Mac or PC?

markos1963

Oh God what have I done? This is like asking Shimano or Campag( with Linux users saying, 'why not Sram?')

I've got a budget of £1400 and I was looking at a new iMac, never had an Apple computer before but fancy the change. The more I look at it from a hardware point of view the more I begin to have doubts.

Problem being Apple users and salesman are so evangelical that its difficult to get an objective point of view.

Computer is to be used for cataloguing 10,000 hard copy photos, low level gaming, internet and music

ride_whenever

if you want gaming then pc. There simply isn't the range for mac, it's changing a bit now steam is on the mac but you're still a little limited. Plus you can customise the storage options much more easily on the pc for storing and backing up the photos.

mcj78

Hey - from what you're describing, an iMac would fit the bill - there'll always be those who say that you could have a PC built to the same spec for half the price etc. etc. & maybe you could, however having used both I prefer the Mac OS to any Windows platform i've used, which makes a big difference to me - no experience of Linux so can't comment on that. As for head to head technical specs against a desktop from Sony/Dell etc. etc. I wouldn't know where to start the comparison - not sure if certain Mac components are proprietary so comparing directly might be difficult. If you do decide for an iMac - hang off a month or 2 as the range is due for a major update in the 1st quarter of this year according to macrumours etc.

J

markos1963

ride_whenever wrote:

if you want gaming then pc. There simply isn't the range for mac, it's changing a bit now steam is on the mac but you're still a little limited. Plus you can customise the storage options much more easily on the pc for storing and backing up the photos.

The games I play are already available for Mac so not a problem there.
I thought Apple's iFace was very good for storing photo's?

markos1963

mcj78 wrote:

Hey - from what you're describing, an iMac would fit the bill - there'll always be those who say that you could have a PC built to the same spec for half the price etc. etc. & maybe you could, however having used both I prefer the Mac OS to any Windows platform i've used, which makes a big difference to me - no experience of Linux so can't comment on that. As for head to head technical specs against a desktop from Sony/Dell etc. etc. I wouldn't know where to start the comparison - not sure if certain Mac components are proprietary so comparing directly might be difficult. If you do decide for an iMac - hang off a month or 2 as the range is due for a major update in the 1st quarter of this year according to macrumours etc.

J

Thanks for that, it is difficult to compare, the iMac comes with an Intel i3 processor and I saw an HP pc at the same price with an i7!! that's why the doubt is creeping in.

One thing that I have heard a lot of is Apple's after sales service being top class so another factor to consider

mcj78

From a gaming perspective ride_whenever's point is a good un - however if you're not bothered about having every new big title that's available you should be fine - best thing to do is head into somewhere like Currys that stocks both & physically have a play around with what you'd likely be spending your cash on & see which suits you best.

J

fast as fupp

if you like viruses, spyware, tinkering with drivers and switching your computer on and off go for a windows pc

if not go for mac or linux

Nuggs

Mac.

That is all.

daviesee

markos1963 wrote:

Oh God what have I done? This is like asking Shimano or Campag( with Linux users saying, 'why not Sram?')

You've gone and done it now!

I'll get the popcorn and settle in

You want the Mac. Get the Mac. Life is too short.

Anonymous

They are both computers, they are more similar than they are different.

However they both have limitations and really the question is which limitations are a bigger problem.

From what you've said gaming may be the deciding factor.

rick_chasey

Nuggs wrote:

Mac.

That is all.

Macs are rubbish.

However, I can't explain how bad they are, so here is a man who's visceral hatred of Mac's is plenty more eloquent than mine.

Charlie Brooker

And for the OP:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ac-windows

pneumatic

We've got both in our house (1 desktop PC, 4 laptop PC's and 1 Apple laptop) Everybody is jealous of my daughter and her Apple (their most basic model). It turns on straight away (cf 8 minutes for my business grade PC laptop), it is very pretty, the graphics are crystal clear, the battery lasts more than twice as long as any of the others, the internet streaming is good, etc.. etc..

It is not perfect (there is something weird going on with Entourage and email sending at the moment) but it is a hell of a lot less hassle than any other computers we have had over the years.

2Phat4Rapha

Mac. - Same reason I drive an automatic. (Albeit one with a fancy electronic manual mode but I rarely use it).

flasher

Get the iMac, if only because it looks good

markos1963

Flasher wrote:

Get the iMac, if only because it looks good

Now we're getting somewhere!

finchy

We have a PC and a Mac. The PC gets turned on about once a week, the Mac every day. There really is no comparison, Macs are that much easier to use.

joshtp

get the i Mac with a big HD and run a split disk... my cousin had an iMac with a boot menu giving the simple option of 7 or iosX

best set up i'v ever known, used or seen.

benefits of both, with the frankly gorgeous looks of both.


you need to get a big enough HD though, as upgrading, while possible, is a right fiddle.

Valy

WTFBBQ?!?!?!!? Sram is Linux? That is Campy mate... hear that? CAMPAGNOLO IS LINUX.

___________________________________

Macs are shiny and pretty, have a good OS and are overpriced. However some of the iMacs with the 2560x1440 IPS displays are pretty good value as the displays themselves are about £600-£700 alone. The specs of the one in your budget are lacking compared to a similarly priced PC big time, but you are getting the nice IPS monitor and if you say you are not gonna be playing latest cutting edge games, then it's looking like a good option for you.

Have a little play around in a shop for sure though - be prepared for a bit of possible frustration with the OS if you are not used to it and as suggested - if there is a new model on the way, then wait a little + see what the new specs are rumoured to be.

BTW - how much space are those photos taking up?

mididoctors

campag

markos1963

Valy wrote:

BTW - how much space are those photos taking up?

None at the moment, they are in the loft waiting to be scanned and sorted!!!!!

Le Commentateur

Isn't the Mac OSX based on Linux? Oh well, whatever, it's better now they have switched to Intel processors from the older PowerPC ones.

With gaming, if you are desperate for something that hasn't had a Mac conversion, you could run a PC emulator on the machine to play them that way, but I suspect you'll need something with a lot of RAM and enough space to install the various extra OS software on top of the Mac OSX system software.

The iPhoto/iMove/iTunes combination is quite good, as it is easy to get going making your own little videos with musical soundtracks. iPhoto is like iTunes for your images, a content management system. For creative editing stuff it's best to install specialist software for these tasks (e.g. Photoshop, Audacity).

The OS also comes with its own scanning and font management software.

guinea

Ugh. People are dumb. Piicking a computer based on operating system is a stupid as buying a car because it has 19" alloys.

Decide which software you want. Then decide which platform supports your requirements best when balanced against price. Then buy that one.

When looked at objectively, for 99% of people, that is likely to be a PC.

PCs are far cheaper, more versitile in terms of software and easier to upgrade. If Windows 7 is too hard for you to use, then you shouldn't have a computer.

By all means buy a Mac but don't pretend you're doing it for any other reason that it's shiny.

Valy

guinea wrote:

Ugh. People are dumb. Piicking a computer based on operating system is a stupid as buying a car because it has 19" alloys.

Decide which software you want. Then decide which platform supports your requirements best when balanced against price. Then buy that one.

When looked at objectively, for 99% of people, that is likely to be a PC.

PCs are far cheaper, more versitile in terms of software and easier to upgrade. If Windows 7 is too hard for you to use, then you shouldn't have a computer.

By all means buy a Mac but don't pretend you're doing it for any other reason that it's shiny.

You may be missing the point. It's not just about the OS, it's about the whole package.

craker

£1400? I didn't think people spent that sort of cash on computers anymore.

The argument from the people-who-have-both camp is quite compelling, and for that sort of cash you'd expect something tip top.

It is a means to an end though, if your cash strapped like me you could get something absolutely useable for about £400 all in. They keep trying to upgrade my Core II at work for something more modern and I just can't see the point.

FWIW I keep trying to get into *nix (Ubuntu mostly) for ££££ free it's great, just not as polished as the mainstream and you need a phd to sort it out when it goes wrong.

Bon_Jovi

I do have Windows and Mac. I find the Apple fans to be fanatical. What Apple does is give you a very well integrated package, but your are locked to their ecosystem. They like to control everything - hardware, software, apps that can go on it, etc. This gives users a bit more stability and predictability, at the expense of flexibility.

If all I did was listen to iTunes, surf the web, and be into video editing, I guess I would go for Mac. However, for me, the flexibility I get with Windows is awesome. I am very impressed with Windows 7 (if you havent tried it, you should) and you can virtually run any software you want. If you want a strong picture manager, get Picassa from google which is a lot like iPhoto. Unfortunately, laptop manufacturers are playing catch-up with Apple in terms of making the equipment "sexy". Macs do look very "sexy".

As a business user, and someone who values flexibility and compatibility, I go for Windows everytime. Maybe I will eventually get an iPad to satisfy my light computing usage when at home (web surfing, gmail, pictures, etc) and have the best of both worlds. A good Windows laptop + iPad will probably cost you less than a decent Mac Pro.

Le Commentateur

guinea wrote:

By all means buy a Mac but don't pretend you're doing it for any other reason that it's shiny.

... although all my clients use them, so that's a factor too.

thel33ter

PC.

_HENDO_

Buy a Mac if you are into media, watching/editing videos or photos.

PC if you do lots of word processing.

Simple as that really.

ALaPlage

After years with windows based PC I've just switched to iMac. Choice was made for photographic use and I run Aperture and CS5. The iPhoto that comes bundled with the computer is a pretty good bit of software for basic editing and creating a usable library.

The iMac IPS screen is amazing for image editing and viewing and taking the cost of a 27" screen into the equation it makes the true cost of Apple v PC much more in line. Granted the kit now in Apples are similar to PC and pound for pound it will appear that the PC package represents better value. Factor in a quality large monitor though and the differential narrows dramatically.

Ignore the responses that Mac is crap or PC is Crap - go with what works for you and consider what your needs are. If as you say your game playing choices are met by Mac and photography is a key reason in your choice then the iMac is a great choice.

Apple does tie you in but in doing so it makes everything work so well together. My experience is the OS is more intuitive and the software I use (which is a direct comparism to a dual core PC with same RAM) runs a lot faster on the iMac.

As already pointed out the start up times and close down is so quick - seconds rather than what can be minutes on PC.

Many Mac users wax lyrical about the kit they use. I understand it now I have my own as it is the experience in use that is hard to explain but is a pure pleasure. I have had no frozen programs, bugs, virus alerts and it just works so well.

It is a little like why buy a Mercedes/BMW/AUDI when a Ford Focus will do. There is a difference in the experience in use (equally in price too but none the less a difference in the quality of the experience). I used to ride a perfectly adequate road bike from a well known motoring chain - I got to try a friends Trek Madone. The experience was completely different - lighter, quicker to react when putting the power down, rolling speed smoother and faster..... you pays your money......

For photographic use iMac wins for me. Pleasure in use iMac wins for me. So much so I've treated myself to a Macbook pro too.

Oh and of course as previously mentioned - Apples are shiny and the eye candy of the computing world.

Apple care is amazing too - but you need to experience it to really appreciate how good it is.

re-cycles

I'm using a 1998 imac, and its still going strong! Macs are ideal if you just want it to work out of the box and do everything it should without any dramas or constant downloads. Sure the software is more expensive, but it'll work.

ALaPlage

In response to Hendo I have Office for Mac 2011 and it is as good as Office on any PC and docs transfer between machines seamlessly - I have a Dell laptop for work and often will write up work on my home iMac and copy into the laptop via a USB stick. Never had any issues with Word, Excel or Powerpoint and it all works extremely well on the Mac.

I would also add that the new App store offers great value software - Aperture only £45.

Gaming choice is limited in comparism to PC but the gap is narrowing and if you can get the games you want on Mac then they are worthy of serious consideration.