Macs no longer for graphics?

Macs ruled?

well, as amusing as that was, yes they ruled the graphics editing field. I am wondering if this is changing though since Adobe now makes new products that are windows exclusive (MACs ARE a brand of PC, they don't have special hardware anymore, and PCs can have linux/other os' then windows).

It could just be adobe, and that they will go back to macs, but who knows.

I don't know of any designers who work on non-Apple computers. I'd say Apple still does 'rule' the design field, and probably always will. I don't think I'd put video and film production into the graphics category, though. Ultra and OnLocation are video editing, and a lot of that kind of work is done on PCs, as is a lot of high end 3d rendering. Adobe Premiere was Windows only for a while, but only as a snub to Apple when they released competing software.

I think it's safe to say Apple will always dominate the design field, for better or worse, although I've never had any problems using a PC for my work.

um...i know plenty of designers that don't go near an apple. does apple dominate the design field? i don't think so.

Probably web designers, though some of those are hardcore Mac users too...

I've never heard of one advertising company/printing house here in Denmark where the graphic designers didn't use a Mac.

I'd say it's the same as always, graphic designers are and will be using Macs as long as they exist.

You may have to narrow the definition of "graphics" to make that statement....and you absolutley have to narrow the definition of "design"

Apple never dominated CAD - Computer Automated Design (AutoCAD, Microstation, Bentley Powerdraft, Cadkey, etc.)

Adamness,  in your opinion, what are the inherent qualities still in a Mac that make them better at graphics than a Windows platform?

It used to be because Apple used CISC CPUs. Now? Not when they changed to Intel CPUs.

CISC made graphics processing faster due to more instructions on die than simpler and more generic CPU used by AMD and Intel.

There is nothing in macs that give them an advantage over a PC when doing graphics anymore.

In the past they had special processors which made it cost effective to buy a mac for design. But now its just a PC in a pretty case and with an extra 1000$ to the price tag.

I worked at a place where the boss exclusively bought macs for all the video editing, simply because he THOUGHT that "everyone uses macs for design because they are better at it". He had no idea how things worked, so he was easily sold on the idea that macs have some design magic, so we had to use photoshop on a mac (yuck, one button mice). However he later started getting PCs at the advice of his employees who know what they were talking about. So for adobe CS2 we got the PC version instead of mac version.

Ignorant bosses who insist on micromanagement can't be the only customer base for a company to survive, and with macs being highly expansive PCs nowadays there is really no reason to do design work on them. So I disagree with the notion that macs "would always rule the design field".

Of course, you could get into the psychological aspects of it. I know girls and erm... "guys" who say they would never own a PC because "Macs are so pretty and cute". They all dub themselves as "artiste" and they do all the photoshopping on their macs, where they change their pictures into black and white because its more artistic, and write nonsensical poems. They are all majoring in some art field too.
So yea, I can see how they will prefer to work for a company who uses macs. But would such companies justify a 1000$ extra per computer just for it to be a mac? And how many of the professional designers fall into that category?

Well being around professional designers, I've found a big draw for Macs is the most superficial: the cool factor. It sounds silly, but walking into a meeting with a slick looking Apple and a big ugly Dell or HP makes a difference to the client. Most designers also have enormous respect for Apple because they have good design themselves. Everything from the product itself to the packaging it comes in is throughly thought over.

That aside, I think it comes down to a lot of the typical Mac vs PC debate. I asked one of my instructors why they still prefer Macs, and it pretty much comes down to ease of use and system resources. I can say that when having a big Illustrator, Quark or Indesign file, we need every bit of memory and cpu. An antivirus program using 50MB makes a difference. And when you're sitting in front of a computer all day, it's nice not having to worry about getting viruses and having the program crash.

There's also a somewhat minor thing in terms of the interfaces. I like how OSX doesn't give you the application background and window frames, which creates a much easier experience, especially when having multiple programs open. Not having the toolbars integrated into the main taskbar at top makes things easier and less cluttered. The dock in OSX is a million times better than icons all over the place. If I didn't have ObjectDock, especially after they added the drag-to-open ability, I'd just kill myself. But again, most designers don't want to have to deal with adding a bunch of programs and customizing. They just want stuff to work out of the box, which Apple provides.

I've noticed that font management is much better with Apples. Windows significantly slows down with around 500 fonts, but the Adobe font pack has 10k fonts. Any computer would be affected by 10k fonts, but in Windows, you need to install a separate font manager like Suitcase. Apple displays, including their laptops, are probably the best there is. I've never seen a PC laptop with a display anything close to a MacBook.

It's certainly true that PCs are narrowing the gap with Apple, and PCs run the standard design programs quite well. I know firsthand of that. But I also know the top designers out there don't know what they're doing with all the ins and outs of running a well maintained PC, and even if you prefer Windows PCs, you know there is maintenance that needs to be done.

Of course, there are exceptions to this and I'm only talking about what I'm experienced with, which is graphic design. I mostly work with Illustrator and Indesign, but usually have Photoshop handy to alter an image. In video and film work, it's probably a mix of both. Apples usually lag in terms of the latest and greatest in hardware, which film and certainly people who work in 3D need, and which PCs provide. Nowadays anyone can use either platform they want, but there definitely are advantages in Apples.

I think I wrote too much.

Before I go into a point by point rebuttals. This is a question of "are macs loosing their graphics edge". I think ADOBE thinks they are, since their new programs are windows only. They question is would macs "Always rule the design field" like some people say, or would they not. Many suggest that nowadays mac no longer have an inherent benefit over a PC when it comes to design work. So lets see if that is true by looking at the various points that make a mac "better" for design then windows PC.

"There's also a somewhat minor thing in terms of the interfaces. I like how OSX doesn't give you the application background and window frames, which creates a much easier experience, especially when having multiple programs open."
Thats a matter of personal preference, I find those things make for a rougher user experience, you like them. But if I understand correctly, those things are modable on a windows PC.

"walking into a meeting with a slick looking Apple and a big ugly Dell or HP makes a difference to the client."

Except there are plenty of awesome looking PCs around. the Dell XPS series looks awesome (it should be, they bought alienware and had them design the cases).
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsnb_m2010?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs
Apple isn't the ONLY company that is capable of making a cool looking computer case. Yes the CHEAP dells and HP's look like crap, but they cost 1000$ less then a mac. The expensive ones STILL cost less and look just as good.

"An antivirus program using 50MB makes a difference"
Don't use shitty antivirus like norton. Use something good like NOD32 or Kasperski. They not only take little ram, but are also very very fast in comparison.

"And when you're sitting in front of a computer all day, it's nice not having to worry about getting viruses and having the program crash."

From working with macs AND pcs doing video / picture / audio at a WORKPLACE (a small three store chain called U-EditVideo) I can tell you that:
1. macs have viruses too.
2. Mac OSX tiger crashes more often then windows XP. Much much MUCH more often.


". Windows significantly slows down with around 500 fonts, but the Adobe font pack has 10k fonts."

Never heard about it, but if that is true then its a DEFINITE plus for the mac compared to WINDOWS. I Would assume you are right about this except everything else you said about windows was wrong (and straight out of the apple commercials where they blatantly lie). So can someone else confirm or refute this? Is this still an issue in vista? regardless that can be a very real and serious reason to use a mac instead of a PC, so good point there.

"I've never seen a PC laptop with a display anything close to a MacBook."
Apple does not make hardware, period! (well, maybe manufacture DRMed BIOS for mobos.. because thats all a mac really is now adays, a PC with hardware DRM preventing windows/linux installation)
Any piece of hardware that apple sells is made by someone else. from their DVD drives to the display, you can get it all on a PC, because an apple IS a PC.
Mac displays are almost exclusively high end sumsung screens. The powerbooks for example use samsung screens.

I have an XPS laptop, and I can assure you if I walked into a meeting with a client it wouldn't make a good impression, certainly not to the extent as an Apple. A MacBook is clean and slick, and that's what clients typically like to see. Trust me, I've done this before, and I've taken classes with top designers who can attest to this.



Well, I've never heard of an Apple virus. Yes, theoretically Macs can have a virus, but to my knowledge there hasn't been one out in the wild, and I don't know anyone with a Mac who runs an anti-virus program. I don't use Norton, but all the maintenance programs do use up resources, however big or small...resources that can and should be used for the actual task at hand.



I have many hundreds of fonts on my computer: 2037 installed but only 96 activated in Suitcase. The impact of fonts makes a big difference on my computer, though I didn't notice it as much on Apples that I've used. Believe me or not, but that's what I've found, and no, it's not out of an Apple commercial.

Dell doesn't make their hardware either, so what? Whether they're Samsung or something else, the displays Apple uses are better than you can find in a PC. I guess they just use a higher quality display, but there is a difference both in the laptops and regular displays. Some might not notice a difference, but trust me, it's there.

I'm not one for a Mac vs PC debate, as I think brand loyalty is moronic. However, I don't see many professional designers switching to PC, and I don't see my fellow students using PCs, except for a few, like myself. With that, I don't think Apple's 'rule' on graphic design is going to end. After the next hardware and software update on the MacBook Pros, I do intend to switch.

Neither crash that often. If it does, its a bogus driver release for Windows or bad kernel extensions installed for OS X.
When all goes well you're lucky if either crash at all.



Perhaps yes, but one crucial point OS X has is colour production for professionals over Windows.
I'm no expert in all the techy nerdy specifications but I've compared Windows and OS X together, calibrated displays and I find my work much better on OS X than on Windows.

I did find an interesting read on colour management on one forum...





I do believe the key feature is colour management. To your average joe well they may not see the difference, but to a professional artists/company well its probably a different ball game when its their livelihood at stake...

Speaking of OS X having virus's too, it's also way less secure: http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9018138&pageNumber=3

I think the term Swiss Cheese is most fitting when describing the secuirty on OS X.

It's all related to programing since the platform could go back to the typical DOS/and pre-linux days..but now Mac is trying out experiments with the intel chip which is why the CS3 is not seen on Mac yet..they had problems with CS2 on the intel macs.

First of all, a Mac has always been a PC, unless it isn't a Personal Computer.

Also, I think both platforms have always been just as good at graphics. Just think about all of the great skins out there, designed using Windows.

The key used to be color management. That edge went away with XP and OS X, which became equals in that regard. The rest was just really good marketing by Apple/Steve Jobs while MS kept shooting themselves in the foot.

I just used a 17" Macbook Pro (company buy) dual boot with Vista and OS X for the past two months and it was a pretty clear tie or win for Vista in every category. I kept it dual boot for the possible use of Final Cut w/shake at some point, but otherwise, Vista just felt better.

Maybe the new OS X will catch-up/leapfrog. Either way, with that machine, I win.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHO8l-Bd1O4