Ahem, now that CMSF Nato is finished...

[Michael Emrys]

...all I want to do is point out that the PC is also a good platform and the MAC is not some sort of holy grail.

As a Mac user I believe I would agree with all of that. And my personal preference is for a Mac by a huge margin. It just meets my particular needs and style of use better, which is not to say that a PC would not be a reasonable choice for someone whose needs and style are best met by that machine.

Now, can we just drop this subject and get back to CM? Please?

Michael

[daft]

yes offcourse. Its great that MAC will get CMN... I actually liked it that homeworld and close combat came on MAC as well.

Back to the celebrations.

Oh God, Homeworld. It has got to be the best game ever.

[/RandomInterjection]

[Destraex1]

I still play homeworld2 today, still a great community with loads of mods.... very very good game. One of the few space combat games that does Z axis well... MAC got it.

@michael emrys

"Back to the celebrations."

[YankeeDog]

Holy Crap years of frustration is writen in the Thread They have a solution for all Frustrated Mac and Pc users.... Consoles its called. I like to see CM:N on a Wii... Weeeeeee

Well, yeah. If it were at all economically feasible for BFC, I would LOVE to see a console version of CM. CM is far and away the most resource-intensive thing I ask of my computer, especially in the 3D graphics area. I would probably save money by paying ~$200-300 for a console to play CM on , and then buying a cheaper computer with less graphics capability for other tasks (whether Mac or PC).

If CM were available on a console, I'd also be able to play it on the 40" LCD TV, whilst my wife did her video and audio editing on the computer...

Alas, this will probably never happen. But it's nice to dream about...

Cheers,

YD

[Destraex1]

For most people I think its the other way around. My wife has the TV while my domain is the computer. Both have their own little rooms

If I had to use the TV for a console based CM, I think we may get a divorce lol

[Jaws]

For most people I think its the other way around. My wife has the TV while my domain is the computer. Both have their own little rooms

If I had to use the TV for a console based CM, I think we may get a divorce lol

+1 my wife too dominates a circly of 5 meters around the TV

[Michael Emrys]

If I had to use the TV for a console based CM, I think we may get a divorce lol

Couldn't you just buy another tv? Or is it one of those multi-thousand dollar plasma jobs?

Michael

[Battlefront.com]

Not to keep this thread off topic too much longer, but...

Within Battlefront Charles and I both use Macs as our primary computers, everybody else uses PCs. In 10 years neither Charles nor I have had major problems with the various Macs we've owned EXCEPT for the inevitable piece of hardware failure that plagues any complex device such as a computer. On the other hand, if I had a Dollar for every time one of our other guys' PCs have had to reinstall Windows, reformat a drive, or do some other horrendously time intensive and tricky fix I could retire quite comfortably Same thing with Charles and my PCs we use for CM development. So from our practical experience, as a shop that runs both sets of computers, the Mac has proven to be the overall more reliable computing system.

Mind you, I'm not saying that the MacOS or Mac hardware is 100% awesome and trouble free. That would be a vast overstatement. However, in practical terms we've found the Mac to be far more reliable than the PC. And as good as Windows has become with Windows 7, we still find the Mac less prone to configuration problems. Earlier versions of Windows varied between not bad and horrible

Steve

[Wengart]

With a VGA adapter you can play CM on a 40" Television.

[vincere]

With a VGA adapter you can play CM on a 40" Television.

I may do that when my partner goes out for a night.

[Lethaface]

I'm always surprised how people are able to create so many problems with PC's and windows. Hard disk crashes, MS Office not working anymore, BSOD, etc etc etc. I remember overheating my mobo during an all night gaming session in summer when processor fans were probably not invented yet, but thats about it. No hardware failure for my personal PC's since that time (must be around 12 years ago). My business laptops all had overheating problems at some time but thats what I get for working in the sunlight with a high end laptop. Luckily there is insurance for that

And of course Windows 98 had to be reinstalled every time I started it up, but then Windows 98 was so godlike that nobody cared.

Since XP SP2 orso I haven't reinstalled windows for other reasons then I wanted to have a new OS or bought a new machine. Of course XP and Vista slow down after you put it full of crappy software. Windows 7 is a lot better in that regard.

--

No, in my opinion the USER is the problem. PC users tend to install all kind of crappy software like free registry fixers, ZIPmaster, or TrojanHorseTheGame.exe / whatever. This is the reason windows PC's have a lot of problems (apart from having 10000's of different drivers from different vendors).

For Mac there is generally less crap to install, so users tend to install less crap and have less problems with crappy software that is faulting the OS.

The problem with Mac users is that many of them are like religious fanatics calling for the holy crusade against the Infidel Windows.

--

This is my view on the differences:

Macs are generally well build and good looking, with hardware optimized for its OS. The OS is very user friendly and good looking. They are also quite expensive.

PC's come in every shapes and sizes, from utter cheap to overly expensive. Nobody can expect a $300,- PC to be as stable as a $1500,- PC, or a $2000,- MAC.

In Windows almost everything you want to do is possible, but the more complex functions are not really user friendly. And of course all software in the world is available for windows.

For me it is quite simple; I can do everything I can on a Mac on a PC and have the skill not break it and to let it ´work´ for me I can do that at a better price then on a Mac and I can play the games I want.

However for my friend who always busts his PC up, doens't play PC games and appreciates shiny hardware I advised a Macbook Air. He also has the paycheck to pay for it.

None is better, some are just better for some users then for others.

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Lethaface, you pretty much summarized my views on the topic exactly.

[Panzerfest]

With a VGA adapter you can play CM on a 40" Television.

I had CM running on a 106" HD projector for a while, it was definitely overkill but was fun for awhile.

I had the volume pumped and was zoomed in on one of my tanks when it caught a ATGM, I damn near had a heart attack!

[Battlefront.com]

Lethaface,

No, in my opinion the USER is the problem. PC users tend to install all kind of crappy software like free registry fixers, ZIPmaster, or TrojanHorseTheGame.exe / whatever. This is the reason windows PC's have a lot of problems (apart from having 10000's of different drivers from different vendors).

Well, this comes back to the fault of the OS to some extent. The security of Windows has always been, and unfortunately will likely be for some time, extremely porous. It certainly doesn't help that there are a lot of people trying to exploit the holes, of course, but the fact remains that it is MUCH harder to do bad stuff on LINUX and MacOS.

Also, badly written software shouldn't take down the OS with it or require a drive reformat. The number of times our guys have had to do this, not to mention our testers, is uncountable. The number of times I've seen a Mac guy have to do this... well, I don't think I've seen this happen to anybody I know. And I know a lot of people using a Mac

One of the primary reasons so many Windows users have a lot of problems is the hardware they use is crap. As the old saying goes, "you get what you pay for". A Mac has always been, and probably always will be, more expensive compared to the average PC of similar horsepower and hardware features. Which is why most Macs don't die, they are retired. I've had two PCs and both are good for nothing better than boat anchors.

The problem with Mac users is that many of them are like religious fanatics calling for the holy crusade against the Infidel Windows.

Much less so now than before. I think most Mac users are comfortable that the existence of Windows isn't going to kill them off, most Windows users are comfortable that they have an OS now that doesn't completely suck (think back to DOS and Windows 3.1 compared to OS 7 or OS 8). Windows XP was the first OS that was mostly able to overcome the old "Plug and Pray" reputation, for example.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

I had CM running on a 106" HD projector for a while, it was definitely overkill but was fun for awhile.

Awe, that's nothing. I have access to a movie theater screen. Literally! I've never actually used it, but I'm thinking I really have to do it just for the Hell of it. I think CM would sound pretty nifty with theater sized Dolby Surround Sound

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

The problem with Mac users is that many of them are like religious fanatics calling for the holy crusade against the Infidel Windows.

Not so many. Ten years ago, maybe yeah. The vast, and I do mean vast, majority of Mac users use it because it suits their needs and let it go at that. I guess there are still a few loudmouths around who have nothing better to do with their lives, but you get those in every crowd no matter what the subject.

None is better, some are just better for some users then for others.

Yeah, I think that's pretty much the bottom line here. I know a fair number of people who use both Macs and PCs depending on what they need them for at the moment.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Awe, that's nothing. I have access to a movie theater screen. Literally! I've never actually used it, but I'm thinking I really have to do it just for the Hell of it. I think CM would sound pretty nifty with theater sized Dolby Surround Sound

This reminds me that I saw The Guns of Navarone in a theater when it first came out. Unbeknownst to me and surely a radical innovation at the time—around 1961—the theater had installed a quadraphonic sound system. So to my surprise at the end when the RN ships were dueling with the guns, I was hearing the muzzle blasts behind me, the shells roaring overhead, and the impacts in front of me. Neato!

Michael

[MeatEtr]

Awe, that's nothing. I have access to a movie theater screen. Literally! I've never actually used it, but I'm thinking I really have to do it just for the Hell of it. I think CM would sound pretty nifty with theater sized Dolby Surround Sound

Steve

This just in, Steve owns a theater. So the rumors are true after all, they're all rich over at Battlefront. So when do we start getting discounts? At least for those of us that been around here for a decade.

[Pvt. Ryan]

Or....

Steve works at the concession stand at a movie theater to make ends meet.

[Michael Emrys]

Or maybe operates the projectors? Nah, too technical...

Michael

[vincere]

Or maybe operates the projectors? Nah, too technical...

Michael

Operates the projector and cuts some sneaky frames in there for project mayhem.

Steve- please posts some pics of CM at the cinema, and maybe gives us a movie of Normandy?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Not so many. Ten years ago, maybe yeah. The vast, and I do mean vast, majority of Mac users use it because it suits their needs and let it go at that. I guess there are still a few loudmouths around who have nothing better to do with their lives, but you get those in every crowd no matter what the subject.

In that case, they must ALL live in the San Francisco Bay Area.

[Lethaface]

Lethaface,

Well, this comes back to the fault of the OS to some extent. [...] Windows XP was the first OS that was mostly able to overcome the old "Plug and Pray" reputation, for example.

Steve

Well of course I have to agree with you, at least partially. Security is surely not Windows strongest point. And I was a happy Mac user when I was around 10 years old with my fathers 256 grayscale monitor. Beats my own 286 DOS with Hercules monitor miles away.

Well, that was 17 years ago and things have changed.

Indeed cheap hardware is actually expensive, since it needs to be replaced often. Personally I always stick with reasonable quality brands and they haven't failed me. However nobodies going to protect a CPU fan from getting fed up with dust when the user has removed a floppy port for some reason. One of my friends managed to do that actually, the CPU burnt in front of my eyes.

Regarding OS faults it is true that windows doesn't really wins a prize for security or stability. However don't forget that the chance that a 'morons' first computer contact is with a (cracked, not-updated) windows PC Windows is about 1000000% higher then the chance they will have a any Mac as their first computer.

This is reason for malware developers to focus on windows. I predict that in the near future more and more exploits for Macs will be written and used, because the market share is higher. So it is not the question whether windows security is that good (it isn't), but how good Mac´s is actually.

For linux this is completely different. Linux is in theory very secure, albeit in the right hands. Try to install an older exploitable Linux kernel on any machine that is directly connected to the internet and it will be compromised within minutes. Incompetent users on Linux is asking for very grave security dangers, with password files being overwritable by anyone etc etc.

However typically Linux users are professionals / geeks who even help discovering exploits and who continually monitor mailing lists waiting to compile new kernels on the fly in order to be 100% secure. (I know them, I work with them).

There have been plenty of security holes in Linux but the community is much more active fixing them, instead of falling in 'm

OSX with its Unix base is stable and quite secure. However all those neat user friendly features are where the security flaws lie to be uncovered. Same with windows.

So, still I have to remain with my point that it is the user which is the real problem. As someone who has spent years supporting customers with any crap they could possibly create, I am beyond convinced

Of course not all Mac users take an offday to watch the new Key Note by Mr. HisNameShallNotBeTold. But it is a safe bet that a lot more Mac users watch the Mac keynote then windows users the windows keynote And I mean that in absolute numbers!

Apart from that I notice otherwise completely sane colleagues defend Apple's fascist like policies regardig tethering, ads, allowed apps, flash, etc. And then to see them defend apple after they screwed up the iPhone 4 is quite remarkable so to speak. And of course buy the disfunctional iPhone 4 while they still have the 3 GS, 3G, 32 GB, whatever versions there were. Nothing beats trying to make a picture with it and then trying to send it over 3g, "Hey look! It doesNOT work?!! MUAHAHAHA". The only reason I am slightly biased against mac (users) is the way they behave. Of course this is only a small % but I work in IT, so there is no escaping for me.

It is like an occult and I wish I had thought of it! How can you possibly sell 4 times the same phone to the same user in 2/3 years for a total of ~3000 EURO?

[Michael Emrys]

In that case, they must ALL live in the San Francisco Bay Area.

That's entirely possible, you know.

Michael

[YankeeDog]

I predict that in the near future more and more exploits for Macs will be written and used, because the market share is higher.

To me, the major flaw with this logic is that the Mac OSes of the late 80s and early 90s were rife with virus vulnerabilities. I don't know if they were as bad as the Windows viruses out there at the time, but they were definitely something you had to worry about as a Mac owner. And Mac's market share was actually lower then than it is now. Given this history, if virus/exploit attacks correlate with market share, then why haven't we already seen an uptick in OSX exploits?

...then to see them defend apple after they screwed up the iPhone 4 is quite remarkable so to speak. Nothing beats trying to make a picture with it and then trying to send it over 3g, "Hey look! It doesNOT work?!! MUAHAHAHA".

The negative attention the iPhone 4 gets in some quarters really leaves me scratching my head. I have to admit, I had my misgivings about purchasing an iPhone 4 given all the bad press. But my 3G was on its last legs (due to physical damage from 2+ years of hard use, not any fault of the manufacturing or design), so, since there was a 30-day no-questions-asked, no restock fee policy on the iPhone 4 at the time, I figured I'd give it a shot. If I didn't like it, I could always return it and go get a Droid er sumfink.

Now I've had it for 2 months, and it's been flawless. I send pix and files via 3G all the time. I've tried to replicate the so-called "grip of death" and I can't. I dunno; maybe I'm just lucky and the places I spend my time all have strong service. I mean, sure; I'll occasionally find myself getting a poor signal. But only in places where one would expect cell phone coverage to be bad -- the gym I go to regularly, which is in the basement of a large building, is one example. But I really don't think I can reasonably blame signal issues in a place like this on the hardware, or the carrier, for that matter.