I was still using one of those metal-chassis IBM PCs in college in 1994! It was pretty worthless except it made a great calculator for the physics lab. ;-)
- As for the Mac, I used one very similar to it (with hard drive) upto 1994 as well. It was provided free by the college to write reports.
- Neither was as good as my Commodore Amiga however - 4000 colors, near-CD quality sound, and true preemptive multitasking. In 1985. And only $600. :-)
Haha fuck me theres still quite a lot for a fucking computer. When I got my MacBook Pro (first use of a Mac) it was instant in knowing how to use it. I spose for the first computers though it was hard.
i remmeber those pc's was absolute poo they was real comPOOters green screen and slower then a snail they made speccys look like super computers, macs i guess they was okey if you was really boring not sure what people did on macs although i know they was responsible for those horrid b&w mag prints i guess if your a writer then this was the typewriter for you prob explains the tiny instruction manual but for the prices they was asking for i would of just got a normal typewriter heh
No, The Mac was 5000x better than any commodore so thats why commodore went out of buisness because the commodore computers were worth what you pay because they stink and the Mac is worth like $5,000. COMMODORE STINKS!
For years, as a PC user I slagged off Macs (and with good reason before OS X)... now, after just under 2 years of owning one, I'll never make Windows my primary OS EVER again! Most people have no idea how secure and stable UNIX-derived OSes are. Their loss, but I'm sure they love installing anti virus software, defragging, cleaning the registry, having Windows nag you with pop up alerts, etc etc.
I think the Mac OS was superior to the Windows PC OS prior to 1985. Then Microsoft blatantly copied the Mac with Win95 (trashcan, finder, shutdown procedure) and they became about equal. Except Mac was still more stable.
Then Windows XP (NT5) arrived, and now I don't really see any difference. They both seem equally capable and stable.
@NDogg15 To me 5.0 versus 5.1 is not a significant difference. Windows ME had flopped and embarrassed Microsoft, so they came-up with a rush job. They released 2000 to the home owners, but under the new name "XP" - no real difference
.
Similarly I don't really see any difference between NT 6.0 and NT 6.1 - they just upgraded the Vista Beta to a bugfixed version.
@harleykman i'm not going to argue on your capability and stability standpoint, but in my usage, i've found mac os to be easier to use, quicker, and all around more enjoyable. (and i've been using computers since windows 95 came out, so no one try to throw that MACS ARE FOR IDIOTS crap at me)
@harleykman the lack of support isn't their fault though. that's down to software developers. also, there are plenty of apps out there for the Mac. you just have to know what you're looking for (i might add that most of the apps are actually kinda better too).
ill take the Ipad.
PortalJumper98 4 months ago in playlist Mac FUN
RIP Steve Jobs
MattFreakinBoy 5 months ago
Godspeed, Steve Jobs
sromero1966 5 months ago
@Triundi, Macs are for Bil Gates to copy, and for you so you can feel smart with yourself
sromero1966 5 months ago
R.I.P. Steve Jobs
msufandan 5 months ago
I'd take both for 2x the sophistication...
poopskinTheLiar 5 months ago
So Macs have always been targeted towards people who don't understand computers? Makes sense.
Triundi 10 months ago
If you'd invested $1000 in Apple stock back then, you'd be a millionaire today.
Catandthespoon 10 months ago
@Catandthespoon forest gump made the right choice!
electron2601 5 months ago
@electron2601 LOL :)
Catandthespoon 5 months ago
@Catandthespoon No, you wouldn't. You would be richer, that's a fact.
But long way from a millionaire. I guess math isn't your strongest point.
drucik 4 months ago
@drucik And I guess being a patronising, smug little cunt, is your strong point?
STFU and get back to cleaning my house, you silly Polak. :)
Catandthespoon 4 months ago
lol still true :D
JakesTechBox 1 year ago
I was still using one of those metal-chassis IBM PCs in college in 1994! It was pretty worthless except it made a great calculator for the physics lab. ;-)
- As for the Mac, I used one very similar to it (with hard drive) upto 1994 as well. It was provided free by the college to write reports.
- Neither was as good as my Commodore Amiga however - 4000 colors, near-CD quality sound, and true preemptive multitasking. In 1985. And only $600. :-)
harleykman 1 year ago
@harleykman
Word.
Shame commodore management had a fatal allergy to common sense.
richardmaudsley77 1 year ago
@harleykman Commodore sold a Amiga for only $600?
MasterNaruto1214 1 year ago
Apple: Making people feel superior to others because they buy useless and overpriced computers since 1984.
setoravenclaw 2 years ago
@oneironaut420 i agree with you, although about Mac os, i think it still was an awesome os
GadgetSuperHero 2 years ago
Comment removed
CubeFish1524 2 years ago
A statement which proves you've never actually used one for any significant length of time.
oneironaut420 2 years ago
Haha fuck me theres still quite a lot for a fucking computer. When I got my MacBook Pro (first use of a Mac) it was instant in knowing how to use it. I spose for the first computers though it was hard.
TheLeardMan 2 years ago
that computer is so BA id trade in my bacmook pro for it right FUCKING now
djcripplecrunk 2 years ago
haha wanna trade i have one with a mouse and a key board and everything!
PQPLAYER92 2 years ago
i remmeber those pc's was absolute poo they was real comPOOters green screen and slower then a snail they made speccys look like super computers, macs i guess they was okey if you was really boring not sure what people did on macs although i know they was responsible for those horrid b&w mag prints i guess if your a writer then this was the typewriter for you prob explains the tiny instruction manual but for the prices they was asking for i would of just got a normal typewriter heh
xslowcorex 2 years ago
Green Screen??? on the Mac 128k? I think you may be confused.
darthsalesman 2 years ago
The Macintosh was affordable. The lisa wasn't. The Lisa's price killed itself.
rwagoner 2 years ago
of course everyone brought commodore amigas that was 2x better and 2x cheaper then any mac lol
buzzjunked 2 years ago
no it was not. amiga was primitive.
wxstatic 2 years ago
No, The Mac was 5000x better than any commodore so thats why commodore went out of buisness because the commodore computers were worth what you pay because they stink and the Mac is worth like $5,000. COMMODORE STINKS!
MacintoshPlus1MB 2 years ago
for years macintosh have slagged of PC computers, for god damm years, and yet 90percent of the population own pc.
what does that say?
1ExTERMINATE1 3 years ago
That Apple makes deliberately over-priced crap that is non-upgradable and is pretty much simply a niche product in this market.
babaev 2 years ago
macs own pcs and ive got 3 graphics cards i my mac pro and 5 hard drives what more could you want (i can even add 2 more graphic cards)
muk546 2 years ago
Comment removed
mule1974 2 years ago
Comment removed
mule1974 2 years ago
For years, as a PC user I slagged off Macs (and with good reason before OS X)... now, after just under 2 years of owning one, I'll never make Windows my primary OS EVER again! Most people have no idea how secure and stable UNIX-derived OSes are. Their loss, but I'm sure they love installing anti virus software, defragging, cleaning the registry, having Windows nag you with pop up alerts, etc etc.
oneironaut420 2 years ago
@oneironaut420
I think the Mac OS was superior to the Windows PC OS prior to 1985. Then Microsoft blatantly copied the Mac with Win95 (trashcan, finder, shutdown procedure) and they became about equal. Except Mac was still more stable.
Then Windows XP (NT5) arrived, and now I don't really see any difference. They both seem equally capable and stable.
harleykman 1 year ago
@harleykman Actually, XP was NT 5.1. Windows 2000 was NT 5.0.
NDogg15 1 year ago
@NDogg15 To me 5.0 versus 5.1 is not a significant difference. Windows ME had flopped and embarrassed Microsoft, so they came-up with a rush job. They released 2000 to the home owners, but under the new name "XP" - no real difference
.
Similarly I don't really see any difference between NT 6.0 and NT 6.1 - they just upgraded the Vista Beta to a bugfixed version.
harleykman 1 year ago
@harleykman i'm not going to argue on your capability and stability standpoint, but in my usage, i've found mac os to be easier to use, quicker, and all around more enjoyable. (and i've been using computers since windows 95 came out, so no one try to throw that MACS ARE FOR IDIOTS crap at me)
vantageIIx 1 year ago
@vantageIIx I agree Mac OS is an excellent OS
- unless you want to run IE web browser
- or 2xAV plugin to make music play double speed (without sounding like chipmunks)
- or if you're stuck on OS 10.4 like I am because Mac doesn't support 700 megahertz CPUs
- and of course 10.4 can't run the latest Safari 5 or iTune
- and on and on and on
.
Mac has a lot of the same disadvantages of Linux - namely lack of wide support/ programs
,
harleykman 1 year ago
@harleykman the lack of support isn't their fault though. that's down to software developers. also, there are plenty of apps out there for the Mac. you just have to know what you're looking for (i might add that most of the apps are actually kinda better too).
j800r 1 year ago
@harleykman Who would WANT to use Internet Explorer?
GruntyStudios 1 year ago
@GruntyStudios i use windows and even i dislike it. its just a programmed fart. almost as bad as google chrome
estlib 6 months ago
One of the first ever computers by Apple. A rich and great one back then.
GarthBeatty 3 years ago
weve come a looong way
smartalec1998 3 years ago
More like Computer for the richer of us if you updated this advert.
damiannerd 3 years ago
Great Ad
fjdiazb 3 years ago