# Laptop for photographers



## NYSTalents (Aug 15, 2008)

I am an advanced amateur photographer looking purchasing a laptop using on all my indoor and outdoor photo shoting, as I shot on the same time picture appear on the laptop monitor to check the quality of each shot and save. What type Laptop? Is Dell a good choice? Which hardware? Which Software?

Thank you


----------



## icassell (Aug 15, 2008)

NYSTalents said:


> I am an advanced amateur photographer looking purchasing a laptop using on all my indoor and outdoor photo shoting, as I shot on the same time picture appear on the laptop monitor to check the quality of each shot and save. What type Laptop? Is Dell a good choice? Which hardware? Which Software?
> 
> Thank you




I use a Dell Latitude 830 with the WUXGA+ monitor option running XP Pro.  I like it.  I'd have preferred a Mac, but my work bought it for me and it's a good machine. I have 2GB of RAM and a DVD burner and it does fine with PS CS2.


----------



## DragonHeart (Aug 15, 2008)

NYSTalents said:


> I am an advanced amateur photographer looking purchasing a laptop using on all my indoor and outdoor photo shoting, as I shot on the same time picture appear on the laptop monitor to check the quality of each shot and save. What type Laptop? Is Dell a good choice? Which hardware? Which Software?
> 
> Thank you



I use a Gateway MX6920 with 2 GB ram and a Centrino DUO Core processor running Windows XP and CS3.  Works great for me.


----------



## Sandspur (Aug 15, 2008)

Either Macbook or Macbook Pro.

And Lightroom is probably the best choice for software.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 15, 2008)

Lenovo just recently announced a new line of lapotps geared towards photography and graphics professionals. The thing is absolutely hawt, though certainly not cheap. (Lenovo W700)

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9314-9557


----------



## icassell (Aug 15, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Lenovo just recently announced a new line of lapotps geared towards photography and graphics professionals. The thing is absolutely hawt, though certainly not cheap. (Lenovo W700)
> 
> http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-9314-9557



 WOW! I want one!


----------



## fabric (Aug 15, 2008)

buy a mac. hardly ever EVER crash and viruses are practically a non-issue (natively)


----------



## manaheim (Aug 15, 2008)

icassell said:


> WOW! I want one!


 
Yeah, that sucker is so on my list.  My Alienware 5100 needs to be replaced anyway.


----------



## STICKMAN (Aug 16, 2008)

WOW Lenovo really put some thought into that baby!!!!!! But thats allot of cha ching for a laptop and im sure that price is way bottom of the line.


----------



## Overread (Aug 16, 2008)

hmm £3000 sep 08 -- knock that down to £1500 sep 09 
affordable, and photo editing does only need a set amount of processing and graphics power - space is the key thing that really is needed -- so one does not need to aim for the upper market version to retain usability.


----------



## elemental (Aug 16, 2008)

Sandspur said:


> Either Macbook or Macbook Pro.
> 
> And Lightroom is probably the best choice for software.



I am running a 15" Macbook Pro with the 2.0ghz Core Duo and 1.5gb RAM and Lightroom. A little over two years old and still runs like a dream. I don't mean to turn this into a Mac vs. Windows debate, but I think a Macbook Pro is about as good as it gets (within reason). They're not cheap, but few good things are, and I've also heard complaints about the LCDs, but this system has been absolutely perfect for me.

I mean, do you _really_ want Vista?


----------



## elemental (Aug 16, 2008)

I was curious, and the new entry level Macbook Pro comes with a dual-core 2.4ghz processor and 2gb of RAM. Now, the cheapest one is still $2,000, but that's a big upgrade from what mine was two years ago.


----------



## Overread (Aug 16, 2008)

you don't need Vista unless you play games -- that is really the only big reason.
Most stores will happily "downgrade" a computer from vista to xp if you ask them - and the current edition of xp is well supported, balanced and not as big a system hog.


----------



## Hybridatomsk (Aug 16, 2008)

I have a crappy Compaq Presario C700. It's not the best laptop in the world,but It's a great laptop. I don't think the laptop really matters,but as long as you have enough space in it to upload your photos.Especially if you plan on keeping them all on your laptop,you know? 

Also, get a backup program for your photos. x_x 
-Hy


----------



## TamiyaGuy (Aug 16, 2008)

icassell said:


> WOW! I want one!


 Yep, me too. *searches parents' wallets*

But I just can't see why you'd need so much power to use Photoshop. I mean, a quad-core processor? Nah, for gaming maybe, but not for editing. My computer has a 3.2GHZ single-core CPU, just over 1GB of RAM, and it runs CS3 completely fine. Sure, it's slow _sometimes,_ but I can generally edit 6mp files with no framerate drops at all. But yeah. And that built-in tablet looks good too.

As for what machine you should get, it's all about your preferences. If you like the way Windows works (or have just "grew up" with Windows), then I'd recommend one of those. If you like the idea of Macs better, then get one of those. As for hardware, a 2ghz dual-core and 2gb RAM should do you OK for most image editing, but, naturally, the more the merrier. A biggish harddrive is always worth it as well.


----------



## Paul M (Aug 16, 2008)

I agree that you should get what you are comfortable with. With that said, I am on my 4th Dell and I have found that the extra $250.00 for the "in-home-warranty" is worth it if you use it just once. I did on one of my laptops a few years ago and I won't get another computer unless I get this awesome service. I can fix desktops but laptops are a little more difficult.

Now, away from the "repair" thoughts. I thought I would stand up to the Vista bashers and describe what I use for my at home system as well as in the field. I have an Inspiron E1505 with Centrino Duo 1.83Ghz, DVD Burner, 2 gigs of memory, 80gig hard drive (500 gig external via USB), and Vista. 

I backup all of my pictures to not only my 500gig external, but one of my desktop networked machines while at home. (1TB is soon to come). My personal preference for a good laptop for photography is at least 2gb of memory, a large hard drive, and chip speed, as well as a good graphics card. This is how I would go if you use your laptop for your main machine (which I do so when I get in the field, I don't "accidentally leave something important on my desktop"). 

Good luck with whatever you decide.


----------



## speed_dmon (Aug 16, 2008)

elemental said:


> I was curious, and the new entry level Macbook Pro comes with a dual-core 2.4ghz processor and 2gb of RAM. Now, the cheapest one is still $2,000, but that's a big upgrade from what mine was two years ago.



This is the one I just received yesterday actually (and im on right now). It is my first Mac and I love it. I used a student discount even though I'm not a student anymore. I just went to the website for the school I used to attend and there was a link to the discounted online Apple store. It was an amazing deal at $1799 plus they give you $299 towards an iPod of your choice. I am selling the iPod so the discount on the laptop equates to a bit more.


----------



## Parkerman (Aug 16, 2008)

elemental said:


> I was curious, and the new entry level Macbook Pro comes with a dual-core 2.4ghz processor and 2gb of RAM. Now, the cheapest one is still $2,000, but that's a big upgrade from what mine was two years ago.




I just recently bought an HP, 15.4 in monitor, 3 gigs of ram, dual core 2.2ghz processors, 250gig harddrive. $799. only sucky thing about it is the 128bit integrated graphics card, That only comes into effect though if i boot up wow on it or something.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 16, 2008)

Overread said:


> you don't need Vista unless you play games -- that is really the only big reason.
> Most stores will happily "downgrade" a computer from vista to xp if you ask them - and the current edition of xp is well supported, balanced and not as big a system hog.


 
Well, if you want games that require DX10... 

And TBH, Vista needs to burn a slow and painful death.  Vista is the worst thing to come out of Redmond... since... well, ever...


----------



## chrisburke (Aug 16, 2008)

i use mac, so obviously i'll say get a mac.. but if I can offer advice.. if you decide to stick with windows DONT BUY A DELL they are great for a year or 2, then they crap out... I'm the only staff member in my office who uses mac, the rest use dells, and every 2 years they have to buy new ones.. and I'm not exaggerating... and they arent noob computer users, they are graphic designers


----------



## danjchau (Aug 16, 2008)

-------------


----------



## manaheim (Aug 16, 2008)

Dells are a little... flimsy.

I had one that I noticed was wobbling on the desktop.  I literally picked it up, and _twisted_ it from corner to corner.  I put it back down and it wasn't wobbly anymore.  Eek.

Their "business class" machines are a little better, but frankly I ain't impressed with them overall.

The Lenovo boxes are ugly as sin, but IMO they're really the best overall machine you can get.  Very solid, good traveller features, very reliable, and... amazingly... very compatible.  (this was a foreign concept to Thinkpad users back in the 90s.)


----------



## Easy_Target (Aug 16, 2008)

From the looks of those specs, that thing must weigh about 10lbs. o.o;;

Personally I don't like Thinkpads in the slightest. They're great for business people, but for heavy usage (college student, art student), they're highly inadequate.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 16, 2008)

Easy_Target said:


> From the looks of those specs, that thing must weigh about 10lbs. o.o;;
> 
> Personally I don't like Thinkpads in the slightest. They're great for business people, but for heavy usage (college student, art student), they're highly inadequate.


 
That's an intriguing statement... how are college students heavier users than business folks?  And how does a Thinkpad not hold up, exactly?

I'm genuinely curious what makes you say this.


----------



## icassell (Aug 16, 2008)

I am a medical imaging user.  Our Dells get heavy use -- desktops and laptops -- and function reliably.


----------



## JerryPH (Aug 17, 2008)

Dells for reasonable price, poor performance and poorer customer support.

- Toshiba for the bells and whilstles.
- IBM for less bells and whistles but ROCK solid stability.
- HP for a few gimmicks, higher price, acceptable performance and stability.

I prefer the Toshiba Satellites because I am an advanced computer user and have access to hardware and software and I can get new Toshiba laptops at about 40% of retail when it is for personal use.  My last Satellite I've owned now for 3 years (a P4 3.4 w/2gig and 17" screen) and have never had to reinstall XP on it.  It is as stable and solid today as it was the day I originally installed the OS and the performance is excellent.  I run several home applications on it such as Pinnacle Studio Pro, Adobe Flash, Photoshop CS3 and many more... often several at the same time.  It has a builtin wireless adapter (nothing to break off that hangs from the side) and the screen is calibrated monthly with a Spyder 2 Pro for accurate picture rendition.

Works for me!


----------



## Arch (Aug 17, 2008)

Well.. as general advice, as with anything in life you get what you pay for.

All the anti-Dell users should certainly edit thier posts and insert 'IMO' next to thier statements 
You can not paint the entire Dell range and service with the same brush, thier machines perform completely different depending on which series and spec you go for... and thier customer service, like any major company, will vary depending on staff, location, type of enquiry... etc etc...

Just to prove a point.

I have a Dell... i bought a high end Dell XPS laptop. I use it for graphic design, photography, gaming, movie/music media and much more.

It is fast, it is powerful, it has a great screen, it does everything i want it to do and since buying it I have never looked back.

Last year i had a problem with my game graphics... i wasn't sure if it was updates or a hardware problem that was causing it.
After speaking to Dell (i only had the normal year warrenty not an extended service at this point) they sent a technician out within 2 days, he sat patiently and ran a series of tests, he was helpful and polite and went through all the possible problems with me. He finally decided it probably was the graphics card and so replaced it on the spot. There was of course no charge, all i had to do was the first phone call.

Overall I would give 9/10 for performance, value for money and service, but even this is of course IMO and your experiences may vary.


----------



## Easy_Target (Aug 17, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Easy_Target said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I don't like Thinkpads in the slightest. They're great for business people, but for heavy usage (college student, art student), they're highly inadequate.
> ...


 My university issues Thinkpad laptops (Models: R40, R50, R52, R60 and T60 for faculty) to both students and faculty (approx. 15,000 students, 1500 faculty). There is ALWAYS a line of at least 6 people waiting outside the repair shop to get their laptop repaired. This will be my fifth and final year there (thank god). Anectdotally, these things are piss poor in terms of performance. 



Hard drive failures
Screens are too delicate
Inadequate cooling
Inadequate performance
To date, I've had to get the hard drive replaced on average 3-4 times a semester for drive failures. About three semesters ago, over the entire semester, I had to get the hard drive replaced a total of *NINETEEN* times. 

Another common problem is cracked LCD screens. Those things crack ridiculously often. This is from just regular carrying from class to class. It results in numerous lines of dead pixels running vertically. I have a Compaq laptop that I got for $300 at Staples a year after I was issued the thinkpad. Not once have I ever had any issues on the Compaq, despite giving it the same treatment.

The built-in heatsinks don't do enough of a job to keep the laptops cool. A couple times I had it plugged in to write a paper in the library. It was hot to the touch almost to the point of being able to burn you. This was over the hard drive, keyboard and heatsink. 

In terms of performance the lower end laptops are a joke. One of my classmates got it brand new, just issued. They installed AIM Triton on it and it immediately bogged down. Just several programs at one time and it makes the system slow to a crawl, so much for multi-tasking. For the art students this is a sticking point. I've installed CS2 on these things before and it takes FOREVER to do anything with regards to CS2.

The freshman and sophomores use their laptops in class, but the juniors and seniors stopped carrying them for the most part. The reason is because it's just not worth the effort.

Since I've been issued it, this is the list of things that have had to be replaced (since 2004) and the reason.


LCD screen x 1 (cracked)
RAM x 1 (failure because of cooling issues)
Motherboard x 1 (failure because of cooling issues)
Hard drive x 30+ (general drive failures)
Keyboard x 1 (key/trackpoint failure) **Will be replaced when semester starts**

When it comes to PCs, I'm a power user. I expect good performance and I'll tweak system settings to make it so. I did that for the thinkpad and it's still inadequate for the needs of a college student, much less an artist.

As much as I hate DELL computers for their substandard & proprietary parts, not to mention crappy customer service, I'd actually recommend a DELL laptop over a Thinkpad laptop for heavy usage.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 17, 2008)

Dual core, 64 bit, 4gigs of ram, 250gig+ HD. That's what I'd go for. 

I know Vista has it's problems but as far as I'm concerned, RAM is far more important and 32 bit OS's can't allocate more than 3.2 gigs.


----------



## Easy_Target (Aug 17, 2008)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

Apparently 32 bit windows CAN do it, just not very well.


----------



## Overread (Aug 17, 2008)

I think 32bit vista at least - simply won't deal with more RAM - it will just ignor it and can even crash with certain programs if it approaches its RAM max (ok only one program and its a game....................)

As for the university thinkpad -- probably as with all big education centres with a feature like that they are the cheapest retail laptops they can get -- so I am not surprised that they fail a lot (further 15000 people is a lot of people and booze to break a laptop )


----------



## Easy_Target (Aug 17, 2008)

I'm not surprised either. They probably get them at a wholesale bargain rate, but if it full out breaks and needs to be replaced, it comes out of our pocket at full retail price. The University pockets the difference. Big surprise.


----------



## photogmatt (Aug 17, 2008)

Low end, Macbook
High end, Macbook Pro


----------



## McQueen278 (Aug 17, 2008)

Nothing less than a Macbook.  Buy a PC if you want to save a bunch of amazing pictures to your computer, only to have it infected with a crippling virus and lose everything.


----------



## Alpha (Aug 17, 2008)

Lenovo is releasing a new laptop for photographers. It has a built-in tablet.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 17, 2008)

Alpha said:


> Lenovo is releasing a new laptop for photographers. It has a built-in tablet.


 
If Alpha wasn't blocking me, he'd see that I already said that. :er:


----------



## usayit (Aug 17, 2008)

manaheim said:


> If Alpha wasn't blocking me, he'd see that I already said that. :er:





My vote is MacBook Pro.


----------



## Parkerman (Aug 17, 2008)

McQueen278 said:


> Nothing less than a Macbook.  Buy a PC if you want to save a bunch of amazing pictures to your computer, only to have it infected with a crippling virus and lose everything.





I've been using PC's my whole life, im 20, we got our first computer when i was 6. Never have we had a virus to wipe everything on our harddrive. We've had a small infection here and there, and over the past maybe 6 years of me having my own personal computer, I've never had a serious virus threat that wasn't fixed in like.. 2 min. 

IMO only complete idiots get viruses. 

Btw, did you happen to see where out of the *Sony VAIO, **Fujitsu U810, *and *MacBook Air. *The macbook was hacked in less than 2 min?


----------



## Montana (Aug 18, 2008)

Best laptop I have owned to date is my HP w/ Centrino Duo w/ 3 G with almost 300G of harddrive.  Just get something fast and lots of memory.  This thread can easily turn into a "my system is better than your system" war.  LOL  Most any decent laptop these days will handle your photostorage, viewing and processing with ease.  If more memory is needed later, get an external harddrive to store on.

Derrick


----------



## Easy_Target (Aug 18, 2008)

McQueen278 said:


> Nothing less than a Macbook.  Buy a PC if you want to save a bunch of amazing pictures to your computer, only to have it infected with a crippling virus and lose everything.


For the tech and commonsense illiterate yes. For those who exercise common sense when using a computer, it doesn't happen often. Or perhaps it was because someone clicked on that popup advertisement for "Dirty c*m guzzling sl*ts" and it brought you to a particularly nasty website? (pun intended)

I've been using computers since I was 8, I'm 22 now. I remember when 14k modems were blazing fast. I've had at least 15 computers from then until now. In that time, I've only gotten a total of maybe 10 viruses, none of which were system crippling. Even when I was a budding script kiddy and would visit IE exploit laden sites (netscape was the alternative) and used ICQ (earlier versions were script kiddy playgrounds), I never got infected by anything serious. Primarily because I used good judgement and was tech literate.



Parkerman said:


> I've been using PC's my whole life, im 20, we got our first computer when i was 6. Never have we had a virus to wipe everything on our harddrive. We've had a small infection here and there, and over the past maybe 6 years of me having my own personal computer, I've never had a serious virus threat that wasn't fixed in like.. 2 min.


Hear hear.


----------



## F1addict (Aug 18, 2008)

As much as I hate them, for photography and arts stuff in general get a Mac. They're way overpriced but you do get a great computer loaded with useful programs for what you'll be doing.
I'm kind of considering buying my friends macbook when he upgrades to a macbook pro. But my deep hatred of Macs is stopping me. I'd never buy a mac to replace a desktop but for a laptop they are great computers, also I know how to build a custom desktop and thats what I'm in the process of doing now (Really just extensively upgrading an old HP I bought from my friend for $100, so far new RAM and vid card and its running great but I still need to replace the whole mother board cpu and the ram...again and install a second hard drive to get it where I want, plus a new wide screen monitor) And you can't do all that stuff with a Mac. If I do buy my friends macbook I'll probably partition the hard drive and run Vista or Windows 7 when that comes out because I hate Macs operating system and everything I have now uses windows.

BTW been useing PC's all my life except at school and I've never had a virus of any kind. 8 billion firewalls and antivirus programs FTW!


----------



## Mystwalker (Aug 18, 2008)

Overread said:


> you don't need Vista unless you play games -- that is really the only big reason.
> Most stores will happily "downgrade" a computer from vista to xp if you ask them - and the current edition of xp is well supported, balanced and not as big a system hog.


 
Am not sur Microsoft gives us the choice nowadays.  I heard they stopped selling XP so it's Vista or nothing.  I will gladly PAY to "upgrade" to XP from Vista if it's available.

Positive of Vista is that the 64-bit version can support more then 3MB.  I do not have PShop, but always hear that it will take as much RAM as you can afford to feed it.  Having 8-16MB in system sounds like a good way to speed it up - max RAM I've seen in a notebook is 8MB.

To answer OP - if all you want is to view and store images while on the road, any notebook will work.

If you want to actually do photo stuff (Lightroom, PShop, DPP, etc ...), you want to look at CPU speed.  That Lenovo has some NICE SPECs, but unless you want to multi-task, I doubt quad-core will be any faster then Core 2 Duo.  If the photo application can take advantage of quad-core, it's a different story.  Can PShop take advantage of quad-core?


----------



## Alpha (Aug 18, 2008)

The MacBooks are a terrible choice for anyone working in PS on their laptop w/o a mouse or tablet. Everytime they release a new laptop w/o a right-click button I get more and more infuriated with their refusal to incorporate it in spite of its utility.


----------



## F1addict (Aug 18, 2008)

Quad cores are useless today. From everything I've been told, there is nothing that can really take full advantage of a quad cores power that an average computer user would need. Maybe for things like 3D rendering there great but not for photo editing. A good dual core is all you'd ever need. 

And there's not much wrong with Vista if you get the 64-bit version and have the power in your computer to support it. I've seen people complaining about it being slow but there trying to run it on 1gb of Ram, a slow cpu, and integrated video. XP doesn't even run very fast with that setup when running programs like photoshop. However Windows "7" (which is what they're calling it now) is supposed to be released in a little of a year or two now since Microsoft themselves have completely given up on Vista already.

And you can still buy XP if you know where to look. I believe newegg.com is still selling it. But they stopped making new XP discs back in June. And trying to find a computer with it would be difficult.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2008)

F1addict said:


> Quad cores are useless today. From everything I've been told, there is nothing that can really take full advantage of a quad cores power that an average computer user would need. Maybe for things like 3D rendering there great but not for photo editing. A good dual core is all you'd ever need.
> 
> And there's not much wrong with Vista if you get the 64-bit version and have the power in your computer to support it. I've seen people complaining about it being slow but there trying to run it on 1gb of Ram, a slow cpu, and integrated video. XP doesn't even run very fast with that setup when running programs like photoshop. However Windows "7" (which is what they're calling it now) is supposed to be released in a little of a year or two now since Microsoft themselves have completely given up on Vista already.
> 
> And you can still buy XP if you know where to look. I believe newegg.com is still selling it. But they stopped making new XP discs back in June. And trying to find a computer with it would be difficult.


 
There's a big jump from "most users won't get much use out of a quad core" to "quad cores are useless".  Quad cores are absolutely not useless, though it's certainly possible that they may be overkill.  I'm just starting to work with my dual quad core machine now, so I'll have some first hand experience on that in the coming weeks.

As far as Vista is concerned... it's a horrible piece of junk, seriously.  Everyone in the industry is up in arms about it, and not just in the usual way that people complain about new OSes (everyone complained about XP as well)

Vista is bloated beyond bloat, it is ridiculously and annoyingly overprotective to a fault, it spends more time worrying about DRM and whether or not you're allowed to use your content, than it does actually allowing you to view it, etc.

The only thing good about it is that it's pretty and it handles multi-core procs better than XP does.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2008)

Arch said:


> Well.. as general advice, as with anything in life you get what you pay for.
> 
> All the anti-Dell users should certainly edit thier posts and insert 'IMO' next to thier statements
> You can not paint the entire Dell range and service with the same brush, thier machines perform completely different depending on which series and spec you go for... and thier customer service, like any major company, will vary depending on staff, location, type of enquiry... etc etc...
> ...


 
I've been a bit more brief in this thread than I should be, in part because I'm wary of the whole "MAC SUCKS!!! AMIGA RULZ!!!" foolishness that comes up so much in these threads.

You are, however, totally right... I should toss IMOs everywhere.

That being said, I also re-read my post on Dell and I didn't give them enough credit where credit is due.  They absolutely can be flimsy, though the XPS machines are pretty much their "sexy" line, so probably not the same as the more typical home or business series machines.  (did you have the uber XPS or the entry point model?)

Dell is a good workhorse of a machine, backed by a company that knows how to support and service their models.  They have a line of uber stuff for those so inclined.  All in all, you really can't go wrong with a good Dell.  Of course, buy the cheapest of the cheap, and as Arch said... you get what you pay for.

Apologize for sounding like I was bashing them.  TBH, I was actually kind of amused by my flex-o-Dell.  As much as I abused it and had to re-bend it back into shape, it always worked.  It still works... it's like 6? 8? years old... it's my 6 year-old daughter's computer now and she loves it.


----------



## Parkerman (Aug 18, 2008)

manaheim said:


> There's a big jump from "most users won't get much use out of a quad core" to "quad cores are useless".  Quad cores are absolutely not useless, though it's certainly possible that they may be overkill.  I'm just starting to work with my dual quad core machine now, so I'll have some first hand experience on that in the coming weeks.
> 
> As far as Vista is concerned... it's a horrible piece of junk, seriously.  Everyone in the industry is up in arms about it, and not just in the usual way that people complain about new OSes (everyone complained about XP as well)
> 
> ...




Turn of the User Account Control and the whole "are you sure you want to do this" goes away.


----------



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2008)

Parkerman said:


> Turn of the User Account Control and the whole "are you sure you want to do this" goes away.


 
Reducing the list of horrifying offenses by a total of 1.


----------



## Rosie. (Aug 19, 2008)

I don't know if someone's already said this, but definitely don't go vista. Worst choice ever, I've had mine for a couple of months, and I've had to system restore 4 or 5 times, which wipes the computer of all the files you created.


----------



## Overread (Aug 19, 2008)

I would say if you go vista pay extra and get Vista Ultimate - it seems to be far more stable and smooth than the home editions


----------



## Parkerman (Aug 19, 2008)

Rosie. said:


> I don't know if someone's already said this, but definitely don't go vista. Worst choice ever, I've had mine for a couple of months, and I've had to system restore 4 or 5 times, which wipes the computer of all the files you created.





I've had my current computer for a year now, which has vista on it. Not once have I had a problem out of it. And if you do a system restore correctly, It will just restore it back to when there were no problems. 

After changing the User Account Control I've had no problems at all with vista... other than it likes to use about a gig of ram.


----------



## Village Idiot (Aug 19, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Well, if you want games that require DX10...
> 
> And TBH, Vista needs to burn a slow and painful death. Vista is the worst thing to come out of Redmond... since... well, ever...


 
I've been using Ultimate since launch. Works fine for me.



McQueen278 said:


> Nothing less than a Macbook. Buy a PC if you want to save a bunch of amazing pictures to your computer, only to have it infected with a crippling virus and lose everything.


 
Macbooks also suck because of the tiny screen. There's no way you'd catch me trying to use something like that for editing photos.



Overread said:


> I would say if you go vista pay extra and get Vista Ultimate - it seems to be far more stable and smooth than the home editions


 
I think business is the next step up from home. The only difference between business and ultimate is the bit locker drive encryption.


----------



## photo28 (Aug 19, 2008)

Are Dells any good?


----------



## tkaat (Aug 20, 2008)

Parkerman said:


> I've had my current computer for a year now, which has vista on it. Not once have I had a problem out of it. *And if you do a system restore correctly, It will just restore it back to when there were no problems. *



I had to, after deleting a program wrongly (had my for a year now 2, and it was really easily and I didn't lose any data but did get the program back but uninstalling it again worked

I was thinking of getting a new laptop myself in a while - a sony FW which most people say is good for the price, $1200 ( I know amazing for sony), but still can't decide if i should get it or if a macbook pro is *really* worth the extra $800 (which i could have to go for photoshop CS3 and Lightroom2 acedemic)


----------



## Raze (Sep 4, 2008)

Village Idiot said:


> Macbooks also suck because of the tiny screen. There's no way you'd catch me trying to use something like that for editing photos.


*There's no way i'd by ANY laptop for photo editing*, the screens just don't cut it (but you could get a monitor to plug into it when you are at home and the mac studio monitors are great).
Photoshop is very memory hungry - both kinds of memory, thinking and storing, as it uses the hard drive as a scratch disk, so make sure you have plenty of both.
I use mac at work (oh I love my brand new 24" imac ) and a great PC at home (my hubby's in IT so has built it from scratch) but for graphic work I prefer the mac.


----------



## chrisburke (Sep 4, 2008)

I've never used anything but my macbook for photography and I have no complaints at all.. i grab my macbook, go to starbucks grab a coffee and edit away... i've never had anything buy good results.

2 things.. someone complained about photoshop on a macbook.. i think they were saying its slow.. I use photoshop every day, for a lot of stuff (i'm a graphic designer in my spare time) and photoshop runs just fine on my macbook.. obviously it runs better on macbook pro, but i've never had any issues with my macbook running it.

also someone complained about no right click.. if you know anything about macs, you know that the macbooks do have a right click.. if you have it set up properly all you do is place 2 fingers on the track pad and click the mouse button... i have no issues with this.. and if you cant figure that out, buy the mighty mouse, or any usb mouse with a right click, but the macbook does have it..


----------



## chrisburke (Sep 4, 2008)

photo28 said:


> Are Dells any good?



not at all


----------



## usayit (Sep 4, 2008)

chrisburke said:


> if you know anything about macs, you know that the macbooks do have a right click.. if you have it set up properly all you do is place 2 fingers on the track pad and click the mouse button... i have no issues with this.. and if you cant figure that out, buy the mighty mouse, or any usb mouse with a right click, but the macbook does have it..



It is really funny how so little people know about that feature...  

My vote is for a Mac and those that have been around here a while know why.  I'm also in the camp that editing should be done with a nice monitor rather than on the laptop display.


----------



## usayit (Sep 4, 2008)

photo28 said:


> Are Dells any good?



At my work, we've had quality issues with Dells but nothing too major.  Unfortunately, my mother-in-law has already exchanged her laptop 3 times and is currently trying to work up the food chain at Dell to get her issues resolved.  She would have an even sharper opinion of Dell.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 4, 2008)

chrisburke said:


> I've never used anything but my macbook for photography and I have no complaints at all.. i grab my macbook, go to starbucks grab a coffee and edit away... i've never had anything buy good results.
> 
> 2 things.. someone complained about photoshop on a macbook.. i think they were saying its slow.. I use photoshop every day, for a lot of stuff (i'm a graphic designer in my spare time) and photoshop runs just fine on my macbook.. obviously it runs better on macbook pro, but i've never had any issues with my macbook running it.
> 
> also someone complained about no right click.. if you know anything about macs, you know that the macbooks do have a right click.. if you have it set up properly all you do is place 2 fingers on the track pad and click the mouse button... i have no issues with this.. and if you cant figure that out, buy the mighty mouse, or any usb mouse with a right click, but the macbook does have it..


 
Doesn't that strike you as a _little_ silly?  This is the kind of thing that really burns my biscuits with Apple.  "We're different, we're special, we don't need or want your silly right mouse button!"... and then jump through hoops for the same functionality that having such a button would provide.

Doofy.



chrisburke said:


> not at all


 
You are a professed Mac user and have "never used anything but my macbook for photography"... don't you think, maybe, you are a little biased? 

Dells as a whole are "fine", but there is also a wide range of "Dells" from the Alienware and XPS devices down to the clunkiest cheapest consumer-grade notebook you can get.  They all work and are pretty reliable and reasonably well designed, but some are better suited to certain situations than others.

Personally, I like Lenovo machines better, but Dells are "fine".

You get what you pay for, and you need to choose carefully.


----------



## usayit (Sep 4, 2008)

A lot of Windows users with low opinions of Mac rarely have any signficant experience working in a Mac environment. 

A lot of Mac users come from a background of Windows environments and decided Mac is better suited for them.

Its just an observation....



btw... I don't think the two button mouse functionality is silly considering that other functionality is also tied to touching two fingers on the touch pad.. scrolling for example.

two versus one button is no different from those used to 5 button mouses or perhaps 6 button mice.   I could easily argue that a three button mouse is silly compared to a programmable 6 button mouse.  Its all silly....

You know what I think is silly... the selection (lack of) ergonomic lefty mice...



Speaking of Lenovo... they released a laptop supposedly geared towards graphic artists with a built in graphics tablet.  Anyone see one in person?


----------



## Arch (Sep 4, 2008)

photo28 said:


> Are Dells any good?



My XPS M1710 is very good.

Take all the power and graphics of a mid to high range Alienware media laptop, remove the Alienware logo add a glowing Dell one, take away the (old and infamous) bad customer support from a high end Alienware (as they are now the same company), and replace with Dell's good customer support = one happy camper...

Anyone who says Dell are rubbish are basing thier opinions on the LOW END market which Dell have admittedly grown a reputation for supplying.


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 4, 2008)

chrisburke said:


> not at all


 
Crap. I should throw out my 4 year old desktop, 2 year old desktop, and 1 1/2 year old notebook then.


----------



## chrisburke (Sep 4, 2008)

please allow me to back up my stance on Dells.  I am a mac user, so yes, that obviously plays some of my role in saying any windows based machine sucks.. however.. dells I have experience with.  

In my office I am the only mac user.  The rest of the staff use Dells.. and I make fun of them every day for it...  I got my MacBook, for example, 2 years ago... it is flawless.. and I use it way harder than the other staff.  Our other staff have high end dells.. couldnt tell you which ones, as I dont care... they bought dell laptops 3 years ago.. spent a boat load of money.. 

now please know, that these guys use these laptops for pretty basic stuff... email, surfing, some very LIGHT video editing, some photoshop stuff.. last year, all 4 staff had to replace the laptops (which were only 2 years old) they spent around $1500 on these laptops... 2 years later they crapped out... one guy had a monitor go, another totally lost his cd drive (burner) it wouldnt work at all anymore, and the other 2 guys lost their mother boards... that means, this year, all of our staff, except me, had to go buy new laptops... so in the past 3 years, they have all now spent about $3000 on their laptops (not to mention the cost for servicing in between, as well as the cost for things like Norton, which you need on those windows machines) now their whole complaint to me was "i'd love to switch to mac, but they are so darn expensive" 

now lets looks at the break down here.. 2 years ago i spent 1600 on my laptop and I upgraded the ram about 6 months later to 2gb which cost 200 from CanadaRam.com... so now I've put about 1800, plus 79 for iWork.. so under 1900.. and my macbook is STILL going strong, and I havent even had so much as a freeze... now these guys, who are very computer savvy.. who also said "macs are to expensive" in the past 3 years have spent $1500 on the first laptop, lets be generous and say that in the 2 years they had them it only cost them each about 100 bucks for servicing (trust me it cost more than that) and now, this year, they spent another $1500 on them.. plus had to upgrade norton.. so lets be generous and say that they've only spent 1600 + 100 for servicing... so if my math  is right, each of these guys have spent (in the past 3 years) $3200 on laptops, which are already starting to have problems..

so if you look at that from abusiness stance these 4 guys have cost the business $12,800 in the last 3 years, JUST on computers... while I, with my lone mac, have only cost the business less than $1900

PLEASE NOTE: I have no quams with Dell, infact I use a dell monitor extended from my laptop in my office... but, look at those numbers, and tell me who was the smarter person???

also note the pic below.. my office setup... i do use an external mouse (the might mouse) which has 6 buttons I believe (i use 4 of them) but when I'm not in the office, i have no problem with the track pad mouse, and it took no time at all to get use to..


----------



## dhilberg (Sep 4, 2008)

usayit said:
			
		

> You know what I think is silly... the selection (lack of) ergonomic lefty mice...



I gave up on that many years ago and just learned to use mice right-handed, among other things like the guitar, can openers, etc. Saved me a lot of trouble.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 4, 2008)

Amigaz Rul!


----------



## juane414 (Sep 4, 2008)

I've had my Dell XPS M1530 for about a month now and wouldn't give it up for anything else.  It cost $1,600 and has a WUXGA+ 1920x1200 display, which is great for viewing pictures.  It also has a 2.4ghz core 2 duo and 4gb of ram, so its plenty fast.  Another thing I like about it is that it has a 5-in-1 card reader so I can just plug my SD card right in the front of the PC from the camera, its a lot faster and cleaner than using the cable.  

I've seen some people say that Macs are better because they don't crash.  Well, guess what?  Vista doesn't crash either.  As long as you keep Vista up to date it won't crash.  I've been using Vista for a year on two different computers, and haver never seen it crash once.  Vista is far superior to XP.  

I say no to the macbook pro because its overpriced for what you get.  I say no to the macbook because it only has 1280x1024 resolution, no multi-card reader, and no HDMI.  The HDMI on my Dell is priceless because I can connect my computer to my Parents 46" 1080p LCD TV and show off my pictures is High-Def glory.

I took this screenshot for you.  The smaller image is the same image that is my wallpaper, but in 1280x1024 resolution.  This will give you an idea of how much more you can see with 1920x1200 (WUXGA+).


----------



## Village Idiot (Sep 4, 2008)

Replacing a whole laptop because of a bad cd drive or screen? That's what's really wasting your company's money.

I've had two MBP's. The first had the casing bent up when I received it and lines in the LCD. The second came with crooked keys and the power button fell into the case after the first month.

My company had about 150 Dell machines. I rarely had to do anything to machines outside of fixing things the users screwed up. On occasion there was a dead CD drive, but you call Dell service and they send a knew one. We're still using several machines for heavy microfilm scanning operations and these machines are probably 5-6 years old.

Dells can be real work horses for the price.


----------



## joecoulsonphotography (Sep 4, 2008)

Does anyone have a tablet? I run two Gateway (not the retail cheapie's) tablets and love the interface with PS and Capture NX. It makes touching up a photo a breeze.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 4, 2008)

Look, this is all very silly.

Having anyone cite their specific anecdotal evidence of why MACS RULE, PCS DROOL! or vise versa is pointless.  For every single person out there that claims that their Mac never fails, I can find you a person who can claim that their PC never fails, and vise versa.  For every single person that claims that their PC is the cheapest and most efficient in the office, I can find you one that claims their Mac is as well.

I've seen 30+ IT environments in my 15ish years of running IT organizations.  I've supported IBM AS400s, Dells, Gateways, HPs, Macintoshes (from IIcxes on up)... UNIX of nearly every flavor, Windows of nearly every variety, MacOS, DOS... servers, desktops, peripherals... you name it...  yes, even Amigas and oddball things like NeXT stations.  I have seriously supported a LOT of hardware and software in my time.

There is one simple and undeniable fact: They all suck when used improperly, and they all work great when used the way they should be.    _This has as much to do with proper management as it does with proper selection of the tool to fit the job, and in truth has VERY little to do with how overall awesome any given choice is._

Hell, I know people (yes, I seriously do) who very happily use their Coleco Adam to do ALL of their work and think that us people on modern day PCs are completely off their fuggin' rocker.  Seriously, see this.

So please, everyone stop before I have to tear my eyes out.  If you don't I'm gonna go out and start googling for ancient threads that literally boil down to...

AMIGA RULZ!  MAC DROOLZ!
NO, AMIGA SUCKS!  MAC RULZ!
(repeat 1000x)

...and start posting them in this thread.


----------



## juane414 (Sep 4, 2008)

photo28 said:


> Are Dells any good?



Inspirons?  Not so much...
Vostro?  Not so much...

XPS?  Amazing!
Latitude?  Very Nice!
Studio?  Never used one but they seem pretty solid.


----------



## bevin (Sep 4, 2008)

FWIW IMHO etc etc...

I have a MacBook and I love it. Granted I'm a total noob here but I use it for all the basics, along with Photoshop, bits of movie editing, WOW etc and I have no issues with it. It's about 2 years old now and is as good as the day I got it, though I'm buying a 500Gb hard drive for it soon as 100Gb just isn't enough even with external hds.

Before this one I had a PowerBook and that was a m a z i n g. I dropped it at least 5 times from about 5ft to concrete - I had a stupid laptop backpack with a side zip which I would regularly forget to zip up (yeah I know i'm an eejit!). Anyway, it got a tiny bit dented but each time it continued to work perfectly and I've never had an issue with it. Now it's 6+ years old and I still have it as a second internet machine for BF.

I've been using computers since I was about 3 or 4 and went from PC to Apple Mac to Windows and now back to Apple. Unless Apple f**k up completely I don't envision myself switching back. Both my computer geek brothers and my parents are all converts also.

Again, IMHO...


----------



## jakedoza (Sep 4, 2008)

NYSTalents said:


> I am an advanced amateur photographer looking purchasing a laptop using on all my indoor and outdoor photo shoting, as I shot on the same time picture appear on the laptop monitor to check the quality of each shot and save. What type Laptop? Is Dell a good choice? Which hardware? Which Software?
> 
> Thank you




Its funny that these discussions show up on a photo forum and not in a computer tech forum.
I believe that something like this was discussed a while back.... oh yeah... it was here:

http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=126122

as in that thread that I posted in I will post here..
I did not read any ones reply to this post before writing this because I do not want anyone to feel like I'm bashing their intelligence in any way.

I am a computer tech (hardware, repair, networking) and have been for 12 years. What I will tell you comes only from experience.

There are several questions you will need to ask your self before even considering the questions you have asked us. 

1. will this be your only system for photo editing and everyday use?
2. what type of system do you have now?
3. is this replacing/upgrading a system you have now, or is this system only going to be used on sites to display images taken with your camera?
4. How deep are your pockets?
5. and I probably missed a few..

as you have probably read from all the previous posts, that I have not read yet, there are people that will tell you their likes and dislikes and this is better than that and so on.. well.. I am going to do the same, but I will tell you all of this from a technical standpoint and be as neutral as possible.

First thing you will need to know is that a laptop is not the best way to edit or store photos.. it doesn't matter if it is a MAC or a PC.
This is why...
There is this thing called a hard drive in ALL laptops that is subject to damage EVERY time the machine is moved. You have to ask your self.. How important are the items on my laptop.
Now if you are simply wanting a laptop to show off the images after you take them to show your clients and then edit/store them on a DESKTOP machine elsewhere.. then really your pocket book is the limit. I personally would buy a toshiba or a lenovo, but that is personal and I'm not getting into that. From a technical stand point.. I'd stick with a big name PC and ALWAYS get the extended warranty. I would not go with a MAC simply because they are more expensive to work on if need be.. but if cost is no issue then a MAC is s great laptop especially since the screens are calibrated. If you want to go with a MAC you have to think about compatibility with what you are already using, other wise be prepaired to spend more money.

If you just want the laptop to check the quality of the photos before saving.. then you are wasting your time.. get a large memory card and shoot shoot shoot and shoot.. check your images later and toss the ones that did not come out. If you cant seem to get your photos like you want them, then you just need more practice at taking photos.


I could go on and on and on about the subject of what computer system is better and how to manage photos and data and things people probably never think of. Bottom line is.. what works for me will not work for everyone, because people are ignorant when it comes to technology. in fact.. I just recovered all the photos from an external hard drive from a photographer (including our engagement photos), because she did things different. She has now changed the way she does things, but a lot of people are stuck in their ways and will not change unless something catestrophic happens to them to make them change. 

Think hard about what you want and ask yourself more questions.. If you have more questions feel free to ask.

..now to go read all the replies to this post.. yay!


----------



## jakedoza (Sep 4, 2008)

manaheim said:


> Look, this is all very silly.
> 
> Having anyone cite their specific anecdotal evidence of why MACS RULE, PCS DROOL! or vise versa is pointless.  For every single person out there that claims that their Mac never fails, I can find you a person who can claim that their PC never fails, and vise versa.  For every single person that claims that their PC is the cheapest and most efficient in the office, I can find you one that claims their Mac is as well.
> 
> ...



+10

good answer...
BTW.. everyone who said "buy a mac because they are better and don't get viruses" 
stick the MAC  where the sun don't shine and learn how to use a computer..
In the past 10 years I have NEVER contracted a computer virus on my PC.. If you watch what emails you open and stay off the porno sites and other illegitimate sites you will not have that problem. 
Don't get me wrong.. I'd buy a MAC, they are great computers.. but that is a LAME reason to buy a MAC..
But then again.. they are made for the technically challenged to run them... Do people that own MACs use AOL???


----------

