About to become a new Mac user


Recommended Posts

Come on now, "symbiotic relationship", you sound like an Apple sales rep, i would bet there's more 7 year old PCs than there are 7 year old macs.

I would greatly disagree with that statement, when I get to work tomorrow I'll see if I can't find the Gartner article about Apple Lifecycles. (Unless someone can beat me to it.)

So in 3 years, the machine will be very good, and can then last 5 years or more? Macs aren't made of magic hardware, it may "last" as in it won't break down but it won't be great in 7 years just because it's a mac.

Great relative to what?

PC gaming has created a set of mind where its necessary to upgrade every year, but for other tasks that machine will be powerful enough for years to come. There are people that still use Amigas for video production for example, I know people that still use G5 or even G4 machines for music production that are very well equiped and can be even considered beast machines today. Everything depends of how well you use your equipment, for what tasks.

For example, a photographer who uses photoshop or any other photo manipulation software for just photo retouching and processing dont need an ultra machine or even the latest software. A top of the line Powermac G4 with Tiger and Photoshop CS or CS2 if you will its more than enough. In my opinion thinking otherwise its just another example of a consumer mindset.

Come on now, "symbiotic relationship", you sound like an Apple sales rep, i would bet there's more 7 year old PCs than there are 7 year old macs.

Honestly Mac's lifecycle its way longer than PC's. Let me do a search for the articles and studies. :)

, i would bet there's more 7 year old PCs than there are 7 year old macs.

Also, that logic its a little flawed. Of course there are more 7 year pcs than macs, pcs are a lot more. The true number to consider would be percentage of pcs that reach that age vs percentage of macs tha reach that age.

Thanks for all the advice. People keep telling me 8 cores is overkill and nothing uses it, but if im running Vista/XP with parallels (maybe both), editing HD size videos and large music files, working with wallpaper sized photoshop docs with many layers, and anything else, will all 8 cores be used? Meaning will I notice a difference between 4 cores and 8 cores?

Thanks for all the advice. People keep telling me 8 cores is overkill and nothing uses it, but if im running Vista/XP with parallels (maybe both), editing HD size videos and large music files, working with wallpaper sized photoshop docs with many layers, and anything else, will all 8 cores be used? Meaning will I notice a difference between 4 cores and 8 cores?

Very few things will use that many cores, correct. That being said I've had both a 4 core and 8 core Mac Pro on my desk at work at one point in time and I can feel the difference between the models, the 8 core is slightly faster and feels more powerful when pushing heavy multitasking at it... Yes, it could be mental since I know it's more powerful, but it does feel faster to me.

Thanks for all the advice. People keep telling me 8 cores is overkill and nothing uses it, but if im running Vista/XP with parallels (maybe both), editing HD size videos and large music files, working with wallpaper sized photoshop docs with many layers, and anything else, will all 8 cores be used? Meaning will I notice a difference between 4 cores and 8 cores?

Nothing uses all the cores NOW but I always think about the future. And since it seems you are doing HD media edition I would get a powerful machine that will last me for years.

Thanks for all the advice. People keep telling me 8 cores is overkill and nothing uses it, but if im running Vista/XP with parallels (maybe both), editing HD size videos and large music files, working with wallpaper sized photoshop docs with many layers, and anything else, will all 8 cores be used? Meaning will I notice a difference between 4 cores and 8 cores?

Grand Central in Snow Leopard may mean that yes, 8 cores will become more useful.

Well, as a lifelong (25 years+) wintel user, who recently switched to Mac, for me, the decision on what to buy was simple.

I bought a macbook laptop for my general laptop usage, like surfing in the family room, outside, and doing light word processing and other basic pc tasks, and for use when traveling.

Its small, lightweight, and relatively inexpensive.

for my "main" unit I bought a Mac Pro, 2.8, with 4 gigs of ram, and installed another 4 gigs myself for a total of 8 gigs.

I do video processing, editing, and all sorts of other things, and never EVER notice any sort of slowdown or bottleneck.

Eventually, software is coming that will use your 8 cores, so, don't worry about "overkill" at this point.

To me, a Desktop blows away anything a laptop can do, and, if you are gonna spend 4,000 bucks, you can get afford to get both..

The lappy is around 1200 bucks, and the desk top is around 2800....

the difference in performance between the 2.8 and the 3.06 processor was minimal, so I used some of the savings between those 2 to get the extra 4 gigs of ram.

Use any other brand of RAM except Apples, and you save around 150 bucks on 4 additional gigs.

And, I installed symantec AV on this machine, only because you never know what you might be downloading, or what junk some emails may have attached or embedded in them, so, contrary to what alot of folks say here, I suggest having some sort of AV on the machine, just in case.

Besides, with 8 gigs of ram, i never notice any sort of performance hits since installing it, and now a days, you can never be too "protected".

so I used some of the savings between those 2 to get the extra 4 gigs of ram.

Use any other brand of RAM except Apples, and you save around 150 bucks on 4 additional gigs.

And, I installed symantec AV on this machine, only because you never know what you might be downloading, or what junk some emails may have attached or embedded in them, so, contrary to what alot of folks say here, I suggest having some sort of AV on the machine, just in case.

Where I don't agree with your stance on Antivirus on the Mac, I will say you are 100% correct on not buying the RAM from Apple, it just isn't worth the excessive premium that is put on Memory from the stores and online store. :p

Crucial is my poison of choice for a Mac Pro.

And, I installed symantec AV on this machine, only because you never know what you might be downloading, or what junk some emails may have attached or embedded in them, so, contrary to what alot of folks say here, I suggest having some sort of AV on the machine, just in case.

You made the right choice. Never listen to anyone who tells you not to have anti-virus software. It's quite short-sighted. If nothing else, it prevents your Mac from being a conduit for Windows viruses. I'd rather give up a few processor cycles running AV software than send something on to my family.

@Cara, you are entitiled to your opinion, and, even though there aren't many, if any Mac SPECIFIC virus threats at this point, we ALL get "stuff" via email and other ways from our "friends" using Windows machines, (USB drives, cd/DVD's, etc.) and you never know what they might have accidentally given to you...

Kinda like having sex with someone without protection...you MAY not have a problem, and the person MAY seem "clean as a whistle", but is it worth the risk, when a little protection will ensure your safety?

@Chad, not sure I am giving up any processor cycles that I can even notice, with 8 gigs of RAM in this bad boy!

BTW Cara, you are one AWESUM resource here for all things Mac...Thanks for helping so many folks out all the time! :yes:

Does OS X allow you to, is it "assign affinity" so that, say, program x is run by core 1, and program y is run by core 2? I think it can be done under Windows...

If that can be set up, even manually, then 8 cores might be more worthwhile before Snow Leopard.

Generally though, I go for what I *need* as hardware is always getting cheaper. Why pay more for more than you need (like an 8 core that is still expensive), when you could wait three years until you actually need that much power, and get the same for less (when those 8 cores will surely be far cheaper).

@Cara, you are entitiled to your opinion, and, even though there aren't many, if any Mac SPECIFIC virus threats at this point, we ALL get "stuff" via email and other ways from our "friends" using Windows machines, (USB drives, cd/DVD's, etc.) and you never know what they might have accidentally given to you...

Kinda like having sex with someone without protection...you MAY not have a problem, and the person MAY seem "clean as a whistle", but is it worth the risk, when a little protection will ensure your safety?

BTW Cara, you are one AWESUM resource here for all things Mac...Thanks for helping so many folks out all the time! :yes:

Creative analogy. ;)

I suppose I deal mainly with file transfer between Apple users and rarely actually forward non-secure files onto anyone so I don't give a lot of thought to what I might pass along in an email or other. All of the Windows Environments I have on my systems are sand-boxed, no direct interaction with the Mac OS portions of my system so I suppose to each their own. :) I run a clean and tight ship on my computers and my personal networks and rely on the security of the corporate network at work to insure I have no large problems there.

With that being said, if someone wants to run an Antivirus, be my guest, however the offerings for Mac OS are actually quite pitiful in both performance and availability due to the lack of demand for them at this time.

As for being a resource here, that is my goal. :) I'm here to help where I can, thank you for the compliment.

Wont opening the case void the warranty though? if I get 2GB then buy all 8 of crucial, I will need to open the case.

Also, Windows can manually manage cores, mac cant?:

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/4042/affinityby8.png

EDIT: Are the SAS drives worth it?

# 300GB 15,000-rpm SAS [Add $650.00]

Memory is a user-serviceable component and won't violate your warranty to add. :)

As for SAS...all I can say is Holy Speed Batman. SAS is typically used on Servers when speed is needed to the extreme, those things are amazingly fast. They are actually the same drives from the Xserve server line.

So you recommend getting 4GB from Apple, then buy another 4 from somewhere else?
Never buy RAM from Apple! Stick with whatever the computer comes with, then order more from Crucial, MacSales, etc.

Agreed, never buy RAM from Apple, you will overpay hundreds of dollars. :) Go with base config on memory and then head for Crucial.

Agreed, never buy RAM from Apple, you will overpay hundreds of dollars. :) Go with base config on memory and then head for Crucial.

Just curious; do you know which brand of RAM are used in today's Macs on the market?

(and another plus one for Crucial :))

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!