Why use Mac?

[L[0ne]R]

I've been wondering this for a very long time but haven't found a definite answer to this question:

Why do most graphic designers/digital artists/video editors and other media specialists use Macs?


Here are a few things I've heard:
- projects are easier to transfer and are more compatible between Macs.
- something about hardware compatibility with not-sure-what.
- Macs are simple and noob-friendly.
- Macs are slim and shiny.

None of these reasons sound clear and convincing enough to use Macs for Digital Media, so for me the question is still very far from answered. I work with digital media myself but I don't like Macs and don't see how are they better than PCs. It gives me an uneasy feeling that I don't know something important.

If you know what it could be - share your thoughts and put my mind at ease.

[DarkCrusade]

Macs looks stylish.

[dnmr]

Macs looks stylish.

THE reason to pay double the price.
Also, you can't upgrade and customize macs as much. Great plus as well.

[jrgp]

Macs:
 - Don't waste your time with security/virus issues. (unix underneath the pretty interface)
 - Pretty interface
 - Installing / Uninstalling actual software is just a matter of dragging and dropping
 - They don't get obsolete anywhere near as fast as PC's do
 - There are no blue screens of death
 - They're fast, and way more resource efficient
 - Giant and friendly support community
 - System maintenance is never really required (unlike defragging and checking for viruses on windows)

Essentially graphics people like them because they don't get in your way and are always really reliable.

All that said, if I had the money I'd switch from Linux to Mac (on the desktop/laptop, not server) immediately.

Also, you can't upgrade and customize macs as much. Great plus as well.

They manage resources in such a way and don't incorporate "planned obsolescence" so upgrading them as often as you upgrade pc's isn't necessary.

[croat1gamer]

The advantages over windows and linux are so big that you cant notice them.
Afaik, the Adobe products are running smoother on Macs because of something.

Still, it doesnt make up that they are a crappy OS (option wise) and in general noone who is an semi-advanced user would use it.
Mac users are rich crybabies who dont know some basic computer stuff, for them the looks are first and you know how it goes after that.


But its good for iPenis products.

Stay with an win/linux combination.

[jrgp]

and in general noone who is an semi-advanced user would use it. Mac users are rich crybabies who dont know some basic computer stuff, for them the looks are first and you know how it goes after that.

This really isn't the case. As I mentioned above, they have fully functioning POSIX compliant UNIX underneath. This means that you can use it pretty much the same way you can use Linux, via the ever powerful and useful command line (as well as all the other things UNIX makes easier, like having scripts act like fully functional programs). This is why UNIX fans like macs: they have the usual reliability and flexibility of UNIX and the ability to use most commercial software, like the Adobe Products.

But, yes, semi-advanced Windows users wouldn't find Macs appealing because it's UNIX underneath, so you have a valid point if you look at it from that direction.

[Psycho]

A PC can do everything a mac can do. A mac can only do a fraction of what a PC can do.

Want to miss out on the ability to use thousands of programs and games? Want a piece of expensive plastic? Go for mac!
I've used mac every day when I went to school, and they crashed alot more than my PC. Was not a blue screen, but a total system lockup is the same thing.

jrgp I dont get your "does not get obsolete so fast" thing. Hardware is hardware regardless of operating system.

[croat1gamer]

Why not using just Linux instead? Its free and doesnt have a cult.


Though, you have a +5 popularity bonus on mainstream publics when equipping Mac as an OS.

[DarkCrusade]

The answer to all your questions is right here!

[Espadon]

You can buy a Mac but I'll still run circles around you with my PC because I'm simply a better artist.

Fears about compatibility and viruses are perpetuated most by paranoid shtters who blame their failures on their tools instead of themselves. For example, yes, UNIX is unpopular for virus writers, but the people who get hit hardest by viruses are the same idiots who get phished by Nigerian spammers. Common sense is the best antivirus.

Since Macs now use Intel processors, there's nothing for Mac fans to claim on the hardware field so it's become pretty much an OS fight. You should stick with the OS you're more familiar with. If you're not a power PC user, it's not a waste of time to go learn Mac, but if you're wasting 30 minutes figuring out how to clear a snag on Mac that you could have cleared in minutes on a PC, you're using the wrong platform and you're going to be wasting waaaay more time than the purported "Mac efficiency" is going to ever benefit you.

Again in the end, being a proficient artist is going to save you way more time than the few extra seconds that "superior compatibility" on a Mac will ever give you.

The Macs-are-artsy notion is just a holdover from the 90's now, but it's no contest that their 'underdog' status will forever endear them to the Trendy Wendys out there that want to shout out to the world, "LOOK AT ME I'M AN ARTIST!"

Further analogy to pound it in: PC vs Mac is like AK47 vs M4A1. You can argue the numbers all you want but ultimately, it's the better man that wins.

Linux ... doesnt have a cult.

You've GOT to be fkin kidding. Srs.

[Dusty]

Macs are popular among artists because they used to perform better with the needed applications. Nowadays Windows is on the same level as OSX when it comes to creative programs. 

[a-4-year-old]

Some graphics software is mac only, depending on who you work for/where you go to learn you might need a mac.  Its the same deal as engineers who use autocad that only works on windows.

The Mac pro (the desktop thing) is basically built for these guys.

These topics always end up with some misconceptions.
For starters apple products are expensive, but with the computers you actually get pretty good value for money, it is true however that anything with an "i" is practically highway robbery.  And its also true that macs don't have a problem with a blue screen of death (BSOD) they have kernel panics and a spinning pinwheel.

With regards to windows, any competent human being can run windows without ever encountering a BSOD and never contracting a virus. I worry about viruses about as much as I worry about spontaneously shitting myself in public.  I'd be much more concerned running a computer that can get viruses (mac) without any sort of detection tool.  Using viruses as a trump card is about as ignorant and outdated as citing the Apple LISA as an example of overpriced apples.

And jrgp unless apple made some kind of anti-aging cream for computer chips, the idea that two computers running the same hardware become obsolete at different rates is total bullshit.

[Espadon]

4yo I give you assload of karma

[jrgp]

For example, yes, UNIX is unpopular for virus writers, but the people who get hit hardest by viruses are the same idiots who get phished by Nigerian spammers. Common sense is the best antivirus.

UNIX is not unpopular for Virus writers, it's just largely impossible. Think about it. The majority of websites on the internet are hosted on UNIX. If you could successfully hack UNIX with viruses/malware, it'd be awesome for crackers since they'd be able to take down nearly the entire internet. The reason UNIX doesn't need antivirus is because of: it's security model, code quality, and the impossibility of privilege escalation. The only reason the term "antivirus" exists is because of Windows. The same goes for the term "defragment" because NTFS is the only modern file system that encounters serious fragmentation.

And jrgp unless apple made some kind of anti-aging cream for computer chips, the idea that two computers running the same hardware become obsolete at different rates is total bulls**t.

I meant the "usefulness" of the aging hardware. By that I mean new Mac software often doesn't require the latest and greatest Mac hardware, thus letting old'ish hardware last longer without as many upgrades.

[Espadon]

Does either make a difference in practical computing though? I really don't think so. I can see why it's a major point for porn-collectors who happen to lack common sense, though. I might need a unix box for a web site, but I certainly don't need unix to make art, just like I don't need superglue to bond paper.

Not sure you can back up your claim about the hardware. Old Macs I've worked with are just as slow and cranky as old PCs. And the 2003 HP I have running Ubuntu is just as slow as it was running WinXP.
I'm sure if you want to believe it's faster it'll seem faster though.

[jrgp]

Old Macs I've worked with are just as slow and cranky as old PCs. And the 2003 HP I have running Ubuntu is just as slow as it was running WinXP.

I didn't mean a giant gaping 7 year old difference, I meant more like a 3 or so year difference.

[Graham]

All I know is that when I need to take my laptop somewhere I don't want to look like a flaming homo so I will stick with a windows based laptop. Oh and steam still isn't on mac, so why would I want a desktop mac?

[Espadon]

As 4yo said, the only reason you really have to have a Mac for art is if you work at a place that uses proprietary software. For typical artists who just use stuff like Painter/AdobeCS[Il/Fl/Ps/Fw], the platform is more or less an issue of pride.

[FliesLikeABrick]

Still, it doesnt make up that they are a crappy OS (option wise) and in general noone who is an semi-advanced user would use it.

I disagree 100%.  Most extremely technical networking or IT management type of people that I've seen have a Mac (including myself).  Much of the audience at some particular networking conferences are almost completely Mac users.  It seems that technical people who don't like screwing around with their computer but want something reliable go with macs - they JFW and are fast and reliable.

Mac users fanboys are rich crybabies who dont know some basic computer stuff, for them the looks are first and you know how it goes after that.

Fixed that ^ part of your quote for you.

[Hair|Trigger]

In the looks/design department, I think Macs are pretty lame.  I am njot sure why but I feel more comfortable when I am surrounded with a heap of media buttons, blinking lights and stuff even if I don't really use them.  Not to mention Macs all look more or less the same.  Competitor brand laptops are not restricted to one design scheme so there's something for everyone, in fact I think that most current Acer, Asus, Sony Vaio and Dell notebooks look better than Macbooks.