Mac vs PC

[M Most]

I don't really care about things like GUI's, particular file systems, or screen displays. I prefer OS X because it's Unix, and as such has a pretty robust set of tools that operate in a standard way. That allows for easy scripting (both using the standard command shell and specific standard scripting languages like Python), very rapid file manipulation, access to a whole lot of open source software, robust networking, and, in general, a lot of good things for those who know Linux or Unix reasonably well.

I think you would find that once you get past the individual user with personal preferences based on personal needs, most companies of size who have settled on Macs in this industry have done so for the reasons I just stated, not because of anything else.

 

[Bruce Ingram]

Some users love to push the envelope, some just want dependability.

Just a note on reliability. Between my iMac and my PC (running Windows 7 Pro), my apps on my Mac will crash more often than apps on my PC by far (usually FCP7 or a web browser), and neither system has crashed at the system level since they have been running. Essentially they both have similar stability records (in my sample). More often than not, a very unstable Windows system is less the OS and more the user.

Windows OS also tends to be more cluttered with profit motivated add-ons

Again, that is less Windows and more the system vendor. A Windows install from a standard disk is pretty barebones. Buy an eMachine or HP consumer system and that's where all that preinstalled crap comes from. Come Christmas time, this is a huge headache for me.

Jeff - Totally see what you mean with the upgrade issue on the towers.

As far as GUI, to be honest neither is the end-all-be-all in my opinion. They both get in my way at the most frustrating times and both are so candy now that I can barely stand it. In my perfect OS, it would be a mix between a command-line interface with a minimal GUI for file management. I really only care about the GUI of whatever app I'm in, I can live without a pretty desktop, but that's just me.

 

[Stephen Townsend]

Very interesting Most. Interesting to hear a decision for mac based on something other than the usual!

 

[Jeff Whitehurst]

Just a note on reliability. Between my iMac and my PC (running Windows 7 Pro), my apps on my Mac will crash more often than apps on my PC by far (usually FCP7 or a web browser), and neither system has crashed at the system level since they have been running. Essentially they both have similar stability records (in my sample). More often than not, a very unstable Windows system is less the OS and more the user.

Of course your experience is a valid example that both OS choices have problems, my experience is different. My statement was actually not simply a criticism of the Windows OS, but rather I was pointing out the endless customization opportunities (with associated pitfalls) in the Windows box market, which is often cited as a primary motivator for choosing the Windows platform. Some people love that DIY stuff, others like me would rather have reliability.

Again, that is less Windows and more the system vendor. A Windows install from a standard disk is pretty barebones. Buy an eMachine or HP consumer system and that's where all that preinstalled crap comes from. Come Christmas time, this is a huge headache for me.

My opinion is that because Microsoft makes their OS available to these third party vendors to add the "preinstalled crap", it creates an environment of susceptibility. Let's don't forget the other garbage that gets "installed" just by simply going online unprotected. Microsoft largely profits from the actual OS and third party deals, not hardware. Apple primarily wants us to buy their hardware, which gives them a powerful incentive to make the OS reliable.

 

[Robert Kurhajetz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeOHEU7Ykyg&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Sometimes it feels like this :]

 

[Scott Shropshire]

No one has even touched on the overclocking potential of pc hardware. If you know what you're doing and build a computer with water cooling you can run a sandybridge intel cpu safely and stable at 4.5ghz+ 24/7. Add 2-4 580 overclocked watercooled graphics cards or a red rocket and 5k footage becomes butter along with any vfx work! My work pc is currently a dual 5690 xeon system overclocked from 3.46GHz to 4.25ghz using an evga sr-2 motherboard with 48gigs of ram, 2 msi gtx 580 lightning xtreme 3gb graphics cards each overclocked from 832mhz to 1ghz on the core. Both cpus and gpus are watercooled. I also have a red rocket and an arcea raid card running an 8 ssd raid for 5k editing. The system screams and makes epic footage in premiere and resolve a lot of fun to work on! I think overclocking unlocks free performance in hardware especially in intel cpus! It's also a lot of fun, like modding your cars engine for more horsepower except it's free! Just 1 advantage to pc hardware. The disadvantage though is that it does take some time to learn how to do and every system/ configuration acts a little differently. Although Asus now has auto overclocking settings in their new motherboard efi bios' that make it very easy to do now

 

[Nick Wernham]

I find the UI on the Mac to be cleaner and less obstructive. Windows feels as if they have tried to make things overly friendly and beautify it in a lipstick on a pig sort of way. Windows, really starting with XP to some extent, but more so with Vista and Win7, has that artificially friendly feeling. I don't know how else to explain it.

I know precisely what you mean and have a hard time explaining it. With that said, when it came time to purchase a new computer for editing Red footage I went with a PC because the current generation of Mac Pros just do not seem future proof enough. They aren't nearly as powerful as a similarly expensive PC (mostly because of the difference in GPU performance). I do love my Mid-2010 MacBook Pro though. Apple has really hit a sweet spot for performance, size and battery life with their laptops that most manufacturers of Windows laptops struggle to match. I hear that Lenovo is good, but I haven't used one of their systems.

 

[George Butterfield]

I'd like to see this discussion but only in relation to processing r3d files.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

As far as GUI, to be honest neither is the end-all-be-all in my opinion. They both get in my way at the most frustrating times and both are so candy now that I can barely stand it. In my perfect OS, it would be a mix between a command-line interface with a minimal GUI for file management. I really only care about the GUI of whatever app I'm in, I can live without a pretty desktop, but that's just me.

I couldn't agree more! I am not sure which is more cheesy, the fake wood / fake metal on OS X Lion or the fake glass on Windows 7? Overall, I give the edge to the Windows 7 UI - leaving the aesthetic aside - for the attention to detail. I have been using Windows 7 for 3 years now, and even today I find minor details which all add up. Most importantly, it is extremely customizable. You can strip it down, you can build it up, you can even make it look identical to OS X!

Either way, all of today's classic desktop interfaces I am familiar with - Windows 7, OS X Lion, Unity (Ubuntu) and Gnome (Linux) - between them are very, very similar but unfortunately extremely cumbersome. I didn't realize it till a few months back when I stumbled on to something that radically altered my computing experience.

That was Windows 8's Metro UI. After about 5 months of the Developer/Consumer Previews, I am convinced Metro is the future. The genius - I don't use this word liberally, I don't think I have ever used it in conjunction with software ever before - of Metro UI is that there is no UI. Gone is chrome, gone are icons, gone are windows. Everything is "authentically digital", there's no candy (as you put it) of any sort. It is not an interface, it's a whole new design language where the content is the interface. Live tiles are brilliant too - the Start Screen updates with information from the apps in a suspended state. You only open apps when the updates inform you that you need to directly interact with them. Once you open the app, the OS gets out of the way completely - the entire screen is devoted to your app. At the same time, all apps are tightly interconnected and built to share between each other. Along with Kinect for Windows, we are looking at the first steps to the Natural UI era. There's obviously a whole lot more to Metro, but I will stop here. Needless to say, I have to drop back to the classical interface for getting work done, and it is a real chore.

However, Metro is just beginning, it has its drawbacks and limitations in its current form. The writing's on the wall - Windows 8 is headed for disaster, at least on the desktop. It's way too much of a paradigm shift. It is great to see Microsoft committing to it, however. The transition will be harsh, I wouldn't be surprised if Metro is not embraced by the likes of Adobe Creative Suite till Windows 9. In the near future (think Windows 11), Metro will take us here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6cNdhOKwi0&feature=player_embedded.

For the foreseeable future, I think we will be dropping back to the classical interface for productivity applications. Luckily, Windows 8 will have a completely overhauled desktop interface as well, which will once again be "authentically digital", all the make-up removed.

I have gone completely off topic, I do apologize.

Back on topic, I think it all boils down to - Choice. I think this has been covered aptly in the first two replies by Tim and Paul (and more since), though I do see merit in Apple's walled garden approach as well. The problem with choice is that there's such a thing as bad choice.

 

[Shapour Daneshmand]

Tim,
this discussion will not degenerate.
I have used IBM based computers since 1986 and from 1993 i have used PCs exclusively for non linear editing.
in 2009 i was forced to use mac because i had to edit a project on FCP.
since then i never looked back and i hope i will never have to.

 

[Stephen Townsend]

Tim,
this discussion will not degenerate.
I have used IBM based computers since 1986 and from 1993 i have used PCs exclusively for non linear editing.
in 2009 i was forced to use mac because i had to edit a project on FCP.
since then i never looked back and i hope i will never have to.

Shapour, for the sake of the thread - can you just clarify the reasons you stuck with Mac, being as analytical as possible? (unless it's as simple as still using FCP)

 

[Shapour Daneshmand]

stephen,
its a long list.
FCP is not the reason.
I also edit on Avid composer 6 and Premiere CS6 on Mac.
i have 5 units of +$15000 PCs sitting in my storage .
in my opinion, it's a myth that Macs are more expensive.
thats all i am going to contribute to this discussion.
but i love the Reduser community regardless.

 

[Jon MIchael Puntervold]

in my opinion, it's a myth that Macs are more expensive.

Correct, especially if you buy when they launch new products. When bought the first i7 iMac, it would be impossible to find a better or equal computer and monitor for the price. Historically, MacPro's has also been very cheap - compared to Dell, HP or self-build - when they launch new models.

But price is not a factor for sticking with Apple, OSX is. And the OS/hardware user experience... It's a smooth experience and it feels better. Feelings are important.

 

[Peter Moretti]

I'm definitely a PC person, but you have to know what you are getting yourself into when you are building your own system. When you buy a Mac you plug it in and you know it will work.

When you build your own PC, you will spend a lot of time specing it out. You'll have to figure out if you should get OEM hardware and/or software. You're going to be reading reviews of cooling devices and PSU's. You'll be waiting for the boxes from Newegg, Amazon and TigerDirect to arrive and maybe have to RMA a mobo or something.

When you finally get the thing humming like a turbine jet, you'll feel aweseome. Just don't believe yourself when say that you actually saved money, unless your cash poor and time rich, LOL!

And the above is if you're lucky. There are also those times when someone puts together a PC and the dang thing just doesn't work. It can literally take months to track down the problem. Uninstalls, reinstalls, disabling/renabling devices; emails, chats and calls to tech support. It can really be a nightmare. With the multitude of hardware and software for the PC, you might have unwittingly chosen a combination that doesn't work at all or, even worse, isn't stable.

 

[Will Keir]

From my experience building PC's in the mid 90s and switching over to MBPs/Mac Pros in 2005 and OS-X there is NO question. OS-X has increased my productivity in film editing, e-mail, web search and script/word creations. Even still, when I am on the XP side I get less done. I work with ease on OS X. The interface is more CREATIVE. It is made by more creative people, for more creative people.

I still use both. I use REDUSER.net on my mac side with Firefox. Firefox on XP is a little worse. I read less, post less, seem to find better things to do then research/respond.

This is from my experience using Win3.1, Win95, 2000, XP.

There is no question PC's are faster, more flexible, support more software, cost effective and most of the world uses them. There's also more bugs, viruses, pop-ups, drivers to install, reinstall, and format/reinstall XP.

I'm glad we have options and programs like Adobe Premier and RCX support both.

Discussion is sure to degenerate, but I'll say the following:

I work in the videogame industry, which involves 2D visual design, 3D visual design, audio design, and engineering. We used 100% PC on the projects I am involved in.

Why?

1. PC is faster - The newest nVidia cards are available on PC long before Mac, and the drivers for these cards are consistently faster on PC than on Mac even when they finally become available. The newest CPU's are available on PC before Mac. The highest configurations (most cores, most memory) are available on PC before Mac, and now that Apple has failed to refresh Mac Pro for so long, may simply never become available on Mac.

2. PC is cheaper - The "Apple tax" is not a joke. You actually pay a substantial mark-up for the exact same hardware to use an Apple.

3. PC has more software - There is a tremendous amount of software that is very important to what we do that is simply not available on Apple's OS.

4. PC is more flexible - We can configure any build-out and any peripherals we want to. Not so for Mac.

5. Our customer base OVERWHELMINGLY uses PC - Despite figures that suggest a total market penetration of roughly 5% for Apple, and monthly hardware sales that are approaching 10%, the actual audience for core games on the Mac is something like 2% of the overall market (probably for all the other reasons I listed above).

Is Apple's interface better? Subjective, but some vocal percentage seem to think so. Does Apple's interface offer any measurable benefit to productivity? My subjective opinion is: quite simply no. As far as I know, there has never been an objective study. Windows 7 is a perfectly usable environment.

Is Apple hardware easier to maintain? Based on my experience, there might be some slight benefit to Apple here (closely guarding their ecosystem as they do), but Macs are by no means trouble-free. If there is some benefit here, it is more than offset by all the flexibility lost in going with Apple.

Bottom line: Apple inspires near religious fervor in its users. Running a business, we need to make decisions based on true merit rather than 'hipness' and brand loyalty. Apple has great industrial design, and an admirable focus on user experience. Meanwhile Apple is also aggressively focused on profitabiity, prioritizes mainstream consumers over niche professional markets, and is proudly isolationist when it comes to their hardware and software environments. None of these are good things in my opinion.

PC for the win.

 

[Will Keir]

Exactly what he said and the resale on a Mac is higher.

"m definitely a PC person, but you have to know what you are getting yourself into when you are building your own system. When you buy a Mac you plug it in and you know it will work.

When you build your own PC, you will spend a lot of time specing it out. You'll have to figure out if you should get OEM hardware and/or software. You're going to be reading reviews of cooling devices waiting and PSU's. You'll be waiting for the boxes from Newegg, Amazon and TigerDirect to arrive and maybe have to RMA a mobo or somthing else.

When you finally get the thing humming like a turbine jet, you'll feel aweseome. Just don't believe yourself when say that you actually saved money, unless your cash poor and time rich, that is, LOL!

And the above is if you're lucky. There is always that time when someone puts together a PC the dang thing just doesn't work. It can literally take months to track down the problem. Uninstalls, reinstalls, disabling/renabling devices, emails, chats and calls to tech support. It can really be a nightmare. With multitude of hardware and software combinations for the PC, you might have unwittingly chosen a combination that doesn't work at all or isn't stable.

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Exactly what he said and the resale on a Mac is higher.

I can still probably get a good $1500 for my 2006 MP if I tried selling it today. Try that with 6+ year old PC hardware.

 

[Paulo Emílio]

my reason: Smoke 2013 on mac.
by the way,in analogy terms is EPIC a pc or a mac ?

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

by the way,in analogy terms is EPIC a pc or a mac ?

Interesting question. I see RED as the PC company that toppled the big guns. As did the PC for giants like Silicon Graphics.

MAC vs PC is a stale question. We are splitting hairs in this debate now. Which proves the point exactly. That PC has caught up to the advantages of the MAC, and that soon, the MAC will lend itself to exposing its frailties (sadly, to a very complacent set of users who think its unassailable).

I fully intend to buy an iPad and a Macbook Air for the kids. For myself, I'm eyeing the HP workstation after ejecting FCP and the Mac Tower from my post suite.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

by the way,in analogy terms is EPIC a pc or a mac ?

The parallels are pretty obvious. Modular, infinitely configurable, upgradable, vibrant community and third party hardware/software support, democratization strategy, close communication with customers during the development process, bleeding edge of performance and technology, etc. The original RED One was definitely the cinema world's Windows 95 moment - both massively influential for democratizing their respective industries. RED has also embraced some of Apple's traits - creating a strong brand, direct sales, an independent ecosystem, innovation in packaging.