Mac Mini and Apple display or Powerbook?

[watermelon]

Hiya, very quick a. or b. question.<br><br>

Looking to move to mac platform to avoid all of Windows' headaches at

last (and they look sweet) and for roughly the same money I could get...

<br><li>

Mac mini  1.42GHz  1 gig RAM  with 20"

cinema screen.<li>

12" powerbook  1.5GHz  756mb RAM.<p>

These would both be for Photoshop CS2, Internet and Word only, no

gaming or anything much else. Photoshop use would be from daily

adjustments and uploading from ACR to occasional editing of scanned 4x5...

[donald_ingram1]

Recomend the Mini Mac + 1GB ram

 

I have a 1GHz 12" with 768MB - just copes with 100MB scans in CS2 but can be a bit slow

with memory swapping with larger scans.

The 12" screen is very poor ( low contrast and small viewing angle ) .

 

My 500MHz cube with 1GB ram and 7200 rpm disc seems faster whan the power pook - plus

the 17 LCD is better.

[petequinn]

I use both a 12" Powerbook 1GHz w/ 1.25GB RAM and a PowerMac desktop. I like my 12"

model because it is small enough to use even crowded into coach on the airlines. That was

why I went with the small PB. The laptop does a good job running CS2. It's obviously not

as fast as a desktop, but using Bridge/PS it does good. I use it for basic processing of RAW

files from a D2x on site. I save my heavy work for the desktop, only because I have a much

bigger screen.

 

I think you are better off spending the money up front on the laptop with as much RAM as

it will hold if this is going to be your primary machine. The display size is obviously going

to be the biggest driver so if this is going to be your primary, shoot for the 17". The

portability of a laptop vs a desktop set-up will be worth the expense IF you will be using it

on the road a lot. You can always run a second monitor for home editing if needed.

 

Pete

[ivan_verschoote1]

Welcome to the world of Mac.

 

The 12" Powerbook is very handy to empty CF-cards (but you need a card reader) on a trip and to check the pics you've taken. It's very handy due to its small size and works pretty good. For serious Photoshopping afterwards I would not recommend it. Like the above poster said - the contrast is too low. The Mac mini is a very good choice. The additional Apple screen is incredible. If you can afford it, take the 23" screen in consideration...

 

Above that go wireless with the Airport Express: it works like a dream.

[crystal-lite]

First off, congratualtions in switching to the world of mac. You will love it.

I have a power-book 12 inch G4 1.33 GHz with 768 MB memory and a G5 Power Mac with

20 inch cimema.

I have installed on the Powermac, Photoshop CS2 and the same with the laptop.

 

The 20 inch cinema has a huge advantage over the laptop screen of 12 inch when working

with Photoshop CS2. However if you are on the move from time to time then the laptop

would be better because though you could take your Mac-mini and cinema display with

you, I personally wouldn't fancy carrying the 20 inch dispaly around for fear of damage.

 

You would be very pleased with either of the purchases you make.

[david cunningham]

i've been using a 12" 1.33 ghz g4 powerbook with 1.25 gb ram for all of my work in cs2 and

have never had a problem. at home i use a 23" hd cinema display. i have no plans for

changing my setup... d

[._._z]

If you don't need to travel with your Mac, and you have the desk space, take the Mac

Mini and the beautiful 20" screen.

[michael_matsil]

Andrew,

 

If critical color editing is of any interest to you, you need the cinema display (any size) and

not the Powerbook LCD. Don't get me wrong, the PB's are great, but they don't hold a

candle to the 20" display you are considering. Not just the size, but the color output and

picture. Just make sure with Apple that the mini can drive that display without

upgrading....I'm pretty sure it can. If you ever need to work in another location for any

amount of time, your cinema display and mini can fit compactly in a fairly slim "Pelican"

case.

 

Add the PowerBook to your repertoire, when mobility becomes one of your important

needs.

[watermelon]

thanks for answers. Just realised the iMac G5 at 2gHz and 20" screen is only tinny bit more expensive. Not as portable but is the screen as good as the cinema screen does anyone know?

[daniel_taylor]

iMac screens are pretty good, but I'll stop short of saying they're equal to the cinema screens since I don't work daily in front of both. BUT the G5 and SATA drive are far better speed wise. I would pick the iMac over that alone.

[mark_punch]

Andrew , just thought I could add one more point to what the others have said....I have a MacMini 1.42 ghz and Apple Cinema Display 20"....its a great combo , but I found the hard drive speed ( 4200 rpm in mine ) a pain , so I replaced it with a Hitachi 7200rpm ....radical improvement...it it does everything better and faster...takes it to a whole other level.......

........regards , Mark.

[basscheffers]

I have a mini and it's fine, but with the small amount extra, I now wish I'd gone for the iMac.

 

You can save some money by using another brand LCD. I got an Iiyama 17" which does fine for me.

 

The Mac Mini isn't that problematic to open either, so you can also fit your own 1GB, like I did. Another little saving.

 

Here in the UK, Apple sells full blown refurbished Power Mac G5s for good prices too.

[Uhooru]

If you are going to buy a 20" Cinima screen, I would go w/the recommendation to get the iMac 20". Order 2 gig of ram from crucial and you're set. Later on or sooner as finances can afford it get a nice La Cie or other external drive.

 

The 20' imac screen is not the same exact screen as the 20" ACD, but its so close, you won't be able to see any difference. Unlike (I think, not sure) the 17" iMac, the 20" is SWOP certifiable, which means its accurate enough to perform color soft proofing to SWOP standards. I had one very knowledgelbe digital artist who runs one of the premiere high end digital labs in Orange County Ca, tell me that the iMac 20" screen is supberb and it would take someone with years of color calibration skills and knowledge to be able to bring out the qualitative difference between the two monitors where they would be only barely visible to a trained eye. He, and I (who have one) Highly recommend. Also, Dell's 20" is suppose to be just as supberb for a bit less money. So if you wanted a mini, that might be a choice too. There's some reviews around on the ACD and Dell 20" model comparisons. They both use the same monitor, but periphials etc. are different. Good luck, its all good, except if you do plan to do serious work in PS..the G5 processor is much better and faster. Two of them are even better.

[tedharris]

Andrew looking specifically at your comment "occasional editing of scanned 4x5..." Neither

of your choices will work real well for this. Problem is that both machines are RAM limited

and high resolution 4x5 scans can start at 400MB and grow rapidly when layers are added. If

you are scannning LF very infrequently and have patience then all will work, just slowly.

[._._z]

The Cinema screen is a higher-quality screen, with a higher refresh rate, than those in

the iMacs.

 

That said, I got the opportunity to set up and play for a few weeks with a 20" 2GHz iMac

last month. Very sweet setup, and the screen looked great.

[awindsor]

I would steer clear of CS2 for a while. There are major performance bugs in CS2 that do not appear in CS according to many posts on Adobe's forums and on MacFixIt.

 

I am thinking of going the Mac mini route myself. The only problems I have are the relatively slow clock speed and lack of upgrade space.

 

I just sold a Dell that I won. Never even opened the box.

 

Currently my set up is a Powerbook G4 hooked up to an external keyboard, trackball, and monitor.

[basscheffers]

Alistair, if you already have a G4, I would wait another year for the new Intel based macs to come out and software to be avialable.

 

Likely, the Mini is one of the first to go, which would probably make it a 3GHz box. Upgrade space will still be limitted, but firewire HDDs are very fast, and what else is there to upgrade these days? Of course there is no way of predicting what the memory limit will be...

[._._z]

A bad idea to buy the first iteration of new hardware, with attendent growing pains.

 

If you want to get a machine now, the iMac and Mac mini are great machines, and good

bargains as well.

[Uhooru]

The Z has a good point, the 1st generation is often a bit dodgy. If you need something now, I'd get it now. As far as the mini is concerned, it seems that people that have them are quite happy, but it seems to me that if you have to buy all from scratch and spring for a ACD monitor etc., they are not so good a deal. If you add it all up at app. 1600 w/20" monitor and Superdrive they are about 3-400 bucks less then the price of a 2.0 20" iMac, a much more powerful machine. If you have all the periphials anyways than 700 bucks is not too bad for an elegant piece of equipment that works very well though it is a bit slow. Its all good though. I'm finding as a new switcher, that the macs are about more than just speed.