Adobe Photoshop CS3 Mac or PC?

I'm going to be purchasing CS3 soon and was wondering what people's experiences have been with using Photoshop on

the Mac or PC. I'm open to using it on either platform and would love to hear your thoughts.

 

Thanks!

even if there were only one difference, it is easier to find files in the Open dialogue on OSX than Windows.

 

t

Well, I have CS2 experience on both platforms. Basically the same really - but I find I enjoy working with it more on the Mac

because I am not so frustrated by other Windows nonsense. :)

Makes no real difference for an amateur photographer. I use Mac at school and PC at home - nix nox.

Thanks for the thoughts! So there isn't really any feature set differences between the two other than platform preference?

It's a really bad time to be thinking of getting a new computer.

 

"...but I find I enjoy working with it more on the Mac because I am not so frustrated by other Windows nonsense."

 

As David says, you have to put up with some non-photo stuff when using Windows. ie possible

viruses/malware/spyware. But your windows experience will depend entirely what quality you buy, whether it is

store bought or properly custom built, and who uses it and where they go on the net. The worse case experience

with a PC is buying a Dell pre-loaded with bloattware, letting the kids download all sorts of "free" games as

they msn message and then have the teenager sneak onto porn sites at night. But, it's really easy to have a

pleasant Windows experience too.

 

As well, there's been a high proportion of "Mac wont..." threads here in the DDF over the last few months and

this platform

is in the minority. So it's not as easy as "just plug it in and use it" as some Mac die hards will state.

 

My windows based photoshop computer is part of my camera gear. It's off limits. When I need a new (windows) box,

I do research on compatible motherboards/cpu/ram and buy them from newegg or NCIX. I usually go with raid 0 array

and pay someone to build, partition, install OS my gear for me. I invested in a good Antec case and am able to

just upgrade the parts as I need them. Sometimes it's a new build, sometimes it's just more ram or faster hard

drives.

 

You can't do this with an iMac and but can do some of it with the more expensive Mac Pro. I do not recommend an

iMac for any reason especially photoshop work or massive batching of raw files. It's a limiting and

over-priced dual core computer that allows a max of 4 gig of ram and one hard drive that comes with an "okay"

monitor. Adobe LR uses four cores if available. CS3 uses four cores for some filters and is rumored to be that

CS4 is going to be using four cores more so than they do currently with CS3. It's easy to see that iMac's are old

tech when a wave of new software is coming around the corner in a couple months that will utilize quad core and

more than 4 gig of

ram. I call iMac's "the laptop that you can't take anywhere". Like laptops, instead of upgrading ones iMac in a

year or two, these things will

be littering the classifieds and land fills sooner than what I feel is necessary. And like everything else, Mac's

are just another

made in china computer that benefits from

excellent (and pretentious)

marketing.

 

Just around the corner is 64 bit CS4 for windows. Mac will have to wait until CS5. But even today, with 32-bit

CS3, Leopard and Vista64 address available ram above 4 gig in a different manner and will allow faster processing

than with a system capped with 4 gig of ram. Especially a 32-bit Windows system with 4 gig of ram. On 4 gig ram

systems, data and read write times usually depend on a

scratch disk when you max out your 4 gig ram. Most have a dedicated scratch disc because of this. When on 64 bit

OS's the data is recalled from this extra ram faster than it can be from a scratch disk. If you go with Mac, go

with the Macpro, if you go with windows, go

with Vista64. With the

Macpro, instead of iMac, you can choose monitors, add up to 32 gig of ram, add more/faster hard drives.

 

Platform choice also depends on budget on how fast you wish to go. Bang for buck, in other words. Both have their

pluses and minuses in functionality and maintenance. Everything is a trade off. With Windows, you will go faster

for less money. With Windows, you will have more hardware upgrade options. With windows, you'll have more

maintenance duties. Vista64 with SP1 is getting great reviews now. It will be the common OS very soon.

 

Architecture changes. A few are coming around the corner really soon. Intel's new Nehalem chip with DDR3 ram and

the new solid state hard drives, SSD for short. SSD is where hard drives are going. They debuted in the Mac Air.

The OCZ 64gb ssd drive is selling like hot cakes at the moment. As most set up their computers to have their C

Drive only hold their OS and applications, these 64 gig drives are more than adequate for this and most

importantly, already out perform and cost less than the fastest mechanical hard drive availble, the velociraptor.

These two advancements, Nehalem and SSD, are bound to make post production tasks like video and still editing

incredibly fast. And more so on Adobe 64 bit CS4. They'll also use less power consumption, heat, and noise.

 

It's a really bad time to be thinking of getting a new computer.

 

 

Garrison, thanks for the detail and insight!

The iMac 24" is an outstanding choice. Many people here have recommended that.

 

If you like phutzing around with hardware, OS, protection software, etc. Go the PC route. You can build your own and lay

claim to having the baddest a$$ pc on your block.

 

If you enjoy editing/processing images and not being distracted with maintenance, viri, etc - and enjoy a well-integrated

(software and hardware) solution, then Macintosh is a superior choice.

listen to Brad. I bought myself a new Toshiba laptop for Christmas running Vista. out of the gate, I thought it just fine. eight months later ... I am about to throw it overboard. as a PC user for over two decades I cannot believe I would say that. however .. after my experiences with Apple iTunes, and iPod and stellar customer support, I must say that if buying an Apple computer is half as satisfying then it will be well worth it.

 

luckily, most of my engineering and photo applications, Mathematica, Lightroom, Dreamweaver, Photoshop, etc ... will run on my new Apple whatever that might be. the Marine related software .. isn't critical, so as long as there is a pathway to run a Windows application, my next computer will be from Apple.

 

you think I am kidding .. I have actually almost tossed this Toshiba laptop overboard several times. never in my entire life have I been so frustrated with hardware and software as to dump my investment overboard and by something else. hopefully my Toshiba, Vista, and funky Hawking Wifi antenna will allow this rant to post.

 

daniel taylor

"so as long as there is a pathway to run a Windows application, my next computer will be from Apple."

 

You can use Parallels to do that in a virtual environment.

SSD's or solid state drives do NOT always draw less power on a laptop than a regular 2 1/2" drive; many draw MORE at idle; thus battery life is actually less.

>>> my next computer will be from Apple.

 

Dan, shoot me an email when your Toshiba ends up sleeping with the fishes.

"If you like phutzing around with hardware, OS, protection software, etc. Go the PC route. You can build your own

and lay claim to having the baddest a$$ pc on your block."

 

"If you enjoy editing/processing images and not being distracted with maintenance, viri, etc - and enjoy a

well-integrated (software and hardware) solution, then Macintosh is a superior choice."

 

This is simply an Utopian view from someone that loves to bash windows at any opportunity and isn't as simple as

Brad paints

it. There's obviously other factors involved as market share indicate dominance of the brand that Brad tries

to under mine all the time. Objective posts would be

helpful, not flag flying.

Thanks for the discussion! Interesting observations!

 

I heard that the PC CS3 has more plug-ins available than the Mac version. Have any of you found this to be true?

it's just like software, out of the two platforms, you'll come across "sorry Mac version not available at this

time" more often. "Convert to B&W Pro" is a good example, I don't think they updated it for Leopard before they

went under. There's stuff from Nikon in the scanning dept I think is hard to run on Leopard too. But that's

Nikon's short comings, not Mac. I don't think it's much of big deal though and keep in mind that Mac is very

popular amongst high end photographers. So you can't go wrong by going with Mac.

 

Everything is give-take, there is no "right" platform in regards to making photos. Me? I switched from Mac in the

late 90's as I felt they were too slow for the money and hard ware upgrades were really difficult back then

compared to windows. I don't mind windows and I'm sensible when it comes to

building it and using it online. This is easy to do and protection is a given like wearing a condom or a seatbelt.

It's just something you do. Most Windows haters is a result of their own ignorance. They buy a Dell. They don't

notice that it comes with "free" software and there's 47 resources running in the back ground the second they

turn it on and the thing slowly degrades and gets slower and slower. Like Dan above, a simple

google search on Vista with older hardware back then would have prevented him all this trouble. He wouldn't feel

this way if he bought it with XP running on it. And he wouldn't feel this way if he bought Vista on a new Toshiba

today as the bugs have been worked out. Yes, I do feel for consumers and think that this was the stupidest thing

MS, or anyone, could do. The Vista nightmare was two fold, it wasn't ready for release and was filled

with holes, and it wasn't backwards compatible like they promised so it didn't work on older hard ware for driver

reasons. That's all changed now, bugs are gone and

works great on todays mobo/cpu's. Many long time windows users, that loved XP and hated Vista when released, are

now saying

Vista 64 is the best OS they've ever used.

 

 

It all depends what you want out of a computer and put your priorities on the balance beam. For me, I like being

able to upgrade parts for a reasonable price. My time is expensive and dearly treasured. It doesn't make sense to

me to buy a slower and more expensive computer when the Epson spits out the same result. When Adobe releases CS4

in 64 bit (for windows only), I'm certainly going to apprecaite this choice when my inexpensive $1500 PC cranks

through raw files three times faster than a $6K Macpro.

 

If you wish for a parts list from newegg to build a great quad-core, 8 gigs of ram, and the right hard drives,

let me know.

Or just buy a Mac an start being productive within minutes. No hangs, virus, hassles.

 

Some people love to play computer jockey and having the baddest computer is what it's all about to them. That's fine

too...

"Or just buy a Mac an start being productive within minutes. No hangs, virus, hassles."

 

That's odd. There's been way more posts here with Mac people having trouble with Epsons, color calibration, and

reading raw files than any Vista or XP users asking for help. With less Mac users, why would that be, Brad?

 

 

"Some people love to play computer jockey and having the baddest computer is what it's all about to them."

 

Do you have any links to people bragging about their PC's? I've never read one. In my opinion though, this

applies more so to Mac owners. The wonderful design and elegant looks often make it a furniture piece and

displayed proudly for others to go "oh, my, you have a Mac? That must have cost a lot?!" You'll find Mac owners

more emotionally attached over their platform choice. Most PC'rs are like "whatever, it's just a computer" and

it's hidden under the desk. It's

the same with Harley Davidson. You pay for a market campaign and are sold a lifestyle. This entitles you to

bragging rights and deserved attention from others. PC'rs are like Honda owners. Get there quicker for cheaper,

and judging by the posts here, more reliably too. Maybe Leica owners are a better metaphor? The first to get

defensive over their $4000 35mm mounted on a $5000 M8 when a used $500 D70 and $200 Nikkor does the same thing.

If not better.

My (insert body part here) is bigger than your (insert body part here).

 

PC versus Mac

 

Nikon versus Cannon

 

It all rather childish at this point.

I have always used a PC. I have built two PCs and am good at fixing PCs. I have helped a few photographers with Apple computers who had never downloaded digital files from their cameras (new digital camera users) and it was easy to do so. I think Apple computers do lots of things well. I do find more programs available for the PC than the Apple including some photo programs. I have never had any driver issues with my PC. I am still on Windows XP Pro. I plan to have a new custom 64 bit machine built with Vista 64 bit with 8 gb ram since the next Windows version of Photoshop (CS4) coming out this fall will support 64 bit computers. I think the Apple OS has done a better job at being able to use more memory with Photoshop than Windows but with the next version of Photoshop becoming available and more and more Windows computers being built to 64-bit this will change. I looked at the cost of a MacPro computer to a custom built Intel 9450 CPU with 8gb ram, Nvidia 9800 GT 512mb card, and two WD 150gb Velociraptor drives and the custom built computer is $2,500 versus $4,400 for a MacPro with similar hardware. I like to tinker with my computer. A lot of Apple owners aren't into upgrading or changing out components in their computer. A lot of photographers use Apples. They are a good computer. I still think they are overpriced compared to a PC when you look at the MacPro. The main problem with Windows computers right now is the problems with Vista. If you purchase a Vista computer plan on purchasing as much memory as you can afford because it is a memory hog. If you buy a 64 bit computer you will need to get Vista 64 bit installed.

 

Mike