Computer Upgrade

[Tom Duffy]

I want to replace a Windows XP machine with newer hardware. I want to use my existing peripherals on the new PC. My primary software will be Adobe Photoshop CS3.

I have a Minolta 5400 Elite 2, for which I understand no Vista drivers exist. Given that my external hard disk, printer and 2 film scanners and router all run just fine on XP, I was considering buying a new Dell with 4GB of ram and having them install XP instead of Vista.

Does this make sense? Will CS3 run better on Vista with 4GB of ram?
Are there other issues I should should consider?
Will software upgrades be a problem if I stay with XP?
Is there a solution to the Minolta driver problem?

I considered a Mac, but a Dell with 4GB, 750 GB disk and 23 inch monitor for $2500 seemed way cheaper than anything in the Apple lineup.

Thanks for your help. I tried Adobe customer support but was disconnected twice.


Take care,
Tom

[Joanna Carter]

I considered a Mac, but a Dell with 4GB, 750 GB disk and 23 inch monitor for $2500 seemed way cheaper than anything in the Apple lineup.

How about a nice shiny new iMac 2.8GHz Intel Core 2 Extreme, 2GB RAM, 750GB disk, 24" monitor all for $2449 ?

If you really want the extra 2GB RAM, then you can get it a whole load cheaper (around $300) compared to Apple's $700 tag.

Windows XP will not use all of the 4GB, it tends to max out at 2.5GB on most motherboards, even with the /3GB switch. I built my own XP box just before getting a Macbook Pro, fitted it with 4GB, RAID 250GB drive, AMD 2 CPU, etc. How I wish I had waited, now I'm in the process of accumulating sufficient funds to get me a Mac Pro

Why switch to a Mac ? You should see just how much slower a Windows machine is, mainly because you have got to have AV software running, whereas my Macbook, even though it is just a laptop seems to run almost as fast as my 4GB XP box.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Robert Teague has a Minolta 5400 and I think he has a Vista machine, so you might ask him to confirm whether the XP drivers will work with Vista. Another option might be running it under Vuescan instead of the original drivers. I was able to rescue my Minolta Scan Dual (I) so it can run in XP with Vuescan (and toss the Win98 machine I was keeping around just to run the scanner).

[sanking]

I considered a Mac, but a Dell with 4GB, 750 GB disk and 23 inch monitor for $2500 seemed way cheaper than anything in the Apple lineup.


Take care,
Tom

What about a 24" Intel iMac? I bought one of these a few months ago and even with Ram upgrade I paid less than $2500.


Sandy King

[Tom Duffy]

Concerning the iMac option, I'm reading a lot of bad stuff on the web forums (the online photographer and dpreview primarily) about the new imac and its glossy screen. People are categorizing it as not suitable for image editing ,e.g., monitor profiling must be done in a dark room, etc.

Also, unless you get to a Mac Pro, you seem short on USB2 ports for all my peripherals and expandability. The Mac Pro Apple recommends for image editing prices out at 4,724 with 4GB of ram and a 23 inch cinema display.

I'm basically new to this in that I prefer B&W darkroom work but I do scan 35mm color negs and just bought an Epson V750 to scan my large format color stuff.

[Joanna Carter]

Concerning the iMac option, I'm reading a lot of bad stuff on the web forums (the online photographer and dpreview primarily) about the new imac and its glossy screen. People are categorizing it as not suitable for image editing ,e.g., monitor profiling must be done in a dark room, etc.

Yes, this would be my only reservation.

Also, unless you get to a Mac Pro, you seem short on USB2 ports for all my peripherals and expandability. The Mac Pro Apple recommends for image editing prices out at 4,724 with 4GB of ram and a 23 inch cinema display.

What I shall be doing for my Mac Pro, is to buy the basic version with no monitor and then upgrade the memory and hard disk from third-party suppliers (can be anything as little as 1/3 - 1/4 of the Apple prices; then get a decent LCD monitor, it doesn't have to be a Mac monitor, unless you really can't do without the "total look"

[Ted Harris]

Tom,

A lot of what you read on the internet (including this Forum sometimes is pure nonesense). You really need to knwo the credentials of the poster before you make any judgement. I have toe glossy screen on my Macbook and have no problems with it. On the desktop I am using a 23" Cinema Display. Apple's recommendation is a bi tovr the top to me. I just got a new MacPro refurb. I purchased the basic 2.66GHz package from Apple online for $2199 and then added an additional 4GB of RAM purchased from www.data.mem.com for another ~ 340. Total 2539 plus the cost of the Cinema Display if you need a monitor.

BTW so far in the few days I have been using the new MacPro with CS3 I find it blazing faster than my old G5. Right now I am working with a 3.4 GB file which it took 3 minutes to open as opposed to over 10 on the old system.

[sanking]

Concerning the iMac option, I'm reading a lot of bad stuff on the web forums (the online photographer and dpreview primarily) about the new imac and its glossy screen. People are categorizing it as not suitable for image editing ,e.g., monitor profiling must be done in a dark room, etc.

Also, unless you get to a Mac Pro, you seem short on USB2 ports for all my peripherals and expandability. The Mac Pro Apple recommends for image editing prices out at 4,724 with 4GB of ram and a 23 inch cinema display.

I'm basically new to this in that I prefer B&W darkroom work but I do scan 35mm color negs and just bought an Epson V750 to scan my large format color stuff.

Shows how little I know. I really love the screen and find it very suitable for image editing. I always profile and edit in a room with subdued light anyway.

The way I look at it, with the Mac I am only in the dark when I profile and edit. With Windows XP or Vista I would be in the dark all the time.

About the USB ports, I was not away there was a limit to the number of peripherals you could connect to an iMac? I have an 8-port USB gate connected to my iMac and all of the devices on it appear to be working fine.

Sandy King

[Henry Ambrose]

Get the iMac.
As for calibrating in a "dark room" you will need to have a controlled working environment no matter what platform you choose. Or look for one of the just discontinued 24" iMacs if you don't want the glossy screen. (the all white ones) I'm thrilled with mine.

As far as a MacPro goes you don't need the absolute cutting edge machine for photo work. Its nice of course to have the killer machine but its not necessary by a long shot. Either of the 20 or 24" iMacs will be great.

[paulr]

I'd agree that an imac screen (old or new) is less than ideal for serious image editing, but the same goes for any screen that you'll get as part of a $2500 everything-included Dell deal.

If you're doing any kind of calibrated work flow, using the computer for printing, then with a $2500 budget I'd suggest spending much of that on the monitor! You'll work faster (and cheaper) with a slow system that requires half as many proof prints.

If you're not using the computer for serious printing, then an imac screen should be fine. Glare shouldn't be a problem ... it's best to do image editing under subdued litghts anyhow.