Did I make the right choice with 2.8 iMac?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by mwi555, Jan 13, 2008.

  1. mwi555 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #1
    I have read these forum's for months, but today I am posting for the first time. I guess I just want some confirmation I made the right choice. Yesterday I purchased a refurbished iMac 2.8 ghz machine from Apple. If they update on Tuesday, I will just refuse shipment or return unopened. If they don't I've got a great machine, here is where I am torn though. I also debated getting a single core MacPro.

    I mainly use normal things like iTunes, Pages, Word, etc. However I do have Aperture and believe it or not Final Cut Studio (picked up a not for resale from a conference for tv folks, someone I know didn't have a mac and didn't have a need for it). I don't use Aperture but maybe an hour or so a week, Final Cut Studio is just to play with, not making a living with it by any means. I do edit HDV, but again just of my family videos and stuff.

    My thinking was I could get a nice(I hope) 24 inch monitor and fast computer, and considerably cheaper than a MacPro after adding monitors, ram etc,. The extra money can fund my next purchase or who knows, maybe help with a MacBook or this new ultra portable that may be coming Tuesday.

    For what I'm doing will this suit my needs well? I really doubt I'll be happy with it for more than 2 years, and then I'll be ready for something else anyway. So just want some confirmation from folks I did the right thing. So many times I second guess myself on what technology I really want vs. what I really need.

    Thanks!
     
  2. profit42 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    #2
    I've been using since the launch of Leopard and it's a great machine (well, after you added RAM of course, I added 4GB to be sure, but maybe 2 is enough):

    - It's cheaper than a Mac Pro and performs as good as a Mac Pro in Photoshop (Photoshop can't handle those 8-cores)
    - It works perfectly with Adobe Lightroom (I recommend you to use that instead of Aperture, it's just a better program)
    - It has a great sound output. It's on my Rotel Amp now and I almost can't hear any difference between the iMac (playing lossless, uncompressed music) and my CD-player (playing a cd)!
    - It doesn't make any noise, the Mac Pro sounds like an airplane taking off...

    etc. It's a great choice!
     
  3. ImperialX macrumors 65816

    ImperialX

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    #3
    If you are willing to up the RAM to 4GB, I think this machine is more than enough to satisfy you for more than 2 years, even with Final Cut. I can run Final Cut on my 2GB 2.4Ghz machine without a hitch, just lags when too many files are involved, and the slower render. 2.8Ghz with 4GB should be more than adequate.

    Very unlikely are the chances the iMacs will be updated tomorrow.
     
  4. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #4
    I use a 20" 2.4GHz iMac for work with Final Cut Studio and it's amazing. If you can afford a Mac Pro with a monitor, then I'd go for that (The base Mac Pro downgraded to 2.8GHz is actually slightly cheaper than the 24" 2.8GHz iMac).

    If you can't afford the Mac Pro, the iMac is an amazing machine and looks stunning too :)
     
  5. timestamp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #5
    It is cheaper than a Mac Pro, and while Photoshop can't utilize 8-cores it still hits as high as 4. The big bonus here is multitasking, I am never only running Photoshop and that is where my Mac Pro pulls away from the iMac. The RAM expandibilty is also a bonus for the Mac Pro.

    And, the Mac Pro is absolutely completely silent. Even quieter than any iMac I have ever used, including the new ones. Let's not make stuff up.

    For your tasks, as they don't side very serious, the iMac was a good choice. Now if you are looking to keep it for a long time and can afford a Mac Pro, I would say go that route. The Mac Pro will last you a very very long time.
     
  6. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #6
    Are you saying that the iMac isn't suitable for multi tasking with Photoshop and other applications?

    Thanks
     
  7. Dimwhit macrumors 68000

    Dimwhit

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    #7
    Out of curiosity, what did you pay for the refurb?

    You made a good choice.
     
  8. mwi555 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    #8
    I want to thank everyone for some great post. I actually got the refurb from Apple for $1949, plus a 100 bucks off a printer too. I am going to sell my MacBook Pro Core Duo to help fund the deal. I agree a MacPro would be better. But unfortunately I'm such a fanboy I would have to buy an Apple monitor and before you know it I got 3 grand tied up in the thing. This way I have extra money and someday that can be reapplied to a new machine or a notebook/ultra portable, whatever it is.
     
  9. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #9
    You made the right choice. iMac isnt getting upgraded and a refurb is a terrific way of saving big bucks on a terrific Machine. I bought a refurb iMac 2.4 and its awesome. iMacs rule.:apple:
     
  10. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #10
    Still hoping for a speed bump in the iMac before I buy :)
     
  11. je1ani macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    #11
    They're $1949.99 + tax :D not a bad deal
     
  12. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #12
    There won't be a speed bump higher than 2.8 if that happens.
     
  13. gazfocus macrumors 68000

    gazfocus

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #13
    That's true but they might make the higher speed ones cheaper
     

Share This Page