Mountain Lion On My Mini??

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by ivnj, Jul 24, 2012.

  1. ivnj macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    #1
    So I went to FRYS yesterday and got the 529 bas 2.3 i5 deal. Upgraded to 8gb of ram by PNY from BESTBUY. I think it was apple (I don't remember) saying lion needs 4gb minimum ram and is hungry. Well my 2gb stock was runnig out super fast so 8gb was badly needed.

    Anyhow few question. Is mountain lion more memory efficient like going from vista to 7. Or mountain lion is also memory hungry. And what is the minimum. Would 2gb have sufficed if I never upgraded.

    And everyone keeps saying the mountains will be filled with lions tomorrow. How do you know its tomorrow if it doesn't even officially say on their website. Were are you getting tomorrow from.

    Also I forget what the apple guy said. How do I upgrade for free. He said any computer bought after the 11th of july. But where do I register for the free coupon.

    Thanks for the advice.
     
  2. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #2
    At least the ML Golden Master is much faster than Lion. Both are very memory hungry, but 8 GB will be sufficient for most users.

    Apple said today that ML is going to be released tomorrow. (Or today as it's after midnight here ...)

    You get the free ML on Apple's Website. Don't have the link right now, but should be easy to find (--> Google).
     
  3. n0cus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    #3
    Lion can run alright with 2GB of RAM, but it is good you upgraded. The minimum for Mountain Lion is also 2GB, like Lion. Yes Mountain Lion is coming out tomorrow. We know that because it was said during the Q3 earnings announcement. To get your free copy of Mountain Lion got to http://www.apple.com/osx/uptodate/ tomorrow.

    P.S. Are you going to return you mini if a new one comes out tomorrow? Just wondering.
     
  4. ivnj thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    #4
    No because I doubt it will. And it will still be more expensive. The base model won't be dedicated graphics also. It has to be shared. So no good. It won't future proof either way. Because mac os 1,000 won't run on it so I'll just resell it when time comes. Because it won't be able to handle anything after 10.4.8. like 11 or 12. I highly doubt it. My graphics cram is listed as 512mb in the profiler. So that's good enough. By the time we get 11 or 12 even todays top of the line will feel sluggish. So no return. Not worth it. Cuz in 5 years i5 will be outdated and replaced i55 or i555. Or we will switch from I to J. So not worth it.
     
  5. n0cus macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    #5
    Very wise words.
     
  6. DJHonda84 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    #6
    Apple's published minimum memory requirement for ML is 2 GB.
    http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/

    That having been said, I would highly recommend a minimum of 4 GB memory for use with ML. This is my early 2009 Mac mini with ML, running just Mail, Safari, iTunes, Messages and Activity Monitor.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. ivnj thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
  8. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #8
    The 2 GB are required for the installation of ML. The installed version of ML requires much more memory.
     
  9. ivnj thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    #9
    So will the 8 I have be enough or do I need 16.
     
  10. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #10
    No, ML requires 8 GB of free storage space for installation and will run with only 2 GBs of RAM.
     
  11. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #11
    2 GB & ML is not a useful combination.
     
  12. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #12
    I wouldn't subject myself to it personally.
     
  13. angusticeps macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    #13
    I also have an early 2009 Mac mini with 4GB RAM and have been wondering whether it's worth updating to ML. Currently it has Lion installed which is visibly slower than SL used to be, but I'm afraid ML could make things worse.

    Would you be willing to share your experience with ML on your mini, in comparison with previous versions of OS X?

    Thanks!
     
  14. Razzerman II macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2011
    Location:
    Scunthorpe - yes, that place
    #14
    Same here. I'd appreciate a hands-on opinion too please.

    Cheers
     
  15. kobyh15 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    #15
    I put ML on my early 2011 13" MBP last night. It's basically the laptop version of the Mini. I have 8 GB of RAM and an Intel 320 SSD as well. I have been really pleased with it so far. I would say the word that comes to mind is "smooth". All animations and transitions are well-done with no jitteriness. I opened every app in my dock at the same time and then used Expose to see them all and it is very quick. No stuttering at all. Much quicker than Lion in feel and UI navigating. I like it a lot. Notification Center is pretty cool.
     
  16. mwhities macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Location:
    Mississippi
    #16
    My early 2009 MacMini stats:
    8GBs of ram (Bought from OWC)
    64B Crucial M4 SSD drive (main)
    750 OWC 7200RPM (sata) drive (second(data doubler))

    I did a fresh instal of Mountain Lion and I highly recommend doing it. Just make sure (I could test it with 2GB and 4 GB ram as I still have my modules.) that you have some amount of ram installed. I didn't get to play with it much (I'm running on 4 hours of sleep.) but, it booted up from being turned off to the login screen in 32 seconds.

    It felt "snappy" and very responsive. I opened up Safari and it opened up far faster than it did with Lion. After that, I went to bed but, I'll do more testing tonight.

    So, all of you with an early 2009 MacMini, update to SSD and to Mountain Lion.
     
  17. Bunyak macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2011
    #17
    I had the same experience with a 2010 base Mini with 8GB RAM and a SSD. Boot time is now about 35 seconds. Everything, including Plex, seems much snappier than with Lion.
     
  18. Zilkir macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2012
    #18
    I'm confused by your post. You seem to be saying that the 2012 update won't have dedicated graphics on the base model and that's why you bought the 2011 base model.

    Last I checked, the 2011 base model doesn't have dedicated graphics available. I'm planning on getting a mini very soon so my main purpose for asking is to be sure I'm reading the specs about the 2.3 i5 and the 2.5 i5correctly.
     
  19. ivnj thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    #19
    I don't care about dedicated graphics. Light web and even a few free games from the app store like Marble World Desktop work great on the shared desktop.

    But FRYS was 529 and normal price is 599. So 70 dollars savings. If I waited till tomorrow and o refresh then 70 dollars was waisted. And for 70 I got ram 8gb kit and still 24 dollars to spare. So not a bad deal. Waiting for a refresh that may or may never happen is not worth it in my opinion.
     
  20. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #20
    This depends on everyones needs. But yeah, if you want to get the base model, the only significant difference would be USB 3.0 - and maybe (but just MAYBE) a cheaper starting price.

    As for the high-end model, there's still the possibility for a more than 50 % faster graphics card - very important for those working with Aperture or playing some more demanding games - and a quad-core CPU, so these potential buyers have to wait. :(
     
  21. takezo808 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #21
    what are things coming too. i still remember the days when 128MB of ram was considerd beast. and it still feel like yesterday when 2GB of memory was considered a gamers memory requirements.

    8GB for a non AMD 6630 equiped Mac Mini 2012 will enable 512MB of video memory instead of the 256 MB it allocates from 2GB installation. (yes it subtracted and you are left with whats left over. Video performace will definatelly improve for video and photo editing. You can enable higher quality textures in some games due to the larger frame buffer. of course if you got an AMD equiped mac mini. it will run circles around the intel gpu even with 512mb of shared memory. The AMD one just has way more horsepower.

    Just don't confuse a Mac ram requirements from a PC. 2GB on a mac is like 4GB on PC.
     
  22. DJHonda84 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    #22
    I've used 10.5, 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8 on my early 2009 Mac mini. Never did a scratch OS install, and still running the stock HDD. I too felt a very noticeable performance hit from 10.6 to 10.7. There is a hit from 10.7 to 10.8, but I found it to be minor. Haven't done any benchmark tests, but it feels just slightly less responsive than Lion. No regrets thou, as I find the added features of ML to be worth it.

    I've been checking Activity Monitor regularly, and page out behavior is about the same as I had with Lion.
     
  23. MJL macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    #23
    Surely you got that the wrong way round - 4 Gb under Windows 7 is the same as 8 Gb on OS X Lion.
     

Share This Page