Andy's Un-Official Unsolicited Mac Advice Thread

cmason · December 3, 2008

In typical IBM fashion, the computer was the IBM 5150. (1981 seems not that long ago). But in very non-typical IBM fashion, they decided to market it as the IBM Personal Computer, presumably because there were lots of other computers at IBM, most of the 'non-personal' variety. Of course, by then, there are lots of personal computers on the market, including Apple. (remember Timex, Ti-99/4A, TRS-80, Epson, etc etc) While I don't think that the name PC,was unique, the term PC took on a specific use, especially after such things as "PC Magazine" took off specifically to support the IBM PC. As Richard said, PC Compatible meant compatible with the 'IBM PC".

colourbox · December 3, 2008

Let's not even get into what "minicomputer" and "microcomputer" have traditionally meant...

Richard · December 3, 2008

Home network print issue
I am having trouble getting a Macbook to recognize a printer on a Windows wireless LAN. The printer is physically connected to a Win2K machine, which I only use as a print server. Other XP and Vista machines have no problem using this printer, and the printer itself works fine when physically connected to the Macbook. But I want to be able to use the printer wirelessly. On the Mac, I try to add a new printer and click on the Windows button, but it does not see the workgroup. In fact, all three panes remain blank. IP connectivity through the router is just fine. Any hints?

DavidTO · December 3, 2008

Richard wrote:

I am having trouble getting a Macbook to recognize a printer on a Windows wireless LAN. The printer is physically connected to a Win2K machine, which I only use as a print server. Other XP and Vista machines have no problem using this printer, and the printer itself works fine when physically connected to the Macbook. But I want to be able to use the printer wirelessly. On the Mac, I try to add a new printer and click on the Windows button, but it does not see the workgroup. In fact, all three panes remain blank. IP connectivity through the router is just fine. Any hints?

Firewall? Dunno. I'll think on it.

Richard · December 3, 2008

DavidTO wrote:

Firewall? Dunno. I'll think on it.

I don't think so, unless there's something in OS-X that I don't know about. OS-X isn't seeing the Windows workgroup.

BradfordBenn · December 3, 2008

Do you need to be running Bonjour on the Windows machine to advertise it? I had to do this on my home network as the Mac was not part of the Windows workgroup, so Windows locked it out.

Richard · December 4, 2008

BradfordBenn wrote:

Do you need to be running Bonjour on the Windows machine to advertise it? I had to do this on my home network as the Mac was not part of the Windows workgroup, so Windows locked it out.

I can see the Mac in the workgroup on my Windows machines. Just as an experiment, I turned on file sharing on the Mac. I can see the Mac folders on the Windows machines. So it appears that the Mac is OK with being a server but doesn't like being a client. I must be missing something obvious.

cmason · December 4, 2008

I had all sorts of trouble trying to do this, and eventually gave up and bought a wireless print server and eliminated all the sharing business altogether.

I found that the Mac finds windows services much better if you have a connection to the Windows machine in question first. So connect via smb to the Windows machine that is the printer, then try adding the printer.

(Finder> Go> Connect to server)

Richard · December 4, 2008

cmason wrote:

I had all sorts of trouble trying to do this, and eventually gave up and bought a wireless print server and eliminated all the sharing business altogether.

I found that the Mac finds windows services much better if you have a connection to the Windows machine in question first. So connect via smb to the Windows machine that is the printer, then try adding the printer.

(Finder> Go> Connect to server)

Good suggestion, but it doesn't work. The Mac can't see any of the machines in the Windows workgroup. I tried connecting to the server by name and IP address and both failed. It just works, eh? :bash

DavidTO · December 4, 2008

Richard wrote:

Good suggestion, but it doesn't work. The Mac can't see any of the machines in the Windows workgroup. I tried connecting to the server by name and IP address and both failed. It just works, eh? :bash

Any of this help?

Richard · December 4, 2008

DavidTO wrote:

Any of this help?

Thanks, David. I've tried a number of things that I found on Apple support groups, but so far no cigar. Since I can always just connect a goddam wire between the Macbook and printer when I need to, it is not really a big deal. At this point, I am just curious as to why it isn't working. In any event, I've had enough frustration for one day, so I'll take a look again tomorrow.

Richard · December 5, 2008

Richard wrote:

Thanks, David. I've tried a number of things that I found on Apple support groups, but so far no cigar. Since I can always just connect a goddam wire between the Macbook and printer when I need to, it is not really a big deal. At this point, I am just curious as to why it isn't working. In any event, I've had enough frustration for one day, so I'll take a look again tomorrow.

Finally got it working. :whew

I found some information on the Apple Support site about manually adding a Windows shared printer. Turns out that option is not available by default in the System Preferences-> Printer and Fax panel. You have to customize the toolbar to make it available. Once I could specify the printer directly--instead of having OS-X find it (or fail to)--it worked just fine.

DavidTO · December 5, 2008

Richard wrote:

Finally got it working. :whew

I found some information on the Apple Support site about manually adding a Windows shared printer. Turns out that option is not available by default in the System Preferences-> Printer and Fax panel. You have to customize the toolbar to make it available. Once I could specify the printer directly--instead of having OS-X find it (or fail to)--it worked just fine.

Yah. Support docs before discussions, usually. They're more helpful, for the most part, if they cover your question.

Gadget_Girl · December 6, 2008

mac book or mac book pro?
I'm buying a mac book

but am having a very difficult time deciding if I need the pro or not. I would love to hear other opinions and suggestions as well as explanations why. I am also buying the 24"Cinema Display. If I go non pro I would be looking at 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB, 320GB Drive.
I have just moved from serious hobbiest to paid photographer.
Currently I'm using a Dell Inspiron 6400 with Vista
2GM Ram with 100GB drive
500GB external drive
CS3 & Lightroom

Thanks for the help,
CL

Moogle Pepper · December 6, 2008

I think the macbook pro is better as it has a better build, more workspace on the monitor, and its own dedicated graphics. But it costs more. :cry

zweiblumen · December 7, 2008

Moogle Pepper wrote:

I think the macbook pro is better as it has a better build, more workspace on the monitor, and its own dedicated graphics. But it costs more. :cry

I concur with Pepper here. The Pro is more rugged, but more importantly has the faster processor and the dedicated video ram. That will make a pretty big difference in render times on for your workflow. Also, having the larger monitor is nice for a dual screen set up. In the past I've had stands for my laptop that put it next to the monitor, it takes up a little bit of desk space, but I found it very useful. HTH

CatOne · December 9, 2008

zweiblumen wrote:

I concur with Pepper here. The Pro is more rugged, but more importantly has the faster processor and the dedicated video ram. That will make a pretty big difference in render times on for your workflow. Also, having the larger monitor is nice for a dual screen set up. In the past I've had stands for my laptop that put it next to the monitor, it takes up a little bit of desk space, but I found it very useful. HTH

How is the Pro more rugged than the MacBook? They're both built with the same process, and the MacBook by nature of being smaller, is probably more rugged.

As far as VRAM improving render times... only if the app uses it ;-) Aperture uses the GPU, and Photoshop CS4 does, but Lightroom and CS3 are all CPU... they don't touch the GPU... ever. So more GPU will be exactly 0 faster with those apps.

zweiblumen · December 9, 2008

CatOne wrote:

How is the Pro more rugged than the MacBook? They're both built with the same process, and the MacBook by nature of being smaller, is probably more rugged.

IMHO aluminum > plastic YMMV

CatOne wrote:

As far as VRAM improving render times... only if the app uses it ;-) Aperture uses the GPU, and Photoshop CS4 does, but Lightroom and CS3 are all CPU... they don't touch the GPU... ever. So more GPU will be exactly 0 faster with those apps.

Don't forget applications like WoW

those can be very important!

All kidding aside, absolutely. It is application specific.

DavidTO · December 9, 2008

zweiblumen wrote:

IMHO aluminum > plastic YMMV

That is old, irrelevant news, my friend. They're both made by the same process out of a single hunk of aluminum. Really, really solid.

Moogle Pepper · December 9, 2008

Are we talking the current gen or the previous ones?

zweiblumen · December 9, 2008

Well color me out-of-date.

I'll go sit in my not-paying-attention corner again. (Someone I know bought a macbook that was plastic, and I swear it was recently, but in checking the calendar it turns out that was 8 months ago.)

DavidTO · December 9, 2008

zweiblumen wrote:

Well color me out-of-date.

I'll go sit in my not-paying-attention corner again. (Someone I know bought a macbook that was plastic, and I swear it was recently, but in checking the calendar it turns out that was 8 months ago.)

Heheh. You're getting old. Time starts speeding up.

Gadget_Girl · December 9, 2008

OK so thank you all for your input. I picked up my mac today and I bought.....the mac book. Seeing as I use an external monitor 95% of the time I figured I was OK with the loss scree space. The new generation mac book's also have a separate video chip and seeing as I'm only making slideshows this works for me. The pro has the same chip X2. As for the processor, I have the 2.4 which is the same a the basic pro. I feel that I did get what I needed without going overboard. So far I'm looking my new system. The only down side so far is that when I called Adobe to get my PC version of software switch to mac versions I need to pay for an upgrade because they aren't offering CS3 anymore- only CS4.
thanks again,
CL

DavidTO · December 9, 2008

Congrats, Gadget_Girl!

Let us know if you need any help with the transition. After we're done bickering over the correct answer, we'll get you squared away!

Andy · December 10, 2008

Switched to the Macbook Air - woah, can't believe I toted around 5.6lbs when I could have this instead!

I'm digging it, very, very much.

Moogle Pepper · December 10, 2008

Andy wrote:

Switched to the Macbook Air - woah, can't believe I toted around 5.6lbs when I could have this instead!

I'm digging it, very, very much.

What is going to happen to your other macbooks?

Pupator · December 12, 2008

Andy wrote:

Switched to the Macbook Air - woah, can't believe I toted around 5.6lbs when I could have this instead!

I'm digging it, very, very much.

It's been great for me. I don't do "heavy processing" on the mobile anyway. Since the Air is so light I take it everywhere and get more use/joy out of it than I ever have any of my other more powerful (and heavy) laptops.

Andy · December 12, 2008

Moogle Pepper wrote:

What is going to happen to your other macbooks?

I had a 15" MBP and it's now with a Smug Hero.

W.W. Webster · December 12, 2008

Andy wrote:

Switched to the Macbook Air ... I'm digging it, very, very much.

Which model, Andy?

Andy · December 12, 2008

W.W. Webster wrote:

Which model, Andy?

1.86ghz w/ 120gb SSD and 2gb RAM.

Andy's Un-Official Unsolicited Mac Advice Thread

Comments