Looking for a new computer...could use advice

[iAMB]

Well the unfortunate time is near that I will start having to look for a new computer. Currently my Dell Latitude laptop has reached 3.5 years and has shown signs of quiting on me. In the past month I had bought an external hardrive and moved all my files over so I can reformat the computer. It also is the time when I will be transfering into Architecture at KU.

I have been searching around and have pretty much landed on an Apple. I currently having my eyes set on the 24" iMac 2.66ghz. My family has no experience with Apple but some of my friends have. I want this thing to last me for 5 years and have been told that it can.

I will be using it for not only photo-editing, but also for drafting and design in the coming years. My real question is, will this thing be a good purchase for my editing? I am able get CS4 from a friend to use as well, so thats not a big worry to me. Anything is pretty much better than what I have now, my screen is so out of color and balance. Any advice would be great, and thanks so much!

[chinoamigo]

wrong section..

do you shoot in raw? i use a 2.8ghz iMac with 4gb of ram and it handled my 40d raw files fine but once i got my 5d II, it was another story.

it's a great machine! and look into the applecare.. (it's less than $100) for 3 year warranty including phone support. it's a worthwhile investment. i couldn't comment on the more technical side of it (color rendering, etc.) but all i know is that when you see your pictures on a 24" screen it'll make you love photography that much more..

[Moppie]

I want this thing to last me for 5 years and have been told that it can.



Not if you want to be using new software in 5 years.

The iMacs are nice, well built, consumer level computers.
They use laptop processors which are now several generations behind true desktop processors in terms of performance.
If you want a lap top, then buy a laptop.

If you want a desk top, then buy a proper quad core desktop. Preferably an i7 if you want it to have a useable life of 5 years (or as close to as possible).

If you want something pretty to sit on your desk that lets you surf the web, watch non-HD movies, and maybe edit the odd photo from a consumer level camera, then get an iMac.

[Saint728]

I've been using the iMac 24" for my photo editing for the past year and it works well. I run Adobe Lightroom 2 and Adobe CS4 Extended and I have no problems with mine. I would prefer to get a new Mac Pro 2.93 Quad Core, with 8 gig of RAM, 2 terabytes hard drive, 30 inch HD monitor, but this one will have to do for now. The 24" iMac looks great and is pretty fast for what it is and the price is good as well.

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick

[Sean]

I currently use a E6750, 4GB of RAM and an 8800 GTX video card. When this system gets too old I am going strictly notebook. If you go the same route, don't skimp on the processor, hard drive access speed and RAM size and speed.

[Bonito]

I am in the same boat, looking at the iMac 2.9 for graphic design and photography.
Using CS3 now, but will soon be using CS4. Are the desktops really that much better?
I really did not want to spend over $2000.

[Bobster]

3 years is my limit on workstations (after i've upgraded components - CPU, RAM, Gfx) then i purchase a whole new chipset, ive got another year on my current setup before i get the next best thing

[Moppie]

I am in the same boat, looking at the iMac 2.9 for graphic design and photography.
Using CS3 now, but will soon be using CS4. Are the desktops really that much better?
I really did not want to spend over $2000.


If your serious about your work flow being un-interupted, and having everything work smoothly, then yes, even a budget quad core is that much better. It's things like moving an image around on the screen and it not moving smoothly, or applying a filter and it taking a second or two to effect the image, or using a brush and having to wait for the image to update half a second later.
They are small things, that you often get used to working with, but if you use a proper work station that dosn't suffer these problems, then you soon relaise how much they interfer with your work, and just how much of a frustation they are.

[kini]

Not if you want to be using new software in 5 years.

If you want something pretty to sit on your desk that lets you surf the web, watch non-HD movies, and maybe edit the odd photo from a consumer level camera, then get an iMac.

And why would you WANT to watch HD movies on a 24" screen? BluRay is a non factor (still) at this point and will still be for quite some time. Blank discs are still much to expensive, HDD storage is much cheaper. There's really no purpose (yet) for having BluRay drives on computers.

Gene

[MaxxuM]

Well the unfortunate time is near that I will start having to look for a new computer. Currently my Dell Latitude laptop has reached 3.5 years and has shown signs of quiting on me. In the past month I had bought an external hardrive and moved all my files over so I can reformat the computer. It also is the time when I will be transfering into Architecture at KU.

I have been searching around and have pretty much landed on an Apple. I currently having my eyes set on the 24" iMac 2.66ghz. My family has no experience with Apple but some of my friends have. I want this thing to last me for 5 years and have been told that it can.

I will be using it for not only photo-editing, but also for drafting and design in the coming years. My real question is, will this thing be a good purchase for my editing? I am able get CS4 from a friend to use as well, so thats not a big worry to me. Anything is pretty much better than what I have now, my screen is so out of color and balance. Any advice would be great, and thanks so much!

5 Years is asking a lot from any computer. To do that you'd need the top of the line of today to handle the possibilities of tomorrow. If you want a computer that is going to last you that long then consider a Mac Pro with a single quad CPU. Take a look at this: LINK (http://store.apple.com/us/product/G0G80LL/A?mco=MjE0NjQ1OA)

Later, say in 3 years, when you think it's starting to show its age just pop in another Xeon 2.9GHz CPU and you're at 8 cores. For $2,550 you'd be hard pressed to find a better workstation quality machine.

[MaxxuM]

And why would you WANT to watch HD movies on a 24" screen? BluRay is a non factor (still) at this point and will still be for quite some time. Blank discs are still much to expensive, HDD storage is much cheaper. There's really no purpose (yet) for having BluRay drives on computers.

Gene

Yep, I agree. I have a Blu-ray burner on my machine and I have only used it once to watch a movie - and I have dual 26" screens and around fifty Blu-ray titles. I find it way more suitable to have a 1TB iTunes drive on the computer + 180GB iPod Classic (+ Laptop), it's far more effective than hauling around a bunch of $30+ Blu-ray disks. Perhaps a college student would want to, but on their budget I doubt they could afford all those Blu-rays. This is the age of Hulu, YouTube, Joost and ripped DVD's.

[iAMB]

5 Years is asking a lot from any computer. To do that you'd need the top of the line of today to handle the possibilities of tomorrow. If you want a computer that is going to last you that long then consider a Mac Pro with a single quad CPU. Take a look at this: LINK (http://store.apple.com/us/product/G0G80LL/A?mco=MjE0NjQ1OA)

Later, say in 3 years, when you think it's starting to show its age just pop in another Xeon 2.9GHz CPU and you're at 8 cores. For $2,550 you'd be hard pressed to find a better workstation quality machine.

I thought the current mac pro CPU was solderd in. How do you pop in another one?

[MaxxuM]

Sorry I misspoke (maybe). I don't have the current model of the Mac Pro and after some research it would seem that there are actually two motherboards. First, the Mac Pro CPU(s) are not soldered - they can be changed and upgraded. However, like I said, there are two motherboards (E vs W series) and the W series Xeon system is a single CPU computer. It's supposed to be a server grade 'desktop' computer, which it is close to the cost of a new 24" iMac. I have the previous series and I purchased it via my work's Apple rep for a 30% discount promotional.

The iMac's, MacBook, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini all have soldered in CPUs while the Mac Pro's do not.

[basroil]

Well the unfortunate time is near that I will start having to look for a new computer. Currently my Dell Latitude laptop has reached 3.5 years and has shown signs of quiting on me. In the past month I had bought an external hardrive and moved all my files over so I can reformat the computer. It also is the time when I will be transfering into Architecture at KU.

I have been searching around and have pretty much landed on an Apple. I currently having my eyes set on the 24" iMac 2.66ghz. My family has no experience with Apple but some of my friends have. I want this thing to last me for 5 years and have been told that it can.

I will be using it for not only photo-editing, but also for drafting and design in the coming years. My real question is, will this thing be a good purchase for my editing? I am able get CS4 from a friend to use as well, so thats not a big worry to me. Anything is pretty much better than what I have now, my screen is so out of color and balance. Any advice would be great, and thanks so much!


I doubt the iMac will last you five years, the G5 macs lasted only three before Apple pulled the plug on software updates for them. And as mentioned before, iMac are already outdated by a year in design and more than two years in parts, so if you want something to last it better be i7 or 5500 series xeon based.

Another thing you should look into is the cost of replacing ALL of the programs you plan on using. Generally that will be 100-400 bucks more than the purchase price, and don't forget to include it when picking something for your budget. Also, check what programs your university offers and for what systems. If you are in architecture, there will be a time when you need to learn cad, and knowing what system the university supports will help you a lot.

And iAMB, it is possible to upgrade the processors... but only by very skilled people. Don;t even try it unless you are prepared to lose your entire investment. http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_pro/faq/mac-pro-early-2009-nehalem-how-to-upgrade-processors.html . Bottom line is, for the common folk, no, you can;t upgrade.


And NEVER get an 8gb mac pro. that means it;s limited to dual channel and will just plain suck at memory intensive things, since ddr3 has generally been slower in access times than ddr2.

I personally suggest an i7 rig, since they are the same price as an iMac but 4-5x faster (level of a single processor mac pro), but you need to see what your university suggests (i.e. what system they have programs for )

[iAMB]

Yea I have come to the conclusion that the iMac is not the best computer for me but rather the MacPro. My problem is that I need a computer NOW. The unfortunate part is that it will see moderate architecture use for the 1st 3 years and only moderate photo-editing, and that the MacPro might be outdated as what i can upgrade it with when i truley need it to use it for architecture in the last 2 years. Granted I am not a top-of-the-line computer person, but im tryign to make the best buy for me in the future. What are your thoughts? I really dont want to do windows anymore.

I really hate to spend money on a budget laptop only to spend more money and upgrade in 3 years again with a true desktop, but it seems inevitable.... Ive truly come to hate computers.

[Jim G]

Yea I have come to the conclusion that the iMac is not the best computer for me but rather the MacPro. My problem is that I need a computer NOW. The unfortunate part is that it will see moderate architecture use for the 1st 3 years and only moderate photo-editing, and that the MacPro might be outdated as what i can upgrade it with. Granted I am not a top-of-the-line computer person, but im tryign to make the best buy for me in the future. What are your thoughts? I really dont want to do windows anymore.

I really hate to spend money on a budget laptop only to spend more money and upgrade in 3 years again with a true desktop. Ive truly come to hate computers.

I was in a similar situation recently and had to decide between a high-end iMac and a Mac Pro; I went with the quad 2.66 Mac Pro and the damn thing flies. I do design work and use Photoshop CS4 and I'm pretty certain that it's going to last me longer than any other computer I've bought.

The removable trays for CPU/RAM do lead me to wonder whether an upgrade in however many years time might be possible rather than buying a whole new machine but I didn't buy the machine betting on that being possible.

Edit: I came from a quad-core 2.4 (Q6600) PC prior to this and in the couple of months I've owned the Mac Pro it's given me that many less headaches than the PC gave me it's not funny. I think my days of custom-building PCs are over. If you do go Mac definitely reinstall OS X as soon as you get it and leave out all the drivers (3GB+) and language packs you don't need... shaves something like 6GB off the OS size.

[basroil]

Yea I have come to the conclusion that the iMac is not the best computer for me but rather the MacPro. My problem is that I need a computer NOW. The unfortunate part is that it will see moderate architecture use for the 1st 3 years and only moderate photo-editing. I really hate to spend money on a budget laptop only to spend more money and upgrade in 3 years again with a true desktop. Ive truly come to hate computers.

I had a decently fast laptop for two and a half years, then spent a nice chunk getting a desktop. If the laptop works, it's good for classes since carrying a desktop to class is a pain ;)

Just remember to check the university for what systems they have programs for, you don't want to pay 3000 (remember, even a 2500 mac pro needs a monitor, which isn't included in the base price) for a mac pro just to find out that all your programs are for windows (in which case you could have gotten a $1500 desktop with the same specs, including a monitor). It may also just be cheaper to get a cheaper temporary laptop if you don't really need the power NOW. A laptop with enough power to run CS4+LR2+most cad programs (though a bit slowly) can be had for under $1200, and a mainstream computer ($1k-2k) in three years will be as powerful as a high end (3-4k for windows based rigs, 3.5-5k for mac pro) one today, so you won't really end up spending more.

If you do get the mac pro though, do think about upgrading the video card, especially when you get into cad programs. many high end cad programs work much better on workstation graphics cards, even the low end ones are better than the piece of garbage geforce 120 that comes with it. Low end cards start around 100 and then cover just about every range between 150 and $4500. The performance increase in certain applications (mainly cad/3d modeling style programs) can be up to 20x just because of the better drivers that come with the cards. Probably won't have a need for it the first year, but when you get into cad heavy things it can help a lot.

[MaxxuM]

I doubt the iMac will last you five years, the G5 macs lasted only three before Apple pulled the plug on software updates for them.

I'm sure you don't mean 'last' to imply that in three years it's going to fall apart. We still have some G3's and G'4s at work that are ticking along just fine that people don't want to let go because of software/hardware (it would cost thousands to upgrade - ex. we have a software package with microscopes and G3 iMac's which has been working for almost nine years!).

[MaxxuM]

Yea I have come to the conclusion that the iMac is not the best computer for me but rather the MacPro. My problem is that I need a computer NOW. The unfortunate part is that it will see moderate architecture use for the 1st 3 years and only moderate photo-editing, and that the MacPro might be outdated as what i can upgrade it with when i truley need it to use it for architecture in the last 2 years. Granted I am not a top-of-the-line computer person, but im tryign to make the best buy for me in the future. What are your thoughts? I really dont want to do windows anymore.

I really hate to spend money on a budget laptop only to spend more money and upgrade in 3 years again with a true desktop, but it seems inevitable.... Ive truly come to hate computers.

Whoa there. I think you've fallen for the big technology trap. If you want to stay current + don't want to spend a lot of money = not very likely. I do a moderate upgrade on my PC's every six months and a new Mac buy every 3-4 years. There is NO reason a ten year old computer cannot do what you NEED it to. What you NEED and WANT may very well be two different things. Like I told basroil, we have 10+ year old computers still doing what they were intended to do and still doing it well.

If you are going to NEED computer that is going to be able to go round for round with computers in 5 years from now - good luck. Five years in the technology world is a very long time! The trick here is, "What are you going to NEED in 5yrs?" Think about it before you answer :)

Now, basroil and I have gone back and forth about the value of Mac. He doesn't seem to think there is much in Mac's and will argue to the ends of the Earth this point despite saying its all about preference ;)

A Mac Pro is a VERY powerful machine. It's likely one of the most powerful systems a regular Joe can get their hands on. I don't know how 8-2.9Ghz core's won't do what you want in 5 years, but anything is possible.

Why don't you just lease and upgrade every two years :)

[basroil]

I'm sure you don't mean 'last' to imply that in three years it's going to fall apart. We still have some G3's and G'4s at work that are ticking along just fine that people don't want to let go because of software/hardware (it would cost thousands to upgrade - ex. we have a software package with microscopes and G3 iMac's which has been working for almost nine years!).

Not saying it will fall apart at all, my old dell r450 lasted me 9.5 years until the hdd died, and that's easy enough to fix (if it wasn't that the computer is slower than some cellphones now). What I am saying is that for OP's case (not a specialized case), he would need to update the OS to the newest one no more than a year after release in order to use the newest programs (lets say he gets a new camera sometime and it is only supported by CS6/LR4, and those two require 10.12). If his computer is no longer accepted for OS upgrades (as with G5), then the machine will be stuck in time regardless how long it physically lasts. Of course, he could then just scrap OSX (for everything but web browsing and stuff like that) and move to windows where he's welcome to install it on decade old equipment if he wants (hard to do, but there have been windows 7 installs on a pII system like my old dell, you can however, install it on late pIII systems and early p4 computers, though it will run sluggish). You need to remember that in general the (not so) invisible hands of Apple tend to move software to be fully compatible with their new OS's, and sometimes that means loss of compatibility with the older ones.

No doubt the mac pro is a powerful machine, though significantly slower than i7 975 systems at a similar price point, but the issue is that OP does state a budget issue. If even a cheap laptop laptop being replaced causes issues (assume any 1200 buck laptop will last him only 4 years, at a cost of $300/year), what will a 3000 buck computer help him with (3000 and lets say 7 years, halfway between your 9 year old g3 and my 5 year old p4, for about 430 bucks/year)? Bottom line is, if you are on a budget, year old refurb will generally be good, and you can save enough money so that in three more years you can add a second computer that is only 1 year out of date rather than four, and at the same price. And if you are REALLY on a budget (less than $2k per three year interval you need the computer for), you need to skip mac altogether.

That said, skipping on a mac doesn't mean skipping on OSX. I know plenty of sites that will help you get OSX on a large number of non-mac systems. You'll just have to google that though, since that is probably about as legal as your copy of CS4.

[iAMB]

To be honest I think I am way over my head with the whole computer thing. The only reason I have been considering the MacPro is the help that I will recieve from the good ol-grandparents, yes it sounds cheap on my part, but they are insisting. The way I see it is that the MacPro is more than I need at the moment, I have never really reached half the potential of a computer, nor do I think anyone has. I have been doing windows for the past 8 years, have been absolutely frustrated with it, prety much to the point where I hate actually trying to learn something ,and have it crash or for a virus to pop up.

My girlfriend has had a mac for 3 years now. Now I am definitely new to the whole Mac system, but I have found it to be pretty much stupid proof ( coming from my terms ). The OS of a Mac as worked wonders for my needs when I used one, and hope to learn and try to find the try potential of the machine. The other bonus I see with the Macpro is the capability to also boot into Windows, for those times when I must. I realize that the computer will become old and may start to show its age in 3 years, But I just want a quality machine that will be able to hold its ground with new programs in the future, to hopefully go 5 years. I know that upgrades and some memory and graphics card will be in the works, but thats something I will hopefully actually enjoy doing. Ugh.. I hope that all makes sense.

Plus it would be so sweet for my photo-editing

[basroil]

To be honest I think I am way over my head with the whole computer thing. The only reason I have been considering the MacPro is the help that I will recieve from the good ol-grandparents, yes it sounds cheap on my part, but they are insisting. The way I see it is that the MacPro is more than I need at the moment, I have never really reached half the potential of a computer, nor do I think anyone has. I have been doing windows for the past 8 years, have been absolutely frustrated with it, prety much to the point where I hate actually trying to learn something ,and have it crash or for a virus to pop up.

My girlfriend has had a mac for 3 years now. Now I am definitely new to the whole Mac system, but I have found it to be pretty much stupid proof ( coming from my terms ). The OS of a Mac as worked wonders for my needs when I used one, and hope to learn and try to find the try potential of the machine. The other bonus I see with the Macpro is the capability to also boot into Windows, for those times when I must. I realize that the computer will become old and may start to show its age in 3 years, But I just want a quality machine that will be able to hold its ground with new programs in the future, to hopefully go 5 years. I know that upgrades and some memory and graphics card will be in the works, but thats something I will hopefully actually enjoy doing. Ugh.. I hope that all makes sense.

Plus it would be so sweet for my photo-editing

Don't know what you're doing to get viruses, have six computers here and the only viruses I've ever had were pet viruses (fun to keep, but need to be safe about it). And the occasional macro virus alert would pop up if I used my USB key in a few macs I use to use (yes, you heard me, viruses came FROM the macs, imacs, mac pros, and even an xserve). If you have up to date antivirus and don't go surfing porn sites, you shouldn't have any problems. OSX isn't immune from viruses, but it's very well locked down so even an "idiot" can't do too much harm, though viruses do happen and can destroy data or even your system. OS choice it up to you, and do remember that many non-mac systems can in fact run OSX. (note the use of "can", since you "should" not use it according to the retarded apple eula)

Don't think about upgrading ram in a mac pro though, unless you are under 6gb there's not much you can upgrade, since they are locked to 6gb MAX for tri-channel (don't bother with 8gb, that's actually a step back in performance). 6gb of memory should be more than enough for most things though. If you need more, get a dual processor mac pro, they start at $4000. Video card you can upgrade though, and probably should in 3-4 years.

[wlescall]

Don't know what you're doing to get viruses, have six computers here and the only viruses I've ever had were pet viruses (fun to keep, but need to be safe about it). And the occasional macro virus alert would pop up if I used my USB key in a few macs I use to use (yes, you heard me, viruses came FROM the macs, imacs, mac pros, and even an xserve). If you have up to date antivirus and don't go surfing porn sites, you shouldn't have any problems. OSX isn't immune from viruses, but it's very well locked down so even an "idiot" can't do too much harm, though viruses do happen and can destroy data or even your system. OS choice it up to you, and do remember that many non-mac systems can in fact run OSX. (note the use of "can", since you "should" not use it according to the retarded apple eula)

Don't think about upgrading ram in a mac pro though, unless you are under 6gb there's not much you can upgrade, since they are locked to 6gb MAX for tri-channel (don't bother with 8gb, that's actually a step back in performance). 6gb of memory should be more than enough for most things though. If you need more, get a dual processor mac pro, they start at $4000. Video card you can upgrade though, and probably should in 3-4 years.

More FUD. Basroil has a stated hatred for Apple, so keep that in mind.

You CAN upgrade RAM in the Mac Pro. The base 2.66 GHZ quad core Mac Pro comes with 3 GB standard but CAN be upgraded to 12 GB - simply replace the 1 GB DIMMs with 4 GB DIMMS. The 4 GB DIMMs are expensive though. From barefeats.com : "Yes, 4GB DIMMs work in the 4-core. We've tested both OWC and TransIntl 4GB DIMMs. They run fast, cool, and stable. "http://www.barefeats.com/nehal08.html

The macro viruses come from PC's - they are designed to spread through Microsoft Office products. Boston College explanation of macro viruses. (http://www.bc.edu/offices/help/meta-elements/doc/articles/html/RX-macrovirus.shtml)

As for architecture on the Mac, see architosh.com (http://architosh.com/). That site has plenty of excellent information and reviews that should be helpful.

[Moppie]

I have been doing windows for the past 8 years, have been absolutely frustrated with it, prety much to the point where I hate actually trying to learn something ,and have it crash or for a virus to pop up.


I used to feel the same way, and blamed everything on windows and microsoft because it was easy to.
I tried looking at replacing my system with a Mac, and found that unless I went with a Mac Pro there was nothing that would work. A Mac Pro was WAY out of my budget.

However, rather than getting yet another cheap computer, I built my own (or you can could get one built for you) using high quality, high end parts and someone forced me to install and try Windows Vista.

My computer experiance since has been fantastic.

To put it simply; it just works!.


With decent hardware, and a decent OS (XP is crap) there is no reason a Windows based computer can't be as stable and easy to use as Macs claim to be. And it can be a lot cheaper.
I got 90% of the performance of a Mac Pro for half the price.

[MaxxuM]

Not saying it will fall apart at all, my old dell r450 lasted me 9.5 years until the hdd died, and that's easy enough to fix (if it wasn't that the computer is slower than some cellphones now). What I am saying is that for OP's case (not a specialized case), he would need to update the OS to the newest one no more than a year after release in order to use the newest programs (lets say he gets a new camera sometime and it is only supported by CS6/LR4, and those two require 10.12). If his computer is no longer accepted for OS upgrades (as with G5), then the machine will be stuck in time regardless how long it physically lasts. Of course, he could then just scrap OSX (for everything but web browsing and stuff like that) and move to windows where he's welcome to install it on decade old equipment if he wants (hard to do, but there have been windows 7 installs on a pII system like my old dell, you can however, install it on late pIII systems and early p4 computers, though it will run sluggish). You need to remember that in general the (not so) invisible hands of Apple tend to move software to be fully compatible with their new OS's, and sometimes that means loss of compatibility with the older ones.

No doubt the mac pro is a powerful machine, though significantly slower than i7 975 systems at a similar price point, but the issue is that OP does state a budget issue. If even a cheap laptop laptop being replaced causes issues (assume any 1200 buck laptop will last him only 4 years, at a cost of $300/year), what will a 3000 buck computer help him with (3000 and lets say 7 years, halfway between your 9 year old g3 and my 5 year old p4, for about 430 bucks/year)? Bottom line is, if you are on a budget, year old refurb will generally be good, and you can save enough money so that in three more years you can add a second computer that is only 1 year out of date rather than four, and at the same price. And if you are REALLY on a budget (less than $2k per three year interval you need the computer for), you need to skip mac altogether.

That said, skipping on a mac doesn't mean skipping on OSX. I know plenty of sites that will help you get OSX on a large number of non-mac systems. You'll just have to google that though, since that is probably about as legal as your copy of CS4.


Wow. You're feeding that tech monster there! Stuck in time? Basroil, 90% of computers are 'stuck in time'. The vast majority of people don't upgrade their computer processors and only a handful (albeit still a large number) upgrade HDD's and graphics cards. And who says that you HAVE to upgrade anything; software or hardware? I know plenty of businesses, professional photographers and common folk that are running computers many years old and still manage to do their jobs very well.

We still have Apple Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz systems at work that are five years old that are still extremely viable and crunching through movies pretty fast. We'll still be using them for a few more years.

I will also guarantee, with absolutly no reservations, that a 3Ghz iMac will be able to run CS5 and CS6 and will have an OS upgrade path for the next 4-5 years. It won't run as fast as an i7 or whoop computers of 2014, but it will 'work' just fine.

[MaxxuM]

To be honest I think I am way over my head with the whole computer thing. The only reason I have been considering the MacPro is the help that I will recieve from the good ol-grandparents, yes it sounds cheap on my part, but they are insisting. The way I see it is that the MacPro is more than I need at the moment, I have never really reached half the potential of a computer, nor do I think anyone has. I have been doing windows for the past 8 years, have been absolutely frustrated with it, prety much to the point where I hate actually trying to learn something ,and have it crash or for a virus to pop up.

My girlfriend has had a mac for 3 years now. Now I am definitely new to the whole Mac system, but I have found it to be pretty much stupid proof ( coming from my terms ). The OS of a Mac as worked wonders for my needs when I used one, and hope to learn and try to find the try potential of the machine. The other bonus I see with the Macpro is the capability to also boot into Windows, for those times when I must. I realize that the computer will become old and may start to show its age in 3 years, But I just want a quality machine that will be able to hold its ground with new programs in the future, to hopefully go 5 years. I know that upgrades and some memory and graphics card will be in the works, but thats something I will hopefully actually enjoy doing. Ugh.. I hope that all makes sense.

Plus it would be so sweet for my photo-editing

Don't kick yourself. OS X is very enticing and so smoooooothhh in its functionality. This coming from someone that's been on PC's for more than 20 years, is a Microsoft Certified Professional and helps manage a 10,000+ PC 25k+ user network. When I go home I use a Mac :)

The end point is this; if you like Mac, hate Windows, don't want to deal with the PC world then get a Mac. If it makes you happy then what's the problem? If a PC would make you happy then get a PC. However, if you just buy a PC just to 'save' a buck but Windows makes you miserable then don't get a PC. You're making this a bit harder than it needs to be. :D

[Todd Lambert]

A newer iMac will do everything you want to do, just fine.

Would you be able to do it faster with a maxxed out Mac Pro or an i7 PC? Yes...

But from what sounds like your needs, get a nice 24" iMac. You'll love it... it will hold it's value twice as long or longer than a pc will and you will still be quite happy with it for the forseeable future. If not, you can always sell it, and upgrade to a Mac Pro.

A lot of the convo in this thread is useless tech babble and dick waving, frankly - don't listen to it.

I myself sold my Mac Pro's and got a MBP laptop - it does eveyrthing just fine... and it's portable. Serious value in that. One laptop that can go anywhere and do anything. Worth considering.

[basroil]

More FUD. Basroil has a stated hatred for Apple, so keep that in mind.

You CAN upgrade RAM in the Mac Pro. The base 2.66 GHZ quad core Mac Pro comes with 3 GB standard but CAN be upgraded to 12 GB - simply replace the 1 GB DIMMs with 4 GB DIMMS. The 4 GB DIMMs are expensive though. From barefeats.com : "Yes, 4GB DIMMs work in the 4-core. We've tested both OWC and TransIntl 4GB DIMMs. They run fast, cool, and stable. "http://www.barefeats.com/nehal08.html

The macro viruses come from PC's - they are designed to spread through Microsoft Office products. Boston College explanation of macro viruses. (http://www.bc.edu/offices/help/meta-elements/doc/articles/html/RX-macrovirus.shtml)

As for architecture on the Mac, see architosh.com (http://architosh.com/). That site has plenty of excellent information and reviews that should be helpful.

Sorry, but wrong according to apple. The xeon 5500 based macs are artificially limited to 8gb for single core model. Only the dual core will allow you to use the 4GB dimms. http://support.apple.com/kb/SP506 Anything else would be a hack, and if you are going to hack a mac, might as well just hackintosh it instead.

As for macro viruses, yes, they do spread though office, but they don't come from pcs. They are cross platform in their ability to infect, and that is all I was talking about. Since few macs carry AV (which they should), the macro viruses end up overtaking all the files, and you know how much of a pain it is to get rid of the "virus" from 4500 files when using a lone PC connected to the xserve that has the broken files, and then hoping that nobody is stupid enough to access it with an disinfected machine before everything is cleaned?

And I have a thing against Apple policies, it's true, but nothing against the products, both software and hardware. It's simply their EULA and million legal deficiencies that I dislike (which, if you get rid of those, then the macs would cost as little as all other pcs). Hence I never told OP that OSX was bad, simply that the chance that Apple will eventually drop support for the computer before it breaks is pretty damn close to 1. OP has all the rights in the world to use his money to get whatever he wants, I just like to add more information so he can make a logical choice rather than listening to all the (horribly misleading) apple ads.

And Maxxum, again, I never mentioned anything about special (corporate, institution, etc) cases, simply about the AVERAGE user. Of the many friends with macs (who have all had problems at one time or another with their machine), ALL of them upgraded to 10.5 when it came out, and the few that had a 10.3 machine ended up upgrading twice. Having the ability to upgrade is different than having the need to upgrade, and if OP wants to upgrade the OS a few times, he has to know that there are limits imposed, and that he should look into whether or not a further upgrade is good or if a few cheaper systems would be better.

But as todd said, you likely don't need a $3000 pc when a 1500 one will do, and the iMac is a pc that fits the budget and performance range discussed in the first post. Not a fan of a batteryless 24" laptop, but it'll have enough kick if my three year old laptop still does the trick.

[MaxxuM]

And Maxxum, again, I never mentioned anything about special (corporate, institution, etc) cases, simply about the AVERAGE user. Of the many friends with macs (who have all had problems at one time or another with their machine), ALL of them upgraded to 10.5 when it came out, and the few that had a 10.3 machine ended up upgrading twice. Having the ability to upgrade is different than having the need to upgrade, and if OP wants to upgrade the OS a few times, he has to know that there are limits imposed, and that he should look into whether or not a further upgrade is good or if a few cheaper systems would be better.

But as todd said, you likely don't need a $3000 pc when a 1500 one will do, and the iMac is a pc that fits the budget and performance range discussed in the first post. Not a fan of a batteryless 24" laptop, but it'll have enough kick if my three year old laptop still does the trick.

I don't think anyone said you didn't like Mac's - just Apple overall. I think you respect the beauty, simplicity and engineering just not the pricing and policies. That's fine. However, every single proprietary vendor I know of will cost more and will protect their technology greedily!

Now, if you just have to have OS X but want to do it on a PC I do not recommend doing it via any hack unless you just want to be geeky. Instead, there is a little device that is probably the best way that I've seen to run OS X. I have not personally used it, but I have a few friends that all swear by it. It's expensive, but it's supper easy. You can even update! :) Another cool thing is you don't have to uninstall Windows or Linux. The only issue (as always) is you have to have approved hardware (which I have).

Here's the link to the device: Home (http://efi-x.com/), buy here (http://www.expresshd.com/p135/EFi-X%E2%84%A2-USB-V1/product_info.html?osCsid=7c915f34ed9cb016099e41caf a9c2c9a) and here is there FORUM (http://forum.efi-x.com/)

As far as upgrades, it took how many interations of OS X before the PowerPC was dropped? And, does this make the machine any less viable today? The only real way to know is to be able to see into the future. Maybe AMD will come out with a CPU that stops Intel or maybe we go to 16 core's in two years and all software programers find some easy way to code for multi cores. Anything can happen. However, for the forseeable future, I do not see any vast changes, only steady upward momentum. Even if there was some great advance in tech, companies will not introduce them quickly. It would be very bad business sense to alienate people with such advancements over a couple of years. No, I don't really see much worry in compatability. OS X 10.7 is going to be the last big step on the back end for a two or three versions - and the next few will be all about features.

[Moppie]

We still have Apple Power Mac G5 Dual 2Ghz systems at work that are five years old that are still extremely viable and crunching through movies pretty fast. We'll still be using them for a few more years.


A rather poor example, but since you insist on using poor examples from your work (which is about as far removed from the needs of the average photograher as you can get), consider this:
The next version of OS-X is 64bit only, and will not work on pre-Intel macs. Any future software updates and relases from Apple will also be 64bit only.
This means your old G5 will be stuck in time, and not able to run anything from Apple released after the end of this year. There is a very, very high chance software like Adobe CS etc, will also be written in 64bit only versions for the Mac, so good luck teaching your students how to use current versions of image and video editing software on those G5's in 6 months time.

On the other hand a new i7 based machine can run everything from windows 95 to Windows 7 64bit, and all the software released in the same period. It will also be able to run new software for a long time to come, in both 32bit and 64bit versions.


Don't kick yourself. OS X is very enticing and so smoooooothhh in its functionality. This coming from someone that's been on PC's for more than 20 years, is a Microsoft Certified Professional and helps manage a 10,000+ PC 25k+ user network. When I go home I use a Mac :)



Correction, you spend your time fixing a large number of windows based computers, so your daily experiance with them is largely a negative one. With 10,000 computers, if 10% have an issue every year then your fixing a 1,000 computers, thats 4 per working day.
But, your not working with 10,000 computers owned by the average consumer, your working with 10,000 computers on a complex network being operated by children who like to break things, so your problems rate is going to be much, much higher than 10%.
No wonder you have issues, all you do all day is fix Windows based machines.

Interestingly enough, a recent survey in New Zealand showed that about 9% of Apple Mac owners reported problems. I'm so glad I don't have to fix them.



As for OS-X being smooth and easy to use, well so is Vista.
However, last time I checked, no one uses OS-X or Vista to edit photos. Lightroom, DPP and Photoshop all look the same and have the same functionality on OS-X or Windows. Those are the programs we use. Opening them and using them requires only the most basic interaction with the OS.
If it requires more then you seriously need to look at your workflow.

[basroil]

I don't think anyone said you didn't like Mac's - just Apple overall. I think you respect the beauty, simplicity and engineering just not the pricing and policies. That's fine. However, every single proprietary vendor I know of will cost more and will protect their technology greedily!

Now, if you just have to have OS X but want to do it on a PC I do not recommend doing it via any hack unless you just want to be geeky. Instead, there is a little device that is probably the best way that I've seen to run OS X. I have not personally used it, but I have a few friends that all swear by it. It's expensive, but it's supper easy. You can even update! :) Another cool thing is you don't have to uninstall Windows or Linux. The only issue (as always) is you have to have approved hardware (which I have).

Here's the link to the device: Home (http://efi-x.com/), buy here (http://www.expresshd.com/p135/EFi-X%E2%84%A2-USB-V1/product_info.html?osCsid=7c915f34ed9cb016099e41caf a9c2c9a) and here is there FORUM (http://forum.efi-x.com/)

As far as upgrades, it took how many interations of OS X before the PowerPC was dropped? And, does this make the machine any less viable today? The only real way to know is to be able to see into the future. Maybe AMD will come out with a CPU that stops Intel or maybe we go to 16 core's in two years and all software programers find some easy way to code for multi cores. Anything can happen. However, for the forseeable future, I do not see any vast changes, only steady upward momentum. Even if there was some great advance in tech, companies will not introduce them quickly. It would be very bad business sense to alienate people with such advancements over a couple of years. No, I don't really see much worry in compatability. OS X 10.7 is going to be the last big step on the back end for a two or three versions - and the next few will be all about features.

I consider that (wonderful) little device a hack ;)

Last I remember, it took three OSX updates from the g5 to render them permanently fixed in OS terms. This is probably longer than the time for OP's use anyway, but considering the graphics card is likely the first thing that will render a system unable to update (when apple goes full ogl 4/ ocl only), it can probably be staved off a bit (unless apple hardware locks card upgrades, hope they don't, but anything is possible). Would be better if apple just allowed any old third party ati or nvidia based card to be installed without warnings, and that would mean good performance with very low upgrade costs. And yes, past 6/7 apple will be hard pressed to push the current OSX system much further without an overhaul. Here's to wishing OSXI for all pcs, not just apple ones :D

EDIT:

As for OS-X being smooth and easy to use, well so is Vista.
However, last time I checked, no one uses OS-X or Vista to edit photos. Lightroom, DPP and Photoshop all look the same and have the same functionality on OS-X or Windows. Those are the programs we use. Opening them and using them requires only the most basic interaction with the OS.
If it requires more then you seriously need to look at your workflow.
So very true... Though I wish Adobe would stop following that so they would be be able to take advantage of things like WDDM, direct x 10, and few other things a bit more. They even dropped one program from cs3 to cs4 to make both systems equal (program couldn't be ported to mac). Only workflow I know of that would be different is if you

[MaxxuM]

A rather poor example, but since you insist on using poor examples from your work (which is about as far removed from the needs of the average photograher as you can get), consider this:
The next version of OS-X is 64bit only, and will not work on pre-Intel macs. Any future software updates and relases from Apple will also be 64bit only.
This means your old G5 will be stuck in time, and not able to run anything from Apple released after the end of this year. There is a very, very high chance software like Adobe CS etc, will also be written in 64bit only versions for the Mac, so good luck teaching your students how to use current versions of image and video editing software on those G5's in 6 months time.

On the other hand a new i7 based machine can run everything from windows 95 to Windows 7 64bit, and all the software released in the same period. It will also be able to run new software for a long time to come, in both 32bit and 64bit versions.

I thought it was a perfect example – and intuitive at that. My example is not born in the present but an example of Apple’s upgrade path and of the future. I am not saying that the OP should get a G5. That would be absurd. The environment these computers are kept is also viable because kids use them as well as adults. It’s a harsh milieu riddled with abuse and poor handling – yet, they keep ticking. If they can work in my environment they will surly work for ‘average’ photographers!

To put it plainly, any Mac the OP buys today will likely be viable in five years as it will support 64-bit so there is absolutely no worry about Apple making another quantum leap in the OS for some time. He will be able to upgrade to CS5 and CS6. I’ve already admitted it will not be faster than computers of 2014 or even i7’s of today.

I will also contend that despite PC’s being able to run early OSes to the more current ones was Microsoft’s choice. Many professional programmers and analyst say that this has held Microsoft back from making real advancements in the OS. A fine example is NTFS which is aging and should have been dropped years ago. Another is the Registry. They served their intention (maybe) at one time, but they are antiquated by today’s standards.

Correction, you spend your time fixing a large number of windows based computers, so your daily experiance with them is largely a negative one. With 10,000 computers, if 10% have an issue every year then your fixing a 1,000 computers, thats 4 per working day.
But, your not working with 10,000 computers owned by the average consumer, your working with 10,000 computers on a complex network being operated by children who like to break things, so your problems rate is going to be much, much higher than 10%.
No wonder you have issues, all you do all day is fix Windows based machines.

Interestingly enough, a recent survey in New Zealand showed that about 9% of Apple Mac owners reported problems. I'm so glad I don't have to fix them.

True enough and likely why I want a simple no-bother home computer(s). Sigh, but I still have to use a PC :( at home.

You could also say that I see a larger picture too of a hostile environment. Yes, until we moved to laser/optical mice I was loosing a ton of balls (snicker), but I don’t hold that against Dell or HP. It’s par for the course. I do however get frustrated with Windows Vista a lot. XP had its problems before SP2, but overall it was just another computer OS. It wasn’t until Vista started popping up at different campuses that I started to worry. Yes, I know most of the problems have been fixed now, but there are still little things about it that cause me to bristle anytime I see a work order come in with Vista in the OS line. I’ll admit it. I hate Vista and it what with Vista that I went full Mac (purchased my Mac Pro). Every PC I’ve looked at (and that’s thousands of ones from work, home, friends and family) have errors being registered. Albeit minor, 99% of users will not notice them nor be effected by them, but they are there and they are usually precursors to bigger issues later down the road ‘if’ the right sequence of events occur – and they often do. Vista’s registry is just bigger, messier and clogged full of unnecessary entries too.

When I installed Windows 7 on my MBP I was surprised. It slipped right into our wireless network, accepted the certificate (Vista will fight you to place certificates in their popper place- uggg) and was actually easy to log in. Vista requires you to jump through a hoop to log into a child domain (just one more step to Vista). I like Windows 7, but, I can still see hints of badness lingering from Vista in there.

And I have to say one thing that bothers me Moppie – something that perhaps other people have noticed. I have never nor will I ever try to sell someone on a Mac if they want a PC. I usually go out of my way to deflect Mac statements within PC threads. I think it’s rude to push the subject, particularly in threads that obviously state “Mac”. Yet, invariably the same people come into Mac threads trying to dissuade people against them. Just something I’ve noticed – something oddly unsymmetrical about it to be honest.

[MaxxuM]

I consider that (wonderful) little device a hack ;)

Last I remember, it took three OSX updates from the g5 to render them permanently fixed in OS terms. This is probably longer than the time for OP's use anyway, but considering the graphics card is likely the first thing that will render a system unable to update (when apple goes full ogl 4/ ocl only), it can probably be staved off a bit (unless apple hardware locks card upgrades, hope they don't, but anything is possible). Would be better if apple just allowed any old third party ati or nvidia based card to be installed without warnings, and that would mean good performance with very low upgrade costs. And yes, past 6/7 apple will be hard pressed to push the current OSX system much further without an overhaul. Here's to wishing OSXI for all pcs, not just apple ones :D

Yea, I guess it's a hack, but one that comes with some guarantees. Which don't come often with hacks. I'm guessing Apple and Microsoft have settled into the 5yr major release schedule to try to outdo each other. Which is always good for us the users. And I doubt Apple will call it OS XI - it just doesn't ring of Apple. They like to keep things very simple and catchy like iPod or OSX. OSXI just seems, well, wrong. They'll call it something zippy and it will instantly become trendy :rolleyes::D

[wlescall]

Sorry, but wrong according to apple. The xeon 5500 based macs are artificially limited to 8gb for single core model. Only the dual core will allow you to use the 4GB dimms. http://support.apple.com/kb/SP506 Anything else would be a hack, and if you are going to hack a mac, might as well just hackintosh it instead.



I don't think that Apple has ever upgraded memory specifications after a machine is launched even after larger modules become available (one of my pet peeves with Apple). I suspect that Apple's 8 GB limitation is solely based on Intel's official specs and I'm sure both wish to continue a mutually beneficial relationship. I have seen an increasing number of reports of users adding the 4 GB DIMMs to Quad core Mac Pros - and those reports include Apple's "Memory Configuration" application informs those users the memory is installed correctly.

[basroil]

I don't think that Apple has ever upgraded memory specifications after a machine is launched even after larger modules become available (one of my pet peeves with Apple). I suspect that Apple's 8 GB limitation is solely based on Intel's official specs and I'm sure both wish to continue a mutually beneficial relationship. I have seen an increasing number of reports of users adding the 4 GB DIMMs to Quad core Mac Pros - and those reports include Apple's "Memory Configuration" application informs those users the memory is installed correctly.

Not at all actually. Intel specs have always been 24GB/processor (using 6 dimm slots), and Apple has TWO specs, check out the link I provided. They artificially limit the single processor to 8GB even though the chip can handle 12/16 GB (12 tri-channel, 16 dual). 4gb dimms have been around an awfully long time, not like it's something made in the last year. Hell, dell's been selling 24gb single processor i7 rigs for months longer than apple.

Maxxum, trendy =bad for the consumer. Means they can price gauge as much as they want. When's the last time you heard of ANY portable media player that required a $20 purchase of new software? Hell, all zunes got 2.0 for free, so Apple's "defense" was about as bogus as they come.

[Todd Lambert]

They should have included an extra $20 buck for all those poor Zune users though...

Apple often has "tested" limits on it's hardware - which is BS, but it's usually for support reasons.

I'm supposed to only be able to have 4 GB of RAM in my MBP... yet I've got 6GB in mine just fine.

[basroil]

They should have included an extra $20 buck for all those poor Zune users though...

Apple often has "tested" limits on it's hardware - which is BS, but it's usually for support reasons.

I'm supposed to only be able to have 4 GB of RAM in my MBP... yet I've got 6GB in mine just fine.

To each his own, but when's the last time an iPod had radio, or how about having WiFi before the touch, or "wide-screen" video? (neither has true widescreen anything). How about being priced $50 less than iPod (or less). I Will tell you that I'd buy a Zune HD over an iPod touch any day.

And yes, you often can use more if the motherboard chips allow it, but it gives Apple one more reason to invalidate your warranty.

[Todd Lambert]

How are they going to prove that you've got extra memory in there? Besides, I've never heard of any warranty claim being denied by Apple because of having more RAM than the machine shipped with. I think you're just making reasons to support your claim.

As for the Zune, you're right... to each his own. I think most people (and the market certainly shows this) would rather have an iPod rather than a Zune.

But, all of this is akin to Canon vs Nikon... they both work very well but are priced differently, work differently and are liked/disliked by different people. It's kind of dumb to even argue the point.

Especially in a thread like this, where the OP stated that they wanted a Mac. Why try and dissuade them, especially with asinine "issues" that don't affect the OP at all?

All of these issues are way off topic (it has been since page one) and don't really apply at all.

[basroil]

How are they going to prove that you've got extra memory in there? Besides, I've never heard of any warranty claim being denied by Apple because of having more RAM than the machine shipped with. I think you're just making reasons to support your claim.

As for the Zune, you're right... to each his own. I think most people (and the market certainly shows this) would rather have an iPod rather than a Zune.

But, all of this is akin to Canon vs Nikon... they both work very well but are priced differently, work differently and are liked/disliked by different people. It's kind of dumb to even argue the point.

Especially in a thread like this, where the OP stated that they wanted a Mac. Why try and dissuade them, especially with asinine "issues" that don't affect the OP at all?

All of these issues are way off topic (it has been since page one) and don't really apply at all.

How can they prove it? Quite easy, you can't really fix things in the Mac Pro yourself while it's under warranty (memory upgrades don't count as fixing), so if something breaks and you need to send it in, really easy to check to see there was more than 8gb of memory (not as easy if you take out the new and put back in the old, but if you forgot to restart with that memory in, bios will remember the higher ram count and they can be alerted to it).

Why persuade OP to consider non-Apple alternatives? Simply because he used the same "I was told it would be better" phrase. That means he did not research everything, or even close to anything. It's like buying a Ferrari because you were told it's amazing, yet you forgot you don't know how to drive stick. OP can chose what he wants, but if he knows all the information he needs to before, then he can be sure he won't regret the purchase.


EDIT: if you need the quote, from OP "My family has no experience with Apple but some of my friends have. I want this thing to last me for 5 years and have been told that it can."
OP, I can tell you right now, I had one desktop of mine last for 9.5 years without issue (except for a floppy drive going bad, simply unplugged the power to it), another is on it's fifth year (soon to be 6, how time flies) and the only thing that keeps going bad is a bad video card (just clogs up with dust and overheats the card, my fault though, I upgraded it and had a bad choice, just reverted to the original and everything's fine), a laptop on it's fourth, and one that just turned 3 (and three more computers, 2 yr, 1yr, and 6mo, yes, my computer family is larger than actual family). All work beautifully, and the ones still around (9.5 year old lost it's hdd finally, so it's retired to a live disk ubuntu test machine) I expect to say years longer. If you get a good computer and MAINTAIN it (clean out fans and heat sinks, proper UPS, etc), it will last you for a long time. Don't do that and it will not last long, even a mac isn't immune to hardware failure from improper (or total lack of) maintenance.

[MaxxuM]

Maxxum, trendy =bad for the consumer. Means they can price gauge as much as they want. When's the last time you heard of ANY portable media player that required a $20 purchase of new software? Hell, all zunes got 2.0 for free, so Apple's "defense" was about as bogus as they come.

Because something is in style? People/markets determine values basroil, not companies. It's not my fault that Apple products are considered more valuable than PC's. And I'm not sure what your referring to, $20 for what? I don't remember paying for anything with any of my iPod's and I have more than a few of them. Zune now? :rolleyes: Poor Zune - all dressed up and no where to go. :cry: Are you going to start up on bing.com now? :D

[basroil]

Because something is in style? People/markets determine values basroil, not companies. It's not my fault that Apple products are considered more valuable than PC's. And I'm not sure what your referring to, $20 for what? I don't remember paying for anything with any of my iPod's and I have more than a few of them. Zune now? :rolleyes: Poor Zune - all dressed up and no where to go. :cry: Are you going to start up on bing.com now? :D

20 bucks for ipod touch 1.0's to get 2.0 software. might have been $15

EDIT: and bing commercials are great... but I tend to just search google/yahoo/etc since I like to manage a million sites at once.

[MaxxuM]

Ahh, I never got the first edition of the iPod Touch and my iPhone is subscription based so no charging :)

[Titus213]

Well, you guys seem to have driven the OP off with your bickering back and forth. Nice work!

And it's strange, but the same folks go at it every time. I suggest you all give it a rest.

[René Damkot]

I suggest you all give it a rest.

I too would like to return to the original topic...

[basroil]

I too would like to return to the original topic...

Well, you guys seem to have driven the OP off with your bickering back and forth. Nice work!

And it's strange, but the same folks go at it every time. I suggest you all give it a rest.

I'm sure he would be glad to hear from others as well. Any suggestions on specs, owner testimonials, etc?


Well, back to OP then, and I'll try summarize three pages worth in easy to understand words, and make it the last post here:

I will be using it for not only photo-editing, but also for drafting and design in the coming years. My real question is, will this thing be a good purchase for my editing? I am able get CS4 from a friend to use as well, so thats not a big worry to me. Anything is pretty much better than what I have now, my screen is so out of color and balance. Any advice would be great, and thanks so much!

If you want to edit photos, iMac is probably more than enough for low volume work, and will handle CS4 and LR2, especially with the geforce 120 upgrade. However, it's fairly underpowered, and a Nehalem based rig would be much better. An i7 based windows system can be had for the same price as the cheapest 24" iMac . Finally, you need to make sure you calculate the cost of switching in terms of software and add that price to any apple computer you decide on (or at least the price of a VM ware like program). Since you say drafting and design, I assume something like AutoCAD or unigraphics, and those can run pretty expensive even for a single add on license in a different OS. For CAD type stuff, it's more or less windows or bust if your budget is under $3000, and it's a lot easier to get quadro and firegl (fire pro) cards that are in the 250-1000 range.

EDIT: As for professional graphics issue, this is mainly just if you are doing things that require it. i