Mac Versus Windows

johnebaker wrote on 3/15/2015, 6:22 AM

Hi Anirban

. . . . I want to know is there really long term benefits of Mac? . . . .

From experience - none.

There are quit a few downsides though:-

The total cost of ownership is more expensive.
OS changes are too frequent and can render a lot of software incompatible
Some of the hardware connectors are none standard requiring extra dongles/converters.
When they go wrong they have to be returned to an Apple agent for servicing/maintenance.
Spare parts are difficult to get hold of - in general spares reach the open market after a model has been made obsolete.
Most models are none user serviceable.
Software availabilty for specific applications can be limited.

. . . . Because when I take my Dell and edit, people are amazed and bit annoyed as well because it doesn’t seem to be ‘professional’? . . . .

That is their problem - they are probably astounded that a Dell running Windows can perform and do tasks as well as their 'top line superfast must have' for which they have probably paid nearly twice as much money.

This is an unfortunate result of all the marketing hype and modern materialistic society we live in,

I would be tempted to say to them 'the MAC is 'Intel inside'

Personally If the Dell does the job, I would not worry about it unless it is losing business - in which case I would need to look into the reasons why?

Do MACs have anything good going for them?

Yes - they look good, and most important - internally all the components are designed to match for best performance.

PC are loads of bits built to 'standard specifications' thrown together in the hope that they all work harmoniously together.

HTH

John EB

cpc000cpc wrote on 3/15/2015, 4:28 PM

Thanks John for a detailed and well reasoned reply. I was going to post:

With 'About 95,900,000 results (0.21 seconds)' for a google search of mac vs windows, the argument is probably about as useful as...

Team_A vs Team_b (game of your choice)
Ford vs Holden (perhaps Australia specific)
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?:-)

Regards & :-),

Carl

nirvanray wrote on 3/16/2015, 3:56 AM

Thanks John,

But in that case why the big houses and editors use Macs? We see every second editor, photo illustrator and animator with a MacBook.

And do we have any Windowsthat do the same work as Mac. I mean what specifications do I look for that is at par with Mac? Also I am tired to explain people / friends / clients that it is the person who is benind the lappy and not the machine. Yet they argue that mac has several options that I even dot know of. Google has both arruments so wantedt to hear your views.

I have one with 8GB RAM and Inteli7 but still when i edit in MAGIX i have problems in rendering. Is it because i have loads of files like movies and songs loaded in my Dell?

Please suggest. I want to take my level to a diffenrt zone in the future.

browj2 wrote on 3/16/2015, 11:29 AM

Hi Anirban,

You are comparing operating systems and not video editors, which is what you should be doing.

Mac users are usually fervent believers that nothing else can exist out there that beats a Mac, and the same holds true for the programs that they use. Reality is different.

A program like Final Cut is supposed to have been optimized for a Mac OS, whereas a Windows program has to accomodate a large variety of equipment, hardware configuration and OS flavours (Windows XP to 8.1). This makes it more difficult, but a powerful Windows machine with the right configuration is comparable to a MAC.

Take a look at the main commercial video editing programs in this Wikipedia list.

Note that they don't even mention Magix Video Pro X, only Magix Movie Edit Pro. You can look up the features of the various editors, and note the cost. It is a very difficult task to create a listing of comparison features, and then add in ease of use.

Any comparison done should put things on a even footing.

If I recall, you are using something like MEP 18 on a fairly low-powered machine. You can't compare that to Final Cut on a Mac or to Adobe Premiere Pro (on either Mac or Windows). Both programs are several times as expensive as MEP and require a lot of horsepower. Adobe Premiere will cost you $240/year - it is subscription based.

When people tell you that a Mac has options that you don't know about, they are not talking about the machine, but about the program. You are using an old, low-cost, bottom-end product, are you not? Of course you don't have the same features. Take a look at Magix Video Pro X6, running on a machine optimized for video, and now you are getting a closer comparison. Some of the "features" of many programs are actually add-ons, thus more money. You can do the same with other Windows-based programs - buy add-ons/plugins for additional effects.

I have watched many tutorials on using certain features in the top level editors, and I find that they are rather complicated to use compared to the same features in Video Pro X6. For example, I seem to have the same colour correction features as the other programs and similar monitoring tools and I can do pretty much the same things. But know-how is the most important aspect.

Finally, sound is very important and Magix has several programs that can be used, like Audio & Music Lab 2014 Premium (AML), Music Maker, Samplitude Music Studio, and Samplitude (one of the best on the market). The tools in AML are very good, and I have similar (sometimes the same) tools in the other programs. See my tutorial on dubbing in MEP using Music Maker, and I did not even touch upon sound-cleaning.

You asked a question recently about how to remove some background hiss or noise using the very basic cleaning tool in MEP, when you actually probably have a better tool in Music Editor which comes with MEP. If you compare the sound cleaning features in the major (expensive) programs with the basic cleaning tools in MEP, you are making an unfair comparison. Look at the Music Editor and you are getting a better comparison, and you are still at the lower end of the pricing. Now look at AML and you are way up there. Again, know-how is very important.

Even more, to have a level playing field, look at the video recording equipment that the big houses use. They are not using 200$ cameras. Add in professional lighting, microphones, etc., and you have source material that makes any program look pretty good.

Finally, look at who is using the editing program. They are dedicated, trained, experienced professionals who really know what they are doing. They can do extraordinary editing with most any good editor because they know how. And, they are probably working as a team.

You can have the best, most expensive program on the market, but if you don't know how to use it properly, it is worthless.

Regards,

nirvanray wrote on 3/17/2015, 7:25 AM

Dear John CB,
Thanks for the in-depth analysis and I do actually agree that it is the programmes that people normally speak of.
It is sad that MAGIX is not that well recognised as compared to FCP and AP and I wonder why. It does preety great job but not many people know about the same.
Now I understand your analysis……do you agree that MAGIX also has as much as options as Premier?
Please do let me know.

browj2 wrote on 3/17/2015, 10:46 AM

Hi Anirban,

Adobe Premiere Elements 13 appears to be very similar to MEP basic as far as I can tell. I would have to use it to determine which I would prefer and whether or not one has more important un-advertised features than the other, ease of use, etc. However, APE13 is normally priced at 100$, MEP basic at 70$. Adobe has a special sale price on for 70$. Thus the normal price would put it equal to MEP Plus, but it is not equal to MEP 2015 Plus. MEP Plus has more features that are important to me, especially HDR Gamma and multi-cam editing. Also, MEP is now 64 bit and can handle 4K and 3D whereas APE13 cannot. MEP does automatic keyframing of objects - magnetic feature, APE does not. APE 13 is also said to be slower than its competitors.

MEP also comes with a Photo editor that is quite useful in most cases and Music Editor 3, which is also quite useful for sound cleaning and mastering. However, I and others have replaced the Photo Editor with Corel PaintShop Pro Ultimate, which integrates nicely with MEP. I also use AML 2014 Premium for sound editing. If you happen to have Xara Photo & Graphics Designer then you have another very powerful tool that works with MEP, especially for creating animated masks. There is also 3DMaker, which is quite neat if you can manage to get it working.

There is more. See this review for the Pros and Cons.

Thus if anyone tells you that you get a lot more with APE 13, they are quite mistaken.

If you take a tour of the other video editors in the same price range, indicated in the linked article, you will find that they are quite similar. Some have tools that others have or different tools, i.e., one has a neat feature that the other doesn't but is missing a feature that another has. Thus often you will find that people use more than one editor, depending on what they are doing. Each program has its pros and cons.

Another consideration is the Ultimate versions that come with third party plugins (light versions). These can greatly enhance the value of the program depending on your needs. That is why I now always go for Ultimate versions. I have Pinnacle Studio 18 Ultimate, because that is the program that I started with and I continue purchasing upgrades because of the added plugins. I only use the program when I need something that I don't have in MEP.

So don't worry about MEP not being up there. Just make sure that you have the program and version that allows you to do what you need to do.

Regards,