home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
- From: mustang@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Paul Christopher Miranda (I love Cheese))
- Newsgroups: alt.cyberspace
- Subject: Re: Macintosh VR
- Message-ID: <84081@ut-emx.uucp>
- Date: 20 Nov 92 20:58:44 GMT
- References: <74097@apple.Apple.COM> <Bxrqtu.DGw@rahul.net>
- Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp
- Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
- Lines: 63
-
- In article <Bxrqtu.DGw@rahul.net> jonathan@rahul.net (Jonathan Heiliger) writes:
- >In article <74097@apple.Apple.COM> billc@Apple.COM (Bill Cockayne) writes:
- >
- >>As for forgetting the Mac, you seem to forget that one of the Macintosh
- >>computers is presently the FASTEST pc on the market (yes it blows 586 machines
- >>away) (oh yeah, don't compare a pc running DOS to a Mac, DOS is outdated).
-
- Sorry, but the MAC OS is so fat and disgusting that it cripples the otherwise
- good Motorola hardware.
-
- > Not really. A 68040 doesn't even come close to Intel's 486/66MHz DX chip
- >which is in a public/beta stage. The Plantim will most definately beat away
- >the 68040, even after the accerlation. That was Apple's mistake to not make
- >any higher end machines but to attempt to steal the 386 market away instead.
-
- Apple is selling on it's strengths of being a very easy to use OS for people
- who don't want to know about computers, just use them..
- I doubt there is anyone knowledgeable who believes that the 486 is faster thanb
- the 040.. (even Intel engineers I would wager)..
-
- A Mac/PC or Intel/Moto argument is pretty useless so if you want to argue this,
- use e-mail.. A good argument is which platform is better for VR...
-
- 1. cost - PC's are dirt cheap.. Macs are overpriced.
- 2. processor power - as I said.. i believe the 040 is faster than a 486 so
- that would be in the Mac's favor, but it's not a big enough difference
- to be worth it.
- 3. video power - In common, stock configuration (A Mac LC vs SVGA for example)
- The Mac OS has more overhead than the PC and is slower.
- In high-end configuration, a quadra has much improved performance, but
- so do PC video boards.. no winner here.
- 4. mass storage - about the same.
- 5. input devices - they both have cheap mice at the low end, higher end devices
- require alternate interfacing so there is still no winner
- 6. programming - VR demands assembly language routines and anyone who has
- programmed in x86 and 68k will tell you that x86 is scary and nasty
- the Mac platform wins here
- 7. market - the PC market is absolutely huge.. Mac is big too, but the installed
- base of PCs cannot be beat.
-
- my conclusion.. the PC is a superior platform because it is cheaper and has less
- OS overhead..
- If anyone can think of some other points of comparison, let it rip!
-
- Part II :
-
- forget part one, shell out the extra bucks and buy an Amiga 4000.. the graphics
- speed stomps anything but high-end (expensive) boards, it has the superior
- processor (IMO), the OS is supportive to applications (it has true multitasking,
- something both previous platforms lack), it may not be as friendly as a Mac, but
- it provides much more power and control. Programming is a shear joy with the
- latest generation of compilers (use C and recode the guts as necessary).
- As for price, it goes for ~ 2500 last time I checked.. I think the extra cost
- is worth it.
-
- Remember: any responses to this should be on the basis of a machine's suitability
- for VR, not spreadsheets!
-
-
- --
- "I have feelings too, I just choose to | Paul Miranda likes cheese
- to hide them underneath bitter denial" | mustang@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
- -- Ms. Musso on "Parker Lewis" (FOX TV) | -- THIS SPACE FOR RENT --
-