Why OSX is better than XP for editing digital photos?

DavidTO

Yeah, it's a controversial thread title, and it's not my assertion, but the assertion of this article. I'd be interested to know if anyone can prove the author wrong, or find a good reason why XP is as good or better than OSX.

I'm not interested in starting an OS war, and I'll delete anything that gets out of hand in that regard. Let's just talk about the two systems and how they draw images on the screen.

Also, how does Vista play into this? Anyone know?

DoctorIt

The only thing in the article I see an issue with is the screengrab. Don't different screengrab utilities use different resolution? We'll give him the benefit of the doubt, that he checked, for now.

Interesting read anyway, I actually didn't know the interpolation difference between OS's. I always thought it was mainly the color.

Nikolai

Couple of questions

DavidTO wrote:

assertion of this article.

By any chance you (or somebody else) can confirm the facts about the interpolation type used?.

I'm sure for Apple OS it's all public knowledge and open source;-), but I doubt that the author has been privileged to look into GDI+ source code.

I personally never heard of these "facts" before.
What I heard (and actually did myself - I'm a programmer, remember?;-) is that there are many ways to draw on the screen, from very simple to very complicated.
If FF developers decided to make a few shortcuts in their Windows version I don't really see how it becomes an OS problem. FF problem on Windows - sure, agree 100%, but don't blame Bill for all the 3d party apps shortcomings...

DavidTO

Nikolai wrote:

By any chance....(snip)

See? Those are the kinds of questions I don't even know to ask. Great, Nik, I'd love to hear the answers!

Nikolai

One answer

DavidTO wrote:

See? Those are the kinds of questions I don't even know to ask. Great, Nik, I'd love to hear the answers!

The very fact that my IE7+XP shows beautifully anti-aliased lines of the "mac version" of the image clearly proves that it's not the OS - otherwise nobody of us poor windows users would be ever able even to tell the difference. :-)

So much for the "interpolation type"...
AFAIK, there is no such thing, not at the OS level that is.
There is a graphics library (the aforementioned GDI+) , but it's up to an application programmer how to use it...

Nikolai

More answers
We're still pretty busy at work during the day, henceforth I could not provide more feedback.
Now I'm back home, my martiny is next to me... So here you go:-)

I have already mentioned the fact that there is no such thing as "default OS interpolation", only different methods (API) in various graphic libraries and different hardware (GPU) to support them.

My next point is as follows.
The article pretends to compare different OS vs digital photo editing.
Now explain to me - phu-lease - why the author has chosen -

• not the Photoshop Mac vs Photoshop Windows;
• not Lightroom Windows vs Lightroom Mac;
• not even Aperture vs Photo Mechanic;

- but a bloody 2 year old FF browser, which, at least to the best of my knowledge, has as much to do with the actual photo editing as Smugmug has with the coffee grinding - i.e. purely nothing.

OK, last one (for now, that is:-).
No OS ever comes specially prepared for the photo editing. It may have some libraries to support it, or some included tools to facilitate it (Aperture, Photo Editor, etc.), but it's not what OS is about.
Any OS's three primary concerns are (in this order):

1. Process handling
2. File handling
3. User handling

(In case you're wondering about security: yes, it should be implemented for each of those goals, but the security itself is not the primary concern. Nobody buys a security for its own merit, it's always to secure something)

Everything else is provided by the apps, whether they come with the OS or from the 3d party. How good or bad they are - lies primarily in the skills of the people who design and develop them.

In this case: go kick some FF guys' butts and tell them to use more advanced algorithms. If they don't know how - give them my number

All in all (again, to my personal taste), this article is as stupid, arrogant and obnoxious as the infamous "pc vs mac" apple's TV ads.

Apple started as a great innovative company, with the beautiful UI and certain advantages on the "artistic" front (as opposed to the "business" front that was taken care by Windows). It's really sad that it came down to the ugly "piss on the competitor" tactics.

Cheers!

DavidTO

Nik,

Makes sense to me! Thanks.

Pixoul

Simple. Macs can save Christmas.

[/thread]

gus

Pixoul wrote:

Simple. Macs can save Christmas.

[/thread]

That was totally fascinating...that hour looking for drivers has me nuts every time i get home with some more photos.

Nikolai

Now *that* was funny!

Pixoul wrote:

Simple. Macs can save Christmas.

You've made my evening :-)

I'm starting to lose the last skoshes of respect for apple's marketing geniuses...
It's a true pity that this - otherwise great - platform has to use this kind of low tricks to lure booboisies into its camp... (Sorry, read too much DM lately:-)

Remember the original Big Broger ad? *That* was powerful and truly up to the point. Nowadays... eh.. :puke

Ric Grupe

The very fact that my IE7+XP shows beautifully anti-aliased lines of the "mac version" of the image clearly proves that it's not the OS - otherwise nobody of us poor windows users would be ever able even to tell the difference. :-)

You might be surprised at the number of people that would look right past this simple logical "in your face" proof (or disproof, depending on your point of view).

It just tickled me the right way.....so I thought I'd let you know, Nik.:D

claudermilk

Ah, you have to love those quickie articles written to make the author feel good about his choice by bashing the competition.

In answer to the OP question: it isn't. Regardless of what the worst Mac-fanatics and the awful ad campaign tries to convince you of.

I agreed that the first point is pure BS since it uses an old browser. Who care what a browser does? Besides that, I never saw those kinds of effects even on that version of the browser--he has something screwy on his system.

The second. Well, a) it's wrong--you can get a color management utility for X,. b) who cares? so long as the editor you are using is color-managed it's a completely moot point.