PDA

View Full Version : Run Mac OS on your PC



Jim_C
05-14-2008, 08:19 PM
Step by Step instructions leak...
Apple looks the other way...for now


http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/software/os/0,1000001098,39415279-1,00.htm

pneuma
05-14-2008, 09:26 PM
I haven't used apple computers regularly in quite some time, but apple would be wise to start selling software that works on PC... While I don't bother buying new macs because of the price and propriety, OSX is certainly my preferred OS. But if I have to choose between my favorite OS and having to spend $2000 for a full size tower with expansion slots, I will choose windows every time.

jin choung
05-14-2008, 10:52 PM
"looks the other way" is code for "there's nothing really they can do anyway?" : )

jin

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 04:58 AM
It'll be interesting to see how Mac OS X performs on a PC. Since we already know that XP/Vista runs faster on Mac hardware than PC hardware, I'm guessing it would be dog slow...unless Apple decide to port it :hey:


"looks the other way" is code for "there's nothing really they can do anyway?" : )


True, the iPhone was locked and some people managed to bypass it and with each firmware update Apple would try to counter the hacks, then the hacks would find new ways to unlock it. Well now we'll have an unlocked G3 iPhone...soon, I guess it's all part of the game :D

Kuzey

hrgiger
05-15-2008, 05:00 AM
Why on earth would you want that? That's just silly.

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 05:09 AM
That's the funny bit...why not just get a Mac mini and call it a day :D

Kuzey

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 06:26 AM
Hi there neverko good of you to show up. :D

Yes, sorry....I was talking about the Macbook Pros being the fastest PC note books on the market.


Even on the same Mac, LightWave and modo run/render a little faster under Windows than under OSX.


Wouldn't that mean its the software not the OS that causing the lag.

Kuzey

Jim_C
05-15-2008, 06:48 AM
Why on earth would you want that? That's just silly.


Well if I could get LiveType and DVD Studio (Mac apps I could personally benefit from ) to run on this new quad core PC I have, then that might be something.

If it worked properly, it would certainly be cheaper (and more powerful) than buying a Mac mini.

'Worked properly' being the key words here tho.

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 07:06 AM
Not really, as far as I have understood it, the render code in these 3d applications is exactly the same across the different platforms. It's practically the best way to benchmark real processing performance across systems.
Only if the compiler is the same. If it isn't then it's a good way to benchmark processing speed using different compilers on different platforms... ;)

Cheers,
Mike

mattclary
05-15-2008, 07:29 AM
It'll be interesting to see how Mac OS X performs on a PC. Since we already know that XP/Vista runs faster on Mac hardware than PC hardware


WTF are you talking about? It's the same freaking hardware.

Never mind, see your other response. Still not sure what you mean by "the fastest PC notebook out there"... Same response, WTF are you talking about? Is it using some secret CPU/motherboard that is unavailable to PC manufacturers?

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 07:29 AM
But that wasn't what you wrote :) Besides there are faster, less expensive laptops than the Apple line.

True indeed...but I was thinking it as I was typing, however it just didn't come out the same :D

Sometimes my thoughts and my fingers don't see eye to eye and do their own thing when typing things down :eek:

Kuzey

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 07:35 AM
WTF are you talking about? It's the same freaking hardware.

Matt :D

It's not 100% the same, some parts maybe, but not every element....I would say the Mac side is better but that's just me :hey:

kuzey

mattclary
05-15-2008, 07:41 AM
Matt :D

It's not 100% the same, some parts maybe, but not every element....I would say the Mac side is better but that's just me :hey:

kuzey

If I remember correctly, Apple uses Foxconn motherboards, FAR from the best you can get. :ohmy:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200280+50002136&name=FOXCONN

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 07:50 AM
Out of genuine curiosity, what do you base that opinion on? I'd really like to know! Simply because it's a Mac? Or do you have some technical argumentation to present? Is it a touchy-feely opinion, or something based on hard tangible qualities?

I just remember reading somewhere (some years ago) that it was how Macs where put together that made the real different in performance. I found this just now and it seems similar to what I remember:

http://www.switchingtomac.com/wp/mac-vs-pc-part-5-hardware/

:D

Mike you can jump in about........Now :D

Kuzey

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 08:03 AM
Mike you can jump in about........Now :D

:jam: You're just teasing... right?

Allright, I'll byte... ;)

Pricewise the Macs are quite decent nowadays... if you want what Apple offers you (I find that I rarely do).
So it is more about PCs offering more choice in hardware than anything else nowadays (Apple imho has huge gaps in their product line between the iMacs and the Pros - an area where a large part of currently sold PCs in the 1000US$ range seem to be).

i.e. the mini is nice and cheap for the size - even compared to same size PCs ... but for the money you can get a decent quad core PC (in a huge case, obviously)...

Cheers,
Mike

mattclary
05-15-2008, 08:48 AM
I just remember reading somewhere (some years ago) that it was how Macs where put together that made the real different in performance. I found this just now and it seems similar to what I remember:

http://www.switchingtomac.com/wp/mac-vs-pc-part-5-hardware/



OK, I'm with Neverko on this. What they say is... humorous at best. Computer components are mass produced, just like every other consumer product. I promise you that Foxconn has jack and sh*t on Intel for designing and building motherboards. When I build an Intel system (for myself), I use an Intel motherboard, the things are virtually bullet proof.



The real difference with the Mac hardware over a PC is how Apple handpicks and configures all the components to run with absolute optimization on Apple’s own OS X operating system.

Now, what I MIGHT grant you is what is well established. A big reason OSX is pretty stable is that Apple has a very narrow range of hardware they support. So in this sense, you might consider the hardware "hand picked", but I promise you, Steve jobs is not lovingly sorting through computer components, picking only the best and giving them his blessing.

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 08:51 AM
So in this sense, you might consider the hardware "hand picked", but I promise you, Steve jobs is not lovingly sorting through computer components, picking only the best and giving them his blessing.
While that is true, Apple does get advance shipments of upcoming products (mainly CPUs). Having said that, due to the fast product cycles, it seems they're a few months ahead during the launch of a new product on selected parts... and then start trailing until the next revision is released.

Cheers,
Mike

pneuma
05-15-2008, 12:01 PM
:jam: You're just teasing... right?

Allright, I'll byte... ;)

Pricewise the Macs are quite decent nowadays... if you want what Apple offers you (I find that I rarely do).
So it is more about PCs offering more choice in hardware than anything else nowadays (Apple imho has huge gaps in their product line between the iMacs and the Pros - an area where a large part of currently sold PCs in the 1000US$ range seem to be).

i.e. the mini is nice and cheap for the size - even compared to same size PCs ... but for the money you can get a decent quad core PC (in a huge case, obviously)...

Cheers,
Mike

That's just it, everytime I see someone say they want a cheaper mac, that person is told to buy a mini or imac... Well... I want more than that, I need PCI /PCI-X /PCI express slots for addon cards. It's not enough for me to just have tiny little thing that that turns into a paper weight in two years...

I love the mac OS, don't get me wrong, but I want it to run on any PC hardware so I can build one economically and get the features I want without wasting money.

Bog
05-15-2008, 12:31 PM
Hmm. I've got a spare box I could try this on. It'll save a lot of hassle when I get Mac-only files from someone. I'll post my findings, if I actually do this.

jin choung
05-15-2008, 12:50 PM
want to clarify - again, these are statements of fact - NOT opinion. so while opinions can vary, facts are either right or wrong.

and as for the superiority of mac hardware... uhhhhh... yeah, especially since they're running intel chips now... and considering that apple doesn't make their own mobos... i'm gonna call bs on that....

jin

jin choung
05-15-2008, 12:57 PM
although undoubtedly, the fact that they control which components get used cuts down on the variability of hardware faced on the pc side and so they're less apt to run into unexpected compatibility issues that sometimes plague diy'ers like meself.

but i do say, "less apt" and not "won't"

jin

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 03:25 PM
LOL, that article is humorous. It tickles my funny bone in ways most hilarious.



ROFL!

That site is retarded.

No offense, but if you want to argue Mac vs. PC hardware you better get some better argumentation than things you read on Mac-centric sites. Those are so full of BS that Apple should pay them money for keeping their customers oblivious.

I did prefaced it by saying "I found this just now", I just clicked on the first one..but yes I remember things like bottlenecks etc.

Take it anyway you like. :hey: But it makes sense, if you have a great chip and if a component connected to it or relies on it is not as good...then the overall performance will go down....Yes/No :D

Here's a PC v Mac test and I don't think you can call this one Mac-centric.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/reviews/4258725.html?page=1

Mike....you were no help at all :tsktsk: :D

Kuzey

Kuzey
05-15-2008, 03:40 PM
Hey Bog,

Let us know how it turns out....here's one to get you inspired :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79AC1NWvlkc

Kuzey

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 04:04 PM
Here's a PC v Mac test and I don't think you can call this one Mac-centric.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/reviews/4258725.html?page=1

That depends on how you look at it. In a way they let Apple rule the specs for testing (by trying to find a PC that matches the iMac specs and then using that as a machine to compare to).
Which is what I basically meant. For the same price they could've easily gotten a nice quad machine with a decent LCD on the PC side... and then the benchmarks would be a lot different.


Mike....you were no help at all :tsktsk: :D

:hey:

Cheers,
Mike

Verlon
05-15-2008, 04:07 PM
Apple MIGHT be able to take some advantage by using only selected components, but they do not make said components.

Beyond that, you can buy the exact same parts and build your own PC, or you can buy BETTER parts and build a BETTER PC. On a good day, you can buy better parts and build a BETTER Mac.

PC hardware updates faster than Macs (or game consoles--same argument, only consoles at least use hardware that isn't found in PCs).

jin choung
05-15-2008, 04:20 PM
yeah the tests didn't even compare machines that were specd the same.

i guess they were the same kind of "consumer product" but you can't really compare stuff that has different speed processors (advantage mac) and different ram (advantage pc) etc....

----------------------------------------------

this would be a fair test -

get a g5 or whatever with leotard and then have a hobbyist site or somebody spec out the exact equivalent in terms of speed of chips, number of cores and amount of ram to the g5. and since we're talkin' about "mac components" and their lack of bottlenecking or whatever, the pc side would be allowed to choose whatever mobo they wanted (because the argument would be that the mac has a jeunosequa quality that beats pc in all cases right?).

then load up leotard on the pc too and have them duke it out.

if the mac wins in that contest, they have a claim to fame fair and square.

jin

p.s. we should allow the pc the advantage of running the best and fastest ddr3 sticks on a ddr3 mobo too since that is an edge that the pc can exploit but the mac cannot but even without, i think the pc would do fine in the shootout.

Andyjaggy
05-15-2008, 04:30 PM
Using a mac makes me feel special.

archijam
05-15-2008, 04:44 PM
Using a mac reminds me I'm in Switzerland.

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 04:56 PM
Using a mac reminds me I'm in Switzerland.
Is it that slow? :D

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
05-15-2008, 04:57 PM
Using a mac makes me feel special.

is it THAT slow?

: )

jin

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 05:01 PM
is it THAT slow?

: )

:confused: - :ohmy:

Cheers,
Mike (oh, and I am planning on getting a second Mac this year...).

archijam
05-15-2008, 05:16 PM
Is it that slow? :D

Cheers,
Mike

Speed is irrelevant in Switzerland.

It's shiny and expensive looking (they paid).

Oh and the university uses ical to synchronize us :P

Hopper
05-15-2008, 05:36 PM
Ummmm I'm sure this is going to sound odd - and I'm obviously late to the game, but ... I'm not sure what the deal is about. I've been running the Mac OS on my PC for over 3 months now. Is this supposed to be some sort of taboo stuff or did I totally miss the boat on what the thread was about?

Lightwolf
05-15-2008, 05:38 PM
...or did I totally miss the boat on what the thread was about?
The mighty ZDNet now finding out about it ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Jim_C
05-15-2008, 05:53 PM
The mighty ZDNet now finding out about it ;)

and some lame-o posting about it like a cure for cancer

Quiet1onTheSet
05-15-2008, 06:09 PM
Well if I could get LiveType and DVD Studio (Mac apps I could personally benefit from ) to run on this new quad core PC I have, then that might be something.

If it worked properly, it would certainly be cheaper (and more powerful) than buying a Mac mini.

'Worked properly' being the key words here tho.I'm with you, on this "silly" notion, Jim.

Someone unwittingly gave me a really thick DVD Studio bible, so to speak, for Christmas. I'd like to put it to use, without necessarily plunking down the dough for a Mac, if that's at all possible.

Thanks for posting the link earlier.

Q1
:D

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 04:27 AM
...And please, don't use a Gateway PC as a serious comparison for any test. Like Mike said, you can build a vastly superior PC for the price of an iMac.....

Hey Neverko, think we're getting a bit of inverted snobbery here! (you warned me once about snobbery in software and were right in that instance, but here you seem to be going off the rails)

You're comparing Macs to custom made PCs.

Apple costs more, but there are huge advantages for some people and it's only about 10-15% more these days. Just because S Jobs can be a jerk doesn't mean anything more than that. Gates charity work is outstanding and maybe makes him the superior man but when he talks about Windows he sounds like a moron.

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 04:40 AM
You're comparing Macs to custom made PCs.

Maybe he was, I wasn't. The shop where I currently freelance just purchased a couple of Dell workstations, mid-range Quadro gfx cards, Q6600 quad core, 4GB Ram... less than 600€ (which is about the price of the smallest mini).

Cheers,
Mike

Bog
05-16-2008, 04:42 AM
You're comparing Macs to custom made PCs.


I'd say that's a fair comparison. If you buy a PC with similar-grade components to a Mac, then you'll pay about the same as a Mac and get similar levels of power from it. This is where the "which OS?" question gets interesting, in terms of which is more efficient, which can be set up for the lowest CPU loading and memory footprint, and therefore which goes faster when you hit F10.

I'm fairly impartial on the subject, as I hate both PCs and Macs. I want my quad-core Amiga, damn it.

Bog
05-16-2008, 04:44 AM
I'd say that's a fair comparison. If you buy a PC with similar-grade components to a Mac, then you'll pay about the same as a Mac and get similar levels of power from it. This is where the "which OS?" question gets interesting, in terms of which is more efficient, which can be set up for the lowest CPU loading and memory footprint, and therefore which goes faster when you hit F10.

I'm fairly impartial on the subject, as I hate both PCs and Macs. I want my quad-core Amiga, damn it.

*edit* I take it back, Macs are still more expensive for the grunt they evolve. Lightwolf's post just highlighted that.

*editedit* Damn, hit "quote" not "edit". Sorry.

meshpig
05-16-2008, 05:28 AM
"teleologically speaking, information, of all and every kind, is meant - destined - to be free."

Information of all and every kind?

-The obvious problem with digital information and 'Teleology' is that you too readily arrive at the purpose before the phenomena because it is too obviously already designed. Machine builders.

I mean Emmanuel Kant argued against "metaphysical causes" but we are a long way from that.

"Teleologically speaking" is only one step away from "intelligent design" and besides if you consider information of every kind, it isn't hard to see how it isn't at all destined to be or meant to be "free".

ie. photons take millions of years to escape the gravity of the Sun and who knows where that kind of information will ultimately end up in the Universe? I mean how can you say a photon is meant to be free?

m

Bog
05-16-2008, 05:35 AM
"teleologically speaking, information, of all and every kind, is meant - destined - to be free."

Hum. Sweeping statements like that give me a nervous tic in my left eyelid, mainly because that's in the class that ignores volition.

Many things seem as though they're "meant to be". Air's meant to be free, and gravity should even work on weekends - but humanity has a habit of piddling in the brew when it comes to "natural order".

Information is the most costly commodity on the planet - and using that information is generally at least as costly. I suppose it's truer to say that information is destined to be free once it's copyright term expires - though I'm with Larry Lessig on how copyright terms should be managed - and while we're waxing metaphysical, despite humanity's fiddlefart interference with "natural orders" (messy local hiati of entropy that we are), if it's not being interpreted by an intelligence, it's not information - it's just data.

So any framework we adopt has to give credence of human nature, otherwise it is of necessity invalid. Until such time as we encounter or construct a nonhuman intelligence that we actually pay attention to, anyway.

meshpig
05-16-2008, 05:41 AM
... you mean some kind of hope that "freedom of information" would somehow be ultimately desirable?

Mmm, what about the colloquial expression "too much information"?

m

Bog
05-16-2008, 05:42 AM
Mmm, what about the colloquial expression "too much information"?


I'm naked.

QED

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 05:44 AM
Maybe he was, I wasn't. The shop where I currently freelance just purchased a couple of Dell workstations, mid-range Quadro gfx cards, Q6600 quad core, 4GB Ram... less than 600€ (which is about the price of the smallest mini).

Cheers,
Mike

That seems very good value if it includes the VAT. The mini-mac is a special thing though and you pay for it's small size. I bought one for a laptop replacement (and for Windows on Bootcamp). They are in one way beautiful little gems but the video card, if it has any, is exceptionally dreadful.

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 05:48 AM
That seems very good value if it includes the VAT. The mini-mac is a special thing though and you pay for it's small size.
That's my point though... What Apple offers is fairly decent everything considered... but Apple doesn't cover everybodies needs and has a wide gaping hole in the product range.

Cheers,
Mike

meshpig
05-16-2008, 06:00 AM
Hum. Sweeping statements like that give me a nervous tic in my left eyelid, mainly because that's in the class that ignores volition.



Wasn't my statement to begin with.


m

Kuzey
05-16-2008, 06:04 AM
That depends on how you look at it. In a way they let Apple rule the specs for testing (by trying to find a PC that matches the iMac specs and then using that as a machine to compare to).
Which is what I basically meant. For the same price they could've easily gotten a nice quad machine with a decent LCD on the PC side... and then the benchmarks would be a lot different.

:hey:

Cheers,
Mike

Don't get me wrong Mike, but I was hoping you would talk about the first article, you know problems like bottlenecks, bus speed etc. and how they/components (other than the chip) would affect the overall performance on the PC side. You know all the technical stuff I thought you knew so well :D


Kuzey

Glendalough
05-16-2008, 06:06 AM
... This is where the "which OS?" question gets interesting, in terms of which is more efficient, which can be set up for the lowest CPU loading and memory footprint, and therefore which goes faster when you hit F10.

I'm fairly impartial on the subject, as I hate both PCs and Macs. I want my quad-core Amiga, damn it.

Agreed here & Yes it's about the OS.

This idea of running OSX on a PC is really GOOD NEWS for everybody.

Mac OSX is at the moment a good system. That is, if S Jobs doesn't ruin it by jamming it with itunes shop (and now Qtime Hollywood). Also if it gets really heavy on the code like Vista it would be bad.

It's just Vsta is such disappointment, MS had everything in the world going for them and they turn this out. Really depressing. Like when Windows 95 appeared people went out and bought it even though some didn't even have computers. Just the buzz and the reality was so good and exciting and you could forgive the short comings.

But with Vista a decision has been made that market share and dominance has priority, therefore the end user is really getting a flawed product, ie its about what the company wants (THEIR interests) and not the consumer. And if this wasn't bad enough, they try to cover their steps with all sorts of BS speak and posturing, end up inventing a totally (windows centric) crazy language, which is really no use to anybody.

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 06:12 AM
Don't get me wrong Mike, but I was hoping you would talk about the first article, you know problems like bottlenecks, bus speed etc. and how they/components (other than the chip) would affect the overall performance on the PC side.
To be quite honest, I consider that a moot point currently. On the Apple side of things there's no choice anyhow (so why compare tech specs?), while on the PC side there's plenty of sites dedicated to comparing the various architectures.

And the bottlenecks due to specific architecture tend to show up more or less depending on the kind of application you're running (i.e. AMD seems to still be ahead in the 4 and more CPU sockets game - but only a few scenarios profit from that).

FSB, Ram latency, Ram speed, CPU cache sizes etc... add so many variables ... with each one only changing the scores in most cases by a single digit % - that I'd just say: go for what you can afford and need ;)

Cheers,
Mike

mattclary
05-16-2008, 06:13 AM
Here's a PC v Mac test and I don't think you can call this one Mac-centric.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/reviews/4258725.html?page=1



1. They tested OSX vs. Vista - instant lose for the PC right there

2. I will grant OSX will be faster than Windows at many things (but so is Linux)

3. They did not test Windows on Apple hardware, so you can not assume the hardware is what makes the Apple faster.

In case I haven't already made it crystalline:
What makes an Apple fast is it's operating system, not it's hardware.

I think OSX sounds really awesome, and one day, if I can ever run it on a machine I built (legally and/or without having to jump through hoops), I will give it a try.

meshpig
05-16-2008, 06:16 AM
Talking of information as communication, these forums are pretty much as imperfect as it ever was.

The basic definition of language and who transmits it by having the capacity and by using it is like so according to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Émile_Benveniste

Émile Benveniste.

In short and for example: when a Bee finds a food source and communicates it's coordinates to another Bee that's not strictly Language. Like it's analogical.

But when the second Bee passes on the derails to a third Bee, that's Language.

m

Kuzey
05-16-2008, 06:20 AM
Please, if you want to argue hardware do so with your own experience and knowledge, not with bad articles from the web. You need to know hardware to argue hardware. At least just a little :)

The moment a guy writes "400 MHz doesn't make a lot of difference in this age of dual-core chips" I close the article and determine the author as a dim-wit.

And please, don't use a Gateway PC as a serious comparison for any test. Like Mike said, you can build a vastly superior PC for the price of an iMac.

As I've always said many times, Apple relies strongly on the average person's lack of computer knowledge as part of their lame-o marketing. And "serious" "journalists" seem to lap it all up with lack of knowledge about the things they write about.

I found you a test that wasn't from a Mac site :D

Ok forget about the desktops...what about the results for the laptops, you can't build a custom laptop like you can a Desktop. So those results would be fairer/correct, yes I know they didn't test other PC brands as well but there you go :hey:

All I know, when I wip my 8 year old G3 iBook out (slow bugger) it still turns heads everytime and that goes double for Mac OS X. And thats always from PC guys :D

Kuzey

mattclary
05-16-2008, 06:24 AM
And please, don't use a Gateway PC as a serious comparison for any test. Like Mike said, you can build a vastly superior PC for the price of an iMac.


Given a clean install of the OS, a Gateway will do as well as a custom built machine with the same or similar components. Same argument I made about Apple, they are just using (more or less) industry standard parts. There is nothing inherently superior or inferior about the actual hardware.

Now, that said, I build all my own. I can pick better (industry standard) parts, and get a better bang for my buck than you can from any pre-made computer (Apple, Gateway, Dell, Alienware...)

mattclary
05-16-2008, 06:27 AM
I found you a test that wasn't from a Mac site :D

Ok forget about the desktops...what about the results for the laptops, you can't build a custom laptop like you can a Desktop. So those results would be fairer/correct, yes I know they didn't test other PC brands as well but there you go :hey:

All I know, when I wip my 8 year old G3 iBook out (slow bugger) it still turns heads everytime and that goes double for Mac OS X. And thats always from PC guys :D

Kuzey

It's the OS, not the hardware. You should be able to find a Windows laptop with better specs than that Apple, and the Apple would probably still kick it's ***.

The reason I don't use an Apple is they are overpriced and have less software available. Well, that, and I would then be an Apple user... ;)

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 06:27 AM
All I know, when I wip my 8 year old G3 iBook out (slow bugger) it still turns heads everytime...
That happens to me everytime I whip out the A4000/060 - and that's from PC people as well (as in Windows and OSX based PCs). Anitquities always have a certain charm to them ... :D

Cheers,
Mike

Kuzey
05-16-2008, 06:29 AM
To be quite honest, I consider that a moot point currently. On the Apple side of things there's no choice anyhow (so why compare tech specs?), while on the PC side there's plenty of sites dedicated to comparing the various architectures.

And the bottlenecks due to specific architecture tend to show up more or less depending on the kind of application you're running (i.e. AMD seems to still be ahead in the 4 and more CPU sockets game - but only a few scenarios profit from that).

FSB, Ram latency, Ram speed, CPU cache sizes etc... add so many variables ... with each one only changing the scores in most cases by a single digit % - that I'd just say: go for what you can afford and need ;)

Cheers,
Mike

There you go, so that article people laughed off could have some truth to it, since there is no choice on the Mac the components would have to be optimized to get the best performance. And throw any off the shelf component in a PC without optimization.. could lead to slow down in performance no matter how small :beerchug:

Kuzey

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 06:40 AM
There you go, so that article people laughed off could have some truth to it, since there is no choice on the Mac the components would have to be optimized to get the best performance. And throw any off the shelf component in a PC without optimization.. could lead to slow down in performance no matter how small :beerchug:

Not necessarily. If it's from Apple, take it or leave it. There is no point in discussing components because of that (wanna compare what, a mini vs. an iMac vs. a Mac Pro?).
If it is an off the shelf windows based box, go ahead, there is choice and plenty of reason to discuss it. But don't compare it to a platform with limited choice, because you will either end up with a comparison like the one in the link ... or apples vs. oranges like the quad based machines that I currently like to use.

Either way there is little point, and as other stated, you only end up comparing the OS in the end.

Cheers,
Mike

Bog
05-16-2008, 06:48 AM
There you go, so that article people laughed off could have some truth to it, since there is no choice on the Mac the components would have to be optimized to get the best performance. And throw any off the shelf component in a PC without optimization.. could lead to slow down in performance no matter how small :beerchug:


I always assumed that Macs would have more efficient drivers and such than PCs. Given that Windows has to have a whole spread of drivers for every variant peice of kit under the sun, or at least provisions for drivers for them, that would (to my mind) open the machine as a whole to slowdowns from badly written drivers, as well as it's generalised infrastructure being a bit more lumpy.

Macs, on t'other hand, presumably have hand-crafted drivers for their specific components, which implies (not ensures, merely implies) that they'd be more refined code, better written and therefore faster. Just because you could focus on writing the specific driver for the specific subsystems of the machine, rather than having to account for everything.

Of course, this may be complete bunk. You can't overstate the value of tight, optimised code, though - I saw a Commodore 64 demo showing bump-map lighting once.

safetyman
05-16-2008, 11:46 AM
<Stands on soapbox> I think it is interesting how Apple has always touted their products as "thinking different" or "freeing the people" like in the famous 1984 television ads. But in reality, the PC has always been an "open" platform where you could customize it to your hearts content, whereas with the Mac, you had to use their hardware choices or you were risking some serious issues. Maybe thats not as true today with the Intel Macs and such, but its always been a very strange situation. I say this because I noticed a review of a Leopard-based system on CNET http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/psystar-open-computer/4505-3118_7-32978558.html and because it wasn't made by Apple, it couldn't get the software updates that Apple customers could.

From the article: "Let's be clear from the start, this is not an Apple system, and it lacks some of the polish and the features we're used to seeing in an OS X-based computer. And as iPhone early adopters can tell you, you're often just a software update away from crippled hardware if Apple decides it doesn't like what you're doing with its products."

I'm really tired of the Apple ads that bash the PC and depict the Mac guy as a free spirit, cool dude, yet someone who "thinks different" and comes up with a low-cost alternative is treated like a red-headed step child. <Steps down from soapbox>

The point is, the PC isn't perfect, but neither is a Mac. It's difficult to compare the two in terms of speed, customizability, and OS. I couldn't do my job if we used Macs, and I'm sure there are Mac users who couldn't do their jobs on PCs. Isn't it great that we have a choice?

mattclary
05-16-2008, 12:12 PM
<Stands on soapbox> I think it is interesting how Apple has always touted their products as "thinking different" or "freeing the people" like in the famous 1984 television ads. But in reality, the PC has always been an "open" platform where you could customize it to your hearts content, whereas with the Mac, you had to use their hardware choices or you were risking some serious issues. Maybe thats not as true today with the Intel Macs and such, but its always been a very strange situation. I say this because I noticed a review of a Leopard-based system on CNET http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/psystar-open-computer/4505-3118_7-32978558.html and because it wasn't made by Apple, it couldn't get the software updates that Apple customers could.

From the article: "Let's be clear from the start, this is not an Apple system, and it lacks some of the polish and the features we're used to seeing in an OS X-based computer. And as iPhone early adopters can tell you, you're often just a software update away from crippled hardware if Apple decides it doesn't like what you're doing with its products."

I'm really tired of the Apple ads that bash the PC and depict the Mac guy as a free spirit, cool dude, yet someone who "thinks different" and comes up with a low-cost alternative is treated like a red-headed step child. <Steps down from soapbox>

The point is, the PC isn't perfect, but neither is a Mac. It's difficult to compare the two in terms of speed, customizability, and OS. I couldn't do my job if we used Macs, and I'm sure there are Mac users who couldn't do their jobs on PCs. Isn't it great that we have a choice?


Great post. Not sure why that didn't occur to me, but absolutely true. "Think different", my a55.

Andyjaggy
05-16-2008, 01:02 PM
Those mac adds were funny at first, even for a guy who likes PC's better. But now, they just annoy me every time I see them. I think Apple needs to call it quits on those ads, pretty soon they might start doing more harm then good.

mattclary
05-16-2008, 01:06 PM
Those mac adds were funny at first, even for a guy who likes PC's better. But now, they just annoy me every time I see them. I think Apple needs to call it quits on those ads, pretty soon they might start doing more harm then good.

I don't know... Personally, I think Apple intentionally markets to smug pricks.

cresshead
05-16-2008, 02:05 PM
mac osx is okay...it's a polished unix u.i. with a few more apps than unix and about 2.1% of apps compared to windows....as for mac...well it's saving grace for me these days is that the new intel mac's can run windows!

jin choung
05-16-2008, 02:08 PM
"Teleologically speaking" is only one step away from "intelligent design"

meh.... that's akin to saying that inductive reasoning is one step away from intelligent design.

while there is a "teleological argument" in theology, it can and is applied to different disciplines and means or argues different things in different contexts.

rest assured that i'm not using the freedom of information as some kind of apologetics for the existence of God or argument against evolution.

besides, i'm using "teleology" loosely and colloquially ... as in purpose or destiny. not trying to be aristotelian or hegelian or anything....

just thinking that in the grand scheme of things - the universe, everything, information disseminates. even stephen hawking admitted recently that the ultimate vaults (or i guess more accurately, disintegrators) for information are unlikely to actually destroy information. maybe even "conservation of energy and mass" serves to argue for freedom of information if we paramaterize matter and energy as ultimately being merely different forms of information. and yes, photons ESCAPE don't they?

in the human realm, one can try to inhibit or block information but it always has a tendency to get out (i love wikileaks... keeps me warm at night). and the more technology evolves, the more this tends to be the case. and of course, everyone stands on the shoulders of everyone else.

and since you brought up theology, i will playfully and facetiously submit:

-word - logos - as in 'telos' + 'logos' - as in teleology
- 'in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God" ... and God is pretty much as free as you can get.
- and a lot is made of "books being opened" in the end and that is a neat evocative imagery of both the preservation and liberation of information.

so yes, information is meant, destined, to be free.

all in all, not one of my more controversial views imo.

jin

p.s. picked a weird place to bring up my signature... : )

Hopper
05-16-2008, 03:21 PM
... and one day, if I can ever run it on a machine I built (legally and/or without having to jump through hoops), I will give it a try.
I'm not sure I get this statement... legally? You can do it legally now. Hoops? What hoops would you be referring to .. putting the media in and letting it boot?

I run Mac OSX on my PC - I don't remember any hoops. And I have a purchased copy of the OS. Not sure what's not legal about it. Did I miss something here?

jin choung
05-16-2008, 03:24 PM
well trivially illegally - the EULA.

jin

Hopper
05-16-2008, 03:28 PM
well trivially illegally - the EULA.

Ahhhh. got ya. People actually read those stupid things? :)

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 03:33 PM
Ahhhh. got ya. People actually read those stupid things? :)
Does it matter if people read them? They are legally binding in some countries nonetheless (not that many people care about it, but that's another matter).

Cheers,
Mike

3DGFXStudios
05-16-2008, 04:22 PM
just don't run OsX on a PC.................




Buy a mac.....You can run Windows on them shits

Hopper
05-16-2008, 05:37 PM
just don't run OsX on a PC.................
As a side note: When I do run the Mac OS on my PC it's quite stable. Runs like champ. I can use Parallels for my Windows VM and it's pretty responsive. So far it's been pretty cool. I don't have much use for it yet, but unlike a lot of people, I choose to actually "use" it and see for myself before I make any Windows vs. Mac comparisons. There are too many people out there that spout out their cake-hole about how much better one product is over the other without being qualified enough to say it. It's tiresome.

1. My Mac OS is pretty. I like it. It plays hard and stable.
2. My Windows OS gets my daily work done.
3. My Linux OS protects my Mac and Windows OS from 12 year-old script kitties with a cable modem and a Knoppix CD.

jin choung
05-16-2008, 05:51 PM
the exhortation not to is probably some desperate devotee attempt to help apple maintain a hardware monopoly that is slipping away?

jin

mattclary
05-16-2008, 05:57 PM
I'm not sure I get this statement... legally? You can do it legally now. Hoops? What hoops would you be referring to .. putting the media in and letting it boot?

I run Mac OSX on my PC - I don't remember any hoops. And I have a purchased copy of the OS. Not sure what's not legal about it. Did I miss something here?

I tried to boot my laptop from an OSX DVD a while back (laptop was new in November) and it was a no-go. There may be PC hardware out there that will do it, but 99% of it won't "just work".

Yeah, "legally" was like sand in my mouth when I typed it, not a great choice of words, but you all know what I mean.

What exactly is your hardware config?

Lightwolf
05-16-2008, 06:06 PM
the exhortation not to is probably some desperate devotee attempt to help apple maintain a hardware monopoly that is slipping away?
I don't see it as slipping to be honest. Apple just doesn't care as long as their potential user base doesn't install OSX on vanilla boxes. And they don't for various reason.

Cheers,
Mike

Hopper
05-16-2008, 06:14 PM
I tried to boot my laptop from an OSX DVD a while back (laptop was new in November) and it was a no-go. There may be PC hardware out there that will do it, but 99% of it won't "just work".

Yeah, "legally" was like sand in my mouth when I typed it, not a great choice of words, but you all know what I mean.

What exactly is your hardware config?
Man, that sux that it wouldn't load. I've got a couple of notebooks that Linux just hates to death. I hear ya.

Believe it or not, I got it loaded on my old Dell 8200 series (1.9GHz 2GB RAM). That's what I'm using now until my case and cooler come in. I should have taken Jin's advice and bought a quick rack so I could assemble my new beast without fear of dropping my coffee on it or knocking it off the table.

I plan on loading it again on my new system, which I have already tested on an identical setup before:

- EVGA nVidia 790i Ultra SLI mobo
- 4GB Crucial DDR3 1600 mem
- Intel quad Q6600 (OC'd to 3.6)
- Thermaltake 760i Liquid cooler
- 4 Raptor 10K 150GB drives raided to 0+1
- nVidia 9800 GX2
- Tagan 900 watt PS
- various and sundry other acouterments

and it's all sitting in the other room .. just sitting there .. /sigh

... and no new monitor yet .. :-( - waiting to see if the A01 release of the 2408WFP comes out anytime soon.

problems under Mac OS:
- no extended sATA drivers for the raptors (yet)
- hardware RAID freaks out under Mac OS once in a while and locks
- no extended drivers for the GX2 (yet)

jin choung
05-16-2008, 11:21 PM
on a lot of linux installers these days, you have to add 'irqpoll' to the boot commands or it will freeze into busybox for some reason. stupid rookie mistake for linux installer imo.

mandrake oops, mandriva does not however.... it's smooth as butter and even does compiz from livecd while ubuntu hh and fedora 9 would NOT....

jin

meshpig
05-18-2008, 07:20 AM
...and yes, photons ESCAPE don't they?

I knew you were going to say that and yeah, Hawking's Radiation implies an even greater escape than photons from the gravity of a mere Sun...


- so yes, information is meant, destined, to be free.


but ideas, which are like packages of information don't die either. The difference though, between an idea and information per se, and especially an idea which is also a concept isn't in it's destiny.

-Telos ...? Well, like when Marx said of a bag of wheat; "by looking at it, you can't tell where it was produced" might not hold up today given gene analysis...

-Of course you are using the word in the colloquial sense but aren't Photons really perpetual fugitives rather than intended for any "purpose", which is the essence or problem? Intelligent design?

I sometimes like Paul Davies and his take on Teleology without Teleology... as in our Solar system appears to have a logic which also seems to be geared towards engendering "life". Like Jupiter maintains the Asteroid belt and protects the smaller planets... but doesn't that sound like what the Druids at Stone-Henge were saying at the outset of the Neolithic revolution?

Whereas it could be all just a complete accident.


-p.s. picked a weird place to bring up my signature...


No, just over controversy and can pick and choose.

m

rakker16mm
05-18-2008, 07:06 PM
the exhortation not to is probably some desperate devotee attempt to help apple maintain a hardware monopoly that is slipping away?

jin

Apple has a hardware monopoly? How can that be? They don't even have that much of a market share. The only real monopoly that we might begin to worry about is Intel since they now produce the core for both the Mac and PC camp, but still there are other players. So I don't think it can be said that any one actually has a monopoly.

As much as I love my Macs they are admittedly a niche product. I think it is cool that the new macs are using Intel chips because I can run almost any modern OS, but to fair the same is true of any Intel based product. The only question about running an OS on a machine that is not approved to run it is what kind of support are you going to get when it doesn't run as well as you expected and that blade cuts in both directions.

BigHache
05-19-2008, 10:01 PM
Apple has a hardware monopoly? How can that be? They don't even have that much of a market share.
Well, in that you, as a consumer, cannot go out and purchase new "Apple" replacement parts for a system, plus only an "Apple Authorized Service Provider" can do warranty work on an Apple system. I would think at least loosely that could/would be considered a monopoly. That system has caused me to do much of my own repairs on my out of warranty systems. The Apple store caught me with a HD failure in a laptop that cost me $300 to replace a 40 GB HD--that's blatant dishonesty and that won't happen again. Obviously a mobo failure would present a problem...


The only question about running an OS on a machine that is not approved to run it is what kind of support are you going to get when it doesn't run as well as you expected and that blade cuts in both directions.
The only support you'd get at that point would be recognition of self-incrimination for violating the EULA. :)

Philbert
05-24-2008, 03:02 AM
I might consider this if I could dual boot it on my old XP machine. Just to get to know it in case some job forces me to use it. The commercials were cute at first how PC guy was always right and mac guy just came off like an ***. But now they're just blatantly lying about PCs and it's really annoying.

BTW what they're reffering to in the original article is this:
http://osx86leo4all.wikidot.com/

OSX86 has been out for a while, but this appears to be slightly different and better.