On my Windows 2008 server desktop, I use a Core i7 i980 and SSD hard disk. I spend lots of time compiling in Visual C++/Windows.
Due to nature of my work (making apps), I need the highest possible CPU speed, highest possible HDD speed.
What kind of Mac do you recommend for such a user?
I need at least a Core i7/995 and SSD hard disk...
I've been using a PC all my life. I currently have a 5 year old Dell 3100 desktop. I've decided to make the switch to a Mac. I have a lot of problems with my current computer, but it's 5 years old so it's expected I guess.
I'm pretty much decided on the Macbook Pro 13 inch model. I'm not a "hardcore professional" computer user, but more of a personal user. Here are some of my concerns:
1. I'm leaning towards the 2.4 Ghz model. The upgrade to a 2.66Ghz with an extra 50 Gb hard-drive is several hundred $$$ more expensive. Do you guys think the added $$ is worth the little extra processor speed and hard-drive size for a non-professional user?
2. Some people are telling me to wait for the 2011 Macbook Pro to be released. Obviously nobody knows exactly when that will be. I can wait a few months, but I'm not sure how much would change. Some people seem to think the processor on the 13' model is "outdated" and needs an i5 or i7. 2011 is just around the corner, so perhaps it might be worth "waiting" to see what upgrades come available.
Ive been reading a few different posts on the forum with regards to this, but thought I would ask the question anyway.
Just got my first MAC, Got the 13". Decided I didnt want to wait anymore, If the new ones are that good then I might sell the 13" in 12 months and get one of the new 15"s.
I am looking for optibay recommendations for my MBP 17" mid-2010. I am not sure which one to get. MCE offers one, which I have looked at, but they are pretty pricy at almost 100 bucks. Then I saw another website, [URL] selling optical bay caddies for almost half that (~50 dollar range); and lastly even some on eBay for the 12$ range from US sellers.
View 7 Replies View RelatedI'm looking to buy an eMac for a friend and trying to decide between two options. They're both combo-drive:
1. 1.25ghz with 1ghz ram with about 10 months left on the Applecare warranty;
or
2. 1.25ghz with 256 ram with basically zero mileage on it but no warranty (it's owned by a family friend who tried it for about a week and then went back to her old computer.)
Option 2 would be a little more expensive, plus more memory would be needed. I'm leaning toward 2 because hey, it's brand new, but I'm concerned about the lack of warranty.
I've run Hardware Test on it, got online, played around with the applications, and there are no issues. Is this about all I can do to test it out?
Also, how much of a factor is usage? Option 1 has been in use every day with some bigger applications- is it more likely to fail sooner? I realize there's no way to predict longevity, and from my own experience I know that Macs last forever, but I'm not familiar with eMacs and maybe there are some issues that I'm not aware of with them.
Note also that my friend plans to use this for a long time. She had an older eMac until now that she loved before it got stolen, and doesn't do anything more intensive than email-internet-digital photos.
A friend of mine wants to buy a "vintage" iMac. He's an interior designer so going for the iconic look rather than specs and looking at the original G3 style or the "pod" style G4s.
Now this will be used primarliy for web browsing, email, iPhoto and iTunes (streaming his music collection to Apple TV - about 50GB of music). He'd like it to run OSX and preferably Leopard.
I'm guessing (from memory) that the original iMacs are out of the question but can anyone suggest a spec he might look for? Maybe somebody that's still using one of these machines could give an opinion? Also, what's the max spec (cpu, hard drive, RAM) that he could expect to pick up?
I have a shiny new macbook and i need a good software phone that supports either SIP or IAX (prefer both) is reliable and can record calls. It would also be nice if it has support for G729.
So far I've found ZoIPer Business, which will set me back 36GBP($58 USD). I'm a bit wary of purchasing it, as I've used ZoIPer FREE and it seems to crash sometimes (i.e. it wont cleanly exit)
I've also tried X-Lite although this also seems very buggy and havent been able to make a successful call.
Is there something someone can recommend that they've used? or should i shutup and buy ZoIPer & not complain about the price?
since i switched to mac about two months ago ive been looking for a good p2p client. Back in the windows days i used ares and loved it. So now ive downloaded several other programs like: Acquisition, Hedera, Posioned, iSwipe and Limewire.
At least two of those are for different networks and none of them have worked except for limewire, but there is too much virus and spam in it. The best option would be a working client for ares network. Every other program just wont connect. Does anyone use iswipe by the way?
I've been trying to find a good, solid powered-USB hub to use with my Macbook Pro. I tried the Belkin 7-port, which had good reviews, but it just stopped working after 2 weeks, and it was never powering self-powered USB hard drives properly (even though it was supposed to).
So I'd like some recommendations for a good USB hub that has sufficient power to use with self-powered USB hard drives and that won't slow down or stop working when i connect too many devices.
I need to setup a new version of gtk and glib2 on my Mac, but the only versions I can find are a bit stale (gtk 2.14) or don't seem to include a newer glib version.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI own an eMac (my first one) and overall, I'm extremely pleased with the machine. However, the fancy-appearing keyboard leaves much to be desired, and I'm looking for a new one. The Matias tactile pro keyboard looks promising, as does the Kensington, but I would be interested in everyone's opinion as to which keyboard has the best "feel." I'm not interested in bells and whistles, just basic utility and keyboard keys striking quality for long sessions on my word processor.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI'm looking for some feedback as to what speakers to get for an iMac 24" (when we finally get our hands on it)
It must: Be great for positional audio for gaming Perform brilliantly at producing my high bitrate iTunes library. Meet points 1 & 2 baring in mind my room is longer than it is wide - 8 feet wide by 13 feet long
It must not: Be a mess of wires - it's connecting to an iMac after all Exceed �200 (excl. P&P)
2.1 channel or 5.1 channel audio is fine, it's the quality I'm more concerned about.
I was wondering if there are any certain types of anti-theft locks for the iMac which I can securely lock onto furniture out there?
View 6 Replies View RelatedKeep track of hours of music listened to in say a continuous 2 week span. This can be synced through your ipod and within itunes itself. And give ratings related to how much hours of music you have listened to in the those 2 weeks. So if you've listened to I dunno 12 hours of music within that span, it'll keep track and give you a rating like: 'casual listener' or if you have totaled up 40 hours of music listening you're an 'avid music fan'. I dunno what to call them but I like knowing how much music I've really listened to recently and this would be cool.
Or to take it even further, see what genre (granted you have this organized in iTunes) that you're listening to most and this can go even deeper.
Like the title says; my dad's vision is getting progressively worse, so I'm looking to fix him up with a ridiculously bright, preferably very large monitor. He likes photography, so at least moderate color accuracy would be nice (video performance is completely irrelevant), but is secondary, since if he can't see it it doesn't much matter how good the color is. Not ridiculously expensive, also nice.
I can, of course, go sort monitors at Newegg by brightness and pick the highest one, but if some of the online tests are to be believed, the specced brightness isn't necessarily accurate, and that doesn't tell the story if it looks like complete crap otherwise.
On paper the Hanns�G HG-281DPB is ridiculous in brightness and size, but it's basically a TV (HDMI-only); I like ViewSonic and Samsung, but on paper most of their screens aren't notably bright.
Looking at buying the new 8core. where to find feedback
Anyone know of concerns...issues with these?
I have a few questions regarding Radeon HD 5870 versus the 5770...
1. Does CS5 (especially photoshop) make much use of graphics cards in general, and will the 5870 make a big difference in speed over the 5770?
2. Is the 5870 going to make things louder? (i have a G5 now and it's like a jet engine, so I'm hoping for a quieter machine)
3. Will the 5870 use a lot more power than the 5770?
Im looking into buying a second hand G5 Powermac Tower for Audio & Video Editing can someone give me a little insider because I beleive they don't all run latest OSX Snow or behond......
View 4 Replies View RelatedI know 300 dollars for a bump from C2D/4670 to a i5/4850 is easily one of the best upgrades Apple has offered in a long, long time.... but would I really need it?
I was primarily going to be using the iMac for everyday stuff (word/browsing/etc) and for games occasionally by others. I don't need everything running on ultra with AA on or anything, just visually comparable to PS3/X360. I will be doing a lot of Photoshop/illustrator things as well and might get into video editing.
I was thinking maybe I could hold out on going quad core for a couple years until Macbook Pro lines get it at a reasonable price then I can just use the iMac as a gorgeous led and media hub in the background as I do my work on the Macbook Pro.
I've seen the benchmarks, but how does it work out in real world situations?
What would having Quad cores do for me except help me handle files/render a few seconds faster here and there? I'm sure it's a tremendous boost in things like encoding but how would it help when it comes to image editing?
Is the 4850 a huge bump in specs compared to the 4670? Is the performance gap similar to going from 9400 to the 9600?
Is anyone runninf SL on those original macbooks (I have the 2 ghz CD, it runs tiger well, but was going to upgrade). Is it too slow on that machine.
View 4 Replies View RelatedThis will primarily be used for application development, primarily with Xcode.
I'll also use it for photography/video (GIMP, and stepping into Aperture and Final Cut Express).
I've ruled out an iMac because I want plenty of expansion options.
I know Xcode scales linearly depending on the number of cores but I am trying to look for a sweet spot in performance and budget. I want something I can grow with for a few years (i.e 3-4).
This is my (second) first post, and I tried using mrooogle to find the issue (i've been a lurker for the most part) I can't seem to find any consensus or info on it.
I have the 2.4 core i5 15" MBP with HR Glossy display, just got it on Monday, installed an owc ssd, and 8 gb of ram and i LOVE IT. The only issue is when the graphics card switches from the nVidia back to the Intel graphics, the screen briefly blanks out or "blinks" for a split second and the Intel graphics comes back on. It doesn't blink when it goes from intel to nvidia, only from nvidia back to intel.
I see the numbers of everything from Core 2 Duo, to the slightly faster and cooler Core i3, to the supposedly faster core i5s and i7s. The benchmarks go up accordingly, but I found this does not always equate in a faster experience on most tasks.
Here's my experience so far on processor upgrade:
In one computer trade school re-certification class I am in, we are working with Windows Server 2003 on a Quad Xeon platform and it's incredibly slow.
But in a previous class we had the previous generation server edition on older Xeons, and while not fast, it was much better. On paper the newer multi-core Xeons should have made a difference, but could 2003 server software be that much more bloated than the previous Windows server edition that it would stall like that and make us wish we had the older setup?
I am going to try out the Adobe CS lab and put the new high end Dells to the test there and see if they work better than when we had an older CS version on older Xeon equipped Dells.
I don't know if this is something to do with Dell, or if Apple's increasing processor bumps/generations are going to similarly not make a difference in the speed things appear to go at, whether it's Adobe stuff, server stuff, or anything else that needs power.
I know somebody who plans on a Core 2 Duo, i5 or i7 MBP and I was wondering if the higher end processor is worth it in that case (iMovie being the main program of use).
Just curious as to how much of an improvement in performance I would see upgrading my system as it states above, since my 2006 machine is 3 years old and getting close to the end of my apple care, figured I would trade it in and upgrade.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI do alot of photography with a canon dslr, I also plan to edit short HD videos as well as some photoshop and flash animation work.
Will I benefit greatly from the Quad Core Imac over the Dual Core Imac?
Has anyone that know if it's possible to upgrade MacPro Nehalem 2.26 to 2.66 Ghz Westmare with the following processors : Intel Hexa Core Xeon? Processor X5650 12M Cache, 2.66 GHz, 6.40 GT/s Intel? QPI part #:BX80614X5650 ? Could you help me telling if it?s possible to upgrading MacPro Nehalem octa core 2.26 Ghz to Mac Pro Westmare hexa core 2.66 Ghz ?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have an opportunity to get a single 3.0 GHz quad core Clovertown.
Should I go for it? There's no advantage to having two cores in two sockets versus having four cores in one socket, right?
is it even possible to upgrade an old dual core powermac g5 to a quad core or even an 8 core.
I have a dual core one and i really need to upgrade to a quad or even 8 but it is so expensive to buy a whole brand new one and i was wondering if there was a way to just get a new processor and more ram or what not.
[URL]
What you say guys?
I know the same article is on main page
So the older Mac Pro's from 2008 have 2 2.8ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon processors, without hyperthreading, for a total of 8 cores, and the top of the line iMac has a Quar Core i7 2,8ghz with hyperthreading for a total of 8 (virtual) cores.
With the ghz being the same but less "real" cores, but probably newer CPU architecture, which CPU will actually be faster?
