Cal Club Autocross Forums

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Aaron Goldsmith wrote:Oh man, I am SO glad I haven't been reading this thread. Oh platform wars, you're so quaint.

It is a riot when the Apple FanBoys get all geeked up and they need to be reminded who's boss!
And also if all that Bucky said was true then why isn't Apple dominating the PC market? It's because Microsoft just took over and did it better (at least from a sales/marketing perspective). Also in all the college engineering departments and Comp Sci classes, all the computer languages that students learn they program on Linux O/S on Sun machines or PCs running Windows (i.e. ASP, .NET, Java, C, C++ C#, Oracle PL/SQL, etc...) They don't do it on Macs.

And don't you find it ironic that a Mac user wants to run Windows (based on the subject title of this thread)? Why does the OP (original poster) need Windows when he's got the Saviour O/S Mac?? Riddle me that Batman

Gio, did you write this post Ironicly? I've got nothing against Macs myself, I buy what i wanna buy and other people can buy what they want, what do I care about convincing them that they're wrong or right?

Aaron Goldsmith wrote:Gio, did you write this post Ironicly? I've got nothing against Macs myself, I buy what i wanna buy and other people can buy what they want, what do I care about convincing them that they're wrong or right?

Yes I did. Yeah I have nothing against them either, but when fanboys say Macs should be on every desktop replacing PCs, I cringe. It's why there's a free market. Each has it's own strengths and weaknesses. I love PCs....but for music....hands-down Apple iPod beats any MP3 player out there. Even the iPad looks slick. Though for phones, I don't need a smartphone regardless of whatever brand (iPhone, Droid, Blackberry). Macs have their following and great at certain things and are slick as well. To each his own.

In my opinion, the reason can be a backlash to what is seen as an Apple marketed superiority that some of the fanboys cling to. You know... "our stuff is so easy to use, not crazy hard like the PCs, and those viruses and the hardware that requires one to set IRQs and be an IT expert." Most of that is old history really. So you hear enough of that, as a PC user and you want to push back a little.

As I said very early on in this thread, the interface is not "better" for either, it is more what one is used to using. Either seems to work fine. I love my Dell XPS laptop and my Fujitsu Lifebook, and my iPad. All fine for general stuff. But all are just tools. I don't get too emotional about them. Same with phones. Use your iphone, crackberry, droid, brick... whatever floats your boat.

By the way, I worked with the studios for Robert Zemeckis/Disney and they used banks of PCs for production work. There may have been some Macs also. And some Unix machines. Whatever tool worked right?

Randy Chase wrote:Whatever tool worked right?

Exactly. Here at DTV, the production dept for making commercials have Macs but the rest of the engineering dept, has all PCs.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:And you call a Mac a toy? A niche market isn't a toy, especially when that niche market is worth $10.3 billion in ticket sales. That doesn't include DVD sales and broadcast revenue for theatrical releases or TV and commercial production. Yeah, just a toy used a niche. Whatever, MicroBoy.

Total f'ing toys. Expensive toys. Now with all that said, yeah it's a slick toy and for surfing the web and watching vids, make photos, and pretty pictures for wallpaper, yeah get a Mac.

Clueless to the end. I don't consider a Mac Pro, with its aluminum case, heavy duty power supply and six fans to be either overpriced or a toy. You might not think that real work is done on these machines, but industries worth billions of dollars worldwide prove you're wrong.

The Dell Optiplex 780 that's under my desk at work is a big piece of plastic. :unimpressed:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:And you call a Mac a toy? A niche market isn't a toy, especially when that niche market is worth $10.3 billion in ticket sales. That doesn't include DVD sales and broadcast revenue for theatrical releases or TV and commercial production. Yeah, just a toy used a niche. Whatever, MicroBoy.

Total f'ing toys. Expensive toys. Now with all that said, yeah it's a slick toy and for surfing the web and watching vids, make photos, and pretty pictures for wallpaper, yeah get a Mac.

Clueless to the end. I don't consider a Mac Pro, with its aluminum case, heavy duty power supply and six fans to be either overpriced or a toy. You might not think that real work is done on these machines, but industries worth billions of dollars worldwide prove you're wrong.

The Dell Optiplex 780 that's under my desk at work is a big piece of plastic. :unimpressed:

But my Dell XPS 730 same as your Mac Pro isn't overpriced. Again Bob, you're getting drunk with the Kool-aid.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Aaron Goldsmith wrote:Oh man, I am SO glad I haven't been reading this thread. Oh platform wars, you're so quaint.

It is a riot when the Apple FanBoys get all geeked up and they need to be reminded who's boss!
And also if all that Bucky said was true then why isn't Apple dominating the PC market? It's because Microsoft just took over and did it better (at least from a sales/marketing perspective). Also in all the college engineering departments and Comp Sci classes, all the computer languages that students learn they program on Linux O/S on Sun machines or PCs running Windows (i.e. ASP, .NET, Java, C, C++ C#, Oracle PL/SQL, etc...) They don't do it on Macs.

And don't you find it ironic that a Mac user wants to run Windows (based on the subject title of this thread)? Why does the OP (original poster) need Windows when he's got the Saviour O/S Mac?? Riddle me that Batman

Schenker ISN'T a Mac user. He's a Windows user who wants a nicer appliance to make his toast with. :gpower: Bill explained his reasons back in posts he made before you started reading the thread. ;)

And Aaron, Gio is the one defending Microsoft-based PCs as if his manhood depends on it.

I didn't use either Mac or PC when I took computer science because neither was much of a business in 1983 and they hadn't made it in to computer science labs yet. Dumb terminals connected to a DEC running Dartmouth Basic. As for Microsoft's domination, it wasn't the company's own marketing that got them ahead, Gio, it was signing a contract with IBM. Word and Excel were MS's success in squashing other competitors in the desktop software market. It was the advent of expanding MS:DOS, and later its GUI layer, onto other company's machines that eventually spread Windows onto more desktops. Twenty years later, IBM is out of the desktop/laptop business entirely. Steve Ballmer wants to buy Yahoo! and Apple has a larger market cap than Microsoft.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:And Aaron, Gio is the one defending Microsoft-based PCs as if his manhood depends on it.

I just love tweaking mac fan boys like Mako who think Mac's can cook you dinner, and clean the house while downloading pics from his camera!

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:As for Microsoft's domination, it wasn't the company's own marketing that got them ahead, Gio, it was signing a contract with IBM. Word and Excel were MS's success in squashing other competitors in the desktop software market. It was the advent of expanding MS:DOS, and later its GUI layer, onto other company's machines that eventually spread Windows onto more desktops. Twenty years later, IBM is out of the desktop/laptop business entirely. Steve Ballmer wants to buy Yahoo! and Apple has a larger market cap than Microsoft.

Bob I don't need a history lesson on how it got all started...I already went to college and been through it. Also Uncle Larry (Oracle) wants to buy Apple (even I think he's insane). Yes Apple is huge right now and I wish I bought their stock back in the day. Not knocking the company, just the fanboys.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:
Clueless to the end. I don't consider a Mac Pro, with its aluminum case, heavy duty power supply and six fans to be either overpriced or a toy. You might not think that real work is done on these machines, but industries worth billions of dollars worldwide prove you're wrong.

The Dell Optiplex 780 that's under my desk at work is a big piece of plastic. :unimpressed:

But my Dell XPS 730 same as your Mac Pro isn't overpriced. Again Bob, you're getting drunk with the Kool-aid.

Gio, I've used computers you've never even heard of. I pick the tools I use because I like how they're built and what they can do. Price and popularity are considerations by don't rank that high on the list. The M3 fanboy complaining about the price of something? That's guzzling some fermented Kool-Aid.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:Gio, I've used computers you've never even heard of. I pick the tools I use because I like how they're built and what they can do. Price and popularity are considerations by don't rank that high on the list.

That's fine. I don't pick popularity either. I pick the platform for my personal needs (gaming, and programming) and pricing and support. And also remember that Apple is a closed proprietary O/S along with the hardware. If they opened it up, then Microsoft would REALLY have to be fearful.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:The M3 fanboy complaining about the price of something? That's guzzling some fermented Kool-Aid.

Oh don't even bring up the M3 crap. Even I know M3s are getting more and more bloated, but still would take one over a Subaru Now with that said it is sad that the M3 barely beat the Mustang in R&T test by Randy Pobst. BMW has lost their way a little bit. I admit it. I'm a fan of the previous gen BMW M3s.

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:Gio, I've used computers you've never even heard of. I pick the tools I use because I like how they're built and what they can do. Price and popularity are considerations by don't rank that high on the list.

That's fine. I don't pick popularity either. I pick the platform for my personal needs (gaming, and programming) and pricing and support. And also remember that Apple is a closed proprietary O/S along with the hardware. If they opened it up, then Microsoft would REALLY have to be fearful.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:The M3 fanboy complaining about the price of something? That's guzzling some fermented Kool-Aid.

Oh don't even bring up the M3 crap. Even I know M3s are getting more and more bloated, but still would take one over a Subaru Now with that said it is sad that the M3 barely beat the Mustang in R&T test by Randy Pobst. BMW has lost their way a little bit. I admit it. I'm a fan of the previous gen BMW M3s.

I don't do any gaming or programming. It's about Photoshop, Lightzone and other image editing tools.

I would pick M3 and it's not based on price, although you'll get that argument; I'd pick it over the Lexus IS equivalent most likely if Lexus made such a thing.

Which Mustang? The new Boss 302 is a lot different than the typical Mustang GT. The words "special Mustang" usual leave me yawning, but Ford put a lot more real work into the 302 to enhance performance.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:I would pick M3 and it's not based on price, although you'll get that argument; I'd pick it over the Lexus IS equivalent most likely if Lexus made such a thing.

Lexus' IS class is the closest to the M series. By the way did you know Infinity tried to pull the crap of naming a series-model lineup M series?? Munich went ape-sh** and sued.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:Which Mustang? The new Boss 302 is a lot different than the typical Mustang GT. The words "special Mustang" usual leave me yawning, but Ford put a lot more real work into the 302 to enhance performance.

Found the article, and sorry it wasn't Road & Track but from MotorTrend, and it was just the Mustang GT, not the Boss 302. Here's the link with Randy Pobst test driving both

2011 Ford Mustang GT vs. 2011 BMW M3 MotorTrend article

Giovanni Jaramillo wrote:

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:I would pick M3 and it's not based on price, although you'll get that argument; I'd pick it over the Lexus IS equivalent most likely if Lexus made such a thing.

Lexus' IS class is the closest to the M series. By the way did you know Infinity tried to pull the crap of naming a series-model lineup M series?? Munich went ape-sh** and sued.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:Which Mustang? The new Boss 302 is a lot different than the typical Mustang GT. The words "special Mustang" usual leave me yawning, but Ford put a lot more real work into the 302 to enhance performance.

Found the article, and sorry it wasn't Road & Track but from MotorTrend, and it was just the Mustang GT, not the Boss 302. Here's the link with Randy Pobst test driving both

2011 Ford Mustang GT vs. 2011 BMW M3 MotorTrend article

Last time I drove an IS it was the F, which isn't quite the same thing as the 300 was and 350 is. I did a comparison test of the BMW 330 vs. IS 300. The 330 won but it was close.

The M3 shouldn't give that much up to a Mustang GT. OTOH, Ford's stated goal with the 302 was to turn a faster lap time at Laguna Seca than the M3. I suspect they've probably got that given how close the GT was in Randy's tests at Streets of Willow Springs. BMW has allowed the luxury of the 7 Series to creep down into the 3 and that's hurt the car on weight.

Bob Beamesderfer wrote:BMW has allowed the luxury of the 7 Series to creep down into the 3 and that's hurt the car on weight.

Can you talk to the boys in Munich? I mean Weight Watchers is a serious understatement. Even the new racing version of the (pics URL -->) M3 GTS (the orange one...hey QC would love this one) hasn't been exactly lighting up the timesheets: URL -->AutoBlog - M3 GTS

Somewhat back on topic...

I'm about to do this. Just ordered a bigger hard drive and Parallels 6. I plan on doing this for two reasons:

1. ChaseCam software if for PC. (Although I can't find it now, I swear I saw that somewhere in the small print.)
2. Move the club accounting off of my work computer. I use Quickbooks.

Everything else will be Mac.

Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

KJ Christopher wrote:Somewhat back on topic...
Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

If you have more than 4GB of RAM (and/or you want to use more than 4GB for Windows) , it might make sense to get the 64 bit version, as the 32 can only recognize up to 4GB.

Also, I don't think ChaseCam is a 64-bit application (someone correct me if I am wrong). If it's not, then I don't see why you'd want to run 64 bit.

KJ Christopher wrote:Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

I say 64-bit because this is a new install and 64-bits is where everything's heading. You don't want to find yourself in a situation in a few years where there's that one program that's 64-bit only...

Thanks. I currently have 4MB or RAMM and I believe that is the limit for my machine. However, that could change in the future if I update to a MacBookPro.

I'll go ahead with the 64-bit.

KJ Christopher wrote:Somewhat back on topic...

I'm about to do this. Just ordered a bigger hard drive and Parallels 6. I plan on doing this for two reasons:

1. ChaseCam software if for PC. (Although I can't find it now, I swear I saw that somewhere in the small print.)
2. Move the club accounting off of my work computer. I use Quickbooks.

Everything else will be Mac.

Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

Quick hint: You might want to consider NT, not 7. NT is very stable (it's what I use on Fusion on my Mac) and I've heard the consumer versions of Windows (e.g.7) aren't so much.

Answer to your question, 64 bit version of Windows allows more data throughput, so theoretically it's faster. However the software your're using has to be written as a 64-bit version to take advantage of the additional throughput.

Since KJ doesn't need a full service OS to just run Chasecam software on his MacBook ... what about a simpler system ... Linux, or ?

Kurt Rahn wrote: Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

Quick hint: You might want to consider NT, not 7. NT is very stable (it's what I use on Fusion on my Mac) and I've heard the consumer versions of Windows (e.g.7) aren't so much.
[/quote]


1993 called, they want their Windows NT floppies back.

Mako Koiwai wrote:Since KJ doesn't need a full service OS to just run Chasecam software on his MacBook ... what about a simpler system ... Linux, or ?

Ick. Linux. I've used several varieties of Linux over the years (my fave has been Ubuntu so far), but trying to get the same level of functionality you get out of a Windows or Mac system (and programs that run on them) can be a bit of a pain if you're not comfortable dealing with command lines, .config files, and programming. It's a wonderful community, but it's VERY DIY and most computer users are not. No thanks.

Steve Ekstrand wrote:

Kurt Rahn wrote: Question: Do I want 32 bit or 64 bit W7? Why do I care?

Quick hint: You might want to consider NT, not 7. NT is very stable (it's what I use on Fusion on my Mac) and I've heard the consumer versions of Windows (e.g.7) aren't so much.

Windows 7 has been pretty stable in the time I've spent in it, but it can be slooooow when things aren't working perfectly. My favorite has been Windows 2000, though XP has been pretty good to me since I finally moved to it last year (I never had a reason to switch until the newer versions of Quicktime and iTunes stopped working in 2000).

but it's VERY DIY and most computer users are not.

Karen's brother likes Ubuntu on his something like 10 PC's ... but then he taught university level computer science.

My porn doesn't stream well on CP/M.