Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

imitchellg5 · Mar 28, 2007, 04:51 PM

I've had the opportunity to use a Mac mini 1.83 GHz for a while now. I really like it. I've put Vista on it through the new Boot Camp update and it's pretty cool. I think it's a pretty nice machine, but who buys it? For $799 you don't get a whole lot of computer it seems. Hooked up to a 20" Cinema Display makes it very nice, but it's almost the price of a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo. Anybody choose a 1.83 GHz mini instead of an iMac? What made you choose the mini?

ibook_steve · Mar 28, 2007, 07:55 PM

I'm seriously considering a mini as the heart of the arcade cabinet I'm planning on building.

Steve

imitchellg5 · Mar 28, 2007, 08:01 PM

That would be very cool. Post some pics when you are done

mfbernstein · Mar 28, 2007, 09:51 PM

I had the 1.66GHZ Mini for 3 months. Small, quiet, and I really liked being able to use my 20" Samsung display with it. Made a great webserver and dev. machine. Perfect for people who don't game, already have their peripherals, and like a small footprint. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend one to my Linux/Windows PC-using friends as a second machine.

Rodster · Mar 30, 2007, 12:16 PM

I plan on buying a mini as soon as the updated ones show up unless the new imacs blow me in their design. I'm currently using a g4 17" emac and it takes up too much space.

The mini would be great for me because I have a dual port flat panel monitor and I can also reuse my mouse and keyboard from my emac.

The one suggestion I would give to the original poster is to buy an external USB 2.0 HDD to speed things up. I could be wrong but I think the current mini's still use 5400 rpm drives to cut down on heat. The mini's take a performance hit when using the 5400 rpm drives.

CheesePuff · Mar 30, 2007, 03:58 PM

As soon as the new Mac mini comes with 1 GB of RAM standard and the Core 2 Duo processor I'll be purchasing it because I like my 20" monitor and don't plan on spending $700 more for the 20" iMac. (And yes, I'm all assuming about the above specs in the updated model.)

peeb · Mar 30, 2007, 04:28 PM

You're right though, it doesn't seem competitive with the iMacs.

brokenjago · Mar 30, 2007, 05:23 PM

It really isnt.

Buying a $799 Mini is craptastic compared to paying the extra $200 for the 17" low end iMac, or even the 17" midrange.

Rodster · Mar 30, 2007, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by CheesePuff

As soon as the new Mac mini comes with 1 GB of RAM standard and the Core 2 Duo processor I'll be purchasing it because I like my 20" monitor and don't plan on spending $700 more for the 20" iMac. (And yes, I'm all assuming about the above specs in the updated model.)

That's what i'm waiting for. And the other poster is correct the mini's are not a very good deal when compared to the 17" imac's.

papadopolis · Mar 30, 2007, 07:16 PM

im actually thnking about getting one but i have also been thinking about getting a 17 inch low-end iMac mainly cause i dont have an flat screen.... but i dont really like the current ones look...

CheesePuff · Mar 31, 2007, 08:50 AM

It would be a real treat if the new Mac mini has the nVidia GeForce 7300 Go graphics system like the Apple TV now has so we won't lose system RAM to video memory.

mfbernstein · Mar 31, 2007, 09:03 AM

It'd be nice, no argument. But the lowest end iMac doesn't even have a dedicated graphics card, so I wouldn't bet on it. In the Apple TV's case, it's kind of a necessity since the 1GHZ processor isn't really up to the task of decoding HD video, plus it only has 256MB RAM for starters.

I'd argue that the mini is almost comparable to the 17" iMac. You lose:
-Core 2
-80GB of HD
-Screen, keyboard, mouse, iSight

You gain:
-SuperDrive
-$200

A decent 17" LCD is certainly not more than $200. So you're out, at most, a few odd peripherals.

Kadman · Apr 1, 2007, 08:17 PM

What made me choose the Mini? We wanted a multi-purpose setup for game systems (XBOX 360, Wii, etc), computing, and even for HD viewing away from our primary TV. The Mini fit in perfectly as part of this combo. We have a Sony Bravia 32" for the display, mounted on the wall. Sure, it's not high resolution from a computing standpoint, but this is a general purpose setup that is mostly used for quick browsing, writing a paper or two, and even editing home video. We all have laptops (kids included) as our primary systems.

Also, I really did like the fact that it's separate from the display. The iMac is a great value out of the gate, but it may not be later down the road if something happens to the system board, etc. Notice all those threads where people are trying to use their previous gen iMac and eMac displays in some fashion? There's something just doesn't feel right about throwing away a perfectly good display.

cherry su · Apr 1, 2007, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by mfbernstein

It'd be nice, no argument. But the lowest end iMac doesn't even have a dedicated graphics card, so I wouldn't bet on it. In the Apple TV's case, it's kind of a necessity since the 1GHZ processor isn't really up to the task of decoding HD video, plus it only has 256MB RAM for starters.

I'd argue that the mini is almost comparable to the 17" iMac. You lose:
-Core 2
-80GB of HD
-Screen, keyboard, mouse, iSight

You gain:
-SuperDrive
-$200

A decent 17" LCD is certainly not more than $200. So you're out, at most, a few odd peripherals.

Core 2 isn't such a big deal when it can't support more than 4GB of RAM. 32-bit is fine for the machine until you can put more than 4GB RAM in it.

By the way you can open up the mini and drop in a Merom if you so desire.

applgeek · Apr 2, 2007, 02:08 AM

I actualy got a 1.42 PPC mini, but i got it because it was a cheap refurb. at that time, the imacs didnt have isights, but they did have faster, G5 processors. I really didnt have as much of a need for an imac, as i was loking at price over performance (although performance was an important factor).

i think that needs and price is important. At the time of buying the mini, i just wanted another computer. I didnt care about using an lcd at the time. I had an ibook and old crap from a pecee. i found that mini fit my needs at the time. (i actually got it so the rest of my household wasnt on MY ibook). That is why chose mini over imac. When i bought the second mini (core solo), i got it so i could use the ppc mac, because my ibook was having extreme issues and was in the shop for months. I again got it becasue it was the most affordable at the time. i needed power, but was on a very low budget. I was also using FCP NON UNIVERSAL, and decided to give the intel mini to the rest of the household for that reason. I now sit with a macbok and the ppc mini. a mac pro is on the horizon.

Why did i choose a mini over an imac? Because I needed a cheap mac and didnt mind using a crt.

mfbernstein · Apr 2, 2007, 09:00 AM

I definitely agree that the Core 2 isn't such a big deal (yet - maybe OS X.7 will only run on 64 bit processors?).

One thing I don't like about the iMacs (particularly the lower end ones) is that I prefer to upgrade my monitor and system at different times. Just doesn't really work with iMacs.

Although for cheap Macs, I think a hacked AppleTV is at this point the definitive cheap Mac. If only it could have come with 512MB of RAM....

Big Mac · Apr 2, 2007, 09:17 AM

Hold on, the OP says that at $799 it's close to the 20" iMac. Since when can anyone get a 20" iMac for less than $1500? If he was referring instead to the entry level 17" iMac, that would make more sense, but also consider that that configuration is probably on the way out.

Rev2Liv · Apr 3, 2007, 02:24 AM

I run a 1.83ghz Core Duo with a 23" Cinema Display. I don't appreciate that the display is housed with the rest of the computer in the iMac leaving behind a perfectly usable display useless once the computer outlives it's purpose.

Also I like the champagne finish of the Mini and Cinema Display. The Mini is virtually silent and leaves a very small footprint on my desk.

As a bonus, it features notebook like power consumption which helps conserve energy. With LCD's consuming more power due to larger sizes sold and brighter screens, I feel that LCD"s don't save as much as power that they used to.

danangdoc · Apr 12, 2007, 11:03 AM

I think there are lots of reasons to buy a mini. I'm planning to purchase one to bring aboard my sailboat. Even at 36 feet, space is at a premium onboard, and with a small flat-screen, it's an easy and light carry-on/off. If I'm going to be in port and not onboard for a while, I can throw the mini in my shore-bag and not worry about leaving it unattended while moored. It will also fit inside a larger tupper-ware case in the event of really bad weather. It's also won't be a huge draw on my battery, which runs a 120V inverter. Can't wait to hit the open water!

beeba123 · Apr 12, 2007, 01:14 PM

I'm happy to have gotten the 1.66ghz mini, because after $100 mail-in rebate from microcenter, it'll only be $499. ok, plus $175 or so for 2gb ram...