[Introduction: this is the article I wrote in 2010 calling for a mid-level Mac computer without a monitor. Back then, all you could get was either a Mac Mini or a Mac Pro (not the trashcan, the great big aluminum enclosure that was as big as a suitcase), but there was no "just right" not-too-big, not-too-small middle option. The iMac ruled in the middle of the lineup. The post was called "Needed: The Goldilocks Box."
Steve Jobs died only 13 months after I wrote this, and Apple introduced the Mac Studio in March of 2022. As predicted in this post, I left iMacs behind and got a new NEC monitor in 2016, and have had it ever since. (The linked article has one of my favorite illustrations I've made for TOP.) Alas, I had to (belatedly) sound the death knell for NEC photography monitors a little over a year ago; my next monitor won't be an NEC. And, yup, I'll be keeping the one I have for as long as it lasts. So far so good.
Oh and by the way—that caption to the illustration? That number is $8,422 now! —Ed.]
-
(Originally published September 28th, 2010) It looks like it's come time to replace the TOP worldwide digital hub again, a.k.a. the computer in my office. It'll be the fun purchase I get to make as a result of my cut from the recent print sale.
But I have shocking news...I'm afraid I really must...criticize Apple.
I know!
Before this causes a furor and a hubbub, not to mention a hullaballoo or other types of tumult, I should hastily say that I understand that Steve (kowtow) likes computers with built-in monitors and that therefore they are Good Things. But this will be something like my tenth Macintosh since 1984 (is there a name for people who've been using Macs since the very beginning? No sarcastic answers, now), and I have to say it: buying a 1984 Mac with a permanent 9-inch black-and-white CRT screen is one thing; buying a 2010 iMac with a 27" LED screen is quite another. The monitor component has been becoming—literally—a bigger and bigger part of the one-piece Mac cost equation.
My first computer, the "Fat Mac" of late 1984. OS 1.0, $2,795. (That's $5,700 in today's inflation-adjusted dollars!)
So why do I have to toss my monitor every time I want to upgrade my computer? Because Apple doesn't make the box I need. I can buy a Mac Pro, which is too big, and I can buy a Mac Mini, which is too small. Otherwise, I have to buy another big monitor to replace the already perfectly good big monitor I already have, which replaced the last perfectly good monitor I had, which replaced the one before that, etc.
There is no "just right sized" standalone Mac box.
The Mac Pro is too expensive and too much computer for me, too, but I really mean it's too big. I've thought about it, and I just don't see where it would fit in my office within reach of everything it would need to be connected to.
My office is very crowded.
Sorry to criticize Apple. I'm aware that such behavior is not permitted (unless you're a PC user, in which case it's mandatory).
But I think it's time for Apple to rethink. Give us the i7 iMac computer without making us buy the monitor at the same time. I probably only need one new monitor for every three new computers I'll buy—but I need to be able to buy the computers I need for the monitor I'll be keeping. If ya follow.
So what about it? Come on, Apple. I promise not to criticize for another 26 years.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)
Mike is on vacation this week. Comments will be posted promptly, but there will be no Featured Comments on these republished articles.
I'm having much the same dilemma right now. I've got a 2015 era 27" imac for photo editing, mainly. It's showing it's age when I try to ingest hundreds or even thousands of photos from an event, or a photo trip, and waiting while it builds the previews. (Yes, I know about Photo Mechanic. For some reason I can't leave it to chew through all the photos, it only does a grid screen at a time.) Working on individual photos is fine.
I'm musing about updating. The 24" iMac has no SD card slot and would seem small after the 27". The Mini has no SD card slot, and I'd need to buy a monitor. (Yes I know I can buy a USB dongle for SD cards.) I'd buy an M chip 27 or 32 iMac again, except they don't make one. The choice seems to be between the Studio box (I really like that there's an SD card slot on the FRONT of the box), and buying a monitor, or a MacBook and still buying a monitor. The nice Mac monitor is stupidly expensive compared to similar monitors.
Decisions, decisions.
Posted by: Keith Cartmell | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 11:23 AM
Let me humbly suggest that the Mac Mini is no longer too small, and may be in fact the perfect device. With the not-so-new-anymore M chips, the Mac Mini is no longer a compromise between size and graphics performance. Or, if it is, the compromise is one that not even the Mac Studio avoids.
I write this on a New Mac Pro (from circa 2013), awaiting FedEx delivery of my new Mac today.
Posted by: SeanG | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 11:25 AM
mm... Mac Mini... a lovely little box...
I almost bought into the iMac dilemma when the Mini was introduced and I was able to keep the monitor/mouse/keyboard already in use....
I've been through three Mac Mini's over the years - never a complaint during the timeframe (except for the one OS upgrade that butchered my inbox)...
Current edition is the last Intel-powered Mini model, but I've been watching the new Studios for awhile now....
Posted by: Dave | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 12:35 PM
My wife got me a surprise gift for Christmas, a new M2 Air, with the 15 inch screen. Battery seems to last forever, Keyboard has the best feel of any Mac to date. Even though she got me the bare bones 256 gb, 8 gb ram version it's crazy how fast it is. I was thinking of returning it for a beefier version but I think I'm fine. It's silent and great for writing, browsing, and movies. I still use the big computer in the basement (M1 Studio) for processing photos, but this one makes me happy.
Posted by: John Krumm | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 12:41 PM
I look forward to hearing about SeanG's fresh experience, but as owner of an M2 Mini, I humbly second his assessment. There's a quantum leap in performance over previous generations.
The catch is that the main reason for that leap is that the CPU and GPU cores and system memory are now all on the same chip--integrated and non-upgradeable. Specifying extra amounts of any of these at ordering time gets pricey quickly, and can be a little complicated. On the other hand, memory management and efficiency are excellent. Apple also charges a lot for built-in SSD storage, also non-upgradeable. The consensus seems to be that it's better to splurge on CPU, GPU and/or RAM as needs dictate, and rely on the speedy Thunderbolt 4 interface for expanding storage later. For most users, using fast external SSD drives for their data right from the start would be quite practical, as well as sensible for a couple of reasons.
One big remaining flaw is that the number of ports remains stingy. Those who need more ports, RAM and/or horsepower may find the Mac Studio the more economical option in the end.
Posted by: robert e | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 01:35 PM
Are you sure the newest Mac Mini wouldn't work for you? With the optional M2Pro chip, it looks pretty beefy to me. Or the Mac Studio? It isn't THAT much bigger than the Mini and it isn't too much more expensive than the Mini.
[The Mac Studio is the model in the middle that I wanted back then. It's here now, yes, and probably would be right for me. But the Mac Mini I have is doing all right. --Mike]
Posted by: Jamie Pillers | Tuesday, 26 December 2023 at 03:27 PM
I have owned the trashcan since 2013, got a good discount as a friend is a trolley dolly for BA and brought from the US for me… £1800 instead of £2500.
I have been using this and a NEC PA272W ever since.
I don’t have any reason or intention to buy anything else, if either part breaks, I will replace that part. Moreover, there are quite a few internal parts that can be changed or upgraded in the trashcan, like memory and graphics.
Add that it looks space age and has a small footprint relative to its potential power. Mine is still as delivered with 12gb memory, and it is all that I have ever needed, it rarely gets switched off and I have cleaned it once since 2013. I have no spinning disks and one fan which spins slowly and almost silently.
This is a big difference to my former iMac 27” which was sent to the sky bin after two years. Also if I remember correctly it had those two wires running horizontally across the display, which I hated.
Posted by: Stephen Jenner | Wednesday, 27 December 2023 at 07:04 AM
The mac mini m1 is a more than enough solution for most people. Together with the satechi hub you can have a second ssd, cardreader, 3 usb a, one usb c its more than enough for me and others. I thank Thom Hogan for this helpful information. At least 16 Gb ram and 512Gb. I use my 27 monitor with it.
Christine Bogan
Posted by: Christine Bogan | Wednesday, 27 December 2023 at 08:48 AM
I suggest you re-evaluate today's Mac Mini options. It really kicks ass with the (relatively) new M2 brain. Trade-in (recycle) your current iMac. Get any of many fine, relatively inexpensive monitors, add external hard drives and Bob's your uncle for many years.
Alternatively, but more expensively, anchor your system with a MacBook Air (which also kicks ass) and give yourself the option of portability.
Posted by: Ken Tanaka | Wednesday, 27 December 2023 at 02:06 PM
Sorry Mike, I guess we're not really grokking the ghosts-of-TOP-past thing yet. I'll do better, I promise!
Posted by: robert e | Wednesday, 27 December 2023 at 04:27 PM