What MAC?

[russellsnr]

Hi, I am thinking to make my next computer a MAC rather than Windows but I no absoulutly nothing about MAC computers but willing to learn so I need a computer that will run Image software of course, maybe have an option to upgrade or install a second hard drive (SSD) and also needs to be able to run a minimum 28" monitor although larger would be better. Does it have to be new? NO, as looking at around £2000 max.
Any advice please? Thankyou, Russ.

[Manfred M]

The first question I would have to ask is why are you considering moving to a Mac?

I use both systems and they perform equally well from a photo / video editing standpoint and the key software you will be running is likely available on both systems.

There will be a learning curve with respect to running using the new operating system and I'm not sure why you would want to go through that?

[DanK]

Just curious, why a Mac if that isn't what you are used to? (It's Mac, not MAC, BTW--it is short for Macintosh, a type of apple popular in the US.) I don't have any particular allegiance to Windows, which is my primary operating system, but having used three different operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux), I'm a big fan of sticking with what one already knows unless there is a good reason to change. It is a real pain when things you are used to don't work the same. However, some people do have a good reason to prefer a different OS than the one they are used to, or they like a different OS enough that they are willing to spend the time mastering it. That's a whole different situation.

Within the image editing software I use, Lightroom, Photoshop, Zerene, and Nik, it makes no difference which OS you choose. The programs are pretty nearly identical regardless.

I don't know if this is still true, but it used to be the case that for a given level of specifications, Macs were generally more expensive than brand-name PCs. I don't know whether that it still true, however. My guess is that someone else here can say whether that is still true.

In the PC world, every computer I have had will run a large monitor. What does vary is whether it has a graphics accelerator that your image processing software can access.

I strongly recommend getting an SSD as a primary drive, not as a secondary drive. What matters most is where your software and scratch files are, not where your data are, and SSDs are more expensive than physical drives. So I have a very typical configuration in my desktop: an SSD for my primary drive and a larger physical hard drive for photos and other data. The SSD is 500 GB, while the physical drive is 4 times that size, 2 TB.

I also recommend getting a lot of physical memory. Memory is cheap, and it has a big effect on how some software runs. I have 16 GB in my computer, which is a fairly standard choice for photo editing.

EDIT: I see that Manfred raised two of the same points while I was typing...

[russellsnr]

I have been with Windows for many years because I used Lightroom and P/S along with NIK but gave up Photoshop at CS6 recently I have been trying out Skylum Luminar and getting to grips with it as far as it goes on a Windows machine however looking at tutorials on the software a great percentage of users (not just Luminar) seem to favour the Mac system so I asked myself the question WHY? Unfourtunatly there are not many people into photography where I live in Greece so really never had the chance to compare Windows versus Mac but as I point out why is it so many seem to favour the Mac system or am I seeing just a shallow overall percentage on these video tutorials? Thankyou, Russ.

[Manfred M]

This is true mainly for historical reasons. Some 15 to 20 years ago the primary platform that the graphics arts industry ran on was the Mac. Generally the software was only available on that platform. Times have changed and pretty well everything runs on both Apple and Windows platforms.

The consensus view is that either system works just fine. People who use Macs don't want to learn Windows and stick with what they know.

I can think of no compelling reason to favour one platform over the other from a technical or use standpoint. Personal preference and budget are really the main considerations today.

[billtils]

Russell

The starting point is to differentiate between "need" and "want". As has been pointed out here and in similar threads on this site, there is no difference between Mac and Windows machines in what photo editing software they can run (Skylum is available on both), and all other things being equal the biggest obstacle to change would be learning a new operating system - a nuisance but not a road-block.

However, if you really want to have a Mac (and I'm typing this on an iMac!) one often overlooked option is the Mini, add the best display consistent with your budget, and see how the numbers go compared to a similarly configured iMac (don't bother with a MacBook).

Looking again at your wish list, AFAIK the good old days of build your own mac are long gone and they all now come in a sealed unit which would severely limit your post-purchase upgrade options.

Where to buy? The mac refurb store would be a starting point, and possibly eBay as long as you know how to separate the good sellers from the dodgy ones.

[rpcrowe]

I have been a Windows user all of my computer life. Early on. when I attended some Photoshop classes the schools I attended normally used Mac computers (which were, in that era, then generally preferred over Windows machines for photo/video editing and general graphic arts work). It was a PITA, being used to Windows and having to wrap my mind around the Mac system but, I survived...

Lately, it seems that Windows and Mac are pretty well used equally in the courses I have taken and I don't feel disadvantaged to any great degree working with Windows over a Mac. In fact, one classroom had both Mac and Windows based computers to give the students a choice.

Many old hands at photo/video editing use the Mac system, and swear by it, since that was what they were weaned on and they don't see any reasons for switching which would slow down their workflow by having to learn a new system. However, many editing "experts" now use Windows platforms because they feel that they can get more bang for their buck with Windows.

I was able to get a Dell computer running Windows from Costco (a U.S. based membership store) and was able to add options to the basic unit. added a 500 GB SSD (on which I run my programs) along with a 2 TB standard hard drive (for storage) I also am running 16 GB of RAM... I didn't check the prices of an equivalent Mac since I am quite happy with the Windows operating system and don't feel inclined to switch systems.

[russellsnr]

Thankyou all. As I said living where I do you don't get so many photographers so never really had a chance to compair systems. I do have a fast Windows machine so reading here seems 'better the devil you no' Thanks again, Russ

[Manfred M]

Russell - the other thing to think about is that Apple has the highest profit margins in the business. That should tell you that these computers are premium priced. You can get better value with Windows machines, but you have to know what you are looking at.

The high regard for Apple machines comes from the days of Final Cut Pro 7 and 8. This Apple product was used by most feature film and TV production houses. Apple essentially "owned the market", with something like a 90% market share of pro film production. When Apple came out with Final Cut Pro X, the customer based bailed on them simply because they dropped a number of features that the pros found essential and almost overnight they went from the most important supplier of video editing hardware and software into "also ran". Come people switched to Adobe products, but the majority migrated to Avid software (built for Mac and Windows). They also killed their Aperture photo editing product.

With those two moves they got out of those markets and people either replaced them with other products running on the Mac or PC. The Mac users stuck with the OS that they felt comfortable with.