Both Mac and Windows have entry level and mid weight solutions now for video editing. J5 mac prepayment review for 99233 kansas. IMovie on the Mac is a wonderful tool but it has limitations and Windows Movie Maker is a free entry level package for PC, again it has its limitations. The reason why Mac can run native Windows is because it is using a subset of PC hardware, If you decide to buy a Mac for running Windows, you will still have to get the same virus/spyware protection, and run into the same issues as a regular PC.
Now i know this is an age old argument, but i'd just like to get some solid facts. A family member has just got themself a Macbook Pro for the purpose of editing photos and it got me thinking a little. I was always under the impression it was the Mac G4 and G5 that were the powerhouse which we're built with video and photo in mind and with an OS designed purely for that hardware (which is extremely powerful) that made Mac the choice for video editors. But it seems that this has now been stamped onto the whole Mac range. Any Mac is better than a PC for editing video or photos?
Modded mac os x iso for intel pc. Now the last time i used a Mac was maybe in primary school so i have very little experience with Mac, but is the age old argument that Mac is better for Video and Photo still hold any truth? I know Macs are expensive, so maybe you always get a decently powerful machine no matter what Mac you get. Is what operating system you use really important, given that most of the software you would be using for photo/video editing you can get on Mac or PC? Lets say for example I wanted to use Adobe After Effects, and I've got $1500 to spend on a computer to run it. This runs on Macs or PCs, and as far as I'm aware there is no great advantage with going for one architecture over another in terms of performance. I'd then look at getting the most computing power possible for my $1500. I doubt very much that in hardware terms $1500 would get you more with Mac than it would with PC (especially if you are building your own PC).
That's how I'd personally look at it. I don't work with Macs though and I don't do much video editing (I do a little using After Effects every now and then) so I'm happy to be proven wrong by someone that has more experience in this than I do. Is what operating system you use really important, given that most of the software you would be using for photo/video editing you can get on Mac or PC? Lets say for example I wanted to use Adobe After Effects, and I've got $1500 to spend on a computer to run it. This runs on Macs or PCs, and as far as I'm aware there is no great advantage with going for one architecture over another in terms of performance. I'd then look at getting the most computing power possible for my $1500. I doubt very much that in hardware terms $1500 would get you more with Mac than it would with PC (especially if you are building your own PC).
That's how I'd personally look at it. I don't work with Macs though and I don't do much video editing (I do a little using After Effects every now and then) so I'm happy to be proven wrong by someone that has more experience in this than I do. That's pretty much the conclusion i came to, but when you ask the question to anyone considering a Mac who has computing knowledge or not, you get the same response: 'Because it is!' I also would have thought that your money would allow for faster components with a PC than a Mac, but we have a few Mac experts here so we can wait for them to chime in. Wouldn't the screen make the biggest difference followed closely by the system speed? I don't see how using OSX would make a difference, unless it handles colour differently? I don't know.
If it's the desktop we're talking about you can just buy a decent screen for a PC. I suppose Macbooks come with good screen, but they seem to come with less powerful components. I've just got myself a new laptop and was looking at Macs, the price for a high end Mac was pretty steep. You could get much better specifications for less with a PC variant. Edited August 8, 2011 by smakme7757.
I haven't checked the prices lately, but Mac tend to be better purely because you get the quality IPS screen at a good price. The screens do look nice. If i was right into photos i'd say a decent screen is a damn good idea.
After some Googleing i see this written every where: 'the reason why Macs are better is because the OSX uses the power more efficiently! You simply do not need that much RAM with OSX. Plus OSX is simply better than windows!' That's just one quote, but seems to sum up the global reasoning as to why Macs are better. I've never used OSX apart from my play time on VMWare so i can't really say if it's true or not. Edited August 8, 2011 by smakme7757. The idea that Photoshop for example runs better on a Mac is a myth (perpetuated by Mac users).
It does have some weight - the original program that Photoshop was designed on (it wasnt called photoshop then) was developed on a Mac and the original version 1.0 of photoshop was released for Macs exclusively. Macs also had an advantage with a better GUI in those days. Hence the idea propogated throughout the early and mid 90's that Macs were the designers choice of system. To be honest there wasnt anything else that really compared in a user friendly software (or hard ware sense) at that time.