For years, I've been the biggest supporter of everyone using a Mac, except gamers. Especially if you are a photographer or graphic designer, it just makes sense and it always has. But as current events unfold it's becoming harder and harder to stick with the platform, no matter how great it actually is.
The Good About Apple
The Mac operating system is what makes it so great. It's not so much the hardware, although it is very nice high-quality hardware. That said it's still commodity hardware and they are using Intel processors just like PC. It's not about the hardware really for the "user" anymore. The operating system (when you know how to use it as a power user) is what makes things so efficient and effective for graphics professionals in general, and especially photographers.
The MacOS Finder is truly incredible and as I mentioned before in my Mac tips. Little things like right-clicking the header of an open document to open that file's containing folder (or anywhere in its tree with ease) is vastly superior to Windows.
The reliability of MacOS is probably a decade ahead of Windows, no joke. There's no comparison on reliability.
I won't just make a statement like that without explaining why. The reason is Apple licenses the OS to work with their own hardware built computers. Meaning they know exactly what configurations of Apple computers are running their OS, since they manufactured them all. Windows, in contrast, has to "generalize" many things to be able to work on an infinite amount of different hardware configurations. On PC Part Picker alone you could configure a PC with thousands of different setups and the one operating system Windows, has to try and work with all those different configurations. That is a lot more difficult than making an OS work with your own handful of specifically built hardware, therefore the reliability of the Mac by that alone is very solid before even getting into the BSD derivative base system that MacOS runs on.
Apple Versus Windows: The Pros and Cons
Either operating system, Windows or MacOS, is capable of running the programs and getting the job done. They differ greatly in workflow, but they do run the same programs with relatively the same capabilities. Windows even has a few little things that are better than Mac, such as the ability to customize extra mouse buttons if you have say, a seven-button mouse. Mac has never been able to utilize those buttons and that's a real shame because that one little thing can make a tremendous difference in efficiency when utilized. As cool as that feature is, it doesn't make up for all the benefits MacOS provides, but it's something.
Bottom line, a capable computer user who has above novice level computer skills can use either operating system and get your work done.
Why Apple Is Making a Grave Mistake
Here's the scenario: I have one of my workstations that's a 2006-2008-era Mac Pro and when it was new it was leading edge quad-core with 32 GB RAM, 512 MB GPU. Now the Apple operating system is designed well unlike Windows which I believe is planned obsolescence the way the registry is structured, Windows actually slows down the longer you use it. MacOS will stay the exact same speed, however the perceived speed will change as software continues to develop and become more demanding. Cameras get higher megapixels, software has new features that are more processor and GPU intensive; those are the things that are making my 06-08 Mac Pro not work as well as it once did. It's the same speed it was in 08, but that's not good by today's demanding standards.
Apple's Mac Pro releases are few and far in between and the last release was the 2013 MacPro, and it was absolutely cutting edge with the 2nd Gen PCI-e SSD, good GPU, fast RAM, Thunderbolt, etc., but it's now four years old already and in computer terms that is an eternity.
So, my options for the 06-08 workstation Mac Pro? I could buy a used 2013 Mac Pro for still close to $2,000. That's a lot of money for an already four-year-old technology, and while they are fast and work well they still are much behind the current curve of fast processors and hardware architecture, such as the i7 7700. For example, for less money than a used 2013 Mac Pro costs, one could buy this. The 8 GB GPU, i7 at 4.2 GHz, DDR4 RAM, SSD. That computer, performance wise, will run circles around a 2013 Mac Pro. You can back a few of those specs down and be around $1,000 for a really fast modern-architecture computer system.
This makes it very difficult to buy a four-year-old used computer that has half or maybe less the performance specs for twice the money. Yes, MacOS is ideal for what I do, but at some point hardware that is 20x faster has to make a difference. Yes, there will be some negatives about the Windows OS to deal with (such as having to deal with some kind of anti-virus), as well as a few positive little things like the mouse button customization.
Further doubling down on Apple's mishandling of the pro market, they announced at the keynote that there won't be a new Mac Pro desktop built, rather a new iMac Pro which does boast some nice specs, but I hate iMac's for professional use. They are a great home or family computer, but I require more customization than that. What if I don't like the screen size? What if I want extra HDs or a different GPU? With the Windows build if I want a different GPU I can just pop out the existing and add a new one, no big deal.
Then there's the cost of this new iMac Pro at a rumored whopping $5,500 or more.
So Apple is leaving a certain market of professionals behind with the path they are headed down, a really expensive high-end iMac which I don't want anyway, or pay a lot of money for really old technology and there's no in-between. That's a rough place to be in because I truly love MacOS and what it gives me for my workflow. Windows will definitely be cumbersome but the speed of the computer is so much farther advanced, that it is appearing to now be the lesser of two evils.
Apple is essentially forcing my hand and likely many others. There will be a few markets left for them as professionals, since some folks may like and be ok with an iMac Pro and have the $5,000-plus to buy one. The rest of us are left with a tough choice. In the past, I have been happy to live with four-year-old hardware to not have to deal with Windows, but the gap now is only growing in performance due to the lack of Mac Pro production, so at some point it makes more sense to deal with the hassle of using Windows for the performance while saving a bunch of money and increasing future upgrade options without having to go out and buy into a whole new system.
It seems Apple is gearing heavily toward the consumer market and as a business decision that makes sense since there are a lot more regular consumers than graphics professionals. But it also seems like a huge mistake to abandon the original customer base that made the Apple computer so strong and good, evolving into what it is today.
What do you think? Is this really the end of the line for feasibly using Apple computers for professional photography?
Windows is like a cult.
There's nothing "efficient" about a really bad UI. And anyone who's willing to accept such a sado-masochistic relationship with a software developer who clearly doesn't give a damn is obviously a brainwashed koolaid-drinking cultist who's happy to accept a lashing and justify it with the notion of saving a few pennies.
That's not really what I think. Just turning your ridiculous "cult" talk around on ya.
No, we're not "talking on Photoshop". You said Mac is a cult. That's got nothing to do with Photoshop. Why don't you just stick to Photoshop and stop slinging trite, uninformed insults at people you don't know.
Simple: I do more than run Photoshop on my Mac.
“they announced at the keynote that there won't be a new Mac Pro desktop built, rather a new iMac Pro which does boast some nice spec”
That is inaccurate. They actually announced that there is a new MacPro desktop coming and the iMac Pro you are talking about is a stop gap.
Really if you love the macOS build a hackintosh. Nowadays there is a ton of good guides on how to do it and what hardware to pick.
But if you want performance you could build a very stable Windows 10 system. For photography a rig with say an i7, 32gb RAM, GTX 1070 and a fast NVMe disk and normal SSD’s as general storage. This would go for around $2000 and will be very fast and all this hardware is very stable tohether. No weird configs that would cause trouble.
I had weighed all options including running MacOS as a VM on a box I built.. licensing becomes an issue, and a Hackintosh just isn't reliable enough for a production workstation, since updates can and will break your system.
But as yousaid, an i7 windows 10, 1070 is exactly what I am likely to do right now.
The argument of Apple or Windows continues! The gap between the two has narrowed considerably over the years. They are both good systems and it’s a trade off for consumers and professionals among hardware, software, price, what you’re already invested in, etc. I’ve used both for many years. I’ve found that the platform a person prefers is the one you’re used to and that’s ok - it’s your choice. Apple and Microsoft are profit-oriented businesses that continue to evole with their business plans and objectives, so stay tuned for more in the future...
God no, I actually went the opposite direction from windows to a Mac and it was like a time machine took me 20 years into the future. Microsoft is a dying giant. They no long have an ecosystem now that their mobile phone market is dead and tablets are replacing Desktops and Laptops for your average consumer who only needs to surf the web, shop, check emails, browse social media, and play games. Microsoft’s operating system is clunky, the interface is inconsistent, and prone to countless security issues. There are few reasons to run windows anymore unless you are a hardcore pc gamer. Using a MacBook has been the most satisfying experience I have ever had with a laptop, my only regret is not switching years ago. Combined with my iPhone and iPad Pro I’m now a true mobile photographer who no longer fears loosing my work due to ransomware or waiting hours to use my machine because it decides it needs to install countless windows updates. I look around at friends, family members, and co workers and they also have moved in the same direction. Ask any kid under the age of 18 and the only operating system they know of is iOS or Android. Microsoft f**ked big time when they decided to ignore the mobile market and felt they were too big to fail, now they are paying the consequences. As far as power is concerned whereas I needed 24 gigs of ram to run Windows 10 and Lightroom and some music production tools I used in the studio, I have no issues with 8 gigs of ram running the same software on my Mac. OSX is incredibly efficient compared to a windows and as such the requirements are not apples to apples ;)
Basically you're missing the point. The article speaks about professional hardware, you're talkative about tablets and phones. Yes those consumer-oriented screenies, have nothing to do with professional needs.
I am trying the switch
I used to be on PC years ago as in the 1900s :) ahhahaha
but with OS X switched to Mac again so what was that 12 or so years ago and now back to windows
built up a 7820x with a 1080 card
mostly use C1
I have had one issue with intel turbo boost a common issue and the hassles of windows arrggghhhhhhhh
if you are just adobe the iMac is not bad since adobe is so so so so behind on making use of current hardware and GPU its sad
programs like C1 make insane use of the GPU
the forums a buddy of mine Craig started a thread with some quick export times worth checking out
my issue with the current iMac and the new iMac pro offerings is once again closed system so when in a few years the GPU makes programs like C1 a lot better I can update
the iMac pro ? stuffing all that the thing is going to take a huge thermal hit (bottleneck)
also cleaning that thing out of dust :) again bad design
no chance of replacing parts and so on
the monitor is OK for a second but prefer NEC or Eizo still for color for some wont matter
windows pros hardware of course
macs I will miss no driver issues and a few programs and ease of use in a few things (common menu etc.. )
why the 7820x chip ? multi-task :) had some tests with the 7700 and 7740 and they can not hold up to multi-tasking like the 7820x
why the 1080 ? well surely not for adobe products :) ahhahhah but mainly for C1 where it does make a huge difference over a less GPU and I like gaming :)
once you are inside its easier :) hahahahahaahah OK
again the reason I only had mac pros I guess cause it's not easy to get in a iMac and they are not as good as a mac pro or PC build because of thermals or part options !!!!!
iMac parts are proprietary and not easily available 3rd party
(again I have 4 mac pros here in studio)
if you knew anything about machines you would understand thermals and power are a HUGE part of any system
the GPU is quite slow compared with what is a current top line so for a so called top line offering its actually quite behind ?
the PCIe storage is very good but proprietary and limited to 1
the screen is below a NEC or Eizo
again great machines for what they are
OK show me the list of 3rd party user upgradable GPU for the 2017 iMac please
just post the 1080 ti the 1080 and say the current radon RX then, please
when the new one gets here? I doubt it will change and again that much CPU and GPU will take a thermal hit and not bench as fast as full-blown units in other cases I would be willing to bet
OK update a 2017 iMac to a 6 or 8 core since they are so upgradable :) or heck just put a 1080 ti in one for me ?
how about dual PCIe storage options
so for say a older 2014 or so iMac again please list the current say 1080 or radeon RX options available for me !
parts are and will not be easy to update to current spec this is the thing even the trash can Mac pros only certain cards were available not a wide range of options to current high end
run the current OS with no tweaking on a older mac pro 3,1
these are the little things that is going wrong with apple
again if one mostly works in just adobe as I said they are fine machines and nothing wrong with em I love the iMac for what it is
since you say its easy to get parts again please post a link to 1080 and 1080ti and Radeon rx iMac upgrades to replace the GPU inside :)
at least you agree the iMac has a slow GPU compared to what one can build
and I should compare it since this is about apples to PC and why Apple is falling behind and options for our use
I and many other full-time photographers are switching for these reasons of sub-par hardware
again the case has issues with thermals even the i7 shoving way more in is going to have issues any competent builder understands thermals :)
the fact you talk absolutes like no photographer needs more than a macbook :) hahhahahahaha OK shows me where you and your knowledge are at :)
one note about switching
I was planning on this since I heard the iMac pro info :)
I switched all our email to Gsuite and started leveraging it using kiwi as a common reader
this was also for other reasons to have a strong workflow we could do from our iPad pro or mac or pc or phone and any of us could answer emails or see what the others replied etc.. (two of us working together with two business)
also using some of the Gsuite tools and chrome synced bookmarks
google keep over the mac notes (which I loved for quick things)
trying to leverage adobe cloud a bit (still working on that) mostly for common assets I use in retouching
really trying to become less OS dependent and being able to work on any system once I am in the app such as C1 or adobe or Gsuite its all about the same anyway
also both adobe and C1 you can be on both at the same time under the current lic which is nice
things I miss about apple are the color management being OS wide but not a huge deal again I tend to work in less apps these days
having everything on a NAS to sync drives but it still took a bit to get all my work over and I would rethink this next time around and plan on getting a 10Gbe nas instead and keep all our work but our current on the system
and just use the one fast NVMe for current production ( I use a 1TB NVMe currently )
finding apps on the PC ? sync apps and a few others is a bit of a pain but I knew that
to many junk apps to sift through and the hassle of AV and malware stuff ? but not a huge deal they run in the background
switching to me was like getting a 10 year old car with a way faster engine ? so way more performance just not the nice smooth amenities or feeling of a new system
compared to my silver mac pro towers my new machine is way more quiet though with a AIO etc..
am I happy ? sure its fun and I am a tech guy but can report in 6 months for a honest answer
and so far the difference is not as much as I thought ? both have pros and cons and over the last two years apple has had its major issues and is no where near the stability it was so with that gone I might as well try out windows again cause I do think people need to experience and know both first hand to know what works for THEM :)
again only adobe use a iMac cause adobe sucks at using modern hardware
using C1 and other apps well night and day difference
2004 Mac Pro? with a Quad Core CPU, 32 GB RAM? Sell it, Sell it quick as it must be a prototype (the Mac Pro 1,1 was released in August 2006) ;) If you can't get details like this right, how are we supposed to trust the rest of your article? The devil is always in the detail.
As for the relentless Windows Vs Mac Os debate, its all been said, use whatever you find fits in with your workflow.
I guess it's an '09, my mistake! Thanks! (just looked at it)
Regarding the original article, you wrote that Apple said they were making a new iMac Pro, but not a new Mac Pro. This is incorrect.
They said they were updating the iMac to create a Pro model in the meantime before their real Mac Pro gets released, which is expected to be next year (and iMac Pro allegedly still this year).
Regarding choices, the spec lag of Macs versus PCs is irrelevant except for GPUs, where it really does matter.
Overall I love my iMac, but I do wish my 3.1TB Fusion drive was bigger.
Adobe Premiere is a seriously bloated piece of software. FCP and anything else perform so much better.
Adobe Lightroom has the same sort of problem .. slow performance generally for what it actually does. GPU is provides little performance gain.
Both of these are this way because Adobe has become very complacent in their industry-leading position.
Someone else has probably already posted this, but if no one has, Apple never said they’re not building a new Mac Pro.
They said, in no uncertain terms, they screwed up with the last Mac Pro as the design is incapable of cooling higher TDP hardware, so they’re forced to create a new design. That new design is expected to be released in 2018. Until then, for less demanding Pro users who’d normally prefer the iMac and replace their machines instead of upgrading the internals, they’re offering the iMac Pro; the iMac AIO design but with workstation-class CPU and GPU.
The iMac Pro is for the sort of business or home user that demands workstation class hardware but defers hardware support to Apple rather than their own, in-house technical support.
I use both platforms PC with windows 10 at work and Mac High Sierra at home. I guess it depends on what people use the machines for.
Microsoft still irritates the heck out of me. I find most of their sw. very counter productive. Apple on the other hand seems to be so confident in what they do, that they seem like they become deaf. The pricing is now so high that I find it difficult to justify. Result: my MBP and iMac are from 2009 and 2010. My Mac min’s are also pretty old. But running Windows servers and Windows 10 at home! Been there done that. My life is too short for that.
I am not a professional photographer, I am an amateur, and my opinion is based on my use. My iMac is the best computer investment I have ever made. And Apple is looking after the amateur photographer at least, as the latest Photos app that came with High Sierra does everything I need—so my copy of Capture 1 and DXO Optics have been unused since the install.
I share a house with someone who builds Windows gaming machines but he could not match the iMac with 27" 5K monitor for the price and although he could get close that would have been without warranty. So I think a lot of the price differential is bogus. Of course DIY is cheaper but it is not a comparable product. A warranted device is something different.
Meanwhile any professional photographers reading this article should be aware that it is laced with inaccuracies and judgement calls. I can't see that it is much more than clickbait.
I could only get a few paragraphs through this article because it so full of inaccuracies. The registry slows down a Windows computer over time? Windows is built around planned obsolescence? Mac OS is more reliable? You don't need anti virus on a Mac?
I spent about 10 years in IT maintaining over a thousand desktops and can definitely attest to the fact that Macs get viruses, Macs are no more reliable than Windows, and a registry is not slowing down any modern Windows computers.
You could put Apple in the very definition of Planned Obsolescence. They sell hardware that you either can't upgrade or your upgrade choices are extremely limited and expensive if they exist at all.
Well Clint, I too have a similar background managing networks with both platforms as well as Linux, VM's and servers.
And if you don't think that the Windows registry system grows over time, and the OS needing to read through it constantly to do stuff doesn't slow it down, especially when the registry gets corrupted. Then I don't really know what to tell ya.
The MacOS is most certainly more reliable as a whole, for the reasons I mentioned in the article. No hardware compatibility issues, everything is designed to work together and does so in an excellent fashion.
Being a Linux/BSD type OS, that is a LOT more secure and stronger than anything Windows has ever been based on.
As far as the Mac getting viruses, I have never seen one in any of the machines I've ever worked with, ever. I mean a user would sure have to work hard to try and find a virus and try to get it past the BSD systems self-protection with the kernels and all... It may "technically" exist, but I can't imagine the % of Mac users that have ever seen a virus, you'd have to work quite hard at that.
And as far as Apple with the obsolescence with the hardware. Sure. That was the basic point of my article... was that the OS is incredible, but they are pushing many of us out of the system due to the hardware lack of options and development. The point was that for things to make the most sense performance-wise, I'll need to build a new PC to replace the old MacPro... Which is the right choice to make given the current state of the industry and options available and upcoming, but I'm obviously very unhappy about being forced to that choice, because Windows really does suck, ESPECIALLY when it comes to file management and such, where the MacOS Finder really shines. (Most Mac users don't even know how to take full advantage of what it offers, but when you do, it's light years ahead of Windows in that regard)
Thanks for your thoughts.
Best Regards,
Bill
I've been right clicking on documents to open their folder for years on windows, not sure when you used one last, maybe Windows NT days?
Reliability being a decade ahead? Is that why every other day I have to force restart my mac at work? Sorry but reliability is a joke. Not to mention they give us top of the line Macs that still force me to stare at that beach ball for half my work day. These things are slow. Programs freeze left and right, half the time if I stand up, I can see two or three of my co workers force restarting at any given time.
Not sure why your Windows installations slow down, unless it's because you last used NT. Mine stay speedy.
Antivirus is for people who blindly download everything they see, I've gone without the past few years.
The rest is fairly spot on, Apple rips off gullible users, their hardware is outdated and subpar.
You've just proved that even some of the more advanced and intelligent users are still naive and really don't know much about computers.
I love when my coworkers rip on me for using Windows, while they use non points from fifteen years ago, meanwhile my computer is thinking circles around theirs, with the same level of quality, half the price, and twice the specs.
Two years I've used that toy of an OS at work, and the entire company is suffering because of it. So much down time, so much expense, not to mention trying to do even the most simplistic task on Mac is a punishment that will take twice as long. I wanted to like them too.
Thanks for your reply, if you've been right click to open a folder/folder tree in windows, please share a screencast video? I'd love for that to be possible. I've been speaking with many close business affiliates, it directors, etc an they all say it can't be done natively in windows.
Oh man, I can't with this article. The whole thing was painful to read.
I've been in the graphic design, photography, video, 3D business for nearly 35 years now, and a UX designer for 7, working with some of the biggest names in tech. Some of you are probably using products I helped design right now.
I've been through so many different computers and platforms before some of you were even born. Currently I use both the latest Mac and Windows platforms, and occasionally some Linux.
Saying the Mac OS is for graphic designers and photographers is not only uninformed, but just plain weird.
I can 100% gauarantee you and anyone reading this article that there is absolutely ZERO advatange for creatives in using a Mac system over any other platform, except for native apps, and a handul of third party "trying too hard" design tools (like Sketch) that are only released on Mac OSX for no logical or technical reason other than bias/snobbery and poor business strategy in 2017.
The first and ONLY platform designed specifically for the creative was not a Mac. It was actually a Commodore, and it was their Amiga line. Let's all get that straight right now.
Mac was always a personal computer aimed at the general user, just like Windows is now. Apple's selling point was (and still is) designing devices that even the most technologically-challenged user could understand and use. This was a Steve Jobs charter/initiative. It had, and still has nothing to with creatives, rather some creatives choose to use OSX, just as some choose Windows, or even Linux.
Windows was about the power user, the functionality, the code. The Amiga was about the creative professional until Commodore left the market in the 90's, which consequently was when Apple and Microsoft starting refining their platforms and taking graphics capability and feature set cues from the Commodore Amiga.
Linux is about "sticking it" to the big 2, a less cpu intensive OS, and the open source community. Android/Chrome is about data mining, integration, and services which is a Linux fork.
When I hear other creatives say, Mac is the only "serious" tool for designers I both laugh and cringe at the same time. I get embarrased by the sheer ignorance and willingness to jump on whatever bandwagon trend the day presents, without much after thought, critical let alone imperical. And nothing could be further from the truth in 2017, when most all platforms are running the same exact creative software pushed by the exact same internal Intel CPU processors, memory/RAM and GPU setups.
I think what is happening is many creatives use the "Mac only" tag line to ultimately explain why they got suckerd into spending twice as much for a closed system they could have had for half the price, and in some cases better preformance by purchasing a different platform.
Apple has never been the value manufacturer, nor a leader in significant raw performance over other platforms. Again, it's selling angle has always been and still is easy to use, not the ultimate creator's tool. That what some creator's prescribed to it back in the late 90's, early 2000s, and has sort of psychologically stuck.
At my personal studio, where I do anything from graphic design, to 3D animation, VFX, photo/film editing, to music composition, to a Cintiq, I run it all through Windows 10/Asus ROG, largely using Adobe CC products. Not because I'm a Microsoft fanboy, but because price to power ratio I can get far more value for the dollar, not to mention way better extensibility for future investment.
Bottom line: Why pay the "stupid tax" if you dont have to? For aesthetics of the system's hardware that my clients never see and could care less about?
You are of course entitled to your opinion.
I can tell you at least in my own personal experience and the experiences of coworkers throughout the years that Macs are not more or less reliable than any other systems I've used and still use. I've gotten "spinning beach balls" as much as "blue screens of death".
In fact right now I had to pick up a Windows gaming machine (ASUS ROG) to keep up with Maya 2017. My 2016 Macbook Pro couldn't handle it and was in a constant state of fan noise, which sounded like I was on the tarmac getting ready to take off. Not only was it annoying to hear while working, it meant the proccesors were in a constant state of max performance, which means heat, which means deterioration in a closed unibody body system. The ASUS handles it like a champ. And the system is easily accesible and exapandable.
I don't resell my machines when I retire them. First, I use them like workhorses. They are not for show and I dont consider them part of my character or reputation as a professional. Secomd, when I have no more use for any of them, whatever brand, I donate them to young students.
Besides, the ratio between cost and value leans farther on the Windows and Linux systems. Because one can get twice the power for the dollar, one doesnt go into that investment with the broader concern of resell value. When one needs a new system, its affordable enough to replace outright.
However, with Apple products, they are so much more expensive that resell value is a concearn, and rightfully so for most people who dont have money to burn. But this is more about brand name recognition than the actual nuts and bolts value of the system.
Furthermore, not all Windows brands are made out of cheap materials. Some systems are actually made solid like a Mac but yet are still half the price. Apple could take a few pointers here.
The "stupid tax" is over paying for something that doesn't give you any more inherent value than something else that is half the cost. If you spend more, you should naturally get more value, but that has never been the case with any Apple products. The brand is about aesthetic and user-friendlieness. Not dollar per performance.
The above is the premise of this article, and something that Apple will eventually be forced to address as more consumers start paying attention.
Why would I as a conscious consumer spend more for the same internal processing power, which consequently is the reason work gets done, just for the overall advantages of a sealed aluminium case that will look good as furniture one day? That might be enough justification for you, and if so each to their own. But that's a hard pass for me.
As someone who has always and will probably always use Windows, the problem with PC's and what gives them a bad name is prebuilts.
They have a few good components but the rest are cheap and in turn shortens the life of the PC. You're much better off building yourself if you go the PC route since you not only get a more powerful machine that's better for the money, but it's also a lot of fun!
PC building is a HUGE hobby! Maybe for the older generations it's not popular but for younger it definitely is!
very nice and well written article ...
but isn't the writer a little anti-Apple if not somewhat uninformed about how things work the Mac way?
yes, indeed PC has a number of important useful stuff Mac doesn't quite offer ... not by default at least ...
but what about a 'powerful' PC, such as the example given here, which is at least $500 less expensive than a Mac BUT it doesn't come with a super fine quality ultra high res monitor (4K for example) built in, which is a MUST if we're doing photography, serious, professional photography that is!?
add such a great monitor to such a PC system and you'll see it'll be much more costly than the top of the line iMac! (btw, the PC you have given here as an example, is not suited for photography simply because it's a gaming computer ...)
then in terms of lots of memory and some other additional hardware goodies ... well, what a Mac system does with 8GB, a PC requires at least 2 times that amount of memory to do the same thing! and that is extra costs again, isn't it? same is with extra storage devices and stuff like that we need for any of the two systems anyway ... so both are even in that department anyway ...
yes, PCs do accept at least 4 HD drives plus at least 1 extra CD drive internally ... but -again- they are not a MUST for photography uses really ... and Mac accepts external drives just as well ...
also, PCs do need to be discarded every two to three years usually and be replaced / upgraded with a totally new hardware and a new version of Windows and stuff, don't they?
the only thing that even a Mac Pro does really suffer from in comparison to a PC imo, is the fact that adding at least an additional monitor on a Mac is not as comfortably done as in a PC, where more than two monitors can be added relatively easily but certainly not cheaply! and as far as i know, there are some resolution limitations for a Mac to accept a second monitor btw ...
_ _ _
as a semi-pro photographer, i'm not a regular Mac user myself because of cost reasons more than anything else (and i do some IT stuff too, which makes PC a 'better' choice for me) but i know it well enough to be sure there are ways to either add a physical multi-button mouse to a Mac in some ways, or download and install some app that can help make Mac's single-button mouse emulate a multi-button mouse ... besides, a multi-button mouse, although quite useful on a PC, is not really a must on a Mac that you're using for photography! even on a PC, multi-button mice are usually needed for gaming, not photography or video and graphics necessarily ... as for extra monitors, well, yes, again, that's an area the Apple Mac system is sagging behind badly apparently ... (one more reason i'm using a PC for my photography and video works ...)
long story short, although this article has tried to address very important topics, it's lacking in proper logic imo and contradicts itself at some points!
After watching the FStoppers laptop battle a few months ago I dropped in and bought a Dell XPS 15. After only two hours of battling with the OS, I was ready to throw it out the window. Being that I bought it from B&H, I can't return it. So if anyone out there wants to buy a brand new Dell XPS 15 9550, I'll give you a hell of a deal. Seriously. Email me at dave@davelehl.com.
Maybe... I'm not a professional photographer, but I imagine that few have a network like mine: 3 Macs, 4 Windows PCs, 3 Linux PCs, and 3 Sun boxes running Linux. I'm pretty much OS agnostic as a consequence. What pushed me back to Windows for my primary desktop, after running with OS X on an iMac for the last 6 years? Hardware. My current desktop is the Surface Studio and feature wise, it just scratched all the itches I cared about. Apple could do this, but they didn't, it's that simple. For art and photography, the Surface Studio is killer, especially with the new Surface Pen.
What that means, anyways to me, is that you just need to decide what matters to you. Right now, comparatively speaking, my Surface machines are quite a bit more reliable than my Macs are. Both have the advantage of getting extra attention, Microsoft is going to be very sure on their OS support for their own hardware, but I'm seeing a lot of rush out of Apple these days. Heck, even IOS 11 has had 3 updates since release. Outside of that, being able to pull that gorgeous display into drafting table mode and use the pen right on my images? Love it. I have a Cintiq, not as nice or convenient to use, your mileage may vary.
I got next to nothing out of this article but conjecture and FUD. I am a system administrator and work with multiple operating systems including macOS, Solaris, Windows and Linux. The idea that Windows machines are prone to problems is complete nonsense!!! Have you ever heard of WHQL??? You can choose to get certified drivers for your hardware if you want.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/install/whql-r...
A Windows machine can as stable or unstable as you want it to be, your choice. But in my experience using Windows machines in both a corporate and home environment since 2001 is that Windows is remarkably stable provided you give it enough hardware for the task(s) at hand. And yes I have worked with systems that did not have sufficient resources and in that particular case, any OS would have crashed.
If you are going to compare and contrast operating systems, talk about real features such as support for multiple cores and CPU's which I think Windows has a significant edge over macOS based on the complaints people have had with Premiere running on macOS and the benchmark test article posted here not too long ago. One macOS feature that can be used specifically to determine the potential cause of the Premiere performance problem is DTrace. I have used this tool on Solaris systems for years and it is far better than truss. I don't have a Mac to test Premiere on but my feeling is that how CPU cores and threads are allocated by the I/O scheduler for macOS may be a problem. DTrace would find the problem.
https://developer.apple.com/legacy/library/documentation/Darwin/Referenc...
Macs are no different than mainstream UNIX hardware from Sun (now Oracle), IBM and HP, the vendor controls what devices can be used so that the experience is seamless. You pay a premium for that experience and if you are OK with that, fine. If you are not go to Windows.
Did Apple forget about creative professionals, I don't know. I gave up on the idea of owning a Mac when Apple wimped out of getting ZFS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS
Is Apple updating their hardware as fast as PC vendors? I find the complaining curious since people like the "stability" of a Mac. You don't get that stability by upgrading your hardware every six months. You get that stability by not changing things, possibly for years. Does that really matter, especially when a number of people here are also complaining about upgrading?
I pick what I use based on best practices and does the software I want to use run on the hardware I have or want to buy and at a price I am willing to pay. Right now that is Windows 10 on a HP Omen desktop running an 8-core Ryzen CPU with 16 GB of memory and multiple SSD's. Photoshop and Photo Mechanic work quite well for me on this system.
What I did was to buy an iClon. PC tower with apple os inside. Take a look to this URL. https://goo.gl/zTGJjV
it could be an alternative
Solid article. I've had loaded MacBook Pro's for the last 12 years as I've been a full time iOS developer and part-time photog. During that time I've paid about $2,500-$3,000 for a loaded MBP. With the high resale value I end up paying about $30 a month to own a MBP for 3 years then upgrade.
It's been a solid experience for me until this last 3 years. I've been stuck on 16GB for what feels like forever. The storage space and video cards really feel like they stalled out compared to the windows counterparts. I sold my latest MBP and 27" Apple Display last week and spent $4,000 on a new Windows Coffee Lake setup. i7-8700K 6-cores 12 threads, 32GB 3200 ram, 1TB Samsung EVO, 1080Ti (12gb ram) etc driving a 32" Dell display. (https://pcpartpicker.com/user/pcmofo/saved/mQgbjX)
Yes windows is awful by comparison to MacOS for daily use. Most of the apps I use (chrome, evernote, Adobe Lr/Ps/Pr) are all cross platform so it really doesn't matter as much as it used to. The end result is after giving apple over $10k in the last 12 years in Mac's my pro workstation is now a PC because I'm not waiting another year or more to pay $6k+ on a Mac Pro. Using an iPad Pro for mobile photo/video with Lr and Luma Touch. So far everything is working great.
IMO Apple Pro gear can no longer be as fast as PC because Apple no longer uses current tech. The best use case for Apple pro gear was always buying something powerful that just works. Alternately Apple could make an iMac as a stand alone computer with no screen and drop the price accordingly. They are intentionally creating a gap between the Mini and the Pro to drive average photographers to a high end iMac or low end Mac Pro.
Just get a spec'd up iMac.
I have a new iMac with 2 additional monitors and it cruises through Lightroom edits and Photoshop work. It makes light work of video editing too and I expect it to live a good 4-6 years
iMac's display is not hight end enough for accurate color work, like an Eizo or similar. Plus the glossy screen gives a perceived contrast difference, and alters how you adjust photos, which folks with non-glossy screens see it in a very different way, iMac is definitely not good for a professional photographer for this reason High end retouchers and photographers use different monitors. (Eizo)
1. The Mac Pro wasn't even a thing until 2006. Before it was the PowerMac G5. It used a PowerPC processor, before the Intel Transition. You wouldn't be able to run past Adobe CS4 on a G5.
2. Apple has committed to making a new standalone MacPro. They also say it will have a modular design that can more easily be upgraded - unlike the current cylinder. This will be made in addition to the iMac Pro. They also committed to making a new standalone display to go along with this computer. The iMac Pro will not be your only option.
Yes I checked, mine's an Early 2009 - my mistake, I had thought it was 04 for some reason.
It is hard for me to take seriously the advice of someone who hasn't upgraded their computer in 13 years. If he had bought a new iMac even two years ago it would have greatly enhanced his performance and he could go another ten before once again writing about how we should all be considering Windo... there it is... the word that always looses me.
I left Windows ten years ago. Ten very happy, frustration-free years that followed almost 20 years of frustration after frustration. Okay, less than that only because when I was in college and a couple years after, I was young and dumb and thought spending more time working on the computer than working was cool.
I said "one of my production machines" not my only machine. and as I previously mentioned, an iMac is not acceptable for a professional colorist/photographer, retoucher. The screens are not good enough. (yes the screens look pretty, but they are not color capable like an Eizo) thats the reason iMac sucks for pro's cause you can't change the display.
If you're referring to the WWDC 2017 keynote, this isn't quite accurate. Apple acknowledged they went down the wrong path with the round trash-can 2013 Mac Pro, and were essentially having to start all over to create a modular high-performance Mac Pro which would not be ready to ship till "after 2017."
In the meantime the only thing available is the iMac Pro.
The problem is that the round Mac Pro required a custom motherboard with every part painstakingly squeezed onto it by the design engineers, which made designing upgrades slow and painful. Apple's engineers weren't able to keep up because every board in the Pro had to be designed to a custom shape and thermal envelope.
So in a rare move, they acknowledged (without having a product to ship) that form-over-function in this case was the wrong move and went back to the drawing board. A key design criterion of the Mac Pro will be that it can be upgraded easily.
On the other hand now, their decision to scrap Aperture software is a better question.
What they did there is they decided to create just a single app (iPhoto) which started with a very basic set of tools and is slowly being upgraded to add pro features. But for now your choices are to keep using an old copy of Aperture or switch to Lightroom etc. if iPhoto doesn't meet your needs yet.
Apple has been over pricing their Macs for years. Nothing new there. People still buy them.
I *ONLY* use Apple because I've just had rotten luck with Windows always frustrating me until I want to smash my computer with a hammer, while the Apple computers I've owned just WORK.
I'm not drinking any brand kool-aid, I'm not waiting in line overnight to spend way too much money on the next phone, or ordering insanely over-priced machines tricked out from the Apple website. I'm buying used, 2-3 year old MBP's on eBay, every ~5 years.
Everybody always replies to this comment with, "you just need to get the right PC" ...or... "you just don't know how to maintain a PC" ...sorry, wrong and wrong. I'm a huge geek and I love tinkering with things, maintaining them, etc. Windows just plain pisses me off, period.
Apple really don't care if professionals are satisfied or not, they want to sell units and the consumer market is the right place for that. Also because the consumer is not looking at specs or benchmarks.
Get over your loyalty to a brand, work needs to be done and that's the responsibility of a PC. Also, Windows 10 is stable, fast and has a very nice Window management - which you won't find in MAC OS.
I worked with both systems and it is always a pleasure to see some of my clients sitting beside me and asking me why I don't use a MAC until they see how quick 10-20 big files will be opened or how quick it is to put two windows side by side in a split-screen.
Take a look at a full spec Mac, take the same amount of money and take a look at Dell or HP and the performance difference will BLOW YOUR MIND!
So again, why loyal to a brand which is not loyal to their customers?
Yep, that's where I'm at, I agree mostly.
I do love the macOS but, I just can't keep using such old hardware, I know the speed will be there. They claim that Windows 10 is more stable, we'll see... Microsoft always claims that, and then it isn't, with every version of Windows that comes out, so I have to be skeptical on that, we will see once I start using it.
As far as Window management, MacOS has tabbed finder windows, Windows does not., Mac has a true column view, Windows does not. and the biggest thing I use all the time is right-click the title header of say a PS file, and it gives you a document tree of where that file is, and navigates you right to the folder with the working file already highlighted. (That's my #1 fav feature of MacOS, and so far no PC tech has been able to come up with a solution for Windows to compete with that) - So for those things, the MacOS is vastly superior, plus iMessage. I text clients all the time from my desktop with screenshots, locations, outfit ideas, etc. and Windows flat doesn't have a solution for that either.
So I do think there WILL be problems with the Windows, but in theory, it's worth it for the speed. Time will tell!
Apple really don't care if professionals are satisfied or not, they want to sell units and the consumer market is the right place for that. Also because the consumer is not looking at specs or benchmarks.
Get over your loyalty to a brand, work needs to be done and that's the responsibility of a PC. Also, Windows 10 is stable, fast and has a very nice Window management - which you won't find in MAC OS.
I worked with both systems and it is always a pleasure to see some of my clients sitting beside me and asking me why I don't use a MAC until they see how quick 10-20 big files will be opened or how quick it is to put two windows side by side in a split-screen.
Take a look at a full spec Mac, take the same amount of money and take a look at Dell or HP and the performance difference will BLOW YOUR MIND!
So again, why loyal to a brand which is not loyal to their customers?
I've been using apple and mac for 5 years now, as a professional photographer, and I've always hated some things mac doesn't do.
I don't understand why people think mac is such a user friendly program. It's stable, yes, but I see a few shortcomings.
Can someone explain me some things the finder in mac can't do, and why? maybe I'm overlooking something..
some examples:
- after exporting images out of lightroom, I want to check the exported jpegs in their folder, in THUMBNAIL mode. As a windows user before, I would just double click on the first image and go through them by clicking the right arrow.
If you do this in a mac, you just open 1 image, and you have to close it and open another one to go to the next one!
I hear you say: "press spacebar for a preview!" - When you press spacebar for a preview, you can go with the arrows to the right, let's say till the fourth image on the far right in that window, it will not jump to the next first image in the next line.. why not?!
You really have to select ALL the photos, and then double click the first one. OR you have to activate the window to display all the photos in text lines, to be able to go through the photos with the down arrow. A lot more actions to do plus if you're doing this with 1000 photo's from a wedding, it might crash sometimes..
- say, I'm in thumbnail mode in a window with jpegs and I want to select photo 8 till 23, I can't click on 8 and then cmd-shift-23 to select this sequential selection... mac does not see this as a sequence.
- if I change the dimensions of the window with thumbnails in it, the position of the thumbnails won't change accordingly to keep filling the frame. If you make the window smaller you could lose sight of some photos!
- if you want to upload a photo inside a browser window, the thumbnails are too small, and in this kind of "uploading" window I can't enlarge the thumbnails to see if I'm choosing the right one!
- there's no option to "cut" in the drop down menu when you selected something.
I've asked these things several people that use mac, but nobody knew the answer, so I'm curious!