Mac mini

mackerski

I just noticed this on the market, and I think I want one. I always wanted a G5, but it seemed poor value given that I'm not about to junk my PC. This, OTOH, looks like a nice package for the price. It would also be my first Mac since... my first Mac, come to think of it.

A few negatives jump out - there's the usual Apple soup-stone config, coupled with overpriced upgrades: "well, yes, you could just take the bundled 256MB, but for only €430 you can have the 1Gig it really needs".

Also, and this one scares me, I can't see any audio in connection. Am I missing something?

Anybody else got opinions on this box?

Dermot

Mixie

I don't think there's an audio in, not that I see listed anyway.

I ordered one yesterday morning, though it won't ship till the 29th. It'll be my first mac, so any must-have software/cool bits anyone cares to recommend would be greatly appreciated!

RicardoSmith

http://www.apple.com/macmini/specs.html
Doesn't look like it. Most onboard sound in is dire. Why do you need it? Also why does it scare you? Apples attitude would be if you need Audio in buy a sound card (USB) or a G5 and PCI sound card.

aidan_walsh

mackerski wrote:

Am I missing something?

Apart from the fact that its been discussed in about 5 other threads in the last two days, I don't think so.

I was thinking that I might get one for testing purposes, until I saw it pointed out on another forum* as to exactly how limited it is. Now I'm a little more up in the air about it. I might wait a while to see if it ships with the updated version of OS X when that comes out before considering further whether to take the plunge.

*Full discussion thread.

mackerski

doodle_sketch wrote:

Apart from the fact that its been discussed in about 5 other threads in the last two days, I don't think so.

Hmm - I did a subject line scan and didn't see any likely threads, but you're dead right. Also about the lack of an audio in. It's a bummer, solely for casual stuff like Internet telephony or whatever.

However, in a classic bit of Apple upselling, I may now buy an Imac G5...

Dermot

Urban Weigl

I wouldn't see the lack of audio in as a huge problem, as most webcams typically include a high quality microphone. For example, the Firewire-based iSight camera does. It is certainly the highest quality webcam I have seen thus far (NOT the cheapest, but the quality of both audio and video is phenomenal when compared to cheaper gear I have used), and the microphone in it is of good quality. Of course, for about €30m you can also get a breakout box with various audio in ports, which would plug into the Mac mini's firewire or one of the USB 2.0 ports.

I am thinking about getting one to replace an old PC. Looks good especially with the educational discount.

Urban Weigl

mackerski wrote:

A few negatives jump out - there's the usual Apple soup-stone config, coupled with overpriced upgrades: "well, yes, you could just take the bundled 256MB, but for only €430 you can have the 1Gig it really needs".

It really needs 512MB to work with heavy duty applications, which to be fair is only €75. I am not saying that 1GB is not nice to have. I also read that you can use 2GB modules as well, though I do not know how much those cost, and suspect they are going to break the bank.

While Apple do not recommend it, upgrading the RAM yourself will not void the warranty, as long as you do not damage it in the process. You can probably pick up a 1GB module for €150 if you know where to look, and pop that in. It uses standard PC memory, after all (there is no such thing as Mac memory).

RicardoSmith

Besides there no such thing as "Audio in"...Its either line in or mic in. Very different things.

mackerski

RicardoSmith wrote:

Besides there no such thing as "Audio in"...Its either line in or mic in. Very different things.

Indeed - and you wouldn't consider each of those a type of "Audio Input"?

In the event, I did what Apple would have wanted, and ordered an Imac G5. With the inadequate 256MB, the rest will come from Crucial. Maybe it'll get a HD upgrade at some stage too.

Dermot

RicardoSmith

mackerski wrote:

Indeed - and you wouldn't consider each of those a type of "Audio Input"?

...

Well if you like being vague you could. Do you call your Mac a PC? Or a HD memory? But I see from Apples site that they use the term Audio in or Audio out a lot. For example the G5 has...

"Optical digital audio input, optical digital audio output, analog audio input, analog audio output, front headphone minijack and speaker"

... so I'll forgive you, but just this once, mind.

..I'm just jealous really...G5....oooohhhh... :cool:

mackerski

RicardoSmith wrote:

Well if you like being vague you could. Do you call your Mac a PC? Or a HD memory? But I see from Apples site that they use the term Audio in or Audio out a lot.

Yeah - I didn't bother differentiating, I'd have taken either.

RicardoSmith wrote:

..I'm just jealous really...G5....oooohhhh... :cool:

Tell you what, I'll share the credit card bill with you.

Dermot

RicardoSmith

My wallet ran screaming from the room..... :eek:

Maoltuile

mackerski wrote:

I just noticed this on the market, and I think I want one. I always wanted a G5, but it seemed poor value given that I'm not about to junk my PC. This, OTOH, looks like a nice package for the price. It would also be my first Mac since... my first Mac, come to think of it.

A few negatives jump out - there's the usual Apple soup-stone config, coupled with overpriced upgrades: "well, yes, you could just take the bundled 256MB, but for only €430 you can have the 1Gig it really needs".

Also, and this one scares me, I can't see any audio in connection. Am I missing something?

Anybody else got opinions on this box?

Audio-in shouldn't be a big deal. There's a *lot* of stuff out there (both USB and FireWire) to do the honours.

There's some interesting tidbits floating around on Macintouch about the MiniMac - such as an inbuilt speaker, seemingly claimed 22dB noise, and that "the memory slot is easily accessible once you get the case open".

http://macintouch.com/mwsf2005notebook.html

I'd guess the memory to be a SO-DIMM, though this could be wrong.

This is a little beauty to go into the living-room, along with say a cordless controller, a TV-tuner (there's DVI-TV adaptors around now) and maybe even one of those new Griffin FireWave surround-sound boxes:

http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/firewave/index.php

I'm personally looking at the moment for a mobile solution, to bring between home, work and 'back home', but this might just do the trick instead of a laptop, and it'll fit under the TV. I have a PowerMac for any DVD-burning, games (KOTOR rocks!) or whatever, so with WiFi on both (and to a WiFi broadband router) I'm set :-)

As an aside, I believe the bottom just dropped out of the market for second-hand Cubes...

deevey

Its standard DDR-333 according to the specs and internal screenshots so...cheep to upgrade the ram

Unfortunatly it looks like a laptop hard drive so a little expensive (well 150 squid) to up it yerself to a 60 gig 7200 ..ouch!

Other bad is lack of screen spanning (boooo) anyone know of any usb - vga/TV soulutions that might give dual screen ?

JustHalf

Don't bother trying to replace the hard-drive. Just use network-attached storage OR use a firewire / USB hard drive.

zAbbo

Inside her - http://www.macnews.de/gallery/displayimage.php?album=16&pos=18

aidan_walsh

bazH wrote:

Inside her - http://www.macnews.de/gallery/displayimage.php?album=16&pos=18

You make it sound so dirty

Raskolnikov

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=11070&cid=3&cname=Technology

No one will want the similarily specced but far more expensive eMac now. Still, I think it's a shrewd move by Apple, cashing in on the sucess of the iPod while also trying to increase penetration of their computers.

Just one thing to remember, not only is the Apple OS propreitory but a lot of the hardware is too.

Maoltuile

Raskolnikov wrote:

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=11070&cid=3&cname=Technology

Just one thing to remember, not only is the Apple OS propreitory but a lot of the hardware is too.

???

OSX is UNIX and Open Source underneath, and the modern Mac uses industry-standard components and interfaces, apart from the rather unusual PowerPC processor (made by IBM).

Maoltuile

deevey wrote:

Its standard DDR-333 according to the specs and internal screenshots so...cheep to upgrade the ram

Unfortunatly it looks like a laptop hard drive so a little expensive (well 150 squid) to up it yerself to a 60 gig 7200 ..ouch!

I have both on hand, right now (a 1GB PC2700 stick from my PC days and a Hitachi 7,200rpm 2.5" drive) so _I'm_ set, along with my ATi Remote Wonder and my Airport Express ;-)

Other bad is lack of screen spanning (boooo) anyone know of any usb - vga/TV soulutions that might give dual screen ?

No, but watch Griffin/Dr. Bott/Belkin/Elgato/Miglia etc. for products within the next six months <g>

Maoltuile

Raskolnikov wrote:

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=11070&cid=3&cname=Technology

Still, I think it's a shrewd move by Apple, cashing in on the sucess of the iPod while also trying to increase penetration of their computers.

There's three consumer markets for this: those getting Macs for the first time (embittered virus-plagued Windows users); those Mac users buying another one or two for the home and those replacing aging G3/G4 Macs.

Raskolnikov

Maoltuile wrote:

???

OSX is UNIX and Open Source underneath, and the modern Mac uses industry-standard components and interfaces, apart from the rather unusual PowerPC processor (made by IBM).

OS X is a FreeBSD based operating system, that's where the similarity with Open Source ends. The source code for OS X (the windowing bit and god knows what else) is closed, the software is neither free or 'gratis' free. Having said that, Darwin, the OS core that preforms scheduling, disc managment, etc is Open Source.

Check this Wikipedia link about proprietary software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software

Apple are even trying to prevent people who purchase music through iTunes from playing it on other mp3 players. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/13/apple_drm_analysis/ The point I'm trying to make is that Apple are no different to Microsoft. If they can acheive significant market share, they'll think nothing of completely locking down their standards, software and hardware.

Raskolnikov

Maoltuile wrote:

There's three consumer markets for this: those getting Macs for the first time (embittered virus-plagued Windows users); those Mac users buying another one or two for the home and those replacing aging G3/G4 Macs.

I think a lot of Windows users (probably never used a Mac) who love the iPod and are anti-Microsoft will make up a fair bulk of the Apple converts.

Thraktor

Raskolnikov wrote:

Apple are even trying to prevent people who purchase music through iTunes from playing it on other mp3 players.

To be honest I do actually agree with Apple regarding how it restricts the use of its music. Allowing the use of iTunes-purchased songs on other digital music players means practically removing any effective barriers to illegal sharing between multiple users, and the popularity of the iPod and it's pairing with iTunes has been a huge step forward against the illegal uses of MP3s, which prior to the introduction of iTunes, accounted for nearly all digital music use. It simply wouldn't make sense to open the system up for abuse, especially while it's still gaining momentum.

Maoltuile

Raskolnikov wrote:

I think a lot of Windows users (probably never used a Mac) who love the iPod and are anti-Microsoft will make up a fair bulk of the Apple converts.

One of my co-workers wants one as primarily a UNIX box which can also do lots of other stuff. And with Virtual PC 7 (and a heap of RAM), being able to use AutoCAD and MicroStation on these comes into play (important in my workplace).

Maoltuile

Raskolnikov wrote:

OS X is a FreeBSD based operating system, that's where the similarity with Open Source ends. The source code for OS X (the windowing bit and god knows what else) is closed, the software is neither free or 'gratis' free. Having said that, Darwin, the OS core that preforms scheduling, disc managment, etc is Open Source.

Check this Wikipedia link about proprietary software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software

(I gather you've reconsidered and concede that the hardware is no longer a big issue ;-)

Darwin is Open Source, as are Apache, Samba, Konqueror (which Safari is based on) etcetc. FreeBSD is a UNIX. The Mac now reads any commonly formatted (read Windows) disk. Being OSS and UNIX-based means open protocols on the system, unlike the eternally munged Windows.

are even trying to prevent people who purchase music through iTunes from playing it on other mp3 players. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/13/apple_drm_analysis/ The point I'm trying to make is that Apple are no different to Microsoft. If they can acheive significant market share, they'll think nothing of completely locking down their standards, software and hardware.

But, we weren't talking about Apple's MP3 player business at all (an entirely different discussion).

Bluehair

Maoltuile wrote:

...consumer markets for this: those getting Macs for the first time (embittered virus-plagued Windows users)...

LOL had to laugh at this one it's me in a phrase. Having used Windoze going back a long time now (I remember being thrilled at buying a dx2-66, 'clock-doubled' you say eh? wow) I'm just tired of never-ending compatibility problems and huge os holes and flaws (despite promise after promise after promise).

I've seen OS X in action a few times now and the Ilife package and now the iworks software suits me down to the ground. I've long ago moved my games playing to consoles too so no loss there.

I'm a convert and was just waiting for them to make it financially easier on me to move. The mac mini is it, re-use old componants like monitor keyboard etc and I'm happy as larry, esp as I'll be over in the states early next month so will only cost me about 400euros. Can't wait.

Raskolnikov

Maoltuile wrote:

(I gather you've reconsidered and concede that the hardware is no longer a big issue ;-)

Yea, only because the integration of the Mac BIOS and OS has completely locked down the Mac platform, thus not allowing 'clones' to be made by other manufacturers. You also mentioned the processor, what about cases, motherboards, the bits they stuck on to AirPort, etc?

Maoltuile wrote:

Darwin is Open Source, as are Apache, Samba, Konqueror (which Safari is based on) etcetc. FreeBSD is a UNIX.

I thought I said that.

A moot point but just because Safari is based on something that is Open Source, doesn't make it Open Source. It's certainly not in the spirit of the Open Source community to take something of theirs and to then close the source.

Maoltuile wrote:

Being OSS and UNIX-based means open protocols on the system, unlike the eternally munged Windows.

The UI and interesting bits of the OS are not open source, not free and completely closed.

RicardoSmith

Its a nice little box. Dunno why you have argue about the OS or the company. Either you want one or you don't. I'd love one. But I'd have to keep a PC for work stuff and games.

Urban Weigl

RicardoSmith wrote:

Its a nice little box. Dunno why you have argue about the OS or the company. Either you want one or you don't. I'd love one. But I'd have to keep a PC for work stuff and games.

Why do you have to do your work stuff on a PC? Just wondering. I know that for instance Sage is Windows-only (though M.Y.O.B is a Mac alternative), but other programs are available for both platforms. I just finished creating a report in Microsoft Office 2004 Mac, and I also use Nisus Writer Express a lot (a fantastic Mac-only alternative for Word, though of course you can get Word for Mac as well (part of office). www.nisus.com

Edit: I am currently weighing either building myself a Shuttle based PC, or getting a Mac mini.

RicardoSmith

Urban Weigl wrote:

Why do you have to do your work stuff on a PC?

Thats what the market uses, so thats what is required.

Urban Weigl

RicardoSmith wrote:

Thats what the market uses, so thats what is required.

That much is obvious, but why exactly in your case do you need to use a PC for work stuff? Sorry if I didn't nail down the wording of my question the first time round. I am just curious.

For example: "Everyone in Ireland uses Sage, of which there is no Mac version. I do not want to use accounting software other than Sage because it would be time consuming to learn a new package" (makes a hell of a lot of sense).

Edit: That is just one example, and probably not even the best one.

eoinm1

I was looking at this new Apple.
Seems to me to be a good idea, I have often thought of getting a second hand iMac to play with as I don't know much about Mac's. Now I think I might have my Brother in New York bring one home from the US on his next trip.

There is over 100 euro in the differance. If Apple sold them here for 450 euro I would buy one in Ireland.

So for me this would be an exensive toy / second computer.

Eóin

RicardoSmith

Urban Weigl wrote:

That much is obvious, but why exactly in your case do you need to use a PC for work stuff? Sorry if I didn't nail down the wording of my question the first time round. I am just curious.

For example: "Everyone in Ireland uses Sage, of which there is no Mac version. I do not want to use accounting software other than Sage because it would be time consuming to learn a new package" (makes a hell of a lot of sense).

Edit: That is just one example, and probably not even the best one.

Curious aren't you. .Net, .ASP, MS SQL, VBA, VB ASP, etc. If your delivery platform is the PC then you have develop for it, and test on it. If you have thousands of users all using PC's then you have to deliver a product that works on those PC's. Then we have a lot of legacy systems that are 5-10 yrs old running on mainframes, Alphas etc. All of the bridges/gateways to them exist on the PC.

Its all off topic though....

eoinm1 wrote:

I was looking at this new Apple.
Seems to me to be a good idea, I have often thought of getting a second hand iMac to play with as I don't know much about Mac's. Now I think I might have my Brother in New York bring one home from the US on his next trip.

There is over 100 euro in the differance. If Apple sold them here for 450 euro I would buy one in Ireland.

So for me this would be an exensive toy / second computer.

Eóin

Me too. But as a toy its expensive. To be honest I'd love an old Quadra 700. I always liked them. More so than the Quadra 800 I currently have. I was thinking on building an iMac into a rack http://www.marathoncomputer.com/irac.html or into a PC case. But I just don't have the time.

JustHalf

The price difference between the US store and the Irish store is mainly down to VAT.

Urban Weigl

RicardoSmith wrote:

Curious aren't you. .Net, .ASP, MS SQL, VBA, VB ASP, etc. If your delivery platform is the PC then you have develop for it, and test on it. If you have thousands of users all using PC's then you have to deliver a product that works on those PC's. Then we have a lot of legacy systems that are 5-10 yrs old running on mainframes, Alphas etc. All of the bridges/gateways to them exist on the PC.

Well, your first statement was very general; I didn't know you were developing PC software. You just said work stuff in general as far as I remember, or perhaps I misread, so I thought you statement was a little strange. That is why I was curious! Anyway, yeah, you won't get very far with .Net and MS SQL on anything other than Windows. As far as VB, take a look at http://www.realbasic.com

It compiles for Windows, Mac OS X and Linux without hassle. You will of course still need a PC for testing. For instance, a mate of mine develops PC software on his PowerBook for a living, but he also has a PC for testing. The software he is developing will be run on Windows 95% of the time. He swears by it, says it is far superior to VB.

FYI, I use both PC's and Mac's.

RicardoSmith

Your flogging a dead horse mate...

Maoltuile

Raskolnikov wrote:

Yea, only because the integration of the Mac BIOS and OS has completely locked down the Mac platform,

I'm honestly not trying to rile you here, but can you perhaps be a little less vague on what you mean by "completely locked down the Mac platform"? Are you referring to the OS, the hardware, or both? Remember, there's a version of NT being used right now on PowerMacs for X-box 2 game development.

thus not allowing 'clones' to be made by other manufacturers. You also mentioned the processor, what about cases, motherboards, the bits they stuck on to AirPort, etc?

Cases are cases. I mean, c'mon, anyone can take out a Mac motherboard and power supply and mount it in whatever they want, with a bit of drilling. Macs take standard RAM, standard hard drives, standard optical drives, use FireWire 6400, FireWire 800, VGA, DVI, SATA, ATA, USB 1.1, USB 2, standard power cables, standard monitors, etcetcetc. Where's the problem? It's really no different (innards-wise) to me than my old "non-standard" AMD.

I'm connecting to the Net now to type *this* by way of an Airport Extreme-equipped PowerMac communicating with a bog-standard WiFi router. My old PowerBook uses a standard Buffalo 802.11g card. Airport *is* fully standards-based, and easily (much more so than Windows!) connects with WiFi gear.

I thought I said that.

A moot point but just because Safari is based on something that is Open Source, doesn't make it Open Source. It's certainly not in the spirit of the Open Source community to take something of theirs and to then close the source.

Apple give back their improvements to the OSS code they use (they are obliged to, anyway, under the GPL). I presume that they do the same for Apache and other bits too. Darwin OS goes without saying.

The UI and interesting bits of the OS are not open source, not free and completely closed.

Darwin is *completely* Open Sourced, and freely available both as binaries and code. As to the Quartz etc., well, I presume they've commercially licenced a good deal of the clever stuff to use in this (I seem to remember that both ATi and nVidia release only binaries for their cards on Linux for this reason).

RicardoSmith

Maoltuile wrote:

I...can you perhaps be a little less vague on what you mean by "completely locked down the Mac platform"? Are you referring to the OS, the hardware, or both? Remember, there's a version of NT being used right now on PowerMacs for X-box 2 game development.....

On the subject of vagueness. Do you mean PowerMacs as in Pre G3's PowerMac's or PC's with PowerPC CPU's? (The Latter obviously) Which version of NT? Etc.

Are you suggesting that the all PowerPC powered PC's can run the same OS as all PowerPC powered Mac's? Mac's used to use customised firmware on their motherboards to prevent this. Dunno if this is the case with latest Mac's.

Jammer

i'll get one for the craic, ive never used a mac before, just to see what its like. Getting a few quid emergency tax back so no better time to try out MAC.

Urban Weigl

RicardoSmith wrote:

Your flogging a dead horse mate...

What post is that in response to?

RicardoSmith

Urban Weigl wrote:

What post is that in response to?

(Post 36)

Urban Weigl

RicardoSmith wrote:

(Post 36)

On occasion, it can be helpful to quote a specific line, especially when it's hard to make out what it could be relation from (for example, no keywords that might help).

RB is hardly a dead horse, and I have been told by (not just anyone) that it is superior to VB. Of course, VB isn't a dead horse either. For some applications, RB is likely to have advantages, and for others VB is going to have advantages. This is getting a bit off topic, but there are many programmers who would argue that anything lower than C/C++ is a dead horse, and not worth doing.

RicardoSmith

Ask a specific question if you want a specific answer.

Whats a dead horse is trying to push Apple to as solution to everything. It isn't, otherwise it wouldn't be a niche product. Comparing languages is plain stupid. You pick the best tool for the job. You don't use a F1 car to pick up the kids and the weekly shopping do you?

The iMacmini is a cool product. But I wonder who its aimed at. For students and family's the lack of decent graphics will make it poor for gaming. It would make a good corporate workstation except for the fact apple isn't in the coporate space at all. Techies and people who want SFF PC's will love it, but thats just a niche market aswell.

mackerski

Maoltuile wrote:

Apple give back their improvements to the OSS code they use (they are obliged to, anyway, under the GPL). I presume that they do the same for Apache and other bits too. Darwin OS goes without saying.

The first thing to note is that the OS-portions of MacOS are BSD-licenced, so there is no obligation for Apple to give back their improvements. Though, as you say, they do it anyway.

The post that kicked off this sub-thread asserted that the Apple OS was proprietary and a lot of the hardware too. This is somewhat true, but, since this was by implication a comparison with Windows, it's a somewhat useless argument (IMHO):

Because, with the exception of those of us using a UNIX of some sort, proprietary "operating platforms" (by which I mean the combination of hardware and OS) are the norm. Windows most particularly so. That the box I run windows on could be running half a dozen other OSes instead is irrelevant, because what characterises my use of it is the utterly proprietary OS.

So back to the Mac. It won't (barring emulataion) run my Windows apps, which certainly is a snag. And it has access to a much smaller set of alternative OSes, but that's OK, since I wouldn't have bought it if I hadn't valued MacOS. MacOS itself is, as others have noted, is open in all sorts of nice ways.

Not everyone will value what it offers. I don't develop Windows apps. If I did, a Mac wouldn't be an ideal dev platform. OTOH I do develop on UNIX, specifically on FreeBSD. Every Windows box I own has a copy of Cygwin in order that I have a decent shell, ssh, perl, various must-have command-line tools and so on. For me, once I can prove that the Mac can provide substitutes for my must-have Windows apps (and I haven't yet, so fun times ahead), all other aspects of the system are a far better fit for what I need.

So let's get over the FUD. A Mac looks like it'll suit me. It wouldn't suit others. The OSS V proprietary mix that Apple have adopted is innovative and brave. It alone is no reason to avoid the platform.

Dermot

Maoltuile

RicardoSmith wrote:

On the subject of vagueness. Do you mean PowerMacs as in Pre G3's PowerMac's or PC's with PowerPC CPU's? (The Latter obviously) Which version of NT? Etc.

NT4 on PowerMac G5's, I believe. There was also a story on The Register a while back about an employee getting sacked for photographing and publishing the crates of PowerMac G5's arriving at Redmond :-)

Are you suggesting that the all PowerPC powered PC's can run the same OS as all PowerPC powered Mac's? Mac's used to use customised firmware on their motherboards to prevent this. Dunno if this is the case with latest Mac's.

You can run OSX on any Mac (presuming the hardware is powerful enough, of course). Maybe you are talking about System 9 and earlier? In which case, you may ask others here - I *hated* the old Mac OS, and wouldn't have switched before I experienced OSX ;-)

Maoltuile

Jammer wrote:

i'll get one for the craic, ive never used a mac before, just to see what its like. Getting a few quid emergency tax back so no better time to try out MAC.

Up the default RAM when you're buying, at the very least. Or, even better, wait two weeks for one of us here to crack open one and post photos of how easy/difficult it is to upgrade it yourself ;-)

Maoltuile

mackerski wrote:

The first thing to note is that the OS-portions of MacOS are BSD-licenced, so there is no obligation for Apple to give back their improvements. Though, as you say, they do it anyway.

Sorry, this sentence was in reference to Safari in particular.

RicardoSmith

Maoltuile wrote:

NT4 on PowerMac G5's, I believe. There was also a story on The Register a while back about an employee getting sacked for photographing and publishing the crates of PowerMac G5's arriving at Redmond :-)

Ha ha your taking the mick aren't you?

I doubt that NT4 will run on anything later than a 603 or 604 PowerPC. Even then it has to be hacked to get it to run. Iì was designed to run on IBM PPC's not Apples. They dropped that port a few years back. If you just going to make stuff up... :rolleyes:

Whats the big deal about this anyway? They were for the design department because they use Mac's. As do the localisation DTP teams. When I worked in MS I worked in a team that work on Apple ports of MS software, so we had access to loads of Mac gear. They used to have a Mac musem/store where you could get a specific machine to test against with if you had a specific problem etc. Dunno if its the same now, but I expect all the Apple versions of MS Software are developed and tested using Mac's. Nothing else would make sense would it?

Maoltuile wrote:

You can run OSX on any Mac (presuming the hardware is powerful enough, of course). Maybe you are talking about System 9 and earlier? In which case, you may ask others here - I *hated* the old Mac OS, and wouldn't have switched before I experienced OSX ;-)

How many things can you get wrong? :rolleyes:

You can only run OSX on G3 and later Macs with USB. Apple decided to cut of support to all other macs. You can hack the install to get it running on pre G3 Power PC Macs but its less than ideal. Apple have a habit of shafting their user base when they shift direction. They have now dropped support for Classic OS on their latest machines. Personally I like the older OS. Its handy if you have legacy apps.

Apple has its hardware pretty tied to its OS. The only non Apple OS I've played with on Apple hardware is YDL (Yellow Dog Linux). What other OS'es are supported on Apple hardware? Though if you're buying a Mac it doesn't make a lot of sense to change the OS, unless its a free OS since Apple also like fleecing you for updates aswell.

mickot

unless its a free OS since Apple also like fleecing you for updates aswell

I just got a price for a upgrade from Windows Me to XP Home for my brother - talk about fleecing ! Full OSX Panther cost 146 euro inc VAT if I remember, so no need for upgrade pricing.

-micko

RicardoSmith

mickot wrote:

I just got a price for a upgrade from Windows Me to XP Home for my brother - talk about fleecing ! Full OSX Panther cost 146 euro inc VAT if I remember, so no need for upgrade pricing.

-micko

Full XP Home retail costs less than €100 inc Vat & Del at the first online place I tried. Probably less if you shop around.
Where are you buying it "Fleece me dot com" :rolleyes: