something about MAC and PC :-))

**** MAC, I still hate them, you can keep the 8 extra FPS


<center>
<font face=verdana size=1>
<img src=http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif>
<a href=mailtoacman@planetunreal.com>Pacman</a>|<a href=http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer>The Redeemer</a>
I wite messeges on money, its my own form of social protest.
A letter printed on paper that no one will destroy.

Uh, 48 - 36 = 12, not 8. Besides, Macs are inherently better. Their proprietary design makes them infinitely more stable. Its creates a small niche market, but you gotta admit -- you can't blame Mac for a lack of software developers -- besides, the best software is always on macs (especially in relation to user-end graphics programs).

Whatever, I was never good with simple math. Aside from that the only thing that MACS have that PC doesn't is SISK processing. Thus a 333 is more comparable to a 400. Whatever and so on and so on, yay MAC, bla bla. All in a nutshell if you want to play a game I would still go for PC.

Sure UT runs nice, but was he using OpenGL on it? Probably, the mac uses OpenGL amazingly, and the Direct 3D is pathetic. Aside from that the systems are very close in comparison. I will give you that. But there is little software support aside from fotoshop sh|t. So I'm not going to give up my PC for something that will run a bit faster with my fotoshop.

<center>
<font face=verdana size=1>
<img src=http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer/images/sig.gif>
<a href=mailtoacman@planetunreal.com>Pacman</a>|<a href=http://www.planetunreal.com/redeemer>The Redeemer</a>
I write messeges on money, its my own form of social protest.
A letter printed on paper that no one will destroy.

Yeah, granted -- I'd use a PC simply because the market exists for it. Unstable as it is, I don't buy a computer to use a paperweight. But, out of curiosity, given the high-end cards, who would take D3D over OpenGL?

If the product support existed for mac (and slowly but surely, it is coming about,) I'd drop my generic brand stuff for a mac in a second -- you know if mac just went to a x86 processor and a fat 32 hard drive system, but kept all the architecture the same, they'd be going strong.

Pacman, its CISC - not "SISK". CISC is what PC's are based on, not Macs. And the PowerPC/Gx series is based on RISC, which is arguably much better.

FreeBSD: The Power to
Serve - <A HREF="http://www.freebsd.org" TARGET="_blank">www.freebsd.org</A>

no, not better. Got preference for.

The PC I use for all my gaming needs. But I never do any of my multimedia work on the PC, I dont even trust my PC while using a wordprocessor. The Mac has a certain elegance to its design and handling which the PC distinctly lacks

stability is partially dependent on the os. windows is increadibly complicated and has an enormous kernal which makes it unstable. it's the price you pay for it not being specialised. on the other hand linuex can be stripped down to fit your needs more exactly and is alot more stable.

Can you spot the sniper?

Too Late!