New Mac user - did I make the right choice?

shuurajou

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 25, 2005
147
0
Bristol, England.
Hi there folks,

I'm not an entirely new mac user, I used to use macs back in 2000 :).

Anyway, after being thoroughly interested in OS X, I decided to take the dive into the Mac world by getting the 20" iMac G5, and I've just purchased a gig of ram which I have yet to fit. The Powermac was just not possible to run alongside my PC due to it's size, so iMac was the next best thing I thought.

I've got this mac to do all business side of things, this is mainly things like Photoshop & video editing tools like final cut pro etc.

My concern is if the Mac will be better at these things than my PC, which current specs are:

200gb HDD
P4 2.8ghz CPU
1gb DDR333 PC2700 RAM
Leadtek 6800 GT Gfx Card

I'm hoping that the mac will provide superior performance, considering the CPU I'm using in my PC is years old now.

Any advice on this would be great.
 

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,125
2
North Carolina
I can assure you your mac will run final cut pro MUCH better than that PC ;)

Don't know about the other stuff, but multitasking will be MUCH better as well. Not to mention the general goodness of being free from spyware, viruses, etc.
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,817
37
Andover, MA
With the PC's graphics card, it will likely be faster for games than the iMac, but, for the things you care about - Photoshop, etc. - the iMac will definitely hold its own and likely be faster.

More importantly, though, the iMac will be more solid. It will not have any viruses. It will not have any spyware. So business apps running on it are inherently safer.

Also, photo/video editing tools are very well integrated under OS X, so your apps will play together nicely.

Third, although you might not notice it when the PC is on, the iMac is very quiet. Sometimes it is nice to be able to work when you can hear yourself breathe. Of course, if the PC's always on, you'll never know. ;)

And, finally, have you looked at it? Surely, it's nicer to work in a pleasant OS X environment with a nice clean system like the iMac, and such pleasantness will translate to better work.

Edit: what wordmunger said.... :)
 

shuurajou

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 25, 2005
147
0
Bristol, England.
wordmunger said:
I can assure you your mac will run final cut pro MUCH better than that PC ;)

Don't know about the other stuff, but multitasking will be MUCH better as well. Not to mention the general goodness of being free from spyware, viruses, etc.
Well, I'm normally a hard core Sony Vegas user on my PC, so I figured final cut pro would be a better solution for mac.

I'm not too bothered about viruses/spyware etc as I've got my PC nailed down pretty tight and it's all sitting behind a hardware firewall anyway.

Just, want to know if it's worth using my new mac for those types of apps as I don't have any stability problems with my PC as of the moment. I'm after overall performance.

At the moment I'm not very impressed with the speed of the iMac, but right now it only has 256mb so I'm sure that will change when I up it to 1gb :).

I do however appreciate the muchly improved multi-tasking on os x.
 

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,125
2
North Carolina
shuurajou said:
Well, I'm normally a hard core Sony Vegas user on my PC, so I figured final cut pro would be a better solution for mac.

I'm not too bothered about viruses/spyware etc as I've got my PC nailed down pretty tight and it's all sitting behind a hardware firewall anyway.

Just, want to know if it's worth using my new mac for those types of apps as I don't have any stability problems with my PC as of the moment. I'm after overall performance.

At the moment I'm not very impressed with the speed of the iMac, but right now it only has 256mb so I'm sure that will change when I up it to 1gb :).
Well, the memory will help a LOT. In terms of raw speed, you might be a bit disappointed, but in terms of overall productivity, I think you'll be impressed. It's not so much how fast one app does one thing, but how quickly all the apps work together.
 

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,881
0
shuurajou said:
Well, I'm normally a hard core Sony Vegas user on my PC, so I figured final cut pro would be a better solution for mac.

I'm not too bothered about viruses/spyware etc as I've got my PC nailed down pretty tight and it's all sitting behind a hardware firewall anyway.

Just, want to know if it's worth using my new mac for those types of apps as I don't have any stability problems with my PC as of the moment. I'm after overall performance.

At the moment I'm not very impressed with the speed of the iMac, but right now it only has 256mb so I'm sure that will change when I up it to 1gb :).

I do however appreciate the muchly improved multi-tasking on os x.
That gig will do a lot both for OS X and your ram hungry apps. Then the system will work a lot faster :D
 

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,125
2
North Carolina
shuurajou said:
Well, I'm normally a hard core Sony Vegas user on my PC, so I figured final cut pro would be a better solution for mac.
If what you really want to know is whether FCP is faster than Vegas on your PC, you might just try working a bit with iMovie (once you get your RAM). Try a couple of typical projects and see which works better. If you like iMovie, you'll love FCP--iMovie uses the same technology, just in a stripped-down, user friendly way. You might even decide you don't need FCP to do what you need.
 

shuurajou

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 25, 2005
147
0
Bristol, England.
jsw said:
With the PC's graphics card, it will likely be faster for games than the iMac, but, for the things you care about - Photoshop, etc. - the iMac will definitely hold its own and likely be faster.

More importantly, though, the iMac will be more solid. It will not have any viruses. It will not have any spyware. So business apps running on it are inherently safer.

Also, photo/video editing tools are very well integrated under OS X, so your apps will play together nicely.

Third, although you might not notice it when the PC is on, the iMac is very quiet. Sometimes it is nice to be able to work when you can hear yourself breathe. Of course, if the PC's always on, you'll never know. ;)

And, finally, have you looked at it? Surely, it's nicer to work in a pleasant OS X environment with a nice clean system like the iMac, and such pleasantness will translate to better work.

Edit: what wordmunger said.... :)
I notice that the iMac is indeed 'whisper quiet' as apple say, and phsyically the system is just nicer to work with, and obviously os x is what I would describe as much more 'fluid' than windows. Although I've used an os x theme for my windows system.
 

Smileyguy

macrumors 6502
Nov 29, 2004
321
0
shuurajou said:
I'm not too bothered about viruses/spyware etc as I've got my PC nailed down pretty tight and it's all sitting behind a hardware firewall anyway.
God, I couldn't imagine needing a hardware firewall. It's sad (for PC users) that such things are needed.
 

shuurajou

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 25, 2005
147
0
Bristol, England.
Smileyguy said:
God, I couldn't imagine needing a hardware firewall. It's sad (for PC users) that such things are needed.
Yeah, it is a pain to have to mess around with udp/tcp ports all the time. Would you say it's safe to run os x fully naked on the net?

I currently have no anti-virus etc on my new mac.
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,817
37
Andover, MA
Assuming you've enabled the OS X firewall (apple menu -> System Preferences...->Sharing->Firewall), you're pretty safe.

However, as a UNIX box, the Mac is reasonably but not completely immune to internet-based attacks (as opposed to viruses). You already have the hardware firewall - I'd keep it. If nothing else, it repels attacks before your other systems need to deal with them.
 

Smileyguy

macrumors 6502
Nov 29, 2004
321
0
shuurajou said:
Yeah, it is a pain to have to mess around with udp/tcp ports all the time. Would you say it's safe to run os x fully naked on the net?

I currently have no anti-virus etc on my new mac.
I would say it's completley safe. I'm not hugely experienced, so some others might have be more knowledgeable, but I've been running OSX totally 10.3 totally naked on the net every day (about 3hrs + a day) for the last year (first on an iMac, then a G5) without any problems at all.
 

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,125
2
North Carolina
powermac666 said:
Why wouldn't the default be to have the s/w firewall enabled?
I don't know, but it isn't on on my wife's new PowerBook. I'm guessing that's the factory setting -- I can't imagine her employer would have turned it off when installing it for her.
 

quidire

macrumors 6502
powermac666 said:
Why wouldn't the default be to have the s/w firewall enabled?
By default, all ports are off but no firewall is in place... The advantage to the firewall is that no program can open ports that then become vulnerable (without your permission)

The disadvantage (and the reason it is not on by default) is some applications won't be able to do certain things until you specifically enable their port ranges. For example, SubEthaEdit (a must have!) can't offer documents on the Internet, (just Rendezvous on your local subnet) until its ports are opened up.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,889
25
Northern Virginia
Performance wise PS should rock once Tiger and Core Image comes out and Adobe gets it in to PS (as I understand Core Image, the software vendor must take and include code to access it).
 

rueyeet

macrumors 65816
Jun 10, 2003
1,070
0
MD
As for whether your Mac will outperform your PC...performance is often in the eyes of the user. We can tell you just about anything, and you might try out your new Mac and decide we're dead wrong. Or completely right. The only way to know is....

try out the Mac! :)
 

paulypants

macrumors 6502a
Jun 17, 2003
519
0
Buffalo, NY
Chip NoVaMac said:
Performance wise PS should rock once Tiger and Core Image comes out and Adobe gets it in to PS (as I understand Core Image, the software vendor must take and include code to access it).
RIGHT ON!! Can't wait for that, hopefully it will help PS not to
eat up all my RAM so quickly...
 

vtprinz

macrumors 6502
Nov 30, 2004
395
0
shuurajou said:
Yeah, it is a pain to have to mess around with udp/tcp ports all the time. Would you say it's safe to run os x fully naked on the net?

I currently have no anti-virus etc on my new mac.
I've been running my iBook completely naked on the virginia tech network (which is painfully high on viruses/misc attacks/hijacks) for 2 years, not a single problem, and it's almost always online.
 

vtprinz

macrumors 6502
Nov 30, 2004
395
0
In fact, just to brag a bit, during the start of the fall '03 semester, the Blaster and Welchia Worms were running rampant through the network, so much so that the university had to block ALL windows users until they could send people out with a patch (on CD) to each and every user.

Of course, I never had a single problem :)
 

sinisterdesign

macrumors 6502
Dec 10, 2003
421
2
atlanta
wordmunger said:
Well, the memory will help a LOT. In terms of raw speed, you might be a bit disappointed, but in terms of overall productivity, I think you'll be impressed. It's not so much how fast one app does one thing, but how quickly all the apps work together.
my thoughts exactly. the RAM will speed it up a ton, but it's still an iMac, G5 or not. i'm a HUGE Apple fan (used to work for them), and i KNOW (don't flame me here, folks) that you can't do a GHz to GHZ comparison btw a PC & Mac, but i still can't help but feel a little slow compared to some of the PCs out there. in my mind, a brand new iMac should be as fast as a year or two old PC. it may be faster, i don't know. but i wouldn't expect to be wowed. :confused:

when you get the RAM in, let us know how you feel about the speed. i'm curious. my buddy just traded in his old PC for a 20" iMac and he likes it a lot, but he's not doing video editing...
 

shuurajou

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jan 25, 2005
147
0
Bristol, England.
sinisterdesign said:
my thoughts exactly. the RAM will speed it up a ton, but it's still an iMac, G5 or not. i'm a HUGE Apple fan (used to work for them), and i KNOW (don't flame me here, folks) that you can't do a GHz to GHZ comparison btw a PC & Mac, but i still can't help but feel a little slow compared to some of the PCs out there. in my mind, a brand new iMac should be as fast as a year or two old PC. it may be faster, i don't know. but i wouldn't expect to be wowed. :confused:

when you get the RAM in, let us know how you feel about the speed. i'm curious. my buddy just traded in his old PC for a 20" iMac and he likes it a lot, but he's not doing video editing...
I think, in general I could say that my iMac feels generally more fast overall; like every program runs generally stable. My PC seems to do some things a lot quicker (like doing tasks in Photoshop tasks, sadly), and some things a lot slower - it's like, the mac just has a balance of it all. But my PC just feels much more responsive. I think this is mainly down to that mouse movement on my iMac feels really un-native and unresponsive. Like it's overly smoothed or softened. My PC's mouse movement just feels more raw.
 

cmvsm

macrumors 6502a
Nov 12, 2004
784
0
shuurajou said:
I think, in general I could say that my iMac feels generally more fast overall; like every program runs generally stable. My PC seems to do some things a lot quicker (like doing tasks in Photoshop tasks, sadly), and some things a lot slower - it's like, the mac just has a balance of it all. But my PC just feels much more responsive. I think this is mainly down to that mouse movement on my iMac feels really un-native and unresponsive. Like it's overly smoothed or softened. My PC's mouse movement just feels more raw.
The largest advantage that OS X has over Windows is multitasking IMO. I can have ten programs running in OS X without a blink of system slow down. Windows could never accomplish this with 5 applications. It was once described to me as OS X only giving programs what they "need" to operate, not what they want. Windows just rolls over and the programs hog all over each other for processor time, hence the inefficient slowdowns.

In terms of productivity, this is like gold. Don't look at the iMac as a gaming machine, leave that to the Xbox and Playstations of the world.

After your acclimation period, I'm sure you'll be very happy with your purchase.