PowerMac G5...?

[NoDaddyNo]

The new case looks cool.

That is about all I can say about that. I personally don't do anything right now that would benefit from going up to a 64bit processor.

 

[manny78]

Is this box worth a penny ? Looks like another cool-elitist-overpriced-useless-computer. ANyway, Apple is far away from reaching PC in terms of sales. Wonder how long till they close shop...

 

[from zero]

Oh man, I would love to have one of those fuckers. The G5 is a graphic artist's dream.

 

[manny78]

Oh man, I would love to have one of those fuckers. The G5 is a graphic artist's dream.

What a Mac can do that a good PC workstation cannot ?

 

[from zero]

What a Mac can do that a good PC workstation cannot ?

Better grammar check maybe?

JK man

Macs are generally easier to use when working with graphics programs, like Photoshop, Illustrator, and Quark. But, maybe that's just because I'm used to working on one. The majority of the field works with Macs.

PCs are generally marketed as a word processing/internet tool. If you've got a G3-5, chances are, you're an artist.

 

[NoDaddyNo]

Oh man, I would love to have one of those fuckers. The G5 is a graphic artist's dream.

Hmm, I was an art major in college. I've done work in Photoshop, Illustrator, and every 3D package available. I interned at a special effects shop and feel that I really know my stuff in art.

I also know programming quite well and I know the hardware...

All that in mind - I still don't see how/why the Mac is a graphic artist's dream.

From what I have seen, Mac is easy with video - easier? better? Not so sure, but they are easy.

I think a lot of it is that back in the day, Mac was specifically designed to be optimized for graphics (as was the Amiga for that matter). As a result, many graphics houses adopted them as their platform of choice.
In the time since, they have accumulated software and users that are used to being on a Mac and it is now cost prohibitive to switch to anything else at this point.

But if one is starting out from scratch and can make the decision, I think the only real desirable thing about the Mac is that it looks very nice, so if you bring clients through your shop, you have a bunch of fancy looking machines to show.

 

[NoDaddyNo]

Macs are generally easier to use when working with graphics programs, like Photoshop, Illustrator, and Quark. But, maybe that's just because I'm used to working on one. The majority of the field works with Macs.

Yeah, it sounds as if you haven't used these programs on a PC lately.
The only difference between the PC and the Mac in PS and Illustrator are that the PC has the ctrl and alt keys instead of the command and option keys.
That and the PC systems have the right click functionality right off, whereas with the Mac you hold the key down, use a keyboard button in conjunction with the mouse press, or you buy an different mouse that has the number of buttons that you want.

Again, I think that this arguement was valid in the early and mid-ninties, but is long since washed up.

 

[Code]

5 years ago, Apple had did great on floating point.
Now-a-days, PC chips perform as well as Apple.

I use Macs because thats what I've always used.
I mean I own PCs, but only for video games.

 

[NoDaddyNo]

5 years ago, Apple had did great on floating point.
Now-a-days, PC chips perform as well as Apple.

I use Macs because thats what I've always used.
I mean I own PCs, but only for video games.

My fiancees mother/stepfather own a Mac. It is a shiny iMac - looks a bit like an art deco lamp had sex with a toy or a snowing paperweight and their offspring happens to have a keyboard.

They sort of typify Mac users that I have to deal with a lot. They will call me over, convinced that their machine is destroyed. I take a look at it and see that they haven't turned it on.
They don't understand the difference between sleep and off.

For the people like that, I'm just glad that they can move about the house and not kill themselves, so if they want a shiny computer for morons, that is fine by me.

That is an entirely different arguement than claiming that they are somehow superior in anyway.

Each system has its own merits for whatever it is you plan on doing and you need to then place a monetary value on the assets each has and then look to see where that monetary value compares to the machine that you are paying for.

For me, at this point, I only need a laptop with FreeBSD or Linux on it - but unfortunately, I have to admin a Windows network, so instead I have a laptop with WinXP Home on it.
While I do enjoy the shininess of a Mac, in the end, they aren't cost effective for anything I do.

If I had a really nice digital video camera and really needed to make videos quickly and easily, I would probably at least consider a Mac.
Other than that, they just aren't for me.

If my math code for some reason starts to need the 64bit processor, then I will start comparing it to the AMD/Intel versions to see - but at this point, nearly everything I do is with money, which is really just interger math in the end - fast stuff on cheap prossesors.