Question about a Windows based DAW vs. a OSX based DAW

[moisiss]

So here's the question...

When you set up a Windows based DAW (digital audio workstation) for "pro" recording, there are a whole slew of recommended adjustments that increase the processing power of of your machine (assumably by decreasing the base workload of Windows by adjusting things like graphics, background programs, etc. Check out www.musicxp.com for a list of the adjustments I'm talking about.)

I've seen never this stuff mentioned for OSX though, and was wondering why? I mean, graphically OSX seems like it would be more intensive than Windows with all the icons zooming in and out and what have you... all I've ever read about it though just simply says that you don't have to make any adjustments... it never gives any real reason.

Does anyone know why you don't have to make the same adjustments with OSX?

 

[The General]

Because PowerMac G5's and Quad-Xeon Mac Pros are not at all comparable to a Pentium 4 Dell running Windows XP. That's like comparing a Chevy S-10 and a locamotive.

There is no need for processor optimiations, they are so fast that it doesn't matter.

 

[moisiss]

That's completely true.... but not all Windows based systems are Pentium 4 Dells. I mean, you could buy/build a PC that was at least moderately comparable, hardware-wise, to a G5 or Quad Xeon.

The stuff I've read vaguely hinted that it has something to do with the way the operating systems are written? That, coupled with the fact that "everyone" says that OSX is more stable, secure, etc. makes me think its more of a software issue. Is OSX written to work more efficiently then Windows? If so, how?

 

[The General]

That's completely true.... but not all Windows based systems are Pentium 4 Dells. I mean, you could buy/build a PC that was at least moderately comparable, hardware-wise, to a G5 or Quad Xeon.

Obviously, but it will cost a lot more... check the prices for a quad woodcrest Xeon Dell workstation, they start at like $3000.

The stuff I've read vaguely hinted that it has something to do with the way the operating systems are written? That, coupled with the fact that "everyone" says that OSX is more stable, secure, etc. makes me think its more of a software issue. Is OSX written to work more efficiently then Windows? If so, how?

I don't know, it works fine. Realisically, you'll only get like 1 - 2% increase in speed (arguably) and it won't be to noticable. Mac OS X also runs Mac-specific applications like Final Cut and Logic Pro, so thats a plus.

 

[Qiranworms]

I think it's mainly to avoid "hiccups". OS X, unless you've opened twenty applications at a time, tends to go smoothly, while Windows seems to run audio software and can 'jerk' if something else gets the system's attention, even if the system is generally a faster one.

OS X tends to perform better with audio in its out-of-the-box stage than Windows. I can play softsynths (without much CPU load) with non-noticable latency with a Mac Mini G4 without any upgrades. Windows XP will not do this, though now there are some free ASIO drivers that seem to actually work on most sound cards. Now Longhorn will apparently ship with low latency drivers built in, but it's not here yet. Panther, which doesn't even have Core Audio (a Tiger feature) was installed on the Mac Mini I was testing. It didn't even sound that bad for integrated sound, I was impressed.


Also, you probably *should* remove OS X things like dock magnification (the icons on the bottom strip that grow as you mouse-over) if you're going to use it as a DAW.