If you can get the refurb this is a good price. Otherwise you can get the older 20" iMac a 24" SPIS from dell for $569 which wouldn't be a bad option either.
Whether Apple surveys people or not and finds the people who prefer matte to be in the minority, it doesn't help for them to keep removing options from people.
It may be that the glass panel is such an integral part of the new iMac, that it's just impossible to offer that computer in matte. It seems like the people who are complaining most of all about glossy are pros of some sort, and I guess Apple feels that they will buy the cinema displays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I'd say go for the 20" because if you had a 24", you'd likely want to put it on a higher resolution (1920x1200) than the imac (1680x1050) and this means that your mouse gets stuck when you move between displays. If you don't use the higher resolution then there's no point in getting the larger display.
What do you mean about the mouse getting "stuck?" Why would the mouse get stuck? As a cat, I have found that mice don't just get stuck.
This is clearly false as I am looking at my second monitor as primary with menu bars and dock while I use the original display for entourage and other secondary stuff.
You have fully functional menu bars and a dock on your extended secondary display? The two screen setup I have at work with a G5 tower doesn't do this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
It may be that the glass panel is such an integral part of the new iMac, that it's just impossible to offer that computer in matte. It seems like the people who are complaining most of all about glossy are pros of some sort, and I guess Apple feels that they will buy the cinema displays.
But attach it to what? The iMac isn't good enough because you still get a glossy screen. A tower would be the obvious answer even an older one but they are way too big and expensive for what is needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
What do you mean about the mouse getting "stuck?" Why would the mouse get stuck? As a cat, I have found that mice don't just get stuck.
Say you have the main screen at 1680x1050 and a 24" on the right at 1920x1200. Moving the mouse left to right is fine because you are moving onto a higher resolution. Moving back however, if you don't move your mouse within the 1050 range that is setup in the display arrangement tab, your mouse stops and you have to slide your mouse down/up until it can pass onto the lower res screen.
This seems minor but if you have to keep passing back onto the other screen for the menubar and dock (which is certainly the case in my experience) then it's not practical.
Someone at my work has an iMac with a second screen and they originally had a small 1024x768 screen as a second display and had to get another 20" because of this issue. Now I think of it, he doesn't have an extra menubar or dock on his 2nd screen either. And also now I think of it, the setup looks hideous because the displays look totally different. The dual setup with the towers is fine because I got matching displays.
You have fully functional menu bars and a dock on your extended secondary display? The two screen setup I have at work with a G5 tower doesn't do this.
In System Preferences you can set which of the two screens is the main one (menu bar and dock).
But attach it to what? The iMac isn't good enough because you still get a glossy screen. A tower would be the obvious answer even an older one but they are way too big and expensive for what is needed.
I would imagine that the next generation tower will be universally smaller. I'm not sure Apple will have a mid-sized tower to appease all the angry gamers posting at AI, but I would not be surprised if all MacPros become "mid-sized." (and then wait for the gnashing of teeth from the pro community about lost internal real estate!).
As for pairing an iMac with a cinema display, I realize that you might not want to do that anyway, but i don't think that the mere presence of a glossy screen will cause a pro user to melt like the wicked witch of the west when doused with water. If you are a pro and have a matte LCD attached to an iMac, the glossy iMac will not be so horrible as to make all work on either screen impossible. It might actually be nice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Say you have the main screen at 1680x1050 and a 24" on the right at 1920x1200. Moving the mouse left to right is fine because you are moving onto a higher resolution. Moving back however, if you don't move your mouse within the 1050 range that is setup in the display arrangement tab, your mouse stops and you have to slide your mouse down/up until it can pass onto the lower res screen.
This seems minor but if you have to keep passing back onto the other screen for the menubar and dock (which is certainly the case in my experience) then it's not practical.
Someone at my work has an iMac with a second screen and they originally had a small 1024x768 screen as a second display and had to get another 20" because of this issue. Now I think of it, he doesn't have an extra menubar or dock on his 2nd screen either. And also now I think of it, the setup looks hideous because the displays look totally different. The dual setup with the towers is fine because I got matching displays.
A good solution for this (I have had some similar setups with different resolution monitors) is to set the monitors up flush on the bottom in the preference pane. So one of the monitors may only go up 3/4 the distance of the other monitor with its greater resolution, but the bottom line and bottom portions of both monitors are shared. You know that when you slide the mouse back and forth, as long as you're in the bottom .75 of the other screen, it doesn't hit a wall. I honestly have never found this to be a problem not even for a nanosecond. The pictures in the setup screen make it absolutely clear what the relationship of the monitors will be, and the mouse is happy to accomodate. I could see how this might be annoying if the monitors created a virtual window of clearance in the middle of larger monitor, but as long as you set them up so that the bottoms are at the same level (or the tops if you prefer), this will never ever be a problem. Not ever ever.
In System Preferences you can set which of the two screens is the main one (menu bar and dock).
That would sort the issue with the matte screen being the secondary display but I still wish the Dock and menu bars were mirrored.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
If you are a pro and have a matte LCD attached to an iMac, the glossy iMac will not be so horrible as to make all work on either screen impossible. It might actually be nice.
It might be but it's not. The displays will look totally different. If you are as neurotic about symmetry as I am then it's likely to send you into fits of hysteria. You'll have heard about the whole Feng Shui idea well, that kind of asymmetry affects me as I work. I like to have things aligned neatly and things that aren't distract me. The last thing I want is not only a non-matching screen but one that acts like a giant mirror.
And another thing, how are you supposed to put a CD/DVD into the slot when there's a display there? You could put the second screen on the left but it's another limitation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
A good solution for this (I have had some similar setups with different resolution monitors) is to set the monitors up flush on the bottom in the preference pane. So one of the monitors may only go up 3/4 the distance of the other monitor with its greater resolution, but the bottom line and bottom portions of both monitors are shared. You know that when you slide the mouse back and forth, as long as you're in the bottom .75 of the other screen, it doesn't hit a wall. I honestly have never found this to be a problem not even for a nanosecond. The pictures in the setup screen make it absolutely clear what the relationship of the monitors will be, and the mouse is happy to accomodate. I could see how this might be annoying if the monitors created a virtual window of clearance in the middle of larger monitor, but as long as you set them up so that the bottoms are at the same level (or the tops if you prefer), this will never ever be a problem. Not ever ever.
I hit that little section way to many times for it not to be a problem. The trouble is that Apple have put two items that are equally well used at opposite ends of the screen. I use the menubar and Dock equally so putting the screen at the bottom means I hit the space going for the menu. If I put the screen up, I hit it going for the Dock.
If you are as neurotic about symmetry as I am then it's likely to send you into fits of hysteria. You'll have heard about the whole Feng Shui idea well, that kind of asymmetry affects me as I work. I like to have things aligned neatly and things that aren't distract me. The last thing I want is not only a non-matching screen but one that acts like a giant mirror.
Well, you can be picky or frugal, but it's difficult to be both.
If you are willing to pay for it, you can banish a fully-loaded Mac Pro into a temperature-controlled closet and connect it with fiberoptic cables to perfectly symmetrical arrays of matte panel monitors positioned by your personal feng shui priest.
Or, you could just buy an iMac on the cheap, plug it in, and live with what is for you its foibles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
And another thing, how are you supposed to put a CD/DVD into the slot when there's a display there? You could put the second screen on the left but it's another limitation.
I know I may just be a cat, but I am amazed at your hyper-vigilance! How did you even think of that?! And when you get down to it, with a few inches in between, and only occassional use, how bad is that really?
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
The iMac is "the good". If you want "the perfect," you have to pay a little extra, and even then, it may never be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I hit that little section way to many times for it not to be a problem. The trouble is that Apple have put two items that are equally well used at opposite ends of the screen. I use the menubar and Dock equally so putting the screen at the bottom means I hit the space going for the menu. If I put the screen up, I hit it going for the Dock.
I may not be following you, but couldn't you put the dock near the menu on the same screen, leaving the other one as an open field?
If you are willing to pay for it, you can banish a fully-loaded Mac Pro into a temperature-controlled closet and connect it with fiberoptic cables to perfectly symmetrical arrays of matte panel monitors positioned by your personal feng shui priest.
But then I can't put CDs/DVDs in it at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
I know I may just be a cat, but I am amazed at your hyper-vigilance! How did you even think of that?! And when you get down to it, with a few inches in between, and only occassional use, how bad is that really?
That was the problem the guy at work had with his iMac and his display is now on the left. He even asked why don't they put the drive on the top. I think it should be on the base. The problem isn't really inserting discs but ejecting them because you'd have to make sure to swivel the screen before the disc popped out. You'd have to make sure you didn't do it half way and snap the disc and let all hell break loose as you try to pull the broken fragments from the slot-loader.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
The iMac is "the good". If you want "the perfect," you have to pay a little extra, and even then, it may never be.
The Mac Pro isn't perfect either because it's too big. I agree that the iMac is a decent computer but I'd rather pay for a computer I want than extra for a computer I already know has faults that affect the way I work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duddits
I may not be following you, but couldn't you put the dock near the menu on the same screen, leaving the other one as an open field?
You can only put the Dock on the side, which I can't stand either because the Dock balances out the menu. It would be asymmetric otherwise. Also, I find it very hard to use on the side.
If you get the stock 2.2ghz MBP at US$1999 I think that would solve a lot of your challenges. Particularly the new LED-backlight screen. Good for designing stuff. Matte.
Well, I would like to thank everyone for their input into this, apparently, highly debatable topic! After much reading here, playing with an iMac at the store, and researching memory intensive programs such as photoshop (geekbench/xbench 20% increase) I have decided to go the new 20in iMac + external display. (sorry Marvin, I let you down man) All benchmarks show about a 10-15% increase over the 2.2 MBP,and I need speed more than portability. I can see myself getting a MB within a year or so if business picks up.
The older model wasn't worth the extra 300 in savings for me, more ram makes CS3 happy! I should have it tomorrow and I am going to hook up my current 20.1 in Samsung to it to see if I like it or if I want to pony up a little more for a 24in. That way I can keep either monitor and pass this along in 2 years or so to my wife, it's a win win!
[quote/]That was the problem the guy at work had with his iMac and his display is now on the left. He even asked why don't they put the drive on the top. I think it should be on the base. The problem isn't really inserting discs but ejecting them because you'd have to make sure to swivel the screen before the disc popped out. You'd have to make sure you didn't do it half way and snap the disc and let all hell break loose as you try to pull the broken fragments from the slot-loader.[/quote]
Has anyone actually done that? Hard to believe the disk ejects with such force that it would snap or shatter! Maybe you accidently put a tea saucer in instead? Or a very large Necco Waifer?
I have decided to go the new 20in iMac + external display. (sorry Marvin, I let you down man)
Not at all, you have very little choice in the matter thanks to Apple. If you had the option of a small tower with dual display support and likely cheaper than the iMac, I'm sure that would have been your choice and similarly mine. Right now, I'm considering an upgrade in the long term but I run quite demanding software and I'd love to get a RAID machine with a fast Core 2 Duo (quad would help though) so my decision is now between an iMac (which already doesn't have what I need) or forgetting Apple hardware altogether. I'd likely have to run a modified version of OS X and possibly migrate to Windows, which I really don't want to do but I simply don't have an option. The Mac Pro would suffice of course but it's more than twice the size of the machine I need, way too heavy and expensive. I have £800+ some extra for BTO upgrades just waiting for Apple to take it - the lowest 20" iMac is £800 but take away the screen and the laptop parts and add a good GPU with the ability to have two internal drives (either optical or HD) and that's ideal.
lowest Mini = £400, lowest Mac Pro = £1400 -> me = £(1400+400)/2 = £900
Someone I work beside has a PC built up for about £500 that suffices spec wise so if Apple can't do it for £800-900 then something is seriously wrong with way they make computers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubit
Has anyone actually done that? Hard to believe the disk ejects with such force that it would snap or shatter!
No I meant that if it ejected behind the second display and you quickly swung the iMac forward, the disc could catch on the second display and snap. Or if not that serious, damage the disc or scratch the screen.
Not at all, you have very little choice in the matter thanks to Apple. If you had the option of a small tower with dual display support and likely cheaper than the iMac, I'm sure that would have been your choice and similarly mine. Right now, I'm considering an upgrade in the long term but I run quite demanding software and I'd love to get a RAID machine with a fast Core 2 Duo (quad would help though) so my decision is now between an iMac (which already doesn't have what I need) or forgetting Apple hardware altogether. I'd likely have to run a modified version of OS X and possibly migrate to Windows, which I really don't want to do but I simply don't have an option. The Mac Pro would suffice of course but it's more than twice the size of the machine I need, way too heavy and expensive. I have £800+ some extra for BTO upgrades just waiting for Apple to take it - the lowest 20" iMac is £800 but take away the screen and the laptop parts and add a good GPU with the ability to have two internal drives (either optical or HD) and that's ideal.
lowest Mini = £400, lowest Mac Pro = £1400 -> me = £(1400+400)/2 = £900
Someone I work beside has a PC built up for about £500 that suffices spec wise so if Apple can't do it for £800-900 then something is seriously wrong with way they make computers.
I know I was just messing around, I pretty much feel the same way. Mac mini is not powerful enough and the MacPro is overkill for me being a non-video/3d editor.
I have to say I am typing this up on my new iMac and the glare/reflections aren't nearly as bad as they were at the Apple store. During daylight hours there is a still the dark/black areas that I can say hello to myself in but that is where my second display will come in handy for serious work. Otherwise I actually like this screen for just web/mail/iphoto etc.
I have to say I am typing this up on my new iMac and the glare/reflections aren't nearly as bad as they were at the Apple store. During daylight hours there is a still the dark/black areas that I can say hello to myself in but that is where my second display will come in handy for serious work. Otherwise I actually like this screen for just web/mail/iphoto etc.
Ironically, the worst iMac glares I saw were in the Apple store. It's not as if the Apple stores have created an artificial environment to lure people into buying a computer that will ignite into a stellar cloud of luminescence as soon as they bring it home. Quite the opposite: better at home.
I have a few Apple computers including a new iMac. The cinema display connotes work to me. The iMac, on the other hand, is more inviting. There's something more fun about it. As you say, for iphoto/web/mail, it's more delightful to work on the glossy goodness of the iMac than the sombre neutrality of the cinema display.
I too like having both and think the iMac works well in a "mixed monitor" environment.
Ironically, the worst iMac glares I saw were in the Apple store. It's not as if the Apple stores have created an artificial environment to lure people into buying a computer that will ignite into a stellar cloud of luminescence as soon as they bring it home. Quite the opposite: better at home.
I have a few Apple computers including a new iMac. The cinema display connotes work to me. The iMac, on the other hand, is more inviting. There's something more fun about it. As you say, for iphoto/web/mail, it's more delightful to work on the glossy goodness of the iMac than the sombre neutrality of the cinema display.
I too like having both and think the iMac works well in a "mixed monitor" environment.
Sorry it took me so long to reply to this but life has been hectic! I just picked up a LG 246WP from Best buy (on sale 499) and so far I am loving it with the dual display setup. I have the LG in front of me and the 20in iMac off the side, at a slight angle because of viewing angles, but it's great to have Photoshop open on the main and my email etc on the iMac.
Thanks again everyone for your advice, this is a great setup! (with 4GB of ram as well.)
This past Thursday, I stopped in at the Apple store to see the new iMacs. The store was being renovated and most of it was blocked off. Only a section about 12 feet wide and about 30 feet long was open. There were shelves part way down the sides with computers with on them. I didn't find the glare on the iMacs too bad - probably because of the difference in lighting. Some of my negative feeling about the glossy screen dissipated. Since my displays are facing a blank wall, I wouldn't have a big glare problem.
However, the glare is not my main problem. I want to buy a mini. I asked a salesman about a possible way to use two monitors. He said, "NO ONE had asked that question before." (I find that hard to believe.) He said he'd talk to the Geniuses in the back room. After about 15 minutes he came back and told me the Geniuses had discussed it and said no. They also told him that no one had asked that question before. He said if I wanted 2 displays, I'd have to buy an iMac or a Mac Pro. Since I need two monitors, it looks like I'll have to get the iMac. That is if Vinea doesn't develop the DIY mini tower.
Are we AI members in a world of our own in thinking of what we want. Why aren't other Mac users asking these questions at the Apple store? I had to bite my tongue to keep from asking him about a future Mini tower. I knew he wouldn't know. One thing I forgot to check on: Is there a DVI out from the iMac? I did a rudimentary search on Apple site, but didn't find an answer. Does anyone have that info?
Why aren't other Mac users asking these questions at the Apple store?
I think it's more that Mac users make an informed choice about what computer they get and they tend to investigate the spec beforehand online. For example, I know that Apple don't make a decent desktop so I wouldn't walk into an Apple Store and ask if they had a small tower because it would be like me walking into a vegetarian restaurant and asking do they sell hamburgers. I pretty much know the answer before I get there so I feel the conversation would be pretty short. They'd just say no and I would feel kinda stupid walking all the way in just for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sequitur
I had to bite my tongue to keep from asking him about a future Mini tower. I knew he wouldn't know. One thing I forgot to check on: Is there a DVI out from the iMac? I did a rudimentary search on Apple site, but didn't find an answer. Does anyone have that info?
I don't know about the new one but the old one has mini-DVI out, which as you can imagine is hardly ideal. You need an adaptor (the ones you get for the laptops work):
I think it's more that Mac users make an informed choice about what computer they get and they tend to investigate the spec beforehand online. For example, I know that Apple don't make a decent desktop so I wouldn't walk into an Apple Store and ask if they had a small tower because it would be like me walking into a vegetarian restaurant and asking do they sell hamburgers. I pretty much know the answer before I get there so I feel the conversation would be pretty short. They'd just say no and I would feel kinda stupid walking all the way in just for that.
Yes, I know. We've covered that aspect in AI ad nauseum; however, just in case there WAS a way to connect 2 ACD's, I figured the Apple stores would have that info.
And no, I didn't ask him about a mini tower because I knew he wouldn't know.
As for everyone investigating the specs beforehand, I don't agree, with all due respect, with you. Listening to the questions asked at the store, I heard a lot of questions a six month user wouldn't ask. Probably, a lot of switchers. The open part of the store was so narrow, you could hear what everyone was asking.
I have a Samsung external monitor attached via DVI from my C2D iMac.
Sometimes (about 25% of the time), when I bring my Mac out of sleep, the external monitor turns on and off a bunch of times, by itself. It seems that the only way for me to fix this is to actually turn off the monitor, then turn it back on.
Is the iMac powerful enough to effectively drive the external monitor, or could there just be a problem with my monitor?
Comments
3. 24in Refurb $1449
- iLife 08 - $79
- 3GB OWC $170
Total = $1789
If you can get the refurb this is a good price. Otherwise you can get the older 20" iMac a 24" SPIS from dell for $569 which wouldn't be a bad option either.
Whether Apple surveys people or not and finds the people who prefer matte to be in the minority, it doesn't help for them to keep removing options from people.
It may be that the glass panel is such an integral part of the new iMac, that it's just impossible to offer that computer in matte. It seems like the people who are complaining most of all about glossy are pros of some sort, and I guess Apple feels that they will buy the cinema displays.
I'd say go for the 20" because if you had a 24", you'd likely want to put it on a higher resolution (1920x1200) than the imac (1680x1050) and this means that your mouse gets stuck when you move between displays. If you don't use the higher resolution then there's no point in getting the larger display.
What do you mean about the mouse getting "stuck?" Why would the mouse get stuck? As a cat, I have found that mice don't just get stuck.
This is clearly false as I am looking at my second monitor as primary with menu bars and dock while I use the original display for entourage and other secondary stuff.
You have fully functional menu bars and a dock on your extended secondary display? The two screen setup I have at work with a G5 tower doesn't do this.
It may be that the glass panel is such an integral part of the new iMac, that it's just impossible to offer that computer in matte. It seems like the people who are complaining most of all about glossy are pros of some sort, and I guess Apple feels that they will buy the cinema displays.
But attach it to what? The iMac isn't good enough because you still get a glossy screen. A tower would be the obvious answer even an older one but they are way too big and expensive for what is needed.
What do you mean about the mouse getting "stuck?" Why would the mouse get stuck? As a cat, I have found that mice don't just get stuck.
Say you have the main screen at 1680x1050 and a 24" on the right at 1920x1200. Moving the mouse left to right is fine because you are moving onto a higher resolution. Moving back however, if you don't move your mouse within the 1050 range that is setup in the display arrangement tab, your mouse stops and you have to slide your mouse down/up until it can pass onto the lower res screen.
This seems minor but if you have to keep passing back onto the other screen for the menubar and dock (which is certainly the case in my experience) then it's not practical.
Someone at my work has an iMac with a second screen and they originally had a small 1024x768 screen as a second display and had to get another 20" because of this issue. Now I think of it, he doesn't have an extra menubar or dock on his 2nd screen either. And also now I think of it, the setup looks hideous because the displays look totally different. The dual setup with the towers is fine because I got matching displays.
You have fully functional menu bars and a dock on your extended secondary display? The two screen setup I have at work with a G5 tower doesn't do this.
In System Preferences you can set which of the two screens is the main one (menu bar and dock).
But attach it to what? The iMac isn't good enough because you still get a glossy screen. A tower would be the obvious answer even an older one but they are way too big and expensive for what is needed.
I would imagine that the next generation tower will be universally smaller. I'm not sure Apple will have a mid-sized tower to appease all the angry gamers posting at AI, but I would not be surprised if all MacPros become "mid-sized." (and then wait for the gnashing of teeth from the pro community about lost internal real estate!).
As for pairing an iMac with a cinema display, I realize that you might not want to do that anyway, but i don't think that the mere presence of a glossy screen will cause a pro user to melt like the wicked witch of the west when doused with water. If you are a pro and have a matte LCD attached to an iMac, the glossy iMac will not be so horrible as to make all work on either screen impossible. It might actually be nice.
Say you have the main screen at 1680x1050 and a 24" on the right at 1920x1200. Moving the mouse left to right is fine because you are moving onto a higher resolution. Moving back however, if you don't move your mouse within the 1050 range that is setup in the display arrangement tab, your mouse stops and you have to slide your mouse down/up until it can pass onto the lower res screen.
This seems minor but if you have to keep passing back onto the other screen for the menubar and dock (which is certainly the case in my experience) then it's not practical.
Someone at my work has an iMac with a second screen and they originally had a small 1024x768 screen as a second display and had to get another 20" because of this issue. Now I think of it, he doesn't have an extra menubar or dock on his 2nd screen either. And also now I think of it, the setup looks hideous because the displays look totally different. The dual setup with the towers is fine because I got matching displays.
A good solution for this (I have had some similar setups with different resolution monitors) is to set the monitors up flush on the bottom in the preference pane. So one of the monitors may only go up 3/4 the distance of the other monitor with its greater resolution, but the bottom line and bottom portions of both monitors are shared. You know that when you slide the mouse back and forth, as long as you're in the bottom .75 of the other screen, it doesn't hit a wall. I honestly have never found this to be a problem not even for a nanosecond. The pictures in the setup screen make it absolutely clear what the relationship of the monitors will be, and the mouse is happy to accomodate. I could see how this might be annoying if the monitors created a virtual window of clearance in the middle of larger monitor, but as long as you set them up so that the bottoms are at the same level (or the tops if you prefer), this will never ever be a problem. Not ever ever.
In System Preferences you can set which of the two screens is the main one (menu bar and dock).
That would sort the issue with the matte screen being the secondary display but I still wish the Dock and menu bars were mirrored.
If you are a pro and have a matte LCD attached to an iMac, the glossy iMac will not be so horrible as to make all work on either screen impossible. It might actually be nice.
And another thing, how are you supposed to put a CD/DVD into the slot when there's a display there? You could put the second screen on the left but it's another limitation.
A good solution for this (I have had some similar setups with different resolution monitors) is to set the monitors up flush on the bottom in the preference pane. So one of the monitors may only go up 3/4 the distance of the other monitor with its greater resolution, but the bottom line and bottom portions of both monitors are shared. You know that when you slide the mouse back and forth, as long as you're in the bottom .75 of the other screen, it doesn't hit a wall. I honestly have never found this to be a problem not even for a nanosecond. The pictures in the setup screen make it absolutely clear what the relationship of the monitors will be, and the mouse is happy to accomodate. I could see how this might be annoying if the monitors created a virtual window of clearance in the middle of larger monitor, but as long as you set them up so that the bottoms are at the same level (or the tops if you prefer), this will never ever be a problem. Not ever ever.
I hit that little section way to many times for it not to be a problem. The trouble is that Apple have put two items that are equally well used at opposite ends of the screen. I use the menubar and Dock equally so putting the screen at the bottom means I hit the space going for the menu. If I put the screen up, I hit it going for the Dock.
If you are as neurotic about symmetry as I am then it's likely to send you into fits of hysteria. You'll have heard about the whole Feng Shui idea well, that kind of asymmetry affects me as I work. I like to have things aligned neatly and things that aren't distract me. The last thing I want is not only a non-matching screen but one that acts like a giant mirror.
Well, you can be picky or frugal, but it's difficult to be both.
If you are willing to pay for it, you can banish a fully-loaded Mac Pro into a temperature-controlled closet and connect it with fiberoptic cables to perfectly symmetrical arrays of matte panel monitors positioned by your personal feng shui priest.
Or, you could just buy an iMac on the cheap, plug it in, and live with what is for you its foibles.
And another thing, how are you supposed to put a CD/DVD into the slot when there's a display there? You could put the second screen on the left but it's another limitation.
I know I may just be a cat, but I am amazed at your hyper-vigilance! How did you even think of that?! And when you get down to it, with a few inches in between, and only occassional use, how bad is that really?
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
The iMac is "the good". If you want "the perfect," you have to pay a little extra, and even then, it may never be.
I hit that little section way to many times for it not to be a problem. The trouble is that Apple have put two items that are equally well used at opposite ends of the screen. I use the menubar and Dock equally so putting the screen at the bottom means I hit the space going for the menu. If I put the screen up, I hit it going for the Dock.
I may not be following you, but couldn't you put the dock near the menu on the same screen, leaving the other one as an open field?
If you are willing to pay for it, you can banish a fully-loaded Mac Pro into a temperature-controlled closet and connect it with fiberoptic cables to perfectly symmetrical arrays of matte panel monitors positioned by your personal feng shui priest.
I know I may just be a cat, but I am amazed at your hyper-vigilance! How did you even think of that?! And when you get down to it, with a few inches in between, and only occassional use, how bad is that really?
That was the problem the guy at work had with his iMac and his display is now on the left. He even asked why don't they put the drive on the top. I think it should be on the base. The problem isn't really inserting discs but ejecting them because you'd have to make sure to swivel the screen before the disc popped out. You'd have to make sure you didn't do it half way and snap the disc and let all hell break loose as you try to pull the broken fragments from the slot-loader.
The iMac is "the good". If you want "the perfect," you have to pay a little extra, and even then, it may never be.
The Mac Pro isn't perfect either because it's too big. I agree that the iMac is a decent computer but I'd rather pay for a computer I want than extra for a computer I already know has faults that affect the way I work.
I may not be following you, but couldn't you put the dock near the menu on the same screen, leaving the other one as an open field?
You can only put the Dock on the side, which I can't stand either because the Dock balances out the menu. It would be asymmetric otherwise.
The older model wasn't worth the extra 300 in savings for me, more ram makes CS3 happy! I should have it tomorrow and I am going to hook up my current 20.1 in Samsung to it to see if I like it or if I want to pony up a little more for a 24in. That way I can keep either monitor and pass this along in 2 years or so to my wife, it's a win win!
Thanks again!
Has anyone actually done that? Hard to believe the disk ejects with such force that it would snap or shatter! Maybe you accidently put a tea saucer in instead? Or a very large Necco Waifer?
I have decided to go the new 20in iMac + external display. (sorry Marvin, I let you down man)
Not at all, you have very little choice in the matter thanks to Apple. If you had the option of a small tower with dual display support and likely cheaper than the iMac, I'm sure that would have been your choice and similarly mine. Right now, I'm considering an upgrade in the long term but I run quite demanding software and I'd love to get a RAID machine with a fast Core 2 Duo (quad would help though) so my decision is now between an iMac (which already doesn't have what I need) or forgetting Apple hardware altogether. I'd likely have to run a modified version of OS X and possibly migrate to Windows, which I really don't want to do but I simply don't have an option. The Mac Pro would suffice of course but it's more than twice the size of the machine I need, way too heavy and expensive. I have £800+ some extra for BTO upgrades just waiting for Apple to take it - the lowest 20" iMac is £800 but take away the screen and the laptop parts and add a good GPU with the ability to have two internal drives (either optical or HD) and that's ideal.
lowest Mini = £400, lowest Mac Pro = £1400 -> me = £(1400+400)/2 = £900
Someone I work beside has a PC built up for about £500 that suffices spec wise so if Apple can't do it for £800-900 then something is seriously wrong with way they make computers.
Has anyone actually done that? Hard to believe the disk ejects with such force that it would snap or shatter!
No I meant that if it ejected behind the second display and you quickly swung the iMac forward, the disc could catch on the second display and snap. Or if not that serious, damage the disc or scratch the screen.
Not at all, you have very little choice in the matter thanks to Apple. If you had the option of a small tower with dual display support and likely cheaper than the iMac, I'm sure that would have been your choice and similarly mine. Right now, I'm considering an upgrade in the long term but I run quite demanding software and I'd love to get a RAID machine with a fast Core 2 Duo (quad would help though) so my decision is now between an iMac (which already doesn't have what I need) or forgetting Apple hardware altogether. I'd likely have to run a modified version of OS X and possibly migrate to Windows, which I really don't want to do but I simply don't have an option. The Mac Pro would suffice of course but it's more than twice the size of the machine I need, way too heavy and expensive. I have £800+ some extra for BTO upgrades just waiting for Apple to take it - the lowest 20" iMac is £800 but take away the screen and the laptop parts and add a good GPU with the ability to have two internal drives (either optical or HD) and that's ideal.
lowest Mini = £400, lowest Mac Pro = £1400 -> me = £(1400+400)/2 = £900
Someone I work beside has a PC built up for about £500 that suffices spec wise so if Apple can't do it for £800-900 then something is seriously wrong with way they make computers.
I know I was just messing around, I pretty much feel the same way. Mac mini is not powerful enough and the MacPro is overkill for me being a non-video/3d editor.
I have to say I am typing this up on my new iMac and the glare/reflections aren't nearly as bad as they were at the Apple store. During daylight hours there is a still the dark/black areas that I can say hello to myself in but that is where my second display will come in handy for serious work. Otherwise I actually like this screen for just web/mail/iphoto etc.
I have to say I am typing this up on my new iMac and the glare/reflections aren't nearly as bad as they were at the Apple store. During daylight hours there is a still the dark/black areas that I can say hello to myself in but that is where my second display will come in handy for serious work. Otherwise I actually like this screen for just web/mail/iphoto etc.
Ironically, the worst iMac glares I saw were in the Apple store. It's not as if the Apple stores have created an artificial environment to lure people into buying a computer that will ignite into a stellar cloud of luminescence as soon as they bring it home. Quite the opposite: better at home.
I have a few Apple computers including a new iMac. The cinema display connotes work to me. The iMac, on the other hand, is more inviting. There's something more fun about it. As you say, for iphoto/web/mail, it's more delightful to work on the glossy goodness of the iMac than the sombre neutrality of the cinema display.
I too like having both and think the iMac works well in a "mixed monitor" environment.
Ironically, the worst iMac glares I saw were in the Apple store. It's not as if the Apple stores have created an artificial environment to lure people into buying a computer that will ignite into a stellar cloud of luminescence as soon as they bring it home. Quite the opposite: better at home.
I have a few Apple computers including a new iMac. The cinema display connotes work to me. The iMac, on the other hand, is more inviting. There's something more fun about it. As you say, for iphoto/web/mail, it's more delightful to work on the glossy goodness of the iMac than the sombre neutrality of the cinema display.
I too like having both and think the iMac works well in a "mixed monitor" environment.
Sorry it took me so long to reply to this but life has been hectic! I just picked up a LG 246WP from Best buy (on sale 499) and so far I am loving it with the dual display setup. I have the LG in front of me and the 20in iMac off the side, at a slight angle because of viewing angles, but it's great to have Photoshop open on the main and my email etc on the iMac.
Thanks again everyone for your advice, this is a great setup! (with 4GB of ram as well.)
However, the glare is not my main problem. I want to buy a mini. I asked a salesman about a possible way to use two monitors. He said, "NO ONE had asked that question before." (I find that hard to believe.) He said he'd talk to the Geniuses in the back room. After about 15 minutes he came back and told me the Geniuses had discussed it and said no. They also told him that no one had asked that question before. He said if I wanted 2 displays, I'd have to buy an iMac or a Mac Pro. Since I need two monitors, it looks like I'll have to get the iMac. That is if Vinea doesn't develop the DIY mini tower.
Are we AI members in a world of our own in thinking of what we want. Why aren't other Mac users asking these questions at the Apple store? I had to bite my tongue to keep from asking him about a future Mini tower. I knew he wouldn't know. One thing I forgot to check on: Is there a DVI out from the iMac? I did a rudimentary search on Apple site, but didn't find an answer. Does anyone have that info?
Why aren't other Mac users asking these questions at the Apple store?
I think it's more that Mac users make an informed choice about what computer they get and they tend to investigate the spec beforehand online. For example, I know that Apple don't make a decent desktop so I wouldn't walk into an Apple Store and ask if they had a small tower because it would be like me walking into a vegetarian restaurant and asking do they sell hamburgers. I pretty much know the answer before I get there so I feel the conversation would be pretty short. They'd just say no and I would feel kinda stupid walking all the way in just for that.
I had to bite my tongue to keep from asking him about a future Mini tower. I knew he wouldn't know. One thing I forgot to check on: Is there a DVI out from the iMac? I did a rudimentary search on Apple site, but didn't find an answer. Does anyone have that info?
I don't know about the new one but the old one has mini-DVI out, which as you can imagine is hardly ideal. You need an adaptor (the ones you get for the laptops work):
http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObje...CAF&nplm=M9321
I think it's more that Mac users make an informed choice about what computer they get and they tend to investigate the spec beforehand online. For example, I know that Apple don't make a decent desktop so I wouldn't walk into an Apple Store and ask if they had a small tower because it would be like me walking into a vegetarian restaurant and asking do they sell hamburgers. I pretty much know the answer before I get there so I feel the conversation would be pretty short. They'd just say no and I would feel kinda stupid walking all the way in just for that.
Yes, I know. We've covered that aspect in AI ad nauseum; however, just in case there WAS a way to connect 2 ACD's, I figured the Apple stores would have that info.
And no, I didn't ask him about a mini tower because I knew he wouldn't know.
As for everyone investigating the specs beforehand, I don't agree, with all due respect, with you. Listening to the questions asked at the store, I heard a lot of questions a six month user wouldn't ask. Probably, a lot of switchers. The open part of the store was so narrow, you could hear what everyone was asking.
Sometimes (about 25% of the time), when I bring my Mac out of sleep, the external monitor turns on and off a bunch of times, by itself. It seems that the only way for me to fix this is to actually turn off the monitor, then turn it back on.
Is the iMac powerful enough to effectively drive the external monitor, or could there just be a problem with my monitor?