Mac or PC For workflow........

Scott · Nov 20, 2000

Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc. I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However, what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20 years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Ger Bee · Nov 20, 2000

You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000 on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it? Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18 months?

Then you have the iMac (1 ~~1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time? Good. From a PC soso!!~~

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

lloyd chambers14736 · Nov 20, 2000

This doesn't address the workflow question very well at all, which is what the original question is.

Macs are quite competitive with PC pricing. I think this post is quite misleading on the price subject.

Ger Beee said:
You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?
Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18
months?

Then you have the iMac (1 1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time?
Good. From a PC soso!!

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

Tom DeRousie · Nov 20, 2000

Scott,

I use both Mac and PC here at Modern Imaging. While there are pros and cons to both platforms, there is no showstopper advantage to either. If you took away all of one or the other platform (machines), the only reason that I would be hurting is all our profiling software is Mac only. Color management is better integrated on the Mac, but the PC platform is coming along. Macs tend to hold their value much better than PC's. Remember, anyone that tells you that PC's crash and Macs don't is lying or is playing with semantics since Macs "bomb" (rather than crash). Both platforms have their share of bugs. Now, had you asked this question 3 years ago, I would have told you that the Mac platform was better for graphics.

Tom DeRousie
http://www.modernimaging.com

Scott said:
Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so
bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which
platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as
workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc.
I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do
apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However,
what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20
years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image
processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to
Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no
more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Andrew Rodney · Nov 20, 2000

Ger Beee said:
But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?

$5K? Man I'd like to be the guy selling you a mac Seriously you can get into a pretty fast Mac G4 with 512mb of ram, a dual video card set-up (for two displays), a SCSC card and all the trimings for not much more than $3K. I just purchased two G4's just before the dual came out (which is the same price I paid for my single 500mhz box) and I got away for about $3000.

Curt Austin · Nov 20, 2000

Scott wrote:
snip

Member said:
Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

snip

This is easy: Macs work best for me. My experience stretches back to an IBM 360/30 with ferrite core memory, and I've used PCs extensively. But I am delighted by Macs. Delighted! iBook with AirPort - delightful! A portable 12X CD-R with FireWire - delightful! A G4 tower unit with handles, flip down door, killer PS performance and an interesting shape - delightful! With a few precautions, never any trouble - very delightful! The promise of OS-X - well, probably delightful eventually.

Accountants, engineers (my first calling), and IT professionals think of computers only with their left brains. You are a photographer - an artist! - that's right brain stuff, and so is the Mac.

Ok, got carried away there - we all have left and right brains, but thought I would give a different answer than the others. I'm sure many notes are being written as I write this one. Most of them will be equally goofy, wrong, misleading, religious, whatever. The only truth: You'll need to live with a Mac for a while to understand if or how it is different than a PC.

stanton · Nov 20, 2000

Ger Beee said:
You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

Isn't that the point? I've heard more griping about Win2K than any other OS...ever.

Ger Bee said:
PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

As I said.

Ger Bee said:
But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?

You're obviously not buying Macs here in the states. The G4's are now starting at $1300. Two 128mb dimms at $150 each makes that $1600. Want a dual? $2400 will buy you a nice one.

Ger Bee said:
Can you afford Mac maintenance?

Mac maintainance??? I've been running Macs since 1987 and never paid a dime in "maintainance. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Can you afford to replace it in 18

Ger Bee said:
months?

Replace in 18 months???? I'm sitting here right now typing from my 1997 Mac 8600.I just got thru running MacBibble and Photoshop, downloading and editing today's images. I could have waited until getting to the office tomorrow morning, but why? My "old" PowerMac is quite up to the task, though not quite as fast as my G4 when it comes to images. Seems to me that its a trifle older than 18 months. But wait...Just in the other room lie one Mac 7100 and a 6100, both still active...fresh off the assembly line...in 1994. There are few Mac programs that REQUIRE software upgrades. It is rare when a Mac OS upgrade requires 3rd party upgrades just to run (most software).

Ger Bee said:
Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

This may seem so at first blush, but its really not so. You may have 1000 reasons to prefer your PC. PC may be the way for the original poster to go, but I have found that performance being equal for imaging, the PC, all things considered will not be cheaper nor a better value.

Stanton

Michael Martin · Nov 20, 2000

Ger Beee said:
You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?
Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18
months?

Then you have the iMac (1 1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time?
Good. From a PC soso!!

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

First of all I have a G4. It did not cost 5 GRAND. I got it last year when it first came

out and I payed $2800.00 for it. Now the same model with a dual processor
costs $2400.00 It was worth it.

Michael Martin · Nov 20, 2000

Scott said:
Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so
bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which
platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as
workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc.
I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do
apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However,
what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20
years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image
processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to
Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no
more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Last October I went to NYC to the big PHOTO PLUS EXPO and I noticed that
Kodak, Fuji, Canon and most other large camera companies selling digital cameras

and Adobe were using MACS. I then went back this year , after I've had my MAC G4 for a year, and

all of those companies were still using MACS. Most graphics and design people will

tell you that the MAC is the industry standard. After seeing MACs at the show for
2 years in a row I believe that the MAC is the photographic standard also.

Curt Austin · Nov 20, 2000

Since the price of G4's has come up, thought everyone should know that a rebate program just came into effect: $350 on 450 DP, $500 on 500 DP. So, a 450 DP costs $2150.

I learned this first from a salesman that called me up yesterday (Sunday!) from Apple. He said I could have another $100 off if I acted that day, and free shipping. I'm usually perturbed at junk calls, but the guy was polite, came right to the point, not pushy, and actually knew a lot of stuff. I didn't bite, since I just got one a few weeks ago. But I will soon need another, so I'm thinking about it.

His name was Pete, 800 409 5381 x2545

Jon J. Both (Edgeman) · Nov 20, 2000

Scott here is my experience relating to starting workin with a new OS

When I started to work with photography related manipulations was in 1985 I looked at the Mac, PC, Amiga...I chose the Amiga..Mac wasn't there yet & PC was even farther behind...yet I could run Mac & PC out of the Amiga which I did...Photoshop was just being released...I chose to try to gain experience on the PC side...time progressed...when it was time to step up to something new, that was 1991...I looked at the PC as I had Illustrator, Photoshop & some other software (not important)..I decided on the PC...then I read that the PowerMac was being released..so I decided to test them both...I had a Kodak PhotoCD cut with various images all the way up to the large 64 meg scans....I got a hold of a Super fast 486 66mhz 64 meg ram memory machine & proceeded to open the Image...it took 45 minutes to open that image ...then I opened that image on a PowerMac 6100 - 66 mhz 64 meg ram memory machine & opened the same image....it took 20 minutes to open the same image....right then & there I made up my mind...I went for the Mac..that was my first machine when the lease was finished I upgraded to a Mac 8500-133 mhz 192 meg of ram which I still have...I have a G4 now with 384 megs of memory...a dedicated Hard Drive just for PhotoShop to swap to it's a 4 GIG SCSI Seagate Barracuda Drive the other drives are standard IDE "there are three" total to 60 Gigabytes of Hard drive space......and let me tell you my Mac never BOMBS, as someone put it.. some crappy programs like Netscape & Explorer will cease to work but all I do is I quite the BAD application & restart the software to continue...the Mac is very reliable I am currently using (OS 9 )....a new OS that will be released next year (currently in Beta) OS X (10) will be based on the UNIX platform and should kick ass for sure...all G4's & G3's laptops will be compatible with this OS.

I know it's hard to make a decision which OS..Mac or Windows..because you probably have software that you are using right now...but believe me it will be worth it to switch to the Mac..I promise, you'll love it.

Jon J. Both
Edge Photo/Graphics Services
Winnipeg, MB Canada

Scott said:
Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so
bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which
platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as
workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc.
I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do
apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However,
what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20
years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image
processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to
Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no
more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Art Boyle25973 · Nov 20, 2000

Hi,

If you already have a Win machine then stay with that. I use both a G4 and two Win 2000 machines. The Windows 2000 machines are much more stable than my G4, but I really like my Mac simplicity better.

My Mac is a little faster that my Win 2000 in most PS filters but were talking 10 to 15 seconds here. The Win 2000 machine does not crash as much and multitasks much better...I can print an 11 x 14 to my Epson and work on another file without any slow down on the Dell while the Mac just can't do this without slowing to a crawl and often crashing and trashing your print and an expensive piece of paper. Colorsync makes things easy on the Mac but for some reason I getter more accurate results with my icc profiles on the Dell and an LaCie Electron Blue monitor. I think that this may be an Epson profile issue not a fault of the Mac.

Also if you get the D1, which I also have, then the PC has more software options. Bibble has much more advanced features on the PC side than MacBibble and now includes Firewire support for the D1. Also QImage is a great little D1 program not available on the Mac. There are a number of D1 oriented programs for the PC that you can't get on the Mac or are in much more advanced stages in the PC version. I'd say the worflow edge with the D1 makes it a PC choice on a close call overall.

lloyd chambers said:
Macs are quite competitive with PC pricing. I think this post is
quite misleading on the price subject.

Ger Beee said:

You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?
Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18
months?

Then you have the iMac (1 1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time?
Good. From a PC soso!!

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

Click to expand...

Jerry Lockard · Nov 20, 2000

Scott,

Perhaps I should not reply, as I am not a professional photographer. But, like you have several years of photography as a serious hobby under my belt. A couple of years ago I got hooked on digital photography...

Now I am a PC man, I have 3 young adult children -- college/highschool .. and I maintain 3 PC towers, 5 PC laptops, 3 laser printers and 4 color printers. That is just the ones that are actively in use by my immediate family. Once you have headed down the PC or MAC path for a while, it is hard to look the other way. A comfort level develops, including the quirks you deal with all the time.

I have photoshop 6, genuine fractals, Bibble, QImage Pro, Corel's full package, Corel Knockout and a variety of odds and ends. But, I was sure waiting a lot on filters and adjustments to pictures - in particular when I was dealing with large 40 to 60 MB files.

So, I looked at Twin Processor's and Win 2000 (so I could run more memory effectively), and I looked at the dual processor G4. In the end I went with the dual processor G4 and added another 1024 of memory (for $850.00 total). I have dedicated about 800 MB of memory to Photoshop 6 on the MAC, and there is no doubt which system is faster. If you want a fast computer, with a large amount of memory (which makes PS6 just coast along), then I think you are hard pressed to beat the MAC.

Now there is a learning curve (long time MAC users have just forgotten). For one steeped in DOS, then every WIN version up to current Win98SE -- the MAC made me feel like a neophyte again in many areas (and it has been over a decade since I felt like that on a home computer system - - it was a very strange feeling).. but it has been rock stable, and although I have had to purchase MAC software in duplicate to what I already owned.. it is fast, and I like its color management. So far, I have no regrets. I have not personally worked with a better "photography digital darkroom".

Workflow .. I still have both up and I am not sure there is a lot of difference - but again, I am much more grounded in the PC side, so I am still learning MAC shortcuts. Work speed .. is very different- which I believe is based on total memory available and management of it by the OS. Colormanagement - again, I am not a pro, but I like the MAC here. Small odds and ends programs - favors the PC in availability. Major programs - most available for both.

Sorry, I got long winded, but had spent many long hours researching the same general question for myself. Good luck in your decision making.

Jerry

Dave -oz · Nov 20, 2000

& you can get a dual processor for pc if you need to.,
I agree with Art Boyle
Dave

Art Boyle said:
If you already have a Win machine then stay with that. I use both a
G4 and two Win 2000 machines. The Windows 2000 machines are much
more stable than my G4, but I really like my Mac simplicity better.

My Mac is a little faster that my Win 2000 in most PS filters but
were talking 10 to 15 seconds here. The Win 2000 machine does not
crash as much and multitasks much better...I can print an 11 x 14
to my Epson and work on another file without any slow down on the
Dell while the Mac just can't do this without slowing to a crawl
and often crashing and trashing your print and an expensive piece
of paper. Colorsync makes things easy on the Mac but for some
reason I getter more accurate results with my icc profiles on the
Dell and an LaCie Electron Blue monitor. I think that this may be
an Epson profile issue not a fault of the Mac.

Also if you get the D1, which I also have, then the PC has more
software options. Bibble has much more advanced features on the PC
side than MacBibble and now includes Firewire support for the D1.
Also QImage is a great little D1 program not available on the Mac.
There are a number of D1 oriented programs for the PC that you
can't get on the Mac or are in much more advanced stages in the PC
version. I'd say the worflow edge with the D1 makes it a PC choice
on a close call overall.

lloyd chambers said:

Macs are quite competitive with PC pricing. I think this post is
quite misleading on the price subject.

Ger Beee said:

You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?
Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18
months?

Then you have the iMac (1 1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time?
Good. From a PC soso!!

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scott · Nov 20, 2000

Dave........Yes, I can get a dual CPU PC. There are many ways to do that. I built my own PC rather than buy retail, so as to to facilitate any upgrading that I might have to do, which has been the case for me the past 12 months.

Scott

Dave said:
Art Boyle said:

If you already have a Win machine then stay with that. I use both a
G4 and two Win 2000 machines. The Windows 2000 machines are much
more stable than my G4, but I really like my Mac simplicity better.

My Mac is a little faster that my Win 2000 in most PS filters but
were talking 10 to 15 seconds here. The Win 2000 machine does not
crash as much and multitasks much better...I can print an 11 x 14
to my Epson and work on another file without any slow down on the
Dell while the Mac just can't do this without slowing to a crawl
and often crashing and trashing your print and an expensive piece
of paper. Colorsync makes things easy on the Mac but for some
reason I getter more accurate results with my icc profiles on the
Dell and an LaCie Electron Blue monitor. I think that this may be
an Epson profile issue not a fault of the Mac.

Also if you get the D1, which I also have, then the PC has more
software options. Bibble has much more advanced features on the PC
side than MacBibble and now includes Firewire support for the D1.
Also QImage is a great little D1 program not available on the Mac.
There are a number of D1 oriented programs for the PC that you
can't get on the Mac or are in much more advanced stages in the PC
version. I'd say the worflow edge with the D1 makes it a PC choice
on a close call overall.

lloyd chambers said:

Macs are quite competitive with PC pricing. I think this post is
quite misleading on the price subject.

Ger Beee said:

You could stick with the PC and spend 2Gs on a new one with Win2000
on it. Rock stable and fast -- except for PhotoShop6.

PhotoShop6 has proved problematic on too many Win2000 machines.

But a new G4 will set you back 5Gs. is the extra speed worth it?
Can you afford Mac maintenance? Can you afford to replace it in 18
months?

Then you have the iMac (1 1½ Gs) nice, buying for the first time?
Good. From a PC soso!!

Macs are nice but a properly tuned PC and experienced users will
get as good overall performance and more reliability and much, much
cheaper replacement cycles (even at two years).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scott · Nov 20, 2000

Gentlemen.......

Many many thanks to all of you guys for responding to my question, as well

as allowing a non professional to enter this forum and seek out some information.

Sincerely...

Scott

Jerry said:
Scott,

Perhaps I should not reply, as I am not a professional
photographer. But, like you have several years of photography as a
serious hobby under my belt. A couple of years ago I got hooked on
digital photography...

Now I am a PC man, I have 3 young adult children --
college/highschool .. and I maintain 3 PC towers, 5 PC laptops, 3
laser printers and 4 color printers. That is just the ones that
are actively in use by my immediate family. Once you have headed
down the PC or MAC path for a while, it is hard to look the other
way. A comfort level develops, including the quirks you deal with
all the time.

I have photoshop 6, genuine fractals, Bibble, QImage Pro, Corel's
full package, Corel Knockout and a variety of odds and ends. But,
I was sure waiting a lot on filters and adjustments to pictures -
in particular when I was dealing with large 40 to 60 MB files.

So, I looked at Twin Processor's and Win 2000 (so I could run more
memory effectively), and I looked at the dual processor G4. In the
end I went with the dual processor G4 and added another 1024 of
memory (for $850.00 total). I have dedicated about 800 MB of
memory to Photoshop 6 on the MAC, and there is no doubt which
system is faster. If you want a fast computer, with a large amount
of memory (which makes PS6 just coast along), then I think you are
hard pressed to beat the MAC.

Now there is a learning curve (long time MAC users have just
forgotten). For one steeped in DOS, then every WIN version up to
current Win98SE -- the MAC made me feel like a neophyte again in
many areas (and it has been over a decade since I felt like that on
a home computer system - - it was a very strange feeling).. but it
has been rock stable, and although I have had to purchase MAC
software in duplicate to what I already owned.. it is fast, and I
like its color management. So far, I have no regrets. I have not
personally worked with a better "photography digital darkroom".

Workflow .. I still have both up and I am not sure there is a lot
of difference - but again, I am much more grounded in the PC side,
so I am still learning MAC shortcuts. Work speed .. is very
different- which I believe is based on total memory available and
management of it by the OS. Colormanagement - again, I am not a
pro, but I like the MAC here. Small odds and ends programs -
favors the PC in availability. Major programs - most available for
both.

Sorry, I got long winded, but had spent many long hours researching
the same general question for myself. Good luck in your decision
making.

Jerry

Kevin Allen · Nov 21, 2000

Scott said:
Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so
bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which
platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as
workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc.
I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do
apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However,
what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20
years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image
processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to
Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no
more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Climb up on the couch

We will dispense with the childhood and size of your Mothers breasts and go straight onto the prognosis.

I think you have been seduced by a Mac. Are you trying to find a reason to buy a Mac. It's like sex really, it does not matter what tricks you perform the end result is all the same! ...... but getting there .

I use a Mac, there are no hard and fast rules that say one is better than another...... its a tactile thing. Why does one person choose one make of car and somebody else choose something different, each will swear that theirs is best.

A Mac works best for me, I supply images to people on both platforms, Mac people appear to have less problems than PC people, but that may be down to the fact that Mac users like the machine with enthusiasm ( like a Harley owner would not by a Jap bike) so they spend time working on its idiosycnrsys.

If your heart wants a Mac, you can not argue with it with your brain, (your brain makes decisions your heart nags. Nagging always wins ask any Husband).
Just get what you realy want, it does not have to have ryhme or reason.
Just Desire
Regards,
Napoleon (emperor)

Scott · Nov 21, 2000

Kevin said:
Scott said:

Gentlemen...........As the thread subject indicates, may I be so
bold as to ask....In everyone's "professional" opinion, which
platform seems to work the best for all of you in so far as
workflow in general, speed, ease of use, Photoshop stability, etc.
I use a PC as of now and PS4.01, with no Mac experience to date.

I am not a professional as most of you are, therefore I do
apologize for the intrusion upon this professional forum. However,
what better place to seek advice than here, as I do have over 20
years of photograghy under my belt.

Currently, still using film with Nikon LS2000 scanner for image
processing in photoshop with my PC, but close to converting to
Nikon D1. PC is sometimes buggy under photoshop, but probably no
more than normal for a PC.

Again......professional opinion-----what seems to work better for
all of you.....PC or Mac.

Sincerely appreciate your time and advice,

Thanks... Scott

Click to expand...

Climb up on the couch
We will dispense with the childhood and size of your Mothers
breasts and go straight onto the prognosis.
I think you have been seduced by a Mac. Are you trying to find a
reason to buy a Mac. It's like sex really, it does not matter what
tricks you perform the end result is all the same! ...... but
getting there .
I use a Mac, there are no hard and fast rules that say one is
better than another...... its a tactile thing. Why does one person
choose one make of car and somebody else choose something
different, each will swear that theirs is best.
A Mac works best for me, I supply images to people on both
platforms, Mac people appear to have less problems than PC people,
but that may be down to the fact that Mac users like the machine
with enthusiasm ( like a Harley owner would not by a Jap bike) so
they spend time working on its idiosycnrsys.
If your heart wants a Mac, you can not argue with it with your
brain, (your brain makes decisions your heart nags. Nagging always
wins ask any Husband).
Just get what you realy want, it does not have to have ryhme or
reason.
Just Desire
Regards,
Napoleon (emperor)

Mr. "Napoleon".......

I do believe you you are probably right.....I have the quirks of the PC platform down pretty well, and yes......the" heart" is most likely seeking out the Mac as new OS to learn. Some of my closest friends have BOTH PC and Mac and enjoy both. But...thanks for the lesson in heart and brain thinking!!! The nagging seems to be the strongest at this point.
And my wife is fine thank you....HA!

Thank you again....

Scott

Ger Bee · Nov 21, 2000

Actually I did want a Mac but could not buy one in a shop, 6 years ago. The dam things are made in my hometown and that hometown is not in the US. Here, where they are made in Cork (European HQ) they cannot be bought from a shop but through a dealership which then gets your model 'built' for you.

The price is DOUBLE that quoted here. I am in fact buying one now for a partnership and I have the quotations and a maintenance contract is 'built-in' another example of inflating the price. If I could indeed buy the Mac G4 twins for £2,400 I would. My price is £4,850 plus £500 for generic (non Apple) monitor, £1,600 for ISDN card.

Again European logic boards are sourced differently and do in fact last only one year with constant use, I firmly believe you when you say you get and expect better lifespans but I have been personally involved with five over the last two years, all went right on the button. I did bring this point up with our dealer and he agreed and said they’d replace the first one free, they are giving only one year’s guarantee on this component against three years and lifetime on most other parts.

It looks like a proposition to fly to the USA have a weekend break and fly home with all our Mac requirements and still have change to spend in the pub for what we have to pay here for inferior equipment.

Andrew20621 · Nov 21, 2000

Honestly, it doesn't really matter.

I've used Photoshop extensively on both platforms, and I prefer it on a PC. But then, I'm a PC guy. It also works well on Macs. I've seen computers running both platforms that were so messed up they would need years of therapy to run without problems. I've also seen system on both platforms that are as steady as a rock as you're going to get in a computer.

Now I have recently used PS6 on a faster computer than I am used to (I would guess 700 to 800 mhz), and PS is fast on it. I mean blazing fast. It can open full sized 3.3mp images in maybe a second. And Intel just released their P4s at 1.5 ghz in a Dell system for less than $2,000. Sounds like a good deal.

But then again I'm a PC guy. But in all honesty, I have to admit those Cubes are cool. I like the idea of their size and the fact they don't have a fan. Which brings me to laptops.

If you look at laptops, I think in the $2,500 range Macs are the best choice. They offer better graphics support and probably comparable speed. If you might look for a $1,000-$2,000 laptop, PCs are the ONLY choice.

I really don't know if this helps, but let me sum it up this way. I like Macs better until I have to use them.

Mac or PC For workflow........

Scott

Guest

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Jon J. Both (Edgeman)

Guest

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Scott

Guest

Scott

Guest

Kevin Allen

Guest

Scott

Guest

Forum Pro

Member

Keyboard shortcuts