# netbook that allows cs4?



## henkelphoto (Sep 10, 2009)

Hi guys!

  I'm interested in getting one of those little netbook computers (the ones with a 10" screen) for travel. But all I've found say they have a 1.6 ghz processor. CS4 says it needs a 2.0 ghz processor. 

  Has anyone tried to load CS4 on one of these? Alternately, are there any programs that will process NEF images that can run on a 1.6 ghz processor that won't take all day (read: Capture NX)?

  Thanks!


----------



## boogschd (Sep 10, 2009)

i dont think a netbook for raw processing is such a good idea :/

not entirely sure though... maybe theres some new more powerful netbooks out there


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Sep 10, 2009)

I'm guessing it's asking a little much of a Netbook, though I do know a few people who've tried one with audio recording software (Cakewalk Sonar) successfully, so it might be worth trying - your mileage may vary though, as they say.


----------



## Garbz (Sep 11, 2009)

Given all netbooks these days come with Vista, and Micro$oft in a desperate money grab decided that netbooks only qualify for cheap vista if they have 1GB or less of RAM they really don't make a very suitable photo editing application.

Even on a windows XP computer I would be cautious about running the latest photoshop on such a low speced machine. Infortunately they are called Netbooks because surfing the net is about all they are good for


----------



## Big Mike (Sep 11, 2009)

I think they can be useful for backing up your images in-the-field/on-the-job...but they are probably not the best solution for any sort of serious editing.

You could also easily use one that is tethered to your camera while shooting, creating instant back-up and/or giving you a lot of memory capacity.


----------



## NateWagner (Sep 11, 2009)

I agree with the above posters that I would not recommend using a netbook with Adobe CS4... That being said, it is possible to put photoshop cs4 on a netbook, and it loads relatively quickly. However, once you start to open images and do anything with it, it will go exceptionally slow.


----------



## dizzyg44 (Sep 11, 2009)

ubuntu and gimp it.........

Not ideal, but neither is processing out in the field, but it would get your through until you return


----------



## henkelphoto (Sep 11, 2009)

I guess this is one of those "It seemed like a good idea at the time," moments. My thought was not to work the photos, but at least to view them. The netbook seems like such a good idea for travelling. Maybe I can get my View NX  program to work, or I can just shoot jpeg while travelling  and load my old PS7 program. 

Jerry


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Sep 11, 2009)

That actually seems a less taxing use of a Netbook. You can replace the standard RAM card with a 2Gb version which would help. What I would look at is whether you need CS4 just to view the images, the software that came with the camera may well be all you need and I'm guessing would be less of an imposition on the Netbooks' resources than CS4. I might even look at doing that with mine now I come to think about it.


----------



## patrickt (Sep 12, 2009)

I have a netbook with Lightroom for travelling. It's painfully slow. I would never use it for editing. I download my raw files to it for storage and edit when I get home.


----------



## 512 (Sep 12, 2009)

netbook = internet,mail and so on, not cs4 or cad...


----------



## NateWagner (Sep 12, 2009)

if all you are wanting to do is to view the photos that is not a problem at all. I often bring a netbook with me to weddings for backing up the photos onto a larger hard drive and then can easily browse through the photos if I desire. You may have to download some basic software but you shouldn't need CS4 to do it.


----------



## Antithesis (Sep 12, 2009)

You can edit photos, just one at a time. No batching... period. I've installed a stripped down version of WinXP using nLite (nlite.com), and that frees up memory for other purposes and reduces the system processes, giving you more available CPU as well. I'm on an Acer Aspire One AA150. 

Maybe look at an older version of PS? Or just try not to multitask... and get one with atleast a gig of ram. I think the MSI Wind takes 2 gigs of RAM and has a "turbo" mode that overclocks the CPU to around 2GHz. Might be your best bet.


----------



## krayola (Sep 12, 2009)

Like Antithesis, I imagine that using older software like CS2 and XP might work fine.  1GB used to be a large amount of RAM, so I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Anyone with XP able to check how much RAM PS and/or ACR consume on a 10+MP image?


----------



## henkelphoto (Sep 12, 2009)

Well, I've got a copy of PS7, but you can't do raw on that version. Anything else is not available except for CS4. And no, I don't believe in or use bootleg software (just in case anyone might suggest it).

Jerry


----------



## photograhpy (Sep 12, 2009)

I think they can be useful


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Sep 15, 2009)

Just as a brief update, I've been playing around with my Samsung NC10 (upgraded to 2 GB RAM) to see what it can do on this score. I did succeed in installing the various utilities that came with my 5DII without too many difficulties. The only limitation I found was that the installer requires a minimum screen resolution of 1024 x 768 - most Netbooks have a res of 1024 x 600 - this can be got round though by forcing it to accept a non-standard resolution for the screen, it just means you end up scrolling the screen up and down to see everything.

Once installed, you can reduce the resolution back down to 1024 x 600 without a problem, but I did find that DPP would not run set like that - it needs the same resolution as the installer. The EOS utilities and ZoomBrowser EX work just fine. I downloaded a sample set of RAW files to the NC10 and was able to view what I needed with no particular issues. I didn't try any editing however.

My initial impression is that it could be used as a handy storage/viewing device when away from my normal editing computer, but I'm not sure I'd like to attempt any editing on it. Perhaps when I get a moment, I'll try resetting the screen resolution to 1024 x 768 again and see how it performs with DPP.


----------



## bigtwinky (Sep 15, 2009)

While I can understand the amount of resources needed for CS4, but I image that Lightroom is somewhat less intense in terms of requirements?


----------



## henkelphoto (Sep 15, 2009)

Unfortunately, Lightroom still requires a chip with a 2Mghz speed. I think I'll get one anyway and try to load View NX on it.

Jerry


----------



## scyzoryk_o4 (Sep 16, 2009)

i use cs2 on my asus 1101.. its not as fast as my mbp but it does the job even on raw files


----------



## Jaszek (Sep 16, 2009)

I have an ASUS EeePC 1000HE and upgraded the ram to 2gb with windows 7 (im about to install Mac OS X on it just for the hell of it ) and CS4 runs but pretty slow, but it's usable.


----------



## ScottsdaleImages (Sep 17, 2009)

Ok, here's the poop from the IT sales guy. Netbooks are definately not designed for that kind of use. Surfing the web, a little music, basic essentials. The smaller processor is what makes the battery last 3-4 hrs on a 3 cell, which a full size notebook would chew up in an hour. And if you have Vista on it, forget it. That thing is  resource hog. 
Now, on the good side. Windows 7 comes out next month and that is a more powerful OS with less footprint than XP, so getting a Netbook then, with the potentially newer processors Intel is developing might change that.
I think the netbook is a great "in the field" resource to dump your images. But trying to do anything else will probably give you a headache.


----------



## Garbz (Sep 17, 2009)

7 has less footprint than Vista, definitely not XP. In fact footprint size it's the same as Vista, but better scheduling of UI, and better memory management make it feel much snappier. 
Poop from someone running Windows 7, it's fantastic on a quad core with 4GB or RAM (modern hardware), but I definitely would get XP if I had a netbook (which are typically about as fast as my computer 3 years ago).


----------



## ScottsdaleImages (Sep 17, 2009)

Hmmm I had an MS VP in my office today and he indicted less footprint. As did the Sales Team that was here to launch it with us. I'll have to wait and see. Those that have tried it say that "it's what Vista was supposed to be" 

And you will be hard pressed to find an XP Netbook soon!


----------



## delizo23 (Oct 27, 2009)

so can you use a netbook to view your files on the spot. if you have the wireless battery grip and can transmit your pictures instantly from you camera to your laptop wirelessly and quickly? would it be slow viewing huge 12mp Raw files? just viewing, not editing. 2 GB ram.


----------



## itznfb (Oct 27, 2009)

I have used an Acer Aspire One to review shots and used PS CS4 on it. Was slow with CS4 and slow loading ViewNX. Once ViewNX loaded it was fine. I ditched the netbook and just went back to my Dell M1330 because of the processing power and screen. The netbook monitors are crap. The M1330 has an amazing screen and just about as powerful as a standard desktop. Plus it barely weighs any more than the netbook.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 27, 2009)

ScottsdaleImages said:


> Hmmm I had an MS VP in my office today and he indicted less footprint. As did the Sales Team that was here to launch it with us. I'll have to wait and see. Those that have tried it say that "it's what Vista was supposed to be"
> 
> And you will be hard pressed to find an XP Netbook soon!



Min spec for 7 is a lot more than that of XP.  It's an improvement on Vista, but it's not smaller than XP.  There's no doubt plenty of XP notebooks stocked so it won't be going away just yet.

Just to reiterate; this is not what netbooks were designed for.  Tablet PC would be more along the right lines.  But they're 6 times the price of a netbook.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 27, 2009)

itznfb said:


> I have used an Acer Aspire One to review shots and used PS CS4 on it. Was slow with CS4 and slow loading ViewNX. Once ViewNX loaded it was fine. I ditched the netbook and just went back to my Dell M1330 because of the processing power and screen. The netbook monitors are crap. The M1330 has an amazing screen and just about as powerful as a standard desktop. Plus it barely weighs any more than the netbook.



XPS laptops are fine when they work.  But they're nowhere near as reliable as a Latitude... not as reliable as an Inspiron either I'd say.


----------



## itznfb (Oct 27, 2009)

oxcart said:


> itznfb said:
> 
> 
> > I have used an Acer Aspire One to review shots and used PS CS4 on it. Was slow with CS4 and slow loading ViewNX. Once ViewNX loaded it was fine. I ditched the netbook and just went back to my Dell M1330 because of the processing power and screen. The netbook monitors are crap. The M1330 has an amazing screen and just about as powerful as a standard desktop. Plus it barely weighs any more than the netbook.
> ...



They use the same mainboards, cpus, ram, optical drives, and other internal parts. Plus they have metal hinges and a more rugged exterior. So I don't see why they would be any less reliable. I've had 2 XPS laptops now and they are absolute tanks.


----------



## usayit (Oct 27, 2009)

MSI Wind with 2GB running Lightroom .  Screen too small and it is slow but still "ok".  I use it to review my photos while away from home.  You are better off with a full laptop.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 28, 2009)

itznfb said:


> oxcart said:
> 
> 
> > itznfb said:
> ...



There's absolutely no comparison in build quality.  Latitude is far superior.  And internally they're not the same.  They're sparkly and fancy and attractive.  But if you're looking for a workhorse run far, far away from them.    

I'd also add - the M1330 max resolution isn't fantastic either.  Again; inferior to a similarly priced Latitude.  Obviously it's smaller though - the price you pay for portability I guess.


----------



## itznfb (Oct 28, 2009)

oxcart said:


> itznfb said:
> 
> 
> > oxcart said:
> ...



How is an all plastic Latitude far superior to an almost all aluminum XPS? No Dell even comes close to an XPS in terms of build quality. And yes, Dell laptops from the same generation all use the same parts.


----------



## tirediron (Oct 28, 2009)

I have NX 1 on my netbook, but it's an emergency-only sort of thing, and crunching a full-size NEF file is generally a 'go for coffee' evolution.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 28, 2009)

itznfb said:


> How is an all plastic Latitude far superior to an almost all aluminum XPS? No Dell even comes close to an XPS in terms of build quality. And yes, Dell laptops from the same generation all use the same parts.



I fear we've drifted off topic, but in any case; XPS laptops are consumer laptops.  Latitude laptops are business grade.  You think metal automatically means better?  That doesn't really make much sense.  Latitude laptops are built better than XPSs are.

I'll not list all the little problems with XPS laptops, but they have well known issues with cooling, their batteries and their power supplies.  If it's light use, they're fine.  But they're not business class machines, they're not very reliable, and I wouldn't personally care to own one.

XPS is like putting a turbo on a 1 litre car.


----------



## itznfb (Oct 28, 2009)

How are they not reliable? I've owned several Latitudes and this is my 3rd XPS. Having owned both I can definitely say the XPS is far superior in terms of reliability and build quality. And yes, considering the cheap plastic they use in the Latitude line metal does automatically mean better. The Latitude chassis starts to crack and fall apart after about 6 months of moderate use. The XPS chassis is an absolute tank and virtually indestructible.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 28, 2009)

itznfb said:


> How are they not reliable? I've owned several Latitudes and this is my 3rd XPS. Having owned both I can definitely say the XPS is far superior in terms of reliability and build quality. And yes, considering the cheap plastic they use in the Latitude line metal does automatically mean better. The Latitude chassis starts to crack and fall apart after about 6 months of moderate use. The XPS chassis is an absolute tank and virtually indestructible.



Can I ask what you do for a living?


----------



## itznfb (Oct 28, 2009)

Sure. It's in my profile. I'm a System Administrator. Spent years maintaining several thousand Dell Latitudes before switching to a real business class laptop with the HP EliteBook when I worked as a desktop administrator. That being said. Each XPS I've has been built with a much higher grade chassis than both the Latitude and EliteBook. It's the reason I carry the XPS with me in the field and the only reason I continue to discuss it in this thread as I feel (in my opinion) that the XPS is the best solution... although it's a bit expensive if picture review is all it's being used for.


----------



## oxcart (Oct 28, 2009)

Then there must be a difference due to location; Dell have been making changes in their setup in Europe.  A number of their larger production centres are moving or have moved.  It's a little bit incredible for me to hear anyone defend XPS build quality - it's routinely mocked here.  In a similar way; XPS desktops that we occasionally source are nowhere near as stable or reliable as Optiplexs.  

XPS laptops (over here at least) are total junk.


----------



## Roncgizmo (Nov 7, 2009)

How do you feel about Mac? I wanted to buy a Netbook myself a few months ago and the more I looked into it the more I changed my mind.. 

I bought a 12" iBook for about the same price. It's a 1.33G4/160/1.5 I'm using CS3 and lightroom 2 on it and it works much better then I thought it would, So much that I haven't touched my main laptop since I bought the mac.


----------

