I'm running a late 2009 Mini with 10.6.8 and want to get a new computer so I can upgrade to Mavericks, needs more memory than I currently have, and also because my mini is coming up on it's 5th birthday.

I'm torn between waiting for a new Mini to come out, if ever, and jumping on the blowout at MacMall for the 27" iMac, MD096LL/A, for $1350. One of the reasons I've had Mini's is for separate monitor and computer. Always been afraid to have them together if one or the other cratered. On the other hand the 27" iMac is a hell of a deal.

Comments appreciated and thank you.

Not an answer, but according to Mactracker, your Late 2009 Mini can both run Mavericks and be upgraded to 8GB of RAM.

Edit: And just to make your decision a bit tougher, you can buy the RAM upgrade from Crucial for $92 and get the Mavericks upgrade free. (Note that you can do better than the Crucial price from OWC and others.)

I'm aware that I can add memory but Mavericks is probably the last that will run on my Mini so future upgrades will not be possible and just thinking ahead it makes sense to upgrade now with a good bargain.

No arguments about that, but if prefer, and if you're a gambler, you could buy time and wait for a new Mini...not even upgrade your RAM until you see how Mavericks runs with what you've got.

On the other hand, though, that iMac is quite a lot of machine for the price.

Douglas,

Apple's World Wide Developers Conference is scheduled for June 2 through 6, 2014. Might you be able to wait and see what, if any, Mac mini update might be announced?

I'm considering that but becoming afraid that the good deals at MacMall will sell out first. Tough decision especially not having any idea what Apple's plans are for the mini. Rumors of a cheaper iMac replacing the mini have me spooked a little too.

Given the multitude of ways Mac minis and Mac mini servers are used in rack mounted and/or headless configurations, I can't see a cheaper iMac as a satisfactory replacement for the mini. Apple has always marketed the mini as an industrial tool thus its compact size and frugal use of power. Have you ever seen a Mac mini on display at an Apple Store? The retail market for the mini is just a sideline.

Of course, that does not rule out a less expensive iMac as a new product offering and my crystal ball has always been pretty cloudy and easy to misread.

I'm certainly not a power user or anything like that. I've had Mini's for the past 8 years and been very happy with them. With the new 27" monitor I'm looking at, if I get another Mini, the cost difference between the brand new previous generation, late 2012, 3.2 iMac and the Mini + monitor is about $250.

Obviously the 3.2 iMac is a vastly superior machine and I guessing the iMac would be superior to whatever new Mini comes out as well. The iMac has a much faster processor, better monitor than most reasonably priced 27" monitors and a better hard drive.

For some reason I'm hung up on the idea of separate components, Mini+Monitor vs. all in one iMac.

> For some reason I'm hung up on the idea of separate components...

You said up-top that [you've] "Always been afraid to have them together if one or the other cratered."

But, so what?

If any component goes, you're out of business with any setup unless you've got backup hardware.

That is about what I figured when I bought my Mac mini nearly a year ago.

For most purposes I have found my Mac mini performs more than adequately. Unless you are into huge spreadsheets, giant Photoshop projects, or heavy duty gaming the "real world" difference in speed is unnoticeable or nearly so. I have a fusion drive in my mini and I can definitely notice the speed increase of that over the HD in my iMac which the mini replaced.

That and the fact I could not justify the cost or need for a Mac Pro are why I now have three Mac minis. One for me, one for my wife, and an old mini that is running OS X server.