Why is everyone using mac for design, still?


Recommended Posts

  mac15 said:
Dreamweaver is a pleasure to use on XP, its horrible in Mac OS X. But thats not because the PC is better, its just crappy coding on Macromedia's behalf.

586086351[/snapback]

That's true, but it doesn't mean the PC is worse. Photoshop runs better on a PC because Adobe optimized it for the P4. Does it mean the PC runs PS better? Yes. Does it mean the PC is better? No.

u have to know that even if Mac OS X does not have too much software options like Windows, OS X itself was developed to handle Graphic, Video and Animation, why? because the main graphic boots is Quarz Extreme that empower the PDF graphic engine integrated, Windows does not have this capabilities, Windows use Directx that is basically designed to boot the audio and game engine in windows and also the graphics card.

So in resumen, Mac OS X is a excellent graphic - designer Operation System and I believe when Steve Jobs call OS X the worlds most advanced OS.

[sanctified]: no iam not .. iam just saying .. pc = more software options, pc = more hardware options .. stablity and performance .. and dont u dare tell me that g5 can hold a stick against an amd fx55 .. so why does everyone keep saying mac is better for design .. the gui? come on windowsxp has a really good one ..

colour management is a big factor, also reliablility of the platform, whether that be stability or security. also the arugement of software library is just nonsense. there might be more programs out for windows, but remember, macs arent prone to viruses and spyware, also on windows there might be 20 apps that do the same thing, where on a mac only one program exists that gets it right so there is no need for anything else. also, has it ever occured to u that people in design just might prefer os x over windows?

remember we are not here to debate which one is better .. iam sorry if i got carried away in some of my posts .. the question was .. WHY do design and advertising companies and universties use macs over pc .. all i got so far is better gui and color managments .. is that all?

  chroniq said:
[sanctified]: no iam not .. iam just saying .. pc = more software options, pc = more hardware options .. stablity and performance .. and dont u dare tell me that g5 can hold a stick against an amd fx55 .. so why does everyone keep saying mac is better for design .. the gui? come on windowsxp has a really good one ..

586086377[/snapback]

Quality over quantity.

Also, there are many industry standard software in mac that its not available in any other plataform. QuarkXpress anyone?

Are you saying that a Windows based machine its more stability and performance? Yes, for some tasks, not everything.

Macs has few options in hardware because it doesnt need more ;) get a clue my friend.

Colormanagement its essenctial and yet you havent really replied about it yet. You just answered with escepticism, not facts.

And, a last point. You are still using comparisions with game benchmarks. Thats laughable. :laugh:

  [sanctified] said:
Also, its bovious you dont have a clue of how Mac hardware works with design.

586086310[/snapback]

bovious? i didn't know thats a word? :laugh: well if you mean "obvious" then ok, would you mind explaining to us who arent familiar with how mac hardware works with design a little summary of how it goes? :wacko:

  chroniq said:
remember we are not here to debate which one is better .. iam sorry if i got carried away in some of my posts .. the question was .. WHY do design and advertising companies and universties use macs over pc .. all i got so far is better gui and color managments .. is that all?

586086389[/snapback]

thats all? Man, really. You have no idea of how the Mac plataform manages media and color and how important is that to the industry. You want to war without guns :laugh:

  StreetGames said:
bovious? i didn't know thats a word?  :laugh: well if you mean "obvious" then ok, would you mind explaining to us who arent familiar with how mac hardware works with design a little summary of how it goes? :wacko:

586086405[/snapback]

Indeed. A little grammar error renders my argument unaceptable now, right?

About your valid question. I, along with other members, did that in this thread. Care to read?

  chroniq said:
remember we are not here to debate which one is better .. iam sorry if i got carried away in some of my posts .. the question was .. WHY do design and advertising companies and universties use macs over pc .. all i got so far is better gui and color managments .. is that all?

586086389[/snapback]

I told u before why universities and companies when is about design prefer macs, read my first post :sleep:

  chroniq said:
[sanctified]: no iam not .. iam just saying .. pc = more software options, pc = more hardware options .. stablity and performance .. and dont u dare tell me that g5 can hold a stick against an amd fx55 .. so why does everyone keep saying mac is better for design .. the gui? come on windowsxp has a really good one ..

586086377[/snapback]

I am following this loosly, but I have to wonder why you start a thread asking about suitiblity for a specific task, yet you throw up "general use" measurements - game benchmarks, number of other non-design apps, and so forth.

If you are wanting to know about design work, I think that you should discuss features that are specific to design work.

"Macs has few options in hardware because it doesnt need more wink.gif get a clue my friend." = so ur saying less hardware is better? i'll be using next generation nvidia and ati cards before mac users would even have went to beta testing drivers stage. is not having the latest technology a good thing about a platform? tell me iam wrong please

"Colormanagement its essenctial and yet you havent really replied about it yet." = thats the only thing u found :/ ..

"You are still using comparisions with game benchmarks. Thats laughable." = har har .. if u use maya (which u only have one version? or am i not right) wouldnt u be worried about having better opengl performance?

please correct ome if iam wrong

also there is a quarkexpress version for pc .. do ur homework

  markjensen said:
I am following this loosly, but I have to wonder why you start a thread asking about suitiblity for a specific task, yet you throw up "general use" measurements - game benchmarks, number of other non-design apps, and so forth.

If you are wanting to know about design work, I think that you should discuss features that are specific to design work.

586086411[/snapback]

You tell him mark! :D

  chroniq said:
[sanctified]: no iam not .. iam just saying .. pc = more software options, pc = more hardware options .. stablity and performance .. and dont u dare tell me that g5 can hold a stick against an amd fx55 .. so why does everyone keep saying mac is better for design .. the gui? come on windowsxp has a really good one ..

586086377[/snapback]

windows gui good! Ha! luna is the most unusable bloated piece of garbage i have seen, its in your face and doesnt quit along with buggy. if im in the middle of doing something on my pc and my virus software needs to check something, it will just pop up and start doing what it wants. once i went without using my pc for 2 weeks, i came back to play a game and suddenly dx9 was missing a critical file. how on earth does dx loose a file when the computer is off for 2 weeks?

on my mac if im busy doing something and lets say os x wants to update, it will be very subtle in telling me what it needs. os x is a very productivity oriented os, it is geared towards getting things done. and also when i turn my mac off, im never worried about it not working when it wakes up, heh.

pc has more software options but thats only if you include useless apps that do the same thing as others. hardware options? im confused, discounting motherboard and processor (which is upgradable on older imac g3's) i have the same options as a pc user.

  someguy03 said:
You can debate EVERY aspect of this subject. There is no right or wrong, better or worse, its all a matter of opinion.

586086416[/snapback]

Thats not true in this thread.

Millions of dolars are lost thanks to unexperienced designer who works in XP and later they screw up their works in printing thanks to XP lousy color management. Not even the color calibration emulation in Photoshop save them.

Macs are the defacto standard for Graphic Designers, just like PCs are with gaming. And 90% of people using Mac's love and adore them. They aren't are going to switch to Windows because there might be a few more options for them.

  chroniq said:
"Macs has few options in hardware because it doesnt need more wink.gif get a clue my friend." = so ur saying less hardware is better? i'll be using next generation nvidia and ati cards before mac users would even have went to beta testing drivers stage. is not having the latest technology a good thing about a platform? tell me iam wrong please

"Colormanagement its essenctial and yet you havent really replied about it yet." = thats the only thing u found :/ ..

"You are still using comparisions with game benchmarks. Thats laughable." = har har .. if u use maya (which u only have one version? or am i not right) wouldnt u be worried about having better opengl performance?

please correct ome if iam wrong

also there is a quarkexpress version for pc .. do ur homework

586086419[/snapback]

sir with all u respect I think u are a <<removed>>, I told u before that macs have a pdf graphics engine that can manage not only color management but also can handle better audio, animation and video, be more open mind and don't be close to u own mind

  chroniq said:
"Macs has few options in hardware because it doesnt need more wink.gif get a clue my friend." = so ur saying less hardware is better? i'll be using next generation nvidia and ati cards before mac users would even have went to beta testing drivers stage. is not having the latest technology a good thing about a platform? tell me iam wrong please

"Colormanagement its essenctial and yet you havent really replied about it yet." = thats the only thing u found :/ ..

"You are still using comparisions with game benchmarks. Thats laughable." = har har .. if u use maya (which u only have one version? or am i not right) wouldnt u be worried about having better opengl performance?

please correct ome if iam wrong

also there is a quarkexpress version for pc .. do ur homework

586086419[/snapback]

And why a graphic designer needs the latest Graphic card again? Yes, there are fields in industry that needs capable machines for modeling. Funny that the big animation studios uses g5's, but that its not the point. You asked about grpahic design. Stick on your won topic.

BTW. Have you even tried the quark windows version and what it does? :laugh:

  chroniq said:
markjensen: frame rates and game benchmarks are important for design .. because it represents 3d design performance .. or is 3d not a type of design?

586086426[/snapback]

Yeah, if you are 'designing' a new game... :laugh:

But serious professional design requires the reliable and accurate colors. Something XP doesn't offer. Yeah it plays games, and is ?ber-cool... But it isn'tbuilt> for DESIGN, which is supposedly why you started this thread, but I am frankly seeing no evidence of you listening to anyone.

  someguy03 said:
Also, I have NEVER had problems with my color in XP.

586086428[/snapback]

you do serious graphic design? You know, offset printing, mass scale production, palette selection, etc?

Do you even know the difference between cmyk, rgb, color lab etc? (That question goes too to the thread starter)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.