I don't think you can say that "Matlab is generally slower on Macs." Again,
it may be that an older version of Matlab is not as easily "compatible" with
your Mac OS (I seem to remember a thread, probably over a year ago, re:
having to compile mex files for SPM to function in older versions of Matlab
for Mac). But I really think the factors are whether your Matlab version can
run the version of SPM that you want to use AND the machine you're using has
good enough specs to optimally run SPM/Matlab.
BTW, if you're running Windows bootcamp on Mac, you can allocate more RAM to
bootcamp; although it will take away from whatever you are/will be doing on
Mac side.
-Julie
On 3/5/10 8:30 AM, "Josee Poirier" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi Julie,
>
> Thanks a lot for your response.
>
> Our Matlab version is actually even older (unless the version you indicated
> -2008- was a typo?), but it's good to know 2008 works well.
>
> I read the thread you're referring to (parallel/multi-core processing), not
> sure if it affects Windows/Mac differently, since the windows OS was
> bootcamp-installed on the Mac.. Our Mac is a 2x2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
> (6GB memory); in Windows, though, the memory is restricted to 1.8GHz.. You
> say your Windows is installed through Parallels (not Bootcamp), wonder if
> the use of Parallels vs. Bootcamp influences how well either side will
> perform..?
>
> So if I understand correctly, the Mac option might be a good one if the Mac
> has much better specs. But since Matlab is generally much slower on Macs
> than Windows, running SPM on Mac - even on a great machine -, we might not
> be better off than running it on a less impressive Windows?
>
> This surely is an oversimplification, but does it mean it comes down to SPM
> on Mac suffering fewer crashes and being able to do more if/thanks to strong
> specs, but being overall slower than on Windows?
>
> [Of course, that's assuming one's version of Matlab is new enough to work
> properly and efficiently on Mac Snow Leopard..]
>
> Thanks!
|