Why is a Mac prefered over a PC for Multimedia?

[MakeYourslf2012]

I don't understand - maybe you guys can shed some light on this question.

Is it the way the operating system is built? Or is it just the proprietary software that Apple makes? If so, What can iPhoto (or i"Whatever") do that is so much better than photoshop?

What can a Mac movie making software do that a Windows based software can't?

I've used Mac OSX and many of its predicesors and don't understand the advantage.

Between the smug apple ads on TV and the equally smug Photography Instructor at my high school, I would like to know, why are they "so much better than a PC"

[faulkner132]

I'm not a historian, but in a nutshell, the processors Mac used to use, PowerPC, were optimal for photo/video manipulation. Because of this most of the developers used Mac as there preferred development platform, hence the industry adapted Mac as the standard.

Here's more reading if you are interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macinto...d_demographics

[XenaWP]

It's not so much a matter of what they do better any more. It's a matter or having a stranglehold on certain markets: graphic arts and printing, for example.

Photoshop is essentially the same program on both systems, but many graphic artists ... being artistic people, don't want the sterile Windows environment ... they want a happy OS like MacOS. Many print shops don't even have PCs because of the initial advantages Macs had in issues like fonts, color correction/management, etc. So the people who used outside printers had yet another reason to stick with their Macs.

Really, after I switched from Mac to PC, I felt like an abused wife who finally got free of her abuser. They charge more, they experiment on their loyal users with their "breakthrough" techologies which they then abandon leaving you stranded, they periodically switch processors leaving you with incompatible/crippled software investments (Photoshop running in 68k emulation on a PowerPC chip, mmmm, fun) ... I could go on and on. I'm over the whole pretty GUI thing.

[Strider]

I'll throw my .02 cents in on this subject, I never really used a Mac so I can't really judge them on performance; although at school for my Photoshop class (They have both PC and Mac in the class) they preform just the same. The initial start up costs for the PC for Multimedia is much higher in the beginning, for you buy the hardware and softwore seperately where as with the MAC most (But not all) are included with the computer (Depending with what kind of MAC you purchase). Myself, since I have a PC and I have purchased Photshop, Vegas Video and other multimedia software I plan on sticking to the PC side, for I can't justify re-purchasing every thing and losing $$$ in the process. One last thing (A little off topic) I can't stand those Apple commericials, I think Apple is doing itself a disfavor in showing the commericials poking fun at the PC. There really isn't much that PC can't do than the Mac can do and the only really headache is viruses that can infect the PC if no anti-virsus software is install and if Apple was bigger that Microsoft then they would be the ones attacked I think.

[Xyphus]

Truthfully, there is even less difference between a Mac and a PC any longer. Since Apple has moved to "Intel Inside" they are in essence the same machines. The only difference now is the OS... (You can even run Windows on a Mac... No emulation needed...)

And with Bootstrap and Parallels, you can even run both OSes with a dual-boot setup...

[TwoRails]

Apple's advantage has been gone for a while. At one time they were considered faster, but today's faster Intel and AMD procs have been smoking them. Maximum PC did a comparison a while back and Apple came in a distant third. Now that Apple is going to work on these faster CPUs, we'll have to wait and see how they stack up.

[mb26]

you know of a more widely available, more powerful, PC than a Mac Pro?

[TwoRails]

If that's a serious and not a rhetorical question, then I'd have to look around and compare as I'm not an Apple fan. But, the question does reinforce what I said since the Mac Pro is an Intel driven machine.

[glc]

I'm just waiting for Mac Medic to find this thread.

[Mac Medic]

I found it, but i really have no opinion. Both platforms do the job. I do think that FCP is a factor for a lot of movie houses, but Avid is a fine competitor on the PC side.

Photoshop users should avoid the Mac right now as the switch to Intel processors has left Photoshop running in Rosetta (emulation) until an Intel native version (CS 3) is released which won't be until next year.

The only place that Apple has a real advantage is in the colour space realm. Color management/color profiles are common place on the Mac yet I rarely hear it mentioned on the PC side even though it's critical for any print/desig shop. This may not even be an advantage as I'm sure Windows does colour management too, I just haven't been able to find it.

Basically, buy what makes you comfortable!. Don't listen to the commercials, they're funny but thats about it, and don't buy a Mac just to run windows!

edit: Oh yeah, if you're planning on doing anything 3d intensive be prepared to spend A LOT of money on a high end Mac Pro! For 3d you can get a PC to do the job for a lot less. Motion only runs well on the highest end Mac's, but as this was a thread directed at Pro's I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have a problem with the price.