Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Questions
Sonyshine
Sonyshine Veteran Member • Posts: 8,891
Re: No.

Clearly someone who has never used both systems. Once you have moved away from Windoze there is no going back. 

 Sonyshine's gear list:Sonyshine's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Apple iPhone SE
Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 13,700
Re: Windows machines cheaper than Mac

steven168z wrote:

Mac only have one maker.

Windows have many OEM maker coy which lower down the Cost of Ownership.

Windows has only one maker.  Hardware that can run Windows has many makers, including Apple.  But Windows is proprietary, and the only PC OS that tried to be "a better Windows than Windows" (namely, OS/2) is long dead, despite IBM's backing and IBM's access to early Microsoft code.

Likewise, cost of ownership is not the same thing as cost of initial purchase.  Cost of ownership is a measure that takes into account many more variables, including performance, reliability, cost to repair, longevity, effect on human productivity, and residual sales value.

Sonyshine
Sonyshine Veteran Member • Posts: 8,891
Re: Windows machines cheaper than Mac

Something which many Windoze fans overlook too is that MACs can run faster on seemingly less powerful hardware because of the excellent OS and integration of hardware and software. MACs don't suffer from bloatware like Windoze does.

 Sonyshine's gear list:Sonyshine's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Apple iPhone SE
danijel973
danijel973 Contributing Member • Posts: 851
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

There have been many responses already but I'll add my experience.

For photographic work, I don't think you'll see much difference one way or another. Both have sufficient hardware and the OS is more than capable enough. Adobe software works on both and I don't think there are significant speed differences.

That said, there are "general computing" differences that you might consider. For instance, Mac has a unix OS so it is quite easy to do command-line scripting in several languages (php, perl, python...) which you can combine with command-line tools such as dcraw or imagemagick in order to automatize certain kinds of image processing. Furthermore, using rsync as a backup tool can be quite useful. So if you have a background in linux, solaris or something similar, Mac's command line will feel like home. If you don't, you probably won't miss it because the rest of the OS works more-less the same as Windows GUI. Mac's built-in backup tool, the time machine, seems to work better than the Windows equivalent, though.

Both operating systems have their share of glitches that manifest occasionally, but they are placed differently. For instance, on Windows I had instances of my Logitech keyboard not working, so I had to unplug the unifying connector and plug it back into the USB port in order to reset things. On my Mac, every month or so the keyboard gets stuck into autorepeat mode, repeating the last character a hundred times or so before it goes away. Both have their stupid background services that occasionally rev up the CPU and HDD doing something useless and you wonder WTF now, but Windows is more annoying with its update policy. Also, a Mac has a different keyboard layout and getting special characters such as @, {}[ ] etc might be quite unfamiliar at first, but you learn it quickly.

You'll pay less for a PC, but not so much less if you really configure it with top spec components, but at least you'll know what you're getting. On the other hand, a Mac feels more elegant and I grew to like it very quickly.

So generally speaking the differences are not all that significant if you don't use unix shell, but if you do, then a Mac becomes a significantly more versatile machine, which is why many scientists, programmers and system administrators use it as their machine of choice: it is as usable as a linux box but without the warts, and you can run the same commercial software as on Windows.

 danijel973's gear list:danijel973's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Sony Alpha a7 II Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +13 more
EricWN Senior Member • Posts: 2,125
Re: Yes: Retina Display.
2

Sonyshine wrote:

MAC's are simply the best.

Best build.

Best screen.

Best software.

Best operating system.

Best reliability.

Buy one and find out for yourself.

Its true you know. 

Your postings seem to have the exact cult-follower charm that people so often criticize about Mac users. I guess you think the same about Sony, given your forum name? This and the fact that you still refer to Windows as "Windoze" shows me how serious one can take your contribution to the topic.

Sonyshine
Sonyshine Veteran Member • Posts: 8,891
Re: Yes: Retina Display.

True. I am a MAC fanboy......after using Windows since version 3.1 through 95, 98, and the disaster that was Vista before I bought a Mac. I have never looked back since.

 Sonyshine's gear list:Sonyshine's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Apple iPhone SE
absentaneous Contributing Member • Posts: 532
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

there are no pros and cons that are not limited to personal preferences. the only difference is really that with a mac you are stuck with what they offer you which is not always the best one can find on the market. with a PC you can really tailor it down to your preferences completely.

it's just more "cool" to use a mac if that is important to you.

webrunner5
webrunner5 Senior Member • Posts: 1,346
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?
1

The one bad thing with new PC's now is that you are going to get Windows 8 on it like it or not. It is not a good thing to look forward to. Works nice for a smartphone. Not so hot for a desktop.

You can duel boot Apple computers now very easily. They use intel  CPU's just like PC's. So best of both worlds. Once you have used a Retina Display there is no going back.

 webrunner5's gear list:webrunner5's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Panasonic Leica D Vario-Elmar 14-50mm F3.8-5.6 Mega OIS Canon Pixma Pro-100 +3 more
absentaneous Contributing Member • Posts: 532
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

hjr13 wrote:

The same can't be said from what I see on pcs. Between hardware conflicts, viruses, etc there are problems that crop up all the time.

this is comparing apples and oranges. you are comparing one system (mac) that is optimized for one kind of software etc. and all kind of different configurations a pc may be based on. obviously there are tons of crappy pcs out there since basically anyone can build their own by simply putting all the different pieces together. so this myth you are repeating here is based on the fact that in this way you are basically comparing 2000$ worth hardware with hardware that may be worth as much as 300$.

what you should compare is a top of the line built pc in the same price range as what macs are sold for and what you'd get would be surely something that looks worse but that performs as good if not better than a mac.

it's the same kind of situation that is present on the mobile phone market where you get this iOS vs. android thing. android is obviously running on many devices that can't be compared to an iphone or something but compare an iphone with top of the line android devices and the winner won't be that clear and if there was a winner it probably wouldn't be the iphone.

Fat Dragon Regular Member • Posts: 192
Re: Stay away from Macs!
1

gaussian blur wrote:

Fat Dragon wrote:

Actually, the same local big U's very busy computer store discretely recommends Lenovo as the make that has proven most reliable.

That Lenovo and formerly IBM Thinkpads (not IdeaPads or even Thinkpad Edges) are the most reliable laptops on the market is no secret. They're built like tanks and sold at reasonable prices (often with three-year NBD warranties for no extra cost) to boot.

Must be somewhat of a secret, because Consumer Reports gave Apple a score of 78% for customer satisfaction, with Dell & Lenovo at 59%. It mentions the iMac repair rate at 7%, but not Lenovo's, which is presumably higher than Gateway (13%), which it does mention.

In a survey by the American Customer Satisfaction Index, Lenovo didn't even make the list, being lumped into 'others'.

And in PCWorld's most recent survey, Apple is #1 for reliability, with Lenovo in 4th place, although the scores were very close. However, unresolved problems were just 4% for Apple and 17% for Lenovo.

I never said Lenovo is the most reliable manufacturer. I said Thinkpads are the most reliable laptops. Apple gets good scores because they charge premium prices for every product they offer, so they offer premium service on them as well. If Lenovo dropped Ideapads, their ratings would skyrocket, just as HP's would if they only sold Probooks and Elitebooks and Dell's if they only sold Latitudes and Precisions. It's not just that these business-class notebooks are better-engineered, which they are, but that they have longer standard warranties and a completely separate support network, which, for each of those three manufacturers, puts AppleCare to shame.

The fact is that pretty much everybody but Apple makes cheap consumer laptops; throwaway electronics - buy one for $400 today, throw it away in a year and a half when it develops overheating problems that you don't have the knowledge to diagnose, and buy another one. Junk like that is their bread and butter and what they lack on margin they make up on volume. It drives their scores down for reliability and customer satisfaction, but it pays their bills, and in the end it means nothing with regards to their higher-end products.

danijel973
danijel973 Contributing Member • Posts: 851
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

webrunner5 wrote:

The one bad thing with new PC's now is that you are going to get Windows 8 on it like it or not. It is not a good thing to look forward to. Works nice for a smartphone. Not so hot for a desktop.

I bought a win8 laptop for my son some time ago and I must admit I'm not a big fan of this OS. All the "innovations" over Win7 feel like they were forced onto the system without real need and were not really well thought through, but it's reasonably easy to find one's way around them. So basically Win8 looks like a product of frankensteinization of Win7 and a smartphone environment, yes. I'm writing this on Mac Air and it's one of the nicest machines I ever had, but that Lenovo Ivy Bridge i5 machine I bought for my kid, it's a speed demon. It crunches bytes like crazy, it's completely reliable, very well made for its price point and I could live with it just fine, so it's not like there aren't great PCs around. Also, there are some incredibly reliable PC machines around; I bought an Acer laptop some 9 years ago and I still use it as a secondary machine. It's slow by today's standards but works fine.

So what I want to say is, a good machine is a good machine, no matter who makes it. For me, OS X and Linux work better than Windows environment but I have quite a specific set of needs for which I prefer unix.

 danijel973's gear list:danijel973's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Sony Alpha a7 II Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +13 more
MikeFromMesa Senior Member • Posts: 2,849
Re: Well, maybe. But ...

Najinsky wrote:

PC users who haven't used both PCs and Macs earnestly are not ideally placed to comment about the comparative experience. This of course will not stop them trying, but all they do is demonstrate they don't really appreciate the real world differences between a feature list and an actual experience.

I am not sure if this comment was directed specifically at me or not.

As someone who has worked repeatedly with and on Macs, I can say that I believe I have comparable experience with both machines and, for my use, I prefer PCs. It is not that I don't understand that others feel differently. They are free to do so and, for them, they are probably right. But there are those who have worked on and with both and prefer PCs. Is that so hard to understand?

I don't dislike Apple itself. I have an iPhone, an iPad and an iPod, all of which I like a great deal. I just don't much care for Macs and, given a choice, would prefer to work on either a PC or a Unix/Linux machine. And that is based on my "actual experience" with the Apple computers going all the way back to the Apple II.

Richard Veteran Member • Posts: 4,858
Mac is midrange at best

Majikthize wrote:

Every company makes some lemons, including Apple. Even so, it easily leads the pack in surveys on reliability and customer satisfaction. The support can't be beat, either, especially if you live near an Apple Store.

-- hide signature --

'No matter where you go, there you are.'

In a recent study, Asus produced the lowest percent of issues, Mac was in the middle and I believe HP was last.

As far as service, HP and Dell, ship you a box, you put it in the box, ship it off to a official place that all they do is repairs and they ship it back. Fast.

EricWN Senior Member • Posts: 2,125
Re: Yes: Retina Display.
1

Sonyshine wrote:

True. I am a MAC fanboy......after using Windows since version 3.1 through 95, 98, and the disaster that was Vista before I bought a Mac. I have never looked back since.

Maybe just consider that fanboy-ism is out-dated and generally not helpful at all. There's millions of people using Windows for millions of reasons.

I have a similar background story and experience to your own from what you mention here, but that does not make me a fanboy per se. i can see that each and every system has some plusses and some downsides.

Most of the user experience comes down to personal preferences and open mindset. If you cannot measure it in a scientific benchmark, it's probably down to taste.

EJ Fudd Senior Member • Posts: 1,348
Re: Are Macs better than PCs for photography work? If so, why?

Apple pics very good products to make it computers, Yes you can choose between vedio cards 2 of them..and if you spec out a PC to a MAC same specs, you will see there is not alot of cost difference. Yes you can buy a 500 laptop but you get what you pay for.

I did not buy a Mac for status symbol..I bought it because it works better...Like buying a toyota over a ford

-- hide signature --

Photography, It ain't the same old Art form it used to be..

 EJ Fudd's gear list:EJ Fudd's gear list
Canon EOS 30D Canon EOS 70D Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS +16 more
Richard Veteran Member • Posts: 4,858
PC is the superior tool for photo editing, here is why..
1

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!

The best tool is the one you can afford. But not only that, lets look by comparing two laptops. Lets assume you have both displays calibrated.. $1800 for the Macbook pro and $ 929 for the HP which is about half the price

The HP has a larger screen 17 which is better for editing, easier to see but you can get the smaller screen from HP if you want and it is less expensive.
In addition to the larger screen HP has double the Ram 8gb, a larger hard drive, 2 drive bays (actually 3 when you include the ability to run an micro SSD that can accelerate your larger spindle drives using intel rapid response storage driver) Blue ray player to play HD movies (HD movies streamed an not true HD) and a 2 year warranty. This laptop was on sale during Easter for $733, I always suggest waiting until a holiday to get sale prices on hp products.

Both laptops do the same thing because they both run photoshop, but the HP has a 2 year warranty, the mac has a 1 year warranty. At the end of the 2 year warranty on the HP for the same price as the mac, you can upgrade your hp to the latest version of laptop with newer and better hardware, the Mac is still stuck with the same hardware and will cost you double to upgrade. I see people with cellular phones upgrade their phones every two years but they must do sigh another agreement. HP you get to do this for free because the laptop is half price.

Trade offs, if you upgrade the memory on the mac to 8gb, you could upgrade the video card on the HP. So they are the same.

So in years 3 and 4 of your purchase, you will have given your still working HP laptop to give to your wife which she will love, you will have a brand new laptop with the latest and greatest hardware with another 2 year warranty which is superior to the 3 year old out of warranty mac, and you will have in speed and specs a far superior/faster system.

The other option is to take the $1000 and buy that new camera or lens you have been wanting, isn't that what photography is really about, the ability to take pictures and the HP laptop can include a free new camera. The HP allows you to that option as well, the Apple will have you sink all your money into a piece of computer hardware which does not help you when you are shooting in the field. Apple doesn't have less than 10 percent of the computer sales for no reason, there is a reason, the PC is superior because of the reasons I suggested, at least for a photographer.

http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MD103LL/A

http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Laptops/HP-Pavilion/A3G47AV?HP-Pavilion-dv7t-7000-Quad-Edition-Entertainment-Notebook-PC

15 macbook pro

  • 2.3GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB GDDR5 memory
  • 4GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
  • 500GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
  • SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
  • MacBook Pro 15-inch Glossy Widescreen Display
  • Backlit Keyboard (English) & User's Guide
Najinsky Veteran Member • Posts: 5,739
Re: Well, maybe. But ...

MikeFromMesa wrote:

Najinsky wrote:

PC users who haven't used both PCs and Macs earnestly are not ideally placed to comment about the comparative experience. This of course will not stop them trying, but all they do is demonstrate they don't really appreciate the real world differences between a feature list and an actual experience.

I am not sure if this comment was directed specifically at me or not.

As someone who has worked repeatedly with and on Macs, I can say that I believe I have comparable experience with both machines and, for my use, I prefer PCs. It is not that I don't understand that others feel differently. They are free to do so and, for them, they are probably right. But there are those who have worked on and with both and prefer PCs. Is that so hard to understand?

No, not at all, it wasn't directed at you personally. The target group was given in the text 'users who haven't used both PCs and Macs earnestly'. What I mostly mean is people who haven't owned OS X based Macs and tried to use them to be productive in their creative content environment (photography, videography, music production, design, etc) or even general purpose computing environment (mail, music, photos, video, office, browsing, hobby, etc).

And I already both specifically acknowledged and generally implied that some will obviously prefer PCs, it's just how people are and nothing wrong with that.

The main point was that throughout net land, I just see much more evidence of switchers who stay switched, than users of both who choose PCs. I don't claim it as an absolute, only a fairly apparent majority in favour of Mac.  And it's reflected in my own circles of friends and associates; I literally couldn't name 1 out of about 30 switchers I know who would say they prefer PCs. They all struggled, to varying degrees, to keep on top of their Windows PCs, but have nothing but praise for their Macs. They switched and are now on their 2nd, 3rd or even 4th Mac. It's what I see and believe.

The second point is that Macs and OSX are more meticulously designed through multiple levels of abstraction and from multiple contexts. Many users struggle to put it all into specifics, but they do latch on to how they combine to create a richer experience and will express it as; it just works; I get more done; It's more enjoyable to use, and so on. But then they get shouted at by PC users who just can't see why and demand specifics.

I don't dislike Apple itself. I have an iPhone, an iPad and an iPod, all of which I like a great deal. I just don't much care for Macs and, given a choice, would prefer to work on either a PC or a Unix/Linux machine. And that is based on my "actual experience" with the Apple computers going all the way back to the Apple II.

And I'm happy you're happy.

trac63 Contributing Member • Posts: 770
Re: Get a custom built PC if your main use is photo editing.
1

Fat Dragon wrote:

The other thing I'll mention is that, with desktop PC's, you can often get more component power for your buck by buying a big brand desktop like an HP or a Dell, counter to what you suggested. However, to get a reliable desktop with quality parts you will be better off building custom. It's actually really easy to custom-build a desktop yourself, too, you don't need a shop or a neighbor if you do a little research yourself.

The national brands like HP and Dell will entice customers with a faster CPU and more RAM at an attractive price point compared to a clone. However, the quality of the power supply and mechanical components (case, fans, heat sinks) in the national brands is usually not very good. OEM graphics cards are typically not as good as the retail version of the same card. Also, the national brand cases, motherboards and PSUs generally do not use a standard form factor like ATX, and are therefore not reusable.

It's really not difficult to build your own PC nowadays. Almost everything is built into the mainboard, and the days of having to set voltage ratios, IRQs, IO addresses and COM ports with jumper pins are long gone. The default settings in the BIOS are usually fine for anyone not trying to overclock. Installing your own OS is really easy too.

MikeFromMesa Senior Member • Posts: 2,849
Re: Well, maybe. But ...

Najinsky wrote:

The main point was that throughout net land, I just see much more evidence of switchers who stay switched, than users of both who choose PCs. I don't claim it as an absolute, only a fairly apparent majority in favour of Mac.  And it's reflected in my own circles of friends and associates; I literally couldn't name 1 out of about 30 switchers I know who would say they prefer PCs. They all struggled, to varying degrees, to keep on top of their Windows PCs, but have nothing but praise for their Macs. They switched and are now on their 2nd, 3rd or even 4th Mac. It's what I see and believe.

It has always seemed odd to me.

In all of the years that I worked as a software engineer before retiring I knew a lot of other engineers who had strong feelings about their personal computers. Almost everyone I knew had their own machines even though this started well before computers really took off as a commodity (I bought my first home computer about 1980 - a TRS 80). And by the mid 1980s people seemed to fall into one of 3 categories - the Apple people who thought PCs were junk, the PC people who thought Apple was a toy and, in my experience, the larger majority who thought that both were OK but generally bought the PC because it either suited the work they were doing "at work" or they felt it offered a larger number of apps. And this division never really ended through all of the years I was working as a full-time software engineer. I can remember the Mac people talking about "Windows 96" as a dig at Microsoft and its problems meeting deadlines right before the release of Windows 95. People on both sides of the divide are often pretty committed to their point of view and the belief that "the other side" is really "the dark side".

My personal opinion (now) is that Macs are fine machines with good technology, but PCs are both more "open" and more comfortable for what I do with them. If someone went out and bought me a MacBook I would probably happily use it, but probably end up putting Windows on it. I have too much software that won't work on OSX.

The one thing I do wonder about is how good Aperture is. I currently use LR and PhotoNinja as my main photo editing software, but also use CS5 and Sagelight as needed. I can't run Aperture because it is not available on a PC and I would not buy a MacBook just to use software I know nothing about, but it still leaves me wondering about Aperture.

My guess is that it is not much better than LR and PhotoNinja, but I don't know and, unless I end up renting a MacBook, I will probably never find out. One of the missed opportunities in life I guess ...

EricWN Senior Member • Posts: 2,125
Re: PC is the superior tool for photo editing, here is why..

Richard 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!

The best tool is the one you can afford. But not only that, lets look by comparing two laptops. Lets assume you have both displays calibrated.. $1800 for the Macbook pro and $ 929 for the HP which is about half the price

The HP has a larger screen 17 which is better for editing, easier to see but you can get the smaller screen from HP if you want and it is less expensive.
In addition to the larger screen HP has double the Ram 8gb, a larger hard drive, 2 drive bays (actually 3 when you include the ability to run an micro SSD that can accelerate your larger spindle drives using intel rapid response storage driver) Blue ray player to play HD movies (HD movies streamed an not true HD) and a 2 year warranty. This laptop was on sale during Easter for $733, I always suggest waiting until a holiday to get sale prices on hp products.

Both laptops do the same thing because they both run photoshop, but the HP has a 2 year warranty, the mac has a 1 year warranty. At the end of the 2 year warranty on the HP for the same price as the mac, you can upgrade your hp to the latest version of laptop with newer and better hardware, the Mac is still stuck with the same hardware and will cost you double to upgrade. I see people with cellular phones upgrade their phones every two years but they must do sigh another agreement. HP you get to do this for free because the laptop is half price.

Trade offs, if you upgrade the memory on the mac to 8gb, you could upgrade the video card on the HP. So they are the same.

So in years 3 and 4 of your purchase, you will have given your still working HP laptop to give to your wife which she will love, you will have a brand new laptop with the latest and greatest hardware with another 2 year warranty which is superior to the 3 year old out of warranty mac, and you will have in speed and specs a far superior/faster system.

The other option is to take the $1000 and buy that new camera or lens you have been wanting, isn't that what photography is really about, the ability to take pictures and the HP laptop can include a free new camera. The HP allows you to that option as well, the Apple will have you sink all your money into a piece of computer hardware which does not help you when you are shooting in the field. Apple doesn't have less than 10 percent of the computer sales for no reason, there is a reason, the PC is superior because of the reasons I suggested, at least for a photographer.

http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MD103LL/A

http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/home-office/-/products/Laptops/HP-Pavilion/A3G47AV?HP-Pavilion-dv7t-7000-Quad-Edition-Entertainment-Notebook-PC

15 macbook pro

  • 2.3GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB GDDR5 memory
  • 4GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
  • 500GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
  • SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
  • MacBook Pro 15-inch Glossy Widescreen Display
  • Backlit Keyboard (English) & User's Guide

No offence, but you are seriously suggesting to compare a cheap, crappy, HP plastic computer with a miserable resolution screen, inferior components etc to a Macbook with Retina Display and your main argument here is price? I'm not so sure I'd want to have this thing anywhere near me even if it were even cheaper than it is now.

It is 2.5 pounds (!!!) heavier than the MacBook. If you work with a MacBook daily, you'll feel the difference. It's like going back to stone ages.

A Mac user, after 3-4 years of ownership (your example above) will sell his old Mac and get a new one. yes, that's right, used Macs have at least a resale value, unlike PCs who are considered junk and waste the minute you switch them on.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads