Bootcamp Good?

Hey,

I need to know is there any draw backs with using Bootcamp compared to using windows on a pc?

Is there any differences, say if i had Windows 7 on a PC and Windows 7 installed on bootcamp on a Mac, and both the Mac and PC were of the same specs. Is there a difference.

I need to know because i need to know if i need to just buy a windows pc or a mac and use bootcamp. There is a few apps on windows i just cant live without

Thanks

Buying a Mac just to run Windows is quite an expensive venture since you can pick up a PC capable of running Windows quite cheaper than a Mac..

Anyway, a Mac is completely capable of running Windows through Bootcamp without any problems just like any PC would. People who do it say that it's actually more stable than any old PC as well..

Another alternate to using Bootcamp is to use a Virtualization software like Virtualbox (free) or paid programs like Parallels or VMWare Fusion and run Windows within a VM.

The virtualization route works if the Windows programs you need to run aren't graphic intensive like games or CAD programs and you are willing to live with slightly less performance than you would achieve running Windows natively on the machine..

Raz0rEdge said:

Buying a Mac just to run Windows is quite an expensive venture since you can pick up a PC capable of running Windows quite cheaper than a Mac..

Anyway, a Mac is completely capable of running Windows through Bootcamp without any problems just like any PC would. People who do it say that it's actually more stable than any old PC as well..

Another alternate to using Bootcamp is to use a Virtualization software like Virtualbox (free) or paid programs like Parallels or VMWare Fusion and run Windows within a VM.

The virtualization route works if the Windows programs you need to run aren't graphic intensive like games or CAD programs and you are willing to live with slightly less performance than you would achieve running Windows natively on the machine..

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info

To add to what i said, I have Ableton Live, Logic Pro (Mac only) and other media software which is all CPU intensive especially when i have 20 tracks open in my DAW running lots of VST/AU's.

I need windows along with mac because i have fallen for FL Studio which is an amazing piece of software. Now the problem is if i use this on any of the Virtualization software you mentioned (i have tried) Parallels becomes too glitchy, slow and pops/clicks i just cant use it no matter how i set the settings on the cpu for Parallels or what buffer settings i use in the soundcard/drivers. I have not tried VM but i read somewhere that it has similar problems using it for this.

I have also tried the FL Studio Mac Beta via wine but this beta is also glitchy and you cant use any 3rd party VSTi's.


My macbook Pro specs
10.6.8
2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB 1067 MHz DDR3

I want a more powerful machine exclusively just for music production (so i can use both windows and mac) and other media so i can use this Macbook for general stuff, it's also not a good idea to have so many apps, files ect on this thing if i also need it for music production. That and for some reason no matter what copy i of windows i install on bootcamp (genuine) it keeps on crashing, i think theres something wrong with the macbook at this stage, I did after all in the past have to replace the harddrive as it failed on me.

Ahh gotcha, if high performance is your criteria, then running natively makes the most sense. Have you decided on whether you want to go with a notebook or a desktop? If you already have a MBP and don't need another mobile machine, perhaps the iMac is a good fit for you.

If, on the other hand, you intend to sell your current MBP and just get a new one and need to stay mobile, then the MBP is good, though there might be a refresh likely around WWDC in June so I'd recommend holding off until after that to see where things go.

You also have to decide between going with the Retina MBP or the non-Retina MBP and all that it brings to the table..you likely want to have the most amount of RAM on your machine and upgrading yourself with the non-Retina MBP will be cheaper while the Retina MBP with the better resolution and flash media will yield faster performance for data access but cost you more to get upgraded from the factory..

Raz0rEdge said:

Ahh gotcha, if high performance is your criteria, then running natively makes the most sense. Have you decided on whether you want to go with a notebook or a desktop? If you already have a MBP and don't need another mobile machine, perhaps the iMac is a good fit for you.

If, on the other hand, you intend to sell your current MBP and just get a new one and need to stay mobile, then the MBP is good, though there might be a refresh likely around WWDC in June so I'd recommend holding off until after that to see where things go.

You also have to decide between going with the Retina MBP or the non-Retina MBP and all that it brings to the table..you likely want to have the most amount of RAM on your machine and upgrading yourself with the non-Retina MBP will be cheaper while the Retina MBP with the better resolution and flash media will yield faster performance for data access but cost you more to get upgraded from the factory..

Click to expand...

I think im going to hold onto my MPB just for general use and get an iMac for the music (expensive hobby). Is it difficult to upgrade an iMac? And does the new models have touch screen capabilities yet?

There is also the option of getting a Mac Pro because of the ease to upgrade it, but i need something more portable like the iMac, and the Mac Pro weighs a ton, last time i checked anyway.

If you're going to keep the MBP, the iMac is a good option. About the only upgrade you can do to an iMac short of taking it apart is upgrading the memory and with the current model you can't upgrade the memory of the 21.5" anymore. You can upgrade the memory of the 27" on your own by the access ports.

The 21.5" doesn't used soldered RAM, so if you take the iMac apart, you can still access the RAM slots and do the upgrade. This is a dumb decision on Apple's part, but it is what it is.

Any other potential upgrades (SSDs if you choose not get one from the factory and so on) will require you to take the iMac apart to get to the innards.

The current Mac Pro is long in the tooth as far as redesign/new release goes and I believe they are not selling it in Europe anymore, so not sure if that means it will be no longer available for sale in the US either or if they are prepping for a redesign. Once again, WWDC might shed light on it..

Price wise, the Mac Pro is going to cost you a lot more than the iMac would and the current iMacs have better performance than the older Mac Pro..

So what is your budget going to be for this? Another option you might want to consider a fully loaded Mac Mini..

Raz0rEdge said:

If you're going to keep the MBP, the iMac is a good option. About the only upgrade you can do to an iMac short of taking it apart is upgrading the memory and with the current model you can't upgrade the memory of the 21.5" anymore. You can upgrade the memory of the 27" on your own by the access ports.

The 21.5" doesn't used soldered RAM, so if you take the iMac apart, you can still access the RAM slots and do the upgrade. This is a dumb decision on Apple's part, but it is what it is.

Any other potential upgrades (SSDs if you choose not get one from the factory and so on) will require you to take the iMac apart to get to the innards.

The current Mac Pro is long in the tooth as far as redesign/new release goes and I believe they are not selling it in Europe anymore, so not sure if that means it will be no longer available for sale in the US either or if they are prepping for a redesign. Once again, WWDC might shed light on it..

Price wise, the Mac Pro is going to cost you a lot more than the iMac would and the current iMacs have better performance than the older Mac Pro..

So what is your budget going to be for this? Another option you might want to consider a fully loaded Mac Mini..

Click to expand...

The iMac 27'' is selling for around €2000 here (Ireland) so thats my budget roughly, i had thought about a mac mini before and with that then i could get a wide range of monitors for it so it is appealing, is upgrading one of those much of a task? and what kind of specs could i get with a mac mini (including a 27'' screen)

I would recommend the i7 Mac Mini upgraded to the 2.6 GHz processor for €958.99 and then you upgrade the memory yourself to the max 16GB and and SSD or faster HDD later on by following the iFixIt guides.

As far as screen goes, you can get the 27" Thunderbolt Apple Cinema display or some other 27" display from Dell, LG, Viewsonic or other vendors for about a 1/3rd less (approx. $650 as opposed to $999 Apple Cinema Display price)

Raz0rEdge said:

I would recommend the i7 Mac Mini upgraded to the 2.6 GHz processor for €958.99 and then you upgrade the memory yourself to the max 16GB and and SSD or faster HDD later on by following the iFixIt guides.

As far as screen goes, you can get the 27" Thunderbolt Apple Cinema display or some other 27" display from Dell, LG, Viewsonic or other vendors for about a 1/3rd less (approx. $650 as opposed to $999 Apple Cinema Display price)

Click to expand...

16GB of Ram Sounds like a plan, thanks for the info