Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Tethered Speed Test: 1Ds Mark III vs P30+  (Read 19336 times)
paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 01, 2008, 04:03:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Paul,

The only thing that keeps me from shooting a lot of our commercial work with the Canon is the tethering, because with the MK2 connected to C-1 the previews are small and then there is the downside of not seeing the image on the back of the camera and the computer at the same time.

We tether for a number of reasons and it's usually project specfic.  Sometimes it's to name/rename files, or background processing, or to set a look in the computer and always to give everyone a decent view of the image.

A canon that will tether fast and allow straight importation to lightroom would cover most of this territory as long as it's stable and fast.

For commercial work I would love to get out of the workflow of producing jpegs for web galleries.

A 4 days advertising shoot can take up to 24 hours to adjust, tweak and process jpegs if there are thousands of images.

Personally I miss the days of the 1ds1, as the back end workflow was a snap.

I had the camera dialed in for color and look and all we did was just drop the medium jpegs into a web gallery and upload them.  Since they were already in SRGB it was just stupid easy to edit, make a web gallery and upload the files.  We use to laugh about it and had great fun doing it as I could just use a laptop, set in a restaurant or coffee shop in almost any place in the world and while having an espresso put the galleries up effortlessly.

Going to medium format changed that and though C-1 is fast in processing and stable, having to produce a jpeg from a raw file from 6,000 images has become a burden.

BTW:  When you tether the mark 3 can you see the preview on the back of the camera?

Thanks.

JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199213\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i havnt quite sussed out all the features of the new canon, although i have shot quite a few jobs with it. i cant remeber the camera screen when i was tethering one my first few shoots, i was just under quite a lot of pressure juggling canon software and hitting computer/transfer buffer in no time at all. i just tended to shoot a few plates, then just pull the cord, and shoot untethered.

yesterday i just noticed that the pic doesnt show on the mk3 when tethering, but then we started shooting to both card and computer (a different experiment, trying to get some kind of redundancy) and then it showed on the back of the camera. so, maybe theres some function that does that?

anyway, ive managed to get windows xp to work with that software on my mac. it was relativly easy. now im trying to download the canon software (i cant find the original software disc), but it says that i cant use it on this system. i got dpp to go, but i need eos utility as well.
so i have to figure out this one before i can test.

paul
« Last Edit: June 01, 2008, 04:17:11 AM by paul_jones » Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 773



WWW
« Reply #21 on: June 01, 2008, 07:07:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I just used the supplied CD (solution disk V16) that came with the camera and everything is working ok. I don't know about the drivers but the eos utility is a 32bit application.

Arnau
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199215\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks, I have a Vista 64 machine here at home I'm using as a test bed to work out the kinks before I take Vista  primetime at the studio.  I'll try it out.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2008, 07:09:01 AM by infocusinc » Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 773



WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 01, 2008, 08:02:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
james, i run the supplied 5m cord with a 3m extension, and there isnt a difference in speed when using osx. ill test this technique as soon as i get a copy of xp, and see if the cable changes anything.

paul
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James, I'm using this active USB extention in addition to the cable supplied with the MKIII.  No problems and the speed is exactly the same as using only the factory supplied cable.

[a href=\"http://www.tripplite.com/products/product.cfm?productID=2423]http://www.tripplite.com/products/product.cfm?productID=2423[/url]

I use DSLR remote pro as the frontend and then set a hot folder in either Capture One V4, or Lihgtroom.  I prefer C1.  

http://www.breezesys.com/DSLRRemotePro/index.htm

DSLR remote pro can be used as a standalone as it delivers a full screen preview.  Speed is 4 seconds from shutter close to high res preview in DSLR remote and add 2 more seconds to get the preview in C1 or LR.

Since I shoot mainly static objects I have no clue about the buffer depth....I'm going into the shop today and I'll check it out.

http://www.breezesys.com/DSLRRemotePro/index.htm
Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 01, 2008, 11:44:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James, I'm using this active USB extention in addition to the cable supplied with the MKIII.  No problems and the speed is exactly the same as using only the factory supplied cable.

http://www.tripplite.com/products/product.cfm?productID=2423

I use DSLR remote pro as the frontend and then set a hot folder in either Capture One V4, or Lihgtroom.  I prefer C1. 

http://www.breezesys.com/DSLRRemotePro/index.htm

DSLR remote pro can be used as a standalone as it delivers a full screen preview.  Speed is 4 seconds from shutter close to high res preview in DSLR remote and add 2 more seconds to get the preview in C1 or LR.

Since I shoot mainly static objects I have no clue about the buffer depth....I'm going into the shop today and I'll check it out.

http://www.breezesys.com/DSLRRemotePro/index.htm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199242\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Thank You.

I have to admit I'm not too wild about diving into the windows world just to tether a camera.

We can work it and keep a PC for checking downloads to certain clients in Asia, but overall it's not something anyone in my studio is expert at, or really plans to be, but if I could tether a MarkIII quickly and with stability, then I'd load it and try it.

It's interesting, that the mfd backs do not produce a useable jpeg for preview and for web galleries.

I think it's kind of funny.  On one older laptop I have a screen saver which has images from a shoot I did years ago in all kind of mixed light, window, daylight, tungsten shot with the 1ds and these are just jpegs out of camera.  The color and tone is stunning and way better than any contact sheet I previously provided in the film days.  That type of workflow took hours instead of days and at the time made digital capture easy, even compared to film.

Now I shoot so much with mfd backs we know that we are starring at a lot of work on the backend, just to get the first set of web gallleries up.

I don't plan on selling my phase backs and buying only Mark III's but  in all honesty the one thing that kept me from this is the tethering of a dslr.  I really hate tethering the MKII and when the III came out the idea of USB just made no sense to me.

I know that backend software for medium format has gotten better and even faster, but I've asked a lot of people in the medium format business why the backs won't/can't produce a good jpeg and never received an answer I understand.

I won't deny that in some ways medium format really is a professional way to work, but in other ways it's almost a full time job keeping up with it, especially when they change software.

I love it when I'm traveling and in some studio next to me a photographer is shooting away with a Canon and if you talk and ask him/her about the camera, the post work the response is usually, "huh, I don't know, we just make a web gallery or the tech gives the client a disk of jpegs".

In other words there knowledge of digital is limited, but on the other hand they are also not burden with the thought of driver updates, software changes processing times, etc. etc.

Now me and my studios business model is obviously different as I have over 60 something (probably a lot more) terabytes of data stored for my clients that we manage the images, the retouching, down to the final delivery and most of that will not go away just because I change cameras, though it would be great if the lcd on a medium format back match the computer and the back produced a large enough jpeg to get to a web gallery without any processing.

I've said this for years, but if a camera maker really wants to understand what we do, don't just come to the set and look at the computer, come into the hotel room our our studios at midnight and watch us crunch out jpegs.

Better yet, come on set when there are about 9 clients and watch the requests and comments, like
"does that image have moire (no it's the preview), does that skin tone match the other girl (no but we will adjust it in post), can you put selects from the last 4 sessions online now because we have a designer that needs to drop them into the layout (yes, but it will take us a few minutes to process, correct etc.).

There are a lot of advantages to using a medium format back, frame dimensions, recovering exposure, detail and up to now the ability to tether with stability.

Still, I'm not unique that at this stage in my career I like a lot of other photographers are closed to being overburdened not just with digital capture, but with the work in general and anything that saves hours, or days is worth looking at.

When I step back and look at all of this my love is not digital imaging, my love is the photograph, my reasoning is to move forward and produce a profit.

Cameras, lenses, computers are all just a means to an end.

All of us examine these files in microscopic detail and a lot of us have just learned to accept the workflow and effort that is handed us, but once again when I look back at the ease of working with the first 1ds, it makes me wonder sometimes if we've really come that far forward in 5 years.



JR
« Last Edit: June 01, 2008, 12:03:08 PM by James R Russell » Logged

203
Guest
« Reply #24 on: June 01, 2008, 04:05:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I don’t know about you James, but in my experience the issue with tethering the Canons was the firewire port itself. I had 3 1D markII cameras, and each had to be sent in to CPS at least twice in a two year period for a *firewire port repair.* The port would bend and go bad with great frequency. I have also had three 5D bodies for the past year, they have probably shot 500,000 tethered images, and never an issue with the ports, or anything else really. Now I am using the 1Ds3 (with USB) and the connections are absolutely solid. And fast. Don’t worry about the USB port - the bottle neck seems to be either the USB implementation in the Macs, or the hard drive speed. (And by the way, the increase in dynamic range on the 1Ds3 is for real, and makes the files much more pliable, IMO. Between that, the huge bright viewfinder, extreme battery life, etc, it really is the best Canon yet. And indeed, I find Windows a lot faster with these files than the Macs are, even though my Windows machines have half the amount of  ram my Macs have.

(Someone should hack a better USB driver for OS X, eh?) I have two $750 17” screen Windows Vista laptops which run circles around my $3000 mac book pro.

I think the shirt in this file shows how nice the 1Ds3 highlights are:

http://www.pbase.com/r_p/image/96346653/original

Warts and all:
http://www.pbase.com/r_p/image/96349699/original

http://www.pbase.com/r_p/image/96256902/original

http://www.pbase.com/r_p/image/96441312/original
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2372


« Reply #25 on: June 02, 2008, 02:36:29 AM »
ReplyReply

The last time I tethered a DSLR was my D1x, which worked fairly well I might say. That was 5 years ago.

James gets to one point that is crucial to me as well. I would love to photograph more, to do more jobs but the post-processing just eats too much time.

It would be nice if we could save time there. Not only do I wonder why the ability to generate a some what post-processed JPG image is virtually non-existant but the integration with the leading image editing programs is also pretty weak.

I would love to have a connection from my raw editing/tethering program to PS via something like the image processor. This is a script that should be possible to integrate into the various programs. That way I can capture during the shoot and have it go through the raw editor towards a jpg that is also handled by one or more actions or droplets in PS. This way you get closer to walking off the set with something resembling the end-result than we are now.

I have asked this question to at least 2 manufacturers but apparently they don't see that these kind of solutions can be of real help. None of them gave this idea serious thought.

For me every minute I can get off the processing time per image counts. 1 minute per image off with a 240 image shoot means 4hours!!!

Sure there are photographers that only have to deliver a couple of decent images after a days shoot but I am not one of them and I am probably not that unique (I hope   )
« Last Edit: June 02, 2008, 02:41:17 AM by Dustbak » Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #26 on: June 02, 2008, 03:56:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have asked this question to at least 2 manufacturers but apparently they don't see that these kind of solutions can be of real help. None of them gave this idea serious thought.

For me every minute I can get off the processing time per image counts. 1 minute per image off with a 240 image shoot means 4hours!!!

Sure there are photographers that only have to deliver a couple of decent images after a days shoot but I am not one of them and I am probably not that unique (I hope   )
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

As I write this it is 1:45am in LA.

I just returned from a fashion shoot in the desert and previewed the images on the computer.

Today I shot with the Canons and the Leica.  I could have used the phase, but shot untethered and it really wasn't a check the detail type of day and I really didn't want to go through the effort of trying to interpret the lcd screen of a medium format back in bright sunlight.

Still, I could have shot it with either the P30+ or p21+ and ended up with a better end product, but out of the 23 gigs we shot today, adjusting and processing raw medium format files to jpegs will take at least 6 hours of on and off work, where as just throwing the medium jpegs in lightroom will take me about 2 hours of quick adjustments.

6 hours is a lot of savings and more importantly it's very fast to adjust a jepg for preview than load 23 gigs of raw files and wait for the previews to build and to make all of the adjustments, especially since 75% of what came out of the cameras today is very close to the first level of presentation.

To be honest I still have a hard time with the 35mm frame.  I don't think I will ever get used to it for a vertical page and though I remember most of the time to pull back and give the shot some air to fit the page, it's difficult when you shoot for emotion rather than a specific pre planned look.

Really I would rather shoot medium format for most of my work, but I'd give anything if there was a way to have a better on camera preview and a useable jpeg out of camera.

Then again this was one of those brutal 15 hour days of production and shooting and when I wake up 5 hours from now, staring down 6, or 8 hours of post production isn't something any of us look forward to.

Then again if the manufacturers are listening, it's more than time savings on the backend.

It's as is mentioned what you set in camera comes through on the software and what you see on the camera lcd matches the computer.



JR
« Last Edit: June 02, 2008, 04:17:37 AM by James R Russell » Logged

paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #27 on: June 02, 2008, 04:47:32 AM »
ReplyReply

well, i just managed to setup windows xp, running with VMware on the laptop .

download speed of images into the windows version dpp/eos utility is about 2 sec per capture, or over three times faster than osx version of dpp/eos cap.

could apple please get their act together! usb shouldnt be this slow. its stupid having to run pc software on a mac just to speed up the usb transfers.
 
james, it isnt a simple procedure to setup, and watch a networked "hot folder" on osx. you might have more luck than me, but all of this has taken me 8 hours on and off to find/ download various things to make it work. i havnt had anything to do with windows before, and i find windows the most unintuative software ever.

paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
Hans_de_Kort
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57



WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 02, 2008, 10:15:18 AM »
ReplyReply

All together it's quit simple.
You run eos utility on a virtualmachine (VMware, parralels) and drop the files in shared folder in XP.
In MacOsx you run eos utility as well and make the shared folder a monitored folder and there you are (You make a samba connection from Mac to PC, smb://)
Logged

psorantin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 49


« Reply #29 on: June 02, 2008, 03:02:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As I write this it is 1:45am in LA.

I just returned from a fashion shoot in the desert and previewed the images on the computer.

Today I shot with the Canons and the Leica.  I could have used the phase, but shot untethered and it really wasn't a check the detail type of day and I really didn't want to go through the effort of trying to interpret the lcd screen of a medium format back in bright sunlight.

...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

James,
Can you share some images that you took with the Leica M8?

I shoot a lot with the M8 (and my Hassy 503/Aptus), and like it a lot.

I remember an earlier post of you where you showed one M8 image you took; would be curious to see how you use the camera today, and the Leica lenses. I like in particular the look of the 75mm/f1.4 'lux, but its freaking hard to focus for my eyes at close distances and frame lines are not very accurate for the 75...

Peter
Logged

Peter Sorantin
New Jersey
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4122



« Reply #30 on: June 02, 2008, 05:43:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James,
Can you share some images that you took with the Leica M8?

I shoot a lot with the M8 (and my Hassy 503/Aptus), and like it a lot.

I remember an earlier post of you where you showed one M8 image you took; would be curious to see how you use the camera today, and the Leica lenses. I like in particular the look of the 75mm/f1.4 'lux, but its freaking hard to focus for my eyes at close distances and frame lines are not very accurate for the 75...

Peter
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199406\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You need a magnifier for the 75 Lux.

Edmund
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 02, 2008, 08:36:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
James,
Can you share some images that you took with the Leica M8?

I shoot a lot with the M8 (and my Hassy 503/Aptus), and like it a lot.

I remember an earlier post of you where you showed one M8 image you took; would be curious to see how you use the camera today, and the Leica lenses. I like in particular the look of the 75mm/f1.4 'lux, but its freaking hard to focus for my eyes at close distances and frame lines are not very accurate for the 75...

Peter
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Here it is in a full size jpeg.  

It's probably not everything you want to see, as it's been worked in lightroom and photoshop.

[a href=\"http://www.russellrutherford.com/final_leica.jpg]http://www.russellrutherford.com/final_leica.jpg[/url]


JR
Logged

TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #32 on: June 04, 2008, 11:21:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Here it is in a full size jpeg. 

It's probably not everything you want to see, as it's been worked in lightroom and photoshop.

http://www.russellrutherford.com/final_leica.jpg
JR
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=199446\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nice, looks like a file from a MFDB Kodak chip.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #33 on: August 06, 2008, 07:49:26 PM »
ReplyReply

mister jones,

on standard white 24 inch Imac, 2.5 gz, 2.5 gig ram, 10.4.1 osx with new 1ds Mark III and new EOS Utility to DPP tethered 17.4.1

shooting raw file and small jpeg which is written on cf card and both files to the computer it is around 2 seconds to full resolution preview the size of the i-mac screen

we did not use windows or run any parallel software   just osx

you can name the files in eos utility in the preferences and switch names without changing folders

the only problem is the backup files on the cf card have only the numbers not the same custom names in the computer

the canon software is not as useful as the c-1   though all of the functions work and it has stability

it is different to learn but it all works professional

i hope this is of use

bcooter


Quote
one of the assistants i work with showed me the tethered speed into canon software when running a macbookpro (just a 2.16) using boot camp and windows xp. it blew me away, it was taking less than 2 second to transfer and render a preview!
it was way faster than i have seen with my old p25 and C1 on a similar mac.

its a pity i only like osx. but,  i will have to get a copy of xp and try it myself.

chris, when is mk3 tethering coming? i havnt used C1 now for so long, been forced into using crap canon software, but the more i use canon, the more i need to get good at it and set up my systems around canon.

paul
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=198924\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: August 06, 2008, 08:46:57 PM by bcooter » Logged
dfphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


WWW
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2008, 12:40:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi can anyone expand on why Vista via Parallels results in 9" time from shutter to screen? This is on an imac 2.8 thanks I hate xp but vista isn't as bad...

DF
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #35 on: September 17, 2008, 11:33:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi can anyone expand on why Vista via Parallels results in 9" time from shutter to screen? This is on an imac 2.8 thanks I hate xp but vista isn't as bad...

DF
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=221582\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Can't tell you about parallels, but today got our 17" dell studio laptop (you'd need a big lap), running windows vista.

Nice computer, well made, still PC so don't really know that much about it.  The screen is bright but haven't calibrated it yet and we only had 5 mintues to run a quick test before meetings all day.

Anway, shooting raw and small jpeg, the buffer is there but only noticeable if you hold the button down and shoot very fast.  Shooting to the recycle of strobe or around a second or even less a frame and there is very little noticable buffer effect.  

The previews come up fast but shooting fast you overrun them, so shooting a burst of about 10 frames takes maybe 5 to 7 seconds for all of them to come up full rez. shooting slightly slower and the previews come up full rez real time.

EOS utility and dpp run the same as on a mac and vista is more mac like with a dock for the applications.

I can't say I would or would not recommend it, but it is much faster than a mac and at this point just as easy.

$2,700 for 4 gigs of ram, 640 gigs of hard drive, faster dual processors, MS Office, CS3 and a 17 inich high rez screen is a pretty good deal.

Once again this was a five minute test.  Tomorrow we will get further into it.

JR
Logged

flashfredrikson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


« Reply #36 on: September 18, 2008, 12:44:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Just installed VMWare Fusion and XP on the latest MacBook Pro and now I use Eos Utility in windows and Lightroom in OS X to tether. Works very good, as has been described before using a shared folder et as a hot folder in LR. It's really easy to set up, even if it`s scary to see xp on that mac. But as soon as it is set up you can hide VMWare and Xp and everything is back to normal. Speed is increased a lot, 2-3 seconds compared to 8 to write the file from the canon to the hd, 4-5 seconds till the preview pops up in LR. As far as I know, this doesn't work with parallels, as it still uses the mac usb drivers, which are the bottleneck. Alltogether, for 150 euros for VM + XP, it's a nice solution.

cheers,
martin.
Logged
James R Russell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984



WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2008, 01:42:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just installed VMWare Fusion and XP on the latest MacBook Pro and now I use Eos Utility in windows and Lightroom in OS X to tether. Works very good, as has been described before using a shared folder et as a hot folder in LR. It's really easy to set up, even if it`s scary to see xp on that mac. But as soon as it is set up you can hide VMWare and Xp and everything is back to normal. Speed is increased a lot, 2-3 seconds compared to 8 to write the file from the canon to the hd, 4-5 seconds till the preview pops up in LR. As far as I know, this doesn't work with parallels, as it still uses the mac usb drivers, which are the bottleneck. Alltogether, for 150 euros for VM + XP, it's a nice solution.

cheers,
martin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222254\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Another tethered test with the Dell Studio laptop and EOS utility.

Though not exact times, the files are transfered in around two seconds or less the previews come up full resolution 24" diagonal at less than 1.9 seconds.

This is shooting full rez raws and small jpegs to the computer and to the cf card.

Obviously you can shoot faster than 2 seconds a frame so you can get ahead of the previews, but there doesn't seem to be a bottleneck or a slow down on the previews coming in and rendering.

Previously on the mac there was a 11 or 12 frame buffer that took about 35 seconds to clear.

Now the buffer exists but only if you just hold the button down and you can resume shooting in just a few seconds after hitting the buffer.

There is a cool feature in the viewfinder that tells you how many frames before you go back on the buffer, it goes 1 then flips in a second to 4 then 6 etc. etc.

So, bottom line it now tethers to a point there will be few times that I have to wait for the buffer or a lot of preview rendering.

JR
Logged

nik
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


WWW
« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2008, 01:58:43 PM »
ReplyReply

If you're running an Intel Mac there's also VirtualBox from Sun Microsystems which is free. http://dlc.sun.com/virtualbox/vboxdownload.html#mac  I'll post when I'm finished testing on my Macbook Pro.

-Nik


Quote
Just installed VMWare Fusion and XP on the latest MacBook Pro and now I use Eos Utility in windows and Lightroom in OS X to tether. Works very good, as has been described before using a shared folder et as a hot folder in LR. It's really easy to set up, even if it`s scary to see xp on that mac. But as soon as it is set up you can hide VMWare and Xp and everything is back to normal. Speed is increased a lot, 2-3 seconds compared to 8 to write the file from the canon to the hd, 4-5 seconds till the preview pops up in LR. As far as I know, this doesn't work with parallels, as it still uses the mac usb drivers, which are the bottleneck. Alltogether, for 150 euros for VM + XP, it's a nice solution.

cheers,
martin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=222254\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
dfphoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


WWW
« Reply #39 on: September 24, 2008, 05:04:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi thanks for the tip on Parallels, it does use the apple usb I noticed that on the bottom right. I wish one of you guys would use Vista to tell me if it works, with Parallels my Vista is similar to a Mac has a keyboard little pop up that shows me what keys are different on pc  vs. mac.

I have VM app will have to see how to get it to work my imac seems to be having some issues blue screen yesterday and weird graphic issues today just reloaded all 10.5 that software sucks.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad