I am here to debate which is the smarter buy for your money:
A Macintosh or an IBM PC ( or compatible ).
I know there is a long, ongoing debate on which is better, but I cannot stand what is going on. Stores such as Best Buy selling PC's like they are the best thing since sliced bread. They are, you say?
I THINK NOT!
I know you're about sick of this discussion, but hear ( or read )
me out.
This text file is meant to settle this argument once & for all. I welcome
E-Mail from anyone & I can be reached in the following places:
AOL: BVBrain
Exec-PC: Brian Verre
CI$: Not yet!
InterNet: BVBrain.aol@com
Now to the nitty-gritty. I admit the PC is a good computer.
However, it is getting along in age, and becoming outdated by newer, faster,
superior computers. You say I'm full of it, I'm a fool. I'm not.
The IBM computers ( excuse me for this, but I'm not going to say "or compatible
" everytime I mention a PC ). are falling behind, constantly. The Windows idea
was an attempt. But if you look at it, Microsoft was feebly trying to copy the
Macintosh. Sure it's legal, definently immoral, but in fact it's downright
plaguerism. Plain & Simple. Windows 3.1 is nice but incredibly inferior to
a Macintosh interface ( which, for the duration of this article [series?]
will be refered to as a MacGUI & the PC a WinGUI ). Windows NT will be even
better than 3.1, but still worthless compared to the Macintosh System 7.1.
Again the ninnies at MicroSoft are ripping off apple. Now a windows compatible
QuickTime will be initiated. O/S 2 is fast, but unpractical. A 486sx w/ 4 megs
RAM & at least a 80 meg HD ( 40 MB's would be filled w/ O/S 2.0 ). Another
problem with it would be the lack of programs. O/S 2.0 will not ever gain
acclaim as a common operating system. In many, many ways Windows is worthless.
Another way IBM is behind is it's basic file storage/ 11 chars max ( including
the THREE letter indentifier. ). Three chars? Excuse me, but I call that
crap. On the Mac, you have up to 31 chars to name your file, in any caps.
The file indentifiers ( you know, like .EXE ) are stored in the files info.
So a file withe type "TEXT" & the creator "MSWD" would be double clicked
( or launched from within a shell, whatever you prefer ) and would be opened
into Microsoft Word. Same with other files. This allows each file to have a
unique icons, etc.
Even more technically, a IBM PC's files are stored in one data fork. Aaaaan!
Wrong answer. If you changed the file identifier from say, .EXE to .TXT you
would have a major disaster. On a Mac that would not happen. Why not?
On a Mac, data is stored in two data forks. One, the resource fork contains
mostly regulated resources that have four char names. Such as "CODE" resources
for applications. "DITL" would hold coordinates for a window. Etc. There is
also a data fork that goes unregulated, and can be used by applications for
whatever they want.
This brings us to another point. There is no standard for drawing things on
the PC. Most applications use either ANSI or have there own process for
drawing things on the screen. This is just another thing that bogs down
the speed of the already outdated CPU. On the Mac it is very regulated,
having 32-bit color QuickDraw and regulated resources standard. Most people
say these things make the Macintosh a bitch to program on ( which we will
get into later ). Not true. You may have to call the Mac Tool Box ( again,
we will get to this later ), etc, but for example, drawing a line on the
screen would be very simple compared to a PC. You would make a window call,
then give the coordinates for the line. On a PC, you would have to go through
a tenacious process of making ( or using some NON-STANDARD process ) to draw
the line directly to the screen. This is crap. No way, jose!
People call the Macintosh a game machine. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE REASON FOR
SAYING THIS. ALL THE GAMES ARE ON PCs! All the real men use Pc's...
...as expensive paper weights. They are in all ways inferior. If a Mac is
such a game machine, why do expensive TV & Movies use them for graphics?
I know a person who worked on Terminator II, and what did they use?
Macs, of course. The toon cult Ren & Stimpy are drawn on Macs. Many prominent
magazines are designed on MAcintosh computer's. The Macintosh is FAR from a
game machine.
You say a Intel 486sx is a workhorse? It may be, but it is a slower work-
horse than a Motorola 68040. It runs at 66MHz? So? A 33MHz 68040 actually
outpreforms it with a 128k cache. Motorola processors, because of their new
design can preform approx 2 instructions per clock cycle. The "Pentium" (586)
will have 3,000,000 transistors? So? The 68060, a generation ahead because
Motorola skipped the 68050, ( They liked the radical new design of the 68060
better ) will contain 3mil transistors and as usual, out preform the 586.
Possibly even the 686. It will also run at 66MHz.
While we're on the subject of processors, lets talk PowerPC. Why is it in
construction? "To bridge the gap between the two giants". Ya, nice try guys.
The real reason is because IBM is dying, having lost 6 billion dollars in the
last term. Sure, it runs at Spec89f, and it's RISC, lightning fast, etc. It's
a good thing, it is the first step. But the new line of Macs will incorporate
the 68060 with a slot left open for the PowerPC chip. Now, as of today, Feb
24, 1993, IBM as anounced even more layoff's. This time, they cannot make
up for these layoff's.
Enough of the kiddie stuff. This is the real gang buster reason why the Mac
is a superior machine. This is for serious PC user's, like the kind that
can't switch to a Mac because they have custom written software or something
but need the superior power of desktop publishing graphics, etc. There are
software emulators can run PC stuff, but those usually can't get the job
done, even with VGA. THIS IS THE SOLUTION:
T H E O R A N G E P C C A R D ! ! !
What is this magical card? It is a full-fledged IBM PC motherboard, adapted to
work in the Mac Nubus slot. Currently, you can have a 486sx 66MHz, 16 MB's, RAM
SVGA, etc, and a couple other goodies. For $1099!!!!! That's definentely
the thing that beat's anything the PC can offer!
Why won't they make a OrangePC for the PC that has a Mac board? If you don't
already know, it's because of STRICT copyright laws that are heavly enforced.
IBM obviously didn't copyright there BIOs well or something, because everyone
and there grandmother can assemble & market a PC compatible. The last company,
back in '84, that tried to make their own mac compat, got their butt's sued
off. Back when Apple tried to make their first portable, a disaster, they
struck a deal with Outbound to market portables. In January, 1993, Outbound
went out of business, falling behind the NEW, sleek, Apple portables.
Finally, the programming. Sure you might have to follow some ( ok, a lot )
of guidelines, the final product you get on the Mac excels what you get on
an IBM. This is fact. I know a lot of backwards little men that use IBM's
still think a mac is a dinky little toy that has a built in 9" screen & is
Black & White. Not true...
In closing, the IBM computers are sold because IBM stands for:
"Inferior But Marketable"... Many PC user's have agreed with me and said this
was true... You can get them cheap, but will get a cheap product compared to
what you could have on a superior machine, such as the Macintosh.
I WELCOME EVERYONE TO DISTRIBUTE THIS FILE, BUT DO NOT MODIFY IT!
SEND ME COMMENTS AND YOUR VIEWS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHY YOU THINK THE
IBM PC OR COMPAT. IS SUPERIOR IN ANYWAY TO THE MAC! I DON'T WANT COMMENTS FROM
AMIGA AND OTHER SMALL PARY COMPUTER's, AS THEY WILL NEVER BE WORTHWHILE.
These views were expressed by Brian Verre. Following files might become avail.
if I get a good reason to make them. ( such as e-mail debates ).
