On Feb 18, 2010, at 3:58 AM, George N. White III wrote: >> On Feb 16, 2010, at 9:27 PM, Jonathon Kuo wrote: >> >>> 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. >>> > > Your Mac midi is a laptop with the case closed. Many people do use > laptops this way, and consider the extra cost for the built-in UPS and > ability to use the machine out-of-office a reasonable tradeoff. > There is much less wear and tear on a laptop that spends most of its > time sitting on a desk. > > Well, no, that's a mini. Actually I was thinking a "midi" would have full-size cards, like a high-speed FSB (a la 1GHz) and high-end GPU, plus a 3.5" disk drive, all unlike a laptop or mini, separating it from that crowd, but still lesser in rank than a MacPro. Wouldn't mind buying such a beast, as a laptop and mini are too slow for my needs. -Jon
_______________________________________________ MacOSX-talk mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-talk
