Pro Tools 001 - Mac vs. Windows?

[Dennis S]

(I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but it's the best I could find)

My friend has a Mac G4 with Pro Tools 001. He is not familiar with either computer platform. He luckily found a guy in his small town who is a PT wizard, but this guy uses Windows at his house. Would my friend be better off selling his Mac and gearing up with a Windows system if he goes to Pro Tools HD, which he might soon. The 001 won't upgrade to a G5, so the two of them are considering going ahead and going to HD.

 

[bennychico11]

all depends on what he's more comfortable with...that's really the answer. does he prefer Macs to PCs or vice versa. Either one will be fine.

 

[masteringhouse]

Since Pro Tools is not capable of burning CDs you will need to think about the additional software you will need for this function. At the present PCs have more options for this.

 

[donkeystyle]

either should be fine. most of my friends prefer macs because right out of the box they work better than pc's, but i think that if you know a little bit about computers, a pc should be at least as good, if not better.

i don't know for sure, but i don't think that macs are as easily upgradeable as pc's either. plus macs don't come with a defrag program. well at least the g4's didn't. i guess i don't know about the g5's, but you definitely need a defrag program when you're dealing with audio and video stuff, so that will cost extra. plus programs for mac seem to cost a whole bunch more than pc's.

 

[giraffe]

you will have less problems on a mac
esp with pro tools, i have some friends that run it on a
very new very expensive pc

new problem every week

i'm still running 5.0 on os9.2 (in a mac) for the last FOUR years (usto be on a g3, now on a g4) and have NEVER (never) crashed in a session

also don't hook your recording computer up to the internet, saves a lot of headaches

 

[reshp1]

you will have less problems on a mac
esp with pro tools, i have some friends that run it on a
very new very expensive pc

new problem every week

i'm still running 5.0 on os9.2 (in a mac) for the last FOUR years (usto be on a g3, now on a g4) and have NEVER (never) crashed in a session

also don't hook your recording computer up to the internet, saves a lot of headaches

The requirements that Digi/Protools has for PC is very stringent. I think that's part of the reason why PC gets such a bad rep for Protools stability, or lack of. Most people buy or build a system that's "close enough" to the specs and end up getting screwed by the details. If you do follow the requirements, you should have no problems (at least no more than Mac).
Mac does seem to be a more plug and play system though, much less details to worry about since there are much fewer variants than PC. Unfortunately, you have to more pay for this.

Oh, and I could not agree more about the keeping it off the internet part.

 

[bennychico11]

you will have less problems on a mac
esp with pro tools, i have some friends that run it on a
very new very expensive pc

new problem every week

i'm still running 5.0 on os9.2 (in a mac) for the last FOUR years (usto be on a g3, now on a g4) and have NEVER (never) crashed in a session

also don't hook your recording computer up to the internet, saves a lot of headaches

i disagree. i'm running PT on both an Athlon XP and 64 and things are as smooth as they would be on a Mac. I just upgraded my G3 OS9 to XP on the 64 because the mac kept crashing and was slow as hell (not to mention having ONE undo in PT kinda sucked).
I find Macs crash just as much as PCs do
just my opinion though

 

[bennychico11]

The requirements that Digi/Protools has for PC is very stringent. I think that's part of the reason why PC gets such a bad rep for Protools stability, or lack of. Most people buy or build a system that's "close enough" to the specs and end up getting screwed by the details. If you do follow the requirements, you should have no problems (at least no more than Mac).
Mac does seem to be a more plug and play system though, much less details to worry about since there are much fewer variants than PC. Unfortunately, you have to more pay for this.

ahh..ya beat me to it.
and yes, Dell's Celeron computers right out of the box aren't gonna do ya much good.

 

[BrettB]

you will have less problems on a mac
esp with pro tools, i have some friends that run it on a
very new very expensive pc

new problem every week

i'm still running 5.0 on os9.2 (in a mac) for the last FOUR years (usto be on a g3, now on a g4) and have NEVER (never) crashed in a session

also don't hook your recording computer up to the internet, saves a lot of headaches

I second my pals reshp and Benny: I run PT 6.4 very, very stable on my PC. Off course, I closely followed all the requirements on the Digi ste.

 

[giraffe]

have all of you NEVER crashed in a session?

 

[masteringhouse]

have all of you NEVER crashed in a session?

I use Macs and I have crashed many a session. Particularly in the original OSX version of Pro Tools.

Save and backup often ...

 

[bennychico11]

have all of you NEVER crashed in a session?

i've crashed in both OS 9/X and XP.
In Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, Sound Forge, etc.
I haven't found one software program to be perfect on any platform.

I have, however, found PCs to be a lot cheaper and faster than Macs...and the AMDs to be more stable of a processor.

again, it's all opinion.

 

[giraffe]

what i said being true, i have to admit that i am a religious (read-crazy) mac user.
and because i don't want to pop a blood vein in my brain, i will not respond to your last statement, or this thread any more (i've nothing further to add anyway)

don't make me brake out numbers though
(trying to resist)

 

[masteringhouse]

It's usually not the OS or hardware that causes things to crash anyway, it's the application (and plug-ins in the case of audio apps).

Pro Tools being originally written for OS9 "should" be the most stable, but none are bulletproof. Also you need to run the same session on both platforms with the same plugs to be a more apples to apples comparison. On my end SpectraFoo seems to be the culprit for causing the majority of crashes. But since it's such a great piece of software I deal with it.

 

[dgatwood]

i don't know for sure, but i don't think that macs are as easily upgradeable as pc's either.

Macs support USB, FireWire, PCI, and the same hard drives and RAM that PCs use. It doesn't get much more upgradeable than that.

plus macs don't come with a defrag program. well at least the g4's didn't.

That's because the HFS+ filesystem code in xnu (the Mac OS X kernel) does on-the-fly hot files defragmentation. Using a separate defrag utility is likely to make performance worse, as the kernel also optimizes file placement (at least for small files) based on frequency of use.

http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/apme/optimizations/#FIVE

You should actually be complaining that Windows still makes you use a defrag utility. UNIX/Linux/*BSD OSes have been doing this behind the user's back for at least a decade now, and Mac OS X is no exception....

 

[bennychico11]

Macs support USB, FireWire, PCI, and the same hard drives and RAM that PCs use. It doesn't get much more upgradeable than that.

although, apple still doesn't let you build your own system. say a new, better CPU comes out on the market (as the AMD 64s did)...and you wanna keep your memory, keep your hard drives, case, fans, CD drive, DVD burner, you OS, etc....and just replace the mother board and CPU for a couple hundred dollars. can't. gotta spend another $1500-2500+ for the newest computer.
but there are downsides to both systems.

i posted it somewhere else around here...but this sure helped me settle on PC or Mac:
http://spherule.com/media/video/switch_parody/switch_dg.mov



btw, i consider macs fine computers...and they've definitely come a long way. i just find myself being a PC guy

 

[masteringhouse]

That's because the HFS+ filesystem code in xnu (the Mac OS X kernel) does on-the-fly hot files defragmentation. Using a separate defrag utility is likely to make performance worse, as the kernel also optimizes file placement (at least for small files) based on frequency of use.

http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/apme/optimizations/#FIVE

You should actually be complaining that Windows still makes you use a defrag utility. UNIX/Linux/*BSD OSes have been doing this behind the user's back for at least a decade now, and Mac OS X is no exception....

According to the following only for files under 20 MB (about 2 minutes of audio at 44.1K 16 bit stereo).

See: http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/29/190237

 

[donkeystyle]

Macs support USB, FireWire, PCI, and the same hard drives and RAM that PCs use. It doesn't get much more upgradeable than that.



That's because the HFS+ filesystem code in xnu (the Mac OS X kernel) does on-the-fly hot files defragmentation. Using a separate defrag utility is likely to make performance worse, as the kernel also optimizes file placement (at least for small files) based on frequency of use.

http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/apme/optimizations/#FIVE

You should actually be complaining that Windows still makes you use a defrag utility. UNIX/Linux/*BSD OSes have been doing this behind the user's back for at least a decade now, and Mac OS X is no exception....

i said i wasn't sure about how upgradeable they were.

we talked to some people at mac, and they said that under normal circumstances you wouldn't have to defrag, but if you were doing a lot of audio and video recording/editing, you would still have to. the problem with that is most people that use macs are using them for audio/video stuff.

and i guess mastering house said the same thing, but in a more concise way.

 

[IronFlippy]

Being a Mac guy since they came out, I have a slight bias. However, this past summer I built a PC for school. I've found that each system has its pros and cons, neither is perfect. Just because Windows offers a tool to defrag doesn't necessarily means that it's good. I've found that it does a pretty bad job at it so I had to get a separate tool anyway. Apple didn't waste its time, because such tools are already available and aren't incredibly expensive either. They concentrate on their OS and their major software for it. I'd say they do a damn good job at it. My biggest gripe with PCs is that there is too much variety, so developers have to cover such a wide range of hardware that their software cannot be as stable as on a mac.

Now back on topic. Fortunately, ProTools is available on both systems. Even more fortunate for your friend, it's really easy to set up on a mac. Tell him to stick with what he has, it's better than the alternatives, in my opinion. The decision is based solely on personal preference of systems, and since he doesn't have one (a preference) it's better to stay with what he has. There are enough books, forums, and websites to find stuff out from that there's no need. Mac users tend to be extremely friendly when they know they are talking to a mac user, but if you mention windows or pcs, they go off in horrible, horrible tangents. I should know, I used to be like that. (Still kinda am). Good luck to him in the future!

 

[donkeystyle]

Being a Mac guy since they came out, I have a slight bias. However, this past summer I built a PC for school. I've found that each system has its pros and cons, neither is perfect. Just because Windows offers a tool to defrag doesn't necessarily means that it's good. I've found that it does a pretty bad job at it so I had to get a separate tool anyway. Apple didn't waste its time, because such tools are already available and aren't incredibly expensive either. They concentrate on their OS and their major software for it. I'd say they do a damn good job at it. My biggest gripe with PCs is that there is too much variety, so developers have to cover such a wide range of hardware that their software cannot be as stable as on a mac.

the defrag thing was just an example of a con. i too believe that they both have pro's and cons. my only issue with mac is cost. my issue with pc's is that you have to know more about computers than i do to make them run as well as a mac will right out of the box.