You got $3,000 to spend for a laptop

[Henchman]

Originally posted by gmstudio99:

Originally posted by Henchman:

Except of course that you still get way more bang for your buck with PC's.

Just to drive your point home, could you please go back and use my "real world" examples of what I've done with my $1000 iBook, as described in this thread, and outline for me how I'm not getting the most "bang" for my "buck?"

 

I'm very curious as to what fantastic things I'm missing out on.

 

Thanks

 

Paul

Track count and plug-in count.

 

Hey, if the ibook is working for you great. Nothing wrong with that.

But I wish Mac people would stop acting like today's PC's are any harder to set-up or use than a Mac. Because they are not. It's the software that ususally gives them the ost problems

 

And I can still get more bang for my buck going the PC route. And spend the money saved on stuff like nicer mic re's and converters.

[Henchman]

Originally posted by gmstudio99:

Originally posted by Henchman:

Except of course that you still get way more bang for your buck with PC's.

Just to drive your point home, could you please go back and use my "real world" examples of what I've done with my $1000 iBook, as described in this thread, and outline for me how I'm not getting the most "bang" for my "buck?"

 

I'm very curious as to what fantastic things I'm missing out on.

 

Thanks

 

Paul

Track count and plug-in count.

 

Hey, if the ibook is working for you great. Nothing wrong with that.

But I wish Mac people would stop acting like today's PC's are any harder to set-up or use than a Mac. Because they are not. It's the software that ususally gives them the ost problems

 

And I can still get more bang for my buck going the PC route. And spend the money saved on stuff like nicer mic re's and converters.

[Henchman]

Originally posted by gmstudio99:

Originally posted by Henchman:

Except of course that you still get way more bang for your buck with PC's.

Just to drive your point home, could you please go back and use my "real world" examples of what I've done with my $1000 iBook, as described in this thread, and outline for me how I'm not getting the most "bang" for my "buck?"

 

I'm very curious as to what fantastic things I'm missing out on.

 

Thanks

 

Paul

Track count and plug-in count.

 

Hey, if the ibook is working for you great. Nothing wrong with that.

But I wish Mac people would stop acting like today's PC's are any harder to set-up or use than a Mac. Because they are not. It's the software that ususally gives them the ost problems

 

And I can still get more bang for my buck going the PC route. And spend the money saved on stuff like nicer mic re's and converters.

[gmstudio99]

Originally posted by Henchman:

Track count and plug-in count.

 

Really? I don't remember complaining about about low track count or plug in count. Never had a problem with those, actually. That's quite an assumption you're making about my system.

 

I think Mac users wish that PC people would quit making assumptions about performance based on specs on paper without real-world experience. Agreed?

 

Paul

[theblue1]

Well, hours later and tons of tracks later, the thing never hiccup'ed or anything. Not once. It took the 828 interface w/o a problem and it tracked, I'd even say, better than my main computer. During the middle of the second session I found myself thinking, "Man, this thing is tight...why even bother with the other computer?"

I have no doubt it was dependable and a pleasure to use -- but, gosh, your 'itty-bitty 12" G4' is a rocket ship compared to the Pentium ("1") 133 mHz machine I used for 8 channel recording from 1996-2000. (It worked fine and could crank up a pretty good track count, too, up to about 18 tracks -- but more than one live-plug-in and it would glitch.)

 

If your contemporary machine -- Mac or PC -- couldn't pull it off, then that would be news. And not good news.

 

People should use the machine they want and not second-guess themselves or put down others' choices all the time. (And I'm not, by any means, suggesting that you are. But we all do, from time to time, don't we? )

 

The truth is that the capabilities of the two platforms are now very close (after the last two OS X releases have added audio and multimedia and plug-in layers to the OS). But even when they weren't, application software designers often took up the slack in individual programs. And now that they are, there are flourishing development scenes for both platforms.

 

The purchase prices are much closer now, too. If you get a high-end boutique PC it will cost just as much or more as a Mac with the same basic performance.

[jcskid]

Hey Obviously on crack!,

you obviously missed a laptop in your research.

 

where is the real specs on that Emachine?

 

i want to know motherboard chipset, Cardbus chipset and Firewire chipset.

 

without knowing that one would have to be an idiot to buy it for audio, or know they could take it back for a full refund.

how loud is the fan for audio? after all it is an AMD.

 

as to the Centrinos, they are pretty good (due to the 1meg cache)

but they are not as fast as the upper 800fsb chips. 2.8 and above, secondly when you start hiting them heavy they start wearing down.

plus only

 

again only 1 internal HDD on both and i doubt either are 7200 RPM.

 

Scott

[theblue1]

Speaking of laptops, I just bought a Dell with a Centrino chipset. (Which means it has a Pentium M [not to be confused with Pentium 3M and 4M] and a specific wireless chipset from Intel.) It only has one HD, but I did make sure it was 60 GB [w/8MB cache] 7200 RPM UDMA. It has a half GB of RAM. It has a DVD+RW burner. The primary fan is very quiet to my thinking. Certainly much, much quieter than my thermo-controlled desktop fan (which is still much quieter than a normal desktop fan). (The secondary has only kicked in once, during a long DVD burn slowed down by transfer over 802.11b. When I burned the next one over my 100 mbps ethernet, it stayed off. The secondary was noticeable but no worse than a quiet desktop fan.)

 

Its actual clockrate is 1.4 gHz but because of a general streamlining and a substantial optimization of piping and prediction processes it performs at the level of a 2.4-2.6 gHz Pentium 4 (or at least this seems to be the consensus) while consuming far less power (I haven't sat down to time it but I usually get at least 4-5 hours.)

 

Interestingly, the Pentium M used in Centrino class machines (a post-P4 design) is actually based to a substantial degree on key features of the Pentium 3 design.

 

I'm still shopping for a proper audio interface (it has USB 2, FW, built-in 802.11b, all the legacy ports -- but it doesn't have a LINE IN, so no impromptu 16 bit projects in the meantime) so I haven't put it through any serious audio work. (ACID Pro works fine on it, hoopty doo ... just like it does on my well-optimised P3-500 desktop.)

 

I bought a Dell because it was one of the few places where I could either spec or see the basic performance of the HD. I bought a refurbished unit from their outlet store [just like new from all appearances -- but with a 3-yr next day warranty to be on the safe side].

 

Oh, the screen is one of those wider, shorter 15.4" screens (very vivid, nice colors, 1280x800 on the machine I got... they have rez's up to 1900 for not that much extra but I need this machine to show web pages and database interfaces... I can't hand out a magnifying glass at a demo.)

 

The price (less the $220 3 year next day warranty) was just under $1500. For a new one spec'd exactly the same it would have been $2100. (US)

 

I'm pretty happy. Even the crappy built-in speakers aren't all that crappy.

[FULLREFUSAL]

Originally posted by jcskid:

Hey Obviously on crack!,

you obviously missed a laptop in your research.

 

where is the real specs on that Emachine?

 

i want to know motherboard chipset, Cardbus chipset and Firewire chipset.

 

without knowing that one would have to be an idiot to buy it for audio, or know they could take it back for a full refund.

how loud is the fan for audio? after all it is an AMD.

 

as to the Centrinos, they are pretty good (due to the 1meg cache)

but they are not as fast as the upper 800fsb chips. 2.8 and above, secondly when you start hiting them heavy they start wearing down.

plus only

 

again only 1 internal HDD on both and i doubt either are 7200 RPM.

 

Scott

Hey scott...The intel 2.8 and above are NOT NOT NOT as powerfull for DSP as the centrinos...At least for PRo Tools and Logic..If you do not believe me, I suggest you go over to the Digidesign site under the Pro Tools Le for Windows section..There is a 20 page thread with all sorts of testing on all sorts of laptops..There is a 100 page thread on General desktop systems..IT's all there..The Intel P4's can not and do not compete with the Centrino 1.7 laptop systems for Audio and Pro Tools..I'm sure they do well in other areas...As for the Chipset on the AMD Emachines unit , here is all the info you will need on this one at the AMD forums.: http://forums.amd.com/index.php?s=e93f6dcf379631a45e6dcec69daa54ea&showtopic=6266

 

Heres a cool Toms Harware review on it: http://www6.tomshardware.com/mobile/20031216/index.html

 

the drive is a Hitachi 60gb 5400RPM w/ 8mb cache.

 

the CDRW is a LiteOn LSC24082k

 

NICs are Broadcom 54G & Via Rhine II

 

Chipset is Via K8T800

 

Audio is Realtek AC650

 

Video (as you know) is Radeon 9600. AGP 8x, 256mb Aperture size, SBA enabled

 

Synaptics Touchpad (nothing new there)

[jcskid]

HI YA,

 

some good links, thanks as i am always looking to the future, so far i cant buy any AMD 64 laptops and that Via chipset makes me nervous..

 

there are some downsides to that laptop.

only 1 internal drive, only takes 5400 rpm.

VIA firewire and cardbus so it wont work well with most audio gear. (although the digi 02 i guess does, i thought Digi was strong on the Texas instruments firwire!!)

while maybe Digi stuff performs better on the Centrino, its the only thing that does.

heres Nuendo tests

 

ftp://ftp.steinberg.net/fwd/performance_tests/Performance.PDF

 

memory performance benchmarks on Toms hardware were pretty bad compared to a P4 real processor, as was the centrino..

for guys doing live gig'n with a bunch of samples that would hurt them.. or using it with sampling.

the CPU marks were pretty good!!

i love AMD and is my present choice for Desktop,

but i have to say the Clevo is still the best laptop. although you will pay a bit more for the Clevo. i keep waiting for Clevo to release an AMD 64, but not holding my breath.

 

Scott

ADK

[Henchman]

Thanks for the benchmarks.

 

I love my AMD set-up. And I have been using the VIA chipset, but not run into problems thus far. I guess I'll find out when I pick up e new interface in the next week or 2.

 

I can't believe the trackcount I get for a $600,- computer.

[jcskid]

I can't believe the trackcount I get for a $600,- computer.

and to think we used to pay almost that much for a 500Meg drive LOL

 

aint life grand, plug-ins and all!

 

Scott

[doc taz]

Originally posted by theblue1:

The purchase prices are much closer now, too. If you get a high-end boutique PC it will cost just as much or more as a Mac with the same basic performance.

Actually, if you do a little shopping and can build your own machine, you'll still save considerable $ compared to any Mac with similar performance.

 

edit: oops, for a desktop PC that is...

[Phil B]

Thanks for all the great input in this thread!! Very helpful stuff.

 

My main soft-synth I'd want to run on a laptop would be Reaktor. This is probably one point for a Windows XP laptop since Reaktor (from reports on the NI forums) seems to be creating less problems on Windows than on Macs. That and my DAW of choice is Sonar (but that's not a major issue here).

 

For me, the big reason why I'm thinking of going Mac is that the last time I bought a laptop a few years ago (Windows 98 or whatever) it made so much NOISE!!! I'm just a little scared going that route again because I feel like every brand is so different, while Macs are Macs. If people say the 12" iBook, for example, is quiet and does "x, y and z," then mine probably would too. But, with Windows boxes, I don't have a real handle on things like the noise factor. Anyone have any input on that aspect?

 

Thanks again

[Phil B]

It looks like the following are basically the same price ($1600-$1800 range):

 

Dell 8600 w/ 1.7GHz Centrino, 512 MB RAM, wide screen 15.4" WSXGA+, 64MB video card, DVD burner, 7200 RPM 60 GB hard drive

 

Emachines M6807 w/ Mobile Athlon 64-bit 3000+ Processor, 512 MB RAM, wide screen 15.4" WXGA, 64MB video card, DVD burner,60 GB hard drive (5400 RPM)

 

Apple iBook w/ 1Ghz G4, 640 MB RAM, 14" TFT, 32 MB video card, no DVD burner, 60 GB hard drive (5400 RPM?)

 

Forgetting software compatibility issues between Mac and XP for the moment (assume either OS is fine in that respect), which of these three would you buy based on stability, processing power, quality of components, potential lifespan, noise level, and anything else you find important?