Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 234569 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 231

Thread: imac vs pc graphics

  1. #61
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    can i ask another newbie question? so mac is not just os but also the hardware? can mac os runs on the same hardware as a pc and the same peripherals like a LCD, so throws out better graphic quality?

  2. #62

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Mac write their OS base on their own hardware, also I have read that they use a chip to lock the OS from running on other hardware. However, some website have reported successful installed OSX to PC. This will require someone with extensive knowledge on computer.

    Will the graphic be better if on PC, I think it will not make much different. The graphic (i mean photo quality) will depend on the quality of the LCD itself more that the OS. For example, the notebook LCD look much better than desktop LCD is due to the resolution and the type of backlighting. Notebook normally use LED where the desktop LCD is CCFL.

  3. #63

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    the chimalogy just get chimmer.... I'm totally lost world liao... so is the old saying still stand true "Play with graphic... get a mac"??

  4. #64

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    OK, make it simple.
    Question : Can you install a Mac OS (which is call OSX) on PC.
    Answer : You can't. (Unless you have the knowledge of a hacker)

    Question : If the mac OS is install on a PC will the PC look better than it running with Windows.
    Answer : no, it depend on the hardware of your LCD.

  5. #65

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by jasongcp View Post
    the chimalogy just get chimmer.... I'm totally lost world liao... so is the old saying still stand true "Play with graphic... get a mac"??
    That is because mac have better software to handle photo.

  6. #66

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    hmm.. i have a MBP n i love it.. of cos, both types of systems have their pros and cons. but i feel tat i love my MBP more than my desktop. i only use the desktop now to play games or listen to music (cos it has a stereo system whereas i dun have external speakers for my mac).

    other than tat, be it doing schwork, even editing photos, i'll normally use my MBP. unless i wan to multi task by playing games at the same time or whatsoever.

    tat being said, the Mac system does take time to get used to. lots of things r done different n the interface as well as hotkey combinations are kinda different. but i love the zoom in zoom out function, as well as all the extra stuff tat diehard PC users will call gimmicks.

    jeanie, just BBB! MTL!

  7. #67

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Get a mac for its OS and for applications such as apperture and
    final cut studios. That'll be the main advantage from the pc world.

    If there was no adobe for pc, would you still get a pc? it's kinda the
    same logic.

  8. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    708

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Hurry get before GST goes to 7%!!

  9. #69
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by griffin View Post
    OK, make it simple.
    Question : Can you install a Mac OS (which is call OSX) on PC.
    Answer : You can't. (Unless you have the knowledge of a hacker)

    Question : If the mac OS is install on a PC will the PC look better than it running with Windows.
    Answer : no, it depend on the hardware of your LCD.
    next question: Mac hardware are sold only as the whole set, they are not sold as individual hardware components such as motherboard and graphic cards that constitute a PC. correct?

    next question: Mac hardware components are not compatible with above mentioned components of a PC. correct?

  10. #70

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by glennyong View Post
    and if you have $250 for graphics card, what will you buy ?

    SLI ? or just a individual card ?
    $250 can only buy individual card. SLi is more for game crunching purpose, overkill for photo works. i have a $200 nVidia 7600GT, & its already very powerful for my use. a bit regret cos its too powerful.

    its not juz the LCD only that's needed to give good quality display output. a decent graphics card like $180 type (to run big screen rez of 1680x1050 or higher, integrated solution will struggle) & a calibrating device r needed. once u know what u r doing, u can get great looking display for photo work on either platform.

    my only gripe with iMac wud be the lack of upgrading path & also if i'm not mistaken, u can't put an extra HDD for scratch disc purpose. ext drive (USB2 or Firewire interface) performance is juz not as good as internal drives running SATA interface.

    u have tried the Core2Duo iMac but have u tried the Core2Duo wintel similar spec'd? i dun think u'll feel any diff in terms of speed.

    alternative to Aperture app, Adobe has Lightroom. Final Cut Studio runs ok w/o hardware, but like i said, when u start to put in hardware accelerated stuff (video capture card, RAID, soundcard, etc), u r opening a can of worms. Alternative to FCP is the Avid Xpress Pro or the lower end Adobe Premiere Pro2. there r always something to choose whichever side u take even for audio. no need to die die only can use Pro Tools.

    if u r into 3D stuff, wintel has more choices & support. the stronger contender r the 3DSMax & Maya. mac has only Lightwave that is on par with the other 2 in this arena.

    another thing i like about wintel is the freedom & flexibility to pick & choose the components for DIY. u can make something with very small budget ($600 old sys) or something pretty decent ($1.5k) or ultra high-end with liquid cooling ($5k & the sky limit). the consumers r really in control.
    Last edited by nightpiper; 20th December 2006 at 01:04 AM.

  11. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    708

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by nightpiper View Post
    another thing i like about wintel is the freedom & flexibility to pick & choose the components for DIY. u can make something with very small budget ($600 old sys) or something pretty decent ($1.5k) or ultra high-end with liquid cooling ($5k & the sky limit). the consumers r really in control.
    After using windows since version 1 (actually I started with DOS). Not 95, not 3.1. I personally don't want the control. Nor water cooling. I rather spend my time taking photos, on PP etc. I briefly flirted with cooling and modifying my PC. It felt rather stupid, especially now that I think of it.

    There's also graphics card updates. This update that dam update. Then sometimes the patch badly written. Something crash. Or hang. I actually reformatted my hdd until the whole thing spoilt.

    That kind of control comes with a lot of wasted productivity. I'd trade all that for something that just works.

    True, a biege wintel bristling with the latest state of the art water cooling and a 8800GT will have its fans. 3D fans might have a use for it. But for us not tampering in that arena, Mac should serve you better. At least it did for me since 2001.

    BTW: HEARD THE JOKE ABOUT WIDGETS AND GADGETS??

  12. #72

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    At the end of the day, computers are just tools to get your job done. The term "job" here means different things to different people.

    Get what your are comfortable with in terms of both usage and budget. Keep an open mind.

    Asking Mac vs PC is like asking Nikon vs Canon vs other camera brands. Never ending debate which sometimes get out of hand...

    I would say the quartz rendering engine and Core Imaging which handles the imaging does make a difference. I can say this confidently between Mac OS 9 and X. As for PC and Mac you have to judge for yourself, personally I think it looks better on a Mac. The most important is still the end result the client wants or what the expected viewer demands. Mac/PC both need good monitors/video card/display calibrator/color management no matter what.

    As for 3D work like CAD/CAM, 3D modelling/rendering and gaming PCs are still MOSTLY better than Mac no matter what a Mac fan says. I am a Mac fan btw and I run both Macs n PCs as it is a requirement.

    As for photography I feel Mac has an edge over PCs. I need a computer that is not prone to virus attacks. Imagine having a virus attack on the eve of your deadline? Yes, there are anti-virus programs but they slow down the PC. Until Mac viruses become rampant, hope not and never , then I will consider a PC. Dont forget the automation of workflow outside Photoshop, Mac has Applescript and Automator, I am not sure what's available on a PC.

    On the topic of upgradability. Please find me a PC that was released in the year 2000 that can run WinXP SP2 decently? I have a year 2000 designed Mac running today's latest Mac OS 10.4.8 and it still works. For those that are curious, it is a Dual G4 450MHz. I upgraded it with standard PC parts bought from Sim Lim. With a Mac, you get tremendous OS backward compatibility, try that on a PC!
    Last edited by VR Man; 20th December 2006 at 01:35 AM.

  13. #73

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    If you do get an iMac, please do not get the Singnet promo as the config sucks for photography, video memory is shared with system memory.

    The lowest config you should get is the 2GHz 17" iMac.

  14. #74

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    hmm.. how do i put this as simple as possible.

    "Macs work for you. PCs make you work."

    What's the difference between windows and osx?
    Windows is fat and slow with lots of strings attached at every corner (due to stupid registry), OsX is slim and fit (has no registry).

    To those that say Mac peripherals (add-on cards) opens cans of worm.. maybe you should trying putting in a card that is Made for Mac I have a PCI GPU, a eSata2 PCI-X and a FW800 PCI card inside and all works fine without even having to install a driver from a CD.

    Ever since buying my first G4 powerbook, I've never looked back. Less hassle, less stress, less braincells spent making things work. Productivity increases, time is saved.

    Had PCs from the first 8086s and every model through to the P4. Ran every OS from DOS 1.0 through to XP. Encountered every virus from Pakistani Brain to whateveranchiladapox. Reformated every kind of hdd from 10mb Seagates to 300Gb Maxtors every six months. All thanks to Microsoft. Also dabbled with variants of UNIX from Santa Crux Xenix to Linux.

    What did I learn? A lot. What did I do? Waste time.

    Got OSX. Never looked back.

    Main workstation:
    Powermac Dual G5 2.0
    7Gb RAM
    4.7Tb HDD
    Gf4 5200 (el-cheapo)
    ATi 9200 (el-cheapo)
    Sony G520 (2048x1536)
    Lacie 321 (1600x1200)

    Client viewing station:
    Macmini 1.3Ghz 1Gb

    Wife's connection to the net:
    Powerbook 1.3Ghz 1.2Gb

    Paperweight:
    3 units Intel P4 3Ghz 2Gb in rackmount casings rusting away (until I can find a easier way to run OSX on these)

    What do I do?
    Produce pictures for people on their wedding day/adverts/homes
    Sometimes edit HD1080 videos for the same people.
    Write emails
    Browse the web
    Run RC aircraft simulators (X-plane)
    Chat
    Burn DVDs
    Print DVDs
    Print Pictures/Posters
    Maintain websites
    FTP

    All on a lowly Mac that has not yet failed to deliver on any of these.

    *Though that said.. an iMac with 2Gb is only ok to do consumer level work. Powermacs/MacPros are the powerhouses of the Apple family and should be your choice for high efficiency workflows.
    Last edited by cibs; 20th December 2006 at 01:47 AM. Reason: Added *

  15. #75
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    from all the posts here i've seen. theres only a few here fighting for pc while the rest is inclined towards mac.

    cs3 is good i know. but i just recently bought the creative suite 2, and if i were to buy cs3, i can be better off bang the wall and die to spend 1k to get the new cs illus and ps.

    well. i do agree that powermacs and macpros are the powerhouse of the apple family. but from the specs, i can see that it uses a intel dual xeon processor, and basically looks more and more like a pc configured to run a osx.

    well. like what csers always say; buy what you can afford.

    a 2nd hand dual core g5 will set be back 2.2k.
    new imac 2.1 c2d gig set will be 2.8k (with 2gb ram upgrade)

    and for pc, i can get a faster and stronger pc fighting the imac with 2.3k with 20"lcd with also a spyder 2 calibrator too.

    upgrade options are more open compared to mac, and accessories means you pay more for a mac.

    parts of pc is cheap and is always ready to be upgraded. viruses and etc etc, i have no issues on my pc for at least 15yrs of useage. i wouldnt say no virus, but i would say the last time i got a virus attack would be 1998. when i was using win95.

    but with 2.1 - 2.5k, its a tough choice for me.

    actually professional work doesnt meant biggest or fastest machine thou. thats in the view of a graphics designer + photographer.

    but i am still open to suggestions. would love to see more contributions from fellow csers.

  16. #76
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    708

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    For PC there's a limit to what you can upgrade. Everytime the technology reaches a certain point, there's not much you can upgrade, less changing your mobo + CPU, which will almost certainly require you to change your RAM as well. Even the graphics card. This is almost like buying a new system IMO.

    On my PC, it just feels dated, sluggish. With a lot of process running it the background which I don't even know what is it for. I have to run virus scan, wait for the scan, update it. Oh, new security patch. Download. Installing. Installed. Crap. Now XYZ programme wont run. Uninstall. Reinstall XYZ program.

    My iMac G5 (first batch to hit SG) does not display such problems over a period of 2 years plus.

  17. #77

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    The hardware of Macs and PCs are almost the same..
    The older generation Macs used IBM chips and the latest ones use Intels.
    ATI and Nvidia produces the GPUs for Macs..
    Hitachi/Seagate etc produces the HDDs etc..

    The differences are:
    1) Mac OSX is based on a variant of UNIX whereas Windows is based on DOS/NT
    2) OSX is designed with a fixed or limited variation in hardware whereas Windows must cater for every tom.dick.and.harry hardware manufacturer out there thus will always have teething problem
    3) Others

    Biggest drawback of Windows based systems is that the system slows down over time with ever increasing registry sizes especially when you install and uninstall lots of stuff. Ever notice that the older your OS installation, the longer it takes to shutdown or boot?
    In OSX, all the apps are separate and do not attach itself to the OS or leave bits and pieces of itself everywhere. If you delete an app, it is deleted.. not 'uninstalled'. Its as simple as binning the entire folder and its clean (with exception of some copyright protected software). Thus your system is running efficiently for longer. OSX is also very lean even with all the automatic system updates from Apple. Usually, the performance drop (response, bootup and shutdown) of an OSX installation will be less than 10% (estimated) after a year of usage versus a ridiculously slow Windows install of the same time. Upgrades are not really that necessary if you have found the spec of machine that you are comfortable working with. I have no need to upgrade to the latest or the greatest because my current setup works fine and dandy doing what I need to do. If it was a Windows system, I would have needed to upgrade the CPU a year ago with each system update. That said, I wouldnt mind having the Quad Xeons for faster video rendering and transcoding but at the moment, the returns from it is minimal and the damn FB RAM is too expensive. My current workstation is 3 yrs old. if it was a PC.. I would have upgraded it last year but because its a MAC.. it will still be working in a year or two or more (until got too much money and ass itchy for new one).

    I would suggest for photo or video work, go for Powermac. The RAM capacity is important. Even a 2nd hand* dual G5 is enough of a machine to do most of today's work in good time. Unless you work everyday with HD1080 or work for PIXAR.. the new high end MacPros are overkill and IMHO not worth the money you have to fork out for RAM.
    Last edited by cibs; 20th December 2006 at 01:57 PM. Reason: *corrected

  18. #78
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by cibs View Post
    The hardware of Macs and PCs are almost the same..
    The older generation Macs used IBM chips and the latest ones use Intels.
    ATI and Nvidia produces the GPUs for Macs..
    Hitachi/Seagate etc produces the HDDs etc..

    The differences are:
    1) Mac OSX is based on a variant of UNIX whereas Windows is based on DOS/NT
    2) OSX is designed with a fixed or limited variation in hardware whereas Windows must cater for every tom.dick.and.harry hardware manufacturer out there thus will always have teething problem
    3) Others

    Biggest drawback of Windows based systems is that the system slows down over time with ever increasing registry sizes especially when you install and uninstall lots of stuff. Ever notice that the older your OS installation, the longer it takes to shutdown or boot?
    In OSX, all the apps are separate and do not attach itself to the OS or leave bits and pieces of itself everywhere. If you delete an app, it is deleted.. not 'uninstalled'. Its as simple as binning the entire folder and its clean (with exception of some copyright protected software). Thus your system is running efficiently for longer. OSX is also very lean even with all the automatic system updates from Apple. Usually, the performance drop (response, bootup and shutdown) of an OSX installation will be less than 10% (estimated) after a year of usage versus a ridiculously slow Windows install of the same time. Upgrades are not really that necessary if you have found the spec of machine that you are comfortable working with. I have no need to upgrade to the latest or the greatest because my current setup works fine and dandy doing what I need to do. If it was a Windows system, I would have needed to upgrade the CPU a year ago with each system update. That said, I wouldnt mind having the Quad Xeons for faster video rendering and transcoding but at the moment, the returns from it is minimal and the damn FB RAM is too expensive. My current workstation is 3 yrs old. if it was a PC.. I would have upgraded it last year but because its a MAC.. it will still be working in a year or two or more (until got too much money and ass itchy for new one).

    I would suggest for photo or video work, go for Powermac. The RAM capacity is important. Even a 2nd hand* dual G5 is enough of a machine to do most of today's work in good time. Unless you work everyday with HD1080 or work for PIXAR.. the new high end MacPros are overkill and IMHO not worth the money you have to fork out for RAM.
    True. But taking into consideration that G5 processors will be obsolete. And prices for a 2nd hand Dual g5 is still very ridiculous.

    I am looking into that.

  19. #79

    Default

    interestingly i see many mac users have wonderful experience with their computer. i must be that one & only odd ball to face so much problems. perhaps i shud juz stick to one company for jobs & not move around?

    yes, i have worked with G3 & G4 on OS-X, the OS runs fine but the app speed is really crawling... no kidding. so what's ur acceptable level of working fine? as long as it cost me lots of time & money, i wudn't say thats working fine.

    PC dated to the P3 450MHz (yr 2000?) can also run XP, crawling too of cos. better with 1GB RAM but any other apps... slow...

    wintel or mac, they both boot slow & shut down slow as time passes. i have encountered before, this is really speaking from 1st hand experience, not hearsay. hearsay that everyone shud / must do house keeping on their machine irregardless, ie, dun install things u dun need. run the sweeper s/w once awhile & spend those scanning time doing something else like going to toilet or shower. again from hearsay, everyone who owns a computer shud also reformat their HDD once in 6mths or 8mths, doesn't matter is it Linux, XP or OS-X.

    lastly, if ur machine has no problems, do not go around looking for patches to patch up. i rem mac has its fair share of patching problems too from OS 8 till now, i also will not believe anyone who tells me there's no such thing cos those news were reported before.

    have ur take. i still believe in setting things up properly & have no prob from NT to 2K to XP so far. mac is juz not value for money for me... i also agree the accessories r over priced too.

    have a good evening everyone.

  20. #80
    Senior Member glennyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,587

    Default Re: imac vs pc graphics

    Quote Originally Posted by nightpiper View Post
    have ur take. i still believe in setting things up properly & have no prob from NT to 2K to XP so far. mac is juz not value for money for me... i also agree the accessories r over priced too.

    have a good evening everyone.
    finally !!!!!

    accessories are over priced. true.

    performance wise true. bugs wise true (witness some problems today at my office's mac..)

    and yeah... more or less convinced me not to take on mac for now unless i have dough for MacPro.

    Thanks nightpiper for the input.

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 234569 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •