Don't like Macs? GTFIH

[EternallyMiscd]

Remember this little amusing picture?



Looks like you *******s are going to have to switch to another baseless argument.

Sometimes pictures are worth a thousand words, like those that appeared over NASA's live feed showing a control room riddled with Macs and other Apple products during the historical landing of the Curiosity rover on planet Mars last night.

The photos, captured from the live stream by Reddit users (via TMO), show nearly a dozen Macs -- in addition to iPhones and even iPads -- in use by the space agency's Entry, Descent and Landing Operations (EDL Ops) team at its Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California Sunday evening.

NASA engineers can be seen fixated on their MacBook Pro screens and incoming data as the $2.6 billion Curiosity made a dramatic arrival on the Martian planet during what NASA scientists have dubbed "seven minutes of terror."

One closeup photo confirms that these Macs were indeed running Mac OS X and not a flavor of Windows, while a second shows a lone *** ThinkPad looking a bit out of place among the Apple-dominated lab.

u mad? jimmies rustled? Still think Macs are just toys used by hipsters?

[Troll_Patrol]

jimmies are not rustled; apple is more than likely paying them a **** ton or donated it for scientific research purposes. i highly doubt they bought any of those computers nor give a single fuark because it can be programmed to do anything they require.

and yes, macs are still ****gy time when you have the choice of which to buy

[EternallyMiscd]

jimmies are not rustled; apple is more than likely paying them a **** ton or donated it for scientific research purposes. i highly doubt they bought any of those computers nor give a single fuark because it can be programmed to do anything they require.

and yes, macs are still ****gy time when you have the choice of which to buy

Yeah, I'm sure NASA will choose whichever company pays them more as opposed to which one is better for the job when they're sending a rover to Mars. Great argument.

[Troll_Patrol]

Yeah, I'm sure NASA will choose whichever company pays them more as opposed to which one is better for the job when they're sending a rover to Mars. Great argument.

you realize the majority of space/flight equipment is made by the lowest bidder, right? herp derp; your argument is invalid

[January912]

Just like Coca Cola sponsors the olympics brah.


Apple knows those laptops will be showcased, apple donates $500,000 in laptops and pays NASA $2,000,000 in advert bucks.

It's pretty simple.

[Mj23foreva]

LOL saw this last night was going to post but was too lazy to screen cap.

[Reflexez]

Rather than debate which OS or build is better (I like both), I'm just going to neg you for making a trash thread with no evidence or purpose than to be a moron.

[EternallyMiscd]

you realize the majority of space/flight equipment is made by the lowest bidder, right? herp derp; your argument is invalid

That may be so, but that's how everything works. You get bids, you determine which ones are technically acceptable and then choose the lowest cost option of the ones that are good enough. If Macs were toys as *******s here claim they are they wouldn't even be considered in the bid no matter how much Apple paid them (by the way, that's conjecture on your part - Apple doesn't get industry leading margins by giving their machines away).

So now that Macs are as good AND cheaper, they're still worse? Lol

[MrAWatts]

jimmies are not rustled; apple is more than likely paying them a **** ton or donated it for scientific research purposes. i highly doubt they bought any of those computers nor give a single fuark because it can be programmed to do anything they require.

and yes, macs are still ****gy time when you have the choice of which to buy

Are you retarded? This is science not politics. They are going to use what equipment works best for them. They're not going to see their work as an advertising platform. One of the dumbest things I've heard in a while (srs), congrats.

[mrawdtsi]

OSX > winderps

[EternallyMiscd]

Just like Coca Cola sponsors the olympics brah.


Apple knows those laptops will be showcased, apple donates $500,000 in laptops and pays NASA $2,000,000 in advert bucks.

It's pretty simple.

And Microsoft did the same for the Hadron Collider. See how easy it is to make stuff up? Funny how this argument comes up now and wasn't ever mentioned before. Lot of jimmies are rustled.

[mynameisuntz]

Yeah, I'm sure NASA will choose whichever company pays them more as opposed to which one is better for the job when they're sending a rover to Mars. Great argument.

Considering the funding cuts to NASA? Yeah, I'm 100% sure this plays a role, actually.

Not saying this is why they chose Apple - simply saying that with NASA's budget being cut quite a bit, I imagine they are trying to save money wherever possible.

[Troll_Patrol]

That may be so, but that's how everything works. You get bids, you determine which ones are technically acceptable and then choose the lowest cost option of the ones that are good enough. If Macs were toys as *******s here claim they are they wouldn't even be considered in the bid no matter how much Apple paid them (by the way, that's conjecture on your part - Apple doesn't get industry leading margins by giving their machines away).

So now that Macs are as good AND cheaper, they're still worse? Lol

the major argument around mac vs pc is that mac is overpriced as fukk for some "ergonomics" and a different OS, that is not compatible with more than half of the major programs used around the world on a pc.

also, that ^^^^

Are you retarded? This is science not politics. They are going to use what equipment works best for them. They're not going to see their work as an advertising platform. One of the dumbest things I've heard in a while (srs), congrats.

see post #12. please go

[3VANGELIST]

You do know that a department was in charge of selecting the laptops right? Which means if the person who made the final decision for buying macs is an apple-fan boy, self-absorbed child, it would make perfect sense.

[EternallyMiscd]

Considering the funding cuts to NASA? Yeah, I'm 100% sure this plays a role, actually.

Not saying this is why they chose Apple - simply saying that with NASA's budget being cut quite a bit, I imagine they are trying to save money wherever possible.

So we go from Macs being expensive to Macs being the cheapest option, with no evidence. You guys are hilarious. Apple spends less on advertising than most other major tech companies - your assumptions are ludicrous. You think NASA engineers are going to use the computer they want to or the computer that is cheapest? Not everyone is a miscer who thinks cheaper is always better.

[January912]

Are you retarded? This is science not politics. They are going to use what equipment works best for them. They're not going to see their work as an advertising platform. One of the dumbest things I've heard in a while (srs), congrats.

Like the government does with contracts? Lol

Just like our troops are still being issued Serpa holsters that are known to be jammed up with sand.

Just like our troops are still being issued chit aluminum magazines when Pmags clearly outperform.

They're "playing" with lives as well.

Maybe someone can prove me wrong with a logical argument.

Why would NASA be allowed to show Apple's logo without any prior permission?

[mynameisuntz]

I don't understand the Windows/Apple argument to begin with. I like Windows. I could not care less if you like Apple. It's a difference of opinions.

Similarly I could not care less if you like a different car, cell phone, TV, refrigerator, etc. than I do.

So we go from Macs being expensive to Macs being the cheapest option, with no evidence. You guys are hilarious. Apple spends less on advertising than most other major tech companies - your assumptions are ludicrous. You think NASA engineers are going to use the computer they want to or the computer that is cheapest? Not everyone is a miscer who thinks cheaper is always better.

Guess you overlooked where I said: Not saying this is why they chose Apple

My point was that, if there was a computer company approaching NASA saying, "hey our product is cheaper" then NASA would absolutely take that into consideration. Let me say this again: Not saying this is why they chose Apple, simply saying price would play a role if Apple's product was significantly cheaper to NASA.

Also let's not compare the price of a retail Mac to what they are charging NASA by supporting Mac on a launch project...

[gixxer0.6g]

I'm not an iphone fan but if you said to take this mac or else....... I'd take it. They look neat.

[letmethink]

Apple give out a shi7 ton of macbooks and iphones for free to big tv shows for ad placement. This doesn't surprise me one bit.

[EternallyMiscd]

You do know that a department was in charge of selecting the laptops right? Which means if the person who made the final decision for buying macs is an apple-fan boy, self-absorbed child, it would make perfect sense.

Yes, good argument. That explains why there are some Windows machines there as well. Clearly everyone must use the same computer decided by a self-absorbed child. Keep trying. Still waiting for a good argument from someone who isn't butthurt.

[Mj23foreva]

Considering the funding cuts to NASA? Yeah, I'm 100% sure this plays a role, actually.

Not saying this is why they chose Apple - simply saying that with NASA's budget being cut quite a bit, I imagine they are trying to save money wherever possible.

lol save money by buying Macs? Find somewhere that says these laptops were donated. And if they were you have to wonder why Microsoft didnt donate PCs. Or did both donate computers but NASA decided to go with MACs? Windows fanboys will come up with anything to justify their points. The fact is there is a billion dollars on the line with this mission and they were going to use the best possible hardware for it to succeed, donated or not I'm pretty sure they went with the best possible. Computers probably make up .1% of costs in this program so they definitely arent going to skimp on that especially considering how important computers are for a mission like this.

[brent89]

Macs last longer, run faster, have better quality parts, look prettier, have better operating systems, plus if you have one girls think you're rich and will want to blow you.

[BullStampede]

I don't understand the Windows/Apple argument to begin with. I like Windows. I could not care less if you like Apple. It's a difference of opinions.

Similarly I could not care less if you like a different car, cell phone, TV, refrigerator, etc. than I do.



Guess you overlooked where I said: Not saying this is why they chose Apple

My point was that, if there was a computer company approaching NASA saying, "hey our product is cheaper" then NASA would absolutely take that into consideration. Let me say this again: Not saying this is why they chose Apple, simply saying price would play a role if Apple's product was significantly cheaper to NASA.

Also let's not compare the price of a retail Mac to what they are charging NASA by supporting Mac on a launch project...

stop being a mature *******! pick a side then go full retard!!

[mynameisuntz]

lol save money by buying Macs? Find somewhere that says these laptops were donated. And if they were you have to wonder why Microsoft didnt donate PCs. Or did both donate computers but NASA decided to go with MACs? Windows fanboys will come up with anything to justify their points. The fact is there is a billion dollars on the line with this mission and they were going to use the best possible hardware for it to succeed, donated or not I'm pretty sure they went with the best possible. Computers probably make up .001% of costs in this program so they definitely arent going to skimp on that especially considering how important computers are for a mission like this.

Does anyone know how the hell to read? I am done responding to people who can't interpret what I'm trying to say.

stop being a mature *******! pick a side then go full retard!!

Seriously. Let's start the same dogmatic arguments regarding TVs or cars. All these items are subjective and based on the user's experience and preference...until we debate Apple vs. Windows...makes zero sense.

[January912]

If I'm wrong I'm willing to admit I'm wrong but it seems like those were placed there on purpose.

At the heart of Curiosity there is, of course, a computer. In this case the Mars rover is powered by a RAD750, a single-board computer (motherboard, RAM, ROM, and CPU) produced by BAE. The RAD750 has been on the market for more than 10 years, and it’s currently one of the most popular on-board computers for spacecraft. In Curiosity’s case, the CPU is a PowerPC 750 (PowerPC G3 in Mac nomenclature) clocked at around 200MHz — which might seem slow, but it’s still hundreds of times faster than, say, the Apollo Guidance Computer used in the first Moon landings. Also on the motherboard are 256MB of DRAM, and 2GB of flash storage — which will be used to store video and scientific data before transmission to Earth.

The RAD750 can withstand temperatures of between -55 and 70C, and radiation levels up to 1000 gray. Safely ensconced within Curiosity, the temperature and radiation should remain below these levels — but for the sake of redundancy, there’s a second RAD750 that automatically takes over if the first one fails.


Software


On the software side of things, NASA again stuck to tried-and-tested solutions, opting for the 27-year-old VxWorks operating system. VxWorks, developed by Wind River Systems (which was acquired by Intel), is a real-time operating system used in a huge number of embedded systems. The previous Mars rovers (Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity), Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, and the SpaceX Dragon spacecraft all use VxWorks. VxWorks also powers BMW iDrive, the Apache Longbow helicopter, and the Apple Airport Extreme and Linksys WRT54G routers (really).

I said that VxWorks is 27 years old, but that’s a bit unfair: The initial release was in 1985 (around the same time as MS-DOS 3.0), but it has been in constant development since then, reaching v6.9 last year. Why does Curiosity use VxWorks? It’s reliable, has a mature development toolchain, and presumably its low-level scheduling and interrupt systems are ideal for handling real-time tasks like EDL (entry, descent, and landing; aka, seven minutes of terror).

[bruhbruh]

5 star thread will read to grandchildren

[2 HUGE]

I think my next laptop will be a mac for sure. seeing as now they can integrate microsoft office into macs pretty much flawlessly (so I've been told) I may have to give it a shot. also my next smartphone will be an iphone. not impressed with BB

[EternallyMiscd]

I don't understand the Windows/Apple argument to begin with. I like Windows. I could not care less if you like Apple. It's a difference of opinions.

Similarly I could not care less if you like a different car, cell phone, TV, refrigerator, etc. than I do.



Guess you overlooked where I said: Not saying this is why they chose Apple

My point was that, if there was a computer company approaching NASA saying, "hey our product is cheaper" then NASA would absolutely take that into consideration. Let me say this again: Not saying this is why they chose Apple, simply saying price would play a role if Apple's product was significantly cheaper to NASA.

Also let's not compare the price of a retail Mac to what they are charging NASA by supporting Mac on a launch project...

Agreed - that's why I described the bid evaluation process in an earlier post. My beef is with idiots who pretend Macs are toys and reserved for hipsters browsing the web at Starbucks. They are powerful, versatile machines and if you have the disposable income (they are not that much more expensive for comparable machines anyway) there are many reasons why they are superior that go above specs. The evidence is clear.

[srsnotsureif]

Who cares, use what you like.

[Aisha808]

Who gives a ****? They're good for different purposes. I own a Mac because they're far, far better for music/audio applications. And that's mostly what I work with.

Common sense, people.