[trurl]

gearheads please weigh in.

i need a viable desktop replacement but am not sure about the state of laptop tech. last time i seriously looked was a couple of years ago and the hardware just wasn't there yet. it looks like things have changed. i don't care how heavy, hot or loud it gets i just want the most mobile muscle available for primarily photoshop i.e. fastest chip available, 2G ram, 7200rpm drives, 17"screen, etc.

i've noticed:
-the dell chips are 2GHz max.

-the sony vaios and toshibas are similar speeds and really really expensive.

-the apple chip speeds are mediocre and haven't changed in a couple of years and you can't get 7200rpm drives in them.

i've narrowed it down to the HP zd8000 series. i understand that the 3.4GHz chip is an actual desktop chip [not a M series etc] and you can put 7200rpm drives in it, max ram, etc.
in the past i heard HP was bad product but supposedly HP's reputation for hardware and service has changed considerably for the better [they don't use substandard parts anymore?]

i would appreciate any advice the community could offer - thanks
t

[eyewoo]

I just purchased a Dell Inspiron 9300 with a 17" screen and two gigs of RAM... I've had it for about two weeks, and do not see going back to my custom 2 processor, 2 monitor system...

This is not the system you are looking for, but I'm real happy with it. Especially the horizontally elongated screen... Works nicely with Photoshop resources on one screen, tucked over on the right side.
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[FallDamage]

I was always under the impression that macs were the graphic designer system of choice. Have things changed?

[eyewoo]

That was once the case.... few years back...
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[trurl]

thanks eyewoo. do you have any crits on the dell? i've been looking at that system and it looks quite nice - that is my second choice. however i am assuming the 3.4GHz chip on the HP is faster than the 2 or 2.13 on the dell. they are both intel processors. the dell is an M series which i understand to be slower on average than the comparable desktop chip. the hp has a pentium 4 with HT which i understand to be generally the current fastest..[not counting xeons etc]? i know chip speed ratings are a confusing mess but the P4 is supposed to be the same chip in actual desktops so i assume it would run the same speed as a comparable desktop?

what about the screen on that dell? i've never liked the laptop screens - they change too much with viewing angle etc.


can anyone speak to the speed comparison on these two?

[eyewoo]

I actually have the lesser 9300 with the 1.6 chip. It seems to run Photoshop faster than my old dual 1.5 gig processor desktop system. At any rate, I'm happy with it. I spent my money juicing up the RAM as high as possible - - 2 gigs. If I'd gone for the 2 gig processor as well, it would have been tooo expensive.... trade-offs, eh!
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[Impaler]

My mom has a 3 ghz Pentium 4 HP laptop. It works better than the 2.4 ghz desktop I'm on now. Battery consumption is pretty conspicuous if you don't have the bulky DC battery connected, thought you could expect that from a greedy desktop CPU. There hasn't been a problem with hardware yet. The LCD is gorgeous. It came bundled with a DVD-RW drive. It's a little heavy, but it's about what you would expect from a screen that size.

The only real issue I have with the machine is the bundled video card (64 mb Radeon 9200). I can't speak from any real experience with regards to upgrading laptop hardware, but if you plan on playing games on a laptop, opt for a better card. If not, then an HP should do you just fine for graphics, browsing, music.
_________________
QED, sort of.

[Gort]

[B0b]

i'd be looking at a dual core amd64 laptop right now..

[trurl]

why?

[Impaler]

The 64-bit edition of Windows is supposed to be released within a year, which would make a 32-bit Pentium 4 (and the $2,000 casing it's in) fairly obsolete.
_________________
QED, sort of.

[B0b]

win64 is available now...

dual core = same as dual CPU (more or less) = faster machine, better response time on a lappy, the 1 thing i miss when moving from my dual CPU workstation to my lappy is the speed of switching etc

also CS2 (released end of the month USA - May rest of the world) will support more than 2GB of RAM if you're running win64 and have enought RAM in ur machine

oh and 17" screen doesn't = a high res - look carefully at what res the screen will display, my 14" laptop will display 1400x1050, and i still crave more pixels!

oh yeah, Dual Core Opterons are now available but dual XP64's will be end of the summer..

[eyewoo]

[trurl]

cool. thanks guys

[Alan]

I've been wondering about this, so here's a couple of questions to add:

1. What about the hd? Any loss with only one, presumably partitioned, drive ?

2. And I have heard that switching resolutions can cause problems, with many laptops using interpolation. in general, any problems with aspect ratio/res changes?

[eyewoo]

Yes... that does seem to be one drawback... the scratch disk. On my old system I had it set to a different small drive dedicated to the scratch disk. On the laptop it is set to a small partion (5 gigs) on the same drive. The result definitely seems slower on the laptop.

I have two gigs of RAM, so when the the scratch disk is needed, it is really needed and it does seem painfully slow. I'd sure like to hear any possible ways to speed it up.
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[B0b]

docking station? usually allow for a second HDD, or if your laptop has a firewire connection, get an external firewire caddy and stick a 40GB 7200RPM, 8MB Cache HDD in shouldn't cost too much

[eyewoo]

sounds interetsing. I'm going tolook into it...
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[B0b]

bin talking to a m8 about ur problem, apparently Dell have the ability to have a 2nd laptop hard disk installed instead of the optical drive (CD/DVD whatever u have) if you have a little port above one of your USB ports then ur in business

[lopar]

Maybe this'll help... last week I ordered an Alienware MJ-12m 7700 desktop replacement. I needed something to last me basically all through college, and this is tough, fast, and upgradeable..

It's got the P4 chips, and the option of an Nvidia Quadro go1400 w/256.. opengl professional class video!

they max out on the site at 2GB of ram, but you can get that in only 2/4 slots, so it's upgradeable up to 4GB eventually, and you can stick in an EM64T chip if you want 64-bit support later on. It's also got 4.1 speakers inside the box (internal subwoofer, yeah,) so that's kinda cool.

Anyway, it's a little hard to find on the site, you have to go to the workstations section, not the notebooks section, otherwise you'll find the Area 51m, which is more for games.

EDIT: oh yeah, they support multiple hard drives too.

Link:
http://www.alienware.com/product_detail_pages/MJ-12m_7700/mj-12m_7700_features.aspx?SysCode=PC-LT-MJ12M-7700&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

Hope that helps!
_________________
Jason Neufeld (Phil. 3:12)
My stuff: http://lopar.shamby.org/

[blehblehbleh]

Get a Powerbook.

[A-13]

I've decided to revive this thread instead of making a new one, since I, too am now in the market for a laptop.
I'm a graphic design student, so I know I need a machine with a decent processor and graphics card.
I'm not concerned much with size and weight- I won't be travelling on planes or anything, just taking it between my dorm and class mostly.
I've talked to some people (one of which is studying graphic design at Temple) and it seems that Macs are still best for the industry. I know that the general opinion here seems to be that PCs can do the same job when it comes to graphic design, but others I've spoekn to strongly support Macs for graphics work.
On that note, I'm looking at the Powerbook G4 line.
I would buy the 15" 1.5GHz model, but I have a few concerns.
Is 64 MB of video RAM good enough for graphics work, or should I be looking at the 128 MB?
Is having the ability to burn DVDs really useful? I don't burn too many CDs right now, and haven't really run into the need for more capacity.
Would it be a good idea to go ahead and pay the extra amount to get the 17" 1.67 GHz Powerbook? It's got more video RAM, a better processor, and the larger screen is quite nice. Will it be better to buy this model since it will last longer as far as things getting outdated?

I'm really sold on the fact that Macs are more stable and less vulnerable than PCs, and how they are built to run smoothly with all their parts, as opposed to throwing together a lot of 3rd party pieces.

Any information, of course, is greatly appreciated- I'm going to invest a lot of money into a computer- I want to make it count! Thanks!
_________________
Self-pity and modesty get you nowhere

[Petri.J]

Well yes, Mac is good. BUT. It's not very good with memory handling or multi tasking. If you use one program, you shouldn't have a problem, but if you like to keep several programs open, and swap between them. That's not going to happen. At least for me when I model, I have to have 3D program and photoshop open.
Because of that limitation I'm never going to buy Mac. I mean, why should I if there's a option without that limitation?

Of course not all programs support macOS, but that you allready know. Right?

- just my two cents

[eyewoo]

And isn't an equivalent Mac somewhat more expensive than a PC...? if you can call a non-multi-tasking computer equivalent.
_________________
HonePie.com
tumblr blog
digtal art

[A-13]

As far as multitasking goes, I don't plan on running multiple heavy programs. It'll be able to handle something like a Internet/Media Player/Mail Client combo, right? Hopefully Macs can handle something like Photoshop/Media Player/Internet...
I know that programs are pretty limited on Macs, but the most important ones are available and as far as games go- I'm a console gamer anyway.
When I was researching PCs it seemed like the price of the Macs and the price of a good PC that has similar stats cost about the same. Plus I get a nifty $200 educational discount from Mac.

I'm pretty sure I'm going to go with a 15" 1.67GHz 128 video RAM Powerbook. I'd love to upgrade the RAM from 512 to at least a gig, but Mac RAM is so expensive I think I'll wait- hoping the prices go down.
_________________
Self-pity and modesty get you nowhere

[Capt. Fred]

I've no intention of stirring up prejudices from either side, just curious about the multi tasking thing.

At any given time I am running Mail, iTunes, a calendar application, dvd player (for sherlock holmes!) and probably preview, photshop, sometimes windowsmediaplayer/realplayer/quicktime, AIM messenger. There are no indications as to how many applications I have running coming from performance. It doesn't occur to me to quit applications for any reason other than tidiness. I had photoshop, illustrator, golive, all 'bloatware', running at once when making my previous website, switching between them and working in them, and I was completely unaware of an slow down of any kind, which i was impressed by, having been used to OS 9 and it's one track brain. I have no strong basis for comparison, but multi-tasking is the single biggest benefit of OS X over 9 for me.

I know little of computers in general and even less of modern Windows PCs, so this is just my own observations. All my experience is relative to mac OS 9 and before. I've only used windows for about 2 hours all told. I have a great deal of empathy for more my machine, which may be clouding my judgement! Feel free to fill me in.

edit/ (I'm using a PowerBook G4 15" running Tiger. Luck boy.I thikn my extra 512 was 30 something quid from crucial.com. (70$?) I don't know if that's cheap on the scale of things.)

[B0b]

A-13 u can use 3rd party RAM in your MAC don't get ripped by the apple marketing system


oh and the BOXX portable workstation (laptop) looks the daddy (hope they produce a 64bit one soon )