New Mac User (not until I get my Mac)

> Do you recommend the Mac Mini

Depends on what you want to do with your computer :-)

The Mac mini is a neat little computer, but it's hard (or impossible)
to extend if you need more RAM, more speed or a better graphics card.
Especially for gaming or heavy-duty video and image editing, I would
not recommend it. For everything else, it's pretty awesome.


> A few more questions I have are: "Is Photoshop, Dreamweaver,
> Flash, and Illustrator on the Mac?"

Yes. Check out macupdate.com for a list of almost all Mac software available.


>"Is OpenOffice on the Mac?"

Yes. NeoOffice is probably the best version of OpenOffice on the Mac:
<http://www.neooffice.org/>


> "Vmware Fusion, Parallels, or Bootcamp?"

If you intend to run Windows apps next to Mac apps, Parallels offers
the best integration between the two systems. MacTech has a great
comparison of the three:
<http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.24/24.02/VirtualizationBenchmark/>


> "What are some essential software titles"

Here's a list of some cool Mac apps:
<http://lkm.tumblr.com/post/21784697>


> "Would my old 17" CRT at 1600x1200 work with the
> graphics card in the Mini?"

The Mac mini has DVI/VGA out, so that should work. It should be noted
that the Mac mini has no separate graphics card, though. It runs using
an Intel integrated graphics processor, the Intel GMA 950.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA>


> "What would you recomend for additional storage."

I've heard bad things about some of the Mac mini-sized external hard
disks (mainly that they're loud). I use LaCie Porsche design disks,
and I can't say anything bad about them.

At 6:07 AM -0800 1/15/08, codemagician wrote:
>I have considered switching to Mac. I've thought about it for a long
>time, and had wanted to for a long time, but due to money reasons, I
>have not. Now that I have enough money, I can finally buy one.

At 3:01 AM -0800 1/16/08, LewisGmail wrote:
>I can't recommend the mini. It's been the red-headed step-child of
>the Mac line since its introduction, and it is widely assumed to be
>near EOL. There was the refresh to core2duo processors, but it is
>still using the very weak Intel GMA950 (64MB) graphics. The low-end
>iMac is a MUCH better machine and a MUCH better value.

Perhaps this should be its own thread: What is the future of the mini?

I don't doubt for a second that the iMac is a better value than a
mini, but otherwise I have to disagree vehemently with Lewis.

I know that there's long been speculation that the Mini is near EOL,
but I've never bought into that reasoning. No, the Mini does not get
a lot of media attention or a lot of publicity from Apple. There's a
good reason for that, it's not what Apple wants people to buy. Apple
would rather people buy higher margin machine.

However, it has an important place in the Mac product line, and that
is for people like CodeMagician. It is the least expensive Mac, by
far. If you already have a keyboard, mouse and monitor, it has BY FAR
the lowest cost of entry. If you have that other hardware and a
limited budget, this is a VERY attractive machine.

If you're a student with$1200 to spend, is it better to get an iMac,
or a Mini along with Adobe CS3 Design Premium? Are you better off
with an iMac or a mini along with Parallels, Windows and whatever you
spend the rest of the money on?

When people ask me for advice about buying a computer, I always tell them:
  First, make a budget.
  Second, figure how much you need to spend of SW and peripherals.
  Last, figure out how much you have left for the computer itself.

The mini is GREAT machine, because it is cheap. The mini is GREAT
machine because it can get people to come over to the Mac who
wouldn't be able to afford to do so otherwise. Because of that,
because Apple's growth depends on people coming over to the mac from
other platforms, the mini - in some shape or form - will continue for
quite some time.

No, Apple will never make it the most attractive machine otherwise.
They want people to buy other machines, instead. But if people can't
afford other machines, Apple want people to have the mini option.

--
=Alex Hoffman
Leadership, Policy & Politics
Teachers College, Columbia University

On 2008-01-16 6:01 AM, LewisGmail wrote:
>
>> "What Video Editing Tools are there available for Leopard?"
>
> All of them. :)
>

Plus some!

AFAIK the Mini does not have VRAM; at least in my actual experience the
Mini is a dog at driving moderately sized monitors with moderately high
resolution. I tried using one of the cheaper "entry level" minis to
drive a 20" Cinema display at 1680x1050. Even after lowering that
hoped-for resolution and also lowering the color depth setting, the Mini
was impossibly slow. I identified the problem as being video by
connecting an old 17" CRT at 1024x760 and things sped up significantly. (*)

You will also run out of room on your Mini really quickly. And depending
on how far and fast you move forward with your production work in
general, you will probably find that the max RAM in a Mini doesn't serve
you well for long either.

I'd agree with Lewisgmail.com's suggestion to look at the iMac instead
of the Mini. I'm sure it will be frustrating to save up the add'l money
if you don't have that much yet ... but IMO the iMac line is a minimum
for the kind of applications you are talking about.

kazar
(*) the happy ending to to the MacMini story was that they seem to have
a very high resale value on craigslist just before Christmas. :-)

On 16-Jan-2008, at 09:45, Alexander Hoffman wrote:
> At 6:07 AM -0800 1/15/08, codemagician wrote:
>> I have considered switching to Mac. I've thought about it for a
>> long time, and had wanted to for a long time, but due to money
>> reasons, I have not. Now that I have enough money, I can finally
>> buy one.
>
> At 3:01 AM -0800 1/16/08, LewisGmail wrote:
>> I can't recommend the mini. It's been the red-headed step-child of
>> the Mac line since its introduction, and it is widely assumed to be
>> near EOL. There was the refresh to core2duo processors, but it is
>> still using the very weak Intel GMA950 (64MB) graphics. The low-end
>> iMac is a MUCH better machine and a MUCH better value.
>
> Perhaps this should be its own thread: What is the future of the mini?
>
> I don't doubt for a second that the iMac is a better value than a
> mini, but otherwise I have to disagree vehemently with Lewis.

Bring it on! :)

> I know that there's long been speculation that the Mini is near EOL,
> but I've never bought into that reasoning. No, the Mini does not get
> a lot of media attention or a lot of publicity from Apple. There's a
> good reason for that, it's not what Apple wants people to buy. Apple
> would rather people buy higher margin machine.

That's only one aspect, though. Look at it, it's had one minor
refresh since it went intel, right?

> However, it has an important place in the Mac product line, and that
> is for people like CodeMagician. It is the least expensive Mac, by
> far. If you already have a keyboard, mouse and monitor, it has BY
> FAR the lowest cost of entry. If you have that other hardware and a
> limited budget, this is a VERY attractive machine.

Oh yeah, I agree the price makes it attractive. But if you're sitting
there with a old PC (PS/2 mouse and keyboard, most likely) and a CRT
and are looking for an entry level Mac, I still say buckle down and
get the low-end iMac as you'll be a lot happier for a lot longer. If
you already have a USB keyboard and mouse (but very few PC users have
both of these as the vast majority of PCs have at least a PS/2
keyboard) and a nice flat panel screen and you're not going to be
doing any heavy lifting on the machine then sure, a mini is a great
little box for not a lot of money.

Likewise, if you are really strapped for cash and need a new machine,
then yeah, it's a good way to recycle some old computer kit and still
have a nice new machine.

_I_ would buy a (well, another, I already have had one) mini, but it
would not be an addition to my other Macs, not a replacement.

> If you're a student with$1200 to spend, is it better to get an iMac,
> or a Mini along with Adobe CS3 Design Premium? Are you better off
> with an iMac or a mini along with Parallels, Windows and whatever
> you spend the rest of the money on?

Well, spending money on Windows seems wrong, on so many levels. If you
have exactly $1200 and you need more video editing than iMovie does,
then yeah, you can't buy an iMac and Final Candidate Express,
obviously. On the other hand, how likely are you to have EXACTLY
$1200? And on the gripping hand, you're going to be hating life doing
much video work on a mini anyway.

> The mini is GREAT machine, because it is cheap. The mini is GREAT
> machine because it can get people to come over to the Mac who
> wouldn't be able to afford to do so otherwise. Because of that,
> because Apple's growth depends on people coming over to the mac from
> other platforms, the mini - in some shape or form - will continue
> for quite some time.

I certainly hope so. I'd like to see a refresh that replaced the
really lousy graphics, then I'd feel a lot better about its future.

> No, Apple will never make it the most attractive machine otherwise.
> They want people to buy other machines, instead. But if people can't
> afford other machines, Apple want people to have the mini option.

I'm not always so sure how smart Apple is about this sort of stuff
though. The current GeForce 8800 debacle is a case in point. As it
stands, it appears that Apple is going to alienate ever Mac Pro owner
before last week by not providing the new cards for the old machines,
despite the fact that those card actually WORK in the old machines, as
long as you boot into Windows instead of OS X. What sort of message
does that send, exactly?

I know the mini is important, and you know its important. I'm just
not sure that Apple always knows what's important.

--On January 15, 2008 6:07:58 AM -0800 codemagician
<codemagician0gmail.com> wrote:

> My question is: "Do you recommend the Mac Mini, and what other
> information should a new Mac user know". (I kinda lied when I said I was
> a new Mac user, but the last time I used a mac was OS 7.5 and I was a
> First Grader.)

First, thanks for making me feel really old 8-) I have a PowerPC Mac mini
and I'm really happy with it. I'm currently converting my DVD collection to
iTunes and it's pretty slow at that so I'm contemplating an Intel Mac mini
and move the PPC mini to my brother.

Unless you're planning on doing serious gaming on the mini the video card
is acceptable. My PPC version plays WOW acceptably, but probably not Guitar
Hero 3.

> A few more questions I have are: "Is Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, and
> Illustrator on the Mac?"

Yes. Add more memory (2GB is what I would move to) for Photoshop or
Illustrator use. Not sure about mem usage on the other 2.

> "Is OpenOffice on the Mac?"

Yes. As is a product called NeoOffice that adds a bit more Mac flavor to
Open Office. I use a product called ThinkFree Office Desktop.

> "What Video Editing Tools are there available for Leopard?"

Personally I've found QuickTime Pro + Visual Hub to be sufficient for
moving stuff from my tivo and editing out commericials. For home movies
iMovie (free with iLife on a new Mac purchase) does all I need. More
complicated stuff and you might want a more powerful processor.

> "Vmware Fusion, Parallels, or Bootcamp?"

The first 2 are virtual machines and a have a slight performance hit (and
getting slighter all the time). Bootcamp requires a reboot to get into
Windows, I'd only use it for high processor/dedicated video card products.


> "What are some essential software titles"

Depends on what you plan on doing. Apps I typically install immediately
after a complete rebuild (or new OS release) are Drag Thing, Camino web
browser, ThinkFree Office, BBEdit (Text editor, Text Wrangler is a less
featured free version), Interarchy (FTP, Amazon S3 file transfer program),
Synchro SVN client, and Maelstrom.

> "Would my old 17" CRT at 1600x1200 work with the graphics card in the
Mini?"

It should. I would note that after I got my PPC mini it refused to work
with any monitor over VGA connector. I switched it to DVI and it worked
fine. Never did get a solution to that but it's been using DVI for years
just fine. I'd look into a DVI LCD if you can.

> "What would you recomend for additional storage."

I use an external Firewire drive. I bought a case that you add your own
drive to. I've upgraded a few times and it's at 250GB at the moment. I
also have a dual layer DVD drive hooked up via firewire. Same deal as the
hard drive, I bought a case you add your own DVD drive to. The DVD drive is
a cheapy 8x refurb job from the local Microcenter.

Kevin

LewisGmail wrote:
> On 15-Jan-2008, at 07:07, codemagician wrote:
>> My question is: "Do you recommend the Mac Mini, and what other
>> information should a new Mac user know".
>
> I can't recommend the mini. It's been the red-headed step-child of
> the Mac line since its introduction, and it is widely assumed to be
> near EOL. There was the refresh to core2duo processors, but it is
> still using the very weak Intel GMA950 (64MB) graphics. The low-end
> iMac is a MUCH better machine and a MUCH better value.
>
> mini: iMac
> $599 $1199
>
> OK, it's twice as much for the iMac, which has much better graphics, a
> 20" flat screen, a DVD writer, 3 times the hard drive space, and also
> includes a keyboard and a mighty mouse. Also, the iMac has a newer C2D
> chip that has twice the onboard cache, and it can be expanded to 4GB
> versus the mini's 2GB max. Oh, and the bus speed on the iMac is faster
> too.

The mini has it's place. Especially if you already own a display and are budget constrained.

But if you can spend the extra money look at both the iBook and the iMac. What's more important? Mobility (even if just around the house) or 20"?

David Ross

On Jan 17, 2008, at 8:55 AM, Lukas Mathis wrote:

> If you intend to run Windows apps next to Mac apps, Parallels offers
> the best integration between the two systems. MacTech has a great
> comparison of the three:
> <http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.24/24.02/VirtualizationBenchmark/

My experience is that Parallels and VMware Fusion are neck and neck.
I own both and prefer Fusion, but Parallels works fine too. In fact,
at the moment there is a problem with Parallels and Leopard that
prevents drag and drop from the Desktop to to Windows. (should be
cleared up soon with an update).

Regards,

Howard

i have something to add to this. i have a powermac G5, and i also
have a mini. the mini serves as my second computer. i use the G5 for
most of records at my studio. i'm an artist. but i like having a
mini at home . it serves as a less expensive second computer.

i like mine a lot. when i bought it, i carried it to my studio and
transferred files from there.

>AFAIK the Mini does not have VRAM; at least in my actual experience the
>Mini is a dog at driving moderately sized monitors with moderately high
>resolution. I tried using one of the cheaper "entry level" minis to
>drive a 20" Cinema display at 1680x1050. Even after lowering that
>hoped-for resolution and also lowering the color depth setting, the Mini
>was impossibly slow. I identified the problem as being video by
>connecting an old 17" CRT at 1024x760 and things sped up significantly. (*)
>
>You will also run out of room on your Mini really quickly. And depending
>on how far and fast you move forward with your production work in
>general, you will probably find that the max RAM in a Mini doesn't serve
>you well for long either.
>
>I'd agree with Lewisgmail.com's suggestion to look at the iMac instead
>of the Mini. I'm sure it will be frustrating to save up the add'l money
>if you don't have that much yet ... but IMO the iMac line is a minimum
>for the kind of applications you are talking about.

My wife uses a current 1.83 GHz Mac Mini with 2 GB memory, and it
does just fine driving a 1200 x 1600 20" LCD. Many people (not 3-D
gamers) can do just fine with 2 GB of memory and 80 GB of disk. The
Mini is fine for general MS Office and web work, and also does OK at
photo editing in Photoshop CS3.

If one really wanted a larger disk in a Mini, one could pry it apart
and put in a larger 2.5" drive. In my view, if portability is a
bonus, then the step up from the Mini is the MacBook, which can take
4 GB of memory, and has a user replaceable disk drive.

--

Alan Charlesworth 503-231-7756

On Jan 17, 2008, at 9:05 AM, LewisGmail wrote:

> Likewise, if you are really strapped for cash and need a new machine,
> then yeah, it's a good way to recycle some old computer kit and still
> have a nice new machine.

I just want to add that if you need to spend as little as possible one
of the best things you can do is to order a refurb. Saves 10-15% over
a new machine.

Regards,

Howard

On Jan 17, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Lukas Mathis wrote:

> (Original poster name lost)

>>
>> "What would you recomend for additional storage."
>
> I've heard bad things about some of the Mac mini-sized external hard
> disks (mainly that they're loud).

I'm using the first one I bought as a trivet. (More accurately, as a
block on which to rest power bricks, since I don't put those onto
carpet.)

The second one (from another company) seems to be doing fine, and is
quiet except when stressed. It's now doing Time Machine backups,
which generally don't stress it enough to make the fan audible.

   --John

On Jan 17, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Alexander Hoffman wrote:

> I know that there's long been speculation that the Mini is near EOL,
> but I've never bought into that reasoning.

And even if EOL is announced the day after one buys a Mini, the
machine doesn't stop working. Nor does it stop being supported under
warranty/AppleCare. (Not sure whether AppleCare can still be bought
for a year, though, once EOL is announced.)

I didn't buy AppleCare for my (original PPC) Mini: my reasoning was
that if the machine broke I'd replace it rather than fixing it.

   --John

I can't bring myself to buy an iMac. The sticking point is that monitors and CPUs last for different lengths of time. Monitors fail. Monitors grow too small (OK, really it is my desire growing too big). CPUs last considerably longer, in my experience.

Is the Mini perfect? No. But I'm not going to put a $2,900 Mac Pro in my home office. It is overkill. For years now, really since the original G3 desktop, I've been wanting a mid-size box with a few slots. Apple, bless their greedy little hearts, wants me to throw out both monitor and CPU and purchase an entirely new iMac. So I finally bought an Intel Mini--and we're getting along so well that I bought another just to connect to the home theatre system

Craig
--
Craig Treleaven, CA -- Clearview Consulting
(905) 829-2054 ctreleavencogeco.ca

On 2008-01-17 7:38 PM, Alan Charlesworth wrote:
>> AFAIK the Mini does not have VRAM; at least in my actual experience the
>> Mini is a dog at driving moderately sized monitors with moderately high
>> resolution. I tried using one of the cheaper "entry level" minis to
>> drive a 20" Cinema display at 1680x1050. Even after lowering that
>> hoped-for resolution and also lowering the color depth setting, the Mini
>> was impossibly slow.
>
> My wife uses a current 1.83 GHz Mac Mini with 2 GB memory, and it
> does just fine driving a 1200 x 1600 20" LCD.

I was really advising against the "entry level" Mini, as stated in my
post ... they come with 512 MB of RAM and a slower processor and smaller
HD. Since codemagician has been saving his/her money and reached a
threshhold where a Mac mini has now become possible to purchase, I am
just afraid that if this means the cheaper mini's and the OP was talking
about wanting to do video editing and other app's that need RAM and
video speed, that the money might actually be wasted purchasing the
first-affordable box rather than saving up more to buy something more
robust.

kazar

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Hoffman wrote:

> However, it has an important place in the Mac product line, and that
> is for people like CodeMagician. It is the least expensive Mac, by
> far. If you already have a keyboard, mouse and monitor, it has BY FAR
> the lowest cost of entry. If you have that other hardware and a
> limited budget, this is a VERY attractive machine.

It's also great for trailing-edge upgraders, as well as switchers.

Say you have a late-model Powermac G4, or even a G5, and a major part
fails on it once it's 4 or 5 years old. Replacing a CPU or logic board
on one of those can start at hundreds of dollars just for the parts.

A mini, on the other hand, is about the same price as the repair, will
in many cases be at least as fast if not quite a bit faster than the
computer it's replacing, and would have a new warranty besides, not to
mention being eligible for Applecare.

A lot of people in such a situation will do the math and opt for getting
the mini, or think a bit more and upgrade to an iMac or Macbook. Even if
the mini isn't what they end up going for, the fact that it's there at
that price point can tip a decision in favor of upgrading rather than
repairing an older machine.

(My mini is currently hooked up with an original iMac keyboard, which in
hindsight I think has aged pretty well -- nice & compact, etc :-)


--
Chris Devers

Lewis wrote:
>I can't recommend the mini. It's been the red-headed step-child of
>the Mac line since its introduction, and it is widely assumed to be
>near EOL.

Well, it has been rumored to disappear shortly almost since it was
introduced, and it's still around. I think it would be a mistake for
Apple to kill it; I know two PC users who bought a Mac mini, but would
otherwise never have bought a Mac. It's a cheap way for people to
check out Macs; maybe their next computer will be one with a higher
profit margin.

Additionally, the rumors of its soon demise are reasons to buy one,
not reasons to avoid one. If you want one, don't wait for the next
revision :-)

I myself use a Mac mini hooked up to my beamer for watching movies and
playing games (mainly MAME; new games don't run well on it). It's
quiet, fast enough, and small.

lukas

The rumors of the mini's demise are always amusing. :-)

 From where I sit, it's a wonderful device. As has been noted, it's
great as an upgrade or for trailing-edge uses. (I have an original
G4 mini at home, it's the iPhoto/Quicken/email/web computer.)

Moreover, it is remarkable in the industry by nature of its size and
that it can run on straight 12V DC current. It's used in a lot of
industrial/embedded situations, say on boats, planes and autos.

At a Macworld session, a gentleman from a cruise line (Princess?)
discussed a project in which they wanted to build IP-based VOD
systems into new vessels. They wound up with flat-panel displays,
each mated to a Mac mini. The project and deployments started with
just signage on some vessels, then adding interactive mapping
displays on another, until finally they built it out to cover every
stateroom on two new vessels. The final count was something like
~2200 TVs (each with a Mac mini) on board. He mentioned they were
particularly impressed by the mini's handling of vibration (they had
visited Apple's NVH testing labs), something of particular concern on
a seagoing vessel.

I look forward to my next, Intel-based mini. :-)

-Andrew

AFAIK the Mini does not have VRAM; at least in my actual experience the
>Mini is a dog at driving moderately sized monitors with moderately high
>resolution.

Depends upon your intended use. We use Minis for our NOC monitors
screens, which are 48" plasmas. We've never had issue with perceived
speed, but then again this is mostly static data being displayed.


--

Chuck Goolsbee

And another important market sector: without the Mac mini, it would be much
harder to do this:

http://dclausen.net/projects/tfam/

- Ben

A few quick notes: I have a macmini1.5G4 with only 512M of RAM that I got on eBay. It works great.

I have a Newer external firewire disk drive on it. You MUST have this because it gives you more ports, more space and more speed. You can find the Newer drives and Boxes at OWC. The box costs only $79; $200 with 500GB. It is quiet--a whole lot quieter than my old sawtooth G4. I use the external drive as my boot up drive and the internal drive as back-up. There is no question that the external drive is MUCH faster.

I use this machine mostly as a server and so forth, but I also occasionally use Photoshop 7 on it and it runs great--even with only 512MB. My main computer is a 1.3GHzPBkG4 with 2GB RAM. The mini feels faster on some things (obviously it has a faster disk drive) but I haven't thought much about comparing the two speed-wise.

If you are lowballing this, don't overlook eBay. the Mini is something that is more likely to NOT have been screwed around with.