Mac v. PC?

[michelekraus]

Okay, here's the scenario. My daughter is getting very serious about her photography as a career path, rather than a hobby. We are ready to make the leap to buy her a computer to be dedicated to the photography handling.
She will be running Adobe Lightshop 3.4 and Photoshop CS (not sure of the version, but higher than 5?), mostly.

So, do we get a Mac or PC? Assuming that money was not the issue (within reason), which system would you recommend and why?

I have been delving into the Macs all morning, and it seems to me that I can get a kick-ass PC system for about 1/3 less than the Mac system. We are a PC family, having had only one disasterous brush with an iMac back in the early 00's. The closest we come to Apple is the Touch and Nano.

But, I guess what I'm asking is if there is something less tangible that I am missing when it comes to Mac v PC in regards to photography. Other than the "arteest" being able to say "I am genuine, because I use a Mac!", is there something the Mac can do that the PC can't?

I am truly on the fence for this one.

Thank you for your insight.
~Michele

 

[loopy]

But, I guess what I'm asking is if there is something less tangible that I am missing when it comes to Mac v PC in regards to photography. Other than the "arteest" being able to say "I am genuine, because I use a Mac!", is there something the Mac can do that the PC can't?

No, its a matter of personal preference.

 

[Dao]

oh no ... Nothing against you. Mac vs PC thread = Canon vs Nikon = Ford vs Chevy = popcorn.

My advice is, go with what you like, not what other people like. As far as photography goes, both platforms are the same. It should be able to do what the photographer want it to do. So it is just a personal preference.

 

[Josh66]

I don't think it even matters - you would likely be using the same software on either one.

 

[michelekraus]

I figured I was opening up a can of worms, but we've never seriously considered a Mac before, but all through the years, all I've heard is that Mac is for "artists": graphic design, photography, etc. But lately, I've been reading that PCs perform just as well for much less money, and so it is more of going with what you are comfortable with. I will say though, Apple makes a beautiful computer.

I did want to add another question: I have heard that the monitor is very important, in order to get "true" color resolution. What should we be looking for when it comes to a monitor?

 

[Village Idiot]

I figured I was opening up a can of worms, but we've never seriously considered a Mac before, but all through the years, all I've heard is that Mac is for "artists": graphic design, photography, etc. But lately, I've been reading that PCs perform just as well for much less money, and so it is more of going with what you are comfortable with. I will say though, Apple makes a beautiful computer.

I did want to add another question: I have heard that the monitor is very important, in order to get "true" color resolution. What should we be looking for when it comes to a monitor?

It's a stereotype perpetuated by the fact that Apple's PPC was supposed to be better with vector graphics and the Intel chips...in the 80's...

With Apple computers running Intel chips, the only real difference will be the OS. Now as far as the price goes, you're a bit off there. The reason why it's so hard to compare Mac to Wintel computer costs is the components. If you compare other all in one computers to a Mac, the prices will be a lot closer than comparing just a PC tower with no monitor. I built a PC that's as fast if nor faster for Mac Pros for about $600 less than a Mac Pro. I could have put a cheaper video card in it and saved anoter $200-$300. The thing is, I used a consumer grade Intel I7 chip and parts where Apple uses server grade parts like the Xeon processors in their Mac Pro. That explains the difference in price. Can I get better performance for the price? Yes, but the cost is in what components are used. It's not like the Mac Pro has the same consumer lever parts that I have in my PC at $600 more for a fancy case.

I do all my photography work in OS X, though. I started with a Mac Pro and absolutely loved the way Adobe's software works in OS X, so I stuck with it. I built a desktop and figured out how to get OS X working on that. Personally, I prefer Apple notebooks to the standard Wintel offerings.

See if you have an Apple store near by and go mess around on the computers. As was said earlier, there's not much difference between the two choices so it's preference. You can even install Windows on a Mac so that you'll have to ability to run Window's programs if they're needed.

Oh, and they do hold their value well. I've had 2 Macbook Pros I've used for about 2 years and sold for about $200-$400 less than the original purchase price.

Edit: Monitor - Get something with at least an IPS panel and not a TN panel. A TN LCD panel can't truly be calibrated and has terrible viewing angles. The refresh rates are usually faster, but that may be one of the only plusses.

 

[SBphotography]

I've had both, I find Mac more user friendly for me personally and the resolution is a lot higher on the iMacs. I have a 15" MacBook Pro and prefer editing photos on it rather than my 19" LCD with Windows. Just my .02, like everyone said it's all what you prefer.

??? vs ??? is always subjective

 

[Derrel]

Macintosh. Why? Reliability and longevity. Apple makes the hardware from high-quality components, and also makes the operating system, so that the hardware and the operating system are integrated. Macs have a much lower incidence of problems with viruses. A lot of people like PCs, many of which are made from components sourced from the lowest bidder, to increase profit margins in the HUGELY-crowded market of Pee Cee makers. Sure, you can purchase a cheap PC. Anywhere. Cheap PC's are abundant. If you want a computer and a software system that is basically, 95% less-likely to be disabled by a virus, just buy a decent Mac. And use it. Hard. Every day. And not have all the 'issues" PC's are plagued with.

Look at total cost of ownership. Macs have less down time. Require fewer hours of tech support per seat in office situations. Fewer issues with viruses. Far fewer issues with hardware/OS incompatibility. If you like having a beater car that always needs to be worked on, and which sucks up weekends as you fit it with repair parts, and causes you to perform countless diagnostic and preventative maintenance routines, then buy a PC. If you want a reliable, modern "vehicle" that just works, buy a Mac. And get rid of the PC headaches and the dumb software system that Windoze is infamous for.

What kind of performance do you want here to have? Kia-like, or Mercedes-like?

 

[Mike_E]

PC + (a really great lens) = $XXX.XX = Mac

Honestly, a quality PC will last just as long and do everything a Mac will do. Even more actually when you consider all the software available for use no a PC that's not for a Mac. And there is no down time if you do regular maintenance (as with a car).

 

[Village Idiot]

Macintosh. Why? Reliability and longevity. Apple makes the hardware from high-quality components, and also makes the operating system, so that the hardware and the operating system are integrated. Macs have a much lower incidence of problems with viruses. A lot of people like PCs, many of which are made from components sourced from the lowest bidder, to increase profit margins in the HUGELY-crowded market of Pee Cee makers. Sure, you can purchase a cheap PC. Anywhere. Cheap PC's are abundant. If you want a computer and a software system that is basically, 95% less-likely to be disabled by a virus, just buy a decent Mac. And use it. Hard. Every day. And not have all the 'issues" PC's are plagued with.

Look at total cost of ownership. Macs have less down time. Require fewer hours of tech support per seat in office situations. Fewer issues with viruses. Far fewer issues with hardware/OS incompatibility. If you like having a beater car that always needs to be worked on, and which sucks up weekends as you fit it with repair parts, and causes you to perform countless diagnostic and preventative maintenance routines, then buy a PC. If you want a reliable, modern "vehicle" that just works, buy a Mac. And get rid of the PC headaches and the dumb software system that Windoze is infamous for.

What kind of performance do you want here to have? Kia-like, or Mercedes-like?

Or you buy a good brand PC and not an Acer and even then your car comparison is stupid when you consider for the cost, you get equal or greater performance for less money with most PCs. Maybe a Camaro vs. your standard C230 Mercedes.

It's a nice post full of stereotypes, but when you look inside a Dell and find the same hardware components that are in an Apple, you start to look at things differently. Apple doesn't make anything, they assemble their computers and if you think every component in an Apple computer is a high end piece of techonological marvel, then you've definitely been drinking the Kool Aid. Ever hear of a company called Micron? They make memory for Macs and other manufactures. Toshiba? They make DVD drives you can find in Apple notebooks and other brands of pre built computers. LG makes Apple screens and Dell Screens.

 

[prodigy2k7]

Macintosh. Why? Reliability and longevity. Apple makes the hardware from high-quality components, and also makes the operating system, so that the hardware and the operating system are integrated. Macs have a much lower incidence of problems with viruses. A lot of people like PCs, many of which are made from components sourced from the lowest bidder, to increase profit margins in the HUGELY-crowded market of Pee Cee makers. Sure, you can purchase a cheap PC. Anywhere. Cheap PC's are abundant. If you want a computer and a software system that is basically, 95% less-likely to be disabled by a virus, just buy a decent Mac. And use it. Hard. Every day. And not have all the 'issues" PC's are plagued with.

Look at total cost of ownership. Macs have less down time. Require fewer hours of tech support per seat in office situations. Fewer issues with viruses. Far fewer issues with hardware/OS incompatibility. If you like having a beater car that always needs to be worked on, and which sucks up weekends as you fit it with repair parts, and causes you to perform countless diagnostic and preventative maintenance routines, then buy a PC. If you want a reliable, modern "vehicle" that just works, buy a Mac. And get rid of the PC headaches and the dumb software system that Windoze is infamous for.

What kind of performance do you want here to have? Kia-like, or Mercedes-like?

Or you buy a good brand PC and not an Acer and even then your car comparison is stupid when you consider for the cost, you get equal or greater performance for less money with most PCs. Maybe a Camaro vs. your standard C230 Mercedes.

It's a nice post full of stereotypes, but when you look inside a Dell and find the same hardware components that are in an Apple, you start to look at things differently. Apple doesn't make anything, they assemble their computers and if you think every component in an Apple computer is a high end piece of techonological marvel, then you've definitely been drinking the Kool Aid. Ever hear of a company called Micron? They make memory for Macs and other manufactures. Toshiba? They make DVD drives you can find in Apple notebooks and other brands of pre built computers. LG makes Apple screens and Dell Screens.

^^This.

Mac may not have many viruses either atm, but that is surely changing. Its not cuz apple is more secure (not saying it is), its because not that many people have macs and there are way more targets on windows, except more and more windows users are installing firewalls and antivirus programs and getting smarter about clicking bad links. Hackers are starting to find ways to create viruses for macs because nobody attacks them and nobody is ready to protect themselves against them. Less than 10% of mac users run anti-virus.

Good "mac defender" on the latest huge security threat to mac user.

 

[djacobox372]

pc's are a better value, the only issue with pcs are the standards, or lack of them. pcs are open platform, with thousands of individual manufactures, but as long as u buy from a reputable company (dell, alienware) your pretty safe.Those that claim macs are higher resolution, faster, or perform better are ignorant--because of the open platform, technology typically hits the pc market first. There was a long time where mac had an edge due to its 64bit desgn, but those days are past.i would buy a pc because it supports the widest variety of software; if its not a desktop publishing app youlp be lucky to be able to run it on a mac.

btw macs have less viruses then pcs for the same reason rossie odonald has less stalkers then angelina jolie.

 

[michelekraus]

Thanks so much for everyone's input!I have to say that I'm not any more committed one way or the other than when this all started.

However, we decided that all things otherwise being equal, we were going to go ahead with a Windows-based laptop and be able to get the second monitor, color calibration software and docking station. Once she actually gets into college and perhaps gets some hands-on use of a Mac (depending on what they might use there), we can make a decision then. Going to the Apple store and playing with one for ten minutes isn't really a good test. In the meantime, she'll have a very good laptop in an OS that she's already familiar with. One less thing to adapt to as she's learning to use Lightroom!

We'll used the money saved to purchase a lens or other photo equipment.

Thanks again!
~Michele

 

[cedricb]

My recommendation is to get a custom built PC. Lots of components have either 3, 5 or lifetime warranty on them (you generally pay shipping to the company and they ship a new one back for free) making it a much better alternative to basic warranties on both MAC and PC (that BS sold by HP/Acer/Toshiba [avoid at all cost] | worst case, get one from Lenovo). Get a GPU that supports hardware acceleration and you should be mostly set. Then you decide hackintosh (Apple OS's kernel is a bit better at optimizing hardware acceleration) or PC (more versatile) and that's it. This way you save a few hundreds to invest in a good IPS panel or new lenses.

Cheers!

 

[Village Idiot]

btw macs have less viruses then pcs for the same reason rossie odonald has less stalkers then angelina jolie.

OS X is built on a UNIX platform which is inherently more secure than Windows. All the latest "viruses" from Apple you've heard of lately have been trojans and such where the user actually has to install the program for it to infect their computer.

My recommendation is to get a custom built PC. Lots of components have either 3, 5 or lifetime warranty on them (you generally pay shipping to the company and they ship a new one back for free) making it a much better alternative to basic warranties on both MAC and PC (that BS sold by HP/Acer/Toshiba [avoid at all cost] | worst case, get one from Lenovo). Get a GPU that supports hardware acceleration and you should be mostly set. Then you decide hackintosh (Apple OS's kernel is a bit better at optimizing hardware acceleration) or PC (more versatile) and that's it. This way you save a few hundreds to invest in a good IPS panel or new lenses.

Cheers!

And this is the worst recommendation in the world if the person has never seen the inside of a computer and I'm betting the OP has never built a computer before because if he had, then he probably wouldn't have even started this post.

Oh, and a GPU that "supports hardware acceleration"? That's the point of a video card. Hardware acceleration is the computer using hardware to perform a function instead of allowing the software and the CPU to control it. A GPU that doesn't support hardware acceleration is called a banana in your PCI-E slot. Where are you getting your information from?