Why are Mac's "better" than a PC in Graphics?

[mr_daemon]

i cannot tell you how frustrated i get at the little simple fact that when i am pressing alt on a windows keyboard i naturally think it is the apple key command. this drives me crazy to no end because it is an innate behavior for me to just press where the apple command key is which happens to be alt on a windows keyboard. we all know it is actually the option key that is equivalent to the mac apple key.

Yeah, I started doing this since I got my iBook, I end up doing alt+c instead of ctrl+c because this is where the apple key would be... the strange thing is, i've been using PCs for 5 years, and i'm only not even 2 months old in Mac-world, however this is the kind of thing that gets imprinted in your brain really easily. i guess it seems more natural to hold that key than control since this is where the thumb lies... it makes sense... i guess.

EDIT: I wrote imprinted instead of the very misleading word I had used previously. Curse you french.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

you know the main reason i love neowin is it usually forces me to think, and i have been thinking about this alot since my original post so here it is....

An Analogy as to Why People are Reluctant To Switch Computer OS's

(And Why They Usually Swear by the OS they Currently Use...)

by Dirty Larry

A Car.

Imagine you first learn how to drive using Car A, which happens to be an Automatic, which for this analogy we will call the Mac.

Imagine you are now looking at buying a new car several years later, Car B, which happens to be a Stick Shift, which for this analogy we will call Windows.

If all of your driving to date has been done an Car A, you are naturally comfortable with this as a result. So as a result you may very well be reluctant to buy Car B, for the simple fact that it presents to you a learning curve for something you already know how and feel comfortable in doing. As a result you might very well opt to find another car just like Car A, in which you learned on. Sure Car B may even be more powerful, but at the end of the day you are just looking for it to do what it is meant to do, and that is in essence get you from point a to point b, with the least amount of resistance and learning involved from your perspective. So I think more people than not will opt to try and find what they are already comfortable with and just stick to that. This applies to both sides of the "switch" whether it is Mac to Windows or Windows to Mac.

I know my analogy has a loophole because if you learned to drive on a Stick Shift, going to Automatic is usually an easy thing to do, but I am just trying to make a point that making the switch to another computer operating system, can just be like anything else in life... It is a matter of what that specific person is comfortable using and doing, which is usually dictated more often than not by how they learned to begin with...

[Spyder Veteran]

yes, no flamming because one wouldn't want to flam (rhymes with blam)

[Stunod7]

yes, no flamming because one wouldn't want to flam? (rhymes with blam)

[OBSCURE REFERENCE]

What if you want to play a flam tap? Some rudiments require a flam.

[/OBSCURE REFERENCE]

[aaron901]

I know my analogy has a loophole because if you learned to drive on a Stick Shift, going to Automatic is usually an easy thing to do

no actually you got a point there. if you've learnt to use Windows first, using Mac is a breeze. :)

[Spyder Veteran]

[OBSCURE REFERENCE]

What if you want to play a flam tap? Some rudiments require a flam.

[/OBSCURE REFERENCE]

holy crap thats obscure! lol i read that and looked like this :wacko:

[aristotle-dude]

Main reasons macs are used in graphics and publishing:

-More acccurate color calibration between RGB and CYMK

-Consistent color calibration across apps

-better PDF and Postscript support

-Less cluttered interface (designers don't want ever bell and whistle on screen at once)

-faster interface (in adobe products like photoshop)

One of the biggest problems with windows apps (especially MS apps) is featuritis. They are trying to be everything for everybody and cram too many features most people will never use.

[realmccoy]

The difference is that some software packages can render faster on the MAC because they are optimized for the Mac. The machine was created as a graphics tool the PC on the other hand has grown from a word processor to a multimedia center that can do everything. Adobe and few other graphic programs are now optimizing there programs for Intel and AMD chips; soon I believe that they will be the same.

Apple has one advantage they make the OS and the hardware. That also means graphic application design for that configuration. While the PC the OS is made by M$ and hardware by different venders disadvantage in performance.

But hey I use PC for graphics

:)

[Redestium]

From my experience from working on a Macintosh at work using Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, etc. and my own personal work at home using Windows I can say that I find very little difference between the two other than semantics that can easily be overcome with time. Currently the color calibration is equally as powerful on both platforms, speed is a tossup considering the G5s are out now (however out of the reach of many). I think many companies and individuals wouldn't mind using the thousands they saved by getting a PC on something else and in return perhaps take a little longer to achieve a certain task. If a company really needs to be the fastest of the fast then they are going to go to something other than a Mac regardless. I do think though that it is out of tradition that people still associate the Mac with the best in graphical ability and performance when in reality it is a much closer race.

[Bling3k12]

I don't have anything thoughtful to contribute, but when I used to go home and do Photoshop on my Mac, I found it a lot better than using it here at work. I can't stand using Photoshop on my XP machine. It's not that it's slow, it's that I just feel more comfortable in a Mac environment, and I've only been using it for a year, while I've been using PC's for 8+.

To simplify my problem, I dropped my PC, and tomorrow I'll be using an iBook for both my home and work tasks. And with Airport at both home and work, my desk will be quite less cluttered.

[JMA_PN]

Because Mac were the first (for the consumer) to have a gui, a mouse and photoshop?

In the past Mac's were indeed better than PC's, but now... I'm really sceptic...

[~Bull}{Dog~]

While the PC the OS is made by M$ and hardware by different venders disadvantage in performance.

Sorry but that simply is not true. There are MANY different options for x86 operating systems, Windows is one choice out of many.

Back to topic I dont have a clue.. I remember when Amigas were the business for graphics.

[tRr]

In my opinion it's simply the Mac OS. Most people agree when using it things just make more sense overall. Whenever I use Windows I get the feeling it was slapped together over time, but when using a Mac its as if somebody slaved over finding out how to do things the best possible way (most of the time at least ;)). Windows has made great improvements in all areas, but even something as simple as the mouse to me and other Mac users I have talked to, just feels choppy, jumpy, and rigid compared to the Mac. Most artist want to concentrate on their work, and not their computer. Of course eventually their Mac's well have problems too, they just seem easier to fix when they crop up.

But as others have said before its whatever platform you need/like to use.

This really isn't why just graphic artists keep their Mac's, its why every other Mac user does as well. It's tough to explain but you just got to try using one without any feelings to start with, and see if its right for you. :)

[aristotle-dude]

Amigas? I remember those things. They had the lead for a couple years in video production in the late 80's to early 90's because of things like the Video Toaster and Lightwave. But they were never really any good for gfx for print work.

[nomis_nehc]

I actually asked my uncle about this question, and this is what he tells me, " It's because Mac was easier to use and designers back then picked up the Mac. And nowadays, it's more like something they are just naturally more comfortable with. And besides, they can afford it."

:shifty:

[the evn show]

One of the main reasons I like PS on the Mac over Windows is that Windows uses an MDI window (IMO the worst UI element in history). This is in addition to the issues around color management.

The problems with MDI windows aren't only in photoshop, but they become really darn irritating to my (and other people's) workflow.

Example 1:

I have a document that I've been working on - I'm preparing it for use on the web or on film. I like to work on an LCD monitor, but I know that CRT screens will often look vastly different than LCD even when color corrected. I created a copy of the document with color correction applied, lay

OSX: Drag the document window to the other screen - do any tweaks as required

Windows: You have to drag the entire application over taking all your documents with it. That makes it really hard to compare the "final" to the original.

Example 2:

I'm making doing a lot of copy paste work between photoshop and illustrator or maybe word (embedding graphics in a document for a presentation of some sort). The easiest method to do this is using drag/drop.

OS X: Select what you want in photoshop. Drag to desktop (make all the clippings you want). drag clippings to whatever program you want.

Windows: The MDI window will prevent you from accessing the desktop (unless you minimize/de-maximize it). So you're left either using that save-as-a-copy window a dozen times or doing the "copy -> switch wnidow -> paste" dance and hoping that it doesn't try to OLE you rather than just plain pasting. I can't remember ever using "scraps" (the windows version of clippings) to do this sort of thing. I suspect that it's because i found them to be broken - but I could be wrong.

Example 3:

I have some text in a PDF file or some other document that is relatating to my work. Maybe it's a list of design requirements or text for use in an advertisement. that I must click back and forth between photoshop and say preview.

OS X: click on any visible part of the 'text' document window and all the photoshop tools hide away and the text data will be visible. If you carefully position windows you'll always be able to see the text. Pather adds expose' (sorry: not on a mac right now: can't spell that right) which is even better - not really an issue today but it'll be cool when it finally ships RSN.

Windows: the mdi window blocks most of the desktop and the toolbar/palettes have an annoying habbit of not hiding when photoshop is not active (this might be an issue if you had 3 or 4 applications open photoshop, pdf viewer, dreamweaver and a couple browsers) which means you have to shuffle window z-order to see things. In the case of photoshops MDI it usually means minimizing the window to see stuff behind it.

Granted these aren't "End of the world" issues like if windows didn't have any color correction at all - but they happen so often that they annoy a lot of people who are used to the 'mac' way of doing things - and they delight people used to the 'windows' way when they see how easy it can be.

I don't have the time, money, or desire to by the absolute fastest photoshop machine every couple months so performance issues don't factor in as much. As long as it's quick enough to do what I need - I don't really care how many MHz or GHz my cpu has. Both P4 and G4 is enough for me right now - I rarely deal with files > 200mb.

These same sorts of decisions make Mac OS better for everything I do from writting code to editing video. That doesn't mean it's the one-true-way, just that I'm more productive/efficient/creative when I work on apple products.

Because this was largely an oppinion based post - YMMV.

EDIT:

Being first on the scene doesn't mean "instant greatness that lasts forever". See

* windows 3 vs Lisa (which one got market share like a mofo?)

* word vs wordperfect

* final cut vs premeire

Most of the time there is a darn good reason for one program or platform to be prefered over another. Computers is one of the places where "it's what we always did" isn't as solid as companies might hope.

Edited October 1, 2003 by the evn show

[Fusion]

Thank you evn. That is what I was trying to explain in my last post. I didn't know there was actually a term for it. I agree, this MDI windows is just plain horrible. Even with the taskbar, I still just prefer the other way.

I can say though, I know a lot of people that use PS on their PC and they love it. They have never had a problem with it and see no reason to switch to Mac. So It still just comes down to what you prefer.

[nvme]

i heard someone say once that macs are better for graphics because of something to do with the difference in the way the pc and mac processors round numbers. dont know if it's true but i thought i'd throw that in. :)

[Premgenius]

MAC rocks in Graphics they are expensive but they are worth it cos nothin compares to them

thanks the evn show

[kairon]

I hate to say it, but SGI compares to them.Those are some awesome powerhouses!

[giantsnyy2002]

One of the main reasons I like PS on the Mac over Windows is that Windows uses an MDI window (IMO the worst UI element in history). This is in addition to the issues around color management.

The problems with MDI windows aren't only in photoshop, but they become really darn irritating to my (and other people's) workflow.

Example 1:

I have a document that I've been working on - I'm preparing it for use on the web or on film. I like to work on an LCD monitor, but I know that CRT screens will often look vastly different than LCD even when color corrected. I created a copy of the document with color correction applied, lay

OSX: Drag the document window to the other screen - do any tweaks as required

Windows: You have to drag the entire application over taking all your documents with it. That makes it really hard to compare the "final" to the original.

Example 2:

I'm making doing a lot of copy paste work between photoshop and illustrator or maybe word (embedding graphics in a document for a presentation of some sort). The easiest method to do this is using drag/drop.

OS X: Select what you want in photoshop. Drag to desktop (make all the clippings you want). drag clippings to whatever program you want.

Windows: The MDI window will prevent you from accessing the desktop (unless you minimize/de-maximize it). So you're left either using that save-as-a-copy window a dozen times or doing the "copy -> switch wnidow -> paste" dance and hoping that it doesn't try to OLE you rather than just plain pasting. I can't remember ever using "scraps" (the windows version of clippings) to do this sort of thing. I suspect that it's because i found them to be broken - but I could be wrong.

Example 3:

I have some text in a PDF file or some other document that is relatating to my work. Maybe it's a list of design requirements or text for use in an advertisement. that I must click back and forth between photoshop and say preview.

OS X: click on any visible part of the 'text' document window and all the photoshop tools hide away and the text data will be visible. If you carefully position windows you'll always be able to see the text. Pather adds expose' (sorry: not on a mac right now: can't spell that right) which is even better - not really an issue today but it'll be cool when it finally ships RSN.

Windows: the mdi window blocks most of the desktop and the toolbar/palettes have an annoying habbit of not hiding when photoshop is not active (this might be an issue if you had 3 or 4 applications open photoshop, pdf viewer, dreamweaver and a couple browsers) which means you have to shuffle window z-order to see things. In the case of photoshops MDI it usually means minimizing the window to see stuff behind it.

Granted these aren't "End of the world" issues like if windows didn't have any color correction at all - but they happen so often that they annoy a lot of people who are used to the 'mac' way of doing things - and they delight people used to the 'windows' way when they see how easy it can be.

I don't have the time, money, or desire to by the absolute fastest photoshop machine every couple months so performance issues don't factor in as much. As long as it's quick enough to do what I need - I don't really care how many MHz or GHz my cpu has. Both P4 and G4 is enough for me right now - I rarely deal with files > 200mb.

These same sorts of decisions make Mac OS better for everything I do from writting code to editing video. That doesn't mean it's the one-true-way, just that I'm more productive/efficient/creative when I work on apple products.

Because this was largely an oppinion based post - YMMV.

EDIT:

Being first on the scene doesn't mean "instant greatness that lasts forever". See

* windows 3 vs Lisa (which one got market share like a mofo?)

* word vs wordperfect

* final cut vs premeire

Most of the time there is a darn good reason for one program or platform to be prefered over another. Computers is one of the places where "it's what we always did" isn't as solid as companies might hope.

i couldnt have said it any better...

MDI interfaces suck... what was adobe thinking when they ported it.

[Redestium]

One of the main reasons I like PS on the Mac over Windows is that Windows uses an MDI window (IMO the worst UI element in history).  This is in addition to the issues around color management.

The problems with MDI windows aren't only in photoshop, but they become really darn irritating to my (and other people's) workflow.

Example 1:

I have a document that I've been working on - I'm preparing it for use on the web or on film.  I like to work on an LCD monitor, but I know that CRT screens will often look vastly different than LCD even when color corrected.  I created a copy of the document with color correction applied, lay

OSX:  Drag the document window to the other screen - do any tweaks as required

Windows: You have to drag the entire application over taking all your documents with it.  That makes it really hard to compare the "final" to the original.

Example 2:

I'm making doing a lot of copy paste work between photoshop and illustrator or maybe word (embedding graphics in a document for a presentation of some sort).  The easiest method to do this is using drag/drop.

OS X:  Select what you want in photoshop.  Drag to desktop (make all the clippings you want).  drag clippings to whatever program you want.

Windows:  The MDI window will prevent you from accessing the desktop (unless you minimize/de-maximize it).  So you're left either using that save-as-a-copy window a dozen times or doing the "copy -> switch wnidow -> paste" dance and hoping that it doesn't try to OLE you rather than just plain pasting.  I can't remember ever using "scraps" (the windows version of clippings) to do this sort of thing.  I suspect that it's because i found them to be broken - but I could be wrong.

Example 3:

I have some text in a PDF file or some other document that is relatating to my work.  Maybe it's a list of design requirements or text for use in an advertisement. that I must click back and forth between photoshop and say preview.

OS X: click on any visible part of the 'text' document window and all the photoshop tools hide away and the text data will be visible.  If you carefully position windows you'll always be able to see the text.  Pather adds expose' (sorry: not on a mac right now: can't spell that right) which is even better - not really an issue today but it'll be cool when it finally ships RSN.

Windows: the mdi window blocks most of the desktop and the toolbar/palettes have an annoying habbit of not hiding when photoshop is not active (this might be an issue if you had 3 or 4 applications open photoshop, pdf viewer, dreamweaver and a couple browsers) which means you have to shuffle window z-order to see things.  In the case of photoshops MDI it usually means minimizing the window to see stuff behind it.

Granted these aren't "End of the world" issues like if windows didn't have any color correction at all - but they happen so often that they annoy a lot of people who are used to the 'mac' way of doing things - and they delight people used to the 'windows' way when they see how easy it can be.

I don't have the time, money, or desire to by the absolute fastest photoshop machine every couple months so performance issues don't factor in as much.  As long as it's quick enough to do what I need - I don't really care how many MHz or GHz my cpu has.  Both P4 and G4 is enough for me right now - I rarely deal with files > 200mb.

These same sorts of decisions make Mac OS better for everything I do from writting code to editing video.  That doesn't mean it's the one-true-way, just that I'm more productive/efficient/creative when I work on apple products.

Because this was largely an oppinion based  post - YMMV.

EDIT:

Being first on the scene doesn't mean "instant greatness that lasts forever".  See

* windows 3 vs Lisa (which one got market share like a mofo?)

* word vs wordperfect

* final cut vs premeire

Most of the time there is a darn good reason for one program or platform to be prefered over another.  Computers is one of the places where "it's what we always did" isn't as solid as companies might hope.

i couldnt have said it any better...

MDI interfaces suck... what was adobe thinking when they ported it.

They were thinking: "hey let's make more money by selling to the majority of computer users". MDI isn't as bad as you make it, especially since there are relatively simple ways around those problems.

[aaron901]

Most artist want to concentrate on their work, and not their computer. Of course eventually their Mac's well have problems too, they just seem easier to fix when they crop up.

yea, less time and effort spent on technical problems and maintenance = increased efficiency and productivity. :)

edit: btw, best thread ever! :D

here's a report about this:

[the evn show]

They were thinking: "hey let's make more money by selling to the majority of computer users".

Probably, but I'd have prefered they were thinking something like "We've got really great software, wouldn't it be great if even more people could use it?"

It's a difference in attitude that definetly shows itself in the finished product.

Why MDI when SDI would have mapped more closely to the Mac OS style interface (which had years of polishing before the windows version was ever dreamed up) is something that is beyond me.

MDI isn't as bad as you make it, especially since there are relatively simple ways around those problems.

If it's all the same - I'd rather not have to deal with work arounds to get my job done; simple or otherwise. I suppose that's why I'm a fan of Mac OS/Apple in general.

[Killa-b]

i skip read this thread so im sorry if its been said.

but remember that for artists the computer is a TOOL, just like a brush, or canvas. if 10 years ago you had the choice between a paint brush that worked, and one that required you to paint with your feet, which would you choose.

Mac's have also been more reliable in the past, and tend to have a longer shelf life.

but like everyone else said, now its no big deal, with win2k and xp, the color calibration issues have been resolved.

my 2 c