Mac or Windows? Feeling Down

sebpayne

After purcashing my Mac Mini in November, I am (for the first time) wondering whether I made the right decision switching because:

* All the software (both photography and non-photography) is available on both
* Adobe seems to be favouring Windows (still no PSE 4, no mention of Universal apps but still Lightroom!)
* I make extensive use of Microsoft Office for school work and the Mac version isn't up to par with the PC one
* School Novell network can't work my OS X
* Everyone I know uses Windows - I am the only Mac user out of about 200 people :-(
* PDA syncing is no where near as good as Windows
* Some apps (like HP apps) are not as good
* Some apps (like Office) are slower than PC version
* Again, compatibility!

Help! I'm feeling a bit down about this whole thing - wondering if I have made a mistake! Do photographers still favour Macs or is that a thing of the past? Is there really that much difference now?

Thanks Again

Seb

Andy

Hi Seb,

I have a G5 Quad for my Photoshop / Studio work. And a Powerbook for the field. My wife and kids each have a Mini. The mini is great, but Photoshop and Office, they are hungry apps - so you maybe experiencing speed issues because of that? Do you have 512 ram, or more?

sebpayne

Andy wrote:

Hi Seb,

I have a G5 Quad for my Photoshop / Studio work. And a Powerbook for the field. My wife and kids each have a Mini. The mini is great, but Photoshop and Office, they are hungry apps - so you maybe experiencing speed issues because of that? Do you have 512 ram, or more?

Hey Andy

Nice to hear from you again. Yeah, I only have 512mb RAM but the problem is upgrading it to a 1gb (or more). There is an Apple dealer near me but I have the feeling it is going to expensive. After using Windows on Mother's laptop for the past hour, I can say it is pretty awful compared to OS X. Nothing matches UI wise! True, Office is better but it doesn't compensate for the rest. I think I'll stay on the Different side

Andy: How are you finding Lightroom? Have you been using it in production or not? How has it been going?

Thanks

Seb

gubbs

sebpayne wrote:

Hey Andy

Nice to hear from you again. Yeah, I only have 512mb RAM but the problem is upgrading it to a 1gb (or more). There is an Apple dealer near me but I have the feeling it is going to expensive. After using Windows on Mother's laptop for the past hour, I can say it is pretty awful compared to OS X. Nothing matches UI wise! True, Office is better but it doesn't compensate for the rest. I think I'll stay on the Different side

Andy: How are you finding Lightroom? Have you been using it in production or not? How has it been going?

Thanks



Seb

Seb, I've just switchd too (Thursday) so too early to comment!

Get your memory from crucial UK
I found them to be virtually 1/2 the price of the apple store

DavidTO

Interesting, I always heard Office was better on the Mac. Well, maybe not Office, maybe it was just Word? The Mac version is supposed to be better, but I have no idea, I've been on the Mac since 1987.

Yeah, definitely upgrade from 512ram.

sebpayne

DavidTO wrote:

Interesting, I always heard Office was better on the Mac. Well, maybe not Office, maybe it was just Word? The Mac version is supposed to be better, but I have no idea, I've been on the Mac since 1987.

Yeah, definitely upgrade from 512ram.

The Mac versions may have a few more features (such as Notebooks?) but it doesn't have all the applications but the main thing is it being sluggish! It is going to be around £100 to get the memory so I'm gonna have to wait.

Thanks Again Everyone :

Seb

cadderly

I have Mac Dual 2,5 and 3 Gb Ram. Ram memory is basic to work with greats image files (64 Mb of image Phase One P25) and so, work better in raw mode (C1 Pro or Aperture), and photoshop for postproduction. So is very important a good monitor. I have Eizo Coloredge CG210. The work in real color is important.
Ram,ram,ram......arfff!!! :

marlof

I use both. Both have issues. In general, my Mac has less issues than my Windows box, but then again, I use it less and try less different software on it. For some things, there's no really good alternative to Windows (like Pocket PC synchronization, where the Mac apps are still lacking). But I love the Apple design, and therefore use a Mac notebook (a very basic iBook G3 800 MHz with 640mb of RAM, which does everything I need on the road and in the living room) next to a Windows desktop (where design is less important to me, it's more of a workhorse). My windows desktop (soon to be replaced) is a bit older (P4 1.7, 512mb), and I don't experience a whole lot of speed difference in using Office on the Mac and on the PC.

sebpayne

marlof wrote:

I use both. Both have issues. In general, my Mac has less issues than my Windows box, but then again, I use it less and try less different software on it. For some things, there's no really good alternative to Windows (like Pocket PC synchronization, where the Mac apps are still lacking). But I love the Apple design, and therefore use a Mac notebook (a very basic iBook G3 800 MHz with 640mb of RAM, which does everything I need on the road and in the living room) next to a Windows desktop (where design is less important to me, it's more of a workhorse). My windows desktop (soon to be replaced) is a bit older (P4 1.7, 512mb), and I don't experience a whole lot of speed difference in using Office on the Mac and on the PC.

Are you planning on replacing the Windows box with a Mac? A very interesting report. How do you find the photography programmes compare between the two?

Thanks

Seb

DavidTO

sebpayne wrote:

Are you planning on replacing the Windows box with a Mac? A very interesting report. How do you find the photography programmes compare between the two?

Thanks

Seb

I'll let Marlo answer the question, but just to be clear his laptop Mac is severely outdated for anything beyond word processing and web browsing. That's why he says it's fine for the living room, I believe.

sebpayne

Well, I have an iBook 1GHz with 640mb RAM (a few years old) and a Toshiab 2.8GHz Pentium D with 512mb RAM. Wonder which one is faster. They are both stylish - just in different ways

Seb

mercphoto

sebpayne wrote:

* I make extensive use of Microsoft Office for school work and the Mac version isn't up to par with the PC one

For quite some time Office for Mac has been ahead of Office for Windows in terms of release date and feature set. The disappointing thing is that Microsoft ships fewer apps in the Mac version of Office than the Windows version. I'll try to not go into my conspiracy theory about that one...

* School Novell network can't work my OS X

I can't think of any reason for that. I log onto a Linux server at work with no problems whatsoever.

* Everyone I know uses Windows - I am the only Mac user out of about 200 people :-(

True, most people are rather dumb.

* Some apps (like HP apps) are not as good

Same can be said of either platform. For example, Windows does not understand color management whereas the Mac does. Creating DVD and movie content on the Mac is vastly superior to a PC. I don't think iPhoto is eclipsed by anything on Windows yet either.

* Some apps (like Office) are slower than PC version

Add more memory.

I've been PC-Free for about 7 years now. I cannot imagine going back to Windows, and I work for AMD.

marlof

sebpayne wrote:

Are you planning on replacing the Windows box with a Mac? A very interesting report. How do you find the photography programmes compare between the two?

Nah. I'm a dual systems guy. I'm operating system agnostic, and like to stay in touch with both major systems. As for post processing: both of my current systems are out of date, and not really up to the task. Happily my E-1 is only a 5 MP camera.

My desktop is my main post processing spot, and the P4 1.7 with 512mb RAM doesn't really cut it. So that one is the first on the nomination to be replaced. I'll keep using Windows for my desktop (simply because there's some stuff for which I still need Windows, and I don't mind an uglier desktop that much).

My iBook is mostly used for webbrowsing, email fetching, word processing, and carrying images to show slideshows for friends and family. When I'm on the road (not very often) I use Olympus Studio and PS Elements 3 on the iBook. It's doable (David might be surprised as in how doable it sill is!), but yes, I could use a new notebook. Then there's always that thing of balancing funds. When my iBook will go (and it will, may be next year or so), I plan to get a new Intel based Apple iBook to replace it. But only if there's a Rev B out by then, I refuse to pay for beta testing Apple Rev A hardware.

BTW: Both iBook and WinBox run iView Media Pro. You get to use one license for both platforms at the same time (Adobe could really learn here). I totally dislike iPhoto (and Picasa on Windows for that manner), and iView Media Pro really is a very nice app. It might be expensive at first, but in my opinion it's well worth it.

MrBook2

Linux, party of one, your table is ready.
Hurray! I am the the first (and possibly only) "other". I am Linux all the way. There is a Windows machine in the house, but it's job is to have a big harddrive for storage (it is a desktop and my main machine is a laptop.)

I use linux for a variety of reasons. The most import is my work. I am an astrophysicist and most of what I do needs Unix/Linux. It is, in my opinion, still unmatched in its power and flexibility. Things are changing in the field however. More and more of the scientists I know are using Macs. It is making inroads with the younger profs (by younger I mean under 50) and I think that OS X was really the tipping point.

--Aaron

sebpayne

I have bought iView Media Pro (being a student has some pluses) which I have installed on my Mac Mini and Toshiba. There is little difference between the two, although the Windows version is not as pretty. Which comes back to my orirignal point - is there really that much difference between the two?

I wonder, how my iBook 1GHz G4 (£1,030) compares to my Toshiba 2.8GHz Celeron-D (£699). I might run a few tests just to see! Also, wonder how the 1.4Ghz G4 Mac Mini compares to my AMD Athlon 2000+. Never thought about it before.

Seb

mercphoto

sebpayne wrote:

Which comes back to my orirignal point - is there really that much difference between the two?

Depends. Do you like virus attacks? Do you really find the Windows user interface better than the Mac's? How often have you had to re-install Windows over the years? Is one system more stable than the other for you?

rutt

Comparing the performance of those G4 macs with modern intel or AMD PCs is gonna bring you down for sure.

Soon enough, they'll be Intel mac minis and everything else. These are what you want. It won't be long before you'll be able to run windows apps on them with some sort of OS virtualization, so they will perform about as well on windows proper. [Call me on this next fall if it hasn't happened. You can have a full week of ad time on my avitar title if I'm wrong.]

As that happens, the price of used and remaindered G5's will fall through the floor. Already, I've seen 15 inch powerbooks advertised at a discount (J&R ad in NY Times yesterday), something I've never seen before.

The bad news: your mac mini and 1GHz iBook are way behind the compute power curve. The good news, things are going to change fast in terms of what apple systems you can get and what they can do.

I also predict that Adobe is going to be a lot more mac friendly now that they only have to tune for one processor architecture.

rutt

mercphoto wrote:

I've been PC-Free for about 7 years now. I cannot imagine going back to Windows, and I work for AMD.

Aren't you some kind of geek? I can see how you could be windows free, but how do you manage to be all Mac at work? Is there some linux lurking in this picture?

rutt

I've been there. I love linux. If it weren't for &)$#*(#$& Adobe, I'd still be linux all the way. I even tried to live with Photoshop on VMWare and on wine, but it just wasn't good enough. I've said it before, but the GIMP also doesn't work well enough for the stuff I do. I so wish this weren't true, but it's always in my way.

So in the end, Apple has been a great compromise for me. I can drop into that opensource world as much as I like. All the opensource apps work great once you learn a few tricks. And I can get most of the pro level photography stuff I want as well. With the Intel switchover, this situation will only improve.

Hmm, an astrophysicist? What about plain old astronomy? Astronomers are jsut about the most technically advanced photographers there are and have been since the very outset of photograhpy. They invented unsharp masking as a darkroom (not digital) technique!

MrBook2 wrote:

Hurray! I am the the first (and possibly only) "other". I am Linux all the way. There is a Windows machine in the house, but it's job is to have a big harddrive for storage (it is a desktop and my main machine is a laptop.)

I use linux for a variety of reasons. The most import is my work. I am an astrophysicist and most of what I do needs Unix/Linux. It is, in my opinion, still unmatched in its power and flexibility. Things are changing in the field however. More and more of the scientists I know are using Macs. It is making inroads with the younger profs (by younger I mean under 50) and I think that OS X was really the tipping point.

--Aaron

sebpayne

mercphoto wrote:

Depends. Do you like virus attacks? Do you really find the Windows user interface better than the Mac's? How often have you had to re-install Windows over the years? Is one system more stable than the other for you?

1. Obviously not but I find virus attacks come to those who ask for them - e.g. opening dubious emails!

2. The Mac interface is a lot nicer. No question about it but Adobe's apps are not all that pretty! Not Aqua anyway

3. I have had to reinstall Windows more than Mac OS X but that could be because I have had more PCs than Macs. I had to reinstall OS X when it would no longer boot or repair.

4. Mac seems to stall when doing some operations but this could be due to speed. Otherwise, they both seem about the same.

Thanks Again - this is a good discussion topic!

Seb

Mike Lane

sebpayne wrote:

After purcashing my Mac Mini in November, I am (for the first time) wondering whether I made the right decision switching because:

* All the software (both photography and non-photography) is available on both

Not exactly true. Since windows has 95% of the market share, there are naturally more Windows apps. What is important is that your system have the app that you want.

sebpayne wrote:

* Adobe seems to be favouring Windows (still no PSE 4, no mention of Universal apps but still Lightroom!)

In terms of numbers of applications maybe because of Window's marketshare. But, for instance, photoshop seems to be one application that is particularly well tuned to work on macs.

sebpayne wrote:

* I make extensive use of Microsoft Office for school work and the Mac version isn't up to par with the PC one

Never used the mac version. I'm thinking of switching to an free opensource version myself anyhow.

sebpayne wrote:

* School Novell network can't work my OS X

That may be an issue if you don't want to go to the lab to print something out.

sebpayne wrote:

* Everyone I know uses Windows - I am the only Mac user out of about 200 people :-(

If everyone jumped off a bridge... I'd bet that the maccies in here think you're teh r0x0rs for using a mac.

sebpayne wrote:

* PDA syncing is no where near as good as Windows

No idea about this one. I find PDAs to be a useless and annoying hassle.

sebpayne wrote:

* Some apps (like HP apps) are not as good

If you need HP apps or the others, maybe it's a deal breaker.

sebpayne wrote:

* Some apps (like Office) are slower than PC version

Give microsoft time, they'll slow the windows version down too.

sebpayne wrote:

* Again, compatibility!

It is true that windows machines will be more compatible with more equipment and software than macs ever will. It's simply a market share thing. If I'm a manufacturer I may find that it is actually MORE expensive to rejigger my product to work with macs considering the small return on investment. Many don't.

sebpayne wrote:

Help! I'm feeling a bit down about this whole thing - wondering if I have made a mistake! Do photographers still favour Macs or is that a thing of the past? Is there really that much difference now?

Depends on who you ask. Ken Rockwell will (annoyingly) tell you that no "real" photographer would think of being in the same 10 block area as a windows machine. Of course, anyone who knows anything about computers knows that it's a matter of software not hardware. If you have photoshop you can do the same things with it in windows that you do in Mac and vice versa. Of course, if a program is only available on one machine and not the other, then that may tilt your decision. If you desperately need to use Aperture, you'd better get a mac or a good emulator (very good). If you need (insert windows program here)... well you get the idea.

MrBook2

rutt wrote:

Hmm, an astrophysicist? What about plain old astronomy? Astronomers are jsut about the most technically advanced photographers there are and have been since the very outset of photograhpy. They invented unsharp masking as a darkroom (not digital) technique!

That is just what it says on the diploma. Most of my time is spent doing observational astronomy. Lots of data reduction. I have actually used the Gimp to clean up some images for public release.

--Aaron

rutt

The poll needs a few new options.

1. All of the above
2. Two of the above

I'm sort of between these options. I'll use windows if I have to, but only as a last resort. Lots of linux and OS X.

mercphoto

rutt wrote:

Aren't you some kind of geek? I can see how you could be windows free, but how do you manage to be all Mac at work? Is there some linux lurking in this picture?

Mac at home, Linux at work. You cannot design and verify microprocessors using Windows, it is an operating system incapable of the job. Not only is all the pertinent softare on various flavors of Unix but we rely so heavily on scripts that using a command line operating system is the only viable alternative. Right now I'm on an Opteron box running Red Hat. I've also been on Sparc machines and AIX boxes. AIX has to be the most stable machine I've ever used.

sebpayne

rutt wrote:

The poll needs a few new options.

1. All of the above
2. Two of the above

I'm sort of between these options. I'll use windows if I have to, but only as a last resort. Lots of linux and OS X.

I would if I could work out how :. Also, how does Mac hardware compare to price-for-power to Windows machines?

Seb

rutt

mercphoto wrote:

Mac at home, Linux at work. You cannot design and verify microprocessors using Windows, it is an operating system incapable of the job. Not only is all the pertinent softare on various flavors of Unix but we rely so heavily on scripts that using a command line operating system is the only viable alternative. Right now I'm on an Opteron box running Red Hat. I've also been on Sparc machines and AIX boxes. AIX has to be the most stable machine I've ever used.

Just what I would have suspected. Last time I was in the sand pounding biz, it was pretty heavily Sun driven, but seems that Linux has made huge inroads. The suits at the companies like Synopsis were betting on Windows, but any geek could see that wasn't going to happen.

mercphoto

sebpayne wrote:

Also, how does Mac hardware compare to price-for-power to Windows machines?

Depends on "when" you are talking about. When the original G4 processor came out the Mac hardware was quite a bit better than the Intel counter-parts. Over years the G4 slowly improved but the Intel processors improved much more rapidly. Possibly because of competition from AMD. Today the G4 is not that great a processor compared to Intel and AMD offerings. Sad, really.

The Intel-based Macs should be very nice machines indeed.

sebpayne

mercphoto wrote:

Depends on "when" you are talking about. When the original G4 processor came out the Mac hardware was quite a bit better than the Intel counter-parts. Over years the G4 slowly improved but the Intel processors improved much more rapidly. Possibly because of competition from AMD. Today the G4 is not that great a processor compared to Intel and AMD offerings. Sad, really.

The Intel-based Macs should be very nice machines indeed.

Which is lucky considering I have all G4 machines :uhoh

Seb

DavidTO

sebpayne wrote:

I would if I could work out how :. Also, how does Mac hardware compare to price-for-power to Windows machines?

Seb

Well, that depends. You can certainly get PCs cheaper than you can Macs, but I read over and over again that feature for feature (not just processor speed, but the whole package) the Macs are very competitively priced. Andy switched to Mac for pure monetary reasons in the beginning, I believe. He could get more power per dollar out of a G5 than he could out of the PCs a year ago. Since then, he's a convert.

cmason

I have used and supported (IT support) both Macs and Windows. You can argue usability till you are blue in the face...just like politics and religion...there is no better or worse, just what you favor. From an IT perspective, Macs had nothing on Windows, they were just as troublesome (remember all those plug ins...whatever they were called...in OS 7, 8 , 9? Mac users were constantly rebooting to load a different set of them).


However, I have a Windows PC at home now...since it is what we have at work, what the kids have at school, etc. Sure, Mac OS X is nice, has some interesting apps and also has the UNIX shell, which would be very useful.
But, for less than $600 (Mac Mini $$), I built my own AMD system, with high end graphics card, 1GB memory, huge harddrive, DVD-RW, and it runs Photoshop and every photo app without a hiccup, stall or noticable lag. So I am getting what would be high end G5 performance (from a user perspective) on the cheap. Thats the beauty of industry standards, and big marketshare.

Now, if Apple would wakeup and recognize the $$ is in Software, not Hardware, run OS X on Dells, and other PCs, then we would have something...

NHBubba

I make my living by writing software for windows. I use Microsoft development tools to develop apps with Microsoft libraries and Microsoft SDKs to run on Microsoft OS's. At the end of the day I'm just to frickin' lazy to try to futz with something new. .. Besides, I already own all the apps I need in the windows flavor.

In my opinion the 'virus/spyware' issue is a little over hyped. Running a few (free) tools and practicing some restraint in your 'net usage avoids most of these problems. I think 90% of the problems you hear about come from novice users doing unsafe things. In the 15 years I've been using 'WinTel' hardware and software I've yet to have any significant data or system corruption due to a virus or malicious software.

I think the most compelling argument for Windows is that it has the largest market share. More people use Windows that any other OS, and at the end of the day that means something. Until that changes, I think it is a very good choice. It's kind of like diesel vs gasonline cars. Diesel could be superior in serval ways, technically speaking. But if you can't get parts, service, or supplies/fuel for it, what good is it? Somedays it's easier just to roll w/ the punches and use what the guy next door has. Somtimes being different costs.

That said, I can't wait for OSX to be available for the Intel platform. I desperately hope (and seriously expect) that Apple will be releasing OSX independant of Apple hardware. At that point I'll be able to install and run it on my hodge-podge, held-together w/ duct tape, bargin basement AMD based PC. At that point I will probably invest in a copy. And I might even advocate to my employer that we consider a platform switch for our applications.