i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

I always tell people that they need to decide on a software app that
they want to use and pick the appropriate platform. These days that
doesn't even matter much as PT and most of the others work equally well
on both PC or Mac. But, I guess if you wanted to use Logic or MOTU
apps, then Mac is the spot. Nuendo probably works better on PC. Pro
Tools...not even sure anymore.
Later,
m

pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story

pc's are not cheaper , when you compare the two with like features.

mac's OS is designed with audio and midi inclusive in its setup.
(core audio and core midi)

and the technology definitely is mac, first with usb, firewire....
have you followed mr. rivers recent troubles with firewire on his dell
laptop in his postings here?

the mac is designed to last longer and generally requires less from any
technology support department.

dale

Vin wrote:
i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

Cheaper is not a big issue when you're talking about maybe $500 cost
difference at the most. If you are 5% more productive on one platform
than the other, then $500 or less is insignificant. The important
thing is to pick the tool that does the job best.

One reason to go with a Mac is that the system software and the
hardware come from the same vendor. There is less hardware
selection available, but what is available is more likely to work
in a hassle-free manner because it is all qualified through
Apple if not manufactured by them. Although it seems odd, by
reducing choice (limiting the hardware that's available), you
actually make things easier because you reduce complexity.
If you only have 3 video cards available, 3 hard drives, one
vendor of RAM, etc., etc., then you can actually test all
possible configurations at the factory and verify that they
all work. You can't do that in the Windows world because there
is just too much variety out there. Likewise, because of lack
of diversity, the third-party vendors (of audio hardware and
software) have fewer configurations to keep track of.

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

You're starting with the assumption that these people (who are going
to be using the DAW) already know Windows well and don't know Mac OS
at all. That's not a fair assumption. They may know both, or they
may know neither.

Also, you've mentioned they couldn't explain why they couldn't have
done with a PC. But you haven't applied that question in the
opposite direction. How many people do you know who have bought
a Windows machine for audio? Did you ask them why they couldn't
have done it with a Mac? Did they have an explanation?

By the way, one possible reason here is that Macs have always been
more popular with artistic people. My upstairs neighbor is a
graphic artist; she uses a Mac. My dad is an architect; his whole
office used Macs until availability of a particular CAD program
forced them to switch to Windows. The graphic artist that designs
the art for the software I'm working on uses a Mac. One possible
reason for this is just that, well, Macs have more panache than
Windows machines do. Windows machines get the job done, but Macs
do it in style. Creative people relate to that.

- Logan

dale wrote:
pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story


pc's are not cheaper, when you compare the two with like features.

Agreed (mostly.)




mac's OS is designed with audio and midi inclusive in its setup.
(core audio and core midi)

Sort of. No general purpose computing OS (other then BeOS) is really designed for realtime applications.



the technology definitely is mac, first with usb, firewire....
have you followed mr. rivers recent troubles with firewire on his dell
laptop in his postings here?

Some technology has appeared first from Apple. Some technology has appeared first on Intel/AMD. Being first does not always mean you have the best implementation.




the mac is designed to last longer and generally requires less from any
technology support department.

Depends on the Mac, depends on what you compare it with.









BTW, what you have posted comes awfully close to what it known in the usenet realm as 'flamebait.' Please try to refrain from inciting flamewars here if at all possible.

"dale" writes:

and the technology definitely is mac, first with usb, firewire....
have you followed mr. rivers recent troubles with firewire on his dell
laptop in his postings here?

Means nothing. Two of my Macs (totally different models/vintages)
have exhibited really freaky glitches when talking to audio interfaces
or hard drives via firewire. Turned out to be cured by adding an
external firewire card. Fortunately it they were only $10 each, and
diagnosing the 2nd one was pretty easy since I had already been
through it once. But vexing, still. I had to give up a slot for
that?! YMMV.

--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

yeah sometimes sharing a firewire bus is not happening for audio/video.
metric halo says if you want to run an external harddrive firewire with
their MIO, you need to do just that.
seems all firewire ports are on the same buss, by adding a new card for
firewire, you have a new buss.
mac is not perfect..... it is just another computer, but a better built
one.

dale

please no flame war
hank has a cheap 410
and I do not want to find out how good his aim is

dale

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:14:16 GMT, Logan Shaw
wrote:

By the way, one possible reason here is that Macs have always been
more popular with artistic people.

And probably more popular with people who want to think of themselves
and have others think of them as artistic and special. (No insult
intended to anyone here)

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

I believe him.

Frank /~ http://newmex.com/f10
@/

I honestly think Macs are overrated....great computers, but overrated and
overpriced. The G5's processing power is not much, if any more than the
top-of-the-line PC's which cost less and OSX is no more stable than 2000/XP.
I would even go so far as to say that ProTools is overrated. Of course it is
an industry standard and still probably the best for many purposes,
especially for syncing w/ video. But apps like Cubase do the basically the
same thing, for less $ and w/o proprietary hardware. Plus I happen to like
the interface and overall stability of Cubase better than PT. Again, these
are totally subjective opinions, but anyone who believes Mac is the ONLY way
to go for audio, obviously hasn't done many critical comparisons.

just an aside, IME "mac people" tend to be very, let's say "defensive" of
their platform of choice, almost in a religious sense as if they have
something to prove..."don't question it! just have faith in it's supreme
dominance!".... anyone who dares question apple's superiority will incur the
wraith of a whole legion of mac geeks.....whereas "PC people" really don't
give a damn who agrees with them. Anyway, now that i've berated PT AND Mac
let the flames begin!

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



"Vin" wrote in message
. ..
i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

I believe him.

exactly the point i tried to make in the aside to my post. "Mac people" are
the religious fundamentalist whackos for the computer world.....won't be
long til they start bombing intel factories heh

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



"Frank Vuotto" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:14:16 GMT, Logan Shaw
wrote:

By the way, one possible reason here is that Macs have always been
more popular with artistic people.

And probably more popular with people who want to think of themselves
and have others think of them as artistic and special. (No insult
intended to anyone here)

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

I believe him.

Frank /~ http://newmex.com/f10
@/

Frank Vuotto wrote:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

Ah, bull****. It's a computer and it does computer **** to me when it
must. g We wound up using Macs because in 1994 my wife wanted to get a
computer and all her friends who used computers and were cross-platform
capable told her a Mac was easier to use. She'd also been a recording
studio mananger for years, and seen many a _Mix_ cover with a Mac
sitting on some fancy console. Her decision was fortuitous for me, as I
eventually got an AMII card and SDII.

Music is a way of life.

--
ha

Jonny Durango wrote:

I honestly think Macs are overrated....great computers, but overrated and
overpriced.

Everytime somebody here who is knowledgable cross-platform goes to the
respective sites and puts together directly comparable non-bottomfeeder
workstation systems the prices are within peanuts of each other and the
advantage is not always PC.

The cheapest PC from Dell is cheaper than the cheapest Mac. And in that
case, it ought to be, with its glorious 90 day warranty.

These are just cyberhammers; pick the one with the handle you like.
Ain't no better about it, in general.

--
ha

When my wife and I finally decided on Mac, one of the very real factors is
that it looks slick, and that helps make it more fun and engaging to do work
on.

Folks who buy hot rods don't usually try to claim it's for the gas mileage, so
let's be honest about our computers too. The Mac is just cooler - and I don't
mean temperature. In many cases, "cooler" alone can be truly worth spending
money on.

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:13:17 GMT, (Vin) wrote:

i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

johnny

did you not have problems with mac and protools in some studio??

I believe him.

exactly the point i tried to make in the aside to my post. "Mac
people" are
the religious fundamentalist whackos for the computer world.....won't
be
long til they start bombing intel factories heh

and you are preaching from the pc bible.

dale

--

Jonny Durango

I have a Mac with Pro Tools and a PC with Cubase.
The PC with Cubase is a joke and the Mac with Pro Tools actually works...

--
Steven Sena
XS Sound Recording
www.xssound.com

"Vin" wrote in message
. ..
i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

SCSI & Firewire, are data transfer technologies specifically designed
to move HUGE amounts of information around in real time. Macintosh
developed these technologies to serve the creative communities who use
them (music & video)! The PC market is a FOLLOW ALONG market that
adapts to the technologies developed by Apple and others. Yes, there
are professional applications available in recording and in video that
you can use on the PC, BUT, there are far better applications for the
MAC!

Just as the game developers do most of their work for the P.C. crowd,
The music and video developers are Mac minded. Macs are fairly one
dimensional machines. They are made to create things with. PC's are
made for the home, office and for gamers.

Final Cut Pro and Digital Performer RULE! They are strictly Mac.
Except for Cakewalk, almost everything else works on both platforms.
Hardware is even a bigger problem for the P.C. Save yourself 10,000
hours of head aches and get yourself a Mac, you won't regret it.

On the other hand, if you want to walk into BEST BUY and find 200
games and other applications for cheap that will work on your PC and
Not on the Mac. Go for the P.C. But If I were a serious artist who
wanted the best tools for my trade. It's not even a close call.
Better yet, go to a Mac store and open up a G5. Then Go to Best Buy
and open up their nicest PC. You're going to know immediately that
there isn't any comparison between the two machines when it comes to
craftsmanship and design. The application differences are even more
dramatic than the obvious physical advantages enjoyed by the MAC.


Go Create!

Steven Sena wrote:

I have a Mac with Pro Tools and a PC with Cubase.
The PC with Cubase is a joke and the Mac with Pro Tools actually works...

Troublemaker!

--
ha ha

Why do Mac people always assume they know which has more panache and
it's a Mac? Mac people are the most insecure consumers in the world.

I use both at work. I don't give a damn which I'm on. i would never
be able to afford expanding a Mac at home the way I can with PC. If
you want a sound card that works well on a PC--just choose from the
tens or hundreds out there, and research it on the web. You'll find
one that you can be 99% sure will work with your setup.

Apple loves to squeeze their users for $$$, that's the difference
between mac and PC. And macs *used to* be more stable.

SongCzar wrote:
Better yet, go to a Mac store and open up a G5. Then Go to Best Buy
and open up their nicest PC. You're going to know immediately that
there isn't any comparison between the two machines when it comes to
craftsmanship and design.

This is one reason why I think creative people are attracted to the Mac.

I am a Unix person myself, and these days it makes most sense financially
to just get a PC and run Unix on it. So I built my own machine a while
back, and a big part of the process was selecting a case that looks nice.

Only, as far as I could tell after looking far and wide, they simply
don't exist! There are no nice-looking cases for PCs! I ended up
with an Antec Sonata, which has a shiny black finish (they call it
a "piano" finish). It's not butt ugly, but it still doesn't look
nice. It's got an ugly curved front with a big spot right in the
middle of the cheap plastic door for a STICKER. Yes, that's what I
want to do with my expensive computer: put a sticker right on the
front of it. What is this -- junior high school or something?

And then below that is the spot where the USB ports, etc. hook up.
It's a nice idea having this there, but it's a big silver (plastic,
of course) curved door with hemispherical multi-faceted clear
(plastic, of course) pieces that cap it off and make it look like
a gigantic Tylenol caplet. Only it has blue LEDs in it (because
anything with a blue LED is automatically cool), so it's a blue
glowing gigantic Tylenol caplet right below my junior high sticker.

Oh, and it also has a green power LED, but that thing is located
about 45% from the top and about 10% from the right size of the
front panel. What kind of proportions are those? Who on earth
thinks it looks good to have a green LED at an essentially-random
position on the front panel?

Meanwhile, I can go pick out a Mac at random at the store, and
there's a good chance I'll look at it and go, "hey, that thing
looks pretty cool". Some of them are just dumb looking and a
little gaudy and/or ill-conceived, but most Macs look pretty cool.

And that's part of what creative people relate to. 21 years later
after the "1984" superbowl comercial, Apple is still making people
feel like they're escaping the drudgery of the PC world, but now
they're doing it in a few really simple, down-to-earth ways, like
making a case that's not butt ugly.

- Logan

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 03:39:50 GMT, (hank alrich)
wrote:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

Ah, bull****. It's a computer and it does computer **** to me when it
must. g

Well, of course it's bull**** but it is a counterproductive attitude
that, unfortunatly, I've sometimes had to deal with in the the last 20
years.

It's also an attitude that Mac users are special and superior to the
PC hordes that is promoted and cultivated by Apple.

........

Music is a way of life.

Yup

Frank /~ http://newmex.com/f10
@/

--

Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.
"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
SongCzar wrote:
Better yet, go to a Mac store and open up a G5. Then Go to Best Buy
and open up their nicest PC. You're going to know immediately that
there isn't any comparison between the two machines when it comes to
craftsmanship and design.

This is one reason why I think creative people are attracted to the Mac.

I am a Unix person myself, and these days it makes most sense financially
to just get a PC and run Unix on it. So I built my own machine a while
back, and a big part of the process was selecting a case that looks nice.

Only, as far as I could tell after looking far and wide, they simply
don't exist! There are no nice-looking cases for PCs! I ended up
with an Antec Sonata, which has a shiny black finish (they call it
a "piano" finish). It's not butt ugly, but it still doesn't look
nice. It's got an ugly curved front with a big spot right in the
middle of the cheap plastic door for a STICKER. Yes, that's what I
want to do with my expensive computer: put a sticker right on the
front of it. What is this -- junior high school or something?

And then below that is the spot where the USB ports, etc. hook up.
It's a nice idea having this there, but it's a big silver (plastic,
of course) curved door with hemispherical multi-faceted clear
(plastic, of course) pieces that cap it off and make it look like
a gigantic Tylenol caplet. Only it has blue LEDs in it (because
anything with a blue LED is automatically cool), so it's a blue
glowing gigantic Tylenol caplet right below my junior high sticker.

Oh, and it also has a green power LED, but that thing is located
about 45% from the top and about 10% from the right size of the
front panel. What kind of proportions are those? Who on earth
thinks it looks good to have a green LED at an essentially-random
position on the front panel?

Meanwhile, I can go pick out a Mac at random at the store, and
there's a good chance I'll look at it and go, "hey, that thing
looks pretty cool". Some of them are just dumb looking and a
little gaudy and/or ill-conceived, but most Macs look pretty cool.

And the run a really really nice version of unix these days.

"Vin" wrote in message
. ..
i can understand where macs had the obvious advantage in the win95/98/me
days of totally instablility and unreliability.. but windows 2000/xp are
extremely stable, pcs are cheaper.. is mac hardware more powerful for
audio processing? whats the story?

two people i know bought macs because they wanted to do some 'serious'
recording but neither of them can really explain why they couldn't
have done it with a pc.. seems silly to learn a whole new OS if there's
no actually benefit..

Apple did a good job early days in the audio arena (as in the graphic design
arena) instilling the idea that "creative people use Macs'.

Some people still cling to that crutch - other just get on with creating on
Macs or Wintels.

The 'closed' business models of early Mac hardware suppliers also benefited
from the 'closed' Mac software/hardware paradigm.


geoff

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
Frank Vuotto wrote:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

Ah, bull****. It's a computer and it does computer **** to me when it
must. g We wound up using Macs because in 1994 my wife wanted to get a
computer and all her friends who used computers and were cross-platform
capable told her a Mac was easier to use. She'd also been a recording
studio mananger for years, and seen many a _Mix_ cover with a Mac
sitting on some fancy console. Her decision was fortuitous for me, as I
eventually got an AMII card and SDII.

probably bought some NS10S on the same logic ....

geoff

"Steve Jorgensen" wrote in message
...
When my wife and I finally decided on Mac, one of the very real factors is
that it looks slick, and that helps make it more fun and engaging to do
work
on.

And they come in so many different colours.

geoff

"Steven Sena" wrote in message
...
I have a Mac with Pro Tools and a PC with Cubase.
The PC with Cubase is a joke and the Mac with Pro Tools actually works...


Have you considered replacing Cubase ?

geoff

"Steven Sena" wrote in message
...
I have a Mac with Pro Tools and a PC with Cubase.
The PC with Cubase is a joke and the Mac with Pro Tools actually works...


Hi Steve,

Just curious, what are the PC specs, what version of Cubase and what audio
interface?

John L Rice

"SongCzar" wrote in message
oups.com...
SCSI & Firewire, are data transfer technologies specifically designed
to move HUGE amounts of information around in real time. Macintosh
developed these technologies to serve the creative communities who use
them (music & video)! The PC market is a FOLLOW ALONG market that
adapts to the technologies developed by Apple and others. Yes, there
are professional applications available in recording and in video that
you can use on the PC, BUT, there are far better applications for the
MAC!

Ah! That may be so, but when you get into radio automation software, most of
it only runs on a Windows platform...not much use for a mac then...

Macs have always been more reliable than PCs for audio. When 95/98/ME
was unstable, Macs were reliable for audio. Now that 2K/XP are more
stable, Mac upped it with Core Audio/Midi, while Microsoft does
nothing for audio. Having the same maker (Apple) of hardware/OS helps a
lot. I use a Powerbook, so I appreciate that. I see people with PC
laptops, especially for loops, but generally it's a Mac, even an iBook,
for recording or live loops. Macs are simply more reliable, especially
XP will crash the whole system over any slight anomaly, such as a bad
driver. Panther is more stable at the core where it processes audio,
and has more native drivers. Stability is why people use Macs.

I do audio for video and there's no client I know who uses Premiere or
Vegas. It's always Final Cut and sometimes Avid, and I use Digital
Performer ('can't afford DigiTranslator). This is all Mac stuff.

There's some killer post-production apps that I keep a desktop PC for:
CD Architect and Acid. In fact, I transfer a lot of my Mac songs to CD
Architect because that's a tasty program. But for serious laptop
recording out in the field with people paying me, Mac rocks and NEVER
crashed during a recording session. Believe me, I wouldn't want to rely
on XP with all the hell I put my Powerbook through because XP would
crash....guaranteed.

Logan Shaw wrote:
SongCzar wrote:
Better yet, go to a Mac store and open up a G5. Then Go to Best
Buy
and open up their nicest PC. You're going to know immediately that
there isn't any comparison between the two machines when it comes
to
craftsmanship and design.

This is one reason why I think creative people are attracted to the
Mac.

I am a Unix person myself, and these days it makes most sense
financially
to just get a PC and run Unix on it. So I built my own machine a
while
back, and a big part of the process was selecting a case that looks
nice.


There's more to this than meets the eye. From the book "Universal
Principals of Design" check out the the chapter "Aesthetic-Usability
Effect". It states "Aestetic designs are perceived as easier to use
than less-aesthetic designs" and refers to experimental evidence to
back up this assertion.

Clearly, Apple knows this and realizes that they can charge more for a
product that *looks better* than an equivalent performing alternative.
With this additional profit margin, they can pay for good design...

Of course not all customers care about this. But Apple is concerned
with those who do. I tend to relate this to different philosophies of
company structure, marketing and product design. Apple cultivates a
cult-like following. So does VW, Porche, BMW, Corvette, Coca Cola, and
thousands of other brands.

Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com

I'm not going to disagree that there are a lot of mac users in the
creative areas, but it's probably a lot less to do with the actual
performance of the boxes, or the applications. Meaning, Macs no longer
are SCSI and have any sort of speed advantage over a Wintel box. I can
still build a Wintel box with SCSI drives, firewire, USB2 and every
other feature I care to build. I can usually do this for around $1200,
if not less to have an absolute screamer that is lean, mean and will
work perfectly with my Nuendo/MOTU products.
I think more guys use Macs because of the their design. They just look
cool. And they see them on the cover of Mix and other mags in "pro
studios".
Speaking of creative people in general...I happen to work for Adobe. A
few years ago, you'd find literally EVERYONE that used Photoshop or
Illustrator on a Mac. Now, I don't see that as the case. The Wintel
boxes run these apps just fine, no different than a Mac. Adobe even
stopped producing their Premier Pro product for the Mac platform. They
bought an audio app....Cool Edit Pro, PC only. As much as I love Macs,
they're just computers.
With all of this said, I'm contemplating getting a new laptop for the
house. Do I want to just use my current computer and move it into
fulltime internet and home duties? Do I just get a PC notebook and
continue to use my music computer for music only? One side of me would
love to have a Mac and they're great computers and look cool, but I'd
be having to get all new software like MS Office, etc. Is it really
worth it? Who knows....they sure look cool though....
later,
m

Ok, I probably shouldnt be jumping on this thread so don't kill me to
bad for asking but ...

So far it seems that most of the posts in this thread (and other
discussions too) are very subjective answers as to why this or that is
better.

Can someone really define what is better about one platform or the other
(aside from reliability issues which is also debatable).

IE: What is the maximum hard disk data xfer speed on each?
Is there really a difference in the quality/speed of the video?
Can one handle more plug ins than the other?
What is "Core Audio" and what actually is going on under the hood?
What benchmarks have been done for each realating to audio?
Etc. Etc.

IOW, lets see some numbers and hard data, instead of "I like the
case better" or "I think xyz is better"
Lets put pricing/personal preference aside and compare raw data if there
is any.

What kind of application are you going to be doing that any of this
makes a difference? The average high-end PC and the average high-end
Mac are both going to be good enough for almost anything if you know how
to use the machine properly (and someone's written a good piece of
software for it).

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Chip Borton wrote:
Ok, I probably shouldnt be jumping on this thread so don't kill me to
bad for asking but ...

So far it seems that most of the posts in this thread (and other
discussions too) are very subjective answers as to why this or that is
better.

Can someone really define what is better about one platform or the other
(aside from reliability issues which is also debatable).

IE: What is the maximum hard disk data xfer speed on each?
Is there really a difference in the quality/speed of the video?
Can one handle more plug ins than the other?
What is "Core Audio" and what actually is going on under the hood?
What benchmarks have been done for each realating to audio?
Etc. Etc.

IOW, lets see some numbers and hard data, instead of "I like the case
better" or "I think xyz is better"
Lets put pricing/personal preference aside and compare raw data if there
is any.

In article writes:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

I believe him.

I would, too. I just wouldn't like to have his life.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Trevor de Clercq wrote:
What kind of application are you going to be doing that any of this
makes a difference?

How about Pro Tools since most are familiar with it and it has both
a mac and pc version.


The average high-end PC and the average high-end
Mac are both going to be good enough for almost anything if you know how
to use the machine properly (and someone's written a good piece of
software for it).

Agreed, they are both good enough ...

Chip Borton wrote:
Ok, I probably shouldnt be jumping on this thread so don't kill me to
bad for asking but ...

So far it seems that most of the posts in this thread (and other
discussions too) are very subjective answers as to why this or that is
better.

You're one of the few rational voices in this flamefest, don't stop now.




Can someone really define what is better about one platform or the other
(aside from reliability issues which is also debatable).

IE: What is the maximum hard disk data xfer speed on each?

Depends on the hard disk chosen more than anything else. The newest generation of Seagate (Barracuda 7200.8) drives are the current speed leaders in 7200 RPM drives. The 10,000 RPM WD Raptor is even faster--but limited to 74 gB, hot, and noisy.




Is there really a difference in the quality/speed of the video?

Not for the 2D rendering that we use in DAW work.



Can one handle more plug ins than the other?

Depends mostly on the plugins and how their options are set. Either will meet the needs of any sane person these days.



What is "Core Audio" and what actually is going on under the hood?

Core Audio is the new Apple OS X audio driver and API. It's equivalent to WDM+KSM or ASIO. All three work, don't sweat it.


What benchmarks have been done for each realating to audio?

Lots of them, each proving that one platform is slightly better than the other, none proving anything useful to most of us in the real world.



Pick the software that suits your needs and workflow pattern best. Pick the OS that runs that SW. Pick the hardware that runs that OS.

Geoff Wood wrote:

"hank alrich" wrote...
Frank Vuotto wrote:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

Ah, bull****. It's a computer and it does computer **** to me when it
must. g We wound up using Macs because in 1994 my wife wanted to get a
computer and all her friends who used computers and were cross-platform
capable told her a Mac was easier to use. She'd also been a recording
studio mananger for years, and seen many a _Mix_ cover with a Mac
sitting on some fancy console. Her decision was fortuitous for me, as I
eventually got an AMII card and SDII.

probably bought some NS10S on the same logic ....

Naah, already had the JBL 4315's, the Auratones, and the Studers, and so
forth. The PC salesman didn't help his cause when he told her one
couldn't do any real work with a Mac. Kinda figure whoever bought an SSL
in those days could've bought an IBM if they thought it a better tool
for their own studio work. You know well that once upon a time Macs were
just a smidge ahead in the audio working world, just as that no longer
is the case. I think Ben Maas's quick show-off for me of Sequoia at AES
indicated that Mac's are probably now _behind_ in audio at the highest
end.

--
ha

mwood5nospam wrote:

I think more guys use Macs because of the their design.

The design of the TiBook certainly didn't put me off, but I bought it to
run an interface and software that works only with Macs, the Metric Halo
MIO and Logic Pro. Just like the statement that in radio automation
(which sucks compared to real DJ's g) there is nothing to do with a
Mac, I chose a tool that has nothing to do with WinTel. So, as always,
the thing that matters most to people wanting to get something done with
their computer can come down to what apps they want to run and what
hardware supports those.

I have been tempted to get a WinTel machine just to run Plextor's CD
error-checking software, but so far it hasn't seemed worth the trouble
for the work I'm doing.

--
ha

Chip Borton wrote:
Ok, I probably shouldnt be jumping on this thread so don't kill me to
bad for asking but ...

So far it seems that most of the posts in this thread (and other
discussions too) are very subjective answers as to why this or that
is better.

Can someone really define what is better about one platform or the
other (aside from reliability issues which is also debatable).

IE: What is the maximum hard disk data xfer speed on each? Is there
really a difference in the quality/speed of the video? Can one handle
more plug ins than the other? What is "Core Audio" and what actually
is going on under the hood? What benchmarks have been done for each
realating to audio? Etc. Etc.

IOW, lets see some numbers and hard data, instead of "I like the
case better" or "I think xyz is better" Lets put pricing/personal
preference aside and compare raw data if there is any.

There are so many variables in that you'll never be able to answer with
numbers. A G4 at 0.933 GHz runs about as fast as a 1.6 GHz P4. So
which is better?

The Mac is still far more stable. I've been forced to reinstall Windows
about eight times to, ah, zero times for OSX. Lots of little crap on
Windows (I mean NT, XP, 2000, *and* 2003; ME and 9x lose hands down)
just plain doesn't work right, and it varies what that may be from day
to day or machine to machine; I finally just learned to grin and call it
"entertainment" when Windows pulls some new stupid ****. I even got my
parents a Mac because I was tired of the weekly phone calls (their first
computer ran CP/M, never got support calls for that, either).

I keep all my machines running well. My Macs altogether involve far
less maintenance time than either of the Windows machines I have left.
And Macs have a longer useful life, as OS upgrades don't slow the
machine down nearly as much. Also, OSX doesn't develop gremlins over
time, like Windows does.

Neither platform is perfect, but there's just no contest. Maybe my
disgust results from having to produce software that's more reliable
than Windows is; if your software costs $2k per seat, folks just don't
want to hear "it's a well-known Windows problem" when their equipment fails.

YMMV if you keep your eyes closed. The only advantage Windows has over
OSX is that its users desperately want it to be as good, and it's not.
I have plenty of examples to support all this, but I really wanted to
stay out of the debate, and I'll get flamed for this as it is.
Sometimes I feel like a reformed smoker talking to a cigar club.

The answer to your question is: just go get one and figure it out for
yourself. Or don't; it's your choice.

Mike Rivers wrote:

writes:

Last week I had a MAC ONLY client (has never touched a PC) tell me
that 'Mac isn't just a computer, it's a way of life'.

I believe him.

I would, too. I just wouldn't like to have his life.

Not even if you could run Firewire and a LAN at the same time? g Get
Mackie to send Kurt A a FW card for his Onyx and we'll meet and test
(and eat, and the rest).

--
ha