Well folks, I did a side to side PC/MAC comparison....

[Guest]

I think you are a liar, and I don't even think you have an pc, why?
because first of all if you feel that way about your "peecee" then you're a fool to have an pc in the first place, and don't tell me its because of some need for compatibility because I and everybody knows that there is no need for that in this day and age even if you work in an all pc office and are using a mac, it's a piece of cake to intergrate, so again you would be lying.
but for all I know maybe you do have a pc and just don't know how to use it do to all the ignorance blocking your ability, oh I know its just for acid right? (hahahaha lol)
look the next time you post a bunch of regurgitated crap that you ate the night before, take my advice so you'll at least sound more credible.

1. don't try to say that you can't get your amd computer to work, cause trust me that bunny wabbit will blow your turtle away.

2. and don't try to say that your mac runs flawlessly running 12 apps and making french toast for you because macs are great systems but no computer has that kind of track record, nothing is perfect.

so in closing I hope you see that you are acting like an idiot instead of getting your point across, the general public is much smarter than what you are giving them credit for and smarter than what apple is giving them credit for judging by the commercials they run. if you are going to spend over $500. for a computer don't act like a bitch whining about downloading drivers. I have a mac myself and I will have an amd 2600 soon, and it will smoke my mac and yours, but i will have them working together and I suggest you do the same. So enjoy your mac, and if you really do have a "peecee" then don't be a "neenee" and learn how to use it

[vivaplex]

One who wanted to encourage such banter would be correct in calling you a jerk sir.

I am a little more kind however, so I will defer to simply informing you that such discourse is inappropriate, even if it IS in binary code. BE NICE and maybe YOU would be more credible. My G4 Ghz Powerbook CAN run 14 apps and itunes. what's it to you anyway?

I think you are a liar, and I don't even think you have an pc, why?
because first of all if you feel that way about your "peecee" then you're a fool to have an pc in the first place, and don't tell me its because of some need for compatibility because I and everybody knows that there is no need for that in this day and age even if you work in an all pc office and are using a mac, it's a piece of cake to intergrate, so again you would be lying.
but for all I know maybe you do have a pc and just don't know how to use it do to all the ignorance blocking your ability, oh I know its just for acid right? (hahahaha lol)
look the next time you post a bunch of regurgitated crap that you ate the night before, take my advice so you'll at least sound more credible.

1. don't try to say that you can't get your amd computer to work, cause trust me that bunny wabbit will blow your turtle away.

2. and don't try to say that your mac runs flawlessly running 12 apps and making french toast for you because macs are great systems but no computer has that kind of track record, nothing is perfect.

so in closing I hope you see that you are acting like an idiot instead of getting your point across, the general public is much smarter than what you are giving them credit for and smarter than what apple is giving them credit for judging by the commercials they run. if you are going to spend over $500. for a computer don't act like a bitch whining about downloading drivers. I have a mac myself and I will have an amd 2600 soon, and it will smoke my mac and yours, but i will have them working together and I suggest you do the same. So enjoy your mac, and if you really do have a "peecee" then don't be a "neenee" and learn how to use it

[NeutrixX]

To the idiot that thinks I'm a liar... well guess what buddy (or should I call you dumb as*).... I've got an AMD 1.5 gig with 256 megs of DDRAM sitting here with over 90 gigs of storage and a 333 iMac with 6 gigs of storage with 160 megs of Sodimm ram. One runs XP Pro, and one runs OSX 10.2.3. Can you guess which box runs which OS dummy? You've got alot of balls to call me a liar (proving that you're probably alot younger or just plain ignorant of the facts). Have you tried opening 12 different apps and running an audio program in OSX 10.2.4? If not, then you should shut your trap. Have you tested out my theory on a 1.5 gig AMD PEECEE with a media player trying to play an MP3 without popping at all - all the while trying to run 3 programs in the back? No? Again - Perhaps you should listen more than talk. And by the way, because of the latency issues with the usb keyboard, it is actually alot more productive to use the Mac right now with Reason. I do use both for Live, so no, I'm not purely "bitching" about my peecee (which I got for free), I'm actually stating facts....
Waiting for your smart alecky remark....

[Stubby]

slow down folks we are going to fast. this is a music forum lets play nice.

[gest]

If a 1.5Ghz Athlon system can't run mp3:s smoothly while running a couple of other apps, then there's something wrong with the system.
My old 75 Mhz pentium can do that without a problem.

Oh, and don't get your hopes up for the new PPC970. It's not going to that fast, not even by todays standards. IBM says they will be releasing it late this year, which translates to early next year (this is how the microprocessor industry works). By then, both the Prescott (the new P4 revision) and the Athlon64 will be out.

P4 has been out for a while now but it's still untouched when it comes to architectural features and it would be innovative as hell even if it was released today.

PPC 970 has a few tricks up it's sleeve but in the whole it's a rather conventional processor. And IBM uses highly automated design methodology, which leads to cheaper and faster development, but also (everything else beeing equal) less performance, higher power consumption and more expensive manufacturing.

The only thing that processor will do for apple is maintaining the current performance delta, not reducing it. At least not by a significant amount.

And saying that live is a bad benchmark for macs doesn't make sense. The only relevant benchmark is the software you acutally use. If you use live, compare performance with live. If you use photoshop, benchmark with that.

I think the best way to make live run faster is to multithread it. That will benefit mac as well as pc users.

[Guest]

>>The only thing that processor will do for apple is maintaining the current performance delta, not reducing it.

That's just your guess. You don't know that. The 970's will start out at 1.8-2 GHz and will be 64 bit. Further, expect to see Quad processor boxes, which will utterly rock. I'd pit a quad 970 against a dual Xeon any day, then let's talk about Deltas. Server-wise, the 970 can scale 16 ways.

Plus, being UNIX, expect to see clustering APIs built into OS X itself. The benefit of this will greater than you might imagine. Put your machine on a decent network, and you've got a supercomputer. Literally.

Also, I've been pushing OS X hard for a year now on two different machines, and have had ONE crash between the two machines in a whole year. One! I've also got 2 PC's - on a 98SE (athlon) box, one an XP Pro (P4) box. The 98SE box crashes bi-weekly and the XP box, usually once a month. Plus it's a pain in the ass w/ drivers, and XP gets flakey sometimes where OS X never does. My Win boxes are for games and ACID. And that's it. I need supreme stability and hardcore, smooth mulithreading, and OS X is an awesome workhorse of an OS. Stuff that utilizes OS X's CoreAudio services has practically zero lag - it's unreal.

I've got a dual G4/800 w/ 1.5GB RAM and it handles a serious, serious audio workload without breaking a sweat. Don't believe the hype. Don't sweat the processors (unless you're buying something old) - it's the OS/apps that can make your life hell. Or heaven.

[Guest]

Well I hope IBM do a better job with it than they did with CYRIX CPU's and the processor going 64-bit doesn't automatically scale the applications so that will be another waiting game I guess. Whew, this MAC upgrade progam is running smothly

[Guest]

heehee.....the PC Dweebs are all riled up with the fur on thier backs standing up in defensive posture Hisssssss!

[quandry]

I have a pc laptop- toshiba satelite 2430: P4 (desktop processor) 2.4 g, 1 gig RAM, XP PRo, 120 gig ext FW WD harddrive, 7,200 RPM, 8 MB cache.
Soundcard, RME multiface with PCMCIA cardbus. I can't sing the praises of this setup enough. I recorded band practice last week with 8 channels recording at once with 1.5 ms latency into live with great sound and no skips! try to get a lower latency than that! My friend just got a Titanium Mac OSX with 1 gig RAM and we both agree that my computer smokes his running live! PC's ROck! Mac guys can talk all their smack, pay way more for their stuff, but you can't really argue with numbers and facts, and from my experiences and reading of posts and perfomance statistics here, PC's rule the Live realm!

[Guest]

"heehee.....the PC Dweebs are all riled up with the fur on thier backs standing up in defensive posture Hisssssss"

>Chuckle< Well, that could be true of a few. The rest quietly laugh at people throwing money away on a platform that a) offers less performance, by far, per buck b) MUST be better 'cos MC Donald and the crew all use them in their 'studios' c) is bereft of anything NEAR the support of tools ranging from free to anything you wish to pay and finally d) is quite honestly, as far as OSX goes, one great big beta-test programme at this point while plugs\apps\programming knowledge gathers pace. And you get to pay big bucks to get in on the programme, great deal!!

A year or two down the line and I 'may' join you guys again depending on a number of factors as OSX has the potential to be something special for us noiseoholics. When all is proven and running up to par. Until then, call me old fashioned, paying WAY more for WAY less isn't a sensible option. I know and have owned Macs but the only reason I can see people buying into the platform is the snob and cock-size factor.

16 I/O, 2.2GHz, 160GB RAID, 1.5ms, cash left over for a 2 week holday in the mediteranean. Nah, pass

[Guest]

will this stupid thread never die?? pointless.....

[quandry]

will this stupid thread never die?? pointless.....

Maybe buying a brand new computer in excess of $2000 is stupid and pointless to you, moneybags, but to us people working out in the real world, we want to know we are getting the most for our money when we throw down serious cash on a computer. I think this is an extremely relevant thread to anyone interested in Live, or interested in purchasing a new computer geared toward Live. I know this thread will be helpful to those out there doing research before making a serious investment in a computer. This is especially relevant since so many people will tell you to get a mac (and spend way more $), but when you do the reasearch and start to look at the numbers and Live's performance on mac vs pc, it quickly becomes apparent that PC's are simply faster and can handle more tracks, effects... than macs--bottom line. Not only that, but a pc system will be considerably less expensive than a mac.

[stew]

You would want to consider more than just raw CPU performance. While my Dell notebook is a lot faster and has a bigger screen (1600x1200) than my iBook, I would never take the Dell to a club. The iBook is much more rugged and more likely do endure hot moist smoky air and accidental beer spillings. For me, the Dell is the studio machine where the iBook is for the road.

[Guest]

quandry,
I was referring to the mac-pc bashing ... and that simply is pointless.

Not only that, but a pc system will be considerably less expensive than a mac.

a good, hi-quality pc laptop (sony, toshiba) will cost just about the same give or take a couple of hundred Euros.[/i]

[Guest]

Not a chance. We have just bought both a PC and Mac laptop where I am working, although not solely for audio purposes, and with PLENTY of shopping around we got a Compaq Presario 2111 (Compaq are way better lately since Hewlett Packard took over operations) with an AMD XP2200+, Mobility Radeon graphics (like the Apple and will dual screen via the monitor connector), Firewire, CDR\RW for £800. The Apple 867Mhz lappie, while certainly of better construction externally, is greatly underspecced in comparison and cost OVER twice as much!!

The Compaq has really surprised me, it's behaving itself in every way though the screen is SLIGHTLY inferior and washed out in comparison to the Apple. The onboard sound isn't up to much performance-wise (re latency) but with that saving you could buy and Audiophile USB which would take that department past the Apple, and STILL get a cheap return air-fare to Australia or sunny island of your choice with the change!!

By the way, if anyone has trouble getting low-latency with the onboard soundcard in their PC, try these... www.asio2ks.de. The latency with Live here went from around 50ms to 3ms!!

With competition comes pressure on manufacturers to offer more for less. I don't know about where you live but around these parts there is NO chance of negotiating with an Apple retailer (if you can find one) except on models that are being phased out.

£1000 difference and the more expensive machine can't crunch numbers, and is no mor stable, anywhere near the one that cost over half the price. The Mac is very well made there is no doubt and theres a purdy button for the PCMCIA slot etc but boy do you get to pay for it and apart from looks the Compaq leaves it in the dust when it comes to actually running as a system performance wise.