Post Your Mac Setup!

shoota said:
Ditto. That's my very same same logic too when I see people say get an SSD it'll blow your mind. My ssd certainly hasn't blown my mind. I think the general convention is that if you don't use large programs like Photoshop then an ssd is still a luxury at this point.
On topic- love your setup. When I finally get my room cleaned up I'll post a pic but I've been saying that for a long time now lol. Besides it's nowhere near as clean and nice looking as most everyone's here.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty safe to say that the only true advantages that SSDs have for 99% of users right now are battery life and weight.

Thanks! It's a bit messy right now to be honest, Apple boxes everywhere! I personally think it pales in comparison to most of the other setups here...!

EDIT: Just in response to Terpfen, yes, dependent on application, however. I couldn't agree more that hard drives are the biggest bottleneck, but there is little use in having an SSD to speed up launch times for Safari, Mail, and Word, which are probably the three tasks that most systems out there see.
 
rflcptr said:
After network IO, of course. ;)
Click to expand...

Not really. Network I/O has nothing to do with how fast a computer in front of you completes a local task, like loading a large app or changing maps in BF3.

That said, yeah, network and broadband speeds could always stand to be faster.

lamboman said:
EDIT: Just in response to Terpfen, yes, dependent on application, however. I couldn't agree more that hard drives are the biggest bottleneck, but there is little use in having an SSD to speed up launch times for Safari, Mail, and Word, which are probably the three tasks that most systems out there see.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the second half of your post here. Any sort of wasted time is detrimental. That's why PC makers are always pursuing faster boot times, finer-grain sleep/wake states, etc. Just because a task is mundane doesn't mean it won't benefit from widening a system bottleneck. Also, regardless of whether or not a person absolutely, truly NEEDS something to load faster doesn't matter; advancements at the bleeding edge of tech, like the adoption of SSDs, gradually trickle down to the low end. So all those cubicle drones will eventually get to load their Outlook PST files in half the time. :p

And now, back to Mac setup photos…?
 
Terpfen said:
Not really. Network I/O has nothing to do with how fast a computer in front of you completes a local task, like loading a large app or changing maps in BF3.
Click to expand...

Assuming a purely local task, obviously. Where I work, I'd happily trade an SSD for improved network IO.

nowphotos!
 
Terpfen said:
Not really. Network I/O has nothing to do with how fast a computer in front of you completes a local task, like loading a large app or changing maps in BF3.

That said, yeah, network and broadband speeds could always stand to be faster.



I disagree with the second half of your post here. Any sort of wasted time is detrimental. That's why PC makers are always pursuing faster boot times, finer-grain sleep/wake states, etc. Just because a task is mundane doesn't mean it won't benefit from widening a system bottleneck. Also, regardless of whether or not a person absolutely, truly NEEDS something to load faster doesn't matter; advancements at the bleeding edge of tech, like the adoption of SSDs, gradually trickle down to the low end. So all those cubicle drones will eventually get to load their Outlook PST files in half the time. :p

And now, back to Mac setup photos…?
Click to expand...

Last thing I will say on the matter, there is a difference between what the consumer needs, and what technology progress will bring us. My perspective was simple; Safari, Word, and Mail all open virtually immediately, and an SSD won't make much difference at all.

Not saying you're wrong, because you're absolutely correct! Just that right now, to the devices where SSDs haven't trickled down, most people don't need them.

That said, of course, the tasks of the "typical home user" have and are changing towards the more intensive - SSDs will soon have their place as a requirement!
 
Try to keep it neet:




php2adzd5AM.jpg



Tv: 43" Pioneer Elite
Imac: Mid 2010 core2duo
Macbook Pro: Late 2011 i5, 8gb ram, 120gb Patriot Wildfire SSD
 
Llm2G.jpg


2011 i7 Macbook Pro 13"
Thunderbolt display.


Temporary desk. In the process of building one for my new place.
 
I don't have a desk so I use my kitchen island for the iMac:

S7E1Ml.jpg


at least I have this for my view:

Bn1eGl.jpg
 
Sekkey, can you post pictures of your fish tank setup and how it's mount? It looks amazing. Thanks
 
I see a lot of IKEA Galant desks here. Simple yet sturdy and customizable.

Another bit on the SSD route for MBPs. I thought about getting one for my MBP, but opted for the 500 GB 7200 RPM drive instead. Faster than the 5400, but more room than the SSD w/o spending a fortune. I couldn't carry all my music and movies on a 128.
 
lamboman said:
I think it's pretty safe to say that the only true advantages that SSDs have for 99% of users right now are battery life and weight.
Click to expand...

shoota said:
Ditto. That's my very same same logic too when I see people say get an SSD it'll blow your mind. My ssd certainly hasn't blown my mind. I think the general convention is that if you don't use large programs like Photoshop then an ssd is still a luxury at this point.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I run VMs regularly on my macbook, and the performance difference is incredible. I no longer suffer through long periods of nothing while the harddrive thrashes trying to do the work of four computers. With the SSD, you can't even tell I've got the VMs running.

As for weight, I can't tell the difference, and my battery life is terrible with 100 tabs open in FF...
 
wow guys.. an SSD has boosted my mac's life 100%. I would never go back off of an SSD for a boot HD. Sounds like 2x trolls.

What do you guys recommend as a sweet docking station?
 
Sold my 2009 15" MBP and got this 11" MBA. Pretty happy with the switch so far.

yiwl0Eyl
 
u3b3rg33k said:
I disagree. I run VMs regularly on my macbook, and the performance difference is incredible. I no longer suffer through long periods of nothing while the harddrive thrashes trying to do the work of four computers. With the SSD, you can't even tell I've got the VMs running.

As for weight, I can't tell the difference, and my battery life is terrible with 100 tabs open in FF...
Click to expand...

True...but 99% of users don't run virtual machines...;)

I really was referring the average home user, that said. I wasn't saying that SSDs don't have a place, merely that their speed isn't currently a huge advantage for most.

I also retract my statement about weight, the SSD and hard drive weigh almost exactly the same.

That said, I can't complain too much; my MBP just received an SSD last week...:D Safari and Mail...no difference. However, my Pages files are ever growing, as are my collection of PDFs, so the huge read speeds are appreciated.
 
Why is everyone posting pictures of the same computer? :confused: Are you all just shipping the equipment to each other ????
 
There are some really nice setups in here. I like come here a steal peoples ideas for my home office. LOL Just bought a 27 iMac yesterday and thought I would share.

HPIM0025.jpg
[/IMG]

HPIM0017.jpg
[/IMG]
 
Last edited:
lcck said:
Morazl.

Damn you. I just soiled myself.
Click to expand...

Thanks.. I didn't post a picture of my iMac.. because it looks just like every other iMac. Proud of my SSD upgrade though :D (did it last week, was very fun, and it's suuuper fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top