AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils new line of 20- and 24-inch iMacs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple unveils new line of 20- and 24-inch iMacs - Page 7

post #241 of 434
8/8/07 at 6:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

When you see Mac's in other product's commercials, it because Apple's product placement agency paid for it to be there. On a couple of shows that used Macs, you will now see Dells. Why? Because they outbid.

Coolness has nothing to do with it, though it seems nice to think so.

It's all about the money.

Think about it. Several years ago you NEVER saw a brand name, unless it was something like a car, which was too obvious to conceal. And even then the auto makers paid for that.

I don't think that's entirely true. Some movies and TV shows will request Apple products because it's thematically relevant, "cool" or whatever. Apple doesn't pay for this. There may be other instances where Apple does pay for placement (I don't know), but many times it's the movie/TV show that makes the request and Apple simply facilitates.
Reply
Reply
post #242 of 434
8/8/07 at 6:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer View Post

For a side-by-side comparison of the new iMac versus my preferred look:

THEIRS...

YOURS...

Impressive. I especially like what you did with the logo. Less distracting.
Reply
Reply
post #243 of 434
8/8/07 at 6:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

I seem to recall reading that Apple never pays for product placement. (Anyone remember the source for this?)

Hum... I seem to recall reading that when Nimoy was making Star Trek 4 (1986), he wanted to use an Amiga as the computer Scotty used to demonstrate "transparent aluminum". But Commodore would only let them use one if they bought it at full price.

Apple offered to let them use a Macintosh for free.

I guess, given the attitude of the industry at the time, that's just about equivalent to paying for a placement - it was money out of Apple's pockets.
Reply
Reply
post #244 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Obviously everyone was expecting the "floating in thin air display, with invisible enclosure".

Maybe you could quote some of these people. Or are you just talking out of your ass again?
Reply
Reply
post #245 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

That is because most people on the forum will never be happy with anything. Even if they introduced a teleportation and time traveling device that fits in you pocket, someone would still complain about it.

Just think of the quote, "If your not having fun, lower your standards."

Yep, if someone disagrees with you, they're just a complainer.
Reply
Reply
post #246 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

No. It's there because it's paid for. That how all products get on Tv. movies, and even other commercials.

When you see Mac's in other product's commercials, it because Apple's product placement agency paid for it to be there. On a couple of shows that used Macs, you will now see Dells. Why? Because they outbid.

Coolness has nothing to do with it, though it seems nice to think so.

It's all about the money.

Think about it. Several years ago you NEVER saw a brand name, unless it was something like a car, which was too obvious to conceal. And even then the auto makers paid for that.

It's become very prevalent today, with every brand you see having been paid for.

It's in response to the backlash against the continuing onslaught of advertising. Some shows on Tv are even using the products as part of the show, mentioning names etc.

There is consideration of having shows without ads at all. The show time would be paid instead by active use of products during the show itself. You're seeing bits of it emerge now. Even in film.

That was taboo years ago.

Wrong.

Just because you're old doesn't necessarily mean that you know stuff.
Reply
Reply
post #247 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:29am
wilco, you're on a mission!
Reply
Reply
post #248 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:36am
Laserbeak, eject. Operation DESTRUCTION.
Rumble, eject. Operation EARTHQUAKE.
Wilco, eject. Operation STFU.
Reply
Reply
post #249 of 434
8/8/07 at 7:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco View Post

Maybe you could quote some of these people. Or are you just talking out of your ass again?

he just means that some people were expecting some massive jump. But to what? There's only so much you can do with an AIO design. About the only thing left that could impress people expecting a massive jump is to make an invisible computer with floating-in-air monitor.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #250 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:22am
I don't understand one thing, perhaps I missed it: is the aluminum part of the new iMac anodized metal like in the Powerbooks and MBP's or painted?
Reply
Reply
post #251 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:45am
Quote:
That's odd, it also seems to be the most-used Apple desktop as a movie or TV show prop. I don't remember seeing the G5 or newer models as often, the one time was on War at Home.

Almost every computer shown in the HBO show Entourage is an iMac. I know someone who works on the show. The Exec Producer is an Apple fan. Apple gives them the computers for free they don't pay for product placement.

PowerBooks and Mac Book Pro receive the greatest amount of screen time in film and television. But on the desktop you see far more Cinema Displays in film and television than you do iMac's. I believe the reason for that from a set design standpoint. Cinema display with its muted grey color is sleek and professional looking without being overly distracting to the eye.

The iMac being pearlescent white calls too much attention to itself. Now that they are black and aluminum we will see if they get any more screen time.

Here is an article about Macs being in film and television, Washington Post

Also notice in graphic design. Most of the time when you see a web browser in an advertisement or picture its either Safari or Firefox for Mac.
Reply
Reply
post #252 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

$70 actually and its top of the line name brand stuff.

Maxed out memory is $850.
You can get a 2gb dimm at new egg for $110 ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820227236 )
Looks like about $600 saving to me.
Reply
Reply
post #253 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:31am
Really, you should take the time to use proper spelling, punctuation, etc.

And you should be more considerate of those who are reading your posts.

I gave up on your message very quickly.



Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey View Post

guess I had allot to say... overall point is... I'll be buying old imacs off of ebay or some other source for my studio. hate the glossy display, hate the black border! sorry if you don't have the attention span; I thought this was a web forum. Should I really be concerned about formatting? I just type as I think on places like this but I suppose I'm busier than many other dorks out there... or I'm not and you're just overly sensative... I've seen plenty of misspellings and contrived confabulation left and right and I don't take time out of my day to criticize poor grammar , formatting and punctuation on a web forum. Are you the MLA authority for web forums? lighten up dude if you don't want to read it skip it!
Reply
Reply
post #254 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJay View Post

i think a big problem with this design is it's similarity with the previous iMac, which most of us hated... i, for one, was expecting something breath taking... and got this.

it's so bad it looks like it was made by dell

I bought my iMac in April or May. I absolutely love the design, and everything about it.

I don't understand why people complain about "The Chin." I prefer that over having a huge computer case and CRT monitor, etc.
Reply
Reply
post #255 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:35am
Oh, please.

I've had CRT monitors with glass screens... There is such a thing as a non-glare glass screen.

This Glossy Screen is a mistake, plain and simple.



Quote:
Originally Posted by emoeric87 View Post

Once Again. I'm reiterating. The display is glossy because it's glass! Not like the Macbook glossy screens that you can't put stuff on without risking damage. It's glass, which can be easily cleaned, and easily made non-glossy (if you want to.
Reply
Reply
post #256 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:36am
I must be in the Happy Minority then.

I bought my first Macintosh iMac, in April. I just love it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

That is because most people on the forum will never be happy with anything. Even if they introduced a teleportation and time traveling device that fits in you pocket, someone would still complain about it.
Reply
Reply
post #257 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:38am
I hope it looks a lot better in the flesh so to speak because I'm not impressed with the photos I've seen. It looks a mess. Black and silver together and it's still got a chin!
Reply
Reply
post #258 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Almost every computer shown in the HBO show Entourage is an iMac. I know someone who works on the show. The Exec Producer is an Apple fan. Apple gives them the computers for free they don't pay for product placement.

PowerBooks and Mac Book Pro receive the greatest amount of screen time in film and television. But on the desktop you see far more Cinema Displays in film and television than you do iMac's. I believe the reason for that from a set design standpoint. Cinema display with its muted grey color is sleek and professional looking without being overly distracting to the eye.

The iMac being pearlescent white calls too much attention to itself. Now that they are black and aluminum we will see if they get any more screen time.

Here is an article about Macs being in film and television, Washington Post

Also notice in graphic design. Most of the time when you see a web browser in an advertisement or picture its either Safari or Firefox for Mac.


The truth is that most everyone on the film crew (in advertising especially) are Mac users. We put Macs in our films becuase we like them and support the cause. Mostly it's the art director/production designer who decide what to use in the set and I can't remember the last time I met an art director who uses a PC.
Reply
Reply
post #259 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by makhaira

I have been waiting and waiting for this announcement to replace my aging G5 iMac. But a glossy screen? Come on! I mostly use my computer for photo editing and having a glossy screen is a no no. Oh well, I guess I will be waiting a little longer until I can save up enough for a Mac Pro and a real monitor. I suppose that is what Jobs had i mind the whole time!

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Actually, you're wrong. I had the photo editing areas in my company controlled as to lighting and color. You aren't supposed to do color work with a bright lighting setup impinging the screen.

If you keep the lights down as you are supposed to do, and keep them from directly lighting the screen, then you'll be fine. Glossy screens actually give better color and contrast, with deeper blacks.

Your recommendation is fine for very specific environments, however, in most situations we don't have perfect (or any) control over our lighting levels (let alone color).

I'm not sure yet if this is a deal-killer for an upgrade to my wife's iMac G5, we'll have to get a look at one in-person and consider where it physically resides. But for my work, which I normally do on a laptop, changing locations a few times/day, a glossy screen is a 100% deal killer. I would hope Apple understands this, since they've chosen to keep both options available for the MacBook Pros, but I am worried as I see a trend. I would have already picked up a MacBook for some specific test purposes, but I just can't tolerate the screen.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #260 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJay View Post

i read somewhere that apple didn't pay them for product placement... which would explain why the G4 and G3 models are more featured than the most recent ones...

if apple DOES pay for product placement, wouldn't they want to have the most recent product on set?

i think they might pay for some and might not for others... i will shamefully admit that i watched the OC and when the series first started, there were iMacs G4 everywhere. the houses, the school... as it progressed, it changed to the G5... the same place that was once occupied by a G4 on the kid's desk, there was now a G5. however there was constantly a sticky on top of the apple logo god knows why that was there. it's clearly a mac

queer as folk was another good example. it started out full of colored iMacs and by the end of the series you could see iMac G4s and Cubes all over the place...

They pay. It would be extremely rare for a product to get on in todays world without paying. The companies would have to have some other commonality.

Sometimes having the most recent model isn't realistic for that point in the program.

For example. The other night I watched a recorded segment of "The Dead Zone". If you know anything about the program, you would know that the sheriff, who had just been killed, used a Mac laptop.

The new sheriff came to his wife's home to collect it.

Now, she could have said that she came for the laptop, but she didn't.

What she said (I'm paraphrasing) was: " I'm here to pick up the 2003 Mac G4 Powerbook".

That is product placement. Everyone who watched the show knew that the sheriff had that machine.

Many companies and governmental departments simply don't buy new machines every year.

The point was that the name MAC was invoked. The fact that the sherriff was still using an older model also points to the longevity of Macs, not a bad thing either.
Reply
Reply
post #261 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Why would Apple pay for the product placement where the logo is hidden or obscured? Why would Apple pay for product placement where the obsolete product is shown? Especially one that is supposedly considered an ugly failure?

That's what used to happen before product placement became an industry.

Do you remember when cameras used by photographers and police departments used to have the name blanked out?

That was before product placement, or after, when the product had to be used, a photographer does use a camera after all, but they didn't get paid to use a particular brand.

Now, when you see a camera, you see the brand name. If you watch carefully, you can even notice that products are displayed in just a bit too obvious a fashion. The can of beer is always held so that the label is out, rather than hidden, etc.

When a product is used but not placed, you will see it, but you won't see a logo. Or, the product will be angled so that it becomes more difficult to recognize to the average public, which is the point. Those who know the models well will always recognize them, and that can't be helped.
Reply
Reply
post #262 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

I seem to recall reading that Apple never pays for product placement. (Anyone remember the source for this?)

No. Anyone who says that doesn't know advertising.

Unless the two companies have some reason to do so, one demands money, and the other gives it.

There are very rare occasions when a producer, or director, may use a new, hot, product, such as, say, the iPhone, with the idea of giving the segment some caché. But, that lasts for only a very short time. After that, it's back to pay as you go.
Reply
Reply
post #263 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits View Post

I don't think that's entirely true. Some movies and TV shows will request Apple products because it's thematically relevant, "cool" or whatever. Apple doesn't pay for this. There may be other instances where Apple does pay for placement (I don't know), but many times it's the movie/TV show that makes the request and Apple simply facilitates.

See my previous post.
Reply
Reply
post #264 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco View Post

Maybe you could quote some of these people. Or are you just talking out of your ass again?

You've just been banned.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #265 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilco View Post

Wrong.

Just because you're old doesn't necessarily mean that you know stuff.

Well, like most everyone else here, I do know far more than you do.

Prove otherwise, instead of making dumb remarks all the time to people.
Reply
Reply
post #266 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post

I don't understand one thing, perhaps I missed it: is the aluminum part of the new iMac anodized metal like in the Powerbooks and MBP's or painted?

anodized
Reply
Reply
post #267 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

Almost every computer shown in the HBO show Entourage is an iMac. I know someone who works on the show. The Exec Producer is an Apple fan. Apple gives them the computers for free they don't pay for product placement.

PowerBooks and Mac Book Pro receive the greatest amount of screen time in film and television. But on the desktop you see far more Cinema Displays in film and television than you do iMac's. I believe the reason for that from a set design standpoint. Cinema display with its muted grey color is sleek and professional looking without being overly distracting to the eye.

The iMac being pearlescent white calls too much attention to itself. Now that they are black and aluminum we will see if they get any more screen time.

Here is an article about Macs being in film and television, Washington Post

Also notice in graphic design. Most of the time when you see a web browser in an advertisement or picture its either Safari or Firefox for Mac.

While that was true as little as two years ago, it simply isn't true now.

And be careful when reading something that says "We don't PAY for product placement".

As I said earlier, there are sometimes reasons for two companies to decide to use products that benefits BOTH companies. THAT, may seem to be a non payment, but it isn't. It's an agreement, tit for tat, and often must be accounted for as an expense. somewhere, for advertising.

But, as I also said, and they say in the article, these costs can get hidden as well. This is how, from the article:

Quote:
A study released by the firm last year found that 64 percent of products placed in films or TV shows are not paid for, but rather arranged through some kind of barter in which the show provides exposure in exchange for products or services. The firm projected last year that product placement on television would grow 30 percent, to $2.44 billion in 2005, and continue to climb 15 percent a year for all media through 2009.
Reply
Reply
post #268 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

Your recommendation is fine for very specific environments, however, in most situations we don't have perfect (or any) control over our lighting levels (let alone color).

I'm not sure yet if this is a deal-killer for an upgrade to my wife's iMac G5, we'll have to get a look at one in-person and consider where it physically resides. But for my work, which I normally do on a laptop, changing locations a few times/day, a glossy screen is a 100% deal killer. I would hope Apple understands this, since they've chosen to keep both options available for the MacBook Pros, but I am worried as I see a trend. I would have already picked up a MacBook for some specific test purposes, but I just can't tolerate the screen.

Laptops are always going to be a problem. But, it's also why no one doing critical color work would ever do anything involving a non reversible color correction on a laptop anyway. The best laptops color is now on the 15.4" MBP, but even there, the color gamut is smaller than what is available on the average 8 bit desktop display, as is the contrast, and black level.

At home, you can often do somwthing that is close enough for most purposes.

But, I would NEVER say that either a glossy, OR a matte screen, is ideal for everyone.
Reply
Reply
post #269 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

For example. The other night I watched a recorded segment of "The Dead Zone". If you know anything about the program, you would know that the sheriff, who had just been killed, used a Mac laptop.

So much for catching up on my DVR.

Reply
Reply
post #270 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:07am
hey peeps.

i'm planning to get my first imac, a 2.4Ghz 24"
i cannot decide whether to upgrade the CPU to the 2.8Ghz C2Extreme or not
is the performance diff going to be very big?

i'll be using it for basic photo/video editing, office processing and the usual uses.

is it worth it for me to upgrade the CPU? normally i would have just upgraded. but the local store guy said i would have to wait 2-3wks if i wanna upgrade, but i dun wan to wait!!!

hmmmm... what to do?


First Post. Cheers!
Reply
Reply
post #271 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Obviously everyone was expecting the "floating in thin air display, with invisible enclosure".

That's the one! Or something more iMac G4 like-- they really had me going when the Ive's at it again rumors came out. That one was a STUNNER! as Seal said. These are probably quite nice, just not awe-inspiringly beautiful and easy to use like the iMac G4 20" proved to be.
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
post #272 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trashley View Post

hey peeps.

i'm planning to get my first imac, a 2.4Ghz 24"
i cannot decide whether to upgrade the CPU to the 2.8Ghz C2Extreme or not
is the performance diff going to be very big?

i'll be using it for basic photo/video editing, office processing and the usual uses.

is it worth it for me to upgrade the CPU? normally i would have just upgraded. but the local store guy said i would have to wait 2-3wks if i wanna upgrade, but i dun wan to wait!!!

hmmmm... what to do?


First Post. Cheers!

Welcome to the Forum.

Hard to know yet, but I usually suggest that if your instincts pull you toward going for the more sophisticated, and expensive, version of a Mac, go for it. That usually breeds a lot less buyers remorse. I've still never sprung for a full tower (every time I reason myself up to a Mac Pro, I go to the store and actually see one of them and wonder how it will fit on/under/near my desk), but I've always gone for the top and have not really been disappointed. Just my thoughts.
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
post #273 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottiB View Post

So much for catching up on my DVR.


Sorry, but it almost freaked me out when I saw the episode.
Reply
Reply
post #274 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubit View Post

That's the one! Or something more iMac G4 like-- they really had me going when the Ive's at it again rumors came out. That one was a STUNNER! as Seal said. These are probably quite nice, just not awe-inspiringly beautiful and easy to use like the iMac G4 20" proved to be.

Let's be a bit hypothetical here.

If Apple does come out with the perfect design, what then?

The problem is this, even a perfect design will get old after a time.

The time a product can stay on the market without losing significant sales is considered to be 3 years.

Even the perfect product will see declining sales.

So, when that happens, what does Apple do?
Reply
Reply
post #275 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:37am
Quote:
As I said earlier, there are sometimes reasons for two companies to decide to use products that benefits BOTH companies. THAT, may seem to be a non payment, but it isn't. It's an agreement, tit for tat, and often must be accounted for as an expense. somewhere, for advertising.

Yes you are using payment in its strictest sense. But yes I agree that no one is doing any of this absolutely for free. Both parties are seeing some type of benefit.

I can easily see Apple having room to barter over paying direct cash. People in Hollywood like free stuff and they are pretty easily bought off. Every production (movies/television) has offices where they conduct business for the show - paperwork, faxing, emailing, copying, printing. The writing staff generally all have computers. So I can see Apple bartering free machines for the office and staff in trade for a machine being used in the show.
Reply
Reply
post #276 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:37am
i cant take the waiting anymore....

it will MAYBE reach my local store next wk. if i upgrade, another 2-3wks. OMOMOMG 1mth before i even smell anything coming to me T_T

will the performance boost justify the wait for me?
Reply
Reply
post #277 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Strange though it may be, I would suspect that a majority of people prefer glossy screens.

They are very popular in the PC world, and the MB sales certainly haven't been hurt by it.

I can't imagine that Apple would use it for a premier product if they hadn't done the product research that showed that most people would prefer it.

Why don't you check it out first?

will do
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
post #278 of 434
8/8/07 at 12:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Let's be a bit hypothetical here.

If Apple does come out with the perfect design, what then?

The problem is this, even a perfect design will get old after a time.

The time a product can stay on the market without losing significant sales is considered to be 3 years.

Even the perfect product will see declining sales.

So, when that happens, what does Apple do?

the G4s WERE the perfect design... apple got rid of it quicker than they should have in my opinion.

then they came out with the G5s... it was alright for a while, not as amazing as the G4s, but we were giving them a break. and that's why with this release, most of us were expecting something completely breahtaking. i can't tell you what it should be. i'm no smart like that. but it sure ain't a new outfit for an old model. jonathan ive used to be more creative than this. and that's what's disapointing.

i think it was you who pointed out how impossible it would be to make that all clear design work in the other thread? well, that was such a futuristic design that it got our imagination going on what apple would come out with.

and when we got an aluminum third generation iMac we kinda got a bit upset
Reply
Reply
post #279 of 434
8/8/07 at 12:16pm
Based on the same file as Tinkerer used, this is my idea -
Reply
Reply
post #280 of 434
8/8/07 at 12:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajprice View Post

Based on the same file as Tinkerer used, this is my idea -


and this is mine:



as you can see, i would be happy without the chin and would not be bitching as much right now

PS: yes, it was done in MS paint
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils new line of 20- and 24-inch iMacs