Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

Making up my mind ??

hotshots4u2c
Posted 20/03/2008 - 01:54 Link
I use both iMac and only occasionally PC (Was a PC user until last year when I purchased my first Mac)

Would like to update to a new model with a 24 Monitor, either a new iMac 24" or go back top a new HP computer package with the 24" Vivid monitor. (I note both Monitors have the so called bright screens) Can this be a problem with reflections when adjusting images ?

Having a hard time making up my mind, would like some help if possible.

The iMac has 2.4GHz, or 2.8 core duo. Super Drive one slot 8x DVD CD etc. Comes with 1gb ram (can upgrade to 4) 320gb hard drive. ATI Radeon HD 2600 pro w/256mb memory. Firewire Bluetooth etc. iSight camera. Support for external display etc. 90 day free phone support. One year limited warranty. (Can pay for extra 2 yrs)

I can get a new HP with over two times bigger Hard Drive. 3gb ram (Can expand to 8GB) 2x1024mb 2x512mb. Intel core duo quad. Nvidia geforce card either 8400 or 8500 ? 8mb cache. 2.40 GHz Processor speed. 24 inch Monitor. Wireless K/B and Mouse.

The iMac is $1795 for the base model. HP is around $1700.

I use the computer for mostly images (adjusting/storage/backup) plus for browsing/research. Not into multi tasking or games. I love the new OS X Leopard with the Mac. Don't know too much about Vista.

Not being anywhere close to understanding the workings of operating systems, which is the better buy ? Is there any difference in speeds etc ?

Any suggestions (polite) would be welcome.

Thanks, RAG.
Don
Posted 20/03/2008 - 02:54 Link
Quote:
Don't know too much about Vista.

... apparently neither does Microsoft......

ok, all kidding aside.... go with the operating system you like.

having used both mac and pc, you must have a preference.....
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
hotshots4u2c
Posted 20/03/2008 - 03:39 Link
Don

That's the problem. I like some features on both.

I was really asking for help on feature for feature and dollar for dollar value.

Thanks,

RAG.
Don
Posted 20/03/2008 - 04:01 Link
I'm sorry.
I don't have an objective answer for you.
In fact, I'm so biased for the mac, that I find it hard to take the question seriously.
the question reads as if it were retorical, and meant to spark a mac vs pc argument.
dollar for dollar feature for feature, hardware specs only..... the pc wins in your example....
unless the user's over-all computing experiance, reliability, ease of use, elegance in design, bundled software, get taken into account, in which case osx wins.

One restaurant may sell pizza delivered to your door in a half hour or it's free, and another may sell pizza in a fine restaurant for more money.
are you looking for the cheapest food or an enjoyable dining experience?

There's room in the marketplace for both.
Which is for you?
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
hotshots4u2c
Posted 20/03/2008 - 06:05 Link
Don.

No way do I want to start an argument.

Just trying to get a feel on use of both systems by photographers. Most on the Photo Forums appear to use PC's. I don't know if this is due to cost, features, or availability of lots of software.

I do have some friends (not photographers) who seem to believe Mac users are in some kind of cult. Odd for someone who has one PC Laptop and two older PC Desktops and one iMac.

Must admit I am leaning towards the new iMac 24"

We shall see.

Thanks, RAG.
Gwyn
Posted 20/03/2008 - 07:54 Link
I use a PC. Much as I would love to have a Mac, I have too much software for PC now, and can't really afford a Mac anyway.
WE used to have a MAc way back in the dawn of time (late 80's) but that was supplied by my husbands employer.
Nowadays he gets a bog standard laptop, which is another reason for me keeping the PC. I am going over to a new one shortly as this one is less than reliable now, poor ancient old thing that it is. But it will be a PC again.
If you can afford a Mac, like the Mac and have all the software for a Mac go with the Mac. If you want pure oomph then go with the PC.
If you want a virus free life go with the Mac!
justgetoutandride
Posted 20/03/2008 - 08:02 Link
I'd go for a Mac, just for ease of use and security. If your not that familiar with OS's and technical aspects then the Mac wins hands down.

As others have said, most people have grown up with a PC and have favourite software that is unavailable on a Mac, so stick with a PC. But as you have a Mac already this may not be the case with you.

I do all my work on a base spec macbook, it's not particularly fast but I'm not in a hurry.
Please call me aj,

I use a Pentax K10D, on a MacBook with LightRoom (vers 1.3 + beta 2)

http://www.ba-joseph.co.uk/gallery
GaryMoffat
Posted 20/03/2008 - 08:52 Link
Same as choosing a camera..

Why did you opt for Pentax and not CanonNikon?

All three have differences but your choice was made to opt for Pentax same situation PC via MAC.
ikillrocknroll
Posted 20/03/2008 - 09:29 Link
What do you like about Mac, what do you like about PC?
It may help in easing you decide listing them, for your own sake and ours
http://www.behance.net/robbranigan
K20D, DA18-55II, FA50 1.4, DA10-17
To buy: Metz 58 AF-1, DA*50-135, DA12-24, DA100M
Mongoose
Posted 20/03/2008 - 09:49 Link
In your position, I'd get the PC, wipe Vista and put Linux on it.

But that's just me.

Having never used OSX OR Vista I'm not going to comment on which OS is better, however, unless OSX is markedly more RAM efficient than Either Windows OR Ubuntu Linux the first thing you're going to want to do with that Mac is put another GB of RAM in it.

With your stated useage patterns (almost exclusively photography), the only spec which you will notice is the RAM. A quad core processor wont make a jot of difference to your life, either graphics card will be barely ticking over in 2D mode (at one point ATI had marginally better 2D image quality but I'm not sure if that's still true).

Don't forget it's possible to dual boot OSX and Vista on the new Macs, so if there's an option to stick an extra GB of RAM in the 2.4Ghz Duo Mac, that's probably your best option for flexibility, though it will obviously push the price up somewhat.
you don't have to be mad to post here



but it does help
MattMatic
Posted 20/03/2008 - 09:56 Link
Just to add to the mix...
Although I use PCs 100%, I'm increasingly fed up with MS stuff.
Bear in mind that Mac users can also get products like VMWare Fusion that provides a seamless way to run PC software on the Mac

There are also other free products that will provide virtualisation without requiring Boot Camp - such as VirtualBox.

I use VMWare and VirtualBox on an XP PC to provide Linux, older Windows and other OS testing environments. And now I've got to the point where I'm seriously considering running Ubuntu Linux as the main OS and having Windows XP as a virtual machine... and the Mac looks seriously inviting too

Comparing the RAM and CPU usage is tricky. I did read that Windows Vista performs AES encryption between the OS and the video driver - leaving the PC with little power to actually do anything else. When MS speak of "security" they are obviously placing a high prominence on securing content, and not necessarily your machine Looks like they are trying to make a platform that can be considered "safe" for premium content like movies etc. Having read that, I'll never, EVER, use Vista for anything except testing.
(If you want, I may be able to rustle up the URL on it)

Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
Mongoose
Posted 20/03/2008 - 10:05 Link
I've been using Ubuntu for a while now, been totally MS free for nearly a year. It's very nice and fluffy, but I am currently seriously considering ditching it for Puppy linux.

Puppy is a tiny distro designed to run on anything you put it on from Pentium I upwards, and I believe it has been successfully installed on fast 486s. It is SERIOUSLY fast on modern hardware. It's far from being as pretty as Ubuntu, but if you aprieciate performance at the cost of looks it is a very serious contender.
you don't have to be mad to post here



but it does help
Hazza
Posted 20/03/2008 - 10:09 Link
We use mainly PCs at work (University)although in the design studios they use Macs but run XP Pro on them, I thing the 3D rendering is faster. The Mac also seems to be more efficient with ram than the PC. Most users are more familiar with windoze but if you like the mac interface then go for that. At home I use a Sony Vaio running Vista. I must admit that to begin with I hated it but as I have used it more it has grown on me and proved to be quite sturdy and reliable, maybe I'm just lucky.
Harry
beakynet
Posted 20/03/2008 - 10:18 Link
Lets not forget that MACs (and possibly PC's) can be made to dual boot to either Windows (XP or Vista) or MAC OX!

Really you can have the best of both worlds. However, as a long tern PC user, if you want the best of both worlds, I would go for the MAC and consider a dual boot option.

It should also be noted that both OSs are about as stable as each other and both OSs about as secure as each other. The difference is that most mallicious software is designed for Windows and not MAC OS.

On the performance side, in general PCs require more omph as the OS requires more resources so things should run about the same on both systems.

One thing to consider is how upgradeable is the MAC? Can you upgrade the harddrive? Would a 500GB external drive work for what you want? You should also note that the built in back up in MAC's latest OS is far superier to that offered by Windows Vista. You will always pay more for an Apple but would buying a PC be false economy?

Just some points for you to consider.

One thing is to avoid Linux at this time as the software for photogrphers is not a mature as it is for MAC and PC, give it a few years.
Bodies: K5IIs, K7, MZ5n, LX, MV
Lenses: DA*16-50, DA18-55WR, DA18-135, DAL35, M50 F2, A50 f1.4, FA50 f1.4, DA*50-135, DA55-300, Tamron 70-300, DFA 100 WR Macro, M135 f3.5, Sigma 120-400 APO DG HSM, Tokina 500 f8.0
Flash: Metz 58, Metz 48
Accessories: BG4, Pentax right angle finder, Pentax mirror adaptor lens, O-ME53 Viewfinder Loupe
Auto 110 System: Auto 110, Winder, 18mm, 24mm, 50mm, 70mm, 20-40mm, AF100P, 1.7x telecon
Unlocker
Posted 20/03/2008 - 10:52 Link
Now that I'm getting used to my mac, I would go with what others have suggested here. Buy the mac, put windows on it. Boot camp is built in and free.

Your example says mac for $1800 or pc for $1700, but you can have both for $1800 plus the cost of a copy of windows.

One of the things that is concerning me about the switch is that there is always going to be something that you want windows for, so this to me is the nicest solution.

Also all versions of leopard are 64 bit and will have no trouble accessing 4GB ram, normal versions of XP / Vista are 32 bit and can even have trouble with 3Gb ram. 64 bit versions of windows would then seem a logical step, but don't even get me started on driver issues!!

Also DO NOT BUY MEMORY FROM APPLE! Did a comparison on Apples prices v. Crucial, price difference between 2gb and 4gb. Apple £240, Crucial £33.

I think you already know what you want and what you prefer, so go with it!

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.