Buying a new laptop...Ideas please

11/30/2006 03:02:56 PM · #26

Originally posted by hokie:

Thanks Gordon..you are really giving great advice.

I'm in the middle of evaluating a intel core 2 duo macbook pro for business & personal use myself. There's a lot of good things about it and a lot of things that are bit of a mess right now.

Personally the CS2 performance issues makes it a non-starter until that's resolved. For business use I'm thinking it might be workable, but the Office compatibility is the biggest frustration.

I'd like to buy a mac to use OSX, not buy it because it happens to be good hardware and then throw away the OSX advantages and reinstall windows for the performance/ compatibility.

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 15:03:16.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

11/30/2006 03:03:15 PM · #27

Catfight! *MEW! Pfft! Pfft! Hissssss!"

Originally posted by Gordon:

Or you can reboot into windows and run it there & pay for two operating systems. The difference is if you didn't buy a mac, you'd only buy one operating system. Just pointing out the additional costs involved.

Many laptops ship with Windows XP Media Center edition. If you want the full "pro" OS, that's generally $149 extra. Apple includes their pro OS on every Mac, along with iPhoto and other media tools. Try configuring a Dell laptop with the exact same specs as Apple's midrange MacBook and then talk about "additional costs involved!"

I'm actually looking at a MacBook or MacBook Pro and Aperture for myself. The main sticking point is that for the extra cost the Pro comes with a good video card, Firewire 800, and room for 3Gb RAM, but Aperture is no slouch with the MacBook's GMA graphics either. Aperture will handle most of my needs, so I don't mind the comparatively slow performance of Mac Photoshop on Intel (it's still about the same speed as my current computer).

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 15:08:57.

Canon EOS-20D

11/30/2006 03:03:15 PM · #28

I've been using a Thinkpad for the past three years and it's time to start looking towards an upgrade. I want to consider other brands but honestly, I'm not especially keen on giving up my eraser tip mouse which I use exclusively. I hate those trackpad things and have zero interest in hauling around a mouse with me (I use the laptop all over the house). A small thing, perhaps, but a big deal to me!

colema19

Canon EOS-20D

11/30/2006 03:05:36 PM · #29

Originally posted by hokie:

Thanks Gordon..you are really giving great advice.

Yeah colema19..I did look at the Asus products on the advice of another and their price to performance ratio is great. I was a little concerned about buying something out of the mainstream (IBM, APPLE, DELL, SONY , HP ETC) but Asus really offers one if not the only package where I can get a 15" screen, 100 gig 7200rpm harddrive, AND a nice next gen video card for around $2,000 ..give or take. Plus...service issues do not seem to be a problem.

Asus is far from mainstream within the IT community(especially in the enthusiast/high performance market). They are a very well known motherboard maker, they are probably an OEM maker for a lot of the larger brands anyway. They just in the last year or two finally started selling laptops directly under their own name. Their motherboards for desktops are generally very good and well regarded. So I wouldn't worry about that if the "name brand" thing is an issue for you.

11/30/2006 03:06:53 PM · #30

Originally posted by scalvert:

I don't want to buy a midrange macbook.

I want to get the highest performance system I can, because right now with a dual core 2.8GHz AMD desktop, photoshop CS2 is slower than I'd like when working with high resolution 16 bit files.

I want a portable solution that will run photoshop CS2 as best as it can be run. I'd quite like to not have to reboot and switch operating systems just to run applications well. It doesn't seem such a big thing to ask, yet all these smokescreens get thrown up all the time to mask the truth.

What does Dell & midrange macbooks have to do with that ? What does products that support photoshop 5 have to do with that ?

Hokie seems to be asking the same original question too - but I might just be misunderstanding it. Perhaps he does want to run a middling performance system with photoshop 5. In which case a midrange macbook and crossovers seems ideal.

if I buy a mac, I need to spend the additional $100-$200 to buy winXP, to get it to run CS2 well. It is just the current reality. At some point, I'll need to shell out $600 to buy the OSX native version, if I want to run OSX and Photoshop CS3 well. Again - if I'm missing something, feel free to address those issues, not some other tangent.

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 15:10:28.

11/30/2006 03:12:46 PM · #31

Originally posted by scalvert:

I'm actually looking at a MacBook or MacBook Pro and Aperture for myself. The main sticking point is that for the extra cost the Pro comes with a good video card, Firewire 800, and room for 3Gb RAM, but Aperture is no slouch with the MacBook's GMA graphics either. Aperture will handle most of my needs, so I don't mind the comparatively slow performance of Mac Photoshop on Intel (it's still about the same speed as my current computer).

Aperture should run a lot faster with a card that supports OpenGL well.
It is probably worth the extra expense.

I think my main problem is that coming from an actually fast desktop that is too slow for 1DII 16 bit files, I don't want to go to something that's going to be even slower. Going to 3Gb of RAM from 2Gb made a quite big difference in that area too. I should have another macbook pro from Apple to evaluate soon so we'll see.

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 15:18:13.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

11/30/2006 03:17:41 PM · #32

Originally posted by mk:

Is that because you just like tweaking hard red nipples ? I had a thinkpad for a while - great laptops. I didn't like the trackpads either. I've sort of gotten used to it on my sony vaio, but it is almost useless for photo editing.

Hmm, I wonder if I could use the pen from my graphics tablet on the touchpad ? :)

Canon EOS-20D

11/30/2006 03:24:48 PM · #33

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by mk:
I've been using a Thinkpad for the past three years and it's time to start looking towards an upgrade. I want to consider other brands but honestly, I'm not especially keen on giving up my eraser tip mouse which I use exclusively. I hate those trackpad things and have zero interest in hauling around a mouse with me (I use the laptop all over the house). A small thing, perhaps, but a big deal to me!

Is that because you just like tweaking hard red nipples ? I had a thinkpad for a while - great laptops. I didn't like the trackpads either. I've sort of gotten used to it on my sony vaio, but it is almost useless for photo editing.

Hmm, I wonder if I could use the pen from my graphics tablet on the touchpad ? :)

Maybe I'll just go for another Thinkpad (despite their ooogliness) and wait for the whole dual this and that thing to get itself worked out better.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/30/2006 03:32:15 PM · #34

Originally posted by mk:

Maybe I'll just go for another Thinkpad (despite their ooogliness) and wait for the whole dual this and that thing to get itself worked out better.

I might just wait on a laptop quad core instead.

mssnare

Nikon D50

11/30/2006 03:36:09 PM · #35

Originally posted by scalvert:

My current setup is a MacBook Pro and Aperture. I am like you in that 90% of the editing I do, I can use Aperture. The setup works great and I have zero complaints.

I originally ordered the MacBook in May then by June sent it back and ordered the Pro. I loved the MacBook but I wanted the video card and RAM capabilities that the Pro offered.

Now that I'm typing this I can't remember what the point of me replying to your post was...

11/30/2006 03:42:24 PM · #36

Originally posted by Gordon:

What does Dell & midrange macbooks have to do with that ? What does products that support photoshop 5 have to do with that ?

I only picked the midrange because the OP wanted a 13" screen. Whatever. I tried to compare Apple's high-end for you, but I haven't found a match yet. Dell doesn't appear to have a 2.33GHz Core2Duo laptop. The Thunkpad T60 series will go that fast, but maxes out at a 15.0" screen and 100GB HD (compared to 15.4" and 120GB). Nevertheless, the price of that system ("on sale" for $300 off) is $50 more than Apple's list price... and you can get $150 rebates on the Apple. So much for the "additional cost" of the OS. Nevermind that the Apple also includes nice touches like the backlit keyboard, magsafe power cord and iPhoto that aren't even available with a PC.

I wasn't aware that CS2 had issues on Crossover until you mentioned it, and had only heard that Photoshop (apparently older versions) ran very fast with it. FWIW, you can also run a PC version of Photoshop under Parallels with very good performance. FWIW, HERE'S some benchmarks showing how PS on a MacBook stacks up against PC laptops. Note that Parallels now runs PS about 35% faster than this with OS X 10.4.8, and that all MacBooks are now Core2Duo, which adds another 20-25% to the performance.

11/30/2006 03:46:26 PM · #37

Originally posted by scalvert:

Nevertheless, the price of that system ("on sale" for $300 off) is $50 more than Apple's list price... and you can get $150 rebates on the Apple. So much for the "additional cost" of the OS.

so I can break even if I buy a macbook pro and install windows on it and just run everything under XP. From the original post, these seem to be the issues to consider: not screen size.

Originally posted by hokie:

My D2x files in raw + jpeg just take too much time when shooting products for customer review.

The software is the usual pile of stuff but I am most concerned with running Adobe products (Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, In-Design, etc).

Originally posted by scalvert:

FWIW, you can also run a PC version of Photoshop under Parallels with very good performance.

The last thread when this was discussed, about a week ago, I posted various benchmarks for CS2 running on the same machine. The WinXP version was 33% to 50% faster, on exactly the same hardware than running virtualised under OSX. This shouldn't be any surprise if you understand anything about VMs so I don't know why it keeps getting brought up.

So the only sensible solution appears to be to buy a mac, wipe the OS and run everything under XP if you want performance. You'll end up paying about the same price for the same performance as every other Intel laptop provider.

But at least the keys light up.

At some point in the future you can re-buy the various applications and run them under OSX at a decent speed, for about $600 for Photoshop.

I'd really like to get a decent macbook pro and run OS X. It just doesn't seem to make much sense at the moment.

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 15:52:56.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

11/30/2006 04:10:19 PM · #38

You can get a macbook pro pseudo-cheaper if you buy one via bhphoto too, and forget to declare the use tax.

hokie

Nikon D2X

11/30/2006 04:14:04 PM · #39

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by scalvert:
Nevertheless, the price of that system ("on sale" for $300 off) is $50 more than Apple's list price... and you can get $150 rebates on the Apple. So much for the "additional cost" of the OS.

so I can break even if I buy a macbook pro and install windows on it and just run everything under XP. From the original post, these seem to be the issues to consider: not screen size.

Originally posted by hokie:

My D2x files in raw + jpeg just take too much time when shooting products for customer review.

The software is the usual pile of stuff but I am most concerned with running Adobe products (Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, In-Design, etc).

Originally posted by scalvert:

FWIW, you can also run a PC version of Photoshop under Parallels with very good performance.

The last thread when this was discussed, about a week ago, I posted various benchmarks for CS2 running on the same machine. The WinXP version was 33% to 50% faster, on exactly the same hardware than running virtualised under OSX. This shouldn't be any surprise if you understand anything about VMs so I don't know why it keeps getting brought up.

So the only sensible solution appears to be to buy a mac, wipe the OS and run everything under XP if you want performance. You'll end up paying about the same price for the same performance as every other Intel laptop provider.

But at least the keys light up.

At some point in the future you can re-buy the various applications and run them under OSX at a decent speed, for about $600 for Photoshop.

I'd really like to get a decent macbook pro and run OS X. It just doesn't seem to make much sense at the moment.

I think we are in the same boat Gordon. The Macbook Pro looks very enticing but..I agree that OS x is the main attraction to a Mac. The hardware is very "sexy" and some of the native applications seem useful.

I would also suppose that running Windows XP on a Mac would open you up to the same potential security risks as any PC.

This is just maddening. Why the hell would Apple jump so fast on Intel hardware without insuring their main software sweet spots don't come along for the ride at the same time? That seems to me that Apple is pushing the functionality of Windows by saying "XP has their act together so buy our computer and run Windows"

Heck, that sounds like Linux proponents "Linux runs the 5 or 6 applications really sweet but you have to ignore 95% of all other applications known to mankind".

Sigh...:-/

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 16:20:52.

slide12345678

Canon EOS-5D

11/30/2006 04:22:36 PM · #40

i dont know if anyone has mentioned it, because i havent read through the entire thread, but DO NOT buy any computer without checking www.slickdeals.net or www.fatwallet.com first!
you will most definitely find the best price on a computer by waiting for and finding the deals there

11/30/2006 04:23:49 PM · #41

Well, OS X is essentially just unix with a nice GUI, so the arguments from the Linux proponents should sound very similar. OSX is BSD with aqua, linux fundamentally just has a different GUI with very similar internals to OSX.

So the pros and cons are the same, with a prettier face. The other caveat seems to be that if you want to run XP on a mac, you are into the realm of beta drivers and no support from Apple. Things like bluetooth isn't supported, nor can you use products like the wireless mouse or keyboard. The ambient light sensor doesn't work so I suspect the dynamic keyboard illumination fails too. The trackpad doesn't really work properly either (no acceleration or scrolling support)

You also have all the traditional windows virus & security issues. So in many ways it seems an inferior way to get XP too. If they were selling it as a good way to run XP, they'd have sorted out the driver situation more completely. It is frustrating. The other problem looks like the potential for boot camp to turn into a pay for use product when the license expires. Dunno if apple have an official position on it other than 'dont use this for commercial work or with important data'

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 16:34:45.

11/30/2006 04:23:56 PM · #42

Originally posted by Gordon:

You can get a macbook pro pseudo-cheaper if you buy one via bhphoto too, and forget to declare the use tax.

Huh?!? Amazon, MacConnection, MacMall and ClubMac all offer $150 rebates, which makes them cheaper than B&H. MacConnection also offers Parallels for free, and MacMall/ClubMac have bundles with Windows XP pre-installed for about $50 more than B&H sells the base laptop.

Even without OS X (and the uber-cool iPhoto and Aperture applications), Apple laptops are still cheaper than equally configured PC laptops, and often outperform their PC counterparts with the same specs.

11/30/2006 04:27:10 PM · #43

Originally posted by scalvert:

Huh?!? Amazon, MacConnection, MacMall and ClubMac all offer $150 rebates, which makes them cheaper than B&H.

Sorry - I should have said you can buy it more cheaply from BH than from apple.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

11/30/2006 04:35:05 PM · #44

Originally posted by Gordon:

Sorry - I should have said you can buy it more cheaply from BH than from apple.

It's worth noting that students, teachers and government employees can get significant discounts from Apple. Also, their refurbs are even cheaper and carry the same warranty as new machines.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

11/30/2006 04:36:40 PM · #45

I am loving this conversation...you guys are getting me through my day! thanks :)

but honestly i am enjoying the knowledge here...i'm soaking it up

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 16:37:20.

hokie

Nikon D2X

11/30/2006 04:40:10 PM · #46

I would buy a Macbook Pro this instant along with the Adobe Creative Suite for the Mac IF I could be convinced I would not lose a lot of performance versus running the same creative suite on a PC based laptop.

The idea of buying the creative suite I need for the Mac at $1,800 and then having a superior Adobe Creative Suite product for the Mac Book Pro available in less than a year would not be so good. UNLESS Adobe offered a very reasonable upgrade (meaning Free ..pffft right!... or for under say...$300).

I will be checking out these Mac resellers taht offer Windows Xp with the Mac though.

I agree with Shannon...The Mac does offer roughly the same hardware performance/price ratio that Dell or other Mainstream PC makers offer. HOWEVER...Asus seems to trump them all for power to dollar ratio.

11/30/2006 04:47:19 PM · #47

Originally posted by hokie:

Here's the bottom line. On the same macbook pro, the performance is 50% slower running under OSX than running in XP. It gets worse if you don't buy the Mac OSX universal binary and run an XP binary through parallels.
I've seen other reports that claim about 40% slowdown. I suspect that sort of performance improvement can be tweaked out of it.
Benchmarks

Originally posted by hokie:

The idea of buying the creative suite I need for the Mac at $1,800 and then having a superior Adobe Creative Suite product for the Mac Book Pro available in less than a year would not be so good. UNLESS Adobe offered a very reasonable upgrade (meaning Free ..pffft right!... or for under say...$300).

Last upgrade price (CS->CS2) was $150. But you'd have to put up with the 50% slowdown in the meantime. There currently is not a WinXP CS to OSX CS upgrade path. There used to be but it was removed. Apple may support it if you call them I suppose.

Message edited by author 2006-11-30 16:50:54.

11/30/2006 04:51:33 PM · #48

Originally posted by achiral:

I am loving this conversation...you guys are getting me through my day! thanks :)

It's stopping me getting bored while playing with quad-core designs :)