Will a new computer help?

Mxsmanic wrote:

Walter Banks writes:

Windows 8 seems to me based on that little I have seen from the beta,
a move to add on more touch functionality on Windows 7.

Which is worse than useless to me on the desktop.

I agree that Windows 8 will likely have a short product life there were a lot
of changes and not all of them are going to stand the test of time.

The more desperate Microsoft becomes for revenue, the shorter the Windows
product cycle becomes.

I don't think that is particularly true. I do think they have become much better at
technology changes. It is nice to see that they are supporting the touch screen
slate that I have rather well. They also supported W2000 and XP for
about 10 years significantly longer that most of the hardware support that
I have seen.

I am still doing a significant amount of development work on W2000
computers.

w..

On 22 Feb 2012 in rec.photo.equipment.35mm, tony cooper wrote:

That's true with current version, but prior versions don't use central
validation. I forget when this came about, but I don't think my
Photoshop 7.0 was subject to this. Nor do I think Elements 5.0 was.

CS3 (version 10) had online authentication for sure. I'm pretty sure
that's when authentication was introduced.

--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:54:59 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:

Oh yeah, sorry. My invoice does not say which USB. Pchased Aug. 2004.
But
the question is will that type of port allow for a fast enough file
access
(using Canon DPP) with a drive with a fast access speed?

If your computer was purchased in 2004 it very likely has USB 2. It
also probably has DDR memory and not just SDRAM. Your initial
description of it led me to believe it was older than that: hence all
my negative comments about its speed. Not withstanding that it will
still be slow compared with computers of today. My comments about the
tires probably still hold.

I have an external HDD on USB as a backup drive and, while it is not
dead slow, I would not like to rely on it for routine disk access.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Right again. Invoice days DDR SDRAM. Clearly I need help with this stuff,
just understanding the basics.

I took computer programming in the 60's. We had to drive our punch cards to
a city an hour away to run them. In graduate school I wrote my own programs
to analyze my data, rather than try to make packaged statistics conform to
my needs (SPSS, BMDP).

But now the makers of the technology don't want us to get comfortable with
anything: As soon as we are we have to buy the "upgrade" in order to make
it all work. So I resist. I'm still using a Windows 98 machine for my
internet access.


Another advanyage of getting a new machine - some have USB 3

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:11:51 -0500, "K W Hart" wrote:


"Alan Justice" wrote in message
...


snip
Oh yeah, sorry. My invoice does not say which USB. Pchased Aug. 2004.
But
the question is will that type of port allow for a fast enough file access
(using Canon DPP) with a drive with a fast access speed?
--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/


USB is not the fastest way to access a disk drive. There are two ways that
digital devices can communicate: serial and parallel. Serial comunication,
such as USB, sends one bit after another. Parallel communication sends
bytes, which are multiple bits (8, 16, 32 or in some cases, 64) at the same
time. If a device has a cable with a lot of wires, and a connector with a
lot of pins, it is likely parallel- for example, an IDE hard drive has
(IIRC) a 32 pin connector. It sends (IIRC) 16 bits at one time. A USB device
would send those same 16 bits one after another.

I have a connector device that allows me to connect a bare IDE drive to my
USB port. It is painfully slow. If I were to install that same IDE drive
inside the computer and connect it through the hard drive controller, it
would be substantially faster.

There may be more to this than you think... most internal drives today are
serial... (SATA) and faster than older parallel drives. USB 3 is potentially
faster than all of them. The transport data stream speed is more important than
the S/P format.

The converter that you have probably has a lot of overhead... I have a few
myself and I don't think much of them. They may be USB 1.1 or something.

I have 2 DVD drives in one of my computers, one is parallel and one sata, and
they are about the same speed. (I tested them) Even though one is a slave to
the HD it sometimes wins in speed but sometimes loses. There are a lot of
variables!

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:11:51 -0500, "K W Hart"
wrote:


"Alan Justice" wrote in message
...


snip
Oh yeah, sorry. My invoice does not say which USB. Pchased Aug. 2004.
But
the question is will that type of port allow for a fast enough file
access
(using Canon DPP) with a drive with a fast access speed?
--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/


USB is not the fastest way to access a disk drive. There are two ways
that
digital devices can communicate: serial and parallel. Serial
comunication,
such as USB, sends one bit after another. Parallel communication sends
bytes, which are multiple bits (8, 16, 32 or in some cases, 64) at the
same
time. If a device has a cable with a lot of wires, and a connector with a
lot of pins, it is likely parallel- for example, an IDE hard drive has
(IIRC) a 32 pin connector. It sends (IIRC) 16 bits at one time. A USB
device
would send those same 16 bits one after another.

I have a connector device that allows me to connect a bare IDE drive to
my
USB port. It is painfully slow. If I were to install that same IDE drive
inside the computer and connect it through the hard drive controller, it
would be substantially faster.

There may be more to this than you think... most internal drives today are
serial... (SATA) and faster than older parallel drives. USB 3 is
potentially
faster than all of them. The transport data stream speed is more important
than
the S/P format.

The converter that you have probably has a lot of overhead... I have a few
myself and I don't think much of them. They may be USB 1.1 or something.

I have 2 DVD drives in one of my computers, one is parallel and one sata,
and
they are about the same speed. (I tested them) Even though one is a slave
to
the HD it sometimes wins in speed but sometimes loses. There are a lot of
variables!



I'm not that interested in file transfer rate from one device to another.
My question is: Will these "fast drives" mean that my raw files will load
faster in my Canon software (DPP)? Or is processor speed more important?
--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
--- snip

I thought that when you buy software it can be installed on all of your
computers because you can only use one at a time. It's a single user.

There are different license agreements used by different companies, in
terms of what's "legal". (And shrink-wrap licenses have been upheld at
least to some extent in court, which is appalling.)

Photoshop allows me to install on two computers, or perhaps more if I
"deactivate" one of the licenses. Since they use central validation,
they can somewhat enforce this (you have to crack the whole DRM
scheme).

Sony Vegas Movie Studio HD has a one-use-at-a-time license, no rules
about number of systems installed on.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

Central validation? An internet connection? I expect to get the latest
PhotoShop at some point, but I protect my computer by not going online with
it. I use another one for that. Does that mean that I can't use PS on it?
--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/

On 2012-02-22 04:18:04 -0800, Mxsmanic said:

Alan Browne writes:

Le Snip

OS X is just a solid OS.

So are all versions of Windows based on NT (which includes NT itself, XP,
Windows 7, Vista, etc.).

VISTA!! ??? A solid OS?
What are you smoking?


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:10:20 -0800, "Alan Justice"
wrote:




wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:11:51 -0500, "K W Hart"
wrote:


"Alan Justice" wrote in message
...


snip
Oh yeah, sorry. My invoice does not say which USB. Pchased Aug. 2004.
But
the question is will that type of port allow for a fast enough file
access
(using Canon DPP) with a drive with a fast access speed?
--
Alan Justice
http://home.earthlink.net/~wildlifepaparazzi/


USB is not the fastest way to access a disk drive. There are two ways
that
digital devices can communicate: serial and parallel. Serial
comunication,
such as USB, sends one bit after another. Parallel communication sends
bytes, which are multiple bits (8, 16, 32 or in some cases, 64) at the
same
time. If a device has a cable with a lot of wires, and a connector with a
lot of pins, it is likely parallel- for example, an IDE hard drive has
(IIRC) a 32 pin connector. It sends (IIRC) 16 bits at one time. A USB
device
would send those same 16 bits one after another.

I have a connector device that allows me to connect a bare IDE drive to
my
USB port. It is painfully slow. If I were to install that same IDE drive
inside the computer and connect it through the hard drive controller, it
would be substantially faster.

There may be more to this than you think... most internal drives today are
serial... (SATA) and faster than older parallel drives. USB 3 is
potentially
faster than all of them. The transport data stream speed is more important
than
the S/P format.

The converter that you have probably has a lot of overhead... I have a few
myself and I don't think much of them. They may be USB 1.1 or something.

I have 2 DVD drives in one of my computers, one is parallel and one sata,
and
they are about the same speed. (I tested them) Even though one is a slave
to
the HD it sometimes wins in speed but sometimes loses. There are a lot of
variables!



I'm not that interested in file transfer rate from one device to another.
My question is: Will these "fast drives" mean that my raw files will load
faster in my Canon software (DPP)? Or is processor speed more important?

You also have to take into account the speed of the internal system
bus and the speed of the memory system. You will probably be buffering
onto the internal hard drive so it's speed will be important also.
There is not much point in speeding up part of the system if there are
still slow pathways to be traversed.

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2012-02-22 05:39:01 -0800, Pete A said:

On 2012-02-20 21:34:14 +0000, Alan Browne said:

[...]
If you get a Mac, order it with minimal memory and update that yourself
with mail order modules (various good sources). Much cheaper (no
effect on warranty).

I wish I hadn't done that :-(

Some Macs have only two memory slots (both of which must be filled). It
would've been much cheaper to order my machine with more memory rather
than replace it later.

OWC will credit you for any memory you have to exchange. So if you buy
2x2GB, or 2x4GB DDR to upgrade the 2x1GB original memory installed. You
install the new memory and then send them the old for the refund.
There might be vendors in the UK who make similar deals.
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple/memory/

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Mxsmanic writes:

David Dyer-Bennet writes:

Sony Vegas Movie Studio HD has a one-use-at-a-time license, no rules
about number of systems installed on.

But doesn't it call home during installation?

I think it may, I don't remember for sure.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info