Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Please help me choose a MAC

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by X Wolf, Mar 7, 2006.


  1. X Wolf

    X Wolf Guest

    I have an ancient Gateway 650 and I have been running Windows 98SE for the last six years! I'm about to make the leap to a Mac and I've got it narrowed down to either

    1) The iMac 20" with the new Intel Core Duo chip or...

    2) The Mac-Mini 1.66 Ghz with the new Intel chip and a separate Apple 20" Cinema monitor.

    Can any of you Mac fans tell me which one I should get and why? I would really appreciate the input. I plan to get the 1 Gig memory upgrade either way because I like to use Photoshop.

    Thanks,

    George
     
  2. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    I'd go for the 20" iMac...Heres why:

    Faster processors
    Bigger HD (3x bigger), and more space for upgrades Mini can only have a 120gig HD max
    Better graphics card
    Built in iSight camera
    20" Cinema Display built in (which is absolutely stunning BTW)

    I'd go for the iMac because you get a faster machine with a bigger HD for only $100 more.

    On the other hand, If you buy the Cinema Display you can easily upgrade your machine without sacrificing the display.
     
  3. iMac all the way. I have the PPC version with iSight. Like others said, more expansion capability.
     
  4. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    http://www.123macmini.com/

    There's a whole community for Mini users.

    Your post has got me thinking. I'm well overdue for a new home machine, but given all these new developments with Apple lately- I've been holding out to see how the intel chip transition develops. I'm now thinking I might go with a mini and the 20" Cinema Display for home. That way I can easily upgrade the machine in a couple years if I want without sacrificing the display.

    Keep in mind certain software, Photoshop in particular is not written for optimum performance with the intel chip. It will run thanks to Apples Rosetta...but the performance suffers compared to the PowerPC machines. Apple and Adobe both claim it's not too bad...but I've used it and it is. Definitely not up to speed for professional designers like myself who rely on PS greatly. But, its only a matter of time until Adobe releases CS3 which will be universal, and most likely users will be forced to upgrade.

    Also, April 1st is Apples 30-year anniversary. You might want to wait until then. They are going to be unveiling more new products, probably something big.
     
  5. X Wolf

    X Wolf Guest

    Thanks so much for all the great input! I'm not going to be making the purchase until the middle of April, so that will give me some time for more research and to see what Apple has up it's sleeve come April 1st. I really appreciate all the helpful posts, Thank you again.

    George
     
  6. Tsal

    Tsal

    Jan 28, 2000
    Finland, EU
    If you want my guess for the 30th anniversary, it's a performance consumer unit, eg. Mini's big brother. Probably in the Cube format.

    On the other hand, they've been rumouring about the TabletMacs, VideoPods and whatnot. And MacBook's supposed to be out soon, not that it's anything spectacular. But there's a load of websites dedicated just for what Apple comes up next, so perhaps we don't need to go into details.

    But anyways, the new Intel-Mini isn't a bad machine, as long as you don't need heavy gaming performance. I'd buy one, but I want it to play my WoW too :ninja:

    By the way, Mr. Burnt, did you try the PS in one of the new DuoCore machines, or on the older developers Intel kits?
     
  7. burgerme

    burgerme

    Mar 3, 2006
    Friends don't let Friends buy Mac.
     
  8. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    My buddy just bought the Duocore Mini. We were running filters on a couple hi-res images and large files with many layers. We A/B tested it against a dual 2ghz PPC G5 and it took substantially longer on the intel machine.
     
  9. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    Mac Jeep

    Check it out, this is so cool. Theres like a whole culture of people that are installing mac minis in their cars. Here's a site dedicated to it. http://www.macvroom.com/
     
  10. skewh

    skewh

    Sep 5, 2005
    Ithaca, NY
    I would go with the iMac, because for $100 more, you get every thing you need, and an extra .4 GHz, whereas with the Mini you will have to buy a mouse, keyboard et cetera.
     
  11. Tsal

    Tsal

    Jan 28, 2000
    Finland, EU
    Thinking this thing over, I would go for the Mini if you are on budget and want to spread the cost of the machine over a couple of months, but if you have 2k of spare cash floating around you could go straight for the 20" iMac.

    There's not a huge performance gap between those two, except for the Mini's graphics card, so it comes to the display you want to use. If you have a good old tube display floating around, you can use that for the graphics work. The HD size is a big issue with the Mini, though, however there are a bunch of external HDD/hubs designed to sit under Mini out there already.
     
  12. C-5KO

    C-5KO

    Mar 9, 2005
    Toronto, Canada
    If you're going for the Intel chip, wait until the second gen's come out. I'm a Mac user, and I've seen enough first generation problems going through PowerPCs, G3, G4, and G5s. Not to mention about a dozen friends who also have been burned by first gen mistakes. Mac's are great, but their first gen's suck.

    Besides, when second gen's come out, the prices usually drop a good chunk.
     
  13. I'd have to agree with the previous poster, to a certain degree. It's always a good idea to give them a chance to work out the bugs. However, if you're in the market NOW, then you don't really have a choice. The PPC models are going away pretty fast and, in some cases, already have.

    I was at MacWorld and saw the Intels demoed. They performed well under most conditions. If you're running Photoshop or the Adobe suite, then you might re-consider.
     
  14. Tsal

    Tsal

    Jan 28, 2000
    Finland, EU
    Also what you want to consider is that Intel-versions of those software are coming. Sooner or later, they will be up to speed, and G5-versions are going to be outdated.
     
  15. WillPlay4Food

    WillPlay4Food Now With More Metal! Staff Member Supporting Member

    Apr 9, 2002
    Orbiting HQ
    Coming, as in 2007 though.
     
  16. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    That long huh?
     
  17. C-5KO

    C-5KO

    Mar 9, 2005
    Toronto, Canada

    Thanks.

    You'd also might reconsider waiting if you're running Protools, Abelton Live, and probably Logic.
     
  18. X Wolf

    X Wolf Guest

    Curious about the specifics of the downside of running Photoshop on the new Intel Core Duo Macs. I've been running Photoshop on a 650 Mhz Gateway with 256 Mhz memory and yes it is painfully slow but basically all the functions work. What specifically does the Mac with the new chip "not" do? I appreciate your patience with my limited knowledge.

    Thanks again I'm learning a lot!

    George
     
  19. 43% burnt

    43% burnt an actor who wants to run the whole show

    May 4, 2004
    Bridgeport, CT
    Photoshop still functions on the intel macs. However, performance suffers in terms of speed mainly...due to the use of Apples "helper" application Rosetta which basically works behind the scenes to translate it into universal binary which the intel duocore processor understands. In a nut-shell that is...probably more to it technically but thats the jist.

    You might not notice much difference due to the slow performance of PS on your current machine. Alot of people wouldn't...but for a professional who relies on this software heavily- It is not up to par.

    Heres a couple links:
    http://www.macworld.com/2006/03/firstlooks/minibenchmarks/index.php
    http://www.macspeedzone.com/html/hardware/machine/performance_in_the_raw/06/2.17.shtml