# Suffering editing withdrawal: laptop advice needed!



## traveller (Nov 5, 2014)

Apologies for my lack of posts over the past few months, I've been living overseas and only have a tablet with me -the touch sceen interface is very frustrating for use on the CR Forum. 

This leads me onto my next request: I am looking for a laptop, on which I can edit my photos. For the past few years I have used a Windows desktop, but I don't like Windows 8 (I know that Windows 10 is coming, but when?). I never thought I'd say it, but I am willing to consider a Macbook, as the price premium doesn't seem so high compared to desktop machines and the Apple laptops are so nice! (side note: can you transfer an Adobe CC licence from Windows to Mac OS?) 

The difficulty where I am living is the lack of choice at the higher end of the laptop spectrum: I want a nice IPS screen, SSD (256MB should be enough with external HDD?), enough RAM and cpu speed to run Photoshop CC for the next few years (moving target, I know). I don't play games or edit video. My desktop is early 2013 Core i7 with 16gb Ram (no SSD) and I wouldn't want my laptop to be noticeably slower. My choices boil down to (what is available in the local market): 

-Mackbook Pro 13" or 15" 
-Dell XPS 13 or 15 (I believe that these may be older versions without the SSD) 
-Lenovo Yoga 2 
(-any other suggestions, but will depend on local availability) 

Are the screen size differences really noticeable? And portability? Will 8gb RAM be enough? What about in 2-3 years time? 

I would appreciate any advice that people have on the subject. I'm asking on this forum because I know that you guys know what I need better than non-photographers, who have never touched a RAW file. 

(note - I am aware that I've just asked the computer equivalent of the Canon vs. Nikon question, but as this is not Macrumors.com or whatever, please could I not invoke a flame war?!)


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 5, 2014)

traveller said:


> Are the screen size differences really noticeable? And portability? Will 8gb RAM be enough? What about in 2-3 years time?



* I'm on a 15" (very crappy dual-core) laptop, and I wouldn't go below that as you miss out on the overall impression of the shot w/o zooming all the time. Remember you usually have all the photo editing tools on the screen, too.

* For Lightroom, 8gb is enough as long as you don't hold 100k shots in a single catalog, much more important is that the catalog is located on a fast hd/ssd. For pixel editing like PS it depends on how many layers you use. This won't change that much unless you upgrade from a current ~20mp sensor to the next-gen 45mp+. Last not least, for gigapixel panoramas your laptop won't do anyway.

* In any case you should get a calibration tool for the monitor, and imho choose the laptop depending on the monitor iq (color representation, reflection, whatnot - see the reviews). Otherwise it feels like flying blind unless you use a second external monitor - but you seem to be on the road a lot. Nevermind the OS, unless you require specific apps all the Adobe stuff and plugins are similar nowadays.


----------



## fragilesi (Nov 5, 2014)

if you have the SSD then despite the obvious power of your desktop then you will probably see some things are much faster anyway. They make a huge difference, one of the big problems I see with modern systems is that the disks, though much faster, often hold the rest of the system back. It has been ever thus but often the more powerful processors are pretty much idling because of the disk speed.


----------



## dstppy (Nov 5, 2014)

traveller said:


> (note - I am aware that I've just asked the computer equivalent of the Canon vs. Nikon question, but as this is not Macrumors.com or whatever, please could I not invoke a flame war?!)



No, no you cannot. Now you're gonna get it.



1) SSD (or a hybrid drive) and enough RAM are a big deal.
2a) Windows - see if you can get something with Win7 64-bit, it's a usable OS
2b) Mac - Look at certified or base-models of what you're looking at, the further you get from base, the more "premium" you buy.

So, tablet Vs. laptop Vs. desktop:
1) You'd be surprised how much more usable an entry level 'ultrabook' (macbook air) is over a tablet, if you don't need true horsepower, they're much more usable for "everything" when you have a flat surface and a chair. They're capable, but 3D rendering, leaky stuff like Flash, and things of the like will burn through battery time
2) Just like Tablet vs. Laptop, an entry level decent desktop will blow away a very good laptop, but you're not looking at those, so if it's laptop and performance you need, you're going to pay.

Bottom line, whatever you get:
Make sure it has USB 3.0
If you don't end up with a Mac, make sure it's not proprietary like a Mac, and you can swap HDD and RAM.

Good luck.


----------



## monkey44 (Nov 5, 2014)

MY Laptop crashed just before leaving on a trip last year -- bummer -- only thing Best Buy had was Win8 -- so i bought it, and regretted it immediately and for the next six months...

Finaly, went to a local shop, had him install a SSD and reinstall Win7 ... altogether, the whole thing (new laptop and converting two laptops from Win8 back to Win7) was close to $2000 .. Laptop, SSD (two) and programs.

The money, well, it's money - cost bummed me out, but not as much as Win8 bummed me out -- sometimes, you bite the bullet to get what you need. SSD drive is clean and very fast, let me say that again Very Fast...

So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ... 

This SSD loads my PC to desktop in Win7 from start to open in seven seconds -- I timed it. 

As an aside -- If Windows continues down the current path, with all the junk files and updating crap -- after twenty years with MS PC, this Monkey will convert to Mac next time we need upgrades ... Win8 was the worst mess we've ever seen. Some like it, but not us ... sometimes the cost of frustration outweighs the $$$$ ...


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 5, 2014)

Okay, here goes...just buy a Retina MacBook Pro. Let me state my credentials. I am not a pro photographer, though I feel like I have _some_ talenthttp://lividphoto.com. I *AM* a professional software and systems engineer who owns and works from Macs except when I am forced to use Windows when working at a client site (DoD). I just upgraded from a 2011 15" MacBook Pro (which I had swapped an SSD into) to the 2014 latest/greatest 15" Macbook Pro (MGXC2LL/A). I also have owned a 27" Core i7 iMac and have built a core i7 Hackintosh. 8gb of RAM is plenty for photo editing. That being said if you find a good deal on one with 16gb don't say no. An SSD is going to give you your single biggest performance boost. A quad core processor (like in the 15" MacBook Pro line) is going to give you more performance when importing/batch processing/exporting than the dual-core in the 13" models. For editing a single photo either is fine. Don't overlook buying a refurbished MacBook Pro http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/macbook_pro/15. In fact, this one looks particularly sweet http://store.apple.com/us/product/FGXA2LL/A/Refurbished-154-inch-MacBook-Pro-22GHz-Quad-core-Intel-i7-with-Retina-Display. The only issue with a 256gb drive / external drive is that you will need to do a good job of manually moving older photos to the external drive. Thankfully, Lightroom 5 and SmartPreviews makes working with images on an external drive really easy. Depending on how much you shoot, you should be able to keep the last 3-6 months on the internal drive. 

MacBooks are tough, fast, and OS X is reliable. You'll need to upgrade machines less often. You really won't regret spending the extra money.


----------



## Halfrack (Nov 5, 2014)

Where you are at matters the most. Getting Apple is a known quantity, but Dell and other vendors still sell Win7 machines - just have to look or ask. Again, where in the world you are matters. 

8gb is really tight - unless you can upgrade it afterwards, I'd go 16gb if purchasing a locked in Mac

SSD all the way for your active disk - worth every penny - most laptops that comes with non-ssd disks can be upgraded to ssd, but I've been 300 screws into a Dell laptop to do it (worst day of my tech life) - check online for howto videos as to how to do it, anything more than 12 screws (~4 for the drive, ~6 for the cover) is the line between a good laptop and a bad one...


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 5, 2014)

Here, I did a little test. Rebooted MacBook. Opened Skype, Google Chrome with 2 tabs, opened Photoshop CC with three RAW images open, opened Lightroom and did a 52 picture RAW to 2000px JPEG export. Here is my memory usage.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 5, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> Here is my memory usage.



... So thanks for disproving the theory below, you're at only 6gb and it's not like minor disk swapping would kill the performance with a modern os:



Halfrack said:


> 8gb is really tight - unless you can upgrade it afterwards, I'd go 16gb if purchasing a locked in Mac



Personally, I'm on a 4gb win7 x64 laptop which is fine using Lightroom with smaller catalogs, the severe bottlenecks are the slow hd and the only dual core cpu when rendering shots with nr and sharpening out of LR.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Nov 6, 2014)

Once you go Mac, you won't ever go back... Kind of. I bought a Toshiba after owning two 27in iMacs, but the Toshiba was not for editing purposes. Looking back, I wish I had bought a Retina MacBook Pro, as bchernicoff has suggested. I have edited on MacBook Pro, Toshiba, and Dell and the Mac is substantially better for laptop editing (of the three). I would up the ante on screen size since, even on my 17in Dell, I was constantly having to zoom, I could only imagine what it would be like to try to edit on a 13in screen.

Cheers!
-Tabor


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 6, 2014)

Gawd, I've participated in or read soooo many of these.

I'm just gonna say that a desktop PC or at the very least a good IPS desktop monitor connected to the laptop is the best way to go for serious editing. Trying to do serious graphics or photo editing on a laptop is a serious compromise regardless of who makes the laptop. That's just all there is to it and it can't be changed or ignored no matter if you like Mac or PC.

Mac or PC, it doesn't matter, you'll just pay more for the Mac for questionable ROI (IMHO). The computer hardware is virtually the same on both with merely different operating systems. It's more of a personal preference and that's why so many people get so emotional about it. For me I just want it to be reliable and get the job done, not be a status symbol.

If you MUST get a laptop, I prefer the Lenovo Thinkpad W series all the way back to the W520 series.

Whatever computer you pick, get plenty of RAM (16+), a large SSD primary drive (at least 256) and at least an i5 CPU or and ideally an i7. Don't waste your time on an AMD CPU or chipset. Don't break the bank on the graphics card and the Intel 4000 series onboard graphics chipset will suffice for photography. Otherwise, don't spend more than $100 or so on a decent graphics board.

Good luck, let us know how it turns out!


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 6, 2014)

Hi Marsu. 
When I read it I see 10.64 GB memory usage, I wouldn't call in excess of 2GB a minor disk swap if I only had 8 GB RAM! The Apps (programs?) are using 6GB so I guess that is what you saw? 
I suppose that shutting all but LR might get you inside the limit. 

Hi bchernicoff. 
Why do you have so many chrome helpers not responding? Are they burning ram? 

Cheers, Graham. 



Marsu42 said:


> bchernicoff said:
> 
> 
> > Here is my memory usage.
> ...


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 6, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> When I read it I see 10.64 GB memory usage, I wouldn't call in excess of 2GB a minor disk swap if I only had 8 GB RAM! The Apps (programs?) are using 6GB so I guess that is what you saw?



As a mere Windows user, I don't really know about the Mac stats so I cannot say what "Wired memory" is. But even including this, it's well below 8gb as you can ignore the file caching - if it needs file and you've got a fast hd/sdd, it won't matter much.

This squares with my own experience using a 4gb laptop, I guess if you've got lots of memory available you never realize with how little you can get away with and that only the bottlenecks count. Last not least, as you mentioned, there's hardly a forcing reason to use both LR and PS in parallel.


----------



## expatinasia (Nov 6, 2014)

I think you will find the Dell Precision 3800 will probably fit your needs and is customizable online.

The Dell Precision line are Dell's business-grade laptops and while the 3800 is not top of the range it is a very good deal.

Hope this helps.


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 6, 2014)

The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.

OS X is a much less troublesome experience as a user. How many times have you tried to shut down your Win 7 laptop only to have it inform you that it has 22 updates to install and that you shouldn't turn it off until it finishes..only to find that it sits there for HOURS saying installing update 15 of 22? Ever had Windows Update run and then your Windows won't start and you have to restore to a restore point? Oh, how about all the preinstalled Norton Anti-Virus trial software, or even Office trial software? You get a new a laptop and immediately it's trying to sell you things, so now you have to uninstall. You don't even get a Windows disk anymore...only a recovery CD. 

None of these issues exist on Mac. The built in backup software Time Machine...WORKS! Occasionally, you will read that an OS X update causes some laptops to lose WIFI or something like that. Though this has never happened to me, I am in the habit of waiting a day or two after the update is available to see if anyone reports problems.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 6, 2014)

monkey44 said:


> So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ...



We are lucky in that we have a very good shop in our area. I would not consider buying a computer at a big store. We get better prices, better service, and better quality. 

What I like most about our local shop is that they don't have the attitude that I find common with IT people. Find a shop where they can talk with you about your computer needs instead of one that talks down to you.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 6, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.
> 
> OS X is a much less troublesome experience as a user. How many times have you tried to shut down your Win 7 laptop only to have it inform you that it has 22 updates to install and that you shouldn't turn it off until it finishes..only to find that it sits there for HOURS saying installing update 15 of 22? Ever had Windows Update run and then your Windows won't start and you have to restore to a restore point? Oh, how about all the preinstalled Norton Anti-Virus trial software, or even Office trial software? You get a new a laptop and immediately it's trying to sell you things, so now you have to uninstall. You don't even get a Windows disk anymore...only a recovery CD.
> 
> None of these issues exist on Mac. The built in backup software Time Machine...WORKS! Occasionally, you will read that an OS X update causes some laptops to lose WIFI or something like that. Though this has never happened to me, I am in the habit of waiting a day or two after the update is available to see if anyone reports problems.



Hi there *bchernicoff*,

Sorry in advance for this post length! You make some good points about a comparison of Mac vs Windows so please don't take my post as trying to argue with you directly but as an IT guy for the last 30 years, I can say with some authority that owning a Mac isn't as rosy as most Mac proponents like to say. Macs are still computers and they are using the exact same hardware that PCs use. They have to coexist with the same external peripherals and use the same Internet while exchanging the same emails and running similar 3rd party software. All computers, PC, Mac, Linux or whatever still have to endure the same challenges with drivers, software bugs and malware/virus attacks. (And those that say Macs can't get malware/viruses today is irresponsible. Sure they can and they do. It's just not as bad as PCs.)

Comparing Mac vs PC is much like comparing Canon vs Nikon. Neither camera is bad, they are just different and both essentially do the same things, just in a different way that appeals to each user based on their personal needs and preferences.

If one owns a Mac, it can still exhibit the same problems as a PC. It has a spinning wheel of death. It can hang on shutdown or during normal operation just like a PC. It can slow down due to a fragmented hard drive. Files can still get corrupted and cause problems with the system. Macs also receive updates and sometimes buggy updates that can cause problems just like PCs do. The other realities that exist include limited driver support from many peripherals or longer wait times for drivers or driver updates. Limited software support from some software vendors or no support at all. Harder to find information about problems on forums and limited support from Apple because Apple tends to ignore/deny problems until they decide the problem actually exists at all and then they issue fixes whenever they get around to it.

True, Macs don't have a lot of bloatware on them when they are purchased. But that comes at a premium because all the bloatware on PCs is part of what makes them cheaper. That and the fact that PC makers have to be more competitive and so don't mark up PCs at such a high profit margin like Apple does with all their products. This is why I purchase BUSINESS LINE PCs refurbished where they are much cheaper and don't come with anything installed except Windows 7 Pro x64. So even cheaper and no bloatware on a higher quality PC made for enterprise, not consumers.

Frankly, it's a waste of time to compare memory usage stats because on both PC and Mac, the actual underlying architecture of the operating system is complex, fairly unknown outside of the internal programming arm of each company and doesn't really matter much with regard to true performance. I'm not saying Macs don't perform, they perform great! But so do Windows PCs running (again) on the same hardware. It's better to compare the results of applications designed to test each aspect of performance like disk, cpu, graphics, different real world application times, etc.

In general, the comparison of Mac vs PC hardware and performance is moot. They are both essentially the same in that regard. Where they are totally different is the interface and the software approach. This is a personal preference of the user and it's important that the user understand the the biggest difference between Mac and PC is the interface and the philosophy of the design. If someone wants to customize and tweak things to do things a certain way, the Mac will present roadblocks. The philosophy of a Mac and OS X is to keep things simple and limit choices by design. (And look really really pretty.) Simplicity and elegance are the strengths of OS X. Windows on the other hand offers a multitude of ways to do the same thing and allows infinite change, choice and customization. And it doesn't try to look elegant, just functional. That is its strength and so can be daunting so some users.

In summary, the choice of Mac vs PC is all about the user experience. All the other things are essentially equal and it's unrealistic to pretend otherwise.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 6, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> monkey44 said:
> 
> 
> > So, you might think about a local computer place (make sure you find a good one) and get the tech to build you one with Win7 on it ... if you don't have the cost of those mistakes we made first - the cost is similar to any ready made, off shelf laptop, and you have exactly what you need and no more junk on it ...
> ...



If you need a question answered that you feel isn't being addressed, shoot it to me and I'll see what I can do. Good luck in your quest!


----------



## bchernicoff (Nov 6, 2014)

RustyTheGeek said:


> bchernicoff said:
> 
> 
> > The key thing to take away from my screen shot was that Photoshop with 3 RAW images open and Lightroom doing a 52 RAW -> 2000px JPEG export were using less than 3GB of RAM. I chose to open Google Chrome with a couple of tabs because I think most people are going to have a browser open while they are working. Chrome is a memory hog so it was adding additional memory pressure, but even so the memory used by Applications was only 6GB. The Chrome helpers are always a bit of a mystery, but they always show Not Responding...the OS just isn't able to get a good status on them.
> ...



You are absolutely correct that these things _can_ happen on Mac. In my personal experience using a variety of Windows 7 desktop and laptop computers, a variety of desktop and laptop Macs, and enterprise Linux servers, Macs *rarely* have these issues. They are the most reliable and functional machines one can buy. One hour ago I applied some Windows updates to a Win 7 VM that I keep on our ESXI server for running MS Visual Studio. The updates appeared to install fine, but the vm hung on shutdown. I got it booted and now Visual Studio won't start. I literally, just had the problem I described earlier. SO frustrating. It can happen on the Mac, but it rarely does. Don't pretend it's otherwise.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 6, 2014)

bchernicoff said:


> It can happen on the Mac, but it rarely does. Don't pretend it's otherwise.



I understand. I won't pretend if you won't. My point is simply that Macs are not immune to the same problems that PCs have and Macs also have problems that PCs don't have. I have Win7 PCs that have literally never experienced a problem too. I set them up clean and simple and don't let misc crap get installed on them. This helps ensure fewer problems. If a user takes good care of their system, Windows is very reliable. Therefore, I think the user should make a choice based on the experience and interface of the computer, not based on things that are fairly equal.

I believe that your point is that Macs are less prone to problems. And in some ways, you are correct. Especially when people are not careful with what they allow to be installed on PCs. I think Macs are less susceptible to junk (like BS toolbars, etc) getting installed while online but they aren't immune and it's common to see Mac enthusiasts trumpet that Macs are superior when in fact they are merely different and less of a target for some of the junk that PC users have to be more mindful of. PC users need to be a bit more vigilant about avoiding malware, etc than Mac users but otherwise I think that most things about both systems are fairly equal. Apple can issue bad updates just like Microsoft can. That's just part of writing software.

To be fair, I honestly like OS X. There's nothing wrong with it except that it's very expensive because Apple refuses to sell it without the hardware that they insist on tacking a big profit margin to. They insist they are a hardware maker, not a software maker and so they refuse to sell OS X by itself because then they know they wouldn't sell their expensive laptops and desktops without OS X to differentiate them with. And for the past several years, all of their hardware, esp the iPhone and iPad are designed to lock folks into the Apple ecosystem to generate sales in the App Store, iTunes, etc. It's a racket. Regardless of how you approach it, owning Apple products is an expensive experience all the way down the line.

** RANT ALERT! **
So with that said, my biggest issue with Apple actually has nothing to do with their products. It has to do with Apple the company and how badly they treat pretty much everyone, developers, competitors, businesses that aren't even competitors and especially their own customers. Apple is arrogant, aggressive, greedy and essentially a corporate bully. And for that reason, I don't want to support them and thankfully I don't have to because there are a multitude of respectable alternatives available over a wide price range.
** END RANT **

Please understand that I in no way have a beef with you or any Mac user. I'm just stating things the way I see them and trying hard to be objective. I've used both and just don't see a reason to spend more money simply for Apple to grant me the privilege to use their stuff. Because eventually that's what it boils down to after you've bought into the Apple world.


----------



## Too_Many_Hobbies (Nov 6, 2014)

Just taking a quick glance, but I like the specs of the Dell. It looks like you can have a 1TB drive for your photos and a quick mSATA SSD drive for your OS?

Personally I went with a refurbished Acer R7 that I maxed to 16GB of memory, installed a 256 GB mSATA SSD drive, and use the 1TB drive as my data drive. I also bought a stylus for it as it does have a digitizer for the touch scrren, so for under $1,000 US I was able to get a pretty nice and flexible device for myself. I also am not personally a fan of Windows 8, but I got used to it.

Every time I think about getting a Macbook Pro I end up getting a PC again as I can't get over the price difference. Maybe next time...

Personally, if you are going to use the laptop without connecting it to an external monitor a lot, I would go with a 15".


----------



## dstppy (Nov 6, 2014)

RustyTheGeek said:


> Please understand that I in no way have a beef with you or any Mac user. I'm just stating things the way I see them and trying hard to be objective. I've used both and just don't see a reason to spend more money simply for Apple to grant me the privilege to use their stuff. Because eventually that's what it boils down to after you've bought into the Apple world.



There *are* a few points about "spend more money" -- compare the entry level MacBook Air or MacBook Pro to a high-end video card or a mid-level DSLR. If you buy it the day it's launched @ MSRP, keep it 1.5-2 years, you can still sell it for a reasonable percentage of what a new one costs. 

In one instance, I got a MBA for $800 (Amazon deal), added Applecare and was able to sell it 2 years later for $800 (applecare stays with the device and you can verify that before buying used).

If you have an Apple Store (which I really, REALLY hate) nearby, they'll triage apple products for free. Sometimes if something's OOW and totally dead (iPods and iPhones) they'll give you a discount on a refurb. They *are* clueless if something involves going to the terminal, navigating into the Library and blowing out corrupt backups or something like that.

For me, I use them as "Linux for the Lazy". It has the additional things that I find handy without having to install cywin and other things.

----- That said ----

I think we're on the same page. All computers end up being expensive if you get something that's worth-while because decent hardware isn't cheap. If I was to spec up "A Dell" for my mom to use, a desktop would end up in the $900-$1100 range

In the end, a $300 laptop, is, well, a $300 laptop.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 6, 2014)

*dstppy*, I do the same thing with Lenovo Thinkpads and other brand enterprise level laptops, PCs and workstations. I buy various refurbished models that are about 2-3 years old all the time for clients, for a fraction of what they cost when they were new, many still under warranty and use them for years. They don't lose much value because I purchased them at a low "pre-depreciated" cost to begin with.

I totally agree with what you are doing with your used Apple purchases. The only difference is while you pay $800 for the used MBA, I'm buying a Thinkpad T420 for about $375 with an i5 CPU, 8GB RAM, USB3 and a 1600x900 screen. I install a nice mSATA SSD for about $80 to $140 depending on capacity and then I have two drives in the unit, the SSD for the system and apps and the existing hard drive for secondary storage and internal backups. I can also get a choice of high quality docking systems for the thinkpads where I can connect up to three digital displays easily. So for around $500 I have over $2000 worth (original retail value) of enterprise level stuff that is built like a tank and will easily run for at least another 3 years but really as long as I want to keep it.

Here's some refurbished examples (all running Win7 Pro x64 with COA attached)... 

T420 with i7 for $315
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/lenovo-t420-notebook-core-i7-2-8-ghz-4gb-320-gb-dvd-rw-windows-7-pro/272274537.html
T420 with i5 & 8GB RAM for $375
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/lenovo-thinkpad-t420-intel-i5-2500mhz-320gig-hdd-8192mb-dvd-rom-14-0/246599692.html
T420 with 128GB SSD $372
http://www.rakuten.com/prod/lenovo-t420-core-i5-2-5ghz-4gb-ram-128gb-ssd-dvdrw-optical-drive-14in/272550619.html

Rusty


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 7, 2014)

Hi Folks. 
Personally I wouldn't buy in to the Mac system after talking to an Apple Mac tech guy in a pub somewhere. He was explaining how apple decided to cludge together 2 drives using software to simulate a hybrid SSHD, (when SSHD were readily available) their software didn't work in many instances and one of their other tech guys had written a fix that they weren't supposed to give out so you had to "accidentally" terminate the call so they could call you back to tell you how to download and fix your computer! If you get disconnected they call you back but they are not allowed to record the call for training as you haven't initiated the call, therefore they can tell you without getting in to trouble! Really?
Just another example of Apple denying the existence of a problem? 

Cheers, Graham. 

Ps Yes I trust the tech guy, in a pub somewhere!


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 7, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Folks.
> Personally I wouldn't buy in to the Mac system after talking to an Apple Mac tech guy in a pub somewhere.



This is how you make a decision?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Nov 7, 2014)

I used to spend hours trying to get different pieces from different manufacturers to work together seemlessly I finally gave up and went Apple. I operate a 21" iMac, 15" Macbook Pro, iPad Air II, a 1TB Time machine wi-fi hub (with an 2 TB SSD storage drive daisy chained from this), Apple TV and iPhone. 
All my Apple devices screens are color corrected using a X-Rite Colormunki Display including the iPad. I use Adobe Lightroom 5 & Photoshop CC in the monthly Photography package they do, this also gives me Lightroom on the iPad and Creative Cloud. 

Whats great is it just works the only non-Apple piece is the cable modem.


----------



## dstppy (Nov 7, 2014)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Folks.
> Personally I wouldn't buy in to the Mac system after talking to an Apple Mac tech guy in a pub somewhere. He was explaining how apple decided to cludge together 2 drives using software to simulate a hybrid SSHD, (when SSHD were readily available) their software didn't work in many instances and one of their other tech guys had written a fix that they weren't supposed to give out so you had to "accidentally" terminate the call so they could call you back to tell you how to download and fix your computer! If you get disconnected they call you back but they are not allowed to record the call for training as you haven't initiated the call, therefore they can tell you without getting in to trouble! Really?
> Just another example of Apple denying the existence of a problem?
> 
> ...



You're talking about the "Fusion Drive". It's a software solution to what I have as an external drive, which is a hybrid.

Hybrid drives are just regular drives with a small SSD strapped on as an extra-large buffer.

When apple says SSD, it's an SSD.

'"accidentally" terminate the call so they could call you back to tell you how to download and fix your computer!'
Citation Required. Seriously. I'll grant you that their 'geniuses' are far from genuises, and there may be no documentation for an existing problem, but you're talking about a well-known, underhanded tech-support trick by end-reps that apple's support ethos would require firing for.

Specifically, Apple has NO PROBLEM with putting IN WRITING things that if we found out would find demeaning:
http://gizmodo.com/5938323/how-to-be-a-genius-this-is-apples-secret-employee-training-manual

But hanging up on a customer, that's a rogue rep or a crappy manager, not a policy.


----------



## LJ3Jim (Nov 7, 2014)

I've been in the computer industry since 1983. Whether you choose Apple or Windows doesn't matter to me. Both work well, and I know there are fans of both technologies.

If you choose to go the Windows route, I purchased a computer a few months ago that I can highly, highly recommend. It's a Lenovo _Thinkpad_ Yoga (not the Yoga 2). I bought mine at a Microsoft Store because they don't allow any junkware to be installed on it when it's purchased through them. Here's the link:

http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/Lenovo-ThinkPad-Yoga-i7-256GB-Signature-Edition-2-in-1-PC/productID.306276200

The screen on this Thinkpad Yoga is a 12.5" 1920x1080 IPS non-glare screen. It's really nice. I do have a 23" IPS monitor that I plug into occasionally, but I find that I can do most of my post processing without the bigger display. I do have a Spyder calibrator for the screen and the external monitor.

If you get this machine, be sure to set the display scaling to 100% (it will probably default to 120%). 100% works great for processing photos.

Good luck with your new machine, whatever it happens to be!

Regards, Jim


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 7, 2014)

:-[ I gotta throw out an apology to the OP because unfortunately it appears that this thread has (yet again) devolved into a Mac vs PC debate and I don't think the OP has received much in the way of useful advice about his request. I started out just wanting to counter the all too common 'Mac just works' lines and ended up writing a dang novel and falling into the tempting debate trap.

Please understand that my main point is that both platforms are great and pretty similar from a hardware and reliability standpoint. One isn't more magic than the other, they just use different interfaces and are supported differently. And if you look at business line PCs instead of Best Buy specials, that hardware is much more robust, well made and reliable.

So I'll say sorry and appeal to everyone to read the OP's original request for advice about laptop features and tech and NOT about why he should buy Apple or PC. (Which he actually said at the end, he didn't want a flame war.)

I would also invite the OP to do a search on CR about this topic because there have been several long and involved threads already about this topic and there will likely be a lot that can be gained by scanning them.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Nov 7, 2014)

LJ3Jim said:


> I've been in the computer industry since 1983. Whether you choose Apple or Windows doesn't matter to me. Both work well, and I know there are fans of both technologies.
> 
> If you choose to go the Windows route, I purchased a computer a few months ago that I can highly, highly recommend. It's a Lenovo _Thinkpad_ Yoga (not the Yoga 2). I bought mine at a Microsoft Store because they don't allow any junkware to be installed on it when it's purchased through them. Here's the link:
> 
> ...



I would support Jim's suggestion as well. The Yoga is a great product from Lenovo despite it being in their consumer line. The Yoga 1 can be obtained for a great price point too. The Yoga 2 was very well reviewed as a super upgrade but the screen is so high resolution that you will need loupes to read it. The resolution of the Yoga 1 is much more realistic. Lenovo also makes a business line rugged Thinkpad version of the Yoga that is heavier and more expensive but it has an amazing keyboard and is a little easier to set up and support. If you go to the Microsoft Store, make sure you also check out the Surface Pro 3. It is also a great product. Very well designed, well made and a strong competitor to the Yoga series. Also keep in mind that when you start looking at touch screen designs, Windows 8 is your best bet. As much as folks like to hate it, it's actually a great and perfectly fine OS, esp after they released the 8.1 update.


----------



## dstppy (Nov 7, 2014)

RustyTheGeek said:


> :-[ I gotta throw out an apology to the OP because unfortunately it appears that this thread has (yet again) devolved into a Mac vs PC debate and I don't think the OP has received much in the way of useful advice about his request. I started out just wanting to counter the all too common 'Mac just works' lines and ended up writing a dang novel and falling into the tempting debate trap.



I don't think we went THERE per se. ;D He got the standard advice:
1) A desktop is more powerful
2) Some useful hardware suggestions
3) Some specific suggestions of systems

All we're missing is the "You should get Linux" guy. Otherwise, it was pretty civilized and tame


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Nov 8, 2014)

dstppy said:


> RustyTheGeek said:
> 
> 
> > :-[ I gotta throw out an apology to the OP because unfortunately it appears that this thread has (yet again) devolved into a Mac vs PC debate and I don't think the OP has received much in the way of useful advice about his request. I started out just wanting to counter the all too common 'Mac just works' lines and ended up writing a dang novel and falling into the tempting debate trap.
> ...



You should TOTALLY get a Linux! Just kidding, I love my macs. ;D

Cheers,
-Tabor


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 8, 2014)

I spent half a day looking at Laptops. Apple, Dell, Lenovo, HP, every brand.

In the end, I felt that none of them were suitable for serious video editing. Some had reflective screens, some had poor colors, and all were too small for me.

The Apple screens looked best, but were shiny, and my experience has shown me that reflections from a screen are totally inappropriate for editing. 

In the end, I kept my wallet in my pocket to wait for the next generation. They are getting better each time. I have a Lenovo X200s, and its poor compared to the newer laptops.


----------



## traveller (Nov 18, 2014)

Thanks to everyone who answered, especially those that stayed on topic 

Apologies for not posting this earlier (I've been offline for over a week), but for anyone still reading, here is an update:

Based upon the advice here, availability in my local market and portability requirements, I have just purchased a new 15" Macbook Pro (base model). Whilst I am grateful for the many alternative suggestions, I simply couldn't find any available locally (importing isn't an easy option either). 

Owning a Mac is a new experience for me, I've never used anything but Windows (unless one counts AmigaOS and Sinclair Basic, but we won't go there!  ). I plumped for the 15" model because whilst I'm away from home, I'm not really travelling around. I don't want to commit to an external monitor, but nor do I need to carry the laptop around every day. 16GB of RAM should help in future proofing too. 

Thanks again to everyone!


----------



## dstppy (Nov 18, 2014)

Congratz. Don't pirate any apps and you'll be good to go ;D


----------



## dhr90 (Nov 18, 2014)

Congrats! I'm not at all envious 

I'm having the same dilemma myself, but I haven't the budget for a Macbook Pro. I don't want Windows 8, or all the bloating software that goes with Windows. Realistically I've decided to put up with this horribly slow, 7 year old, cheap at the time PC, at least until the next windows OS comes along. It runs lightroom, just takes a bit of time for the images to load, but that is probably down to the library being on an external USB2.0 drive (internal drive is full, and it isn't my PC anyway).


----------



## meywd (Nov 18, 2014)

traveller said:


> Thanks to everyone who answered, especially those that stayed on topic
> 
> Apologies for not posting this earlier (I've been offline for over a week), but for anyone still reading, here is an update:
> 
> ...



Congratz, yeah 16GB is minimum, i have 12GB on my windows 8 desktop and its barely enough - yes 4x VS 2013 windows, 20+ browser tabs, LR, SQL Server, 2 Mail clients, Skype,,,,,,etc etc - also have 16 GB on my late 2011 15" mac upgraded from 4 - after a year of use - and it was a big upgrade. now if you didn't get a SSD then get one, its really a big difference especially if you game  , but you will need external storage for your photos.


----------



## tolusina (Nov 19, 2014)

dhr90 said:


> ....the bloating software that goes with Windows......


There's a misconception.
Windows does not include bloatware, never has. If you were to install Windows from scratch, you'd see that there is very little software installed. 
You'll get Paint, NotePad, WordPad, a photo viewer, Internet Explorer, some basic utilities and a few simple games.

Whatever bloatware you see on Windows boxes is installed by the device's manufacturer like HP, Dell, whoever, it's not Microsoft's doing or fault.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 19, 2014)

tolusina said:


> dhr90 said:
> 
> 
> > ....the bloating software that goes with Windows......
> ...


 
I went searching for bloatware complaints on the Surface Pro, it seems that it has very little. That surprised me. I have no issue removing unwanted software from a computer when I buy it, it may take 20 minutes.


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 19, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I went searching for bloatware complaints on the Surface Pro, it seems that it has very little. That surprised me. I have no issue removing unwanted software from a computer when I buy it, it may take 20 minutes.



Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of "under the hood" improvements in windows 8 (and all windows versions, for that matter). One issue they addressed is the hard disk hog syndrome, esp. after having to download a lot of updates. It's just that focus usually is on the ui like the missing start button.

In a recent win7 automatic update M$ added the option to get rid of *backups* of *replaced/updated* system components (the infamous winsxs folder).
In win8, they at last added the option to get rid of the *source* files for all system components. Otherwise when you "uninstall" solitaire it still keeps the solitaire archive around in case you change your mind. In xp and before, you had to dig out your windows cd, in vista and 7 and later these component source fill up your hd with nothing you can do about it.


----------



## Northstar (Nov 19, 2014)

traveller said:


> Thanks to everyone who answered, especially those that stayed on topic
> 
> Apologies for not posting this earlier (I've been offline for over a week), but for anyone still reading, here is an update:
> 
> ...



You made a great choice. I have the MBpro ret 13" and love it for it's small size, weight, and performance. 

Also, it's a tough little SOB...I set it on the roof of my car and drove off forgetting that it was up there one day a few months ago. It was turned in to the police by a little old lady who found it on the pavement at the edge of a busy intersection a mile from my home. It was protected only by a soft and thin leather case that had been terribly scratched up from smashing onto the pavement and sliding across the intersection. (I concluded that it finally fell off as I made a turn)

At the police station I turned it on and it worked like nothing had happened to it....They just work! (Sorry rusty ;D)


----------



## dstppy (Nov 19, 2014)

tolusina said:


> dhr90 said:
> 
> 
> > ....the bloating software that goes with Windows......
> ...



+1 --- Windows problem has always been that there is too much 3rd party software that tends to go out of support/is poorly written. Keep your installs lean and there's little issue.

Now Outlook, that's another story ;D


----------



## dhr90 (Jan 12, 2015)

Rather than start yet another which laptop thread, I thought it might be better to revive this one. How important is a graphics card for use with lightroom, maybe elements in the future and potentially a small amount of video editing? The cards below are the two I am looking at.

I've narrowed my choice down to two laptops, the PCSPECIALIST Ultranote II or CosmosII (both I have specced with a full HD IPS screen.
One has an Intel HD Graphics Media Accelerator 4600 graphics card, which I believe is built in graphics rather than separate? 
The second has a choice of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 840M 2.0GB DDR3 Video RAM - DirectX11, or the 850M. 
Otherwise the specs are identical between the two choices, but the second laptop will be more than £150 extra.

I've had a play with some Macbook Pro's, and whilst very nice, any with a retina screen and even approach the spec I desire completely smash my budget and are utterly unaffordable for me 

Finally, has anyone had experience of PCSPECIALIST? Slightly wary of it as I haven't heard of it before, but they seem to be well received on the internet, and one of their machines is available from Curry's so should be legit (without the IPS screen or SSD and at a greatly increased price).


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 12, 2015)

dhr90 said:


> Rather than start yet another which laptop thread, I thought it might be better to revive this one. How important is a graphics card for use with lightroom, maybe elements in the future and potentially a small amount of video editing? The cards below are the two I am looking at.
> 
> I've narrowed my choice down to two laptops, the PCSPECIALIST Ultranote II or CosmosII (both I have specced with a full HD IPS screen.
> One has an Intel HD Graphics Media Accelerator 4600 graphics card, which I believe is built in graphics rather than separate?
> ...



While there will be a variety of opinions, my IT experience wants to make these points....

- If you are on a budget, why are you trying to purchase a laptop for image/video editing? You can get a lot more bang for your buck and true performance with a desktop PC and high quality display. Trying to edit images/video on a laptop is ALWAYS a compromise and ALWAYS more expensive to get the compromise.
- With regard to the video systems you reference, it's a laptop. They are all in the same league as far as performance. And the video card performance is a moot point when editing images, it's just not the most important factor. RAM, CPU, even Drive Speed is more important. And since these are all laptop mobile chipsets, they are all going to be fairly limited on color space, etc so it's a really a moot point. I would be more concerned with stability and driver compatibility. And with that in mind, the Intel chipset will likely be the most trouble free with regard to drivers and maturity. (At least that is usually the case.) And I would definitely avoid an AMD CPU/Chipset which is what might be coming with the Nvidia graphics.

Get all the RAM you can without killing your budget (16GB should be enough) and at least a 240GB SSD for the OS, apps and scratch/working disk area. This applies to both a desktop or a laptop.


----------



## Skirball (Jan 12, 2015)

dhr90 said:


> Rather than start yet another which laptop thread, I thought it might be better to revive this one. How important is a graphics card for use with lightroom, maybe elements in the future and potentially a small amount of video editing? The cards below are the two I am looking at.



I have almost no experience with video, but for stills it doesn't matter - assuming you have a modern CPU with integrated GPU. I use the integrated GPU (Intel 4770k) in my desktop and it runs Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom smooth as butter. Based on the research I did at the time I built my PC, unless you get a really high end video card, it doesn't make a difference for stills editing. Even then, the difference was that the high end GPU would run such and such a filter 0.2 seconds faster than the integrated card. That kind of stuff doesn't bother me, so long as it can edit large documents smoothly without stutter and quickly select through photos.

And +1 to everything Rusty said above about the desktop vs. laptop. If you have no choice but to choose a laptop, then deal with what you can get. But as far as value, a laptop can't come close to competing with a desktop. And a desktop is much easier to upgrade down the line. I have to use my laptop, and I make it work. But when I have a lot of editing to do I wait until I'm at my desktop.


----------



## dhr90 (Jan 12, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> While there will be a variety of opinions, my IT experience wants to make these points....
> 
> - If you are on a budget, why are you trying to purchase a laptop for image/video editing? You can get a lot more bang for your buck and true performance with a desktop PC and high quality display. Trying to edit images/video on a laptop is ALWAYS a compromise and ALWAYS more expensive to get the compromise.
> - With regard to the video systems you reference, it's a laptop. They are all in the same league as far as performance. And the video card performance is a moot point when editing images, it's just not the most important factor. RAM, CPU, even Drive Speed is more important. And since these are all laptop mobile chipsets, they are all going to be fairly limited on color space, etc so it's a really a moot point. I would be more concerned with stability and driver compatibility. And with that in mind, the Intel chipset will likely be the most trouble free with regard to drivers and maturity. (At least that is usually the case.) And I would definitely avoid an AMD CPU/Chipset which is what might be coming with the Nvidia graphics.
> ...



- Space. I simply haven't the space for my own desktop while living with my parents (mine is boxed up and just goes on the dining table when I really need it). I currently use their desktop which is a decade old (it was cheap at the time, so a low spec and mine isn't much better), has a full HDD (no content is mine) thus forcing me to import and edit photos on an external drive via USB2.0. Plus the option to use a laptop from the sofa for general surfing etc would be nice. As for a screen, I have my own 23" monitor with a high resolution which is good enough for my needs for serious editing.

I'm looking at a 4th gen i5 4220M 2.6GHz with 1x 8GB RAM and windows 7 64bit. 
I dislike how Windows 8 looks, unless that has some big advantages I've missed, they're the same price so I'm happy to be converted to the newer OS. 
I intend to add another 8GB of RAM in a year or so, prices will hopefully have fallen, and it spreads the cost out.

As for SSD, I'm going to and fro between 120GB and 240GB, again for price. 240GB would be nice and I could keep 80% of my general files and music on it, with photos on 2 or 3 external drives once processed etc. The laptops I'm looking at have the option of replacing the disc drive with a second HDD caddy which is tempting given the OS is pre installed for me.



Skirball said:


> I have almost no experience with video, but for stills it doesn't matter - assuming you have a modern CPU with integrated GPU. I use the integrated GPU (Intel 4770k) in my desktop and it runs Photoshop CS6 and Lightroom smooth as butter. Based on the research I did at the time I built my PC, unless you get a really high end video card, it doesn't make a difference for stills editing. Even then, the difference was that the high end GPU would run such and such a filter 0.2 seconds faster than the integrated card. That kind of stuff doesn't bother me, so long as it can edit large documents smoothly without stutter and quickly select through photos.
> 
> And +1 to everything Rusty said above about the desktop vs. laptop. If you have no choice but to choose a laptop, then deal with what you can get. But as far as value, a laptop can't come close to competing with a desktop. And a desktop is much easier to upgrade down the line. I have to use my laptop, and I make it work. But when I have a lot of editing to do I wait until I'm at my desktop.



Thanks. Just the sort of advice I was looking for about the GPU.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 12, 2015)

*dhr90*, based on the situation that you describe, save a little money and just get a refurbished Lenovo Thinkpad T420 or T430. The T420 is a little older but probably one of the best laptops Lenovo ever made. The T430 (slightly more expensive due to being a bit newer) will lose you the classic style IBM keyboard but gain you integrated USB3 and one gen newer CPU/graphics. But you could add USB3 to the T420 with an inexpensive PCIe card. Add a mSATA 240GB SSD drive and then you will have a spot for a large internal secondary SATA hard drive. Don't worry so much about which generation the i5 CPU is. In your situation, it won't make much of a difference for the amount of money it will cost. You could get a high quality enterprise level laptop and SSD drive for less than $1000 easily. And both have DisplayPort digital external monitor connectors and support a variety of docks if you want to make it easy to use it at the table with the better display, mouse, etc. If you want more info on this, feel free to PM me. I set these up for folks all the time at a fraction of the cost of new ones.

And if you want a true powerhouse, get a *W520*. It has a 15" IPS high resolution display with i7 CPU and supports up to 32GB of DDR3 RAM with 4 modules + USB3. After the same 240GB mSATA SSD drive you will probably still slightly less than $1000.

http://www.notebookreview.com/notebookreview/lenovo-thinkpad-t420-review-the-best-business-laptop/
http://blogs.technet.com/b/keithcombs/archive/2011/03/27/lenovo-thinkpad-w520-mini-review.aspx


----------



## Skirball (Jan 13, 2015)

I dislike how Windows 8 looks, unless that has some big advantages I've missed, they're the same price so I'm happy to be converted to the newer OS. 

I stuck with Win 7 for my desktop for similar reasons. There are some minor advantages to 8, but in my opinion they're not significant. The biggest reason I considered 8 was that the base version can go over 16 gigs of RAM, but that's not going to be an issue on your laptop. Win 8 can start up a bit faster, but I find Win 7 with an SSD to be plenty fast enough. Win 8 claims to have minor performance gains, but I can't imagine it's significant, otherwise there'd be a lot more hoopla over it.


I intend to add another 8GB of RAM in a year or so, prices will hopefully have fallen, and it spreads the cost out.

If you're putting your own RAM in it shouldn't be that expensive. But you can get by with 8 for awhile (but make sure you have the 240 gb for scratch).

As for SSD, I'm going to and fro between 120GB and 240GB, again for price.

I would save until I could afford the 240. I just can't imagine dealing with a 120. Just your OS, programs, and some music, photos, and a few movies can fill that up pretty quick. And that doesn't leave any room for Scratch or work in progress.


----------



## dstppy (Jan 13, 2015)

You're better off with Windows 7 (64-bit).

I just got my kid an office-grade desktop (SSD, i7, 32GB RAM) and Windows 8.1 takes a LOT of getting used to; it's frustrating because I can set up a Win7 box so an XP user can find everything in 20 minutes.


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 13, 2015)

dstppy said:


> You're better off with Windows 7 (64-bit).
> 
> I just got my kid an office-grade desktop (SSD, i7, 32GB RAM) and Windows 8.1 takes a LOT of getting used to; it's frustrating because I can set up a Win7 box so an XP user can find everything in 20 minutes.



Yep. Very true. (Based on my exp with sooo many ex-XP users over the last couple years.)


----------



## Skirball (Jan 13, 2015)

dstppy said:


> I just got my kid an office-grade desktop (SSD, i7, 32GB RAM) and Windows 8.1 takes a LOT of getting used to; it's frustrating because I can set up a Win7 box so an XP user can find everything in 20 minutes.



Agreed, but the key word there is office grade. Windows still dominates the work place, and will most likely continue to do so. So unless Microsoft gives up on the new interface style, or decides to maintain two styles, one for personal/tablets and one for professional use, you're going to have to learn it sooner or later.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 13, 2015)

Skirball said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > I just got my kid an office-grade desktop (SSD, i7, 32GB RAM) and Windows 8.1 takes a LOT of getting used to; it's frustrating because I can set up a Win7 box so an XP user can find everything in 20 minutes.
> ...


Microsoft is getting ready to roll out Windows 10 later on this year... reviews from Beta testers are quite favorable... If you can wait a few months, I would...

P.S. I have windows 8.1 on my laptop. The day Windows 10 comes out is the day it gets wiped and a new OS put in place. My plan is to install a new OS on a new HD.


----------



## Neutral (Jan 13, 2015)

I would suggest to have a look at this : 
http://www.originpc.com/workstation/laptops/eon15-s-pro/
http://www.originpc.com/workstation/laptops/eon17-s-pro/

ORIGIN PC is US based PC manufacturer/vendor for professional top level grade laptops and desktops which are fully customizable - could be ordered in any required for customer configuration. 
You just need to select laptop , select required configuration, place order and you will get best for your budget.

I ordered one in my own configuration one year ago and I am extremely pleased with that since I received that.

I spent quite amount of time evaluating different options from different vendors and found that ORIGIN PC is the best way to go - best investment for available money - you get exactly what you want and need .
It is not very well known brand - as they specialize not in mass production but in providing custom made system with top performance

Regards.


----------



## lvanzijl (Jan 13, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > dstppy said:
> ...



Lots of rumors that windows 10 will be a free upgrade for windows 8/8.1 owners.


----------



## dhr90 (Jan 13, 2015)

Should have mentioned this earlier, my top budget is £700, the UltranoteII is about £620 (about $1000 if my maths is right?) which I am much more comfortable with paying, I'd only go to £700 if it was a high end Macbook Pro sort of spec, which I know won't happen hence my looking to spend a bit less.



RustyTheGeek said:


> *dhr90*, based on the situation that you describe, save a little money and just get a refurbished Lenovo Thinkpad T420 or T430. The T420 is a little older but probably one of the best laptops Lenovo ever made. The T430 (slightly more expensive due to being a bit newer) will lose you the classic style IBM keyboard but gain you integrated USB3 and one gen newer CPU/graphics. But you could add USB3 to the T420 with an inexpensive PCIe card. Add a mSATA 240GB SSD drive and then you will have a spot for a large internal secondary SATA hard drive. Don't worry so much about which generation the i5 CPU is. In your situation, it won't make much of a difference for the amount of money it will cost. You could get a high quality enterprise level laptop and SSD drive for less than $1000 easily. And both have DisplayPort digital external monitor connectors and support a variety of docks if you want to make it easy to use it at the table with the better display, mouse, etc. If you want more info on this, feel free to PM me. I set these up for folks all the time at a fraction of the cost of new ones.
> 
> And if you want a true powerhouse, get a *W520*. It has a 15" IPS high resolution display with i7 CPU and supports up to 32GB of DDR3 RAM with 4 modules + USB3. After the same 240GB mSATA SSD drive you will probably still slightly less than $1000.
> 
> ...



I'm intrigued by those thinkpads, and the w520. But I am VERY hesitant about preowned, even if they are refurbished. The workstation part thought for use with an external screen does sound good, my plan had been to just have them side by side and to use a proper mouse for editing work. I'll think about refurbished and get back to you. Thanks for the offer though! 



Skirball said:


> I dislike how Windows 8 looks, unless that has some big advantages I've missed, they're the same price so I'm happy to be converted to the newer OS.
> 
> I stuck with Win 7 for my desktop for similar reasons. There are some minor advantages to 8, but in my opinion they're not significant. The biggest reason I considered 8 was that the base version can go over 16 gigs of RAM, but that's not going to be an issue on your laptop. Win 8 can start up a bit faster, but I find Win 7 with an SSD to be plenty fast enough. Win 8 claims to have minor performance gains, but I can't imagine it's significant, otherwise there'd be a lot more hoopla over it.
> 
> ...



Sold on Win7 and 240GB SSD after mulling it over at work.



Don Haines said:


> Skirball said:
> 
> 
> > dstppy said:
> ...



Having waited this long, I can wait a bit longer to see what Windows 10 is like. I just don't understand why they would put a touch screen looking interface, on an OS going on non touch screen machines  

Thank you for everyones advice, I look forward to using a machine which I can use within a minute or two of turning on. Currently I switch this machine on and then go to make and eat dinner before this one is ready to use ;D


----------



## RustyTheGeek (Jan 13, 2015)

dhr90 said:


> Should have mentioned this earlier, my top budget is £700, the UltranoteII is about £620 (about $1000 if my maths is right?) which I am much more comfortable with paying, I'd only go to £700 if it was a high end Macbook Pro sort of spec, which I know won't happen hence my looking to spend a bit less.
> 
> I'm intrigued by those thinkpads, and the w520. But I am VERY hesitant about preowned, even if they are refurbished. The workstation part thought for use with an external screen does sound good, my plan had been to just have them side by side and to use a proper mouse for editing work. I'll think about refurbished and get back to you. Thanks for the offer though!



*dhr90*, you're going to have to decide how far you will compromise to stay within your budget. You say you want to save money but then you compare what you prefer to a Macbook Pro and are not comfortable buying used. (And IMO, Macbooks are about the most expensive and worst value/ROI there is. I know many will disagree but I've never considered Macbooks as being that great. Mid range at best as far as performance and usefulness, at least with regard to the hardware. But hey, the marketing is top notch!) I agree that buying a cheap consumer grade plastic laptop used is risky and probably would be a disappointment. However, buying an enterprise grade Thinkpad W520 is akin to buying an L lens. It's built like a tank and assuming it wasn't just totally beat to heck, it will be a great used system and work great for as long as you want to keep it.

Most folks don't realize that the major laptop brands have two lines. One is retail you see in stores. The other is business/enterprise that are only available through specific channels. The enterprise lines are more expensive, better built and last longer. It's not that the retail lines totally suck, they just aren't built to the same standards or consistency. Kind of like L Lens vs EF and EF-S lenses. These include some of the following...

Brand Enterprise vs Retail
Lenovo Thinkpad vs Lenovo (various models)
Toshiba Tecra/Portege vs Satellite etc.
HP Elitebook vs Pavillion
DELL Latitude vs Inspiron


----------



## dstppy (Jan 15, 2015)

RustyTheGeek said:


> Most folks don't realize that the major laptop brands have two lines. One is retail you see in stores. The other is business/enterprise that are only available through specific channels. The enterprise lines are more expensive, *better built and last longer*. It's not that the retail lines totally suck, they just aren't built to the same standards or consistency. Kind of like L Lens vs EF and EF-S lenses.



I can't stress that enough for longevity. In desktops, the price-to-reward makes it a no-brainer. Every time someone says they spent $500 on a computer, I raise an eyebrow and am very glad they don't have my number.


----------

