PC or Mac

PC or Mac

Results are only viewable after voting.

Not open for further replies.


Senior Member
Feb 4, 2009
Which platform is better to run Photoshop if specs are same?


Senior Member
Feb 15, 2003
Outside the Dry Box.
Visit site
if specs the same, then no diff... its up to each user's preference...

but in terms of specs same (hardware) if you run 1 using vista, 1 using OSX, then can feel the diff... but as we know, same specs, confirm mac is going to be at least 1.5x more expensive.

For design purpose, most of the designer will choose mac. As in a sense it more user friendly for us multi tasking.

If you hate trojan and virus, then you will love mac more since Mac is still currently free from virus and trojan.

lastly is that, many game are not supported by Mac!!! LOLX!!

So overall, BUY MAC!!! XD


New Member
Mar 19, 2009
i preffered mac.. faster and user friendly. u dont have to defrag and minimal virus. of course u got what you pay for...lol


Mar 17, 2008
i got so fed up with windows crashing on me all the time and losing all my photos, i switched to a mac. NEVER REGRETTED IT!


New Member
Jul 23, 2008
Upper Bukit Timah
Think it's more important for you to get a good calibrated monitor than to deliberate which OS is better for PS.

Accurate colours will make or break your photos more than any virus or BSOD :bsmilie:


New Member
Mar 8, 2007
I never had any problems on Windows crashing on me for the longest time. would prefer a PC for versatility in terms of upgrading and sorts. and oh yea, there's always hackintosh. :D Just make sure you get an original copy of leopard when that happens.


Senior Member
Dec 31, 2004
Was a PC user a long as I can remember and swap to Mac about 3 years ago and never look back since. Mac is getting cheaper and it is still a very stable machine.

Is PS faster on Mac or PC? I don't think they make much of a different if you are talking about the same spec machine.

I always find iMac very handy for its compactness and its capability. Now running 2x iMac and 1 MacBook Pro and it is great so far.

Everything looks better in Mac as far as graphic of the software goes... but consider PC if you play games.

My main use for my Macs are for photoshop work... Love it...

Good luck in choosing one.


Mar 10, 2008
using both pc and mac.. as an interactive designer/artist.. i find no difference between the 2.. both have pros and cons.. mac is not all that mighty btw..


Senior Member
May 16, 2005
Windows Vista 64 PC with as much RAM as you can afford... cause it can run 64-bit Photoshop CS4, which can utilize just about as much RAM as may be stuffed onto most commercially available motherboards... definitely a speed boost for working on large, multi-layered files... no 64-bit Photoshop CS4 for OSX yet...

no, colour does not look better on a Mac... properly profiled systems should all provide good colour... nor is it more stable... I have done commercial work with XP, OSX and Vista and can say Vista 64 is the most stable...

Last edited:


Senior Member
Nov 18, 2005
Singapore, Singapore
PC - You have to troubleshoot software/hardware
Mac - You have to troubleshoot hardware

Everything else is equal except for price, which really equates to the ability to install OSX.


New Member
Mar 19, 2006
In a lousy place
Welcome to the marketing monkey world of Macs are for designers.

Given the option of working on a PC or a Mac, I have no qualms of working on either platform, its part of my job requirement. I face a Mac Pro at work and an AMD Phenom2-940 system running on Vista (64bit edition, no less) at home.

I used to own a Powerbook Titanium AND a G5 tower back in its hey day. When it works, it works beautifully, its only when things start screwing up ( like BAD ram, or the final nail in the coffin, a blown power supply ) that the PC will outshine the Mac. When a component in a PC blows up, its as easy to find a compatible replacement. Now try saying that for a Mac. YES. You -can- go to the Apple centre for parts but being a mac, its easily priced twice, or in extreme cases, quadruple the amount the ahbeng salesman in Sim Lim Square will quote you.

Put a PC and a Mac together and yes, you'll realize that macs are shamelssly sexy in terms of design and aestetics. That was partially one of the reasons why I swtiched to the Mac in the past. Then it occured to me, a big clunky aluminium box with thousands of holes that are punched in the front and more in the rear is more design than functionability. Anyone who worked for years in the IT industry knows that dust is unwelcome in a computer. And with a G5 tower full of holes, dust balls have more choice of which hole to enter from.

Now the business of money. Now, according to the business of economics. If you buy two similar things, one with a ugly steel and plastic exterior (but with more than 100 manufacturers offering thousands of variety), and another with a full aluminium body and only is manufactured in one variant by one manufacturer, it will cost more.

The question of usability. OSX Vs. Vista. Being familiar with both operating systems, the only difference I feel between them is that OSX is more svelte solution. And switching between windows on OSX is easier than you would on a PC. Just a button, instead of Windows-Tab. But with OSX you're severly limited to hardware choice. You can only install OSX onto an Apple computer. Unless you're part of the l337 generation and h4xx0r OSX to be installed on a ordinary Dell/HP/Lenovo/etc.

The question of virus attacks, well when OSX reaches a 80% worldwide userbase.. who will even bother writing new viruses for windows? Get the idea? And avoiding a virus problem is so simple. If you see someone sneezing badly, you wouldn't want to go near that person would you? In fact most of the macs today are infected full of PC viruses because yup, macs can't be infected with a virus. But its a carrier of viruses. I make it a habit to scan anything that comes from a Mac thoroughly with an Antivirus program ( and hell no, not with Norton ). Just something simple will keep viruses at bay, unless you're too lazy, of course.

Then, you wonder, what makes OSX stable? Isin't it obvious to why Apple doesn't offer two options for processors.. Its to keep the hardware base controlled tightly so that nothing will affect the main core of the OS itself. On a PC, you have pratically unlimited configurations. When I was buying my new work machine I started out with an AMD PhenomII processor. And then immediately I had DFI, Asus. MSI, Gigabyte, Sapphire, etc... Buying ram meant choosing between Kingston, Corsair, Geil, OCZ, Hynix, etc. Buying a graphics card meant choose between AMD and nVidia. And then choosing one from the twenty different manufacturers of graphics cards.

Its this mind boggling choice of hardware that is the archielies heel of Vista. It has to be as accomodating as possible to almost any configuration, be it AMD, intel, or VIA, nvidia, out there. And the possibilities of a screw up -can- occur in this mix-and-match world. But when all the hardware pieces comes together nicely, the stability of Vista 64bit is as good, if not even better, than OSX.

And when they say that Macs have more software that's geared for media production.. Just how many are OSX-exclusive?

Finally you may say, hey, you're Krado, the AMD-biased faggot who got banned from Hardwarezone and VR-zone. Yes, I am a fevernt supporter of non-intel products. So its goodbye Mac, and welcome back PC. Because when it comes down to the business of making money, my PC investment costs less, and does the same job.

In my opinion:
Mac: For those who don't care about what goes in. Only care about how it looks. And works unless it screws up.
PC: For those who care about every thing that goes in. Still cares about how it looks, and works most of the time.

Last edited:


New Member
Dec 4, 2008
The Mac is certainly not for monkey, it is made from people with revolutionary ideas for people with forward thinking and a positive attitude. People who cannot catch up with the Mac either choose to follow or simply curse & swear.

In the early years of the Mac world, parts like RAM, hard drives or monitors are not easily available, even if you managed to found one, it's going to be very expensive. A 500 MB SCSI drive cost about $500, a 19" CRT color monitor will set you back even further at $7k, a pretty cut-throat price. Good news is now user accessible parts are easily & readily available from SLS, stuff like RAM, hard drive or external drive, LCD monitors or optical drive are abundant. So hard to get Mac spare part is a thing of the past, it's long gone!

After years of failure, Apple raised from the ashes and is proud to be in a shaped up condition and sexy in term of look & feel in design and ergonomically. Minimalist and clean line design concept is top of their agenda – less is more. A slim aluminium keyboard, buttonless trackpad, concealed buttons on monitor and the latest, unibody – a one-piece aluminium body, a 17" Macbook Pro with concealed battery compartment. Ask yourself how often you open up a battery compartment & replace with a spare battery. Besides, the battery's usefulness life could probably outlive your hardware upgrade pattern.

For a few bunch who still didn't know, you can install and run Windows OS yourself on any Mac computer (from ver 10.4 onwards) and it'll runs flawlessly. Unless you are a hi-tech geek, running Mac OSX on a PC is still possible, check this out, http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/10/13519/. Now, who's accommodating who?

The Mac community will never hit a world computer user population of 80%. Analyse these, banks, government bodies and multi-national corporation all over the world won't switch to Mac just like that (click!). I work in an environment with both Mac & PC platform, we don't have any problem sharing files among us. Catching a virus from the Mac? That's a bad & baseless accusation. And one more thing, Mac don't recognise .exe files.

Guarding trade secret tightly control, it's part and parcel of a company operation, If you were a CEO of Apple would you do the same? Why not? Picture this, if someone steal your photo, and photoshop it a bit here, a bit there and altered your style, what would do?

If I remembered correctly, the first version of Mac OSX 10.0 was released on March 2001, 5 months later the same year, Windows XP was born and had grown up to be Windows Vista on November 2006. But sadly, even on the super sophisticated Vista, its still rely the the aging Bios technology to perform certain computing task. To date Vista OS looks & feels are much like their Mac OSX counterpart. Mac Widgets vs Windows Gadgets, Mac Finder vs Windows Vista Explorer, Mac iCal vs Windows Calendar & more... For Vista stability issues, kudos to the Mac.

Mac are expensive? You don't have to score 'A's in your maths subject to do a simple calculation. Buy any Windows laptop of the same specs and upgrade the OS to Vista Business/Ultimate and you'll get the answer – a very small differential, use it to buy yourself a laptop cover or any other stuff if that could make you happy.

On the Mac, it comes in a neat package.

As for people who hatred the Mac so much, stop grouching, you never realise how much you're going to miss out from the Mac, and please do yourself a favor, scroll to the top of this page and take a good look at the poll results, 70% of the CS community can't be wrong. Lastly, you don't have to blow your mind on deciding either machine, it's a personal choice.

May I ask which Mac are you? :)


New Member
Mar 31, 2009
Happyfrog, to specifically answer your question.

It does not matter whether you are on Windows Or Mac. If you main goal is to use PS to edit your photos, then the most important item is not the OS or the outlook/spec of the machine. Its the "Output", which is the MONITOR.

Someone mentioned this point as well in the thread. The difference between a good monitor and a normal one is HUGE.
It makes all the difference when viewing, edit and running photos. Not the OS, not how much RAM you have, not the processor.
Perhaps the graphic accelerator (card) does play a part too. But Professional GFX card normally is not readily available in either Mac or Windows based machines.

The reason why Macs "used" to be the platform of choice for Multimedia and Photographers is because previous generation Mac hardware (iMac, Studio/Cinema Displays) had premium 8-bit IPS/PVA screens. These 8-bit screen brings out not only a larger spectrum, wider viewing angles but more accurate colour reproduction than compared to the more common/cheaper 6-bit TN seen widely in almost all LCD monitors nowadays.

Since forever, most off the shelf PC manufacturers (HP, Compac, Acer etc) use TN Screens on the desktops & laptops. (99% of all Laptops have TN Screens) Apple however, used good quality screens on the Cinema Display LCDs, as such the difference was obvious. Unfortunately, due to bottom line thinking, or cost cutting the latest batch of Apple Cinema Displays (esp the 20" size) have started dropping the ball on quality by using TN Screens (with some software enhancement). As such, there have been alot of complains lately on the colour quality issues with Mac's new displays.

So beware when you look around for what you require.

Screens aside, OSX or Windows, to be honest both do the same work for around the same cost and can be virus/hardware failure free.

There is no OS in the world that is crash-free or virus free. Its how you choose to maintain the OS that matters. I use Windows, so far in a sea of virus, i have not had any hit me. Its about being vigilant on what you do with your OS that will keep you trouble free. Hardware wise, its sometimes good to maintain, clean and take care of how you use the hardware. A Macbook or Dell laptop will be equally prone to hardware failure if you keep banging your lappy around without taking proper care of it.

Hope i have helped you in someway or the other.

Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom