pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Which PC or MAC would you buy "now"?  (Read 32317 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: January 16, 2014, 16:24 »
0
Don't know about Windows 8, but beware of the blue screen of death in 7.
Hopefully they fixed it in 8.


http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/resolving-stop-blue-screen-errors-in-windows-7



EmberMike

« Reply #51 on: January 16, 2014, 22:12 »
0
I'm not a fan of the iMac screens. Had two and didn't like either. I switched to a Mac Pro 2 years ago and got a really nice ViewSonic screen to use with it.

I really like the expandability of the Mac Pro. Not the new ones that look like trash cans, the old towers that let you do anything to them. Figure I'll just upgrade things as needed and I expect to get quite a few years out of this thing. Told my wife this is going to be my 10-year computer. She laughed.

Challenge accepted. :)

But really, I got 5 years out of my last iMac before I felt compelled to upgrade. I really see no reason why this can't be a 10-year computer.

marthamarks

« Reply #52 on: January 17, 2014, 02:05 »
+3
My husband is on the phone all the time with Apple.  Mac software never works and they constantly have to take control of his computer to figure things out.

Gadzooks! What kind of hellaciously complicated software is he using?

I'm a sweet little old lady ;D and by some major miracle (I guess) I'm fully able to install new software on my Mac and keep it running for years, all by my itsy-bitsy self, without ever once needing to call Apple to take control of my computer to figure things out.

« Reply #53 on: January 18, 2014, 13:57 »
0
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

« Reply #54 on: January 18, 2014, 19:06 »
+2
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

I would hesitate to put SSDs into the non-essential category. The increase in performance is pretty amazing!

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #55 on: January 18, 2014, 19:14 »
+1
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

I would hesitate to put SSDs into the non-essential category. The increase in performance is pretty amazing!

I'd agree. I tested the boot time between a HDD vs Hybrid HDD/SSD. HDD was 42 seconds. Hybrid was 20 seconds. I haven't timed anything else but a lot of apps seem a lot quicker to load and run with the Hybrid.

And I'm not sure the price thing is accurate. I always believed this too but when I spec'd out a Dell laptop with similar configuration to a Macbook Pro the price was pretty close. Seems like Apple doesn't make bare bones stuff which is why PC is cheaper on average but not apples to apples.

« Reply #56 on: January 18, 2014, 20:10 »
0
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

I would hesitate to put SSDs into the non-essential category. The increase in performance is pretty amazing!

I'd agree. I tested the boot time between a HDD vs Hybrid HDD/SSD. HDD was 42 seconds. Hybrid was 20 seconds. I haven't timed anything else but a lot of apps seem a lot quicker to load and run with the Hybrid.

And I'm not sure the price thing is accurate. I always believed this too but when I spec'd out a Dell laptop with similar configuration to a Macbook Pro the price was pretty close. Seems like Apple doesn't make bare bones stuff which is why PC is cheaper on average but not apples to apples.

Of course it's quicker to load.  What do you spend your time on, loading or working and is 20 seconds at the start really worth the money?  When working it's all in RAM anyway.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #57 on: January 18, 2014, 20:57 »
0
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

I would hesitate to put SSDs into the non-essential category. The increase in performance is pretty amazing!

I'd agree. I tested the boot time between a HDD vs Hybrid HDD/SSD. HDD was 42 seconds. Hybrid was 20 seconds. I haven't timed anything else but a lot of apps seem a lot quicker to load and run with the Hybrid.

And I'm not sure the price thing is accurate. I always believed this too but when I spec'd out a Dell laptop with similar configuration to a Macbook Pro the price was pretty close. Seems like Apple doesn't make bare bones stuff which is why PC is cheaper on average but not apples to apples.

Of course it's quicker to load.  What do you spend your time on, loading or working and is 20 seconds at the start really worth the money?  When working it's all in RAM anyway.

You're right. RAM means everything. Carry on.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #58 on: January 19, 2014, 04:02 »
+3
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

I would hesitate to put SSDs into the non-essential category. The increase in performance is pretty amazing!

Slow computer means: more time to think and drink coffee.

« Reply #59 on: January 19, 2014, 05:42 »
0
I've been running a Early 2008 Mac Pro tower since, well, early 2008 obviously. Still runs fine, though I have to replace the HDs every year to keep up with storage limitations.

I think my next workstation will be an iMac though, when they make a 27" retina display one. With Thunderbolt you don't need internal SATA drives to keep the I/O speed up and that makes it a lot easier to stay on top of storage and back up. 32GB of ram and OSX running off a fast SSD and you'll be good to go I reckon, even when we're all editing 4K video from our phones in 3 years time.

Harvepino

« Reply #60 on: January 19, 2014, 07:53 »
+2
Very happy with the latest mac mini. It is 4x faster than my 5 years old iMac. It isn't much slower than Mac Pro considering the price difference. Advice: go for Fussion drive when you plan to use it for photo editing. I have the same mac mini without fussion drive as rendering server and it takes much longer to load photographs or open apps.

I believe there is new gen mac mini coming soon, I'd wait for that.

iMacs are suberb for editing as well, if you prefer all in 1 option.

« Reply #61 on: January 19, 2014, 08:58 »
0
I think my next workstation will be an iMac though

The only downside might be - if the screen goes off over time. An old monitor panel is difficult to replace DIY.  I recently sold on my 2006 Mac Pro. I had worn out several monitors over the life of the machine and am pleased that I did not have built in monitor panels. Mac Minis and Macbook Airs are the current sweet spots for most users IMO.

(OT - For various reasons I have started getting back into some coding again recently. The Apple Xcode development environment for iOS and OS X is awesome. iOS / OS X is extremely mature and well designed. I thoroughly recommend anyone with even a passing interest to download Xcode from the App Store and spend a few hours having a look at it and reading some of the documentation and history).

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #62 on: January 19, 2014, 09:21 »
0
Very happy with the latest mac mini. It is 4x faster than my 5 years old iMac. It isn't much slower than Mac Pro considering the price difference. Advice: go for Fussion drive when you plan to use it for photo editing. I have the same mac mini without fussion drive as rendering server and it takes much longer to load photographs or open apps.

I believe there is new gen mac mini coming soon, I'd wait for that.

iMacs are suberb for editing as well, if you prefer all in 1 option.

I am a fan of the Mac Mini too.
I think that it is a very  undervalued machine (you can even consider it as a portable one)
« Last Edit: January 19, 2014, 09:24 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #63 on: January 21, 2014, 14:24 »
+1
lb for lb MACs are at least twice the price - I'd prefer to spend on CPU and RAM than badges or complete non-essentials like SSDs.

You buy your computers by the pound? Probably not a good idea. :)

« Reply #64 on: January 23, 2014, 14:33 »
+1
great discussion - been trying to find out the same info - thanks much!

« Reply #65 on: January 23, 2014, 14:48 »
0
great discussion - been trying to find out the same info - thanks much!

cool stuff! still haven't made my decision, guess I have spent the money already ???

« Reply #66 on: January 23, 2014, 17:59 »
-2
PC=viruses
Mac=no viruses

« Reply #67 on: January 23, 2014, 18:14 »
+1
PC=viruses
Mac=no viruses

Macs are just as vulnerable to viruses. Since Macs are the minority it is less of a target, but to say Macs do not get viruses is just untrue.
 
No matter which you get, don't bypass virus protection software

« Reply #68 on: January 23, 2014, 19:26 »
0
PC=viruses
Mac=no viruses


Macs are just as vulnerable to viruses. Since Macs are the minority it is less of a target, but to say Macs do not get viruses is just untrue.
 
No matter which you get, don't bypass virus protection software


http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/features/security/3418367/do-apple-macs-need-antivirus-os-x-security-explained/

« Reply #69 on: January 23, 2014, 20:06 »
-1
That article is pure opinion and BS. I can write you up a virus for Apple, especially if you don't have antivirus. Let's stick to facts, fact is that a Mac is less likely to be the target of viruses since it is in the minority. This is not the same as saying they don't get viruses. Truth is they are just as vulnerable. Apple markets the no virus thing based on the small number of Mac viruses in comparison to PC. I'm not being anti-Mac, just realistic here. Mac or PC doesn't matter as much as the software and the users abilities. The system you use just determines how fast you get to your end result spec wise. This is why getting the most Ram, CPU, and GPU you can afford is more important than the Platform.


http://drtech.bangordailynews.com/2013/04/14/new-products/busting-the-myth-apple-macs-do-get-viruses/

« Reply #70 on: January 23, 2014, 21:15 »
+1
I changed to Mac this year from being PC for ten years. The PC (XP) was great, so stable. The Mac had to be fixed twice. Motherboard both times costing Apple $800 in parts. Has been good since then but I'm going to have to shell out another $200 for an Apple care plan given the history of this machine so far.

Coming back to Mac after 10 years away was like working in honey for the first few weeks. I was so use to the speed of navigation the PC. I'm slowly getting the hang of the mac.

« Reply #71 on: January 24, 2014, 13:17 »
+1
I've had more serious trouble with my MACs than I ever had with PCs - in 2012 both my iMac and my Macbook crashed within 2 days of each other! My antivirus software finds the occasional virus and cleans it.

Yet, despite the higher cost and their track record, I wouldn't go back to a PC. I've used my husband's and friend's PCs from time to time over the past 6-7 years since I switched and find them far less user-friendly than MACs.

As a photographer, when I print the colors match, even from my uncalibrated laptop prints look much as they do on my screen. Personally, I find it worth the difference. And the convenience of the MAC stores and their online help beats any of the PC manufacturers I've dealt with (I had trouble with my Dell and HP PCs/laptops too - and getting help was always a trial).
Just one woman's opinion.

Once you get the hang of the MAC again, I think you'll be happy. Apple Care is a necessity. Good choice.


« Reply #72 on: May 06, 2014, 09:13 »
0
started this interesting discussion back in January and I still haven't made up my mind, lately I have been looking at the Lenovo A730, too bad there aren't many extended reviews on it, anyone has or knows a person that purchased one?

thanks in advance!

« Reply #73 on: May 06, 2014, 09:42 »
+3
I am purchasing a new Mac this week. I looked and thought hard about buying a PC -- the value is so much better, but having owned both Macs and PCs, the Macs require much less maintenance. I have virtually never had a serious problem with any of my Mac laptops and desktops in 20 years. The PCs I have owned always had problems requiring lots of attention. My wife has a Dell laptop and if a week goes by without a problem it's a miracle.  The reality is, I am too busy to spend time on computer maintenance.

« Reply #74 on: May 06, 2014, 09:53 »
+1
I would invest in PC Hackintosh.
My working configuraton: (2 years old) - Intel i7 3770K/4 cores, 32GB, GF450 1GB, 4xSSD is about 700 now (UK) + now Maverics is free. Solutions, hints and guides here: www.tonymacx86.com


I equate Hackintoshing with image and film piracy. If you are using a thing beyond pure experimentation I think you should pay for it. And OS X which is basically free is funded by the people who buy Macs.

Why not go the Linux route if you want a great free OS ? Linux is excellent.


A "hackintosh" is just a PC running Mac OS. Began to be possible once Macs started using Intel processors.

Hardly piracy.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
9659 Views
Last post March 14, 2011, 05:33
by fotorob
4 Replies
8948 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
5 Replies
8697 Views
Last post September 17, 2011, 22:33
by PeterChigmaroff
25 Replies
49838 Views
Last post May 26, 2015, 05:40
by cathyslife
8 Replies
5334 Views
Last post August 21, 2013, 23:16
by stockphoto-images.com

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors