or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Value of the new iMac???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Value of the new iMac???

post #1 of 35
Thread Starter 
When I saw the $1800 price tag I wasn't sure how it measured up against a Wintel PC. Well here are the results of my investigation. The new iMac actually does pretty well... I still wish it had more than an 800MHz G4, but anyway... What do you think? Are the prices I used for Wintel components too high or is the new iMac really this good?

Hardware
========

$500 Pioneer DVR-A03 DVD/CD Burner
$400 15" flat panel screen
$50 256MB RAM
$100 nVidia geForce2 MX (32MB)
$130 PCI Firewire Card
$100 60GB Hard Drive
$30 Speakers
$25 10/100 Ethernet Card
$40 Wireless Card (Difference between PCI card and Airport card)
$40 56K Fax/Modem
$135 Motherboard
$100 Athlon 1GHz Processor
$30 Case with Power Supply
$30 Optical Two Button Wheel Mouse
$25 Keyboard
$60 Sound Blaster card
$20 Miscellaneous cables

Software
========

$270 Windows XP (Assuming initial purchase + 2 yrs of upgrades)
$70 DVD Burning Software (iDVD equiv)
--- MovieMaker (iMovie equiv) in WinXP
--- Windows Media Player (Quicktime/iTunes Equiv) in WinXP
--- Image Management Software (iPhoto Equiv) in WinXP
$60 Microsoft Works (AppleWorks 6 equiv)
$30 Anti-virus Software
$50 Quicken 2002 Deluxe

$2,295 Total
post #2 of 35
Your specs seem okay, but I can't really say. I tried to spec out something on Dell and it was hard to match the new iMac exactly, but in almost every case using the base Dimension 4400 I got over $2,000 but not to far over. Honestly it is very hard to say which is best, since they are so different. If you don't look at clock speed, don't care about upgrading the graphics card, want a small footprint, and want perhaps better digital hub software than the iMac is the winner. If you want more raw power the Dell would win I think. But to be fair you'd have to look at other PCs.
post #3 of 35
The value of the new iMac is that no-one else can do that with the same amazing design, ease of use, and quality for ANY price.

Also, I think that a G4 800 will seem nippy, and I always believe that you cannot really compare the speeds of PCs and Macs on day to day use, because most of that is down to the OS - only high end apps truly show the processing power inside your box. Methinks that the more realistic thing to do is for Apple to iron out the bugs in OSX.

Dave
_ ________________________ _

I have no signature - Doh!
Reply
_ ________________________ _

I have no signature - Doh!
Reply
post #4 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by iMacfan:
<strong>The value of the new iMac is that no-one else can do that with the same amazing design, ease of use, and quality for ANY price.

Also, I think that a G4 800 will seem nippy, and I always believe that you cannot really compare the speeds of PCs and Macs on day to day use, because most of that is down to the OS - only high end apps truly show the processing power inside your box. Methinks that the more realistic thing to do is for Apple to iron out the bugs in OSX.

Dave</strong><hr></blockquote>

Amazing Design? Ok. I'll buy that.

Ease of Use? No. I'm sorry, this arguement doesn't hold water anymore. Both OS X and Windows XP are intuitive and easy to use. Specific software packages are another matter.

Quality? I really can't comment on this other than to say how do you know it will be so good? 'Cause it's Apple? Gimme a break. If their quality is so good, why don't they stand behind their product for more than a year or give you more than 90 DAYS tech support. My friends iBook has already been sent back twice. Not saying Apple quality is bad, just that the Apple name doesn't make it stellar.

Where do you get that the OS determines your machine's speed? Assuming two systems with like hardware, ok. But between a PC and a Mac, hardware most certainly DOES come into play.
post #5 of 35
then why do slower MHz apples beat much higher MHz pc at some applications?? software can be more important than hardware...usually because poor software holds faster hardware back...just give me a good machine running a good os with good software and i'm happy...don't know why pc people always want mac people to switch...i may never switch, but also don't care if you use a pc and don't care if you never switch....

i use a pc at work and use an apple at home...don't mind the pc at work (runs NT 4.0 and works well), but perfer the apple and will keep using apples at home till bill gates (aka satan with a bad haircut) buys out the whole western hemisphere and rules (as king) that apples should be no more g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #6 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>then why do slower MHz apples beat much higher MHz pc at some applications?? software can be more important than hardware...usually because poor software holds faster hardware back...just give me a good machine running a good os with good software and i'm happy...don't know why pc people always want mac people to switch...i may never switch, but also don't care if you use a pc and don't care if you never switch....

i use a pc at work and use an apple at home...don't mind the pc at work (runs NT 4.0 and works well), but perfer the apple and will keep using apples at home till bill gates (aka satan with a bad haircut) buys out the whole western hemisphere and rules (as king) that apples should be no more g</strong><hr></blockquote>

Slower Mhz Apples, as you call them, sometimes beat faster Mhz PCs due to the fact that the PowerPC does more work per clock cycle than the Pentium family does. It has little to do with the OS. I don't care if you switch either, I'm actually considering getting a Mac to play with. As for the comments about Bill, Steve Jobs is no better, he's just not CEO of Microsoft. But his ego is huge, and hence Apple is more about what Steve thinks we should have rather than what we actually want.
post #7 of 35
agree...SJ ego is huge...but he has better style so is easier to forgive (and has a lot less power...BG power is scary)....g


pcman, glad to hear you my get an apple to play with...hope you enjoy it...g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #8 of 35
The iMac seems a good value to me.

And honestly, I don't think Steve Jobs' ego is any bigger than most of the people who post in these forums. He just has the money and company to make what he thinks is cool.

Apple's business philosophy is also much, much different than Microsoft's.
post #9 of 35
what happened to the idea of improving market share? how many people do you really think will choose a $1300 nonupgradeable desk lamp over a $799 P4 Dell thats fully upgradeable? Please. Apples core fans will buy it because its an odd duck and a good value compared to the old iMac.

The $1299 iMac is not really a terrible deal considering a digital LCD monitor sells for $499, leaving the computer at $799. However, you are stuck forever with the monitor and the machine can never be upgraded-you want USB2.0-sorry, can't have it. Firewire gets an upgrade-sorry. Games start to require 64 Mb Video Ram-sorry.

To be fair, for Apple the new iMac is LOADS better than the old iMac in terms of value. In terms of appeal-a question mark. I think its kind of bizarre looking and really doesn't appeal to me, but time will tell if it appeals to others. On the other hand the old iMac looked appealing but the monitor was too small. Did you guys know that Jonathan Ive had a mock up of the iMac flat screen that looked much like the old iMac but was just a little smaller in the back because of the LCD? Jobs made him change it and delayed it for a year because Jobs wanted the sunflower thing. I think he should have let Ive do what he wanted and Steve Jobs needs to get over himself. A simpler design could have brought the LCD iMac in at $999 and would have had a chance at increasing their market share. Oh well, the niche lives.....................
post #10 of 35
Hey PCman where can I get a Superdrive equiped computer with a 15 inch high quality digital display and the design aesthetic from a PC vendor? Where? Thats what I thought. Apple does the iApps that synch so well with the hardware and OS. Where can I get that? Where can I get a G4 from a PC vendor? Where is that? Ok, that's exactly what I thought you said.

iMac

800 Mhz G4 (with velocity engine)

15 inch flat panel digital display

Superdrive

60 Gig HD

256 MB Ram

Airport Card

32 MB Geforce 2MX
=================

$1,850.00

PCMan, go home.
post #11 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Macintosh:
<strong>Hey PCman where can I get a Superdrive equiped computer with a 15 inch high quality digital display and the design aesthetic from a PC vendor? Where? Thats what I thought. Apple does the iApps that synch so well with the hardware and OS. Where can I get that? Where can I get a G4 from a PC vendor? Where is that? Ok, that's exactly what I thought you said.

iMac

800 Mhz G4 (with velocity engine)

15 inch flat panel digital display

Superdrive

60 Gig HD

256 MB Ram

Airport Card

32 MB Geforce 2MX
=================

$1,850.00

PCMan, go home.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Macintosh, your post is a joke. You list the specs of the Machine as if they are something to brag about. How about a GeForce3 Ti500? How about a 100GB Hard drive? Show me ANY Mac that has these features. Superdrive? Very cool, I'm not positive but I think a few vendors are shipping them. Who wants a G4 in a PC? Who wants a G4 period? Intel Monday relased its new 2.2Ghz (yes that a G), based on the Northwood core. I guarantee this will chew up ANY Mac you can find, spit it out and ask for seconds. And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good. You're just another Mac elitist that can't take any criticism of his chosen platform. You give all Mac users a bad name. STFU.
post #12 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by PCMan:
<strong>

Macintosh, your post is a joke. You list the specs of the Machine as if they are something to brag about. How about a GeForce3 Ti500? How about a 100GB Hard drive? Show me ANY Mac that has these features. Superdrive? Very cool, I'm not positive but I think a few vendors are shipping them. Who wants a G4 in a PC? Who wants a G4 period? Intel Monday relased its new 2.2Ghz (yes that a G), based on the Northwood core. I guarantee this will chew up ANY Mac you can find, spit it out and ask for seconds. And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good. You're just another Mac elitist that can't take any criticism of his chosen platform. You give all Mac users a bad name. STFU.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Even though I'm a mac enthusiast I have to agree with you, PC's have a lot of config options that we miss in the apple community. Still IMO apple is far ahead on the design side (unfortunately that just not enough). About the OS, well I really don't know?
post #13 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by PCMan:
<strong>

Macintosh, your post is a joke. You list the specs of the Machine as if they are something to brag about. How about a GeForce3 Ti500? How about a 100GB Hard drive? Show me ANY Mac that has these features. Superdrive? Very cool, I'm not positive but I think a few vendors are shipping them. Who wants a G4 in a PC? Who wants a G4 period? Intel Monday relased its new 2.2Ghz (yes that a G), based on the Northwood core. I guarantee this will chew up ANY Mac you can find, spit it out and ask for seconds. And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good. You're just another Mac elitist that can't take any criticism of his chosen platform. You give all Mac users a bad name. STFU.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The joke is that you actually believe that you have a superior OS and that there are comparable apps like iDVD on the PC side. There is no comparing moviemaker or whatever it is that MS ships with XP to TRY and compete with iMovie. Apple is WAY ahead in the applications department, and best of all they are free.

In terms of processors Apple will indeed be shipping PENTIUM crushing G4's within 6 weeks. A G4 simply does more per clock cycle even if it ticks slower. Apple is the ultimate solution in computing today. What really matters is what the G4 can and will do compared to the doomed direction of the Win-Tel machines.

The bigger joke is that their is no digital hub counterpart on the PC side for the same price of the new iBook or iMac. Both of Apple's machines do what people really care about, performance and ease of use. Apple doesnt charge the customer for the iApps because they charge that fee in the total cost of mac ownership. If this is the case then Apple is far and away the best PC vendor on the block today.

The Digital Hub is an Apple technology.

Please deal with the fact that Apple's ship is being steered in the right direction while yours is heading right for the storm @ 2.2 Gigahertz.



[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</p>
post #14 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Macintosh:
<strong>

The joke is that you actually believe that you have a superior OS and that there are comparable apps like iDVD on the PC side. There is no comparing moviemaker or whatever it is that MS ships with XP to TRY and compete with iMovie. Apple is WAY ahead in the applications department, and best of all they are free.

In terms of processors Apple will indeed be shipping PENTIUM crushing G4's within 6 weeks. A G4 simply does more per clock cycle even if it ticks slower. Apple is the ultimate solution in computing today. What really matters is what the G4 can and will do compared to the doomed direction of the Win-Tel machines.

The bigger joke is that their is no digital hub counterpart on the PC side for the same price of the new iBook or iMac. Both of Apple's machines do what people really care about, performance and ease of use. Apple doesnt charge the customer for the iApps because they charge that fee in the total cost of mac ownership. If this is the case then Apple is far and away the best PC vendor on the block today.

The Digital Hub is an Apple technology.

Please deal with the fact that Apple's ship is being steered in the right direction while yours is heading right for the storm @ 2.2 Gigahertz.



[ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Jesus, you are the biggest Mac elitist I've ever seen. Get your stories straight. I never dissed on your OS, nor did I say mine was superior. I like OS X, and Windows XP. Nor did I claim that the apps MS provides with Windows were the ones that were comporable to iWhatever. I simply said such apps existed. And the iApps are hardly free, you just pay for them up front, and boy do you pay hefty. Faster G4s in 6 Months? Sure. Faster than the P4/Athlon XP will be by then? You must be joking. By that time x86 will be pushing 3Ghz. PowerPCs do more per clock, true, but not THAT much more. That's been the issue thus far, and it's only getting worse. Apple needs to dump Motorola and go with a chipmaker who can deliver what it promises in a resonable timeframe.

What exactly is a digital hub? It's a term coined by Apple that doesn't mean a hill of beans. I can buy MP3 players, DV Camcorders, Digital Cameras, and more that all connect to my PC. So how is that not a digital hub? Apple the ultimate solution in computing today? Get real. In your eyes is it possible for Apple to do wrong?
post #15 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by PCMan:
<strong>

Jesus, you are the biggest Mac elitist I've ever seen. Get your stories straight. I never dissed on your OS, nor did I say mine was superior. I like OS X, and Windows XP. Nor did I claim that the apps MS provides with Windows were the ones that were comporable to iWhatever. I simply said such apps existed. And the iApps are hardly free, you just pay for them up front, and boy do you pay hefty. Faster G4s in 6 Months? Sure. Faster than the P4/Athlon XP will be by then? You must be joking. By that time x86 will be pushing 3Ghz. PowerPCs do more per clock, true, but not THAT much more. That's been the issue thus far, and it's only getting worse. Apple needs to dump Motorola and go with a chipmaker who can deliver what it promises in a resonable timeframe.

What exactly is a digital hub? It's a term coined by Apple that doesn't mean a hill of beans. I can buy MP3 players, DV Camcorders, Digital Cameras, and more that all connect to my PC. So how is that not a digital hub? Apple the ultimate solution in computing today? Get real. In your eyes is it possible for Apple to do wrong?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Jesus, you are the biggest moron I have ever seen. Do you know what Apple has just done to the consumer competition?

And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good.

This sounds as if you think there are actually comparable apps out there for a PC?

The Powermac line that is going to be shortly released is going to make you eat your words. You must be an "Intel Insider" to know that they will be bringing out 3Ghz machines this year. If Apple and MOT can get this thing to work then Apple can and will outdo the Win-Tel side.

The big point that you fail to see is that Apple is so pre packaged in a good way that this makes the "Digital Hub" actually exist. Sure you have USB ports and um..Firewire on a PC but that does not mean that you have the same refined machine that a mac gives the user. I am not an elitest. I buy on value and shelf life. Apple seemingly rewrote the book on these things on January 7.

It may be time for Apple to catch up in the Mhz department but it is time a PC gives me the software I want.
post #16 of 35
Thread Starter 
Well I didn't mean this to turn into a "My Computer is better than your computer" discussion, but it does tend to devolve into that so often doesn't it?

My point/question was that the new iMac, regardless of the MHz, is priced fairly. If the speed is adequate for your intended purpose, this Apple product fits the bill quite nicely.

I'm a software architect creating Java apps during the day, using Windows NT and AIX. At home, I am a self-proclaimed Mac guy. I like the look of OS X and the Apple machines. They appeal to my sense of aesthetics far more readily then Windows PCs do. Even though they are both okay at what they do, and I use either without much trouble, I do prefer Macs. I find Macs offer much more elegant and efficient solutions for my computing needs. It's a subjective statement, but it is indeed mine to make.

Now being a Java guy, I would love to have a Mac that can churn through Java bytecodes as well as one of the high MHz PCs that I use at work. Apple has done a splendid job with it's Java implementation, they simply need more raw horsepower that a 800MHz G4 simply does not deliver.

In the end I am still considering this new iMac, because it would easily handle the majority of things I throw at it, the movie and DVD editing being high on that list. Who really wants to do "work" at home anyway ;-)
post #17 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Macintosh:
<strong>


Jesus, you are the biggest moron I have ever seen. Do you know what Apple has just done to the consumer competition?

And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good.

This sounds as if you think there are actually comparable apps out there for a PC?

The Powermac line that is going to be shortly released is going to make you eat your words. You must be an "Intel Insider" to know that they will be bringing out 3Ghz machines this year. If Apple and MOT can get this thing to work then Apple can and will outdo the Win-Tel side.

The big point that you fail to see is that Apple is so pre packaged in a good way that this makes the "Digital Hub" actually exist. Sure you have USB ports and um..Firewire on a PC but that does not mean that you have the same refined machine that a mac gives the user. I am not an elitest. I buy on value and shelf life. Apple seemingly rewrote the book on these things on January 7.

It may be time for Apple to catch up in the Mhz department but it is time a PC gives me the software I want.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I see I've reduced you to mere name calling. I can't have a logical conversation with someone who can't take any criticism, and insists that Apple is the best company in the universe, regardless of what they do or don't do. You would obviously lay down and die for them, and I just don't feel that strongly about either side. But here goes. I don't understand how you talk of shelf life when even today Apple is shipping new Macs with yesteryear's chips. I wish them well, beleive it or not, but It's going to be tough. And yes, I know that Intel has demoed the P4 at 3.5Ghz, I'm not an insider, this is from an Intel Press Release months ago. Who knows, they could be toying with 4Ghz now. . .
post #18 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by PCMan:
<strong> And iApps? Gimme a break. Each has counterparts on the PC side that are just as good.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, no, there are no good counterparts for iMovie, iDVD, and now iPhoto. There just is nothing on the PC side that combines their ease of use with their robustness. Let alone for free.

There are iTunes-like programs available for the PC, but none nearly as good for free (with with XP, you pay for an add-on pak to get mp3 goodness). The iPod integration is nice, too (XPod on the PC is very buggy still, and costs money)

As for your comments about hard drives, yes, you can hook up huge hard drives to the iMac via FireWire. No, you cannot upgrade the video card in the iMac, and yes, the 2.2ghz P4 is likely faster than the 800mhz G4 in the iMac.

However, you are not going to find a 2.2ghz PC with firewire, usb, a flat screen monitor, similar RAM, hard drive, and a DVD/CD RW drive for the price the iMac is offered for.

Certainly there is a slight tradeoff in performance and upgradability with the iMac -- but it is a tradeoff many people are willing to make for elegance, ease of use, and the ability to do really cool stuff right out of the box with the iTunes/iMovie/iDVD/iPhoto (and other apps as well) bundle.

For what most consumers actually do with their computers, I really do think the iMac is the best value out there right now for what you get.

The iMac can be upgraded in the manner that most folks care about: more RAM, adding peripherals easily via USB/FireWire, etc. The number of consumers (this is who it is market at, remember) who will _ever_ upgrade their computer beyond this is quite small; about the same as the number of consumers who end up upgrading their cars with additional components.

Even I as a programmer and "power user" almost never upgrade anything other than RAM in my machines. Perhaps it is a different mentality; but I really do see the much-vaunted PC expandability as a non-issue in the consumer space.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #19 of 35
As unhappy as I am with the hardware side of Apple, I believe their software apps are far superior to Microsoft. But why, oh why, can't Apple let me have a tower for $999? THAT would increase market share.

To many people, Apple is a whacked out company that insists people love wierd looking computers-well, some do, most don't. Most people want good value and Apple simply misses the boat.

That said-picture this: A Black iMac with black base and black LCD and a brass colored arm instead of chrome. Even I would have to consider that puppy-but only for $1299.

Apple got rid of colors and went with white, but i think they would be more successful if they also made a black version....................................
post #20 of 35
Apple's design is clearly one of it's strengths. Apple combines the elegance of what a Mac is supposed to be with a great bundle of easy to use apps and sub par hardware which all makes a nice consumer computer. Apple really does need new hardware on the high end that compares in sheer megahertz with the pentium. If they do they do and if they dont they will be close enough in overall performance to compete. Apple needs to have hardware that is as cutting edge as its design and software is if it truly wants to call the machine a POWERMAC. The iMac though has stepped far beyond a consumer machines boundry and I do think software and design will sell it as much as the hardcore specs.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</p>
post #21 of 35
When all is said and done, the PC wins out in two categories most of the time:

Speed and price.

Overall, PC's are faster. There's no doubting this. If you do, you're deluding yourself. They are also cheaper. Again, don't delude yourself into thinking otherwise.

However, the discussion in this thread is about the new iMac and within that space (consumer space), the iMac is clearly a better deal than any of its competitors. It's almost as fast and just as cheap. Add in the other things that the Mac wins at:

Ease of use (yes, the Mac still wins that department), elegance and an abundance of good FREE software from Apple. Out of the box, people can do stuff with the computer. Open it up and plug it in, and you're ready to start burning DVDs. No muss, no fuss. Apple wins hands down on this iMac (the iBook too for that matter, but that's a different story).

Right now, Apple is king of the consumer space. Now if they would just get their power line in tow,they'd be golden...
post #22 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by torifile:
<strong>Overall, PC's are faster. There's no doubting this. If you do, you're deluding yourself. They are also cheaper. Again, don't delude yourself into thinking otherwise..</strong><hr></blockquote>

As a programmer who has worked on both architectures, I will take a slight exception to this. An altivec optimized algorithm can do some extremely impressive stuff. I'd square a well-done altivec algorthim on an 800mhz G4 against a 2.2ghz P4 any day.

The unfortunate thing is that not every algoirthm can be altivec optimized well, nor do all programmers bother to do it.

Strip Altivec out of the equation alltogether, and I would agree that PCs are on the whole faster than Macs to in terms of raw processing power. The rub, of course, is that this doesn't translate into being more useful.
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #23 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by steve666:
<strong>Apple got rid of colors and went with white, but i think they would be more successful if they also made a black version....................................</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's just The Man tryin' to keep us down!
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
Andrew Welch / el Presidente / Ambrosia Software, Inc.
Carpe Aqua -- Snapz Pro X 2.0.2 for OS X..... Your digital recording device -- WireTap Pro 1.1.0 for OS X
Reply
post #24 of 35
[quote]I never dissed on your OS<hr></blockquote>

No, just our hardware.

Shoo PC boy.
post #25 of 35
To reiterate: The new iMac is an incredible value, right PCMan?
post #26 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Cobra:
<strong>

No, just our hardware.

Shoo PC boy.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hey, if the shoe fits. . .

[ 01-10-2002: Message edited by: PCMan ]</p>
post #27 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Macintosh:
<strong>Apple's design is clearly one of it's strengths. Apple combines the elegance of what a Mac is supposed to be with a great bundle of easy to use apps and sub par hardware which all makes a nice consumer computer. Apple really does need new hardware on the high end that compares in sheer megahertz with the pentium. If they do they do and if they dont they will be close enough in overall performance to compete. Apple needs to have hardware that is as cutting edge as its design and software is if it truly wants to call the machine a POWERMAC. The iMac though has stepped far beyond a consumer machines boundry and I do think software and design will sell it as much as the hardcore specs.

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]

[ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Macintosh ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Just so you know, I agree with this post entirely, Macintosh. :cool:
post #28 of 35
BOttom Line: Apple is not going out of businewss anytime soon/ Macintosh computers will continue to come out for many years. I predict that the Apple Computer Company will live longer than I will. Microsoft ha always been suseceptible to the free market and willful consumers. Die, Microsquash and clean up before you're done.
post #29 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by PCMan:
<strong>

Just so you know, I agree with this post entirely, Macintosh. :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>

I was trying to be more reasonable in my wording. Your not so bad PCMan. I wish that Apple had 2.5 Ghz G4/G5 machines to round out the 3 piece puzzle to having a great computer. Specs,Price,Design.
post #30 of 35
Compare the iMac to this <a href="http://www.gateway.com/home/prod/hm_profile3sp_ProdDetail.shtml" target="_blank">gateway</a>
post #31 of 35
Gateway specs:
Processor: Intel® Celeron™ Processor 900MHz with 128K Cache

Screen: 15.0" XGA TFT Active Matrix

Memory: 128MB SDRAM expandable to 512MB

Hard Drive: 40GB Ultra ATA Hard Drive

Floppy Drive: Integrated 1.44MB 3.5" floppy diskette drive

CD-ROM or DVD: Integrated 10X min./24X max. CD-ROM drive

Operating System: Microsoft® Windows® Millennium Edition

Application Software: Microsoft® Works Suite - Including Microsoft® Word and Encarta

Video: Integrated Intel® 3D Graphics

Keyboard: 104+ keyboard

Mouse: USB Mouse and Gateway Mouse Pad

Speakers: Integrated Speakers

Expansion Slots: (1) Type III PC Card Slot

External ports: (4) USB, Parallel, Serial, IEEE 1394 and (2) PS/2

Input/Output Jacks: Headphone/Speaker, Line-in and Microphone Jacks

Dimensions: 15.39" x 15.75" x 7" (WxHxD) and approximately 17.39lb.

Modem: HPNA/V.90 Combo Card

Limited Warranty Program: 3 Year Limited Parts / Labor / Lifetime Support

Adapter: AC Adapter


and ugly as all heck!!!

to keep fair---1299 iMac vs 1299 gateway
iMac wins in looks (by a freakin landslide)
processor (G4 vs celeron)
equal ram (but iMac goes to 1 gig vs 512 max on gateway)
equal size monitor
equal size HD
no floppy on iMac (50 buck for a usb iMation floppy if needed)
Windows ME vs OS X (X wins...even windows people hated ME)
CD rom vs CD Burner on iMac
etc etc etc ---looks like iMac wins or at least ties if you want floppy and pci cards etc...but man the looks of the iMac vs that thing...not close...g
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #32 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>
Video: Integrated Intel® 3D Graphics
</strong><hr></blockquote>

What the hell is this?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #33 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by corvette:
<strong>Compare the iMac to this <a href="http://www.gateway.com/home/prod/hm_profile3sp_ProdDetail.shtml" target="_blank">gateway</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

LOL!
post #34 of 35
PCMan,

In many ways you are right, but let's take a closer look. The 2Ghz P4s are faster than the G4s in many ways, but not in every way.

For example, iDVD. Altivec allows the G4 to encode MPEG2 (aka DVD encoding) 2.5 to 3 times faster than the fastest P4 on the market. This has been independently proven. See here:
<a href="http://www.nstl.com/downloads/Apple%20Final%20iDVD%20Report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.nstl.com/downloads/Apple Final iDVD Report.pdf</a>

In this case, the performance difference between the G4 and P4 is so great, that a P4 doesn't exist that is fast enough to match the G4 at this specific task.

"Big deal", you say? It is a big deal. iDVD is a core feature of these iMacs, so it is an important feature to the consumers who buy these machines.

Likewise, the G4's Altivec benefits all aspects of the iApps, which all stress Altivec's abilities.

In this light, the LCD iMac is an extremely good value for what it is meant to do.

G'day.

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: NeoMac ]</p>
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
Like, I really had something clever to say, like, you know ...
Reply
post #35 of 35
[quote]Originally posted by Anders:
<strong>

What the hell is this?</strong><hr></blockquote>
u dont wanna know...its low end peice of crap even us mac users never got to use =\\
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Value of the new iMac???