PP: MAC (Desktop) vs PC (Laptop)

[JzB]

Hi,

Being new to digital, I thougt I should ask the following;

I have the opportunity to PP either on Mac or PC. Are there any significant advantages one has over the other?

To add some possible information to help answer my question;
I will run external memory.
If using the laptop I plan to use an additional screen.

Im tending to use the PC Laptop for versatility - so I guess my question should really be;
Is there a distinct advantage using an Apple Mac over PC, in terms of System and Software?

Cheers,

JzB

[ricktas]

personal choice. Really! Both systems have their advantages as disadvantages and it really is up to you to decide, just like which camera brand.

[junqbox]

Not neccessarily, it comes down more to the rigour of setting up and calibration. traditionally, Mac's have been used for image/desktop publication type work, but many publishers around the world now use PC's 'cause they're cheaper and easier to manage within a broader IT network (which is usually PC based).
I personally use a Mac at home and PC at work and find no real differences between them, except for minor keyboard controls.

[peterking]

I switched to an iMac last year after using PC's for nearly 30 years, and glad I did. I still work with PC's at work and sometimes wish I didn't. The main thing that got me on the mac was IT JUST WORKS. No having to download this or update that, just stick the disc in the drive and away it goes.

More specifically I use Lightroom 2.5 and apart from having a drama with the latest RAW plugin when it was first released have had no problems. A second release of the plugin works perfectly by the way. I also use Elements 8 and here I have a difficulty. It uses Adobe Bridge as the front end whilst the PC uses Organiser. The PROBLEM here is that the Scott Kelby book does not include a chapter on Bridge. You have to download it from the web. This is more of a nuisance as now I have two books to refer to instead of one. Several other books I have seem to focus more on the PC side of things so this can make life a little difficult.

There is no reason why you can't use a PC notebook and a Mac desktop with external an drive. Just make sure the drive is formatted for the PC otherwise the PC will never see the drive's contents. I have a 500GB WD Passport that works between about 5 PC's and my Mac and have no problems.

As Rick and junqbox both say it is a personal choice. They are both capable of the task (if properly configured).

[bigdazzler]

24' or 27' imac loaded with Lightroom and Photoshop .... You wont be disappointed. :th3:

[AmyK]

I switched to an iMac last year after using PC's for nearly 30 years, and glad I did. I still work with PC's at work and sometimes wish I didn't. The main thing that got me on the mac was IT JUST WORKS. No having to download this or update that, just stick the disc in the drive and away it goes.



24' or 27' imac loaded with Lightroom and Photoshop .... You wont be disappointed. :th3:

Agree with both of these comments. I changed to a Mac set up at the start of the year and it hasn't ever missed a beat! Previous to that I was running a reasonably high performance PC laptop set up and in comparison, the laptop is crap.

The Mac still asks for the occasional software update, but it's nothing compared to what Windows keeps asking for!

[Big Pix]

24' or 27' imac loaded with Lightroom and Photoshop .... You wont be disappointed. :th3:

.......agree :D

[bigdazzler]

24' or 27' imac loaded with Lightroom and Photoshop .... You wont be disappointed. :th3:

oh and as much ram as you can jam into it .... ;)

[Charbuque]

I wouldn't like to sway you one way or the other. mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac mac :D

[BUGSnBIRDS]

so out of curiosity what is the difference between i5 at 2.66Ghz and duo at 3.06Ghz.
What software would you be using that would see a noticeable difference.
Strikes me the 27 inch Duo is well priced imac but I know nothing about Mac but keep looking at them with my head slightly kinked :lol:

[BLWNHR]

Why not, I'll throw my $0.02 in.

First up I'll start with a few questions:
Why do you have the choice? Do you not own a computer now? Or are you looking to buy a new system?
If you are looking to buy a new system make sure any peripherals (printers, scanners etc.) will work with your chosen platform (Mac or PC).
What software do you currently use? Have you bought software to suit the flatform you currently use?
What is your budget?

If you can answer those it will really help in giving you an informed opinion.

A couple of points to remember.
Mac's are significantly more expensive to buy and repair. There are fewer options for service than there are for PC.
Internet-based support for Mac is also more difficult to find (though the gap is beginning to close).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not Mac-bashing. What you buy has no effect on me whatsoever, I am just trying to work out which platform would be best for you, and most importantly, making sure you're informed about the decision.

On a side note, people always complain about virii and adware etc. on PC's. I also see a few people in this thread complaining about updates etc. I would just like to say, I haven't had a virus, malware, adware, or any other malicious software on any of my computers in about 6 years. I don't run a firewall, and run free anti-virus. As for Windows updates, when you can have 1.5mbps ADSL for $50/mo with 50gb of bandwidth, where is the issue with downloading 20-30mb of updates once a week?

[ricktas]

t I was running a reasonably high performance PC laptop set up and in comparison, the laptop is crap.



Just a note with further information regarding this comment. MOST laptops are not suitable for high quality editing. The screens are often cheap and can have colour and brightness variations from one side of the screen to the other. Hardware calibrating can improve them, but if you are very serious about your photography, you need a desktop system with a largish high quality screen, that is calibrated to have an optimal environment to edit photos in. Mac or PC, it is up to you.

[zollo]

talk photo editing and people just spit out mac without thinking. i run windows 7 on a very powerful pc which would have cost $10 000+ in appal world. ($6000 in pc world) so price is worth considering. Another point - upgrades. What you can upgrade costs lots, and other things like graphics cards are pretty hard to do. not cool

Unreliability for me has been a non issue with windows7. updates happen (automatically) overnight while i am sleeping. yes you have to keep on top of registry cleans and defrags but again, use a good program and they happen (automatically) overnight and, use a good program to avoid viruses, basically i'm with BLWNHR, for me, problems are very, very rare.


also further to photo editing considerations, the new 27" super glossy appal monitor has been criticized for being not very good for photo editing at all. also look at software availabilty such as 64bit compatibility for both editing programs and plug ins. macs dont do bluray either.

anyway look around and research

[Calxoddity]

Hi,
I'd recommend a desktop over a laptop, simply because you can choose your monitor to suit your tastes and nothing is quite like a big screen for post-processing.

I went from Windows to Mac 2 years when it came time to replace my old home-built box, but I could have just as easily stayed Windows except that I liked Aperture better than Lightroom, and Aperture is mac-only software.

Before you decide to go to a Mac, go to the Apple store and have a proper play with them - you may be turned off by screen glossiness or don't like the way the software works. Do the same for a Win7 box - then decide.

Personally, if I was in the market again now, I'd buy a Mac - the experience has been good so far.

Regards,
Calx

[darkc]

27' Mac all the way. The screens are seriously amazing and perfect for photographic work. Sure you might pay a bit more but not much these days considering what you get for your money. The whole experience is much more intuitive and user friendly. As others have mentioned you plug it in, switch it on and away you go, no hassles, no virus worries and they actually look good. The after sales service is excellent to.

[bigdazzler]

appal

Typo ??? Sadly, probably not :rolleyes:

[JM Tran]

27' Mac all the way. The screens are seriously amazing and perfect for photographic work. Sure you might pay a bit more but not much these days considering what you get for your money. The whole experience is much more intuitive and user friendly. As others have mentioned you plug it in, switch it on and away you go, no hassles, no virus worries and they actually look good. The after sales service is excellent to.

I wouldnt go as far as saying theyre amazing mate, theyre adequate......is the best word. The high reflections from lighting indoors makes it very annoying sometimes, and its inability to properly show deep shadows properly due to the high gloss can make it a bit unnerving for those wanting the best accuracy possible. But it is much better than the old and obsolete Apple 30 inch Cinema Display monitor.

the high res matte screen on my macbook pro is a lot better for photo representation whilst editing,compared to the glossy LED backlit screens from other macbooks or iMacs, albeit a lot smaller of course.

[zollo]

Typo ??? Sadly, probably not :rolleyes:

lol nothing personal just a bit of a jab. cool that you got it though

[bigdazzler]

I know mate ... ;)

This debate is an old one, way too old to be taken seriously ... each to their own I say.

Bit like blondes v brunettes eh ... :D

[Calxoddity]

hey, what about the redheads???

[darkc]

I wouldnt go as far as saying theyre amazing mate, theyre adequate......is the best word. The high reflections from lighting indoors makes it very annoying sometimes, and its inability to properly show deep shadows properly due to the high gloss can make it a bit unnerving for those wanting the best accuracy possible. But it is much better than the old and obsolete Apple 30 inch Cinema Display monitor.

the high res matte screen on my macbook pro is a lot better for photo representation whilst editing,compared to the glossy LED backlit screens from other macbooks or iMacs, albeit a lot smaller of course.

Well, your hard to please mate! To much time at the computer looking for inadequacies. For the money I think they are amazing. I have a high res matt finish 17" MacBook Pro as well and I do agree it is better but way to small and annoying.

[JzB]

Why not, I'll throw my $0.02 in.

First up I'll start with a few questions:
Why do you have the choice? Do you not own a computer now? Or are you looking to buy a new system?
If you are looking to buy a new system make sure any peripherals (printers, scanners etc.) will work with your chosen platform (Mac or PC).
What software do you currently use? Have you bought software to suit the flatform you currently use?
What is your budget?

If you can answer those it will really help in giving you an informed opinion.

A couple of points to remember.
Mac's are significantly more expensive to buy and repair. There are fewer options for service than there are for PC.
Internet-based support for Mac is also more difficult to find (though the gap is beginning to close).
...

Thanks for the replies. To answer some questions.
I run a laptop (PC) for work and have a MAC desktop at home. So no, not buying a new system. If I go with using the laptop, I will invest in a secondary (Large) screen - this offsets the poor screen issue of a laptop.

I think I have some well rounded responses here - and some areas I need to look into further.

Thanks again,

JzB

[arthurking83]

Nah! I wouldn't do that(use the laptop with a secondary screen!)

just use the Mac!... you already go it :D

if you ever think of updating one the machines in the future, then consider the options. For now, use what you have as you already have them.

Macs do tend to have better screens by default in the mid to upper end, from what I've seen, but I've never had any contact with the lower end(cheapest) Macs.. so I dunno.
PC's you get what you pay for, and you need a minimum of $400ish for a high quality 22"LCD from a reputable vendor.

Sometimes tho, with having so much variety in the PC world in terms of both software and hardware, you can invariably choose the 'wrong setup'.. which I kind'a did with my current PC.
(I build my own boxes) and I went for a more expensive physical box(tower) and cheaped out on the graphix card, where I bought a very low end single card($40) instead of the originally planned 2 x mid-high end cards(total approx $300-500) due to budget constraints.