Print 85 comment(s) - last by Totally.. on Apr 29 at 6:21 AM

New study shows that Apple's 13" MacBook Pro running Boot Camp is the most reliable Windows notebook

Apple vs. Microsoft, OS X vs. Windows -- these are comparisons that pit fanboys from each side against each other with little middle ground. The two sides have bickered for years with Windows fans bragging about lower prices and larger market share, while OS X backers cite high quality, reliable machines and the lack of significant malware penetration.
Today, however, an Israeli PC management firm has added a slight twist in the age-old Mac vs. PC debate. Between January 1st, 2013 and April 1st, 2013, Soluto monitored 150,000 notebook computers running Windows and analyzed the data from:
224,144 crashes
250,791 hangs
84,251 BSoDs
1,346,000 boot cycles
62,476 hours spent on boot
After analyzing the above data and giving each machine a "Soluto Score", the results of the study were quite surprising. The results showed that the most reliable "PC" was the 13" MacBook Pro (mid-2012 model) running Boot Camp.
Soluto attributes this victory to the fact that a MacBook Pro running a copy of Windows via Boot Camp is free of the typical bloatware that comes with a brand new Windows machine. To this point, Soluto opines, "PC makers should look at this data and aspire to ship PCs that perform just as well as a cleanly installed MacBook Pro."

To those that say that a clean install of Windows on a MacBook Pro isn't a fair comparison, Soluto offers this consolation, "One could argue that we should not compare a cleanly installed MacBook Pro with an OEM-imaged PC from Acer or Dell… But – for this first report we simply compared the real PCs in the field, some with original images and some reinstalled by their users. We believe it’s more representative of reality."
Rounding out the top five entries were the Acer Aspire E1-571, Dell XPS 13, Dell Vostro 3560, and the Acer Aspire V3-771. The 15” Retina MacBook Pro, three more Dells, and a single Lenovo entry fleshed out the top 10. Notebooks from ASUS, Samsung, Toshiba, and Samsung were nowhere to be found on the list.
ZDNET's Ed Bott reckons that the reason for the strong showings by Acer and Dell in the study is the companies’ relatively bloat-free installs, with very few third-party utilities to muck with users' computers. On the other hand, Samsung, which didn't make the list, is notorious for filling machines with needless third-party software junk.

Sources: Soluto, ZDNet

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: uh, what?
By chemist1 on 4/26/2013 9:44:25 PM , Rating: 2

[quote from my post:]
2) Scientist or engineer that does a lot of coding: Linux or OSX, since both offer a native *nix interface, which is very power for code development.

I represent the engineering side of this coin. I would qualify your choice depending on what you are developing in particular. I'm not really sure what you are referring to as the *nix interface advantage. I'd probably give *nix the advantage for certain languages (like python) and command line interfaces. If you need an IDE, Eclipse works well enough, but I think Windows has the advantage once you get away from the command line (not really my thing, though). Matlab and Xilinx tools seem to be easier to use in Windows, though again, use of Xilinx at the command line and scripting was more natural on *nix. I've had better luck with Cadence ASIC design tools on *nix. What little I've done with CUDA was definitely superior in Windows. I have yet to find a situation in my field where OSX is better than or even equal to *nix so my choices end up being *nix or Windows depending on workload.

[quote from my post:]
3) Someone doing serious office productivity work (such as a scientist putting together publications incorporating text + equations + tables + graphics): Here OSX is the clear winner.

I'll agree that OSX is the winner here. Though, there are some things you can do to get a lot closer with Windows and *nix....Again, OSX is definitely the out of the box winner here, but it's not as if you are out of luck with a different platform. They just need a little help.

Thanks for your comments.

Regarding my point no. 2, by *nix I mean any flavor of Linux or Unix, which thus includes Apple's version of BSD Unix in OSX.

More importantly, in point no. 2 I should have been more precise and instead wrote: "Scientist or engineer that does a lot of coding using the command line interface." For most of our heavy-duty scientific computing, we did our development work locally on our personal machines, and then sent the jobs to one of our computer clusters (two use Linux, and the other uses OSX, which means Apple's flavor of Unix -- the commands are nearly identical). Interaction with the clusters, as is typical, was entirely through a *nix command-line interface. Thus doing our development work locally via a *nix command-line interface (I used OSX) made for much more seamless porting to the clusters. And of the three big OSes, only OSX and Linux offer native *nix command-line interfaces. Alas, I found that what you can get in Windows with Cygwin is a poor substitute. See also my response to Pirks, where I note that Linux is the standard at computationally-intensive scientific institutions like CERN, and it's the standard for a reason. If you're doing a very different kind of programming from the type of scientific computing that falls within my purview, the optimum OS could, as you point out, be very different.

I should add that the remainder of my scientific computing was done via Mathematica, which I assume runs equally well on all three platforms.

Regarding point no. 3, I respect what you are saying, but I think you may be overly minimizing what I suspect could be a substantial real-world difference in functionality between native OSX and Windows + add-ons. Please take a look at my reply to Nikon133, and note the extent to which I was stressing the navigation and windows management capabilities of the UI when I was writing my thesis. As I'm sure you can understand, I'm highly skeptical whether, under such conditions, Windows+the add-ons you mention could come close to providing the efficiency, ease and fluidity I got from OSX.

"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki