Mac + Console = casual gamer lifestyle?

[Soukyan]

I've been debating picking up a Mac Mini to futz around with OSX and because, from what I can tell, it would be my best bet for a machine that I can use to edit video footage.  We're expecting a kid very very soon and I'd really like to get a nice digital video camera so that I can inundate my parents with the footage of their grandkid that they'll miss since they don't make it into the city very much.

It might also be a good machine for the kid to learn on (much later on, obviously).  My first computer was an Apple ][e, so maybe that's a bit of nostalgia bias, I dunno.

Does anyone know if the video editing software is truly superior for Macs?  I've heard great stuff about GarageBand (music software, but whatever), so I'm wondering if all of the hype I see about the Mac's video editing powers are true. 

Plus, with a kid on the way, a Mac Mini may be cheaper than a new PC rig with a DVD burner....that's a good thing, IMO.

Final Cut Pro is a nice piece of professional software, but may be a bit more than you need and will not run nicely on a Mac Mini. I'd suggest getting an iMac G5 if you plan on doing video editing and a PowerMac G5 is out of the price range. Mac Mini's are nice for the size and whatnot, but considering that they don't come with a monitor, keyboard or mouse, if you add those on, you're almost at the price of an iMac. And the new revisions of the iMac have the iSight camera built right into the monitor, which is neat for video chat and not much else, but still. ;)

iMovie and iDVD should suit your purposes fine and should come loaded with any new Mac so I'd say spring for an iMac if you can afford it. A Mini should run those both alright, but the video performance still suffers from the video card that comes in them. If you decide to buy Final Cut Pro and load it up, plan on at least an iMac.

I believe that Microsoft has released Windows Movie Maker software for free via the Windows Update site and I think that there is a similar program that's free from Adobe as well. So if the Apple price points don't fit the budget, you do have options on a Windows PC. All of them are fairly easy to use, but I will give Apple the nod for having the best templates and transitions.

[Hanzii]

If you want to do professional video or sound editing, then both platforms will do fine (allthough you'll still get more bang for the buck if you go pc).
If you want ease of use, a bunch of programs that play nice together and are easy to learn, because the interface is the same then nothing on the pc beats iLife which all the Mac Minis are bundled with.

But it's a myth that professional editing is done on Macs or that they're somehow better.
Most graphic work is done on Macs (I work in publishing), but that's changing, the Adobe suite which is winning over Quark has no Mac preference. Most photographers use Macs, but that's because professional photographers have more money than sense and like stuff that looks good...
The video and sound editing companies I know, have left the Mac behind.

[raydeen]

The only thing that I really use my PC stuff for anymore is music production. I got an external Sound Blaster for the HP laptop and can pretty much emulate a full music studio with real-time vocal processing using Cakewalk Project 5 and N-Track along with a USB keyboard. Now if only I could get my mitts on Logic Pro for the Mac....then we'd see how the two stack up.

Why not Pro Tools with the mac? It's what tons of studios are using now. I've been eyeing the Digi002 control surface for years, I don't like using the mouse as my interface, holdover from ye auld days.

If that's the big $1000 dollar music package, then yeah, that's probably what I meant. As i said, if I could get my mitts on it....just don't have the moolah for that right now. As for using the mouse as the interface, I've found that I come up with some pretty cool stuff when I compose completely with mouse and computer keyboard. I don't get locked into set patterns like I do when I have a keyboard/guitar/drum controller. I tend to experiment and analyze more. I usually try to do a bit of both though. I'll start with doing the keyboard/mouse method and then add more humanly inspired stuff over it with a typical MIDI controller. What I really want to do eventually is play with one of the Smart Boards at our school. They're sort've like big iinteractive white boards attached to a computer and LCD projector. Think vertical digitizer or REALLY HUGE touch screen. I keep thinkg that would be really cool for doing realtime collaborative stuff. One person playing the notes, while another plays with the shape and sound of the note, while another does real time effects processing on the note. 'Course, now that I've put my dream on the net, someone will do it before me. Or already has. Such is my life.

[stray]

I keep thinkg that would be really cool for doing realtime collaborative stuff. One person playing the notes, while another plays with the shape and sound of the note, while another does real time effects processing on the note. 'Course, now that I've put my dream on the net, someone will do it before me. Or already has. Such is my life.

Ever use Ableton Live?

[fnddf2]

You have the perfect attitude to be a hardcore mac zealot: blind. Really, did you post this from 1995? The only reason you'd have a big noisy beige box is if you bought one that way, despite the hundreds of alternatives. I don't even know if you can buy one like that any more. Sorry to be such a dick, but that's crazy talk. I've got computers mounted to the undersides of desks, the only footprint is the LCD monitor and input devices. My own pc is big (my choice), but it's nice brushed aluminum and fits right in with my a/v gear.

Yes, you are right.  I guess I forgot to mention a few things.

I have looked into such things as small form factor cases.  Getting such a system is probably cheaper, or at least a better value for the performance.  However, there's just something that's more interesting about a Mac.  I don't know, it's like there's something conceptually appealing about the way Mac products are that has nothing to do with performance.  It's clearly part of the way they advertise themselves.  They are very good at showing that a Mac will actually change your life, that it will add a significant value to it beyond the confines of mundane computing.  I guess this makes me a sucker, but this decision was actually inspired by a desire for lifestyle change.  Since Wintel isn't offering that kind of novelty, Macs are looking more appealing now.

But also, I have been looking at the software package that comes with a Mac.  There seems to be a lot of software that comes with it.  You also get developer tools, which is a big plus for me.  I also tire of having to fuss with drivers and downloading patches for stuff and other maintainance in general.  Having a computer that actually can't game (at least not to any great extent) will probably cut out a good portion of these chores.

But, as you say, I am going into this blind.  That's why I am glad to have heard all of these opinions.  In the end, I'm really trying to stop having the computer rule my life in general (and to think that a week before this post, I bought both Baldur's Gate 2 and Vampire: Bloodlines :( ).  I think that buying a low-performance, no-gaming shiny box may a step in that direction, with consoles providing the occasional gaming kick if need be.

[Samwise]

However, there's just something that's more interesting about a Mac.  I don't know, it's like there's something conceptually appealing about the way Mac products are that has nothing to do with performance.  It's clearly part of the way they advertise themselves.  They are very good at showing that a Mac will actually change your life, that it will add a significant value to it beyond the confines of mundane computing.

Wow.

Isn't it uncomfortable having Steve Jobs's hand that far up your ass?

[schild]

I guess what it comes down to is:



>



If you're going to spend a Mac amount of money and forgo playing games, you may as well get something that looks about 500x better than any mac. And hell, the thing above has a Geforce 6600 256MB card in it. It'll play any strategy game you want, maybe not all the FPS games. But it'll play a million games more than the mac when you finally do get PC gaming envy.

[Tebonas]

I thought the point was the fucking OS and its better usability and durability? Was I mistaken in this?

[Jain Zar]

You are comparing a media center PC to a Power Mac Schild?

Why not compare it to an iMac which does the same thing and is consumer level priced and
looks pretty as all get out?

Then again, you shouldn't be allowed to give purchasing advice anyhow Mr PSP and X Box 360 on opening day that still don't have jack shit worth the cash expenditure on.
(Shit, I have more games for my not even a week old Mac that are good games than those 2 systems have of must play titles combined.)

You don't buy a Mac for gaming.  You buy it because its not fucking Windows, and unlike Linux it has actual developers working on it.  According to Apple a million Windows users switched to Macs this year.   All the virii, adware, and spyware that help Windows' natural bloated Harkonen carcass blow ass aren't there.  Yeah there are more apps on a Windows machine.  Its because it (undeservedly) is the most popular computer platform since 1990 or so.  (Because Commodore apparently couldn't market water in the fucking desert, but there ya go.)

Computer gaming is dying out in its current form.  Game stores shove the PC game section into a smaller and smaller corner every year.
Who cares about a computer for gaming?  To play what?  More FPS titles that don't run smoothly without 300+ dollar videocards?  RTS games?
Whoop dee shit.  Consoles have more variety and tend to run better on their native hardware that doesn't go gamer obsolete in a year or two.

Yes Macs cost way too much.  Maybe the Mactels will be cheaper, who knows?
But I looked at it this way.  Windows machines are like 80/20 fat ground beef.  Its kinda greasy, but it gets the job done.  Its cheap, but you gotta drain the fat which can be irritating.
Macs are 97/3.  Costs a good 25% more than than the 80/20, but its a lot tastier, and you probably won't have to drain the grease at all.

I used to hate Macs too.  But I came to the realization my hate came from using Mac SEs in 1990 and computers have evolved.  PCs aren't anything like they were then, and neither are Macs.
And I am much happier for it.  Ive got a sexy bitch of an iMac for everyday computing, and my Windows laptop for all my legacy apps from 13 years of PC usage (except for those disk programs since laptops don't have disk drives any more.  Which really only prevents me from playing a good 5-10 games from the pre CDROM era I like anyhow.).

Will I have some system/game envy crap?
No, because I am not a dipshit.  You can't have everything you want anyhow.  If you have every system and top of the line hardware you probably don't have enough money for the software anyhow, unless you are some warezing douchebag who give fucksticks like Valve the excuse to DRM our virtual asses till they bleed.  
I have more games than I honestly know what to do with any how.  So I might miss out on a few PC only games.  Most of them are FPS and RTS and I have already mentioned how I don't give a damn about either genre.  And the few FPSes that are really good come out for consoles anyhow.  I can deal with dual stick FPSing just fine.  Its almost as intuitive as mouse keyboard now.

What's funny is since getting my Mac a number of forums have had discussions about the Mac and some guys always have to come out of the woodwork screaming about how lame Macs are.
Its about as retarded as your average Gamefaqs system boosting thread.  

if you like the hardware you have, good!  But why bash other systems just because its not your preference?
The pros and cons are one thing, pointless wankery is another.

[schild]

Hi, angry mob. Welcome to the beginning of the thread.

1) Mac.  I think I should by a Mac.  Mac seems to put the focus away from gaming.  Instead, they focus on how their products fit into or change your lifestyle, being more of an all-purpose computer.  So I was thinking of getting a Mac (and an LCD screen if need be) so I can stop having giant, noisy, beige gaming PC's in my room, and have the computer retain a very small profile.  Desk space is precious to me, as is overall room space.  This would effectively prevent me from playing the majority of games out there, as well as my old games.  So that's why I was also thinking of...

How does the computer I posted not fit the quiet, small profile/footprint, not beige but striking, all-purpose computer requirement that he had? In addition to letting him play his old games, let alone play new ones.

[Hanzii]

I hate it when Schild is right. But Schild is right.

[Tebonas]

Im neither angry nor a mob. But point taken, I think I still had Voodoolily and her Autoupgradewonderpost in mind.

I agree, if its only the size and the noise thats bothering, by all means buy a bare bone system which is visually appealing to you. You may not be able to play all games, but still more than on the Mac, and it should be cheaper.

[schild]

I agree, if its only the size and the noise thats bothering, by all means buy a bare bone system which is visually appealing to you. You may not be able to play all games, but still more than on the Mac, and it should be cheaper.

Edit: My post got eaten.

Just to point out, the computer I posted a picture of isn't remotely barebones. And it's the best use of a Pentium M I've seen in desktops. Shuttle puts all their stuff in a kickass case. There's a reason I own one (not the one above though  :-()

Anyway, Linkity link link. The most you'll need to do is upgrade the ram, which I'm fairly sure is easily done. That computer would make a dandy desktop replacement with a gig stick.

Edit again: Also, some of Shuttle's new computers come with a silent external power supply. Which is just fucking awesome.

[Jeff Kelly]

I for one have that kind of setup that you describe. I own a Powerbook G4 15'' with a 1,25 GHZ Processor as a computer and a PS2 and a gamecube as consoles.

Why? At first it was a choice made because of my personal usage profile. I was a comp sci student and all of the computers in our labs were running some kind of unix dialect (Solaris, HP-UX, Linux or FreeBSD), I also used FreeBSD on my PC at home for all development work and web surfing. I had a Windows partition on that PC to dual boot into but I pretty much only used Windows to play games. Everything else was done on FreeBSD, including Text processing via TeX, Framemaker or Open Office.

At that time I was pretty much sick of all the installing new drivers, reinstalling windows and the constant patches required to play the latest games. I also kept buying less and less games for my pc because I was sick of EGO_SHOOTER_351 and REAL_TIME_STRATEGY_OFFERING_452 so I used the pc less and less for gaming. I think in 2004 I only have bought about 2 or 3 games for my PC. I don't play 1st person shooters or RTS because they bore me.

I loved and still love the flexibility of the command line interface but to this day despise the UI offerings for Unix. KDE, and Gnome are bloated pieces of UI crap that try and fail to emulate the Windows look-and-feel in their standard configuration, while every odd KDE and Gnome app has its own interpretation of usability and UI layout. Everything else is just Window Managers with either a few or a lot graphical gimmicks with every odd app using different widget sets and its own way of laying out the UI.

OS X came out and I liked the basic concept behind it very much (standard GUI with sensiible UI guidelines and the flexible BSD userland with bash or tcsh) so that in 2004 II bought a mac in order to try it. Shortly before that I had bought a gamecube for Zelda WW and Mario Sunshine and a used PS2 for GTA San Andreas and Final Fantasy.

Half a year later I sold my pc because I hadn't used it ever since.

I have bought more console games this year than I had bought PC games in the two years previous and I had more fun with them than I had with the last pc game I bought. With Metal Gear Solid 2 and 3, Final fantasy X, Zelda the Wind Waker and GTA San Andreas I had months of fun while Far cry lasted only for 5 hours (until it was played to the end).

I have that setup for two years now and have not yet suffered from gamer envy. Most games I care about nowadays will be released for one of the 3 console offerings eventually or are even platform exclusives and for the price of a decent gamer PC (Eur 1000)  I can buy all three of the new consoles and a few games and still have money left for my DVD addiction.

I used this thread as an opportunity to look up the current top 20 pc games here in germany.

1 Age of Empires 3 (RTS, PC only)
2 Call of Duty 2 (1st person shooter, released for all major consoles)
3 Sid Meiers Civilization 4 (MAC port planned for early 2006)
4 Need for Speed - Most Wanted (released for all major consoles)
5 Star Wars Battlefront 2 (released for all major consoles)
6 World of WarCraft (MAC version available)
7 Football Manager 2006 (PC only)
8 X3 - Reunion (PC only)
9 F.E.A.R. (1st person shooter, PC only)
10 The Movies (PC only)
11 Dawn of War (RTS, PC only)
12 Battlefield 2 Special Forces (1st person shooter, PC only, planned releases for XBOX and PS2)
13 Age of Empires 3 (RTS, pc only)
14 Fifa 2006 (released for all major consoles)
15 Die Sims 2 (released for all major consoles)
16 Harry Potter und the goblet of fire (released for all major consoles)
17 Die Sims 2 - Nightlife (released for all major consoles)
18 Battlefield 2 (released for PS2 and X-BOX)
19 Guild Wars (PC only)
20 Finding Nemo (released for all major consoles)

Out of those 20 games there is only one I care about (X3) that is not released for either MAC or one of the major console platforms so for me gamer envy is not much of a problem. YMMV however.

I like the console way of life:

1. put cd in tray and press close
2. play
3.
4. profit!

No mucking about with drivers or patches and a broader variety of game types and I don't waste so much time to "maintain" the sanity and stability of my windows box which means more free time to do other things and I can play games while sitting on my couch.

[HaemishM]

Embrace

the

Niche,

Bitches.

[Surlyboi]

I hate it when Schild is right. But Schild is right.

Feh, you only think Schild is right because Steve Jobs apparently touched you in a bad place once...

Schild's argument, while somewhat valid is still based on a false premise. As has been pointed out a few posts back, if he had compared that media center PC to an iMac or a mini, the argument would have been fine. Instead, he compared a pro-level G5 to a 'doze box I would only give to my most techno-retarded relatives.

[Righ]

If you're going to compare the G5 case to something, you might want to look at:



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16811112055

There's better application software for Windows for almost everything. Macs have solid bases of very good productivity applications, but there are still more choices for Windows. However, the PowerPC 970MP processor, the only Unix system to have a worthwhile graphical environment, some of the Apple software technologies and the relative lack of support overhead are good reasons for considering a Mac.

As far as music production is concerned, Macs are still better choices, despite all the ear candy available on PCs. Using a Windows box to run a few Windows-only synths is okay, but Apple's Core Audio is more scalable and has lower latency than anything you can do with Windows applications.

If you want to play games, get a PC. If you want to only get one computer, you should almost certainly get a PC too. If you want to spend less time dicking around fixing Windows boxes, cleaning up spyware, dealing with application interoperability issues, or you're a Unix maven like myself, or you want to run a lot of virtual instruments and effects in one box, or you just want a lightweight platform to do basic Internet crap, you'll enjoy using Macs. But you'll probably still want to maintain a PC, because you're an F13 reader, and hence a gamer.

[Pococurante]

Anyway, Linkity link link.

"...best of all you’ll no longer need your DVD player, audio receiver, or TiVO."

Now that grabbed my attention.  I've been debating a replacement for my ReplayTVs.  Will these things do auto commercial skip?  Talk to each other/share movies?

Main problem is the price point.  Those are not appliance prices.

[Lum]

Windows Media Center (what those are packaged with) won't, and are saddled with the usual MS DRM stuff.

You can get Beyond TV tho, replace Media Center with it, and you'll have all the things you mentioned (auto-commercial skip, shared video libraries, etc). The latest version supports recompressing to DivX natively, which is nice.

[schild]

I hate it when Schild is right. But Schild is right.

Feh, you only think Schild is right because Steve Jobs apparently touched you in a bad place once...

Schild's argument, while somewhat valid is still based on a false premise. As has been pointed out a few posts back, if he had compared that media center PC to an iMac or a mini, the argument would have been fine. Instead, he compared a pro-level G5 to a 'doze box I would only give to my most techno-retarded relatives.

The media center PC looks better. And out of the box can inherently play more games and has more "software" available than a pro-level G5. I don't think our friend here is a professional music producer so my point is completely valid. And to think, at first I was really only comparing the look and design specifications put forth in the first post.

As for Beyond TV - Yes.