Question:
I've got very interested in photography to the extent that I want to use it as a source of income on the side when I retire. I have all PCs but recently got a demonstration of an iMac. I was swayed, but need to really research the differences before I spend that kind of money. I looked at a 24-inch iMac, basically set up for photography, therefore any Microsoft Office needs would not be an issue for a computer with such 'big guns'. Should I continue down this road, or focus back to a PC. I don't want to be crashing often, and the Mac guys say it won't happen (wrong people to ask). Need feed back from users to be more confident. Any guidance would be appreciated.
Submitted by: Chaz
Answer voted most helpful by our members:
Chaz,
To be honest about this, my PCs (there are 7 of them here) lock up or crash about once a year, and I believe that the whole idea that a quality PC is less stable than a Mac is a myth. The marketing side of me loves the “Mac vs. PC” commercials ... they are great commercials, well done, funny, and they do a good job of selling Macs ... but they present one very simplified and dumbed down side of a situation that is not nearly so simple as the commercials portray.
So let me first make a comment on Mac vs. PC: Macs are made, entirely, by one company, on whom you are almost totally dependent for everything. They are of generally high quality, but they are also generally quite expensive. PCs are made by .... well, by everyone including your neighbor’s teenage son in the garage or on the kitchen table, and both the price and quality can vary all over the place. A kit of haphazardly matched surplus last-generation ultra-parts obtained for $89 (after two dozen rebates) from JungleAnimalDirect and assembled by a high school student who is doing this for the second time and thinks he now knows it all is not going to have the same quality as a $2,000 Dell XPS system, but they are both “PCs”. So when we talk about the stability of a system and how often it crashes, I come back to the point that a quality PC is as good as a Mac.
Another point that is related here is that Macs now use Intel CPUs and chipsets, they use PCI, they use AGP and USB, they can actually run ... directly ... Microsoft Windows XP instead of the Mac OS. The Mac, in other words, IS a PC, just one that can use the Mac OS, which a non-Mac PC cannot. Mac hardware is, again, no more stable than quality PC hardware. Because, in fact, they are at this point pretty much the same thing, from a hardware perspective.
So let’s talk about your primary interest, digital photography. There is nothing about any PC that is hardware specific to photography. And as to software, there are tons and tons of digital photography applications available for the PC, and tons for the Mac OS as well. Of course if you are really, really serious about doing professional level photography on a computer (Mac or PC), you are probably talking about using Adobe full-version Photoshop, which is available on both platforms (and, again, the Mac can run Windows XP if you want to go that route (although the Mac may well not be the best platform for XP)).
So the real issues with Mac vs. PC are going to come down to the following items:
• If you buy a PC, you have to select a source for the PC, and all PCs are not created equal. The issue, from a quality, reliability, stability and cost perspective is not so much Mac vs. PC as PC vs. PC
• You can run XP on a Mac, but a Mac is not the optimum Windows XP platform, and switching back and forth between different OS’, while entirely possible, is a pain (Currently, you can’t officially run Vista on a Mac as far as I know, but I am certain that this will change at some point)
• While some products (including Photoshop) are available for both the Windows and the Mac platform, for the most part the two platforms have different software offerings. There is no argument that some of the Apple software for multimedia (photography and video) is very good, and you can’t run the Apple software on a PC. So if you want to use the Apple software, your decision is pretty clear. But there is a lot more software (superb, good, bad and yes, ugly) for the PC, so determining the software that you want to use is a key element in making this decision
• Unless you plan to use this computer only for your digital photography, there are probably two orders of magnitude more software, overall, for PCs vs. Macs. So keep in mind, also, the entire universe of what you will be using this computer for. Very few computers are used for only one single application.
The problems that people have with PCs come down to the fact that a typical PC system is made up of hardware and software from dozens or even hundreds of different firms, and that even with billions of PCs on the planet, the exact combination of both all of the hardware and all of the software found in any one PC is probably completely unique. On top of that, because PCs running Windows are 90% of the installed base of personal computers, they are the preferred target for virus and malware authors. It is the abundance and variety of both hardware and software offerings that gives PCs their versatility and low cost, but, at the same time, it’s that exact combination that also causes most of the problems that people have with PCs. You can’t have the good without the bad ... they go together. If you go with a Mac, you can avoid some of the pitfalls that exist in the PC world, but at the same time you will be avoiding a lot of the benefits as well, and precluding yourself from running most of the software that is currently being written (at least without switching operating systems and converting the Mac back into what is probably a sub-optimal PC).
In the end, however, it’s an individual choice that only the person actually using the system can really make.
Sincerely,
Barry Watzman
Submitted by: Barry W. (CNET member Watzman)
If you have any additional advice or recommendations for Chaz, let's hear them. Click on the "Reply" link to post. Thanks!
(Note: Please keep your advice and opinions objective. We are here to help this member with your knowledge and guidance. Let's not turn this into a heated PC vs. Mac flame war. Respect each other, and keep it civil. Thank you.)
If nine out of ten professional photographers use Mac for editing, I think that's a pretty good recommendation. How do I know this? I'm a magazine publisher (topselling newsstand high quality publication). All of the professional photographers that we use edit on Macs. The art directors use Macs. The differences between Mac and Windows for photography: ease of use, intuitive functions, sophisticated tools, no crashes.
I used Windows in the front office for four years. After continual crashes, error messages and admonitions to send error reports to Microsoft on the myriad things that went wrong, I just switched to a duo core Mac. I'm up and running in seconds, not multiminutes, I have no more crashes and I can edit photos and videos with a sandwich, not a manual, in one hand. My MacBook Pro also has a copy of Windows XP Pro and the Parallels application for using Windows. I use it to access my office machine when I have to. I have no connection to Mac except for the money I give them when I buy a computer. It's a rather larger sum than I would wish but in the professional art and photography world, this time you really do get what you pay for.
user name: amidu@aol.com
This was exactly my experience with Windows XP. After a procedure a techie at HP's India Call Center recomended for a problem I was having backing up my data that partitioned my hard drive, I bought a Mac.
I am a pro (over 30 years) photographer and was there in the "beginning" . The only reason that many (and I seriously doubt it's anywhere near 9 out of 10) photographers used Mac's (or Apple I,II, Lisa etc) and Photoshop is that those manufactures gave the products away for free to the training institutions / schools back in the "beginning". It was a fantastic marketing stratagy and cornered the graphics / printing market overnight for many years as it is always easier to upgrade than learn / purchase a new system (PC).
Please do not think that I am "bashing" Macs or Photoshop but there are less expensive alternatives out there that will do the job just as well. I have PS CS2 and Illy CS2 on my PC (yes, I have used Macs) but use them only to convert files for the "old world" printers that have not kept up with the times. All my graphics / photo work is done with Corel at a fraction of the cost of Adobe products. I, and many other professionals, have yet to find anything that can't be done in Corel that Adobe can do. Both Adobe and Corel are great programs but Corel is less than half the price of a PS and Illy combo.
In dollars and cents, you can put together a PC that is far superior in speed, memory and video to a Mac at the same price or equal to a Mac at a savings of 25%-35% (been there, done that, with top quality components). Security on a Mac is nothing to brag about..no better or worse than a PC. It's all in the firewall, anti-virus etc where it counts. Sure there have been fewer attacks on Apple OS's...there's no real market for hackers to really bother with it BUT even that has been changing lately judging by the dozens and dozens of security patches and updates lately.
If someone gave me a top notch Mac, I'd use it for some work...but for the price of it and PS / Illy, I'd rather build a PC with Corel and spend the savings on new lenses for my cameras.
PS: If you do get a Mac and Photoshop, you WILL be very happy....but you might miss not having that F2.8 lens you've been drooling over.
PhotoMan
Hi,
Like you I am: retired, a lifetime photographer, attempting to sell my pictures on the net, I use Adobe photoshop CS (the first Ed), and have been using photoshop since 1998 I started with PS 4 LE that came with a Nikon scanner at that time. I have been up grading (and experiencing the pain) ever since. The suggestion to use Corel should be taken seriously since it is scary when you think about where Adobe seems to be taking the graphics industry. But the Industry can probably afford it!
I havn't ever used a Mac but have specified my last two PC's myself. I believe you need as fast a processor and as much memory as you can afford large hard drives and a good graphics card too. I use layers in photoshop and often find myself with 1Gb+ files.I like to print big pictures 90cm x 90cm etc. But if you don't want to go beyond say A3+ you can work with much smaller file sizes and still use numerous layers.
If you only want to print your pics from the last outing on the home printer then forget most of the above but may be remember, Corel or some other programme ,speed and memory.(there were a couple of good programs that came with the Canon 350D)
Cheers Bill.
P.S. I get the ocasional crash or lock up necessitating switching off at the wall too.
You may like to type photographersblue into your browser some time.
I'm with ya Photoman..I was there as well, and clearly remember when Apple ruled the graphics world. That is when Quark and Quark xpress were the gold standard of professional publication. The reason Macs are still prevailant in the professional world, is the same reason Nikon still hold the edge in professional photography. No professional photographer is going to argue that Nikon is superior to Canon, however many have untold thousands of dollars invested in Nikon gear...no one with hefty investments in hardware and software, is about to switch. If it ain't broke..well you get the picture. And please, no flames from Nikon fan-folks.
Not to be too picky but your comments about Nikon and the pro's is correct so far as the point about not making a switch due to the investment. But it's incorrect as to who is the big guy. Canon owns the pro market right now and has for several years. Nikon is actually less expensive to own as it's trying to regain market share. As a user of both (and several other brands) Like the Mac Vs PC debate which will never end, other camera systems are great and it's really a matter of personal taste. But next time your watching pro sports, news where photographers are present or a fashion shoot pay a attention to how many cameras you can count from any one brand. Canon will be the highest. Now even though I like both, I've also gotten to use the new Sigma and Fuji, both are great camera's but as you said the market will not convert over to them even as they may be less expensive because like computer users camera users can also be snobs. A hard core Nikon user would feel very self continuous shooting at a pro event with an Olympus or a Pentax.
I'm so tired of the money argument when Apple and PCs are compared. When you consider all the time involved (e.g., making PC hardware work with Windows, protecting Windows from viruses, spyware, etc.) how much money have you saved?
Why spend so much money on equipment that doesn't work unless hours are used trying to "make it go?" If you factor in the amount of time wasted, are you really saving money with a PC? I realize there are people who enjoy customizing computers, tweaking operating systems, and breathing life into old hardware. I did. As a tech-type who finds his spare time more scarce these days, please consider the cost of all of the time you spend to "make it go" when comparing Apples to Windows, then decide if you save money by building and maintaining a PC.
When your Mac opens an email, it's pre scanned for naughty no-no's like a PC (if it doesn't you are asking for problems) and scans (ie system scans) are set up to run when the computer is not being used (like when you are asleep). There's no more time lost on a PC than there is on a Mac.
When it comes to problems "making things work", Apple has posted over 2 GIGABYTES worth of updates, security and 'make it work' patches since January,07 alone ! Hardly anything to brag about since Apple is the "manufacturer" of its' own products. PC's have more compatibality "problems" because the added software and hardware comes from all over the world....not just ONE address, like Apple.
It takes just about as much work to keep Mac up'n running as a PC. No computer, PC or Mac is perfect. Routine maintenance is a necessity for anyone using one. Those who don't practice it are asking for problems and don't respect their computer's needs.
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)!
I have an Antique 64M ram Presario PC with 98SE which I have been willing to deal with its shortcomings. Call me sentimental, call me financially Strapped. However its time to move on.
In my search for the best computer for me to purchase I am asking for opinions on which would be best.
Criteria:
I am continuing my trade certificate for Computer Aided drafting / Design And Autocad 2007 compatibility is a must. AS well I seek out and will continue to seek out CAD studios, Apps, Etc and I do not know which computer hardware is the best.
I need to stay in a OS that I can completely understand, I monitor and personalize my computer and do not overly worry about crashing or security issues heavily using apps, patches,(this is why I've stuck with windows 98.)
I really cannot afford to go over $2000
although less important: I am still toying with C++ and would like to continue my hobby in playing with programs.
It seems that there is less availible Shareware and Freeware for Mac Os and I'm hoping that there not limitations with the MAC i'm not seeing.
Not concerned with photography, or portables' compatibility.
Mac? PC? any comments would be useful.
Please don't laugh at my Antique Computer, Its hard to let go.
Chris B
Notice that I said mac OR pc. Not versus. The Mac OS is a highly stable system, however, it will crash (kernel panic) when hardware is bad, particularly bad RAM. Get good RAM and lots of it, especially for Photoshop. Also know that Photoshop is for image editting and manipulation and is considered the best at what it does. However, as a photographer you will probably want to evaluate (then purchase) Aperture, made by Apple for the professional photographer. The second iteration of this software is absolutely awesome! iPhoto (part of the iLife suite) is alright for amateurs, but Aperture is what you want.
As for running Windows on Mac, do it! however, not only can you use Boot Camp to create a dual-boot, Mac-Windows machine, you might want to consider using Parallels Desktop, VMware Fusion or CrossOver, instead to run Mac and Win at the same time. (I prefer Parallels Desktip.) This way you can run the great Macintosh apps, then fire up Windows XP or Vista or 2000Pro (and more) when you want to use those few Windows specific applications that you might need. By the way, just because Windows has thousands more applications, most of those are on the low end and on the gaming side or are very specific to a particular niche - 95% of which you'll never use. Most businesses use no more than 20 applications on a single machine, and most businesses don't use half the power of MS Office. Save yourself money, don't buy MS Office. Get one of the inexpensive Office clones from Open Office Org (such as Neo Office) or something similar. As a photographer, you might prefer Pages (part of the iWork suite) for professional looking page layout without the huge expense - AND it can export as PDF, Word, HTML and other formats. Use that monetary savings to pump up the RAM in your machine.
The iMac 24" is considered an entry level 'Photoshop' machine. The Mac Pro is considered the machine for the professional; however, it isn't cheap and you have to add a monitor. Don't get a cheap PC monitor that can't be color adjusted! If you want professional results, get a professional display (which doesn't necessarily mean expensive -- check out the CNET reviews.)
'Nuff said. If you want more advice from a professional consultant in your area, check out http://consultants.apple.com
Well, after reading all of these posts, I have only 4 questions and a few comments:
1. If Mac is so perfect, why does it seem like every Mac user out there also seems to own at least one Windows PC?
2. If the Windows platform is so bad, then why did Apple find it necessary to make the Mac capable of running Windows?
3. What are you people doing with your PC’s to be experiencing so many crashes and problems? I can not even remember the last time I had a crash with any of my Windows XP computers.
4. What is the big WOW with the iMac built-in camera? Sony laptops have had built-in cameras for years.
waytron as a new mac owner All I can tell you is I can burn a dvd or a c.d. while browsing the web listening to music, check email or play a slid show all at the same time. This machine isn't glitchy like my p.c. was. Also the OS is so simple to use & learn all my p.c. friends (2 of which own PC service co.) are switching after i let them check out my mac book pro.
Like you, I am so used to running things like downloading and burning in the background while I go about doing whatever else I want, such as editing photos, whilie listening to music and having my email always on and set to check ever 15 minutes and atleast 2 or 3 different browsers open plus an FTP client and and probably illustrator or indesign. I guess I must be spoiled because every time I go to my brothers, who swears he has a super powerful top of the line PC, I invariably lock it up within 15 minutes, and he doesn't even have photoshop on there.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |