All-in-One PCs

In article , Alfred Molon wrote:

android:
Why?

Very simple - I don't have any Mac software.

What Windows software do you have that you plan on using on your new computer?

--
Sandman

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

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.

boot camp is perfect for someone who buys a mac and only wants to run
windows.

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 2014 model doesn't, but prior to that they absolutely did.

the reason is because the quad core i7 has a different socket and it's
not worth making a separate logic board for a low volume configuration.

it also doesn't matter all that much.

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

very.

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Very simple - I don't have any Mac software.

it's possible to sidegrade, including adobe.

And I have no clue whether
and how Windows will run on a Mac.

quite well.

http://www.cnet.com/news/macbook-pro...ming-windows-l
aptop/

http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-run...ac-is-better-t
han-running-it-on-a-pc/

If Apple were offering Macs with preinstalled Windows (why aren't
they?), I would consider one.

because people want os x.

those who want windows can buy windows on their own.

But I'm surprised that you suggest a Mac, when almost everybody is using
Windows machines.

completely wrong.

for photography, mac share is huge.

I couldn't care less about Windows vs Mac vs Linux vs whatever. But
since everything I have is with Windows, my next PC will be a Windows
one.

your choice.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| Just curious if anyone is using all in one PCs for image processing and
| if yes which ones.
|
| Personally I'm currently eyeing some models with a 24" or 27" screen and
| 4K resolution.

You might want to ask in a Windows forum if
you want to hear from people who actually know
about Windows.

The all-in-ones are basically budget machines.

wrong.

Like iMacs, they have limited upgradeability,

most people don't upgrade.

yet
typically cost far too much for what you get because
of the basic rule of electronics: Smaller costs more.

all-in-ones are not small nor do they cost far too much.

it's impossible to match the specs and price of an imac 5k with
separate parts, for instance.

And like any kind of all-in-one, if one part breaks
you may have to junk the whole thing.

nope.

If you want the best possible display then I
wonder why you'd limit yourself to all-in-ones.
Presumably you don't need portability, so why
not just have a desktop computer and look for
the best monitor?

the best display is in an imac 5k, an all-in-one.

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

Presumably you don't need portability, so why
not just have a desktop computer and look for
the best monitor?

See above. In principle the ideal device is a 24-27" tablet with fast i7
processor, 32GB RAM or more, slot for SSD and slot for 2.5" HDD, 4K high
quality display (those with the new RGB LEDs), user upgradeable (user
can open it and replace/upgrade HDD, SSD and memory, weight as light
possible ( 2 or 3 Kg). With sort of a mounting bracket so that you can
fix it as a monior and take it off in case you want. Internal battery
not needed or perhaps small for for 5 minutes of autonomy, in case the
power gets cut off for some reason.

But we are quite far away from such as a device. Currently on the market
you find only behemoths with up to 16 Kg of weight.

such a device is not marketable.

On 24/01/2016 16:06, Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
See above. In principle the ideal device is a 24-27" tablet with fast i7
processor, 32GB RAM or more, slot for SSD and slot for 2.5" HDD, 4K high
quality display (those with the new RGB LEDs), user upgradeable (user
can open it and replace/upgrade HDD, SSD and memory, weight as light
possible ( 2 or 3 Kg). With sort of a mounting bracket so that you can
fix it as a monior and take it off in case you want. Internal battery
not needed or perhaps small for for 5 minutes of autonomy, in case the
power gets cut off for some reason.

I have 10-inch tablet which plugs into a keyboard directly. The whole
package which runs Windows-10 was only about GBP 120 (about Euro 160).
I hadn't appreciated how convenient the tablet/keyboard until I actually
used it. Of course, it wouldn't meet your needs, but I can see why you
are thinking that way.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B...p age_o04_s00

Now about GBP 140 or Euro 180.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 2016-01-24 15:57:37 +0000, Alfred Molon said:

In article , android
says...
Since oninalls is generally Macturf I thought that Alfred could get some
useful input from the Mac group. I was right.

Indeed I got some "interesting" input. Somebody insulted me for no
reason.

Alfred meet Lewis, Lewis, Alfred.
You can thank android for that little interaction.

I've nothing against Macs. It's just that my stuff is all Windows...


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 1/24/2016 8:17 AM, 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?


Yep! I use an HP Elite, which i have upgraded a few times. Added some
memory, cost about $70. A few years ago the HD crashed, cost to replace,
including labor under $200, including adding a second internal HD. I
recently added a new graphics card to support my new monitor. Cost under
$100. I have had the machine for a bit over six years. While there is
nothing wrong with Macs, I think the ability to easily upgrade makes it
a better machine for y purposes.
BTW my processor is an eight core i7.


--
PeterN

On 1/24/2016 9:28 AM, 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.

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.

Indeed it is. Many of Windows users find it works just fine, serves our
purposes and is easily flexible to meet changing needs. I am not machine
passionate. Nor do most Windows users I know, with one exception, fall
in love with Apple.
As for graphics uses, my daughter, who is a creative director, prefers a
windows machine. I have used both, and seen little, if any, difference,
except that not all Windows programs run well under VM. Also, despite
what some here say.

--
PeterN

On 1/24/2016 10:11 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2016-01-24 09:58, Lewis wrote:
In message
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 ...

You do not need a glue gun for an iMac.

I never said one did. What one does need is the glue-gasket to put the
screen bezel back in place after making a repair.
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iMac+In...lacement/15624



There are significant differences between the Mac mini and the iMac.
Processors and GPU are the most obvious ones.

Yes, I alluded to that elsewhere in this thread.



A screw driver takes less space, and has other uses. ;-)

--
PeterN