To the OP, and anyone else thinking of going mini, the fine folks at OtherWorld Computing will trick out your mini for you with more memory, a DVD burner, and/or a faster HD.
It appears that I may be. I checked, and the last Hotfixes (as well as Security Updates) listed on my system are from July. I have Automatic Updates enabled, so I don’t know why the August ones haven’t been installed.
I really want to like the Mac Mini. It looks great, and there’s obviously a good market for neat, unobtrusive small-form-factor computers. And i’m a big fan of Apple products in general. But it just seems so dreadfully underpowered for the money.
Admittedly, the OP’s computing needs do not seem to be incredibly taxing, and the stuff she wants to do would probably work fine on the Mini, so it might be the perfect choice. Still, i’m not sure i’d dismiss the idea of a PC in the same price range.
Well, there are cheap PCs, and then there’s eMachines. In the PC world, eMachines computers are widely-known for being pieces of crap that should be avoided at all costs.
Also, if you’re not even willing to consider a cheap PC, i’m not quite sure what the purpose of opening the thread was. As far as i can tell, if you’re not willing to consider a cheap PC, then you can either buy a used Mac (as you’ve suggested you might do), or you can buy a more expensive PC or Mac. But if the latter is an option, then it’s really not a fair comparison with the Mac Mini anyway, because someone willing to fork out the cash for a high-end PC or a G5 Mac is probably looking for something completely different in a computer than someone who’s contemplating a Mac Mini.
Basically, if a Mac Mini will do everything you want it to do, and you like the size and the look well enough, and the relatively low processing power of the computer is unlikely to affect you, then go right ahead. By all accounts, they do what they do very well.
But i don’t agree with all the Windows doomsayers who assume that a Windows box is broken as soon as you turn it on. And, despite the crowing over OSx, the fact is that Windows XP is, on the whole, a pretty reliable and stable operating system.
The mini makes for a very attractive paperweight, but unless you’ve just got cash to burn, it’s too much money for too little except littleness itself. About the only thing it’s really got going for it (besides the MacOS) is the stylin’ bitty form factor, and that’s only a plus if you never plan to upgrade it.
Just buy a refurb iMac if you want a Mac. You can snag a 17" iMac G5, 1.6GHz, sporting a lovely widescreen LCD, for $900 from the Apple store right now. Faster processor, more VRAM and a better GPU, bigger and faster HD, etc. If you’re unwilling to spend that much, then, quite frankly, I think you’re better off getting a PC.
-
-
- This is interesting; I am curious if doing so voids the warranty…?
-
…I’m stunned they stick the slower HD in the more-expensive machine. And stunned even further that people would buy them knowing this. …If anything, the better-machine should have the 7200 (at least as a factory option), and have at LEAST a 5400 standard. It’s a crippled product, they slowed it down intentionally. They’re ripping you off.
~
No one who uses this new computer will be playing games, will they? The processor tops out at 1.42ghz which is pretty slow…not to mention that it costs the same price as the 2.8ghz PC I bought last year.
But if no one’s playing games it probably doesn’t matter that the processor is slow by today’s standards and that it only has a Radeon 9200 graphics card in it. (a better card than you’d get in a $600 pc, however - the card is the first thing I upgraded in my computer).
If it sounds like the mini is up to doing what you want it to, so why not get it if you like it? 
I don’t get you people. You’re bitching about the drive performance on the cheapest machine Apple sells. Folks bitched that Apple was too expensive, when Apple made an inexpensive computer, they bitch about the finish on the screws that aren’t used.
Listen. For $500, make me a PC with a Mac Mini’s capabilities (don’t leave out the firewire, silent operation, and form factor…oh, and don’t leave out iLife).
This machine’s job is to get OS X in the hands of as many people possible, NOT to appease the speed geeks. It’s supposed to be an internet appliance for the masses, and a second (or third, or fourth) computer for enthusiasts. For a chunk more money, get an iMac, it’s got a faster proc and faster front side bus…if you want a LOT more performance, get the dual-G5…but don’t slam Apple for making a full marketing spectrum that makes sence.
Lastly, if you’re buying this thing to mod it, you’ve got bigger problems. This is a closed box appliance.
Bingo. For a general-purpose personal computer like the OP describes, a Mac mini is just about perfect. I’ve still got a PC for when I want to get into geek pissing contests, but it never gets used except for games. 99% of the stuff I need a computer for, I use my Mac mini and shudder at the thought of going back to Windows to do the same stuff.
The OS and supplied software makes all the difference. It’s all built-in and designed to work together.
Only caveats:
-
Don’t skimp on the memory. I got one of the 256MB Mac minis, assuming I’d upgrade the memory somewhere down the road. Running Tiger on the thing was completely unusable; it kind of pisses me off that Apple would release them knowing that their new OS would barely run on it. I upgraded immediately; I chose 1GB, but I imagine that the 512MB they’re selling them with now would be adequate.
-
If you’re doing anything graphically intensive, don’t get a mini. The videocard supplied with it just doesn’t have enough memory for even some of the built-in Tiger “show-off” features. The card in my Powerbook is more powerful than the one in my desktop machine.
-
If you’re ever planning on doing any kind of DVD burning, go ahead and get the SuperDrive built in. The built-in DVD software doesn’t work with third-party DVD burners. (Another “Screw you, consumer!” message from Apple).
-
The “resumes and spreadsheets” mentioned in the OP will require you to get a good office package up-front. There’s no word processor or spreadsheet built in. I went ahead and bit the bullet and bought Microsoft Office for the Mac. I’ve never found a freeware/shareware equivalent that I’ve liked (although I hear OpenOffice is all right), and I’ve never heard anyone particularly impressed with Apple’s own releases.
[couching statement]I am a long-term Mac user since my SE/30 in 1988. I use Windows machines, configure a lab full of PCs running XP, and use Macs for everyday use, home use. I have G4 iMac, G5 iMac, G4 Powerbooks, iBook, and have had almost every Mac since the Performa series, so consider me biased[/couching]
It is important to remember that speed comparisons between the Motorola and Intel families are impractical and inaccurate. (see BareFeats)
Also, Macintosh is a GUI over a Unix system. It comes with MySQL, PHP, Apache Server, etc installed. It is a BSD.
IMO, there is simply no comparison between OS X (10.3.9 or 10.4) to the Windows OS. If you want to tackle the initial switch, the end result is a multi-tasking cross-platform computing paradise that is unique and peerless.
You can’t. But you’re missing the point. No-one has said that the Mac Mini is a bad computer. I made very clear in my last post that if it does what the OP wants and needs in a computer, then she should buy it.
Mine was the perspective of someone for whom the power of a computer is, for example, more important than whether it can fit in a shoebox. The area around my desk is big enough that having a computer tower isn’t a problem. So why would i pay money to reduce the form factor size when that’s a completely irrelevant issue for me? If you do, in fact, want or need a computer that is just 6.5’’ square, then a Mac Mini is perfect. But the fact is that size reduction in computers still costs money for the equivalent processing power, so if you don’t need the small footprint then it may not be the right computer.
As for the firewire port, that’s probably nice, but for most users firewire can’t do very much that USB2.0 can’t do, and if they really need firewire then they can spend a whole $25 for a firewire card. Of course, your answer will be that some people don’t want to mess around with the inside of their computer. Well, if you buy a firewire card from my local geek shop, it will probably cost a few bucks more than from CompUSA, but they’ll install it for you for nothing.
Perhaps one of the problems here is that the OP hasn’t really made it that clear what her priorities are. For example, cost is obviously a factor of some sort, but we don’t know exactly how much of a factor. Also, we don’t even know whether the size issue is of major importance. Furthermore, the OP specifically asked for reasons NOT to get a Mac Mini, so i have merely been acting as devil’s advocate in this situation, which appears to be exactly what she wanted.
Well, you have failed in your duty as advocate. The No 1 reason not to get a Mac Mini is that anyone with even the slightest hint of geek in their genetic makeup will go into a rabid combat frenzy over it, as demonstrated in this thread. Mere sight or mention of one in mixed company results in teeth on the carpet and blood on the walls - it’s more divisive than a SCOTUS justice wearing a crucifix and a ‘Jesus Saves’ baseball cap while sat at the bench.
But to summarise:
[ul]
[li]If you don’t mind paying for the convenience and slight drawbacks of having a computer which just does what it does without getting cranky, then buy one but hide it in a drawer where guests won’t see it.[/li][li]If you absolutely must have maximum price-performance and are willing to invest some time, then build your own PC with your choice of operating system and be prepared to fiddle with it periodically.[/li][li]If you want to have your cake and eat it, a $40 KVM switch will let you run both options using a single keyboard, screen and mouse[/li][/ul]
Horses for courses and all that…
Boy, you ain’t kidding there. I guess the problem is, I’ve been a staunch anti-macnoid in the past, but the current OS and equipment Really Is Nice. And there is a bunch of geeks the get them BECAUSE they’re a pretty wrapper around a powerful Unix OS.
I’ve moved PAST the ‘best bang for the buck’ arguement because, really, computers today do EVERYTHING faster than the machines I found really useful 5 years ago. Sure, play your games, they’ll use all the Horsepower and more, but I haven’t found those games perticularly compelling, just pretty. Aside from that, do you care if the machine has wasted 1.5 million cycles waiting for you, or 3.5 million? If you leave the box to build a DVD at night, do you care if it takes 15 minutes or 45?
Buy what you want, but be ready to defend your decision to the death because you ‘wasted’ your money on a fruit with a slower spinning disk. If you REALLY want some compelling evidence, price two year old computers on ebay, the mac’s are still worth 60% of their original price…and there IS no market for used PCs.
Loads of good information in this thread. To answer a couple of questions, size isn’t a concern, and the machine probably won’t be used for gaming. Some good ideas here; my husband and I will have to sit down and peruse this thread at our leisure. I like the idea of a re-furbished Apple, too. I just want to get the most bang for my buck, and I want it to be reliable.
-
-
- Well see it’s like this: I checked at my online PC parts supplier of choice and the cheapest 4200 RPM 80-Gb laptop drive there costs $100. The cheapest 5400 RPM 80-Gb laptop drive costs… $12 more. The Otherworld Computing page says “up to 33.6% faster performance with 5400 RPM”. If I had bought one and found that they had intentionally put in one slow part to drag the whole system speed down, I’d be furious. Especially if a significantly-faster part only would have added 2% more on to the cost.
Cheap indeed.
~
- Well see it’s like this: I checked at my online PC parts supplier of choice and the cheapest 4200 RPM 80-Gb laptop drive there costs $100. The cheapest 5400 RPM 80-Gb laptop drive costs… $12 more. The Otherworld Computing page says “up to 33.6% faster performance with 5400 RPM”. If I had bought one and found that they had intentionally put in one slow part to drag the whole system speed down, I’d be furious. Especially if a significantly-faster part only would have added 2% more on to the cost.
-
Obviously agreeing to disagree is about the only ground we’re gonna gain here. :rolleyes:
What definition of “reliable” are you talking about here? All of the Macs I’ve ever owned have lasted at least six years each without any problems; Macs hold their values very well (check eBay prices) largely because of their reliability.
I haven’t bought refurbished stuff myself, but all accounts I’ve heard are that they’re generally very good. Small Dog Electronics gets a lot of praise from the folks I’ve heard from.
System Requirements for the Sims 2
Mac
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.3.8 or later
CPU Processor: PowerPC G4/G5
CPU Speed: 1.2GHz or faster
Memory: 256 MB or higher
PC
–With a T&L capable video card with at least 32 MB of video RAM (such as nvidia GeForce 2 or better or ATI Radeon 7000 or better):
Windows XP, Windows ME, Windows 98 or Windows 2000
800 MHz P3 processor
256 MB RAM
They’re not identical, as you said, but the Mac Mini is still barely going to be fast enough to run most of the newest generations of games, which was my point in mentioning the processor speed. And according to the specs for the Mac version of Doom 3, it won’t run that game at all. (okay, so sometimes you can get a game to “run” if you’re under specs, but it’s a crap shoot, and if it does, it doesn’t work properly anyway)
What I call “reliable” - it can open multiple browsers and handle multiple grinding tasks at one time without freezing or crashing erratically (no checkmark for my eMachine in that box); it isn’t susceptible to the billions of viruses, trojans, spoofs and worms out there; it can run any program that I can buy for it that is supposed to work within its parameters without freezing or crashing (yet another lack of checkmark for my eMachine).
Resale value isn’t a concern; we buy computers to use 'em up.
I think I’m pretty qualified to answer your questions!
I’ve been a PC guy for ages and recently bought a mac mini. I had an athlon 2400XP with one gig of ram. So I decided to get one last february. I got the 1.4 Ghz G4 and then went on to upgrade the memory and install a DVD burner myself. I later added the bluetooth/airport card.
Pros:
Quiet. (hardly notice its on)
OS X is really cool
never really crashes (although a reboot is necessary sometimes)
the sleep mode functions extremely well. Doesn’t crap up like on a PC
Stable no matter how many apps you have open.
Obviously I enjoy all of the other pros mentioned by others.
Now I’ll try to add something unique in the cons department.
Its slooooooooow. I don’t care what anyone here says about that. I know from first-hand use of Macs and PCs that they seem more sluggish. Also note that the intel PCs that are running OSX now are actually much faster. Microsoft Word and Excel are reeeeeeaaaaally slow. I used a 1 Ghz pentium 3 at work and it was faster in this area. Don’t try to play Sim City 4 on it either. Its not possible.
Another thing I miss is Ctrl+Alt+Del. Once an app freezes you don’t get that instant ability to kill it like in windows. Firefox will beachball from time to time and you kind of have to wait a sec for the menu to come up to kill it. Sure there’s Option Command Escape, but that doesn’t give you an activity monitor too.
That’s a minor beef.
So in summary, My problems are lack of games and slowness.
But what I’d really reccommend is to wait on the purchase of that Mac mini. As you may know, Apple is moving to Intel cpus in the near future. I believe the first ones are expected early 2006. That’s a long time to wait for a PC but I think it is seriously worth it. From what I learned they will be updating the lower end of the line first (eg minis and ibooks) This would take care of both of my concerns in one fell swoop. It will be faster due to the intel chips and the lack of games will likely be negated due to the fact that its easier to make ports to the Mac. If not there’s always running emulation or even dual booting. Apple has said they won’t do anything to prevent people from booting windows. Why should they? They make their money on the hardware.
Huge hijack:
leandroc76, will you send me an email at my forum address? Your email is disabled on the boards.