Dauphin said:

When dealing with audio and video, you want processing speed, bandwidth, and memory allocation. Companies who create audio video software work with apple. Apple provides a more consistent architecture per release, and generally supports newer bus systems in terms of FireWire and USB. As such, they generally get the job done faster, and more consistently Pcs can do it too, and cheaper. But in this case you do get what you pay for.

How much faster? At this point is it even an noticeable amount? I don't think it is unless you're counting in microseconds.

Cerebus said:

nd33 said:

They are a team of experts who deal directly with manufacturers and creators of the software.

The truth of the matter was one format had major issues and the other had none. You can't argue with the fact that Mac is an elegant and reliable format. Many PCs are too but with PCs there are thousands of variables as to that being reality when it comes to using PCs simply because the hardware and software is so vast in numbers and fragmented.

I just can't see any advantage from a professional point of view for someone involved in high end media, to go PC except it will be a little cheaper in terms of initial purchase cost (unless there was a specific piece of software needed that was PC only, but even then, all Macs these days can run windows as well as a PC apparently, even though I've never been compelled to try).

Never had a prob with Macs. That's just my experience bro!

Actually, you just gave the reason. The ability to have a vast amount of choices to do what you want to do, the way you want to do it, instead of being forced to do it the way some company has convinced you you're supposed to do it, thereby not giving you any other way to do it.

Run-on sentences ftw!

I think you're completely missing my point. A person trying to put down their creative vision couldn't give less of a shit about thousands of options, choices and variables. It's all time wasted away from getting your stuff down. If one company makes the complete hardware package which is 100% reliable and simple as hell, then freakin fantastic!

nd33 said:

Cerebus said:

Actually, you just gave the reason. The ability to have a vast amount of choices to do what you want to do, the way you want to do it, instead of being forced to do it the way some company has convinced you you're supposed to do it, thereby not giving you any other way to do it.

Run-on sentences ftw!

I think you're completely missing my point. A person trying to put down their creative vision couldn't give less of a shit about thousands of options, choices and variables. It's all time wasted away from getting your stuff down. If one company makes the complete hardware package which is 100% reliable and simple as hell, then freakin fantastic!

I am a creative person and I totally disagree with you. My point has always been that there are options. The idea that mac is the one and only best way is simply not true. To each their own.

None of this has anything to do with the op question, though. As I said a long time ago, industry standard is industry standard. If they want to be a sheep and avoid getting asked pointless, lame questions all the time they should buy a mac.

Cerebus said:

nd33 said:

I think you're completely missing my point. A person trying to put down their creative vision couldn't give less of a shit about thousands of options, choices and variables. It's all time wasted away from getting your stuff down. If one company makes the complete hardware package which is 100% reliable and simple as hell, then freakin fantastic!

I am a creative person and I totally disagree with you. My point has always been that there are options. The idea that mac is the one and only best way is simply not true. To each their own.

None of this has anything to do with the op question, though. As I said a long time ago, industry standard is industry standard. If they want to be a sheep and avoid getting asked pointless, lame questions all the time they should buy a mac.

Well that's just the beauty of the world there, isn't it

I think this rule is a holdover from a time when ALL computers were a lot slower and less powerful.

imago said:

ZombieKitten said:

Ace said: Fonts for example.

Isn't OS-X's color management scheme more suitable for print and graffics?

For example, the color you see on your computer screne is more likely to be the color your printer produces, because OS-X doesn't use RGB internally, but something else? I can't remember---someone had explained it to me when a photo I printed from my PC (a few years back) looked all wonky compared what I was seeingo on my computer screne.

colours are something I let go of 15 years ago.

I pick my colours out of a swatch book like this:

that way I get the colour I expect on the printed article

not that even then there aren't variations

ZombieKitten said:

imago said:

Isn't OS-X's color management scheme more suitable for print and graffics?

For example, the color you see on your computer screne is more likely to be the color your printer produces, because OS-X doesn't use RGB internally, but something else? I can't remember---someone had explained it to me when a photo I printed from my PC (a few years back) looked all wonky compared what I was seeingo on my computer screne.

colours are something I let go of 15 years ago.

I pick my colours out of a swatch book like this:

that way I get the colour I expect on the printed article

not that even then there aren't variations

oooh, that's pretty!

I'm actually in the "business" (commericial lithography....since the late 80's)....so I thought I'd add this:

Our staff designers are (and have always been on the Mac OS)....and most of the outside designers I work with (independents & ones at major ad / design firms) are as well. It remains the "industry standard", by & large.

It's more a matter of history than tech snobbery. In the late 80's & well into the 90's, PC's just didn't offer the kind of complex design solutions (IE...there wasn't software up to par for commercial purposes out there for PC's). And Macs have been long known to have a more stable OS overall. So...they came to "dominate" the market by default over that time period.

That has changed, however.

The MAIN thing that I see is the commonality of creative sotware (for "publishing" broadly...if you plan to print your work in any form.....or pass your files around for virtually ANY kind of production to be done). Nearly all designers I work with are currently using Adobe's InDesign. The conventional wisdom seems to be that it's the most cohesive, advanced & flexible software for design work. Fonts, color work (CMYK and spot color both), Photoshop edits, traps....you name it.......it's all there in one application & top notch.

It's available for Mac and PC.

Depends a little on what kind of "design work" you are looking to do, Ace. If it's purely full motion video or film work......the above might mean nada. Or purely digital stuff (Like fractal art using the Flam 3 platform, say..diff story entirely). So, YMMV.

For anything you plan to have printed in ANY form though, circa 2011...my professional advice would be to go with InDesign for either Mac or Windows.

[Edited 9/29/11 0:01am]

ZombieKitten said:

I use CS5 at work very very nice!

Yer Pan color bridge ink fan is HAWT

JamFanHot said:

Cerebus said:

Dauphin said:

When dealing with audio and video, you want processing speed, bandwidth, and memory allocation. Companies who create audio video software work with apple. Apple provides a more consistent architecture per release, and generally supports newer bus systems in terms of FireWire and USB. As such, they generally get the job done faster, and more consistently Pcs can do it too, and cheaper. But in this case you do get what you pay for.

How much faster? At this point is it even an noticeable amount? I don't think it is unless you're counting in microseconds.

Looking at the hardware review sites, it seems the 64bit revolution has really narrowed the gap. And Win7 performs comparable to Mac's OSX. Looks like personal preference in choice of software at this point.

ZombieKitten said:

I use CS5 at work very very nice!

My cheap company still has me working with CS2.

Ace said:

If so, how, exactly?

It's not better for design work, but it is better designed, and many graphic artists like to surround themeselves with better designed or styled products in the form of furniture, fashion, haircuts, or macs.

But in reality the combination of processors, graphic design of interface and user experience, casing design, with built in high quality monitor of the Apple imacs are actually cheaper then their equivalent PC.

ufoclub said:

Ace said:

If so, how, exactly?

It's not better for design work, but it is better designed, and many graphic artists like to surround themeselves with better designed or styled products in the form of furniture, fashion, haircuts, or macs.

This is the answer I tend to hear over and over again ('Er...uh...they`re cooler!`).

Against most PCs, I`d agree with that. But I`d be lyin' if I said that I felt you were gettin' more bang for yer buck with a Mac.

I work in web and graphic design on the side and I use Photoshop CS5 on my PC. Have used it on my cousins Mac, no difference. Software is software.

But if I wanted to use OSX, I'd build a hackintosh. Best of both worlds.

Militant said:

I work in web and graphic design on the side and I use Photoshop CS5 on my PC. Have used it on my cousins Mac, no difference. Software is software.

That's what I thought.

Cerebus said:

This sounded like the best answer to me:

Genesia said:

If your friend is trying to get into graphic design and is told that everyone in that field uses Macs - accept it. Because it's true. It makes no sense for her to use a PC when the industry is based on Mac.

sextonseven said:

This sounded like the best answer to me:

Genesia said:

If your friend is trying to get into graphic design and is told that everyone in that field uses Macs - accept it. Because it's true. It makes no sense for her to use a PC when the industry is based on Mac.

That sounded like this to me:

'Everyone else has got one.'

Ace said:

That sounded like this to me:

'Everyone else has got one.'

Does your friend intend to work with "everyone else"?

Ace said:

sextonseven said:

This sounded like the best answer to me:

That sounded like this to me:

'Everyone else has got one.'

Well, duh!

My point is...you can argue that it doesn't make sense, but you're wasting your breath. Most people who work in the creative field (art direction, graphic art, copywriting) are Mac people. The creative departments they work in use Macs and they use Macs at home. Sure, it's a convention. But it's a long-standing convention that has its roots in the fact that Macs used to be the only game in town for most creative work (back to the days when everyone used Quark to build pages). It isn't going to change.

So for someone just starting out to say, "Well this makes no sense - I'm going to get a PC," when the creative world runs on Mac is futile and stupid.

sextonseven said:

Ace said:

That sounded like this to me:

'Everyone else has got one.'

Does your friend intend to work with "everyone else"?

Very nice - and succinct.

Genesia said:

for someone just starting out to say, "Well this makes no sense - I'm going to get a PC," when the creative world runs on Mac is futile and stupid.

But no one's made the argument that you can't do the actual work with a PC.

sextonseven said:

Ace said:

That sounded like this to me:

'Everyone else has got one.'

Does your friend intend to work with "everyone else"?

Yes. But she just might have the stones to "think different".

Ace said:

Genesia said:

for someone just starting out to say, "Well this makes no sense - I'm going to get a PC," when the creative world runs on Mac is futile and stupid.

But no one's made the argument that you can't do the actual work with a PC.

It.Doesn't.Matter.

Genesia said:

Ace said:

But no one's made the argument that you can't do the actual work with a PC.

It.Doesn't.Matter.

I just don't understand why people think following the herd, particularly creative people, is the way to go. There is no difference anymore (something I've been saying for years). People in this thread, smart people, have explained it in very clear, technical terms. If all of the work is interchangable because its done on software usable on both peices of hardware, why does the piece of hardware you're using matter? Because its pretty? Because that's what people have been using? Ugh. I just hate this mess. Do whatcha like. Change is good. Etc etc etc.