Moving to Apple...asking for suggestions on new system.

The graphic cards are different between the 20" & 24" iMacs. The basic & optional cards for the 24" are more powerful. You would see the most gain in performance in Aperture. Aperture uses the graphics processor for image processing. Otherwise about an 8% performance gain.

If you do graphics gaming or plan on using Aperture or you want the larger screen, the the 24" is much better. Otherwise you have to decide if the increased price is worth the minimal speed gain.

With so many Apple retail store around the country , is there one in your area or at least in reasonable driving distance?

If so, I strongly suggest going there just to kick around a few applications and set ups. That way you get a good feel for what the iMac can do with the standard configuration and some have added ram too.

I think I am going with the 256k video card, 2.33 Ghz duo and 2GB ram. Additionally, I understand that an Apple running with the same processor as a Windows unit will run PS faster. My neighbor who has the 20" iMac has never looked back and he is an information systems grad and understands and works with high end systems for a living. I think, along with all your comments, my mind is set.

Photoshop CS3 is reeeaaalllly fast compared to CS2.

canoflan wrote in post #3057131
I think I am going with the 256k video card, 2.33 Ghz duo and 2GB ram. Additionally, I understand that an Apple running with the same processor as a Windows unit will run PS faster. My neighbor who has the 20" iMac has never looked back and he is an information systems grad and understands and works with high end systems for a living. I think, along with all your comments, my mind is set.

A 256k card is really slow. Perhaps you mean a 256MB video card.

Right, I meant 256Meg, not 'k'

Don't get a used g4 or g5.

Try and find yourself a refurb imac, or save a few weeks more and get a nice shiny new one. The $1880 deal you found is pretty good.

transcend wrote in post #3058353
Don't get a used g4 or g5.

Try and find yourself a refurb imac, or save a few weeks more and get a nice shiny new one. The $1880 deal you found is pretty good.

Thanks. I just posted a new thread asking for hints on setting up because I just bought the $1800 setup I mentioned. I am pretty excited!

Adobe platform transfer fees are minimal. Cost me $5.83 to transfer my CS2 windows license to mac.

It's unfortunate that the 24" iMac uses SODIMM ram. It has a great price on it but if you want to bump the ram from 2GB to say 4gb, it's a $700 (eBay used) upgrade. This 24" iMac is a great photo editing system, but design limits it for true potential.

I say buy used and buy a tower. Cram as much RAM as you can into it with the money saved.

cosworth wrote in post #3060792
I say buy used and buy a tower. Cram as much RAM as you can into it with the money saved.

Ditto.

cosworth wrote in post #3060792
It's unfortunate that the 24" iMac uses SODIMM ram. It has a great price on it but if you want to bump the ram from 2GB to say 4gb, it's a $700 (eBay used) upgrade. This 24" iMac is a great photo editing system, but design limits it for true potential.

I say buy used and buy a tower. Cram as much RAM as you can into it with the money saved.

Unless you have a 64-bit OS and the application to support it (which Photoshop doesn't), you're going to be limited to 3 gigs anyway (which is what an iMac will take), regardless if it's a Mac or a PC.

Just to be clear, tiger is 64b capable on PPC processors, and leopard is on both intel and PPC. The mac pro will currently address up to 16gb of ram. How much an application will address depends on the application. I currently have about 5 apps runnign full time + the os. I use far more than 4gb of ram at a time.

Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don’t have to install separate applications for different machines. There’s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don’t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.

transcend wrote in post #3064132
Just to be clear, tiger is 64b capable on PPC processors,

G5, not G4 or before, correct?

As I understand it, when OS X is installed, the installer software checks to see which Mac it is, then installs modules, some of which are 64-bit and others that are 32-bit depending on the machine. This presumably allows OS X to manage both 32-bit apps and 64-bit apps without any hiccups. (I believe this is different with Windows - you have to either install the 32-bit version OR the 64-bit version, which can cause problems for some apps. Someone who knows, please comment.) With the move to Core 2 Duo processors, the iMac and MacBooks (all of which use Merom chips) are now 64-bit capable (the Mini is still only 32-bit capable), but cannot address more than 3.4 gb of RAM because the video component of the chip is still 32-bit. When Santa Rosa comes out next month it should have this problem resolved. I don't think Santa Rosa is pin-compatible with the curren version of Merom, but if it is, then you might be able to upgrade iMacs and Mac Minis by swapping processors (assuming heat is the same or better) since they're socketed. The Mac Pros use Woodcrest (and now Clovertown for the 8-core machines), which are fully 64-bit.

Regardless, Adobe has made it clear that if 64-bit Photoshop becomes available, it won't be until CS4 at the earliest.

Tony-S wrote in post #3064499
G5, not G4 or before, correct?

As I understand it, when OS X is installed, the installer software checks to see which Mac it is, then installs modules, some of which are 64-bit and others that are 32-bit depending on the machine. This presumably allows OS X to manage both 32-bit apps and 64-bit apps without any hiccups. (I believe this is different with Windows - you have to either install the 32-bit version OR the 64-bit version, which can cause problems for some apps. Someone who knows, please comment.) With the move to Core 2 Duo processors, the iMac and MacBooks (all of which use Merom chips) are now 64-bit capable (the Mini is still only 32-bit capable), but cannot address more than 3.4 gb of RAM because the video component of the chip is still 32-bit. When Santa Rosa comes out next month it should have this problem resolved. I don't think Santa Rosa is pin-compatible with the curren version of Merom, but if it is, then you might be able to upgrade iMacs and Mac Minis by swapping processors (assuming heat is the same or better) since they're socketed. The Mac Pros use Woodcrest (and now Clovertown for the 8-core machines), which are fully 64-bit.

Regardless, Adobe has made it clear that if 64-bit Photoshop becomes available, it won't be until CS4 at the earliest.

All PPC machines were 64b, no exceptions. Right back to the old school quadra 900s etc. The intel machines is where the problems arise.

Also correct about the 32/64b problem with windows, it's one or the other. Amc os X allows the OS to be selective, both with applications and hardware. The older intel stuff was not 64b capable, all the newer ones, as you mentioned, are.