Forgive my ignorance, I''m not a MAC user but I''m considering a MAC Mini for my Ruby/Rails development. Seeing as how most RoR developers seem to be using MAC I was wondering if this is a suitable platform for development. Thanks in advance. Kyle Heon kheon-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org
Absolutely. Mac Minis are sweet little things, and they run OS X, so Rails development will be fun. Go for it dude! On 8/5/05, Kyle Heon <kheon-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Forgive my ignorance, I''m not a MAC user but I''m considering a MAC Mini for > my Ruby/Rails development. Seeing as how most RoR developers seem to be > using MAC I was wondering if this is a suitable platform for development. > > Thanks in advance. > > Kyle Heon > kheon-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
+1. I love doing Rails on my Mac. Pony up for a license for TextMate (after trying it out of course). On 8/5/05, Pat Maddox <pergesu-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > Absolutely. Mac Minis are sweet little things, and they run OS X, so > Rails development will be fun. > > Go for it dude! >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
> Forgive my ignorance, I''m not a MAC user but I''m considering > a MAC Mini for my Ruby/Rails development. Seeing as how most > RoR developers seem to be using MAC I was wondering if this > is a suitable platform for development.I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed for heavy-duty development work. It''s a surf-the-web, read-email, do-a-little-word-processing kinda machine. Just want to be sure we''re setting the proper expectations here. I''m assuming you''ve been developing on a PC for a while and with that, you probably have a beefy, fast Wintel box or laptop. But, if you want to experience a Mac for the first time without parting with too much of your money, then by all means, go for it. [Pedantic, but friendly, note: it''s ehm, Mac not MAC... it''s not an acronym. :-) ]
Since OS X came out the defacto rule for Macs has been to upgrade the RAM as soon as you get it. Get that mini for a low low price, then jump on crucial.com and max it out. The upgrade parts from a 3rd party will be a lot cheaper and just as good (if not better...almost all have a lifetime guarantee). -Jeff>I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed for >heavy-duty development work. >
It''s really no different than using an entry-level iBook, which I''ve also done. In the case of Ruby, we''re talking about pretty light-weight dev requirements. Crank that mini up to 1GB of RAM and it''s going to do just fine for most kinds of web development. On 8/5/05, Dean Matsueda <dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org> wrote:> > I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed for > heavy-duty development work._______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
After doing dev on a Mac Mini for the last 5 months, the only other item besides a RAM upgrade that I''d recommend, is a faster HD. The slow little bugger they come with drags things down. After slapping a new 7200 RPM WD HD in there along with the memory upgrade, it ran sweet, even Phostoshop did fine after that. Brad Wilson wrote:> It''s really no different than using an entry-level iBook, which I''ve > also done. In the case of Ruby, we''re talking about pretty > light-weight dev requirements. Crank that mini up to 1GB of RAM and > it''s going to do just fine for most kinds of web development. > > On 8/5/05, *Dean Matsueda* <dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org > <mailto:dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org>> wrote: > > I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed for > heavy-duty development work. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
Sorry, forgot to add this. For more info see <http://www.fastmac.com/ProductPage/minimax.html> Sean Stephens wrote:> After doing dev on a Mac Mini for the last 5 months, the only other > item besides a RAM upgrade that I''d recommend, is a faster HD. The > slow little bugger they come with drags things down. After slapping a > new 7200 RPM WD HD in there along with the memory upgrade, it ran > sweet, even Phostoshop did fine after that. > > Brad Wilson wrote: >> It''s really no different than using an entry-level iBook, which I''ve >> also done. In the case of Ruby, we''re talking about pretty >> light-weight dev requirements. Crank that mini up to 1GB of RAM and >> it''s going to do just fine for most kinds of web development. >> >> On 8/5/05, *Dean Matsueda* <dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org >> <mailto:dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org>> wrote: >> >> I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed >> for >> heavy-duty development work. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Rails mailing list >> Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org >> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >> > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >
On 8/6/05, Sean Stephens <schmoboy-j9pdmedNgrk@public.gmane.org> wrote:> After doing dev on a Mac Mini for the last 5 months, the only other item > besides a RAM upgrade that I''d recommend, is a faster HD. The slow > little bugger they come with drags things down. After slapping a new > 7200 RPM WD HD in there along with the memory upgrade, it ran sweet, > even Phostoshop did fine after that.Yeah, I agree. I do all my rails development on my powerbook which also has a slow HDD. I moved my dev database onto a local linux box and this thing sings! It makes a huge huge difference. -- Cheers Koz
On 8/6/05, Michael Koziarski <koziarski-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Yeah, I agree. I do all my rails development on my powerbook which > also has a slow HDD. I moved my dev database onto a local linux box > and this thing sings! It makes a huge huge difference.Apparently dropping in a 7200RPM drive into the powerbook makes quite a difference. I''m thinking of getting the Hitachi 80GB: http://www.ascent.co.nz/mn-product-spec.asp?pid=340779 See http://www.pbfixit.com/Guide/54.9.0.html if you''re interested as well, nice step-by-step with pictures on replacing the drive. Afaik, you won''t void your warranty unless you break something in the process. Leon
On 6 Aug 2005, at 3:05, Kyle Heon wrote:> Forgive my ignorance, I''m not a MAC user but I''m considering a MAC > Mini for > my Ruby/Rails development. Seeing as how most RoR developers seem > to be > using MAC I was wondering if this is a suitable platform for > development.I''ve been using a Mac Mini for Rails development since they came out (February?), and an iBook before that since last fall. I''ve released four full commercial apps, and have other non commercial ones, and all were done on these machines. The Mac Mini has it all. It has enough speed, it''s ultra quiet, it runs OS X - as good a UNIX as you''ll find anywhere, and you can pretty blindly move apps from an OS X machine to a Linux-based server without batting an eyelid. It''s got TextMate, it runs Apache or lighttpd, it can run MySQL/SQLite/postgresql. It''s the perfect development platform for Rails. The only thing better might be an iMac G5. I find the PowerMac G5 unbearably noisy and big. The only downsides.. my apps run slower on the Mac Mini than on my deployment servers, but it''s not bad enough for me to care. Also, Tiger. Panther flies on a machine with 512MB RAM, but Tiger really demands 1GB. So once I''d got the Mac Mini up to 1GB things were good once more. My productivity on the Mac over the PC is, wow.. well this is my best year since 2000 when the ass fell out of my market anyway. Cheers, Pete
Brad Wilson <dotnetguy-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes:> In the case of Ruby, we''re talking about pretty light-weight dev > requirements.Not sure I buy that. I''ve got a powerbook 1.33GHz G4 with 1.25GB RAM. When I go to ''rake test'' it maxes out my CPU. I''ve got a buddy with same config except 866MHz G4 (I think). It''s a lot more painful to run tests on his box. I love my Mac, but there''s no denying it''s IO subsystem is slower than true FreeBSD or even Linux. The Display PDF graphics system takes a lot of RAM. Running the tests takes a lot of disk IO. The best thing about development on the Mac is the tools you get to use. Don''t be misled that it will all be smooth sailing. The niceness of the UI will overcome a lot of the performance problems. Upgrading RAM is a must. Upgrading the disks will help a lot too. -- doug-jGAhs73c5XxeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org
Thanks. That''s cool. I just built a Linux box with a 120gb 7200rpm WD only a few months ago that I could easily swap out. Thanks for all the feedback, and I apologize for using MAC instead of Mac. Kyle Heon kheon-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org -----Original Message----- From: rails-bounces-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org [mailto:rails-bounces-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2005 12:23 AM To: rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org Subject: Re: [Rails] Using a MAC Mini for Rails dev After doing dev on a Mac Mini for the last 5 months, the only other item besides a RAM upgrade that I''d recommend, is a faster HD. The slow little bugger they come with drags things down. After slapping a new 7200 RPM WD HD in there along with the memory upgrade, it ran sweet, even Phostoshop did fine after that. Brad Wilson wrote:> It''s really no different than using an entry-level iBook, which I''ve > also done. In the case of Ruby, we''re talking about pretty > light-weight dev requirements. Crank that mini up to 1GB of RAM and > it''s going to do just fine for most kinds of web development. > > On 8/5/05, *Dean Matsueda* <dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org > <mailto:dmatsueda-1n2u0cAa2q8@public.gmane.org>> wrote: > > I''m sure it''ll be fine but know that the Mac Mini wasn''t designed for > heavy-duty development work. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >_______________________________________________ Rails mailing list Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005, Kyle Heon wrote:> Thanks. That''s cool. I just built a Linux box with a 120gb 7200rpm WD only a > few months ago that I could easily swap out.Beware that the mac mini accepts 2.5" hard drives, like in laptops. There are mods available to put a regular 3.5" hard drive in, but they''re kinda ugly ;) You can get 100gb 7200 rpm laptop drives for ~300USD, 60-80 in the ~200USD range. Ben
On Aug 6, 2005, at 12:30 PM, Ben Bleything wrote:> On Sat, Aug 06, 2005, Kyle Heon wrote: > >> Thanks. That''s cool. I just built a Linux box with a 120gb 7200rpm >> WD only a >> few months ago that I could easily swap out. >> > > Beware that the mac mini accepts 2.5" hard drives, like in laptops. > There are mods available to put a regular 3.5" hard drive in, but > they''re kinda ugly ;) > > You can get 100gb 7200 rpm laptop drives for ~300USD, 60-80 in the > ~200USD range.Another alternative is to get an external FireWire drive. That''s more expensive, but you won''t have to crack open your nice new computer. http://www.newertech.com/ministack http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10476 I have a 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook G4, and it''s more than fast enough for what I do, which entails doing lots of stuff at once. For software development (Lisp, Rails, C, Python), running PostgreSQL, working in Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, web browsing, listening to music, and even game playing (CoD), it''s plenty fast. My 20" keeps me sane. If I had to prioritize stuff to spend money on, it would be memory, display, hard drive, and then processor. Pixels equal productivity. Ed -- Transmogrify, LLC * <http://xmog.com/>
Ed Watkeys <edw-tIV1OJqwIcc@public.gmane.org> writes:> I have a 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook G4, and it''s more than fast enough > for what I do, which entails doing lots of stuff at once. For > software development (Lisp, Rails, C, Python), running PostgreSQL, > working in Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, web browsing, > listening to music, and even game playing (CoD), it''s plenty > fast. My 20" keeps me sane. > > If I had to prioritize stuff to spend money on, it would be memory, > display, hard drive, and then processor. Pixels equal productivity.That''s my exact config. I agree with the priorities. Keep in mind, I definitely wouldn''t be running rails tests while doing batch processing from Photoshop. I don''t have too many complaints about PS CS2 on this powerbook, but could certainly use more speed. It''s a heck of a lot faster than Gimp on this machine. I also don''t have too many problems with running tests. Unit and Functional tests (a total of 130 tests and 766 assertions) take just over 1 minute 30 seconds real time. My CPU is definitely pegged, but I can still do stuff (like navigate/edit in emacs). I think my buddy''s 866MHz G4 takes like 3 minutes to run the tests. -- doug-jGAhs73c5XxeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org http://blog.lathi.net
I have 2 1.4 minis with 1g each for my staging servers, One is web other is db. Memory is definately where you want to go if your doign dev on it. Sam On 8/6/05, Doug Alcorn <doug-jGAhs73c5XxeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org> wrote:> Ed Watkeys <edw-tIV1OJqwIcc@public.gmane.org> writes: > > > I have a 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook G4, and it''s more than fast enough > > for what I do, which entails doing lots of stuff at once. For > > software development (Lisp, Rails, C, Python), running PostgreSQL, > > working in Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign, web browsing, > > listening to music, and even game playing (CoD), it''s plenty > > fast. My 20" keeps me sane. > > > > If I had to prioritize stuff to spend money on, it would be memory, > > display, hard drive, and then processor. Pixels equal productivity. > > That''s my exact config. I agree with the priorities. Keep in mind, I > definitely wouldn''t be running rails tests while doing batch > processing from Photoshop. I don''t have too many complaints about PS > CS2 on this powerbook, but could certainly use more speed. It''s a > heck of a lot faster than Gimp on this machine. I also don''t have too > many problems with running tests. Unit and Functional tests (a total > of 130 tests and 766 assertions) take just over 1 minute 30 seconds > real time. My CPU is definitely pegged, but I can still do stuff > (like navigate/edit in emacs). I think my buddy''s 866MHz G4 takes > like 3 minutes to run the tests. > > -- > doug-jGAhs73c5XxeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org > http://blog.lathi.net > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails-1W37MKcQCpIf0INCOvqR/iCwEArCW2h5@public.gmane.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >