@ Oli

Yeah I keep hearing that a lot. But why are there special websites with instructions for this? Why can’t you just use the install disc?
And can you keep it up to date? Do you need to do anything special to update it?

And what about the core level Mac functions?
If my mac has a software issue, I can usually fix it with another Mac in firewire mode. Is this possible with a PC running OSX?

Also, non changeable battery and no user upgradeable hard drive!!!! Awful!

For audio development, you can do it all with a Macbook Pro running Bootcamp (for native user experience) or a virtual machine like VMWare Fusion.

Plus, Macs really do run Windows faster, although, I suspect this is due to lower-quality parts found in affordable notebooks.

Thanks for the comments. I can’t remember the time I could have this type of conversation on the web without a flag jacket.

But Bjorn, there are definitely more machines out there. A lot of musicians are indeed now using the Rain Recording machines. Also worth checking out: Asus, MSI. I’ve seen machines from each of those guys that work really well. I think it’s not coincidental that Asustek and MSI are also two of the biggest mainboard manufacturers. Quanta, the biggest, is the company that makes the Apple MacBook. But MSI and Asus actually have their own brand and support and do a good job of it.

Anyway, if I can find a way to do this scientifically, I will. And that goes for Apple, too, because a lot of that is also heresay.

But if you’ve heard the only working PCs come from Apple and Sony(!), you’ve definitely heard wrong. That’s something we can work on. ;)

In the end, we all use computers. Every single last one of us. While you can debate about different models forever, you can’t argue with benchmark results.
The only references of PC’s that work I have in mind would be Kraftwerk using the Vaio’s and macbooks running windows.

The computer is pretty much the most important tool you need to create digital music..

@Bjorn: I do think that’s a good idea. The closest I’ve seen is the guide Cakewalk did, but it’s just tough to keep up with the sheer quantity of PC laptops out there. What might make sense is some kind of knowledge base about chipsets, etc. And frankly, that could benefit even the Mac side, because Macs *are PCs* in terms of internal hardware — especially these days, when people are running Linux, too, and it’s not just about the OS. (I could go on about that — look at the amount Apple is promising to do on the GPU, too, using OpenCL… you’ve got a lot of hardware and code that’s identical regardless of OS)

That really does sound like a horror story. I’ve been lucky not to go there. There’s no debating the variability of the experience is broader on the PC — sometimes in a good way, sometimes in a scary way.

By the way, yes, sometimes the Mac has an advantage because of fewer hardware choices. But I’d also say there are cases in which Apple does things better with the *same* choices as, say, Windows. That should be a point scored for the Mac side, so I’m a bit puzzled way Mac advocates lately have bought the Apple corporate arguments that say it’s just about their level of control.

Sounds reasonable but it’s impossible. PCs are not Macs. There are so many variables -not only due to hardware combinations but also user software combinations, unreliable set of drivers etc.- that it is nearly impossible to take particular experiences as “facts”. You don’t deal with those kind of things on a Mac and it’s something a lot of PC users don’t understand -the so-pomposly-called Mac experience- until they own one.