This question should get some lively comments going.
I'm thinking of how to configure my next computer system and whether to make the switch to Mac now, before I get any more curmudgeonly and set in my ways. I'm thinking that 4 Gigs of RAM should hold me for awhile and maybe a RAID system with a terrabyte of storage would be cool, but I don't want to break the bank, either. And then there's the big question: Is there really any good reason why a nature photographer needs a MAC vs: a PC???
So, if you just bought a system or have been kicking similar questions around in your head, what system and setup would you go with?
Posted by Rick Dunn on January 11, 2007 at 7:12 PM
I just bought a Mac Pro this week, switching from Dell. I went with 2GB of memory but plan to add another 2; Apple charges a ridiculous amount to go from 2 to 4. For hard drives, I went with a 500GB and, again, plan to add more for a RAID system. I was running with 2GB of RAM on my Dell and it was sufficient; not blazing fast, but okay. 4GB will let PS use what it can without taxing the system.
I went through the same Mac vs PC questions. I have a lot of programs that won't transfer directly to a Mac version. Also, a new Dell with 4GB RAM and 1 TB of hard drive space configured for RAID 1, with a 24" ultrasharp widescreen display was about $700 less than my Mac Pro w/ 23" Cinema display. More RAM, more storage, less money.... Tough call. Plus, I'll add some cost for new software for the Mac. For reasons I don't still understand - partly system stability, partly the cool factor, and partly that my wife was picking up a Mac Book Pro - this seemed like the time to make the switch. I did like - very much - that the Mac Pro has 4 hard drive bays that I can continue to add to for storage. But to answer your question, I couldn't think of anything that a PC would have 'prevented' me from doing from a photography perspective. I certainly didn't feel limited by my Dell.
All I can say is that if you're one who tends to be pragmatic and/or budget-minded, stay away from the Apple store. Unless you look at the iMacs, going Mac will almost certainly cost you more than going PC; but once you go in there, it's tough to think about going back to a utilitarian PC!
Posted by Jesse Speer on January 11, 2007 at 8:47 PM
I don't think PC vs. Mac really matters. But the new Mac Pro can't be beat right now. Get a basic system from Apple (albeit the best Mac Pro you can buy), and soup it up yourself.
The Mac Pro would be ideal ideal for an internal RAID setup, as has been mentioned - with the 4 bays. The first link below offers various options for setting up RAID disks. I'm using their internal disks in my Mac. Also consider SoftRaid software, which will notify you if there is a problem with the RAID (Apple's Disk Utility doesn't do this, but it's free). This software also allows you to set up some very cool RAID options (like hot-swapping a third disk, etc.).
And never buy RAM from Apple. Go 3rd party. I've used Ram Jet for years.
http://www.macsales.com/
http://www.ramjet.com/
Posted by Kalin Wilson on January 12, 2007 at 3:02 AM
I agree with Jesse, I don't think there is any longer a clear advantage to the Mac for graphics/photographic work over the PC as there was years ago. I was looking for an interesting article or book forward to this affect that I read recently but couldn't find it, sorry.
So if you can produce the same quality images and manage them similarly on either platform it really comes down to cost or aesthetics. I think the PC will usually beat Mac cost-wise, especially on hardware, and will definately have a wider selection of software available although what you want for photo work is probably available on both.
I can't comment on the quality or cost of Dell or any of the other makes of PCs, I build my own. I pick cases that give me lots of space for hard drives and I pick components that are near the bleeding edge when I build so the system will last for awhile, but I also build systems with upgrade room. The trade-off is I'm my own technical support which can be a pain when something isn't quite right.
In my house I run AMD-64 systems, both single and dual core, normally with at least 2GB, and 250GB or more storage in non-RAID, RAID-0, and RAID-1 configurations. My personal system has a 3.2Ghz processor with 2GB of RAM using a 120GB, 200GB, 2x300GB in a RAID-0, and 2x120GB in RAID-1 in terms of hard drives. ~Did I mention I was a geek?
Pick up a Computer Power User magazine and take a look at the ads to get an idea of the range of computers you can get from quality builders (with support) other than Dell.
As you probably know, lots of memory and fast drives will make any system, mac or pc. Get as much as you can afford.
Now that the Apple Cinema monitors can be used with PC's, I'm much more tempted to browse the Apple store. :)
Good luck!
Posted by Brad Beeler on January 12, 2007 at 1:16 PM
I'll throw in another vote for the MAC, I got a Mac Book Pro about 4 or 5 months ago, and I'm in love. I spend upwards of 10 - 15 hrs a day in front of a computer, and I cant wait to afford to replace my desktop Windows box.
As far as processing images, there are lots of articles out there showing the performance of Photoshop being slower on the new Intel based Macs. I can say it is slower, but not by much, and certainly not to an unusable state. Too Adobe should be relasing the new universal version of Photoshop in 2007.
That's my .02
Posted by John McMillin on January 27, 2007 at 2:28 AM
You might check out Ken Rockwell's essay on the mac's merits at this link: http://www.kenrockwell.com/apple/why-pros-use-mac.htm In his typical blustery, one-sided manner, the Bill O'Riley of DSLR Blogs, is right on with this topic. Mac sells the best hardware, in the best designs, with the best software inside. Try it. you can't lose. If you decide that despite general critical accalim, OS X isn't your favorite, you can load the Apple with Windows and be on your way. But OS X was powerful enough, run every computer at JPL's control room during the landing and operation of the Mars rovers, I noticed at the IMAX movie. Consumer Reports rates Apple's reliability and service at the top. I sold my four-year-old eMac for 3/4 of my purchase price, so I owned it for about $50 a year. Viruses, what are these "viruses"? Those are some of my testimonials, but not all.
Unless your boss orders you to use Windows or else, you have a choice. But you don't really own that choice unless you take it. There's never been a better, or safer, time to make the switch.
Discussion
5 repliesI'm thinking of how to configure my next computer system and whether to make the switch to Mac now, before I get any more curmudgeonly and set in my ways. I'm thinking that 4 Gigs of RAM should hold me for awhile and maybe a RAID system with a terrabyte of storage would be cool, but I don't want to break the bank, either. And then there's the big question: Is there really any good reason why a nature photographer needs a MAC vs: a PC???
So, if you just bought a system or have been kicking similar questions around in your head, what system and setup would you go with?
here's a thread that took place a little while back discussing questions similar to yours; might provide helpful thoughts and opinions.
I just bought a Mac Pro this week, switching from Dell. I went with 2GB of memory but plan to add another 2; Apple charges a ridiculous amount to go from 2 to 4. For hard drives, I went with a 500GB and, again, plan to add more for a RAID system. I was running with 2GB of RAM on my Dell and it was sufficient; not blazing fast, but okay. 4GB will let PS use what it can without taxing the system.
I went through the same Mac vs PC questions. I have a lot of programs that won't transfer directly to a Mac version. Also, a new Dell with 4GB RAM and 1 TB of hard drive space configured for RAID 1, with a 24" ultrasharp widescreen display was about $700 less than my Mac Pro w/ 23" Cinema display. More RAM, more storage, less money.... Tough call. Plus, I'll add some cost for new software for the Mac. For reasons I don't still understand - partly system stability, partly the cool factor, and partly that my wife was picking up a Mac Book Pro - this seemed like the time to make the switch. I did like - very much - that the Mac Pro has 4 hard drive bays that I can continue to add to for storage. But to answer your question, I couldn't think of anything that a PC would have 'prevented' me from doing from a photography perspective. I certainly didn't feel limited by my Dell.
All I can say is that if you're one who tends to be pragmatic and/or budget-minded, stay away from the Apple store. Unless you look at the iMacs, going Mac will almost certainly cost you more than going PC; but once you go in there, it's tough to think about going back to a utilitarian PC!
The Mac Pro would be ideal ideal for an internal RAID setup, as has been mentioned - with the 4 bays. The first link below offers various options for setting up RAID disks. I'm using their internal disks in my Mac. Also consider SoftRaid software, which will notify you if there is a problem with the RAID (Apple's Disk Utility doesn't do this, but it's free). This software also allows you to set up some very cool RAID options (like hot-swapping a third disk, etc.).
And never buy RAM from Apple. Go 3rd party. I've used Ram Jet for years.
http://www.macsales.com/
http://www.ramjet.com/
So if you can produce the same quality images and manage them similarly on either platform it really comes down to cost or aesthetics. I think the PC will usually beat Mac cost-wise, especially on hardware, and will definately have a wider selection of software available although what you want for photo work is probably available on both.
I can't comment on the quality or cost of Dell or any of the other makes of PCs, I build my own. I pick cases that give me lots of space for hard drives and I pick components that are near the bleeding edge when I build so the system will last for awhile, but I also build systems with upgrade room. The trade-off is I'm my own technical support which can be a pain when something isn't quite right.
In my house I run AMD-64 systems, both single and dual core, normally with at least 2GB, and 250GB or more storage in non-RAID, RAID-0, and RAID-1 configurations. My personal system has a 3.2Ghz processor with 2GB of RAM using a 120GB, 200GB, 2x300GB in a RAID-0, and 2x120GB in RAID-1 in terms of hard drives. ~Did I mention I was a geek?
Pick up a Computer Power User magazine and take a look at the ads to get an idea of the range of computers you can get from quality builders (with support) other than Dell.
As you probably know, lots of memory and fast drives will make any system, mac or pc. Get as much as you can afford.
Now that the Apple Cinema monitors can be used with PC's, I'm much more tempted to browse the Apple store. :)
Good luck!
As far as processing images, there are lots of articles out there showing the performance of Photoshop being slower on the new Intel based Macs. I can say it is slower, but not by much, and certainly not to an unusable state. Too Adobe should be relasing the new universal version of Photoshop in 2007.
That's my .02
Unless your boss orders you to use Windows or else, you have a choice. But you don't really own that choice unless you take it. There's never been a better, or safer, time to make the switch.