| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/31/2008 02:54:29 PM · #1 |
Not intending on a flame war, I know all platforms have their perks and pitfalls.
A laptop is on my buying agenda for this year. It will be an effort to save for a good one and I probably will not be upgrading it nor replacing it, for a good number of years.
I have three needs of such a device; Photography, Programming, and Gaming.
I know there are lots of Mac games, however not as many as for PC. I also know Macs can dual-boot into Windows and play games fine, however at the cost of not being able to use OSX at the same time.
I know that PCs can play games wonderfully, as well as run Photoshop, Lightroom, etc. no problems whatsoever. PCs are all that I have used for my Photography and I don't feel set back.
However Macs are more fun to Program on than windows PCs, in my personal opinion, or seem like they would be, just because I prefer developing on unix and linux when possible.
My natural choice would be to pick a Windows based laptop as Games seem to be the odd duck out. Mac can do Photography, Programming, and with a reboot Games. While a PC can do Photography, Programming with some extra overhead, and play Games.
I am still leaning towards a Windows based laptop, eye-candy and smoothness doesn't matter a whole lot to me right now, just raw function.
However as I understand it, the holy grail of Photography is Mac, Photographers must use Macs, otherwise they are just silly. Supposedly Photoshop, etc. runs better on a Mac, etc. Is this true and if so how true is it?
Once again, not meaning to cause a war, I just need some help on this. Thanks a bunch once again DPC!
|
|
|
|
10/31/2008 03:14:26 PM · #2 |
| I use Mac, but since I don't have very much experience in any of those things (photo editing, programming and gaming) I will leave it to somebody else to give you a more in-depth answer. My big things: I have never had a problem with viruses/spyware/malware/etc. with a Mac. I never have to think about it. It's nice. My bf is a bit of a gamer. He just made the switch to Mac, and we're thinking about getting a seperate PC desktop gaming computer if he finds that it's too much of a pain to run Windows on the Mac. A desktop will do better for games anyway, if you have the space and budget for it. And while I'm still figuring out photo editing, my specialization in college was Film Studies, and we always used Macs for our video editing and everything ran like a dream. I have an ex-roommate who was programming with linux/unix and he is an avid Mac user. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 03:21:13 PM · #3 |
I switched from PC to Mac 2.5 years ago, and do not regret it. I expected to need the Windows capability on my Mac, but once I tried the superior MS Office for Mac suite, I had no need.
I am not a gamer, but the conventional wisdom is that serious gaming requires a PC. Note that you can use Parallels to run windows apps simultaneously with the Mac OS, and can even have a windows app run when you click a desktop icon in Mac OS, so it can appear seamless. Note also that I have not done this, and the performance to support gaming may just not be there--well worth a visit to an apple store if you can, to see something in action.
Can't speak to Photoshop on Mac (I have "elements" but much prefer Aperture). I am guessing that more photographers here use Photoshop than Aperture, so platform is no biggie.
Walt Mossberg is fairly objective and a search of his reviews/columns may help you. The linked column specifically addresses low cost options, and PC platforms win.
The main advantage of Macs in general seems to be the integrated design: the OS, software, and hardware are designed as an integrated thing--the user experience is friendly, smooth, and largely problem free (plug and play). On my pc, I was forever hassled by what should be simple things--a Canon scanner was not plug an play (was on the Mac), getting a linksys wireless router to work was a lengthy process, but an Apple Airport Extreme took longer to take out of the box than it did to have up an running.
If you like to get "into" the computer and tweek, etc., PCs are probably more fun/interesting. If you want your machine to get out of your way, so you can do the things you want, Mac's seem far superior based on my experience. (I have not used Vista, so my PC experience stops with XP).
It does seem clear that in terms of computing horsepower, you can get a PC for less money than the "equivalent" Mac. The value of the Mac for me, though, is more than the sum of it's hardware specs, and the user experience is worth it--I have spent almost NO time in the past 2.5 years hassling with a technical problem on the Mac.
Hope you have fun choosing, and fun with whatever you select. I hope also that your wish of not igniting a flame war comes true! There is one guy here who always comes into any thread about this to spew irrational Mac hate. Wait for it.....
But be sure about the gaming suitability before you go Mac. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 03:35:18 PM · #4 |
[quote=togtogHowever as I understand it, the holy grail of Photography is Mac, Photographers must use Macs, otherwise they are just silly. Supposedly Photoshop, etc. runs better on a Mac, etc. Is this true and if so how true is it?
[/quote]
Not really true at all. First and foremost, Mac and PC electronics are the same. The only reason MacOS won't run on a PC is a little chip that tells the OS "I'm a Mac."
Secondly, a 64-bit version of Ps is not yet available for the Mac, but is for Windows, and Ps just flies under 64-bit Vista.
It's certainly not true that "photographers must use macs." Either platform is equally acceptable, and what you use depends mostly on personal preference.
All that said, where higher-end laptops are concerned, if you look carefully at the hardware specs, there is no price advantage to a PC (which is usually one of the larger advantages people point to) and the Mac laptops are very well built and nicely designed, something that is harder to come by in a PC.
In the end, look carefully at the hardware specs and buy something that will meet your needs, and don't worry about whether it's a Mac or a PC, with the exception that if you are switching platforms, make sure that your software licenses can follow you, and plan for the cost of replacing apps that are not available for the platform you are migrating to. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 06:01:07 PM · #5 |
| I'd look at the graphics performance of the new MacBooks and MacBookPros. You don't need a desktop for gaming anymore. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 06:11:54 PM · #6 |
| I use both OSX and Vista on my MacBook and find that I use Vista about 80% of the time. One big component for me is this ability to connect to this machine when I am at the office or traveling for work. OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot. I use MS Visual Studio for writing code (.net) - again - no OSX equivalent. Other than that, there is virtually nothing that can be done on one that can't be done on the other. I run CS3 on both and both perform excellent. I really don't have a preference for one over the other. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 06:18:11 PM · #7 |
It's all a matter of preference.
The some of the newer Macs use Nvidia graphics cards. They also sell for the PC. My HP has a Nvidia Geforce 8500GT.
However, do not fall into the trap of expecting a $500 PC laptop to perform like a $1,200 Mac laptop. Apple is not pocketing $700 per machine. You might find a PC laptop with similar capabilities for a hundred or two less, but it's not going to be less than half price.
If you really want to use a Mac, it may not be necessary to buy one. Visit Insanelymac.com (but that is a whole other non photographic discussion) |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 06:38:47 PM · #8 |
Thank you all for the replies. It is nice to know that it seems to be a matter of preference and that it isn't required. I have to be honest, I've, kinda biased against Apple, long story. And vowed never to give them money again, again a long story. However, I think I am catching macbook pro lust, god what a nice looking machine, hehehe.
So I'll start saving, when I go insane from impatience whatever I can afford will be my choice, hopefully I will be very very patient ;)
I'll keep monitoring this thread for any other advice, it will probably be about four months of good luck before I can save that much so I'm not buying something tomorrow, lots of time to think about it, and lust lust lust...
ETA: Forgive me SC for the drool, I'll get a mop...
Message edited by author 2008-10-31 18:38:52. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 06:52:01 PM · #9 |
I use both on a regular basis and both have their pros and cons. That being said, I do all my personal stuff using my MacBook Pro (I know you'd be happy with it). I have really enjoyed doing my photography on the MBP and have found that it performs really well for what I do. I do have dual-boot into Vista an it runs Vista like a champ, but truth be told I rarely boot into it unless I absolutely have to, like for my engineering modeling software.
I haven't dabbled much into X-Code much, but I know a ton of devs that love it. I only have used VS2005 and didn't quite know what I was doing. Like though that it's free with OSX.
You'll be happy either way. I just like have BOTH options native and find that a reboot to play a game hasn't been a big deal to me.
|
|
|
|
10/31/2008 07:43:25 PM · #10 |
I've had both, and am completely sold on Mac. Firstly, you NEVER have to worry about viruses or virus protection, which can really slow your workflow down when the virus database updates etc. I have a huge bright screen, which does have slight drawbacks as I have had to adjust my photographic output to brighter than I would normally want, as most other computers seem to be darker and view their images accordingly. Once you get used to that, there's no problem. I find the graphics programs to be far more effective on mac, and it really is designed to be optimal for 'the arts' rather than pure office procedure. Most graphic designers here in Australia use Mac, and there are some brilliant programs available. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom, but thats only because I wanted it to interface smoothly with photoshop.
The other bonus is that iphoto has a direct line to brilliant photo book and printing services - you simply design your book or presentation on iphoto, then press 'order', and you receive your book in the mail. The iweb website feature is pretty good too - you can't get flash sites up, but the templates are excellent and very easy to design. |
|
|
|
10/31/2008 10:17:36 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by jettyimages:
I've had both, and am completely sold on Mac. Firstly, you NEVER have to worry about viruses or virus protection, which can really slow your workflow down when the virus database updates etc. |
While much less common, there are Mac viruses, malware, and spyware. NEVER is an awful big word. As Mac popularity increases, expect more reprobates lacking any shred of integrity to target the Macs as well. Even Linux is starting to see a virus or two.
Unless you use dial-up, virus database updates take place in the background and happen in seconds on a broadband connection. I've never noticed any measurable speed decrease during an update. I just get a little pop-up in the lower right hand corner of the screen letting me know it happened. |
|
|
|
11/01/2008 11:44:56 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac.
Message edited by author 2008-11-01 13:53:01. |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 01:40:56 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac. |
You are talking about screen sharing which is quite different from remote desktop connection.
The good news is that you can download Remote Desktop Connection for Mac from the Microsoft website. I use it all the time for work. So you CAN do RDC on a Mac so there is no reason to stick with Vista. :) |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 01:47:48 AM · #14 |
As a 'gamer' and as a software engineer I have to have a PC running Windows to play my games and build my software. As a photographer and general computer user I have to have a Mac to do email, surf the web, use office documents (yes, Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac is 600x better than Office 2007 on PC), do school work, edit photos, etc. This is what I have found works best for me. I switched to Mac in April 2008 after spending 6 frustrated months with Vista and haven't looked back since. As I said... I keep a Windows PC around only for playing games and building software since my entire development environment is Windows based. For that I run Windows Server 2008 SP1 64-bit (Windows Vista SP1 without all the bloat).
It really boils down to what you prefer. Each has their strengths and each has their weakness. I happen to know that one of Mac's weaknesses is water... Google "MacBook Water" and you'll see what I mean. :P |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 07:54:43 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac. |
No, you cannot access a machine running OSX from a PC and have full control over the application process or the OSX GUI. You you can RDC from OSX to PC running Windows, but not the other way around. |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 08:02:52 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by signal2noise:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac. |
No, you cannot access a machine running OSX from a PC and have full control over the application process or the OSX GUI. You you can RDC from OSX to PC running Windows, but not the other way around. |
I misunderstood. I thought we were talking about OS X capabilities. |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 08:14:32 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac. |
No, you cannot access a machine running OSX from a PC and have full control over the application process or the OSX GUI. You you can RDC from OSX to PC running Windows, but not the other way around. |
I misunderstood. I thought we were talking about OS X capabilities. |
Yeah, that is really one feature that OSX is lacking. I'm not sure why Apple would care what type of machine/OS was connecting to it. There are RDC apps for (connecting to) windows from OSX, Linux and Windows which all work extremely well. That and an advanced coding app, like MS Visual Studio (something better than CF or Dreamweaver), would enable me to stick with OSX instead flipping between the two. |
|
|
|
11/02/2008 08:21:01 PM · #18 |
I don't game.
But I use PS and the internet.
I'm a lifelong Mac person. I grew up on an Apple II clone, wrote BASIC and stuff on it; got a Mac Classic II which still works perfectly, it's now 16 yrs old; my old orange clamshell G3 still works perfectly; and I use an ol' iMac for PSing my photos. LOVE THE MACS.
But I have an HP running Vista for Internet access. It is crappy, unreliable, crashes all the time (4x and counting this evening alone since 6:30 and it's only 8ish now), I frickin hate it. But I'd much rather ruin and discard a PC than any of my Macs.
I've known many PC users who've gone to Mac, but never known anyone who did the opposite...at least not more than for a week or two. Even my super-geeky brother-in-law went over to Mac and is amazed at how reliable it is, how intuititive and damn easy to use.
Once this HP shuffles off to PC heaven, I will never buy another. PC, imnsho, stands for Piecea Crap, and ergo it is my sacrificial lamb. |
|
|
|
11/08/2008 08:40:48 AM · #19 |
Gaming is still very far behind the curve on Mac. If a game does come out on the Mac, it is often times months behind the Windows version. Also when you run a game on a virtual system, you will suffer a performance hit. DirectX10 is also another weakness of the Mac possesses.
I have used both and I now stick with 64-bit Vista; it had a lot of bad press, but SP1 really turned it into a nice OS. I just am not happy with the prices that Apple charges. You can find much cheaper deals for better performance if you open up your options. |
|
|
|
11/08/2008 09:26:47 AM · #20 |
A PC is no doubt better for games but I'm personally not interested in games on my computer. My kids use a PS/3 and 42" LCD screen plus a wheel/pedals for that purpose. Beats PC gaming hands down (according to them!). They also have a PC that they inherited from me but it's mostly collecting dust.
For creative work I personally find the Mac to be a much better choice. The OS X operating system seems much more stable to me than any of the Windows versions I have used - and I have not missed any. At work I'm managing an IT help desk and I feel Windows on my skin every time I go through the weekly scorecard to see what my staff is using most of their time on.
What I generally find with Windows is that there's always a lot of talk about the next release - both from Microsoft, the press and on the street (the consumers). I don't even know when the next OS X is coming out but I honestly don't care. |
|
|
|
11/08/2008 10:48:18 AM · #21 |
I think the mac ads are funny, they act like there are problems with vista. I have had NO problems at all. I don't use prebuilt machines because I don't want all the added junk that might very well be causing problems. Plus you just can't buy a fast machine.
I haven't heard anyone say anything about printing with 64bit on the mac? Thats the only plus I see from a mac. And I'm sure its a matter of time for the PCs(if not already here). |
|
|
|
11/08/2008 10:56:27 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by signal2noise:
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Originally posted by signal2noise:
... OSX doesn't have a Remote Desktop Connection app, so that keeps me on Vista a lot... |
It's built into OS X. I use screen-sharing frequently, either straight from the Finder or via iChat. If I want to access my home desktop while abroad, there's Back to my Mac. |
No, you cannot access a machine running OSX from a PC and have full control over the application process or the OSX GUI. You you can RDC from OSX to PC running Windows, but not the other way around. |
There's always Timbuktu
//www.netopia.com/software/products/tb2/
|
|
|
|
11/08/2008 11:25:48 AM · #23 |
| I'd dearly love to be on a Mac right now, but spec for spec, I just can't afford it. |
|
|
|
02/20/2009 10:05:56 PM · #24 |
I prefer PC... and it's just because im used to it...
one thing to keep með from mac, is when im done writing (long) emails, and write in the email address, i always seem to turn off the damn window when trying to get the "@" it drives me nuts... |
|
|
|
02/20/2009 11:26:35 PM · #25 |
I'm primarily a Windows user, but I have and use both platforms. I'm the only one at work that really knows the Mac, so most of the support calls we get for Mac issues tend to get forwarded to me.
My biggest single problem with OSX is it requires some hacking to get it to run on a beige box. There are things I like and dislike about both platforms. Here's my take on the pluses and minuses from where I sit on the fence:
-The underlying nuts and bolts of the Mac OS is much more elegant. The Unix based system is solid. I like the way the OS makes the file system easy to use, but does not insulate the user from it. You can put a few common apps in the dock, but if you have a lot of them, then you have to go into the applications folder. This is actually the file system itself, and it is very slick the way a folder with multiple files is presented to the user as a single executable application. (You can still open it up and see the contents within if desired, but most users never even realize the apps are actually folders)
-Conversely, Windows separates the file system from the method of launching applications. Most users will not ever go into the untamed forest that is the program files folder. Instead you have an application launcher, the Start menu. I have run across many people who do not fully understand the distinction between the start menu and the actual file system.
-Printer drivers are often more user friendly on Windows. The Macs print driver system is more simplistic. A good thing in some ways, perhaps. OS 10.5 seems to have made big advances in this area, I see major overhauls in the printing system, but I think most Windows print drivers have more functionality and user friendliness built into them.
-Though I like the underlying file system better on the Mac, I like the actual file Manager better on windows. It seems more functional in less space for me. Especially with an add in I just installed QT Tab Bar, that gives me tabs in my file manager. Very slick and very useful. I don't like the big icons or list view on the Mac. I use the column view, but a simple list would be better for me. The windows file manager is very customizable. This preference *may* be just a matter of what I am used to the most, but I don't think so. I've been using Macs long enough now.
-Applications are usually easy to move on the Mac. You just copy the folder. On Windows you have the $!@#!!#$! registry, and if you move an application folder, it may not work because of registry entries that point to the old location.
-I absolutely hate Apples mice and keyboards. They are beautiful, but don't fit my hands well. Also, it sure took Apple a loooonnnnng time to start making two button mice, even though OSX has supported 2 buttons all along. My Macs all get aftermarket mice and keyboards. (I'm picky about my rodents, and prefer a fairly wide one.)
-IMO, the Mac is more secure against malware primarily because it is a smaller market. The OS is indeed inherently more secure, however the malware writers will find the security holes once there is more profit in it. Windows is becoming more secure and the new attack vector is through insecure applications and web based attacks that can run on both platforms. (This is my own opinion and I expect some people to disagree on that.)
A Vista box is my current PC, because I like to roll my own. A home built "Hackintosh" is a future project for me.
Hope this helps, though it may just serve to confuse you more.
Message edited by author 2009-02-20 23:30:58. |
|
