Why are Mac computers so popular among producers?

Robot Sunset Extreme said:
Is anyone who gets a mac stupid and only getting it for brandname? No.
Click to expand...

Not everyone, but most. "Most" is all it takes to make something popular, which refers to the original question.

You admitted a while back that potential clients are impressed by your Mac computer, making your setup "more of a legit studio". If people stick with your services because they trust your computer's brand, don't you think people will use the same irrational thinking when they buy their own computers?

Case closed.
Macs are shiny, expensive penis extensions, with a pretty GUI that appeals to high school girls. The aforementioned upper-middle-class high school girls convince their parents to buy them a Mac computer as a graduation present. The functionality is a secondary feature.
 
Last edited:
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
Thank you.

That's a 50 dollar difference. Hardly a bloated Apple price.

Mac comes standard with software like GarageBand and piano lessons and guitar lessons. The camera is perfect for video chat. And the overall package is tighter and more elite. That proved my point ya I mean? Point proven...
Click to expand...

$50 dollars and the difference is quite noticeable

Quad Core vs Dual Core
GeForce GTS 240 w/1GB of RAM vs slower Geforce 9400M laptop video subsystem with shared memory.

Don't be stupid all your life. Anyone with a pair of eyes can see the better value.
 
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
Thank you.

That's a 50 dollar difference. Hardly a bloated Apple price.

Mac comes standard with software like GarageBand and piano lessons and guitar lessons. The camera is perfect for video chat. And the overall package is tighter and more elite. That proved my point ya I mean? Point proven...
Click to expand...

Lol @ "Tighter and more elite" (penis extension statement) and @ "The camera is perfect for video chat" (as though that has a damn thing to do with music production)...

also "comes standard with software like GarageBand" :cry: Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha... the "MS Paint" of music making... lol :D

Man this is gonna be my new sig :)
 
Last edited:
logic7 said:
I've already proven you wrong...


TWICE...


Give it up duke... Facts trump ideology all day, every day, and twice on Sundays.
Click to expand...

sorry to destroy your argument even further but I just went over the specs and noticed the MAC has DDR 3 and the one you posted has DDR 2.

The difference in perfomance from just that is gigantic. That iMac would perform better than that PC simply on these two facts alone: OSX is a better operating system for making music and dealing with lots of tracks and effects, and DDR 3 is leaps and bounds above and beyond DDR 2.

Sorry bud. I am not trying to argue with you.

I agree that people should build their own machines online to save money. But I dont agree that Macs are bloated in price and expensive. In fact they are pretty much equal and up to the matter of the preferrence of the consumer.
 
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
sorry to destroy your argument even further but I just went over the specs and noticed the MAC has DDR 3 and the one you posted has DDR 2.

The difference in perfomance from just that is gigantic. That iMac would perform better than that PC simply on these two facts alone: OSX is a better operating system for making music and dealing with lots of tracks and effects, and DDR 3 is leaps and bounds above and beyond DDR 2.

Sorry bud. I am not trying to argue with you.

I agree that people should build their own machines online to save money. But I dont agree that Macs are bloated in price and expensive. In fact they are pretty much equal and up to the matter of the preferrence of the consumer.
Click to expand...

LOL.

For someone so serious about benchmarking, its interesting that you're ignoring the fact that DDR3 systems don't benchmark any higher than DDR2 systems. Sometimes they even benchmark SLOWER :(

OSX is a better OS? Than what OS? XP? Vista? 7? One of the 32 flavors of Linux?! Haha. Just give it up. You're relying on "facts" that are very difficult to prove objectively.
 
Last edited:
Salem Beats said:
Lol @ "Tighter and more elite" (penis extension statement) and @ "The camera is perfect for video chat" (as though that has a damn thing to do with music production)...

also "comes standard with software like GarageBand" :cry: Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha... the "MS Paint" of music making... lol :D
Click to expand...

in my opinion its more stupid to think a slower computer with the super out-dated DDR 2 memory is better because it has a fmarginally aster DVD burner lol.

The fact is if its a matter of 50 dollars, it destroys the initial argument that macs are expensive.

For 50 dollars I would rather go with the more beautiful device. Humans do afterall like shiny things. Dont hate on that. People like nice cars too lol.

Furthermore, Garage band records perfect high quality digital audio to your harddrive exactly like Logic does. Theres nothing wrong with garageband, and I would rather have that than save 2 seconds when I burn a cd (which nobody burns cds anymore).

DDR 3 is screaming fast and lightyears beyond DDR 2 when it comes to having 50 tracks with 100 effects piled on there. DDR 3 is a huge factor, more than a processor speed or even memory ammount.

This topic is getting redundant and ho-motional.
 
Last edited:
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
DDR 3 is screaming fast and lightyears beyond DDR 2 when it comes to having 50 tracks with 100 effects piled on there. DDR 3 is a huge factor, more than a processor speed or even memory ammount.
Click to expand...

Lol you keep arguing this point. I love it when people make themselves look like an a$$ before they're proven wrong.

Now, for Robot Sunset Extreme's favorite thing to do: Run benchmarks!
http://xtreview.com/review198.htm

See? Marginally faster while much, much more expensive. In the future, the difference will be greater, but as for now -- early adopter status.
 
logic7 said:
Intel Xeon X5570 Nehalem 2.93GHz LGA 1366 95W Quad-Core Server Processor Model BX80602X5570 - Retail
Item #: N82E16819117180
Return Policy: CPU Replacement Only Return Policy
$1,439.99

This is just a waste of money. I would buy a i7 920 Intel Core i7-920 Bloomfield 2.66GHz LGA 1366 for 288$ and overclock it to 3.8 GHZ. This is actually very easy and you don't even need watercooling. Now its even faster than the Mac.

Buy a Mac - $3,149.00
Build a PC ~ $1256

Price difference - $1893
Click to expand...
----------------------
 
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
in my opinion its more stupid to think a slower computer with the super out-dated DDR 2 memory is better because it has a fmarginally aster DVD burner lol.

The fact is if its a matter of 50 dollars, it destroys the initial argument that macs are expensive.

For 50 dollars I would rather go with the more beautiful device. Humans do afterall like shiny things. Dont hate on that. People like nice cars too lol.

Furthermore, Garage band records perfect high quality digital audio to your harddrive exactly like Logic does. Theres nothing wrong with garageband, and I would rather have that than save 2 seconds when I burn a cd (which nobody burns cds anymore).

DDR 3 is screaming fast and lightyears beyond DDR 2 when it comes to having 50 tracks with 100 effects piled on there. DDR 3 is a huge factor, more than a processor speed or even memory ammount.

This topic is getting redundant and ho-motional.
Click to expand...


you're still ignoring the fact that your precious iMac is a dual core machine whereas the Dell is a quad core.

As Salem has already stated, the difference in performance between DDR2 and DDR3 is negligible. Those studies have been published all over the place.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1782/amd_phenom_ii_ddr2_vs_ddr3_performance/index.html

and my favorite:

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/ddr2-800-vs-ddr3-1333.html

There is no miracle again: faster memory yields 1% performance gain on one of the fastest processors with the 1333 MHz FSB, while the only processor for the 1600 MHz bus gains 2% from it. As always, faster memory appears much earlier than we really need it. But let's not act as ignorant users, who shout about being cheated. There is no cheating here. Look at results and draw your conclusions. Sooner or later, we'll have processors that will be able to use the full potential of DDR3-1333. It would have been naive to think otherwise. It will just happen later, that's all.
Click to expand...


NEITHER machine can utilize DDR3 well, so your precious iMac has RAM that gives it a cool buzzword, but in reality it won't give it an edge... ESPECIALLY NOT AGAINST 4 CORES!!!
 
Salem Beats said:
Lol you keep arguing this point. I love it when people make themselves look like an a$$ before they're proven wrong.

Now, for Robot Sunset Extreme's favorite thing to do: Run benchmarks!
http://xtreview.com/review198.htm

See? Marginally faster while much, much more expensive. In the future, the difference will be greater, but as for now -- early adopter status.
Click to expand...

This is sad, sorry AGAIN to destroy the arguments even embarrasingly further but....
























































(that review was written 3 years ago in 2007 - it IS the future lmaaoooo)
 
Last edited:
musicbird said:
----------------------
Click to expand...

bruh... Preaching to the choir. What I did was give an apples-to-apples comparison for RSE. That is, I took the hardware of a Mac Pro and spec'd out an identical machine over at Newegg. In order for it to be relevant, I had to use the same processor that the Mac Pro does, which happens to be the Xeon.
 
logic7 said:
bruh... Preaching to the choir. What I did was give an apples-to-apples comparison for RSE. That is, I took the hardware of a Mac Pro and spec'd out an identical machine over at Newegg. In order for it to be relevant, I had to use the same processor that the Mac Pro does, which happens to be the Xeon.
Click to expand...


You edited that in after the fact lol.

The core I7 thing. hahaha.

And just because you gathered together the CHEAPEST components you could find on newegg from razors-edge savings on important components doesnt mean it will run the same. Thats like comparing a Dell to an Alienware and thinking the benchmarks would be the same.
 
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
(that review was written 3 years ago in 2007 - it IS the future lmaaoooo)
Click to expand...

Yep, I didn't date-check. I quickly googled "DDR3 vs DDR2 benchmarks" and linked to the first relevant page that came up.

Check Logic7's links for more up-to-date benchmarks that prove DDR3's bandwidth is under-utilized by some of the fastest CPUs on the market :)
 
Robot Sunset Extreme said:
And just because you gathered together the CHEAPEST components you could find on newegg from razors-edge savings on important components doesnt mean it will run the same. Thats like comparing a Dell to an Alienware and thinking the benchmarks would be the same.
Click to expand...

And likewise, it doesn't mean that they'll run any different, nor does it mean that the more expensive parts will run any BETTER.

What's your point, Robot?
The only thing you're doing is proving our point by asserting that, regardless of actual performance, you like expensive parts and fancy brand names.
 
Last edited:
Salem Beats said:
And likewise, it doesn't mean that they'll run any different, nor does it mean that the more expensive parts will run any BETTER.

What's your point, Robot?
The only thing you're doing is proving our point by asserting that, regardless of actual performance, you like expensive parts and fancy brand names.
Click to expand...

All Im saying is best worded here:

Mac's are high quality machines that have expensive components. But if you are to get a pc that has the same components, it would cost the same price.
Click to expand...

How have you done your comparison? Have you compared feature for feature, build quality for build quality?

I have seen lots of laptops and desktop at similar price points to Apples (although I confess I haven't done the nose to nose comparison), and at higher price points. Seems to me Apples are competitive in the mid to upper market. Fighting in the low end of the market for the cheapskates is a losing game that many PC brands are happy to play.

Many factors influence the price, either direction. Part of it is the Apple value proposition -- a better, more stable OS running on solid hardware, wrapped in cutting edge design that's simpler to use, supported by a loyal customer base. Sounds like a reason to have a higher price. And keep the price up and don't discount heavily so as not to cheapen the brand.

PC brands have to deal with paying MS a big chunk of change with every system built, constant flux in component design, unclear brand images, razor-thin margins, cutthroat competition and picky, disloyal customers.

Sounds like Apple has the recipe.
Click to expand...

http://askville.amazon.com/Macs-expensive-PCs/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=6566653

And take that quote from your sig. The garageband comment was about recording high quality audio over instrumentals. The camera point is a point well made because if we were dealing with 50$, one had the webcam and the other didnt. Thats a normal point. Dont be gay.
 
Robot against all lol...

Y'all don't get it...


Robot was developed by Apple to terrorize all the forums and promote the Apple brand by any means necessary...


You can type as long as you want, Robot doesn't need to sleep, he'll recharge quickly and continue his work...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top