Originally Posted by Chipp

I would not say that any one OS is superior to any other, but they certainly have thier differences. OSx tends to be more stable, due mostly to the fact that Apple knows exactly what hardware they are developing for and can optimize and include for support for exactly that. However, Windows covers and works on a much wider range of hardware, and requires very little in the way of CPU instructions, instead of the several that OSx requires to run.

Top apply a Linux analogy, think of Mac like Gentoo and Windows like Ubuntu. One is built specificly for the hardware it will run on, while the other is built for the ultimate in compatability at the cost of some performance.

Originally Posted by rabidgnome229

I agree that they really aren't "better" or "worse" than each other. They just have different target markets. If you want something that will work no matter what go for OS-X. If you are an average user go for Windows. If you like to screw with stuff go for linux.
I look at the 3 OS's in terms of insulation and customization. OSX insulates the user from the lower level functions - but as a result what you see is what you get. You can't really do much with OSX. Windows lets you mess with a lot more but still keeps a lot hidden from the user. With linux you can **** with anything - so you can **** anything up.

Originally Posted by kaxx

Cools, thanx for the clarification Chipp and rabid. Are they ever gonna make(or is there now) an OS-X disk to be installed and booted on a standard PC??

Originally Posted by Chipp

They did when Apple first ported OSX for x86, but it was taken off the market due to huge ammounts of piracy.

Originally Posted by selectodude

It was always tied to the TPM/EFI chips. Never installed on a BIOS w/o hax.

Originally Posted by TheLegend

Bios hax as in soft or hard? Aren't TPM/EFI chips an Apple thing?