I am a graphics design college student. It is always recommended that we use a mac. What is a mac going to do for me that a pc cant? Also if I was to get a pc instead of mac what would be the best option closest to a mac? Which mac would you suggest?
You absolutely do not need a Mac. They are very nice machines, and they are quite useful for many things, including design. However, there is absolutely nothing a Mac can do that can’t be done on another machine. All the major design and graphic software runs equally well on Macs and Windows machines.
In the early 90s, Windows was not capable of high-end multimedia, and the Mac was. That’s when the idea that Mac was for creative people and Windows is more for homes and businesses came about. Apple has carefully nursed this myth into a full-blown icon. A Mac is a very good machine, but it’s almost always pricier than the equivalent PC, and gives you fewer options.
Macs are critically important to the design culture. It’s almost a symbol of being artistic, but that is a symbol born more of a carefully-nurtured image campaign (on the part of Apple) than any sort of reality about how the machines perform.
Any reasonably-high-end PC will do the job. Since there is real competition for PC hardware (unlike the mac world) you’ll be able to find something with the same general specs quite a bit cheaper.
I’m no Windows bigot, I’m currently writing this on a Linux machine. I also use both Mac and Windows. I like Macs. I just think they’re overpriced, and I think people have been taken in by clever marketing.
It’s ironic that artists – people who pride themselves so much on creativity and individuality are such sheep when it comes to their computer of choice.
If you’re a student just get a MacBook from eBay, a white/black one from last year.
I bought one for my studies, and it cost me £400, but Apple sell them "refurbished" for over £700.
I have no idea why Macs are preferred, but I prefer them to PCs, they are much easier to use and have a better Graphical User Interface.
References :
If this was about 10 years ago, then, yes, Macs were better for graphical design.
But these days, both Macs and PC and software for both are the same for graphical work. So for graphics design, either is good. There’s no difference in functions between a Mac or PC–they pretty much use similar components inside the computer. Just make sure to get a good graphics card and a good monitor.
The biggest selling point with Macs is that Apple can say they are more stable, but that’s because they are a closed system. If you are a novice computer user, I’d suggest getting a Mac will be better because it will give you less problems.
But if if you an advanced computer user that likes to tweak and configure your system, PCs will give you more freedom and are easier to do that with, but you’ll also have to know how to fix things if things go wrong.
References :
My personal opinion is this, Windows is built for gaming, and just that. Macs on the other hand are created for Video Editing, Music Editing, and Graphics. Macs have much greater power compared to a standard Windows machine and thus are able to process graphics much faster without any slow downs (Most of the time).
At my school I used a Mac for Graphics and a Windows for Graphics and compared them. The Mac won hands down as being easier to use and the fact it doesn’t clump together the program like Windows.
References :
Compared both of them and personal preference.
You absolutely do not need a Mac. They are very nice machines, and they are quite useful for many things, including design. However, there is absolutely nothing a Mac can do that can’t be done on another machine. All the major design and graphic software runs equally well on Macs and Windows machines.
In the early 90s, Windows was not capable of high-end multimedia, and the Mac was. That’s when the idea that Mac was for creative people and Windows is more for homes and businesses came about. Apple has carefully nursed this myth into a full-blown icon. A Mac is a very good machine, but it’s almost always pricier than the equivalent PC, and gives you fewer options.
Macs are critically important to the design culture. It’s almost a symbol of being artistic, but that is a symbol born more of a carefully-nurtured image campaign (on the part of Apple) than any sort of reality about how the machines perform.
Any reasonably-high-end PC will do the job. Since there is real competition for PC hardware (unlike the mac world) you’ll be able to find something with the same general specs quite a bit cheaper.
I’m no Windows bigot, I’m currently writing this on a Linux machine. I also use both Mac and Windows. I like Macs. I just think they’re overpriced, and I think people have been taken in by clever marketing.
It’s ironic that artists – people who pride themselves so much on creativity and individuality are such sheep when it comes to their computer of choice.
References :
http://www.aharrisbooks.net
I would get a PC for Graphics Design.. There is nothing the Mac can do that a PC can’t. Another user said that they are sheep and it is true. You get much better specs on a PC that a Mac for a lot less..
Today, Macs use a subset of PC hardware. Why spend extra to get the same CPU chips, graphics cards and OS X isn’t as secure as you think..
Don’t believe the lies that Macs are better than PCs at graphics/animation.. Dreamworks Animation http://www.dreamworksanimation.com/ under studio click on Technology of Animation, an independent film maker I know uses PCs, a graphic artist I used to know uses PCs also.
PRICE/SPEC COMPARISON (HIGH END)
Mac Pro (Compared on 07/2009)
4 Core Xenon 2.66GHZ (3500 series) ($2500 (NO MONITOR) $900(MONITOR)) = $3300 (Significantly Slower)
3GB (three 1GB) memory
640GB Hard Drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive (11% faster)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB (Much worse)
4 Core Xenon "Nehalem" 2.93GHZ (3500 series) ($3000 (NO MONITOR) $900(MONITOR)) = $ $3900 (Significantly slower)
3GB (three 1GB) memory
640GB Hard Drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB
http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/configure/MB871LL/A?mco=NDE4NDIwNA
8 Core Xenon 2.66GHZ (3500 series) ($3300 (NO MONITOR) $900(MONITOR)) = $4200 (Signifcantly Slower – Not Much better than 4 Core Mac Pro at same speed, look below)
6GB (6×1GB) memory
640GB Hard Drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB
8 Core Xenon "Nehalem" 2.93GHZ (3500 series) ($5900 (NO MONITOR) $900(MONITOR)) = $6800 (Signifcantly Slower – Not Much better than 4 Core Mac Pro at same speed, look below)
6GB (6×1GB) memory
640GB Hard Drive
18x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB
http://store.apple.com/us_smb_78313/configure/MB535LL/A?mco=NDE4NDIyMQ
Dell XPS 730x $1800 NO MONITOR 24Inch Monitor(Min Option on Apple for 900) $340 MOUSE $10 KEYBOAR $80) = $2230
I7 920 2.66(2.67)GHZ
6GB (6×1GB) memory (Double Ram of 4 Core, Same Ram as 8 Core)
640GB Hard Drive (Same)
16x CD/DVD (11% slower)
ATI RADEON 4850 with 512MB http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-4850.13975.0.html
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=dxcwwy2&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&kc=desktop-xps-730x
Dell XPS 730x $2270 NO MONITOR 24Inch Monitor(Min Option on Apple for 900) $340 MOUSE $10 KEYBOAR $80) = $2700
I7 920 3.06(3.07)GHZ
6GB (6×1GB) memory (Double Ram of 4 Core, Same Ram as 8 Core)
640GB Hard Drive (Same)
16x CD/DVD (11% slower)
ATI RADEON 4850 with 512MB http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-4850.13975.0.html
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?oc=dxcwwy2&c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&kc=desktop-xps-730x
High end CPU comparison
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
I7 920 2.67GHZ Rank#9 http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7+920+%40+2.67GHz
I7 950 3.07GHZ Rank#4 http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7+950+%40+3.07GHz
Intel Xenon W3520 http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+W3520+%40+2.67GHz
Macbook Pro 8 vs 4 Core Comparison
Macbook Pro (in 2007) 8 Core was barely faster than 4 Core (Memory Bottleneck?) http://www.barefeats.com/octopro1.html
MacBook Pro (2009) 8 Core either barely faster or a little slower than 4 Core http://www.macworld.com/article/139507/2009/03/macpro2009.html
High End Graphic Card Comparison
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html ATI Radeon 4850 Rank# 16.. (High end) in Dell XPS 730x
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?cpu=GeForce+GT+120 Rank# 142 (High end) in Mac Pro
A number of PCs can also run OS X (Mac OS) http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=os+x+on+pc&btnG=Google+Search&aq=0&oq=os+x+on+ as well just that Apple makes it illegal in order to get Market share.. The reason why Mac can run native Windows is because it is using a subset of PC hardware,
If you decide to buy a Mac for running Windows, you will still have to get the same virus/spyware protection, and run into the same issues as a regular PC.
Now is a Mac worth buying for OS X?
I say: NO… for the following reasons…
QUALITY/PROBLEMS
Contrary to belief, Macs are not better quality. Apple also has been changing suppliers to try to "lower the price" and thus lowering quality. Even with the lower prices, Macs still cost more, they spend a higher percent of budget trying to make it look pretty, and marketing.
Sample of problems: Overheating Macbooks, OS X- not responding to keyboard, some units with 16bit screens, etc. Apple statistics are misleading since Mac users with problem machines are more likely to go out and buy a new computer than PC users. Apple is lowering prices which means you can expect lower quality than in the past. Apple had switched the manufacturers producing parts. OS X also has problems slowing down.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10020263-17.html
http://www.tuaw.com/2008/08/01/apples-quality-dwindling-my-macbook-pro-sob-story/
http://www.appledefects.com/
http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/os-x-operating-system/107748-mac-os-leopard-running-slow.html
http://cybernetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/reliable-laptops.jpg
Repairs are more expensive than PCs since the IMac, Mac Mini are compact units, and Apple charges a premium for their services. Some repairs can be done by another repair service but the compact design of the computer causes problems.
With an IMac, if the problem is with the monitor, the whole computer would have to be brought in.
IMac and Mac mini lack expansion.
VIRUSES
Mac OS X has viruses (and significantly on the rise), a friend of mine has a virused Mac. As more users use Macs, more viruses will come out for it. Especially when users think "they are safe".
http://infosecurity.us/?p=4005
http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2008/07/malware_authors_take_aim_at_growing_number_of_1.html
http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/poll_have_you_noticed_an_increase_in_malware_viruses_etc_on_your_mac/
SECURITY
Mac OS X was hacked in 2006 less than 30 minutes, and within 2 minutes in a contest in 2008, and within 10 seconds in 2009. In 2008, Linux and Vista were not hacked until another day when restrictions were lowered. Vista was next, and then Linux. In 2009 Windows 7 fell shortly after the Mac but Linux was unscathed.
Macs are standardized with Cameras, if your Mac gets hacked, the hacker can turn on your camera with more ease.
Please Note: All OS’s have vulnerabilities.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Mac-OS-X-hacked-under-30-minutes/0,130061744,139241748,00.htm
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/03/27/Gone-in-2-minutes-Mac-gets-hacked-first-in-contest_1.html
http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/03/19/Researcher_cracks_Mac_in_10_seconds_1.html
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Microsoft-Finds-Irony-in-Mac-OS-X-Getting-Hacked-Before-Vista-SP1-82135.shtml
References :