When I was in school I had a professor that was "Doctor Seid", trouble was, he was an idiot. People that stand on their credentials and titles usually have nothing else ...
agree totally,
and my dislike of surnames goes back to age 11 when "THEY" confiscated my first name and called me by my surname for the next 7 years...
funny how school moulds us, both for good and for bad, but all too often for life
Quote:
Asperger's Syndrome {Autism coupled with above average intelligence, giving me two strikes}
seems to me that 'Aspies' (if you don't mind that tag) in a sane world would be valued for having something different and unusual to offer, but instead our insane society is more interested in what you can't do than what you can.
The fact that anyone can describe high intelligence as a 'second strike' is a seriously sad comment on our culture.
in a sane world would be valued for having something different and unusual to offer
For example their ability to insist on things being right, and to deliver on that aspiration. In the right context they're gifted, not disabled. One such context is the preparation of a technical manual for a large project.
seems to me that 'Aspies' (if you don't mind that tag) in a sane world would be valued for having something different and unusual to offer, but instead our insane society is more interested in what you can't do than what you can.
The fact that anyone can describe high intelligence as a 'second strike' is a seriously sad comment on our culture.
I got in trouble in one of the group thearpy sessions as I said I was different. I had no implication that it was derogatory. But a statment of fact. I mean, I could always see that I did not fit in ... just never quite knew why.
But as a teen, being different in any shape, manner, or form is a kiss of death ... then, if you "bend" the curve ... well ... not that much of a loss, as we "aspies" (call me anything you want - we usually don't pick up on the "clues" :))
Hello, Paul, Hi gravywavy,
Paul if you don't mind me borrowing from a naval phares, "Glade to be onboard Chief". I tend to be on the formal side till given permission to use informal address. Sort of like given people space till invited in.
Do you think that Apple might be deploying on the X86, to show the X86(ie, windows user)that the unix/apple blend is better then Windows? Perhaps even selling their OS as an "alternative to MS-Windows?
Think what the ad's would say "We have a surpirior OS, That is more stable then Windows, think of the speed gain...Now think of it on our hardware", or something to that effect.
They could. But the marketplace and buying patterns indicate that this is not the way to success. Dell made it big because it coould and did undercut the prices of the competition. Like grocery stores (profit margin in the 1-3% area), margins in the PC industry are razor thin. But, people insist on buying the cheapest they can. I don't get it, as I generally have a PC for 5-10 years as a productive tool.
I tend to (still) buy at the top end so they don't get obsolete on me that fast. Though the Dell I bought was a 3.4 GHz rather than the absoulute tops as I was only allocated a set amount of money (and blew over that too).
There is, I think, no way they can compete head to head with Dell *AND* Microsoft at the same time. I can't see how they can really beat throughput while using the same chips.
My Power Mac at 2.0 GHz does work at roughly the same speed as does my 3.2 GHz machines (Look at the page average processing speed) to get the numbers). So, I WOULD have bought the top end PowerMac this year, now, I will wait to see how Apple does with the new line. I think, others will also. Apple should have been ready with the full line NOW ... Unless this is a ploy to put pressure on IBM ... with their take being only 2-5% of IBM's output of Power chips I don't see how ...
You three sound like you're on top of the whole spectrum of current computers, so you may be the best group to ask this:
Sorry if this sounds like a dumb question.
(Not to be too formal, it's just the way I was raised)
My daughter recently graduated from college with a degree in Graphical Arts. She has been dropping some seriously heavy hints that to get a good job in this current down-turned economy she needs to be able to compete with the other applicants out there and the only way she can do that is if some nice old guy buys her a Macintosh. (meaning a new one I'm sure...)
I told her she could have my old Compaq (AMD 750 Mhz) and she made a face...
Now my question is: Is Apple really that superior a grahics machine compared to Intel? I have been playing with Knopppix a bit and it occurred to me that I could probably get a Linux distrub from the internet and load this ol' Win/ME system with that and a new graphics card and it MUST be as good as any Mac would be.
Is she right? i haven't any experience with Apple and only know what I read. (That and when I was forcing everyone back in the early 80's to allow an IBM PC
on their sacred desks they all referred to it as an "Apple.")
Either way she is gonna have to wait a bit for her prospective gift as her sister just made fly to Hawaii for her wedding. (Made me - hahhahahaha!)
If, and there are a lot of things that go into that if ...
I have a PowerMac G5 with two processors, 2.5 G memory and the 23" display. With that, yes, you have steller graphics.
BUT, the proper way to eat this elephant is to find out what software is going to be used, THEN shop the platform it will run on.
Mac may be the best thing, but, can you afford $8 K? Which is roughly what I paid to stand up my system.
I can get a dual Xeon from Dell (about the same throughput) for a little over $3,000 ... so, if the software has a Windows XP version, cost says go PC not MAC. I got the Mac for stability because I do computer stuff for long days and I feel the Mac give me less problems in that regard.
Linux, home PC you are not going to do that much with mainstream software is a "cheaper" alternative, but if the graphics program is not available for it, who cares?
Hello "thaumielx72"
Good of you to drop in...Unlike Paul,Walt Gribben,gravywavy, I'm the last person to ask. Your daughter has pick a very competive field. I got my degree in photography, the digital age has made just about anyone a "photographer".
If, and there are a lot of things that go into that if ...
I have a PowerMac G5 with two processors, 2.5 G memory and the 23" display. With that, yes, you have steller graphics.
BUT, the proper way to eat this elephant is to find out what software is going to be used, THEN shop the platform it will run on.
Mac may be the best thing, but, can you afford $8 K? Which is roughly what I paid to stand up my system.
I can get a dual Xeon from Dell (about the same throughput) for a little over $3,000 ... so, if the software has a Windows XP version, cost says go PC not MAC. I got the Mac for stability because I do computer stuff for long days and I feel the Mac give me less problems in that regard.
Linux, home PC you are not going to do that much with mainstream software is a "cheaper" alternative, but if the graphics program is not available for it, who cares?
Hi Paul,
I hade no clue that Mac'x cost that much, I'll stay with the X86's, not as stable, but if it's stablilty I could always in stall "Free BSD".
In Fact I have the notion to get an old slow system just for that purpose. Take care hope to hear from you soon.
Now my question is: Is Apple really that superior a grahics machine compared to Intel? I have been playing with Knopppix a bit and it occurred to me that I could probably get a Linux distrub from the internet and load this ol' Win/ME system with that and a new graphics card and it MUST be as good as any Mac would be.
No, apple isn't really a superior machine when it comes to graphics. I believe Apple got a bit of a jump on the graphics industry because (and this is only my theory) creative types found the GUI aspect of the Macintosh easier to get around on.
With Windows, more and more graphics apps started to appear on the PC platform. And as more apps became available, people also found the much lower price of a PC very attractive, and Apple started to lose it's user base.
Apple still has a pretty good user base in the desktop publishing field, but not so much with the pro graphics community anymore. (those doing 3D modeling and rendering) It's much cheaper to built a render farm of PCs than Macs, and at the end of the day, you wouldn't be able to discern output from either platform as being "superior" to the other. And for the really heavy graphics users (the 3D guys) horsepower is king, and dollar for dollar, you'll get more horsepower from a PC. A lot of graphics houses are ditching their SGI workstations for PCs.
So as Paul says, let the applications be your guide. What kind of work is she going to be doing? What applications does she need to use? What platforms does it support? Then make your decision.
My personal opinion would be to go with a PC. More bang for the buck.
RE: When I was in school I
)
agree totally,
and my dislike of surnames goes back to age 11 when "THEY" confiscated my first name and called me by my surname for the next 7 years...
funny how school moulds us, both for good and for bad, but all too often for life
seems to me that 'Aspies' (if you don't mind that tag) in a sane world would be valued for having something different and unusual to offer, but instead our insane society is more interested in what you can't do than what you can.
The fact that anyone can describe high intelligence as a 'second strike' is a seriously sad comment on our culture.
~~gravywavy
RE: in a sane world would
)
For example their ability to insist on things being right, and to deliver on that aspiration. In the right context they're gifted, not disabled. One such context is the preparation of a technical manual for a large project.
Like BOINC wiki
~~gravywavy
RE: seems to me that
)
I got in trouble in one of the group thearpy sessions as I said I was different. I had no implication that it was derogatory. But a statment of fact. I mean, I could always see that I did not fit in ... just never quite knew why.
But as a teen, being different in any shape, manner, or form is a kiss of death ... then, if you "bend" the curve ... well ... not that much of a loss, as we "aspies" (call me anything you want - we usually don't pick up on the "clues" :))
i gotta quit
Hello, Paul, Hi
)
Hello, Paul, Hi gravywavy,
Paul if you don't mind me borrowing from a naval phares, "Glade to be onboard Chief". I tend to be on the formal side till given permission to use informal address. Sort of like given people space till invited in.
Do you think that Apple might be deploying on the X86, to show the X86(ie, windows user)that the unix/apple blend is better then Windows? Perhaps even selling their OS as an "alternative to MS-Windows?
Think what the ad's would say "We have a surpirior OS, That is more stable then Windows, think of the speed gain...Now think of it on our hardware", or something to that effect.
Greg
They could. But the
)
They could. But the marketplace and buying patterns indicate that this is not the way to success. Dell made it big because it coould and did undercut the prices of the competition. Like grocery stores (profit margin in the 1-3% area), margins in the PC industry are razor thin. But, people insist on buying the cheapest they can. I don't get it, as I generally have a PC for 5-10 years as a productive tool.
I tend to (still) buy at the top end so they don't get obsolete on me that fast. Though the Dell I bought was a 3.4 GHz rather than the absoulute tops as I was only allocated a set amount of money (and blew over that too).
There is, I think, no way they can compete head to head with Dell *AND* Microsoft at the same time. I can't see how they can really beat throughput while using the same chips.
My Power Mac at 2.0 GHz does work at roughly the same speed as does my 3.2 GHz machines (Look at the page average processing speed) to get the numbers). So, I WOULD have bought the top end PowerMac this year, now, I will wait to see how Apple does with the new line. I think, others will also. Apple should have been ready with the full line NOW ... Unless this is a ploy to put pressure on IBM ... with their take being only 2-5% of IBM's output of Power chips I don't see how ...
Hello. You three sound
)
Hello.
You three sound like you're on top of the whole spectrum of current computers, so you may be the best group to ask this:
Sorry if this sounds like a dumb question.
(Not to be too formal, it's just the way I was raised)
My daughter recently graduated from college with a degree in Graphical Arts. She has been dropping some seriously heavy hints that to get a good job in this current down-turned economy she needs to be able to compete with the other applicants out there and the only way she can do that is if some nice old guy buys her a Macintosh. (meaning a new one I'm sure...)
I told her she could have my old Compaq (AMD 750 Mhz) and she made a face...
Now my question is: Is Apple really that superior a grahics machine compared to Intel? I have been playing with Knopppix a bit and it occurred to me that I could probably get a Linux distrub from the internet and load this ol' Win/ME system with that and a new graphics card and it MUST be as good as any Mac would be.
Is she right? i haven't any experience with Apple and only know what I read. (That and when I was forcing everyone back in the early 80's to allow an IBM PC
on their sacred desks they all referred to it as an "Apple.")
Either way she is gonna have to wait a bit for her prospective gift as her sister just made fly to Hawaii for her wedding. (Made me - hahhahahaha!)
If, and there are a lot of
)
If, and there are a lot of things that go into that if ...
I have a PowerMac G5 with two processors, 2.5 G memory and the 23" display. With that, yes, you have steller graphics.
BUT, the proper way to eat this elephant is to find out what software is going to be used, THEN shop the platform it will run on.
Mac may be the best thing, but, can you afford $8 K? Which is roughly what I paid to stand up my system.
I can get a dual Xeon from Dell (about the same throughput) for a little over $3,000 ... so, if the software has a Windows XP version, cost says go PC not MAC. I got the Mac for stability because I do computer stuff for long days and I feel the Mac give me less problems in that regard.
Linux, home PC you are not going to do that much with mainstream software is a "cheaper" alternative, but if the graphics program is not available for it, who cares?
Hello "thaumielx72" Good of
)
Hello "thaumielx72"
Good of you to drop in...Unlike Paul,Walt Gribben,gravywavy, I'm the last person to ask. Your daughter has pick a very competive field. I got my degree in photography, the digital age has made just about anyone a "photographer".
Greg
RE: If, and there are a lot
)
Hi Paul,
I hade no clue that Mac'x cost that much, I'll stay with the X86's, not as stable, but if it's stablilty I could always in stall "Free BSD".
In Fact I have the notion to get an old slow system just for that purpose. Take care hope to hear from you soon.
Greg
RE: Now my question is: Is
)
No, apple isn't really a superior machine when it comes to graphics. I believe Apple got a bit of a jump on the graphics industry because (and this is only my theory) creative types found the GUI aspect of the Macintosh easier to get around on.
With Windows, more and more graphics apps started to appear on the PC platform. And as more apps became available, people also found the much lower price of a PC very attractive, and Apple started to lose it's user base.
Apple still has a pretty good user base in the desktop publishing field, but not so much with the pro graphics community anymore. (those doing 3D modeling and rendering) It's much cheaper to built a render farm of PCs than Macs, and at the end of the day, you wouldn't be able to discern output from either platform as being "superior" to the other. And for the really heavy graphics users (the 3D guys) horsepower is king, and dollar for dollar, you'll get more horsepower from a PC. A lot of graphics houses are ditching their SGI workstations for PCs.
So as Paul says, let the applications be your guide. What kind of work is she going to be doing? What applications does she need to use? What platforms does it support? Then make your decision.
My personal opinion would be to go with a PC. More bang for the buck.