John In Remote Kansas (JIRK) on LIK's cookie

This is almost an ancient argument, and LIK will probably do unkind things to me for getting into it on her cookie, but:

MAC is a tremendous machine. The MAC philosophy has been – and probably still is – that THEY know so much that you don't need to know anything about how it works. This is a good idea for a lot of us. It is plug-and-play simply because the code is tightly held, and it is all but impossible to market anything that the MACGODs don't approve. The MAC still holds primacy in many publishing (including music) and graphics fields. Most things that a MAC can do can now be done on a PC, but the MAC is established as the standard in these areas. Most of the programs that the MAC built this reputation on are "major muscle" jobs – and it's not necessarily a good idea to use your "bread and butter" machine for trivial stuff. (Nobody I know uses their CATIA terminal to surf the web.) If you're not doing these kinds of heavy duty things, there are few reasons to argue strongly for or against the MAC. Pick the one that suits the software you need.

The PC is, in current versions, also a very good machine, and Windows isn't all that bad. Because early versions of Windows needed more complex programming, modular/script based programming methods (think JAVA? for a nonWindows similar concept) have become progressively more important. At the present time, almost anyone can still write a "Windows" program. This means that there are many more programs available to PC users, but also means that a lot of them are not really as clean as they might be.

Anyone who is not happy with either the MAC or the PC is certainly free to use one of the UNIX/LINUX op systems. These are at the extreme of "open." The problem with them is that anyone using them MUST occasionally write, debug, assemble, disassemble, and otherwise mangle code. (A command line input is a trivial kind of coding, especially if you include switches or other options.) For most of us the GEEK QUOTIENT required exceeds our GLAZE FACTOR. (See the Hackers Dictionary – any edition).

There are a lot of comlaints about frequent crashes with Windows. The above cited "semi-open" status is probably responsible for most of these. Crashes do occur, but very infrequently, if the machine runs only "good" programs. You can load yourself up with freeware, shareware, and other such. Some of it is very good, but a lot of it is good without the "very." Memory leaks are one of the most common faults in "less than fully compliant" programs.
For BillD and others – re memory leaks. Nothing runs until it has been loaded to RAM. In order to speed things up, Windows will usually fill at least 80 to 90 percent of available ram, if open programs are that big. RAM is filled by "pages," and one of the processor intensive Windows functions is "swapping" pages so that the next part of the program that is needed will be ready to go. Even though most of the RAM may "have something in it," only those parts of RAM that are "active" in running programs counts against resources. Windows will also swap to the Hard Drive, and in fact does a full "mirror" of a running program in Hard Drive Temp files. After initial program opening, all swaps in and out of RAM are made from the Temp copy of the program. A well behaved program will tell the computer what parts of its code are needed, and will "close" a part of code that has finished executing and is no longer needed. A well behaved program will obviously "close" all its share of memory when the program is closed. When a program fails to close unneeded memory, you have a "leak." Code is in RAM, and/or is in Temp on the Hard Drive, and since the program that put it there has gone away, it may stay there until a reboot (and sometimes after).
Too much RAM can actually slow a Windows PC down, at least through Win95. The reason for this is that the processor spends so much of its time keeping track of the swaps, that there is nothing left to run the program. Microsoft's recommendation for Win95 and NT3 on Pentium2 machines was, as I recall, that you NOT install more than 128M of RAM (unless you have a particular program – like CAD or some high-end graphics stuff - that really needs more). Newer versions will handle more, but I haven't heard what the "best" values are for Win98, Win2000, NT4, etc.
Microsoft core applications (Office) are not without memory leaks of their own. These occur mainly when a program "calls" a "plug-in," which may not free its memory when it finishes. The extent of these leaks is usually minor, and should not cause serious problems. All of the people I have known personally who have had a history of extremely frequent Windows crashes have been people who use a lot of freeware (it's free – I gotta download it) or aftermarket software. Screensavers (totally unnecessary, but fun) are a common culprit. With newer Windows versions, legacy programs that you got when you had an earlier (more DOSsy) version of Windows may also be a problem. I have, unfortunately, observed apparent memory management problems with all commercial music publishing software I've tried out. Maybe the shareware is better?
Resources include RAM – but it's usually all "full" anyway. Temp space on the hard drive is a common resource problem, since Windows limits the percent of free disk space it will use for Temp files. You can change the limit, but be careful.
Interrupts and DMA channels are also resources. The problem here is that newer versions of Win may use a lot of shared IRQs and DMAs (there ain't enough of them) and if you open a program that has to share with something already running, the processor has to manage the share, and has to keep track in memory.
Windows writes changes to the Registry only on shutdown. Changes are frequent. It is highly recommended that you shut down and reboot on a regular basis, if for no reason other than to "capture" the current state of the Registry. (I "religously" observe this warning by shutting down whenever a thunderstorm is forcast – at least 10 or 12 times a year.)
Your hard drive is your permanent storage for everything. Obviously it must be big enough to hold (store) all your programs and all your documents. To accomplish the above cited memory swaps (with default settings) ten percent of the FREE space on your hard drive must also be enough to hold all of the programs you will have open at any one time, plus at least TWO copies of each "document" that is open – plus of course all the cookies, etc.
Your RAM is where everything happens. For a new Windows machine, I would consider 128M a minimum, and would think about 256M. It is unlikely that you will need more than that for the forseeable future.
Buffer:pipeline:I/O RAM is tied to the processor in most cases. If you have picked your processor, it's automatic – forget about it.
Video and Sound Card RAM are built into your accessory cards, and (usually) are addressed internally by the card. They do not affect your basic machine performance – they only affect video and sound performance.
Microsoft now thinks that Windows is "so obvious" that you don't need instructions. The one real beef I have with them is that WINDOWS DOCUMENTATION SUCKS! I know that Linux is well papered. I also know that some very intensive attempts to find out something about MACs a few years ago were useless. Every good piece of meat has a bone?

I'm told that in some parts of the world local phone calls are metered (time per call). Boston in 1960 is the only US location where I've run into this. This can make it somewhat costly to connect – even on a local line – to your ISP by POTS (plain old telephone service). I should think that this might be one of the key factors in electing a hard-wired service. For my own purposes, POTS connection is plenty fast enough, and at present all of the other available options are still on the wait-and-see list. There have been some horror stories about TOS (Terms of Service) contracts, and there is still some fairly frequent shake-out in terms of here-today/are-you-still-there companies. ANY always-on connection needs a GOOD FIREWALL!! At present, software solutions are helpful but not fully adequate IMHO.

Far too much, but you get a lot for your nickel here.

John