Wonder if 256 ssd will suffice

[iMacLate2013]

The iMac of current build with 256 ssd as plan A is going to replace
Windows XP based 32Bit machine.
On Windows the os and all installed software consume about 12GB on disc.

I wonder if 256GB ssd in the new iMac will suffice if to assume
there won't be any major increase in needs of installed applications
and tasks the iMac will be used for.
Let's assume eventually just a minor increase of software to be installed
and to be used will take place.

Let's keep the storage demand generated by documents and other big-stuff user data out of focus here. It is to be taken in considerations by other way.

4TB NAS is available in LAN for all big-stuff user data.

 

[Tjosansa]

The iMac of current build with 256 ssd as plan A is going to replace
Windows XP based 32Bit machine.
On Windows the os and all installed software consume about 12GB on disc.

I wonder if 256GB ssd in the new iMac will suffice if to assume
there won't be any major increase in needs of installed applications
and tasks the iMac will be used for.
Let's assume eventually just a minor increase of software to be installed
and to be used will take place.

Let's keep the storage demand generated by documents and other big-stuff user data out of focus here. It is to be taken in considerations by other way.

4TB NAS is available in LAN for all big-stuff user data.

Comon.. u use 12 gig today and wonder if 256 will be enough?
Answer is yes.

 

[jvette]

I have a brand new i7 Imac with a 512gb SSD and with some itunes and some of my photos I have already used 130gb of that drive. Most of my photos are on a external hard drive and the ones that are on my internal drive are the ones I am working on.

I don't think the 256 is enough on the MAC. If I wasn't willing to pay what the 512 cost I would have gone with the 1tb fusion drive for the same $200 being the 512 SSD is a $500 upgrade.

 

[iMacLate2013]

Comon.. u use 12 gig today and wonder if 256 will be enough?
Answer is yes.

I am not sure
if one can compare current 12GB on 32Bits Windows machine with 12GB on iMac which is 64Bits!
It is quite the question if for example the binaries compile to files of similar size.
There might be also diffs in resulting compile size just due to question of platform. There might be yet other reasons for being comparing apples with ...

----------

As for me there is one reason to take 512 ssd with new iMac.
If one day the upgrade to 512 is needed, the present 256
is in some way a thrown away invest - iMacs SSD's seem to show
nowadays a proprietary type of connector - one has less
degree of freedom while reusing / in resale the 256 being replaced.

Yet another argument for the bigger one could might be the wear leveling.
More life span of ssd if to take the 512 one?

 

[iMacLate2013]

Me be still in doubts.

Ordering sleek new iMac with 512 ssd will pay off in our case only
if this system will be able to provide its services for about next 10 years.
Because there are no signs the 512 disk space will be needed within next 4 years.

The main prerequisite the imac to be useful next 10 years is
the Apple will also provide security actualizations
or its latest successor supported on current imac builds
(Mavericks + stock software) for same long period of time.
That's the killing point in regards to decision 256 or 512 ssd.
As far as me knows there is no warranty me will get such updates
in the next ten years.

Current computer the imac is going to replace did just serve us
ten years long. As of us there is no reason to do it with imac as
replacement in other way - means we expect the imac to be
usable for same time period - availability of os security actualizations
as prerequisite.
Reason? Every change of machine does consume lot
of energy and time resources. Productivity suffers in the time
around the machine change. Therefore to be avoided as long as possible.

 

[jmgregory1]

Me be still in doubts.

Ordering sleek new iMac with 512 ssd will pay off in our case only
if this system will be able to provide its services for about next 10 years.
Because there are no signs the 512 disk space will be needed within next 4 years.

The main prerequisite the imac to be useful next 10 years is
the Apple will also provide security actualizations
or its latest successor supported on current imac builds
(Mavericks + stock software) for same long period of time.
That's the killing point in regards to decision 256 or 512 ssd.
As far as me knows there is no warranty me will get such updates
in the next ten years.

Current computer the imac is going to replace did just serve us
ten years long. As of us there is no reason to do it with imac as
replacement in other way - means we expect the imac to be
usable for same time period - availability of os security actualizations
as prerequisite.
Reason? Every change of machine does consume lot
of energy and time resources. Productivity suffers in the time
around the machine change. Therefore to be avoided as long as possible.

Of course you can't be guaranteed of anything when looking out 10 years. What you've experienced the previous 10 with your Windows computer can not be translated into what is likely to happen in the next 10 years. If you worry about productivity and wasting energy, it's MORE likely you will be less productive and consumer more energy using a computer from 2013 in 2023, let alone 2015. You should simply buy what you need for today and recognize that your needs will change and computers will change over time. It's great if you can get a computer to last 10 years and that you feel like you're productive, but I cannot imagine going back to using my 2007 MacBook Pro. There is NO way I would be as productive, even though the computer was blazing fast in its day - those days have passed.

 

[fig]

Me be still in doubts.

Ordering sleek new iMac with 512 ssd will pay off in our case only
if this system will be able to provide its services for about next 10 years.
Because there are no signs the 512 disk space will be needed within next 4 years.

The main prerequisite the imac to be useful next 10 years is
the Apple will also provide security actualizations
or its latest successor supported on current imac builds
(Mavericks + stock software) for same long period of time.
That's the killing point in regards to decision 256 or 512 ssd.
As far as me knows there is no warranty me will get such updates
in the next ten years.

Current computer the imac is going to replace did just serve us
ten years long. As of us there is no reason to do it with imac as
replacement in other way - means we expect the imac to be
usable for same time period - availability of os security actualizations
as prerequisite.
Reason? Every change of machine does consume lot
of energy and time resources. Productivity suffers in the time
around the machine change. Therefore to be avoided as long as possible.

You apparently take a lot longer to get your new machine up and running than I do.

Ten years for a machine is pretty optimistic, and I don't think anyone could really accurately predict that far out for needed hard drive space.

For the next few years 256gb should do an average user just fine. Five years or more from now neither I nor anyone else can make an educated guess.

 

[iMacLate2013]

Our experience shows the transition to new machine does always generate a big effort.
These are not just the user data / documents. It is rather due to all
personalization / customization of gui - os and frequently used soft.
We apply lot of personalization, you know the fashion how control elements are placed and shown on workspace. How they look, which are on direct access which not.
All this helps to be productive as good as possible.
There are some further aspects as well than just personalization, like
adapt to new inter-action concepts, adapt yourself to lack of old functions,
adapt yourself to new functions and so on.
All this results in the span of time were productivity suffers.
Me personally hates doing the same task twice.
Switching to new machine is like to put energy in job already done once.

Not to mention co2 emitted by production of new appliance,
recycling the old appliance. So the end balance counts.

We don't have impression we weren't now productive with our ten years old windows machine.
The only reason for switch is they just stop to be safe in usage, me means
security and integrity of os, used soft, user data and communication.
Despite this fact we can imagine very well to continue using them for
few next years. That's the strong side of Windows platform against Mac.

 

[Fishrrman]

You probably aren't going to get 10 years of service from an iMac ordered today. Ten years from now, it won't be able to run current versions of the OS -- assuming there still -is- a "Mac OS X" ten years from now. Apple does not continue to support Macs that old with updated versions of the OS. This can also create problems with 3rd party application software.

You'd better figure 5-6 years of good service, with the possibility the computer could last longer. That will become icing on the cake.

256gb will probably be enough storage to last for the lifetime of the Mac, provided you don't fill the drive with huge libraries of pictures, music, or movies. Such libraries are best archived on external storage.

You sound like the new Mac is going to be used in a business environment. In that case, if cost is an issue that has to be justified, I'd recommend that you also investigate the Mac Mini. Much lower entry cost, but still offers good performance. Much easier to add/swap drives.

 

[marzer]

The iMac of current build with 256 ssd as plan A is going to replace
Windows XP based 32Bit machine.
On Windows the os and all installed software consume about 12GB on disc.

I wonder if 256GB ssd in the new iMac will suffice if to assume
there won't be any major increase in needs of installed applications
and tasks the iMac will be used for.
Let's assume eventually just a minor increase of software to be installed
and to be used will take place.

Let's keep the storage demand generated by documents and other big-stuff user data out of focus here. It is to be taken in considerations by other way.

4TB NAS is available in LAN for all big-stuff user data.

I just replaced a 1TB HD in my 2009 iMac with a 256GB SSD. The machine is used by my son for gaming (several Steam and some standalone games). He's only using about 60GB of drive space, that's OS X + applications + games + user data. I anticipate the 256GB will easily last many years before I need to worry about running out of space.

 

[tyche]

I run a 256GB SSD. I have 70GB split for Windows bootcamp, various programs and data (iTunes only holds lots of apps). All movies/music stored on a NAS. I have 120GB free.

Use your NAS like you are and it will be very, very hard to fill up a 256GB SSD.

If you want to use iTunes to store your media library it can be an issue although you can manually change the library location with some success.