[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [APML] computer video card
>This is the kind of statement that I see on all the Microsoft supported
>press. If you look at the objective media (not the pro-Mac or Pro-PC stuff)
>you will find that similarly configured machines cost about the same.
Hi Taras,
I consider myself objective. I use both platforms professionally every day.
I have absolutely no reason to prefer one to the other. My opinions are
based on actual real world use.
In fact, I don't think either one is anything to get that excited about. I
certainly have no great love for Microsoft. I have no great love for Apple
either, to be honest. Both should be much better.
Anyone who is so in love with a Mac that they would run a Windoze emulator
to run all of the software that is not available for the Mac, gets exactly
what they deserve.
Here is something I do not know (really)... how many slots are there for
ram on the G5 motherboard to get you up to 8 gigs?
Jerry
>Also, 100 software titles doing the same thing, most of them poorly, is
>not much of an advantage. Most of the major commercial stuff is available
>on both platforms.
>
>Pros for staying with a PC:
>
>- you don't have to buy new versions of your software (but if you are running
>software on multiple machines you should check the software license if that's
>allowable)
>- you don't need to relearn the computer's interface
>- more choice in video cards
>- most specialist astro-focused image processing software/shareware is PC only
>at this time
>
>Pros for switching to Mac
>
>- with the current G5 models you can go up to 8 GB of RAM
>- FireWire built in
>- you can run PC software with Virtual PC in a pinch (though this option is
>usually slow and the current version isn't compatible with the G5's yet)
>- built in (Gigabit) and easier to set up networking
>- access to UNIX software on internet and many LINUX programs can be adapted,
>too (most need to be compiled, but the system software comes with the
>developer
>tools, though they are not installed)
>- no need to worry about DLL conflicts
>
>On both platforms, I would expect the dual processor models to shine on
>Photoshop, compared to their single processor brethren.
>
>In Kirk's case, I would not expect him to fork over for another Photoshop
>license, just to switch to the Mac, unless the advantages of that platform
>in other areas are going to give him more.
>
>Taras
>
>On Jan 29, 2004, at 2:58 PM, Jerry Lodriguss wrote:
>
>>
>>Hi Kirk,
>>
>>There are no advantages of a Mac over a PC, unless you want to pay more
>>for exactly the same hardware for the Mac name.
>>
>>And you can get about 100 times more selection in software for the PC.
>>
>>Jerry
>>
>>
>>
>>At 01:21 PM 1/29/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>>>Hello Bobby & Jerry,
>>>
>>>I have been meaning to ask about this topic. I have an older PC similar to
>>>Bobby's. I am thinking about getting the Artixscan 120 format scanner in
>>>the future. I currently use the Polaroid 35plus with a USB connection. My
>>>computer doesn't have a fire wire connection because Windows 98 doesn't
>>>support it (that's according to the directions with the fire wire card that
>>>came with the Polaroid machine and trying it anyway). So I am talking to my
>>>wife about leaving the existing computer for her use and having a dedicated
>>>imaging machine for me. I have asked our computer guy here at work and our
>>>graphics person for recommendations and they are both steering me towards a
>>>Mac. I have noticed that my PC really slows down when I start working on
>>>files over 100mb. I don't need any files that large for internet stuff but
>>>I like to make prints and that's where I am trying to go with this.
>>>I want
>>>to get into the digital darkroom to process land based photos and
>>>astrophotos. I will initially send the files out for printing.
>>>Doing my
>>>own printing may or may not happen in the future. I am not really
>>>interested in games. What are the advantages of the Mac over the type of
>>>machine Bobby has found at Dell?
>>>
>>>Kirk Carbo
>>>
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Jerry Lodriguss [mailto:jerryapml@astropix.com]
>>> >Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:29 PM
>>> >To: Discussion of Film Astrophotography
>>> >Subject: Re: [APML] computer video card
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Hi Bobby,
>>> >
>>> >The integrated video on the motherboard will probably be fine for
>>> >Photoshop. If you play games, it would be a different story.
>>> >You can always
>>> >try it and then add a video card later, but if all you need it for is
>>> >Photoshop, you probably won't need to.
>>> >
>>> >The 2.8 gigahertz machine should be much faster for Photoshop
>>> >tasks (and
>>> >everything else) than your 500 megahertz machine.
>>> >
>>> >Jerry
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >At 12:13 PM 1/29/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>>> >>Dell has a pretty good offer on a Deminsion 4600. Here's
>>> >what's included:
>>> >>DimensionTM 4600
>>> >> Intel ® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.8GHz w/533MHz FSB
>>> >> Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition
>>> >> SPECIAL OFFER! 512MB at 333Mhz DDR SDRAM for the price of 256MB
>>> >> FREE UPGRADE! 80GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive
>>> >>$399 after rebate but sale ends today (no monitor; includes
>>> >DVD player and
>>> >>2nd
>>> >>Bay CD Burner Free shipping.
>>> >>
>>> >>Here's my question: Will the native video card (Extreme graphics card;
>>> >>integrated) be just a good for Photoshop work as the $70
>>> >upgrade to a 128MB
>>> >>nvida GForce 4 graphics card. This machine will be networked
>>> >to my other
>>> >>desktop which has all my scanners going and I will not use
>>> >this machine for
>>> >>anything except image editing.
>>> >>Also, will this machine be much faster than my Dell Pentium
>>> >III XPS T500
>>> >>with 512 MB ram?
>>> >>Bobby Middleton
>>> >>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Astro-Photo mailing list
>Astro-Photo@seds.org
>http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo
_______________________________________________
Astro-Photo mailing list
Astro-Photo@seds.org
http://seds.org/mailman/listinfo/astro-photo