time I use a PC it's to fix a problem tho.

When I first came to Drunk Duck I was based on a Windows PC. I'm also biased by all the trouble that machine gave me (running Win2000 ) before it just up and died….

I admit the Win2000 and XP are both VASTLY superior to Win98se and Windows Millenium - or should be.

The evil of I.E. is not heresay, it's fact. Use Mozilla Firefox.

Really Mac vs PC is PC vs PC - as new Macs on Intel processors can run the inferior WindowsXP too, at will.

MY BF has a Dual processor G5 that will hard crash because he added a stick of substandard ram to it. I've never seen a stock Mac running OSX hard crash and that includes the minimalist Mac Mini I'm using right now.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
Inkmonkey at 12:20PM, June 3, 2006
(online)
posts: 2,220
joined: 1-3-2006
All I can say is that I had a Mac, and it wouldn't run any programs I needed and it ceased functioning for no reason at one point and I had to buy a new computer. Every Mac I've ever used has given me some minor irritation of some sort, and based just on my experience with them, I just don't like the damn things.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:59PM
gigatwo at 2:52PM, June 7, 2006
(online)
posts: 308
joined: 1-6-2006
ozoneocean
And how is using Linux any better of an experience than it was when we used DOS and BASIC and stuff like that, because that's what is sounds like… nasty consoles.
It is, because I like it. It's actually much simpler than you seem to percieve it to be. Although it takes a little bit of time to memorize basic console commands (three or so days if you take the time to look them up), one doesn't have to spend the majority of their time opperating the command prompt. For the most part (depending on what distro or desktop environment you're using) it's similar to windows. You just have to use the command prompt to open up install packages, and the only thing other thing that I've really had to use it for was when I had to have my comp use me SB live soundcard instead of the onboard one.

I dunno, I just can't stand microsoft as a company. (although I can't say that I like macintosh a lot more). They're stuff is overpriced, and Windows vista ripps off of Sun's Project Looking Glass OS. And yet, I've heard people refer to the idea as original.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:35PM
mykill at 1:17PM, June 9, 2006
(online)
posts: 194
joined: 1-11-2006
Well, If your mac experience wasn't with OSX, I'd reccomend you give it a try. Especially the new Macs that run Windows or almost any other OS you wanna throw at it.

Apple prides itself on the software you get for free with a Mac, and they should. It's all top notch software.

That's really why Linux is a kick ass operating system. Not only is Linux STABLE, not only is it virus and spyware resistant - But it runs some of the very best software in the world - and all of it is FREE.

(Open Office, Mozilla, Gimp, Apache, Programming environments, multimedia and more)

Mandriva Linux is my fave, I reccomend it. I reccomend it to all windows users especially - it will install comfortably on 5 gig og hard drive space side by side with Windoze - and if you use Linux for all browsing, downloading and email - your Windoze OS will stay safe and secure indefinitly.

The killer app of OSX, is BSD Unix - which lets me use almost all of the very best open source software Lunux users enjoy, as well as all the raw power (If i were geek enuf to exploit it).
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:09PM
tonik at 4:55PM, July 5, 2006
(offline)
posts: 18
joined: 1-7-2006
I use pc.

However, the main advantage mac has over pc, is that mac has much (read: MUCH) richer color range (color profile) than pc.
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:32PM
Liriel at 9:15PM, July 5, 2006
(offline)
posts: 24
joined: 1-8-2006
That's funny seeing as I draw a black and white comic XD

I'm obviously willing to go into debt for a Mac, so they must be doing something right… Frankly I'm not a tech monkey (got burned trying to keep up to date for PCs back in the day). I just want a stable machine that really plugs and plays without friggin giving me problems every five seconds.

Apple modems suck though. :(

~Liriel
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:35PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved