New iMacs offer more value than competition - report - Page 6

The blind Apple followers argument is a cheap shot from someone who has no argument based on facts.

You simply want to accuse Apple without taking into account the current state of the computer industry or the current state of the world economy. We have attempted to present to you the reason from the business side of Apple's choices and you completely ignore those facts and realities without actually presenting any facts of your own.

The reason you've stated you feel Apple should build another desktop line is because you believe Apple should be able to come up with some mythical "new and innovative" desktop that will increase sales during a time when desktop sales are projected to plunge 31%. You have no idea what new and innovative desktop Apple could invent that would accomplish this task, nor do you have any evidence if Apple did create such a desktop if this strategy would even work.

Seeing as how Dell has lost over 40% of its profits and HP has lost 13% of its profits, Apple has still remained profitable. Its pretty clear Apple doesn't feel they have the mythical desktop that will increase sales. Therefore Apple is hunkering down and will wait out the worst parts of the recession. Many of us that you wish to call sycophants are simply saying looking at the reality of world economy this seems to be a reasonable plan.

Most computers these days are fast enough and have enough space for the majority of users, 90%.

Seeing as Apple keeps increasing their profits and selling more computers, phones in this economy I would say they are doing well.

So you didn't notice you were being ripped off before the credit crunch when Macs were the same price?

Yes it seems after every update, we get more and more users registering to troll.

Get a refurb or used Mac Pro. Today, your sunk costs would have been $599 + 4GB kit.

But the 20" iMac is your only semi-reasonable 8GB option at the moment...although perhaps there will be a way to get the Mini's to work with 8GB at some point. Right now 8GB installs but the performance after 4GB crawls. It might do 6Gb though...I don't think that was tested...just 2 4Gb sticks.

Well the refurb is out, the old Mac Pro was overpriced by today's market value and I'm not paying over 2 grand for a 2 year old model. Unfortunately the 20in iMac is out too because it has a crappy 9400 notebook chip in it that can't handle Lightroom 2 and Photoshop cs4 acceleration, which is why I made my argument that the starting cost for someone beyond the consumer isuite level is the $1,799 model.

Well I think the issue is I don't fault Apple for making money everyone is out for profit, this is America! My issue is the design community that grew up using their products, buying their software and keeping them alive have now become the expendable group. We (print/web designers) don't need 8 XEON cores and 64GB of ram but what we do need is the availability of more than one internal hard drive and cheaper ram without a minimum $3,600 price tag.

I admit wholeheartedly for 3D/Video the MacPro is a hellova bargain but it is total overkill for what tens of thousands of designers need.

That said I understand where they are heading and it makes complete sense that if average mom wants to blow $2k on an iMac then bless her soul and Apples pocketbook but there is a huge chunk of their current customers who have been sitting on the fence scratching their heads wondering when we became irrelevant.

I do agree Apple is leaving a pretty sizable portion of the computer market unserved without a middle desktop line.

At the same time we have to look at the results of the market. Dell and HP do serve lots of desktop variations. From a business perspective how large and how profitable are middle desktop lines.

From what Marvin says the 9400 is okay for COD4 on medium and CINEBENCH says it's at least as fast as my old X1600. Of course, that's nowhere close to the performance of any of the iMac dedicated GPUs but it's not as horrid as the GMAs were.

But if you're going pro then the new Mac Pros are the only ones with the Nehalem Xeons and not bad for $3-4K. It all depends on how much OSX means to your workflow. Frankly Windows 7 isn't that bad even as a beta.

Just a quick word on this idea that gets tossed about better hardware integration worth the extra money.

2 years ago I took delivery of two very similar specced notebooks at roughly the same time, a Dell XPS 12" beauty that is my work machine and a MacBook Pro 15" for personal use.

In the last 2 years my Dell has not had a single problem, not one. I have not changed anything and it still runs like a dream.

My MBP has been back to an Apple store 3 times! One to have some serious hardware replacement.

My MBP gets much, much hotter than my Dell.
My MBP makes much more noise than my Dell when it gets hot.

I have had to put an extra 2GB RAM into my MBP, the Dell has been performing fine with just the standard 2GB.

I no longer take my MBP on flights as it has the most poorly designed screen of any notebook anywhere. It does not open anywhere near far enough back, yet my Dell opens all the way back. Perfect for using on your knee or even standing up (very important to anyone who works at a desk). I thought Apple were the design kings?

I still remember how pissed off I was when I got my shiny new MBP home only to realize that the lid design was not very strong and thus the lid was warped and did not close flush. I was even more pissed off to be told this was not considered to be an issue worthy of replacement and seemed to be a common thing.

Again, Apple the design kings?



Don't get me wrong I love OSX, I like using Mac's (my wife has one now too) but I do get so annoyed with this notion that Apple make superior products than others and that it is down to this perfect design and seamless hardware integration. Sorry that is rubbish, it might have been true years ago but it is not anymore.

Mac's are nothing more than PC's, sharing standard off the shelf PC Components, and put into a box that is prettier than most of the competition.

You are right it looks great.

My MBP looked great when new too, the best looking laptop I had ever had, by far.

Now? 2 years later, my MBP is looking much, much worse for wear than my Dell. All scratched around the trackpad - My watch has worn away much of the aluminum . I now have to remove my watch whenever I use it - bit too late however. I do not need to remove my watch to use my Dell. That could be considered a user flaw, it could be considered a design fault.

To me it is another example of form over function. Just because something is better looking it is in no way a good indication of better design. I think many Apple fans get this confused.

My car would look much better if my wheels were diamond encrusted, it would certainly cost more than the competition too - does that make it better designed?

Nothing wrong with plastic on an item that is supposed to be designed for portable use, being thrown in bags and carried on planes etc... Design wise it still is the better material for making a notebook out of.

While I agree satisfaction in a product can come down to subjective personal taste. Its simply not true that Apple uses all standard off the shelf parts.

Sounds as if you've had all types of problems, sounds as if that MBP was a bad call for you.

The Processor - Is this not a standard Intel Processor used by most other box builders?

The Graphics Card - Again, not a NVIDIA card you can buy from any PC dealer?

The DVD Drive - Apple buy drives from different people, mainly Pioneer I think.

The HDD - Don't Apple buy HDD's from Hitachi, Seagate and Toshiba?

The LCD - Not sure who they buy from currently, know they have signed a long term deal with LG.

RAM - Well of course just standard sticks, same as everybody else uses, from the same factories.

The Motherboards, of course these are not off the shelf. Apple designed and built by Intel for Apple. But when we are talking about components I do not usually think about the motherboard. This is just what holds all the parts that actually drive the computers together.

Have I missed anything?

In many ways it is a great notebook, I do not regret buying it. My point is that it is not some shining beacon to fantastic design and perfect hardware as many fans on here would have you believe. It is a notebook, a bloody expensive notebook.

The imac is also an expensive notebook. It may be dressed up like a desktop but underneath the skirt it is just a notebook with last years notebook parts.

Mostly yes, but at times Apple has gotten custom chips. Apple had Intel to design the low voltage Merom processor for the Mac Book Air. The 3.06GHz chip used in the April 2008 iMac update was a custom chip run Intel made for Apple.


Again yes mostly, but the Nvidia MCP7A-U chipset was custom designed for Apple. Even though Nvidia will offer it to others.

I don't think anyone claimed the Mac Book Pro was absolutely 100% perfect and nothing ever goes wrong with them. Seems to be the sentiment you are reacting to.


Only the CPU is last years parts. The motherboard, chipset, GPU are this years parts.

I believe the chipset was a shelved item from Intel that they saw no market for, but after Apple asked for such a chip they brought it out. It only appeared that it was made for Apple when it more correctly was put into production for Apple. We see further evidence of this with the other ultra-lights using that chip many months later. However, that doesn't take away from your initial point that Apple doesn't just use off the shelf parts that it can find in some local computer store, as Murphster suggests. He has made mention of the base parts that any computer has, things that Apple used along with other even before the move to Intel, save for the CPU of course.

No one in their right mind would claim that any CE is perfect across the board. It's the nature of highly complex, mass produced electronics. Frankly, I'm surprised that my equipment doesn't break down more often with the way I treat my CE.