[I WAS the One]

OK, I own a PowerMac G4 MDD since 2002 I guess it was the first one that year if I'm not wrong... I thought that I was making the right decision that day, and realized that next time I will buy the most advance mac for better usage time performace. I remember thinking "why pay more if I can get more or less the same paying less?" and that how I ended with my then Faster Dual 867Mhz MDD G4... and now Super slower MDDamn machine.... anyway I learn from my mistake... and from now on when I decide to buy a brand new mac I will buy the most advance one.

I don't know about you guys, but I still use my Mac for living... I mean it's not for entertaimnet only, I do Audio Production using Protool, an Mbox card, an external 12 channels small console, one Midi controller and one Yamaha Keyboard (now days I use Garage Band too for pro tasks too, believed or not) I also do Graphic Arts, I got the CS2 bundle and the living dead app that I love FreeHand... and let me tell you, Today I need speed. for real, I max out the RAM, the storage, the graphic card and it felt slow. I mean Slow Slow. I Need More... but I gotta admit that the new Mac Pro seems to be too more powerful, I think it was made for some Pro Users like 3D modeling or special FX pros, or extreme audio producers, I mean... today if I buy a Mac Book, I will be far better using it than the MDD I use today, also if use Rossetta for CS2 apps... it will be better... what do you think? if I gotta buy a new Mac and now that you know my everyday tasks, what's gonna be a better deal?

[Commodus]

The way you use your system, you'd still be better off buying a Mac Pro. Anyone who works a computer that hard will probably need as much performance as possible in the long run. That's especially true when you might want an internal card (speaking of which: if your Mbox card is a PCI card, you'll need to get a PCI Express equivalent to it).

If you don't think you'll need overwhelming power, you can always configure a Mac Pro with base specs. A quad 2 GHz model is $2199 (if you don't change anything besides the CPU); you might want to add another gigabyte of RAM or a second hard drive to it, but you don't have to keep Apple's recommended specs if you don't want to.

Besides, we'll see how "too powerful" feels a couple of years from now.

[zerostar]

I would probably get the 2.66 Mac Pro, you will be able to get 3.3 to 3.66 GHz processors in the future and *potentially* pop them in. Since you don't upgrade extremely often I would go for the Mac Pro because of some of the internal features. For me the single optical and 2 Drive Slots in my Quad is limiting at times, also the new ports on the front of the new G5 are nice to have.

It might be slight "overkill" as a production machine right now, but we all know software will get hungrier and need more power to perform smoothly.

I am going to stick to my Qad G5 since it is only 5 or 6 months old now, but I am definetly getting some Mac Pro's for work once Adobe CS3 is released, we have never regretted getting top of the line when it comes to machines that make us money.

[I WAS the One]

Originally Posted by Commodus

Anyone who works a computer that hard will probably need as much performance as possible in the long run. That's especially true when you might want an internal card (speaking of which: if your Mbox card is a PCI card, you'll need to get a PCI Express equivalent to it).

Besides, we'll see how "too powerful" feels a couple of years from now.

I mean, I never stop working with my MDD, I mean I gotta create one original comedy/parody song per week for a morning show, and work with two magazines everyday! so, thats what I was thinking of a Mac Book pro, it's specifications are way too more than my MDD right now. also the Mbox is a USB card so I really don't need the PCI card slots... I mean Right know the MDD it's filled up with firewire and USB PCI cards but just for external drives...
in the other hand, If I buy a Mac Pro, I think I will be covered for almost five years without problems... right? I mean I still use my PowerBook G3 KANGA, for internet surfing and some basic webpage designs... and my Pismo, it's my full time traveler Mac... I do a lot with it. in fact, I end stuff that I stared on my MDD sometimes... maybe it's true, a Mac Pro sounds a good option.

Originally Posted by zerostar

I would probably get the 2.66 Mac Pro, you will be able to get 3.3 to 3.66 GHz processors in the future and *potentially* pop them in. Since you don't upgrade extremely often I would go for the Mac Pro because of some of the internal features. For me the single optical and 2 Drive Slots in my Quad is limiting at times, also the new ports on the front of the new G5 are nice to have.

You're right... I guess a good configuration for a long lasting machine will be a Quad 3.0, 2 g RAM and one 250 HD, just for a start right? wait.. did I gotta buy a special HDs for the Mac Pro or its just a enclosure for the drives?

[Gossamer]

The Mac Pro comes with the hard drive brackets and everything, you just need to buy the SATA drive. And it was suggested that you go with the Quad 2.66 instead of the 3, then upgrading down the road.

[I WAS the One]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

The Mac Pro comes with the hard drive brackets and everything, you just need to buy the SATA drive. And it was suggested that you go with the Quad 2.66 instead of the 3, then upgrading down the road.

2.66 is better than a 3.0?? or you think it will be more cheaper upgrade later...? other question... can I use the HDs that I have inside my MDD with those brackets??

[CatOne]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

2.66 is better than a 3.0?? or you think it will be more cheaper upgrade later...? other question... can I use the HDs that I have inside my MDD with those brackets??

The 2.66 is $800 cheaper than the 3.0.

Personally, I don't know if I'd count on upgrading the processors myself... by the time that time comes, the bus speed, etc., often end up limiting things.

As for the hard drives -- no. Your MDD drives are Ultra ATA. The drives on the Mac Pro (as well as on the G5) are SATA -- they are not compatible. It should be pretty easy to transfer data -- just boot the MDD into target disk mode and connect them via firewire. If you want to attach the drive to the Mac Pro long-term, get an external firewire enclosure (Wiebetech makes good ones -- make sure you don't get a cheapie one that doesn't use an Oxford 912 chipset -- I have had problems). Cost is like $50 for this.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

...I still use my Mac for living...

Any pro needs a pro box and for pro use typically higher end boxes are most life cycle cost effective. As such, none of the existing G5s or MacIntels present as ideal for a working pro whose existing setup is still functional.

IMO your ideal professional upgrade path will be to wait for the Merom MBPs and buy one in September. Then use the MBP as a desktop replacement until Mac Pro performance becomes so much stronger that also owning a high endMac Pro becomes appropriate for your workflow; at least wait to have a look at the quad Mac Pros that we will see approximately 2007 January (Intel is on track to deliver quad cores 2006 Dec).

My current setup and upgrade needs are almost identical. However adding another graphics workstation soon means I will probably be forced to buy a new Mac Pro well before the quad core Mac Pros become available. I will be buying a Merom MBP as soon as available.

Don't even dream about buying a G5! New boxes are used for the next few years, not just today; look how long you and I have used our existing G4 towers. Anyone suggesting purchasing new G5s is a good performance value for the next 3-5 years is not thinking very well about where apps and the OS are going. G5s are not cheap, and IMO the labor cost of changeover to a new workstation is very high, so we should minimize how often we change boxes.

-Allen Wicks

[I WAS the One]

no I'm confused....

Both machines will work fine, but it will be better a MBP'07 now and later a MB Quad?...
but to be honest, I will be buying just ONE machine to keep with me at least 5 years...

I truly can't buy 2 machines..

Not enough money, and also my wife will kill me too. LOL

What to do? My Mac is getting old... and a brand new models are very powerful....what to do?

[ndptal85]

"I mean, I never stop working with my MDD, I mean I gotta create one original comedy/parody song per week for a morning show, and work with two magazines everyday! so, thats what I was thinking of a Mac Book pro, it's specifications are way too more than my MDD right now. also the Mbox is a USB card so I really don't need the PCI card slots... I mean Right know the MDD it's filled up with firewire and USB PCI cards but just for external drives...
in the other hand, If I buy a Mac Pro, I think I will be covered for almost five years without problems... right? I mean I still use my PowerBook G3 KANGA, for internet surfing and some basic webpage designs... and my Pismo, it's my full time traveler Mac... I do a lot with it. in fact, I end stuff that I stared on my MDD sometimes... maybe it's true, a Mac Pro sounds a good option."

If you are really doing all that media work you must be making some serious coin and if thats true then you are seriously under-serving yourself computer wise. You're still using a friggin Kanga and Pismo!?? Saving money is a virtue and its always good to avoid wasteful spending but then again you only live once. Join us in this century!

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

My current setup and upgrade needs are almost identical. However adding another graphics workstation soon means I will probably be forced to buy a new Mac Pro well before the quad core Mac Pros become available. I will be buying a Merom MBP as soon as available.

The Quad Core Mac Pros are available now. It sounds like he's got a usable desktop system and a good laptop upgrade would be an excellent addition, so a MacBook Pro would be a good idea, but the new Mac Pro will still blow it away in terms of performance.

If you want to use your current hard drives, the optical drives in the Mac Pro are on an ATA bus still, so you could add one more hard drive to the optical drive, but an external firewire 400 or 800 case would be a better solution.

[Jonaziz]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

The Quad Core Mac Pros are available now.

By Quad-core he meant four-core... the processors with four cores, not the 2x2 set up used now. (4x2 will be the next hopefully).

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

no I'm confused....

Both machines will work fine, but it will be better a MBP'07 now and later a MB Quad?...
but to be honest, I will be buying just ONE machine to keep with me at least 5 years...
I truly can't buy 2 machines..
What to do? My Mac is getting old... and a brand new models are very powerful....what to do?

Sorry, I got the impression that both laptop and desktop were part of your needs.

You want a tower for best value in a single computer for 5 years. Best is to wait to see the quad core Mac Pros in January or so if you can, because values will improve again with the quad core generation and once initial Mac Pro demand has been satisfied. RAM will be cheaper too. If you cannot wait the standard Mac Pro is already a better value than G5s were. The 7300 graphics card may work for you; if not you can add a better graphics card later.

[Note that today's Mac Pros are called "dual core" by Intel, even if there are two dual core chips on board. "Quad core" is on track for December deliveries.]

-Allen Wicks

[Rolling Musubi]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

but I gotta admit that the new Mac Pro seems to be too more powerful, I think it was made for some Pro Users like 3D modeling or special FX pros, or extreme audio producers, I mean... today if I buy a Mac Book, I will be far better using it than the MDD I use today, also if use Rossetta for CS2 apps... it will be better... what do you think? if I gotta buy a new Mac and now that you know my everyday tasks, what's gonna be a better deal?

When I got my Quicksilver 2002 Dual Gig (about a month after it was released), I remember how butt fast it was for everything thrown at it. It was also very responsive when running many tasks and that remained true for the next 2 years. Unfortunately, my QS was always a bit problematic; twice under warranty, the processors failed; then in 2005 out of warranty, it died again (KP hell ensued for a few weeks). Originally I was planning to just replace it with a Power Mac G5 but then the Intel announcement occured and I decided to hold off and picked up the cheapest Dual G4 upgrade card (1.2GHz GigaDesign). For most tasks, it still is a wonderful system but for encoding or playing video with newer codecs, it is showing its age. System responsiveness has also gone down, sometimes to the point where it can be aggravating.

After evaluating the iMac Core Duo (which I am highly impressed with) and contemplated getting earlier in the year, I decided to hold off since I really needed a tower (my G4 is packed with over a terabyte of disk space, maxed out on the RAM, and all PCI slots filled). Looking back to my 8500/120 (then upgraded to a NewerTech G3/250 in 1997) and Sawtooth G4/500, those always ended up being maxed out over time and while they were all more than adequately fast at the start of their life, ended up being overwhelmed just 2-3 years down the road. So while the Dual Dual-core Xeon looks like way more than what I need today, 2-3 years from now, who knows what kind of OS features, applications, codecs, etc will exist that will make use of that excess horsepower. Additionally, when I compare the amounts I paid for those previous systems (on a non adjusted for inflation basis), it makes this Mac Pro look dirt cheap.

I was originally going to settle for a Core 2 Duo E6600 (Conroe 2.4GHz) based system but it is looking like the Mac Pro 2.66GHz will provide plenty of bang for the buck and have an equally long life as most of my previous towers (the G3 upgraded 8500 is still running mainly for e-mail and word processing, the Sawtooth G4 has been a file/mail/web server since 2002, and the QS will probably replace the Sawtooth once I actually order the Mac Pro).

Originally Posted by ndptal85

You're still using a friggin Kanga and Pismo!??

I still use a Pismo for mobile computing as well but it is used just for scheduling, word processing, e-mail, and web browsing. Back in the day though, it was great for doing video including compression using encoders the norm at the time but if I still had to do that sort of stuff now, it definitely wouldn't be the best tool for the job.

[chefpastry]

If you still need to access the files on your old MDD, you could always do it over a gigabit network. This would save you from having to buy external cases and having tons of wires all over the place. You can even put the MDD in far away corner where you won't hear the fans. Since the Mac Pro has two ethernet ports, you can use one just for this purpose.

[mduell]

If you want to upgrade every 4 years, buy a Mac Pro.

If you want to upgrade every 2 years, buy a MacBook.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by mduell

If you want to upgrade every 4 years, buy a Mac Pro.

If you want to upgrade every 2 years, buy a MacBook.

And if you have money, buy a Mac Pro and a MacBook. And then upgrade every year.

[paulc]

While contemplating a Mac Pro,2 things to keep in mind:

0.34 processor speed increase=$800 more
0.66 processor speed decrese=$300 less

And:

RAM=$560 for 2G

[jamil5454]

Dude, just get the 2.66 Mac Pro; it sounds like you'll need the power now and in the future. This isn't a life or death decision. From what it sounds like you do, the 7300 should be plenty and depending on whether or not you'll need it you could go for the second optical drive. I'd go ahead and get the Airport and Bluetooth as well, unless you're absolutely sure you won't use either.

Leave the RAM stock. Get it from an outside source such as Crucial. I buy all my RAM from http://www.newegg.com (MUCH cheaper than Crucial) and have yet to receive a single bad stick. Just read the customer reviews on the RAM you're looking at and chances are people will write about whether it worked in their xxxx model Mac. As long as the specs match, it should work.

Also, make sure you do research to make sure the drivers for all your external devices are Universal and bug free. Nothing would suck more than buying a brand new Mac Pro, installing all your software, then connecting your Mbox to do some testing and Boom! crash.

[ERG]

just my 2 cents:
I'm doing audio/video and all other kinds of jobs a mac/pc user can do..
My main pc is a dual 2.3 G5 (Cypher) but in late may this year, for a particular job project I bought a MacBookPro 17" 2.16

Now I can run every OS (through parallels) and do whatever I've ever done on the main machine at (almost, except Adobe's; I still have to upgrade to UB Logic and FCP suite, because they works here too..) the same speed and without all the the "heavy duties" I have with the G5 in my office everywhere I go..

I think my next step (because of the future) will be to sell my G5 and buy a new MacPro: could be tomorrow or next january, I'm very spontaneous (and I've no wifes to report to..)

[ender78]

Its interesting that RAM has already gone up in the last few days. Current prices are astronomical. Same thing happened in the first few days/weeks of the MBP release. One way to save some $$$ is to downgrade to the 160GB HD. For the differnce in price, you can pick up a 250GB when on sale. The discount for downgrading the HD is $75. A 320GB HD can be had for $99.

[polendo]

If my modus vivendi depended on the tools that I used, I would definetly and inexcusively buy the darn Pro.. make no expenses.. buy it, work it and get back your investment before wife knows what hit her.

[Bigfoot]

As stated already... you are having analysis paralysis. The new mac pro is plenty fast enough for what you (and I) are doing. Waiting until January for yet another faster mac? Then what, wait until April? When does that logic stop and you finally buy something?

I'm just waiting (and you should too) for Digi to give the green light for compatability (which they expect will be soon, or when enough Digi users have these in their hands, and are having no serious issues, then my credit card will be out. My only other need/wait will be universal or native Photoshop and Indesign. They'll work under Rosetta now, but I will be looking forward to the speed bump... I'm using a dual G4/1.25 and have no real complaints however.

I'm chomping at the bit (waiting for Digidesign). I'll likely order the 2.66 with two gig ram and two superdrives. Plus a 23" Cinema display.

[I WAS the One]

Originally Posted by ndptal85

If you are really doing all that media work you must be making some serious coin and if thats true then you are seriously under-serving yourself computer wise. You're still using a friggin Kanga and Pismo!?? Saving money is a virtue and its always good to avoid wasteful spending but then again you only live once. Join us in this century!

HA HAHAHA!!! LOL
I know... I'm a cheap bastard... I'm living well, right now, and yes I can make arrangements and collect the money and buy a great Mac. But I'm not rich and truth is that I buy Macs for a long time use. it doesn't matter if I can get the money or not, I just need a tool that serves me well for a time period, and I guess that if can get one great machine and also not that expensive and it will work for my production needs I will try to invest less to get a whole lot more.

[I WAS the One]

Originally Posted by Bigfoot

As stated already... you are having analysis paralysis. The new mac pro is plenty fast enough for what you (and I) are doing. Waiting until January for yet another faster mac? Then what, wait until April? When does that logic stop and you finally buy something?

I'm just waiting (and you should too) for Digi to give the green light for compatability (which they expect will be soon, or when enough Digi users have these in their hands, and are having no serious issues, then my credit card will be out. My only other need/wait will be universal or native Photoshop and Indesign. They'll work under Rosetta now, but I will be looking forward to the speed bump... I'm using a dual G4/1.25 and have no real complaints however.

I'm chomping at the bit (waiting for Digidesign). I'll likely order the 2.66 with two gig ram and two superdrives. Plus a 23" Cinema display.

Damn! we got the same exactly problem! and you just found out a solution faster than me!

[hldan]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

Any pro needs a pro box and for pro use typically higher end boxes are most life cycle cost effective. As such, none of the existing G5s or MacIntels present as ideal for a working pro whose existing setup is still functional.



-Allen Wicks

What R U looking for the Mac Pros to do? They have Quad Xeon processors in them. That's the ultimate workstation for professionals. How can you say that they don't present an ideal workstation for a pro user?

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by hldan

What R U looking for the Mac Pros to do? They have Quad Xeon processors in them. That's the ultimate workstation for professionals. How can you say that they don't present an ideal workstation for a pro user?

What I said was "none of the existing G5s or MacIntels present as ideal for a working pro whose existing setup is still functional." You miss the "whose existing setup is still functional" part.

We are at the v1.0.0 version of a brand new tower architecture. Intel's road map shows double the current horsepower available in a few months. And shortly after v1.0.0 there always comes a significant increase in general overall competence. I am recommending that folks "whose existing setup is still functional" should wait 4 months.

Due to reasons of forced client cash flow I will probably be buying a v1.Mac Pro soon even though logically IMO I should wait until January. And personally I will buy a Merom MBP as soon as they are available.

[hldan]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

What I said was "none of the existing G5s or MacIntels present as ideal for a working pro whose existing setup is still functional." You miss the "whose existing setup is still functional" part.

We are at the v1.0.0 version of a brand new tower architecture. Intel's road map shows double the current horsepower available in a few months. And shortly after v1.0.0 there always comes a significant increase in general overall competence. I am recommending that folks "whose existing setup is still functional" should wait 4 months.

Due to reasons of forced client cash flow I will probably be buying a v1.Mac Pro soon even though logically IMO I should wait until January. And personally I will buy a Merom MBP as soon as they are available.

Sorry dude, you're right, I didn't read the whole thing. Yeah, I have a dualie 2.3Ghz G5 with the ATI X800 card and 2.5GB ram and I am a gamer and play Doom3, Unreal and Quake 4 and at this point the Quad MacIntels wouldn't be a major upgrade for me either but some pro users may need the PCI-E expandability and the multi optical drive and hard drive expandability which is what Macs have been crippled by for years.

[I WAS the One]

so... do I gotta wait for the next MP? no MBP for me either huh?

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by SierraDragon

[Note that today's Mac Pros are called "dual core" by Intel, even if there are two dual core chips on board. "Quad core" is on track for December deliveries.]

-Allen Wicks

so let me understand this... my new 3.0 "Quad" Mac, is going to be superceeded by a "Real" Quad core Mac in only 3 more months?

Please, what will they do then? Have only one CPU with 4 cores, or 2 cpu's with 8?

do you have a link to substantiate this?

[chefpastry]

Yes, Intel is supposed to be releasing the quad core Xeons soon. They are known as Clovertown. They are supposed to be compatible with the current Woodcrest Xeons, so unless Apple did something to prevent it, you can upgrade your Mac Pro to have two quad core Xeons. I have no idea what the costs will be though.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by chefpastry

Yes, Intel is supposed to be releasing the quad core Xeons soon. They are known as Clovertown. They are supposed to be compatible with the current Woodcrest Xeons, so unless Apple did something to prevent it, you can upgrade your Mac Pro to have two quad core Xeons. I have no idea what the costs will be though.

interesting, so am I to understand (assuming Apple doesn't add some obstacle) that when these come out, I can simply ebay my current CPUs and install a newer faster ones with plug-n-play ease? This is cool if it's finally that easy to get more crunching power.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

so let me understand this... my new 3.0 "Quad" Mac, is going to be superceeded by a "Real" Quad core Mac in only 3 more months?

Please, what will they do then? Have only one CPU with 4 cores, or 2 cpu's with 8?

do you have a link to substantiate this?

They're called Clovertown and Tigerton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon

Don't worry, Apple won't get them or won't use them within 2006. Spring 07 probably.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Simon

They're called Clovertown and Tigerton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon

Don't worry, Apple won't get them or won't use them within 2006. Spring 07 probably.

it never ends! I tell you!

good thing I suppose as we get to see faster software and computers.. I can only hope they'll allow for CPU upgrades down the road. Only Apple can take something as straight forward as that concept, and make it impossible.

[Simon]

The Xeons are socketed. Chances are you'll be able to put something in there further down the road. Just like people have already managed to put Merom in a mini.

[chefpastry]

I wonder how long Apple will continue to use socketted CPUs. It would not surprise me to see Apple put some sort of block in firmware or something. I remember they did that to B&W G3 motherboards to prevent usage of G4 CPUs.

[Senbei]

Originally Posted by chefpastry

It would not surprise me to see Apple put some sort of block in firmware or something. I remember they did that to B&W G3 motherboards to prevent usage of G4 CPUs.

If Apple wanted to, they supposedly could utilize the TPM to lock in the hardware configuration. Since Kodawarisan was able to drop in a faster Core Duo into the iMac and xtremesystems able to drop in a Core 2 Duo Merom engineering sample into a Mini, it looks like they aren't doing that. That could always change though. The other possibility is potentially at the EFI level where a firmware upgrade might be required.

[Hobeaux]

a word of caution

I haven't seen the chips up-close, but if you -can- swap out the woodcrest for one of the new chips coming out this year, i'd be careful. The new chips may require a different cooling system or have different power requirements. just my 0.02c

so i said that to say, if you buy a current machine with the hope of doing a simple swap-out, don't be disappointed if you can't actually do it.

Me: I'm waiting for the Tax Man to give me money back. I'll make my purchase then (april-ish timeframe)

[I WAS the One]

ok, Now I'm Shock. did anyone saw the new 24" iMac? that's a powerful machine with a real big monitor. now you tell me. a MP or an iMac? Core 2 Duo means two processors or Quad? how long you think an iMac will last working excellent? 5 years? I need as I said a machine for more or less 4 or 5 years... If I buy an 24" iMac I will be getting a brand new sharp monitor with a super computer attached with the expansion options of HD, processors, graphic card, memory, iSight wireless and BT, but no PCI expansion slots... and if I buy a Mac Pro, I will get just a Powerful Tower. with PCI expansion slots (that I really don't use) help me here, I just wanna know how fast the iMac is right now and if those Intel Core 2 Duo are a great add on for the price? don't know what to do...

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Simon

They're called Clovertown and Tigerton. Don't worry, Apple won't get them or won't use them within 2006. Spring 07 probably.

My expectation is Q1 2007. I will be surprised if we don't see quad core Macs by February, since Intel currently forecasts to deliver Clovertown Q4 2006.

-Allen Wicks

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

ok, Now I'm Shock. did anyone saw the new 24" iMac? that's a powerful machine with a real big monitor. now you tell me. a MP or an iMac? Core 2 Duo means two processors or Quad? how long you think an iMac will last working excellent? 5 years? I need as I said a machine for more or less 4 or 5 years... If I buy an 24" iMac I will be getting a brand new sharp monitor with a super computer attached with the expansion options of HD, processors, graphic card, memory, iSight wireless and BT, but no PCI expansion slots... and if I buy a Mac Pro, I will get just a Powerful Tower. with PCI expansion slots (that I really don't use) help me here, I just wanna know how fast the iMac is right now and if those Intel Core 2 Duo are a great add on for the price? don't know what to do...

The new iMac is a sweet machine if you get a big hard drive, all 3 GB RAM and spend the $125 to get the 7600GT graphics card. HOWEVER, IMO 3 GB of RAM is a serious limitation relative to many future heavy apps plus future OS versions. iMacs are cute and less expensive but not the best choice for a 5 year desktop box. Anyone buying an iMac can expect to be RAM-starved long before 5 years of life. (How long depends on your apps. Photoshop already likes 8 GB of RAM.)

-Allen Wicks

[I WAS the One]

So, a Mac Pro it's a better option then?

also, I got 2 Gigs of Ram and Photoshop runs great with that.... 8 Gigs may be use to larger than life proyects... I design logos, magazines, ads, and stuff like that... like three clients per week as a regular basis

[Bigfoot]

I've been to the Apple store a few times since they introduced the MacPro. Each one that I tried with Photoshop on it I was able to crash the program (either just quite or froze) within minutes of just manipulating images. IMO it is painfully slow at some tasks. Sometimes just moving an open image across the screen there is a delay. I don't think Rosetta is cutting the mustard where PS is concerned. No point in going backward. I'll wait a while longer for a MacPro.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

So, a Mac Pro it's a better option then?

Yes.

[SierraDragon]

Originally Posted by Bigfoot

I've been to the Apple store a few times since they introduced the MacPro. Each one that I tried with Photoshop on it I was able to crash the program (either just quite or froze) within minutes of just manipulating images. IMO it is painfully slow at some tasks. Sometimes just moving an open image across the screen there is a delay. I don't think Rosetta is cutting the mustard where PS is concerned. No point in going backward. I'll wait a while longer for a MacPro.

The stock 1 GB of RAM on a Mac Pro is inappropriate for PS. And, most retail stores have lame setups - not any kind of meaningful test.

I tested Photoshop for an hour on a MacBook Pro with 2 GB RAM and it ran just fine, about the same as on my Powerbook G4.

All that said, the point is that for those of us on G4s, Mac Pros with appropriate RAM are a great upgrade, even before UB PSCS3. For folks with workable G5 setups now it generally makes sense to wait for PSCS3 and buy new hardware then.

Note that for anyone who runs Aperture, MacIntels are a major improvement.

-Allen Wicks

[I WAS the One]

Wait a minute here... a Mac Pro it's made for Profesional use and it can't handle PSC2??? I use PSCS2 on my PMG4 MDD with 2G RAM and get the job done fast. so, a Quad Mac is less than my G4 in functionality right now??? how is that possible? I want a new Mac but I don't want to go backwards doin it. I need speed but it seems that speed it's a problem when PSC2 is the main App...

[paulc]

Uh, Rosetta? Not so sure I'd equate Photoshop issues to the Quad just yet, remember it's running under emulation.

The only advice I have is definitely go for the tower. The ability to add lots of RAM over the iMac would be the swing issue to me. Yes, RAM for it is a bit for a shock compared to what we've been used to, but it is already dropping. Once in tower territory, I find an interesting value proposition. Essentially, the only one that has what I'd call reasonable value is the stock 2.6G processor machine. 800 bucks for 3.0G is too much for too little. Worse is the 300 less for a much slower set of processors. At 2500, this is a really good sweet spot.

Another issue for me would be the ability to have multiple monitors. If I did the kind of work you do, no question I'd be multiple monitor equipped. Don't know is you've noticed, but LCD computer monitors are very cheap these days, so it's NOT like it's that big of an investment (boy I remember the day when a "huge (17")" CRT monitor was so new that it took 2 grand to buy one).

Funny story, I was on a photo shoot on a trading floor in a NYC investment house... these guys always use multiple monitors. Most had 4 going, but there were 2 rows of what seemed to be the top guys with 6, I mean SIX monitors each.

[memento]

I just upgraded from a MDD 2x876 and PS2 runs much faster on my MacPro, as you'd expect. Don't know what people are talking about. You do need more that 1GB RAM. I'm sure it's not optimized, but it definitely runs faster. I used to have to sit and wait for NoiseNinja to process some of my larger images, now it's quite fast. PS3 will FLY.

[I WAS the One]

Originally Posted by paulc

Uh, Rosetta? Not so sure I'd equate Photoshop issues to the Quad just yet, remember it's running under emulation.

The only advice I have is definitely go for the tower. The ability to add lots of RAM over the iMac would be the swing issue to me. Yes, RAM for it is a bit for a shock compared to what we've been used to, but it is already dropping. Once in tower territory, I find an interesting value proposition. Essentially, the only one that has what I'd call reasonable value is the stock 2.6G processor machine. 800 bucks for 3.0G is too much for too little. Worse is the 300 less for a much slower set of processors. At 2500, this is a really good sweet spot.

Another issue for me would be the ability to have multiple monitors. If I did the kind of work you do, no question I'd be multiple monitor equipped. Don't know is you've noticed, but LCD computer monitors are very cheap these days, so it's NOT like it's that big of an investment (boy I remember the day when a "huge (17")" CRT monitor was so new that it took 2 grand to buy one).

Funny story, I was on a photo shoot on a trading floor in a NYC investment house... these guys always use multiple monitors. Most had 4 going, but there were 2 rows of what seemed to be the top guys with 6, I mean SIX monitors each.

you're right... I used two monitors back then.... and I miss them...
I need to know what to do... Pretty iMac or Powerful Mac Pro.... tic tac tic tac

[Leonard]

Originally Posted by I WAS the One

Core 2 Duo means two processors or Quad?

Core 2 Duo is the second generation of Core Duo. The iMac has 1 Core 2 Duo processor with 2 cores (1 processor x 2 cores = 2), which means it has half the power of a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro has 2 Xeons with 2 cores (2 processors x 2 cores = 4). Xeons also have twice the L2 cache and a faster bus than the iMacs.

The iMacs are for people who don't need power or who are new to a computer. The iMacs are low-end to ALMOST mid-point desktop computers, Mac Pros are high-end desktop computers.