<span style="color: #000000; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Or you could pick up 2 or 3 similarly spec'd PCs for the same price [:P]Originally Posted by mikehillman89
<span style="color: #000000; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif';"]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Or you could pick up 2 or 3 similarly spec'd PCs for the same price [:P]
True. But premiere is very picky on what components you have in the computer [:P] as well
<span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"]Or you could pick up 2 or 3 similarly spec'd PCs for the same price<span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"]
I always like these debates. I have a 17" MacBook Pro that's over 4 years old, and still performs wonderfully fast running the latest Mac OS. Show me a "similarly spec'd PC" from 4 years ago which can run the latest Windows version efficiently. I should also point that I don't use Macs exclusively - my work provides me with a PC laptop. In fact, I am on my sixth work-provided laptop in the same 4 years I've had my current Mac laptop - of the previous 5 Windows machines (a Compaq, 3 HP's, and 2 Lenovos), one was end-of-lifed and the other fourjust up-and-died (hard drives, CPUs, etc.). Even with corporate discounts, my employer spent a whole lot more money on my PC laptops than I did on my Mac.
Remember the I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ads? Here's my favorite version:
Thanks for the backup neuro!
I just like to tease because Mac users are always so in love with their computers :-)
Now days these are pretty much the same components in both systems so I wouldn't say that's indicative of PC's.
I have to ask about your 4 year old MacBook...have you upgraded it in the past 4 years (RAM, etc)? How much do versions of the OS cost (or are they free)? I'm just curious if you put any money into it over its life to have it run the latest OS well.
I don't think there is a "correct" answer to the Mac/PC debate. If there was one of them would probably go away (beta max vs. VHS, HD-DVD vs. blu-ray, etc). It comes down to personal choice (and in some cases software availability, but less so than in the past). I personally view PCs as disposable. They should sell laptops in vending machines! One thing that I find to be important is both RAM and HD space. Each version of a software application usually demands more RAM and cameras/video cameras keep spitting out larger and larger files. What's my point? Even if your awesome Mac still "runs" well after 4 years the fact is that you're memory needs (both temporary and permanent) will continue to grow. Sure external space is cheap and easy so desktops, in my eyes, don't make this argument as effective. Laptops on the other hand, if you're dealing with a PC, it's often times cheaper to replace than to upgrade. Laptop memory and internal hard drives are still way more expensive than their desktop counterparts. Where was I...on yeah, so if I spend $600 on a PC that actually specs out WAY better than an entry level MacBook that costs more like $1,200 I can toss it in 2 years and buy another one for $600. Of course that one will be significantly faster and have twice the temporary and permanent memory. Not everyone shares this attitude though.
Side note, if Mac dropped their prices by 25% I would wonder if they could make more money off of the volume of sales. The argument I always hear is about the $$$ and not about the fear of the "change" the way it often used to be. What do you think?
No hardware upgrades - the only thing I've bought for it since I've owned it is spare battery (bought recently because I wanted continuous power if needed to help entertainour 2 year oldon our first cross-country plane trip with her - turned out books worked just fine, though).
The most recent OS upgrade (10.6) was $29 (I actually spent $49 for the 'family pack' version so I could use it on my wife's MacBook as well - honestly, that is - with Apple the family pack is on the 'honor system' since the single-user license discs can be used on an unlimited number of machines).
I agree that there's no 'right' answer here - personally, I prefer Macs because they tend to be more stable (I can't remember the last time mine 'crashed' and I only reboot when forced to by a software update),and for the design/ergonomics. They are alsoinnately more secure from a virus/spyware standpoint (because the OS is based on a Unix kernal) - but of course nothing is invulnerable. Good AV software is a must on a PC, not so for a Mac. Then, there was some recent unpleasantness at work when a broken McAfee antivirus update pushed out to corporate America resulted in lots of PCs unstoppably rebooting every 60 seconds...but, I digress.
You have some great points about the ever-increasing need for RAM and storage. I will say that the MacOS is very efficient at RAM allocation, though, and it alsoautomaticallyperforms file defragmentation, cache cleanup, etc., on the fly and in the background. I guess my point is that a 'similarly spec'd' Mac will likely perform faster than it's Windows counterpart because the same vendor has control over both the hardware and the OS, so they are more tightly integrated. But, if I was doing much in the way of video editing, I know that I'd quickly be constrained by the size of my largest-available-in-2006 internal HDD. The only time I ever feel that I'm running short of RAM or CPU power is when I am running Windows in a virtual machine (an image of my work laptop) and need to allocate half of my RAM and one of my CPU cores to the VM. But I prefer that handicap to carrying two laptops!! In fact, when Apple switched to Intel CPUs in 2006 I think that eliminated much of the 'fear of change' issue - it added the ability to run Windows natively or efficiently via virtualization (i.e. only softwarevirtualizationneeded, not hardware) . If I really wanted to (not that I would), I could boot my Mac laptop in Windows and it would be a PC (albeit a prettier and more expensive one []).
The other thing I really appreciate is the 'plug-and-play' convenience. Case in point, the instructions for the SIIG High-Speed ExpressCard CF reader/writer I got when I got my 7D:
Windows Vista:
- Insert a memory card into the adapter.
- Insert the adapter into the computer.
- Insert the driver CD.
- Click Start.
- Click Search.
- Type "D:\setup.exe".
- Click Enter.
- Click Continue.
- Click Next.
- Click Install.
- Click Finish.
- Right-click Computer.
- Click Manage.
- Click Continue.
- Click Device Manager.
- Double-click Memory Technology Driver.
- Confirm that the ExpressCard CF Adapter is listed.
Mac OS X:
- Mac OS X will automatically detect theExpressCard CF Adapter, no driver installation is needed.
I can't speak for all those Windows users out there, but I know which set of instructions I'd prefer to follow. [:P]
--John
Did you really have to do that?!?!? I was not a fan of Vista at all. Window's 7 is much improved although I hate the TV ads ;-)
My next computer purchase will be a desktop of some variety and its sole purpose will be to manage picture files. I'll probably be looking this summer. Feel free to start talking me into a 27'' iMac :-)
Of course not, because I'm using a Mac. I just stick the thing into my ExpressCard slot and it works.
Get the iMac! The display on them is wonderful, and the form factor is great... After all, you high-end photo equipment - you should have the best computer to process your images, right?!?
<span style="font-size: 10pt; color: #000000; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"]How about calibrating them? Ithink Iremember reading that the old ones had problems because they were so bright and even turned down to their lowest setting people were still having problems with their prints being too dark?<o></o
<span style="font-size: 10pt; color: #000000; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"]By the way, I officially apologize to the OP for hijacking their thread [:$]
Agreed. The best equipment should be complimented appropriately.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote