How do these specs look for first Mac?

[Pruddock]

I'm a PC guy and have been for years but as I start getting more and more into the photography profession I see more and more of an argument to use the Mac OSX operating system and I'm interested to get my feet wet. Just not quite sure if I want to dive in and by a $2,000 Macbook Pro to start off. How are the Mac Mini's for processing large amounts of photographs? They seem to be the cheapest route from the amount of research I've done, but I wasn't sure if we had any Mac users on here who wanted to express an opinion. What would be a good Mac to go with that I could get for a decent price, use for photography purposes, and decide if I want to make the switch or not?

[Moppie]

What sort of camera do you own, do you shoot JPEG or RAW, how many photos do you take per session, and many to you process at once?

What spec is your current computer, and what do you feel it needs to do better?

OS-X might be wonderful, but all but one of the Mac's are built around laptop based dual core processors, a single, sometimes un-upgradable harddrive, and have limited RAM capacities.

[MaxxuM]

Before the PC guys chime in, the first thing you have to know is that all laptops will be about 30% slower than the same GHz desktop and will cost you 30% more than a desktop of the same GHz. iMac's are a type of hybrid laptop/desktop. They are faster than laptops but make sacrifices like the absence of quad CPUs. Apple does not compete with PC manufactures in the desktop market and that's a big segment. Apple jumps from laptops and hybrid systems right to workstation, which are professional usually business machines - which makes them expensive, but on par with PC workstations.

Now, you'll have to weigh what you want more - a Mustang with an enormous engine or a BMW with comfort.

Now, to answer your question, the Mac Mini is a very tiny computer. It is basically a laptop with a little more style. It will do the job, but not quickly. The 2.5GHz MB/MBP will do just about anything you toss at them, but like all laptops will not do it as fast as a desktop. It will get better as you go up in MHz, but will never be as fast as a $1000 quadcore PC with Vista. Think of it like buying from Wal-Mart or a local vendor that makes their own product. Cheap almsot always wins in the short run but there are consequences.

Mac's are not budget computers. :(

[wlescall]

The major speed issues that I see with the mini, especially if you will be processing a large number of photos are:
Processor - 2.0 GHz C2D
5400 rpm HD
Maximum RAM = 4 GB

I suggest you take a look at one of the iMacs. To save some $ check in the refurb section of the Apple store. As I write this, they have a 2.66 GHz C2D/2 GB RAM/640 GB HD for $1299 or a faster 2.93 GHz C2D/4 GB RAM/640 GB HD for $1549.(These can hold a max of 8 GB of RAM)

If you can, go to a store near you that carries Macs and look at them to see what you like.

[Pruddock]

I went ahead last night and found a great deal on a Macbook with a 2.0 GHz processor and 2 GB of RAM (not sure if this is upgradable to 4 but if it is it will happen). Only downside is the HD capacity at 80GB, but I tether to a couple different RAIDs of externals so its not like I don't have the capacity to work with large amounts of info. I mostly want to test the theory that every professional photographer I've talked to in the last year - the Mac OSX just doesn't have as much background crap running as Windows XP therefore doesn't need as much power to get the same job done.

That said, my problem right now is that I have a great PC with a Quad-core and 4GB of RAM running 32-bit windows XP and photoshop and lightroom still chug a little bit to get going on photos. I never seem to use much of my hardware capabilities at all as I never see my RAM and power usage bar much over 15%. Not sure how to get more out of my computer but if Windows isn't going to utilize all the power I have behind it then maybe Mac will use it more effectively. We'll see. BTW The computer I bought came with a licensed, COA'd copy of Windows XP and I already have 2 licenses so that'll be FS up in the FS section here soon I guess lol.

[WRCfan]

I am running a classic MacBook with 4GB ram, 160GB HD and it runs photoshop really well, no issues at all even when dealing with reasonably large batches. Just did the upgrade from the standard 2GB of ram it came with.

Wonderful computer.

[Pruddock]

How old is your Macbook? For some reason I think the one I bought recently is only upgradable to 2GB of RAM. At least as far as I can determine, but hopefully this will be enough for me to at least check out the Mac OSX software and see if I want to convert from PC. Thanks for the opinions and help everybody, I'll let you know what I think/how it goes! :cool:

[crn3371]

Which MacBook did you get. I'm pretty sure that any of the current models will handle up to 4 gigs. With the 80 gig hard drive I'm guessing the white one.

[Pruddock]

I bought one that is a little older to save some money. It has the Intel Core Duo and not the Intel Core 2 Duo (I believe), and yes it is one of the polycarbonate models, not the new aluminum models.

[WRCfan]

I am pretty sure all the MacBooks have 2 memory slots (white MacBooks) so just add 2GB of RAM to each slot. That is what they did with my one. Brought it last August and was the baseline model...cheaper to beef it up than buy it beefed up.

[Pruddock]

Sweet. Maybe I'll take it in to the Apple store at The Woodlands Mall in Houston and see what they have to say about it. In the words of Tim the Tool Man Taylor "POWER!! Hoh! Hoh! Hoh! Hoh!" lol sorry... I'm a bit Home Improvement plan

[Moppie]

That said, my problem right now is that I have a great PC with a Quad-core and 4GB of RAM running 32-bit windows XP and photoshop and lightroom still chug a little bit to get going on photos.



So you have a quad core PC, with lots of RAM, and you think that a laptop with half as many cores, running at a slower speed, and half as much ram, also running at a slower speed is going to work better?

Would you be interested in buying a Bridge?
Its nearly new, and hardly ever used.

[crn3371]

Sweet. Maybe I'll take it in to the Apple store at The Woodlands Mall in Houston and see what they have to say about it. In the words of Tim the Tool Man Taylor "POWER!! Hoh! Hoh! Hoh! Hoh!" lol sorry... I'm a bit Home Improvement plan

You are going to pay a premium to have Apple do it. I'd recommend either going to Crucial, or OWC for your memory. I know that Crucial has an online memory configurator and OWC probably does to. Adding memory is easy, and is an Apple approved user install. One of those sites might even have a tutorial or video to show you how to do it. If not, try Apples site.

[Titus213]

So you have a quad core PC, with lots of RAM, and you think that a laptop with half as many cores, running at a slower speed, and half as much ram, also running at a slower speed is going to work better?

Would you be interested in buying a Bridge?
Its nearly new, and hardly ever used.

Yeah, but is the bridge portable?:lol:

[Pruddock]

So you have a quad core PC, with lots of RAM, and you think that a laptop with half as many cores, running at a slower speed, and half as much ram, also running at a slower speed is going to work better?

Would you be interested in buying a Bridge?
Its nearly new, and hardly ever used.

See, here is where literacy really helps. I never said that the computer I bought is going to run faster than the one I have. What I questioned was whether this is a good computer for me to just test out the Mac OSX at an affordable price and determine if its an OS that I might want to explore more. I also stated that I have all of this power and I feel like Windows barely utilizes any of it yet still has difficulties running some programs and I don't understand why. I've heard that this is due to all of the background programs that Windows has running alongside the OS, and that Macs generally do not need as much power to run the same programs better because of the OS. But thank you for chiming in with the criticism and sarcasm, it was helpful and not the least bit extraneous or unnessecary. ;)

[Pruddock]

You are going to pay a premium to have Apple do it. I'd recommend either going to Crucial, or OWC for your memory. I know that Crucial has an online memory configurator and OWC probably does to. Adding memory is easy, and is an Apple approved user install. One of those sites might even have a tutorial or video to show you how to do it. If not, try Apples site.

Thanks for your concern and direction. I actually just talked to a buddy of mine who works at the Apple resource store here in town (we don't have an actual Apple store in College Station, but one that services Macs for the university and students) and he said he'd help me out no problem, just had to order the RAM and he'd install it. I'm sure I could probably due it myself, I'm just not comfortable or familiar with Macs obviously.

[Tony-S]

How are the Mac Mini's for processing large amounts of photographs?

I used to use my Mini as a photo processing computer (1.66 ghz Core Duo, now relegated to home theater box) and it was fine with my 30D raw files with Aperture 2 and Photoshop 3. It would likely be fine with 40D files as well, and with Photoshop CS4. Where you might run into problems is with the new, high pixel count cameras, such as the 5Dii, 1D, 50D and the T1i.

But that might all change with Snow Leopard, since it will leverage the CUDA on the nVidia 9400m gpu. The big unknown is how CUDA (through Apple's OpenCL) will function; i.e., will it work just with SL, or will the applications have to be rewritten to use it? Also, it's still not clear just how good OpenCL will be.

[Titus213]

Thanks for your concern and direction. I actually just talked to a buddy of mine who works at the Apple resource store here in town (we don't have an actual Apple store in College Station, but one that services Macs for the university and students) and he said he'd help me out no problem, just had to order the RAM and he'd install it. I'm sure I could probably due it myself, I'm just not comfortable or familiar with Macs obviously.

Memory upgrade was the very first thing I did on my MacBook. If I can do it anyone can. I found the memory at Crucial.com but actually bought it for less from Newegg.com. The upgrade was a snap. Well, two snaps for two sticks of memory. I do not use the MacBook for any serious photo editing though as I haven't gotten to the point of switching my Photoshop license.

[Moppie]

I've heard that this is due to all of the background programs that Windows has running alongside the OS, and that Macs generally do not need as much power to run the same programs better because of the OS.

Then you have been either mis-informed, or heard incorrectly.

Enjoy OS-X though.



But that might all change with Snow Leopard, since it will leverage the CUDA on the nVidia 9400m gpu. The big unknown is how CUDA (through Apple's OpenCL) will function; i.e., will it work just with SL, or will the applications have to be rewritten to use it? Also, it's still not clear just how good OpenCL will be.


Accoding to Apple, the software will need to be rewriten to take advantage of it.

I imagine the next Adobe CS will make more use of it, expanding on CS4 already does under windows.