RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
gdanmitchell wrote:
I was going to post on this point yesterday, thought better of it, but now I want to reinforce your point.
But first, I'm certain that which computer platform one choose to use for photography post-processing and image management makes about as much difference to one's photography as which camera brand is used. As in, probably no difference at all. So whether one prefers PCs or Macs... in my view they should just get a suitable system from whichever platform they are most comfortable with and move on.
The Apple versus Everyone Else "battle" has now been going on for close to 40 years! Think we'll solve it here, eh? Heh.
As a college faculty member I was part of a team that worked to create specifications for campus-wide computer, peripherals, and software standards. My campus had an enlightened dual-platform standard that recognized that it made sense to accommodate both PC and Mac users, so we came up with a two-column set of standards. For example, there was a so-called "high end" desktop standard for users needing more power. In this category there was a PC option and a Mac option that were relatively equivalent in power for certain categories of tasks. The same was true in other categories. There was a dual-standard for what we might call "standard" users who mostly did word processing, email, and similar; a couple of standards for both high end and standard laptop users, and so forth. (The institution is large enough that there are sufficient users in each category.)
Amazingly, over time we realized that the costs for roughly similar systems from the two platforms tended to be very close once the total cost of computer, peripherals, and software were calculated on a per-user basis. In some categories the PC option cost bit less, while in others the Apple option came in at a slightly lower cost. (Note that we were doing institutional level purchasing, so not purchasing at normal retail.)
We relied on our tech support and training folks to help us understand the relative costs of the two platforms when it came to support. They were unequivocal about the fact that support (hardware configuration and setup) costs and training costs were significantly lower for the Apple users. This was partly the result of the software on the systems, but also the more fully integrated Apple environment and its more consistent technology. (For example, our PC spec machine in some category might remain the same, but the vendor/manufacturer would shift the internals, creating issues for the support folks.)
And, of course, problems can and will occur on both platforms. Important question include how often they occur (on an objective basis, not based on anecdotes) and what is involved in resolving them.
The main take-aways here are that:
1. Overall, the costs of functionally similar Apple and branded PC systems are generally pretty close. (Note that we did not consider build-your-own PC systems, since savings there would be more than eaten up by additional tech support costs.)
2. Essentially comparably powerful systems could be configured for either platform.
Trying to "prove" that either platform is The Very Best Computer System For Everyone and that The Other Platform Sucks is a lost cause and a giant waste of time. Let it go.
If four decades of this nonsensical platform wards stuff has demonstrated anything...
... it is that both platforms work great. They certainly both can work beautifully for photographers....Show more →
So, if the take away is that you can get there from either side ... what's the gain for a seasoned Mac user (OP) to move to the PC platform?
I don't disagree that you can get there from either side, having been on the PC side for a long time, and recently finding the Mac to my appeal. So, rather than debate the "which is better", the question can be shifted to "what's to gain for the switch".
I've long advocated that change is expensive, (time, effort, energy, $$$) ... but, when it lands you where you really WANT to be for the long haul, that cost can be worthwhile. But, if the temporary cost reduction puts you in a place that you DON'T really want to be for the long haul, then it only sets up another change, down the road. Just makes me wonder if the OP is being short sighted on the $$$ now vs. where he'll be down the road (i.e. Windows platform and desiring to be back on the Mac platform).
I think the point about camera brands is relatively similar ... the point being, that when you find what works for you, no need to go chasing the greener grass. BUT, if you haven't yet found "the one for you", then change is part of getting you there. Once you're where you want to be, that "desire for change" really goes away greatly.
Which begs the simplicity of the question for the OP, to be reduced to "where do you want to be?" ... rather than "how much spec / $$$, can I get from a different platform"
Gotta ask the right question, to get the right answer. 
Edited on Jan 21, 2023 at 02:30 PM · View previous versions
|
) ... i.e. about unable to refute GB=GB for Mac spec. To which, I'd think that if this was indeed incorrect spec from Mac, it would have been called out long ago. But, idk, so again ... face value, nothing to refute it with.