Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Andy8 · May 6, 2005, 10:24 AM

Is anyone using a setup like this, i am considering this for simple web, email, database and iPhoto, nothing to intense.

kikkoman · May 6, 2005, 11:56 AM

for that kind of money i'd get a 20" imac g5

Commodus · May 6, 2005, 12:08 PM

Yeah, you'd be better off with a 20" iMac, if just for iPhoto. You might not have the sheer screen area, but iPhoto itself will run much more smoothly.

tooki · May 6, 2005, 02:20 PM

Or get a Mac mini or Power Mac with a non-Apple 23/24" display for 1/3-1/2 the cost of Apple's.

tooki

Andy8 · May 7, 2005, 06:12 PM

Well, I was hoping in the future to get a tower to replace the mini, then the screen would stay the same.

iDaver · May 7, 2005, 10:12 PM

I have the setup you're asking about. The mini just barely drives the 23" Cinema. I'm hoping Apple will provide an upgrade path from the mini soon; something with at least 64MB graphics. A mini G5 would be even better but I'm not holding my breath.

icibaqu · May 8, 2005, 12:20 AM

does the mini do a better job of running the 20" than "just barely"?

iDaver · May 8, 2005, 12:35 AM

Have discovered features of OS X 10.4 Tiger that won't work with the mini and a 23". Photo slideshows in mail, or via Finder control-click won't work unless display-colors is set to "thousands" instead of "millions." Double clicking a photo file in the Finder will not open that photo in Photoshop (even though the program launches) but I don't know whether this is a limitation of the mini or a Tiger glitch. Can anyone test that for me?

maCCer · May 8, 2005, 06:45 AM

can some one answer that?
cheers

iDaver · May 8, 2005, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by iDaver

Double clicking a photo file in the Finder will not open that photo in Photoshop (even though the program launches) but I don't know whether this is a limitation of the mini or a Tiger glitch. Can anyone test that for me?

Found the answer to my own question. Seems a Tiger archive install misses a file called "Adobe Unit Types" in the boot drive: Library: ScriptingAdditions. Pulling it out of the previous system collection and replacing it where it belongs fixes the problem, as will a reinstall of Photoshop.

liquidtrance123 · May 8, 2005, 09:40 AM

my mini runs the 20in just fine, no problems at all. However if your using the 23in, the native LCD resolution is the mini's radeon9200's ultra maximum resolution. So all your 32mb of video ram pretty much goes to just driving the display, or at least most of it. 23 + mini is a waste IMO. i would go with the 20in. 1920x1200 is just too much for the mini's video card. It'll run it.....but it takes everything it has just to put those pixels on the screen.

Andy8 · May 8, 2005, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by liquidtrance123

my mini runs the 20in just fine, no problems at all. However if your using the 23in, the native LCD resolution is the mini's radeon9200's ultra maximum resolution. So all your 32mb of video ram pretty much goes to just driving the display, or at least most of it. 23 + mini is a waste IMO. i would go with the 20in. 1920x1200 is just too much for the mini's video card. It'll run it.....but it takes everything it has just to put those pixels on the screen.

That answers my question. I think I will get a 20" iMac or see if I can strech for a powermac and a 23" ACD.

the_glassman · May 8, 2005, 07:05 PM

I'm going to be using one with a Dell 24" LCD. I'll let you know how it goes in a few weeks.

maCCer · May 8, 2005, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by the_glassman

I'm going to be using one with a Dell 24" LCD. I'll let you know how it goes in a few weeks.

looking forward

Andy8 · May 8, 2005, 09:53 PM

Originally Posted by the_glassman

I'm going to be using one with a Dell 24" LCD. I'll let you know how it goes in a few weeks.

Would be very interested to know your results, especially if your running Tiger on your mini.

liquidtrance123 · May 9, 2005, 07:47 AM

The mini will run at the 24in dell or 23in ACD's native resolution of 1920x1200. However that is the absolute MAXIMUM resolution the mini's video card supports. And being as the mini only supports 32mb of ram, you'll get a display. However doing anything else that requries video ram will have to offload that to the system memory. So if your going to run a large display like that i would make sure you have lots of system memory

the_glassman · May 9, 2005, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by liquidtrance123

The mini will run at the 24in dell or 23in ACD's native resolution of 1920x1200. However that is the absolute MAXIMUM resolution the mini's video card supports. And being as the mini only supports 32mb of ram, you'll get a display. However doing anything else that requries video ram will have to offload that to the system memory. So if your going to run a large display like that i would make sure you have lots of system memory

I'm aware of the resolution capabilities with the ATi card, which is why I went with this display.
I think it will be alright with 1 GB ram and 1.67 GHz processor. I'll be running this setup until we see a real Powermac update.

Jasoco · May 12, 2005, 12:38 AM

I don't see any problems at all with the 20" on a mini. I don't know what people keep complaining about. No flicker, no problems. It's fine.

TiDual · May 13, 2005, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by Andy8

That answers my question. I think I will get a 20" iMac or see if I can strech for a powermac and a 23" ACD.

This is exactly the right conclusion. I have the former at home, and the latter (dual 2.7 + 23" ACD) at work. Both are excellent. A (maxed) mini + 20" is almost the price of the iMac 20", and the latter has *much* superiour performance + therefore longevity. Thus while you can't upgrade the iMac (and keep the display) ... you won't likely need to upgrade for some time.

the_glassman · May 13, 2005, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Andy8

Would be very interested to know your results, especially if your running Tiger on your mini.

Changed my order to a maxed out iMac.