Laptop for digital side of workflow

[Bob McCarthy]

This subject (laptop to buy) comes up frequently, but the quality of the offerings in the market is constantly evolving.

I've come to the conclusion that either a PC or Mac laptop will have enough power and memory to provide a good platform. I'm looking at the screen being the factor to differentiate the crowd.

I see the newer trend to a glossy screen. Will they calibrate. I unfortunately don't have an outlet to see them all, and tend to mailorder from Dell, etc.

Has someone purchased a new Mac/PC and can you give an analysis of screen quality. I've got my checkbook out and...

Thanks in advance,

bob

[Greg Miller]

Laptop screens can be calibrated. The major issue is angle of view. The brightness of the image will change with even a slight change in viewing position. I have not yet seen a laptop display that I would trust for doing serious image editing.

[roteague]

I would not recommend a Dell, whatever you decide upon. I bought a Dell a few years ago, and after replacing the motherboard two times (in 18 months) - due to a design flaw by Dell - I had to throw it away when the motherboard failed for the third time (and they wanted $500 to repair it).

[Jeremy Moore]

I'm going to disagree with Robert and suggest a Dell. I purchased a 2ghz dualcore with 2gb of ram 17" laptop for very cheap and it has a 4 year complete warranty which even covers my clumsiness if I should knock it on the ground or spill my Shiner on it.

I have been using it for editing web images, but am in-between facilities and won't be doing any serious printing for another couple of weeks. The screen is very bright and I will be profiling it, but I also have a CRT I plan on hooking the laptop into (the Dell's have outlets to hook in exterior monitors) for final color checks. The ultrasharp screen on the laptop is very bright and crisp, though.

[CXC]

One critical consideration is the matte vs. glossy screen issue. The glossy gives richer colors, greater contrast, and deeper blacks. It also picks up reflections from external light sources something fierce. For me, this reflectivity was a deal-breaker, but then I don't do intense, prolonged photo editing on my laptop.

BTW the glossy appears to be the screen of the future, the matte is becoming hard to find.

[Ted Harris]

I recently got a new MacBookwith the glossy screen and had no trouble calibrating it. Yes, you have to be careful about reflections, OTOH it is an absolute joy to work with in situations with lots of light where you can't even see the matte screen.

I do smoe photo editing on the machine and in term sof speed and memory (full 2 gigs of RAM) it is ok. OTOH I would never want to find myself in the situation where it was my only or primary machine for photo editing ...not without an external trackball or graphic tablet and an external,larger monitor.

[Frank Petronio]

I have been using nothing but Powerbooks for years, and just got the missuses one of the newer black 13-inch MacBooks (not the Pro) with a glossy screen. I think these are great, the screens are beautiful. You don't calibrate a laptop in the same sense as a fixed controled display, you really just want to control the Gamma (mid tones) and keep grey = grey. Use the numerical palette in Photoshop to confirm.

But yeah, they are great. And watching it boot XP is a trip. They are probably the very best laptops on the market right now, for either OSX or XP. They certainly are better built than any Dell or anything short of a VooDoo.

I am waiting to get a 15-inch MacBook Pro - it has a separate video card - the plain MacBook has integrated. But otherwise I think the less expensive MacBook is just as durable and high quality, at least the black ones are.

[Bob McCarthy]

I use X-Rite's Monaco to calibrate all my monitors. When I'm in the field I take a 2 year old Sony Vaio. 2.8mhzP4. We call it the cinder block as thats how it feels in the case when carrying it through airports.

It can be calibrated but the screen "blooms" and other issues when adjusted by calibration. Actually, one doesn't calibrate a monitor with a LCD laptop, you adjust the video card CLUT.

I'm glad to hear the new generation screens will successfully calibrate. Now Mac, or Toshiba, or ....

On using a mac with XP, how does one work with the mouse differences between platforms? Left-right-wheel doesn't exist in Macdom as I understand it!!

Bob

[Marko]

What Ted and Frank said. The only thing I would emphasize is to max out on the memory.

I firmly believe that you get what you pay for, especially when it comes to laptops, therefore, I have the MacBook Pro on its way.

[Frank Petronio]

Well this MacBook non-pro is first class build quality, and it is thinner and lighter... so if you don't need to drive a 30-inch LCD it bears consideration (and get the 2gb of OEM Ram cuz I guess they are touchy about bad Ram).

Also the AppleCare on laptops makes sense. I wouldn't get it for a desktop but for a laptop they get a lot more abuse.

[Bob McCarthy]

I'm kinda pumped on getting a Mac. I began with Apple (II), moved to Mac (SE) though PPC in 95. Went PC and I like the idea of coming back (lots of PC software is PC only essential to business).

Beyond the mouse, a couple more questions, can two screens (internal + one external) be separately calibrated? Can Mac be upgraded to 4 gig with non Mac memory? External drives, are they mac only or can they be partitioned for both OS's?

And mac pro offered two screens, is the matte one better?

I have a lot of traveling in my future and whatever I purchase will be my primary machine for a while.

Bob

[Frank Petronio]

matte = less glare
glossy = sharper details
Powerbooks = max 2gb RAM and it is sensitive as to quality of the RAM so buy only the best stuff that can be tested or buy full-price from Apple
It comes with 2x256 that need to be tossed if you buy third party RAM so also consider that. In the future they may make 4gb RAM that fits but not yet.
Soon to be here MacPro towers = max 16 gb RAM!
multiple screens can be calibrated independently and you can switch profiles for different environments
External HDs all work interchangablly although not for boot disks, only as data
Apple Bootcamp puts XP on a new partition and you boot from either.
Parrallels software allows you to run OSX and XP from the same drive and the same time, but faster than Virtual PC ever could...

[CXC]

Another difference between MacBook Vanilla and MacBook Pro is the screen size, as you get 2 more inches with the Pro, 15.4 instead of 13.3. And remember that these are the new wide screens, so the total real estate is markedly reduced for the same numerical size, compared to the old screen shape.

Regarding matte/glossy, ideally you want to go to an Apple store and see them side by side. But I assume that for accurate detail work you should go with glossy, and find a spot, or arrange your other lighting, so that reflections are minimized.

One final thing I dislike about the MacBook Vanilla is the keyboard, which is "chiclet" style, the keys kind of snap, with no shock absorption or play.

[Bob McCarthy]

I've looked everywhere I normally buy without an answer to this question.

Can one use more than 2 gig of ram on a duo-core laptop?

Bob

[Marko]

I've looked everywhere I normally buy without an answer to this question.

Can one use more than 2 gig of ram on a duo-core laptop?

Bob

Short answer: No.

Long(er) answer: Memory needs more power and dissipates more heat. Neither of which is desirable in a laptop. The heat could be dealt with adding a fan, but that would require more power still.

On the other hand, laptops are not made to be main image processing machines. So we have a 2 gig limit as a compromise. For the time being, of course.

Similar reasoning goes for disk capacity and speed.

[Bob McCarthy]

Thank you all. This has been very helpful.

Bob

[Ted Harris]

A further note on memory. Frank is right on about Apple being picky about the memory you use but there are lotsa third party sellers that can provide certified RAM and way way way way (and may more ways) less than Apple charges. I just got a new MacBook and the additional RAM from my favorite supplier cost me ~ $200 for 2 GB of certified RAM with a lifetime warranty. You can get it a bit cheaper sometimes but these guys are generally right there with the best prices. The company is Data Memory Systems www.datamem.com you can call them at 800-662-7466. Ask for Bud, tell him I sent you and you may get a small discount if you are buying a couple of hundred worth of stuff. I have no affiliation with these guys other than being a loyal customer for more than 15 years. They are quick to ship, quick to replace dead memory or flash cards, etc. and knowledgable when you need help. The second or third RAM chip I bought for them was for a Powerbook 140 (you figure out how long ago that was) and I installed it, turned the machine on and smoke curled up into the air. I called them and they replaced it with next day FedEx at no cost. I also had a 1 GB CF card die a year ago and they sent me a new one at no cost. Good people.

[Charles]

Another important point to consider is the speed of the hard drive. Most laptops come stock with 5400 rpm hard drives. I'm not sure about Macs or whether their hard drives are easily upgraded. I upgraded to an aftermarket Toshiba 7200 rpm HD in my laptop and it made a world of difference in performance with Photoshop when processing large files that had to be temporarily written to the HD. The speed of the HD can significantly impact video editing, especially if you intend at some point in the future to edit high definition video.

As for Mac vs PC laptop build quality, it simply depends on which brand you compare to the Mac. There are a number of PCs built as well or better than Macs. There is nothing special about the build quality of a Mac. They use the same oem suppliers as the PC industry. The quality of a Mac or PC, or any piece of consumer electronics for that matter, is directly related to how well the product is mechanically engineered (especially a laptop or any portable electronics with mechanical components) and the level of quality of compnents specified. Virtually everything nowadays is surface mount so problems in the field are a result of mispecifing parts values and tolerances, or poor fabrication of the PC board.

And for what it's worth, the new Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as a PC, there just aren't as many viruses out circulating intended to hit Macs. But the number of viruses being written now for Macs is surprisingly high and it will only get worse.

[Bob McCarthy]

As for Mac vs PC laptop build quality, it simply depends on which brand you compare to the Mac. There are a number of PCs built as well or better than Macs.

What PC's would fit this better build quality?

Bob

[Ted Harris]

"And for what it's worth, the new Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as a PC, there just aren't as many viruses out circulating intended to hit Macs. But the number of viruses being written now for Macs is surprisingly high and it will only get worse."

I'm not sure this is correct. AFAIK it might be true for Intel based Mac's that are booted up to Windows but still not for Mac's running OSX or any UNIX operating system for that matter. As far as the "suprisingly high number" my understanding that there have been less than a dozen Mac viruses in the "wild" in fact I think evenlower than that.

[Frank Petronio]

The Sonys, Levenos, and the gaming machines - VooDoo and Alienware - are almost or as well built as the Apples. Note that these machines cost more than the bargain Dells and Toshibas that the magazines usually try to compare an Apple to.

I own a Toshiba. It is crap.

Yep, you can get 7200 RPM HDs for Mac laptops just like a PC. They are the same thing afterall.

And as for viruses, sooner or later some jerk will unleash something to attacks Macs. And right now I don't like any of the anti-Virus solutions...

[Marko]

Another important point to consider is the speed of the hard drive. Most laptops come stock with 5400 rpm hard drives. I'm not sure about Macs or whether their hard drives are easily upgraded.

Same as PCs. Just as as you said yourself further down in your post, they all use the same parts from the same manufacturers these days. So, yes, they are as easily upgraded. The reason why most laptops come with slower drives is mainly power consumption. It takes less power to make them run and they generate less heat. You can replace your hd with a faster one, but you'll likely pay the battery life penalty.


As for Mac vs PC laptop build quality, it simply depends on which brand you compare to the Mac. There are a number of PCs built as well or better than Macs. There is nothing special about the build quality of a Mac. They use the same oem suppliers as the PC industry.

True, and all those PCs that are built the same or better cost the same or more. Both quality and price differential stem from quality control. In other words, no free lunch, regardless of platform. And to top it off, being PCs, they still have to run the same crummy OS... ;-)


And for what it's worth, the new Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as a PC

It's neither PCs nor Macs that are succeptible to viruses - it's the operating systems they run. PCs mostly run Windows, Macs run OSX, which is a variant of BSD Unix and that's what makes PCs so vulnerable and Macs so resilient. Put Unix on a PC and it will be equally resilient as any Mac.

But bottom line is no operating system is fully bullet-proof. It's just that none of them are so widespread as Windows nor do they have as many holes.

[Charles]

POSTED BY MARKO
It's neither PCs nor Macs that are succeptible to viruses - it's the operating systems they run. PCs mostly run Windows, Macs run OSX, which is a variant of BSD Unix and that's what makes PCs so vulnerable and Macs so resilient. Put Unix on a PC and it will be equally resilient as any Mac.

But bottom line is no operating system is fully bullet-proof. It's just that none of them are so widespread as Windows nor do they have as many holes.[/QUOTE]

Actually the Mac OS has lots of holes, they just haven't been exploited. Go to GOOGLE and enter APPLE OS ISSUES. You'll find interesting reading including the following:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Ancient_flaws_leave_OS_X_vulnerable_/0,2000061744,39234678,00.htm

[Charles]

"And for what it's worth, the new Macs are just as susceptible to viruses as a PC, there just aren't as many viruses out circulating intended to hit Macs. But the number of viruses being written now for Macs is surprisingly high and it will only get worse."

I'm not sure this is correct. AFAIK it might be true for Intel based Mac's that are booted up to Windows but still not for Mac's running OSX or any UNIX operating system for that matter. As far as the "suprisingly high number" my understanding that there have been less than a dozen Mac viruses in the "wild" in fact I think evenlower than that.


SEE PRECEDING POST

[Joe Lipka]

Arguing the physical merits of hardware is tough, because the machines change so often.
I make the wild assumption that you are going to use Photoshop as your image editing software. If that is the case, the only concern that I would have about using a mobile as a permanent machine for digital workflow has to do with the scratch disk. Adobe recommends the use of another hard drive as a scratch disk to help speed up photoshop while saving intermediate files. You probably do not have this option when using a mobile computer for photshop work.

That may not be a big deal for you.

That being said, I do use my Thinkpad when I make photographs. It is a wonderful place to store images and review the "dailies".

[Marko]

It's neither PCs nor Macs that are succeptible to viruses - it's the operating systems they run. PCs mostly run Windows, Macs run OSX, which is a variant of BSD Unix and that's what makes PCs so vulnerable and Macs so resilient. Put Unix on a PC and it will be equally resilient as any Mac.

But bottom line is no operating system is fully bullet-proof. It's just that none of them are so widespread as Windows nor do they have as many holes.


Actually the Mac OS has lots of holes, they just haven't been exploited. Go to GOOGLE and enter APPLE OS ISSUES. You'll find interesting reading including the following:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Ancient_flaws_leave_OS_X_vulnerable_/0,2000061744,39234678,00.htm

ZDNet has far too much invested into the whole Microsoft thing that they can hardly be taken as an objective observer. Take the following quote from that article:

"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms.… If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems, regarding security vulnerabilities"

Mr. Archibald has it right in the first part of the quote, insofar as BSD Unix could be considered less common 'Nix, but the second part of it is pure bull, pardon my bluntness.

Let me rephrase the part you quoted me on: Windows as an operating system is a patch of a patch originally built to sit on top of another patch of a patch, DOS, a Disk Operating System. It's vulnerability stems directly from the fact that it was built to accomodate as much backward compatibility as possible. Being essentially still a Disk-oriented system, real security is much harder to obtain than is the case with Account-oriented system like Unix.

Yes, Unix is vulnerable too, and yes, as Apple's market share increases, it will begin to get targeted as well. But the difference will be on an order of a magnitude at least, due to the differences in the operating systems.

My bottom line remains: it's not the hardware that matters in this matter, it's the software. And Microsoft - both Windows and Office - remains the Emmentaler of the bunch.

[Charles]

ZDNet has far too much invested into the whole Microsoft thing that they can hardly be taken as an objective observer. Take the following quote from that article:

"The only thing which has kept Mac OS X relatively safe up until now is the fact that the market share is significantly lower than that of Microsoft Windows or the more common UNIX platforms.… If this situation was to change, in my opinion, things could be a lot worse on Mac OS X than they currently are on other operating systems, regarding security vulnerabilities"

Mr. Archibald has it right in the first part of the quote, insofar as BSD Unix could be considered less common 'Nix, but the second part of it is pure bull, pardon my bluntness.

Let me rephrase the part you quoted me on: Windows as an operating system is a patch of a patch originally built to sit on top of another patch of a patch, DOS, a Disk Operating System. It's vulnerability stems directly from the fact that it was built to accomodate as much backward compatibility as possible. Being essentially still a Disk-oriented system, real security is much harder to obtain than is the case with Account-oriented system like Unix.

Yes, Unix is vulnerable too, and yes, as Apple's market share increases, it will begin to get targeted as well. But the difference will be on an order of a magnitude at least, due to the differences in the operating systems.

My bottom line remains: it's not the hardware that matters in this matter, it's the software. And Microsoft - both Windows and Office - remains the Emmentaler of the bunch.


Whatever.....at least Microsoft admits their OS issues as opposed to Apple where the company policy seems to be admit nothing. Admission would, of course, tend to shatter the myth of Mac superiority or at least weaken it.