So I'm thinking of getting a (mini) Mac..

[DStanic]

Before I go into questions about Mac, I'll briefly describe my situation.

I'm a PC user, in fact- I'm A+ certified (although I quit WORKING in the I.T. business because it just wasn't my thing). I'm knowledable about PC hardware and software (except for Vista- I've kind of avoided it since XP is working alright.

When it comes to Macs, I know about as much as my grandma knows about PCs.. lol

My PC is an AMD64 Athlon 3000+, 2gb ram, Nvidea FX5200 for graphics, yadda yadda.. I'm not into gaming or anything too intense, Photoshop is the only thing that ever slows me down, and I mostly use Lightroom anyways.

I'm getting more into Photography and HATE it when unexpected random PC crashes happen. I know that the media sends the message that PCs are garbage and Macs work flawlessly, I'm sure that's probably a bit exageratted. I'd really just like to try Mac for the simpler more efficient OS (or so I understand). I figure that instead of spending money upgrading my PC with a new mobo/CPU/RAM/graphics I can just start out with one of those mini-Macs that start aroud $650. I would basically use it just for internet and Photoshop 90% of the time. Down the road I may consider a MacBook as well, since I hate my Toshiba notebook and think it was a waste of money.

Any tips on buying a mac? I was looking at This Mac Mini (http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0926INGFS10095528&catid=26226) at Bestbuy and it looks like a nice little machine. I figure I can hook up external HDs to it and such. Can you upgrade the RAM in those things?

[incendy]

If you want it for Photoshop/Lightroom you do not want the Mini.. The performance on it is pretty bad, in fact really bad. You would be much better off with the IMac, the extra few hundred in this case would be the difference between usability.

[Tony-S]

I figure that instead of spending money upgrading my PC with a new mobo/CPU/RAM/graphics I can just start out with one of those mini-Macs that start aroud $650... I would basically use it just for internet and Photoshop 90% of the time.

The Mini is supposedly undergoing a substantial revision, if you can wait a couple of months.

I used a 1.66 gHz Core Duo Mini as my main photo processing computer for two years prior to building a Mac clone. It's perfectly fine use with Photoshop - but of course a 1.83 gHz computer won't be as fast as a 2.4 gHz computer. Mine would render 30d raw files in about 2 sec using Aperture, which was the most demanding app I used on it. Photoshop 3 or 4 will run natively on the Mini. If you're doing photography as a business, I wouldn't recommend a Mini.

The biggest advantage of a Mini over an iMac is that you can connect a matte display to it up to 1920x1280 (i.e., 24" native res). Also keep in mind that the Mini's hard drive is a 1.5 gb/s 2.5" SATA drive, so you won't get the performance from it that you would with a 3 gb/s 3.5" drive. You can put any 2.5" SATA drive in, though. It has Firewire 400 and USB2, the former performing substantially better than the latter, so if you do go with external drives it would be best to use FW.

The Mini's are a pain to add ram to, but not overwhelmingly so. There are a number of web sites that tell how to do it, but it takes about 10 min to open it up to gain access to the two slots. It has a 32-bit memory controller, so you can install up to 3.2 gb of RAM (2x2 gb SO-DIMMs and which preserves dual-channel performance), or 1 gb and 2 gb chips for 3 gb RAM (and lose dual-channel, about a 5% hit in video performance).

The 2 ghz Mini is a lot better than the 1.83 gHz version because its processor has a 4 mb cache, vs. 2 mb for the 1.83.

[incendy]

The Mini is supposedly undergoing a substantial revision, if you can wait a couple of months.

I used a 1.66 gHz Core Duo Mini as my main photo processing computer for two years prior to building a Mac clone. It's perfectly fine use with Photoshop - but of course a 1.83 gHz computer won't be as fast as a 2.4 gHz computer. Mine would render 30d raw files in about 2 sec using Aperture, which was the most demanding app I used on it. Photoshop 3 or 4 will run natively on the Mini. If you're doing photography as a business, I wouldn't recommend a Mini.

The biggest advantage of a Mini over an iMac is that you can connect a matte display to it up to 1920x1280 (i.e., 24" native res). Also keep in mind that the Mini's hard drive is a 1.5 gb/s 2.5" SATA drive, so you won't get the performance from it that you would with a 3 gb/s 3.5" drive. You can put any 2.5" SATA drive in, though. It has Firewire 400 and USB2, the former performing substantially better than the latter, so if you do go with external drives it would be best to use FW.

The Mini's are a pain to add ram to, but not overwhelmingly so. There are a number of web sites that tell how to do it, but it takes about 10 min to open it up to gain access to the two slots. It has a 32-bit memory controller, so you can install up to 3.2 gb of RAM (2x2 gb SO-DIMMs and which preserves dual-channel performance), or 1 gb and 2 gb chips for 3 gb RAM (and lose dual-channel, about a 5% hit in video performance).

The 2 ghz Mini is a lot better than the 1.83 gHz version because its processor has a 4 mb cache, vs. 2 mb for the 1.83.

You can connect a display to an Imac as well as long as they have a connection which I believe the new versions all do. The mini does not run Photoshop or Lightroom well at all in my experience so I hope you aren't leading people in the wrong direction. HDR renders are incredibly slow with processor on the currectly available Mini and Lightroom processing is extremely slow, to the point I found it unusable. My eperience with the Mini is very limited because I didn't find it was a hardware worth wasting my time with but that is what I took from it. I would never recomend it to anyone using Photoshop or Lightroom

[DStanic]

incendy: what were the specs of the mini that you used?

[Tony-S]

You can connect a display to an Imac as well as long as they have a connection which I believe the new versions all do.

Of course you can, but now you're talking about $1600 for a 20" iMac and cheap 24" display. By that point, you might as well buy the 24" iMac, which at least gives you an H-IPS panel (but still glossy). If OP's looking at a Mini, I suspect that kind of cash is outside his budget. Most people who buy a Mini already have a display, keyboard and mouse from their PC days.

The mini does not run Photoshop or Lightroom well at all in my experience so I hope you aren't leading people in the wrong direction.

It does the great majority of Photoshop CS3 tasks just fine. As I stated, and which you seem to have ignored, is that a faster CPU will give you better performance.

HDR renders are incredibly slow with processor on the currectly available Mini

I just did a PSCS3 Merge to HDR of the same three 16-bit TIFF images on my MacBook Pro (2.4 gHz Core 2 Duo with 4 gb RAM) and Mini (1.66 gHz Core Duo with 2 gb RAM). The MBP did it in 18 seconds, the Mini did it in 29 seconds. Unless the app is coded to utilize the gpu (which PSC3 isn't) then cpu is principally all there is on Macs. If you do HDRs all day long and your time is money, then, again, don't go with the Mini.

and Lightroom processing is extremely slow, to the point I found it unusable.

Well, I cannot speak about LR since I do not use it, but I'm sure Aperture is much more demanding that LR since it is programmed to leverage the gpu, while LR is not. Perhaps that gives Aperture a leg up on LR.

My eperience with the Mini is very limited because I didn't find it was a hardware worth wasting my time with but that is what I took from it. I would never recomend it to anyone using Photoshop or Lightroom

Well, you're entitled to your (admittedly limited) opinion on the subject. I used the Mini exclusively for two years doing both Aperture and Photoshop concurrently. As I said, I wouldn't use one if you're doing heavy work, but for someone doing photography for their own personal uses, the Mini is just fine.

[DStanic]

I do have a Samsung 21" wide LCD which I like very much which is why I wouldn't bother with an iMac.

Is it fair to say that the CPU and RAM are the main speed factors whether it's a Mac mini, iMac or MacBook? I wouldn't be going with anything slower than a Core 2 Duo and probably opt for 2gb of RAM like my currect PC. My friend is very knowledgable about both PCs and Macs, and says that a Mac with identical hardware specs (ie CPU/RAM) would be faster than a PC due to more efficienent OS, and just less "garbage" running in the background. He is not a photographer though, with any experience with PS or LR.

I just think that the $650 price of a Mac Mini looks very attractive compared to spending nearly that much for new guts for my PC, and I'll get an OS and second computer with that. I'd rather spend my time now learning something new (Mac OS) rather then pissing around with Vista.

[Tony-S]

Is it fair to say that the CPU and RAM are the main speed factors whether it's a Mac mini, iMac or MacBook?

Yes. The 1.83 gHz Mini uses a T5600 cpu that has a 2 mb cache. While good, it's not great. The 2 gHz mini is about 20% faster because of its larger cache. RAM is cheap these days - a 4 gb kit will set you back about US$80. That would give you 3.1 gb available RAM because of the 32-bit memory controller on the Mini. The bus on the Mini is 667 mhz.

My friend is very knowledgable about both PCs and Macs, and says that a Mac with identical hardware specs (ie CPU/RAM) would be faster than a PC due to more efficienent OS, and just less "garbage" running in the background.

This is my experience with my MBP under Boot Camp with Win XP Pro, but I don't know the reasons why, just that it is.

I just think that the $650 price of a Mac Mini looks very attractive compared to spending nearly that much for new guts for my PC, and I'll get an OS and second computer with that. I'd rather spend my time now learning something new (Mac OS) rather then pissing around with Vista.

The Mini was designed with people like you in mind. Still, if you can wait a couple of months there may be an update to T8300 cpu and NVidia chipset.

[incendy]

incendy: what were the specs of the mini that you used?

It is the 1.83 Core 2 Duo and 1GB RAM. The memory is definately the factor that killed it the most while using LR and CS3 but the Processor is also a problem. Then again I am so used to using 2 Quad Core Xeons maybe my perception of unusable is jaded. However having said that, trying to run filters, HDR renders or alpha light renders on a 5D file which is 4368x2912 was a terrible experience for me, to the point as I stated I found it unusable.

It is your money, but for 650 to 700 you can get a quad core dell with 6gb of RAM which will absolutely destroy the Mac Mini.

[incendy]

Well, you're entitled to your (admittedly limited) opinion on the subject. I used the Mini exclusively for two years doing both Aperture and Photoshop concurrently. As I said, I wouldn't use one if you're doing heavy work, but for someone doing photography for their own personal uses, the Mini is just fine.

Limited because it was that bad. No reason to use something that doesn't do the job well.

If you throw more memory into it maybe it would be better but for a resource hungry application like Photoshop or LightRoom it just doesn't make sense to buy a computer with a processor at the lowest end of the spectrum.

[incendy]

http://www.incendy.com/dell.jpg

as you can see.. The Dell has a quad core process at a faster clock speed, memory that is 6 times more and a hard drive that is about 5 times larger for less money.

[Tony-S]

Jesus, here we go again. No thanks.

[incendy]

I am just saying the Mac Mini is a bad deal. I wouldn't buy either system as neither has a good video card and there will most definately be a time when that will become an issue. That is why I recomended the Imac at first.

[MaxxuM]

Before I go into questions about Mac, I'll briefly describe my situation.

I'm a PC user, in fact- I'm A+ certified (although I quit WORKING in the I.T. business because it just wasn't my thing). I'm knowledable about PC hardware and software (except for Vista- I've kind of avoided it since XP is working alright.

When it comes to Macs, I know about as much as my grandma knows about PCs.. lol

My PC is an AMD64 Athlon 3000+, 2gb ram, Nvidea FX5200 for graphics, yadda yadda.. I'm not into gaming or anything too intense, Photoshop is the only thing that ever slows me down, and I mostly use Lightroom anyways.

I'm getting more into Photography and HATE it when unexpected random PC crashes happen. I know that the media sends the message that PCs are garbage and Macs work flawlessly, I'm sure that's probably a bit exageratted. I'd really just like to try Mac for the simpler more efficient OS (or so I understand). I figure that instead of spending money upgrading my PC with a new mobo/CPU/RAM/graphics I can just start out with one of those mini-Macs that start aroud $650. I would basically use it just for internet and Photoshop 90% of the time. Down the road I may consider a MacBook as well, since I hate my Toshiba notebook and think it was a waste of money.

Any tips on buying a mac? I was looking at This Mac Mini (http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?logon=&langid=EN&sku_id=0926INGFS10095528&catid=26226) at Bestbuy and it looks like a nice little machine. I figure I can hook up external HDs to it and such. Can you upgrade the RAM in those things?

Perhaps you should look at a MacBook... It looks better than a Mini just about in every way.

MacBook (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013FRA0O/sr=8-3/qid=1226269384/ref=noref?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1226269384&sr=8-3)
Add Memory (http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Memory-DIMM-200-pin-unbuffered/dp/B000K1KTNW/ref=pd_sim_e_22)

Or Just buy from Amazon (authorized Apple vendor) (http://www.amazon.com/Apple-MB138LL-Intel-Drive-Combo/dp/B0006HU49Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1226269774&sr=1-1)

It's more than you were looking at spending, but you don't have to buy a monitor now, bigger processor, more memory and it is portable. Just my 2 cents.

[DStanic]

Thanks for the suggestions, but comparing Canadian and US prices are apples to oranges with the current exchange rate. $570 US (for the mac mini on amazon) is just over $670 Canadian, and that Dell machine would be $776 CND, about $150 more than the Mac mini at bestbuy.ca (although it's quite a powerful machine- I know macs come at a premium and I could build a more powerful PC, it's not really the point) .

I don't know when I will be buying a new computer, it may be a couple of months, possibly there will be deals on boxing week (it's like black friday for Canadians, but after xmas). My friend also may have connections for used stuff, so I might be able to get some better gear for the price.

[OdiN1701]

Why not build a Hackintosh? Tony is running one I believe. Should be able to get something similar in price with better upgrade options / faster CPU/more RAM than the mini. That's what I would probably do if I wanted to tinker with OS X, and you have the background to build a system it seems.

[DStanic]

I can build a system, no problem... but I have no idea where to start with mac OS. I'd rather start with the proper gear and learn the basics rather then getting frustrated with software issues.

[MaxxuM]

You can Google "OSx86 project" & "Hackintosh". I tried two methods and though I found it fun, I wouldn't personally rely on a 'hack'.

[low note lee]

Why not build a Hackintosh? Tony is running one I believe. Should be able to get something similar in price with better upgrade options / faster CPU/more RAM than the mini. That's what I would probably do if I wanted to tinker with OS X, and you have the background to build a system it seems.

Hackintoshes are risky, because they can sometimes be brought to their knees by software updates. It's more painful than setting Windows up on a home-built PC.

If you want to run Mac OS X, get a Mac. If you want to run Windows, build your own.

[cory1848]

For everyone saying that a Mac mini wont run LR....here is what I am running... I am using a Mac MDD 867 Dual. I run CS3 with LR, IM app, Entourage, and PS3 all open and its my main production box. Yes its slower than a Mac Pro G5 but I can guarantee its slower than a New Mac mini and its still a usable machine. I will be upgrading come spring time and then I will turn it into a Mac Server to replace my WHS. So, my suggestion would be to get it but use external storage. Its a nice machine and it will run LR without a problem.