So here’s a crazy idea: Buying 2 Mac Minis

[Bearygoodfries1]

Hi everyone,

A crazy idea I thought of while deciding what Mini to get…

Getting 2 Mac Minis: one 16GB RAM / 512 SSD) and one 8GB RAM / 256 SSD.

I was debating on getting a Mac Mini Pro (32 GB RAM / 512 SSD), but even with an education discount, after taxes it’s about 1700 USD.

Two Mac Minis with the above configurations come to about 1500 USD. Heck, I could even splurge for 24 GB of RAM and it would be about the same as a Mac Mini Pro with the above configurations.

I have the monitors for two set-ups. I can use the more powerful Mini for video editing, app design, and graphic design work WHILE I work on the other Mini for less intense purposes, like the office suite and some web browsing at the same time.

Theoretically, I can copy and paste easily between systems, so I can work with both of them at the same time.

I don‘t know, I’m just having a hard time deciding what to get, but it’s a fun idea I think LOL.

 

[Orizence]

I think a normal 24/512 would be the better compromise, you can always add another monitor with an adapter. Unless youre ALWAYS rendering maybe, but from the sounds of it the regular M1 can handle quite a bit all at the same time.

 

[now i see it]

Depending on what you’re doing, having access to more slower computers is WAY more productive than having one fast one.
Years ago I worked for a professional photographer who had a computer office populated with 6 Macs. I ended up using 5 of them simultaneously. Every day. Each one was doing a specific task in batches.

The job took me 6 months. If I only had one computer — I never would have finished.

 

[NeonNights]

That is definitely thinking outside the box.

Hmm, intriguing...two base machines for less than the cost of the topline model. People recognize the M2 Pro Mini can cost 2-3x the base machine but it never dawned on me to actually consider literally getting multiple base machines instead.

I can easily transition between laptop, tablet, and phone but I initially feel it to be redundant to have two desktop Minis. It wouldn't be hard to get a KVM switch and hook both Minis to it, but it's still a foreign idea to me. The irony is I already have a KVM set up to alternate between my Windows box and M1 Mini...yet I find it odd to ping-pong between two Minis.

Since I already have a base M1 Mini, an M1 MBA with 16GB, and a Windows PC, I'd rather have a beefy M2 Pro or Mac Studio with 32GB RAM to handle jobs that are too demanding for the lesser-spec machines. Nonetheless, an interesting thought exercise, OP.

 

[sam_dean]

Go get em tiger!

 

[teohyc]

Maybe I missing something.

How's that more productive compared to connecting two monitors to a single Mac Mini?

 

[Bearygoodfries1]

Maybe I missing something.

How's that more productive compared to connecting two monitors to a single Mac Mini?

Three monitors (2 for the 16GB one, 1 for the 8 GB one).

 

[retta283]

I've done this before, in the days before iCloud. I relied on NAS storage and apps to sync on their own, the few that did at the time. It does work, and it is a good way to get extra monitors but there are caveats. It does depend on how reliant you are on external storage and the like, because rooting around behind two machines and getting things where you want them is tedious if you ever attempt to use both machines for the same job. I myself leave the startup empty, so I am reliant on this.

Likewise having two sets of keyboard/mouse are a pain if you're using Apple ones. With a KVM you can use one wired set but it will take a while to remember to switch over. As others have said, sometimes having two machines is more efficient than one because you can leave one tied up and begin a new job. I relied heavily on this in the Windows NT years when I was driving monitors off onboard 1-port graphics systems, had 3 machines all in different tasks as a battle station type thing.

It's definitely an idea, and it does have its ups and downs. You can always replace the 8GB one down the road and keep the 16GB as the second machine and seesaw the upgrades. If you're willing to try and have it not work out, I say go for it.

 

[Bearygoodfries1]

So… I ended up getting the base Mac Mini Pro 👀

I like the idea of more GPU and CPU, and the extra ports.

I’ll test things out, but I feel I need a bit more extra power while multitasking, I will get the Mac Mini (especially since I’m marinating the idea of setting up a second Mac workstation anyway), which would be a bit more than a 32GB Pro, but not by much).

Whatever the case, if I’m not happy with it, or I think its overkill, I’ll return it and get a base Mac Mini AND 16GB Mac Mini.

 

[meson]

I've worked for much of the last 5 years with 2 Macs on my desk at work, my work issue laptop and a 2013 21" iMac. When I was finally able to install Monterey with Universal Control on my work machine, I installed OCLP and Monterey on the iMac, in the process ditching the external display I was using with my laptop.

Universal Control makes working with two Macs simultaneously very doable. For the most part things worked well. The only copy/paste type bug I had was that using copy and paste to pull an image out of a PowerPoint presentation on one machine and dropping it into a Keynote presentation on the other would result in an image with reduced resolution. I’m inclined to think that was more related to the patches in OCLP than UC itself. Ventura bunked up AirPlay support for using the iMac as an extended desktop however (not sure if that has been fixed yet).

The thing you have to keep in mind is that the machines are separate entities. With UC, you do not get extended desktop-like behavior, so you can’t drag windows back and forth, although you can use handoff if the app supports it. You can get extended desktop behavior over AirPlay but the resolution is limited to 1080p and you will see compression artifacts.

It is nice being able to seamlessly navigate two Macs with only one keyboard and mouse. This part of Universal Control works quite well.

For me, using two machines was more about having extra screen real estate and being able to silo parts of my work. Although in my use, it's always been one desktop machine and one portable machine. If your media work bogs down the machine for significant periods of time, and you can use the other machine to still remain productive, it will easily pay off in the long run.

I've since moved on to a from the iMac to a Mac Mini with a screen large enough to not need an additional display, so I use Universal Control much less now.

 

[MBAir2010]

I needed 3 MacBooks yesterday to:
configure and launch 32bit router software (MBA2010-El Captain)
Upgrade that router (MBP2012-Mojave)
sign up with a fake email address (MBA2020M1-Ventura)

this was all for naught because the cable modem brand (sharksurf...surf'rsuck...suffersurf) totally sucked!

if I only had 2 Mac minis......

 

[apostolosdt]

I have a base 2014 Mini and a base M1 Mini and I had this crazy idea of somehow connecting them as a sort of “distributed system” and install Parallels on M1 and the VM on the other. I wonder if it’s technically feasible.

 

[tacman7]

I have a plain jane M2 that's been working fine without problems but I was thinking of getting another.

Somethings can be distributed, like if I load virtual instruments on one machine and trigger them via midi on the other machine, to offload all that processing.

Nice if I could do something with security camera's

The other thing I do is luminar neo which runs fine on one machine.

interesting, still trying to sell myself on the idea...

What else could you do with 2?

Thanks