Why I chose the mini - MacRumors Forums
Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 18, 2013, 10:52 PM   #1
50voltphantom
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Why I chose the mini

I love my C2D iMac but the time came to upgrade, so I anxiously awaited the new iMacs, but when I found out you couldn't upgrade the RAM yourself on the 21.5" model and the cost to buy one with 16GB and a Fusion Drive (must-have option IMO) came to $1749, I just couldn't do it. I was devastated and felt very frustrated. So I begin re-evaluating my wants vs. available options; the Mini has user accesible RAM, relatively easily access to HDD's/SSD's and even kept a FireWire port on the new model. Hmm... I already have a keyboard and Magic Trackpad.....I can get a decent monitor for ~$200. The mini it is, and I can't wait for it to arrive.

I put this out there because I have been noticing quite a number of people online mentioning replacing their aging iMacs with new minis. Has anyone else noticed this trend?
__________________
Mac mini 2.3 GHz i7 1TB Fusion 16 GB RAM w/FW iSight | iPad 3 16GB | iPhone 5s 32GB | AirPort Extreme 5th Gen | Apple TV (x2)

Last edited by 50voltphantom; Feb 18, 2013 at 11:19 PM.
50voltphantom is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 10:59 PM   #2
Woodcrest64
macrumors 6502a
 
Woodcrest64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by 50voltphantom View Post
I love my C2D iMac but the time came to upgrade, so I anxiously awaited the new iMacs, but when I found out you couldn't upgrade the RAM yourself on the 21.5" model and the cost to buy one with 16GB and a Fusion Drive (must-have option IMO) came to $1749, I just couldn't do it. I was devastated and felt very frustrated. So I begin re-evaluating my wants vs. available options; the Mini has user accesible RAM, relatively easily access to HDD's SSD's and even kept a FireWire port on the new model. Hmm... I already have a keyboard and Magic Trackpad.....I can get a decent monitor for ~$200. The mini it is, and I can't wait for it to arrive.

I put this out there because I have been noticing quite a number of people online mentioning replacing their aging iMacs with new minis. Has anyone else noticed this trend?
Sounds like you made a great choice! When did you get your C2D iMac?
__________________
MacBook Pro Retina | iPad 1 | iPhone 5 32GB | Apple TV 3rd Gen | HTC One | Nexus 7 32GB 2nd Gen
Woodcrest64 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 11:19 PM   #3
50voltphantom
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodcrest64 View Post
Sounds like you made a great choice! When did you get your C2D iMac?
March/April of '08. It's been an absolutely fantastic computer. Still doesn't feel 'slow' at all. I'm quite certain it won't be able to install to the next version of OS X this summer so it was time to upgrade. Keep in mind it's on it's fourth(!) different 10.x release since I bought it (shipped with Leopard).
__________________
Mac mini 2.3 GHz i7 1TB Fusion 16 GB RAM w/FW iSight | iPad 3 16GB | iPhone 5s 32GB | AirPort Extreme 5th Gen | Apple TV (x2)
50voltphantom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2013, 11:33 PM   #4
nephron8
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
You can still install your own fusion drive.
Its software implementation afterall.
For your imac,you may install ssd for better perf.
nephron8 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 02:59 AM   #5
benwiggy
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
I also replaced a 2006 iMac with a 2012 MacMini. The base model iMac didn't have Fusion drive option when it was first launched -- I might have sprung for it with full RAM if it did -- but even so, I feel like the Mini was the better deal.

The Mini has FireWire, Audio In, Infrared, none of which the iMac has. You can take it to bits fairly easily. Installing 16Gb of RAM was a doddle. It's got a Geekbench score similar to a 2010 MacPro, FFS!
I already had 2 Apple Cinema Displays -- one was surplus at work; the other I got cheap on eBay. The Mini powers them both beautifully, despite its clockwork GPU (which some would have you believe).

The Fusion drive is absolutely brilliant. Anyone who prefers moving their files around between two separate disks is wasting their time and fooling themselves, IMO.
benwiggy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 06:30 AM   #6
Micky Do
macrumors 6502a
 
Micky Do's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Thailand, for now.
When Apple introduced the Mini back in 2005 they seemed to be pitching at those looking to change from the Windows environment.

I bought one, but for me it was my first computer. The small size and BYOKDM fitted my criteria. I didn't want a laptop, but I did want something that was easily transportable. Being a life long motorcyclist, my philosophy is that if something cannot be carried on a motorcycle, it's not for me.

My first one was ok, it did what I wanted, but it had its shortcomings. In my cynical moments I got the feeling that they developed it to use up stocks of G4 chips and other bits, as it was not too long after that they went over to Intel. They were certainly not a machine for somebody already well into the Apple gear.

When the HDD and power supply failed in 2009 I went for a new Mini, that certainly addressed the shortcomings of my first one. It was also relatively cheap, as I only had to buy the computer. I am still using my original monitor and speakers, but have replaced the keyboard (with a small wired Apple model) and mouse (now a basic wired Logitech)

Last August I had more RAM and Mountain Lion installed, so now have a computer that should be good for a few more years. It is all the computer that I need, with peripherals that suit my budget, purposes, and space......

The Mini is probably all the computer many people need!

From a fringe product, almost an orphan in the line-up, the Mini has become mainstream, and of interest to existing Mac users. The machine, and your system, can be configured and easily upgraded to suit your needs.

So, back to the OP, yes, there does seem to be a trend to the Mini, with good reason. It makes sense.

Last edited by Micky Do; Feb 20, 2013 at 06:04 PM.
Micky Do is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 06:55 AM   #7
1934hotrod
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Woodstock
What got my attention was the size plain and simple. The mini offers good horse power with a small foot print, got 5 of them spread out around the house. For me the i series was not a good fit, all in one packaging limits the user in ways they do not realize. Example display goes south big bucks to fix that. Component design for computers is versatile and the right way to build.

Enjoy the mini, but beware they multiply

Cheers,
Greg
__________________
" Trust but verify "
1934hotrod is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 07:26 AM   #8
philipma1957
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1934hotrod View Post
What got my attention was the size plain and simple. The mini offers good horse power with a small foot print, got 5 of them spread out around the house. For me the i series was not a good fit, all in one packaging limits the user in ways they do not realize. Example display goes south big bucks to fix that. Component design for computers is versatile and the right way to build.

Enjoy the mini, but beware they multiply

Cheers,
Greg
yeah I have 3 in use plus 1 on a bench waiting to be changed to a fusion that is 4. I just sold one thats 5. Over the years I have purchased and upgraded hundreds . I have also used 2-4 for the house since 2007.

In 2009 the 2.66 model even the 2.53 both c2d cpus the mini has been good enough for the average user.
philipma1957 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 09:47 AM   #9
LCD
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: SW Florida
In January I switched from a 2006 iMac to a 2012 Mini with a 23" IPS display after trying the 2012 iMac in December.
LCD is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 10:10 AM   #10
martinm0
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
I just picked up a 2.6 i7 Mini from BH Photo. Its quite a powerful little bugger I must admit! However, I do a lot of Handbrake encoding and find it extremely noisy when the fans kick up.

I really want to like the Mini, but the display issues (crushed whites and odd lines only on the Macrumors site...) and noise while encoding videos make me want to give the 2012 iMacs another try (been through 3 27" models so far).

For the record my 2012 2.6 i7 Mini with 16GB RAM and an SSD (external) posted a geekbench score of 12015 (the iMac was around 12800). That's pretty damn close!
martinm0 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 11:44 AM   #11
utekineir
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
says a lot when the modern i7 mini is a legitimate sidegrade to an 8 core mp.


let alone that thing uses about as much power as a cfl lightbulb most of the time.
utekineir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2013, 02:30 PM   #12
Mojo1
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Another "switcher" who upgraded from a 24" 2006 iMac to a 2.3GHz 2012 Mini.

That iMac was my last all-in-one Mac unless Apple backtracks from its ridiculous "form over function" design ethos. The "glassy" display and a lack of any meaningful ergonomic adjustments are deal-killers for me. Apple's Thunderbolt display? Again, no ergonomic adjustments except for the essentially useless "tilt." (I guess that it is somewhat helpful when attempting to reduce glare from overhead lighting... which wouldn't be a problem in the first place if Apple would go back to its excellent anti-glare panels.)

And Apple keyboards are terrible if you do much touch-typing...

I have had zero display issues using a 24" NEC2490WUXi2 connected via a DisplayPort to MiniDP adapter plugged into the Thunderbolt port.

IMO the G4 iMac was the most ergonomic-friendly all-in-one computer ever built. With the advent of the flat-panel iMac it's been downhill ever since.
Mojo1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 07:49 AM   #13
utekineir
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinm0 View Post
However, I do a lot of Handbrake encoding and find it extremely noisy when the fans kick up.
Place it safely in a stable location on its side with the power supply at the top.

Remove the bottom cover and run a handbrake encode.

See if you like the difference in noise enough to adapt your setup to that 24/7, even a filter could be rigged up to add.

That plate on the bottom is a huge air flow restriction, pretty much only has a slit for air to go through.
utekineir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 09:05 AM   #14
Fishrrman
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
"From a fringe product, almost an orphan in the line-up, the Mini has become mainstream, and of interest to existing Mac users."

My "main Mac" for almost 9 years was a 2004 PowerMac g4/MDD tower. A sturdy piece of equipment that kept going and going and going. The only reason I replaced it with this 2012 Mini i7 2.6 was the OS and software could no longer be updated and kept "current enough" (even though it still ran).

No regrets.
More importantly, NO NOISE. They didn't call those g4's "wind tunnels" without good reason.

The Mini _is_ becoming "mainstream". I believe there are even a few former Mac Pro users who have switched over and found the Mini to be surprisingly good.

I think there remains among _some_ Mac users a certain level of snobbery towards the Mini. A few days' back, I replied to a posting from someone in the iMac forum -- he was on his third or fourth 2012 iMac 27", was dissatisfied with the display quality, and was moaning because he was going to have to return the screen again. When I suggested he simply ditch the iMac and get a Mini instead, the reply was that the Mini "was not as good a computer as the iMac" (to that effect). Guess he'll just have to keep buying new iMacs and then send them back for exchanges!
Fishrrman is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 10:29 AM   #15
Mike in Kansas
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Metro Kansas City
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishrrman View Post

The Mini _is_ becoming "mainstream". I believe there are even a few former Mac Pro users who have switched over and found the Mini to be surprisingly good.
Fully agree. What was once a low-cost bare bones entry model to get switchers to come into the fold is now the sleeper that can keep up with Mac Pros from just a few years ago. It's the '65 Chevelle with stock wheels and paint sporting a 388 cubic inch LS Corvette engine inside. As on-board graphics have continued to improve, the Mini can now perform just as well in situations where you needed discrete graphics just a few years ago. The HD4000 in my 2012 MBA outperforms the ATI2600 in my 2008 iMac; the experience with the Mini would be even better. When my iMac finally gives up the ghost, there is no question what it will be replaced with. I figure that if I'm not held back in the graphics department now, I surely won't be regardless of what the Mini ships with next year.
__________________
13" 2012 MBA/i7/8GB/256GB
24" 2008 iMac/2.8GHz/6GB/240GB SSD & 2TB FW800 HDD "Fused"
2GB TC; ATV 3; 32GB iPad 4; iPhone 5
Left Nikon for Fuji X-E1, Fujinon 18-55mm OIS, 55-200mm OIS, 27mm f/2.8
Mike in Kansas is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 11:10 AM   #16
Mojo1
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Kansas View Post
The HD4000 in my 2012 MBA outperforms the ATI2600 in my 2008 iMac; the experience with the Mini would be even better.
Why would GPU performance be better running a Mac Mini with the same Intel HD4000 graphics card?
Mojo1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 11:29 AM   #17
7thson
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Six Rivers, CA
One more person switching to a mini from an '06 iMac. While I love the form of the all in one, my experience has been it's an expensive trade off. The display started going bad shortly after the warrantee expired and finally got so bad I had to hook up another monitor to use it. I'm looking forward to getting that fugly mess off my desk.
7thson is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 11:40 AM   #18
utekineir
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Kansas View Post
now the sleeper that can keep up with Mac Pros from just a few years ago.
I'm still not sure wether to be impressed that the i7 mini basically matches the encode times and geek bench of the 08 octo mp i had, or impressed that a 5 year old computer was competitive with a pretty decent modern cpu.
utekineir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 12:30 PM   #19
jchase2057
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Detroit
Quote:
Originally Posted by utekineir View Post
I'm still not sure wether to be impressed that the i7 mini basically matches the encode times and geek bench of the 08 octo mp i had, or impressed that a 5 year old computer was competitive with a pretty decent modern cpu.
I would say the latter is more impressive.
__________________
MacBook 1.83 Core Duo
1GB RAM
180GB Intel 530 Series SSD
OS X 10.6.8
jchase2057 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 01:25 PM   #20
Mike in Kansas
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Metro Kansas City
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo1 View Post
Why would GPU performance be better running a Mac Mini with the same Intel HD4000 graphics card?
The MBA is limited to 8GB of RAM, meaning the HD4000 is allocated 512MB of "VRAM". The Mini can be upgraded to 16GB, which bumps "VRAM" up to 768MB, which should improve graphics somewhat. I should have said that GPU performance "could be even better", assuming you had the 16GB of RAM. Similarly, it's been mentioned on various benchmark sites that the HD4000 on a quad core processor with 6GB of L3 cache (available in the Mini) will outperform an HD4000 on a dual core processor with 3GB or 4GB of L3 cache (found in the MBA).

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchase2057 View Post
I would say the latter is more impressive.
Except that the MP probably cost 4X 5 years ago of what the Mini is going for today...
__________________
13" 2012 MBA/i7/8GB/256GB
24" 2008 iMac/2.8GHz/6GB/240GB SSD & 2TB FW800 HDD "Fused"
2GB TC; ATV 3; 32GB iPad 4; iPhone 5
Left Nikon for Fuji X-E1, Fujinon 18-55mm OIS, 55-200mm OIS, 27mm f/2.8
Mike in Kansas is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 01:35 PM   #21
Mike Valmike
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chandler, Arizona
I await more ready availability of the new iMac, but the only thing that is keeping me interested in that over the Mini right now is usage robustness, and I'm dubious as to how much of an issue that is. I use a 2012 Mini at my business and it's great, it is my Light Speed Retail server and my personal workstation. Max stats including aftermarket RAM and SSD and it flies. However, I EXPECT to beat it up and replace it in a couple years at work. For my home unit, I want something that I can leave on as a media server (already have the TB drive array) and have it be 24/7 household computing base for the next 4-5 years at least. With desktop components, not mobile ones, the iMac seems better suited for this use. Also I would need to buy an ATD for the display I want, so there isn't quite parity there either. The Mac Pro would be better still but I am thinking overkill given the likely price tag. Once I have a clearer idea of the new Mac Pro (or its replacement) in terms of cost and components, I can line it up and make an informed decision.
Mike Valmike is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 01:40 PM   #22
utekineir
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Kansas View Post
Except that the MP probably cost 4X 5 years ago of what the Mini is going for today...
$2800, plus ram and some hard drives,

at the time the 3.1 mp was new it was a spectacular value, couldn't even build a comparable windows box for the price, the later mp versions had nowhere near the same bang for the buck.

after factoring in depreciation against taxes and the resale price it averaged to less than $20 a month.

worth every cent.
utekineir is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 01:49 PM   #23
SnowLeopard2008
macrumors 603
 
SnowLeopard2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Silicon Valley
Send a message via AIM to SnowLeopard2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Kansas View Post
The MBA is limited to 8GB of RAM, meaning the HD4000 is allocated 512MB of "VRAM". The Mini can be upgraded to 16GB, which bumps "VRAM" up to 768MB, which should improve graphics somewhat. I should have said that GPU performance "could be even better", assuming you had the 16GB of RAM. Similarly, it's been mentioned on various benchmark sites that the HD4000 on a quad core processor with 6GB of L3 cache (available in the Mini) will outperform an HD4000 on a dual core processor with 3GB or 4GB of L3 cache (found in the MBA).

----------



Except that the MP probably cost 4X 5 years ago of what the Mini is going for today...
Think you mean MB not GB. L3 cache is not that big.
__________________
YouTube | @beautifulcode
Mac Pro | Thunderbolt Display | iPhone 5 | iPad mini | Apple TV | AirPort Extreme | iPad signed by Steve Wozniak
SnowLeopard2008 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 02:08 PM   #24
jchase2057
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Detroit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Kansas View Post
Except that the MP probably cost 4X 5 years ago of what the Mini is going for today...
2500 dollar machine being equal to an 800 dollar machine 5 years later is impressive. Factor in the expandability and its still a no brainer that the pro was and is a great value. I would take a 2008 mac pro over a new quad mini any day.
__________________
MacBook 1.83 Core Duo
1GB RAM
180GB Intel 530 Series SSD
OS X 10.6.8
jchase2057 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2013, 04:18 PM   #25
pine88
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I switched primarily because I wanted a basic internet box that could connect to my 24" Ultrasharp. I also didn't want, say, a laptop connected to a monitor for ultra portability or a tablet but an actual PC that had some upgradeability. So the mini was it. I don't think I'd ever bother with an iMac. The mini is more than sufficient, as someone already pointed out, for most standard tasks. Its also dead silent unless really pushed, sips power and can be transported easily. The only annoying thing is the lack of front panel USB ports. 4 in the back is great, but how about an additional 2 on the front?
pine88 is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help me chose US carrier yly3 iPhone 17 Feb 8, 2013 02:56 AM
Why you chose the iPhone over the competition? AppleFan91 iPhone 36 Oct 8, 2012 01:23 AM
I chose MBA over rMBP christophermdia MacBook Pro 26 Jun 28, 2012 07:36 PM
Are you Happy With The Model You Chose? MikeM87 iPad 39 Jun 25, 2012 10:00 PM
Why I chose th 13 over 15. dHk MacBook Pro 15 Jun 21, 2012 01:08 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC