Reading mode: Light Dark

macs vs pcs - a quick poll

Go to last post
I just finished building my workstation PC, and I couldn't be more satisfied with everything, including the 64-bit Vista OS

I was specking it out for a few months and took a serious look at purchasing a Mac Pro workstation from Apple. Problem was, the Mac would have cost me thousands of dollars more for the same hardware performance.

My feeling on the situation is that as long as you purchase quality hardware for your PC (not the low-cost commodity junk found in most desktops sold at BB), and know and operate the OS properly (i.e. not downloading and installing every 'freeware' utility you stumble across on the net), you shouldn't have any [out of the ordinary] issues with a PC.

Remember, all hardware will eventually fail, but ‘cheap’ hardware seems to have a head start in that race.

As for the aesthetics, my workstation looks amazing (purchased a Silverstone TJ10 case), so I have no worries that I made the right decision all around. The machine is blazing quick, stable, and does everything that I could ask for. Less important for some, but the other reasons I purchased the PC are for the over-clock ability (additional performance for little extra cost), and the scalability of the hardware.

That said, my wife and I are now toying with the idea of purchasing a macbook pro to be used as the 'family/portable' pc…you know, get the best of both worlds.

--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

 
Lasse Eisele said:
Now that it's time to replace my Pentium IV computer, I'll be
considering a switch to Apple. I'm just afraid of the cost. Not only
are the Macs still rather expensive, I also have to replace
Photoshop, MS Office, Lightroom, PTGui and a lot of other programs,
some of them probably not even available for Macs. I'm afraid it's
going to be very expensive. OK, I understand I can run Windows on the
Mac but then I wouldn't take full advantage of the brilliant Mac
interface.
So, how do you do it?
Click to expand...
First, don't buy into the "Apple is more expensive" myth. While true a few years ago, it isn't any more. I just bought a 24" iMac in August and it was as cheap or cheaper than every PC I configured with equiavlent specs. When I factored in the included software, lack of security issues, and less general irritatin, it wasn't even close.

Most people look at the Apple lineup and see the iMac line starting at $1200 and think they are more expensive. Look at the iMac specs and then go to Dell or wherever and configure a PC with similar specs. I don't mean just the same amount of memory or whatever but EQUIVALENT quality AND quantitiy.

I just went to Dell's web site and configured an Inspiron desktop with similar features and it came to $1277 w/antivirus software and Roxio CD/DVD software to try to compete with the included software in the iMac. I configured a 20" digital montior w/webcam (to match the iMac display).

Other things to consider is usable life and resale value. A Mac will typically remain useful for a longer time than a PC. This isn't a hardware issue, it's a software issue. The newest release of OS X is compatible with machines several years old; the same cannot be said for Vista. Also, Macs retain their value much better than PCs. I don't have any numbers, but do a Google search and check out some of the research.

The first three software titles you listed are available on the Mac. My wife was worried about the same thing and I needed to be able to run 3D modeling from work, so I installed WMWare Fusion and run Windows XP on that with no trouble. I stay away from it as much as possible, but it's there if I need it.

I have yet to see anything done on a Windows computer that cannot be done on the Mac. The software may not be the same title, but you can do whatever you need. If you have to have a specific program for work, there is virtualization or you can install Windows to run natively from the hard drive.

Go to an Apple store and use the computers. Take some documents and pictures and use the machine like you would at home. The employees at the Apple stores are very helpful.

I chose to move to the Mac platform just because I was tired of all the little Windows problems. I was amazed that ALL of my peripherals just worked when I plugged them in. I didn't need any drivers - they just worked. In some cases, they work better (easier) than they did on the Windows computer.

I couldn't be happier...

--
**********************************************

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

http://www.wikihow.com/Use-Apostrophes
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors
 
Macs all the way.

Don't just rely on numbers (Ghz and Mhz) alone. Real world speed is what counts. Well-built PCs spec'd to the same numbers can match Macs, but most of the time knocking together a frankenstein PC yourself is going to produce a slower machine compared to a Mac in the real world. All the components on every Mac are designed to work together in unison - including the OS, and that equals more speed, more reliablility and probably more future-proofing.

I'm been using Macs professionally for 13 years, long before they went transparent / silver / trendy. I couldn't care less what they look like as mine sits under my desk. Take a G5 or Mac Pro apart to install RAM or similar and you can appreciate just how well they are put together. Dare I say it - a bit like Nikon v Canon in a way.
 
Guys, this thread can go on and on for another 20 years because Mac and Win camps have argued about superiority for last 20+ years already without final resolution (but for me ,personally, resolution came 5 years ago when I switched to Mac).

Let's put this discussion back to initial context of OP: he is not professional and he wants to enjoy photo processing platform. Honestly all these debates about faster processor, protection from viruses, technical specs etc mean little from end goal perspective.

For me 5 years ago criteria was simple:
  • I knew that I will be spending lots of hours experimenting with pictures,
  • I knew that pictures alone won't be in isolation so I had to integrate them seamlessly and neatly with the web design app and video processing (nothing professional, but with the goal of semi-professional look that stands out from crowd and pleases me)
So all this translated into single thing - usability/interface and efficiency:
  • screen should not be cluttered
  • real estate of the screen must be very useful
  • look and feel between all design apps (photo, video, music, graphic design etc.) should be similar for efficient workflow
Then I looked closely to past experiences in Windows and new venue of Mac. What struck me was that Mac OSX interface/usability philosophy exactly met my requirements:
  • Apple enforces strict abidance by software usability standards - hence user interface is intuitive and well thought across all (or most) applications. In Windows it is relatively a chaos.
  • The above point creates illusion of seamless integration between different applications like photo, video, web design etc. Hence provides efficient workflow
  • context driven menu and smartly organized toolboxes save expensive monitor real estate. Look at Windows apps, MS Word's cascade of menu bars and toolboxes is taking already 1/3 of the screen. In fact MS Word/Excel version for Mac OSX is more efficient to use than in Windows. This eliminates screen clutter, which is very important when you deal with photo and other content rich media.
  • overall organization of Desktop and Mac OS X is just pleasure to work with for long hours
So when I said in my previous postings that Mac OS X is the best platform in terms of efficiency in getting top results in photography and related fields - that is what I meant.

Of course, if you plan to use only one app, and don't plan to spend hours and hours creating stuff, and will be opening one-two windows only - then why bother going with Mac?

I deliberately am not touching here design of the boxes, or power of the CPUs or other technical differences/advantages, cause these are really secondary compared to usability. All in all, you are not going to use Mac/Windows as a database or web server to care lot about these specs. Besides, from hardware performance perspective Mac/Win are comparable.

--
MrZ
LIVE LIFE LIVELY
'Life is too short not to enjoy gadgets - but don't overkill it'
 
It's the OS. Unix-based with a Mac. When I had a PC, I had to format the hard drive every 12-18 months because of a gunked-up registry.

I couldn't care less about the hardware. Windows is just an awful OS fundamentally. Aqua, and the i-Apps are just icing on the cake.
 
TexasAg03 said:
First, don't buy into the "Apple is more expensive" myth. While true
a few years ago, it isn't any more. I just bought a 24" iMac in
August and it was as cheap or cheaper than every PC I configured with
equiavlent specs. When I factored in the included software, lack of
security issues, and less general irritatin, it wasn't even close.

Most people look at the Apple lineup and see the iMac line starting
at $1200 and think they are more expensive. Look at the iMac specs
and then go to Dell or wherever and configure a PC with similar
specs. I don't mean just the same amount of memory or whatever but
EQUIVALENT quality AND quantitiy.

I just went to Dell's web site and configured an Inspiron desktop
with similar features and it came to $1277 w/antivirus software and
Roxio CD/DVD software to try to compete with the included software in
the iMac. I configured a 20" digital montior w/webcam (to match the
iMac display).
Click to expand...
The iMac isn't very expensive if you can live with 1 GB RAM. But if I want 4 GB RAM, I'll have to add almost 50 percent to the initial cost (Mac RAM is horrendously expensive). Please consider also that prices are already 50 percent higher here in Sweden. I would end up paying something like $2600. And if I would like to add even more RAM, well, it's not possible. So how future proof is that machine? The Mac Pro is another story. Fully featured with enough RAM and a high quality monitor, it costs more than two D300's. Wonderful computer though.
TexasAg03 said:
The first three software titles you listed are available on the Mac.
Click to expand...
Sure, but I have already paid for that software once, don't want to pay again.
TexasAg03 said:
I chose to move to the Mac platform just because I was tired of all
the little Windows problems. I was amazed that ALL of my peripherals
just worked when I plugged them in. I didn't need any drivers - they
just worked. In some cases, they work better (easier) than they did
on the Windows computer.

I couldn't be happier...
Click to expand...
I know from my own experience that Mac is better, just don't know if I can afford one.

Regards
Lasse
 
Lasse Eisele said:
The iMac isn't very expensive if you can live with 1 GB RAM. But if I
want 4 GB RAM, I'll have to add almost 50 percent to the initial cost
(Mac RAM is horrendously expensive). Please consider also that prices
are already 50 percent higher here in Sweden. I would end up paying
something like $2600. And if I would like to add even more RAM, well,
it's not possible. So how future proof is that machine? The Mac Pro
is another story. Fully featured with enough RAM and a high quality
monitor, it costs more than two D300's. Wonderful computer though.
Click to expand...
Mac RAM is no more expensive than PC RAM.
Apples just charges more for it.

So, buy it somewhere else.
 
prefer the operating system , swapped platforms 4 yrs ago. Also colorsync is a good thing IMO. Also spend less time rebooting,defragging,and doing general maintenance .

Bought my wife one a year ago, she says she doesn't like it. But I don't have to listen to her gripping about her computer from the other room any more. She would never admit to it though. It is really a matter of which operating system an individual prefers.
Like the nikon canon thing, both are good, it s a matter of preferences.
--
Tony G-J.
 
although I've used macs before, I do not have extensive experience...and so i need a little help here.

If I'm using Photoshop on a Mac, and Photoshop on a PC, how do they differ from a usability standpoint?! They're the same applciation, no?!

You make reference to some mac-bundled photo publishing tools and such, which I understand to be quite nice to use...but other than those tools which will be used for putting together a photo album, how is it easier to edit photos on a mac vs a pc. This is where i'm a little confused?

thanks.

--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

 
The application is the same. Photoshop is no better/worse on a Mac as it is on a PC.

The hardware is no better/no worse.

The OS is what's better. Built on Unix. Is scriptable. No registry. Files can be moved on the hard drive while they are open, etc. It's just a much better experience.

We haven't even mentioned the wealth of intelligent software by the large developer community. The cry "there's no software for the Mac" is not true. There is are so many free/cheap useful apps for OS X.

Can someone who has used both systems stick up for Windows? I haven't seen that yet in this thread.
 
Keith Knipling said:
The application is the same. Photoshop is no better/worse on a Mac
as it is on a PC.
Click to expand...
yeah, that's what I figured...I just keep hearing (and reading) people say that its so much easier to do thise things on a mac, and it doesn't compute with me (pun not intended)
Keith Knipling said:
The hardware is no better/no worse.
Click to expand...
agreed...
Keith Knipling said:
The OS is what's better. Built on Unix. Is scriptable. No
registry. Files can be moved on the hard drive while they are open,
etc. It's just a much better experience.
Click to expand...
yes, I know Unix well, and understand its virtues as an OS vs windows (DOS).
Keith Knipling said:
We haven't even mentioned the wealth of intelligent software by the
large developer community. The cry "there's no software for the Mac"
is not true. There is are so many free/cheap useful apps for OS X.
Click to expand...
I'd like to hear more about this (never really considered it to be honest), so I'll do a little digging on the net.
Keith Knipling said:
Can someone who has used both systems stick up for Windows? I
haven't seen that yet in this thread.
Click to expand...
that would be an interesting read... ;)

regards
--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

 
Lasse Eisele said:
The iMac isn't very expensive if you can live with 1 GB RAM. But if I
want 4 GB RAM, I'll have to add almost 50 percent to the initial cost
(Mac RAM is horrendously expensive). Please consider also that prices
are already 50 percent higher here in Sweden. I would end up paying
something like $2600. And if I would like to add even more RAM, well,
it's not possible. So how future proof is that machine? The Mac Pro
is another story. Fully featured with enough RAM and a high quality
monitor, it costs more than two D300's. Wonderful computer though.
Click to expand...
I bought 4GB of RAM from Otherworld Computing for $150.
Lasse Eisele said:
Lasse Eisele said:
The first three software titles you listed are available on the Mac.
Click to expand...
Sure, but I have already paid for that software once, don't want to
pay again.
Click to expand...
That is an issue, although if you are going to upgrade that software soon, the price differential isn't as great. I'm lucky since I didn't have any expensive software on my PC.

--
**********************************************

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange

http://www.wikihow.com/Use-Apostrophes
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors
 
Hey Emeka,

If you use Photoshop CS family alone and nothing else - then it is almost the same wheither you use Mac or Windows. In fact Photoshop CS family is like extra OS itself...if you know what I mean :-)

I am using Aperture as central piece in my Nikon -> Aperture -> Photoshop/Capture NX -> iWeb (web design) -> iPhoto -> GarageBand -> iMovie/Final Cut Express -> Maya 8.5 workflow.

All these apps seamlessly integrate with each other:

I use Aperture to store my original photos, various version of the same photos, and i do quick photo editing (both manual and batch) - usually this app is 95% enough to get photos ready
If i need super effects or many layers compositions then I use Photoshop

If I desperately need to use U-point features for important and tough to fix shoots I use Capture NX (which, unfortunately, has horrible and antiquated interface and primitive versioning functionality),

then for eye pleasing and Ajax enabled albums I use iPhoto (both for web publishing and preparing books to be printed)

for richer Web page content I use iWeb (pics/video with textual follow-up, blogs, podcasts)
for rich Podcasts with embedded photo and voice/music overlay I use GarageBand
for movies iMovie/Final Cut Express
for animation/design Maya 8.5

All of those apps seamlessly integrate with Aperture as center piece, orchestrating app (well Maya is the only exception, cause they don't follow Apple's interface guidelines). More specifically, as example, from within each app you see shared by Aperture assets, not just as a file system, but organized and easily searchable albums and pics. Dialog boxes, structure of windows/toolbox sub-sections and the content is similar from look and feel perspective across multiple apps. So you have illusion that in fact it is all one big app, and no clutter.

This may not be issue for you. But for me doing this workflow almost on daily basis and spending many hours on this task - it means a lot.

I can't imagine how long it would have taken for me to achieve decent results in Windows, besides I didn't want to spend years to learn each key app. In Mac though it took me a year to perfect all but Maya apps skills, which itself is lifetime learning beast.... :-)
Emeka U said:
although I've used macs before, I do not have extensive
experience...and so i need a little help here.

If I'm using Photoshop on a Mac, and Photoshop on a PC, how do they
differ from a usability standpoint?! They're the same applciation,
no?!

You make reference to some mac-bundled photo publishing tools and
such, which I understand to be quite nice to use...but other than
those tools which will be used for putting together a photo album,
how is it easier to edit photos on a mac vs a pc. This is where i'm
a little confused?

thanks.

--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

Click to expand...
--
MrZ
--
LIVE LIFE LIVELY
'Life is too short not to enjoy gadgets - but don't overkill it'
 
Emeka U said:
yes, I know Unix well, and understand its virtues as an OS vs windows
(DOS).
Click to expand...
I'm sure that you are aware that Windows shed its DOS roots when Dave Cutler came over from DEC and built Windows NT from the ground up. The DOS window is just a command shell since then.
Emeka U said:
I'd like to hear more about this (never really considered it to be
honest), so I'll do a little digging on the net.
Click to expand...
There are vibrant developer communities for every operating system you can name. Windows just has the biggest community ... which kind of makes sense with such a huge market share.

--
http://letkeman.net/Photos
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com
 
Kim Letkeman said:
I'm sure that you are aware that Windows shed its DOS roots when Dave
Cutler came over from DEC and built Windows NT from the ground up.
The DOS window is just a command shell since then.
Click to expand...
Hi Kim...yes I'm very aware of this, guess I was just referencing that it still works the same...knowhatimean?! I knew someone would call me on that though :P

--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

 
  • Colour management is superiour to XP and OSX (check http://www.outbackphoto.com/tforum/viewtopic.php?TopicID=2518 )
  • Hardware is cheaper, easier to customize to your needs and easier to repair
  • There're more windows freeware tools available for photographers
  • Upgrading your hardware is MUCH cheaper if you're ready to exchange motherboard, CPU and graphic card by yourselve
  • You don't get trapped by the iProduct hype ;-)
If you're purchasing new hardware DON'T make the mistake to stick with XP 'cause the crowd tells you so. I've upgraded to Vista two weeks ago and was surprised how easy everything was compared to all the XP installations I did before. Quad core cpu's a are much better supported in Vista, the aero desktop is MUCH faster since it went vector based (like aqua). Working with CS3 with several applications open is a hell of a lot better than in XP. Workflow is also faster 'cause the thumbnail previews make application switching easier for me. Although some drivers are still to be improved most of the issues are solved as far as I have experienced. The lastest nVidia drivers e.g. are REALLY fast. And the soon to be released service pack will improve the performance much more although I actually don't have a problem with that so far.
 
My friend, that's a problem. We are entangled in this vicious cycle of putting together greatest and bestest beast and proud that it is cheapest possible solution.

But..we forget that in the end it is the result of our creative process that matters whether done on Windows or Mac. Creative process is through:
  • knowledge of domain (photography in this case),
  • knowledge and availability of the right tools (software)
  • pleasure of workflow and fast quality results.
What I am saying that re last two bullets Mac is unbeatable. Who cares is it the fastest per buck machine or not?? I it is not like I am professional and have to produce tons of pics where every megahertz matters.

Any cost saving thoughts based on purely on hardware spending is just illusion. In the end - how fast you get great results, how happy you are with your results and how least frustrated you are. In that respect - Mac is way cheaper :-)

Having said that if you compare apples-to-apples the specs of hardware and software that you bundle with it, Mac is still beating Windows. I don't know where you got that Mac is very expensive....??
Emeka U said:
I just finished building my workstation PC, and I couldn't be more
satisfied with everything, including the 64-bit Vista OS

I was specking it out for a few months and took a serious look at
purchasing a Mac Pro workstation from Apple. Problem was, the Mac
would have cost me thousands of dollars more for the same hardware
performance.

My feeling on the situation is that as long as you purchase quality
hardware for your PC (not the low-cost commodity junk found in most
desktops sold at BB), and know and operate the OS properly (i.e. not
downloading and installing every 'freeware' utility you stumble
across on the net), you shouldn't have any [out of the ordinary]
issues with a PC.

Remember, all hardware will eventually fail, but ‘cheap’ hardware
seems to have a head start in that race.

As for the aesthetics, my workstation looks amazing (purchased a
Silverstone TJ10 case), so I have no worries that I made the right
decision all around. The machine is blazing quick, stable, and does
everything that I could ask for. Less important for some, but the
other reasons I purchased the PC are for the over-clock ability
(additional performance for little extra cost), and the scalability
of the hardware.

That said, my wife and I are now toying with the idea of purchasing a
macbook pro to be used as the 'family/portable' pc…you know, get the
best of both worlds.

--
I likes shootin' things with them new-fangled picture-takin' devices! :D
VISIT OFTEN: http://emeka.smugmug.com (comments welcomed)

Click to expand...
--
MrZ
--
LIVE LIFE LIVELY
'Life is too short not to enjoy gadgets - but don't overkill it'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top