Macbooks so why do I want one ?

[snadge]

A lot will depend on the graphics card there.

My macbook has onboard graphics, intel chip, pretty shit, the inspiron has an ATI mobile 256mb graphics card in it yet, when working wit raw images from my canon 5D my mac can process and size far better than the vista machine, it also seems to deal with multiple pictures better, although I don't profess to know how different OS's allocate memory, the mac can recall previously opened RAW files far quicker than the Dell.

 

[editor]

could you tell us how much money you have spent on these thousands of programs and updates, if any, please?

Not much. I get loads of apps for free because I'm a journo, although I use a lot of freeware/shareware apps and don't mind coughing up a few quid if I end up using them a lot. There's also loads of excellent programs available for free on coverdisks (all the panoramas on this site were done on a freebie giveaway), or on websites offering free/open source programs and, of course, many Windows users get by on a feast of extended evaluation copies.

The GIMP does everything that anybody reading this thread needs to do, unless they already know what it is that it can't. By which I mean, the functions that it doesn't have are obscure and specialised, and people needing them will already know what they are.

But it's not just about functionality - it's about usability, familiarity and learning something that - like it or not - has become the industry standard and an essential for a jobbing graphic designer.

I've tried to get my head around GIMP many times and I still hate the way it looks and works - and if you're using something for hour after hour, these are important factors.

 

[editor]

My macbook has onboard graphics, intel chip, pretty shit, the inspiron has an ATI mobile 256mb graphics card in it yet, when working wit raw images from my canon 5D my mac can process and size far better than the vista machine, it also seems to deal with multiple pictures better, although I don't profess to know how different OS's allocate memory, the mac can recall previously opened RAW files far quicker than the Dell.

That's all pretty meaninglessness stuff unless you compare processors, graphics cards, RAM, running apps etc etc.

Mind you, MacBooks are lovely machines but you can almost certainly get faster performance on a cheaper PC laptop.

 

[Jonti]

I know who I'd rather be.

Pfft. Yesterday's men.

I prefer the look of the future, myself.

 

[Orang Utan]

The boyfriend has very poor impulse control and so we have one.

I must say, they are *very* pretty. I like that the keyboard lights up!

Mine doesn't!

 

[editor]

I like the illuminated keyboards on MacBooks. Nice touch.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

But it's not just about functionality - it's about usability, familiarity and learning something that - like it or not - has become the industry standard and an essential for a jobbing graphic designer.

I've tried to get my head around GIMP many times and I still hate the way it looks and works - and if you're using something for hour after hour, these are important factors.

Usability is a moot point - full-fat Photoshop is an absolute horror in terms of learning it, so much is utterly arbitrary and makes no sense. This it shares with the GIMP. Image editors of any power are all pretty horribly complex these days.

Familiarity just depends on what you already know, and industry standards... well, sure, PS is an industry standard, but only some people have to care about that. Certainly freelancers don't; I regularly use the GIMP to edit PS files that other people have posted. As long as I produce graphics at the end of it that people can use they don't care. It's like using Word docs; everything can read them.

I don't care these days what individuals use, particularly if they're accustomed to a package, and I'm bumping up against the edge of some of the "obscure" functions that only PS really does these days myself so I might pay money for it, but I stand by the statement that for pretty much everybody who doesn't already know the answer, the GIMP will do everything they want to do and they have no need to get some cracked copy of PS.

 

[Orang Utan]

I like the illuminated keyboards on MacBooks. Nice touch.

Are these new Macbooks?

 

[elbows]

Are these new Macbooks?

Yes in the past only the macbook pro's had illuminated keyboards, but now the new macbooks do too.

 

[snadge]

That's all pretty meaninglessness stuff unless you compare processors, graphics cards, RAM, running apps etc etc.

Mind you, MacBooks are lovely machines but you can almost certainly get faster performance on a cheaper PC laptop.

just CS4 running and my workflow on the macbook is far more fluent than CS4 on the Dell, I also find Logic running on the macbook far more responsive than Cubase on the PC which is what I used to use, the amount of stuff I "lost" due to crashes in Cubase was soul destroying.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

They selling the white one on the apple site for 700 quid...

 

[elbows]

They selling the white one on the apple site for 700 quid...

Less of a ripoff but best avoided if you want reasonable 3d graphics or better keyboard and trackpad.

But it does have firewire, which is the bad omission from the new macbook.

 

[editor]

Familiarity just depends on what you already know, and industry standards... well, sure, PS is an industry standard, but only some people have to care about that.

Every time I've had to do into a company's office to work on a graphics job, I've worked on - and shared - Photoshop files.

I'm sure GIMP would be technically up to the job, just the same as Corel Painter circa 2002 could probably do it too - but if you don't learn Photoshop you'll soon become unstuck in almost all professional graphics environments.

I'm not saying I enjoy that fact, mind, but that's just how it is.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I use the GIMP to work on PS files all the time. Everybody saves assets as PS; I open them, work on them and export as PNG, JPEG or TGA.

 

[djbombscare]

So if I did score a mac something. Probably an air if I get a contribution or something out of work. So if I did, then on a personal basis I'd be looking to use it for video and photo editing, and website design.

What I would look to run on based on what I currnetly can use would be.

Photoshop for pics. Yes or no ?
Camtasis for video editing cos I know it like the back of my hand.

That as far as Im concerned is it. obviously if work are helping then I'll be running other software.

So what else do I need or suggest.

I've just started on dreamweaver for webdesign stuff but is there something esle that will fit the bill be prfessional and easier to use ?

Thanks for all this everyone.

 

[tarannau]

If you're going for full-on video editing, don't go for an Air. It's a thin little beast, but it suffers with less connectivity options and power as a result - it's more of a luxury second mac than a primary machine imo.

Photoshop for pics, Final Cut Pro for movies, Logic for Music. Those three rightfully dominate on the OS and are largely industry standard - not much reason to look elsewhere really. Logic's got a little bit of a learning curve, but it's difficult to go back once you've got used to it.

 

[djbombscare]

Yeah its probably better to go for the mac pro. So I'll have a look at those.

I'm not gonna be doing bbc full on video products just taking bullet cam stuff and stuff off minidv and editing it in camtasia.

 

[snadge]

All adobe products are available for Mac so dreamweaver etc are out there for OSX, Premiere for OSX is also out there to do your video editing.

Camtasia on the Mac is in beta development.

BTW I have found the learning curve for Logic to be far more intuitive than Cubase.

 

[djbombscare]

I'm trying to learn dreamweaver but something more intuitive would be really helpful first and then pick up dreamweaver.

And the Camtasia thing is no worries as I used to be their UK Dude and still what they call a "Mavern" (apologies if its spelt differnetly) for them

 

[pk]

Mind you, MacBooks are lovely machines but you can almost certainly get faster performance on a cheaper PC laptop.

*cough splutter burp choke*

 

[tarannau]

BTW I have found the learning curve for Logic to be far more intuitive than Cubase.

Probably right, but I was a Cubase boy from the ST era onwards - it's what you get used to first I guess.

 

[Crispy]

15" mbp
2.53 GHz core 2 duo (1066Mhz FSB)
4GB (1066MHz)
320GB (5400rpm)
Nvidia 9600M GT
£1,712.01

15" Dell XPS
2.53 GHz core 2 duo (800MHz FSB)
4GB (667Mhz)
500GB (5400rpm)
NVIDIA 8600M GT
£1,200.09

Let me see if I can get a closer spec elsewhere.

 

[snadge]

Probably right, but I was a Cubase boy from the ST era onwards - it's what you get used to first I guess.

so was I, I had an STE I think, just for cubase and an Amiga 3000 for proper stuff.

 

[Crispy]

oops, sorry, thats for the pro. let me do a little homework on the regular mb

 

[djbombscare]

so was I, I had an STE I think, just for cubase and an Amiga 3000 for proper stuff.

Hey I started on a falcon and TCB tracker

 

[djbombscare]

ok so as a side question is it possible to run OSX on a PC ?

 

[editor]

ok so as a side question is it possible to run OSX on a PC ?

No. It is verbotten.

 

[Crispy]

ok so as a side question is it possible to run OSX on a PC ?

Possible, yes.
Legal, almost certainly no.

 

[tarannau]

Skins yes. Full OSX not so easily. Given that much of the appeal with OSX is that it's a an intuitive OS that just works, do you really want to be tinkering about on geek sites to get something that 'almost exactly' works as flawlessly as the real thing.

 

[Crispy]

Quite. A lot of OSX's reputation for stability and ease of use comes from the tight integration with the hardware. Start messing with the hardware and you start having trouble.