Current iMacs are slow..hmm.
Don't get me wrong, iMacs may not be as slow as I make them sound, but compared to what the PC's companies are selling they're pretty much left in the dust. I mean, for the price of a 24" for example..you buy a high-end gaming PC with Quad Core and 4GB of Ram included. Why is Apple always outdated and wait for things to become ancient in order to release them. By the time they make the transition to Quad..a new processor would already be out for PCs. This is the only reason why I hold back from Apple, you'd probably have to replace your computer in a year or two. Although their stability and security is untouchable because of their software..their hardware is actually pathetic and expensive. Come on Apple, step your game up...consumers are not as dumb as they seem. Your computers are not as good as you sponsor them...looks aren't everything you know...
And forget about getting a Mac Pro...good luck with that price.
And forget about getting a Mac Pro...good luck with that price.
Comments
I have an Aug 07 2.0 GHz iMac and is it plenty fast enough for the light photo editing and programming that I do. For the price I paid, and with a built in 20" screen and rock solid aluminium construction, it is a decent deal.
This debate on Apple pricing has been had a million times, but the iMac is an example of a product with a slight Apple tax which is justified by the looks, construction and OS.
The current high end iMac for $2450 has:
- 3.06GHz Core2 Duo
- 24" 1920x1200 HD screen
- Nvidia GeForce 8800 512MB
- 1TB 7200 HDD
I have not found a Quad Core PC with similar specs for a lower price.
Troll.
Do you mean slow on paper, or slow in actual use? You sound like a paper guy to me. You see, there was a time when I was like you. I carefully looked over the comparison charts and wisely decided that the Mac was way behind the curve and that the people who bought these machines were fools. It remained that way for many years until circumstances provided the impetus for me to buy one. Suddenly, Mac users didn't seem like fools anymore. Out of the box, I was doing things with my underpowered Mac that I was never able to do with a powerful Windows box. I made the switch from being a paper person to a real person. I don't know if it is due to superior engineering, better software, or magic pixie dust, but the Mac performs so much better than high-end Windows PCs ever dreamed of performing. I still use both platforms. I help people set up new computers all the time. I am also the fix-it guy in my circle. I know Windows all too well. I use my computer to actually get work done and I am definitely on a budget. I would not trade the productivity I get from my lowly iMac for anything the PC world has to offer. That may not make sense on paper, but the real world is a whole different animal.
Well I didn't mean to be a troll, but if anybody hasn't noticed I'm a frustrated man trying to make the best decision on his next computer. I'm a current eMac G4 700Mhz 256 Ram 40GB user, who well...is desperate for a new computer. It's lasted me for a little over 6 years and I was hoping to get a new Mac since I'm used to it and find it hard to go to being a Windows user and their complicated interface. It's just...they seem a little over-priced, especially when I went to do some research on alternative PC's..where I could get twice the Ram and current-gen processors.
But it might be like Mac Voyer said in his excellent observation, lol...I'm the paper guy. I based my opinions on the specs. I still have the 24" 2.8Ghz iMac model in mind..but I don't want to regret spending all that money when I could've bought a cheaper higher end PC. More bang for the buck situation perhaps?
... It's lasted me for a little over 6 years and I was hoping to get a new Mac...
But... I'm confused... I thought Mac's had to be replaced after two years. That they'd be too out-dated to be useful. How could you have possibly gotten SIX YEARS of use from a pathetic, overpriced Mac???
Or perhaps you just gave credence to the "Troll" comment?
But... I'm confused... I thought Mac's had to be replaced after two years. That they'd be too out-dated to be useful. How could you have possibly gotten SIX YEARS of use from a pathetic, overpriced Mac???
Or perhaps you just gave credence to the "Troll" comment?
To hear some people on these forums talk, you'd think that Macs had to be replaced every six months.
But out in the real world, people buy computers and use them until they literally fall apart.
But... I'm confused... I thought Mac's had to be replaced after two years. That they'd be too out-dated to be useful. How could you have possibly gotten SIX YEARS of use from a pathetic, overpriced Mac???
Or perhaps you just gave credence to the "Troll" comment?
Huh? Wait I'm confused. Every two years? I thought computers should be kept until you really need another one...what is this some sort of rule on Macs
I was hoping to get a new Mac since I'm used to it and find it hard to go to being a Windows user and their complicated interface. It's just...they seem a little over-priced, especially when I went to do some research on alternative PC's..where I could get twice the Ram and current-gen processors.
But it might be like Mac Voyer said in his excellent observation, lol...I'm the paper guy. I based my opinions on the specs. I still have the 24" 2.8Ghz iMac model in mind..but I don't want to regret spending all that money when I could've bought a cheaper higher end PC. More bang for the buck situation perhaps?
Actually since Apple transitioned to Intel. Every new update of its computers is using the best CPU and chipset Intel has to offer at the time.
Part of the problem is exactly what do you need the computer to do. Various parts of this are subjective. Dell and Gateway created all-in-ones like the iMac and do not have the same specs.
Post a link to the Windows computer you are talking about. I guarantee it won't have better spec to a Mac and significantly cheaper.
Huh? Wait I'm confused. Every two years? I thought computers should be kept until you really need another one...what is this some sort of rule on Macs
King was being sarcastic. Macs are found to be usable longer than PCs. Rarely is a PC used for six years.
Your original post stated that you didn't like Macs, because they would need to be replaced in two years. Then your next post said you'd been using the same eMac for SIX years.
You kinda made your own point that a Mac is an excellent bargain and not nearly as "last generation" as you might be led to believe.
Actually since Apple transitioned to Intel. Every new update of its computers is using the best CPU and chipset Intel has to offer at the time.
Part of the problem is exactly what do you need the computer to do. Various parts of this are subjective. Dell and Gateway created all-in-ones like the iMac and do not have the same specs.
Post a link to the Windows computer you are talking about. I guarantee it won't have better spec to a Mac and significantly cheaper.
Well I found this: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=DXDWQJ6&s=dhs
The only "drawback" would be the screen, which is 2" smaller. So is it just me for being unexperienced or is that a good deal?
By the way...any chance of Apple releasing Quad Core iMacs next month?
Well I found this: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=DXDWQJ6&s=dhs
The only "drawback" would be the screen, which is 2" smaller. So is it just me for being unexperienced or is that a good deal?
By the way...any chance of Apple releasing Quad Core iMacs next month?
One problem with that PC............it ISN'T an all-in-one
One problem with that PC............it ISN'T an all-in-one
You say that as if you think most people care about it.
IMac 24 inch (165,000),
Macbook 2.4ghz + 24 LED Cinema display (254,000)
Macbook Pro 2.4ghz and 24 inch Cinema display (298,000)
(Pricing in YEN is based on OCN's cashback in BIK Kamera)
Living in my small appartment and owning an iPhone, i don't really need the mobility of a laptop. If i had a laptop i could use it when I travel to the UK for holidays, but that's about it. My only worry would be if I decide to go live in another country - that 24 inch iMac is so heavy! But then again, watching a movie on the 24 inch cinema screen, whilst using the laptop screen to browse the net sounds pretty amazing.... But can the Macbook handle it?
So, my real question is two-fold. Firstly, will the Macbook 2.4 ghz manage playing a full-screen HD movie on the cinema display, without slowdown, whilst I browse the net and do basic tasks on the laptop screen? is this better suited to the Pro?
OR
Is it a waste of money for me to pay more money for a mobile solution and a large screen, if i'm only going to use the laptop as a laptop twice a year or so.
I need the system to last me for at least 2 years and slow-down of video is a big no-no. I have Blu-Ray rips at 1080p that I can't wait to watch and my Dell can't even open!
Thanks for any advice on this matter, I've spent the last 2 days researching but haven't been able to answer these questions myself yet.
Help!