Mac or PC

#1

Hello,

I need an advice about Modo.
What kind of computers seems to be the best choice for working with it, Mac or PC?

Many thanks for your help

Philippe

3D Illustrator
http://www.philipperaimbault.com/

#2

Which platform is better? hehehe! That would just turn into an endless platform-wars thread.

Maybe a better way to answer it is that Luxology really looks after both platforms. This is particularly refreshing for Mac OS X users, as we get equal importance to Windows users. There are some other software companies (who shall remain nameless) who make Mac users feel like they are an afterthought.

Iā€™m using modo on OS X. It runs really nicely. Iā€™m very happy with it.

#3

Just buy the fastest machine you can afford of either platform and modo will run great on it.

OSX is a more elegant solution from the standpoint of OS UI and daily use, but modo runs pretty well on Windozeā€¦I use it on both platforms.

Itā€™s funny, but modo is one of the first non Apple applications on OSX that just feels totally right on OSX (itā€™s beautiful on OSX and Windows).

Cheers.

#4

Hi policarpo.

Iā€™m very happy with the OpenGL response I get with modo, but I also think thereā€™s more to a system than just speed or megahertz. Workflow can be just as much a time saver.

You really are the multi-tool expert, as Iā€™ve seen you posting about your experiences with Lightwave, C4D, MotionBuilder, Modo. You seem to have the lot!

Iā€™m looking forward to Luxology developing their renderer. It was shown at various expos (Siggraph and others), but Lux also demonstrates their software at Mac expos, the last one being the Mac Expo in Paris.

A Quicktime of the entire Paris expo is available here:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/expo04
The Luxology renderer demo is 22 minutes in.

Itā€™s also nice to know that Luxology optimizes their code for both Mac and Windows. Thereā€™s some technical information on Appleā€™s site about how Apple is working with Luxology to optimize the Mac version.
http://developer.apple.com/business/macmarket/luxology.html

#5

Next time you quote me beam, please do so properly. :stuck_out_tongue:

Heheheh.

But seriously, with modo, I think you will be fine regardless of your platformā€¦they have done a great job of building it well for both platforms (it reminds me a lot of C4D in how clean the code and workflow is on either platform). I would just get the fastest machine you can afford, so if and when the animation/rendering component for modo comes out, you wonā€™t be wishing you had.

Cheers.

#6

I use modo on OSX (iMac G5) and it is truly a pleasure to use. On the PC, it had a problem with nVidia cards that have been resolved with new drivers.

Iā€™ve used modo on both platforms and didnā€™t notice any differences in performance. Stick with the OS that best suits you and other apps you may get. BTW, messiah:studio is my only app on the PC. I prefer the mac, but since my Athlon box is still useable, Iā€™ll keep using messiah. :hmm:

-henry

#7

A lot of us are using Modo on OSX, and itā€™s always demoed on a G5 running with OSX, but I think you should choose whatever OS your most comfortable with. Iā€™m sure it runs equally well on an x86 box, and many people are using it on Windows machines.

#8

Well, as someone who uses MACs and PCā€™s daily, I would recommend a PC, but Iā€™m sure there are others who feel differently. The real choice is up to you. What OS are you most comfortable in? I would go with what you know. If youā€™ve been using a Pc, you may get frustrated with the way things are done on a mac.

#9

I use modo both on a dual G5 and on a 2.8 P4 WinXP and it runs great on both paltforms. If it came down to having to make a choice I would pick the PC only because I feel there are some stability issues on the Mac (occasionally get the spinning wheel of death) and I find the open GL performance to be better on the PC (in my opinion).:wise:

The stability issue will probably be resolved with the coming upgrade.

#10

It will work well on either one.

#11

I use it on OS X and XP, and although I hate to admit it, I find it more stable on XP. Like silba said though the patch will probably fix this.

#12

As it stands Lux has been favouring OSX more with xcode etcā€¦ C4d and modo are the only apps with osx power in mindā€¦The others are catching up or dont care for now cause they are dreaming of a 64bit windows.

#13

I wouldnā€™t say dreaming since it exist. As for modo, I believe there really isnā€™t any major difference between platforms so you can choose the one you like the most :slight_smile:

#14

For practical purposes it doesnā€™t exist until it is released. I think all the makers of 3D apps are dreaming of going 64-bit. So, whatever platform one chooses, Iā€™d recommend getting a 64-bit machine so itā€™ll be useful when the 64-bit software comes out.

The Apple G5 is 64-bit hardware
The AMD64/Opteron is 64-bit hardware
Most other Wintel/Pentium machines are 32-bit hardware

#15

Bah, that doesn;t really hold up very well. Itā€™s one thing when you are talking about hardware you canā€™t get or concept cars that never see the street.

Iā€™ve been using Win64 since before Sigraph 2003. Anyone could get it, anyone could install it.
Itā€™s not selling yet, but it certainly exists and it was more than stable enough to develop on.

#16

It would be nice to have a mobile option to take to client visits, etc. Obviously this would be in addition to my design workstation. Anyone using Modo on a 15" PowerBook G4? Is it good, workable, rough, or donā€™t even think about it? Remember it would have to work in front of clientsā€¦

#17

I am using modo with no trouble on a 17" Powerbook 1.5Ghz and 1.5 gig of ram.
I donā€™t notice any difference in responsiveness between it and my desktop (athlon xp 2700 with 1 gig ram and geforce 4200 ti)

#18

Wow. I didnā€™t expect that reply. It has been my experience that even the best laptops pale in comparison to a real workstation.

I would love to hear other users experiences on PBsā€¦ it would be sweet to tell a client, ā€œyes, I can make that tweak for youā€¦ right here and now!ā€ :thumbsup: or do some modeling on a long flight.

#19

Well, a caveat would be that the heaviest model I have done serious work with is 8373 polys.

the Man_FullBody.lwo that was released is a few more than that.
but it seems to run well too. the one thing that I can notice is a slight stutter when you free spin the model with alt-rmb.

hope this helps

#20

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.