Forum Topic: Macbook superiority - ...really?

(517 views • 47 replies)

This topic is 2 pages long. [ 1 | 2 ]

<< < > >>
Resigned

ZeroNuclear

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/25/08 10:40 PM

ZeroNuclear DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 08/23/02

Posts: 99

So, I'm looking for a decent PORTABLE option for working on my flash content...

I've heard time and time again that macs are great for multimedia work. My old PC, which I used in working on my most recent work for the past 2 years, was super slow afterwhile and it got ridiculously frustrating to work on flash cartoons. My current laptop is a loaner, and i wouldn't even dare install Flash on here, lest this thing literally explode neath my fingertips.

So I'm SERIOUSLY considering buying a macbook. NOT a Macbook PRO, because I live in the real world and I have bills to pay and don't have $2,000 to blow on a computer. My main worry has been compatibility issues with running the various programs that I use to get my work done.

Ideally, I'd be able to buy a new PC laptop, and get a really nice system for the same price as the Macbook I'm aiming to get, and not have any worries about compatibility. But to be honest the only thing stopping me from doing this - Windows effing Vista. I continue to hear nothing but bad things about it, and I don't wanna go near it with a ten foot pole.

So what I want to know is - would investing in a Macbook REALLY improve my ability to work on my flash projects? Is it REALLY worth the investment in the supposed superiority in multimedia (not to mention avoiding Vista like the plague)?

I'd love some real opinions and advice here, because I;m going crazy not being able to work on any of my stuff. Thanks in advance.

BTW the Macbook im aiming for:

2.4 GHz core 2 duo processor
160 GB Hard Drive
2GB RAM (should I go for 4GB if doing heavy flash work?)
13 inch screen.
8X "Superdrive"
and all the other random crap that comes with the white Macbook... and NO this is not a cosmetic choice. personally I don't much care for the look of macbooks. I just wanna create shit.


None

Polioman

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/25/08 10:44 PM

Polioman EVIL LEVEL 12

Sign-Up: 07/06/06

Posts: 314

Depends on which programs are you using


None

ZeroNuclear

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/25/08 11:21 PM

ZeroNuclear DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 08/23/02

Posts: 99

well, I can work with both the old Flash MX 2004 Professional and CS3. Alot of my stuff that spans a longer time frame is still based in MX on my old system.

I also do alot of work in photoshop and some work in dreamweaver, and im planning to do alot ofwork in Illustrator in the near future (which can definitely be a RAM hog. additionally, i use simple audio editing software to play around with sound effects and some music. i also use some cakewalk programs for music and audio, as well as an old version of fruity loops from like years ago.

i sometimes use screencasting software like camstudio to blogcast.

and several other randomprograms. im more concerned about my ability to work with those bigger design programs i mentioned first.

would a macbook hold its weight with that kind of workload?


Elated

Polioman

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/25/08 11:27 PM

Polioman EVIL LEVEL 12

Sign-Up: 07/06/06

Posts: 314

Its as easy as using them on Windows, maybe easier, so don't worry about photoshop or everythhing about Adobe, you can use them with no problem, about the screencasting programs the are some good ones and with a good qualityso that's nothing to worry about, it's working for me.


None

ZeroNuclear

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/25/08 11:56 PM

ZeroNuclear DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 08/23/02

Posts: 99

That sounds ideal....

what about performance though? I just worry about encountering difficulties with working with large files. Not a MAJOR worry mind you. With specs like those above, I don't think it'd be a huge problem. Still i wonder. It's just that macbooks are a recognizable brand and therefore cost so much more... you start to question if its REALLY worth the investment.

Any other thoughts on this?


None

Polioman

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 12:42 AM

Polioman EVIL LEVEL 12

Sign-Up: 07/06/06

Posts: 314

At 9/25/08 11:56 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: That sounds ideal....

what about performance though? I just worry about encountering difficulties with working with large files. Not a MAJOR worry mind you. With specs like those above, I don't think it'd be a huge problem. Still i wonder. It's just that macbooks are a recognizable brand and therefore cost so much more... you start to question if its REALLY worth the investment.

Any other thoughts on this?

It is a good investment, cause it's a recognized brand and the OS is lighter, it consumes less RAM which is really useful for this kind of software.


None

Toast

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 04:26 AM

Toast DARK LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 04/02/05

Posts: 8,924

is that an intel or AMD processor?


None

salted-tator-tot

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 06:14 AM

salted-tator-tot FAB LEVEL 30

Sign-Up: 02/26/06

Posts: 3,318

I don't think they're bad, but they are so over-priced for things that are no better than Windows. I've only ever used them at my school, but they seem alright.

01000100011000010110111001100011011 01001011011100110011101010000011010 01011011100110010101100001011100000 11100000110110001100101010001110111 010101111001

BBS Signature

None

Pasty-Flawss

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 06:16 AM

Pasty-Flawss LIGHT LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 01/22/08

Posts: 432

Well in my opinion mac is honestly not really good for anything, windows is a lot more stable and better. I see your point in disliking vista so you could do what i did and download a windows XP torrent free of charge, however this is sort of illegal, but microsoft won't really care unless you're some really big business, and if you bought a PC windows vista was included in the price so they still are making money out of you so it's not that bad :).


None

Gatekeeper0

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 07:21 AM

Gatekeeper0 FAB LEVEL 08

Sign-Up: 06/05/08

Posts: 359

Well my dad works with someone who basically does all the computer work for them [since my dad cant do shit with a computer] But one day I asked the guy if he preferred Macs or PC without even thinking he replied Macs. Of course I asked why, he said that apple spends a lot more time researching program issues to ensure it does not encounter any errors or run slowly.

An plus NO BLUE SCREEEN!!!!!
BBS Signature

None

Moo12321

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 07:39 AM

Moo12321 NEUTRAL LEVEL 10

Sign-Up: 08/26/07

Posts: 157

At 9/26/08 06:16 AM, Pasty-Flawss wrote: Well in my opinion mac is honestly not really good for anything, windows is a lot more stable and better. I see your point in disliking vista so you could do what i did and download a windows XP torrent free of charge, however this is sort of illegal, but microsoft won't really care unless you're some really big business, and if you bought a PC windows vista was included in the price so they still are making money out of you so it's not that bad :).

Can you elaborate on that? What makes Windows more stable or better? As far as I know, the Mac operating system is far more stable than the Windows operating system (I heard Windows Vista, yes, is even worse). Windows, however, does have its advantages over Mac as well though. Its not too hard to find software for a Mac.

However, some programs simply have had more development on Windows than Mac, and are much better on Windows. MSN messenger, for example, is like a very old Windows version of MSN on the Mac, with refined graphics (No one really cares about graphics on a messenger right?).

There are some very specific things you can't find, and games. I would say its quite hard to find games on a Mac, but the games you actually can get are generally big title, like Command and Conquer, Spore, The Sims. There are some games which are Mac games only, which are pretty good, but they generally are not action games. If you have had an iPod Touch, or iPhone, you might have played Enigmo? That's one of those Mac games.

Ok, and the things other than games that you might want. You are a Flash user, so I assume these are thing you might have used before on Windows that you'll have a very small selection of. It is very hard to find Flash decompilers on the Mac. There is Flasm, which only decompiles code, and only into a simplified form (which won't help you too much :P), and Trillix, which you have to pay for (However, you could get a trial version that only decompiles in black and white). Trillix is a great decompiler, just that I would prefer freeware. So you might want to make backup copies of your game, on a USB drive, or external HD (I assure you will not want to go through the trouble of decompiling). Adobe stuff, as pointed out earlier, is all compatible if not better on Mac. If you want a screen capture program (you know, on-screen video recorder), it will be hard to find one. However, I have found two that I think are excellent, and actually, both much better than the beloved Hypercam. They are called iShowU and Snapz Pro X. You can Google them if you want. They both cost money though, but they are worth it. I bought iShowU, its a great program. Both of these programs leave a huge fullscreen watermark though on the trial version. So, as opposed to the Hypercam's unregistered mark, it will be much more annoying. So, it might be kind of difficult to show your work, and make sure you are secure at the same time. Screenshots, I guess would work too, but I prefer for people to be able to see the physics and animation too in games and such (screenshotting is much easier on a Mac).

And don't listen to the Mac advertisements. iLife isn't as good as they say it is. It is very limiting, because of the fact it is pretty much completely automatic. I believe they added the ability to put HTML into iWeb JUST now. Before, you could not even make tables in iWeb. iWeb also is meant to be used with .Mac (now its called MobileMe I believe), which I am not a fan of.
In conclusion, the Macs are better than Windows. But I would have to say, prepare to spend some cash, unless you are going to try taking risks. I would not suggest illegal downloading.


None

AcidSoldier

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 08:41 AM

AcidSoldier DARK LEVEL 16

Sign-Up: 11/01/05

Posts: 2,761

At 9/25/08 10:40 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: 2.4 GHz core 2 duo processor
160 GB Hard Drive
2GB RAM (should I go for 4GB if doing heavy flash work?)
13 inch screen.
8X "Superdrive"

My PC has a 3.2 GHz AMD Anthlon64, and it's a single core. Waste of money.
HDD is good.
2 GB Ram is good enough for anything really.
Meh, it's a laptop, screen doesn't need to be big.
8x?! My old CD drive before I had to get rid of it was 52x, the 2nd fastest.

So like, at first I was like "wuts a domane lol!11" but then I was like "lol i has un!111111111"

BBS Signature

None

zedd56

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 09:07 AM

zedd56 LIGHT LEVEL 14

Sign-Up: 08/31/07

Posts: 1,475

Don't comment on pc specs if you don't know what you're talking about.

8x is his dvd drive speed, 52x is cd speed. Don't be a noob.

Anyways, i've always heard macs are used more than pc's for photoshop. But don't get a mac unless that's all you're gonna do with it. Pc's work just as good, and chances are it'll be nearly half the price for the pc laptop.

Macs are going to take some time to get used to, and believe me, it'll piss you off in the beginning.

Make your choice wisely.


None

zedd56

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 09:11 AM

zedd56 LIGHT LEVEL 14

Sign-Up: 08/31/07

Posts: 1,475

sorry for the doublepost (tom needs to give us some fucking post editing abilities.)

Vista is not bad. You'll get used to it in about 5 days or so. Depending on what you do.

Vista was garbage when it first came out. But now with service pack one and updates being released nearly every week, it isn't bad anymore.

There used to be lot's of bugs, and that's why nobody liked it. But now? I've been on vista for about 2 months now and so far nothing has gone wrong.

Don't be afraid of vista; xp was just as horrible when it first came out.
3 Service packs later, it came to be known as the greatest microsoft OS ever made.

Vista will be the same.


None

Jimtopia

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 09:48 AM

Jimtopia LIGHT LEVEL 12

Sign-Up: 02/16/06

Posts: 1,237

I have a Mac and it works great. I love it for my multimedia work.


None

Toast

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 12:24 PM

Toast DARK LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 04/02/05

Posts: 8,924

At 9/26/08 08:41 AM, AcidSoldier wrote:
At 9/25/08 10:40 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: 2.4 GHz core 2 duo processor
160 GB Hard Drive
2GB RAM (should I go for 4GB if doing heavy flash work?)
13 inch screen.
8X "Superdrive"
My PC has a 3.2 GHz AMD Anthlon64, and it's a single core. Waste of money.

Clocking speed doesn't mean shit. You could have an intel quad core EQ9550 at only 2.2ghz which would be 100 times better than some random single core 3 ghz processor. Ghz only defines the clocking speed, which is independantly irrelevant without precising the amount of work done in each clock.

also, my penis is larger than ur screen


None

Moo12321

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 03:55 PM

Moo12321 NEUTRAL LEVEL 10

Sign-Up: 08/26/07

Posts: 157

At 9/26/08 12:24 PM, Toast wrote:
At 9/26/08 08:41 AM, AcidSoldier wrote:
At 9/25/08 10:40 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: 2.4 GHz core 2 duo processor
160 GB Hard Drive
2GB RAM (should I go for 4GB if doing heavy flash work?)
13 inch screen.
8X "Superdrive"
My PC has a 3.2 GHz AMD Anthlon64, and it's a single core. Waste of money.
Clocking speed doesn't mean shit. You could have an intel quad core EQ9550 at only 2.2ghz which would be 100 times better than some random single core 3 ghz processor. Ghz only defines the clocking speed, which is independantly irrelevant without precising the amount of work done in each clock.

also, my penis is larger than ur screen

The Mac operating system also is just simply more efficient. It runs faster.

(On the side note, I found something really silly at Circuit City. It was a Windows XP laptop, which was frozen on the Windows starting screen. You don't see that much...)


None

permaximum1

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 06:50 PM

permaximum1 NEUTRAL LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 08/17/08

Posts: 192

ya i use a mac. I switched over from a pc like 2 years ago and it has been great. Macs operating system is far superior to dells. And i use flash on it and i have had no problems


None

jmtb02

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 07:07 PM

jmtb02 LIGHT LEVEL 29

Sign-Up: 03/01/04

Posts: 5,844

The Macbook you listed is the same exact Macbook I have.

I do Flash on it and have done projects on it for a while. It's been very good to me, and the power is right-on for normal Flash projects. By normal Flash projects, I mean anything where you aren't using huge 500+ symbol projects or bloated FLA's.

It has some problems with larger files, and yes, because it's a Mac the Flash Player will run slower (but your files will run faster typically on a PC with IE/FF).

When you get a Macbook, the colour settings for the screen are slightly whiter than what matches other screens. Consider changing your sRGB settings in the Display Control panel to brighten the colours and lower the white balance.

Another consideration is that the USB ports are on the left side. If you plan on using a mouse, get a mouse with a long enough cord to wrap around the back to the right side. Some people have notebook mice that can't reach past 2-3 feet and people feel severely limited in this regard.

I would recommend this computer over any other computer if you don't plan on having a powerhouse for a computer. It's a great notebook, has good battery life with Flash (1.5 hours with Flash/Photoshop open on dimmer screen brightness) and most of all is reliable.

If you need the powerhouse, move towards Macbook Pro. If you can be happy with a moderately fast but reliable piece of hardware, go with the MacBook.

Also note that if you are switching between Mac and PC, the Adobe License will NOT transfer.

Hi there!

BBS Signature

None

Patcoola

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 07:55 PM

Patcoola LIGHT LEVEL 46

Sign-Up: 03/07/03

Posts: 2,085

well a better computer wont make you better at flash, thats up to you.

a mac comes with everything, you can't go wrong with a mac, i've seen many people buy cheap laptops then do nothing but complain about it, or over paid for a laptop that breaks right after warranty.

with a mac you have to get flash 9 or newer, anything under 9 runs in a emulator and is alittle slower, but you can always run windows.

i don't know about flash 9 but all serial keys for 8 and under works on both, in my experience.

anyways the macs have very nice screens.

Website | Blog | Buy T-Shirts | Flash | Audio

BBS Signature

None

zedd56

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 08:16 PM

zedd56 LIGHT LEVEL 14

Sign-Up: 08/31/07

Posts: 1,475

I can't believe some of these posts.
Some of these people are giving smart, educated answers.

Whereas i'm seeing others that are extremely biased who have no idea what they are talking about.

Listen, no matter what anybody tells you, whether you're using flash on a mac or a pc, it's still flash. The whole "Macs are better for multimedia" is bullshit. It's the same program, not limited in any way on a pc, or a mac, mind you. People say macs are better for media because they simply can't do anything else. Not many program are ported (or made compatible) for macs, because they aren't used anywhere near as often.

I, myself, would never buy a macbook unless i already owned a pc laptop. To have one of each is ideal, but obviously not pricewise.

What i mean to say, is that flash is not the only thing i do on my computer. Macs would not suit me. Whether or not they will suit you, i will never know unless you give more detail.

I've said it before, i'll say it again... consider some of the wise words here and make your choice wisely.

PS: if you're still torn between the two, get a pc. All-in-all, it'll be more compatible with today's software and it will be a lot cheaper.

P.P.S: polioman, vista's new ram consumption/caching methods are now equivalent, if not better than, the mac's.

P.P.P.S: Listen to's and Don't Listen To's

Don't Listen To:
-AcidSoldier; he's not helping the situation, he's just giving his own pc specs.
-Pasty-Flawws; he's being extremely biased, and isn't looking at the brighter side of Mac. Also, he'll land you in jail, not to mention getting banned from these forums.
-GateKeeper0; he's doing the exact same thing, except on Mac's side.
-Jimtopia; Simply not helping.
-Permaximum; Don't say what things are superior when you have no idea how they work. Btw, your noob is showing.
-Patcoola; I thought you were smart until: "the macs have very nice screens." Dude stfu. Anybody who would list a detail like that obviously doesn't care for what's inside the computer.
-AND DEFINITELY DON'T LISTEN TO THE GOD DAMN MAC COMMERCIALS. THEY'RE A BUNCH OF BIASED LOADS OF HORSE SHIT.

Listen To:
-Toast; He seems to know what he is talking about, but obviously, he hasn't taken much interest in your issue.
-jmtb02; He has given a really good review on macs. That doesn't mean you should go and buy a mac, it means that if you do end up buying a mac, he's a good person to look to.


None

Patcoola

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 09:14 PM

Patcoola LIGHT LEVEL 46

Sign-Up: 03/07/03

Posts: 2,085

At 9/26/08 08:16 PM, zedd56 wrote: I can't believe some of these posts.

you shouldn't care so much about other people, he will do whatever he feels like with his money.

bottom line there both a PC they both run windows.
Mac has "Im a Mac", Microsoft has "Im a PC" everyone advertises.

nobody cares, and all he wants to know is about flash, this is not the general forum.

Website | Blog | Buy T-Shirts | Flash | Audio

BBS Signature

None

Pasty-Flawss

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 10:15 PM

Pasty-Flawss LIGHT LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 01/22/08

Posts: 432

At 9/26/08 03:55 PM, Moo12321 wrote:
At 9/26/08 12:24 PM, Toast wrote:
At 9/26/08 08:41 AM, AcidSoldier wrote:
At 9/25/08 10:40 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: 2.4 GHz core 2 duo processor
160 GB Hard Drive
2GB RAM (should I go for 4GB if doing heavy flash work?)
13 inch screen.
8X "Superdrive"
My PC has a 3.2 GHz AMD Anthlon64, and it's a single core. Waste of money.
Clocking speed doesn't mean shit. You could have an intel quad core EQ9550 at only 2.2ghz which would be 100 times better than some random single core 3 ghz processor. Ghz only defines the clocking speed, which is independantly irrelevant without precising the amount of work done in each clock.

also, my penis is larger than ur screen
The Mac operating system also is just simply more efficient. It runs faster.

(On the side note, I found something really silly at Circuit City. It was a Windows XP laptop, which was frozen on the Windows starting screen. You don't see that much...)

Hmm, that's the only reason i can see why people choose macs over PC's. Because they like the simple environment and they like to be different. But linux is a lot more simpler and it does run A LOT faster than mac or windows so that sort means mac isn't that good at anything apart from photoshop, but I think photoshop is just as good on a windows computer.


None

DanielZ

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/26/08 10:41 PM

DanielZ DARK LEVEL 08

Sign-Up: 07/30/08

Posts: 566

Go Mac. It's easy. The new Macbooks are powerful enough to run all the CS3 programs. If you're somewhat skilled with technology, buy the low-end Macbook, and upgrade it with cheap parts. You'll save about $300-$400. Another advantage with the the new Macbooks is that they can run Windows, so if there's some killer Windows-only app, you don't have to miss out. And with parallels desktop, you can run Windows side by side with Mac. Macs are generally more stable, because OS X is based on Unix. I can get about 20 days of uptime with no problems on my Mac. Also, it's much harder to get viruses on Macs, even if you download everything in sight. A Macbook has good excellent battery life, and I get about 4-5 hours from my Macbook Pro, which is twice as power-hungry. Also, if you can afford it, spring for the Macbook Pro. If you can't, the Macbook is a good choice.

BBS Signature

None

ZeroNuclear

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/27/08 09:57 PM

ZeroNuclear DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 08/23/02

Posts: 99

Wow...

I really appreciate all the different advice here. Thanks.

From what I've read, there's a few things I could elaborate on in more detail...

At 9/26/08 04:26 AM, Toast wrote: is that an intel or AMD processor?

--- its an Intel. I don't know that Macs actually even come with AMDs standard, do they?

At 9/26/08 06:16 AM, Pasty-Flawss wrote: Well in my opinion mac is honestly not really good for anything, windows is a lot more stable and better.

--- I agree with Moo12321, I'd like to hear more of an explanation here. Pretty much every piece of literature out there contests that the Mac OS is far more stable and crash-resistant/bug-free than any Windows OS currently in use. What makes you say this?

At 9/26/08 09:07 AM, zedd56 wrote: Anyways, i've always heard macs are used more than pc's for photoshop. But don't get a mac unless that's all you're gonna do with it. Pc's work just as good, and chances are it'll be nearly half the price for the pc laptop.

---- The price point is definitely true, as I've seen from researching this. That's one of the major sticking points for me. However, I plan to use more than photoshop, as I said above. Flash is the major program I'd be running, along with alot of photoshop, illustrator, dreamweaver (essentially the most popular programs in the adobe suite). not to mention several music & audio editing programs, the screen capturing stuff I mentioned... that's about all really.

At 9/26/08 07:07 PM, jmtb02 wrote: The Macbook you listed is the same exact Macbook I have.

I do Flash on it and have done projects on it for a while. It's been very good to me, and the power is right-on for normal Flash projects. By normal Flash projects, I mean anything where you aren't using huge 500+ symbol projects or bloated FLA's.

It has some problems with larger files, and yes, because it's a Mac the Flash Player will run slower (but your files will run faster typically on a PC with IE/FF).

---- Interesting... I'd never heard that flash player runs slower on Macs generally. As far as flash projects, the bulkiest FLA files are probably anywhere from 90 - 120 MB. This is a high estimate. The more realistic upper range is more like 80-85 MB. I can't estimate the size of my libraries accurately, but I don't think it approaches 500+ symbols. Maybe like 300-ish.

At 9/26/08 07:55 PM, Patcoola wrote: well a better computer wont make you better at flash, thats up to you.

--- My primary concern here is not AT ALL gaining some spontaneous boost in skill by switching to a Mac. In fact I suspect that I'd face technical challenges in the first couple of weeks of working in the new environment.
Instead, my primary concern is having the ability to work free of hindrances with my files, within the given setup. When I work on files now, the PC is frustratingly slow. Every tiny command will make the PC load for seconds on end (this sounds like I'm complaining over a small thing, but it's VERY annoying when you click the "undo" button in flash, and have to wait 30 seconds for the damn hourglass to go away). It's very difficult dealing with those little inconveniences when they occur every other second, and add up to a big ball of "FUCK THIS COMPUTER."
If switching to the Mac OS instead of upgrading to Vista or working in XP would get me closer to being able to work without the sluggishness and the dumb ass freezing problems, then I'd really consider it and probably go ahead and get one that's suitable.


None

mongoid

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/27/08 11:12 PM

mongoid LIGHT LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 01/03/02

Posts: 245

At 9/27/08 09:57 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: Wow...

I really appreciate all the different advice here. Thanks.

From what I've read, there's a few things I could elaborate on in more detail...

At 9/26/08 04:26 AM, Toast wrote: is that an intel or AMD processor?
--- its an Intel. I don't know that Macs actually even come with AMDs standard, do they?

At 9/26/08 06:16 AM, Pasty-Flawss wrote: Well in my opinion mac is honestly not really good for anything, windows is a lot more stable and better.
--- I agree with Moo12321, I'd like to hear more of an explanation here. Pretty much every piece of literature out there contests that the Mac OS is far more stable and crash-resistant/bug-free than any Windows OS currently in use. What makes you say this?

At 9/26/08 09:07 AM, zedd56 wrote: Anyways, i've always heard macs are used more than pc's for photoshop. But don't get a mac unless that's all you're gonna do with it. Pc's work just as good, and chances are it'll be nearly half the price for the pc laptop.
---- The price point is definitely true, as I've seen from researching this. That's one of the major sticking points for me. However, I plan to use more than photoshop, as I said above. Flash is the major program I'd be running, along with alot of photoshop, illustrator, dreamweaver (essentially the most popular programs in the adobe suite). not to mention several music & audio editing programs, the screen capturing stuff I mentioned... that's about all really.

At 9/26/08 07:07 PM, jmtb02 wrote: The Macbook you listed is the same exact Macbook I have.

I do Flash on it and have done projects on it for a while. It's been very good to me, and the power is right-on for normal Flash projects. By normal Flash projects, I mean anything where you aren't using huge 500+ symbol projects or bloated FLA's.

It has some problems with larger files, and yes, because it's a Mac the Flash Player will run slower (but your files will run faster typically on a PC with IE/FF).
---- Interesting... I'd never heard that flash player runs slower on Macs generally. As far as flash projects, the bulkiest FLA files are probably anywhere from 90 - 120 MB. This is a high estimate. The more realistic upper range is more like 80-85 MB. I can't estimate the size of my libraries accurately, but I don't think it approaches 500+ symbols. Maybe like 300-ish.

At 9/26/08 07:55 PM, Patcoola wrote: well a better computer wont make you better at flash, thats up to you.
--- My primary concern here is not AT ALL gaining some spontaneous boost in skill by switching to a Mac. In fact I suspect that I'd face technical challenges in the first couple of weeks of working in the new environment.
Instead, my primary concern is having the ability to work free of hindrances with my files, within the given setup. When I work on files now, the PC is frustratingly slow. Every tiny command will make the PC load for seconds on end (this sounds like I'm complaining over a small thing, but it's VERY annoying when you click the "undo" button in flash, and have to wait 30 seconds for the damn hourglass to go away). It's very difficult dealing with those little inconveniences when they occur every other second, and add up to a big ball of "FUCK THIS COMPUTER."
If switching to the Mac OS instead of upgrading to Vista or working in XP would get me closer to being able to work without the sluggishness and the dumb ass freezing problems, then I'd really consider it and probably go ahead and get one that's suitable.

The real question is are you ready to buy Mac versions of all of your software? Unless you run a dual boot system, that's what you'll have to do. And even then, why buy an expensive Macbook if all you're going to do is run windows on it?

I've completed 90% of my games using a PC laptop. It's a Toshiba Satellite that I bought back in 2005, and it's running great. I use a dual screen setup that works fantastic. It's underpowered for playing games, but that's not the reason for why I bought it.

In my opinion, PC laptops are better than Apple laptops in that they're MUCH less expensive. A new Toshiba Satellite Laptop with AMD Turion X2 Dual Core Processor, 4 GB of RAM, and 14.1 inch screen is $350 cheaper than a low end Macbook. Vista may have its quirks, but that's all they really are... quirks. It runs a little different than XP, some functions are filed under different folders. But learning Vista is a hell of a lot easier than OS X if you haven't used a Mac before.

Vista is very stable. OS X and Vista are essentially the same in this regard, so it's almost pointless to argue this. You're missing out on Apple's gimmicky software like iMovie, iCal, GarageBand, iPhoto, etc.... but if you have no real need for that stuff, then it's pointless. Not to mention that there are free PC equivalents like Windows MovieMaker, Google Calendar, Picasso that do just as good of a job, but lack all that flashy garbage that Apple programs utilize. Your iPod works the same as it does on a Mac. Same goes for iTunes.

Take this from a guy who used to work at an Apple Store. PC laptops are just as good. In some ways, even better than Macbooks. Especially the Macbook Pros. Stay away from the Dell Inspirons. I've heard horrible things about their customer service and quality of production. Be cautious around the HP's, since they put a lot of crappy 3rd party applications on them to run down the price. So far, the Toshiba and AlienWare brands are the best.

Good luck!


None

mongoid

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/27/08 11:19 PM

mongoid LIGHT LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 01/03/02

Posts: 245

Also, to make sure that your next computer doesn't get bogged down like your current one, make sure you don't install 101 programs that run in the background, or in the system tray. Use antivirus and antispam programs like AVG, Spybot SDk, and AdAware to keep your system clean. Constantly flush your temporary files, and schedule a defrag for at least once a month. Also, if you can live without it, turn off indexing.

That's what keeps me running strong. You can't expect your computer to tune itself. A lot of people seem to forget this and blame their machines for slowing down.


None

ZeroNuclear

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/28/08 02:53 PM

ZeroNuclear DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 08/23/02

Posts: 99

You've made some good points as well. Thanks!

I'm still making up my mind. It's alot to think about.


None

Pasty-Flawss

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/28/08 09:56 PM

Pasty-Flawss LIGHT LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 01/22/08

Posts: 432

At 9/28/08 02:53 PM, ZeroNuclear wrote: You've made some good points as well. Thanks!

I'm still making up my mind. It's alot to think about.

It's up to you, but there's very little difference between flash on each operating system. I even made flash in linux which was basically just the same. Go with which OS you prefer rather than which one you think is better for flash, I prefer windows in general so I use windows.


None

mulatto401

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 9/29/08 01:28 AM

mulatto401 NEUTRAL LEVEL 02

Sign-Up: 05/02/06

Posts: 164

I don't understand the fuss around Vista! It is MORE stable then Windows XP (hardy ever crashes). The big thing about Vista is it takes too much damn RAM. If your gonna go PC make sure you get MORE THAN 2GB of RAM cuz technically your only gonna have 1GB since Vista uses 1GB of it.

I have a 1.6GHZ AMD Dual Core processor with 2Gb of RAM, worked so well but cuz you can't use flash CS3 on Vista Home Basic I upgraded to Premium and then the slowness came along. (Vista basic only uses 512MB of RAM).

Anyway, I would say stick to PC, for the money...your gonna get faster and better hardware then Mac will offer for the same price. The money you spend on a Mac is basically for the software.

Also make sure your processor is at least 2GHZ and I recommend Intel over AMD, Intel is a stronger processor and can multi task better but slower than AMD.

Oh, and don't forget that if you go Mac you'll have to re-buy all your software like CS3 or whatever programs your usings for the Mac versions!

Current Project: Defend Your Cheese (www.thegameproject.com)


All times are Eastern Standard Time (GMT -5) | Current Time: 09:27 PM

<< Back

This topic is 2 pages long. [ 1 | 2 ]

<< < > >>
You need a Grounds Gold Account to post on the NG BBS! If you don't have one, click here to sign up now! It's fast, free, and easy — and opens up tons of great NG features!