upgrading computer - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 16-85 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

06/23/2006 12:11:30 AM · #26

I'm hoping to move up from an iBook to a MacBook sometime this week. If portability wasn't an issue, I'd be going 20" iMac Core Duo in a heartbeat. Maybe I'll sell my desktop computer and monitor and get both. :-D

talmy

Nikon D300s

06/23/2006 12:11:35 AM · #27

Originally posted by scalvert:

Note in the tests that the low-end MacBooks with Intel graphics actually ran Photoshop faster than MacBook Pro models with dedicated ATI 128MB graphics cards. Unless you're playing games or modeling 3D, the integrated video is a non-issue.

Absolutely! These (high end) cards are optimized for 3D -- they don't benchmark them for 2D these days because the market (primarily gamers) only care about 3D performance. Likewise all the RAM on the cards is a waste. 16MB does fine for a 1600x1200x24 display. I used Matrox cards with 16MB for years this way.

That was another irony in the $8000 dual-Xeon workstation I've got -- they bought it with a $1500 high-end professional 3D graphics card, yet the applications (CAD tools, but 2D) never take advantage of any of the features.

BTW, the problem with the dual Xeons is the memory has to run slower than in a single Pentium 4 system so most applications (none of the CAD programs I use are multithreaded) actually run faster on the Pentium 4. Also the hyperthreading on the Pentium 4 can be enabled and increases the performance on the Pentium 4, potentially higher than the dual Xeon because of the memory bottleneck. Hyperthreading cannot be enabled on the dual Xeons (making it 4 processors) because the OSes can't draw a distinction between the real and virtual processors and might just as well divide two active threads on on real processor instead of using both real processors -- again causing the performance to drop below that of a similar speed Pentium 4.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

06/23/2006 12:19:47 AM · #28

Pardon my total ignorance here, but are you saying that you can run Windows XP on a MacBook?

tate

Apple iPhone 15 Pro

06/23/2006 12:22:26 AM · #29

Go Mac ... forget worrying about viruses and scary e-mails that might blow-up your computer.
Even if you get a non-intel machine (old), you could run a soft-windows type software that will allow a PC to run inside the Mac. If you're gonna upgrade, there's not been a better time.

Make sure to take advantage of Apple's built-in firewall in OSX: Firewall on a Mac

The latest iMac is pretty much 1 piece and has enough fire-power for the avg user (I used to have towering macs with 3 hard-drives and 4 slotted slapped with RAM .... now the standard hard-drive, RAm and video card are enough for the avg multi-media geek). Some of Apple's software is a little hokey IMHO .. .but most is decent and comes installed already on these new macs.

PS: Mac's monitors view at a slightly different resolution and tend to view brighter ... a result of the gamma difference ... Link Explaining This â�¦
in Photoshop, you can preview images how they should appear in PC RGB and Mac RGB (View > Proof Set-up).

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 00:24:50.

Jason_Cross

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/23/2006 12:24:40 AM · #30

Originally posted by ursula:

Right now I have a Toshiba Satellite laptop, Intel Centrino 1.40 GHz processor, 512 MB of RAM, 50 GB harddrive. It's a wide screen. I have a second monitor attached (a ViewSonic).

I've always wanted to go MAC (I was stuck with PC because of work, but I'm in the process of slowly ending my current employment - hopefully by December, and then I have no idea what I'll do, YEAH!). But I am much more familiar with PC, and have had no problems with PC.

I hadn't decided on how to get a new computer - I imagine buying either from a major vendor or retail, I don't think I have the ability to build my own.

Just by jumping into a full size PC you will be able to dramatically improve performance. Your laptop will get slower and slower the warmer and warmer it gets when you hammer the CPU while rendering graphics. I just built a PC for my brother in law for about $350 (because he blew a bunch of the budget on a real nice video card) and we were able to get him something in the 2.8ghz range, 7200rpm hd, and a gig of ram. His computer renders video very quickly, so for photos it would be all you would need. I would check out //www.geeks.com or if you know more of what you want go to //www.pricewatch.com and click on systems to see some great prices on computers from all the web sites. You can buy them already made from these places, and if you do a little foot work it will serve you well. I prefer anything to a dell or gateway, because they load them up with so much garbage that almost every process is slowed down. If you take a computer run strait windows xp installed from scratch, and let the OS do it's job without all the 3rd party garbage on it, you will be amazed at how fast your computer can be.

If you need some help I would be happy to assist.

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 00:31:37.

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

06/23/2006 12:27:04 AM · #31

Originally posted by ursula:

Originally posted by awpollard:
how bout a Tablet PC where it's a laptop or the screen swivels around, lays flat and becomes a tablet with touch screen...

I know shameless plug for a sister company... but I got to play with one of these and they are sweet.

ED: Check the gallery shots

One of the participants in a conference I attended recently had one of these. It was quite cool, but I don't think it's what I need or want.

Portability is not an issue (I have the laptop for that). The issue is photo processing ability (speed, clarity).

Hmmmm. So much to think about.

Yup there's a lot to think about...

There's a lot of "If I were you, I'd..." going on in this thread (myself included) but in the end it not for us... You just got to go play with some of the new units, and when you finally say "Hey I really like the way this feels" that is probably the one for you.

06/23/2006 12:32:53 AM · #32

Originally posted by ursula:

Pardon my total ignorance here, but are you saying that you can run Windows XP on a MacBook?

Correct (and faster than virtually any PC laptop available). Ironic, isn't it?

DjFenzl

06/23/2006 12:33:25 AM · #33

Just in case it helps at all I bought my Dell Laptop as a desktop replacement a month ago for $1400.

It has a 19" truelife LCD that runs 1920X1200
Intel Core Duo 1.86ghz processor
Geforce 7900 (I can run any current game on it's highest settings)
1gb DDR2 533Mhz RAM
100GB 7200 RPM SATA drive
Sound Blaster Audigy High Def. Audio

So far I am VERY happy with it and the price could not be beat. It's WAY faster than the home built Intel P4 3.6 I had before. No regrets whatsoever.

It would have cost me $2250 but I found a $750 off coupon on fatwallet.com . The promotion I bought mine on was over in a week but they are always running deals like that. My company has used Dell for years (we have over 150,000 employees) and from what I have seen and experienced they are just as reliable as anything else out there,

Just something to consider. You can get a laptop that competes with a desktop and it doesn't have to cost a small fortune,

06/23/2006 12:34:11 AM · #34

Originally posted by scalvert:

I just checked into the 20" iMac Core Duo at www.apple.com. It says that it has:

512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB GDDR3 memory

Yet it seems that everyone is saying you need lots of RAM, 2 gigs or so. Why would the iMac work when it seems to say it has 512 MB of RAM, and the graphics card 128 MB of RAM?

----

Also, the price difference between a MacBook and iMac is not that big. Why are you getting a MacBook and not the iMac you want?

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 00:37:20.

06/23/2006 12:38:31 AM · #35

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by ursula:
Pardon my total ignorance here, but are you saying that you can run Windows XP on a MacBook?

Correct (and faster than virtually any PC laptop available). Ironic, isn't it?

At the same time? I mean, can you run XP and the Mac system simultaneously? Or, can I run PSCS under XP and something like FileMaker under the Mac system?

06/23/2006 12:38:45 AM · #36

Originally posted by ursula:

Why would the iMac work when it seems to say it has 512 MB of RAM, and the graphics card 128 MB of RAM?

All computers ship with minimal RAM. The iMac supports up to 2GB of RAM (though 1GB is sufficient if you're on a budget). As noted earlier, the graphics card is a non-issue. You'll really only be using 32-64MB of that video memory. The rest is for dual monitors, 3D, projectors, etc. FWIW, adding RAM is very easy, and it's readily available for about 2/3 of what Apple charges.

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 00:41:28.

06/23/2006 12:42:53 AM · #37

And another question, just to make sure: If I have a Mac, and the rest of the family has PCs (and I have my old Toshiba still, because I like it), can I still run the wireless internet router the same way I have it now? In other words - the router doesn't break if not all computers are the same operating system, right?

Would that be the same for printers also? In other words, can the same printer be used for both a Mac and a PC?

(Now you all know how terribly dumb I am at this)

06/23/2006 12:43:00 AM · #38

Originally posted by ursula:

Why are you getting a MacBook and not the iMac you want?

I want a portable for vacations, GTGs and remote shoots.

06/23/2006 12:44:11 AM · #39

Originally posted by ursula:

...can I still run the wireless internet router the same way I have it now?

You don't have to change anything to use a Mac with those systems. It just works.

06/23/2006 12:46:45 AM · #40

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by ursula:
Why are you getting a MacBook and not the iMac you want?

I want a portable for vacations, GTGs and remote shoots.

Ah, OK, thank you! Sorry about the rather nosey question.

06/23/2006 12:46:49 AM · #41

Originally posted by ursula:

...can you run XP and the Mac system simultaneously?

Apple's free BootCamp software allows you to startup the computer in Windows or Mac OS X (you'll need to install Windows). A new application called Parallels (about $80) allows you to use Windows within OS X.

06/23/2006 12:52:14 AM · #42

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by ursula:
Why would the iMac work when it seems to say it has 512 MB of RAM, and the graphics card 128 MB of RAM?

All computers ship with minimal RAM. The iMac supports up to 2GB of RAM (though 1GB is sufficient if you're on a budget). As noted earlier, the graphics card is a non-issue. You'll really only be using 32-64MB of that video memory. The rest is for dual monitors, 3D, projectors, etc. FWIW, adding RAM is very easy, and it's readily available for about 2/3 of what Apple charges.

The iMacs look like they will fall apart any minute. I mean, they look so sleek. They don't have a big clunky case that I can take apart to add memory. So, what I'm asking is, if I were to get one and add memory, wouldn't it fall apart on me?

[and you're allowed to laugh]

crayon

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

06/23/2006 12:53:29 AM · #43

Originally posted by ursula:

Would that be the same for printers also? In other words, can the same printer be used for both a Mac and a PC?

depends. if your printer do not have support for mac, then it wont work.

DjFenzl

06/23/2006 12:58:14 AM · #44

Ram is cheap and easy to upgrade after the fact, if you find a good deal with not as much memory as you'd like I'd still take it.

06/23/2006 01:01:52 AM · #45

Originally posted by ursula:

...if I were to get one and add memory, wouldn't it fall apart on me?

AHAHAHAHAHA! Er... I mean, no it wouldn't. They're quite sturdy.

crayon

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

06/23/2006 01:06:21 AM · #46

Originally posted by Megatherian:

Ram is cheap and easy to upgrade after the fact, if you find a good deal with not as much memory as you'd like I'd still take it.

Easy maybe for you, but from Ursula's posts, it appears to me she may not even know what are the differences of all the grades and speeds of RAM available, or which are compatible, or which will actually slow down her computer (if a slower speed is mixed with the existing) and so forth. I'd advise her to get it all in her initial purchase if she could - I've also seen people "frying" their RAMs or motherboards with static while attempting to upgrade.

06/23/2006 01:06:50 AM · #47

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by ursula:
...if I were to get one and add memory, wouldn't it fall apart on me?

AHAHAHAHAHA! Er... I mean, no it wouldn't. They're quite sturdy.

Okeydoqui, I'll take your word for it. They don't look sturdy. They look awfully pretty though.

So if you were to get one with 512 base memory, how much memory can you add? Another 3 512 cards? Or is it better to have just 2 1 Gig cards?

06/23/2006 01:08:11 AM · #48

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by Megatherian:
Ram is cheap and easy to upgrade after the fact, if you find a good deal with not as much memory as you'd like I'd still take it.

Easy maybe for you, but from Ursula's posts, it appears to me she may not even know what are the differences of all the grades and speeds of RAM available, or which are compatible, or which will actually slow down her computer (if a slower speed is mixed with the existing) and so forth. I'd advise her to get it all in her initial purchase if she could - I've also seen people "frying" their RAMs or motherboards with static while attempting to upgrade.

Yeah, you're right about that. But I'm good at asking lots of questions, and eventually I get most things :) I figure with a Mac there must not be that many different choices for memory as there probably are for PCs.