For quite some time now, I've been in doubt whether to buy a new Macbook or Macbook Pro (after Leopard is released). I'd really prefer a MB Pro but my budget won't really allow that. I guess I'll have to settle for a Macbook. A black one, no white in any case. But a MB, though fast and 'cool', remains a consumer notebook. I've always had pro machines : a G3/400 pismo powerbook, quicksilver Powermac G4/800. Now, I've been looking at some second hand Powerbooks, especially the last models (1.67Ghz, dual layer sd and high res screen) are of particular interest to me. I've always wanted a machine like that, but I didn't have the money when they were released at the end of 2005/beginning 2006. Now I do. And it's hard to resist.
I know that a Powerbook G4 quite a bit slower than a Macbook, not to mention a Macbook Pro. But it's not all about processor speed, but rather the whole 'experience' of working on such a notebook. I also believe that a 1.67Ghz G4 Powerbook will be a lot faster than my Powermac G4/800.
So I have a 1.8ghz dual G5 with 3gb of ram for work. I mainly work in Adobe CS and do a far amount of Photoshop work. At any given time I may have all of Adobe CS plus Office and a few other apps running -- and a gazillion fonts. Went to the store and saw the new 24" iMac. How would a new iMac compare to my late '04 1.8DP G5? On that same note, how would a new MacBook Pro compare to the above?
I bought the last model of iBook G4 14" back in December and now I have this craze to to sell and get the macbook. Can someone compare the $1299 macbook to the laptop i have? ..not the configuration, i meant the insider's pros and cons & defects.
I've recently run into this crazy obsession. I want an iBook, but I have a Macbook. When I was looking into getting a new computer, I decided to wait, so that I would be able to get the newer Macbook, but now that I've had it, I keep looking back at the iBook, and I think to myself how much money I could potentially get for downgrading to an iBook, and I love the idea of the older PowerPC computer for some reason. (Basically, I could always think that my Macbook is outdated or have the BEST iBook possible. Course, my usage on either computer would be exactly the same, although I'm sure the iBook would be a tad slower.
Ok, i just bought an imac and need a mac laptop for school, and im not sure what to do. 1 I sell my imac on ebay, and cut the loss and add a few hundred to cover the price of the macbook. 2 i take that couple hundred i was going to use to buy the macbook and buy an ibook g3. Also ill mention that i have a 20'' external monitor that i could use with either of the laptops
I did a quick google search but I was hoping someone here would have more links or real world experience.
With CS3 now, I'm considering an upgrade from my 15" powerbook 1.67 to a macbook pro 2.33. However, I would have to keep my Adobe CS2 for probably a few months longer before I can afford the upgrade to CS3..
Would the 2.33 + 2gb RAM run the same or faster than 1.67 + 1.5gb RAM even with a non-native program like Adobe CS2?
A question for those who have used both the MacBook Air 1.6 GHz and the Powerbook 12" 1.5GHz maxed out 1.5GBRAM - I wonder how the Powerbook compares in terms of speed and zippliness relative to the early 1.6 GHz MacBook Air's.
So I've got a 2.0 GHz, white MacBook with 1gb ram, and a G4 Powerbook 1.67 with 1gb of ram. The major software difference between the two is the OS, the MacBook is running Leopard. So, I noticed the MacBook started to lag a little from when it was new, so when I upgraded to Leopard I did a clean install. Still noticed the lag so I checked my ram, and here's what I got:
The Powerbook was running the same exact apps (iTunes, iChat, iPhoto, Safari) as the MacBook, and even after loading dashboard on the Powerbook it still used only 500mb of ram and 4.45gb of Virtual Ram. The MacBook was using 615mb of ram and 32 GB OF VIRTUAL MEMORY?I thought it might just be counting space set aside, but I checked the apps and adding all them up is about 32gb. They both have the same iPhoto library yet the powerbook's only took up 240mb of virtual ram and the macbook's over 1000mb.
I realize there are some slight differences (different iChat, spaces was running) but why in gods name would it make the MacBook use almost 7 times the amount of virtual ram!
I am currently at the beach and I have my Powerbook G4 12'' and my father's MacBook operating. Both have OSX 10.4.11 running. My father's MacBook, which is approximately 3 years old versus my older Powerbook, is picking up several internet connections from the surrounding houses in the area but for whatever reason, my older Powerbook only picks up about 1/3 the amount of internet connections. Does anyone know why this is the case? Do the newer MacBook's have improved components in terms of their airports that allow them to pick up more signals? Is there a setting I can change on my older Powerbook that could improve my signal reception.
Do Universal Binary applications (Adobe Illustrator CS3) run quicker on Intel than on Power PC if the machines were similary spec'd maybe due to better architecture etc. E.g. a "G5 PPC 2.0Ghz" vs "iMac C2D 2.0ghz". I'm looking for real world application use rather than benchmarks. Wondering if it is better to go second user on a G5 or splash out on a new iMac/MacPro?
I am looking to get another mac to do some basic video editing and encoding. All the editing is going to be done in the mpeg4 format and once the video has been edited I am going to encode the video into H.264. My question is which will be better A Power Mac Dual 1.8Ghz G5 or a Mac Mini Core 2 Duo?
I am looking for stable set up that can handle encoding video for a few hours at a time. I am leaning towards the Power Mac Dual G5 because of how much more cooling it has however that said a Mac Mini with a Core 2 Duo running at 1.66 Ghz would also probabley work well.
I'm still hanging in there with my powermac g5 from 2004 (dual 1.8 g5, 2gb ram, ati 9800xt 256mb).
I do a lot of photo processing, and some video editing. This summer i'll be upgrading my SLR (10mp to 15mp), and I'll also be shooting 720p 30fps video.
I'm thinking I should upgrade my computer the same time as the camera. The g5 has leopard and CS3, Apeture, Final cut pro. these programs are really chugging along (sigh, the g5 used to be SOOO fast).
SO my question is... will the new imac (3.06, 4gb ram, ATI HD) be a noticeable bump in performance, worth the upgrade? Also, how much should I sell my g5 for (including the aluminum 20" apple cinema display).
I'm trying to decide which product to buy and I was hoping for some advice.
First and foremost I want a device so that I may transfer my VHS tapes to DVD.
Live TV recording is secondary but for the price, I'd like to find the device that suits me best so I can continue to use it after i've transferred all my VHS.
Here are my concerns:
1) I'm going to be moving from the US to Ireland in a couple of months (not sure for how long, could be years+) Obviously there's the whole NTSC vs. PAL, ATSC vs. DVB.
I know with EyeTV 250 it's either or, any ideas if buying some sort of converter is an option (prices, quality)? If I bought just a PAL one, would I still be able to convert VHS or would it be completely unusable in the US?
2) I'd like some sort of HD/Digital abilities. From what I can tell TVMax is analog only and Blackmagic may also be but I can't find more specs on that.
Does this mean they'll be useless once the US undergoes the conversion?
So as of now I'm leaning towards EyeTV 250 but the question are there any forseeable problems with using a PAL to NTSC converter or using a PAL EyeTV in the US just to convert VHS.
I am planning on purchasing a new display for use (currently) with my imac. I am completely torn between these two models, and cannot make a decision. Any thoughts? I like the Dell because it is LED backlit, thus good blacks and little to no backlight bleed. But I like the Samsung because of the (supposedly better panel and (supposedly) better color reproduction. I like the simplistic look of both of them (though they could look a little better ) so I'm not sure which one to buy.
I ran some tests on my 2009 Quad Nehalem to try and determine what was up with the triple Vs dual memory "brouhaha".
I posted the results as a new thread because I think it will be useful information for a lot of quad owners, but it was originally going to be a reply to this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=735845
Here we go. Tesselator suggested 3 tests that could show the differences in speed between triple and dual channel bandwidth.
As one idea I would maybe try creating a few very large images (16-bit, blank white, blank black, gradient fill) and then duplicating and deleting that layer repeatedly a few hundred times.
So I did them, 10 times each. I could have gone on, but the results were very very stable after the first 2 attempts.
Set-up: a 40Mpx, 16bit image (8000*5000). First test it was simply filled white; second test: black; and third test a black to white gradient. I added a fourth test, using a real (photo) 12Mpx RAW image from my Nikon D300.
I created (took a while!) an action with 350 repetitions of "duplicate layer" and "delete layer", followed by a red fill to let me know the action was done. The same action was used in all four tests.
The computer was restarted before each of the four tests, which may explain the irregularities on the first 1-2 attempts. Nothing else but PS4 was launched.
The results are interesting:
We can clearly see that the simple white and black fills show a speed difference of around 10%.
We can also clearly see that this difference disappears when a more complex image is used. The use of more complex images represents a much more realistical use of PS.
To make things even more realistic, I also tested RetouchActions's speed test on my own 12Mpx image. I use nearly all of the operations of that action on a daily basis, so it's a lot more representative of the work I do on PS.
Here are the results:
The results are clear: 11% increase in performance using 8GB of ram (Vs 6GB) when working on a 12Mpx image.
Added info: number of page-outs after running the 10 test series (after about 45 minutes of intense PS work): -17K when using 6GB (1.7K page-out avg). -10K when using 8GB (1K page-out avg).
For me the results are definitive: unless I plan on working only with full black or full white images (not even black and white!), having 8GB is better, even when working on smallish 12Mpx files. I imagine the differences would have been even greater using bigger file sizes of actual complex images.
What would now be interesting: someone with a 2009MP Octo doing the same tests at 12GB and 16GB.
Two short questions on which I really need an answer. This academic year, I'll be writing a lot of papers, but most specifically, I am forced to use SPSS (statistical software package for social sciences).
Will I really need the 2.93 over the 2.66 and notice the improvement?
Same goes for the gfx. I like full-hd 1080, I'll be in InDesign, and use Logic Pro. Will I need "slash" notice the 4850 over the gt130?
Also, are the "hang-ups" with the 4850 truly fixed and does it indeed run a lot hotter (inc. really that more noise) than the gt130?
I've heard Office:Mac isn't that great, and doesn't make up for what iWork 09 is missing. So I'm wondering what people think about it and why does it get such a bland reputation? Also, do people use a combination of the above? Such as iWork and Office:Windows? Both Offices? I do mainly word processing, some soft Excel work (no hardcore giant spreadsheets...yet), and general PowerPoints for presentations. I have access to cheap iWork/Offices (school discount) and a family pack of the top-level edition of Office:PC (family) so it isn't a big deal to get any of the above.
Lastly, what's the difference between Camino and Firefox? I use Firefox currently and love it, mainly due to the add-ons (weather at the bottom, Gmail alert, skins, page views, other customizations). Tabs seem to be on all browsers these days, so are there any other key differences?
Soon i will be getting a Mac(i think) and was wondering about a case. Since i want a Macbook Pro with the Unibody Housing i want it to be safe. Now i can't decide if i want a case or a Sleeve. Now the Case might have heat issues even with the vents that are on the case. The sleeve won't have that issue but will it be more prone to scratching the Macbook it self? Or should i go no case and just sorta deal with the scratches. There is a Price difference between the Sleeve and the Case. About $20 Cdn more for the Case.
I have an early 2011 Macbook Pro 15-inch running at 2ghz with 4gb of ram. I am looking to upgrade it various sites selling ram are offering 1.35v and 1.5v ram for the same price. I know that the lower voltage obviously uses less power and probably runs a little cooler. Does my macbook pro support low voltage ram? I think it's called DDR3L.
I'm at the point that I am finally needing to upgrade from my old 15" MBP (1,1), and will be jumping to a 13" MBP base model. I know Apple is currently running the promotion with the (up to) $199 MIR with an iPod purchase, but my trusty 160GB Classic is doing a marvelous job as is, so the iPod is relatively frivolous for me at the moment.
The question is whether or not there's a perk to buying now and just selling off an iPod brand new (aka bigger MBP discount), or if they run some different promotion after the current one lapses on the 7th that I might have an interest in. I'd scour my memory to recall if they do any other fall promotions (but it rarely remembers these sales, been nearly four years since I bought my last Mac), and searching has been fruitless (or I'm just using ill-formed queries). In any case, my purchase isn't terribly time-crucial (in the short term), but I'm certainly not waiting until Nov/Dec to pick one up. Does anyone recall if Apple traditionally does some other sort of promotion after the typical "rake in all the college students and give 'em free iPods to clean house" at the start of the school season?