59 replies to this topic

[Jernlov]

1920x1200 17" monitor

1920x1200 on a 17" screen is ridiculous. Too many pixels on a screen that's too small for them all.



But if it works, it works, and that's how I'm going to answer. Go with what works best for you.

[llcoolguy972]

Errdoth said everything that needed to be said. Windows machines can do anything a Mac can do and they're customizable to hell. Macs are outrageously priced and, imo, becoming outdated. Really the only reason people buy them is because they're more aesthetically pleasing than most Windows machines. So if you want something that'll sit there and look pretty; buy a Mac. If you want a computer that'll do... anything else; buy Windows.

[Kaphias]

I'd suggest you go for a Windows. They're generally considerably cheaper for the same stuff, and you're already used to the Windows interface and whatnot. Only reason I'm still on a Mac is the fact that that's what I've been using for the past... forever, and it's hard to change.

[compfreak847]

1920x1200 17" monitor

1920x1200 on a 17" screen is ridiculous. Too many pixels on a screen that's too small for them all.



But if it works, it works, and that's how I'm going to answer. Go with what works best for you.

My lappys 1920X1200 17", and it works great.

[Yomyth105]

Get a pc that comes with windows vista macs r way way way overpriced and tbh i wouldnt want a laptop to be so thin because they always break and stuff. pc is the sensible choice.

[Sbrideau]

Even if they have both their pros and cons, I'd still go with a Windows machine. Hell, you can even get Windows 7 when it gets released! I'm currently using the Beta, and it works wonders compared to Windows XP or Vista.

[Dracion1]

PC's will get you more bang for your buck hardware wise. You don't necessarily have to have windows either, something like Ubuntu is an excellent free alternative.

[ThurinEthir]

My laptop (Approximately the same specs as Nadril's) was cheaper than a Macbook, and can do just about everything better. As far as I'm concerned.

On the other hand, Macs look cool.

...Yeah.

[Nadril]

1920x1200 17" monitor

1920x1200 on a 17" screen is ridiculous. Too many pixels on a screen that's too small for them all.



But if it works, it works, and that's how I'm going to answer. Go with what works best for you.

My lappys 1920X1200 17", and it works great.

Yeah. It is smaller than I'm used to (although I'm going to use my 22" monitor as a main anyways once I get a DVI to HDMI adapter) but I will say that games look fantastic on a 17" @ 19200x1200. TF2, UT3 and stuff are all really crisp.

[Princess Viola]

If you ask me, PCs are better as more games are made for PCs, more file types are supported. (Yes, you can run the Windows only file types on Macs, but you have to download something) Plus, PCs have RIGHT-CLICKING. Although, you can buy a two button mouse for a Mac, they cost like $20.



But, Macs are shiny like a Polar White Nintendo DS Lite.



I guess that's all Macs got against PCs. They're shiny. So, shiny. My precious.



Plus, if you get a PC, you can be on TV.

[Salad]

Pc all the way, way more softwares, cheaper and cooler.

[compfreak847]

1920x1200 17" monitor

1920x1200 on a 17" screen is ridiculous. Too many pixels on a screen that's too small for them all.



But if it works, it works, and that's how I'm going to answer. Go with what works best for you.

My lappys 1920X1200 17", and it works great.

Yeah. It is smaller than I'm used to (although I'm going to use my 22" monitor as a main anyways once I get a DVI to HDMI adapter) but I will say that games look fantastic on a 17" @ 19200x1200. TF2, UT3 and stuff are all really crisp.

Yeah, I have a 22" monitor running 1600X1080, and it always seems to be kinda hazy compared to my laptop.



It was a godsend when HD came out, though. I kept having to drop the resolution to 960X600 so I could read the text when I wanted to play RS

[Forerunner]

PC. THERE'S NO QUESTION.

[Kaphias]

Plus, PCs have RIGHT-CLICKING. Although, you can buy a two button mouse for a Mac, they cost like $20.

Incorrect... Mac computers have come with a 4 button mouse for at least a year.

[eggzs]

Plus, PCs have RIGHT-CLICKING. Although, you can buy a two button mouse for a Mac, they cost like $20.

Incorrect... Mac computers have come with a 4 button mouse for at least a year.

My 9 button G5 costs less than a wired mighty mouse, not to mention better ergonomics and adjustable weights.

[Varda]

I own a Mac, and that's why I draw, design and all that all the time, a Mac works best for work, such as design, arts, and stuff like that.

I've never understood this one. I run the entire Adobe CS4 Master Collection on Windows and it's no different than on the Macs I use in my design class at school.

When you move a program to the dock, it doesn't use any RAM, and speak to any concept artist, and most will say that the Mac is best for arts.



But turning this thread, to an OS war is just silly, people use what they like, it's none of your business.



OS war is just silly too, only shows that there are no grown-ups.

Plus, PCs have RIGHT-CLICKING. Although, you can buy a two button mouse for a Mac, they cost like $20.

Incorrect... Mac computers have come with a 4 button mouse for at least a year.

My 9 button G5 costs less than a wired mighty mouse, not to mention better ergonomics and adjustable weights.

Want to see that one who still use Mighty Mouse.

[compfreak847]

When you move a program to the dock, it doesn't use any RAM, and speak to any concept artist, and most will say that the Mac is best for arts.



But turning this thread, to an OS war is just silly, people use what they like, it's none of your business.



OS war is just silly too, only shows that there are no grown-ups.

I still don't get the whole 'artest\photographers use macs' thing... The entire CS4 suite works great on windows, and that pretty much covers everything.

http://img80.imagesh...ge=photoyj7.jpg

'nuff said

[Nadril]

My college still use the mighty mouse Sue, it [bleep]ing sucks haha.



And yeah I love my windows machine for graphical work.

[Errdoth]

When you move a program to the dock, it doesn't use any RAM, and speak to any concept artist, and most will say that the Mac is best for arts.

I've never heard that about the dock before o.o

I know several people who do design professionally, some use Macs, some use Windows, and tbh, "other people use them" is a stupid reason to use them yourself :/



And with your picture: being a bit of a motorhead, and a complete tinkerer when it comes to computers, I wouldn't want a car that "just worked."

One of the comments I remember from when that picture was posted on digg/reddit/one-of-those-sites went something like "Yes, but the mac car can only run on mac gas, can only drive on mac approved roads, and to change the oil you have to ship it off to a shop"



Honestly, they look like sex, but I'd never buy one solely because of the sheer price of the thing and it not being able to play games.

[Rahila]

well i still think i'm leaning towards a mac laptop, but i'm still undecided.



I've read everyones posts and it is pretty much what i expected to hear in terms of mac vs. pc (seeing as this is a gaming forum, i assumed most people would prefer macs)



but after all I am going into college and my work life is more important than my gaming life.



On a side note, i currently use limewire to get my music, so is limewire compatable with macs? or are there any other good free music download sources for macs?



thanks