HF100 - computer req's, dvd player req's?

I have a 1999 computer. Have been told a "fast" computer is necessary. Are there minimum req's of a computer to burn a dvd from this camcorder? Also, I only have a "upscaling" dvd player. Do I need a Blue Ray player (or PS3) to play the HD recorded DVD in the best quality? Thanks for your information.

I'd be looking to upgrade your PC definitely. Video is a bandwidth hog that requires a TON of RAM and processing power. Now, multiply that by a factor of 10 and you have Hidef requirements. If your computer is 9 years old, it doesn't have the beef required to process the video signal. You'll end up with a ton of dropped frames, audio synch issues, and that's even at SD quality. You can try and beef up your RAM to the max, it'll improve your performance by about 20%, but I doubt that'll even be enough.

What you need is:

WINDOWS VISTA, XP, and 2000 Operating Systems Processor:

* INTEL PENTIUM 4 2.8 GHz processor or faster
* INTEL PENTIUM D processor
* INTEL CORE Duo and CORE 2 processors (including CORE 2 Duo, CORE 2 Quad, etc.)
* AMD ATHLON 64, 64 FX, and 64 X2 Dual-Core processors
* AMD TURION 64 and 64 X2 Dual-Core mobile processors

Computer Memory (RAM): 2 GB or greater (64 bit systems are unlimited)
Video Display Memory: 256 MB or greater

MACINTOSH OS X
Processor:

* 1.8 GHz POWERMAC G5 or faster
* INTEL CORE Duo and CORE 2 processors (including CORE 2 Duo) D processor

Computer Memory (RAM): 2GB or greater
Video Display Memory: 256 MB or greater

Thank you very much for your response to the computer portion of my question. I believe you are absolutely correct in that my computer needs to be replaced. Since asking the question and researching further, I have decided to buy a HP Pavillion Elite m9340f computer which I believe should resolve the computer issue as to burning DVD's from this camera. The other portion of my question is; when I've recorded HD data on the camera and burn it to a DVD, do I need a blue ray player/PS3 to play the HD DVD, or will the "upscaling" DVD player I have currently not; 1. be able to play it, or: 2. not exhibit the same HD quality I've recorded and burned it to? Hope this makes sense. Thanks again for responding to my questions.

James, thanks for the info and the tip.

James Der.. & TD, Just a comment as I have Asus Gaming laptops (G1S-B1 & G2K-A1), thinking that what gamers like would be a good start for DVE maybe even HD editing if set up is done properly. I can set virtual memory as high as I desire, am still considering a RAID 3 (reliability & back up) on a stand alone Desk Top for bigger projects.

Intel base laptop: CPU T7700 C2D @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB of DDRII-800 CL 4, GPU=GeForce 8600 GT (256 MB Vram).
AMD: TL-64 Turion (x2) @ 2.2 GHz, same DRAM, VRam is 256 w/ hybrid capabilities to 768 MB on a ATI Radeon 2600 HD.

Am hoping to find good 64bit GNU/Linux distro & GNU application (See new Editing Q?) that would be comparable to a MacBook Pro w/ Final Cut but have 2 different machines for less than or the same Apple price.

I'm not a Linux guy, so the best I can do is point you to Sourceforge. Sorry Doug.

The 'Best Answer' is actually somewhat incorrect, or at least misleading. Upscaling doesn't apply to HD content on Blu-ray. Upscaling is a term used with standard-definition DVD players. It describes a circuitry that takes the original standard-def image from an ordinary DVD (480 interlaced lines) and enhances it as best as it can to 1080 lines. All Blu-ray players do this with standard-def DVDs. They don't need to do it with Hi-def Blu-ray discs.

Second, with respect to burning your video to DVD (or 'HD DVD'). Let's clarify a few things here. HD DVD is a dead format. It used to be a competitor to Blu-ray, and it lost the format war earlier this year. If you meant to say burning an ordinary, standard-def DVD from your HD material, you must be aware that you will effectively be down-sampling all HD content into standard definition, which won't look any better than an ordinary standard-def camcorder (of $180 or so). In order to preserve original HD quality, you'll need to burn your final content in Blu-ray format. You can do this with a Blu-ray burner (which is way too expensive -- $25 per blank disc), or you can do some research and do the following. Using one of the Blu-Ray authoring tools (I believe most recent versions of Vegas or Pinnacle Studio can do this), finish your HD movie in Blu-ray format (with menus, if needed); make sure the movie size is within 1 hour and the final MPEG-4 compression level is set so that the total size of all created files doesn't exceed 7.9GB. Instead of burning the project onto Blu-ray disc, save it to your hard drive. Then, burn that onto an ordinary DVD+R DL (dual-layer) - $1 per disc. You can then play back this 'fake' Blu-ray disc in any standard Blu-ray player, and your HD quality will be completely preserved (1920x1080 pixels).

Actually, Predrag, I wasn't saying that HD players upscale HD content. That would be redundant and silly. I was merely saying that most HD DVD players can upscale SD content. But in retrospect, I wasn't as clear as I thought on that. Apologies for the misunderstanding.

Outside of that, your post is very well said. One other thing. You can burn Blu-Ray HD content in HD onto a standard DVD disc. It'll only play on an Blu-Ray DVD player though. NERO does it for Windows, Toast, on the Mac. Nero 8, using Nero Vision will burn it to a DVD-R. Needs to be 1080i. But you will still need a Blu-Ray player/Playstation 3 Blu-ray player to play it back and it’s only about 20 minutes worth on regular DVDs.

Speaking of PS3s, the Blu-Ray that the PS3 has will not deinterlace the video as it plays. Meaning, it won’t knit the two together so you’ll need to rely on your HDTV display to deinterlace it.

James,

Thanks for clearing it up; it completely makes sense.

As for Nero Vision, I didn't know about it (I'm a Mac person, so I know little about Windows solutions). What you are saying, though is that Nero Vision cannot do 1080p? If that's the case, it is my understanding that, even if one uses PS3 as their blu-ray player, pretty much any modern HDTV will deinterlace that (originally progressive) image.

Then I would point you to Toast to try. But yes, the HDTV will handle the deinterlacing.

James. I just bought an HF100 and was doing some googling for AVCHD and Studio and ran across a message board with your posts. I have been researching for days and for way too many hours and out of everything I have read, your couple of posts on the HF100 - computer req's, dvd player req's? thread at digitalcamera-hq.com have been by far the most helpful and appear to by very knowledgeable. This is pretty long but I wanted to give you enough detail to understand what I am trying to do. I have a Samsung 46� flatscreen HDTV with PS3 and standard DVD player. My computer needs to be replaced in order to work with AVCHD video format. My wife says that whenever I make electronic or bigger purchases, I run into �analysis paralysis�. I am having difficulty making a decision on a computer and video editing software.

Here are my wants: Film (most footage is of my 4 kids and their activities) in highest quality available on HF100, burn raw AVCHD to DVD for permanent backup. I want to do farily basic video editing, burn to standard DVD to view in PS3 in high def and burn to standard DVD so parents can watch on standard DVD player. Almost everything I have read online says that transferring, editing, rendering and burning takes hours and hours for 12 months) I will get a blu-ray burner and want to take the previously edited footage and take advantage of the blu ray advanced menu options, but in the meantime I still want to record in 1080, edit in 1080, burn in 1080 and view in 1080. Ideally, I would also like to take some old footage from my Sony mini DVD recorder and combine with some of my new HF100 footage to make a few movies of the kids in their particular sporting events. I do not want to lose the original HD quality throughout the process except for copy intended for my parents standard DVD player.

I think my biggest stumbling blocks are whether to get a new laptop or desktop and whether I should switch to Mac or stay with PCs. I prefer laptops for their portability but understand to get the power I need I will have to spend quite a bit more than I would on a desktop.

I can get a Dell / HP desktop with the following comps for just under $1600. Before the slash is Dell component and after slash is HP component. Personally, I think I could downgrade this some and still have good performance with Studio 12 or PD7.

Intel� Core�i7-920 (8MB L2 Cache, 2.66GHz) / Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad processor Q9650 [3.0GHz]
Vista 64 Bit / Vista 64 Bit
6GB Tri-Chan DDR3 SDRAM at 1066MHz - 6 DIMMs / 6GB DDR2-800MHz dual channel SDRAM [2x2048,2x1024]
750GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache / 500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB / 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4650 [DVI, VGA, HDMI]
20 to 24 inch flat screen

If I go the PC route, I am leaning towards Studio 12 plus or ultimate. PD7 is on my list as well but they do not list on their site nor will they tell me via email if PD7 supports the HF100 and they do not have an 800 number for support... Probably 90% of the reviews and discussion boards I have read about Studio 12 is that it is VERY, VERY slow with AVCHD.

I think with the laptop option in order to get the horsepower I will need I will need to spend well over $2000, unless I go with a macbook. The confusing thing is that I keep getting different answers from BB employees, MacStore employees, apple experts on apple chat, reviews and message boards. Via some of these mac sources, I have been told that I can do what I want to do with the macbook 13.3 white for $999 and have been told by the other mac sources that I will need to get the MacBook Pro for $2000.

So, based on my wants in paragraph 2, can you provide your opinion based on your experience to the following questions?

PC Route
1. Will the components listed on the Dell or HP above allow Studio or PD7 to work very efficiently? Could I even downgrade a bit and if so, on what comps? Perhaps the video card?
2. What about the AMD Phenom Quad Processor? I didn�t list a computer with this processor but that option is available in desktops and is usually cheaper. If you have had luck with AMD, what size processor do you recommend?
3. Is there a big computer horsepower demand difference between PD7 and Studio 12?
4. Do your recommend PD7 or Studio for a beginner and for what I want to do?
5. Can I run other applications such as IE, Word, Excel or Quickbooks on the computer while PD7 or Studio is transferring, editing, rendering or burning?
6. If I go the desktop route, will I absolutely need anything else besides the appropriate computer, software and blank DVDs?
7. Are my research findings correct that in order to get a powerful enough Dell, GW, HP or Asus laptop, I will have to spend > $2000.00.

Mac Route
1. What is the lowest level MacBook required so that I am not waiting hours and hours to do what I want to do using iMovie and possibly FCE? I was very close to getting the 13.3 aluminum for $1599 but changed my mind at the last minute. I was also told by several that you do not need near the processor or RAM on a Mac that you need on a PC to run the same software.
2. If the $1599 Mac will work, will I see a big performance difference between Mac and the PC options above?
3. Can I do everything I want to do in paragraph 2 above seamlessly with Mac?
4. Are there big advantages / disadvantages of iMovie and FCE vs PD7 or Studio?
5. What are advantages of Mac over PC?
6. What are disadvantages of Mac over PC?
7. If I go the Mac route, will I absolutely need anything else besides the appropriate Mac and blank DVDs? I suspect I will probably want to get FCE ($150), iWork ($50) and an accidental coverage plan (~$400) since I have 4 kids running around the house.
8. Is the more expensive Mac route really worth it?
Any other words of wisdom, advice or thoughts are greatly appreciated.

May I offer an opinion here? Here are some quick answers:

Either Mac or PC route will be fine. I will avoid presenting all the arguments in favour of Mac, since it usually brings up the old Windows vs. Mac debate. I know it will work extremely well; it is stable and robust. For working with HF-100 (which I've had for 9 months, since it came out), the difference between PC and Mac is as follows:

1. On Windows, you edit AVCHD files directly. That requires EXTREMELY fast PC (if files are at max bitrate). Also, if you slap on some basic visual effects or transitions, the real-time rendering would turn into a slide-show. On a Mac, you don't edit AVCHD directly (not in iMovie or FCE/FCP; Adobe CS3 or CS4 actually DOES edit AVCHD directly, with same performance issues as PC). Before editing, iMovie or FCE will transcode your movies into much more manageable codec (AIC -- Apple Intermediary Codec). That stuff can be edited on an Intel Mac of any generation (even older ones).
2. On Windows, software such as Pinnacle Studio (or Vegas, or ULead) can edit AVCHD, render Blu-ray (or standard-def DVD) and burn it on Blu-ray or DVD-R discs. It supports standard blu-ray encoding, AVCHD encoding that's compatible with blu-ray players, as well as ordinary SD MPEG-2 (your everyday DVD player). It works well, but demands really, really powerful PC. On Mac, you'll need to buy Toast 10 in order to have similar functionality; iMovie doesn't have its Hi-Def iDVD counterpart (yet). iDVD will do SD DVDs effortlessly; to create HD optical media, you'll use Toast.

As for the time and effort to do this, both PC and Mac will need hours to encode the video, but you can continue to work on other software while encoding goes in the background.

As for Mac software, you probably won't need FCE. The new iMovie has significantly expanded feature set and just might give you enough power for your needs. Spend the money on Toast with HD plug-in instead.

Predrag thanks for the wonderful response. May I ask for some more clarity?

1. With a Mac, do I have the option to burn the AVCHD raw format to a DVD for permanent backup?
2. I assume the AIC can only be edited on a Mac. Therefore, keeping a copy in AVCHD is all the more important if I ever want to work with the same video in a PC right?
3. You say EXTREMELY fast PC for AVCHD...will either of the above desktop builds fall into the extremely fast category?
4. Do I lose the HD quality when transcoded to AIC?
5. I assume the AIC can only be edited on a Mac. Therefore, keeping a copy in AVCHD is all the more important if I ever want to work with the same video in a PC right?
6. Based on your experience, what is the smallest macbook I can get that will still perform well for what I am trying to do?
7. So iMovie / iDVD will allow me to burn an SD DVD but I will need Toast to get HD quality that will play in my PS3 or any other blu ray player? I assume I get the same quality as burning AVCHD directly to a disk and sticking in my PS3?
8. What mac do you use to edit your HF100 video?

Thanks again!

Hick,

While waiting for James's official answer, here are my own to your questions:

1. Yes. Whenever I came close to filling up an 8GB card, I just burn it as a data disc onto a dual-layer DVD-R DL. I store it away and don't think about it. Some Blu-ray players can actualy play that disc directly, although I don't have such a player to confirm.

2. AIC is a QuickTime codes, so it can be played/edited wherever QuickTime exists (i.e. even on Windows XP). However, keeping a copy in AVCHD is always a good idea, especially since it's rather cheap (about $1 per blank dual-layer DVD disc).

3. The specifications of your PCs seem quite sufficient. You should be able to get fairly smooth AVCHD playback with that (as long as you're on XP; with Vista, I'm not so sure, but I can't back it up with personal experience).

4. When you transcode into AIC, it takes all the pixels encoded in AVCHD and converts them into a format that is much easier to edit. While it is NOT a lossless format (therefore, you theoretically lose some image information in the process), the loss is much less significant than the AVCHD artifacts (in other words, it is impossible to see, even for professionals).

5. see answer to No. 2.

6. Any new MacBook will smoothly edit AIC without effort. The only issue is hard disk space, since AIC takes up 10 times as much space. Therefore, for one hour of HD video from HF-100 (8GB), you'll need about 80GB of free disk space. An external USB2 or FireWire (with a white MacBook) drive with plenty of space will solve that problem easily (500GB can be had for about $60 online).

7. With Toast, you'll get practically the same quality as if burning AVCHD directly to a disc and sticking it in the PS3. Practically, but not exactly, since on a Mac, you'll be converting the video from AVCHD to AIC and back. As I said, the difference is really impossible to view.

8. I have an Aluminum iMac (2GHz), as well as a white MacBook (2.2Ghz, Core 2 Duo). They both have 2GB RAM.

I hope this helps!

Predrag, your answers are valued as well. I initially wanted to email both of you by clicking on your names as you can on other message boards. I then noticed your name did not have a hyperling. I typed the info in an email because I was thinking I could email him directly by clicking on his name and because my info and questions were so long. When it was time to email him, I realized you can only post on the site and not email privately and I forgot to remove the info in the first paragraph that specifically referenced James.

Followup to two things.

6. Any new MacBook will smoothly edit AIC without effort. The only issue is hard disk space, since AIC takes up 10 times as much space. Therefore, for one hour of HD video from HF-100 (8GB), you'll need about 80GB of free disk space. An external USB2 or FireWire (with a white MacBook) drive with plenty of space will solve that problem easily (500GB can be had for about $60 online).
If the AIC transcodes to 80GB, how do you then burn that to a DVD. Is it again converted to some other format to make the size smaller?

6. Any new MacBook will smoothly edit AIC without effort. I assume because macs are supposedly much more efficient and it is converted to AIC, a much smaller horsepower machine can work with HD?

Predrag is pretty much right on, but frankly, I'm definitely recommending the MAC. First off, it already comes with everything you need to get started. And the bonus is that you can have the best of both worlds by running Windows as well. Should you get a $999 laptop? I don't think that a 13" laptop will have the real estate you want to do your video editing. But then again, I don't know if you really need to drop $2K on MacBook Pro either (although the new 17" MBP is suhweet). Though it certainly wouldn't hurt. LOL.

That $1600 MacBook would probably work fine for basic video editing, but I'd spend a few hundred more and get a faster processor and double the RAM. And I would recommend FCE. I say that because frankly, ever since Apple redid iMovie from the ground up, they took out a bunch of features and dumbed it down terribly (so much so that they offered iMovie 06 as a direct download for dissatified iMovie users). But it the 08 version did support AVCHD. I haven't had a chance to play with iMovie 09 yet, but I have heard that they address some of the gripes that users had about the new version. So there may be hope. But Final Cut Express is a great interface which will allow you to do much more than capture, trim and burn.

As for the PC side, like I said, you could run Windows on the MAC using boot camp or Parallels and still edit in a Windows Environment. But Pinnacle is no longer the only editing software that supports AVCHD natively. Adobe Premiere Elements 7 does as well now and I really like PE. And you can't argue with the price ... $89. The beauty is that no matter what you go with, just about all the editors are available as Demo Downloads, so you can try each before you buy and determine which one you like best.

I wish there was a way to get beyond the time it takes to encode the video when editing, but unfortunately, there just isn't. The faster the processor and more RAM you have, the faster the encoding will go.
PC ... if you're doing video, you should probably go 64 bit as the advantage is that you can use over 4GB or RAM. But there comes a point where the performance bump plauteaus and it just doesn't justify the expense. And that is around 8GB IIRC.

And here's a tip on your video import. Rather then importing at 1080i, import at 540p. You'll get about 95% of the quality for less time importing and encoding. And it takes up less space as well.

Do you need iWork? That's Apple's office software, which you won't need.

Also, I agree that TOAST is going to be the best way to burn to HD DVD. But you also have an extra advantage having a PS3. With the cost of Blu-ray discs still hovering around $10 a pop, you can actually burn HD to Standard DVD and play it on a PS3 Blu-ray player. You won't have a ton of time on it, but it's an option for small, short videos.

Finally, with the latest models of Macs, you can only get firewire available through the Pro series, as Apple has foolishly dumped firwire in the lower models in favor of USB2. Which, IMNSHO is an epic fail.

Outside of that, I don't think I can add any more to what's been shared. To sum up, I recommend the MAC, Final Cut Express, and importing as 540P.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for all the wonderful advice Predrag and James!

James,

I don't think there would be any use for FireWire with new tapeless HD camcorders; none of them have it and they only use USB2 to transfer AVCHD files. So, the loss of FireWire on the new MacBooks is pretty much inconsequential for vast majority of consumers moving to HD. Having said that, if money is a serious constraint, even the sub- $1,000 white MacBook is capable of editing HD without trouble. The screen is indeed small, but on a low budget, I'd still recomment that any day, rather than a bigger-screen Windows laptop for the same money.

My suggestion regarding Final Cut Express was to hold off with purchase until seeing iMovie 09. I got it, tried it and switched from FCE to iMovie 09 for most of my HF-100 editing. It is indeed significantly better than the 08, which was, at least for me, practically useless. For home movies, and even for some more ambitious work, iMovie 09 gives a lot, so $150 is an expense that could potentially be avoided.

Predrag and James, I sense some tension between you two by reading this complete thread. I want to thank both of you very much for your input. It has been very helpful. How do I give you points for your answers? I am new to this forum.

I understand the following:
1. Both of you have used both Macs and PCs for AVCHD editing and both prefer a Mac over PC, regardless of PC's horsepower.
2. I see above and have read other reviews that iMovie 08 was stripped down. 09 appears to be better. I suspect iMovie 09 will work for my basic editing needs. I can save $ on FCE by seeing if iMovie 09 meets my needs.
3. Need Toast if I go the Mac route to burn HD quality on standard DVD to view in HD on my PS3.
4. James says $1600 mac will work but I assume recommends the step up to Pro based on his comment to spend a few hundred more to get bigger processor and double Ram...and more real estate. Predrag realizes the budget concerns and says $1000 mac is capable of what I want to do. It is obvious that the more horsepower the better my results and performance going the Mac or PC route.

Clarification Questions:
1. James = "You won't have a ton of time on it, but it's an option for small, short videos." Nick = How long of an HD movie can I burn to a standard DVD?
2. If the AIC transcodes to 80GB, how do you then burn that to a DVD? Is it again converted to some other format to make the size smaller?
3. Predrag = "Any new MacBook will smoothly edit AIC without effort." Nick = I assume because macs are supposedly much more efficient and it is converted to AIC, a much smaller horsepower machine can work with HD?
4. Do you mind sharing why both of you prefer the Mac for my needs considering the lower the expense the better? I still see the Mac route as being much more expensive, especially if I go above the entry level Mac. Both routes provide the editing I want. Keep in mind, never used a Mac except clicking a few icons at BB and Apple Store.
5. Never really heard either of your thoughts on why to not go the PC route. Perhaps because you are biased toward macs because that is your daily computer...?
6. With all the transcoding going the Mac route, the human eye can really not see the results of the degradation?

Nick,

I'll chime in again (by the way, no tension anywhere; it's just that sometimes I tend to be vocal in providing my opinion).

Basically, you got everything right. Here are my own answers to these:

1. AVCHD can squeeze more than an hour of HD on an 8GB dual-layer DVD, but the actual length will depend on the bitrate. Original AVCHD files from HF-100 use 17Mbps, which puts one hour. If you lower the bitrate to 12Mbps (and resolution to 1440x1080), you can put 80 minutes of video.

2. the 80GB of data in AIC is used for editing. When you export, you'll be creating MPEG-4 files, which will be compressed depending on your target format. As answered in 1, if you encode at 17Mbps, you can squeeze full hour on DVD-R DL.

3. The main reason is not so much that Macs are much more effficient (perhaps only slightly); it is the AIC. In Windows, you'll usually edit AVCHD directly (most tools have workflow set up for that, and transcoding into something similar to AIC is a bit complicated process).

4. and 5. Well, this goes back to the Mac vs. PC argument, with a twist. For the most part, you get much better reliability with Macs. In windows, oftentimes, something won't work. Your AVCHD files won't be properly recognised; your software may not find the codec, and in general, you may have stability or performance problems. Macs have always been famous for their consistent and intuitive interface. The software package that comes with them is smoothly and tightly integrated (your iTunes music and iPhoto pictures are available in iMovie, as well as all the short movies captured with a digital picture camera), I've seen people (such as my wife) who have never used anything other than a web browser intuitively transfer video from the camcorder, edit it, create titles, transitions, add music, even narration and export it to DVD with chapter markings. It is smooth, fast, intuitive and reliable.

If you are a person who is extremely proficient in computers and IT in general, you will probably quickly figure out any software and the usability differences may be less significant to you. Still, it generally makes it easier and faster to use software that requires fewer mouse movements or mouse clicks to accomplish things. And on a Mac, especially with Apple's own software, everything is generally very carefully designed to require as few mouse movements and clicks as possible. In the long run, a Mac investment ends up costing less than a Windows; a friend of mine has a G4 PowerMac from year 2001. He upgraded the OS to the most recent (Leopard), uses most recent versions on majority of Apple's software and the machine performs quite well. No ordinary Windows PC from 2001 can do anything meaningful with Windows Vista today (and most can't even work with Vista).

and finally, 6. Yes, even though the transcoding happens twice on a Mac (vs. only one on a PC), human eye won't notice the degradation.

No tension at all. Predrag has given great advice. I'm just adding things, filling in gaps, where I see it, is all. That's true, predrag, but that just underscores the tragedy that firewire was abandoned. Being a larger pipeline, it was a waste to sacrifice it for USB 2. But then again, USB 3 is going to trump all of it when it debuts later this year or next. So I guess it's a moot point.

I agree that with work a 13" MacBook could handle it, but 13" is pretty postage stampy. I was merely pointing out that a larger screen gives breathing space for working, and being that part of the issue was how long it would take to capture and encode, using a faster chip with more RAM would merely cut the time down.

ANd don't forget that even on a budget, using the MacMini with a stronger chip will save you money - even though I know you'd prefer a laptop. But the MAC works great largely because of the OS. It's faster, more secure, and as stated, AIC works more efficiently. And as I stated, if you import at 540p, rather than 1080i, you can get about 90-95% the quality at half the space. This saves time and resources.

In addition, if you're buying a new Mac, you get all the software you need to hit the ground running (save Toast, that is). It's all in. And while I still use both formats and edit primarily on Adobe Premiere, I have since moved to recommending the MAC because of it's security, software, and the ability to run Windows in dual boot, and that gives you the best of both worlds.

And again, Predrag is offering fantastic advice, no tension on my part, I can assure you of that.

Totally agree with everything James said here, especially about FireWire. The fundamental difference between FW and USB makes it superior even to the future USB3, since USB is still less robust and reliable. This is a discussion for another forum, but the bottom line is, there will surely a number of people who will not buy a computer without the FireWire. Hopefully, no other future Macs end up deprived of this interface.