Eric Smith wrote: > J.M.P.Hissel wrote: >> On 29-06-2010 02:20, Don Clark, donzclark at rocketmail.com, wrote: >> >>> You need to get a G5 Dual Quad , HeeHee >> >> Don't do that! Avoid the G5's!! Go to an IntelMac or a Hackintosh. > > I think the Intel Macs are problematic simply because of Apple's product > offering. I suppose that the new iMacs have sufficient specs, but if > you're like me you won't go for an integrated cpu / monitor combination. > And the iMacs, like the mini, are too restricted in terms of expansion. > The Mac Pro is overkill power-wise and overpriced for what you get. > > For whatever reasons, Apple has moved away from the mid-range desktop > product that they used to excel at. I finally stopped waiting for an > Intel system that would fill the functions of my PM G4 and built a > hackintosh. But having done that I wouldn't necessarily advise others > to go that route, especially if you want to use your system for real, > productive work. As a hobby project it's fine, but unless you're pretty > aware of what you're doing and prepared to deal with the vagaries of > boot loaders, kexts, and third-party drivers, as well as prepared to > have every OS X update be a potential adventure, you should be wary > of the hackintosh. > > I guess this is a long-winded way of saying that the G4s and G5s may > still be the best alternatives for many tasks. > > Eric S. Not sure I agree with your assessment of the Hackintosh option having built 11 of them so far, but it's clear they are not as easy to update and configure as an acutal Mac would be. But consider the fact that I did the last few movies on my 1st Hack and it took less than half the time it took on my MDD, you would have to count this as a viable option if speed is important. Of course the building and maintaining is fun for me, as you said it is a hobby, but I can see this would not be for everyone. JMHO Just a message from mosslack...