Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Adobe and the Intel Mac

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    640

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Well, I actually run Photoshop on an Intel iMac (2x2GHz). It is usable, but not snappy; kinda pokey, actually, especially for say sharpening a large file. Now I haven't used it on a G5 or even a power book (although I do own one, just never got around to it) but there is no way in hell it is faster on my Intel iMac. There are a few bench marks kicking around to prove it.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Forest Grove, Ore.
    Posts
    4,675

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    John Brownlow wrote: "What has this got to do with Aperture's interface with PS? It works fine."

    Oh, indeed, I'm sure it does. I've seen it demonstrated. I was sort of joking about the interface when running on the Intel Mac. I don't know, maybe that works, too!

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    628

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Paul K., thanks for the real-world data. Any other comments on the IntelMac? I am considering a PPC 12" PowerBook, vs. waiting for an Intel 12" MacBook. Not sure the Dell will stay alive long enough for the latter.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Neil: Just a rumor, but I heard someone's already hacked the new Intel Apples to run XP! Has anyone else heard similar stories?

    Yes, I've heard it's possible, although why would anybody want to do something like that is beyond me.

    Paul :Well, I actually run Photoshop on an Intel iMac (2x2GHz). It is usable, but not snappy; kinda pokey, actually, especially for say sharpening a large file. Now I haven't used it on a G5 or even a power book (although I do own one, just never got around to it) but there is no way in hell it is faster on my Intel iMac. There are a few bench marks kicking around to prove it.

    Me to, Intel iMac (dual 2GHz) maxed out on RAM. Prior to this, I used to run it on a 1.6MHz single G5 desktop, with 1.5 GB of RAM. I mention RAM because it can make greater difference than raw cpu speed under certain circumstances. My G5 was equipped with two hard drives, and the second one was hosting the PS scratch file. My iMac is single disk. I also used an old G4, single 800 MHz with 1 GB of RAM.

    Photoshop startup time was definitelly faster on a G5. The difference in actual performance was smaller, but I could still clearly feel it. The G5 was definitely faster, no doubt about it. The performance on the iMac is far from spectacular, but still very acceptable. MUCH faster and snappier than the G4. I mention G4 because that's the closest thing I have to the older laptops and mac minis and, properly configured, updated and maintained, can still be very usable in a pinch.

    All being said, having software so complex as Photoshop run under software emulation so quickly and so smoothly is, IMHO, nothing short of spectacular. It's like participating in a lively discussion in a foreign language using simultaneous interpretation and still being able to talk down some of the native speakers.

    Finally, this is all just my impression, based on my own hardware, software and workflow, and as such extremelly biased and subjective. I did NOT run any tests because I a) don't have the time for it, b) don't have the appropriate software and c) don't care all that much.

    Regarding PS, chances are we would have to wait for CS3 until next year anyway, whatever the CPU.

    Regards,

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    628

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Marko, that's some more useful info, thanks.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    640

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    On Intel Mac's in general:

    I find my iMac very very lovely. For native stuff, it is very very fast and pretty much a pleasure to use all the way around, including the ergonomics (the display is particularly lovely) and operation. I am not sure about the new powerbooks, but my G4 (1.5 GHz era) PB is quite nice and all indications are that they only have got better.

    However..... I don't know your intention, but if it is the processing of images and printing, I think it is a little less the ready for primetime, IMO. Things like scanner software are languishing and not all that kind of software works in emulation. Printing software looks like it is behind the curve too. But all that said, it is still already more useful then I thought, though some of that is due to Lightroom, which catalogs very nicely and Beta 2 actually understands my grey scale TIFF's. I think it is some a matter of how complex your workflow is. Still, if I had my time back, I still would buy one even if I am on the bleeding edge.

    PK

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Is there any other image-editing software that supports ICC profiling ?

    Last time I looked at the GIMP, it did not - or if it did, I didn't see it. In other respects, it seemed to offer many of the features that I use regularly when editing photos in B&W. I don't know how fast it is compared to Photoshop, or how memory-hungry.

    It wouldn't surprise me if Photoshop is an amalgam of code written over the years, and therefore bloated, cluttered, hard for developers to extend and maintain, etc. but profitable.

    Is there an affordable alternative ?

    If Photoshop is slow, then why not perform many of the time-consuming operations in something that is faster, and then use Photoshop for the rest of the tasks ?

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,736

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    Ken: Is there an affordable alternative ?

    Because Heisenberg said you can't have more than two out of three.

    And you paraphrased him the other day in the other thread.



    Me, I'd gladly pay for Quality and Speed.

    Now seriously, one can never have enough speed, memory or space when it comes to media files. There is a reason why Photoshop is the standard that it is. Not even Microsoft managed to get into the graphics market, and certainly not for lack of trying.

    I don't know what exactly is there under the hood, but I find all original Adobe products (as opposed to acquired, e.g. CyberStudio aka GoLive) tend to run very smoothly and reliably, at least on the Mac side. Well, they tend to be be more stable than anything else even on the Windows side, for what it's worth. I would think that's a result of good programming and maintenance strategy at Adobe.

    Photoshop IS a BIG and complex app, has to be, and maybe it's just me, but I don't feel it as bloated at all. What CAN make it sluggish are all the plugins, filters and third party add-ons. Fonts too. Pruning your font and plug-in directories can do wonders, especially for startup.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    126

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    You appreciate Photoshop when you use other image-editing apps on large files.

    In Mac OS X, PS pretty much never crashes, even when youo are working right at the limits of available disk space and memory. It gets real slow sometimes, but it always gets there.

    Nevertheless, I find that a lot of the editing of smaller files can be done in Aperture with trips to Photoshop for spotting and other physical edits. I love the interface in Aperture... the easy of switching between different modes of use.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

    Adobe and the Intel Mac

    "Because Heisenberg said you can't have more than two out of three".



    Ha ! Excellent



    "Pruning your font and plug-in directories can do wonders, especially for startup."



    Is there a "how-to" document around that would let us do this, and later restore things - or is it as simple as making some new directories outside of the Photoshop folder, and placing all the unused fonts and plugins in them ?

Similar Threads

  1. Adobe Photoshop--Observations, Questions & Stuff
    By Raymond Bleesz in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 17-Apr-2002, 17:11
  2. Paintshop Pro 6 Vs Adobe
    By George Nedleman in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24-Feb-2000, 17:34

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •