Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ric Carter wrote: > I've tried to resist, but, really, the best upgrade you can make in > your PC shopping is to get a Mac. > > We run a PC shop at my office with Macs coming in recently. We are > running Parallels on an iMac. It runs Windows faster than the PCs we > have. It is also relatively immune to viruses and spyware. Ugh. Getting a Mac isn't really an upgrade. My qualtifications for chiming in here: I worked at Apple for years. Now I work at Adobe. I spend all day in Photoshop (less now with Lightroom). I've owned macs, I've owned PCs over the past 15 years. I've seen and used most everything. The easy one: I wouldn't own a pre-intel mac for the world. The intel processors run circles around the G4 Macs in Photoshop. They were unbearably slow. Good riddance. The Intel Macs are great - you get the good hardware and you can run both OSes without problems - the only negative is that they are expensive if you just want to run Windows. Photoshop/ACR/Lightroom on both platforms are the same for all intents/purposes, so it really is just the speed they run at that makes or breaks it. Personally, I like Windows a bit more these days, but I'll work in the Mac OS without too many gripes. I see stupidity on both platforms, with a slight usable/reliable edge going to the Mac, but not as much as Mac people would like to claim. Its really a percentage point or two nowadays. This isn't the days of Win 3.1. Parallels will *not* run faster than a native PC. It just won't. I've seen and used it, and its slower than bootcamp Windows by a measurable amount. You can just feel it. If you just use it to run Outlook, you'll be fine. If you have to use Photoshop in it, you'll know. My current machine is a Macbook pro and I mostly use it with Windows except when I have to travel (because bootcamp windows does not sleep very well).