imac users please help with info

[jcaldwell]

I visited the apple vendor today looking at an Imac.  I am a long term PC user with an extensive investment in graphics software.  I use the adobe suite daily.
My questions are:

1) does bootcamp with xp installed run cs2....is it slow?
2) Can you calibrate the screens using spyder software
3) is the upgrade to 256K of video memory necessary
4) how much memory do you need ideally
5) is there a better mac alternative.


THANKS FOR YOUR HELP

[photo570]

I visited the apple vendor today looking at an Imac.  I am a long term PC user with an extensive investment in graphics software.  I use the adobe suite daily.
My questions are:

1) does bootcamp with xp installed run cs2....is it slow?
2) Can you calibrate the screens using spyder software
3) is the upgrade to 256K of video memory necessary
4) how much memory do you need ideally
5) is there a better mac alternative.
THANKS FOR YOUR HELP
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71304\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

1) Yes, and no it runs at native speed, with bootcamp you are running XP on an Intel chip, end of story.
2) Yes.
3) No, but advisable, as it isn't that much, and you never know what is coming software wise that may benefit from it (more software using GPU ala Aperture.
4) As always with any Adobe product, more is not quite enough. Fill'er up, after market may be a little cheaper.
5) Very soon, WWDC is 7th August, and widely expected to see the introduction of new "PowerMac's", so only two weeks to wait. Don't forget the iMac can drive a second display as well, so it may be sufficient if PCIe cards are not needed, a personal call really, based on your own needs.

Cheers  

[Rokcet Scientist]

I visited the apple vendor today looking at an Imac.  I am a long term PC user with an extensive investment in graphics software.  I use the adobe suite daily.
My questions are:

1) does bootcamp with xp installed run cs2....is it slow?
2) Can you calibrate the screens using spyder software
3) is the upgrade to 256K of video memory necessary
4) how much memory do you need ideally
5) is there a better mac alternative.
THANKS FOR YOUR HELP
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71304\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're making the switch! Very sensible. Excellent decision, jcaldwell. Congratulations and welcome to the club!

[jcaldwell]

You're making the switch! Very sensible. Excellent decision, jcaldwell. Congratulations and welcome to the club!


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71325\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

thanks for the info.....david

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Oh, shucks! Another one has deserted to the Dark Side -- and just because the Mac may be a better machine.  

Eric (Incurable PC user -- though sometimes I wish I weren't)

[61Dynamic]

1) Yes, it'll run CS2. It's running a full copy of Windows and Windows gets to use the computer in full just as if it weren't a mac. Parallels may be a better solution however if you don't intend to play games.

*You can trade in your Window license on your adobe software and get a Mac license for free. Call Adobe Tech Support and they'll set you up.*

3) I'd recommend it. OS X Tiger uses some hardware acceleration to render the interface and that 256MB of memory will make some of it feel more snappy. It'll have a even bigger effect in the near future as the full UI will no doubt be fully hardware accelerated (Quartz 2D Extreme as it's called).

4) Definitely, give it the full 2GB it can take. You'll be grateful you did.

5) Yes, the PowerMac. Why? Because it can hold more ram (up to 16GB), has PCI-e expansion slots, and more hard drive space (granted by only one additional drive, but there are third party solutions to squeeze three more in there too). Intel based replacements are very possibly coming early next month so if the PowerMac is of interest to you, I'd wait until WWDC takes place. Like photo570 said though, it depends on your needs.

Since the new Intel Core 2 chips are now out, PowerMac replacements are bound to happen soon. In fact, it's even possible the Core 2 chip could make its way into the iMacs too. Probably not by WWDC though since that is for developers and is more geared for professional market announcements.

[digitaldog]

I'm quite happy with my 20" iMac with 2 gig's of ram. Yes, Photoshop runs a tad slow in Rosetta compared to my G5 but compared to a Powerbook (PPC), not much difference. The one "issue" I find is that sometimes, with Photoshop and say Lightroom running at the same time, I get a lot of the SBBD (Spinning Beach Ball of Death) and I think it's an Adobe thing. I use an EyeOne Display to calibrate the display. It works and while the LCD is no Sony Artisan, its decent. Quite machine that has run fine from day one (I got it just when announced since I needed to test Intel Macs). I think you'll be happy. Just don't buy the RAM from Apple (too expensive). You can install it in a snap.

These guys have good prices on RAM and good service:

http://www.transintl.com/

[Rokcet Scientist]

thanks for the info.....david
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71332\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You're welcome..... Jake.
(I guess)

[Stephen Best]

The one "issue" I find is that sometimes, with Photoshop and say Lightroom running at the same time, I get a lot of the SBBD (Spinning Beach Ball of Death) and I think it's an Adobe thing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71377\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's likely that the combined working set sizes of the two apps exceeds available memory. This can be addressed by adding more memory (not much help if you're already max-ed out) or changing the memory allocation of Photoshop. Once you start thrashing it helps to have different volumes (not partitions) for the Mac OS paging space and the Photoshop scratch space. Replacing the boot disk with a 10,000 rpm Raptor (or similar) will also speed things up ... and not just when you're paging/swapping.

[61Dynamic]

It's likely that the combined working set sizes of the two apps exceeds available memory. This can be addressed by adding more memory (not much help if you're already max-ed out) or changing the memory allocation of Photoshop. Once you start thrashing it helps to have different volumes (not partitions) for the Mac OS paging space and the Photoshop scratch space. Replacing the boot disk with a 10,000 rpm Raptor (or similar) will also speed things up ... and not just when you're paging/swapping.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71439\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

While more memory always helps, RAM is not the main issue here. The issue is that LR is still beta and has not been fully optimized. With 5.5GB or Ram, I get the SBBOD as well from time to time. LR tends to make the system sluggish overall with or without PS running. B3 is not as bad as B1 or B2 were.

[Stephen Best]

The issue is that LR is still beta and has not been fully optimized. With 5.5GB or Ram, I get the SBBOD as well from time to time.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The SBBOD says that the system has taken over (for paging/swapping). I used to get the same problem with Photoshop and OmniWeb (a real memory hog though vastly improved with the new 5.5 beta) until I went from 2.5GB to 4GB. Sure all apps can have their working set pruned. It's unlikely that Lightroom will use all your RAM. Photoshop will only address about 3.5GB, though it can use the remainder as an alternative scratch space (VM Buffering).

[61Dynamic]

The system always maintains the paging file and RAM allocation, not individual applications. The SBBOD comes up when a program is unresponsive or there is a problem with the paging file.

Since the SBBOD only comes up frequently with LR open, the source of the issue is -logically- LR.
...and I know LR doesn't take all my ram, but that is moot. All applications are allocated some virtual memory space regardless of their footprint in physical RAM (And on that note, it should be noted the VM numbers in Activity Monitor are not really the true amounts of VM any particular app is using at that given time - just in case someone looks and wigs out thinking the weather widget is taking 350MB of swap space file on their hard drive. :) )

Buggy code could be tripping up the system when virtual memory (vm) is being used. I bet it's possible to trace the issue with Shark or Spin Control (nerd alert), but I'm not that concerned with the issue since this is beta software. Point is, it happens and I know it's due to LightRoom and I'd say it's a given that they'll have it nipped by 1.0. 'nuff said.