Array
01-13-2003, 06:39 AM
http://www.robgalbraith.com/diginews/2003-01/2003_01_07_macpc.html
View Full Version : ANOTHER scientific Mac vs PC article
|
|
Saurus
01-13-2003, 07:03 AM
Pretty good stuff, considering Alienware 3.06 is not yet set up for hyperthread. Also, a similar system at a cheaper price should be coming out from Sager laptops
Saurus
Saurus
stephen2002
01-13-2003, 10:50 PM
yet another reason not to "switch" Thanks for that link.
finearts2
01-14-2003, 02:27 AM
Is't SOOOO funny how people need the speed. Just to let you all know in the PC world, take ONE photo spread sheet for layout and go to your local service bureau and enjoy the laughter and giggles when they say "please don't tell me you color corrected on a PC"
Speed ain't everything, and I don't care if some slave labor Dell PC made my rendering faster. If my mac is slower, I can do something that most PC'ers can't, I multitask.
Just waiting when Apple makes a iclue so I can give to my PC friends!:)
Speed ain't everything, and I don't care if some slave labor Dell PC made my rendering faster. If my mac is slower, I can do something that most PC'ers can't, I multitask.
Just waiting when Apple makes a iclue so I can give to my PC friends!:)
Chris
01-14-2003, 02:40 AM
talk about flamebait. I hate it when people make meaningless statements not altogether based on anything like reality... :shrug: :) however, each to his own...
PC's have always multitasked much better than Macintoshes, the mac guys at our studio regularly come in & say things like: "You mean you are rendering, surfing the net & burning a CD at the same time?!? I wish I could do that"
As for colour correction, the PC system I work on for graphic design work is pretty flawless really, its definately not a hassle - I set up jobs constantly for all sorts of print production digital, offset, screening etc & dont have any colour reproduction hassles. The biggest hassle I have is getting in files from the local mac users at agencys, who invariably forget to convert text to paths, or forget to include image files etc, which seems to boil down to a basic lack of understanding on what is actually going on with their files when they for example embed a font, or link an image file <sigh>
I do like the mac cases though! :)
PC's have always multitasked much better than Macintoshes, the mac guys at our studio regularly come in & say things like: "You mean you are rendering, surfing the net & burning a CD at the same time?!? I wish I could do that"
As for colour correction, the PC system I work on for graphic design work is pretty flawless really, its definately not a hassle - I set up jobs constantly for all sorts of print production digital, offset, screening etc & dont have any colour reproduction hassles. The biggest hassle I have is getting in files from the local mac users at agencys, who invariably forget to convert text to paths, or forget to include image files etc, which seems to boil down to a basic lack of understanding on what is actually going on with their files when they for example embed a font, or link an image file <sigh>
I do like the mac cases though! :)
Array
01-14-2003, 03:34 AM
Originally posted by finearts2
Is't SOOOO funny how people need the speed. Just to let you all know in the PC world, take ONE photo spread sheet for layout and go to your local service bureau and enjoy the laughter and giggles when they say "please don't tell me you color corrected on a PC"
Speed ain't everything, and I don't care if some slave labor Dell PC made my rendering faster. If my mac is slower, I can do something that most PC'ers can't, I multitask.
Just waiting when Apple makes a iclue so I can give to my PC friends!:)
Have you actually iLooked at your iLable on your iMac? Most likely it was made in Singapore.
In terms of people supposedly laughing at images color corrected on PC's, nuts to them. I bet they also laugh at people who dont drive gas guzzling SUV's and throw dirt at homeless people. What kind of a sad individual uses the type of PC they use as a status symbol?
Also, please explain to me how it is that PC's cant multitask? Right now im running 2 monitors displaying IRC, 2 mozilla windows, 4 AIM windows, and Photoshop. Am I missing something?
In terms of 3d content creation, speed is VERY important. Imagine rendering 100,000 frames. Lets say hypothetically a macintosh takes 10 seconds longer to render a frame than a PC of comprable price (im being generous), thats 1,000,000 extra seconds tacked on to your render time!
I'm also wondering if you even bothered to READ the whole article and the discussion that follows it. The author himself is a macintosh zealot who uses macs daily for digital photography work. He wrote the article to open the eyes of his fellow Mac users, so that more people can push Apple to drop the current processor line of G4's, and opt for something a bit speedier. He was also upset by the fact that Apple tends to give out a lot of inflated benchmarks under undisclosed conditions.
I did not post this article to encourage inflamatory disscussion (I should know better by now though that anything even mildly apple related ends up being a flame war :annoyed: ). I posted the article because I thought people would be genuinly interested in SCIENTIFIC results. I would also consider myself a bit of a mac fan ever since OSX. It truly is a next generation operating system, and I would not at all mind owning an iBook, but I would definately not use it for any graphics work.
Is't SOOOO funny how people need the speed. Just to let you all know in the PC world, take ONE photo spread sheet for layout and go to your local service bureau and enjoy the laughter and giggles when they say "please don't tell me you color corrected on a PC"
Speed ain't everything, and I don't care if some slave labor Dell PC made my rendering faster. If my mac is slower, I can do something that most PC'ers can't, I multitask.
Just waiting when Apple makes a iclue so I can give to my PC friends!:)
Have you actually iLooked at your iLable on your iMac? Most likely it was made in Singapore.
In terms of people supposedly laughing at images color corrected on PC's, nuts to them. I bet they also laugh at people who dont drive gas guzzling SUV's and throw dirt at homeless people. What kind of a sad individual uses the type of PC they use as a status symbol?
Also, please explain to me how it is that PC's cant multitask? Right now im running 2 monitors displaying IRC, 2 mozilla windows, 4 AIM windows, and Photoshop. Am I missing something?
In terms of 3d content creation, speed is VERY important. Imagine rendering 100,000 frames. Lets say hypothetically a macintosh takes 10 seconds longer to render a frame than a PC of comprable price (im being generous), thats 1,000,000 extra seconds tacked on to your render time!
I'm also wondering if you even bothered to READ the whole article and the discussion that follows it. The author himself is a macintosh zealot who uses macs daily for digital photography work. He wrote the article to open the eyes of his fellow Mac users, so that more people can push Apple to drop the current processor line of G4's, and opt for something a bit speedier. He was also upset by the fact that Apple tends to give out a lot of inflated benchmarks under undisclosed conditions.
I did not post this article to encourage inflamatory disscussion (I should know better by now though that anything even mildly apple related ends up being a flame war :annoyed: ). I posted the article because I thought people would be genuinly interested in SCIENTIFIC results. I would also consider myself a bit of a mac fan ever since OSX. It truly is a next generation operating system, and I would not at all mind owning an iBook, but I would definately not use it for any graphics work.
KingMob
01-14-2003, 04:07 AM
MY DAD COULD BEAT UP YOUR DAD!
wmendez
01-14-2003, 04:18 AM
And the Hulk can kick Things butt :cool:
KingMob
01-14-2003, 04:40 AM
yeah but hulk is REALLY cool.
he's got torn pants!
he's got torn pants!
jason-slab
01-14-2003, 04:41 AM
Originally posted by KingMob
MY DAD COULD BEAT UP YOUR DAD!
lol:applause:
MY DAD COULD BEAT UP YOUR DAD!
lol:applause:
finearts2
01-14-2003, 04:44 AM
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
Joviex
01-14-2003, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by finearts2
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
I grew up on apple, from the days of 4k total system memory and tape decks, through 300 baud modems on galacticomm BBS's to IIgs to the first 512k Color Mac. That was where I learnt that PC's were not the evil macinations people (read APPLE ZEALOTS) made them out to be. I was a card carring member in Stevie Jobs land till he left and afterwards, until I was enlightened.
From 1991-1996 Apple was in the shit can. Mix as many words as you want, it was pure crap compared to what a PC could do. Recently 1998-now, Apple has rallied.
I read that article and felt exactly like that guy. We use Apples and PC's in harmony here, but the sad fact of reality is, speed is UTMOST important in the DIGITAL age.
I see that apple has recently decided to deflate the most common nitpick PC users have, price, a bit, which is a good trend. Having that article should make people like you aware that MAC's aren't all that and a desktop -- er, iComputer. He was putting out a call in a good way to say, HEY, we need some more processing power. Ease of use never entered the thread.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
I grew up on apple, from the days of 4k total system memory and tape decks, through 300 baud modems on galacticomm BBS's to IIgs to the first 512k Color Mac. That was where I learnt that PC's were not the evil macinations people (read APPLE ZEALOTS) made them out to be. I was a card carring member in Stevie Jobs land till he left and afterwards, until I was enlightened.
From 1991-1996 Apple was in the shit can. Mix as many words as you want, it was pure crap compared to what a PC could do. Recently 1998-now, Apple has rallied.
I read that article and felt exactly like that guy. We use Apples and PC's in harmony here, but the sad fact of reality is, speed is UTMOST important in the DIGITAL age.
I see that apple has recently decided to deflate the most common nitpick PC users have, price, a bit, which is a good trend. Having that article should make people like you aware that MAC's aren't all that and a desktop -- er, iComputer. He was putting out a call in a good way to say, HEY, we need some more processing power. Ease of use never entered the thread.
Array
01-14-2003, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by finearts2
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
Did anyone here say that Mac users are idiots? No......
You yourself exhibited some interesting logic though. Your saying its a benefit that your computer is so slow that you have time to paint your house while you render an image? I dont know about you....but I like to stay focused as much as possible on the task at hand.
Also you bring up the point that you are quite a businessman with a worldwide clientelle? Tell me this, you need lots of computers to do a LOT of LARGE data processing (3d rendering, compositing, etc). Would you buy a room full of Apple Xservers or a room full of x86 linux boxen? Theres a good reason all production studios go with the latter. APPLE HARDWARE IS NOT COST EFFECTIVE IN A PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT! If they were, dont you think Steve Jobbs would bring Pixar Renderman back to the Apple platform?
Also, you make yourself out to be quite humble :rolleyes: how are you improving ANYONE's life by using Apple hardware? Moreso, how are you improving ANYONE's life by trolling this board?
You like apple? Great! So do I! But there is NO denying the paltry price/performance ratio exhibited by today's Apple products. The whole point of the article I posted was to raise awareness to this. Maybe you should read it again (or for the first time if you havent yet).
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
Did anyone here say that Mac users are idiots? No......
You yourself exhibited some interesting logic though. Your saying its a benefit that your computer is so slow that you have time to paint your house while you render an image? I dont know about you....but I like to stay focused as much as possible on the task at hand.
Also you bring up the point that you are quite a businessman with a worldwide clientelle? Tell me this, you need lots of computers to do a LOT of LARGE data processing (3d rendering, compositing, etc). Would you buy a room full of Apple Xservers or a room full of x86 linux boxen? Theres a good reason all production studios go with the latter. APPLE HARDWARE IS NOT COST EFFECTIVE IN A PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT! If they were, dont you think Steve Jobbs would bring Pixar Renderman back to the Apple platform?
Also, you make yourself out to be quite humble :rolleyes: how are you improving ANYONE's life by using Apple hardware? Moreso, how are you improving ANYONE's life by trolling this board?
You like apple? Great! So do I! But there is NO denying the paltry price/performance ratio exhibited by today's Apple products. The whole point of the article I posted was to raise awareness to this. Maybe you should read it again (or for the first time if you havent yet).
KingMob
01-14-2003, 06:34 AM
"When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.) "
I like mac's, and I usually ignore or make fun of this sort of thread.
But that is the most insane thing I have ever read...and I have read some pretty crazy stuff.
:surprised
I like mac's, and I usually ignore or make fun of this sort of thread.
But that is the most insane thing I have ever read...and I have read some pretty crazy stuff.
:surprised
Gentle Fury
01-14-2003, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by finearts2
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
hahahahahahaha
yer kidding right???
you are actually saying slow is better because you have time to do other things??? Well if i want to do other things like paint a house or anything else that needs to get done on a computer............ummmmm, ill turn the computer off! But if im working i would like to continue working!!! Not be forced to take the day off because my comp cant handle a render and something else going on.
and WHAT the hell were you talking about PCs not being able to multi-task????? I have had many an occasion when i had Photoshop, Maya, Shake, many IE windows, AIM, Winamp, and Premiere all running at the same time with no problems..........maybe your multi-tasking phrase was completely unintended to be about what you can do on a comp.....but when we are talking about how fast a comp is it sure as hell should be!
Saying i would rather have a slow mac over a fast PC because it is more respectable to have a Mac is ridiculous!!! Its kinda like saying, well i never use a computer to type my work up on....i only use a typewriter! If my co-workers ever found out i used something that was faster and more convinient they would shoot me!!!!
honestly who really gives a crap what anyone thinks about what hardware you use......and if you really work with people that will shun your work because you did it on a windows ver of Photoshop 7 as opposed to a Mac ver (which are BOTH IDENTICAL!!!! and NOONE would ever be able to tell the difference!!!) then i think you really need to start hanging out with different people ;)
anyway, this has got to be one of the nerdiest debates i have ever taken part in....and my role is done ;)
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
I post this only because I'm just really sick of all the " mac people are idiots for paying for a slower, more expensive, blah, blah,blah.... My computer tests show I can render out a file 2 seconds faster on my dell with a, blah, blah, blah.... Guess what folks! In the next wave of computers released, your fastest computer you have won't be so fast. BIG WHOOP!
For all the service bureaus I delt with (Alot!! My company is worldwide) Not one of the 52 (I counted) would want anything other than a Mac format - it's just the standard in the publishing world.
But you know what, none of this really matters in the end.
I have a PC at work, and a Mac at my other work and at home. I don't own stock in only one company, although I do have a preference (guess which one) but I do have hope that when I look back at my life's work, I won't be the one saying " He who dies with the most toys (or fastest) wins. My life will be, " He who makes the lives of others better wins"
hahahahahahaha
yer kidding right???
you are actually saying slow is better because you have time to do other things??? Well if i want to do other things like paint a house or anything else that needs to get done on a computer............ummmmm, ill turn the computer off! But if im working i would like to continue working!!! Not be forced to take the day off because my comp cant handle a render and something else going on.
and WHAT the hell were you talking about PCs not being able to multi-task????? I have had many an occasion when i had Photoshop, Maya, Shake, many IE windows, AIM, Winamp, and Premiere all running at the same time with no problems..........maybe your multi-tasking phrase was completely unintended to be about what you can do on a comp.....but when we are talking about how fast a comp is it sure as hell should be!
Saying i would rather have a slow mac over a fast PC because it is more respectable to have a Mac is ridiculous!!! Its kinda like saying, well i never use a computer to type my work up on....i only use a typewriter! If my co-workers ever found out i used something that was faster and more convinient they would shoot me!!!!
honestly who really gives a crap what anyone thinks about what hardware you use......and if you really work with people that will shun your work because you did it on a windows ver of Photoshop 7 as opposed to a Mac ver (which are BOTH IDENTICAL!!!! and NOONE would ever be able to tell the difference!!!) then i think you really need to start hanging out with different people ;)
anyway, this has got to be one of the nerdiest debates i have ever taken part in....and my role is done ;)
finearts2
01-14-2003, 07:31 AM
What production enviroment do you speak of? I work (one of my jobs) at one of the biggest ad agencies in the world, and all they use is Macs. Speaking to IT department, they tell me the Mac systems we have saved the company a ton of money.
Two final points, 1) your right, why troll thru this and all other posts that have ' Another reason why PC's are the best bang for the money, etc...' No point in discussing anyones likes or dislikes , but for how some people didn't think I understand the article, it also doesn't seem like some people understand my point. IF only you are using the computer for 3d work, and I'm guessing for a big project that needs 100, 000 frames rendered in your examply ARRAY, sure, go for the gusto, get the most powerful rendering system you can get, although 2 render farms we deal with directly don't have any single machine over 1gig and they do quite well. but most people in the forums are probably not in that group. most people I've talked to have had no problems with walking away from the computer when prep prerendering to do other things (captain 3d rendered Pump action for ALONG time, and I'm sure he still managed to continue with his day job) The point is, any time someone posts a time comparison between systems and one is "faster" people start to think----- "yet another reason not to "switch" Thanks for that link."----- instead of looking at the real picture. Not one person can say if they are making a animation and while they render out all the frames that they sit and stare at the screen until it's finished. I bet most people get up and do something else or work on something else and let the rendering go on in the background. If they are rendering a photoshop image and the rendering is 6 minutes in a Mac and 4 minutes in PC it seems that in any article I read you lost 2 minutes. I don't lose 2 minutes if I'm prepping my next project or contacting a runner to deliver the finished piece during that time. Also the other way around.
2)I want to apologise to anyone if they feel offended. Not my intention to flame, just the interpretation of how one reads something, even if someone says something that can be helpful can also be looked at as hurtful Sometimes the spoken word conveys the sense of what the person wants to express more effectively than the written word.
Two final points, 1) your right, why troll thru this and all other posts that have ' Another reason why PC's are the best bang for the money, etc...' No point in discussing anyones likes or dislikes , but for how some people didn't think I understand the article, it also doesn't seem like some people understand my point. IF only you are using the computer for 3d work, and I'm guessing for a big project that needs 100, 000 frames rendered in your examply ARRAY, sure, go for the gusto, get the most powerful rendering system you can get, although 2 render farms we deal with directly don't have any single machine over 1gig and they do quite well. but most people in the forums are probably not in that group. most people I've talked to have had no problems with walking away from the computer when prep prerendering to do other things (captain 3d rendered Pump action for ALONG time, and I'm sure he still managed to continue with his day job) The point is, any time someone posts a time comparison between systems and one is "faster" people start to think----- "yet another reason not to "switch" Thanks for that link."----- instead of looking at the real picture. Not one person can say if they are making a animation and while they render out all the frames that they sit and stare at the screen until it's finished. I bet most people get up and do something else or work on something else and let the rendering go on in the background. If they are rendering a photoshop image and the rendering is 6 minutes in a Mac and 4 minutes in PC it seems that in any article I read you lost 2 minutes. I don't lose 2 minutes if I'm prepping my next project or contacting a runner to deliver the finished piece during that time. Also the other way around.
2)I want to apologise to anyone if they feel offended. Not my intention to flame, just the interpretation of how one reads something, even if someone says something that can be helpful can also be looked at as hurtful Sometimes the spoken word conveys the sense of what the person wants to express more effectively than the written word.
Sieb
01-14-2003, 07:50 AM
I read that article the other day. I don't pay much attention to benchmarks these days. A few seconds here and there doesn't make you a flat out winner in my book. I usually just read the conclusions for an opinion. I grew up with apples also so hold some good tidings with them. While I do agree that they need some more "umph" to add their appeal, getting away from the motorola/intel chipset would help alot. From what I hear, Moto has been dragging their feet. Hence the AMD bits that were floating around. And now, given that Jag is running a unix core, porting to a new chipset won't be that hard, just rewriting programs.. Yea yea, like that would ever happen.. But it has always been nice to look at macs as how PCs should be evolving. OSX has helped alot to pick up the pace for Macs. I would gladly spend a little extra on one of those 17" Powermacs and its impressive array of extras given the fact its an inch thick and an all aluminum case. Quite a bit more appealing than the massive square PC laptops like my gateway..
I used a G3 as a desktop replacement for a few months and was quite pleased once I got Jag on it. Its nice to boot something up and know it will work. And now the unix and X11 background integrates nicely with my servers instead of emulating everything in windows just to connect to them. And they have come along way in making everything more cross platform compatible file and networking wise.
While it would be nice to render a movie in 30 seconds on my uber Hyperthreading P4 Dell, you are also going to pay a higher premium for that power. Moreso than a mac of half its speed, but same capability. I have gone through my share if issues with PCs, and just having something nice, portable, and always working is more appealing to me than sheer speed. But everyones need is different, which is why I avoid the whole PC/Mac debate.
Multitasking wise, this isnt an issue anymore. OS9 used Co-operative multi tasking, everyone had their share of Processor time. Now with BSD as the core, its all preemptive scheduled multitasking. So that line between PCs and Macs has disappeared. More reason not to debate. Multimedia wise, Macs hold up great. Superdrive and 1394b.. wow..
There is something to be said about having limited hardware options considering they are all the best ones avaliable. Less hardware compatability issues. I am all for that, anything that keeps me from fiddeling with the insides.. I find mac users care more about doing their work and not worrying about anything else. As opposed to us PC users who are always worrying about something with the PC other than the work... The less to worry about, the better off you are. Having an OS that isn't a Windows clone thats nice to look at is a plus also.
This got a bit off topic, but I think they are all valid reasons that are never taken into account when comparissons are made. There is more to a setup than just how fast PS7 boots up.. Granted render times are an issue, but I am not going to make a movie on one machine either. You have to like what you are using first before you feel like investing anytime in doing work on it is how i see it..
I used a G3 as a desktop replacement for a few months and was quite pleased once I got Jag on it. Its nice to boot something up and know it will work. And now the unix and X11 background integrates nicely with my servers instead of emulating everything in windows just to connect to them. And they have come along way in making everything more cross platform compatible file and networking wise.
While it would be nice to render a movie in 30 seconds on my uber Hyperthreading P4 Dell, you are also going to pay a higher premium for that power. Moreso than a mac of half its speed, but same capability. I have gone through my share if issues with PCs, and just having something nice, portable, and always working is more appealing to me than sheer speed. But everyones need is different, which is why I avoid the whole PC/Mac debate.
Multitasking wise, this isnt an issue anymore. OS9 used Co-operative multi tasking, everyone had their share of Processor time. Now with BSD as the core, its all preemptive scheduled multitasking. So that line between PCs and Macs has disappeared. More reason not to debate. Multimedia wise, Macs hold up great. Superdrive and 1394b.. wow..
There is something to be said about having limited hardware options considering they are all the best ones avaliable. Less hardware compatability issues. I am all for that, anything that keeps me from fiddeling with the insides.. I find mac users care more about doing their work and not worrying about anything else. As opposed to us PC users who are always worrying about something with the PC other than the work... The less to worry about, the better off you are. Having an OS that isn't a Windows clone thats nice to look at is a plus also.
This got a bit off topic, but I think they are all valid reasons that are never taken into account when comparissons are made. There is more to a setup than just how fast PS7 boots up.. Granted render times are an issue, but I am not going to make a movie on one machine either. You have to like what you are using first before you feel like investing anytime in doing work on it is how i see it..
geoffr
01-14-2003, 09:05 AM
Point well put Sieb.
Can I also add that if the image is crap, it doesn't matter if it renders in an hour or an hour and ten minutes. The image will still be crap.
Have you all seen Rustboy? An old program used on a mac and it looks fantastic! You don't see Brian switching to Maya on a PC just because he can, he's sticking to the tools with which he's happy with.......... it would be nice if the tools were a bit quicker though ;-)
Can I also add that if the image is crap, it doesn't matter if it renders in an hour or an hour and ten minutes. The image will still be crap.
Have you all seen Rustboy? An old program used on a mac and it looks fantastic! You don't see Brian switching to Maya on a PC just because he can, he's sticking to the tools with which he's happy with.......... it would be nice if the tools were a bit quicker though ;-)
ggg
01-14-2003, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by finearts2
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
Athough I agree while writing on my old dual 550 that speed increase can sometimes be overrated and underused anyway, this has to be one of the most rediculous attempts to cover a statement I have read on this forum in a while. :surprised
Life is short.
When I say multitask, I mean while my Mac is rendering, I can perform other tasks (draw a new character, paint my house, or anything else that has to be done , not just on a computer! Funny how computer users think the phrase only relates to the digital world.)
Athough I agree while writing on my old dual 550 that speed increase can sometimes be overrated and underused anyway, this has to be one of the most rediculous attempts to cover a statement I have read on this forum in a while. :surprised
Life is short.
zen
01-14-2003, 02:31 PM
im not getting into this, im just tired of mac heads saying PC's dont work or are always crashing.
"nice to boot something up and know it will work" and etc.
Dont say PC's dont work. Say the truth, say you dont know how to configure one so that it will work properly, say that you need a system that is all setup or you cause you wouldnt know how to do it yourself, say you need your hardware chosen for you cause you wouldnt know what to look for or how to assemble it yourself. say that. But stop saying pc's dont work.
Ive seen my share of freezing/crashing macs too so...
"anything that keeps me from fiddeling with the insides.. "
...exactly.
"nice to boot something up and know it will work" and etc.
Dont say PC's dont work. Say the truth, say you dont know how to configure one so that it will work properly, say that you need a system that is all setup or you cause you wouldnt know how to do it yourself, say you need your hardware chosen for you cause you wouldnt know what to look for or how to assemble it yourself. say that. But stop saying pc's dont work.
Ive seen my share of freezing/crashing macs too so...
"anything that keeps me from fiddeling with the insides.. "
...exactly.
Sieb
01-14-2003, 04:57 PM
Dont say PC's dont work. Say the truth, say you dont know how to configure one so that it will work properly, say that you need a system that is all setup or ...
As if that comment was called for.. I won't wast time taking that comment personally but I will clarify my point. I said what I said because I have spent the last 5 years building computers and servers and have had to deal with all sorts of compatability issues that have nothing to do with me building the system (mostly just Via chipset issues). I have also had to deal with alot of bad hardware or dead hardware that was brand new. My point was about how much time it takes to work all the bugs out of a new system setup because of the sheer amount of combinations avaliable. I go through all the testing to make sure I find parts that work properly and work well together for end user systems. I also like upgrading and modifying what I have as a personal hobby. After doing this all day, it is nice to just have a computer I wont be tempted to mess with, and works easier than win/linux system that I have to work with on a daily basis..
Did I ever say PCs suck because they crash? No. I will take a PC desktop over a mac destop anyday. Its what I am acustomed to using. Most of my comments were directed at laptops. I am well aware that Macs crash too but with the time I have spent working with them, it has happend far fewer times than with PC machines. OSX helped improve Macs reputation alot in this area as I have had my share of OS9 crashes. Then again, the linux servers I run have never crashed.. go figure. A testament to Unix. But I also have yet to have a Windows XP system blue screen with useless errors unlike 98 or 2k. The few times it has, its been a simple driver issue. I praise XP just as much as I do OSX.
The overall goal I was trying to achieve with my previous post was that most people only pay attention to the numbers which don't always tell the truth, nor are they always fair, which is why I hardly pay attention to benchmark comparisons. Most forget to mention the fact that they are completely different chipsets between PCs and Macs where thier speed isnt always an indication of performance. Especially when x86s have SSE and such added in. Ease of use, asthetics, and capabilities go alot farther IMHO than a few seconds faster render times. If I know the system isnt going to crap out on me right at the end of a render due to some stupid video driver or memory hole issue, then I might be more inclined to use it.
As if that comment was called for.. I won't wast time taking that comment personally but I will clarify my point. I said what I said because I have spent the last 5 years building computers and servers and have had to deal with all sorts of compatability issues that have nothing to do with me building the system (mostly just Via chipset issues). I have also had to deal with alot of bad hardware or dead hardware that was brand new. My point was about how much time it takes to work all the bugs out of a new system setup because of the sheer amount of combinations avaliable. I go through all the testing to make sure I find parts that work properly and work well together for end user systems. I also like upgrading and modifying what I have as a personal hobby. After doing this all day, it is nice to just have a computer I wont be tempted to mess with, and works easier than win/linux system that I have to work with on a daily basis..
Did I ever say PCs suck because they crash? No. I will take a PC desktop over a mac destop anyday. Its what I am acustomed to using. Most of my comments were directed at laptops. I am well aware that Macs crash too but with the time I have spent working with them, it has happend far fewer times than with PC machines. OSX helped improve Macs reputation alot in this area as I have had my share of OS9 crashes. Then again, the linux servers I run have never crashed.. go figure. A testament to Unix. But I also have yet to have a Windows XP system blue screen with useless errors unlike 98 or 2k. The few times it has, its been a simple driver issue. I praise XP just as much as I do OSX.
The overall goal I was trying to achieve with my previous post was that most people only pay attention to the numbers which don't always tell the truth, nor are they always fair, which is why I hardly pay attention to benchmark comparisons. Most forget to mention the fact that they are completely different chipsets between PCs and Macs where thier speed isnt always an indication of performance. Especially when x86s have SSE and such added in. Ease of use, asthetics, and capabilities go alot farther IMHO than a few seconds faster render times. If I know the system isnt going to crap out on me right at the end of a render due to some stupid video driver or memory hole issue, then I might be more inclined to use it.
wgreenlee1
01-14-2003, 06:03 PM
Sweet.......................
gmask
01-14-2003, 06:30 PM
>>>Most forget to mention the fact that they are completely different chipsets between PCs and Macs where thier speed isnt always an indication of performance.
Yo cannot simply look at the number that is true but I think this guys comparison is valid as he taking the same apps and timing them ont he different platforms. Likewise it would be fair to look at the render times betwen apps that run on both PC and Mac.
>>>Ease of use, asthetics, and capabilities go alot farther IMHO than a few seconds faster render times.
If you need several hundred systems then asthetics are meaning less , cost is a big issue and seconds do matter.
>>>If I know the system isnt going to crap out on me right at the end of a render due to some stupid video driver or memory hole issue, then I might be more inclined to use it.
The biggest problem I have had with PC's is with Ram.. although I have had my share of them ont he mac as well. I will say that the current mac tower is the easiest machine to get into they ahve ever made. I hated the 9500's what a pain in the arse. For your first computer you should buy a complete system. It would be a big mistake for a new user to buy seperate compnenets and try to get it right. From my experience if you buy from vendors that test the components for compatibility you'll be safe with building your own PC but I think often people will try to frankenstein it by buying from every place that has the cheapest this and that and that will get you burned. The fact that their are so many vendors for PC's does make them cheaper and Mac has allways had a lower DOA rate but it's not like the average PC will hop up and jump off your desk into the trash can. Buy goo dmemory an dnot generic for love of joe! I can only hope that MacOSX is stable as the previous OS blew chunks and I was sick of having to restart dozens of times during a workday. On a PC I I may not reboot all week(not a good idea but what the hey).
If you want asthetics you have options with PC whereas with the mac you only have theirs to pick from.
Yo cannot simply look at the number that is true but I think this guys comparison is valid as he taking the same apps and timing them ont he different platforms. Likewise it would be fair to look at the render times betwen apps that run on both PC and Mac.
>>>Ease of use, asthetics, and capabilities go alot farther IMHO than a few seconds faster render times.
If you need several hundred systems then asthetics are meaning less , cost is a big issue and seconds do matter.
>>>If I know the system isnt going to crap out on me right at the end of a render due to some stupid video driver or memory hole issue, then I might be more inclined to use it.
The biggest problem I have had with PC's is with Ram.. although I have had my share of them ont he mac as well. I will say that the current mac tower is the easiest machine to get into they ahve ever made. I hated the 9500's what a pain in the arse. For your first computer you should buy a complete system. It would be a big mistake for a new user to buy seperate compnenets and try to get it right. From my experience if you buy from vendors that test the components for compatibility you'll be safe with building your own PC but I think often people will try to frankenstein it by buying from every place that has the cheapest this and that and that will get you burned. The fact that their are so many vendors for PC's does make them cheaper and Mac has allways had a lower DOA rate but it's not like the average PC will hop up and jump off your desk into the trash can. Buy goo dmemory an dnot generic for love of joe! I can only hope that MacOSX is stable as the previous OS blew chunks and I was sick of having to restart dozens of times during a workday. On a PC I I may not reboot all week(not a good idea but what the hey).
If you want asthetics you have options with PC whereas with the mac you only have theirs to pick from.
Sieb
01-14-2003, 06:52 PM
Yo cannot simply look at the number that is true but I think this guys comparison is valid as he taking the same apps and timing them ont he different platforms. Likewise it would be fair to look at the render times betwen apps that run on both PC and Mac.
I agree, I did thumb through the benchmarks but I see so many I only see numbers and lines anymore. hehe I put more value into the conclusion at the end and what the author has to say. But at the same time, optimization of apps gets in the way of valid marks. But the optimization has something to be said for PCs. Macs still lack the optimization like SSE(2).
If you need several hundred systems then asthetics are meaning less , cost is a big issue and seconds do matter.
I agree here too, but as I said, a Mac destop will never replace my PC desktop due to the time and investment I have already made in hardware and software for my PC systems. But at the same time, with Macs closed development and ease of use, IT costs are lessened as compared to PCs, which means more to some companies as opposed to render times. And macs will never replace a pure renderfarm either. Linux holds alot here already in its ability for large scale deployment. But for general daily use of PS or office in an design environment, I see macs flurishing just because of the less hassle to maintain.
And like I said before, Apple has been able to put more effort into the form follows function rule. They have something that works, and have spent the time to make it more than just a biege box that everyone is afraid of. I give them props for their achievement as I wish the PC world would take a clue.
If you want asthetics you have options with PC whereas with the mac you only have theirs to pick from.
Well, the asthetics in the PC area are all cheesy to me (imac copies), but they still all revolve around the same biege box, just nowadays they like black.. I still think some people see the PC as archaic.
I agree, I did thumb through the benchmarks but I see so many I only see numbers and lines anymore. hehe I put more value into the conclusion at the end and what the author has to say. But at the same time, optimization of apps gets in the way of valid marks. But the optimization has something to be said for PCs. Macs still lack the optimization like SSE(2).
If you need several hundred systems then asthetics are meaning less , cost is a big issue and seconds do matter.
I agree here too, but as I said, a Mac destop will never replace my PC desktop due to the time and investment I have already made in hardware and software for my PC systems. But at the same time, with Macs closed development and ease of use, IT costs are lessened as compared to PCs, which means more to some companies as opposed to render times. And macs will never replace a pure renderfarm either. Linux holds alot here already in its ability for large scale deployment. But for general daily use of PS or office in an design environment, I see macs flurishing just because of the less hassle to maintain.
And like I said before, Apple has been able to put more effort into the form follows function rule. They have something that works, and have spent the time to make it more than just a biege box that everyone is afraid of. I give them props for their achievement as I wish the PC world would take a clue.
If you want asthetics you have options with PC whereas with the mac you only have theirs to pick from.
Well, the asthetics in the PC area are all cheesy to me (imac copies), but they still all revolve around the same biege box, just nowadays they like black.. I still think some people see the PC as archaic.
gmask
01-14-2003, 07:08 PM
>>>Well, the asthetics in the PC area are all cheesy to me (imac copies), but they still all revolve around the same biege box, just nowadays they like black.. I still think some people see the PC as archaic.
I have allways preferred black but what about the alienware boxes?? In the show us your workspace thread I have noticed some interesting "boxes" that were anythign but an Imac clone. Persoanlly I find the iMacs kind of hideous from an asthetic point of view. They remind me of those clear plastic cellphones filled with candy. To me they seem juvenile from a design point of view but if that's what the kids like then who am I to argue. I like black, metal and rackmount.. next to a laptop I like a desktop computer with a handle on it ;-)
I haven't really had a chance to use MacOSX so can you define what it is that makes the Mac easier to use? Once you are into an application it doesn't really seem to matter what platform you are on. I will grant that many of the control panels for windows are confusing but the first time I had to setup a Mac Network I was as clueless as anybody and I managed to figure it out. I had to go through the same thing the first time I setup a PC so what else is better on the Mac.. what actually makes you more productive.. so don't bother to mention iTunes etc are those really productive?
I have allways preferred black but what about the alienware boxes?? In the show us your workspace thread I have noticed some interesting "boxes" that were anythign but an Imac clone. Persoanlly I find the iMacs kind of hideous from an asthetic point of view. They remind me of those clear plastic cellphones filled with candy. To me they seem juvenile from a design point of view but if that's what the kids like then who am I to argue. I like black, metal and rackmount.. next to a laptop I like a desktop computer with a handle on it ;-)
I haven't really had a chance to use MacOSX so can you define what it is that makes the Mac easier to use? Once you are into an application it doesn't really seem to matter what platform you are on. I will grant that many of the control panels for windows are confusing but the first time I had to setup a Mac Network I was as clueless as anybody and I managed to figure it out. I had to go through the same thing the first time I setup a PC so what else is better on the Mac.. what actually makes you more productive.. so don't bother to mention iTunes etc are those really productive?
Gentle Fury
01-15-2003, 05:19 AM
ok, this is getting silly.....now we are talking about aesthetics???????? and it seems the case and the OS is being referred to.......well my opinion on that is......i HATE mac cases....i think they are repulsive (this is not to offend mac users) i think they look like toys.....my first computer by fisher price type thing........sorry, but i dont like my comp looking like a plastic toy....and the mouse and keyboard???? I never understood the perfectly round mouse!!! I always found myself moving sideways and diagonal and the keyboards are generally so tiny that only a woman or a midget can use them!
And as for OS look and feel....well i HATE aesthetics in an OS.....flair is wasted resources! aka crap.....i cant stand the mac os and i cant stand the new windows os......if i could have a command line based OS that could run all the current software (and damn it would be more efficient) i would take that ANY day......anyone that has ever worked in a command line env (unix for instance) will tell you that it is SO much more intuitive and stable......instead of sitting and waiting for windows to open an explorer window and sifting thru countless folders you can just type your destination.
and instead of fighting with drag and drop....that never seem to want to drop where you want it you just type it out! and best of all instead of having 30% of your resources wasted by said "aesthetics" you could be running your SOFTWARE that is making you money at 100%!!!!!!
so, im not advocating any new OS.....i want an up to date OS that will run anything (mac, linux, windows) and not have all the crappy flash to go with it!!!! The only windows i want to deal with are within the programs that are making me money!!! MS and Mac windows only takes money away ;)
oh and btw to the person that said windows is only a mac os rip off.....i honestly dont give a crap who ripped off who....if you really think about it in either case, the only person being ripped off is us ;)
And as for OS look and feel....well i HATE aesthetics in an OS.....flair is wasted resources! aka crap.....i cant stand the mac os and i cant stand the new windows os......if i could have a command line based OS that could run all the current software (and damn it would be more efficient) i would take that ANY day......anyone that has ever worked in a command line env (unix for instance) will tell you that it is SO much more intuitive and stable......instead of sitting and waiting for windows to open an explorer window and sifting thru countless folders you can just type your destination.
and instead of fighting with drag and drop....that never seem to want to drop where you want it you just type it out! and best of all instead of having 30% of your resources wasted by said "aesthetics" you could be running your SOFTWARE that is making you money at 100%!!!!!!
so, im not advocating any new OS.....i want an up to date OS that will run anything (mac, linux, windows) and not have all the crappy flash to go with it!!!! The only windows i want to deal with are within the programs that are making me money!!! MS and Mac windows only takes money away ;)
oh and btw to the person that said windows is only a mac os rip off.....i honestly dont give a crap who ripped off who....if you really think about it in either case, the only person being ripped off is us ;)
gmask
01-15-2003, 05:25 AM
>>>oh and btw to the person that said windows is only a mac os rip off.....i honestly dont give a crap who ripped off who....if you really think about it in either case, the only person being ripped off is us ;)
Aww.. they both ripped off Xerox
Aww.. they both ripped off Xerox
flaagan
01-15-2003, 11:38 AM
heh.. this is by far the most reserved and controlled mac vs pc arguement i've seen. good job to all for trying to being serious about this. Living in cupertino just a mile or two from Apple headquarters, i often find myself contemplating such issues as Apple vs PC when stuck in traffic. Namely, i've found a few things to come forward in my mind.
As was stated earlier, Apple did lag for a while, and the fact that Windows systems are customizable yesterday almost as much as today allowed/s for much better prices. Companies like Dell and the like have made the 'prebuilt and set up for you' arguement null and void. PC prices are by far more pleasing to most home and casual computer users. Also, the 'what people i know have' way of buying probably favors Windows, unless people have had bad experiences with 3rd party hardware or software (as has always been the case for me; i never have a problem if i dont go for the bottom of the bargain bin).
In larger companies (and most smaller ones), what you use as far as a system usually is predetermined by the compay's business and money strategies. For individual users and self-employed, in many cases owning an Apple can be benificial, as programs like Final Cut are near (if not are) industry standard, and benefit from what I will readily admit is better support for devices that use Firewire on Apple's part (hence all those annoying as hell "Switch" commercials... it was people, trying to go the 'home movie editor' route or the like when they didnt have a goddam clue to begin with). Albeit, the proper equipment for a near-pro setup is not cheap. For a while i was studying to become a video edittor, and was considering a Apple and DV setup similar to my schools, which would of cost~$10k on the cheap end.
On that note, i switched to 3d modelling for video games as an area of study (which i am LOVING) and immediately dropped any interest in owning an Apple. The hardware choices and software lineup was nowhere near as pleasing as the PC market was and has become. Also, Apple gaming is something i consider something of a joke (any system that comes standard with a one button mouse is asking for trouble). On a personal (and sadistic note) i love to hear Apple owners whine "We should of gotten Halo~~".
Finally, case and system design in itself. The Imac lineup's colors spawned nothing but absolutely gaudy ripoffs throughout damn near every consumer market. It is nothing to be proud of in my opinion. The newest Imac that looks like a lamp has already been out-designed by Dell (i believe it was Dell, correct me if i'm wrong) with their version of a tabletop all-in-one system. Personally, though, i still would not buy something like that. both versions of the IMac are perfect examples of throw-away systems. Once outdated, you dont see Apple offering to gut the tower and upgrade what needs to be upgraded. The larger G4 towers, while pretty in clear plastic, also confuse me with their design. The 'handles' on all four corners, i've been told, are for when you move the tower, and can be removed... the tower looks ugly with them on or off, doesnt fit properly into most tight desk spaces, and honestly, how often are you going to move your tower? Back to the imac... i do not like my system (no matter how small) on my desktop. while i know this is a personal preference, but you'll have to deal with it.
The Apple OS GUI (and i dont care who ripped off who or what) is, in my opinion, not the best it could be. Both the Windows and Apple GUI's have been in redesign (you cant imagine my joy when i first used win95 after using win3.0 and windows for workgroup). One of the wierdest arguements Apple zealots have had with me is over Windows' use of a multibutton mouse versus Apple's standard one button mouse. In my opinion, it's like comparing 3DSmax 4 to XSI3. it's relatively obvious forward thinking to take advantage of the fact that humans have more than one finger, and the inclusion of context menus with a right click is by far the most useful thing i can think of. I've yet to get a good response from a one-button clicker about the advantages of a single button.
... and at this point, i'm gonna to stop and see how many people i've pissed off. I dont consider myself an Apple hater, but moreso an Apple zealot hater. I'll work on whatever system is put in front of me, as long as it's set up with the workflow of the current project in mind.:cool:
As was stated earlier, Apple did lag for a while, and the fact that Windows systems are customizable yesterday almost as much as today allowed/s for much better prices. Companies like Dell and the like have made the 'prebuilt and set up for you' arguement null and void. PC prices are by far more pleasing to most home and casual computer users. Also, the 'what people i know have' way of buying probably favors Windows, unless people have had bad experiences with 3rd party hardware or software (as has always been the case for me; i never have a problem if i dont go for the bottom of the bargain bin).
In larger companies (and most smaller ones), what you use as far as a system usually is predetermined by the compay's business and money strategies. For individual users and self-employed, in many cases owning an Apple can be benificial, as programs like Final Cut are near (if not are) industry standard, and benefit from what I will readily admit is better support for devices that use Firewire on Apple's part (hence all those annoying as hell "Switch" commercials... it was people, trying to go the 'home movie editor' route or the like when they didnt have a goddam clue to begin with). Albeit, the proper equipment for a near-pro setup is not cheap. For a while i was studying to become a video edittor, and was considering a Apple and DV setup similar to my schools, which would of cost~$10k on the cheap end.
On that note, i switched to 3d modelling for video games as an area of study (which i am LOVING) and immediately dropped any interest in owning an Apple. The hardware choices and software lineup was nowhere near as pleasing as the PC market was and has become. Also, Apple gaming is something i consider something of a joke (any system that comes standard with a one button mouse is asking for trouble). On a personal (and sadistic note) i love to hear Apple owners whine "We should of gotten Halo~~".
Finally, case and system design in itself. The Imac lineup's colors spawned nothing but absolutely gaudy ripoffs throughout damn near every consumer market. It is nothing to be proud of in my opinion. The newest Imac that looks like a lamp has already been out-designed by Dell (i believe it was Dell, correct me if i'm wrong) with their version of a tabletop all-in-one system. Personally, though, i still would not buy something like that. both versions of the IMac are perfect examples of throw-away systems. Once outdated, you dont see Apple offering to gut the tower and upgrade what needs to be upgraded. The larger G4 towers, while pretty in clear plastic, also confuse me with their design. The 'handles' on all four corners, i've been told, are for when you move the tower, and can be removed... the tower looks ugly with them on or off, doesnt fit properly into most tight desk spaces, and honestly, how often are you going to move your tower? Back to the imac... i do not like my system (no matter how small) on my desktop. while i know this is a personal preference, but you'll have to deal with it.
The Apple OS GUI (and i dont care who ripped off who or what) is, in my opinion, not the best it could be. Both the Windows and Apple GUI's have been in redesign (you cant imagine my joy when i first used win95 after using win3.0 and windows for workgroup). One of the wierdest arguements Apple zealots have had with me is over Windows' use of a multibutton mouse versus Apple's standard one button mouse. In my opinion, it's like comparing 3DSmax 4 to XSI3. it's relatively obvious forward thinking to take advantage of the fact that humans have more than one finger, and the inclusion of context menus with a right click is by far the most useful thing i can think of. I've yet to get a good response from a one-button clicker about the advantages of a single button.
... and at this point, i'm gonna to stop and see how many people i've pissed off. I dont consider myself an Apple hater, but moreso an Apple zealot hater. I'll work on whatever system is put in front of me, as long as it's set up with the workflow of the current project in mind.:cool:
dmonk
01-15-2003, 11:57 AM
... and at this point, i'm gonna to stop and see how many people i've pissed off. I dont consider myself an Apple hater, but moreso an Apple zealot hater. I'll work on whatever system is put in front of me, as long as it's set up with the workflow of the current project in mind.
Well said.:applause:
Well said.:applause:
Sieb
01-15-2003, 06:11 PM
... and at this point, i'm gonna to stop and see how many people i've pissed off. I dont consider myself an Apple hater, but moreso an Apple zealot hater. I'll work on whatever system is put in front of me, as long as it's set up with the workflow of the current project in mind.
Well put. As long as it will do what I want, I am fine with it. Same with most people. I should point out when I mentioned asthecitcs, again, I was leaning more towards Laptops since thats where it matters most, desktops I could care less about. I don't really care if its purple or pink as long as it does its job. "Go ahead, make fun of my pink box.. But its Hyperthreading and yours isn't.." :) Their desktops look fine in an all mac design office IMO where they all match. Their new all silver cases are an improvement over the older models. When it comes to the Imac itself, while a nice 17" LCD is always nice, I have since started prefering the new Shuttle boxes.
anyone that has ever worked in a command line env (unix for instance) will tell you that it is SO much more intuitive and stable
Yea, I do this all day.. Stable.. Yes.. Intuitive, I would say no, efficient, a big no.. While its nice to be on the command level, you get annoyed having to remember hundreds of commands and their options. Span this across Cisco hardware, Unix systems, and linux systems and you can see why I and others prefer GUIs. Why spend the time typing 3 lines of code to run a script when I can just click the icon thats already programed to type all that for me opposed to have to keep around tons of books with commands listed in them? To save a few megs of ram when it already has half a gig? ha The price to pay for convenience. Remember what.. 3dsmax r2 or r3? All dos based, ew.. I would prefer to not go there again.. Same with Softimage..
As for the mac GUI, I read somewhere where the GUI elements are loaded into ROM, not RAM, to avoid resouce hoggin.. but I could be wrong. Good idea though. An improvement for OSX is that I can throw X11 ontop of Quarts now and run all my unix apps with no real problem saving me of having to deal with swapping between windows and linux on my system (not to mention just getting linux to work on it in the first place). This alone is a massive efficiency boost to alot of people like me. Aside from the mac itself, OSX is the way Linux should be, or should be evolving to if it ever hopes to fully counter Windows. I dispise the wole start menu system. Whats nice about macs, is when you open a program, the top bar changes to that programs menu system instead of entire seperate windows like in Windows. Hard to get used to, but more efficient I think. But thats nothing new.
But alas, this thread is degrading into the lower levels of "why I hate Macs compared to PCs..." I was trying to keep my comments about operations and such between the two. Mentioning asthetics has a big appeal to alot (like i said, with laptops), moreso than the actual use of the system, so it deserved a plug. This is also getting away from the initial points made in the review.
Well put. As long as it will do what I want, I am fine with it. Same with most people. I should point out when I mentioned asthecitcs, again, I was leaning more towards Laptops since thats where it matters most, desktops I could care less about. I don't really care if its purple or pink as long as it does its job. "Go ahead, make fun of my pink box.. But its Hyperthreading and yours isn't.." :) Their desktops look fine in an all mac design office IMO where they all match. Their new all silver cases are an improvement over the older models. When it comes to the Imac itself, while a nice 17" LCD is always nice, I have since started prefering the new Shuttle boxes.
anyone that has ever worked in a command line env (unix for instance) will tell you that it is SO much more intuitive and stable
Yea, I do this all day.. Stable.. Yes.. Intuitive, I would say no, efficient, a big no.. While its nice to be on the command level, you get annoyed having to remember hundreds of commands and their options. Span this across Cisco hardware, Unix systems, and linux systems and you can see why I and others prefer GUIs. Why spend the time typing 3 lines of code to run a script when I can just click the icon thats already programed to type all that for me opposed to have to keep around tons of books with commands listed in them? To save a few megs of ram when it already has half a gig? ha The price to pay for convenience. Remember what.. 3dsmax r2 or r3? All dos based, ew.. I would prefer to not go there again.. Same with Softimage..
As for the mac GUI, I read somewhere where the GUI elements are loaded into ROM, not RAM, to avoid resouce hoggin.. but I could be wrong. Good idea though. An improvement for OSX is that I can throw X11 ontop of Quarts now and run all my unix apps with no real problem saving me of having to deal with swapping between windows and linux on my system (not to mention just getting linux to work on it in the first place). This alone is a massive efficiency boost to alot of people like me. Aside from the mac itself, OSX is the way Linux should be, or should be evolving to if it ever hopes to fully counter Windows. I dispise the wole start menu system. Whats nice about macs, is when you open a program, the top bar changes to that programs menu system instead of entire seperate windows like in Windows. Hard to get used to, but more efficient I think. But thats nothing new.
But alas, this thread is degrading into the lower levels of "why I hate Macs compared to PCs..." I was trying to keep my comments about operations and such between the two. Mentioning asthetics has a big appeal to alot (like i said, with laptops), moreso than the actual use of the system, so it deserved a plug. This is also getting away from the initial points made in the review.
mushroomgod
01-15-2003, 06:30 PM
some people like macs and some people like pcs, in the same way that some people like the mini cooper and others like the vw beetle..
if you want a compter to do 3d and play games id recomend a PC anyday...if on the other hand your on of these strange people who has little intrest in using a computer for 3d/games id recomend a mac... But at the end of the day it all comes down to preference, and not everything revolves around benchmarks...cuz if it did we would all be using linux.
if you want a compter to do 3d and play games id recomend a PC anyday...if on the other hand your on of these strange people who has little intrest in using a computer for 3d/games id recomend a mac... But at the end of the day it all comes down to preference, and not everything revolves around benchmarks...cuz if it did we would all be using linux.
Gentle Fury
01-15-2003, 06:37 PM
Yea, I do this all day.. Stable.. Yes.. Intuitive, I would say no, efficient, a big no.. While its nice to be on the command level, you get annoyed having to remember hundreds of commands and their options. Span this across Cisco hardware, Unix systems, and linux systems and you can see why I and others prefer GUIs. Why spend the time typing 3 lines of code to run a script when I can just click the icon thats already programed to type all that for me opposed to have to keep around tons of books with commands listed in them? To save a few megs of ram when it already has half a gig? ha The price to pay for convenience. Remember what.. 3dsmax r2 or r3? All dos based, ew.. I would prefer to not go there again.. Same with Softimage..
yes, true.....but what i was saying was if i could have basically an xwindow system with no front end i would be happy. I wouldnt want to work on my art apps in a command line env.
so basically doing all the rudimentary stuff by typing.......and then starting maya or photoshop and working on it as normal......but being able to have my software i need to run be using nearly all the resources as opposed to windows based systems that waste all your systems mem before you run a single app.
i want a happy medium ;)
just saying eye candy when im moving files is not for me.
yes, true.....but what i was saying was if i could have basically an xwindow system with no front end i would be happy. I wouldnt want to work on my art apps in a command line env.
so basically doing all the rudimentary stuff by typing.......and then starting maya or photoshop and working on it as normal......but being able to have my software i need to run be using nearly all the resources as opposed to windows based systems that waste all your systems mem before you run a single app.
i want a happy medium ;)
just saying eye candy when im moving files is not for me.
Gentle Fury
01-15-2003, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by mushroomgod
some people like macs and some people like pcs, in the same way that some people like the mini cooper and others like the vw beetle..
if you want a compter to do 3d and play games id recomend a PC anyday...if on the other hand your on of these strange people who has little intrest in using a computer for 3d/games id recomend a mac... But at the end of the day it all comes down to preference, and not everything revolves around benchmarks...cuz if it did we would all be using linux.
ha ha true......but unfortunatly you cant get a good benchmark comparison off of an OS that wont run any of the software being tested! :annoyed:
some people like macs and some people like pcs, in the same way that some people like the mini cooper and others like the vw beetle..
if you want a compter to do 3d and play games id recomend a PC anyday...if on the other hand your on of these strange people who has little intrest in using a computer for 3d/games id recomend a mac... But at the end of the day it all comes down to preference, and not everything revolves around benchmarks...cuz if it did we would all be using linux.
ha ha true......but unfortunatly you cant get a good benchmark comparison off of an OS that wont run any of the software being tested! :annoyed:
gmask
01-15-2003, 07:05 PM
>>>While its nice to be on the command level, you get annoyed having to remember hundreds of commands and their options. Span this across Cisco hardware, Unix systems, and linux systems and you can see why I and others prefer GUIs. Why spend the time typing 3 lines of code to run a script when I can just click the icon thats already programed to type all that for me opposed to have to keep around tons of books with commands listed in them?
You'd feel differently about this if you were a programmer. Unix was really designed for programmers who mainly deal with commands and typing them. It really allows for the most flexibilty when if comes to making your own shortcuts to anything if everything can be issued as a typed command. It is also nice to have buttons and icons and that can be done and not everybody needs to use the commandline. Likewise you coul dnot have an icon for every possible command.. where would they go? With the gam eline all youhave to do is remember how it is spelled..which I have found not to be a problem.. even though when typing email I make horrific typos but when I script I don't it's weird. :surprised Would prefer to have to communicate with people through icons???
>>>As for the mac GUI, I read somewhere where the GUI elements are loaded into ROM, not RAM, to avoid resouce hoggin.. but I could be wrong.
The mac has allways had a ROM. This makes alot of sense for them sense they ar ethe only manufacturer and they only have one flavor of MacOS unlike windows which has ME,NT,95,98,2K,XP.. but these OS can pretty much still run on even old system wheras the new MacOSX cannot. I don;t know if it really saves that much in resources these days..I think ROMS are only a few megs anyhow. It was much more of a memory saviour back in the days of the 512 or Mac Plus.
>>>I dispise the wole start menu system.
It's not that much different than the Apple menu??
>>>Whats nice about macs, is when you open a program, the top bar changes to that programs menu system instead of entire seperate windows like in Windows. Hard to get used to, but more efficient I think.
It wasn't easy for me to get used to the way windows treats file browsers on the desktop...but I got use dto it and know I don;t care either way. There are things I still perfer about X11 type windows or Motif from Irix.. I liked how you could put your cursor over a background window in Motif and type a command into it without bringing to the foreground. Or you could select text from that background window and then paste it into the foreground. You can't do that with winodws ..I don't know about MacOSX though.
>>>But alas, this thread is degrading into the lower levels of "why I hate Macs compared to PCs..." I was trying to keep my comments about operations and such between the two. Mentioning asthetics has a big appeal to alot (like i said, with laptops), moreso than the actual use of the system, so it deserved a plug. This is also getting away from the initial points made in the review.
Hate is a strong word.. the problem is when people make statements that are absolutes because obviously not everybody chooses their computer for the same reasons. If you live in and work in mainly a PC world then why not PC. Or maybe you hate your job where you work on PC and don't want to be reminded by it when you compute at home. Some schools are more orientated one way or the other. 3D is truly dominated by PC these days. That could change but only if more of the major software developers decide to port to Linux or MacOSX. To be honest I think those developers that have been windows only are more likely to port to Linux than MacOSX unless Apple buys them out. When I got on the Mac in the early 90's I was under the impression that PC's sucked when it came to color reproduction and color usage. Since that time was in the middle of the desktop publishing era those points would have been crucial. These days I don't think as much. If your are really big into games then the PC is your buddy and probably allways will be.
All of these systems could be more or less wickedly fast if more effort was spent by the developers to optimize their code but it takes alot of effort to do that. Programming in Machine language is too hard and maintaining revisions across multiple hardware changes is like playing whack a mole. The solution is to throw more CPU horsepower at it. There is not so much of a dramatic difference in speed that you can only make this decisions based on that. There are more factors involved. If I had a googlehertz system but there are no developers for it.. how productive would that be?? If you plan on writing all of your own software including the operating sytem then it's fantastic but otherwise it is a nightmare.
You'd feel differently about this if you were a programmer. Unix was really designed for programmers who mainly deal with commands and typing them. It really allows for the most flexibilty when if comes to making your own shortcuts to anything if everything can be issued as a typed command. It is also nice to have buttons and icons and that can be done and not everybody needs to use the commandline. Likewise you coul dnot have an icon for every possible command.. where would they go? With the gam eline all youhave to do is remember how it is spelled..which I have found not to be a problem.. even though when typing email I make horrific typos but when I script I don't it's weird. :surprised Would prefer to have to communicate with people through icons???
>>>As for the mac GUI, I read somewhere where the GUI elements are loaded into ROM, not RAM, to avoid resouce hoggin.. but I could be wrong.
The mac has allways had a ROM. This makes alot of sense for them sense they ar ethe only manufacturer and they only have one flavor of MacOS unlike windows which has ME,NT,95,98,2K,XP.. but these OS can pretty much still run on even old system wheras the new MacOSX cannot. I don;t know if it really saves that much in resources these days..I think ROMS are only a few megs anyhow. It was much more of a memory saviour back in the days of the 512 or Mac Plus.
>>>I dispise the wole start menu system.
It's not that much different than the Apple menu??
>>>Whats nice about macs, is when you open a program, the top bar changes to that programs menu system instead of entire seperate windows like in Windows. Hard to get used to, but more efficient I think.
It wasn't easy for me to get used to the way windows treats file browsers on the desktop...but I got use dto it and know I don;t care either way. There are things I still perfer about X11 type windows or Motif from Irix.. I liked how you could put your cursor over a background window in Motif and type a command into it without bringing to the foreground. Or you could select text from that background window and then paste it into the foreground. You can't do that with winodws ..I don't know about MacOSX though.
>>>But alas, this thread is degrading into the lower levels of "why I hate Macs compared to PCs..." I was trying to keep my comments about operations and such between the two. Mentioning asthetics has a big appeal to alot (like i said, with laptops), moreso than the actual use of the system, so it deserved a plug. This is also getting away from the initial points made in the review.
Hate is a strong word.. the problem is when people make statements that are absolutes because obviously not everybody chooses their computer for the same reasons. If you live in and work in mainly a PC world then why not PC. Or maybe you hate your job where you work on PC and don't want to be reminded by it when you compute at home. Some schools are more orientated one way or the other. 3D is truly dominated by PC these days. That could change but only if more of the major software developers decide to port to Linux or MacOSX. To be honest I think those developers that have been windows only are more likely to port to Linux than MacOSX unless Apple buys them out. When I got on the Mac in the early 90's I was under the impression that PC's sucked when it came to color reproduction and color usage. Since that time was in the middle of the desktop publishing era those points would have been crucial. These days I don't think as much. If your are really big into games then the PC is your buddy and probably allways will be.
All of these systems could be more or less wickedly fast if more effort was spent by the developers to optimize their code but it takes alot of effort to do that. Programming in Machine language is too hard and maintaining revisions across multiple hardware changes is like playing whack a mole. The solution is to throw more CPU horsepower at it. There is not so much of a dramatic difference in speed that you can only make this decisions based on that. There are more factors involved. If I had a googlehertz system but there are no developers for it.. how productive would that be?? If you plan on writing all of your own software including the operating sytem then it's fantastic but otherwise it is a nightmare.
Sieb
01-16-2003, 01:09 AM
Ah, finally, some good content.. I agree with gmax on the whole development issue. Now that PCs top 3GHz, 4 by summer, and most programs only still require a between a 500 and 1GHz, I think its safe to say we can tone down the horsepower dev cycle a bit and work on optimizing everything. A PCI bus of the same speed would help... Then again, when a program or game is limited to a few months dev cycle itself, sadly there isn't much room for improvement. Everyone is fighting to reach the almighty dollar. And we have seen what happens when you do this on a grand scheme (*cough* windows *cough*)... No hard feelings though.
I think OSX is at a good crossroads finally. With its BSD kernel, low level stuff will be easier and faster to code for. The problem is getting into Quarts or Carbon, but X11 helps here now also. Who knows, Mac may someday become the linux flagship which would be nice. The only thing holding them back is the hardware. An x86 or hammer chip would easily make everyone a mac fanatic but that will never happen either. I just wish Apple would get off the motorola wagon. Does anyone know the exact performance reasons for using a motorola chip? or is it contractual? I don't know many numbers about the 128bit engine, but 4-8 FBU puts it on par with an Athlon... Links anyone?
yes, true.....but what i was saying was if i could have basically an xwindow system with no front end i would be happy. I wouldnt want to work on my art apps in a command line env.
Enlightenment? NeXt? Windowmaker? Blackbox? hehe
I think OSX is at a good crossroads finally. With its BSD kernel, low level stuff will be easier and faster to code for. The problem is getting into Quarts or Carbon, but X11 helps here now also. Who knows, Mac may someday become the linux flagship which would be nice. The only thing holding them back is the hardware. An x86 or hammer chip would easily make everyone a mac fanatic but that will never happen either. I just wish Apple would get off the motorola wagon. Does anyone know the exact performance reasons for using a motorola chip? or is it contractual? I don't know many numbers about the 128bit engine, but 4-8 FBU puts it on par with an Athlon... Links anyone?
yes, true.....but what i was saying was if i could have basically an xwindow system with no front end i would be happy. I wouldnt want to work on my art apps in a command line env.
Enlightenment? NeXt? Windowmaker? Blackbox? hehe
Saurus
01-16-2003, 03:55 AM
More horsepower is always good. At work, when you are working with over a hundred shots, each about 5 seconds long, at 30 frame a second, the extra minute it takes for a render farm with slower machine adds up to hours, even day. When you are dealing with deadlines, you loose time to be creative and render test becomes a scare. You hope your first renders will have the perfect animation, perfect lighting, perfect everything and error free, but it is usually not the case. Then on top of all of this, you have to deal with directors and producers and all of their changes. Time is money!! Do we need faster machines. Damn right! Faster machine will let us see work more interactive during the building stage. Even today’s machine, won't let you do, high quality animated textured models with particles. I beg for the days, when all of these are possible. Yes, machines are getting faster and faster, but software companies are making software so inefficient that you require these fast machine to run them. The first Maya release probably worked nicely on a 166 MHz machine with 256 mem...not hundred percent sure on the machine spec. I don’t think today’s version won't even start Maya at that spec. Now, if you are working at a personal home project with all the time in world...no you don't need a faster machine; otherwise, bring on the horse power!!
Saurus
Saurus
JA-forreal
01-16-2003, 03:04 PM
"Yes, machines are getting faster and faster, but software companies are making software so inefficient that you require these fast machine to run them. The first Maya release probably worked nicely on a 166 MHz machine with 256 mem...not hundred percent sure on the machine spec. I don’t think today’s version won't even start Maya at that spec. Now, if you are working at a personal home project with all the time in world...no you don't need a faster machine; otherwise, bring on the horse power!!
Saurus"
Learn to use Blender. Any sane 3d artist on a PC or Mac would be crazy if they never looked into the power of the Blender 3d workflow. I can work as smoothly on a 486 as on a P4. Render times may differ but are always done in "realtime". Multitasking , hey I can open 10 blender windows and render in them all at the same time while watching a dvd. I can flip through 50 3d scene or animation files like a book with "0" loading time. Man, 3d never worked better!
Now with the new Blender YafRay-
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/gallery/index.php
-Photon Map Radiosity Rendering tool I'm seeing "Finalrender" quality renders in 3 to 12 minutes. It's getting better all of the time.
Maybe it ain't the stinkin' hardware it's the stinkin' software?
JA-forreal- forreal
Saurus"
Learn to use Blender. Any sane 3d artist on a PC or Mac would be crazy if they never looked into the power of the Blender 3d workflow. I can work as smoothly on a 486 as on a P4. Render times may differ but are always done in "realtime". Multitasking , hey I can open 10 blender windows and render in them all at the same time while watching a dvd. I can flip through 50 3d scene or animation files like a book with "0" loading time. Man, 3d never worked better!
Now with the new Blender YafRay-
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/gallery/index.php
-Photon Map Radiosity Rendering tool I'm seeing "Finalrender" quality renders in 3 to 12 minutes. It's getting better all of the time.
Maybe it ain't the stinkin' hardware it's the stinkin' software?
JA-forreal- forreal
Gentle Fury
01-16-2003, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by JA-forreal
"Yes, machines are getting faster and faster, but software companies are making software so inefficient that you require these fast machine to run them. The first Maya release probably worked nicely on a 166 MHz machine with 256 mem...not hundred percent sure on the machine spec. I don’t think today’s version won't even start Maya at that spec. Now, if you are working at a personal home project with all the time in world...no you don't need a faster machine; otherwise, bring on the horse power!!
Saurus"
Learn to use Blender. Any sane 3d artist on a PC or Mac would be crazy if they never looked into the power of the Blender 3d workflow. I can work as smoothly on a 486 as on a P4. Render times may differ but are always done in "realtime". Multitasking , hey I can open 10 blender windows and render in them all at the same time while watching a dvd. I can flip through 50 3d scene or animation files like a book with "0" loading time. Man, 3d never worked better!
Now with the new Blender YafRay-
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/gallery/index.php
-Photon Map Radiosity Rendering tool I'm seeing "Finalrender" quality renders in 3 to 12 minutes. It's getting better all of the time.
Maybe it ain't the stinkin' hardware it's the stinkin' software?
JA-forreal- forreal
i dont mean to sound offensive here, but are they paying you to pimp their software....or are you one of the creators?
i honestly dont think i have ever seen anyone so enthused about that confusing mess of a program before.
btw ver 1 beta of maya came out in 1996 and only ran on SGI machines. So, no, the specs havent come down all that much....PC's have just gotten powerful enough to run it!
"Yes, machines are getting faster and faster, but software companies are making software so inefficient that you require these fast machine to run them. The first Maya release probably worked nicely on a 166 MHz machine with 256 mem...not hundred percent sure on the machine spec. I don’t think today’s version won't even start Maya at that spec. Now, if you are working at a personal home project with all the time in world...no you don't need a faster machine; otherwise, bring on the horse power!!
Saurus"
Learn to use Blender. Any sane 3d artist on a PC or Mac would be crazy if they never looked into the power of the Blender 3d workflow. I can work as smoothly on a 486 as on a P4. Render times may differ but are always done in "realtime". Multitasking , hey I can open 10 blender windows and render in them all at the same time while watching a dvd. I can flip through 50 3d scene or animation files like a book with "0" loading time. Man, 3d never worked better!
Now with the new Blender YafRay-
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/
http://www.coala.uniovi.es/%7Ejandro/noname/gallery/index.php
-Photon Map Radiosity Rendering tool I'm seeing "Finalrender" quality renders in 3 to 12 minutes. It's getting better all of the time.
Maybe it ain't the stinkin' hardware it's the stinkin' software?
JA-forreal- forreal
i dont mean to sound offensive here, but are they paying you to pimp their software....or are you one of the creators?
i honestly dont think i have ever seen anyone so enthused about that confusing mess of a program before.
btw ver 1 beta of maya came out in 1996 and only ran on SGI machines. So, no, the specs havent come down all that much....PC's have just gotten powerful enough to run it!
parallax
01-16-2003, 10:48 PM
Some people really use stupid arguments.
Yes you always do need more power, and yes you always you will work faster/better when you have more power.
If i would let you choose between two hands, with one hand holding $100, and the other $300, wich one would you choose??
For what reason would anyone choose to use a slow system, if the same money can provide you with 2 systems of the same speed??
I'm not a mac hater, apple has a lot going for them, i just think you should choose what gets the job done.
Unfortunately, PC's get the job done these days.
Do you think a large FX company with a thight deadline would choose macs because they look cooler? they need speed.
If you deny this, then your a big ol' liar. (or ignorant)
The funny thing is, a lot of mac hardware has been ported from PC's lately.
IDE/AGP/what not. the only thing different from PC's these days are the chipset and motherboard. Macs use DDR RAM these days for crying out loud. (and there NOT even running at that speed!!)
If OS X would be ported to PC's, or Apple would pick up a 8x86 cpu, then things would start getting interesting. We might even get cheaper more powerfull computers for both platforms. (and better OS'es) :buttrock:
Right now, it should be a no-brainer.
Yes you always do need more power, and yes you always you will work faster/better when you have more power.
If i would let you choose between two hands, with one hand holding $100, and the other $300, wich one would you choose??
For what reason would anyone choose to use a slow system, if the same money can provide you with 2 systems of the same speed??
I'm not a mac hater, apple has a lot going for them, i just think you should choose what gets the job done.
Unfortunately, PC's get the job done these days.
Do you think a large FX company with a thight deadline would choose macs because they look cooler? they need speed.
If you deny this, then your a big ol' liar. (or ignorant)
The funny thing is, a lot of mac hardware has been ported from PC's lately.
IDE/AGP/what not. the only thing different from PC's these days are the chipset and motherboard. Macs use DDR RAM these days for crying out loud. (and there NOT even running at that speed!!)
If OS X would be ported to PC's, or Apple would pick up a 8x86 cpu, then things would start getting interesting. We might even get cheaper more powerfull computers for both platforms. (and better OS'es) :buttrock:
Right now, it should be a no-brainer.
Meshbuilder
01-17-2003, 01:33 AM
PC users should be glad that we have Macs out there. Without them we wouldn't have this wonderful discussion, over and over and over and over again :beer:
dark_lotus
01-17-2003, 01:39 AM
Um I think your forgetting the really important points here:
1. Macs look Pretty
2. Microsoft have never had an original idea in their entire corporate history - even their flagship product DOS was bought.
3. Mac looks Pretty
4. The Powerbook has a 17" Screen.
Who cares about megahertz, i mean really? :rolleyes:
1. Macs look Pretty
2. Microsoft have never had an original idea in their entire corporate history - even their flagship product DOS was bought.
3. Mac looks Pretty
4. The Powerbook has a 17" Screen.
Who cares about megahertz, i mean really? :rolleyes:
gabe28
01-17-2003, 01:56 AM
For me it's always been about price. I just upgraded. I bought 512 MB of Ram, an AMD xp 2000+, tower, power supply, Motherboard, and Geforce 4 4200 ti card (dual monitor support) all for under $500 (that includes shipping). It's not the bleeding edge of technology but I couldn't get into that kind of setup for that cheap on a Mac.
If price were no object I'd give Macs a longer look because they are cool but anything other than iMacs (and I'll NEVER buy one of those) are just so damn expensive. Then again, even if price were no object, I couldn't just ignore benchmarks that show the P4 demolishing the Macs. I mean, c'mon, the margins aren't narrow anymore.
If price were no object I'd give Macs a longer look because they are cool but anything other than iMacs (and I'll NEVER buy one of those) are just so damn expensive. Then again, even if price were no object, I couldn't just ignore benchmarks that show the P4 demolishing the Macs. I mean, c'mon, the margins aren't narrow anymore.
parallax
01-17-2003, 07:51 AM
The problem with this discussion is,
it used to be a discussion based on facts. Now that the x86 platform beats the living crap out of the Apple platform (dont quote me on that on..;) ), it is becoming a discussion based on opinions.
when the two platforms approach eachother it will be a more interesting discussion. I think it will even bring some nice features to the x86 platform.
it used to be a discussion based on facts. Now that the x86 platform beats the living crap out of the Apple platform (dont quote me on that on..;) ), it is becoming a discussion based on opinions.
when the two platforms approach eachother it will be a more interesting discussion. I think it will even bring some nice features to the x86 platform.
JA-forreal
01-17-2003, 07:57 AM
Gentle Fury wrote-
"i dont mean to sound offensive here, but are they paying you to
pimp their software....or are you one of the creators?
i honestly dont think i have ever seen anyone so enthused about that confusing mess of a program before.
btw ver 1 beta of maya came out in 1996 and only ran on SGI
machines. So, no, the specs havent come down all that much....PC's have just gotten powerful enough to run it!"-
Your quote was not offensive just uninformed and typical of the
mindset of today’s PC user.
Everyone can learn something new and powerful in the space of 1 or 2 hours or totally wate their time on something entertaining and fun in the space of 1 or 2 hours of a week, of a month.
Hey I own licenses to the "other mainstream 3d apps"- I've learned that you often don't get what you pay for and that in the end, the only person who can satisfy your needs when it comes to software tools is you, the artist and not a software marketing scheme. Did you know that PC's were invented to ultimately be controlled by their users and not the retailers that sold the user the equipment? It’s sad when PC owners lose the power to control the total process of how they choose to use their own tools. Most PC users rely fully or in part on a retailer to meet all of their needs when it comes to personal computing. You then either wait around for the company you brought you software from to upgrade your PC to a new level of use or spend more money on tools that barely advance you to a new level of productivity. Or you’re locked into a mode of operational mindset that is often one sided in the favor of the retailer who sold you the stuff.
No one has to pay me to say in a brief post what I feel about how I use my computer. I choose to tell others who have been either burned or dissatisfied by some aspects of retail products.
I 'm glad to let users know that there are other options to mainstream apps that work as well if not better in many ways than their current solutions. That's the power of the internet. It gives you access to choose and seek other solutions to aid you in getting everything you need to do what you best behind a keyboard. Sometimes retailer catch onto the flow of the world around them. Say have you ever overclocked your PC to get it to run faster? In the early days of computing end-users had to "hack" their hardware to do this. Now every Motherboard I own can be overclocked with a simple bios selection. Retailers caught onto the needs of their customers and acted in their customers interest or their own need to stay viable in the marketplace.
Are you willing to wait years for a software company to get on the ball and create faster realworld productivity updates or seek out tools that give You the power to access features of their tools that can give You the power you need today? I feel that at the rate end users are advancing in creating and maintaining their own solutions with tools like Blender and Linux certain software’s we all buy and rely on today will be replaced by user driven tools like Blender.
Hey the Blender product went bankrupt but it's power of use got even stronger. Hey it surprised me but I saw the method to this madness and I put more than a casual effort into supporting the Blender setup.
That's my 3d story for now.
JA-forreal- forreal
"i dont mean to sound offensive here, but are they paying you to
pimp their software....or are you one of the creators?
i honestly dont think i have ever seen anyone so enthused about that confusing mess of a program before.
btw ver 1 beta of maya came out in 1996 and only ran on SGI
machines. So, no, the specs havent come down all that much....PC's have just gotten powerful enough to run it!"-
Your quote was not offensive just uninformed and typical of the
mindset of today’s PC user.
Everyone can learn something new and powerful in the space of 1 or 2 hours or totally wate their time on something entertaining and fun in the space of 1 or 2 hours of a week, of a month.
Hey I own licenses to the "other mainstream 3d apps"- I've learned that you often don't get what you pay for and that in the end, the only person who can satisfy your needs when it comes to software tools is you, the artist and not a software marketing scheme. Did you know that PC's were invented to ultimately be controlled by their users and not the retailers that sold the user the equipment? It’s sad when PC owners lose the power to control the total process of how they choose to use their own tools. Most PC users rely fully or in part on a retailer to meet all of their needs when it comes to personal computing. You then either wait around for the company you brought you software from to upgrade your PC to a new level of use or spend more money on tools that barely advance you to a new level of productivity. Or you’re locked into a mode of operational mindset that is often one sided in the favor of the retailer who sold you the stuff.
No one has to pay me to say in a brief post what I feel about how I use my computer. I choose to tell others who have been either burned or dissatisfied by some aspects of retail products.
I 'm glad to let users know that there are other options to mainstream apps that work as well if not better in many ways than their current solutions. That's the power of the internet. It gives you access to choose and seek other solutions to aid you in getting everything you need to do what you best behind a keyboard. Sometimes retailer catch onto the flow of the world around them. Say have you ever overclocked your PC to get it to run faster? In the early days of computing end-users had to "hack" their hardware to do this. Now every Motherboard I own can be overclocked with a simple bios selection. Retailers caught onto the needs of their customers and acted in their customers interest or their own need to stay viable in the marketplace.
Are you willing to wait years for a software company to get on the ball and create faster realworld productivity updates or seek out tools that give You the power to access features of their tools that can give You the power you need today? I feel that at the rate end users are advancing in creating and maintaining their own solutions with tools like Blender and Linux certain software’s we all buy and rely on today will be replaced by user driven tools like Blender.
Hey the Blender product went bankrupt but it's power of use got even stronger. Hey it surprised me but I saw the method to this madness and I put more than a casual effort into supporting the Blender setup.
That's my 3d story for now.
JA-forreal- forreal
flaagan
01-17-2003, 09:24 AM
i'm willing to wait for 'years' for a good GUI..
oh.. but wait, i've got maya and xsi at my disposal... i'm satisfied.
oh.. but wait, i've got maya and xsi at my disposal... i'm satisfied.
Lukashi
01-17-2003, 01:56 PM
Wow why did they have such a weak computer to benchmark, they spend like 3300 on the laptops and then have a 500 dell to represent desktops...
gmask
01-17-2003, 03:52 PM
>>>Hey the Blender product went bankrupt but it's power of use got even stronger. Hey it surprised me but I saw the method to this madness and I put more than a casual effort into supporting the Blender setup.
I'm a fan of free softwa too and I wish people would take advantage of it rather than opt for crack but what has this got to do with Mac versus PC?
I'm a fan of free softwa too and I wish people would take advantage of it rather than opt for crack but what has this got to do with Mac versus PC?
wmendez
01-17-2003, 03:59 PM
Dark_Lotus:
My machine is pretty --> http://tinyurl.com/20yf
Gmask:
Free software might come into play since Apple has just adopted X11 which mean lots of Linux apps can be ported to Mac as you see with Film Gimp.
My machine is pretty --> http://tinyurl.com/20yf
Gmask:
Free software might come into play since Apple has just adopted X11 which mean lots of Linux apps can be ported to Mac as you see with Film Gimp.
JA-forreal
01-17-2003, 04:52 PM
gmask said,
"I'm a fan of free softwa too and I wish people would take advantage of it rather than opt for crack but what has this got to do with Mac versus PC?"
Well... apps make a Pc or a Mac more powerful along with the hardware. I wonder if anyone who is a PC user has tried out a Mac. Also I wonder if there are any Mac users here who have tried out a PC. Take the chance to do so. I used a mac for years at school before PC's had apps like Photoshop, Freehand, and Painter. If a Mac wasn't a useful product it wouldn't be around today in a world dominated by PC's.
I wish Mac hardware did run better with Linux and that Mac hardware was available in the form of a "Motherboard" that could be used in any PC or Mac "Case" setup. That would be the next big leap for Job's. Can Mac produce a single hardware solution that will change the way the world looks a using a personal computer like Job's and Wozniak did in the past? That would be something to talk about. Forreal.
Computer , software and all hardware companies involved in delivering products to us sould hire folks to read forums like ours. Then they will now how to deliver the right products to us in the future.
JA-forreal
"I'm a fan of free softwa too and I wish people would take advantage of it rather than opt for crack but what has this got to do with Mac versus PC?"
Well... apps make a Pc or a Mac more powerful along with the hardware. I wonder if anyone who is a PC user has tried out a Mac. Also I wonder if there are any Mac users here who have tried out a PC. Take the chance to do so. I used a mac for years at school before PC's had apps like Photoshop, Freehand, and Painter. If a Mac wasn't a useful product it wouldn't be around today in a world dominated by PC's.
I wish Mac hardware did run better with Linux and that Mac hardware was available in the form of a "Motherboard" that could be used in any PC or Mac "Case" setup. That would be the next big leap for Job's. Can Mac produce a single hardware solution that will change the way the world looks a using a personal computer like Job's and Wozniak did in the past? That would be something to talk about. Forreal.
Computer , software and all hardware companies involved in delivering products to us sould hire folks to read forums like ours. Then they will now how to deliver the right products to us in the future.
JA-forreal
gmask
01-17-2003, 04:59 PM
>>>>Free software might come into play since Apple has just adopted X11 which mean lots of Linux apps can be ported to Mac as you see with Film Gimp.
Hmmm.. on another thread somebody said that the Mac was losing sales in europe because there just isn't enough cracked software for it ??? The point being that regardless of cost many users are too cheap to buy the software they want rather than use what is free and legally available.
For graphics users this should be a boon as there is alot of great gnu apps and the like out there for free.
Hmmm.. on another thread somebody said that the Mac was losing sales in europe because there just isn't enough cracked software for it ??? The point being that regardless of cost many users are too cheap to buy the software they want rather than use what is free and legally available.
For graphics users this should be a boon as there is alot of great gnu apps and the like out there for free.
gmask
01-17-2003, 05:10 PM
>>>Well... apps make a Pc or a Mac more powerful along with the hardware. I wonder if anyone who is a PC user has tried out a Mac. Also I wonder if there are any Mac users here who have tried out a PC. Take the chance to do so. I used a mac for years at school before PC's had apps like Photoshop, Freehand, and Painter. If a Mac wasn't a useful product it wouldn't be around today in a world dominated by PC's.
I have tried them all.. at one time I even had Photoshop and Illustrator on an SGI Irix system. I don't know if this is true anymore but one reason I had allways understood about the PC is that there is more shareware for it and in general more apps. There is more competition on the PC where as with vendors for the Mac you may have to take it or leave it.
>>>>I wish Mac hardware did run better with Linux and that Mac hardware was available in the form of a "Motherboard" that could be used in any PC or Mac "Case" setup. That would be the next big leap for Job's.
It would be and they tried it with Power Computing and realized it did not make them much money. Apple has changed their policies at various times . A one thime your virtually voided your warranty just by opening the case. I think they woul dbe doing themselves a favor to conform to standard ATX motherboard designs. They want to maintain their PowerPC island because that means they ar ethe only manufacturer and they don't want to compete with INTEL and AMD. If apple users could buy other CPUs they woul dprobably buy what is cheapest like most PC users and Apple would loose.
>>>Computer , software and all hardware companies involved in delivering products to us sould hire folks to read forums like ours. Then they will now how to deliver the right products to us in the future.
They do read forums and they also do market research and focus group studies. I actuallly was in a focus group for Apple around 96-97 and were talking about delivering a low budget desktop editing system.. in generallt he group was pretty exceited about it and several years later the G3 with Firewire was born.
I have tried them all.. at one time I even had Photoshop and Illustrator on an SGI Irix system. I don't know if this is true anymore but one reason I had allways understood about the PC is that there is more shareware for it and in general more apps. There is more competition on the PC where as with vendors for the Mac you may have to take it or leave it.
>>>>I wish Mac hardware did run better with Linux and that Mac hardware was available in the form of a "Motherboard" that could be used in any PC or Mac "Case" setup. That would be the next big leap for Job's.
It would be and they tried it with Power Computing and realized it did not make them much money. Apple has changed their policies at various times . A one thime your virtually voided your warranty just by opening the case. I think they woul dbe doing themselves a favor to conform to standard ATX motherboard designs. They want to maintain their PowerPC island because that means they ar ethe only manufacturer and they don't want to compete with INTEL and AMD. If apple users could buy other CPUs they woul dprobably buy what is cheapest like most PC users and Apple would loose.
>>>Computer , software and all hardware companies involved in delivering products to us sould hire folks to read forums like ours. Then they will now how to deliver the right products to us in the future.
They do read forums and they also do market research and focus group studies. I actuallly was in a focus group for Apple around 96-97 and were talking about delivering a low budget desktop editing system.. in generallt he group was pretty exceited about it and several years later the G3 with Firewire was born.
Are3D
01-17-2003, 07:23 PM
wmendez-
All u need now is a Honda logo with the vtech sticker on the back and a wing if you got the extra cash.
All u need now is a Honda logo with the vtech sticker on the back and a wing if you got the extra cash.
wmendez
01-17-2003, 08:09 PM
I actually added some stickers ie Nvidia, Linux Penguin, xsibase.
sorry no Honda or Got Rice? stickers this time around.:cool:
sorry no Honda or Got Rice? stickers this time around.:cool:
CGTalk Moderation
01-14-2006, 04:02 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.