Members online

Total: 939 (members: 3, guests: 936)

Forum statistics

Threads
29,483
Messages
332,598
Members
6,588
Latest member
Hayze0

Apple is getting out of hand

Dysphuncktional

Dysphuncktional

ILLIEN
ill o.g.
could be true.

you dont defrag your hard disk in *nix either...

What people describe about macs, is how PCs are with a flavor of *nix as the OS.

Too bad they dont really have good audio progs though for *nix...
 
konceptG

konceptG

ILLIEN
ill o.g.
Dysphuncktional said:
could be true.

you dont defrag your hard disk in *nix either...

What people describe about macs, is how PCs are with a flavor of *nix as the OS.

Too bad they dont really have good audio progs though for *nix...
Click to expand...

'tis true.

Steinberg once started development on Cubase and/or Nuendo for SGI's Irix (I used to own an SGI Indy R5000-150/256MB machine) years ago. Woulda been nice to have back in those days.

Ardour for Linux and OSX is about as close as you're gonna get. Rosegarden qualifies too, but it's' audio capabilities pale to Ardour's. Ardour, however, has no sequencer (which Rosegarden has).

And, Dream, I've owned a mac from the Quadra 840AV up to the B&W G3. Never again.
 
classic

classic

I am proud to be southern
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 90
bthis!
I priced out the dual quard core on the apple site for fun with all the new goodies... It came out to $25,000. Mac's are more powerful but you pay for it

... and what people always forget to mention is that PC's have a longer shelf life.. When A new processer comes out for my PC.. I just cop that and update the BIOS on my mother board... Same with memeory,, i can also replace my entire motherboard etc.. MAC's allow NONE of that.. your stuck with what they give you with very little upgrade options besides maxing out ram and harddrive space.....

So please dont get on your high horse MAC people...

class...
 
thedreampolice

thedreampolice

A backwards poet writes inverse.
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 21
bthis!
dude the resell value of mac are MUCH higher a 5 year old mac still goes for a good price where and 5 year old PC will not.

Repair Disk Permissions is not defraging and you usually don't need to do it. The mac file system does not fragment like windows files system does. As said Linux does not need fragmenting either check out this article for why http://geekblog.oneandoneis2.org/index.php/2006/08/17/why_doesn_t_linux_need_defragmenting

Ardour is a fun program but still needs time to grow. At the end of the day pick your tools then pick your platform. If you like Logic get a mac, Sonar get a PC. Lets make some damn music. But Macs are not more expensive :)
 
Ash Holmz

Ash Holmz

The Bed-Stuy Fly Guy
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 207
bthis!
bthat!
7thangel said:
macs need to defrag and all that other ish too, trust.

to each his own but i'm glad i never drank to kool-aid and now that i've seen the light with my own eyes, i'm immune to the hype (and the subliminals from the cult of apple).
Click to expand...

macs dont need to defreag ... macs automatically do a defragging -like process in the background all the times... in other words, macs are defraaging almost all the time so a dedicated process is unneccesary.
 
Sincock

Sincock

Fucking Wankers
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 8
To each his own, who really cares what others like to use?

As far as having to defrag, clear caches, remove spyware etc: I don't see the big deal here. All that's required is to click on an icon and wait a couple of minutes, no great hardship.
 
Sincock

Sincock

Fucking Wankers
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 8
thedreampolice said:
Sometimes removing spyware is much more involved that just clicking a button. The question is why deal with it if you don't have to?
Click to expand...

For myself personally, the answer would be because the benefits outweigh this, to me, very minor inconvenience, (in my experience no spyware has required more than clicking a button, maybe I'm just lucky). In my part of the world, pcs are cheaper, (a lot cheaper), easily upgradeable; there is more software available and it's the software I want to use, (eg there are far more VSTs for PC than Mac). Only one company makes Mac so they have a monopoly; hundreds of companies make pcs and pc components which means competition. Competition results in better quality, IMO, and more options. I don't care about resale value I care that I'm gonna get use out of what I have and can easily upgrade it.

Each to his own, if you like a mac then go for it, makes no difference to me.
 
M!nd_Ctrl

M!nd_Ctrl

Posted Up
ill o.g.
Ash Holmz said:
yo ... wtf they just started shipping the 8 core systems! .... yo these macs are getting crazy ... i dont even know what u would need all that power for .. esp if u maxed evything out.. apple is on some world domination shit right now lol ... i feel in the stone age with my single g5!

www.apple.com
Click to expand...

8 cores means nothing without software being written to utililize them. Hardly any software can use 4 cores currently.
 
7thangel

7thangel

7th Angel of Armageddon
ill o.g.
one article plus quotes from another

"Maintenance Myth #4: Most folks with an opinion will probably tell you that Mac's running OS X never need to have their hard drives defragmented.

Here is a quote from a MicroMat technician, that I think is very insightful:
The claim that installations of Mac OS X on HFS+ volumes do not fragment is a myth believed by people who do not have disk optimizers that allow them to see how much fragmentation their disks have. It is an example of ignorance that is not able to be removed by any amount of evidence. I think theologians call that “invincible ignorance.” It is now a widespread form of the pollution of information space.
http://tinyurl.com/yuqn4

Actually, some Macs running OS X can benefit quite a bit from defragmenting their hard drive. But not for the reason that you might expect. There is often little in the way of performance to be gained by defragmenting your hard drive. But defragmenting your drive can stave off some very flaky behavior, out of memory errors, and possibly even data loss.

OS X handles *file* fragmentation (a file being broken up into chunks and strewn across your hard disk) automatically, and fairly well, every time that you launch a fragmented file under 20MB.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.macosx.general/22906
http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=8300945231&m=9900929295
http://archives:archives@lists.apple.com/mhonarc/darwin-development/msg19702.html
http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/29/190237
But it doesn't handle *drive* fragmentation (small bits of free space between files) well at all. In fact, OS X is prone to huge amounts of drive fragmentation.

Drive (as opposed to file) fragmentation under OS X is mostly irrelevant with respect to performance, as long as it isn't severe. Where hard drive fragmentation becomes important is when there are no longer any large contiguous chunks of free space left on your drive for OS X to use for working space, for virtual memory, temp files, databases, etc. When this happens, OS X can start acting flaky, and eventually, in extreme cases, it will suffer from data loss.

I used to recommend that folks defragment their hard drive when it was approaching 80% full (no matter how large the drive is), because I've heard from so many folks who were experiencing out of memory errors and flaky behavior at this level (no matter how large their drive was), and defragmenting invariably fixes the problem. But I've since heard from a number of users who made heavy use of their drive and they have experienced the problem as early as around 60% full. And other folks don't experience the problem until their drive is well over 80% full. Clearly how you use your drive makes a difference as to when, or if, you run out of free contiguous space on your hard drive.

So, now, instead of using a rough rule of thumb on when you should consider defragmenting your hard drive, what I recommend now is that folks check to see how much free contiguous space there is on their drive routinely, once their drive is over 50% full."



oh and i never said repair disk permissions was defragging. you said there were no issues with it. could care less either way, i have to use both, and i have yet to see perfection or anything close to it
 
MarkN

MarkN

ILLIEN
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 55
We've got a few of the quad cores in the studio i use and they are more than enough 8 cores is crazy! i spose if you were high end film editing then thats the way too go though!

just to jump in on the argument i used to use PCs but had never ending problems, whoever said they manage to keep there PC free of viruses and spyware with just avg free is a better man than me lol
i got an imac now and don't think i'd go back to a pc anytime soon ! plus they look fuckin cool !
 
Formant024

Formant024

Digital Smokerings
ill o.g.
...

oke,

a hd exist in perfectly placed clusters, you create a file and it know which cluster to grab to provide the most integer file possible. The speed and processing when making this file depends on whether the system can find the right cluster rightaway, if not it will fetch an alternative but not the best ( opposed to defragged where its fast because all clusters are placed in the right order ). However, when you delete a file it will just spread out those cluster all over the available spaces left on the hd so the next time the system need to make a file it will take longer before creating the file and its not the most ideal condition( so if its a system file being made it will reduce the system's integrity.

Now im talking one file, but all you leeching mofo's are talking about either full dvd porn (4.1Gb), warez or the core stuff....audiotracks ( a 100mb in the least a track, average 8 tracks per song). So these are a lot of clusters being made and dropped/spread back over the disk, grabbed again, spread again over and over and over and over untill you defrag and sort clusters back into the right order. When you know you're handling large files then defrag regulary because it affects performance on your daw (when you record a track...it takes those clusters again) so the chances that your recordings corrupt are bigger and reading/writing goes slower (this also includes gui's and menu build up).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top