Apple owners richer than Windows users

Are you an Apple user or Windows user?

  • Apple

    Votes: 8 13.6%
  • Windows

    Votes: 38 64.4%
  • Both

    Votes: 7 11.9%
  • Neither

    Votes: 6 10.2%

  • Total voters
    59
Wow so you are saying that video where the ssd blows the standard hdd to shyte is just fanboyism?

Ok LOL

Peter do you realize you could have 250 gb of ram but your programs would not start faster because amazingly the memory is still waiting for the hdd. So i am unsure why a program that only uses 1gb to load up would load faster on a system with 7gb than it would with a system with 2 gb. Makes no sense. Explain to me this:

Let's for argument sake say final cut uses 1.2gb memory on start (i am just guessing) and you have 3gb memory, so it starts up in 5 seconds. Why would adding another 4gb of ram make it load any faster than the 3gb memory when it does not use 3gb to load up let alone 7gb.
 
Wow so you are saying that video where the ssd blows the standard hdd to shyte is just fanboyism?

Yes. I don't see the same benefits in real world tests.

To summarise,
Mac starts much faster.
Mac shuts down faster.
Programs start a little faster.
However, once you start the program, since there is only 40GB left on the 160GB (149GB actually) left over - there's not much for loading data or for swap (scratch disk). Maybe if I put everything on a big SSD for R20K it would be much faster. With 7GB of RAM there is also a lot of caching and less swapping going on.

In theory SSDs are very good for performance but only if your program files, documents and swap (OS) and scratch disk (program's swap file) is on the SSD. If you use a hybrid SSD/HDD system the slowest element will still slow you down. I'd like to buy 4x 1TB Intel SSDs but these neither exist nor could I afford to spend R100K or more on storage.

Peter do you realize you could have 250 gb of ram but your programs would not start faster because amazingly the memory is still waiting for the hdd. So i am unsure why a program that only use 1gb to load up would load faster on a system with 7gb than a system with 2 gb. Makes no sense. Explain to me this:

Let's for argument sake final cut uses 1.2gb memory on start (i am just guessing) and you have 3gb memory, so it starts up in 5 seconds. Why would adding another 4gb of ram make it load any faster than the 3gb memory.

Well with reading ahead and pre-caching and Mac OSX defrags HDDs too (all the time), you can get very good HDD performance. FCP in only about 130MB in size and that takes a 7200RPM drive with 32GB of cache a second to start loading the first program elements. With lots of RAM there is less swap file usage too, stuff just loads and loads into RAM.

I have lots of plugins in FCP 2 and they enumerate only about 10-20% faster when loading from the SSD.

That's what I've seen. Besides once you load up your app and your 40GB video file - the 160GB OS drive has little significance. You need to understand this, the swap is on a seperate drive because 40GB is not enough swap for video. It takes me usually 200GB worth of swap for a single project on a seperate non-video file, non-OS drive.
 
Last edited:
I am amazed you chose an SSD that is only 160gb for what you need though. Yikes you wasted your cash badly man. Did you not know 160gb would be to small?
 
I am amazed you chose an SSD that is only 160gb for what you need though. Yikes you wasted your cash badly man. Did you not know 160gb would be to small?

Intel X25M is at 160GB max. Didn't you know that?

Oh and I won't for for that OCZ/Samsung stuff - those drives are subpar.

I may take the SSD out and put it in a notebook later so a waste but not such a terrible one.
 
Yea but from the sounds of it you need bigger than a 160gb fast hard drive to see performance gain so i am just asking why you would buy a fast hdd that would be to small and you would see no benefit from?
 
...Similarly spec'ed Windows and Mac machines cost similar prices....

Bull****.

My current PC (6 months old, 7 years 6 months of useful life left) is currently retailing at PCInt for:

Intel Cube Cove MB - R 1093
Intel Q9550 - R 2449
4 Gigs of RAM - R 590
1 TB HDD - R 751
DVD Writer - R 199
Case - R 467
Windows XP Pro x64 - R 1366 Well, I didn't actually pay for it (ARRRG), but if I did that's what it would have cost.
Total: R 6915

Off you go now, find me a Mac with those specs for the same price. Of course we all know Macs are made by commies, so you can't choose your specs, so find me a Mac for DOUBLE that price that is even remotely competitive. (Don't for get to add the extra R 4000 for Windows - you can't legally install the DSP on a Mac).

Add to add further insult, I haven't had one forced reboot since I bought the machine, you know, PCs, "They just work".

The article's really quite insulting to rich people. Everyone's going to think that we're mentally disabled, and can't run PCs. I think it must be a style thing, because I can't think of any other area where Mac outperforms PCs.
 
Bull****.

My current PC (6 months old, 7 years 6 months of useful life left) is currently retailing at PCInt for:

Intel Cube Cove MB - R 1093
Intel Q9550 - R 2449
4 Gigs of RAM - R 590
1 TB HDD - R 751
DVD Writer - R 199
Case - R 467
Windows XP Pro x64 - R 1366 Well, I didn't actually pay for it (ARRRG), but if I did that's what it would have cost.
Total: R 6915

Off you go now, find me a Mac with those specs for the same price. Of course we all know Macs are made by commies, so you can't choose your specs, so find me a Mac for DOUBLE that price that is even remotely competitive. (Don't for get to add the extra R 4000 for Windows - you can't legally install the DSP on a Mac).

Add to add further insult, I haven't had one forced reboot since I bought the machine, you know, PCs, "They just work".

The article's really quite insulting to rich people. Everyone's going to think that we're mentally disabled, and can't run PCs. I think it must be a style thing, because I can't think of any other area where Mac outperforms PCs.

Ok, without being rude to you I'll show you how wrong you are:

http://www.techdigital.co.za/c887/Sony-Vaio.aspx
Sony® VAIO BZ Series Notebook (VGN-BZ153GN)
R 12,086.00
Intel® Core®2 Duo P8400 2.26GHz, 2GB DDR2 667, 250GB 5400RPM Serial ATA HDD, 8x DVD Super Multi, 15.4" WXGA, Intel GMA X Series Integrated VGA, Wireless 802.11 A/B/G, Modem, Bluetooth, Eye Webcam, Fingerprint Reader, Card Reader, Windows Vista Business
2.7 kg
Lithium-Ion 6 Cell Battery. Battery Life (approx.) 3 h 30 min
(untested)

http://www.zastore.co.za/macbook.php

MacBook White

Image
R11,999.00
Available Now!
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz
2GB DDR2 Memory
160GB hard drive1
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics
Standard keyboard
White polycarbonate shell

2.27 kg
In terms of battery life, we found that the white MacBook could play a QuickTime movie at full brightness for three hours and 22 minutes, 38 minutes longer than the aluminum MacBook and 28 minutes longer than the MacBook Pro, when the pro system was set to use its battery-saving lower powered graphics.
http://www.macworld.com/article/140995/2009/06/macbook213w.html

So we have a Macbook which is sold by Core, and Core are renowned for price gouging, but anyway sold by Core, it's LIGHTER and has a FASTER GPU.

The Sony Vaio, a machine of similar build quality, is heavier, and has a slower GPU but comes with a bigger HDD and a slighly faster CPU (0.13GHz) faster.

The Macbook's battery life is proven in real world tests at high usage - fully lit display and playing a video file non-stop. The Sony Vaio - has a manufacturer rated time of 3h 30 min but these are usually very optimistic and with screen dimmed down.

A faster GPU will outperform that 0.13GHz CPU speed difference. A bigger HDD is cheap, for the price difference and lack of need to buy AV software you can easily afford a >250GB HDD. Having a lighter laptop is also a bonus :).
 
You can use a DSP Windows Vista/XP/7 with Bootcamp. Windows DSP versions get sold with jumpers these days, you don't even need to buy a mouse.

Microsoft does not say you may only install it on a Microsoft PC. A Macbook is a PC too. Duh.
 
Yea but from the sounds of it you need bigger than a 160gb fast hard drive to see performance gain so i am just asking why you would buy a fast hdd that would be to small and you would see no benefit from?

It's not a total dud, but its not entirely worth it. I realised that even without an SSD a Mac is fast and good enough. 160GB is still enough for the OS, application files and some swap.

Look the system starts in 10 sec and by that I mean its entirely usable by the end of those 10sec. It's nice to have that, before it would take about 20-25sec but not longer.
 
Do we not get a linux choice here? :D

As stable as Mac, certainly can be as functional and free at least :) Also can be made very pretty.

I think Mac is probably the correct choice if you're a designer and PC works if you use proprietary programs or games. Easy :P
 
You said:
...Similarly spec'ed Windows and Mac machines cost similar prices....
You didn't say "... only in the high end graphics oriented notebook and workstation segment.", and yet those are the machines that follow.

Ok, without being rude to you I'll show you how wrong you are:

http://www.techdigital.co.za/c887/Sony-Vaio.aspx

2.7 kg
Lithium-Ion 6 Cell Battery. Battery Life (approx.) 3 h 30 min
(untested)

http://www.zastore.co.za/macbook.php



2.27 kg

http://www.macworld.com/article/140995/2009/06/macbook213w.html

So we have a Macbook which is sold by Core, and Core are renowned for price gouging, but anyway sold by Core, it's LIGHTER and has a FASTER GPU.

The Sony Vaio, a machine of similar build quality, is heavier, and has a slower GPU but comes with a bigger HDD and a slighly faster CPU (0.13GHz) faster.

The Macbook's battery life is proven in real world tests at high usage - fully lit display and playing a video file non-stop. The Sony Vaio - has a manufacturer rated time of 3h 30 min but these are usually very optimistic and with screen dimmed down.

A faster GPU will outperform that 0.13GHz CPU speed difference. A bigger HDD is cheap, for the price difference and lack of need to buy AV software you can easily afford a >250GB HDD. Having a lighter laptop is also a bonus :).

My PC isn't a laptop, it's a desktop. And you forgot to add R 4000 to the price of the Apple, for Windows.

As for Core: Boo hoo hoo, Just because Apple are a bunch of commies who refuse to allow competition in the SA market, doesn't mean us PC users care. Our products are sold on an efficient, open market which you might recognise as capitalism. Go complain to The Party about it's actions; Apple's restrictive, condescending policies are another reason I CHOOSE FREEDOM over TYRANNY AND OPPRESSION.

You can use a DSP Windows Vista/XP/7 with Bootcamp. Windows DSP versions get sold with jumpers these days, you don't even need to buy a mouse.

Microsoft does not say you may only install it on a Microsoft PC. A Macbook is a PC too. Duh.

I don't even need to buy the DSP to get hold of a copy, I'd just download it, but that doesn't mean it's legal for me to run it. Unless the EULA has changed, the DSP can only legally be installed as a clean install (no OS X), by system builders. Has the EULA changed or have you found a loophole?

Oh and here's my Mac Pro vs the equivalent Dell workstation price comparison:
http://www.internet-nexus.com/2006/08/mac-pro-vs-dell-precision-price.htm

That's a 3 year old article discussing R 40 000 workstations, not PCs. The focus of this thread is PCs used in the households of "rich" people. They aren't using workstations, they're generally using desktops or laptops.

And by the way, that R 40 000 workstation is the cheapest machine Apple makes that out performs my R 7000 desktop. Not exactly similarly priced, are they?

While your laptop comparison is valid, you forgot about Lenovo, Dell, and HP:sick:. They all make well built machines, that you could have compared the Apple to, and cheap too. The only areas Apple can hope to be competitive are too niche to even mention, suffice to say that the households discussed in this article aren't buying Macs for their niche market superiority, but because they look better on the exposed desk in their designer middle class open plan lounge-dining room-kitchen-scullery. (No offence to the middle classes.)
 
Last edited:
Do we not get a linux choice here? :D

As stable as Mac, certainly can be as functional and free at least :) Also can be made very pretty.

I think Mac is probably the correct choice if you're a designer and PC works if you use proprietary programs or games. Easy :P

Not at all the days of mac being for designers is long gone, majority of your good designing programs run fine on windows. Look at corel draw for instance that used to be solid on mac it is not not supported unless you use version 11.
 
You said:
You didn't say "... only in the high end graphics oriented notebook and workstation segment.", and yet those are the machines that follow.

Now you're being unfair and weaseling your way out of it.

The term PC includes notebooks too. PC is not synonymous with desktop, it means PERSONAL COMPUTER and not a mainframe. In fact Mac Pros and Dell Xeon based workstations are PCs too.

My PC isn't a laptop, it's a desktop. And you forgot to add R 4000 to the price of the Apple, for Windows.

1. I don't want to use Windows when Mac OSX comes with everything an average household needs, perhaps add R1400 for iWorks - the equivalent of MS Office Home Edition. But a Vista PC doesn't come with a word processor either.

2. If you want to run Windows in Bootcamp, getting OEM Windows is acceptable and not illegal. OEM or DSP Windows will cost the same on PC.

As for Core: Boo hoo hoo, Just because Apple are a bunch of commies who refuse to allow competition in the SA market, doesn't mean us PC users care. Our products are sold on an efficient, open market which you might recognise as capitalism. Go complain to The Party about it's actions; Apple's restrictive, condescending policies are another reason I CHOOSE FREEDOM over TYRANNY AND OPPRESSION.

Despite Core charging more, Apple Mac books are similar in price to similarly spec'ed quality made notebooks. The same goes for Mac book Pros and the same can be said for Mac Pros - when compared to Dell and HP solutions.
At the same time iMacs - remembering they include a high quality 24inch - ie true 8 bit panel not the 6bit junk Acer and Samsung sell - are similar in cost.



I don't even need to buy the DSP to get hold of a copy, I'd just download it, but that doesn't mean it's legal for me to run it. Unless the EULA has changed, the DSP can only legally be installed as a clean install (no OS X), by system builders. Has the EULA changed or have you found a loophole?

It is acceptable per the EULA to install it on a bootcamp partition because it is a clean partition. Perhaps they don't want you to run it in a virtualised environment such as under VM Ware Fusion or Parallels but installing it in bootcamp is acceptable as per EULA because the System is running in REAL mode.


That's a 3 year old article discussing R 40 000 workstations, not PCs. The focus of this thread is PCs used in the households of "rich" people. They aren't using workstations, they're generally using desktops or laptops.

I own a Mac Pro and I'm just explaining how I'd have paid a similar amount of money if I went with Dell or HP.

And by the way, that R 40 000 workstation is the cheapest machine Apple makes that out performs my R 7000 desktop. Not exactly similarly priced, are they?

I gave you a comparison of a Sony Vaio vs MB.

While your laptop comparison is valid, you forgot about Lenovo, Dell, and HP:sick:. They all make well built machines,

Price differentials are similar. On a spec per spec basis including WEIGHT, battery life, build quality and screen resolution you'll find Mac book (pros) are similar in price to quality branded machines. What you won't find is heavy, cheaply made low range Lenovos, Dells and HPs and those machines are not well built. The only well built machines that can compare to Apple are
Sony Vaio, higher end Lenovo (IBM >> Lenovo), NEC and the Pansasonic Let's Note range of notebooks.

that you could have compared the Apple to, and cheap too. The only areas Apple can hope to be competitive are too niche to even mention, suffice to say that the households discussed in this article aren't buying Macs for their niche market superiority, but because they look better on the exposed desk in their designer middle class open plan lounge-dining room-kitchen-scullery. (No offence to the middle classes.)

Utter nonsense. Macs are bought by people who want to use their PC to get something done, then turn it off and forget about it. They don't want to have to maintain a PC - run antivirus, run internet security app, run defraggers, registry cleaners, anti-spyware, mess with settings, etc.
The Mac comes with a great video editor, great photo editor, fully functional DVD player and if you buy iWork you have a full suite for word processing/accounts/etc or use Open Office or buy MS Office for Mac.

No viruses, get that, no viruses unless you download WAREZ and authorise it to run. No viruses from USB sticks. No viruses from email attachments which just execute or execute by confusion (pretend to be a JPG file). No rootkits. No keyloggers to steal your data. No worries.

The OS is easy to use. It doesn't bother you with rubbish balloons and endless error messages to tell you that the USB stick works or that you're running low on disk space despite having clicked the X to close it 10 times already. Oh and it doesn't steal your focus of attention. If you're typing and a dialog box pops up, it won't make you stop typing. No need to learn Windows jargon. No blue screens.
No red screens. No pushing of updates and forcing of Reboot every 5 minutes.

You're just bitter.

Macs are easier to use. Safer. Usually come with everything you need (just dl Open Office). They are well spec'ed machines and the only sin Apple is committing is not making cheap machines with relatively low specs and poor build quality. And until you've handled a Let's Note or a NEC Versa or an old ThinkPad good build quality is not the junk I see in Incredible Connection, except for Mac books/MBPs.

Disclaimer:

I own a chipped, cracked chassis, paint rubbed off, dead screen R29,000 Acer Notebook (Paid R15,000 in Singapore for this high end notebook in 2006 while it cost R29,000 here, TravelMate 8104). I also own a Panasonic Let's Note and a NEC VersaPro UltraLite. These things are built beautifully and are rock solid. In contrast most Acer, Dell, HP, and basic Lenovo is poor build quality, even most Vaios feel like plastic which will fall apart with a mild knock. My Acer didn't even suffer a knock, it chipped, paint wore off, screen died on its own and a treat my stuff with kit gloves.
 
Last edited:
Not at all the days of mac being for designers is long gone, majority of your good designing programs run fine on windows. Look at corel draw for instance that used to be solid on mac it is not not supported unless you use version 11.

Yeah ZBrush is THE program of choice when it comes to 3D Modeling - sadly the mac users get their updates MONTHS after us windows users, and is generally a LOT buggier apparently...

So I really have no idea what they use Macs for - it's useless for Zbrush.
 
Not at all the days of mac being for designers is long gone, majority of your good designing programs run fine on windows. Look at corel draw for instance that used to be solid on mac it is not not supported unless you use version 11.

Sure, the mac may not dominate the design scene anymore, design companies have been outsourcing to cheap Asian companies and freelancers so obviously the Mac would lose it's position but now the Mac dominates movie editing and music production, Logic and Final cut are some of the best software programs for this job and Apple develops it, since it's apple you can bet it is a quality piece of work and this is why producers and Movie/Tv production studios still buy macs.

The premium you pay for a mac is not for the hardware but for the design and innovation, my 2 year old macbook has outlasted my dad's 2 years old high end HP so there is a focus on build quality too. And when you buy a mac ilife is included, this makes Windows Premium versions look like a rip off, ilife pwns premium bundled scrap that Microsoft forces you to pay a premium for.
 
What OS do they use to create animation movies? Just curious cause i have no idea. Don't care if it is mac windows linux or whatever just curious.
 
What OS do they use to create animation movies? Just curious cause i have no idea. Don't care if it is mac windows linux or whatever just curious.

Pixar uses renderman, which is created by themselves. It runs on OSX

I should mention that the standard for 3D animation is 3d Studio Max, which runs on Windows. Similar to Maya on OSX
 
Last edited:
What OS do they use to create animation movies? Just curious cause i have no idea. Don't care if it is mac windows linux or whatever just curious.

They used to work on SGI Workstations, but not so sure anymore....

it might be a linux-based OS but i'm not 100% sure....

Pixar uses renderman, which is created by themselves. It runs on OSX

i've installed it on my Windows machine a few years ago iirc :confused:
 
They used to work on SGI Workstations, but not so sure anymore....

it might be a linux-based OS but i'm not 100% sure....



i've installed it on my Windows machine a few years ago iirc :confused:

Correction then... Pixar uses OSX with renderman installed. Problably because Steve Jobs is the CEO

edit: no wait.. i`m wrong again....
they use LINUX
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-983898.html
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X