Mac vs PC

[Howie Felterbush]

New guy, here.

The differences between Macs and PC's are lost on me. What I know about computers you could write on your little fingernail and still have room left for the Lord's Prayer. I have used plenty of Windows-based machines, and I find them all pretty baffling (I'm better with carburetors). But whatever Mac may be doing right or wrong, their advertising works like a charm. An example...

I worked right next to a young lady who used a Mac exclusively in her job duties (making signage in a retail store, the program's name escapes me, but "Quark" sticks in my mind for some reason). All day long I listened to her curse that Mac for being a slow p.o.s that locks up all the time. Her words, not mine, by the way. She was forever heaving big sighs of frustration and glaring at her computer. One day she came in to work happy as a clam. She told me she just bought a new Macbook. I was taken aback, to say the least. I asked her why she would buy a Mac if her daily use of one left her so frustrated.

Her response was to look at me as if I had suddenly spouted an extra head and say, "Because Macs are so much better than PC's! Duh!"

Yes, she actually said, "Duh!"

Again, I make no claim as to which platform is better, because I honestly don't know or care, just thought you might get a kick out of the story.

 

[Ducky]

New guy, here.

The differences between Macs and PC's are lost on me. What I know about computers you could write on your little fingernail and still have room left for the Lord's Prayer. I have used plenty of Windows-based machines, and I find them all pretty baffling (I'm better with carburetors). But whatever Mac may be doing right or wrong, their advertising works like a charm. An example...

I worked right next to a young lady who used a Mac exclusively in her job duties (making signage in a retail store, the program's name escapes me, but "Quark" sticks in my mind for some reason). All day long I listened to her curse that Mac for being a slow p.o.s that locks up all the time. Her words, not mine, by the way. She was forever heaving big sighs of frustration and glaring at her computer. One day she came in to work happy as a clam. She told me she just bought a new Macbook. I was taken aback, to say the least. I asked her why she would buy a Mac if her daily use of one left her so frustrated.

Her response was to look at me as if I had suddenly spouted an extra head and say, "Because Macs are so much better than PC's! Duh!"

Yes, she actually said, "Duh!"

Again, I make no claim as to which platform is better, because I honestly don't know or care, just thought you might get a kick out of the story.

What would you recommend for a 351 Cleveland? Holly? Any good resources/links you may have are welcome.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

What would you recommend for a 351 Cleveland? Holly? Any good resources/links you may have are welcome.

Should have specified...motorcycle carburetors. Sorry, I don't know a whole lot about automotive carbs, aside from theory. I can give you some general advice, though. Don't go too big. Everyone in the bike world wants a rack of carbs that are two or three mm larger than stock. This is fine in a racing application, where throttle position will be W.F.O. most of the time, but for a daily driver it is not ideal. You need to keep the intake tract velocity up or throttle response will suffer. I would say a 650 c.f.m. four-barrel w/vacuum secondaries would fill the bill for your Ford, unless it's real light and geared really low, then you could opt for mechanical secondaries. Assuming the thing isn't supercharged and is in a mild street tune, this carb should serve you well up to about 6000 rpm. I've seen small blocks that were an absolute terror at high rpm's but were stuttering turds at low rpm's due to the 800 C.F.M carb some monkey bolted on.

Good luck, and sorry for the derail, everyone knows Macs are fuel injected!

 

[GreNME]

No, no, this derail is the best content in the thread so far!

 

[Howie Felterbush]

Thanks, but I don't want to get myself modded on my first day.

 

[Ducky]

Should have specified...motorcycle carburetors. Sorry, I don't know a whole lot about automotive carbs, aside from theory. I can give you some general advice, though. Don't go too big. Everyone in the bike world wants a rack of carbs that are two or three mm larger than stock. This is fine in a racing application, where throttle position will be W.F.O. most of the time, but for a daily driver it is not ideal. You need to keep the intake tract velocity up or throttle response will suffer. I would say a 650 c.f.m. four-barrel w/vacuum secondaries would fill the bill for your Ford, unless it's real light and geared really low, then you could opt for mechanical secondaries. Assuming the thing isn't supercharged and is in a mild street tune, this carb should serve you well up to about 6000 rpm. I've seen small blocks that were an absolute terror at high rpm's but were stuttering turds at low rpm's due to the 800 C.F.M carb some monkey bolted on.

Good luck, and sorry for the derail, everyone knows Macs are fuel injected!

Most excellent advice, thank you.


Best derail ever.

 

[nota]

thats why 3 deuces is a better setup then one big carb for a street driven car

 

[Ducky]

I would think they wouldn't do it as they would then have to support hundreds and hundreds (thousands and thousands?) of hardware configurations instead of just the comparatively few configurations they need to support by controlling what hardware goes into their systems.

Apple is not the only company developing an OS for specific hardware specs.

They took pains to note that Google itself won't be offering Chrome OS as a download to install on any system you have. They're developing Chrome OS for machines with "specific reference hardware," as their machines will boot directly from those machines and skip a lot of the hardware checking steps that standard operating systems run through.

 

[Bill Thompson]

You can put a vitural compter on Vista or Windows 7 and have a little window showing a Windows XP or any other microsoft Operating system.

You can have a Linux session in Windows.

But Apple will not allow you to have a little window on a Microsoft OS desktop where you can simulate how a web page will load on a Mac.

So because of this, I think Mac's looses.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

thats why 3 deuces is a better setup then one big carb for a street driven car

One hundred percent correct. I'll take six smaller venturis over four bigger ones just about any day, the only exceptions being forced induction engines or something with an astronomical redline. Bottom end and midrange is where it's at, especially on the street. Since Ducky was asking specifically about a 351, I thought a small four barrel would do the trick. If he had a 400 c.i.d. or bigger engine, it would be a rack of three two barrels to be sure. The Tri-Power Pontiacs and Six-Pack Chryslers were the bomb.

Back to Mac vs. PC.

 

[tesscaline]

You can put a vitural compter on Vista or Windows 7 and have a little window showing a Windows XP or any other microsoft Operating system.

You can have a Linux session in Windows.

But Apple will not allow you to have a little window on a Microsoft OS desktop where you can simulate how a web page will load on a Mac.

So because of this, I think Mac's looses.

Uh... Safari is freely downloadable for use on Windows. You don't even need to load a separate OS to use the Safari browser on another platform. And that's all you need to simulate how a web page will load on a Mac.

On the other hand, IE is no longer available for Mac, so in order to test a website's functionality on IE, you have to have install the windows OS somewhere, and use that.

I don't really see how Mac "loses" there.

 

[GreNME]

You don't even need to load a separate OS to use the Safari browser on another platform. And that's all you need to simulate how a web page will load on a Mac.

I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume ignorance on this point, but you're definitely way wrong.

 

[phantomb]

Apple will not allow you to have a little window on a Microsoft OS desktop where you can simulate how a web page will load on a Mac.

So because of this, I think Mac's looses.

I could be wrong, but isn't "how a web page will load" determined by how well the browser you use conforms to web standards and not what OS you're using?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3

 

[GreNME]

I could be wrong, but isn't "how a web page will load" determined by how well the browser you use conforms to web standards and not what OS you're using?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3

No, not entirely. The OS plays a role in how something will look. I'll try to show you. I'll use randi.org as the base web address for comparison.

Mac OS (Leopard) and Firefox 3.5

Windows 7 and Firefox 3.5

Ubuntu Linux and Firefox 3.5

Same browser engine, same web page, yet the font weights and sizes show up differently, and if you took your time to go over the screenshots you would see other minor things that are slightly different. And mind you, this is the exact same browsing engine on three different platforms, so claiming one browser is more "correct" than the other doesn't fly in this case. The three differences in appearance are almost completely attributable to the platform the browser is on.

Professional front-end web developers-- trust me, I live with one-- need to be able to compare how their web pages look across platforms as well as across browsers in order to keep their pages as consistent as possible with the most regularly-used browsers out there (including IE). Randi's site happens to be among those whose site developers did a very good job at keeping it consistent cross-browser and cross-platform, and yet there are still obvious (but not big) differences between them. These are differences that can't be coded out by developers of the website front-end, because they're inherent differences in how the operating system displays the desktop and application environments on each platform.


Also, the Acid3 test is for browsers, not for web pages and front-end development. The W3C standards are for website front-end developers to use as a baseline, but again in the end what needs to be coded is for the intended audience and the browsers they'll be using.

 

[Darat]

...snip.... Randi's site happens to be among those whose site developers did a very good job at keeping it consistent cross-browser and cross-platform, and yet there are still obvious (but not big) differences between them.

...snip...

This Forum is one of the things that helped me make the decision to get a Mac because issues would arise that were simply because of differences in the platforms not the browsers. Albeit back in the olden days (you know 3 or so years ago...) it was the different browsers that caused the most headaches and that has lessened somewhat in recent times.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Can a MAC do all what Windows 7 can do?

 

[GreNME]

Can a MAC do all what Windows 7 can do?

How would a machine hardware address do something an operating system can do? The MAC on a computer facilitates the software addressing the network hardware in order for the network stack to work, but...

Ooooh, you're doing that whole "MAC in place of Mac" thing. Silly me.

 

[kuroyume0161]

Professional front-end web developers-- trust me, I live with one-- need to be able to compare how their web pages look across platforms as well as across browsers in order to keep their pages as consistent as possible with the most regularly-used browsers out there (including IE). Randi's site happens to be among those whose site developers did a very good job at keeping it consistent cross-browser and cross-platform, and yet there are still obvious (but not big) differences between them. These are differences that can't be coded out by developers of the website front-end, because they're inherent differences in how the operating system displays the desktop and application environments on each platform.

Yes. This is one reason why I flatout said 'no' to a friend who wanted to partner up to do web site development. I've done basic stuff and retaining compatability across browers and OSs is a *biatch*. He has no experience except for those template sites where you choose options. Web development is lucrative because of this but also very frustrating. You must be very knowledgable about the standards (HTML, XML, CSS, etc.) and test everything under every possible configuration.

 

[jsiv]

Can a MAC do all what Windows 7 can do?

No, it can't.

 

[rwp]

Mac OS (Leopard) and Firefox 3.5
Windows 7 and Firefox 3.5
Ubuntu Linux and Firefox 3.5
Same browser engine, same web page, yet the font weights and sizes show up differently, and if you took your time to go over the screenshots you would see other minor things that are slightly different. And mind you, this is the exact same browsing engine on three different platforms, so claiming one browser is more "correct" than the other doesn't fly in this case. The three differences in appearance are almost completely attributable to the platform the browser is on.

Same machine? No.
Same hardware? No.
Same display hardware settings? No.
Same browser settings? No.

Evidence that an OS changes how web pages look? No.