New PC Purchase - Mac or Windows

[mikew09]

Team,
I a drawing close to a PC upgrade sometime this yr. I am less than 12 months into photography and have always been a Windows / Intel man but seems to me that my PC tool is not ideally suited for what I want to use it for.
I assume that all serious photo type people would use Mac or prefer too if within the budget. A couple of fwork buddies have just gone down the Mac stream, Mac Book Pro and a very large and brilliant screen desktop.

Went to good old JB and had a play with the new Mac and WOW - this is what I need for my photo processing.

So thought I would poll to see if my assumption is correct.

[peterking]

I voted for Mac simply because that is what I am using. Bought mine last year and am very happy with it, but up until then had been using a PC for decades.
Of the two there is not a lot of difference as you end up using the same software on either. My choice was based on the mac simply working and having what I thought I needed from day one. In hindsight I could have just bought the software for my PC and saved some money.
Having said all of the above I am glad I moved to the mac and have no intentions of going back to a PC although I do use them at work and have one sitting here occupying space.

[ricktas]

Your poll makes it sounds like professional photographers only use Mac, and three out of the four options are Mac related. Me thinks you do not need a poll and have already made up your mind, but may not have realised it consciously yet.

In reality, you can process photos on either a Mac or a PC. Both offer DAM software that is similar in Lightroom and Aperture, both can run Photoshop and other editing software, and in the end your choice of computer is just another link in the chain, same as Nikon v Canon. If I presented two photos on AP, one taken with Nikon and processed on a PC, the other taken with Canon and processed on a Mac, you would not know which was which, and your choice would be a guess.

Buy the Mac cause it is what you want (as your post and poll show), but remember that it isn't the thing that makes your photos any better.

[coolie21]

Just to point out that your title is misleading. Macs are intel too.

[Dylfish]

I have both a quad core windows machine and a 15" mbp. Personally I prefer using my MacBook but either are fine for pp. Are you on the go much or is it mostly from home?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kym]

Intel/Windows - not because I really want to but my bread and butter is based on that.
Windoze is the lowest common denominator product.

If I could it would be Ubuntu Linux but PS etc. don't run on that platform.
The GIMP is ok, but not up to everything I want yet.

FWIW: The AP server is the latest Centos Linux (free Redhat Enterprise Server) - but servers are a different game.

I've edited the thread heading ;) 'Mac or Windows'

[mikew09]

Hi All, thanks for the comments and help.

Rick - yea, in looking back I suppose I just should have polled who uses Mac or Windows.
Coolie - good point, I think Kym has corrected that for me.

Oh well, my first attempt at a "pole" type thread. Easy enouhg to do but retrospect I think it requires a look more though on what the real question is to be answered.

Thanks again for the helpful comments.

Mike

[Dan Cripps]

Of infinitely more importance is the consideration you should give to your monitor and colour calibration workflow. The importance of the operating system is dwarfed by comparison.

[mikew09]

Zeke - I suppose that is why I am leaning towards the imac. From what I have experienced in the stores the imac is far superior in monitor and graphics display.

[Regnis]

I just received my 27 inch iMac today and I have to say it is absolutely amazing!! Possibly one of the best things I have ever bought in my whole life. The screen is amazing and everyones photos look sensational on it! Just switched to mac and can't say i'll be going back within this decade

[mikew09]

Regnis - I had a play with the 27" iMac at JB in the city today - absolutely bloody awsome. I am sure you will not look back.

[mal from cessnock]

I'd change to MAC tomorrow if I didn't already have 3 good PCs and all the software I need for PP images.

It represents a big change to swap from PC to MAC

At the end of the day the PC does the same job with a few limitations. The worst one being that Windows reserves too much RAM where I am told MAC doesn't (and this is here-say, I don't even know if this limitation is true)

Thankfully, "the computer does not take the photograph", it's our ability to see the light around us in this wonderful world and respond accordingly with the skills we have acquired that is the important issue.

[Kym]

At the end of the day the PC does the same job with a few limitations. The worst one being that Windows reserves too much RAM where I am told MAC doesn't (and this is here-say, I don't even know if this limitation is true

True. *nix systems have a very different approach to memory and resource usage.
MacOS is a Unix variant in case your were not aware. http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

Indeed the X11 graphics system is radically different to Windoze as well.
This difference makes porting software between the two systems problematic.
But having Adobe PS etc running on MacOS means there would be much less work to make it available on Linux - Adobe are a pain in that respect.

[Tannin]

I assume that all serious photo type people would use Mac or prefer too if within the budget.

If you start with incorrect assumptions, you will get incorrect answers. You can't get much more incorrect than this.

[IanB]

I just received my 27 inch iMac today and I have to say it is absolutely amazing!! Possibly one of the best things I have ever bought in my whole life. The screen is amazing and everyones photos look sensational on it! Just switched to mac and can't say i'll be going back within this decade

This can be very misleading when the digital image is going to be printed.


I'd change to MAC tomorrow if I didn't already have 3 good PCs and all the software I need for PP images.

It represents a big change to swap from PC to MAC

At the end of the day the PC does the same job with a few limitations. The worst one being that Windows reserves too much RAM where I am told MAC doesn't (and this is here-say, I don't even know if this limitation is true)

Thankfully, "the computer does not take the photograph", it's our ability to see the light around us in this wonderful world and respond accordingly with the skills we have acquired that is the important issue.

I'm in the same boat.

[Dan Cripps]

Zeke - I suppose that is why I am leaning towards the imac. From what I have experienced in the stores the imac is far superior in monitor and graphics display.

iMacs are notoriously hard to calibrate, traditionally.

I have no experience with the current models, however.

[Calxoddity]

iMacs are notoriously hard to calibrate, traditionally.

I have no experience with the current models, however.

The main problem with previous generations of iMac is that they didn't have the capability to reduce brightness enough to calibrate properly unless you applied 3rd party solutions to reduce the brightness to 110-120 lumens (some free, some pay lots). People would be complaining that their prints were always too dark.

With the latest generation iMacs, the use of lcd backlighting instead of cold cathode appears to have gotten rid of this problem - you can reduce the brightness until the screen is almost dark.

So, unless you have an objection to glossy screen, the new 27" iMacs are really nice machines with really nice screens. With the stronger dollar, they're also good value.

Oh, one last point - a previous poster observed that the prints look really good on the screen. Sometimes it's "too good" - the print never lives up to the punch and contrast of the on-screen version and the user is disappointed. Again, good calibration can reduce/eliminate this effect within the constraints of the target printer capability and ambient light conditions in the workspace.

Regards,
Calx

[Regnis]

[QUOTE=IanB;490985]This can be very misleading when the digital image is going to be printed.

I have thought about this. I guess it is initially just going to be a case of trial and error. I must say though my shots on this computer are much closer to my prints than my 4yr old dell laptop was.

[mikew09]

Regnis - Same, my Dell on screen shots are nothing like my prints - very much trial and error but in general the prints are better. Hmmm, but what can I expect from a 4.5 yr old Dell laptop that struggles to run PS.
In the week I have frequented JB HiFi to play with the demo PC's and I have to say that I don't see much improvement in the Windows servers, especially with performance, but find the mac very impressive.
In review, I think I did a poor job in creating this thread as opposed to what I wanted out of it. Live and learn.

I have never owned a mac, a couple of mates (hobby photographers) have moved to mac in the last month or so and rave about them. Mainly I was interested in how mch of the photography realm used mac's for photo editing.

Regardless, I have found this thread very interesting.

[DAdeGroot]

I have never owned a mac, a couple of mates (hobby photographers) have moved to mac in the last month or so and rave about them. Mainly I was interested in how mch of the photography realm used mac's for photo editing.

I do, but as others have said, Lightroom and Photoshop are available on Windows too, and with calibrated screens on either system there's not a huge amount of difference, esp. if you go 64 bit Windows (OSX is pretty much 64bit native these days, but even before that, you'd still see all your RAM > 4Gb anyway due to a different memory architecture).

[dmdigital]

Gone totally over to Mac in the last 18 months. Only keep a windows laptop round so I can run software to fault find on the car. Vista was the initial driver as it really was a pile of ...

I now love my iMac and 13" MacBook Pro. Wouldn't go back to Windows and a PC again unless things radically change.

I find Photoshop CS3 is far, far better running under Mac OS X than Windows XP or Vista where it would lock up everything trying to do a large edit. Don't know what it's like under Windows 7 but I suspect they won't have improved the multi-threading in the Windows kernel that much.

[mikew09]

Very interesting to see the comments around this topic. All have been constructive for me in one way or another - thanks to all.

[ricktas]

Agree Mike. Must admit I find these threads amusing. The PC or Mac, Holden or Ford, Macca's or Hungry Jacks, Nikon or Canon, are all the same.

In the end we drive cards, we eat burgers, shoot photos and process them, and we all tend to get good results from our chosen brands. It really is a personal choice, and the Holden People will say Holden, the Macca's ppl will say Macca's, the Canon people will say Canon.

In the end, buy what you want to and enjoy it.

[peterb666]

I use Windows based PCs on a daily basis for desk top publishing and graphics. I have used Macs for extended periods of time and still every now and again. I find that your average Windows based machine is quicker, both with processing and in its userbility. I find the 2/3 button mouse better than the Mac mouse and funny-apple key arrangement. I also find the click through nature of programs on a Mac is quite annoying and absolutely bewildering to novice users. Cries of "where's my program gone" are common. Note that I was previously involved in training people how to use Macs and PCs.

I know some think that Macs perform better than PCs but I have never found this to be the case, even when using them concurrently. Throw the same money at a PC that you spend on a Mac and the PC will come out on tops. One thing though, Macs are much better value for money now than they have ever been in the past.

If you currently use a Mac and are comfortable with it, stick with Mac.

If you currently use a PC and are comfortable with it, stick to PCs.

[Gavvvvvin]

I dont get all this Photosop runs better on a Mac stuff...its not exactly the most resource intensive program out there pretty much any computer from the past 10 years will run it fine and dandy.

[Gremlin]

Been a pc man since i began as a tech for a bank in 91, always been windows.
November after almost 12 months of saving for new dslr, hd camcorder, cs4 ps, was going to buy premiere. Big purchase here so you could understand the long time saving thing, even longer time to buy, I was all set to spend 2k ona pc that owuld have enough memory hdd space graphics cards, tower with ps etc etc you know the story.
As someone else mentioned, went to jb hifi and played, luckily I got an out of work photographer as a staff member, he saw my work shirt and id hanging off me so knew he couldnt bs me.
Now keep in mind im pretty useless when it comes to software(im ahardware tech on financial machines) he showed me a few things, and brought his own laptop out(macbook) and had final cut express and ps cs4 on it, spent a good 30mins with the guy.
Canned the idea of pc, bought a 27in Imac and have to say love the thing, took a week or two to get used to the different keyboards the wireless mouse thingy (although I have a wacom tablet) and havent looked back. I have coreldraw on my pc and bought this program which for life of me cant recall its name, so I can use win apps on it, best of both worlds. Screen brightness thing is great and no more fans I can hear humming away.
Well Im no expert, more a tech then user, i got this for video and photo editing, anobsessive hobby, and love it. But having said that, the op system is kinda different you will need to learn new things, like hwere you photos hide and how to browse easily etc, I store everything on a 1TB external drive and all is good with the world.
Hope this helps
Grem.

[mikew09]

Hi Gremlin, I was considering the 21" screen but have decided to do a little more saving and go for the 27" screen in the imac.
3 out of work buddies have now upgraded to either an imac or mac book pro and we are all server support guys using windows in the office. Pretty much all the stuff we support runs on UNIX or linux though.
It has be interesting to see comments around the whole Mac - PC thing. I am a bit of a windows fan but one thing that consistantly bugs me is the over head required to keep the Windows OS secure, virus scan engine and scheduled runs, malware engines, firewall etc etc etc. To date, mac has been able to fend of all these resource hungry tools and I can only assume this is due to the underlying OS which I believe is now linux or a cut of it.

[GerryK]

From my simple perspective, not having money to buy dedicated PC's for individual purposes, but needing a PC that will do all things, I would opt down the Windows path. At a course I did recently I used a Apple (G4 I think, not up to date with the apple world) and it was awesome. 23" screen, all inclusive, powerful. Wow I thought. Would love one of these. Then reality cut in and the need to be easily compatible with my work environment (Windows based) other family members, etc and windows does me fine. Now if I had bucks to burn and could build descrete devices for purpose an Apple would be seriously considered.

[Calxoddity]

I completely changed over to a mac at home from a PC, and there's nothing I can't do on that, which I could do on the PC.

I still use a wintel laptop for work and frequently move documents between the two machines without any problem.

My sons both use PCs on the same home network as the Mac and actually print to the printer connected to the Mac. I can access my son's iTunes on his computer. We all share the same internet connection. My son tests on my Mac his website developed on his PC.

Tell me again about "discrete devices"??

Regards,
Calx

[Gremlin]

mikew, you wont be dissapointed trust me ;)

[mikew09]

Hi Calx, my mate who just bought a Mac Book Pro is telling the same things and he loves it.

Hi Gremlin, I beleive you are cooorrreeeeccccct - :-)

[mcdesign]

I have just set up a Macbook Pro for a friend, I am amazed that straight out of the box we got a print identical to that on the screen printing to a Canon pixma printer, it is also linked up to a larger monitor, neither of them have needed to be calibrated! I have spent endless hours calibrating my iMac (2008) and the ViewSonic monitor, I have also had ICC profiles made for the papers I use. So looks as if Apple have got it right with the new monitors. Incidentally, the monitor on the Pro can be edited on easily (15") seems to have more real estate than previous monitors of the same size and the quality is fabulous!

[JohnRA]

After using Windows PC's for the last 16 years I have made the change to Mac.
I bought an IMac a couple of weeks ago & love it. Took a bit of getting accustomed to but now I realise what Mac users have been waffling on about for years.
Still use the Dell PC for various stuff but the Mac is the first one turned on each day.

[mal from cessnock]

I wish you guys would stop talking about changing to Mac. It's giving me an anxiety disorder.

I'm already setup with relatively good PCs and have blown my budget! :)

[latino]

Thinking of swapping to an Imac 21.5, Is the Apple still good in regards to catching virus's? Because I remember checking my mates new PC after a week of conservative use and had spyware etc already.

[mikew09]

Thinking of swapping to an Imac 21.5, Is the Apple still good in regards to catching virus's? Because I remember checking my mates new PC after a week of conservative use and had spyware etc already.

From what I have read on the apple site and some forums it appears to still be. Considering the underlying OS is a bread of linux (UNIX) it makes sense it should be realively much more secure.

Keep in mind that though the system is unlikely to be infected within its own container, it can still be capable of passing viruses onto other windows systems via email and such. Seems to be plenty of engines out there for mac that can provide that form of protection.

Do some web surfing on the topic and you will find some very positive info.