Bittersweet Candy Bowl Forums

SuitCase said:

But if people were to suddenly decide to switch en masse to the Mac, then wouldn't the problem of malware also follow them? Since malware is typically targeted most often at those platforms that large numbers of people are using.

Well, that's what people say.

Still doesn't affect reality. Look at how cheap all of you are, refusing to pay a meagre 10-30% premium, or even a high-end premade computer at all. Do you really think Macs will achieve huge marketshare when most people are like you?

I have a custom-ordered computer, so I did choose to pay for quality, albeit for Windows rather than Mac.

SuitCase, on 02 September 2011 - 05:16 AM, said:

I doubt it's their goal

Avoiding malware and viruses is a terrible reason to switch to mac. In the 4 years since I've owned my own computer, I've gotten one virus of any sort, and that was 6 months into having my first laptop, and I've never used a firewall or antivirus. Avoiding malware and viruses is a matter of not clicking on stupid shit online and not opening emails that are of dubious intent.

I can agree with this. I think the Windows malware situation is so much better than it used to be. I think the reason you should get a Mac is because it is a beautiful elegant thing that runs beautiful elegant applications. (These adjectives are relative.)

SuitCase, on 02 September 2011 - 04:58 PM, said:

It's not that it's better, it's that its users are smarter and websites are taking up more of an initiative to protect their users. That and file sharing is waning. Seriously, as long as you don't randomly click every email attachment you get, click every link you see, and pay attention to the websites you download from, the chances of getting a virus, trojan horse, etc is very low. And since most houses use routers these days, most people have firewalls--that cuts down on the spreading of worms. Then you have a LOT of people using software firewalls as well.

About the reasons you should get a Mac--I agree, if it's important to the end user and if they agree that Macs have these qualities. Some people would rather have a purely Open Source experience, save as much money as possible without sacrificing too much experience, have control over their hardware and plenty of choices with it, have a high end gaming experience and decent creative experience and some people--believe it or not--either don't like the Mac UI or the Mac experience.

Or in the case of the OP, owning a computer is only an option if they build it themselves due to other people demanding this, in which case either Windows or Linux would do (Theoretically, you CAN build a mac, but it's a pain if you want to do it without violating the EUA).

This post has been edited by Carcharocles: 02 September 2011 - 06:03 PM

Building a computer isn't that difficult if you know what components you need. I've ALWAYS had my own towers built, not bought. It's actually a lot cheaper to build it yourself, too. I use Newegg mostly for parts, or certain electronic stores. You just need to know what you need, depending on what you want to use your desktop for (gaming? school? programming? etc)

OMG, MAC FETISH. Guys, Macs only make up 5-7% of the market. The operating system is extremely oriented around a few specific aplications/ scripts- i.e., you or I couldn't just write our own program - it wouldn't run without extreme skills or a certificate from Apple ( on the other hand, Windows is much easier to write for and run several hundred times the number of apps in terms of software). And Apple only uses 3% of the total number of parts avaliable on the market, meaning less coding for each and every different part, then less driver conflicts, etc., which could allow for hacks. And you have much less control on what you can do ( no overclocking, or replacing with outside parts not from Apple [ Anyone smell profits? ]), and the OS is writen for just those parts. This is why there are few viruses for the mak platform.

Windows vs. Mac OS = Tank vs. Really Expensive Car

The car looks nice and is easy to use/ drive, flashy, comes in a lot of colors, but is far less powerful than the tank. The tank can breakdown easier, can be dificult to learn and use at times, but if you do know how to use it, it's much more powerful and has a variety of applications - also, people will want to take that power from you/ use it for their own will, i.e. viruses.

Ok, a self built computer is much better, because parts are what you choose, and the market for self built is real strong right now (stock, etc).

Ok, Wall-o-text.

First- You need a case. these can go from $25-$300+. I recommend geting a cheaper one for now, or using the one you have (make sure the 'board will fit though).

Second- A motherboard. With Intel, there are three types- The H, P, and Z series. The H line uses the integrated graphics with the CPU, and this is not for you if you are a gamer/ overclocker. You will need the P or Z lines, so you can use dedicated graphics. The P line is more mainstream, and designed for newer users and less savy people. The Z line allows almost complete control, letting you use either the integrated of dedicated graphics, but is more expensive. I recommend the P line for now.

Third- CPU. I would get the i3 2100, because it is much cheaper, but if you really want some bang, go for an i5 K series. These are unlocked, and are more powerful than the i3's, and about $30-$70 more, but allow for a good overclock, which if you do, can get you a great processor for the price of a good one.

Fourth- GPU. Don't go for the ATI (AMD) 5000x series. They use a lot of power and make a ton of heat. If anything, you should a new Nvidia card, because of the integration with some new Intel proccessors, and the have many cool features and thing that ATI/AMD does not have, including PhysX, a very advanced rendering engine and tesselation matrix. I recommend the 560 Ti series. Though the 590 reigns superior, it is far more expensive. The Sparkle Calibre X560 for $270 and the MSI N560GTX-Ti Twin Frozr II/OC for $250 are good canidates. The Sparkle is one of the best, but the MSI is a great choice for value. You can also "SLI" the Nvidia Cards I gave, which means you link two ( or more) cards, and this will give you room to upgrade later without breaking the bank. This basically makes the cards act as one, and give tremendous power.

Fourth- PSU, or Power Supply Unit. I say get a good 500W-600W (Watt) from Antec, Inland, or Cooler Master. They are about $40-$70, and very good quailty. Try to get a 80Plus Gold rating, for power efficiency.

Fifth DVD/CD Drive, or if you want, Blue-Ray. DVD Drives are around $20-$30, and BR Drives can go from $60-$150.

Sixth- Mouse and Keyboard. You get what you pay for, really.

Felixeab, on 03 September 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

People new to building computers should just avoid overclocking (which is all the unlocked part of the K series intels does is allow you to overclock; Black Edition AMD's allow you to do it easier). Why? You need an aftermarket cooler, a good case with good airflow, hours (at least 12) of stability testing with prime95 with no errors (one error means you could crash at any time) and if you do it wrong, kiss your 200 dollar processor goodbye. Oh, and overclocking voids the warranty, so you get to pay to replace it yourself.

Quote

Yes, by all means avoid LAST GENERATION ATI video cards, they don't have good tessellation. Of course, if the heat comment is bullshit anyway, I'll get to that in a second. And as for 3D viewing--both the 6000 series Radeons and Nvidia have it, there just aren't many monitors supporting the Radeon version because it hasn't been out long, and well, you need a 350 dollar video card from either company to get the most out of it.

Quote

Physx only supports 20 some odd titles. CUDA is useful if you're running Photoshop or something similar, but means jack shit in games. Nvidia renders about the same as AMD/ATI--Nvidia fakes performance by paying titles to code in their favor (you know, all the titles with the The Way It's Meant to be Play logo, the only ones Nvidia does very good in), Tessellation in the 6770, 6750 and 5000 series sucks, but the 6790, 6800 series and 6900 series handles it exceptionally well.
In fact, even if you take the TWIMTBP games into consideration, the Nvidia isn't doing nearly as well as they were doing before during the 8800/9800 era. The GTS 550 ti is only slightly better than the 5770 but costs the same as the Radeon 6790, which itself is slightly more powerful than the 550. The older GTX 460 1GB competes with the Radeon 6850, but doesn't perform as well. The GTX 560 (non-ti) and the Radeon 6870 trade blows so often they're pretty much identical. The GTX 560 Ti is inferior to the Radeon 6950 1GB--unless you get one of the flakey 1000 MHz pre-overclocked models. The GTX 570 used to trade blows with the Radeon 6870, the but the Radeon has pulled ahead. The GTX 580 has no competetion, but is extreme overkill for 1920 x 1200 or lower. Both the Radeon 6990 and the GTX 590 are basically two video cards on one board, require the appropriate drivers to use, and an 850 watt power supply with absolutely insane amperage. They also perform exactly the same.
FYI, I have an XFX Radeon 6950--it maxes out at 64 degrees under stress. Granted, I have a dual fan model, but you can get one of these from Sapphire for 240 bucks--10 dollars less than a GTX 560 Ti, which isn't as powerful.

In short, if you have one of the handful of games that has phsyx or are planning on running Photoshop, get nVidia. If not, look at benchmarks of similarly priced cards, find one with the games you're playing, and get the card that performs the best.

Also, the 560 ti is a MODEL, not a series.

Quote

.
Fixed.

Quote

So much wrong with this statement. Okay, first, SLI is does not make two cards act as one. It uses a percentage of the second card to enhance the first card's power. It isn't something that just happens--you need to set it up, and the game needs to support it. Not all games do, and not all that do do it well. SLI system are much less stable and more prone to glitches and crashes. You'll also use twice as much power--you'll have to look into a 700, 800 or even 850 watt power supply with insane amperage on the 12-volt rails. You need an SLI certified motherboard to do this, with at least TWO PCIe x 16 2.0 or 2.1 slots. And here's the best part: ATI/AMD has their own version of it, called Crossfire, which has all the positives and all the negatives of SLI.

Quote

Don't know Inland, so if they're available in the US, skip em. Antec's good if you stick to the High End Current series, older ones are hit and miss with a tendency toward hit. Cooler Master consists of absolutely nothing but mediocre power supplies priced way to high, with high quality models from Antec, Seasonic, Corsair and Silverstone being priced either identically or lower. And there's nothing wrong with bronze performance--hell, the Seasonic S12IIB/M12IIB series (and by default, the 400 watt, 520 watt and 620 watt models of Antec High Current Gamer) have 87 percent efficiency at high loads. Gold? About 92%.

Felixeab, on 03 September 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

What are you even talking about? How fully native Mac apps use Objective-C, that newfangled language from 1994 that's fully compatible with obscure "C" code? Because that's all I can think of. You do know you can write OS X apps in Java, Ruby or Python too, right?

Either way, who cares? I don't write apps. I also don't care how many apps I have access to. Windows might have 10x the amount of FTP apps, but which of them are Transmit-calibre? How're those bundles of godawful Adobe AIR Twitter clients going? These are all pointless arguments that don't address the main point — that Macs are better computers to use, because the best applications are made for Macs.

Felixeab, on 03 September 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

I don't care about overclocking or anything else, though. I want it to work without me having to tweak it. And if the computer breaks, I don't care how much the parts cost. It's under warranty, so I just take it to an Apple Store and they fix it.

Felixeab, on 03 September 2011 - 03:32 AM, said:

Well, then. You drive your "tank" to work, and I'll drive my BMW.

Ah well most people here talked about powerful CPU/Graphic Cards, that's nice and all, but if you want to go high-end, don't cheap out on the motherboard. Cheap motherboards tend to have shitty north/south-bridges which will drastically reduce the power of your RAM/CPU/GPU which you can use.

I finished my computer. It has
Intel i7 quad-core processor
8 gigabytes of RAM
2 Terabyte (2048 gigabytes) hard drive
Radeon HD 4670 graphics card
some high-end Intel Motherboard, it has a skull on it.
It's totally sweet.
Thank you to everyone who gave advice and helped.
Sorry for abandoning this topic for a while.

does it have an aluminum and glass enclosure

naahh, get carbon fibre

It's steel, but it's basically covered vents and air-holes. You can see all the LED lights and stuff on the motherboard. It's totally sweet.

Steel? did you choose that? If so, how much thought did you put into that?