Am I good to go for a Mac?

[digitaldog]

<p>NEVER let Apple update Epson drivers. Kiss of death. That means examining all the updates and not letting the system update apply anything Epson related. </p>

[james_smith55]

<blockquote>

<p>I won't let Apple's updater touch the driver for this reason, but <strong>it can't be helped with major OS upgrades</strong>.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In less than 2 years I've had to deal with 3 separate Mac OSes. When I first hackintoshed by PC SL was the latest and greatest. Then Lion came out and now less than a year later Mountain Lion DP is out. At this pace you will have to do a major OS upgrade at least once a year just to keep up.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>I have the iMac 27" and upgraded the RAM to 12GB. I currently have 2 scanners, 2 printers, 4 external HDDs and a couple of other USB devices. I had to buy a powered USB hub because the 4 USB ports built into the Mac didn't have enough power to manage everything at once. The hugely important downside to this machine is that it doesn't have a mic input. That's a monumentally stupid decision in my opinion. I also agree that 3 OS upgrades in less than 2 years in frustrating, especially as you have to pay for them.</p>

<p>Other than those points I love the thing. It handles just about anything and I will never go back to a PC if Macs remain as good as this. </p>

[james_smith55]

<blockquote>

<p>The hugely important downside to this machine is that it doesn't have a mic input.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Get a USB microphone. One thing I failed to mention when I was biasedly extolling the benefits of a hackintosh vs a mac is sound seems to be frequent issue. The sound out of mine is NOT clean by any stretch of the imagination. It's weird. It sounds like standard PC sound when I boot it up in Windows and it sounds markedly more noisy when I boot it up in SL or Lion. It's fine for listening to music but it just isn't as clean as when running Win 7. I'm baffled why the same hardware would have different noise levels when running different operating systems. Upon doing some searching I found out that even in the best case scenario onboard computer sound will never be the best. Something to do with noise on the motherboard, etc. So I researched it further and discovered anyone doing serious sound work on any platform bypasses the onboard sound and gets a USB solution. <a href="http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/duet2.php">This one is pretty awesome</a>. It is only for the Mac. There are of course much cheaper simpler options. There are also USB speakers and USB digital outputs that can connect to DACs and then amplifiers.</p>

<p>I think Apple figured if you were serious about sound you would not use a built in Mic input. At least I learned something, rather obscure, due to my hackintoshing. :)</p>

[johne37179]

I have a fullhouse iMac with an additional 27 inch monitor. I also have a Mac Mini on my network, but only use the mini to

display images and manage my Apple TV system. I would think that the Mac Mini does not have the horsepower to

process large files in reasonable time. Memory will also be an issue -- but no more than you had in your Windows

environment. When traveling I use a loaded Macbook Pro, and a 2 TB portable drive, but it is slow by comparison to the

desktop enviornment. With RAW images in the 20 MB range, any processing takes CPU horsepower.

You should not run into any software issues. I use much the same software you describe, but have switched to Lightroom

for importing and initial processing and cateloging. I use CS5 for final processing.

 

I have used Apples for years and other than some occassional issues about upgrading my OS before Adobe had caught

up, I haven't had core issues other than those that naturally arise with larger and more complex systems. I think you will

like the move to Apple.

[james_smith55]

<blockquote>

<p>I think you will like the move to Apple.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not sure that statement is justified. Here's what you said earlier in the same post...</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><strong>I would think that the Mac Mini does not have the horsepower</strong> to process large files in reasonable time. Memory will also be an issue -- but no more than you had in your Windows environment. When traveling <strong>I use a loaded Macbook Pro, and a 2 TB portable drive, but it is slow</strong> by comparison to the desktop enviornment.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong>The OP's issue is not one of operating system.</strong> Regardless of operating system one can have a sub par experience if you buy the wrong hardware. Comparing a laptop randomly purchased from "a year or so ago" with a brand new specced out Mac mini is not an apples to apples comparison. If you dropped over $1200 on a desktop PC and it couldn't drive an NEC monitor then yes serious questions would have to be asked. I have NEVER spent over $1000 on a PC and my current rig I bought years ago has an i7, 9 gigs of RAM and Terabytes of HD and SSD space.</p>

<p>You can't compare an iMac, Mac Mini, Macbook pro, and a PC from "a year or so ago" and come to any meaningful conclusions regarding operating systems. If the OP wants to switch to Mac just for the hey of it that's fine but to insinuate you can't find a desktop PC for far less than $1000 that will run Photoshop CS5 and an NEC monitor is ludicrous.</p>

 

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>James: Thanks for the advice on a USB microphone. I was thinking of something for less than 10 quid, just a cheap thing to do simple voiceovers on instructional videos. The built in mic on the iMac doesn't have the sensitivity to deliver a loud enough recording, despite my attempts at fiddling with the settings.</p>

<p>As for the whole PC vs Mac debate, I think the overriding factor is that a PC usually = hassle. That's not a problem for those of us that are computer savvy, adept at spotting incoming malware, solving hardware/software conflicts etc. Not to mention the constant barrage of updates, not just for Windows but for the other countless programs running in the system tray. After 20 years of all that crap I got sick of it and jumped to Apple. I've wasted so much time over the years constantly re-booting, configuring, updating, solving problems and fist thumping that I decided enough was enough. Computer downtime now costs me money because my own business depends on it 24/7. Since I switched to Mac last year everything has ran perfectly. I think it must be over 2 months since I last rebooted or even powered off my iMac. Just sit down, hit return and start working. It's bliss as far as I'm concerned. People who are not skilled in fixing or maintaining computers would benefit even more from the switch to Mac in my opinion.</p>

[d_ponce]

<p><strong>Regarding the upcoming upgrade to ML – Apple does not require that you upgrade to the next OS as soon as it comes out, do they? Would it not make more sense to wait until Adobe ensures compatibility with it before upgrading? Also, I presume there are settings, like in Windows, where you can say ‘no automatic updating’, correct -- to avoid an accidental Epson update that was mentioned? </strong></p>

<p><strong>James, I am not sure if you were directing your last post to me, but you are correct -- I do not feel I am trying to make a decision strickly based on the OS -- I have wanted to go to the 'other side' for years, but hesitated for various reasons. But now that Windows gives you one install and one install only of its software - even if you buy the full version, or even if your PC crashes after a year -- I no longer see the benefits of staying with Windows. I will keep my 2005 vintage XP for all of the old Windows software that I currently "can't live without" and for general day to day email, etc -- so the transition won't be 'cold turkey' -- but my photography will be 100% Apple and I'm looking forward to seeing what so many have been talking about for so long -- how, for grahics/photo editing, nothing can beat it!</strong></p>

[justin_thackeray]

<p>The Mac mini solution will definitely work fine, but you need to be aware of a few things. The trade-off with a mini compared to (say) an iMac is that the base mini has a slow HD (5400rpm vs 7200), only has 2GB RAM standard and is limited to a maximum of 8GB RAM.</p>

<p>Of course you don't probably don't have a real <em>need</em> for 16GB RAM now, but in my 20 years+ experience with Macs, having limited RAM expandability is often the first thing that causes you grief a few years down the road. 2GB for a photography machine is really going to be sloooow in Photoshop manipulation of image files. I wouldn't consider a new machine for photo image manipulation with less than 4GB, a $100 upgrade on a base mini.</p>

<p>The slower HD isn't a deal-breaker, but again, as a photographer you'd do noticeably better by starting with a 7200rpm drive, which is another $150 on top of the base mini price.</p>

<p>These two key upgrades bring you to $849 for a basic mini, with no monitor, keyboard or mouse and a limit of 8GB of RAM.</p>

<p>The second-level iMac (base $1499) comes with 4GB RAM, a 1TB 7200rpm HD and is expandable to 16GB RAM. You also get a mouse, monitor and a gorgeous 21.5 inch monitor thrown in. That is of course an extra $650, which almost buys you another Mac mini in 3 years time...</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>D,</p>

<p>I am running Lion as my new Mini came with it, but was happy with Snow Leopard until recently. My girlfriend is still very happily running Leopard, there is absolutely no need to "upgrade" just because a newer version comes out.</p>

<p>Keep doing the incremental updates, 7.3-7.4 etc, but the system won't take you to ML, 8.1, until you ask it to, and pay! Apple keep supporting older OS's reasonably well, for instance there was a big SL update a week after Lion came out.</p>

<p>Justin,</p>

<p>You really aren't keeping up are you? The base Mini will take 16GB of RAM for $239, even though Apple say it won't, and a 1TB internal can be had for $140. Also all non CD drive Mini's can take two internals.</p>

[james_smith55]

<blockquote>

<p>Regarding the upcoming upgrade to ML – Apple does not require that you upgrade to the next OS as soon as it comes out, do they?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's not something you are going to have to worry about. Cupertino does incremental updates for free on a regular basis for example 10.6.3 then 10.6.4... 10.6.8. After awhile they do a major update and give the OS a new cat name for example 10.7.1, Lion. When that happens the update is absolutely not automatic. You have to pay Apple for the pleasure. Everyone cheered when Apple announced the price of Lion would be $30. We felt they were giving it away. What we didn't know was that a new OS was going to be released <1 year later. Now we are like, no way. We are not going to feed the beast every year. Unless ML is $10 I am sticking with Lion.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>James, I am not sure if you were directing your last post to me, but you are correct -- I do not feel I am trying to make a decision strickly based on the OS -- I have wanted to go to the 'other side' for years, but hesitated for various reasons.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Cool. As long as you have your reasons. I would just hate for you to start over with a new OS simply because of straight forward video issue.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Thanks for the advice on a USB microphone. I was thinking of something for less than 10 quid, just a cheap thing to do simple voiceovers on instructional videos.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm assuming based on the use of the word "quid" you live somewhere in Britannia. This may not be much help to you but <a href="http://www.zzounds.com/item--CADU1">here is an example of a cheaper USB mic</a>. I can't vouch for the store and I have never used a USB mic. So I can't really tell you what they are like. I just wanted to give you an example more in your price range.</p>

[justin_thackeray]

<blockquote>

<p>Justin,</p>

<ol>

<li>You really aren't keeping up are you? </li>

</ol></blockquote>

<p>Scott, the reason I joined photo.net was to find a forum where people could have conversations without unnecessarily aggressive responses to every remark (like most of the forums at dpreview for example).</p>

<p>I went to the trouble of going to the Apple website. I loaded up a comparison with various iMac and mini models and took careful note of the limits, which for the base mini is listed as 8GB RAM. It appears there is unpublished information that you are party to, that is absent from Apple's own website. Fine. Tell us. But its completely beyond me why you have to deliver the information in that way.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Justin,</p>

<p>My apologies if I upset your sensibilities. I agree, people are often too quick with a pithy or dismissive reply, I have been guilty of both before.</p>

<p>In this instance, though, it seemed obvious that you had not read the replies of two other people in the thread that both actually own current Mac Mini's and have said repeatedly that despite Apple listing the RAM limit as 8GB they will actually take, and access, 16GB. Posters have also suggested where to get it and posted links.</p>

<p>So, whilst I might have come across as a bit too blunt, how much time would you give to posters who seemingly ignore at least three previous in thread posts, from actual owners, that state something completely different? </p>

<p>Please don't take this as a second effrontery, it is meant as a genuine reply to your comment, I am trying to show why, sometimes, it can be excruciatingly difficult to keep giving good information in a level headed and polite manner to people when other, less knowledgeable people (in one specific area), give contradictory "help".</p>

<p>Take care and welcome to Photo.net.</p>

[d_ponce]

<p>Yes, Justin -- welcome! don't leave! -- I'm sure Scott meant no ill-will. Heck, his comment was tame compared to the lashing that I received from the responders of another posting I did to this forum recently! But I didn't care -- I knew they were wrong and I was right. LOL! This group is actually quite polite -- but most of all, very knowledgable! And although I also appreciated your contribution, Justin, I was looking for people who actually owned the mini so I did focus on their responses. I also read the specs of all of the Macs on the Apple web site and based my decision of the mini because, after weighing out all the pros and cons -- and then actually going to an Apple store to see and feel their products and talk with the salesman -- I decided for me, the (fully upgraded) mini made the most sense. HOWEVER, being thorough as you may all imagine, I then had to hear from actual users -- it's one thing to hear the salesman tout how great their products are but its another to hear from actual users. I had read terrible reviews of compatibility issues from other sites and of course was hesitant -- but, again, based on their comments I was not sure if the problem wasn't really 'user inexperience' -- that's why I come to this forum -- I've asked numerous questions over the years and everyone has been so eager to help; this question, however, has to be a first when it comes to number of responses! which was great -- I can't wait to get my mini! Thx again!</p>

[sf_photo1]

<p>I know your last sentence was "can't wait to get my Mini" but I wanted to confer with the post above re: iMac & 7200RPM drive. Have both myself and the access time for the scratch disc makes all the difference.</p>

<p>The 2011 'entry' model mentioned above is presently $999 at the Apple store:<br>

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC309LL/A</p>

<p>Specs:<br>

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/stats/imac-core-i5-2.5-21-inch-aluminum-mid-2011-thunderbolt-specs.html</p>

[d_ponce]

<p>sf photo: I'm not sure what you were referring to in your post. Please clarify. The mini (upgrade) comes with a 750g/7200 rpm HD; core i7 processor. If I go the iMac I'm "stuck" with a glossy screen -- and, presumably, non IPS. True, once you start adding upgrades to the mini 'low cost' is no longer a factor -- but once I crunched the numbers it seemed you pretty pay the same amount based on what options you want. </p>

[sf_photo1]

<p>Is there a fan in the Mini? The 7200 drive runs hotter hence the reason they are not used in notebooks. If no fan I would want to explore this further as to reliability etc.<br>

If you do not like the glossy screen and no screen covers are available then best stick to the Mini.<br>

Personally I boot from an external Firewire with the Mini to compensate for the slower standard drive. I have a Dell monitor, very sharp but lots of calibration time and still not quite like the truer iMac colors.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>Yes there is a fan in the Mac Mini. There have been no reports of issues running 7200 drives in them, or even two drives, probably because they are designed to do it.</p>

<p>As for booting from a Firewire 7200 rather than an 5400 internal drive, the internal will be faster. Even FW800 isn't going to actually achieve the read write speeds of an internal SATA 3, or possible 6, Gb/s connected drive. I have done both and found the FW much slower. I also have 3.5 and 2.5 external drive enclosures with eSATA connectors (all 8 in the image above have then), even they are slower than internals.</p>

<p>One thing I do when I travel but don't want to take my computer, I clone my internals to a bus powered drive and then plug it into any MAC when I get where I am going, pushing the Option key on startup enables me to boot, what is effectively, my computer, a really useful Apple function.</p>