Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iZach said:
When I first saw the title of this post, I thought you meant that you're parents needed help in the sense that you were mad since they would not buy u a mac. :D lol

-Zach

Really, my parents won't buy me a mac. :( My G3 here is literally falling to pieces, and they're making me suffer by telling me that I will be able to get money in the summer, but the fact is there won't be any jobs for me to do. It's torture. :(
 
Snowy28 said:
The iMac is futureproofed, it WILL last longer than a mini.


I disagree. Think of it this way:

My girlfriend's parents buy only combo VCR + DVD player units for their house, isntead of a seperate DVD and VCR. Over the past 3 years or so, they've had 3 of these units go out on them. What happens is that, for example, the DVD player will go out while the VCR remains fine. However, instead of just buying a replacement DVD player, they are really attached to the idea of an "all-in-one", so they continue to buy a VCR+DVD player combo setup. Every time the DVD player portion of the unit dies, they end up throwing the whole thing, perfectly-fine VCR included, and replace it with another combo unit. Perhaps the combo unit is cheaper or more convinent in the short-run, but in the long run, it's wasteful.

I prefer to look at computers the same way. What if you buy an iMac now, and 5 years later you're looking to buy another computer because the iMac is too slow. Well, if you are going to get rid of the iMac because it is too slow, you're also going to be replacing an otherwise perfectly good monitor, whereas if you just invest in an external screen to start with, you can continue to use that monitor as you replace the computers.

That's what I see happening here. iMaczealot's folks are replacing their old computer, fine. But in the process they are also going to be throwing out a perfectly good monitor because it is attached to the aging computer.

My advice remains to get a mac mini. Snowy28 claims that the iMac will last long, which strictly speaking may be true. However I believe that by investing in a sturdy external screen, which you can continue to use computer after computer makes my idea more "futureproof" in the long run.

Both the iMac and mac mini have what I consider to be equally limited expandibility options. If "futureproofing" is what you ultimately desire, a single processor Powermac G5 will give you the expandability options you need to keep a computer going for 5+ years.
 
iMacZealot said:
Can "17-inch flat panel" and "$250" even be in the same sentence? You show me a $250 17" flat panel and that will be the day. Also, that saves you $50, plus you'll have a bunch of wires going around. Personally, I prefer all-in-one designs. Furthermore, in my opinion, the Mac Mini will become out of date when it comes to it's hardware. This computer will be worked to the bone (figuratively speaking) for 5-6 years. Plus, isn't there something about the Mini's graphics card not supported by Tiger?

A Mini looks good now, but will it in 6 years?

Wow, you really need to get out more. www.dell.com www.newegg.com www.tigerdirect.com Go to those web sites and you'll see hundreds of 17-inch flat panels under $250, many under $200 even.

Please read my previous post regarding all-in-one designs, and the lifespan of the Mac mini vs. the iMac.

Also, do you HONESTLY believe that the mac mini, a current production computer for Apple, would not support Apple's current production operating system? You have much less faith in Apple than you should.
 
iMacZealot said:
. Furthermore, in my opinion, the Mac Mini will become out of date when it comes to it's hardware. This computer will be worked to the bone (figuratively speaking) for 5-6 years. Plus, isn't there something about the Mini's graphics card not supported by Tiger?

A Mini looks good now, but will it in 6 years?

6 years is a really long time to have a computer. In 1999, Apple announced a 450 MHz Power Mac G3, and that was a top of the line computer. That was 2 processors ago. Show me any computer that will look good in 6 years. A lot can over 6 years in the technology world.

There's no way that Apple would be selling a product that isn't supported by Tiger. So people would just buy it, and then when they asked about Tiger, the Apple employee would just say, "O that sucks". I don't think so. The graphics card isn't great, which is probably what you were thinking/read.
 
Monitors
Okay. You're right. I always thought of LCDs as being more expensive.

Graphics Cards supported by Tiger
I didn't quite think about this so much. I think the deal is that the Mac Mini's graphics card doesn't support Core Image. I think. I checked the system requirements for Tiger a minute ago and it can run Tiger, just not Core Image.

The Processors
Yes, I know 6 years is a long time to hold onto a computer, but we don't always have the money to update all of our computers. Anyways, just think about this. Mac Mini: 1.25 GHz G4 Processor. iMac: 1.8 GHz G5 processor. Which will be in better shape in six years??? Now, in my previous posts, I did exagerate a little bit about how the G5 will look absolutely good in six years. What I meant was that a G5 will perform better than a G4. The G5 won't be top-of-the-line in six years, but it will be closer than the Mini's G4, let alone my iMac G3.

Throwing out "good" parts
Yeah, right. Nothing is good about that Gateway. The fan is as loud as can be, has a hard drive the size of a pimple, and the monitor can't even show a screen saver right. It's a Pentium III machine, so we aren't throwing out good parts. Perhaps, once we decide to pitch it, we could give it to a tech store that cuts them up for parts. That's what we did with my sister's ancient G3 iMac.
 
iMacZealot said:
Monitors
Graphics Cards supported by Tiger
I didn't quite think about this so much. I think the deal is that the Mac Mini's graphics card doesn't support Core Image. I think. I checked the system requirements for Tiger a minute ago and it can run Tiger, just not Core Image.

The Processors
Yes, I know 6 years is a long time to hold onto a computer, but we don't always have the money to update all of our computers. Anyways, just think about this. Mac Mini: 1.25 GHz G4 Processor. iMac: 1.8 GHz G5 processor. Which will be in better shape in six years??? Now, in my previous posts, I did exagerate a little bit about how the G5 will look absolutely good in six years. What I meant was that a G5 will perform better than a G4. The G5 won't be top-of-the-line in six years, but it will be closer than the Mini's G4, let alone my iMac G3.

Throwing out "good" parts
Yeah, right. Nothing is good about that Gateway. The fan is as loud as can be, has a hard drive the size of a pimple, and the monitor can't even show a screen saver right. It's a Pentium III machine, so we aren't throwing out good parts. Perhaps, once we decide to pitch it, we could give it to a tech store that cuts them up for parts. That's what we did with my sister's ancient G3 iMac.

I agree with you about the G5 processor being a lot better in the long run.

After reading my post I realize I was pretty harsh towards you. Sorry about that. I know your just trying to help this kid's parents out. My bad.
 
macbaseball said:
I agree with you about the G5 processor being a lot better in the long run.

After reading my post I realize I was pretty harsh towards you. Sorry about that. I know your just trying to help this kid's parents out. My bad.

First, they're my parents.

Second, You are forgiven. I've seen harsher replies.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.