Any computer nerds among us? I need to know... Mac or PC?

[Smoke20]

Hey there,

The subject says it all. I'm a photographer and I'm trying to decide.... Mac or PC. I'm leaning towards the Mac, but any opinions from users of either would be great.

[Troy]

That depends entirely on what you are used to and what you want to do. There's a ton of great imaging software for either and any of the newer high-powered models on either platform have plenty of processing grunt. It boils down to the interface so if you're used to using a PC then you'll probably feel more comfortable. All of the artists and photo editors that I know prefer a Mac but they've used them for years. I have absolutely no use for a Mac even though I keep trying to find an excuse. If you can get the software you want on both platforms then it mostly boils down to personal preference.

Troy

[Dale The Bold]

I agree with what Troy said.

I work in the graphics industry (I work on a Mac all day) and people here swear by the Macs.  I don't like them, I prefer PCs.  But it's just that, a preference.  Mac guys tend to be more evangelical about it, though.  Probably because we are so saturated with PCs.

[Smoke20]

Thanks guys.

It's an expensive purchase so I'm trying to not make a mistake. I'm used to PC's for office use, but I have no allegience to them. If I can run my photography business easier and more efficiently on one computer over another, that's what I'm interested in.

You always here about this virus and that, and PCs crashing unexplainably with their "fatal errors"... It just seems that Macs are unneffected by these problems, and are more stable and efficient in moving and manipulating large image files.

Am I off base here?

[Troy]

Yes, you are off base - but if I try to explain the Mac zealots swarm out from their holes and argue with me...

A poorly configured computer (or server) is ripe for attacks and crashes no matter what the operating system. Some are just easier to screw up than others. If you adjust the settings to higher standards, pay attention to what you are doing, apply patches as soon as possible, and have a good maintenance plan then most modern OSs are perfectly capable of running smoothly for a long time. Any more, many of the "crashes" that people may mention are usually easily pinned on the operator, administrator, or improperly installed/misconfigured software. Macs are hardly unaffected in these instances. Windows versions before 2000 were't all that stable but neither were Mac versions prior to 10 (X). Mac OSX is a derivative of Unix so you've got a 20+ year history of patches and fixes built in. Macs used to always come with SCSI hard drives (not sure if they still do) so this makes transferring files/paging much faster. Any system can run Firewire or USB 2 for external transfers so that's not a factor any more. Soon Macs will be running on Intel chips/mainboards so the hardware differences will be even less noticeable.

Efficiency has a lot to do with familiarity as well. If it takes you three months to be an expert on a Mac will you have to work that much faster to make up for the training time?

Troy

[Dans 68]

Out of our holes?   Troy, tell us how you really feel about us OSX guys!

Sure, we're zealots, but in a good way. I've used Macs ever since the IIci came out, and have not been disappointed. I have also used Wintel's, at work (I used to write FORTRAN programs for missile simulations a looooong time ago) and have found them to be skittish as far as stability, and very unfriendly as far as software upgrades and general user interfaces. Troy is correct in stating that in keeping the patches updated and the settings optimised Windows is a stable and secure platform. But, the Mac OS already inherently does this for you. "Windows" have come a long way, but I believe they have a little longer to go before they will approach Apple's OS; the stability of the underlying UNIX system cannot be overstated. If you can get the software you want for the Mac then go that way. In my "extensive" experience the Mac is King. Stability, elegance...'nough said.  

Dan

[Troy]

I work on everything but for some reason when promote Apple it's just never enough for some people. Every time one of these subjects comes up I get blasted if I even think about saying a bad word about Macs. I think it's because I don't *only* like Macs and that annoys the "purists". So that means I just pick on everyone who thinks there platform is the only one worth using. Remember that OSX is the the first Mac OS built on Unix so what does that say about the previous versions? Windows 2000 and XP were primarily based on NT so that tells you the quality of Win 95, 98, and ME wasn't exactly stellar either. If I ever have to sit in front of Mac OS 8 or Windows 98 again I'll poke my eyes out with a sharp stick. I primarily deal with web servers and databases and the Mac platform is flat out the wrong tool for either. If I edited pretty pictures, made print layouts, or wore tie-dyed t-shirts and sandals I'd use a Mac all the time. If I edited movies, created animations, or crunched scientific numbers I'd skip straight to a linux cluster. I use the right tool for the job and I really don't care who makes it. If there wasn't any competition then we'd have a bunch of junky software so I hope they all keep getting better.

Did I mention I can build 5 Windows PCs and about 7 Linux boxes for what a semi-decent G5 costs?

Troy

[Dans 68]

Troy,

Good points all. After all, you are the computer forum messiah to most of us. But it was that "out of their holes" crack that got me posting. The arguments you make are all valid. But, I think that for most of us the Mac platform is still easier to use. Even with OSX I still hide the sharp sticks, but I don't have to be as "rigorous" at hiding them. And for the record, I have never owned, or made (but I know how) a tie-dyed t-shirt. Do flip-flops count as sandals?  

Dan

[Troy]

Do flip-flops count as sandals? 

If you know the difference then...

Troy

[Dans 68]

Do flip-flops count as sandals?  

If you know the difference then...

Troy

Hah! Very good!

Dan

[ck1]

Hers the deferents that was explained to me by some one who took computer science between mac's and PC.  PC still have a underlying system softwere that looks but for some reason no seems to want to call it DOS anymore and then the windows platform.  Some PC guys will say not anymore but a DOS window still comes up at start up on our computer at work to load the window program.  Mac's or apple only has one system software which in theory make for less error when a computer fails, programs on top of system softwares are suspended and run on random memory and information can get lost easier when crashes happen. I have been on our PC at work for 15 year and maybe had 6 times a year when computer crashes and have lost important information to run programs but nothing to major, apple computer at home has crashed about half as much but never lost anything, but doesn't have as much information to loose on it, I just use it for internet mostly.....there all just great big glorified tape recorders anyway........I run a mac at home and a PC at work.......but if I were you and never had a computer i would get a PC, there cheaper and will do the job...........

[Smoke20]

.... If I edited pretty pictures, made print layouts, or wore tie-dyed t-shirts and sandals I'd use a Mac all the time.

Thank you. My pictures ARE pretty, dammit, and although my 18 month old son has a tie-dyed Harley Davidson tee, it's only because I can't find a Mopar one in his size. 

[sandmbmx88]

as much as i hate apple...id say a mac wouldnt be a bad choice for photos and editing.   A PC would also be fine and give you alot more oportunities if you wanted to do more with it though.

[Dale The Bold]

My OSX Mac at work is a lot more buggy than my PC at home.  The fonts alone are an enormous headache, and keep causing crashes.

I don't think Macs are any safer from viruses in their programming.  PCs have a lot of built-in protection, too.  But, as someone said who was training me on the Macs, "Much like software, no one writes viruses for the Mac."  I always enjoyed that.

The thing I've noticed in particular is that if you're going to be submitting files to print shops, they always prefer Mac (but with Photoshop files, it really doesn't matter, just save them as binary instead of ASCII and you're set).  The rest of the world prefers PCs, so I think the decision pivots on who you're going to be sending files to.

[Troy]

PC still have a underlying system softwere that looks but for some reason no seems to want to call it DOS anymore and then the windows platform. Some PC guys will say not anymore but a DOS window still comes up at start up on our computer at work to load the window program.

I would mostly disagree with that assessment. When did your friend graduate? There might still be some DOS code floating around in there for backwards comaptability but, for the most part, DOS can't survive in the NT/2000/XP environment. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to even run DOS under the 64 bit version of XP. The little black screen you see in Windows is a boot loader and all operating systems have one. More info:
http://www.pcanswers.co.uk/tutorials/default.asp?siteid=8&sectiontypeid=7&subsectionid=607&pagetypeid=2&articleid=29876&page=2

Mac's or apple only has one system software which in theory make for less error when a computer fails, programs on top of system softwares are suspended and run on random memory and information can get lost easier when crashes happen.

This is also a misconception as the GUI (Graphical User Interface) part of Mas OSX is built on top of a Unix-based operating system. If you know what you're doing you can call up a command prompt (little black window) and drop into the underlying OS.

There are lots of subtle differences and I'm sure they've been argued to every end on multiple occasions. I'm not an expert on system architectures and low level design but the differences these days are so small that it doesn't matter much. Does anyone really care how the OS interacts with the RAM if they can't even figure out how to create a new folder in the interface?

Troy

[Smoke20]

Thanks for all the input guys, I've decided on the mac for my imaging needs.

I have my regular PC which is admittedly old and tired to get me through the learning curve, but some of the video stuff on the mac I saw in the computer store just sparked some creative juices in me and I can't wait to start some new projects.

[Dans 68]

 

Dan

[ChargerBill]

I am a graphic designer. I have nearly 19,000 digital photos in my archives, I retouch photos all day, I create DVD presentations, I edit video, I design and create websites, I have nearly 3,200 songs iin my archives, I create unique sound bytes and sound FX for buttons, slideshows, etc..., I design flyers, brochures and cataloges, can you guess what machine I'm using yet? OK, let me further explain that my computer came out of the box with all the software needed to do most of the things above. Yes, I did upgrade and add software, but only because I do more than the average user does.

Look, I've used both types. The PC IMO has more software available for use. more shareware, more 3D animation capabilities, more office software possibilities, more programming possibilities and is very expandable and customizable. The Mac IMO is more stable, more user friendly, has a MUCH shorter learning curve, is more intuitive, is more widely used in the graphic design industry, is geared more toward graphic design software needs and did I mention, more stable? (IMO) When I used the PC I seemed to want to crash or freeze up once a week. At the same time I was running the PC (about 2000 to 2003)  the Mac (pre system OSX) would freeze-up once every couple of months...maybe. Since OSX I have yet to have a single freeze in over a year. i'm not sure how the new Windows performs, so i cannot comment on the stability of the current PC stuff at all. I can however also tell you that Mac can read PC files, BUT PC cannot read Mac files...and I'm not sure why (ask Bill Gates)

Yes, you can build three comperable PC's for the price of one great G5, but you will always have a PC while trying to work in a Mac world (graphics). There isn't really any arguing that Mac is the choice for grphic design, photo retouching, enhancement, etc.. With a PC you will ALWAYS be expecting Mac guys to read your files (which they can...most file types at least) and asking them to save their files to PC format. Had you said 3D animation, programming or simply web design I would have said either would be fine, but for what you specified I would go Mac. Mac OSX has THE BEST photo managing software out there...iphoto blows them all away. iDVD is great for publishing slideshow presentations and video compilations...also standard with Mac OSX. iTunes is the superior music managing software...period. iMovie is great for editing video, slides and photos, adding music, etc.. AND, Adobe Studios, the leader in design industry software such as Photoshop, Illustrator, GoLive, Image Ready, InDesign, etc..., develops software FOR Mac and then adapts it to PC afterwards.

I know I sound like an evangelist or zealot, but I have been in the design industry for 23 years and have seen hundreds of people convert to a Mac from PC, and have seen maybe a half dozen go the other way...there HAS to be a reason why.

[ChargerBill]

If I edited pretty pictures, made print layouts, or wore tie-dyed t-shirts and sandals I'd use a Mac all the time.

Troy

Gee Troy, tell us how you really feel.

BTW: I get to go to work in my underwear and socks if I want to...no sandlas required. And IMO tie-dyed shirts are for Greateful Dead throwwbacks... 

[Troy]

Bill, I have to disagree on two points (well, one and a half).
1. Which Mac files can't a PC read? Can any other OS read Mac files? Do you have a good reason to use non-compatible file formats? I ask because now that XP and OSX can be seamlessly networked I've never had a file that I couldn't read.
2. Photoshop 7 was built for PC then ported to Mac. It's the first version to do so.

As for which is *more* stable... if you want stable start using Linux. Other than that, all of my PCs are just as stable as all of the Macs I use (meaning I haven't crashed either and I almost never restart). If you have persistent problems with stability then there is most likely some reason other than the OS (examples: fonts on a Mac, hardware on either, and crappy freeware software on a PC). As for the Mac being more intuitive, I guess that depends on whether the user is new to computers or is coming from 8-10 years of PC experience.

Maybe you know a couple of hundred people who have "switched" to a Mac but millions have never bothered to use one. Reasons: price and familiarity.

Troy

[Troy]

If I edited pretty pictures, made print layouts, or wore tie-dyed t-shirts and sandals I'd use a Mac all the time.

Troy

Gee Troy, tell us how you really feel.

BTW: I get to go to work in my underwear and socks if I want to...no sandlas required. And IMO tie-dyed shirts are for Greateful Dead throwwbacks... 

Read the rest...

Troy

[steveca]

Uh, hate to step in here, but a couple of observations.
*)   Windows based OS's cannot read, for instance, .DMG files (which a MAC can read, among others).
*)   Windows NT/4 (which all subsequent Windows versions are built off of) was and is one of the most stable versions out there (it's pre-2000).   There are many enterprises running NT Server environments and have been for years - I see them all the time
*)   Linux is stable?   Which one?   Redhat ES/AS, Mandrake, SUSE, OpenBSD, ...??   You pay for Redhat now so it's nothing more than a Windows knockoff.   Other   variants (SUSE, etc) are Open Source and as a result are basically unsupported (in other words, you're on your own when you apply patches, OS Version upgrades, etc).  
*)   DOS is still alive and well.   Commands and executables like defrag, cd, dir, rmdir, etc etc are used all the time to build scripts and standalone - these are all straight DOS commands

In answer to the original question, MAC or PC?, there is MUCH more software offered for the Windows environment, so it essentially boils down to what you're going to use the machine for.   Determine that, then decide the additional software you'll need/use, and make your decision based on the availability of that software.   OSX 10.x Tiger/Panther and Windows XP are essentially the same in terms of stability; neither blue screens (crashes) that much.   You should consider a Server OS (like Windows 2000/2003) if you're going to be running IIS (web site with a public IP).   Otherwise, you can firewall up your MAC/PC appropriately (you're behind a router in your house/office) - firewalls are configurable on the MAC and Windows boxes.   Run your antivirus and anti-spamware, keep the O/S updated, and you'll be fine.

[ChargerBill]

Wasn't Photoshop 7 created for Windows first because they skipped a version prior for windows or the previous Windows version was a huge mess? I remember there being a specific reason and it had something to do with Windows users immediate unadressed needs. The Mac photoshop 6 version was very stable and had many great features which pretty much kept Mac users happy and not shouting for an update. in fact, I think the Photoshop 6 to Photoshop 7 Mac upgrade was very insignificant...a few new and not so necessary additions and features.

As far as files, DMG was going to be the main one I mentioned. Maybe I should have said DISCS, because a Mac can read just about any format (including one formatted for PC), but a PC needs specific CD formatting to read. Also, a preview saved for a PC can be read by a Mac, but a Mac formatted preview cannot be read by a PC. Also, animated icons formatted for a PC are readable by a Mac, but not vice versa. There are many little idiosyncrisies that I have come accross...I'll have to sit down and think about them. oh yeah, a PC formatted Iomega Zip or Jaz disc can be read by a Mac, but not the other way around. I'll think of more...

[Troy]

DMG = Macintosh OS X Disk Copy Disk Image File
Well duh, forgive me if I don't care if I can read it on a PC since it's a Mac only format. I'd really hope a Mac can read it though. However, a little Google search shows "Mac OS X: Apple Disk Utility (not compatible with Mac OS 9)". So apparently you can *only* use it on OSX. Hardly a quality example. This really only comes in to play if you're in a shared environment.

Now, tell me if the average user even has a clue what that means or if it will affect their purchase in any way...

Troy

[Troy]

Uh, hate to step in here, but a couple of observations.
*)  Windows based OS's cannot read, for instance, .DMG files (which a MAC can read, among others).

See above.

*)  Linux is stable?  Which one?  Redhat ES/AS, Mandrake, SUSE, OpenBSD, ...??  You pay for Redhat now so it's nothing more than a Windows knockoff.  Other  variants (SUSE, etc) are Open Source and as a result are basically unsupported (in other words, you're on your own when you apply patches, OS Version upgrades, etc). 

I've used almost all of them without any issues. This site's server and two others of mine are running on Red Hat (which is hardly a Windows knock off), I have 3 other servers on Debian that have an uptime of over 700 days, and two other servers running SuSE. I don't use the BSD variants because most of what I do is database intensive and Linux tends to handle that better. Which OS do you use that you don't apply patches on? Don't you have to upgrade every OS? Normal people are not out writing kernel code to update their own machines. I think you have a strange impression of Open Source but that's your opinion. How do any of those compare to OSX (since underneath it's completely based on BSD)? I also work in two different Microsoft only environments which are Windows 2000 and up and there's hardly ever any issues. Modern computing is pretty good no matter what the brand name is.

*)  DOS is still alive and well.  Commands and executables like defrag, cd, dir, rmdir, etc etc are used all the time to build scripts and standalone - these are all straight DOS commands

I said it wasn't needed in the OS and/or that the OS wasn't based on it. DOS is run in an emulator so those scripts still work. As I stated, try it in the 64 bit version of Windows and see what happens.

He's already made the decision to get a Mac any way. Personally, when it comes time to buy my own equipment I make decisions based on my own research and works best for me. I really don't care what someone else is using unless their needs are exactly the same as mine (or unless I have to support it which rarely happens). I don't read or follow all the propaganda or listen to the zealots (ChargerBill excluded ). I'm a "best bang for the buck" kind of person so fads and useless features really don't sway me in any way. Just give me something that works and does it consistently with a minimum of interaction on my part.

Troy