• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Mac Or Windows?

Linux won't be a workable platform until Apple and Microsoft decide to merge, at which point they'll need competition to avoid an Anti-Trust lawsuit.

Believe me. The day is coming. It started with Intel Macs, and continues with OSX looking like Windows and Vista looking like OSX. Soon, Jobs and Gates will be featured on the cover of time shaking hands over the new AppleSoft merger. Or maybe the Micrapple merger, but I think they know marketing better than that.

You wait, when Linux gets big, it'll be the sign of the computer OS apocalypse. We'll ALL be hosed, then. No more choices, one OS to build them all, one OS to buy them, one OS to run them all, and in the darkness screw them. And a barely-functional Linux to fend off the feds.

The real problem is, you probably think I'm joking.
 
Yeah.

Now pay for legit recording software.
As well as, (actually valid,) video editing software, native DVD authoring software, photo editing software, etc, all of which is native, and totally cross functional in a way that only things like the Adobe Creative Suite has even sort of touched on.

Add a proven, rock solid and stable, and EFFICIENT OS to the mix.
Not to mention hardware from a company that actually uses reliable components. 'Cause, I don't know about you, but I sure haven't seen to many Gateways that could really, and I mean REALLY, take the kind of abuse that things like serious audio recording puts on then.

Then there's the little things like the native webcam, plug and play with pretty well everything, and even the ridiculously sleek casing of the iMac, and I think you have an awfully attractive package. Besides, I bet that you'll find that any 19" LCD that a company includes with an $800 computer for free, probably isn't really worth the trouble of tossing out your old CRT. Especially compared to the award winning ultra sharp displays on the iMacs.

And if you absolutely HAVE to have the doesn't-really-do-anything-important-that-xp-couldn't-do, except-that-it's-slower-at-it trainwreck that is ONE of the 7 versions of Vista, (compared to the 1 version of Mac OS that comes with everything, and does everything,) then it's (unofficially) functional on Macs as well, thanks to BootCamp.

Now, if Gateway starts making $800 computers that CAN run BOTH Mac OS and Windows, AND can do it out of proper components instead of just whatever they can get the cheapest that fiscal quarter, then I MIGHT be interested.
For five minutes.
'Till I go buy a mac.
 
Aside from the fact that you can get a Gateway with Core 2 Duo, 2 G ram, 19" widescreen, etc, etc, etc for $839...and that comes with the Windows Vista upgrade for free.

I think you're talking about a desktop which are cheaper than laptops.

I did a quote with gateway and a computer with your specs was 1112.99.

Apple desktops start at $599 for the Mac Mini or $999 for a iMac.
 
is it possible to get OSX on a pc? (btw, i'm just askin, not making a ridiculously laid out point to counter bigdawg's post)

No.

Mac OS requires a specific TPM chip, (read; pretty well unhackable microchip based security device,) to be installed on the main board of the computer, and such a chip isn't something that could just be installed after the fact. Each chip needs to be paired up with each copy of the OS.

Which is why, (as far as I know,) no one has been able to get a functional copy of Mac OS on any non-Mac X86 hardware.

I don't see them released a non-chipped version any time soon, either. Mac's hardware devision is a huge part of their profit. And by keeping everything in-house, they're able to prevent all the incompatibility issues and scapegoating-when-it-breaks-down runarounds that continue to plague PCs.
 
And for as much as people keep saying that they want Linux to be THE OS of choice, they seem to forget that OSX is pretty well just a GUI based on the Unix kernel. I mean, isn't that close enough?

Haven't forgotten that at all. Just would prefer a nonproprietary OS solution, so the fact that Apple still totally controls OSX means that no, it's not quite close enough. Not that this really keeps me up at night crying in my pillow or stops me from recording.
 
I recently switch my recording set up from a Desktop PC running cracked Sonar 5 and EMU 1820 hardware to an Apple Powerbook running ProTools and mBox2 Pro.

Let me tell you as a windows user it's been an absolute nightmare. Apples do not just work! You have to sit there a mess with them for hours just like a PC.

They do have their advantages. If you're not too computer savy, it will be easier to use an apple and garage bands and get great results and you will stay with Apple forever. If you're like me, switching my recording set up has been as difficult and complicated as I imagine moving from bass to keyboard...similar yet very different.:hmm:
 
No.

Mac OS requires a specific TPM chip, (read; pretty well unhackable microchip based security device,) to be installed on the main board of the computer, and such a chip isn't something that could just be installed after the fact. Each chip needs to be paired up with each copy of the OS.

Which is why, (as far as I know,) no one has been able to get a functional copy of Mac OS on any non-Mac X86 hardware.

I don't see them released a non-chipped version any time soon, either. Mac's hardware devision is a huge part of their profit. And by keeping everything in-house, they're able to prevent all the incompatibility issues and scapegoating-when-it-breaks-down runarounds that continue to plague PCs.

This probably won't happen with Steve Jobs at the helm. In the 80's Apple booted Jobs and you started seeing Apple clones running Mac OS. A year or so later Jobs got back in and immediately shut down all clones.
 
Let me tell you as a windows user it's been an absolute nightmare. Apples do not just work! You have to sit there a mess with them for hours just like a PC.

How so?

I really am genuinely curious. I mean, as much as I may be a Mac guy myself, I'm also %100 willing to admit that NO ONE makes the "perfect" machine.

I would just hate to hear that someone was getting soured on a normally excellent platform because they got a lemon or something.
 
Yeah.

Now pay for legit recording software.
As well as, (actually valid,) video editing software, native DVD authoring software, photo editing software, etc, all of which is native, and totally cross functional in a way that only things like the Adobe Creative Suite has even sort of touched on.

Add a proven, rock solid and stable, and EFFICIENT OS to the mix.
Not to mention hardware from a company that actually uses reliable components. 'Cause, I don't know about you, but I sure haven't seen to many Gateways that could really, and I mean REALLY, take the kind of abuse that things like serious audio recording puts on then.

Then there's the little things like the native webcam, plug and play with pretty well everything, and even the ridiculously sleek casing of the iMac, and I think you have an awfully attractive package. Besides, I bet that you'll find that any 19" LCD that a company includes with an $800 computer for free, probably isn't really worth the trouble of tossing out your old CRT. Especially compared to the award winning ultra sharp displays on the iMacs.

And if you absolutely HAVE to have the doesn't-really-do-anything-important-that-xp-couldn't-do, except-that-it's-slower-at-it trainwreck that is ONE of the 7 versions of Vista, (compared to the 1 version of Mac OS that comes with everything, and does everything,) then it's (unofficially) functional on Macs as well, thanks to BootCamp.

Now, if Gateway starts making $800 computers that CAN run BOTH Mac OS and Windows, AND can do it out of proper components instead of just whatever they can get the cheapest that fiscal quarter, then I MIGHT be interested.
For five minutes.
'Till I go buy a mac.

Those are all good reasons why one could reasonably buy a Mac. They're not good reasons why one shouldn't buy a PC. For me personally, Garageband and all that video stuff are useless. Don't need 'em, don't want 'em, don't care at all.

And IME the stability of Macs is a tad overrated. They're great and all, but the idea that they don't have problems is overblown. Every Mac user I've known has had problems. That doesn't make them bad, or even worse than Windoze, but I have to admit, on a personal level, I get kind of tired of the more extreme forms of Mac boosterism I've seen (I'm NOT saying that you';re doing this).

And for recording purposes, you can't really compare Macs and out-of-the-box Gateways. You ought to compare Macs used for recording with PCs whose components have been chosen and set up for that purpose by people who know what they're doing. There's no earthly reason to believe that Mac components as a group are inherently of higher quality than PC components as a group. Good PC gear is just as good as good Mac stuff. You just have to be more careful about your choices in the PC world.

It's true that an average Mac is probably better suited for recording as it comes out of the box than an average Gateway PC is, but in the end, I can't see that that really matter all that much. What matters is the quality of the recording machine you actually end up with. If I have a fast, powerful, stable, efficient PC that runs the software I want without ever crashing or freezing and that didn't cost me an arm and a leg, then I don't care what had to be done to get that computer to that point. I don't care that the tweaking might have been easier or even unnecessary with a Mac. I only care that the computer now does what I want it to, and keeps doing it.

My own bias is that for most people, if you're comfortable with Windoze and experience few problems, there's probably no compelling reason to switch to another OS. Switch if you can't deal with Windows or if the software you want is Mac-only; don't bother otherwise. If you're happy with Macs, there's also no reason to switch. If the new Macs can run Win as well as people are saying (I'd kinda forgotten that real progress is being achieved with this), there may be no reason to switch from Mac even if the software you want is PC-only. Unless you just dislike the Mac environment (such people do exist, BTW).

I still think this is actually one of the lesser issues involved in computer recording, for most of us anyway. I think the choice of audio recording software--ProTools, Logic, Cubase, Nuendo, Reaper, Podium, Tracktion, nTracks Pro, Sonar, Audacity, what have you--is gonna affect your actual workflow more.
 
For the most part it truly works great and in a lot of ways I like it better than PC. Some of my frustration is due to not being confortable with how Apple sets up their configuration option and other problems are with other software.

For example, I wanted to reformat and start over because it was a used computer when I got it. I had been running ProTools on it before the reformat with little problems.
I finally got my mBox up and running and ProTools updated. I went to record and got a H/W Buffer Error. Tried every setting for the Playback Engine and got the error everytime. Rebooted and still got it. Switched the firewire port on the back and it worked.

Next day, it's happening again. Switch back to the original firewire port on the mBox and it works again.

My guess is that it's a bug.

As far as hardware, it's super nice, but no more dependable than my Dell. Also the Dell was less than 1/2 the price of this.
 
It comes down to 2 things.
1. What programs you want to run.
2. What platform you are more comfortable with.

After factoring in those 2 things, the answer is get whatever you want.
It really doesn't matter one bit. People can debate the whole pc vs. mac thing til their blue in the face. it doesn't matter one bit which one you get. They both are great systems and you will be able to do whatever you want with either system.
 
I've never used a Mac before other than running ProTools in a studio I worked for. I learned ProTools on an Apple, so I bought an Apple when I was ready to set up to do my own recording. Pretty much as simple as that. I also spec-ed out new Sony, HP, and Dell laptops, and by the time I got the specs to appear on par with the Apple, the price difference was pretty slight. So far (about a month w/ the MacBook Pro), the Apple has just been much more intuitive to use, so at this point I really don't see myself switching back. I do still use PCs at work everyday, and they're great for what we want to do with them.
All-in-all, the machines are just different. PCs are good for if what you want to do runs best on PCs. Macs are good for if what you want to do runs best on Macs.
 
Those are all good reasons why one could reasonably buy a Mac. They're not good reasons why one shouldn't buy a PC. ...is gonna affect your actual workflow more.

I pretty much agree with you totally. With the hardware stuff in particular.

I actually used to work for a high-end PC notebook company. They used totally top of the line hardware, and were overall very solid machines. Just as solid as my Macs, which have over the years had a couple of hardware issues. Nothing like power supplies going and taking out the board or anything, but issues nonetheless. So I definitely agree that the hardware on a Mac may be prettier in general, but it's not "better" than truly comparable PC hardware. It's all just plastic and silicon, right?

I do honestly believe Mac OS to be the superior operating system, though. I've found, after years of using both OSs, that they just run better, with a lot less frigging around necessary. And if someone was looking to buy a new PC, (as a lot of people will have to do now anyway, thanks to Vista's base hardware requirements,) then I think that, particularly with the full blown Windows compatibility, they'd be well advised to look at a Mac. Unless they needed a tablet.
 
All that being said, a properly tweaked PC can be a totally viable machine in my opinion.

And even I, as a Mac guy, can find some of the more... militant... Mac users to be very frustrating, (although, OBVIOUSLY, they're not as bad as the PC equivalents. OBVIOUSLY.)

I know your iPod is cool, and I know why. I have one too. Shut up about it.

(But make sure you get the new 80 gig model and an iPhone to go with it, ASAP.)
 
I went through this a few years ago.

I was the on PC user in a graduate program of music. Until it came down to being able to use the software at the school (ProTools & Digital Performer) as well as what the industry standards are (ProTools, Digital Performer, and Logic) it was all mac.

I broke down and bought a G4 and Digital Performer. I cussed alot when I first went to the platform. I could not figure out how to do many of the things that I could do on the PC. But after a little while it became software specific and I could use the DP without issue as fast as I could use Word on the PC (no comparison of software...just speed).

Now I am literate and functional on both of the platforms.

If you are just going to dink around with small amounts of recording, midi, etc...then stay with the PC. It is much cheaper to deal with.

If you are planning on doing pro level work then I would suggest you move over to the mac.

Mac's have always done graphic arts and music better. Dunno why, just that all of the pro's that I ever met in those industries had the mac.

Just my opinion
 
And if someone was looking to buy a new PC, (as a lot of people will have to do now anyway, thanks to Vista's base hardware requirements,) then I think that, particularly with the full blown Windows compatibility, they'd be well advised to look at a Mac. Unless they needed a tablet.

Honestly, the word I hear about Vista is one of the things that would make me look harder at a Mac next time I need a computer. If Vista is anything like the utter bloatware it's said to be, I would feel some reluctance to support it. I certainly have ZERO intention of "upgrading" to Vista on either of my current XP machines.

And I have to admit, I love going in the local Apple store. If someone gave me one of those 17" notebooks or one of those new dual-processor desktops, I'd be all over it like white on rice.
 
i'll restate what i have already said. you can use either, and both will work fine for audio. but on a PC, you have a much much higher chance of having general computer problems such as viruses, malware, spyware, serious security holes, and problems with hardware interoperability. personally, i'd rather spend my time recording than being a sys admin.
 
i'll restate what i have already said. you can use either, and both will work fine for audio. but on a PC, you have a much much higher chance of having general computer problems such as viruses, malware, spyware, serious security holes, and problems with hardware interoperability. personally, i'd rather spend my time recording than being a sys admin.
Fair and true enough, but a lot of that undesirable stuff can be avoided by not hooking up your PC computer to the Internet. True, that's not an option for those who need to use a single computer for everything, but it is an option if you have a dedicated machine. My recording PC has never seen the Internet and doesn't even know what it is; consequently, and not surprisingly, I've never had an issue with viruses, spyware, or malware. It's nonetheless true that even having to think and worry about that stuff at all, even if you've managed a way to avoid it, is an inconvenience in itself.