No OS is perfect, but by combining the ease of use that Windows users expect, and the eminent hackability of the *NIX platforms, OS X makes a great case for a one-size-fits-all solution.Full disclosure: I am a traditional Mac Zealot. I have been using the Mac since 1988, and I haven’t really looked back. However, I have spent considerable time using other machines, and in true OSNews Geek fashion, I have spent equally considerable time playing with other operating systems. Like many, I toil daily on the Windows platform, but I come home to my Mac for real fun, and to get real work done.
Windows is popular in the business world because it works. In the mid-’90s, it offered a shiny GUI that CIOs understood, and hosted all the business apps that allowed their worker bees to get the job done. Slick marketing and an accessible development platform sealed the deal. Today, if you enter any workplace, chances are you’ll find Windows PCs sitting on every desktop…including my own. Once the penetration levels were complete at work, it began at home, and now you find Windows mindshare is at least as great as its market share.
But just because you can do anything with Windows, doesn’t mean it’s the best overall computing experience. The cracks are appearing in the Microsoft monopoly’s facade: increasing feature bloat, lagging performance on ever-faster hardware, security nightmares thanks to ever-more-interoperable software.
For the average Windows user on a broadband connection, it’s a bad, bad world. I’m sure many of you have had the experience of supporting family and friends through constant pop-ups, crippled systems and other bizarre behaviour. In fact, I’m already set up to visit my in-laws this weekend for yet another “cleaning session”.
The facts are becoming too huge to ignore: Windows has become a liability. Not for everyone, surely, but for the majority of the average, non-technical crowd, it’s become a weight they don’t even know they’re carrying.
Some people are looking elsewhere. For the Intel crowd, there’s Linux, a gorgeous, ideologically-pure OS with every capability that Windows has…except for usability. Look, I’m right there with the Penguin crowd, desperately wanting a super-slick Linux desktop, but it’s just not there, folks. For those without a qualified Geek nearby, Linux is simply an unattainable fantasy, something certainly hyped to a great extent, but nothing they’ll be able to manage on their own. (One caveat to this point: I would love to try out a PC that has Linux pre-installed. I wonder what kind of out-of-the-box experience I’d get with that.)
We’ve all heard stories of people who have turned away from Windows to check out Linux, but most of the time, they become frustrated and head back to the safety of the Start menu. Despite Windows’ shortcomings, when you boot into it, things just work for the most part, and you don’t have to hit the command line to get that damned sound card to work.
At present, I see only one viable alternative to Windows, and that’s the Mac. It stands toe-to-toe with Windows on a usability level, and while the masses of OSNews readers will quibble about this feature or that feature, the fact is, you can reliably interchange one computer for the other, and you don’t need a degree in Nerdology to make it happen.
The groupthink on computing states that the Mac is an “artsy” platform, suitable mostly for graphic and publishing work. I deny that: the Mac is suitable for anything you care to compute (Save games. But if you’re hardcore into games enough that a PC is your way to go, you should be looking into a console anyway). The Mac has its own fair share of applications for business and home use; you just have to know where to find them. Apple’s own Product Guide is a terrific place to start.
Furthermore, Mac OS X is built on a UNIX foundation, and thus enjoys the benefits of open source development: rock-solid stability even on older hardware, and a host of applications available. For Linux users who are seeking the power of their original platform, but are sick of dealing with compile errors and dependency problems, OS X is the best of both worlds.
For the Windows user looking for a fresh start, OS X is a compelling option. The chief burdens on Windows today — virii, security breaches and overwhelming choices — are defeated by the Mac’s simplicity. Its small market share means it has yet to be the target of a virus writer; it comes out of the box way more secure than Windows; plus, the smaller development community produces titles that are of consistently higher quality, and available for much less (including free) than their Windows counterparts. Check MacUpdate for the best in Mac shareware and freeware.
The Mac is not for everyone. But for those who are not dependant on the Windows platform, and looking for a change, the Mac presents a wonderful option. You owe it to yourself to look past the hype, and try it out.
About the author:
Aaron Vegh is a newsletter editor and freelance publisher based near Toronto, Canada. His machines include a RedHat 9 server, Gentoo laptop and his beloved G4.
‘switching’ is for non-techies.
no self respecting geek who visits osnews.com would switch.
we just “add”.
here, running, pentium 4, athlon, opteron, ppc g3, ppc g4, 12″ alum powerbook, decstation 500 (dec alpha), pentium-m(centrino), pentium 2….
running a variety of operating systems, os9, os x, xp, slackware, freebsd, dos, mandrake, and yellowdog.
stop the idiocy. are you a tech enthusiasts expanding your skills? or are you a whining fanboy of a single niche?
Farken A. well said.
“I agree that Macs are wonderful platforms. Only one issue – cost. When they can start competing on price points, then I will seriously start looking at time. For me, right now Lintel is the way to go – (accually Linux on AMD – but close enuf, eh?).”
Apple computers are cheaper than pc’s, at least in the US they are. I know this because I have tried many times to convince myself that going back to windows would be cheaper. And dollars to doughnuts, Macs are always a LOT cheaper, as much as 1/3 the cost of an equivalent pc system.
if you dont believe me, compare for yourself.
32 bit PC
pc mb integrated snd $125
3.4 ghz p4 $976
256mb video card $90-$600 avg $345
gigabit ehternet $45
sound $25
dvd burner $200
250 gb hd $200
500 watt pwr supply avg price $285
case $50
keyboard and optical mouse $150
microsoft windows xp pro $299.99
microsoft office pro 2003 $499.99
grand total without monitor $3200.98
64 bit Apple system with office
power mac G5 $1799.00
Office X for mac os X $399.99
grand total without monitor $2198.99
Apple is MUCH MUCH less expensive, the numbers are proof. and its true for laptops as well, when I bought my 14 inch iBook 2 years ago I paid a full $1000 less with a 3 year waranty then Dell was charging for an inferior inspiron system with no extended coverage.
Apple machines are not more expensive, this is just another bad myth.
SOURCES: http://www.pricewatch.com, http://www.compusa.com, http://www.apple.com
I shouldnt post this, but I cannot resist.
Here we are getting excited about whatever os is the best.
Isn’t osNews about a bit of facination for each os?
I mean, I like the mac. But I do not deminish any other os (except win, sorry)
Instead I look at osNews every now and then to check out what kind of facinating new os has come into excistance!
I know some arguments for and against each os I’ve tried, and even not tried. They change when you get to know an os a bit more.
Most of the arguments here are about trivial things based upon habits and familiarity. That’s not the way to compare osses!
What I’m trying to say is, please stop arguing.
Start to enjoy our shared interest.
-mack
“…the web page creation app…”
Are you kidding me? Microsoft doesn’t have a fucking clue how to make a decent web page creation app.
The joke is on you my friend, I have owned many PC systems and have replaced many ASUS mother boards (among others). However, I have owned 4 Macs. They are all still running. I have rplaced one flyback transformer in my old Mac II monitor. The 1988 model Mac 2 still runs fine today. I do not use it, but ocasionally sit people down infront of it and show them Word, I also run word on a 1.6 GHz PC – they performa at comparable levels (other than saving, the old HD in the Mac is slow). It is impresive to see that a 16 MHz computer compare favorably with a 18 year newer and 1000 times “faster” computer.
In the past 15 years I have maintained a PC for development (and games) – The only saving grace for the cheap hardware is that ever-poorer software makes the hardware obsolete before it breaks more than 50% of the time.
My new mac’s are still in use, I upgraded only because I can afford nicer models than I could earlier – relplacing my iBook with a PowerBook. My 3.5 year old descktop is till in use – the iBook is being used by a friend. The only Mac I purchased that is not used daily is the old Mac II and it took almost 7+ years before needing to be replaced.
How many PC’s run unmodified for 7 years? How about 4? I would be surprised if the majority of PC users get 2 years out of a system. By seven years, the only original equipment is the case …
The bottom line is Mac’s are cheaper in the long run. If you compare Apples to apples, they are cheaper out of the box. But generally you do not buy a new monitor with each new PC, nor do you buy a new copy of Windows to run on it (though in most cases you should legally).
Start throwing in productivity and the Mac really stands out. The real joke is that people continue to shell out money for hardware that is marginal and an OS that is a pure crap, spend hours, days or weeks in wasted time and consider it cheaper when they save $150.
Go to an apple store and look at the quality of construction on the Macs, it is head and shoulders above the PC. When you add in style – Apple really starts to shine. Ask your wife which computer she prefers – 10 to 1 the mac styling alone would be worth the extra $ (eMac excepted off course – but many like it, just not me)
It’s viruses. See http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoynePollard/FGA/plural-of-virus.ht…
to see if it really was a myth. But this is what I came up with to match the specs of the $1799 G5 in PC parts. Did a quick job of it since I need to go out, but I did it all from Newegg.com which is my favored store:
Nvidia FX 5200 Ultra $87
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-150-05…)
Allied 500W Power Supply $59
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=17-154-01…)
Corsair 256MB DDR333 $54
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=20-145-40…)
Seagate 80GB SATA HArd Drive $84
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=22-148-01…)
Pioneer 8x DVD-Burner $125
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=27-129-13…)
Logitech MX500 Optical Mouse USB $41
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=26-104-12…)
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ $224
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=19-103-42…)
MSI K8T800 Chipset Motherboard $97
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=13-130-44…)
D-Link Copper Gigabit PCI Ethernet Adapter $24
(http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-127-13…)
Case $50
Sound $50
Keyboard $30
microsoft windows xp pro $299.99
microsoft office pro 2003 $499.99
Total $1,727.98
So I’m still led to believe that building a similar system on PC is cheaper. I’m also not sure why the original poster chose components that are much higher end on the PC compared to the $1,799 G5. Things like the 250GB harddrive when the G5 only offers 80GB.
Are you loony? The systems you priced-out aren’t the slightest bit comparable. And you forgot to take into account the price of Office X for the Mac! Much more comparable:
Dell Dimension 8300
3.0GHz P4
256MB RAM
GeForceFX 5200
80GB HDD
DVD + RW Drive
FireWire, GigE, crappy speakers
Office 2003 Basic Edition
No monitor
1y warrenty
Various media apps
—————–
$1515
PowerMac G5
1.6GHz G5
256MB RAM
GeForceFX 5200
80GB HDD
SuperDrive
Firewire, GigE, crappy speakers
Office X. Standard Edition
No monitor
1y warrenty
iApps
—————
$2198
Price difference? About $700. For that price difference, you can upgrade the Dell to a 3.2GHz P4, 1GB of RAM, 250GB of HDD, a Radeon 9800 Pro, an Audigy 2, a set of 5.1 surround-sound speakers, and still have $80 left over. Doing the same upgrades for the Mac (minus the Audigy 2) puts you at $3317. Price difference? About $1100. For that price difference, you can ugprade the Dell to a 3.4GHz P4, Radeon 9800 XT, 2GB of RAM, and a 400GB RAID-1 array. The Mac? Well, the Mac doesn’t go that high. Just the 2GB of RAM and a 250GB RAID-1 array puts you at $4000. At that point, you have to switch the Dell to a Precision workstation, and stick a Quadro in there
> 3.4 ghz p4 $976
Get an opteron, man! They’re cheaper than the p4 you present.
The price difference is even bigger than you note. The OP didn’t include Office X. for Mac into his pricing, but included the PC version.
The issue of parent-child windows is one of the main philosophical differences between the Mac and Windows GUI. If you feel the need for parent-child windows, stick with Windows.
Apple believes a single menubar in a consistent place (i.e. along the top of the screen) is the more intuitive option. Plus under Apple’s model you can make an application active by simply clicking on any of its windows (rather than hunting for it in the Taskbar).
If the windows of other applications are distracting you, you can always “hide others” with shift-command-H.
More on Mac-Windows GUI differences here:
http://developer.apple.com/ue/switch/windows.html
why did you include the basic edition of Office in the dell? is it the same price as the standard in a mac? Standard Office for OS X is $399. Basic office for windows is 169.
and if you included it only because it came with the computer, then I think you should not be adding standard office to the mac.
the poster is referring to MDIs.
the desktop in os x is an MDI. and the floating pallets of an app disappear when the app is not in focus which means you always know what floating pallet belongs to what app.
obviously, the poster has never used OS X or he would not have made such a statement.
I use Macs, and have used OS X for two plus years now. I laugh reading about them crashing, because it’s a lie. OS X is the most stable OS I’ve ever used. I also have a PIII Dual 2.4 running XP in my office, and I use that machine maybe twice a week when customers bring me forms created on PC only software. Both OSs are extremely stable, but again, I maintain 13 work stations and one server running OS 10.3.3. I spend maybe two hours a week doing system admin duties. We have a whole section of 60 people doing XP sys-admin duties and they’re NEVER caught up. Gotta laugh.
New Emac prices.
$994.00!
eMac G4 1.25Ghz
New! Will be in stock by Monday, April 19th. Place your order now!
256mb PC2700 DDR SDRAM
80GB HD
Superdrive
56k Modem
10/100BaseT Ethernet
3 USB 2.0 ports
2 Firewire 400 ports
OS 10.3.3 (Panther)
Free Epson photo printer.
no sale tax outside of CA
There is also a system starting at $699 plus free printer.
I don’t think you could walk out of Walmart with a complete system for less.
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/families/emac/
I Dont think anyone who buys a mac buys it for its Unixness…I do evrything i need to in Nix and i would not buy a mac for that reason…they are good machenes but for the Unix someone is better of with some nice new AMD…and one more thing…Mac hardware is nice but VERY overated…just my 2 cents.
‘switching’ is for non-techies.
no self respecting geek who visits osnews.com would switch.
we just “add”.
You make an excellent point. Most technical people end up using a bunch of OS’s
@Artist: The equivilent Dell machine is a much faster 2.66Ghz P4 for $826. That’s not including the $100 mail-in-rebate, which I’d put towards getting a decent graphics card. And note, that this isn’ even a bundle offer — if you can find a special bundle deal like the eMac you list, you can probably get it even cheaper.
@Debman: Well, Office Basic is probably too little, and Office Pro is probably too much. Even if you include Office Pro, however, that’s still close to a $500 price difference.
Who cares what your running as an OS!
I want the biggest monitor in the world! Much more important than speed or operating system 🙂
I currently use a Mac.
now a days, processors speed is meaningless when you get over 1 GHz.
I write programs, edit home video, organize and fix my family photos, write papers, make graphs, do presentations all from my iBook which runs at 800 MHz. the OS is smooth as butter and nothing takes a long time to render, compile, etc. and when I am compiling or rendering, I can get work done with out hiccups in the system.
I still use my PC, but not as much since it is a desktop system (I have not used my desktop for much except storage since I got my first laptop 2 years ago…an HP pavilion)
so, I really don’t care much about the CPU anymore…. it is irrelevant for most tasks that 95% of the people want to complete. sure it matters when you are doing serious work in engineering, 3d rendering, and other processor intensive work, but even then, a G5 is perfectly fine since most of the work is vector processing and the G5s vector unit is more than adequate for the task (of course, you go tot he system that has the apps for the task as well)
so, I say to all, stop starring at your belly buttons.
The real bottomline is that some things are actually better than others despite having the same parts.
For example a Mercedes and a Hyundai will both get you to any destination you want. They both use the same roads, gas, and most of the same parts but in the end the Mercedes is a better car.
Ever look at the fit and finish of a Dell and a low end eMac? Everything on the eMac is tight and flush. Is the Dell faster? Sure but the low end and high end Dell all have crappy construction. Open a new Dell Dimensions up once and it will never close up the same again. The case rattles and squeaks all over the place. Any tech that has worked on these can tell you this. the Celeron systems aren’t even worth buying, but the low end eMacs run MacOSX just fine.
Apparently this is a big deal for PC users to say how bad Macs are yet have no idea how they work whereas most Mac users are familiar with both platforms and actually have a clue WHY Macs and MacOSX is good or not.
That’s a ridiculous comparision. The Mercedes and the Hyundai do not use the same parts. A Mercedes uses lightweight aluminum rods, expensive, well-engineered transmission components, and real wood in the dash. The Hyundai uses heavy steel rods, cheap transmission components, and plastic in the dash. The two are just not comparable. On the other hand, Apples and PCs use the exact same off-the-shelf parts from the exact same manufacturers. A western digital 80GB hard drive is the same whether its in a PC or a Mac!
And I’ve got 3 Dell cases in my room, and I can say that they are very well-engineered. Easy to access, decent-looking, and very, very quiet. As spiffy-looking as a G5’s? Heck no. But I’m buying a computer, not an art-piece. It sits under my desk and gets kicked a lot. I don’t care what it looks like.
Btw: I’m typing this from an iMac G4. I use both platforms on a regular basis, so I’m not just making claims out of thin air.
The price comparisons for the laptops are crap. Dells are basic 1.8″ thick plastic with lots of stickers. Powerbooks are clean, aluminum, include ambient light sensors with auto-adjusting screens & backlit keyboards- Take a look at the screen hinge. You wont find anything even remotely as nice on an x86 laptop. In that 1″ inclosure is a FULL system-DVD burner, gigabit ethernet, bluetooth built in, 802.11g wireless, USB 2.0, Firewire 400( 6 pin), Firewire 800, PC card slot, v90 modem, audio in/out, s-video & dvi out(mirroring and screen spanning), and wireless antenna built into the monitor. + Extreme attention to details like the tactile feel of the keyboard, symmetry, glowing power plug to show good connection and charging/full charge.
So you are all comparing apples to oran… x86 PCs
And the 1.6GHz G5 isn’t a good deal for a reason. Apple wants you to spend more to get the high end machine. Compare a Dual 2GHz G5 with a Dual top of the line opteron, and comparisons become more debatable. This is neglecting the fact that it is beautifully designed and engineered compared to a throw-it-together your self and pray you’re not dyslexic machine. Plus Apple is expected to announce big upgrades to probably dual 2.6GHz very soon). You can’t get a Radeon 9800XT on Mac, but you could get a 9800 on it a year ago when it was first announced on all platforms. And you’ll be able to get an x800 pro (ATi’s new chipset to come out soon) when the G5’s are upgraded. You just have to time your purchases in the Mac camp.
Apple can continue to shrink in market share and still grow a larger user base(The market as a whole is growing fast). If they do this, they will not lose developers, because it will still be profitable to stick a team together to develop for the platform. Over 10 million OS X users, Just as many OS 9 getting ready to upgrade, and a constant feed of switchers. Free, powerful, and easy developer tools. Does this sound like doom to you? Macs may stay niche, but there’s nothing wrong with that if they continue to improve cross-platform compatibility and continue to innovate.
That being said, Windows will not lose to the Mac, ever. Part of being a monopoly is the ability to control the market, and thats what Microsoft does. I haven’t used Linux (YET, but it will), so i can’t comment too much on it. However, i will say that Linux does have the potential to beat Windows due to the fact that you can get it for free. Microsoft can’t undercut free, but they can buy the media to make the masses believe total cost of ownership is high (and they already have), fund licensing disputes against Linux vendors (already have), and make as many proprietary technologies as possible to create the lock-in effect (ditto). Thats life. Go Linux!
I did include office x in the price, look again. and your right, the systems i compared werent comparable because the p4 only has a 32 bit word size vs the 64 word size of the g5. also that 250 gig hard drive has a 4096 byte sector size under windows xp vs 512 byte sectors under osx on an 80 gig drive. there is nothing comparable about these machines and as for the dude who mentioned using an opteron, I already have a heating system in my house, I am not in the market for a space heater at this time, but when I am I will certainly give AMD a look.
I Dont think anyone who buys a mac buys it for its Unixness..
I did. Finally there was a Unix system with an integrated GUI – not the add-on afterthought KDE and Gnome represent (though they both are doing an extremely good job for that).
Don’t underestimate the force called IBM. Better get used to these goodies, the consolemarket finally gonna push them to more GHZ aswell make them cheaper.
Go work at Burgerking afterhours and in a short while you also can enjoy the magic of these wonderful machines.
Ever worked on AIX pseries?
If linux is linux because of its kernel, why is OS X considered a UNIX if it uses the MACH kernel?
Do you have the slightest clue what you’re talking about? 32-bit vs 64-bit makes zero difference in performance (well, small integer percentage point difference). Its important because of the increased addressable RAM. Thus, 32-bit vs 64-bit has nothing to do with G5 vs P4. The G5 is faster clock for clock, but a mainstream 3.0GHz P4 should keep up easily with a 1.6GHz G5. And a GB is a GB, and all modern hard drives have a sector size of 512 bytes. Comparing a 80GB to a 250GB harddrive is just plain innane.
PS> Oops, you’re right about the Office OS X. But so did I, so the $700 price difference stands.
a 64 bit word can hold more control information, so you can utilize more opcodes, address more registers, use 3 address instructions, etc.
basically, not only does 64 bits allow more address space (almost never 2^64 on a RISC machine due to the control word structure) but it allows for more information to be placed in a control word, which, when optimized, could make your code work faster because it could reduce the number of instructions that you must pass through the pipeline.
wow!
as i read this, i thought to myself this is me!
i run windows at work, and had run it at home…
…til i bought a g4 on ebay.
it was my first mac experience in nearly 15 years,
and the best computing decision i have ever made.
i am sick of updating/maintining/securing win boxes at work.
i certainly wasn’t about to do the same at home.
i bounced around a few linux distros, still running several… at one point i was running win/linux/osx on a 4-port kvm. i really love linux, and play w/ it constantly. but like the author, i needed a simpler solution. (i.e. get on, get work done, get out).
today, i run osx as my primary box at home. i unplugged the win and lin boxes, removed the kvm, and couldn’t be happier.
to supplement my win cravings, i installed virtual pc running xp. i encapsulated it w/o network connectivity, so it lives its life out in a bubble in osx solely to run autocad. i have yet to install lin in v-pc; in the meantime, i always have the terminal for my lin/unix/bsd cravings. regarding gaming, aspyr [etal] have come up w/ some great ports. i have no issues w/ my gaming on the mac. however, again like the author, if i was that hard-core about gaming, then i’d buy a console…
osx provides me stability, power, speed, and security (everyone) deserves. perhaps at a cost, but believe me, you get what you pay for. though not a g5, the quality of my g4 box and its componentry is superior to anything i have seen.
apple just announced a price drop on the emacs, 1.25 g for $799. if you are looking into a new box or have ever been mac-curious, i say run and buy one.
thx for a great article,
jeff
you jokers are tiresome.
think i’m a mac zealot? you would be wrong, you won’t find a single mac in my apartment currently. perhaps i’ll get a powerbook when they go G5, perhaps not.
anyway, as an mcse, rhce & small business owner, if I ran across you in my day to day business, I can guarantee you that your never ending crusade to prove to the mac people that “you are right”..would severely hurt any respect I might have had for you.
i mean, give it a rest.
It’s just a tool. Do you really think if I found myself in need of a video editing workstation, or just a secretary computer that would be somewhat more resistant to the usual XP garbage (viruses, trojans, spyware) THAT I WOULD GIVE A SHIT ABOUT $500-$700 over the life of a computer?
please.
If I need 3000 cheap as shit computers, sure I’d probably go Dell.
But if I need 10 workstations for a research lab, the extra $5000 isn’t shit to a $30,000 budget. That extra $5000 will save $20,000 to hire a microsoft monkey to apply patches and hit the restart button when things go wrong.
You people are stupid beyond belief. Are you guys mature adults with responsibilities?
I find that impossible to believe.
Anyway, I’d be very interested to meet some of you…perhaps I’ll bring along some friends, CCIEs, PHDs, research fellows, oncologists, physicists etc.
and we’ll have a good long laugh at your idiocy.
-a fan of dell, newegg.com, apple, slackware, windows xp, redhat, yellowdog, powernotebooks.com, freebsd, OS X, and OS 9.
Rayiner said: “Do you have the slightest clue what you’re talking about? 32-bit vs 64-bit makes zero difference in performance”
again…Rayiner shows his supreme intellect. Dude, what kind of fool are you? I’m about to buy a dual Opteron system precisely because it’s faster then a P4 in 64bit operation.
blah blah blah, spout some false, or narrow scoped psuedo technical garbage.
THE FACT IS, THE OPTERON IS FASTER IN 64BIT MODE against itself (in 32bit mode) and a P4.
so just give it a rest. In fact, I’d have to suspect that you are paid by OSNews just to be a nuisance, and create these extremely long pointless threads.
64bit makes a difference. only retards and rayiner thinks 64bit makes no difference.
http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/archives/pari-dev-0401/msg00015.html
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1884&p=17
“THE FACT IS, THE OPTERON IS FASTER IN 64BIT MODE against itself (in 32bit mode) and a P4. ”
If you knew anything about the Opteron, you’d realize why that is – and it has nothing to do with being a 64-bit chip and everything to do with exposing more registers in extended mode. It doesn’t indicate anything for other architectures. In fact, for some tasks (and all else being equal) a 64-bit chip can be slower.
As far as getting work done goes, Expose is incredibly helpful.