| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/17/2011 08:47:48 PM · #1 |
| I'm not trying to stir up a hornets next here. I've been using PC for decades, and my current PC needs serious upgrading or replacing. I've been quite pleased with it but keep hearing that Apple is "better" for graphics and photography. Add to this that I use my computer for MUCH more than just photo editing. I'm interested in technical feedback about the advantages of one system over the other, and not personal preferences. My current feeling is that both systems do the same thing equally well but differently. Dispel or confirm this hunch. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 08:53:28 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I'm interested in technical feedback about the advantages of one system over the other, and not personal preferences. |
Technically, when building a computer you can have pretty much the exact same specs in either machine. Some people however favor UI (User Experience)of one over the other. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 09:42:07 PM · #3 |
| I wasn't aware you could build a Mac. I thought that was all very proprietary, etc. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 09:49:58 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I wasn't aware you could build a Mac. I thought that was all very proprietary, etc. |
I do believe you can build a custom one from their site. You could also build it from scratch buying parts from Newegg and other online retailers. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 09:52:40 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I've been quite pleased with it but keep hearing that Apple is "better" for graphics and photography. |
Yep, the Apple marketing department is good!
There's nothing "better" about a mac for graphics/photography (or anything else for that matter) no matter how much Apple want you to think there is (most people just use the same software regardless). The advantage to macs (for some people at least) is their ease of use; their gui design and product integration. If you're prepared to pay through the nose for hardware, it is quite nice having your ipad talk to your apple tv and get it to stream stuff backed up automatically from your mac to your time capsule without having to spend more than 30 minutes figuring out how it all connects up to each other. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 09:58:45 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
I wasn't aware you could build a Mac. I thought that was all very proprietary, etc. |
Google Hackintosh. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 10:34:16 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by HawkinsT:
Yep, the Apple marketing department is good!
|
probably the best marketing company on the planet. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 10:54:55 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by gcoulson:
Originally posted by tanguera:
I wasn't aware you could build a Mac. I thought that was all very proprietary, etc. |
Google Hackintosh. |
ETA: The hackintosh is the DIY build guide for building an Apple computer using off the shelf parts and that you can use to boot Windows as well.
Hackintosh Mini
Hackintosh
Message edited by author 2011-12-17 22:55:53. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 10:54:59 PM · #9 |
Now they have swapped to the same hardware as the rest of the world.... building a hackitosh is not that bit a deal. IF you buy the stuff in the apple store then I find the same hardware is FAR more expensive.... but they build all the compatibility so you have to pay for that (just like you do at dell, hp, others for a windoze machine).
Photography software is basically identical apart from slight interface things.....
The rest is a difference in UI, although that is minor IMO now days... compare to say the early 90's when it was very different. Just like Nikon vs Canon, some really really prefer one over the other, most of the rest of us could use either without too much hassle. |
|
|
|
12/17/2011 11:03:37 PM · #10 |
| my best friend switched to mac because he works on windows all day....makes no sense to me anyhow he said macs don't get viruses. he said 90% of the viruses out there are written for windows but so are most of the games and since i'm a gamer i can live with that besides i haven't gotten more than 3 viruses anyhow and two of them were my own fault. |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 01:18:09 AM · #11 |
If you're comfortable using a PC, then you can continue just fine with that. Apple's focus has long been on the creative industry, while PCs were for business. Accordingly, Macs have held an edge is areas like color management, printing, and intuitive ease of use. Apple's monitors tend to be very high quality, whereas it's hit or miss on a PC. Viruses are almost unheard of on Macs, and of course iPads, iPods and iPhones are more tightly integrated... take a photo with your iPhone and it will automagically be on your Mac and iPad, too. Macs come with iPhoto, which makes organization and basic photo editing a breeze, and you have to go out of your way to lose an original RAW file.
On the hardware side, both platforms use primarily industry standard parts and will run Photoshop comfortably, but the similarities end there. Many PCs are stripped down, and while they offer more opportunity for customization, Macs come with all the bells and whistles and little need to add anything (one reason for purported price differences). Blue-ray and USB 3.0 are an exception, although the Macs' Thunderbolt interface is arguably superior to USB. The other (and biggest) reason for price differences are that Apple doesn't cater to the low end. Instead, they use overwhelming supply chain leverage and shared components to maintain higher quality computers at competitive or lower prices than similar PCs. For example, PC makers are having a hard time competing with the MacBook Air on price. Typical PCs are price-sensitive commodity products, so the manufacturers necessarily use cheaper parts wherever possible to remain competitive. Apple, on the other hand, is very particular about the components it uses, and the result is a more reliable computer that's often faster than a PC with similar specs. The warranty on a refurbished Mac is the same as a new one, used models hold their value much better, and the OS and software upgrades don't cost as much since Apple doesn't have to make money on software alone. You can build a Mac on your own from scratch, just as you can build a BMW on your own. I wouldn't recommend either unless you really know what you're doing. |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 02:30:42 AM · #12 |
I'm a Mac user after spending years as a PC user (and builder) - if you want low end / basic setup, a PC will give you a bargain, if you want performance and reliability PCs just don't get near a Mac on a bang per buck basis.
Last PC laptop I bought - a £3k Rock, noisy, hot, heavy, 40 mins battery life - never really worked despite going back to the manufacturer three times.
Bought a MacBook Pro after that, faster, lighter, quieter, 5 hours battery life - completely reliable and ran Windows faster than the Rock.
Last PC Desktop I bought - a Chillblast Fusion: water-cooled (to be quiet) SLI beast, fastest quad core processor available at the time - highest score seen on 3D Mark when I bought it. Pretty good machine. Motherboard broke, replaced both graphics cards (they broke). Blue screened fairly often.
Upgraded to a Mac Pro - much quieter, better build quality, much, much faster, has never hung. Runs Windows natively under boot camp more quickly than the Chillblast - thought I would use Windows but I don't. The graphics card has broken but replacing was easy (despite the Apple Store saying the graphics card I wanted to put in wasn't supported - it works just fine)
At the high end Macs are bargains compared to very high end PCs.
Then there's the operating system - seems I was always patching and restarting Windows; the Mac occasionally restarts for updates but far far less.
If you buy into the whole Apple thing and have an iPhone, iPad, Apple TV and a MacBook. The ease with which you get really useful workflow is unrivalled.
Cons: If you want to constantly upgrade your hardware, the Mac isn't nearly so friendly but to be honest in recent years the changes to memory, motherboard sockets etc been than upgrading often means upgrading multiple components at a time.
I've had about 12 PCs, built five or six myself - I have had my Mac Pro for four years, nowhere near needing an upgrade yet.
Can't see me ever going back to PC - why would you when a Mac runs even Windows more quickly? |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:27:18 AM · #13 |
Apple does put high quality hardware into their machines, no doubt. Because they pay attention to how that hardware integrates and works together, the performance is often top notch. The bottom line though is that Macs run on the very same hardware as PCs, and similarly equipped boxes will run the same tasks in nearly identical times. It is simply not true that for some magical reason a Mac will run windows faster than a similar PC.
OS X is also a very good operating system. It is quite different from Windows, and it takes some getting used to. If you're a long-time Mac user, Windows may seem unintuitive... but the reverse is also true. I've been back and forth, having used both Mac and PC in a business environment (have always been PC at home).
|
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:35:22 AM · #14 |
First, thank you all for keeping it civil. "Hackintosh"!!! Love it. Knew immediately what it meant.
Paul, my computer background is very similar to yours. I've had about the same number of PCs and built about the same number almost from scratch. However, I've had MUCH better luck with my hardware. In my life I may have on had 1 or 2 blue screens. Replacing parts was mostly plug and play, except of course, for motherboards.
As I am completely ignorant about Mac, what about external periferals? I have a couple of hard drives I use for storage and back up. Does Mac use USBs or would I have to replace those as well?
And finally, if I do make the transition, do I have to buy all new software...? |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:38:13 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
The bottom line though is that Macs run on the very same hardware as PCs, and similarly equipped boxes will run the same tasks in nearly identical times. It is simply not true that for some magical reason a Mac will run windows faster than a similar PC. |
I have 20Gb of RAM in my Mac Pro - is it not right that, in at least earlier versions of Windows, that's more memory than could have been addressed in a PC? |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:43:18 AM · #16 |
As long as this thread is up, I have a question -
I'm looking to make the switch to apple but might not have the $$$ for high end. So how about iMac?
And no, I'm not planning on building anything myself. |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:43:43 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by kirbic:
The bottom line though is that Macs run on the very same hardware as PCs, and similarly equipped boxes will run the same tasks in nearly identical times. It is simply not true that for some magical reason a Mac will run windows faster than a similar PC. |
I have 20Gb of RAM in my Mac Pro - is it not right that, in at least earlier versions of Windows, that's more memory than could have been addressed in a PC? |
It's true that until the advent of 64-bit operating systems, that's more than you could address. It's also true that, up until a few years ago, the majority of Windows machines shipped with 32-bit version of Windows, which essentially limited the user to 4GB. Power users have been running 64-bit Windows for years, however. For practical purposes, RAM is limited only by the motherboard, which is true for both Macs and PCs.
|
|
|
|
12/18/2011 11:52:19 AM · #18 |
| Also, I got an octocore Mac as they became available - perhaps there were octocore PCs around at the time, but I hadn't come across any... |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 01:22:16 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by kirbic:
The bottom line though is that Macs run on the very same hardware as PCs, and similarly equipped boxes will run the same tasks in nearly identical times. It is simply not true that for some magical reason a Mac will run windows faster than a similar PC. |
I have 20Gb of RAM in my Mac Pro - is it not right that, in at least earlier versions of Windows, that's more memory than could have been addressed in a PC? |
It's more memory than can be physically addressed by a 32 bit x86 cpu, doesn't matter what the os is (so post-powerpc 32bit versions of os x will have the same issue)... I believe the old powerpc chips will have had similar addressing issues anyway though, also being 32bit. Of course it depends what you're really asking when you say "earlier versions". I can tell you now, mac os 1 wouldn't have supported 4gb of ram =). |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 01:29:52 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Apple's monitors tend to be very high quality, whereas it's hit or miss on a PC. |
Every apple monitor I've seen, while nice for desktop use, significantly lacks black definition. Perhaps the ones I've used haven't been calibrated well though. |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 02:30:02 PM · #21 |
I don't play games on my computers. I bought my first computer in 1983. I've used at least one of most everything. I own, and use, both the PC, and the Mac.
My preference is the Mac. For the simple reason that the system does not have to be dependent on a myriad of drivers for a myriad of boards, cards, and whatnot. The system is tighter and more efficient due to the very fact of limited choice, that some decry. I've built, and modified many a PC. (Just put a Raid 0 SSD array in my PC. Verrrrry nice...). If I could only have one, it would be a Mac. Otherwise I'll continue to have both. Its like choosing lenses. Which one is the best? The one you use and like the most.
|
|
|
|
12/18/2011 02:47:39 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by PennyStreet:
As long as this thread is up, I have a question -
I'm looking to make the switch to apple but might not have the $$$ for high end. So how about iMac?
And no, I'm not planning on building anything myself. |
You can get all the power you would ever need for image editing for quite some time in an iMac Penny. Sure you can get even more performance out of a MacPro, but the gains for image editing will be minimal- video editing would be a different matter.
I think your biggest concern with an iMac will be where will you be editing and will that beautiful but "glare prone" glossy screen become an issue? I just got a new Mac and chose to go with a MacBook Pro hooked up to an older Apple Cinema display with anti-glare screen because of where I do my editing. Plus the occasional portability of a laptop is nice as well. And a new quad-core MacBook Pro with even 8GB of RAM works its way through editing quite well...
Message edited by author 2011-12-18 14:48:33. |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 04:42:27 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by paulbtlw:
Originally posted by kirbic:
The bottom line though is that Macs run on the very same hardware as PCs, and similarly equipped boxes will run the same tasks in nearly identical times. It is simply not true that for some magical reason a Mac will run windows faster than a similar PC. |
I have 20Gb of RAM in my Mac Pro - is it not right that, in at least earlier versions of Windows, that's more memory than could have been addressed in a PC? |
Most people I know run a 64bit version of Windows 7. Still plenty of people running XP or 32 bit versions, but the trend has been 64 bit for a few years.
Here are captures from the Microsoft site for desktops and servers.
Dave
|
|
|
|
12/18/2011 04:53:14 PM · #24 |
I'm going to jump in on this thread also as I was just about to post the same question and then saw this thread (thanks tanguera)
Others may know I have been posting about getting a new dell U2711 to hook up to my laptop (I have one on order which was on a great special but I am having second thoughts) - desktop recently died - and I also missed an opportunity to purchase a good secondhand imac before that.
I'm at a similar point to tanguera. Do I make the jump to Mac? Everyone I have spoken to that has made the move says it's the best thing they ever did. Love the machines and the ease of use. My experience with home PC's hasn't been too bad (work is another story).
Lightroom can work on both platforms (is loaded with both on the CD)
Topaz can be loaded on both platforms
ProShow Gold is not even made for a MAC
Will have to purchase PS5 (or maybe I can get by with Elements 10 now that I have lightroom)
I need to make this decision real soon as I would have to cancel the Dell monitor order.
FOR THOSE THAT USE AN IMAC ALREADY
Do you find the 27" glossy screen a problem? |
|
|
|
12/18/2011 05:18:11 PM · #25 |
The household has been running PCs for a long time and I'm writing this on one. There's an imac upstairs and everything works on it. In simple terms they cost more and they're worth it.
As for the 27" glossy screen... Problem? We assume this to be subtle irony. |
|
