Support NeoGAF

[FreakyFink]

Apple-esque sexyness + 3 buttons w/ scroll wheel - cord = pre-order

 

[Shogmaster]

I'd like to see a Windows machine run Photoshop CS, Painter 9, Dreamweaver MX (all with projects open), an FTP app, a chat client, bit torrent, soulseek(both with downloads), an internet browser(10-ish tabs), and iTunes and still move as fast as my G5 does. In fact, I'd like to see one do that and not crash. I used Windows until a couple months ago, and it just cannot hold a candle to kind of performance I get out of my G5.

If your machine has dual procs, then you have to compare the performance with a dual proced PC. SMP really helps with performance when you have multiple proggies open.

Now if you just have a single proc G5, then I say my workstation that I built for $1000 back in early 2003 can do all that no fucking problem like your G5 (3,0C P4, Intel D865PERL mobo, 2GB of PC 3200 in dual channel mode).

 

[aaaaa0]

I'd like to see a Windows machine run Photoshop CS, Painter 9, Dreamweaver MX (all with projects open), an FTP app, a chat client, bit torrent, soulseek(both with downloads), an internet browser(10-ish tabs), and iTunes and still move as fast as my G5 does. In fact, I'd like to see one do that and not crash.

Geez. I've owned two entire generations of PCs since I've generally stopped needing to care about how many programs I'm running and if they'll slow down or crash the OS.

These days, I basically treat the machine as being able to run as much stuff as I want it to, and I'm pretty sure that's true of just about any decent modern machine (Mac OR PC) running any decent modern OS.

(Most of the time. Exceptions being games (for which I do end up closing apps) and some of my heavier dev tools: static code analysis can eat up a ton of memory.)

Listing the apps you can run AT TEH SAME TIME is just so 90s. ;-)

 

[xsarien]

Add in another half dozen programs and I'm going to have to say that you're long out of physical memory.

It depends on how OSX manages memory and programs that are either minimized or not in focus. Programs in Windows deflate considerably (e.g., iTunes, Firefox) when you minimize them.

Now, if all of those programs are actively doing something, that'd be impressive.

 

[Jill Sandwich]

I like both PCs and Macs, am I gay?

 

[Shogmaster]

I like both PCs and Macs, am I gay?

No, just confused.

 

[tedtropy]

I like both PCs and Macs, am I gay?

I think that makes you a bitechxual.

 

[clipunderground]

From a google search, OSX looks to take up 100mb-125mb ram by itself, and the first three apps you listed are going to consume a lot of ram regardless of the platform, especially with projects open. Add in another half dozen programs and I'm going to have to say that you're long out of physical memory.

A straight up owning if I've ever seen one. lol

 

[Manabanana]

From a google search, OSX looks to take up 100mb-125mb ram by itself, and the first three apps you listed are going to consume a lot of ram regardless of the platform, especially with projects open. Add in another half dozen programs and I'm going to have to say that you're long out of physical memory.

I don't know how OSX manages this stuff differently that XP does, but it works. I did notice, however, that if I have everything open that I mentioned in my last post AND Illustrator it "hiccups" a lot. Illustrator is fekkin' heavy. Without Illustrator though, it's perfectly smooth. If you don't believe me, go to an Apple store in your area and try it. I have a Dual 1.8 Ghz G5 with 256megs of RAM.

 

[shantyman]

From Mac site daring fireball:

For Whatever Reasons


Monday, 27 Sep 2004


USA Today technology columnist Kevin Maney complained last week about having been hit hard by a Windows virus on his home computer:



My computer was only 18 months old. I wasn’t totally naïve. My broadband Internet came into a router, which provided something of a firewall — a barrier to keep the riff-raff out. I had one anti-virus program and one anti-spyware program running.


But about six weeks ago, the runaway adware started. No telling why. Someone in my house could’ve clicked on the wrong thing. But trying to knock the ads down was like playing Whac-A-Mole.


I ran software to clean it up. I switched from Microsoft Explorer Web browser to Mozilla’s Firefox, since the bad guys mostly pick on Explorer. I almost got the situation under control.


And then one morning as the PC started to boot, a box popped up saying something about a “remote procedure call.” It said Windows had to restart. So Windows rebooted, came to that same point, showed the same “remote procedure call” box, and again restarted. My PC was doomed to a continuous loop of never turning off but never starting — a computer purgatory. This was the virus at work.



The reaction from his neighbors?



Anger about this stuff is spreading as fast as the viruses. At our end-of-summer block party, I mentioned to a group of neighbors that a virus had crashed our PC. Instantly, every one of them launched into stories about unstoppable blitzes of adware (which throws pop-up ads on your screen, or worse) and spyware (which can find stuff on your PC and send it somewhere) and computers brought down by viruses



This week Maney filed up a follow-up column regarding the deluge of “you should get a Mac” mail he received from readers. He can’t resist banging the “Mac users are a cult” drum, repeatedly, but he gets the most important nugget right, writing (emphasis mine):



The message I get is that people are fed up with the vulnerability of Windows. They are increasingly willing to consider other options. And, for whatever reasons, Apple Computer’s Macintosh and Linux-based computers hardly get infected or invaded at all.



“For whatever reasons” is the key point I tried to make in “Broken Windows” back in June. The reasons why are subject to argument. But you can’t argue about the net effect: Windows users, especially with their home computers, are plagued by insidious malware; everyone else is not.


Microsoft has been talking about improved security in Windows for the last few years. But the situation continues to get worse. New viruses and worms are up 400% this year over last, according to Symantec.


Kevin Maney is not a nerd. Enthusiast, maybe, but not a nerd. What’s interesting about these two columns isn’t technical insight into the nature of the problem; he has none. But the vast majority of Windows users aren’t nerds, either, and Maney seems to have his finger on their pulse.


New Windows updates, new anti-virus software, new ad-blocking software — regular people are starting to realize that the cycle never ends, that they are never going to successfully secure Windows, and that the easiest and best solution to the Windows security problem is not to use Windows at all.


The masses are restless.

http://daringfireball.net/2004/09/for_whatever_reasons

 

[maharg]

"And then one morning as the PC started to boot, a box popped up saying something about a “remote procedure call.” It said Windows had to restart. So Windows rebooted, came to that same point, showed the same “remote procedure call” box, and again restarted. My PC was doomed to a continuous loop of never turning off but never starting — a computer purgatory. This was the virus at work."

This was posted YESTERDAY? USE WINDOWS UPDATE.

 

[Manabanana]

From Mac site daring fireball:

For Whatever Reasons


Monday, 27 Sep 2004

...http://daringfireball.net/2004/09/for_whatever_reasons

I can't get the idea out of the back of my mind that Mozilla or Mozilla supporters are the ones making this spyware.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

I work mainly w/ researchers and they love their Macs. I kind of have to be well acquainted w/ both.

I love Mac hardware, but I hate the OSs.

 

[Shogmaster]

I don't know how OSX manages this stuff differently that XP does, but it works. I did notice, however, that if I have everything open that I mentioned in my last post AND Illustrator it "hiccups" a lot. Illustrator is fekkin' heavy. Without Illustrator though, it's perfectly smooth. If you don't believe me, go to an Apple store in your area and try it. I have a Dual 1.8 Ghz G5 with 256megs of RAM.

You didn't read my reply, did you? I guessed right. You have dual proc. SMP, mofo, SMP. That's the reason for the difference in performance. Try comparing to a dual procced PC. You know, Apples to apples (Yes, I have commited a deliberate pun).

From Mac site daring fireball:

For Whatever Reasons


Monday, 27 Sep 2004


USA Today technology columnist Kevin Maney complained last week about having been hit hard by a Windows virus on his home computer:



My computer was only 18 months old. I wasn’t totally naïve. My broadband Internet came into a router, which provided something of a firewall — a barrier to keep the riff-raff out. I had one anti-virus program and one anti-spyware program running.


But about six weeks ago, the runaway adware started. No telling why. Someone in my house could’ve clicked on the wrong thing. But trying to knock the ads down was like playing Whac-A-Mole.


I ran software to clean it up. I switched from Microsoft Explorer Web browser to Mozilla’s Firefox, since the bad guys mostly pick on Explorer. I almost got the situation under control.


And then one morning as the PC started to boot, a box popped up saying something about a “remote procedure call.” It said Windows had to restart. So Windows rebooted, came to that same point, showed the same “remote procedure call” box, and again restarted. My PC was doomed to a continuous loop of never turning off but never starting — a computer purgatory. This was the virus at work.



The reaction from his neighbors?



Anger about this stuff is spreading as fast as the viruses. At our end-of-summer block party, I mentioned to a group of neighbors that a virus had crashed our PC. Instantly, every one of them launched into stories about unstoppable blitzes of adware (which throws pop-up ads on your screen, or worse) and spyware (which can find stuff on your PC and send it somewhere) and computers brought down by viruses



This week Maney filed up a follow-up column regarding the deluge of “you should get a Mac” mail he received from readers. He can’t resist banging the “Mac users are a cult” drum, repeatedly, but he gets the most important nugget right, writing (emphasis mine):



The message I get is that people are fed up with the vulnerability of Windows. They are increasingly willing to consider other options. And, for whatever reasons, Apple Computer’s Macintosh and Linux-based computers hardly get infected or invaded at all.



“For whatever reasons” is the key point I tried to make in “Broken Windows” back in June. The reasons why are subject to argument. But you can’t argue about the net effect: Windows users, especially with their home computers, are plagued by insidious malware; everyone else is not.


Microsoft has been talking about improved security in Windows for the last few years. But the situation continues to get worse. New viruses and worms are up 400% this year over last, according to Symantec.


Kevin Maney is not a nerd. Enthusiast, maybe, but not a nerd. What’s interesting about these two columns isn’t technical insight into the nature of the problem; he has none. But the vast majority of Windows users aren’t nerds, either, and Maney seems to have his finger on their pulse.


New Windows updates, new anti-virus software, new ad-blocking software — regular people are starting to realize that the cycle never ends, that they are never going to successfully secure Windows, and that the easiest and best solution to the Windows security problem is not to use Windows at all.


The masses are restless.

http://daringfireball.net/2004/09/for_whatever_reasons

Guarenteed the moron was running as administrator the whole time. Deserves it, especially if he is a tech journo.

 

[Manabanana]

You didn't read my reply, did you? I guessed right. You have dual proc. SMP, mofo, SMP. That's the reason for the difference in performance. Try comparing to a dual procced PC. You know, Apples to apples (Yes, I have commited a deliberate pun).

I read your reply, and yes you guessed correctly. Thing is, dual processor PCs aren't easy to find. I'd love to try one to see if it works as well as my G5. You're gonna have to keep in mind that I chose a machine and OS based on what I use my computer for. I don't play games on it, I use it for digital art, which Macs are better for. It's a definite plus that I don't have to virus scan, spyware scan, or defragment. EVER. My reply was aimed at the nay-sayers. Especially Clip whose "OMFG OWNAGE" post was completely unfounded.

 

[MASB]

I read your reply, and yes you guessed correctly. Thing is, dual processor PCs aren't easy to find. I'd love to try one to see if it works as well as my G5. You're gonna have to keep in mind that I chose a machine and OS based on what I use my computer for. I don't play games on it, I use it for digital art, which Macs are better for. It's a definite plus that I don't have to virus scan, spyware scan, or defragment. EVER. My reply was aimed at the nay-sayers. Especially Clip whose "OMFG OWNAGE" post was completely unfounded.

Anybody who wants to, could order the necessary parts (if they didn't want to buy a dual-CPU PC premade) and for less money (than buying premade), build the dual CPU PC themselves. If Clip's ownage post was unfounded, all your other posts were unfounded as well. There's no point in comparing a dual G5 against a single CPU PC. Unless you compare a dual G5 against a dual PC CPU, your posts aren't worth anything as you're praising the Apple, which already has an 'unfair' advantage because of two CPUs. The only surprise would be if your dual G5's had any trouble at all compared to a single PC CPU. Praising dual G5s is like praisng a V8 engine for outperforming a V4 engine. There's no comparison because you're not comparing the same type/number of engines/CPUs. Only comparing a single G5-single CPU, dual G5-dual CPU has any validity.

 

[Shogmaster]

I read your reply, and yes you guessed correctly. Thing is, dual processor PCs aren't easy to find. I'd love to try one to see if it works as well as my G5.

This might give you some ideas:
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=28168-1

I know they don't have 2.5Ghz G5, and those PC workstation are mucho bucks, but that's mostly from the redilcuously expensive 15,000 rpm SCSI or 10,000 rpm SATA RAID HDs and uber expensive OGL workstation video cards. The tests that don't require write cycles are mostly CPU, app and OS dependant, so you should get some idea of which side is faster.

You're gonna have to keep in mind that I chose a machine and OS based on what I use my computer for. I don't play games on it, I use it for digital art, which Macs are better for.

That's like 10 years dated BS. I've used Macs at work and PCs at home for art. Photoshop and Painter (our apps) works exactly the same on both, except you get much better bang for the buck on the PC side. For instance, who would be more productive as an illustrator (what we both do)? A PC guy with a $1000 3.6Ghz P4 set up and a $2500 Cintiq 18SX, or a Mac guy with a $3000 dual 2.5Ghz G5 Powermac and a $400 17" LCD, and a 4x5" graphire 3?

It's a definite plus that I don't have to virus scan, spyware scan, or defragment. EVER. My reply was aimed at the nay-sayers. Especially Clip whose "OMFG OWNAGE" post was completely unfounded.

What, do you do everything on your Powermac at the same time? I can't possibly find such a setup ideal. I need two seperate machines: A workstation to do actual work on, and a support machine to do research and display reference (and play MP3s in the backgorund).

This way, your main machine isn't bogged down with unnecessary tasks eating up CPU cycles and resources.

And because I have two machines, my workstation never does anything that's remotely dangerous. I don't surf the web with it, nor install programs that are questionable. I even have the 10/100 port disconnected via the OS, and only reconnect when I absolutely need to (Windows and anti-v updates, and networking to the ghetto box for trading files). My workstation thus is always in tip top shape.

 

[Phoenix]

A straight up owning if I've ever seen one. lol

Clearly you've never run XP with 256 MB of ram. Try it one day.

 

[Manabanana]

Anybody who wants to, could order the necessary parts (if they didn't want to buy a dual-CPU PC premade) and for less money (than buying premade), build the dual CPU PC themselves. If Clip's ownage post was unfounded, all your other posts were unfounded as well. There's no point in comparing a dual G5 against a single CPU PC. Unless you compare a dual G5 against a dual PC CPU, your posts aren't worth anything as you're praising the Apple, which already has an 'unfair' advantage because of two CPUs. The only surprise would be if your dual G5's had any trouble at all compared to a single PC CPU. Praising dual G5s is like praisng a V8 engine for outperforming a V4 engine. There's no comparison because you're not comparing the same type/number of engines/CPUs. Only comparing a single G5-single CPU, dual G5-dual CPU has any validity.

Ok, I won't compare performance specs unless I'm comparing a dual PC to a dual Mac. I still don't get the owange, though. Owned because the G5 works or what?

Also, what's with the "Mac users are a cult!" thing. PC elitists and Mac elitists are equally wildly irrational. (not directed at anyone in particular.)

 

[Phoenix]

This way, your main machine isn't bogged down with unnecessary tasks eating up CPU cycles and resources.

I tend to do most things on the same machine. Right now I have bbedit, intellij, terminal, slashdock, iTunes, safari, motion, entourage, and Final Cut Pro open with two screen. I've got InteliJ, terminal, and bbedit open on one with final cut, motion and safari open on the other. All the other applications are sitting in a virtual desktop. I have found few reasons to have multiple phystical machines - just lots of screens.

All this from a feeble 1.25Ghz G4 Powerbook with 512MB ram.

 

[Shogmaster]

I tend to do most things on the same machine. Right now I have bbedit, intellij, terminal, slashdock, iTunes, safari, motion, entourage, and Final Cut Pro open with two screen. I've got InteliJ, terminal, and bbedit open on one with final cut, motion and safari open on the other. All the other applications are sitting in a virtual desktop. I have found few reasons to have multiple phystical machines - just lots of screens.

All this from a feeble 1.25Ghz G4 Powerbook with 512MB ram.

Everything you've listed is not crucial to have the real time feel.

The stuff that I do, when there's a resource drain, and I can feel it, that takes away from my process. Nothing worse than drawing in Painter and it feels less than real time due to some crap running in the background slowing things down enough to make the difference. I didn't spend $2500 on my LCD tablet to feel sluggish while drawing.

 

[lachesis]

Well, I work for a major TV network in graphics department.

Normally, people associate us with Macs. When I first started working here, it was all macs - as people still call our room "mac room" However, the higher-ups decided to support NT format only. (now moving to 2000) few years ago.

Well, since I actually have a PC at home, I do not have much problem with it. I just find that Macs are better at what I do in a lot of intricate cases, and mundane issues, and a lot of people who are in graphic design depend on Macs.

By utilizing PC only, a lot of people who come in to my workplace do have problem.
Of course, a lot of times, it's only the basic differences when it comes down to illustrator/photoshop etc - but it is a factor for a lot of people not fully functioning due to the platform differences.

So i did proposed to my directors regarding getting new macs, and they refused: the reason being is tech guys just can't figure out appletalk and always complains about network issues between Mac and PC. They did provide me with a newer pc with faster cpu and all - but I am getting tons of printing issues especially network printing issues to our plotter and other printers. As for the printing goes, my 5 yr old G3, (yes, G3) kicks butt of my dual processing 2000 machine and I use my G3 for printing station. Which works out fine, but whoever comes in to work on the machine always complains how "sloooooww" the machine is. Too bad there's no new macs coming in near future.

I'm set as what I am for the moment, but I do feel sorry for my co-workers, who are much older than me and having the hardest time to cope with PCs. In the end, they went back to their old macs (one g4 and one g3), and trying to work with it with older OS9.2... but they are litterally feeling the heat of "slow machine".

While the managements are spending tens of thousands of the dollars on most recent version of Inferno and build up a massive render-farm - they are so frugal to us and not upgrade anything hardware wise. Software wise, we are not upgrading as we should do either, and my work amount nearly trippled in past 5 yrs. While I'm doing all the dirty works for the whole department - as I supply the ground work for the entire scheme - such as designing the look of the show, logos, and all kinds of different things - and they don't see the importance of groundwork by providing right supplies. In this case, Macs.

Yes. my tech managers hate macs, becaus they can't figure out. So.. to make the long story short, I work in mac-hostile environment, at least by my tech managers. Otherwise, all my co-workers actually prefer macs - then again we are "graphic" people

lachesis

 

[Manabanana]

What, do you do everything on your Powermac at the same time? I can't possibly find such a setup ideal. I need two seperate machines: A workstation to do actual work on, and a support machine to do research and display reference (and play MP3s in the backgorund).

This way, your main machine isn't bogged down with unnecessary tasks eating up CPU cycles and resources.

And because I have two machines, my workstation never does anything that's remotely dangerous. I don't surf the web with it, nor install programs that are questionable. I even have the 10/100 port disconnected via the OS, and only reconnect when I absolutely need to (Windows and anti-v updates, and networking to the ghetto box for trading files). My workstation thus is always in tip top shape.

That's an awesome setup! I'm jealous. But how can you bring price into it if you have both? Why have 2 machines that do different things as opposed to just one machine that does everything and you have to worry about security on? I'll probably be getting another monitor so I can dual display, and I've been thiking about a Cintiq. I'm worried that because they're LCD they'll be kind of low quality (like a laptop monitor). Would you reccomend one?

As for the 10 years dated BS, I know they can both run the programs just as well the other, but Windows machines tend to be more prone to getting unwanted processes running in the background. Because of that, it makes Macs, in my mind, more suitable for this type of work. If you're running things like you are, though, you have no reason to worry about unwanted processes and security and all that. But that brings up cost again.

With the charts and such that posted, that's not comparing apples to apples The Apple machine was the cheapest one of the bunch so if you factor the cost thing in again, it doesn't make sense. With that G5, not only could you do everything on the same machine, but it would be cheaper than the rest of those and it's at least comparible to everything on there.

 

[Shogmaster]

Well, I work for a major TV network in graphics department.

Normally, people associate us with Macs. When I first started working here, it was all macs - as people still call our room "mac room" However, the higher-ups decided to support NT format only. (now moving to 2000) few years ago.

Well, since I actually have a PC at home, I do not have much problem with it. I just find that Macs are better at what I do in a lot of intricate cases, and mundane issues, and a lot of people who are in graphic design depend on Macs.

By utilizing PC only, a lot of people who come in to my workplace do have problem.
Of course, a lot of times, it's only the basic differences when it comes down to illustrator/photoshop etc - but it is a factor for a lot of people not fully functioning due to the platform differences.

So i did proposed to my directors regarding getting new macs, and they refused: the reason being is tech guys just can't figure out appletalk and always complains about network issues between Mac and PC. They did provide me with a newer pc with faster cpu and all - but I am getting tons of printing issues especially network printing issues to our plotter and other printers. As for the printing goes, my 5 yr old G3, (yes, G3) kicks butt of my dual processing 2000 machine and I use my G3 for printing station. Which works out fine, but whoever comes in to work on the machine always complains how "sloooooww" the machine is. Too bad there's no new macs coming in near future.

I'm set as what I am for the moment, but I do feel sorry for my co-workers, who are much older than me and having the hardest time to cope with PCs. In the end, they went back to their old macs (one g4 and one g3), and trying to work with it with older OS9.2... but they are litterally feeling the heat of "slow machine".

While the managements are spending tens of thousands of the dollars on most recent version of Inferno and build up a massive render-farm - they are so frugal to us and not upgrade anything hardware wise. Software wise, we are not upgrading as we should do either, and my work amount nearly trippled in past 5 yrs. While I'm doing all the dirty works for the whole department - as I supply the ground work for the entire scheme - such as designing the look of the show, logos, and all kinds of different things - and they don't see the importance of groundwork by providing right supplies. In this case, Macs.

Yes. my tech managers hate macs, becaus they can't figure out. So.. to make the long story short, I work in mac-hostile environment, at least by my tech managers. Otherwise, all my co-workers actually prefer macs - then again we are "graphic" people

lachesis

I don't know what that anadote is proving, except Mac folks don't like change. That printer issue is rediculous (G3 is faster than new PCs? Purleeze), and is due to poor software choices or set up.

My friend works in network TV editing and compositing. Every machine there are PCs and people working there have no problems with them. What does that prove? Just as much or little as your story.

 

[Shogmaster]

That's an awesome setup! I'm jealous. But how can you bring price into it if you have both? Why have 2 machines that do different things as opposed to just one machine that does everything and you have to worry about security on?

Because the ghettobox is the old workstation that got replaced! That's the beauty of it! I get new workstation built every 18 months. The old workstation becomes the new ghettobox, etc..

I'll probably be getting another monitor so I can dual display, and I've been thiking about a Cintiq. I'm worried that because they're LCD they'll be kind of low quality (like a laptop monitor). Would you reccomend one?

The old Cintiq LCDs were shite. I had the original 15X that was like 50th off the assembly line. It used a Hyundai LCD with horrible contrast (250:1), brightness and rediculous response time (over 40ms). It looked utter shit. But the LCD itself started to go out 18 months later, and they replaced the LCD with the new unit that they were using at the time which was 100x better. The LCDs used in Cintiqs now are top notch ones that only have subpar response times (25ms).

As for the 10 years dated BS, I know they can both run the programs just as well the other, but Windows machines tend to be more prone to getting unwanted processes running in the background. Because of that, it makes Macs, in my mind, more suitable for this type of work.

You realise, you can uninstall porggies that are not necessary, and even put Win XP on a diet that will make it lean and mean, right? And if you don't want to bother with them, then just use Win 2000 like me! My workstation leaner and meaner than your typical OSX machine, I guarentee.

If you're running things like you are, though, you have no reason to worry about unwanted processes and security and all that. But that brings up cost again.

How? I spent no unnecessary money to run my set up.

With the charts and such that posted, that's not comparing apples to apples The Apple machine was the cheapest one of the bunch so if you factor the cost thing in again, it doesn't make sense. With that G5, not only could you do everything on the same machine, but it would be cheaper than the rest of those and it's at least comparible to everything on there.

If you get rid of the 15K SCSI/10K SATA RAID HDs, and Quadro vid cards, those PCs will come under the cost of the powermac easily. And those tests don't take advantage of the HDs and the vid cards.

 

[xsarien]

You realise, you can uninstall porggies that are not necessary, and even put Win XP on a diet that will make it lean and mean, right? And if you don't want to bother with them, then just use Win 2000 like me! My workstation leaner and meaner than your typical OSX machine, I guarentee.

However, you don't have to worry about a littered registry on OS X. You can uninstall shit all you like, but there are plenty of sloppy uninstallers out there that will just not bother removing anything from the registry that they put in.

With the Mac, all you do is get rid of the folder. I need to agree with whomever said that a simple, elegant user interface and experience isn't equivalent to "dumbed down." Yeah, I can *make* Windows lean and mean, but the point is that I shouldn't have to.

 

[Shogmaster]

However, you don't have to worry about a littered registry on OS X. You can uninstall shit all you like, but there are plenty of sloppy uninstallers out there that will just not bother removing anything from the registry that they put in.

With the Mac, all you do is get rid of the folder. I need to agree with whomever said that a simple, elegant user interface and experience isn't equivalent to "dumbed down." Yeah, I can *make* Windows lean and mean, but the point is that I shouldn't have to.

Well, I guess that's the difference. You are more concerned about some lofty "principals of OS" that you are willing to spend premium on overpriced hardware to enjoy your more ideal OS.

Me, not being an OS connoisseaur, only care about working with my needed applications, so I'd rather enjoy much more reasonable costs for my machines to run those apps, which happen to be exactly the same on both sides.

 

[xsarien]

Well, I guess that's the difference. You are more concerned about some lofty "principals of OS" that you are willing to spend premium on overpriced hardware to enjoy your more ideal OS.

Me, not being an OS connoisseaur, only care about working with my needed applications, so I'd rather enjoy much more reasonable costs for my machines to run those apps, which happen to be exactly the same on both sides.

Hardware means jack if the operating system running it is shoddy, or needs to be tweaked/can only be tweaked by people who know it inside and out.

 

[somnific]

I don't know what that anadote is proving, except Mac folks don't like change.

i don't know if lachesis was necessarily trying to prove anything with his story, but something i can definitely take from it is that sometimes cramming a platform type down a person's throat and forcing them to work with something they are not used (or want) to *can* be crippling to a work environment. if people are already comfortable with a certain platform, why force them to change especially if said system is currently being upgraded and supported.

they way i see it is that creative people are supposed to be creative - why not encourage and nourish that environment by providing them with what they want, be it mac or pc? (of course while trying to stay in budget). if i were management i would put the onus on the tech people to figure out appletalk and networking between pc's and mac's because that's what they are supposed to be doing - to me, forcing my entire creative department to learn a new operating system and how programs work in that new os would be far more debilitating.

 

[Shogmaster]

Hardware means jack if the operating system running it is shoddy, or needs to be tweaked/can only be tweaked by people who know it inside and out.

Shoddy? How? Does it hamper my usage of the applications? Does it crash on me? It doesn't do what I tell it to? What the hell are you talking about?

And as for tweaking, I do them to improve performance of my set up. I don't know any OS that doesn't benefit from tweaking. There is no perfect OS (except in the minds of delusional Mac fans).

 

[BlackMage]

Macs can't run WARHAMMER 40K: DAWN OF WAR (available in stores no for WINDOWS btw); therefore macs SUCK!

 

[Phoenix]

Everything you've listed is not crucial to have the real time feel.

The stuff that I do, when there's a resource drain, and I can feel it, that takes away from my process. Nothing worse than drawing in Painter and it feels less than real time due to some crap running in the background slowing things down enough to make the difference. I didn't spend $2500 on my LCD tablet to feel sluggish while drawing.

You don't do much synchronization in video I take it.

 

[Manabanana]

Shog, most of us don't have the luxury of getting a new machine every 18 months I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. I'll probably be getting a low-end Windows machine here pretty soon and run 98 Version 2. Would you say 2000 is better? I'm sick of XP and despite restarting all the time, 98.2 seems to be more stable.

I'd think since the Cintiqs dropped $1000 in price, the new ones should be out soon, right? I'd probably go for the 15X, but the 45ms response is ass.

 

[Phoenix]

Hardware means jack if the operating system running it is shoddy, or needs to be tweaked/can only be tweaked by people who know it inside and out.

Same reason why Linux lives on my servers, and not my desktop. While Suse is a good start - OSX is far far beyond it in terms of having desktop Unix (something that this thread hasn't really touched upon yet).

 

[Shogmaster]

Shog, most of us don't have the luxury of getting a new machine every 18 months I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree.

I spend $1000 every 18 months to build my workstations. You spend probably over $2000 to buy your PowerMacs every 3 years or so. We'd spend about the same money, but I stay closer to the top of the power curve, and usefulness of the machine.

I'll probably be getting a low-end Windows machine here pretty soon and run 98 Version 2. Would you say 2000 is better? I'm sick of XP and despite restarting all the time, 98.2 seems to be more stable.

This just tells you how much you know about Windows. Using Windows 98 in 2004 is utter stupidity, unless you are some retro PC gaming freak or something.

I'd think since the Cintiqs dropped $1000 in price, the new ones should be out soon, right? I'd probably go for the 15X, but the 45ms response is ass.

That's the Hyundai LCDs in the old Cintiqs. The new ones like mine have around 25ms respose time. Still not great, but not that bad either.

You don't do much synchronization in video I take it.

I don't, but having observed my vid ed friends at work, but I doubt it's as nitpicky as Painter is. I'm trying to replicate drawing on paper as close as possible. Pencil don't show any delay when you draw on paper. I need the same kind of response from Painter, otherwise the feel goes to shit. A little different than using mouse to do video editing, I'd imagine.

 

[Phoenix]

Shog, most of us don't have the luxury of getting a new machine every 18 months I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. I'll probably be getting a low-end Windows machine here pretty soon and run 98 Version 2. Would you say 2000 is better? I'm sick of XP and despite restarting all the time, 98.2 seems to be more stable.

I'd think since the Cintiqs dropped $1000 in price, the new ones should be out soon, right? I'd probably go for the 15X, but the 45ms response is ass.

If you are going to dump XP to go to 98.2, something is seriously wrong. While I prefer OSX - I use WIndows all the time and I would never willingly subject ANYONE to going back to Windows 98 when XP or Windows 2000 is a viable option. That's just non-sensical.

 

[Phoenix]

I don't, but having observed my vid ed friends at work, but I doubt it's as nitpicky as Painter is. I'm trying to replicate drawing on paper as close as possible. Pencil don't show any delay when you draw on paper. I need the same kind of response from Painter, otherwise the feel goes to shit. A little different than using mouse to do video editing, I'd imagine.

There is a difference between video editing and video synchronization. If I'm compositing video and audio together in a way that it lines up, looks good, sounds right, and gives me the same feel going to a settop as it does on my screen - yes, its millisecond picky.

 

[Manabanana]

If you are going to dump XP to go to 98.2, something is seriously wrong. While I prefer OSX - I use WIndows all the time and I would never willingly subject ANYONE to going back to Windows 98 when XP or Windows 2000 is a viable option. That's just non-sensical.

No no, 98 is horrible but 98.2 was much better (still not great, obviously). XP takes up so much more RAM than it needs to. 2K it is

 

[lachesis]

I don't know what that anadote is proving, except Mac folks don't like change. That printer issue is rediculous (G3 is faster than new PCs? Purleeze), and is due to poor software choices or set up.

My friend works in network TV editing and compositing. Every machine there are PCs and people working there have no problems with them. What does that prove? Just as much or little as your story.

Yes. I agree with general Mac folks doesn't like the change - and you should consider the age of my co-workers: One of them has been in the industry for 34 years. He learnd how to use Mac in very late in his life, and he has hard time changing into pc format. do you get it? It's just like our fathers cannot figure out how to use certain things on VCR.

Anyhow, as for the printing issues, I stand by my point. I'm not necessarily saying the "speed", mind you, but more of stability of background printing when it comes into hundreds of very high-resolution files. I have hardest time printing on PC when the file become large format. My new PC basically "creams" any macs in my room, but just the printing issue. Yes, printing e-mails are just fine and dandy on my PC, but I'm talking about billboard size highres files, multiple of them. You said that poor software choices, but the software I'm using is exactly same software as what I have on Mac.

Setup? Since I am not a tech manager, set-up is not my issue, and even if I knew how to do it, I'm not supposed to fonder with it - If my pc is better at printing in general (not just speed wise), perhaps its the unstable PC network setting that's not allowing me to print extremely large files to my network printers. Perhaps my company should just fire those tech managers who can't even figure out how to maximize my PC's printing capacity.

Editing and compositing is a different story. I personally don't really consider "editing" being "graphic". Actually, those discreet logic products works better on 2000 based system. Avid systems are all on 2000 based pcs and they seem to work fine, as I also work with them in many cases too. I guess Combustion/Flint/Flame/Inferno could be an exception, but they are not mere "editing" machines you know. However, if you are into graphic design, I'd say most people prefer Mac, and that's my honest experience by talking to many graphic designers in and out of schools. I do not have any agenda to put down PC format, but I do find it's a very convenient coincident, that a lot of "graphic designers" do prefer Macs, don't you? Perhaps, there's a reason for it, I presume.

I'm just writing this down, with no hidden agenda on which platform is better or whatnot. As a pc person, I don't really care - but all the design schools do seem to prefer Mac format, and I have to deal with people coming from outside only knowing Macs and I end up helping them out in very mundane cases. Thats why I believe our graphic department should employ more Macs, for the sake of efficiency in this specific case, but not in entire general way. My story is just a mere "story" for story's sake from my experience. Nothing more, nothing less, and especially not to put down certain platforms.

lachesis

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Shog-- you talk of not wanting to pay a premium for hardware-- and yet you upgrade every 18 months! I'm not sure your comparison is all that viable.

I'm not a Mac zealot-- I haven't owned on in years, and while I am considering a powerbook, it's mainly for durability/lightness/my desire to play with OS X... but there is also somethign to be said for the OS being more elegant and easy to use. If you're building a new box every 18 months, you probably know more about WIndows than most folks.

That said, for raw power, the PC is going to be cheaper-- but figuring in cost of use and headaches, the Mac might be worth it, depending on your skillset.

 

[Shogmaster]

Shog-- you talk of not wanting to pay a premium for hardware-- and yet you upgrade every 18 months! I'm not sure your comparison is all that viable.

Spending $1000 every 18 months vs $2000~$3000 every 3~4 years. Which is smarter? I stay closer to top of the PC power with my approach, but don't spend more money.

I'm not a Mac zealot-- I haven't owned on in years, and while I am considering a powerbook, it's mainly for durability/lightness/my desire to play with OS X... but there is also somethign to be said for the OS being more elegant and easy to use. If you're building a new box every 18 months, you probably know more about WIndows than most folks.

That said, for raw power, the PC is going to be cheaper-- but figuring in cost of use and headaches, the Mac might be worth it, depending on your skillset.

My skillset isn't all that high mind you (I don't have MCSE or A+ cert or anything like that), but it works out great for me.

 

[lachesis]

i don't know if lachesis was necessarily trying to prove anything with his story, but something i can definitely take from it is that sometimes cramming a platform type down a person's throat and forcing them to work with something they are not used (or want) to *can* be crippling to a work environment. if people are already comfortable with a certain platform, why force them to change especially if said system is currently being upgraded and supported.

they way i see it is that creative people are supposed to be creative - why not encourage and nourish that environment by providing them with what they want, be it mac or pc? (of course while trying to stay in budget). if i were management i would put the onus on the tech people to figure out appletalk and networking between pc's and mac's because that's what they are supposed to be doing - to me, forcing my entire creative department to learn a new operating system and how programs work in that new os would be far more debilitating.

Perhaps you could be my boss. Thx, somnific for understanding what I was talking about... exactly my point.

lachesis

 

[xsarien]

Shoddy? How? Does it hamper my usage of the applications? Does it crash on me? It doesn't do what I tell it to? What the hell are you talking about?

And as for tweaking, I do them to improve performance of my set up. I don't know any OS that doesn't benefit from tweaking. There is no perfect OS (except in the minds of delusional Mac fans).

"Shoddy" in relative comparison to Windows in general. I have yet to see Windows do anything OS X can't do. Or, rather, I have yet to see a reason why I should pick a Windows machine over a Mac unless games are a major factor in the buying decision. But also, on more practical levels, Apple's operating system people have the benefit of knowing precisely what hardware is in the machine. By X's very nature - core aside - it's more stable.

Also, yeah, I'm aware that there's no such thing as a "perfect" OS, but I don't think my yearly OS purge/reinstall just to get rid of all the virtual plaque that's built up in the registry, taken the form of orphaned DLL files, and general misery is a situation unique to myself. MacOS, overall, is the better choice at least from a raw bullet-point perspective. Everything I need is available for it, and as we've discussed in the past, performance issues are negligible, if nothing more than pissing contests due to the disparity in where Windows is respective to OS X.

I'd also trust an Apple to "mission critical" stuff long before I'd trust a Windows machine. So there.

 

[Shogmaster]

Perhaps you could be my boss. Thx, somnific for understanding what I was talking about... exactly my point.

lachesis

Well shit, then you guys should know how I feel! "You do graphics? Then you NEED to use Macs!"

 

[Shogmaster]

"Shoddy" in relative comparison to Windows in general. I have yet to see Windows do anything OS X can't do. Or, rather, I have yet to see a reason why I should pick a Windows machine over a Mac unless games are a major factor in the buying decision. But also, on more practical levels, Apple's operating system people have the benefit of knowing precisely what hardware is in the machine. By X's very nature - core aside - it's more stable.

All negated by Windows user that knows what he/she is doing, and how to set up their machine.

Also, yeah, I'm aware that there's no such thing as a "perfect" OS, but I don't think my yearly OS purge/reinstall just to get rid of all the virtual plaque that's built up in the registry, taken the form of orphaned DLL files, and general misery is a situation unique to myself.

What the hell, does one need to install new program every other day? Who cares? Shit, by the time those things come into play, I've done my every 6~9 months OS reinstall. And don't tell me any crap about OSX not requiring reinstall. I worked in compter retail. We had to reinstall OSX machines every once in a while, just like PCs, to make it run better.

MacOS, overall, is the better choice at least from a raw bullet-point perspective. Everything I need is available for it, and as we've discussed in the past, performance issues are negligible, if nothing more than pissing contests due to the disparity in where Windows is respective to OS X.

I'd also trust an Apple to "mission critical" stuff long before I'd trust a Windows machine. So there.

I'd trust a custom installed Win 2000 machine for mission critical over any OSX install from factory.

 

[Matlock]

Clearly you've never run XP with 256 MB of ram. Try it one day.

Real men run it on 128MB of RAM.

 

[lachesis]

Well shit, then you guys should know how I feel! "You do graphics? Then you NEED to use Macs!"

Well, thanks for the insult, shoggy.

lachesis

 

[shantyman]

All negated by Windows user that knows what he/she is doing, and how to set up their machine.

How many people can you say this is true of though? The nerds on this board and other forums on the net? (I include myself in this group)

The average computer user (90% of users I'd say, Mac or PC) does not know what they are doing.

 

[Phoenix]

Real men run it on 128MB of RAM.

I would sooner run Linux.

 

[Shogmaster]

Well, thanks for the insult, shoggy.

lachesis

Huh? When did I insult you?