Suffering editing withdrawal: laptop advice needed!

[traveller]

Apologies for my lack of posts over the past few months, I've been living overseas and only have a tablet with me -the touch sceen interface is very frustrating for use on the CR Forum.

This leads me onto my next request: I am looking for a laptop, on which I can edit my photos. For the past few years I have used a Windows desktop, but I don't like Windows 8 (I know that Windows 10 is coming, but when?). I never thought I'd say it, but I am willing to consider a Macbook, as the price premium doesn't seem so high compared to desktop machines and the Apple laptops are so nice! (side note: can you transfer an Adobe CC licence from Windows to Mac OS?)

The difficulty where I am living is the lack of choice at the higher end of the laptop spectrum: I want a nice IPS screen, SSD (256MB should be enough with external HDD?), enough RAM and cpu speed to run Photoshop CC for the next few years (moving target, I know). I don't play games or edit video. My desktop is early 2013 Core i7 with 16gb Ram (no SSD) and I wouldn't want my laptop to be noticeably slower. My choices boil down to (what is available in the local market):

-Mackbook Pro 13" or 15"
-Dell XPS 13 or 15 (I believe that these may be older versions without the SSD)
-Lenovo Yoga 2
(-any other suggestions, but will depend on local availability)

Are the screen size differences really noticeable? And portability? Will 8gb RAM be enough? What about in 2-3 years time?

I would appreciate any advice that people have on the subject. I'm asking on this forum because I know that you guys know what I need better than non-photographers, who have never touched a RAW file.

(note - I am aware that I've just asked the computer equivalent of the Canon vs. Nikon question, but as this is not Macrumors.com or whatever, please could I not invoke a flame war?!)

 

[Marsu42]

Are the screen size differences really noticeable? And portability? Will 8gb RAM be enough? What about in 2-3 years time?

* I'm on a 15" (very crappy dual-core) laptop, and I wouldn't go below that as you miss out on the overall impression of the shot w/o zooming all the time. Remember you usually have all the photo editing tools on the screen, too.

* For Lightroom, 8gb is enough as long as you don't hold 100k shots in a single catalog, much more important is that the catalog is located on a fast hd/ssd. For pixel editing like PS it depends on how many layers you use. This won't change that much unless you upgrade from a current ~20mp sensor to the next-gen 45mp+. Last not least, for gigapixel panoramas your laptop won't do anyway.

* In any case you should get a calibration tool for the monitor, and imho choose the laptop depending on the monitor iq (color representation, reflection, whatnot - see the reviews). Otherwise it feels like flying blind unless you use a second external monitor - but you seem to be on the road a lot. Nevermind the OS, unless you require specific apps all the Adobe stuff and plugins are similar nowadays.

 

[fragilesi]

if you have the SSD then despite the obvious power of your desktop then you will probably see some things are much faster anyway. They make a huge difference, one of the big problems I see with modern systems is that the disks, though much faster, often hold the rest of the system back. It has been ever thus but often the more powerful processors are pretty much idling because of the disk speed.

 

[dstppy]

(note - I am aware that I've just asked the computer equivalent of the Canon vs. Nikon question, but as this is not Macrumors.com or whatever, please could I not invoke a flame war?!)

No, no you cannot. Now you're gonna get it.



1) SSD (or a hybrid drive) and enough RAM are a big deal.
2a) Windows - see if you can get something with Win7 64-bit, it's a usable OS
2b) Mac - Look at certified or base-models of what you're looking at, the further you get from base, the more "premium" you buy.

So, tablet Vs. laptop Vs. desktop:
1) You'd be surprised how much more usable an entry level 'ultrabook' (macbook air) is over a tablet, if you don't need true horsepower, they're much more usable for "everything" when you have a flat surface and a chair. They're capable, but 3D rendering, leaky stuff like Flash, and things of the like will burn through battery time
2) Just like Tablet vs. Laptop, an entry level decent desktop will blow away a very good laptop, but you're not looking at those, so if it's laptop and performance you need, you're going to pay.

Bottom line, whatever you get:
Make sure it has USB 3.0
If you don't end up with a Mac, make sure it's not proprietary like a Mac, and you can swap HDD and RAM.

Good luck.

 

[monkey44]

MY Laptop crashed just before leaving on a trip last year -- bummer -- only thing Best Buy had was Win8 -- so i bought it, and regretted it immediately and for the next six months...

Finaly, went to a local shop, had him install a SSD and reinstall Win7 ... altogether, the whole thing (new laptop and converting two laptops from Win8 back to Win7) was close to $2000 .. Laptop, SSD (two) and programs.

The money, well, it's money - cost bummed me out, but not as much as Win8 bummed me out -- sometimes, you bite the bullet to get what you need. SSD drive is clean and very fast, let me say that again Very Fast...

So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ...

This SSD loads my PC to desktop in Win7 from start to open in seven seconds -- I timed it.

As an aside -- If Windows continues down the current path, with all the junk files and updating crap -- after twenty years with MS PC, this Monkey will convert to Mac next time we need upgrades ... Win8 was the worst mess we've ever seen. Some like it, but not us ... sometimes the cost of frustration outweighs the $$$$ ...

 

[bchernicoff]

Okay, here goes...just buy a Retina MacBook Pro. Let me state my credentials. I am not a pro photographer, though I feel like I have some talenthttp://lividphoto.com. I AM a professional software and systems engineer who owns and works from Macs except when I am forced to use Windows when working at a client site (DoD). I just upgraded from a 2011 15" MacBook Pro (which I had swapped an SSD into) to the 2014 latest/greatest 15" Macbook Pro (MGXC2LL/A). I also have owned a 27" Core i7 iMac and have built a core i7 Hackintosh. 8gb of RAM is plenty for photo editing. That being said if you find a good deal on one with 16gb don't say no. An SSD is going to give you your single biggest performance boost. A quad core processor (like in the 15" MacBook Pro line) is going to give you more performance when importing/batch processing/exporting than the dual-core in the 13" models. For editing a single photo either is fine. Don't overlook buying a refurbished MacBook Pro http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/macbook_pro/15. In fact, this one looks particularly sweet http://store.apple.com/us/product/FGXA2LL/A/Refurbished-154-inch-MacBook-Pro-22GHz-Quad-core-Intel-i7-with-Retina-Display. The only issue with a 256gb drive / external drive is that you will need to do a good job of manually moving older photos to the external drive. Thankfully, Lightroom 5 and SmartPreviews makes working with images on an external drive really easy. Depending on how much you shoot, you should be able to keep the last 3-6 months on the internal drive.

MacBooks are tough, fast, and OS X is reliable. You'll need to upgrade machines less often. You really won't regret spending the extra money.

 

[Halfrack]

Where you are at matters the most. Getting Apple is a known quantity, but Dell and other vendors still sell Win7 machines - just have to look or ask. Again, where in the world you are matters.

8gb is really tight - unless you can upgrade it afterwards, I'd go 16gb if purchasing a locked in Mac

SSD all the way for your active disk - worth every penny - most laptops that comes with non-ssd disks can be upgraded to ssd, but I've been 300 screws into a Dell laptop to do it (worst day of my tech life) - check online for howto videos as to how to do it, anything more than 12 screws (~4 for the drive, ~6 for the cover) is the line between a good laptop and a bad one...

 

[bchernicoff]

Here, I did a little test. Rebooted MacBook. Opened Skype, Google Chrome with 2 tabs, opened Photoshop CC with three RAW images open, opened Lightroom and did a 52 picture RAW to 2000px JPEG export. Here is my memory usage.

 

[Marsu42]

Here is my memory usage.

... So thanks for disproving the theory below, you're at only 6gb and it's not like minor disk swapping would kill the performance with a modern os:

8gb is really tight - unless you can upgrade it afterwards, I'd go 16gb if purchasing a locked in Mac

Personally, I'm on a 4gb win7 x64 laptop which is fine using Lightroom with smaller catalogs, the severe bottlenecks are the slow hd and the only dual core cpu when rendering shots with nr and sharpening out of LR.

 

[Tabor Warren Photography]

Once you go Mac, you won't ever go back... Kind of. I bought a Toshiba after owning two 27in iMacs, but the Toshiba was not for editing purposes. Looking back, I wish I had bought a Retina MacBook Pro, as bchernicoff has suggested. I have edited on MacBook Pro, Toshiba, and Dell and the Mac is substantially better for laptop editing (of the three). I would up the ante on screen size since, even on my 17in Dell, I was constantly having to zoom, I could only imagine what it would be like to try to edit on a 13in screen.

Cheers!
-Tabor

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Gawd, I've participated in or read soooo many of these.

I'm just gonna say that a desktop PC or at the very least a good IPS desktop monitor connected to the laptop is the best way to go for serious editing. Trying to do serious graphics or photo editing on a laptop is a serious compromise regardless of who makes the laptop. That's just all there is to it and it can't be changed or ignored no matter if you like Mac or PC.

Mac or PC, it doesn't matter, you'll just pay more for the Mac for questionable ROI (IMHO). The computer hardware is virtually the same on both with merely different operating systems. It's more of a personal preference and that's why so many people get so emotional about it. For me I just want it to be reliable and get the job done, not be a status symbol.

If you MUST get a laptop, I prefer the Lenovo Thinkpad W series all the way back to the W520 series.

Whatever computer you pick, get plenty of RAM (16+), a large SSD primary drive (at least 256) and at least an i5 CPU or and ideally an i7. Don't waste your time on an AMD CPU or chipset. Don't break the bank on the graphics card and the Intel 4000 series onboard graphics chipset will suffice for photography. Otherwise, don't spend more than $100 or so on a decent graphics board.

Good luck, let us know how it turns out!

 

[Valvebounce]

Hi Marsu.
When I read it I see 10.64 GB memory usage, I wouldn't call in excess of 2GB a minor disk swap if I only had 8 GB RAM! The Apps (programs?) are using 6GB so I guess that is what you saw?
I suppose that shutting all but LR might get you inside the limit.

Hi bchernicoff.
Why do you have so many chrome helpers not responding? Are they burning ram?

Cheers, Graham.

Here is my memory usage.

... So thanks for disproving the theory below, you're at only 6gb and it's not like minor disk swapping would kill the performance with a modern os:

8gb is really tight - unless you can upgrade it afterwards, I'd go 16gb if purchasing a locked in Mac

Personally, I'm on a 4gb win7 x64 laptop which is fine using Lightroom with smaller catalogs, the severe bottlenecks are the slow hd and the only dual core cpu when rendering shots with nr and sharpening out of LR.

 

[Marsu42]

When I read it I see 10.64 GB memory usage, I wouldn't call in excess of 2GB a minor disk swap if I only had 8 GB RAM! The Apps (programs?) are using 6GB so I guess that is what you saw?

As a mere Windows user, I don't really know about the Mac stats so I cannot say what "Wired memory" is. But even including this, it's well below 8gb as you can ignore the file caching - if it needs file and you've got a fast hd/sdd, it won't matter much.

This squares with my own experience using a 4gb laptop, I guess if you've got lots of memory available you never realize with how little you can get away with and that only the bottlenecks count. Last not least, as you mentioned, there's hardly a forcing reason to use both LR and PS in parallel.

 

[expatinasia]

I think you will find the Dell Precision 3800 will probably fit your needs and is customizable online.

The Dell Precision line are Dell's business-grade laptops and while the 3800 is not top of the range it is a very good deal.

Hope this helps.

 

[bchernicoff]

The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.

OS X is a much less troublesome experience as a user. How many times have you tried to shut down your Win 7 laptop only to have it inform you that it has 22 updates to install and that you shouldn't turn it off until it finishes..only to find that it sits there for HOURS saying installing update 15 of 22? Ever had Windows Update run and then your Windows won't start and you have to restore to a restore point? Oh, how about all the preinstalled Norton Anti-Virus trial software, or even Office trial software? You get a new a laptop and immediately it's trying to sell you things, so now you have to uninstall. You don't even get a Windows disk anymore...only a recovery CD.

None of these issues exist on Mac. The built in backup software Time Machine...WORKS! Occasionally, you will read that an OS X update causes some laptops to lose WIFI or something like that. Though this has never happened to me, I am in the habit of waiting a day or two after the update is available to see if anyone reports problems.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ...

We are lucky in that we have a very good shop in our area. I would not consider buying a computer at a big store. We get better prices, better service, and better quality.

What I like most about our local shop is that they don't have the attitude that I find common with IT people. Find a shop where they can talk with you about your computer needs instead of one that talks down to you.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.

OS X is a much less troublesome experience as a user. How many times have you tried to shut down your Win 7 laptop only to have it inform you that it has 22 updates to install and that you shouldn't turn it off until it finishes..only to find that it sits there for HOURS saying installing update 15 of 22? Ever had Windows Update run and then your Windows won't start and you have to restore to a restore point? Oh, how about all the preinstalled Norton Anti-Virus trial software, or even Office trial software? You get a new a laptop and immediately it's trying to sell you things, so now you have to uninstall. You don't even get a Windows disk anymore...only a recovery CD.

None of these issues exist on Mac. The built in backup software Time Machine...WORKS! Occasionally, you will read that an OS X update causes some laptops to lose WIFI or something like that. Though this has never happened to me, I am in the habit of waiting a day or two after the update is available to see if anyone reports problems.

Hi there bchernicoff,

Sorry in advance for this post length! You make some good points about a comparison of Mac vs Windows so please don't take my post as trying to argue with you directly but as an IT guy for the last 30 years, I can say with some authority that owning a Mac isn't as rosy as most Mac proponents like to say. Macs are still computers and they are using the exact same hardware that PCs use. They have to coexist with the same external peripherals and use the same Internet while exchanging the same emails and running similar 3rd party software. All computers, PC, Mac, Linux or whatever still have to endure the same challenges with drivers, software bugs and malware/virus attacks. (And those that say Macs can't get malware/viruses today is irresponsible. Sure they can and they do. It's just not as bad as PCs.)

Comparing Mac vs PC is much like comparing Canon vs Nikon. Neither camera is bad, they are just different and both essentially do the same things, just in a different way that appeals to each user based on their personal needs and preferences.

If one owns a Mac, it can still exhibit the same problems as a PC. It has a spinning wheel of death. It can hang on shutdown or during normal operation just like a PC. It can slow down due to a fragmented hard drive. Files can still get corrupted and cause problems with the system. Macs also receive updates and sometimes buggy updates that can cause problems just like PCs do. The other realities that exist include limited driver support from many peripherals or longer wait times for drivers or driver updates. Limited software support from some software vendors or no support at all. Harder to find information about problems on forums and limited support from Apple because Apple tends to ignore/deny problems until they decide the problem actually exists at all and then they issue fixes whenever they get around to it.

True, Macs don't have a lot of bloatware on them when they are purchased. But that comes at a premium because all the bloatware on PCs is part of what makes them cheaper. That and the fact that PC makers have to be more competitive and so don't mark up PCs at such a high profit margin like Apple does with all their products. This is why I purchase BUSINESS LINE PCs refurbished where they are much cheaper and don't come with anything installed except Windows 7 Pro x64. So even cheaper and no bloatware on a higher quality PC made for enterprise, not consumers.

Frankly, it's a waste of time to compare memory usage stats because on both PC and Mac, the actual underlying architecture of the operating system is complex, fairly unknown outside of the internal programming arm of each company and doesn't really matter much with regard to true performance. I'm not saying Macs don't perform, they perform great! But so do Windows PCs running (again) on the same hardware. It's better to compare the results of applications designed to test each aspect of performance like disk, cpu, graphics, different real world application times, etc.

In general, the comparison of Mac vs PC hardware and performance is moot. They are both essentially the same in that regard. Where they are totally different is the interface and the software approach. This is a personal preference of the user and it's important that the user understand the the biggest difference between Mac and PC is the interface and the philosophy of the design. If someone wants to customize and tweak things to do things a certain way, the Mac will present roadblocks. The philosophy of a Mac and OS X is to keep things simple and limit choices by design. (And look really really pretty.) Simplicity and elegance are the strengths of OS X. Windows on the other hand offers a multitude of ways to do the same thing and allows infinite change, choice and customization. And it doesn't try to look elegant, just functional. That is its strength and so can be daunting so some users.

In summary, the choice of Mac vs PC is all about the user experience. All the other things are essentially equal and it's unrealistic to pretend otherwise.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ...

We are lucky in that we have a very good shop in our area. I would not consider buying a computer at a big store. We get better prices, better service, and better quality.

What I like most about our local shop is that they don't have the attitude that I find common with IT people. Find a shop where they can talk with you about your computer needs instead of one that talks down to you.

If you need a question answered that you feel isn't being addressed, shoot it to me and I'll see what I can do. Good luck in your quest!

 

[bchernicoff]

The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.

OS X is a much less troublesome experience as a user. How many times have you tried to shut down your Win 7 laptop only to have it inform you that it has 22 updates to install and that you shouldn't turn it off until it finishes..only to find that it sits there for HOURS saying installing update 15 of 22? Ever had Windows Update run and then your Windows won't start and you have to restore to a restore point? Oh, how about all the preinstalled Norton Anti-Virus trial software, or even Office trial software? You get a new a laptop and immediately it's trying to sell you things, so now you have to uninstall. You don't even get a Windows disk anymore...only a recovery CD.

None of these issues exist on Mac. The built in backup software Time Machine...WORKS! Occasionally, you will read that an OS X update causes some laptops to lose WIFI or something like that. Though this has never happened to me, I am in the habit of waiting a day or two after the update is available to see if anyone reports problems.

Hi there bchernicoff,

Sorry in advance for this post length! You make some good points about a comparison of Mac vs Windows so please don't take my post as trying to argue with you directly but as an IT guy for the last 30 years, I can say with some authority that owning a Mac isn't as rosy as most Mac proponents like to say. Macs are still computers and they are using the exact same hardware that PCs use. They have to coexist with the same external peripherals and use the same Internet while exchanging the same emails and running similar 3rd party software. All computers, PC, Mac, Linux or whatever still have to endure the same challenges with drivers, software bugs and malware/virus attacks. (And those that say Macs can't get malware/viruses today is irresponsible. Sure they can and they do. It's just not as bad as PCs.)

Comparing Mac vs PC is much like comparing Canon vs Nikon. Neither camera is bad, they are just different and both essentially do the same things, just in a different way that appeals to each user based on their personal needs and preferences.

If one owns a Mac, it can still exhibit the same problems as a PC. It has a spinning wheel of death. It can hang on shutdown or during normal operation just like a PC. It can slow down due to a fragmented hard drive. Files can still get corrupted and cause problems with the system. Macs also receive updates and sometimes buggy updates that can cause problems just like PCs do. The other realities that exist include limited driver support from many peripherals or longer wait times for drivers or driver updates. Limited software support from some software vendors or no support at all. Harder to find information about problems on forums and limited support from Apple because Apple tends to ignore/deny problems until they decide the problem actually exists at all and then they issue fixes whenever they get around to it.

True, Macs don't have a lot of bloatware on them when they are purchased. But that comes at a premium because all the bloatware on PCs is part of what makes them cheaper. That and the fact that PC makers have to be more competitive and so don't mark up PCs at such a high profit margin like Apple does with all their products. This is why I purchase BUSINESS LINE PCs refurbished where they are much cheaper and don't come with anything installed except Windows 7 Pro x64. So even cheaper and no bloatware on a higher quality PC made for enterprise, not consumers.

Frankly, it's a waste of time to compare memory usage stats because on both PC and Mac, the actual underlying architecture of the operating system is complex, fairly unknown outside of the internal programming arm of each company and doesn't really matter much with regard to true performance. I'm not saying Macs don't perform, they perform great! But so do Windows PCs running (again) on the same hardware. It's better to compare the results of applications designed to test each aspect of performance like disk, cpu, graphics, different real world application times, etc.

In general, the comparison of Mac vs PC hardware and performance is moot. They are both essentially the same in that regard. Where they are totally different is the interface and the software approach. This is a personal preference of the user and it's important that the user understand the the biggest difference between Mac and PC is the interface and the philosophy of the design. If someone wants to customize and tweak things to do things a certain way, the Mac will present roadblocks. The philosophy of a Mac and OS X is to keep things simple and limit choices by design. (And look really really pretty.) Simplicity and elegance are the strengths of OS X. Windows on the other hand offers a multitude of ways to do the same thing and allows infinite change, choice and customization. And it doesn't try to look elegant, just functional. That is its strength and so can be daunting so some users.

In summary, the choice of Mac vs PC is all about the user experience. All the other things are essentially equal and it's unrealistic to pretend otherwise.

You are absolutely correct that these things can happen on Mac. In my personal experience using a variety of Windows 7 desktop and laptop computers, a variety of desktop and laptop Macs, and enterprise Linux servers, Macs rarely have these issues. They are the most reliable and functional machines one can buy. One hour ago I applied some Windows updates to a Win 7 VM that I keep on our ESXI server for running MS Visual Studio. The updates appeared to install fine, but the vm hung on shutdown. I got it booted and now Visual Studio won't start. I literally, just had the problem I described earlier. SO frustrating. It can happen on the Mac, but it rarely does. Don't pretend it's otherwise.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

It can happen on the Mac, but it rarely does. Don't pretend it's otherwise.

I understand. I won't pretend if you won't. My point is simply that Macs are not immune to the same problems that PCs have and Macs also have problems that PCs don't have. I have Win7 PCs that have literally never experienced a problem too. I set them up clean and simple and don't let misc crap get installed on them. This helps ensure fewer problems. If a user takes good care of their system, Windows is very reliable. Therefore, I think the user should make a choice based on the experience and interface of the computer, not based on things that are fairly equal.

I believe that your point is that Macs are less prone to problems. And in some ways, you are correct. Especially when people are not careful with what they allow to be installed on PCs. I think Macs are less susceptible to junk (like BS toolbars, etc) getting installed while online but they aren't immune and it's common to see Mac enthusiasts trumpet that Macs are superior when in fact they are merely different and less of a target for some of the junk that PC users have to be more mindful of. PC users need to be a bit more vigilant about avoiding malware, etc than Mac users but otherwise I think that most things about both systems are fairly equal. Apple can issue bad updates just like Microsoft can. That's just part of writing software.

To be fair, I honestly like OS X. There's nothing wrong with it except that it's very expensive because Apple refuses to sell it without the hardware that they insist on tacking a big profit margin to. They insist they are a hardware maker, not a software maker and so they refuse to sell OS X by itself because then they know they wouldn't sell their expensive laptops and desktops without OS X to differentiate them with. And for the past several years, all of their hardware, esp the iPhone and iPad are designed to lock folks into the Apple ecosystem to generate sales in the App Store, iTunes, etc. It's a racket. Regardless of how you approach it, owning Apple products is an expensive experience all the way down the line.

** RANT ALERT! **
So with that said, my biggest issue with Apple actually has nothing to do with their products. It has to do with Apple the company and how badly they treat pretty much everyone, developers, competitors, businesses that aren't even competitors and especially their own customers. Apple is arrogant, aggressive, greedy and essentially a corporate bully. And for that reason, I don't want to support them and thankfully I don't have to because there are a multitude of respectable alternatives available over a wide price range.
** END RANT **

Please understand that I in no way have a beef with you or any Mac user. I'm just stating things the way I see them and trying hard to be objective. I've used both and just don't see a reason to spend more money simply for Apple to grant me the privilege to use their stuff. Because eventually that's what it boils down to after you've bought into the Apple world.