Cost of implementing 20 photography Macs into Active Directory

[Sheridan]

We put 15 Macs into Music, joined to our AD and an Xserver in the golden triangle. Generally works ok with preferences etc. We've had a few issues but mainly with specific Mac software (which is no different to the problems we can have with Windows software)

 

We find the Macs require little attention, but again our Windows 7 Suites don't either! Based on cost I would simply buy Windows PCs as all the software we use on the Macs has a direct Windows equivalent.

[seawolf]

A couple of things that seem to be forgotten with this whole anti-Mac thread going here is that a great many graphics departments and companies in the "real" world will be using Macs and there actually is such a thing as Mac-specific graphics software, plugins, and workflow customisations. That is, software that is only available for the mac or workflows that have only been created with Macs and Mac software in mind. Forget this "there is a PC equivalent for everything Mac" business because you would shoot down anyone saying that there was a Mac equivalent for everything PC - because there isn't. If you think Photoshop or CS Suite is the whole of the design software universe - you're mistaken.

 

While it might not be the reason the Departments want the Macs, there is actually a good reason to use them in graphics, design, and art classes in preference to PCs - because if the students continue in a career in those fields there is a high probability they will end up using Macs (which they may have never used before). It is a good thing for them to be exposed to them now, don't you think. Alternatively, in IT courses I would be trying to expose students to a variety of platforms - including UNIX, Linux, Windows, Mac, iOS, Android - because they may end up having to support or develop for any mix of them.

 

So let's stop the hating and start the thinking...this doesn't have to be an either/or thing.

Edited July 25, 2013 by seawolf

[pcstru]

While it might not be the reason the Departments want the Macs, there is actually a good reason to use them in graphics, design, and art classes in preference to PCs - because if the students continue in a career in those fields there is a high probability they will end up using Macs (which they may have never used before). It is a good thing for them to be exposed to them now, don't you think. Alternatively, in IT courses I would be trying to expose students to a variety of platforms - including UNIX, Linux, Windows, Mac, iOS, Android - because they may end up having to support or develop for any mix of them.

 

IMO students should be taught the concepts involved in image editing using vector and pixel based packages but specific software is not important - in-fact specific software should be discouraged. The real aim should be that students can pick up any image editing package and feel confident that they can use it to do basic operations with minimal familiarisation because they know the basic concepts and they know that those don't change between systems.

[seawolf]

IMO students should be taught the concepts involved in image editing using vector and pixel based packages but specific software is not important - in-fact specific software should be discouraged. The real aim should be that students can pick up any image editing package and feel confident that they can use it to do basic operations with minimal familiarisation because they know the basic concepts and they know that those don't change between systems.

 

As long as it's done with a PC right?

 

Sorry, I disagree. You can't teach a student how to build an iOS app with a PC and a Nexus 7, you do it with a Mac and iOS (and vice versa). You don't teach a student to play the drums by teaching them how to read music and giving them piano lessons.

 

This idea that we only have to teach generic, one-size fits all skills philosophy is a crock in the actual real world we live in. Teaching real skills and not just concepts is what students crave and need. Teaching them "concepts" is what makes too many students disinterested, unfulfilled, aimless and without ambition for learning. Real learning motivates students for further learning, teaching concepts is dull and boring.

[sonofsanta]

I did say in the opening post that this wasn't intended as a Mac vs. PC debate.

 

I am aware of the "familiarity" argument and am all for it; the question is whether that one point outweighs the problems with integration, the added security, the added cost, the training requirements...

 

I have also not heard any concrete argument of "we need a Mac because of workflow X or application Y", I have only heard "because it's industry standard" without ever getting an answer to "why?". If there is a valid point made I will happily concede it; my job role is to fulfil the wishes of others, after all. The difficulty is in balancing requirements to meet the optimal set of wishes given a limited budget.

 

(FWIW, current plan is that the 16 machines we were looking at initially will be PCs, in a general teaching room, shared by Media. The Art room that was going to have the machines in will now be a wet room, with benching & cabling at one end so that machines - potentially Macs - can be added at a later date, behind boards to segregate them from wet work*)

 

(*as in paint, not murder)

[pcstru]

As long as it's done with a PC right?

Did I say that? I'm largely platform agnostic - my platform evangelism withered a long time back (atari ST vs Amiga, 6502 vs Z80, PIC vs Amtel). In a school with limited budgets and resources, value for money must be a factor and Mac's generally provide less value for money than other platforms.

Sorry, I disagree. You can't teach a student how to build an iOS app with a PC and a Nexus 7, you do it with a Mac and iOS (and vice versa). You don't teach a student to play the drums by teaching them how to read music and giving them piano lessons.

Fair enough with the drums you are stuck, but they are a very specific instrument and schools do specific instrument lessons as part of a more general study of Music. The subjects we teach where people clamour for Mac's are DT, Art and Music. We don't run courses "iOS app building" we run "Programming", "Computing" or "ICT". We don't generally have courses "Mac Illustrator Design", we teach the concepts of design, that students can apply through a variety of technology - even pen and paper.

This idea that we only have to teach generic, one-size fits all skills philosophy is a crock in the actual real world we live in. Teaching real skills and not just concepts is what students crave and need. Teaching them "concepts" is what makes too many students disinterested, unfulfilled, aimless and without ambition for learning. Real learning motivates students for further learning, teaching concepts is dull and boring.

 

My point is that the ultimate aim is to teach the concepts. You might do that through specific skills but you should not subsume the teaching of concepts for the teaching of skills. Education is not about being a factory producing robots which businesses can then put to work. It is about giving people skills that will be useful through their whole life.

[Norphy]

A couple of things that seem to be forgotten with this whole anti-Mac thread going here is that a great many graphics departments and companies in the "real" world will be using Macs and there actually is such a thing as Mac-specific graphics software, plugins, and workflow customisations. That is, software that is only available for the mac or workflows that have only been created with Macs and Mac software in mind. Forget this "there is a PC equivalent for everything Mac" business because you would shoot down anyone saying that there was a Mac equivalent for everything PC - because there isn't. If you think Photoshop or CS Suite is the whole of the design software universe - you're mistaken.

 

While it might not be the reason the Departments want the Macs, there is actually a good reason to use them in graphics, design, and art classes in preference to PCs - because if the students continue in a career in those fields there is a high probability they will end up using Macs (which they may have never used before). It is a good thing for them to be exposed to them now, don't you think. Alternatively, in IT courses I would be trying to expose students to a variety of platforms - including UNIX, Linux, Windows, Mac, iOS, Android - because they may end up having to support or develop for any mix of them.

 

So let's stop the hating and start the thinking...this doesn't have to be an either/or thing.

 

I don't know if you mean me specifically or just this thread in general but I need to reply to this.

 

First of all, let me say that I am not anti-Mac. In this flat, there are three Macs, three iPhones, three iPods, an Apple TV and an Airport Extreme. I buy films and music from iTunes and I subscribe to iTunes Match. I've been using Macs since the days of Vista (Guess what drove me to OS X in the first place) and my GF has been using them for even longer. I use them day in, day out, I've spent my own money on them and I like them a lot.

 

In an ideal world, I'd agree with you. However, this isn't an ideal world. I don't know how things are over in Australia but schools and colleges here are getting their budgets cut right, left and centre. We can't afford to spend money on buying and supporting multiple platforms if it's not necessary. If the OP had said "My school is going to be teaching video and sound editing using Final Cut and Logic Pro, I need to buy a suite of Macs for that", you'd have a point. However he didn't, he gave the impression that they'll be using Adobe Creative Suite on them and little else. If the teachers at my place are anything to go buy, I would imagine that one of them pouted that "Macs are better, I want Macs" and didn't give much of a reason for it. Even an ardent Mac fan like me can see the futility in this. Why buy an entire suite of Macs for (best case scenario) 60% more than a suite of Windows PCs would cost (Basic Mac mini costs £500, keyboard and mouse would be £20. Ignoring Thunderbolt, same spec PC would be about £350) when a Windows PC can do what they want to do? And the Macs alone wouldn't be the only cost. You'll need to spend extra money on infrastructure (can't manage Macs without something additional, be it a Mac server or third party software), training (Someone who's used to Windows will take one look at a Mac and have a meltdown, especially if they're not technical), support (speaking as a tech who has to look after them professionally, you'll need it), software (There will be some piece of Windows software that the user will want to use and you'll either have to find an equivalent, purchase a terminal server or use a virtualisation package).

 

Unless the school can specify an actual specific need for a Mac, (Logic, Final Cut, whatever) they're a waste of money. I'm sorry, they are. If my college didn't have that need identified, I'd get rid of them as soon as the hardware had finished its life cycle.

[mac_shinobi]

You're welcome.

 

If someone does try to strongarm you into using Macs for no good reason, these screenshots may be useful to you:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19057[/ATTACH]

Photoshop CS5 on a Mac

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19060[/ATTACH]

Photoshop CS5 on a Windows PC

 

Apart from minor OS related UI differences, they're exactly the fracking same. Wave those at whoever says "But Macs are better for Photoshop"

 

That's just the GUI not a video comparing doing a bunch of complex image manipulations on a high res image on a similarly spec'ed pc and mac and comparing how quick they are at doing the tasks etc

 

Im not debating which ones better etc just saying the above as

 

1.) I would like to see a fair comparison done

2.) want to see how they are against each other

[localzuk]

This argument is entirely pointless. The software is optimised for x86 processors and the related architecture. Both OS X and Windows run on the same chips. Any difference between the 2 is going to be minimal, especially at school level.

 

If you want Macs, as you want to run a heterogeneous environment, go for it. Doing so is even in the national curriculum now. Specifically, the curriculum specifies using multiple, recent, platforms.

Edited July 25, 2013 by localzuk

[mac_shinobi]

This argument is entirely pointless. The software is optimised for x86 processors and the related architecture. Both OS X and Windows run on the same chips. Any difference between the 2 is going to be minimal, especially at school level.

 

If you want Macs, as you want to run a heterogeneous environment, go for it. Doing so is even in the national curriculum now. Specifically, the curriculum specifies using multiple, recent, platforms.

 

But you are only looking at the cpu not the filing system or any other aspects ( windows ntfs which is not organised when written to the disk hence the defrag utility versus hfs+ on os x journalled and on a pc you would need a non windows os to get an indexed / journalled FS as far as I know. Could be wrong on that point and as stated above I just wanted to see a comparison out of personal curiosity

Edited July 25, 2013 by mac_shinobi

[localzuk]

But you are only looking at the cpu not the filing system or any other aspects ( windows ntfs which is not organised when written to the disk hence the defrag utility versus hfs+ on os x journalled and on a pc you would need a non windows os to get an indexed / journalled FS as far as I know. Could be wrong on that point and as stated above I just wanted to see a comparison out of personal curiosity

 

In a school, you really won't notice the difference. Especially if you choose SSD based storage. (Also, note that HFS+ is not a good filesystem. Even Linus Torvalds doesn't like it - http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/horrors-linus-torvalds-calls-hfs-utter-crap/1278).

Edited July 25, 2013 by localzuk

[Arthur]

OS X does have some advantages over Windows. Installing fonts is a very good example - something our media students do quite a lot of.

 

• On OS X, limited users can install fonts themselves because they each have their own fonts folder (~/Library/Fonts).
  
• On Windows, users would have to get someone with admin rights to install them (usually an IT technician/manager). Because of this, many students simply stick with the default fonts included with the OS.
  

Automator, folder actions and colour-coded folders are all quite useful too. You don't really have any equivalents to those on Windows.

[mac_shinobi]

In a school, you really won't notice the difference. Especially if you choose SSD based storage. (Also, note that HFS+ is not a good filesystem. Even Linus Torvalds doesn't like it - http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/horrors-linus-torvalds-calls-hfs-utter-crap/1278).

 

Thats not a good article as it just keeps saying that leopards fs is crap and thats from leopard vs vista. Also it mentions a new framework in leopard yet he still chose leopard over vista but then goes onto comparing programming on the two platforms ( yet how does that relate to the fs on either platform )?

 

Then goes onto say how linux fs beats the other oses hands down ( at least windows and os x ).

 

Where are the examples and how do the linux FS'es beat windows or OS X and I can't see a mention of what parts or aspects of hfs+ are crap and the same for windows as far as what bits or parts are rubbish and also what bits of whichever linux fs are so good ?

 

Also when he says linux FS - which one(s) is he comparing hfs+ / ntfs to ??

 

ext 2,3 or 4, or what exactly ?

 

Just want to know if there is any difference between hfs+ vs ntfs also taking into consideration trim support if using flash storage ie ssd or PCIe ssd / flash when using the same application

 

Saw this comment in the article you linked to and it made me laugh. Not really related to the above

 

Linus is just mad...

 

...because he doesn't have the clout and following that Jobs and Woz have.

 

Hey, Linus, hear that? It's the world's smallest violin and it's playing a sad sad song just for you.

 

(Why else would he say that Linux is better, when it too has it's own short-comings?)

 

nix_hed

6 February, 2008 13:18

Reply Vote

Edited July 25, 2013 by mac_shinobi

[Arthur]

@localzuk is right. HFS+ isn't particular great...

 

What's wrong with HFS+ « Ars Technica

 

HFS+ has served Apple well, and probably for far longer than its designers ever imagined it would. But like all the other Apple-related products and technologies that fit this description (e.g., classic Mac OS, Carbon, PowerPC), there comes a time when things once treasured must pass from this world.

 

Last year's Lion review detailed the problems of HFS+. Lion offered some hope in the form of Core Storage, Apple's new logical volume manager, which was used to implement File Vault 2's whole-disk encryption feature. At the time, I wondered if the technology in Core Storage could be used as a starting point for a new, better file system. Alas, Mountain Lion brings no such advancements. (Source)

 

We've had a couple of Mac's at school that have had HFS+ related issues. The Mac's wouldn't boot and OS X was unable to repair the file-system. I had to boot from a Ubuntu disc in order to recover the data from the hard drives and then re-install the operating system.

[mac_shinobi]

@localzuk is right. HFS+ isn't particular great...

 

What's wrong with HFS+ « Ars Technica

 

 

 

 

 

We've had a couple of Mac's at school that have had HFS+ related issues. The Mac's wouldn't boot and OS X was unable to repair the file-system. I had to boot from a Ubuntu disc in order to recover the data from the hard drives and then re-install the operating system.

 

Thanks that was a good read and article. Scary. Have you got a guide on how you used an ubuntu disc to recover data on os x. Just in case I need to do that

 

Reading that apple clearly need to do a new FS from the ground up thats more suited to unix and also the newer hardware and do hard links and other features in a much better way than hfs+ does

@localzuk and @Arthur

 

Not arguing what FS or OS is better etc but just trying to take into consideration all the pros and cons of both OSes / hardware etc namely windows and os x here. As the original post I think was get a pc with windows software or get a mac with whatever software and the only way to see in my eyes would be like I said to do bench marks on similar hardware with similar OSes in terms of comparing say OS X Lion with Windows 7 as I presume mountain lion was released more or less in line with win 8??

 

Trying to be neutral here ref all my posts and at the same time see how all the pros and cons of each os and hardware build would effect using said software in the example given was photoshop cs 5 I believe

 

Presume 10.9 maverick is still sticking with hfs+ as cant see mention of file system updates etc at least nothing drastic

Edited July 25, 2013 by mac_shinobi

[mac_shinobi]

Good article and a petition ref trying to get apple to get or use a modern FS

 

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/02/zfs-loving-mac-users-demand-support-in-os-x-10-9/

[Arthur]

Have you got a guide on how you used an ubuntu disc to recover data on OS X. Just in case I need to do that

Luckily for me it was quite simple since all the data I needed to copy was in the /Users folder and the file-system was still readable by Linux. The following is pretty much all I did.

 

1. Download the latest Mac-specific ISO (currently ubuntu-13.04-desktop-amd64+mac.iso) and burn to DVD or USB flash drive.
   
2. Boot the Mac into Ubuntu and chose the option to run it from the disc/flash drive (as opposed to installing it to the HDD).
   
3. Open the Terminal app, type 'gksudo nautlius' (and press Enter) to launch Nautlius with root privileges. This enables you to access all of the files on the Mac's drive without any permission issues.
   
4. Go to File » Connect to Server, enter the relevant details and copy the data you need over the network to another computer. Alternatively, connect an external HDD and copy the data to that.
   

[seawolf]

@localzuk is right. HFS+ isn't particular great...

 

What's wrong with HFS+ « Ars Technica

 

We've had a couple of Mac's at school that have had HFS+ related issues. The Mac's wouldn't boot and OS X was unable to repair the file-system. I had to boot from a Ubuntu disc in order to recover the data from the hard drives and then re-install the operating system.

 

If you haven't run into some of NTFS' inherent flaws you haven't been using it long enough. Forced to choose between NTFS and HFS+ - I'll take the latter any day. And yes, there are much better file systems than both.

[seawolf]

I could pick both Windows and Mac apart in their weaknesses if I wanted too (and without even touching the steam coming off of Win 8), but what does that do for anyone? Most of the people on this thread are just dogging Macs irrationally and with little knowledge. PCs and Macs both have their place, but only to those without a closed mind.

 

Off to other threads that are more edifying...

[mac_shinobi]

If you haven't run into some of NTFS' inherent flaws you haven't been using it long enough. Forced to choose between NTFS and HFS+ - I'll take the latter any day. And yes, there are much better file systems than both.

 

Maybe an old example but something like this

 

http://www.retosphere.de/tipsandtricks/ntfserror.php?menu_id=24&

[mac_shinobi]

I could pick both Windows and Mac apart in their weaknesses if I wanted too (and without even touching the steam coming off of Win 8), but what does that do for anyone? Most of the people on this thread are just dogging Macs irrationally and with little knowledge. PCs and Macs both have their place, but only to those without a closed mind.

 

Off to other threads that are more edifying...

 

Maybe you could do that via pm as I would be interested to know :-)

[Roberto]

But you are only looking at the cpu not the filing system or any other aspects ( windows ntfs which is not organised when written to the disk hence the defrag utility versus hfs+ on os x journalled and on a pc you would need a non windows os to get an indexed / journalled FS as far as I know. Could be wrong on that point and as stated above I just wanted to see a comparison out of personal curiosity

 

NTFS is a journaled file system, and this is a feature that's unrelated to fragmentation, etc.

 

HFS+ and NTFS both have their own strengths and weaknesses but this isn't part of it.

[mac_shinobi]

NTFS is a journaled file system, and this is a feature that's unrelated to fragmentation, etc.

 

HFS+ and NTFS both have their own strengths and weaknesses but this isn't part of it.

@Roberto

 

Should rtfm before I make daft posts and am wrong on all counts on that post. Apologies for that. Yes you're totally right regards to both having strengths and weaknesses

 

I think Im thinking of the hfs plus catalog file to allow for faster file / folder searching and still looking but not sure if os x ( hfs + ) writes data in a chronological order ( due to disk optimisation software being available such as Drive Genius )

 

I did find an article advising against disk optimisation( from what I understood although could be wrong ) as it would conflict with OS X 10.2 or laters routines that are in place to auto defrag etc as per below

 

http://macs.about.com/od/faq1/f/defrag.htm

 

http://www.coriolis-systems.com/help/iDefrag.help/Contents/Resources/English.lproj/pgs/why.html

 

Only way on windows to try and auto defrag / optimise is on windows 7 to schedule to do it daily or at set dates or times which isn't ideal as I prefer to defrag when

 

I have got no applications in use aside from the os and bacground services ie Anti-Virus etc

 

That ive also cleared temp files and the likes / disk cleanup etc

 

The better way on windows that ive found is an opensource util called ultra defrag which you can set to defrag / optimise on bootup which with rebooting quite often as I shut down at the end of each day I know it will do what it needs to do before I can use the pc so I personally prefer ultradefrag over the windows one

Edited July 28, 2013 by mac_shinobi

[gill]

I am trying to maintain an impartial, open mind about this, but you can probably sense a thread of agreement running through my posts. You can get some gorgeous 27" monitors, we have the screen calibration hardware, and I will get Photoshop running like a dream on an x64 install.

 

On a personal level, of course I would like to know more about Macs, and add that line to my CV - but it isn't about me. It's about what's best for the school and the best use of money.

 

I will even buy them white monitors if it makes them happy. On a related note, does anyone have an Apple logo stencil and a can of grey spray paint in the right shade?

 

A few years ago we stuck some old apple logo stickers on a bunch of Dell computers. Several members of staff commented about how good it was to finally have Mac computers! Brilliant, we didn't even have to paint them white!

[PotNoodleTech]

There is only one fundamental reason for a school to buy a mac rather than a PC, and that is if you are planning to run mac only software. It's a big reason, it's a good reason, It's one I wouldn’t argue with.

 

If you are just using PC based software, then a MAC is a pointless waste of taxpayers money IMHO. Get a PC, save yourself 50%, and ease your support workload.

 

If your HOD wants mac's just "because" then he can fund the extra cost compared to a same spec PC from his capitation. See how much he "needs" a mac then.