What would you rather have?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by wfoster, Sep 29, 2009.

  1. wfoster macrumors 6502a


    Feb 16, 2009
    Plymouth, UK
    Hey, I’m in bit of a pickle. I have the choice of either having a Mac Mini 2.0GHz, 4GB, 120GB with dual screen or a 20” iMac, 2.66GHz, 2GB, 320GB.

    What one would you go for?
  2. imaketouchtheme macrumors 65816

    Dec 5, 2007
    The iMac.....
  3. ADent macrumors 6502a

    Sep 9, 2007
    The mini.

    I really like 24" screens, so the 20" iMac wouldn't do it for me.

    When my monitor broke, I send it in and dug up a CRT from the basement.
    On an iMac I would have to do a full backup, wipe critical data, and be without a computer for that time.

    When I pass the old mini down for use as a server hooked up to the TV - I can keep my old monitor, and no need to hide the built in screen while leaving the IR port exposed.
  4. ditzy macrumors 68000


    Sep 28, 2007
    I'd go for the iMac because power and upgradability are more important to me.
  5. Jackintosh macrumors 6502a


    Mar 21, 2009
    The Mini. Fast , quiet, portable, elegant, not chained to a monitor, and no overheating issues or worries.
  6. Arran macrumors 601


    Mar 7, 2008
    Atlanta, USA
    With apologies to the previous poster...

    The iMac. Faster, quiet, portable (one box, no wires), elegant, not chained to a monitor (it is the monitor), etc., etc., :)
  7. BittenApple macrumors 6502a


    Nov 29, 2008
    If you could wait there are new iMacs on their way soon.

    Anyways, I would pick the iMac is money was not an issue. Otherwise the Mac Mini is not a bad choice for a budget Macintosh.
  8. gjw4u macrumors 6502

    Dec 2, 2008
    OP, I would rather have a better title to your thread.
    As new iMac & mini might be on the way, I would wait and see, that is unless you must have one now.
  9. TXbug macrumors member


    Aug 24, 2009
    Austin, Texas
  10. Jackintosh macrumors 6502a


    Mar 21, 2009
    Apologies also, but noticed no comment about iMac overheating issues/worries. Also, "chained" to the monitor and "is" the monitor are one in the same thing. The point being that the Mini is neither, hence the freedom to choose/upgrade/replace monitor at will.

    Also, I believe the iMac's fan has to work harder at higher revs to cool the combined all-in-one unit. Hence quieter (no attached warm monitor) Mini.

    iMac more portable than Mini? See which fits easier into a shoe box.
  11. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Mar 30, 2004
    In the short-run, iMac is a better buy. Equip Mac mini with Apple-branded accessories (24-inch LED, keyboard, mouse), 4 GB RAM, and beefier hard disk (either internally or externally), Mini will quickly eclipse 24-inch iMac by few hundred dollars.

    But in the long-run, even when you factor in iMac getting cheaper over-time, mini's value proposition becomes more apparent. In addition, you can continue using older mini for home theater and/or home server.
  12. mrsir2009 macrumors 604


    Sep 17, 2009
    Melbourne, Australia
    If money is an issue and you really want a big screen then the Mini. If you want a clean computer and money isn't an issue then the iMac :D
  13. tbayrgs macrumors 603


    Jul 5, 2009
    I have to agree with Jackintosh---excluding your first point, this argument makes no sense.

    Faster? Certainly and if this is most important for whatever uses you have in mind, could be deciding factor, however...

    Quiet? Can't comment on iMac but I have a Mini and it's very quiet, even with an upgraded 7200 RPM hard drive. I don't think I could tell if another computer was quieter.

    Portable? Yeah, the iMac is portable--I see people unloading theirs from their suitcases for one-on-one sessions at the local Apple Store. The mini fits in a backpack. Oh wait, that's right, having to carry that ONE extra cable to connect the mini to a monitor may just be too much.

    Elegant? This is purely subjective and I'd state the mini is beautifully designed but to each his own.

    Not chained to a monitor? Simply incorrect and in fact, exactly the opposite but since this has been addressed by others, enough said.

    My $0.02---go with the mini, especially if you have dual monitors. Tons more flexibility, great small footprint, as nutmac said, makes a great HTPC.
  14. iMJustAGuy macrumors 68020


    Sep 10, 2007
    Beach, FL
    The iMac. No extra cords or extra monitor needed. It's all there. And you can upgrade the memory to 4 if need be.
  15. nullx86 macrumors 6502a


    Jun 26, 2009
    Wilmington/Jacksonville, NC
    iMac. The Mac Mini is only good as a media center imo. If its going to be your everyday computer, get something with power.

    The iMac starts with a 2.66GHz processor, Mac Mini starts at 2GHz.
    iMac starts with 2GB memory, maxes out at 8GB; Mac Mini starts at 1GB, maxes out at 4GB.
    iMac comes with a Monitor and a mini display port; Mac Mini has no monitor, comes with a mini display port and mini dvi.
    iMac comes with 4 graphics card options (9400M, GT120, GT130 and ATI 4580); Mac Mini has 9400M only.
    iMac comes with built in iSight and Microphone; Mac Mini has neither.

    But it all depends on what your using it for... everyday computer, iMac hands down. Media Center or some other thing where space is a necessity, the Mac Mini.
  16. Alrescha macrumors 68020

    Jan 1, 2008
    I tried the new 24" iMac when they came out. I was excited at all that capability for $1500. I returned it after a couple of days (endemic screen issues).

    I'm back using my old Core Duo Mini, and happy about it.

  17. three macrumors 65816


    Jan 22, 2008
    Washington State
    I'd go for the iMac, I've always felt that the iMac is a better computer than the Mac mini. If you have space issues, the mini is the way to go.
  18. Bennieboy© macrumors 65816


    Jan 15, 2009
  19. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Mar 30, 2004
    iMac is better spec'd in a way MacBook Pro to MacBook was.

    iMac's advantages (24-inch base iMac to base Mac mini + 24" LED Cinema Display + Apple Keyboard + Apple Mighty Mouse):
    • Faster CPU: 2.66 GHz with 6 MB L2 vs. 2.0 GHz with 3 MB L2
    • More standard memory: 4 GB vs. 1 GB
    • Larger, faster hard disk: 640 GB 7200 rpm vs. 120 GB 5400 rpm
    • IR receiver supports optional Apple Remote
    • Cheaper: $1499 vs. $1596

    Mac mini's advantages:
    • Mac mini has faster Superdrive: 6x DVD DL and 24x CD-RW vs. 4x DVD DL and 16x CD-RW
    • Mac mini has more USB ports: 5 vs. 4

    But like I said, Mac mini is cheaper to replace. For the price it costs to upgrade 24-inch iMac once, you can upgrade Mac mini twice (assuming one keeps the display, keyboard, and mouse).
  20. Richard8655 macrumors 6502a


    Mar 11, 2009
    Not wanting to offend the iMac'ers here.

    But it's like audio equipment to me. The high-end would be separate components - amp, preamp, tuner, various disc players, etc. As in Spectral, Krell, Linn, Meridian, etc..

    The low-end are the all-in-one units with electronics packed together because their consumers can't be bothered with separate units, wires, and the like, and wouldn't hear the difference anyway. As in Bose Wave radio.

    Not an exact analogy (the Mini is packed already), but as far as the iMac's sandwiched added display, it's the same principle.
  21. miki66 macrumors 6502


    Nov 19, 2008
    i was struggling about similar things too.

    mini+acd vs 24" imac

    mini is more portable and after a year or so you could always be easy to resell it and get a newer one. plus the design is cute!

    acd, i'm really loving it so....

    imac, i know it's all in one and cheaper overall, but it's quite huge, and as some other people have pointed out, a little bit noisy..

    let's see what apple's gonna offer us next/next next week:)

Share This Page