Digital BW, The Print

Anthony Atkielski wrote:

>If a photographer finds that his computer runs too slowly for his needs, the
>simplest solution is to buy a larger computer. 
>
Talk about a statement that means virtually nothing.. "larger"?

In what sense?

RAID?

Hard drives?

SCSI over IDE?

what memory architecture?

how MUCH RAM?

what CPUs...?

What video...?

What motherboard?

Dual or single cpus?

or do you simply mean laptop users should move to say a laptop to a 
desktop chassis/housing?

> It won't be the cheapest in
>terms of capital investment, 
>
of course you'll need to buy a new one pretty often

>but it will certainly be the cheapest in terms
>of time gained,
>
that is excluding all that time spent on transferring programs and data 
each time one gets a new system..

> and his time is more valuable than the computer hardware he
>is using.
>
>
>  
>
First off, the latter part of that statement may well apply to full-time 
Professionals or others who use the Machine primarily for PShop...  It 
is less likely to be the case for non-professionals whose machines are 
not simple capital investments..

OK...

Then  ignore what I said... Leave your Photoshop and windows memory 
settings to the defaults and simply buy the absolute fastest machine on 
the market...

ANd, shopping for a machine designed with PShop as the target is 
probably a waste of time also...  Just buy the fastest machine with SCSI 
drives from one of the major suppliers..  RAID will confuse you, so 
avoid it, it'll take  up your time..  

Fact is, a mid-speed machine tweaked for PhotoShop will save a LOT of 
processing time.. Just as will the faster machine..  It's your time and 
money...

Wanna know a major "secret" about the PC biz?  Just like with car sales, 
manufacturers make by far the most profit per-unit on high-end products 
and performance benefits are usually less than 10% over units with a 
significantly lower markup...  I for one would prefer not to get soaked 
every time I buy a new machine..

Keith
 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]