i wonder why many people said MAC is the best performance of graphic than PC although both machines have the same hardware , somebody tell me please
2007-10-15 19:40:22 · 7 answers · asked by oun k 1 in Computers & Internet ➔ Hardware ➔ Laptops & Notebooks
They have the same hardware now. They used to be better than PC's. But now it's just the operating systems and the applications.
2007-10-15 19:51:57 · answer #1 · answered by af 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you, with the similarity of the hardware yet Mac is still the best performance for graphic software, maybe it's the kernel or core for this window either XP or below version are not 64bit but 32bit makes it much harder compare to Mac.
And security issues are always a hit for both machines, but people think PC are always vulnarable to spam and so on and Mac are much safer in terms of security. If PC can beaten Mac in terms of multi-tasking, gaming, solution and so on then we believe it's not a PC it must be a workstation or super-PC.
Hey that's my 10cents ok, here's more details on Mac VS PC. Found at google.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/08/17/costanalysis/index.php?lsrc=mwrss
2007-10-16 02:53:42 · answer #2 · answered by Crayon Shin Chan 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because Macs are made by designers for designers. And Apple has an attention to detail in design that no other company has. This includes the design and operation of the OS.
Macs may not always be the fastest when it comes to out right speed, but when stability and reliability count in the long run, give me a Mac. It also comes down to whether the software is optimized for Mac or PC.
2007-10-16 03:02:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It isn't.
In the olden days back when macs used PowerPC chips there was a performance difference but in that case it was actually the other way with the macs being slower.
Although Apple were known for rigging benchmarks and lying in their ads.
Apple might have an efficiency advantage due to Mac OS X but I doubt it would be significant.
2007-10-16 03:15:49 · answer #4 · answered by bestonnet_00 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That is old outdated information.
There was a time when Mac's had the ability to display 256 colors simultaneously when IBM compatible systems were limited to 16 colors displayed simultaneously. That was a very long time ago. 1989-1990 time frame.
Now both systems are capable of millions of colors simultaneously.
As far as frame rates, IBM compatibles are far and away faster than any Mac now.
2007-10-16 02:51:56 · answer #5 · answered by Jag 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hardware means nothing without good software backing it up
2007-10-16 02:51:48 · answer #6 · answered by PHormality 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They don't have the same hardware.
The rumor that one is better than the other is just a rumor - they both have their fans.
The software used has more to do with it than the hardware.
2007-10-16 02:49:51 · answer #7 · answered by ANON 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋