Cubase on Pc or a Mac ?

For the record, not all of us PC users will steer people towards PCs. I think he should use what he’s comfortable with, and if he’s already on VEPro, then he could use a mixture of PCs and Macs. But I also will be realistic and say that PCs will give people better low latency performance, which has been proven fairly scientifically at this point by the excellent DAW benchmarks by TAFKAT and crew. (See DAWbench site.)

What you believe is irrelevant. Benchmarks don’t lie. Even Steinberg themselves have admitted Cubase runs better on Windows.

So you’re saying that my experience is just bull? I wish you could come and tell that to the PC’s I have tried CB on. Think that would make them perform better? Perhaps put the test sheets into the DVD drive would do the trick?

Please get it into your head that the question was our experience, not a resume of some dubious test. Guess he would have found the test on the net himself. As you also should understand is that the test is one thing, experience deviate from it in either direction. Guess that is why the question was asked. If you think the referred benchmark is the answer to all questions on the two platforms you are so wrong and the numbers of computers tested in the benchmark are way too few to give serious and significant results. So please go back to your test sheets and spend your time there.

Hence the reason why I worded my statement explicitly to show a “tendency” as opposed to a rule.
Your post is but one, read the others, the tendency is obvious and to be expected.

It might well be. It’s not like you have presented any EVIDENCE of what you alleged. And even if it were real, it could still be the result of your incompetence.

not a resume of some dubious test.

Here’s a suggestion: if you want to be credible with people other than Apple fanbois like you, instead of just slandering Mr. Curigliano (who certainly knows computers much better than you) why don’t you do your own tests SCIENTIFICALLY (i.e. you post equipment and methodology down to the tiniest details) and then post them? You see, an Apple fanboi claiming that his PC’s malfunction all the time isn’t something terribly original to read on the internet. And then of course reasonable people would ask themselves why on earth would someone with such an emotional attachment to Apple ever use PC’s.

And BTW, what part of Steinberg claiming that the best system they tested Cubase on is an HP Z workstation did you not understand? Let me guess, Steinberg is also in the conspiracy to smear your beloved Apple? I bet that’s what you think.

You proved my original point about fanbois being emotional and in complete denial and making stuff up to support the unsupportable.

Steinberg do not say HP’s are better than Mac’s. They just say that HP’s are tested and work with Cubase. The performance tests you have linked to are outdated and only show Cubase’/ASIO shortcomings.

And your Apple hate have a religious dimension that is very amusing.

Here’s a suggestion: if you want to be credible with people other than Apple fanbois like you, instead of just slandering Mr. Curigliano (who certainly knows computers much better than you) why don’t you do your own tests SCIENTIFICALLY (i.e. you post equipment and methodology down to the tiniest details) and then post them? You see, an Apple fanboi claiming that his PC’s malfunction all the time isn’t something terribly original to read on the internet. And then of course reasonable people would ask themselves why on earth would someone with such an emotional attachment to Apple ever use PC’s.

And BTW, what part of Steinberg claiming that the best system they tested Cubase on is an HP Z workstation did you not understand? Let me guess, Steinberg is also in the conspiracy to smear your beloved Apple? I bet that’s what you think.

You proved my original point about fanbois being emotional and in complete denial and making stuff up to support the unsupportable.

Are you blind? If you know just a little about statistics you would recognize that the referred benchmark just tells the result of the benchmark and that it is NOT applicable for other computers. (Too few computers tested. Too few configurations. What you see is all there is. NOT What you see is what you get).

I have also tried to hammer into your head that the question was for PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, not who could give reference to any benchmark test.

And you see to have missed the point that I currently use no less than 5 PCs and “only” two MACs. And you then conclude that I am a MAC “Fanboy”? And BTW I have been working with computers since 1976 and then I mean as a professional, not just a user, and conducted a lot of benchmarks over the years. Guess I´ve seen most of them in most configurations. So I also know “a little” (for you “a lot”) how much benchmarks can deviate from actual situations.

Agin - are you blind?

wow it’s amazing suddenly all these computer experts have risen from the grave ,anyone got a spare beer ive run out ??? :wink:

Fantastic, you people keep proving my point. Unlike you, I don’t have any emotional attachment to computers, any more than I have to a hammer or a saw. So no, there is no hate whatsoever. I switched from mac to windows and I’ll switch from windows to another OS, if that means getting better performance.

You, on the other hand, feel very threatened by anyone who dares to say that your object of veneration sometimes may not the best machine for the job. You just can’t accept it, and that proves my point.

And in case you haven’t noticed, I posted quotes of Apple users (not fanbois like you, just users) on this forum that confirmed what I said about windows being the better platform for Cubase. I wonder if you consider them “Apple haters” too for daring to say that the mac may not always be the best solution. Actually I know that’s exactly what you think.

I’m sorry but I don’t believe a word of what you’re saying. You have stated that PC’s are inferior machines (without providing an ounce of evidence of course), so it wouldn’t make any sense for you to use them. Like I said, plenty of examples on the internet of fanbois like you claiming to have PC’s that fail all the time. You’re not very original.

You are making absurd claims and you have zero evidence to back them up. Even worse, your attempt to defame Mr. Curigliano was shameful. Like I said, provide you own tests for anyone to verify your credibility, or lack thereof. Until then, you have no authority whatsoever to question Mr. Curigliano’s very detailed and very scientific tests.

C’mon, the point isn’t that important. It’s not worth your effort or any ruckus.


People use what they like and both Windows and OSX platforms work fine.
There. We’re done. We can all go home now.

I’ve been working for 20 years with both OS’s and this is what I found out : since XP and even more with W7 (didn’t test 8 yet) the performances of MAC and Windows are equivalent, a mac is really “plug and play” when a custom PC is more “plug and pray”, however if your budget is less than $4.000 I’d go for a PC…and a prayer :wink:

OK, so Hans Zimmer switched to PC because he can no longer afford a mac. And he’s willing to live with an “unreliable” machine that requires prayer to work because, after all, what he does isn’t very important.

Yeah, that makes sense. :unamused:

Prayers don’t actually work in reality, unless one relies on lucky coincidences and pure chance. Diligent research, on the other hand, coupled with the scientific method actually does work more often than not.

To the OP. I would urge you to ignore anecdotes. You’ll hear horror stories from both camps. They are meaningless. Do some research. If you still think it viable to spend the extra on a MAC then go with that. Other wise build a powerful PC with quality components and have enough left over to buy a good UAD-2 system, or similar.

I’m sorry but I don’t believe a word of what you’re saying.

You have fully proven that.

You have stated that PC’s are inferior machines (without providing an ounce of evidence of course), so it wouldn’t make any sense for you to use them.

Nope never said that. That is your conclusion after I said that I prefer MACs to run Cubase, Never said anything about other programs, filesystems and workflows. Believe it or not, I use PCs for almost anything else.

fanboy

Wonder where that came from? since I have 5 PCs 2 MACs and use PC for almost anything else than Cubase.

defame Mr. Curigliano

Nope, not my goal. Just a fact that benchmarks are just benchmarks and can only be concluded for the computers, and that is the actual used computers and NOT the make, involved. It is a common mistake to believe anything else. Common, but a mistake never the less. I do fully believe that the benchmark has been carried out and that the results are presented correctly. However that is all I can pull out of it. As mentioned the benchmark involves too few computers to make any significant value to the public in general. Read up on statistics.

Making claims with zero evidence

What kind of dictatorship is this? The question was NOT for evidence at all, just my experience. Testing approx 20 computers is my experience. I do NOT claim this to be statically better than ANYBODY else’s experience or better statistically than any other benchmarks, but it IS my experience.

scientific test

You reveal yourself as no scientist. The test is not even close to fall under those terms. It would need thousands of computers.

Grow up.

You are in a no-sense PC/mac computer battlefield and you are forgetting the more important feature: Cubase/Nuendo are both multiplatform compatible. You use software (master) on hardware (slave)- reverse this relationship is a mistake. I have used cubase/nuendo on mac since 2001 and perhaps my next computer could be a PC
If you know well windows OS go on PC. Do you like mac “pussycat” OS? go on mac (is the choice for a lot of cubase pro users). Moreover, PC/mac can live together: ie. a macmini Cubase master Ethernet wired to a PC VEP-slaved with full samplers libraries onboard… I think yo must be guided for OS knowledge and budget in your choice

A good point, Logic Pro and Sonar users don’t have the luxury of choosing platforms. I started out on PC, moved to Mac, and have an open choice as far as my next system goes. I’ll just say that Cubase has worked well for me on a Mac and I tend not to worry too much about benchmarks.

If you have to take your computer to the Geek Squad every time something goes wrong with it AND you can afford the Mac, go for the MAC. You will sacrifice some control over your computer such as ability to tweak settings, hardware options, software available, and a slight decrease in general performance. Some applications (Logic and Safari, for example) DO run better on Mac than PC. This restrictive environment that Apple products live in has helped them gain their reputation as a more stable, easier to use platform. It is true that if you lock yourself in your closet with an air purifier, you will get sick less often and it is also true that if you have trouble understanding computers, you will find an interface with less buttons and less options easier to use. You won’t be targeted by hackers as much because most of the world, and most importantly, most corporations and governments, are on WIndows. They are able to use Windows because they have IT departments with people that understand how to configure, troubleshoot, and repair computers and they don’t have to take their computers to the Geek Squad to configure them or diagnose and replace an occasional bad drive, memory card, or fix a conflict between two pieces of hardware or software.

I own an i7 iMac. My wife prefers it (she thinks computers are magic). She calls it, “the Facebook computer”. I do use it for surfing, e-mail, etc. But for music (Cubase, Guitar Rig, Reaktor, Kontakt, etc.), I personally prefer the PC. I also admit to occasional gaming such as Skyrim and Unreal Tournament III which are not available (natively at least) on the Mac. I speculate the Mac would struggle with the video requirements anyway.

dark blue man is correct, in my opinion, that PC’s do not require prayer to use successfully. They do require a larger working knowledge of computers. I see many more “advanced options” checkboxes on Windows than on OSX. It is my opinion, that Apple decided since most users are more likely to screw things up using advanced options, they just took them away. I would rather have the options.

I used to wonder why everyone who raves about Apple seemed to be saying the same things about the switch from Windows, right down to emphasizing the same syllables. “Everything just works on a Mac.”, “I was tired of the endless updates on Windows.”, “Windows kept getting viruses and crashing.” When I got the iMac I figured out why. If you film the screen in slow motion, every 60th frame displays these chants (its in greyscale so its hard to see, but it’s there.) I also found it strange that most people I meet, when they pull out their MacBook start defending it right away. Somewhat like a guy who drives up in a mini-van and gets out saying (before anyone else says anything), “It’s my wife’s. She needed it to take the kids to soccer practice.”

Another good advantage to a Mac is that if you have any friends with electric cars or solar panels on their roof, you can show them your Mac and they will like you more.

I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
J.L.

children children this argument will carry through the other side of the apocalypse ,what about ATARI ???

Amiga is better!

right that’s it , it’s WAR !!! :smiley: :smiley: