Re: My G5 & Leopard

"PC Guy" <pcguy@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
y5udneDKObfNERjanZ2dnUVZ_tyknZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx on 1/9/08 8:09 PM:


"Snit" <CSMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C3AAD6A6.A0E19%CSMA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"PC Guy" <pcguy@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
EMWdnU-3G_o44hjanZ2dnUVZ_rKtnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx on 1/9/08 7:15 PM:

It is an advantage - and a big one - of using a system that is immune
from
the vast, vast majority of all malware a user is likely to encounter...
effectively the risk to OS X users approaches ziltch.

As I said: That's one advantage of using minority system. Fortunately the
alternative doesn't add any appreciable effort to avoid malware.

The advantage is the fact that OS X gets less malware.

As I said: That's one advantage of using minority system. Fortunately the
alternative doesn't add any appreciable effort to avoid malware.

Your beliefs as to the reasons why are irrelevant... and frankly of no
interest to me.

Truth hurts.

As far as the Mac being "underpowered", do you know what machine was
recently deemed to be the fastest at running Windows? Obviously you
do
not.

LOL! Not THIS again. I bet my $650 Gateway system will outperform every
Mac
up to and including the 2.0GHz quad core Mac Pro.

Ah, shall we pick some tasks... do a screen cast of your time and I
shall do
the same. How about getting 10 images from a digital camera, resizing
them,
and then posting them to a website that we can each view. We can look
to see
how good the site looks, too! No fair using a pre-made site (though
pre-existing web/ftp space is fine).

This could be fun. Are you game?

Sounds like a very bad idea.

I never could have guessed you would bow out. LOL!

Too many variables. What camera?

Whatever camera you have. Hey, we can make it the built in camera your
computer has - make it super easy.

Oh.. your computer likely does not have that. OK... any camera.

What pictures?

Anything... the idea is not to have the best pics... just to see who can
complete a task more quickly.

What size for the pictures?

Oh, say max size of a size as 500 px... but whatever you want is fine by
me.

What software to resize?

Whatever you are most productive with, of course.

And what do you mean by "no fair using a pre-made site"?

No fair just uploading to a site made by Picasa or whatever... must make
your own site - though I suppose templates are fine.

What has that to do with the benchmark you're proposing?

You said your computer will outperform any Mac... I have a Mac. Mine is
far
less than the 2 GHz quad core Mac Pro (it is a dual core iMac). Unless
you
think I am simply far more capable than you then you should have no
problem
with this challenge.

Come on... this sounds like fun. What are you afraid of?

No surprise Snit doesn't understand that one should try to make as many
variables equal as possible least the results be biased based on those
differences. No wonder you like those "TCO/ROI studies". LOL!

Oh, and virus scans *do* have a performance penalty... even if you
deny it.

LOL! Man! You have to be one of the most clueless people I have ever
seen.
Here is what I said:

"With a quad-core system and Windows low priority I/O there's no
perceptible
performance impact. Non-issue. "

Note the key word "perceptible" there Snit.

Right. There is a *perceptible* performance impact. Here, a quick test
for
you: you point to whatever settings you think have the least performance
impact with the free version of AVG... I will set my program to use
those and
then we can look at how much CPU and other resources it takes.

Deal... or shall you run?

Snit. I've got FOUR cores. Each running at 2.4GHz. CPU power is NOT going
to
be a problem.

Well, depending on what you are doing. If you are just playing solitaire
you are obviously right.

But if you think you have a point to make take my challenge.

But you won't.

It's pointless Snit. The AV program is single tasking thus leaving three
cores to do something else. I realize you're technically inept so you need
pictures drawn instead of just an explanation but you'll just have to trust
the rest of the world.


A Mac runs just fine without third party software:

So does a Windows system.

Well, other than malware protection, sure.

It runs fine without it too.

As long as you are really careful... maybe.

Maybe.

you can pull a Mac out of the box, plug it in, and then be surfing the
web
far safer than you can with Windows... you can also do all sorts of
other
tasks: read email, do all the cool things you can do with iLife
including
create websites, and on and on. You can, of course, also install other
software, but unlike with Windows you do not have a burning need just
to
keep your computer running well. You *need* AV software on Windows if
you
want it to keep it relatively safe.

Gee, no comment from you PC Guy. I am shocked! :)

What is there to say? I can do all that with Windows.

But you won't take my challenge, above? Gee, why not?

Because there are too many variables making the results worthless for
comparion.

... Nope... I did not mention what years studies I was referring to.
You
made an idiotic jump to ones from long ago - I did no such thing.

So provide references to some of these "recent" studies.

More recent than 1995, easy: the Pfeiffer and Security Awareness
studies of
2006.

This guy seems to have spent his life advocating the Mac. Sorry, not
buying
it.

This guy? Those are two different studies... neither from 1995 (or even
close).

Yes, I am aware of that.

Yet you said these two studies came from "this guy". Odd.

I did not. Go back and read it again. Oh why bother, you've never gotten
anything on subsequent re-readings in the past. Why would I expect you to do
it now?


At least you finally provided a link to the second study. Too many hits
in
Google for "Security Awareness"

I will graciously accept your apology. :)

When you come up with some current studies then you'll get one.

You mean other than the two you just discounted out of hand for no good
reason... LOL!

His a Mac zealot...just like those in this forum. He has an agenda and
surprise, surprise, determines the Mac is more productive. Why don't you
just save yourself the trouble and say "Because I said so"? It has the
same
weight with me (which is NONE).

Here - more info on them:

---------
<http://pfeifferreport.com/Mac_Win_Sample.pdf>
<http://snipurl.com/uvly>
28 Mar 2006: Pfeiffer
* It almost takes twice as long and twice as much to deploy a new
Windows machine vs. a new Mac
* Replacing a dsyfunctional Windows machine costs 45 percent more
than
replacing a dsyfunctional Mac
* Macs are 22 percent more productive in a sample Photoshop workflow
even though the the Windows machine was 2.3 times faster in the
core
loading performance of a 100 mb image. The discrepancy was
explained
by the high "user interface friction" of Windows in executing the
workflow.
* Mouse precision benchmarks show Windows users are prone to make six
times more errors given the same task.

Security Awareness.
<http://snipurl.com/i4m2>
<http://www.macobserver.com/article/2006/03/07.7.shtml>
07 Mar 2006: Security Awareness
The initial cost of a Mac may not be any more than a comparable PC,
and the overall cost of the Mac will be significantly lower.
----------

Another Zealot who "proves" the Mac has a better TCO. Imagine that! Where
are the Gartner studies Snit? You know, someone with a little (little,
what
am I think, make that A LOT) more credibility than "some guys who like
Macs"?

Ah, so I am sure you are just going to slam me with the counter studies...
oh... wait... as far as I know there are none.

Why bother? With > 90% market what would be the value?

No study, *ever*, that I know of, has found Windows to have better ROI or
TCO than the Mac. Ever. And you simply discount the studies that show
otherwise... first *lying* about them coming from 1995

You deny there were studies done in 1995?

and then just whining and making up stories about the people doing the
studies.

What stories have I made up? I merely commented they were biased.


And PC Guy panics in 3... 2... 1...

What do you know - I was exactly correct.


--
When I'm working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only
how
to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not
beautiful, I know it is wrong. -- R. Buckminster Fuller



You mention how "truth hurts". I have no doubt that for you it does. For
me that is not the case.

You keep running back to your theory as to why OS X has less malware as if
your views on it matter or if the reason why is relevant to the fact that it
is a clear advantage over Windows. Hint: your opinion as to why is
irrelevant to the fact that OS X users have a huge advantage over Windows
user here.

The fact you run from a contest to see if your machine (run by you) is more
capable than mine (run by me) is not a surprise. You made a claim you know
is not true or, at best, you are afraid to test. You simply are not willing
to test your claim. Note: I am. I have little doubt I would run circles
around you - ending up with a better product produced in less time.

You also ran from my offer to test if AVG can be set to have effectively no
impact on CPU usage and other areas which impact performance. Once again: I
have called you on your BS and you ran away with your tail between your
legs.

And then when it turned out your initial claims of being outdated did not
apply to the TCO/ROI studies I was referring to between OS X and Windows you
merely discounted the studies out of hand insisting that they must be
biased... but offered *no* support nor any other study that you thought was
handled better.

Such is life... you simply will crawl around with no legs to stand on.




--
Computers are incredibly fast, accurate, and stupid: humans are incredibly
slow, inaccurate and brilliant; together they are powerful beyond
imagination. --Albert Einstein

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Giz Explains: Why OS X Shrugs Off Viruses Better Than Windows
    ... malware than the Mac, the Mac must have magic pixie dust (which Mac fans ... cannot explain) to protect it. ... They present "Unix" as a sort of totem, which is supposed to drive off malware like evil spirits. ... We can see that the product itself is a much softer target than Windows these days; we can see that Apple is not putting much effort into the technical side of security. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Damn Im Good!
    ... Windows advocates are being dishonest when they claim that they do not ... which could detect this piece of malware. ... All Mac users also DO and HAVE TO own Windows ... analyzing DNA sequences (for the purposes of designing PCR primers, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Damn Im Good!
    ... Windows advocates are being dishonest when they claim that they do not ... which could detect this piece of malware. ... All Mac users also DO and HAVE TO own Windows ... analyzing DNA sequences (for the purposes of designing PCR primers, ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Mac Pro Price Trounces Dell
    ... research the specifics on the malware that I specifically mentioned, ... MB of graphics files in the public directories, ... higher ROI for the Macintosh Mac users still choose the PC. ... But yet he went and bought a Windows system for ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: My G5 & Leopard
    ... vast majority of all malware a user is likely to encounter... ... I bet my $650 Gateway system will outperform every Mac ... less than the 2 GHz quad core Mac Pro. ... "With a quad-core system and Windows low priority I/O there's no perceptible ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)