Well, what are you doing in PS and Quark? If you are working with huge uncompressed graphics files, especially more than a couple at a time, you MIGHT run into an issue with RAM - the iMac only supports up to 3gbs, and 2gbs is the only affordable option.kamber said:I am a PC user switching to Mac. The main programs I will be using are QuarkXpress7 and PhotoshopCS2. Should I buy a iMac or will I outgrow it quickly? The Mac Pro is so expensive, but if I have to do it I will. Please help!!
Yes it is, and I still dont have a computer because I am still deciding.amin said:This is becoming a very common thread topic. Seems like a lot of people are having a hard time deciding. For my home use and the home use of my dad, the iMac was the clear choice. For those who already have a nice display hanging around, the Mac Pro is a compelling option, even for non Pros.
Voltes V said:power, upgradeability and $1,000USD more on top of an iMac 20"
I've made the same points too. It's tough if you already have a monitor, because you can get an entry level MP for only about $250 more than a 24" imac. And you DON'T have to be a pro to use a MP.amin said:I think those of you who are saying the Mac Pro is only for Pros and the rich are missing the fact that many people already have a nice display, and that a Mac Pro without a display doesn't have to cost as much as an iMac.
Compare the following options:
1) 2.33GHz 20" iMac with a 500GB HD for $1949
2) 2.0GHz Mac Pro with a 160GB HD for $2124
The prices are similar, and the iMac will have better performance in most apps (those that can't use 4 processors). However, the Mac Pro will likely last longer since 1) more apps coming out are likely to utilize more than 2 cores, and 2) processor, HD, and graphics card upgrades are so much easier to do in the Mac Pro.
The form factor of the iMac is very appealing, but the choice is not easy.
Not if you already own a monitor. Since the OP is coming from a PC, I'll take a bet that he already has a monitor. So the gap is much closer than you think.xUKHCx said:It would be more than that if you factor in a screen.
The golf between the iMac and the MAc Pro is extremely large, i out grew my iMac G5 rev a very quickly but if i were to purchase a new iMac i feel it has enough speed and graphics (compaired to the geforce 5200 POS in my iMac) to last a decent ammount of time. If i had the money i think i definately would get a Mac Pro and a separate screen, i truely wise the release the Cube2
Well, the Mac Pro ist still less expensive than a 17 inch MacBook Pro (that is if you have a display already) and I've never heard anyone say the above about a MBP. You get a lot of power for your money with a Mac Pro and probably won't need to buy a new machine for at least 5-6 years.irishgrizzly said:I think it comes down to two things. Get it if you are
A) Going to make money from it, ie use it for work.