Mac v. PC?

[prodigy2k7]

I like macs for laptops and windows for desktops as I built them.

 

[adversus]

1. A Mac is a PC. Get the terminology right.
2. I have a hybrid household: 2 MacBook Pro's, 1 Mac Pro, 1 off-brand.
3. My entire professional career working on Windows and Mac OS platforms as an IT Manager and developer
4. Is The "Apple Tax" Real? Mac vs. PC Value Analysis - HotHardware

Derrel is partially right. Apple doesn't make the components that go into their products. A lot of times they have a hand in the design, but Intel makes the CPU, chipset, bus, etc. AMD and NVIDIA make the graphics cards. Hitachi and Seagate make the hard disks. You get the point.

What Apple does well that Windows does NOT is they make the drivers. Apple creates 99% of the hardware drivers that they use in their systems, as opposed to Windows where each driver manufacturer provides their own drivers (Microsoft provides basic ones for emergency use). Because Apple has complete control over the software/hardware integration, the system is inherently more stable. Anybody who's ever had a hardware induced BSOD on Windows, or an IRQ conflict, or a Memory conflict feels the pain of the fragmented Windows market.

Apple does have a premium on their products, but it's not what people think. The premium is $50-$200 at best. I'll use the example of my Mac Pro:

My Mac Pro is a workstation class machine. That's the key. I paid $2499 for it. Could I get a Dell for $699? Sure. But they aren't nearly in the same class. If you compare flashy numbers that the marketing people want you to pay attention to (13140897.4 Ghz!!!!!!!!!!), the comparison looks silly. I'd trust my $2500 workstation that runs on a tightly controlled software/hardware integrated platform over a $1200 HP/Dell/Asus/Whatever.

Spec for spec, the price difference between a Mac and a non-Mac is really small:

1. A Mac Pro is a workstation, and a workstation with the same hardware from Dell or IBM is almost exactly the same cost
2. A Macbook as a mobile device is about the same price as a Windows machine if you include size, weight, and body materials (aluminum vs. plastic) (and really, who doesn't when choosing a laptop?)
3. An iMac, with an included monitor, is only slightly (~$200) the same price as a Dell/IBM/Whatever for the same components + buying a 3rd party monitor

Most people get sticker shock without actually comparing the components and performance of each machine.

*** EDIT ***: I just priced out a Dell Precision workstation to match my Mac Pro, and it was $185 more expensive. But it does come with a crappy Dell monitor!

 

[DaniellaChristine]

I need help deciding on a new PC asap!I'm in the process of starting up my Photography studio. I just finished up my portfolio, I have the space/location, now I need a computer that doesn't make editing pics in CS5 take twice as long as it should. I don't have alot of time as I have been having issues with red & green sparkles on my current Sony Vaio all-in-on Model# VGC-JS160J which a tech told me meant my video card was failing. Also its driving me crazy when trying to edit photos and save them. I'm considering the new Sony Vaio all-in-one Signature L Series Model# VPCL21SFX/W. Through research I made a list of specs that most people said were important. I'm the kind of person that likes to have just a little bit more than what I "need" just in case. Specs look good from what I compared to my list except it comes with a 2TB storage which makes it 5400RPM. Should I get it? Is it "inappropriate" (so to speak) to use an all-in-one for professional photography? I will be doing heavy photo editing in Photoshop CS5, Lightroom & occasionally Photoshop elements. I shoot all my photos in raw format and after adding layers the files become VETY large. The folder I'm currently editing is over 100gb and I'm not finished. I also need a 24 or 27 inch ips monitor. I'd like to try other software as well. I would also like to offer videography down the road for wedding and special events so I need to be able to efficiently & in a timely manner also put together Full HD videos. I love Sony's movie maker software and the fact that the Model VPCL21SFX/W has a Blu-ray Burner (not just player. Its a very attractive PC as well which is important to me as it will be on my desk in my office where I meet (impress) clients but mostly cause I'm a girl so I like pretty things..lol. Only drawbacks I can tell is the 2TB storage gives it 5400 RPM and I read somewhere that 5400 is a lil slow for windows 7 and I don't see anything that says it has a firewire port. Do I really need that? I haven't yet. Could someone please help me decide what would be best for what I'm doing? If this model isnt good, my other options are a Mac or building a PC with a dual monitor system. Mac is an option because I know I can get that sleek, "pretty" design that I'm looking for and because I've always been horrible with maintaining my PCs so it would be nice to not have to worry bout that so much. Would I have any compatability issues or extra steps when uploading things/photos online with a mac? My fiance had a Mac Laptop a few years ago and he installed, whatever the software is called that lets you put windows on your Mac, and its never worked right after that. He knows about as much about computers as I do which is what scares me. I don't want that to happen to me if I try to do the same. I'm weary of building one mostly cause there is no big company to call if something goes wrong. How do I find out what the prob is? Prob have to pay someone to figure it out, pay to purchase another and pay someone to install it. But I like that I could set up a dual monitor system and potentially have EVERYTHING the way I NEED it and then some. I dont know anything about computers except the specs I apparently need for my particular workflow and even that I'm not 100% on. I've been researching for weeks and all I see is the same ol MAC vs PC debate...but no real answers, just who likes what better. PLEASE HELP! Opinions are great but just a few options of stuff that will def do the job (and that no one else disagrees with..lol) would be nice to. Thank you in advance for any help you provide

 

[KenC]

...but no real answers, just who likes what better.

That's because there are no "real answers" - everything has its advantages and drawbacks and it all comes down to what works for you. When you're starting out, that could be anything. Just get what seems most comfortable to you based on your own experience with either or both systems and you will be fine if you make sure you have lots of RAM. I'm OK with 4 GB on a Mac, but I don't typically generate huge layer-rich files, so you should get as much RAM as possible and then you won't regret not having bought more.

 

[mjhoward]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned but the new Mac's can run both Windows AND MAC OS... a PC can only run Windows. Thats a plus in my book. Plus Mac's are built better... much better.

 

[Rekd]

1. A Mac is a PC. Get the terminology right.

RAWR!!!! :twak:

I'll take the PC over the Mac unless I'm doing just graphics.

 

[Village Idiot]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned but the new Mac's can run both Windows AND MAC OS... a PC can only run Windows. Thats a plus in my book. Plus Mac's are built better... much better.

Did you even read this thread? My self built Wintel machine is running OS X and Windows 7. That has already been mentioned.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

 

[penfolderoldo]

As usual whenever this 'debate' comes up anywhere the majority of posters divide themselves into 1 camp or the other. There are some fundamentally wrong statements that keep getting made, including:

'the build quality of macs is better than pc' - whilst obviously there are cheap, substandard pc's around, to lump all pc's in together is just false, end off...
'macs are better because they don't get viruses' - not true - macs can get viruses just the same as a pc, only reason they tend to get less is because of a number of factors including the fact that Os X is based on unix, but inherently macs aren't virus proof...
'There's software you can't get for macs that is available for pc's' - whilst this was i'm sure once the case now things are MUCH better, and pretty much any software you're likely to need can be found for both mac and pc.

In answer to the OP's question (and the one slightly later), I use a dell with 1Tb of storage, 8gb RAM which runs at 7200rpm easily enough to cope with the largest files i ever work with, it runs Lightshop, CS5 and PSE 9 (for when i need to do basic tweeking) and an HP monitor with H-IPS. Looked at the dell ones but they weren't great. Total system was just shy of £950

And no, there is nothing a mac can do that a pc can't, or vice versa...

 

[mjhoward]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned but the new Mac's can run both Windows AND MAC OS... a PC can only run Windows. Thats a plus in my book. Plus Mac's are built better... much better.

Did you even read this thread? My self built Wintel machine is running OS X and Windows 7. That has already been mentioned.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

You're living up to your name.

I think the 'I don't know if this has already been mentioned' part explains that I didnt read the 4 pages of replies to see if anyone had mentioned that. Your self built machine might run OS X but most prebuilt desktops and laptops I don't believe will, at least not natively. Just because you had one of the OLD plastic macbooks that had a button fall in, doesn't mean they were poorly built. I'm a software developer and used to need a new laptop once every 18-24 mos. The entire plastic bodies would be cracked, keys worn to where you could barely make out the characters, significant degradation in performance over time even with complete format and reinstall of OS, battery would no longer hold charge, etc. With the newer aluminum macbook... I've not had any of those problems. I've had it for about 30 mos with heavy use and it still looks like new. Still performs like new and even the battery still holds several hours worth of charge. Yes, in my experience they are built better. Better resale, better parts, better aesthetics. If you are doing any kind of photography, a Mac display is MUCH better and more accurate than most PC displays (Notebook and Desktop).

 

[Village Idiot]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned but the new Mac's can run both Windows AND MAC OS... a PC can only run Windows. Thats a plus in my book. Plus Mac's are built better... much better.

Did you even read this thread? My self built Wintel machine is running OS X and Windows 7. That has already been mentioned.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

You're living up to your name.

I think the 'I don't know if this has already been mentioned' part explains that I didnt read the 4 pages of replies to see if anyone had mentioned that. Your self built machine might run OS X but most prebuilt desktops and laptops I don't believe will, at least not natively. Just because you had one of the OLD plastic macbooks that had a button fall in, doesn't mean they were poorly built. I'm a software developer and used to need a new laptop once every 18-24 mos. The entire plastic bodies would be cracked, keys worn to where you could barely make out the characters, significant degradation in performance over time even with complete format and reinstall of OS, battery would no longer hold charge, etc. With the newer aluminum macbook... I've not had any of those problems. I've had it for about 30 mos with heavy use and it still looks like new. Still performs like new and even the battery still holds several hours worth of charge. Yes, in my experience they are built better. Better resale, better parts, better aesthetics. If you are doing any kind of photography, a Mac display is MUCH better and more accurate than most PC displays (Notebook and Desktop).

You think you're clever making such an obvious insult about my user name, yet your lack of comprehension is a shining example of why people shouldn't speak if they don't know what they're talking about.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

See that? Macbook Pro. Do you know what the Pro at the end of the Macbook designation stands for? If you need some help, I'll get you a link to Apple's website. I've owned 2 Macbook Pros and one Macbook and have had issues with both Macbooks that have required repair.

Since installing Vista then Windows 7, I've never had to reinstall and OS. One of my Macbook Pros did have OS X crash so bad that it required me to completely reinstall the OS for the computer to do anything besides protect my coffee table from the condensation on my beer bottle.

I bought a 30" HP monitor over the Apple 30". It has better response times and calibrates better. Compare ACDs to comparable IPS panel displays from other manufactures and your statement because false. It's like comparing crap Wintel machines to Apple computers. It's just a way for insecure Apple owners to justify their purchases.

 

[lukeb]

Long time visitor, first time poster

You will have so many different opinions on this it will be hard to take any solid answer away. Just too many variables

"macs are more reliable" Both my roommates have 2 year old macbooks and they were both down at the same time. One with a hard drive failure (resulting in loss of data) another with a faulty batery.

"PC's are way cheaper" Windows crashed on my mothers pc several years ago, resulting in a repair bill that would have easily paid for a mac.

In the end, it comes down to your personal preference.

 

[nickzou]

When it comes to photography it doesn't matter one lick. In terms of overall usability... if you're a PC user and just a casual computer user in general, I'd say get a nice PC laptop (ASUS, Sony, etc...). However if you want a well designed machine with a GUI you are willing to spend a bit of time to learn (the OSX GUI is NOT intuitive and seems to fail usability tests at every turn, we do app development at work right now and just some of the **** we have to deal with in xcode and Snow Leopard, absolute garbage) and willing to pay a few extra bucks, a Macbook Pro is an excellent excellent machine. Historically, Apple seems do not know how to install the proper RAM for their motherboards, because I've had some many stories about Macbook Pro's dying and it was all because of some kind of RAM issue (so this idea that Macbook's being problem free isn't exactly true either).

In the end, I think that if photography is your focus and you don't really want to worry about your computer much, get a Macbook Pro. Worth the money. But for computer enthusiasts, most of the hardcore Mac users I know actually have Hackintoshes or just run Windows 7 or some Linux build. I like photography and computers so I tend to lean towards PCs. But that's a personal preference.

 

[mjhoward]

Did you even read this thread? My self built Wintel machine is running OS X and Windows 7. That has already been mentioned.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

You're living up to your name.

I think the 'I don't know if this has already been mentioned' part explains that I didnt read the 4 pages of replies to see if anyone had mentioned that. Your self built machine might run OS X but most prebuilt desktops and laptops I don't believe will, at least not natively. Just because you had one of the OLD plastic macbooks that had a button fall in, doesn't mean they were poorly built. I'm a software developer and used to need a new laptop once every 18-24 mos. The entire plastic bodies would be cracked, keys worn to where you could barely make out the characters, significant degradation in performance over time even with complete format and reinstall of OS, battery would no longer hold charge, etc. With the newer aluminum macbook... I've not had any of those problems. I've had it for about 30 mos with heavy use and it still looks like new. Still performs like new and even the battery still holds several hours worth of charge. Yes, in my experience they are built better. Better resale, better parts, better aesthetics. If you are doing any kind of photography, a Mac display is MUCH better and more accurate than most PC displays (Notebook and Desktop).

You think you're clever making such an obvious insult about my user name, yet your lack of comprehension is a shining example of why people shouldn't speak if they don't know what they're talking about.

I had a Macbook Pro that had the power button fall into the case. The keys were also crooked. It was built better that way.

See that? Macbook Pro. Do you know what the Pro at the end of the Macbook designation stands for? If you need some help, I'll get you a link to Apple's website. I've owned 2 Macbook Pros and one Macbook and have had issues with both Macbooks that have required repair.

Since installing Vista then Windows 7, I've never had to reinstall and OS. One of my Macbook Pros did have OS X crash so bad that it required me to completely reinstall the OS for the computer to do anything besides protect my coffee table from the condensation on my beer bottle.

I bought a 30" HP monitor over the Apple 30". It has better response times and calibrates better. Compare ACDs to comparable IPS panel displays from other manufactures and your statement because false. It's like comparing crap Wintel machines to Apple computers. It's just a way for insecure Apple owners to justify their purchases.

LOL you're still living up to that name. My comprehension skills are just fine. Yours, along with your 'Legend in your own mind' attitude, on the other hand may need some work.

You yourself even admitted that Apple uses server grade parts in their pro lines while other manufacturers use consumer grade. Now you're trying to argue that apple doesn't use better parts? And just because you had a Macbook 'PRO' doesn't mean it was one of the newer aluminum unibody's that I was originally referring to. I thought the older Macbook PRO's were plastic as well since the unibody's only came out in 2008, I was wrong about that, big deal. They've made Macbook PRO's since 2006, of which were not the Unibody's and I would hardly consider as one of the newer models.

I also never said that there arn't any other vendors that make displays as good or better than apple. My statement was with regards to the general consumer whom is going to purchase either a desktop that comes with the monitor in a package deal, or a notebook with no external display. I stand by my statement that for these cases, the apple display is almost always going to be better. And if you think you are going to 'school' me on computer hardware, then you might want to bark up another tree. And F your HP monitor... I've got 3 Eizo's for my WinBLOWs machine.

 

[Village Idiot]

LOL you're still living up to that name. My comprehension skills are just fine. Yours, along with your 'Legend in your own mind' attitude, on the other hand may need some work. Just because you had a Macbook 'PRO' doesn't mean it was one of the newer aluminum unibody's that I was originally referring to. I thought the older Macbook PRO's were plastic as well since the unibody's only came out in 2008, I was wrong about that, big deal. They've made Macbook PRO's since 2006, of which were not the Unibody's and I would hardly consider as one of the newer models.

I also never said that there arn't any other vendors that make displays as good or better than apple. My statement was with regards to the general consumer whom is going to purchase either a desktop that comes with the monitor in a package deal, or a notebook with no external display. I stand by my statement that for these cases, the apple display is almost always going to be better. And if you think you are going to 'school' me on computer hardware, then you might want to bark up another tree. And F your HP monitor... I've got 3 Eizo's for my WinBLOWs machine.

I'm living up to that name? You're the one that seems to be pretty unclear on what you're talking about. I've had the older model and the new unibody designs there bud. You're pretty good at being wrong. I haven't seen you be right about anything so far.

The general consumer is most likely not going to be a photographer that's worrying about monitor quality. Anyways, unless you blow over $2,500 on a Mac Pro that's probably already outdated or a mini that's good enough for browsing the internet, then you're going to be stuck with whatever panel Apple decides to use at the time.

And if you think you are going to 'school' me on computer hardware, then you might want to bark up another tree.

You're right, I don't think you're capable of learning anything so it would be a waste of time trying.

And F your HP monitor... I've got 3 Eizo's for my WinBLOWs machine.

I see using the internet is obviously a stressful activity for you.

 

[Village Idiot]

Long time visitor, first time poster

You will have so many different opinions on this it will be hard to take any solid answer away. Just too many variables

"macs are more reliable" Both my roommates have 2 year old macbooks and they were both down at the same time. One with a hard drive failure (resulting in loss of data) another with a faulty batery.

"PC's are way cheaper" Windows crashed on my mothers pc several years ago, resulting in a repair bill that would have easily paid for a mac.

In the end, it comes down to your personal preference.

I agree completely. I use Win 7, OS X, and Windows Home Server at home currently, but I've been through every iteration of Windows, used numerous Linux distros, and other OSes throughout the years. Use what you enjoy and what you're comfortable with, just like picking a camera.

When it comes to photography it doesn't matter one lick. In terms of overall usability... if you're a PC user and just a casual computer user in general, I'd say get a nice PC laptop (ASUS, Sony, etc...). However if you want a well designed machine with a GUI you are willing to spend a bit of time to learn (the OSX GUI is NOT intuitive and seems to fail usability tests at every turn, we do app development at work right now and just some of the **** we have to deal with in xcode and Snow Leopard, absolute garbage) and willing to pay a few extra bucks, a Macbook Pro is an excellent excellent machine. Historically, Apple seems do not know how to install the proper RAM for their motherboards, because I've had some many stories about Macbook Pro's dying and it was all because of some kind of RAM issue (so this idea that Macbook's being problem free isn't exactly true either).

In the end, I think that if photography is your focus and you don't really want to worry about your computer much, get a Macbook Pro. Worth the money. But for computer enthusiasts, most of the hardcore Mac users I know actually have Hackintoshes or just run Windows 7 or some Linux build. I like photography and computers so I tend to lean towards PCs. But that's a personal preference.

I agree completely. Most photographers I see using Mac Pros like the OS X interface but wouldn't know where to start with putting a Hackintosh together. If Apple released OS X for use on anything, it would make a lot of people happy, but end up bankrupting them. The problem is when you get Apple zealots that believe that Steve Jobs ****s gold and walks on water. Both platforms have issues and there's no way around that.