# Apple are Unbelievable



## stevenson-again (Oct 7, 2010)

my old 27" monitor was dying so i said bugger this lets grab an apple display. i ordered online and i have just opened it....


....and now i have closed it again in preparation to sending it back.

un-f***ing believable. it says on the site that it comes with mag-safe mini ports, but nowhere on the site does it explicitly say that a brand new display will not work with a mac only a year old. it ONLY comes with mini display connections, you can't connect it to a desktop mac - unless it is a brand new one that also comes with mini connections.

naturally apple sell DVI to mini DVI adpators - but only for going from DVI to mini, not the other way around.

i am absolutely gutted. my computer is 'only' 1 year old. it is just ludicrous. yet the latest 30 inch display which is £400 more DOES come with standard DVI connections. WTF?

i just can't get my head round it. what IDIOTS. this has happened before with DVI-ADC-ADB or whatever but i thought i would be safe this time. maybe i am the idiot. maybe i should just not by anything from apple unless i am actually held at gun point.

ach....


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 7, 2010)

Bizarre that they don't include an adaptor to DVI.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 7, 2010)

> Bizarre that they don't include an adaptor to DVI.



mate they don't even exist. i just can't believe it. how one earth are we supposed to know that we are supposed to have lap tops to use these screens?


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 7, 2010)

stevenson-again @ Thu Oct 07 said:


> naturally apple sell DVI to mini DVI adpators - but only for going from DVI to mini, not the other way around.


I'm not trying to be a smartass, but is there a difference between the two? I have a Mini-DVI to DVI adapter sticking out the back of my Mac MINI right now so that I can connect a DVI monitor to it. Couldn't I take that same adapter and plug the mini-DVI plug into the new 27" monitor, then connect it to an old Mac desktop using a regular DVI to DVI cable?


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 7, 2010)

it's a gender thing. which way round to the little sticks point?


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 7, 2010)

The adapter on my Mac Mini is Male Mini-DVI to Female DVI.

Assuming the Mini-DVI jack on the 27" monitor is female (like it is on the Mac Mini or newer MacBooks,) then it should plug in just fine and a regular old male to male DVI cable will do the rest. Unless I'm misunderstanding something.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 7, 2010)

I looked on the Apple site and apparently you only get a breakout cable, rather than jacks. I see your problem, since I assume that video connector is male rather than female. This seems like a pretty big oversight on Apple's part. The only solution I can think of is this rather expensive ($150) adapter: (Don't quote me that it would work, by the way)

http://www.gefen.com/kvm/dproduct.jsp?prod_id=8913


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 7, 2010)

Can't you just add a DVI m-m or f-f adapter, s-a?

There's no conversion as far as I know, just an adapter.


----------



## rgames (Oct 7, 2010)

Actually I don't think they're mini DVI - I believe it's an Apple proprietary connector - mini DisplayPort, I think? I have a mini-DVI connection on my video card but it's not the same as mini DisplayPort.

I believe DisplayPort was part of Apple's response to HDCP and Blu-Ray - they don't want their customers dealing with that inferior crap. :? Standards be damned! So they created their own format (or with someone else maybe - can't recall) to deal with content protection.

rgames


----------



## Animus (Oct 7, 2010)

rgames @ Thu Oct 07 said:


> Actually I don't think they're mini DVI - I believe it's an Apple proprietary connector - mini DisplayPort, I think? I have a mini-DVI connection on my video card but it's not the same as mini DisplayPort.
> 
> I believe DisplayPort was part of Apple's response to HDCP and Blu-Ray - they don't want their customers dealing with that inferior crap. :? Standards be damned! So they created their own format (or with someone else maybe - can't recall) to deal with content protection.
> 
> rgames



And to sell $50 adapters, which is where a good bit of the 50 billion of cash reserves come from. That and iphone accessories, cuz everyone wants to accessorize you know.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 7, 2010)

After looking at the Gefen link I see that this is probably more than just an adapter.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 8, 2010)

the cheapest solution is an adaptor i am not sure would work properly, that still costs close £100 and isn't even available in the UK. i am hopping mad about this. what a waste of my time. if they don't want to make stuff compatible with their own stuff - fine - their loss - but be explicit about it.

as soon as it goes back i will order the dell ultrasharp. it's slightly more expensive than the apple display but it definitely has every connector under the sun. unfortunately it doesn't have the built in camera which was one of my reasons for going with apple display.

what complete twats.


----------



## david robinson (Oct 8, 2010)

hi rohan,
hope you're well.
sorry to hear this, but that's apple for you.
why do you think i stopped posting in the logic forum a few years back?
it certainly wasn't because of the other fine ppl there.
all the best and success to you.
j.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 8, 2010)

they do exist:

http://www.cancomuk.com/Brand/Gefen/Pro ... -DVI-2-MDP

grrrr. this still pisses me off. do you know if i had known this earlier i might have gone ahead with the 30 inch version and paid the extra. but i am so annoyed...in any case the 30" doesn't have the isight camera which i was thinking would be nice on top of the fact that the monitor is deeply deeply gorgeous looking.

but my studio is actually an adapted conservatory and it's a bit bright. i do need as bright a monitor as i can find. the glare is problematic on sunny days.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 8, 2010)

well it's gone. the man has just picked up my useless apple monitor and i believe my dell monitor will turn up tomorrow. considering it took apple nearly 2 weeks to send me a monitor i couldn't use, at least they were prompt picking it up.

how ironic i have to get a competitors product in order for it to be compatible with my macpro.


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

I went with a nearly new 30 inch LG, same panel as your Dell. Only cost me 500 quid. 2560 by 1600 res, nice. 

Apple stuff is mostly overpriced crap, only reason I am looking for a Mac Pro is Logic. Even they are hugely overpriced. A PC half the cost will wipe the floor with them.

Now you know why Steve Jobs has 6 Billion Dollars

j.l.b


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 8, 2010)

> Apple stuff is mostly overpriced crap, only reason I am looking for a Mac Pro is Logic. Even they are hugely overpriced. A PC half the cost will wipe the floor with them.




much as i would like to agree with you can't. even the monitor i sent back is only slightly more expensive than the nearest equivalent - the dell ultrasharp. it's more expensive if you have to get an adaptor though. idiots.

also the macpro is not overpriced for what it is. if you built a comparable system as a PC it would cost the same or even slightly more.


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

You aren't serious? I could build an absolutely kick ass PC system based on the Core i7, for a _fraction_ of the cost of a Mac Pro, and none of this 2.26Ghz or 2.4Gghz crap either. :D 

jlb


----------



## midphase (Oct 8, 2010)

The i7 is not in the same class as the Xeon Nehalem...sorry.

Apple builds a kick ass i7 computer for a fraction of the price of the Mac Pro too...it's called the iMac.


----------



## IFM (Oct 8, 2010)

Don't make me pull this forum over!!


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

There is no problem with the i7, I notice lots of the proper rackmount DAW systems use it. 

Ok this is an old chestnut. But the new 12 core Mac Pro cost 4 THOUSAND POUNDS and comes with SIX GIGABYTES of RAM. It's an absolute disgrace. That is more than I paid for my CAR.

Rant over

jlb


----------



## midphase (Oct 8, 2010)

I didn't say that the i7 is bad...but you're making a flawed comparison by saying that you can build one for a fraction of the price of the Mac Pro.

I wish, instead of making pointless statements, that you would show a way to build a 12-core Xeon Nehalem computer at a reduced cost. I think that would go way further in giving you some valid arguments than simply bitching about Apple's price tag.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 8, 2010)

midphase @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> The i7 is not in the same class as the Xeon Nehalem...sorry.
> .


 :roll:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2010)

jib, look up the prices of the processors alone and you'll see why the current Mac Pros cost what they do. And yes, of course you pay a premium for Apple products vs. generic equivalents, but obviously there are lots of people - myself among them - who find it worth it.

Having said that, I agree that $4500 is too much to pay for a computer even now that they last longer than they used to. (They used to be long in the tooth after two years, now it's more like 3-1/2 or even four.)

s-a: The 30" Cinema Display is one of the best investments I've made - so much so that I don't even mind having bought it a few months before the price dropped 20% or something; it was worth paying extra to have had it for those few months. Just a great product.

I hope the Dell is as good - and I'm not saying that sardonically.


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

midphase @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> I didn't say that the i7 is bad...but you're making a flawed comparison by saying that you can build one for a fraction of the price of the Mac Pro.
> 
> I wish, instead of making pointless statements, that you would show a way to build a 12-core Xeon Nehalem computer at a reduced cost. I think that would go way further in giving you some valid arguments than simply bitching about Apple's price tag.



I'm not surprised you are ok with it in the US. The 12 core is $4999, that is about £3,100 pounds. They even had them refurbished this morning for $4200, that is £2650 pounds. Over here they are £4000. That is $6342 dollars. With 6 Gigabytes of RAM. 6 Gigabytes, are you seriously suggesting that is ok? UK mac buyers are BEING SCREWED.

jlb


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 8, 2010)

jlb @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> You aren't serious? I could build an absolutely kick ass PC system based on the Core i7, for a _fraction_ of the cost of a Mac Pro, and none of this 2.26Ghz or 2.4Gghz crap either.



Depends what system you're comparing. You can definitely build an i7 machine that beats the performance of a xeon quad for much cheaper. But to compete with the 8/12 core xeon machines you have to build a xeon machine which is much more expensive (and much closer to the apple pricing).



midphase @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> The i7 is not in the same class as the Xeon Nehalem...sorry.
> 
> Apple builds a kick ass i7 computer for a fraction of the price of the Mac Pro too...it's called the iMac.



In terms of performance, an i7 is extremely competitive with a quad xeon setup (faster if the i7 is overclocked, which can be done easily). And the iMac i7 is hardly a fraction the price of a mac pro, you can build an i7 machine for about half the price of that iMac.



jlb @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> Ok this is an old chestnut. But the new 12 core Mac Pro cost 4 THOUSAND POUNDS and comes with SIX GIGABYTES of RAM.



And with software that supports it, an i7 isn't going to come anywhere close. If you're going to compare, you need to price a 12 core PC.


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

Ok fair points guys, I can't build an i7 PC that could compete with an 8 or 12 core MP. But I could build a hell of a machine, the fastest RAM, SSDs you name it.

Try and see it from our point of view over here in the UK. Would any of you guys pay $6342 dollars for a machine with 6G of RAM?

jlb


----------



## madbulk (Oct 8, 2010)

Be grateful.  Apple's RAM prices have traditionally been super puffy. Appropriate amount of RAM for the machine aside, you want the stock configs under RAM'd.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 8, 2010)

Just for the record the i7 is a nehalem based processor just like the xeon. Xeon was specifically built for server applications that imo desktop musicians don't really need. There isn't any performance benefit. Perhaps it's a little easier for xeon chips to utilize boatloads of ram(64 gigs and above), but I doubt that in what we do that would even make a difference.

So I know it pisses Mac people off to no end, but jib is right. The reason why Xeon chips are priced what they are is because of the intended market, which is medium to large scale businesses that have big servers and not individual users.

Given that the i7 nahalem based processors are actually better set up to run graphics and to be utilized in desktops, you could use the i7 and build a machine that's just as good if not better for what we do for a fraction of the cost.


----------



## midphase (Oct 8, 2010)

Honestly JLB, I agree with you that those machines are ridiculously expensive. 

If it makes you feel any better, I use a 4-core Mac Pro 2.66ghz first generation that I purchased refurb for $2200 about 3 years ago. I recently upped my RAM to 12 gigs and switched to using Logic Pro in 64 bit mode. The CPU is not hit hard at all, so even though a 12-core Mac Pro sounds sexy as hell to me, I am perfectly happy with the good ol' 4-core that I have. 

Of course different people have different needs, but I also know plenty of people who don't bat an eye at purchasing a $4k mic pre-amp or quality mics. In short, it really comes down to how much stuff is worth it to you for your own personal workflow. To me using Logic Pro is well worth paying for a Mac. If I wasn't using Logic I'd probably go back to (gasp) DP...which is also a Mac only app....so there you go!


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

midphase @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> Honestly JLB, I agree with you that those machines are ridiculously expensive.
> 
> If it makes you feel any better, I use a 4-core Mac Pro 2.66ghz first generation that I purchased refurb for $2200 about 3 years ago. I recently upped my RAM to 12 gigs and switched to using Logic Pro in 64 bit mode. The CPU is not hit hard at all, so even though a 12-core Mac Pro sounds sexy as hell to me, I am perfectly happy with the good ol' 4-core that I have.
> 
> Of course different people have different needs, but I also know plenty of people who don't bat an eye at purchasing a $4k mic pre-amp or quality mics. In short, it really comes down to how much stuff is worth it to you for your own personal workflow. To me using Logic Pro is well worth paying for a Mac. If I wasn't using Logic I'd probably go back to (gasp) DP...which is also a Mac only app....so there you go!



You are getting on fine with one of the old 4 cores, that is interesting and good to know. We all want the 12 core ovò&6   êC^&6   êC_&6   êC`&6   êCa&6   êCb&6   êCc&6   êCd&6   êCe&6   êCf&6   êCg&6   êCh&6


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 8, 2010)

i agree. those imacs are just super beautiful. i bought one for my daughter and i have been envying it. that's one of the reasons i wnated the apple display. i had it on the desk all set up and my heart was aflutter. and then...the connectors....and it all came crashing down.

somebody needs to rot in hell for doing that.

i very very nearly did buy the cinema display. i might actually have done had i been not so pissed off with apple for this travesty. but my dell ultrasharp arrives tomorrow. and i am not looking forward to it. i feel a bit empty inside somehow....


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 8, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> Oh, but that iMac is such a gorgeous machine! You have to appreciate the beauty of the design. The whole thing is inside the 27" monitor, it comes on a great swivel stand, the keyboard and mouse are wireless...you can't compare it to a generic box.



And none of those things is going to help you get your orchestral mockup done faster or sound better.



Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> This is why the current Mac Pro is so expensive:
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi ... re&x=0&y=0



Makes sense for the 8/12 core machines, but Apple have been fools for using xeon for quad core machines when they could have used i7 for the same performance at a much lower cost.


----------



## jlb (Oct 8, 2010)

Yes they could and should have used the I7, absolutely

jlb


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2010)

> And none of those things is going to help you get your orchestral mockup done faster or sound better.



Now you're just being obstinate, Mike!


----------



## rgames (Oct 8, 2010)

oooh a good ol' Mac vs. PC debate!

Apple doesn't make overpriced crap. It is overpriced, but it's not crap. Apple uses the Disneyland model for their business: you're buying the experience. Sure, there are theme parks with better rides that can be had for much less money, but they're not *Disneyland*.

Not sure if it's still true but as of a couple years ago the Dell monitors used the same panel as the cinema displays. The Apple product had different plastic around the panel and a different base but the panel was exactly the same. And, of course, the Dell model was about 1/3 the price when I bought my 24" models.

That must be some good plastic...

Might still be the same panel but Apple's move to displayport would require them to make some mods somewhere. Regardless, Apple doesn't actually make any computer components so they're buying it from somewhere. Odds are extremely high that someone else is selling the same thing under a different brand.

rgames


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 8, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> Now you're just being obstinate, Mike!



Just because I'm not willing to pay twice as much for just a shiny pretty case?


----------



## José Herring (Oct 8, 2010)

Not only is it cheaper but you get to design your very own special machine that nobody else has. It's become a creative hobby for me. I got me some red neon fans. Gonna install a water cooled cpu cooler. Got me some nice big 140mmm fans. And I got a Plexi glass side that I can see into my beautiful machine. 

Oh and btw midphase. The xeon's and the i7's are practically the same. You'll only notice a slight difference if your putting your xeon under intense server demands. Also, the i7 was designed with mutli media in mind so actually is slightly more suited for what we do.

I honestly think that the next gen Mac pro's will have an i7 option. Just Intel right now won't allow dual cpu configurations with the i7 chips. It would totally wipe out their more expensively marketed Xeon chips for business servers. Because of the fact that they're exactly the same chip save for a couple of minor differences making the Xeon slightly better at seeing over 64gigs of ram, the i7 and the xeons are practically interchangeable.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 8, 2010)

Also, for you Mac Pro users that want an upgrade to the 6 or 12 core xeon configurations. As far as I can tell you could just purchase the chips separately and install the new cpus in your existing machine. 

Just a thought. Especially if you're past your warranty. Could save you $4000 on your next upgrade.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2010)

> Just because I'm not willing to pay twice as much for just a shiny pretty case?



Not at all because of that.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2010)

I doubt you can just plug them in, Jose, but I could be wrong.


----------



## Animus (Oct 8, 2010)

So let me get this right, the new Cinema Displays only connect to the newest Macs? And there's no adapter or anything to connect to the previous models or before? Odd.

Anyways, you'd be better getting one of the NEC ips panels. Much finer than a Cinema Display. I have a 26 inch.


----------



## Animus (Oct 8, 2010)

Looks like this adapter would work, Atlona DP-400 DVI-Mini. But it's expensive and looks cheap.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 8, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 08 said:


> I doubt you can just plug them in, Jose, but I could be wrong.


I did some research. It can be done. But, it's not easy. 

OP is right. Apple sucks. Usually you'd be able to pop the processor out and replace it. Apple uses a custom processor without an integrated heat spreader, so that simple upgrades would be almost impossible for the average user. Lame.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/m ... ssors.html


----------



## nikolas (Oct 9, 2010)

I never liked Macs! Never in all my (rather short thus far) life! So my post is biased...

Still there are a few issues I realise from both points of views...

Mac

1. It is overpriced, no matter what you say.
2. It's overpriced for a reason! Even if you don't realise it.
3. It's followed by fans! Ludicrous!
4. It's coming with a closed architecture, closed ideas, and closed peripherals in general. Yes you can put in other stuff, but in general Apple's idea is that you use their own stuff.

PC

1. It's lower priced, but rather often you get what you pay for.
2. It's coming along with tons of useless crap and the Internet is filled with even more of that.
3. It's crowd could probably be mistaken as "anti-apple' crowd. :D
4. Open architecture which leaves plenty of room for destroying a computer rather than making it better.

Not sure what is better really. My finances do not allow for a Mac to be bought and my habits don't either. My job and my workflow is working lovely on my 6 GB RAM, i7 920 computer, for which I paid around $1500! For that price tag this CAN'T be beaten. 64-bit windows 7 (no issues), Cubase 5 (5.5 sucks for some reason over here, but 5.1 is fine), K4, etc, etc. All is fine and dandy! It's already 1 year old, but I still feel it's brand new!  And off the internet.

____________

Fact remains: A year old computer should be compatible with stuff coming out today, especially a bloody screen! Apple sucks at that alone!


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 9, 2010)

People complicate something very simple IMHO. Computers are tools for running software. Decide which software you want to run and buy the best machine you can afford that runs it best.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 9, 2010)

> Mac
> 
> 1. It is overpriced, no matter what you say.
> 2. It's overpriced for a reason! Even if you don't realise it.
> ...



1. actually that is not true. many things are quite reasonably priced - such as the display i had to return. like for like much of apples stuff is pretty comparable and has the virtue of integrating well other of its stuff...normally. one of the reasons i wanted the apple display is that i know they tend to go for the high end version of what you can generally get - ie its generally pretty good quality. in that sense i let apple do the shopping around for me. that was the theory anyway.

4. it's true but in this way they can make everything integrate and be a little more reliable, requiring less of the user to figure stuff out. ie they do the heavy lifting and just leave you with a homogeneous setup that is generally going to be pretty high spec and should work.

what shits me to tears is that in keeping things the latest greatest they don't at least support those who have purchased only just recently. at the very least i should have been warned explicitly on the site that computers pre-2010 would not work with their screen. i would have been irritated, but not nearly as irritated as having to wait for the thing to come and then realize it wouldn't work. i have my roughly equivalent dell monitor set up and...well...ho hum. it's ok. very boring looking and i am not sure that i should be looking at financial spread sheet or something.

had it been explicit on the site i may very well have parted with MORE money and gone with their 30". spectacular stupid twatting bastard eggheaded morons.

i agree PC's are fine but only if you want to get your fingers dirty and get a bit techy. perfectly legitimate way to go. but like for like they really aren't that much cheaper.


----------



## nikolas (Oct 9, 2010)

Yes on 1, but you forgot about 2 (which pretty much explains my No. 1... :D).

And yes, PCs tend to make you a bit more techy... 

I do realise all the reasons for wanting a mac, but it's just not for me at this moment. And I do want to stress that I don't think any is better. (Or Cubase vs Sonar vs Logic vs whatever, or Finale vs Sibelius, or whatever really).


----------



## José Herring (Oct 9, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> People complicate something very simple IMHO. Computers are tools for running software. Decide which software you want to run and buy the best machine you can afford that runs it best.



I agree with this. But, sometimes it's the computer that can determine what software. When I switched to PC from Mac I was a DP user contemplating buying a G5 and going with Logic. I started to weigh the cost of the machine vs. a comparable PC. At the time the P4 running at 3.0g or above benchmarked just as well as a dual cpu mac running at 2.5g. I decided to find out what programs ran on PC. Found Cubase and thought that Cubase looked pretty good. So I decided to take the plunge and buy my first PC Daw. I had had success with a gigastudio PC. So I knew that I could get it to work. Back then it took a little more effort than getting a Mac to work for music. Ran across some problems that would have been unimaginable on the Mac. But sooner or later it all worked out.

On the other hand these days I don't think that you need to be that techy at all to run a pc. I think that you have the option to be techy where on a Mac you don't or it's harder to do so. But, now you could buy a PC off the shelf and run music software on it without any special knowledge. Certainly wasn't the case 5 years ago, but today the computers are powerful enough to run audio without any optimization.

Just my opinion. In truth I don't even know why I posted. I could really care or less what people use or what people think is "better". It's all personal. 8)


----------



## Animus (Oct 9, 2010)

I ran macs for audio solely up til around 2003. Then I got a few pc machines to run as fxteleport slaves. Before I knew it I switched my main rig over to a pc as well. PCs are just more powerful and cheaper. That is true then and now. And also with a mac you have to constantly worry about obsolescence with each os and hardware update. On my pc now I am still running WinXp sp2. That's been 7 years. i can install software I had from 2003 or the latest software and it will work. Try that with a mac.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 9, 2010)

there you may have a point.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

Nikolas' #3: I've worked on Macs all day long every day for the past 24 years. You wouldn't catch me dead waiting in line to buy a freaking iPhone, or putting an Apple sticker on my car, or any of that. Not everyone who uses Macs is a Swaggart Zombie!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

No really, I mean it!


----------



## nikolas (Oct 9, 2010)

I believ you alright! Problem is that I CAN think of Mac fanboyz but not PC ones... :-/ This is just a personal impression of course but still...


----------



## Frederick Russ (Oct 9, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> Not everyone who uses Macs is a Swaggart Zombie!



You heard it here first.


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 9, 2010)

ii agree with apple's strong planned obsolesce but price? 
if you build the same machine as a new mac pro with comparable pc components its about the same price, give or take $200-300 not a thousand or more. those chips mac are using a very expensive, for pc as well. 

with that said, you are stuck with one model in the mac side when you can customize further in the pc side. 


to be honest, i dont know how anyone can like windows OS /PC in general. it just bafles me, really. i think windows xp/7 just sucks soooooooooooo bad impo. 
butt hats me because i dont like spending time bulding/figuring out software/os , viruses, and bad GUI. 
but thats my own personal opinion as i know a lot of folks like building, tweaking etc.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

And as usual I disagree with Jay. Well, it is that simple - duh, if you want to use DP or Logic you buy a Mac and if you want to use Sonar you buy a Windows machine.

But it's more than that. I really like my now ancient PC slaves. Like Animus I bought my first Giga machine in 2003 and it's still running fine (now with Giga 3 ReWired into BiduleVST hosted in Audioport Pro, as I posted...which reminds me, I have to see whether it's possible to access more than one MIDI bank...but one digresses).

You can put together less expensive PCs to do just what you need them to do.

The caveat is that I like those machines while the sun is shining; Windows is much harder to troubleshoot, especially when you're using it in a complicated system like we are. cm at VSL reports the opposite - most of their tech support is for Mac users - but my experience in my rig has been otherwise.

Example: the other day one of my machines would go black after the Windows splash. I posted here, called a company in the know, posted on Facebook...and nobody had the answer. It turned out to be f-ing ridiculous: the crappy old monitor I keep in the garage for troubleshooting required Windows to be booted up in VGA mode or something.

Here's another example: one of my machines won't network now that I installed a new router and changed all the IP numbers. It works fine over Remote Desktop Connection, it accesses the internet to download updates, in fact it networks to one of my other Windows XP machines. But it doesn't like the username and password I put in from my main Mac (even though they're correct), and it won't see the Mac drives anymore.

I'm sure the answer is simple, but so far I don't know what is.

Those are just two examples of the kinds of problems you rarely encounter on Macs. Part of it is that I know them better, but I honestly do think there are advantages; there really is something to "ease of use."

Having said that, I haven't used Windows 7 very much and I'm sure it's better. And eventually I did manage to figure out all but the last problem on my Windows machines.

***
Also, some people miss the point about elegant design. Why is a Monte Blanc fountain pen more than a Schaeffer that writes just as well? Would a king rule any better or worse sitting on a folding chair? And so on.

One other point: there really is something to be said for hand-holding. For years I used a Linksys router, and its software is perfectly functional - you access it through a browser and after trial and error you get it to do what you want; then it just works until it finally gives up a few years later.

But I just replaced it with the Apple Extreme Base Station. Yes it's more expensive (although not really more expensive than any other dual-band router), but the software is just great! Everything is there in English when you set it up, and you won't forget everything next time you need to access the set-up software.

I don't mind paying a little more for that kind of elegance.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 9, 2010)

Animus @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> On my pc now I am still running WinXp sp2. That's been 7 years. i can install software I had from 2003 or the latest software and it will work. Try that with a mac.


Last week, my accountant sent me some tax worksheet (I always file late) that's PC only. I pulled out an old Windows XP PC that's gotta be a decade old and by golly, it worked like a charm.

However, I wonder if that would have been the case if Vista had been more successful. In other words, is this not so much an endorsement of PCs as it is an indictment of Vista and continued support of XP was a necessity rather than a superiority of the platform? Did Windows 95 or 98 enjoy such long support?


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 9, 2010)

Mike Greene @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> Animus @ Sat Oct 09 said:
> 
> 
> > On my pc now I am still running WinXp sp2. That's been 7 years. i can install software I had from 2003 or the latest software and it will work. Try that with a mac.
> ...



i think in this context both mac and windows no matter what version should open an older excel worksheet. tech in general does little to make things better but rather get ahead in the game with new features and hope "thier" new feature will set the standard, . 

planned obsolesce is both for windows and mac, (more mac) but pro tools is in that game, new handheld devices are that game so if you want a 3rd party new application/plugin you have to have certain hardware/OS /drivers etc. 
that just sucks but they sure are getting big bucks for it. 
imagine having to buy a new car because you want a new car stereo which wont work with your current car :roll:


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 9, 2010)

gsilbers @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> i think in this context both mac and windows no matter what version should open an older excel worksheet.


Not to make a big deal out a minor point, but it wasn't a spreadsheet, it was some proprietary program that some software company sold to the accounting firm.

I *wish* it was a spreadsheet, because the damn thing was total PIA. It worked just fine in XP, so it's not a PC issue, it's just that the design was flawed. For instance, it wouldn't let me enter a 2010 date for a perfectly legit payment I made in 2010 (a payment when I filed for the extension) because everything had to be 2009 and I couldn't find a way to over-ride it. I eventually gave up and went back to entering everything on paper.


----------



## midphase (Oct 9, 2010)

nikolas @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> I believ you alright! Problem is that I CAN think of Mac fanboyz but not PC ones... :-/ This is just a personal impression of course but still...



PC fanboyz are all these guys (like my brother in law) who are tech heads into customizing every ridiculous aspect of their computer while not being particularly productive with it. They're constantly praising the coolness of PC's open architecture (they also generally run some version of Linux), but they don't do anything with it...just tweak and tweak and tweak with no purpose. They will configure their computer to operate their toaster oven...but then they won't make toasts....ever!

What I love about the Mac experience is that I hardly ever think about the underlying technology...I just focus on the creative aspect and nothing more. It's a beautiful experience that is unfortunately lost on many...but when it comes down to it I assure you it's as rewarding as getting behind the wheel of a well engineered car. I think the car analogy is very appropriate here, there is more to driving a beautiful German car than just esthetics and status symbol. But if you disagree, keep on convincing yourselves that that Toyota is just as great...but know that in a reverse way you're being just as snooty and elitist, just in the opposite direction.


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 9, 2010)

i agree... except for the car analogy


----------



## jlb (Oct 9, 2010)

Macs are better to work on there is no question. Unix based MacOS is totally superior, although Windows 7 is getting good reports, there is always the virus/spyware headache. Mac's just work, you don't have to worry about all that. I just wish in the UK the Mac Pro wasn't so damn expensive

jlb


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

It's not just the image, Richard, it's the experience of using it. Of course marketing is important, and they're great at it, but they back it up with products that a lot of people like.

A more apt car analogy is Camry and Lexus: they have the same engine and chassis but the body and interior are different.

Plus I have't seen any arguments to what I'm saying about troubleshooting Windows being harder.


----------



## jleckie (Oct 9, 2010)

Hmmm - Windows guy here. I have both and i'd rather have my VePro running on a windows machine than MAc. I've triued both and Windows was more efficient, and less CPU intensive. Dont get me wrong - I love Macs.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2010)

rgames @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> midphase @ Sat Oct 09 said:
> 
> 
> > I think the car analogy is very appropriate here, there is more to driving a beautiful German car than just esthetics and status symbol.
> ...



It's not strictly on the basis of image. The car analogy rings true for me and not for you. As I understand it, my lexus suv is almost all the same stuff as my friend's 4-runner. But wow, when you spend every day for 24 years in the lexus, you've spent your time better, I think. 
Did I overspend? Depends, as Jose said. I may have. But I'm happy in it.

If you don't love great design, don't spend your money on it. It may well be a waste of your money.

But Apple more generally? It's hard to keep up this argument. Apple has beaten the pants off non-Apple. 
Apple are Unbelievable, because their stuff is better. Better!
Closed? Yup. Working like crazy? Yup. iPad the koolest thing freakin ever? Yup. The mighty Blackberry on its way out? Yup. Them and everybody else scrambling to make stuff that looks like an iPhone and an iPad? Yup.

Days numbered? Maybe. If things kept going like they're going there'd be only one electronics company in the world by 2020.


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 9, 2010)

i don't think it is just marketing either. apples stuff is really desirable. we all like our toys. my new dell screen works perfectly but i am not excited by it. it looks like something a banker would use. i don't feel very flash or inspired to sit in front of it. they might make nice stuff but they bastards for making me have to send it back.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 9, 2010)

Feeling your pain, man. I can't believe they are making monitors that any cheese grater won't run out of the box. They do that though from time to time. No doubt about it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

What Brian says three posts up.

And one post up, for that matter. The Magsafe connector makes sense because it saves computers when you trip over the cord, but putting an esoteric connector on a monitor seems like a very curious move.


----------



## rgames (Oct 9, 2010)

I don't think it's that curious - Apple made it clear they had no intention of joining the rest of the world in the emerging standards for HD video and content protection (Blu-Ray and HDCP).

So they had to do something for HD content protection. The move to displayport-only monitors is part of that process.

rgames


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2010)

I think you're picking a very bad time to sneeze at Apple, Animus. 1980 was a long time ago. They now have the third highest market cap of any company in the world, behind only Exon Mobile and PetroChina!

Nobody says they're going to sell more computers than all the Windows machines combined, but any measurable percentage of all the computers sold in the world represents an unfathomable amount of money. Plus they're selling tens of millions of iPhones, iPods, iPads...I think you may be selling Apple just a little short.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 10, 2010)

It's not strictly on the basis of image. The car analogy rings true for me and not for you. As I understand it, my lexus suv is almost all the same stuff as my friend's 4-runner. But wow, when you spend every day for 24 years in the lexus, you've spent your time better, I think. 
[/quote]

That argument is persuasive if you keep your car for 24 years but considerably less os if it is a three year lease an in my experience a new Mac is good for about 4 years before it no longer keeps up with what we then demand of it.

I am and have always been a Logic/Mac guy and at my stage of the game that is not going to change but if I were starting from scratch I might very well see if I could make myself learn to love a Cubendo/PC rig because of the much lesser cost and far more upgradeability of PCs.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 10, 2010)

Ok, not one but a chain of six overpriced macs over Nick's 24 and my 18 years. And a series of DAWs from Studio Vision to DP to Logic, all selected in my case not against all the sequencers and DAWs in the universe but only the ones in the Apple universe so that I can enjoy not just my favorite DAW, but also the Apple software ecosystem. I'd rather be sitting in the Lexus and paying up for it, lease after lease, denying myself something else instead. Again, the importance I place on user experience.
And Animus I wasn't suggesting that Apple is going to eliminate Google. On the contrary I'm saying that things CANNOT continue as they have. And wake up, they do not have a minor market share among computers. Computers fit in your pocket now.


----------



## Animus (Oct 10, 2010)

madbulk @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> Ok, not one but a chain of six overpriced macs over Nick's 24 and my 18 years. And a series of DAWs from Studio Vision to DP to Logic, all selected in my case not against all the sequencers and DAWs in the universe but only the ones in the Apple universe so that I can enjoy not just my favorite DAW, but also the Apple software ecosystem. I'd rather be sitting in the Lexus and paying up for it, lease after lease, denying myself something else instead. Again, the importance I place on user experience.
> And Animus I wasn't suggesting that Apple is going to eliminate Google. On the contrary I'm saying that things CANNOT continue as they have. And wake up, they do not have a minor market share among computers. Computers fit in your pocket now.



Point taken. But Apple will always be a minor player in the "luxury" class. There's a Chinese developer who has developed a ipad like device that costs 10 dollars to make. Apple might innovate but others will make it affordable. An ipad cost $500/600 subsidized. An iphone 4 cost $700 unsubsidized. Very pricey stuff.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2010)

Animus, I just don't understand how you can call a company that has as much *cash* as the GDP of Lebanon or North Korea a minor player in any class.

That's actual cash, not money on paper - I mean a pile of money reaching up to Saturn.


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 10, 2010)

40 billion, at last count. I wish they would buy Netflix already.


----------



## Animus (Oct 10, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> Animus, I just don't understand how you can call a company that has as much *cash* as the GDP of Lebanon or North Korea a minor player in any class.
> 
> That's actual cash, not money on paper - I mean a pile of money reaching up to Saturn.



What does that have to do with marketshare? A company can still do well and only have a portion of their market.


----------



## Animus (Oct 10, 2010)

josejherring @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sun Oct 10 said:
> 
> 
> > 40 billion, at last count. I wish they would buy Netflix already.
> ...




haha! At least you get it. Apple is worse than Microsoft ever was in trying to control the market with proprietary crap.


----------



## Animus (Oct 10, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> Animus, I'm reacting to "minor player."
> 
> And this thread is starting to get really stupid.



Well, a computer maker that only has about 5 of every 100 computers in the world is what I would call a minor player. I use macs everyday for pleasure and business, and I have a iphone and ipod.. I think they are great and very user friendly. I just happen to have several pcs as well. In our world of creative endeavors (graphics, music, video etc) macs are very prevalent and thus seem to be bigger than they are, but outside in the real world macs are barely a blip on peoples' radar. Sad but true,


----------



## madbulk (Oct 10, 2010)

There's little doubt that as creatives we will tend to overestimate apple pc's position. 
But I think you overestimate the ongoing importance of PC marketshare as I understand it to be calculated.
At enterprise level, yeah, apple is a blip on the screen. Really hard to see that changing any time soon. Granted.
But more generally?
There are lots of notebooks and netbooks in the total number of PC's sold, stuff that costs 450 bucks. 
iPads for now don't count. Apple might sell 12 million of those this year.
And marketshare counts units, not dollars spent. Apple's share of PC dollars spent is something like 12% worldwide and 20% or more in the US?

What do you want, Larry? Marketshare? or Share of Dollars Spent?


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 10, 2010)

who, me? I just want the stock price to go up 50%.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2010)

To me it's beyond absurd to talk about how insignificant it is selling what, 10 million Macs a year?


----------



## madbulk (Oct 10, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> who, me? I just want the stock price to go up 50%.


yeah you. and go to sleep!


----------



## José Herring (Oct 10, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> Animus, I'm reacting to "minor player."
> 
> And this thread is starting to get really stupid.



This thread started out really stupid. I mean c'mon, who doesn't check to make sure that a monitor has the right connection BEFORE he presses the buy button? I mean, really. :mrgreen: 

caveat emptor


----------



## NYC Composer (Oct 10, 2010)

madbulk @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> NYC Composer @ Mon Oct 11 said:
> 
> 
> > who, me? I just want the stock price to go up 50%.
> ...



Yes, Mistress!


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 11, 2010)

> This thread started out really stupid. I mean c'mon, who doesn't check to make sure that a monitor has the right connection BEFORE he presses the buy button? I mean, really



OI!

i DID check! it said it works with every new mac. my mac is new!

what they meant was: "it ONLY works with brand new macs". had i read that i would have checked to be sure. i did read that it comes with a minidisplay port, but i assumed that was in addition. 

i work with macs everyday, and i have 6 of them in my house. i keep tabs on latest developments and blah blah. if i could miss that...i wonder how many others will be affected like me?

PS jose, i know you were only having a wind up...


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 11, 2010)

Animus @ Sun Oct 10 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Sun Oct 10 said:
> 
> 
> > Animus, I just don't understand how you can call a company that has as much *cash* as the GDP of Lebanon or North Korea a minor player in any class.
> ...




:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## José Herring (Oct 11, 2010)

stevenson-again @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> > This thread started out really stupid. I mean c'mon, who doesn't check to make sure that a monitor has the right connection BEFORE he presses the buy button? I mean, really
> 
> 
> 
> ...



With Apple's new marketing plan anything that's more than a month old is called "legacy".


----------



## midphase (Oct 11, 2010)

rgames @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> Comparing Apple to fine cars, fine wines, or fine whatever is not appropriate but it is an example of the success of the Apple marketing engine
> 
> You can put an M3 on the track and *show* how it beats the pants off a Camry. You can't *show* how a Mac beats a PC because they're basically the same thing - it's a distinction strictly on the basis of image. And Apple sells on image.
> 
> ...



See Richard, you're totally missing the point. To PC guys it's all about performance, to Mac guys it's all about the experience.

A Mac beats a PC because the experience of using a Mac feels more human and more artistically conducive. It's hard to explain, but it's there nonetheless. It has nothing to do with components, or performance, that is what all the PC guys miss completely when discussing Mac v. PC. On a Mac, the end result is truly greater than the sum of its parts.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 11, 2010)

Kays is exactly right. It's not the raw numbers that matter, and that's why the car analogy is so nice.

Think about it, when you see car companies make comparison, it's always Hyundai or some other wannabe company running an ad exclaiming their new model has a better 0 to 60 time than a Porsche, and how it beat out the BMW in some cornering test, and had better fit and finish than Lexus in the latest Consumers Digest. Undoubtedly, all these stats are true. But would you really rather drive the Hyundai?

Or better yet, lets take one of those Hondas that the kids hot rod with their NOS setups and intercoolers and all that. I'm quite sure that a lot of these monstrosities will outrun a Porsche. And I'm quite sure that there are lots of people who will swear they're better cars than anything being made by a factory.

It's not just image. No matter what the horsepower or cornering or braking or whatever specs, a BMW, or Porsche or Lexus just plain *feels* nice to drive.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 11, 2010)

Mike is right as always.

But what's the "warnings" in your information? I've never seen that before.


----------



## Animus (Oct 11, 2010)

midphase @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> rgames @ Sat Oct 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Comparing Apple to fine cars, fine wines, or fine whatever is not appropriate but it is an example of the success of the Apple marketing engine
> ...



I totally see what you are saying. I am about performance. But I spend most my time in my DAW application so it isn't like the operating system plays a big part in the creative experience. Having more performance can actually make for a better experience when inside applications. My pcs are totally dedicated music making machines, like a tape machine and console. I just use my mac for emails, itunes, surfin porn etc.


----------



## booboo (Oct 11, 2010)

I'm going to tie these two concepts together. I've used both Macs and PCs for almost 20 years, and have built several PCs in addition to custom systems myself from the ground up.

Rgames - 
You're close on your car race analogy, but just a little off....I'm serious here.

If the Mac is the Toyota Camry, then the PC is NOT an M3, but rather Mr. Garrison's "IT" personal travel vehicle that goes faster than a jet in this ep of South Park.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/153051/flexi-grips (http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/1 ... lexi-grips) (go to :32 seconds in)

I'd prefer the "Camry" any day of the week, wouldn't you?

Making the PC the "M3" in your analogy implies elegance, which the PC's even by their own and users admittance.....are certainly not. so While they're technically "faster", the 'experience' almost always gets in the way.
And I disagree that the reason is intangible. I can list several reasons right now that make the mac, in my opinion, superior to PCs for Real-Time creative art of any kind (ie - work that requires realtime processing - music, film/editing, etc).


----------



## José Herring (Oct 11, 2010)

[quote:a16e622bd3="Mike Greene @ Mon Oct 11, 2010 11:30 am"]Kays is exactly right. It's not the raw numbers that matter, and that's why tò(½   êíÊ(½   êíË(½   êíÌ(½   êíÍ(½   êíÎ(½   êíÏ(½   êíÐ(½   êíÑ(½   êíÒ(¾   êí›(¾   êíœ(¾   êíÓ(¾   êíÔ(¾   êíÕ(¾   êíÖ(¾   êí×(¾   êíØ(¾   êíÙ(¾   êíÚ(¾   êíÛ(¾   êíÜ(¾   êíÝ(¾   êíÞ(¾   êíß(¾   êíà(¾   êíá(¾   êíâ(¾   êíã(¾   êíä(¿   êíå(¿   êíæ(¿   êíç(¿   êíè(¿   êíé(¿   êíê(¿   êíë(¿   êíì(¿   êíí(¿   êíî(¿   êíï(¿   êíð(¿   êíñ(¿   êíò(¿   êíó(¿   êíô(¿   êíõ(¿   êíö(¿   êí÷(¿   êíø(¿   êíù(¿   êíú(¿   êíû(¿   êíü(¿   êíý(¿   êíþ(¿   êíÿ(¿   êî (¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî	(¿   êî
(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî (¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(¿   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî(À   êî (À   êî!(À   êî"(À   êî#(À   êî$(À   êî%(À   êî&(À   êî'(À   êî((À   êî)(À   êî*(À   êî+(À   êî,(À   êî-(À   êî.(À   êî/(À   êî0(À   êî1(À   êî2(À   êî3(À   êî4(À   êî5(À   êî6(À   êî7              ò(À   êî9(À   êî:(À   êî;(À   êî<(À   êî=(À   êî>(À   êî?(À   êî@(À   êîA(À   êîB(À   êîC(À   êîD(À   êîE(À   êîF(Á   êì£(Á   êì¤(Á   êì¥(Á   êì¦(Á   êì§(Á   êì¨(Â   êì¡(Â   êì¢(Â   êîG(Â   êîH(Â   êîI(Â   êîJ(Â   êîK(Â   êîL(Ã   êîM(Ã   êîN(Ã   êîO(Ã   êîP(Ã   êîQ(Ã   êîR(Ã   êîS(Ã   êîT(Ä   êîU(Ä   êîV(Ä   êîW(Ä   êîX(Ä   êîY(Ä   êîZ(Ä   êî[(Ä   êî\(Å   êî](Å   êî^(Å   êî_(Å   êî`(Å   êîa(Å   êîb(Å   êîc(Å   êîd(Å   êîe(Å   êîf(Å   êîg(Å   êîh(Å   êîi(Å   êîj(Å   êîk(Å   êîl(Å   êîm(Å   êîn(Å   êîo(Å   êîp(Å   êîq(Å   êîr(Å   êîs(Å   êît(Å   êîu(Å   êîv(Æ   êîw(Æ   êîx(Æ   êîy(Æ   êîz(Æ   êî{(Æ   êî|(Æ   êî}(Æ   êî~(Æ   êî(Æ   êî€(Ç   êî(Ç   êî‚(Ç   êîƒ(Ç   êî„(Ç   êî…(Ç   êî†(Ç   êî‡(Ç   êîˆ(Ç   êî‰(Ç   êîŠ(Ç


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 11, 2010)

josejherring @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> The only thing that matters is the music at the end of the day. . . . Who gives a rats ass about the computer and or OS that got them there.


This is why the car analogy is good, because that's exactly what my grandmother would say when I'd joke with her that she should buy a BMW.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 11, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> But what's the "warnings" in your information? I've never seen that before.


Craig gave me that a year or two ago. I can't go into too much detail, but lets just say that it's okay to say that his wife is a good looking lady, but be careful exactly *how* you say it.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 11, 2010)

Mike Greene @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> josejherring @ Mon Oct 11 said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing that matters is the music at the end of the day. . . . Who gives a rats ass about the computer and or OS that got them there.
> ...



And, that's where I say it is flawed.

BMW is a good car, better than most. So from where I sit a good PC is a BMW and the Mac is just a costly Jag. :mrgreen:


----------



## midphase (Oct 11, 2010)

josejherring @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> A computer isn't a car. The only thing that matters is the music at the end of the day. And trust me. I've heard good music from Mac people and I've heard good music from PC people and that's all that counts imo. Who gives a rats ass about the computer and or OS that got them there.
> Jose



See? We still disagree here. You're being pragmatic and simply stating that either OS will get you there...so what's the problem with saving a few bucks? My point is that if you're not aware of the subtle but definite feel that working on OS X gives you, then what else are you missing out on? Even using a mouse in Windows feels wrong to me...the simple idea of getting a screen cursor from one end of the screen to the other feels clunky to me on a Windows machine. Weird? Yes, but definitely palpable. I think in a gazillion subtle ways, staring at Windows machine impacts one's creativity. Maybe it's one of those right brained left brained things...but I will argue that people who are more sensitive to the user experience are also the ones who craft more interesting and unique music at the end of the day. Composers who use PC's (I'm heavily generalizing here) tend to be more "practical" in their compositional methods as well. The two go hand in hand, when you look at the world from a pragmatist POV (which is probably what leads one to favor PC's over Mac's), then this pragmatic view will manifest itself in their art.

Mac users by throwing logic out of the window when choosing their computer, will also more likely throw logic out the window when being creative which is the key to great art!


----------



## madbulk (Oct 11, 2010)

Wait, what? Okay even our side of the argument will from time to time get a little nutty.
I do notice Kays got himself a sixth star somehow though.


----------



## midphase (Oct 11, 2010)

You may all refer to me as Supreme Overlord from this point on.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 11, 2010)

Six stars is pretty badass, but really if I had my druthers, I'd like one of them warnings. I think I'll go insult Montreal. I'd swear a whole thread just vanished a few minutes ago. Someone might have an itchy trigger finger up there.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 11, 2010)

Well, if believing that makes you feel better then by all means, believe it.

I just don't happen to believe that any of what you said is actually true in real life.

The place where I like to get is when I'm no longer thinking about the machine and I'm just into creativity and the machine just becomes another intuitive instrument. You can get there with a PC or a Mac.

Great art comes from the composer and how he uses his tools. In the violin world, everybody thinks that the Strad is the best violin. But in truth I'm the guy that prefers the Guanari to the Strad. So the Strad cost more, and the Guaneri can generally be had for a few million less. But in truth, the player can make both sound good. Just a matter of what he prefers to play on.

Me personally I'd just save a few million and go for the Guanari. I like it better anyway.

Jose


----------



## Animus (Oct 11, 2010)

booboo @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> \
> 
> Making the PC the "M3" in your analogy implies elegance, which the PC's even by their own and users admittance.....are certainly not. so While they're technically "faster", the 'experience' almost always gets in the way.
> And I disagree that the reason is intangible. I can list several reasons right now that make the mac, in my opinion, superior to PCs for Real-Time creative art of any kind (ie - work that requires realtime processing - music, film/editing, etc).



Macs can't even properly thread on multiple cores. See Logic and FCP. There's also a problem with Speedstepping,/EIST on macs.


Actually the best car analogy would be that a mac is a Cadillac. And Cadillimac if you will. It looks great and you impress your friends in high society, and polish it every morning. A PC is a hotrodded vehicle that is pulled together from the best parts and engine from several vehicles, and you take pride getting your hands dirty making it exactly what you want. With a Cadillac you got to take it into a expensive car dealer to get signature service to change a headlight bulb. When you want a more powerful car, with the hotrod you just find another engine and pop it in. With a Cadillimac you turn it in after its 3 year lease and lease a whole new one from scratch at full price, and then buy new iphones, ipads and ipods to make sure you have a matching set, and then go online to forums to tell everybody how badass the new model line is.


----------



## rgames (Oct 11, 2010)

OK the car analogy is being misunderstood.

The point was not to say a PC is an M3 and a Mac is a Camry - the point was to say that whatever one is, the other is the same. So if the PC is an M3, then the Mac is also an M3. Or if the PC is a Camry, then the Mac is also a Camry.

They're both the same in terms of "parts".

Where they're different is in the intangibles - I think I'm agreeing with you, Kays. The experience on the Mac *is* different - that's the point. That's how Apple brands itself - on the experience. Both Mac and PC can push bits around just fine, so the actual functionality is no different. What Apple sells is a distinct image, not a distinct capability.

re: real-time processing: no way - a powerful Mac and a powerful PC are on even ground in terms of processing power. PC's used to have the advantage but Apple caught up when it went to Intel chips.

Here's an example: there are folks who do processing across tens of thousands of processors at a time. Do you think they buy Mac hardware? No way - they buy PC hardware because it's much more cost efficient.

And, of course, they run it under Linux 

Since the hardware is the same, you can't really do the Mac vs. PC power debate. However, you can compare the OS. In that case, Linux is light years ahead of either Mac or Windows OS. However, Windows is definitely in second place.

rgames


----------



## madbulk (Oct 11, 2010)

Noooooo. 
Still not getting it. User experience is not the extra little bit of sparkle. And it's certainly not a function of marketing. It is capability. If it has little value for you, fine. But to some, it's functional -- it's the steak, not the sizzle.
There are two kinds of people, and they're on either side of this argument. It's not about right and wrong. That's why we're all morons for keeping this going.


----------



## Animus (Oct 11, 2010)

madbulk @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> Noooooo.
> Still not getting it. User experience is not the extra little bit of sparkle. And it's certainly not a function of marketing. It is capability. If it has little value for you, fine. But to some, it's functional -- it's the steak, not the sizzle.
> There are two kinds of people, and they're on either side of this argument. It's not about right and wrong. That's why we're all morons for keeping this going.



It's a totally subjective thing though. You might think mac is a more a human experience but that is simply personal preference and inclinations. Coke vs Pepsi. I say Pepsi tastes better and is more refreshing than Coke. Coke is for people that don't care and just want to drink something carbonated.


----------



## Stephen Baysted (Oct 12, 2010)

One thing that you guys are forgetting is that Windows and Nuendo/Cubase/Sonar has been fully 64bit for ages - none of these arcane, labyrinthine, voodoo workarounds just to overcome OS and DAW limitations. 

I use both PCs and Macs, but I would say that Apple has a greater propensity for making really stupid design decisions in their quest to 'think different.' Hence Rohan's issues.


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 12, 2010)

[quote:72125a51d6="madbulk @ Mon Oct 11, 2010 1ò&Ë   êj¬&Ë   êj­&Ë   êj®&Ë   êj¯&Ë   êj°&Ë   êj±&Ë   êj²&Ë   êj³&Ë   êj´&Ë   êjµ&Ë   êj¶&Ë   êj·&Ë   êj¸&Ë   êj¹&Ë   êjº&Ë   êj»&Ë   êj¼&Ë   êj½&Ë   êj¾&Ë   êj¿&Ë   êjÀ&Ë   êjÁ&Ë   êjÂ&Ë   êjÃ&Ë   êjÄ&Ë   êjÅ&Ë   êjÆ&Ë   êjÇ&Ë   êjÈ&Ë   êjÉ&Ë   êjÊ&Ë   êjË&Ë   êjÌ&Ë   êjÍ&Ë   êjÎ&Ë   êjÏ


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

midphase @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Although it is possibly subjective, you have to agree that a large majority of industry professionals tend to side with the Mac as far as user friendliness and general pleasure to work on.



You mean the large majority of a industry that it is a minuscule minority amongst other industries? :D


----------



## dedersen (Oct 12, 2010)

midphase @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> Maybe it's one of those right brained left brained things...but I will argue that people who are more sensitive to the user experience are also the ones who craft more interesting and unique music at the end of the day. Composers who use PC's (I'm heavily generalizing here) tend to be more "practical" in their compositional methods as well. The two go hand in hand, when you look at the world from a pragmatist POV (which is probably what leads one to favor PC's over Mac's), then this pragmatic view will manifest itself in their art.
> 
> Mac users by throwing logic out of the window when choosing their computer, will also more likely throw logic out the window when being creative which is the key to great art!



This sounds a lot like Apple marketing gibberish to me. I could just as well argue that people who go with the current trend of popular culture without critical thinking will choose Mac over PC, and thus a greater percentage of musicians using Macs will create derivative, boring music. I would be wrong of course.

And I have no idea why I am getting involved with this. Nothing good ever comes of these debates, except perhaps a few giggles here and there.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 12, 2010)

Taking silliness seriously: the reason I find all this "market share" talk frustrating is that the "minuscule minority" is millions of peoples' and their families' lives - including mine, thank you very much.

There's always something bigger. So what.


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Taking silliness seriously: the reason I find all this "market share" talk frustrating is that the "minuscule minority" is millions of peoples' and their families' lives - including mine, thank you very much.
> 
> There's always something bigger. So what.



A minority making assumptions and bigotry towards the majority. It's called elitism. All those sheep pc users don't truly know a human experience with Windows, Macs are the true way don't you know. That is silly. :D 


Anyways, mac vs pc debates always end the same way. Who cares. I use both but I only get annoyed by the apple evangelists. They are tools. Not lifestyle choices or religions.

Anybody ever seen the documentary Macheads? freaking classic 

Watch it free here...
http://www.imdb.com/video/hulu/vi2149450265/


----------



## madbulk (Oct 12, 2010)

Nothing silly about it. My computer is better than yours. 
The reason I find this market share discussion not annoying is that it's not nearly so damning for my horse as it's made out to be. I don't care how many millions of grandparents and babies we're talking about, a minority is a minority. But the minority is not miniscule, and it quite possibly is not even a minority. It really depends, and more importantly, it's still moving HEAVILY in Apple's favor, for the time being.
And yes, I've seen Macheads. Don't hang your hat on that one. Gawd, that was awful.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 12, 2010)

And now the mac guy puts his tail between his legs and asks, "Hey any of you PC loving weirdos know a way to take a broken PC that won't boot, and USB it or something to a working PC for purposes of getting data off the broken PC's drive?"


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 12, 2010)

Personally, I find the term "elitist" to be used over-broadly to the point where anyone who empirically knows more about a skill and thinks there is some value in that is automatically assumed to be "looking down" on others and gets lumped in with those who only believe they know more.

Stephen Hawkings knows a lot more about Physics than I do or any freshman at college. My guess is that if he were on a forum and some smart aleck freshman challenged his assumptions and he were to respond, "Kid, you are not in my league in knowledge of this, why don't you just pay attention to what I am telling you and learn?" somebody would then accuse him of being an elitist.


----------



## madbulk (Oct 12, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Personally, I find the term "elitist" to be used over-broadly to the point where anyone who empirically knows more about a skill and thinks there is some value in that is automatically assumed to be "looking down" on others and gets lumped in with those who only believe they know more.
> 
> Stephen Hawkings knows a lot more about Physics than I do or any freshman at college. My guess is that if he were on a forum and some smart aleck freshman challenged his assumptions and he were to respond, "Kid, you are not in my league in knowledge of this, why don't you just pay attention to what I am telling you and learn?" somebody would then accuse him of being an elitist.



THAT'S WHAT I SAID. 
No, wait. That's what I meant!!!
What I said wuz, "My computer is better than yours!!"


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 12, 2010)

Can one explain Macs without God?


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

madbulk @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> And now the mac guy puts his tail between his legs and asks, "Hey any of you PC loving weirdos know a way to take a broken PC that won't boot, and USB it or something to a working PC for purposes of getting data off the broken PC's drive?"



That's a nobrainer. Take the drive out and put it in another computer, of course assuming the drive itself is not damaged. Damn mac users.


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Personally, I find the term "elitist" to be used over-broadly to the point where anyone who empirically knows more about a skill and thinks there is some value in that is automatically assumed to be "looking down" on others and gets lumped in with those who only believe they know more.
> 
> Stephen Hawkings knows a lot more about Physics than I do or any freshman at college. My guess is that if he were on a forum and some smart aleck freshman challenged his assumptions and he were to respond, "Kid, you are not in my league in knowledge of this, why don't you just pay attention to what I am telling you and learn?" somebody would then accuse him of being an elitist.




Well there you go even there. you are making the assumption that mac users somehow "know better". I understand mac fanaticism. I was a fanatic up until about 2003 and used macs exclusively. I hated pcs with a passion. Why? i had no idea as I hardly had ever used one. When I finally did use them in a honest way I started changing my tune. 

On a side note. Check out these cross-platform DAW benchmarks. http://www.cubendo.com/showthread.php?2 ... #post28072


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

madbulk @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Nothing silly about it. My computer is better than yours.
> The reason I find this market share discussion not annoying is that it's not nearly so damning for my horse as it's made out to be. I don't care how many millions of grandparents and babies we're talking about, a minority is a minority. But the minority is not miniscule, and it quite possibly is not even a minority. It really depends, and more importantly, it's still moving HEAVILY in Apple's favor, for the time being.
> And yes, I've seen Macheads. Don't hang your hat on that one. Gawd, that was awful.



Yeah as a documentary not that great but as spectacle of looking at some dumbass mac users....priceless. :D


----------



## madbulk (Oct 12, 2010)

Animus @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> madbulk @ Tue Oct 12 said:
> 
> 
> > And now the mac guy puts his tail between his legs and asks, "Hey any of you PC loving weirdos know a way to take a broken PC that won't boot, and USB it or something to a working PC for purposes of getting data off the broken PC's drive?"
> ...



Well, that would be a no brainer, but Man! I have to take the drive OUT of the machine?? The machine in this case is a laptop. Maybe it's easy taking the screws out but maybe it ain't. Yuck.
I was hoping for something elegant like, put a firewire cable between them at hold down the T key at startup, and the drive on the targeted dead pc, if not damaged itself perhaps, would appear and be available to the host machine. Damn PC's.


----------



## Animus (Oct 12, 2010)

madbulk @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Animus @ Tue Oct 12 said:
> 
> 
> > madbulk @ Tue Oct 12 said:
> ...



I don't even think Target Firewire Disk works on a mac if the mac is not booting. I've never tried it at least.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 12, 2010)

Animus @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Oct 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Personally, I find the term "elitist" to be used over-broadly to the point where anyone who empirically knows more about a skill and thinks there is some value in that is automatically assumed to be "looking down" on others and gets lumped in with those who only believe they know more.
> ...



Please tell me where in my post I even mentioned Macs. I was addressing the over-use of elitist. I am not a Mac fanatic.

I started on an Atari with Notator and bought a mac when Logic came out and Notator/Atari died.. For a while it was cross platform and I was considering switching to a PC because at that time they were far more powerful. Then Apple bought Emagic, discontinued PC support and came out with more powerful Macs. So I use a Mac.

Had a different company bought Emagic and discontinued Logic support for the Mac I would be on a PC now. I care more about the software than the machine that runs it.


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 13, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Can one explain Macs without God?




:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 13, 2010)

yes. that was genuinely funny comment.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 13, 2010)

gsilbers @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> ii agree with apple's strong planned obsolesce but price?
> if you build the same machine as a new mac pro with comparable pc components its about the same price, give or take $200-300 not a thousand or more. those chips mac are using a very expensive, for pc as well.



With the 8/12 core machines, it probably is pretty close.

With the 4/6 core machines, not even close. It's no exaggeration to say that you can build a machine at least as powerful for half the price, plus more ram slots and other advantages. As mentioned before, it's mainly because apple chooses to use xeon chips for quad machines which jacks the price way up for very little benefit.



rgames @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> You can put an M3 on the track and *show* how it beats the pants off a Camry. You can't *show* how a Mac beats a PC because they're basically the same thing - it's a distinction strictly on the basis of image. And Apple sells on image.



That's not entirely true since they run different operating systems. If one OS has demonstrable advantages, you'd be able to show that.

And of course since the user experience is different, many people are going to prefer one or the other although of course that is a matter of opinion.



josejherring @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> The only thing that matters is the music at the end of the day. And trust me. I've heard good music from Mac people and I've heard good music from PC people and that's all that counts imo. Who gives a rats ass about the computer and or OS that got them there.



I do because the OS and apps make a difference in how I work, how fast I work, how much or little time I spend troubleshooting, etc. And frankly, how enjoyable is the time spent doing it.

There's no doubt that the hardware is now the same on the mac and PC side. But as long as the operating system is different, I don't buy the claim that there's no difference between a mac and PC.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 13, 2010)

Animus @ Mon Oct 11 said:


> Macs can't even properly thread on multiple cores. See Logic and FCP.



Logic doesn't handle mutliple cores properly on some machines, but other apps do. It's an app problem, not a mac problem. I assume there are apps that have the same issue on PC as well.

I'd be curious to see a benchmark that compares the best performing mac audio app to the best performing PC audio app, running third party plugins, to see if performance is really better on a PC. It seems to be the case with some cross platform apps like Cubase but that could be due to the devs optimizing better for PC than something inherent in the OSs.

Has anyone actually done a comparison like that? Does Cubase or Sonar run more convolution verbs than Logic?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 18, 2010)

I just saw this. Interesting:

http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Screen-shot-2010-10-18-at-15.55.53-670x436.jpg (http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploa ... 70x436.jpg)


----------



## david robinson (Oct 18, 2010)

hi,
from that graph, it's easy to see why apple are doing what they are doing.
in the end, it prolly means apps like logic will stick around, if only because
apple can carry them.
to another company similar to apple, logic might be a mill-stone.
j.


----------



## tripit (Oct 18, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Oct 09 said:


> Here's another example: one of my machines won't network now that I installed a new router and changed all the IP numbers. It works fine over Remote Desktop Connection, it accesses the internet to download updates, in fact it networks to one of my other Windows XP machines. But it doesn't like the username and password I put in from my main Mac (even though they're correct), and it won't see the Mac drives anymore.
> 
> I'm sure the answer is simple, but so far I don't know what is.


I have had the same problem with one of my old P4 giga slaves. I had to reinstall the OS several times to get it to finally see MOL or the mac for that matter. 

For all the mac's I've owned and the PC's as well, I never ran into such problems with the Mac. The mac is just stupid simple for the most part. PC's are much more fickle about drivers, parts and apps. I've had to reinstall OS on all of my PC machines several times over the last few years, due to things that stopped working. My old G5, which is now a slave as well, has been running since about the same time as my P4 and I've never had to wipe the OS due to problems. 

Another note: I keep my 4 PC slaves stripped down and simple. Nothing else runs on them, at all. In contrast, I run just about everything under the sun on my macpro, abusing it daily. I couldn't even begin to imagine the problems I would run into if I were doing all the things I do on my Macpro DAW machine if it were PC instead. 

Cost wise, the PC's are cheaper to build, but really to what end? Honestly, with the time you put in researching what to use, putting them together, dealing with conflicts in drivers and parts etc. you could probably have just bought a mac and come out even and with a few less gray hairs.

But with that said, I'll probably go another round - starting with taking my oldest PC and turning it into an i7. Jeeeezzzz........


----------



## tripit (Oct 18, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Wed Oct 13 said:


> Animus @ Mon Oct 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Macs can't even properly thread on multiple cores. See Logic and FCP.
> ...



That would be interesting, but really it's not about that. It's about what DAW you like to work in. I like DP and PT. I'm not about to go back to Logic nor Cubase or try something like Sonar. So, it's really a moot point for me, and I assume I'm not alone in the matter - going both ways for PC users and Mac alike.


----------



## tripit (Oct 18, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Oct 12 said:


> Animus @ Tue Oct 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Had a different company bought Emagic and discontinued Logic support for the Mac I would be on a PC now. I care more about the software than the machine that runs it.



+1 We're not driving race cars for a living.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 18, 2010)

tripit @ Mon Oct 18 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Oct 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Here's another example: one of my machines won't network now that I installed a new router and changed all the IP numbers. It works fine over Remote Desktop Connection, it accesses the internet to download updates, in fact it networks to one of my other Windows XP machines. But it doesn't like the username and password I put in from my main Mac (even though they're correct), and it won't see the Mac drives anymore.
> ...



Ah just proves that you're pc challenged and not much of anything else. I ran a P4 for 5 years straight and never reinstalled the OS not even once. It went from my faithful DAW to my faithful slave without a hitch. I only just put it to pasture because I was changing the case and I broke the cpu fan. 

On the other hand Macs are slightly more simple in networking, but only slightly. And Nick, your problem is probably related to the fact that you haven't established a work group in your PC so that it can be included in your Mac network.

Jose


----------



## kdm (Oct 18, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Oct 18 said:


> I just saw this. Interesting:
> 
> http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Screen-shot-2010-10-18-at-15.55.53-670x436.jpg (http://www.9to5mac.com/wp-content/uploa ... 70x436.jpg)



Hmm - seems that this is quite a bit of a skewed analysis since it is "Apple + iPad", which is basically the same as comparing PC shares + Droid phone (or other tablet/media device) sales to Macs alone. 

The iPad is technically NOT part of the Mac/personal computing line, or a true personal computer in the modern sense - it's a larger version of the iPod Touch, which is just a media/apps device. In part some buyers are more interested in an email gadget than a personal computer, and that's why the iPad syphoned off some PC sales (and probably some iMac/Macbook sales as well, so it's a 2-way street there simply due to the new tech with the tablet concept, for now).

Also doesn't match other sales figures since the graph puts Apple in first place (others put Apple 3rd or 4th in the US, despite a 30% increase):

"According to IDC, HP claimed 24.3 percent of U.S. market share on shipments of 4.6 million units (a year-on-year growth of just 2.7 percent), and Dell shipped 4.4 million units for 23.1 percent market share, despite a year-on-year shift of negative 4.9 percent. Apple reportedly shipped 1.999 million units for 10.6 percent market share — a growth of 24.1 percent year-on-year growth — while fourth-place Acer shipped 1.949 million units for 10.3 percent market share and a growth of just 0.1 percent. 

Gartner estimated that 25.3 percent of the U.S. market went to HP, on shipments of 4.5 million units; 23.8 percent went to Dell, on 4.2 million units and Acer claimed 10.5 percent market share on shipments of 1.85 million units. Just behind Acer, it found Apple to be fourth place, shipping 1.83 million units for 10.4 percent of the market." - From eWeek assuming they are at least somewhat accurate.

An impressive increase for Apple to break the 10% mark, but not quite the same impression the graph gives. 

Fwiw.... Use what you prefer. Sales numbers don't make a tool useful.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 18, 2010)

Of course you're right that it's skewed - that chart comes from a Mac site, after all - but I still find it interesting that Apple sells more computers than anyone else.

Smartphones are also computers, but I'd put them in a different category from tablets. That's not an argument I could win, because you could point to a million apps for a smartphone and be perfectly right if you wanted to disagree. Somehow I see the tablet as an alternative to a computer, though, while the smartphone is a different kind of tool for the most part.

So I think a better comparison would be PC + a tablet that runs Windows or Windows mobile, because iOS is based on Mac OS X while Android is a separate OS. You could also include Netbooks, I suppose, although they're really just small laptops.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 18, 2010)

Thanks Jose, I'll take a look at that. I did have a workgroup before changing numbers, but you must be right.

However I still say that my Macs are easier to maintain than my Windows machines. That's Apple's thing: their stuff just works (except when it doesn't  ).


----------



## tripit (Oct 19, 2010)

josejherring @ Mon Oct 18 said:


> Ah just proves that you're pc challenged and not much of anything else. I ran a P4 for 5 years straight and never reinstalled the OS not even once. It went from my faithful DAW to my faithful slave without a hitch. I only just put it to pasture because I was changing the case and I broke the cpu fan.
> 
> On the other hand Macs are slightly more simple in networking, but only slightly. And Nick, your problem is probably related to the fact that you haven't established a work group in your PC so that it can be included in your Mac network.
> 
> Jose



Just cause you haven't had problems doesn't mean I'm challenged :lol: I don't claim to be a PC expert - but I'm not THAT challenged either. I've built and trouble shot a lot various PCs over the years. But that's the whole point - I've had to trouble shoot more issues in PC then a Mac. Crappy drivers, bad parts, shoddy software, corrupted OS etc. Not that Mac's aren't prone to trouble - they have them too, just not as much. Less conflicts, generally good parts, and mostly user friendly software and just about zero driver and interrupt conflicts. That's my take on it from owning and using 8 or 9 PC's for the last 11 years. As one of my friend says " If I ever meet Bill Gates, I'm gonna slap him" 

It's no secret that Apples are easier.


----------



## dedersen (Oct 19, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> However I still say that my Macs are easier to maintain than my Windows machines. That's Apple's thing: their stuff just works (except when it doesn't  ).



It's funny, I've had a Windows desktop machine and a MacBook laptop for a long time now, and I've pretty much had an equal share of problems with both machines. Actually, I think the Mac may have given me slightly more problems. At any rate, I have never been able to see this huge difference in stability of the two platforms, at least if Vista is disregarded. XP and Windows 7 have always been rock solid for me.

It seems like it's one of those "Apple truths" that are perpetuated simply through repetition.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

tripit @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> josejherring @ Mon Oct 18 said:
> 
> 
> > Ah just proves that you're pc challenged and not much of anything else. I ran a P4 for 5 years straight and never reinstalled the OS not even once. It went from my faithful DAW to my faithful slave without a hitch. I only just put it to pasture because I was changing the case and I broke the cpu fan.
> ...



Well don't get crappy parts and all should be golden.

I try to build my PC's like Macs are built with careful attention to parts that work well together and meticulous testing of installed software. The secret being to just copy the machines of well established DAW makers.


----------



## midphase (Oct 19, 2010)

But Jose...if you truly don't get crappy parts then the price difference is really rather minimal!


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

midphase @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> But Jose...if you truly don't get crappy parts then the price difference is really rather minimal!



You can get quite good parts for a quad pc and still keep it under $1500. I could build a 6 core PC for under $2000. 

I could even beat the newest 12 core Mac Pro with a pc equivalent for about $3500.

When the Mac pro's first came out Apple did a good thing. They priced it fairly. It was even cheaper than the equivalent PC. Now the prices are just starting to creep up again. I don't get it. I just priced it out and I could beat the stock mac pro by about $1500 building a comparable PC using the exact same parts as the Mac Pro. IMO that's just outrageous. It's like paying $1500 for OSX as part wise the Mac is a PC.

I know that we harp on this subject over and over but I just can't get over it. I need to get over it. My blood pressure is suffering. Because sooner or later I know I need to get a PT rig going. :x 

Jose


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

> It seems like it's one of those "Apple truths" that are perpetuated simply through repetition



I'm in the business of exactly not doing that, dederson. This is my personal experience based on seven years with Windows machines and 24 with Macs; no way would I make a statement like that if it were just hearsay.

But I should have rephrased what I wrote to repeat what I said earlier: all computers screw up, but I find it a lot easier to get Macs going again. Part of that is the imbalance in my experience, but part of it is simply the way they're designed.

Again, I like my Windows machines as dedicated slaves, in fact that's what they're really good at.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

Jose, are you sure about that pricing? I'm not including RAM and drives, because we know Apple charges several times more than you need to pay for that, but everything else feature for feature?

And are you figuring about $275 for the case? There are no exact generic equivalents with computer-controlled fans and all that, but you'd have to compare them to an over-spec'ed custom-built machine with quiet fans and all that.


----------



## dedersen (Oct 19, 2010)

Oh, I'm sorry, Nick. That last remark certainly wasn't aimed at you specifically. I've probably just met a few too many Apple-only people who claim ultimate superiority of the OS X platform with little or no experience with Windows.

Now, back on topic...oh wait, what was that originally?


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> Jose, are you sure about that pricing? I'm not including RAM and drives, because we know Apple charges several times more than you need to pay for that, but everything else feature for feature?
> 
> And are you figuring about $275 for the case? There are no exact generic equivalents with computer-controlled fans and all that, but you'd have to compare them to an over-spec'ed custom-built machine with quiet fans and all that.



Yes. I just took the base Mac Pro with 1 hdd and 6 gigs of ECC ram. The Mac case and fans imo is nothing too special, but that's just my opinion. I got an Haf 932 case for $139.00 with a ton of huge fans and nearly silent. At least I can't hear the fans unless I put my ear near them. As far as fan control I didn't include that because I don't use it, but adding an extra $60 for a controller won't affect the price too much.

I'll post the specs of my mock machine in a bit when I get home. Interesting exercise to be sure. This could be a contender for my next DAW.

Jose


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

dedersen, I'm not bent out of shape, just pounding my point into the ground. 

Jose, the time you appreciate the runaway elegance of that case is when you open it to put in a drive, card, or RAM. These are all small details, but they're part of the whole picture: no screws to open it; the four drive caddies just slide out as soon as you open the lever to take the side cover off; there are no wires to connect - you just plug pop in the drive and tighten the brushed stainless screws (which are held in place by a plastic ring so you don't drop them). All the card slots are covered by one holder - you don't have to screw each card in. Even putting in a second DVD drive is easier than normal. RAM cards just slide in.

Yes it's all small stuff, but it's that kind of attention to detail - from the packaging on up - that separates these products from what you can put together from parts. That's why people buy Apple's stuff and why they couldn't print money as fast as theò.   ì3©.   ì3ª.   ì3«.   ì3¬.   ì3­.   ì3®.   ì3¯.   ì3°.   ì3±.   ì3².   ì3³.   ì3´.   ì3µ.   ì3¶.   ì3·.   ì3¸.   ì3¹.   ì3º.   ì3».   ì3¼.   ì3½.   ì3¾.   ì3¿.   ì3À.   ì3Á


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 19, 2010)

got to say i am with nick. i think the whole thing with apple is the 'whole-ness' of the approach, the attention to detail, the quality generally. what i personally wanted was that i would have a really good looking screen, made from i know would be top of the range stuff without me having to go and shop around and read reviews - i'd just know they used the best quality gear - and that i would be able to plug it in to my mac and everything would work without me having to figure anything out.

ok so i stumbled at the compatibility hurdle....sheesh.

but while i am sure that PCs can be built for less and do the same job, i absolutely don't want to be one of those geeks. a computer is a tool and annoys me to have to deal with them at all. what i want is something that will just go when i turn it on.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

Base line 12 core (2.66ghz) Mac Pro ( 1 hdd, 6 gigs ram): $4999.99

Equivalent PC:

2x xeon 5650 cpu (12 cores @ 2.66): $2050
Intel Dual socket 1366 mobo: $439
ECC DDR3 Ram 6 gigs: $285
Corsair HX Series 80+ 750watt PSU: $150
1tb Cavier Black hdd: $88
ATI RADeon: $155
Hafx Tooless Case with (almost) silent fans: $200
Zalman Fan controller: $40

ASUS DVD/CD R/W: $40

Win 7 64bit pro: $140

Wireless Keyboard and Mouse (optional. I don't think I'd go wireless. Added bluetooth driver would make me worry a bit): $140

Total: $3727



Let me know if I missed any parts.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

stevenson-again @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> got to say i am with nick. i think the whole thing with apple is the 'whole-ness' of the approach, the attention to detail, the quality generally. what i personally wanted was that i would have a really good looking screen, made from i know would be top of the range stuff without me having to go and shop around and read reviews - i'd just know they used the best quality gear - and that i would be able to plug it in to my mac and everything would work without me having to figure anything out.
> 
> ok so i stumbled at the compatibility hurdle....sheesh.
> 
> but while i am sure that PCs can be built for less and do the same job, i absolutely don't want to be one of those geeks. a computer is a tool and annoys me to have to deal with them at all. what i want is something that will just go when i turn it on.



I'm kind of the opposite. Maybe because I'm black...err I mean African American. If I have to spend a day doing research to save $1000 or more. I'll do the research. The way I figured it is that if Bach could learn how to build an organ, the least I could do is spend a day building a damn PC.

And yes, when I turn it on it just works.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

So if you factor in the assembly it's about 20% less. Interesting.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 19, 2010)

josejherring @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> Wireless Keyboard and Mouse (optional. I don't think I'd go wireless. Added bluetooth driver would make me worry a bit)


In light of Nick's point, I assume that was tongue in cheek?


----------



## jlb (Oct 19, 2010)

Thank you Jose!! You have just proved the point I raised right back at the beginning of the thread when I got shot down!

jlb


----------



## José Herring (Oct 19, 2010)

Mike Greene @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> josejherring @ Tue Oct 19 said:
> 
> 
> > Wireless Keyboard and Mouse (optional. I don't think I'd go wireless. Added bluetooth driver would make me worry a bit)
> ...



No not really. I mean bluetooth wouldn't hurt any. It's just me personally. The less stuff I have running in the background the more comfortable I feel. 'With wired stuff I wouldn't have to install any additional software. But if my computer were in the next room or I had a large room I'd be bluetoothing all the way. But my computer sits about 2 feet from me so there's no need.

Jose


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

I have the Apple BT mouse, and it's really great - but only if you use MagicPrefs to program it. The velocity scrolling is fun, but it's all the extra things: going back and forward through windows by swiping with two fingers, I have it set up to switch applications (which you can do on the wired mouse but you need MagicPrefs to do it with this mouse), I launch different programs by swiping up or down with three fingers...it's very useful.

Apple's regular wired keyboard is the best one I've ever typed on - and I'm really picky; I'd buy the wireless BT version if it had a 10-key, but without that it's useless for me.

Having said that, the Mac Pro's BT is weak (blocked by the case). I had to disconnect its antenna and run a cable to an external wi-fi one (wi-fi is in the same 2.4GHz range). To be precise I drilled a hole for the antenna's plug in a PCI slot cover, so it's a little more elegant than having a wire hanging out.


----------



## Mike Greene (Oct 19, 2010)

I've always bought wired instead of wireless because I've assumed there's a lag time (latency,) since digital data has to be converted to airwaves and then converted back again. Does this seem to be the case in real life, or is a wireless mouse/keyboard just as responsive?

Nick, what do you mean when you say "swiping with two fingers?" How is that done with a mouse? Are you talking about that new touch pad thingie like on the newer MacBook Pros?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

By the way, the components in the first Mac Pro added up to more than the computer. That's changed, but the disparity between a named computer and the top-of-the-line Mac Pro is likely to be less than 20%.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

Mike, the latency with the BT mouse ("Magic Mouse") is very low - not a factor for me. It senses where you move your fingers just like a touch pad, so (with the free Magic Prefs program) it knows whether you're clicking, tapping (clicking and releasing), swiping, or pinching, and it knows how many fingers you use for each. If you program too much it'll do the wrong thing some of the time, but otherwise it's great.

www.Magicprefs.com


----------



## Animus (Oct 19, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> So if you factor in the assembly it's about 20% less. Interesting.



Also factor in about 20% percent less performance with a mac. Interesting. 


Also you can get just as nice of a case for pc as for mac but depends on how much you want to spend; personally I'd rather put that money into something else other than cosmetics. But toolless have become pretty standard for all cases now. My cases even have toolless pci brackets.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

Animus, who are you? Do we know each other?

Your posts tend to put me in a bad mood.


----------



## Animus (Oct 19, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> Animus, who are you? Do we know each other?
> 
> Your posts tend to put me in a bad mood.



I am truth. And truth hurts.


----------



## midphase (Oct 19, 2010)

Ouch!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 19, 2010)

I just noticed another reason Apple has so many disciples: the green power light on the bottom of the Magic Mouse turns off to save battery power as soon as it senses it's on your desk.

That seals it. No other company is anywhere near cool enough to have a proximity sensor on the bottom of a mouse.


----------



## midphase (Oct 20, 2010)

I love the Magic Mouse...but I am puzzled as to why Apple doesn't have a wireless keyboard with a number keypad?


----------



## stevenson-again (Oct 20, 2010)

> I love the Magic Mouse...but I am puzzled as to why Apple doesn't have a wireless keyboard with a number keypad?



same reason their 27" screens are only meant for laptops.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 20, 2010)

I'm puzzled too, Kays.


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 21, 2010)

midphase @ Wed Oct 20 said:


> I love the Magic Mouse...but I am puzzled as to why Apple doesn't have a wireless keyboard with a number keypad?



i went over to the apple store here in surrey, uk and asked them for a wireless keyboard with numbers and the guy just shrugged. i think because i have an american accent they thought i was from apple or something and i have still not gotten an answer. i really would like a number keypad.


----------



## IFM (Oct 22, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Wed Oct 13 said:


> Animus @ Mon Oct 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Macs can't even properly thread on multiple cores. See Logic and FCP.
> ...



Logic certainly handles multiple cores but I see your comparison is more for PC vs Mac. I've only tested macs and have personally spent hours testing DP7, Cubase 5.1.1, and at the time Logic 9.1.1 and always can get more happening in Logic (but that's due to the way Logic handles non live tracks - see below). I also have CPU meters running full time (menu meters) and you can watch. All four cores in my machine are active.

Where people get this confused is that Logic handles armed tracks differently than playback tracks and they would see a CPU bar in logic peg out with no activity on the others, but if you watch the CPU that isn't the case. They were more like 'audio stream' bars which is why the 9.1.2 only has one now (in the transport bar) and that's the way Cubase and DP does it. Logic handles unarmed tracks at 1024k buffer and armed tracks at whatever buffer you have set in your audio preferences. The other two DAWs handle all tracks as though they were live all the time, thus requiring you to run at a higher buffer in order to get more out of your machine. Personally I wish they all worked this way but that's just me.

As for why Cubase runs better on PC's vs. Mac who knows. If had the time I'd bootcamp my MacPro with W7, install Cubase and load a test project and compare.
At least then the hardware would be 1 to 1. Too bad too as I've had Cubase since Score 1.0 and even have their MR interface.

Chris


----------



## Mike Connelly (Oct 22, 2010)

jlb @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> Thank you Jose!! You have just proved the point I raised right back at the beginning of the thread when I got shot down!



Didn't you say you could build a machine for half the price of the mac that would wipe the floor with it? That's not the case with this comparison.



Animus @ Tue Oct 19 said:


> Also factor in about 20% percent less performance with a mac.



Has that been benchmarked or is that just repeating the "common knowledge"?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 22, 2010)

It's what we in the profession call *a wind-up.*


----------



## Animus (Oct 22, 2010)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Oct 22 said:


> It's what we in the profession call *a wind-up.*




the profession of gay firemen? wind-up toy? hmmm I am afraid to ask.


----------

