Author: Zachariah Amela
Date: 08:47:54 10/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 12, 1999 at 21:15:48, Robert Pawlak wrote: >On October 12, 1999 at 16:53:18, Zachariah Amela wrote: > > >>I'm familiar with TCO. > >Sorry, your previous post did not give me that impression. > >>I just don't buy it. How many programmers, HW >>technicians, network admins, etc. ALREADY exist for PC platforms than Mac? I >>don't see training as a real big deal. > >You personally may not, but I guarantee that many businesses see support and >training as very important costs. Perhaps. I can agree that I may just not have worked w/ an organization that has gone that route. I've installed, maintained and wrote millions of lines of code for the x86. No one has ever asked me to do that w/ Macs. Could just be the situation. > >> >>With the notable exception of the graphic design industry, I can't think of one >>that would save w/ Mac software. >>In the Win/x86 world Financial, Industrial, >>Military and Gen. Business have literally millions of shrink wrap solutions to >>choose from and a massive labor market geared to support it. >> > >Yes. However, the Mac has it's share too. So what if some vertical market cannot >find the exact app they want for the Mac. They are in the minority. The vast >majority of computer users are covered by Mac OS, Windows and Linux. > Sure. A family member uses only Macs. Why? Because the graphics development he does can't be touched by the PC world. You are correct. Many apps have a Win and Mac ver. >Right now, the chess playing community is not as well served on linux as it >should be. I think that has some relationship to what we were originally talking >about :) True. > >>I would be very, VERY interested in any studies you have to back up the claim >>however. I am not a Mac basher; far from it. In fact I dislike Winblows a lot >>more, but I need proof. My experience in IT has told me otherwise. > >Frankly, I don't have the numbers "at hand". You can go look them up if you >want. It's possible to take issue with the computation and formulas used to >compute something like this, and I suspect that you would probably argue with >whatever numbers were put forth. So I won't waste my time. I guess. I was actually hope that you could provide the data. I've heard many a Mac user make the same claim, but have never seen anything to back it up. In my experience doing cost analysis work, I couldn't find it. > >However, my personal observation (and we have two macs + two PCs at home) is >that people who should not consider going near a PC can be productive on a Mac. >Things that you may take for granted can be tough going for others. True. At home I have two PCs and one Mac. One thing I have to give MacOS. The installation smokes Windows or Linux. Windows has gotten better and Linux needs some MAJOR improvement in that department. The only thing I found worse was installing Solaris 7 for x86. That install is a nightmare. >I could go on here about assembly and internet hook-up, etc. But this thread is >going waay off topic. Agreed. This is way of topic, but interesting. > >Bob P. Well, take care. > >> >>Take care.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.