Apple Event: May 7th at 7 am PT

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

PC user wanting to swap to Mac has some queries.

Hi,

As the title suggests I have a few queries about swapping from PC to Mac. Firstly I've been informed that you can't directly compare speeds, processors, RAM etc of a PC with a Mac as MAcs run quicker, but is there a way of knowing what an equivalent mac is compared with a specific spec PC. I understand PC specs but not sure how they translate to Mac. For example, my current Laptop has Intel Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz processor with 4GB RAM (I'm wanting to improve on this spec), what would the equivalent Mac be?


I use my laptop for Full HD video editing and use Sony Vegas Movie Studio Platinum 9, and have found out this is not compatible with Mac. The only equivalent software I've seen for Mac is Final Cut Pro X, but I'm not prepared to pay £199 for this, especially considering the fact you can get Sony Vegas..... Platinum 11 for £30. Therefore I would need to partition my Macbook and run windows 7 (unless someone can recommend a good video editor for Mac which is much cheaper). Is it free to install windows 7 on a Mac or do you have to buy software? If so how much is it? Would it still recognise AVCHD?


One issue I have with Sony vegas on my current laptop is that it takes ages to render HD video, it can take hours (literally) to render 10mins of video. I don't know if this is down to the OS, RAM, processor or Hard drive, or something else. When editing I only have this one program open as using any other program (even the internet) is painfully slow. Would having a quad core i7 processor and 8GB RAM speed up the rendering process? Do Macs speed this process up, or if you are running it in windows mode would it be exactly the same as running it on a PC?


When ripping music to the Mac can you only rip in AAC/ALAC or can you rip it as MP3 so it's more 'universal'? I have music systems that can't read AAC :-/


Finally, when having a quick 'play' with a MacBook in store (PC world) I noticed that when I opened new Windows/apps the window did not fill the entire screen, and when you opened up further windows/apps you could see them stacked over each other a bit randomly. Can you change the setting so that the windows fill the entire screen, and can you set it so that this happens as default?


Sorry for all the questions, but I want to make sure a Mac's right for me before forking out thousands of pounds.

Posted on Feb 9, 2012 1:51 PM

Reply
75 replies

Feb 12, 2012 6:12 AM in response to fane_j

The most useful file search and manipulation utility I've ever seen, by a wide margin, is File Buddy. It has been the first piece of third-party software I've installed on every new Mac I've bought for about 15 years.


http://www.skytag.com


It still has some vestigial bits of old code in it, so a handful of features aren't usable in Snow Leopard (I haven't upgraded to Lion), but I've never missed any of them. Apparently it has some problems with Lion, but I don't know what they are, and I suspect the developer has moved on. FB hasn't been updated in years, but it's still the first tool I go to for many purposes, especially searching.

Feb 12, 2012 6:43 AM in response to snerkler1

Well I went out of my way to go to an Apple store today. They had the hi-res antiglare screen but only the standard glossy. The font, icon size etc of the hi-res was fine for me but I didn't like the antiglare, looked a bit dull to me even with brightness set on max. I would have liked to see the standard screen side by side with the hi-res glossy but I can't. I assume photos etc with look better and more detailed with the hi-res? If someone can confirm that I'd appreciate it.


The store I went to did have all different specs in so could have bought a 'customised' one then and there, but I'll be buying it on finance and they don't do finance in store, online only. With regards to the RAM upgrade obviously it's cheaper buying aftermarket, but on finance it only works out at £4/month ($6.3/month) extra so won't even notice it.


I think I've decided to go the Mac route. Thanks for all the device, and thanks for making me aware that Macs have their flaws as PCs do. I just fancy something new.

Feb 12, 2012 7:45 AM in response to snerkler1

Yes all SATA compatible hard drives use the same Data and power connections no matter whether they are for desktops or notebooks, 3.5" or 2.5". They also have the exact same spacing between the Data and power connectors.


I certainly would not spend $200 for something I can buy for $50. But you aren't me. That extra $6.30 a month will turn into $250+ at the end of the finance period.


Good Luck with your Mac.


PS I have the Gloss screen on the Mac and the anti glare on my new Dell. I like the Mac screen more as the Dell is dull by the anti glare coating. I never use my notebooks outside or at least not much if ever.

Feb 12, 2012 7:59 AM in response to Shootist007

Yeah some will say it's stupid paying over the odds for the RAM, but like I say I'll not notice the extra.


I'm now questioning the Hi-res screen, as the one I saw was actually on the 17" screen. Whilst the layout was fine and the text size was fine I'm wondering if it will be too small on the 15" 😕


On my PC laptop I can change the screen resolution, can you do this on the MBP ie change the hi-res screen to 1440x900 ( like the standard screen)? I know this would be a waste of money, but it would be better than having a laptop I don't like the screen of.

Feb 13, 2012 6:29 AM in response to snerkler1

So I've had a change of heart after looking at the finance options as the interest rates are pretty high, therefore I'lll be buying the Macbook straight out. This means that the price difference of RAM upgrade is now important so will be looking at buying aftermarket. However, Apple list the RAM upgrade as 8GB (2 x 4GB) 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM but I can't find any aftermarket with these specs. The best site I've found is crucial, but they only let you select DDR3 OR SDRAM not both DDR3 AND SDRAM. What are these and what difference does it make?


I've found these products, would these be the same as those supplied by Apple, albeit a different manufacturer?


http://www.crucial.com/uk/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT2KIT51264BC1339

Feb 13, 2012 6:55 AM in response to Shootist007

Thanks Shootist007 once again. Does the Voltage matter, I can't find the 1.35V in the UK. Does this have something to do with the different mains power supply in the UK (240V)?


Will this crucial one run as fast as the apple one with it not showing as SDRAM, whatever that is? The Macbook I will be getting is the 15" 2.4GHz quad core intel core i7, I assume this RAM from crucial will be compatible and not waste clock cycles?

Feb 13, 2012 6:59 AM in response to snerkler1

From everything I read at the crucial US site the voltage doesn't matter other then the lower voltage uses less power. But not enough to notice any difference in battery life. Not sure about heat output as I've only used the 1.35V stuff.

Crucial still lists it on the US site.


http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=MacBook%20Pro%202.2GHz%20Intel %20Quad-Core%20i7%20(15-inch%20DDR3)%20Late-2011&Cat=RAM

Feb 13, 2012 7:54 AM in response to Shootist007

I have managed to find the 1.35V one on the Crucial UK site now. But there's a 204pin DIMM

http://www.crucial.com/uk/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT2KIT51264BF1339


and a 204-pin SODIMM

http://www.crucial.com/uk/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT2KIT51264BD1339


Does it matter which one I use?


Shootist007 wrote:


From everything I read at the crucial US site the voltage doesn't matter other then the lower voltage uses less power. But not enough to notice any difference in battery life. Not sure about heat output as I've only used the 1.35V stuff.

Crucial still lists it on the US site.


http://www.crucial.com/store/listparts.aspx?model=MacBook%20Pro%202.2GHz%20Intel %20Quad-Core%20i7%20(15-inch%20DDR3)%20Late-2011&Cat=RAM

Feb 14, 2012 12:40 AM in response to snerkler1

Well I finally got to see the 15" hi-res (albeit the anti glare) and the standard screen side by side. The difference in screen quality is night and day, BUT the hi-res does make it too small for me. This leaves me with a bit of a dilema as if I go with the standard screen having now seen the hi-res I can't help but think I'm always going to be disappointed. I know that future products can't be discussed on this forum, but I have heard rumours of a product possibly being released later this year that might be the best of both worlds.


In the meantime the guy at the Apple store told me the difference between the 2 base 15" MBP's (ie the 2.2GHz/512MB Grahpics card vs 2.4GHz/1GB GC) isn't worth the £300 ($470) difference. What are peoples views on this? Whilst it might not be worth it, if I'm going to notice improved performance in rendering HD video, and for software such as logic, plus make the MBP more future proof then I would be prepared to swallow the cost.

Feb 16, 2012 7:28 AM in response to snerkler1

Well I've gone and ordered a MBP. Thanks so much for the help on here. I went back to the Apple store to have another go on the hi-res screen and the guy found a setting that makes web browsing much better. You can select a minimum font size, and when I set this to 14 it made the world of difference and did not affect the layout of the pages.


So after a lot of deliberation I decided to go with the lower spec model (2.2Ghz) with hi-re glossy screen (I don't like the colours on the Anti glare), and am going to buy 3rd Party 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD.


I'm hoping I'll get on with the hi-res screen now that I've found the above workaround for web browsing, and don't find other menu systems too small. I do have the comfort of the 14 day returns, but I'm pretty confident I'll be fine with the hi-res.

Nov 28, 2013 5:16 AM in response to snerkler1

Stay with the PC, I regret swapping to MBP every day (and I mean every day).....

The hardware is great, I can not fault that (maybe could do with another USB) but the OS is just lacking in so many ways, it is a real shame. In short it is sooooo slow and the look is very dated - it is like Apple has not sat down and used a competitors OS for 15 years.

Okay I am a developer so I have large apps running and a number on them and truly I have tried to get on with X OS for a year now (I want to I do, I have job for next 2 years using it), I even just spent another £300 doubling memory and swapping to SSD HD just to try and get it slick but it is not.

I have friends who love their Mac's and I watch them using it and it is like they do not want to admit it is not that great, it seems they are defending an ideology and not an opinion. Strangely I do kind of understand it, for example it is very very easy to waste a lot of time resizing, moving windows and so on just to try and get them in a position that is usable - all a waste of time but somehow you feel like you have achieved something.

As soon as my memory and SSD turn up I will try the new Mavericks, people with better machines than mine have said it is much slower so I have not done it yet. I am looking forward to better dual monitor support as it is just appalling at the moment and I use two all the time.

PC user wanting to swap to Mac has some queries.

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.