Linked by David Adams on Wed 10th Sep 2008 21:33 UTC
It this post Geek.com offers a walkthrough of the building of a powerful, yet affordable workstation. Each of the parts was carefully chosen and the build was extensively detailed. There were some problems, but those were worked around and the end result was an impressive 64-bit workhorse.
Thread beginning with comment 330026
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
The USB port on the camera ONLY supports JPEGs, not RAW files, so it's useless to me. I could use a memory card reader, but why should I have to? The camera *comes* with a damn well ieee1394 port, so it should be God damn usable.
So why not actually use the IEEE1394 port instead of the USB port? It takes a different cable, but it'll be faster than the USB.
Member since:2006-12-16
Sorry, thought I made my previous Canon rant clear lol! Canon cameras (pro ones, the normal ones don't use ieee1394) like the 1D series are primarily designed to use the ieee1394 port for data transmission. If you shoot RAW, then you MUST use the ieee1394 connection, the USB connection ONLY supports JPEGs via PTP. Canon uses a closed proprietary variation of the ieee1394 interface I believe, so a standard driver does not work. Canon will NOT produce a 64 bit driver for the ieee1394 connection. Herein lies my problem.
Dave
Member since:
2006-12-16
Agreed. I ended up paying around 3.5k (AU) including a 24" Samsung monitor for my new system (quadcore 6600, 8GB ram, Vista 64 bit, 1.5tb of hdd space, motherboard etc etc). I could have picked up a similar spec machine probably cheaper pre built. The OEM market is dead these days, it's not like the good ole days of circ 97/98, when real bargains could be had by buying OEM and building yourself.
As an aside - my system flies. I very happy with Vista, less happy with hardware manufacturers though (more on this later on). I see my 4 cores being used quite often, certainly not fully utilised 100%, but still being used. And yes, XP lets you assign the cores to processes etc, but Vista is EVEN better in this respect by all accounts (I've been too lazy to bother playing with this feature).
3rd party hardware manufacturers are crap with 64 bit support. This is *not* Microsoft's fault, it's lazy, good for nothing, hardware manufacturers who like making nice profits but not spending the small change to build 64 bit drivers. Case in hand - Canon EOS 1DMark IIn (pro camera, out of the price range of your average person) - absolutely no 64 bit support for the ieee1394 connection (which I need for a variety of reasons), and they have absolutely NO intention of doing so. If Canon treats its customers so badly like that, then it's Nikon for me. This time next year I'll be over to a Nikon D3. I'm not going to waste anymore time with such a shyte manufacturer.
Dave
PS I've been a loyal Canon user for 20 years...so much for goodwill, or customer support, let alone technical support. Canon sucks. BIG time.
edit: I shoot RAW (and convert to 16 bit tiffs later either using Canon's DPP or Capture One Pro v3.8). The USB port on the camera ONLY supports JPEGs, not RAW files, so it's useless to me. I could use a memory card reader, but why should I have to? The camera *comes* with a damn well ieee1394 port, so it should be God damn usable. I should not have to change my operating system choice because Canon is a bunch of lazy, tight a$$ed a$$holes. I chose Vista because it was a good, solid improvement over XP, and I chose 64 bit for the better memory management, which is highly useful with Photoshop as you could imagine.
Edited 2008-09-11 02:03 UTC