Hey guys,

I've been set to buy a MBP in a few weeks because I'm seriously pursuing graphic & web design. Regardless if you agree with it or not, I've been using OSX86 on my Thinkpad T42 for the last few days to learn and get comfortable with the OS, and I love it.

I've realized that the apps are not much different, a lot better looking, but overall the same (including the Adobe Suit). I've googled and haven't really found anything solid on the topic of why Mac's are preferred for design, besides "because they have always been" and "because of expose".

I have been thinking about it, and seeing as I don't exactly have a lot of money, and I'm back on the fence.

Basically, to the people who have switched from PC to Mac because of design reasons, do you think it was worth it?

Thanks.

I thought it would be better too, but after having both a Mac Mini and an iBook, I can say there's really not much difference anymore. The Adobe Suite works very well despite the OS. All you really get is the eye candy (and as far as general computing is concerned, no real virus or spyware threat). If you're a savvy Windows user I would bet that you'll probably be more efficient if you stick on Windows, rather than having to learn a new OS.

I don't have anything against Macs, and I'll gladly use one if it's in front of me, but I just find myself working much more efficiently on Windows. I daresay some of the eye candy actually gets in the way of efficiency when using a Mac.

I'm now back on a PC full-time and have actually gotten rid of both Macs that I used to own.

They used to be preferred because Adobe created Photoshop for Mac way back in the day. Obviously it was ported and now I believe Windows actually performs better using CS3. At least in my experience it has been.

Good comments gigapixels. I'm exactly the same just I find working on a Mac easier then windows. The difference is very minimal these days. In fact the only advantage I can think of is when using a lot of Photoshop files at the same time Exposé really helps

This may just be the best reply I have ever seen to this question. Nowadays they are basically the same. There really isn't much in it. But if you're a savvy windows user as you said, it'd would be a lot more beneficial sticking with windows.

Most people get a Mac to either look good, or because it's "Industry Standard" and everyone else has one in the business.

Text rendering is far superior on OS X than it is on Windows.

For one reason, fonts are handled much better in OS X for designers as they're represented on how they look on print. (as said on IRC)

I feel the workflow is indispensable as well with Expose, CMD+~ (switching between application windows), and CMD+H (hide application).

You should see the movie Helvetica if you want to see how common macs are in the design industry.

edit: Leopard takes efficiency further with Quick Look.

I switched from Windows to OS X and I prefer doing design work on OS X. Expose and Spaces are awesome when working with lots of files. I also like being able to drop a file onto an icon in the Dock to open it. Saves me having to bother with the Open dialogue when the file is on the Desktop or in a Stack.

Preview also having support for file types like PDF, PSD, RAW, DNG, EPS, AI, etc and Quick Look having support for most of those file types makes things a lot quicker. I don't have to open a heavy app like Photoshop just to look at the file.

Out of the box font management is also a lot better in OS X compared to Windows. Yes, you can download a font manager. But having a built in one is quite nice. You can also use Quick Look to preview a font before you install it.

For me it's all about the shortcuts.
Although there are shortcuts for the PC, I find the mac shortcuts to be much more efficient.
And ofc CMD+~ like giga said. The workflow for me is much better on the Mac.

I go to a school with graphic design and digital media design and it is almost exclusively Mac.

This is a bit of a stab in the dark here, but I also believe another reason a Mac is the weapon of choice for graphic design, is how they display colour. I remember reading a while back that Macs display colours more accurately then a Windows machine and this is very important to a graphics designer. I could be wrong but that is what I understood was one of the reasons.

Macs also default to a Gamma of 1.8, which is better for print.

There's no difference if you calibrate them both properly.


I'm pretty sure 2.2 is the standard now.

Saying OS X has more eye candy is absurd with Vista on the loose now. The Leopard GUI is far more efficient and less distracting than any form of windows and the consistency between programs is very nice. As far as design goes CS3 is much more useful to me on OS X than it was on windows, one prime example is the lack of a background in photoshop. This allows me to work on my designs while having pictures, documents, sites, whatever behind that I can work off of. Another huge benefit in Leopard is spaces which allows me to work on many things at once without cluttering up one desktop. There are many more reasons why a mac is better for design but I'd rather not get into it all, but one minor thing is designers usually like making things look good, so its a no brainer they would want their computers to look good too

My general reasons for using it aren't so much that the system is made better for designing, its that the tools they provide to do it are much more effective, use this analogy, would it be more effective to put a nail in with the end of a screwdriver or a hammer?

Tanks for the replies. I have noticed the workflow is smoother, switching from one app to another. Everything seems well integrated.

Xero> if you could get into all the reasons, that would be great, hence this topic.

well... from the early days, Macs had better font rendering (focusing on the print quality instead of the pixel grid) and had lots of graphics effects built into the OS in very efficient algorithms.
with OS X, they took that a step further by having a back buffer for each window, so window repainting like you had in Windows when you alt+tabbed to another window didn't happen in OS X, it was already painted.
Exposé helps a lot to mitigate the lotsa windows problem and actually SEE where you're switching to.
color calibration has been there from the early days and worked REALLY well from what i read.

i think those are the main reasons.

Mac has been the industry standard for the graphic design and audio industries for years before any of the conveniences of OSX and all that jazz. They were the graphic design standard before Adobe ever dreamed up Photoshop. They were the graphic design standard before font rendering became a crucial issue. In fact, Photoshop was first made for MAC and fonts are rendered in the preferable way because Mac was/is the industry standard.

So ultimately none of those could be the real reason.

The reason is because Macs have had a GUI the longest.
It can be kind of difficult to do graphic design through a DOS command line.

They are still the "industry standard" in Graphic design, (and by osmosis video editing and audio engineering, as well) because there has never really been a reason for the industry to switch, and historically, an "integrated" computing solution is ideal for "graphic design-types" who don't want to have to needlessly dick with their boxes to get them to do what they need them to.

I'm liking the fact that it's like working on a real desktop where you can see everything you have on it, and you can switch back and forth naturally.

It seems to be consensus that Windows is better for web design, and Mac OS X is better for print design. The default settings of a Mac are better suited to print because of gamma and font rendering, but it becomes a real issue in web design where everyone is using Windows, which has different font rendering and defaults to a gamma of 2.2.

YES I do believe it is easier... Just by the way you can label files/sub label them and manage your files,but it is getting better on Windows Platforms.... Though I still laugh when I see the commercial for Mac's Vs. PC. Especially the one where the PC has a virus and the MAC does not. Though I know of about 30 viruses that have infected MAC ... Mostly because by default they are installed with Quick time. Or the one where they say Microsoft PC's are built with different Parts... Though If your Hard drive goes bad you just can't goto the all night Walmart at 3am and buy a new one. Proprietary components.

Now don't get me wrong I have owned Mac's before... Just sold my Mac Laptop...


With Macs you can Take a picture of many different dogs then save them by subclasses like color,breed, scenery.

Font rendering really isn't an issue for mac users focusing on web design. I would actually say it would be the opposite as cleartype just gets plain awful at larger sizes.

I do wish they that they would require all users to calibrate their monitors at system start (where they can select 1.8 or 2.2).

You can Do more with Linux if you know how to use it... I actually Had to teach my Aunt how to use her Mac Properly... All she did on it was put CD's in and listen to them...

Though I am about to start on some heavy testing on the Safari for windows.

From what I remember, it was colour management and fonts look like they will when they print. (and something about screen vs. print layout that I can't remember so I won't mention it)

These days, Vista supports colour management right through the OS, but it's still lacking in font rendering.

Edit: ClearType seems to completely break as the font gets larger, it's quite odd.

from what i've seen they aren't better... most people i know in that field, the companies they are working for are doing away with MAC's since PC can do just as good a job for 1/3 the cost.

Having used printing I think MAC's are superior. But I think Clear Type superior with small fonts...In fact for readability on screen it is superior to the Mac OS X equivalent. With Large fonts it is different story.

Windows font rendering is better for low resolution output, OS X is better for high resolution output.

It may not matter with the large majority of fonts, but if you're trying to get perfect alignment with a font for print output, you won't get it with Windows (since it changes the font to render well on your low DPI screen), unless you're using another font API, like FreeType.

Edit: Ahh, the GDI version of ClearType gets crappy at large sizes because it only does X direction anti-aliasing, WPF version of ClearType does X and Y direction, so it looks "purdy".

Three reasons:-
1) Colour representation/calibration
2) Font Rendering
3) General ease of use - Macs get the job done, designers are not geeks and therefore don't like messing with their machines.

Not that I know and looking at your sig I'm not sure I'd trust your opinion


The reason macs really took off in Graphics is because a long long time ago, Apple, Adobe and Aldus got together and produced what was unable at on a PC at that time

Apple, the Mac
Adobe, Postscript, Postscript Fonts and Photoshop
Aldus Pagemaker and wysiswyg
Laserprinters

This enable the Mac to be THE desk top publishing computer, there was a little more to it then that but thats it right at the core. essentially Adobe Postscript, Pagemaker and the Mac

"Decreased time and effort spent on technical problems (The Macintosh platform has much lower overall support and maintenance requirements than the Windows platform.) Increased efficiency and a smoother, more efficient graphic development process (Designers using Macintoshes are 42% more productive, according to a recent GISTICS study."
- Trade-Off Analysis of Macintosh and Windows Platforms, GISTSCS ROI Technology Brief, Volume II, Issue 1, Number 1, Revision 4.8

well on PC being used in Design houses and Printers, dunno about any other designer but if I go to one, and see they're all using Dells I'll probably feel they're amateurs or tight, might be a elitist but thats the feeling.

It probs similar if you was a office worker and went to a place that was using Macs and numbers, you'd feel it wasn't right.

I've used CS3 on Vista and Leopard (x86), and I found it easier to use with vista.

Don't get me wrong, they seemed to perform just as fast as each other, and a lot of the short cuts were similar, it was just the layout that I didnt like.

I'd never seen the point in being able to see behind photoshop at your other open windows...in fact it just annoyed me as it would distract me.

But now that people here have mentioned it, I can see how if you want to be looking at something in the background as a reference, or have another image open to look it, how it could be useful.

Apart from that though, both seemed fairly similar

Drag and drop between Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign?

Ahh...can see how that would be quite useful

if you've ever tried using CS3 on a mac and pc, you'll realise the answer.

altho there are the **Same** the mac one feels a lot less clunky.
plus expose is a god send!

I would argue that Macs were doing colour calibration while PCs were still fiddling with VGA cards.

I have this issue constantly with my tutor at college, we use Macs there and he has a real hate for PCs - when i bring the subject up he cant find 1 reason why a Mac would be better for Graphic Design over a PC... I use both but i 100% prefer to use Vista over OSx for my designing, just things such as windows taskbar - couldnt live without that and the position of minimize buttons etc...

I personally feel Macs make designers very big-headed, purely my personal opinion but from my experience from college working with Mac users its extremely clear.

When I serviced Mac's and PC's I asked the same question because I did all my graphic design on a PC. The Macies told me that the only reason they used the mac was because of the file format the programs spit out which were supported by the newspapers. Other than that.. they could easily be working on a PC.

I'd support other mentions on here like the font rendering and such..

Being the old codger that I am in this Computing Industry, I can remember when the first Macintoshs were beginning to be used in businesses, and all the way up to the OS9 releases and OS X up to today; I think that one of the reasons for Macs being more preferred by graphic artists & designers has more to do with the history of the Mac product line, and basically being boiled down to the superior rendering of PostScript versus HP's PCL rendering in the early years of the Mac. Hands-down, PostScript was vastly superior to PCL back in the days of the early HP LaserJet printers and Canon Printer Engines back then. Rendering PostScript on-screen set the Mac ahead of the PC in graphics use very early on.

Today, Macs still are the kings & queens of graphics rendering, Pantone matching & calibrated colors - but that distinction is becoming even more blurred these days.

--ScottKin...whom is eyeing a Mac G4 over at one of the local PC Recyclers (who woulda thought?!?!)

You may have owned a Mac but that doesn't mean you know stuff, 'cause you clearly do not. There are no 'proprietary' harddrives: there's just a harddrive that goes in a pc, in a Mac, in a Sun SPARC machine, in a IBM PowerPC supercomputer, etc. The harddrive from your pc can be put into your Mac and vice versa. For example, the drive in the Macbook is very easy to swap, so going to any store (like Walmart) and get a replacement drive is absolutely no problem whatsoever. There were some different parts from pc's because Mac used to be based on the PowerPC processor from IBM/Motorola. Nowadays they are the same x86 Intel machines as pc's are. So that may have been an old Mac vs PC commercial.

The viruses for OS X are nearly nonexistent, they are only PoC's (Proof of Concept). For earlier versions there were quite some viruses but they are all taken care of with a virusscanner. And no, they are not installed with Quicktime. You'd know that if you had some sense and if you check various security bulletins. There were some security bugs in Quicktime as are with most software. I think you meant to say bugs and not viruses.

^ hilarious that people think macs use proprietary hardware, also funny that they call them MAC

Yet--it's not system wide. Preview has been color managing since forever and I can't even put my finger on which image viewer color manages on the other side.

The default picture viewer

Thread Cleaned

This guy know's what he is talking about!

Correct.. I mean everything works and Macs have their own advantages that have kind of less to do with the actuall apps but more with less hassle with OS for designers.

I have extremely powerful computers as I do a lot of stuff in design, after effects, coding and stuff and I can tell you Adobe apps and Flash and stuff works faster on PC then on Mac. And I just got the latest 8-core Mac Pro with 10gb of ram.

CS4 should work great on Macs too again due to huge improvements in the actual underlying things. Not that it doesn't work great now but it's still a bit clunky when compared to PC.

The reason why designers choose Mac platform are two-fold.

One reason is as some others here explained. It's a tradition. The first graphical applications were developed on Apple hardware and for a LONG time the best results in both print design, prepress and overall any graphics work were superior to PC. That obviously changed as PC platform matured, got stronger graphics, better OS etc etc. All piece fell in place.

Now, the reason why designers pick Macs is because of no-hassle approach. This means, that OSX no matter how you look at it is a much simpler system, everything just works and it crashes and has incompatibilities much much less then PC. This allows you to concentrate more on work then trying to figure out why my Photoshop on PC stalls for 10 secs for absolutely no reason and it happens totally randomly.

I've been using PCs for A LONG time as a primary platform and just recently switched back to OSX, especially because today if you buy a Mac you actaully a get sick fast PC that can run both platforms with no problems, and I realized how smooth and great OSX is.. sure there are issues that are annoying to me but that's just because I got accustomed to PC too much so things are done slightly differently.

To me its the way you can organize windows and folders with expose etc - its all so fluid and clean with one click of a button


Really? I find it annoying you have to mark all the images in a folder and open all of them in order to scroll through them with the keyboard arrows etc



Been using my brothers mac a few times, so novice-novice mac user here

Quick Look! (fun fact: even Quick Look is color managed. ColorSync!)

Quick Look?
Where do I find that?

Highlight any file in finder and press the Space Bar on your keyboard.

Have you ever tried to open multiple windows in XP or vista?! Its a hugh pain switching among the windows in this environment. You have to click the taskbar and usually you have several windows open that your currently using. Its so much easier with the Expose, move the mouse to a particular corner of the screen and all the windows come up to the screen for you to choose from. Move the mouse to the opposite side and it clears the screen of windows revealing the desktop. This is all done in a fluid manner, no hiccups or stutters. I work as a graphic designer for a print company where I live (3yrs). When I was hired I had no prior knowledge about Macs and was completely clueless. I learned quite a bit over the first few weeks and now I refuse to work with anything related to Microsoft and the PC. They are just so much easier to use. I could go on and on about this but I won't.

Mike