Talk to me about switching to Mac...and still running XP

[umd]

I would only recommend a mac to someone how doesn't know shit about computers and has a lot of money to spend.

actually, I would recommend PC's to those people.

I would recommend a couple of friggin X-Boxes for those people and keep them away from home computers totally...

Sorry, I'm just bitter because I'm the one who fixes everyone elses damn PC around my way...and its always some mundane stupid thing that they done that screws up their system..

That must be windows then... People who buy macs don't tweak anything.

ps: shit, back to some other windows vs. linux vs. mac osX vs. intel vs. amd thread.

[justamuso]

I switched to a Mac Mini a little over a year ago after using (and programming) PCs since 1981. I knew PC hardware and software inside out, whereas I knew almost nothing about Macs, but because the minis were so cheap I figured I'd see how the other 5% lived.

This last year has been the best year I've ever had using computers, not just for music, but for everything I do in general. Not having to worry about viruses, or spyware, or BSODs ... having my hardware just plug in and work (99% of the time) without having to install drivers which fight with each other ... and OSX itself is a dream to use. On the downside, I do miss a number of plugins that are Windows-only, and there are some websites that won't display correctly in either Safari or Firefox because they're using IE-specific coding, but these are minor niggles and can be worked around.

I've run XP on the mini both via Bootcamp and Parallels. It runs great either way, but is way faster in bootcamp, obviously, because it's running natively and not via an interpreter, so I'd recommend you go down that path unless you really have an urgent need to be able to swap between OSX and XP at a keystroke. Parallels is great, but does slow everything down .

However, I'd advise you to wait until later in the year before committing. The new version of OSX (Leopard, or 10.5) is coming in October, and it contains the full, integrated version of Bootcamp, not a beta. Any bootcamp installation you did now may have to be deleted and reinstalled under Leopard (Apple make no promises).

As for what hardware to get - the mini is great and it's possible to upgrade its CPU if you're not shy about cracking it open (people are upgrading them to 2.33 Dualcores and they run fine). Make sure you get at least 2Gb of RAM (3Gb is the max, unfortunately). It's not too bad for games - I was able to run World of Warcraft on it at fairly high detail levels - but if you really want high end, forget the mini.

My wife has a Macbook Pro now and it's a beast. My only niggle with it is the keyboard feels weird, like it's too big or spaced funny, but YMMV.

You could also consider the iMacs if portability is an issue - monitor and computer all built into one, like a notebook, but the screens are bigger and they are significantly cheaper.

If you want to know anything else specific, feel free to drop me a PM.

[debra1rlo]

That must be windows then... People who buy macs don't tweak anything.

ps: shit, back to some other windows vs. linux vs. mac osX vs. intel vs. amd thread.

Almost correct johnny 1982... Actually it's: People who buy Macs don't need to tweak anything.

[botkiller]

That must be windows then... People who buy macs don't tweak anything.

ps: shit, back to some other windows vs. linux vs. mac osX vs. intel vs. amd thread.

Almost correct johnny 1982... Actually it's: People who buy Macs don't need to tweak anything.

BWAHAHAHHAHA

[joshhunsaker]

let's not forget that macs are based of the debian linux system which is more tweakable than windows will ever be. The problem is you have to know what you are doing inside terminal in order to accomplish anything. There's no access to window's kernel that I know of...

[iain_morland]

Please...let's steer away from the generalised mac vs pc issues! Not that they're not interesting, just that they've been covered before.

I'm particularly interested in hearing about the more subtle distinctions between Mac desktops vs laptops, and budget PC laptops vs expensive ones.

[debra1rlo]

...debian linux..

Debi and Linux? Nope sorry, I never dated him, you must be thinking of another Debi! Nice guy but he has issues...

[botkiller]

Please...let's steer away from the generalised mac vs pc issues! Not that they're not interesting, just that they've been covered before.

I'm particularly interested in hearing about the more subtle distinctions between Mac desktops vs laptops, and budget PC laptops vs expensive ones.

Agreed, let's try to stay on topic for at least one page

Iain, if you're looking for some nice laptops, these guys make some nice stuff: http://www.sonicalabs.com/

[iain_morland]

thanks for the link, botkiller!

[Meloday]

my two main audio apps are Windows only: Audition and Project 5.

personally, i wouldn't switch platforms just for the sake of what is supposedly 'better'. If your main apps are windows only, well, i'd say stick with windows. it's not about the platform, it's about the music, and if Project 5 and Audition help you make the best music then why would you want to give that up?

[Akshara]

I too have a self-built, dual-boot XP desktop system. Having two independent OS partitions, one for studio recording and one for office/internet/gaming, is a very good idea. Besides convenience and personal taste, there aren't any real good reasons not to run a dedicated studio OS; yet there are plenty of reasons to do so, which we don't need to go into here.

To your questions...

I understand it's possible for XP to coexist with OS X using Bootcamp. But how about having two installations of XP as well as OS X? Is that feasible or nuts? The main reason is I want to play some games but not let them clog the DAW XP installation.

Not by default. Bootcamp requires starting with a single partition, and then only allows for creating one Windows partition. There are those who have figured out workarounds to this and been able to create multiple Windows installations under Bootcamp. Run some searches on the Apple Bootcamp Discussion Board over at the Apple website on how to do this. I question whether the effort is worth the payoff however, and I personally wouldn't go this route while Bootcamp is still in the beta stage. Once it's live, maybe.

OSX is an excellent operating system for daily work, like internet, email, office, etc. and you may find that it's more enjoyable than doing the same with WinXP. You're going to have to keep the OSX partition anyway, so might as well use it. There are virtualization programs like Parallels and Fusion which allow one to run WinXP from within OSX, which might be a better solution for Windows gaming than going through the headache of creating a second dedicated WinXP partition just for playing games. I guess it depends on how many and what type of games they are... personally, having a game or two on my studio system would be fine.

Am I right to think a Mac laptop would probably be better quality and more of an investment than a PC laptop? This is my perception, but that might be simply because Apple's marketing is effective!

To a certain degree, you are correct. It's challenging to find a PC laptop that uses the exact or comparable quality components to the recent Macbook Pros within the same price range - similar specs on paper don't necessarily mean equal components. It's not just the hardware though... the design approach Apple uses "under the hood" on all of their Intel Mac systems is really brilliant, and it would be quite a challenge to find or build a PC with such a well thought out design - not impossible, but not easy or cheap to accomplish.

If you go for the Apple Care Protection plan, which is a wise idea to do, you're investment is pretty well covered, at least as well as you'd get with any other manufacturer.

Does running Windows on the latest Mac hardware work as well as on the latest PC hardware?

In most situaitons, yes. There are several published reports which demonstrate that the performance of Windows and some Windows based applications often rivals or surpasses the performance on comparable PC systems, and sometimes of the Apple versions under OSX on the same computer.

Unfortunately, those tests are mainly for graphics applications. There is some debate as to whether these tests translate to pro audio and low latency applications. I've heard reports of certain Firewire interfaces seeing higher latencies under WinXP on the Macbook Pro when compared to the similar PC systems. The problem is this hasn't been officially tested, and so it's hard to know the source or reason for these kind of reports. Bootcamp and the Mac drivers are still under development, so there are some things which are still being worked out. Not everything that works under OSX will work under WinXP, yet.

Are there any known issues with the FireWire Solo and Mac hardware?

I've not seen anything regarding that device. I've read positive reports from users with other M-Audio firewire interfaces with the WinXP/MBP combo, and I'd presume that the Solo would be using similar drivers. RME Fireface users seem to be generally happy too. I've seen negative reports on Motu, Mackie and Yamaha firewire interfaces/mixers, but not really that many.

Are there immanent updates to OS X for which I should wait before buying?

The next big update is to Leopard, which is scheduled for an October release. This will be the first 64-bit OSX version, and will reportedly be the live release of Bootcamp, which will be intergrated into Leopard. Should you wait, I can't say... personally, I wouldn't because Tiger is stable and works, and our studio will have to upgrade a ton of OSX stuff to be 64-bit compatible. But since you don't have any prios OSX investments, waiting might be a good call. Maybe Apple will offer some kind of upgrade plan for recent purchasers as it gets closer to release.

Am I being foolish and should I just get a PC laptop until I'm ready to move entirely to OS X?

I don't think you're being foolish. Going with a Macbook Pro is a smart move for a lot of reasons. Especially right now. I mean in PC land we're having to deal with the whole Vista upgrade push anyway. It won't be long before finding a retail 100% XP compatible system will be a real challenge, except from online legacy retailers and ebay. Microsoft isn't going to develop XP drivers for next-gen hardware, and many manufacturers have already begun releasing systems without XP driver support. It's hard to find a PC notebook of the same quality as a Macbook Pro that isn't running Vista. In my opinion, it's just as much of a gamble buying a new Vista laptop and hoping to install and run XP on it.

The Macbook Pro is a viable alternative for a WinXP system. It's not perfect yet, but it's still a great option. And if you'd like to get into the Apple world too, it's a no-brainer.

HOwever... if tweaking around with Bootcamp beta and reinstalling WinXP multiple times aren't things you'd like to spend time doing; or if OSX and the world of Apple just don't interest you at all, then investing in a 100% XP compatible PC laptop would probably be the wiser choice.

[johnny2johnny]

Are there immanent updates to OS X for which I should wait before buying?



The next big update is to Leopard, which is scheduled for an October release. This will be the first 64-bit OSX version, and will reportedly be the live release of Bootcamp, which will be intergrated into Leopard. Should you wait, I can't say... personally, I wouldn't because Tiger is stable and works, and our studio will have to upgrade a ton of OSX stuff to be 64-bit compatible. But since you don't have any prios OSX investments, waiting might be a good call. Maybe Apple will offer some kind of upgrade plan for recent purchasers as it gets closer to release.

I heard, and can not confirm this to be true, but I definately heard, 64 bit leopard, has technology built into it, that allows, 32 bit software to be used without compatability issues, That all plugins, nomadfactory, or psp, from expensive, to free....... will be sped up by the software, making them not only run well......... but better.

[Akshara]

Yes, the Apple Leopard site states this; but how it actually plays out in practice we'll have to wait and see. It would be a blessing if all of our current 32-bit applications, drivers and hardware components remain compatible in Leopard with zero problems. Based on my past experience with Apple OS upgrades, I'll be surprised if that really ends up being the case.

Thanks for sharing that though. Appreciate the hope.

[iain_morland]

Akshara, I really appreciate your time and detailed advice

Meloday makes a good point about my audio apps being Windows-only (and, incidentally, I'm really not interested in returning to Logic which I used to use on the PC), but in the light of Akshara's post it seems that using a MacBook for a dual boot XP/OSX system would simply be a different way of running a dual boot system (whether of XP/XP or XP/Vista) on a new PC laptop...and would probably have the benefit of better hardware.

But it does also sound like I should wait for Leopard before taking the plunge.

Oh and to clarify a point that came up earlier, Vista seems to me to be the beginning of the end for serious audio work on a PC. Now it's possible that after Vista Microsoft will make a leaner OS that's better for audio, but at the moment Vista seems to be a step back from XP in terms of bloat, slowness, and the hardware costs that are necessary simply to get XP-level performance.

(I used a friend's new dual core Vista laptop last weekend and it was embarrassingly slow in comparison to my 4 year old desktop PC.)

I know this is a contentious point, but certainly up to now I have been happy with Windows, so it's not mindless Microsoft-basing; it's just that Vista looks to me like a dinosaur in comparison to OSX.

So my current plan is to stay with XP for as long as possible, then move to OSX.

[hibidy]

I'm sure it's been mentioned, but a couple of things.

a. I do mac and pc, so I'm independent of "what's best" simply there just are differences between both systems that are fact.

b. On the mac side, you get a nice all in one package mostly.

c. On the mac side, aggragate devices (and gereral extra flexibily overall in audio) I can't run two audio sources at once on windows without crackling/popping UNLESS everything is just right. Not so on mac, you can have different sample rates, differnt soundcards and it works. Pretty important for musicians I would think

d. Macs cost WAY TOO MUCH and do NOT have the cpu performance promised.

e. By and large, the mac-only software is developed by snobish dorks who really could not care less about service/updates/etc......that INCLUDES apple. (audiofinder is the only company I can think of off top that I believe provides superior service and attitude toward customers)

f. So many options for PC......yes, in some cases TOO many options, but options are good.

g. One big problem for PC desktops is choosing. Especially now with vista, what MB? what ram? What hard drive? etc etc etc.......It can be very hard to get it all to play nice sometimes.

h. I don't care for the structure of PC laptops. They seem to usually have all the wrong stuff and not enough of the right stuff (hmmmmm, real 6 pin fw comes to mind at the top of that list )

i. DRIVERS!!!!!, er, or lack of with mac.....nuff said!

j. One definate myth I want to expel........macs are not necessarily more reliable than pc's! However, macs do seem to have the ability to fit hardware and software "together" a bit better.