Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Worth moving to Mac?  (Read 74802 times)
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6799


« Reply #120 on: February 24, 2008, 11:37:15 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]
Good find Andrew!
 
Logged

Francois
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3365



WWW
« Reply #121 on: February 25, 2008, 10:08:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Why anyone would "unmirror" a RAID volume then continuing to use the degraded partition is beyond me, irrespective of OS
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I didn't use the degraded partition. It was flattened and all repartitioned afresh. So it was once again simply two hard drives, used as two hard drives.


Quote
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

[a href=\"http://www.xvsxp.com/files/copying.php]http://www.xvsxp.com/files/copying.php[/url]
Odd as the new version [Mac Vs Windows] of that site is blank on the OSX bit where it compares Filecopying.

Anyone know of any Mac File copying/moving utilities that is better than Finder's mext to useless [for my needs] method?
Directory Opus has got it spot on. The bold type shows you the file difference and even has a picture for image files and gives you several behavioural options. No Mac version sadly.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2008, 10:23:00 AM by jjj » Logged

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

Posts: 626


« Reply #122 on: February 25, 2008, 10:18:07 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?

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]

I asked an Apple rep the same question....he said yes...go for more RAM.

Steve
Logged
Jack Flesher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2595



WWW
« Reply #123 on: February 25, 2008, 10:58:21 AM »
ReplyReply

FWIW, I just made the switch after being a dedicated PC user since the "new" 8088  

Transitioned my laptop to a MacBook Pro (2.6, 4G RAM) in December, then my desktop to one of the new MacPros (3.2x8, 10 G RAM) in January.   I ported all of my images over to Mac format drives across a gig-LAN wire and that went perfectly well.   Set up of the MacPro was a breeze since the OS lets you copy programs and preferences form another Mac --- I ported everything over from my MBP and this worked perfectly too.  I went from dumb box with fresh OS install (on a faster/bigger drive) to a fully-loaded and ready to use Mac Pro in less than an hour total, INCLUDING the fresh instal of the OS.  CS3 even activated automatically(!)  

Problems were: 1) My favorite printing program, Q-Image is not Mac compatible. I have fusion and a copy of Win XP sitting on my desk, but have not yet installed it...  2) If you are a power user of Quicken on the PC, the transfer interface to Mac ABSOLUTELY SUCKS!  It will NOT remember ANY of your scheduled or memorized actions and only ports over the raw data itself.  Not only that, the UI is totally different, half the things that the PC version does automatically, like insert a current date, you have to do manually on the Mac version -- so plan on spending a week getting up to speed with QuickenMac...  

Other than those two issues, I can honestly say I don't know why I waited so long.  Everything else works better and runs better

Oh, and PS: Yes, 8 cores are a waste for CS and LR for NOW, but I suspect that with the introduction of CS4, both will fully utilize all 8...  

Cheers,
« Last Edit: February 25, 2008, 11:03:35 AM by Jack Flesher » Logged

Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1630


WWW
« Reply #124 on: February 25, 2008, 02:43:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Any multithreaded application will make use of multiple cores.  Multiple cores also help with other background applications, services, etc. and allow them some CPU time without choking your main app.

You will always have a reducing rate of return on multiple cores unless you're running multiple apps or those apps have a large number of threads running simultaneously (at which time you will see a more steady return from the additional cores).

If you want to listen to MP3s, browse the web, work on Photoshop, have email in the background, and FTP app for loading up to the web, a virus scanner, Lightroom, some widgets, and another utility or plug-in or something running, then the multiple cores will help deal with when all of those want a slice of time at once.

With some operating systems, you can even lock an executable to a particular core and force a spread.

New versions aren't going to benefit from more cores in and off themselves to any great extent (not in the ratio of 8 being twice as good as 4).  But as we do more and more simultaneously on our computer of choice, more cores will help to a greater extent.
Logged

David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #125 on: February 26, 2008, 12:23:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
FWIW, I just made the switch after being a dedicated PC user since the "new" 8088  

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=177263\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You must be a relative newcomer to computing.  My first Intel processor was the 4004 with a paper tape reader for reading in my programs.  As I recall, it did seem a bit faster than Vista.  
Logged

David White
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #126 on: March 05, 2008, 05:17:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Again, I want to thank everyone who took the trouble to respond to my question. There were some really useful, thought provoking replies. Itís easy to forget just how incredibly useful this forum is and I think we should thank Michael for keeping it running the way he does.

So, is the grass greener? Well, for me it is (so far) but only by a little. I was due to upgrade my systems and that was a big factor. I bought the new Macbook Pro for location and tethered, and will get a Macpro tower in a couple of weeks.

The learning curve for the Mac way was/is not so bad as I expected.  Sure, at times itís frustrating, but once you find out how, it soon feels just as easy. Re speed: the Macbook pro (2.5, 2gb ram, maybe 4 soon) is about as fast as my PC (dual core, 2gb ram) so thatís ok for location work, but I expect the Macpro to be significantly faster. And now Iím getting the hang of it all, it does feel a slightly better, ie, more logical, way of working. But of course, I could be simply justifying the hassle and expense!

Adobeís customer service team were most helpful and friendly, and the only cost for switching CS3 and LR was the minimal charge of shipping a couple of new DVDs. Iíll keep the old pc laptop, which still performs respectably, and probably also the desktop for some Windows apps. You get so little when selling itís usually worth keeping the stuff as backup.

My ďbottom line adviceĒ: if your PC gear is working well and doing the job you want it to, itís probably not worth the expense and learning curve to change. But if youíre ready to upgrade, Iíd recommend the Macs.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad