or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Disgruntled Apple Fans UNITE !
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Disgruntled Apple Fans UNITE ! - Page 2

post #41 of 104
just get a ps3 if u want to play games
post #42 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuff99 View Post

just get a ps3 if u want to play games

I already have that anyway. But...ach, just read my post.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #43 of 104
Feedback supplied, also mentioned the LACK of USB 2 port on the back 3 is NOT acceptable when the "lesser" mini has 4!!!

even my PS3 has 4 USB 2 ports!
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
I don't see how an anti M$ stance can be seen as a bad thing on an Apple forum I really can't!

nagromme - According to Amazon: "SpongBob Typing Tutor" is outselling Windows
Reply
post #44 of 104
Disgruntled Apple Fans UNITE !

And GO HERE or HERE

Seriously, Apple is just another company. Don't like their products, buy someone else's!

post #45 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch pear View Post

Disgruntled Apple Fans UNITE !

And GO HERE or HERE

Seriously, Apple is just another company. Don't like their products, buy someone else's!


Why are you pushing windows on us ?
We as Mac fans should know all too well that Windows is crap for anything other than gaming.

If we were talking about a company like Sony or HP here, then yeah, lets just go to someone else.
But with Apple, were else are you going to get your fix of OSX ?
OSX is brilliant, and I dare not entertain the thought of using XP or (gasp) Vista as a everyday OS.

Apple just seems to have screwed up a very vital component in its primary desktop line
This may well be because they pushing people who want a decent GPU to buy a Mac Pro - this is highway robbery for anyone who likes OSX but is a power-user too.
Has Apple started changing to a far less customer friendly corporation ? I hope not, but the iPhone is not a good indication.

I mean, look at the MacBook - generally, its a nice piece of kit, but to make people want to buy a Macbook Pro, the shove in integrated graphics, which burn performance to the ground. Also, look at the new iMac displays - sure, glossy is great for some people, but why is Apple forcing EVERY SINGLE BUYER of the iMac to adopt glossy when some dispise it. Also, they seem to be warding Pros away from the iMac by this, once again, forcing them to upgrade to the Mac Pro for a decent experience. Perhaps its just me, but Apples entire selling strategy is changing - its no longer "buy this, that or the other" but now "you could buy this, but we have decided to make you buy that by crippling this"
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #46 of 104
I agree with the OP, but if you want to run Mac OSX you know you're just going to have to live with Apple hardware, through better or worse, richer or poorer etc. There needs to be a massive backlash to get them anywhere near changing their minds, but judging by the mixed response to the thread, it's not likely to happen...

Then again, I wouldn't benefit from the graphics increase as I don't really game, just the basic work/photos/music/internet combo.

Just to straighten out, what are the 3D intensive tasks that you are referring to?
"Heavy is the head that wears the crown"
Reply
"Heavy is the head that wears the crown"
Reply
post #47 of 104
The price difference between the 2.4 GHz and the 2.8 GHz 24" iMac is more or less the price of a Playstation 3. If you're serious about gaming, you're using a console, anyway. You've already stated that you _do_ own a PS3. Good for you!

If you _see_ that the reason for the graphic cards in the current iMac probably is pricing offered by ATi, you should be happy Apple went with ATi instead of their probable bargaining position: To use intel's onboard graphic chip set.

The iMac isn't and has _never_ been "the solution" for a gamer's needs. Its graphics have never been decently upgradable in the 9 years it's been around. Why start expecting the iMac to be a gamer's machine now? It's completely nuts of you to do so.

While we're on the part where you're completely nuts: You're talking about "3D applications" other than games in your posts. What are you talking about? Which "3D applications" actually make use of a 3D accelerator graphics card in a way that makes the current iMac (the one just introduced) suck? Name two. Now name the one the majority of Mac users use everyday. You'll find none. If you're talking about professional 3D software and making money with that, you'll find no problem in buying a maxxed out Mac Pro, because it's a good investment. It's bonkers to put the iMac where it doesn't belong.

That whole attitude thing you bring on with your thread and your follow-up posts aren't working for you. Let's start again:

The new iMac's choice of graphics cards isn't the best possible. There would have been other options that seem viable to you. That's okay. If you currently own a decent Mac, there's no reason to downgrade to this new iMac right now. Instead, you have _several_ options you seem to be missing:

- Buy a used Mac Pro. You'll find one for less than the maxxed-out iMac that _doesn't_ meet your needs. This option will also allow you to use a cheap, non-glossy, display.
- Wait it out. Apple will probably add one or the other graphics BTO option in a couple of months. Who knows, we might see a completely new (well, new CPU and GPU) iMac by January '08.
post #48 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fryke View Post

The price difference between the 2.4 GHz and the 2.8 GHz 24" iMac is more or less the price of a Playstation 3. If you're serious about gaming, you're using a console, anyway. You've already stated that you _do_ own a PS3. Good for you!

If you _see_ that the reason for the graphic cards in the current iMac probably is pricing offered by ATi, you should be happy Apple went with ATi instead of their probable bargaining position: To use intel's onboard graphic chip set.

The iMac isn't and has _never_ been "the solution" for a gamer's needs. Its graphics have never been decently upgradable in the 9 years it's been around. Why start expecting the iMac to be a gamer's machine now? It's completely nuts of you to do so.

While we're on the part where you're completely nuts: You're talking about "3D applications" other than games in your posts. What are you talking about? Which "3D applications" actually make use of a 3D accelerator graphics card in a way that makes the current iMac (the one just introduced) suck? Name two. Now name the one the majority of Mac users use everyday. You'll find none. If you're talking about professional 3D software and making money with that, you'll find no problem in buying a maxxed out Mac Pro, because it's a good investment. It's bonkers to put the iMac where it doesn't belong.

That whole attitude thing you bring on with your thread and your follow-up posts aren't working for you. Let's start again:

The new iMac's choice of graphics cards isn't the best possible. There would have been other options that seem viable to you. That's okay. If you currently own a decent Mac, there's no reason to downgrade to this new iMac right now. Instead, you have _several_ options you seem to be missing:

- Buy a used Mac Pro. You'll find one for less than the maxxed-out iMac that _doesn't_ meet your needs. This option will also allow you to use a cheap, non-glossy, display.
- Wait it out. Apple will probably add one or the other graphics BTO option in a couple of months. Who knows, we might see a completely new (well, new CPU and GPU) iMac by January '08.


You see, normally, I wouldnt be suprised that Apple has used a crappy GPU - Ive been with Apple long enough to realise that. However, all that hullaballo at WWDC stated the exact opposite - Gaming IS coming back to the Mac.

Common demanding 3D applications ? Final Cut, to name one...

You raise valid points, but finding used machines (atleast in my area) is a hassle.

Oh, and as for the attitude, well thats because I have to keep repeating what I essentially stated in my OP

As for not too many complaints being sent, well quite many were sent on the MacRumurs version of this - any complaints gained here, if its even only a few, always helps persuade Apple to update.

But still, perhaps I should just give up on Apple and build a Hackint0sh.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #49 of 104
(no need to quote the post right above yours...)

Final Cut works fine with a "lesser" graphics card AFAIK. And even so: Final Cut is a Pro app. The iMac is not a pro Mac.

About repeating what you've stated in your OP: Don't. If you create a thread and make a few points and the people who come to the thread and disagree, I don't see any reason to make the same points again, even if you change the wording.

Used machines can be found online, as well.

If building a hackint0sh with all its implications of illegality and probable current and future hassle (hacking, patching, being unable to update to the most recent system version at the time Mac users do etc.) is a viable option for you, then by all means do so. I can see where this absolutely makes sense. Apple is _not_ giving us back the inexpensive but internally expandable desktop machine.
post #50 of 104
Sadly, Apple has been making noises about gaming coming back to the Mac since at least 1999 when they got Carmack up on stage to demo Quake 3 Arena. Likewise, the iMacs have had low-end graphics cards since day one.

While I do agree that it is a kick in the teeth that the MacBook Pro gets a superior GeForce card, it is not entirely unexpected. Particularly given Apple's inability to live up to their claims of iMacs being great games machines in the past.

I guess Apple figures that the iMac is aimed at casual gamers who don't buy the latest and greatest FPS games. For that market, budget ATi cards are fine. As the hardcore PC games market continues to deminish I'm not too surprised this what they are aiming for.
post #51 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgbx View Post


Besides, if you look at the links you guys have already provided, the old iMacs had a NVidia 7600GT, which is not much faster than the 2400 and 2600 GPUs in the newer syetems.

emphasis added.


enough said right there.

Edit: The lower margin comment/blog link above is very interesting, and quite possibly explains the locked in ATi minimal. Possibly as the costs of other components come down (6-12 months) we'll see the option of other graphics cards appear. that is, it seems Apple has locked in their 'extra ram and HDD' prices for a good while, and are right now eating the cost of the lower margin. eating the cost and spitting out a mangled ATI2600.....


Edit2: Didn't the G5 iMac have no fans? or am I mistaken.
Good for <del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks
<del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks for Good
Reply
Good for <del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks
<del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks for Good
Reply
post #52 of 104
mistaken.
post #53 of 104
When complaining about the specs some guys here a missing on e of the main design goals of the iMac - to be compact and silent. When comparing Desktop vs. Mobile processor/chipset specs, only the power consumption is taken into account. There is other major difference though: the max operating temperature of the desktop CPUs is in the range of 65 deg. Celsius vs. 100 deg. Celsius for the mobile parts. This is A LOT. One of the first reviews on the Ars mentions that the new iMacs are extremely quiet:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...e-new-imac.ars

I like quiet machines! I am not a big fan of the glossy display though

As all of us can read here:
http://www.kodawarisan.com/k2007_02/...aaaaaaa_3.html

the glass cover has a metal strip and is hold by a magnet. This brings hope that a third party can produce a matt cover.
post #54 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow View Post

When complaining about the specs some guys here a missing on e of the main design goals of the iMac - to be compact and silent. When comparing Desktop vs. Mobile processor/chipset specs, only the power consumption is taken into account. There is other major difference though: the max operating temperature of the desktop CPUs is in the range of 65 deg. Celsius vs. 100 deg. Celsius for the mobile parts. This is A LOT. One of the first reviews on the Ars mentions that the new iMacs are extremely quiet:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...e-new-imac.ars

I like quiet machines! I am not a big fan of the glossy display though

As all of us can read here:
http://www.kodawarisan.com/k2007_02/...aaaaaaa_3.html

the glass cover has a metal strip and is hold by a magnet. This brings hope that a third party can produce a matt cover.

I must say its strange Apple has chosen to limit themselves so much by using laptop components - would any of us complain if the iMac was 3/10ths of a inch thicker but offered far superior performance ? The computers would even be cheaper.


Infact, has anyone seen CNETs recent review of the iMac ?
It ran Quake 4 with the resolution of 1024x768 (20" iMacs resolution is 1680x1050 which that of the 24" is 1920x1200) with max details at 40fps.
Now, if thats what Quake 4, at such a low resolution runs at, I dare not think about how a more modern game at the native resolution would run.

Essentially, if you want a decent desktop with any longetivity, its either the Mac Pro or nothing, according to Apple.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #55 of 104
I think now you've got it. About the desktop part, I mean. The part about the futility of quoting the entire post right above yours – not so much.
post #56 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by sequitur View Post

My gripe is that there isn't a mini-tower. There's still a gap in the lineup.

just take two mac mini's and strap them together on top of each other.
post #57 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

I must say its strange Apple has chosen to limit themselves so much by using laptop components - would any of us complain if the iMac was 3/10ths of a inch thicker but offered far superior performance ? The computers would even be cheaper.

It is not that simple. 3/10ths of an inch will not do the job. Look at the temperatures I cited above. At 25 deg. Celsius ambient temperature the max. temperature of the desktop chip is about 40 degrees higher. For the mobile part it is 75 degrees higher. And the power consumption of desktop chip is higher as well. The heat dissipation depends on both linearly, so if you have 1.2 more power and 2 times lower temperature difference it will require 2.4 times higher efficiency of the cooling system. [EDIT] This is not taking into account the power saving features of the mobile chipsets which their desktop counterparts do not have! [/EDIT]] If you use small fans this will mean a lot of noise. Regarding the performance - look here:
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...new-imac.ars/5
Not that bad IMO. This will hold the iMac perfectly usable for few years - not for hardcore gaming of course.
The fact remains: you can't tweak the configuration to perfectly fit your dreams (it will meet your needs I assume ) - but that's Apple, get used to it
post #58 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

Ok, a lot of us are unhappy at the update to the iMac.

We all know the choice of GPUs in the new iMac is appaling and insulting, to put it lightly.
For those that dont know, here, a benchmark just for reference:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3023&p=11

Apple seems to have give the iMac a very nice CPU update, but TOTALLY CRIPPLED the computer when it comes to 3D intensive applications by choosing the NOTORIOUSLY poor-performing ATi HD 2000 series, which seems like a very bizarre decision on their part (political, perhaps ?)


Also, quite a few of us are less than pleased with Apples choice to make glossy screens mandatory. Hell, I myself want a matte screen for more reasons than one.

However, just moaning about it on forums wont get us far -
here, follow this link, and take your complaints up to Apple.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=338795

This way, if they get enough complaints, they may make a update.
Its not impossible - remember that the 7600GT was added as a CTO to the previous iMac.

Please, also, pass this on to any other people you know are not happy with the update.

IF WORK TOGETHER, WE CAN ACHIEVE SOMETHING !



post #59 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaqarov View Post

That doesn't prove he's wrong.
I'd join the revolution. It is indeed a crap GPU. Obviously we do have a choice, but the only option for non-Pro users (or pro-gamers for that matter) is to get a windows box or a Macbook Pro. There was already a huge gap in Apple's lineup and they just made it bigger.


zaqarov

agreed!

Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

I'm surprised at you murch. We would think that after Apple had their hoopla with J.Carmac, and EA Games they would at least back up the claim that Games were decent on Macs with better graphics all around the line. I think it's a kind of insulting. That card is shit now. What's it going to look like in a year? It's not like this machine has any longevity with a card like that.

that card is shit, and I have sent a complaint in to Apple.

The thing is, no, the iMac is not a hardcore gamer's wet dream, that's what a mac pro is (yes, even some consider that not enough, but w/e). However, the iMac should not have a "major" update in which the GPU regresses. That's unacceptable. I understand that obviously the more expensive components, and Apple's upgrading the other system specs means they have to cut back somewhere, but they should definetely be offering a better GPU as a BTO. That way, the people who want the GPU power can have the GPU power.
MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
post #60 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

just take two mac mini's and strap them together on top of each other.

MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
post #61 of 104
Just for grins, I ran Cinebench 10 on my current iMac G4 1GHz, the results weren't pretty to say the least! Almost an hour and a half later, (to run one pass!) here are my results:

Quote:
Processor : G4
MHz : 1000
Number of CPUs : 1
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.3.9

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce4 MX OpenGL Engine
Resolution : 1440x900
Color Depth : Millions

************************************************** **

Rendering (Single CPU): 444 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): --- CB-CPU


Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 67 CB-GFX

The new iMac is almost 6x faster at CPU rendering (thought it would be more considering how far behind the G4 is) and nearly 76x faster at OGL Shading!



So it's quite an upgrade for some of us!
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 #62 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by auslander View Post

No, I'm just saying, as others have, that the iMac might not be the best choice for gaming or graphics-intensive work. That area is covered by other models. No argument here - just pointing out the fact.

It's fine for day to day internet, sending email, chat, and many other things of course, and will probably be a resounding success as a result.

In my life I have used computers to do a lot of things. I have produced intense mathematical simulations, intricate 3D models & renders for commercial product visualization, graphics-rich magazines, written programs, and more, all on hardware vastly inferior to the current iMac. Modern computers are BEYOND most of our contemporary needs, even those like me who are bona-fide power-users. If you called me a "prosumer," I'd punch you. I hate that term, because it insinuates that the tools make the user. But nonetheless, I produce good work on computers, that work being far more than internet, sending email, chat, etc. You can do that shit on an iPhone, for goodness sake!

When people whine about the iMac having a GPU that can't replicate pan-fried catfish (geek reference), I want to punch them in the face as well. These people are spec whores with little ability. If they had any ability, and legitimately needed a GPU that could, indeed, replicate pan-fried catfish, they'd be able to afford a Mac Pro. Enough said.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #63 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

In my life I have used computers to do a lot of things. I have produced intense mathematical simulations, intricate 3D models & renders for commercial product visualization, graphics-rich magazines, written programs, and more, all on hardware vastly inferior to the current iMac. Modern computers are BEYOND most of our contemporary needs, even those like me who are bona-fide power-users. If you called me a "prosumer," I'd punch you. I hate that term, because it insinuates that the tools make the user. But nonetheless, I produce good work on computers, that work being far more than internet, sending email, chat, etc. You can do that shit on an iPhone, for goodness sake!

When people whine about the iMac having a GPU that can't replicate pan-fried catfish (geek reference), I want to punch them in the face as well. These people are spec whores with little ability. If they had any ability, and legitimately needed a GPU that could, indeed, replicate pan-fried catfish, they'd be able to afford a Mac Pro. Enough said.

Why the hell should I buy a Mac Pro to play a few games on the side ?
Im very far from a spec whore, however, I believe in using hardware that has longetivity - hardware which isnt already obsolete. Even more so because when I buy a computer, I use it around 4 years before I get a new one. Thats a long time to spend depressed at your computers terrible performance at gaming.
Have you even seen the incredible suckiness of this card in benchmarks ?
No, not the iMac in general, but the card.
And besides, what ability do you talk of ? Perhaps with professional software you have to tweak your video card, but when it comes to gaming, your card either performs or it doesnt. Here, we have a card which not only doesnt perform, but dies before the starting line.

You state new computers are beyond most of our needs - yes, thats the case if you are talking about average Joe and plain Jane who do nothing of real demand on their computers.
Ignore them however, and you have a huge market for power-users.

...And I want to punch people in the face who tell me to get a Alienware, but I dont usually say it because its rude.


And, Fryke,



Quote:
Originally Posted by Targon View Post

Yeah well u have other choices you know. Like, move out of your overly taxed country (17.5% VAT has got to hurt), build an OSx86 Hackintosh yourself, get a playstation, Get a Mac Pro or just don't buy a Mac, or build a Vista PC then you don't have to 'just run OSX". Or maybe stop crying and learn the iMac is consumer home machine designed not for what you are welling up over.

viva la revolution

Since ive taken the time to read your post, can you now take the time to read mine ?
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #64 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

Why the hell should I spend between £2500-£3000 just to have a choice to be able to play games decently and be able to use OSX ?

Yeah well u have other choices you know. Like, move out of your overly taxed country (17.5% VAT has got to hurt), build an OSx86 Hackintosh yourself, get a playstation, Get a Mac Pro or just don't buy a Mac, or build a Vista PC then you don't have to 'just run OSX". Or maybe stop crying and learn the iMac is consumer home machine designed not for what you are welling up over.

viva la revolution
post #65 of 104
Thread Starter 
To hell with it.

In precisely either 3 hours or 72 hours im picking up a...

QX6700
4GB RAM 800MHz
ASUS 8800GTX
P5N32-E
500GB 7200 RPM SATA
(and other peripherals)

Uber L33T haxxor computer for £1,200.
Im tired of Apple dictating what hardware I will be using year, after year, after year, after bloody-year. Im picking up this beast, going to run hackint0sh on it.

This disgruntled Apple fan has lost faith in Apple.
No doubt none of you actually care, but I thought I would point it out anyway.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #66 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

...they'd be able to afford a Mac Pro. Enough said.

The issue isn't affording the Mac Pro. The issue is -- why endure having to house a huge, empty, heavy box? The same identical components can be stuffed into a small cube, they've done it before and should do it again.
post #67 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

To hell with it.

In precisely either 3 hours or 72 hours im picking up a...

QX6700
4GB RAM 800MHz
ASUS 8800GTX
P5N32-E
500GB 7200 RPM SATA
(and other peripherals)

Uber L33T haxxor computer for £1,200.
Im tired of Apple dictating what hardware I will be using year, after year, after year, after bloody-year. Im picking up this beast, going to run hackint0sh on it.

This disgruntled Apple fan has lost faith in Apple.
No doubt none of you actually care, but I thought I would point it out anyway.

Why not just wait for Mac Pro revisions, coming next?
post #68 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits View Post

Why not just wait for Mac Pro revisions, coming next?

I could, but ive already been waiting 2 years for Apple to launch a computer to fit my needs. Im tired of waiting. I want it now.

Also, a Mac Pro kitted for my needs will cost about £2700, while delivering probably only somewhat (15% ?) superior performance.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #69 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

To hell with it.

In precisely either 3 hours or 72 hours im picking up a...

QX6700
4GB RAM 800MHz
ASUS 8800GTX
P5N32-E
500GB 7200 RPM SATA
(and other peripherals)

Uber L33T haxxor computer for £1,200.
Im tired of Apple dictating what hardware I will be using year, after year, after year, after bloody-year. Im picking up this beast, going to run hackint0sh on it.

This disgruntled Apple fan has lost faith in Apple.
No doubt none of you actually care, but I thought I would point it out anyway.

Enjoy it.

You will be back though.
post #70 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

To hell with it.

In precisely either 3 hours or 72 hours im picking up a...

QX6700
4GB RAM 800MHz
ASUS 8800GTX
P5N32-E
500GB 7200 RPM SATA
(and other peripherals)

Uber L33T haxxor computer for £1,200.
Im tired of Apple dictating what hardware I will be using year, after year, after year, after bloody-year. Im picking up this beast, going to run hackint0sh on it.

This disgruntled Apple fan has lost faith in Apple.
No doubt none of you actually care, but I thought I would point it out anyway.

ive already been waiting 2 years for Apple to launch a computer to fit my needs. Im tired of waiting. I want it now.

Good choice. Is it a tower or are you building your own miniature computer? I'm sick and tired of waiting too and I would love to do the same but I don't want a noisy tower.
post #71 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

Ok, a lot of us are unhappy at the update to the iMac.

We all know the choice of GPUs in the new iMac is appaling and insulting, to put it lightly.
For those that dont know, here, a benchmark just for reference:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3023&p=11

Apple seems to have give the iMac a very nice CPU update, but TOTALLY CRIPPLED the computer when it comes to 3D intensive applications by choosing the NOTORIOUSLY poor-performing ATi HD 2000 series, which seems like a very bizarre decision on their part (political, perhaps ?)


Also, quite a few of us are less than pleased with Apples choice to make glossy screens mandatory. Hell, I myself want a matte screen for more reasons than one.

However, just moaning about it on forums wont get us far -
here, follow this link, and take your complaints up to Apple.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=338795

This way, if they get enough complaints, they may make a update.
Its not impossible - remember that the 7600GT was added as a CTO to the previous iMac.

Please, also, pass this on to any other people you know are not happy with the update.

IF WORK TOGETHER, WE CAN ACHIEVE SOMETHING !

Easy solution: buy an old iMac. If you don't like it - don't buy it. Your power lies in your wallet.
post #72 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Paying close to $3000 just play a game a decent framerate is completely unreasonable to ask.

When someone has a passion for something, they usually find a way to afford the requirement for entry into the activity. Get a part time job if necessary and then buy whatever it takes to play.

m

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #73 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

When someone has a passion for something, they usually find a way to afford the requirement for entry into the activity. Get a part time job if necessary and then buy whatever it takes to play.

this baffles me every time I hear it. Do you people not listen or what?

What it takes to play is a sub-$1000 mid-tower Mac with a $200-300 graphics card (under $1500 total anyway). Apple don't offer it. It's not a case of the buyer not having what it takes in this instance but the seller. When you see benchmarks of the iMac against the Mac Pro playing games, they come out about the same so you can plainly see that the graphics card is the most important component and they are pretty poor in both offerings. It's ridiculous to suggest people should spend so much on a tower whose extra CPU horsepower make very little difference to the gaming performance.

It's also not very practical for people who maybe take their computer to LAN gaming tournaments due to the extreme bulk. A small lightweight tower would be ideal and not just for Mac gamers either, I'm pretty sure that a lightweight expandable machine would be a hit with Linux and Windows people too.
post #74 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

this baffles me every time I hear it. Do you people not listen or what?

It's also not very practical for people who maybe take their computer to LAN gaming tournaments due to the extreme bulk. A small lightweight tower would be ideal and not just for Mac gamers either, I'm pretty sure that a lightweight expandable machine would be a hit with Linux and Windows people too.

Linux and Windows people can build their own machines already. What do they want with a Mac.

If you are into professional competition gaming, you aren't using a Mac anyway so what's the fuss?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #75 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

Why the hell should I buy a Mac Pro to play a few games on the side ?
Im very far from a spec whore, however, I believe in using hardware that has longetivity - hardware which isnt already obsolete. Even more so because when I buy a computer, I use it around 4 years before I get a new one. Thats a long time to spend depressed at your computers terrible performance at gaming.

You are completely a spec whore. What games can't you play? Secondly, Apple doesn't care much about gamers. End of story. They are a tiny part of the overall market. Most money in video games is in consoles and portables, and the next biggest chunk is in games like "the sims," if I remember correctly. The part of the video game community that worries incessantly about frame rates is a minority share of one of Apple's minority markets.

Why don't you come out and just say that you want a cheap tower mac? That's ultimately the point, isn't it? For you to hate the iMac is like for me to hate on women's fashion trends. Ultimately, I have an opinion, but I'm not part of the market. You're not part of the iMac market. You never were, and probably won't be for some time. Your opinion doesn't count.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #76 of 104
Yes, Apple could easily make a Mac for gamers. They could also easily slash several hundred dollars off most of their Macs just to cut us breaks at the expense of their margins. There's no reason to believe at this point they have the slightest interest in doing either.

Apple really only caters to creative professionals. Otherwise, they try and make products with mass appeal. It is their philosophy. Will this ever sink in with anyone looking for the $300 UberMac?
post #77 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It's also not very practical for people who maybe take their computer to LAN gaming tournaments due to the extreme bulk. A small lightweight tower would be ideal and not just for Mac gamers either, I'm pretty sure that a lightweight expandable machine would be a hit with Linux and Windows people too.

You mean a small, lightweight tower like this?

Are you serious about somebody taking a Mac to a LAN event, no matter how powerful it is? At least 75% of Mac games won't network with their PC counterparts. (thanks again for Direct Connect, Microsoft! )

Apple likes to fill niches that nobody else can fill like Apple can: the Pro towers for the AV professionals, the home user AIO market (name one AIO other than the iMac off the top of your head), portable devices, etc. There are many companies that make small, relatively quiet gaming rigs, Apple just chooses not to be one of them.

That said, I'm still very disappointed the GMA950 is hanging around...it stinks even for casual gaming. There is something wrong when my 4 year old iMac G4 with a GF4MX can put out similar frame rates in UT2K4 as a Core2Duo MacBook or Mini.
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 #78 of 104
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You are completely a spec whore. What games can't you play? Secondly, Apple doesn't care much about gamers. End of story. They are a tiny part of the overall market. Most money in video games is in consoles and portables, and the next biggest chunk is in games like "the sims," if I remember correctly. The part of the video game community that worries incessantly about frame rates is a minority share of one of Apple's minority markets.

Why don't you come out and just say that you want a cheap tower mac? That's ultimately the point, isn't it? For you to hate the iMac is like for me to hate on women's fashion trends. Ultimately, I have an opinion, but I'm not part of the market. You're not part of the iMac market. You never were, and probably won't be for some time. Your opinion doesn't count.

What games cant I play ?
Oh no, I can run the games, but unless im going to reduce everything to lowish settings, im going to be having a slideshow.
And I...ach, screw it. Whatever. Go find someone else to insult and anger since im gone 'neyway.

---

Marvin + msantti - thanks.
Its actually a computer a enthusiast made at my local PC shop for sale, so he made it.
As for noisiness, I will check that out actually - Ill PM you if it isnt, and tell you what the fan im using is.
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
OSX > Windows. Fact || Leopard > Vista. Fact || Apple > Microsoft. Fact
The single best piece of audio you shall ever hear http://media.putfile.com/Metal-Gear-Solid-2-Main-Theme
Reply
post #79 of 104
Hold your breath just for one sec...

The peops over at macrumours are suggesting that the imac contains the Mobility HD 2600 XT from looking at various hardware scans. The Mobility HD 2600 XT is said to be better then the Desktop 2600 Pro Apple claim to be in their imacs.

Take a look, although yet its still in speculation.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=339616
post #80 of 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by 132GHz,4TB DDR8 SDRAM,95TB HDD View Post

What games cant I play ?
Oh no, I can run the games, but unless im going to reduce everything to lowish settings, im going to be having a slideshow.
And I...ach, screw it. Whatever. Go find someone else to insult and anger since im gone 'neyway.

---

Marvin + msantti - thanks.
Its actually a computer a enthusiast made at my local PC shop for sale, so he made it.
As for noisiness, I will check that out actually - Ill PM you if it isnt, and tell you what the fan im using is.

If what you want is gaming then it makes sense to get a pimped out PC and game your little thumbs off. Then, once the things starts driving you crazy for other reasons, maybe at that point there'll be a mac that will be just as good for gaming and not too expensive. You can sell your PC on craigslist for $8 and move back to the chocolaty goodness of the mac.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Disgruntled Apple Fans UNITE !