Why is it that graphic designers more often use an Apple Mac? I am studying graphic design and I am hoping to do some freelance work in my spare time. I have a unit in my studies to discover why Macs are used so much in the graphic design industry.

I also want to purchase a MacBook Pro to start off with, but my brother (a PC user) is adamant that I am wasting my money and that I'm only buying it for show, as he says: 'Macs are just expensive because they're stylish.' I want to give him a number of valid reasons as to why it will help me in the graphic design industry. As he studies games design and he is adamant that a PC can do just the same as a Mac. What a ridiculous unit for studying Graphic Design. Mac does not beat PC on anything but price and style. If you compare an equally priced PC to a Mac it's likely that the PC will have more power. Mac is more a guarantee of high quality components all packaged nicely together and not prone to hardware issues.

Also, there are less viruses. Unless you're rich it would be foolish to spend that money when you're just starting out, my own goal is to earn enough money through graphic design to buy a state of the art mac at some point. – Apr 2 '14 at 11:07. There's a seperate question on which is better: For the question of why Macs are more popular, there's a very simple answer:. Almost all art colleges and design schools bought Macs back in the days when Macs were unquestionably better for design ( and answers below detail how). Art / design teachers got used to teaching using Macs.

Many top teachers are veterans of the pre- computer days, and would not willingly suffer learning a new operating system. So, most designers use Macs in their formative college years, and get used to Macs Art/design colleges are unlikely to change to PC-first as it would be expensive and difficult (not just the cost of buying new machines, but the cost and time of re-training staff and re-writing course materials, and the cost in popularity among senior staff for whoever made the decision.). Many do now have PC suites as well as Mac suites, but they're usually smaller and linked to specialist areas (e.g. Video/games/fx design, ). Designers are seldom keen to change tools. We're not techies, our tools are a means to an end - 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. We usually have a similar attitude to technology as musicians have to the craft of making instruments - 'magic happens here - don't mess with the magic you need to do your job'.

(there are many exceptions - e.g. Designers who write scripts, like there are musicians who make their own instruments - but they are exceptions, and the reaction to both is often similar: 'What dark sorcery is this.'

With a mixture of awe and suspicion) So, most designers prefer to stick to the tools they know, which will more often be a Mac. You could make a Windows machine that is 100% designed for designers, like - but when any crafts professional knows that their existing way works and is considered normal and correct, they usually won't want to risk invoking the wrath of the Technology Gods, smiting them with the curse of 'It fails when you need it the most!' For deviating from the familiar, true path. These days, familiarity, comfort and preference are a bigger factor than any objective difference between Mac and PC, and PCs seem to be becoming slowly more popular in design than they were as more people start design school having already done design on a PC. I personally use a Mac at work and a PC at home, and the practical differences are tiny. If you're already comfortable with one, there's no real reason to switch, unless you fancy a type of machine that is only available to the other (e.g. Windows pro pen tablets like, or, ).

If you do, there's no real reason not to switch, so long as you don't mind re-learning a few things and risking a little frustrating unfamiliarity at first. I think Macs did have one advantage in the early 2000s - they were the first to only crash one application at a time. PC designers could have a doc's layout open in InDesign, placed graphics open in Illustrator, edited photos open in Photoshop, then they'd open a Word doc to copy some text, Word would crash bringing everything else down with it, and they'd lose all their recent work in everything. Then Windows sorted that out (can't remember which version), and the differences have been tiny ever since.

– Apr 5 '14 at 11:23. @RandomO'Reilly You're about fourteen years late on that, MS-DOS was dropped when Microsoft switched to the NT kernel (the core of the OS) for consumer versions of Windows starting with Windows 2000.

They just had emulation built in for 32-bit members of the NT family (and even then you could get issues when trying to run some 16-bit applications even in a compatibility mode). 64-bit versions of Windows don't have that emulation built in, but it's still possible to run DOS applications, you just need to use some sort of virtual machine program (DOSBox, Microsoft's Virtual PC, etc.). – Apr 3 '14 at 16:43.

I think a lot of the legacy reasons have been established here, so I won't address that. I recently purchased a new computer (after asking this community about ), and I went with a Mac Mini. My full-time job for four years had me working on a PC, I like Windows 7 just fine, and I'm comfortable with Ubuntu as well, so when I started thinking about a new system, I had a lot of angles to consider. Here are a few reasons why I stayed in the Mac world:. The software ecosystem. Because a lot of designers are Mac-only, I feel like some of the best software and productivity tools are on OSX.

Panic makes amazing software, but it's Mac-only. Pixelmator and Sketch are promising possibilities to challenge the Adobe hegemony, and they're Mac-only. Compatibility. This is probably the most objective and important point to make: Getting a Mac is the only legal way to run every major operating system. Not only is a Hackintosh a hack that would take some time to get running, doing so would violate the terms of service.

However, I've legally run a licensed copy of Windows 7 (and my ever-aging copy of Civilization III) on my laptop for years. Also, with my new job, we used VirtualBox to set up a VM that runs Ubuntu for running Python servers. Microsoft even provides free VMs for testing sites on old browsers and old operating systems! But if you run a Windows or Linux device, you don't get to try Mac apps or test things on Safari, at least not without needing some kind of specific solution for that. The mobile connection. If you ever want to design for mobile, it's good to have a solid link to iOS. If you don't have an iPhone, iOS Simulator is incredibly useful for mobile testing.

While you can make iOS apps on Windows, it's not the preferred way to do things, and since most iOS developers are on the Mac, it's good to be on that platform as well. Also, if you have an iOS device and like it, Macs will give you better integration with your device. Simplicity. Choosing hardware is a lot easier with Apple. Sure, you have fewer overall choices, but I personally get overwhelmed by too many choices. There are a bunch of PC OEMs that have a ton of choices, but Apple has a relatively simple grid of products and prices. Do I wish that they'd put iMac parts in a Mini?

Graphic Design App For Mac

Do I wish that it was easier to add an SSD to mine? But I know that I can shop for a Mac without doing a ton of homework. The hardware ecosystem. Because Macs are popular and relatively standardized, a nice ecosystem can thrive around it. If you want a protective laptop case, you'll have more options if you get an Air over a PC laptop. If you want a charging system designed to work with your keyboard, you can get that.

If you want a backup drive or a laptop stand that looks like your desktop, you're more likely to get it. Which leads me to my next point:. Style.

Not my most important reason, but I might as well embrace it. I'm a designer, a visual person. I have a Magic Trackpad and an Apple Wireless Keyboard on my desk.

They look fantastic; the trackpad matches up with the keyboard perfectly. The Mini looks great next to my desk. We're visual people, so visuals matter to us. And to a certain extent, that's okay.

They're luxuries, sure. But everyone has luxuries that they like to indulge in, and for me it's amazingly-designed hardware. This argument is true with software as well. FileZilla and Transmit do a lot of the same things, but Transmit is a beautiful piece of software. I love the attention to detail that tends to go into Mac apps more than Windows apps. Don't let people criticize you for that last one.

Graphic Design Software For Macbook Pro

Any component and software comparison will tell you that Mac prices are at least close enough to make the overpriced argument marginal, so it's not like you're paying $100,000 for a Lamborghini when a $2,000 car would do just fine. We live in a world where people sell $100 purses to the masses and the masses love it because of the style and cachet that comes with it. Where a guy like me irrationally likes the Under Armour and Nalgene brands. Where people will spend hundreds of thousands on a logo redesign. If you want a world without that stuff, then we can go back to the days where you'd go and get 'rice' and 'meat' from the 'store', and graphic designers wouldn't have much work to do! Some people don't care about design and style and that's one hundred percent okay.

I'm not advocating rampant materialism here, just saying that if you like Macs because they're stylish and because they care about good design as much as you do, that's not a bad reason to get one. But hopefully my other reasons will help you out as well.:). Two things not mentioned in other answers that were keys to establishing the Mac as a DTP platform in the early days:. The original Mac due to a brilliant collaboration between Adobe and Apple, so that it could provide hinting for low-resolution output on screens and laser printers (300 dpi is low resolution in typesetting terms). PostScript and the LaserWriter made it possible to create great looking documents incredibly cheaply. July 1985 saw the launch of Aldus Pagemaker, the first DTP application. It was Mac-only, it took off in the design community, and it created the DTP industry.

There's a wonderful story in the Introduction to John McWade's Before and After - Page Design in which he describes how he established the first DTP company in the world. John was the original beta tester for PageMaker and did a great deal to ensure it had all the essential capabilities for professional grade page layout. He goes on to relate what happened when Apple asked him to design a poster for them: I created How to Design a Page on Saturday and on Monday drove to Cupertino with proofs. 'You did this on our computer?' I was surprised by their surprise. 'No one here does this,' they said. 'I just used PageMaker,' I said.

'But you're using it,' they said, 'to design cool stuff.' Just as Visicalc had given a new lease on life to the Apple II a few years earlier, PageMaker created the DTP market for the Mac (which was selling very poorly at the time, mostly due to being very expensive and lacking useful, reliable applications). Ventura Publisher followed later on the PC platform, but it was late to the party and hindered by the poor graphics support then available for DOS.

As so often happens in a new market, being there firstest with the mostest is a huge advantage. I believe many years ago Mac were better suited to Graphic Design. I remember hearing about the screen being superior at least. These days there is no difference as the majority of features and software are comparable. I think once you establish yourself in an industry as the go-to brand, old habits die hard. It is like Bing trying to compete with Google - even though they offer the same ability to search the web, people never refer to 'Binging' something (vs 'Googling'). IMO that is why Mac is the default in the Graphic Design industry (besides being stylish).

A related industry that is pro Mac is video production. Final Cut Pro, which is only on Mac can be a decision maker for many budget editors/studios, even though Adobe Premiere (or the top-end expensive Avid suite) is very capable on the PC.

In contrast, most games/fx companies are on PC because they need more horsepower and the ability to put in custom hardware like bigger processors, more RAM and high end graphics cards etc. They can build machines for specific tasks like render farms for example at a fraction of the cost.

PC is more customizable and cheaper, while Mac lock everything down (and overcharge for the exclusivity). Yes there are more viruses on PC, but that comes with popularity.

Install anti-virus and be responsible with your internet browsing and downloading and you won't have an issue. There are also more hardware manufacturers, which can cause problems, but I've also had more problems with Mac hard drives failing than I've ever had with PC hardware. Personally, I only buy top end consumer machines. A top of the line HP for example (as of 3 years ago), running i7 6-core, 18gb RAM, 2x 23in monitors and advanced video card. You need these things if you want to maximize your productivity. I haven't checked the current prices, but in my experience, you just can't compare a Mac to a PC for pure horsepower customization or bang for the buck.

I agree it is something they haven't targeted, which is why I can't compare apples (literally) with apples for high end machines. The prices may be comparable on budget priced systems which is why I didn't want to comment there. Also, Mac doesn't use better parts than other manufacturers, they just choose a specific manufacturer and remove the open market for mixing and matching.

That is what I referred to when I said 'locked down'. I feel Mac also up-prices everything because there is no shopping around - everything has to be mac-approved. You also have to choose from pre-built machines. – Apr 2 '14 at 17:04.

The main reason for Apple having a large design presence is 'tradition.' Apple went all out inserting their computers into the design school workflow as far back as the late 1980s. Because of this, the OS became the standard target for prepress and commercial printing hardware and the Windows versions of the drivers for these RIP devices (etc) was a secondary consideration. I went to school in the 80s and believe me, Macs were slicker then than now.

This also meant that people like Linotype (etc), Adobe and QuarkXpress wrote for the Mac first and the PC second. One huge problem was typefaces which were not generally cross-platform which meant that even if all the other software was (and over time the software was more and more capable of interchange), you still had re-flow and glyph substitution from font replacement. Both of these problems are insidious and hard to spot. When fonts became more cross-platform, there was still a problem with the Mac dual-fork file system which usually resulted in naive users dragging the wrong fork of the file over for sharing. This meant the font data never got sent. All of these problems helped to enforce the design preference for macs, but most of these issues no longer exist, and in fact Macs are the very nearly the exact same hardware as any generic PC with Windows or Linux on them (excepting BIOS/CMOS locks to restrict OS installation).

The change to intel/x86/amd64 hardware has helped a lot on the driver side as well, because things like the old motorola stuff had a different byte order which introduced a lot of problems porting code between OS. Once you get into the software packages themselves which generally have a unified functionality across platforms, the underlying OS makes little difference. I have used or owned original Mac, apple 2c, amiga, c64, atari 800, CP/M, MS DOS, linux, and even vax. The OS is only relevant when it gets in the way of the work you need to do.

Fonts Mac OS X arguably comes with better fonts out of the box, but people can argue about this. Where it has a clear advantage, though, is management and ease of use. The built-in font chooser on a mac is leagues ahead of what you get in Windows programs, and the built-in font manager is simple and powerful (for some purposes you still need 3rd party software, but Windows font management absolutely sucks).

Font smoothing is also vastly better on a Mac. Windows font smoothing still looks blurry in a lot of places, and Linux is just best not discussed. If you're rendering text to images or pdf graphics, having it come out looking good is a huge advantage. UI Consistency I'm on a Windows box right now, and I have open four applications that all have subtly different UI styles (not including Windows 8 Metro Apps) - all are Microsoft programs. That's kind of atrocious. By contrast, Apple requires all its in-house applications to adhere to their strict UI guidelines.

Most 3rd party applications do so as well, because Apple makes it really easy to do so. This also extends to deeper concepts like changing application and system settings. With a Mac, nearly everything that's meant to be user-accessible is done through System/Application Preferences, located in the apple menu in the top right corner. With Windows, stuff is all over the place.

Graphic Design Software For Mac Free Download

Control Panel in Windows 8 is increasingly harder to get to, there are new settings you can only find in the Metro interface and not in control panel, some applications use Tools Options. But others use File Options or Edit Settings; sometimes File is a menu and sometimes it's a Windows 8-style screen, and so on and so on. Chances are, if you notice and care about graphic design, you notice and care about the design and function of the UI. Modifier Keys This, for me, was always one of the big ones. The Windows key is basically wasted space since 1995; it has a few more functions under 8 but few people know about them and even fewer use them. On a Mac, those keys are mostly available to user applications as modifiers, both for keyboard shortcuts and mode modifiers for e.g.

Mouse actions. Your average user doesn't notice this much, but power users do, and graphic designers are definitely power users of their applications. As someone who has used Adobe applications under both Windows and OS X, it can make a lot of common tasks easier to have that full complement of modifier keys available. It also helps that the most common modifier key, command, is right next to the space bar where you thumbs can reach it instead of the control key off in the corner.

Power I don't know whether their components are more energy efficient, or put together better, or they just put better batteries in, but Macs have better battery life than PCs pretty much across the board. If you're an intensive user and you're doing work on the go, having an extra hour or two of juice while you work is a big deal. @horatio: I freely admit that I don't know the details of image compositing on either platform, but I do know that smoothed fonts look much better on Mac OS X, and I presume that the same transparency effects used in screen display could also be used in rasterizing. As for ctrl vs command, my point is that you don't need to take your fingers away from the home row to use them; you can stick with natural typing position. Even though pinky-control allows you to cover more space, in many cases the Mac way will be faster since there's less hand movement. – Apr 3 '14 at 19:18. Price is not the issue.

High end hardware comes at a high end price. Western digital 1tb my passport studio portable hard drive for mac. Apple's hardware is high end because it is intended for performance purposes. Similar quality PCs typically sell at a similar price point, minus a few bucks for their lower status in the market (but not much). Don't forget about resale value. If you are a freelancer (there are many in the Creative business) resale is a valuable business consideration.

Apple hardware has a much slower depreciation curve due to the aforementioned status and reputation for quality build. That essentially wipes out the price differential in my experience. So what is it? History plays a part. Apple catered to a performance graphics market for years (as well as power office users). The hardware ecosystem was well suited to the graphics industry.

So was SGI, but that's a whole different question;) Reliability counts too. In my experience, agencies that choose Mac OS have a smaller IT support staff than those who choose PC.

Mac is generally easier for a creative to self manage. Usability counts more. 'Creatives' are not spreadsheet lovers, they are revolted by 'corporate' looking interfaces, and they like a free-form workflow. Microsoft is notorious for some of the most unusable interfaces in the business. Apple has some serious interface mistakes in it's history too, but the overall impression is like butter. Steve knew how to give a UI polish.

For myself On a purely personal level, I can say that the decision to go Mac has followed this breakdown every time in the past 16 years. 60% OS. 30% hardware. 10% resale value I'm perfectly proficient on a PC, I just find that I'm not as happy doing it. As a designer that uses BOTH Mac and PC for designing. I'll admit that OSX runs much smoother and more reliably than Win 7 or 8.

On similarly spec'd machines. The main advantage is color, well use to be color, if you look in any design program you'll see color profile 'Adobe RGB (1998)' all mac monitors stuck to this for years as its standard, allowing the colors to be reliably consistent from one machine to the next. Even my canon 5D has uses the adobe 98 color profile. And since windows has no say over which monitor was shipped with your machine, they had no real control over th.

. – free. – open source. – free, Mozilla Firefox based. – free, proprietary. – free. – open source.

– free. – open source, combines browser, email client, WYSIWYG editor.

– open source. – free, proprietary. – free, proprietary. – free. – built-in from, available as a separate download for. – open source Internet application suite.

– open source. – free, by. free, open source.

free, by Torch Media Inc. – free, by Microsoft. – Safari application framework, also in the form of an application Web design and content management. a template-based website editor Weblog clients. See also. References.