Email: brqyvn@gmail.com
I have been a user of the PC platform forever. Photoshop, Lightroom have been by tools for years and I have to admit that I have been pleased with the results. All my business work is done using Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel. All my books were written using Word. There are no questions as to the popularity of the PC world.
However, it seems that most serious or professional photographers and graphic artists have been using the Mac for their graphic work. As I understand, the iMac is supposedly much better and easier to use for graphic, music, cinema, and most of the artsy side of computing. I never owned a Mac and frankly always thought that they were way too expensive.
There is an Apple store I visit once in a while when I go down to Los Angeles. The screen resolution and clarity seem to pop out at you. Applications like IPhoto, IMovie and Garage Band are very impressive and tempting. It's one thing to look at an iMac at the Apple store but the real test is likely to have one at home and work on it for a while before making a judgement as to which machine would be best for a photographer.
So.I spent $300.00 and purchased a used iMac G5 with 1.8GHz and upgraded the RAM to 4GB right away. It only has apple software on it and I cannot compare Lightroom on both platform. I used iPhoto and copied about 2000 of my images, both RAW and JPG, from the PC to the Imac. The iPhoto runs pretty smooth and I can't say that the images are better on it, but it is an old computer running a much slower processor The iMac does run Microsoft Office 2008 and all my usual writing tools are remaining the same. That's a good thing. The iMac is about 6 or 7 years old and the processing speed is not great compared to my current PC which only runs XP. With Windows 7 pro on a new PC (around $800.00) I could get 64bit processing and clock speed in the 3.5 MHz or so. The newest iMac in it's simplest form, 21.5"-3.06MHz-4GB RAM, is $1,200.00 then add Microsoft office, some editing software and other necessary tools, you at $2,000.00. Buy a Mac Pro quad-core starting at $2,500.00, plus software, you way pass my budget.
I have to admit that I really like the ease of the operating system on my cheap iMAC G5. This is the way a true windows operating system should work. It is very intuitive and the applications are running very smooth. As far as I know, you rarely get any viruses when runing the Apple Platform. I suppose that the number of Apple computers worldwide is not big enough to satisfy the appetite of hackers.
So, I'm at a crossroad again. It's time to upgrade and I'm not sure what I should do. Some of you have always used a PC and probably would tell me to go with a PC again. Some of you have always used a Mac and probably would tell me to go with a Mac again. Some of you certainly have used both platforms and have very valuable experience with both platform. I would appreciate any guidance from you guys in particular. You can post comments herein, send me an email brwyvn@gmail.com , reply on my Facebook or Twitter as well. I am posting this blog on photo-net and hope to get comments there too.
Hi Pentaxian friends.
I have been a user of the PC platform forever. Photoshop, Lightroom have been by tools for years and I have to admit that I have been pleased with the results. All my business work is done using Microsoft Word and Microsoft Excel. All my books were written using Word. There are no questions as to the popularity of the PC world.
However, it seems that most serious or professional photographers and graphic artists have been using the Mac for their graphic work. As I understand, the iMac is supposedly much better and easier to use for graphic, music, cinema, and most of the artsy side of computing. I never owned a Mac and frankly always thought that they were way too expensive.
There is an Apple store I visit once in a while when I go down to Los Angeles. The screen resolution and clarity seem to pop out at you. Applications like IPhoto, IMovie and Garage Band are very impressive and tempting. It's one thing to look at an iMac at the Apple store but the real test is likely to have one at home and work on it for a while before making a judgement as to which machine would be best for a photographer.
So.I spent $300.00 and purchased a used iMac G5 with 1.8GHz and upgraded the RAM to 4GB right away. It only has apple software on it and I cannot compare Lightroom on both platform. I used iPhoto and copied about 2000 of my images, both RAW and JPG, from the PC to the Imac. The iPhoto runs pretty smooth and I can't say that the images are better on it, but it is an old computer running a much slower processor The iMac does run Microsoft Office 2008 and all my usual writing tools are remaining the same. That's a good thing. The iMac is about 6 or 7 years old and the processing speed is not great compared to my current PC which only runs XP. With Windows 7 pro on a new PC (around $800.00) I could get 64bit processing and clock speed in the 3.5 MHz or so. The newest iMac in it's simplest form, 21.5"-3.06MHz-4GB RAM, is $1,200.00 then add Microsoft office, some editing software and other necessary tools, you at $2,000.00. Buy a Mac Pro quad-core starting at $2,500.00, plus software, you way pass my budget.
I have to admit that I really like the ease of the operating system on my cheap iMAC G5. This is the way a true windows operating system should work. It is very intuitive and the applications are running very smooth. As far as I know, you rarely get any viruses when runing the Apple Platform. I suppose that the number of Apple computers worldwide is not big enough to satisfy the appetite of hackers.
So, I'm at a crossroad again. It's time to upgrade and I'm not sure what I should do. Some of you have always used a PC and probably would tell me to go with a PC again. Some of you have always used a Mac and probably would tell me to go with a Mac again. Some of you certainly have used both platforms and have very valuable experience with both platform. I would appreciate any guidance from you guys in particular. You can post comments herein, send me an email brwyvn@gmail.com , reply on my Facebook or Twitter as well. I am posting this blog on photo-net and hope to get comments there too.
Thank you, you are the best,
Yvon Bourque
20 comments:
Which ever you feel comfortable working with. I personally prefer Mac.
วลัญช์ ,
Whydio you prefer Mac? Better resolution, faster, easier to use? Why?
Whatever spec you can get with a Mac by default, is available on pc, including the expensive screens.
I guess what it comes down to is, do you want Mac OS or Windows 7. What would you be more comfier using, are you happy with the cost involved with going Mac?
I'm running Win7 here, quite happy with it and will continue with it.
Mac maybe nice, but the outlay is far too much in my mind.
Hi
I use mac and windows at work and mac and windows at home. I used mac since the mac plus in 1984 and avoided windows until about 2003. Since then, I use both. Everyone has an opinion on what's wrong with windows, but mac has better marketing and is currently trendy with the cafe latte crowd.
Things to watch out for on mac that would affect a photographer:
* ZERO quality backup applications. Time-machine is unreliable and it's not uncommon for the data sets to become corrupt with no warning. It also doesn't work on networks or allow you any control. There's also no way to confirm files are being backed up as there's no log. Retrospect is poorly implemented on mac and not an alternative.
* Networking and sharing documents can be problematic due to "permissions".
* Lots of invisible files - these get copied onto cds and archive files, when you open them on windows they all appear.
* iphoto takes control of the photo folder and creates lots of thumbnails and an obscure folder structure that makes finding and backing up your photos difficult. iphoto cds don't work at the local photo lab either, as it copies this folder structure and thumbnail files to the cd.
* Picassa is excellent on mac, but only supports intel macs.
Basically, I'm happy to use the mac for the internet and general office documents, but I run retrospect for backing up my networks from the pc and if I'm sending files or cds I make them on my pc.
There is no absolute answer to your question. Is Pentax better than Nikon? It just comes down to personal preference.
I use both at work and at home and find the Windows experience intrusive. I'm always annoyed. That is my deciding factor, but may not be yours.
You can buy a cheaper PC, but it will be cheaper not less expensive. If you spec out equivalent desktops they will run about the same as an Apple. Generally, don't buy RAM from Apple. Third party modules are the spec as Apple's and the same price as PC modules. ramjet.com is a good source.
Except for RAM, PC's are easier, much easier to upgrade than an iMac. That said, I've never needed to upgrade an iMac.
Ignore Clalum Chambers comment about Mac backup software. He's right about Time Machine being less than ideal but there are numerous dependable and easy backup programs.
I forgot to mention one major factor in favor of Macs, malware. To-date there are no Mac viruses or spyware. There's also no need to worry about the registry.
Check out a Mac Mini. Much less expensive, yet all the Mac goodness. Some years ago, I switched to Macs from Windows at the urging of some friends who were big Mac enthusiasts. I had teased them for years, but I've never regretted the switch. Now when friends ask me to help them with their Windows machines, I cringe because with the Mac, I find it easier to simply get things done & do not have to worry about so many technical details & things not working like they're supposed to, etc.
That being said, it's not like you can't get things done on Windows machines ...
I've been an Apple man since 2003. I love the Apple apps for photography. Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, iPhoto, etc. Some are available on Windows, but everything seems to work better on a Mac IMO.
Personally, I love the screens that come with the iMacs. They are gorgeous with amazing resolution. I have a 20" iMac from 2003, and it still kicks ass today. I do all my processing on it.
As far as the rest of the story goes, Macs have everything, if not more, than Windows does at this point. And usually they do it better, too. Reading the other comments, I'm also inclined to disagree with Mr. Chalmers.
iPhoto works great as a library and for organizing albums, but keeps it all in a single Library file. You don't ever need to go searching for them. If you need to create a CD, or get individual photo filesjust drag them out of iPhoto onto your desktop or whatever device you have and it makes a quick copy for you, leaving your original in the library.
Anyway, it comes down to preference. I personally prefer the layouts and options of the Mac programs. It's clear they were designed for and by people who do production and design.
OSX is also incredibly simple to use.
The Adobe Suite functions basically the same on both platforms. There's no need to think that Photoshop or Lightroom is better on a Mac than a PC or vise verse. One benefit of a Mac is that they have relatively high hardware quality standards. PC's can be all over the place especially if you are shopping for the cheapest price. But if you get a good one, you'll essentially be getting nearly identical hardware. I recently built a computer with hardware specs very similar to a high end Mac tower for 1/3 the cost. Works wonderfully.
For me Macs aren't worth the extra cost. I simply don't get an extra $2000-$3000 dollars of productivity, or profit-making ability out of a Mac. I've never heard anyone say "That's a great photo, I'll bet it was edited on a Mac/PC." The end results are the same, you just need to decide how to get there. For me it's with my trusty PC.
I was at a cross roads too..I wanted a coke but only saw a pepsi. I was about to walk away but then I bit and I must so I did not regret drinking the Pepsi.
What ever works use it.
Try and install the current Mac OS on your existing mac.
Doesn't work, does it?
This is poor backwards compatibility (a PENTAX quality that I admire) and happens with the applications as well.
For me, it's happened many times, so it's not a one off.
System 4 to 6 broke my 50% of apps.
System 7 to 9 ditto
System 9 to 10.1 was a nightmare and cost thousands per seat.
10.5 to 10.6 broke some 32 bit apps.
Just the expensive ones.
Printers and peripherals get short shrift on mac as well, rarely working smoothly from one system to the next.
We have to keep a 'museum' of system 7, 9 and 10.3 macs running in order to access older file formats as the applications don't install on newer machines.
I'd bet that the guys who are happy with their mac are home users and don't try networking or using professional printers. That's fine, I'm just telling my experience as an ex-mac tragic.
Stick with Mac. I moved from PC in March 2007 after having been a PC user since 1984! My wife persuaded me to try it. Will never look back. Word and Excel and Powerpoint are all completely compatible, Lightroom is quicker on my 4 year old Mac (I have it on my two year old PC in the office so am in a position to make a direct and regular comparison) - there is really nothing to be said in favor of PC over Mac in my opinion.
Just as there is nothing to be said in favor of Canon or Nikon over Pentax!! :-))
Hope this is a help!
All the best and keep on keeping us entertained and informed.
When I used windows my life was sad.
I don't think a mac or a pc are that different, if you would spend the money you would pay for a mac on a pc their wouldn't be much difference.
Both operating systems are stable enough, I did see a great improvement when I switched to win7-64bit, and the corresponding lightroom, photoshop.
Backwards compatibility is a bit better with windows but because we mostly use new programm thats not an issue.
Than upgrading a mac to a newer operating system is not always possible, but would you want to have a pc from 8 years back running windows 7 (I wouldn't).
So for me the only difference is the pricing, you can get pc's cheaper but then they will be inferior to the mac, or you can get better pc's and they'll be in the price range of the mac.
It's like the question, is a nikon D7000 better than a pentax K5, its not the camera its he one behind it and the time they want to invest in it to get the desired results
Bottom line they are both equal.
Thank you everyone for your comments, either here, by email, or Twitter and Facebook as well as on Photo-net. I have learned a lot about the Imac platform from your comments. In the end, although I do like the looks of Apple better, I am going to stick with the PC and will be upgrading to the Dell Studio XPS 9100 Desktop, Intel® Core™ i7, 8GB RAM, 1T Hard Disc, nVIDIA, etc. The $300.00 iMac I purchased for trial will go to mu wife for emails and family photo album, all JPEG files.
Again, Thank you for all your comments.
Looks like I'm too late to the party. While Callum's experiences are accurate, they are Callum's experiences and not the norm. Though his first post does contain a lot of FUD. There is a log of TM backups and it is dead easy to verify.
Glad you finally made a decision, but I'll be interested to see where you are in 5 years' time. My iMac is just over 4 years old now and the only thing I wish different about it is more RAM, but it is maxed out at only 3 GB. I run Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop without any trouble. Latest versions too. I know people who run older Macs still, too, and one who upgraded last year to the (4 year old) model I have.
But the most telling metric I know is this. I know exactly two people who have switched to Mac and then switched back. One of them is an idiot anyway, the other I haven't figured out. I do know a LOT of people who have switched to Mac and never gone back. Including myself. It's not perfect. Far from it. But I find it consistently a better experience.
I meant to say - seeing you have a Mac in the house now - see how that goes for general use and then consider it can do everything the PC can. If your wife has an open mind I bet she'll love it.
I switched to an iMac about three years ago and haven't looked back. The screen is absolutely outstanding for editing and displaying photographs. The operating system is almost flawless. So much better than the pc. I still have an HP Laptop running Vista. I hate the thing. Always having to worry about virus and Malaware hits and the computer locks up just as good as the other PCs that I have used over the years. My next laptop will probably be an iPad. Just waiting for the next iPad version hoping that it will hold more memory, better resolution and have USB and HDMI ports.
Whatever platform you need to work with - just one comment about the cost of a Mac. They keep their value far better than PCs, it is not unusual to get more than half the original outlay back on eBay after 4 years. Try that with a PC at the same specs.
Hello, maybe I am a bit too late, but here are some thoughts:
COST
Macs keep their value very well and are easy to resell. Personally, I update every year - I have a spreadsheet and the biggest loss incurred was less than 25% of the original purchase value. Granted, to achieve this you need to follow closely what is happening on the market and preferably live in some bigger city where used equipment is easier to get rid of. This also means reselling every year and reinstalling the software. With an external HDD most of this isn't really problematic, but still.
Mac pricing - Apple prices its products only once - at their release. It is very rare that they do not follow this rule. They change models on average every year. So I suggest to not compare an Apple product that has been on the market for 11 months to most PC vendors. This would be a very skewed picture.
Depending on the company you can easily spend more on PC than Mac, think Sony for example. The MacPro being expensive is ridiculous. It has server grade components and it is a very good machine. At its release it was one of the cheaper workstations out there. Remember that this kind of power is complete overkill for photography purposes. The Imac is a great buy, especially considering the 27" IPS panel inside. The same panel is used inside Dell's 27" Ultrasharp monitor which costs 1000$ alone.(problem with the iMacs is the glass in front of the screen - very reflective; you can adjust your lighting to address this, but it can be a bit of a hassle)
RELIABILITY
Macs are very reliable. Same as Asus, Sony, etc. What the others do not have though is Apple's customer support. You won't get better.
Less malware to worry about too.
MACOS
I've tried everything under the sun already and MacOS is the best choice for me. Some may argue that Windows 7 is great and it is, but imho it is not as good as MacOS. This, btw, I think is the most important question - which fits you better? And don't forget how long it took Microsoft to come up with something like Win7.
Post a Comment