I want a Power iMac, all the pro features in a sweet all-in-one package.
If Apple would allow an extended desktop with a 2nd monitor instead of mirroring I would get a 17" lcd or a 20" lcd (if my wife would let me <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> ) I don't know about the rest of you but I like to spread things out.
Most consumers do not need or want a tower. My experiance with consumers doing upgrades is that they up their memory. The iMac was a hit because it want the consumers wanted. If you do need another harddrive they can use their firewire for an external drive.
The people who want a cheap tower are gamers and semiprofessional who will upgrade graphic card, harddrives, etc.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Many people, including me, do want a tower but won't pay $1499 for one that should be a lot cheaper. There's no reason not to have a cheap tower.
Apple don't endear with this kind of ridiculous pricing. Macworld mag had a pop at Apple over this a while ago and the Apple spokesperson sounded very shaky on it.
As for the cheap tower. Most of the Wintel world did alright selling towers to 'consumers'. I'm a 'consumer' and want a decent tower for a decent price.
The current 'low end' could do with another 10% off and I'd be okay with that.
<strong>Jesus, you people cry like babies. The 15'' iMac could be your low end tower if you would let it be.
The new iMacs are as good as they can get considering the PowerMac line's specs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I could let the 15 in iMac be my tower if i could rip off the LCD screen, stuff some PCI cards in there and make the graphics card removeable. Or, Apple could just give us an affordable tower
i have pc people switching to the new iMacs...they want something that works and works well....the iMacs will do them fine for many years.....the 32x burner in the combo helps....of course apple should keep going and making it better...and of course they will...but the iMac of TODAY will work great as a computer for 90% of the non-pro consumers out there...people who will run office and make movies and burn cds and and IM and email and surf the web...the fact of the matter is if you aren't doing 3d graphics and animation, almost any computer nowadays is gonna be fast...if you do 3d stuff, don't get an iMac...if you do photoshop all day and need the space for images and pallettes....don't get the iMac...if it is the ultimate in gaming you want...go for the playstation2 or cube or x-box....anybody who spends 1000 or 2000 or 3000 for a computer to play games is wack.....g
<strong>i have pc people switching to the new iMacs...they want something that works and works well....the iMacs will do them fine for many years.....the 32x burner in the combo helps....of course apple should keep going and making it better...and of course they will...but the iMac of TODAY will work great as a computer for 90% of the non-pro consumers out there...people who will run office and make movies and burn cds and and IM and email and surf the web...the fact of the matter is if you aren't doing 3d graphics and animation, almost any computer nowadays is gonna be fast...if you do 3d stuff, don't get an iMac...if you do photoshop all day and need the space for images and pallettes....don't get the iMac...if it is the ultimate in gaming you want...go for the playstation2 or cube or x-box....anybody who spends 1000 or 2000 or 3000 for a computer to play games is wack.....g</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well put.
Anyway the new I mac are very appreciated by 3 friends who own them (and it's not the latest revision). In reality they are very happy, they said they are fast (especially for booting) al least compared to their old i mac G3 400.
The most important advantage of the new i mac, is their screen, and especially the ergonomia of the "magic" arm. My friend use them at their office, and it allow to pivotate the screen easily to show something to their patients.
That's why i consider to buy a 17 inch I mac for my office. Compared to my old G3 333 he would be damn fast especially at booting (and that damn G3 333 who crash one time per day, take 5 minutes to boot ), damn fast at photoshop (and that stupid G3 333 don't want to upgrade at mac os 9 and therefore mac os X), have a superdrive who will be employed with pleasure. The screen we will take so fewer place than my Sony F500 and i can rotate it without breaking my back.
The important point when you change of computer is : is he faster than you previous one, and sufficiently faster. I think that the new I mac will be.
got two iMac combos shipping out to friends as i type this....another friend is getting a laptop...she is waiting a couple of weeks to see if the 15' is updated..if not she is getting the 17" lapzilla (tried to get her to go 12" with 20 lcd at home..but no dice....saw the 20" lcd yesterday at compusa..it is a ****ing lovely screen...i NEED one....ha)...
all three are pc people, so will have to hold their hands and teach them os X...but it shouldn't be hard, nor take long.....g
if IBM can get the 970 out soon and we get some good OS X commercials (try an OS that just works), apple will rule the world....mhahammmmmmhahahaha...or something like that....
[quote] if IBM can get the 970 out soon and we get some good OS X commercials (try an OS that just works), apple will rule the world....mhahammmmmmhahahaha...or something like that....
When playing with the new 800Mhz and 1GHz FP iMacs at the local Apple store I noticed that the screens were *extremely* viewing-angle sensitive. If you don't look at it straight-on, text is no longer crisp and colors change. While this is easily adjusted thanks to the swivel-arm, I was wondering whether one of you screen experts could elaborate on the quality of the different screens Apple uses.
(I have seen many posts stating how great the 20" Cinema Flatscreen Display is...)
- How do the iMac screens rank in quality, crispness, colors?
- How do they hold up? Any trouble with the swivel arm?
- Has there been a change in screen hardware for the 17" iMac, or will there soon be?
- I wasn't able to compare them side-by-side, but it appears to me that the 14.1" TFT screen of my PowerBook Pismo is crisper and much less angle sensitive than the iMac screen...!?
Comments
If Apple would allow an extended desktop with a 2nd monitor instead of mirroring I would get a 17" lcd or a 20" lcd (if my wife would let me <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> ) I don't know about the rest of you but I like to spread things out.
<strong>
Most consumers do not need or want a tower. My experiance with consumers doing upgrades is that they up their memory. The iMac was a hit because it want the consumers wanted. If you do need another harddrive they can use their firewire for an external drive.
The people who want a cheap tower are gamers and semiprofessional who will upgrade graphic card, harddrives, etc.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Many people, including me, do want a tower but won't pay $1499 for one that should be a lot cheaper. There's no reason not to have a cheap tower.
<hr></blockquote>
Apple don't endear with this kind of ridiculous pricing. Macworld mag had a pop at Apple over this a while ago and the Apple spokesperson sounded very shaky on it.
As for the cheap tower. Most of the Wintel world did alright selling towers to 'consumers'. I'm a 'consumer' and want a decent tower for a decent price.
The current 'low end' could do with another 10% off and I'd be okay with that.
Lemon Bon Bon
The new iMacs are as good as they can get considering the PowerMac line's specs.
<strong>steve666: You obviously have NFI about the Apple's target markets.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think I have an idea:
1. Apple fanatics that will pay through the nose for a computer thats way overpriced or underfeatured, or both.
2.Graphics Depts who have the money for overpriced towers
3.Consumers who don't know much about specs
The only thing missing is the majority of consumers. I guess Apple doesn't need THEM
<img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[surprised]" />
<strong>Jesus, you people cry like babies. The 15'' iMac could be your low end tower if you would let it be.
The new iMacs are as good as they can get considering the PowerMac line's specs.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I could let the 15 in iMac be my tower if i could rip off the LCD screen, stuff some PCI cards in there and make the graphics card removeable. Or, Apple could just give us an affordable tower
<strong>i have pc people switching to the new iMacs...they want something that works and works well....the iMacs will do them fine for many years.....the 32x burner in the combo helps....of course apple should keep going and making it better...and of course they will...but the iMac of TODAY will work great as a computer for 90% of the non-pro consumers out there...people who will run office and make movies and burn cds and and IM and email and surf the web...the fact of the matter is if you aren't doing 3d graphics and animation, almost any computer nowadays is gonna be fast...if you do 3d stuff, don't get an iMac...if you do photoshop all day and need the space for images and pallettes....don't get the iMac...if it is the ultimate in gaming you want...go for the playstation2 or cube or x-box....anybody who spends 1000 or 2000 or 3000 for a computer to play games is wack.....g</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well put.
Anyway the new I mac are very appreciated by 3 friends who own them (and it's not the latest revision). In reality they are very happy, they said they are fast (especially for booting) al least compared to their old i mac G3 400.
The most important advantage of the new i mac, is their screen, and especially the ergonomia of the "magic" arm. My friend use them at their office, and it allow to pivotate the screen easily to show something to their patients.
That's why i consider to buy a 17 inch I mac for my office. Compared to my old G3 333 he would be damn fast especially at booting (and that damn G3 333 who crash one time per day, take 5 minutes to boot
The important point when you change of computer is : is he faster than you previous one, and sufficiently faster. I think that the new I mac will be.
1. Apple fanatics that will pay through the nose for a computer thats way overpriced or underfeatured, or both.
2.Graphics Depts who have the money for overpriced towers
3.Consumers who don't know much about specs
The only thing missing is the majority of consumers. I guess Apple doesn't need THEM
<hr></blockquote>
That's below the belt Steve.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
all three are pc people, so will have to hold their hands and teach them os X...but it shouldn't be hard, nor take long.....g
if IBM can get the 970 out soon and we get some good OS X commercials (try an OS that just works), apple will rule the world....mhahammmmmmhahahaha...or something like that....
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
Some friends have the 15 inch I mac. How do compare the 17 I mac screen with the 15 ?
Thanks for your answers.
<hr></blockquote>
Yeah. I've got good vibes about 'fall' this year.
Go Apple!
Lemon Bon Bon
(I have seen many posts stating how great the 20" Cinema Flatscreen Display is...)
- How do the iMac screens rank in quality, crispness, colors?
- How do they hold up? Any trouble with the swivel arm?
- Has there been a change in screen hardware for the 17" iMac, or will there soon be?
- I wasn't able to compare them side-by-side, but it appears to me that the 14.1" TFT screen of my PowerBook Pismo is crisper and much less angle sensitive than the iMac screen...!?
thx
Martin