Trading in a G5 PowerMac for an Intel Mac Mini - any advice or comments?
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Umbrella Frameworks
Next: DumbĂwireless question
From: Andy Hewitt on 5 Mar 2010 09:07 Debbie Wilson <djmaizels(a)mac.com> wrote: > Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > > > I'd definitely suggest getting the current Mini - you can bump those > > to 2x4gig memory, same as the current MBPs, which should be enough for > > a little while (and will be a lot cheaper by the time you want to go > > past 4gig - ie next year!). > > > > Also, you can sell Minis for 80% of their purchase price. > > OK - I didn't realise they could take 8GB, if you do a DIY job. > Interesting... it is certainly a hell of a lot less than an iMac or a > Mac Pro, so even if it didn't last me quite as long, it's not such a > problem. You can spec these up a bit, and almost match the iMac for performance, although they're only a few quid cheaper if you do that. If you take a monitor into account, the Mini solution could be more expensive than an iMac. -- Andy Hewitt <http://web.me.com/andrewhewitt1/>
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 5 Mar 2010 15:23 On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:24:37 +0000, Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: >On 5 Mar 2010 10:45:05 GMT, zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >>David Empson <dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz> wrote: >> >>> With Valve's Steam rumoured to be appearing on the Mac soon, there >>> will >>> be more Mac games and they are more likely to be up to date in future. >> >>Am I correct in thinking that if I bought Portal through Steam running >>in a VM, then when (if) Steam comes to the Mac, I can just redownload >>Portal with the same account and without re-paying? > >We don't know yet. I do hope so - I've got bunches of Valve's own >games that I'd love to play without rebooting. HL2 and Portal mostly. > >Have you seen that Portal has changed slightly this week? Touting for >Portal 2, it seems. Not only have radios which spout morse code and >SSTV images been added to the game, but the ending also stretched: > >http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/03/portal-updated-with-extended-ending/ >http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/01/portal-releases-radio-patch-tunes-in-hints-of-a-sequel/ And http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/05/portal-2-confirmed-by-game-informer-cover-due-in-2010/ Hurrah! Does anyone know what "this holiday season" means when spoken in American - Christmas or summer? Cheers - Jaimie -- "On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
From: Rowland McDonnell on 5 Mar 2010 15:31 Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > Nige <nige(a)room.fsa.com> wrote: > > >Could anyone offer any advice/insight on this as a worthwhile move? > >Looking at my G5 and comparing it with the diminutive Mac Mini, it > >seems hard to believe I'd be 'trading up' - but the spec's speak for > >themselves... don't they? > > Do it. They are wonderful little workhorses, and the latest ones will > indeed spank the G5 on everything except on quantity of internal disk. <cough> Or available expansion space. Or max RAM. Or i/o interfaces. Or - maybe - some streaming operations and - maybe - UI snappiness. I mention UI snappiness because the only `modern' Mac I've had that has had as much snappiness as (for example) my Mac Plus was the 2.5GHz 4G5. My current 3.06 GHz Core2DUo 24" Intel iMac has less UI snappiness than my Plus (or old 4G5). And yes, the iMac has max RAM and the beefiest graphics card available. And no, the very slight UI sluggishness isn't a problem, but... 3.06GHz of Core2Duo and serious graphics hardware and I've got `less snappy' than an old 8MHz 68000 machine... Current Mac Minis appear to me to have a spec that'd make them less UI-snappy than my iMac. [snip] Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Rowland McDonnell on 5 Mar 2010 15:41 eastender <nospam(a)nospam.com> wrote: [snip] > Seconded. I got fed up with my G5 last summer (admittedly a single > processor model) and bought a 2MHz Mac Mini. <grin> There has never been a 2MHz clock speed Mac. The slowest was the Mac XL at 5MHz. > I opened it up and put 4GB > Crucial memory in and a 7200 rpm 320MB WD drive. It is very fast and can > easily handle multiple apps My 1986 4MB Mac Plus with its 8MHz 68000 CPU (16/32 bit) can easily handle multiple apps, file sharing, networking, and so on. Admittedly, if you want it to run it as a LocalTalk file server, while it's still nominally `useable by a local user' so much CPU gets chewed up running the serial port flat out (~1/4 Mb/s) that you can forget using the thing for anything but file serving - the UI slows to a crawl. But aside from that... > - earlier today I had InDesign, Quark, Word, > Safari, Mail, Acrobat, Parallels/WIndows XP and assorted others all open One would expect that number of apps to be no problem for a typical 68K or PPC Macintosh of the early 1990s, running System 7.x. I've certainly often had email, Web, Usenet, and text layout apps (different ones, of course) open at the same time very very often on my old Performa 475 with its 4MB RAM and no video card as such at all - oh, and an 80MB internal HDD. > and the fan never went above its base 1500 rpm and there was little > impact on the apps, save a bit longer to open one or two. My Mac Plus doesn't have a fan at all - it runs silently (aside from the external SCSI HDD - 5.25", and with a massive 20MB of storage). And it's often had that many apps open. > It's a great machine. Not denying that - but you've not shown it's any better than the old stuff, though. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Debbie Wilson on 5 Mar 2010 15:43
Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > Since you've already got the best screen, it's ideal. > > Do you have need of vast amounts of storage? The Minis take a single > 2.5" SATA, which is restrictive internally, but they do have FW800 and > GigE for external disks. I do use a lot of storage due to archiving 16 years' worth of digital artwork files, some of which are on the large side. However a 500GB Mini for live projects combined with a large networkable hard drive so my OH and I can both access archived files, would actually be a better solution for us, and network HDs are fairly cheap. After the tinnitus-causing drone of this G4 for the last 8 years, I also really like the idea of a silent computer and one that can nestle on the base of my screen's stand :-) Deb. -- http://www.scientific-art.com "He looked a fierce and quarrelsome cat, but claw he never would; He only bit the ones he loved, because they tasted good." S. Greenfield |