Ad
Ad
Ad
Poll
Question: What Computer do you use?
Mac - 121 (42%)
Intel - 97 (33.7%)
AMD - 67 (23.3%)
Other (please tell us) - 3 (1%)
Total Voters: 39

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: What Computer do you use?  (Read 19517 times)
Stef_T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« on: February 05, 2005, 12:52:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry, I am not aware of this mouse issue? I know that the mouse that comes with the Mac isn't very good (same things goes with anything you get from dell) but you can still attach any USB mouse to a Mac and it would work fine, right?

Stefan
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2005, 11:14:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Quote
As for Photographers going Windows, I think it's due to cost and ignorance
I disagree. If you're used to Mac, it's easier than Windows, but if you learned computers on Windows machines, Mac OS is not particularly intuitive to figure out, and there is no compelling reason to switch. And if you can get better Photoshop performance for 2/3 the cost, what's ignorant about using the Windows platform?
If you read past my first sentence in that paragraph I am talking about people new to computers in general and not nessasarily only people visiting these forums...

Many Do-It-Yourself-ers tend to go with Win due to the customizeability of that platform. But DIYs (and computer savvy DIYs) are a small portion of the artistic/photographic crowd. Most people don't know a terrible amount about computers and easily get "sticker-shock" as they don't fully understand the value of a system.

Also the cost benefit of going windows depends on your setup. If absolute high-end is the game (dual CPU for example) then the Mac can actually be cheaper. Mid (where most photogs land) and low-range (no pro-photographers land here) the WinPC has the price advantage.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2005, 02:00:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Maybe 64 bit port of Photoshop running on a 64 or 128 way Itanium system?
64-bit PS? That's on Macintosh and with the release of Tiger it'll be true 64-bit (not just partial).

You'll have to wait untill WinXP 64 comes to the PC. WinXP 64-bit is currently in RC 2.

Also:
* There is no 128-bit Itanium.
* 64-bit computing would not increase the heat produced by the chip in any significant way. It only increases the instructions the chip can run (very simplified).
Logged
Robert Spoecker
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 162



« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2005, 08:31:54 PM »
ReplyReply

I have had so many virus problems with my VIAO table top computer I switched to a Mac G4 running OSX 10.3.3. I am running Virtual PC on it
because I need to run word 2000 on it for a very small and modest business venture I am engaged in. I am hoping that I would have to access the Internet in Virtual PC to get a virus that affects Virtual PC. I only access the Internet from OSX. Am I living in a fools paradise or am I correct in my assumption? Any one have any difinative answer to this question.

Robert
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2005, 06:56:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I see what your saying
Logged
merriwolf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3



WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2005, 01:22:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I currently use a Mac 12" Aluminum 1.33 GHz G4 PowerBook running OS X 10.3.7, sometimes attached to a 19" Samsung SyncMaster 192MP display when I want a larger and better view.

I also have a 2.8 GHz Intel PC running XP, but seldom use it unless I have no choice (i.e. syncing my PDA) as I still prefer the Mac for its ease of use and greater security.

I first got involved with computers in 1966 when I learned to program and use them and hated them for their nonintuitive complexity until I saw my first Mac in 1985 and immediately bought one. I now support both Mac and Windows because competition is good for us all and look forward to the day when Linux truly competes.
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8883


« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2005, 02:19:20 AM »
ReplyReply

It was increased to 6GB of DDR2 RAM within days of my taking delivery because I hadn't realised the motherboard was capable of 8 Gb of RAM and that the company that assembled the computer for me had started advertising 2GB sticks of RAM in the period between my ordering the computer and their delivering it. They were prepared to swap 2x1GB of the 4 sticks for 2x2GB, for the price difference, giving me a total of 6GB. I would have got the full 8GB if I could have found any reference to a benifit in Photoshop, on the net or at Adobe. Apparently 8GB on a Mac is of some benefit, but not with Windows.

Now if only ColorEyes had a 64bit driver for my DTP94, this system would be fully functional  Cheesy .
Logged
Stef_T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 266


« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2005, 04:02:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I'd apreciate if you could tell me what computer you use for photoshop. In case you use more then one, please pick the one that you use most or prefer using.

I would like to refrain from turing this into a flame war, but I would apreciate if you told me how do you find your computer now (good/bad/planning on getting a new one) and why you picked that one as opposed to something else.

Thank you all for your time.

Stefan
Logged
Dinarius
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 709


« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2005, 10:56:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My Win XP PC has never crashed.  Not once.  

PS, yes I agree on the mouse issue  Cheesy
Agree and agree!

Glad to see I'm not alone on the mouse issue. About time it was aired! ;-)

Seriously though, it's horses for courses. The decision makers of the digital image world have, for the most part, been using MACs since a time when choosing the competition simply wasn't a consideration. Those of us who came to the party a little later, often as in my case requiring the use of other very PC-oriented software, have been lucky that the playing field is now a lot more level.

But, you pays your money and you takes your choice, as we say around here.

D.

ps. still perfer my mouse though! ;-)
Logged
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2005, 12:36:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
and so they buy PC unaware that they'd probably be better off with a more new-user friendly platform.

Another reason for some of us to stick with PCs...

As pointed out, the office market uses PCs much more than Macs.  I work in an office (not photography-related) that uses only PCs, so that's what I'm forced to use there.  It would drive me nuts to switch back and forth between different operating systems constantly, having to remember the differences between them and change my manual reactions to match, so I use a PC at home too for consistency.

Lisa
Logged

giles
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 209


« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2005, 12:36:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not when you shoot 1500+ RAWs at a concert or sporting event and want to get a color web gallery (with correct white balance and other tweaked conversion settings) posted in a reasonable time frame. The fastest available hardware is none too sppedy for such things.
Mmm.  An additional 2s/image for 1500 images would get you close to an extra hour.  In that case, buy the fastest you can, if you can't batch enough of the work.

Maybe 64 bit port of Photoshop running on a 64 or 128 way Itanium system?  Of course, the power requirements and air conditioning to run the system adds to the cost ...

Giles
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2005, 09:39:48 PM »
ReplyReply

First off, why did you buy VPC to run Word 2000 when youy could have bought the full version fo Word for OSX for less?

Anyhow, if you were to get a virus on the mac that is geared for Windows it won't do you any harm unless you get the virus through VPC in which case it'll only effect Windows within VPC. You still could however get a virus that is cross-platform or made for Unix or even contribte to the spread of Windows-based viruses.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2227



WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2005, 06:25:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I love macs, who are you preaching to!  I'm just talking about people that specifically switch because of the reasons I mentioned...reasons that have nothing to do with the inhearent platform

'Oh, I had blue screens and crashes, and got infections, oh, I couldn't deal with a PC anymore, so I went MAC'.  That's very common to hear.  And it just means the user didn't know what they are doing, and got infected.  When MAC virii start spreading more like they do for the PC< those type of users will be back in the same boat...'oh, my mac kept crashing and getting infected, I can't take it anymore, I went to (linux?  LOL)'

Get it?
Logged

ausoleil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 38


« Reply #13 on: April 22, 2005, 08:48:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Linux could and would truly compete if vendors like Adobe would release apps like Photoshop for the platform.  For some reason, there is a misconception that if a commercial application is released to the Linux platform it somehow is forced into the GPL.  This is maddening, and quite frankly, I see Microsoft's hegemonic hand in this.  After all, Microsoft has led the charge in the computer world for some time to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about Linux, because they know it is a better performing platform and as an open platform they could not control as they have Windows.

I agree about the Mac's inherent advantage in ease of use, and I have a collection of Macs dating back all the way to the same time you do.  Every now and again, for fun, I will fire up an old 128 and play with it -- and the amazing thing is the relative consistency back to the very beginning.

My only problem with Apple is the extreme premium they charge for hardware.  For me, the decision came down to purchasing a dual G5 or a 400mm VR lens -- and since at the end of the day, the print cares not one whit about what computer platform edited and printed it, I went the cheaper route.  When it comes to glass for the camera, the print does indeed show the quality of the lens.  Seems wiser to me to put my money there.

However, if Apple ever comes out with a truly competitive price/performance option, I will happily resume using their products.
Logged
tived
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 691


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2005, 08:11:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
. Intel Pentium D 830 3.0GHz Dual Core S775 64 bit CPU
. Asus P5LD2 Deluxe motherboard
. 4GB Kingmax DDR2 533MHz RAM
. Matrox P650 PCIe 128 video card
. 16x Pioneer DVD burner
. 2x WD 36GB Raptor SATA hard drives (10,000 rpm)
. 2x WD 200GB SATA hard drives (7200 rpm)
. Win XP Professional X64

Budget system! Being built!
Sounds like a sweet system Ray!

Henrik
Logged
Robert Spoecker
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 162



« Reply #15 on: February 03, 2005, 11:08:21 PM »
ReplyReply

I recently got a Macintosh G4. I have been using windows based IBM clones for more years than I care to remember. Recently my latest pc cought a virus or probably a few viruses and I completly rebuild the whole C drive but a few days later it would be infected again, I heard that the Mac platform did not have these problems so I switched. I am running Photoshop CS and it runs nice. I did have some programs and data pertainig to a very small business endeavor so I put a copy of Virtual PC running Windows XP on the Mac. This is a hassle but at least I can still use the Mac to run PC software. So far no viruses as I do not access the Internet from Virtual PC but only from the Mac OSX side. When or if I ever migrate totally to the Mac I will remove the Virtual PC software and never look back.

I am a happy Mac er  Cheesy  and not so happy PC er  :p
Logged
etmpasadena
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2005, 09:56:27 AM »
ReplyReply

If you have an Apple store near you, pay them a visit and see for yourself. As for the price/performance advocates any true comparison must be done by comparing machines which are identical in specs. Once you do that the price difference is minimal.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2005, 01:41:10 AM »
ReplyReply

The market share of Win and Mac goes back to the early days of the platforms. MS gambled on the buisness market and Apple gambled on the educational market figuring that if people were learning computers on the mac they'd buy a mac. It didn't work out that way; MS gambled correctly...

As for Photographers going Windows, I think it's due to cost and ignorance (generalizing- not neccsarily on this site alone). Many photographers are used to film and never had to deal with computers. They are now switching to digital and suddenly need a computer. They get a little freaked by the initial costs of things ("I want quality that matches my MF but $1500 for a camera!?" is something I hear a bunch) and see that PCs are alot cheaper than Macs and so they buy PC unaware that they'd probably be better off with a more new-user friendly platform.

Oh, My current system:
Dell 4400
Intel P4 1.6Ghz
1GB ram
GeForce4 Ti 4400
Dual monitors
Logitec MX700 mouse

My next system will definatly be a Mac.
Logged
Gabe
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 146


« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2005, 04:07:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That test at Rob Galbriath would have been interesting a year ago but holds no relevance today

... erm, a year ago it would have been a year out of date (or am I missing something?)


As for OSX viruses: what are they? When did they surface? How are they transmitted?

I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm not about to suggest it'll never happen (there were a handful for the Classic MacOSs, for example). I'm not suggesting I'm an expert by any means. But I genuinely want to know, as I'm unaware of the existence of even one that affects OSX. I do spend quality time investigating occasionally (although I haven't gone on a proper hunt for a few months now).

Outside of a few proofs-of-concept that never went any further than that (and were quickly addressed by Apple), the closest thing to a virus that I am aware of is a "zombie" script for OSX which can do all sorts of truly hideous things to the machine it's installed on. I mean really frightening stuff.. But it's not a virus (and is even discussed on the forum from whence it came as being more 'nifty' than 'useful' due to the hoops one must jump through to get it working). It requires extensive physical access to the computer, the open-firmware password, an admin password, and it's not self-replicating. A large number of Windows trojans put this thing to shame in terms of both features and ease-of-use - not to mention installed base!

Besides, with that level of access to the machine, they can do anything they want. Give up. If you can manage to get this thing installed on your box without your knowledge, well... you probably won't find THIS cartoon very amusing either.

The next biggest threat to OSX that I can see would be to people running Virtual PC (which for those who don't know is a Microsoft product that allows you to install and run Windows on the Mac). I guess this could be considered splitting-hairs, but it's a bona-fide way to make all kinds of viruses run on modern Apple hardware, and they'll do all the nasty things to your Virtual PC partition/install that they can do to the x86 machines they were initially coded for. Performance will be lacklustre compared to running them on native hardware, however  These are still Windows viruses affecting Windows though, so does this even count? Who runs Windows without AVS and the joy that is "Windows Update Mondays" anyway?

About the only valid way I can see to run a genuine virus on your Apple hardware under OSX (and again: I'm soliciting updates to my level of understanding here), would be to acquire one of the many macro viruses written for Microsoft Word.. Needless to say, this is not because of a flaw in the OS's security architecture.

Lastly, I can't think of a piece of adware/spyware for the MacOS that's any more threatening than RealPlayer, and I'm sure there are quite a few people out there who would strongly disagree with that classification. Can someone point me to something worse though? Fact is, I really don't consider spyware or adware to be a real threat to any platform, annoying and sneaky as it may be. But once it becomes installable without user input it moves into virus or trojan territory, does it not?

User negligence is a treat to any and all computer systems. Need to rid your life of spyware or adware? Follow best practice and stop installing it
Logged
djgarcia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 343



WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 02, 2005, 06:08:48 PM »
ReplyReply

In the PC world that's known as mouse acceleration, configurable in the mouse settings. See, we're not so different after all .
Logged

Over-Equipped Snapshooter - EOS 1dsII & 1DsIII, Zeiss & Leica lenses
http://improbablystructuredlayers.net
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad