iMac vs Mac Mini?

P

photogdave

Shops local
Local time
2:58 PM
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
2,142
Location
Film-filled Vancouver
View My Gallery
I'd like your thoughts.
I am going to order a new computer this week. What do you think is the best buying philosophy:
Get a mac mini maxed with RAM. Cheap, modular (if the monitor goes I don't lose my whole computer), takes up little space and even though not the fastest machine in the world, will still be a huge performance upgrade from my failing six-year-old 1.6ghz G5 tower. Or...
Get a 21.5" iMac with the stock faster processor, more RAM, faster hard drive (don't need bigger but oh well). Allows me to get rid of the old CRT display and have dual monitor with my Samsung 19" but will cost more $$ and if the monitor goes, so does the whole computer.
Considering both machines will be obsolete in 5-6 years is it smarter to spend the minimum amount for the mac mini which will likely be sufficient for my needs, or spend more money and get a more kick-ass machine that may offer some speed advantages in the coming years?
I mostly do photo editing, some basic graphic design and the usual watching of videos etc. on the web. I used to so a lot of video editing but not so much any more.
 
I faced the same choice two years back. I ended up going with the Mac Mini. For me, it was a good choice. Just made more sense to me to invest in a good monitor (a 24" Dell) and to upgrade to a new computer whenever something new caught my fancy. Which is now, for I see where Apple has just updated the Mini so I'll be selling my current one and upgrading to a new Mini sometime soon.

BTW, I mainly use my Mini with Photoshop CS3.

Jim B.
 
I presently own four macs of recent vintage. I'm buying three more for a new office. I had to make the same choice. First, I will say that the Mac Pro Desktop is worth the extra money for heavy duty work. I didn't need a heavy hitter for the office. Once I priced the Mini plus keyboard, monitor, extra memory and DVI adaptor, it was close in price to the lower end iMac, so I went for iMac. I've two at work and they have served me well. I will also be purchasing the new Mac Mini Snow Leopard Server. Great deal if it holds up to 24x7 use.
 
Depends on what you'll use it for. I'm assuming it has something to do with photography, so your main concerns are display and harddrive. Since computers go obsolete every two years (5-6 would be a dream), I'd put my vote in for a Mac mini. With the rest of the money, get a fast harddrive and a display that you can use with any other computers you might end up buying over the next years. Lots of people sell fast 3.5" external drives with FW800, so that should be enough speed for you (if I'm not mistaken) while you can still use the drive with any newer computer.
 
I purchased a 24" Imac in June. I considered the Mini, but having to buy a monitor too, plus keyboard and mouse, I'd have ended paying almost the same for a less powerful machine.

Cons: if the iMac goes, it goes to the trash including the panel.

I'm very happy with the iMac. The screen is fantastic, and can be dimmed using software. The problem is the glare, but I'm used to it now and it doesn't disturb me that much anymore.

Those new 27" panels are huge. With the 24" I have more than enough.
 
About obsolescense, my iMac runs PS CS4 great. It does great audio too, quite fast, so as long as it keeps running I won't need another computer with more power for what I use.

I have Apple Care, so the computer is going to stay with me for three years minimum.
 
Can't go wrong with either. My tendency as of late is to spend the money to get the fastest processor, most memory, biggest HD etc. in the hopes that it will stave off obsolescence for a little while longer than lesser machines. My G4 mini was the best when I bought it, and it is still very usable, especially after I upgraded the HD and maxed out the memory.

My guess is that an iMac would probably be obsolete before the screen went anyway.

EDIT: the picture quality on CRTs is still quite good - the LCD I got with my mini is awful.
 
Just so everyone is on the same page. Both iMac and the Mini have been upgraded over the last week or so. Check out the processor speeds, new displays, memory installed and such. Don't assume that it is the same as previous systems. For photographic/video rendering purposes the slightly increased speed of the low end iMac vs. Mini might be of some value. The high end iMac is now quad-core with a 27" screen. Nice but $$.
 
I think all iMacs now have a glass covered glossy screen.
If you want a choice of LCDs the mini would be the way to go.
If you buy a good LCD - you can always transfer it to a faster computer later.

An old mac mini would make a good little PVR ( with a USB tuner )
 
Computers don't go obsolete in two years... I'm still using a computer I bought in 2003 for M8 files + photoshop.

It works just as fast as it did when I bought it.
 
Tough call, but if budget is a concern, I think I'd lean towards the Mac Mini. One of my sisters has a 20" iMac and another a Mac Mini. Funny enough, it's the later sibling that's had to do more intensive photographic stuff (daughter in high school sports) and the Mini has held up very well.

I feel I must throw in though, that my aging dual 1.8ghz G5 still holds up quite well too.
 
The iMac and the more expensive Mini both max out at 4 gigs of RAM (and I definitely would get those 4 gigs).

An iMac and a Mini with a comparable new monitor will cost about the same.

An iMac delivers a bit less clutter. The screen is really very good.

I've had both, and have an iMac now.

So... go the cheapest route to get the goodies you want. Seriously consider buying an auxiliary drive for expansion and/or backup. You don't need to buy an Apple product. Half-terabyte enclosed drives that plug in and go can be had for less than $200.
 
thanks for the feedback so far!
a couple of things to add:
My CRT is fritzing out anyway so if get the mini I will probably also get a second LCD monitor. I already have a 19" Samsung that is a matte screen, which I will use for photo editing even no matter what, so if I go iMac the glossy screen will just be for web browsing etc.
My G5 still runs great too and is powerful enough for Photoshop and Final Cut but I want to try Aperture or Lightroom. Also a lot of web content is now unviewable on the G5, and the hard drive with my OS on it is starting to crash and even tough a replacement is cheap I don't want to throw any more money at this thing!
 
wgerrard said:
The iMac and the more expensive Mini both max out at 4 gigs of RAM (and I definitely would get those 4 gigs).

An iMac and a Mini with a comparable new monitor will cost about the same.

An iMac delivers a bit less clutter. The screen is really very good.

I've had both, and have an iMac now.

So... go the cheapest route to get the goodies you want. Seriously consider buying an auxiliary drive for expansion and/or backup. You don't need to buy an Apple product. Half-terabyte enclosed drives that plug in and go can be had for less than $200.
Click to expand...


New iMacs have a ram limit of either 8 or 16gb, can't remember which.
 
Oh, and I'd get an imac personally - mine is 3-4 years old and still a very quick/efficient machine. I'll upgrade to a new one next year but I have no doubt this one will still be going great in 3-4 years time.
 
I have been using Macs since 1986 and in the past 5 years or so I have stopped considering the "what if" factor. "What if" the screen dies, "what if" in a year or two I decide I need to use some piece of software that requires a faster processor, etc etc. The reason I no longer consider the "what if" question when I buy a new mac is because in every single case, the "what if" never came true or if it did it was time for a new machine anyway. I just get what I need for my present usage.
 
I picked up one of the new iMacs (21.5" screen) for a client on Friday. It's the base model at $1200, but you get 4 gigs of RAM (all current iMacs can handle up to 16GB), 500GB HD, 3GHz Intel Core Duo (yes, the Quad is available for more bucks), wireless keyboard, and that groovy Magic Mouse, which is a lot of fun to use.

On the bang-for-buck scale, the iMac wins over the mini: the cheapest iMac comes with 4 gigs Ram vs the mini's 2 gigs, can handle much more RAM than the mini, and comes with an LED display which theoretically should last a good deal longer than a conventional flat screen.

If your imaging needs are greater than what any of the iMacs can handle at the moment, frankly, you should be looking into a Mac Pro, perhaps even a used or refurb if buying a new one isn't in the cards budget-wise.

Over here, my main iron is a near-last-generation, dual-processor G4 tower (MDD, FW800), maxed out with 2 gigs RAM and quartet of fast, fairly big hard drives; running PS CS2, the thing is plenty fast for me, and I've been doing a heavy amount of scanning on it.


- Barrett
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

robert blu
Mac Mini with M1 chip
2
Replies
23
Views
3K
stephaneb
S
R
I hacked my new monitor
Replies
0
Views
1K
Ronald M
R
A
Pana Leica 12mm f1.4 vs Pana 24mm f1.8, thinking
Replies
3
Views
273
Archiver
A
lynnb
2018 Mac Mini update coming
Replies
1
Views
2K
Freakscene
Freakscene
S
Which CPU and how much RAM for photoshop in 2018?
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
blue4130
B
Back
Top Bottom