Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Vista
I try to keep the non-political posts confined to the weekend, but my question here is brief. I do some fairly high-end Photoshop work on a somewhat antiquated system -- a single core Athlon and 1.5 gigs of RAM. Yeah, I should upgrade to a double-core system with at least two gigs of RAM, but bucks are tight. I've read that installing Vista will slow Photoshop performance 13%-25% on a system like mine. If that's so, why on earth would I want to pay for such a thing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
You wouldn't. Vista is a wet dream for hardware makers b/c it is a huge jump in hardware requirements. For the user the jump in functionality, if any, is not worth it.
If you can afford Apple's prices OSX w/ Parallels for windows needs, is a great choice.
Don't even try to install Vista. It probably won't work on your system -- or it's performance will be unacceptable -- and you'll end up paying for another copy if/when you buy new hardware (as part of the purchase price).
Besides, there's no likely Vista benefit for PS, even on a new system (apart from whatever speed advantage the newer hardware provides).
As the previous poster noted, Apple is indeed better -- but, alas, it comes at a substantial mark up.
Joseph,
Here are a few links for you:
6 Reasons NOT to Buy Vista
http://www.digitmag.co.uk/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=220&blogid=2
MIT's Tech Review: Uninspiring Vista
http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/17992/page1/
WSJ: Vista Worthy, Unexciting
http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20070118.html
The MIT article also shoots down the old fantasy of Macs being more expensive than comparable PCs - the operative word being "comparable."
Remember, all Macs include bluetooth and wireless (the new 802.11n) and all Mac laptops and iMacs have built in cameras for teleconferencing. Compare feature to feature to get an honest outcome.
I have to work on Macs when I work in-house, since they remain the standard for ad agencies. Sorry, but I dig them not. Besides, I don't trust any computer I didn't personally screw together.
But I am VERY grateful for the links!
Don't even bother with a Vista upgrade. It's 100% unnecesary. Basically, all you're getting is a slew of new DRM techniques that stand to make your computing experience a hassle, and some nifty new effects in the GUI (various pseudo-3D stuff) that basically requires you to upgrade your videocard because it hogs the GPU. There's no added functionality that makes Vista better for a user, unless that user is a gamer with a high end machine that wants to be able to play videogames that use the DX10 interface when they are made. Stick with XP or 2000.
I too was going to suggest Apple, but your response to that idea prompts me to simply say "fair enough and I wish you luck." Nice to not see such a discussion degenerate into a platform flamewar as so often happens.
Post a Comment