I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
I hear what you're saying. But then in turn should every Windows story point out that iLife can't run under Windows? Or that OS X isn't supported on non-Mac hardware? Just asking.
If the point is that AppleInsider has some bias - well, ok, thanks. They also expose problems and bugs from time to time. It's not a big deal to me.
It's their blog and they're going to write it the way they want to, probably on how it will draw the most traffic and ad-clickers. Complaining about bias on a site like this isn't really going to do much.
I'm sure that everyone noticed how the comparaison is limited to only 2 models of all-in-one computers, the most expensive on the market.
But, when I open the weekly flyer from Staples, I see an HP tower with an Intel quad-core Core 2 Quad Q8200 CPU, a Blu-Ray drive, a 19 inches screen, a 500 GB hard drive and 4 GB of RAM for only $949 Canadian dollars (regular price is $1219).
iMacs are not competing with the most expensive computers on the market, but quad-core desktop computers that sell for much less.
The same Staples flyer quotes a price of $1699 and $2299 for 2 different models of HP Touchsmart all-in-one computers with Core 2 Duo CPUs and a Blu-Ray drive for the most expensive model.
If you could get a Core 2 Quad HP desktop tower computer with a Blu-Ray drive for only $949, would you really prefer a mid-range iMac model selling for $1799 in Canada? On the Canada AppleStore, iMacs sell for $1399, $1799, $2099 and $2599. See:
One thing to keep in mind, HPs use very low end logic boards (in some cases refurbished logic boards), a very low end Power Supply. The moment you want to upgrade your video card, more often than not you are also going to have to upgrade that 250-300 watt PSU to a 450 to run almost any video card on the market.
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black? Why does AppleInsider need to post an article everyday comparing Macs to PCs and saying how superior they are or how "PCs sales are down" or how "Apple machines offer better value than PCs" or "Netbooks are ravaging PC sales" etc.
If this is an "Apple" site, why do the editors feel that they have to talk so much about PCs all the time?
Does it have something to prove? AppleInsider takes every opportunity it can to push PCs into the mud; what's wrong with calling them out if they go over the line with their comparisons?
And I own Apple products which is why I visit this site. Is my opinion somehow not valid?
I don't get all the negativity about this report. I'd suspect most everyone who reads this site is a Mac fan so why are we arguing that the iMac isn't that good of a deal? Either this site is being overrun by haters or suddenly people are getting extremely cynical.
Apple doubled the speed and drives of the iMacs while lowering the prices. That to me sounds like something to crow about. Some people may want more but personally I'm very impressed with the update.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.
I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html
Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.
If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.
The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.
This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.
If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.
Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.
I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html
Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?
Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
That's beside the point. I'm a mac lover myself but I don't go around justifying the stupid decisions that Apple makes. And as with any good news source, objectivity is key...and AppleInsider is definitely not that. We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.
Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?
Uh, for you information, I've been checking AppleInsider for the past few years. Never registered because I didn't see the point in arguing with Apple fanboys like you.
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
AMEN i was just going to say the same thing. Somebody said this type of article is "exactly what they expect to see anymore on this site" (paraphrased). What else would you expect? I'm sure there are sites out there with Dell "fanboys" talking up how they're better than Apple. Go there and enjoy company amongst like-minded apple-haters. That's fine, but it always amazes me that people who dislike Apple always manage to find their way onto APPLE FAN SITES and feel the need to bash people.
These types of comparison reports are laughable. This is comparing a low-end 24" iMac with certain all-in-one PC configurations, from manufacturers. A real comparison of "value" would be to compare a maxed-out, high-end iMac with a comparable custom-built PC.
Maxed-out iMac (hardware only):
Base 24" @ 3GHz: $2200
Additional 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM: +$1000
Wireless Mouse: +$20
Wireless Keyboard: +$30
Total: $3250
Now, I'm not going to put together a shopping cart's list of parts needed to build a custom PC of equal hardware capability (I do not have the time at the moment, and there are many combinations of high-end parts to select from), but suffice to say, it would not cost a cool $3250! Of particular note is Apple's absurd pricing for 4 GBs of SDRAM (remember: it already comes pre-configured with 4GBs, so that price is already built into the base price). Not only is Apple solely offering sticks of 1066MHz (which is the very low end of DDR3 speed), they are ripping you off somewhere upwards of $800 for just 4 GBs of additional SDRAM. That's ridiculous. If you feel the need to waste money on memory like that, go ahead. Point is, if you truely want to discover the real "value" in what Apple is offering via the iMac (or lack there of), you need to compare their maxed out model to what you could likewise build on your own, not what comes preset by other manufacturers.
[QUOTE=flipdude;1384970]AppleInsider has become extremely biased [QUOTE]
haha - what do you expect?? That's why people come here! To read about apple products! THIS IS NOT "unbiased-tech-review-insider.com" ITS ALL ABOUT APPLE AROUND HERE - go somewhere else! Hah...always amazes me!
Not to mention, this article was reporting on an anlysis and comparison done by a STOCK ANALYST, not AppleInsider.
We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.
Well then maybe this isn't the site for you and you should stop visiting it. Find a site that reports in a way you agree with and enjoy yourself. Why make attacking comments? Your words won't change the report you just read. If you want to vent frustration to AppleInsider by all means do, but there is no need to involve the rest of us in it.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Hey AH. Name one of the "?thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant." Careful now.
And while you are at it, name one of the "?thousands of other software titles that the iMac all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the other 2 can.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Are you on drugs?
iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.
It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.
If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.
The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.
This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.
If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.
It's not just the software. Design counts. You don't think Mag-safe is significant? I do. Do you think the iPhone touch interface is significant? I do. Are we supposed to wait for Dell to come up with stuff like this? It's easy to label magsafe etc as trivial, but without Apple who would ever push some changes?
What about the Genius Bar? Does HP have a presence at your mall? When you have a software problem does Apple blame your hardware manufacturer?
These types of comparison reports are laughable. This is comparing a low-end 24" iMac with certain all-in-one PC configurations, from manufacturers. A real comparison of "value" would be to compare a maxed-out, high-end iMac with a comparable custom-built PC.
You're grasping at straws. The comparison is for those people who want the advantages of an all-in-one. Is that so hard to understand?
Nowhere does the report say this is the best computer you can buy (or put together) for a certain amount of money. It merely says that for comparable manufacturers' all-in-ones, Apple has slightly better value than Dell or HP.
iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.
To be perfectly fair, if you get a Dell it will come with Microsoft Works, and Windows also has some iLife-like software things like Windows Photo Gallery, Windows Media Player and Movie Maker.
Of course, iLife is still way better than anything Microsoft offers... but that doesn't make the comparison anything close to objective.
I'd suspect most everyone who reads this site is a Mac fan so why are we arguing that the iMac isn't that good of a deal?
Because it's not?
Being a mac fan doesn't mean you have to blindly accept everything Apple does. They make some great decisions and some terrible ones, I see nothing wrong with commenting on both.
Comments
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
I hear what you're saying. But then in turn should every Windows story point out that iLife can't run under Windows? Or that OS X isn't supported on non-Mac hardware? Just asking.
If the point is that AppleInsider has some bias - well, ok, thanks. They also expose problems and bugs from time to time. It's not a big deal to me.
It's their blog and they're going to write it the way they want to, probably on how it will draw the most traffic and ad-clickers. Complaining about bias on a site like this isn't really going to do much.
I'm sure that everyone noticed how the comparaison is limited to only 2 models of all-in-one computers, the most expensive on the market.
But, when I open the weekly flyer from Staples, I see an HP tower with an Intel quad-core Core 2 Quad Q8200 CPU, a Blu-Ray drive, a 19 inches screen, a 500 GB hard drive and 4 GB of RAM for only $949 Canadian dollars (regular price is $1219).
iMacs are not competing with the most expensive computers on the market, but quad-core desktop computers that sell for much less.
The same Staples flyer quotes a price of $1699 and $2299 for 2 different models of HP Touchsmart all-in-one computers with Core 2 Duo CPUs and a Blu-Ray drive for the most expensive model.
If you could get a Core 2 Quad HP desktop tower computer with a Blu-Ray drive for only $949, would you really prefer a mid-range iMac model selling for $1799 in Canada? On the Canada AppleStore, iMacs sell for $1399, $1799, $2099 and $2599. See:
http://store.apple.com/ca/browse/hom...ac?mco=MTE2NjM
One thing to keep in mind, HPs use very low end logic boards (in some cases refurbished logic boards), a very low end Power Supply. The moment you want to upgrade your video card, more often than not you are also going to have to upgrade that 250-300 watt PSU to a 450 to run almost any video card on the market.
Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black? Why does AppleInsider need to post an article everyday comparing Macs to PCs and saying how superior they are or how "PCs sales are down" or how "Apple machines offer better value than PCs" or "Netbooks are ravaging PC sales" etc.
If this is an "Apple" site, why do the editors feel that they have to talk so much about PCs all the time?
Does it have something to prove? AppleInsider takes every opportunity it can to push PCs into the mud; what's wrong with calling them out if they go over the line with their comparisons?
And I own Apple products which is why I visit this site. Is my opinion somehow not valid?
Apple doubled the speed and drives of the iMacs while lowering the prices. That to me sounds like something to crow about. Some people may want more but personally I'm very impressed with the update.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.
I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html
Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.
If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.
The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.
This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.
If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.
Totally agree with you! AppleInsider has become extremely biased and I no longer intend to visit it simply because I'm sick and tired of hearing unreasonable justifications supporting Apple no matter what they do.
I'm an Apple fan but come on, you cannot support them in every decision they make! Especially when they decide to put the 9400M integrated graphics into their 2 lowest end iMacs. The previous model had discrete graphics cards and it's simply laughable to compare integrated graphics with dedicated as in this article. Check the tests yourself...http://www.notebookcheck.net/Compari...rds.130.0.html
Why should I buy a computer that just downgraded it's graphics card? Especially to a card designed for notebooks like the Macbook?
Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?
Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
That's beside the point. I'm a mac lover myself but I don't go around justifying the stupid decisions that Apple makes. And as with any good news source, objectivity is key...and AppleInsider is definitely not that. We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.
Anybody notice the number of 1st time crappers hitting the sites lately?
Uh, for you information, I've been checking AppleInsider for the past few years. Never registered because I didn't see the point in arguing with Apple fanboys like you.
Then why do you bother reading AppleInsider?
Why do all these Mac haters feel they need to vent their frustration at owning a PC by visiting Mac news sites and wasting their time?
Who cares what crap Dell you can buy, remember this is APPLEINSIDER NOT DELLINSIDER!
AMEN i was just going to say the same thing. Somebody said this type of article is "exactly what they expect to see anymore on this site" (paraphrased). What else would you expect? I'm sure there are sites out there with Dell "fanboys" talking up how they're better than Apple. Go there and enjoy company amongst like-minded apple-haters. That's fine, but it always amazes me that people who dislike Apple always manage to find their way onto APPLE FAN SITES and feel the need to bash people.
Maxed-out iMac (hardware only):
Base 24" @ 3GHz: $2200
Additional 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM: +$1000
Wireless Mouse: +$20
Wireless Keyboard: +$30
Total: $3250
Now, I'm not going to put together a shopping cart's list of parts needed to build a custom PC of equal hardware capability (I do not have the time at the moment, and there are many combinations of high-end parts to select from), but suffice to say, it would not cost a cool $3250! Of particular note is Apple's absurd pricing for 4 GBs of SDRAM (remember: it already comes pre-configured with 4GBs, so that price is already built into the base price). Not only is Apple solely offering sticks of 1066MHz (which is the very low end of DDR3 speed), they are ripping you off somewhere upwards of $800 for just 4 GBs of additional SDRAM. That's ridiculous. If you feel the need to waste money on memory like that, go ahead. Point is, if you truely want to discover the real "value" in what Apple is offering via the iMac (or lack there of), you need to compare their maxed out model to what you could likewise build on your own, not what comes preset by other manufacturers.
haha - what do you expect?? That's why people come here! To read about apple products! THIS IS NOT "unbiased-tech-review-insider.com" ITS ALL ABOUT APPLE AROUND HERE - go somewhere else! Hah...always amazes me!
Not to mention, this article was reporting on an anlysis and comparison done by a STOCK ANALYST, not AppleInsider.
We come here for the news about Apple, not to be spoonfed how wonderful Apple is.
Well then maybe this isn't the site for you and you should stop visiting it. Find a site that reports in a way you agree with and enjoy yourself. Why make attacking comments? Your words won't change the report you just read. If you want to vent frustration to AppleInsider by all means do, but there is no need to involve the rest of us in it.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Hey AH. Name one of the "?thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant." Careful now.
And while you are at it, name one of the "?thousands of other software titles that the iMac all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the other 2 can.
I stopped reading, when after seeing about 5 bisased mistakes in the chart, I came across the golden nugget where they listed iLife and compared it against the 2 windows machines of course with the iMac being at the advantge. Yet no mention of the thousands of other software titles that the other 2 all in ones can run natively(sp?) that the iMac cant.
Yea this article isn't biased at all. It's actually the exact type of article I expect to find now on Appleinsider.
Take a nice long drink of that kool-aid.
Are you on drugs?
iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.
It's the OS. Apple are well aware of this fact and say it openly when referring to the Japanese market. It's because they make good software.
If Apple only sold hardware that ran Windows, they would very likely be out of business or a much smaller business. This is why they get so annoyed at people like Psystar and the people posting guides on how to hack netbooks to run OS X. They are taking Apple's best selling point and giving it to people who don't care for their hardware options.
The short of it is that Apple are using their software to sell overpriced, novelty hardware. This is because of design and nothing else. They want people to use (what they think are) aesthetically pleasing machines. People who want value for money over aesthetics don't come into the picture.
This is because they know that a mid-range machine will sell more than any other model and they probably don't think they can make it unique enough so that it becomes a good identity - the majority sales of it will make it identify the company but in a less unique way.
If that's the case, I'd disagree because a Core 2 Quad cube could easily differentiate itself from the mass of huge plastic quad-core PCs.
It's not just the software. Design counts. You don't think Mag-safe is significant? I do. Do you think the iPhone touch interface is significant? I do. Are we supposed to wait for Dell to come up with stuff like this? It's easy to label magsafe etc as trivial, but without Apple who would ever push some changes?
What about the Genius Bar? Does HP have a presence at your mall? When you have a software problem does Apple blame your hardware manufacturer?
The software is good, but there's more.
These types of comparison reports are laughable. This is comparing a low-end 24" iMac with certain all-in-one PC configurations, from manufacturers. A real comparison of "value" would be to compare a maxed-out, high-end iMac with a comparable custom-built PC.
You're grasping at straws. The comparison is for those people who want the advantages of an all-in-one. Is that so hard to understand?
Nowhere does the report say this is the best computer you can buy (or put together) for a certain amount of money. It merely says that for comparable manufacturers' all-in-ones, Apple has slightly better value than Dell or HP.
Are you on drugs?
iLife comes free with the computer - if Dell or HP gave you any decent software in the box, it would have been included also as an advantage for them. All those titles you're talking about would add hundreds of dollars to the price. Sheesh.
To be perfectly fair, if you get a Dell it will come with Microsoft Works, and Windows also has some iLife-like software things like Windows Photo Gallery, Windows Media Player and Movie Maker.
Of course, iLife is still way better than anything Microsoft offers... but that doesn't make the comparison anything close to objective.
I'd suspect most everyone who reads this site is a Mac fan so why are we arguing that the iMac isn't that good of a deal?
Because it's not?
Being a mac fan doesn't mean you have to blindly accept everything Apple does. They make some great decisions and some terrible ones, I see nothing wrong with commenting on both.