Who would buy the rumored 28" iMac?

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 36
    pbpb Posts: 4,244member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    Most home plans I looked at had a desk in the kitchen. Is it that big of a stretch to put a computer at the desk?



    Never seen that before. It is new to me.
  • Reply 22 of 36
    irelandireland Posts: 17,785member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mrtotes View Post


    You surprise me; this is probably as close the the Apple TV you talk about you'll see this year.



    No it's not. TV's are a different animal. Besides, my existing TV is 42", why the heck would I want a 28" iMac as a TV. With all sorts of stuff inside it bringing up the cost that TV's don't need.
  • Reply 23 of 36
    pmjoepmjoe Posts: 565member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by brentsg View Post


    I voted no simply because I still can't buy into the "all in one" nature of the iMac.... so it's nothing against a 28 in particular.



    Same here. I have no interest in buying an all-in-one desktop. Waste of a good monitor, because the computer is practically outdated the day you buy it.
  • Reply 24 of 36
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmjoe View Post


    Same here. I have no interest in buying an all-in-one desktop. Waste of a good monitor, because the computer is practically outdated the day you buy it.



    I see this argument (that a monitor has a longer lifespan than a computer) a lot and while its valid to an extent, I think it's really overdone. Some people hang onto their monitors for several generations of computer use but I doubt as many people do it as people think.



    My first Mac was a Power Mac 6500. I bought a 17" CRT Samsung monitor for it. It was a pretty good monitor at that time. But when I got a new computer, I decided to switch to LCD. Its thinner and fit in better in the spot I wanted to put the computer. At that time I bought an HP machine with an HP monitor. But it now has two vertical lines running down it so I have no desire to keep it when I get new desk top.



    Keeping the monitor and computer separate really only makes sense if you get new computers every two to three years. Most people are going to get a new monitor every five or six years so that they can get something larger or with the technology of the day.



    I plan on getting an iMac next and keeping it for 5 years. The whole monitor issue is moot for me because I've never kept a monitor for longer than 5 years.
  • Reply 25 of 36
    If I want > 26 in screen I'm going to wall mount it or on an adjustable arm. I want the display to be well-built but not as heavy as an entire system.
  • Reply 26 of 36
    ajpriceajprice Posts: 320member
    If you had a separate screen and Mac over the time the iMac has existed and had to have the matching Apple display there would be the screen upgrade VGA > ADC > DVI > Display Port... so people keeping up with the tech would be changing their screens anyway.



    Screens do last longer than the computer that comes with them are 'useful' though. In work my machine is a G4 with a 17" ADC port Apple Display (the silver/clear one), I'm fighting for a new Mac at the mo, and if/when it comes there's a perfectly functional 17" screen thats going to be useless (all but one of the other computers in the office are iBooks or iMac G5/Intel iMacs).



    I'm not sure where the 28" size has come from for this iMac though, its an odd size, 27" or even 30" would be possible as they are more standard sizes (30" iMac... hmmmmm....).
  • Reply 27 of 36
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    If I want > 26 in screen I'm going to wall mount it or on an adjustable arm. I want the display to be well-built but not as heavy as an entire system.



    Yeah that's a good point.
  • Reply 28 of 36
    I would only if my desk were about 12 inches deeper, I am farsighted so something that large a foot or two away would be overwhelming. 28 inches is more than twice the size of my current display and I am not sure I want go any larger than 24 inches. Plus, the price would have to be reasonable, I don't have $2500 to spend on a computer these days. I could justify $1500 to $2000, but that's really about it.
  • Reply 29 of 36
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    It's not that I think the screen is too big, I would love a 28" screen. It's not that I don't like the new technology, the Core i7, the latest and greatest graphics chips. I'm just worried that it will be priced so way out of my budget.



    I have to agree with you as far as the price, Apple has a way of making you take a second look at prices and go "ummm, I don't know..."



    20" iMac $1199

    24" iMac $1799

    28" iMac $2499

    30" iMac $2999

    32" iMac $3499



    The "Wicked Fast" Macintosh IIfx when new listed for $9,900.00 in 1990

    The original 128K Macintosh went for $2495.00 new

    My first Macintosh - a Mac Classic was $1495.00 new in November 1990...\
  • Reply 30 of 36
    Depends on what it is. If we're talking about notebook in a cinema display with a single all too small non-user accessible 3.5" then no. It would still have most of the bottlenecks my current waste of two grand has. If they want to take a slightly different approach here and use that extra space for things like small form factor desktop hardware, better graphics, twin user upgradable hard drives, and/or a return to VESA mounting, then I might take another look.
  • Reply 31 of 36
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Personal interest? None. My 24" iMac is still shiny and new.



    It sounds nice, though. I've thought that Apple could to an iMac HD for a while now. Their new display connector does HDMI, so it could double as an HD video player.



    When Apple proliferates the new display connector through their line they might even be able to start rolling out BlueRay drives.
  • Reply 32 of 36
    expatexpat Posts: 110member
    An iMac over 24" sounds crazy. Now this is speaking as someone who sits close to their monitor, but at a certain point it doesn't make sense. Personally, I'd rather take a dual 20" or 24" over a 28".



    Now, if Apple strayed from the 16:9 ratio, I could understand it. the new Vaio portable uses a wider screen, and I think something like this would add to the flexibility of the screen if it were that big. That being said, the whole line of computers and monitors is 16:9 (as well as the iPhone and all iPods aside from the classic), so I don't know why they'd stray from a ratio that is the new industry standard.



    As for the larger iMac becoming a TV - I just don't see it. It would have to be 32" -40" to make sense, and even then, would you want to use your TV as a computer? Typing a term paper or doing taxes from the couch might seem like it'd be nice, but not when the screen is on the other side of the room, and someone else in the house wants to watch something.
  • Reply 33 of 36
    That's just unreasonably large. 28" is OK as a TV, not as a monitor. IMO, 24" is kinda pushin' it.
  • Reply 34 of 36
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


    That's just unreasonably large. 28" is OK as a TV, not as a monitor. IMO, 24" is kinda pushin' it.



    Remember resolution independence. It's coming.



    I currently sit about 5 feet from my 24" monitor. I still have the eyesight to get away with doing that. But when resolution independence arrives it will be not only possible but desirable to put a few more feet between yourself and your display.
  • Reply 35 of 36
    I wouldn't mind the debut of a 28-inch iMac. Not sure if that's going to happen but no reason the iMac shouldn't grow a larger screen. Remember when the rumors of the sunflower iMac going from 15-inch to 17-inch started? No way, so many said, too out of proportion, not going to happen ...Apple will never do it. Then the same thing all over again when it made the jump from 17-inch to 20-inch... no way, too huge, not going to happen. Who knows... this could be one of those, no way, not going to happen times, too.
  • Reply 36 of 36
    phongphong Posts: 219member
    I am totally uninterested in any all-in-one computer.



    If they're not mobile or quasi-mobile, like the original Mac or Sunflower iMac, then frankly I don't see how anyone could be interested. For long term stationary use, computers and monitors ought to be separate, so that issues concerning them can be handled separately. Beyond mobility, it does not simplify things to put them together, but actually complicates them.



    Jobs has this weird thing with all-in-one design. It's been there since the Apple II. There's no getting around it. A 28" iMac sounds stupid, but it'll probably happen anyways.
Sign In or Register to comment.