In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

On 2016-01-24 09:40, android wrote:
In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

On 2016-01-24 08:28, android wrote:
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...

The consensus is that if you really want an all in one then the iMac is
the way to go... The real way to go is, however to buy a Mini Mac and
hook up a screen of your choice!

Fine, but is there anything with Windows?

Why? Whatever! You can run W10 in Bootcamp IIRC...

Bootcamp is next to useless. Run Windows in a VM such as VMWare Fusion
or Parallels.

Whatever, some have very little use for Windows. I boot it once or twice
per month on average...

iMac's are fantastic. For a Windows user who has a monitor, keyboard
and mouse, the Mac Mini is a fine transition machine, but none come with
a quad core i7.

The newer iMac's with 5K retina displays are magnificent.

I like to Lego approach... One pice broken? Then fix THAT one.

The only difference between a Mac mini setup and an iMac is the screen
and the brick. The Mac Mini has become a turd in terms of repairing -
though not as bad as an iMac which now involves ordering a glue-gasket
to put it all back together ...

Lego: If the CPU is a gonner then i get to keep the display. If the
display lost it then i get to keep the CPU. That's the way that I want
it.

So, for a photographer who needs a great displays and a powerful main
processor and pretty good graphics processor, the iMac has it all over
what one could do with a mini and 3rd party monitor.

But I wanna pick the display meself!

If one wants the 'lego' approach one might as well stick to desktop
machines.

The MacPro isn't that different in the respect that it's a unit
separated from the screen
--
teleportation kills