_Cinnamon_ wrote:
When MM goes down, do people go on other sites and post about it? Nah--they probably just play curveball...

Actually....they do.

Blanchard Photography wrote:
well...i like to look at SG and Mayhem as social networking sites. Both are good for generating business or interest in projects. I was just curious if anyone knew..didnt mean to open a can of worms.

No worms here. I wasn't asking sarcastically--genuinely wondering, since I don't actually belong to any other sites.

PK Digital Imaging wrote:
Ummm.... isn't this the same as going to Microsoft's website and asking why Apple's website is down?   

-PKD

actually thats legit because microsoft owns 25% of apple, If I owned a large part a computer based company that went offline oh yeah I'd be askin questions.

Tikal wrote:
actually thats legit because microsoft owns 25% of apple, If I owned a large part a computer based company that went offline oh yeah I'd be askin questions.

You honestly think that MS techs will know anything about why Apple's servers are down??  MS owning 25% of Apple has nothing to do with network infrastructure.

And to the OP.. no worms here either... just was a bit odd. 

-PKD

_Cinnamon_ wrote:
When MM goes down, do people go on other sites and post about it? Nah--they probably just play curveball...

Did someone say Curveball? 

www.modelmayhem.com/curveball.swf

Eric Gunther wrote:
Yep, attack must be right - I'm up to five seporate sites giving me "server busy"
All of them being very large sites.

Give it a few hours.  Then call Al Gore and complain.

Traceroutes show traffic is fine to myspace.com.   SG on the other hand... something is killing traffic once it bounces into California.

PK Digital Imaging wrote:

You honestly think that MS techs will know anything about why Apple's servers are down??  MS owning 25% of Apple has nothing to do with network infrastructure.

And to the OP.. no worms here either... just was a bit odd. 

-PKD

I thought you ment more along the lines are rivalry as in why would they care because its better business.. And it wouldnt shock me if apple used microsoft networking techonology, and would bet they have at least one microsoft based server, Apple is the better system, Apple is better graphicly but microsoft is more advanced and way way way more mainstream in networking than apple meaning if apple wanted to communicate or created a forest with other trees/ domains other than there own they have a better bet using a microsoft based server than hoping that every comp on the 3d party domain has apple talk installed. But either way.

PK Digital Imaging wrote:

Traceroutes show traffic is fine to myspace.com.   SG on the other hand... something is killing traffic once it bounces into California.

Maybe something is happening over there, they are based in CA I think.

Tikal wrote:
I thought you ment more along the lines are rivalry as in why would they care because its better business.. And it wouldnt shock me if apple used microsoft networking techonology, and would bet they have at least one microsoft based server, Apple is the better system, Apple is better graphicly but microsoft is more advanced and way way way more mainstream in networking than apple meaning if apple wanted to communicate or created a forest with other trees/ domains other than there own they have a better bet using a microsoft based server than hoping that every comp on the 3d party domain has apple talk installed. But either way.

Hehehe.. I'm not going to get into a tech debate here. 

You can't say Apple is a better system.  Both Mac's and PC's have their strengths and weaknesses.  Apple's main problem is 3rd party software support.

Apple is a hardware and first party software developer.  Microsoft is a 3rd party software only developer.  Graphically you can't really compare the two.  Now if you compared Apple vs Intel/AMD.. that's a different story.

-PKD

Tikal wrote:
Maybe something is happening over there, they are based in CA I think.

I think someone unplugged a network server and plugged in a coffee maker.

Tikal wrote:

I thought you ment more along the lines are rivalry as in why would they care because its better business.. And it wouldnt shock me if apple used microsoft networking techonology, and would bet they have at least one microsoft based server, Apple is the better system, Apple is better graphicly but microsoft is more advanced and way way way more mainstream in networking than apple meaning if apple wanted to communicate or created a forest with other trees/ domains other than there own they have a better bet using a microsoft based server than hoping that every comp on the 3d party domain has apple talk installed. But either way.

Um......where do you get these crazy ideas about Apple? Microsoft owns exactly ZERO% of Apple. The only time Microsoft owned any Apple shares was after Microsoft settled a patent infringement case by buying 100,000 special, non-voting Apple shares which MS sold after holding them the agreed 5 years.
Apple stopped using Apple talk networking 6 years ago and now uses any standard network protocol any other Unix based system can.
Apple has been selling the Xserve for years which is a capable mid level server.

Seems to me that you haven’t really looked at Macs since 1999 or so. Lots has changed.
BTW, Macs run on Intel CPUs now and you can run Windows natively on a Mac.

Surreal Eye Studio wrote:
Did someone say Curveball? 

www.modelmayhem.com/curveball.swf

Oh gods *drool*
*swipes the swf*

Surreal Eye Studio wrote:

Did someone say Curveball? 

www.modelmayhem.com/curveball.swf

Curveball is cooler than SG!!!

blackmirror wrote:

Curveball is cooler than SG!!!

And the photography is better.