Remember folks, unsupported != illegal, and if apple were to go after a paying customer who installed their copy of OSX on a beige box, it would be a PR disaster.
Well, Apple wouldn't go after people installing OS X on a beige box (particularly if that person bought a Mac), but they sure as hell would go after someone hosting OS X illegally, just like Microsoft and Apple do now.
As for OS X being sold for installation on beige boxes: no way that's happening anytime soon. (Five years, I think, would be a minimum.) Apple just doesn't have the userbase to support doing so right now, and the five year estimate would assume that Apple grows astronomically.
Well, Apple wouldn't go after people installing OS X on a beige box (particularly if that person bought a Mac), but they sure as hell would go after someone hosting OS X illegally, just like Microsoft and Apple do now.
As for OS X being sold for installation on beige boxes: no way that's happening anytime soon. .
I wasnt talking about piracy, I was talking about buying a shrinkwraped copy of Leopard at my local apple retailer and installing the thing on my Dell...nothing illegal there...
and a UB of OSX would be a shrikwrapped beige box edition! if it can install on a core duo notebook with an Apple logo, it will work on a Thinkpad or HP notebook with the same specs, the only "hack" would be to emmulate EFI, at least enough to fake out OSX.
I'm sure most of this has been rehashed in other threads, but
- hardly any Mac software has any need for right click anyway since up until recently Apple didn't ship a mouse that worked with it. Hardly anyone who uses a Mac really even notices, or cares.
- Cameras are only a problem in certain government areas, and occasionally some corporate areas. These places just won't use iMacs, if they use Macs at all. Big deal.
- It's generally not cost effective to upgrade most things anyway—processors at this point are mostly limited by the system bus, there pretty much are zero Mac games anymore, and FireWire drives are generally more convenient anyway. Also, 98% of people are scared to death of opening their computer. That's why when you call for support, they ALWAYS check to make sure you're comfortable opening up something.
.
-Anyone who has used a 2 button mouse in OSX and then went to a place where the one-button is all that is availible can tell you just how wrong that first point is: the 2nd button is great, I use it all the time in mail, firefox, even iTunes...
-Cameras are a stupid accessory for me and many others because I and many others have nice digital cameras that would work better, furthermore, many of us will never use it for iChat because it is pretty much useless unless you know lots of other people with cams, and even then it is a needless waste of bandwidth in many cases. I am not saying there should be no cameras, I am saying don't make me pay for that crap when I will not get use of it.
-RAM, GPU, Optical drive**, and HDDs should be easilly upgradable on a desktop...
**remember, long before the life of that new Mac is over, we will likely all be using bluray/HDDVD or some form of next-gen optical media
$1499 or lower starting price point? NOT EVEN CLOSE
One out of eight ain't bad right? The said thing is, the release of such a machine shows how clueless Apple is about the prosumer. It's just a more expensive all in one that is still built mostly from laptop parts would require an army of external devices.
Actually, the new iMac's are conroe. Core 2 Duo E6400 and up = Conroe core. the E6300 is an Allendale, which means it just has half the cache. And the price is $1549AUD to start with, so im fairly sure thats lower than $1499 wherever you are from. I dont honestly see what you need two optical drives for. I have had the option for 4 in my Coolermaster Mystique tower for ages, and im yet to have an inclination to install more than one. Admittadly, more than one hard disk would be nice, especially if we could slide them in and out from the top or something. But thats what USB/Firewire drives are for. Nothing uses PCIEx1 slots, aside from uber fast networking and raid cards, and i dont see much call for them in an iMac. Some way to use the display after the PC itself has ceased to be usefull would be nice, you have me there.
-Cameras are a stupid accessory for me and many others because I and many others have nice digital cameras that would work better,
WTF? Who would take pictures with their iMac? What the fuck are they gonna do, carry it around with them and get a friend to press the mouse? Honestly. Of course it's for fucking iChat.
You have some decent points about the 2nd button in all?I don't use it, but I know (well, one person) who does.
But seriously. You come off with these ridiculous statements (like a $799 tower?yeah, it's possible, if we want Apple to go out of business from not making any profit), that're just... like my god.
Actually, the new iMac's are conroe. Core 2 Duo E6400 and up = Conroe core. the E6300 is an Allendale, which means it just has half the cache. And the price is $1549AUD to start with, so im fairly sure thats lower than $1499 wherever you are from...
Umm, the new iMacs are Merom - T5600 clocked at 1.83 GHz, the T7200 clocked at 2.0 GHz, the T7400 clocked at 2.16 GHz, and the T7600 clocked at 2.33 GHz.
Conroe and Allendale are 1066MT/s FSB whereas Merom is 667MT/s and Yonah pin-compatible. New iMacs use 667mhz DDR2 RAM which is running 1:1 FSB:RAM memory divider. Conroe and Allendale normally use 800mhz DDR2 RAM, or "overclocking" 1066mhz RAM.
Hi Pyrix, gratuituous ad: If you or someone you know are looking in Brisbane Oz for a new unit/townhouse, my family is auctioning this on Sep30 - St. Lucia.
I wasnt talking about piracy, I was talking about buying a shrinkwraped copy of Leopard at my local apple retailer and installing the thing on my Dell...nothing illegal there...
and a UB of OSX would be a shrikwrapped beige box edition! if it can install on a core duo notebook with an Apple logo, it will work on a Thinkpad or HP notebook with the same specs, the only "hack" would be to emmulate EFI, at least enough to fake out OSX.
Oh, ok, I got you. I still don't think Apple would bother to go after individual users, but they could go after whoever's provding the hack (assuming it's a piece of software, and not simply a set of instructions), and that wouldn't be horrible PR (because the story wouldn't be big enough to pick up).
But 99.9% of consumers aren't going to spend the time to do that, so that's why Apple shouldn't really care. If it did turn into a problem, however, the solution is easy: require some sort of automated, over-the-internet activation thing to ensure that the software is being put on an Apple-built Mac.
(Disclaimer: I don't think that's a good idea, but that's one possibility if Apple felt like it had no choice.)
I'll deal with it by reluctantly upgrading my PC instead of switching. Is Apple deliberately keeping its market share low for some reason? And why do so many poster dismiss the frequent request of a mid range EXPANDABLE (stop bringing up the Mini!) single CPU tower? Apple has ALWAYS offered such an option. All I want is a Conroe with multiple internal HDs and PCIe slots. I don't want (that is, can't afford) dual CPUs, expensive server RAM, and a high end video card in a bloated over elaborate case.
I'll deal with it by reluctantly upgrading my PC instead of switching. Is Apple deliberately keeping its market share low for some reason? And why do so many poster dismiss the frequent request of a mid range EXPANDABLE (stop bringing up the Mini!) single CPU tower? Apple has ALWAYS offered such an option. All I want is a Conroe with multiple internal HDs and PCIe slots. I don't want (that is, can't afford) dual CPUs, expensive server RAM, and a high end video card in a bloated over elaborate case.
No expandable Macs below $2200? No thanks!
Yup, keep at your PC. I'm not being snide, I'm just repeating what I said before, if the Mac non-expandability and non-Tower-ishness is an issue, tweak your PC and get more satisfaction out of that.
Yup, get a Conroe - don't be too reluctant, the cheapest Allendale (Conroe at 1.86ghz with only 2MB cache) can as I said can overclock to past 3ghz. Get some decent 1066mhz RAM, pop in your 2 hard disks RAID and SLI up a mid-end video card of your choice. All in a non-bloated non-overelaborate case. Yeah, just a few neon leds in the case, not too elaborate....
................
I know what you mean about the case. I had to sell my PowerPC G5 and taking it back to the Apple reseller was not fun. I had to take BOTH the case AND a 23" cinema display, both in their boxes, like almost 1 block from where I got dropped off and drag it into the lift lobby. All by myself. Not fun.
i got a core duo 2ghz 20" imac at the beginning of the year when they were launched. it turned out to be a fantastic OSX and winxp machine, even tho the windoze solution at the time was a gamble. i figured it would happen one way or another, because villagers demanded it.
i maxed out the ram to 2gb, got the 256mb x1600 option. it was pretty much top of the line (i just went with the 250gb HD instead of the 500gb, which i still havent filled up. this machine has multiple users too, multiple mp3 collections and itunes accounts. a winxp partition, etc). i do have 2 external drives though, both firewire, and both for backup and file transfer purposes to and from work.
now you can get this same imac, with a faster 64bit cpu, for $500 less. its only been barely 8 months since it came out too. technology marches on right? dammit
i want the 24" model, and i'll probably sell my 20" to help recoup the costs. so you have some idea of where i'm coming from, at work i use a p4 3.4ghz dell with 2 dell monitors, a 24in and 19in (1280x1024). its a decent machine, but the 2ghz core duo in the imac i own clearly trounces it. the p4 is pathetic compared to to a core system. i also have a core2duo 2.4ghz on my desk i've been testing, and i'd say for the apps i use its about double the speed of a 3.4ghz p4.
i'd also say the screen in the (now old) 20" imac is just crazy bright. much brighter than the dells and OSX just looks nicer even with less resolution. i cant run the imac monitor at max brightness, it just kills my eyes, cant say the same thing about the dells. and i didnt think i'd be satisfied with a 20" widescreen, already being used to a 24" widescreen at work, but that turned out not to be the case. the experiences i've had, i feel confident about the mac's superiority as a computing platform- both in the OS experience being more modern and advanced overall and the quality of the hardware, apple displays, just edging out the pc stuff in every way that matters to me.
but i guess if there was a deficiency with the 20" imac is that it isnt a 24" screen. using one every day i know how good 1920 resolution is to have. OSX would make it look that much better. buying a 24" now would give me a 15-25% faster cpu, 64bit readiness for 10.5, upgrade in video to a 7600GT, firewire 800, the ability to go to 3gb ram (2gb has been comfortable, i have 2gb on the pc's at work btw) and obviously the 24" screen, which apple claims is even brighter. thats insane to me, but i can believe it. i got to use the 13" macbook for a few days and that screen was awesome (incidentally, i work in an office with 50+ tech savvy pc users, most of them wanted to keep the macbook for themselves when they actually used it. i'd say a good percentage of them are really pc users "on the fence"). that 24" config with much better overall specs would be about $100 less than what i paid in january for the 20.
so yeah i'm probably gonna sell the 20 i have now for what i can. i just wanna wait a few more days and see what happens on the 12th, just to be sure i'm also looking to replace an older G4 powerbook with a macbook, but i'm waiting for the merom macbooks before doing that. you never know, that could be this month, and its a slightly higher priority for me than buying 2 imacs in the same year.
Cool sounds like you're part of just the kind of people Apple's targeting with the new iMacs. Where budget is a bit more flexible, has space for upgrades (juicy increased Apple profits) and offering Windows, PC Gaming, and a smooth, scintillating OSX experience on CORE.
Have you tried overclocking your Core2Duo? Since you're testing it, go for it. Increase the FSB, adjust RAM dividers accordingly. I bet you can push 3ghz. Think about it - 24" iMac and 13" MacBook, then Conroe 3ghz with dualie 24" monitors. AWESOME. 8)
edit: For the PC, right now actually I would *NOT* go nVidia 7900GT or 7900GTX. If you do want to max it out, go 7950GX2 nVidia. Otherwise, the X1900GT is offering some good value and it looks like ATI have cleaned up some of their slouch in terms of OpenGL games. In any case, the 7600GT 256MB in the 24" iMac will hold the fort well on the Mac side.
Cool sounds like you're part of just the kind of people Apple's targeting with the new iMacs. Where budget is a bit more flexible, has space for upgrades (juicy increased Apple profits) and offering Windows, PC Gaming, and a smooth, scintillating OSX experience on CORE.
Have you tried overclocking your Core2Duo? Since you're testing it, go for it. Increase the FSB, adjust RAM dividers accordingly. I bet you can push 3ghz. Think about it - 24" iMac and 13" MacBook, then Conroe 3ghz with dualie 24" monitors. AWESOME. 8)
edit: For the PC, right now actually I would *NOT* go nVidia 7900GT or 7900GTX. If you do want to max it out, go 7950GX2 nVidia. Otherwise, the X1900GT is offering some good value and it looks like ATI have cleaned up some of their slouch in terms of OpenGL games. In any case, the 7600GT 256MB in the 24" iMac will hold the fort well on the Mac side.
yeah i'm probably pretty close to their ideal target market. to me the difference between paying 1000, 2000 or 3000 for a computer is nominal, because i'm a salaried professional who doesnt have alot of time to mess with devices. i need it to work and i need it to be quiet. noise was one of the biggest deciding factors for me in getting the imac. when the core imacs came out people were reporting they were nearly dead silent, and thats what i noticed using one in the store. 8 months later the machine is still completely silent, its quieter than my external 250gb drive. fast and quiet, high quality display, lots of ports, features and extras.
the core2duo system i have is a test system from intel, its basically 'on loan'. cant really mess with it too much, its also a work system, but i dont feel i have to. 2x the speed of the p4, in some cases 3 or 4x (but mostly due to opening files, thats probably due to the shitty drive in the dell vs the fast RAID drive in the core2). yeah the future looks bright for core2, i'm trying to get our workplace upgraded to them asap. i have a hard time wrapping my mind around something like a 3 or even 4ghz core2 (equivalent of about 9 or 10ghz p4 maybe?). thats before the software is fine tuned for multicore.
i mean, we knew the p4 was a lousy design. thats a given. it just makes the core2 look more amazing than it really is. i would say before all this core business even the single cpu 2ghz AMD64 was noticably faster than a p4 3.4.
...i have a hard time wrapping my mind around something like a 3 or even 4ghz core2 (equivalent of about 9 or 10ghz p4 maybe?). thats before the software is fine tuned for multicore...i mean, we knew the p4 was a lousy design. thats a given. it just makes the core2 look more amazing than it really is. i would say before all this core business even the single cpu 2ghz AMD64 was noticably faster than a p4 3.4.
Believe it - 1.86ghz Conroe(Allendale) Core 2 to 3.0+ghz on air cooling
WTF? Who would take pictures with their iMac? What the fuck are they gonna do, carry it around with them and get a friend to press the mouse? Honestly. Of course it's for fucking iChat.
.
Let me spell it out for you: a camera with a good lense and high res sencer will make a much higher quality output than a cell-phone cam which is pretty much all these are: furthermore, any digital camera that I have come accross can be connected to a PC or mac and put into webcam mode. so I wil say the same thing to Apple that I say to Cingular: PLEASE, PLEASE, give me a high end product without a camera, I hate paying for something I will never use.
Let me spell it out for you: a camera with a good lense and high res sencer will make a much higher quality output than a cell-phone cam which is pretty much all these are: furthermore, any digital camera that I have come accross can be connected to a PC or mac and put into webcam mode. so I wil say the same thing to Apple that I say to Cingular: PLEASE, PLEASE, give me a high end product without a camera, I hate paying for something I will never use.
You're right, there's like 3 cameras out there with that option.
Apple should TOTALLY stop wasting the two dollars they spent on their built-in iSight.
Then they'll be that much closer to the $299 PC of your dreams!
NOOOOOOOOO my main man shanmugam, there is a delicious and beautiful peace now that Windows and OSX coexist on Mac - PC gaming can be done on Mac, and Mac for everything else...!
Seriously, X1600, 7300GT, 7600GT, X1900XT - these various options as available for iMac, MacBookPro and MacPro, means PC gaming is a very real option...!
I am only saying to those that say "boo hoo, I can't use video card 739240 GXB in the Mac", I say, yes I feel your pain, but you have options now with Mac for PC gaming at medium to high quality.
No, there's no medium-high quality offering, just low-medium. With LCD's, you want native resolution. The X1600 on the 20" iMac is too little for the iMac's 1680x1050, and the 7600GT on the 24" iMac is just as little for the iMac's 1920x1200. With modern games like F.E.A.R., not to mention what's coming out at the beginning of next year, that is a resolution which actually requires something like the X1900. If there was a 7600GT edition of the 20" iMac, that I'd consider to have medium-high quality graphics for gaming.
I don't expect the iMac to get more graphics power, it has plenty for non-gaming purposes and low-medium use. The whole problem wouldn't exist if Apple put out a headless with integrated graphics and a free PCI Express slot. ATi and nVidia and their upgrade offerings for the Mac Pro would give gamers what they want without Apple lifting a finger.
Don't even bother to mention Mac Pro. It's a workstation with workstation pricing. If you have one anyway, of course you can slap on a card and go gaming, and this is a good thing, but no one will originally buy the Mac Pro for that purpose.
Yes, if you are talking native resolutions for 20" and 24" then we are talking X1600 and 7600GT at medium to medium-low settings for smooth frame rates. Would that be better than say 1280x720 non-native-res on 20" and 24" iMac at medium to medium-high quality? Hmm... Maybe not, but it would depend on iMac gamers.
Comments
Remember folks, unsupported != illegal, and if apple were to go after a paying customer who installed their copy of OSX on a beige box, it would be a PR disaster.
Well, Apple wouldn't go after people installing OS X on a beige box (particularly if that person bought a Mac), but they sure as hell would go after someone hosting OS X illegally, just like Microsoft and Apple do now.
As for OS X being sold for installation on beige boxes: no way that's happening anytime soon. (Five years, I think, would be a minimum.) Apple just doesn't have the userbase to support doing so right now, and the five year estimate would assume that Apple grows astronomically.
Well, Apple wouldn't go after people installing OS X on a beige box (particularly if that person bought a Mac), but they sure as hell would go after someone hosting OS X illegally, just like Microsoft and Apple do now.
As for OS X being sold for installation on beige boxes: no way that's happening anytime soon. .
I wasnt talking about piracy, I was talking about buying a shrinkwraped copy of Leopard at my local apple retailer and installing the thing on my Dell...nothing illegal there...
and a UB of OSX would be a shrikwrapped beige box edition! if it can install on a core duo notebook with an Apple logo, it will work on a Thinkpad or HP notebook with the same specs, the only "hack" would be to emmulate EFI, at least enough to fake out OSX.
I'm sure most of this has been rehashed in other threads, but
- hardly any Mac software has any need for right click anyway since up until recently Apple didn't ship a mouse that worked with it. Hardly anyone who uses a Mac really even notices, or cares.
- Cameras are only a problem in certain government areas, and occasionally some corporate areas. These places just won't use iMacs, if they use Macs at all. Big deal.
- It's generally not cost effective to upgrade most things anyway—processors at this point are mostly limited by the system bus, there pretty much are zero Mac games anymore, and FireWire drives are generally more convenient anyway. Also, 98% of people are scared to death of opening their computer. That's why when you call for support, they ALWAYS check to make sure you're comfortable opening up something.
.
-Anyone who has used a 2 button mouse in OSX and then went to a place where the one-button is all that is availible can tell you just how wrong that first point is: the 2nd button is great, I use it all the time in mail, firefox, even iTunes...
-Cameras are a stupid accessory for me and many others because I and many others have nice digital cameras that would work better, furthermore, many of us will never use it for iChat because it is pretty much useless unless you know lots of other people with cams, and even then it is a needless waste of bandwidth in many cases. I am not saying there should be no cameras, I am saying don't make me pay for that crap when I will not get use of it.
-RAM, GPU, Optical drive**, and HDDs should be easilly upgradable on a desktop...
**remember, long before the life of that new Mac is over, we will likely all be using bluray/HDDVD or some form of next-gen optical media
Lets see.
Two full size optical drives? NO
Two or more hard drive bays? NO
Conroe? NO
Optional Geforce 7600GT? YES
PCI-E x16 slot? NO
PCI-E x1 slots? NO
Seperate display? NO
$1499 or lower starting price point? NOT EVEN CLOSE
One out of eight ain't bad right? The said thing is, the release of such a machine shows how clueless Apple is about the prosumer. It's just a more expensive all in one that is still built mostly from laptop parts would require an army of external devices.
Actually, the new iMac's are conroe. Core 2 Duo E6400 and up = Conroe core. the E6300 is an Allendale, which means it just has half the cache. And the price is $1549AUD to start with, so im fairly sure thats lower than $1499 wherever you are from. I dont honestly see what you need two optical drives for. I have had the option for 4 in my Coolermaster Mystique tower for ages, and im yet to have an inclination to install more than one. Admittadly, more than one hard disk would be nice, especially if we could slide them in and out from the top or something. But thats what USB/Firewire drives are for. Nothing uses PCIEx1 slots, aside from uber fast networking and raid cards, and i dont see much call for them in an iMac. Some way to use the display after the PC itself has ceased to be usefull would be nice, you have me there.
-Cameras are a stupid accessory for me and many others because I and many others have nice digital cameras that would work better,
WTF? Who would take pictures with their iMac? What the fuck are they gonna do, carry it around with them and get a friend to press the mouse? Honestly. Of course it's for fucking iChat.
You have some decent points about the 2nd button in all?I don't use it, but I know (well, one person) who does.
But seriously. You come off with these ridiculous statements (like a $799 tower?yeah, it's possible, if we want Apple to go out of business from not making any profit), that're just... like my god.
I want what you're smoking.
Actually, the new iMac's are conroe. Core 2 Duo E6400 and up = Conroe core. the E6300 is an Allendale, which means it just has half the cache. And the price is $1549AUD to start with, so im fairly sure thats lower than $1499 wherever you are from...
Umm, the new iMacs are Merom - T5600 clocked at 1.83 GHz, the T7200 clocked at 2.0 GHz, the T7400 clocked at 2.16 GHz, and the T7600 clocked at 2.33 GHz.
Conroe and Allendale are 1066MT/s FSB whereas Merom is 667MT/s and Yonah pin-compatible. New iMacs use 667mhz DDR2 RAM which is running 1:1 FSB:RAM memory divider. Conroe and Allendale normally use 800mhz DDR2 RAM, or "overclocking" 1066mhz RAM.
http://www.realestate.com.au/cgi-bin...796&c=79919203
I wasnt talking about piracy, I was talking about buying a shrinkwraped copy of Leopard at my local apple retailer and installing the thing on my Dell...nothing illegal there...
and a UB of OSX would be a shrikwrapped beige box edition! if it can install on a core duo notebook with an Apple logo, it will work on a Thinkpad or HP notebook with the same specs, the only "hack" would be to emmulate EFI, at least enough to fake out OSX.
Oh, ok, I got you. I still don't think Apple would bother to go after individual users, but they could go after whoever's provding the hack (assuming it's a piece of software, and not simply a set of instructions), and that wouldn't be horrible PR (because the story wouldn't be big enough to pick up).
But 99.9% of consumers aren't going to spend the time to do that, so that's why Apple shouldn't really care. If it did turn into a problem, however, the solution is easy: require some sort of automated, over-the-internet activation thing to ensure that the software is being put on an Apple-built Mac.
(Disclaimer: I don't think that's a good idea, but that's one possibility if Apple felt like it had no choice.)
Headless Macs:
Mac mini
Mac Pro
Deal with it, folks.
I'll deal with it by reluctantly upgrading my PC instead of switching. Is Apple deliberately keeping its market share low for some reason? And why do so many poster dismiss the frequent request of a mid range EXPANDABLE (stop bringing up the Mini!) single CPU tower? Apple has ALWAYS offered such an option. All I want is a Conroe with multiple internal HDs and PCIe slots. I don't want (that is, can't afford) dual CPUs, expensive server RAM, and a high end video card in a bloated over elaborate case.
No expandable Macs below $2200? No thanks!
I'll deal with it by reluctantly upgrading my PC instead of switching. Is Apple deliberately keeping its market share low for some reason? And why do so many poster dismiss the frequent request of a mid range EXPANDABLE (stop bringing up the Mini!) single CPU tower? Apple has ALWAYS offered such an option. All I want is a Conroe with multiple internal HDs and PCIe slots. I don't want (that is, can't afford) dual CPUs, expensive server RAM, and a high end video card in a bloated over elaborate case.
No expandable Macs below $2200? No thanks!
Yup, keep at your PC. I'm not being snide, I'm just repeating what I said before, if the Mac non-expandability and non-Tower-ishness is an issue, tweak your PC and get more satisfaction out of that.
Yup, get a Conroe - don't be too reluctant, the cheapest Allendale (Conroe at 1.86ghz with only 2MB cache) can as I said can overclock to past 3ghz. Get some decent 1066mhz RAM, pop in your 2 hard disks RAID and SLI up a mid-end video card of your choice. All in a non-bloated non-overelaborate case. Yeah, just a few neon leds in the case, not too elaborate....
................
I know what you mean about the case. I had to sell my PowerPC G5 and taking it back to the Apple reseller was not fun. I had to take BOTH the case AND a 23" cinema display, both in their boxes, like almost 1 block from where I got dropped off and drag it into the lift lobby. All by myself. Not fun.
i got a core duo 2ghz 20" imac at the beginning of the year when they were launched. it turned out to be a fantastic OSX and winxp machine, even tho the windoze solution at the time was a gamble. i figured it would happen one way or another, because villagers demanded it.
i maxed out the ram to 2gb, got the 256mb x1600 option. it was pretty much top of the line (i just went with the 250gb HD instead of the 500gb, which i still havent filled up. this machine has multiple users too, multiple mp3 collections and itunes accounts. a winxp partition, etc). i do have 2 external drives though, both firewire, and both for backup and file transfer purposes to and from work.
now you can get this same imac, with a faster 64bit cpu, for $500 less. its only been barely 8 months since it came out too. technology marches on right? dammit
i want the 24" model, and i'll probably sell my 20" to help recoup the costs. so you have some idea of where i'm coming from, at work i use a p4 3.4ghz dell with 2 dell monitors, a 24in and 19in (1280x1024). its a decent machine, but the 2ghz core duo in the imac i own clearly trounces it. the p4 is pathetic compared to to a core system. i also have a core2duo 2.4ghz on my desk i've been testing, and i'd say for the apps i use its about double the speed of a 3.4ghz p4.
i'd also say the screen in the (now old) 20" imac is just crazy bright. much brighter than the dells and OSX just looks nicer even with less resolution. i cant run the imac monitor at max brightness, it just kills my eyes, cant say the same thing about the dells. and i didnt think i'd be satisfied with a 20" widescreen, already being used to a 24" widescreen at work, but that turned out not to be the case. the experiences i've had, i feel confident about the mac's superiority as a computing platform- both in the OS experience being more modern and advanced overall and the quality of the hardware, apple displays, just edging out the pc stuff in every way that matters to me.
but i guess if there was a deficiency with the 20" imac is that it isnt a 24" screen. using one every day i know how good 1920 resolution is to have. OSX would make it look that much better. buying a 24" now would give me a 15-25% faster cpu, 64bit readiness for 10.5, upgrade in video to a 7600GT, firewire 800, the ability to go to 3gb ram (2gb has been comfortable, i have 2gb on the pc's at work btw) and obviously the 24" screen, which apple claims is even brighter. thats insane to me, but i can believe it. i got to use the 13" macbook for a few days and that screen was awesome (incidentally, i work in an office with 50+ tech savvy pc users, most of them wanted to keep the macbook for themselves when they actually used it. i'd say a good percentage of them are really pc users "on the fence"). that 24" config with much better overall specs would be about $100 less than what i paid in january for the 20.
so yeah i'm probably gonna sell the 20 i have now for what i can. i just wanna wait a few more days and see what happens on the 12th, just to be sure
Have you tried overclocking your Core2Duo? Since you're testing it, go for it. Increase the FSB, adjust RAM dividers accordingly. I bet you can push 3ghz. Think about it - 24" iMac and 13" MacBook, then Conroe 3ghz with dualie 24" monitors. AWESOME. 8)
edit: For the PC, right now actually I would *NOT* go nVidia 7900GT or 7900GTX. If you do want to max it out, go 7950GX2 nVidia. Otherwise, the X1900GT is offering some good value and it looks like ATI have cleaned up some of their slouch in terms of OpenGL games. In any case, the 7600GT 256MB in the 24" iMac will hold the fort well on the Mac side.
Cool sounds like you're part of just the kind of people Apple's targeting with the new iMacs. Where budget is a bit more flexible, has space for upgrades (juicy increased Apple profits) and offering Windows, PC Gaming, and a smooth, scintillating OSX experience on CORE.
Have you tried overclocking your Core2Duo? Since you're testing it, go for it. Increase the FSB, adjust RAM dividers accordingly. I bet you can push 3ghz. Think about it - 24" iMac and 13" MacBook, then Conroe 3ghz with dualie 24" monitors. AWESOME. 8)
edit: For the PC, right now actually I would *NOT* go nVidia 7900GT or 7900GTX. If you do want to max it out, go 7950GX2 nVidia. Otherwise, the X1900GT is offering some good value and it looks like ATI have cleaned up some of their slouch in terms of OpenGL games. In any case, the 7600GT 256MB in the 24" iMac will hold the fort well on the Mac side.
yeah i'm probably pretty close to their ideal target market. to me the difference between paying 1000, 2000 or 3000 for a computer is nominal, because i'm a salaried professional who doesnt have alot of time to mess with devices. i need it to work and i need it to be quiet. noise was one of the biggest deciding factors for me in getting the imac. when the core imacs came out people were reporting they were nearly dead silent, and thats what i noticed using one in the store. 8 months later the machine is still completely silent, its quieter than my external 250gb drive. fast and quiet, high quality display, lots of ports, features and extras.
the core2duo system i have is a test system from intel, its basically 'on loan'. cant really mess with it too much, its also a work system, but i dont feel i have to. 2x the speed of the p4, in some cases 3 or 4x (but mostly due to opening files, thats probably due to the shitty drive in the dell vs the fast RAID drive in the core2). yeah the future looks bright for core2, i'm trying to get our workplace upgraded to them asap. i have a hard time wrapping my mind around something like a 3 or even 4ghz core2 (equivalent of about 9 or 10ghz p4 maybe?). thats before the software is fine tuned for multicore.
i mean, we knew the p4 was a lousy design. thats a given. it just makes the core2 look more amazing than it really is. i would say before all this core business even the single cpu 2ghz AMD64 was noticably faster than a p4 3.4.
...i have a hard time wrapping my mind around something like a 3 or even 4ghz core2 (equivalent of about 9 or 10ghz p4 maybe?). thats before the software is fine tuned for multicore...i mean, we knew the p4 was a lousy design. thats a given. it just makes the core2 look more amazing than it really is. i would say before all this core business even the single cpu 2ghz AMD64 was noticably faster than a p4 3.4.
Believe it
http://xtremevn.com/forum/showthread.php?p=23588
Conroe Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93ghz to 4.0+ghz on air cooling
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2795&p=18
Conroe Core 2 Extreme X6800 2.93ghz to 5.0+ghz
http://www.neowin.net/forum/lofivers...p/t472865.html
WTF? Who would take pictures with their iMac? What the fuck are they gonna do, carry it around with them and get a friend to press the mouse? Honestly. Of course it's for fucking iChat.
.
Let me spell it out for you: a camera with a good lense and high res sencer will make a much higher quality output than a cell-phone cam which is pretty much all these are: furthermore, any digital camera that I have come accross can be connected to a PC or mac and put into webcam mode. so I wil say the same thing to Apple that I say to Cingular: PLEASE, PLEASE, give me a high end product without a camera, I hate paying for something I will never use.
Let me spell it out for you: a camera with a good lense and high res sencer will make a much higher quality output than a cell-phone cam which is pretty much all these are: furthermore, any digital camera that I have come accross can be connected to a PC or mac and put into webcam mode. so I wil say the same thing to Apple that I say to Cingular: PLEASE, PLEASE, give me a high end product without a camera, I hate paying for something I will never use.
You're right, there's like 3 cameras out there with that option.
Apple should TOTALLY stop wasting the two dollars they spent on their built-in iSight.
Then they'll be that much closer to the $299 PC of your dreams!
would've liked an input but never thought that would happen.
i would have liked and really hoped for a swappable hd like in the macbook.
NOOOOOOOOO my main man shanmugam, there is a delicious and beautiful peace now that Windows and OSX coexist on Mac - PC gaming can be done on Mac, and Mac for everything else...!
Seriously, X1600, 7300GT, 7600GT, X1900XT - these various options as available for iMac, MacBookPro and MacPro, means PC gaming is a very real option...!
I am only saying to those that say "boo hoo, I can't use video card 739240 GXB in the Mac", I say, yes I feel your pain, but you have options now with Mac for PC gaming at medium to high quality.
No, there's no medium-high quality offering, just low-medium. With LCD's, you want native resolution. The X1600 on the 20" iMac is too little for the iMac's 1680x1050, and the 7600GT on the 24" iMac is just as little for the iMac's 1920x1200. With modern games like F.E.A.R., not to mention what's coming out at the beginning of next year, that is a resolution which actually requires something like the X1900. If there was a 7600GT edition of the 20" iMac, that I'd consider to have medium-high quality graphics for gaming.
I don't expect the iMac to get more graphics power, it has plenty for non-gaming purposes and low-medium use. The whole problem wouldn't exist if Apple put out a headless with integrated graphics and a free PCI Express slot. ATi and nVidia and their upgrade offerings for the Mac Pro would give gamers what they want without Apple lifting a finger.
Don't even bother to mention Mac Pro. It's a workstation with workstation pricing. If you have one anyway, of course you can slap on a card and go gaming, and this is a good thing, but no one will originally buy the Mac Pro for that purpose.