Abe
Expert Member
There is still a problem there. Comparing with a product (Quicktime) that originated on the Apple and is arguably tweaked for that platform is also unfair.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: If you were buying a TV today, which brand would you choose?
Performance showdown: OSX Snow Leopard beats Windows 7
- Thread starter d0b33
- Start date
There is still a problem there. Comparing with a product (Quicktime) that originated on the Apple and is arguably tweaked for that platform is also unfair.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Got to laugh - time and time again I hear people bemoaning Mac hardware for being generic PC hardware in a fancy case and now someone uses the same hardware to compare both OSes and the tests are bogus?
True bootcamp hasnt been optimised for W7, yet, and this test was therefore a little premature but since Apple fully supported XP and Vista in bootcamp I doubt that update is far off.
As far as I can see the best way to continue to make these comparisons is by using identical hardware and this is the best way to do that natively.
BTW - I'd be saying the same thing if W7 had smoked SL.
Trouble is not the hardware bwana, bootcamp is not optimized for windows 7 so straight off the bat the test is flawed.
I think regardless of what OS you prefer we can all see that test is just complete rubbish.
Last edited:
True - the guy should have used the old version of Quicktime. IIRC the installation of QT X instead of keeping QT 7 is optional.
Did I not highlight that in my second paragraph?
No, its not optimised yet and therefor the test is premature but can you think of a better way?
Windows runs natively on the Mac hardware. When you say bootcamp you should say drivers. It's the same hardware after all. Intel Xeons and dual processor motherboards and the like are available to buy from HP, Dell or component suppliers.
Arguably you could say the opposite thing too. The video card drivers for the Mac are not as optimised as Apple does not see its platform as a chiefly gaming platform or/and ATI does not bother as much with the Apple Mac OSX version. Then there is Direct X vs Open GL, did they use OpenGL in both or DirectX under Windows and OpenGL under Mac?
Who really cares.
killadoob
Honorary Master
How about we get hackintosh to go against windows 7 and see the results?
Hmmm might not be fair.
Why do these 2 os's need to be tested? they are both rocked solid and i cannot think of a fair way to put them against each other.
Hmmm might not be fair.
Why do these 2 os's need to be tested? they are both rocked solid and i cannot think of a fair way to put them against each other.
Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
You could do that. DL the version of the torrentz and maybe it will work.
Then again hacking OSX to run on generic PC hardware without EFI and then hacking it a second time to run bootcamp to get the hacked version to allow Win 7 to install on generic PC hardware is quite illogical. Win 7 runs natively on that h/w.
killadoob
Honorary Master
Of course if OSX had been smoked by 7 I bet you'd be playing a different tune.
Why would you think that?
It would be obvious to me that it was not a fair test and my name is not peter so not i would not think like that. I actually do not care about osx vs windows 7 i only get involved because you are always sprouting BS.
Because it gets the fanboys arguing, which increased page hits and therefore boosts ad revenue.
And btw in my experience my installation of SN isnt particularly solid and isnt as necessary an upgrade as W7 is to Vista.
killadoob
Honorary Master
LOL fair enough
Well peter must be a huge money maker for you hahaha.
Well vista and windows 7 are not very different to be honest, main difference is w7 is just faster on slower pc's and a couple other new things like the toolbar but for the most part windows 7 is so similar to vista.
vista failed for one reason, that it could not run well on slower pc's.
Well peter must be a huge money maker for you hahaha.
Well vista and windows 7 are not very different to be honest, main difference is w7 is just faster on slower pc's and a couple other new things like the toolbar but for the most part windows 7 is so similar to vista.
vista failed for one reason, that it could not run well on slower pc's.
How do I make money off this?
killadoob
Honorary Master
Because it gets the fanboys arguing, which increased page hits and therefore boosts ad revenue.
When i said you i mean't myBB
.killadoob
Honorary Master
Haha! You're just sore you can't afford a Mac.
Why would i be sore?
I do not have any use for a mac, nothing i do requires mac. In fact if i had to buy a mac i would be limited to corel draw 11 and not 14.
So no i am not sore at all.
I do not walk around going on about how i can afford a mac like it makes me cool or better than everyone else like you do.
Seriously it seems your whole argument regarding mac's is that people cannot afford them. Does owning a mac mean you have money or something? I thought macs where not about looks and price but how they can get work done. Yet your comments just keep pointing towards the only thing people who have a mac can say is that people cannot afford them
. Kinda makes you look lame going on about that peter.Shame pete.
Remember money cannot buy class bud
.Abe
Expert Member
I would be interested to hear how many Mac users are actually using the system in this way, where it makes sense instead of just for the logo and to read email. In my position, it's a total waste of money. No bones about it, and it's worse here in SA where we have to buy through a rip off of a distributer.
Look that's my story. Many people use FCP as it's better than Premiere and way ahead of Vegas. In fact the BBC and CNN use FCP. But that's beside the point. Mac has lots of high end, cheap apps for its platform. Because Apple is mostly a hardware company it doesn't charge too much for pro-apps.
Right now Apple Logic Pro, Apple Aperture, Final Cut Studio (QuicktimeX, Apple Motion (does what After Effects does), Color, Final Cut Pro, Compressor, DVD Studio Pro, etc) and Apple Shake are Apple Pro-apps. These apps usually come with printed manuals, without any BS activation or checks, with very cheap upgrades and relatively low prices for full versions. In addition as said, you can legally run FCS on the desktop Mac and a notebook Mac - so you save even more. Obviously Apple is using these as incentives for buying more hardware - but I don't care because these apps are so good - it doesn't matter. You can also run Adobe Production suite too if you want - it's just not as affordable and FCS is rated better by users overall.
Anyway I'm sure that you'll find most people who use these apps get excellent value and are not influenced by shiny bling of macs. Some Windows fanboys don't understand that.
Apple Final Cut Studio 3 upgrade:
http://www.pricecheck.co.za/offers/9298584/Apple+Final+Cut+Studio+Upgrade/ - R3000
Adobe Production Suite CS4 upgrade:
http://www.pricecheck.co.za/offers/6809115/Adobe+Creative+Suite+4+Production+Premium+Upgrade/ - over R6000
Last edited:
Adenoid Hynkel
Executive Member
Aren't there any tests out yet where both OS run on their own Hardware?
Macbook Pro with SL and any Laptop with same specs and WIN7?
Pretty sure the numbers will turn.
My Acer which is equiped with a T7400 and 1.5GB ddr2 667 Ram and a Geforce 7300 Go 128mb boots WIN7 32bit under 35 sec. Im pretty sure the Macbook Pro is more powerfull.
This is what happens when MAc Fanboys get bored, they post rubbish like this (not you aqua, u just copy and pasted)
Edit. Shutdown time of 12.6 sec for WIN7 on a fresh installed system. What rubbish
Macbook Pro with SL and any Laptop with same specs and WIN7?
Pretty sure the numbers will turn.
My Acer which is equiped with a T7400 and 1.5GB ddr2 667 Ram and a Geforce 7300 Go 128mb boots WIN7 32bit under 35 sec. Im pretty sure the Macbook Pro is more powerfull.
This is what happens when MAc Fanboys get bored, they post rubbish like this
(not you aqua, u just copy and pasted)Edit. Shutdown time of 12.6 sec for WIN7 on a fresh installed system. What rubbish
Last edited: