Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1- Is it true that for the same buget, a PC based Pro Tools will be more powerfull?
Your Answer:
|
Depends on how you calculate your budget initial hardware cost or total cost of ownership. For example, it is true that initial hardware cost is more for the Mac, however, research demonstrates that total cost of ownership is less for the Mac.
B
|
Which is negated everytime they decide to totally redesign their OS. $150 for Panther, then another $150 for Tiger etc etc. Then all the downtime at every "dot" upgrade since they tend to break third party software (like Pro Tools) almost everytime.
|
You should learn to only upgrade your OS AFTER Digidesign has completed testing and blessed the OS. Then watch the DUC for people who have installed the software and whether or not third party SW still works or not. Only then should you make a decision to upgrade.
Common sense really.
Quote:
OTOH, WinXP has been extremely stable and is less complicated than OS X. It's a more mature platform than OSX now, and they seem to care about compatibility.
|
I am not commenting on stability, maturity, or compatibility. All of which will yield different comments depending on who you talk to, thus moot points.
Quote:
I got tired of Apple forcing me to the bleeding edge all the time and holding me up for more cash to do it.
|
Upgrading an OS is a choice of the user, not the choice of the manufacturer. I am sorry you feel like Steve Jobs is holding a gun to your head demanding you have the very latest OS installed, but in reality, you have a choice. Use it.
-----------------------------------------------------
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1- Is it true that for the same buget, a PC based Pro Tools will be more powerfull?
Your Answer:
|
Depends on how you calculate your budget initial hardware cost or total cost of ownership. For example, it is true that initial hardware cost is more for the Mac, however, research demonstrates that total cost of ownership is less for the Mac.
B
|
Research? lol!!! Yeah, i guess if two baboons are given a mac and a wintel, each will incur similar cost figures...
i have owned both...mac is (by far) more expensive (almost double) for an educated user. For the uneducated, "dont really want to learn" user, it could even up, depending on use and abuse.
Links to research with cost breakdowns?
|
A 2002 Garner study concluded that Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for the mac platform were LESS than PC based.
In 2002 the respected technology research company Gartner concluded a major study of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) between Macintosh and Windows-based platforms. According to Gartner's study Macintosh computers are 36 percent cheaper to run than Windows PCs. In their report the primary reason why Macintosh computers had a lower TCO is because they require less technical support and hardware and software costs were also lower. This translated into direct savings of 25 percent for similar sized organizations.
Moreover, the Gartner study revealed that users felt happier about using Macs than users felt about their PCs. Gartner notes that users on the Mac platform require less technical support and less formal training which may contribute to happier end users. This too generated cost savings due to productivity gains.
The 2002 AEC CAD IT Study by Architosh reveals the leading IT areas within AEC organizations where Macintosh firms gain cost saving advantages over Windows and mixed-platform firms. Of the five key findings in the Architosh study one finding was detrimental to the Macintosh's Total Cost of Ownership average: initial hardware cost (IHC). Back in 2002 the findings revealed that Macintosh only firms spent 12 percent more on initial hardware costs but kept their hardware longer on average than mixed platform and Windows-only firms.
SNIP
In a feature report on Architosh, one of the world's leading CAD (computer-aided design) software developers (who produce software on both Mac and Windows platforms) have shared internal performance test scores with Architosh which reveal just how much more powerful Apple Power Mac G5 systems are than competing Intel-based Windows systems in the same price range. At this point in time Apple's professional Power Mac G5 systems have no equal competition at any price in the PC space. (see Apple G5: Smokes Intel Competition)
In addition to Apple's continued use of standard industry components in its systems -- which led to more price competitiveness with Wintel -- Apple has scored a major victory in the adoption of IBM's phenomenally powerful 64-bit PowerPC 97x microprocessors which are at the heart of Apple G5 systems (Power Macs and Xserve servers). These processors from IBM yield substantial performance advantages for Apple in three major areas: 1) floating-point calculation performance, 2) systems bus connectivity performance, and 3) physical size and energy requirements. In addition the chips yield advantages when software is written for its 64-bit data registers or its extended memory capacity. Apple systems can support up to 8 GB of RAM on current motherboard designs compared to the 4 GB limit on Intel 32-bit processors.
Read more here Opinion: Macintosh OS X Platform To Extend TCO Advantage in Near Future
<
http://www.architosh.com/news/2004-0...mac-tco.phtml>
--------------------------------------------------------
Now getting back to the original poster I would also look to future trends when making a decision like this take a look at the following for life beyond WinXP:
Microsoft Windows is Officially Broken
Here is the link to the LONG article:
<
http://www.smartofficenews.com.au/Co...News/E5T7U6H8>
Microsoft Windows Is Officially Broken
David Richards & WSJ - Monday, 26 September 2005
Windows is broken and Microsoft has admitted it. In an unprecedented attempt to explain its Longhorn problems and how it abandoned its traditional way of working, the normally secretive software giant has given unparalleled access to The Wall Street Journal, even revealing how Vice President Jim Allchin, personally broke the bad news to Bill Gates.
-------------------
B