I would go for, but I am a dyed-in the wool Mac guy. I am very
impressed with the engineering specification of the iMac line, and
the 24" iMac has an absolutely beautiful display. Also, I don't know
if you have used the Core 2 Duo Mac, but they are smokin' fast! I
have a black MacBook (not the Core 2 Duo, but the Core Duo) 2 GHz,
and it is as fast as my PowerMac G5 Dual Desktop. You can run Windoze
on these via BootCamp or Parallels, and they become *very* fast PC
boxes when you do. The Mac hardware architecture and I/O is very very
good.
-Stephen.
On Nov 19, 2006, at 6:19 PM, Listar wrote:
> From: "Bob Whitmire" <bwhitmire@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [OM] iMac for Workflow
> Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 14:16:42 -0500
>
>
> It's not my intent to get a Mac v. PC argument going here, but I'd
> be less
> than honest if I didn't admit that I've been thinking for quite a
> while
> about switching platforms from PC to Mac.
>
> Was just perusing the new 24" iMac. It seems to have sufficient
> firepower to
> handle photoshop and a robust workflow. I've always hesitated to go
> Mac
> because of the cost involved not so much in the hardware, but in
> switching
> over all the software.
>
> Now I learn that Adobe will sell Mac versions of PS to folks making
> the
> switch for little more than the cost of the medium to send it on. I
> don't
> know if this is true, but Shutterbug reported it, so . . . <g> I'm
> also
> thinking about using the new computer, whatever it is, for photo
> work only,
> keeping the old box to do everything else with. That, too, would
> make it
> easier to port Platforms if I could keep using my Windows system
> until the
> Mac system was running as I like it.
>
> Anyone out there using a 24" iMac these days? Anything to saw about
> it?
>
> The models Apple is selling now have Intel Inside.
>
> --Bob
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|