PC or Mac?

JulieC

I was hoping someone can help me, im looking to buy a new laptop but I don’t know much about them. My main use for it is Photoshop. Does anyone know from a completely performance based point of view know which is better when using Photoshop, a Mac or PC? I've looked around and the PC seems like a better option, it’s cheaper and has more memory than the Mac but I don't know if the Mac ruins Photoshop better just because it’s Mac? Please help

Creamy Goodness

they are pretty much the same tbh,

i use mac, before i got into photography because it was do with having a UNIX based operating system.

i've used both photoshop on windows and mac, and my work flow is better on a mac.

the reason i most like mac is becuase of shortcut keys are universal between all programs. also i find things are a lot more solid, there's no random crashes due to hardware faults as the hardware and software in a mac are coupled tightly together.

what i mean by that is there's is only a set amount of permutations of hardware on mac, whereas with pc's you have X amount of vendors, with X+100 hardware manufacturers which can lead to hardware faults without proper drivers, testing by laptop company etc.

they are very close, tbh, it's quite a marmite dilemma, you either hate or love either one.

Rb

PC's need more memory in general because they've to run the hog that is Windows Vista (nowadays anyway).

If you've got the money for a Mac, you'll never regret it. If money is a concern, just get a PC.

Kbeg3

I was in the same situation last year. I started this thread. The end answer seems to be personal choice

Dublin_Gunner

Rb wrote: »

PC's need more memory in general because they've to run the hog that is Windows Vista (nowadays anyway).

If you've got the money for a Mac, you'll never regret it. If money is a concern, just get a PC.

Vista really is no more a memory hog than OSX - and before you ask, I do use both, Mac Pro in work, PC at home.

If you're more used to using a PC, get a PC. And vice versa. There is also the cost issue. You can get a PC equivalent laptop for at least half the price of a comparable macbook pro - so that would be my choice made up right there.

Secondly, and this is from personal experience, Adobe applications seem FAR more stable on the PC (CS3+Vista) than on the Mac (OSX 10.5.6 + CS3).

Plus, the PC versions (CS3 and up anyway) can utilise the GPU for rendering much better than the mac can. I dont know whether this is an OS / driver cause, or simply how Adobe have chosen to interpret it in either platform.

This is my experience anyway, so take it for what you will.

But in essence, if you prefer the Mac / OSX platform, and dont mind spending the extra, go for that. If you prefer the PC / Windows, go for that, and save plenty of money in doing so.

eshortie

I have used a Mac before, must admit it is nice but they are ridiculously over priced.

A PC will outperfrom a Mac of the same price by yards in terms of Photoshopping and most other applications.

I had this dilema myself just a few days ago as I was buying a laptop. i compared Mac and Pc's and simply came to one conclusion: I am farmilliar with PC and it's waaay cheaper, Unfarmilliar with Mac must pay high price for one especially as I wanted a screen larger than 13inches. Standard laptop was the choice. I ended up gettin a 17 inch Dell Studio, with two hard drives, Blu-ray, 1900x1200 res screen, logitech mouse, 4 year warranty nad 64 Bit vista for €1455.

Dell 15 inch (1900x1200 extra high res) screen, 4GB RAM, 500GB 5400 RPM Hard Disk. €1163
http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?b=&c=ie&cs=iedhs1&kc=NRS15351&l=en&m_30=110161&oc=N0453505&rbc=N0453505&s=dhs


Mac 15 inch, 1440x900(average res) screen, 4GB RAM, 320GB 7200 RPM Hard Disk. €2004
http://store.apple.com/ie_smb_65421/configure/MB470B/A?mco=MTkzOTQxNw

I think they both have 2 year base warranty.

At the end of the day it's your budget and preference to a specific Operating System and style.

Hope those links work

eshortie

The dell link doesn't work but you see my point

Cabaal

It really depends on the person,
I started off using Windows years back (I'm even a Window mod on boards) but I bought my first Mac in 2007 in the states.

I find the MacBook lovely to use and memory management is far better then window, I like it so much that when it comes to replacing my windows desktop I'll be getting a iMac

Nforce

Firstly, it's worth mentioning that laptop screens are notoriously difficult to colour calibrate and have limited viewing angles...it would be better to hook up your notebook to a pc monitor for pp, or maybe just use a desktop computer for editing. I tend to do very little editing on my notebook (Alienware m9750), prefering to PP on my desktop's Dell 30" monitor.
Mac laptops can be extremely expensive to upgrade ,and generally come with lower spec components at a higher price than the equivalant Window's laptop. Vista has been given a bad name since it's inception, but since the release of services packs it's proven to become a very reliable and good performer...at least imo. Problems only seem to occur if you are running it on very low spec systems with small amounts of RAM. The forthcoming Window's 7 seems to be a fantastic operating system, judged on the recent beta releases...so maybe it might be worth holding out for that? If you get a decent spec notebook (17" 1920x1200 screen,4gb of memory, a reasonably fast Intel dual/quad core processor, good sized hard drive with 7200rpm spindle speed and a good graphics card (not onboard) you will have a very good Photoshop capable system.

Valentia

At the risk of repeating myself for the millionth time.....I would love a Mac but refuse to be robbed in broad daylight :mad:

CabanSail

I have both.

Like both, though have kept away from Vista.

Cannot see a huge difference in them. They both do the job, just slightly differently.

Cabaal

I bought mine in the states so I saved over 500e

homerun_homer

I had the same choice and I was certain I was going to get a Mac until a few IT friends put me off by telling my how incompatable it is from transferring files from Mac to PC and how it messes things up a lot. Eg, if I saved a Photoshop file I was working on and decided to finish it in work on my PC there would be issues.
Since I use so many PC's (office, parents, sister's houses) I decided to stick with it and got a Dell laptop. No regrets, though Garage band is enticing.

CabanSail

I have edited files saved on the Mac in a PC, and the other way as well.

These files have been PSD, TIFF & JPG.

Steve (stcstc) uses Mac but I am sure a lot of people sending him work have done their editing on PC's. I have not heard him say that there is a file compatibilty issue, so I assume it's OK. I have taken JPG, TIFF & PSD to him without a problem.

Cabaal

I've never heard or had any file compatiable issues between any Macs or PC in my life, sounds like your IT friends are scare mongering and just reusing old myths

Mac's have come along way ever since OS8/OS9.....OSX is where its at now :pac:

padocon

I find Mac better. But its a personal choice really. I dont know how to put it, but Mac is more simple and easy to use is one way.
I compleatly agree with Creemy Goodness about the errors etc

conchubhar1

overpriced or not

no pc laptop will outrun my macbook - on xp,vista or on osx

conchubhar1

Valentia wrote: »

At the risk of repeating myself for the millionth time.....I would love a Mac but refuse to be robbed in broad daylight :mad:

how much is your time worth?

even if you get free antivirus and firewall etc, you have to waste time fecking about with it - majority of the time its slower starting up and shutting down - expose, spaces and dock etc are faster at doing basic jobs and just making it easier

conchubhar1

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Vista really is no more a memory hog than OSX - and before you ask, I do use both, Mac Pro in work, PC at home.

say what?!?

thats not even up to opinion, thats just plain not true

Fajitas!

homerun_homer wrote: »

I had the same choice and I was certain I was going to get a Mac until a few IT friends put me off by telling my how incompatable it is from transferring files from Mac to PC and how it messes things up a lot. Eg, if I saved a Photoshop file I was working on and decided to finish it in work on my PC there would be issues.
Since I use so many PC's (office, parents, sister's houses) I decided to stick with it and got a Dell laptop. No regrets, though Garage band is enticing.

Nah, that's not true at all. My MBP with OSX runs waaaaay faster than my similar spec'd Vista desktop and XP'd laptop. No errors, no random problems, no blue screens. Files are (within reason) completely interchangeble too.

Nforce

conchubhar1 wrote: »

overpriced or not

no pc laptop will outrun my macbook - on xp,vista or on osx

What are the specs of your Macbook?

Valentia

conchubhar1 wrote: »

overpriced or not

no pc laptop will outrun my macbook - on xp,vista or on osx

Is that 100m, 1500m or marathon? Your statement makes no sense. A few (specific) examples would help.

Nah, that's not true at all. My MBP with OSX runs waaaaay faster than my similar spec'd Vista desktop and XP'd laptop. No errors, no random problems, no blue screens. Files are (within reason) completely interchangeble too.

It's a long long time since I have encountered any of those problems. My son has a high spec 17" Macbook and I was surprised how slow and stuttery PS could be under pressure. Certainly no better, and in my mind, worse, than my dual core inspiron.

Anyway I still stick with my view that Macs are daylight robbery taking the components into account. The operating system may be a lot better but that does not give them the right to rip people off with the hardware. It's the same as everything else I suppose. I still believe that image plays a big part in it too.

Fajitas!

Valentia wrote: »

It's a long long time since I have encountered any of those problems. My son has a high spec 17" Macbook and I was surprised how slow and stuttery PS could be under pressure. Certainly no better, and in my mind, worse, than my dual core inspiron.

Really? I'd have to say, all the CS runs far better and faster on my Mac OS than any Windows machine - Even Lightroom is far superior, even considering I'm dealing with 160mb tiff's these days, it'll still run through them grand. I put one through my XP machine for the laugh, and it nearly had a heart attack when I tried duplicating a layer...

Anyway I still stick with my view that Macs are daylight robbery taking the components into account. The operating system may be a lot better but that does not give them the right to rip people off with the hardware. It's the same as everything else I suppose. I still believe that image plays a big part in it too.

I don't really think it's an image thing, out of the 11 people in our class, I think 6 of us have MBP's and the others have MB's - So noone's trying to be different (Except me, I got fed up of not knowing who's Mac was who's, so I stuck dirty bits of green tape onto the back of mine). We run software that isn't availible on PC (Final Cut), which is the reason the majority go for Mac's, ease of use is another big reason.

Costwise - I think for quality components, various Windows OS at the same spec, were working out at between 1700 and 2100, depending on brand. I paid 2005 for mine (15", 4 gig ram, top processor, top hard drive blathey blah). The physical build of the Macbook Pro is waaaaaaaaaay over any of the plastic fantastic machines I was looking at, imo, the screen is better... I think the only thing I missed out on was more USB's and a 17" screen (Already had the 17" screen in a HP, and my back is still recovering).

Valentia

Fajitas! wrote: »

Really? I'd have to say, all the CS runs far better and faster on my Mac OS than any Windows machine - Even Lightroom is far superior, even considering I'm dealing with 160mb tiff's these days, it'll still run through them grand. I put one through my XP machine for the laugh, and it nearly had a heart attack when I tried duplicating a layer...

Well I was going to say that my son's Mac is my only experience so my experience is limited ;-)

I will say though that saying that you nearly had a heart attack on an XP machine is kind of meaningless. It could have been a Celeron XP jobbie. My 4 core desktop and 2 core laptop do a fairly decent job to be honest. Maybe we are not comparing loke with like? My son's Mac is in for repair BTW. The keyboard gave up on him.

Fajitas!

Is a dual core Intel machine, 2 gigs of RAM - It wouldn't be bottom of the barrell!

Nforce

Fajitas! wrote: »

Is a dual core Intel machine, 2 gigs of RAM - It wouldn't be bottom of the barrell!

Depends on how quick the dual core chip and memory are,though.;)
Photoshop is memory intensive, especially if applying filters, so more is best. Having a fast processor helps too......Intel would be the prefered choice as AMD, although having upped their game with the new Phenom II chips, are still way behind Intel's offerings.
If it's a choice of a 15" lcd Mac or a 17" lcd window's notebook, and assuming that the components are of similar spec and both are similarly priced, I'd go with the 17" screen.:)

Fajitas!

17"? If you're using a 17", then you may aswell just buy a desktop x2.

F*ck that! Not with a minimum of 2 bus journey's a day, minimum of 2 long distance train journey's a week, repeated walking, possibly cycling, and random business meetings! No way!!!! My 15 does grand. I can set up what ever external monitors I need, but seriously, my back killed me after 8 months of it. Fwiw, I'd feel the same about any Mac.

The Windows machine, well, I put it to you like this; It wouldn't be at the cheaper end of the scale - far from it. It wouldn't be exactly on par with the Mac, but in comparison, it shouldn't have done what it did. For arguments sake, I put the same file through my Vista machine. Lol. Waste of time.

Nforce

I'd a 19" notebook for a while..........now THAT was heavy:eek::o. 17" screen doesn't bother me, but if the OP doesn't have another monitor to hook up to there's no sense geting a 15" notebook.
As I've stated earlier...my windows notebooks and desktops will power through any CS4 file that I throw at them. Perhaps you have a hardware issue with your windows rigs?

Fajitas!

Lol, no, no hardware issues. I've files coming out of LR2 at 130-160mb before processing. One system handles them, the other dosn't.

Valentia

Fajitas! wrote: »

One system handles them, the other dosn't.

I'd still like to know the exact specs. None of this stuff makes any sense if we don't know them

Fajitas!

a)2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4Gb Ram, OSx

b)2.66Ghz Intel Core dual core, 2Gb Ram, running XP

c)Not 100% sure on the speed of the desktop, but it's Intel dual core, definitely sure it's a faster processor than the MBP though, with 3 Gb of Ram, running Vista

d)Newly tested, iMac, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB memory, OSx

All systems have enough free HD space to work away without problem. All running CS3 (Legal of course, before it's suggested it's a dodgy copy) and all with the exact same image of a graphic designer sketching in his studio, same workflow, both a) and d) are seaming to get the job done with less hiccups, where as b) & c) are slowing down a lot more. I don't know what else I can do than give an invite to come up to Dublin, then drive me down to Waterford, and back again, and show you in person* :pac:

*Offer will have to wait until after June 5th!

Fajitas!

Actually, before I get the 'Mac Fanboy' thing thrown at me, I still use Windows and still find it has it's applications.

Valentia

Fajitas! wrote: »

a)2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4Gb Ram, OSx

b)2.66Ghz Intel Core dual core, 2Gb Ram, running XP

c)Not 100% sure on the speed of the desktop, but it's Intel dual core, definitely sure it's a faster processor than the MBP though, with 3 Gb of Ram, running Vista

d)Newly tested, iMac, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB memory, OSx

All systems have enough free HD space to work away without problem. All running CS3 (Legal of course, before it's suggested it's a dodgy copy) and all with the exact same image of a graphic designer sketching in his studio, same workflow, both a) and d) are seaming to get the job done with less hiccups, where as b) & c) are slowing down a lot more. I don't know what else I can do than give an invite to come up to Dublin, then drive me down to Waterford, and back again, and show you in person* :pac:

*Offer will have to wait until after June 5th!

LOL!!! OK so but I did say I would like one. It's the "premium" that puts me off. 5th June's a big day for me too. My political career ( for what it's worth) ends on that day too. Well maybe not technically, but the election is on.

challengemaster

Macbook ordered

Nforce

Fajitas! wrote: »

a)2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4Gb Ram, OSx

b)2.66Ghz Intel Core dual core, 2Gb Ram, running XP

c)Not 100% sure on the speed of the desktop, but it's Intel dual core, definitely sure it's a faster processor than the MBP though, with 3 Gb of Ram, running Vista

d)Newly tested, iMac, 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB memory, OSx

All systems have enough free HD space to work away without problem. All running CS3 (Legal of course, before it's suggested it's a dodgy copy) and all with the exact same image of a graphic designer sketching in his studio, same workflow, both a) and d) are seaming to get the job done with less hiccups, where as b) & c) are slowing down a lot more. I don't know what else I can do than give an invite to come up to Dublin, then drive me down to Waterford, and back again, and show you in person* :pac:

*Offer will have to wait until after June 5th!

Still not really comparing like with like.;) There can be huge speed differences between intel dual core processors, and as Photoshop is memory intensive whichever system has the most(and fastest) memory will perform better.How many background running processes on the PC's,as this too will have a bearing on the outcome?:p

Fajitas!

Nforce wrote: »

Still not really comparing like with like.;) There can be huge speed differences between intel dual core processors, and as Photoshop is memory intensive whichever system has the most(and fastest) memory will perform better.How many background running processes on the PC's,as this too will have a bearing on the outcome?:p

Lol, of course I'm not comparing exact like with like, I'm comparing a laptop with a desktop and laptop, running different OS's, from different factories, produced at different times. I said similarly spec'd - Not identical

Both Windows systems running with minimum background clutter - Not even shoddy antivirus' nor instant messaging programs, etc. I don't even have them online atm.

OSx running with LR2 in the background, iTunes repeating The Smiths, constant Skype conversations and Firefox open.

And lo, I'm getting better performance from OSx. :pac: