Is it true that this screen is way less glossy than the 2010, 2011 screens? I found those to be too reflective, and would hate to see my matte screen go bad.
When I saw the new iMacs in the shop with all its bright lights, the screen was much less reflective than the old ones sitting next to them (1st day, still getting things set up).
I've had a day with mine now and yeah, the screen is very different. When my old 2011 replaced my matte screen, I stopped being able to use the overhead light in my office when using the Mac. The glare was bad. I don't have that with the new one at all; it looks great.
That said, I usually don't use the overhead light as I personally don't like strong direct light. I have a nice set up of LEDs with color and brightness control reflecting off the ceiling.
Anecdote Time: During this week's Genius appointment for my MBP I asked about the repairability of the new iMacs and if that glued on display is making it more difficult for them. She had already had the training for it but hadn't repaired any at this time but she stated with certainty that the new models are better than the previous models.
They use an actual pizza cutter to cut the adhesive between the glass and case on three sides, then lift the display up with the pivot being the uncut edge resting on the aluminum lip. When it's up high enough they discount a couple cables and then use the pizza cutter on the inside to finish cutting the adhesive.
To reapply the panel they have to first clean all adhesive from the casing and glass before applying new adhesive on 4 sides.
This seems like it would be more of a pain then simply using suction cups to remove a magnetically attached glass panel, right? Well in that sense it is but the problem with the old models is that 2mm gap between the display and glass. They have to clean both perfectly and then put it back in place without a single spec of dust caught inside. Apparently this is harder than it seems as she said it usually takes a few tries and is very frustrating and stressful.
Good to know.
I've had my 2011 iMac apart once, I added an SSD. I had removed the screen cover a few other times. Dust really wasn't a problem for me. It's a relatively ordinary microfiber cloth. I don't need the suction cups though. Eight fingernails are just enough to peel it off, quicker than applying the suction cups for me anyway.
I don't use an overhead light, so if my screen dies I'll get a TB 27". Possibly. Thanks for sharing your experience. It's posts like yours and [B]JeffDM[/B]'s that make this site a wonderful resource. You just have to navigate through crap posts, some coming from me as well.
Didn't quote; this thread has become a private chatroom with occasional guests dropping in, which is cool.
After a solid week with my iMac I've noticed the included batteries with the Magic Trackpad are down by 25%. The wireless keyboard still says 100%. Looks like I'll have to pick up some NiMH batteries. Perhaps Eneloop brand.
After a solid week with my iMac I've noticed the included batteries with the Magic Trackpad are down by 25%. The wireless keyboard still says 100%. Looks like I'll have to pick up some NiMH batteries. Perhaps Eneloop brand.
Apple's are Eneloops. The rechargeable set, I mean. They're great!
It took 8 days but it finally happened. I went to use my iMac today and thought "I wish they made a bigger display." 27" is no longer [I]good enough[/I] for me and my 13" MBP looks so petite. How did I ever get any work done on it?
It took 8 days but it finally happened. I went to use my iMac today and thought "I wish they made a bigger display." 27" is no longer good enough for me and my 13" MBP looks so petite. How did I ever get any work done on it?
What took you so long?
You know you can connect multiple displays to the iMac...
There you go! Wait till you're behind someone else's 30"! (lame, I know)
Multiple screens have great advantages though, especially in photography. Just 1 problem with the iMac; if you put a 27" TB screen next to it the height differs. So if you do buy a 2nd screen, instead of putting them side-by-side you're possibly better off setting them in a 'V'. Hmm, maybe better to set them up in a forward- and back slash orientation (/\), otherwise you'd be looking either at the backs or need to have a chair with wheels.
There you go! Wait till you're behind someone else's 30"! (lame, I know)
Multiple screens have great advantages though, especially in photography. Just 1 problem with the iMac; if you put a 27" TB screen next to it the height differs. So if you do buy a 2nd screen, instead of putting them side-by-side you're possibly better off setting them in a 'V'. Hmm, maybe better to set them up in a forward- and back slash orientation (/\), otherwise you'd be looking either at the backs or need to have a chair with wheels.
I believe I read there was an issue with fullscreen apps with multiple monitors.
I've not heard anyone associate a doubling of RAM with a doubling of speed. I don't know where they get that from, except maybe from lying salesmen. It's nowhere nearly that simple. It really depends on how much you actually use. If you have enough RAM, then you don't need any more. But if you do not have enough RAM, your computer can really slow down when it runs low, because it pages memory out to drive to free up space.
The more applications, the more & bigger files, the more RAM you need for peak performance. Given how inexpensive RAM is now, 16GB hardly hurts, and if you use more than 8GB, it can help keep the computer at its peak. The excess RAM is either not used or becomes cache, keeping the computer as speedy as possible. Check Activity Monitor after you've been using the computer a while with a normal level of applications open.
Exactly. In my case, doubling the RAM resulted in ten times speed increase. I did not measure anything, just how it felt like judging from waiting time before and after the RAM upgrade for main routine tasks. Granted, this poor MBP is heavily used by the family and mostly by my daughter in her Facebook account: she scrolls down huge pages with hundreds of photos eating RAM for breakfast, she is doing work for school, editing her own photos, opening simultaneously many YouTube videos; the wife runs her own programs (including X11 and VMWare); I have an account too, mostly for web and some light applications. The MBP initially had only 4 GB of RAM. I upped it recently to 8 GB (the maximum it can take) and I saw yesterday that it had again a whopping 8 GB of swapfiles! Mad. When the memory clears up, e.g. after a system update reboot, it runs again smoothly like butter. Impressive after almost four years of solid service, while the software evolved much in the meantime.
I will take nothing less than 32 GB in my next family machine (certainly an iMac).
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Is it true that this screen is way less glossy than the 2010, 2011 screens? I found those to be too reflective, and would hate to see my matte screen go bad.
When I saw the new iMacs in the shop with all its bright lights, the screen was much less reflective than the old ones sitting next to them (1st day, still getting things set up).
I've had a day with mine now and yeah, the screen is very different. When my old 2011 replaced my matte screen, I stopped being able to use the overhead light in my office when using the Mac. The glare was bad. I don't have that with the new one at all; it looks great.
That said, I usually don't use the overhead light as I personally don't like strong direct light. I have a nice set up of LEDs with color and brightness control reflecting off the ceiling.
Good to know.
I've had my 2011 iMac apart once, I added an SSD. I had removed the screen cover a few other times. Dust really wasn't a problem for me. It's a relatively ordinary microfiber cloth. I don't need the suction cups though. Eight fingernails are just enough to peel it off, quicker than applying the suction cups for me anyway.
[VIDEO]http://www.apple.com/jobs/global/media/en/genius-us-20101019.mov[/VIDEO]
I don't use an overhead light, so if my screen dies I'll get a TB 27". Possibly. Thanks for sharing your experience. It's posts like yours and [B]JeffDM[/B]'s that make this site a wonderful resource. You just have to navigate through crap posts, some coming from me as well.
Didn't quote; this thread has become a private chatroom with occasional guests dropping in, which is cool.
Eneloops work pretty well. I've used them for years.
Apple also sells rechargeable batteries... basically Eneloops.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
After a solid week with my iMac I've noticed the included batteries with the Magic Trackpad are down by 25%. The wireless keyboard still says 100%. Looks like I'll have to pick up some NiMH batteries. Perhaps Eneloop brand.
Apple's are Eneloops. The rechargeable set, I mean. They're great!
Are they actually Eneloop branded batteries? Or just Low self-discharge NiMH batteries? Or just NiMH batteries?
I had planned on buying Apple's charger.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Are they actually Eneloop branded batteries? Or just Low self-discharge NiMH batteries? Or just NiMH batteries?
I had planned on buying Apple's charger.
I seem to remember a teardown when the set was first released, revealing them to be simply rebranded Eneloops.
Hey, yep. So "likely", but it does look like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It took 8 days but it finally happened. I went to use my iMac today and thought "I wish they made a bigger display." 27" is no longer good enough for me and my 13" MBP looks so petite. How did I ever get any work done on it?
What took you so long?
You know you can connect multiple displays to the iMac...
Multiple screens have great advantages though, especially in photography. Just 1 problem with the iMac; if you put a 27" TB screen next to it the height differs. So if you do buy a 2nd screen, instead of putting them side-by-side you're possibly better off setting them in a 'V'. Hmm, maybe better to set them up in a forward- and back slash orientation (/\), otherwise you'd be looking either at the backs or need to have a chair with wheels.
I believe I read there was an issue with fullscreen apps with multiple monitors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I've not heard anyone associate a doubling of RAM with a doubling of speed. I don't know where they get that from, except maybe from lying salesmen. It's nowhere nearly that simple. It really depends on how much you actually use. If you have enough RAM, then you don't need any more. But if you do not have enough RAM, your computer can really slow down when it runs low, because it pages memory out to drive to free up space.
The more applications, the more & bigger files, the more RAM you need for peak performance. Given how inexpensive RAM is now, 16GB hardly hurts, and if you use more than 8GB, it can help keep the computer at its peak. The excess RAM is either not used or becomes cache, keeping the computer as speedy as possible. Check Activity Monitor after you've been using the computer a while with a normal level of applications open.
Exactly. In my case, doubling the RAM resulted in ten times speed increase. I did not measure anything, just how it felt like judging from waiting time before and after the RAM upgrade for main routine tasks. Granted, this poor MBP is heavily used by the family and mostly by my daughter in her Facebook account: she scrolls down huge pages with hundreds of photos eating RAM for breakfast, she is doing work for school, editing her own photos, opening simultaneously many YouTube videos; the wife runs her own programs (including X11 and VMWare); I have an account too, mostly for web and some light applications. The MBP initially had only 4 GB of RAM. I upped it recently to 8 GB (the maximum it can take) and I saw yesterday that it had again a whopping 8 GB of swapfiles! Mad. When the memory clears up, e.g. after a system update reboot, it runs again smoothly like butter. Impressive after almost four years of solid service, while the software evolved much in the meantime.
I will take nothing less than 32 GB in my next family machine (certainly an iMac).
Some call it a fiasco:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3196329?start=0&tstart=0
No problems at all if you're still on 10.6.x though ¡