PC Vs MAC ?

[Axleuk]

OK this thread is a kind of spin off from this one http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/sho...?t=9439&page=2 , but how many people use Macs and how many use PC's ?

For those of you that have made the switch from PC to Mac, how long did it take you to get to grips with the OS and know your way around the system and how well do you feel the Mac is supported in general ?

I understand that for certain areas the Mac is better suited ie: Graphics and the printing world, but does that alone warrant a switch ?

[DannyRaphael]

A number of years ago I switched from Mac to PC. (I was working for Microsoft at the time, so I had little choice.)

Moving from Mac OS to Windows was a pretty big significant transition. Lots more under the covers tuning knobs with Windows. Mac OS was considerably easier to use.

I would expect that today the transition from Windows to Mac OS would not be that difficult. Once you get past terminology differences such as "shortcut" in Windows = "alias" in Mac OS, there's a lot of functional overlap. Where do you think MSFT got the ideas for creating Windows?

Regarding the so-called Mac superiority over Windows from the graphics perspective: From what I've been told, that gap is very narrow (if it exists at all) these days and it's a function of the application software, not the OS. This is one of those topics can evolve into a holy war of debate. Personally I don't care.

Another consideraton: If you've made a significant investment in software, beware that some software companies don't care if you're migrating from one platform to another. If you want the Mac version of Program X, you gotta buy it -- even if you already own the PC version. This would be something to investigate in advance to get a better feel for what the true costs of migration are.

My 2¢...

~Danny~

[Gary Richardson]

Macs are fine till something goes wrong. Prices for Mac parts are considerably higher than those for PCs. Engineers trained in Macs are also much harder to find than those trained in PCs. Lastly, Macs are expensive in comparison to PCs for equivalent processing power. All in all, there really is not too much of a case for Macs, as can be seen by the fact that most people buy PCs.

[MBChamberlain]

Not only are they expensive to replace, but also to buy. (without software like Photoshop included) I built the best grpahics system I could at Apple and found that it would run me about $6,600. I built a comparable system (actually quite a bit faster) for PC for only 2300, and that includes a custom case with a cool dragon on the side. I could add SCSI raid to it and still come out under $4,000. That would leave me with $2,600 to spend on software. (CS Suite here I come!)

Michael

[JustChecking]

PC + other

i use PC at home, and at the faculty i use PC's, SGI's, and SPARK...

i'd like to say that i really hate PC architecture (at the low level), and that Intel got one more "enemy" when they postponed release of 64bits...

but what else can you do when they're cheapest (thus most spread)...

[Chip Hildreth]

...what they all said.

For my personal machines I've migrated back and forth between PCs and Macs; my first PC was an 8088 (PC/XT) and my first Mac was a IIcx. It was on the IIcx that I learned Photoshop... 2.1 I think.

I have always enjoyed USING a Mac more but I strongly prefer MAINTAINING a PC. Mac support issues, while not so frequent, are often just plain intractable; I can fix a PC, usually in short order and since computers only break at really bad times, I now use PCs. Macs are kind of pricey. I don't think Macs are any better than PCs for graphics or pre-press; it's the software apps that matter.

My partner, a graphic designer, had been strictly a Mac user until two years ago when we started our business and now she uses a PC... because that's what we had. She says PCs are just as easy to use for design and print production now that she's used to them.

I gotta say that I just hate the Windows OS because it is so bloated and crosswired but I have to admit that XP doesn't screw up nearly as much as its predecessors. Mozilla Firefox has made it much more tolerable, IE is crap, always has been.

When people ask me about PCs versus Macs I always give the same answer... PCs didn't win the desktop wars because they were better systems...

Chip

[sfxphil]

Mac's

I have been using Mac more than 15 years after a disastrous start on an Apricot computer ( remember those )

I do everything from Photo retouching to spread sheets and can honestly say i have never had a hardware problem in all of the 12 Macs i have owned. Yes they used to be more expensive to buy and peripherals are more expensive. But i am happy to pay more for the extra productivity i gain. Since OSX Macs are even more stable and since installing Panther i have not had a single crash. Never in all my years on the web has a single virus or spy ware / trojan horse ever invaded my network. I would never advise people to switch to Mac's in fact i am against it. The more people who use Macs the more virus will be written for them.

My 2 cents

[Swampy]

I've had my Mac G-5 since last July and not ONE crash, or freeze. My computer is on 16-18 hours a day. I generally push the envelope when working in applications (everything from multimedia to online games, word processing, heavy prepress and graphics usage). Again... NOT ONE CRASH in eight months!!!

MBChamberlain.. How can you claim "I built a comparable system (actually quite a bit faster)..." No way you can say a PC running can run faster than a Mac G-5 dualie with a 64 bit processor. Look at the test results from the speed test forum. Macs rule.

In 15 years of using Macs, I've only had ONE that required bench work (technician) service. It was under warranty, and took one day to get the CPU replaced at a full service Apple store.

Every external device I've ever plugged into a Mac has worked RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX! True plug and play. From scanners to midi keyboard, firewire enabled camera to my Canon ProShot 1(I love how iPhoto just sees it and starts downloading pictures).

The beauty of Apple is that they build the hardware AND the operating system that drives that hardware. And, from the beginning, Apple set standards for software developers so that their software complies with the OS's architecture and EVERYTHING JUST WORKS (and works the same way from program to program).

Expensive? Maybe, but you get what your pay for. Comparing a Mac to a PC is like comparing a Mercedes to a Ford. The Ford will get you from point A to point B, but the Mercedes will do it with style and dependability.

[Gary Richardson]

If you think a Mercedes is reliable, you've obviously never owned one. I have, and they're no more reliable than a Ford, they just have better dealers, so the perception is that they're more reliable. Pretty much like Macs.

[gijohn]

I've owned a few Mercedes cars (still own a 280SL) over the years and have found them very reliable. I'll take one over a Ford (and Mac over a PC) any day. To each his own I guess.

[cardmnal]

I learned to use photoshop and a lot of other graphics programs on both Mac and Windows systems. Neither system has been better than the other in terms of ease of use or in quality. I agree with everyone who has said it is the software and not the OS.

In terms of the OS, since XP came around it has improved the windows operating system, in terms of stability, quite a bit. Yes the windows system is huge but so are todays hard drives so that is not really an issue anymore.

Seeing as how replacing all my software would be more exensive then replacing my computer, I'll be sicking with my windows OS.

[Gary Richardson]

I did'nt say I'd prefer a Ford to a Mercedes, just that they were no more reliable. I'm not trying to criticise people's choice of car (or computer), merely pointing out that we often have a perception of reliability that is not bourne out by the statistical evidence. MTBF (mean time between failures) is not significantly different between Fords and Mercedes, (or PCs and Macs). Personal experience of either can not really be taken into account, as you may have owned atypical examples. I know we all judge by personal experience, but to be fair to either manufacturer, its the statistical evidence that is the more accurate indicator.

[Swampy]

I'm just going to quote from PC Magazine - October 2004....
------
According to the most recent survey of Consumer Reports magazine readers, Apple ranked best for reliability for desktop computers, followed in order by Dell, IBM, and Hewlett-Packard. Apple also received the highest rating for laptop reliability, with Toshiba, Sony, and IBM following suit.

Apple also ranked at the top for technical support with both desktop and laptop users, according to Consumer Reports readers. Following (in order) were Gateway and Dell with desktop support and IBM and Gateway for laptop users.

http://www.infotoday.com/linkup/lud1...sborough.shtml
------

[winwintoo]

My son and his family have a Mustang car, a cute 4X4 truck that they can all ride in, but if they need to haul anything they have to borrow the father-in-law's real 1/2 ton and in winter if my son takes the 4X4 out of town on business, my daughther-in-law borrows my old Dodge Colt for running errands because it's more stable on ice than the Mustang is (although the Mustang makes a better fashion statement at the beach in the summertime)

I use a Mac PowerBook for surfing the web and email and most of my computering (I do a lot since I'm a retired computer programmer) and I can usually (but not always) find software to do what I want to do on the Mac. When I can't find software to accomplish what I want on the Mac, I switch to my WindowsXP laptop and use that instead. I'm thinking of getting a 3rd laptop to run Linux on so I have an even broader range of software available.

I've go lots of software for both computers - some of it works on both - and lots of peripherals - mouses, keyboards, printers, scanners etc. they all work on both. Both computers connect wirelessly to the internet without a hitch using the same router.

I've bought lots of Macs and some of them were lemons so I returned them immediately to the store - my rule is if it doesn't work out of the box, it ain't never gonna work - and while I was still employed, I had several different Windows based machines. I'm a programmer so I'm likely to do things that annoy the computer and I can't honestly say that the Macs were less annoyed than the Windows machines.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a computer is a tool. It's meant to do a job. No one computer is meant to do EVERY job. Use the one that does the jobs that you need done and let other folks use the computer that does the jobs that they need done and lets all try to get along.

Trying to argue that one computer is better than any other is like trying to tell my son's family what kind of car(s) to buy - unless they buy a whole fleet, there will still be times when they will have to borrow or rent extra wheels.



Margaret

[gijohn]

its the statistical evidence that is the more accurate indicator.

ok ..... I'll stick with the statistical evidence and enjoy my computer of choice. <grin>