Finally beaten Microsoft...after 15 years

[Brac]

Dave, could you point me to the dock and card your using?

[skonopa]

Nowadays, if anything, Apple could easily shut MS out, and practially already have in the mobile and tablet space. Apple does not need MS anymore than GM needs Ford or Pepsi needs Coke.

Proves my point. They got into toys because they were not allowed to expand in the PC market.

I personally don't consider mobile or tablets to be "toys". We are finding some real-world, actual use for these and why my company is looking seriously into expanding into that direction as well (thus a lot of Android development going on here within the past year or so). My ASUS tablet has far more computing power than my desktop PC does (yeah, I know - I need to get a new deskop PC). Also, the reason why we are also seriously looking into the iOS front as well - like I said before, there is no ignoring the millions of iPads and iPhones out there (seems like darn near everybody I know has an iPhone these days)

As much as you and others on here may not like Apple (I refuse to get into those utterly childish platform holy wars),

Where did I say I didn't like it? I don't like or dislike it anymore than Windows. Frankly, I don't see any difference except much higher costs with Apple and I almost never see one except on TV.

The way you go off on Apple sometimes, I get the impression that you don't like them. As far as never actually seen any other than on TV, you apparently, you don't get out very much then. I've seen quite a few MacBooks and iPads out there. On my recent flight out to Colorado, I've seen quite a few of them in the airport and on the plane. Several of the guys in my ski club has Macs and iPads (was awesome for sharing pictures and videos we took out on the slopes - was really impressed how good the video I recorded with my GoPro camera looked on the iPad). I have a MacBook and iPad myself. I have seen differences, and my personal experiences says that I just found the Apple stuff to be generally better built than most of the typical PC/MS stuff that is out there. You can go on and on about "overpriced" and all that other nonesense about Apple gear, but to me, I actually find it to be worth it to me to spend a little bit more to get what I found to be actually better build-quality hardware and I do happen to like OS X as well (with the UNIX underpinnings - yes, under the hood of OS X is actually a UNIX kernal - based on NeXTStep operationg system from NeXT. And yes, it does have true pre-emptive multi-tasking and memory protection and such). Have you ever actually used a modern OS X based Mac?

Much like the musical tastes and audio equipment choices here, whatever floats your boat when it comes to your choice of computing platform.

Not really. Windows has an iron boot on the neck of corporate America...and pretty much the world. I managed to get a single Linux server installed for some experiments...and that caused quite a stir in IT!

Anyway, when all the available platforms still do not perform as well in a number of respects...notably preemptive multitasking...as those of years past I don't have any interest in rooting for one POS (pitiful operating system) over another.

Again, maybe 15 or so years ago, that was the case, but I am not seeing as much as now. I think it is more that many larger enterprises are so entrenched with MS that they don't want to spend the time and money to move to something else. I am no here to root for any particular platform over another either, but I am still holding by my original idea that people will ultimately use what they feel will do the best to get the job done for thier particular needs.

Since you are a pro, perhaps you have a take as to why one cannot purchase a raster based graphic subsystem for any of the currently availalbe OSs? Video production, in particular, and simulations as well, are SO hamstrung by vector based GPUs and things that are simple with a raster GPU, like 2D animation, are a bleeding nightmare in vector.

Graphics and simulations are not my area of expertise, even though years ago, I was involved (actually lead) a project in developing an OpenGL-based 3D rendering tool for rendering missile tracks as returned from the SPY radar system on Aegis ships. Currently, I am very heavy into cellular technologies, which is also why I am very interested in the mobile and tablet space. Still, with that said, my guess is that many of the consumer grade GPUs that are out there now are geared very heavily towards the gaming community, which relies heavily on 3D rendering performance (thus the vector-based GPUs). I am gessing that you would have to go with one of the "professional grade" cards, such as the NVIDA Quadro's or ATI Fireball GL type cards. Even professional redendering (i.e, AutoCAD) is pretty much 3D based nowadays as well.

In the mid-90s, I used the Amiga OS for a number of projects and having access to both vector and raster output was awesome and allowed us to do things easily that will bring a current flagship machine to its knees in seconds. In one, we ran a hardward PC card with Windows and another with Mac SIMULTANEOUSLY! Did that largely for grins...because we could.

Dave

There was no denying that the Amiga was a really nice machine. In the mid-90's, I just graduated college and just getting started in my projessional career. I would be lying if I did not say how much I lusted over an Amiga 4000 rig, fully tricked out, back in the day. However (and using the same argument that the anti-Apple crowd seems to use today), the Amiga was too darn expensive compared to getting a PC back in the day (and just starting out, I really did not have much money to spend on cool, expensive, toys back then), plus even then, it looked like Commodore was well on its way into running that platform into the ground. Thus, ended up with a 486DX/2-based PC running good ol' Win 3.1 and DOS 6.0 at the time. Added a SoundBlaster-16 ASP card and CD-ROM drive as well.

[Mallette]

Dave, could you point me to the dock and card your using?

I have a Cavalry dual and a Sabrent single, both USB 3.0.

Here's a good list from Newegg. I tend to go with price and user reviews. Generally works well. However, bear in mind that those who have issues or DOA problems are quicker to post so these are generally a bit over weighted.

Dave

[Mallette]

There was no denying that the Amiga was a really nice machine. In the mid-90's, I just graduated college and just getting started in my projessional career. I would be lying if I did not say how much I lusted over an Amiga 4000 rig, fully tricked out, back in the day.

Well, as I said, I don't involve myself with platform wars...especially since they are pretty much over, IMHO. The corporate world is a Microsoft lake and while I have occasionally seen a personal Apple I never see a large corporation that is other than Microsoft. I'd say 90% of the employees in my company would be just fine with Linux and OpenOffice and costs would be vastly less...but it just isn't happening for the reasons you mention.

I still have an A4000. i keep it because it's one of the 65 SimStaions we build at ARCO Technology Transfer Group. It's my hope to find it a home at one of the universities with strong instructional systems and ed tech programs someday.

I boot it every now and then (still works great) to remind myself of the promise of the PC back then. I could load up Deluxe Paint, delcare a 300 frame animation, put the final frame at the end and then simply work backwards to complete it in a matter of a couple of hours or less. 2D animation programs on modern machines are AWFUL and very, very slow going.

These thing weighs 75 lbs. We designed it to be crane lifted to offshore platforms and survive. It has a 24 bit video overlay (remember, it's a raster based OS so video is native and you can mix buttons and such right into a playing video...no problem) card, an 8 channel sound card, a top of the line Pioneer SS video LaserDisc (all software controlled right down to telling you what disc to insert), and a number of other goodies.

When Commodore managed to ****** defeat from the jaws of victory (the year they committed suicide they'd just matched the number of Macs in use...mainly due to the Video Toaster) we had to re-work everything in Windows. it was awful, but we made it sort of work.

While i don't like any of them, the last Windows I considered reasonably stable and unbloated was 98SE SP2. It could be installed in "compact" mode on 100mb(!) and only a few users would be missing anything useful.

Steve, I whine a lot and I am sorry. But consider the title of this thread. it is NOT an overstatement. This new machine is the first Windows box I have ever used that came close to the performance levels we took for granted on the Amiga and other systems in the mid-90s.

For 20 years, my rubric for computer speed has been "If you have to wait on it, it is too slow."

Dave

[carbon summit]

RAM is important and I'd not run less than 8 gb with W7...more on a 64bit system. It helps a lot.

Dave

I'm not too knowledgeable about PCs so sorry if this is way off. I've never bothered upping my RAM because when I look at the Performance tab on Windows Task Manager the physical memory usage meter shows that I rarely use half so I assume that tells me I've got enough memory. Am I understanding that information correctly? Windows 7 64 bit system with only 4 gb ram.

[Mallette]

I've never bothered upping my RAM because when I look at the Performance tab on Windows Task Manager the physical memory usage meter shows that I rarely use half so I assume that tells me I've got enough memory. Am I understanding that information correctly? Windows 7 64 bit system with only 4 gb ram.

If it is working for you, don't worry about it. Perhaps i should mention that I am a performance user and do 3D rendering, editing of HD video, use Adobe CS 5.5 regularly...often with several programs running, etc.

W764 can use up to 192gbRAM...and will, if you push it hard enough.

However, like all Windows, it also will spill over if required to virtual RAM. In your case, my guess is that you aren't doing much heavy computing. Web surfing is almost a system idle operation, and Word doesn't require much more.

All that aside, just re-read the first line: If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

Dave

[Marvel]

RAM is important and I'd not run less than 8 gb with W7...more on a 64bit system. It helps a lot.

Dave

You can only use 4G on Win7 32 bit.

We get no performance benefit with 64 bit for what almost all of our faculty use. Our Physics Dept. uses Macs, and Snow Leopard is natively 64 bit. I have 8 Gig of RAM in mine, but I run Win7 32 bit as a virtual machine. It is as fast as my last standalone Windows computer running XP.

Bruce

[Mallette]

You can only use 4G on Win7 32 bit.

Correct, Bruce. I meant to say 8gb min with W7 64. What i said about apps is true, however. I just checked my monitor. I have nothing open but Outlook and IE, and my memory usage is 9% of 24gb. Obviously, I'd be just fine with 4gb total at the moment. OTOH, I am not doing any work... [:$]

As to W7 64, you really only see significant benefits if running 64bit software. The performance improvement is significant with Adobe CS 5.5, 3D MAX (especially with cuda GPU), AutoCAD, etc.

And these will use all the RAM you can throw at them.

The reason a 32bit OS is limited is due to maximum unique addresses for RAM locations.

Dave

[Marvel]

CS5.5 is a resource hog! We have i7 quad core iMacs with 16 gig of ram and it still slows down.

[Mallette]

CS5.5 is a resource hog! We have i7 quad core iMacs with 16 gig of ram and it still slows down.

Launch time for Premiere and Photoshop is less than 2 seconds on my new build at home. Haven't really done anything super intensive yet, but I am sure Adobe will eat up everything in sight. i had an "old" 30gb SSD I've put in as a dedicated scratch disk. That should help...

Dave

[Marvel]

It isn't the launch time that's slow, it becomesthe execution and actions of the program.

Photoshop 5 launches in about 3 seconds on my Mac Pro, with 4 remote desktop sessions active, outlook running, and Win 7 running in a virtual machine. Firefox has about ten tabs up. []

[Mallette]

It isn't the launch time that's slow, it becomesthe execution and actions of the program.

Yeah, that's why I specified I really hadn't yet put a serious load on it. I'll get back to you about that when I do. It's my intent to produce a unit history of my Vietnam bunch in the not too distant future and it will be all 1080P...serious load!

Dave

[Brac]

Not the thread jack, but I am better off getting a dual? Will the $20 difference allow me to copy my now boot drive the the new SSD? Keeping in mind that said drives will be different sizes, so I'm guessing I can't clone?

[Mallette]

Dual is very useful for a number of things.

As long as there is adequate space on the target drive, duals don't care about size. They don't "clone" as software does but simply bit for bit copy. In theory, this should yield a bootable copy...but I have heard complaints than some copy, but don't always put stuff precisely where archaic boot systems such as that of Windows expect to find them.

I use a disk copier that's a couple of hundred bucks and it works fine. I'd check the user reviews and see if anyone mentions making bootable copies, or contact the US rep if they have one and ask.

Wish I could be absolute, but "nature of the beast."

If you do have a problem, try disk cloning software like Easeous Todo or a paid (not to expensive, as I recall) one like True Image. Good to have around anyway and some of these don't care about matching disk sizes either. True Image doesn't, and since Todo is free, no risk in trying it.

Dave

[Brac]

I've got a card and dock all picked out, now just trying to find a good seal on an SSD. Going with a Cavalry Retriever.

[germerikan]

I have been thinking about this for a RIP (Raster Image prossing) computer.Im a service tech in a software company that Develops RIPs the only concern we have is the EOL for the SSD´s. There is a lot of number crunching going on and time is money.

What is the general concensus of how long they live? A little bit steep if you have to change every year or 2.

[Mallette]

I have been thinking about this for a RIP (Raster Image prossing) computer.Im a service tech in a software company that Develops RIPs the only concern we have is the EOL for the SSD´s. There is a lot of number crunching going on and time is money.

What is the general concensus of how long they live? A little bit steep if you have to change every year or 2.

So what's it cost outside of an SSD to get between 30 and 100 percent speed up in a PC?

As to service life, one would think they'd outlast anything mechanical by a long shot. I have flash mem that has been through the washer (literally) and is 7 years old that still works fine.

I don't know the answer to that, but when I can get renderings and other intense tasks speed up by 50% and am paying a developer or modeler 80.00 an hour we could throw one away every month and still come out ahead.

You have my attention about RIP. Do you have RIP subsystems in your PCs or are you processing vector internally and converting (the normal, very PITA way)?

Every now and then I do a bit of research to see if there is any activity in raster GPU subsystems and find nothing. I'd happily pay a couple of thousand for a raster system and something like Deluxe Paint for 2D animation. It would pay for itself in about 2 months if we used it for nothing else.

Dave

[germerikan]

You have my attention about RIP. Do you have RIP subsystems in your PCs or are you processing vector internally and converting (the normal, very PITA way)?

Every now and then I do a bit of research to see if there is any activity in raster GPU subsystems and find nothing. I'd happily pay a couple of thousand for a raster system and something like Deluxe Paint for 2D animation. It would pay for itself in about 2 months if we used it for nothing else.

Dave

We "are" the RIP, this is getting images processed for printers of all kinds. There are different ways to do this (JAWS, APPE for vector) but in the end it has to be "flattened" down to a format the printer can understand.

The people using this are LFP, Screen /Flexo/Tampon and on the screen side we are starting new technologies. What would you be needing this for?

www.ColorGATE.com

Take a look and if you see something that could be adapted for your needs pm me.

[Mallette]

Took a look. I see what you guys do. Big job getting precisely accurate contone from vectors.

Only a few remember raster based GPUs in computers. One of the reasons Photoshop is so huge, complex, and slow is you work on a vector display that has to internally convert to a bitmap for processing and then redisplay as vectors. It is also why everything you select is square or rectangular rather than the shape you are after.

Well, at least it's good for you as you'd have a lot less work if there were still raster GPUs around.

Wouldn't be concerned, as I've seen absolutely no interest in same even though it would be of enormous benefit in a wide area of work like Hollywood and video.

If you are ever where "antique" computers are being shown, you may see raster at work. The Amiga, C64, TRS80 and a number of others were raster in the 90s and MS/IBM DOS started and remained vector based. That's why early on few had IBM PCs at home as the best you could get was 16 colors when others offered much more at much lower cost. Since high res printing wasn't an issue at home nobody cared. Why pay over a thousand for a word processor or spreadsheet machine at home when for 80.00 you could get a C64 that could do that but also play games in real color and display on your TV?

Of course, the concentration on corporate America by MS and others eventually caused the demise of these other systems as vectors are better for most business work. Video editing on vector systems, childs play that hardly takes a raster system beyond idle for most things, is incredibly processor intensive on a vector system due to the aforementioned "convert to bitmap, process, then back to vector" situation having to be peformed up to 60 times per second. Ouch. No wonder Avid and such are so expensive and even top of the line PC's so slow at it!

Dave

[germerikan]

That is why the SSD´s interested me. Althought the processor is hit medium hard with our programm the writing to disk back and fourth is what takes up more time.

"RIPing" a >100GB file takes its time and anything we can do to speed this up would be welcomed buy many, might just have to buy one to see if the performance can be increased with our usage.