Like some, if not all of you, this is going to be a very big purchase for me. There are many different configurations and features to choose from so I am just trying to chip away piece by piece. I know people here will say there is only a 7% performance increase etc, and that the $800 can be better spent elsewhere, and will advocate for the 2.8, but can anyone try to convince me to take the 3.0 over the 2.8? I will be using this for Logic, cs3, aperture, final cut, soundtracking etc. Possibly some gaming, but mostly heavy music, video, photography editing. I will also have this as my machine for years to come and do not want to regret in any way getting the 2.8 when I could have gone for the 3.0. I am thinking a couple years down the road. I would put a premium on speed and performance. I would hate to have a "what if?" mindset at some point. Peace of mind may be worth the extra cash. I always believe I have the fastest thing only to realize a year or two later is isn't all that fast (that said I have only owned imacs and powerbooks). I plan on getting some samsung HDs and extra ram from a 3rd party to save cost, and possibly Time Capsule to back up (I would be really bummed if I lost my media files or any drives crashed without backup). I have read about people mirroring their HDs but I feel like with the programs I would use that I wouldn't really have space for that as I would have to dedicate certain drives for specific purposes, leaving only TC or an external for a true back-up, am I just over thinking this? Obviously there are other factors that will affect this, such as how I will use my HDs, which is another question (or thread) all together, but if someone wants please feel free to chime in how I could best set up my computer knowing my needs above and all the media files that will be on my computer, ie that sample instruments should have their own drive etc (or how I can configure to maximize performance of the apps like logic etc). Thanks!