Mac or PC?

rookies

rookies

Messages
8,063
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
I am currently a Mac User but some people keep telling me to go down the PC route what should i do?
 
Daddy or Chips?

If you're currently a mac user then I'd stay with Mac, you'd have to rebuy all your software if you switched (unless you use open source software).

The only reason I could see for changing now would be if you're a frequent upgrader and you're finding the cost of propitiary Apple hardware too hard on the wallet.
 
Are you a Mac or Pc user?

To be honest i quite like the Mac side Aperture is a great software to use. I dont upgrade really my Macbook Pro is 2 years old and am well happy with it
 
As I do want a desktop machine and not sure wether to get a Mac or Pc but like what been said I wont be able to put my software on the PC. But what puts me off is the price of a iMac but I beleive they are solid and good
 
I assume you mean a Windows PC? Why on earth would you want to downgrade?

Do you feel you are missing something by not having to fight viruses and other malware?

I've never used a Mac but I dropped Windows about 18 months ago and now use FreeBSD (Unix) exclusively (used to dual boot before) and, TBH, I've yet to find anything I can't do that I could under Windows. If I had the money though I'd be getting a Mac Mini.

There have been many people on various forums I'm on who've switched to Macs and, without exception, their comments have been along the lines of "it's fantastic; wish I'd switched years ago" which I think tells you all you need to know (y)
 
Why not upgrade the OS and get Bootcamp so you can run both on your Mac, I know that means buying 2 new OSs but you get the best of both worlds or actually you could get VMware Fusion and run Windows on top.
 
What reason to these people give for going down the PC route?

I can't think of anything you can't do on a Mac. Been a mac user for about 6 years, but still use a PC at work... can't wait to get home to my mac at the end of every day. :)
 
I've just changed from PC to Mac. Both have their strong points, but I'm enjoying the Mac experience so far. How many people do you hear going from PC to Mac - quite a lot. How many do you hear going the other way?
 
Ok If I went for a Mac which iMac should I go for, for photography of course :) Cant afford to go down the Mac Pro route thou....

Wonder if there any new release coming out?
 
well im a pc user and i prefer the look of a mac tbh-the screen resolution is great and colours look good and i have seen many a pro studio using mac instead of pc so i think maybe they have the advantage tbh
 
rookies said:
Ok If I went for a Mac which iMac should I go for, for photography of course :) Cant afford to go down the Mac Pro route thou....

Wonder if there any new release coming out?
Click to expand...

From what I understand the screen on the 24" is MUCH better than on the smaller one, something to do with the amount of colours...
 
Craikeybaby said:
From what I understand the screen on the 24" is MUCH better than on the smaller one, something to do with the amount of colours...
Click to expand...

its also an extra £400.

The entry level iMac with 20" screen is plenty.

Or.......

If you have a screen, buy the mac Mini £399/£499 depending what spec you want.
 
Have a read of this, the screen on the 20" is a TN panel, whereas the screen on the 24" is an IPS panel, that is a big difference.
 
Craikeybaby said:
Have a read of this, the screen on the 20" is a TN panel, whereas the screen on the 24" is an IPS panel, that is a big difference.
Click to expand...

I'm shocked by that.

Looks like a bit of a slap in the face for the people that have supported macs for many years! (graphics, photo editors etc)

I'll stick with my trusty old Silicon Graphics 1600SW!
 
I don't think after owning a mac for so long that I could ever use a PC of my own accord
 
I picked up a quad core PC the other day for £285 with 4GB ram and I think a 400GB HD with vista. I don't think you could get a mac dust cover for that price. Will last a few years I suspect, practically free computing...bit of a no brainer really.
 
I have a mac mini downstairs but use a pc upstairs for my photo editing. The reason I stayed with a pc was because it was far far cheaper to build a fast pc than it was to buy the Mac and its also easy to upgrade. When this pc dies I may replace it with an iMac though as I much prefer the mac way of life - and depite the fact I do NOTHING on the pc other than photo editing and very ligth web surfing its still starting to show problems with crashing every once in a while or need rebooting for no real reason!
 
walls said:
I picked up a quad core PC the other day for £285 with 4GB ram and I think a 400GB HD with vista. I don't think you could get a mac dust cover for that price. Will last a few years I suspect, practically free computing...bit of a no brainer really.
Click to expand...

so what your saying is cheap is best...:wacky:

might sell my d300 and buy a coolpix then:bonk:
 
Monkey said:
so what your saying is cheap is best...:wacky:

might sell my d300 and buy a coolpix then:bonk:
Click to expand...

of course you know that's not what i'm saying, but perhaps in your situation, you should :clap: I ran my cheapy through that photoshop speedtest as this is generally the software we use. It runs it in around 25 seconds...give me the price of a mac that does it around that speed as I've just specced a similar one at the apple store for £1779...now that's funny..or stupidity :D

but, if I was a graphic designer there are two things I would need - thick black rimmed glasses and an apple mac otherwise my friends may not come around for fruit tea :wacky:
 
walls said:
of course you know that's not what i'm saying, but perhaps in your situation, you should :clap:
Click to expand...

not quite sure what you meant by that, why in my situation, i have no problem spending the money on proper kit.

And i aint saying your quad core pc is ****, its windows thats ****, not the hardware.
 
walls said:
I picked up a quad core PC the other day for £285 with 4GB ram and I think a 400GB HD with vista..
Click to expand...
Where from? Link?

Monkey said:
not quite sure what you meant by that, why in my situation, i have no problem spending the money on proper kit.

And i aint saying your quad core pc is ****, its windows thats ****, not the hardware.
Click to expand...

Well, some of the h/w is **** because the manufacturers make it to work on Windows which means that, to get the WHQL certification they use a Windows reference platform - great if that's what you machine is but if it isn't then you may have problems.

Doing price/performance comparisons between Macs and PCs is a pointless exercise, you're comparing apples and oranges. Macs are a proprietary platform whereas PCs aren't (although M$ seems to think it owns the platform).

Of course, PCs started life as an IBM proprietary platform but because a team (that eventually became Compaq) managed to clone the PC BIOS in clean-room conditions (thus giving IBM no legal redress for patent or IP infringement) it then became, effectively, an open platform and, unfortunately for us, we have IBM to thank for giving M$ the chance to become the dominant OS supplier as they acceded to Gates' demands for a clause in the contract to supply DOS to IBM that allowed M$ to also sell it direct to end users - IBM figured that they would only be able to sell to IBM customers and PC-DOS was a better OS anyway so didn't see it as a threat.
 
Myself im a Windows person.

But at school in my Media lessons im going to have to get used to iMacs. I see the idea of having them as there just great for design and you dont have the issues of virus's etc...

But its just the cost of upgrading and stuff. Like most people have said get a Mac and bootcamp and buy a Windows OS.

The only way to see what you like more.
 
parish said:
Where from? Link?
Click to expand...

have a look in tescos :D I think it was on their oline direct webpage too but I was able to use a £15 voucher instore

price comparisons are exactly what you do when you're looking for a new pooter. I have a machine that can do the same job for around about £1500 less.
 
walls said:
have a look in tescos :D I think it was on their oline direct webpage too but I was able to use a £15 voucher instore
Click to expand...

Ta (y)

walls said:
price comparisons are exactly what you do when you're looking for a new pooter. I have a machine that can do the same job for around about £1500 less.
Click to expand...

True, but the point I was making is that the two aren't comparable - except that they are both computers. Using the D300 vs. Coolpix that someone mentioned above, if you'd buy a PC simply because it's cheaper than a Mac then why not buy a Coolpix instead of a D300? after all, they both take photographs.
 
parish said:
True, but the point I was making is that the two aren't comparable - except that they are both computers. Using the D300 vs. Coolpix that someone mentioned above, if you'd buy a PC simply because it's cheaper than a Mac then why not buy a Coolpix instead of a D300? after all, they both take photographs.
Click to expand...

they do the exactly the same job though - they run photoshop/lightroom only a windows based PC does it as well for much less money.
 
i think i may have lost the point of the actual thread now!!!!!!!

We all know a pc is much much cheaper than a mac - and will run photoshop

We all know a coolpix is cheaper than a pro slr - and will take photographs

We all know if you put a 2 litre turbo engine in a vauxhall nova it will be faster than a ferrari 355 0-60.

BUT its not always about the cheapest way to get a result, its a bout the best way to get a result.

Macs run better and more reliably than pc's
DSLR's take better pictures than compacts
And ferraris drive alot better than nova's

I can say this because ive done all 3, i would never buy a pc again, im not selling my D300, and i wont be putting a 2.0 litre engine in a nova ( even *** i cant afford a ferrari)
 
walls said:
they do the exactly the same job though - they run photoshop/lightroom only a windows based PC does it as well for much less money.
Click to expand...

NO......

OK it runs it, and your quad core runs faster than alot of the mac core2duo's because it has double the cores in the CPU... But it doesnt run it as well.

Windows is unstable and thats why people pay more for mac computers, because they wake up one morning and decide they should buy a proper computer and ditch all the hassle you get from trying to run cheap.
 
lets not get heated folks. its only a compter...

i use a pc at work, have a laptop pc, and a mac. best of both worlds on tap for me.
 
Monkey said:
NO......

OK it runs it, and your quad core runs faster than alot of the mac core2duo's because it has double the cores in the CPU... But it doesnt run it as well.

Windows is unstable and thats why people pay more for mac computers, because they wake up one morning and decide they should buy a proper computer and ditch all the hassle you get from trying to run cheap.
Click to expand...

I can count the time on one hand XP has crashed, Vista has never crashed...so, tell me, why doesn't a windows based machine run photoshop as well as a mac?

I think you don't have a point at all.
 
if i didnt have a point, macs wouldnt sell for so much more money than the equavalent pc, and since the release of vista the sales of macs has been shooting up and up.

I dont need to justify my point as i used a pc for 16 years, now id never buy another.

i have experience of both, and in my opinion, macs are the more superior, if you dont agree thats fine, we all are allowed an opinion.
 
Monkey said:
if i didnt have a point, macs wouldnt sell for so much more money than the equavalent pc, and since the release of vista the sales of macs has been shooting up and up.

I dont need to justify my point as i used a pc for 16 years, now id never buy another.

i have experience of both, and in my opinion, macs are the more superior, if you dont agree thats fine, we all are allowed an opinion.
Click to expand...

XP isn't inherently unstable, neither is Vista. Adobe I would think makes sure its software runs perfectly well on all platforms. For the equivalent spec, a windows based PC is cheaper by a substantial margin = you have no point.

I think I may go and buy a dyson, because on the advert it says they go around corners...not that i've ever had trouble getting my henry to go around corners..but still, they also come in nice colours too.
 
walls said:
XP isn't inherently unstable, neither is Vista.
Click to expand...

But XP at least (and probably Vista too given M$'s track record) is inherently insecure. Plus, when it does go mammaries skyward it can be a major pain to fix especially if the GUI stops working as you can't get unrestricted access to the OS - like my daughter's XP box that I'm trying to fix - without resorting to an In-place upgrade to reinstall XP :bang: - which seems to die when the screensaver is running. Only solution so far is to power-cycle it :bang:
 
never had that kind of issue. I clone any install with acronis image. I do a quick reinstall of the image perhaps every 6-8 months, takes about 15 minutes whilst I go to the loo with a comic. I use free avg and a router hardware firewall. That's it, easy peasy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top