The boss(es) here at work are talking about replacing an aging G4/933 with an iMac (24 inch). I think anything would be a marked improvement over what I am currently using but don’t have much knowledge of iMac for Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Microsoft Office etc., (I personally have a MacPro 8-core with 14 gb of RAM, NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT graphics card coupled to a 26" NEC monitor — assume it a step above the iMac).
Any major downsides to an iMac for the above-mentioned use/apps?
The major downside of the iMac is you will have to upgrade sooner as Adobe abandons your GPU. With a tower you can swap out the part. Another is that it will run slower than your home machine, but it seems you’re surviving that one OK 🙂 .
You answer your own question (it will of course be OK). The debatable issues are ROI etc. If your employer is happy buying you a new machine every three years I recommend getting the iMac for PRINT. A new shiny twice as often. But if you’ll be working with large format files etc that PRINT becomes a squishy term…
iMac has a shiny monitor no extra internal drive for scratch. Is limited on RAM. iMacs are not the best choices for Photoshop as they are not Pro Machines.
If Geoff does not have very large files to work on and if the shiny monitor is not an issue, it could be OK. It would not be my choice for a heavy production-level machine.
You could make the argument that if you’re going to buy a crippled machine, get a mini so You can have a pro display. Some of your work software isn’t going to run under Leopard, maybe.
But I would also play devil’s advocate and say that if Geoff doesn’t need the horsepower, space or flexibility of a desktop and can live with the built-in monitor, the iMac could be fine.
I don’t see how the shiny monitor can’t be an issue. I’ve seen and played with those suckers at the Apple store and at Fry’s, and I’d personally have nothing to do with them.
I agree with you about any shiny monitors, no matter how sexy they might look. My wife has a new MacBook, and she has to be careful to avoid reflections from overhead lights. (Otherwise that stock 13.3" aluminum shell machine is fine for her non-graphics needs).
Lundberg has a good point: if you’re going to get the cheapest iMac with the 9400M shared, then get the Mini and a nice display. But again, I’d be shopping GPU as much as CPU and reading up on that.
I have a brand new shiny 20 inch iMac, but I don’t use it for Photoshop. This has to be the worst monitor I have ever used. You get everything behind you reflected in it. It gradates from bottom to top in luminosity. It’s WAY too bright and when you knock it down it just gets muddy. Haven’t hardware calibrated it yet because I need to buy a newer $90 Keyspan to work with Leopard. There’s only a FW 800 port, so you need buy another adapter for legacy FW400 devices. Since I only use the iMac for business stuff and internet, it’s not that big of a deal, but a graphics machine it ain’t . No built in modem either now. Gotta go buy another adapter – a USB modem. Will it ever end. This has been my biggest disappointment from Apple ever. Such a rounding endorsement.
Folks considering an iMac would be well advised to do some research in advance. There are major distinctions (6-bit versus 8-bit) between the two screen sizes (20 and 24in) which, according to reviews, really makes a huge difference, especially in graphics centric work.
– The 24-inch iMac has an 8-bit wide-screen TFT active-matrix LCD that displays millions of colors.
– The 20-inch iMac use 6-bit wide-screen TFT active-matrix LCDs, achieving millions of colors by dithering.
Ramón, No I haven’t seen the NEC monitors (those who buy things at the newspaper where I work have a soft spot for Samsung and HP when it comes to external displays… no I don’t like those).
I have seen the 24" top of the line iMacs though (we’ve got about 70 of them by now and getting more as fast as our Apple reselelr can deliver them) and they are very good (except for the mini-keyboard which I wouldn’t recommend to anyone who actually USES the keyboard to type on and wants to be able to use shortcuts in Adobe applications – presently price is the same with normal size keyboard or the little one, but the small one is the default if you don’t say anything when ordering).
You also CAN add external monitors to any Mac, be it iMac or portable if you so desire. But none of the iMacs or the portables have a non-glossy display any more. If you have the budget for it you can add an extra display.
My point is that the 24" iMac – with 1TB harddisk – which can have 8GB Ram (comes with 4GB as default), definitely is acceptable for Photoshop work and other graphical work. Our editors are actually quite happy with them now that they have gotten rid of the old and tired G5’s with Tiger and the old and tired 24" Apple cinema displays. Of course you still have to calibrate and also to watch out for ddisturbing light and mal-placed lamps, but that is valid for any display as I see it, glossy or not.
When our photographers got the first MacBooks with glossy displays we waited for their screams and complaints (as we had all read and heard the commentaries on forums like this one). That was about 2 years ago. We are still waiting. None (or extremely few) find them troublesome to work with. From a base of several hundred users we’ve got about 3 complaints over the last years. Two of them were from programmers who develop websites, one from a photographer. None other. The complaints we heard prior to giving out Macs with glossy displays came before any of them got a glossy display and before any of them had ever used one. When they got them, complaints seized to come except those three mentioned above.
So, as I see it, they are not as bad as those who have never used them always say that they are. Most of it is prejudice (sticking my neck out here). Of course there are better displays out there, but that said, it is not the same as that the glossy ones not being possible to use.
So, as I see it, they are not as bad as those who have never used them always say that they are. Most of it is prejudice (sticking my neck out here).
I’m going to disagree: brightness and color shifts if you’re off axis, and reflections are often a real issue for those who do critical color work on this side of the pond. I know that if had a glossy screened monitor (instead of my 23" ACD), I’d have to completely rearrange my office — not easy with everything built in.
In doing some comparison between the iMac and MacPro, I came across this for the specs on the Quad-core:
Memory and Storage Quad-core: Four DIMM slots support up to 8GB of memory
8GB maximum for a MacPro!?
Glad I didn’t wait for the new MacPros, even the entry level "early 2008" MPs are capable of 32GB total RAM. You are forced to spend $3,300 if you want more than 8GB.
ps1 – You are misreading somewhere about the MacPro. It is: Memory
* 1066MHz DDR3 ECC SDRAM * 8-core: Eight memory slots (four per processor) supporting up to 32GB of main memory using 1GB, 2GB, or 4GB DIMMs * Quad-core: Four memory slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory using 1GB or 2GB DIMMs See <http://www.apple.com/macpro/specs.html>
So, as I see it, they are not as bad as those who have never used them always say that they are. Most of it is prejudice (sticking my neck out here).
Neil said:
I’m going to disagree: brightness and color shifts if you’re off axis, and reflections are often a real issue for those who do critical color work on this side of the pond.
You’ve just proved his point. Brightness overload and color shifts are traits of the lower quality panel of the 20in iMac – the 24in model do not exhibit these issues. Naturally, you wouldn’t know this because you’ve used neither one.
Both are glossy of course, but whether or not someone can tolerate reflections is a very personal thing. It also heavily depends on your working environment. I don’t work in a cave, but my surroundings aren’t lit up like the makeup counter at Macy’s either. Subdued, is what I prefer – regardless of the type of display. Personally, I think it’s rather stupid to judge this glossy issue in a brightly-lit Apple or other retail store. Who in their right mind edits images in that environment? Contrast perception goes out the window in an bright working environment. (I cringe every time I enter one of our designer’s offices with the overhead lights ablaze and direct sun blasting into the room)
I have the last generation Macbook with a glossy screen. It’s not my main machine but I don’t find the gloss to be much of an issue at all. Some people are deeply affected by reflections of any kind … others, not so much. As I said, it’s a very personal thing.
The reality is Apple will keep on pushing glossy until they feel they’re losing money because of it. Hopefully, they’ll soon offer matte options across the board. The recent "glare reduction" option of the new 17in MacBook Pro is a good sign.
I think it’s rather stupid to judge this glossy issue in a brightly-lit Apple or other retail store.
You’re right about the 24" iMac screen’s superiority. For some reason I thought that Nini was using some 20" versions.
Moving on…still, gloss can be an issue for some users. And unfortunately, a lot of people have to use their (iMac and other) computers in typical bright office environments, and don’t have the luxury of adjusting the overhead fluorescent lights or their desk orientations.
Agreed, Neil. It’s perfectly understandable that not everyone has control of their environment. (which would seriously suck – gawd, I would hate that!)
But it’s important to understand the "glossy or not" issue goes beyond simply a preference – some people have a physical reaction to glossy – they complain about severe eye-strain and headaches when forced to endure any kind of reflections. Thankfully, that’s not me.
And for those like me, the iMac is perfectly doable for graphics work. (Not that I’m giving up my Mac Pro and NEC 2690 any time soon …) 🙂
Neil, what you might remember is that I have a 20", non-glossy, first generation intel iMac at home which I might have mentioned at some time past. That is very soon being retired in favor of a 24" iMac (3,06 GHz and 1 TB harddisk).
I’m test driving one of the new 24in… 3.06 Ghz iMacs right now. Picked it up last night.
First impressions: Compared to my G4 733, this machine is blazing fast. I’d wager that its at least 20 to 30 times faster at rendering video than the G4. Absolutely NO comparison!
Safari is instantaneous. Double steroids!
The screen is huge. And gorgeous. Haven’t quite got used to it yet. My 15in looks like a toy now. You simply cannot compare this screen to what it looks like at the store. So far, I see little to no issues with reflections. It is a bit on the bright side, though. Normally, this doesn’t bother me as I generally use a grey-themed desktop for graphics work. Anything with white backdrops (browser pages, etc) are a bit bright, even with the control set all the way down.
They only had the models with NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 graphics card in stock. I really had planned on the ATI Radeon HD 4850. That one should be even faster at rendering than what I got now.
Anyway, I have 2 weeks to make up my mind. If I decide to go iMac, I’ll probably order one with the ATI 4850. Other than that… I’m quite impressed after a day at various tasks.
You wondered what we do with the old Macs we dispose of.
Well, they are all leased, so they go back to the leasing company who either sell them as is to the public (after some cleaning and dusting and vacuuming (is that a word?)), or use them for spare parts for repairs for custumers with older machines where Apple no longer sell the spare parts.
A few (the better ones, (at the moment Mac Book Pros 15") are bought by us for a low price and sold quite cheap to some of our users on condition that they get no support from us (the Helpdesk) for those machines and they also get no guarantee for how long they will last.
Our leasingcontract is now much shorter than it used to be. We are down to 3 years I think. Used to be 5, which is much too long as the machines are very heavily used 7-24 year round and development cycles for machines are much faster nowadays.
Neil – Yes the shorter time, 3 years, for the leasing is better. That’s why we changed it. Someone thought it out wrong (it was cheaper they thought, not taking repairs into the calculation) the previous time when making it five years. What we have been seeing for quite some time with the hard-used G5s is that they are really run down and one after the other just dying on us. Not to mention limitations of harddiskspace etc.
The boss(es) here at work are talking about replacing an aging G4/933 with an iMac (24 inch). I think anything would be a marked improvement over what I am currently using but don’t have much knowledge of iMac for Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Microsoft Office etc.
Any major downsides to an iMac for the above-mentioned use/apps?
Yes. Glossy display (admittedly personal preference, but most graphics pros find glossy displays unacceptable), limiting mobile-level hardware (but with no mobility), and worst of all limited RAM. Moving forward with OS 10.6 and beyond and new apps versions RAM limitations will be increasingly cost-ineffective.
Allen, Minis for graphical work??? You must be joking? That would never be MY choice. Too slow and too small harddisk and really limited RAM (4GB only maximum). The highend iMac 24" (which can have 8 GB RAM) is a good choice for most people and definitely for graphical work too.
Neil, What is dying on the old G5s (various models and various ages, the oldest ones only have a 160 GB HD which at the time was considered large…the newest ones have 250GB HD) is the harddisk and the fans and the motherboard and in a few cases (less frequent) the RAM. We’ve replaced harddisks and motherboards on several of the old ones during the last year. Starts with a scratching gurgling sound, then it sounds like a landing airplane screeching… then the fans starts working without a break (noisily) for hours and nobody wants to be near the machine when it does that and the whole machine gets very hot and on the next restart, dead, and never starts again.
Starts with a scratching gurgling sound, then it sounds like a landing airplane screeching… then the fans starts working without a break (noisily) for hours and nobody wants to be near the machine when it does that and the whole machine gets very hot and on the next restart, dead, and never starts again.
A little vacuum-cleaning of their interiors might have prevented that but perhaps you were all just gung-ho to get new toys?
Ann chimed in a bit ahead of me on this. But for heat and fan issues, the first thing I would suspect is air circulation, either due to the physical location of the computer or dirt and dust inside. Considering that your machines are used 24/7, I would suspect the latter. I’d recommend that IT routinely pop the covers and clean out the accumulated matter inside. It will go a long way to prolong computer life and reliability.
That may the reason for hard drive, logic board, and RAM failure. Then again, as drives are mechanical devices, they may have just worn out. I’m surprised that you don’t mention keyboard and mouse failures.
Just a note about the 8GB RAM limitation of the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core. That was Apple’s stated limit all right but OWC has just released 4 GB Modules for that model which increases the limit to 16 GB. Cost is about $1,000 for 4 x 16GB modules.
Re vacuuming: Be sure to use a small hand-held, low-suction vacuum cleaner. A state worker I know used an industrial-strength unit and literally suctioned off some components from the logic board.
Might have needed vacuuming, I agree on that. I know how dusty the floors they stand on get (the cleaners have a hard time to really clean the floors as it is always people working there)… on the other hand, as they are used 24/7 by various users who share the machines, it is not only dust but also sandwiches and coffee and water and lunch and I don’t know what that get into some of them and we really don’t have the opportunity to vacuum them (editors are hard to get to move away from their computers except when it dies and they wait for an exchange… they hardly move away long enough for us to attach the cables and such). Only when it is already too late we have an opportunity to lay hands on the machines. I AM part of the IT department.
Mice and keyboards are regarded as disposables and are simply exchanged when they stop functioning. We go through an extreme amount of keyboards in particular, but also mice and chargers for portables (their cords get stamped on, burned and broken, yes, even the ones with magnets).
We actually believe the situation will be better with the iMacs as they will be ON the tables and not under them…
Just a note about the 8GB RAM limitation of the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core. That was Apple’s stated limit all right but OWC has just released 4 GB Modules for that model which increases the limit to 16 GB.
Thanks for that Welles. I suspected this would be the case eventually.
Hey Allen – hate to be one to say I told you so, but … I told you so! 🙂
Yeah, I know – a 16GB RAM (4x4GB) 4-Core box would only be about $100 cheaper than a 16GB (8x2GB) 8-core box so not much point. But the moral of the story is Apple’s limit ain’t always the limit. 4GB chips will get cheaper too.
The last company I worked for in-house was a defense contractor and they experienced laptop thefts every month, along with cel phones and chargers, you couldn’t leave them out. Some sonofabitch on the night shift even stole my wife’s father’s big magnifier that was over 100 yrs old. Cost me 80 bucks to replace. You couldn’t hide it, I guess they just walked out carrying it at midnight.
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
