Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aperture on a mac mini core duo 1.66 ?
- Thread starter MacPowa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if you mess with some files, you can. im not sure if its legal though. also, why would you want to? it will be unbearably slow. aperture on my 2.16 MBP with 2 gigs of ram is plenty annoyingly slow as it is, i cant imagine what it would be like on a mini
Don't do it.
Go with adobe's lightroom.
apple's aperture and adobe's lightroom are VERY similar if you are running a high end machine.
HOWEVER.
Adobe's program is very nicely streamlined in order to run on much less powerful machines.
I run it on a 4 year old ibook g4.
Just hook up a decent external hardrive and put the library on that, and you'll be good to go.
Go with adobe's lightroom.
apple's aperture and adobe's lightroom are VERY similar if you are running a high end machine.
HOWEVER.
Adobe's program is very nicely streamlined in order to run on much less powerful machines.
I run it on a 4 year old ibook g4.
Just hook up a decent external hardrive and put the library on that, and you'll be good to go.
I've been running Aperture on a Mini since v.r. 1.0.2. Any installer before 1.5 will not install on a Mini without using Pacifist. Once installed, you'll have to do manual updates, too.
Aperture is actually less demanding on a CPU than is Lightroom. The difference is, though, that Aperture relies more on the GPU than Lightroom does, thus its performance is somewhat less on Macs using integrated GPUs, such as the Minis and MacBooks.
With that said, however, Aperture on my 1.66CD Mini renders raw files in about 2 to 3 seconds, while my MBP renders them in about 1.5-2 seconds. So, if you're using Aperture casually, it will be fine on a Mini. If you're a pro doing dozens or more pics a day, it'd probably be worthwhile to buy a Mac with a dedicated graphics card, or you may want to go with Lightroom.