Apple unveils new iMacs with 21.5 and 27-inch displays

1192022242543

Comments

  • Reply 421 of 853
    msanttimsantti Posts: 1,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    And on about Blu-Ray, IT SUCKS!!





    My PS3 BluRay died after a firmware update, won't read any disk. PS3 works and does the Folding@home now but that's it.



    Had to buy another PS3, so now I got two nice heaters.



    Sony is being sued because of the bricking of so many PS3 BluRays, something I'm sure had to do with copy protection/HDMI being broken. Perhaps serials being copied/stolen or something. So mine got hit.



    Blu-RAY IS A BAG OF HURT!!





    The iMac is a pain as it is with nothing being user accessible, much less a malfunctioning Blu-Ray and firmware updates coming from (of DRM/Rookit fame) Sony Inc. to protect the copy protection.



    You need BluRay? Get a external device. It's not ready for the mainstream and perhaps never will be.



    The MIAA (which Sony is part of) really doesn't want BluRay movies on computers, unless they can control the DRM and playblack so it can't be copied. Apple won't go for that naturally, all that evil Sony code in OS X.



    Apple is trending towards less mechanical, less laborious, more all on the logicboard type devices anyway.



    You got to be kidding. You must be hanging out at the AVS Forums too much.Always amazed at how so many people have had dead PS3 after a firmware update and hear practically zilch elsewhere.



    I updated to 3.0 and 3.01 and my system works just fine. Just as thousands of others have. No problems. Either you all like to stir the pot or you all turn off your systems during the update.



    Unreal.
  • Reply 422 of 853
    pt123pt123 Posts: 696member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post




    BluRay is not coming to Mac's.





    Who needs it anyway when you got this device?



    http://www.roku.com/default.aspx



    I need it because I have 1.5 Mbps DSL and AppleTV is a bag of hurt with 1.5 Mbps internet. It takes over 4 minutes before a HD trailer will even begin playing.
  • Reply 423 of 853
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    Yes the glossy screens look more attractive, this is why they sell well to the uninformed.



    Yes, I owned a glossy white Macbook and gave to a girlfriend, who didn't like the glossy screen neither. It gave us both headaches and eyestrain. The computer went unused and un-cared for. It got a drink spilled on it because nobody paid attention to it. Now it's a $1000 paperweight.



    Yes, I used glossy CRTs over the years, so I KNOW about the dangers of reflections and glare. We had to hang stupid anti-glare screens and hoods in front of our CRTs to get accurate color/pictures.



    Yes, I know about the Sony tubes, that was the best technology at the time, until cool to the eyes matte screen LCD's came out. And why wasn't the LCD's glossy hmmm? Why did they do a extra process to place a matte film on the LCD? Glare was a issue with CRTs and LCD's solved it. Now we are back to glossy like fools.



    Yes, you can have a higher quality Trinitron with more pixels if the matte LCD was a cheap low resolution model and couldn't display all the pixels the content had.



    Yes, the best Sony HDTV's Bravia are all matte screens.



    Yes the iMac's are matte screens covered with a glossy glass, take the glass off and see.



    If you're doing any kind of serious work, you still have to use hoods, and turn the lights down. There are companies that sell them for that purpose, and most high end graphics monitors come with hoods as standard, even though they are matte. You don't get less reflections on matte, you just think the image itself is washed out.
  • Reply 424 of 853
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Wow, another BS story from MacTripper! BluRay not ready for mainstream? Guess again. Lower prices, increasing sales, every movie coming out on BluRay...it is ready for mainstream. Despite the PS3 firmware glitch, BluRay is thriving well. Stand-alone Blu Ray players (not PS3's) are selling very well, and increasing in sales each year. If you hate Sony so much, why did you buy it? Yet you claim Sony makes the best HDTV's with their Bravia line, but you despise them in this post.



    Mainstream for TV, not for Mac's.



    BR drives are flaky and unreliable, prone to draconian DRM schemes that might brick your BR installed in your Mac. Just like the firmware update did to thousands of PS3 owners. And the DRM/rookit thing that came on music cds.



    Sony is so controlling, they even altered the Folding@home program to say it's "Life with Playstation" So I can see why there are problems with their firmware updates and BluRay in Mac's.



    And yes Sony can make good stuff, it's got a software and control issue though, which makes it too flaky to include their devices in Mac's.



    Sony needs to be broken up and let the diseased sections of it die and the good ones, like making TV's, live on and profit.
  • Reply 425 of 853
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    No one is implementing that feature



    Ver 2 models do. But it's also up to the movie studios. It's not B-R itself, which does allow it.



    But you can't make a legal copy of a download, or of a DVD either, and both have DRM.
  • Reply 426 of 853
    cubertcubert Posts: 728member
    Freakin' Sweet!!!
  • Reply 427 of 853
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    Mainstream for TV, not for Mac's.



    BR drives are flaky and unreliable, prone to draconian DRM schemes that might brick your BR installed in your Mac. Just like the firmware update did to thousands of PS3 owners. And the DRM/rookit thing that came on music cds.



    Sony is so controlling, they even altered the Folding@home program to say it's "Life with Playstation" So I can see why there are problems with their firmware updates and BluRay in Mac's.



    And yes Sony can make good stuff, it's got a software and control issue though, which makes it too flaky to include their devices in Mac's.



    Sony needs to be broken up and let the diseased sections of it die and the good ones, like making TV's, live on and profit.



    You're just making stuff up now. Keep it to the facts.
  • Reply 428 of 853
    Well, let's see, I have four SATA HD's (two 150MB 10K Raptors (as RAID 0), and two 500MB 7.2K Samsungs), 20" display, keyboard, and mouse.



    So what can I get for about half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8GB) iMac?



    i7-860? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115214



    P55 MicroATX MB? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157170



    8GB DDR3 1600MHz? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231193



    GeForce GTX 260? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127426



    650W 80 PLUS SILVER Certified power supply? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817341036



    22X DVD burner? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827151187



    HTPC Case? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811204035



    Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116762



    Total Cost? $1.15K < half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8MB i7-860) iMac



    Has eSATA and HDMI to boot.



    Will I miss a 27" monitor? No because I have a 37" 1080P display currently hooked up to my LAPTOP for watching 1080P content.



    Faster graphics, faster HD's, faster RAM, very efficent power supply, a real HD display for watching HD content from several feet away, and I can (but don't want/need to) OC this puppy.



    Why are Macs twice the price for half the speed?



    See you, don't want to be you!
  • Reply 429 of 853
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by franksargent View Post


    Well, let's see, I have four SATA HD's (two 150MB 10K Raptors (as RAID 0), and two 500MB 7.2K Samsungs), 20" display, keyboard, and mouse.



    So what can I get for about half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8GB) iMac?



    i7-860? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115214



    P55 MicroATX MB? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157170



    8GB DDR3 1600MHz? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231193



    GeForce GTX 260? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127426



    650W 80 PLUS SILVER Certified power supply? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817341036



    22X DVD burner? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827151187



    HTPC Case? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811204035



    Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116762



    Total Cost? $1.15K < half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8MB i7-860) iMac



    Has eSATA and HDMI to boot.



    Will I miss a 27" monitor? No because I have a 37" 1080P display currently hooked up to my LAPTOP for watching 1080P content.



    Faster graphics, faster HD's, faster RAM, very efficent power supply, and I can (but don't want/need to) OC this puppy.



    Why are Macs twice the price for half the speed?



    See you, don't want to be you!



    you're the epitome of a loser, what are you doing in this forum? if you could afford a mac, you'd buy one



    you must be sad because you have to run windows on that computer
  • Reply 430 of 853
    Finally some sense. Someone posted a price comparison of IPS monitors and several would easily fit in the budget I specified and don't forget I'd still have money left over anyway!!!



    I have been an unashamed fan-boy since I got my first little box running system 6, I love my LC3 and my 6400, my imac dv wasn't as great as I had expected, but I loved my g4. We run Macs exclusively at work. But since the switch to intel I've really had the chance to compare apples with apples.



    To upgrade to i7 is an extra $390 NZ, when the difference between processors in a shop is $110, to upgrade from 1tb to 2tb is an extra $500 (I bought an external 1t drive for $160 a few weeks back) $390 to double the ram?? With these upgrade prices alone I could build a whole new box.



    The 4850 is a lame duck in my opinion, considering upgrade options for graphics cards are limited in Macs I would want a few years out of the one I get at least (especially at $3400) - its a $170 NZ graphics card, its high end of the low end, being the best the Imac comes with is a pretty sad reflection.



    What you are paying for is essentially hype, and don't tell me apples margins aren't spectacular - look at their profit and the tens of billions they have just sitting around. We the consumers are getting raped - no two ways about it.



    And as to BluRay - too little too late man, streaming is the future and their are better disc formats waiting in the wings for data storage - and why on earth would apple support it when they offer streaming, would be shooting themselves in the foot I would have though.



    However someone mentioned the CPUs are desktop components this time around, does that indicate an easier/cheaper upgrade route? And does this extend to GPUs?



    If so - I don't care if they are tearing me a new one, the moment these puppies are available on the tick I'm getting one!











    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    I agree with the sentiment of this post 100%.







    Honestly. It's not like the i7 is now a premium package cpu. It's dirt cheap. The i5 is dirt cheap.



    They had the chance. A BIG chance to give the iMac parity with many a mid-tower PC desktop. And guess what? They blew it. BIG TIME!



    They could have put the dirt cheap i5s in the 21 inchers. They would have walked out the stores.



    They could, as Marv' said, put the i7s in the 27 inchers. Game over.



    If you'd have given me the option of buying the £1700-ish quad core iMac with 4850 a year ago...with 27 inch monitor with that resolution? I'd have torn your arms off.



    As it is...I have a major league boner for that iMac.



    However, we didn't. We got a cheap side-grade when the cpus were there to deliver this ages ago. And then we still have to pay £1300+ to get access to quad core?



    Puh-lease. Quad cores can be had for nearly a thousand pounds less.



    For the sake of a hundred quid here and there...Apple are nickle and diming their customers. This line up would have been stellar a year or half a year ago. But it's late. Very late.



    The 27 inch monitor is stunning. Sure the i7 (which people kept arguing against...y'know...how we 'don't need them', yeah, right...and how they're too hot...uhm...so the BTO option for one is fiction, right?) is nice. The 4850 beats the snot out of my 8800gs. However, for the same price any PC rig in the £1000-£2000 mark has a gpu to pound the 4850 into the dirt. It's a low end gpu. Come on, Apple put at least a mid-range gpu in there. The gpu is the weak link for that kind of resolution.



    Which means, I pass on this update. Until Apple update with a better gpu and bring the quad core iMac into the realms of sanity. Then? It's an upgrade. But that's a year away.



    Yes, I'm excited by this upgrade. But the premium pricing of cheap pc components is hard to justify in my book. The i5s are dirt cheap. The i7s aren't expensive. And the 4 iMac models should have been split around them accordingly.



    Apple are making good profits. But they're clearly ripping off the customer on components that can be had in PCs that are far cheaper. I would have thought the i5s would have been as cheap as the 3 gig core duos?



    Shrugs.



    Still got a boner for the i7 BTO 27 inch iMac. But don't worry, I'll put some ice on it...



    Lemon Bon Bon.



  • Reply 431 of 853
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MadIvan View Post


    If history repeats itself, you are certainly correct. Image quality was superior on Beta, VHS was more convenient because of longer playing time on the tapes. Which one won?



    It depends.

    If you watched videos at home, VHS won.

    If you watched anything on tv, anywhere in the world, except for movies, it was almost guaranteed to have been recorded on Betamax. It was the standard.
  • Reply 432 of 853
    I expected Apple to retire the art easel imac by now. A new form factor is need. It's been around since the white version. No blueray. These new macs are clearly for movies. About time wireless mouse and keyboard. WTF! No numeric pad. No quad core on the low end. Come on. 27 inches is too rediculous. Oh it's for TV replacement. Then why can't I watch blueray? It's like Apple's late to the party CD fiasco during the 90s. For crying out loud, why is the ON button still located at the back. User interface pioneer my arse!



    Thanks for nothing apple. No sale!
  • Reply 433 of 853
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by franksargent View Post


    Well, let's see, I have four SATA HD's (two 150MB 10K Raptors (as RAID 0), and two 500MB 7.2K Samsungs), 20" display, keyboard, and mouse.



    So what can I get for about half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8GB) iMac?



    i7-860? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115214



    P55 MicroATX MB? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813157170



    8GB DDR3 1600MHz? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231193



    GeForce GTX 260? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814127426



    650W 80 PLUS SILVER Certified power supply? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16817341036



    22X DVD burner? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16827151187



    HTPC Case? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811204035



    Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit? Check



    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16832116762



    Total Cost? $1.15K < half the price of the 27" $2.4K (8MB i7-860) iMac



    Has eSATA and HDMI to boot.



    Will I miss a 27" monitor? No because I have a 37" 1080P display currently hooked up to my LAPTOP for watching 1080P content.



    Faster graphics, faster HD's, faster RAM, very efficent power supply, a real HD display for watching HD content from several feet away, and I can (but don't want/need to) OC this puppy.



    Why are Macs twice the price for half the speed?



    See you, don't want to be you!



    Fine. now figure out how much it would cost to put all of this junk together, test it, install the OS and programs, and cover it with one warranty and exchange program.



    Not likely you'll get the same price, is it?



    And exactly who do you call when you have a problem? Buying Win 7? Great, try to have MS figure out where the problem is when you have one. They won't? Gee, too bad. Same thing with all the other parts there.



    What you really need to do is to go to a manufacturers site and check out their AIO's. Look at what they charge for what you get.



    That's a meaningful comparison. What you gave has nothing to do with anything.
  • Reply 434 of 853
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    And no matte and still ugly black border- puke.

    I now have to wait 6 more months.



    Same feeling with me. As long as the screen is gloss I am staying away no matter how gorrrgeous the macs are. This is paving for larger than 30" cinema displays next year. Hope they listen to designers and give us back matte
  • Reply 435 of 853
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post


    you're the epitome of a loser, what are you doing in this forum? if you could afford a mac, you'd buy one



    you must be sad because you have to run windows on that computer



    Oh, I forgot to add in the 7% sales tax for the shitty iMac.



    Total cost of iMac = $2,566.93



    Total cost of much faster DIY = $1,152.91



    $1,152.91/$2,566.93 = 45%



    I've got enough spare parts to build two of these puppies for the cost of this one piece of shit.



    Read 'em and weep!
  • Reply 436 of 853
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    If you're doing any kind of serious work, you still have to use hoods, and turn the lights down. There are companies that sell them for that purpose, and most high end graphics monitors come with hoods as standard, even though they are matte.



    Yes.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    You don't get less reflections on matte, you just think the image itself is washed out.



    You know it really sucks when a company you supported all your life all of a sudden starts making devices you can't use anymore.





    Goodnight mel..
  • Reply 437 of 853
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post


    you're the epitome of a loser, what are you doing in this forum? if you could afford a mac, you'd buy one



    you must be sad because you have to run windows on that computer



    I love posts like franksargent?s. Besides not adding a monitor to the price because he has a 37? 1080p, likely TN display with LCD backlight, which he thinks is better than the 27? 2560x1440 IPS display with LED backlight simply because it?s larger, he doesn?t consider the value of having the machine pre-built, having it as an AIO with less wires, the value of OS X, the cost of ?green components?, the value of having a single warranty for parts that is significantly less of a hassle and doens?t require shipping parts back on your dime, etc. Just read the reviews on that P55 MoBo. Talk about, ?see you, don?t want to be you."
  • Reply 438 of 853
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by franksargent View Post


    Oh, I forgot to add in the 7% sales tax for the shitty iMac.



    Total cost of iMac = $2,566.93



    Total cost of much faster DIY = $1,152.91



    $1,152.91/$2,566.93 = 45%



    I've got enough spare parts to build two of these puppies for the cost of this one piece of shit.



    Read 'em and weep!



    Wow! Two of your own Frankenstein monsters.



    You forgot to add the two 27" hi rez LED backlight monitors. You can throw your 37" piece of junk away.
  • Reply 439 of 853
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Fine. now figure out how much it would cost to put all of this junk together, test it, install the OS and programs, and cover it with one warranty and exchange program.



    Not likely you'll get the same price, is it?



    And exactly who do you call when you have a problem? Buying Win 7? Great, try to have MS figure out where the problem is when you have one. They won't? Gee, too bad. Same thing with all the other parts there.



    What you really need to do is to go to a manufacturers site and check out their AIO's. Look at what they charge for what you get.



    That's a meaningful comparison. What you gave has nothing to do with anything.



    ZERO!



    Now if I didn't have a vast amount of previous experience, like all Mac users, major problem.



    As it is? No problem, I can do it in my sleep, Bucko.



    Let's see AIO's? Why constrain yourself? Oh, that's right, Apple doesen't have a true $1K desktop, they have a $10K desktop.
  • Reply 440 of 853
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by franksargent View Post


    Oh, I forgot to add in the 7% sales tax for the shitty iMac.



    Total cost of iMac = $2,566.93



    Total cost of much faster DIY = $1,152.91



    $1,152.91/$2,566.93 = 45%



    I've got enough spare parts to build two of these puppies for the cost of this one piece of shit.



    Read 'em and weep!



    i feel like weeping for you actually



    have you ever used a mac? if you haven't, then you have no idea of what you're missing out on
Sign In or Register to comment.