Do Mac's still have any solid graphical advantage over PC's?
-
I haven't used a Mac since they were called Apples, and even then I didn't do much more on them but play Oregon Trail during computer class in 5th grade. Not only that but I don't own an iPod nor do I have an iTunes account. In other words I'm not up to date on my Mac knowledge.
From what I hear, there was a time when Mac's had some significant advantage for designers. They were better at color representation, or calibration or the software was better integrated - I'm not sure what it was but that seems to be the consensus. And it still seems to be a general consensus among some people I know who are less than technically inclined. As for those who ARE technically inclined and/or work with graphics, there are still a number who also prefer macs, however they tend to have far fewer solid sounding reasons than those who may have old information or misunderstandings.
Anyway, my question is, are there still any real advantages as there may have been several years ago? Can a mac user legitimately look down on a PC user on the basis of having better color representation or some such thing?
-Brodie
-
no, i don't think so.
it's pretty much all the same hardware these days and in most cases, pcs will out-spec the macs in the same price range.
-
It's all down to what you're used to really.
I've tried to switch (to Windows), but I've just missed features mainly to do with workflow like hitting the spacebar for eg when a file, say a jpeg, pdf or audio file is highlighted, is like running the file within a tiny app that gives me a preview of the file- at any size I want it to be. It's instant, and there is no having to open this program or that application. It makes editing photographs for instance very fast. There is probably a similar thing for Windows, but I would probably have to buy it. I don't know.
I've been using Apple computers ever since the Apple IIe, way back in 1980 or so. I've owned a Sinclair ZX80, 81 and a Spectrum. Eventually I bought an Atari STe (which had an interface just like an older Mac). I found an old Mac SE30 in a skip (with a dead HD), about 15 years ago, and have never really used anything else since.
I do know that the output on a pdf from a Mac is at a much higher resolution that from that of Windows- but again that may have changed? I don't know.
I think the worrying trend now is that there really isn't a lot of difference between the two, which isn't very good for consumers.
-
@tfdesign said:
I think the worrying trend now is that there really isn't a lot of difference between the two, which isn't very good for consumers.
I don't agree; while the hardware has many similarities down at the basic function level as you might expect, the overall physical package is usually much nicer with the Apple devices. Just go to a store and compare. Obviously, your taste may vary from mine, which simply means that you are wrong
Open up a Mac Pro and some Dell thing and consider how much more pleasant the Mac would be to stick your delicate fingers into for maintenance jobs. I still have scars from old PC-XT cases.The software seems to me to be very different. I like my Mac because it hardly ever bothers me. It just gets on with doing things mostly the right way. Since I don't do Windows I can only go on the constant tales of woe and requests for help from friends and neighbours as to the pleasures of life with a Windows machine. Perhaps they're all just whiners, who can say.
I used to use Windows, back in the days of 3.0, 3.1, NT4 etc. It was possibly less annoying than the contemporary versions of Mac OS 6/7/8/9 but you certainly could never have called it 'good'. I used to use various forms of unix and later linux etc and they're generally horrible - in fact I'm having to do some work on Red Hat linux right now and I suspect it has actually got worse in the ten years since my last exposure.
The simple fact is that the only actually good OS was RISC OS and that isn't around (in any meaningful sense) anymore. If you can tolerate Windows and think that it saves you a meaningful amount of money then feel free to use it. I won't be joining you any time soon.
-
@tim said:
Obviously, your taste may vary from mine, which simply means that you are wrong
To be frank, and dare I say it, honest, it is precisely this kind of smug and arrogant statement that turns me off cult of Mac (I rarely step inside Mac Stores because they make me feel uneasy). I can fully understand why a statement (ie "you are wrong"), would get someone's back up. You certainly ruffled my feathers!
Of course it isn't the Mac's fault that its user behaves in such a manner, more the kind of people who tend to be drawn to them. A Mac is almost a status symbol that tells others "I have a Mac, therefore I am a creative, forward thinking person". The latter of course, being utter nonsense.The only other reason for buying a Mac of course, is if you are an Apple iPhone developer, because you can't run Xcode on a PC.
And Tim, if you cut your hands, then your are a fool who needs to take better precautions! A good engineer should have the tools as well as the expertise to carry out such a procedure with minimum harm to themselves or others.
Tom
-
@tim said:
I don't agree; while the hardware has many similarities down at the basic function level as you might expect, the overall physical package is usually much nicer with the Apple devices.
What do you mean by "much nicer"? Are you just saying that Apple uses the same hardware and just puts it together in a more aesthetically pleasing way? Or are you suggesting that a PC put together with the same basic specs would still be inferior in quality/performance?
One issue I have with Apple is the lack of choice. You certainly see it with ipod's link to itunes but I see it with the macs as well. For example, for work I have a custom Dell with an intel 980x (6 hyperthreaded cores at 3.33 ghz). I couldn't get an equivalent Mac if I wanted to. The closest Mac I can spec out is a 6 core 2.93 Ghz and it would cost me more than twice as much. I picked up mine for about $4000 whereas the Mac is around $9600. The only advantage, hardware-wise, I can see MAY be the monitors. They give you one option and they're $1,000 each. Mine have IPS panels rather than the cheaper TN panels so they're pretty decent but I'd hope that the $1,000 monitors have some advantage.
-Brodie
-
Brodie, just to dispel another Mac myth, my two monitors that are powered by this (tiny!) Mac Mini are both made by NEC. Essentially they are 20" 4:3 ratio 2070NX PC monitors. The graphic card in my Mini will easily handle two 30" widescreen monitors, and despite the hype, you don't have to use Apple's overrated and overpriced monitors to run with a Macintosh. I also have no problem whatsoever using both as one mega screen! You may also have multithreading, but I know of few applications apart from renderers that take full advantage of this technology? SketchUp certainly doesn't require it! My tiny little Mini is up for the job for what I need it for (archviz, development, Unity3D and SketchUp. Blender also works really well too).
If I was loaded, which I am not, I would consider another system- but I don't have the money. My Mac cost me about £400. The monitors were about £60 each. It's not expensive. Sure I would probably be able to build a faster PC system, but I really can't be bothered farting around with Bios's and floating around blind in the Windows Recovery Console. I would also have to duplicate much of my (paid for) software again- so it simply doesn't make sense for me to switch to Windows.
-
re: 'a much nicer package'
just a little story. possible unrelated but..
i'm doing some stuff for mother this week.. i went into their offices for a consultation the other day and saw a very open space with huge desks and probably 150 computers set up.. there were macs and pcs.. laptops and desktops..from a 'nicer package' point of view, the imacs were no brainers.. i don't think even the hardcorest of mac haters could argue that the pc workstations were in any way shape or form nicer looking than the mac setups. no wires, no boxes etc..
to some people, their actual workspace is as important or more important than their tools in which case, the macs make the space nearly unarguably much nicer.
to me, that same idea transfers to the OS. i feel the osx environment is so much nicer than windows and if i'm going to be spending 4-12 hrs per day on a computer, it becomes priority..
i'm also convinced that anything you can do on macs can be done on pcs and vice versa.. accounting, design, music, photography, internet/email, etc.. the limitations are put on the users themselves and nothing really to do with the tools(computers)..
i mean, if i could switch to pc and automatically have all sorts of fresh new design ideas then i'd buy one immediately.. unfortunately, that's not going to happen so i'm going to have to continue finding other excuses for my mental blocks instead of blaming the fact that pcrules.app isn't available on mac -
I can't believe after all these years we are still discussing this, Mac's became PC's in shiny cases, with an OS that's comparable to Windows 7 (Vista was a disaster I admit), however for software creators Mac still seems a little dodgy, so many still refuse to offer Mac versions.
Personally I cannot see how one can compare a Mac to a PC, you can compare Apple to Windows, but Mac is hardware as PC is and they are essentially the same.
-
@tfdesign said:
You may also have multithreading, but I know of few applications apart from renderers that take full advantage of this technology?
Well, I'd hope that anyone spending the bucks for a 6 core machine would know what they're getting into, whether it's the (seemingly overpriced) mac or the pc. As for me I had to get the fastest all around computer I could get for both modeling and rendering. Price wasn't really an object as the boss was paying for it and he values speed and quality more than an extra few thousand dollars. The 980x is top of the line at the moment (you can get processors that render faster but at the cost of single threaded modeling speed). But that's kindof beside the point. The point I was trying to make is just that for the professional/tech savvy user (which Mac's seem to be geared towards) Mac's seem to have some limitations in terms of the variety and available options.
-Brodie
-
@solo said:
I can't believe after all these years we are still discussing this, Mac's became PC's in shiny cases, with an OS that's comparable to Windows 7 (Vista was a disaster I admit), however for software creators Mac still seems a little dodgy, so many still refuse to offer Mac versions.
Personally I cannot see how one can compare a Mac to a PC, you can compare Apple to Windows, but Mac is hardware as PC is and they are essentially the same.
Solo, that seems to be the conclusion I'm coming to based on even a small amount of research. But that being the case, why do you think that there are still a great deal of graphic artists and visualizers who feel strongly about using a Mac? Do you think they are just holding on to old biases and are ignorant of the similarities between mac and pc now?
-Brodie
-
Brodie, The whole 'tech savy' thing to me does not hold water, I remember going to the Apple store to buy my Imac (when they started using Intel chips), Normally I get my stuff from Fry's electronics (PC based), I noticed the folks buying Mac's actually had less tech knowledge than those PC counterparts, the way I saw it was they were not bothered knowing how it works, but rather that it works. That was the whole sales pitch I even got from the Apple salesman, his words which i cannot quote verbatim was that Mac's are hands free, plug and play, while PC's require tech knowledge.
I think most Mac users are part of the "I like cool shiny things" mindset, similar to the average iPhone user (of which I'm one also) -
Yes, I believe many well known 3D artists are and always have been Mac users, and will never change and rightfully so, if they are getting the job done with a Mac then there is no need to change, but dissing a PC because you use a Mac is just stupid snobbery IMO.
-
went down this path last year. needed to upgrade the old dell laptop, as my design software was suffering on it. been stuck over in pc land for the last x years since getting into design and architecture and i'm married to acad and a 3rd party overlay. was planning on weening myself from it with sketchup for most work, but had the dual boot option for when clients needed acad / 3rd party work.
priced it all up, and landed a dell precision m6400 for about half of what a comparable powerbook would have set me back. and i got the larger size and nicer screen. i did have a copy of xp to load for the dual boot on the mac so i could run acad and other software but i don't have to mess with it now.
i do miss some of the recent innovation on the mac hardware / software side. and i'm envious of shiny aluminum boxes that weigh less than the power brick for my dell... (i hate lugging this thing around for presentations... but i'm on the road enough that i do design work when i'm out of town)
but, for the $$ i couldn't beat it, especially being self employed.
now i'm looking at upgrading off of vista, and running my presentations from my android phone.
ideally i'll be picking up one of those google chrome notebooks (when they become available) or wait for HTC to come out with an android tablet so i can do road work on a smaller device. (no modeling, just estimates, presentations, etc.)and i'll need a workstation. the current machine is great for portability and modeling... but i'll need something to render with and do more complex work...
-
@solo said:
Brodie, The whole 'tech savy' thing to me does not hold water, I remember going to the Apple store to buy my Imac (when they started using Intel chips), Normally I get my stuff from Fry's electronics (PC based), I noticed the folks buying Mac's actually had less tech knowledge than those PC counterparts, the way I saw it was they were not bothered knowing how it works, but rather that it works. That was the whole sales pitch I even got from the Apple salesman, his words which i cannot quote verbatim was that Mac's are hands free, plug and play, while PC's require tech knowledge.
I think most Mac users are part of the "I like cool shiny things" mindset, similar to the average iPhone user (of which I'm one also)Interesting observations. The iphone comment brings up another issue. There seem to be a good deal of folks who are just fine with their pc's but when it comes to phones and particularly mp3 players are die hard apple fans. Any thoughts on this, being an iphone user? I don't know if the iphone has any real competition as it's something I've never looked into. But I'm surprised by all of the ipod users. I got an mp3 player from Creative a few years back and am quite happy that I don't have an ipod (although I've never actually used one so maybe I don't know what I'm missing). Mostly I much prefer not being married to iTunes. I like the napster model where I just pay $15/month and get unlimited songs rather than paying for each individual song.
-Brodie
-
from a programmer point of view (mine) Mac is a way better alternative :
- Ruby comes preinstalled,
- all extensions work and are compilable,
- Quartz Composer and Core Images filters,
- 64bit system,
- more polished applications
- not wasting time with malware and viruses
will not get back to Windows (even if I spent 18 years on that platform)
-
@unknownuser said:
@solo said:
But that being the case, why do you think that there are still a great deal of graphic artists and visualizers who feel strongly about using a Mac? Do you think they are just holding on to old biases and are ignorant of the similarities between mac and pc now?
i personally think one reason a lot of designers/visualizers tend to use macs is because the computers themselves are designed/visualized much nicer (opinion of course).
same thing might happen with the pencils an artist might buy.. sure, i can get a 10pack of #2s for a buck but if i'm drawing all day long with pencils, i can easily see myself buying the $50 pencils.. or writing a book with a bic pen vs the $200 pen etc etc..
those might not be exact analogies but i'm just trying to make the point that's there's a whole lot more to it than the spec/cost ratio.if the life span of a computer is say 3 years then a professional user is faced with the decision of paying maybe 55¢/hr to use a mac or maybe 45¢ to use a pc..for many, paying the extra dime to use a mac is an easy choice and i personally don't feel like i'm being any more ripped of buying a mac over a pc.. (well, i pretty much feel like i'm being ripped off anytime i buy anything but that's a different topic)
another reason why the graphic artists might still be using macs is along the lines of what tom was saying.. they're used to them and know the ins in outs of them.. that's probably the #1 reason why i don't even consider a pc when buying a computer.. i mean, i'm sure i could pretty much figure out how to use windows as well as i can use osx after a year or so but the thought of the little things, 'how do i erase a file from the hard drive' or 'how do i change the desktop color' or 'how do i change a font' etc.. those type of things that i've spent minutes or hours on over the years, that's too much headaches that i don't want to go through again.
[not to mention the whole virus thing.. that's the #1 reason i bought a mac in the first place 12 years ago and still to this day, i've never used any sort of virus protection and i've never ever had and sort of problem]i dunno, this post isn't meant as an argument either way.. hopefully it's just a realistic look at why one person might spend an extra grand on an equally spec'd computer.
-
I've always considered a PC to be more of a hobbyists computer. You can argue the OSX is a better (read, easier to use) OS and that the case looks nicer. These are reasonable considerations and I might even concede that the ratio of users should probably be the reverse of what it currently is (~85% pc vs. ~15% mac) if only because the average person probably doesn't demand very much from a computer (what do you actually need to browse facebook at the local Starbucks?) With that in mind, better looking case and (arguably) more accommodating OS should be more common.
My problem with Macs is that you have the computer that you get and that's it. You pay a premium for a good quality machine and it's a closed system. A PC, on the other hand, can be bought from Dell or HP or (better) built part by part. This is where the hobbyist part comes in. You can choose exactly what components to use -- where to spend money and where to save. How to set up the cooling, overclocking, etc., and when it starts to get a little long in the tooth you just upgrade certain parts. You can expect certain core parts to survive several years/systems.
I imagine the enjoyment of this is similar to people that would rather fix up a cheaper car to be something really awesome than buy a BMW.My only day to day use with an apple product is my ipod which I love/hate. I might be wrong, but I imagine this is indicative of apple as a company in general. It generally does what I want, is small and unobtrusive but is so controlling. Only certain file types, it has to be used with itunes, it can't just connect to any computer. Why does it have to be a good package that is so restrictive? Why not just drag-and-drop whatever file types instead of having to use their organizing software.
Finally, is it significant that bootcamp (or whatever) is so popular, just to run windows programs but there is no demand for the reverse?
-
@dsarchs said:
Finally, is it significant that bootcamp (or whatever) is so popular, just to run windows programs but there is no demand for the reverse?
the reverse is that people buy macs.
well that and the fact that it's illegal to use OS X on non-apple computers but some people still do it.. it's called a hackintosh -
It's getting so they are all the same nowadays. . .
Advertisement