 marsiliphotography.com - Paula E. Marsili  Contact Paula E. Marsili Paula E. Marsili's Gallery |
PC vs MAC I'm in the market for a new computer. I currently use a PC but have heard in the past that a MAC is the way to go for great graphics. Is this true today for photography? Has PC technology caught up with MAC? Or was this not true to begin with? Basically, is there any reason to go MAC over PC when dealing with digital photography or should I stick with a PC?
|
|
|
|
||
|
A C |
A lot of people will tell you to go with MAC. But a lot of people will also tell you to go with Photoshop CS3. I don't use either one. I have PS CS ... but why upgrade when I'd really like to put that money into lenses right now? If you can afford it, then sure, go with a MAC. I'd like to get one sooner than later. But I won't get it until after I get a more lenses, lighting, and other odds and ends. I think these things will benefit me more.
|
|
|
|
||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Hi Paula, When I decided to get a new desktop a few months back, I went down to Best Buy and looked at all the new Windows machines with Vista. I had not heard any good things about Vista and asked for one with XP installed instead. The Best Buy sales people argued and it just hit me that I didn't want to get another Windows machine and have to deal with constant updates & virus protection and got a 24" IMAC instead. It took a bit to get used to the MAC and I did end up buying CS3 (I had a CS2 Windows license and was going to convert) but I downloaded a trial version of CS3 and thought the improvements were worth buying CS3 for MAC. I have not regretted any of these decisions. MAC is much faster simply because they dont have all the background processes running that Windows do. I can run CS3, Corel Painter X (with a Wacom tablet) and several other programs at the same time with no problem. I had trouble running Bridge & CS2 at the same time with my XP machine. It would crash and I would lose my work in the process which is why I went to get a new one in the 1st place. I dont have crash problems with my MAC. I will be adding a Mac Pro laptop in the near future. I dont care about the whole MAC vs Windows thing (kinda like Canon vs Nikon to me) but after my experience using the IMAC, I will continue buying Apple machines in the future. The 24" screen is a real joy to work with as well. - Carlton
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
And you can run Windows, and all your Windows software, on a Mac too, if you want.
|
|
|
|
||
|
marsiliphotography.com - Paula E. Marsili Contact Paula E. Marsili Paula E. Marsili's Gallery |
Thanks everybody for your input. I need to get out there and take a closer look at both.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Lynch |
Paula, I bought my first Mac in the late 80s, and my first PC about 8 years ago (the latter was a laptop). I have a day job where I work on a PC and currently at home I have a Mac Pro desktop and laptop. In other words, I am a Mac owner of some 20 years and recently upgraded to their top of the line. On the other hand I am very familiar with PCs as I use them often, and I also run Windows (via Parallel) on my Macs. I can honestly say there are few real differences, and I think I can outline them: * Mac can run Windows as well as the Mac OS, and I am not sure the reverse is true (I hear you can do it, but it is not built into the OS). * Mac has a 1.8 native gamma and PC 2.2 * There are more programs for PC * There are more viruses for PC * Mac can recognize more RAM (PC is limited to 4GB; macs are limited by the number of slots in the model) * Macs support RAID natively * Macs are thought to be more expensive (though it is arguable that cheaper PCs are just cheaper machines) * Mac design is generally superior (Carlton's machine, for example, is pretty much a work of art). I continue to work with Mac by choice for a few of the above reasons. One of which being I trust the 1.8 gamma more than the 2.2 of the PC and it seems to reflect what I get in print more precisely. I like having the flexibility of running both platforms at the same time because in writing and teaching Photoshop, there is often a good reason to be in one platform or another. I like having the ability to enhance performance with a lot of RAM. The industry is heavily Mac, but many of the issues that were a problem before (file format readability issues, file transfer, etc.) have mostly been mitigated. Services may often be Mac oriented, as might graphic departments at colleges, graphic departments at businesses, etc., but I believe this is more a hold-over at this point. I think the Mac vs. PC wars are virtually over -- though the setback of Vista and success of the iPod may see Mac gaining market share. I think you can make either work to your advantage, but that may be more the peripherals and configuration you choose than the OS. I got some great deals on my current hardware which is a concern when shopping for Mac. While I can justify the difference in cost for the differences I can define, it may not be the same for everyone. If you have the opportunity to work on both (borrow a mac from someone if you can), then you can be more sure of your choice. I hope that helps! Richard Lynch
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
An even-handed and concise assessment! Excellent, Richard. That's experience speaking. May I add to: The Mac OS – MacOSX – CAN be run on a PC box. But that's for deeeep PC nerds only. Not for Joe Blow, Jane Doe, or for my aunt Margaret. Nor for me or 99% of users out there. You can't buy it in a box. See how it works here:
|
|
|
|
||
|
R K Stephenson |
I hope this is an extension of the original question rather than just 'off-topic'. There is a MAC v. PC problem I have yet to resolve. As Richard noted, "* Mac has a 1.8 native gamma and PC 2.2" One effect of this is that images placed online will appear different when viewed on a MAC v. when viewed on a PC. I took Richard's excellent "Correct and Enhance Your Images" course. I was able to identify and correct some calibration problems on the PC side. But I am still unable to resolve the problem of images appearing different (usually a brighter/darker issue) on the two platforms. Also related: Carlton, do you use any type of calibration on the iMac? I picked up an iMac at a CompUSA "going out of business" sale but I can't find any way to adjust the monitor's settings. Cheers, RK
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Lynch |
RK, If you are using Photoshop, you might try using the Proof Setup and choose Macintosh RGB. I've had some success with that viewing for my own purposes...however, one thing you will not be able to control is what other people see based on their color setup, calibratons, and proof setup. I've used some tools to measure the mac screen response, and the displays seem to consistently fall within an acceptable pre-calibration range for RGB balance. I use the Spyder calibration devices for my screens. Richard Lynch
|
|
|
|
||
|
marsiliphotography.com - Paula E. Marsili Contact Paula E. Marsili Paula E. Marsili's Gallery |
WOW Richard, thanks for you input. I'm not sure I even understand all that you told me so obviously I have much to learn. I have been doing fine with a PC so I may stick with what I know. But I will get out there and look at the MACs to learn more before I make a decision one way or the other. Thanks again to you and all others who have shared their thoughts on the subject.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Yes RK, I am using the same Spyder2 on my MAC that I has previously used with my PC. Great Info Richard.
|
|
|
|
||
|
R K Stephenson |
Hi, Carlton, Thanks for that! I can't seem to find any way to adjust the monitor on the iMac, though. Cheers, RK
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Lynch |
RK, Newer macs do not have controls for brightness contrast as they already take care of that. The thing I was suggesting you consider is previewing in Mac RGB on the PC which can tend to give you a more mac-like preview. HOWEVER, it all depends on having everything else set correctly. Richard Lynch
|
|
|
|
||
|
R K Stephenson |
Hi, Richard, Thanks for that! I just picked up a new (PC) laptop which has hardware video controls so I can adjust it based on my Spyder recommendation. That should take care of the 'everything else'. ;^) Cheers, RK
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rom A.G. |
A long time ago, I had a computer which lasted me 5 years and it _never_ crashed... it was the Commodore64! No mouse, no hard drive, but I loved it. Look at how many dealers are selling MACs in NYC. J&R had a Apple section next to their PCs, not any more.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Lynch |
"Thus you are paying full price always." Not true. The system I was trying to purchase from Apple was $8500 on their site. I got it for about $4200 by shopping around. A comparable PC system was actually more (1/3 of the end price was the monitor). Funny these stores you speak of are not selling Macs anymore, as the trend is Mac is gaining market share, not selling less. Clones have not been around for 9-10 years or so...a failed experiment. I still have an old Starmax 4000. But the point: clones were short-lived. Is your research perhaps a little old? Here's a link from the J&R store...happy shopping: Hope that helps! Richard Lynch
|
|
|
|
||
|
W. |
LOL!
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||