This link does a decent enough job on iMac v. Mac Pro

[snouter]

http://www.marco.org/868606627

Personally, I've long since known about the resale advantage of most Mac products. When you buy a decent MacBook Pro or Mac Pro you do spend more initially, but also get more (especially compared to PC) at resale.

This does not completely nullify the "Apple tax" but it helps.

I would think used Mac Pros are pretty easy to sell and probably get a fairly decent price.

 

[Ravich]

The article makes a few good points, but is extremely lacking when it comes to the actual comparison.


The 2008 iMac and Mac Pro were in completely different leagues. The iMac was still dual core, maxed out at 4GB RAM, and used a 5400RPM HDD.

The October 2009 iMac update brought the processor speed up to par with the low end Mac Pro, and upped the RAM capacity to 16GB, which is the same as the single processor Mac Pros.

More importantly, after simultaneous updates, the high end iMac STILL has just as much to offer in terms of processor speed and RAM capacity as the low end Mac Pro.

Additionally, iMacs can now hold 2 internal drives, one of them being a 256GB SSD.


That article doesnt really adequately address the issue of iMac vs Mac Pro, because it references a time where an iMac couldnt compete with the Mac Pro to begin with.

 

[snouter]

Definitely, this theory would only apply to the i5 or i7 iMacs.

Before that, the iMac was a glorified laptop.

 

[snouter]

Additionally, iMacs can now hold 2 internal drives, one of them being a 256GB SSD.

Still not easy to replace, and the word is that if the iMac does not come with SSD out of the box, then it's very hard to add after the fact.

iMac with SSD starts to hit the $2500 point for the entry Mac Pro, for which it is much easier to add aftermarket drives and SSD drives at that market grows yearly.

If you plan on keeping the machine for 3 years, the Mac Pro starts to look less like a bad idea, especially factoring in their scarcity and ease of resale.

I rarely see Mac Pros on Craigslist, whereas iMacs are fairly common.

 

[Ravich]

Yes, the SSD is not user serviceable, and yes there arent many options (256GB or nothing), but that's only going to get less problematic from here on out.

If SSDs were in the middle of establishing themselves and coming down in price, it wouldnt be that big of a deal for a lot of people. Some people need more than 1 HDD, but that doesnt mean that they need to be able to swap them out on a whim.


My point is that the article references a significantly outdated comparison between the iMac and Mac Pro.

 

[Icaras]

Yes, the SSD is not user serviceable, and yes there arent many options (256GB or nothing), but that's only going to get less problematic from here on out.

If SSDs were in the middle of establishing themselves and coming down in price, it wouldnt be that big of a deal for a lot of people. Some people need more than 1 HDD, but that doesnt mean that they need to be able to swap them out on a whim.


My point is that the article references a significantly outdated comparison between the iMac and Mac Pro.

I agree. Adding an SSD and having two drives in the machine is just another noticeable step into Mac Pro territory. With dropping prices on SSDs and lightpeak on the way, it will only get less problematic from here on out, like you say.

Nice article by the way, if not a tad biased.