Best computer for HD & Vegas?
 

What are some minimal specs for this as far as processor and memory go?

Straight from the ReadMe file for Vegas 6.0d:


System Requirements:

The following lists the minimum system requirements for using Sony Media Software Vegas software:

Microsoft® Windows® 2000, XP Home, or XP Professional (Windows XP SP2 required for HDV)
800 MHz processor (2.8 GHz recommended for HDV)
200 MB hard-disk space for program installation
600 MB hard-disk space for optional Sony Sound Series Loops & Samples reference library installation
256 MB RAM (512 MB RAM recommended for HDV)
OHCI-compatible i.LINK® connector*/IEEE-1394DV card (for DV capture and print-to-tape)
Windows-compatible sound card
CD-ROM drive (for installation from a CD only)
Supported CD-Recordable drive (for CD burning only)
Microsoft DirectX® 9 or later (included on CD-ROM)
Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 SP1
Internet Explorer 5.1 or later (included on CD-ROM)

The better question (because as you see your answers were staring you in the face) would have been what is the best chipset or something similar... I am quite curious as to what is the better chipsets myself.

I would say that the Sony specs are minimum for editing/rendering HDV. I exceed those specs and it is a struggle to play 1920x1080 files at full speed, much less edit them easily. I would not suggest anything less than a 64 bit dual core CPU at this point whenever high definition anything is mentioned. Yes, it is possible to accelerate editing a little if you use an intermediate codec, but rendering is still gonna take a long time with a single core. I don't think the chipset matters much any more, at least on the new boards. I'm in the process of updating my overclocked 2.8 GHz AMD XP Barton to a Core 2 Duo setup as soon as the new CPUs are available.

I could be wrong but I think everything is in the chipset... otherwise a 400 emachine would be just as good as a similar spec'd custom built that cost 3 times as much. To me it all comes down to motherboard.

Don't get me wrong. Motherboards are important. But, there are Intel, Nvidia, ATI, SIS and Via chipsets that all perform pretty close to one another depending on the motherboard manufacturer. The latest chipsets are the ones that complement the latest CPUs. HOW the motherboard manufacturer incorporates the chipset is more important than the chipset alone. I tend to select the CPU first, then the best performing motherboard with the features I want (like Firewire ports, etc.) to complement it.

Agreed

There should be a list of pc's and mother boards to avoid ;)

My computer is already a Celeron 2.0, with 768 memory and it is slow to edit and shunky, but still plays. I am going to upgrade this week - but more importantly, how about the video card? Is it going to play any part in making this work?

It's only role is in feeding whatever monitor(s) you have.
Other than that, a more expensive video card gains you nothing unless you're also a gamer who needs things like 3D features.

In my opinion any upgrade now should be based on the requirements for Vista (nomatter if you think to use it or stick with WinXP)!
For that reason speaking of graphics card you should get no less than 256MB fited one.
I never tried HD playback not to speak editing but roughly speaking you need 5 times faster proccesing power than the older P4 3 GHz CPU based system to get same ease of editing experience. I havent heard of anything equal (no matter how many cores) of 15GHz so we have to wait longer for easy HD editing I guess.

P.S. Ohh, and feeding a monitor with HD might urge VGA card makers to implement some hardware acceleration in their chips... Remeber that days when even DVD playback was only CPU related task?

If you go with 720p @ 24fps, it's only about 2.5 times heavier than DV. 1080p @ 60 Hz is another story altogether.

Video cards don't normally add much to the editing experience. Except the new ATI cards with Avivo can be used to accelerate rendering.

I am going to upgrade to this :

Intel 4 - dual core 800fbs - 3.0ghz
1 gig memory ddr400
Asus motherboard that will let me use DDR400 ram

Hopefully this will be enough to get me through this project!

Again, amazingly, I can edit the HD footage with my celeron 2.0 ghz - slow slow slow. I can't scrub, but I can render it out and it doesn't take that long. Just playback of the video looks choppy and chugs.

do most video cards support dual monitors these days? I really don't know. If not, that's certainly a nice thing to have....

So what would be the best MAC option in a laptop. Would the MacBook Pro just as it comes enough? I'm looking at a MAC instead of a pc for my laptop.