Mac or PC?

[tchambers]

I am venturing out to rebuild my 2005 pc to updated i7 processor and motherboard. I am running 4 raptor hard drives. I use my computer primairly for video editing. I have many friends that have made the jump to Mac. Other than the cost of equipment, the cost of all new programs, does anybody have any advice on this subject? They swear that the operating system lends to a much smoother and trouble free environment. Before I spend 1000$ on the upgrade, including all new ram, powersupply, and video card, does anybody have anything to say?

[guns1inger]

I work in a mixed environment, and basically computers are computers, and Macs are prone to issues just like Windows or Linux PCs. Yes, they are different issues, but they are not immune.

As a user I find the Mac environment limited, limiting and frankly, uninspiring. There are too many tools that are simply not available or have no viable equivalent on the Mac platform, especially in the video area.

I would get a Mac only if I had to use use FCP or DVD Studio pro. And I would never get one as my only machine.

[jman98]

I would get a Mac only if I had to use use FCP or DVD Studio pro. And I would never get one as my only machine.

As someone who has worked with both, I really cannot agree more with this.

The problem with Macs is that you usually have at most only 1 or 2 programs that can do what you want. Those programs don't work for you? You are out of luck my friend. On Windows you have a wide variety of software choices so if A doesn't work, try B or C or D or E. Macs are great for dumb ass users who just want to read email and surf the internet. Or if you want to be a poser. Wish I could tell you I'm joking, but the most hard core Mac fanboys I know think that they are "video gurus" because they can use Mac The Ripper and then pass that through Handbrake to do H.264 encodes. You ask them what an "I frame" is and they will look at you like you are speaking Greek, but they sure pass themselves off as experts on all things video related because they can use Handbrake.

On the plus side, OS X does at least spare you from having to deal with the constant idiocy that is Microsoft Windows. A key DLL just freakin' vanished for no reason? Your previously fine Windows box will today no longer boot even though you made no changes to it? You'll be spared that. But at a cost. You'll have a hardware platform with extremely limited options for upgrading and you'll quickly have to add USB hubs just to add stuff to it. And you'll pay MUCH MUCH more for the Mac too.

I am writing this on an iMac by the way.

[Lodovico]

I have two Macs that I use all day, but when I want to do video work I fire up my PC and boot into XP (not Windows 7, which doesn't like my capture cards and won't run my VirtualDub filters without crashing). This is partly because I don't want to tie up my Macs with long processor-intensive stuff, but mainly because there's a Windows tool for pretty much any video task. As guns1inger said, the software choice for video work is unfortunately quite limited on a Mac.

I ended up a Mac user not because I'm a "poser" or a "dumb ass" but because the university department where I was working happened to be Mac-based. Windows 7 is pretty (and very Mac-like on the surface) but far from trouble-free, which is why I have to keep reverting to XP.

[lordsmurf]

As someone who has worked with both, I really cannot agree more with this..

Make that three of us.

My Mac is relegated to specific tasks, because that's all it's really good at.
- Lightroom
- DVD Studio Pro
- MAMP

Mac makes for a terrible "general use" computer, as it's very limiting.
Consider something as simple as FTP. Most of the software is garbage, free or otherwise.
There's many basic tasks that have no Mac equivalent of any kind.

[lordsmurf]

http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20021126

[budwzr]

I met an iMac user once and showed her some photos I took using the Windows slideshow thingy, and she said her Mac doesn't have anything like that. She wanted to know what program is that.

P.S. That cartoon is hilarious!

[Lodovico]

Yep. Throw a match into the Mac vs PC powder keg, sit back and watch the sparks fly.

[HoosierGuy]

I'm new to video editing and no nothing about Macs. I have always heard Macs are good for artistic things like video editing. Be that true or not, why have Macs
gained that reputation?

[edDV]

I'm new to video editing and no nothing about Macs. I have always heard Macs are good for artistic things like video editing. Be that true or not, why have Macs
gained that reputation?

Apple has specialized in two video markets, low consumer (included iLife package) and mid pro ($999 Studio package).

For the low end entry consumer, iMovie and iDVD are easy to use but limited for sources and workflow. At the output end, Apple steers you to their players. HD output support is limited because Steve doesn't like Blu-Ray. Third party support is limited but adequate for the average consumer.

The Studio package assumes a pro production workflow (e.g. camera source to polished finished product) rather than a video re-purposing workflow that many hobbyists want.

There is a big gap between iMovie and Final Cut. Windows PC's have video software products for every level and application plus extensive open source options. In today's market, I think Mac has the advantage at the entry consumer level because the products are built in and the workflow is mandated. Above the entry level, Windows offers far more flexibility and cost effectiveness.

For the Home Theater PC application, Windows is far in the lead. Linux is second (e.g. MythTV) and Mac a distant third.

[edDV]

...
I have always heard Macs are good for artistic things...

That historically was because artists aren't geeks and are highly conformist. They were intimidated by Windows. In the old days Macs offered an easier user entry with focused marketing to publishing and education. Adobe, Aldus and Canon products made Mac a usable desktop publishing platform. Mac held the publishing lead until Windows '95 but by 2000, Windows platforms were the preferred high performance choice.

Mac was on the decline until Jobs returned. The Mac revived as Jobs moved the company vision to consumer media consumption. The iLife package allowed the Mac to compete as a bundled consumer solution that worked well with iPod/iTunes for media consumption and limited media publishing.

[Cornucopia]

Having worked (and administered) side by side on both for decades, I can say that Mac users aren't stupid, per say, but they DEFINITELY aren't the same level of geekiness as an old DOS-head or Linux script-kiddy!

What they've got going for them is a solid OS foundation, a sleek and consistent user interface that is geared toward only a few ways of doing things, and a closed system of hardware supply and support. These are both strengths and weaknesses, depending on what your situation is.

Because HISTORICALLY Macs ruled the DTP/Art/Photo/Music world, there is still much pressure to keep it that way, but times have greatly changed.
It's clear nowadays that Apple is geared more towards its other CE lines (iPod, iTunes, iPhone, iPad, etc).


For the OP:

I think what you should do is decide "what do you want to be able to do with your -STUFF-", and then work backward and find the software(s) that do just that, and then find the hardware that supports THAT software.

Scott

[budwzr]

I'm new to video editing and no nothing about Macs. I have always heard Macs are good for artistic things like video editing. Be that true or not, why have Macs
gained that reputation?

Back in the 80's, the Macs had higher resolution monitors, and all software was still fledgling. Now that computers have matured, PC's evolved much more rapidly because Steve's motto is K.I.S.S. and the Mac OS was not considered robust enough for anything more than simple tasks, and remains so today.

So when you go into a doctor's or other professional office and see Macs, you know what you're dealing with. Somebody bamboozled them when they took bids for IT dept.

Apple's vision is to provide a computer for "the rest of us", AKA the bottom 10% of the market, and they have done a fantastic job of hitting that mark.

[poisondeathray]

Yes, definitely pros/ cons to either platform.

Some of biggest issues with Mac right now in terms of video editing are compatibility issues with various formats (everything needs to be MOV wrapped, so you usually end up wasting time transcoding everything to ProRes for FCP) , gamma issues , poor blu-ray support. But there are workarounds

Apple is more of a hardware oriented company - they want to sell you latest ipod/pad/thingy . FCP is really due for a major overhaul. PC's have access more software options to choose from different vendors, including very useful open source developed applications like avisynth

[16mmJunkie]

I have many friends that have made the jump to Mac. Other than the cost of equipment, the cost of all new programs, does anybody have any advice on this subject? They swear that the operating system lends to a much smoother and trouble free environment. Before I spend 1000$ on the upgrade, including all new ram, powersupply, and video card, does anybody have anything to say?

What have your friends told you after they "jumped" to Mac? That would be helpful to you and give you a chance to hands on....regardless of the upgrade to PC or Mac your looking at $$$ ! i7, i5, AMD 6 core, motherboard, memory etc... If you want to be cutting edge in hardware or software will run $$$. Either PC or Mac isn't much different IMO ( I work with both Apple and PC). If you don't know what your doing in one...it is not much different in the other. Final Cut Studio works well in my experience with the G5 and Mac Pro equipment I have in-house. As well as the PC equipment we use with Adobe, Avid, etc.... it's a choice I like having many different tools to complete work. And much of my work is done according to project demands. Apple has limited software, but those available do a great job. PC has a luxury of many different sources in software and get the job done as well. It can be good ... but many are lousy programs. 2005 hummm.......long due for a overhaul in video work

[16mmJunkie]

Apple is more of a hardware oriented company - they want to sell you latest ipod/pad/thingy .

All computer makers are hardware driven.....PC makers every 3 month it seems are releasing new CPU, Memory, HD, Videocards etc.... Apple may focus on markets beyond desktops but they are in the desktop/laptop market.

[deadrats]

as someone that has owned both and used both, all the way back in the ibm-pc and apple 2e days to today, here is my take:

it's ridiculous to buy a mac in this day and age of cheap pc components, since the OP is keeping his raptors, all he really needs is a motherboard (a good one can be had for $80), a sandy bridge based cpu (roughly $150 range) and some ram (4 gigs ddr3 can be had for under $100); spending thousands on a comparably equipped Mac is silly.

as for how macs got the reputation as being for professionals the answer is really convoluted:

1) there was a time when Mac Oses were considered "ram" OSes, i.e. they made the best use of ram and simply throwing more ram into them would speed up the system, basically all Mac OSes would use up all the available ram before hitting the swap file (just like linux and unix); in contrast win 9x and nt based OSes were designed to hit the swap/page file regardless if there was free ram or not (on 9x based windows there was a registry hack that allowed could change this behavior).

2) there were a ton of upgrades available for Macs, such as processor daughter cards that could simply be plugged into a pci-x slot (i think they also made pci daughter cards) and you could add more ram and even additional cpu's. there used to be an $800 dual g4 card that could be plugged into a g3, compare that with about $1600 for a dual g4 from apple or the cost of building a comparable dually on a pc platform and you can understand why some considered the Mac the superior platform.

3) the Mac, using RISC cpu's, was easier to program for and AltiVec, the Mac version of SSE was significantly easier to code with, as a consequence many of the cross platform graphics hardware ran faster on the Macs than their pc counterparts.

4) the availability of professional add in audio and graphics cards aimed squarely at the Mac market: i remember back when the dual core g5's first came out i happened to be in a customers apartment that was in the music business and used to edit music videos. i remember looking into his studio and noticing that he had to Macs, a dual g4 and a quad g5 (2 dual core g5's) but all his sound and video equipment was plugged into the dual g4. when i asked him why that was he told me that the g4 was faster than the g5 and further explained that the reason was that he had a $2500 professional sound card and 10 grand professional caliber video card in the g4 and it would be too much of a hassle to swap everything over to the g5.

eventually however windows improved, people learned how to get the most out of SSE and it's derivatives and most importantly pc component prices started to drop drastically, allowing users to stay current with hardware improvements rather than having to consider a computer a long term investment.

[Gramps]

I would go with a PC. While there is nothing wrong with Macs but, as others have said, the variety of software choices is limited when compared with what is available for the PC.

You should also consider that, while your current goal is to use it primarily for video editing, that may change 6 months or a year down the road. Six months from now, you might decide that you want to give Linux a try, or to set up that box as a virtual machine host, or get in gaming, etc.

With a PC, such software flexibility make them possible, but not if you are tied to the Mac architecture.

[videopoo]

Only reason I own a Mac is because my clients do. You dont want to be on a PC when everyone is feeding you Mac files. Like it or not, they dominate the video editing business for the most part.

[budwzr]

I'm new to video editing and no nothing about Macs. I have always heard Macs are good for artistic things like video editing. Be that true or not, why have Macs
gained that reputation?

For the same reason Cadillacs are perceived as pimpmobiles.

[budwzr]

Hahaha, seriously, if you have to ask, then you're a Mac person.

[Cornucopia]

Only reason I own a Mac is because my clients do. You dont want to be on a PC when everyone is feeding you Mac files. Like it or not, they dominate the video editing business for the most part.

With the exception of Pixlet or ProRes QT/MOV files, I've never had trouble using a PC along with Macs in a video editing environment.
True, FCP (Mac-Only) is still used A LOT in the film industry.
But NOW, so is Vegas (PC-only) & Premiere (both PC&Mac). And AVID, while starting out as Mac-only, now has the bulk of their business as PC.

I wouldn't mind getting a Mac these days, since it's basically a PC with a particular hardware set and a Unix-derived OS. If you dual-boot (or I rather like swappable boot drives instead), you're just on a PC. Intel architecture and all...
Then, when I NEED to use a Mac, I'd have it.

Still, big price differential.

Scott

[lordsmurf]

I wouldn't mind getting a Mac these days, ...
Then, when I NEED to use a Mac, I'd have it....
Still, big price differential.

Tip...

Get this Mac mini: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013FK9U2?ie=UTF8&tag=thdifa-20&linkCode=as2&camp=17...SIN=B0013FK9U2
Only $670

+ $95 for 8GB RAM
RAM sale info at http://www.digitalFAQ.com/forum/showthread.php/8gb-ram-mac-2812.html

And it works every bit as well as a Macbook Pro or iMac. Very fast, very nice, very tiny.

[budwzr]

My wife's iPad crashed the other day, and she thought the battery had a problem. She thought I was a "genius" because I could reboot it and make it work again. It was so cute, bless her heart.

If the Mac people were a little less arrogant, I think many of us PC people could make room for them in our big tent. But instead they sneer and snide and act superior. It's laughable

[videopoo]

With the exception of Pixlet or ProRes QT/MOV files

True but it seems everyone is using ProRes I really like FCP above Avid and anything else. I wish a new upgrade would come soon though. I hear the BBC went all Premier Pro

[edDV]

With the exception of Pixlet or ProRes QT/MOV files

True but it seems everyone is using ProRes I really like FCP above Avid and anything else. I wish a new upgrade would come soon though. I hear the BBC went all Premier Pro

ProRes makes sense for pro 4:2:2 source but won't improve consumer 4:2:0 video.

[16mmJunkie]

If the Mac people were a little less arrogant

I think your laughable at your assumption of Mac People... you've place a bunch of responses that show your own arrogants!

[budwzr]

Well too bad. This is the editing section and I get tired of reading about Macs. There's a section for Macs, and I don't know why it keeps spilling over here.

"Mac or PC?" has nothing to do with editing.

The OP starts out fawning over Macs, and how many friends made "the jump", and this is what rubbed me the wrong way.

[16mmJunkie]

Well too bad. This is the editing section and I get tired of reading about Macs. There's a section for Macs, and I don't know why it keeps spilling over here.

"Mac or PC?" has nothing to do with editing.

The OP starts out fawning over Macs, and how many friends made "the jump", and this is what rubbed me the wrong way.

Then don't read the posts and move on....Lots of posts I skip because of no interest.....

[budwzr]

Alright man, peace.