i'm using PC and Macs since the early 80's, if mac users are still ok using just one mouse button i'm afraid they're going to be confused with two buttons

It's true that the mid 80s Macs you were once familiar with only had a one button mouse.

OS X fully supports 2 and 3 button mice, wheel mice etc. The interface and menus are built around right click etc. The standalone and integrated trackpads also fully replicate the old 3 button paradigm but also support a wider range of gestures.

I recently upgraded.

PC i7 32 GB RAM, SSD local disk (+four HDD for storage).

price for the upgrading: about 900 dollars

It flies, no matter what software I'm using.

There are many of us who don't want to build our own machines. We don't know or care what is inside. We want to buy a computer that works from the get-go, is fast, has an operating system that is easy to upgrade, has a display that works with our eyes and that can be color-tuned to they way we work, will not be obsolete in a year and seldom needs trouble-shooting. I work on a Windows machine at work, a Mac at home. I use the same programs and they work just as well on both. They are both speedy. The dif is that there is an IT staff at work that takes care of all the problems and upgrades. At home I don't have to know too much other than every Mac I have owned has been worry-free out of the box and lasts forever. Yes, I back-up - that is a given no matter your system. Yes, I add as much memory and storage as I can but that can be done before the machine arrives at my house. Do I pay more, probably but the convenience is worth it to me since I am not a computer tech and do not play one on tv. It all comes down to personal preference (duh) and any time this question is asked you will get the same answers. It's just like the question, "which is the best camera, blah, blah". It depends on what you want to shoot and how you work. As with cameras, I say give a few a try and see what feels right for you. Same with computers. Your mileage may vary.

There are many of us who just want to be lumberjacks, no need to concern ourselves with what/how computers are, and all that 21st century BS. Just need an axe and a comp that can log on to the lumberjack forums on weekends.

Quote from: topol on January 13, 2014, 20:53

Quote from: cuppacoffee on January 13, 2014, 10:24

There are many of us who don't want to build our own machines. We don't know or care what is inside. We want to buy a computer that works from the get-go, is fast, has an operating system that is easy to upgrade, has a display that works with our eyes and that can be color-tuned to they way we work, will not be obsolete in a year and seldom needs trouble-shooting. I work on a Windows machine at work, a Mac at home. I use the same programs and they work just as well on both. They are both speedy. The dif is that there is an IT staff at work that takes care of all the problems and upgrades. At home I don't have to know too much other than every Mac I have owned has been worry-free out of the box and lasts forever. Yes, I back-up - that is a given no matter your system. Yes, I add as much memory and storage as I can but that can be done before the machine arrives at my house. Do I pay more, probably but the convenience is worth it to me since I am not a computer tech and do not play one on tv. It all comes down to personal preference (duh) and any time this question is asked you will get the same answers. It's just like the question, "which is the best camera, blah, blah". It depends on what you want to shoot and how you work. As with cameras, I say give a few a try and see what feels right for you. Same with computers. Your mileage may vary.

There are many of us who just want to be lumberjacks, no need to concern ourselves with what/how computers are, and all that 21st century BS. Just need an axe and a comp that can log on to the lumberjack forums on weekends.

Why did you bother posting such an idiotic response? Oh, the answer lies in my sentence, sorry.

Well that's a tad embarrassing with such basic irony. What I meant is saying that you don't want to care how computers work, etc, is saying you don't want to live/be compatible with the 21st century.  Glad I could help, always here for the simple folk.

You must mean 1987, the first Mac wasn�t even around until �83.

Actually, I did mean 1982. If you'll notice, I said I got an Apple II that year. Not a Mac II. Before the Mac came out, there were the original Apple, Apple II, and even an Apple III.

Believe me, I still have documents written on my original Apple II, dated 1982.

Quote from: cuppacoffee on January 12, 2014, 01:31

You must mean 1987, the first Mac wasn�t even around until �83. My first Mac was the 512K in 1984. I think the Mac II came out in '86 or '87.

The Apple II came out in 1977. It's not unlikely that Martha would purchase one in 1982 because Apple continued to sell them and introduce new Apple II models up until 1988, well after the introduction of the Macintosh in 1984.

Exactly right.

As an old-timer with a loooooong history of using Apple products, I do know what computers I used in the early days.

Martha, I didn't mean to challenge your statement. I'm seasoned too and have used Macs and/or Apples since the beginning. The Apple II wasn't in use at many places in the early years but that doesn't mean you didn't use one. You were one of the lucky ones to have an alternative to DOS. Looking back you and I have seen a lot of tech changes.

Hobo - Yes, I realize that Windows has come a long way and as I said, I use both with equal results. I guess you could also say that since this is 2014 what is the dif between a Canon and Nikon camera? Not as much difference as in 1997 but you will still find people who insist that one is "better". It's more about comfort level and often past experience. Even though a $1000 bottle of wine may lose in a taste test to a $5 bottle, there are some who will insist that the more expensive is "better." Different strokes for different folks...

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 am PC builder for 15 years I  would buy all parts and build it. Best solution for performance and scalability for the money + I love building my machine.

But if you are not, I make it easy. Here is the answer in two scenarios :

 - If you want easy setup, worry free OS and you are fine with paying more - buy MAC
 - If you want best performance and save some money for lens e.g., and you are fine with handling Win7/8 (I hate w8) - buy PC

enjoy

I still have the receipt for my first "real" computer, which was an Apple IIe, dual floppy drives, monitor (monochrome), very expensive Hayes 300 baud modem, daisy wheel printer, monitor was composite back then. But since I can't quote it exactly, about $2700 drove it home and assembled it myself. Still  have that computer and used it for my checkbook for a long, long time.

First IBM, which was really an IBM computer, complete with a huge 20MB hard drive and 2MB of memory. Wow, loaded 8086 and EGA graphics.  Ran about $2000 - but remember times had changed and technology was getting less expensive. (last I saw it, under a desk in the office somewhere)

TRS 80 Model III was more expensive than either of the above. Still have it, doesn't work, but with some effort it might. It was the floppy drive to boot LDOS that went bad. There's a good reason people called them Trash 80s.

I've stuck to MS-DOS computers because that's what I have and what I build and what I can afford. Nothing wrong with people who picked Macs, they work fine also. Each has advantages.

Quote from: DF_Studios on January 12, 2014, 09:24

Note the computer equipment sans monitor was about $1200.  Same with Apple probably be $5000 (ok maybe I exaggerate)

Yes, you definitely do exaggerate.

Yes I can answer:

I guess you could also say that since this is 2014 what is the dif between a Canon and Nikon camera?

One has a K in the name and the other has a C, after that, it's difficult to find anything really different except personal choice. Both have N's and an o and take fine photographs, in the right hands.

I shoot Canon because my first SLR was a Canon. Almost every camera I've had since then has been a Canon.

I had to decide at the time, Yashika, Minolta, Pentax, Nikon or Canon. (think about 1966) I couldn't afford a Nikon and Canon had good lens quality. The Pentax had a threaded mount, and the Canon a Bayonet. Other two didn't offer the accessories, durability or options I wanted. I was happy then (still have that camera...) and I'm happy now.

Nikon people somewhere made the same decisions and picked what they liked and wanted and here we all are. So I'll rest on, one has a K in the name the other has a C. 

Reminds me I should get out one of the old IIe's and see if I remember how to boot it. I did get an external drive eventually and a color monitor. I wonder if I can find Lunar Lander or one of those games with block people and square balls?

thanks again for all relevant information guys! I still haven't made up my mind because I am very busy lately but I am still more inclined to PC (Dell) once I don't want to change all my workflow, hope this topic is helping other as well

If you use Lightroom and Photoshop (and most of the software) your workflow will be very similar with Windows or Mac.
Personally I should not consider not changing the workflow a valid point for a decision.

And according to Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/04/25/the-best-windows-pc-is-an-apple-mac/

Forget the PC and MAC BS...just buy the best computer you can afford. In short get the most processing power and RAM you can afford. A good mid-range video card is pretty cheap these days. And a solid state drive makes a different when open and saving programs and files to your hard drive.

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.