Mac/PC debate

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 5 6 end

Archive 2009 · Mac/PC debate

santaliqueur
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · Mac/PC debate

you can build an i7 rig for less than a base Mac Pro, and I'm sure his completely smokes Apple's current offering
You make it sound like building your own or buying Apple are the only ways to go. Assembling your own is ALWAYS cheaper than buying from someone else, and is frequently used to make Apple look more expensive.

The Mac Pro is a serious machine that is not cheap. But try pricing similar machines (with identical hardware) from other vendors selling workstations. The Mac Pro is usually cheaper. The pricing debate is won by the PC side when you go below $599, because Apple doesn't offer anything below that.

My girlfriend has a MacBook Pro unibody 13", and it cost $1,199. Find me a laptop with the same specifications (build quality included) for that price. There is a place for super cheap plastic Dell notebooks for $399, and there is a place for more expensive notebooks that were milled out of one block of aluminum. Use whatever you like, but understand that the components may be similar, much of the extra cost goes into making the machines as sleek and sturdy as possible.

Her MBP is as sturdy as I've seen any computer. You can pick the thing up with one corner and it doesn't flex at all, nevermind make any creaking sounds like I've heard on every other laptop I've ever used. Add to that little things like the magsafe power connector, and it makes owning a Mac worth it to some people, not worth it to others. Also, Macs are the only machines that run all 3 major operating systems natively.

But above all that, I prefer OS X to any other operating system by far, and that's why I use a Mac. To each his own, until the end of fanboy OS arguments.

Nov 03, 2009 at 06:19 AM

luminosity
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Mac/PC debate

I'll be interested to see how the unbodies are doing about four to five years down the road. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of them still around and in service.

Nov 03, 2009 at 06:45 AM

santaliqueur
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · Mac/PC debate

I would expect them to be great utility notebooks since they should remain solid, but their hardware is going to be dated, like all computer hardware eventually.

Nov 03, 2009 at 08:18 AM

Leoric
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · Mac/PC debate

Here's my recent experience. At work, I had been using an old single core AMD FX-55 processor with 2 gigs of RAM and two 10,000 rpm Raptors, quite an old computer and the company I work for decided to get me a brand new 8-core, 12GB of DDR3 Mac Pro with the last version of Leopard (not Snow Leopard, because Capture NX 2.2 doesn't work). I was expecting a massive boost in performance. Well, bad news. Photoshop actually runs worse than the single core antique PC and that's especially visible when you try the warp function. On the PC, everything is smooth, but on the Mac, it's like I'm running a 386. I've noticed a boost in performance for Capture NX 2, but not something out of this world. ptgui processes my panoramas faster, but when you place control points it's actually slower to match between images.

I know that CS4 only uses 3 GB or ram of the Mac and I've read that ptgui actually knows how to work with several cores. I don't know about how Photoshop and Capture NX 2 benefit from the extra processing power.

Overall, I'm utterly disappointed about the whole Apple/Mac thing. I am aware of the 32-bit limitations when it comes to memory, but even so, the Mac should have had a more consistent boost in performance.

Nov 03, 2009 at 09:11 AM

lou f
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · Mac/PC debate

to quote dionysis...

dreamworls- pc

pixar- mac

:o)

Nov 03, 2009 at 12:08 PM

lou f
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #6 · Mac/PC debate

my nx2 snow lepard experience on my 24'' 2.93 imac. nx2.2.1 and view nx (not the latest version) boot in 64 bit mode and its very quick, quicker than 32 bit.

Nov 03, 2009 at 12:12 PM

linathael
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Mac/PC debate

panos.v wrote:
If you start thinking how you can get the same performance for less and the words "value", "cost", "benefit" and "ratio" turn up, you don't want the iMac. Nobody buys an iMac for the cost-to-performance benefit. You buy it because it looks nice and runs OS X (which is a personal taste). The fact that it is a pretty good machine too is a bonus. But Dell can most definately sell you something faster for less.

not necessarily with the same quality and reliability.
If Apple is first in customer satisfaction, and Dell way behind there is a reason, and it has a cost.
As a definition you should invest in a computer you feel confident and comfortable with.

After all, one should not restrict "faster" to the clock speed of your processor. In addition, the iMac 27" comes with core i5 or i7 (a quad core CPU unlike stated by the original poster).
Today, performance of a computer is drivent buy the best combination between CPU, RAM and HD (and of course GPU). In other words, it is useless to get a quad core GPU in a Dell if you get a slow HD, as it will be the bottle neck.
In addition multicore hardware are only usefull and user benefits from it when the OS and the application are coded to be multi-core-aware.
Windows XP and Vista are NOT particularly multicpre aware, Windows 7 should improve this topic, but one should be cautious between what Microsoft says and what is finally done.
Linux is multicore aware, and Mac OS X Snow Leopard is too. In other words, the stystem itself will run faster on multicore CPU hardware. If your favorite application is coded mono-threaded (so single core aware), then one one core of your quad core will be used. In this case it could be usefull to have a Core i5 or i7, or any CPU featuring the Turbo Boost mode, able to overclock its cores depending on load and threading of applications.

overall, if you feel that the Mac and its OS X would be nice as a try, then go for it, you will of course be able to sale your hardware at a good price if you change your mind. If you go for a PC, then carefull select a unit with the same specification (meaning true identical motherboard, CPU, HD RAM latency, etc...) than the iMac to really find simlar performance level.

I did the exercice recently, and the iMac or any other Mac hardware is only 10% more expensive than its "true" corresponding PC model. I know some people will argue I am wrong because they simply look at the CPU and its clock speed, and not beyond, but this is a mistake.

I might even think than the original poster might really improve its current hardware by purcahsing the Samsung 24" LED display + fast HD (WD velociraptor, or even SSD) + some RAM modules with low CL.

Have fun, and remember, the best computer is the one that can do the work you want to do without troubles and fights.

PS: If you want to switch to Mac, do it, maybe by step, get a MacBook Pro 13.3" and start discovering how Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard is a real advanced OS, even compared to Win7. Discover why it really matters to get a computer thought as a optimized unit and not assembled pieces. I use both mac and PC, and if you give me the choice, I go Mac as you can get access to plenty of features without the pain of looking for them, better GUI for both beginner and power user.

Nov 03, 2009 at 01:28 PM

linathael
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · Mac/PC debate

Leoric wrote:
Here's my recent experience. At work, I had been using an old single core AMD FX-55 processor with 2 gigs of RAM and two 10,000 rpm Raptors, quite an old computer and the company I work for decided to get me a brand new 8-core, 12GB of DDR3 Mac Pro with the last version of Leopard (not Snow Leopard, because Capture NX 2.2 doesn't work). I was expecting a massive boost in performance. Well, bad news. Photoshop actually runs worse than the single core antique PC and that's especially visible when you try the warp function. On the PC, everything is smooth, but on the Mac, it's like I'm running a 386. I've noticed a boost in performance for Capture NX 2, but not something out of this world. ptgui processes my panoramas faster, but when you place control points it's actually slower to match between images.

I know that CS4 only uses 3 GB or ram of the Mac and I've read that ptgui actually knows how to work with several cores. I don't know about how Photoshop and Capture NX 2 benefit from the extra processing power.

Overall, I'm utterly disappointed about the whole Apple/Mac thing. I am aware of the 32-bit limitations when it comes to memory, but even so, the Mac should have had a more consistent boost in performance.
well, well again not comparing the same thing.
put both Raptor in your Mac Pro, and repeat the experiernce

last but not least, if CS4 run slowwer on your Mac than on your PC, then you have a problem in the installation or something like that.

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:52 PM

Pavel
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Mac/PC debate

Well put linathael.

Nov 03, 2009 at 02:54 PM

MichaelKirk
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Mac/PC debate

These are the kind of threads that kill us "computer Idiots" that are looking for a new computer!

I'm pretty much in the same boat as the OP, I have a several year old DELL with upgraded ram and HD's. Wife put a nice virus on it that we can't seem to completely get rid of - want to upgrade my monitor to at least a 24" and no sence in doing this if I get an iMac.....I was holding off buying last year to see what MAC came out with. Spent way too much time on the phone over the years with Dell's Tech support. Have always been intersted in switching to MAC. Build your own? Wish I knew how, Comparabible prebuilt PC options??

27" iMac or PC??

You come across these threads and back and forth one is better, no PC is better - no Mac is better...build your own.....man it get confusing

I guess it's the Ford vs Chevy vs Imports vs coke vs pepsie vs......

Guess I'll just tag along for the ride a bit longer.

Michael

Nov 03, 2009 at 03:24 PM

traveler
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Mac/PC debate

Honestly they are BOTH sweet systems with their own strengths (and weaknesses). I sure love my Iphone and can get a glimpse of the wisdom in their operating system layout. I'm just used to PC so will probably stick with it. I have a fairly new I7Core Intel machine with a competent AMD video card and 6gb of DDR3 RAM along with a fairly fast 650gb hard drive. I have no glaring issues. However I'm currently running 64bit Vista and wonder:

Is switching to Windows 7 really going to make significant improvements over my current Vista 64bit Home Premium? Just curious for those that have used both thus far.

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:11 PM

MichaelKirk
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Mac/PC debate

I thought about starting a new thread on this specific issue, but will at least start it here.

Please post your reply or comments geared toward the majoriety of us computer idiots

If choosing an iMac, that's a pretty simple purchase - pick and choose a few optional upgrades and walah! - Done!

What about PC options? Can anyone suggest a PC build for the majoriety of photographers here? Remember, we (at least I) do not have the knowledge to go out and build one myself - not going to happen. I'll need to go to a store or website and order that way. Should we be looking at home media PC's or workstations like someone earlier in the thread suggested the HP Z400 - what really is the difference?

fire away!
Michael

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:23 PM

ShadowWalker
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · Mac/PC debate

Well put. I'm an old IT guy as well w/ a strong bias towards Unix/Linux. I used PCs and Sun Workstations at work and home for many years. I changed over to a Mac Pro desktop and laptop about 2 years ago and immediately loved. it. Wish I had made the change sooner in fact.

Lightroom runs in 64 bit on the Mac and uses the same license as Windows so you won't need to buy another license or media.

The only thing I don't like, is the time machine theme that comes w/ Leopard and Snow Leopard. Really dislike it. But, changing it was easy enough, just copy an image file with the theme you want over the top of the DefaultDesktop.jpg file and bingo, your own splash screen instead of the time machine theme.

Unix gives you the ability to customize like that, Windows doesn't for the most part.

All that being said ...

Windows 7 is the best Microsoft OS so far. Never cared for the others but have a 3 machine setup at work (Win7, MacOSX, Ubuntu Linux) and I have found Win7 to be quite nice. Be aware though, it is very bloated and needs a lot of strong hardware and memory to make it run smooth and look pretty. If you do have strong hardware and lots of memory, it is a nice OS, much better than its predecessors.

You won't have to worry nearly as much about viruses, spyware, trojans etc on a Mac as you do Windows.

My current home and laptop setup:
MacPro and Macbook Pro running OSX dual booting w/ Ubuntu Linux.
Ubuntu Linux is so nice I use it 90% of the time and use MacOSX for my photography because Lightroom and PS don't run on Linux (unfortunately).

not sure if this was helpful or not, hope so.

jeff

Pavel wrote:
Until moving over to be a full time photographer I spent 12 years in IT doing several things but much of it testing.
One thing I would urge high end PC users to do is either build their own rig (and put in a expensive power supply) or go with HP. Dell is, sorry to say not very good. That is not fanboy'ism but based in the fact that HP will guarantee workstations to have certain components. Dell is a part of the day vendor. If we order 30 machines at a time we have always found one or two differences between identically spec'd machines. It could be a modified chipset ... all the way to a different motherboard! It doesn't bite you then ... but after a while when you upgrade drivers etc ... it can drive you insane.

My only objection is that people keep saying that the Mac costs more. It does not. The only issue with Mac is when you try to go cheap. They simply don't build anything particularly inexpensive in their desktops. Order an identical machine from Dell (and I mean identical) and sometimes it is 5% cheaper ... sometimes 15% more expensive.

Of course building your own is the best approach - until you have to isolate intermittently flaky hardware and try to get things fixed. My time is money and as far as photography ... I no longer want to do my old job.

Lastly ... when you want power - and you put on anti-virus software, office and a couple of other common sofware packages - there goes 15% of that power. If I had to use a PC again, I would of course use ONLY a dedicated repository/editing box. Then I would buy a second cheaper PC for the rest of it ... or that $500 Mac Mini ... so I don't have to worry about all those headaches.

We use industrial grade anti-virus software with definitions pushed down by a Server. Still ... about four times a year we get what I consider an epidemic when some virus or malware writer gets the advantage on the anti-virus software guys for a moment. Then we typically get 20-50 workstations - which we often have to re-format. I've seen people crying over the loss of 5 years worth of work. It leaves an impression on ya. We make it easy to back up ... but you know how good intentions go.

I'm certified in both systems. As much as I love the registry (sarcasm) .... I won't consider any flavor of windows anything but a poorly designed with bandaids system - until they let that lousy concept go. (btw I started pre-dos) Dll's? ditto. What a lousy concept.

But perhaps it is the fact that I am an old Unix head that draws me to Mac OSx? Or perhaps it is choice. A Mac can run windows, Mac OSX or Linux. Basically all of it - and ALL the apps. There are some Mac only editing apps that are to die for. Or perhaps it is that I have never had to re-format a Mac when I have not wanted to. It just works. And what price that?

I buy pretty good bodies and lenses. My 24 pc-e is that last one (the 14-24 f 2.8 should be here this week) and I don't mind spending good money on good glass even if a lens like the 24 is not exactly "economical" or bang for my meager bucks. I see the stuff that you gent's post pictures with. Not many vivitar lenses, I've noticed. So leave that "bang for the buck" in the same perspective, I say. It strikes my ear as funny, and fanboy rhetoric when someone here posts pictures with their 300 f 2.8 and then in a debate such as this is quick to state that the Mac is expensive. It is not ... and PC bargains in the long run, usually aren't.

In either platform it is wise to buy at the higher end. It saves on grey hair ... no matter how you slice it.

Oh never mind. I just got the latest Best buy flyer. Hey ... did you see that deal on that 399.95 Acer at best buy? I guess Mac's do suck after all.

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:29 PM

trybul
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · Mac/PC debate

Dragonfly,
Just to chime in here, i too have a mix of pc and mac, And here is what i use and why.
I currently do 3d animation for film and broadcast, and as such will always us a pc as they are faster and able to handle a bigger work load. There have been a number of studies by various site that i visit, ie www.cgtalk.com. Now, i am sure that i will get some flack from the other camp, saying that you can get a mac to match a pc... simply it is not true. I cannot walk into the apple store and ask for an 80 core machine with 256gigs of ram, they would look at me like i am insane.

Next advantage to the pc, they are upgradeable, macs for the most part are not. Yes i can put more ram, or more HD space into them, but they are limited on what they can use for video cards and you cannot upgrade the processor after purchase. What ever upgrade you do, will cost you more they the pc as well.
Now there is an advantage to the mac from not being able to "upgrade" it. For instance i have never ran into the apple having irq and memmory conflicts based on my Video card not liking my processing ram, or having a DLL not likeing some other DLL and causing crashes and other weirdness. The macs i have are solid, well more solid them my pc :P But having said that, my Pc crashes maybe once every two months. ( and i am working with files that are gigs in size, and computing fluid dynamics )

Ok, It may sound like i am anti mac.. i am not, like i say, i have two of them. There are things they are great for. I love the ease of networking with them. I love the simplicity of them. I like their security for surfing, They are designed well, and like i say for the most part run out of the box. (haveing said that i got one for my GF for Christmas last year, and it did not work right out of the box, lol, had to reformat ) The two macs i use, are, one a new macbook pro and a macpro. Both of these have bootcamp installed and also run windows when i need more pc power. I can tell you that when in windows they are very similar to a similarly speced pc, ( as they should be, as they are just well controlled pc assemblies.)
I use the macbook for surfing, shooting tethered, pic editing, and travel. I found it to be a great design, and better built then any pc laptop i could find. I also like all the features it offered. But you pay for them.
the macpro i bought so that i could do an actual comparision vrs pc my self. now i use it for my photo stuff. I do believe that it handles and edits 2d editing and compositing faster then a comparable pc. The speed diff is not a huge gain though. I also wanted to use Aperture.

So in the end i would echo what has been said before. If you want design, and a system that is pretty stable. Then a mac is a good choice. If you want some freedom and more power for less $$ then PC is the way to go.

again, i am pretty unbiased and believe the each have a place, they are tools, and each have uses and "perks" Just choose the one that fits you the best..Hope that this helped.
c

Nov 03, 2009 at 04:54 PM

jetmutant
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · Mac/PC debate

I recently aquired a very nice macbook pro 17" through nefarious means (didn't steal it but close

) being a Winders dolt the Mac OS is bit difficult to get used to but it would appear that the programs are written a bit tighter, identical windows programs are a bit larger files on average for some unknown reason (to me anyhow) those that say you don't have to reboot a Mac... I call Bullschtien! I've had to do it several times... I don't mind (gotten used to that with windows... oh well no biggie)
Viruses? I run no AV software, just don't like software getting in the way & slowing down my computer. I made an acronis image of my computer HD after I put it together and back up often so reloading after a major bug is less of an issue, OS X seems to have a nice feature that is simular and when they (Mac) get more than 15% of the computers in the world I am sure the malcontents that have nothing better to do than ruin other peoples day will turn their evil on the Mac OS because, as some of you here have said if you are familiar with UNIX (Mac OS) code line you can do some pretty cool stuff with it but it seems to me that could be used for evil...perhaps not? I love the MBP quite a bit, it is really very nice to look at & very sleek, like when I show up with Snap-on tools at my real job, when you whip out the MBP the customers eyes do light up! (just before they pull out the .45 to rob yer dumb a$$

it is that pretty!

Anyhow like some of the other comparisons (Nikon to Canon, Ford to Chevy....) the are pretty close to the same & what ever you are comfortable with is what you should use... I shoot H&K because that is what fits me therefore I can hit what I aim at, I could use something else sure but why? Same with Canon, I have become acustomed to the way they work and would feel like an idiot with a Nikon (for a while at least...) as to the hardware,

I am a firm believer in build your own because I didn't see anything inside the cookie cutter machines that I liked but if you have to buy one, due diligence is KEY read some bulletin boards to see some of the issues, but like any BB take some of the stuff with a grain of salt, some people should just be content to watch TV & not touch anything more technical than the TV remote...

If HP is the one that the studios are using it should work just fine
recomendations would be (some of these are personal preferences):

Windows 7 is the shiznit been running windows since ver 3 and this is by far the best!
PC Power & Cooling power supplies= solid good stuff
4 GIG ram minimum do not scrimp here, with Win7 more is better
ATi videcard (5850 or better with 1 gig ram, I do a lot of gaming also & this thing rocks! & I just like the IQ over Nvidia...personal preference)

The fastest hard drives you can get & if the mainboard supports raid by all means use it! WD Raptors baby!!
most mainboards have built in sound which is actually pretty good for most things but if you are spending money the Creative "new" stuff is better
Intel or AMD? I have used AMD for a loooong time but intel is usually faster now with the the quad cores so go with intel. AMD is a bit cheaper & plenty fast Choices Choices...
Mainboards? if building I like Gigabyte, Asus, DFI & Abit match your chipsets to the video card for best performance... AMD to AMD Nvidia to Nvidia but if you not overclocking and tweaking to squeeze that last ounce of performance it really is not going to matter all that much anyhow besides that usually leads to unstable systems...and who needs that?

Long winded but I hope it helps someone... if you want more help email or PM me I will do my best.

Nov 03, 2009 at 05:22 PM

Jozef
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · Mac/PC debate

Steve Perry wrote:
I was looking at the same thing about 8 months ago - ended up building a i7 core (2.93 Ghz) 12GB ram, super fast hard drive etc for less than 2K. Any mac that would have been even close to as fast would have been 4-6K in price.

Well sad!
Build a new PC overclock that sucker and save the money for D4

(yes D4)

Nov 03, 2009 at 06:29 PM

andrewd01
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · Mac/PC debate

Leoric wrote:
Here's my recent experience. At work, I had been using an old single core AMD FX-55 processor with 2 gigs of RAM and two 10,000 rpm Raptors, quite an old computer and the company I work for decided to get me a brand new 8-core, 12GB of DDR3 Mac Pro with the last version of Leopard (not Snow Leopard, because Capture NX 2.2 doesn't work). I was expecting a massive boost in performance. Well, bad news. Photoshop actually runs worse than the single core antique PC and that's especially visible when you try the warp function. On the PC, everything is smooth, but on the Mac, it's like I'm running a 386. I've noticed a boost in performance for Capture NX 2, but not something out of this world. ptgui processes my panoramas faster, but when you place control points it's actually slower to match between images.

I know that CS4 only uses 3 GB or ram of the Mac and I've read that ptgui actually knows how to work with several cores. I don't know about how Photoshop and Capture NX 2 benefit from the extra processing power.

Overall, I'm utterly disappointed about the whole Apple/Mac thing. I am aware of the 32-bit limitations when it comes to memory, but even so, the Mac should have had a more consistent boost in performance.

I suggest you upgrade to Snow Leopard and boot in the 64-bit kernel (see digglloyds web site for instructions). You will see a big step up in performance. CNX2.2 works fine. I followed the advice of people on this forum and did the upgrade of CNX2 before upgrading the OS. No problems whatsoever.

Nov 03, 2009 at 06:38 PM

lordarka
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · Mac/PC debate

Leoric wrote:
Here's my recent experience. At work, I had been using an old single core AMD FX-55 processor with 2 gigs of RAM and two 10,000 rpm Raptors, quite an old computer and the company I work for decided to get me a brand new 8-core, 12GB of DDR3 Mac Pro with the last version of Leopard (not Snow Leopard, because Capture NX 2.2 doesn't work). I was expecting a massive boost in performance. Well, bad news. Photoshop actually runs worse than the single core antique PC and that's especially visible when you try the warp function. On the PC, everything is smooth, but on the Mac, it's like I'm running a 386. I've noticed a boost in performance for Capture NX 2, but not something out of this world. ptgui processes my panoramas faster, but when you place control points it's actually slower to match between images.

I know that CS4 only uses 3 GB or ram of the Mac and I've read that ptgui actually knows how to work with several cores. I don't know about how Photoshop and Capture NX 2 benefit from the extra processing power.

What you are describing makes no sense at all, and is definitely out of the norm. If this is your experience, you need to examine whether there was a bad install or Photoshop, or perhaps if you are using CS2 or earlier. But even if you're using CS2 (which is not Intel optimized), it should perform relatively well on a new MacPro. If CS3 or higher, there is almost no reason why it should perform worse than an old AMD chip. Having owned and used 386 through Pentium II-based Windows systems, I can't imagine how a new MacPro, properly configured and running OSX software of any variety, would perform at a level comparable to a 386.

That being said, I have noticed that using the Liquefy command (similar to warp) on huge images (i.e. 7000x9000) will cause the MacPro to slow down. But I can only imagine what such operations would reduce an AMD FX-55 to.

Arka C.

Nov 03, 2009 at 07:34 PM

tmark
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #19 · Mac/PC debate

I've built more than enough Windows (and Linux) boxes in my lifetime to know that simply picking "quality" components is not enough to ensure a stable Windows machine. One day I got tired of tracking driver updates, and rooting out incompatibilities, and all the other things I did professionally, so I got a Mac. Suddenly, I don't spend any time maintaining it any more and I haven't once had to reinstall OS X just because things were slowing down.

Inital buy-in is just one cost associated with buying a computer. For me, the ongoing costs of maintaining and running a Windows machine is prohibitive, not to mention the significant loss of productivity I encounter when running under Windows. For mundane day-to-day work I find the OS X environment much more conducive to getting things done.

Nov 03, 2009 at 08:37 PM

domdog31
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #20 · Mac/PC debate

I married a PC she cheated on me with my brother......

Nov 03, 2009 at 08:46 PM

dionysis
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #21 · Mac/PC debate

I will feed more fire to the flame wars.... I dare anybody to go out and build a pro level machine for the price that HP or Apple builds a pro level machine.

I have priced it out several times and HP or Apple is always within a small % of the cost for me to build and from there I get them to do parts & labor if anything brakes.

When you calculate in the quality components vs the ones that will work you will find that most of the time your cost to build a machine piece by piece is as expensive. Now can I make a knock-off and skimp on some components like the system board, Power Supply and Memory. You still end up with close to the same system performance wise but not truly the same system.

My vote is still to go for a HP workstation or a Mac, unless you would prefer the satisfaction of building it yourself.

Nov 03, 2009 at 09:03 PM

Scott Snyder
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #22 · Mac/PC debate

I work in publishing and design. I spend all day on PCs. I run macs at home. Why? I enjoy the mac os and just tolerate windows. I'm still running a 6 year old machine that has never hickupped. It's getting slow by todays standards, but still runs 100% of the time with no maintenance. After my initial settup cost I never have to think about the machines. That is worth a premium to me.

Nov 03, 2009 at 09:37 PM

poisonpill
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #23 · Mac/PC debate

dionysis wrote:
I will feed more fire to the flame wars.... I dare anybody to go out and build a pro level machine for the price that HP or Apple builds a pro level machine.

I have priced it out several times and HP or Apple is always within a small % of the cost for me to build and from there I get them to do parts & labor if anything brakes.

When you calculate in the quality components vs the ones that will work you will find that most of the time your cost to build a machine piece by piece is as expensive. Now can I make a knock-off and skimp on some components like the system board, Power Supply and Memory. You still end up with close to the same system performance wise but not truly the same system.

My vote is still to go for a HP workstation or a Mac, unless you would prefer the satisfaction of building it yourself.

Oh for sure. It's not like 10 years ago when you can save a fortune building your own. I would buy an HP machine too if I wasn't just constantly upgrading my computer. Heck, I'm still using the case ATX case from 10 years ago.

Sometimes you get aggravating conflicts when you build your own too. I think Josh priced out a real screamer anyway.

The only thing annoying about HP/Dell/etc PCs is that they come with a lot of garbage and demo software. I would blow that crap away and start with a fresh install. Luckily once you get Windows 7 online, the "find drivers automatically" thing actually works... unlike in Windows XP.

Nov 03, 2009 at 09:46 PM

dionysis
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #24 · Mac/PC debate

poisonpill wrote:
The only thing annoying about HP/Dell/etc PCs is that they come with a lot of garbage and demo software. I would blow that crap away and start with a fresh install. Luckily once you get Windows 7 online, the "find drivers automatically" thing actually works... unlike in Windows XP.

You would be really surprised with the worstations. I can only speak from experience of working for and owning HP workstations, but if you purchase a Technical workstation it comes only with the OS and necessary drivers. That was a feature changed about 8 years ago because of requests made by customers like General Motors & DreamWorks.

Nov 03, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Qranc
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #25 · Mac/PC debate

I have run both for a long time and I personally prefer Mac. Of the systems available at home everyone tends to choose one of the Macs. That said I wouldn't try to convince anyone to go Mac. If someone is satisfied with PC then perhaps that is where they should stay.

R

Nov 03, 2009 at 10:31 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 6 end