Mac book??

[Jeremy Gray]

I am going off to college in a coouple months and I am most likely going to study cinema and video production.I am looking for a laptop for on campus and I thought about getting a mac so I could eventually get FCP in the future.But I'm not sure how compatible macs are with anything, because macs are kinda gay when it comes that!! If you could give me your inputit would be appeciated Thanks!!

[Michael Lehnert]

"..gay..."

 

?!? :huh:

 

Wow, that the latest thing I heard about the myth that Apple is "incompatible".

 

I am not sure if you still live in 1989 when IBM battled with Apple about the supremacy to put their file system on pre-formatted 3.5"-diskettes which defined the issue of data compatibility then...

 

Considering that Final Cut is an Apple application, and that the Apple ecosystem is the most dynamic, compatible and innovative around today, and that even Microsoft builds better products for the Mac than for their own platform, such as Office:mac, I really cannot see any issue not to go for a Mac solution for office, cine, video, audio, networking and communications work of yours.

 

Or to put it in your terms: Apple is as transgender and transgressive as you can wish for, and it plugs in every AV solution or office solution or cloud computing app you should consider when working in cinematography and for college/school, straight out of the box, or via very good third party solutions for adequate prices.

 

If you want to run multimedia suites or NLE on a portable machine, even RAW or with a RAID, I suggest to go with a MacBook Pro over a MacBook, as investing in hardware that has more computational capacity over the long run pays out alot. And Apple systems are already the most long-living devices you can go for - at least from my experience...

 

If you have any further questions, feel free to post.

Cheers,

 

-Michael

 

 

(Typing & posting this from a 1998 Apple Macintosh PowerBook G3 [series Wall Street] which is standing next to my 1983 Apple IIe - works well, too; did my first school paper on it in those years!)

[Rich Hibner]

I'm not sure how you feel about legality, but, since Macs are ran off of Intel cpu's you can easily install Leopard on your PC and run all the mac programs without having to go out and buy a really expensive MAC. Dual boot and you can have best of both worlds.

[Phil Rhodes]

That can certainly be done, with a bit of fiddling about. The main problem for Macs is that they're 20-30% more expensive than a PC of equivalent performance, and that Apple does tend to take a rather holier-than-thou attitude even to its own customers. There's a certain fashion-statement factor to Macs which I find quite offputting - that glowing, backlit logo on the lid is upside down to the user, and only the right way up to onlookers, thus its purpose is to allow him to loudly proclaim "get a load of me - I have a mac."

 

But they do work.

 

P

[Rich Hibner]

Absolutely Phil, thats' why.....shhh don't tell Steve Jobs, I have a hackintosh.

I don't want this to be a PCvsMAC thread, but I really like the ability to upgrade my parts on a PC

[Jim Keller]

I am going off to college in a coouple months and I am most likely going to study cinema and video production.I am looking for a laptop for on campus and I thought about getting a mac so I could eventually get FCP in the future.But I'm not sure how compatible macs are with anything, because macs are kinda gay when it comes that!! If you could give me your inputit would be appeciated Thanks!!

 

First, a bit of social advice for film school and your professional career. Using the word "gay" as an insult is not acceptable any more. You will meet a lot of gay people in this industry, and it's not "just a word." Besides, there are much better insults available for Macs. :)

 

I've found that I haven't had any serious problems with Macintosh compatibility since we started transitioning to Macintels about a year ago. We had more issues with our older Mac software (Cleaner being the biggest offender) than any of the PC applications we've attempted to use.

 

That said, there are a few PC applications that simply will not work in Boot Camp, and may not work even in a dual-boot situation. AutoCAD is one of the more notorious (though we use VectorWorks, so we've never wrestled with it directly). If you're a hardcore gamer, you may find that the required hardware isn't available for the Mac. The publishers of these software packages and games will tell you if you ask if it won't work on a Mac, so simply check for anything you think you may need to run. If you need something that doesn't work on a Mac, then Mac isn't the right choice, and you will have to live with the software that's available in PC land (which is generally OK, just not optimal). Otherwise, going with the industry standard is probably the better way to go.

 

The other thing to consider before buying a laptop is that you're limiting your capture options somewhat. You can't put a native HD card in a laptop; Final Cut's HDV over firewire capture doesn't support timecode; P2 cards need to be transferred to a local hard drive for the footage to be accessible; etc. It will be fine for the typical film school curriculum, but if you're thinking of going professional with it, you'll probably need a desktop.

[Walter Graff]

You'd do well with a macbook. You can run final cut and any number of great programs for audio and video editing. I understand your fear based on being a Windows users. I was a serious Windows user for 15 years. I could write code for Windows. I knew every in and out of the computer and how to fix most every problem that often came up. My fear of using a Mac was that I thought I could not give up Windows software. I thought Mac had little in that department to offer. I was afraid because I liked to expand my computer, sometimes build my own devices, and my ignorance of Macs made me think I couldn't do that with them. I was bidding on a $800,000 job about eight years ago. I had my trusty office PC system and was making a CD of the final presentation. The computer froze. I rebooted and spent half the night trying to figure out what suddenly happened the night before I needed to hand in my bid. I was savvy but Windows computers can be tricky as you know. At 3am I said I'd wake up, go to JR and buy a cheap computer, make my disk and return it, then go hand in my bid. I bought a $300 computer. Loaded the file and thankfully I was able to make the CD. Then realized I might as well make two. And freeze. That computer locked up. THat was the last day I used a Windows computer. Bought my first official MAc the next day. And what did I learn? Everything I thought about MAc was wrong. I didn't need the 3000 versions of the same software that everyone made for PC. I could expand but Macs are not PCs and I found that I didn't need the same expansion set up for a Mac. It had everything it needed and what was sold for it, was far better in design. They are both computers but I realized that what I thought was the norm for PC was simply not for Mac. You paid once and got a better set up. And the resale of Macs is about 1000% better than PC. A PC is trash in five years. I still have ten year old Macs that I can sell easily for $800. Software was better for mac once I realized that you don't need all the crap made for PC. That was a big fear. There was so much more software for PC so why would I want a Mac. But when you have one you see why all that PC software is a waste and what is available for MAC is so much smarter and more in tune with everything you need to do creatively. Everything was better. My productivity went up 1000%. To think of all the years I wasted on a PC. Wow, was I stupid. And now, I could not even use a PC. It is such a simple minded one dimensional computer. I see folks here who have no MAC experience talking about the same myths I belived before I switched. Most all the creative s in the world are MAC. I've actually become a bit biased towards creative types I work with who are on PC, because I realize they are not executing their full potential, or perhaps they simply are not as talented. Macs talk instantly to other computers. No more bugs. No crashes, lock ups, blue screens. Just stable software and stable OS that eve fixes itself at night while you sleep. I still use my first G4 as my computer for dumping to Betacam for TV spots. It works perfectly ten years later. So for a guy who worked both sides of the fence with MAC and PC, I can tell you from years of experience, ignorance to a MAC, and frankly, an attitude about MAcs for no reason other than ignorance that you'll find you are a better student, smarter thinker, better writer, and overall work better with a MAC. The tool is just a tool, but when you have talent and a good tool, you can do wonders. As a guy who hated mac out of ignorance like most diehard PC users, I sure found nirvana.

 

As for cost, a well known PC mag ran an article recently showing that MAcs actually cost less than PCs when you apply all the things about using a PC. I also read one of my favorite articles in a PC mag that was the ultimate PC vs MAc article and they did every single test possible. Macs blew away Pcs. One of my favorite tidbits that I forgot about was how ridiculously long it takes a PC to start. My Mac is ready to go in 15 seconds. I remember the days when it took minutes for a PC to load all the crap that is Dos and to this day is still the backbone of a PC. So let those that use PC enjoy them. They are good computers. But when you switch to MAC you see so much more in life and get so much farther so much faster.

 

Macs are growing exponentially in popularity, which I'm, kind of upset about. Today they make up 14% of the PC market. I don't know a pro in the film, TV, still world that uses Pc these days. Why am I Upset about MAcs growing in popularity. Upset because it's sort of special to be in a smaller group who has a tool that blows away PCs every day. Even the PC magazines now always rate Macs better. You've just got to try it to see the difference. For me, it was amazing.

[Michael Lehnert]

Walter, thanks for making these points in such an extensive way, and giving an account of what I learned to see as the typical "transitional experience" from Redmont to Cupertino.

 

I was sitting on the fence on whether to post, after the first reply posts after mine came in about macs not being expandable, too expensive, being fashion accessories, having attitude, and being gay (what was missing is that its a computer for women, read: not for the real Man in the know...)

 

But I had too many pointless debates with Windows aficionados and Penguinistas at the turn of the millennium who were thinking of candy-like-looking Apple products and Mac users as "creatives" (= lazy people not getting out of bed before 11, being tech-iliterate, not really professional in their corporate delivery, pseudo-educated and totally high about themselves) that I really cannot be bothered anymore about evangelizing for Cupertino.

 

People have to make their own experiences, and if they prefer to stick to the pedestrian convention, so be it. Mental change takes time - if you come from the Wintel way - to adjust to what makes Apple work. Interestingly, people new to computers struggle mastering Windows in great depth, while those starting out with Apple products become thorough users quite rapidly: I have seen that time and time again... from kids to septagenarians.

 

To me, Windows was from its original approach onwards, and remains to this day essentially a hobbyist's system, geared towards those people's skills and philosophy and preoccupations through and through. It was a mere coincidence that it got propelled into the corporate world and got universally adopted where it actually doesn't belong, because of prohibitive maintenance costs in relation to productivity achieved.

 

Apples (i.e. not only Macs) were planned as an integrated appliance geared towards consuming users that wants to perform tasks without extensive knowledge of the inner workings and a short learning curve.

 

If we think about stuff around us, one should aks how much items we have around us work in the Windows way, and how many work the Apple way - as outlined above? Anyone recently bought a coachbuilt/kit-car automobile? manually adjusted the heating elements in the washer-dryer? Upgraded the laser in their CD-player? Had his newspaper delivered in single sheets so that s/he can manually bind it according to his/her wishes at home? Thought so...

 

Anyway, I better retreat from this thread before I get flamed B) ;)

[Rich Hibner]

laugh, there isn't a difference in Mac and PC now that they both use Intel'....it all has come down to better OS. I work with Macs all day long editing photo's and editing video. I come home and still turn to Windows for all my applications. If you use Windows strictly for business, no surfing web pages for naughty time, no d/ling programs you aren't sure of, you're machine will behave as it was meant to. Macs win there. They have a strict OS not allowing for malicious programs to be installed. I believe they are completely equal. To the guy who stated his PC froze twice when making a project, well, I'm sure back then, using a relatively old Windows, that poop happened. I've had Macs spinning color wheel of death lots of time on older Macs and had to restart. It's just how computers work. I haven't had my Windows freeze yet since getting my new box. There is NO better machine. It's user preference. I have a PC I built and when I have it running Leopard, it kills what Macbook pro would run at using Xbench. Literally, I'm not bullshitting. I wasn't subjected to what Mac wanted to put in the box. If Linux had it's own box and more support, that would be the better OS. I can't doubt you have a Mac boot up in 15secs, but I've never seen one do that before. Windows does have a tendency to load up resources that are completely unnecessary. I'm using a modified XP created by users and it doesn't take longer than 45seconds to boot.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Rich Hibner

[Rich Hibner]

Wouldn't let me edit my post. I'm not sure the part was exaggeration, but if you could seriously sell an 10year old mac for $800.00 I'd sell my PC right now.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Rich Hibner

[Saul Rodgar]

Hardware is not as important really as the OS, as it has been hinted. As a Mac user, I only know that my system works when I need it, unlike most of the PC systems that surround me. I see people running all kinds of virus protection software just to keep their Windows machines running, maybe. Too much maintenance is needed to keep PC's operating properly. So that is what I go by. Yes, Steve Jobs is pretty evil in his sale of the "cult of all things Mac", but again, I have no problems running my Mac systems, so that is what I put up with in the name of dependability.

 

In the ideal world I would have both Windows OS and a Mac OS X on my machines, (dual-boot Intel Unix system), I just cannot bring myself to do it due to the high maintenance of the Windows OS. I need a computer to make money with, not to try to keep it running properly.

 

To answer the original question: A (Unix/ Intel) Mac Book will give you the best of both worlds as you can run Windows and Mac OS X on the same machine. Try doing that as easily on a Windows PC. What could then be better?

[Rich Hibner]

It's not going to be much longer....they've got viruses for Macs now...it's all a matter of time before the same poop happens to that OS.

[Saul Rodgar]

It's not going to be much longer....they've got viruses for Macs now...it's all a matter of time before the same poop happens to that OS.

 

Maybe, but I doubt it. What the future holds, is mere speculation. Today my Mac needs a 5 minute virus scan once a week to keep me going strong.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Saul Rodgar

[Michael Lehnert]

laugh, there isn't a difference in Mac and PC now that they both use Intel'...

 

This really is a gross simplification which would equal to you saying that there isn't a qualitative difference between lenses from Schneider, Zeiss and Leica, as they all draw on glass elements manufactured and supplied by Schott...

 

To the guy who stated his PC froze twice when making a project, well, I'm sure back then, using a relatively old Windows, that poop happened. I've had Macs spinning color wheel of death lots of time on older Macs and had to restart. It's just how computers work.

 

This is exactly why I learned to dislike Windows over the years of my own user experience. It lowers the expectations beyond rational reasoning. I guess this is also why noone seems to be outraged that RED is on the 16th firmware upgrade within a year. If Panavision were to change the transportation mechanisms in their Panaflex models that often over the same period, no DoP would risk choosing it. Heck, Arri was in effect forced to buy Moviecam because the 535 was such a turkey, DoPs moved away from using it in business-critical masses... Yet in ICT and electronics, people just shrug and say "well, it's software, it's complex"... and they now even accept buggy embedded systems in cars, telephones, air conditions... I guess the electronic/digital revolution did come at a price after all...

 

If Linux had it's own box and more support, that would be the better OS.

 

But then, it wouldn't be what defines Linux to its core anymore; it would just be a Unix derivate... hmm, like Solaris, or NeXTStep, or Mac OS X...

 

I have a PC I built and when I have it running Leopard, it kills what Macbook pro would run at using Xbench. ... I wasn't subjected to what Mac wanted to put in the box. ... I'm using a modified XP created by users and it doesn't take longer than 45seconds to boot.

 

Thanks for proving my point about Windows being essentially a hobbyist's systems. I am sure you can outgun an out-of-the-box Aston Martin DB9 with a nitro'd & tuned-up Dodge Neon, with both costing the same in the end, but that is exactly showcasing the philosophical and technological difference between the two platforms.

And please bear in mind that the overwhelming part of personal computer users just go to their local PC World, get the box a mostly uninformed and generally disinterested summer term high school kid is suggesting based on product promotion rules from head office. After that, the buyers are left alone until the "next-door-neighbour's-geek-son" install and pref's it... and I am not talking about low-level hacks to the BIOS, I am talking about installing a printer, and establishing the WiFi network. Imagine you would buy a car that would only start-up properly and reach highway speed after some next door mechanic tweaked the engine and electronic control unit so that it achieves what was in the brochure... that company wouldn't live long, unless a majority of their cars were sold as corporate chauffeur services with a dedicated mechanic/chauffeur department taking care of them.

 

The most disarmingly honest view on the Wintel/Mac debate I ever heard came from a FTSE-100 CTO who said that if they were to adopt Macs, he would put himself and his staff out of work (that was before CEOs started buying iPods and MacBook Airs privately and consequentially started to run Apple pilots internally to positive outcomes if they just could run Exchange ActiveSync with them... oh wait, that just happened...)

 

I'm not sure the part was exaggeration, but if you could seriously sell an 10year old mac for $800.00 I'd sell my PC right now.

 

Actually, a friend of mine just did better. He sold his old 2002 Apple PowerMac G4 [Quicksilver] with Mac OS X 10.5 ("Leopard") installed plus contemporary periphery for 650 Euros, which is 1012 USD. Obviously, despite the proven falsification, I am sure people will now suggest that this is a singular sale to an idiot overpaying... well, delusion performs in many guises.

 

As I said, on my 1998 PowerBook G3 that I still use for my private office use (which involves Adobe RAW works and AV NLE, by the way, not just ciny.com posts), I am running Mac OS X 10.3 ("Panther"), unsupported by Apple, but out of the box. I dare you to try running Microsoft Windows XP (SP1) on a Wintel with 1998 hardware configuration... so much for longevity and residual values.

 

It's not going to be much longer....they've got viruses for Macs now...it's all a matter of time before the same poop happens to that OS.

 

I am sorry, but this is just false. The idea of the proportional axiomatic correlation between marketshare and malware is nonsense in terms of programmer psychology, platform architecture and the purpose and political economy of malware. I invite you to read this white paper downloadable here to clarify the issue.

This malware myth has been put to the public since 10 years, when the ILOVEYOU worm hit the Wintel world. Apple has nearly trippled its Mac marketshare then, and holds around 40% to 60% of other product-related markets... still no viruses... meanwhile, Vista had already 2 mainstream-public-reaching virus scares this year, but that doesn't matter, now does it, because 4 months after launch, everyone is already talking about Windows 7, 3-4 years into the future... I wonder why that is?!?

 

(I nearly finished with the sentence that by the time of launching Windows 7, Steve Jobs will be teaching Data how to operate LCARS, but would be just daft from me, wouldn't it :D . Say 'yes', please.)

[Walter Graff]

It's not going to be much longer....they've got viruses for Macs now...it's all a matter of time before the same poop happens to that OS.

 

They have been saying that for some years no but no one has come forward to test that. One Trojan horse for MAC was discovered in 2006. But the thing about MAC is it's not the kind of OS anyone seems to be really interested in making viruses for or can successfully. There are a few others but they only affect Microsoft software run on MACS or are so harmless as not to be viable and even then they are easily defeated due to the design of the MAC OS. The key difference in the MAC OS and Windows is MAC is open architecture so it invites virus writing in sense and yet no one is interested in writing viruses for MAC. Probably because MACs have a set up that prevents any changes to your hard drive unless you type in a password. The only MAC Trojan horse (not technically a virus) which I have never heard any problems with since it was discovered works with ICHAT but is still limited to what it can do because of how the OS is designed to be password protected if anything wants to be written to it, and to pass it you have to accept a file in ICHAT and execute it. The user has to receive a file via iChat, and manually choose to open and run the file contained inside so like all malicious software for MAC it's pretty useless and defeatable by the OS from the get go. I laugh at all the money wasted on virus software for Windows nowadays. And all the software that further slows down a Windows computer as it spends a great portion of its time checking everything it does for one of the thousands of malicious codes written for it. I have no virus software on my MAC and frankly don't need it. No, MACS will not be inundated with viruses like PCs. If that was the case, they would be by now. No one is interested in writing viruses for MAC. As I said probably because of how the MAC OS is written and how it requires a password with anything you want to do to alter it. Yet another reason I am happy I switched from PC.

[Michael Lehnert]

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/04/01/t...s-malware-crown/

[Rich Hibner]

Ah, such a relative debate. This thread turned into exactly what every thread turns into when you mention something vs something. I digress.

Thanks for proving my point about Windows being essentially a hobbyist's systems. I am sure you can outgun an out-of-the-box Aston Martin DB9 with a nitro'd & tuned-up Dodge Neon, with both costing the same in the end, but that is exactly showcasing the philosophical and technological difference between the two platforms.

 

Thanks, for making a really dumb assumption. My box cost $400.00 and my niece helped put it together. She can install a printer too.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Rich Hibner

[Rich Hibner]

Oh yeah. Mac OS X has had 6major releases, but one was a free update to users who had an earlier version. So that's 5. Not including OS 7, 8 and 9.

Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 2000, Xp, Vista. So it's fair to say each OS has had as many releases as the other.

[Michael Lehnert]

Ah, such a relative debate. This thread turned into exactly what every thread turns into when you mention something vs something.

 

No, not at all, as this isn't Ars Technica's Battlefront subforum, here.

Also, bear in mind: in ACL versus NPR threads, or Aaton X versus Arri SR in the 16 forum just recently, for example, everything was cultivatedly and factually debated, as it was here. (excemption: Red threads, for an inexplicable reason :( ).

These are different design approaches to what the tool wants to accomplish and how its manufacturer achieves that. Whether its Sun, SGI, OLPC, or Apple or the component assemblers that sell own-branded Wintel PCs.

It's just that when technical inaccuracies are raised as arguments against something, the original question poster deserves a clarification. After all, when someone recently posted here that Blu-ray is the ideal medium for 65mm origination as it has the necessary resolution (in effect implying that 35mm had lower resolution than Blu-ray), everyone pointed out the disconnected relations, the inadequacy of the terms used, the problem with basing arguments on 'resolution' alone, and other fundamental technical inaccuracies.

Similarly, it's difficult to let the Apple myths surrounding malware spread, software architecture, effective vs. nominal costs, longevity & residuals etc just stand in the room without pointing out how unfounded they are from a engineering, programming and consuming perspective.

 

Thanks for proving my point about Windows being essentially a hobbyist's systems.

 

Thanks, for making a really dumb assumption. My box cost $400.00 and my niece helped put it together. She can install a printer too.

 

Well, that's what I said, it's a hobbyist's approach.

Why is that term always negatively connotated??!

Without hobbyists, who knows if Kitty Hawk or Munich or Brantford or Palo Alto would have been the stages they became in the making of the modern world. I think Wintel users should be proud about that instead of seeing Macs as faggot machines out of an angled perspective on their own evangelized platform that shapes up like a mixture of Stockholme Syndrome and snobbery. You get an industry-design mac box with software and licence and applications you are actually legally allowed to own for $600, and a complete workstation (not just "the box") for $1000. And that premium is worthwhile for people who just want to get the car key and drive away, and not hobby around with family members, as great as this social experience is (and I don't mean that in an ironic way, but plain frank).

 

So there is no reason to become aggitated if one gets rid of all the battlefield smoke and dispassionately looks at the technological and social patterns that differentiates these machines, for the better and for the worse.

 

As far as the software version & update myth is concerned that you threw in at the end: if you want to believe that Mac OS X versions are merely Service Packs 1- 25, feel free. Just please don't mention it to coders or programmers, because it would sound a little bit ill-informed in respect to how the platforms grew. Read a white paper on this here.

[Rich Hibner]

Macs as faggot machines

 

That was the quote of the day. I'm not a fan boy of either machine. Or OS. I believe it's completely and utterly user based. I work with both. 40hrs a week with a Mac about 40hours a week at home with a PC. I see no difference in either of them. Am I dumb? Maybe. I don't have sixth sense to tell the difference between the two. But from where I see it, they both run applications, they same way. Is one faster than the other, that's totally dependent on your configuration.

 

So, yes, this is a relative debate. It goes nowhere.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I agree that on the whole they are similar. I see the same issues arising on both machines. Same goes at home; where I have a wonderful Dell that hasn't even crashed, and a Macbook Pro which takes 2 minutes to boot up. A lot depends on the user, and what you're doing; they both accomplish the same tasks, computing data. They both will have problems sooner or later, and they both will leave you at 5 am with a dumbfounded look trying to get something to work which just doesn't.

Pick the one you're most comfortable and proficient with and go from there. But that's just my 2c.