Which Mac to buy

[Andy Liakos]

In the hopes of eventually scanning MF & LF negatives, and reproducing them accurately, without waiting 5 minutes for Windows XP to process a filter in Photoshop CS, I am seriously considering a new Mac. Have an old G3 that has not been seriously used in years, and want to upgrade to a powerful Mac that will get me by for the next 10 years. Thoughts on how much Mac to buy? Dual 2.5 processor? Is a single-processor model satisfactory? Not interested in going cheap, but don't want to drop $6000 if $4000 will me more than enough. Since scanned LF negatives can be rather huge files, obviously lots of RAM. But beyond that, I'm clueless.

[Howard Slavitt]

Wait until the new Intel-based PowerMacs come out. Then buy one of those -- I usually buy the middle one. Load it up with 5GB of RAM. And that's about it. Buy lots of external hard drives. That should keep you for about 4-5 years. That's what I did 4-5 years ago and am waiting for the new Intel based Macs. The current Macs are great, but then you'll be buying into a outdated chip, given the switch in the Mac line. IMACs are very capable and could work, except that they have a limit of 2GB of RAM, which isn't enough for Photoshop and large files. Prices vary widely on RAM so shop around when you add the extra RAM. Also, it's very easy to install RAM yourself.

[Percy]

I NEVER thought I would say this, but: I think my most recent Mac will be my last. I have two G3 s, which are wonderful machines. My G4 stinks, in my honest opinion. The fan is so loud that it can be heard two rooms away. I have had issues with every iteration of OSX I have used. The combo drive petered out on me. It spins my disks at an alarmingly rapid rate of speed, leaving marks on them, and no, it will not read them any longer.

Photoshop 7 works very, very quickly in OSX, but I have yet to figure out how to make my Epson 2200 print correctly without switching back to 9.2.2, and I am not a novice Mac user.

After having several pc's give up the ghost, or become chronic chrashaholics, I became a Mac enthusiast; the machines almost NEVER crashed, the OS was intuitive, and more than reasonably idiot proof. The G4 I have (dual 867 processors) has left a bad taste in my mouth. Recent revelations that Apple will now be using Intel chips, as far as I am concerned, was the final nail in the coffin with respect to the attrition of reasons to spend a LOT more money for a better computer. I just don't any good reason to spend more money for a machine whose predecessor has not been very good to me. Maybe I just got a lemon...

[julian_4860]

errr, there is quite a large speed penalty in Macs at the moment... if handling big files is an issue, get a decent pc, 4 10k rp drives set as 2 raid 0s (one raid for the system and one for scratch) 3 meg of ram and the update to PS to allow you to use it. don't take my word for it, take a big file to a decent shop that allows you to test a pc specced like that against a top of the range mac...

[paulr]

if being future proof is an important part of the plans, it might make sense to wait a few months for the intel desktop macs. the powerpc macs will still be useful for a long time, but pretty soon they won't be supported by new software releases anymore.

beyond that, i think any of the new ones will have plenty of processing power for the kinds of photoshop work most people anticipate doing. be sure to budget money for a very good monitor, plenty of ram, a big fast hard drive (or two), and some kind of archiving strategy.

i don't think you'll have to spend more than $4000.

if you have to buy something right now, you can get great deals on used recent model G5s, and amazing deals on dual processor G4s. you could save most of your money for the monitor, drives, etc., and upgrade the cpu when it starts to feel like a drag. or when something new and shiny seduces you.

[Frank Petronio]

Websites like macintouch.com (http://www.macintouch.com) are good starting points for catching up on what is happening in the Mac world. Right now Apple is switching its computers over to the Intel chips, and their higher end workstations won't have the newer chip until later this year. But Adobe also needs to update Photoshop to take advantage of the new chip's performance anyway, so it is a bit of a waiting game.

But anything will be a huge improvement over your G3 or a mediocre Windows box, so you might consider getting the new Intel based 20-inch iMac and loading it with the maximum amount of RAM. It would still be a huge leap over everything short of a maxed out dual G5 tower, but the advantage is that it will be even faster once the software is upgraded in a few month.

A higher end XP machine will outperform a contemporary Mac for Photoshop, but once the Mac-Intel chips and software are up to speed (summer probably) they will very likely be the system of choice.

It is always better to buy a less expensive processor and more RAM instead... RAM is the first thing to upgrade.

[Ron Marshall]

First, let me say I am no computer guru, but I will relate my experience to you. Several years ago I bought a new Dell with a Pentium II. It was their "Power" model of the time, with all the bells and whistles: fast system bus, etc. When our daughter went off to university we bought her a bottom of the line Pentium 4, since she was only using it for word processing. Surprisingly, since this computer was four years newer, the 4 ran much more slowly, bogging down on many tasks that were transparent on the old machine, even though the new one had more memory and a larger HD. I ran diagnostics, and checked for spyware, etc.; the computer was just slow. I guess the low end model was cheaper because they scrimped on bus speed and controller cards etc.

I don't know how much any of this applies to an Apple. But if you plan to keep it for many years the extra money may pay for itself many times over in time saved.

[Frank Petronio]

I try to buy the top of line model of the second edition of a model line, for Macs. First editions are liable to have manufacturing bugs and a premium price. Try to be patient. With this strategy, I've been able to get 3-4 years out of each machine before feeling that I was hopelessly bogged down.

Mac II Ci > PowerMac 9500 (604) > 333 mhz G3 Tower > 1 ghz Powerbook Ti = all great, long life machines that I could add upgrades to and get a long life. The Ci is still operational, for old kid's games and word processing, with over 80,000 hours on the clock.

I've hada few dogs too, but when Apple gets it right they make some great hardware. Buy smart.

[FpJohn]

Hello:

You have received good advice. Max on RAM, wait for newer Intel machines, look for compatible hardware and Photoshop upgrade. My G3 iMac and Mini are at max RAM and perform well for 6x7 and 6x9 if you take your coffee while you wait!
yours
Frank

[Paul Droluk]

Right now I'm running a dual 1G processor G4, with 1.5G of RAM. It has served me very well for about 3 1/2 years without a single hiccup. I work on fairly large files... 6x12, 6x17 and 6x24 scanned @ 3200 dpi. This works out to about 700 Mb on the high side, and my current Mac can handle that reasonably well (without layers). That being said, I'm chomping at the bit waiting for the new Intel based Dual core, Dual processor machines from Mac. When I buy I'll max out the RAM, and get as many of the largest drives as I can fit in the box. I had a chance recently to play with one of the new Intel based IMacs... it was stunning. I currently use a G5 IMac in my home office, and the Intel version made mine look like "Ned and the 1st reader".

[Antonio Corcuera]

I also need a new mac and have been thinking of waiting for the new Powermacs... problem is, Adobe has informed it WILL NOT make a universal binary version of Photoshop until it releases CS3, which should be at the end of the year... too long to wait. I have tried PS under Rosetta and is a royal pain for files over 200-300 Mb...
check out http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

[Ted Harris]

The previous posts have said most of it. Let me try to summarize and categorize for you:

1) With regards to Photoshop, starting with the current release CS2, Photoshop can now recognize and access up to 3.5 GB of RAM making file swapping and image manipulation much faster. In order to take full advantage of this ability you will need to have somewhere in the range of 5 to 8 GB of RAM installed in your machine. With the lower limit, 5 GB, you can set your Photoshop memory allocation to access the full 3.5 GB and still have 1.5 left over to run your system and MAYBE a couple of other small, non memory intensive applications. The closer you move toward the high end, the more applications you can run in addition to Photoshop.

2) Only the Mac G5's and comparable 64 bit PC's can break the '4 Gig' barrier so you need one of those if you are going in this direction. Further, you need a machine that physically has slots for more than 4 Gigs of RAM, some do not (e.g. iMac's and the first generation entry level G5). With regards to Photoshop this RAM bottleneck is far more important in terms of improving the speed of your work than any other hardware consideration, including the speed of the processor. So,if you can get a good deal on a closeout or refurb, of one of the current or last generation G5's, as you often can at the Apple Store online, you may want to save the money that way and spend it on RAM.

3) Next in importance as far as Photoshop is concerned is the scratch disk. Many folks report significant speed increases by fully dedicating a scratch disk to the program. My findings agree with this. I have a small (in this day and age read 20GB as small) external drive that is totally dedicated to Photoshop.

4) So which machine to buy? IMO if you try to keep up with technology you will go nuts. I buy where I can afford and what matches my needs, generally the middle of the range as Frank suggests, and plan on hanging on to the machine for two years or thereabouts. The tradeoffs between the middle of the current range and the top of the last generation may swing you toward the older machine sometimes. Right now with the shift to the Intel processor you probably will want to wait to make your purchase if you have no urgent time constraints. I would expect we will see Intel based G5 PowerMacs sometime in the next 6 months. OTOH, I am not sure I agree that current software will be orphaned as rapidly as paul suggests. I believe you will be safe in purchasing a Power PC based machine in terms of software updates for at least two years .... after that one can asks, who cares if you are using the machine for business .. i fit is not then you may well care but you may also be happy with what will then be older generation software but software that serves you quite well. Bottom line is that while the chip supplier is different and the chip architecture itself is different the changeover has been made with as much attention as possible to not disadvantaging the current installed G5 base.

[Andy Liakos]

I have learned more, and obtained enormously better information in two hours than I have found, or could have dreamed of finding in days of online research. This, plus the other discussions on this board, have inspired me to become passionate about my photography again. Thank you all very much.

[paulr]

"I am not sure I agree that current software will be orphaned as rapidly as paul suggests. I believe you will be safe in purchasing a Power PC based machine in terms of software updates for at least two years "

i completely agree ... in fact, it may be over a year before we see intel native versions of photoshop. i mentioned the orphaned software issue because Andy said he didn't want to buy another machine for a long time.

[Kirk Gittings]

"I buy where I can afford and what matches my needs, generally the middle of the range."

As Ted said....

I actually use PC's but I buy Macs for my kids who are both grown now and design professionals. I also always buy Mac's reconditioned from the Apple website. They are cheaper. They have the same warranty and I have never had a problem with any of them. Not once.

[Frank Petronio]

I've bought a lot of refurbs for my businesses too, and Smalldog (http://www.smalldog.com) is a great place to find refurbs with Apple warranties too. They are a real small business where you communicate with a thinking human being, unlike the warehouse stores. But I've also by direct from Apple and in the mall Apple stores and have had excellent service, although they charge more for RAM and add-ons. For that reason I like Smalldog, because they'll install and test before shipping, and their prices are better than Apple's.

If you buy a refurb (and maybe a new one) it is a good idea to reformat the drive and do a clean install from scratch. Sometimes I've gotten a refurb that still had remenants of prior use and corruption. It also gives you a clear benchmark to evaluate that it is working correctly. I have needed to return a few Macs over the years - the turn around is good but I still hate to do it.

The "out of box" experience is nothing like the PC laptop we just got. That took nearly a day to uninstall all the bloatware and junk that came "free" -- using them side by side, even though the PC is slightly snappier, the interface slows me down and strains my eyes.

Finally, consider a loaded laptop with a second display, so long as you aren't working on super giant files. I moved from big towers with dual 21-inch monitors to a laptop and second desktop monitor - it isn't as fast a machine as a tower but the convenience of only maintaining one computer instead of a fleet is well worth it to me.

[robert_4927]

I'm not very computer savvy. But we bought one of the super mini macs and we like it a lot. It probably doesn't have all the bells and whistles as a G5 but it serves it's purpose very well. I actually don't know what this little thing is capable of. I'll have to ask one of the kids.

[Doug Dolde]

Check out "macman812" on Ebay. His name is Brian.

I have bought from him and he's trustworthy. Excellent prices and he will load them with software if you wish.

[Brian Ellis]

" . . . without waiting 5 minutes for Windows XP to process a filter in Photoshop CS."

I have a 1 gig Windows XP Dell computer with an 80 gig external hard drive that cost about $120 IIRC. I scan my 4x5 negatives at 2400 ppi. I've never waited five minutes or even close to it for anything.

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

Andy, go to ebay, at the top right is a logo 'Java powered by Sun', just click on it to find the computer you really want.

Just a thought

[Andy Liakos]

>>>I have a 1 gig Windows XP Dell computer with an 80 gig external hard drive that cost about $120 IIRC. I scan my 4x5 negatives at 2400 ppi. I've never waited five minutes or even close to it for anything.<<<

I'm running currently a 1.6, w 1 gig of memory and using a 200 gig external as a scratch disk, and after working with several files (usually scanned 35 mm slides around 180MB with a Minolta 5400 film scanner... haven't gotten the LF scanner yet) the system slows down quite a bit and even clearing the cache stops being effective after awhile. I've also had the same experience on the laptop, except worse because it does not have the same resources as the desktop. Perhaps is only seems like it takes 5 minutes for an image to resample after using a filter (I'm not the most patient person). My previous experience with Macs had me thinking that I would buy a Mac for photography and graphic arts, and use the XP unit for regular business stuff, for which it works absolutely fine.

I think the suggestion of waiting for CS3 and the new intel machine, and going for the dual processor is what I'll do. I can certainly wait and muddle through with the XP for now... I'll just reboot more frequently. In the meantime I'll be working on making more use out of that old Linhof...

[Andy Liakos]

>>>Hi there,

Andy, go to ebay, at the top right is a logo 'Java powered by Sun', just click on it to find the computer you really want.

Just a thought<<<

Yep, bet that'll speed things up! Thanks, Paul.

[Ted Harris]

Two more comments ... Frank is right about Small Dog, a great company and a total sketch to visit in person. Usually about a dozen dogs running around in addition to the people.

Another great place form memory is Data Memory Systems ... www.datamem.com ... if you are an educator ask for Bud and you will get an additional small educational discount. I have bought almost all of my memory from them and have been doing so for close to 20 years. They are knowledgable, ship fast and at reasonable prices (free if you want to use the US Mail) and honor warranty returns and replacements quickly. In 1989 or 1990, when eveer the first Powerbooks came out I ordered additional RAM for my Powerbook 140 from them. Was a bit unsure on installing it so I called them and they walked me through it on the phone. Went to reboot the machine and the RAM went up in smoke,they had a new chip out to me via FedEx overnight before we hung up and I had it in the morning .... and if you have installed enough memory you know this can happen. Also had a Transcend 1 GB CF card that put all six legs up in the air after a couple of years of hard use. They replaced it with a new one without a blink. Ontopof tht their prices are as low as you can get for certified memory.

[Kirk Gittings]

"I have a 1 gig Windows XP Dell computer with an 80 gig external hard drive that cost about $120 IIRC. I scan my 4x5 negatives at 2400 ppi. I've never waited five minutes or even close to it for anything."

My sentiments exactly. I run two Dells each with 4 gig of memory dual internal HDs plus external storage blah blah etc and another Dell just to keep my wife and daughter off of mine. Every summer when I am at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago I use Macs and am not convinced that they are worth the extra money.

"the system slows down quite a bit and even clearing the cache stops being effective after awhile"

PC's do "clog up" after working on image files for awhile and I agree clearing the cache only does so much. For the past 6 months I have been running Registry Mechanic www.pctools.com/ (http://www.pctools.com/) which clears all this crap that builds up in the registry from CS2 Bridge in particular. I run it every two or three days and it speeds things right up again. I was leary of it at first, but it has turned out to be very helpful and after 6 months I am running it on all my machines and feel confident in reccomending it.

[paulr]

"Every summer when I am at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago I use Macs and am not convinced that they are worth the extra money."

have you actually compared prices of current top of the line desktop macs to comparably equipped dells? i've seen comparisons done by more than a couple of websites (including non mac-zealot sites) and in all cases the dells came out a bit more expensive.

one example is here: http://www.systemshootouts.org/shootouts/desktop/2005/1022_dt5300.html

i've used windows a bit lately, and found it to be perfectly functional (not always the case in the past). what i can't stand is how unbelievably ugly the interface is. i really doubt i'd be able to stand looking at it all day long. those guys have some money in their pockets--why can't they hire a decent designer? reminds of the "why won't bill gates pay for a decent haircut" brain teaser.

[Kirk Gittings]

Paul,

That turn around must be a fairly recent event. I have not done a price comparison since last summer, when even buying refurbished mac with my educator discount was not comparable.

[paulr]

even the high end macs? it seems to me that the pro desktops have been competitive for a while now. it's laptops and home computers where the macs have been extra pricey.

[Kirk Gittings]

To be honest with you I never look at one of those $5,000 computers. They are way out of my price range.

[Christopher Keth]

Yeah, I'd love to get a new G5 but it's just too much cash. ANyway, I wanted to chime in with my feelings from quite a bit of experience in the professional digital video editing and effects field. It doesn't particularly matter which platform you buy, as long as you spend a comparable amount. This sounds pretty counter-intuitive given what everyone says but it also seems that the Mac/PC comparison is always done with a brand new G5 and a PC that's fairly run-of-the-mill. If you were to spend 5 grand on building a PC (read building, you'll get LOTS more for your money) and compare it to a 5G mac, they'd be *roughly* equal in performance.

[Ted Harris]

BTW, another thought at the low end if you are in the market for a new computer and do NOT have intensive scanning requirements ... then a look at the Mac Mini or the iMac's might be worthwhile from a space saving point of view in addition to technical considerations. The Mini particularly takes up only a few inches of space on a desktop and is priced ~ $500.

[Frank Petronio]

I hate to open a can of worms, but the price differential, if it exists, is only a couple of hundred bucks. And when you factor the shoddy quality of the budget PC versus the Mac it's a no brainer. You should be comparing Macs to Alienware level PCs, not a Dell Jalopy.

But people stick with what they're used to, with cameras and computers. And I advise people to buy whichever platform they will get the best support from (i.e. who will provide hand holding and tech support - if their husband or kids are PC geeks, then just get a PC).

[Christopher Keth]

Bingo, Mr. petronio. Mac's always seem to be compared to those "Dell jalopies" instead of their real competitors.

[Roger Richards]

I currently use a Mac G5 dual 2.3 Ghz with 2.5GB RAM, Os X 'Tiger' and external FireWire hard drives for digital video editing using Final Cut Pro 5, as well as scanning and Photoshop work. I also use PCs for most other stuff, including Web site construction and maintainance. I have to say that when it comes to serious creative work the current G5's are more cost effective. To build a PC that would run as fast as my G5 system would cost a bit more. I constructed this G5 media dedicated computer from scratch in May 2005, and have never had a crash or glitch. I like both kinds of computers for different things. But for serious image (still or moving) work, I find the Mac is much more intuitive and stable.

My business depends on both types: in addition to the G5, we use a Mac G4 17-inch Powerbook, a G4 desktop souped-up to the gills with memory and internal drives, a G3 as a file storage computer, a loaded up Sony VAIO Pentium 4 with XP Pro multimedia PC for Web work, and a current Dell 15-inch laptop.

Bottom line is, go with what you like.

[Andy Liakos]

Thanks, Roger. Now I know what to do with my G3... it was going to get donated (according to my wife) but file storage is a great idea.

[paulr]

you guys, this is the most civilized, no-bs discussion on the topic i've ever seen. in the land of film vs. digital jihads, these more mundane ideological differences seem like a tea party. scone, anyone?

[Paul Kierstead]

I have a six-computer household, including Linux, Windows and Mac. For the last quite a while, photo work has been done on the windows machine; the mac is for all the 'productivity' stuff, the Linux machines keep it all togather.

I have decided to migrate my photowork to the Mac; I hesitated previously due to the performance gap in the price range I am willing to spend, but the new iMac seemed to be the way to go, so I obtained a new Intel iMac 20", which I have been using for a few days now.

I will say this: If your intention is to scan film, edit and print on the Intel Mac, be prepared to be patient. It isn't just Photoshop that isn't there yet for the new ones, it is scanning programs, printing apps, organization apps, monitor profiling, etc. All the little bits that make up a full digital darkroom are still not universal yet. This makes for a tough decision. When I bought it, I planned on the transition from using the windows machine fully to using the mac fully to take the rest of the year, and I still see that being the way.

I will say, the build quality on the new on is fantastic; it is truly a beautiful machine to look at and use, right down to things like a very flexible power cord which doesn't bend ways you don't want it to, and a very beautiful display.

It's your call: Buy an Intel one, where the future is but where the bleeding edge also is, or a PowerPC one, well mature and good for many years to come. I think we will see solid Universal binaries (i.e. PowerPC support) for an absolute minimum of 5 years for software being produced now. New software by new vendors might be a little different.

One other thing, is expect to see some deals on the PowerPC ones coming up, or perhaps some very nice used ones for good deals.

[Eduardo Aigner]

One word:
productivity
This is all about OS X. And it's great!

[gfen]

I've been using computers for about 20 years now. That's not so long as some, but in that time frame I've done it all from pure recreation to self-taught nerdy to an actual job as a sysadmin. I've seen alot of things and used many different OSes and none of them gets it right like MacOS X does.

It just works, and it works how you want it to in a way that makes sense. I can't explain it; I can still do things more efficently in a Windows enviroment (because that's what all of my customers use) than I can in a OSX enviroment, but X brings a smile to my face everytime I work with it because of how it all comes together. Not too mention, Windows has gotten so ridiculous I refused to help friends and family with XP.

That said, buy a Macintosh. You won't go wrong. However, if Photoshop is your primary focus do NOT buy a new Intel mac. Buy one of the G5's they have on blowout, as Adobe has no intention of releasing fat binaries for the x86 processors til 2007. That means you either buy an Intel and use their Rosetta emulator, or buy a G5.

Buy the G5.

Buy the G5 iMac. They've been dumping last year's G5 iMac in the refurb store for $750 on up. For $950 you can't beat a 2ghz G5, 17" and SuperDrive model. Omit the superdrive for $850. You'll have support for the life of this machine, and there's no comparison between the G5 and the previous systems (I've also been seriously using a G3/500 iBook, a G4/500 cube, and a beige G4/466 to compare this too). The iMac is truly fantastic, and this from someone who thought they'd never buy an iMac.

I admit, I've skipped the bulk of this thread. I should be reading, but there's my input for the small budget types.

[Frank Petronio]

Compared to a "super high-end" strategy it may make more sense to upgrade to a budget G5 iMac for 2006, then swap up to the latest, greatest Intel Mac system next year when everything comes together. The G5 iMac will iMac will still be a useful machine for the students/friends/family that need a simple basic system, and for under a grand you get to work at 90% of full speed for the bulk of 2006.

Rob Galbraith just did a real world test of imaging applications and rated the Intel Macs as "about like a G4 Powerbook" for the Rosetta emulation (scanning and Photoshop apps). So there really isn't any urgency to get an Intel Mac at this point. The quad G5 tower was something like 3-4X faster at this moment.

[Emre Yildirim]

I agree with what most people said here. In my opinion it's better to get a new 'Intel Core Duo' Mac, since this will be the future for Apple. These machines are 3x faster than the G5 and consume less power. I think Apple will eventually have to dump the PowerPC architecture (G3, G4, G5 etc) because it'll be too expensive to support.

Oh yeah, while I use Windows at home, I use OS X at work for software development. I love OS X due to my Unix background, but also because of the nice user interface. Everything just seems to work out of the box.