1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Blogs Valve claims Steam is five times more stable on Mac

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 26 May 2010.

  1. Simnol

    Simnol New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm never seen it, should watch it at some point.
     
  2. StoneyMahoney

    StoneyMahoney New Member

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    287
    Likes Received:
    13
    Windows has DirectX. OS X only has OpenGL and is built out of hardware designed for DirectX over OpenGL. End of gaming argument.

    OS X is more stable out of the box, but adding 3rd party hardware is just as much of a stability-crushing opportunity as for Windows.

    The bottom line - Windows is just as stable as Mac OS when it's configured right, on top of which it's got the performance edge. Windows = gaming win. True, Macs have a lot of other stuff going for them (Mac Mini = HTPC perfection), but they sure don't cut it when you're talking FPS in [INSERT GAME HERE].
     
  3. rickysio

    rickysio N900 | HJE900

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    964
    Likes Received:
    5
  4. Simnol

    Simnol New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
  5. rickysio

    rickysio N900 | HJE900

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    964
    Likes Received:
    5
  6. JagFel

    JagFel New Member

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
  7. Ab$olut

    Ab$olut New Member

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2004
    Posts:
    590
    Likes Received:
    1
    [​IMG]
     
    Pete J likes this.
  8. kylew

    kylew New Member

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    214
    Likes Received:
    2
    A none-positive comment doesn't make it a negative comment. I don't really see this as an "attack" on PCs. It's just a developer talking about their experiences, it's something new to them, and with it being on apple computers, with their hardware lockdown, they can probably get stuff done quicker. Also, I think people are reading it in to it a bit much, Not Macs, but Portal.

    1) Come on, don't be ignorant, do you really think they have 2 weeks experience running on Macs? This will have been in progress for a long time.

    2) Clearly, however they're talking about Portal only.

    3)Again, they're talking about portal.

    4)I don't think anyone thinks anything differently.
     
  9. Pieface

    Pieface New Member

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    134
  10. kylew

    kylew New Member

    Joined:
    28 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    214
    Likes Received:
    2

    Definitely not.

    While portal is perfectly playable (and I know I wouldn't be complaining about that performance) it's a good point to show how the same hardware fares between windows and macs when it comes to games.

    I expected there to be a performance difference, but not such a large one as Anandtech shown.
     
  11. Tom @ CCL

    Tom @ CCL AKA: Yewen

    Joined:
    10 May 2010
    Posts:
    454
    Likes Received:
    11
    Will be the driver maturity between the two operating systems.

    Until now why would anyone spend any money making drivers optimised for Portal when it didnt work on the mac?
     
  12. Volund

    Volund Am I supposed to care?

    Joined:
    16 Sep 2008
    Posts:
    1,947
    Likes Received:
    65
    Yes, a game that was released on PC Windows nearly three years ago, meaning that, as is the custom now, it was released in a slightly buggy, more easily crashed form. The OSX version had the advantage of receiving a completely patched, ready-to-go game, which has matured to the point of running perfectly on most systems.

    In other words, the OSX version didn't suffer from the initial period that we have to suffer through as gamers... you know, being used as testing guinea pigs...
     
  13. rickysio

    rickysio N900 | HJE900

    Joined:
    6 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    964
    Likes Received:
    5
  14. smc8788

    smc8788 ...at least I have chicken

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    5,961
    Likes Received:
    269
    No, 60FPS is the maximum the human eye can see on most LCD monitors because that's how many times the image on the screen is refreshed every second. On monitors with higher refresh rates, you will be able to see higher FPS.
     
  15. dyzophoria

    dyzophoria Member

    Joined:
    3 May 2004
    Posts:
    391
    Likes Received:
    1
    lol, I wonder what valve made as a basis for this?, OSX installed with alot of stuff is just as stable (or unstable) as windows installed with the same(or similar) programs running on the background. ive seen alot of crashes on OSX based on how I use it (think of it as not like a mac user only staring at the screen just because of awe on the expensive non-windows machine infront of him). if you use a mac the same as you use windows I think stability wise it will be the same
     
  16. Chocobollz

    Chocobollz New Member

    Joined:
    25 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    122
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, that's only if if you have VSync enabled. The framerate is independent to the monitor's refresh rate. IMO, the comfortable framerate for our eyes (at least for mine) is approx. 85 Hz. And that's why I still use my CRT monitor for gaming, because I can crank its refresh rate and resolutions to whatever I like :)
     
  17. smc8788

    smc8788 ...at least I have chicken

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    5,961
    Likes Received:
    269
    Yes, but was my understanding that even if you had a framerate of 200FPS in a game, on a 60Hz monitor you would only see 60 of them.
     
  18. Shagbag

    Shagbag All glory to the Hypnotoad!

    Joined:
    9 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    320
    Likes Received:
    4
    An interesting article. While it's too early to call, if Valve's product range grows rapidly, we may well be saying in 2-5 years time: "if you're a gamer, you're better off without Windows".

    That would be good news - as long as it leads to increased competition between platforms. The last thing we want is to be reliant on a single, dominant platform (OSX or Win) pushing its own APIs with little incentive - due to its dominance - to enrich them for the benefit of the consumer.

    More competition = consumer wins. Monopolies = consumer loses.
     
  19. Krayzie_B.o.n.e.

    Krayzie_B.o.n.e. New Member

    Joined:
    2 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    427
    Likes Received:
    6
    My Steam crashes running...
    Windows xp 0
    Windows 7 32 bit 0
    Windows 7 64 bit 0
    Hackintosh OSX 2

    It should run more stable on a MAc as MACs don't do sh!t but as you can see Microsoft 0 Mac 2 nuff said.
     
  20. shomann

    shomann New Member

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2003
    Posts:
    402
    Likes Received:
    4
    No, not enough said. Use a Mac, not a Hackintosh, which by definition and name has been hacked.

    That said, I still stand by my earlier comments. There hasn't been enough time that Mac Steam has been around to make a huge jump in the stability argument. I am just glad its available!
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page