|
|
|
10-14-2014, 09:11 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22,567
|
Mac vs. PC benchmarks
Ok, let's avoid windows vs. OSX debates (won't happen, I know)
and let's please avoid the fact that most windows machines are crap
are there any differences between a mac machine and a PC that should make me just buy a mac and run windows on it vs. building my own windows machine (custom windows machines have performed amazingly well for me ((and still do, mind you)) since 2008)...
are there any possible benchmarks between similarly spec'd pcs or is it really just dependent upon the OS?
and in that way, are there things about the OS that make is perform worse than one or the other?
Don't talk viruses, haven't had one in a decade
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 09:37 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,509
|
As far as hardware goes I don't think there is much difference. My son has a MacPro and he has his problems, I have my issues on a PC, too. Most of our problems are the same i.e., ram, hdd, monitors, etc.
The biggest difference I see between his system and mine is the availability of software. And, now that Macs have Intel chips and can run windows, I don't know if the "proprietory" software thing is an issue anymore or not.
Should be an interesting thread...as long as the "loyalty" thing doesn't get in the way.
cliff
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 09:53 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,630
|
10 years ago, there may have been a bigger opinion divide among users. I began using Macs in 1993 and love the ease of use and the "look" of the interfaces of Mac software (yes, it often differs aesthetically), so I still prefer to use Macs for everything. However, I built a PC specifically for using Reaper and found that the primary PC (desktop model) advantages are:
1) lower cost to build
2) greater backward compatibility (I still use an RME PCI card/UAD-1 with it.)
As far as performance goes, I suspect that an Intel i7 chip is an Intel i7 chip.
At this point in computer music making history, I don't really think that you can lose. However, I resent that Mac made my audio hardware obsolete so fast, only to change, then abandon, formats that would have required further hardware purchases (PCI-x). For that reason, I am rebelling by suggesting that you buy a PC.
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 10:04 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: nyc
Posts: 35
|
Despite my myriad problems with Macs over the years, I don't think there's much difference in the hardware these days except the price premium you pay for going with Apple and their support. Upgrading on a Win box is a bit cheaper and more flexible as well. Still, the hardware/upgrade limit is the motherboard's chipset and that's not exclusive to either platform.
That said, the main concern for me personally would be the available software and drivers. I'd suggest lurking and searching for issues with whatever audio hardware you're using or plan to use for either platform. Audio interfaces, USB controllers, stuff like that.
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 10:07 AM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,562
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
Ok, let's avoid windows vs. OSX debates (won't happen, I know)
and let's please avoid the fact that most windows machines are crap
are there any differences between a mac machine and a PC that should make me just buy a mac and run windows on it vs. building my own windows machine (custom windows machines have performed amazingly well for me ((and still do, mind you)) since 2008)...
are there any possible benchmarks between similarly spec'd pcs or is it really just dependent upon the OS?
and in that way, are there things about the OS that make is perform worse than one or the other?
Don't talk viruses, haven't had one in a decade
|
I ran the Windows version of Reaper on my i7 a while ago after seeing a post claiming slower graphics on the Mac version. It was not a fair test in that I didn't spend time optimizing anything specific to the Windows side. I don't know the OS and have zero motivation to give it any time. The graphics response in the Windows version was... broken vs. what I'm used to in OSX. Clearly something needed to be optimized. Never had anything close to such laggy GUI behavior in OSX right out of the box. Only had to start paying attention to preference settings after going well over 100 tracks and 100 plugins with HD audio.
Take that for what it's worth but I think it's not only the hardware. The OS is part of the equation too. I'd get quality hardware (either Apple or DIY) to start and if you go DIY, make sure you give yourself the option to install OSX (Hackintosh). No sense limiting your options right?
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 01:47 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
a while back i ran into a wall using reaper on my older mac pro. i had windows 7 in a bootcamp partition on the same machine. out of curiosity, i switched the stalled project over and opened it on the windows side and was, pleasantly, surprised to find that it ran fine. the mac pro is a server class machine so i never really bothered with a lot of optimization on osx or w7. i just found that w7 ran memory much more efficiently.
eventually, i ran into the same wall in w7 and had to get a new machine. it did run longer on the w7 side, though, without hitting that wall.
as for the new machine, i was a bit perplexed by the issue of whether to get a new mac or pc. how to compare? for that i turned to the hackintosh community. not that there are absolute and direct comparisons, just thought it would offer some comparisons as the same hardware would be running both systems. wound up building my own hackintosh, originally thinking i would NOT run osx on it. i had just wanted to use the hackintosh info to compare systems. i'd been thinking i'd continue to run osx on the old mac pro and run w7 on the new pc. an additional gear failure (matrox triplehead2go) made the continued use of the mac pro impractical and i ended up installing osx on the new pc. i was able to do this because i'd made the build entirely from hackintosh-compatible parts.
final build cost about $2700us, far cheaper than a new mac pro, and allowed me to make use of parts i'd had and wanted to use forever, mainly a rack-mount server case. i'd always been annoyed by the lack of ability to easily rack mount my mac pro. no longer a problem. displays would have been a problem with a new mac pro too. worked out fine with the existing setup and the new pc.
bottom line, for me, mac pro is quieter (only slightly), probably more sturdily built but limits how other gear is employed. pc seems MUCH more flexible in the way i can integrate with other gear. this last point saved a LOT of money and allowed me to design my equipment lay out in a manner more to my liking.
BabaG
|
|
|
10-14-2014, 07:43 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 121
|
If you are one that knows how to build you aren't going to get close to the performance in something off the shelf for twice the price in my opinion. I mean you obviously know that most of that off the rack crap is just that and when you open them up and see the tiny PSU or the puny motherboard you have very limited options. Most of them rely heavily on the CPU meaning that graphics and sound eat into clock cycles and upgrading just adds cost if you can even do it.
Just build one.
Now the only caveat is that I bought a dual quad core Xeon editing workstation off of e-Bay from one of those places that sell refurbed office machines. I got it for about $1200 and the same machine was still going to for about $5k on the manufacturer's website. It's been great for a few years now and that's the only time that I'd take the plunge on anything that's already built because I couldn't do better buying the parts myself at the time.
Use the skills you are blessed with.
__________________
Just here to steal all of your knowledge
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 05:31 AM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 370
|
short unbiased checklist :
- how many internal drives can you connect ?
- how many USB2 / USB3 / maybe FW ports (if needed) ?
- how many free PCIe / PCI slots ?
- what's the cost of adding standard expansions (a Raid controller, a USB3 card, 2nd NIC etc), another VGA ?
- what are your addon card and replacement parts choices ?
- how about backwards compatibility over years ?
- no need to think about software availability, price and stuff at this point anymore, I guess.
ymmv,
Rhino
Last edited by ProfRhino; 10-15-2014 at 05:38 AM.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:20 AM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22,567
|
ok so let's talk about under the hood OSX vs. windows then -
with real time processing, multiprocessing - are there PERFORMANCE features that make one better than another?
Of course, this would have to be SIGNIFICANTLY different in order for me to even consider switching as my entire workflow is windows-based.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:56 AM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 8,062
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
with real time processing, multiprocessing - are there PERFORMANCE features that make one better than another?
|
This is tricky because even with Intel Macs, you are not running the same machine code in the user software between Windows and OS-X because the compilers used will most likely be very different. (Some OS-X developers are still stuck using a VERY old version of GCC/g++, while a much better and modern C++ compiler called Clang exists and is the only one officially supported by Apple now.)
As far as general system performance features go, anything that is better on OS-X compared to Windows (or vice versa) is likely to be counteracted by some other issue that makes something else worse. The only way to know for sure which system is better for you, would be to test yourself with the softwares you will be using...
__________________
I am no longer part of the REAPER community. Please don't contact me with any REAPER-related issues.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 10:25 AM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
some insight can be gleaned also from company policy. it's often pointed out that the newest mac pro is quite expensive. it's less often mentioned why. as i understand it, the graphics cards in those machines add hugely to their expense as they boast the ability to run up to three 4k streams simultaneously. this would appear to indicate an emphasis on video and video editing. does a daw builder/buyer really need this kind of functionality/expense?
thanks,
BabaG
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 10:41 AM
|
#12
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,957
|
If you are looking at laptops then its a Mac by a mile.
For desktops, I agree with others that you will get more bang for your buck building a custom PC especially if you know what you're doing - and it sounds like you do.
I've been rolling my own PC's since the late 90's and they always served me very well.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 10:47 AM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
excellent point about the laptops.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 11:05 AM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,206
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
are there any differences between a mac machine and a PC that should make me just buy a mac and run windows on it vs. building my own windows machine (custom windows machines have performed amazingly well for me ((and still do, mind you)) since 2008)...
are there any possible benchmarks between similarly spec'd pcs or is it really just dependent upon the OS?
|
Since both machines uses more and more of the same hardware components, I would think performance differences are more in the software (and settings) than in the hardware.
One central factor is the economy. Macs comes pre-loaded with pretty much anything anyone will need (except for very specific needs) in terms of connectivity, compatibility, ports, standards, high performance screen etc. So, it's fair to say that several of those you will never use during the time you use that mac.
That's perhaps the main reason why macs are referred to as more expensive. It would cost just as much to equip a windows PC with the same array of assets/quality. But on PC you choose which ones you need, and the quality you need, and don't spend money on the ones you won't use. Though, if you do buy a new asset you'll have to roll up your sleeves and install/get it working.
This is a central difference of usage perspective, to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
and let's please avoid the fact that most windows machines are crap
|
How unbiased
Last edited by Colox; 10-15-2014 at 11:19 AM.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 11:08 AM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 534
|
I'm a former PC user that switched to Macs back in 2003. Went through a G5 tower, an iMac and several MacBooks. My 2009 17" MacBook Pro has been my workhorse machine (made lots of music and edited several broadcast television shows and commercials) until I built a higher end Hackintosh tower in early 2013.
I spent about $2800 altogether (the SSD drives were spendy at the time), and it's been nothing but a positive experience. I have card slots open, and can upgrade the ram, video card, etc when I feel I need to. I will say my original build still performs like a champ, and I haven't been able to break it with Premiere, FCPX, Pro Tools or Logic. Reaper, of course, doesn't break a sweat.
I keep saying I'm going to upgrade my GPU to the latest/greatest, but at this point, it's a want and not a need. I can see going another 2 years with this system before I have to think about making any serious changes or upgrades.
tg
__________________
Mac Studio M1 MAX / 64GB / 2TB HD / macOS Ventura 13.6.3 / RME BabyFace Pro FS / SSL UF8 + UF1 + UC1 / Roland SYSTEM 8 / Kontrol S61 mk3 / Keylab 61 mkII / Komplete 14 / Omnisphere / Keyscape / Trilian / V Collection X / UVI Falcon
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 05:06 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montréal, Québec province in Canada
Posts: 150
|
Maybe a year ago, there was a project called "CPUKiller" or something like that here on the forums: it was like 100 tracks of record armed audio tracks I think.
On my MBP early 2011 13 inches: took a while to open (more than a minute) and CPU usage was higher than W7 on the same hardware.
In W7 bootcamped, opened almost instantly and CPU usage was something like half OSX (Lion)...
For what it is worth, it was an older version of Reaper (maybe 4.33, not sure).
YMMV
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:09 PM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22,567
|
it's not unbiased. most windows machines ARE crap and most macs are awesome. hardware wise.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:25 PM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
while that may be true, it's worth examining the philosophy underlying it. macs, and i'm thinking particularly of the mac pro as that's what i've had until recently, are server class machines. the idea is that of a workhorse. you buy it and can forget about it for a long time and focus on getting your work done.
pcs, on the other hand, are generally made from cheaper parts that may not last as long or be as trouble-free. i used my mac pro for something like 6.5 years without ever thinking much about it. pcs, though, i tend to upgrade and switch out parts on much more frequently.
i found that the reliability of the mac tended to allow me to let it fall behind until it was very much underpowered for the current workload. that might not have happened in a pc environment as i'd likely be continually sprucing it up.
one can, of course, build a pc that's just as robust as any mac pro and it will cost as much as a mac pro. with my recent build, i decided to go back to the pc mode of working, keeping options for upgrading more open. it just depends on how you want to handle the maintenance of your studio. are you hands-on, or not? bottom line, i'd say the answer to the original question is no, there is no single big thing offered in the mac world that would obviate the efficacy of a pc. it's a question of philosophy and how you want to work.
and, don't forget, you can always get a server from somebody like hp or dell that should, pretty much, match any mac and you'd likely have more options.
i'll close by saying that one thing that put me off of apple was when they refused to sell me a logic board for my mac pro. who owns the machine? they said they'd sell me one but not let me install it. that and the inability to rack mount the mac pro really irritated me.
BabaG
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:27 PM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 5,635
|
You're chasing mice, Jason. The question you should be asking isn't "Which one is more performant?" You should be asking "Is what I have perfomant enough for what I do?" If yes, keep on keepin' on. If no, then there are other factors to consider when you upgrade, and #1 is...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
..my entire workflow is windows-based.
|
I think you have your answer right there. Pretty much any new 'puter is going to have enough oomph to do the job. So if you prefer the Windows workflow, I don't know why you'd want to switch.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:29 PM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,227
|
i agree.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 06:36 PM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 913
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill
it's not unbiased. most windows machines ARE crap and most macs are awesome. hardware wise.
|
There all made in China now and pretty much the same crap. At least you can more easily fix a Windoze machine. Apple even solders in RAM in some of the machines.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 07:36 PM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,206
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsampson
Apple even solders in RAM in some of the machines.
|
Really? This true? Sounds radical to me.
If so, do you forfeit any warranty if you heat up the solder and remove the RAM sticks - even for just inspection?
Last edited by Colox; 10-15-2014 at 07:47 PM.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 07:37 PM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 22,567
|
im just saying the vast majority of machines that run windows are pretty bog standard email machines. Not serious machines. That's totally fine - that's what average people need.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 07:46 PM
|
#24
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,859
|
If you're talking hardware, then for a specific machine type (desktop, laptop, ultrabook), you need to know which SPECIFIC hardware mac uses.
- Which cpus?
- Which chipsets and motherboards?
- Which ram?
- Which disks?
- Which video cards?
- Which audio codec?
- Which network/wifi cards?
If you can't find these things out, then you can't compare performance data...just pissing in the wind.
You should also consider the firmware (bios/uefi) for when it comes time to deal with performance options, maintenance, and upgrades. Is the firmware locked down? Is it unlockable? Does mac whitelist certain hardware? It's going to be a bummer if you need to tinker with powerstates if the firmware is locked, or use hardware that isn't allowed.
I would very much think that for the same money you would pay for a mac, you could build a higher performing machine (desktop or laptop) with better configurability, and maintenance/upgrade options. And if you want to run osx, you could go the hackintosh route (select hardware that will work with osx).
__________________
It's time to take a stand against the synthesizer.
Last edited by brainwreck; 10-15-2014 at 07:54 PM.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 08:23 PM
|
#25
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New York
Posts: 387
|
Nowadays, the biggest difference between PC and Mac is the user.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 09:28 PM
|
#26
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
|
Quote:
it's not unbiased. most windows machines ARE crap and most macs are awesome. hardware wise.
|
It's pretty simple really. One places the responsibility of hardware outside the company the other within it. Both have advantages and disadvantages. It would have never been possible to put "a computer in every home" with only expensive top quality hardware controlled by the maker of the OS, conversely it would never have been possible to originally "own" the publishing world and the like without that tight control over both OS and hardware. However...
The big point is hardware is hardware, choose good hardware, it ain't about the OS these days other than what jives best with the individual.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 10-15-2014 at 09:37 PM.
|
|
|
10-15-2014, 10:56 PM
|
#27
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 232
|
I will say this though the reason why Apple had a strangle hold of the media industry is quite simply -inside deals-.
I said HAD!! as they are finished in the Media editing side nowadays.
As Apple ventures further away from computers where real work is done, I believe it's mac users who are behind the cross hairs right now.
Final Cut X was the last straw for many Studios as they have had enough of Apple breaking of software and software stopping to work on just a .1 OS update.
Apple is making cell phones now, they really don't want Pro's to use their Machines anymore, as Pro's do not update every 6 months ( Iphone, Ipad crap)
Apple has been dumping the Pro users for many years now.
I thought about switching then came the reality as half of the applications I use are not available on the Mac even today.
Pro users have already switched, Studios have already dumped the Mac Pro's.
The next 5 years are going to be very interesting as Linux is heading nowhere with so many forks and it all comes down to Windows and PC hardware as everyone else abandoned ship.....
You can not blame Apple for dumping the Pro's, as Apple is making a killing off the cell phone sales.
Apple is not a "computer" company anymore, they are a small device selling company and $500 computers is not making any money and Apple knows this well, and thus this is why the death of the Mac Pro Desktop is coming since Everyone now can make amazing work even with a $500 PC
First you deny it, then you question it and in the end you do what every Studio out there did with the Final Cut X fiasco, SWITCH.
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 06:00 AM
|
#28
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Surrounded by the Great Lakes
Posts: 146
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic
It's pretty simple really. One places the responsibility of hardware outside the company the other within it. Both have advantages and disadvantages. It would have never been possible to put "a computer in every home" with only expensive top quality hardware controlled by the maker of the OS, conversely it would never have been possible to originally "own" the publishing world and the like without that tight control over both OS and hardware. However...
The big point is hardware is hardware, choose good hardware, it ain't about the OS these days other than what jives best with the individual.
|
Karbomusic, nice summary. You nailed it! Most PCs sold in the big box stores are geared toward the home internet user. Many PC manufacturers do make higher end models and yes they cost a fair bit more. Generally, you get what you pay for. As for operating systems, both OS X and Windows are pretty darn solid these days. Go with what you're comfortable with.
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 06:35 AM
|
#29
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,551
|
I run Bootcamp Vista on my MacBook and it's... Windows. It performs fine, it's just Windows running on an Intel chip.
Having said that, Apple's hardware is maybe set to cross over a certain lower level threshold, which may be why they cost a little more. Not that PC's can't use the same hardware, more that Apple simply doesn't build anything really cheap hardware wise.
For example: My old MacBook soundcard does things that none of my other Windows laptops did, expose the stereo mix output. That's something that only shows up on my Window's desktops. I imagine that Apple put a better soudcard in the MacBook than is typical for cheaper Win laptops. My little white MacBook cost more than my desktop IIRC.
But yeah, the $1000 I paid for my Gateway desktop gaming system that I use as my studio system, the system configuration, would not have even been possible at that price for a Mac. The only thing Apple even sells in that price range or lower is Mac Mini's and iPads. The $1200 iMacs didn't even compare for speed and ram and similar. (but of course, the monitor comes with it so that balances out the price a bit if you actually do need a monitor, which I didn't)
One reason to buy a Mac and put Windows on it is to have access to software from both. I mean, there's Camtasia and there's Screenflow, much the same thing but Screenflow is a good bit less expensive. How many OSX apps you might buy to save money over similar Win apps like that might help balance out the higher cost of Mac + the additional cost of buying a Windows license.
Last edited by Lawrence; 10-16-2014 at 07:00 AM.
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 07:16 AM
|
#30
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 46
|
Also Apple develops OSX against a smaller fixed set of hardware components whereas Windows has to work with far greater combinations of hardware.
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 09:49 AM
|
#31
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 534
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelC
I will say this though the reason why Apple had a strangle hold of the media industry is quite simply -inside deals-.
I said HAD!! as they are finished in the Media editing side nowadays.
First you deny it, then you question it and in the end you do what every Studio out there did with the Final Cut X fiasco, SWITCH.
|
I'll admit, Apple handled the X launch badly, but it has matured, and I use it daily for commercial work. I also use Premiere as well. Like the PT vs Reaper thread on here, it doesn't really matter what DAW or NLE you use. I can tell a story on both. I just happen to work better and faster on X. Use what works for you and get the job done.
Macs are still prevalent in broadcast television, and while many houses have switched NLE's, they're still working on Macs. The thought is why spend even more money replacing perfectly good machines?
At our broadcast facility, we happen to have one of the new MacPro trashcans. It's a monster machine. Will I have one at home? Nope. Too expensive, and my Hackintosh is more than up to the task, and I can upgrade it.
tg
__________________
Mac Studio M1 MAX / 64GB / 2TB HD / macOS Ventura 13.6.3 / RME BabyFace Pro FS / SSL UF8 + UF1 + UC1 / Roland SYSTEM 8 / Kontrol S61 mk3 / Keylab 61 mkII / Komplete 14 / Omnisphere / Keyscape / Trilian / V Collection X / UVI Falcon
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 10:24 AM
|
#32
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colox
Really? This true? Sounds radical to me.
If so, do you forfeit any warranty if you heat up the solder and remove the RAM sticks - even for just inspection?
|
This is true for all recent Apple laptops. And even if you think about desoldering, they are not in sockets anymore, just plain SMD chips on the logic board. It's not a very bad thing, from Apple's point of view, because SODIMM connectors need care and ram almost never breaks. So that's one less part to worry about.
The battery is no longer user replaceable, but prices for replacement service are lower (99 $) than the price of a battery used to be. Apple seems to have concluded no one uses a second battery. And battery lifetime has improved a lot, so it's not so weird.
And Apple does build cheap stuff that is better than most competitors: their routers are very good. You'll always be able to find better range or throughput, but nothing compares to their ease of use, or the fact that the Express has an audio out port...
|
|
|
10-16-2014, 12:20 PM
|
#33
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
|
Quote:
I will say this though the reason why Apple had a strangle hold of the media industry is quite simply -inside deals-.
|
Probably, that's competition good/bad/ugly but not what I was getting at.
The simpler bigger idea is controlling the hardware forces some practices to simply not occur such as cobbling together a machine out of the cheapest, worst, mismatched parts available, along with the crappiest drivers someone could possibly write just so they can legally be called drivers, then hoping they'll run flawlessly on an infinite number of combinations of that same shitty hardware all for $599. Sound familiar?
Preventing that logically and sensibly breeds stability, not doing that logically and sensibly breeds contention for those who don't like proprietary and want choices. Choose your collective demon as there is no perfect method that makes everyone happy.
That's really what I'm describing and is a well known idea, you either control the hardware so you can keep it extremely tightly integrated or you open it up to allow more choices and diversity. Shall we count how many times someone says "its a driver problem" with Mac vs PC? That's why.
Lastly, I simply picked a market that Macs were strong in, it didn't really matter which one it was since that is secondary to what I'm trying to get across.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 10-16-2014 at 12:26 PM.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:33 AM.
|