I’m almost ready to submit my first item here – an under construction/coming soon template. My question is how advanced do these need to be to be accepted? They’re so simple that barely any documentation is necessary and there’s not a lot of room to go nuts on features. Seems like it should be almost all about the design.
Also, is there anything I should watch out for?
The 27” 2560×1440 IPS panel in my iMac (same as in the Thunderbolt display) has served me very well.
I’ve been working on my web design skills for several years now. I’m nothing grand, but I’m not terrible either. My work could probably be accepted here with a little extra elbow grease.
During this time, one quote has consistently come up again and again: “Websites don’t have to look the same in every browser.” I’d be inclined to agree, but all of the designs I’ve created so far just don’t look right if one browser decides to deviate on something by a few pixels. This makes me think it’s a core problem in my design methods, and I’m trying to root it out.
What is the key to designing so that small variations won’t be noticed or make a difference? Is it less fine details (double 1px borders, for instance)? More whitespace? What’s the secret?
I’m confused by what you mean when you say, “16GB external”. The only memory any computer has is its internal memory. It’s not like a hard drive, which can be hooked up through external interfaces like USB and Firewire.
Don’t buy the iMac with 16GB of memory. Just go with the standard 4GB and buy your memory from an online retailer like http://www.newegg.com/ or http://www.crucial.com/ and install it yourself. It’s extremely easy (the iMac has a little hatch that you open to insert the memory sticks into) and you’ll save a ton of money because Apple overcharges for RAM .
If he’s going to wait, then yeah I’d agree with going for the Mac Pro. As it stands, however, the top-end iMac puts the low-end Mac Pro to shame.
I really hope the next Mac Pro update is nothing short of incredible. If it isn’t, I’ll have to turn to hackintoshing to get what I want from a Mac OS machine.
I would say the Sandy Bridge CPU is a good reason. It’s a good leap over Nehalem with a 20% overall performance boost, PLUS you’re talking about whole 1Ghz difference in clock speeds. The iMac is going to perform better in nearly all circumstances.
Let’s not forget that the 5770 is an ancient graphics card now, which is going to impact the performance of things like live/preview rendering and video encoding (OpenCL). The iMac’s 6970 is dramatically more powerful than the 5770 – several times, in fact.
As it is right now, you’re getting a lot more bang for your buck for the iMac than you are for the Mac Pro. The iMac uses a latest-generation Sandy Bridge CPU whereas the Mac Pro hasn’t been updated in two years and uses an outdated Nehalem-based Xeon. This is significant because the Sandy Bridge architecture provides about a 20% performance boost over Nehalem – nothing to be sneezed at.
So while the Mac Pro might do better at heavily parallelized tasks that take advantage of multiple cores (say like video editing/encoding), for nearly any other purpose the iMac is giving you more power for your money.
Something else to keep in mind is that the iMac gives you an industry-grade IPS display, exactly the same as the Apple Thunderbolt display and Dell’s 27” IPS display. One of these alone will run you $1,000US, making the $1,999US 27” iMac a pretty nice bargain. The only sacrifice you make is upgradability.
Hey Doru, you will hear a lot of talk about hypothetical increase in productivity, and whilst I don’t believe these people are lying, I do believe their opinions are… slightly biased.
Take for example, not having to do a reboot for 100 days, well if you turned of windows updates and took necessary precautions to protect against viruses and other nasties, I don’t see why a beefed up spec pc running windows couldn’t stay switched on for 100 days too… in hibernate mode.
As for the interface speeding up the design process, I’m inclined to believe this is also highly biased as well. I mean, all software run EXACTLY the same on both OS’s with exactly the same hotkeys… So how exactly – where and why these increases in productivity comes from I’d love to know…I hope that helps…
Productivity encompasses more than the applications you work with – the operating system’s workflow and UI also make a huge difference. On Mac OS, applications are made to feel like they compliment each other as opposed to Windows, where each program is more or less in its own little bubble. On my Mac I can have several tens of applications open without any of them feeling cramped for space. In contrast, under Windows I feel like each program is competing for dominance over my screen.
There’s also a sizable number of subtleties that speed things up, but aren’t apparent unless you’ve used the system for some amount of time – for instance, clicking a window’s close button while holding down alt closes all windows belonging to that window’s application. The system is loaded with tons of little tidbits like that.
Consistency among application UIs also makes a big difference. In fact, the difference is big enough that Mac users have come to loathe developers who just shoehorn their Windows UI onto the Mac version and don’t bother to properly integrate their software with the OS (big-name software like Adobe CS being the exception).
I use Mac OS X simply because that’s what works best for me with everything I do, ranging from Photoshop to Ruby on Rails to Obj-C/Cocoa to 3D work to about anything else I want to dabble in. It does it all and does it with a UI and workflow setup that’s really smooth for me.
While I am fully capable of using Windows, doing so results in a massive productivity loss. Whenever I am using Windows, I can’t help but think that it’s not designed for massive multitasking; as the number of open programs and windows skyrockets, the taskbar and alt-tab become ever more cumbersome. Even the funny 3D kinda-exposè-but-not-really doesn’t help that much. The other thing that really irks me is the lack of native virtual desktops – Linux and Mac OS have had them for over a decade and yet Microsoft lags behind in this case, refusing to add them to the stock system. Don’t even get me started about not having a Quake-style pulldown UNIX terminal at my beck and call (and no, the command prompt really isn’t the same).
If I had to use something other than Mac OS, it’d likely be either a Linux distro or NetBSD with a nice window manager installed. Overall, Windows really doesn’t fit me at all.
That said, Apple hardware indeed can be expensive. I’m using a 27” iMac at the moment and while it was worth the money (the IPS display is worth $1,000 alone), I wouldn’t even consider touching the Mac Pro lineup in its current state and price. If Apple’s next update to the Mac Pro isn’t satisfactory, I will build myself a hackintosh tower and save around $1,000 – $1,500.
As far as build quality goes, the only laptops out there that are on the same level or are better than Macbooks are Lenovo Thinkpads. They’re tough, have great hardware, and will last you for a long time.
I’ve also heard Dell’s business laptops aren’t bad, but aren’t as good as Thinkpads.
Practically everything else out there is creaky, consumer-oriented plastic junk.