Best phone camera 2016/2017: Galaxy S7 vs iPhone 7 vs Google Pixel vs HTC 10 Evo vs OnePlus 3T vs…
I was back in PC World on Thurs Powerless and looking at the mini-mac, I liked very much what I saw until I looked at the end of the row and saw the Powermac with a 21" monitor £1,800 complete, played with it for almost an hour and absolutely bowled over with its features and beauty.
I'm now doing some serious thinking on my present set up, do I keep the reasonably powerful PC I have at the moment and buy the Powermac, or wait for longhorn and a new Laptop to go with it. I was very tempted to get the plastic out or take advantage of taking it home there and then and pay in 12 months.
Only the thought of what my wife would say stopped me from committing wife assisted suicide! I'm working nice and easy on her at the moment and she is now using the net more and more to find info on the crafts/hobbies she does. I mentioned the other night it would be better for us to have 2 machines so that she does not have to wait for me to take a break. "Seems a good idea" came the reply. Almost there!!
I clearly need lessons on how to do that. Any such suggestion is met with absolute incredulity.
There is another factor...
Macs will ship with Intels processors next year and the transition will be complete by 2007. And Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard will be going head to head with 'Longhorn' according to Steve Jobs.
I wouldn't go near the Power Mac as its dual G5's would be twiddling their thumbs as I wouldn't have anything intense to throw at them. It would also be great to have one of those ACD's...but It wouldn't be used as it's meant to be. For me I would go for the iMac, cheaper :-)
big G5s - unless you have some work that warrants their sheer processing power, plus that unique Mac 'feel' it's very difficult to justify the expense.
Having recently completed my first homebuild and been forced to replace the laptop, my chances of survival if a walked through the door with another new PC, Mac or otherwise would be very slender.
I contemplated buying one but decided that it didn't do anything more than a PC and was a trifle expensive considering it was sans monitor. Binned the idea.
I think it was an absolute bargain. The 1.25Ghz with just 256Mb of ram. I upgraded the module to 1 gig of pc2700. Far cheaper than apple doing it.
The Pentium "M", mac's preferred choice for the new processor, will probably be the only machine that will support OS X 10.5.
Older G 5's, mac mini's and G 4's will not be able to run his operating system, it is rumoured.
Steve Jobs is not very popular with some mac fans.
but I didn't get one.
The price is not bad, but my reliable PC is still working well, so the price of mac mini would have to be even lower for me to cautiously try out a Mac.
I don't see why some 'Mac fans' seem to dislike Apple's future use of Intel chips, I read on the BBC website that software WILL continue to work with the new macs...so what's the fuss about? If IBM can't make chips that satisfy Apple's needs, then surely the job should be handed over to a more capable company.
By this I mean:
(a)very basic users - some people who want an 'it works out of the box' setup with works software (AppleWorks is a lot less grief than anything by Microsoft for everyday use), web browser and the lifestyle suite which is actually pretty good.
(b) very specialised users - speaking as a musician, I know that lots of impoverished Mac musicians will buy it to run audio software. There is also a facility on Logic Pro 7, the leading professional software, to offload processing of CPU-hungry soft instruments and digital effects to a second Mac simply by installing a small program and hooking the two up by ethernet or firewire. The Mac mini is ideal for this.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.