Post by: Raven on July 13, 2003, 12:44:30 PM
Currently as a graphic designer I use a G4/400, 386 mb RAM. OS9.1. QuarkXpress 3 & 4 Photoshop 5.5/soon 7, Freehand 9. It's stable and everything works great!
I also use a Epson Scanner, Apple Laserwriter 360 (uses a Farallon adapter), Epson Colour 800 printer and Yamaha CDRW. The Scanner and CDRW are SCSI devices.
I want to move to OSX reluctantly, but hesitating cause I'd have to upgrade my QX and some peripherals, which is pricey! I'm debating about switching to InDesign, but that's another issue that I don't want to deal with here. My biggest concern is the downtime to move to OSX and work out all the upgrade stuff and peripherals etc.
So I am thinking... I need to buy a new G4 with OSX. Spend some time to learn it. Move my Software over a bit at a time (over 30 days), learn the difference and then finally sell off my old G4 to recover some costs. I don't need a G5 yet, cause I don't need to be at the cutting edge. I believe G4 prices drop as the G5's come out?
1) So, does THAT make sense? From all the information I've looked at the G4, 1.25 GHz model looks like the best value. They are running at about $1300 US (I'm in Canada).
2) But do I need the 0S9 bootable one? Does that mean it also has OSX on it and you can switch between the two OS? Do you have to shut one down each time you want to use the other?
3) How is that different or better than using OSX and Classic? That's important for my QX3.32 which only works in 0S9.
4) Also, I read that some of the latest G4's/OSX could NOT boot into OS9, but now the ones released in June could! How do you tell the difference when you buy one? The specs aren't always clear on that.
Lots of questions, so that's why I numbered them. You TS folks have been extremely helpful about this. Sorry to be anal about this, but I have to get this stuff straight in my head before I start buying. :-)
Post by: Raven on July 13, 2003, 01:02:21 PM
The LCD wasn't a priority, but if the price is right...
Or should I wait for a better deal?
I'm open to TS suggestions.
http://www.smalldog.com/wag13259/atdealmaced/
Post by: kelly on July 13, 2003, 01:05:28 PM
Did I waste my time? Am I now?
2. Yes. Yes.
3. Booting into OS 9 is not the same as Classic.
You can Boot from either and do what you want.
Other machines run OS 9.x in Classic Mode but don't Boot OS 9.x.
Being able to Boot OS 9. x assures you can run all your old Software.
Running it in Classic, maybe, maybe not.
4. Smalldog states it clearly. Most sites do. Ask to be sure.
Post by: kelly on July 13, 2003, 01:08:52 PM
The 20 inch Displays are nice but expensive.
Post by: RHPConsult on July 13, 2003, 01:12:27 PM
QUOTE
But do I need the 0S9 bootable one? Does that mean it also has OSX on it and you can switch between the two OS? Do you have to shut one down each time you want to use the other?
OS 9 as the bootable OS is "industrial strength". Anything that would run w/o X on the disk will run with 9 and X cohabiting.
If you want to boot in 9 you either A set 9 as the start-up disk (if you have it on a separate partition - recommended) or B at the bong in booting, hold down OPTION and make your choice from the two OS icons that reveal themselves.
QUOTE
3) How is that different or better than using OSX and Classic? That's important for my QX3.32 which only works in 0S9.
If you're certain that QX3.32 won't work in Classic (and you might be surprised when you test it) then you simply boot in 9.2.2 and that's that. If you don't know for sure, you boot in 10.6.2 (with a preference set to have Classic start-up in the background) and see what happens. I have a number of old apps that reside in the Apps Folder in OS9 (which is on a separate partition). I can move from an X App to a 9 App without rebooting, another advantage of separate partitions.
Post by: Paddy on July 13, 2003, 01:51:35 PM
http://www.baseboard.net/forums/showthread/t-106.html
One thing - running things in Classic, in my limited experience is usually slower than running them in the native OS. Much as running something in Virtual PC is slower than running it on a real PC. Running in Classic you are running in emulation mode.
I would strongly recommend that you update your software, so that when you make the switch to OS X you can avoid Classic mode altogether. Switching back and forth is confusing and time-consuming - you'll find yourself not wanting to do it! Menus are different...all sorts of things are different.
I also think that the best way of getting comfortable in OS X is to jump right in - with all your software OS X native, so that you don't find yourself switching back and forth and becoming muddled. You'll become comfortable with OS X much faster. If you keep switching back and forth, you may find yourself reluctant to make the leap - after all, we humans tend to like the familiar.
I don't know what sort of monitor you have now, but if it's a very good CRT (Mitsubishi or LaCie for instance) I'd take a good hard long look before jumping to an LCD. Color matching and contrast are two issues that those in the graphics profession complain about with LCD's, though they are improving steadily.
Ultimately, the choice is up to you - for me, buying a new G5 will make way more sense (eventually) since I have already upgraded my Sawtooth 400 to 1GHz. I've been using OS X for 18 months now and love it - but on the non-improved 400MHz Sawtooth it was a tad slow. Now however, I'm in no rush - I have been very happy with the upgrade, have almost a GB of RAM and over 160 GB of storage on two drives - none of which can be moved to the new G5 (unless I want to buy an adapter for the drives). I still lust after a new graphics card, since I know that would improve performance yet again...but I don't intend to spend any more $$ on this machine now. Tempting as it is, I wouldn't rush out and buy a new G5 right away - I'd let others work out the kinks first. And let the prices drop a bit, as they always do. So, even though I knew that the G5's were fairly imminent, I did the upgrade - knowing that it would keep me going for at least another year. Of course...hubby will probably want a new Powerbook before Mom gets a new G5!!
At some point, one has to begin to wonder...just how fast is fast enough?
Post by: Bill on July 13, 2003, 01:59:09 PM
QUOTE
Sorry to be anal about this, but I have to get this stuff straight in my head before I start buying.
"get this stuff straight in my head"
Nothing wrong with asking the same questions many times over Raven.
As stated above, unless you are absolutely positive classic will work for your present apps/programs [or upgrades] I'd think towards a machine that 'will' boot into OS9xx.
After all you've stated a G5 isn't desirable for you right now.
That link to smalldog:
"G4/1.25GHzDP 256/80/Combo/Radeon9000/56K Not OS 9 Bootable."
Post by: Raven on July 14, 2003, 12:34:33 AM
Apple's 20" LCD rated the best in a test this month in MacWorld. I have a 19" Sony G400 CRT which has excellent quality for design work. Any idea how the Apple LCD would compare to my Sony or any similar CRT?
Post by: Raven on July 14, 2003, 11:33:26 AM
Sorry folks, but I did NOT see Page 2 and your comments on my last post on this topic until today. That's why I asked similar questions again here. It's not very obvious to newbies that there is a page 2. Live and learn!
Thinking out loud...
- Won't buy a G4 off eBay.
- Definitely want the G4 with OSX AND OS9. So that narrows my choice.
Seems like the June 2003 model is the one to get. The January model is OSX only.
- Dual is better. Lowend Mac rates the Dual G4/1.25 GHz very highly.
Not sure if there is a Dual AND Single version of G4/1.25 GHz???
So, now it's looking around for the next few weeks for the best price. Dealmac seems to be on top of the best prices. But some companies don't ship to Canada, so I will be doing a little bit of tire kicking yet.
Paddy,
I've been thinking for a while about an external HD for back up. I'm using CDs right now and it's a pain. Are you telling me you can't use your extra HD if you move to a G5? Why not?
And the ID vs QX debate is another issue. That was the biggest holdup for me a month ago to move to OSX. But now that I can get a G4 that will boot in OS9, that will help ease the transition.
Thanks to all of you. There is light at the end of the tunnel! :-)
Post by: Paddy on July 14, 2003, 11:38:18 AM
LCD's appear sharper (at least to some eyes!), have higher contrast, are much more sensitive to ambient light, don't support a wide variety of screen resolutions (most only really have one "native" one - the rest will not be very good) and generally have a smaller viewing angle, not that this is an issue unless you're entertaining a crowd! Color is generally somewhat less accurate than with a CRT.
Some comparisons:
http://www4.tomshardware.com/display/20020...114/lcd-03.html
Ergonomic comparison:
http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/CULCD2003.html
Discussion of LCD's vs CRT's for photo work:
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-...g?msg_id=0049HK
CNET articles:
http://www.cnet.com/techtrends/0-6014-8-8798084-1.html
Read the "Should you get a CRT or an LCD"
QUOTE
Colors. With LCD monitors, there's a hard limit on colors, typically 16.7 million (also known as 24-bit color). CRTs have no such limit, which in itself is no big deal since few applications go beyond 24-bit color. The real difference is in color accuracy, a quality not reflected in manufacturer specs. CRT monitors far outperform LCD monitors when it comes to color. A graphic designer, for example, wouldn't touch an LCD monitor. Colors on any kind of monitor are created by varying the intensity of red, green, and blue dots in the millions of triads that make up an image. CRTs control color by varying the intensity of the electron beam as it strikes each color dot. To vary the transmission of light through color filters, LCDs use magnetic fields to twist particles floating in a liquid--an inherently less precise process.
I'm not so sure about that "a graphic designer...wouldn't touch an LCD" - some are undoubtedly making the switch (I know of at least one) but I think by and large this statement probably stands.
That said, Apple's LCD's do tend to rank very highly in any comparisons, though you also pay for that quality.
Though I do notice the difference when I switch from my Ti Powerbook to my G4 with a LaCie Electron Blue (22") - at first things appear a little less sharp - I wouldn't trade my Electron Blue in just yet!! One thing that bugs me with the LCD is that I can see every pixel in the text - to me it looks, well, pixelated. I know it's probably easier on the eyes in the long run (no flicker - but a high end CRT doesn't flicker either - at least not visibly) but it bothers me.
I cannot accurately edit photos on my Ti - that much I do know. I realize that the standalone LCD's are no doubt much better, but contrast and color are never completely accurate with the Ti.
I have a very good friend who until recently worked for a company that makes chips used in almost all LCD's. He says that LCD's have the potential to be better than CRT's - eventually - in all respects. However, they're not quite there yet, for all users.
To answer your question about the HD - the new G5's have serial ATA drives, and to use a regular ATA drive (like those in the current G4's) you need an adapter. Theoretically, the serial ATA drives are faster - in practice there may not be a substantial difference. I'll wait and see what others report!
Post by: Raven on July 15, 2003, 12:29:13 AM
Small Dog sells a DUAL G4/1.25 GHZ for about $1600US.
What's the difference between a Single CPU and a Dual besides speed?
Is it worth $250 more?
Does 0SX, or Photoshop 7, or whatever, work Better or just Faster with a Dual CPU?