Still Pentaxian but...MAC or PC?

Hi Pentaxian friends.

<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_EO9piAKCkcU/TUo-TGjZ9WI/AAAAAAAAGjM/zMklETC3RTA/s1600/iMAC.jpg"><img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_EO9piAKCkcU/TUo-TGjZ9WI/AAAAAAAAGjM/zMklETC3RTA/s400/iMAC.jpg" border="0" alt="" width="400" height="330" /></a>

<br />I have been a user of the PC platform forever. Photoshop, Lightroom have been by tools for years and I have to admit that I have been pleased with the results. All my business work is done using Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel. All my books were written using Word. There are no questions as to the popularity of the PC world.<br /><br />However, it seems that most serious or professional photographers and graphic artists have been using the Mac for their graphic work. As I understand, the iMac is supposedly much better and easier to use for graphic, music, cinema, and most of the artsy side of computing. I never owned a Mac and frankly always thought that they were way too expensive.

 

<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EO9piAKCkcU/TUo_iI38mvI/AAAAAAAAGjQ/1r2FP5pJs6I/s1600/dell-studio-xps-435.jpg"><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EO9piAKCkcU/TUo_iI38mvI/AAAAAAAAGjQ/1r2FP5pJs6I/s400/dell-studio-xps-435.jpg" border="0" alt="" width="400" height="272" /></a>

<br /><br />There is an Apple store I visit once in a while when I go down to Los Angeles. The screen resolution and clarity seem to pop out at you. Applications like IPhoto, IMovie and Garage Band are very impressive and tempting. It's one thing to look at an iMac at the Apple store but the real test is likely to have one at home and work on it for a while before making a judgement as to which machine would be best for a photographer.<br /><br />So.I spent $300.00 and purchased a used iMac G5 with 1.8GHz and upgraded the RAM to 4GB right away. It only has apple software on it and I cannot compare Lightroom on both platform. I used iPhoto and copied about 2000 of my images, both RAW and JPG, from the PC to the Imac. The iPhoto runs pretty smooth and I can't say that the images are better on it, but it is an old computer running a much slower processor The iMac does run Microsoft Office 2008 and all my usual writing tools are remaining the same. That's a good thing. The iMac is about 6 or 7 years old and the processing speed is not great compared to my current PC which only runs XP. With Windows 7 pro on a new PC (around $800.00) I could get 64bit processing and clock speed in the 3.5 MHz or so. The newest iMac in it's simplest form, 21.5"-3.06MHz-4GB RAM, is $1,200.00 then add Microsoft office, some editing software and other necessary tools, you at $2,000.00. Buy a Mac Pro quad-core starting at $2,500.00, plus software, you way pass my budget.<br /><br />I have to admit that I really like the ease of the operating system on my cheap iMAC G5. This is the way a true windows operating system should work. It is very intuitive and the applications are running very smooth. As far as I know, you rarely get any viruses when runing the Apple Platform. I suppose that the number of Apple computers worldwide is not big enough to satisfy the appetite of hackers.<br /><br />So, I'm at a crossroad again. It's time to upgrade and I'm not sure what I should do. Some of you have always used a PC and probably would tell me to go with a PC again. Some of you have always used a Mac and probably would tell me to go with a Mac again. Some of you certainly have used both platforms and have very valuable experience with both platform. I would appreciate any guidance from you guys in particular. You can post comments herein, send me an email <a href="mailto:brwyvn@gmail.com">brwyvn@gmail.com</a> , reply on my Facebook or Twitter as well. I am posting this blog on photo-net and hope to get comments there too.

Thank you, you are the best,

Yvon Bourque

<p>Yvon, I have used both, but not Apple for photo editing. As I understand it, the reason Apple tends to have the numbers in the design and photographer communities is that Photoshop and other key design software packages were originally written for Apple PCs, so when designing went digital it went Apple as there was then no alternative. This resulted in a form of inertia in the design community as the belief set in that Apple was the goods for design and photo editing. <br>

(For similar reasons, gamers tend to use Windows PCs because for quite a while the best games were Windows only)</p>

<p>But that reason no longer applies, as now there is now functional difference between the Apple and Windows versions of essentials like Photoshop and Lightroom. It is the software that counts, that is where 99% of the human/machine interaction takes place, so if there is no difference between the software on different platforms why switch away from what you know? </p>

<p>I talked to a photographer friend just yesterday who went down the path you are considering, and thousands of extra dollars later, with a steep learning curve and lots of unexpected headaches, he says he is using the same software the same way, and wonders why he bothered. (And he really misses the right mouse click)</p>

<p>Lastly, the people into colour management say stay away from Apple monitors - get an Eizo or the high end NEC if you are serious about good prints rather than poppy screen displays.</p>

<p>What Peter says!! I've used both, and now only use PC. Unless Mac becomes hell of a lot cheaper, with many more people writing cheaper software options, there is no reason to go Mac anymore. PC is not better, it's just not worse anymore, and is so cheap and easy.</p>

<p>I work in a Mac environment although I am a dedicated PC user myself, but not for graphic packages. Even after five years in the environment I really don't like Macs and I have to deal with the complaints of students all the time who just don't make the transition. The reason we are a Mac environment is much like Peter described except for Biology software packages and for the same reason there is little reason any longer to justify getting any more Mac equipment. It's too expensive and there is little difference in the software.<br>

I do think if I wanted to do serious art work/art manipulation the Mac is a better platform, at least that's what my computer geek friends tell me. I guess it all depends on what level of sophistication you need.</p>

<p>I use both professionally. The job won't do Mac's and gave me a Dell T3500 with dual Dell 23" monitors. The whole set up was less than 2 grand (Win 7, Xeon, 12 gig of ram, TB of storage, 2gig video). It's really a good machine. Silent and rock steady. I have to admit Win7 is really stable. Microsoft got it right this time. I hated Vista with a passion. It just stunk. <br>

I use my Mac as well because dealing with other agencies, who do use Mac's, I run into problems when transitioning material over to the PC. Especially with fonts. Open Type has eliminated some of these problems, but there are still many people using Type 1 and TTF's don't always show up on a Mac the right way either. The Mac is also less maintenance, do more of what I want to do, less time worrying about updating virus, defrag, etc., etc.<br>

Bottom line. you can do whatever you want on both. There is a piece of software that will work on each platform that will do what you want. It's about how you want to do it. I like editing video on my PC because Sony Vegas doesn't do Mac. I prefer Photoshop, InDesign, let's just say Adoobe software on my Mac because it works better and I never get a crash. I do on the PC. <br>

One piece of software I do recommend for the Mac is CleanMyMac. It's very good at removing unwanted files and uninstalling programs. You'd be surprised how much disk space you can recover.</p>

I have used both. I stepped into a job a number of years ago as editor of a 48-page weekly newspaper. We used Macs for workstations and a PC for file server. The Macs were constantly crashing, and we often missed deadline because of it. When it came time to replace the workstations we went with PCs. End of crashes. I have always said that in order to make a true comparison of Mac vs. PC, you must compare machines of equal specifications. Mac users often fall into the trap of saying the Mac is superior because they have been working on a machine with superior specs, but had they been working on a PC with exactly the same specs they might not notice a difference. And that is part of the reason Macs are thought of as being more expensive; Apple loads them up with quality parts including great graphics cards that the $399 Walmart PC will not have. With my experience on the newspaper, I'd never consider going back to Mac.

<p>Every system will need maintained from time to time since every computer was designed by humans. Any system running in tip-top shape has been maintained properly.</p>

<p>That said:</p>

<p>Macs are known for their stability. Why? Because their hardware under the hood is finite and controlled. With fewer variations in hardware, the software can be written specifically for it with fewer errors. The downside is that Mac hardware must be purchased as specific vendors or they risk not being able to use the hardware. It is true that Apple has been attempting to let simple usb devices be completely usable on a Mac, but this is a slow process.</p>

<p>Windows PCs are known for their compatibility. Why? Because anyone can run down to Fry's, BestBuy, or Newegg and purchase hardware for it. Seemingly, everyone makes hardware for PCs. This makes the amount of hardware that's Windows compatible that drivers need to be written for very intimidating, and the vendors themselves will often be forced to write software for a few versions of windows at once.</p>

<p>And there is a Third choice in some cases...</p>

<p>Linux PCs are known for being machines that survive Armageddon. A Linux machine with very simple hardware will run forever, which is why it the choice for large data centers, internet mainframes, and root domains. Linux is also completely free from viruses. (The only viruses that can infect a Linux system are those in testing environments where the systems securities were purposefully disabled. There are none that exist in the real world.) The downside to Linux is that it's so useful that many have adapted the code to their own needs, even splitting off from the main kernel and creating entirely different operating systems based on the code, hence the term "flavor of Linux." While many server systems are Command Line based, many users of Linux actual do most of their work in a Graphical User Interface similar to Mac and Windows systems. While most software can be used on various Linux systems, software that requires proprietary code (ie, DirectX from Microsoft) does not usually function correctly. Open Source programmers will often write code to make up for these deficiencies, but that often takes time. In some cases, hardware and software vendors are feeling the increase pressure to write Open Source software and will write Linux drivers and ship them along side Mac and Windows drivers, but not all vendors are willing to devote man hours to this task. Adobe is known for "attempting" to write drivers for Linux (Flash player, etc) but as of right now, the larger titles like Photoshop and Lightroom are simply not available for Linux.</p>

<p>As you can see, this is a larger issue than just Mac vs PC. There are many things to consider. It's apples to oranges to bananas in most cases. Apple has a large part of the creative community already behind them. Windows have hardware compatibility. Linux is often thought as a DOS prompt and not useful to end users. Personally, I use Linux at home (Ubuntu to be specific), but I'm currently forced to use Windows to use Lightroom. I am looking at a Mac myself, but I'm looking at the Mac Mini. I don't need another monitor or tower fighting for space on my desk. I believe the Mini is currently $700, $800-ish with Aperture3 installed. I had considered a MacBook, but I simply don't need another laptop.</p>

<p>Yvon, my recommendation is to keep your current PC for running email, web-browsing, and other general tasks. I would have your new machine do media processing (video, photo, audio, etc) and JUST that. The new machine will be clean and free to do work. There is no need to completely retire a machine due to age alone.</p>

<p>Good Luck!</p>

<p>Wow, I was expecting more (or at least one) Mac evangelist(s)!<br>

I have used both (but consider myself a "PC guy") and I agree with the general sentiment here.<br>

The Mac OS is elegant, but Windows 7 isn't that far behind in polish. The insides of new macs and PCs are now very similar since Apple went with Intel CPUs, so I can never get over the difference in price. I also put together my own machines, which in a Mac world you simply cannot do.<br>

My main home PC is one I have had in one form or another for 10 years or so. Whenever my needs outpace the hardware, I can get a new motherboard, ram, and CPU (AMD for me - another great value) for just a few hundred dollars, make the swap, and basically have a new machine without a big investment or creating as much trash as a full machine replacement. My current setup is a Quad core 3 GHz AMD CPU with 8 GB of RAM and a 1TB drive. At work (software engineering) it's a Dell workstation (company bought) with a 2.5 GHz Intel quad core and 12 GB of RAM. Both run Win7 x64 and I'm happy with them.<br>

Finally, it's really the applications that help us do the work we use computers for, not the OS. So as long as the OS is functional and the applications run well, we can do our work. Whether it's Mac OS, Windows, Linux, or even Chrome OS (maybe one day) it shouldn't matter. Right now I think the Windows side of things offers the best value and that is a big reason I stick with the platform. Linux might be an even better value for many of the same reasons, but it has even less polish and most importantly, fewer applications.<br>

Incidentally, value was also what drew me to a Pentax dSLR. Maybe this is why we seem to be more in agreement here than other places where I have seen the same discussion.</p>

<p>Oh, and one more thing. If you have a few computers in the house (Mac or PC) and need to back them up and/or share files easily, consider Windows Home Server. I have one running on a low power Atom-based system in a closet that backs up all the computers in the house automatically over the network. It's also the main media sharing hub containing my 20,000+ mp3 collection, photos for viewing on the TV, and anything else we want to share easily. If I lose or upgrade a drive in a PC, I can just pop in a new drive, boot from a CD to restore from my WHS backup, and be up and running very quickly.<br>

WHS might be a good use of an old computer that has been outgrown as a desktop, even if it's just for the backup functionality. I had it running on an old PC at first, but bought a $200 "Nettop" later to keep power costs down.</p>

<p>Yvon, I went through this just a month ago. I had been using and old Dell XPS that at the time was the cats meow and even today it is better than most anything for under $1200.00...Anyway, I was all set to go the Mac route even though I would get grief from my wife and kids all of whom are Mac fanatics. My eldest daughter is one of those mac Geeks at the apple store.So I was pretty much set to jump ship, until I started to research the software. I would have to replace it all and I am really vested in software for the P.C. I have the entire Photo shop CS5 suite, Lightroom 3.3 and all of the NIK and Topaz software for P.C...I have spent more on software than I have for the computer. So just a couple of weeks back I bought another DELL XPS with the wazzo 64 processor and 8 gigs of ram and wowza!...I am happy as a clam, + widows 7 is pretty cool and what XP should have been. so no grief from the wife and i have a blazing fast computer. </p>

<p>I used both for years. Much depends on what you used first, since that "imprints" you one way or the other.</p>

<p>You can do good work on either platform, and for that matter Linux is worth considering on its own merits.</p>

<p>That being said, Apple has put a lot more effort into human engineering than anyone else. I have used Adobe Photoshop on both platforms and the support given by the Mac OS to use of the program is important in making it more pleasant to use all around.</p>

<p>When I retired, not the least of the benefits was that I don't have to work in Windows anymore. Windows works, just like a Chevy Nova works, but I prefer to drive a Porsche.<br /> Some people will never understand that sort of choice. For them, a MacDonalds is as good as filet, so why waste your money? If you don't understand that, by all means stick with Windows. It's more than good enough.</p>

<p>Come on, 'fess up, you're really one of those damned Mac users trolling here - all that computer porn and all.</p>

<p>By the way, most of you PC users are way out of date on the current state of Mac hardware and software. "Right click," for one example.</p>

<p>Thank you for your helpful comments everybody. I was afraid I would get answers from Mac or PC fanatics preaching the virtues of their system, but it seems that many of you have used both systems and the general concensus is that a new PC with Windows 7 @ 64bit will be the best choice for me, money wise. Like Javier, I have pretty much the same software and it would cost a lot to replace in a MAC platform.<br>

Peter does have a good insight of both system history and it makes sense to me.<br>

Gary, Douglas, Rich, Will, and Matt all have used both platform and what I get from you guys is that there really no difference between the two system now that Window 7 is out.<br>

Jeremiah, You are very well versed in computing, more so than I will ever be and a linux system would get me in trouble. Reading between your lines though, I really think you are suggesting I keep the PC platform.<br>

Much appreciated,<br>

Yvon</p>

<p>JDM von Weinberg<br>

You got me all wrong. I have been a PC user forever but I do like the looks of a iMac. That's why I recently purchased a used $300 cheap Imac G5 1.8GHz, knowing it would not be fast enough for my needs,but to feel how it is to work with a Mac. I like the user friendliness of it but they are so expensive. Judging from the answers herein, from my friends on this site, which I already know and trust, it looks like I'm going to upgrade my PC based system with a faster processor and windows 7.<br>

I do think your comparison of a Chevy Nova and a Porsche is off kilter. It might be more like a Corvette and Porsche. Both are fast but in the end it's the driver that makes the difference.</p>

<p>If Windows 7 is the answer you're looking at, make sure you get a solid Quad Core CPU. The dual cores work well enough, but I've noticed mine chugs when applying masked layers and such in LR2. I have 6GB of Ram and it's just waiting for the processor to catch up. My next "everything" rig will have a quad, or even 6core. I imagine if I wasn't using the "everything" rig to do LR2 in vBox in Linux I'd probably have a lot more horsepower from the dual core. (using the car analogy, what I'm doing is putting a 292 in a Corvette. It totally works, but not quickly)</p>

<p>But you're right Yvon, I'm a total nerd... lol But all I'm really endorsing is the best workflow for YOU. Everyone is different. :-)</p>

<p>I think history has been made in this thread -- not a single MacEvangelist chiming in? They must all be busy reading The Daily on their iPads. ;)<br>

Having worked on both systems, I agree with the consensus here. Mac is prettier, but not enough prettier to make up for the extra expense and limited utility. A Porsche, to use the car analogy, is actually much less useful than a Chevy in most real-life situations (try getting the kids' soccer team to a game in that beautiful Porsche....)<br>

<strong>@Jeremiah</strong>: You run LR2 on Linux.... Does it work OK? Any reason you haven't upgraded to 3.x?<br>

I would love to run Linux on my main "everything" computer, which is currently Windows7, but can't wean myself off LR and QuadTone RIP.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have been asking the same question around, and getting some similar answers. The PC offers a greater variety of software, and not interchangeable with Apple. I also heard that USB 3 is soon coming, which is supposed to be much faster than USB 2, so to me it makes sense to wait for that. I don't want any fancy lightroom, just Photoshop Elements. My editing needs are not extensive, and I am far from a skilled computer person.</p>

<p>A young student friend recently changed to an Apple laptop because he had so much trouble with viruses, spam, adware, spyware, etc. etc. despite having McAfee. I am in the same boat. I have McAfee, Spybot, and Adaware that attack and elimnate the intruders, and I run these at least 3x per week. Nevertheless, every time I log into this PN site, for instance, right away I find numerous malwares like"adtechus", "adserver", "'about blank", "googleads", "admet", "doubleclick", etc. etc. that appear at the bottom of my screen so that each page I turn here has to clear through each of them. Takes forever just to turn a page. More and more of these accumulate as I visit other sites, and I must run my cleaning programs again and again. But they come right back. My computer was not running for months due to infections! I finally got it to a service center that cleared over 200 viruses out to get it running again!!</p>

<p>I have my privacy settings on my homepage as high as I can and still be functional. These issues take time and trouble. I am very tired of dealing with it!!! Someone said I should change my homepage from my current AT&T supplied Yahoo Internet Explorer to something else- I don't know what.</p>

<p>My student friend now has no such problems with his Apple. But he does not do alterations with his photos. He is simply a point-and-shoot. camera user. His needs are mainly for his studies and for the internet.</p>

<p>I thought I might get an Apple laptop just for internet use, and for travel, and use my desk PC just for photo processing, and other storage. Quite different from many Apple users who specifically want use for graphics. But one tech said that if I download photos during travel, I cannot transfer them to my PC later, because an Apple won't communicate to a PC!!!</p>

<p>Michael K. - i think your tech advisor is wrong - it is harder to get PCs and Macs to talk to each other than to their own kind, but we transfer pics between platforms with a USB memory stick with no problems. And you can format a portable hard drive to work with both and do the same.</p>

<p>@Bob, I wish it would run perfectly in wine, but alas, it doesn't. I'm currently using <a href="http://www.virtualbox.org/">VirtualBox</a> to run WindowsXP in a sandbox. From that "virtual" environment I can run LR2 without much issue. It's not as smooth as it would be natively, but it works well enough. If you have a <em>licensed</em> copy of Windows lying around, I fully endorse running Windows XP/7 in a vbox. They run very well. Vista sucks. (I say <em>licensed </em>so no one tries to get in trouble here...)</p>

<p>I've used LR2 on my Windows7 machine and it was a touch slower than that of the XP machine, so I don't run LR2 on W7. This makes sense since the requirements of XP are fairly low in comparison to W7, and the OS isn't sucking as many resources.</p>

<p>@MK, I highly suggest using <a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/">Firefox</a> as your browser. There is a plug-in for Firefox called <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/">NoScript</a>. NoScript's greatest strength is the ability to block all of the java script commands that are built into web pages. Each time you visit a page, you turn on only the ones you need and trust. Common/Trusted scripts can be enabled all the time if you choose. Those scripts that link to ad sites (or other crappy stuff) can be permanently blocked regardless of what website you visit. My virus infection rate on Windows-based machines has been nearly zero for the past 3 years while using NoScript. My Linux-based machine, of course, has never been infected with a virus, but I use NoScript on that machine regardless. I believe Justin uses NoScript as well IRRC.</p>

<p>@Peter, in a perfect world Samba would rule as king of the protocols. :-)</p>

<p>Enjoy your burger, all.</p>

<p>Michael Khune - your comments made me giggle a little. I have so many friends that are so worried about viruses. I think the "myth" that there are no viruses for Mac is due to one thing - they don't look for them! I don't run any malware, adware, spyware, virus software stuff on my 4 PCs - and I never get a virus!! I just am very sensible about where I surf online, I have my setting in my browser so that no pop ups are allowed, I clear my cache every time I shut the browser etc.</p>

<p>Something else I do is take advantage of the great service in Taiwan - and this is where the rest of the world just lags - horribly!!! There are hundreds and hundreds of shops here called "PC clinics". You pop in there with your computer - of any make and software base (except Mac lol), and within an hour your pc has a total overhaul.</p>

<p>Why do we think we need to take our cars in for regular services, but not our high tech gadgets? We have become so used to discarding the slightly outdated stuff in favour of the new fad. Ridiculous! And the cost of these services is cheap!! As long as no new hardware needs to be put in, these services cost 800 Taiwan dollars, which is about US$25.00. If new hardware is needed, the idea will brought to your attention by phone, if you agree, you pop off to any of the MULTITUDE of hardware suppliers, and purchase the part so that the clinic cannot make money from your problems. They only make the money they charge for their hour's work - US$25.00. All of this is within a few minutes of one's house - wherever you may live!!! Sigh - there are some things about Asia that I love lol!!!</p>

<p>Now one more problem I have with the Macs I use at work. They constantly crash, have no end of compatibility issues, and always need to be sent away for service, requiring weeks of absence. This may in part be because Apple Asia is the WORST for service! HORRIBLE manners, utter incompetence! If those work Macs weren't so bloody expensive, I would have shoved them up a few people's @$$es a long time ago!!!! (and yes - I have gone very far afield to try and find a decent source of Apple service!! Not just one local twit)</p>

<p>:))) My ten cents worth lol!</p>

<p>I need to clarify the virus thing a little. What I'm trying to tell you Michael, especially concerning browsing sites like photo.net, is I think what your adware, spyware, virus software stuff is shouting about is not viruses. All ads and various things that your browser perforce must open when browsing sites like photo.net are run on certain systems, certain software. It so happens that people can use those systems and softwares to be malicious. That doesn't mean that those systems or adverts on photo.net per se are malicious themselves, but your safety check software cannot make that judgment call. You are exhausting yourself by checking everything within certain parameters that "could" be used maliciously. And those parameters are extremely extensive.</p>

<p>I guess it is easier for me to laugh about this, because the few times that I have been to a PC clinic here and mentioned a performance issue, the guy will invariably say that there is something that can be removed, etc.It has never been an issue. So it is easy for me to deal with this.</p>

<p>Additionally, I have nothing sensitive on my PCs that spyware can effectively make use of. I'm not running for office, so I have nothing to hide lol! My porn sites are carefully selected sources of delectable dirt (tongue in cheek). In the end, most of the stuff I use my computers for are photo editing, getting sport updates, and mostly - writing educational material, which is my job. A glorified typewriter you could say lol! The amount of time I spend browsing the net is mostly all on facebook, photo.net, and rugby updates sites lol! I still go to the bank itself to deal with anything financial, and I don't even read the news!</p>

<p>When I do go to some sports websites, the fact that they will feature ads based on what I browse can be irritating, but, well advertising is such a red flag to me anyway! I try my utmost to never buy anything that has been advertised, unless I really can't find anything better! Hmm, is that why I use Pentax? :))</p>

<p>I have used Macs and PCs for 26 years and many of the comments here look to me ludicrous. But I am not evangelizing anybody. By buying a G5 you got yourself a better experience, and a proof of what it means having a machine that lasts longer in all senses, and then tell me it is costly. Compare with a PC of the same age and do your maths properly please.</p>

<p>Take also into account the time you'll spend doing things you wouldn't on a mac, and value that. I remember a colleague who came all happy one morning to the office extolling his virtues in making a 33.6k modem work on his PC after a night of work. I just don't get it, I prefer things that work in no time.</p>

<p>From the photo point of view, I have no really professional use for it now that I make more money doing my regular work than I might with moonlighting (in the past it was the reverse), yet I keep taking pictures as if I might sell them one day, and with Aperture I have a wonderful tool that helps me organize them yet is powerful enough to do most of my touchup in 90% of the cases. iPhoto is not bad, but if you shoot a lot go to Aperture for the long term.</p>

<p>When I need to use something for windows I can do it in NO TIME on a mac (something I think nobody mentioned, strange) because in terms of hardware it is just a better PC, so most of what I read on "choosing" a camp is at best a half truth, sort of the FUD IBM sellers were using decades ago to scare away people form switching to other brands. Or just ignorance.</p>

<p>On a Mac you can run all your PC apps if you want, no sweat (in many cases ALONG with Mac apps, without rebooting, thanks to virtualisation sw), and have a serious machine when you are tired of things that, apart for viruses which ARE a problem, drive me crazy on my office PC. Like doing an action in a different SW and getting a different result (try hitting the backspace key after selecting something, for instance, sometimes it deletes the selection, other it deselect and gets the cursor at the beginning of the selection, other at the end), use the right click, or the gestures (ever tried the magic mouse or the new trackpad, and use them to manipulate pictures?) or try to select a word with the mouse in MS Word, why does it need to decide for me what I want to select??? On Macs you get a consistent response in 99% of the cases, because Apple enforced this for years and SW houses understood that this was for the best. MS with all their power could not achieve this.</p>

<p>Time is yours, money is yours, the G5 experience is yours, make your choice, IMHO you'll get what you pay for. I have no Apple shares, it does not boost my ego and I do not earn anything whatever choice you do. I just did never find a reason to go to a PC as my main machine or as my portable (I have an old PC I got for free for low grade work, just because I don't want to reduce the life of a costly machine leaving it on full time, and when it breaks I'll use the older of the 5 macs in my house to replace it) and I still see no reason to do it to spend a few bucks less. I'll save them the first time I will not have to spend time (or money) on fixing something, and I will get them back in spades when I will be able to keep a reasonably performing machine for longer than I would with a PC (did you read the advice above about getting at least a 4 core machine for Vista, does this sound familiar to you? What will happen with the next version? With SL, for instance, macs GAINED performance, not lost it on older machines). I still currently use a Macbook I got in 2001. Most of my colleagues changed their machine due to HW problems or low performance at least twice in the same time. I changed just the HD once. Who's been saving money?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Now one more problem I have with the Macs I use at work. They constantly crash, have no end of compatibility issues, and always need to be sent away for service, requiring weeks of absence. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Starting to sound like Alfa Romeos to me, or maybe even Porches!</p>

<p>JDM, I care about the food I put in my body, so you won't see me eating a burger from one of the big chains, and I do care a lot about the quality of the images I produce for myself and my clients. Having used both platforms, I agree there is a quality edge in the Apple hardware, and if I thought that this edge would translate into a significant difference in the speed or quality of my output then I would be using a Mac. But I know that it does not. My next upgrade will be to a 64bit Windows 7 system - that way I get some real benefits from the new stuff, without throwing away 20 years worth of experience wrangling MSDOS and Windows machines. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Take also into account the time you'll spend doing things you wouldn't on a mac, and value that</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you switch systems, take also into account the time you will spend learning how to do things the new way - for me there is nothing more frustrating than having to spend minutes, hours, working out how to do something on a Mac that is an automatic, ingrained, no-need-to-think action for me on a PC. Going the other way of course, users would encounter the same issues.</p>