Community Newsletter: Q&A: Is the Mac right for me?
- 4/5/07 11:48 AM
mac vs pc for photo pro
by hitsch - 4/2/07 7:35 PM In reply to: Mac vs PC for photo pro by 163manthank you " carbonware " for telling us the facts as to who uses mac and who uses pc when it comes to photography. all i'd like to add is the coincidence, that in my e-mail today i received the c/net newsletter with the report on the new adobe photoshop cs3 extended and news@insideApple.apple.com announcing the all - new adobe creative suite 3 in the new universal binery.
have fun !
p.s. i switched from pc to apple 4 years ago; i have a huge photo collection to edit and save and no
regrets.
universal binary ???
by PhotoMan - 4/3/07 6:41 PM In reply to: mac vs pc for photo pro by hitschIf you are refering to Adobe's new propriatory RAW convertor, it is NOT universal or accepted within the industry as a "standard". This is Adobe's attempt to "take over" the RAW format by offering a convertor to the manufacturers for free.....note that it will not work in any graphics program except theirs. This is another of Adobe's backdoor attempts to take over the industry and force all to purchase their infllated ($$$) products.
universal binary
by hitsch - 4/4/07 10:34 AM In reply to: universal binary ??? by PhotoManphotoman i'm referring to the latest c/net report on the "new adobe photoshop cs3 extended" software for mac AND on the inside apple.com report on the all new "adobe creative suite 3" software for mac.
"universal binary" = software, that is designed or redesigned to run on both powerpc & intel based mac computers.
sorry no adobe conspiracy here.
binary?
by PhotoMan - 4/4/07 10:37 PM In reply to: universal binary by hitschMy apologies...been a bit of a flap in the graphics newsgroups communities about Adobe's latest RAW format takeover attempt...and admittingly haven't fully read up on the "Extended CS3". Got the panics mixed up a bit.....think it's time for another coffee !
It's true. Macs don't run Windows as well as PCs do.
by bpmttt - 4/2/07 11:40 AM In reply to: Barry do you own a mac? by gmclean1Gmclean1, have you used Apples all your life, or have you ever sat down and compared a PC and a Mac with the same technical specs to see which one performs better? Here is a link to all the Win XP performance issues experienced on a top of the line Mac. "Emulated performance is bearable, but it's by no means fast." http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832
wow
by t1r2b3 - 4/7/07 8:52 AM In reply to: It's true. Macs don't run Windows as well as PCs do. by bpmtttSome poor people all ways complain lol yes your poor, you don't go to buy a BMW if cost is an issue. But to tell you the truth thats is so old, stack up whats in a mac and then try to do the same with a dell or what ever and every time you will pay more to get what comes out of the box with a mac/imac .As to software you will pay the price for pro apps either way you go point peroid end of that for sure , but there is just like the pc is a ton of great freeware/shareware for the mac so don't let people fool you into thinking you have to spend $$$ for software on a mac ,besides 90% of software you will ever need comes bundled with your mac 
and upgrading a mac is easy as pie just slip in some more ram and add a external HD firewire fer sure on an imac ,on the desktop pro the sky the limmit you upgrade it all just like a bulkyboxy pc lmao and OS and software updates are fine ,well i have yet to have a problem and we mac users do not seem to fear them like pc user do ihave freinds who are afraid to upgrde do firmware or anything for somthing all ways go's wrong on there PC's - and omg you 64 bit been doing that on the command lines side for some time and like core 2's a core 2 its a 64 bit cpu -and with lepord it will be full 64 bit and still work seamlessly with 32 bit apps will Vista do that for you ? O wait i forgot this is a world in wich most folks are still running windooze me/2000/like what ever ... as i said poor people prefer PC's thats the real heart of this matter , So trick it out stuff all you can into it so you feel better because at the end of the day its like a car you can soup it up all you want like say a honda civic , but its still a honda civic not a BMW so live with your self and that , but then this is America and people are care more about beer than computing hardware so perhaps you want a cheap PC and a couple case's of beer to help you live with your poor choice
...wow
by theboyofspewn - 4/15/07 8:53 AM In reply to: wow by t1r2b3Wow, you are really helping people to understand the pros of a mac here, through language and statements that show ignorance. If I had to decide to purchase a mac or pc based entirely on your reply, I would purchase a PC because it is very obvious that Mac people are ignorant.
Of course, to actually reply to your statements... I am a PC person (you know one of the people you call "poor"). I have always been a PC person, and I more than likely will always be a PC person. The heart of the matter is this, Apple controls their computers. They are both in the Hardware and the Software business. Microsoft creates Software, period. Microsoft doesn't make computers, they make an Operating System. In ways, the manner that Apple is doing business is great, because they are able to control every part of the system, from OS down. They can guarantee the type of hardware that you are running. Of course, you are able to put other things in an Apple these days, but that is when you start running into problems in the OS. An instructor I had at the Cleveland Institute of Art (one of the top art schools in the country, definately not inexpensive) wanted to upgrade her RAM on her PowerMac G5. This is pre-Intel Mac mind you. She purchased the correct type of RAM from a different vendor, and installed it. Her system began randomly crashing and what not, all because the RAM she purchased didn't come from Apple. And the RAM that Apple sells cost at the time nearly twice as much as the RAM she purchased.
My current computer is a PC that I built myself from parts. Every once in a while I have some minor issues with the OS, running WinXP Pro. but those problems are mainly because of little things that Microsoft has no control over. My computer cost me $2000 in parts and perhaps 3-4 hours of build time. When I built it, it had better hardware than the same-priced Apple, regardless of the line. If you can price out an Apple that has "comparable" hardware to a PC and costs "the same" or less, I would like to see it. Considering the base model Apples usually cost around $2000. It does become harder to find a comparable PC for an Apple computer, considering they are venturing into the quad-processor motherboard realm. But to put comparable hardware together on Mac or PC, the PC will be cheaper. That is the way it has always been, and I have done the research. I am a computer artist. I design websites in Flash. I work with Video. I work in Photoshop, and Illustrator. I push these softwares to their limits, regardless of the OS they are running on. In my experience I have found that a Mac is a lot less stable than advertised, and will crash relatively easily when running the types of processes I put through Photoshop on a regular basis.
At the end of the day, a well-built PC running Windows outperforms an Apple with comparable hardware. I have seen IT groups run the tests. The only time the Apple won over the PC, it was because the Apple had 2 processors, while the PC had one dual-core. This was considered "comparable" hardware. I don't consider it comparable hardware, as 2 processors always beats 2 cores. And the PC hardware costs less, and is more flexible than the Mac hardware. If you or anyone else is able to find differently, in real numbers of real computers, I would like to see it, because my research has shown me what I have stated.
90% of software ?
by PhotoMan - 4/15/07 10:00 AM In reply to: wow by t1r2b3You might be correct, if you have no "real" (ie: for your source of income) need for a computer and your photpgraphic needs are based upon family snapshots BUT the original question refers to working on photos on a professional basis. For this Apreture does not qualify. It has a few more bells and whistles than the software that came with my camera for downloading / management but it certainly does not qualify as a true photo editing software.
I guess that the software needed to justify the purchase of the computer must fall within that other 10%.
answer to watzmzn 3-26-07
by lechtmmg - 3/30/07 5:19 PM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by WatzmanI'am a Mac man forever. On My 6th one. Had to run Norton once in all that time. New Macs will
run PC software with Parrells. I just got of the phone with a life long friend who switched 6 months
ago and is very happy. I do not know where you are looking but I think if you look at price for what you
get they are about even. My last word is I have two very good friends that are professionals with
photoshop and they just got new PC and both of them have had troubles. My comment to them is
mine works does your.
lechtmmg
Thank you for a well-reasoned answer
by rsimanski - 3/30/07 5:45 PM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by WatzmanBack in 1ate 1989, when I was setting up a desktop publishing system, for my employer, I tried to get an impartial analysis of the relative merits of PCs versus Macs. I found this to be nearly impossible, even from a trainer who taught both platforms. The general comment from Mac users was "you're crazy to use an PC." This was the case even though there were valid reasons for doing so.
Over the years, I found that this attitude persisted, even though I knew that a properly-configured and well-maintained PC equipped with good-quality hardware could be made to be very reliable.
Thank you for your well-thought-out and well-reasoned response. It's the first time that I've read a sensible, fact-based analysis of the relative merits of PCs versus Macs.
Very good answer!
by oso_online - 3/30/07 7:14 PM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by WatzmanI am a PC guy. I thought your answer was very good and I appreciate the time you spent writing it.
Jim
Mac Vs PC
by codebowl - 3/30/07 10:11 PM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by WatzmanIf all you are looking to do is photography there is not a difference between the 2 systems. Either way I would suggest that your main concern be a backup drive. Dont go to staples or Office max and get just any backup drive. You will have to educate yourself on RAID and get one that will save your files. If there are 2 hard drives in the backup unit and a drive dies you want one that can sync that data back without losing the data.
Let's face it we are not talking about Mac VS PC really. You are looking for a way to keep your photographs safe.
As for the whole Mac VS PC bit I personally use a Mac Pro. I used the PC for 12 years prior to making the switch to the mac. I made the switch without ever having used a mac. I got sick of my high end machines crashing all of the time and losing data from work. I jumped directly into the Quad PowerMac G5 and upgraded to the Mac Pro because I wanted to take advantage of the Intel architecture.
One thing i can say is be careful, everyone is saying how the Mac is so much like a PC it can run XP and Vista and other software. This is true, it can even run windows under Parallels (virtual machine) and will allow for coherence mode which put's the windows applications right in your dock in OS X. It's pretty cool.
However dont plan to play any high end games within windows. Either in Parallels (almost guranteed they wont play) or even under Bootcamp. I have Windows XP installe and have a hard time playing Need For Speed Carbon on the native Windows XP install. This is because the video card does not have native windows drivers, you have to actually use drivers that were developed for this by Apple (I believe). I have a high end video card with 256mb of video memory and i can barely play the game on Medium video settings.
Also I just bought a Revolution 7.1 surround sound card for my machine, M-Audio stated that it was PC/Mac compatable. It is but only for certain mac's. It seems the Mac Pro uses a different type of PCI slot. You still have to watch what you buy and I dont want anyone misleading you into thinking that any PC hardware can just be thrown into the mac because it supports AGP and PCI now.
What I can say is that I made the switch about 8 moths ago, do not regret it and doubt if I will ever look at a PC again. I love the stability (no crashes yet, crosses fingers) and when you install an application it is as simple as dragging and dropping into the applications folder. Also when you run updates on OS X or install a program very seldom do they require you to reboot your computer. The only time this happens is when it alters the core operating system and not applications that are installed.
I love the mac and cannot wait for Leopard.
Just look at the big picture, does it matter what architecture you use when you are thinking about photography? Not really. As long as you have a safe place to store your images you would be fine. I would also suggest you get a Network Attached Storage if you want multiple machines to access the data.
Typical
by hotshot982 - 3/30/07 10:40 PM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by Watzmansomeone actually takes the time to put together a structured, balanced argument, and the Mac fanboys swoop in to explain why their system is superior to anything else in the world. Thank you for a rare, unbiased answer Watzman
Ahh yes the Mac vs PC debate
by somethinginharrisburg - 3/31/07 5:41 AM In reply to: Answer for Chaz, AOTW for QOTW by WatzmanOk first lets determain what is the difference between a Mac and a PC for they both are computers. As mentioned before the differences are not as far away as they were before. PCs are small computers. Stands for Personal Computer. Wow pretty broad with millions of choices to choose from. You can get a cheap one if that fits your needs or something more robust, to outright insane. My PC is more toward the insane side. Since there are so many PCs out there and anyone can build parts for them there is alot that you can do with them. Any you can customize it to the extreme very easily, tailor it directly towards what you want to do, look, function, and perform. You are not at the mercy of anyone or anything. You have full control over what you bought. Also on the software side again free will. Also since that so many PCs are built throughout the years and millions sold per week. Everyone makes excellent software for it. It does not have to go through one company to be allowed to be made for the PC.
Now all the strengths that I quickly listed is the exact strengths that are its exact weakness. There are alot of cheap PCs that give good ones a bad name. Also since Windows can run all of these different parts it needs drivers to do it. And people loose the disks that contain the drivers and when they swap or upgrade parts they never install the drivers again. But Windows can run almost all parts out there without drivers, it just wont run them to the fullest of capabilities. Also new drivers come out that make the parts faster and smarter. Thus your pc will either get better with age if you take care of it( like you do with a car) or if you neglect it, it starts to not perform well. As far as Macs are made with the best parts? Macs are built with old technology. And now they are made with standard PC parts. Macs use to always trash talk Intel chips and how they are so garbage. Well now you can get a Intel Mac that blows the doors off $5,000 Macs that they just had out. That Mac deemed was the most powerful PC in the world. Macs are good for kids. I had one, so did my first child. But thats it. They are good for old people or people that really are not going to use the computer for much. They are good for house hold stuff. And that is for they are easy to use. You do not have to worry about updating them. For there is not anything to update. They come out with new operating systems just like windows does and yes you do have to pay for them. But they do not do updates. For their whole claim to fame is. When you buy it, the computer is finished. No more upgrading or updating parts. You are done and if you want a new part you can buy a new Mac. Which is ok for there are not many at all upgrade parts for it. They only sell uprade parts that snap right in for they do not like people working on their own PCs. And their parts are multiple times more expensive even though they are made by Foxconn which is considered a garbage part maker in the PC world. You cannot overclock a Mac. And let me repeat that. You can not overclock a Mac. You may do a very small overclock on it. But you have no way to keep the heat down or upgrade from the old junk parts that you just paid 4 times too much for. Macn run very slow memory, have garbage motherboards, slow hard drives, video cards(what are those for). Macs say that they are great for designing. Then why cant they play any games if they are that good. Why does the exact part cost 4 times as much? Its just a PC part. Apple has been hit recently with alot of flak over its pricing since it switched over to mainstream pc parts. Now everyone could see how much they were getting vs what they were paying for. On Apples website you could upgrade your Mac to 2 gigs of memory for $700. But if you went to Newegg the same exact memory with the same serial number was selling for $130. Also with a Mac you cannot put in faster parts. You bought it, its done, please buy a new one cause the one you just bought is garbage. The reason why is that everything Mac has to come through one guy. He says what it will be, he says how much you will pay, and what you can do with it, and what software you can run with it. Now if you were that one guy, would you want to make more money or less for there is no Mac competition. The moron already paid 4 times as much for cheap computer. So you know that you already have them in the bag. Keep twisting the screws Steve. Now you are saying to yourself that I am a Mac hater. Well I have a very big surpise for you all. I have the best of all worlds. I have a liquid cooled severly overclocked machine that is running XP, Linux, and Mac Tiger. And it is not a Mac. The os is just software. You can hack it to make it work. The only problem is that the Mac OS cannot handle the speeds of my PC. It will crash over 3.0ghz. So I have to run into XP or Linux which then allows me to run at 3.76ghz on a Core 2 E6600. With my ram running at 1123mgz. And my front side bus. Well I will just let you drool over that in your head. I hate Apple machines. I do. They are old, garbage, and slow. Everyone knows that. The OS is decent. Its really easy to use. Bill Gates stole it and gave it to everyone else that didnt want to pay Steve Jobs the big bucks for it and be stuck to garbage old hardware. And the Mac OS will run on certain hardware. Go with Asus motherboards, Intel Chips, and Corsair ram. Then from there you will have to buy and take back (yes in this world you are allowed to return items) until you find a combination that the Mac will run. As soon as you find the right combo you are on. It thinks its a Mac. And now you have a much better upgradeable machine for less than half the price that will smoke a $7,500 Mac that you built yourself for $1300. Just for taking Steve Jobs out of the picture. So now what are you going to blast me for? I have your OS running on my faster PC. Now I can use any software that I want. I have them all covered and its not hard to do. For I know how to use a computer. So I am not stuck with Apple making me pay for Itunes that will only play on an Ipod and will not play any music that I burn. Or Itv that will only play movies that I buy from Itv. What a joke. Lemers jump off cliffs following the crowd. Go chase your logo.
My Opinion
by chuck1jones - 4/1/07 11:38 AM In reply to: Ahh yes the Mac vs PC debate by somethinginharrisburgIf you have the money get a Mac, if you don't get a PC. Mac's are better in general, and now that vista is out you are likely to get a PC with Vista on it, in which case it is a waste of time, the hardware running vista is capable of running a much smoother version of XP, than vista it's self. Better yet the mac runs the same effects with half the hardware requirements needed than XP, with the bonus of an immensely simple OS in comparison to XP. Taking the example of applications with pc it is next next next next install finish. with mac it is drag drop done.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
