Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Worth moving to Mac?  (Read 74179 times)
Peter Frahm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #100 on: February 17, 2008, 05:42:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I am a proud, f*****g fanboy, go MAC. They've made smart decisions when they've needed to and the boys at Microsoft are still sitting in rooms trying to figure out how to catch some of that fire.

JJJ, you played the game, qualified explanations are boring and wimpy. Kiss and make up.

: )
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 586


« Reply #101 on: February 21, 2008, 04:35:52 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been thinking about buying a MacPro, but when I think about it, I say to myself, "Why?"

I was customizing a MacPro on the Apple website.  Two 3.2GHZ Quad Core Xeon processors (NICE), up to 32GB RAM (NICE), lots of hardrive space available, and really crappy video cards for really awesome Apple 30 inch monitors.  But the price was too high for me.

Then I went to the Dell website and customized a WORKSTATION with 2 Quad Core processors and a video card that blows the mac cards out of the water, and it's still cheaper.

Then I went to the Alienware website, made myself a PC with an Intel Core Extreme with TRI (yes, 3) 768MB Nvidia top of the line video cards (uh, 2.3GB of Video Memory, anyone?).  The price was high, but not much more than the Mac.  I'd say the price was almost equal, and the alienware would blow the mac away for video performance if you can configure Windows to perform perfectly (like I can).

I've noticed the "windows crashes and locks up and has viruses, blahblah" has become the stereotype for PCs.  And don't get me started on those commercials.

Let me say this:I have an "old" Dell computer.  It stays on 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year, without constant restarting, no lockups, blue screens of death, viruses, or any performance issues.  This bitch keeps working and working.  

I don't know what to think with people who have PC problems and go running to the Mac.  

Perhaps you keep too many of those preinstalled programs that come with your computer running in the background? (Something that a Mac won't have, most likely).  

Anyway, I'm still on the fence about getting a Mac, but I'd rather just get a super powerful Dell Workstation instead.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2008, 04:41:25 PM by T-1000 » Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8604



WWW
« Reply #102 on: February 21, 2008, 04:42:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I was customizing a MacPro on the Apple website.  Two 3.2GHZ Quad Core Xeon processors (NICE), up to 32GB RAM (NICE), lots of hardrive space available, and really crappy video cards for really awesome Apple 30 inch monitors.

There are at least three video cards available, and what makes the least expensive one crappy? You want to drive more than two 30" Cinema's (which are just so-so displays)?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 586


« Reply #103 on: February 21, 2008, 04:45:32 PM »
ReplyReply

The MacPro is capable of being so powerful, and I guess for performance close to the Nvidia 8800 Ultra x3, you'd have to get the Nvidia Quadro FX 5600 for $2850 more.

But those ATI cards aren't quite in the same league as a top Nvidia card in Tri mode.

I'm not thinking about more than one monitor.  I'm thinking about gaming (I'm a PC guy, remember?)
« Last Edit: February 21, 2008, 04:47:06 PM by T-1000 » Logged
CatOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 376


WWW
« Reply #104 on: February 21, 2008, 04:46:31 PM »
ReplyReply

T-1000, I don't understand exactly what 3 high-end video cards with 2.3 GB of VRAM is actually going to GIVE you.  Is it going to improve your ability to edit photos in any way?  What applications on the PC side actually LEVERAGE 3 video cards?

Now if you're talking about SLI gaming that's one thing -- gaming on the PC is better than it is on the Mac.  That's really not too much of a debate.  But for photographic purposes, is this really a specification war?

The NVIDIA 8800GT is a very good graphics card, and OS X can actually USE it to do everyday things (Core Image, Core Video, etc.,).

As far as Windows has viruses... well that's true.  Sure, if you're diligent you can avoid them.  But then again there are approximately 10 MILLION PCs in the US alone that are spam sending zombies (this information from a friend of mine who is an AV product manager at Symantec, who has to provide nightly updates to their corporate customers so they can block IP ranges that these machines switch to).  The fact that there are MILLIONS of these machines means that many people are NOT diligent at running AV updates, eh?
Logged

RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 586


« Reply #105 on: February 21, 2008, 04:48:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Indeed, I'm thinking gaming.  Everything is pretty equal in terms of media editing I suppose.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8604



WWW
« Reply #106 on: February 21, 2008, 04:48:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
But those ATI cards aren't quite in the same league as a top Nvidia card in Tri mode.

To do what?
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
CatOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 376


WWW
« Reply #107 on: February 21, 2008, 04:52:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Indeed, I'm thinking gaming.  Everything is pretty equal in terms of media editing I suppose.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176494\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The pierced face and genitals set (er, "creatives") seem to vehemently prefer Macs to work on Photoshop/Illustrator/etc.  I can't speak for them (no piercings TYVM ;-) ) but there's a reason they prefer the Mac I reckon.

I also know when I was on the Antarctic trip that the entire staff Michael brought along ran Lightroom on the Mac.  Not sure whether it was causative or correlative :-)

Again, gaming is something separate and I won't argue that you can game better on a PC.  There is no Mac that supports SLI.  You *can* stuff 4 video cards in a Mac and run 8 30" displays off one... if that's something that floats your boat.
Logged

RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 586


« Reply #108 on: February 21, 2008, 05:00:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
To do what?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176495\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Play a high spec 3D game or work in a demanding graphics/3D application at a resolution of 2560x1600.
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1622


WWW
« Reply #109 on: February 21, 2008, 05:36:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The fact that there are MILLIONS of these machines means that many people are NOT diligent at running AV updates, eh?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176493\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's exactly the issue, plus they are targetted.  As Mac grows its market share, so too will they be targetted more and more as it becomes worthwhile to do so.

Mac has an advantage so long as Mac users don't take the ostrich approach - there's time to build the defences before that critical mass takes hold and be ready for the onslaught when it comes.  Could be a real point of distinction - ahead of the game instead of behind it - but only if the fanboys stop insisting they're invulnerable.  The relatively closed hardware architecture gives tremendous advantages over Windows having to try to deal with a squillion different hardware iterations.
Logged

vandevanterSH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 626


« Reply #110 on: February 21, 2008, 05:57:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you are thinking of moving from PC to MAC and you use Epson professional printers, you may wish to first do some careful research on the user-friendliness of the Epson driver with the Apple operating system you will be using.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171884\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

When Leopard first came out, the Epson drivers wouldn't work with my 3800.  the new drivers work quite well.

Steve
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8604



WWW
« Reply #111 on: February 22, 2008, 03:55:50 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been vacillating about getting a new tower and this was enough to get me to pull the trigger (a really great deal on Amazon):

   
Quote
Apple Mac Pro 8-Core 3GHz Xeon Workstation for $2,600 after rebate + free shipping
Amazon.com offers the Apple Mac Pro 8-Core 3GHz Xeon Workstation for $2,799.99. This $200 mail-in rebate cuts it to $2,599.99. With free shipping, that's the lowest total price we could find for this configuration; for comparison, Apple charges about $1,000 more. This Mac Pro features two Intel Xeon 3GHz quad-core processors, 2GB RAM, 320GB hard drive, SuperDrive, ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB video card, and more. Deal ends March 11.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
John S C
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 108


« Reply #112 on: February 23, 2008, 07:20:45 AM »
ReplyReply

As I may be migrating one of my windows workstations to a Mac Pro, I read this thread with interest .

Can I ask a question?

The main applications that will be run on the Mac Pro are Lightroom and Photoshop. I had been considering a 8 core machine, but from what I've read elsewhere there does not seem to be a significant increase in speed over 4 core units with the same processor speed for these applications.

The tests I have been able to find were run under Tiger not the latest Leopard OS.

My question is obvious. With Photoshop and Lightroom are 8 cores really a waste of money?

Thanks

John C
Logged
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #113 on: February 23, 2008, 09:57:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As I may be migrating one of my windows workstations to a Mac Pro, I read this thread with interest .

Can I ask a question?

The main applications that will be run on the Mac Pro are Lightroom and Photoshop. I had been considering a 8 core machine, but from what I've read elsewhere there does not seem to be a significant increase in speed over 4 core units with the same processor speed for these applications.

The tests I have been able to find were run under Tiger not the latest Leopard OS.

My question is obvious. With Photoshop and Lightroom are 8 cores really a waste of money?

Thanks

John C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176862\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As soon as I saw a demo of Windows XP running on a Mac using Parallels in Jan 07, I instantly bought a MacBook Pro to replace my Dell Dimension laptop. It runs Windows faster and more reliably than my Dell. I have to run Windows for my financial planning practice to use ACT! CRM and IE 6.0 for IE specific secure web sites. When I'm in my home office, I have this docked to a Dell 27" wide screen display to have the benefit of dual monitors.

I bought a MacPro 8 Core from my friend's Apple store when they first became available in Mar 08. Mine was the first one that he sold. Since upgrading to Leopard (did a clean install upon his recommendation) the system cranks. I use LR and PS3 along with the usual iLife, iWork and MS Office 2008 apps. I also run Windows XP Pro using Parallels. It all works very well together.

I have a 1GB drive for OS and regular docs and files, 2x750 GB drives in a RAID 0 config (1.4TB) for my photo and video files, and a 750GB drive for a mirror backup of my 1TB drive using SuperDuper. Via Firewire 800, I have a 1.4TB Iomega UltraMax RAID external drive to back up my internal RAID and an older Lacie Bigger Disk Extreme 1.2TB dedicated for Time Machine backups that exclude the RAID disks. This system drives a 24" Eizo ColorEdge CE240W display that is calibrated using an Eye One colorimeter.

After installing Leopard, I upgraded the RAM from 2GB to a total of 12GB. That made it quicker too.

That said, since I was coming from a 3 year old Dell Precision 470 workstation running WinXP Pro for LR and CS2, any new mac would seem faster and easier to use.

The only problem that I've had is that because I run Windows every day for work next to the Mac OS, I am constantly reminded by how inelegant Windows is compared to the Mac OS. It seems that 99% of my tech problems stem from the Windows environment.

Anyone want to buy a pristine condition Dell Precision 470 workstation?

Cheers.

Bud James
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8604



WWW
« Reply #114 on: February 23, 2008, 11:56:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My question is obvious. With Photoshop and Lightroom are 8 cores really a waste of money?

Perhaps. See this:

http://www.macworld.com/article/59022/2007...pro8.html?t=205

FIY, that amazing deal on Amazon ended up being a mistake on their part. Figures. Few hours after I ordered it, got an email that it was a mistake and the would not honor it.

Between that issue, and the above article, I might just go with a 3ghz dual core referb that's a pretty good deal ($2299).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8604



WWW
« Reply #115 on: February 23, 2008, 12:56:25 PM »
ReplyReply

And now for something completely different....

http://blip.tv/file/340692/
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #116 on: February 23, 2008, 03:01:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Great movie!  Says it all!

I finally switched last year.  After more years than I care to remember managing networks with thousands of Windows nodes and  a hundred+ Windows servers, I had had enough.  Sure, Windows can be stable if you never add and remove software from it, but once you start doing that, it is all downhill.

Unfortunately, Microsoft chose to stick with their central registry and DLL concepts, the Achilles heels of Windows platforms.  I had Unix-based systems that had been up for a couple of years without a restart despite adding, updating and removing software.

On the other hand, I do love Windows systems for the same reason that my auto mechanic loves Jeeps.  Lots of business and income.    
Logged

David White
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3203



WWW
« Reply #117 on: February 23, 2008, 06:26:49 PM »
ReplyReply

BTW Something that may catch out those new to Macs is when you move folders to a drive with a folder with the same name, it simply replaces the entire folder, without regard to content. [span style=\'font-size:12pt;line-height:100%\']This could easily lose you lots of data/images[/span] if you expect it to work the way PCs do. and is something I've only ever seen mentioned once, with regard to OS differences. Which is odd as it's probably the most important/dangerous difference.

This may sound trivial but one of the things I like best about the Apple OS is that you can elect turn the cap lock key off.  


I was in the Apple store yesterday to ask about eSata drives [got a blank look] and every MacAir I had a look at whilst there managed to lock up when you tried to look at tackpad preferences - I wanted to try out the new trackpad, but as usual the default is everything turned off!?   Plus it may be thin, but its still bigger than my Vaio. So a bit disapointing.
My brand new MacPro also managed to lose one of my hard drives. Pathfinder could still see and access it, but Finder [and hence the OS] was completely stumped. I originally had two 1TB disks mirrored, but decided to un-mirror them and dupe externally as I needed more than 1TB storage internally, but after a couple of days of using them independently, Finder suddenly forgot that's what I'd done. So after trying everything else Time Machine/OS Reinstall I had to flatten the drives using Disk Utility and start all over again, including recopying 800G of data. Nothing lost as new machines/kit always goes through a probationary period.
So if you expect Macs to never crash, work flawlessly etc, don't get your hopes up as they are in fact no better than PCs, probably as they are only a rebadged PC anyway.    


And where Andrew learnt his err 'social' skills
http://www.binaryaspects.com/2007/12/08/7-...e-a-mac-fanboy/
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #118 on: February 23, 2008, 07:55:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Mac's folder behavior is different is certain aspects - here's a nice article explaining the difference.  Interestlingly - MS's .NET framework supports application deployment that *exactly* mimics Mac's Replace Existing folder behavior

http://www.xvsxp.com/files/copying.php

Quote
I originally had two 1TB disks mirrored, but decided to un-mirror them and dupe externally as I needed more than 1TB storage internally, but after a couple of days of using them independently, Finder suddenly forgot that's what I'd done.

Why anyone would "unmirror" a RAID volume then continuing to use the degraded partition is beyond me, irrespective of OS

Quote
So after trying everything else Time Machine/OS Reinstall I had to flatten the drives using Disk Utility and start all over again, including recopying 800G of data. Nothing lost as new machines/kit always goes through a probationary period

Yup!  Thats the way to do it!  Again under any O/S
« Last Edit: February 23, 2008, 08:01:18 PM by Joh.Murray » Logged

budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #119 on: February 24, 2008, 05:20:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And now for something completely different....

http://blip.tv/file/340692/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=176904\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hilarious! After I stopped laughing, I forwarded this link to my friend who owns 2 Apple retail stores.

Andrew, thanks for sharing.

Bud James
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
Pages: « 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad