BeardofPants
New Member
windoze sucks
mac
mac
What is your uptime record?
- Thread starter markjs
- Start date
tommyj27
Not really Banned
when i lived at school we ran a CS server without a CPU fan for months at a time. right now my current uptime on the xbox is
15:19:34 up 19 days, 18:15, 2 users, load average: 0.33, 0.32, 0.28
which is since i put linux on it.
most of my machines don't stay up very long because none of them are production (with the exception of the xbox and that's questionable) and i'm always testing new kernels, hardware, etc. in them.
15:19:34 up 19 days, 18:15, 2 users, load average: 0.33, 0.32, 0.28
which is since i put linux on it.
most of my machines don't stay up very long because none of them are production (with the exception of the xbox and that's questionable) and i'm always testing new kernels, hardware, etc. in them.
BeardofPants
New Member
Oh right. Clearly it's not a real comp until it crashes every other minute, and I can brag about "long" upload times of 3 months... I mean, the fact that my mac goes WAY longer than that makes it wimpy, right?Gato_Solo said:Is that a real computer now?
markjs
Banned
There's a simple reason for Mac's stability, but that reason is both pro and anti Mac at the same time.
A Mac is made by Apple with only Apple made hardware and has relatively little software available to it. So therefore the operating system only has to fit a limited scope of very expensive proprietary hardware. The fact that Mac users are only a small percentage of the computing world is why there isn't 1/10th as much software available for it.
The same reasons are just opposite with the PC. Windows has to fit for thousands of inexpensive (yet not neccisarily inferior) open standard hardware configurations. This can lead to lack of stability. If Mac OS had to work on PC hardware I've no doubt it'd be half as stable as Windows. But since PC hardware is non proprietary you can get a lot more computer for the buck than with a Mac. Plus being the standard issue in the computer world a billion people write software for it.
All in all if someone asked me what their first comuter should be I'd go PC because A. It's much more bang for the buck B. It's what most people use so it's more practical in that regard. And C. because anymore Windows isn't really any harder to learn than Mac OS.
A Mac is made by Apple with only Apple made hardware and has relatively little software available to it. So therefore the operating system only has to fit a limited scope of very expensive proprietary hardware. The fact that Mac users are only a small percentage of the computing world is why there isn't 1/10th as much software available for it.
The same reasons are just opposite with the PC. Windows has to fit for thousands of inexpensive (yet not neccisarily inferior) open standard hardware configurations. This can lead to lack of stability. If Mac OS had to work on PC hardware I've no doubt it'd be half as stable as Windows. But since PC hardware is non proprietary you can get a lot more computer for the buck than with a Mac. Plus being the standard issue in the computer world a billion people write software for it.
All in all if someone asked me what their first comuter should be I'd go PC because A. It's much more bang for the buck B. It's what most people use so it's more practical in that regard. And C. because anymore Windows isn't really any harder to learn than Mac OS.
Mirlyn
Well-Known Member
Same can (usually) be said for SGI/Irix and Sun/Solaris.markjs said:
The real problem isn't just making it work, but making it work and yet easy to use.
I think thats the usual instability stigma associated with Windows. Sure Windows can make your modem work, but sometimes its the nifty little window that tells you the speed and duration of the connection in a human-readable format that crashes and makes it incompatible.Of course, this all hinges on another factor: proprietary parts. Thats a whole 'nother can of worms.