Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
not a fair comparison...do a side by side boot of windows 1 and that version of mac...windows 1 would win, and same concurrently through the versions...plus its longhorn vista, not official release vista, longhorn was even more of a resource hog than vista at release was...
Guest Guest
Posted
My 1983 Amstrad loaded faster than both of those, instantly infact. But thats also a stupid comparison
Posted
My 1983 Amstrad loaded faster than both of those, instantly infact. But thats also a stupid comparison

 

It certainly is - and the person who decided to film it is also stupid. I only posted it to see if any Apple Fan Boys would pipe up..... ;-)

Guest Guest
Posted

"Apple Macs, If you don't like the one on the left, you probably use your computer for more than just dicking around on facebook"

 

I'm not actually a fan of the look of the iMac, its too bloody big! I have a 24 inch monitor (infact I have 2) but my base unit is hidden away out of sight. Add that to the fact that the iMac is pretty useless for music production (far too few ports) and it can't play games and regardless of if I could afford it, its no good to me - I can actually afford it as my PC cost more than even the top spec iMac.

Posted
and for part 2 of that test, they then load up call of duty on both machines and see which loads first, another fair comparison as of course both machines need to load the same things on boot (the vista media player app probably uses more memory than the entire mac os)
Posted
Notepad uses more ;-)

 

exactly, so a fairer test would be how quickly vista opens notepad to how quickly that mac boots

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...