or Connect
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 8

post #281 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

See my previous post.

See BennettVista's previous post. His is spot on.

You are right in that product placement has become a big and distracting industry, with mini-ads creeping their way into TV and film.

That, however, is different from an art director's choice of what table, computer, plant, and rug to put in a scene. Art directors and other creative folks tend to use and favor Macs and place them into their work. Apple facilitates this by making their products available to the industry, but without payment.

I simply don't know if they've paid for product placement like so many companies have. I don't know, maybe someone else does. i don't want to pretend to know something i don't.

However, even though I am just a cat, I do know, as a fact, that many films and TV shows simply choose to place Apple products into their scenes and without payment.
post #282 of 433
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?

It already happened to the Nano, the Shuffle and the Mac Pro.

I am curious to witness the imminent successor of the Shuffle and the Nano design. I guess they can still play with colours, textures and materials though, but what to do with the Mac Pro?!
post #283 of 433
Gosh, I am very tempted by the new iMac only to realise that they did not release a 22" iMac. Dammit!

Looking at the myriad of recent design innovations by Ive & his team, it is very exciting to imagine the successor of the MBP:

1/ a magnetic latch

2/ a new keyboard (iMac/MB)

3/ a black border around the screen (iMac '07)

4/ a glass screen covering the actual screen surface and the black border (yummy, iMac '07)

5/ a black Apple on the outside (I love the black Apple on the silver)

6/ aluminum encasing


The new finder in Leopard does make it very tempting to marry the MBP with the current iMac as it is easy to switch between computers. One could take advantage of the big screen, big harddrive and power of the iMac while .mac gives you access to your iMac at home when you are away with your MBP.
post #284 of 433
The new iMacs are a big letdown in many respects. Here's a list of missing features:

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.


Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer. MacPro computers are for graphic professionals, not home, family or office users.

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go. Steve Jobs has been the Apple CEO for 10 years and he is under SEC investigation for an illegal, backdated, fraudulent $650 millions stock option grant. Stockholder class actions are still pending, as the SEC investigation. Enough said.
post #285 of 433
Well, I ordered one, my first Mac! Woohoo, i'm excited.

Apple site says max power consumption is 200 Watts. is it just me, or is that pretty darn low for a desktop PC?
post #286 of 433
imac is not equal to mac pro


Come on its the size of most normal screens, why dont you think about that for a bit before posting things.
post #287 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

The new iMacs are a big letdown in many respects. Here's a list of missing features:

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.


Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer. MacPro computers are for graphic professionals, not home, family or office users.

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go. Steve Jobs has been the Apple CEO for 10 years and he is under SEC investigation for an illegal, backdated, fraudulent $650 millions stock option grant. Stockholder class actions are still pending, as the SEC investigation. Enough said.

Stop enough with the whining. Save your anger for something important. I suspect that none of you who are trashing the new iMac have actually seen one. Do yourself a favor and visit your nearest Apple Store (and soon to be Best Buy) and spend a little time with it. It is a thing of beauty that can't be adequately captured in photos. And the touch and feel of the keyboard just might pleasantly surprise you.

Yeah--you can complain about the specs--but if you are more demanding than the packages they have put together...guess what? You are not their target market. I agree with the analysts that Apple will sell 2 million by end of September.

==============================
We'll now return to our bitching program that is already in progress.
iMac G4, TiBook, Bodoni Blue iMac, 128K
Mac, Ti-Book, Dual G5 2.0 ghz,
23" HD Cinema Monitor,MacBook,iPhone
and nearly every generation of iPods
---------------------------
www.BeyondtheShoebox.com
Reply
iMac G4, TiBook, Bodoni Blue iMac, 128K
Mac, Ti-Book, Dual G5 2.0 ghz,
23" HD Cinema Monitor,MacBook,iPhone
and nearly every generation of iPods
---------------------------
www.BeyondtheShoebox.com
Reply
post #288 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

The new iMacs are a big letdown in many respects. Here's a list of missing features:

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.


Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer. MacPro computers are for graphic professionals, not home, family or office users.

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go. Steve Jobs has been the Apple CEO for 10 years and he is under SEC investigation for an illegal, backdated, fraudulent $650 millions stock option grant. Stockholder class actions are still pending, as the SEC investigation. Enough said.

This has got to be the dumbest post ever. Or... the wittiest, most satirical Future Hardware post ever!
post #289 of 433
i think he is refering to the xMac

iMac form factor, his specs cannot be fulfilled, but xMac could do

xMac in MWSF 08?

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
post #290 of 433
If there ever is an xMac, it will be below the iMac, and it will be a beefed up Mac mini replacement. The iMac is too deep rooted now to be taken away, or even to have a headless equivalent in the range.

The Mac mini (or any new small headless Mac / xMac) will be below the iMac, and the Mac Pro will be above it. That's how Steve wants it to be.
post #291 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

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

Melgross, I had to erase my first couple of attempts at replying. For some reason, I find many of your posts condescending and overly self assured. It tends to make me want to respond back in kind. This is one of those instances.

While it is true that product placements are normally accompanied by a contract, this is not always the case. You simply don't know if Apple receives compensation for their products placements. Your claim to absolute certainty is arrogant at best.
post #292 of 433
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?

I'm not sure that I'd agree that most people prefer glossy.. In regards to MB sales, it obviously has not been a deal breaker, especially given the relatively low price point, but if a choice was given, I believe most would choose matte.

I just found this from ArsTechnica regarding a poll that Lenovo ran regarding matte vs. glossy:

"Lenovo recently ran an online poll asking its customers their personal preference, and the results are revealing."

"An overwhelming 86 percent of respondents preferred the old-school anti-glare matte finish for their laptops, with only 8 percent voting for the glossy reflective finish. Only 5 percent were indifferent. Clearly, non-glossy won by a landslide.


http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061018-8022.html
post #293 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Melgross, I had to erase my first couple of attempts at replying. For some reason, I find many of your posts condescending and overly self assured. It tends to make me want to respond back in kind. This is one of those instances.

While it is true that product placements are normally accompanied by a contract, this is not always the case. You simply don't know if Apple receives compensation for their products placements. Your claim to absolute certainty is arrogant at best.

Don't take it personally, we're all know-it-alls.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #294 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz.

2) More powerful, desktop class processor

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz

These three are all the same point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

No need for that. All apple have to do it write drivers for the GPUs they've had in their Macs for years. Both ATI and Nvidia GPUs have dedicated hardware for H.264, MPEG-2, and VC-1 decoding.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come. Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go.

Are you serious? Look at Apple's stock price over the last ten years. Steve Jobs and his "puppet directors" have turned Apple from a company on the brink of collapse to one of the most successful computer companies on the planet. You've got a screw loose, mate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

he is under SEC investigation

No he isn't. That ended ages ago and he was exonerated.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #295 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider View Post

This has got to be the dumbest post ever. Or... the wittiest, most satirical Future Hardware post ever!

You were right the first time.
post #296 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

It already happened to the Nano, the Shuffle and the Mac Pro.

I am curious to witness the imminent successor of the Shuffle and the Nano design. I guess they can still play with colours, textures and materials though, but what to do with the Mac Pro?!


I dont know if you had a G5 or Mac Pro, they share almost the same case. Its another league product and for my part its kind of impossible to compare with a couple of iPods. First cause iPods and Pro Desktop are oposite segments. Dont know any of my customers or friends that has one that doesnt love how it looks or perform.
Never saw a cleaner interior on a desktop computer, well organized, intelligently managed (heat, energy, fans, space, etc)
Never saw that on a Dell clone desktop, still waiting, so how u can say the Mac Pro failed, are u a Pro user? Do u need to edit high def video, heavy graphics, hardcore uber gamer?
I use my Mac Pro for all that and more and I love it, as I loved my old G4 tower or my 500mhz PB, my lamp iMac and my eMac.

what can I say, I'm a happy Apple customer.

post #297 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

The new iMacs are a big letdown in many respects. Here's a list of missing features:

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.


Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer. MacPro computers are for graphic professionals, not home, family or office users.

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go. Steve Jobs has been the Apple CEO for 10 years and he is under SEC investigation for an illegal, backdated, fraudulent $650 millions stock option grant. Stockholder class actions are still pending, as the SEC investigation. Enough said.

In its defense, the iMac isn't a desktop, it's an all in one. It's designed to be an integrated, easy to use package, not designed for speed. It's fine the way it is. Apple's lineup, however, isn't.
post #298 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJay View Post

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

There is something called "rising expectations". That's what we have too much of here. We expect the impossible, when we are all just human.

A lot of people liked the iMac G4, and a lot of people hated it.

Schools, for one, hated it. They would just not buy it in any great numbers.

Why?

Because the kids would swing the monitors around, and hit someone, or the machine next to it. Kids are like that, even ones in high school. Actually, they are the worst, because they are bigger and stronger. The monitors were always breaking from being hit by another one.

You might ask why they didn't just move them further apart. Well, room is at a premium in a computer lab. Everything is at a set distance apart, as are the jacks, etc.

Companies have come out with designs that were functionally wonderful, only to find that in the next incarnation they were less functional. Read CU, you'll see that newer designs are not always better. Sometimes they are worse.

Apple is treading a fine line.

It just so happens that black and silver is "in" right now. It's a new Apple look, and we will likely see more of it before the next transition comes in a few years.

I think the silver keyboard with black keys would look horrible, though.
post #299 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJay View Post

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

Why don't you make a mechanically correct drawing for how the machine would look from the side without the space at the bottom for all of the electronics and power supply, speakers, etc that you cut off?

Make sure that the cooling is properly done.

And also make sure that the center of gravity is well below the swivel point for stability, as Apple has done.
post #300 of 433
i'm not a designer. apple has that type of people for that reason. i just made a copy and paste job to show what i would think an attractive iMac would look like. how it works and how things are meant to be placed inside i have no idea... but i'm sure they'd find a way. they made the cube and the mini AND the iMac G4 before... if there is one company that can make it, it's apple.

why are you attacking me on this one i don't know. i don't like the new iMac and i don't have to like everything apple puts out. and the reason why there is a forum here i believe is for us to express how we feel about apple ain't it?

and in my perspective, it would be as thin as a lap top, and that black part there would have the acrylic the G4s had, in the same way they had it on the monitor... how that would work i have no clue. but that's what like to see.

if steve jobs had your mentality, apple would never have released the iPod or the computers they have. apart from the pro desktops, there hasn't been an apple computer that wasn't designed from the inside out, thinking first of how it looks and then how they would shoe horn everything inside it.
post #301 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits View Post

See BennettVista's previous post. His is spot on.

You are right in that product placement has become a big and distracting industry, with mini-ads creeping their way into TV and film.


That, however, is different from an art director's choice of what table, computer, plant, and rug to put in a scene. Art directors and other creative folks tend to use and favor Macs and place them into their work. Apple facilitates this by making their products available to the industry, but without payment.

Art directors have little leeway in placing directly recognizable products in a scene. You overestimate their power. They design a scene, and then take it for approval. The "shirts" make all the decisions. Often the "shirts" tell the art director exactly what they want to do, and the AD merely follows their instructions so that it looks correct.

Quote:
I simply don't know if they've paid for product placement like so many companies have. I don't know, maybe someone else does. i don't want to pretend to know something i don't.

Then why are you saying what you don't know to be true or not?

Quote:
However, even though I am just a cat, I do know, as a fact, that many films and TV shows simply choose to place Apple products into their scenes and without payment.

This goes back to my previous statement.

You don't know, as you said. Why don't you leave it at that?
post #302 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

It already happened to the Nano, the Shuffle and the Mac Pro.

I am curious to witness the imminent successor of the Shuffle and the Nano design. I guess they can still play with colours, textures and materials though, but what to do with the Mac Pro?!

One can't improve a perfect design, can one?

By its very nature, perfect is, to make up a word, unimprovable.

So, the various iPods were different, but not necessarily better, or worse.

The interesting thing about design is that if the designs were switched in time, the same popularity would occur.

I'm not talking about technical improvements, just the design. So if the Mini came out after the Nano, it would have become the bigger hit. The Nano had the benefit of the Mini building up the user base first. Switch them, and the same thing would have happened.

Look at what the Nano is now! A small Mini!

This often happens, as design concepts float around in a circular route in time.

As for the Mac Pro, that's much more difficult.

Many love it, and many hate it.

But, a pro machine should do what it must do. And the Mac Pro case certainly does that. The transition from G5 to Core proved that.

So, what would Apple do?

Hopefully not diminish the excellent design just for the sake of being new. How would they do that? I haven't the faintest idea right now.
post #303 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJay View Post

why are you attacking me on this one i don't know.

It's not an attack. People are just trying to point out to you that what you desire probably would require Apple to break the laws of physics.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #304 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

The new iMacs are a big letdown in many respects. Here's a list of missing features:

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.


Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer. MacPro computers are for graphic professionals, not home, family or office users.

As a computer buyer, and corporate governance observer, I don't like Apple 36% fat profit margins, nor the lavish, demented, insane payoffs of $750 millions to 5 individuals for the year 2006. Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go. Steve Jobs has been the Apple CEO for 10 years and he is under SEC investigation for an illegal, backdated, fraudulent $650 millions stock option grant. Stockholder class actions are still pending, as the SEC investigation. Enough said.

The reasonable price you're talking about for a 20" has just now risen to at least $2,000.

Is that ok with you?
post #305 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

Melgross, I had to erase my first couple of attempts at replying. For some reason, I find many of your posts condescending and overly self assured. It tends to make me want to respond back in kind. This is one of those instances.

While it is true that product placements are normally accompanied by a contract, this is not always the case. You simply don't know if Apple receives compensation for their products placements. Your claim to absolute certainty is arrogant at best.

Say what you like. I just say what I like. I talk in a straightfoward way. I'm sorry if some don't like that.

I've been involved in advertising since 1969, and I've worked with any number of ad agencies, Tv studios, movie companies, etc. I did a lot of the work that you think I don't know anything about.

I speak as though I know, when I know. When I don't know, I ask questions of others, and if someone can show definitively, that I'm wrong, then I will say so. Otherwise, just like most everyone else here, I stick to what I say.

But, when articles linked to, for example, show contrasting statements, a careful read will show the truth.

When it comes to opinions of what we migh prefer, that's different, everyone has the right to prefer something.

Am I condesending, nope!

Am I self assured? Yup!
post #306 of 433
I think the design is fine, however I think they made a mistake in axing the 17 inch. It could have hit the $999 price point and would have been a huge seller, IMHO.
I also have issues with the glare, however I will check it out at the store before harping anymore about it.
post #307 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

1) Core 2 Quad processor @ 2.4 GHz. The new pricing for 1000 unit purchases is only $266 since July 22, 2007 for the Q6600 quad-core processor (2.40 GHz @ 1066 MHz FSB). See "Quad-cores for all Intels price cut" at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33027/135/

2) More powerful, desktop class processor in a ticker enclosure leaving enough room for adequate ventilation. If I want a laptop class, slower processor, I'll buy a MacBook, not an iMac with a large screen.

3) A faster, higher quality, desktop class, Intel Front Side Bus @ 1066 GHz or 1333 GHz, not an outdated, slower, laptop class FSB @ 667 MHz. If I want a laptop, I won't buy an iMac.

All the same point. You want the iMac to have a desktop processor. It doesn't. It doesn't need a desktop processor. It's designed to be a "pull it out of the box, plug it in, it works" device. Unlike most PCs. You can't easily make a All-in-One with a desktop processor. Perhaps come Penryn time (Q1 2008) this will be feasible.

I would also dispute the value of quad-core chips at this point. They're nice and all, but given the state of multi-threading right now, not really valuable. It'll be 2008 or 2009 before the Xcode improvements result in apps optimized for quad-core machines. A dual-core iMac at 2.2 to 2.8 GHz is plenty fast for just about everything people need. I have a Mac Pro, and I'll attest that 90% of the time, I could shut off one of the processors and not notice (actually, I run 2 BOINC instances, so I basically do). Only in the event of doing simultaneous encodes or compilation do the quad-cores help. A single quicktime H.264 encode maxes out at 120% on my computer. So one can encode and do light work in addition on a dual-2.2

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

4) Faster DRAM to go with the missing, faster, desktop class Front Side Bus. 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300) doesn't cut it on today's desktops.

You don't provide any evidence (and I haven't seen any elsewhere) that memory bandwidth or latency would be a massive performance issue here. Additionally, I'm not sure there are 800 MHz SO-DIMMS. And if there are, they'd be like the FB-DIMM situation too expensive relative to normal chips for minimal gain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

5) 2 GB of RAM standard on all iMac models for the upcoming graphic user interface of Mac OS X Leopard and new, more demanding applications to come.

While I would have liked to see a 2 GB standard on the top end model, expecting it on the lower models is unrealistic. At the moment, the plan seems to be that Pro machines get 2 GB, and the consumer machines 1 GB.

As for Leopard, it can be run on 1 GB of RAM. It'll probably be able to run (unpleasantly) on 512 MB or 768 MB. In fact, since Leopard pushes even more of the GUI work to the GPU, the extra gizmos shouldn't work performance much

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

6) ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256 MB of GDDR3 memory standard with all models of 20 or 24 inches iMacs. 256 MB of graphic RAM was never a luxury, especially for 20 inches LCD monitors.

I think you'll find that 128 MB of video RAM is a plenty large framebuffer for WSXGA+ (1680x1050), and I know plenty of people who run it at that. Since the monitor's probably limited to 60 Hz anyways, you should have no problem even if you had half that video RAM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

7) Blue-Ray disk drives to save a copy of our digital lifestyle.

If you want to add $400 for Blu-Ray read-only. If you honestly want a BR burner in an iMac, you're looking at a $3000 machine right there. A BR burner will easily run you a thousand dollars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

8) The 50 cents chip needed to decode Blue-Ray films and .H264 content.

Others have already pointed out that that's what the graphics card is for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

9) Standard, minimum 500 GB Serial ATA hard drives on all iMac models, with inexpensive upgrades for 750 GB and 1 TB hard drives. iMacs are not laptops and should not be outfitted with small, cheap hard drives. Give us room to expand our digital collections.

250 GB is plenty of room. At 256kbps, a GB is 500 minutes of music. At 1000 kbps (a decent 480i/p bitrate in H.264), a GB is over two hours of video.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

10) Mac OS X Leopard, version 10.5, included or with a coupon for a free upgrade when it becomes available. The $129 or $149 upgrade fee is unacceptable on a brand new computer.

It's at least 2 months away. Wait until it comes out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

11) eSATA connector for faster, external hard drives which have been on the market for more than a year now. FireWire 800 is great for some, but has no future.

For a single HDD, FW 800 is fine for an external hard drive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

12) Digital TV tuner to take advantage of the LCD displays. You can't sell electronic or home appliances in Japan unless you include digital TV reception with cellphones or home appliances. Be a leader, Apple, or a follower if you can't innovate, but give us the features available from other manufacturers.

A Digital TV tuner would add $50 to the final price for something many, many people wouldn't use. Especially given the whole encryption thing on digital cable and satellite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

13) 1080p High definition capability with all iMac LCD displays.

There is no such thing as a standard 20 inch 1920x1200 monitor. There are a few 17 or 19 inch laptop panels at that res, but the industry standard resolution for 20-22 inch widescreen monitors is 1680x1050. And the DPI on a 1920x1200 20-incher would be too high for easy computer use until Leopard comes around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Give us the features we want, for a reasonable price, like every other computer manufacturer.

These aren't the features consumers want, these are the features you want. And if you expect some of what you're asking for in a sub-$2000 price range, you're nuts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Apple is so severely mismanaged that it will be a textbook example of wasteful mismanagement for decades to come.

Steve Jobs and the whole board of puppet directors have to go.

In the space of 10 years, Steve Jobs and his "puppet directors" took Apple from "Apple is dying" to "Holy crap! The sky's the limit for Apple!" If that's mismanagement, then I hate to think what you expect from well-managed companies.

Seriously, Apple's gone from hemorrhaging money and having no realistic next-gen plan to massive profits and being widely recognized as a pioneer. If you told someone in 1997 that Apple would be worth what it's worth now, they'd say you're nuts.

----

Overall, please do some basic research or at least look around a little bit before posting. Some of your claims had merit (wanting a desktop Mac), but an awful lot of them were pretty out there. I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just saying that your post was unrealistic. You want Apple to make a $3500 computer and sell it to you for $1500. That's mismanagement.
post #308 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve666 View Post

I think the design is fine, however I think they made a mistake in axing the 17 inch. It could have hit the $999 price point and would have been a huge seller, IMHO.
I also have issues with the glare, however I will check it out at the store before harping anymore about it.


Have you seen these Engadget pics? As with any other glossy screen, the glare on the new iMac is actually quite bad. Headaches, eyestrain, reflections... I just don't understand why anyone would choose glossy if given a choice. More than that, I can't understand why Apple is not giving us a choice.

http://www.engadget.com/gallery/appl...nds-on/343535/
post #309 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

Have you seen these Engadget pics? As with any other glossy screen, the glare on the new iMac is actually quite bad.

That's because the iMac is facing a window and the picture is taken at an angle. Fire an iMac away from a window and sit in front of it, and you won't see any reflections.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #310 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Art directors have little leeway in placing directly recognizable products in a scene. You overestimate their power. They design a scene, and then take it for approval. The "shirts" make all the decisions. Often the "shirts" tell the art director exactly what they want to do, and the AD merely follows their instructions so that it looks correct.

Apparently, the suits have gone along with many art director's decision to include Apple computers for sympathetic characters.

Beyond this squabbling, the larger issue is Apple's successful guerilla marketing strategy of which media exposure is a part. Analysts estimated the PR value of the iPhone campaign at 400 million dollars. However, very little of that was paid by Apple, most of it was provided free by the media and propelled by the numerous channels of buzz the company, the products, the fans, and the CEO generate. Apple's ability to place products in film and TV is part of their successful strategy to generate exposure without paying for it.

I am not sure of the point you are pursuing, but it sounds as if you are trying to suggest that whenever you see an Apple computer in a movie or TV show, it is because Apple has paid for the privalege. No one argues that there isn't rampant paid product placement in film and TV. However, you are mistaken if you think that widespread use of Apple computers in film and TV is a result of that practice. On the contrary, widespread use of Apple products in film and TV is because the filmakers themselves, art directors and "suits" included, tend to prefer Macs. And to accomodate their preference, there is a dept at Apple that facilitates their requests, but doesn't pay to play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Then why are you saying what you don't know to be true or not?

I'm not. Let me clarify:

I know this is true: Many TV/film producers place Apple computers in their productions without receiving payment from Apple. Filmaker wants an Apple computer in the scene, contacts Apple's film liason, receives loaner computer for production. Period.

I don't know if this is true: whether or not Apple pays for opportunities for product placement in movies and TV shows above and beyond opportunities that fall into their lap and for which they do not pay. It may be that Apple has a policy of not ever paying for product placement. Or it may be that Apple pays for product placement in film and TV productions that are particularly valuable for them. I don't know.

But what i do know is that there are a lot of placements simply because Apple is Apple, and the producers' interest in including Apple products is sufficient that they do not require payment from Apple.

The products themselves tend to be more beautiful than the competition, look nice on screen, and connote modernity and hippness for characters that use them. As others pointed out, they are also popular among the people who make films and TV, which also contributes to their on-screen use. Hence, lots of Apple cameos on screen, no payment neccessary.

I think it would be safe to say, for example, that if the Carrie Bradshaw character in Sex In The City typed her column on a Dell, Dell might have paid for the placement. But Carrie's Mac was a design decision in keeping with her personality and the show's personality. I am sure the producers would rather go to their local Apple store and pay out of their own pocket for a Mac for Carrie to use rather than receive gobs of money from Dell. Carrie's Apple laptop helped the audience understand her character and is part of a successful network of largely unpaid positive media exposure for Apple products. (Or negative exposure if you don't like Carrie).
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You don't know, as you said. Why don't you leave it at that?

Because you misunderstood what I said, and you seem to misunderstand the dynamic between Apple and the film and TV industry.
post #311 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

That's because the iMac is facing a window and the picture is taken at an angle. Fire an iMac away from a window and sit in front of it, and you won't see any reflections.


I understand that the glare is coming from the window, but that's the whole point.. With a glossy screen, you will get glare and reflections from windows and overhead lights, with matte screens, you don't. Most iMacs will likely be in dens, offices or rooms with windows and overhead lights.
post #312 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun View Post

Have you seen these Engadget pics? As with any other glossy screen, the glare on the new iMac is actually quite bad. Headaches, eyestrain, reflections... I just don't understand why anyone would choose glossy if given a choice. More than that, I can't understand why Apple is not giving us a choice.

http://www.engadget.com/gallery/appl...nds-on/343535/

Macworld just panned the glossy screen. I may have to go with a Mini and buy a 17 inch LCD monitor. Any suggestions?
post #313 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve666 View Post

Macworld just panned the glossy screen.

They did? Where? This first impressions article states "Turning on the iMac gave me the chance to see the bright, glossy display in action, which looked more pleasing than the previous iMacs."
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #314 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

That's because the iMac is facing a window and the picture is taken at an angle. Fire an iMac away from a window and sit in front of it, and you won't see any reflections.

Mmm, yeah. That is an option, but my desk is in our den (3 large windows) and is part of a built-in entertainment center. Kinda hard to turn it away from the windows. It's not directly at them as is, and I have glare problems with my current iMac with matte screen, depending on sun angle.

What about overhead lights, such as an office/professional environment?

The angle the picture is taken at is very slight also, maybe 10 degrees off center? Not an uncommon angle if you want to show somebody a document, etc. on your screen.
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #315 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

They did? Where? This first impressions article states "Turning on the iMac gave me the chance to see the bright, glossy display in action, which looked more pleasing than the previous iMacs."

Lookee here:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/edit...tion/index.php
post #316 of 433
The guy is criticizing without having played with the new screen and basing his opinion on a different device altogether.

I'm surprised that MacWorld would print such dribble.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #317 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve666 View Post

Lookee here:

http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/edit...tion/index.php

I think if you're concerned about the glossy screen see it for yourself before deciding. I wouldn't take anyones word for it. You might like it or find it acceptable even if you prefer matte. I like matte, especially on a laptop where I think one is more likely to encounter glare. On a desktop I don't think it would be to bad as long as the location of the machine was thought out and measures taken to control lighting. Heck blinds are cheap and might be all you need. I don't think the glossy is necessarily the deal breaker some make it out to be.
post #318 of 433
I don't know if anyone has seen this yet, but for those who were wondering what the inside looks like, kodawarisan has disassembled the new iMac...

I think someone was asking what kind of display they're using. I'm not sure about the 24", but this one (the 20") is using a LG PHILIPS LM201WE3 (TN Film 16.7 (8-Bit) 1680 x 1050 5ms 800:1 2000:1 300 / 450 160 / 160)
post #319 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by mokarran View Post

I don't know if anyone has seen this yet, but for those who were wondering what the inside looks like, kodawarisan has disassembled the new iMac...

I think someone was asking what kind of display they're using. I'm not sure about the 24", but this one (the 20") is using a LG PHILIPS LM201WE3 (specs)

Thank you very much for the kodawariwan link in particular. Very interesting to see the placements.
"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 #320 of 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

...On a desktop I don't think it would be to bad as long as the location of the machine was thought out and measures taken to control lighting. Heck blinds are cheap and might be all you need. I don't think the glossy is necessarily the deal breaker some make it out to be.

Exactly. I've got a 20inch iMac ordered. I know which room of my house it is going in. I control the environment. I will deal with any glares that may be there. Glossy screen is not a deal breaker.
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