I use a 2011 MacBook Pro and I love it. I also have Windows on my mac so that I can use it for work too (some things my work uses is just not compatible with OS X).
http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/the-10-fastest-computers-in-the-world-941548 Just sayin and they use linux!!
Your point here is invalid. Since the implementation of multi threading and the massive amount of processes of using it having more cores over speed is actually more efficient. The actual clock speed of CPU's are becoming less important due to utilizing multi core systems. The general consumer makes the common misconception above. Similar to how Mac would pitch it. Like "oh you got 8 cores? well we have 4 but they run 25% faster" which if you do the math, still means I am running 50% more throughput than that mac CPU. Yeah, that MAC can run 4 processes at the same time faster, sure. But I can run 8 at the same time, at a speed thats not much different. And If that program is utilizing multithreading.. then it helps me out even more. As general computing evolves, the need for a "Faster" cpu fades. the Bus Clock speed is becoming more and more irrelevant as time goes on. And because of this, you get more energy/temperture efficent machines. Which anyone who is serious about a computer lasting a while is serious about. I have personally watched things melt in a PC due to improper cooling, and its not always the fault of the builder, I mean when you have to start thrwoing 400$ liquid cooling machines in your Stack for it to even function correctly... something needs to be changed. Gist of it is, your statement above is describing the linear advantage, while nowadays a computer can benefit from a more populated CPU.
i own a 27" Imac. OS: OS X/Windows 7 thru bootcamp (so much freakin better) Ram: 4GB HDD: 1TB CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo 3.6ghz GPU: AMD Mobility Radeon HD 4670 Screen: 27" LED-backlit disply with IPS technology. Resolution 2560x1440 I say beast, besides the GPU. Damn 256MB's xP But, I'll be building a desktop to use on this screen shortly :3
I have a Dell studio 540, running windows 7 64-bit Cpu: Pentium dual core E5200 @2,50 ghz Gpu: Radeon HD6670 Ram: 4 GB Hdd: 298 GB
I dont think the mac os is faster they just sell less cheap computers. If you compare a similar priced laptop with windows to a macbook you will see that the windows has way more power for the same price. Most people just have a rubbish PC.
Ok, I have a MacBook Intel Core Duo Using Mac OS 10.7.3 Got 2 extra screens And the Laptop is the 2009 MacBook.
My PC is home built. Processor=AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE (Overclocked from 3.2 to 4.0) RAM=16GB of DDR3 1600mhz ram GPU's=Dual AMD radeon 6850's in crossfire Hard drives =1TB Samsung hd103sj and a 60gb intel boot drive. Motherboard = Asus M5A88V-Evo OS= Windows 7 64bit professional. Price = £957.65 An equal speced Mac is £2500
Mac Eater! i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz 1.3v - ASUS P8P67 Pro, SLI EVGA GTX 570, RV02B-W case, Corsair 950TX, Corsair H70 Hydro, G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB 1600, 3 x ASUS VE276Q, Corsair FORCE 3 2.5" 240GB (SSD), LG Black 10X Blu-ray Burner WH10LS30 LightScribe, Thermaltake N0023SN Max 4 3.5" SATA HDD Racks, 2ea HITACHI Deskstar 7K3000 and 1 Segate 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s, External 2 x SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb, Win 7 Pro 64, Corsair Vengeance K90 KB & G9X mouse.
Also, about the laptop i listed specs for. I got it for $600!! not a waste at all a local company lost its bios password, so its now useless to them. Dont know exactly why other than that, so my aunt informed me about it amd i scooped it up as soon as i could. $600 for those specs is insanely cheap
