Mac mini and tiger?
Mac mini has a 9200, which is not supported by tigers core image, Is it wise to buy a mac like this right now if it will not handle the OS that shipps in 3 months? I dont have the funds for a powermac, but I really want to have a Mac.
I, as a windows geek, have a really bad feeling about buying a system that will not be compatible with the os in like 3 months, not three years, three to five stinking months, If I am being unreasonable, tell me so, but for me, even 600$ is a ton of money.
If my taxes come back better than I project, I am goin for a PM but I doubt that very much.
I, as a windows geek, have a really bad feeling about buying a system that will not be compatible with the os in like 3 months, not three years, three to five stinking months, If I am being unreasonable, tell me so, but for me, even 600$ is a ton of money.
If my taxes come back better than I project, I am goin for a PM but I doubt that very much.
Comments
Originally posted by a_greer
Mac mini has a 9200, which is not supported by tigers core image, Is it wise to buy a mac like this right now if it will not handle the OS that shipps in 3 months? I dont have the funds for a powermac, but I really want to have a Mac.
I, as a windows geek, have a really bad feeling about buying a system that will not be compatible with the os in like 3 months, not three years, three to five stinking months, If I am being unreasonable, tell me so, but for me, even 600$ is a ton of money.
If my taxes come back better than I project, I am goin for a PM but I doubt that very much.
Two things:
-- Tiger is still in flux. I believe Apple has removed the list of supported GPUs from their site. So we don't know, really.
__ Mac mini will handle Tiger just fine, in terms of a functioning operating system. What we don't know is to what degree various bits of eye candy will be deployable on a 32M video card.
EDIT: Technically, the question is to what extant core image will be implemented on a 32M CPU, but that's just about things glowing and fading and whatnot. You still get the full feature set.
In the event that something you want to do doesn't take advantage of Core Image, Tiger will likely revert to a CPU based implementation of the routine, or forego doing that effect if it's just a visual aid (i.e. ripple effect on Widgets).
Originally posted by addabox
Two things:
-- Tiger is still in flux. I believe Apple has removed the list of supported GPUs from their site. So we don't know, really.
__ Mac mini will handle Tiger just fine, in terms of a functioning operating system. What we don't know is to what degree various bits of eye candy will be deployable on a 32M video card.
EDIT: Technically, the question is to what extant core image will be implemented on a 32M CPU, but that's just about things glowing and fading and whatnot. You still get the full feature set.
I misunderstood, I thought that core image was key to the opperation of tiger like Quarts extream was to jaguar...Like I said, I am a pc guy, and on a pc, a 9200 is great, compared to what any 500$ box would have. I think the hardest part of switching for me will be not applying the windows mindeset.
Originally posted by a_greer
I, as a windows geek, have a really bad feeling about buying a system that will not be compatible with the os in like 3 months, not three years, three to five stinking months, If I am being unreasonable, tell me so, but for me, even 600$ is a ton of money.
Um, as a Windows geek, you have seen the preliminary specs for Longhorn?
I know it's not a huge deal or anything, but I just don't see apple selling a computer loaded with an OS that can't take full advantage of EVERY feature.
Originally posted by iPoster
Um, as a Windows geek, you have seen the preliminary specs for Longhorn?
They don't even make machines today that would run it.
Beta 1 is due soon. We'll know more then. I for one wonder what shade of blue the BSOD will feature in this release.
Originally posted by a_greer
Mac mini has a 9200, which is not supported by tigers core image, Is it wise to buy a mac like this right now if it will not handle the OS that shipps in 3 months? I dont have the funds for a powermac, but I really want to have a Mac.
Core Image is for accelerating high-end PhotoShop-like effects. If a machine doesn't have the shaders on the GPU, the OS will just use Altivec on the CPU - no biggie.
The ATI Radeon 9200 is a 4X AGP chip which will handle Quartz Extreme (hardware compositing) just fine.
Originally posted by m01ety
They don't even make machines today that would run it.
Beta 1 is due soon. We'll know more then. I for one wonder what shade of blue the BSOD will feature in this release.
Longhorn is due in 3 YEARS, Tiger is due in three MONTHS
Originally posted by a_greer
Mac mini has a 9200, which is not supported by tigers core image...
This is not true. Well, it is partially true.
Before MWSF, the publicly available Core Image requirements were a programmable GPU from ATI or nVidia (the 9200 is not in the list). Now, Apple says that Core Image will run on the Altivec unit and/or multiple processors when it does not see a programmable GPU in the system.
So, no need to worry about that. And Apple shows a really nice face trying to optimize to the max the OS and the graphics layers for the available hardware (Altivec/MP), when a powerful GPU is lacking.
Originally posted by a_greer
Longhorn is due in 3 YEARS, Tiger is due in three MONTHS
True, but I have a 4-1/2 YEAR old PC that shipped with Win98 that runs Win2k and could run XP just fine...
Originally posted by iPoster
True, but I have a 4-1/2 YEAR old PC that shipped with Win98 that runs Win2k and could run XP just fine...
Laptop bought in '99, 300 MHz running OS X.
Could run Tiger like a champ.
--B
Originally posted by a_greer
Longhorn is due in 3 YEARS, Tiger is due in three MONTHS
If I am not mistaken, Microsoft said they will cut some (major) features, in order to have Longhorn out next year, but I don't have a link at hand right now.
Originally posted by PB
If I am not mistaken, Microsoft said they will cut some (major) features, in order to have Longhorn out next year, but I don't have a link at hand right now.
Yes, Avalon and WinFS are gone and will be added later. I heard it will be 2006 for sure, but probably at the very end of that year.
Originally posted by iPoster
True, but I have a 4-1/2 YEAR old PC that shipped with Win98 that runs Win2k and could run XP just fine...
That is because xp was a money grab, they tacked a crap gui on 2k, andd shipped it, no innovation whatsoever, the last time M$ innovated was back in the NT development days working with ibm on what later became windows nt and IBM OS/2
Longhorn is really M$s first solo attempt at true innovation in their history.
In all truth, win98 should have been NT4 based...but then again, the timeing back then sucked too, it was supposed to be Windows 97...
Originally posted by Aquatic
So I can still do coolass CoreImage effects on pics and video with my PBG4 867mhz with 32 meg card, because it has a G4? That'd be sweeeet. I was expecting to not be able to use CI. That'd be great!
Yes. Core Image will use the CPU if needed.
Quartz 2-D Extreme debuts in Tiger. This is where everything is done on the GPU except very rare and specialized drawing. 800x800 rectangle fills are sped up 1400 times over software on a dual 2.5 with Radeon 9800 XT.
Quartz 2-D Extreme requires a Radeon 9600 or better, or an NVidia GeForce FX or better to get hardware acceleration. As with Core Image, Quartz 2-D Extreme will use the CPU if these requirements are not met. However, the software 2-D drawing routines have been optimized in Tiger, to achieve about a 2X speedup.
Get your Mac, and one day you can upgrade it to something better.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Yes, Avalon and WinFS are gone and will be added later. I heard it will be 2006 for sure, but probably at the very end of that year.
Avalon isn't gone. It is still part of Longhorn, and will also be available as an add-on to XP and 2003 Server.
Originally posted by Aquatic
So I can still do coolass CoreImage effects on pics and video with my PBG4 867mhz with 32 meg card, because it has a G4?
Yeah, only difference is that with a programmable GPU the CI effects are real-time, while on Altivec they should be just... fast