New iMac or mini

[JBazz]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

Reselling a mini is difficult in comparison to an iMac, so if you are disappointed you need to return within your refundable window.

 

[mdgm]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

Reselling a mini is difficult in comparison to an iMac, so if you are disappointed you need to return within your refundable window.

The new iMac needs an external optical drive too now so there's less of a reason to get an iMac rather than a Mini. Also connecting Minis up to TVs is very nice and something I like. I wish Apple but a blu-ray player in the Mini but that's not going to happen.

 

[blanka]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter.

The only difference is a good screen. Yes that adds a cable.
If you want ethernet, you want, the imac has 2 cables
If you want a decent keyboard with numpad, you want, the iMac has 3 cables
If you want a backup drive, you want, the iMac has 4 cables.
If you want an optical drive, you are stupid, you don't want, don't bother
If you want speakers, either way the built in of the Mini is fine (for working background music), actually I'm surprised how good it sounds, but if you want more (then you want more on your iMac), your iMac has 5 cables.

The difference remains 1 display cable. But 5 or 6 is not that much different.

If you buy the right display, you can remove many clutter from your desk with a mini: 1 cable to the screen, the mini somewhere under your table, and 2 cables from the screen to wacom/mouse and keyboard.
You have 2 cables less than on an iMac.

Another pro with the mini: you can use all black cables and you don't get input devices that suck and can be trown in a drawer. With an iMac every thing has stinking white cables (left overs from the old G5 and early Intel mini's). With a Mini you can buy a black keyboard, a 1$ black power cord (replacing it on the iMac looks weird) and very nice black display cables that fit right in without white ugly adapters.

 

[JBazz]

The only difference is a good screen. Yes that adds a cable.
If you want ethernet, you want, the imac has 2 cables
If you want a decent keyboard with numpad, you want, the iMac has 3 cables
If you want a backup drive, you want, the iMac has 4 cables.
If you want an optical drive, you are stupid, you don't want, don't bother
If you want speakers, either way the built in of the Mini is fine (for working background music), actually I'm surprised how good it sounds, but if you want more (then you want more on your iMac), your iMac has 5 cables.

The difference remains 1 display cable. But 5 or 6 is not that much different.

If you buy the right display, you can remove many clutter from your desk with a mini: 1 cable to the screen, the mini somewhere under your table, and 2 cables from the screen to wacom/mouse and keyboard.
You have 2 cables less than on an iMac.

Another pro with the mini: you can use all black cables and you don't get input devices that suck and can be trown in a drawer. With an iMac every thing has stinking white cables (left overs from the old G5 and early Intel mini's). With a Mini you can buy a black keyboard, a 1$ black power cord (replacing it on the iMac looks weird) and very nice black display cables that fit right in without white ugly adapters.

It is more than one screen, you need speakers also.

----------

The new iMac needs an external optical drive too now so there's less of a reason to get an iMac rather than a Mini. Also connecting Minis up to TVs is very nice and something I like. I wish Apple but a blu-ray player in the Mini but that's not going to happen.

I am glad you like the mini on your TV, but for me it is a terrible choice. I have no seating as close to my TV as I would a desk. This causes issues with being able to read. Adjusting resolutions, etc. just never made it anything but mildly acceptable.

Like I said, glad to hear others like it but the OP asked opinions of people who went from an iMac to a mini. I gave mine, it's just not good enough for me to ever buy another mini. What I have is an expensive iTunes manager.

 

[mdgm]

I am glad you like the mini on your TV, but for me it is a terrible choice. I have no seating as close to my TV as I would a desk. This causes issues with being able to read. Adjusting resolutions, etc. just never made it anything but mildly acceptable.

As I use my 3 minis as a HTPCs not as my main machine they're fine for me.

Like I said, glad to hear others like it but the OP asked opinions of people who went from an iMac to a mini. I gave mine, it's just not good enough for me to ever buy another mini. What I have is an expensive iTunes manager.

That's a fair opinion.

I wouldn't recommend a mini connected to a TV for a main machine but for a HTPC it's great. You can hook up a mini to peripherals like an LCD display on a desk and use it as a main PC.

 

[EDarkness]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

Reselling a mini is difficult in comparison to an iMac, so if you are disappointed you need to return within your refundable window.

No offense or anything, but you should have known you were going to have to get external peripherals before you even purchased a Mini. If you didn't like the "clutter" a "regular" desktop brings, then a Mac Mini wasn't for you.

 

[Poki]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

Reselling a mini is difficult in comparison to an iMac, so if you are disappointed you need to return within your refundable window.

Buy a Thunderbolt Display, a Apple wireless mouse and keyboard and you're almost as clutter free as with an iMac. If you want actually good speakers and a more ergonomic mouse, you have to buy more stuff and clutter anyways.

Reselling a Mini isn't that difficult at all, as it loses less value compared to an iMac.

 

[fig]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

It sounds like your issue is more cable organization than anything else.

 

[kdoug]

I have been holding out for a new iMac for about 1 year, but now i can't decide on what to get.

Currently I have a 24" 2008 iMac with 4GB RAM, 3.06Ghz C2D, Nvidia 8800 GS 512MB and 1TB Hard Disk. I originally purchased this because I wanted to play games via Windows on bootcamp, as well as use OSX for day to day tasks Now my windows partition is long gone, and most of my gaming is done on my iPad

My iMac is now getting a little slow and i am thinking of passing it down to my kids

The new computer i purchase will be used for the following:

Web Browsing
Plex Media Server, inc transcoding to IOS clients
Email
iPhoto etc

My question is: Do i really need a new 27" iMac? Would a middle range mac mini i7, fusion drive and with a nice monitor do the same job for a lot less?

I was holding out for the iMac also until I found out that the memory was not user upgradeable and you'd have to spend at least $1600 to get the i7. If you're into replacing your HD down the road, the MacMini is a no brainer.

 

[JBazz]

No offense or anything, but you should have known you were going to have to get external peripherals before you even purchased a Mini. If you didn't like the "clutter" a "regular" desktop brings, then a Mac Mini wasn't for you.

The OP asked for personal experiences, I gave mine. Hate it. Will never buy another mini.

----------

Buy a Thunderbolt Display, a Apple wireless mouse and keyboard and you're almost as clutter free as with an iMac. If you want actually good speakers and a more ergonomic mouse, you have to buy more stuff and clutter anyways.

Reselling a Mini isn't that difficult at all, as it loses less value compared to an iMac.

Totally not interested in a TB display. iMac is cheaper than a mini plus TB display.

Reselling my mini was difficult. I couldn't resell it even when it was only 3 months old. It is the only Apple device that I could not resell. Which is why it sits attached to my bedroom TV, used very little.

 

[iamthedudeman]

I went from an iMac to a Mini and am very disappointed. The mini needs everything. Speakers, display, optical drive, etc. it really is a step back with all the clutter. I gave up and put mine on my TV and use it for almost nothing. Pretty much just managing my iTunes and iPods.

Reselling a mini is difficult in comparison to an iMac, so if you are disappointed you need to return within your refundable window.

Huh?

You know you can put the mini just about anywhere you want? I put mine behind my Thunderbolt display. As clean looking as a imac.

The Mini is easier to sell. How is it easier to sell a monitor with a computer attached? Shipping is alot more and shipping is a hassle selling a imac. The mini is in a neat little box. Can be put in it's original plastic wrap, if you are care full you can remove the mini without messing up the plastic wrap that surrounds it.

The display on the imac is great, but expect some more yellowing than a monitor without a computer attached. The heat from the computer causes the yellowing. If you hook it to a external display you don't have that problem. My thunderbolt display looks better than any of my 27 imacs. Cooler colors no yellowing at all.

The Mini actually holds it's value more than the imac, actually much more. I don't why you had so much problem selling yours. I sold mine last year for more than what I paid for it after adding a SSD and Ram. Something that is actually difficult on a imac. I actually made a profit selling it. I was not even looking to do so.

With the mini, you can practically change the computer every year or two and hardly lose nothing or gain a slight profit. You can keep your monitor for a longer time period making upgrading more often cheaper than a imac would be.

Seeing that the new mini's have more horsepower under the hood than the stock macs and the top mini can match the top imac. Other than the GPU the mini's wins in my book, hands down. That is just my opinion, your mileage will vary.

 

[JBazz]

Huh?

You know you can put the mini just about anywhere you want? I put mine behind my Thunderbolt display. As clean looking as a imac.

The Mini is easier to sell. How is it easier to sell a monitor with a computer attached? Shipping is alot more and shipping is a hassle selling a imac. The mini is in a neat little box. Can be put in it's original plastic wrap, if you are care full you can remove the mini without messing up the plastic wrap that surrounds it.

The display on the imac is great, but expect some more yellowing than a monitor without a computer attached. The heat from the computer causes the yellowing. If you hook it to a external display you don't have that problem. My thunderbolt display looks better than any of my 27 imacs. Cooler colors no yellowing at all.

The Mini actually holds it's value more than the imac, actually much more. I don't why you had so much problem selling yours. I sold mine last year for more than what I paid for it after adding a SSD and Ram. Something that is actually difficult on a imac. I actually made a profit selling it. I was not even looking to do so.

With the mini, you can practically change the computer every year or two and hardly lose nothing or gain a slight profit. You can keep your monitor for a longer time period making upgrading more often cheaper than a imac would be.

Seeing that the new mini's have more horsepower under the hood than the stock macs and the top mini can match the top imac. Other than the GPU the mini's wins in my book, hands down. That is just my opinion, your mileage will vary.

My EXPERIENCE selling my used macs is different. The mini never sold. Never had a problem selling an iMac or Mac laptop.

 

[MrXiro]

I have been holding out for a new iMac for about 1 year, but now i can't decide on what to get.

Currently I have a 24" 2008 iMac with 4GB RAM, 3.06Ghz C2D, Nvidia 8800 GS 512MB and 1TB Hard Disk. I originally purchased this because I wanted to play games via Windows on bootcamp, as well as use OSX for day to day tasks Now my windows partition is long gone, and most of my gaming is done on my iPad

My iMac is now getting a little slow and i am thinking of passing it down to my kids

The new computer i purchase will be used for the following:

Web Browsing
Plex Media Server, inc transcoding to IOS clients
Email
iPhoto etc

My question is: Do i really need a new 27" iMac? Would a middle range mac mini i7, fusion drive and with a nice monitor do the same job for a lot less?

Mid range Mac Mini has hyper threading... so in theory it's faster than the base 27" iMac.

Also have Firewire if you use FW drives...

 

[Snowcake]

Mid range Mac Mini has hyper threading... so in theory it's faster than the base 27" iMac.

Also have Firewire if you use FW drives...

What a ********.

The iMac has also hyperthreading. Even if the iMac has no hyperthreading it would be faster than the Mac Mini.

2.7 Ivy quadcore for the Imac vs 2.3 Ivy quadcore Mac Mini Mid.

 

[strongs]

Same boat as you I've been waiting for the new iMacs for ages but within the past month I have been thinking about getting a Mac Mini infact I was ready to go out and get one last weekend but then I started reading about the black screen issues that they are having over HDMI

 

[cyclotron451]

I think Mini+ is the new iMac

I gave up waiting for the vaporware 'Late 2012 iMac' that is not to be, becoming instead the 'very very late 2012 iMac' or as some people call it the 'early 2013 iMac' I simply decided - after about 2 months discussions on MR - to sidegrade my home 2008 2.4GHz C2D iMac to the new mini+

I bought the basic dual i5 Mac mini + Dell U2412M + tiny Dell AX150 soundbar and will upgrade it soon + samsung 830 SSD + bigger hdd + 16GB ram, + later the Sonic Impact 2 digital amplifier for some monitor speakers. (the iMac has for years had the similar "Class-T" amplifier inside giving decent audio, my mini+ will have a better system!)

Using a miniDisplayPort to DisplayPort $6 cable should avoid the current HDMI woes. Pondering HDMI, (the whole philosophy of which is to stuff digitally rights managed encrypted digital signals through a wire, with crypto handshakes to stop the user from getting near the clear signals) it might be that the mini - or any HDCP computer - is just re-establishing the session crypto? I'm sure that I've seen Chinese $10 "HDMI Amplifiers" that split HDMI (split = accidentally strip all crypto DRM!) to allow convenient desktop video editing. I wonder if a non-DMCA non-true-handshaking non-HDMI/HDCP compliant cable would be the best way to avoid the HDMI blackouts. This 'blackouts story' could well be a Digital Rights Management fiasco?

if the 24" Dell stops working in 2 years (as I expect based on my previous Dells) then I'll simply move up to bigger & better NEC monitors. For the mini+ display I did try to stay Apple, I'm using the 27" Apple Cinema Display on my work MacPro, but when I tried to add an ACD to my telephone order for the Mac mini - the Apple Store was unable to find a 27"ACD anywhere in their sales catalogue!!! talk about time for a TB and ACD refresh (USB3 hub & TB and/or DisplayPort functional throughput) presumably the ACD/TB refresh is on hold whilst they're made thinner & welded in even more extravagant a new way, using lasers and sharks.

New iMac or mini = another vote for mini

 

[David085]

Get the iMac 2012 the Mac mini is the low end system you don't want that it isn't powerful enough for most of the games.

 

[nnynas]

Personally I would save the $$$ and go with the base model mini, unless you've some tasks that really need to have power.

 

[MrXiro]

What a ********.

The iMac has also hyperthreading. Even if the iMac has no hyperthreading it would be faster than the Mac Mini.

2.7 Ivy quadcore for the Imac vs 2.3 Ivy quadcore Mac Mini Mid.

The base models are all i5 on the iMacs as far as I saw.

4 cores at 2.7Ghz (Turbo Boost 3.6) on the iMac vs 4 + 4 virtual cores at 2.3Ghz (Turbo boost 3.3) on the Mac Mini... unless my math is totally off regarding Hyper Threading the i7 should be faster... but only in theory as I said.

http://ark.intel.com/products/68315 -the i5 in the base 27" iMac. (4 threads)
http://ark.intel.com/products/64899 - the i7 in the Mid Mac Mini. (8 threads)

Hyper-threading works by duplicating certain sections of the processor—those that store the architectural state—but not duplicating the main execution resources. This allows a hyper-threading processor to appear as two "logical" processors to the host operating system, allowing the operating system to schedule two threads or processes simultaneously. When execution resources would not be used by the current task in a processor without hyper-threading, and especially when the processor is stalled, a hyper-threading equipped processor can use those execution resources to execute another scheduled task. (The processor may stall due to a cache miss, branch misprediction, or data dependency.)

This technology is transparent to operating systems and programs. The minimum that is required to take advantage of hyper-threading is symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) support in the operating system, as the logical processors appear as standard separate processors.

So to my understanding the Mac Mini's i7 would be seen as 8-2.3Ghz processors, while the iMac would have 4-2.7Ghz processors.

Am I off on this?

I'm only a part time geek, the rest of the time I watch prowrestling so I can dumb myself down.

 

[Snowcake]

The base models are all i5 on the iMacs as far as I saw.

4 cores at 2.7Ghz (Turbo Boost 3.6) on the iMac vs 4 + 4 virtual cores at 2.3Ghz (Turbo boost 3.3) on the Mac Mini... unless my math is totally off regarding Hyper Threading the i7 should be faster... but only in theory as I said.

http://ark.intel.com/products/68315 -the i5 in the base 27" iMac. (4 threads)
http://ark.intel.com/products/64899 - the i7 in the Mid Mac Mini. (8 threads)



So to my understanding the Mac Mini's i7 would be seen as 8-2.3Ghz processors, while the iMac would have 4-2.7Ghz processors.

Am I off on this?

I'm only a part time geek, the rest of the time I watch prowrestling so I can dumb myself down.

Aha you're right! But as far is i know Hyper-Threading performance depends on what for aplications you use. Sometimes it can have a negative inpact on performance! But that is likely not to happen with desktops.

 

[MrXiro]

Aha you're right! But as far is i know Hyper-Threading performance depends on what for aplications you use. Sometimes it can have a negative inpact on performance! But that is likely not to happen with desktops.

For my main use, video encoding, it takes full advantage of the hyper threading.

 

[Snowcake]

For my main use, video encoding, it takes full advantage of the hyper threading.

Video encoding take advantage of Hyper-Treading. If you do video encoding Hypertreading is good: Up to 23% faster than without hyper threading.
So the 2300mhz with Hyper-Threading equals a 2829mhz quad-core without Hyper-Threading in optimal situations.

 

[Fantola]

Mac Mini

We will not see imacs before 2013, so im going with a mac mini probably. All specced out! How does the intel graphics 400 do it's job? big diffence?

 

[Rhinoevans]

The new iMac needs an external optical drive too now so there's less of a reason to get an iMac rather than a Mini. Also connecting Minis up to TVs is very nice and something I like. I wish Apple but a blu-ray player in the Mini but that's not going to happen.

Blu-ray is already outdated technology. I dumped my player 2 years ago. Digital downloads so much better.

 

[fig]

Blu-ray is already outdated technology. I dumped my player 2 years ago. Digital downloads so much better.

Digital downloads still generally lack special features, commentary, etc., something that's still important to a lot of viewers.