Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey ppl!
Just bought myself a Mac Laptop, and currently looking for Mac PSX emulator. I used to have ePSXe1.6 for PC, and now i feel kinda lost, for there are no ePSXe for MacOS =(((
So I need a piece of advice on the best Mac PSX emulator. Any ideas?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Powerbook G4 =)
You see^ I've tried PCSX but I had a truoble with bios (I think).
When I use "simulate bios" mode my FFVII dies as soon as first battle starts, and there are other gliches as well (like sound is going slower than video, stuff like that).
However, when I use 1001 bios, i cannot acces controller at all. Like i tried two different plug-ins yet nothing worked. =(((
Other two emulators (Flameworks2 (i think that's the name) and VGC (not sure about the name either) are not working at all).
Any ideas guys?
thnx
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
A better option, if your PowerBook G4 is a TiBook

kingsize said:
Hey ppl!
Just bought myself a Mac Laptop, and currently looking for Mac PSX emulator. I used to have ePSXe1.6 for PC, and now i feel kinda lost, for there are no ePSXe for MacOS =(((
So I need a piece of advice on the best Mac PSX emulator. Any ideas?
If you've got a Titanium PowerBook G4 rather than one of the AlBooks, you can boot natively into OS9 and run Connectix VGS. That is really the way to go if you've got a TiBook. Solid USB gamepad support (no analog sticks though) and super speedy.

I've held onto my TiBook primarily to have a nice portable PSX.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Piffle.

Valcrist said:
Uh, any mac can boot natively into OS 9.
:???: Whoah? Care to name your source on that one? I'll use Apple and personal experience as mine.

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25114

Take a look at that chart. You see that (9) in the OS 9 column for all those Macs at the bottom? Check the qualification on that. Apple says (quite rightly) that they can "start up only in Mac OS X, but most Mac OS 9 applications can be used with Apple's bundled "Classic" software environment".

Classic is not the same as OS9. Witness the fact that VGS does not run under classic, only having natively booted into the old OS 9. This was the point I was trying to make in the first place...before you attempted to correct me with nonsense.

Try booting any G5 into OS9. Nope. Trying booting an intel based iMac (or now shipping MacBookPro) into OS9. In fact, try to boot an AlBook G4 into OS9. It does not work. That is just plain fact. I could also get pedantic and explain how sooooooo many Macs that predate OS 9 cannot boot natively into OS9, but that's not the point.

The point is that you made a completely misinformed and inaccurate statement. I'm correcting that for you.

:cool:
 

·
Premium Member
bsnes, ePSXe
Joined
·
23,380 Posts
hoho, chalk up another point for why Macs suck!

a PC bought in 1998 can run Windows 98. a computer bought in 2006 can run Windows 98. but Macs have no such advantage with their respective OSes :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Macs are teh suck?!

hushypushy said:
hoho, chalk up another point for why Macs suck!

a PC bought in 1998 can run Windows 98. a computer bought in 2006 can run Windows 98. but Macs have no such advantage with their respective OSes :rolleyes:
LOL. Abandoning support for legacy technology. Yeah, that really sucks. I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or actually believe that.

But if you do, here's food for thought... Many of those pieces of hardware in that 2006 PC will not be supported, nor guaranteed to work correctly if you install Windows 98. Windows 98 and in fact 98SE have been declared end-of-life by Microsoft. Whereas Microsoft had to split their energy in two with their Consumer and Enterprise OSes (Windows 98, 98SE, ME vs. NT4, NT5 (later to be renamed Windows 2000) ) and went in two different directions (mainly because they couldn't get the games working under their non DOS-based operating systems), Apple made a clean break and released OS X. So, without having to develop a legacy OS (98, 98SE, ME) to get around the shortcoming of their non-DOS-based OS (2000), OS 9 ceased further development.

Why a company would opt to develop a dead operating system for new hardware that doesn't support it doesn't make that much sense.

The only reasons this particularly comes into play is Sony's suit against Connectix over VGS and then their acquisition of same. Had Sony not killed off the product during the OS 9 era, I am sure development would have seen it through to the modern era.

I couldn't tell if you were being serious, taking the Mickey or just trolling your own boards, but I figured I would respond in case it was the former. :thumb:

In any event, having used both Macs and PCs for over 20 years, I figured I might point out what seemed to be a rather short sighted and uninformed comment.
 

·
Premium Member
bsnes, ePSXe
Joined
·
23,380 Posts
heh, only partly serious. i have absolutely no ambition to use 98, but hey some people do. and it's nice to know that you can use it on any hardware.

it's just the fact that Apple makes "complete" computers that always bugged me. it's the proprietary thing going on. no one has to develop crap for windows 98 anymore, do they? but it'll still run on my current computer, just in case i want it to. but Apple is the opposite. notice how you said you keep this old laptop just to play VGS? wouldn't it be nice if you could simply dual boot into OS9 on your new laptop if you wanted to play VGS?

i hope you see the analogy i was trying to make there....just about how im disappointed that Apple continually pushed for new new new and ditched the old stuff (i honestly didnt know that you couldnt natively boot OS9 on newer Macs).

PS. what is taking the Mickey? i was gonna ask if that was a foreign term but....we live in the same city :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,447 Posts
QBranch: Ok, I knew that it couldn't boot OS 9, I did mean boot it in Classic which isn't the same as OS 9 but for someone who is new or doesn't know much about macs is realtively the same enviroment, heck even the folder has a 9 on it, my words got mixed up :p. And I never tried VGS on a mac seeing as how I've always done emulation on my PC since its much more powerful so of course I wouldn't know that. Also I do not claim to know everything about macs, nor was I trying to throw around "non-sense" I've only had a Mac for a year now sheesh, but thank you for correcting me :p.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
hushypushy said:
heh, only partly serious. i have absolutely no ambition to use 98, but hey some people do. and it's nice to know that you can use it on any hardware.
Actually, there are a few games that play better in DOS, which is all 95-98SE are with the Windows OE on top. And for this I keep a machine that runs 98 perfectly around. However, this idea that you can "use it on any hardware" is a bit of a misnomer. There is plenty of modern production PC components that will not work under 98. There's no reason for it too though. The manufacturer of the OS isn't developing for it any longer, the market for the hardware doesn't really exist.

hushypushy said:
it's just the fact that Apple makes "complete" computers that always bugged me. it's the proprietary thing going on. no one has to develop crap for windows 98 anymore, do they? but it'll still run on my current computer, just in case i want it to. but Apple is the opposite. notice how you said you keep this old laptop just to play VGS? wouldn't it be nice if you could simply dual boot into OS9 on your new laptop if you wanted to play VGS?
For the most part, it is complete hardware. Except I can change the graphics card in my desktop, the RAM in my desktop, the disks drives in my desktop, the HD interface in my desktop, the external firewire and USB devices in my desktop, the interface and acquisition cards in my desktop and the monitor on my desktop. Hold on... What does that leave? The case, the power supply and the motherboard. OK, the case, the power supply and the motherboard are a complete computer designed by Apple. Everything else is up to me, if I opt to.

There's a market for people who want to mod up their Honda and a market for people that want to buy a Ferrari with select components dictated to them by the manufaturer. I don't see them stealing market share from each other, they fill totally different market niches.

And to answer your question, I am quite content to keep my VGS sportin' old PowerBook for just that purpose. If the new laptops from Apple had to have the legacy crap built in to support dead operating systems they would end up looking like...well...those Dell brick laptops that look like a steamrolled desktop. So much of the technology in the new machines is relatively cutting edge and dead OSes like Windows 98 and Mac OS 9 couldn't handle it.

hushypushy said:
i hope you see the analogy i was trying to make there....just about how im disappointed that Apple continually pushed for new new new and ditched the old stuff (i honestly didnt know that you couldnt natively boot OS9 on newer Macs).
And here's where we either have a fundemental disagreement, or, as someone who uses only Windows boxes, you might not be getting the full picture.

Although the old operating system is not developed for new systems and after a certain point (after the announced death of OS 9) great pains were taken not to "ditch the old stuff" as you suggest. Although you can't boot the most modern PowerPC Macs into OS9, the Classic component of the modern OS X allows for running almost every OS 9 legacy application that there is with no rebooting required and this works. There is a very small percentage of OS 9 applications that do not work under Classic, but they are a short list of applications.

The reason VGS is one of this applications is not to do with Apple at all. Whereas almost every application that needed to be reworked to run natively under OS X (or at the very least to run under Classic) was fixed, Sony's legal actions against Connectix and the resulting settlement meant that Sony got their hands on VGS and could lock the code away where it wouldn't canabalize PSX sales. The issue here is down to Sony.

Here's an analogy for you that I think will clear up the legacy support issue involved.

Apple and Sony have a good track record in this area of late. When Apple decided to transition from the old OS 9 to the modern OS X years ago, they provided an ability to run almost every OS 9 application under OS X without the need to reboot or do any tricks. When Sony released the PS2, they included the ability to run almost every PS1 title on it. Most work great. Some 3-D titles look even better with the enhanced texture mode available when running on the PS2. Some have problems running and some just don't run at all. This is why I keep my original PSX around. For those few remaining titles that are fun, but don't work on the PS2. The same is true of my G4 Desktop and my TiBook. They both run the modern OS natively. The desktop runs every modern OS X application and almost every OS 9 application that I would want. But if I need to go back and run one of those few finicky legacy applications, I've got the trusty TiBook for that.

hushypushy said:
PS. what is taking the Mickey? i was gonna ask if that was a foreign term but....we live in the same city :p
San Franciso! The best city, to be sure. As to your linguistic query, you are correct it is a foreign term. But I imagine you might hear a few of those every day around SF. International city that it is. :D

Taking the Mickey - From Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take_the_mickey

"To tease, to ridicule. Also shortened to take the mick. An abbreviated form of the Cockney rhyming slang take the mickey bliss, meaning 'take the piss'."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Valcrist said:
QBranch: Ok, I knew that it couldn't boot OS 9, I did mean boot it in Classic which isn't the same as OS 9 but for someone who is new or doesn't know much about macs is realtively the same enviroment, heck even the folder has a 9 on it, my words got mixed up :p.
And this was the fundamental distinction that I was making when suggesting to the original poster the alternate route to VGS, if their machine was a TiBook.

Valcrist said:
And I never tried VGS on a mac seeing as how I've always done emulation on my PC since its much more powerful so of course I wouldn't know that.
VGS is really is a treat. I do my fair share of emulation on both platforms and there is definately a lot more development on the PC side in many areas, but I would question the above "much more powerful" statement. There are certain machines, due to architecture, that work better on PowerPC hardware. I prefer the right tool for the right job, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach to computing.

Valcrist said:
Also I do not claim to know everything about macs, nor was I trying to throw around "non-sense" I've only had a Mac for a year now sheesh, but thank you for correcting me :p.
Sorry if I was overbearing. My main irritation was that, rather than ask a general statement to a question you didn't know (Can all Macs boot into OS 9?). Your statement happened to be the opposite of the known fact (All Macs cannot boot natively into OS 9, see chart, etc.). As this followed a post that I made, offering technically sound advice to the original poster, only to be followed by a post stating something that, if true would have negated my entire post, I was a bit annoyed.

Welcome to your second year of cross platform exploration. Plenty to do and learn and now you've learned a little something about Mac hardware and emulation using VGS.

Cheers,:beer:
Q
 

·
Premium Member
bsnes, ePSXe
Joined
·
23,380 Posts
There's a market for people who want to mod up their Honda and a market for people that want to buy a Ferrari with select components dictated to them by the manufaturer.
yeah, and Windows runs on Hondas, and Mac OS runs on Ferraris. which is all well and good--except Apple wants everyone to run Mac OS. wait doesn't that mean that everyone has to own a ferrari?

i've long said that if i had to do work only, i'd run a mac. final cut pro, photoshop, etc, you know. but for fun, i'm all about my PC.

i guess one thing i cant stand about Macs is their attitude towards PCs. using the Ferrari analogy, it's like if every time a Ferrari owner saw me, he'd scoff (and i do drive a honda IRL :/). it's Apple's thing about supporting the stupid PPC architecture (FINALLY they're changing that crap) for years when (almost) everyone else is on x86. i'm not saying whether PPC is better or worse at all, no, i dont want to discuss that. im just saying that there has always been a sour taste in my mouth from Apple and it not being compatible with a lot of stuff. it's more than a different OS, it's a different way of life.

it reminds me of something that happened last summer, it's a little OT but i'll go with it. my mom bought my sister a new iPod mini for her birthday. so you know, that's cool. but the damn thing wouldnt work. wouldnt work with itunes, not with the ipod plugin with winamp, it was having major driver issues. i spent so long on help forums around the web, and found out it might be a problem with the interface. so i got her a USB2.0 card (she had 1.1). no worky. i got her a firewire card. no worky. so i took it to the Apple store (down in san jose, uhh valley fair mall i think..screw those guys) and we waited in line. they were like, yep it works fine. we formatted it and put music on. great, i told them...but now it's formatted for Mac (ah yes, not only do macs have different processor structures, they have different hard drive formats as well..). the guy said, well, it should work. and what if it doesnt? the guy actually told me, "i don't know, i've never used a PC in my life".

what the crap is that? it's like Apple finally said, OK FINE, WE'LL SUPPORT YOUR STUPID PC (remember the first iPods and their non PC support? and then you had to buy a specific iPod for either mac OR pc?) BUT WE WONT MAKE IT WORK.

we took it home and yeah, it didnt work. my sister spent hours (literally) fiddling around with firewire, USB, iTunes, etc. it doesnt work with the winamp ML plugin, but at least it works with iTunes so she can put music on. i really do not understand what their deal is.

my roommate has an iPod mini as well that just wont work now (also on PC). i dont get Apple's marketing strategy. they are marketing a Ferrari (a great speciality car, perhaps a bit pricey) to the average Joe.

people complain about MS's monopoly. well damn, it's not hard to see why they have a monopoly. they are doing everything right. if i could do 1/3 of the things on a Mac that i could do on my PC, i might be less bitter.

PS. what is the deal with single button mice?? those are sooooo 1985
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
hushypushy said:
yeah, and Windows runs on Hondas, and Mac OS runs on Ferraris. which is all well and good--except Apple wants everyone to run Mac OS. wait doesn't that mean that everyone has to own a ferrari?

i've long said that if i had to do work only, i'd run a mac. final cut pro, photoshop, etc, you know. but for fun, i'm all about my PC.

i guess one thing i cant stand about Macs is their attitude towards PCs. using the Ferrari analogy, it's like if every time a Ferrari owner saw me, he'd scoff (and i do drive a honda IRL :/). it's Apple's thing about supporting the stupid PPC architecture (FINALLY they're changing that crap) for years when (almost) everyone else is on x86. i'm not saying whether PPC is better or worse at all, no, i dont want to discuss that. im just saying that there has always been a sour taste in my mouth from Apple and it not being compatible with a lot of stuff. it's more than a different OS, it's a different way of life.
Well, I seemed to have hit a nerve there, so allow me to modify that analogy to something less threatening. Replace Ferrari with another model of car. A Volvo, perhaps, something less flashy. Something simple. Whatever works for you. The idea here is that in addition to designing the hardware, they design the software as well. This allows a more controlled product. That product isn't for everyone. They don't design the product to appeal to everyone. That's the whole idea. And as I indicated earlier in the thread, I'm not a one sized fits all technologist. I prefer the right tool for the right job. Frequently it is a Mac, frequently it is a Windows box, frequently it is an old legacy system designed better for a particular purpose than anything that has come since.

And I just want to revisit one particular line which left me bewildered.
hushypushy said:
i guess one thing i cant stand about Macs is their attitude towards PCs
Now, assuming that you don't think the computers actually dislike each other in the example above, I am going to guess you mean Mac users or, more particular Mac Zealots and their PC brethren. Frankly I find any person that argues blindly in favor of a single concept, discounting all else simple minded and shallow. If you've taken me for a Mac Zealot, with the simple mention of a Ferrari, I would want to correct that impression. The analogy still stands if the Mac is a Volvo and the PC is a super tuned Muscle Car or modified BMW or AMG Mercedes. It doesn't matter, the point was contrasting a pick your part product or a completely designed package product. But this car thing has gone far enough, I've explained what was meant above.

hushypushy said:
it reminds me of something that happened last summer, it's a little OT but i'll go with it. my mom bought my sister a new iPod mini for her birthday. so you know, that's cool. but the damn thing wouldnt work. wouldnt work with itunes, not with the ipod plugin with winamp, it was having major driver issues. i spent so long on help forums around the web, and found out it might be a problem with the interface. so i got her a USB2.0 card (she had 1.1). no worky. i got her a firewire card. no worky. so i took it to the Apple store (down in san jose, uhh valley fair mall i think..screw those guys) and we waited in line. they were like, yep it works fine. we formatted it and put music on. great,
Interesting troubleshooting story. Driver issues. Most iPod users have no problems getting started. Some do on both platforms, some times it is a DOA iPod. That does not sound like the case here if it worked in the store. USB iPods do work (albeit slowly) over USB1, so that wouldn't have been the problem. Had you tried it on another PC? It might have helped isolate the problem to the single windows box you were trying to get it to work on.

hushypushy said:
i told them...but now it's formatted for Mac (ah yes, not only do macs have different processor structures, they have different hard drive formats as well..). the guy said, well, it should work. and what if it doesnt? the guy actually told me, "i don't know, i've never used a PC in my life".
The "processor structures" you mention aren't something a user ever sees, so I'm not sure what the reference is there. Different hard drive formats! Oh my. Like almost every other operating system out there? Not much of a shock here. Including the fact that right now I am typing on my Mac which is pulling files on its main external drive...a FAT32 formatted drive. There are many standards out there and this hardware supports many of them. It's a pity this Apple store peon wasn't very helpful. He might have told you that if he had reformatted it, you could do the same on your PC. A bad experience with an inept salesdrone. I see it happen all the time.

hushypushy said:
what the crap is that? it's like Apple finally said, OK FINE, WE'LL SUPPORT YOUR STUPID PC (remember the first iPods and their non PC support? and then you had to buy a specific iPod for either mac OR pc?) BUT WE WONT MAKE IT WORK.
A bit of a mischaracterization, I think. Point 1. The first iPods plugged into Firewire. At the time, Macs were shipping with Firewire, 90 plus percent o PCs were not. Of course it was Mac only. Factor in also, that this was a test step into a market that already existed and they were not sure how it would test. Obviously, it went well. So the next rev supported USB and Firewire. And, yes, they sold two versions. I assume a) to not force half the users to reformat them upon install. But, as a point of fact, you could take a "Windows iPod" and make it a Mac iPod and vice versa, so perhaps it was an early way to gauge demographics to see how much of the PC user portable audio market they were getting.

Thankfully they've moved on to a unified product.

hushypushy said:
we took it home and yeah, it didnt work. my sister spent hours (literally) fiddling around with firewire, USB, iTunes, etc. it doesnt work with the winamp ML plugin, but at least it works with iTunes so she can put music on. i really do not understand what their deal is.
So it does work with iTunes then? OK, well I must've missed a step in that story.

hushypushy said:
my roommate has an iPod mini as well that just wont work now (also on PC). i dont get Apple's marketing strategy. they are marketing a Ferrari (a great speciality car, perhaps a bit pricey) to the average Joe.
As I explained earlier, it's a complete experience they are trying to create. Forget Ferrari, think Volvo, or whatever works for you. And if you look at the number of people with their products, I think you'll find they are more common than Ferraris.

hushypushy said:
people complain about MS's monopoly. well damn, it's not hard to see why they have a monopoly. they are doing everything right. if i could do 1/3 of the things on a Mac that i could do on my PC, i might be less bitter.
People complain about Microsoft's monopoly issues because they were convicted by the Federal Government for breaking the law many many times. How they established their dominance is something I have watched for a great deal of my life. Doing everything right isn't exactly the way I would describe some of things they've done. A number of things yes, but any number of vile and dishonest things they've been found to have done? Absolutely not. Apple has made plenty of mistakes over the years. They just have the advantage of not having been found to have violated chapter and verse of the laws governing the United States and a number of foreign entities as well.

If you could do a third of things on a Mac that you do on a PC you'd be less bitter? Wow, not really sure what to make of that. I do a lot of things on a Mac and a lot of things on a PC and I don't see a conflict there and I don't derive any bitterness from it at all.

I know I said I'd drop the car thing, but some things are better done on a motorcyle, some in a coupe, some in a station wagon or SUV. That doesn't make any one of those vehicles the right one for every task. There's nothing stopping you from running Microsoft Word as your word processor and Lotus 1-2-3 as your spreadsheet. Select whichever tool suits you best. Someone else might prefer WordPerfect and Excel. Too each their own. No need to be bitter.

hushypushy said:
PS. what is the deal with single button mice?? those are sooooo 1985
What's with the floppy drive? That's sooooo 20th century. Pshaw. :eyemove:

Human UI Guidelines are a good thing for most. If the elegance of being able to do everything with one button wasn't your cup of tea, you've always been able to hook up 2, 3, or 20 button rodents to the Mac. No reason to mock what doesn't appeal or doesn't register with you.
 

·
Premium Member
bsnes, ePSXe
Joined
·
23,380 Posts
Now, assuming that you don't think the computers actually dislike each other in the example above, I am going to guess you mean Mac users or, more particular Mac Zealots and their PC brethren.
yeahhhh i skipped a word. oh well. i liken it to people who drive a Prius. now, the Toyota Prius is a nice car. but it is WAYYYYYYY overrated. and the people who drive it think they are real tough ****. they get to drive in the carpool lane. they get good gas mileage. but that car doesnt get the best gas mileage (other hybrids, like the Civic, get better), and it's not the cleanest (natural gas cars like VW or Honda's are cleaner), not to mention its butt-ugly. it's just the stigma of these people. it works the same way for Mac. i can't stand the way Mac people look down on PC people. but can i stand the way PC people look down on Mac people? I guess so. i think the Anti-Mac reasons are more compelling than Anti-PC reasons. maybe it's because Mac OS is so overrated, and being that Windows is dissed, knocked down, and hated on so much...perhaps it might be underrated? (or at least, rated correctly...if that's even a real phrase).

i remember dealing with HFS and HFS+ back in the late 90s. meh. i used to love Macs. Why doesn't Apple use NTFS? is there any reason? i never really got that.

the iPod has come a long way. the iPod mini is a total piece of asscrap that i wouldnt even recommend to my enemies. however, my friend let me borrow an iPod shuffle, and i have to say, it worked perfectly. so maybe they're working on it. still though, there's no way that i buy an iPod till it supports OGG (which will probably happen...i heard that Apple doesn't support ogg in any of its things because no one asks. duh, i should just write them a letter).

the car analogy is perfect, look at my Prius one :p Yes, some things are better done in a coupe, a truck, a sedan, or a motorcycle. trouble is, people usually can't afford to own all those cars at once. so you have to decide what you want and make a compromise. you could say that a G5 running OSX is a new Japanese motorcycle (honda, yamaha, kawasaki, something common). it's fast as hell, and will get 2 people wherever you need to go fast. perfect! however....you cant haul lumber on a motorcycle. honestly, the best analogy i can think of is that Mac OSX is something like a Honda S2000---sexy car, well made, will impress your friends, it's fast, but it only holds 2 people and has a small trunk. However, running windows XP is like an SUV. not really a lot of speed or elegance, not to mention its big, but hey, it can hold people, cargo and stuff, go offroad and onroad, so its versatile.

about mice: it's no biggie just to buy a Mac sans mouse and then buy one with buttons. it's just weird how Apple still sticks with one button and no scroll wheel. i dont see the "elegance" in holding down the big button instead of right clicking, or not being able to scroll. one button mice look cute, and are good for children, but other than that...useless. luckily, most mice out on the market today work for Macs.

on another note, if i could have a Mac and a PC, i would. but i just can't afford it (or the software to run on it!). if you were a consumer with only enough money to buy one computer to everything, what would you buy? i think that is a question that Apple needs to ask themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Steering the car back on topic

hushypushy said:
yeahhhh i skipped a word. oh well. i liken it to people who drive a Prius. now, the Toyota Prius is a nice car. but it is WAYYYYYYY overrated. and the people who drive it think they are real tough ****.
A gross generalization? You are judging the personalities of every driver of a particular model of car? Do you feel the same way about people that wear a certain brand of sneaker? Have a certain kind of hairstyle? Speak differently than you? Have a different color skin? You are certain that you can judge the content of a person by an external trapping such as that?

hushypushy said:
it works the same way for Mac. i can't stand the way Mac people look down on PC people.
Another gross generalization. And a big one at that. As someone who works with and supports Macs and PCs and works with others in similiar roles, I have to say there is more to be seen of people than you have discovered in your travels thus far. In order for me to like my Mac and do my job I would have to look down upon the users I support. In other words, to be disrespectful and insulting to the people that are responsible for me having a paycheck. That's just wrong. And sad. I beg to differ that it isn't as black and white as you suggest. The extremes in any group, be they religious, political or computer platform related will always be the loudest. That doesn't make them representative of the remaining population.


hushypushy said:
but can i stand the way PC people look down on Mac people? I guess so.
And it would appear that you have taken sides, that's a pity, but at least that's clear. So I was possibly correct when I made my initial suggestion that perhaps you were trolling with your initial comment. Seeing as how disdain is a one way street on this subject based on your comment above.

hushypushy said:
i think the Anti-Mac reasons are more compelling than Anti-PC reasons.
Anti-Mac?! Anti-PC?! It's a war? And we're either with you or against you? OK, I won't try and correct your misinformation now that I realize you are a partisan in this war of the minds that some feel compelled to wage.


hushypushy said:
and being that Windows is dissed, knocked down, and hated on so much...perhaps it might be underrated? (or at least, rated correctly...if that's even a real phrase).
Got it. OK, well since there's an agenda here, I'll refrain from feeding.

hushypushy said:
i remember dealing with HFS and HFS+ back in the late 90s. meh. i used to love Macs. Why doesn't Apple use NTFS? is there any reason? i never really got that.
I've tried to respond to your technical comments in this thread, but each time I see it met with some anecdotal story that doesn't really speak to the comments made. But I'll play one last time, now that I realized you are a partisan...

HFS and HFS+ yes, I remember them well. Why doesn't Apple use NTFS? Odd question. Why didn't Microsoft go from FAT to HPFS or XFS? Why doesn't any flavor of BSD format to NTFS by default? Your asking me why Apple didn't choose a Microsoft file format for their internal file system? Why would they? Seems like another straw man argument to me. But OK, I'll bite... Maybe they didn't want to accept the inherent security flaws introduced by the fork commands in NTFS? As good a guess as any, I suppose.

hushypushy said:
i have to say, it worked perfectly. so maybe they're working on it. still though, there's no way that i buy an iPod till it supports OGG (which will probably happen...i heard that Apple doesn't support ogg in any of its things because no one asks. duh, i should just write them a letter).
OGG works fine on Mac systems if you want to install support for it. Presently, there is no support on the iPods for OGG, but they do support playback of lossless compression if that is what you are after. Plenty of OGG supporting players out there, find one that works for you. The iPod doesn't support the playback of ATRAC-3 audio either, but they seem prepared to accept the loss of that market (however sizable or imaginary).



hushypushy said:
the car analogy is perfect, look at my Prius one :p
Right, read that. You said "the people who drive it think they are real tough ****"

hushypushy said:
Yes, some things are better done in a coupe, a truck, a sedan, or a motorcycle. trouble is, people usually can't afford to own all those cars at once. so you have to decide what you want and make a compromise.
So it's all cars or no cars, is it? I can't have a motorcycle AND a car? Or a two car household? Seems a flawed analogy.

hushypushy said:
you could say that a G5 running OSX is a new Japanese motorcycle (honda, yamaha, kawasaki, something common).
Well, as there are only two G5 models, I'm assuming you mean the iMac G5? Because I would hardly think of the giant cheese grater looking G5 desktop Quad Core a motorcycle... Too much room in that case for stuff. You must mean the iMac G5. I don't really see that as a motorcyle, but whatever. I started this stupid car talk, seems only fair it should carry on to the end.

hushypushy said:
it's fast as hell, and will get 2 people wherever you need to go fast. perfect! however....you cant haul lumber on a motorcycle.
Fast as hell? No, that would be the desktop G5 alright. You're not going to find more room inside that monster, I think you've got the comparison wrong this time.


hushypushy said:
honestly, the best analogy i can think of is that Mac OSX is something like a Honda S2000---sexy car, well made, will impress your friends, it's fast, but it only holds 2 people and has a small trunk.

And now a collosal leap. From comparing hardware on one model to the operating system. So now the software is a car and the machine is irrelevant? Fast, only holds two people? Has a small trunk? These are things that sound like hardware limitations, not software. I think the car analogy tow truck just pulled up for you!


hushypushy said:
However, running windows XP is like an SUV. not really a lot of speed or elegance, not to mention its big, but hey, it can hold people, cargo and stuff, go offroad and onroad, so its versatile.
And here it goes again, now we're software on an unnamed machine? I'll do you the dishonor of using your earlier technique back at you. XP, running on a system that meets the "basic system requirements" for XP, you think it meets that description? That's rhetorical, anyone that's tried that knows the result. But I am not arguing the point, because the comparison just doesn't make sense.


hushypushy said:
if i could have a Mac and a PC, i would. but i just can't afford it (or the software to run on it!). if you were a consumer with only enough money to buy one computer to everything, what would you buy? i think that is a question that Apple needs to ask themselves.
I don't need to ask Apple. I can answer that one myself. If I had to make a choice, and I would never want to have to make that choice, selecting the right tool for the right job is much more desirable. If I did have to have only one computer, I think it would be a Mac. As I look at the usage of both machines, I think I could justify just playing games on consoles and leave the computer free for actual productivity. Editing video, audio, word processing, email, web surfing. Everything but gaming, basically. That would make the Mac be my choice. I am grateful that I live in a country where I am able to afford the ability to select from either when I need to.

And to take this thread back to the topic at hand, as I've been feeding the troll for too long here....

Here's your parting question again -
hushypushy said:
if i could have a Mac and a PC, i would. but i just can't afford it (or the software to run on it!). if you were a consumer with only enough money to buy one computer to everything, what would you buy? i think that is a question that Apple needs to ask themselves.
I think this is exactly what Apple and Connectix were thinking 8 years or so ago when they debuted VGS at MacWorld here in San Francisco. I could see them thinking to themselves, if we offer the people a cheap program that allows them to play hundreds and hundreds of existing video games right on a shiny new Mac, maybe they won't be forced to think of the Mac as that machine that does all this great stuff but doesn't cut it as an entertainment machine. Thanks to Sony's legal department and the subsequent settlement with Connectix, we will never know how well that gambit would have worked.

And with that, the thread is back on topic with PPC Macs, VGS and hopefully the OP got a TiBook and can enjoy what I was describing in the first place.
 

·
Premium Member
bsnes, ePSXe
Joined
·
23,380 Posts
OGG works fine on Mac systems if you want to install support for it.
but it doesnt work at all on iTunes PC (well, i've read about a plugin that technically works, but is so slow [15 seconds to load a song or edit a tag] that it's worthless) or on any iPod (sans the modded ones). that's more of what i was getting at--not "no Mac can ever play OGG files ever never".

anyway, i blabbered on so much that i completely spun out of control and lost track of everything, crap. if i could start over, i would, because i don't even know what the hell to say anymore. also, you completely misinterpreted my car analogy (as i was reading your response, i half expected you to say "the Mac is nothing like an S2000! it doesnt have six gears!"---you took it just a little too far there, what with the "fast" and "spacious" type comments that you applied a little much...i didnt directly mean speed and space, they were analogies about the tools that each platform gives you). you're right, i shoulda dropped the car analogies a long time ago.

anyway, i never meant to mean "Macs suck", in fact, i hardly ever mean anything i say (maybe that's why i don't have any luck with the ladies, and maybe that's why i can't get upset at people on the internet [ya know, noobs asking for help in the ePSXe/PCSX2 sections]).

Thanks to Sony's legal department and the subsequent settlement with Connectix, we will never know how well that gambit would have worked.
i don't think that one program could, would, or ever will save an entire operating system.

anyway, i meant it on a broader scale, not just you. you obviously have a use for Macs, and so do a lot of other people. but why are Macs so dismally low? ya know, the other day my friend said "7zip? what the hell is this?" and i explained that it's better than RAR because it's said to have better compression, plus its free and open source. he quipped "if it was better, there would be no RAR". which is funny, because OGG is better than MP3 (better compression, open source), Firefox is better than plain IE (tabs, security), etc... better does not always mean more popular. i honestly dont know where i'm going with this, just saying....

right, on topic. bottom line: if you want to emulate, buy a PC. you already said nothing wrong with a multi-car household, nothing wrong with a multi computer household ;)

edit: i just want to admit, RL is taking a toll on me lately, which probably adversely affected my judgement and/or ability to reason correctly. i've been told many times to leave emuforums alone when RL attacks, but i can't...oh well! sorry.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top