POLL: PC or Mac

<p>For the record, I have no interest in convicting anyone that one platform is better than another (I have no stake in what anyone else chooses to use!). However, the TCO (total cost of ownership) is typically MUCH LESS on a Mac. Check out eBay prices for a three year old Mac vs a three year old PC. And that's just one factor in TCO.</p>

<p>Here one of my Photoshop licenses was from old Photostyler; another was when I tuned in the Mac version of Photoshop 2.0 for a full bore PC version Photoshop 2.5; with some added cash. After awhile on has to buy a full bore version again. Thus 2.5 / 3 /4 / 5.5 /6 /7 /CS /CS2 /CS3/CS4 etc upgrade doesnt work. For an Imac 20" unit in which we added CS2; it was far cheaper to buy a bundle on Ebay with full Mac PS7; and a Mac upgrade for CS2; then buying full bore CS2 for the Mac.</p>

<p>As a 20+ year Pc user, I switched to Mac (I-Mac, 24", 4GB RAM, 465GB HD) last May and can't say enough good about it for photo processing. Yes, there is a learning curve, get the "Switching to the Mac" by David Pogue. It will walk you through the differences between operating PC & Mac. In order to avoid the expense of changing platforms for all my other programs, I elected to retain a pc laptop for MS programs such as Word and Excel. No problems upgrading across platforms with Adobe although I did have to sign an affidavit that the original PS 7 would be removed from the computer and if the software was found it would be destroyed. Apple support has been excellent. <br>

I used dual monitor system on the PC but with the 24" screen I find that I have room for the pallets and still plenty of working space for the image. I did just add an external hard drive but haven't really seen any difference in performance--still super fast. <br>

Good luck in your decision. </p>

<p>PC: Dell, quad core processor, 3 Gb ram, > 3 Tb hard disk space, 24" monitor. Mainly all that power is used for video editing: For just images it's overkill.</p>

<p>Both: 2 PCs, 1 Windows PC server, and an iMac. For me, it's like debating Nikon or Canon. Why not use both--or the tool that is best for the job. I use both PC and Mac for imaging and they are both equally up to the task. I use the iMac for presentation and video production because of unique Apple software. More business software is available (and at a cheaper price) for the PC.</p>

<p>RE; However, the TCO (total cost of ownership) is typically MUCH LESS on a Mac. Check out eBay prices for a three year old Mac vs a three year old PC. And that's just one factor in TCO.<br /> <br /> Here most all of my dozen plus computers are PC's.<br /> Many are used for scanning; batch files; photoshop are from Ebay or auctions; a few year old off lease PC's.<br /> Thus the box thats used to command the Nikon/Canon slide scanner(s) are a IBM Pentium III with a 1Ghz cpu and 1 gig of ram; it was 50 bucks off of ebay; its overkill for the application.</p>

<p>The support and documentation is excellent; the ram cost is trivial; drivers well documented; ite uses a standard ATX power supply it ever craps out. I bought a pallet of these same boxes about 5 years ago; I have 8 units and 4 spares in usage of this class computer; the entire lot cost less than the cute 20" Imac we bought for a retoucher.</p>

<p>The iMAC 20" unit from 2006 cost about a grand; the pallet of computers was about 500; freight 120. The iMAC 20" unit from 2006 with OSX 10.4 will not read many VISTA written discs; but a obsolete ebay Pentium III with XP from 5 years ago will.</p>

<p>For bigger files ie mapping we have several XP 64 bit boxes with 8 gigs of ram; adding CS4 allows one to handle giant files; one breaks the old 32bit 4 gig barrier. The 64 bit box was just a new old stock HP workstation 3.4 Ghz; dual core; two L2's with 2 megs of L2 each for 450 bucks 18 months ago. All I did was add ram to 8gigs; and add CS4. The computer cost a tiny fraction of a Mac tower unit; its total cost was less than CS4.<br /> <br /> For SOME of us using a PC means we spend a tiny fraction compared to using a mac; say 1/10 the cost.<br /> The source of decent PC's is often trivial or even free. One of my FTP sites I run is on an old so called obsolete box I got free; its a 2.8 Gz Prescott unit that I just reformated and added an OS and FTP software; freeware.<br /> <br /> Even monitors are a trivial cost; two home units are 20 buck Sony trinitron Dells; 19" flatscreens.<br /> In a couple of the IBM's from the pallet buy; they had XP and Photoshop already installed; scrapped out school units already filed with 1 gig of ram and Photoshop 7.0. Buying a computer for 50 bucks with Photoshop already installed means the total cost has been 10 bucks per year over the last 5 years.</p>

<p>When one has dozens of computers the cost of ownership per unit can be very small if one plays one cards right. There is NO RULE one has to to the dumb typical thing of exposing unprotected computers to the internet or public.<br /> <br /> In commerical work there is also no rule one has to have a nice computer case; if one is a computer in a gasoline pump; or scanning folks slides; or batching files.</p>

<p>It really doesnt matter whether you use a PC or Mac or a Red Hat box; what matters is getting the job done.<br>

<br /> Some folks like Macs.<br>

They might also like our Imac 20" 2006 unit that Steve Jobs has decided for YOU that it will not load Photoshop 7.0; but a PC from 1994 will.</p>

<p>Like Government; some folks like others to decide and define ones life; with a PC one has more freedom to use older software.</p>

<p>I have a 20" iMac.</p>

<p>In the past 20+ years, I've had one PC. It was like throwing money down a rat hole.</p>

<p>Thus to read a customers images for printing at our shop; IF they written with VISTA and the settings are are not set backwards compatible; the CD cannot be read by the 1000 buck Imac 20" unit; Steve has decided for YOU that either you do not need this customer; or you beloved cute prepie Imac obsolete; thus you upgrade it; or scrap out the 2.5 year old box. Thus a 50 buck 5 year old XP box off of ebay; or our 349 buck VISTA box can be used to read a customers VISTA disc; and then the files transfered to the Imac 20" unit. Thus sometimes an old PC is usefull as a way to read Vista written discs; something our 2006 Imac 20" cannot do; but our triple boot IBM with XP can do'; with a box whose hardware is from 1996. Having customers that are pure mac users is a good thing; we get there customers inputs they cannot read; something others have decided as being good.</p>

<p>Mac users are a great source of free PC's too.<br>

<br /> Many former PC users just fill them up; never clean house; never defrag; never run a virus program.<br>

<br /> Thus many times a disgrunted former PC user's computer's HDA is just placed as a slave unit on one of our don't care computers; and one either formats it; or removes the impacted mess.<br>

<br /> First one searches for temp files and removes many gigs of crud. One might have an older P4 with a 80 GIG HDA and XP; and only a few hundred megs are left on the HDA.<br>

<br /> The chap wonders why it is so slow and crashes; its full.<br>

<br /> One deletes temp files and then one has 1 to 3 gigs more headroom; now one can actually peek at files radically quicker.</p>

<p>One searches for giant files; then deletes some movies I already have; the one might have 5 to 10 gigs now free. One then might try defraging; many times it is just a solid red bar.</p>

<p>You wonder if the users house is like this; all clutter; trash in the hallways; never doing any housekeepng. Then one try running a virus scan and it picks up a ratnest of virsus crud and trojans; thats why I mentioned a dont care box that I can reghost it pickups any manure from Mac users old PC box.<br>

<br /> Its actually an interesting exercise in understanding the Mac religion.</p>

<p>One might peak at the disc's properties; it never been defragged for over 1000 plus days; ie never since its about a 3 year old box.</p>

<p>The former PC was baffled why as the computer aged it look longer to save a 40 meg file; one new it could be placed in one place; when old; impacked and not defragged the 40 meg file might be scattered in the few holes left; in dozens of spaces 100 to 200k each; over the entire disc's radius of tracks.</p>

<p>PC - Dual 2.4ghz Xeon HP Workstation with 3 gb RAM, 1.5tb internal HD storage, plus DVD, with ATI FireGL video card and dual Samsung 20" LCD monitors. Oh, and a WACOM tablet to scribble with.<br>

Former MAC user. I don't care what the platform is, so long as I can run the software I need to run and do my work.</p>

<p>Mac, unless I need to use a PC, then I boot into Windows on my Mac! That's like twice a year. Point is, if you get a Mac, you can both. I honestly can't see why anyone would be a Windows box. <br>

Oh, take a peek inside a MacPro case. Man, a beautiful site. </p>

<p>Changed to an iMac last year and never looked back. Awesome, no problems</p>

<p>Andrew; its about money; custrom designing; having control; being an individual; backward compatibilty; not drinking the koolaide! Thus If somebody has an IBM cassette for a PC; I just fire up the old original IBM PC with the cassette port. One might have customers with unknown stuff/data on old 48 dpi 5 1/4 floppies; sometimes they do not read as well on a modern 1.2 Meg unit; but a older unit will read them. Using a PC allowed some of us to run Windows server and NT with 1 gig of ram; when Apple had no box that would hold this amount eons ago. Time is money; why fart around with impotent cute box with 1/2 to 1/ 4 the amount of ram? Today one can use a PC and CS4 use alot more ram than a Mac with photoshop; again time is money; clients have deadlines; having boatloads of ram matters with giant files. Maybe only wanting to view a clients inputs on a CD written with Vista; and the cute Imac 20" unit from 2006 will not read the disc; but a 5 year old XP box does. Its not all about cute cases.In dealing with the public files one really doesnt have the luxury of just accepting on file format or source; one has floppies; zip discs; jazz discs; maybe the images from a lawyer are in wordperfect and open perfectly with an older box.</p>

<p>Mac.</p>

<p>pc, quad core , 8 gig, 2,5 tb, lacie 22, vista 64 fast and stable, pleasure working with.</p>

<p>Macbook<br>

and I love it!</p>

<p>macpro 6gig of ram, raid, external drive, 2 monitor nec and apple, calibrated with i1display2, intuos tablet = production station.</p>

<p>macbook pro unibody 15inch, 4 gig of ram, 320 gig HD 7200rpm, 24inch LCD, bamboo 6x8 = home / on location station.</p>

<p>Mac is better! I use the iMac and Macbook.</p>

<p>24" iMac (older with 2gb ram) which runs CS4 and Lightroom 2 just fine. Handles video, but if I did more video I would need more power obviously. External 2TB WD via firewire 800 in Raid 1 configuration. I miss the esata from my PC, but firewire 800 is plenty fast.</p>

<p>Used PCs for years, spent tons of my time maintaining, reformatting, babying them and hoping they wouldn't die. Ended up replacing them every three years anyway. I don't need multiple machines, just one fast one. Time is money, and the time I spent keeping my PCs working smoothly more than pays for my Macs.</p>

<p>Kelly, if I had your situation I would agree that PC is cost effective. But I want one simple/powerful desktop that just works. I don't want to tinker with my computers or work with strange or old files or equipment. (been there, done that) Everything I need is on my Mac, I don't need to read a Vista CD or have multiple boxes doing different things. Simple is sweet. Nothing wrong with either decision, but make the decision that's right for you, not to make a point about your individuality. There are plenty of non-koolaide-drinking Mac owners that fully understood the choices and choose Mac. Plenty of koolaide guzzled by both camps... :)</p>

<p>iMac 24" 3gb ram, many external drives close to 2 T.B's. Plus, my old pc NEC CRT 19" monitor that still works fine for a 2nd monitor.</p>

<p>James; your beloved tax dollars ie the US government (if you are in the USA) has folks issuing bid packages that are often sent as CD's that will open on some machines; and not others. These include photos and drawings. Thus part of the printing cost is dealing with ill sized PDF's not to scale; fonts missing; CD's that cannot be read.<br>

Thus if you could not read the disc with a Mac; you might just ask for another CD; or punt and bid on other jobs.<br>

Thus the taxpayer has less bidders; the cost of the project is thus higher. The jackassery with ill discs is not free; ie means we all pay for this morrass of ill discs.</p>

<p>The real SAD thing is if these discs were written on a dumb PC with a Walmart LG or Liteton burner with dumb bundled Free Nero; it would read on both Macs and PCs; whether a Win3.11 box; or Vista; or most all Macs too.</p>

<p>I charge more for jobs that involve more time; ie futzing with weird discs; have fonts missing; or a bastard scale; I have to; it involves time.</p>

<p>An old dream PC for Photoshop that cost many grand still is used for UPS labels; it only draws a few watts; something like 8; its just a 75Mhz Pentium; with back then an insane amount of ram 72 megs. It was bought when 16 megs of ram was 600 bucks; what photoshop cost. It started as a win3.11 machine; then it got Chicago/win95 a year later when it came out; later I upgraded it to win98se. Its never been reformated; its got the same 850 meg HDA from 15 years ago. The hassle if one could call it that was just Y2K; we added an ISA card to fake off the date; it was 35 bucks. Having a computer with little of no issues that "just works"; is a green 8 watts when active; and still works well after 15 years is a decent machine; it happens to just be a PC; an old photoshop dream machine that has several grand of ram; ie 72 megs. The file dates are mostly from 1993. Here I purposely like having a green low wattage computer on the UPS shipping table; it saves time; it drives a dumb printer; one can also print to it from another computer on the LAN. It doesnt even have any virus software either; its life is today like a toaster; its going to be used untils it dies. IF the HDA ever crashes I will probably rebuild it with a solid state HDA like I use with other older stuff. The HDA has been one for about 130000 hours now.</p>

<p>

POLL: PC or Mac (off topics slightly)

 

<p >mac</p>

 

</p>

<p>There are certain things that aren't going to change that much regardless of which system you buy. I assume that the monitors, input devices and storage devices will be pretty much the same regardless of the "pizza box" you get. So what you have to decide is what you need in terms of your graphics card, memory, processor, etc.; essentially what are the guts of the computer. This includes the operating system. So you need to take a look at what you need out of the system and what computer will best meet those needs.</p>

<p>All that being said I am a mac fan, having used one for over twenty years. A Mac Pro system, actually pretty much any Mac, is pretty well defined, lacking the variability in configuration that you find in, say, a Dell system. If you don't need that much power, the slots or internal storage then an iMac or MacBook Pro might serve you well. I use a 17" MacBook Pro, and attach a 21" NEC monitor when I'm doing photo/graphics work. My needs aren't as great as they once were (I'm not doing design anymore) and probably not as great as yours but the combination serves me well. The iMac can support an external monitor as well. <br>

If you are near an Apple Store I would recommend you stop by and take a look. You might think about attending one of their classes. Likely you won't learn anything new but it will give you and introduction to Macintosh work flow.</p>

<p>

POLL: PC or Mac (off topics slightly)

 

<p >mac</p>

 

</p>

<p>This is my Photoshop, Capture NX2 workstation.<br>

Mac Pro dual quad core, 10GB RAM, NEC 2690WUXI calibrated with Spectraview software and EyeOne Pro, 2TB internal, 1TB external backup, Weibetech RTX100 external HD enclosure for hot swapping backup drives, and a Wacom Intuos tablet. If you need speed spend more on RAM and dedicate a fast HD for the OS and PS scratch disk.<br>

Whatever you do calibrate your monitor. Prior to this machine I had a circa 2000 Mac G4 dual 1GHz MDD with 2GB RAM. Needless to say it is too slow for processing files from 12-24MP DSLRs.</p>