The Old question ... Mac vs. PC what do I do?

<p>I had used a PC for all my editing for just about 8 years. This past March I purchased my first Mac, a MacBook Pro. I couldn't be happier with my decision. I mostly edit with Lightroom, but occasionally use Photoshop. I still have a PC which I only use for Office applications. </p>

<p>Bob</p>

<p><em>I still have a PC which I only use for Office applications.</em></p>

<p>This is perhaps the third post saying such. Why can't you guys use you your Mac for office work?</p>

<p>A Mac to do Office work?! are you totaly crazy..i will never use one of my overpriced computer to do such a small ridiculous task. I prefer hiring someone with a PC for that ; )</p>

<p>So is this why Mac MS Word doc's always come through totally messed up?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I prefer hiring someone with a PC for that</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I'll take $50 a pop to spell check each of your posts for you in Word (someone should!) ;-)</p>

<p>Now that's funny</p>

<p>Cool! can you do this in french, spanish and english? its cheaper than buying 3 software maybe ; )</p>

<p>Go for the mac. The mac are better for a couple of reasons:<br>

Better for photos and video<br>

Better customer support based in the US not in Inida<br>

Apple care comes with 3yr warrantee<br>

better parts are put into macs<br>

comes with all the software that is lacking in PC<br>

don't need anti-viris since macs don't get viris<br>

less maintence to deal with <br>

most programs are user friendly<br>

The down side is the price laptops stare at $999<br>

If you can afford go for it. I used to own a PC and hated it wasted lots of my time with crashes and bugs, spyware, etc. Always upgrading spyware, anti-viris etc, not with the mac. It cost only $29 to upgrade the operating system</p>

<p>Can someone please expound on WHY a Mac is better than a PC for photo/video applications? I see absolutely zero hardware advantage, and if anything else, the mac hardware is inferior, despite the excellent engineering that goes into the design of the unit as a whole.<br>

Oh, and you shouldn't even consider a switch if you've never used a Mac. It actually still drives me nuts after, although I'm very proficient with OSX after using and servicing them for the past 4 years.<br>

And seriously, if messed up ram is the issue, have a tech look at it, and worst comes to worst, buy some new ram. DDR2 is cheap nowadays. I got some Corsair Dominator DDR2 modules (basically the best stuff there was) for less than $50USD... which would have been unheard of a year or two ago.</p>

<p>This reply is from a 24" 2.8Ghz iMac, running Windows XP, via Parallels 4.0 virtual machine<br>

Best of both worlds -- <a href="http://www.parallelsstore.com/parallels_desktop.html">http://www.parallelsstore.com/parallels_desktop.html</a><br>

You don't have to reboot or lose speed as it is a partition on your HD</p>

<p>too all the little fish that bite everytimesssssss on the *mac is better at this* or *pc is better than this because*...</p>

<p>Please, just get the concept of <strong>BOTH are good</strong> , <strong>BOTH are equal</strong> in many ways, <strong>BOTH are fast</strong> , a Mac is <strong>2x more expensive</strong> , and you <strong>get more power</strong> / memory / HD for your money <strong>with a PC</strong> for less money.</p>

<p><strong>Both </strong> can have virus <strong>IF</strong> unprotect, <strong>BOTH</strong> <em> can be drive by idiot / stupid / computer saavy / expert.</em></p>

<p>and finally, <strong>BOTH</strong> when in Photoshop / Ligthroom look approximatly the same</p>

<p>Anything new to the equation anyone wants to add? something that have never been said in the past 20 years of this endless Mac vs PC war / debate? Let's start something <strong>new</strong> like film vs digital instead ; )</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Anything new to the equation anyone wants to add? something that have never been said in the past 20 years of this endless Mac vs PC war / debate? Let's start something <strong>new</strong> like film vs digital instead ; )</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>SUN makes a good SPARCstation..... and.... I am totally suprised the mod has not shut down this thread yet....</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>No, the biggest difference is the OS. Mac OS X is a fast, efficient, secure OS with features that really do improve the end user experience. </em><br />Daniel, contary to popular belief, you don't have to buy Apple hardware to get Mac OS legally. Check out this:<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.psystar.com/" target="_blank">http://www.psystar.com/</a><br />There's no reason to get ripped off on hardware just to get Mac. Windows, Linux, and Mac all happily run on x86 processors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The only way to get OSX is to buy Apple.<br>

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/05/26/psystar_files_for_bankruptcy_likely_delaying_apple_case.html</p>

<p>I've used both...if you want printer problems use a Mac with Leopard and CS4.<br>

Newer printers aren't so bad, but printers only a few years old will turn your hair gray...<br>

Worst thing is...I still prefer the Mac....</p>

<p><em>a Mac is <strong>2x more expensive</strong> , and you <strong>get more power</strong> / memory / HD for your money <strong>with a PC</strong> for less money.</em></p>

<p>That's a myth. Before buying my MacBook I compared it to what was available from Dell, HP, etc. I knew I was going to get a MacBook, but I just wanted to see what I would be paying in "Apple tax". Truly equivalent machines (motherboard speed, RAM speed, GPU, size and weight, warranty, etc.) were within about $200-$300 of the price of the MacBook I was looking at but did not have aluminum unibody enclosures, big glass multitouch trackpads, backlit keyboards, etc. All things considered I didn't pay more. If I had wanted to save that money I could have gotten the plastic MacBook which would have been the body equivalent of the PC notebooks I looked at.</p>

<p>I could have gotten something bigger, heavier, with less battery life and a slower motherboard, but with similar CPU/RAM size/HD for less. Lots of models emphasize those three metrics but skip on other things and you have to be careful of that. You also have to remember that there's a serious Vista performance penality and then another performance penalty to run AV software which means with equal hardware the Windows machine is going to be slower on many tasks.</p>

<p>I'm not going to say it's impossible to show a large price/hardware difference on paper. Pick an Apple model that's due for a refresh and a no name clone. Build the PC yourself. Or just gloss over the specs ignoring things like motherboard and RAM speed. But those types of comparisons aren't entirely honest.</p>

<p><em><strong>Both </strong> can have virus <strong>IF</strong> unprotect</em></p>

<p>Mac OS X does not have a thousand security holes by which a virus can install itself. There are only a handful of malware packages in the wild for Mac OS X, and they all require the user to download and launch the package, then enter their password for installation. <strong>The overwhelming majority of Mac users go through their entire Mac ownership never owning AV software and never having an infection.</strong></p>

<p>There are literally hundreds of thousands of viruses out there for the PC, most of which can install themselves while you're simply copying a file or viewing a web site. <strong>The overwhelming majority of Windows users have multiple infections throughout their ownership even while running AV software. Many never even realize their machines are infected, they just assume Windows slows down on its own and then reformat the hard drive.</strong></p>

<p>Let me repeat: I cannot begin to express to you how unsecure Windows is, or how dangerous it is that much of our business and infrastructure rests on Windows PCs. Windows should be outlawed from critical applications and Microsoft should face a class action lawsuit. The engineering in terms of security is just horrible and it has gone on far too long.</p>

<p>I use my iMac at home for all the fun stuff. For the boring sh*t my PC does the job.</p>

<p><em>Let me repeat: I cannot begin to express to you how unsecure Windows is, or how dangerous it is that much of our business and infrastructure rests on Windows PCs. Windows should be outlawed from critical applications and Microsoft should face a class action lawsuit. The engineering in terms of security is just horrible and it has gone on far too long.</em> <br /><br>

I've been hearing this since the 80's so please settle down, the sky is not falling and you're just repeating your ignorance, Daniel. The same design principles that allow anyone, you, me, to write legit software for PC (thumbs up) are the same ones that allow people take advantage to write malicious code. The alternative, your alternative, is to have a closed OS like Unix and have everything approved (like it is with Mac) before being released. That's even a more dangerous situation and isn't going to happen. 96% of the computing world tend to agree.</p>

<p><em><strong>Answering to</strong>:"Back to the original post...so computer was fast, then new ram it was slow.. So why don't you check to see if the ram is bad? Why go through all of this without seeing if your perfectly good computer can't be easily sorted out. Seems kind of <strong>rediculuous</strong> to me. Why people feel some need to start up this thred every few weeks escapes me. You could of done a search and gotten all the same opinons."</em><br>

Barry:<br>

I will try to answer to your comment in a diplomatic manner.<br>

Yes computer was fast, became slow when new RAM was added. RAM has been checked: good RAM. Checked everything else, including benchmarks at the lab: all OK ... latest Windows "update" with Service Pack 3 seems to be at fault ... why? Nobody knows why! <br>

Solution has been found:<br>

1. added 2Gb of RAM to the original 2 Gb totaling now 4Gb ... DDR2 in dual channel.<br>

2. added one HDD in RAID with the original one, RAID 0; <br>

3. changed motherboard, and processor for a dual core.<br>

4. added Photoshop CS4 as an update to CS3.<br>

5. paid in cash upon receipt.<br>

Results: lightning fast processing, even with batch processing 8 bits TIFF files.<br>

But that did not answer my question as to whether I should consider getting a MAC. Now my perfectly good PC computer will likely last another six months or so before it starts to act up again, then we shall see if an Apple Mac is still an option.<br>

Some people browse through all Mac vs. PC threads and are not getting solutions, so some people will try to get answers, and that includes me.<br>

I apologize for having upset you with this thread, I'll try and be more careful next time before I post a redundant question.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Ross: thank you for the input and the great link!<br>

JP</p>

<p>Garrison: great response, and appreciated. <br>

I will experiment a bit with the new setup of the PC, just revamped and see what happens during the next few weeks. Once, Win 7 comes out, I'll be able to add a few Gb's of RAM, and under a 64 bits environment, that should work ok.<br>

I still think the Mac SEEMS to be an easier machine to work with but, I have been told I was wrong before.<br>

Again, thanks for the reply.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Thomas, I did all of the required testing as you mentioned and the local comp teckies finally fix the problem. Nobody knows why but adding the RAM (tested good) and getting SvcPack 3 from windows apparently caused some conflicts. We will never know which one of the two caused the slow-down, maybe it was a combination or maybe it was just plain old bad luck.</p>

 

<p>Harry: thanks for your reply and also for the warning. I am just hoping the new setup will have fixed the problem once and for all.<br>

JP</p>

<p>

<p>Jacques, as a Mac user since 1984 I'll sing their praises for a long time. But it seems like your problems are related to the RAM. Have you tested other chips in there? The place that built it for you should have the skills to at least give you a diagnosis.<br>

Hi Michael: It wasn't the RAM after all ... because the same set is being used with a different setup and all is well. Hopefully, this PC issue won't ever surface again. It has been a nightmare.</p>

 

</p>

<p>... back for more replies soon ... gotta go!<br>

Cheers to all until tonight or tomorrow.<br>

JP</p>

<p>Daniel:<br>

<em>Build the PC yourself. </em><br>

Yes, this is really the only way to buy a computer and get what you want without getting ripped off.<br>

<em>Or just gloss over the specs ignoring things like motherboard and RAM speed. But those types of comparisons aren't entirely honest.</em><br>

Building you can buy hardware with better (or at least equal) specs than the Mac Pro's for less money. 24GB of RAM vs. 3 GB the 24GB is going to win, even if it's not quite as quick. And it isn't as though Apple is the only company with the rights to sell fast RAM. Mac motherboards aren't better than top of the line from Asus, DFI, etc.<br>

Also, even if Psystar lost the court case, I would still argue that it's silly to pay for either Mac OS or Windows. Install Ubuntu - it gets updated all the time, is as virus-safe as it gets, and will still run Photoshop CS3 and other Windows apps just fine with Wine. Oh, and it's <strong>free</strong> . And, contrary to popular belief, it really is no less user friendly than Mac or Windows.</p>