User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 6:53:38 PM EDT
[#1]
If you want a computer for graphics, just get the dual 1GHz G4!! But you would do fine with the iMac too....
To use some graphics programs, you will be using OS9 alot. Sometime in the next year, I will be getting my wife a new iMac, because we are giving her old one to her folks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 7:58:41 PM EDT
[#2]
The ONLY reason, after much hard thought, that I am going to get a G4 tower instead of a new iMac is because of the screen resolution. You can only select 800x600 and 1024x768. For graphics, those completely blow. Ever use Painter? Then most of your screen will be menus and palets. Photoshop 7 is shipping now, and I intend to have a 21" monitor to use it with.
Otherwise, it is a GREAT machine. Good luck! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 8:33:22 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: The ONLY reason, after much hard thought, that I am going to get a G4 tower instead of a new iMac is because of the screen resolution. You can only select 800x600 and 1024x768. For graphics, those completely blow. Ever use Painter? Then most of your screen will be menus and palets. Photoshop 7 is shipping now, and I intend to have a 21" monitor to use it with. Otherwise, it is a GREAT machine. Good luck! ... VERY good point! Thank you. Sometimes there is gold to be found on this sight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 9:32:50 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: To use some graphics programs, you will be using OS9 alot. Why? I now don't use OS 9 at all. All the major apps are out for OS X. Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign, GoLIve and many others. Except for Quark but I left Quark for InDesign several years ago. Don't miss it at all. And OS X will not crash, ever. Period. (well, unless you have a few too many beta programs...) I'm also running Virtual PC for those extremely rare occasions when I need Windows (and I mean extremely rare). Pretty funky to see Win98 full screen on my Mac. [:X*] Go with the iMac unless you are serious graphics user. The iMac is plenty powerful for anything else. If you haven't seen one in person you have no idea how beautiful they are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 10:07:51 PM EDT
[#5]
[b]Finally[/b] saw one at the local CompUsa store (idiots!) this weekend. Very nice indeed. Can't think of anything on the PC side that I'd rather have for the money.
That screen looks HUGE in comparison to my little iceBook, even though the resolution is the same. In my experience, 1024 X 768 seems entirely adequate for occasional Photoshop and Illustrator use. OTOH, if you're doing graphics for a living, you're probably gonna want the tower for other reasons, anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2002 11:29:43 PM EDT
[#6]
I'm a computer consultant and specialize in Macs. Right now I have two clients who are ready to replace all their older machines with new iMacs (about 45 in all). The majority of these users are doing standard stuff (Word, Email, Accounting, etc.). Most of my graphics clients are going the tower route for the faster video cards, expandability and larger monitors. If you only plan on doing occasional Photoshop and Illustrator work the iMac should be just fine. Make sure you get at least 512 MB of RAM.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 12:03:27 AM EDT
[#7]
the new imac is definitely an impressive machine design wise. and with osx, it 's equally impressive software wise. i think you'll be quite pleased with the package if you do buy. if portability is of any concern, the only other thing that came to mind that you might consider was one of the ibooks and an external monitor for heavy graphics use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 10:00:38 AM EDT
[#8]
mac = waste of money
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 10:59:02 AM EDT
[#9]
I like the commercial with it dancing in the store window. [:D] [:D]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 11:36:30 AM EDT
[#10]
AlClenin = Idiot
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 3:10:21 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: mac = waste of money ... Seems you're not understanding the difference between the fundementals of the two architectures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 3:18:28 PM EDT
[#12]
the cinema display is great for the purposes you mentioned, I would get it just for the cinema display alone!!! BTW the dual 1GHz G4 machines are very good.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 4:03:43 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: the cinema display is great for the purposes you mentioned, I would get it just for the cinema display alone!!! BTW the dual 1GHz G4 machines are very good. Summary • 1GHz - DP PowerPC G4 • 1.5GB SDRAM - 3 DIMMs • 2x72GB Ultra160 SCSI - Dual card • Apple SuperDrive • NVIDIA GeForce4 Titanium • Apple Cinema HD Display (23" flat panel) • Apple Display (17" flat panel) + Dr. Bott DVIator • Zip 250 Drive • 56K internal modem • AirPort Card • Apple Pro Keyboard - U.S. English • Mac OS - U.S. English • APP for Power Mac (w/ or w/o display) - Enrollment Kit All told: Subtotal $11,143.00 Ouch. But, dual G4 gigahertz. Blazing speed. Granted, I may have gone a bit overboard on the accessories, but when you're dreaming, you might as well dream big. As a Visual Studio applications developer, though, I can't justify the purchase of a Mac just yet. But if I could wish for one, yeah, the above would be it. Viper Out |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 4:50:51 PM EDT
[#14]
Cinema display...sigh.
I've had laptops since 1994, every LCD panel I've ever had has faded in brightness and brilliance over time, it happens to CRTs too. When you spend $2000 plus on a display it's not so easy to give it away or replace it when it's not as bright anymore (instead you get a yellowish look, just stand an older LCD next to a new panel and you'll see the difference at once). LCDs can have stuck pixels that are impossible to fix, short of replacing the entire panel, can't display 32bit bit depth, looks fuzzy when viewed below their native resolution due to anti-aliasing. The only occasions when I'd recommend an LCD display are when the space is tight, or the client has health concerns due to EMT (debatable hazard) or when the client really wants one despite its shortcomings. When I upgraded from a 19" CRT to something else, I had the choice of getting an 18" LCD or 21" CRT, I went with the 21" CRT, it's now doing 1600x1200. Try doing that on an 17" or 18" LCD, you can't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 4:57:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Cinema display...sigh. I've had laptops since 1994, every LCD panel I've ever had has faded in brightness and brilliance over time, it happens to CRTs too. When you spend $2000 plus on a display it's not so easy to give it away or replace it when it's not as bright anymore (instead you get a yellowish look, just stand an older LCD next to a new panel and you'll see the difference at once). LCDs can have stuck pixels that are impossible to fix, short of replacing the entire panel, can't display 32bit bit depth, looks fuzzy when viewed below their native resolution due to anti-aliasing. The only occasions when I'd recommend an LCD display are when the space is tight, or the client has health concerns due to EMT (debatable hazard) or when the client really wants one despite its shortcomings. When I upgraded from a 19" CRT to something else, I had the choice of getting an 18" LCD or 21" CRT, I went with the 21" CRT, it's now doing 1600x1200. Try doing that on an 17" or 18" LCD, you can't. obviously you have not seen the cinema display, its incredible, BTW it's optimal resolution is 1920*1200. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 5:09:38 PM EDT
[#16]
What can you do on a Mac that you cannot do on a PC for a lower price? (note: run mac os is not a good answer.)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 5:24:25 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: What can you do on a Mac that you cannot do on a PC for a lower price? (note: run mac os is not a good answer.) [img]http://LewisTechnoGroup.com/images/DP3.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.motu.com]Mark Of The Unicorn[/url] [url=http://www.bias-inc.com/]Bias, Inc.[/url] Can't beat this on a PC! (among other things) [url=http://www.apple.com/creative/musicaudio/]Educate Yourself[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 5:33:23 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: What can you do on a Mac that you cannot do on a PC for a lower price? (note: run mac os is not a good answer.) Well, I'm being a dick. I've actually considered getting a G4 just to run mac os. I used to be a pretty zealous pc-bigot, but the new windows XP verification system has changed that. My next upgrade I'll be dumping wintel for either Mac or AMD/Linux. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 5:39:04 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Quoted: What can you do on a Mac that you cannot do on a PC for a lower price? (note: run mac os is not a good answer.) Well, I'm being a dick. I've actually considered getting a G4 just to run mac os. I used to be a pretty zealous pc-bigot, but the new windows XP verification system has changed that. My next upgrade I'll be dumping wintel for either Mac or AMD/Linux. Good!! I use both of the above. There is not a single windows machine in my house as of yet... I really don't have a need for one honestly. I plan to build another computer (linux) or get another Mac for my kids to use... I *may* consider dual booting Windows on the Linux box just so the kids can use some of the stuff out there (mainly games).. I don't know if I really need to do that but i'm considering it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 6:13:45 PM EDT
[#20]
The macs are damn expensive though. You can easily build a parts computer that will blow the doors off of the macs, and for less money. This is not an option for hardware hacking ignorant folks though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2002 6:37:06 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: Quoted: Cinema display...sigh. I've had laptops since 1994, every LCD panel I've ever had has faded in brightness and brilliance over time, it happens to CRTs too. When you spend $2000 plus on a display it's not so easy to give it away or replace it when it's not as bright anymore (instead you get a yellowish look, just stand an older LCD next to a new panel and you'll see the difference at once). LCDs can have stuck pixels that are impossible to fix, short of replacing the entire panel, can't display 32bit bit depth, looks fuzzy when viewed below their native resolution due to anti-aliasing. The only occasions when I'd recommend an LCD display are when the space is tight, or the client has health concerns due to EMT (debatable hazard) or when the client really wants one despite its shortcomings. When I upgraded from a 19" CRT to something else, I had the choice of getting an 18" LCD or 21" CRT, I went with the 21" CRT, it's now doing 1600x1200. Try doing that on an 17" or 18" LCD, you can't. obviously you have not seen the cinema display, its incredible, BTW it's optimal resolution is 1920*1200. Well you missed the point, which is that displays will inevitably fade, an LCD with a higher price tag but more shortcomings, especially for graphic artists, is not ideal. The new Cinema display can do that resolution, but can it do 2048x1536? My CRT can, and it can do other 16 resolutions gracefully, the same can hardly be said of ANY LCD display. Don't be so quick to jump on someone that has a different opinion than yours, you don't know my credentials. CCDA, CCNA, MCSE, Apple Desktop certified, Apple PowerBook certified. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
