Gosh, you must be going to the wrong Apple store . I've bought at least a dozen Apple computers over the last 30 years, and I seem to still have a lot of soul
Paul via phone > On Nov 30, 2013, at 9:15 PM, John <[email protected]> wrote: > > This will probably be of absolutely no help whatsoever, but ... > > I don't think now is a particularly good time to buy Windoze computers > anyway. Looks like everything that's available comes preloaded with > Windoze 8, which is not the best thing Micro$oft ever came up with. > > I've currently got 2 build-your-own systems with XP & one with Windoze > 7, along with a laptop I need to finish updating the Windoze 7 that I > replaced Vista with. > > Windoze sucks, but not enough to induce me to sell my soul to Apple. > > I did briefly consider going the hackentosh route, but it doesn't really > look like a viable platform for someone who doesn't enjoy spending all > their time fighting the OS. That's about the only good thing about > Windoze. You can schlep the equipment together & install the OS and it > will pretty much work without having to constantly fight with it. > >> On 11/30/2013 4:14 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: >> My 7-year old iMac just keeps on working, but it really struggles >> with large image files, etc. My dilemma is not whether to buy a new >> computer - that is a given. My dilemma is about what to buy. >> >> Note: I am well aware that I can certainly find cheaper alternatives >> than those discussed below. However, I have had enough experience >> with MS-DOS and Windows systems over the last few decades to be 100% >> certain that I have zero interest in going that route. And within >> the Apple lineup, the Mac Mini, tricked out and paired with the 27" >> Thunderbolt Display, is about what I would get in an iMac all-in-one >> for about the same price. With some sacrifice in expansion ports >> with the Mini. So the Mini is not off the table, but pushed well to >> the side while I look at other options. >> >> Specifically, short version: a. all-in-one (iMac) vs. desktop Mac >> Pro + display. b. If desktop+monitor, then Apple Thunderbolt display >> vs. other good display vs. display with wide (Adobe RGB) color >> gamut. >> >> WRT the monitor - I have read several magazine articles and blog >> comments and other material (including this interesting piece from >> EIZO: >> http://www.eizo.com/global/library/basics/lcd_monitor_color_gamut/ ) >> and I am not sure what I would gain from a wide-gamut display. If >> web images and printers are stuck with sRGB, then for me to see a >> "better" image on my desktop isn't really going to do anything >> except to further increase the load on my credit card. >> >> And if the iMac or Apple Thunderbolt style monitor is good enough, >> then do I need a desktop at all? >> >> A current quad-core iMac with NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M GPU with 4GB >> graphic memory plus some system memory and drive upgrades would be >> about $2900. >> >> The quad-core base version of the new Mac Pro will start at $3000, >> including 2 AMD FirePro D300 GPU's with 2GB on each. Some TBD added >> cost of memory upgrades, cables, etc. >> >> So, is there sufficient value added with the desktop and its option >> to go for a wide gamut display? Am I gaining other intangible >> benefits from the (to me) inscrutable differences in processor and >> GPUs between the iMac and Mac Pro? Should I save some money on the >> computer system and buy a 20-40 lens? >> >> >> I welcome any comments or opinions, informed or otherwise. >> >> stan > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
