Max's out at 8GB of ram?
The mid-2011 Mac Mini supports a current max of 16GB of RAM.
Max's out at 8GB of ram?
You bring up an excellent topic of discussion here and while I wish you were right about that sentiment, more than can be properly conveyed here, you're not. As someone who has Mac OS X first and foremost as his computer platform of choice running on his primary machine, who only has Apple IT certifications and is trained for Mac IT stuff (by choice mind you) and not Windows IT stuff, and works in an IT job dominated by Windows PCs, take it from me, it doesn't make much sense.
For one, the amount of control you have as a Windows sys admin over your users machines is lightyears beyond what Mac OS X gives you. And the larger your organization is (and thusly, the more computers there are in place) the tighter the control schemes have to be; that is more or less a law of IT; ironically enough, it's one of the first things you read in the prep book for the Apple Certified Specialist - Deployment 10.6 book. For a small business paying someone else to host their stuff; sure, 1-30 Macs is perfect. Throw in a Mac mini Server or a Mac Pro Server in that mix and you're golden. More than that and you need means of controlling, managing, and locking down systems that OS X just isn't as great with. Plus, when it comes to users at the workplace, computers are tools, not toys. They are meant to be used for the apps they have installed, not fiddled with much in the OS level. Plus, even though Snow Leopard and later supports Exchange out of the box just as well as a Windows PC with Outlook does, you still need an Exchange server. Microsoft doesn't make Exchange for OS X Server (which is a shame, because I feel like that could resurrect OS X Server) so even then, you NEED a PC because, let's face it, OS X Server's use of Contacts, Calendars, and IMAP/POP is good, but it's no Exchange.
Again, if you solely do your work in Photoshop, you're in Photoshop 95% of the time you are at that machine and in the OS maybe another 3%. I assume that you use other things to fill that remaining 2%. From the standpoint of the Windows GUI, it's not THAT bad or THAT different from OS X. Windows problems suck more to deal with than Mac problems; in a workplace, those problems aren't your problem, they are the problem of the IT guy who is paid 36K+ a year to fix your problems. For the money spent, PCs are way cheaper and way faster than Macs are. Period. If the screen isn't an issue, I could build a PC that is faster than the most expensive iMac you can price out. And yes, I could've done that before Ivy Bridge stuff came out. A Mac, especially a desktop, is a poor value in the workplace unless aesthetics or something specific to the platform is important, if not mission critical to you.
iMacs are terrible machines. Substituting a Mac Pro for an iMac using Thunderbolt until the cows come home makes for a replacement that will never be as good as the original solution (namely the Mac Pro) was. The iMac is unupgradable and really the problem isn't your external components as much as it is your internal components. Desktop components in such a thin enclosure is very problematic and is why those machines fail the most frequently out of any of Apple's current Mac product lines. If they were to make a new design and model it after HP's Z1 (which mind you, for an HP machine, is impressively designed), that'd be something. Until they do, I put no stock in the iMac's ability to be anything other than a disappointing placeholder for the mid-tower Mac that everyone and their mother would love to see come to light.
While you make some very accurate points, I don't totally agree with you on all. I too was an IT Admin (a supervisor near the end), for Apple, Pixar, Motorola, others..). I supported many Macs and some Windows PCs. I was putting things in context for the user I replied to. You're right about the server points you made in regards to numbers of users and Exchange. No argument there.
I also agree that an iMac replacing a MacPro is not a great solution either, BUT, as components get smaller, are devices going to get smaller too while still getting more powerful, or will systems remain in the same form factors but using newer and faster components. Is it possible that we'll see miniature workstations? The HP's Z1 was a good example. The iMac could be that. It's too bad Apple has taken the position that it will build "upper middle-class" hardware, in favor of a pretty design and still charge a lot. I'm not happy about that. Apple should make higher end boxes across the line, but they don't and I understand why they don't). Smaller components are less reliable but that won't always have to be the case (relatively speaking, small equals new, new equals not as stable).
But, to me, it's mostly about the OS (and apps). Other people are different. They care about boot times, or being able to "pimp" out their PCs. Fine. I want a great OS/apps experience.
Where I disagree with you, and this is just my personal opinion... is that the interface and OS experience can and does influence the workflow and enjoyment factor by a lot. I think the Windows GUI IS that bad. And when I'm in an application I use the OS's Services to such a great extent that it makes a huge difference in my workflow. Maybe that's lost on some people. For you, as an IT Admin, that's not your biggest priority, but as a user it could be an important one. Display Postscript is one small example of a feature that definitely helps me quite a bit. Uniform Services across the entire OS and applications is another. It's very well done in OS X, IMO. That's a big one actually. I admit to being "Mac biased" but when I work on a PC, I find certain limitations of Windows to be unacceptable. To me, although at first glance an app in Windows may look the same as an app in OS X, there are underlying system level services in OS X that make Windows feel like a cheap, unfinished knock-off. And I'm seriously trying not to be non-objective, and granted I haven't spent as much time on a Windows PC. This is just my own user experience.
As far as IT support goes, I admit I'm a little out of date as I left the IT world quite a few years ago. But when I was leaving, Windows still couldn't boot from a CD/DVD, downtimes (which we measured) were MUCH higher for Windows then they were for OS X (and this was a mixed PC and Mac IT staff severing a 500+ mixed environment in one instance, and a smaller 40+ mixed environment in another). In one instance at a university I had a group of about 80 people, all using Macs, on Mac servers that were responsible for everything but email (which was hosted somewhere else, and I don't remember what system), and that was the cushiest gig ever. I was like the Maytag repair man. After purchasing and deploying the clients, servers, etc.. it was easy street. Perhaps it's that way now with Windows, and my perception is out of date. But now, as an end user, and a content creator in my particular field, I don't see how I could ever use any other current OS.
Anyway, thanks for the conversation. Time to go create some content!
Now days with iMacs coming with quad cores, 16 GB of ram, and terrabytes of hard drive space, and thunderbolts ability to add external storage, and an expansion slot chassis
the only reason why i would think people would get a Mac Pro is to show off
You forgot about demanding apps, particularly things like audio and video and ones like FC and Logic that are mac only. Those apps run on any mac but tons of cpu and ram are required for some usage. In that situation the only options are MP or a high end hackintosh.
Or use ProTools or Premiere Pro/Avid
seriously, who the hell uses a Mac Pro Server? i only seen one throughout all of the customer sites i've been too. LOL and they dont even use it.
Dells are cheaper, efficient, and compatible with everything, especially with people getting rid of towers these days and getting the regular desktop module and multiple virtual machines on it.
and for Mac Pro for personal use? gaming and stuff, are you really going to install windows and play windows based games (which is basically all the new and high end games) with an over priced desktop? when u have the choice of purchasing a gaming desktop at half the price and deliver the same gaming performance? and if not for gaming i guess its OK for maybe designing and art, but those thinks can be done in an iMac.
the only reason why i would think people would get a Mac Pro is to show off, and the server seems utterly useless your company is run totally of mac, which would lead to alot of problems (most companies that still go all mac still have a couple of windows machines or bootcamp of windows)
windows has the business game on lock, like the iOS has the mobile game on lock (and come on dont compare it to an android, android is a camry compared to the iOS which is a bently)
they are gonna drop this line, unless they really think they can break into the business side (which i highly doubt) with the mac OS. maybe in the future, but i highly doubt it.
and plus all the mac developers would charge extra for any mac program equivalent to a windows program (at least i would think)
Running those on PC is an option, but some people prefer the mac only versions. I use both PT and Logic and I wouldn't want to have to give up the latter just to get cheaper hardware.
I have a Mac Pro running Server. I'm just an ordinary guy.
Dells may be cheaper and more efficient but they are also horrible.
For me both form and function are important. Why can't I have something that looks nice and works well at the same time?
So just to p*** all over your hypothesis. Not only have I installed Windows I have it running in parallels. Am using it for Splinter cell and Soul Reaver right now on Win7. Why because often Mac ports of games don't include gamepad support.
Am I showing off, not really, no. The pro is under a desk where nobody sees it. The server gives me great VPN functionality and increased power to manage client accounts for my other family members. My house is all Macs except the DOS box my work gives me.
Anything else you want to add as right now you are starting to look a fool?
You forgot about demanding apps, particularly things like audio and video and ones like FC and Logic that are mac only. Those apps run on any mac but tons of cpu and ram are required for some usage. In that situation the only options are MP or a high end hackintosh.
they're just not going to last and they're not making profit. and before any smart guy goes off saying "how do you know they're not making profit".
do you think apple is going to discard a product thats selling and making money for them?
I'll say it anyway. You don't know they're not making a profit on it. Honestly, it's hard to imagine how they wouldn't be making a profit considering the price, the components, and that their R&D costs for it must be negligible.
I don't. Which is why I do think we'll see some sort of update this year.