20" iMac Is Here! - Page 4

This would fit into my thinking of one more quiet speed bump to 1.42mhz (perhaps in Feb?).

you don't need to buy a 20" iMac everyday... you buy it once...

One, this computer is not for the average consumer. Who ever said it was?

Two, a computer is not an everyday purchase. It's something for which most people save for months, if not years.

The 20" inch iMac is a fine computer for those who can afford one. For the average consumer who can't or doesn't want to spend $2199, there are several other Macintosh options.

Well, I saw the 20" iMac yesterday at both an Atlanta-area CompUSA and the Apple retail store.

I tell you what, it's the most gorgeous, kick-ass display/computer combo I've ever seen. And if I wasn't so hot to own a laptop, I would've put the $2500 I dropped on this PowerBook and would've been proud to have bought and owned this 20" iMac.

I was amazed at a) how balanced and "right" it looked (I was wondering if it might look off-kilter or top-heavy) and b) how large/roomy the screen looked. I made it a point to open every window/app I could, just to see how well 1680x1050 holds all that crap with a minimum of overlap and Exposé usage.



I thought it was amazing in every way. Basically, it's the "guts" of my PowerBook (1.25GHz, AirPort Extreme, USB 2.0, etc. - but minus the FireWire 800...big deal), which I'm completely happy with, performance-wise.

I couldn't get over that screen!

Good. Now Apple should put its money where its mouth is, and advertise this sucker on tv.

Edit: hey Scates -- is this going to help you any?

If they do, it'll probably be one of their typical foo foo ads with pictures that say nothing about the computer or why you should buy it.

I think this will actually point to the future of the iMac in an important way: With consumers buying laptops in droves, there's not much point offering a desktop with a laptop screen. The 17" gets a bye because it's so much cheaper than the cadillac PowerBook, but the advantage the 15" has over the 14" iBook (from a consumer point of view) is slender indeed. I actually wonder if this isn't one reason why the iBook is the first Apple product to get a G4 without getting a SuperDrive: It would not only hurt the 12" PowerBook, it would cannibalize the iMac.

The mission of the 20" is clear: A consumer product with the sort of screen you only get in a desktop, so that you don't have to spend much more on a PowerMac just to get that nice big screen. It's definitely a splurge in terms of consumer pricing, but there's 20 inches of gorgeous screen reminding you what you spent all that money on. It's probably the most immediately tangible and comprehensible benefit Apple could have invested in.

So while I've said that this particular 20" iMac is a quickie for the holiday, I think it points in the direction of the iMac's evolution. The consumer desktop has to offer a tangible benefit over consumer laptops now, and a huge monitor is as obvious and tangible as you get.

One of the key components of a consumer desktop is consumer pricing. As has already been pointed out, the iBook line makes the 15" iMac all but irrelevant. the 17" iMac is 3-4 hundred too much for what you get. And $2200 is well into the pro range. On the PC side, that price would definitely include a no compromise computer and a good LCD monitor, though maybe not 20".

That's great, but at this point a no compromise monitor is more valuable in a consumer item than a no compromise computer. You're really screwing yourself over if you chintz on the display. You only get one pair of eyes.

If computing power were so important in this space, people wouldn't be buying laptops. As it is, power has been so underutilized in the consumer space that even Apple - which has a vested interest in driving hardware upgrades, and which has a group of mathematics PhDs on salary specifically to optimize the heck out of computationally intensive algorithms - hasn't really succeeded in offering applications that wouldn't run on my over three year old G4 (and its original RADEON GPU) perfectly well. At this point, the only reason you'd get top-end hardware is if you're trying to get more than 1 FPS out of UT2K3. But that describes a pitiful sliver of the overall consumer market.

The Washington Post has weighed in on the subject of this season's PC buying habits [attr: MacSurfer]. Accessories are driving PC sales, not the other way around (hello iPod!). The major attractions are integration with said accessories and flat-panel displays. Computational performance isn't anywhere to be found as a concern until the very end, where an analyst wonders what incentive people will have to upgrade next round, seeing as the current crop of machines can do everything? Price isn't mentioned anywhere! The article is only concerned with the Wintel side, but if that's what's going on on the Wintel side then Apple seems to be extremely well positioned, and the 20" iMac seems to be pushing the right buttons (multimedia capability, integration with accessories, and an exceptional flat panel).

This will look great in music videos, on television shows, and at the movies. It's exquisite design will make the 20" iMac a status symbol, perhaps not among power mongering geeks, but definately with well-to-do professionals from other fields.

I think that there's too much drama attached to this whole subject. I looked at the machine yesterday and I think it feels great. If I'm going to spend _______hours a day staring at a screen, I want a nice screen, and that one's about as nice as I've seen. And for running Finale (music notation), it's just about perfect, as you can see two whole pages on it if you move the dock to the side. If there were only a way to partition the HD on it so that it would boot OS9 just long enough to get me through until Finale 2004 (OSX version) was released, I'd buy one tomorrow.

I'm not trying to bust anyone's chops, but as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, it's not only "yuppie web surfers" who like these machines - there are also many professionals who want to focus on doing the work they do comfortably and in an environment that feels comfortable and easy without having to **** with a lot of computer jargon. I have a G4 800 that I use for audio, and it's a great machine...solid as a rock, intuitive, and not at all buggy. Quite a few people I know find the "time tested" models a comfotable choice because you don't have to worry about things changing so fast - just power up on a system you understand and do your work. Like I said, if I find a way to run Finale on the 20" iMac tomorrow, I'd buy one tomorrow.

Time to play "Flame the Newbie"! But before you do, I just wanted to say "Nice Forum"...glad I found it!

Welcome, Chris!

Yeah, I think so many people approach the whole "assessing a computer's worth" strictly from their higher-than-average demands and expectations and, quite frankly, nothing is ever good enough, fast enough, etc. to some of these people.

I have a special name for the especially ridiculous among them...



But for the thousands (maybe millions?) of people who just want to sit down and do the types of things that don't require a G5 and this bus and that cache and that DDR RAM, etc. you can't beat an iMac. And since the screen is THE one thing you notice most about a computer - whether you want to or not - then this 20" display on this new iMac is more than enough to push many people over that bump!

Sounds like you're waiting for one important, particular application to find its way to OS X and you'll be set, huh? I don't know anything about - or follow - audio apps...have you heard from that company what their OS X plans are, if any? Do they have a statement on their website where they mention any sort of OS X commitment or migration plan?

If not, is there anything comparable out there that you could change to that was OS X native if the wait just got to be too long (or if this company comes out and says "we're not making xxx for OS X...".

EDIT: I re-read your post and it looks as though Finale 2004 is indeed in the works...sorry, I glossed over that the first time.

I went to their site and it says "we now expect to ship Finale 2004 for Macintosh OS X no earlier than December 15, 2003." (but I'm sure you already knew that!)

So that's not TOO bad. It may very well be announced at MWSF in early January. That's only another 6 or so weeks. I was afraid they might be like some of these other companies out there, making it a complete mystery about their OS X plans!

There is (Sibelius), but I don't want to relearn another app over this. In the meantime, I'll just have make my audio machine (G4 800) do double-duty, since it can boot OS9 as well as X. But if anybody knows a stable way to get an iMac to boot OS9 (boot from a firewire drive, partitioned drive, etc.), tell me and then 75% of the good folks on this forum can ridicule me for being one of the "well-to-do" SUCKERS who actually went for the 20" iMac.

What's the special name? What's the special name?

Don't you pay attention? It's "spec whore"! I use it all the time. I have to, around here!

Ah, yes. [iDave must have loose memory chip in brain]

I'll be picking up my 20" iMac on Friday, and will report in when I've had a chance to check it out. Can't wait!

DUURRRRL!


Very, good points there, and I think it is good to emphasize the fact that apple isn't stupid, they wouldn't make this machine if they didn't think there was a market for it, that was substantial enough to warrant making it. hrm, unless they are just trying to move inventory on surplus 20" LCDs...but even then, they know that there are lots of people that love the AIO form but need a lot of Screen space.

hmm, both the iMac and the Powerbook line has 3 screen sizes, and with both of them it's like "traditional" "modern" and "fairly risque"

Not only that, but in my experience Macs are well known for three things: Music apps, Graphics-based apps, and a warm and fuzzy user-interface. And believe me, that 20" digital monitor is both WARM and VERY FUZZY. Seeing it for the first time reminded me of when I met my wife. I remember thinking, in addition to all of her other wonderful qualities, "Wow, I wouldn't mind waking up next to THAT FACE for the next 40 years or so". The 20" iMac is kinda like that in a weird sort of way.

no...YOU'RE kind of weird in that sort of way

If it weren't for my lack of job security I'd be interested in the 20" except for one thing, the 1.25Ghz G4. While I'm sure it performs very well with Panther, the 1.25Ghz G4 is going to seem pretty slow in a year or two when 3+ GHz G5s are released, and you've got this computer with a big gorgeous screen stuck to a processor that's starting to show its age. I guess that's a limiting feature of the AIO rather than this model in particular. Does it still MacOS 9 boot by the way? I'm sure those that have them or are getting them will find they're awesome to watch DVDs on however.

Guaranteed; the 1.25Ghz G4 will still do in two years what it does today. If you don't need a 3+Ghz G5 today, you're not likely to need one in two years. Just a thought.

I'm very happy with the performance of my 1.25 GHz iMac. Previously I had been using a 700 MHz eMac, which took care of my needs just fine, but then I moved and left it behind with its owner -- thus necessitating the purchase of a new toy!

Comparing the two, while there was a nice performance jump moving to the iMac, the performance jump upgrading to Panther was at least as nice! At least for the kinds of tasks I'm usually doing, the performance bottleneck lies somewhere between the interface and my brain. Point being: there seems to be a lot of room for performance improvements in OS X (a new Finder, please Apple?!? ), so you can expect the machine to feel faster from that alone, although YMMV of course.

FWIW, I just got though reading this thread, and I've must give due credit to Amorph for his passionate advocacy of for the iMac -- I couldn't have said it better. Keep it up, dude!

Do the new iMacs still support OS 9 booting? What other computers support OS 9 booting? I remember when Apple tried to prevent OS 9 booting on the latest model G4s before the G5 was released in an attempt to force users (and developers) to adopt OS X, but it seems now that all G4 systems (the towers at least) do support OS 9. I ask this only because I have a couple of games that would not work under Classic in MacOS X and it's also kind of cool to have for nostalgic purposes, but I'd trade a shiny new G5 for that if I could afford one any day.

I think the old G4 towers and the old G3 iBooks which are still available at the Apple Store; are the only Macs remaining that boot OS 9. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

That's right, Daver.



"Need to use your Mac OS 9 software as well? The eMac lets you do that, too, running all your Mac OS 9 applications in Mac OS X Classic mode."

http://www.apple.com/emac/specs.html

I saw a 20-incher yesterday at the Southdale Apple store. There was definitely more stiffness to the arm on the 20-inch compared to the 17-inch. Not hard to move by any means, but noticeably not as fluid as the 17- and 15-inch.

Sounds like somebody is protesting too much...



Lemon Bon Bon

What are you talking about? That doesn't even make sense.

No doubt. Are you high Bon Bon?

I picked up my new 20" iMac on Friday, and I have to say it's the perfect machine for what I'm doing. When running music notation software on it, it runs plenty fast, and I'm able to see two entire pages on the screen at a time, which has always been a dream of mine. I have yet to find any faults with the iMac, although I realize that may change. For now at least, the honeymoon is still in full bloom.

Here are some pictures I found. Note how much thicker the display is!

Here are some pictures I found. Note how much thicker the display is!

OMG I want one.

WOW.

Agreed!

God how does that thing not fall over?

Nice find TWinbrook46636!

The base must be filled with lead or something. Pretty impressive piece of design!