Apple Vc PC

[fuckass365]

I didn't say they weren't, but waiting 4 years for a big title is gay dude. Also if I'm going to play a low resource game I'd rather have it on my iPhone.

[Tiberius]

When will you start listening to what I'm saying? I'm not arguing that gaming on the Mac is better, never was. I'm saying that a lot of new games are also released on the Mac, because the markets are changing like that. I've never said the games play better, or that they are better on the Mac, but the argument that Macs are shit for gaming is just not true anymore.

Not all indie games are low resource...you know that, so I'm not sure why you are trying to argue it.

[fuckass365]

Also, MW is crap lol. What about Mass Effect, I bet it's not on Mac, at least not 2 or 3.

---

Debating with you is pointless, you get stuck on one idea and continue to talk about it when everyone else has moved on.

If you saw my post, I appended to it that "Mac is not shit" and just explained why I think it's not as good. If Mac was as good for games as Windows right now I'd use it primarily.

---

Not all indie games are low resource...you know that, so I'm not sure why you are trying to argue it.

No, but a lot of those $5 titles are direct iOS ports and I'd rather play them on a touch screen.

[Tiberius]

Debating with you is pointless, you get stuck on one idea and continue to talk about it when everyone else has moved on.

I've responded to your actual points. You continue to strawman my argument.

If you saw my post, I appended to it that "Mac is not shit" and just explained why I think it's not as good. If Mac was as good for games as Windows right now I'd use it primarily.

You added to that post after you posted it, and after I was writing my reply. I saw the original, and replied to the original. It isn't my fault if you add something to your post after I've responded to it.

[fuckass365]

It's not my fault that you didn't notice the post count went up by two, either.

[fr0d0]

I didn't argue they had greater longevity. I hold they have the same longevity. Yes, Windows XP is still supported, but an upgrade to to the next version of OS X costs $30, rather than Microsoft's extortionate amount. There is no reason for anyone to still be using the original version of Mac OS X (10.0 Cheetah) when it costs so little to upgrade.

Longevity wasn't aimed at you.

Macs have equal longevity if you pay to upgrade sure. With an XP PC you haven't had to pay anything. Would a 10yr old MAC even run the latest OS?? I very much doubt it. Even the PC hardware can be recycled with a light linux OS and still be current. Meanwhile similar aged Macs are good for scrap metal value.

[Tiberius]

It's not my fault that you didn't notice the post count went up by two, either.

It doesn't go up by two. If you double or triple post, they are automatically merged into one, and it counts as one.

Tip: Think before you hit the "Post Reply" button, and if you think of something to add, add it to the original post before you submit it. That way, people won't miss stuff you've said, and you won't have to tell people you've updated your post.

In any case, the difference between you and I when it comes to tech is that you are firmly set with your preferences and beliefs. I've consistently argued for why some people use consoles rather than PCs, without the need to try and trash PC gaming. Here, I even admit that Windows is a better OS for gaming, but you can't let that stand; you have to insist that I believe something which I quite clearly don't. I wouldn't complain, but you do it every time a debate on tech comes up, and it's really starting to get old.

You don't need to misrepresent my position in order to have a discussion with me. In fact, I'd prefer it if you didn't. The only reason it may seem to you that I "get stuck" on one idea, is because my original response to that idea was completely misrepresented by you, and I have to continually correct you on it.

[fuckass365]

Every US government facility is still using XP. This goes for the military as well.

---

@Tibs My mistake but I post primarily from Tapatalk and it adds to the post count so I assumed it did so on the forum as well.

[Tiberius]

Macs have equal longevity if you pay to upgrade sure. With an XP PC you haven't had to pay anything. Would a 10yr old MAC even run the latest OS?? I very much doubt it. Even the PC hardware can be recycled with a light linux OS and still be current. Meanwhile similar aged Macs are good for scrap metal value.

Well wait a minute. Are we arguing hardware or software here?

If you are installing XP on a 10 year old PC, then we are talking both, and yes, a 10 year old Mac could run OS X 10.0 (i.e. the XP equivalent).

If you are installing XP on a new PC, then we are talking about software only, and I'm not sure whether OS X 10.0 could run on the latest machines.

If you are talking about installing OS X 10.7 (or whatever we are on now) on a 10 year old Mac, then you aren't being fair, since it just isn't comparable to installing XP (which is an old OS). I mean, are you trying to argue that Windows 7 works on 10 year old tech? That's the equivalent argument for the Windows side.

So, what scenario are we talking about?

I should also probably note that the Windows XP price is a lot more than $30, so your software price comparison isn't fair either. Windows XP is a one off high price. Mac OS X is a lot of small prices. It probably works out at the same.

[BoyWonder]

I don't often agree with the emperor but this time I do.

This guy sees PCs only as gaming machines. That's the only thing that matters to him. His universe is make-belief. So what do you expect of his opinions?

He'll probably do well in church...