PC vs Mac: What makes one better than the other for Second Life?

[Emma Krokus]

Having almost exclusively used windows pc's, I am now looking to get a new desktop specifically for SL. Assume I am happy to learn a new (to me) OS and have an unlimited budget :D.

In your opinion / experience, what features / issues would make you recommend either a PC or a Mac?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts!

 

Emma :)

[Pamela Galli]

I have owned only Macs for 25 years and would not dream of owning anything else.

That said, the viewer is not optimized for Mac; you will get more speed and overall stability with a PC. For example, there is a Firestorm bug that makes me crash every time I quit. (I still use it tho.) 

Also if you are a creator you will find some niche software and plugins that are for PC only. 

[Emma Krokus]

Thanks for your balanced reply Pamela .

 

Emma

[Madelaine McMasters]

I'm also a lifelong Mac owner, and use Windows professionally, as most of my engineering software tools run under it. I don't evangelize for the Mac, it's simply the environment I prefer.

Pam is right about the viewer not being optimized for the Mac, and that some helpful SL tools require Windows. If you own a copy of Windows, you can install it directly on the Mac, using "Boot Camp" or you can run it under a virtualization tool such as VMWare Fusion or Parallels. Running Windows virtually, as I do, will not give you the best performance, but is very convenient. For best speed, you'd boot into Windows and run it natively. Mac OS would be unavailable until a subsequent reboot into it.

There is some advantage in having the the OS and drivers come from the same company that makes the hardware. I found keeping my HP and Dell computers up-to-date to be frustrating at times, particularly when the finger pointing started. I'm all Apple now, so there's only two fingers to point, theirs and mine. The most stable and hassle free Windows computers I have ever used are... my Macs. If something in my Apple world goes to hell (it does, but rarely), I know exactly who to call.

The current crop of higher end Macs (both portable and desktop) use nVIDIA GPUs. The low end use integrated Intel GPUs. The soon-to-be-released Mac Pro will use a pair of ATI (AMD) GPUs. I've heard that nVIDIA plays better with SL. My previous iMac had ATI and worked fine.

There's a lot more selection available in the PC world, and many desktop PCs are accessible enough to allow for some amount of future upgrading. If your budget is unlimited, your best Mac future proofing will come from buying one that has everything you think you'll need for the years you'll have it. Macs are closed (with the exception of adding memory in the 27" iMac and the upcoming Mac Pro). That said, if Thunderbolt ever takes off, all current Macs will have the ability to expand externally into expansion devices using that standard.

[Madeline Blackbart]

I've used both and TBH it's kinda a issue of same story diffrent day. the only thing is a lot of things you might want don't run under mac because up until recently it;s not been as popular a os. Also making a custom mac (versus a custom PC) I think it smore difficult and replacing parts in a mac is a lot of times not doable (at least for the avarage user). But really both are good os's

 

[Emma Krokus]

Thank you Madeline and Madeleine - you're both raising issues here that are important for me to take into account too.

Emma

[Syo Emerald]

I would never buy a Mac. No matter how well SL would ever work on it.

1. Its damn expensive. I can get a similar PC for less. I'm not going to pay just for an apple symbol.

2. I'm not free with a Mac. I hate to be forced to stick with the decisions of one company.

3. I have made really bad experiances with other apple products.

But thats just a personal thing.

[Pamela Galli]

Here we go. :matte-motes-frown:

[TristanMercer]

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

I would never buy a Mac. No matter how well SL would ever work on it.

1. Its damn expensive. I can get a similar PC for less. I'm not going to pay just for an apple symbol.

---

I agree with the pricing. I can't really see myself paying $2000 for a Mac when I can build a kick ass Windows machine  for half as much.

Each OS has it advantages and disadvantages. Without stating too much...it is probably not the best of ideas to get into OS Wars on these forums.

[Bree Giffen]

I would consider myself a Windows user but I have a lot of Mac experience too. As far as Second Life goes I'd recommend the PC machine. It's cheaper and you can either choose to get the best video card in your pc or you can upgrade to the best video card later on. It used to be that the pc and mac were very different both in hardware and software but now the two have a lot of similarities in terms of performance and features. It's all just cosmetic differences and marketing now.

[Emma Krokus]

Hmmm... for running Second Life

pc = faster & better performance for SL, more options for other SL related software, easy to upgrade the ystem, cheaper, possibly less reliable

mac = their users love them!, less options for other software, easier updating of OS & drivers, possibly more reliable, may be possible to upgrade

Is that a fair summary?

I'd still love to hear some more views.

Emma

[Pamela Galli]

Yes that's about right. PC for gaming. My iMac has a lot of power so SL is not slow for me, but That will cost you. If you are not already addicted to Mac you would not miss it.

 

But if money is no object and you do more than gaming -- just google Mac vs PC.

[Feldspar Millgrove]

High end Macbook Pro works great for SL.  (Better than any of the PCs I have, and better than running the Windows version of SL on the Mac hardware.)   Ancient 2009 Mac Mini runs SL more or less OK, but it seems to get hot.

 

I get 75 FPS on three simultaneous instances of Firestorm on the Macbook Pro.  If I run a lot of them (say, nine instances) then the fans come on and the FPS goes down but it's still usable.

 

[Feldspar Millgrove]

If you're trying to decide on a Mac v PC, please be informed that "less software choices" is not a true statement.  The Mac can run both the Apple operating system ("OS X") and Microsoft Windows at the same time, using virtual machines.  You can run all the Mac software, as well as any Windows software, at the same time.  You can also run Linux programs at the same time.  I routinely run all the Mac applications at the same time as Windows programs (such as Visual Studio, Visio, Office, and various programs you've never heard of) and all of Linux (again, programs you never heard of)...all at the same time.  You get a Windows START menu in the Mac's normal dock (launch bar). Click click click it just all works.

 

You can't do that on a PC.

 

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Feldspar Millgrove wrote:

High end Macbook Pro works great for SL.  (Better than any of the PCs I have, and better than running the Windows version of SL on the Mac hardware.)   Ancient 2009 Mac Mini runs SL more or less OK, but it seems to get hot.

 

I get 75 FPS on three simultaneous instances of Firestorm on the Macbook Pro.  If I run a lot of them (say, nine instances) then the fans come on and the FPS goes down but it's still usable.

 

---

I get 30-50fps on my 2012 iMac (3.4G i7, nVIDIA GTX 680MX, ultra settings), but I'm running a 2560x1440 pixel display.

I would not recommend the MacBook Airs or 13" MacBook Pros (Retina or non-Retina), as they do not have dedicated GPUs. The The 15" MacBook Pros contains an nVIDIA GPU and quad core i7. The Retina version must push four time as many pixels and so may not perform as well as the non-Retina version. SL doesn't support Retina (afaik), so there may be no advantage at this time to running SL on a Retina model. That said, the Retina displays are gorgeous when apps can take advantage of all those pixels.

All MacBook Pros are expected to be updated to Haswell processors in the next few months, which should dramatically increase battery life. If one is not in a hurry to get a Mac laptop, wait for this upgrade.

The next version of Mac OS (Mavericks), expected this autumn, will support OpenGL 4.1. The current version (Mountain Lion) supports OpenGL 3.2. I recall reading that the Mac version of the SL viewer runs OpenGL2.1, and so doesn't take advantage of all the new bells and whistles in 3.x and 4.x. If the Windows viewer runs a newer version of OpenGL, that could explain the claims of better SL performance on Windows machines. This should translate into better performance on a Mac running Windows under Boot Camp, but that seems to disagree with your personal experience, Feldspar. I've never run SL under Windows on my Macs.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Feldspar Millgrove wrote:

If you're trying to decide on a Mac v PC, please be informed that "less software choices" is not a true statement.  The Mac can run both the Apple operating system ("OS X") and Microsoft Windows at the same time, using virtual machines.  You can run all the Mac software, as well as any Windows software, at the same time.  You can also run Linux programs at the same time.  I routinely run all the Mac applications at the same time as Windows programs (such as Visual Studio, Visio, Office, and various programs you've never heard of) and all of Linux (again, programs you never heard of)...all at the same time.  You get a Windows START menu in the Mac's normal dock (launch bar). Click click click it just all works.

You can't do that on a PC.

---

For years, I ran my engineering software on Dell and HP computers and everything else on my Macs. I tried VirtualPC to run Windows on my PowerPC Macs, but that was just dreadfully slow. When Apple finally switched to Intel processors, virtualization became practical and I moved entirely to Apple hardware. It is very nice to be able to double click an engineering document and have it launch Windows and the appropriate app, then double click a marketing document and have it launch Pages on Mac OS. I can then cut and paste things between my Mac and Windows programs, and have all my backup duties performed by the Mac. There is no need for anti-virus software on the Windows virtual machines, as they are not allowed on the internet. I surf only from Mac OS, which also hasn't needed anti-virus software.

It's also been a blessing to be able to archive an entire Windows working environment in a virtual machine image. My clients generally run Windows, and so it's nice to be able to hand them a self contained copy of my entire working world on a thumb drive. My NDA obligations make it desireable to sequester client working environments and virtualization makes that very easy. Keeping separate working enviroments also reduces my need to remember where everything is. Client A's virtual machine contains all of client A's work, and only client A's work.

The only thing you can't do on the PC is run Mac OS. Every other advantage of virtualization applies. I do recommend virtualization for consulting engineers like myself, who have similar needs, or for engineers who must archive a certified development environment for regulatory reasons. It's a lot easier to put a virtual machine image on a thumb drive, drop it in my purse and take it to the bank safe deposit box than to do the same with an entire PC. I've also not yet found a way to e-mail a PC to someone.

 

[WADE1 Jya]

 

Perhaps for some of us it depends what you started from with computers.

What was the first computer you spent a lot of time on? Mine was a mac, and I've stayed with mac ever since. PC never felt engaging to me. So naturally the first computer I spent loads of time on was mac.

I actually can't use PC I realise lately... because I just don't know how anymore! Everything feels in the wrong place for me and it just looks foriegn & intimidating. At a friends house if they have PC I always have to ask them how to do simplest thing on it like how to change what music is playing :catvery-happy:

One thing I don't get is why is UI of PC always so ugly and require 5 steps where mac does it in one? If it looked prettier & didn't seem to be making thing more complicated on purpose to appear very serious business, I would probably have a PC also as it would be useful to me as a software developer ....from time to time.

 

[Emma Krokus]

75 fps? Wow - I'd be in heaven... (and a better internet connection....)

And it's interesting to read of yours and Madeline's experiences of running other os's on a mac without too much hassle...

Oooh that's thrown a spanner in the works! Hmmmm...

Emma

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

WADE1 Jya wrote:

 

Perhaps for some of us it depends what you started from with computers.

What was the first computer you spent a lot of time on? Mine was a mac, and I've stayed with mac ever since. PC never felt engaging to me. So naturally the first computer I spent loads of time on was mac.

I actually can't use PC I realise lately... because I just don't know how anymore! Everything feels in the wrong place for me and it just looks foriegn & intimidating. At a friends house if they have PC I always have to ask them how to do simplest thing on it like how to change what music is playing :catvery-happy:

One thing I don't get is why is UI of PC always so ugly and require 5 steps where mac does it in one? If it looked prettier & didn't seem to be making thing more complicated on purpose to appear very serious business, I would probably have a PC also as it would be useful to me as a software developer ....from time to time.

 

---

The first computer I spent a lot of time on was Dad's PDP-11. I couldn't move it, so had to wait for him to leave his office to use it. He finally got me a terminal, so I could chat with him from my room, not his.

When he brought home his first Macintosh, I was able to move it, and did. He never got it back.

If people grew up with Windows, I don't recommend they switch unless there's a compelling reason. My Mother has a Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad. I've got all of those things too. I got my elderly neighbor an iPad so she could video conference with her sister in California. The neighbor kid got an iPhone so I could easily find him when he needs a ride. All of our households run Apple Wi-Fi. I am Ms. Tech support for everyone. It would be just too difficult to manage a disparate array of devices and operating systems, so I stick with Apple. I imagine the same thing happens to Windows owners, if to a lesser degree.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Emma Krokus wrote:

75 fps? Wow - I'd be in heaven... (and a better internet connection....)

And it's interesting to read of yours and Madeline's experiences of running other os's on a mac without too much hassle...

Oooh that's thrown a spanner in the works! Hmmmm...

Emma

 

---

But if you've no need or desire to run Mac OS, you can do the same on a Windows PC, which can run the same virtualization software. People run Linux in a window on Windows all the time.

[Frawmusl]

Er.. Money is a huge issue for me personally.. So take a look at this comparison when you want to see just why everyone complains about why Macs are so expensive when the functionality is (literally) the same

http://imgur.com/gallery/vKkRbpK

[Madelaine McMasters]

Oh Emma, I should also point out that Apple is rapidly heading away from optical drives in their products. The only computers left with CD/DVD drives are the 13" MacBook Pro laptops (non-Retina). If you still need access to CD/DVD, you'll have to purchase an external Apple USB Superdrive for USD$79.

I haven't needed one in years, Apple software updates come over the internet and all modern Macs can re-install the OS (even if you completely erase the hard drive) without needing an optical drive.

[Emma Krokus]

Ooooo.... errr... yes!

OMG - that's a ... chasm!!!!

Thank you

Emma

 

[Emma Krokus]

Thanks Madelaine - I haven't use one either since I last reinstalled the OS... - CD/DVD drives are handy as cup holders though... hmmm....

Emma

 

[Siofra Highmist]

Really the only thing that is pushing me away from Mac is the pricing. Poking around on their website the other day, it looks like they do not offer a computer under USD$2300 that contains an actual grapics card over integrated graphics chips. 

I'm currently on intel's newest incarnation of integrated graphics and I can tell you that it really can't run anything efficiently. It takes sometimes 15+ minutes to load my own house let alone anything else in SL. 

Obviously I could have missed something as I did not go in store to ask, just poked around online. But if that is in fact what's going on I can happily say we'll be going PC again in this house..

Edit: And no, it's not another problem causing my inefficient running of SL... that's really  the only substandard part of the computer I own.