The difference between Pro and Consumer.

macgeek2005

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 31, 2006
1,098
0
I've been thinking alot about "Pro" computers vs. "Consumer" computers.

I think it's one massive stinking brainwash.

For instance, before Intel came along, people bought G4 powerbooks, and used them for Final Cut Pro and intense video editing. Now people say "Don't buy an iMac if you'll be doing any serious professional things... but the iMac is twice the speed of the G4 Powerbook or more!!!

So, what's the deal? Does it even take up 8GB of ram to render Photoshop pictures, etc? What would happen if you were on a machine with 2GB of ram, and did what you do on your 8GB ram G5 tower on it. It still works!!

I just don't get it, can someone explain to me and PROVE to me, that a Professional can't do his stuff as well on an iMac as he does on a tower?

Thanks
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
1
Randy's House
macgeek2005 said:
I've been thinking alot about "Pro" computers vs. "Consumer" computers.

I think it's one massive stinking brainwash.

For instance, before Intel came along, people bought G4 powerbooks, and used them for Final Cut Pro and intense video editing. Now people say "Don't buy an iMac if you'll be doing any serious professional things... but the iMac is twice the speed of the G4 Powerbook or more!!!

So, what's the deal? Does it even take up 8GB of ram to render Photoshop pictures, etc? What would happen if you were on a machine with 2GB of ram, and did what you do on your 8GB ram G5 tower on it. It still works!!

I just don't get it, can someone explain to me and PROVE to me, that a Professional can't do his stuff as well on an iMac as he does on a tower?

Thanks
Can you fit 8GB of RAM,two 500GB HDD's and 512MB video card into the iMac?
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,199
6
Adelaide, Australia
You start by comparing laptops to desktops, which is pointless because laptop users must account for and accept the compromise of having a machine that can be used on the go.

As for the Power Macs, sure they're expensive and possibly overpriced, but they're faster. There are more differences between the Power Mac and the iMac than just the potential RAM quota. The Power Macs have room for more internal storage, they have user accessible PCI slots and they use an external display. These are just some of the differences I can think of off the top of my head, before we even start talking about the CPUs.

I agree the Pro machines don't represent the same value for money that the consumer Macs do, but that doesn't make them irrelevant. :)
 

macgeek2005

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 31, 2006
1,098
0
iGary said:
Can you fit 8GB of RAM,two 500GB HDD's and 512MB video card into the iMac?
No you can't. But what I asked was Do you really need that for what you do? and how do you know it won't work as well on an iMac?
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
1
Randy's House
macgeek2005 said:
No you can't. But what I asked was Do you really need that for what you do? and how do you know it won't work as well on an iMac?
Because I had an iMac.


And yes, during large Photoshop batches of 12MP images, or batching QTVR's, I need the RAM so I can do other things while the machine is working.

I tried doing photo work on the iMac and while it is a fine machine, it just couldn't keep up with what I do.

Ask Dr. Andersen if he could do his 3D modeling on an iMac effectively, I bet I know the answer.
 

imacintel

macrumors 68000
Mar 12, 2006
1,581
0
The iMac isn't consumer. it is Prosumer. Powermac/Mac Pro is Professional. The Mac Mini is consumer.
 

celebrian23

macrumors 65816
Mar 12, 2006
1,186
0
Under the sun
the powermac, in my opinion is a huge stepup from the imac. It really is worth the extra power for that sect who depends on fast computers for their work. For the amatuer, final cut pro on an imac may be fine, but for the professional, that extra power in the powermac is much appreciated.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
imacintel said:
The iMac isn't consumer. it is Prosumer. Powermac/Mac Pro is Professional. The Mac Mini is consumer.
what is this talk? imac is consumer, the mac mini is consumer as well but aims more at being an easy upgrade for those who like thier monitor, keyboard etc. the term "prosumer" doesnt exist and the hardware inside the imac isnt bleeding edge in any way. professional entails that the machine is built to do just about everything very well for a few years. the core duos are not all they are cracked up to be and coming from the PC world im not impressed by the clockspeeds at all.
 

ManchesterTrix

macrumors 6502
Feb 24, 2005
324
0
jamesi said:
what is this talk? imac is consumer, the mac mini is consumer as well but aims more at being an easy upgrade for those who like thier monitor, keyboard etc. the term "prosumer" doesnt exist and the hardware inside the imac isnt bleeding edge in any way. professional entails that the machine is built to do just about everything very well for a few years. the core duos are not all they are cracked up to be and coming from the PC world im not impressed by the clockspeeds at all.
Clockspeed != Performance. Core Duo is much better than any Intel chip to date.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
macgeek2005 said:
I've been thinking alot about "Pro" computers vs. "Consumer" computers.

I think it's one massive stinking brainwash.

For instance, before Intel came along, people bought G4 powerbooks, and used them for Final Cut Pro and intense video editing. Now people say "Don't buy an iMac if you'll be doing any serious professional things... but the iMac is twice the speed of the G4 Powerbook or more!!!

So, what's the deal? Does it even take up 8GB of ram to render Photoshop pictures, etc? What would happen if you were on a machine with 2GB of ram, and did what you do on your 8GB ram G5 tower on it. It still works!!

I just don't get it, can someone explain to me and PROVE to me, that a Professional can't do his stuff as well on an iMac as he does on a tower?

Thanks

first off, ppl who did video editing on a G4 powerbook are goofy. for editing video, apple really only used to have one option (powermac) but then they finally improved the rest of their line so you have folks using imacs to do common tasks with some intensive editing thrown in the mix. It is not as if photoshop requires 8 gigs, its just that the more you have the better it will run. no one is trying to argue that you need the bleeding edge to do the kind of things iGary does, so i dont see what you could be trying to say. and whats with this "prove" thing? this isnt exactly the most pressing matter of our lives, it just seems like you listened to too many ppl bragging about thier ridiculous specs.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
ManchesterTrix said:
Clockspeed != Performance. Core Duo is much better than any Intel chip to date.
ugh, how did i know that there would be someone who would state the most basic knowledge every about clockspeed and expect "omg a revelation" from me. i know the core duos are fast but im not impressed b/c i felt resorting to two cores was cheap and easier than improving the single cores they had.
 

realityisterror

macrumors 65816
Aug 30, 2003
1,354
0
Snellville, GA
jamesi said:
the term "prosumer" doesnt exist


There's gotta be some sort of distinction between a Mac mini and an iMac. That's consumer and prosumer. Your grandma writing emails and looking up recipes is a consumer. Your uncle that records videos and makes DVDs is a prosumer.
 

wonga1127

macrumors 6502
Mar 16, 2006
339
0
Wishing for a magic bus.
jamesi said:
the core duos are not all they are cracked up to be and coming from the PC world im not impressed by the clockspeeds at all.
I agree, I'd rather have a 1000 degree Pentium 4 with a 250 stage pipeline and a clock speed of 54.2 Ghz.* Fast stuff.

*Requires submersion in ice while being blasted with air at -250 degrees

PS: jkjk, just exaggerating:)
 

celebrian23

macrumors 65816
Mar 12, 2006
1,186
0
Under the sun
The mac mini and imac are both consumer. I don't believe in the phrase prosumer either. An imac is simply a more powerful consumer product than the mac mini.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
wonga1127 said:
I agree, I'd rather have a 1000 degree Pentium 4 with a 250 stage pipeline and a clock speed of 54.2 Ghz.* Fast stuff.

*Requires submersion in ice while being blasted with air at -250 degrees

PS: jkjk, just exaggerating:)
dont assume, your joke suggests that you missed what i was talking about. there isnt any reason why work cannot be done on single cores to improve thier speed and heat, its just an older architecture that needs some maintainence
 

ManchesterTrix

macrumors 6502
Feb 24, 2005
324
0
jamesi said:
i think it was already implied that they are more beneficial from words like "easier" and "faster"
You really want to be condescending, don't you. But your use of easier no way implied "more beneficial" since it wasn't in reference to use but rather design and manufacture. And faster does not imply more beneficial at least not entirely because the benefits of multi-cores are more numerous than just speed. Basically you made a comment that made little sense and after being called on it you've gotten snotty.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
realityisterror said:


There's gotta be some sort of distinction between a Mac mini and an iMac. That's consumer and prosumer. Your grandma writing emails and looking up recipes is a consumer. Your uncle that records videos and makes DVDs is a prosumer.
lol what are you talking about? sounds like you didnt read my entire post and simply jumped at the chance to take a screen shot of your widget or w/e it is. everyone already understands what consumer and professional so i dont know why you saw fit to make those points again. the distinction between the mini and the imac is in who buys it.
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
ManchesterTrix said:
You really want to be condescending, don't you. But your use of easier no way implied "more beneficial" since it wasn't in reference to use but rather design and manufacture. And faster does not imply more beneficial at least not entirely because the benefits of multi-cores are more numerous than just speed. Basically you made a comment that made little sense and after being called on it you've gotten snotty.
i know im being bitchy (i havent eaten all day ugh) but i honestly thought it was pretty obvious that a computer being fast was beneficial. how is a faster chip not beneficial? it will do all of your tasks quicker so i dont understand your reasoning at all. sure there are other benefits to the dual core such as less power and less heat (ive heard) but i was under the impression a chip being fast was a pretty big plus
 

jamesi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 13, 2005
595
0
Davis CA
ManchesterTrix said:
Basically you made a comment that made little sense and after being called on it you've gotten snotty.
haha, oh arent you so clever breaking it down like that
 

Paimon

macrumors newbie
Jun 1, 2006
6
0
Don't believe the Hype. If you are at the computer for 8 hours a day doing 'professional' stuff it's probably worth it because of the saved time. Otherwise it's for people who get a hard-on over having the best available (soon to be obsolete anyway) hardware and are willing to pay a ridiculous premium to get it.

If you meet the minimum system requirements the software is going to run.