Originally Posted by gus No..better yet. Wait til CS4 is out & an upgrade on the upgraded Macbook Pro.

My events have a visible horizon. Yours don't.

Originally Posted by rutt Well, actually, I'm still on hold just now. Apple is taking shipment of Intel's Core 2 Duo, which benchmarks almost 40% faster than the chip they use now. It's also supposed to be quite a bit cooler which also implies better battery life. It's pin compatible, so I'm guessing Apple will announce and start shipping in September. I know I'm kind of a bore about this. But I do actually buy eventually. There really are sweet spots of timing in these things.

That's kinda where I am, Rutt.

I'm currently thinking I'll buy a Macbook Pro to replace my desktop when (a) the Macbook Pro is upgraded (August?) with the newer processor and maybe allows more memory and (b) Adobe releases the Universal Binary upgrade (January?)

I notice there aren't any rumors about the MBP going to 4GB of RAM, but there's no harm in dreaming.

Originally Posted by wxwax I notice there aren't any rumors about the MBP going to 4GB of RAM, but there's no harm in dreaming.

David and I were chatting abt this the other night. 4mb and that thing would be SWEEEEEEEEEET.

Originally Posted by wxwax I notice there aren't any rumors about the MBP going to 4GB of RAM, but there's no harm in dreaming.

I would find it hard to believe that they would release a 64 bit Pro laptop and not allow you to expand beyond 2GB of RAM. Where's the fun in that?

Originally Posted by Andy David and I were chatting abt this the other night. 4mb and that thing would be SWEEEEEEEEEET.

Here ya go....

http://www.crucial.com/store/partspe...E=CT25664AC53E

Crucial 2GB DDR2 sodimms. Pop two of these in your Mac and you have 4GB

Of course....






At $1440 EACH, only Andy can afford them

Ran the tests under Parallels XP Windows, updated post here:
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=345952&postcount=54

Originally Posted by Andy Ran the tests under Parallels XP Windows, updated post here: http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=345952&postcount=54

Rosetta beats Parallels?

Originally Posted by Andy Macbook Pro, 17" 2.16ghz processor, 2gb RAM. Photoshop CS2 under Rosetta: Fred Miranda Test: 34 seconds Retouch Pro Test: 73 seconds (8bit file) Macbook Pro, 17" 2.16ghz processor, 2gb RAM. Photoshop CS2 Windows under Parallels: Fred Miranda Test: 55 seconds Retouch Pro Test: 2mins 22seconds

Very interesting.

How much memory did you configure parallels to be allowed allowed to access? Is this even an option in parallels (haven't tried it, no mactel yet). It makes a huge difference to vmware.

Originally Posted by rutt How much memory did you configure parallels to be allowed allowed to access? Is this even an option in parallels (haven't tried it, no mactel yet). It makes a huge difference to vmware.

Good point, Rutt. I rejiggered Parallels, to give it 1.5+ Gb of Ram. Then I told Photoshop to use up to 1GB. Updated results here:

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=345952&postcount=54

Rosetta still beats Winders.

Originally Posted by Andy Rosetta still beats Winders.

This is really quite an accomplishment for Rosetta and the reverse for Parrallels. I've had quite a lot of professional experience with previous generations of binary translation and virtual machine software. Usually, the binary translation loses big time to virtual machines. Wonder what's going on.

Originally Posted by rutt This is really quite an accomplishment for Rosetta and the reverse for Parrallels.

More like the latter than the former.

Originally Posted by Parallels FAQ Parallels Workstation runs normally on SMP systems. Each virtual machine currently represents an Uni-processor system; SMP support inside guest virtual machines is in scope for future versions of Parallels Workstation.

VMWare has the technology to do this right. Right now they charge big bucks for it, but when the OS X product actually ships, if I were them, I'd add this feature to crush Parallels.

Looks like my guess about VMWare's OS X strategy was right. See:
http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/blog/cons.../08/#macintosh

So I'm still guessing that fastest photoshop for the MacTels will be a virtualized windows version. The windows for this, though, will only be the period between release of OS X VMWare (or parallels with guest SMP) and release of Photoshop CS3.

Originally Posted by rutt More like the latter than the former. VMWare has the technology to do this right. Right now they charge big bucks for it, but when the OS X product actually ships, if I were them, I'd add this feature to crush Parallels.

Eyes bleeding... must... ask... rutt... to.. give me the reader's digest version!

Originally Posted by Andy Eyes bleeding... must... ask... rutt... to.. give me the reader's digest version!

Applications running under Parallels use only one processor. VMWare can use all the processors. So for applications which use multiprocessors effectively, expect VMWare to offer the same kind of speedup that multiprocessors do (versus Parallels.) [Did I simplify enough?]

I guess an even shorter reply is: fill out this form now and take the thing for a spin when you can. it should cut parallels by a lot.

Originally Posted by Andy Power Mac G5 Quad Results Originally Posted by Andy Machine Name: Power Mac G5 Quad Fred Miranda Test: 11 seconds Retouch Pro Test: 23 seconds (8 bit file); 28 seconds (16 bit file)

OK Fresh Out of The Box!

Mac Pro results. Mac Pro, 3.0ghz, 5gb ram. Photoshop CS2 running under Rosetta.

Fred Miranda Test: 8bit file: 9 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 20 seconds (8 bit file); 33 seconds (16 bit file)

Originally Posted by Andy OK Fresh Out of The Box! Mac Pro results. Mac Pro, 3.0ghz, 5gb ram. Photoshop CS2 running under Rosetta. Fred Miranda Test: 8bit file: 9 seconds Retouch Pro Test: 20 seconds (8 bit file); 33 seconds (16 bit file)

Nice, and that's running under emulation! Can't wait to see this thing with CS3!

Originally Posted by DavidTO Nice, and that's running under emulation! Can't wait to see this thing with CS3!

So, interesting, on the 16 bit Retouch Pro test, the Mac Pro is like, 18% slower than the G5 running native CS2. But all the other tests, faster. No doubt, it'll be faster, with CS3 but I have to say, fast is fast.

Originally Posted by Andy but I have to say, fast is fast.

Its only until the next model comes out











....and the next......and the next.....