Even that fails because if you really want a silent computer, you'll get one that's liquid cooled. I had a liquid cooled Acer 2-in-1 a few years ago that was fanless and only cost me about US$900. It was a terrific little machine and I did most of the production work for the first version of our most recent album on it (before we decided to re-do it on Cubase, by which time I had a new Dell).
echosystm wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 23, 2021 4:31 am
I'll take a simple example. Tell me the model of your laptop and I'll tell you the last time it had a CVE for the CPU and how long it took Dell to fix it (if they fixed it at all). I predict it will be at least twice as long as Apple, assuming they fixed it at all.
And anyone would care about arcane shit like that because... ? BTW, my current laptop is an Asus, not a Dell, and it's not been patched by Asus since I got it. There are a couple of things queued up but I haven't bothered running them. OTOH, Dell used to patch my last one fairly regularly so they were probably well on top of that kind of shit I don't care about. And, honestly, I really
don't care about that shit. If those are the lengths you have to go to, it helps make my case, in that it is something which does not make your "experience with S1 on Mac
" better, as you claimed. It's not a "tangential reason", it is completely unrelated.
lb24569 wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 23, 2021 7:42 am
- Core Audio baked into the OS, not having to rely on an ASIO driver.
Why is that better? You've stated a simple fact, you've not show why or how that's any kind of advantage. And nobody has to rely on ASIO anyway. Windows has it's own audio system, which works quite well these days. With Studio One, I get comparable performance using Windows Audio to ASIO. We can use either on stage, which gives us a bit of redundancy that you probably don't have in macOS. Choice is a good thing,
- Built in Aggregate Device support.
? Do you mean the ability to use multiple devices at once? So I could output Studio One to my USB audio device and hear it through my laptop speakers at the same time? I can see how that might be handy, although I can't imagine too many use-cases for it. But it's definitely a tick in the box for macOS.
- No need to mess around with the OS's power settings to get optimal audio performance.
Nor here, beyond setting up power management to suit me, rather than having to put up with whatever Microsoft decided was best for me, which is something I've been doing since before I ever even thought about using a computer for music. Again, you are taking something that is an advantage of Windows - choice - and trying to make it seem like a bad thing. Choice is never
a bad thing.
- No loss of audio performance when running their laptops on battery
Why would you think it was otherwise with Windows? Sure, you can set it up to be like that but that's because Windows is much better at managing your battery than macOS is. Again, an advantage for Windows.
- Most hardware manufactures prioritise MacOS support
You mean like nVidia? Oh, that's right, you can't use nVidia graphics on a Mac, you're stuck with inferior AMD/ATi krap. In any event, I don't prioritise support, I prioritise a set-up that won't require any.
I could keep going...
But you'd just be digging yourself a deeper hole. From the things you've listed, it seems you are afraid of choice and want someone to take away all your options and make all those decisions for you, which I find exceedingly strange.
I ordered a Dell XPS and had terrible latency issues, sent it back to dell. Sticking with Apple for all things mobile.
From what you've said so far, I think that's probably for the best in your case. You're clearly used to having someone else do everything for you, which makes macOS a natural fit for you. OTOH, while I am by no means a tinkerer, I prefer to make my own decisions about how my computer works, whether it goes into a low power mode when it's on battery power or it stays on full power and which plan is the default.
If your happy to tinker with your PC to get optimal performance that's perfectly fine but for the rest who like to just get their work done and focus more on the work itself, don't go saying that Mac's being better is "made up"
I imagine you probably spend more time choosing your desktop wallpaper than I spend setting a new PC up the way I want it to work. And it only needs to be done once, so we're talking 5 minutes over the lifetime of ownership. Hardly the kind of imposition that would force you to make a different choice. OTOH, having 32 bit support taken away on a whim, as Apple did with Catalina, is a really
good reason to f**k them off on the spot, I reckon. Not just because of the repercussions of doing that but because of the message it sends to every user that Apple don't give a flying f**k about you, if they can save a few bucks on development costs, they'll ruthlessly f**k off anything. And before you say "who cares
", I'll point out that we made 4 albums using 32 bit software and if we want to be able to play those songs live, we need access to that 32 bit software so we can get the song(s) ready to import into a 64 bit environment. e.g. By removing 32 bit only plugins (mostly my SE synths) and finding suitable replacements that also have a 64 bit version. It is something we can do on an as required basis but if we'd been on a Mac, it would have been a huge f**k-around getting everything done, just in case, so we could upgrade to the latest OS. But if you think putting up with that kind of capricious bullshit if preferable to spending two minutes creating a custom power-plan once every few years, then have at it but don't try and tell me it's not the dumbest decision imaginable.