Celtic Heroes

The Official Forum for Celtic Heroes, the 3D MMORPG for iOS and Android Devices

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#42
Robert wrote:
Rochoh2000 wrote:
then you dont have a very good opinion. and there is a difference between more secure and "not getting as many viruses" in case you didnt know.

Elaborate on the difference?

Also, what are your Computer specs?

a more secure as in a more closed system and not being able to be hacked as easy. but that can have some disadvantages.

my current computer that i own is crap, but I intend to build a really good one. but if you insist, 2 half gig sticks ddr ram, some crappy celeron processor and a 80 gig hard drive. idk the exact specs of the processor tho. and by the way, i do not think of myself as an xtreme computer geek.

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#43
Rochoh2000 wrote:
Robert wrote:
Rochoh2000 wrote:
then you dont have a very good opinion. and there is a difference between more secure and "not getting as many viruses" in case you didnt know.

Elaborate on the difference?

Also, what are your Computer specs?

a more secure as in a more closed system and not being able to be hacked as easy. but that can have some disadvantages.

my current computer that i own is crap, but I intend to build a really good one. but if you insist, 2 half gig sticks ddr ram, some crappy celeron processor and a 80 gig hard drive. idk the exact specs of the processor tho. and by the way, i do not think of myself as an xtreme computer geek.

I consider myself to know tons of information on PCs. And I know Macs suck for both value for money and performance in comparison to a much lower priced PC.

My PC:
Processor: Fx-8350 @ 4.4GHz
Ram: 4 x 2GB XMS3 Ram
GPU: Sapphire HD 7950
Image


“Brevity is the soul of wit.”

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#44
Robert wrote:I consider myself to know tons of information on PCs. And I know Macs suck for both value for money and performance in comparison to a much lower priced PC.

My PC:
Processor: Fx-8350 @ 4.4GHz
Ram: 4 x 2GB XMS3 Ram
GPU: Sapphire HD 7950



U are completely nuts. The quality of my MacBook Pro with retina will pretty much school any laptop PC out there
maulz - warrior - level 195 - belenus - iPhone 7

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#45
tgwaste wrote:
Robert wrote:I consider myself to know tons of information on PCs. And I know Macs suck for both value for money and performance in comparison to a much lower priced PC.

My PC:
Processor: Fx-8350 @ 4.4GHz
Ram: 4 x 2GB XMS3 Ram
GPU: Sapphire HD 7950



U are completely nuts. The quality of my MacBook Pro with retina will pretty much school any laptop PC out there

In what way does it school it? In how to take advantage of the Apple fanboys who blindly purchase every apple product that's released? Despite the changes being so negligible it can barely be called a different device?

Macs suck value for money, any any half-decent PC will beat a Mac in any task.

The latest Mac, which is alot more powerful than the latest MacBook Pro, has these specs:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/i ... specs.html
It costs 4X as much as my PC with a 0.9GHz less processing power and a worse graphics processor, and lacks the upgradeability of the PC. How, in any way, is the hardware better? And for that how is it better value for money?
Image


“Brevity is the soul of wit.”

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#46
Robert wrote:
tgwaste wrote:
Robert wrote:I consider myself to know tons of information on PCs. And I know Macs suck for both value for money and performance in comparison to a much lower priced PC.

My PC:
Processor: Fx-8350 @ 4.4GHz
Ram: 4 x 2GB XMS3 Ram
GPU: Sapphire HD 7950



U are completely nuts. The quality of my MacBook Pro with retina will pretty much school any laptop PC out there

In what way does it school it? In how to take advantage of the Apple fanboys who blindly purchase every apple product that's released? Despite the changes being so negligible it can barely be called a different device?

Macs suck value for money, any any half-decent PC will beat a Mac in any task.

The latest Mac, which is alot more powerful than the latest MacBook Pro, has these specs:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/i ... specs.html
It costs 4X as much as my PC with a 0.9GHz less processing power and a worse graphics processor, and lacks the upgradeability of the PC. How, in any way, is the hardware better? And for that how is it better value for money?


well, gratz on having an insanely powerful computer. macs do have less hardware for the money, but it they are optimised way better and run way better, and they will always use the best quality of harware.

i plan to build a pc not quite as powerful as yours, but still pretty insane. i would like some suggestions on how powerful of hardware i would need to do things like neverwinter battlefield and many other high performance games and be able to run them on very high if not the highest settings. that is what i would need help with.

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#47
Believe it or not, Macs are the same as low quality Microsoft machines in almost every way. They charge a fortune just for the packaging, even though the hardware is completely the same. Amcs are also the most secure computers in the market, but incredibly restrictive. You are paying extra for slightly more protection by removal of priveliges.
x*Warrior Tank*x
x*Arawn*x
x*BadaBing*x

Critical thinking greatly intrigues me.

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#48
Rochoh2000 wrote:
well, gratz on having an insanely powerful computer. macs do have less hardware for the money, but it they are optimised way better and run way better, and they will always use the best quality of harware.

i plan to build a pc not quite as powerful as yours, but still pretty insane. i would like some suggestions on how powerful of hardware i would need to do things like neverwinter battlefield and many other high performance games and be able to run them on very high if not the highest settings. that is what i would need help with.

If someone has to go 100 Miles to reach a destination and goes at 100 Miles/h, then that takes them 1 hour. If another person has to go 10 miles and travels at 20 Miles/hour, then that takes them 1/2 an hour. This doesn't make them more efficient, it just means he had less distance to travel (like processes). Meaning, just because Macs have to do less doesn't make them magically faster by what you describe as optimisations...

If you want an insanely optimised gaming machine, get a console. For one, they are alot cheaper, and for two they use almost all of their resources on games. This is why the Xbox 360 can compete with modern PCs despite being 8 years old.

A Mac is not a gaming machine, they are very bad value for money in this respect. If you want a good computer to game on, and aren't under the ridiculous impression that Macs are insanely good, then I can help you with the components you'd require to build a PC yourself. And believe, its not any where near as hard as some people would suggest.
Image


“Brevity is the soul of wit.”

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#49
Aggra_Tetch wrote:Believe it or not, Macs are the same as low quality Microsoft machines in almost every way. They charge a fortune just for the packaging, even though the hardware is completely the same. Amcs are also the most secure computers in the market, but incredibly restrictive. You are paying extra for slightly more protection by removal of priveliges.

just about the only thing in this that is true is that macs are more restricted but are more secure. they will always have the latest and best quality parts, even if they are not the most powerful. that is part of the reason why they run so good for what they are and last long.

Re: Apple vs. Microsoft vs. Google

#50
Robert wrote:
Rochoh2000 wrote:
well, gratz on having an insanely powerful computer. macs do have less hardware for the money, but it they are optimised way better and run way better, and they will always use the best quality of harware.

i plan to build a pc not quite as powerful as yours, but still pretty insane. i would like some suggestions on how powerful of hardware i would need to do things like neverwinter battlefield and many other high performance games and be able to run them on very high if not the highest settings. that is what i would need help with.

If someone has to go 100 Miles to reach a destination and goes at 100 Miles/h, then that takes them 1 hour. If another person has to go 10 miles and travels at 20 Miles/hour, then that takes them 1/2 an hour. This doesn't make them more efficient, it just means he had less distance to travel (like processes). Meaning, just because Macs have to do less doesn't make them magically faster by what you describe as optimisations...

If you want an insanely optimised gaming machine, get a console. For one, they are alot cheaper, and for two they use almost all of their resources on games. This is why the Xbox 360 can compete with modern PCs despite being 8 years old.

A Mac is not a gaming machine, they are very bad value for money in this respect. If you want a good computer to game on, and aren't under the ridiculous impression that Macs are insanely good, then I can help you with the components you'd require to build a PC yourself. And believe, its not any where near as hard as some people would suggest.


i might agree with that, but there are still some high performance games available on macs that they have no problem handling.

i would rather have a pc now since i really need a better comuter and there are some specific pc games that i want but maybe eventually

i understand that macs are not meant for gaming, and i decided a while ago that a pc would be far better for me than a mac.
i am definitely going to build one myself than buy a whole one since it is cheaper, if a part dies then you know what it is and you can replace it, and it is easy to upgrade and no warranty is voided just by replacing the RAM. my computer prob couldnt support more than 1 gig tho :lol:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests