SOUND ON SOUND

[Rich Hanson]

I will hazard a guess and say that out of the world's top 20-30 odd studios, a majority would probably be on the MAC platform.

To which I would counter "so what?"

The so-called top tier are a tiny percentage of the professional world, and are most likely there not because of the computer that they use but the skills that they possess.

PCs are used a lot in broadcast, for instance. Not as glamorous as the "top-tier" dance producers, but just a professional. I recall that a few years a back, for instance, in Nashville a good deal of the studios there were PCs running Nuendo (this has probably changed).

And then there's a certain little known band called Kraftwerk...

Certainly there are issues with Windows particularly if you use one of the home editions, but it's not as if a Mac OS upgrade has never broken anything!

So, you can disagree all you like, but the fact remains there are many many professional users successfully using PCs rather than Macs.

(Just to note that I am myself a Mac user)

[Hugh Robjohns]

Sorry, I respectfully disagree.

I think that's implicit -- but I appreciate and reflect the respect! :-)

I will hazard a guess and say that out of the world's top 20-30 odd studios, a majority would probably be on the MAC platform.

Hmmm... but where you're hazarding a guess, I've been in most of them and seen for myself just how many PCs are used in preference to, or alongside, Macs. I'm not suggesting the Mac/PC split is 50/50... but your sphere of interest of the pro-audio world appears narrow and are thus unaware of just how many mastering studios, music composers, film studios, radio and TV broadcasters, live-sound systems, theatres, post-production studios, games producers, project studios, and countless other wings of the audio industry really are using PC platforms.

It's not hard to find a specific market where a specific platform dominates -- largely for the copy-cat reasons you state -- but the pro audio world is rather larger than that.

Perhaps you could indulge me and provide some names of some of these high-end professionals who purportedly use Windows as their OS of choice for their production needs?

:smirk: This is going to be a silly game, but one of the most famous film music composer, Hans Zimmer, is famously PC-based (but uses Macs too for some post-production aspects of his work), and the same is true of a remarkably large number of his peers.

Most of my own hands-on personal experience is in high-end mastering, broadcast and post-production facilities, and there the PC does really dominate.

And it's not just the audio-production side of things either. Most people are very surprised to learn that the high-end Studer Vista digital mixing consoles installed in countless broadcast studios, concert halls and major theatres actually run on a Windows platform -- and it's not the only digital console brand to do that! Some highly regarded high-end hardware multitrack recorders are PC/windows-based too.

It's important to remember that the pro-audio industry is quite a lot wider than the DJ and re-mixer fraternity... important contributors though they are.

The point is that the Mac really isn't the ONLY professional solution, and it's grossly misleading to suggest otherwise. Yes, of course the Mac is very popular in many quarters -- and for very good reasons -- but the PC platform really is employed very widely too for equally good reasons.

It's just not as black and white as you'd like to think.

H

[OneWorld]

Sorry, I respectfully disagree.

I think that's implicit -- but I appreciate and reflect the respect! :-)

I will hazard a guess and say that out of the world's top 20-30 odd studios, a majority would probably be on the MAC platform.

Hmmm... but where you're hazarding a guess, I've been in most of them and seen for myself just how many PCs are used in preference to, or alongside, Macs. I'm not suggesting the Mac/PC split is 50/50... but your sphere of interest of the pro-audio world appears narrow and are thus unaware of just how many mastering studios, music composers, film studios, radio and TV broadcasters, live-sound systems, theatres, post-production studios, games producers, project studios, and countless other wings of the audio industry really are using PC platforms.

It's not hard to find a specific market where a specific platform dominates -- largely for the copy-cat reasons you state -- but the pro audio world is rather larger than that.

Perhaps you could indulge me and provide some names of some of these high-end professionals who purportedly use Windows as their OS of choice for their production needs?

:smirk: This is going to be a silly game, but one of the most famous film music composer, Hans Zimmer, is famously PC-based (but uses Macs too for some post-production aspects of his work), and the same is true of a remarkably large number of his peers.

Most of my own hands-on personal experience is in high-end mastering, broadcast and post-production facilities, and there the PC does really dominate.

And it's not just the audio-production side of things either. Most people are very surprised to learn that the high-end Studer Vista digital mixing consoles installed in countless broadcast studios, concert halls and major theatres actually run on a Windows platform -- and it's not the only digital console brand to do that! Some highly regarded high-end hardware multitrack recorders are PC/windows-based too.

It's important to remember that the pro-audio industry is quite a lot wider than the DJ and re-mixer fraternity... important contributors though they are.

The point is that the Mac really isn't the ONLY professional solution, and it's grossly misleading to suggest otherwise. Yes, of course the Mac is very popular in many quarters -- and for very good reasons -- but the PC platform really is employed very widely too for equally good reasons.

It's just not as black and white as you'd like to think.

H

I guess my heading Mac vs PC was a little ambivalent, I suppose I was really asking MacOS vs Win10

It isn't so much the PC I am unhappy with but Win10. I hardly had any problems at all with XP (except the 4gig ram restriction) and that was resolved with Win7/64 - a beautiful OS if ever there were one, in all the years I was using it I don't remember having a single problem with it.

If I did, it was so trivial that it was easily fixed and so insignificant I can't remember what it was. Win10 was equally reliable, but I was irked by all the flotsom and jetsom bundled with it, then the major updates came and my problems started

[ConcertinaChap]

t isn't so much the PC I am unhappy with but Win10. I hardly had any problems at all with XP (except the 4gig ram restriction) and that was resolved with Win7/64 - a beautiful OS if ever there were one, in all the years I was using it I don't remember having a single problem with it.

Ahhhh, yes. I still use W7 a bit in virtual machines. It's a great shame Microsoft felt the need to go beyond W7. Mind you, I likewise think it a shame that Apple went beyond Snow Leopard, which also did all that I wanted an OS to do and did it elegantly.

Can't we have a moratorium on new OS versions and just have bug and security fixes on the ones we've got? It would make life so much easier.

CC

[Hugh Robjohns]

My main music computer is a Scan-built Win7/64 machine and it has always been and remains entirely problem-free (and I have no plans to 'upgrade' it anytime soon).

Personal experience of Win 10 to date is rather more limited (wife and daughter's laptops and my own MS Surface) but none have given any problems so far. I regularly use the Surface with a variety of different audio interfaces and DAW software -- often in lengthy recording sessions -- and I've not had any problems at all with it -- not even after any of the win10 updates. The only minor frustration I've had has been having to reduce the screen resolution occasionally to make some GUIs properly readable (SADiE's LRX being one!).

All of these machines have been running Win 10 from the outset though, not upgrades from 7, and that seems to be a significant factor in many Win 10 complaints I've heard. I agree about the included bloatware, but it seems fairly easy to ignore... Certainly hasn't got in the way with anything I want to do with the machine.

H

[Jadoube]

The modern OS has become as much a portal to an ecosystem of products and services (internet) as much as anything else. This is often contrary to building a stable platform to host near real-time software solutions... i.e. DAWs etc. I couldn't help but notice that a good part of the tangential discussion in this thread was around how to "freeze" BOTH Windows and macOS. Both operating systems suffer from the same issue; upgrades that destabilize a DAW. The question is really your best-preferred strategy for freezing your software music tools in time.

I wish there was an Open Source OS platform (probably a Linux) that could attract all the music developers similar to the way Steinberg's VSTs become a relatively stable defacto standard. Now that would be a great OS for music.... but who would be motivated to build it? No idea! An OS is a much more challenging project than a plugin framework. And all those different bits of hardware,,, :headbang:

[Hugh Robjohns]

At the begingings of the first DAWs, back in the early 90s, there was an operating system called BeOS, developed specifically for audio/video media platforms, and it had quite a lot going for it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS

It seems few have heard of it, though, and while it still underpins some high-end audio products from Tascam, Roland, (and the earlier RADAR audio recorders), it seems to have fizzled out... I guess the weight of the corporate monsters from MS and Apple have drowned it...

[desmond]

Apple were very interested in buying BeOS as the next Mac operating system, but Jean-Louis Gassée basically thought they had no other viable choice and expected them to buy it so demanded too high a price...

They went with NextStep in the end, which became OSX. They paid more for it than JLG wanted for BeOS, but of course, that came with Steve Jobs and, well, he proved to be worth the money... ;)

JLG is an interesting figure in Apple history...

[garrettendi]

There's a new OS being developed with BeOS compatibility built into the x86 version. It's called Haiku and is pretty much the successor to the much-unkown BeOS

https://www.haiku-os.org/

The first Beta is being released next month. I tried the first Alpha way back in around 2011 and it was very basic, but since then seems to be a bit more fully featured. There isn't much software built in, but with the BeOS compatibility, you could use the old audio software!

(I don't work on the project btw ;) )

[Jadoube]

At the begingings of the first DAWs, back in the early 90s, there was an operating system called BeOS, developed specifically for audio/video media platforms, and it had quite a lot going for it... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BeOS

It seems few have heard of it, though, and while it still underpins some high-end audio products from Tascam, Roland, (and the earlier RADAR audio recorders), it seems to have fizzled out... I guess the weight of the corporate monsters from MS and Apple have drowned it...

I was a registered developer for BeOS! :thumbup:
They tried to pedal it to Jobs but he brought NeXT over instead. (ahh as mentioned above!)

[Forum Admin]

I always thought NeXT was such a clever name for Jobs' project/company, as he was indeed trying (in his mind at least) to create the new, ubiquitous XT.

[Agharta]

A major issue for me with Apple is the very limited range of hardware they sell.
My last 3 Windows computers have no closely comparable Apple equivalent which makes Apple a non starter.

Then there's the fact that the Dell laptops I buy come with a next business day on-site warranty.
When my dad's ipad was playing up the next time slot at an Apple store was in 5 to 7 days and a 100 miles away.

With Windows I find if you keep an eye on which versions to avoid or delay using things are straightforward, although W10 has upped the ante a bit.

So for me Apple makes no sense even if their prices were halved.
But I fully understand why some people use them.

[ManFromGlass]

Next business day on-site warranty? :idea: :mrgreen: :idea:

Have we entered another dimension? Holy crap! Says the Mac-based guy.
Have you ever needed it? Was it true to the description?

[James Perrett]

Next business day on-site warranty? :idea: :mrgreen: :idea:

Have we entered another dimension? Holy crap! Says the Mac-based guy.
Have you ever needed it? Was it true to the description?

In my previous job we had quite a few Dell Precision laptops with a similar 3 year warranty. I only ever remember it being needed once and it certainly lived up to its promise. This sort of warranty is pretty common in the IT world and I'd be very surprised if it wasn't available on Apple machines (although, knowing Apple, at a cost whereas it comes as standard on Dell's higher end machines).

[Ariosto]

In fact, yes. My wife had a Dell computer and there was a problem. They came out twice and replaced the motherboard. We then found it was a third party modem that caused the problem! So that was thrown out and everything was fine.

And 10+ years later the monitor is still going strong, although the computer has been replaced with a Mac Mini!

[Agharta]

Next business day on-site warranty? :idea: :mrgreen: :idea:

Have we entered another dimension? Holy crap! Says the Mac-based guy.
Have you ever needed it? Was it true to the description?

I used to be a Dell reseller so when you handle thousands of systems you have to use support more than a typical consumer.
As long as you phoned before 4pm or so they would be with you the next business day except on the very rare occasions when a part was out of stock.
They'd often arrive with a range of parts just in case the fault wasn't the obvious one.
They phone prior to coming so you have advance notice so don't have to wait in all day.

For Servers and critical gear you can get a 4 hour response 24/7 if your pockets are deep enough.

[Agharta]

In my previous job we had quite a few Dell Precision laptops with a similar 3 year warranty. I only ever remember it being needed once and it certainly lived up to its promise. This sort of warranty is pretty common in the IT world and I'd be very surprised if it wasn't available on Apple machines (although, knowing Apple, at a cost whereas it comes as standard on Dell's higher end machines).

It also comes as standard on many official Dell refurbished business systems costing from £600 or so. That's useful if you upgrade your system every 2 years as selling a system with a one year manufacturer on site warranty is very good for resale values.
Often you can upgrade the warranty from 3 to 5 years for a reasonable price also.

[Dave B]

And 10+ years later the monitor is still going strong

Iirc, Apple and Dell both use the same screens for their monitors. A fair few Mac mini owners have Dell monitors .. :D

[Wonks]

I have 19", 21" and 25" monitors. They're all Adele.

[zenguitar]

I have 19", 21" and 25" monitors. They're all Adele.

:D
I see what ya did there Wonks, far too clever by half :clap:

Andy :beamup: