marcstreeter
Distinguished
I would probably say that in some ways this is the best selling point Windows has - native driver support. That's why just about any component of home-brewed computer will run well (notice I didn't say configuration since some components just don't get along) and run the speed its supposed to run because every ability that *that* particular component has is supported(or recognized) under the driver being used. Fast forward to OS X and the drivers are pretty sparse, and when you do have a driver (for hardware not made by Apple) it is rarely of the same quality of its Windows counterpart. Heck its more of an afterthought when compared. Case in point : Logitech. Blech. Native support doesn't always mean you are getting the same thing. It just shows where the company's priorities are (usually expressed by the number of experienced programming personnel they are willing to put on payroll to support your platform). Apple is no saint here either (probably noticeable in this article's comparison of Windows and OS X performance for Safari even on a Hackintosh). Now fast forward *a lot* to the Hackintosh community that has sprung up around Apple's use of the intel architecture. You have less people working on their own pet projects in even less organization than those employed in the companies that produce substandard drivers that "work" already. Result : drivers that "work *sometimes*". This is not to say that their efforts are fruitless or useless. In truth, they are doing an amazing job of leaping over restrictions that Apple has purposely placed to prevent such a community. But there is a realization that many of us, me included, come to: native drivers on slower hardware will run circles around any PC hotrod that has been hacked to "work". I repeat, drivers that "work" to allow the use of a component on your particular machine's OS (in this case OS X) don't necessarily mean that they are using *all* of the capability of the component, just enough so that it fulfills the word "works". Most of the experience I have had with shoddy driver performance on Hackintosh's in general is the graphics card. The usual litmus test for graphics cards within the Hackintosh community is whether or not you get QE/CL working (usually visible if the ripple effect is present when you add a widget ). I have found that is not sufficient. For more info on why that is I invite you to read up on tonymacx86's forums. But if you have used a Hackintosh and used a (spec's wise) slower Macintosh you will be astonished to find that expected performance can be deceiving. Especially with web browsing. One example is when I "upgraded" from an iMac Core 2 (dual core) to a Hackintosh i5(quad core) you'd think I could reap the benefits of a drastically (spec's wise) faster computer. Not so. True *some* things are drastically faster. And some things are slower, browsing included. Why? My own lack of expertise in making a Hackintosh? Probably. The effect of being hacked in the first place. YES. One should not expect full performance in a hacked environment. Don't fool yourself and don't do tests on hacked hardware and publish the results like anything but an article for the Hackintosh community. If anything the title of this article should say "Browser showdown on *my* Hackintosh show that OS X browsers are catching up" and then at the end put the disclaimer that "Not all Hackintosh computers (even with the EXACT same configuration) are the same. Duh" instead of putting the most important piece of information at the end. Yes, the scope of your audience has been limited to just 1 computer, but at least you keep your credibility for the future.
-Marc
I thought I would just through in the definition of hack (from a computing perspective, source is http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hack ):
Hack: 1) Originally, a quick job that produces what is needed, but not well.
-Marc
I thought I would just through in the definition of hack (from a computing perspective, source is http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hack ):
Hack: 1) Originally, a quick job that produces what is needed, but not well.