Best desktop computer for photography work.

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Questions thread
glasswave Forum Pro • Posts: 10,268
Re: Best desktop computer for photography work.

glasswave wrote:

Mark K wrote:

theJuke2 wrote:

I'm trying to look for a new desktop which will be dedicated just to my photography work and I won't be using it for anything else. I am a PC person by nature, but I am not opposed to Mac. What are the pros and cons? Everyone I talk to seems to prefer Mac. I'm trying to find some PC users (or past PC users) to get their input and see how they feel about the Mac/PC comparison for photography work. If you are a past PC user, why did you switch? I'm looking for the pros and cons for each. (Please don't give me the "Macs don't get viruses" reason, and please don't tell me that Macs are made with all Mac hardware and processors - that isn't true any more.) I'm looking purely for functionality. Thank you!

I am PC man as well. Years ago I understood Mac was made for graphics and that was the only solution.

That is completely wrong.

pc's were the only  ($50K unix workstaions excepted) solution for 24bit color image editing until the early 90's. Macs soon developed a lead in color management, but were slower and outrageously more expensive than pc's until the mid 90's. The power pc conversion gave Macs an slight performance edge for a  brief while, but intel processors soon caught up to their RISC counterparts. Windows NT/2000 was a better os than os7-8. OSx and the switch to intel again leveled the playing field, but by then Apple was well on its way to becoming a consumer electronics firm and computers were taking a back seat to ipods/itunes and then iPhones. Windows color management has slowly caught up and here we are today.

Bottom line -- boths macs and pc's have been viable color content editing/creation systems since the early 90's.

However, recent development of Adobe showed the other way round. Current PC with good enough hardware can run Adobe or other photo editing software smoothly. There is no comparable hardware in Mac world, unless you go for Mac Pro.

Also, wrong.

iMacs are fine photo editing solutions. Yeah, they aren't as upgradable, but their OS is arguably built upon a more stable platform and their displays are top notch.

For that department, any upgrade is painfully expensive. If you don't mind spending tons of money, Mac Pro is a better choice.... because Mac Pro can utilize multiple CPUs .

Multi CPU pc's are also an option, but you simply aren't going need multiple cpu's for photo editing.

The Juke wrote:

If you are going to say that a person's response is wrong, please explain why. I'm looking for information on all sides of this issue right now. Thanks.

Glasswave responds:

How's that? Also, see my other posts.

-- hide signature --

There is simply too much beauty in the world to photograph it all, but I'm trying.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow