Why doesnt the military use Macs or OSX?

[SFDMALEX]

Why is that so? If MACs are SO MUCH MORE stable, reliable etc?

I just ask because I was at a military expo today and the latest of radar equiped APCs use windows on their onboard computers.

And I've seen plenty more PC in the military, never a mac.


So why?

Why is that so? I mean price is not even an issue with a professional army so wtf do they use PCs?

[TNT]

b/c most people get scared when they work on MACs..... the menu is at the top.... :shock:

but i would think they would use it for virus protection. :bah:

but PCs are cheaper and it is the government. :lol:

[saadie]

it is very easy to intrigarte different electronic gadgets on a PC using serial /parallel and usb ports even PCI slots, and controlling program made in any programing language such a C or VB etc.

[SFDMALEX]

Yea yea I know all that guys.


Im just waiting for an excuse from the mac boys.

[nthfinity]

anybody else remember the Pentagon Macintosh G4 virus disaster?

[black_magician]

^^ AHAHAHAA!!

answer: they're running linux!

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS8940905970.html

[TNT]

I think bmw06m6 got it right, if you look at when it all started then that is where loyalties began. and when you spend billions of dollars its hard to change what isn't broken

[saadie]

Not so much, they use Linux on mainframes and servers but Winders on desktop and portable devices.

lol ... yeh ...

these days .. APC and Radars are portable devices ;)

[Sir_GT]

PC's are cheaper. Simple.

Desktop + Portable device x the amount used by the government = hundreds of millions of dollars.

Even a $1 diff would probably cost the government more than $10M. So why would they spend that amount of taxpayer's monies? They would never be able to justify it, especially with the abundance of tech guys for windows-based hardware.

Honestly, would you want to see your tax money spent on a profit margin? Good product or not, Apple has always placed a wider profit margin on their products compared to rival PC offerings.

Besides, there aren't any portable Mac OS's. Everything is just much easier when your main PC and your portable are running the same OS brand.

[saadie]

when it comes to millitary .. money is no big issue ..... ;)

the only thing is veristility ;)

[TNT]

^^^ money is an issue when you are spending millions or even billions on a network.

[saadie]

what network do you want with a radar .. lol

i am very much deeply involved in the millitary ...

and i know this dude really well who intregating PC's for SAM's and radars and even aircraft testing equiptment ;)

[TNT]

My dad is a DoD contractor ( http://www.eaglesystemsinc.net/ ) i hear about it all the time about computers, staff, and money.

[saadie]

^^ you rich lil poodle :lol:
my dads a brig general in the MOD muhaha :prr:

and heres the the page of the company my uncle owns http://www.nextekservice.com/ ....

[SFDMALEX]

I have to say Im am fucking shocked that the Mac excuse is "price"


This is funny.....since when did the military care about money?

If MAC offered something better THEY WOULD SWITCH TO MAC.

There are not going to bother saving 100 or 200 or even 500 or even 2000 dollars on a million + plus APC if the other system actually offered anything better.

This is trully pathetic if you think that they get PCs because its cheaper :lol:

Your a bunch of pooftas afterall then to even think this. :lol:


Oh and a funny response from our admin
"yeh i guess all those billions on stealth planes meant they couldnt afford a few macs :roll: "


Its also funny because my dad has first hand expriance with the US military, place he works at http://www.uniquesys.com/ is selling communication devices to the US Air Force and they are willing to pay thousands of dollars extra for added stability etc.


And Im sure 10 or 100 million is going to put a big dent in the 450 BILLION budget of the states.

Im sure they are willing to save 100million or fuck 5 billion dollars....and with those saving get unstable systems that crash over heat and put the lives of the troops and multi billion dollar developments under risk.

The shittiest argument I have herd yet...I mean really..... :roll:

The bottom line is that military was is and always will be the eptiome of technology. What modern military systems are capable of is simply mind bogling. Everything comes from military first.


And as previously said. Im sure the US government cared to save 500$ on a 350$ million F-22 :roll:

The US Navy spent over 100million to change the wiring on all F14s, because even though the old wires where OK, they found some things problematic.

The military use potentiometers with silver conductors, and relays that cost about 10x more then your conventional relay in your little stereo...

I mean the argument is trully pathetic.

[SFDMALEX]

WTF another mac vs. pc thread :violin:

Why don't we use the energy to hate on finalgay instead, macs is oldsk00l :P


Whose waisting energy? me not.....I just find this amussing....you know waiting for mac boys to come up with an excuse...only to get a valid point out of them by about page 4 of the thread :P

[TNT]

Still SFDMALEX you are not proving anything and why would MAC users (ie myself) get in a hissy over the government not using the product i am using?......... :? if anything i would be happy they don't "understand" my computer tech. i use :mrgreen:

[Sir_GT]

I have to say Im am fucking shocked that the Mac excuse is "price"


This is funny.....since when did the military care about money?

If MAC offered something better THEY WOULD SWITCH TO MAC.

There are not going to bother saving 100 or 200 or even 500 or even 2000 dollars on a million + plus APC if the other system actually offered anything better.

This is trully pathetic if you think that they get PCs because its cheaper :lol:

Your a bunch of pooftas afterall then to even think this. :lol:


Oh and a funny response from our admin
"yeh i guess all those billions on stealth planes meant they couldnt afford a few macs :roll: "


Its also funny because my dad has first hand expriance with the US military, place he works at http://www.uniquesys.com/ is selling communication devices to the US Air Force and they are willing to pay thousands of dollars extra for added stability etc.


And Im sure 10 or 100 million is going to put a big dent in the 450 BILLION budget of the states.

Im sure they are willing to save 100million or fuck 5 billion dollars....and with those saving get unstable systems that crash over heat and put the lives of the troops and multi billion dollar developments under risk.

The shittiest argument I have herd yet...I mean really..... :roll:

The bottom line is that military was is and always will be the eptiome of technology. What modern military systems are capable of is simply mind bogling. Everything comes from military first.


And as previously said. Im sure the US government cared to save 500$ on a 350$ million F-22 :roll:

The US Navy spent over 100million to change the wiring on all F14s, because even though the old wires where OK, they found some things problematic.

The military use potentiometers with silver conductors, and relays that cost about 10x more then your conventional relay in your little stereo...

I mean the argument is trully pathetic.

Who said I'm making an excuse? Look at my sig, I'm running windows.

All I'm saying is that there are several factors here. Personally, I think price is an issue, especially when you can find a cheaper alternative that is easier to make work with your mobile hardware, and basically is more appropriate to the tasks at hand.

So how can you justify spending millions of dollars on something that will just force you to use up more time because there isn't a mobile counterpart?

It all depends on what you want the hardware for.

Ad agencies, video editing and special effects studios use Mac's. The pixar guys use Macs too IIRC. It's a machine you use if you need to edit, process, and render graphics. Big whoop.

The military needs something that is easily configured right? Isn't that what Mac's aren't? Machine's that are easily configured?

Also, with regards to price again: just because you have a 450B budget means that you can just piss away 10M. The US gov't spends an insane amount on stealth bombers because there isn't a better alternative for what they are intended for. Need something that can't be detected, can't be hit my normal GtoA missiles, and yet still cause an insane amount of hurt on the opposition? Then look no further.

Likewise, when you have an always changing network of systems, you can't rely on one company to provide you with the hardware you need only when they feel like it. You need to be able to find what you need, asap, through any means necessary. And with the incredible amount of PC manufacturers around the world, both desktop and mobile, it only makes sense to go that way.

Besides, for all you know, they're all probably running Linux. Which is a free customizable version of the Mac's UNIX-based OS. It's fully customizable, it's free, and it's a shitload faster than windows.

[dutchmasterflex]

MS has a monopoly. Windows is everywhere.

Windows however, is going into a downward spiral.. The operating system blows, and a much better one (unix based, like OS X) should be it's replacement.

those are my 2 cents..

[SFDMALEX]

MS has a monopoly. Windows is everywhere.

Windows however, is going into a downward spiral.. The operating system blows, and a much better one (unix based, like OS X) should be it's replacement.

those are my 2 cents..

:lol: So are you saying a Ukrainian APC/Tank/x/x/x/x designer builder like Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau is being somehow forced to use windows? :lol: :P

And this is not debate about operating systems, this is about platforms. Everyone knows that a lot of military software is unix based, but what they run on is PC.

Windows just happens to be one of the hundreds of operating systems for PC. :P

[SFDMALEX]

Who said I'm making an excuse? Look at my sig, I'm running windows.

All I'm saying is that there are several factors here. Personally, I think price is an issue, especially when you can find a cheaper alternative that is easier to make work with your mobile hardware, and basically is more appropriate to the tasks at hand.

So how can you justify spending millions of dollars on something that will just force you to use up more time because there isn't a mobile counterpart?

It all depends on what you want the hardware for.

Ad agencies, video editing and special effects studios use Mac's. The pixar guys use Macs too IIRC. It's a machine you use if you need to edit, process, and render graphics. Big whoop.

The military needs something that is easily configured right? Isn't that what Mac's aren't? Machine's that are easily configured?

Also, with regards to price again: just because you have a 450B budget means that you can just piss away 10M. The US gov't spends an insane amount on stealth bombers because there isn't a better alternative for what they are intended for. Need something that can't be detected, can't be hit my normal GtoA missiles, and yet still cause an insane amount of hurt on the opposition? Then look no further.

Likewise, when you have an always changing network of systems, you can't rely on one company to provide you with the hardware you need only when they feel like it. You need to be able to find what you need, asap, through any means necessary. And with the incredible amount of PC manufacturers around the world, both desktop and mobile, it only makes sense to go that way.

Besides, for all you know, they're all probably running Linux. Which is a free customizable version of the Mac's UNIX-based OS. It's fully customizable, it's free, and it's a shitload faster than windows.



And I dont think your quite grasping the concept.

Pissing away money would be if both platforms offered the exact same thing but one was significantly more expensive. That would be pissing away money.


However if the MAC platform offered anything even remotly more secure, more stable, more expandable the military would go with that.

You see the light now mate?

If MACs offered anything over PCs, a smaller failure rate, better stability, faster proccessing the military would get the better product even if it costs them 500$ more a unit.

We are talking about professional army's too. Im not talking about some conscript number force of north korea.


As I said before. The soviets used potentiometers that used silver for the coductor strips where are a ton of other metals could be used to perform the same job, maybe 0.01% worse.

[Sir_GT]

Who said I'm making an excuse? Look at my sig, I'm running windows.

All I'm saying is that there are several factors here. Personally, I think price is an issue, especially when you can find a cheaper alternative that is easier to make work with your mobile hardware, and basically is more appropriate to the tasks at hand.

So how can you justify spending millions of dollars on something that will just force you to use up more time because there isn't a mobile counterpart?

It all depends on what you want the hardware for.

Ad agencies, video editing and special effects studios use Mac's. The pixar guys use Macs too IIRC. It's a machine you use if you need to edit, process, and render graphics. Big whoop.

The military needs something that is easily configured right? Isn't that what Mac's aren't? Machine's that are easily configured?

Also, with regards to price again: just because you have a 450B budget means that you can just piss away 10M. The US gov't spends an insane amount on stealth bombers because there isn't a better alternative for what they are intended for. Need something that can't be detected, can't be hit my normal GtoA missiles, and yet still cause an insane amount of hurt on the opposition? Then look no further.

Likewise, when you have an always changing network of systems, you can't rely on one company to provide you with the hardware you need only when they feel like it. You need to be able to find what you need, asap, through any means necessary. And with the incredible amount of PC manufacturers around the world, both desktop and mobile, it only makes sense to go that way.

Besides, for all you know, they're all probably running Linux. Which is a free customizable version of the Mac's UNIX-based OS. It's fully customizable, it's free, and it's a shitload faster than windows.



And I dont think your quite grasping the concept.

Pissing away money would be if both platforms offered the exact same thing but one was significantly more expensive. That would be pissing away money.


However if the MAC platform offered anything even remotly more secure, more stable, more expandable the military would go with that.

You see the light now mate?

If MACs offered anything over PCs, a smaller failure rate, better stability, faster proccessing the military would get the better product even if it costs them 500$ more a unit.

We are talking about professional army's too. Im not talking about some conscript number force of north korea.


As I said before. The soviets used potentiometers that used silver for the coductor strips where are a ton of other metals could be used to perform the same job, maybe 0.01% worse.

What would the US military need garageband and iPhoto for? :|

My argument is that the military uses what's appropriate, you're argument is that they use the "best". But isn't the "best" equipment whatever is the most appropriate?

Think of it this way: the "best" land machine in world would be an F1 car, but that isn't appropriate for military use, but with regards to speed and manueverability, F1 cars simply use the best technology out there.

Do you think that the military would spend $3B on F1 cars "just because"? Of course not. They would never be able to justify that. They would spend $3B on tanks. They're nowhere near as fast as an F1 car, nor are they as agile, but they sure as hell get the job done.

Again, why would the military purchase a 3Ghz Quad-core, 16GB Ram, 2TB MacPro? Just because they can? What for? To render Ice Age 3: Acorns in Iraq?

Bollocks.

They'll purchase the hardware that is most appropriate to what they need. That, for the military, is the "best" hardware.

[TNT]

^^^ well said.

[SFDMALEX]

What would the US military need garageband and iPhoto for? :|

My argument is that the military uses what's appropriate, you're argument is that they use the "best". But isn't the "best" equipment whatever is the most appropriate?

Think of it this way: the "best" land machine in world would be an F1 car, but that isn't appropriate for military use, but with regards to speed and manueverability, F1 cars simply use the best technology out there.

Do you think that the military would spend $3B on F1 cars "just because"? Of course not. They would never be able to justify that. They would spend $3B on tanks. They're nowhere near as fast as an F1 car, nor are they as agile, but they sure as hell get the job done.

Again, why would the military purchase a 3Ghz Quad-core, 16GB Ram, 2TB MacPro? Just because they can? What for? To render Ice Age 3: Acorns in Iraq?

Bollocks.

They'll purchase the hardware that is most appropriate to what they need. That, for the military, is the "best" hardware.

The land example is too broad of a scope. We got everything from tractors to jet powered dried salt lake world speed record machines.


Here we are talking about computers, personal computers whose task is to do the same thing. I mean after all PC and MAC are in direct competition, or in reality no competition because mac is oh how many per cent of the world computer netowork? I think you know that number. We are not talking about basic function calculators and NASA super computers.

So once we get back on track and start talking about compters and not the polar opposites of F1 machines and Tanks we get back to the question of why is the military using PC platforms instead of MAC platfroms if MACs are soooo much better (we all know they arent, but thats what the mac boys say) then PCs, more stable, faster and all that :wink: :P


Your attempt and trying to make it look like MACs and PCs do different things hence the military chooses the PCs for their purposes is weak. Because, essentialy MACs and PCs do the same thigns. PCs do about a 1000x more due to the simple fact of software availibility but forget all that...as the mac boys say apples do everything and then some over my not so orange PC.

[TNT]

^^^ you aren't making any points, you are just trying to get us MAC users in a hissy fit. but its not working. we have given a lot of reasons and the main one, money, you don't want to accept. but look at the history, when MACs went "downhill", PCs boomed and the market force went to the software of PCs and the government ran with what was popular. besides during that time MACs were viewed as hard to use.

thus once the government set up its contracts/training/budget they just had no need to change or want.

[Toronto]

the military isn't doing graphic or editing videos on their PC's,
they are just using it for numbers.
that is why. plain and simple. apple has never claimed to be better @ a PC on simple tasks like excel and 2+2. they are aimed for people who want to do audio/graphics/video editing and other visual/audio stuff

DONE AND DONE.....

now get bill gates dick out of your ass and stop with the anit-apple spam.

and don't bring up the whole 'but the adobe suite is on PC TOO now' cause if you have ever used it on BOTH you will be shocked @ the diff. and by USED i mean knowning all the shortcuts, drop down menus and sliders.

[SFDMALEX]

WTF is you on about? 2+2 eh....man your more fucking lost then a redneck in a pussy trying to find the g spot.

Bill Gates dick? I'm sorry aint Apple paying him for ipods? No one takes it more up the ass then apple.

And I would like you to point where ever I supported gates or Microshaft.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's just sad seeing all the mac boys get so sensative because there is FUCKING NOTHING that apple can offer over the competition. Even looks since I can get that same bloody case on a 400$ PC. You all just dish out your cash and take it up the ass like a hair dresser.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Your mac is a fasion accesory. Like it or not, from the military to engineering no one uses a fucking mac. And eventualy everyone will stop using them in the audio and video business. But its ok, I'm sure each dickhead in hollywood has one, and you just like the idea. :P

Brutal honesty hurts. But keep taking it up the ass, just use protection.

DONE AND DONE

Case closed.
:P

[Toronto]

so why don't you start some microsoft bashin threads?
cause it is to easy? it is like pickin on a retard?

[SFDMALEX]

so why don't you start some microsoft bashin threads?
cause it is to easy? it is like pickin on a retard?


Way ahead of you.

[nthfinity]

the military isn't doing graphic or editing videos on their PC's,
they are just using it for numbers.
that is why. plain and simple. apple has never claimed to be better @ a PC on simple tasks like excel and 2+2. they are aimed for people who want to do audio/graphics/video editing and other visual/audio stuff


ok..... who said excel is the best number crunching software for pc? PSI plot is amazing, and used by the government; and what about circular track-plots? oh... there is only one prog that does that...

and so the reason the governness doesn't take apples is because apple sucks at doing databases, and analyzing data? i guess they must have shitty code for the processor to not even run raw data well.

so the reason teh Government doesn't use apple mac's is because the government doesn't need graphic heavy needs?

how stupid are you?

seriously

how s t u p i d. (hats on/hats off type debate)

what do you think NORAD/NSA/CIA/FBI etc. etc. etc. all use when they are looking at satalite imagry (read, not nessisarily phots; but color ehanced through uber satalite technology; AND USER END Graphical PC's

Satalite imagry, satalite data converted to graphical imagry, Radar, radio, photonics and super secret shit we dont even know about that is accurate to 1" or perhaps better.

so yeah, the government doesn't do massive labor intensive graphical use at all :roll:

[SFDMALEX]

Satalite imagry, satalite data converted to graphical imagry, Radar, radio, photonics and super secret shit we dont even know about that is accurate to 1" or perhaps better.

so yeah, the government doesn't do massive labor intensive graphical use at all :roll:

man you silly :lame:

You know they only do 2+2 :roll:

[Toronto]

i thought he was talking about ground units? NOT NASA not CIA and not NORAD and ACP's last time i checked they don't need to render a graphics?

also i never said that excel was the best? nor did I apply?
also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.

and i am sure the super computers don't use a user interface like OSX or XP, they use a much simple and straight forward code that they don't sell to others.

ground units DON'T do massive labor intensive graphical use at all. show me one!

[SFDMALEX]

i
also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.


Common d00de is this the best you can come up with? :( I wanted to keep this one sided argument going but your giving up already :(

[Toronto]

http://www.xvsxp.com/finalscore/index.php

[SFDMALEX]

http://www.xvsxp.com/finalscore/index.php

:shock: Thank God for Google :P And their PC Linux Servers :P

[Toronto]

i
also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.


Common d00de is this the best you can come up with? :( I wanted to keep this one sided argument going but your giving up already :(

NASA uses VxWorks, not XP or MS products on most of their systems.
if you know what NORAD and the CIA uses please tell me.

also apple and apple products are not trageted to governments. so to ask why they don't use them is to ask why doesn't a truck driver use a bedpan?

[nthfinity]

i thought he was talking about ground units? NOT NASA not CIA and not NORAD and ACP's last time i checked they don't need to render a graphics?

also i never said that excel was the best? nor did I apply?
also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.

and i am sure the super computers don't use a user interface like OSX or XP, they use a much simple and straight forward code that they don't sell to others.

ground units DON'T do massive labor intensive graphical use at all. show me one!

have you ever heard of Scion Image?

that is the program NASA/NOAO/NRAO etc. use to "color" thier images....

guess what, I've been to these places, and what isn't a Sun workstation, is a PC, or a PC with Solaris, or Windows NT.

guess what, MOST of their work graphical intensive computers are NT PC's not some garbage mac.... in fact, there was not a single Macintosh on any of the premesis' that I worked at.... unless some poofta brought it to unwind with at home, or at the premisis' dorms.

NASA CIA and NORAD, National Weather Service etc. ALL render graphics..... WTF you think satalite, space craft, rovers' etc. all send back? digital data that is all specific numbers and values; often uninterpretable by human eyes, in natural form etc. whatever.

in these super-hi res forms, how what exactly do they look at, some 80 character monochrom screen? no sir; 4 monitors for those guys...... on NT workstations predominantly.

I've never seen a mac doing the graphics work at the NWS any of the times i've worked with them at thier buildings; and let me tell you... they got shit that multi national companies cant even get in regards to IT

in regards to rendering graphics

what about the most powerful rendering program out there, Maya?

how long did it take it to port over to Mac? 12 years? huh? more?

It began on a SGI workstation, and ported shortly afterward to Windows NT workstations, Linux boxes, and eventaully macs for home use; since there isn't a such thing as a mac render farm... why? because the code must suck?

[SFDMALEX]

daaaaaummmmmnnnnnnnnnnnn OWNAGE, w00t w00t


I laugh out lond if they try to argue that, I mean really.........someone just got TOLD!



Someone is putting those PC based Google servers through their paces right now trying to find a counter argument :P

[Toronto]

how many groud units in iraq are using Maya???? tell me?

again
ground units DON'T do massive labor intensive graphical use at all. show me one!
the topic was about and ACP? what does an ACP have to do with the CIA and NORAD???? TELLL me stop posting all this NORAD and weather shit if it isn't answering my question?

satalite, space craft, rovers - they run on VxWorks no XP, so why don't we make a thread talking about that? why cause it isn't targeted to them!!! why is this hard to grasp?

i am not saying or supporting that the military or any weather service etc. should use macs. i am saying it wasn't built for them. plain and simple.

[Toronto]

daaaaaummmmmnnnnnnnnnnnn OWNAGE, w00t w00t


I laugh out lond if they try to argue that, I mean really.........someone just got TOLD!

ownage? i believe to be owned a person my have their point or statement proven wrong?

"apple and apple products are not trageted to governments" don't see a counter point for that?

[SFDMALEX]

/\/\/\


D00de for the second time ITS APC I dunno wtf ACP is.

The topic was about military, not APCs, thats just one example of PC use in the military.

And for your information they do rendering. Their night vision runs through filtering software thats on a PC :P


w00t w00t

[SFDMALEX]

[quote=SFDMALEX]
"apple and apple products are not trageted to governments" don't see a counter point for that?


Thats right, Apple needs targeted advertisments to sell their products.

PC are like Ferraris, no adds and they still sell like XTC at a rave. :P

[Toronto]

And for your information they do rendering. Their night vision is runs through filtering software thats on a PC :P
w00t w00t

night vision runs via a PC????????

D00de for the second time ITS APC I dunno wtf ACP is.

sorry it is 2am and i am pissed tired, and i have to wake up in 5 hours to go to my work. and have no time to argue with people that seem to not get a simple point. and blow a non-existent point out of proportion to make themselves feel better to make fun of the people that use a mac because of their personal preference

[SFDMALEX]

i am not saying or supporting that the military or any weather service etc. should use macs. i am saying it wasn't built for them. plain and simple.

So macs cant do what PCs can afterall. Who woulda thunk et!

Bingo!

So coming outta the closet wasnt so hard afteral eh? :P

[nthfinity]

ground units DON'T do massive labor intensive graphical use at all. show me one!
the topic was about and ACP? what does an ACP have to do with the CIA and NORAD???? TELLL me stop posting all this NORAD and weather shit if it isn't answering my question?


what computers run guidance systems?

what computers determin Friend or Foe in zero light conditions, converted to both visual reference, as well as computational interopolation in the ground force tanks/APC's etc. ? Not a mac, i'll tell you that.

what about targeting systems? ground units dont use mac based targeting systems either.


ownage? i believe to be owned a person my have their point or statement proven wrong?


well, not that i'm trying to own anybody...

BTW


also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.


I am on a first name basis with many guys at NOAO/NRAO/NWS, and have done some stuff with the guys at the NOI (oceanographic)

[SFDMALEX]

night vision runs via a PC????????


Welcome to the new age :P

I believe that guy told me its a 5 year old system. So not so new afterall :P Maybe they run it on IPODs now.

Maybe your forgeting that we are talking about a radar equiped APC and not a headset type night vision :P But Im sure you knew that. :P

ranging distance, and a bunch of other functions built in. Why do you think it costs 10,000$ for an entry level set of night vision?

[Toronto]

what computers run guidance systems?

what computers determin Friend or Foe in zero light conditions, converted to both visual reference, as well as computational interopolation in the ground force tanks/APC's etc. ? Not a mac, i'll tell you that.

what about targeting systems? ground units dont use mac based targeting systems either.


of course it isn't a mac!!! wait were they built for that? maybe.... er... no.

but if you guys want to be picky. they ain't PC's either :wink:

[Sir_GT]

What would the US military need garageband and iPhoto for? :|

My argument is that the military uses what's appropriate, you're argument is that they use the "best". But isn't the "best" equipment whatever is the most appropriate?

Think of it this way: the "best" land machine in world would be an F1 car, but that isn't appropriate for military use, but with regards to speed and manueverability, F1 cars simply use the best technology out there.

Do you think that the military would spend $3B on F1 cars "just because"? Of course not. They would never be able to justify that. They would spend $3B on tanks. They're nowhere near as fast as an F1 car, nor are they as agile, but they sure as hell get the job done.

Again, why would the military purchase a 3Ghz Quad-core, 16GB Ram, 2TB MacPro? Just because they can? What for? To render Ice Age 3: Acorns in Iraq?

Bollocks.

They'll purchase the hardware that is most appropriate to what they need. That, for the military, is the "best" hardware.

The land example is too broad of a scope. We got everything from tractors to jet powered dried salt lake world speed record machines.


Here we are talking about computers, personal computers whose task is to do the same thing. I mean after all PC and MAC are in direct competition, or in reality no competition because mac is oh how many per cent of the world computer netowork? I think you know that number. We are not talking about basic function calculators and NASA super computers.

So once we get back on track and start talking about compters and not the polar opposites of F1 machines and Tanks we get back to the question of why is the military using PC platforms instead of MAC platfroms if MACs are soooo much better (we all know they arent, but thats what the mac boys say) then PCs, more stable, faster and all that :wink: :P


Your attempt and trying to make it look like MACs and PCs do different things hence the military chooses the PCs for their purposes is weak. Because, essentialy MACs and PCs do the same thigns. PCs do about a 1000x more due to the simple fact of software availibility but forget all that...as the mac boys say apples do everything and then some over my not so orange PC.

There isn't that big a diff between F1 cars, tanks, and PC's and Mac's.

F1 cars and tanks both take you from A-B, one can carry a maximum of 2-3 people when designed to do so, and one traditionally needs 2 people (driving and the gunner), and can carry a few others.

PCs and Macs can also both do similar tasks, but when it comes to specifics, they are designed to do different things.

I've already gone into detail and explained my point of view. I don't need to sound like a broken record and repeat it just because you refuse to accept the fact that Macs are designed to be the best platform for graphical work.

Do you see Mac ads talking about numbers? No. They even gave it to the PC when the spoke about spreadsheets in the ads. They talk about how great they are when it comes to processing graphics, websites, videos, and the like.

AND, the fact of the matter is, they make the best hardware for those tasks. Period. They are the "best" at what they are designed for.

The end.

[SFDMALEX]

d00de dont loose your breath, you need to catch up, we're way passed comparing dildos to dicks and lattes to espressos. :P

[Sir_GT]

ground units DON'T do massive labor intensive graphical use at all. show me one!
the topic was about and ACP? what does an ACP have to do with the CIA and NORAD???? TELLL me stop posting all this NORAD and weather shit if it isn't answering my question?


what computers run guidance systems?

what computers determin Friend or Foe in zero light conditions, converted to both visual reference, as well as computational interopolation in the ground force tanks/APC's etc. ? Not a mac, i'll tell you that.

what about targeting systems? ground units dont use mac based targeting systems either.


ownage? i believe to be owned a person my have their point or statement proven wrong?


well, not that i'm trying to own anybody...

BTW


also i know the artist that colours the hubble telescope images uses a mac.


I am on a first name basis with many guys at NOAO/NRAO/NWS, and have done some stuff with the guys at the NOI (oceanographic)

nth, don't the "mobile" units need to process their data via some sort of wireless signal before reaching the processing unit at "home?"

Mac doesn't have ANY "mobile" software/OS whatsoever IIRC. So why would the government use something that doesn't coordinate as well with their mobile units?

Again, we were talking about the military, not Nasa. Nasa technicians can probably put together hardware that goes well and beyond what consumers can afford, not something that Macs really do, is it?

Mac's OS has to run off specific hardware. I think we're all aware of that. If the Nasa techs needed hardware for "number crunching" that wasn't compatible with Mac's OS, why would they use it?

Again, it just boils down to the same argument: the government, or any government arm, will purchase whatever is the most appropriate to their needs. There are just way too many factors to consider, most of which we will never be privy to, such as contracts, deals, support offers, and the like.

[nthfinity]

Do you see Mac ads talking about numbers? No. They even gave it to the PC when the spoke about spreadsheets in the ads. They talk about how great they are when it comes to processing graphics, websites, videos, and the like.

AND, the fact of the matter is, they make the best hardware for those tasks. Period. They are the "best" at what they are designed for.

The end.


has anybody said how macs' require that you have your recorded video/music to be recorded on an external hard drive? PC's dont give a shit.... oh, and RAID RAID RAID ;)


but if you guys want to be picky. they ain't PC's either

x86 architechture, running at vast temperature extremes, high humidity; low humidity, whatever.

so it may not be windows; but it shares commonalities with a IBM, Sun, Unisys, and other high end PCs.

yes, not everything is x86, some is newer these days.

[Sir_GT]

d00de dont loose your breath, you need to catch up, we're way passed comparing dildos to dicks and lattes to espressos. :P

Goodmorning to you too. I'm 12 hours ahead of EST, and it's a holiday. I think I'll take my time.

Besides, I'm more interested in building a quad-core PC at the moment, then deciding what OS to run afterwards. :)

[SFDMALEX]

/\/\/\

Another one out of the closet.

Macs dont have ANY "mobile" software : :shock: but why :shock: :lol: I thought macs do everything a PC can better and then some :P

[SFDMALEX]

Anyway good night.


Oh and FUCK MIRCO$HAFT.

http://edbatista.typepad.com/edbatista/images/2005/05/Power%20to%20the%20People.gif

[Sir_GT]

/\/\/\

Another one out of the closet.

Macs dont have ANY "mobile" software : :shock: but why :shock: :lol: I thought macs do everything a PC can better and then some :P

Eh? I never said that. Don't count me as a Mac fanboy. I always knew that Mac's couldn't do everything. However, they can do most of what I need for my work. I've only started looking into their hardware recently because they seem to have a lot of things that are "appropriate" to what I need.

HOWEVER.

I would rather build a PC, then run Mac's OS on it, rather than pay the premium for the design. I'm more interested in the functions.

So far, all this thread has proven is that PC's are easier to build toward a specific purpose, but what I don't see being mentioned is what is lost in the process. From a consumer standpoint, I still need something that can do the best at the work I do, and still give me casual/daily use-flexibility.

Hence, I admittedly am very fascinated with Mac's OS. But, as I said, I would rather buy and build the hardware myself.

Besides, pooftas exist on both sides of the spectrum. Look at the alienware pooftas, and sony pooftas. :)

[TNT]

wow, that was the biggest load of BS i have read in a while.

The only point the anti-mac people are proving is that the uses the government asks for in a computer, isn't filled by Apple. nor has Apple tried to fill in that gap or wants to. They are a stable GRAPHIC based OS. Apples are known for having better graphics/graphic processing.

sure each OS has its strong point be that Linux, OSX, Windows, etc. But SFDMALE you aren't proving a point? You asked a question and you get an answer and then proceed to going on for three pages about nothing...... :roll:

again what are you trying to prove?

[saadie]

hes trying to prove that we are right and so is he ... :lol:

[SFDMALEX]

/\/\/\

Another one out of the closet.

Macs dont have ANY "mobile" software : :shock: but why :shock: :lol: I thought macs do everything a PC can better and then some :P

Eh? I never said that. Don't count me as a Mac fanboy. I always knew that Mac's couldn't do everything. However, they can do most of what I need for my work. I've only started looking into their hardware recently because they seem to have a lot of things that are "appropriate" to what I need.

HOWEVER.

I would rather build a PC, then run Mac's OS on it, rather than pay the premium for the design. I'm more interested in the functions.

So far, all this thread has proven is that PC's are easier to build toward a specific purpose, but what I don't see being mentioned is what is lost in the process. From a consumer standpoint, I still need something that can do the best at the work I do, and still give me casual/daily use-flexibility.

Hence, I admittedly am very fascinated with Mac's OS. But, as I said, I would rather buy and build the hardware myself.

Besides, pooftas exist on both sides of the spectrum. Look at the alienware pooftas, and sony pooftas. :)

Ok ok your not as bad as I thought :wink: I respect your opinion.

However if you are going with an alternate OS route on a PC why MAC OS? Just curious since you have 100s of OSs to choose from.

[SFDMALEX]

wow, that was the biggest load of BS i have read in a while.

The only point the anti-mac people are proving is that the uses the government asks for in a computer, isn't filled by Apple. nor has Apple tried to fill in that gap or wants to. They are a stable GRAPHIC based OS. Apples are known for having better graphics/graphic processing.

sure each OS has its strong point be that Linux, OSX, Windows, etc. But SFDMALE you aren't proving a point? You asked a question and you get an answer and then proceed to going on for three pages about nothing...... :roll:

again what are you trying to prove?

lol.......what? :lol: :P

So Mr. I own a mac and it's great from Graphics proccessing. What is exactly that graphics proccessing that you do on your mac?

Lets see some of your models and renders :P


It's funny because lately I made a lot of friends in the game industry and I am yet to hear anyone say anything about doing their work on a mac. :P You know graphicaly intense modeling and such.

So show me how you use the strong points of your mac.

There I just proved my point.


And now that you all came out of the closet and admitted that the only proffesional use for a MAC would be a narrow field in graphic applications I guess we can all close the case and let the jury go.

So MACs are shit anyway and 80% of MAC users dont even use a mac because of its "strong points" Old news made public :P


But please retaliate, I find this thread ammusing.

[Sir_GT]

/\/\/\

Another one out of the closet.

Macs dont have ANY "mobile" software : :shock: but why :shock: :lol: I thought macs do everything a PC can better and then some :P

Eh? I never said that. Don't count me as a Mac fanboy. I always knew that Mac's couldn't do everything. However, they can do most of what I need for my work. I've only started looking into their hardware recently because they seem to have a lot of things that are "appropriate" to what I need.

HOWEVER.

I would rather build a PC, then run Mac's OS on it, rather than pay the premium for the design. I'm more interested in the functions.

So far, all this thread has proven is that PC's are easier to build toward a specific purpose, but what I don't see being mentioned is what is lost in the process. From a consumer standpoint, I still need something that can do the best at the work I do, and still give me casual/daily use-flexibility.

Hence, I admittedly am very fascinated with Mac's OS. But, as I said, I would rather buy and build the hardware myself.

Besides, pooftas exist on both sides of the spectrum. Look at the alienware pooftas, and sony pooftas. :)

Ok ok your not as bad as I thought :wink: I respect your opinion.

However if you are going with an alternate OS route on a PC why MAC OS? Just curious since you have 100s of OSs to choose from.

So far, between "popular" ones such as Windows, Linux, and Tiger, It's OS X's that I found had the right "balance" of what I needed. Basically, it was a no-bs OS (legacy code?) that was still useable without having too much adjusting.

Linux is quicker, yes, but the lack of a plug-and-play system and the apps I need for it automatically takes it out of the equation. (I used Knoppix btw)

It basically boiled down to windows and os x, simply because of the software apps I need. One of which, as silly as it may sound, is safari. I need to test websites once the coding is done, and since I can use bootcamp on macs to boot winxp, I can still test the site on IE, so I don't really lose anything, but I can't do the same on a windows-based PC.

Again, as you can see, I'm interested because of the functions I need that mac's os has. The poofta designs can go to hell.

I'm sure there are similar "mount" programs similar to bootcamp on the other os's, but I can't really work on graphic programs that are simply "mounted" due to the loss in performance. I can live with mounting windows just to test IE, but I can't work with a mounted Adobe and Macromedia Suite.

[SFDMALEX]

I see, thanks for saying it how it is :wink:

[TNT]

wow, that was the biggest load of BS i have read in a while.

The only point the anti-mac people are proving is that the uses the government asks for in a computer, isn't filled by Apple. nor has Apple tried to fill in that gap or wants to. They are a stable GRAPHIC based OS. Apples are known for having better graphics/graphic processing.

sure each OS has its strong point be that Linux, OSX, Windows, etc. But SFDMALE you aren't proving a point? You asked a question and you get an answer and then proceed to going on for three pages about nothing...... :roll:

again what are you trying to prove?

lol.......what? :lol: :P

So Mr. I own a mac and it's great from Graphics proccessing. What is exactly that graphics proccessing that you do on your mac?

Lets see some of your models and renders :P


It's funny because lately I made a lot of friends in the game industry and I am yet to hear anyone say anything about doing their work on a mac. :P You know graphicaly intense modeling and such.

So show me how you use the strong points of your mac.

There I just proved my point.


And now that you all came out of the closet and admitted that the only proffesional use for a MAC would be a narrow field in graphic applications I guess we can all close the case and let the jury go.

So MACs are shit anyway and 80% of MAC users dont even use a mac because of its "strong points" Old news made public :P


But please retaliate, I find this thread ammusing.

i use my for all things graphic design.

http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/matrix.html

the premium version. so name anything those programs can use and i can do it.

[evoWalo]

Who says the military doesn't use Macs?

http://www.apple.com/itpro/profiles/army/

For the lovers here are some new Get a Mac ads

http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/accident_848x496.mov

http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/angeldevil_848x496.mov

http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/trustmac_848x496.mov