..... somehow i don't know why, MACs seems to be able to totally skip the BIOs (black screens) and this makes them speed up a lot more faster than a PC (hibernating doesn't count, you still need to shutdown once in awhile to clear system cache)
I don want to post my question in apple forums as i want a true real ans from those photography shooting lover here. I love shooting and I don want to get a MacBook pro with regret. Can Mac lover tell me why u all so support MacBook despite of it's high cost?
I prefer a Windows PC with a good screen.
Best part is being able to select my own screen.![]()
Mac use UNIX as the base OS, so it is not as fat as Windows, and translate to faster responds given the same hardware. Unix manages the memory differently also, and I would say unix uses memory more efficiently.
the three biggest pluses for the Mac (for me) are:
1. Time Machine (really easy-to-use incremental backup to retreive your data/photos in the last few hours, days, or months)
2. lack of Mac-viruses--no need to install a virus-scanner that slows down your system.
3. really long battery life for long flights, long bus rides (though some Windows laptops like the Acer timelines have this too)
4. reliable close-the-lid-to-standby, open-the-lid-to-wake-from-standby. i can go without rebooting for weeks. my Fujitsu has the same feature but it's so unreliable / unstable (maybe there are Windows laptops that can last for weeks without rebooting, using standby modes, but i'm not aware of them).
if I really need Windows, i'll just use VMWare / VirtualBox / Parallels / dual-boot.
I see that you bought into Apple's bunk.
Have you ever seen the WinNT kernel stripped to less than 100MB?
And in addition, what makes you think that UNIX is so much more efficient that WinNT? Take a look at some Linux distros out (Ubuntu comes to mind) there using a*NIX-like kernel and they offer virtually no performance difference over Windows.
I have build a linux kernel that can be loaded into a 16MB embeded device. I have also strip both the winNT kernel and Linux Kernel when I wrote my own OS. That is when I discover that winNT's code it really fat as compared to unix or linux for that matter. Go check out the linux kernel source code directly and you know the diff.
loneWolff said:1. Er, anyone bother to let nathaniel know that there are similar backups in Wintel camp.
2. Mac has viruses, you probably dunno if you have gotten them as you don't have an antivirus runnning. Hell, you might just have a keylogger running on your machine this moment. :angel:
3. Slow performance machine suck less power so it can run longer, same concept as atom processors except their northbridge and southbridge sucks. Take the same spec, battery power to compare instead of just stating it.
4. Do you do the same stuff as you do on both machines or do you simply just use your mac to surf the net and wintel to do serious work? ;p
Thank goodness you know VMWare, so you know we can also run OSx in a sandbox.
So lets not side any of them unless you do an apple-to-apple comparison. :thumbsup:
nathaniel said:1. May I know which backup software you use? I've tried Windows Live OneCare, Comodo and Cobian but none of them are as good as Time Machine (I typically do 3-4 incremental backups per day).
2. Mac may have viruses but the anti-virus Mac software market is so much smaller than the Windows one due to lack of Mac viruses.
3. Atom processor is not for me. With MacBook Pro 13", I get 2.4 Ghz dual core + NVidia with 10 hr battery life, ie I can get 10 hour battery life without underclocking.
4. I do all my work on Mac / Linux as high performance computing is primarily done in *nix environments.