"Mike G" wrote:

according to apple.com it is ".Mac" ??

No, .Mac is an online service for Mac users.

Steve's .Mac page is he

http://homepage.mac.com/steve/Resume.html

if you want to learn more about .Mac (or dotmac as some people call it)
go he

http://www.mac.com/

but Apple refers to the Macintosh, as a Mac or mac or Macintosh, never
MAC since MAC in all caps means "Media Access Control". And every
computer has a MAC address, thus the reason you can't interchange the
two meanings.

lastly, some uneducated people think "Mac" is a company, meaning they
mistakenly say something like:

If MAC would get a built-in toaster, I'd buy one...

When it's only correct to say: "If Macs would get a built-in toaster...

Or, "If Apple would put a built-in toaster into a Mac, I'd buy one...

"Julie Smith" wrote:

I'm not trying to flame... but I hate bottom posting! I have to scroll all
the way down just to read your post because I read the posts before it. I
don't want to read the indented text messages. That said, I dont mind
bottom-posted emails. But bottom posting in newsgroups is useless.

yes, but you aren't using a "real" newsreader, you are using Microsoft
Outlook Express 6.0 which isn't designed to work with Usenet.

for the PC, get something like Forte Agent and you'll understand why the
keepers of Usenet / maintainers of proper netiquette demand that replies
be at the bottom.

http://www.forteinc.com/main/homepage.php

lastly, part of the problem is newbies don't understand they need to
"trim" or "snip" unneeded content when they reply... so for people like
you Julie, I understand since the thread may be too long, too much
trouble to go to the bottom, but if they would learn how to properly
"reply", it's not a problem.

These "vista" groups are quite new, so it will take awhile before people
learn to do it properly.

Mr. Landry, apparently you haven't been inside an Apple store lately. The
one in the Annapolis Mall offers their Macs with dual operating
systems....OSX AND WIN XP. The whole reason for switching to INTEL was to
enter the faster, more compliant platforms.

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

If he see a flame war as you suggest, we need to blame the OP of this
thread for starting the flame war.
The large cross posting of off topic by the OP in itself suggests a flame
war was desired from the beginning.
So you are seeing the desired outcome which really had little to do with any
information of substance.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org


"Ted Landry" wrote in message
...
"ChrisM" wrote:

Do you guys ever read your own posts on topics like this?
It's like reading messages by a bunch of kids!
My OS/Platform is better than yours! My dad is bigger than your dad...!

Basically MAC and PC are two very different platforms. They each have
their
own strengths and weaknesses. No-one can deny that PC(in this case, I
mean
Microsoft) has a much larger share, but that doesn't mean it is the
better
platform for all applications. MAC is probably better at certain things,
especially very high powered graphical stuff, but that doesn't mean it is
the best choice for everything.
For goodness sake, just use the platform you want to, and accept the fact
that someone from the opposing 'camp' is unlikely to share your opinions!

chris, that's all nice and cute... but it doesn't get to the reason
these debates exist...

here is the situation:

the mac world, is pulling world society forward on a massive scale...
the first real pc, first color monitors, first floppies, first mouse
first laser printers, first networking, first web access, first digital
cameras, created the www, first to have wireless, first real mp3 player,
etc.

while the PC world, is really "the old IBM punchcard world", they are
concerned with keeping the status quo, they don't like change, they DO
like complexity, they like expensive support, poorly written code, loud,
poorly built computers, etc. they are concerned with "keeping people
down"......

which is the complete antithesis of what the "mac world" is trying to do.

SO you have conflict... what you see in a flame war is just that "flame".

it's two difference sides pulling on each other. is either side right?
no, of course not. but the fun thing about the Mac world is we are using
computers and techniques a PC user won't see for 3-10 years, we get to
do the fun stuff, create, explore and have the best tools while doing so.

pc users are kinda the "unconscious cogs of society", they typically
work at 9-5 jobs, are part of some corporate bureaucracy, have little
personal freedom and have no power "over" their computer, microsoft
controls "all" and they are fine with it. whereas mac users have total
control over their machines, and apple simply stays out of their way.

neither is right or wrong, it's just mac users pull society forward, and
pc users pull society back.

Mac-Intosh......

Mc-DONALDS....

All rubbish designed to fill a hole while waiting for life to occur.

"Michael Jennings" wrote in message
...
M comes before N which make dot you know which better.
Might have to be a mactroll to be able to figure that one out?

"Mike G" wrote in message
...
according to apple.com it is ".Mac" ??

"Ted Landry" wrote in message
...
bp wrote:

yep! if you want the best, you get a Mac, just like I have been
saying.
If your MAC is so good why does it have a Windows emulater?

ah, first of all... it's not MAC... it's Mac, or mac... NEVER "MAC". So
you are wrong right at the start.

2nd... no Mac comes with a "Windows" emulator... that's only added later
for people still needing hand holding before they enter the modern
computer world. and 3rd, it's NOT an "emulator", it's a Virtual Machine.

Read up on it next time...

http://www.parallels.com/

Bob wrote:

Mr. Landry, apparently you haven't been inside an Apple store lately. The
one in the Annapolis Mall offers their Macs with dual operating
systems....OSX AND WIN XP. The whole reason for switching to INTEL was to
enter the faster, more compliant platforms.

But Apple will never sell you one configured that way. They have no need
for Windows. That's just a working demo for the Windows users so they
can feel comfortable while they make the switch to a more modern OS.

Windows is basically seen as "Utility Software" by the Mac community.
It's rarely needed anymore, but some old timers keep it around for
nostalgia.

On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:26:26 -0700, Ted Landry wrote:

Bob wrote:

Mr. Landry, apparently you haven't been inside an Apple store lately. The
one in the Annapolis Mall offers their Macs with dual operating
systems....OSX AND WIN XP. The whole reason for switching to INTEL was to
enter the faster, more compliant platforms.

But Apple will never sell you one configured that way. They have no need
for Windows. That's just a working demo for the Windows users so they
can feel comfortable while they make the switch to a more modern OS.

Windows is basically seen as "Utility Software" by the Mac community.
It's rarely needed anymore, but some old timers keep it around for
nostalgia.


That's what I said about my orignial mint condition TRS-80 from Radio
Shack. A Mac very much reminds of that. The Mac community is basically
cooks, fools and wild eyed zealots that don't know any better.

http://www.weller.to/wcc/trs/wcctani__01l.jpg

Adam Albright wrote:

That's what I said about my orignial mint condition TRS-80 from Radio
Shack. A Mac very much reminds of that. The Mac community is basically
cooks, fools and wild eyed zealots that don't know any better.

http://www.weller.to/wcc/trs/wcctani__01l.jpg

Nah, Macs are just the epicenter of the computer world, what Apple does,
everyone else follows. And that's been true for a little over 30 years.

That's what I said about my orignial mint condition TRS-80 from Radio
Shack. A Mac very much reminds of that. The Mac community is basically
cooks, fools and wild eyed zealots that don't know any better.



I did not know that they were also cooks . Any good? :-)


--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"Adam Albright" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:26:26 -0700, Ted Landry wrote:

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:11:47 +1000, "Julie Smith"
spake thusly:

I'm not trying to flame... but I hate bottom posting! I have to scroll all
the way down just to read your post because I read the posts before it. I
don't want to read the indented text messages. That said, I dont mind
bottom-posted emails. But bottom posting in newsgroups is useless.

If don't properly, the post is trimmed and responses may be
interspersed throughout/.

Not to mention posts have a tendency of not hitting all news servers,
thus preserving the post in chronological order helps with that.
--
Scott http://angrykeyboarder.com

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

"Ted Landry" wrote in message
...
bp wrote:

No, Vista has a long way to go until it can be compared to OSX in terms
of security or being advanced enough for large IT departments. You are
forgetting OSX is far more battle tested in the field than any version
of Windows could ever hope to be

This is the silliest thing I have ever heard.

how so? OSX has been tested much longer than Windows, it dates back to
the early 70's before Microsoft was even around... follow the Unix
history chart back... follow the OSX line back and you'll see Windows
doesn't even compare in terms of being "battle tested" more than OSX.

http://www.levenez.com/unix/

If OXS is such a fantastic OS why is there not an IBM PC version out there
? Sould kick MS's butt according to you.