7 ms·
I do not understand. What is the appropriate use case for a Mac Pro where something equivalent and much cheaper cannot be used?
by tar 14y ago
I do not understand. What is the appropriate use case for a Mac Pro where something equivalent and much cheaper cannot be used?
- wmf 14y agoPCIe cards. Multiple matte 30" monitors. Anything really CPU intensive.
- joshAg 14y agoI think he meant, why wouldn't a windows/unix/linux machine with similar hardware work just as well?
- jmelloy 14y agoBecause it doesn't run OS X?
- nikatwork 14y agoMost creative pro apps are only available on Windows or OSX. I don't hate Windows7 but I find OSX superior (integration, stability, decent shell etc). If you want OSX, you generally need a Mac. I'd switch to Linux if the apps were there, but it's not even close. And I'm an edge case, I suspect most creative types would rather not mess with xorg.conf.
- cheatercheater 14y agoThat's why I wish, over and over, for a Wine equivalent that runs OSX apps. I have ran some windows audio applications on Ubuntu 10.04 and the timing accuracy (tested by specialist software) was several orders of magnitude higher. In addition, I can achieve higher workloads. This is all with software that wasn't even compiled for my OS.
- dasil003 14y agoFinal Cut Pro?
- sphilipakis 14y agoIOS + OSX developers (edited out my not really interesting comment about XCode)
- petercooper 14y agoLogic Pro with high numbers of tracks and effects/filters. Anything that needs workstation-level graphics like the NVIDIA Quadro (for doing stereoscopic graphics, multi device synchronization, broadcast pipelines, and more).