All things being equal: processor speed, memory, hd capacity, photoshopetc., Is there really a difference between a Mac and a PC---specifically in the laptop world? would love to hear from those who have experience with both.
Thanks,
Bob
Printable View
All things being equal: processor speed, memory, hd capacity, photoshopetc., Is there really a difference between a Mac and a PC---specifically in the laptop world? would love to hear from those who have experience with both.
Thanks,
Bob
Both will do a good job but I feel that a MAC has much better resolution for viewing images.
Thanks Julius
Like cameras, computers are only tools to capture and inhance you images. The most important item is you.
Mark
I've worked at couple places that had PCs and they never seemed as fast as the macs especially with PS but I don't know enough about PCs to know if they were running properly. This is going back a couple years also.
The Mac interface has always seemed easier to navigate and tweak to me. My Mac is very low maintenance too.
With a mac you have all the option for editing software PC do and then you have a big plus in Aperture.
I've recently made the switch from PC to Mac. I wish I had done it years ago - the main reasons I never did earlier was the price difference between a new Mac and a similarly spec'ed PC, and software limitations. Software isn't really a limitation anymore, nearly every PC program I commonly use is now available for a Mac, and the ones that aren't, well it doesn't really matter because there's usually a better Mac only program available, and with the increasing number of Mac users out there the price of Mac software is very reasonable now (used to be that Mac software seemed to be $10 more expensive than PC versions - now they often come on the same DVD). It always seemed tough to justify the purchase of a $2000+ MacBook Pro when I could pickup a PC notebook for less the $1000. But after getting a new Mac I must say the cost was well worth it. I never knew what I was missing - a computer that just works as it should right out of the box. Ah? What a novel idea. Whenever I bought a new PC, I always seemed to spend at least a day and a half reformatting it and reinstalling the programs that I really wanted on it (rather than a bunch of preloaded shareware crap that you can never completely uninstall without a complete reformat). Then there was the task of downloading and installing all the updated drivers and frustration that seemed to come from not installing programs in some sort of magical order and then having to reinstall it again to get it working again. There was a bit of a learning curve to using a Mac because there are a number of things that are nothing like a PC, but once you get over that it's great. I love my Mac, you get what you pay for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julius
Resolution is dependent on the monitor, not the operating system.
There are much better monitors out there for viewing images than what is supplied with the MAC. The MAC has a good monitor, but the PC is independent of the monitor you purchase. The Eizo's and some NEC's beat the MAC monitors hands down.
I like MACs a lot but not because of the hardware. Their value is in the OS. I can always build a PC that beats the performance of the fastest MAC available for a fraction of the price. You don't see too many serious gamers using MACs. For processor performance and graphics performance they build/buy PCs.
What I have noticed with Mac's PC's in terms of reliability is in the components. Now that they use the same components they are virtully the same now. Pre built PC's are usualy terrible! If you can build a computer that is the way to go. You can customize every thing and it's a lot cheaper too. It's really not hard to do, all you are doing is assembling some components and install the operating system and you have a computer that would rivall almost any pre built system in terms of reliability and performance. Just google How To build a Computer and you will be amazed how simple it is. I have built two computers myself, the first computer took about 3 hours to build and the second took about 1 hour.
John.
John.
This is a pretty common debate and in the graphics/ photo editing industry Mac's have traditionally been the goods. These days however you can build a PC from scratch for much much cheaper than a MAC and get as good, if not better performance. (and it's not difficult at all as mentioned)
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe you can buya Mac withouta monitorand add a better monitor later.Mac's makeexcellent LCDscreens (especially the new LED backlit screens) but there's better options out there for colour accuracy which is paramount for photo editing as far as I'm concerned. I just bought the new Dell U2410 IPS panel for a hell of a lot cheaper than a Mac screen and it's the ducks nuts (needs calibrating out of the box but most do).
You can always run the Snow Leopard operating system on a PC if you prefer it over Windows too.
I'm a PC user myself but am in no way against the use of a Mac. I think they're brilliantly setup for the user, with so much work going into making it an experience to use. There's certainly a few thing microsoft cantake from Apple'sproducts.
My 2 bob. Cheers.
Its down to personal taste. I think Macs are great, but I prefer PC's.
Windows 7 with CS4 is superb I find. Havent encountered any problems. Its fast and does what I need.
The problem is, people rate a standard PC against a Mac. You can't do that. A standard PC from your computer market is NOT a decent machine to run specific requirements on. If a PC has the same spec as a Mac, both will do the designed job perfectly.
People buy a Mac at a high price built with high specs. People buy a PC at the CHEAP, they want a cheap machine to get online or whatever, this doesn't work if you then expect that machine to do a tough task of using Photoshop.
Photoshop will run crap on any machien with low specs. Give a machine decent specs it will run Photoshop well no matter what OS it has.
Yes I have used Photoshop on a Mac here at work, before the Mac fans say I'm biased or haven't tried it ;)
BOTH are good, I wouldn't rate one above the other.
Thanks to all for the insight, your comments and recommendations were valuable as always. As an experienced PC user with a considerable investment in software (and hardware), I don't think I will be switching anytime soon. I understand and can manipulate the Windows environment to meet my needs, so to change now would force another learning curve and at my age, those are sometimes hard to overcome.
Thanks again
Bob
My PC is marvellous, it not only deals with my TIFF files from the Canon 5D2 as I blend layers in photoshop, but it also manages to cope with windows vista at the same time!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by btaylor
You can purchase a Mac without a monitor, the MacMini and the MacPro. Also, all Mac's have an additional video output to connect an extra monitor.
You can only run Mac OS X on a Mac or a "rigged" PC (which I wouldn't recommend).
The best part about the Mac is the same people design the hardware and the software. Things just seem to work on a Mac.
From some one who has sold and serviced PCs for 20 years, I all way stress service, if you need help, how close is a MAC dealer. Not very close here in central Illinois. But in a town of 30,000 we have 4 retail business to service PCs. PCs can get ( do get ) ALLOT of malarious ( extra unwanted software, that can do anything from slowing down your system, to making it complete unusable ) software that will need professionally removal. This does not happen with MAC!
Desktops should be, as stated, upgraded, custom ( read this as faster, starting at a little less than $1000, without the monitor, do spend the extra money to get a better monitor, it does not help with the speed, but does makes a big difference in image quality ) systems, not the slow off the self system form local retailers.
Desktops can be easily serviced by any local shop, no matter the brand. Most portables need to go back to the factory for any warrenty service, any repairs may need expensive ( more costly than a desktop system ) parts. Portable do need more service, ( broken power jack, broken LCD, dead batteries ) just the nature of things, from all the moving around.
Portables can be gotten that are faster, ( again in the price range of a MAC Portable, but avoid cheap ( less than $1000 ) off the self systems, they will be slow. Most, if not all, portables need to be cleaned ( you may want to get professional help ) of extra software that the factories load, to get the system running at the full speed the system is capable of.
Only thing I would add is - run the 64-bit version of Windows, whether it's Win7 or Vista. This is one area that Macs have a measurable advantage - their OSs are 64-bit. With PCs you have to specifically buy the 64-bit version.
But IMO there's no sense being limited to 3.5GBs of RAM (actually ~3G) - especially since RAM is so cheap these days.
You may not notice the difference between 3G and >6G if all you ever run is Photoshop or LR. But if you need multiple programs open at the same time (incl your browser) you'll really appreciate that extra RAM.
And the only way to get it is by running a 64-bit system - OSX or Win7 64 (or Vista 64).
Quote:
Originally Posted by canoli
Absolutely! The good thing as well is WIndows 7, no matter what version you buy, they all ship with both 32 & 64 bit versions!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maleko
Actually you have to buy either a 64bit or 32bit version. Both don't come in the same box.
However if you already have a license you can purchase an installation disk for like $10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiethole
Incorrect.
You had to buy them seperately for XP and for Vista, but for 7 both get sent in the box.
My box contains both, and it states it on the product features: http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-7-Home-Premium/dp/B002DHGMK0/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=12596802 22&sr=8-3
Windows 7 Home Premium (includes 32-bit & 64-bit versions)
Why would you pay more money for both disks? You can only install one version.
Home Premium 64bit = $117
Home Premium 32bit = $120
Home Premium 32bit + 64bit = $199
With what we sell here at our store, which is the OEM version ( we build our own commuters ) xp home and xp pro and xp 64 come on separate cds and you need a matching product key. But your product key ( for xp pro ) will work with any xp pro cd. With Vista, Win 7, and Office 2007 all the products are on the same DVD and depending on the product key you enter which version is installed. Your Win 7 product key will work with any Win 7 dvd ( even a copy from someone else, if you loose your DVD, or did not get one with your system ) but you will always get the product that the Key number calls for - home, pro - 32 or 64 versions.
Some companies may not include DVD and may charge extra for it.
Bill
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiethole
Both disks come as standard here retail. I got my copy of 7 on pre-order for £60, both discs. If I didn't pre-order it for that much, I would have got it OEM.
All things being equal: Mac costs more! With PC I get more for my money.
i USED both UNTIL I INVEST nEW Imac 24" .Mush preferred th iMac for resolution and collabration with processing center ... 99% spot on adjustment required by processing center[:D]
so many versions of Windows Vista and the new 7 OS to keep track of and make comparisons. I have a Mac mini that runs Snow Leopard (Mac OS X) and a Dell machine that still runs Windows XP Professional with SP3
the installer for Windows 7 is quite impressive, compared to XP or Vista.