fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       6       7       end
  

Archive 2009 · Mac/PC debate

  
 
traveler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · 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 11:11 AM
MichaelKirk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · 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 11:23 AM
ShadowWalker
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · 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
...Show more



Nov 03, 2009 at 11:29 AM
trybul
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · 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 11:54 AM
jetmutant
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · 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 12:22 PM
Jozef
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · 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 01:29 PM
andrewd01
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · 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
...Show more

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 01:38 PM
Arka
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #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
...Show more

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 02:34 PM
tmark
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · 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 03:37 PM
domdog31
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · Mac/PC debate


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


Nov 03, 2009 at 03:46 PM
Jim Casteel
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · 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 04:03 PM
Scott Snyder
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · 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 04:37 PM
poisonpill
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #13 · 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
...Show more


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 04:46 PM
Jim Casteel
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #14 · 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 05:04 PM
Qranc
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · 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 05:31 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · 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
...Show more


You are incorrect. I build high-end qaulity PCs all the time and do so at a significant discount (33 to 50% typically). In fact, I will often track down the exact parts used by places like Dell and place superior components in my boxes and still beat the price by nearly the same margin. Most of the extra expense of places like Apple & Dell comes from the tech service and profit, not the parts or the warranty.

As for HP, you have to be smart about which model you choose to look at when building a machine through them. If you build the current cutting edge gamers' box, the price difference between Mac and and HP PC will be small, with a slight advantage going to the HP PC. Now go one level down and build a home PC, and do the same and the magin between the two increases significantly. If you know what makes a gamers box, it's easy to spec out the Home PC to basically be a gamers box.

All the PC companies do this (gamers' box vs. home pc) and they do thing like put a 250GB drive standard and offer an ubgrade to a 500GB drive. On the Home PC the upgrade cost $50 but on the gamers' box, the upgrade cost $100. So, if you are stupid and spec a gamers box PC, you might as well buy a Mac. If you want the significant savings and take one step back from the bleeding edge, build a home PC and save a lot of money.



Nov 03, 2009 at 06:05 PM
Jim Casteel
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · Mac/PC debate


Andre, You are still talking about consumer machines. A workstation is more in line with a server than a cutting edge gamers box. Yes you can build a high performance consumer machine for 30% less. That is the PC manufacturers highest margin products. With workstations the margins are lower and the cost of the materials is higher.

The ONLY computer I will purchase from HP is a workstation. While working in the Workstation division we would test identical spec "Gamers" machines from HP and other manufacturers and the workstations would run circles around them. This is because of the R&D that was put into making the components of the computer more efficient. Unless you have nearly $5000 into a machine there is no way you can build a machine that will match the performance of a $5000 workstation from HP or Apple.

I have built PC's for the past 2 decades and then worked for HP for nearly a decade. I don't work there now but I had proven to me time and time again that a PC is not a workstation not only in name but also in Performance.



Nov 03, 2009 at 06:34 PM
Andre Labonte
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #18 · Mac/PC debate


dionysis wrote:
Andre, You are still talking about consumer machines. A workstation is more in line with a server than a cutting edge gamers box. Yes you can build a high performance consumer machine for 30% less. That is the PC manufacturers highest margin products. With workstations the margins are lower and the cost of the materials is higher.

The ONLY computer I will purchase from HP is a workstation. While working in the Workstation division we would test identical spec "Gamers" machines from HP and other manufacturers and the workstations would run circles around them. This is because of the R&D
...Show more

Ah, I see your point. I was clearly refering to the consumer-level boxes which is what this over-all thread is about and is at the level of experience of most of the respondents to this thread. People (even photogs) don't normally spend $5K on a computer. $500 to $2500 is the norm. And nobody claimed that a Personal Computer would ever perform to the level of a workstation. Why go there unless you are trying to confuse the converstion?




Nov 03, 2009 at 07:59 PM
zoetmb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #19 · Mac/PC debate


I've used both Mac and PC since the beginning of Micro-computing and I greatly prefer the Mac. It's not a matter of memory, hard disk and video card choices. If you look at the machines as a collection of parts and nothing more, than a PC usually wins (because it's cheaper, especially at the low end, although I think if you look at everything you're getting in an iMac, including the quality of video, etc., I think it's a bargain). And if you evaluate overall productivity, I think the Mac definitely wins.

The Mac is superior because Apple has control over the OS and the hardware and they work better together. And because Apple has always been superior at user-interface and the user experience. And because there is no registry on a Mac and the Unix-based OS is far superior.

I haven't used Windows 7 yet, so I can judge that. But IMO, Vista was the worst piece of garbage I've ever seen. I had Vista on a laptop (which was supposedly robust enough to handle it) and I would have to boot the machine before I left my office to go to a client meeting, otherwise everyone would be waiting around for 15 minutes for the machine to boot-up. Even coming out of sleep or standby took forever. It supposedly had power management, but it never worked and after six months, the battery needed replacement. And it would never properly find wireless networks, or it would find them, but not access them even if they weren't secured by passwords. I'm sure there was a way to configure it to run properly, but I really don't want to have to read a 600 page book to get the OS to work reasonably. The Mac just works.

My desktop in the office is running XP and it's okay...I don't have any major complaints, but the difference between using that and using my Mac is like the difference between a Ford Taurus and a BMW.....the BMW is just a lot more fun to be in.

I do have occasional app crashes on my Mac (almost always Word or Microsoft Entourage), but the machine itself NEVER crashes. The only time I reboot is when I shut the machine down because I've taken it out of the house or I'm going away for several days so I shut it down completely.

Every PC laptop I've ever owned had to be replaced or completely rebuilt within a 1 to 2 year timeframe. I used a Mac tower for seven years (although I did replace the hard disk with a larger one, the original writable CD, read-only DVD with a drive that could read/write DVD and I added memory). At the end of those seven years, the machine still worked perfectly. The only thing it couldn't do really well was very large Photoshop files (operations like smoothing might sometimes be slow on large images) and video editing. Everything else still worked better than my much newer XP developer machine in the office. But I wanted a laptop, so I finally replaced it.

There's one thing I think the Windows OS does better and that's the mini-finder. In Windows, if you open the finder from within a program to open a file, and you see some other files in the list that you want to delete or rename, you can do it. On a Mac, you can't. But that's relatively minor.

One thing I would advise if you're considering the new iMac: hold off a few weeks. There have been some complaints about those machines (like Flash running slowly), so there might be a fix coming soon if those complaints turn out to be real problems.



Nov 03, 2009 at 08:33 PM
fishfilm
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #20 · Mac/PC debate


Oh what the heck, might as well chime in...

I killed my Gateway laptop after 3 years of treating it like a rented mule. Heavy PS use, dual monitors and so forth. It died in it's sleep, literally. MB failure. Started looking at Macs since I love the build quality but the price was a killer. The Dell/HP/Borg/whatever desktops were so shoddy in build it was kind of turnoff. So started looking at the smaller, boutique builders like Velocity Micro/Polywell/cyberpower and a few other from cnet searches. Ended up with an I7/6 gigs of 3 channel, 1300 mhz RAM, nice video card and great build from Velocity for about the same price as the others (~1100 delivered) BUT way better build quality, lifetime support, no crapware/games/etc installed and so on. Runs Vista 64 without a hitch and seamless in every way. On a machine that can handle it, Vista is great. I'm betting there are often conflicts with the crap software that manufacturers are paid to install as a part of the Vista issues. For me, Vista has been a non-issue. And if I had been willing to go for another ~700$ I could have gotten a dream setup with boot/data/scratch drive config that would have been a photoshop monster.



Nov 03, 2009 at 11:20 PM
1       2       3              5       6       7       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       6       7       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account