Is PS on a Mac better than PS on a PC?

Spooky

Spooky

Messages
1,556
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
Yes
Here, in brief, is the situation...

We are about to have our computers upgraded at school (in the Photography dept.) At the moment we use iMacs and I am suggesting that we switch to PCs and with the money saved invest in bigger and better monitors, and 20 licenses for PS CS5 - we currently run CS

This has met with approval from our IT dept. but one of the senior managers is digging his heels in and insisting we stick with macs 'because they look good!' He also claims that there is 'more functionality in PS on a Mac than there is on a PC'.

I am pretty confident this statement is rubbish as I use PS on both Mac and PC platforms and have never encountered anything that one version could do that the other couldn't.

Anyhow, before I go into battle, I first of all wanted to check my theory (there is no difference) but also wanted to source opinions - one argument that has been put forward is that we will be disadvantaging students if we go down the PC route because 'everyone in the industry uses macs' - again my experience says this is not true.

Thoughts, as ever, are always appreciated

Cheers

Spooky
 
As someone who has recently purchased a Mac and use both Mac and Windows PC, I would get rid of my PCs immediately if it wasn't for the fact that I have some software that I can't run on Mac and don't wish to purchase new.

As soon as I stop using the Windows programs, I will get rid of the PCs and go totally Mac - which will include purchasing a laptop.

It's not that there are more features in PS on a Mac, but it's just that the Mac works much better generally.
 
Gosh... I'd be inside for murder if I worked where you do ;)

AFAIK, there is no difference between Mac and Windows. They both work in the same way, just one uses a control key, the other a command key as keyboard modifiers! There's heaps of difference between CS and CS5 though ;) Especially the ability to run 64bit (and so access lots of memory...).

For the PC, get as good a processor as you can - a second gen i7-2600 is ideal, with 8G+ memory (and Win 7 64bit). Sorted...
 
The answer to the question is no. And that is from someone who has just switched from PC to Mac. ;)
 
My view is that functionality is more or less the same, but one thing to take into consideration that in 'saving money' are you going to buy cheapo monitors, which will affect the output on screen. I think it is largely true that the graphics industry uses Macs but if you are in a secondary school its unlikely that kids are going to go from there into a job in the industry, so they will gain experience on macs as uni or college.

I think your senior manager is right on 'looks' but although Macs are designed for looks, the functionality argument doesn't hold water.

BTW I use Mac at home and PC at work ...
 
I was a PC PS user for many years but switched over to the Mac four years ago.

PS on my PC ran ok but would crash on occasion and more often than not, struggle with the RAM when working on large files.

Now on my iMac, PS runs so smoothly that it has never crashed and it handles the large files without any problems at all.

So speaking from experience I would strongly recommend the school goes with the Mac, the new iMacs are amazing and will work beautifully for so many applications!

Hope that helps!
 
stevejh said:
I was a PC PS user for many years but switched over to the Mac four years ago.

PS on my PC ran ok but would crash on occasion and more often than not, struggle with the RAM when working on large files.

Now on my iMac, PS runs so smoothly that it has never crashed and it handles the large files without any problems at all.

So speaking from experience I would strongly recommend the school goes with the Mac, the new iMacs are amazing and will work beautifully for so many applications!
Click to expand...
And the spec on the PC vs iMac were the same? :shrug: A mac is a high end PC running OSX. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't contain any pixie dust that makes it inherently better....

Let me put it another way:

I'll tell you now, PS runs perfectly smoothly on my PC (and runs quicker than on your iMac because I have a faster PC than any iMac out there ;)) and it has never crashed and it handles all the files I run on it without any problems at all. I would strongly recommend Windows PCs as they are amazing and will work beautifully for so many applications!

Sounds a tad evangelical and based on feelings rather than facts - don't you think?

BTW, it's the PC that leads the way with Adobe. Did you know that the first 64-bit implementation of PS was for a PC? The OSX version didn't go 64-bit until CS5 ;)
 
Paul MR said:
A PC can have the edge on a Mac if you are using Photoshop CS5 and need to use certain filters (Running in 32bit) More memory can be allocated than on a mac (Over 1 gig) see:-
http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/404/kb404439.html
Click to expand...
Interesting. I wonder what cobbled CS5 on 32bit mac when it was the other way around on CS4.

Bit of a moot point though as anyone now would surely run 64bit windows...
 
arad85 said:
Interesting. I wonder what cobbled CS5 on 32bit mac when it was the other way around on CS4.

Bit of a moot point though as anyone now would surely run 64bit windows...
Click to expand...
It is because CS4 used Carbon to run, but CS5 uses Cocoa which requires much more memory and less available to the application.
A lot of plug-ins won't work in 64bit, so if you what to use your plug-ins and need the extra memory use CS4.
 
arad85 said:
And the spec on the PC vs iMac were the same? :shrug: A mac is a high end PC running OSX. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't contain any pixie dust that makes it inherently better....

Let me put it another way:

I'll tell you now, PS runs perfectly smoothly on my PC (and runs quicker than on your iMac because I have a faster PC than any iMac out there ;)) and it has never crashed and it handles all the files I run on it without any problems at all. I would strongly recommend Windows PCs as they are amazing and will work beautifully for so many applications!

Sounds a tad evangelical and based on feelings rather than facts - don't you think?

BTW, it's the PC that leads the way with Adobe. Did you know that the first 64-bit implementation of PS was for a PC? The OSX version didn't go 64-bit until CS5 ;)
Click to expand...

:agree:

Most people that move to Macs and think they (in most cases rightly) blow their PC out if the water is because the PC was nothing special. Over the years I have built many PCs with the requirement it has to be able to cope with high end gaming and they have all run PS with ease. On occasions I have had looks from people who obviously think I am mad as I have spent over 50% of the cost of their PC on just the graphics card, sometimes I think I am mad too :bonk:
 
Paul MR said:
It is because CS4 used Carbon to run, but CS5 uses Cocoa which requires much more memory and less available to the application.
A lot of plug-ins won't work in 64bit, so if you what to use your plug-ins and need the extra memory use CS4.
Click to expand...
Thanks - you learn something new every day :)

Good point about the availability of 64bit plugins, but most are getting there now :)
 
Thanks for all the responses, folks. I do feel a bit more empowered now and might even arm myself with a few quotes.

If we go down the PC route I would certainly be asking for decent processors and quality monitors. I may even suggest we go for white finish monitors, white keyboards and mice and see if anyone really notices the difference!

Spooks
 
Iv got a mac now and iv always loved them, but having said that it ****es me off no end when my school gets them, especially because they run windows!!!!!!!!! id have some understanding if they put snowleapord on them but they are purely there to look fancy!
and even if they were running OSX half the people would complain they didnt know how to use them, as a school if your willing to spend 1000 pounds on a computer then it should be very powerful, o and should have up to date software!!!!!!

and thats from an apple fanboy :p

PS you can send them that little rant if you wont, im thinking of sending it to my school (who know owns 3 suites of imacs, one in geography which make no bloody sense, i sort of undertsand in graphics and art, it does look more professional but geography!!!!)

Jack
 
Spooky said:
Thanks for all the responses, folks. I do feel a bit more empowered now and might even arm myself with a few quotes.

If we go down the PC route I would certainly be asking for decent processors and quality monitors. I may even suggest we go for white finish monitors, white keyboards and mice and see if anyone really notices the difference!

Spooks
Click to expand...

ive said that a million times, we could replace our mac pros and macbook pros in the design dept with high end windows based boxes and they wouldnt really know any different. the company would save money over night. except youd lose staff over night because they hate windows and theyre not as "cool" (great reasons i know).
 
The software is the same to all intents and purposes....

However, from a very recent converter from Pc to Mac I would happily recommend anyone else to do the same. Mac's are fantastic
 
A big difference with OSX is ofcourse that a 32bit OSX kernel can run 64bit apps and a 64bit kernel can run 32bit apps no problem. The 2Gb limit that Adobe has listed in their FAQ just doesn't make any sense, and really has never been a limiting factor on PS on OSX...

Anyway, functionality wise there is no difference between the versions ofcourse. But that is not to say that there are no other elements that come into play for the overall package. You can ignore that ofcourse if you only use them as PS terminals....

Don't forget to calculate the total cost of ownership, generally in a corporate environment the capital purchase price only accounts for about 7% of the total cost of ownership across its lifetime.
 
Most people that switch from a pc to MAC and claim that the MAC is better usually switch from a low end pc to a high end MAC. If you compare a pc and a MAC with the same spec you probably won't notice any difference.

Others complain that pcs are prone to viruses. I have owned pcs for nearly 15 years and have never had problems with viruses. If you are properly protected you should not experience any problems.

Functionality wise there is no difference in how the software functions on both platforms. In fact I think the pc will be easier for the students to use because the majority will pcs at home. I remember going into the media department at university and didn't have a clue what to do or even how to launch an application on the MAC. It took me a quite some time to be comfortable with the MAC environment. The time I spent trying to learn how to use the MAC could have been spent doing something useful elsewhere. I remember being so ****ed off because I had to have different files for different environments.

The other thing to consider is the cost of upgrading and support for the hardware. Support for the MAC will be more expensive. Have a look at how much it will cost to upgrade memory on the pc and compare that against the cost of upgrading memory on the mac.
 
Last edited:
another thing for the OP's argument..

is the school running a windows network and server platform? is so presumably they have something like extremez-ip or other similar software? theres another cost that can go. plus you still have the inherit issues with OSX on a windows network (file sharing issues such as locks not working correctly, corrupted files etc) to name a few.
 
dejongj said:
A big difference with OSX is ofcourse that a 32bit OSX kernel can run 64bit apps and a 64bit kernel can run 32bit apps no problem. The 2Gb limit that Adobe has listed in their FAQ just doesn't make any sense, and really has never been a limiting factor on PS on OSX...
Click to expand...
A 32 bit *nix kernel can only access ~3Gb of memory without some method of swapping (I think it's 1G that is reserved for real mode kernel access) . You can always page memory in and out (it's how the original DOS system used more than 640k of memory) but this is always slower than accessing it without paging. If a 32 bit kernel can access more than a 4G address space and thus allow a 64 bit application access more than ~3G of physical memory directly, it's not a 32 bit kernel ;)
 
arad85 said:
A 32 bit *nix kernel can only access ~3Gb of memory without some method of swapping (I think it's 1G that is reserved for real mode kernel access) . You can always page memory in and out (it's how the original DOS system used more than 640k of memory) but this is always slower than accessing it without paging. If a 32 bit kernel can access more than a 4G address space and thus allow a 64 bit application access more than ~3G of physical memory directly, it's not a 32 bit kernel ;)
Click to expand...

You've taken the generic approach, OSX separates out the kernel vs application address space, they do not have to reside in the same space. Hence even if both were 32bit they could still utilise 8Gb as it gets partitioned in 4Gb maximum. This is one of the reasons where the OSX kernel is a little bit different especially compared to the not so real nix linux and can run 64bit apps on a 32bit kernel without a problem. I'm not one hundred percent certain but iirc it is down to the long mode operation which would alienate 16bit apps but that is not a legacy problem OSX has.
 
ziggy©;3767352 said:
The other thing to consider is the cost of upgrading and support for the hardware. Support for the MAC will be more expensive. Have a look at how much it will cost to upgrade memory on the pc and compare that against the cost of upgrading memory on the mac.
Click to expand...

LOL Where do you get that from? And regarding the memory just order it of crucial or the likes like you would do with a PC, that is if a school really does those kind of things...:thinking:
 
ziggy©;3767352 said:
The other thing to consider is the cost of upgrading and support for the hardware. Support for the MAC will be more expensive. Have a look at how much it will cost to upgrade memory on the pc and compare that against the cost of upgrading memory on the mac.
Click to expand...

The memory is exactly the same as PC memory, and is only expensive if you pay Apple to upgrade it for you.

Luckily HDDs and RAM are usergradeable parts and won't void the warranty if you replace them yourself.
 
Last edited:
I'd go PC instantly, but I can see the attraction for the manager to go with macs as for a school that instantly gives it more credibility as a department, unfortunately.

OS makes very little difference to me as I run my entire electronic life pretty much in Adobe apps and in web browsers - so the cheaper, more open option that can just so happen to run whatever game I feel like playing wins it for me. If I was buying a laptop I'd probably buy a mac as there aren't many good PC photography options without spending mac money anyway, but desktops I will always be a windows guy.

Now if only people bothered making good looking pc monitors with decent panels...
 
Ksanti said:
Now if only people bothered making good looking pc monitors with decent panels...
Click to expand...

I use a Dell 3008WFP with my MacPro :D it is stunning when calibrated, and the brushed alu bezel is not too bad either...
 
redddraggon said:
The memory is exactly the same as PC memory, and is only expensive if you pay Apple to upgrade it for you.

Luckily HDDs and RAM are usergradeable parts and won't void the warranty if you replace them yourselfs.
Click to expand...

I was referring to MAC support in general. The memory is just a general example.
 
ziggy©;3767739 said:
I was referring to MAC support in general. The memory is just a general example.
Click to expand...

Like the no quibbles AppleCare for hardware ;) Or have you got any actual examples?
 
dejongj said:
You've taken the generic approach, OSX separates out the kernel vs application address space, they do not have to reside in the same space.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're on about here, but kernel space in a generic *nix kernel doesn't reside in the same space as the user address space. It is in the same 4G space, but 1G is dedicated to kernel addressing - once you go into kernel address space, you are free from virtual addressing and access memory directly.

dejongj said:
Hence even if both were 32bit they could still utilise 8Gb as it gets partitioned in 4Gb maximum.
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're on about here. A 32 bit kernel uses 4 byte integers to address memory. Without some manipulation of these variables, the kernel can't access more than 4G (1G real, 3G virtual) address space. This is what a 32 bit kernel does by definition... Any manipulation of the address space implies paging and indirection, which will slow down memory accesses. If it can deal with more than 3G real, it's more than a 32 bit OS natively. Have a read through: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X and you'll see that Snow Leopard was the first to introduce anything more than a 32 bit address system.
 
The thing is in my experience, macs do tend to just work better without so much support from the user or IT department. Probably because the company that makes the OS controls exactly what its going to run on, but for me that type of solution is so elegant and practical that its worth any perceived extra cost at the start. Most people who defend PCs know a lot about them and are happy to solve problems and keep them running.

The thing to ask yourself is am I prepared to make this computer work or do I want something that just works out of the box. I know that will upset the IT crowd but its true, I have a friend who runs the Unix network at a large university, he will tell you the same thing. He hates getting asked for help fixing friends and families computer problems all the time and will try to convince them to get a mac so they will leave him alone.
 
I'm not certain whether we are in violent agreement :) Or have a mis understanding. The one fact that I know is that my Mac Pro that used to run OSX 10.4 (Tiger) had 8Gb RAM and all of it was being used. However any one app could not use more than 4Gb of RAM. But you could most definitely use all of it without having to resort to excessive paging as you suggest.
 
Once you start configuring your PCs to the same spec as the Macs (HW & SW) you will hardly be saving any money, if at all, especially with educational discounts.

I never had any problems with corrupt files etc, as has been mentioned, running Macs on a Windows network. User accounts work, shares work, network printing works etc etc. People who say they don't just haven't configured everything right. I mention this from a standpoint of having run multiple mac suites on multiple windows networks on multiple sites (both in the private and educational sectors).
 
dejongj said:
I'm not certain whether we are in violent agreement :) Or have a mis understanding. The one fact that I know is that my Mac Pro that used to run OSX 10.4 (Tiger) had 8Gb RAM and all of it was being used. However any one app could not use more than 4Gb of RAM. But you could most definitely use all of it without having to resort to excessive paging as you suggest.
Click to expand...
Ahh got you. That'll be using PAE support (as linked to in the previous post). Thought you were saying that you could access more than 4G from a single process.... You can't which is why the 2.1G limit from Adobe makes sense ;)
 
lensflair said:
The thing is in my experience, macs do tend to just work better without so much support from the user or IT department.
Click to expand...

supporting both, i beg to differ.

Ploddles said:
I never had any problems with corrupt files etc, as has been mentioned, running Macs on a Windows network. User accounts work, shares work, network printing works etc etc. People who say they don't just haven't configured everything right. I mention this from a standpoint of having run multiple mac suites on multiple windows networks on multiple sites (both in the private and educational sectors).
Click to expand...

even with AFP shares set up, macs on a windows network suck. fact.
 
If the option is;

Apple - worse monitors and old version of Photoshop

versus

PC - better quality monitor & CS5

Surely the answer must be go down the PC route isn't it?

The argument about the 'industry' uses Macs just doesn't wash. The main issue is the software being used. It certainly won't take long for any kid to make the transition if they ever moved to the pro world. Things will have moved on massively by then in any event.

I also don't really buy this 'I moved from a PC to a Mac and everything is now perfect' argument.

If someone moved from a 4 year old Mac to a new £1000 PC they would see the same improvement.
 
neil_g said:
even with AFP shares set up, macs on a windows network suck. fact.
Click to expand...

Then don't use AFP. It is not a 'fact', what is a fact is that you have obviously not set it up right. Refer to my previous statement about it being set up correctly. SMB works a treat.
 
E17phil said:
I also don't really buy this 'I moved from a PC to a Mac and everything is now perfect' argument.

If someone moved from a 4 year old Mac to a new £1000 PC they would see the same improvement.
Click to expand...


well actually thats not entirely true, i moved form a higher specked newer laptop (and a similar aged and specked desktop) to to an older, second hand, slightly under specked mac, adn my relationship with my computer has massively improved, i dont think its the machine, and i only think its partly about the OS, for me i wake up and see my nice shiny mac sitting there and i feel a bit warm inside, and when over people see it there impressed by it.

I know its lame and i know it shouldn't make a difference but it does, for my £600 i could have bought a better brand new windows laptop, i would like it,no doubt, but i wouldn't love it and thats why i like macs

O and before you say it, i know im a fan boy, but i completely agree that macs are not practical for most school (as my angry rant sates earlier)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top