Desktops: MACS VS THE PC
MACS VS THE PC
by Krissa3 - 1/3/07 9:11 PMI would like to open a discussion about the pros and cons of macs over pcs and pcs over macs. I must admit I have been a devoted windows and Microsoft fan, but I have recently become interested in perhaps buying a mac because I have heard they are better for media creation ( I do photography so this is important to me), is this true? But are not macs less powerful than pcs and more expensive? Anyway just wanted to get this discussion going...
owner of both
by ramenoodles - 1/3/07 11:54 PM In reply to: MACS VS THE PC by Krissa3I am an owner of both a mac and pc. My mac is a ibook 1.33 ghz powerpc g4 with os 10.4.8 while i have a self-built 2.4 ghz pc with windows xp professional. I prefer the max os over windows. it is feels much more better. the only downside i have is that most applications and programs are for windows. i cannot really compare the processing power of the 2. after using the 2 for the past year, i prefer to use my mac. i used macs in a class to edit photos. the program was adobe photoshop and i used the program on both computers and found that the mac was better at rendering and processing. the mac used in the class was an emac 1.42 ghz. i have yet to see the performance of macs with the intel chips but i plan to purchase one.
Does an artist blame their tools?
by R. Proffitt
- 1/4/07 5:27 AM
In reply to: MACS VS THE PC by Krissa3
Both are tools. Use what you feel is better.
Bob
For the Money buy a PC
by 2pur400 - 1/5/07 5:09 PM In reply to: Does an artist blame their tools? by R. Proffitt
I have both also. Some of the people who work for me like Macs and have grown up with them. So for these people I buy Macs. But as the person who pays the bill I can honnestly say that dollar for dollar you get more machine with a PC than you do with a Mac.
As an example, the best PC's in my office cost around $2,000. They are faster, have more storage and the grapich output is equal to that produced by the Macs. The best Macs in my office cost nearly $3,000. They are not quite as fast as the PC's but since the people who like them are more productive on the Mac is worth the extra money. I would rather spend an extra $1,000 on a machine than to spend thousands on re-training someone.
Its all good
by pfred - 1/6/07 1:03 PM In reply to: For the Money buy a PC by 2pur4002pur400:
You are so right to give the Mac to Mac people. Their enhanced production EASILY overcomes the small increase in initial expense. ROI figures: what are the soft costs?? $25/hour, better attitude...
I think that the original argurements still stand, the Mac was DESIGNED as a GUI, WIndows is a kludge. OK, no flames please; just look at how many dlls & other calls need to be set up for Windows apps
Since the Wintel platform started as 'business' aps; many more application programmers wrote to that platform, more titles, cheaper...; more options for the harware from MANY different sources
Missing the point
by Jelly Baby - 1/14/07 3:41 PM In reply to: Its all good by pfredI think you miss the point. The PC's offer more bang per buck. It's simply a matter of custom that the employees prefer macs - because that's what they are used to.
Starting from scratch there's no contest - Even photoshop offers more functionality on a PC than it does on a mac these days.
I've supported both for many years.(Since MacOS 7 / Windows for Workgroups networked to a Novelle 3.5 server)
In terms of functionality, stability and speed, Windows on the PC caught up with macOS around Windows 98, took the lead with 2000 and has firmly stayed there ever since.
Your point about Windows loading DLL's to run Photoshop also misses the point. Windows calls DLL's when the application loads (and, if the application behaves correctly, unloads them when it closes (Adobe please try harder on this one!!!) MacOS STILL needs to load everything at boot time - something which certainly amuses the Unix comunity but doesn't seem to perform any other function unless the application is called - at which point it will load a little bit quicker.
If you have used a PC at anything other than the most basic level there are so many things which will anoy you about MacOS and it's insistance that you work it's way. With any Windows PC I can set it up to do what I want it to do. MacOS denys access to far too much of the OS to allow you to fine tune it. I for one don't buy into the arrogance of the "It's perfect, why would you want to change it?" attitude.
And if you do have a problem.... remember the old MacOS 9 "It's not my fault...." That just about sums up the current Mac technical support attitude as well.
Give Me A Break
by robertmro - 1/14/07 4:33 PM In reply to: Missing the point by Jelly BabyYou sounded like you knew what you were talking about until you mentioned PhotoShop.
PhotoShop CS3 is now out in beta and will be release in a couple of months. It's universal binary and flies on the Intel Macs. Illustrator and AfterEffects to follow.
Goodbye PC.
video game design
by bysusan - 1/16/07 8:58 PM In reply to: Give Me A Break by robertmromost game design is done on the pc for a large variety of reasons. The game industry is huge, and is still growing. I would not say "goodbye" to pc photoshop users. Maybe PC Photoshop users that are graphic designers. But not game designers, and that alone is plenty to keep PC photoshop in competition.
Reply
by robertmro - 1/16/07 10:00 PM In reply to: video game design by bysusanTo my knowledge, game engines are written to run on the PC. Whether there are UNIX versions of lets say the Real engine, I don't know but can easily find out.
What is happening is the cross breeding of the feature film visual effects and the video game worlds. Any high end visual effects shop will have a variety of different platforms, Windows, Mac and UNIX. I would imagine that high end video game companies like EA are operating in a similar fashion. All the the different platforms can communicate, so there is no reason to be tied to one particular OS. A bigger problem is the lack of standardization of formats, in particular with 3D programs. But regardless, the biggest difference between features and games is that game developers generally use 3D Max while the feature industry uses Maya more often.
The speed of the Mac was inferior until the adoption of the intel chip set. Mac users have been waiting a year for Adobe to port all their software to universal binary. PhotoShop CS3 is the first to come down the pike. I am not in a position to run tests to say for sure which platform is actually faster but I have no doubt that the PC is no longer the leader.
Though it's not an Adobe product Vue 6 runs faster on the Intel Macs according to some authorities.
I could go on and on about about things like Shake, After Effects, Mondo, Nuke, Fusion, Maya, 3D Max etc. The bottom line is that I don't expect PC Photoshop users, especially hobbyists, to throw away their PCs and buy Macs. A lot of people have major investments in software licenses and Adobe is one company that will not allow you to use the same license on both platforms.
When I say Goodbye PC, I'm only referring to the speed advantage.
Are Your Macs Intel?
by robertmro - 1/12/07 6:18 AM In reply to: For the Money buy a PC by 2pur400My experience is that the Intel Macs are faster.
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
by Shinau - 1/6/07 8:42 PM In reply to: MACS VS THE PC by Krissa3PLEASE DO NOT GET A MAC! They are overpriced, are incompatable with everything, and the only reason they stay alive is because they are user friendly. Unless you plan on doing NOTHING administrative, go with the pc PLEASE!
I'm impressed. Here's why.
by R. Proffitt - 1/6/07 8:54 PM
In reply to: NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! by Shinau
Ever install the MacOSX? Piece of cake. Slip in the OS CD and boot from it. It will even offer to save your files.
Does Microsoft treat your files with care?
Bob
About MS in my opinion
by meisinscotland - 1/12/07 3:28 AM In reply to: I'm impressed. Here's why. by R. Proffitt
"Does Microsoft treat your files with care?"
Yes, of course they do. All of this Anti-competitive BS I'm tired of. I once hated them, because I had watched too many YouTube videos, listened to too many n00bs, and let my opinion be formed by others who were hellbent on shoving their beliefs down everyone else's throats.
Until I found out myself that Bill G isn't as evil as we all thought. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he invest in Apple to save the iPod? The Windows Kernel is coming to a point where it will be hard to improve except by bloating out the OS (like Vista)
Also, the fact that Bill Gates steals other people's ideas is nothing less tnan 100% true, but no less of other companies either. It's CALLED BUSINESS!! THE REAL WORLD! If people didn't nick others' ideas, it wouldn't be the same world.
I know we have always disagreed since day 1, and I may even have got the wrong end of the stick, but hey.
Why msft "invests" in its competitors
by clsgis - 1/13/07 9:33 PM In reply to: About MS in my opinion by meisinscotland"Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he invest in Apple to save the iPod?"
MSFT poured hundreds of millions into Apple (inflated "porting fees" for Explorer and Office) to keep it alive. MSFT is an illegal trade monopoly. But that's difficult to prove under an antitrust law that hasn't been revised since the age of steam locomotives. Apple helped MSFT fight that prosecution, just by being there. It wasn't real competition but it looked enough like it to make the antitrust case more difficult.
When MSFT beat the rap in the US, it didn't need Apple any more and the subsidy stopped. That was when Apple really needed to find another business besides Macintosh. Ipod and itunes, now a fancy PDA/phone.
Now MSFT is being prosecuted as an illegal trade monopoly in the European Union. MSFT admitted years ago in its SEC filings that free and open source software is its only serious competition. Now MSFT is pouring money into Novell, owner of SuSE Linux. This time MSFT doesn't *want* Explorer and Office ported, so they're doing a "patent exchange." That'll end when MSFT beats the rap in Europe.
CLS
http://notwindoze.blogspot.com
Well to be quite honest I don't care
by meisinscotland - 1/17/07 5:47 AM In reply to: Why msft "invests" in its competitors by clsgisI got myself a life months ago when I realised that sitting in front of a computer dissing Microsoft, fussing over how Bill Gates' head worked and being lonely among all of it just never worked. I have since found my friends once again, let the computer do what it does best, which is be Windows, got a MySpace and since became the people's person, ish.
Seriously folks, computers are tools, they should be no more than that. People who see it as an accessory need to get out - really, it works.
So what if Bill Gates plays dirty? I couldn't give a rats ass!
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
