fredmiranda.com
Login

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

FM Forums | Pro Digital Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4              6       7       end
  

Archive 2009 · Why iMac over PC

  
 
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · Why iMac over PC


Well PC vs Mac is always a fun argument, both sides having a good debate.

But I would ask why it is that if Mac is so superior in terms of graphical performance, why is it that the PC is THE format for high resolution, high frame rate computer gaming? When I first got into digital darkroom work in the mid 1990s Mac had the advantage of coming with good graphics cards, on a PC you had to pay extra. Now when you buy a PC the ability to choose from a wide range of fab 2D and 3D graphics cards represents a pleasure, not a liability.

Since the good old days of automatic Mac supremacy then generation after generation of cutting edge gaming graphics cards have emerged - for the PC!



Jan 06, 2010 at 04:15 AM
patrickphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · Why iMac over PC


better OS. Better memory handling structure -> less operating overhead.

better support....

more cost....

makes a bit of sense.

(I run windows and mac).



Jan 06, 2010 at 04:51 AM
luketrot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · Why iMac over PC


Dell will be announcing a new 2560 x 1440 27" monitor using the same screen as the 27" iMac.

Dell U2711

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/pictures/dellu2711-1l.jpg



Jan 06, 2010 at 08:09 AM
Pell
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #4 · Why iMac over PC


I use both PC and Mac, it is all the same thing, there is no difference. IMHO it is all in the marketing. I am a Mac user but use PC daily as well. I use Mac because I prefer the user interface shortcuts.


Jan 07, 2010 at 05:12 PM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #5 · Why iMac over PC


"IMHO it is all in the marketing"

Just about sums it up



Jan 08, 2010 at 01:00 PM
veroman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · Why iMac over PC


David Baldwin wrote:
"IMHO it is all in the marketing" Just about sums it up


No it doesn't. It seems to me ... and I could be wrong about this ... that some who have posted here do not know the history behind these two very different platforms. So let me try to convey that history as briefly as possible.

First: the Macintosh was designed from Day One as a software-based, graphical user interface (what we used to call a GUI ... or Gooey). The processor, motherboard, ICs and everything else inside a Mac box are subservient to that software (or operating system), as was The Mouse, an Apple invention. Everything inside and outside the Mac is designed to support that operating system, now OS 10 X. The original GUI was actually developed by Xerox. Steve Jobs saw that interface, thought it the best way to develop a personal computer, and went on to develop the precursor to the Mac ... a machine called Lisa ($10,000 in 1982). The Lisa was a mistake and was replaced by the Mac 128, 512 and then the SE ($2,700 in 1984).

The IBM-based PC was designed from Day One as a hardware-based machine. IBM's idea was to develop a personal computer that could be manufactured by anyone, anywhere, using off-the shelf parts that are easily available or could be fabricated/manufactured with relative ease.

It was a great idea except for one thing: IBM didn't have an operating system to support this hardware idea. Along comes Bill Gates (and a few other individuals and companies), who is invited to present an operating system concept to IBM that would work with just about any configuration of this new p/c idea.

At the very first meeting, Gates told IBM he believed he had the operating system that would pull it all together. Actually, he had nothing, but he KNEW of a guy that had developed something called DOS (Digital Operating System) and bought it from him for $50,000 ... not telling him, of course, what it would be used for. The rest of that guy's life is kind of a tragedy, but that's a different story.

When the Macintosh took off like nothing before, it was evident that users were gravitating towards a GUI-type machine. Gates & Company asked Jobs for a few Macs to study (they were friends at the time), then took it upon himself to reverse engineer the Macintosh desktop "look" in order to develop the operating system called Windows, which rested on top of DOS, the underlying operating system of the PC.

It was a flagrant slap in the face to Jobs. MS was hauled into court and was involved in a litigation vs. Apple last lasted some 15-20 years (I think). Apple lost, unfortunately. It was, in reality, a complete rip-off.

However ... and this is the big "however" ... what MS did was rip off only the desktop look, feel and the appearance of a GUI. They did not rip off the MAC OS because they couldn't. It's proprietary. To the best of my knowledge, there are no other machines in the world that are driven by the Mac OS. There was a time ... a brief spell thank heaven ... when Apple licensed their OS to other makers, but it turned out to be disastrous move on their part. When the licenses expired they were not renewed.

Bottom line of all this: there really is no such thing as a PC. There is no single machine that's a PC that sets the standard for all other PCs and to which all other PCs are compared. Why? Because that was never the idea behind the PC. To this day, anyone and everyone can build a PC from off the shelf parts, including individuals. It's a non-proprietary, hardware-based idea that's about as unique a single banana in a bunch of bananas.

The Macintosh, on the other hand, is singular and very unique. There is no other machine that's a Macintosh except an Apple Macintosh, and there is no machine that operates like a Macintosh except another Macintosh.

This all goes well beyond marketing. The concepts behind each machine are entirely different. They might APPEAR the same from a desktop point-of-view or even from an application point-of-view. But that does not make them the same, no more than I'm the same man when I wear a black suit as the man next to me who is wearing the same, exact black suit.

- Steve




Edited on Jan 08, 2010 at 04:21 PM · View previous versions



Jan 08, 2010 at 03:51 PM
buildertj
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #7 · Why iMac over PC


One of the biggest differences I have seen between Mac and PC is that most of the blogs I read and other training websites, all the teachers use Macs. Also, the Photoshop training, etc. with the Kelby group is all taught from the point of view of a Mac. They do give you the quick keys for a PC but they really are geared towards a Mac. It has made my learning curve not quite so sharp because I have a Mac. I can follow the instructions better, etc. Of course, this has nothing to do with hardware, software etc; but I have found I like a Mac better than a PC if only because it seems a little more intuitive. Also, I have a MacBook Pro and I love the Multi-Touch track pad. Hope this helps.


Jan 08, 2010 at 04:09 PM
luketrot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #8 · Why iMac over PC


veroman, you do realize that Mac OS is just another flavor of Unix right? (FreeBSD) A history of computing is irrelevant when the Mac is based on a command line OS as well.

+1 Pell.



Jan 08, 2010 at 08:27 PM
veroman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #9 · Why iMac over PC


luketrot wrote:
veroman, you do realize that Mac OS is just another flavor of Unix right?....
+1 Pell.


Yes ....



Jan 08, 2010 at 08:34 PM
ajkessler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · Why iMac over PC


veroman wrote:
Yes ....


You also realize that Microsoft's OS have not been based on DOS architecture since XP, right?

You're entire spiel about a Mac being some uniquely designed proprietary Jobsian creation is ridiculous. I can build a Mac using the same off the shelf parts that I would buy to build a PC... because they all use the same parts now. Apple does seem to source good parts that they ensure (mostly) work together, but they're all the same parts that anyone can buy. I'm not sure where you stumbled across this notion.



Jan 09, 2010 at 01:04 AM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #11 · Why iMac over PC


Steve,

Well, we can disagree, but if Mac OS and Windows are so radically different how come you can now run them on the same hardware?



Jan 09, 2010 at 07:23 AM
shatterkiss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · Why iMac over PC


veroman wrote:
as was The Mouse, an Apple invention.


Sorry, you're wrong there...the mouse came out of Xerox PARC the same way the GUI did: Apple and Microsoft BOTH stole both innovations, Apple just being a little quicker and more aggressive about it. Microsoft did make the mistake of layering Windows over DOS - but that's only because they already had a successful product that they didn't want to outmode. Apple had no issues tossing the baby out with the bathwater, since the Apple II series was a dog. Xerox is also responsible for calling the base GUI a "desktop" and using iconographic metaphors like "folders" and "documents". Apple didn't innovate any of that, they just repackaged and recoded Xerox's work.

The Macintosh, on the other hand, is singular and very unique. There is no other machine that's a Macintosh except an Apple Macintosh, and there is no machine that operates like a Macintosh except another Macintosh.

That has nothing to do with design or quality - it's exclusively a function of Jobs' understanding that if you make an Apple computer the only way to get access to the OS and platform then they can charge exorbitant and unprecedented markups on commodity hardware. It's not singular and unique, it's done all the time: a Tivo is made out of commodity parts too, but it's still sold as a closed and proprietary box where you're buying the hardware to get access to the software. Apple is very smart about understanding that if you buy and control a resource (say, the iTunes Music Store) and limit access to it to your own products (iPods and iTunes) you can cash in on hardware sales as well and dominate your competitors.

You seem to think this somehow demonstrates the superiority of Apple products. I think it just demonstrates how much more cutthroat the company is.



Jan 09, 2010 at 09:07 AM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #13 · Why iMac over PC


veroman wrote:
First: the Macintosh was designed from Day One as a software-based, graphical user interface (what we used to call a GUI ... or Gooey). The processor, motherboard, ICs and everything else inside a Mac box are subservient to that software (or operating system)....

When the Macintosh took off like nothing before, it was evident that users were gravitating towards a GUI-type machine. Gates & Company asked Jobs for a few Macs to study (they were friends at the time), then took it upon himself to reverse engineer the Macintosh desktop "look" in order to develop the operating system called Windows, which
...Show more

First...hardware is not subservient to an operating system. Hardware and the operating system work in concert -- neither is subservient to the other. The operating is system is used as a medium to allow the user to access hardware controls.

Mac OS and Windows are both mediums. The way they call requests to the hardware does not differ significantly. They are just different user interfaces. Windows and Mac OS should not be compared to two men wearing black suits. They could be compared to one man wearing a black suit and one man wearing a white suit. The suits are different, but they are both men.

And second ... DOS does not stand for "digital operating system", it stands for "disk operating system".

And third ... around the time that Windows was being released, a lot of companies were reverse engineering BIOS (the lowest level medium between the user and a hardware) to design their own systems. There is nothing ethically wrong about reverse engineering of software. And certainly it does not make the reverse engineered product any worse than the originally designed product per se.

And of course going on at length about the history of Mac and Windows, however historically inaccurate it may be, does not really answer the question of which is better than the other...



Jan 11, 2010 at 03:06 PM
joezasada
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · Why iMac over PC


I think this image totally sums things up:

http://xahlee.org/funny/i/mac_win_linux_perceptions-s.jpg



Jan 12, 2010 at 05:57 PM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · Why iMac over PC


Joe,

That's brilliant! Particularly laughed at the Linux fan's point of view.



Jan 13, 2010 at 08:27 AM
mudsill
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #16 · Why iMac over PC


I entered into graphics back in 91 or 92 when the only "true color" situation was with a $1400 Targa video card and a special second monitor. I stuck with the PC intil 98 or so when I purchased my first Mac, a G4. Now on my 3rd, with a G5 powermac that is 4.5 years old.

I will look at an Intel Mac after I pay off a Leica lens. Mac gives one much in included software and they make the using process easy. Given the choice, I will always have a Mac as my primary computer, so reliable.

I do have a home built PC for one program only, 3DS Max, a 3d program. Bill Gates doesn't need my money.

">PC with Mac monitor

Edited on Jan 13, 2010 at 05:23 PM · View previous versions



Jan 13, 2010 at 03:27 PM
mdude85
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · Why iMac over PC


mudsill wrote:
I do have a home built PC for one program only, 3DS Max, a 3d program. Bill Gates doesn't need my money.


Steve Jobs does?



Jan 13, 2010 at 04:16 PM
astensgaard
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · Why iMac over PC


if you want raw power, buy a pc
if you want ease of use, buy a mac

I use a pc but as mudsill I only use it because of 3ds max!

so call me a pc user with mac envy!



Jan 14, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Bieg
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #19 · Why iMac over PC


Steve Jobs did not "steal" the XEROX PARC operating system, He bought it by trading Apple stock for it. Bill Gates then stole it from Apple.

If you want "Raw Power" AND "Ease of Use" get a Mac Pro Tower.

A Mac can run BOTH Windoze and Mac OS-X.



Jan 14, 2010 at 06:01 PM
AdamStewart
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · Why iMac over PC


Joe, check out page one


Jan 14, 2010 at 09:29 PM
1       2       3       4              6       7       end




FM Forums | Pro Digital Corner | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4              6       7       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account