On Feb 16, 2010, at 6:07 PM, Ashley Aitken wrote: > I would prefer a midsize system, that would allow be to change the graphics > card (so not build onto the motherboard), desktop disk and RAM (of course), > and two external displays . The mini does all of that, except the graphics > card and, of course, it has a laptop disk drive.
I was thinking about the design trade-offs involved. The iMac can have high-end components (mobo + gpu) because it can accommodate full-size cards & drives behind the screen, whereas the Mac mini has to compromise to fit into a tiny square box. Fair 'nuf. If they made a Mac midi, where the guts were in sort of a small pizza box, and you just hook up your monitor, it could fill the power gap between mini and tower. That's one reason we didn't go with the mini -- it's just *too* underpowered. The MacPros can be a bit overkill (and pricey!) for a lot of things. The only thing (currently) in the middle is the iMac. Just my two cents... -Jon _______________________________________________ MacOSX-talk mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk
