Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Computers & Peripherals => Topic started by: Paul Wright on September 04, 2017, 09:52:08 pm
-
As if right on cue, my 3.5 year old PC is starting to exhibit those annoying little glitches and slowdowns (especially in Lr) that get you thinking about the next upgrade. This is a Win10 64, i7-4790 @ 3.6 GHz, Nvidia GTX 770, 32Gb, SSD setup, backing up to a five-bay Synology NAS. I'm entirely platform agnostic with a new MBP Touchbar for location work and tethering, and a MacMini for office use, web browsing, MS Office stuff and iTunes. The performance per dollar equation for primary workstations has always favored a high spec custom built PC. They're great for a couple of years then the degradation starts to kick in. Any Macs I've had seem to last for years. Maybe time to switch to iMacs as primary workstations?
Before I commence research on a September/October 2017 PC build, has anyone done a recent PC build and be happy to share the specs; also it would be great to hear from someone who has made the switch to iMac after an extended period with PC's. The upcoming iMac Pro looks like it will be a little too high priced. It's that darn performance per dollar equation again.
-pw
-
Simply rebuilding the current machine (clean installation of OS and apps) might prove to be all you need (and you'd have to do that anyway with a new machine).
-
Simply rebuilding the current machine (clean installation of OS and apps) might prove to be all you need (and you'd have to do that anyway with a new machine).
second to try the clean reinstall ... I am still doing fine with a PC notebook of the same age (i7-4810mq, nVidia GTX 870M, 32GB RAM, 2 x mSATA SSDs + 2 x SATA HDD) for A7R2 raw files ...
-
This is one of those questions that can only be answered by yourself. Everyone else gives their personal experience. I am not computer illiterate, having spent 40+ years in the IT industry, but computers is not my hobby, they are a tool used mainly for photography.
So for me expect them to work out of the box, to work every time and to work for at least 5 years. My experience with PCs is the same as yours. After 3 years be become a pain, if not from the start. My wife uses PCs. She bought a new one home and told me how much faster it was than the old one. I looked at the specs and it was exactly the same as the old one. So yes rebuilding would probably fix it. Then you have all that data and users and settings and applications on the old machine that you have to move over. So what do you value your time at per hour?
I currently have a 2013 iMac. I bought it because my 2008 iMac started to fail in the hard disk. Last year I needed another computer so I had the hard drive on the 2008 replaced. Still works fine on the almost latest operating system. Each time I just plug in a Time Machine backup and restore. The same day I have a new machine with original users, programs, data and settings, and I don't even have to watch it.
So I have used PCs since DOS 6.0 and Macs since OS7 around 1988. I would pick a Mac every time over a PC for productivity per dollar if you factor in your own time, backup and restore, security etc. Cheers
-
This is one of those questions that can only be answered by yourself. Everyone else gives their personal experience. I am not computer illiterate, having spent 40+ years in the IT industry, but computers is not my hobby, they are a tool used mainly for photography.
So for me expect them to work out of the box, to work every time and to work for at least 5 years. My experience with PCs is the same as yours. After 3 years be become a pain, if not from the start. My wife uses PCs. She bought a new one home and told me how much faster it was than the old one. I looked at the specs and it was exactly the same as the old one. So yes rebuilding would probably fix it. Then you have all that data and users and settings and applications on the old machine that you have to move over. So what do you value your time at per hour?
I currently have a 2013 iMac. I bought it because my 2008 iMac started to fail in the hard disk. Last year I needed another computer so I had the hard drive on the 2008 replaced. Still works fine on the almost latest operating system. Each time I just plug in a Time Machine backup and restore. The same day I have a new machine with original users, programs, data and settings, and I don't even have to watch it.
So I have used PCs since DOS 6.0 and Macs since OS7 around 1988. I would pick a Mac every time over a PC for productivity per dollar if you factor in your own time, backup and restore, security etc. Cheers
exactly the point... if somebody spends " 40+ years " in " in the IT industry ", but can't keep a simple PC in shape then indeed he needs to stay w/ Mac ;D
-
exactly the point... if somebody spends " 40+ years " in " in the IT industry ", but can't keep a simple PC in shape then indeed he needs to stay w/ Mac ;D
Thanks for your point. Steve Jobs and even Bill Gates were also in the IT industry, but they didn't make money selling to geeks. There is this whole other world of normal people called users of which geeks have no knowledge.
Users could probably works out how to keep a PC in shape, just like geeks could work out how to write a manual, but why should they when there are actually computers that basically maintain themselves and keep working by design for twice the time. Time is money. If your time is worth zero per hour then buy a PC and enjoy your new hobby. Cheers.
-
Come on guys - we don't need yet another PC vs Mac argument.
It doesn't help the OP (who has already declared being platform agnostic). Different people like different systems and that's all there is to it.
-
Users could probably works out how to keep a PC in shape, just like geeks could work out how to write a manual, but why should they when there are actually computers that basically maintain themselves and keep working by design for twice the time. Time is money. If your time is worth zero per hour then buy a PC and enjoy your new hobby. Cheers.
Thanks Bob, your points make a lot of sense. Following the "time is money" thought, the as yet unreleased, high priced iMac Pro may actually make a lot of sense. All it has to do is give me five trouble free, productive years and I'm ahead of a $3k PC build which based on all previous experience starts to get annoying after a couple of years. Time Machine offers has a very high value for business security as well. My only regret may be losing three inches of screen real estate compared to the current 30 inch panel, but the 5120x2880 27inch 5k display may just make up for it with sheer image quality. Do I sound like I've convinced myself?
-pw
-
If you're happy to drop some cash on the Mac (and it will be a great machine), why not consider doing a rebuild on the PC for no more than the time involved? You'll need to do it for the Mac anyway, basically, and then you may have two machines (one for a backup, bigger screen, whatever) or at least a faster one pending the release of the Mac?
-
In my situation, I'd also like to upgrade. I'm on an 17-2600k that's ~6 yrs old, still going strong. Going to Intel's fastest (i7-7700k), I might get about a 50% improvement. That's not bad, but not enough to cause me to dance in the streets.
Problem is that LR and PS suck at using more than 4 cores, so some 12-16 core monster offers me nothing, and in fact would be slower due to lower base clock rate. So, I've resolved to sit and wait until things get faster.
Your 4790 is faster than my 2600, so you wouldn't even see 50% improvement.
My suggestion: if your hardware is solid, then do a clean install and wait for Intel to press the gas pedal a bit further.
I'm personally waiting for something that's twice as fast as what I have.
good lluck
-
What specific SSD and motherboard are you currently working with? I'm thinking if you're going to have the fun of a reinstall, upgrading the SSD to one of the NVMe drives will get you more I/O (PCIe v SATA).
-
The board is Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD7 TH, 2xSSD's are Crucial 512GB M550 Series.
-pw
-
Yea, I have a feeling you're just seeing the difference between NEW SSD's and those that have been loved a few years. If you're ok with the space, I'm tempted to suggest you add a PCI-Express 3.0 SSD (aka M.2 NVMe drive + PCI-E card adapter) as a boot drive. They're about 4x faster than SSD's and a newer structure in the flash chips.
-
M.2 NVMe drives are certainly worth using. I built my main PC recently with a M.2 NVMe inserted into one of the two slots on the motherboard and this machine performs really well in LR & PS. Spec here...
CPU Intel Core i7-7700K
CPU Cooler Noctua NH-L9I
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix Z270I
M.2 NVMe SSD Samsung 512 GB 960 Pro NVMe M.2
RAM Corsair Vengeance LPX 32 GB DDR4
Video Card GTX 1060 Mini ITX
Power Supply Corsair RM550x
Case Corsair Carbide Series CC-9011070-WW Air
You get a lot better performance from a PC built to this spec when compared to a Mac at almost twice the cost.
-
Thanks everyone for your valuable input and suggestions. No decision made yet...too busy to do the fresh install on the old machine this week.
-pw
-
One thing to consider, is the Retina 5K display of the iMac. I love mine and when switching to a regular monitor, it looks fuzzy.
Also, Apple Refurbs are a great way to go, so long as they have the configuration you want.
Good Luck
mdr
-
+1 on Apple refurbs - we acquire all our gear accordingly.
-
I work in higher-ed IT and love these computer discussions. I support and use Macs (iMacs and Mac Pros) but also run Windows 10 and Deepin Linux as either VMs or natively, depending on whether I am sitting at a Mac or at my Hackintosh.
Random thoughts:
-OP has very decent specs on the "slow" PC. I also vote for the fresh install. No need to spend a penny there. Sounds like Windows cruft.
-Thanks for the heads-up about the PCIe NVMe SSD option. I hadn't given them much thought as I'm not currently building a new machine as the Hack is running fine and I have others. But definitely something to consider.
-While I love Macs, the last one I bought new was in 1997 (PowerMac 7300), and a used G4 tower off ebay a few years later. That's it. I would not spend my own money again on a new Apple device (price/performance, as noted by other earlier). Of course I'm not still using those machines! I've used older iMacs over the years. At home I currently use a maxed-out 2013 or 14 MacBook Air which was given to me by a colleague (it was actually on the way to electronic recycling, something to do with a cat and a large drink...). The screen is all cloudy but I use it with an external monitor and kb, and it works great (and is actually clean inside). I was also given a 2007 Dell thinline desktop (Pentium, 4 gigs RAM) which I also put Deepin Linux on recently as a spare station.
-If you must buy a Mac, get a used/refurbed iMac (2010 or newer) and replace the HDD with SSD and max out the RAM. Avoid the Mini though.
-Building a computer is the best way to go, regardless of which OS you prefer. At this moment I am sitting at my triple-boot 2011 build Hackintosh in a G5 case (i7 2600, 16 gigs RAM, Gigabyte Z68 and a bunch of HDDs and one old SSD) which I bought from a friend cheap and made changes to, running Deepin Linux which I recently installed (please Google it and check it out). The Hackintosh also boots Windows 10 and OSX El Capitan. It's ugly and noisy but it's fast and efficient. It's my "play" machine" when I feel like tinkering. The video card limits the resolution in OSX and Linux but Windows looks normal.
-
Windows has made strides in recent years, but Macs are still easier to deal with. One important difference is that color management is still a long way off - Windows is far better than it was in the "what's color management" days of Windows 7 and earlier, but it's no Mac even today... the same is true of high-res screens. Apple handles them natively, while Windows needs a degree of application-level support, which many, but not all applications have. Couple that with the security foibles on Windows (again, better than they were, but lousy by Apple standards), and I'd still call the Mac a far better choice if you can make the limited hardware selection work for you. Neither is perfect - there's some VERY innovative PC hardware out there, while most Macs are nice, but generic (no touch /pen screens or other innovative interfaces), and some of them have surprising limitations (16 GB RAM limits on expensive 15" laptops). The new and expensive iMac Pro comes with a super-glossy monitor with less than Adobe RGB gamut - on a machine like that, that's not the most likely monitor for the user to prefer - I suspect a lot of iMac pros will wind up with the glossy screen being used as a (very expensive) secondary display while an Eizo or other pro color monitor is the main screen.
-
Windows has made strides in recent years, but Macs are still easier to deal with. One important difference is that color management is still a long way off - Windows is far better than it was in the "what's color management" days of Windows 7 and earlier, but it's no Mac even today... the same is true of high-res screens. Apple handles them natively, while Windows needs a degree of application-level support, which many, but not all applications have. Couple that with the security foibles on Windows (again, better than they were, but lousy by Apple standards), and I'd still call the Mac a far better choice if you can make the limited hardware selection work for you. Neither is perfect - there's some VERY innovative PC hardware out there, while most Macs are nice, but generic (no touch /pen screens or other innovative interfaces), and some of them have surprising limitations (16 GB RAM limits on expensive 15" laptops). The new and expensive iMac Pro comes with a super-glossy monitor with less than Adobe RGB gamut - on a machine like that, that's not the most likely monitor for the user to prefer - I suspect a lot of iMac pros will wind up with the glossy screen being used as a (very expensive) secondary display while an Eizo or other pro color monitor is the main screen.
-
Gee, let me guess ....... I bet you are an APPLE fan.
-
Windows has made strides in recent years, but Macs are still easier to deal with. One important difference is that color management is still a long way off - Windows is far better than it was in the "what's color management" days of Windows 7 and earlier, but it's no Mac even today... the same is true of high-res screens. Apple handles them natively, while Windows needs a degree of application-level support, which many, but not all applications have. Couple that with the security foibles on Windows (again, better than they were, but lousy by Apple standards), and I'd still call the Mac a far better choice if you can make the limited hardware selection work for you. Neither is perfect - there's some VERY innovative PC hardware out there, while most Macs are nice, but generic (no touch /pen screens or other innovative interfaces), and some of them have surprising limitations (16 GB RAM limits on expensive 15" laptops). The new and expensive iMac Pro comes with a super-glossy monitor with less than Adobe RGB gamut - on a machine like that, that's not the most likely monitor for the user to prefer - I suspect a lot of iMac pros will wind up with the glossy screen being used as a (very expensive) secondary display while an Eizo or other pro color monitor is the main screen.
Colour managed workflows and screens etc have been available under Windows for a long time. What exactly do you think is missing?
My Surface Book has a 3000x2000 screen that is beyond amazing and it's all handled natively.
Apple is actually very slow compared to Microsoft when it comes to security issues, and the only reason that it's not targeted more is because it's far less used, particularly in business. If they ever become mainstream enough, they'll be targeted and the flaws will be exposed just as easily.
The Mac is a far better choice if you prefer Macs. It's pretty much impossible to make an objective call in favour of either one above the other without very specific usage cases.
-
Apple is actually very slow compared to Microsoft when it comes to security issues, and the only reason that it's not targeted more is because it's far less used, particularly in business. If they ever become mainstream enough, they'll be targeted and the flaws will be exposed just as easily.
The Mac is a far better choice if you prefer Macs. It's pretty much impossible to make an objective call in favour of either one above the other without very specific usage cases.
Macs have been around for 30 years. I don't think it is valid to wheel out the old "security is not an issue because there are less of them" line. Security updates come just as rapidly when needed I think. In practice, there are less issues and they are less catastrophic with Mac OS because it has a protected kernel and requires an admin password to make significant changes.
In this business, being photography I think that they are mainstream enough, even the majority. Most big business using PCs have a significant IT staff which small business can not afford.
I agree that in the end it is a personal choice but is your business building and fixing computers or selling photos?
Speaking from my experience, my main machine is a 2013, my laptop and file server are a 2010 and my standby is a 2008. All work fine and some are running software from 2001. My wife has had 3 PCs in succession in the same time and the last one won't run Outlook from a couple of years ago on Win10.
-
Macs have been around for 30 years. I don't think it is valid to wheel out the old "security is not an issue because there are less of them" line. Security updates come just as rapidly when needed I think. In practice, there are less issues and they are less catastrophic with Mac OS because it has a protected kernel and requires an admin password to make significant changes.
In this business, being photography I think that they are mainstream enough, even the majority. Most big business using PCs have a significant IT staff which small business can not afford.
I agree that in the end it is a personal choice but is your business building and fixing computers or selling photos?
Speaking from my experience, my main machine is a 2013, my laptop and file server are a 2010 and my standby is a 2008. All work fine and some are running software from 2001. My wife has had 3 PCs in succession in the same time and the last one won't run Outlook from a couple of years ago on Win10.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263393/global-pc-shipments-since-1st-quarter-2009-by-vendor/
Macs are a small portion of PC sales and OS X / MacOS hasn't been around for 30 years. Honestly, outside of niche industries, they're a small player (not insignificant by any means, but small), and these days some people with Macs are running a lot of Windows, so the amount of OS X / MacOS time is reduced a little there.
If your wife's PC won't run Outlook that's 2 years old under Win 10, you've done something wrong. You can run just about every Windows program that's 32bit or 64bit under Win 10, regardless of age.
The reality is, as I said, Macs aren't targeted because there's far fewer of them. They still have vulnerabilities and Apple is known for taking longer to fix them than Microsoft - it's just a fact. They're not slow in the sense of taking weeks or anything, but they're much slower on average. It doesn't really matter, overall.
-
I always worked with both and quite frankly, both are tools to make the job done; being more a matter of user preferences and/or business model.
For example, it was common to see both in a collaborative environment: designers, retouchers, editors...on Mac while colorists, fx artists... on PC.
PCs were crap compared to Macs when it comes to independent professions, small facilities, because they needed maintenance and computer knowledge not every business could afford.
But nowadays one or the other really does not matter unless you have a specific reason: a proprietary software or media format available such as FCP or Prores, or the use of shortcuts etc...
Macs have generally a better built quality. I dropped one day a notebook that fell just on the edge corner: nothing! Not a scratch. If it had happened with a PC...well...
Then the crapfactor, which is psychologic. All the collective imagery that surrounds PCs was less sophisticated. Cool factor zero. PCs is popular and common, Mac is the desired object that could be exhibited in an art gallery. And that, from a marketing perspective, changes it all.
But IMO, the area where Mac has a great advantage today is not the computer world against PCs but the iPhone.
-
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263393/global-pc-shipments-since-1st-quarter-2009-by-vendor/
Macs are a small portion of PC sales and OS X / MacOS hasn't been around for 30 years. Honestly, outside of niche industries, they're a small player (not insignificant by any means, but small), and these days some people with Macs are running a lot of Windows, so the amount of OS X / MacOS time is reduced a little there.
If your wife's PC won't run Outlook that's 2 years old under Win 10, you've done something wrong. You can run just about every Windows program that's 32bit or 64bit under Win 10, regardless of age.
The reality is, as I said, Macs aren't targeted because there's far fewer of them. They still have vulnerabilities and Apple is known for taking longer to fix them than Microsoft - it's just a fact. They're not slow in the sense of taking weeks or anything, but they're much slower on average. It doesn't really matter, overall.
But does one really care why there are way fewer security issues with Macs...bottom line there are fewer security related issues on the Mac.
Look at the windows world, a whole industry was created to deal with the lack of security on windows.
-
But does one really care why there are way fewer security issues with Macs...bottom line there are fewer security related issues on the Mac.
Look at the windows world, a whole industry was created to deal with the lack of security on windows.
Yes, you should care, because if you think that Macs are somehow invincible, you'll get caught out (as many users do).
I've never had a security issue since Win 3.1 (first version I used). If you actually think for a moment before you click something, you'll be 99.9% protected. However, that's not the average user.
-
Yes, you should care, because if you think that Macs are somehow invincible, you'll get caught out (as many users do).
I've never had a security issue since Win 3.1 (first version I used). If you actually think for a moment before you click something, you'll be 99.9% protected. However, that's not the average user.
In one of my jobs, I had a quarterly seven figure budget allocated to agency for ad and creative deliverable. The first question that I ask an agency when I onboard them if they are a mac house. If yes, I require a 30 to 45% discount on all their fees since I am charged by the hour. Why? Because mac uses outdated hardware that doubles or triples alot of the development and rendering time and there is no way in hell I am paying that out of my budget because they are in "love" with a platform. I saved so much money on agency fees that allowed me to not only get extraordinary amount of bonus, but to also equip my team with the dual socket XEON PC workstations that will murder any mac performance.
In my current work, I have a 18 core XEON workstation, and a dual socket 44 core workstation all under $10K, no mac will ever come close that type of price to performance ratio. As for security issues they are moot because any system used for sensitive or unreleased works are typically offline or in segmented lan.
-
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
They gave you a 45% discount because they had already trebled the price when you walked in the door.
I wonder how they got to the moon with computers less powerful than modern calculators.
The majority of security issues are caused by users so segmented LANs don't help much.
Use what you want to use
-
They gave you a 45% discount because they had already trebled the price when you walked in the door.
I wonder how they got to the moon with computers less powerful than modern calculators.
The majority of security issues are caused by users so segmented LANs don't help much.
Use what you want to use
Engineers in each time era use what they have at their disposal. Using Mac security as an argument over PC superiority is weak at best.
-
Come on guys - we don't need yet another PC vs Mac argument.
It doesn't help the OP (who has already declared being platform agnostic). Different people like different systems and that's all there is to it.
+1 Especially given that if you were blindfolded, and then put in front of a monitor with a “generic keyboard and mouse” you’d not be able to tell which platform you were using if all you could see was LR and Photoshop! And, as far as I’m concerned the “other differences” in how the OS’s look and act are a matter of complete indifference. They have become “distinctions without a difference.”
Rand
-
+1 Especially given that if you were blindfolded, and then put in front of a monitor with a “generic keyboard and mouse” you’d not be able to tell which platform you were using if all you could see was LR and Photoshop! And, as far as I’m concerned the “other differences” in how the OS’s look and act are a matter of complete indifference. They have become “distinctions without a difference.”
Rand
Until you hit the “save as” button... It might be your indifference. Others may see it otherwise. Lots of other things happen with your computer than Photoshop and Lightroom.
-
Until you hit the “save as” button... It might be your indifference. Others may see it otherwise. Lots of other things happen with your computer than Photoshop and Lightroom.
Macs ruled digital imagery since the very roots, apart from some very demanding
Niche workflows that have been using PCs.
99% of designers, retouchers, graphic artists etc...use Mac.
99% of advertising agencies are Mac execpt maybe the secretaries.
And probably a good 70% of photographers use Mac. Maybe more.
Most of motion small facilities used Mac when FCP kicked Avid in the ass
although it has changed a bit recently but not that much.
And on cellphone imagery there is nothing that compeats with the iphone.
I use more my peecees than my macs. In fact I hardly use Mac now.
But let's be honnest. Mac is the brand of digital artists.
-
Macs ruled digital imagery since the very roots, apart from some very demanding
Niche workflows that have been using PCs.
99% of designers, retouchers, graphic artists etc...use Mac.
99% of advertising agencies are Mac execpt maybe the secretaries.
And probably a good 70% of photographers use Mac. Maybe more.
Most of motion small facilities used Mac when FCP kicked Avid in the ass
although it has changed a bit recently but not that much.
And on cellphone imagery there is nothing that compeats with the iphone.
I use more my peecees than my macs. In fact I hardly use Mac now.
But let's be honnest. Mac is the brand of digital artists.
I was a Windows guy forever and I built many workstations over the years. When I stated doing digital photography way back when, I took a lot of good natured ribbing from all of my agency friends/clients. I was the outsider for sure. I only got my first Mac because my wife wanted a MacBook Pro so she could use Garage Band. I bought one too so I could understand the thing to support hers. After some frustrating times trying to make the Mac work like a PC, I just gave in and learned the Mac way. And then I ditched the PC. For me, and I stress that phrase...for me...the workflow is just so much smoother. And I spend almost no time working on the dang things. Support my wife’s computers? Heck I don’t even mess with them. Prior to moving to Macs I spent more hours than I could count cleaning up or reloading PCs for my extended family. So instead of dealing with the almost monthly calls to fix something I bought them all Macs. In the 5 years since I’ve none nothing to any of those computers.
I used to snicker when I heard my artist friends tell me their Macs “just worked”. They got it right.
Again, this is true, “for me”. Others mileage may vary. Personally I just love the Apple ecosystem, and I use it all. Oh, I still have a dual boot Hackintosh with a Windows 10 boot drive, but W10 has only two uses for me. One is Microsoft Flightsim, and the other is iRacing.
Is Apple perfect? Of course not. The Mac Pro in its current form is a mess IMO and it leaves a big hole for guys like me who don’t want an all in one and want to use a a high quality monitor like an NEC. Maybe they will get it right with the next version.
If you like using Windows that’s great, W10 is not terrible. If you like using MacOS, that’s great too. For a user not in some high end situation, the current hardware for both platforms is quite fast. And it’s reliable. For my money and my situation the MacOS and the complete Apple ecosystem wins hands down.
YMMV.
-
I was a Windows guy forever and I built many workstations over the years. When I stated doing digital photography way back when, I took a lot of good natured ribbing from all of my agency friends/clients. I was the outsider for sure. I only got my first Mac because my wife wanted a MacBook Pro so she could use Garage Band. I bought one too so I could understand the thing to support hers. After some frustrating times trying to make the Mac work like a PC, I just gave in and learned the Mac way. And then I ditched the PC. For me, and I stress that phrase...for me...the workflow is just so much smoother. And I spend almost no time working on the dang things. Support my wife’s computers? Heck I don’t even mess with them. Prior to moving to Macs I spent more hours than I could count cleaning up or reloading PCs for my extended family. So instead of dealing with the almost monthly calls to fix something I bought them all Macs. In the 5 years since I’ve none nothing to any of those computers.
I used to snicker when I heard my artist friends tell me their Macs “just worked”. They got it right.
Again, this is true, “for me”. Others mileage may vary. Personally I just love the Apple ecosystem, and I use it all. Oh, I still have a dual boot Hackintosh with a Windows 10 boot drive, but W10 has only two uses for me. One is Microsoft Flightsim, and the other is iRacing.
Is Apple perfect? Of course not. The Mac Pro in its current form is a mess IMO and it leaves a big hole for guys like me who don’t want an all in one and want to use a a high quality monitor like an NEC. Maybe they will get it right with the next version.
If you like using Windows that’s great, W10 is not terrible. If you like using MacOS, that’s great too. For a user not in some high end situation, the current hardware for both platforms is quite fast. And it’s reliable. For my money and my situation the MacOS and the complete Apple ecosystem wins hands down.
YMMV.
Agree - Mac is okay for 2D or photo workflow which was dominant in the last two decades. The landscape has changed and 4K videos and 3D plays a much bigger role and thats where mac totally fails. Just look at the joke of the latest imac pro and the garbage can mac pro.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33rfvP9OTKU
http://www.thehurlblog.com/hp-workstation-versus-apple-mac-pro-filmmaking/
I do not know what happened to Apple because I really admire their Power Mac G5 Dual CPU system back in the days when I am still a high school student without the financial means to buy those high end hardware. When I finally had the means and acquired the technical knowledge to do so, I can't find any single decent professional-grade hardware that Apple is known for.
-
...
I do not know what happened to Apple because I really admire their Power Mac G5 Dual CPU system back in the days when I am still a high school student without the financial means to buy those high end hardware. When I finally had the means and acquired the technical knowledge to do so, I can't find any single decent professional-grade hardware that Apple is known for.
+1
Apple has been very unreliable to the power user ... and photographer (Aperture) and filmmaker ( fcp to fcpX)
if you work with 3d - virtualization you have to work with windows...
hopefully the 2018 Macpro- coming 5 years too late- may be a more modular system... but will be too expensive for sure...
Apple should at least have learned by now that a round design is not that functional... ( the lamp, the trashcan)
-
+1
Apple has been very unreliable to the power user ... and photographer (Aperture) and filmmaker ( fcp to fcpX)
if you work with 3d - virtualization you have to work with windows...
hopefully the 2018 Macpro- coming 5 years too late- may be a more modular system... but will be too expensive for sure...
Apple should at least have learned by now that a round design is not that functional... ( the lamp, the trashcan)
Yes and now they have this joke - https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/5/15741540/apple-imac-pro-announced-price-specs-release-date-wwdc-2017
Someone at Apple gave the industrial designers way too much power and their products reflect that - its now all gloss no function (trashcan Mac Pro).
-
Yes and now they have this joke - https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/5/15741540/apple-imac-pro-announced-price-specs-release-date-wwdc-2017
Someone at Apple gave the industrial designers way too much power and their products reflect that - its now all gloss no function (trashcan Mac Pro).
Like I said, to each his own. In YOUR world the PC makes more sense. In mine the Mac does. The original poster has no use for the boxes you do. Nor do I. I agree that Apple has not given the high end the attention it needs, and perhaps thats just fine for Apple and its marketing plans.
So yes, Apple sucks for you, and it does not suck for others. I'm really glad you are happy. I am too.
-
+1
if you work with 3d - virtualization you have to work with windows...
This is not the case any longuer. It was true in the past but not now.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=POpi-Jt_EaQ
This is high-end Nuke pipeline for feature, big prod. It is Mac.
Nowadays it doesn't really matter one or the other.
-
This is not the case any longuer. It was true in the past but not now.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=POpi-Jt_EaQ
This is high-end Nuke pipeline for feature, big prod. It is Mac.
Nowadays it doesn't really matter one or the other.
Nuke is platform agnostic and I can guarantee you that it will run faster and more productive on a top spec PC workstation vs Mac stuck with outdated hardware.
-
Overall Macs can be more economical if you factor in maintenance over a period of years, though this might be less of a factor for an individual user who is capable of doing all of his or her own maintenance and has the time for that.
I do not recall doing any maintenance on my PCs whatsover ... they just work, granted I did not buy anything from a junk yard to start with.
-
Overall Macs can be more economical if you factor in maintenance over a period of years, though this might be less of a factor for an individual user who is capable of doing all of his or her own maintenance and has the time for that.
My experience is that PCs are fairly easy to refresh - graphics card, memory, disks - at say halfway through their expected life. On the other hand, my experience is also that PCs tend to become buggier as they age and that is almost always down to drivers or clumsily updated software packages. I haven't owned Macs since the 1990s but from the outside it looks as if they are more reliable but at the price of not being nearly so upgradeable if upgradeable at all. I'd guess it is likely a wash between the two unless someone really doesn't want to wrestle with the internals at all, in which case a Mac is likely preferable. My wife has a Dell laptop which I maintain for her every month or so. I am always amazed at the quantity of updates and stuff that rolls in over just a few weeks, many poorly explained and not automatic. This is far beyond what most folks can mess with and any company offering a quality product (I am not saying Dell necessarily falls into this category) should not expect them to. You can see why the world is generally going mobile. It's overall much simpler. I need a new PC but I am increasingly turned off by sheer clunkiness and dodgy reliability of the big boxes with five fans, a mess of wires, huge heat sinks, thermal issues, noise, monster power draws, bios updates from who knows that can tank the whole box, et al. There is just too much to go wrong. I'm looking now at getting an HP Z book hooked up to a 27" monitor with storage hanging off thunderbolt. At least the Z book is easy to open up and upgrade, and it comes with multi-year onsite support.
-
If you are computer savvy and know what you want, then a PC is was better choice and less expensive desktop choice. If not, then a MAC is like an appliance and the better choice for you, though I have had my share of issues with MAC OS and software as well.
My preference is a PC for desktop and a MacBook for a laptop. Since you can't really customize or tailor a laptop very much, and the MacBook Pro's and Air's have excellent build quality, the laptop choice is a no-brainer to me (I think an Windows laptop of equivalent build quality is nearly as costly).
-
At the moment i find the iMac 2020 good value; if you want a computer with a screen attached.
But i still prefer a MacPro type 2012 and choose my own screen.
Since it does not exist and the MacPro2019 is indeed a year behind and way too expensive; I would build my own box based on a pci-4.0 board and ingredients.
Much faster and cheaper then a Macpro2019 and then i would make it into a Hackintosh, for i like OSX better. (up until Mojave at least)
I have very little problems on my present pci 3.0 Hack running Mojave.
-
Well, it has been already 3 years, however i still consider that in case you are looking for a new pc, and comparing a new build (a windows one) or an imac, well, a fully new build is a better option. I mean, with the same money you pay for an imac, you can get windows build which would be twice better, with the performance levels would be at least twice better. However the imac is actually a really great thing. I understood that a new build is a better idea was after i asked for help on https://gadgetguide.in. The guys are there to select for you the best variant for your requirements.
-
Well, it has been already 3 years, however i still consider that in case you are looking for a new pc, and comparing a new build (a windows one) or an imac, well, a fully new build is a better option. I mean, with the same money you pay for an imac, you can get windows build which would be twice better, with the performance levels would be at least twice better.
Then you calculate without the very nice 5K iMac screen. LG sells it for about 1200$.
-
Thanks everyone for your valuable input and suggestions. No decision made yet...too busy to do the fresh install on the old machine this week.
-pw
Before you do your fresh install, you may want to clone the ‘C’ drive using the free Macrium Reflect. Since many programs save data in the ‘user’ area, I often find it necessary to use the clone to find the stuff I forgot to backup before building.
-
Before you do your fresh install, you may want to clone the ‘C’ drive using the free Macrium Reflect. Since many programs save data in the ‘user’ area, I often find it necessary to use the clone to find the stuff I forgot to backup before building.
Do you realize you answer to a post of three years ago..?
-
Do you realize you answer to a post of three years ago..?
Ooops....no....😀
-
The thread had died a natural death in 2017. It was restarted by a pseudo-spammer. whose post (and licence to post) I have removed.
Jeremy
-
I noticed; still this stays a topic...
what is a 'pseudo spammer' ?
-
I noticed; still this stays a topic...
what is a 'pseudo spammer' ?
Someone who behaves in a fashion that has become increasingly prevalent over the past few months. Initially benign, although nearly always fatuous, posts* conceal the true intention which becomes apparent later. Sometimes I nip them in the bud.
Jeremy
*hard to distinguish from the rest, in many threads