Posted by Brian Monk on January 4, 2008 at 9:14 PM
My old (1 1/2 years!!) computer's hard drive crashed. Luckyt me, I at least backed up all of my photos. My wife is pressing me to get a new computer. This means changing OSs, getting new software, etc.
What do you guys think?? I don't want this to be a big Mac vs. Microsoft debate, I want to know if managing my photos will be easier/better and in what way on a Mac.
Well, I have computers that are 10 years old and they work just fine. My editing station is the only one that's "really new" at 2.5 years old.
I believe you should be getting only a new hard drive; possibly two, so that you can continuously back one onto the other.
Posted by Bill Chambers on January 4, 2008 at 11:36 PM
I've never used a Mac, but I've sworn I'll never use another MS based product. The only reason I bought a PC this past time was that some of my business software wouldn't operate on a Mac. That has since changed, and I'll definitely be going to Mac next time around.
Posted by Daniel Moore on January 5, 2008 at 12:01 AM
I'm a windows user myself, but I say go Mac!
Pros:
Mac holds a better rep for photo/video/graphic use and is normally faster at this kind of work.
Mac has WAY more less viruses than Windows, so not much problem there.
PS and similar photo editing programs normally work better on Macs than on Windows.
I think that an Mac's user interface is a little easier to move around when dealing with media.
Macs are all in one machines (except the new mini mac), so you don't have to worry about buying a separate monitor (although you can hook up another one if you want)
You can run Windows and Leopard (Mac's operating system) on a Mac, but you can't run Leopard on a PC.
Cons:
Although more and more programs are coming out that are mac compatible, Windows still dominates the software line (besides you can still run windows on a mac and use those programs)
Macs cost a little more than PC's
Right now I use Windows, but when my PC dies(5+ year old), I'm going with a mac.
I've always been a PC user (and still am), but I'd definitely go for a Mac! I'm now using Windows Vista, and I hate it! If you go for a new Intell-based Mac you can run both operating systems (don't install Vista, but rather XP) in parallels. Many programs are available for both Mac and PC, so I don't think you need to worry about Mac vs PC in terms of photo managing options to much.
Best,
Henri
Posted by Mark Stahlke on January 5, 2008 at 12:38 AM
Two months ago I bought my first Mac. I wish I'd done it a long time ago. Leopard on a new Mac Pro is awesome. The only downside is the tattoos and piercings required to be a rad Mac dude. That was painful. Wait, let me get it right. I was all like "Whoa dude! That hurts!" and stuff.
BTW, only the iMacs and Mac laptops, of course, are all-in-one machines.
I'm a Mac user - once I switched to using a Mac about 10 years ago, I've never wanted to go back to a PC. I find my MAC is much easier to maneuver to suit my way of wanting to use it than a PC will ever allow. I also own a marketing business so I have to have a myriad of office software programs on here, and that, along with the photo imaging software available for Mac more than fills my needs.
Good luck in your new purchase,
Nancy
Posted by Carol Hyman on January 5, 2008 at 1:18 AM
Brian, 2 more cents. Go for a MAC. The OS is based on UNIX. No more blue screen of death.
Adobe makes it easy to move to MAC. All you need is the more recent version of PS and they send you the new MAC version after you agree to destroy the old software. Example. When I bought my MAC a year and a half ago, all I had to pay for was the upgrade for Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign and Adobe sent me the new complete version for the MAC. A piece of cake.
Obviously get as much RAM as you can. I have 2 gb. That was as high as I could go when I bought my MACBook Pro.
Good luck and let us know what you select.
Carol
Posted by Nathan Lovas on January 5, 2008 at 1:48 AM
I have used Macs for the past 5 years...I just bought my third because I love them so much...I had used windows my whole life and was skeptical of the change...it was one of the best decisions I ever made...It takes a little while to get used to the differences between windows, but it is so worth it...don't be afraid...you'll love it....all the best...nate
Posted by Zack Schnepf on January 5, 2008 at 3:27 AM
I too am a proud Mac user, and have been for almost 10 years. In my opinion, the biggest advantage is the overall user experience. It seems much more logical once you get the hang of the differences. Another huge advantage is zero viruses, they just don't exist yet for OSX, although as apple's market share grows it is bound to happen. With the new intel based Macs able to run any windows program, there is no real reason not to buy a Mac. Some may argue price, but you get what you pay for.
Posted by Kelly Rowe on January 5, 2008 at 4:07 AM
April 24, 2005... I was terrified. I had used PCs since PCs existed. Actually I recall a conversation with my boss in 1983 where we were discussing the future of the PC. It was nothing but a solution looking for a problem. Surely it would not last. But I digress. I was walking into an Apple Store in Orlando to "look at" a Mac. I was sure I could look and not get anything on me. Maybe that would be safe. I called my Mac user friend in San Diego for moral and spiritual support. She reassured me and coaxed me into the store. I spoke with a sales person and asked if he would show me the dreaded Mac OS. We looked at Finder. That seemed safe enough. Then Mail and Safari. Then iTunes (I had that on my PC at home so I knew it was safe). Divining that I was a photographer, the stealthy salesperson opened up Aperture. That set the hook! I could finally get rid of that clunky Adobe Browser and have a professional workflow application that was completely intuitive!
But what about my venerable Microsoft business applications, I quipped? He opened up Microsoft Word, then Excel! He created a spreadsheet and a document and saved it to a folder on the desktop. Later I learned that those objects would open in iWork and could be saved in the native Word and Excel formats.
But I am (was at the time) a Microsoft SQL Server DBA. I need to have my SQL Server tools available at home when I remote to work. He said two words... Boot Camp. I looked it up and learned that I could dual boot an Intel Mac. It can start Mac OS X or it can start Windows XP.
I left there that day with a fully loaded iMac 20 and a second 20" Apple Cinema display. Since I've added a Mac Mini, a MacBook Pro, and two 8-core Mac Pros to my studio. I would not ever consider going back to PCs, especially with the latest Vista release. That was half baked even by Microsoft's standards. I just upgraded all of our machines to OS X Leopard and as is usually the case in the Apple world, everything went smoothly. Once I brought the first Mac into the house, everyone just started using it. It was like there was no learning curve to get the basic operations. The only questions I got were things like, "Where is the web browser?". Showed them Safari and they were on their way. The Mac versus PC commercial is real. You just take it out of the box and start using it. It's a no-brainer.
I agree with all the pros for going with MAC but... there is one major pitfall and that is price.
apple charges way to much for hardware. If you have a PC and a MAC with +- the same specs the mac would easily set you down about 35% 40% more.
Wim
Posted by Greg Barteluk on January 5, 2008 at 8:22 AM
Brian: I'm in a similar circumstance. Although my desktop PC is new a very powerful, my laptop is an old, steam-powered PC that badly requires replacing. I'm going to buy a MACBook Pro, and if the MAC experience is as good as I expect, the desktop PC will be history as well. My current OS is Vista 64bit and I encounter a number of problems running PS3. It could be that Adobe makes a greater effort to support MAC.
Posted by Grace Blair on January 5, 2008 at 10:19 AM
If you enjoy having regular computer crashes, lost data, hours on the phone with tech support, complex interactions in order to even hook up to the internet and an OS that barely works and regular need to replace the hard drive because of "unexpected death" and wish to save a few dollars up front but ultimately pay lots more for replacements and hours (days) in lost productivity then go with a PC. On the other hand if you don't enjoy frustration, like plug and play and intuitive OS and software I would recommend that you spend the money up front and get a Mac Pro intel with one of the fabulous Apple LCD screens. I just bought the Airport Extreme so that I can decrease the cord count and also hook into my backup drives via my laptop from any room in the house plus lots of other pluses for the wireless advantages.
Good luck and let us know what you decide!
Posted by Steve Foss on January 5, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I used PCs at work in newspapers for 10 years and Macs at home. Now that I'm working exclusively from my home office, I'm blessed that I don't have to deal with all the PC crap that our office machines visited upon us.
I agree with all the Mac advantages listed here, and sympathize on the price issue. However, I've never owned a brand new Mac. It's quite easy to buy refurbished Macs for far less money and still get a warranty and tech support on them. I buy all my Mac stuff from http://resale.headgap.com and have for the last four years. You don't necessarily NEED the very latest machine to do your work. While this may not be the best option for some (tons of RAW workflow in 16 bit or more color from really large digital files), it works quite well for me and my 8 Mp cameras shooting RAW. I'm going on four years on a G4 desktop from headgap with absolutely no problems.
Posted by Merle Cook on January 5, 2008 at 11:16 AM
My wife and I recently (2 months ago) switched to MAC. I got the I-MAC with 24 inch monitor and she got the MAC MINI. We both love them and would not go back to PC for anything. Her MINI plugged right into the 18' flat panel and she was off and running. Some frustrations over converting her data bases and spread sheets to the new software, but all is well and as they say, " The best way to learn a new machine is to play with it". I upgraded from Elements 5 to Lightroom and CS3 at the same time. There is no learning curve to speak of with the machine. Only with the software for me. Good books and patience will get me through this.
I recommend MAC, and Apple has a refurbished outlet on their web site. Good prices and the same warranty as a new one. Just my 2Cents.
I have never understood the Mac cost more than PC argument. Every equal comparison I have ever done between the two the cost is equal or more for PC up front. Then you have to add all the cost of wasted time using a PC, the anxiety of whether a backup is going to work or not and the list of negatives can go on and on as much of the responders have mentioned.
Mac is not without its problems but those problems are incredibly rare. Apple's tech support is amazing for a company that size, in five years the longest I have ever had to wait is 10 minutes before talking to someone who has always solved my problem.
I am so glad I threw my PC off the back porch 8 years ago and bought a Mac. I can guarantee you will be much happier and better off with a Mac purchase than a PC purchase. Buy a Mac.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 5, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Keeping on the OP topic, I think software makes a much bigger difference in the photo editing/managing experience than what type of machine it's on. The difference in the imaging software between MAC and PC is pretty minimal - both are very well supported. (The main difference being Aperture only available for the MAC I think.) And as far as speed goes, whatever you get new will seem fast, but will age quickly. I don't think the speed difference is a deal maker or breaker, because of this. A new PC or MAC will be much faster than either one that''s older.
Off topic, I'm amazed at the vitriol directed at PCs here. Not that MACs aren't great, but I'm surprised that very few of you are more moderate. I prefer PCs myself, having only used friends and computer lab MACs - never owning one. I think I prefer PCs mainly because that's what I'm used to. Of course, I'm also a computer engineer and like having an easier time "messing" with my computer.
I've got to say, though, that I've owned 4 PCs (two laptops), and very very rarely had a problem. I've upgraded cards, added RAM, swapped hard drives, etc. I've never had much wasted time, issues, calls to tech. support, etc. I don't think I've ever called tech support for anything actually. I have had two hard drive failures, but I'm certain that that has zero to do with the PC vs. MAC debate. I very very rarely have crashes, and haven't seen a "blue screen of death" more than a couple of times a year.
And Tim, I just recently priced out a Dell laptop, HP laptop, and MAC laptop, and the MAC was about 60% more expensive, with nearly identical hardware. A big chunk of that was what Apple charges for RAM; But even buying third party RAM and installing it yourself, the cost difference is substantial.
After stopping by the Mac store in Honolulu last week, I came home and bought Mac stock. There were PC computer stores around too, but I don't recall seeing any customers in any of them. But you could hardly get through the doors of that huge Mac store, it had so many customers! Lots of folks are moving away from PC, so I think any shortcomings in the software department will be resolved by market forces alone.
I just had my first-ever problem with a Mac. Our old G4 tower wouldn't start up. It is so antiquated and slow compared to contemporary models that we use it only for internet access and to drive some SCSI scanners. Following advice I got here at NPN I replaced the tiny lithium battery on the logic board ($6) and I was back in business. That's a pretty good record for Mac harware. If it costs more up front, I'm betting it's cheaper in the long run just because it gives so many years of trouble free service. Near as I can tell, I bought the G4 around the turn of the century. The PCs I use and friends use can't hold a candle to that kind of performance.
Posted by Richard Wong on January 5, 2008 at 1:45 PM
At the ad agencies we always have MAC, but at home I use PC. I've seen MAC's crash on a regular basis, act slow, etc... just like any computer does upon occasion so brand makes no difference to me. My computer at home is reliable though so I dont feel a need to fix what ain't broke. Apple does a great job at marketing though.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 5, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Hank - This is a little bit of speculation from doing some research - I'm no export. But now that MAC has switched to Intel processors, the actual hardware in many cases is identical. And you still pay more for it through Apple. Apple does tend to include the highest quality (or at least highest performance) components for graphics cards, screens, etc, but these can be had on PCs as well for less money - particularly with laptops. The desktop price difference is much less pronounced.
That's all true David, but my point is about loooooongevity of Mac products. They simply last longer with fewer breakdowns and hassles than any PCs I've known, owned or used.
There's an interesting spinoff on the switch to Intel. In spite of the higher cost and whole agencies built around PCs, scientists are switching wholesale to Mac. A close friend just returned from presenting a paper at the annual AGU meeting (American Geologic Union as I recall), attended by close to 20,000 geologists from around the country. It's the premier event for geologists. He reports that they had a huge conference room set up for folks to use their laptops and access the net via wifi. There would be hundreds and often close to max capacity of 1,000 people in the room at once to plug in. My friend made it a habit to walk around and do an informal Mac/PC every time he walked into the room. In that crowd of scientists Mac topped PC more than 10:1.
Hmmm. The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to dump my remaining Microsoft stock and add to my recent Mac investment.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 5, 2008 at 7:24 PM
Hank, if they are using the same components, I'm not sure how MACs would break down less (so I'm only talking about fairly current generations). Of course, if you're talking about brackets, and hinges, and connectors, etc, then MACs are more solid than almost all PCs I've seen (except maybe those that cost as much as MACs or some that are even more).
That's really interesting about the scientist poll Hank. I've only known a handful of people who have owned MACs, but I wonder if there's something about the scientific community that's really spiking Apple's growth there? Does that match the growth in other fields? (In the engineering field, I'd guess "no" based on my limited experience.)
Posted by Brian Monk on January 5, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Folks -
I have done enough informal research to determine that PCs DO have alot more problems than Macs with their hardware. The mysterious hard drive failure at between 12 and 24 months is the premier problem with these computers. I know, it has happened to me THREE times in the past 2 years - all with different computers. I'm not saying my research hasn't found problems with Macs, just far fewer. The latest laptop, a beautifully fast dual processor 30 gig model from HP, crapped out on me TWO WEEKS out of the box. And it took me a MONTH to convince anyone at HP that there was a problem, let alone that the problem was not my fault. And now the hard drive is gone *POOF!*
I am not giving up my PCs (hell, I have four of them), but after reading these posts, I think for the most important data (My photos) I will be using a Mac
Posted by Jerry Greer on January 5, 2008 at 9:40 PM
You guys are too funny! Mac or PC, it's all in what you feel good with. I've got a PC that'll do anything photo based as good or as fast as any comparable Mac. I've had only a couple of issues with it and those issues had NOTHING to do with it being a Mac or PC. Remember, they use the same HDD’s and most components. Hell, now Mac’s use Intel chips!
People buy Mac's just because a lot of Pro's use Mac. Well, I'm a book publisher/photographer and I use a PC. So buy what you feel you need and can afford, DON'T listen to the hype!
You guys are too funny! Mac or PC, it's all in what you feel good with. I've got a PC that'll do anything photo based as good or as fast any comparable Mac and have had only a couple of issues with and those issues had NOTHING to do with it being a Mac or PC. Remember, they use the same HDD’s and most components. Hell, now Mac’s use Intel chips!
People buy Mac's just because a lot of Pro's use Mac. Well, I'm a book publisher/photographer and I use a PC. So buy what you feel you need and can afford, DON'T listen to the hype! I had custom workstation built of my own specifications.
If you put together a PC with the same basic configuration as a Mac you’ll get about the same performance. Apples to apples and oranges to oranges! The problem is lots of folks are comparing grapes to grapefruit and that won’t work! You can’t go out and buy a home-based Dell for $1,000 and compare it to a $2,500 Mac as 99% of most people do. That’s just silly! If you’re going to compare a Mac G5 then compare it to a PC built with the equivalent components. If you want to buy a real Dell buy a workstation designed to do the work of Professionals (they have a separate division for their professional line). Then you’ll see that they compare pretty darn close and perform about the same. Oh, and the price will be about the same too. A professionally built PC will only run about 10% less that a comparable Mac G5.
Posted by David Bostedo on January 5, 2008 at 10:54 PM
A couple more points :
Jerry - I totally agree. I think I'd be happy to have a MAC, I think they're great computers. But I don't have a problem with my PC, have lots of familiarity, and like the cost savings. I think you're probably right about the price difference for desktops - I thought they had gotten pretty close. But check the prices on laptops with as much equivalent hardware and you can get - the price difference is pretty huge.
Brian - I have no doubt that there are many more problems in PCs. But I think it's for a couple of reasons - the number of PCs that exist, and the number of manufacturers. If you were to find statistics on the drives used in "better" PCs, and those in MACs, I'm willing to bet the failure rates are pretty much identical. (It would have to be rates, not absolute number, since there are WAY more PCs out there.) The problem is you're probably more likely to get a PC with a crappier drive, sine there are more options, more manufacturers, and more chances for a company to cut corners on hardware. In that case, the MACs might have an advantage, because as mentioned they generally won't use any lower cost/low quality components.
Posted by Jerry Greer on January 5, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Again, when you buy a low-cost HP (Compaq), Dell, Gateway, Sony, Toshiba, etc., you are getting the performance that you pay for! They are in the business to spit out as many computers as possible at the least amount of $$$$'s. They DON'T use the best hardware! If you purchase products from their Business/Professional division, which most of them have, you get better performance and longevity. This is due to higher quality components and workstations that are designed to be upgraded/changed. The best is to work with a local shop that knows what they are doing and build your own with the best hardware available (this is what I did and still do).
It’s so funny how someone can buy a $500.00 desktop box, get pissed because it won’t perform as they feel it should or has a failure of some kind. Then go out and spend $2,500 for a G5 box and think, “that damn PC was a piece of crap and I’m sure glad I bought my Mac”! When the problem was that they purchased too cheap in the first place and just needed to blame it on something.
Actually all this Mac Pc stuff is funny because really hardware should be the issue. The issue is the operating system and how stable the machine works....
That to me is way more important than the hardware you can or can't build a machine with, No good having the most expensive hardware if the base operating system is no good.
THAT"S WHY I USE A MAC
Posted by Janet Bentley on January 6, 2008 at 3:47 AM
Probably because PCs vastly outnumber Macs and because there are more generic cheap versions, you will hear more PC horror stories. Garbage in - garbage out.
I worked for many years as tech support person at a local college campus. We had faculty offices full of Macs and faculty offices full of PCs. I repaired, upgraded and replaced Macs at the same rate as PCs. Macs earned an early reputation for better functionality in graphics and math functions. That has been equally met with Pcs.
I have been comfortably using computers of both persuasions for 20+ years. I build my own PCs because they are excellent, and I can get exactly what I want at a decent price. Never had a hard drive go belly up. With the exception of a front case cooler fan ($3.50 cost) my computers have never broken down even with years of continuous use. I replace and upgrade components as the spirit moves me - not under pressure because something's broken.
If this is an operating system discussion - well, that swings both directions as well. Neither camp has mastered perfection. I suggest buy the best you can afford and use what ya like. Either can accomplish the task quite well.
Posted by Jerry Greer on January 6, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Keith,
I've had NO problems with my machine running XP Pro (for years) so I can't say that the operating system is crap, I take care of my stuff for it pays the bills). If all the guys would stop surfing porn sites they would be much less problems with the Windows operating system!
Just a note: I use my system to build books, calendars and do all of my photo work. When building books you’re looking at huge files containing high-rez photos for projects that run 100’s of images. Just as my Blue Ridge book, it’s a 200 page 13” x 11” hardcover. It handles it without those crashes you and the others talk about.
Posted by Richard Wong on January 6, 2008 at 4:22 PM
" If all the guys would stop surfing porn sites they would be much less problems with the Windows operating system!" Interesting observation Jerry. That hasn't given me any problems.
I have a six year old $1,000 Dell Dimension w/ XP which was near top of the line for consumer computers at the time and I have no intention of replacing it. It works fine and only crashed once, last year due to my own fault. I had a portable photo hard drive plugged in and accidentally unplugged it while it was loading apparently and that fried that drive and made my computer unstable. I was still able to back up my whole computer on an external though before reformatting the computer. So one crash in six years isn't what I would consider unreliable. On the other hand I have seen Macs have all of the same problems as the PC's mentioned above such as printer driver malfunctions, sluggish performance, crashes, etc... So i stand behind my argument that the only difference between computers is one of luck and advertising.
There's no doubt both platforms can work very well for imaging applications. Personally I just find the Mac has far fewer distractions and annoyances so I can actually get my work done in peace, without interference or compromises.
The price differences can be easily mitigated if you don't mind installing memory and drives on your own. Apple has a huge markup on these and buying them from a third party really cuts down on cost.
A customized PC will likely have a small performance advantage, but having used Vista for a couple of months I decided I'd rather take a nominal performance penalty for a slicker operating system and great customer support (Apple and Dell are poles apart in that department).
It's also worth mentioning that with Parallels ($80-90, last time I looked) you can run all your Windows software on the Mac, alongside native Mac software. You can't really do the opposite on a PC.
As someone who is involved in operating system design, I can't help but smile when reading another one of these "mac vs pc" debates.
Posted by Jerry Greer on January 7, 2008 at 10:30 AM
You guys boast about this Mac support thing. When will Dell or Mac support service come to your house and maintain your box or laptop? My custom builder, NAC of Johnson City, does just that! So, I’ve got a kick-ass fast PC with service that Mac or any of the other big-box PC’s can't touch for about the same price. Hummm! To me it’s a no-brainer!
Also, I really don't think Mac has any software that I need to run that I can't buy for my PC. You really can't say that for a Mac can you? You must be able to run both platforms on a Mac.
Actually the reason I prefer a Mac, is simply I don't have to run anti-virus software, anti-spyware software, I don't need to defrag the HD.
Actually I do need to run anti virus software so when some PC emails me and the email has a virus I don't want to accidentally send that email to a PC friend.
Posted by Richard Wong on January 7, 2008 at 5:09 PM
You've got a point there Keith, that is the one thing I clearly like better on the Mac. you still use a firewall though right?
I don't want to get into the debate, but I want to comment on certain things said
Keith, any filesystem needs to be defragmented. You have to do it on the Mac too, I'm just not sure you are allowed to.
Guy, well, you can run the entire Mac operating system on Windows using virtual machine software like the Boch's emulator or VMWare.
On a related note, a few people are talking about Dell support.
Long story short, when you buy your stuff from the Dell website, you get to pick from amongst "Home & Home Office", "Small & Medium Business", "Large Business", and "Government, Education, and Healthcare". You are allowed to pick any of these options, there is no checking involved - you get treated to different types of support, even if the product you bought costs the same across the four categories. And the product may not cost the same across the categories, even if it is exactly the same product.
Also, about performance advantage - anandtech.com ran a graphics rendering benchmark test on a PC and on a Mac with a processor twice as fast as the one on the PC, and they returned the same benchmark results. And these are not any random benchmarks - these are graphics conversion benchmarks that really test the system.
Apple will come to your house for technical support. I called tech support on a warranty issue and they were out the next day to fix it, which they did at no charge and has worked perfect ever since.
No you do not need to defrag a Mac. Just repair permissions and your good to go.
I graduated from ITT Tech and have built many Windows PC's and I have to use them at work. Still I can see absolutely no reason for a peecee anymore. Mac's are far more easier to use, have a superior OS, I don't know why anyone would want to but you can run Windows applications natively.
Discussion
37 repliesWhat do you guys think?? I don't want this to be a big Mac vs. Microsoft debate, I want to know if managing my photos will be easier/better and in what way on a Mac.
Thanks!
I believe you should be getting only a new hard drive; possibly two, so that you can continuously back one onto the other.
Pros:
Mac holds a better rep for photo/video/graphic use and is normally faster at this kind of work.
Mac has WAY more less viruses than Windows, so not much problem there.
PS and similar photo editing programs normally work better on Macs than on Windows.
I think that an Mac's user interface is a little easier to move around when dealing with media.
Macs are all in one machines (except the new mini mac), so you don't have to worry about buying a separate monitor (although you can hook up another one if you want)
You can run Windows and Leopard (Mac's operating system) on a Mac, but you can't run Leopard on a PC.
Cons:
Although more and more programs are coming out that are mac compatible, Windows still dominates the software line (besides you can still run windows on a mac and use those programs)
Macs cost a little more than PC's
Right now I use Windows, but when my PC dies(5+ year old), I'm going with a mac.
Best,
Henri
BTW, only the iMacs and Mac laptops, of course, are all-in-one machines.
Good luck in your new purchase,
Nancy
Adobe makes it easy to move to MAC. All you need is the more recent version of PS and they send you the new MAC version after you agree to destroy the old software. Example. When I bought my MAC a year and a half ago, all I had to pay for was the upgrade for Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign and Adobe sent me the new complete version for the MAC. A piece of cake.
Obviously get as much RAM as you can. I have 2 gb. That was as high as I could go when I bought my MACBook Pro.
Good luck and let us know what you select.
Carol
But what about my venerable Microsoft business applications, I quipped? He opened up Microsoft Word, then Excel! He created a spreadsheet and a document and saved it to a folder on the desktop. Later I learned that those objects would open in iWork and could be saved in the native Word and Excel formats.
But I am (was at the time) a Microsoft SQL Server DBA. I need to have my SQL Server tools available at home when I remote to work. He said two words... Boot Camp. I looked it up and learned that I could dual boot an Intel Mac. It can start Mac OS X or it can start Windows XP.
I left there that day with a fully loaded iMac 20 and a second 20" Apple Cinema display. Since I've added a Mac Mini, a MacBook Pro, and two 8-core Mac Pros to my studio. I would not ever consider going back to PCs, especially with the latest Vista release. That was half baked even by Microsoft's standards. I just upgraded all of our machines to OS X Leopard and as is usually the case in the Apple world, everything went smoothly. Once I brought the first Mac into the house, everyone just started using it. It was like there was no learning curve to get the basic operations. The only questions I got were things like, "Where is the web browser?". Showed them Safari and they were on their way. The Mac versus PC commercial is real. You just take it out of the box and start using it. It's a no-brainer.
apple charges way to much for hardware. If you have a PC and a MAC with +- the same specs the mac would easily set you down about 35% 40% more.
Wim
Good luck and let us know what you decide!
I agree with all the Mac advantages listed here, and sympathize on the price issue. However, I've never owned a brand new Mac. It's quite easy to buy refurbished Macs for far less money and still get a warranty and tech support on them. I buy all my Mac stuff from http://resale.headgap.com and have for the last four years. You don't necessarily NEED the very latest machine to do your work. While this may not be the best option for some (tons of RAW workflow in 16 bit or more color from really large digital files), it works quite well for me and my 8 Mp cameras shooting RAW. I'm going on four years on a G4 desktop from headgap with absolutely no problems.
I recommend MAC, and Apple has a refurbished outlet on their web site. Good prices and the same warranty as a new one. Just my 2Cents.
Mac is not without its problems but those problems are incredibly rare. Apple's tech support is amazing for a company that size, in five years the longest I have ever had to wait is 10 minutes before talking to someone who has always solved my problem.
I am so glad I threw my PC off the back porch 8 years ago and bought a Mac. I can guarantee you will be much happier and better off with a Mac purchase than a PC purchase. Buy a Mac.
Off topic, I'm amazed at the vitriol directed at PCs here. Not that MACs aren't great, but I'm surprised that very few of you are more moderate. I prefer PCs myself, having only used friends and computer lab MACs - never owning one. I think I prefer PCs mainly because that's what I'm used to. Of course, I'm also a computer engineer and like having an easier time "messing" with my computer.
I've got to say, though, that I've owned 4 PCs (two laptops), and very very rarely had a problem. I've upgraded cards, added RAM, swapped hard drives, etc. I've never had much wasted time, issues, calls to tech. support, etc. I don't think I've ever called tech support for anything actually. I have had two hard drive failures, but I'm certain that that has zero to do with the PC vs. MAC debate. I very very rarely have crashes, and haven't seen a "blue screen of death" more than a couple of times a year.
And Tim, I just recently priced out a Dell laptop, HP laptop, and MAC laptop, and the MAC was about 60% more expensive, with nearly identical hardware. A big chunk of that was what Apple charges for RAM; But even buying third party RAM and installing it yourself, the cost difference is substantial.
I just had my first-ever problem with a Mac. Our old G4 tower wouldn't start up. It is so antiquated and slow compared to contemporary models that we use it only for internet access and to drive some SCSI scanners. Following advice I got here at NPN I replaced the tiny lithium battery on the logic board ($6) and I was back in business. That's a pretty good record for Mac harware. If it costs more up front, I'm betting it's cheaper in the long run just because it gives so many years of trouble free service. Near as I can tell, I bought the G4 around the turn of the century. The PCs I use and friends use can't hold a candle to that kind of performance.
There's an interesting spinoff on the switch to Intel. In spite of the higher cost and whole agencies built around PCs, scientists are switching wholesale to Mac. A close friend just returned from presenting a paper at the annual AGU meeting (American Geologic Union as I recall), attended by close to 20,000 geologists from around the country. It's the premier event for geologists. He reports that they had a huge conference room set up for folks to use their laptops and access the net via wifi. There would be hundreds and often close to max capacity of 1,000 people in the room at once to plug in. My friend made it a habit to walk around and do an informal Mac/PC every time he walked into the room. In that crowd of scientists Mac topped PC more than 10:1.
Hmmm. The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to dump my remaining Microsoft stock and add to my recent Mac investment.
That's really interesting about the scientist poll Hank. I've only known a handful of people who have owned MACs, but I wonder if there's something about the scientific community that's really spiking Apple's growth there? Does that match the growth in other fields? (In the engineering field, I'd guess "no" based on my limited experience.)
I have done enough informal research to determine that PCs DO have alot more problems than Macs with their hardware. The mysterious hard drive failure at between 12 and 24 months is the premier problem with these computers. I know, it has happened to me THREE times in the past 2 years - all with different computers. I'm not saying my research hasn't found problems with Macs, just far fewer. The latest laptop, a beautifully fast dual processor 30 gig model from HP, crapped out on me TWO WEEKS out of the box. And it took me a MONTH to convince anyone at HP that there was a problem, let alone that the problem was not my fault. And now the hard drive is gone *POOF!*
I am not giving up my PCs (hell, I have four of them), but after reading these posts, I think for the most important data (My photos) I will be using a Mac
People buy Mac's just because a lot of Pro's use Mac. Well, I'm a book publisher/photographer and I use a PC. So buy what you feel you need and can afford, DON'T listen to the hype!
You guys are too funny! Mac or PC, it's all in what you feel good with. I've got a PC that'll do anything photo based as good or as fast any comparable Mac and have had only a couple of issues with and those issues had NOTHING to do with it being a Mac or PC. Remember, they use the same HDD’s and most components. Hell, now Mac’s use Intel chips!
People buy Mac's just because a lot of Pro's use Mac. Well, I'm a book publisher/photographer and I use a PC. So buy what you feel you need and can afford, DON'T listen to the hype! I had custom workstation built of my own specifications.
If you put together a PC with the same basic configuration as a Mac you’ll get about the same performance. Apples to apples and oranges to oranges! The problem is lots of folks are comparing grapes to grapefruit and that won’t work! You can’t go out and buy a home-based Dell for $1,000 and compare it to a $2,500 Mac as 99% of most people do. That’s just silly! If you’re going to compare a Mac G5 then compare it to a PC built with the equivalent components. If you want to buy a real Dell buy a workstation designed to do the work of Professionals (they have a separate division for their professional line). Then you’ll see that they compare pretty darn close and perform about the same. Oh, and the price will be about the same too. A professionally built PC will only run about 10% less that a comparable Mac G5.
Jerry - I totally agree. I think I'd be happy to have a MAC, I think they're great computers. But I don't have a problem with my PC, have lots of familiarity, and like the cost savings. I think you're probably right about the price difference for desktops - I thought they had gotten pretty close. But check the prices on laptops with as much equivalent hardware and you can get - the price difference is pretty huge.
Brian - I have no doubt that there are many more problems in PCs. But I think it's for a couple of reasons - the number of PCs that exist, and the number of manufacturers. If you were to find statistics on the drives used in "better" PCs, and those in MACs, I'm willing to bet the failure rates are pretty much identical. (It would have to be rates, not absolute number, since there are WAY more PCs out there.) The problem is you're probably more likely to get a PC with a crappier drive, sine there are more options, more manufacturers, and more chances for a company to cut corners on hardware. In that case, the MACs might have an advantage, because as mentioned they generally won't use any lower cost/low quality components.
It’s so funny how someone can buy a $500.00 desktop box, get pissed because it won’t perform as they feel it should or has a failure of some kind. Then go out and spend $2,500 for a G5 box and think, “that damn PC was a piece of crap and I’m sure glad I bought my Mac”! When the problem was that they purchased too cheap in the first place and just needed to blame it on something.
That to me is way more important than the hardware you can or can't build a machine with, No good having the most expensive hardware if the base operating system is no good.
THAT"S WHY I USE A MAC
I worked for many years as tech support person at a local college campus. We had faculty offices full of Macs and faculty offices full of PCs. I repaired, upgraded and replaced Macs at the same rate as PCs. Macs earned an early reputation for better functionality in graphics and math functions. That has been equally met with Pcs.
I have been comfortably using computers of both persuasions for 20+ years. I build my own PCs because they are excellent, and I can get exactly what I want at a decent price. Never had a hard drive go belly up. With the exception of a front case cooler fan ($3.50 cost) my computers have never broken down even with years of continuous use. I replace and upgrade components as the spirit moves me - not under pressure because something's broken.
If this is an operating system discussion - well, that swings both directions as well. Neither camp has mastered perfection. I suggest buy the best you can afford and use what ya like.
I've had NO problems with my machine running XP Pro (for years) so I can't say that the operating system is crap, I take care of my stuff for it pays the bills). If all the guys would stop surfing porn sites they would be much less problems with the Windows operating system!
Just a note: I use my system to build books, calendars and do all of my photo work. When building books you’re looking at huge files containing high-rez photos for projects that run 100’s of images. Just as my Blue Ridge book, it’s a 200 page 13” x 11” hardcover. It handles it without those crashes you and the others talk about.
I have a six year old $1,000 Dell Dimension w/ XP which was near top of the line for consumer computers at the time and I have no intention of replacing it. It works fine and only crashed once, last year due to my own fault. I had a portable photo hard drive plugged in and accidentally unplugged it while it was loading apparently and that fried that drive and made my computer unstable. I was still able to back up my whole computer on an external though before reformatting the computer. So one crash in six years isn't what I would consider unreliable. On the other hand I have seen Macs have all of the same problems as the PC's mentioned above such as printer driver malfunctions, sluggish performance, crashes, etc... So i stand behind my argument that the only difference between computers is one of luck and advertising.
The price differences can be easily mitigated if you don't mind installing memory and drives on your own. Apple has a huge markup on these and buying them from a third party really cuts down on cost.
A customized PC will likely have a small performance advantage, but having used Vista for a couple of months I decided I'd rather take a nominal performance penalty for a slicker operating system and great customer support (Apple and Dell are poles apart in that department).
It's also worth mentioning that with Parallels ($80-90, last time I looked) you can run all your Windows software on the Mac, alongside native Mac software. You can't really do the opposite on a PC.
Guy
Also, I really don't think Mac has any software that I need to run that I can't buy for my PC. You really can't say that for a Mac can you? You must be able to run both platforms on a Mac.
Actually the reason I prefer a Mac, is simply I don't have to run anti-virus software, anti-spyware software, I don't need to defrag the HD.
Actually I do need to run anti virus software so when some PC emails me and the email has a virus I don't want to accidentally send that email to a PC friend.
Keith, any filesystem needs to be defragmented. You have to do it on the Mac too, I'm just not sure you are allowed to.
Guy, well, you can run the entire Mac operating system on Windows using virtual machine software like the Boch's emulator or VMWare.
On a related note, a few people are talking about Dell support.
Long story short, when you buy your stuff from the Dell website, you get to pick from amongst "Home & Home Office", "Small & Medium Business", "Large Business", and "Government, Education, and Healthcare". You are allowed to pick any of these options, there is no checking involved - you get treated to different types of support, even if the product you bought costs the same across the four categories. And the product may not cost the same across the categories, even if it is exactly the same product.
Also, about performance advantage - anandtech.com ran a graphics rendering benchmark test on a PC and on a Mac with a processor twice as fast as the one on the PC, and they returned the same benchmark results. And these are not any random benchmarks - these are graphics conversion benchmarks that really test the system.
No you do not need to defrag a Mac. Just repair permissions and your good to go.
I graduated from ITT Tech and have built many Windows PC's and I have to use them at work. Still I can see absolutely no reason for a peecee anymore. Mac's are far more easier to use, have a superior OS, I don't know why anyone would want to but you can run Windows applications natively.