Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 80

Thread: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!

  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
    And the problem you are talking about is a NIVADIA problem

    Well, I think that flies in the face of the idea that Apple makes extra effort to "control quality". I've bought many PCs, but the first Apple I buy happens to be hit with two class action lawsuits involving the purchase of substandard parts (6-bit TN and reject NVIDIA chips). HP, Dell, and Apple all had the option to buy the full-price normal-quality production units from NVIDIA, but they chose to go with the cheaper reject chips just like Apple. The difference is that at least with HP, Dell, Toshiba, etc., you have the choice to pick from a variety of different video chips, and probably one of them is a more expensive "normal" production quality unit instead of a reject. Apple doesn't let you chose the video card on MBP, so you're stuck.Plus, they're almost half the price in the first place, so at least they are passing some of the savings on to you.

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    3,110

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Browning


    Well, I think that flies in the face of the idea that Apple makes extra effort to "control quality". I've bought many PCs, but the first Apple I buy happens to be hit with two class action lawsuits involving the purchase of substandard parts (6-bit TN and reject NVIDIA chips). HP, Dell, and Apple all had the option to buy the full-price normal-quality production units from NVIDIA, but they chose to go with the cheaper reject chips just like Apple. The difference is that at least with HP, Dell, Toshiba, etc., you have the choice to pick from a variety of different video chips, and probably one of them is a more expensive "normal" production quality unit instead of a reject. Apple doesn't let you chose the video card on MBP, so you're stuck.Plus, they're almost half the price in the first place, so at least they are passing some of the savings on to you.




    Ok, they put a bad chip set:


    http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2377


    Apples response:


    In July 2008, NVIDIA publicly acknowledged a higher than normal failure rate for some of their graphics processors due to a packaging defect. At that same time, NVIDIA assured Apple that Mac computers with these graphics processors were not affected. However, after an Apple-led investigation, Apple has determined that some MacBook Pro computers with the NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT graphics processor may be affected. If the NVIDIA graphics processor in your MacBook Pro has failed, or fails within four years of the original date of purchase, a repair will be done free of charge, even if your MacBook Pro is out of warranty.


    Daniel...sounds like to me you have a 4 year warranty on yoru machine. Looks to me like Apple is standing up to the issue and correcting it.


    How is this a negative if they make it right?

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Of course Apple themselves are going to try and put it in the most positive light on their own web site, but if you read into the details surrounding the issue it comes out that only reject chipshave the issue. All the NVIDIA chips that passed the normal QA are still working fine. And unless I just happened to be affected by two rare exceptions, I think both lawsuits are evidence that Apple is no more selective in its hardware components than PC manufacturers. (Not to mention the $100 power supply that died in my MBP.) In other words, it shows that Apple customers are not paying twice as much to get better hardware, but other things, like better software, service, support, etc.

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    3,110

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Im not sure I would agree that Apple is no more selective than other manufactures, because failures are a big cost to buisnes. But that is not what I see as important with the monitor issue. It appears to me they made up this short coming with Support and Service by extending the warranty. To me its a big factor how much a company stands behind their product, as well as how well it is built.


    I mentioned earlier about my sons HP that died. I called him and apparently its the same NVIDIA problem as with apple. Difference here is that his HP right now is a $1000 paper weight and Apple has given a warranty to stand behind theirs. I told him he should check with HP again and see if maybe they have been forced to repair/replace the defective units.



  5. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,956

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk
    Difference here is that his HP right now is a $1000 paper weight and Apple has given a warranty to stand behind theirs.

    That's for sure. Plus we happen to live just a few minutes from a really fantastic authorized mac shop, so getting warranty service is fast and convenient.

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, WI
    Posts
    3,863

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk


    With so many PC guru's about, I am supprised on one has pointed this out yet. If you only have 1 GB available on your hard drive you are probablyoverloaded. You need to have a certain amount of memory on your hard drivefor your computer to run properly or you will be going slow and getting errors. It sounds like one of the things you need to do is save some of those pictures on an exterior hard drive and delete them off your PC.


    Sorry to keep interrupting this MAC vs. PC debate but....

    Not too very long ago I had bought my first external hard drive (a Maxtor something or other) and stored a ton of photos on there and deleted them from my hard drive. Within a very short time, the external hard drive stopped working and I could not retrieve any of my photos. After many tears shed, I went and bought two more (HP and Seagate) and they have been working flawlessly but I still do not have my faith restored. Well, tonight I bit the bullet and deleted MANY photos from my computer and I am not the proud owner of over 100 GB of free space! I still have more to go thru but it's quite a start. But if my external hard drive die again ...better lock me up in a padded room!

    Only problem is, the new DxO 6.5 I bought and installed the other day is still giving me grief! I keep getting "NOT RESPONDING" every time I scroll thru the photos! I did not have this problem with the 6.2 trial version! I am currently uninstalling and reinstalling as I type this so cross your fingers and wish me luck!!

    Ok, now back to the PC vs. MAC debate ...[:P]

    Denise

    UPDATE: Still the same problem after the reinstall ....ERRRRRR!!![:@]

  7. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    3,110

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by ddt0725
    Ok, now back to the PC vs. MAC debate

    Denise


    Looks like were getting close to being "Debated Out". Like all Political debates nothing resolved of course.


    Looks like you have already learned. 2 external hard drives....





    On another note...I was never really happy with results from DXO, I did the trial and then deleted it. I had heard it was good for correcting lens distortion, which a person might want to correct with lens 20mm and wider. But it never seemed to do it quit right.





    Why do you want to use DXO and not photoshop or DPP?

  8. #68
    Senior Member Trowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    176

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    If you need to store things on an external disk, one of the best solutions is a two disk (or more) enclosure that can be configured in RAID 1 so the drives mirror each other. This way if one drive dies, the other drive will still have all your data. This is a great way to be able to get photos off your computer without having to worry about losing them. You
    - Trowski

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, WI
    Posts
    3,863

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    DPP is ok but I really liked some of the results I obtained from the trial version of 6.2 and it was easy to use. I have done only a few things in 6.5 and to be honest, I liked the results from 6.2 better. Photoshop is awesome with what you can do with it but only if you know how. It

  10. #70
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    3,110

    Re: Computer performance should not cost more than our Cameras!



    Quote Originally Posted by ddt0725


    DPP is ok but I really liked some of the results I obtained from the trial version of 6.2 and it was easy to use. I have done only a few things in 6.5 and to be honest, I liked the results from 6.2 better. Photoshop is awesome with what you can do with it but only if you know how. It's alittle ...ummm, ALOT to advanced for me! Also, the difference between DXO and PS other than ease of use is about $600 or $700! I do have Elements and it's on my winter to do list as far as learning how to use it.


    Denise


    I have CS5 Master Collection, and I agree just photoshop itself is overwhelming. My son is taking classes in college to learn to use all the programs. Me, I have been watching the new videos for DPP to get a little better. Being overwhelmed with CS5 and DPP is one reason I didn't go ahead and get DXO. I have enough to learn on the others without adding to it.


    Another thing I found though, is the more I learn I find myself going back to when I first started taking pictures and modifying theme differently. Seems the more I learn the more work it makes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •