Jump to content

Mac vs. PC....I NEED to be convinced. :)


Recommended Posts

<p>Aloha Friends,</p>

<p>I am purchasing a new computer to help further my career in photography. My current computer is a Dell laptop that I used in college for papers/internet and it's way too slow now...plus I am unable to use callibration software on it. I have worked with Macs for imaging purposes in college, but that is about the extent of my Mac knowledge. I didn't find anything majorly groundbreaking with Macs that makes me think they are truly superior, but I keep hearing that they are for imaging.</p>

<p>I am planning on getting an iMac...24inch / 3.66ghz / 500gb hdd / 512mb RAM etc etc...basically the best iMac that exists...including everything I want, the price tag is about $3200.</p>

<p>Problem: I can get the the same thing in PC except a 750gb hdd for only $2100. I am divided. I have always wanted a Mac, but is it REALLY worth it?? Really people, I need a good educated answer.</p>

<p>Also, I have heard that there is a reocurring problem with iMacs...after 2 years they just quit on you and lose all your information; of course I back everything up, but I want a computer that will last and be worth the $3200!</p>

<p>Thank you for any input! :)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 326
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>A fully loaded 24" iMac is $2449. And it comes with a 750GB HD, and 4GB RAM. There is no 3.66 ghz version, it is 3.06ghz.<br>

I would also save $150 and get the 2.8ghz version instead.<br>

What I would do with the extra $$$ is to buy an airport extreme and a 2TB USB HD to use with time machine. Finally, I would buy the apple care extended warranty from LA Computer which always sells them MUCH cheaper than Apple ($120 vs. $169)</p>

<p>Convinced yet?</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Charmian-as an iMac user, all I can say is (1) don't let anyone else convince you one way or another, you need to convince yourself so if you haven't already used a Mac, go to a store and use one to see what you think, (2) the comment about 512 MB of RAM has already been made, and (3) I suppose it's possible that someone's Mac crashed after 2 years-all computers are susceptible to a crash- but as far as this being a recurring problem with Macs, this is the first I have heard of it. I switched to Mac as IBM no longer made pc's and I didn't want Vista; I liked my pc but I love everything about my Mac (just wish there was a Mac version of Train Simulator!). Check out this Apple site re switching to Mac. regards, cb :-)<br>

http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/campaigns/new_to_mac?mco=NDAxMDU0OA</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thank you everyone.<br>

Okay, yes sorry for the confusion...it was 4gb RAM and 3.06ghz. So why should I get the 2.8ghz version if the 3.06 is faster...especially with a 750gb hdd? Is it just not <em>that </em>much faster?<br>

And thank you for the advice for the Apple Care Extended Warranty since that is definitely something I will be purchasing...I will check LA Computer.<br>

Can someone explain the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB <strong>vs</strong>. NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS with 512MB memory for me?<br>

I definitely would prefer to get an Apple computer over a PC, I just want to make sure that the price tag is worthwhile. :)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I have been a big fan of Apple for a decade, but every computer I've ever bought for myself is a PC. </p>

<p>My current Dell Desktop, running Vista 64, is a dream for Photoshop and Lightroom, and it cost only $650 delivered last year, including 8 GB RAM (I already had a monitor). No Apple can touch it for less than $3000, partly because Apple chooses not to compete in the reasonably-priced desktop market segment.</p>

<p>I would never buy an iMac for myself, although I recommend it to all my family members because they don't care about performance and are largely computer illiterate (I don't want them calling me with questions). The iMac serves their purposes nicely, because they don't care about the machine's drawbacks, which are:</p>

<p>Drawbacks to iMac as I see them:</p>

<p>(1) You are limited to one internal hard drive.<br>

(2) You are limited to 4GB RAM. (They have to change this ridiculous limitation soon enough, if you are willing to wait.)<br>

(3) The screen is Glossy, and it's only 24". Sure, you can buy a second screen $$$.<br>

(4) The price is not right, unless you value glitz over performance.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>i dont see the use of the faster processor (having try it for month with CS4 vs the smaller Imac 24inhc..) i would save money and get the bottom line imac fully load for a 1000$ less. Or go with a Mac Pro...</p>

<p>but again, before you get 40000 answer saying that for less money you could have a pc even faster and more powerfull...i will say; you could have a pc for less money more powerfull and faster : )</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>About a year ago, I bought a 24" iMac after having owned many, many PCs. (I had first ordered a Dell that was DOA; after several days of fighting with tech support I sent it back.) I like the iMac fine and don't regret the purchase at all, even knowing it was somewhat more expensive. I use it mainly for editing photos and it runs very smoothly and quickly. Nikon Capture NX2 was always a pain on my PC but is now very easy to use. Photoshop and Bridge run very well.</p>

<p>But honestly, I can't put myself in the category of a Mac evangelist-it is still just a computer. Some things it does very well...much better than a PC. But it also has its own foibles that you have to learn to work with. </p>

<p>One of the things that Mac does very well is the Time Machine automated backup--definitely you should budget for an external HD to take advantage of that feature.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Very good points about PC's. I am still on the fence.<br>

My current PC has Windows XP, but I have used Vista on other computers and HATE IT.<br>

The best arguements I can come up with for Mac right now are the imaging related tools, security (they don't get viruses)....and...I've heard monitor callibration is internal?<br>

...seems to me that the PC really is a better idea even though there are faithful Mac users out there.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Use what you're comfortable with. Mac users tout the security, usability and stability of their platform, but I have Mac stories that would curl their hair. I've read numerous horror stories about how crash prone and fussy PCs are, but that's not been my experience.<br /><br />You can make either machine work for you. Estwing and Craftsman both make fine hammers, but one is likely to feel better in your hands than the other. The one that fits is the tool to use.<br /></p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Actually it brings out the worst in both Windows and Apple fanboys.</p>

<p>RAM limitation of 4 gb was mentioned. That will change with the release of the Snow Leopard OS later this year.</p>

<p>This is another one of those "which is better" questions that only you can decide. I use both and prefer the Mac. Whatever. The differences are mostly interface, security, and troubleshooting related issues. One thing I prefer is the self contained applications of Macs (shared with Linux) and not having to track down troublesome dlls. I offer that just as an illustration.</p>

<p>Said another way, this is like a Canon vs. Nikon question - only you can decide. For my money, the time the Mac saves me is well worth the additional money, money being repaid to me in time and longer equipment life for me. YMMV.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I got a fully loaded 24" iMac for less than what you describe, so you may want to re-run those pricing figures.</p>

<p>If you are going to do serious photoshop work on the Mac (or, I presume, PC) you'll want a very large hard drive (I'd get 1TB these days), 4GB RAM, and external drive(s) for backup purposes.</p>

<p>One way to save some money is to not get the very fastest processor. One often pays a big premium for this, but the actual difference in performance is typically insignificant and even unnoticeable.</p>

<p>Ultimately, if you price out equivalently equipped systems from Apple and the top-tier Windows vendors your pricing should end up being very close. If it isn't you are probably either not finding the best pricing or you are not actually specifying equivalent systems. (You can build your own PC system for less if that is your thing.)</p>

<p>Dan</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Charmian, if you hate Vista, why are you on the fence? Seems like an easy choice.</p>

<p>Chris Werner: are you saying that once Snow Leopard comes out (and you buy it) you can open up your iMac, remove, and toss out, the 4GB that you already paid for, and put in another 8GB to replace it? Even if you could, it sounds wasteful. You can buy a Dell today with 12 GB if you need it and it won't break the bank.</p>

<p>But hey, it's only money.</p>

<p>The analogy to Nikon vs. Canon sounds good on the surface, but it s a poor comparison. Both Nikon and Canon have a full line of DSLRs and lenses; I use one system, but I could just as easily use the other one (in any given year, a couple of lenses might exist in one system but not the other, but both systems aim to, and generally do, satisfy the same needs). <br>

Apple, on the other hand, does not have a full line of computers; if you happen to want one of the models they make, great. But they are missing, among other things, the one thing I wanted in a computer: a reasonably priced desktop. If you want a reasonably-priced desktop, you have to go with the PC. It's that simple.</p>

<p>If money were not an issue, I very well might have bought a MacPro. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Thank you everyone for the discussion! I know this always brings out the worst in Mac and PC fanboys but I still appreciate the comments. ;) Every comment brings up good points so I will definitely take all into consideration. I'm pretty comfortable on both PC and Mac, so I will do some more checking around for pricing comparisons...I have Photoshop on my PC so it would be beneficial to stay PC...but I love Mac's tools...aaah. <br>

Okay, THANK YOU once again.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I would wait on getting an iMac if you can. I love em, great steady photo tool, and I don't mind external drives for back-up and storage. But the biggest limit , though not currently a problem is the 4GB limit. My 2006 model uses 3GB at max and it works good. But I will sooner or later have to upgrade if I want to use the newer operating system/s. The rumor's are that there will soon be a choice of a quad core iMac. If that is true and they allow sufficiant ram to run it, you may have a very attractive solution. <br>

Manakash's "drawbacks" are sensible, however, I think when you look at the overall price of it including the monitor (though it is glossy), it's not that much of difference and it is a very smooth tool for photo editing.</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I recently went through this myself. I've been using Windows PCs for years. Convinced myself it was time to switch to Apple and then did the pricing comparisons. As of late last year, there simply was no comparison. From Dell, for $900 I got a quad-core fast Intel processor, 4 gig RAM, 750 gig hard drive, Windows XP (Vista was not acceptable to me.), nice ATI video card, etc., ample USB outlets and expansions slots, etc.<br>

Apple had nothing comparable for me because I already have a great photoshop monitor - an NEC Wuxi. Even if I had been ready to throw this out, I insist on the flexibility to upgrade to the monitor of MY choice. If I went with the twice as expensive iMac, the Apple display would be joined at the hip to the other hardware. So for me going Apple would have cost me - at a minimum - twice the price of going with the Dell. So I did the latter and am very happy.<br>

No brainer for me. As has been said, this is a gaping hole in Apple's product line. They know it. It's an effort to force upgrades to the extremely expensive (for me) Mac Pro. That's a lovely machine from lots of angles. But it's overkill for most 2D photographers.<br>

One last thing - Microsoft's new OS - now called "Windows 7" is supposed to be out in the fall and to have some wonderful attributes for photographers, including solid color management, etc. Apple already has many of these things, but the early reviews on the Windows 7 beta suggest that it will leave Vista in the dust. So, depending on how urgently you need your new machine, the relevant comparison may be Apple OS vs. Windows 7 (as opposed to Vista).</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...