[Sparkle]

Which is the better computer to use today for photography, a new PC or a new Mac?

Please "briefly" opine.

[Tom S.]

Ultimately depends on your end use. If you are into graphics, the Mac seems to rule. Because there are fewer users, they are also less prone to virus attacks. Outside of that, the PC has vastly more programs and options (including operating systems) available.

That's as brief as I can be...

[jogiba]

I build my own PCs so my latest is a 6 core PC with USB 3.0 but I also have a Mac mini with 26" Samsung 1920x1200 monitor that also works with my four 1080p HDTVs to view my 1080p home videos. BTW both have Windows 7 on them to view my 1080p60 home videos using Media Player 12. My 2TB ext HDDs run much faster using USB 3.0 on my 6 core PC than FW800 on my Mac.

[normhead]

Here we go again. Let me expand on briefly... expand on your use of your computer... there is absolutely no need to start in to biased negatives against someone else's system, or name calling.

Mac pros
- Apple always licenses the best monitor technology out there. They basically pay for their own plant. You will always have a first rate monitor on an apple system.

Less maintenance - my school board ran side by side labs. Macs were 1/10 the system maintenance costs than PCs for video editing applications.

Custom software - the free software on your mac is customized for your machine configuration. Apple tests every piece of software on every conceivable Mac configuration that it can run on. They have a very small number of video card and hardware to test, so they configure for each machine.

But for photography an iMac 27 inch i7 quad core is a great thing.

Cons - high price - all those high end components don't come cheap, but if it's any consolation.. the last time I priced out a PC in a similar configuration, it was within 20%, but, you have to know, Apple has the highest profit margins in the industry and has for years.

No bargains, a bargain on a Mac, even on a refurb is a couple hundred dollars off, you'll never see the equivalent of a $300 refurb at yoru Business depot.

If you buy a low end system, you won't be able to upgrade later, by swapping out cards. USB ports, video cards etc. are all hardwired on to the motherboard. You have to pay for the system you want up front. You can expand memory (easy) and hard drives (not so easy) but that's about it.

PCs - you can put together a PC with low end motherboards, processors and sell off parts and get a very functional computer for not very much money. When you buy a refurb PC you usually get a great deal. You can usually pirate your software.. which makes them even cheaper.. if you put a cheap card or drive in your system you didn't really want to save money when you bought it, you can easily swap it out a few months later once you've saved your pennies.

PC's starting price is one third of what the cheapest Mac is.

Cons - you can get some really bad combinations of hardware right off the shelf, machines that are destined to be trouble. Checking the reliability of your system on line is a must. The numbers are out there, check for reliability and customer satisfaction before you buy.

Gamers use PCs. plain and simple, end of discussion

Most PC guys will tell you PCs are just as easy to use. Having used both, I have to agree. I got used to Macs first so they will always be "intuitive" for me. But PC guys trying to use my Mac find it frustrating too. There is a bit of a learning curve to switching. But IMHO, the first system you learned on is always going to seem "intuitive". Since XP, the ease of use in day to day tasks has been pretty similar.

But for photography

An Imac 27 inch i7 (quad core) is a great thing.

[vievetrick]

lol this thread will get ugly soon I'm sure lol it is like Coke or Pepsi - Pentax or Nikon - Red Sox or Yankees - for the record I'm a Mac , Pepsi, Pentax and Red Sox guy :-) switched to a Mac about year and a half ago and very happy ;-)

[normhead]

Any year my Blue Jays aren't in it (which is almost every year) I'm a Boston fan. ANyone but those yanks. It is interesting than in recent years Apple has gone to branding (Apple guys are cool, PC guys are dweebs in business suits) to make their case. I always assume that when a company starts branding, it's because they can't make a meaningful case any other way. As for pepsi and coke... did you know that if in a taste test 50% of the coke drinkers choose pepsi...it means they can't tell the difference?

A better question for PC users is, what off the shelf machines would be good for photography? Most of us, even people like me who have done it before, don't want to build our own systems. With Mac's its easy. Photography uses memory. Buying a machine I wouldn't go with less than 8 gigs, a 1T drive. a 4 core processor, (the high end Apples use 8 cores). My 27 inch monitor is starting to feel small.

I'm sure you can get a similar config in a PC somewhere. I just have no clue what it might be. So that would be my question.... what in the PC world would be an equivalent? It's not about PC or Mac. It's about what systems have the horse power to get the job done without time lost waiting for the machine to perform standard operations, like running a photoshop filter or other day to day operations.

I can tell you from experience, if you try to run Aperture on a Core 2 duo machine.. with less than 512 Mb dedicated video memory, you aren't going to be very happy, very long.

[lithos]

- Apple always licenses the best monitor technology out there. They basically pay for their own plant. You will always have a first rate monitor on an apple system.

Yeah? Who makes the panels?

[boriscleto]

lol this thread will get ugly soon I'm sure lol it is like Coke or Pepsi - Pentax or Nikon - Red Sox or Yankees - for the record I'm a Mac , Pepsi, Pentax and Red Sox guy :-) switched to a Mac about year and a half ago and very happy ;-)

I'm a Mac, soda is poison, Pentax, Yankees guy

[Frogfish]

Some ideas here :

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography/127817-need-compact-s...er-laptop.html

My post from that thread :

Another vote for the MacBook Pro.

After 30 yrs of everything that came before Windows, through every iteration of Windows - I had had enough with crashes, viruses, poor program integration and clashes etc. and decided to give the Apple system a go .... I'll never go back. A delight to use. I know people say this is not about the system but about the computer but you can not differentiate between the two - they are packages, go with a PC and it's Windows or Linux, go with Apple and it's OSX, when you buy one then you are buying into the system - just like choosing a camera system and lenses.

Computer cover - you can always do what I did and buy a composite case to enclose your Mac / PC in, I did and it has been worth every penny (about US$50). The case is still in excellent condition and I know inside is pristine - that wil certainly help with re-sale in a year or two.

I use 4GB memory and it gets by but I use Aperture 3 heavily (or you could use LR3 - both superb products, just depends which one you personally prefer) so I'll be adding more memory very soon to speed it up even more ... however I do always have at least a dozen programs open at any one time !

Other Pros :

Trackpad
Superb screen (never ever noticed reflections - but I don't use it outside except in the odd cafe when I arrive first !) - my wife has a HP and daughter a Sony, at work we have some Dells. The Mac screen blows them all away.
Fantastic program integration.
No noise !
No heat ! My PCs were almost either melting themselves or me.
Battery life (I'm sure some PCs have great battery life too but I really noticed this after switching)
Being able to just close/open the lid anytime and let OSX take care of putting the computer to sleep/waking it up.

n.b. you don't have to use an Apple mouse - I use Logitech and they work great with the MacPro.

Cons
Just 2 USB slots
Wireless is NOT as good as many PCs - this is to do with the location of the receiver/transmitter inside the case where the aluminium interferes with the signal. If you find this an issue it's easy to add a US$20/30 dollar USB booster.

Good luck with whatever you choose !

[Ratmagiclady]

Well, I think there's a lot of merits to both: Macs seem pretty nice under ideal conditions, ie, if you can plunk down a chunk of money and be there. PC's are definitely the choice if you've got to cobble things together and rely on what workarounds-for-not-having-the-latest-of-everything you can get hold of.

There's some things which'd make Mac more to my liking, but I ended up just giving up on really trying to adapt: trying to learn a whole new OS (particularly one with a habit of not telling you what it's doing or where it's putting things ) really ended up proving to be an extended exercise in frustration for me.

[Ira]

I'm a Mac, soda is poison, Pentax, Yankees guy

Me too on all counts--so I drink beer!

[boriscleto]

There's some things which'd make Mac more to my liking, but I ended up just giving up on really trying to adapt: trying to learn a whole new OS (particularly one with a habit of not telling you what it's doing or where it's putting things ) really ended up proving to be an extended exercise in frustration for me.

Any problems you were having with the OS could be solved with 15mins with someone who knows what they are doing. Keeping track of files in OS X is not hard at all and Spotlight makes finding files much easier than Windows search.

[kryss]

Which is the better computer to use today for photography, a new PC or a new Mac?

Please "briefly" opine.

For the type of work you do a PC is more than adequate.

[normhead]

Yeah? Who makes the panels?

I don't know, but what Apple does is, they keep up with all the high end manufacturers, when they find a monitor that meets their specs, they invest in the company, the full cost of the plant, and guarantee them enough business to make the plant profitable. That way they have the screen they want locked up for a few years, without the R&D costs. I don't know who their current supplier is, a few years ago I believe it was Samsung. But long story short, if you like the Apple monitor, they bought the plant where it's manufactured, you pretty much have to buy it from them. (They'll be happy to sell you one.) But I'm also sure those companies sell a similar monitor to everyone else.

[boriscleto]

I can tell you from experience, if you try to run Aperture on a Core 2 duo machine.. with less than 512 Mb dedicated video memory, you aren't going to be very happy, very long.

I run Aperture 3 on a Core 2 duo mini w/ 256MB shared video memory & 2 GB of RAM. It runs, but it has to be the only application running. It also takes about 5 minutes to create a swap file the first time I hit the Adjustments tab.