Quantcast

What works and what is paused · Email is limited to account activation and password resets.

Jump to content


Photo

Looking At Macs


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Random

Random
  • 8199 posts


Users Awards

Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:15 AM

Two years ago I bought my computer because I was into gaming, now the opposite is true.
It's a wonderful laptop, and I have a friend who is interested in buying it for a pretty good reseller price after two years.
I was looking at Macs, and wondering if I will notice the difference in processor speed.( My interest in photography and video editing and my being my trendy is my reason for looking at a Mac tongue.gif)


I have a 3.6Ghz processor in my current notebook, and all the Macbook pros have mid to high 2 Ghz. Do you think I'll notice a drastic difference, or will I still be happy with my purchase?

Advertisement

    #2 Cyo

    Cyo
    • Pauly D

    • 2561 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:20 AM

    Be happy with your current purchase.
    macs are overrated. Sure you're like: OH SHI- that's awesome it's white n' shit. But later you'll realize that it's just another linux notebook which just costs shitloads more.

    #3 ROFLCopterz

    ROFLCopterz
    • 471 posts

    Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:23 AM

    Kind of like Starbucks. tongue.gif

    #4 Twilight

    Twilight
    • 429 posts

    Posted 12 July 2008 - 10:53 PM

    what kind of laptop has 3.6 ghz?

    #5 redlion

    redlion
    • I don't exist!

    • 12072 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 12 July 2008 - 10:56 PM

    QUOTE (Twilight @ Jul 13 2008, 12:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    what kind of laptop has 3.6 ghz?

    Thats a good question actually.

    Also, IMO - macs add style, but not any functionality. Any video or photo editing software you want to run can easily run on a PC. And there are some sexy PCs out there nowadays. Better off saving the 300 dollar price difference between a mac and its PC counterpart, and going with a PC.

    #6 Bahbuu

    Bahbuu
    • 2028 posts

    Posted 12 July 2008 - 11:21 PM

    and you might also want to think where you will use your programs (that are more powerful - i.e. photoshop, video editing, or other stuff you do) most

    Let's say you mostly work with those programs at home, and you are unlikely to do those on the go, where you will only need programs such as office or firefox, for note taking and surfing the net

    Then you could get a combination of a desktop and a laptop (netbooks)

    Since you'll definitely get a better value for money (power-wise, not portability ofcourse) from a desktop.
    And netbooks for portability - costs probably 400 - 600 (depending on your needs, and linux/windows)

    and since most programs are windows compatible anyway, there's really not much difference between windows and macs

    Let's say photography programs - (apart from photoshop)
    -- Adobe Lightroom, Capture One, those are professional programs - windows compatible
    Video editing - not so sure since I've never paid attention to that aspect

    But like others said, macs a kinda overpriced just because it has a... 'creative' factor... which isn't entirely true anyway

    #7 Cyo

    Cyo
    • Pauly D

    • 2561 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 13 July 2008 - 01:40 AM

    QUOTE (Bahbuu @ Jul 13 2008, 10:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    and you might also want to think where you will use your programs (that are more powerful - i.e. photoshop, video editing, or other stuff you do) most

    Let's say you mostly work with those programs at home, and you are unlikely to do those on the go, where you will only need programs such as office or firefox, for note taking and surfing the net

    Then you could get a combination of a desktop and a laptop (netbooks)

    Since you'll definitely get a better value for money (power-wise, not portability ofcourse) from a desktop.
    And netbooks for portability - costs probably 400 - 600 (depending on your needs, and linux/windows)

    and since most programs are windows compatible anyway, there's really not much difference between windows and macs

    Let's say photography programs - (apart from photoshop)
    -- Adobe Lightroom, Capture One, those are professional programs - windows compatible
    Video editing - not so sure since I've never paid attention to that aspect

    But like others said, macs a kinda overpriced just because it has a... 'creative' factor... which isn't entirely true anyway


    theres potoshoop for windows too u noob lol

    #8 Tormentedsoul14

    Tormentedsoul14
    • 98 posts

    Posted 18 July 2008 - 02:37 PM

    This is what I had to do for the most part except my notebook was a POS. Im going for Digital media technology and its all done on macs. We use garageband and various other audio and video stuff most of the programs I cant get on windows so its forced me to buy a mac. Anyways it depends on how much you are wanting to do at one point I think the macs at school have a 2.4 processor and they still work rather well.

    #9 33724

    33724
    • 976 posts

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 08:32 AM

    While Popular Mechanics isnt exactly a truly non-biased magazine, they did an interesting article on Mac vs PC.

    #10 ROFLCopterz

    ROFLCopterz
    • 471 posts

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 08:44 AM

    QUOTE (33724 @ Jul 19 2008, 08:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    While Popular Mechanics isnt exactly a truly non-biased magazine, they did an interesting article on Mac vs PC.

    Lol, they put coke cans. tongue.gif

    #11 33724

    33724
    • 976 posts

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 08:47 AM

    QUOTE (Twilight @ Jul 13 2008, 01:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    what kind of laptop has 3.6 ghz?



    his laptop is overclocked to hell and Robert McNamee injected it with HGH

    #12 Random

    Random
    • 8199 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 12:32 PM

    QUOTE (33724 @ Jul 19 2008, 12:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    his laptop is overclocked to hell and Robert McNamee injected it with HGH


    It isn't overclocked.

    Hp nx9600.

    #13 33724

    33724
    • 976 posts

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 12:43 PM

    Great cougamooga....Intel Pentium 4 processor 650* with HT Technology (3.4-GHz, 800-MHz FSB, 2-MB L2 cache, SpeedStep®)


    *thumbs his nose at randomness and pouts at his under performing 2.3GHz processor


    but it did get the juice right?

    Edited by 33724, 19 July 2008 - 12:43 PM.


    #14 Random

    Random
    • 8199 posts


    Users Awards

    Posted 19 July 2008 - 12:45 PM

    QUOTE (33724 @ Jul 19 2008, 04:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
    Great cougamooga....Intel Pentium 4 processor 650* with HT Technology (3.4-GHz, 800-MHz FSB, 2-MB L2 cache, SpeedStep®)


    *thumbs his nose at randomness and pouts at his under performing 2.3GHz processor


    but it did get the juice right?


    Yeah I gave that shit a power bar.


    1 user(s) are reading this topic

    0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users