Was the Mac as superior to Windows in the early 2000s as it looked?

>>105904598 (OP)
It was good, but Windows was pretty good at the time as well.

>>105904598 (OP)
ngl Windows XP looked like garbage compared to this

Fell flat on its face if you ever needed something slightly obscure(heaven forbid gaming), but otherwise pretty fucking good.
People forget that really, all you needed was a office suite internet, and maybe some form of local jukebox. At least for the time. Many were still on dial up until the mid 2000s.
Windows just won the popularity contest. Apple had like what, 5% marketshare in the early/mid 2000s? They didn't matter.

>>105904598 (OP)

maybe i seen like three macs in that era but i was not that social afterall

>>105904598 (OP)
situation has literally not changed in over 20 years:
>has lower adoption
>bad with games
>locked-down ecosystem
>looks good and works good
>special-snowflake hardware
funny how it is almost 1:1 situation with only difference being better internet speeds and ppc replaced with apple silicon

Nah it was way more annoying back then. The gap is now bridged, I daresay MacOS is better now since it has all of the features and none of the bloat.

>>105904598 (OP)
It was better than Windows XP for most things other than gaming but Windows 7 was amazing. Vista was also decent if you had fast enough hardware.

OS X 10.4 Tiger was extremely fast and stable and offered good backwards compatibility, especially on PowerPC with the Classic Environment for running OS 9 apps. Apple's Aqua designs probably peaked with 10.5 Leopard on PowerPC, or 10.8 Mountain Lion on x86.

in the era of spinning platter hard drives where a windows machine felt like it took 10 minutes to load up, a mac took at max 5 minutes and was ready to use because you didn't have 10 tasks tied to startup.

it had faults, but i think for most normie computer tasks (and arguably, still) it was quite ahead of the competition.

>>105904598 (OP)
It has always been Apple for design, Windows for compatibility. Now Microsoft is trying to be more like Apple and we are seeing the consequences. Early 2000's was peak design for both Apple and Microsoft though

Tiger was better than XP (subjective)
and Snow Leopard was WAY better than Vista (fact)

>>105904787
... If you're willing to pay for/pirate CrossOver for vidya and Parallels for work

>>105907353
>vidya
grow up manchild

>Parallels for work
arm64 Windows is usless

>>105907435
>grow up manchild
Faggot pseud.
>arm64 Windows is usless
People can use CAD software on Parallels just fine althoughbeit

>>105904598 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWxC8ezE4Dk
macos is currynigger shit
always has been
always will be

Apple was dunking all over Windows until 7, but by that point, the desktop was already on the decline.

>>105904598 (OP)
If you stuck within the ecosystem and its limitations... I mean you got your Mac you buy music on iTunes you sync that shit to your iPod you write your documents in Pages and back that shit up into your Time Capsule that's also your wifi router and you even got a baller UI for the backups.

Apple was always about selling an experience first and foremost.

>>105905589
>and Snow Leopard was WAY better than Vista (fact)
Snow Leopard is contemporary to Windows 7 though (which basically is Vista)

>>105904598 (OP)

It was superior but much less the all around option it is now. You could do way more with XP and at the time I got a Vaio because of it. Nowadays you can virtualize 11 so…

Yes

UI alone, 100% it was. Even into 2005 it looked about 20 years newer than XP ever could.

>>105904598 (OP)
Yes, the Mac interface wasn't considered old and clunky yet.

>>105904598 (OP)
I don't know about performance/stability, but in terms of UI nothing beats the perfection of classic windows.

>>105909081
It's very utilitarian, but I think we can all agree that modern windows is trash compared to windows classic.

>>105904598 (OP)
Yes

>>105904598 (OP)
Windows 2000 was the only version that was better than Mac, every other version around that era (98/XP) was an unstable buggy mess and a security nightmare. But it doesn’t really matter since Mac had fuck all application support compared to windows.

>>105909081
I think Mac was a tad more stable than windows even with the service packs but performance wise Mac was infamously abysmal due to the new aqua theme requiring more CPU to process.

>>105912033
what? powerPC macs could run almost any classic mac os application

>>105912082
Pre OSX still didn’t have as many as windows

>>105912082
therefore
>fuck all application support compared to windows.
same shit today too. no i'm not gonna start wasting days researching "XX software equivalent for apple silicon"
they are overpriced status symbols for social media and netflix consumption, nothing more.