[thearn4]

Do a lot of folks here generally like Mac desktops? I've grown to like Macbooks because I do like working on a portable UNIX-y platform, and have had generally bad luck with Linux laptops in the past.

On desktops though, I'm willing to put more effort into settling software update issues/device conflicts, since I probably have to do that anyway to write performance-optimized code (depends on the exact purpose of the desktop though, but I do a lot of scientific computing). So a Linux/Windows split boot on a generic PC usually wins out. I used to do a lot of PC gaming, but that's really less of a factor now.

[e40]

After running every version of Windows since 3.1, I've decided to go Mac for my desktop. I run stuff on it 24/7 and have 6 external disks, so a MBP is out of the question. The cost of external enclosures, though, for the new Mac Pro makes it out of reach ($3000 + $2400 = $5400... I can put together a nice hackintosh for $1700).

[melvinram]

The DIY PC route is still going to be more affordable. If we go the Ivy Bridge E route and opt for a Core i7-4930K, you get more cores than either of the options above for around $600 for the CPU. Adding in another $330 for a motherboard, $180 for 12GB of DDR3-1866 memory, $1400 for two W7000 GPUs and $220 for a fast SATA SSD (Samsung 840 Pro) we’re at $2730 for a configuration that would cost at least $3499 from Apple. That’s excluding case, PSU and OS, but adding another ~$350 takes care of that and still saves you some money.

As the AnandTech review points out, you're looking at $2700ish if you opt for hardware that is apples to apples comparison... regardless of whether you went with hackintosh, Linux, or Windows.

[revelation]

Only because of the workstation GPUs. You can get better performance for much less if you don't need the special labeling.

[MBCook]

But that's not apples to apples.

[bryanlarsen]

It's not apples to apples either way. The Apple GPUs are missing ECC for example.

[morganherlocker]

I use a MBPr for general development, have an imac close to top specs and have a beefy windows/linux box. Of the 3, my imac gets the least use, and I will probably be retiring it fairly soon. For development, I really do not need a power house machine.

I code with a focus on TDD and small unit tests, so even though I do mostly statistical computing work, my development tests use small amounts of data and low computing power. When I actually need to run big production stuff, it goes off to the Linux box or a Linux server cluster.

My beef with the imac is that it is not really that much faster than my MBPr, but has terrible heat management. When I am running big jobs on it, it gets a few degrees off from a toaster and heats up my office. A 2.5k linux box would not have this problem and would be way faster.

[wtallis]

Your iMac is not producing any more heat per unit of computational work than your other machines unless it is significantly older and thereby less efficient. The iMac doesn't conduct the heat away from the processors and into the room as quickly as a larger desktop would, so the chips operate at higher temperatures under load. This does not have any effect on the actual amount of energy dissipated into the room over the long run.

[morganherlocker]

That makes sense to me and all... but the difference is quite noticeable. As in, I need to take off some layers if I am doing something on my imac, but not with the others.

If I had to guess, it probably has mostly to do with the imac sitting closer to me while typing, and also that I tend towards using it for more graphics heavy tasks (since it has the largest screen). Also, I am in the southeast, so heat changes are unusually noticeable, especially in the summer.

You are right though, the imac probably is as efficient or even more efficient than my other machines, however it is more noticeable when the heat is in your face instead of blowing out off next to a baseboard.

[jsz0]

Mac desktops are great if you can find a model/configuration that fits your needs. If you don't need any GPU power it really opens up your options. It gets tricky when you want a more well balanced system. You go from about $800 to $2k+ with a iMac 27" + GPU upgrade when you could be perfectly happy with an imaginary Mac Mini + discrete GPU.

[gaius]

I have been running Linux on laptops for about 12 years now. The only way to do it and retain your sanity/get any useful work done is to run it inside a VM on OSX or Windows. Full screen, you won't even notice the underlying OS if you don't want to.

[gurkendoktor]

I used to hate Mac desktops, but the Magic TrackPad is a killer IMHO (both hardware and software).