Desktop PC / iMac ADVICE needed!

almillar

Again, davester, you're not comparing like with like. The iMac is an all in one and a Dell tower is not. Dell make all in one computers, so please compare with those. OP hasn't stated which she wants as far as I can see, but you pay a lot more for an all in one computer - Mac or PC. It's unfortunate that Apple doesn't do a consumer tower, but comparing an iMac to a black box doesn't get anyone anywhere.

isofa

Our local John Lewis has as many Macs as PCs in their store... There is an Apple Store in the same area, plus a grotty PC World that again carries Macs, oh and a Cancom in the High Street, exclusively selling Macs... we are a very well served town.

asininity

If you get a PC wait for win 7. Generally PC's are cheaper in hardware, software wise for what you want OSX.

You say you're looking to get into photography and music, I assume you're currently not. In that respect I'd buy a PC to start with purely so save money because if you're just starting out you dont know if you'll carry on with it; if you don't you've just bought yourself a really expensive internet machine. Dont get swayed by the "professionals use it" argument unless your actually looking to set up a business, for home use (hobbies/fun) theres not much in it software quality wise.

Alternatively go for a PC and put linux on it, the movie studios do!:D (Disclaimer, this is just for fun, hope you dont mind Donnie, please note the smilie)

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

you're currently not. In that respect I'd buy a PC to start with purely so save money because if you're just starting out you dont know if you'll carry on with it

That's reasonable, but then if the OP wants to buy a Mac, they will have spent even more money.

if you don't you've just bought yourself a really expensive internet machine.

Well, they'll have a really expensive nice computer.

Dont get swayed by the "professionals use it" argument unless your actually looking to set up a business, for home use (hobbies/fun) theres not much in it software quality wise.

I would very much disagree. You should see our wedding DVD, made on my Mac, with only the software that came with it. You'd have to spend quite a lot of money to do the same thing on a PC.

Alternatively go for a PC and put linux on it, the movie studios do!

Actually, they go for quad or dual-quad core Mac Pros and put Linux on them so they can use Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux.

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

That's reasonable, but then if the OP wants to buy a Mac, they will have spent even more money.

Yes but it could be considered a better investment then. If the OP wants a Mac just get one, no need to the excuses about looking into getting into photography/music to justify it.

Well, they'll have a really expensive nice computer.

When a cheaper one would do.

I would very much disagree. You should see our wedding DVD, made on my Mac, with only the software that came with it. You'd have to spend quite a lot of money to do the same thing on a PC.

I'll take your word for it, thats all I can do. I'll stick with my free software though as it works for me.

Or using windows movie maker, I'm a PC and I'm eight years old.:D

Actually, they go for quad or dual-quad core Mac Pros and put Linux on them so they can use Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux.

Theres me thinking that all the large studios use Linux as their primary OS for desktops and server renderfarms. Though I did hear the Spiderwick Chronicles used Macs with OSX swapped out for linux.

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

Yes but it could be considered a better investment then. If the OP wants a Mac just get one, no need to the excuses about looking into getting into photography/music to justify it.

I hardly think it's an excuse. The OP wants something and the Mac provides it.

When a cheaper one would do.

Well, that's your opinion. If the OP wants to spend £1,200 on a computer, they're probably not looking for a cheap one, regardless of who makes it.

Or using windows movie maker, I'm a PC and I'm eight years old.:D

Those ads are cute. Microsoft totally missed the point of the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads (surprise surprise), but they're still cute.

Theres me thinking that all the large studios use Linux as their primary OS for desktops and server renderfarms.

Lots of industry standard software isn't available for Linux. Sure, you can run some of it under Wine, but really, why bother?

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

I hardly think it's an excuse. The OP wants something and the Mac provides it.

Sorry couldn't resist the excuse bit. Wants something that can be provided by a cheaper PC too.

Well, that's your opinion. If the OP wants to spend £1,200 on a computer, they're probably not looking for a cheap one, regardless of who makes it.

Of course its my opinion. If the OP wants to spend that thats upto them.

However if you're thinking of taking up fishing, for example, you dont go out and buy all the top of the range kit before finding out you if you like it.

And £1200 is expensive if all you're doing is browsing the internet, writing a few docs, checking email, whether its a mac or a PC.

Those ads are cute. Microsoft totally missed the point of the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads (surprise surprise), but they're still cute.

I disagree. Those adverts are annoying, plain and simple. Is it wrong to want to punch that 8 yr old?

Lots of industry standard software isn't available for Linux. Sure, you can run some of it under Wine, but really, why bother?

Lots of the industry standard software for the movie industry is unix based and running it on linux is a lot lot cheaper. Interesting articles:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9653
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9951

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

Sorry couldn't resist the excuse bit. Wants something that can be provided by a cheaper PC too.

As I explained in my lengthy post above, because two things are similar, it doesn't mean they're the same, or even directly comparable. A BMW and a Yugo are more alike than they are different, but it would be a bit of a stretch to say you're getting the same thing from the Yugo that the BMW provides.

However if you're thinking of taking up fishing, for example, you dont go out and buy all the top of the range kit before finding out you if you like it.

Your argument would have some merit if we were talking about something that only has one function.

And £1200 is expensive if all you're doing is browsing the internet, writing a few docs, checking email, whether its a mac or a PC.

If it lasts for 5 or 6 years, it's not really. I have a 10 year old G3 iMac tucked away somewhere that still runs as well as the day I got it.

I disagree. Those adverts are annoying, plain and simple. Is it wrong to want to punch that 8 yr old?

lol…well, I think they're cute.

Then again, I liked the Jerry Seinfeld/Bill Gates ads too.

Lots of the industry standard software for the movie industry is unix based and running it on linux is a lot lot cheaper. Interesting articles:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9653
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/9951

And lots of it isn't available on Linux.

Don't forget, there are many different workflows involved in making a movie or TV Show.

Regardless, I don't think the OP is going to make a blockbuster movie just yet, so it's pretty inconsequential.

asininity

Marty_J wrote: »

As I explained in my lengthy post above, because two things are similar, it doesn't mean they're the same, or even directly comparable. A BMW and a Yugo are more alike than they are different, but it would be a bit of a stretch to say you're getting the same thing from the Yugo that the BMW provides.

Please next time post about a car commonly avaliable in the UK, I had to google that Yugo, which looks a good starting point for a boy racer to expand on with big sound system/wheels/etc.

I've mentioned before that the car analogy doesn't fit Mac vs PC comparisons. Hardware wise you're looking at 2 BMWs one price at least 1/4 higher. Software wise???

Your argument would have some merit if we were talking about something that only has one function.

Not sure I get what you mean.

If it lasts for 5 or 6 years, it's not really. I have a 10 year old G3 iMac tucked away somewhere that still runs as well as the day I got it.

I can tell you if I paid £1200 for a computer it would last more than 6 years.

lol…well, I think they're cute.

Then again, I liked the Jerry Seinfeld/Bill Gates ads too.

Dont think I've seen that one you got a link?

And lots of it isn't available on Linux.

You've said that before. Just providing info to show its not all about Macs and theres lots not available on OSX as well.

Don't forget, there are many different workflows involved in making a movie or TV Show.

I'm not forgetting.

Regardless, I don't think the OP is going to make a blockbuster movie just yet, so it's pretty inconsequential.

I'm quite sure you're right, which is why the comment that started this little side discussion was there just for fun, and maybe a little bait.:D

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

I've mentioned before that the car analogy doesn't fit Mac vs PC comparisons. Hardware wise you're looking at 2 BMWs one price at least 1/4 higher. Software wise???

But as I've mentioned before, they're not the same.

Cheap computers generally are not comparable to expensive computers, regardless of who makes them. Go compare a cheap Dell and an expensive Dell (which will probably cost more than the equivalent Mac).

I came across an article earlier about the iPhone Multitouch Patent Myth, and it contained this rather pertinent quote:

If PCs were cars

No other industry seems so devoid of appreciation for creativity, aesthetics, and smart design. How is it that auto magazines praise vehicles’ bodywork styling, clever instrumentation, and sporty handling on the same level as (or even greater than) the engine’s displacement and the size of the rims? How is it that expensive cars can be spoken of as being worth the premium when they actually are, rather than being demonized for being any amount more than the cheapest vehicle available?

My theory: the auto industry has plenty of knowledgeable people that actually care about cars who are available to write about them intelligently, while in the tech industry, anyone who has half a brain can apply their talents at actually working in a tech company, leaving only unqualified blow hards to take positions writing about stuff they really don’t appreciate or understand, people who have accomplished so little in the last twenty years that they have to refer to themselves as a “technologist.”

Imagine opening up Car and Driver and finding some writer blowing off the new BMW and instead bragging up loud ugly knock-off he had imported from China because it was 10% cheaper and had two tailpipes with blue neon underneath. Who cares if it lasts half as long and the airbags might deploy viruses and advertising instead of saving your life in a crash?

asininity wrote: »

Not sure I get what you mean.

I mean, a fishing rod only does one thing: fish. If you don't want to fish, you don't need the rod. A computer however, does lots of things. Just because someone buy sa computer that's really good for photographers for instance, and then later decides they don't like photographer, it doesn't render their computer useless or a waste of money. It will do lots of other things too.

Dont think I've seen that one you got a link?

Sure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIjNJZpRtj8