See, we both have a good sense of humor.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Mac v. PC
- Thread starter Mental
- Start date
;-)android604
Member
Both will work great.
PC is better value. At the office with tested single Pentium 4 3 ghz against G5 dual 2ghz both with 2 gig ram. We work with satellite images.
PC opened and modified a 2 gigabyte TIF much faster than the MAC - 30% faster. Neither computer crashed, both finished the process correctly. We now have 3 of these P4's.
Buy what you can afford, and you will get more value for dollar from a PC but both will work.
Andrew
PC is better value. At the office with tested single Pentium 4 3 ghz against G5 dual 2ghz both with 2 gig ram. We work with satellite images.
PC opened and modified a 2 gigabyte TIF much faster than the MAC - 30% faster. Neither computer crashed, both finished the process correctly. We now have 3 of these P4's.
Buy what you can afford, and you will get more value for dollar from a PC but both will work.
Andrew
Kjeld Olesen
Senior Member
I am a PC user and have had my fair share of Mac use at work, where we had a DNA sequencing software funning on a Mac. That was one of the most unstable and unlogical setups I have ever. I would not recomend a MAC over PC for any purpose - today that is. In the past, obviously MACs had their strong points, but no more.
Kjeld Olesen
http://www.acapixus.dk
--
Kjeld Olesen
http://www.acapixus.dk
Kjeld Olesen
Senior Member
True, it may look good, but if you want to do critical color editing, no labtop LCD are up to the task.
As far as your other praises of MAC I can say just the same - just the other way around ;-)
And I have had my fair share of Mac use at work, where we had a DNA sequencing software funning on a Mac. That was one of the most unstable and unlogical setups I have ever experienced - and I had no idea how to troubleshoot it. Trouble shooting a PC is easy - if you know what you are doing of cause ;-)
--
Kjeld Olesen
http://www.acapixus.dk
Kjeld Olesen
Senior Member
Mental
Well-known member
Thanks...man i have learned a lot here...but what i want to know is which one will give me the best pixs from my 10D...or does it matter?
It's all between you and the camera. Photoshop is the same in the PC or Mac. Good luck,
Rich
Rich
Chris Ventura93896
Forum Enthusiast
I think everyone is entitled to have an opinion. I know of people who will suggest a FORD over a Mercedes. It just amazes me how many design professionals use the mac and not the pc. In the past year, I have been to well over 15 design confrences, and well over 95% were using the mac platform.
The latest article in DESIGN GRAPHICS stated that the new dual G5 system outperformed the dual 3 GHZ XEON by a factor of two. Twice as fast when using graphics applications.
The PC is great when the work isn't criticle, and you don't mind leaving much of your productivity up to chance.
DNA sequencing sounds like the perfect thing to do on a PC. Creative professionals need a better tool for the job than Windows XP.
The latest article in DESIGN GRAPHICS stated that the new dual G5 system outperformed the dual 3 GHZ XEON by a factor of two. Twice as fast when using graphics applications.
The PC is great when the work isn't criticle, and you don't mind leaving much of your productivity up to chance.
DNA sequencing sounds like the perfect thing to do on a PC. Creative professionals need a better tool for the job than Windows XP.
Sean Lowrey
Leading Member
I manage computers and technology for multiple states and multiple locations. I own both Macs and PC's at home. I also have had a lot of laptops in both platforms. The following are personal opinions:
I sold my 15" Titanium 1Ghz machine with 1GB of ram because of the benefits did not outweigh the price. I found that my PC laptop that cost me about $500 bucks was just as fast and did what I needed just as well.
Be careful of what others claim. I have found that MAC users are a cult group kinda like Unix users or Linux users. Often people state that their Mac boxes never crash which for them maybe they don't. But for a lot of people they do.
I find that I do not care for Mac Monitors vs. PC based monitors. I find that there are things that I do not like about OSX, as well as WinXP.
They both do what you need and speed is all relative. My opinion? Purchase a PC laptop and invest the money into quality lenses, licensed software and spend time shooting and post processing and enjoy the hobby.
Sean
http://www.mmsean.com
http://pbase.com/slowrey
I sold my 15" Titanium 1Ghz machine with 1GB of ram because of the benefits did not outweigh the price. I found that my PC laptop that cost me about $500 bucks was just as fast and did what I needed just as well.
Be careful of what others claim. I have found that MAC users are a cult group kinda like Unix users or Linux users. Often people state that their Mac boxes never crash which for them maybe they don't. But for a lot of people they do.
I find that I do not care for Mac Monitors vs. PC based monitors. I find that there are things that I do not like about OSX, as well as WinXP.
They both do what you need and speed is all relative. My opinion? Purchase a PC laptop and invest the money into quality lenses, licensed software and spend time shooting and post processing and enjoy the hobby.
--
Sean
http://www.mmsean.com
http://pbase.com/slowrey
Ben Lanterman74611
Senior Member
I have a nephew in full time advertising work who has both and perfers a Mac.
I have a Mac G5 dual processor machine and a 20 inch wide Apple flat screen monitor and like it a lot except which it freezes up - Once every couple of days or so. Two much old junk on it I think. But it is very very fast.
I use a PowerBook G3 and like it to download and look at on location but have also bought a SmartDisk Flash Trax for temporary storage.
--
Ben Lanterman
http://public.fotki.com/benlanterman/
http://webpages.charter.net/benlanterman/Index.html
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=208093
I have a Mac G5 dual processor machine and a 20 inch wide Apple flat screen monitor and like it a lot except which it freezes up - Once every couple of days or so. Two much old junk on it I think. But it is very very fast.
I use a PowerBook G3 and like it to download and look at on location but have also bought a SmartDisk Flash Trax for temporary storage.
--
Ben Lanterman
http://public.fotki.com/benlanterman/
http://webpages.charter.net/benlanterman/Index.html
http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=208093
Greg Matty
Senior Member
Compare a recent model of each and decide which you like best, neither will improve or degrade your photos.
As a Mac person, I get a little grief from people in the office. We recently changed accounting systems from Mac's to PC's and people say things like, "See, I told you PC's are faster than Mac's and you didn't believe me did you?" Well stupid you are comparing a brand new 2.4 ghz P4 to a four year old 300mhz iMac. Of course the PC is quicker.
I swear to god this type of thing happens in the real world all the time. People compare a new PC to an old Mac and can't believe how much better it is. I hate stupid people.
I love my dual G5 and much prefer it to a PC. If for no other reason than I don't have to worry about 99.99% of the computer viruses.
Good luck.
Greg
As a Mac person, I get a little grief from people in the office. We recently changed accounting systems from Mac's to PC's and people say things like, "See, I told you PC's are faster than Mac's and you didn't believe me did you?" Well stupid you are comparing a brand new 2.4 ghz P4 to a four year old 300mhz iMac. Of course the PC is quicker.
I swear to god this type of thing happens in the real world all the time. People compare a new PC to an old Mac and can't believe how much better it is. I hate stupid people.
I love my dual G5 and much prefer it to a PC. If for no other reason than I don't have to worry about 99.99% of the computer viruses.
Good luck.
Greg
Mental
Well-known member
Thanks again friends....i know what you mean about stupid people Greg...the reason i asked this question is i took some pixs to the local neighborhood newspaper and when she downloaded them on her computer the quality was far better than my new pc...she said that was because she was using a mac and they were far better than pcs for digital imaging...i came here to get different view points as i felt that maybe she may have been partcal to macs...but i must say the images were really stunnig off her mac
Sean Lowrey
Leading Member
I have both macs and pcs and I don't think the mac makes my images look any better. Mac OS although tends to be a bit soft and not as sharp as windows. I believe it's tha Windows runs at 96dpi and Mac runs at 72dpi. Someone help me out if I got my numbers fuddled!
Sean
http://www.mmsean.com
http://pbase.com/slowrey
--
Sean
http://www.mmsean.com
http://pbase.com/slowrey
android604
Member
The reason it looked better on your friends Mac is because the colour configuration was done properly and your new PC wasn't.
What most people don't spend time on is configuring the computer. They plug everything in, turn it on and think everything is good to go. This may be, infact, more simple on a mac because you can buy a mac monitor, or maybe a mac monitor and you can even get a mac monitor... but on a PC you can get viewsonic, sony, bobs blown up screen, etc.
So, in conclusion, a local photography school here has a whole 6 hour course on how to properly configure computers for photography. Just to give you an idea that it isn't always plug & play. Once you set up, you don't need to change again.
I still think PC is best value... the $1000 you save on the PC can get you a really nice lense or a trip to someplace exotic to photograph, and after all its about the pictures, right?
Andrew
What most people don't spend time on is configuring the computer. They plug everything in, turn it on and think everything is good to go. This may be, infact, more simple on a mac because you can buy a mac monitor, or maybe a mac monitor and you can even get a mac monitor... but on a PC you can get viewsonic, sony, bobs blown up screen, etc.
So, in conclusion, a local photography school here has a whole 6 hour course on how to properly configure computers for photography. Just to give you an idea that it isn't always plug & play. Once you set up, you don't need to change again.
I still think PC is best value... the $1000 you save on the PC can get you a really nice lense or a trip to someplace exotic to photograph, and after all its about the pictures, right?
Andrew
William D. Sullins III O.D.
Member
Just to add what Chris posted... There is an open firewear hack to add monitor spanning capabilty (vs. mirroring) to the iBook. See http://www.rutemoeller.com/mp/ibook/ibook_e.html
Joe Gudac
Well-known member
I use both systems and have to lean towards the Mac. All the speed comparisons are a bunch of hype. Some programs load quicker on the PC, some on the Mac.
What it comes down to is find the software you need, and make sure it is available for the type of computer you want.
One big advantage I find that the Mac has is support. If I really screw up the System on a Mac and need to reinstall I can be back running will all applications in in about 30 minutes. I have blown my Windows XP twice this month and it takes me about 4 to 6 hours to get my Windows XP back and running.
Good luck and Happy Holidays!
Joe--
William D. Sullins III O.D.
Member
One factor to consider in your computer choice with the EOS-1OD is the screen's aspect ratio: the EOS CMOS produces images that are 1.5 times as wide as tall. My desktop monitor's resolution is 1280x1024. This 1.25 aspect ratio results in either a letter box effect or having to crop width out of the EOS photo to go full screen. The powerbook's resolution is 1280x854 as some other computer's aspect ratio is almost exactly 1.5, so images can proportionally be scaled to fill the screen.
Trey
Trey
Barry14748
Leading Member
I agree with you Andrew. The quality of the finished photo or match to the print depends on the person's knowledge of setting up color management on either platform, not on the platform itself. I use a PC at home and a dual 2Ghz Mac/Panther at work (commercial printing). Photoshop works pretty much the same on both OS'es. It all pretty much comes down to personal preference.....both OS 10.3 and Windows XP are equally reliable. The Mac has an edge in a mixed platform network as it will see legacy Macs and Unix servers and workstations. If I'm buying for myself I'll buy a PC every time because I can get an eqully fast machine for about half the price.
The reason they buy Macs at work is becuase they started out with Macs back in the day when Macs WERE superior for graphics work and have bought software over the years for them. To change platforms would mean buying everything new. That and the people who give buying advice used the Macs back then and are of the mindset that they are still superior. To me they're just more expensive.....
Regards!
Barry
EOS-10D, Canon 17-40 f/4L, Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Canon 50 f/1.8
The reason they buy Macs at work is becuase they started out with Macs back in the day when Macs WERE superior for graphics work and have bought software over the years for them. To change platforms would mean buying everything new. That and the people who give buying advice used the Macs back then and are of the mindset that they are still superior. To me they're just more expensive.....
--
Regards!
Barry
EOS-10D, Canon 17-40 f/4L, Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Canon 50 f/1.8
Stevejac
Leading Member
This is not to say the MAC is less stable than the PC but...
When my 1.2ghz athlon system circa 2001 choked on my 18mb TIFFs from my new digital rebel, I strongly considered getting a MAC. I went to the MAC tools forum on this site and asked questions. I was told about frequent crashes, poor or absent printer drivers, etc. Meanwhile, my old system, running Windows 2000 has crashed less than 10 times in more than 2 years and my 6mo old XP laptop has never crashed so far. The W2000 machine took 10-20 minutes to open a massive file but even this didn't make it crash.
My local IT folks got mad at me when they came to add a program to my NT machine at work. They want the machines logged out every night so they can remotely push software updates. They were angry since my machine had been logged in for 91 days straight in violation of their protocols.
Now I'm aware that bulletin board systems attract complainers... look at the 300D forum for an object lesson in this given that the digital rebel is everybody's camera of the year. Still, I was frankly amazed at the complaining over there.
So I bought a 2.8GHZ P4 with 1.5gb memory a month ago. Would a MAC be faster? Perhaps, but this is plenty fast right now. It hasn't crashed yet. I'd never suggest to a MAC person that they switch. As other posters mentioned, I don't know enough about the MAC to comment. But I gather it is far from bullet proof. And the NT/W2000/XP machines are light years better than the older Windows machines.
When my 1.2ghz athlon system circa 2001 choked on my 18mb TIFFs from my new digital rebel, I strongly considered getting a MAC. I went to the MAC tools forum on this site and asked questions. I was told about frequent crashes, poor or absent printer drivers, etc. Meanwhile, my old system, running Windows 2000 has crashed less than 10 times in more than 2 years and my 6mo old XP laptop has never crashed so far. The W2000 machine took 10-20 minutes to open a massive file but even this didn't make it crash.
My local IT folks got mad at me when they came to add a program to my NT machine at work. They want the machines logged out every night so they can remotely push software updates. They were angry since my machine had been logged in for 91 days straight in violation of their protocols.
Now I'm aware that bulletin board systems attract complainers... look at the 300D forum for an object lesson in this given that the digital rebel is everybody's camera of the year. Still, I was frankly amazed at the complaining over there.
So I bought a 2.8GHZ P4 with 1.5gb memory a month ago. Would a MAC be faster? Perhaps, but this is plenty fast right now. It hasn't crashed yet. I'd never suggest to a MAC person that they switch. As other posters mentioned, I don't know enough about the MAC to comment. But I gather it is far from bullet proof. And the NT/W2000/XP machines are light years better than the older Windows machines.
Really?
I can set my screen to:
1152x864 = 1.33
1280x768=1.66
1280x960=1.33
1280x1024=1.25
But I generally run in either 1024x768 or 1280x1024. I guess this could be nice to use an acact crop-factor for showing pictures to people on the screen. But, I don't think this would ever play any part in my decision making process for buying a computer.
Me-Confused
I can set my screen to:
1152x864 = 1.33
1280x768=1.66
1280x960=1.33
1280x1024=1.25
But I generally run in either 1024x768 or 1280x1024. I guess this could be nice to use an acact crop-factor for showing pictures to people on the screen. But, I don't think this would ever play any part in my decision making process for buying a computer.
--
Me-Confused
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum