Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

cinema display+mac pro vs. Imac

J

jimbo110

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 10, 2006
82
4
Denmark
I was planning to buy a new 23" cinema display for my Mac Mini G4. I have got a special discount for the next 30 days. But was looking forward to get a new cinema display with remote/isight built-in. I'm a little disappointed that apple didn't release a new cinema display.

I have plans to upgrade my Mac Mini to a Mac Pro when the leopard is released. But now looks like there is no remote for the mac pro.

I'm working from home and are using my mac for fun and for work. I do design web-pages for a e-commerce store and I often use Photoshop. Rest of my work is primary web-surfing, e-mails, music and movies.

Is a 20" Imac a better buy? Or do you think it's better to buy a cinema display now and upgrade for a mac pro later?

I really need a bigger display I'm working on a 17" on my mac mini.

Any suggestions?
 
when leopard is released and mac pros ship with front row they have to come with a remote.
 
I might go for an upgraded 20" iMac. Is all the power of a Mac Pro necessary? I don't do web design so I'm not sure how taxing that is.

But if you really want the bigger screen + extra power, then go for the Mac Pro. I don't think that you could go wrong either way. I'm kind of partial to the iMac design.
 
extraextra said:
I might go for an upgraded 20" iMac. Is all the power of a Mac Pro necessary? I don't do web design so I'm not sure how taxing that is.

But if you really want the bigger screen + extra power, then go for the Mac Pro. I don't think that you could go wrong either way. I'm kind of partial to the iMac design.
Click to expand...

I'm specifically biased *against* the iMac design. I'm not trying to flame or be controversial. The thing I *hate* about the iMac is that when the day comes (and it will...) that you are done with that machine, there is nothing to salvage. If you have an external monitor...and it is a nice Apple Cinema Display (or better yet a more versatile, cheaper Dell...okay...they don't look as nice...) then you can keep that and upgrade the machine. With an iMac you basically have to pitch the whole thing. That stacks up to an environmental disaster and a marketing coup.
 
Don't get a Mac Pro unless you really need its power or you don't mind forking out several thousand dollars for the tower+ACD. iMac 20" is a great machine.:cool:
 
Basically extraextra web design does not demand extreme power besides when using photoshop to design the graphics. The thing with Mac pro it may be a long term investment. Since it may have enough power for future demands.

I really like the imac design. My computer is almost on 24/7 and usually when i leave i only turn off the screen. But with the imac that may not be possible. Maybe that it will shorted the life of the screen.

Let's take my old dell I'm also using. Since I bought my dell computer I need to change displays 3 times (some of them crashed). If that's the case with imac I'll soon be without a computer.

Hayduke i agree with the fact when your are done with machine you have nothing and the computer may also be difficult to upgrade. Let's say the screen crashes there not much fun having a imac without the screen.
 
hayduke said:
I'm specifically biased *against* the iMac design. I'm not trying to flame or be controversial. The thing I *hate* about the iMac is that when the day comes (and it will...) that you are done with that machine, there is nothing to salvage. If you have an external monitor...and it is a nice Apple Cinema Display (or better yet a more versatile, cheaper Dell...okay...they don't look as nice...) then you can keep that and upgrade the machine. With an iMac you basically have to pitch the whole thing. That stacks up to an environmental disaster and a marketing coup.
Click to expand...

I dunno about that. I fully intend to use my iMac as an entertainment centre when I retire it from active duty: I'll get me an EyeTV, move the iMac to the bedroom and have a lovely 20" screen, digital TV, DVD player, MP3 player, Photo Viewer etc etc etc.

On a separate note, I'm a full-time web & graphic designer, and a few months ago, I invested in a refurb'd 20" G5 iMac (to run the Adobe apps natively) for around £850. I can honestly say it's the best Mac (or computer for that matter) that I've ever owned, and I have a G5 PowerMac in the office (2x2Ghz), a MacBook at home and the other half has a G4 Mac Mini.

The "chin", which a lot of people seem to have a problem with, actually means that the screen sits at a much better height than the 20" cinema screen I use in work, and overall, it looks great and runs like a dream.

As much as I'd love the flexibility and undoubted raw power that a Mac Pro would offer me, I think I may stick with iMacs at home for the foreseeable future.
 
jimbo110 said:
I really like the imac design. My computer is almost on 24/7 and usually when i leave i only turn off the screen. But with the imac that may not be possible. Maybe that it will shorted the life of the screen.
Click to expand...
My screen turns off after 15 minutes of inactivity.
 
Stick with PPC until Photoshop is universal

I have a MacBook Pro 2.0Ghz and Mac mini G4 1.42Ghz. Photoshop is *MUCH* faster on the PPC Mac mini than it is on my Intel MacBook Pro. If you do significant work on your Mac using Photoshop you will be quite disappointed with the iMac Core Duo. Buy the bigger screen for your Mac mini and when the Universal version of Photoshop appears some time next year you could switch to a Core Duo iMac and run your 23" as a second monitor, or just buy an Intel Mac mini which should have a Core 2 Duo in it by then, or if you really must go for the Mac Pro you will already have a nice monitor to use with it.

I'm sticking with my G4 mini for a little while longer (just migrated the system disc onto an external firewire drive which makes it run much faster) :)
 
Given this is a rumour site I will venture forth with the rumour that we may see a headless Mac to sit between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro fitted with a Core 2 duo chip and some Pro expansion features. If your not in a hurry Paris is only a few weeks off and might be worth the wait.
 
thePhilster said:
I dunno about that. I fully intend to use my iMac as an entertainment centre when I retire it from active duty: I'll get me an EyeTV, move the iMac to the bedroom and have a lovely 20" screen, digital TV, DVD player, MP3 player, Photo Viewer etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.


thePhilster said:
The "chin", which a lot of people seem to have a problem with, actually means that the screen sits at a much better height than the 20" cinema screen I use in work, and overall, it looks great and runs like a dream.
Click to expand...

This is another thing that *kills* me about the iMac the the cinema displays. You can't adjust the height! Argh!!! I ended up with a Dell monitor in part because the height was adjustable. I know I could buy a VESA arm, but that just adds to the price. Regardless, apple does make pretty things.
 
Well, considering you use Photoshop and need screen 'real-estate', go with the 23" Cinema Display, no question there. You can do so much more multi-tasking on a 23" monitor. I generally have say Photoshop open, a video playing in the corner and my email or a webpage in another corner:)
 
I don't see why ACD should get isight and remote... ACD is designed for professional work and those things are for entertainment. I know, the name implies entertainment...
I have a 20" iMac, I am happy with it. I don't think you should go with the Mac Pro, given that it is speced way over your needs.I don't think you'll ever need 2 dual core processors. iMac is a really good computer, go for it.
 
The only reason I believe ACD should get isight and remote. Mac pro is the only mac without front row and remote. Even MacBook pro has got remote, isight and front row.
 
Native vs. Rosetta:

GreatDrok said:
I have a MacBook Pro 2.0Ghz and Mac mini G4 1.42Ghz. Photoshop is *MUCH* faster on the PPC Mac mini than it is on my Intel MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...


I have MacBook Pro 2.16Ghz and an iMac G5 (1.8) - the difference in the speed of Adobe's CS2 applications is noticable for me too, but not significant enough to hamper my workflow. On the converse - the universal binaries I've added on my MacBook run much, much faster than they do on the G5. Maybe RAM is a factor in your experience? I have 2GB in both of my machines which could offer some padding against the slow-down from Rosetta (my MacBook Pro is much slower in openning the programs, but I don't notice much difference really in using them.)

Their statement about it can be read here:
http://www.adobe.com/products/pdfs/intelmacsupport.pdf

So perhaps if you're not planning on upgrading your adobe software for some time you might get a little bit more speed out of a PPC machine, but if you're planning on keeping up with software releases you can expect a kick up in performance on the Intel Macs.
 
I know this would sound weird, but if a guy showed up at my house and had two computers, a 20" iMac, or a Mac Pro with a 20" display... I'd choose the iMac. The Mac Pro is giant and you can go so many places wih it... but I simply wouldn't. The iMac would be perfect for me, it's compact and beautiful and still powerful. I wouldn't need all that extra power, so why take up extra space for nothing?
 
I've been thinking about this as well. Unless you're a pro who can use the mac pro up to its full potential, or unless you're a multi-millionaire mac pro seems like a waste of money compared to 20" iMac. there are some people around here who can do some good things with Mac Pro but certainly not me :)
 
I really do not like the iMac design. The only reason for everything to be in one box is for portability IMO (thus laptops are fine). I would go for the cinema display, or possibly and LCD tv.

I was browsing around 123macmini last night and in the user photo section a person posted his desktop consisting of a 37" westinghouse 1080p LCD tv with a mini. Has anybody here tried such a setup? I wonder what it is like looking at such a large 1920x1080 display so close.
 
I was wondering...okay imac look nice it's compact it don't use much space. On a long term basis won't imac soon get outdated? And I would need faster mac. Compared to a mac pro?
 
I love my iMac. I live in a small flat with my wife and daughter and the form factor is great. I have one cable runnnig off it, thats it. I use it for light editing of my showreel etc, burning DVD´s and the ususal "home" stuff. It has enough power for me, and if you think it will have enough power for you, I´ll say get it
 
Hello,

I'm getting ready to make my Mac purchase, but I'm torn between the 20" imac (supped up to 2 gb) and the mac pro. Now I've read all the info in this thread, but none of it addresses my concerns.

My main uses would be for After Effects and Final Cut pro. Has anyone used the 20" imac for this type of work? The issue of rosetta is not really a concern for me because i know the intel software will all be released soon.

Do you guys think the imac will cut it?

Thanks.:)
 
FCP Studio on iMac 20"

Grunze said:
Do you guys think the imac will cut it?
Click to expand...

I'm in a very similar situation to Grunze except that I already have a small, windows-based design studio. This will be my first mac purchase and expressly for Final Cut Pro Studio (all the apps) plus Shake. If I had all the money in the world, a Mac Pro would be a no-brainer. I don't and I really like the iMac 20" design.

I want to build my expertise in these apps but will not be doing serious studio production work. Also, I don't need to worry about Adobe CS because I can continue to run those on my existing windows side. I am not even much interested in BootCamp.

Is anyone using the iMac 20" for FCP Studio? How is it for you?

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back