Just recently I have been reading lot’s of stuff about Windows 7 vs Apple OS X and I feel bit confused! Why do people waist time to compare two of the Operating Systems?
CNET performed various tests like this one “Performance Showdown: Windows 7 vs Snow Leopard“
Comparing the two systems on same hardware and say it’s valid test is simply not going to work.
a. Mac hardware needs to be altered with things like Boot Camp in order to install Windows 7 on it.
b. Comparing Macbook Pro with similar PC with Windows 7 is not going to work due to hardware differences.
Windows 7 can be altered to boot faster is just that man got to know how to speed it up. Same thing goes for Apple OS X (leopard).
So for me reading things like which OS is “Better”? Is just waist of time.
My test goes like this:
I go to the store or online. Check the hardware performance and I buy the damn PC or Apple (I am Linux user so PC).
End of story!. (Yet another comparison opinion by Sillicon Alley Insider)
I stumbled yesterday upon good post by BetaNews might want to read it: Mac Fanboys should get a life and some Windows 7 common sense
The CNET test is interesting, and has value, but it could have been a lot more extensive, and there are a couple of flaws with what they did.
Here are some comparisons that could be done:
1) Which runs faster on a MacBook Pro (Windows 7 versus Snow Leopard).
2) Which runs faster a $X Mac with SL or a $X PC with W7.
3) Which runs faster a Mac with SL and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
4) Which run faster a Mac with W7 and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
5) Which runs faster a $X Mac with W7 or a $X PC with W7.
Each one of the above has value, and the more extensively they're done, the more value they have. And if one wanted they could also include hackintoshes into the mix.
CNET chose #1 above in this test, which is perfectly fine as a test. If you have a MacBook Pro and don't have a preference to which OS you run, which would be faster for you? Also, if Windows 7 runs faster overall on the MacBook Pro, it would show that Microsoft is doing something very right, while Apple has some work to do.
CNET could've made this test more extensive by:
1) Testing on more Macs (especially newer ones).
2) Testing with more configurations: Especially RAM levels and SSD.
3) Testing with a much wider array of software, not only types of software but different titles (VLC on both platforms versus QuickTime for example).
It's good to see that CNET is going to test again after use, especially with more apps installed. My guess is that this will benefit Snow Leopard substantially, but I'd like to see this tested.
Here are the flaws with the test:
1) CNET should've used the same hard drive, or at least the same brand and model of hard drive that they then benchmarked to see that they got the same results with. I would have just used the same drive. Format, do a clean install of one OS, and then re-format and do a clean install of the other.
2) The game they chose has an emulation layer on the Mac side. Of course it will be faster when booted in Windows…not that anyone wouldn't expect a far better gaming experience on Windows anyway.
3) Using Apple developed software in the few key categories definitely biased the results, although would be helpful to know for someone who would intend to use that specific Apple software.
I agree with you Kevin. Great comment!
The CNET test is interesting, and has value, but it could have been a lot more extensive, and there are a couple of flaws with what they did.
Here are some comparisons that could be done:
1) Which runs faster on a MacBook Pro (Windows 7 versus Snow Leopard).
2) Which runs faster a $X Mac with SL or a $X PC with W7.
3) Which runs faster a Mac with SL and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
4) Which run faster a Mac with W7 and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
5) Which runs faster a $X Mac with W7 or a $X PC with W7.
Each one of the above has value, and the more extensively they're done, the more value they have. And if one wanted they could also include hackintoshes into the mix.
CNET chose #1 above in this test, which is perfectly fine as a test. If you have a MacBook Pro and don't have a preference to which OS you run, which would be faster for you? Also, if Windows 7 runs faster overall on the MacBook Pro, it would show that Microsoft is doing something very right, while Apple has some work to do.
CNET could've made this test more extensive by:
1) Testing on more Macs (especially newer ones).
2) Testing with more configurations: Especially RAM levels and SSD.
3) Testing with a much wider array of software, not only types of software but different titles (VLC on both platforms versus QuickTime for example).
It's good to see that CNET is going to test again after use, especially with more apps installed. My guess is that this will benefit Snow Leopard substantially, but I'd like to see this tested.
Here are the flaws with the test:
1) CNET should've used the same hard drive, or at least the same brand and model of hard drive that they then benchmarked to see that they got the same results with. I would have just used the same drive. Format, do a clean install of one OS, and then re-format and do a clean install of the other.
2) The game they chose has an emulation layer on the Mac side. Of course it will be faster when booted in Windows…not that anyone wouldn't expect a far better gaming experience on Windows anyway.
3) Using Apple developed software in the few key categories definitely biased the results, although would be helpful to know for someone who would intend to use that specific Apple software.
I agree with you Kevin. Great comment!
The CNET test is interesting, and has value, but it could have been a lot more extensive, and there are a couple of flaws with what they did.
Here are some comparisons that could be done:
1) Which runs faster on a MacBook Pro (Windows 7 versus Snow Leopard).
2) Which runs faster a $X Mac with SL or a $X PC with W7.
3) Which runs faster a Mac with SL and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
4) Which run faster a Mac with W7 and X set of specs or a PC with W7 and X set of specs.
5) Which runs faster a $X Mac with W7 or a $X PC with W7.
Each one of the above has value, and the more extensively they're done, the more value they have. And if one wanted they could also include hackintoshes into the mix.
CNET chose #1 above in this test, which is perfectly fine as a test. If you have a MacBook Pro and don't have a preference to which OS you run, which would be faster for you? Also, if Windows 7 runs faster overall on the MacBook Pro, it would show that Microsoft is doing something very right, while Apple has some work to do.
CNET could've made this test more extensive by:
1) Testing on more Macs (especially newer ones).
2) Testing with more configurations: Especially RAM levels and SSD.
3) Testing with a much wider array of software, not only types of software but different titles (VLC on both platforms versus QuickTime for example).
It's good to see that CNET is going to test again after use, especially with more apps installed. My guess is that this will benefit Snow Leopard substantially, but I'd like to see this tested.
Here are the flaws with the test:
1) CNET should've used the same hard drive, or at least the same brand and model of hard drive that they then benchmarked to see that they got the same results with. I would have just used the same drive. Format, do a clean install of one OS, and then re-format and do a clean install of the other.
2) The game they chose has an emulation layer on the Mac side. Of course it will be faster when booted in Windows…not that anyone wouldn't expect a far better gaming experience on Windows anyway.
3) Using Apple developed software in the few key categories definitely biased the results, although would be helpful to know for someone who would intend to use that specific Apple software.
I agree with you Kevin. Great comment!
I think you should know there is no virtualization when running Windows on a Mac. Boot Camp is a BIOS emulator. You have to use Boot Camp to start Windows because Macs use EFI firmware to boot instead of BIOS firmware. Once Windows has actually finished booting, it runs natively on Mac hardware, just like it would run on a PC, so running a test with Windows on a Mac would be a perfectly legitimate test.
I think you should know there is no virtualization when running Windows on a Mac. Boot Camp is a BIOS emulator. You have to use Boot Camp to start Windows because Macs use EFI firmware to boot instead of BIOS firmware. Once Windows has actually finished booting, it runs natively on Mac hardware, just like it would run on a PC, so running a test with Windows on a Mac would be a perfectly legitimate test.
I think you should know there is no virtualization when running Windows on a Mac. Boot Camp is a BIOS emulator. You have to use Boot Camp to start Windows because Macs use EFI firmware to boot instead of BIOS firmware. Once Windows has actually finished booting, it runs natively on Mac hardware, just like it would run on a PC, so running a test with Windows on a Mac would be a perfectly legitimate test.
I think you should know there is no virtualization when running Windows on a Mac. Boot Camp is a BIOS emulator. You have to use Boot Camp to start Windows because Macs use EFI firmware to boot instead of BIOS firmware. Once Windows has actually finished booting, it runs natively on Mac hardware, just like it would run on a PC, so running a test with Windows on a Mac would be a perfectly legitimate test.
Why do people —–waist—– time to compare two of the Operating Systems?
LOL
Totally agree