Vista Not all that bad

[He Man]

LOL awesome pic!



downloading windows 7 beta right now.... quad booting now!

[COWBOY]

this i have to see... can you provide a list of processes and do you have a particular german shepherd in mind? 

specs?

which apple are you referring to, cause the mac pro has taken the "fastest pc alive" crown for quite a few years.

Didn't PC Magazine also do a benchmark test that showed the Apple Macbook Pro ran Vista faster, etc than any comparable Dell, HP, IBM?   I know the test and results just can't remember the PC mag.

Z - I'm with Derby on knowing which processes, specs and mac you're comparing.   You either are using some antiquated info or really like dog ball sweat.   

edit

still searching for article mentioned.  found this one from popular mechanics though.  benchmarks load times, start up, etc mac v. vista and including vista times running natively on the mac hardware.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/reviews/4258725.html?page=4

Also appears this isn't a new phenomena.   Check out which Laptop PC World named the Fastest Windows Notebook for 2007.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/136649-3/in_pictures_the_most_notable_notebooks_of_2007.html

[ZLTFUL]

CPU: Q9550@4.0GHZ
MOBO: XFX 780i SLI
RAM: 2x2GB Patriot Viper PC8500
HSF: Xigmatek HDT-S1283
GPUs: 2x XFX 8800GTS(G92) Alpha Dog in SLI (2xGTX295 on the way will be here Monday but pushes me to the cost of a Mac)
HDD1: 2x150GB WD Velociraptors in RAID 0
HDD2: 2x500GB Seagate Barracudas RAID 1
HDD3: 1TB Seagate Free Agent External
OD1: Lite-On BD-ROM
OD2: LG DVD-RW w/Lightscribe
CASE: Cooler Master HAF-932
PSU: PCP&C TurboCool 1kW
Display: Dell 30in Ultra Sharp LCD

Benchmarks:
1M SuperPI: 10.594s
32M SuperPI: 12m00.750s

SuperPI calculates the number PI out to the specified digit. 1million in the 1M test and 32million in the 32M test.

Just sheer computational power.

For rendering, Cinebench 10 is a great benchmark as it renders using ONLY the CPU.
Single Core: 5094
Multi Core: 16123

I will have to do some encoding runs as I haven't had the need to encode since I finished buildig this rig...

And frankly, if we are talking about stock performance, then yes, I will agree that the Macs tend to have a little faster performance out of the box. But who in their right mind leaves this shit stock? I mean this chip has a healthy OC but the Q6600 I have in my HTPC box has been as high as a 100% OC on a dry ice run and if I really wanted to invest in a phase change unit could easily run that OC 24/7. 2.4ghz to 4.875ghz is a pretty impressive leap.

And I won't even get into some of the insane clocks the E8600 is capable of. 5.0GHZ on air cooling? Poop in a bucket and call it lunch that's hot.

[COWBOY]

ohhh you mean serious number crunching.   

Benchmark Cinebench10 scores for the MacPro (current desktop although it's been over a year since it's been updated)

MacPro 3.2ghz (early 2008 model)                 21,354
MacPro 2.8ghz (early 2008 model)                 18,336
MacPro 3.0ghz (April  2007 model)                18,916

http://www.barefeats.com/harper.html

Or how about some REAL number crunching --- hows 29 Teraflops?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/07/24/virginia-tech-building-supercomputer-out-of-324-mac-pros

Not only is an 8 core system ridiculous to begin with but you can order them as a standard option with 4TB of storage in system with Fibre, RAID, and SAS SAN for christsake let alone the $2800 graphics upgrade (NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600 1.5GB).  With a maxed out config the only comparable "PC" are all servers from IBM, Dell, HP and Sun.

I'm not looking to start a holy war, but the argument that mac's aren't as powerful or aren't "business" or "enterprise" strength is a false one.   

[mihama01]

Gotta Say I am really underwhelmed by Vista.

I wonder if anyone at microsoft actually uses it, there are a lot of really simple things that go wrong that could easily be fixed. Oh and its really slow, I uninstalled it from my Bootcamp because I actually wanted to get work done rather than wait for it to start up. I have got XP on there at the moment.

Some of the more entertaining aspects.

1) I enabled MP4 movie file preview so that I get a little thumbnail of the video in explorer, I made a copy of a file yesterday and Explorer promptly restarted because it "Became unresponsive", I guess the thumbnail generation was taking too long ( like less than a second). Lost all my open web pages and work also. There is nothing wrong with the video file.

2) My favourite error was when I tried to empty the Recycle Bin. I got an error that file XX doid not exist in the recycle bin and asking me if I wanted to recreate it?

3) I absolurtely hate the way backup works in Vista Ultimate, there seems to be no way to determine what files have actually been backed up. Does wonders for my paranoia

4) Did I mention it was so slow,

Just makes me go WTF? Is that the best you can do *seriously?*

[ZLTFUL]

ohhh you mean SERIOUS number crunching.
Benchmark Cinebench10 scores for the MacPro (current desktop although it's been over a year since it's been updated)
http://www.barefeats.com/harper.html  Great comparison vs other Macs...and using Cinebench. Of course, you are comparing my single 4 core CPU 4GB of RAM computer to a 2 CPU 8 Core with 16GB of RAM Mac...also that they used the 32bit version of Cinebench and not a 64bit render.

Or how about some REAL number crunching --- hows 29 Teraflops?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/07/24/virginia-tech-building-supercomputer-out-of-324-mac-pros

Or perhaps Akka (Windows Based) at 46 Teraflops?
http://www-01.ibm.com/software/success/cssdb.nsf/CS/DLAS-7JHKGG?OpenDocument&Site=default&cty=en_us


I'm not looking to start a holy war, but the argument that mac's aren't as powerful or aren't "business" or "enterprise" strength is a false one.
That's just it...you are using "hardware" to defend an OS when the hardware itself is the same flavor these days. And Unix will smoke Mac OS or Vista. It all boils down to which OS makes you feel all warm and IZ_. In my case and because I run the whole gamut from rendering to encoding to DB work to gaming, prefer the flavor of Vista.

[COWBOY]

Great comparison vs other Macs...and using Cinebench. Of course, you are comparing my single 4 core CPU 4GB of RAM computer to a 2 CPU 8 Core with 16GB of RAM Mac...also that they used the 32bit version of Cinebench and not a 64bit render.

Now you want the Mac to use a downgraded chip to compete with your overclocked cpu? 

Didn't notice any of that falsetto in this bold claim "but if you can find a Mac based computer that can do the number of processes at the speeds my PC based computer can do, I will happily lick the sweat off of a rapid German Shepard's balls."

Are you asking us to put the Shepard back in the kennel?

That's just it...you are using "hardware" to defend an OS when the hardware itself is the same flavor these days. And Unix will smoke Mac OS or Vista. It all boils down to which OS makes you feel all warm and IZ_. In my case and because I run the whole gamut from rendering to encoding to DB work to gaming, prefer the flavor of Vista.

1.  I'm not doing anything other than responding to your premise that ..."if you actually use a computer for actually doing computing (heavy math processing, deep encoding, rendering, etc) Macs are definitely not the way to go."  That is a question of processing power and computability not OS or UI.

2.  From a stability standpoint as far as the HW goes there's very little difference between the Unix servers and the MacPro  (the prior generation even shared chips with IBM's top of the line P-Series servers).  From a speed standpoint it would depend on which level of Unix server and configuration you are looking at and how they are partitioned/clustered/virtualized etc.

3.  Stating that using a Mac equates to a technical simpleton or someone who needs their hand held let alone stating that Mac's aren't for serious work is just a fanboy retarded claim and it deserved being called out as such.

I love PC's and all things MS.  I sell Enterprise SW to the Fortune 100 that helps them manage, monitor and secure all the Systems, Networks, Software and Applications they have.  If it weren't for the inherent flaws of the PC systemwide; I'd have a lot less income to spend on my passion - Ducs.   

We agree on OS from one standpoint and that's UI.  I agree that's personal preference and to each their own.  For me, when I get home after helping others operate on their systems, networks and applications the last thing I want to do is act as a computer tech.  I bought a MacBook Pro because it's stable, reliable, relatively secure and just plain works - night after night after night after night with little to no care and feeding.  The fact that it's fast is a nice plus.

[He Man]

I bought a MacBook Pro because it's stable, reliable, relatively secure and just plain works - night after night after night after night with little to no care and feeding.

I bought a Windows based laptop becasue its stable reliable, relaitively secure and just plain works, night after night after night ( 4 years, what finnaly got it was hardware failure from droping it, traveling with it, using it as a sheild to incoming objects. etc).

Whats the difference? it all boils down to what you need to do with it and what u are most comfortable with. All the big expensive software exists mostly on a windows based computer right now. so thats where most of the market is. When Mac cleans up their user interface to something more logical, and they stop using the whole brand to sell a life style, AND they have a good number of software then ill check it out.

Till then, im happy with my HP Blue Label laptop.

Heres  something to think about. Mac attacks PC. PCs = Personal Computer. A PC can run things other than windows. Hell my PC runs Vista and Ubuntu. I could just run one or the other. Even Mac knows that they need to allow windows to run on their machines just be competative because a lot of software is still windows based. Without OSX can you even run windows bootcamp? Could you install linux/unix based OS onto a mac without having OSX on it? (these arent rhetorical questions)

[derby]

Whats the difference? it all boils down to what you need to do with it and what u are most comfortable with. All the big expensive software exists mostly on a windows based computer right now. so thats where most of the market is. When Mac cleans up their user interface to something more logical, and they stop using the whole brand to sell a life style, AND they have a good number of software then ill check it out.

what "big expensive software" are you referring to?

i have ONE piece of software that a choose not to run on my mac because the windows version is more fully featured: quicken.

Without OSX can you even run windows bootcamp? Could you install linux/unix based OS onto a mac without having OSX on it? (these arent rhetorical questions)

yes, if you have a bootloader that can do it. grub will.

(bootcamp is really just an installation wizard, a collection of hardware drivers for windows, and a bootloader that allows you to choose which OS to boot)

[COWBOY]

you like Windows that's cool but you need to learn more about what you hate.  you're points are so full of inaccuracies regarding SW, logical file structures, etc i'd get a hand cramp replying to them all.

[derby]

it's not that HP doesn't sell hardware that can compete w/ a mac pro, it's just that you have to shop for it in a completely different section:

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/en/WF06b/12454-12454-296719-307907-296721-3432827-3432828-3651657.html

this made me giggle:

Operating system
   Genuine Windows Vista® Business with downgrade to Windows® XP Professional custom installed

[He Man]

you like Windows that's cool but you need to learn more about what you hate.  you're points are so full of inaccuracies regarding SW, logical file structures, etc i'd get a hand cramp replying to them all.

Learn more about what you hate? Is that suppose to be like "know thy enemy"?

I used it, i dont like it for the reasons i pointed out. its not like i didnt try. My school has a computer lab and im always on the Macs because the PCs always have a line. I just dont like the using it. Should i go waste my time and learn about something that i would never need to know how to use, nor care for?

If your not directing your post to me then nvm.

what "big expensive software" are you referring to?

As far as I know, there isnt autocad and matlab for Mac which is what i use the most. Im having some problems running 2006 autocad on 64bit and i heard theres an open source cad for ubuntu.... but until then im running it on 32bit windows xp.

[derby]

As far as I know, there isnt autocad and matlab for Mac which is what i use the most. Im having some problems running 2006 autocad on 64bit and i heard theres an open source cad for ubuntu.... but until then im running it on 32bit windows xp.

no autocad (there are alternatives), but matlab is good to go:

http://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab/requirements.html

http://www.mathworks.com/support/sysreq/current_release/macintosh.html

[zarn02]

Courtesy of XKCD.... http://xkcd.com/528/






That is all

i actually popped into this thread specifically to post that xkcd, but thought i'd check and see if anybody'd beat me to it.

[ZLTFUL]

We agree on OS from one standpoint and that's UI.  I agree that's personal preference and to each their own.  For me, when I get home after helping others operate on their systems, networks and applications the last thing I want to do is act as a computer tech.  I bought a MacBook Pro because it's stable, reliable, relatively secure and just plain works - night after night after night after night with little to no care and feeding.  The fact that it's fast is a nice plus.

Well I *AM* the IT department for a company that cleared $155 million in revenue last year(selling the number 1 alcoholic beverage in the world). And my piss takes a uturn stream and travels 4 city blocks before climbing 3 flights of stairs and taking the elevator up 2 more floors to the urinal.

You tried to turn this into a pissing contest. 0.1% of the Top 500 super computers in the world run Mac OS. 0.1% of them run BSD. 5% of them run Windows based environments. The rest are split between Linux and Unix so if you look at it that way, we are both failsauce.

Fact is, both Vista AND Mac OS are USUALLY shot down by people how have not taken the time to learn the interface. And even more so by those afraid to tweak the environment to their liking. But I *HAVE* used both and I find for the type of computing I do, Windows (both XP and Vista) win hands down. In fact, we had a DIE HARD Mac user join our graphics team and for her first week she pregnant doged non stop about having to use Windows. I told her that when she came in on Monday that her computer would work just like her Mac (so I made it buggy and only work half the time hahaha Just kidding).
So I tweaked the UI a bit, added a theme similar to OSX, shanged a few other things and viola, she said if she didn't notice the Apple key missing, it would be identical to her Mac. She is very happy now and cranking out some great designs for upcoming concerts.

Bring a Mac Pro on over, I'll provide the beer, and we can have a bench off. Make sure you OC that harpertown though...oh wait...Mac won't let you tweak that aspect of your computer. 

And the neighbors German Shepard still has his nuts...just in case.