burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Creative Cloud subscribers only need an Internet connection about once a month, so they can verify that you're still active, and for updates and any cloud storage you use. You can keep all your files local — Putting them in the cloud just slows you down. But if you need to share, as my wife does, the cloud allows that. At $9.99/month for Lr and Ps and Bridge, the bundle is a good deal.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Macs are based on BSD UNIX. They will run any Unix or Linux app, via X11, perhaps with a re-compile. They also do a bang-up job of running Windows, either natively, or in an emulator such as Parallels Desktop.

I "grew up" (as a 20-something adult) using the Apple IIe in '84, then a Mac in '86, then a PC in '86, and have used both platforms ever since. I've had the most positive experiences with the Mac. I've spent about equal time in each environment. For five years, I managed a software development project on PCs. For many more years, after that, I developed databases in FileMaker Pro (Windows AND Mac) to run various processes in a photo lab. I've used Mac OS 5 – 9.2.2, Mac OS X 10.2 to current Mac OS 10.12, plus DOS 5 & 6, Win 3, Win 3.11, Win 95, Win 98, Win NT, Win 2000, Win XP, Win Vista, Win 7, and Win 10.

Mac OS and Windows are quite different. Win 10 is the best Windows yet. But it still holds no candle to the usability of Mac OS, and the sheer intuitive nature of its interface. While either will get the job done, it isn't always about the hardware or the cost. If you overlook the long run benefits of using the Mac, you miss the point. It's about the entire Mac OS/iOS ecosystem. It's about the ability to avoid the overhead of virus protection. It's about the drastically lower support costs.

Even IBM recognized the value of using Macs... Google 'IBM uses Macs' for a long list of articles. They deployed over 30,000 in just six months.

Dan O Loc: Shrewsbury, Pa

I have had no problems with Win 10 at all. Lightroom and other photo software run well for me.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Back in the early 2000s, we were using 1.0 GHz dual Xeon Dells and Win 2000 to drive Noritsu mini-lab printers in a photo lab. The computers had just 2GB of RAM. They were faster than the printers... We ran Kodak DP2 and half a dozen proprietary VB database apps on them, all at the same time. Most of the time, the computers were idle. Occasionally, they would kick another file over the network to a printer.

Our Macs back then had 400 MHz processors and 1 GB RAM. We printed from Photoshop to an Epson 9600 (44" printer) with one of them. Once the first image was in the queue, we could print non-stop for hours, with no speed issues. Background spooling fed the printer, while the operator prepared files in the foreground.

We had a room full of PCs running Photoshop CS and Kodak Professional Auto Retouching software, both for retouching. No issues with speed, although we were using 1.0 GHz dual Xeon Dells and Win 2000 running with 2GB RAM. Again, rendering occurred in the background, while the operator watched KPARS work, or opened problem files in Photoshop for manual fixes.

Yes, if you build a custom PC, you can put 64GB RAM and a 10TB drive array in it. It will render files in a blink. But few of us need that. It's like owning a 600 HP race car... Do you drive that on vacation around the USA? Your computer is SELDOM the bottleneck in your workflow, unless you are doing 4K video editing, or rendering files of 1GB or more for mural size prints.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Macs have long been the favorites of artists (including photographers) and graphic artists (likely because of their interface), but given the same HW (Macs are typically using the same processors, memory and disks as PCs, although they are often a generation behind), I've seen no data except anecdotal evidence that OSX is faster or more stable than Windows 10 for the same HW - in fact, the opposite is often true (see: http://www.alphr.com/features/386098/windows-vs-os-x-which-is-faster/page/0/2 ) and OSX has had their share of memory management and stability issues as well. It's also not the case that Macs are immune to viruses and hacking. The higher percentage of viruses in existence for Windows is likely partly because Windows machines make up the vast majority of machines in use, both for personal use and business (why is that?). The advantages of Windows include an open system architecture from the beginning (unlike Apple) with the attendant advantages of more available compatible SW and HW as well as the considerably lower price for the same hardware and the ability to customize the machine that you build far beyond any options that may be orderable for Macs. This has become a "religious issue" for some, and if you prefer the interface of a Mac or the industrial design and packaging and are willing to pay 2x the price for the same level of performance, by all means do, but the idea that the performance, stability, reliability or quality of internal components is better cannot be demonstrated by the facts.

I'm now prepared for the inevitable flames from the Mac evangelists - just make sure to include benchmarks and actual reliability data. BTW, I own both PCs and an IMac and IPads and IPhones, and while I really like the packaging of Apple products and the ease of sharing data, IOS is the least stable and buggiest OS I use, and the IMac is the slowest platform, dollar-for-dollar.

jmcgloth Loc: Ocean Park, WA

Actually I'd vote for Lindsay over the two monkeys running.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

My first work computer with a graphical interface back in the '80s was an IBM branded 386 PC, the forerunner to the 486 Pentium, running Windows 3.1 with 3mb of ram. You read that correctly, 3 megabytes of ram! Those were the standard machines used on the trading floor and by developers at JPMorgan back in the 80s. We purchased around 3000 of them at the time if I recall correctly. We also used Spark stations and a few Macs as well as IBM mainframes and other equipment from DEC and others. A little bit of everything.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I have Windows 10 running on six computers, three desktops and three laptops. I have had zero problems running Photoshop, PSP, Visual Studio, and other programs for photographers. Every problem I have read about was caused by perculiarities of the software, like LR which keeps pointers in its library, not the real file and therefore sometimes gets lost. Bridge does not do that and runs flawlessly. I have heard that Photoshop does not know how to use a few video cards unless you get new drivers. Otherwise zero problems.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

Going to Mac is never a good idea. A Mac is 3 times as expensive, capability for capability, power for power. It is a much more closed system so upgrading is either impossible or difficult and even if possible, is very expensive.

There was a day when the Mac was easier for a novice to begin to learn. Also the virus, trojan and other malware programmers tended to leave it alone. If you want to infect the most computers, the Mac used to have 2-3% of total market. You'd put your energy into attacking Windows because that gave youu 97% target. Now Macs are up to 8-10% (Depends who is counting.) so now there are several new malwares out every week. You can keep up with this by subscribing to Sophos' newsletter called "Naked Security."

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

Sinewsworn Loc: Port Orchard, WA

Comment about saving to any cloud.
Uplink speed is a huge factor in saving images to the cloud in any of its iterations. My best speed up .5 mb! A 24 mb file will take a while. Times 30 or 300 images and images can take hours to upload.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Show me actual, physical evidence of real, in-the-wild *viruses* attacking a Mac since OS X came of age. Modern Macs can get attacked when users let it happen by clicking on "Install" in some bogus web page or an email attachment that delivers "anti-malware malware." The same dupes attack Windows users the same way. But there are hundreds of thousands of Windows *viruses*.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

that is incredibly slow by modern standards. Are you in a rural area where that's the fastest at a reasonable price?

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

Apple iMac is a great solution.

BebuLamar

I don't know how to use a Mac and it wouldn't run many softwares that I need to run. I don't think it's overpriced but Apple offer limited choice. My windows pc works fine.