# Please recommend a computer for photo editing



## zeppman (Apr 6, 2010)

Hey everyone,

I am in the market for a new computer.  I prefer PC because that's all I've ever worked with, but would be open to the suggestion of a mac.   My current computer is over 10 years old and takes forever to run lightroom.  I'd like to keep this reasonable (under $1k if possible).  Does anyone have any suggestions?    Is RAM the most important component?  I am also capable of building my own computer.  I just would like to know what processor and amount of RAM would make lightroom run smoothly. Thanks.


----------



## Boomn4x4 (Apr 6, 2010)

zeppman said:


> Hey everyone,
> 
> I am in the market for a new computer. I prefer PC because that's all I've ever worked with, but would be open to the suggestion of a mac. My current computer is over 10 years old and takes forever to run lightroom. I'd like to keep this reasonable (under $1k if possible). Does anyone have any suggestions? Is RAM the most important component? I am also capable of building my own computer. I just would like to know what processor and amount of RAM would make lightroom run smoothly. Thanks.


 
Processor speed is most important, followed by RAM.  Well, in reality, their importance is equavlent, but its easy to upgrade your RAM later on, but impractical to upgrade your processessor.

Honestly, for $1,000 you'll be golden with whatever computer you buy.  

An Intel 3gHz processor, 4GB of RAM is going put you in at about $800... Which will be more than sufficient for you.

You would even be safe dropping down to a 2GHz processor and 2GB, dropping yoru price to about $500... and still be fine.

But you really should consider going as high as your budget will allow.  The more you put into it now, the longer you will be happy with it.

If you are going to be doing video editing however, that's a whole different can of worms.


----------



## zeppman (Apr 6, 2010)

Thanks Boomn... and I am only interested in photos.


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 6, 2010)

Just to somewhat parrot what Boom has said, hardware is WAY more important than Operating System. Keep in mind that Macs today have the same hardware in them that PCs do, and they cost about 20-30% more. I have nothing against Macs, but I can't, in good conscience, recommend a Mac to someone on a budget, especially one under 1k.

Get as fast a processor as you can afford, and load as much RAM into as possible. Like Boom said, keep in mind it's easy to add RAM later, not as easy to upgrade a processor.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 6, 2010)

Also consider that for a machine made for photo editing, the display is something rather important to consider.  Most monitors these days are made to look good for web surfing, movies & video games...but not necessarily for accurate photo editing.  Either way, you should get yourself a calibration system for your monitor, if you don't have one already.


----------



## Boomn4x4 (Apr 6, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> Macs today have the same hardware in them that PCs do, and they cost about 20-30% more. I have nothing against Macs, but I can't, in good conscience, recommend a Mac to someone on a budget, especially one under 1k.


 
Try 100% more.... a bare bones iMac starts at $1,200... an equivalent PC about $600.  Toss into the mix the fact that the Mac operating system is based off of Unix, which is essentially Linux.... which is free.... 

But you are right.... I would never recommend a Mac to anyone... budget or not.

Something I forgot to mention in my first post.  Avoid at all costs building a computer.  Unless you are a high tech gamer, it isn't worth it.  10 years ago, it was a great thing... but today, computers are so cheap you aren't looking at saving much money by building one... and when you build one, you get no support.  The $100 you save by building it yourself is going to get washed out in the 8 hours it takes you to build, configure, and install the OS on a homemade.

And another thing.... don't bother asking what brand to buy.  You are going to get 10 different answers from 10 differnt people... and each of the 10 answers is going to get bashed by the other 9 people.  Just shop around for a name brand computer... Dell, Gateway, Sony, Toshiba, IBM, HP... and you'll be fine.  Some of them run good deals at times, and the bottom line is all the parts are made in the same place anyway.


----------



## zeppman (Apr 6, 2010)

I don't want to stray too far away from "photo" discussion (since this is a photo forum) but it is interesting that you say that, Boom.  I built my old computer, and although I haven't been following computer technologies since then, I don't think it would be that difficult... if you had once done it before.  

I thought selecting your own hardware (some places will pair CPU/MB for you) selecting the required ram, hard drive and video card you pretty much set.  I have an OS already on disc.  

I'm assuming lightroom/photo shop do not need a high end video card since these are still shots, not moving video.  Am I correct in assuming that?


----------



## Rosshole (Apr 6, 2010)

You can also look for systems on Tigerdirect/newegg type sites and you can get a hell of a machine with a 22" monitor for $600.

Computers are far better than what they used to be, and they are all made with the same hardware anyways.


----------



## Rosshole (Apr 6, 2010)

zeppman said:


> I don't want to stray too far away from "photo" discussion (since this is a photo forum) but it is interesting that you say that, Boom. I built my old computer, and although I haven't been following computer technologies since then, I don't think it would be that difficult... if you had once done it before.
> 
> I thought selecting your own hardware (some places will pair CPU/MB for you) selecting the required ram, hard drive and video card you pretty much set. I have an OS already on disc.
> 
> I'm assuming lightroom/photo shop do not need a high end video card since these are still shots, not moving video. Am I correct in assuming that?


 
That sounds right to me, and one huge bonus of building your own is that you don't get all of the "Bloatware" installed on your computer.


----------



## reznap (Apr 6, 2010)

zeppman said:


> I'm assuming lightroom/photo shop do not need a high end video card since these are still shots, not moving video.  Am I correct in assuming that?



Yes.  Even most moving video is handled by the CPU, not the graphics processor.  HOWEVER, Photoshop CS4 does have the capability of graphics hardware acceleration and video players like VLC, or Windows Media Player Classic, can play hardware accelerated HD video.

I use hardware acceleration in cs4 and really it only makes zooming in, panning, a few effects, etc.. work smoother and more 'fluidly' but really not that big of a deal.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 6, 2010)

> I'm assuming lightroom/photo shop do not need a high end video card since these are still shots, not moving video. Am I correct in assuming that?


For the most part, yes, that is correct.

Although, the latest versions of Photoshop (CS4 & CS5) have now started to take advantage of the available RAM in the video card (provided you have the right card) to speed up or improve some things.


----------



## table1349 (Apr 6, 2010)

Boomn4x4 said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> > Macs today have the same hardware in them that PCs do, and they cost about 20-30% more. I have nothing against Macs, but I can't, in good conscience, recommend a Mac to someone on a budget, especially one under 1k.
> ...















Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*

How many viruses have I had on my Mac's?...*0*

How many times have I had hardware issues with my Mac's?...*0*

How many times have I had registry issues with my Mac's?...*0*

How many times have I had installation issues with my Mac?...*1*  It was the software vendors error that they had fixed by the next day, not a problem with my OS.

How many times have I had uninstall issues with my Mac?...*0*

Want me to go on???

Yes Mac's cost more in outlay, but their serviceable life is longer, they have far fewer vulnerabilities, fewer compatibility issues and the hardware that Apple uses is dependable top of the line.  

While I too would probably not recommend a Mac to someone on a tight budget, I would recommend it to anyone who wants a quality, well written tight system that they can depend on.


----------



## usayit (Apr 6, 2010)

Here we go again...

Unix is ~not~ essentially Linux...   and Mac OS X is closer to Unix (loosely.. ) than Linux borrowing from two distos of BSD.  

sheesh...


Oh yeh.. there is a lot more design differences that go into different hardware (be that HP, Dell, Mac, etc) than simply the spec of memory and CPU.


----------



## usayit (Apr 6, 2010)

With that said...

If you like Mac.. stick with it.
If you like Windows.. stick with it (Windows 7 is actually a big step forward)

Most naysayers of Mac are primarily Windows users with little experience with Mac OS X.  Most (if not all) Mac users have considerable experience with Windows.  So the choice to use Mac OS X is often an educated and preferential choice.



What ever you do, spec the largest configurable memory for the machine.  My ol'G5 dual is configured 16GB of memory at this time and still chugs along just fine after all these years.  My other slower Dual G5 with 8GB (max) is still fine but there is a noticeable difference.


----------



## Darkhunter139 (Apr 6, 2010)

You could always try building it yourself.  I built my last desktop and will never go back to buying pre built ones.  Its not as hard as you might imagine as long as your not computer illiterate. And if you are getting it for photo editing make sure you get a nice monitor


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Apr 6, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> How many viruses have I had on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> ...


 
Oh, do go on.

I have had zero issues with my (windows) laptop, and my 3 year old  (windows) desktop.
No problems. Zero.
:roll:
So, whatever.  

Canon is better than Nikon.


----------



## KmH (Apr 6, 2010)

I would want a 64 bit, quad procesor, *a lot* of hard disk space, and 4 GB minimum of RAM (6 GB would be better). Lots of fans and plenty of power.

I would recommend 2 (500 GB) internal drives (one exclusively for system use), 2 video cards (dual, calibratable (gamma) monitors).


----------



## Rhodes7586 (Apr 6, 2010)

If your willing to spend a grand on a computer, I would rather have over kill on the hardware side now, than not have the ability to run something a few years down the road. I have no experience with Mac's but have alot with pc's. So what I would do is go with at least a Intel Core I5 and possibly the I7 depending on budget. Make sure it has the ability to hyperthread. I would go no less that 4gb (easily upgraded in future), also I would check out some SSD's (Solid State Disks) to put the OS/Install software on. Would also prob. get a video card with a 1 GB because of the fact that software is just starting to utilize this. Might not use all of that now, but you will in the future.


----------



## Darkhunter139 (Apr 6, 2010)

Rhodes7586 said:


> If your willing to spend a grand on a computer, I would rather have over kill on the hardware side now, than not have the ability to run something a few years down the road. I have no experience with Mac's but have alot with pc's. So what I would do is go with at least a Intel Core I5 and possibly the I7 depending on budget. Make sure it has the ability to hyperthread. I would go no less that 4gb (easily upgraded in future), also I would check out some SSD's (Solid State Disks) to put the OS/Install software on. Would also prob. get a video card with a 1 GB because of the fact that software is just starting to utilize this. Might not use all of that now, but you will in the future.



I just put an SSD in my desktop a few months ago and it was the single biggest upgrade as far as speed goes I have ever made.  Computer boots/shuts down in about 10 seconds and programs run and open super fast.


----------



## vtf (Apr 6, 2010)

My daughter uses a Mac for her graphic arts courses in college. Its been highly regarded as a much better system for graphics and photos. PC (windows) is primarily better at word processing and pricing. You wont find a mac under $1000. I myself use a dell pc but dream of the day my daughter passes down her Mac to me.
A good pc for around $500-$700 will get your pretty far. Good luck and check around, You'll be fine.


----------



## Mr. Remote (Apr 6, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Boomn4x4 said:
> 
> 
> > Gaerek said:
> ...



I beg to differ... Mac can get a virus just as, if not more easily than a PC. Mostly due to the idea that 90% of mac owners have that they simply CAN'T get one. the fact of the matter is you can, and it'll happen faster than a pc would. The only reason mac users don't get them as often, is because 75% of the world uses PC's.

It would be a huge waste of time for a hacker to write and distribute a virus that will only effect 25% of a collective, when he can gain so much more information from the 75%. About a year ago, i was surfing the web daily, on a PC with out of date (by 2 years) virus definitions, and didn't cop a single virus.

The reason you hear of so many PC's getting hit, is not because of the hardware, but because of the ignorant users who don't know what things they shouldn't click on.

My art professor uses a Macbook Pro, and I've watched it crash more than once right in front of me while he was showing me photoshop/flash/bridge work. He got the blue screen of death once as well.

Some friends from my local church use macs, and two out of the four had to have there hard drives replaced due to random crashes and all information being wiped.

and for your uninstall, hardware, and registry issues, I've never had any problems with my PC, except for one update where I had to change a number in the code and reboot to start up. But it took me maybe 10 minutes to find and correct. And the ability to upgrade anything I want in my PC makes it worth having over a mac alone.

If you loosen a screw on your mac your warranty is voided.... WTF kinda ish is that?
 =)

As for the OP, I'd say build your own PC. You can get a WAY better pc for 1k if you build it yourself than if you buy it from a brand. Newegg, and that Tiger site mentioned earlier are really good for buying parts, and are generally 20% or more cheaper than your local Best buy or Fry's.

The biggest thing is to get a quad-core processor, and ram to match. BE careful though because TOO much ram will cause problems in your pc, and to little ram will cause problems. I'd say if you get a quad core processor, 6gb of ram should be the perfect amount for photos. (video requires 12gbs).

also mentioned before duel hard drives is a must. Windows uses about 6 to 8 gb's of space alone just to install. running it uses more. so one HDD to run windows, one to store programs and back up windows. then a third or even fourth External HDD would be good to back up your photos, and other important files.

as far as graphics cards go, most brand name desktops put deecent cards in now, my gateway i bought in 09 came with a nice Radeon HDMI card and runs  my video games flawlessly on HIGH everything. But if your building your own, i'd suggest going to a site called www.systemwars.com (I haven't been there in a long time but the PC section is called "Hermit Habitat") but make an account and ask what the pc world thinks is the best graphics card at the moment for your wants. they have strong opinions but they know what there talking about.

But graphics cards are just as important as anything else, because they define how well you see things on your monitor. The image quality, color modes, and smoothness of gradients and such.

Lastly FANS, LOTS AND LOTS OF FANS. Photo editing takes up a lot of CPU, photoshop, bridge, lightroom, they use a lot of CPU processes, so you need good fans to keep your PC cool. and even if you want to research it, Water cooling is something to think about, but it has Pros and Cons, so thats your decision.


----------



## burstintoflame81 (Apr 6, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> How many viruses have I had on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> ...


 
Blue screens are primarily caused by hardware malfunctions ( in most cases its a drive ). And beings that the macs have practically the same crap in them now, your point isn't very valid. Everything craps out from time to time.

Now to the OP. If you need to do graphics, or music recording, macs are pretty decent, but you can get a faster PC for a lot less money. If you know how to clean your computer from time to time to get rid of things that cause errors, you don't have problems. Also, if you don't install questionable software, or do idiotic things, like open virus laden emails etc etc. Macs are great if all you are doing is photo editing. If you want to use your computer for many other tasks, go with a PC.  I would look on EBAY at reputable sellers who sell barebone systems. You can often get a case, RAM, and processor. Then you can buy all the add ons and the harddrive seperately so that you can get exactly what you want, and probably get it cheaper as well. I would spend $500 on the computer and $500 on a great monitor if $1000 is your budget. Also, with computers remember that your set up is only as good as the weakest link in the processing chain. If you have a super fast CPU and a ton of RAM, but your Front Side Bus is garbage, then its a waste. You can't transfer enough information between the RAM and CPU when the FSB is all clogged up. Also, if you are inputing info, data, video, music etc., a PCI based set up is always going to transfer and process faster than inputing the data with a USB device. ( although USB is getting an upgrade this year and should be a little faster ). Similarly, a Firewire input is going to transfer faster than USB.


----------



## LittleMike (Apr 6, 2010)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> ...


 


LMAO!!! 

Don't forget to throw in the Chevy/Ford duel while we're at it.

Seriously though, Mac or Windows will both due. It just comes down to personal preference.


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 6, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> How many viruses have I had on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> ...



Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Windows 7 machine?...*0*

How many viruses have I had on my Windows 7 machine?...Not sure, but I've never seen one, and I work in IT, so if I haven't seen it, it probably isn't there or anti-virus got to it first. I can't wait for the first Mac viruses to start running rampant.  Just a matter of time...

How many times have I had hardware issues with my Windows 7 machine?...*0*

How many times have I had registry issues with my Windows 7 machine?...*0*

How many times have I had installation issues with my Windows 7 machine?...*0*

How many times have I had uninstall issues with my Windows 7 machine?...*0*

How much less did I pay for my Windows 7 machine than an equivalent Mac?...$500

Want me to go on???


----------



## Vinny (Apr 6, 2010)

I haven't read the whole thread but most people in "the arts" prefer the Mac; I personally like the PC. Whatever you buy make sure you buy the better version of the processor (only goes for PC). For Intel its Pentium vs Celeron, I'm not an AMD person but if you do choose AMD buy it's premium version. You should buy a Video Accellerator card - don't share the onboard memory. And don't go whole hog! whatever you buy today will be obsolete tommorrow.

I don't know how much pricing has been mentioned but you can get a HP Pentium I-3, 4 Gig of memory, 640 Gig hard drive and 512 Meg video card for approx $650. Just my $0.02.


----------



## vtf (Apr 6, 2010)

Not to give away my age but I remember the day the experts claimed a 1 ghz processor would make computers self aware.


----------



## burnws6 (Apr 6, 2010)

My penis is bigger than your penis.


----------



## usayit (Apr 7, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> How many times have I had uninstall issues with my Windows 7 machine?...*0*
> 
> How much less did I pay for my Windows 7 machine than an equivalent Mac?...$500
> 
> Want me to go on???



Please stop because your post is completely utterly useless...

Its like someone going to a doctor complaining of some pain and the doc sayin "Well I feel fine.. go home, its in your head".  Who cares if it works for you?

My point being, most Mac users went to Mac because of bad experiences with Windows.  In other words, most Mac users are Windows users as well and they switch for whatever reasons.  The opposite cannot be said for the majority of Windows users.

As for the money.. big f'in deal.. its their money and they can spend it however they want.

Get over it!


For me... I hated the fact that almost all users on Windows boxes run with the equivalent permissions of "root" on a Mac/Unix/Linux box.  Yes.. the majority of the viruses and hacks take advantage of that.  I'm not saying Mac isn't more resilient, I'm just pissed off that it took Microsoft 20 years to figure that out (Windows 7 and 2008 server is a good step forward).  It has also pissed me off that it took them 20+ years to figure out that I need a decent shell environment to script my work.  Don't tell me DOS is as good as ksh, sh, or bash.. because if you do, you have no clue.  Windows 2008 server finally has powershell... 20 years later.  I too can go on.. but just like I said... what does it matter to the Windows user who is happy?  Absolutely Zero.

WTF was MS thinking with Windows ME????

I'm not saying Mac is better, its just that they work better for me.  Those of you who can't figure out that everyone has personal preferences is an idiot.



The answer is simple.
* If you like Windows and have a bit of cash.. get a Dell, Hp, or whatever.
* If you like Windows and on a budget, consider building a machine.
* If you have been dissappointed with Windows, go to a Apple store and try them out for size.
* If you are Happy Mac user, no reason to consider windows... just keep saving.

Whatever you do, I'd suggest maxing out on memory (yes Mac manages large amounts of memory quite efficiently).   


For Mac users, don't buy apple memory (expensive).  Consider getting it from Performance Upgrades; FireWire USB SATA Storage; Memory, more at OWC for a better deal.  The issue with Apple is that they don't make a distinction between commercial and consumer memory which results in extraordinary high prices for consumers looking to upgrade memory.


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 7, 2010)

My point was basically that anecdotal evidence means absolutely nothing. There is so much misinformation about Windows today, it's not even funny. People are making the same jokes about Windows today that they were making 10 years ago, and really, it's old. Vista sucked, yeah, we all know that. Windows 7 is easily the best Microsoft OS since XP SP2, and I'd go as far as to say it is their best yet. How come you called my post useless, but not gryphonslair99? Oh right, because you own a Mac, and you probably actually believe those Mac vs. PC commercials.

If it's ok to use anecdotal evidence to *prove* the superiority of one system over another, let me add my own. About 6 weeks ago I was visiting a friend for his sister's wedding. He wanted a new computer. I tried to convince him to by a PC, but he was deadset on getting a Mac because, and I quote, "It's better at photo processing and video editing." (More lies and misinformation, but I digress.) Without going into too much detail, he had received and returned 3 different Macbook Pros in as many days. They all had some problem that made the computers unusable. He finally got frustrated and bought a Dell that had slightly better specs than the Macbook Pro he wanted, and he had an extra $600 to put towards the new lens he wanted.

I relate this story to show how useless anecdotal statements are. Gryphonslair99 thought he was clever for saying his computer had none of the problems that PCs are supposed to have, when in fact, if you exclude Vista (as most Windows users did, lol) PCs really haven't had any of those problems (save the virus thing) since XP SP1 which was in 2002 I think. Mac users (and I deal with a lot of them) think they are clever talking about the blue screen of death, or viruses and how their Macs are immune to them lmao. 

And so you know I'm not talking out my butt, I work in IT in a network that has ~50 windows machine and about 12 Macs. I know how to use them, I use them in daily life. I still prefer PC, but I have nothing against Macs. I'm just sick and tired of all the misinformation and lies that Mac users seem to spout out about PCs. Windows 7 is a great OS that doesn't have ANY of the problems that people seem to think Windows has.

If you like Mac, use Mac, I don't really care. But if you don't care what computer you want, I cannot in good conscience recommend spending extra money on a Mac simply because "it's better at photos and video" (it's not) and "it's more secure than Windows!" (it's not). If you prefer it, then it's worth the money to you. If you don't, then it's probably not worth the money.


----------



## Boomn4x4 (Apr 7, 2010)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> How many viruses have I had on my Mac's?...*0*
> 
> ...


 
If you are going to make the switch off of Windows in favor of a different operating system... make the switch to Linux.

I'm not suggesting that Windows is better... In fact I would agree the Mac has the superior operating system over Windows... but its NOT superior over Linux... and Linux is free.  Linux is a quality, well written, tight system that you can depend on.... so why recommend someone pay $1,000 more than they need too?

When you by a Mac, you are paying for an image... not a computer.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

Boomn4x4 said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> > Macs today have the same hardware in them that PCs do, and they cost about 20-30% more. I have nothing against Macs, but I can't, in good conscience, recommend a Mac to someone on a budget, especially one under 1k.
> ...


 
Did you include about $300 for a good 22" IPS display?

And I'm assuming you're comparing it to a budget PC. What about a Sony AIO with the same specs? They run about the same price.

And OS X's design goes far beyond something like Ubuntu. I've only ever once had to manually install a driver for anything in OS X. Plus the built in features are something I have to use 3rd party programs in Windows to acheive.

Rosewill ATX mid tower $40
Mobo and Intel i5 - 750 2.66ghz quad core processor $315
GeIL 4x1GB memory $120
EVGA 1GB Nvidia GTS 250 $135
Antec 650W PS $110

You can get 1TB HDDs for about $100 and DVD driver for something like $20.

A basic build with a quick browse through Newegg. $840 + tax, etc...

Cheapest comparable computer on Dell's site in an Inspiron 580 with 20" monitor. Thing is it has a mediocre 512MB GPU and a 300gb HDD, irrc. Not to mention, with a self built rig, you know where the parts come from.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

vtf said:


> My daughter uses a Mac for her graphic arts courses in college. Its been highly regarded as a much better system for graphics and photos. PC (windows) is primarily better at word processing and pricing. You wont find a mac under $1000. I myself use a dell pc but dream of the day my daughter passes down her Mac to me.
> A good pc for around $500-$700 will get your pretty far. Good luck and check around, You'll be fine.


 
Myths. There's only two reasons to choose an Apple over a PC for "graphics and photos" and they are personal preference and the want to use a program that's on one OS and not the other.

It used to be true a long long long time ago, but that was in the 80's? Either one will do either job suitably.

Oh. Hai! Mac Mini, $599 - Apple - Mac mini - The most affordable, energy-efficient Mac. I found a Mac under $1000.



Mr. Remote said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Boomn4x4 said:
> ...


 
Yes, we get it already. People are ignorant of the facts. The few vulnerabilities out there usually consist of using something like Safari to gain access to a user's computer, along with the user actually having to click on something granting permission to a hacker to do so.

When's the last time you've heard of an OS X install riddled with virii? Probably not as many times as I've actually had to fix PCs that were infected.

I've also seen quite a few people using Apples that would be just as clueless on a PC and if they were using a PC, would probably have a ton of malware, adware, viruses, and who knows what else.

I've owned Macs and numerous PCs and each company that I've purchased the equipment from has successfully fixed or replaced any piece of hardware that ended up malfunctioning within the warranty period. I've seen more PCs break down, but then again they're the cheap ones that're leased to our company.



Vinny said:


> I haven't read the whole thread but most people in "the arts" prefer the Mac; I personally like the PC. Whatever you buy make sure you buy the better version of the processor (only goes for PC). For Intel its Pentium vs Celeron, I'm not an AMD person but if you do choose AMD buy it's premium version. You should buy a Video Accellerator card - don't share the onboard memory. And don't go whole hog! whatever you buy today will be obsolete tommorrow.
> 
> I don't know how much pricing has been mentioned but you can get a HP Pentium I-3, 4 Gig of memory, 640 Gig hard drive and 512 Meg video card for approx $650. Just my $0.02.


 
Even if you buy a Mac, you want to best processor possible. Like buying an I7 iMac vs. a c2d for photo editing.



Boomn4x4 said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Mac's?...*0*
> ...


 
Yawn. BS.

Linux can be a good OS, but there are so many varients that there's no real stability to the platform between different OSs and different upgrades even.

I upgraded from Ubuntu 7.X to 8.x and some of my hardware wouldn't work. They didn't include the drivers that came with 7.X in the 8.X *upgrade* (or is that downgrade?). I had to find Windows drivers and use a wrapper to get them to work. Worst part is, the wireless card was one of the devices affected so I had to use additional computers to fix my Linux box. 

Saving me from that trouble alone is worth the $30 it costs for Snow Leopard. Not to mention all the other features just make it a million times easier to use than Linux will probably ever be.

When you buy a Mac, you buy at the beginning of the product's life cycle and you get a computer that is not that much more than comparable PCs, but with additional touches. When's the first time you've seen a notebook that was less than an inch thick and had a backlit keyboard? I don't know about you, but for me that was several years ago with the MBP. Can't recall the first time I've seen a PC clone, but I know it was that long ago and I'm pretty sure that the price is going to be similar.


----------



## zeppman (Apr 7, 2010)

Sorry guys, my intention was not to start a "mac vs. pc" thread...  

Anyway, I'm leaning towards the "build your own pc" route.  Thank you for everyone's comments, and if anyone has any other input on what kind of setup I should go with (similar to what Village Idiot provided a few comments up), that would be appreciated.  Thanks.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

zeppman said:


> Sorry guys, my intention was not to start a "mac vs. pc" thread...
> 
> Anyway, I'm leaning towards the "build your own pc" route. Thank you for everyone's comments, and if anyone has any other input on what kind of setup I should go with (similar to what Village Idiot provided a few comments up), that would be appreciated. Thanks.


 
I built a gaming rig last summer right before the i5 was released. It cost about $1700, but that's mainly because of the GPU and some other frivolties (even a word?).

i7-920
3 x 2GB RAM
1000W PS
Nvidia 1.8GB GTX 295 ($500 just by itself)
Blu Ray burner

and some other junk.


----------



## usayit (Apr 7, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> How come you called my post useless, but not gryphonslair99? Oh right, because you own a Mac, and you probably actually believe those Mac vs. PC commercials.



NO.. 


He is basically saying that he switch to Mac and things improved for him.  It is a statement that is TRUE for his case.  Your response is basically that of the "doctor" saying that gryph's experiences have no merit because "it works for you".  Which is utterly idiotic.


As I said, most if not all market growth for Mac OS X in the recent years is solely placed on the mistakes within the Windows experience.  The opposite cannot be stated.




--

Btw... I'm a Linux user steaming from a unix background.  Last time I checked, I can't buy a Lightroom is not ported to Linux.  So no.. that is not a solution.


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 7, 2010)

usayit said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> > How come you called my post useless, but not gryphonslair99? Oh right, because you own a Mac, and you probably actually believe those Mac vs. PC commercials.
> ...


 
And I am saying that I've used both Macs and PCs, and for the price you get more with a PC. What part of reading comprehension do you not understand? The post you originally quoted was a completely tongue-in-cheek attempt to show that the arguments used 10 years ago by Mac users are still being used today even though they are nearly completely irrelavant now. I've said in this thread (and in other threads...go ahead and search!) that you should buy what works for you. However, in context of the OPs problem, I couldn't recommend a Mac mainly because of the price. It was someone else who said they would never recommend a Mac.

If you consider me using a tongue-incheek method of pardody as a way of showing his experiences have no merit, then you missed the whole point of what I posted. He wasn't showing his experiences. He was basically repeating almost verbatim what the Mac vs PC commercials and stupid "fast PC" remedy products like finallyfast.com say about PCs.

Please quote gryphon as saying, and I quote from your post, "He is basically saying that he switch to Mac and things improved for him." I'm trying to find where he said that and can't find it. He might have switched, but nothing he said indicates that. I just read through grphon's post...twice...and again, there's nothing in there indicating that he switched, or he actually experienced those himself. Again...reading comprehension is good.

And to say what I've always said (both here and in other posts):

If you like PCs, stick with it.
If you like Macs, stick with it.
If you have a specific reason to have either one, then get the appropriate one.
If you're not sure which to get, but want a good computer for a good price, get a PC.

Please usayit, read what I say, read what others say, and don't extrapolate information that simply isn't there.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> usayit said:
> 
> 
> > Gaerek said:
> ...


 
So you're saying that Macs aren't good computers for a good price. It's right there ^.


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 7, 2010)

Village Idiot said:


> So you're saying that Macs aren't good computers for a good price. It's right there ^.


 
Close, but not quite.



> And I am saying that I've used both Macs and PCs, and for the price you get more with a PC.


 
and



> If you're not sure which to get, but want a good computer for a good price, get a PC.


 
I don't think that Macs are a good value if you don't have a reason to buy one. That is all. I use Macs everyday at work and actually like OS X. Macs are great computers, but you're paying a lot extra for what a lot of people would perceive as not much more value.

If you like Aperture and not Lightroom, get a Mac. If you prefer OSX to PC, and the extra "Mac Tax" is worth it for you, get a Mac. If you don't care what OS you use, buy a PC and put a down payment on that new 'L' glass you want with the money you save.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > So you're saying that Macs aren't good computers for a good price. It's right there ^.
> ...


 
I just configured a 13" 2.26ghz MBP with 4GB RAM to nearly the same specs as a 13" 2.13ghz HP Envy with 3GB of RAM and the Envy came out at $1700 with the MBP at $1350.

That's a pretty steep Mac tax at -$350.


----------



## usayit (Apr 7, 2010)

Gaerek said:


> And I am saying that I've used both Macs and PCs, and for the price you get more with a PC. What part of reading comprehension do you not understand? The post you originally quoted was a completely tongue-in-cheek attempt to show that the arguments used 10 years ago by Mac users are still being used today even though they are nearly completely irrelavant now.



and what part of your own post do you not understand?  What part of "Your experience does not invalidate the experience of another"  do you not understand?  What part of "It their f'in money they can spend it anyway they please" do you not understand?

Oh its "tongue-in-cheek" now.. hmmm I see.    So are you now saying that 10  years ago Windows had problems and the statements were valid 10 years ago?    Kinda interesting since 10 years ago is when MAC OS X started to make headway into market share.  



Gaerek said:


> Let's see, how many times have I had a blue screen of death on my Windows 7 machine?...*0*
> 
> How many viruses have I had on my Windows 7 machine?...Not sure, but I've never seen one, and I work in IT, so if I haven't seen it, it probably isn't there or anti-virus got to it first. I can't wait for the first Mac viruses to start running rampant.  Just a matter of time...
> 
> ...


----------



## Gaerek (Apr 7, 2010)

Village Idiot said:


> Gaerek said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...


 
And if I wanted to, I could configre any number of Windows 7 based PCs to be similar spec'd and cheaper than a Mac. Your anecdotal evidence proves what, exactly?



usayit said:


> and what part of your own post do you not understand?


I wrote it. I understand it. I was parodying the fact that he wasn't relating experiences (as evidenced by HIS own post) but complaints that people have had with PCs a decade ago. I was showing that those problems are all but gone today.


> What part of "Your experience does not invalidate the experience of another" do you not understand?


What experience of his again? I asked you to show me where he said that those were his experiences and I have yet to get an answer on that. Like I said above, from his post, all I can assume is that he's listing the old laundry list of PC problems not his own experiences. Show me where he says that, and I'll eat my words. Until then, I wasn't invalidating experiences. I was invalidating the misinformation that is still running rampant about Windows based computers.


> What part of "It their f'in money they can spend it anyway they please" do you not understand?


Um...let me quote myself to show I do understand...I guess you skipped over this part.


> If you like PCs, stick with it.
> If you like Macs, stick with it.
> If you have a specific reason to have either one, then get the appropriate one.
> If you're not sure which to get, but want a good computer for a good price, get a PC.


 
Remember, in context of this thread, I recommended a PC because of budget concerns of the OP. If he didn't have any budget concerns, I would have said he could look at Macs if he wanted to. Find me a Mac with specs good enough to do what he wants for under $1000 and you can completely invalidate my opinion from the very beginning.




> Oh its "tongue-in-cheek" now.. hmmm I see.


 
See above.

I think I'm going to say adieu to this thread. It's obvious that certain people are either:
1) Not fully reading my posts
2) Not fully understanding my posts
3) For some reason are defensive about their choice of a Mac and hate to see that someone might think that a PC can be as good as a Mac.

This thread is going no where, and I totally regret engaging myself in this pissing contest.


----------



## Mr. Remote (Apr 7, 2010)

BACK TO THE TOPIC..... 

OP. Make sure that at what ever cost, when building your PC, DO NOT BUY VISTA! Get Windows 7 or Windows XP. I still use XP SP2/3 (not quite sure which one I'm on) today and I've only ever had 1 problem. XP was the last great OS from Microsoft, and 7 is the latest greatest OS.

Vista was basically a for sale beta version of Windows 7 and as you know it was riddled with problems. Also, Adobe CS5 is made to run on 7 if you plan on upgrading, CS4 wont run on 7 with out a hassle. Due to the fact that CS4 was built to run on XP/Vista (it runs way better on XP though).

As for the Mac vs PC debate.

Mac's are a waste of money IMO. They give you little advantage out the box over a PC for a good $600 dollars more. Also given the fact that if you really wanted to, you could duel boot OS X on a PC and run the few programs that work better on a mac than a PC with out spending the 1300 bucks for a mac book..... BUT truthfully, the only reason I'd ever buy, or recommend a Mac to someone, is for audio recording or production... Pro Tools is GOD on a mac. All of my DJ friends, (DJ Dust, DJ Ethical, DJ Alphatrion, DJ Klever) all Atlanta Local's but are well know around the world, use macs, and they do some damn good mixing. So I leave my views of mac at home when I'm around them.

I work in a local music venue as well, and the quality of sound we put out due to the mac hooked into the sound board astounds me.

So the only thing a mac has over a PC is Music compression and recording software and the like.

But thats just how I see it.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 7, 2010)

Mr. Remote said:


> BACK TO THE TOPIC.....


 
Funny guy. You say that but immediately go back off topic.



Mr. Remote said:


> OP. Make sure that at what ever cost, when building your PC, DO NOT BUY VISTA! Get Windows 7 or Windows XP. I still use XP SP2/3 (not quite sure which one I'm on) today and I've only ever had 1 problem. XP was the last great OS from Microsoft, and 7 is the latest greatest OS.
> 
> Vista was basically a for sale beta version of Windows 7 and as you know it was riddled with problems. Also, Adobe CS5 is made to run on 7 if you plan on upgrading, CS4 wont run on 7 with out a hassle. Due to the fact that CS4 was built to run on XP/Vista (it runs way better on XP though).
> 
> ...


 
Read much? There's been PC to Apple comparisons in this thread, even the HP MBP clone where the HP cost more than the superiorly specced MBP.

And quality of sound has nothing to do with Windows Vs. OS X. It has to do with the hardware and software. Pro Tools runs on Windows. I've recorded artists and bands with software on Windows and OS X. There's no sound quality difference.

From some one that's an IT professional and who's career is nothing but dealing with specs and tech, you should do a bit more research then trying to turn you biased opinion into fact.

Edit: And in addition, OS X runs Final Cut which is the industry standard in video processing too. Of course, there's Adobe Premier that runs on either of the two previously mentioned OSes, but is not as widely used as Final Cut. There's also Logic, which not as widely used as Pro Tools is becoming huge with the somewhat recent advent of A/D conversion hardware that's not software specific like Pro Tools gear.


----------



## Boomn4x4 (Apr 7, 2010)

And to think, I was worried about MY post geeking this thread up


----------



## Dao (Apr 7, 2010)

Buy just looking at the title ....  I know this thread is going to end up a XX vs YY


----------



## vtf (Apr 7, 2010)

wow people, one thing for sure Steve Jobs is a better marketer than bill gates or microsoft, if 20 years later people still think Macs out perform pc's. Windows 7 premiered with a slight fever but the ipad is already back ordered into the thousands. Just an oberservation for what its worth. Actually I thought the thread was dying so I thought I'd liven it up again. lol


----------



## Mr. Remote (Apr 7, 2010)

Village Idiot said:


> Mr. Remote said:
> 
> 
> > BACK TO THE TOPIC.....
> ...




I'm not an IT guy........ WTF? Where did you even get that statement?


----------



## usayit (Apr 7, 2010)

vtf said:


> wow people, one thing for sure Steve Jobs is a better marketer than bill gates or microsoft, if 20 years later people still think Macs out perform pc's. Windows 7 premiered with a slight fever but the ipad is already back ordered into the thousands. Just an oberservation for what its worth. Actually I thought the thread was dying so I thought I'd liven it up again. lol



Steve capitalized on Microsoft's mis-steps....  (Mr Remote's "DO NOT BUY VISTA" statement is an example) 

Steve also did another thing differently than Microsoft.  He kept Apple's innovations focused not only on software but (more importantly) hardware.  Bad products by third party vendors running Microsoft Windows is indirectly a reflection to Microsoft's image.  

Some might see the proprietary hardware a PITA (it can be at times) but this means things work to Steve's standards not to the standards of third party vendors.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 8, 2010)

Mr. Remote said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Remote said:
> ...


 
I never said _you_ were.


----------



## Mr. Remote (Apr 8, 2010)

Village Idiot said:


> Mr. Remote said:
> 
> 
> > Village Idiot said:
> ...



OHH sorry, it was late, I read "From" as "For"... but I do read a lot of specs, I just helped my friend build 2 hella bad ass PC's, one for his job as a video editor, one for his home use. They ran him $1200 dollars each, and can out preform any machine I've ever touched.


----------



## Village Idiot (Apr 9, 2010)

Mr. Remote said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Remote said:
> ...


 
I've built a ton of PC's over the past so many years. I still use a MBP that I've paid less for than a comparable PC for Photo Shop, Final Cut, and aperture.


----------



## James Baranski (Jan 9, 2015)

I review motherb


alenmcmilan said:


> Processor: Intel core to due
> RAM: 4 GB
> Monitor: Flatrone or LCD
> Key Bord: Logtech
> Dard disk: 160 GB


 What is a core to due?


----------



## Forkie (Jan 9, 2015)

I'm in the Mac camp, too.

For my photography day job I currently use a nearly 3 year old 27" iMac with 3.1GHz Intel Core i5 and 1024MB Radeon HD.  It is starting to slow down a bit now it's getting full, but in general it works pretty well and the screen colour is great.

At home I use a Macbook Pro - (can't remember the specs off the top of my head) with Retina display and every time I use it, I feel sad about going back to my work iMac!  The Retina display is ridiculously clear and the colours are wonderful.

If I could afford it, I would have the 27" iMac with Retina display.


----------



## James Baranski (Jan 9, 2015)

usayit said:


> vtf said:
> 
> 
> > wow people, one thing for sure Steve Jobs is a better marketer than bill gates or microsoft, if 20 years later people still think Macs out perform pc's. Windows 7 premiered with a slight fever but the ipad is already back ordered into the thousands. Just an oberservation for what its worth. Actually I thought the thread was dying so I thought I'd liven it up again. lol
> ...


 I know this is an old thread but Apple does not make 1 stick of hardware in their machines. All your buying is their OS and software. Win7 and software now a day makes Apple overpriced crap


----------



## TCampbell (Jan 9, 2015)

Uh oh.  Zombie thread coming back to life.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 12, 2015)

James Baranski said:


> usayit said:
> 
> 
> > vtf said:
> ...



No. Price a notebook with the same specs. It'll be the same if not more. If you go more bare bones, you can get more performance for the dollar, but you lose out on other things.

Not to mention at my job we just got in 7 Dell AIO computers to install for a client and there was a visible gap on one side of the bezel between the screen but not the other. That's on all of them. They're just not of the same quality. I spent several hours the other day trying to get all the drivers for an emachine laptop because I had no idea what was in it. If it were an Apple notebook, that would have been a non-issue and saved me a good chunk of time.

Use what works for you.


----------



## chuasam (Jan 12, 2015)

I have an imac 27" with a 3.5ghz i7 4gb Radeon 32 gb ram and an SSD 
It works fine for me 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## James Baranski (Jan 12, 2015)

Village Idiot said:


> James Baranski said:
> 
> 
> > usayit said:
> ...


Have no idea what your talking about, win7 installs all drivers. Laptops have drivers pre installed on them


----------



## mcap1972 (Jan 12, 2015)

For lightroom you also need a fast HD or SSD.


----------



## James Baranski (Jan 12, 2015)

mcap1972 said:


> For lightroom you also need a fast HD or SSD.


Don't get me wrong but a SSD will be faster. Platter drives are not in the same league but most performance when rendering photos comes from a good processor with high L3 cache


----------



## Light Guru (Jan 12, 2015)

James Baranski said:


> mcap1972 said:
> 
> 
> > For lightroom you also need a fast HD or SSD.
> ...



Yea your lightroom files are fine on a regular hard drive, but your operating system will definitely benifit from running off a SSD


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 13, 2015)

James Baranski said:


> Village Idiot said:
> 
> 
> > James Baranski said:
> ...



No it doesn't. Just yesterday I had to do fresh reinstalls on three customer computers. Network drivers weren't installed on any of them. Next I had to get the correct video drivers and not the default installed drivers. A laptop may have perinstalled drivers but when it's been five or six years and its a crap laptop, good luck finding them. I also had to install an X-ray sensor, x-Ray scanner, and dental camera yesterday morning. Guess what? No drivers.


----------



## mrs.hankIII (Jan 15, 2015)

Everyone is in a pissing contest over Mac vs PC and what hardware you need. But everyone but one person is forgetting something VERY important. The MONITOR that you LOOK AT. If the monitor is screwy, your prints won't match your screen and that's pretty dang important.

From what I've learned, there are things you need to look for in a monitor. Resolution is meh, not the biggest thing. 

Taken from Damien Symond's website (and he knows what he's talking about) and paraphrased:

Panel type, go for IPS over TN. TN screens tend to look lighter or darker depending on how you're looking at it, whereas IPS is the same no matter what angle you're looking from. Color representation is fantastic. Probably can't find one in stores, best to look online.

Get a matte screen. Gloss is no good, reflections are bad and a pain in the butt to look at.

So basically. Get a monitor with an IPS and matte screen. Better to go small with excellent quality than get a huge screen with meh quality.

Lots of recommendations here
Monitor recommendations


----------



## pixmedic (Jan 15, 2015)

I have a Walmart gateway PC. Single core 3.5 ghz, 6 gigs DDR3 ram, some BS on board video crap and it runs adobe CC juuuuust  fine. LR and PS.
I added a Nvidea 2gig video card for gaming recently, but haven't noticed any photo editing differences. 

I also have a 27" ips monitor.


----------



## table1349 (Jan 15, 2015)

Even though this is a zombie thread, this works very nicely for me:

27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display with the following configuration:

•   4.0GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.4GHz
•   32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x8GB
•   3TB Fusion Drive
•   AMD Radeon R9 M290X 2GB G

Glossy screen isn't all that big a deal if you are using either an editing hood or position the lights properly.


----------

