Mr_Odwin Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 And yes classic screws up the quality of the video when I maximise it, I've got one monitor using original, one monitor using classic and I can tell the difference between the two, both playing the same thing. Perhaps it's the choice of resizer in view>options>output? Try using bicubic rather than bilinear. If it's not that then it may be that mplayer2 (the name of the exe you like) is using different splitters/decoders.
Sanchez Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 You raise more questions than you answer, Sanchez. Can you answer all the questions you raised? I think I answered all the questions I raised, apart from the ones that were meant to be rhetorical. I did use too many I would say. No, it doesn't lose to much space just for the sake of looking good. This is up to the user. Watch what I can do to my documents folder. I don't know how much better OSX is for file exploring, I rarely use it but I hear an increasing number of people complaining about Finder. And you do have to watch out for virusses, not? Think about every mail you open, about every file and make sure that windows verified your acces ('Are you really sure you want to open that file? Yes. Really? Yes. Really? Stop bugging me, Windows!'). All my spam gets spammed automatically and if one gets through gmail would catch it or not let me download it. Then you complain about UAC which you can turn off in less than a minute, like I did. On mac you can open what you want, chances of finding a virus are small. And the latest hack people found in Apple's latest and greatest OS takes nine hours of an open safari window (no closing!) to work. Au contraire to hacking into Windows in a matter of minutes. What are the circumstances? OSX will be more secure for the foreseeable future but these "hacking into windows" in a minute is with exploits that are usually patched by tuesday. I've never seen an article about how easy windows is to hack with a fully up to date system. And come on, you're totally off course with your 'Do I care about iLife? DO I care about the weight of my laptop?'. To be honest, everyone cares about the weight off their laptop. I think that's why Apple's very first portable computer didn't sell. My point was every user puts a different price on ever feature, I have no idea that's how off course on the topic of "PC vs Mac Price Comparisons" it may not be groundbreaking, but at least it works and makes it easy to get your movies from any digital camera to your PC without having to scroll through ninehundred drivers Dated presumption, windows will automatically detect and support 99% of cameras out there and seventy applications before I have my movie burned on DVD. Just two applications, one to cut it, one to write it. Usually just nero does it? Oh, and MacOS X sells one edition against Windows that sells six. One edition with all the features. One. Not two like XP or six like vista, but one. To use Steve Jobs' words: X Starter Edition: $99. 'Mac OS X Home Basic edition: $99. Mac OS X Home Premium Edition: $99. MacOS X Business Edition: $99. macOS X Enterprise Edition: $99. MacOS X Ultimate Edition: $99. Sounds like a fair deal, no? And I'm not counting the server editions just yet, pal. Yes, Choice sounds like a terrible thing. You're totally off track and just searching to offend people, Sanchez. At least use viable arguments to prove yourself and not just questions to answer questions. I think you're taking offence from stuff that isn't offensive and my arguments are valid.
Jasper Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Choice sounds like a terrible thing? Why don't we give the entire OS (let's call this one Mac OS X Ultimate) for half the price of Windows Vista Home Preium. Now why do we need choice if we get everything and then we can choose what we use, whilst paying less than if I choose for an OS that leaves me less choice of things to do. No really, wouldn't everyone trade in our 'choice of OS' for 'one full-featured OS with choice of what to do?'. Really, your perception of choices makes no compelling argument. An increasing number of people complain about finder? I guess you read that on a site that doesn't know that a mac use a mouse as well, and that switched the iPhone for Nokia's latest and reviewed it as 'spectaculairy apple-crap'. You know what I mean.
Caris Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Ant is right. VLC is king, it is the best media player on a Mac or PC.
Sanchez Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Choice sounds like a terrible thing? Why don't we give the entire OS (let's call this one Mac OS X Ultimate) for half the price of Windows Vista Home Preium. Now why do we need choice if we get everything and then we can choose what we use, whilst paying less than if I choose for an OS that leaves me less choice of things to do. No really, wouldn't everyone trade in our 'choice of OS' for 'one full-featured OS with choice of what to do?'. Really, your perception of choices makes no compelling argument. You're going off track, this is about the price comparisons between PC's and Mac's, not windows and OSX. An increasing number of people complain about finder? I guess you read that on a site that doesn't know that a mac use a mouse as well, and that switched the iPhone for Nokia's latest and reviewed it as 'spectaculairy apple-crap'. You know what I mean. Nope, Digg. MPC Boo Do you like VLC?
Jasper Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 You're going off track, this is about the price comparisons between PC's and Mac's, not windows and OSX. If you're wrong, I'm off track? Hey, OS is important none the less if you buy a computer and if we aqre talking about the value of a computer, the OS has a play in that too. So if you want to know how much Apple's are overpriced, then try checking the OS. The OS itself is worth the overpricing. Don't say I'm of ftrack when you're too stuborn to admit you were wrong about the choice-thing. Sigh. You're tiring me.
KKOB Posted August 14, 2007 Author Posted August 14, 2007 Lets keep this monetary eh?! Bringing up unique differences and things that directly effect a potential buyer is fine, but don't get squabbling. The different versions of Vista could confuse a normal buyer, where as with a Mac you get everything.
Sanchez Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 If you're wrong, I'm off track? Hey, OS is important none the less if you buy a computer and if we aqre talking about the value of a computer, the OS has a play in that too. So if you want to know how much Apple's are overpriced, then try checking the OS. The OS itself is worth the overpricing. Don't say I'm of ftrack when you're too stuborn to admit you were wrong about the choice-thing. Sigh. You're tiring me. And quite frankly sir, you're tiring me because I'm near enough certain you know I have valid arguments that you can't disregard. Meanwhile, you have called me stubborn because I made one reply against your choice argument. What about linux? Why are you ignoring the value and price of linux and just whining about windows in a mac vs. PC thread is what I wanted to imply.
Caris Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 This topic is totally ufair. You can't compare a Computer with OSX and Windows through price. I mean, there both just a disk and about £100 but totally diffrent. If it was something like Dell vs HP then yeah that would be okay.
KKOB Posted August 14, 2007 Author Posted August 14, 2007 This topic is totally ufair. You can't compare a Computer with OSX and Windows through price. I mean, there both just a disk and about £100 but toally diffrent. If it was something like Dell vs HP then yeah that would be okay. Thats kinda my argument as well. But people still insist about bitching that Macs cost waaaaaay more than equally spec'd PCs when it's just not true. £100 or so is worth it for iLife and the gorgeous notebooks and the iMacs. And these shouldn't really be compared to PCs. But people like to compare so.
Jasper Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Oh, and by the way: th OS and the design (but the design has no actual retail price) are the only things that differntiate the computers apart. So the OS has to satisfy the £100 price difference, no? That's why it turned out OS vs. OS again.
McPhee Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Choice sounds like a terrible thing? Why don't we give the entire OS (let's call this one Mac OS X Ultimate) for half the price of Windows Vista Home Preium. Now why do we need choice if we get everything and then we can choose what we use, whilst paying less than if I choose for an OS that leaves me less choice of things to do. Are you talking about the standalone OS price here? OS X costs £80, yes? http://www.ebuyer.com/UK/product/116448 Vista on the other hand is £118 for a boxed retail version, or £52 for the student edition (both Home Premium, the main SKU). So this makes Vista overpriced by £38? Yes? Wrong! If you are buying the Tiger disk then you already own a Mac and a copy of OS X. It cannot be installed on any other *type of* computer without hacks. This makes it an upgrade, not a retail boxed OS. A Windows CD on the other hand is far more valuable as it can be installed on any computer, PC or Mac and you don't have to own the OS in order to buy the OS Sorry for pulling the thread off track again, i just had to point out that little oversight in the comparrison
Jasper Posted August 14, 2007 Posted August 14, 2007 Do you have proof of this? Since you're making a valid point - but not one I was aware off, if it's even true. And if you buy a mac, you get a full install CD boxed with it. And I think you're wrong since you can move your OS to another drive and reinstall it again using a copy of the OS disc. But you could be right, McPhee.
Guest Jordan Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Thats why i never come into these bitch fests anymore...
McPhee Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Do you have proof of this? Since you're making a valid point - but not one I was aware off, if it's even true. And if you buy a mac, you get a full install CD boxed with it. And I think you're wrong since you can move your OS to another drive and reinstall it again using a copy of the OS disc. But you could be right, McPhee. I should have worded that better. I meant you can't install OS X on anything that isn't a Mac, i.e. anyone that is buying OS X is either upgrading or has lost their disk. This makes the OS X disks closer to upgrades than a retail OS. The hacks part was a reference to installing OS X on a PC Thats why i never come into these bitch fests anymore... You still read them though :p I have an excuse, im supposed to read them...
Jasper Posted August 15, 2007 Posted August 15, 2007 Yeah - but still. In essence, you're not allowed to install Vista on any other computer than the first you install it on (that's officially, though), so at that end you have the same comparison on mac, except you have to buy a mac and have little choice of what to buy. Yes, but I think you get my point. So still, the OS is the most important value addition.
KKOB Posted August 15, 2007 Author Posted August 15, 2007 Is there anything extra that you get when you buy a new PC? I know Sony have given stuff like photoshop elements and stuff away with it's Vaios, but is there anyother non-bloatware apps that i've been unaware of?
Wesley Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 Is there anything extra that you get when you buy a new PC? I know Sony have given stuff like photoshop elements and stuff away with it's Vaios, but is there anyother non-bloatware apps that i've been unaware of? I got more free stuff when I've bought Windows based machines than I did with my Mac. I'd say that my Mac came with more "bloatware".
KKOB Posted August 16, 2007 Author Posted August 16, 2007 I got more free stuff when I've bought Windows based machines than I did with my Mac. I'd say that my Mac came with more "bloatware". Only bloatware i got with my mac were two 30 day trials. iWork and M$ Office. With my old laptop i had lord knows how many, probably more than 10, crappy apps which i didn't want or need installed on it from the manufacturer. What comes with Windows that is say comparable to something like iLife, or even silly like Comic Life (i think it's called).
Sanchez Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 There are pc's that come with games, my friend got 4 of them with his. Some PC's come with Nero, etc.
McPhee Posted August 16, 2007 Posted August 16, 2007 It depends on the manufacturer. I've seen one that had Half Life 2, Photoshop, Office and loads of other stuff pre-installed. Then again i've also seen computers with nothing useful and loads of bloat (like Quicktime and AOL trials)
Jasper Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 So generally, when you're buying a PC, you're jus guessing on what software you egt on it. Flip a coin and hope that it's good - but with a little bad luck and you're stuck with worthless trials and spyware. With macs you have a lot of software pre-installed, but most of it works and has a use, a function, and can be found on the Apple website to be included in your sparkly-white mac. So in essence, this means that you have better software coming with your mac for sure. And maybe you've got good software on Windows. But again, with mac that means it adds value to the package - you're assured you've got iLife. With Windows you're assured of barely anything. Like someone used as a counterpoint: 'you just use NERO to burn your discs' - NERO is not an application that comes pre-installed on every computer, that depends on the manufacturer. Application add value to macs, but not to Windows, since you barely know what you'l get untill you open the package.
Recommended Posts