Doesn't OSX support much less hardware? What's with calling everyone a kid?
If you search Killa and Penguin's responses you'll see that they're very rude, immature, vulgar posters - they don't post politely and they use ad hominem at every opportunity. Now my reply here
could be construed as ad hominem too, sure, but that's after many attempts from my end to deal with them politely. Just look at Penguin's signature. Of course I should not even reply to these two because it's below my dignity but I err, I'm human, sorry
.
Saw you doing it in another thread as well. Even if it's the case you realise that our teenagers usually know far more about technology than we do,
No, they don't. Some teens do but not the ones on MyBB
. I own TWO SSD drives, and if you search my posts, I commented many aeons ago that an SSD will not do much for an overall computing experience at the sizes they go for. Killadoob insists that they speed you up a lot. Well they don't - they ONLY improve start up and application start up but most people once they get their app running use it and an SSD speeds up I/O but not to files which are not stored on it.
An SSD can speed up I/O of data files - say HD video - for example XDCAM EX video at 35Mbit/sec at 1080p30 - but 7200RPM drives are good enough to get sustained read/writes of such video - but even so SSDs are faster except an HD project usually consumes 200-300GB of data minimum just for captured video - with SSD drives costing R5000 for 160GB (Max size) - it's a very expensive way of speeding up your machine marginally - most processing is still on the CPU and on the GPU or 3rd party encoder/capture board. The HDD waits for the CPU. Same with Adobe Photoshop, applying filters is CPU/GPU intensive but reading/writing a 200MB TIFF file is not so taxing on the HDD as is the data processing on the CPU.
We're going a bit off topic but I can honestly tell you that after installing the fastest SSD available on my 2006 Mac Pro - the Intel X25M 160GB Gen2 - the boot up is very fast but application startup isn't very much faster no is actual application performance because the SSD sits idly, the data is on 7200RPM drives and I would need 1TB of SSD at least - which would cost me R30,000 for a marginal speed increase.
Now SSDs do speed certain things up, if you have a PC and all your data, scratch and swap fits on an SSD, you're set. But in my and many other peoples' case tiny SSD sizes we get now are not cost effective. The best performance SSDs are made by Intel but they are 160GB max and are very expensive. Think R5000 for a measly 160GB. That's hardly enough to accommodate the OS and applications alone, you'll need a second one for data and a third for scratch. That's R15,000 to get a marginal speed increase and for very small projects - 160GB is not a lot for HD or RAW files.
Furthermore having lots of RAM, in my case 7GB, but 4GB is pretty standard now, negates the benefits of SSD even further.
SSDs will only be worthwhile when they are cheap, as cheap as HDDs now and of the same capacity.
Finally I am genuinely not an Apple fanboy. Just a person frustrated with MS' bull.
Apple is just as full of hype, but for some reason their stuff works better - and it's not perfect either.
.