Mac or PC?
- Thread starter topolino
- Start date
Tifstorey
Guinea Pig
Oh Great...Another Mac / PC debate! These happen too much!
I use both a Mac and Pc. I use my Mac for most things because i find its much more reliable than my Pc. I dont get worried about it crashing on me during a recording session.
Bottom line is that theyre both good in theyre own ways! I just wish these debates would stop happening! Whichever you have chosen to use, please dont start anymore of these!
I use both a Mac and Pc. I use my Mac for most things because i find its much more reliable than my Pc. I dont get worried about it crashing on me during a recording session.
Bottom line is that theyre both good in theyre own ways! I just wish these debates would stop happening! Whichever you have chosen to use, please dont start anymore of these!
Rock Star 87
New member
i can't believe im joining this debate again, but i am. i think it depends on 2 things, software and experience. personally i use PA9, so im a PC guy, but also because i learned computing on a PC. and manning1 is right, u can't bitch and complain about ur computer not working if u don't know how it works. i sat down, tore my CPU apart and fucked with the OS for at least a day straight and i know everything about that computer, so when something fucks up, i kick it in the ass. but as now i stand:
PLATFORM IRREVELANT
PLATFORM IRREVELANT
wes480
New member
In my mind the debate should really be OSX vs. Windows XP at this point...not "mac vs. pc".
They both have respectable hardware and a lot of it overlaps both platforms.
Someone mentioned Linux and Unix etc...which is proof if there ever was that "pcs can cut it". The problems with stability and such that everyone complains about are rarely hardware related. Though in some cases as this thread has pointed out...it can be bad hardware, bad setup. Etc.
Mac OSX was built from the development of NextSTEP - which took it's foundation in BSD(Berkley System Designs)4.4-lite (the last official BSD release that was a legal separation from AT&T UNIX systems).
That operating system (which finalized development in the early 90s) is one of the most stable and efficient of all times...and it's TCP/IP stack has propogated almost every computer out there today. FreeBSD was built on it - and runs about 80% of the webservers in the world.
Virginia Techs "X System" - 1200 G5's in a cluster, is ranked as the 7th fastest super computer in the world. (behind computers from IBM and others using Linux clusters).
Obviously, MacOSX has a huge advantage over Windows XP (even though WinXP *can* work). Only time will tell if Longhorn is going to be worthwhile for audio recording. I have my doubts.
The problem with Linux/BSD on a DAW PC is drivers - and of course also recording software...though more does exist in that area than drivers.
I've yet to find anyone who has a good multichannel soundcard working in that environment.
If Longhorn is dissapointing and tides keep changing from Windows though, manufacturers may decide that supporting Linux or other open source projects is important (like nvidia and ati have). That would lead to an increased interest in developing more state of the art software for recording on the platform.
Just for reference, there is a program for Linux called Cinellera for video editing, that many in the industry claim rivals final cut.
So yes, they are very viable platforms...and hopefully where the future of personal computing goes. But they aren't there yet.
That being said, if you follow what I was saying at the top of this post - you could consider Mac OSX as almost a "glimpse into the future" of operating systems.
(if this kind of thing interests you, check out the history of UNIX on wikipedia, and google for some information on the history of NeXt - the world wide web, and Doom were both developed on that platform. Pretty neat)
They both have respectable hardware and a lot of it overlaps both platforms.
Someone mentioned Linux and Unix etc...which is proof if there ever was that "pcs can cut it". The problems with stability and such that everyone complains about are rarely hardware related. Though in some cases as this thread has pointed out...it can be bad hardware, bad setup. Etc.
Mac OSX was built from the development of NextSTEP - which took it's foundation in BSD(Berkley System Designs)4.4-lite (the last official BSD release that was a legal separation from AT&T UNIX systems).
That operating system (which finalized development in the early 90s) is one of the most stable and efficient of all times...and it's TCP/IP stack has propogated almost every computer out there today. FreeBSD was built on it - and runs about 80% of the webservers in the world.
Virginia Techs "X System" - 1200 G5's in a cluster, is ranked as the 7th fastest super computer in the world. (behind computers from IBM and others using Linux clusters).
Obviously, MacOSX has a huge advantage over Windows XP (even though WinXP *can* work). Only time will tell if Longhorn is going to be worthwhile for audio recording. I have my doubts.
The problem with Linux/BSD on a DAW PC is drivers - and of course also recording software...though more does exist in that area than drivers.
I've yet to find anyone who has a good multichannel soundcard working in that environment.
If Longhorn is dissapointing and tides keep changing from Windows though, manufacturers may decide that supporting Linux or other open source projects is important (like nvidia and ati have). That would lead to an increased interest in developing more state of the art software for recording on the platform.
Just for reference, there is a program for Linux called Cinellera for video editing, that many in the industry claim rivals final cut.
So yes, they are very viable platforms...and hopefully where the future of personal computing goes. But they aren't there yet.
That being said, if you follow what I was saying at the top of this post - you could consider Mac OSX as almost a "glimpse into the future" of operating systems.
(if this kind of thing interests you, check out the history of UNIX on wikipedia, and google for some information on the history of NeXt - the world wide web, and Doom were both developed on that platform. Pretty neat)
wes480
New member
elevate said:
Well, in that context I was talking about it's ability to use cluster computing (i.e the virginia tech example).
Someone mentioned earlier that they would like to use Logics "multi system rendering" mode or whatever it is called.
Mac OSX has greater scalability than Windows XP - how many XP machines are considered "super computers"?
Scalability may or may not have any impact on whether or not it makes a good DAW. I was simply pointing out that the operating system itself is superior in this way. It is also superior for other reasons, such as it's preemptive multitasking abilities.
I'm not slamming Windows here...and I'm not a Mac user...all I own are PCs. But if you can't realize that WinXP is not exactly state of the art when it comes to the underbelly of operating systems...then there is a problem.
Also, it's worth nothing that the issues of spyware and adware are not as prevelant in Mac OSX.
LRosario said:
That is not true. The main reason why most people feel that macs are more stable because the average Joe doesn't know how to maintain his pc. Meaning defragging and all of that. The mac we have at the studio G4 or 5 dont really know. But anyway, It has crashed a couple of times. So I would say pc for one reason you have more software choices.
heroics321
New member
ive looked extensively into linux audio... as of now, i think its most ideal use would be as a sort of expanded hard disk recorder. there are plugins available, some of which are supposed to be very good, but it would be most useful with a mixer and some outboard processors. there's enough supported cards that its really not that much of an issue, especially if you have an RME interface. www.alsa-project.org and www.ardour.org have plenty of info. my dad just brought home an old dell from work, we've got plans with that involving linux and an m-audio card, i'll keep you guys updated.
elevate
New member
This is completely irrelevant, and I would even go so far as to suggest that Virginia Tech made a stupid move by 1) not getting the cluster from IBM (which is further reinforced by the Power Mac/XServe debacle), and 2) not running Linux. There's also the matter of there being Windows computers on the tpc.org list, but curiously, there are no computers running OS X. Regardless, until you can somehow show that audio production has anything at all to do with Beowulf clusters running Linpack, I'll contend that this point is moot.wes480 said:
In what way is OS X's multitasking abilities superior to to Windows'?
What specific properties of XP are not state of the art?
In my experience, the skill of the user is inversely proportional to the amount of spyware they have on their computer. Or, in short, use Firefox.
Havoc said:Forgot this in previous post: while the rme drivers are good, they don't support 88.1 or 96. Read the small print on the alsa site.
PS: you don't have to convert me, I'm already converted
It'd be nice if the interface companies pitched in a bit, and wrote their own drivers for Linux. I'm surprised an interface maker and DAW app maker haven't teamed up and done a Linux distro based around their products..... a total solution. That would be cool.
brummygit
Member
Bulls Hit said:
was a Celeron - when i say 5-10 mins to boot, i mean for the drive and everything to shut up, to be able to get things to load quickly. it was a decent setup and i tweaked everything as much as possible to shut out the little pop ups that say 'do you want to do this' 'do you want to update this' etc. i am an intermediate pc user but still, the problem i find with windows is that it tries to help too much and thus loads/prompts for un-necessary stuff. macs just work. i dont know the science behind that, its just the way it's been.
yes pc's have their place, but mac's are now by far my favoured choice