RustyBug Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
dugaut wrote:
Skimmed through the comments and not sure I saw backup mentioned. Time Machine works well enough.
I saw something related to this, but apps are compiled for the intel have to be recompiled to run on apple silicon. Some have been updated, but some not, and those that aren't run through Rosetta2, and that might explain some of the spinning beachballs.
I use both mac silicon and windows 11. As noted, windows 11 is the best windows os, but the mac seems more refined and stable.
I backup to a slow 5tb drive ($110), and also have a fast 1tb tb drive external ($300) that you can actually work off of if you need more space.
...Show more →
Not sure why ... but when folks talk about the Mac being more stable ... I haven't experienced any stability concerns with my Thinkpad's over the years. Yet, I remember the "Blue Screen of Death" on my daughter's Mac ... and Apple not doing anything to help ... wound up buying her a replacement PC.
Here again, it makes me wonder how much the gap (of yore) has been bridged in general ... and maybe to a more specific degree the way the TP's are being engineered / configured. Wondering if the TP's might be a notch up on the general PC market (for which the reputation of instability might be more warranted historically).
I'm not discounting the controlled match of Apple software / hardware advantage presenting better than a PC mfr cobbling together components of choice that varies from one mfr to another. But, my TP's seem to have been made to play well together, too.
The one thing that does intrigue me about this ^ ... is that allegedly, software (i.e. Photoshop, etc.) programmers can write to a Mac standard vs. a "non-standard" PC. According to Apple personnel, this allow Photoshop to run better on a Mac than a PC. Sound good on paper, in premise ... but, I don't know if that is actually true that Adobe's Mac version is written to take advantage of such ... or, it just sounds good to say (i.e. seems logical enough).
Again ... I haven't had the opportunity to find out how it REALLY performs, yet.
That ^ and I don't import a large volume of images or bulk process the way some might. I'm not a sports shooter racking out 10 - 30 fps all day long, nor an event / wedding shooter taking 1,000's of images per event, every week. So, it might be a "fit for purpose" thing that's a bit in play, here.
Still, I'm looking forward to a chance to see how much performance there really is. If it is close to what I read about ... well, that will be the tell-tale as to whether or not it compels me into an "I gotta get this !!! "
Until then ... thanks to all for chiming in ... journey TBC.

|