Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Mac vs. pc for photo work

Reply
Thread Tools

Mac vs. pc for photo work

 
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
Little Green Eyed Dragon wrote:
> In article <0knJd.14899$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Ron Hunter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Sure, but then I wouldn't have time to respond to 100 or most posts in
>>various newsgroups every day.

>
>
> Wow that must be all you do.


I am retired, and ill. Since October, I haven't been able to get around
much.


--
Ron Hunter http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
nospam wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Brian C.
> Baird <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>>(E-Mail Removed) says...
>>
>>> My knee-jerk reaction was from the perspective of being in the
>>>98% category after spending years creating things everyone reading
>>>this uses. His remarks are extremely insulting to the majority of
>>>readers.

>>
>>No, my remarks are offensive to you, a minority of readers.
>>
>>What is difficult about assembling a PC, assuming you have all your
>>faculties?
>>
>>Is it selecting parts? No, there are plenty of good websites devoted to
>>helping you make a good choice. Compatibility issues are less prevalent
>>than they ever were.
>>
>>Is it assembling the components? No. With many PCs, you don't even
>>need a screwdriver to assemble them any more.
>>
>>Is it installing the drivers? Maybe in the past, less so now.
>>
>>So why is it you underestimate the abilities of so many people to
>>assemble a simple piece of electronic equipment?

>
>
> why is it you can't see that most people have *no* interest in building
> computers or any other bit of electronic equippment? whether it is
> lack of ability, lack of time, or simply lack of desire, most people do
> *not* want to bother. they want to take it out of the box, plug it in,
> and start working.
>
> some people love building computers. more power to 'em. have fun. but
> don't tell the rest of the world that is the 'one true way.' it isn't.


Just like some people like to build their own cars, and wonder why
everyone doesn't enjoy it. Sigh.

At one time, I would have enjoyed building my own computer, but the last
thing I built was a frequency counter. Soldering all those tiny joints
for the digital display totally burned me out on it, forever. I haven't
built anything electronic since.


--
Ron Hunter (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Brian C. Baird
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Yes, I've been there and done that even intergrated systems on a S-100
> bus but defie anyone to build a pc out of parts which has the
> beautiful design and esthetics of the iMac. Face it any pc you build
> will look like a box with a bunch of cables coming out of it even with
> the lights in the case making it look like something which you would
> find hanging in a 70's Disco.


Form over function?

Since when do PCs need to be pretty?

Well, if you want I guess you could buy one of the numerous custom cases
out there... can't get those for Macs!
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Brian C. Baird
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
In article <250120051258119838%(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed)lid says...
> why is it you can't see that most people have *no* interest in building
> computers or any other bit of electronic equippment? whether it is
> lack of ability, lack of time, or simply lack of desire, most people do
> *not* want to bother. they want to take it out of the box, plug it in,
> and start working.
>
> some people love building computers. more power to 'em. have fun. but
> don't tell the rest of the world that is the 'one true way.' it isn't.


Do what you want - but don't tell me it's a lot of work. It isn't!
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
In article <U7CJd.15692$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Ron Hunter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>nospam wrote:
>>
>> some people love building computers. more power to 'em. have fun. but
>> don't tell the rest of the world that is the 'one true way.' it isn't.

>
>Just like some people like to build their own cars, and wonder why
>everyone doesn't enjoy it. Sigh.


Quite. I've built computers, and have come to the conclusion that I hate
doing it. When the last Athlon Linux system I built finally failed (the CPU
fan died and the processor incinerated itself and part of the motherboard),
I swore "never again" and replaced it with a Powermac G4. Never regretted my
decision.
 
Reply With Quote
 
huntzing@pica.army.mil
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
chris wrote:
>
> I don't think iPhoto is that good. It's way over-rated for no obvious


> reason.


The obvious reason is that it comes bundled free with new Mac's, so it
falls into the "don't look a Gift Horse in the mouth" catagory. IMO,
there's little harm in at least trying it before deciding to buy
something else.


> Has it been updated to categorize off-line photos?


I don't know the answer for v5, but since hard drives keep coming down
in prices, buying the hardware to keep the images online may be an
acceptable alternative for some. For example, for the same $200
required to buy iView MediaPro software (which does Archive), you could
instead choose to pick up a 300GB internal SATA hard drive.


> It's set up to easily order prints from APPLE; making their wallet
> puffy by merely sending your order to Ofoto (Kodak) to process.


True, and no one is being forced to do use this option. I've not tried
it yet, but I have seen some people give it fairly high praise, so
there's apparently some people who think that the convenience is worth
the cost; YMMV.


> You can't share photos without the $99 .Mac account.


Sure you can. You just have to do it the old fashioned way: FTP them
up onto your existing website. A nice FTP app to do this is
"Transmit":

http://www.panic.com/transmit/

IIRC, Transmit allows an unlimited number of 10 minute sessions for
free, but it is a program that's worth paying its $25 Shareware fee
IMO.


-hh

PS for Howard: hope that despite all of the Mac/PC tangents of this
thread, you've gotten most of your questions answered.

I can't offer much aid on your Networking question, except that
anecdotally, it seems that most challenges tend to be in basic
configuration stuff which is not particularly unique to any OS. I have
heard some claims that wireless is supposedly "better" on a Mac; my
wireless experience has been to boot up my laptop and watch XP proceed
to claim that the wireless network that was in the previous airport's
waiting lounge is still within range!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Nobody Nowhere
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
In message <250120051608375459%(E-Mail Removed)>, nospam
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>I


>
>scsi is not *that* well supported in osx, even with the appropriate
>cards. also, quite a number of peripherals never had driver updates.
>and the adapters don't work so well for devices other than a hard
>drive.


Why did I have to read this precisely two hours after I purchased a
power Mac G5? My peripherals include an older Imacon scanner (Precision
II), which can only be linked by scasi, and a canon printer (i9950).
(The scasi card (adaptec) came with the scanner originally). The G5 has
not yet been delivered, but the intention is of course to remove the
scasi card from the PC and put it inside the G5. Do you anticipate any
problems with that? I assume that there should be no problem with the
printer, which is linked via USB. Is that right? Thanks in advance for
any comments.

--
nobody
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
Nobody Nowhere wrote:
> In message <250120051608375459%(E-Mail Removed)>, nospam
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>> I

>
>
>>
>> scsi is not *that* well supported in osx, even with the appropriate
>> cards. also, quite a number of peripherals never had driver updates.
>> and the adapters don't work so well for devices other than a hard
>> drive.

>
>
> Why did I have to read this precisely two hours after I purchased a
> power Mac G5? My peripherals include an older Imacon scanner (Precision
> II), which can only be linked by scasi, and a canon printer (i9950).
> (The scasi card (adaptec) came with the scanner originally). The G5 has
> not yet been delivered, but the intention is of course to remove the
> scasi card from the PC and put it inside the G5. Do you anticipate any
> problems with that? I assume that there should be no problem with the
> printer, which is linked via USB. Is that right? Thanks in advance for
> any comments.
>

(For a minute there I thought I was in comp.sys. mac.....)

I have no idea what SCSI cards work with what. I hooked up my last SCSI
peripheral in '98 or '99, and to this day have a Jaz 1Meg removable
drive system gathering dust and no regrets.

In general I advise getting a new scanner (USB, or now, firewire) rather
than paying for any sort of adaptor. And, frequently the old 'puter is
around to be a dedicated scanner or print server, plus you now have two
scanners.... but I guess the Imacon is in a class by itself and may be
worth adapting.

--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
Ron Hunter wrote:
> Little Green Eyed Dragon wrote:
>
>> In article <0knJd.14899$(E-Mail Removed)>,
>> Ron Hunter <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, but then I wouldn't have time to respond to 100 or most posts
>>> in various newsgroups every day.

>>
>>
>>
>> Wow that must be all you do.

>
>
> I am retired, and ill. Since October, I haven't been able to get around
> much.
>
>

Well, I am sorry to hear that, Ron.

But I'd sincerely like to keep reading your posts! Look at it this way:
respond to just 90 posts in a day, using the saved time to trim.

You will save each of hundreds of readers a fraction of a second each
post of yours they read.

Net benefit to the NG: 28 minutes of saved time per day....

well, give a few hours, or take 27 minutes...

Get well soon.

--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-26-2005
Nobody Nowhere wrote:
> In message <250120051608375459%(E-Mail Removed)>, nospam
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>> I

>
>
>>
>> scsi is not *that* well supported in osx, even with the appropriate
>> cards. also, quite a number of peripherals never had driver updates.
>> and the adapters don't work so well for devices other than a hard
>> drive.

>
>
> Why did I have to read this precisely two hours after I purchased a
> power Mac G5? My peripherals include an older Imacon scanner (Precision
> II), which can only be linked by scasi, and a canon printer (i9950).
> (The scasi card (adaptec) came with the scanner originally). The G5 has
> not yet been delivered, but the intention is of course to remove the
> scasi card from the PC and put it inside the G5. Do you anticipate any
> problems with that? I assume that there should be no problem with the
> printer, which is linked via USB. Is that right? Thanks in advance for
> any comments.
>

The printer will almost surely work, the scanner is a tossup. There
may, or may not be a driver for it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2811 snmp for what mac's are on which port ( simliar to thesh mac-add ) ab Cisco 0 02-12-2007 08:26 PM
Image quality on .mac (dot mac) eyalnevo@gmail.com Digital Photography 4 05-16-2006 03:07 PM
Vertical Gap between DIVs in Opera 8.5 Mac + IE 5.2 Mac mangm HTML 2 12-01-2005 12:48 PM
mac!! mac!!! * * * Y o u r . S h e p h e r d . A q u i l a . D e u s . ( d 2 0 0 5 x x , d 2 0 0 4 x x , d 2 0 0 Computer Support 7 06-03-2005 12:48 AM
Senseless rendering: Mac.Mozilla != Mac.Netscape6.01 ?!?! Roman =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Bl=F6th?= HTML 1 07-02-2003 10:23 AM



Advertisments