Why do so many people run photoshop on a mac?

[Comdrpopnfresh]

My sister doesn't know much about computer hardware, and is currently taking a community college course on photoshop, and is somewhat of an apprentice with a local photographer. She wants to get into digital photography as a new career, including the editing portion. She keeps telling me how the computers in the class are macs, and how everyone in the class goes home and practices on a mac they own- even her friend who is an aspiring digital photographer uses photoshop on a mac laptop. It boggles my mind really.

I'm not too familiar with photoshop, but seeing as it calls on the gpu in latest versions to speed things up, feel it is a safe assumption it is quite hard on hardware. She plans on getting a macbook and putting CS4 on it. I keep trying to tell her the money would be better spent on a quad-core desktop with a huge accurate monitor or two, a very good nvidia gfx card, or ati gfx in crossfire, as much ram as the motherboard can take, a large harddrive for storage, and an SSD for the install drive. I know you can't get much/all of that in a laptop, let alone a macbook.

The thing I keep telling her is; if you get a laptop you restrict your hardware/power and raise the price for even mundane components- getting a bitten piece of fruit on your hardware does each of these to near an order of magnitude. I think the money would be better spent on a non-mac computer, a desktop; something I could build her- saving even more, and allowing for more handpicked hardware choices for her uses.

I'm not sure what her budget is, but I feel she should get: A s775 quad core w/ 12mb L2 or a i7 920 w/ maybe some OC, at least 8gb ddr2 1066 or at least 6gb ddr3 1333 on i7, a 1TB internal for storage and non performance program installs, an ssd for os and photoshop, an external drive for backups, at least a 24" monitor with good resolution and color gamut, and 2 ati 4870's in CF.

Would she be okay with a macbook? What hardware should she get? Maybe a few configurations? Thanks.

 

[dguy6789]

Quad core desktop with a 64 bit OS and 8GB of ram or more. Crossfire or SLI would be a complete waste of money. Buy something like a Geforce GTS 250. Notebooks can run Photoshop, but it's a better on a desktop for sure. As of today, Windows is definitely better than Mac OS for Photoshop, no doubt about it at all.

 

[Krynj]

Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

 

[Blain]

I'll need 3 cents in change back out of my nickel...

* She's learning something you've said... "I'm not too familiar with".
* Since you are "not to familiar with" Photoshop, she'll likely be asking them for advice.
* She's working with people that use Apple products.
* Let her follow her own path in life.

 

[Kraeoss]

*Blain enjoys punching ppl with reality checks*

yea well i'm guessing that the mackbook is portable and the big heavy desktop is not so therefore portability is the issue and chances are that mac's are wierd ok a macbook and a laptop are in like 2 different categories depending what you use them for. in your sisters case let her learn on her own

 

[Bateluer]

Even if she wants a laptop, she could get a PC laptop that would make the most tricked out MacBook Pro look like an Atari 2600 for less money.

Edit - A quick glance at the Apple site reveals that a max'd out Macbook Pro 17in, minus the cost of software and external monitor, the Macbook costs just south of 5K.

A Sager 9262 from PC Torque with similar specs to the Macbook, except it has the substantially more powerful 9800M GTX graphics card and C2Q, costs less than 4500.

 

[JackMDS]

Originally posted by: Blain
I'll need 3 cents in change back out of my nickel...

* She's learning something you've said... "I'm not too familiar with".
* Since you are "not to familiar with" Photoshop, she'll likely be asking them for advice.
* She's working with people that use Apple products.
* Let her follow her own path in life.

:thumbsup:

Next Job, or the Job thereafter she will have to learn Windows, and then she would be better equipped for real live than we are.

I have a good friend that is one of the most Clio awarded in the Advertising business.
He does all if his work with A MAC.

Can I technically do with PC everything that he does with MAC.

Sure, I can and even More and Better, I like to tease him and show him how I can do every think with a PC. However, he got use many years ago to a MAC and as long as it serves his purpose, he keeps going.

Here is one of his famous ads that his considered one of the most stepping-stones in Modern TV commercials. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc0izCGKxP8

Here is his latest Adventure, http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Sell...&qid=1237061985&sr=1-1

The Book is Not about sex it is about how the Advertizing businesses use sex to sell other stuff. :shocked:

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

Yes. Macs may have, back in the day, had better editing software. Today it's definately no longer the case. The only thing keeping Apple in the computer realm is that trendy facor, and Apple is banking on that.

 

[Comdrpopnfresh]

Okay, okay- some good feedback- I like it.
She's not completely set on a mac... she doesn't know much about computers at all- she's more likely to be swayed by TV ads than comparing computers in a store. Not a slight against her, it's just that she seems to think that the mac is better for some reason, with no real basis; and here I am offering to put together a machine for her. She doesn't travel much, and is less familiar with the apple OS than I am. By 'not familiar' with photoshop, I meant I can't use it near the level of a pro- but I know it is a taxing program on hardware, depending of the functions being run, the photo being edited, and the type of editing being done. I'm pretty sure she's not going to just let it auto-correct photos, and her class is getting her pretty involved with editing and procedures not for a novice.

So what is an average hardware requirement for photoshop? Any computer she buys will likely not be upgraded or replaced for a number of years- just another factor.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Comdrpopnfresh
I'm pretty sure she's not going to just let it auto-correct photos, and her class is getting her pretty involved with editing and procedures not for a novice.

Any computer she buys will likely not be upgraded or replaced for a number of years- just another factor.

Two more reasons for her to buy a Mac, like the other people she'll be collaborating with.
Does she have lots of time to worry about infection and system scrubbing?
If so, maybe Windows is the OS for her.

 

[secretanchitman]

well you can swing the decision either way.

there are pros to the macbook...ability to run osx and windows xp/vista natively, you get a pretty decent video card (loads better than the crap gma 950 they were using earlier), and it just all works and looks good too with an amazing resale value. downsides = price/apple tax and glossy screen only.

pros to the desktop - performance/price ratio. you can definitely build a way faster desktop with pretty good components (quad core, 4GB+, high end GPU, etc), and the ability to upgrade whenever you want. downside = its not portable.

pros to the windows laptop - everything the mac has, but it wont "look as pretty", can run hackintosh (depending on hardware), and is much cheaper than a macbook. you can basically get any size laptop you want for the same price you get as a 13" macbook. downside = windows = maintenance if something goes wrong, and the tech support *probably* wont be as good as apple, and the resale value.

i think she should get a macbook + a good monitor to use at home. best of both worlds!

 

[VinylxScratches]

A Macbook with a nice external monitor would be great. She doesn't have to get the Pro. Just get the Macbook.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: SonicIce

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

Yes. Macs may have, back in the day, had better editing software. Today it's definately no longer the case. The only thing keeping Apple in the computer realm is that trendy facor, and Apple is banking on that.

This

 

[wolrah]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

You do realize there are other reasons to choose a Mac rather than appearance, right?

Familiarity (remember, until recently Mac OS was the superior media editing platform, so most who have been in the media industry are used to it)
Stability (my BSOD count in the last 3 years on XP/Vista - 7. KP count on OS X - 3. I also average 45 days between reboots on my MBP where my desktop is rarely allowed two weeks before MS pushes a mandatory reboot on Windows Update)
Security (how many remotely exploitable, on by default security holes has Windows had in the last 5 years?)
64 bit that doesn't suck (Windows' 64 bit architecture is incredibly hack-filled and you still run in to some driver issues to this day)
UNIX (needs no explanation, having a Unix machine I can actually install commercial apps on is a major win)

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Edit - A quick glance at the Apple site reveals that a max'd out Macbook Pro 17in, minus the cost of software and external monitor, the Macbook costs just south of 5K.

A Sager 9262 from PC Torque with similar specs to the Macbook, except it has the substantially more powerful 9800M GTX graphics card and C2Q, costs less than 4500.

Are you seriously comparing that fat pig of a notebook to a Macbook Pro? The Sager you mention is a desktop with a battery, where the MBP is actually usable in a portable environment. Two entirely different markets. You just compared a BMW M5 with a Hummer H1.

Also, everyone knows you don't ever pay Apple's rates for upgrades, especially memory.

I would normally at this point link to my comparisons of equally-specced Apples, Dells, and homebrew machines, but I've been lazy and haven't updated it for the current generation of anything. I think I'll go do that now actually.

Originally posted by: SonicIce
Yes. Macs may have, back in the day, had better editing software. Today it's definately no longer the case. The only thing keeping Apple in the computer realm is that trendy facor, and Apple is banking on that.

Got the first half right, for the second see above.


Now, with all that over with, I'll gladly agree that for the purpose of Photoshop CS4, a Windows machine is the better choice. This is not due to hardware or Windows being better in any way, but rather Adobe's laziness in not porting off of Carbon meaning they can not offer a 64 bit version of CS4 for Mac OS X. Right now it's 32 bit only on Mac, where it's 64 bit on Windows. For heavy use, that is a big deal. CS5 will solve this issue, but that's a while off.

edit: for reference, I have four homebuilt PCs right now (two running dual-boot hackintosh setups) and one Macbook Pro which also boots in to Vista 64 and has XP 32 and 7 64 in VMs, so I'm by no means a Mac fanboy.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Macs are trash. Anyone can edit FreeBSD and not give credit since it's under the BSD license. They're overpriced pieces of garbage that use system links in their filesystem. Almost every mac user you talk to has no idea what they're talking about. They're selling point is: "Well, you don't get viruses." Well, when you have a 6% user base and they're all mac huggers that have never touched a piece of code in their life then yes, viruses would be almost non-existent. As far as it being Unix, *nix shouldn't be used and was never designed to be used as a desktop os. The filesystem alone is unfit for the desktop. It works great on servers though when you don't use clunky X11. As far as mac security, what a joke. At the Hackathon, the mac was the first to be hacked. 64 bit Windows is much less "hack-filled", than a 64 bit desktop *nix.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: wolrah
stuff

and welcome the foru...... wait... what?? :Q
joined 2006 and only one post? you're the king of lurkers

 

[wolrah]

Originally posted by: WaitingForNehalem
Macs are trash. Anyone can edit FreeBSD and not give credit since it's under the BSD license. They're overpriced pieces of garbage that use system links in their filesystem. Almost every mac user you talk to has no idea what they're talking about. They're selling point is: "Well, you don't get viruses." Well, when you have a 6% user base and they're all mac huggers that have never touched a piece of code in their life then yes, viruses would be almost non-existent. As far as it being Unix, *nix shouldn't be used and was never designed to be used as a desktop os. The filesystem alone is unfit for the desktop. It works great on servers though when you don't use clunky X11. As far as mac security, what a joke. At the Hackathon, the mac was the first to be hacked. 64 bit Windows is much less "hack-filled", than a 64 bit desktop *nix.

Wow, so much misinformation in one post...

re BSD: It's well documented that the Darwin OS (the core UNIX underlying Mac OS X and the iPhone/iTouch) is based on the XNU kernel (a mix of Mach and 4.3BSD built for NEXTSTEP) and the userland utilities tend to be pulled from FreeBSD. Apple doesn't hide this so I'm not sure what you're complaining about. The man pages and source code are often untouched or only slightly modified from the BSD versions and have the standard BSD notices.

re filesystem links: I'm not really sure what the hell you're talking about here, but I assume it's a reference to the Time Machine feature using hard links on directories, which was previously not implemented in other Unixes due to the potential to create a loop.

re userbase: it's actually closer to 10%, but that's not really relevant to the technical discussion

re coding: um, yea, that's just such an incredibly retarded statement I have a hard time believing you're not trolling. I guess in your world there's no one using Xcode, no one's making the thousands of iPhone apps, no one wrote the hundreds of apps I use every day on my MBP, and certainly there's not a single user who (like me) switched so he/she could have a bash shell, Python, perl, Ruby, etc. installed out of the box, and a very nice IDE which uses gcc as one of its compilers while still being able to install WoW and Microsoft Office without using API emulators.

re unix filesystem: I agree that the "standard" layout described in the FHS is confusing to a non-technical user, but if the OS developers have done their jobs right that type of user will never see anything outside of their /home/ so it's all irrelevant.

re security: I assume you're referring to the CanSecWest PWN2OWN contest. The 2007 one was a bug in how Quicktime interacts with Java, so it had nothing to do with Mac OS. The same flaw existed on Windows and both were patched within a week. The 2008 hack was a flaw in Safari, which isn't really surprising at all given Safari's track record on security. Neither were full remote exploits, in both cases the user would have to visit a malicious web page. My statement was referring to zero interaction remote flaws (you know, like the RPC and LSASS issues). I'll give you points on that one though since all three programs involved in the two exploits are installed by default, but you then have to give me the ability to point at every single IE hole as a Windows problem if you want to consider it fair. Remember, IE is the browser so bad that Microsoft just gave up and sandboxed it rather than trying to fix it.

re 64 bit: Have you ever looked in the depths of a 64 bit Windows system? The number of hacks for the sake of compatibility required due to bad decisions in NT's implementation are incredible. The most visible would be the "Program Files (x86)" thing and even more amusing, System32 vs. SysWOW64. On that last one, applying any logic to what files would be where ends up completely backwards, for some reason 64 bit libraries are in System32 and 32 bit libraries are in SysWOW64. There are also major issues at the kernel level which could have been avoided had Microsoft just done things the Unix way from the beginning. AppleInsider has done a great job explaining the difference in this series.

I'm using two 64 bit desktop Unixes right now, Mac OS X 10.5.6 and Ubuntu 8.04.2 LTS. Feel free to throw examples at me of "hacks" in the system architecture you perceive.

Speaking of hacks, looks like there's a Windows Defender bug running around messing with HOSTS files and breaking IPv4 localhost if you allow it to do what it wants to do. Good job with the security tools there Microsoft, flagging your own file as a potential exploit, then changing it in a way that breaks major network functionality. I just had it prompt me to quarantine my HOSTS file on my Vista x64 machine when the file is dead empty other than IPv4 and IPv6 localhost entries as normal.

Originally posted by: SonicIce
and welcome the foru...... wait... what?? :Q
joined 2006 and only one post? you're the king of lurkers

Haha, I've been known to do that. There's another forum I can't remember right now where I registered in 2002 and didn't post until 2007, I still only have 4 posts there. I obviously never browse here normally, I just saw the thread title in the active thread listing on an article and clicked in, then felt like I had to respond since it doesn't seem there are very many here (at least using this thread as a sample) who actually use all three major platforms every single day.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Macs have a reputation of being "computers for graphics people." This is partially because, way back in the day, they were. They persist in this role partly because those graphic designers from 20 years ago who all owned Macs are still Mac users. Take my mother, for instance. First graphics job was working in Illustrator 88 on a Mac Plus. First computer of her own, once she went freelance, was a Mac. Every computer since then has been a Mac. She is an Adobe Illustrator person, not a computer person, so while she can blaze through Illustrator, she is still not a computer specialist and it's not worth it for her to get used to using Windows.

If you have no inherent preference, there are still a few situations in which Macs may be better... first of all, while it's easily possible to get a Windows laptop with better stats than the MacBook for cheaper, it's not so easy to get one that is also as thin, light, and well-made, all things that are especially important with laptops. If you account for those things as well, then Macs are actually only a little more expensive than Windows laptops, not a lot. I'd never recommend a Mac desktop, though. Also, they're good for people who are so incompetent that they need a Mac because it's harder to screw up than a Windows PC.

Lastly, these days it seems that the one area in which Macs still do have a major software advantage is high-end video editing. Basically, Final Cut. I don't know much about that area though and I'm sure there are lots of Windows alternatives that do the same thing. But again, if you're a professional who's used to a particular software suite, the higher cost of a Mac could easily be made up by not having to spend your time learning how to use new software.

 

[fleabag]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

This.

 

[SonicIce]

Originally posted by: wolrah

Originally posted by: SonicIce
and welcome the foru...... wait... what?? :Q
joined 2006 and only one post? you're the king of lurkers

Haha, I've been known to do that. There's another forum I can't remember right now where I registered in 2002 and didn't post until 2007, I still only have 4 posts there. I obviously never browse here normally, I just saw the thread title in the active thread listing on an article and clicked in, then felt like I had to respond since it doesn't seem there are very many here (at least using this thread as a sample) who actually use all three major platforms every single day.

quality over quantity any day :thumbsup:

 

[Absolution75]

Originally posted by: wolrah
re security: I assume you're referring to the CanSecWest PWN2OWN contest. The 2007 one was a bug in how Quicktime interacts with Java, so it had nothing to do with Mac OS. The same flaw existed on Windows and both were patched within a week. The 2008 hack was a flaw in Safari, which isn't really surprising at all given Safari's track record on security. Neither were full remote exploits, in both cases the user would have to visit a malicious web page. My statement was referring to zero interaction remote flaws (you know, like the RPC and LSASS issues). I'll give you points on that one though since all three programs involved in the two exploits are installed by default, but you then have to give me the ability to point at every single IE hole as a Windows problem if you want to consider it fair. Remember, IE is the browser so bad that Microsoft just gave up and sandboxed it rather than trying to fix it.

Sandboxing is an evolution on software and not "because they couldn't get it right". Everything has been put in a sandbox these days. More and more device drivers are being run in userland rather than at kernel level. Windows 95/98/ME weren't run in sandbox and were garbage compared to the NT kernel at the time. It really isn't an indication of "giving up on trying to fix it".

re 64 bit: Have you ever looked in the depths of a 64 bit Windows system? The number of hacks for the sake of compatibility required due to bad decisions in NT's implementation are incredible. The most visible would be the "Program Files (x86)" thing and even more amusing, System32 vs. SysWOW64. On that last one, applying any logic to what files would be where ends up completely backwards, for some reason 64 bit libraries are in System32 and 32 bit libraries are in SysWOW64. There are also major issues at the kernel level which could have been avoided had Microsoft just done things the Unix way from the beginning. AppleInsider has done a great job explaining the difference in this series.

Eh, does this matter to anyone besides developers? No.

SysWOW is obviously System WOW which is synonymous with emulation. It isn't really backwards. As far as the System32 directory, its obviously not renamed to preserve compatibility with old programs.

Program Files x86 is obviously 32bit programs and Program Files is obviously native 64bit programs. I can't see how this is relevant regardless.

I can tell you don't know very much about how software is developed.

 

[CoinOperatedBoy]

This general Mac hatred is amusing. Newsflash: Macs have used Intel procs for years now -- they ARE "PCs". You pay a premium for design, manufacturing quality, support, and the ability to run Mac OS X. You can run Windows on them if you want to. If you don't care about any of those things, then get something else. End of story. Some people like Macs, and not just to be "trendy fags". They have their uses.

I think forums like this may bring the hammer down on Macs because the members are so used to the DIY lifestyle involved in system building. OF COURSE you can put together a cheaper rig than a similarly spec'd Mac. But there's a world full of people out there who don't want or need to learn about the current hardware scene, take the time to price components, research compatibility, buy the parts, physically assemble their computer, and get everything working properly. To us that might sound like fun; to others, a nightmare.

From a usability standpoint, Mac OS X is great. The OP has described his sister as not being that tech savvy. A Mac might be nice for her, so the OS can get out of her way and she can focus on learning Photoshop. And no, you don't need a beastly system to run it. Just about anything multicore with a crapload of RAM will do fine. (And if she does need more RAM, don't let her buy it from Apple...)

 

[wwswimming]

Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
Because they're elitist trendy morons who think Windows is 'ugly' and 'a poor interface for designers'.

Mac + Adobe = Borg, sub-variety "i am SO cool"

 

[JackMDS]

People are different one from the other.

Some people by their psychological make up do not like too much flexibility (that the way it is and Nothing is wrong with it) for them MAC is very good solution.

They usually buy the MAC as is add to it few applications (like Photoshop) if they need any, and then use it for few years not needing to be concern wit the computing aspect.

The PC platform offers much more flexibility with a lot of special solution that are Not available in the MAC platform.

I as (an an example) would not be able to do my work on the MAC platform.

As for the psychology of PC users, I hope that these quotes do not represent their technological savvy. :shocked:

"Because they're elitist trendy moron".

"Macs are trash".

"Mac + Adobe = Borg, sub-variety "i am SO cool"

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

re filesystem links: I'm not really sure what the hell you're talking about here, but I assume it's a reference to the Time Machine feature using hard links on directories, which was previously not implemented in other Unixes due to the potential to create a loop.

No, your precious mac file system is full of symbolic links since it still uses the Unix file system.

Mac OS X aliases and symbolic links