| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/19/2008 11:02:39 AM · #1 |
Has anyone done this? I'm probably due a new machine soon and I've always used a PC. Somehow or another I've also understood that Macs are better for graphics/photos/picture editing etc.
Specific problems with transferring files, software?
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 11:19:38 AM · #2 |
There are several threads on this matter throughout the history of DPC.
Most people never look back. I am sure there are some who prefer the Windows experience.
You can get cross grades for most software that that support both platforms. Adobe (Photoshop) is one.
All the common graphics files will transfer no problem, jpg, tif, psd, gif, etc.
There is a MicroSoft Office for the Mac, Office 2008, that will open Word, Excel, and PowerPoint files with no problem. You can also get open source office suites like Open Office, that can open most of the file generated form the Windows version of Office as well.
Some web sites can be an issue. Some sites only work on IE for Windows, but not many. Usually if a site doesn't work on Safari, it will work with FireFox for the Mac. The ones that don't work on the Mac at all, well, that's thier loss, IMO.
Others will chime in with more info, I'm sure. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 11:23:18 AM · #3 |
| Echo Scarbrd, search for previous Mac vs. Windows threads. No need to beat that horse to death. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 11:24:44 AM · #4 |
I've used both, though I am primarily a PC user. I love the underlying Unix based system of Mac OSX. They have really nailed down a way of making the file system fairly easy to use, but also hiding some of the complexity. I love the fact that the Mac does not insulate the user from the file system, however, you do not see dozens of obscure file names in an application folder (like under Windows) Instead an application folder is presented to the user as an executable application. Slick. One of my complaints about Windows is that it insulates the new user from the file system by having the "start menu". Many people are confused by that. On the Mac you have the Dock, but you only put your most frequently used stuff in there. For the rest, you navigate the folders to find what you want. There are some bells and whistles that Windows has that would be nice on the Mac, however.
I'm a little more fond of the file manager interface on the PC, (NOT to be confused with the file system itself) though that may just be because I use it more. I also do not use the default view it offers. If I used a Mac all the time, I would certainly tweak it to my preference.
Printing dialogs are not as user friendly on the Mac, the user interface for drivers is more generic in nature.
Some software is not available for the Mac. But you will find alternatives. Lots of good open source is out there. You don't always have to spend a fortune.
One of my complaints about the Mac is the heavy graphics overhead of the interface. It can be sluggish unless you have a fast video adapter. I like a snappy interface and even on Windows XP, I turn off as much eye candy as I can. Windows Vista is similar to the Mac that way.
If I could build a Mac from components, I would, but Apple keeps OSX locked to their hardware. There are ways around it but Apple tends to do updates that break those methods, or they sue third parties that try to produce compatible systems. As much as I would like my next system to be a Mac, it will probably have (ugh) Vista running on it. Maybe I just need both on my desk.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 11:29:45. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 12:54:15 PM · #5 |
| Many thanks all you in-chimers. Will search. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 12:57:27 PM · #6 |
| I switched to a MAC last month (although I still have my PC as a secuity blanket, lol). Honestly though I love the Mac it's just seems to be nicer to navigate (and i've been using a PC since DOS was still an O.S. lol). |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:04:06 PM · #7 |
Today's macs are (for the most part) dual boot and run both OSX and Genuine Microsoft Windows. If there's some software that's windows only (and I've not run into any photography related windows software that didn't have OSX equivalents), you can still run it by booting into windows or using virtualization software (like parallels or vmware).
Only thing I'd like to add to this that may be mentioned in other threads -- my entries were all edited on a Mac. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:07:19 PM · #8 |
Just to add the opposite point of view, I was excited by the new Mac in the office some time ago, only to find it very difficult to get used to. My experience of the interface was that it was very unintuitive. I found it hard to find basic things like machine and software settings. I couldn't really tolerate the "your desktop is the interface for the currently running application" paradigm. And the process to mount drives, software images, and so on was a complete turn off.
I think it would just take getting used to. I also am a DOS/Windows user from the hoary old days long before the Internet, and am likely just set in my ways. But I suppose you could consider that from that viewpoint, I'm a new user, and so the interface should be fairly easy to navigate. It just wasn't so for me.
The one thing Mac has is beauty. Along with that comes beautiful applications, and I'm often disappointed that I can't use software like Coda and Scrivener. But beauty is one thing, and function another. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:20:10 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Louis:
And the process to mount drives, software images, and so on was a complete turn off. |
Yes, that's a huge difference. Ont PC you have an executable installer. On the mac you have to get used to DMG files (files that the system treats like a mounted disk drive), executable application installers without extensions to identify them as such, and sometimes you will still run across a SIT file. OSX has dropped SIT in favor of ZIP files, but you will still find them and the Mac OS does not have stuffit expander as standard anymore.
It took me a while to understand some of the conceptual differences, and when I run across the older OS9 systems, I still get lost on them.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 13:20:40. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:32:15 PM · #10 |
Have fun discovering that every Apple marketing point is complete crap :D
"Just works" my ass... *grumble*
Also, have fun paying too much. Enjoy having 60% of applications stay running and eat your RAM when you red X them. I hope you don't have a specific file extension open with something other than the default player, because as far as I've found, you can't set that extension to permanently open with the non-default player (I'd love someone to prove this wrong, because really, it's the most retarded thing ever).
I'd go on, but I'll just say I've been much happier after getting XP running on my Macbook Pro. Steam may have something to do with that.
Edit: I just realized that my file extension rant didn't make much sense, so here's a better explanation. In Windows XP, I can right click on a .avi file, and tell it to always open with VLC Media Player instead of WMP. That way, not just the .avi I clicked on, but ALL .avi files open in VLC. However, in OSX, you can't do that. I have to right click and open with VLC every time I want to play an episode of the X-Files. Like I said, I'd enjoy someone proving me wrong on this point, because it simply seems too stupid to be like that.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 13:37:17. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:36:07 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Anti-Martyr:
I hope you don't have a specific file extension open with something other than the default player, because as far as I've found, you can't set that extension to permanently open with the non-default player (I'd love someone to prove this wrong, because really, it's the most retarded thing ever).
|
If I've not got this too wrong: select the file, get info, then play with the 'open with' drop-down and then click the button to make sure that the chosen app always opens that type of file.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:46:35 PM · #12 |
hi  raish.. i am also a 'switcher'
hehehe
//dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=813117
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 01:50:00 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Anti-Martyr:
In Windows XP, I can right click on a .avi file, and tell it to always open with VLC Media Player instead of WMP. That way, not just the .avi I clicked on, but ALL .avi files open in VLC. However, in OSX, you can't do that. |
Rick click the file and choose "Open With" whatever application you want, or Choose "Get Info" and make the change there, then click the button to make that change stick for all similar files.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 13:50:57. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:38:46 PM · #14 |
I have never been a a big fan of Mac , probably because I never found it very intuitive and too fancy for my taste. The one click mouse is one of the fancy Apple thing, which I despise. Though I found the mac OS system rather more stable than Windows, although the XP and Vista are much more stable than Windows 95/98. Regarding software availability, PC are above Mac by far (and it will probably remain the same). If a lot softwares were available under Linux, I think I will go for a Linux operating system. Some may compare Linux and Mac but I think there are way different.
Linux >>> Mac
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:47:54 PM · #15 |
not intuitive?
And clicking the "Start" button to Stop is?
just kidding,
Doing things on a Mac is different than things on Windows. But just because it isn't the same doesn't make it bad or worse.
There is a slight learning curve, but you take someone with little or no experience on either OS and I'll bet they'll be doing things faster on a Mac than on Windows.
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 02:49:14 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
The one click mouse is one of the fancy Apple thing, which I despise. Regarding software availability, PC are above Mac by far... |
Apple hasn't sold a one button mouse in three years, and since all current Macs can run both Apple and Windows software without emulation, there is far more software available for Macs than PCs. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 03:38:45 PM · #17 |
I guess it is a tired old argument and I have apologised for bringing it up again, but consider a visit I had last week from a friend who is getting nervous about his fourteen-year-old daughter and the likelihood of her sexual debut etc. Do I say, "That's a tired old argument" and show him the door?
Not a very good or fair comparison, but I've got a lot of good information and opinion here and it's up to date. I'm grateful for that, thank you all very much - and grateful to dpc as a whole for being a good place to do this.
Just wait 'til I get the damned thing (although the decision is not officially made yet) and post a million tales of woe and consternation. Then you can break out the popcorn. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 03:40:33 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by yospiff:
Originally posted by Louis:
And the process to mount drives, software images, and so on was a complete turn off. |
Yes, that's a huge difference. Ont PC you have an executable installer. On the mac you have to get used to DMG files (files that the system treats like a mounted disk drive), executable application installers without extensions to identify them as such, and sometimes you will still run across a SIT file. OSX has dropped SIT in favor of ZIP files, but you will still find them and the Mac OS does not have stuffit expander as standard anymore.
It took me a while to understand some of the conceptual differences, and when I run across the older OS9 systems, I still get lost on them. |
I was getting close to buying an Apple laptop but after reading this my plans have been pushed to a few more years down the line, if ever.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 03:59:35 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
Network >>> Linux is the answer
To scalvert
About emulation programs....when they work...but having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:05:59 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
Network >>> Linux is the answer
To scalvert
About emulation programs....when they work...but having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it |
How about Office for the Mac? We're up to version 2008, more features than Office 2007 for Windows.
Microsoft has the largest Mac development group outside of Apple. Office 2008 is very profitable for Microsoft.
I've never had a problem with the Office suite from Microsoft, not perfect, but pretty darn good. It's their shotty OS I have problems with.
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:16:44 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
Network >>> Linux is the answer
To scalvert
About emulation programs....when they work...but having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it |
How about Office for the Mac? We're up to version 2008, more features than Office 2007 for Windows.
Microsoft has the largest Mac development group outside of Apple. Office 2008 is very profitable for Microsoft.
I've never had a problem with the Office suite from Microsoft, not perfect, but pretty darn good. It's their shotty OS I have problems with. |
Of course Office for the Mac does exist, but I just don't understand why Mac did not come up with their office mentioned 'Think Different' instead of being dependent on Microsoft. That sounds strange to me.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 16:23:38. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:29:14 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
Network >>> Linux is the answer
To scalvert
About emulation programs....when they work...but having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it |
How about Office for the Mac? We're up to version 2008, more features than Office 2007 for Windows.
Microsoft has the largest Mac development group outside of Apple. Office 2008 is very profitable for Microsoft.
I've never had a problem with the Office suite from Microsoft, not perfect, but pretty darn good. It's their shotty OS I have problems with. |
Of course Office for the Mac does exist, but I just don't understand why Mac did not come up with their office mentioned 'Think Different' instead of being dependent on Microsoft. That sounds strange to me. |
Won't the iWork apps open Office files anyway?
|
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:29:46 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
Originally posted by scarbrd:
I come for the old DOS days too, and I work in a Windows only environment at the office. We just spent the last 2 weeks cleaning up a nasty virus outbreak on our network. I'll never let a Windows machine in my house again! ;-) |
Network >>> Linux is the answer
To scalvert
About emulation programs....when they work...but having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it |
How about Office for the Mac? We're up to version 2008, more features than Office 2007 for Windows.
Microsoft has the largest Mac development group outside of Apple. Office 2008 is very profitable for Microsoft.
I've never had a problem with the Office suite from Microsoft, not perfect, but pretty darn good. It's their shotty OS I have problems with. |
Of course Office for the Mac does exist, but I just don't understand why Mac did not come up with their office mentioned 'Think Different' instead of being dependent on Microsoft. That sounds strange to me. |
They do have a Suite called iWorks. I use it at home. Word Processor, Spreadsheet, and Presentation, $80 US
Open most Office documents, but not 100% compatible. In the business world compatibility is king. Keep in mind, Apple is a hardware company, Microsoft is a software company. Different focus. So it makes sense that MS would make Office for both platforms, much like Adobe does with Photoshop.
Apple makes software to sell more hardware.
Message edited by author 2008-08-19 16:30:13. |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:30:16 PM · #24 |
| There's always OpenOffice. It needs X11 (Unix X-Windows for OSX), which is now installed on Leopard by default. It's free and an excellent alternative to MS Office -- which I wouldn't give up for the world. :-P |
|
|
|
08/19/2008 04:30:47 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by msieglerfr:
having microsoft office on a Mac computer, I don't get it... I just don't understand why Mac did not come up with their office mentioned 'Think Different' instead of being dependent on Microsoft. |
They did both: their own iWork suite for people who 'Think Different' and Microsoft Office for those who don't get it. Microsoft Office was released first on the Macintosh platform, NOT Windows, and it's the de facto standard business suite, so why wouldn't it exist on Macs? |
|
