Peter wrote:

The whole apple vs. windows question is useless, because it's a matter of taste and I'm getting sick of vista's malfunctions, so that's why I wanna get one...

Why in God's name did you get Vista when you could've just stuck with XP? I bought my IBM laptop shortly after Vista came out, but after hearing about all the problems with it, I stuck with XP and have been perfectly happy with it.
I do hear good things about Windows 7 though, so you might wanna just stick it out until that comes out.

[quote="Ziegenbartami"]

Peter wrote:

I do hear good things about Windows 7 though, so you might wanna just stick it out until that comes out.

This should be Windows new motto. I am hearing good things about *insert new system here*. Just wait for that. All I ever had was problems with my PC. I own a Mac now and have virtually no problems what so ever. I enjoy all the products they make. I switched and at this point will never return.

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/09/16/hacker-snow-leopard-less-secure-than-windows

What's that? Less security? No games? Hand-holding system for those who don't even know how to turn a computer on? Annoying, pretentious fanbase with no technical knowledge of how to fix a problem other than "get a Mac", which is economically a horrible choice?

But I guess if you like tricycles, go ahead.

Also, I reiterate again - what problems with Vista? I've had it for about a year and a half now and I've never, ever had a problem with it. Don't bother getting Windows 7 just yet because it's going to have bugs for a while. Just like Vista did, and yes, XP for its first three years of production. Anything new like that is going to have them.

Nautilus wrote:

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/09/09/16/hacker-snow-leopard-less-secure-than-windows

What's that? Less security? No games? Hand-holding system for those who don't even know how to turn a computer on? Annoying, pretentious fanbase with no technical knowledge of how to fix a problem other than "get a Mac", which is economically a horrible choice?

But I guess if you like tricycles, go ahead.

Also, I reiterate again - what problems with Vista? I've had it for about a year and a half now and I've never, ever had a problem with it. Don't bother getting Windows 7 just yet because it's going to have bugs for a while. Just like Vista did, and yes, XP for its first three years of production. Anything new like that is going to have them.

Less security? Well since 99% of all viruses are written to infect PC's, I am fine with my security.

No Games? Don't care. Never bought a computer to play games. I bought a PS 3 for that.

Hand-holding system for those who don't even know how to turn a computer on? Why is simple bad? I took some time getting used to. But once I did, it feels much more user friendly than any other computer I have ever used.

Annoying, pretentious fanbase with no technical knowledge of how to fix a problem other than "get a Mac", which is economically a horrible choice? This one is my favorite. In this discussion the PC's have ruled. The moment someone mentioned Mac they are attacked and told they are stupid for buying it and computer illiterate. Talk about pretentious.

I have a Dell with Vista, and I have absolutely no problems with Vista as well.

I've had a Mac since before I started college and it has given me no problems whatsoever. I've even spilled bourbon on it and it functions perfectly. If I had bought a PC I know by this point I would have had to do a system restore at least twice.

Kamikaze wrote:

I've had a Mac since before I started college and it has given me no problems whatsoever. I've even spilled bourbon on it and it functions perfectly. If I had bought a PC I know by this point I would have had to do a system restore at least twice.

For the record I would prefer a Mac, but I couldn't afford one.

If you're bitching about Windows Vista or XP, why not just load Linux onto it? The same OS that the mac's use and its Open Source (read: free). Seriously, that argument holds no weight. The argument is a simple one; if you can afford it and wouldn't know how to service your PC (Firewalls, Defrags, Adware, AV Software, RAM overloads, Registry errors, Startup configurations, etc, etc) then yeah, a mac is better option. Its harder to fuck up. The trade off is the price, and its also harder to fix if it does fuck up - and eventually it will.

With an Ipod you're paying for the design more than the actual components. Creative as a branch of microsoft shall we say, isn't the most innovative in this department. Instead they'll let Apple come up with the idea's, copy them and then 6 months later release a more reliable equivalent. Apple make the click wheel, creative come up with the slide-button. Ipod goes to a colour screen, Creative fits in one with better resolution. Apple add the ability to convert files, Creative release firmware containing the drivers for every format under the sun. Hell, I can even play FLAC files on this if I wanted.

I've thus far had two problems with my Creative Zen in nearly three years. Hard Drive failure (would have been as likely in any other MP3 player) and the eventual destruction of the thin case that came with it. I rectified the former by ordering a new HDD for £40, replacing the HDD myself and upgrading it to an 80gig MP3 player in the process, and the latter I got a friend to knit me a new one.

If anyone wonders why I've been absent for most of today/yesterday, my PC had a fairly nasty virus. Despite this, at no point did I think "If only I spent an extra thousand on a system that wouldn't let me in to fix the problem!"

I've had Vista for about 9 months and had no problems whatsoever.

I have to say that I love my 16GB iPod Touch

Never, ever, ever ever ever EVER get a sony walkman or use that piece of shit that is Windows Media Player.

Nautilus wrote:

Never, ever, ever ever ever EVER get a sony walkman or use that piece of shit that is Windows Media Player.

As in the portable CD player? I still have mine from 100 years ago, and it still works fine (though I almost never use it anymore).
What's wrong with WMP? What media program would you use instead?

As in one of their mp3 players.

And I prefer iTunes because when you add folders to the library, they actually get added to the library.

Nautilus wrote:

And I prefer iTunes because when you add folders to the library, they actually get added to the library.

With WMP, all you have to do is add them to your 'My Music' folder (works for me anyhow). *shrugs*

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Nautilus wrote:

And I prefer iTunes because when you add folders to the library, they actually get added to the library.

With WMP, all you have to do is add them to your 'My Music' folder (works for me anyhow). *shrugs*

...goddamnit. But it still doesn't make any sense. I can click "add to library" and then specify a folder, and it won't add.

Nautilus wrote:

Ziegenbartami wrote:

Nautilus wrote:

And I prefer iTunes because when you add folders to the library, they actually get added to the library.

With WMP, all you have to do is add them to your 'My Music' folder (works for me anyhow). *shrugs*

...goddamnit. But it still doesn't make any sense. I can click "add to library" and then specify a folder, and it won't add.

I dunno, maybe check your settings on WMP specifying from which folders it automatically adds music?

Yeah, I added all my music folders to that setting. It still doesn't work.

Nautilus wrote:

Yeah, I added all my music folders to that setting. It still doesn't work.

WMP works fine for me. It uses less RAM than iTunes, doesn't try to convert my cds into their own format when I rip them, allows me to specify the quality easily, automatically adds anything that I download to my library and sync's to my Zen with the click of a button.

In fact, the only time I use another program is when I want to convert all my files to a lower bitrate (I rarely keep them in 320KB), where I use mediamonkey. It replaces the file with the re-encoded version and WMP picks it up instantly.