Here is the Macintosh lineup today excluding the worthless new iMac, they all start (with the exception of a slightly slower mini, and the upgraded Mac Pro) at around 2Ghz Core2 Duos:
- MacBook: The notebook of course, $1000USD 13inch entry
- Macbook Pro: A notebook with a graphics card that won’t make you want to shoot yourself, $2000 15 inch entry.
- Mac mini: (The 2ghz) No monitor, $800
- Mac Pro: PC-Desktop style, No monitor, $2,500.
Now I know what you are saying, “DUH! The iMac fits right in as the only Macintosh, with a monitor, that’s not a laptop, for $1,200. 20 inch screen, sleek design, all in one unit. You get a Radeon 2400 XT instead of the GMA950 in the Mini.” I admit, this looks like a good deal. Except that it’s not.
The iMac, because of it’s size uses notebook components such as drives, powersupply, and more than likely, logic board (motherboard in non-mac world). It’s not any more upgradeable, or usable.
If you are going to buy a notebook, why not actually get a notebook? For $800 more, you get the mobility of the MacBook Pro, equivalent graphics (which aren’t much to be had), 200 more mhz, and 1GB more memory. The only sacrifice you make is 5 inches diagonal: 20 to 15 inch display (and the res difference is small; comparing 1680×1050 to 1440×900).
So now you are saying you don’t have that extra $800 to spend? It’s not like those graphics are rocking so hard that you will tell a difference while playing WoW. The biggest improvement you’ll see in the iMac’s graphics chip over the Mac mini is that the Radeon 2400 supports DirectX 10. Oh, wait, this is OSX, not Vista, so you won’t even enjoy that advantage. Then, go buy a 20 inch LCD from newegg for just $200-$300. If money is the problem, you really aren’t going to see any more improvement from the 2Ghz mini over the 1.83Ghz, except that you might be sad that it’s not an even number.
$600 mini + $300 monitor = $900. That means you are spending $300 for the iMac at $1,200 just to get a Radeon 2400, which is worth about $75. $300 more to you on a $1,000 investment that won’t last you more than 4 years, either due to failure from notebook parts, or because it’s just not graphically capable from the start.
Don’t buy the new iMac. Cheap parts sold to you as gold because they make it look pretty. The only reason why you wouldn’t go with a MacBook, the Mini, or a different company, is because you think it looks cool.
I dunno that i follow your logic. Based on the specs of the LCD (with I might add, a glass display) you’d have to spend more than 300 bucks for a monitor that matches it, spec wise. It’s not a cheap HannsG or something. It also has a few features built in that the imac mini does not (webcam, off the top of my head). And being DirectX10 capable is handy for those that dual boot to Vista.
As to getting a laptop instead, giving up 5 inches of screen space is a lot to some people, especially if they don’t need the ability to tote it around.
I could see many valid reasons for not getting one, though I think they are pretty damn sexy in person. But I don’t know that I agree with your particular reasons here.
iMacs do not use notebook drives.
You forgot to account for a mouse and keyboard to go with the Mini. The difference is more like $250.
Other areas where the iMac is better than the Mini besides the GPU: faster system bus, double the maximum RAM, bigger/better hard drive form factor with much higher capacity, faster clock speed, faster optical drive, better connectivity (FW800), better wireless (802.11n).
Your efforts to be a mini-Dvorak are noble, but next time you may want to do some research.
You got me on the drives, I went on an unreliable source for that — I apologize, and the FSB compared to the Mini is substantially better.
Again I apoligize for the incorrect research on the drives, I still stand by the assertion that they have little place in the Apple lineup. The amount of power you get for the price doesn’t seem justified compared to Apple’s other products.
I have to disagree with a few of your points. The iMac does use notebook-like components, but it is still more upgradable than a notebook. For starters, you can upgrade the CPU in the iMac. It’s non-trivial, but it’s equally difficult if you buy a small form-factor PC from another vendor.
The hard drive is standard size, and can be replaced. Like a 1tb hard drive? Just add one as soon as they come out next year.
The LCD is a much higher standard that a $300 number. For starters, it is a glass screen, and the panel is covered by the Apple warranty just like the rest of the machine.
Finally, I don’t know how long you’ve owned Macs in the past, but they certainly have a genuine reputation for longevity in components, notebook or otherwise. I’d say it would be unwise to speculate on these iMacs failing earlier rather than later.
I had to butt in here, as a member in good standing of the “Anything but Apple” FB group. About four years ago I purchased an iMac 24, based in part on fond memories of learning to work on a computer in 1986 on a Mac 512. The iMac was extremely expensive and the experience has been dismal. From the outset the gorgeous acrylic-encased keyboard was next to impossible to use. Sticky, stiff keys that you had to hammer. So out she went and a $30 Logitech keyboard replaces it. The DVD drive has never worked properly – can’t tell if the problem is mechanical, software nightmare or a combo. Discs occasionally tease the user, refusing to eject properly. Two weeks after the one-year warranty ran out the HDD failed – imagine what a new one cost. Time and again there have been software annoyances: .jpegs that refused to open (fine on a PC though), finicky video playback (‘Why don’t you go out in the yard and hunt for a codec? Know what that is?’) and numerous other annoyances. A lack of USB ports fits in with the glamourous design (and Apple’s notoriously arrogant attitude to users). The latest annoyance is the 3.5mm audio out jack (the only way to take analog audio out of the computer). It does not mate with plugs properly, so you have to jam them in and press them against the back of the computer to get contact. The whole thing smells of cheap components inside, lack of backup (no manual) and a careless attitude to users. Nice to watch YouTube videos on the unit, though. Except for the cheesy chinee speakers of course. Never again. ABA.
Nevertheless, DIY options are nearly always cheaper – but in this case if you really needed the monitor form factor (never really…) then you would get the IMac
Personally I have a MacBook Pro and a previous generation iMac and I used to have a Mac Mini so I’m not biased one way or the other really.
But your points are valid to a large extent.
The iMac is less than it could be, and the mini is much less than it could be.
I’ve believe that there is a market for an upgraded mac mini with discrete graphics and santa rosa chipset… sell it in black and charge a premium for the extra components (like the black macbook).
But I bet that even if apple did this they still wouldn’t add discrete graphics *sigh*.
The mini is still the best value in the range though!
Hey Geo,
You make some fair points there. I’m in Australia and I don’t know the exact pricing but over here it seems logical to for those who buy the 20″ iMac over a mini.
The price premium at the same 2.0ghz processor models is about $500AUD. However a 20″ Screen ($350AUD), an Apple mouse + Keyboard alone would add $140 so that in itself makes up the price difference.
The fact that the target market receives a 20″ PC with the footprint of only the monitor is vastly different to those who want a portable, albeit being slightly faster. The premium of the aforementioned MBP portable is $1300aud above the base model iMac. For that price you may as well buy the 20″ iMac + a standard MacBook (about $1700aud outright) and have the best of both worlds.
5″ off the LCD is HUGE! Same with the quality of a $200 20″ compared to the iMac LCD.
If it’s just going to sit there, 5″ of screen space >>>>>>>> portability.
You can’t run OS X on other hardware, and you pay a premium for this privilege. For most people, it isn’t worth it.
Makes you wonder if any research was done at all, really.
Using a laptop is great. Not as an everyday computer though. 5″, 3.5″ HDD and the other differences mentioned DO make a very noticeable difference to someone using the computer every day.
The LCD panel used in the new 20″ iMac is a LG Philips LM201WE3 TN film panel, which places it rather low on the quality scale.
Perhaps this is why Apple decided to disguise the panels shortcomings behind a sheet of glass. :)
That LG panel is no better than any $200 panel. The glass screen is nice, but irrelevant in terms of image quality.
I love how people justify why macs are a ridiculous investment when compared to their own DIY solution. Brilliant. What these gumby’s don’t seem to understand is that when you buy a mac you don’t need to go through all the ‘joys’ of making sure the GPU fits with the Motherboard, and that it will be current for the next game you buy and not obselete, and your drivers won’t spaz the OS, or that you may have an OS revision in under 5 years.
Geo if you want to us your DirectX 10 support from the GPU and you are foolish enough to use Vista go right ahead…or boot camp the mac and use xp or windows…im sure it’ll work much better than your DIY solution.
It’ll definitely work better than the notebook you suggest…that actually uses notebook drives…not 3.5’s as you see below
http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html
A hoy hoy
I love how people CAN’T READ
i love unexplained one line sentences with random capitals. They give others very little to work from
Geo never mentioned “his own DIY solution”. He suggested that buying one Apple product is better than buying another, because it saves a lot of money, and has similar performance. He may have been off a bit regarding the performance, but his case is still perfectly valid.
Unless you consider buying a MONITOR as “DIY”… (sorry for the caps, but they’re not random)
[...] don’t want to shy away from my mistakes in my previous article. I relied on a poor source which informed me of notebook drives in the new iMac, which I hope you [...]
When you want to discuss power, use some real examples. Talk about how you’d use “the mini” in a real scenario, and the difference using “DIY” would be. Discuss the gains of Form Factor against spending 3 hours at Frys. With this poorly structured diatribe against a product you dont know, you’ve fallen into the quagmire of paper specifications rather than actual results. Thought about working for Toms Hardware?
Poorly structured diatribe huh?
Hm, yes. Poorly structured, under researched and purely anti-Apple sentiment. Its pretty much possible to replace “Apple” with Transmeta and the argument would both sound the same and wrong. You know, how a 1ghz transmeta is somehow not as fast as a 1ghz Pentium.
Transmeta? Huh? anti-Apple? Are you even referring to the correct article?