Community Newsletter: Q&A: Is the Mac right for me?
- 4/5/07 11:48 AM
Windows sucks for photography
by runlevel0 - 3/31/07 2:47 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I reacently bought a Pentax *ist DL2 and went straight to the internet to search for the necessary tools for digital darkrooming (working with RAW files).
The first thing I learned, was that the best tool to convert and work with RAW formats, an open source tool called DCRAW and the program UFRAW
where a bit more difficult to find and use than on it's native platforms, Linux (and of course all the *nixes such as Mac OS X).
Even if you are willing to pay for a Photoshop licence (instead of using Gimp) you will have problems finding a working copy of DCRAW. UFRaw has some minor bugs, for example the resizing of the windows, but it works mor or less.
Irfanview is a nice program, but it lacks some of the functionality of KDE's built in Pictureviewer (advanced white balance and an easy cropping and canvas resizing method).
You can solve all these problems, but in other OSses like Linux there are no need to even bother...
AND... in Mac you don't even need to bother about calibrating and profiling the hardware for the right output, you gett it for free.
PLUS: Mac has iPhoto that can be used toghether with Gimp or Photoshop in the digital workflow. \
BUT, the most important is that Mac has been built from the ground up to be used as a graphics design platform. Every sigle detail is optimized for this particular task so that Mac has been for decades the Platfrom Of Choice for photographers and graphic designers in general. You will really notice it in every part of your worlflow, from the download of the pictures to the rendering on the screen, Mac works faster as any PC (be it Windos or Linux based). Even an old G3 will make a superb job.
oh give me a break already
by PhotoMan - 4/3/07 7:36 PM In reply to: Windows sucks for photography by runlevel0Just what is your experience in photography and the digital darkroom? Don't talk about the OS when it's the graphics software, video card, HD and memory that does the work. The OS's built-in software is academic, at best and means nothing in the end when working with photographs. To me, you seem to be just pulling on a Mac's apron string, talking the talk.
Macs all the way!
by wicker_man - 3/31/07 5:19 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I am a recent convert to Mac because I was fed up with Windows crashing, going slow, virus/adware/spyware and it sometimes going so slow that it needed a reformat. And this is on a farily new laptop which was maintained well (regularly ran AV scan, defrag'd etc).
I had heard about how great Macs were from friends and played around in shops and they did look nice. Plus, since I owned an iPod and was very happy with it (simplicity, reliability etc) then I decided to pick up an old G3 iMac to try out OS X.
This is a nice thing about OS X; even though my G3 iMac (400MHz) is a 7 year old machine, it is able to run Apple's latest operating system (Tiger) with just a RAM and hard drive upgrade. And, it runs at a decent speed, I can browse the net, listen to music, use IM and MS Office all at once with little slowdown. Try running Vista on even a 3 year old machine and watch it fall to it's knees.
I was very happy with the Mac, it took a couple of hours of playing around and exploring to get to know how to use it, and after a few weeks I knew my way around it fairly well. I was very impressed with it, but it wasn't powerful enough to use as a primary machine.
I then came across a couple of bargains, firstly a G4 Cube + 17" LCD to replace my G3 iMac and a G4 15 inch PowerBook to replace my windows laptop. I am now a happy Mac user and looking to buy a MacBook Pro after Leopard is launched.
My sister now uses my G3 iMac after years of using ThinkPads and she loves it. Very easy for her to pick up and use as a primary machine for all her work, music etc. My dad is also going to buy a Mac Mini (once they are refreshed) because he is impressed with OS X.
It is true that OS X has less software ranges available, but the ones that are are usually much higher quality. Who needs 20 different photo organisers or disc burning software when you can find one that does the job well?
Also, OS X DOES crash, but this is either due to bad program coding or a hardware issue. And if you find a program does stop responding, then you can force quit it and it will close without affecting the rest of the system stability.
People who say the reason Macs don't get viruses etc is because of a smaller user base are wrong. It is because of the security of the UNIX base OS X is built on. Plus you need to put in a password to run any updates or change important files.
Sure, Macs may cost a bit more than a similarly specified PC (although not overly so nowadays), I would gladly pay more for a computer which would be more reliable and last longer.
Something to consider before you buy a Mac
by rbatton - 3/31/07 6:32 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I work for a publishing firm with 95% PC and 5% Mac. I'm with technical support and I have seen both machines fail. I can swap parts between PCs and the parts will work....when I swap parts between Macs I have to keep my fingers crossed....sometimes it works and sometimes not. When swapping parts on a Mac and it does work, the results are shaky. Likewise with reinstalling the OS...I've had problems with Macs. Like others have already mentioned, when you use a PC you've got choices between manufacturers....with the Mac all you have is Apple and you are stuck with their offerings. On occasion I have to physically move the PCs and/or Macs...working with the Mac desktops I've found these things to be heavy....I'm willing to bet I can take a couple of G4s or G5s and anchor a battleship. Oh yeah, if you ask a Mac user about PC vs. Mac be prepared for a sermon, Mac users tend to be quite elitist.
Pot calling the kettle black
by Fotograffiti - 3/31/07 9:23 AM In reply to: Something to consider before you buy a Mac by rbattonFirst off not all Macs are heavier than PCs. I had a Dual G4 which was indeed heavy, but I can put my 20"inch iMac under my arm and move it around easily. I have yet to own a PC where I could do the same with the tower and monitor. I would be willing to bet that you would have no trouble carrying a Mac mini around as well.
Your last comment was just an inflammatory comment made against Mac users to make yourself feel better right? I believe I see just as much elitist attitude from PC users when comparing computers.
One more question? You are in tech support, and you have had trouble installing OS X? Are you serious?
Extremism
by joemama12344321 - 3/31/07 7:08 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
OK... so I guess the place to start is here... as many of you have stated, the MAC is a personal computer, and yes, the hardware is identical... so lets just agree that to that extent that Macs and Windows machines are very similar. The main difference lies then in software and service.
I know that many MAC extremists will say that MACs never crash, or that they never get viri... but let's be honest, it isn't a magical machine, so while I agree that they are not impervious, let me tell you a little about why they tend to be more reliable than their Windows running counterparts.
Since the hardware is the same, we must look to the software for our major differences.
I will say that what MS has done with Windows it quite incredible... they have taken a software and made it behave identically upon many different hardware platforms... How many different manufacturers make hardware for Window's based operating systems... the list is quite extensive... and as many of you pointed out, you can also go to your local comp shop and purchase the parts yourself and create your own machine... however this is a task most daunting to the average PC consumer. All of these different machines have very different component specifications from logic boards to processors and RAM, it is all different. Windows then installs over this hardware and must be able to operate using any combination of literally thousands of components. Think of it like going on vacation without knowing the location that you will be travelling to... You bring EVERYTHING with you. This is why the Windows install is so large, and why Windows tends to use quite a bit more system resources for normal operation.
The Mac OS is what I like to refer to as a "skinny" OS, as the Apple designers and Programmers have created the Mac OS to run on the specific Apple Hardware configurations, and there is no need for the endless lists of DLL (library files) to allow the OS to operate with the various Software and hardware installed on your system.
In Windows, these files are basically storing information about the various hardware and software components within your system, and as Windows operates it refers to these files to gain info about the components so that it knows how to proceed.
When I was on windows, I would sometimes get an error that a DLL file was missing or corrupt... especially after a new software installation or after removing a program or hardware component. Then I would have to track down another machine with the same file and copy it over to my system to get operational again.
Another important thing to note, is that many people have stated that the MAC machines are not upgradable... this is just a myth perpetuated by someone who doesn't know the last thing about the MAC machines... the MacPro systems that are selling now have the ability to hold 16GB of Ram, they have AGP slot and PCI Express slots for expansion cards, and can hold 3TB of internal Hard drive space, not to mention the full external expandability using USB2 or Firewire (an Apple invented connectivity Bus) used for connecting hard drives cameras and scanners.
Yes the consumer machines are upgradebale externally and only have limited internal upgradability (RAM) but most consumers aren't interested in upgrading every 3 months... they simply want a machine that works well, and that they wont have to replace in 2 years. And because the MAC OS is so "Skinny" and requires less resources you can accomplish more with 1GB of RAM than you could in Windows with 2 or 3 GB... in fact, if you have the chance go to your local CompUSA or Apple store and get on an iMac with 1 GB of RAM, and just start opening applicaitons... you will be able to get about 15 - 20 applications up and running on a base system with 1 GB of RAM, and run an D video file at the same time with little or no slow down whatsoever... I challenge and Windows based system with 1GB or RAM to make that claim.
Mac users tend to keep their machines much longer than their Windows counterparts, and because of the lack of Spyware, spamware on the systems they do not slow down to a crawl like so many WIndows systems do.
Yes, I said it, and I will stand by the statement... These malicious softwares are Windows based executable files or Visual basic scripts, and thus only malignant within an operating system that can run such files... the very thing that Windows users bash macs for so frequently (the fact that Windows based software titles do not run on MACs) is what keeps the MAC safe from these software threats.
anyone with some technical savvy can download a free compiler and create a basic program capable of running on the Windows operating system upload it to the web and have it affecting others with total anonymity. On the MAC software programmers must purchase a developers kit to write software. This means that in order for a virus or malware to be written and start affecting the MAC the writer of the program must first purchase the kit, second, learn the new programming language... but if they are successful in creating the software and uploading it online, there is a record of who they are and where they live (from purchasing the D-kit) this is a GREAT deterrant to those wishing to write malicious software, although it is also the reason that it has taken so long for those in the MAC community to get software titles that are already very prevalent on the Windows system. In the last year there were about 4 viruses written for MAC and over 130,000 for the Windows operating system. so as I said, it is not impervious, but the liklyhood of contracting a virus is very small on a MAC, and there is very little (if not any) spam ware, spy ware, or ad ware... in fact, in over 20 years of using a MAC, I have yet to contract any of these malignant softwares...
so as I stated before, it is not a magical machine, but when you eliminate the DLL system of Windows, and 99.9% of the malignant software that plagues Windows users, the experience with a MAC tends to be a little more favorable.
The rest of the problems that computer users face tend to be hardware failure or user error, which will be faced no matter what operating system you choose.
There is much more we could discuss about ease of operation and use but that has more to do with what you learned originally than what features the system contains... An important thing to point out, is that with VISTA out, most users are looking at purchasing new hardware to run the newest Windows OS, and there will be a learning curve with VISTA just as there would with the MAC OS so now is an ideal time to take the plunge and make the switch.
I think there is a definate place for both systems, I have used both, I was a windows programmer for some time, but for the average consumer who does not build their own machine, or even care to crack the case the Mac is a wonderful solution... and for the Power user who needs ultimate configurability, the MacPro fits the bill... and now that the MAC can also run Windows through Bootcamp or Parralels buying a MAC gets you the best of both worlds in one sleek and easy to use machine. just remember that running Windows on that new MAC will open you up to all of the problems and issues inherant with that OS.
Hope this helps clear up any confusion.
Use a Mac AND a PC!
by MicahW - 3/31/07 7:48 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I wouldn't suggest that you make "The Move" to a Mac if it means that you are thinking of abandoning the PC. By all means get a Mac but keep your PC too! If you walk into just about any graphics department of any newspaper or print shop you will find that they have both machines.
As an artist I use both too. Corel and Photoshop are on my Mac, MGI Photosuite and Flash are on my PC, I would be lost without this setup. Computers are just tools that help you get a job done, by utilizing both systems I think you will find that you like some programs on one machine better than the other and visa versa. ALSO, some programs are specific to only one OS so having both setups will avail you to more options.
You wouldn't try to open a studio if the only lens in your camera bag was a wide angle lens would you? A wide angle lens is perfect for some situations but a less than perfect fit for others. The same is true with these two operating systems.
With that said, if money is a concern stick with the PC. Many people focus of the expense of buying Mac hardware but you should also consider the expense of buying software too. Many of the programs you will be using are very pricey but you can find inexpensive alternatives for the PC, you don't have the same luxury for the Mac. I use MGI Photosuite ($30 program) on my PC all the time. It does a fine job for some situations, but it can't run on my Mac.
In the end, if you have the cash add a Mac to your toolbox. If you are on a budget stick with the PC only setup.
Software costs can get expensive
by ketama - 3/31/07 9:37 AM In reply to: Use a Mac AND a PC! by MicahWIf you have Photoshop for your PC now, just stick with the PC for the time being until you feel you need an upgrade on your hardware. Upgrades to Photoshop are much cheaper than the full version needed when changing operating systems.
I spend far more time trying to figure out how to edit images in Photoshop than I gain by having a fast computer.
Both my PCs and Macs hang up fairly often. Lately I have had to shut down my programs and reboot the Mac to get it to act normally. But I am running an older G4 with OS 10.3.9. I ran out of firewire ports so I added a firewire card to the Mac and now the hard drive and fans will not "sleep".
Something that is different with Macs is that they give you a "maintenance disk" and suggest you run it regularly to keep the system working smoothly. However, the maintenance program is now even crashing-what's up with that?
If you practice for a while with your existing PC, you will be able to purchase a Mac later that is probably better than what they have on the market today.
Load a cheap PC with RAM and run Gimp for free
by Kurt Sanger - 3/31/07 1:11 PM In reply to: Software costs can get expensive by ketamaGimp is a GNU shareware program that has most of Photoshop's features for free. If I was just starting out, I'ld buy a low end PC with over 1GB of RAM and a large Hard Drive. Then download and compile Gimp.
Photoshop V4 ran under WinXP until SP2. Then it keeps getting corrupted or confused with updates to XP and AntiVirus and SW Firewalls... Bill doesn't care if updating your OS to keep you "Safe" kills all that expensive SW you've purchased.
I'm running a home built AMD 2800XP with 1GB RAM, 80G HD and Win XP Pro. Dreaming of building a 2x 64Bit CPU system someday. I'll probably switch to Linux too, and Gimp runs on both so I won't have to relearn how to use it. My old Win98 box 900 MHz AMD converted to Linux runs much quicker than WinXP. Its been running for two years with no updates, no antivirus, and no problems other than having to learn how to do everything over again in Linux. Linux printer drivers are difficult to install though, so for photo work I'ld stick with XP, or Mac OS.
My Olympus E500 digital SLR runs greate under XP. Just plug it in and its seen as a portable USB drive.
I've also written my own photo software to modify images running under Photoshop using Filter Meister. This is really cool as you don't have to know how to open the files, plus you get to use Photoshops features to see the file. Don't know if Filter Meister is compatible with Gimp yet. Someday I'll check into it.
So until you know what you want to really do, I'ld go cheap and free.
Photoshop upgrades
by joemama12344321 - 4/2/07 10:52 PM In reply to: Software costs can get expensive by ketamaIf you are going to pay for an upgrade, then why not make the switch... Adobe will license an upgrade priced version of the MAC OS based photoshop if you send them your PC version, thus you end up with a full version on the new operating system for the cost of an upgrade on the Windows system.
Forget the Geek talk, lets talk reality
by MzSabina - 3/31/07 4:55 PM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I have been tracking this forum since it started, and frankly, I am flabbergasted. Some of these "so called experts" out there claim to be long term Apple users, yet they have less than 10 years experience. My first hands on experience was actually on a Lisa, which I used to typeset the user manuals for DOS in 5 different foreign languages. Since than I have always been aware of the ongoing advancements in both the Apple and the Windows operating systems as well as hardware issues.
As for hardware, where is this myth that ALL internal hardware must be purchased from Apple? And who in the world is giving people the idea that it has to be installed by Apple? Why would Apple make accessing the inside of their towers as simple as lifting a handle going back to the first G4 if they wanted to make it difficult to access? I have always replaced or upgraded all of my RAM, installed internal hard drives, video cards and other components. As a matter of fact, the first time I accessed the internal components I had exactly 2 weeks experience and was walked thru it over the phone and that was on either a Quadra or something even earlier.
As I learned more about both systems and began speaking to PC users, I found it amazing that my friends who all had PCs had no clue where their files were going when they installed software. No wonder they would run out of space and have constant conflicts. Makes you wonder who was spending their money where? Apple on development and Microsoft on propaganda and stealing and doing cheap knockoffs Steve Jobs work. Goes to show you get what you pay for, just like in any other industry.
Watching the development of WIndows over the years, it was like watching "catch up". It was as if Microsoft kept trying to do what Mac was doing, yet they never could get it quite right. It never did seem to interface smoothly.
Apples biggest flaw is not in their computers. It is a matter of history. Big mistakes were made in their marketing and management. They were idealists, and though they were the market leaders at first, their lack of business savvy was the leading cause of their loss of that position. That and their image of being just "too cute" to be taken seriously by the big business world.
For all you PC people out there who find the Macs OS clumsy or less intuitive, take a couple of hours and go through some of the Mac Help files or go on Apples web site and read some the tutorials. I can guarantee you that for every hour you put in familiarizing yourself with Macs OS and how well the applications and system interface, besides the fact of how endlessly customizable it is, you save yourself days and days of banging your head against the wall and cursing at your computer if you continue down the PC road. There is a reason that Mac users are so loyal, especially the ones who are more than just novices in the Windows world.
I would rather spend my time on my computer doing what I bought it to do, and not using my foam rubber bat beating the thing up. (something my employees bought me to keep me from destroying the one PC among our 12 Macs).
I could keep going on (with over 30 years behind me it isn't very hard). So "geek" talk aside, the point is, Apple is still the leader in inventiveness, and Microsoft is just a bargain brand knock of.
Mac is right for me
by jhayesb - 3/31/07 6:15 PM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I have owned 12 macs, both Towers and notebooks in the past 15 years... I usually have the latest Mac laptop. I have also had the latest PC notebooks and towers where I work... I FAR and away prefer the Mac OSX over and version of windows, even Vista. I do a lot of video, music and multimedia projects. Every day I have one of each on my desk at work and at home. The Mac RARELY freezes if ever, let alone crashes. Never had a virus on the Mac, ever. The PC of course has had many, often daily freezes/full ctrl-alt-del crashes and of course occasional virus problems, even with the latest virus protection updated and in place.
My current situation finds me using the latest MacBook with two gigs of ram running both OSX and XPP Pro at the same time. I do more "risky" web surfing and purchasing, and multimedia on the Mac side with its 128 bit encription... while doing the PC only software tasks on the PC side. Works well for me... sharing the same hard drive. When the PC side freezes or crashes, I still have a functioning computer... as the PC side still acts completely like PC. The MacBook running PC apps runs at speeds meeting and often exceeding the speeds of my regular PCs.
Hope this helps. I am a computer professional with over 30 years of experience. John
mac wins out for me..
by hupalmer - 4/1/07 7:53 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I have been working as a professional photographer for twenty-plus years, and during my digital incarnation I have worked on both PC and Mac platforms. I kept PC going for my main image processing work simply because I could afford more memory and processing power by choosing the cheaper PC machines, but since a year or so I have ditched all my PCs in favour of the dual processor macs that are very powerful and are much better value than they used to be.
I don't miss the tendency to crash that the PC's had, together with the experience of a PC hard drive crash that cost me more in lost time, than I spent extra on my new dual processor mac. I also find the new generation macbooks marvellous to work with on the road.. I keep its hard drive backed up to a smallsized lacie hard drive, and can clone thehard drive onto a new machine if it goes missing, at the touch of a button, settings, accounts, passwords, the lot... which is an example of how mac products are designed with thought for the user, worth the extra in my experience.
Good luck!
Hugh
Macs vs PCs
by Glenna Webb - 4/1/07 11:31 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I use a Mac at work (old 9.2 operating system)and a PC at home. Just bought a new one with WinXP Professional. Don't know if this will help, but I find not a lot of difference between the two. Macs are very stable, don't crash a lot. Usually it's only one specific program. But the same is true for the PC, at least when you use an office/professional version of Windows. When I had Win95 and Win98, neither of which was a "professional" version, there were quite a few crashes. Then upgraded to Win2000Pro, and eventually to WinXPPro and it rarely, if ever crashes. A program might crash, but not the whole computer.
Also, in having to switching back and forth between a Mac and PC on a daily basis, I have found that there is not a whole lot of difference in how they work. Once you learn a program, it works pretty much the same on either a Mac or PC, provided the programs you want to use are available for that operating system.
So, just my opinion, but I think that whether you decide to use a Mac or a PC will depend more on the programs you want to use and their availability for a particular operating system. If you decide to stick with a PC, make sure your OS is the professional version and you should have very few, if any, problems with crashes.
Glenna Webb
Mac - Media; Windows - Gaming, System Administration
by cameroncole - 4/1/07 11:51 AM In reply to: Is the Mac right for me? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Well spoken scotlandyardus.
I've been a long-time Mac and Windows user.
I just want to identify one point that is essential for all photographers, and graphic designers. Mac OS has the ability to perform graphic calculations on the operating system level, not just the application level. All versions of Windows up until Windows XP didn't have this ability. This is most noticeable when graphics are being re-sized by the operating system. Windows XP doesn't have this ability. OS X has a graphics engine called "Quartz Extreme" which performs all of these calculations.
The benefits for photographers are that all pictures (both created, and photographed) are defined better by the operating system (not just on the application level). This means that system processing is not controlled (or should I say stolen) completely by one application.
This was a major issue that Microsoft dealt with in the latest version of Windows (Vista - which, was pretty much released for this very reason). Vista has this ability now, but it's memory requirements make the operating system very sluggish when performing simple graphical tasks (dragging windows, "windows switcher", etc.).
Vista is a work of beauty, but still has several issues, that need to be fixed by Microsoft before I take photography to windows.
Windows does have the advantage in the gaming realm, because they use Direct X to perform pre-defined graphical calculations (as opposed to OpenGL, which is going to be obsolete), but most game ports for Mac that are written for OpenGL perform well.
Macs do crash, but not nearly as often when multi-tasking while working with media. It's a much better platform for these tasks.
Windows is excellent for System Administration (network, etc.), gaming, and other tasks that the modern world is slave to due to the fact that Microsoft has such a significant share on the market (which I believe is a skewed number, and a different discussion altogether).
Conclusion,
Macs are superior for graphical applications because of the software, and the operating system's ability to work with graphics.
Windows machines are superior for system administration, gaming, and general compatibility.
I will say this, I’ve benchmarked the new operating system (Windows Vista) on my Intel-based Mac, and the benchmarks were actually better, than those of a PC with similar specifications. By controlling what hardware is installed in their computers, they have complete control over the hardware environment with which the OS works.
New emulators, and the ability for Macs to run Windows gives the company a huge advantage over Windows based PC's, but I don't see any reason to by a Mac to run Windows. Personally I have 8 computers; half are Macs, and half are Windows-based.
The no-virus/spyware thing is also a major benefit for a person like me (which in most cases is the cause for systems crashing)!
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
