Is A Windows 7 computer better for gaming than a Snow Leopard Mac OS X?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b2b34c3a42a1
deactivated-5b2b34c3a42a1

2436

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 deactivated-5b2b34c3a42a1
Member since 2009 • 2436 Posts

Title, overall, which is better for gaming and why?

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts
considering there are far fewer games for OSX, the choice is obvious for gaming.
Avatar image for Frenzyd109
Frenzyd109

2276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#3 Frenzyd109
Member since 2007 • 2276 Posts
Obviously 7, few games are available on Macs.
Avatar image for scoots9
scoots9

3505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#4 scoots9
Member since 2006 • 3505 Posts

It's better at most things, gaming especially.

Avatar image for powerwolff
powerwolff

686

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 powerwolff
Member since 2004 • 686 Posts

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Mac = Very few games (they all fit on one wall in the Apple store), Macs cost about 4x as much as a PC that has identical hardware, Mac keyboard and mouse are unsuitable for gaming, few gaming accessories

PC = Access hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of games, can build the most powerful computer money can buy for a fraction of what a much weaker Mac would cost, the most diversified and numerous gaming accessories of any gaming platform period

The choice is obvious

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#7 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts
Ahem Hackintosh :P
Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

powerwolff

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

Avatar image for 5ssj
5ssj

328

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 5ssj
Member since 2004 • 328 Posts
^^ hahahahahahahahahahahahahah LOL
Avatar image for kodyoo
kodyoo

258

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 kodyoo
Member since 2010 • 258 Posts

[QUOTE="powerwolff"]

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

gameguy6700

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

You forgot to put the PC equivalent... And why would you buy all of the software bundles? Either way, PC is the way to go for gaming, mac has like 2 games worth playing, at least till steam comes out for mac.

Avatar image for p00zer
p00zer

2514

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#11 p00zer
Member since 2006 • 2514 Posts

Windows 7 of course.

Though steam will shortly be porting its library to OSX, so the playing field may become more comparable in the future. For now though, it's absolutely indisputable.

Avatar image for p00zer
p00zer

2514

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#12 p00zer
Member since 2006 • 2514 Posts

[QUOTE="powerwolff"]

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

gameguy6700

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

Jesus Christ :shock:. I have an only slightly worse version of that computer (besides for different peripherals), and I paid $900. Yay Newegg.

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#13 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts
What are 2x18 superdrives?
Avatar image for kodyoo
kodyoo

258

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 kodyoo
Member since 2010 • 258 Posts

Jesus Christ :shock:. I have an only slightly worse version of that computer (besides for different peripherals), and I paid $900. Yay Newegg.

p00zer

Doubt it seeing that 8 TB of storage cost $600 for cheapest ones and 32 GB of RAM cost $1000 at the least on newegg. Not saying the Mac is a good deal by any means (Far from it really), but the components selected are still worth several thousand dollars

Avatar image for NamelessPlayer
NamelessPlayer

7729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 NamelessPlayer
Member since 2004 • 7729 Posts
What are 2x18 superdrives?JigglyWiggly_
I'm pretty sure they're 18x DVD burners. Don't know why Apple calls DVD burners "SuperDrives"-it's kind of like how they say "AirPort" instead of Wi-Fi. Anyway, while I used to want a Mac Pro should I ever have an unlimited budget, EVGA showed that dual-socket LGA1366 board with eight full PCIe 2.0 x16 slots, which completely killed my interest in the former given that I could build a superior PC for the same price around that board. (Windows 7 also happened to kill my interest in OS X, and the massive slant in game compatibility for Windows has a lot to do with that.)
Avatar image for sammysalsa
sammysalsa

1832

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 sammysalsa
Member since 2004 • 1832 Posts

I can't beleive this is actually a question! probably trolling.

And LOL at the Mac pro, on the Australian website they charge $480AU to add an additional 1tb HDD, of which i could simply buy from my local computer store for ~$100.

Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts

[QUOTE="powerwolff"]

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

gameguy6700

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

and it can't even run gta4 about med lol. Great for film but not for gaming.

Avatar image for pure89
pure89

211

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 pure89
Member since 2009 • 211 Posts

[QUOTE="powerwolff"]

Even if you are thinking of running boot camp...which does indeed run Windows XP/Vista/7 just fine, and plays games as well - it really comes down to the hardware. Even the highest end iMac (which I think only has a 4850?) will be outperformed by even low end "gaming" desktops you find.

gameguy6700

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

LOOL :)

Avatar image for pure89
pure89

211

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 pure89
Member since 2009 • 211 Posts

i have hackintosh on my pc, but there are no drivers for 5850 :(

Avatar image for kungfool69
kungfool69

2584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 kungfool69
Member since 2006 • 2584 Posts

Ahem Hackintosh :PJigglyWiggly_

this is the cheapest option if u want teh fancy OSX (dunno why...it doesnt do anything different......just puts stuff ina slightly different place then calls it "advanced")

Avatar image for kodyoo
kodyoo

258

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 kodyoo
Member since 2010 • 258 Posts

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Ahem Hackintosh :Pkungfool69

this is the cheapest option if u want teh fancy OSX (dunno why...it doesnt do anything different......just puts stuff ina slightly different place then calls it "advanced")

Have you ever used a mac for an extended period of time? If not, then I don't really want to hear your opinion on the OS
Avatar image for Lach0121
Lach0121

11815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

#22 Lach0121
Member since 2007 • 11815 Posts

for gaming, and most normal things pc is the better.. sorry mac fans, its true.

if your doing video editing then maybe go with the mac..

hell use to mac was the best to do music on,, now pc has caught up... (come on mac whats up, spending too much time, making new versions of the Iphone, calling it the Ipad, lol, neither one can make any calls)

Avatar image for krisroe_213
krisroe_213

898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 krisroe_213
Member since 2003 • 898 Posts

Troll. I can't believe this question could cross someone's mind - especially on a gaming forum.

Avatar image for 5ssj
5ssj

328

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 5ssj
Member since 2004 • 328 Posts
True say....I thought this was a sarcastic topic or something..... And if you're in designer/printer industry, you definitely want a Mac, coz the whole calibration for color works better, and its like Adobe designed their programs to work better in Mac...
Avatar image for CellAnimation
CellAnimation

6116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 CellAnimation
Member since 2007 • 6116 Posts
Jesus Christ :shock:. I have an only slightly worse version of that computer (besides for different peripherals), and I paid $900. Yay Newegg.p00zer
... as if! :roll:
Avatar image for sgac
sgac

434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 sgac
Member since 2006 • 434 Posts

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

[QUOTE="powerwolff"]

Indeed. If I go to the Apple store this is what I can get if I max out a Mac:

- Two 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
- 32GB (8x4GB) RAM
- 4x 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3Gb/s
- ATI Radeon HD4870 512MB
- 2x 18x SuperDrives
- Apple Magic Mouse
- Apple Keyboard (English) and User's Guide
- AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi Card with 802.11n
- Quad-channel 4Gb Fibre Channel PCI-E card

All for the low, low cost of only $10,989.00

BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!

Add on all the bundled software options, customer service plan, extended warranty, and two 30" cinema HD displays and the total comes out to a measly $20,254.85

kodyoo

You forgot to put the PC equivalent... And why would you buy all of the software bundles? Either way, PC is the way to go for gaming, mac has like 2 games worth playing, at least till steam comes out for mac.

Mac = Very few games (they all fit on one wall in the Apple store), Macs cost about 4x as much as a PC that has identical hardware, Mac keyboard and mouse are unsuitable for gaming, few gaming accessories

PC = Access hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of games, can build the most powerful computer money can buy for a fraction of what a much weaker Mac would cost, the most diversified and numerous gaming accessories of any gaming platform period

The choice is obvious

gameguy6700

What you have to bear in mind is that OS-X is actually just as capable of gaming as Windows is, it's just that the 2 OS's use different API's for grpahics etc. It just so happened that the gaming industry chose Microsoft's DirectX (wouldn't be too surprised if Microsoft put s lot of money behing the industry for it's propreitry programming language mind you), rather than openGL (which is what Linux, Mac OS-X etc all use). Most of the games on Windows could easily be done on the Mac too if they used OpenGL, though that will not happen for evry game released as it would be too much money to create 2 versions of a game engine, still I am glad to see more focus on the Mac gaming front, more competion is surely a plus in anybody's book.

Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

[QUOTE="kodyoo"]

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

You forgot to put the PC equivalent... And why would you buy all of the software bundles? Either way, PC is the way to go for gaming, mac has like 2 games worth playing, at least till steam comes out for mac.

sgac

Mac = Very few games (they all fit on one wall in the Apple store), Macs cost about 4x as much as a PC that has identical hardware, Mac keyboard and mouse are unsuitable for gaming, few gaming accessories

PC = Access hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of games, can build the most powerful computer money can buy for a fraction of what a much weaker Mac would cost, the most diversified and numerous gaming accessories of any gaming platform period

The choice is obvious

gameguy6700

What you have to bear in mind is that OS-X is actually just as capable of gaming as Windows is, it's just that the 2 OS's use different API's for grpahics etc. It just so happened that the gaming industry chose Microsoft's DirectX (wouldn't be too surprised if Microsoft put s lot of money behing the industry for it's propreitry programming language mind you), rather than openGL (which is what Linux, Mac OS-X etc all use). Most of the games on Windows could easily be done on the Mac too if they used OpenGL, though that will not happen for evry game released as it would be too much money to create 2 versions of a game engine, still I am glad to see more focus on the Mac gaming front, more competion is surely a plus in anybody's book.

That doesn't change the fact that OSX has a tiny gaming library and is thus unfit for gaming. Maybe in an alternate universe where openGL beat out DirectX things would be different except that...oh no wait, Apple still overcharges you to a criminal extent for crappy hardware. OK, assuming that openGL succeeded and that Mac fanboys were willing to build their own computers instead of buying one from Apple (man this is one crazy alternate universe), then maybe OS X and Windows would both be good platforms for gaming. Now thing is OS X still wouldn't have as many games as Windows since Windows would still have 90% market share...unless we also assume that in our comically absurd universe that Microsoft never managed to crush Apple, in which case THEN Mac and PC might both be viable gaming platforms.

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#29 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts
It would have been nice if OpenGL just won the API wars. I don't like closed standards when things get huge.
Avatar image for sgac
sgac

434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 sgac
Member since 2006 • 434 Posts

[QUOTE="sgac"]

[QUOTE="kodyoo"] [QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

Mac = Very few games (they all fit on one wall in the Apple store), Macs cost about 4x as much as a PC that has identical hardware, Mac keyboard and mouse are unsuitable for gaming, few gaming accessories

PC = Access hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of games, can build the most powerful computer money can buy for a fraction of what a much weaker Mac would cost, the most diversified and numerous gaming accessories of any gaming platform period

The choice is obvious

gameguy6700

What you have to bear in mind is that OS-X is actually just as capable of gaming as Windows is, it's just that the 2 OS's use different API's for grpahics etc. It just so happened that the gaming industry chose Microsoft's DirectX (wouldn't be too surprised if Microsoft put s lot of money behing the industry for it's propreitry programming language mind you), rather than openGL (which is what Linux, Mac OS-X etc all use). Most of the games on Windows could easily be done on the Mac too if they used OpenGL, though that will not happen for evry game released as it would be too much money to create 2 versions of a game engine, still I am glad to see more focus on the Mac gaming front, more competion is surely a plus in anybody's book.

That doesn't change the fact that OSX has a tiny gaming library and is thus unfit for gaming. Maybe in an alternate universe where openGL beat out DirectX things would be different except that...oh no wait, Apple still overcharges you to a criminal extent for crappy hardware. OK, assuming that openGL succeeded and that Mac fanboys were willing to build their own computers instead of buying one from Apple (man this is one crazy alternate universe), then maybe OS X and Windows would both be good platforms for gaming. Now thing is OS X still wouldn't have as many games as Windows since Windows would still have 90% market share...unless we also assume that in our comically absurd universe that Microsoft never managed to crush Apple, in which case THEN Mac and PC might both be viable gaming platforms.

How'd you work out that Windows would still have 90% market share if both platforms were equal on graphics terms? The fact is that Ms Windows is just by the very series of events THE OS that is installed on about 90% of PC's out there, despite having multiple other OS's to choose from, your average joe go's into a shop ,buys a PC and that's just the OS he's likly to get. Why would he go and install anything else? Despite there being several alternatives that can be just as good as Windows is at doing the same thing. The Mac has a tiny gaming platform because the vast majority of developers aren't going to code for a platform that only has 10% of users in the first place. Now Macs have always been about but its Microsofts bullyishness to have thier OS on every PC about that that is what the masses see and hence that's why Windows has a 90% share. I think if given half the option of what OS a consumer wanted and without any biasism to one in particular, they would be willing to look at the alternatives out there, and gaming might get a broader OS Base. I'm not anti-windows by any strerch of the imagination, I'm a gamer myself, but blindly supporting Windows just because it has 90% market-share and ignoring the fact that consumers didn't really get the coice of what OS they would like to game on in the first place is abit fanboyish to me. Yes I can agree on Apple overcharging you for hardware but another point to bear in mind is that , as I comment from mrbit10 on Yotube to sum it up he says that the best DirectX 10 card is probably not the best performing Open GL Card, and that my friend makes a hell of a difference when your comparing 2 very different programming interfaces, hence if you were to gamr on Apple's hardware you might find that the performance of it's cards were very high indeed , almost as much as a DirectX card under Windows.
Avatar image for sgac
sgac

434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 sgac
Member since 2006 • 434 Posts
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]It would have been nice if OpenGL just won the API wars. I don't like closed standards when things get huge.

Not saying DirectX is bad or anything myself but when you have a closed standard and M$ decides what version runs on what OS, then the gaming industry is split in half. Just look at what happened with Vista/DX10 not saying they were bad but nobody begun to use Vista really until about 2008 and even today half or more of the gaming titles are still DX9 Because not enough People have upgraded thier systems to make development for this version of the API viable, so devs play it safe and develop for DX9 Predomininintly. Contrast to OpenGL which is an open standard and the latest version could easily be run on Windows-whatever, Mac OS, Linux, Solaris what have you, so there you are, a more flexible system all-round. Means gamers on other platforms get a chance to play.
Avatar image for NamelessPlayer
NamelessPlayer

7729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 NamelessPlayer
Member since 2004 • 7729 Posts
[QUOTE="sgac"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]It would have been nice if OpenGL just won the API wars. I don't like closed standards when things get huge.

Not saying DirectX is bad or anything myself but when you have a closed standard and M$ decides what version runs on what OS, then the gaming industry is split in half. Just look at what happened with Vista/DX10 not saying they were bad but nobody begun to use Vista really until about 2008 and even today half or more of the gaming titles are still DX9 Because not enough People have upgraded thier systems to make development for this version of the API viable, so devs play it safe and develop for DX9 Predomininintly. Contrast to OpenGL which is an open standard and the latest version could easily be run on Windows-whatever, Mac OS, Linux, Solaris what have you, so there you are, a more flexible system all-round. Means gamers on other platforms get a chance to play.

Fully agreed. I want to avoid DirectX as much as possible because of this, though I'll probably still be very dependent on DirectInput for game controllers of all sorts. Not sure what OS X and Linux have to offer in that regard. Another thing to consider is that games based on old DirectX versions (DX7 and prior) appear to be a bit broken on modern software and hardware. I'm not sure how much is Microsoft's fault and how much is ATI/NVIDIA's fault, but the end result is that it just doesn't work. Somehow, I feel that it wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem if OpenGL was used. The only thing that worries me is if all the development tools and university courses and whatnot still insist on some portion of DirectX. It just seems like such a situation would cause me to develop bad habits and lock myself into MS' little closed API suite.
Avatar image for gameguy6700
gameguy6700

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 gameguy6700
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

[QUOTE="sgac"]What you have to bear in mind is that OS-X is actually just as capable of gaming as Windows is, it's just that the 2 OS's use different API's for grpahics etc. It just so happened that the gaming industry chose Microsoft's DirectX (wouldn't be too surprised if Microsoft put s lot of money behing the industry for it's propreitry programming language mind you), rather than openGL (which is what Linux, Mac OS-X etc all use). Most of the games on Windows could easily be done on the Mac too if they used OpenGL, though that will not happen for evry game released as it would be too much money to create 2 versions of a game engine, still I am glad to see more focus on the Mac gaming front, more competion is surely a plus in anybody's book.

sgac

That doesn't change the fact that OSX has a tiny gaming library and is thus unfit for gaming. Maybe in an alternate universe where openGL beat out DirectX things would be different except that...oh no wait, Apple still overcharges you to a criminal extent for crappy hardware. OK, assuming that openGL succeeded and that Mac fanboys were willing to build their own computers instead of buying one from Apple (man this is one crazy alternate universe), then maybe OS X and Windows would both be good platforms for gaming. Now thing is OS X still wouldn't have as many games as Windows since Windows would still have 90% market share...unless we also assume that in our comically absurd universe that Microsoft never managed to crush Apple, in which case THEN Mac and PC might both be viable gaming platforms.

How'd you work out that Windows would still have 90% market share if both platforms were equal on graphics terms? The fact is that Ms Windows is just by the very series of events THE OS that is installed on about 90% of PC's out there, despite having multiple other OS's to choose from, your average joe go's into a shop ,buys a PC and that's just the OS he's likly to get. Why would he go and install anything else? Despite there being several alternatives that can be just as good as Windows is at doing the same thing. The Mac has a tiny gaming platform because the vast majority of developers aren't going to code for a platform that only has 10% of users in the first place. Now Macs have always been about but its Microsofts bullyishness to have thier OS on every PC about that that is what the masses see and hence that's why Windows has a 90% share. I think if given half the option of what OS a consumer wanted and without any biasism to one in particular, they would be willing to look at the alternatives out there, and gaming might get a broader OS Base. I'm not anti-windows by any strerch of the imagination, I'm a gamer myself, but blindly supporting Windows just because it has 90% market-share and ignoring the fact that consumers didn't really get the coice of what OS they would like to game on in the first place is abit fanboyish to me. Yes I can agree on Apple overcharging you for hardware but another point to bear in mind is that , as I comment from mrbit10 on Yotube to sum it up he says that the best DirectX 10 card is probably not the best performing Open GL Card, and that my friend makes a hell of a difference when your comparing 2 very different programming interfaces, hence if you were to gamr on Apple's hardware you might find that the performance of it's cards were very high indeed , almost as much as a DirectX card under Windows.

You misunderstand. I'm not trying to be a fanboy for windows, I'm bashing Apple for selling underpowered computers for exorbitant prices.

Also, the gaming market didn't have much to do with windows' dominance over Apple. That trend is mostly thanks to the rapid adoption of PCs by the business sector (and really Apple never got adopted by the business sector since before windows most companies were using IBM computers). It also doesn't help that while Microsoft merely licenses its OS to third party vendors (HP, Compaq, Dell, etc), Apple insists on having complete control of all prebuilt Macs. That pretty much allowed the Windows OS to get spammed into every retail chain by those third party vendors, whereas the only people selling Apple computers were, well, Apple.

Avatar image for sgac
sgac

434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 sgac
Member since 2006 • 434 Posts
[QUOTE="NamelessPlayer"][QUOTE="sgac"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]It would have been nice if OpenGL just won the API wars. I don't like closed standards when things get huge.

Not saying DirectX is bad or anything myself but when you have a closed standard and M$ decides what version runs on what OS, then the gaming industry is split in half. Just look at what happened with Vista/DX10 not saying they were bad but nobody begun to use Vista really until about 2008 and even today half or more of the gaming titles are still DX9 Because not enough People have upgraded thier systems to make development for this version of the API viable, so devs play it safe and develop for DX9 Predomininintly. Contrast to OpenGL which is an open standard and the latest version could easily be run on Windows-whatever, Mac OS, Linux, Solaris what have you, so there you are, a more flexible system all-round. Means gamers on other platforms get a chance to play.

Fully agreed. I want to avoid DirectX as much as possible because of this, though I'll probably still be very dependent on DirectInput for game controllers of all sorts. Not sure what OS X and Linux have to offer in that regard. Another thing to consider is that games based on old DirectX versions (DX7 and prior) appear to be a bit broken on modern software and hardware. I'm not sure how much is Microsoft's fault and how much is ATI/NVIDIA's fault, but the end result is that it just doesn't work. Somehow, I feel that it wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem if OpenGL was used. The only thing that worries me is if all the development tools and university courses and whatnot still insist on some portion of DirectX. It just seems like such a situation would cause me to develop bad habits and lock myself into MS' little closed API suite.

I'm not sure about the older DirectX versions stuff, it is probably a combination of Microsoft deaming anything before DX9 Legacy and thus dropping as much OS support for it and The ATI/Nvidia drivers not supporting DirectDraw 2D and alot of other legacy stuf in the older DirectX's in thier newer drivers or something else. DirectX does have some very good bits to it that no fouby makes programming alot easier for some things, but making it proprietry just shows thier ignorance and arrogance to license it to anyone else, they wanna be the boss of things, and I can see thier point from a business standpoint but still, arrogence and ignorence at it's best. Cheers
Avatar image for kungfool69
kungfool69

2584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 kungfool69
Member since 2006 • 2584 Posts

[QUOTE="kungfool69"]

[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"]Ahem Hackintosh :Pkodyoo

this is the cheapest option if u want teh fancy OSX (dunno why...it doesnt do anything different......just puts stuff ina slightly different place then calls it "advanced")

Have you ever used a mac for an extended period of time? If not, then I don't really want to hear your opinion on the OS

well i am sorry, this is the internet, everyone can express their opinions. I for one prefer Vista over MAC OSX. and yes, i used OSX for one year doing video editing with final cut pro in 2004-05. i became well versed in it. i still consider the os to be rather pointless.

Avatar image for kungfool69
kungfool69

2584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 kungfool69
Member since 2006 • 2584 Posts

And if you're in designer/printer industry, you definitely want a Mac, coz the whole calibration for color works better, and its like Adobe designed their programs to work better in Mac...5ssj

sorry about double posting, but this is a myth that is quite quickly changing. there s no photoshop CS4 64bit version for mac.......LAME. so what if u through 8 gb of ram or even 32gb, in ur new multicore XENON powered Mac pro.....no 64bit......aw.

Avatar image for codezer0
codezer0

15898

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 0

#37 codezer0
Member since 2004 • 15898 Posts
If the underlying hardware is the exact same (many pc-tards here like to compare their i5/i7's with the Mac Pro because it's the only tower-based Mac Apple sells, while that thing is more in line with a workstation with server grade processors than it has anything to do with a desktop system), then it should all perform the same. At least now, eVGA has released a GTX 285 for the Mac Pro, allowing it to be just as worthy to game as any equivalent system with this graphics card (no artificial speed crippling, like ATi did for some "Mac edition" Radeons in the past). then, with enough RAM, and software like VMWare fusion or Parallels, you can then run the two OS's side by side without having to reboot, and still get ~90% of the performance you would have got simply dual booting. On a Mac, at least you don't have to run Windows, so that if it starts pissing you off, you can go to an OS that is much nicer to do your regular stuff in :) And now that VALVe are updating source to be able to work natively on the MacOS, every other PC game dev on the planet has officially run out of excuses.