Korean Job Discussion Forums

IlIlNine · Joined: 15 Jun 2005 Location: Gunpo, Gyonggi, SoKo

Oh, Apple products are great, no doubt!

I think Apple really got other companies thinking about UI in a way that no others did before and caused many people to rethink the role of what a computer is and what it should do. It's definitely a visionary company.

Other than UI, technically there isn't that much special to Apple hardware. In fact, one of the reasons why I find Apple a little distasteful is their desire to completely monopolize the platform. You can see it clearly with the iTunes tie-ins to apple products -- evident in the application store selection process, for example.

MS has done quite a few things right, too. DirectX, MS office, Windows Networking, just to name a few. The biggest problem for MS is that they don't control the platform like apple does, so it's much harder for them to ensure end-to-end quality. All things considered, I think they do a reasonable job.

I like Windows because it doesn't really get in my way and there's a lot of available software. Don't need anything else, really!

crescent · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Location: yes.

ublove · Joined: 03 Sep 2007

seonsengnimble · Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:10 am Post subject:

crescent · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Location: yes.

Wow. Relax. It's surely not mind boggling for me, but how about you and reading? Something to work on, hmm?

I surely didn't say it was a HUGE design flaw. I said it was a SIMPLE concept that a team of PhDs got wrong. A good amount of the choices in the startup menu aren't even things that can be "started'.

http://sillydog.org/graph/ss/mac/leopard_solid_menu.jpg

giraffe · Joined: 07 Apr 2009

Well in Vista its not really a start menu anymore its just a logo of Window. =p. Hows that any better than an apple logo? Can i feed an apple to my computer? haha

Anyways im not here to argue, Theres no doubt that Mac software is better design /looking and easy to use. Hardware isnt much different though , its essentially all the same stuff internally ever since they changed to intel based chips.

Ive been using both macs and pc daily since College (roughly 9 years ). Right now, I work on a Mac at work for 10 hours a day ( because the boss is mac crazy ) and a PC at home. To be honest i still prefer pc because i can afford it and upgrade it without putting a dent into my pocket and I also own 5 000$ of graphic / video software that are all PC versions. I could switch to mac version of software but i would need to pay 2000$ to make the license switch. SOOO i stick to pc. Which really doesnt bother me at all.

Also i've had issues with macs at work. I do alot of intensive After FX and photoshop work, the mac and the pc work GREAT. The problem is when you get into files/videos that are 16 bit or 32 bit channel at 30 000 pixel resolution a 3000$ mac cant properly process these images under an adobe software. The mac ends up chugging and crashing every 15 minutes or so because it goes into a memory loop and cant handle the files ( it should be able to run it because i have the same specs on my pc at home but its just hurting the mac). Soo even though the boss hates PCs we have to keep one in the studio for this very reason. IM not saying this to prove anything, its just a reality of the daily job, the mac hardware we bought cant do everything we need to do even though its a decent machine. A typical pc like i have at home would chug on the above image specifics but It doesnt crash which is why i appreciate having a pc at home so that i can finish my work when i have to work in those formats. Macs CAN and DOES absolutely handle those files, but you have to buy an above average mac computer that costs over 5000$ ( mac tower , raid hd , monitor , at least 8 gigs of ram ) ect.. And buying somethign liek that isnt an option for me when i can buy a pc for 2000$ for the same specs.

Dont get me wrong, MACs are great for image processing but for some reason their average system cant exactly handle those high end images. ( and like i said you would have to buy into their top of the line stuff). NOt sure what the problem is, im sure this will get resolved sooner or later. Its probably just a mix of adobe programming , mac os and the hardware is uses. In any case both the mac and pc does what i need them to do 99% of the time. Heck i even use a mac keyboard with my pc =p.

Anyways just my 2 cents. Love macs , love pcs but i still stick to pc for good reasons.

denverdeath · Joined: 21 May 2005 Location: Boo-sahn

crescent · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Location: yes.

giraffe · Joined: 07 Apr 2009

Crescent,

Nope not pirated , i work in entertainment industry everythign we use is legal. I myself own all the adobe software + a couple of 3d software and video software all paid for. Yeah i know about pirated software and stability issues, all my friends use pirated software and keep complaining about how it crashes. I keep telling them to buy the damn software but they're too cheap to buy anything legal if they can just download it haha.

The reason why your friend probably never complained is because hes probably NEVER worked at the size i have to work at because this is for Feature film stuff. I really doubt any photographers end up with 30k resolution files at 32 bit channel with 100 + layers. Its VERY VERY VERY specific situations that 99.5% of people would NEVER EVER EVER run into even as a professional photographer ect. 30k res is the LIMIT for photoshop and its a LIMIT that doesnt work nicely with say an IMAC with 4 gigs of ram , good processor , fast hd ect. BUT on a PC with the same specs that i have at home using it doesnt crash at all. ( ive also tested many macs over the years with this issue and it only works on the most expensive macs. which is a bummer ) Most photographers work 16bit and rarely go anywhere near the 30k res mark not to mention with hundreds of layers. Thats one of the only situations where ive seen an average 2500-3000$ mac go kaput. We have a couple high end macs around the studio but are ALWAYS being used soo since the studio cant afford any more they bought a few cheap pcs to get some grunt work done on ( and they do the job great). Ive had to split files into 2 many times to be able to work with them properly on the mac.

Again i dont think any less of the mac because of this. Im all for using multiple platforms/ software / hardware to get the job done. The only reason i prefer pcs over mac is because i own software that i would need to pay alot of money to transfer on the mac and the price. Nothing related to me thinking PC is better or MAC sucks. i have 6 years of professional experience working extensively with both mac and pc and in the end both of them are computers that do the same exact tasks. Maybe 10 + years ago MAc had a clear advantage over PCs ( or so ive heard) but these days the line is very finely blurred ( in terms of performance of course). Aesthetics wise mac does win the award hands down BUt ive been seeing alot of cool pcs coming out these days too. ANd yes the mac OS does make more sense to me But im soo used to windows that using isnt really an issue.

Theres ALOT ALOT of stuff i love about BOTH PCS and MAC far too much to list. BUt i also have issues with both of them aswell. Theres alot of software that i like that i can only use on the mac like final cut pro , colors , aperture ect... The best thing for me would be if i could actually have Both computers because none of them do everythign i want them to do exactly like i want it too..

crescent · Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Location: yes.

Yet, my current audio production setup experience has been similar to your story, but in reverse. Really fine audio scrubbing/editing, with a spectrum of additives crippled my PC, which was way over any of the specs needed. I made sure of that.
The Mac I bought 2 years later and used simultaneously with the PC had half the RAM, less processor power, and I'm running an entire studio on it.

Refreshing to finally get a perspective from someone deeply invested in both platforms.

seonsengnimble · Posted: Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:19 pm Post subject:

Personally, I have no beef with Macs, I just have no need to buy one. They have some definite advantages. They're generally built as a whole, rather than assembled piecemeal. That is to say, If you buy a macbook with a high end processor, HD and video card, you know it will run smoothly. Whereas if you buy a pc notebook with great components, you can never be too sure if it will run smoothly. There can be a crappy fan or some other part that makes your computer overheat as well as many other possible problems.

As for desktops, however, I prefer PCs. If there's a new game I want to play, and my current video card isn't up to snuff, I can simply buy a new one and replace the old one. The only difficult things to replace are processors and mobos, but it's still doable.

I also prefer the xp setup to mac os/vista. This isn't because it's superior, it's just a personal thing. I haven't regularly used a mac since over ten years ago when I was running a performa. To me, the xp setup is pretty straightforward and barebones. I prefer scrolling through a list of programs which are arranged by me to having a big friendly wheel to scroll through. It just seems a bit too user friendly.

One thing that would be nice for windows, though, is if they would improve the quality of internet explorer. Instead of making it big and fuzzy with stupid defaults with no address bar, because you don't need to type an address, you just need to ask jeeves, they could actually improve security.