What do you mean "here"? If you mean in this specific forum, I browse OcUK using "New Posts", I don't pay attention to the category
How Good is an iMac?
- Thread starter Vita
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 24,262
I assumed it was the new posts thing, but still.
Surely you know Mac people are indoctrinated cultists!
Yes, and I am a persistent preacher
I do like Macs, by the way; I can't wait to get my new Macbook Pro. However, that doesn't mean to say I don't think they're over-priced, or pretend to someone who is on a budget that it is the right choice for them, or pretend to someone it has comparable hardware (for the same price), and so on.In fact, I can't stand to see Apple fanboys recommend Macs to people who really could do a lot better for their requirements looking at something else. As soon as someone says "I don't care, I have the money and I like shiny stuff" then I would say "Same as me, enjoy your purchase".
Last edited:
Yes, and I am a persistent preacher
In fact, I can't stand to see Apple fanboys recommend Macs to people who really could do a lot better for their requirements looking at something else. As soon as someone says "I don't care, I have the money and I like shiny stuff" then I would say "Same as me, enjoy your purchase".
Unfortunately, that is this forum down to the ground. I did say i wouldn't post in here again for the incessant whining backlash you get every time you speak out, but it's just a crying shame to see some poor sod recommended something wholly unsuitable because he happens to have posted it in the Mac section, under some false illusion that you *need* one for photo editing. If you dont like Macs you (apparently) shouldn't post in here.. So the use of asking in here for advice is long gone, because anyone left loves macs.. The ones who would give you unbiased advice were chased out with the pitchforks long ago
If you're into photo editing, build up a custom quad box with as much ram as you can afford, good screen, scratchdisk, whack Vista 64 on it and the new WINDOWS ONLY 64 BIT VERSION OF CS4
, and edit away 
It won't look as nice, and it won't be as quiet, and you probabaly wont have as many people online to justify your purchase for you.. But it will get the job done faster If anyone has a genuine reason why a person should choose an iMac for photo editing i would love to hear it. Anytime you challenge the concept you get 1 of the two default replies;
OSX is WIN
That's what Mac Pro's are for.
*now awaits for someone to quote the whole post with simply the witty words "yawn" written underneath"
Soldato
Personally Aperture would be justifaction enough for me... That said ive got 2x Macpros, so dont really do any photo-editting on my 24"iMac.
As for Vista64bit, nothing at all to stop you installing that on a Macpro (and probably iMac, but i havent done that) and then using this special Windows only CS4 64bit version... But i doubt youd notice much of a differance then using the OSX version of CS4, apart from the fact youd have to reboot into OSX to get into Aperture, unless you liked LR2, which personally i dont.
Soldato
1. That HP is as ugly as the Dell
2. With regards to hotlinking, are you a don? No? Then kindly shut up.
I ain't going to host every picture I need to post and I see no problem with linking to CNet. A Don has disagreed but that's there call not yours.
Associate
can I just say that hp one is a lot nicer in the flesh! I love the iMac too. Time to save some money!
You're right; it is their call. They made it (you've even said that have). I'm just trying to be a good forum user and advise others of the rules
That argument is assuming that everyone has the technical know-how and patience to built their own machines. Apple aren't competing with custom built machines, they're competing with Dell and HP (et all).
People look at Dell, HP, Apple, because they either don't have the inclination, or the ability, to build up a machine from scratch.
Of course, you will always be able to build a machine that is bigger, better and more current than a pre-built, but that isn't limited to just Apple.
Oh, and Yawn
That argument is assuming that everyone has the technical know-how and patience to built their own machines. Apple aren't competing with custom built machines, they're competing with Dell and HP (et all).
People look at Dell, HP, Apple, because they either don't have the inclination, or the ability, to build up a machine from scratch.
Of course, you will always be able to build a machine that is bigger, better and more current than a pre-built, but that isn't limited to just Apple.
Oh, and Yawn
Then buy a Dell Studio. £10 less, Quad core, 3x more ram, MILES better graphics card, 3x more hardrive space. Dont have to build it yourself and it would STILL be better for editing photos. Argument still stands
Apple sell to a certain sector of the market, undoubtedly a sector very concerned with image (I'm sure it's not just OSX that gives them record growth).. The problem is the image attached to photography and Apple. You say hey, we say ho. You say photos, everyone shouts Apple. In a professional environment this may not be far wrong, the problem is people not recognising the difference, and assuming every Apple is the best for editing photos, which they simply aren't
Lolwut?
Soldato
I can build a machine. I can build a better machine for less than I could by an Apple.
I cannot build a machine that looks as good as an Apple, that runs OS X legally. I also work all day and do not want to spend any time building a PC. I also want to spend as little time fixing and faffing and as much time doing.
Apple fits the bill. Looks good, small foot print and works so well I just use it without thinking.
That's why I'll happily pay the premium. Other mays chose not to but it seems increasingly that people are willing.
Associate
With all due respect, it sounds like Vita had all but made up his mind. It's not like anyone here's had to really talk him into it!
Not sure I see how an imac is 'wholly unsuitable' either
What law do you break by running OSX on non-Apple hardware, or what precedent has been set to imply such?
With all due respect, it sounds like Vita had all but made up his mind. It's not like anyone here's had to really talk him into it!
Not sure I see how an imac is 'wholly unsuitable' either
Quite, see my early point about justifying purchases. You don't come here to ask advice, you come here to justify your purchase. Or justify your train of thought prior to making a purchase. No-one (Bar JimpsEd it seems) stands up and says "Hey, maybe a Mac ISN'T the best choice for you, thought about a PC?"
Maybe wholly unsuitable was a bit harsh, they will still do it of course, just not as well as a similarly priced PC. The base spec iMacs for photo editing are laughable to be perfectly honest. 1 whole GB of ram, whopee! That will only take me 4 layers and a few history states to chomp up. And no-one can argue "Just put more ram in it" because this is the "I just want to buy a computer turn it on and it works" train
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Dec 2003
- Posts
- 2,697
Great, another thread that has been derailed. Not surprising since it seems the usual in this section of these forums.
Vita had a set of requirements which the higher end iMac are perfectly capable of fulfilling them. He did not ask for a cheaper alternative or an alternative that boasts higher specifications for a similar price. In fact he was deciding which size iMac would be ideal for himself until all hell broke loose.
Vita, it seems that the high end 20 inch iMac (if you think the screen quality is fine) or the low end 24 inch iMac are the ideal choices for you.
Vita had a set of requirements which the higher end iMac are perfectly capable of fulfilling them. He did not ask for a cheaper alternative or an alternative that boasts higher specifications for a similar price. In fact he was deciding which size iMac would be ideal for himself until all hell broke loose.
Vita, it seems that the high end 20 inch iMac (if you think the screen quality is fine) or the low end 24 inch iMac are the ideal choices for you.