Mac vs. PC

[Gaz]

I accept that.
But is not far away that the PCs will not be able to have MacOS.
But at the end why a PC to put a Mac OS and not put a Linux OS?

Anyway I leave that.

My posts had to do with "Gaz" saying half truth about PCs. Thats all.
At the same time I said a half truth about Macs but you correct me.
And I accepted it. :smilewinkgrin:

So I am not missing any point that he said.

as you said i stand corrected, did a bit or research and found the stuff you pointed out was incorrect.

and you won't ever be ALLOWED to run OSX on an IBM-clone, it's againts the licence agreement.

 

[blueradio]

I love my PC.
But I wouldn't mind having a Macbook Pro or something along those lines.
They do everything and the interface is incredible.
I would love to have a Mac. I'm sure I'll get one eventually.

 

[Zakkorn]

as you said i stand corrected, did a bit or research and found the stuff you pointed out was incorrect.

and you won't ever be ALLOWED to run OSX on an IBM-clone, it's againts the licence agreement.

So you are saying that you are right and you found after a bit of research that PCs cannot have more than 4GBS of RAM right?
Because that was the 1st thing I pointed out from your post.
I dont understand where you are corrected.

 

[JoeTheZombie]

Well, Windows 2000/XP can utilize up to 64GB RAM using address windowing... I think you are confusing the 4GB limitation as it applies to kernel/application addressing where the system can only access 2GB of kernel space + 2GB of application space at a time.

Essentially, the computer swaps 2GB sections of RAM from a maximum available 64MB into the application area as needed. The real limitation is the 2GB kernel area, as it can not be swapped, and is really limited to 2GB across all applications. Terminal services on XP can support about 200 users until the 2GB kernel area is filled.

Hardly a concern on a home desktop.

 

[Gaz]

So you are saying that you are right and you found after a bit of research that PCs cannot have more than 4GBS of RAM right?
Because that was the 1st thing I pointed out from your post.
I dont understand where you are corrected.

i stand corrected over saying that PC's cannot have more than 4GBs of ram, but i don't stand corrected over talking about the hardware limitations of having more than 4GBs of ram in a pc.

 

[Zakkorn]

i stand corrected over saying that PC's cannot have more than 4GBs of ram, but i don't stand corrected over talking about the hardware limitations of having more than 4GBs of ram in a pc.

I still dont understand what do you mean by PC's cannot have more than 4GBs, when its not true.

Really, could you please explain it.

 

[csiguy4u]

i stand corrected over saying that PC's cannot have more than 4GBs of ram, but i don't stand corrected over talking about the hardware limitations of having more than 4GBs of ram in a pc.

This motherboard can have more than 4GB of ram so I am not sure what hardware limitation you are talking about:

http://www.pcconnection.com/ProductDetail?sku=7045367&srccode=cii_14110944&cpncode=10-34342919-2

 

[Gaz]

I still dont understand what do you mean by PC's cannot have more than 4GBs, when its not true.

Really, could you please explain it.

how often do you find a mother board with more than 4 Ram slots? and how often do you see more than 1GB memory cards, so this is what i mean about the limitations. i'm not saying it can't now, i'm saying it's far from easy to do it.


CSiguy: thats a lovely server motherboard there, but hardly practical for home use.


Just to clear a few things up, when i was saying max only 4GB i was talking about the physical memory of the more popular 32-bit editions of any windows XP and Windows 2000 as well as windows Sever 2003. (Xp can only have a maximum of 4GB Physical Memory as well)
Oh and the Virtual addressing space on 64-bit hardware for windows is 16 Terabytes.

 

[NateTheGreat]

Seriously, either a self-built PC or a Mac hold enough RAM to be sufficient. Who really needs more than 2GB of RAM? The major difference between a PC (a.k.a. a WindozXp running computer) and a Mac is in the OS and how one (Mac OS X) is built around the hardware while the other (Windoz and Linux) are not.

 

[Master Wii]

You guys do realize that Mac has been using 3rd party hardware for a long time now right? Not all of it is mac specific anymore.

 

[Redan499]

I'm mostly a PC gamer w/ some Image editing, so PC works great for what i like to do.

 

[Gaz]

You guys do realize that Mac has been using 3rd party hardware for a long time now right? Not all of it is mac specific anymore.

but they fit it all there selfs, test it there selfs, and code the systems around it, something which microsoft can't do..

 

[Master Wii]

but they fit it all there selfs, test it there selfs, and code the systems around it, something which microsoft can't do..

Not really,

In pretty much any of the newer Intel based macs, you can pretty much plug and play any hardware as long as there are drivers for it.

 

[Gaz]

Not really,

In pretty much any of the newer Intel based macs, you can pretty much plug and play any hardware as long as there are drivers for it.

eeeeer no lol

mac doesn't user drivers, so if there is no support from the hardware vendor, then it doesn't work

 

[Zakkorn]

how often do you find a mother board with more than 4 Ram slots? and how often do you see more than 1GB memory cards, so this is what i mean about the limitations. i'm not saying it can't now, i'm saying it's far from easy to do it.


CSiguy: thats a lovely server motherboard there, but hardly practical for home use.


Just to clear a few things up, when i was saying max only 4GB i was talking about the physical memory of the more popular 32-bit editions of any windows XP and Windows 2000 as well as windows Sever 2003. (Xp can only have a maximum of 4GB Physical Memory as well)
Oh and the Virtual addressing space on 64-bit hardware for windows is 16 Terabytes.

Thats why I am saying that you telling half truth.

Do you understanding me now?

Why oh, why you are refering only to a portion of the PC market and not to all of it?
Does every Mac comes with Windows, no.
But You can put it if you want it, right? And I accept that.
Yes but you saying it like it is very normal and the everyday mac user is doing it.
But you cannot agree (I have no idea why) that PCs HAVE more than 4GBs of RAM. When the only thing they need is a 64bit OS.
Of course I am not talking for old PCs. Why to take only them into account.
Because from last year 99% of PCs sold have 64bits CPUs.
So with WinXP 64 (that are out from 2005) you can have far more of 4GBs.

And another thing.
Why you are saying that the hardware limits the PC?
Are you insane?
You know that Macs dont have the shops around the corner where you can build your own system thus selling items usualy for everyday things and gaming.
So a professional or every user will buy a Mac from a high class place and will be a professional product at the end. That include high class (lets say) things such as more than 4GBs of RAM for your case, Caz.
But in PCs if someone wants a professional machine the only thing he has to do is to go ta a "serious" place (not the shop around the corner), usually in big vendors such, as Dell, HP, IBM etc.
There he can find everything he needs and much more options.

So why you take into account only the shops around the corner that yes there is hard (but definately not impossible) to find m/bs with 8 slots for RAM.

So what you are saying is not fair, and is hiding the a big fact of the truth.

Please be more objective and not as subjective as you are at the moment.