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 9

post #321 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:30pm
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.
Reply
Reply
post #322 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer View Post

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

-

I have to agree with Mr. O. At first sight I thought yours was nicer, but when I saw the both side by side I can see why Apple didn't do what you suggested, not that they obviously didn't it behind closed doors. Ditto for the LOGO, I thought your LOGO was much better until I saw them both side-by-side. We are talking about a mainstream consumer product after all. Despite the bullshit marketing talk Jobs always gives, I think he gave a great insight to how they approached the design of this product when he mentioned that it would appeal equally to Pro's and consumers. Very, very sleek with just the right amount of friendly poured into the mix. Your design is not as mainstream, it's a pro design. Still who knows, the iMac may look like that in two years time.

Excellent work though. Glad to see your libido is going well.

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #323 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:42pm
I hate glare so much I didnt like the white iMac because I thought the white part was too shiny.
Glare is bad.
I am going to the Apple Store tomorrow, hopefully they will have one to look at.
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
post #324 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:48pm
Yeah, actually after seeing them in person today, I have to say they are quite nice looking. I still don't prefer the black logo or the black backing (the latter of which i won't have to see pretty much ever, and it will eliminate the current problem I have of a bleached screen when the sun comes through the window behind it)

I viewed four or five of them in an extremely brightly lit room with and the reflection was minimal at worst, which was most pleasing. I will be more than happy to take one home with me real soon.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

I have to agree with Mr. O. At first sight I thought yours was nicer, but when I saw the both side by side I can see why Apple didn't do what you suggested, not that they obviously didn't it behind closed doors. Ditto for the LOGO, I thought your LOGO was much better until I saw them both side-by-side. We are talking about a mainstream consumer product after all. Despite the bullshit marketing talk Jobs always gives, I think he gave a great insight to how they approached the design of this product when he mentioned that it would appeal equally to Pro's and consumers. Very, very sleek with just the right amount of friendly poured into the mix. Your design is not as mainstream, it's a pro design. Still who knows, the iMac may look like that in two or three years time.

Excellent work though. Glad to see your libido is going well.
Reply
Reply
post #325 of 434
8/8/07 at 8:59pm
The glossy screen debate is a tough one, and is often very personal. When I ordered my new MBP (to replace an older PB) earlier this spring, I spent a lot of time considering the two, actually spending time at the store moving the display machines around. I ordered the glossy, and, several months later, am very happy with my purchase.

Photos look fantastic on the glossy screen compared to my old matte PB (there may be some other factors involved as well, though). The glare is not much of a problem; I tend to use the machine in the same locations at each place I carry it to and have adjusted to the lighting which could cause glare. Sitting at a certain angle or propping the screen at a certain angle will do the trick most of the time. In one location, I re-organized the lighting (and actually cut the cost of electricity for the entire room, and was able to turn the airconditioner up a degree due to reduced heat created in the room).

A desktop is not a laptop, however, and I will have to wait and see for myself if the glossy is worth it for me. Having played on other glossy computers at the local shop, I was secretly waiting for Apple to go glossy, as the iMacs were suffering in comparison to some of the other brands.

steve666: You are about as tough-sounding on glare that I have seen, so I will be very interested to read your opinions; I won't be able to see one of the new machines until they get one at my local computer shop (they usually have a delay of two months). The nearest Apple Store is 5 hours and 125 bucks away, round trip. Not that that should stop me...

 

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 #326 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:37pm
I really wrestling with what one to buy, 20 or 24" ?

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #327 of 434
8/8/07 at 9:45pm
I am waiting until later in the fall to actually really plan on buying one, but I thought about that, as well.

In the past 24 hours, I have used a 15" MBP, a 20" iMac, and a 23" Cinema Display.

Depending on how you like to open your apps, you can do fine with the 20". If you really like to spread things out, or have three apps open and visible at the same time, go for the 24.

At home on my 23", I like to work on one thing while having a rather large video displaying somewhere on screen. My mail is often open, too, so that I can see incoming mail without having to switch around. However, i do find that I have a lot of open space much of the time, so I could likely have done with the 20.

There is the CPU on the 24 which is slightly better, but I don't think that 0.4 GHz will really make or break any apps.

 

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 #328 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve666 View Post

I hate glare so much I didnt like the white iMac because I thought the white part was too shiny.
Glare is bad.
I am going to the Apple Store tomorrow, hopefully they will have one to look at.

I like what Bergermeister says about the subjectivity of one's response to a glossy screen. I went to my local Apple store tonight and found that I wasn't as put off by the screen as I expected to be. Evidently there is glossy and then there is GLOSSY. The new iMac's screen struck me as the former pleasantly more subdued than it might have been.

That said, by their very nature glossy screens run the risk of making reality into a blown-glass meretrix. All the oozing flash the wet, high contrast, hyper-saturated color I just don't know about it. Images from the worst-offending screens call to mind a 21st century mob splashing in the waters of youth, eyes wiggling around like little water snakes until each frivolous bather abruptly fastens his or her gaze on timeless old Ponce de Leon who doles out bright, shiny brochures for ice cream and scuba gear.
Reply
Reply
post #329 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:11pm
With all that Alu, does anyone know how good the wireless reception is?
Reply
Reply
post #330 of 434
8/8/07 at 10:14pm
when i first saw the new imac on the apple website, i didn't like it at all. the black border around the screen, despite the functionality, looked terrible. however, i changed my mind upon seeing photos of the real thing, rather than the 'representations' on the online apple store. though i do think the aesthetic works better for the 24"/wider aspect.

whilst it would have been nice to get a completely overhauled design, eg a la our inviso-imac mock-up, i think some of our expectations were a tad unrealistic on the design front at least. i'm looking forward to seeing one in person - we ordered a 20" (2.4/2gb/320) yesterday for dvd authoring and as a back-up cutting station.
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
"We're Apple. We don't wear suits. We don't even own suits."
Reply
post #331 of 434
8/8/07 at 11:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

The glossy screen debate is a tough one, and is often very personal. When I ordered my new MBP (to replace an older PB) earlier this spring, I spent a lot of time considering the two, actually spending time at the store moving the display machines around. I ordered the glossy, and, several months later, am very happy with my purchase.

Photos look fantastic on the glossy screen compared to my old matte PB (there may be some other factors involved as well, though). The glare is not much of a problem; I tend to use the machine in the same locations at each place I carry it to and have adjusted to the lighting which could cause glare. Sitting at a certain angle or propping the screen at a certain angle will do the trick most of the time. In one location, I re-organized the lighting (and actually cut the cost of electricity for the entire room, and was able to turn the airconditioner up a degree due to reduced heat created in the room).

A desktop is not a laptop, however, and I will have to wait and see for myself if the glossy is worth it for me. Having played on other glossy computers at the local shop, I was secretly waiting for Apple to go glossy, as the iMacs were suffering in comparison to some of the other brands.

steve666: You are about as tough-sounding on glare that I have seen, so I will be very interested to read your opinions; I won't be able to see one of the new machines until they get one at my local computer shop (they usually have a delay of two months). The nearest Apple Store is 5 hours and 125 bucks away, round trip. Not that that should stop me...

I'll report back as soon as I see one. Not sure if the store has a display yet but I will be in the area and will stop by.
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
post #332 of 434
8/9/07 at 12:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

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.

And yet, Apple does not fail to prove every day that it is very reluctant to write such drivers. Once the hardware DVD decoding has been dropped years ago, Apple never looked back again and relied on raw CPU muscle. Same story with HD video. The GPU has HD video decoding capabilities from the X1600 era at least and Apple has yet to release drivers making use of this.
Reply
Reply
post #333 of 434
8/9/07 at 12:53am
About the new design: I am rather neutral or slightly negative. I think the black border destroys the aesthetic balance. There was a variant posted before with a totally black front that I liked better. But I will reserve my judgement for when I see it in person.
Reply
Reply
post #334 of 434
8/9/07 at 5:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post

And yet, Apple does not fail to prove every day that it is very reluctant to write such drivers. Once the hardware DVD decoding has been dropped years ago, Apple never looked back again and relied on raw CPU muscle. Same story with HD video. The GPU has HD video decoding capabilities from the X1600 era at least and Apple has yet to release drivers making use of this.

Is this backwards compatible. In other words, how would mac users with older powerbooks and less power gpus benefit?
Reply
Reply
post #335 of 434
8/9/07 at 10:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

I really wrestling with what one to buy, 20 or 24" ?

I would certainly choose the 24" as the screen has much better resolution wise and also the angle of vision. Check complete tech specs to see the difference. And if you can afford it go for the deluxe 2.8 version...

http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html
Reply
Reply
post #336 of 434
8/9/07 at 11:10am
24"!

20" has a lower quality panel matrix
Reply
Reply
post #337 of 434
8/9/07 at 11:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

I really wrestling with what one to buy, 20 or 24" ?

Same here … 24" is slightly too big, 20" is slightly too small \

Today, I spent one hour travelling between both iMacs. The Apple Genius told me that there's no difference between the screen of a 23" Cinema Display and the screen of the 24" iMac as they both have the same resolution. So, technically speaking, the 24" iMac is actually a 23" iMac.

However, the dilemma was easily solved by the food paradigm: it is better to stop eating while you're still a little hungry i/o keep on eating till you're stuffed and feeling miserably afterwards. The first habit will slim you down, while the other one might lead to chronic depressions.

Meaning, it's better to save the extra cash (and spend it on an iPhone) and coping with the idea that your A4 documents will be slightly too big on your 20" screen
Reply
Reply
post #338 of 434
8/9/07 at 1:22pm
As just posted on Macworld:

For those that missed it the "GLOSSY" part of the screen is really just a glass plate held on by magnets, over a regular, MATTE finished LCD. If you really had your heart set on an iMac, simply removing the glass plate will restore the traditional non-glossy screen, AND provide a nice recess to keep the screen in shadow.
Reply
Reply
post #339 of 434
8/9/07 at 2:14pm
The glass protecting the screen is great, I can finally buy an iMac to my family without risking the kids smudging/scratching the panel.

Not too keen on glossy myself, for work I prefer a standard display - but for "home use" (looking at photos/movies/webb) I believe a glossy screen would actually be better.

The new wireless keyboard is perfect, I have been looking for such a keyboard for ages (to allow me to dock my PB without having to use a sucky big keyboard).

---



Wow, classy.
That Angelina desktop pattern should be made standard on the new iMacs (makes me remember the cool Shark desktop in the Pismo ads).
The Black/Alu screen looks so much better with a black and white desktop (and grey folder icons).

---
Reply
Reply
post #340 of 434
8/9/07 at 4:04pm
OK, I just saw the iMac in person:
There is defintely plenty of glare from the overhead lights and you can see yourself in the screen also. However, the picture is clearer compared to the Apple Monitor that was hooked up to a Mini. The Monitor actually looks fuzzy to me, as if there is dust on the screen (there wasn't).
Its hard to gauge what the glare would be like at home, but I assume there will be glare from whatever light you are using. I dont understand why Apple didnt apply a non glare coating to the glass surface, that would have eliminated the glare problem while still giving a clearer picture than the Studio Display and I assume the old iMac.
As for the new keyboard, I like it. I like how the keys are spaced apart, its easier to avoid hitting 2 keys at once. The mouse still sucks.
I will wait until people buy the iMac and try it at home to see if the glare is a problem. Again, I dont understand why Apple didn't just add an anti-glare coating. Stupid if you ask me.
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
www.numbersusa.com
www.fairus.org
www.usenglish.org
Reply
post #341 of 434
8/9/07 at 8:35pm
erm... because they wanna make you go buy a film of anti-glare yourself and earn your $$?
Reply
Reply
post #342 of 434
8/9/07 at 8:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trashley View Post

erm... because they wanna make you go buy a film of anti-glare yourself and earn your $$?

How many anti-glare films for iMacs is Apple selling right now? Note: the answer is less than 1.
Reply
Reply
post #343 of 434
8/9/07 at 9:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer View Post

How many anti-glare films for iMacs is Apple selling right now? Note: the answer is less than 1.

They do need to keep the 3rd party suppliers in business, eh?

Why else would they keep making keyboards with bright white keys, for example?

(looks at the iSkin cover on his Apple Pro keyboard)
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 #344 of 434
8/10/07 at 12:20am
Hi, Do they still use that mobile core duo and for example would it be possible to upgrade to a 3.0 extreme (6800 /6850?)
Reply
Reply
post #345 of 434
8/10/07 at 12:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer View Post

How many anti-glare films for iMacs is Apple selling right now? Note: the answer is less than 1.

duh... whoever said its available now...
Reply
Reply
post #346 of 434
8/10/07 at 12:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

Same here 24" is slightly too big, 20" is slightly too small \

Today, I spent one hour travelling between both iMacs. The Apple Genius told me that there's no difference between the screen of a 23" Cinema Display and the screen of the 24" iMac as they both have the same resolution. So, technically speaking, the 24" iMac is actually a 23" iMac.

However, the dilemma was easily solved by the food paradigm: it is better to stop eating while you're still a little hungry i/o keep on eating till you're stuffed and feeling miserably afterwards. The first habit will slim you down, while the other one might lead to chronic depressions.

Meaning, it's better to save the extra cash (and spend it on an iPhone) and coping with the idea that your A4 documents will be slightly too big on your 20" screen

That post has only confused me more, thanks

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply

DaHarder just got banned. Let's crack open the champagne.

Reply
post #347 of 434
8/10/07 at 3:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

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

Posts don't get much better than this ;-)

big up yer self man
Reply
Reply
post #348 of 434
8/10/07 at 3:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deranged View Post

Do they still use that mobile core duo

Mobile Core 2 Duo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deranged View Post

and for example would it be possible to upgrade to a 3.0 extreme (6800 /6850?)

No.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #349 of 434
8/10/07 at 4:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

The Apple Genius told me that there's no difference between the screen of a 23" Cinema Display and the screen of the 24" iMac as they both have the same resolution. So, technically speaking, the 24" iMac is actually a 23" iMac.

Eh? Just because they have the same resolution doesn't mean they are the same panel. A 24" panel can have the same resolution as a 23" because the 24" will have a larger dot pitch - hence a completely different panel.

Besides, Apple cannot sell a 23" panel and call it a 24" like the good old days of CRT, where they can get away with it due to the hidden dimensions of CRT tubes and overscan.

Honestly I wonder how much it takes to become an Apple 'genius' sometimes...

Give me a panel part number for the 24" and we can settle this
Reply
Reply
post #350 of 434
8/10/07 at 5:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by l33r0y View Post

Just because they have the same resolution doesn't mean they are the same panel.

I think the point the "genius" was trying to make was not that the panel is the same - obviously they can't be - but that there's not much effective or practical difference between the panels. Since they have the same resolution, there isn't really an advantage of the 24" over the 23" panel - just because it's physically bigger doesn't mean you get any more useable screen space.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #351 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

I think the point the "genius" was trying to make was not that the panel is the same - obviously they can't be - but that there's not much effective or practical difference between the panels. Since they have the same resolution, there isn't really an advantage of the 24" over the 23" panel - just because it's physically bigger doesn't mean you get any more useable screen space.

Yes true if you are speaking in practical terms, but the quote was in technical terms, which is inaccurate.

Either the Appple Genius was mis-quoted, or is speaking out of his @ss

Quote:
technically speaking, the 24" iMac is actually a 23" iMac
Reply
Reply
post #352 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

That post has only confused me more, thanks

I think it's an easier choice if there's a 17" still in the mix.

With 17, 20, and 24, then it's easy to go for the 20": not too big, not too small, juuuuuuuuust right.

So just pretend the 17" still exists and tell yourself you'll get the 20".

Then, apply the same logic you would have applied a week ago: if you still feel the 20" is too small for you, up it to 24".

Reply
Reply
post #353 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by l33r0y View Post

Yes true if you are speaking in practical terms, but the quote was in technical terms, which is inaccurate.

Either the Appple Genius was mis-quoted, or is speaking out of his @ss

Oy, I think the Genius was speaking in practical terms. Sorry for the misquote, but I found it very confusing at the time so I was just playing the smart guy by nodding my head on everything he was saying
Reply
Reply
post #354 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

I think the point the "genius" was trying to make was not that the panel is the same - obviously they can't be - but that there's not much effective or practical difference between the panels. Since they have the same resolution, there isn't really an advantage of the 24" over the 23" panel - just because it's physically bigger doesn't mean you get any more useable screen space.

They are equivalent in the number of dots, but I think the slightly larger one is slightly more useable, you can sit slightly farther away or it's slightly easier to read at the same distance. Last I heard, there was only one supplier of the 23" panels, everyone else had settled on 24" panels.
Reply
Reply
post #355 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits View Post

I think it's an easier choice if there's a 17" still in the mix.

With 17, 20, and 24, then it's easy to go for the 20": not too big, not too small, juuuuuuuuust right.

So just pretend the 17" still exists and tell yourself you'll get the 20".

Then, apply the same logic you would have applied a week ago: if you still feel the 20" is too small for you, up it to 24".


I think Apple should release a 22" iMac.

It is amazing how I got used to the 20" screen. At first, I thought it was huge. Today, I am surprised to experience it is just not big enough.

As to Ireland, forget about the food paradigm and go for the 24". I guess you might find it HUGE today, but you might get used to it (finding it just not big enough in a couple of years ).
Reply
Reply
post #356 of 434
8/10/07 at 6:43am
Have a 20 inches 2.4 arriving on monday plus the 4gb kit from owc. Cant tell how happy i'm !

Reply
Reply
post #357 of 434
8/10/07 at 7:08am
What is the powerbutton on the side of the new wireless keyboard used for? Does it just switch the keyboard on and off or does it controll your Mac as well?
Reply
Reply
post #358 of 434
8/10/07 at 7:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trashley View Post

duh... whoever said its available now...

So the conspiracy is that they put glass on iMacs to sell film that's not even available for sale yet, if ever?
Reply
Reply
post #359 of 434
8/10/07 at 7:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RolandG View Post

What is the powerbutton on the side of the new wireless keyboard used for? Does it just switch the keyboard on and off or does it controll your Mac as well?

Keyboard
Reply
Reply
post #360 of 434
8/10/07 at 7:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RolandG View Post

What is the powerbutton on the side of the new wireless keyboard used for? Does it just switch the keyboard on and off or does it controll your Mac as well?

Mac.

The keyboard is switched on automatically from the moment you start typing.
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