The problem isn't just the loss of a FW400 port. Your adapter cable works in such a case.
The bigger issue for some (my dad included) is that this new iMac only comes with ONE (1) FireWire port of any kind. Every iMac since the original iMac G5 has come with TWO (2) FireWire ports. Initially they were both FW400. Then, with the advent of the aluminum bodies, Apple shifted to one FW400 and one FW800.
Now you only get a single FW800 port. Why does this matter? Well, for one, anyone who has multiple FW devices now MUST buy a FW hub. But try to find some decent FW800 hubs. Sure, FW400 hubs exist (my dad uses a Belkin 6-port unit), but if you use that--which implies using a cable like the one you mention to connect the hub to the iMac--you've just effectively killed the entire point of FW800.
So let's say you can get a FW800 hub. And let's say (as I'm not sure this is the case) that connecting a FW400 device to a FW800 hub using a cable such as you mention does NOT cause the entire hub to shift into lowest-common-denominator 400Mbps mode. Even with all that, what happens when most of your devices, such as camcorders, are still FW400? All those FW400 cables you have? Useless. Now you need to buy several of the cables above, one for each device.
And if the hub DOES shift down into FW400 mode if there's a single FW400 device attached, see same note above about making FW800 port useless. For folks like my dad who have a Drobo (I have it connected to his iMac G5 using a cable similar to the one above), so much for finally getting that FW800 performance. He got the 2nd gen Drobo specifically with the idea that when he bought a new iMac, he'd finally get the full performance that its FW800 port offered.
Why did Apple not simply replace the FW400 port with another FW800 port, giving users at least two FW800 ports? It's not like it would take up more real estate on the back of the unit. THIS is one thing that does disappoint me. My dad has been itching to replace his iMac G5 1.9GHz unit. But with all the FW devices he currently has connected, he won't be able to do a simple swap if he bought a new iMac today. If he wants to be able to use the Drobo at full FW800 speed, he'll have to buy a FW800 hub (good luck finding one that offers 6+ ports for less than $100 if at all) and a crapload of the cables above. This, compared to simply buying one such cable to connect to his FW400 hub, then having the Drobo connect directly to the 2nd FW800 port.
So while I applaud the rest of the features (sure, I was hoping Apple would put a quadcore into the iMac, but maybe next time), this to me IS, in fact, taking away functionality that users used to have.
This is a major recession "upgrade". Drop the prices and make small, incremental changes.
No, this is just an incremental update. It updates the cleanest, prettiest desktop computer there ever was. For all you looking for a NEW iMac, you should have known this was not it. Apple would never introduce a re-design in this way. No fanfare means no new design. It was ever thus.
One big advantage (if you want to call it that) with PC's is that they are infinitely customizable. It really is an undisputed fact and if you fall into the category of people who can't make the Mac options work for you, get a cheaper, better specked PC. The trade off is the OS but it is not the end of the world. Then, when you have your cheaper better specked perfect hardware you can always go back to Mac if the OS doesn't sit well. By that time there may be a 'perfect' Mac available for you. You never know.
For me personally, I live in happy union with both hardware AND software.
i just noticed doubling the ram in the iMac adds $1000. thats far too much. if i get one, i'll be making that upgrade myself.
ok, wow. i just checked a dell, to see how much it costs to upgrade the same speed DDR3 ram. if you go from 6GB (standard) it costs $1300 to upgrade to 24GB. Vs. the iMac where you pay $1000 to go from 4GB to 8GB.
All in one desktops? Didn't know they existed, but then again, I don't know PC's.
I see a Dell with an i7 processor and a 24" display (tower) for $2000AU. I guess that's about what the new powermacs are, without a display for about $4500AU +
You want to compare, go ahead, I'm all ears....
You are a tool and this post simply makes you look uninformed, biased and ... stupid.
this is the fanboyism that i am talking about. lets just make a list, to sort things out.
1. people buy computers, PC or Mac, to get things done. they buy them to accomplish some kind of task, from finances o video games. some PICK Macs because they look better and they like OSX more than windows. this is stating the obvious. which i need to do with you.
2. Software is not better. while it does have some great apps, its just too limited to say it is "better" as a general statement, maybe you like it more because everything you use is on it, and you like the mac software better, but more than likely you like it because its pretty, and its all you know because you wouldn't touch a PC, which has so many different programs for so many different needs. personally everything i need is available on a mac, which is one reason i am looking for them (i also like them more) but there is a difference between you and i. i think its easy to see that difference.
2.1 "especially for creative people" you are so pretentious.
3. Specs count. its as simple as that. i would gladly pay a few bills more for a computer that i felt looked nice and was of high quality. but when you get to the point where you can have an all-in-one with the same sized screen with things like blu-ray drives, desktop graphics cards, and quad core CPU's included in a price slightly lower than the iMac? then a person starts to realize exactly what they are losing by getting the one that looks nicer on the desk.
4. I come here because i like the Apple iPhone, the iPod Touch, and i want to replace my old mac with a new iMac. I come here because i want to learn everything i can about the future products before i make my purchase. unlike you i come here with an open mind to things outside of the Apple Empire, and i will not blindly buy a new Apple product because it has been upgraded and the price dropped. i will continue to compare it to other products, and when these products continue to advance on the iMac, i will not ignore it and pretend that the products are worse than they are.
5. Most people do not blindly buy apple computers because they look nice. OSX users that i know tend to be far more knowledgeable about what their computer is capable of, than the average PC user i run into, that suggests that these people buy it for those functions more than they buy it for a pretty computer. sure it helps, but that is not why most people put their money down for it.
6. you stick with Apple because it is what you know, youve cornered yourself because you fear that a PC could not do what your Mac does, they can, for your information, but i understand why you stick with them nonetheless.
7. you've said i am claiming that specs alone matter, more times than i care to count. this is false, i have been one of the people that have stated they would spend more money on a computer that has the same specs if it means the computer looks a little nicer, but go back to the top and see what i said about the dell all in one that costs slightly less and offers a quad core/better graphics card/and blu-ray, thats not a small difference. if it was something like the apple having a 2.66 Quad core vs a 2.93 Quad in a dell? i'd stick with the mac. if the dell had a 8800gtx and the mac had 8800gt, id go with the mac... but these are HUGE leaps past the mac, i cant simply blindly ignore it, simply because i WISH the Mac was more comparable.
8. i'll state this one last time, and others will agree, the screen on iMacs are not GREAT, in fact they are average at best. glossy or not they are still average at best. they are old, outdated, and worse than what even apple was using years ago! finding a better screen is cheap and easy. it needs replacing. again, this is a case of a person that likes the design, likes everything about the computer, so they assume everything about it is GREAT when compared to everything else. in reality, this is not the case.
9. how about tossing in an alaskan joke. Members tend to revert to that on this forum. i like macs, ive made that clear, just because im not a blind follower of a company does not mean that i should not be on a forum talking about products i like... i think if anything people like me add a lot more to this forum than people like you.
First off your need to list things off is an indication of you teckyness. I use windows computers at work all day long, I am a professional graphic designer but my employer does not supply Macs mostly because the I.T. department is incompetent and incapable of supporting macs. So actually I use windows computes more than Macs, so guess what you?re wrong on that point.
Many times my employer asks me to produce video work, I have to do this work at home on my Mac because my windows based Dell computer at work comes with absolutely no software for video editing (or for photo editing and organization, or for DVD burning, or for...etc) and my IT department refuses to supply any. So no, I don?t use a Mac because the software is pretty. I use my Mac because it gets the job done, out of the box, unlike my Dell at work, and that?s the point I?m making! Out of the Box, Macs are more useful and easier to use. To equip a windowz computer with all that a mac can do in terms of software will cost several hundred dollars, if not more than a thousand, thus offsetting the extra cost of a Mac.
Macs are more suited for creative people, yes, that is not pretentious. Go into any news paper, graphic design house, high end art professionals all use Macs. That?s reality!
No I?m not afraid of PCs, I use them more than Macs actually and I hate them because of my experience with them, not because I?m misinformed.
Yes, they are. MacBooks/PowerBooks don't count because they never had a dedicated numeric keypad. However, the keyboards have always had numeric keypads, all the way back to the late 80's with the first ADB keyboard. Once Apple cut the keypad from the wireless model, the biggest complaint and request has been to offer a wireless keyboard with the keypad. Now Apple has two wired options, they should also have two wireless options.
I guess you don't work with numbers. If you did, you would find it impossible to work with such a limited keyboard.
So there aren't external keypads you could buy for laptops if you needed one?
You realize those who care enough about a dedicated keypad for their iMac can opt for a free keypad-sporting keyboard during online checkout, right?
Anyway, I think everyone would be a little happier about today's announcements had the iMac moved to LED backlighting. Perhaps those will come later this fall or even this summer at Snow Leopard's launch.
my mother makes grocery lists, but cant figure out how to play scrabble on facebook. is she "teckyness"?
Its a work computer. its not going to be nice, its not a representation of what is available on the market.
that was more simple than it should have been.
you have to purchase software to use on a desktop, just as you do with a mac, if you are happy with iLife then great, but if you think its the only option, your mistaken.
they are great right out of the box, i agree.
No they are not more suited for created people, this statement is absurd. that would be like me saying that windows is the best operating system for everyone because by far the majority of people use them. macs are good, but they are also hip.
you are misinformed. you use a worktop. a bare bones system. blah...
The longer i think about the more i'm generally disappointed here ....
I read somewhere either earlier on this page or the previous someone saying "The iMac is a good mid-spec desktop computer" ..... that it may be ... but at the prices they're asking for a notebook with a stand....
I really want an iMac.... i was ready to drop £1500 on one today ... i was sat refreshing the store page .... but now they've come .... i'm struggling to justify spending almost £1600 on a computer with mediocre graphics and a non-LED backlit display
I'm genuinely stuck now ... i have a previous gen MacMini ... but i need more power .... i know i could get a kick-ass PC based system inc. good 24" monitor for the same price but i HATE windows more and more
My other problem is that i didn't really want a 24" display but the spec on the 20" means i might as well get a new mini and use my (slightly) old monitor..... i'm feeling pretty disappointed and i was hoping for at least LED or C2Q cpu's and maybe the 4870x2 mobility graphics
Wow. Can we have 5 more pages of complaints on the new models?
I have a couple of questions and I'm interested in thoughtful responses. Why no LED backlighting on the new iMac displays? I really thought that was a given for these new models.
It's now clear that all the new models are basically speed bumps (not complaining, just commenting). Why haven't we seen them sooner? The fact that they have been so long overdue gave the illusion that we would see all new external designs. Desktop sales have languished of late, due no doubt in part to the fact that they have been somewhat long in the tooth. It seems odd that the waited this long to do a speed bump.
Along these lines, the new models don't seem to be ideal for the OpenCL in SL either. I thought there was a possibility that the delay had something to do with that, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
Wow. Can we have 5 more pages of complaints on the new models?
I have a couple of questions and I'm interested in thoughtful responses. Why no LED backlighting on the new iMac displays? I really thought that was a given for these new models.
It's now clear that all the new models are basically speed bumps (not complaining, just commenting). Why haven't we seen them sooner? The fact that they have been so long overdue gave the illusion that we would see all new external designs. Desktop sales have languished of late, due no doubt in part to the fact that they have been somewhat long in the tooth. It seems odd that the waited this long to do a speed bump.
Along these lines, the new models don't seem to be ideal for the OpenCL in SL either. I thought there was a possibility that the delay had something to do with that, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
you basically hit the nail on the head for why there is 5 pages of complaining.
no LED because apple didnt completely redesign the computer, they will likely save that for the all new iMac, for one more reason to get people to upgrade to it. but if that doesnt come out in 6-8 months, they will be seeing a lot of mac people go to PC... sad as it may be. (including myslef)
but if that doesnt come out in 6-8 months, they will be seeing a lot of mac people go to PC... sad as it may be. (including myslef)
While I agree I find Apple's current hardware offerings a bit lackluster, I can't say I'll ever go back to Windows. OSX is just too good from my point of view, and Snow Leopard will probably only make it better.
When I bought my 1st gen Alu iMac in the summer of 07, there was simply nothing in the PC world that could compare, so it was good value for me anyhow, because it was unique. My Early 08 MacBook with 2.4GHz Penryn is something similar, since at that time, such a bleeding edge processor in a 13 inch enclosure at that price was damn nice.
Nowdays... Dell, HP and Sony are definately catching up from a hardware point of view if you ask me. But Apple MUST have something up its sleeve. The unibodies are an example of being ahead of the competition, but those are out the door now so I'm sure Apple's huge R&D team is working on something "insanely great".
Seems decent, but is the 9400M a good enough chip for a $1200 machine? I'm asking.
Yes. Keep in mind electronic company's are going to have the same pressure as auto's soon when it comes to the environment. This iMac should run in the GOLD standards maybe better, in real life it means your looking at an entire computer system consuming less than 60 watts.
As for the naysayers above and below. The 9400M is a VERY GOOD CHIP! You know it is! It's not 3 yr old junk that PC users create the illusion around being better ("oh I got 512mb memory, that means your 256mb is worse than mine... he he...") rather it's total output. Look at it this way... The specs... 1066mhz memory at 256mb is MORE than enough to run a 30" at it's highest resolution above 50fps (we humans only see at 32fps, not sure about the bionic geek gamers). It uses very little power and also runs your north and south bridge thus making the entire computer faster and more efficient. So is it decent? YES. Will you outgrow it? YES, but how long is the real question. Compared to the outgoing model this is better, faster and less power hungry while providing more overall computing power. So YES. You have to keep in mind the design constraints in building the thinnest all-in-one full power desktop on the market. There's only so much room, space, heat dissipation.
This upgrade should run much cooler than the outgoing units too.
While I agree I find Apple's current hardware offerings a bit lackluster, I can't say I'll ever go back to Windows. OSX is just too good from my point of view, and Snow Leopard will probably only make it better.
When I bought my 1st gen Alu iMac in the summer of 07, there was simply nothing in the PC world that could compare, so it was good value for me anyhow, because it was unique. My Early 08 MacBook with 2.4GHz Penryn is something similar, since at that time, such a bleeding edge processor in a 13 inch enclosure at that price was damn nice.
Nowdays... Dell, HP and Sony are definately catching up from a hardware point of view if you ask me. But Apple MUST have something up its sleeve. The unibodies are an example of being ahead of the competition, but those are out the door now so I'm sure Apple's huge R&D team is working on something "insanely great".
Keep in mind OS X runs graphics in a much faster way than windows by almost 3:1.
I'd like to know how many of you whiners use your Macs for anything more than social networking, browsing and email downloading porn etc...???
I'd like to know how much PURCHASED professional software you use on a full time basis that requires more than a Macbook...I'd like to know if you've ever in your pathetic whining lives ever needed more computing power than any of the new Macs offer....
I'd be willing to bet that most of the whiners here haven't even a clue, but will complain anyway, just because the internet affords every dog a throne ...
This is complete BS on Apple's part, they have the hardware capabilities that all the other PC makers have access to so why couldn't they make a core i7 iMac with LED screen or at least given us the option of a bigger and bad ASS - iMac system - i guess the absence of SJ is really starting to show, given that they made us wait extra time for this crappy upgrade and i resent your whiner comments- i am a music producer and i work with video as well and i'm in IT field.
I have been begging my clients to wait for this update because of the expectations of all the 'new' chips and technology that most of us were waiting for.... WTF??!@#
PLEASE STEVE JOBS get well soon - APPLE NEEDS HELP!!!!
Well...c'est la vie as they say. You want Apple to subsidize currency depreciation? Then don't ask for price cuts when they appreciate. It's a two way street.
Actually, the prices in Europe where never "lowered" when the US dollar was weak i.e. various European currencies were strong. This had the perverted effect that because you could get more dollars for the same amount of your own currency, it was cheaper to buy the Mac's in the states, That's why, in the summer of 2006 I went to New York, bought a bunch of Ipods. Added a 25% mark-up and sold 'em to my friends. I made a profit (per ipod of 25%) and my friends saved about 10% on buying them in Sweden.
What Apple has done know is to raise prices for us here in Europe.
Yes, Apple is NOT responsible for currency fluctuations, but they do not apply their policies equally pending what way the currencies swing - that's what's messed up.
Yes, I get it, Apple doesn't care and they make more money. I think that's great for them, but not for us.
Prices went up by about 30% on the entry level iMac. 30%!!!
The mini went up a staggering 40% compared to the old one AND the new high level mini is the SAME price as the old entry iMac.
Yes, Apple has better design, I LOVE it, and MUCH better OS, but in THESE times, regardless if you have the cash or not, who spend it on such hikes. At the end of the day, the average man cares about Mhz, GB, etc. They will let a bit extra for stability, security and design. That's why I didn't mind spending about 40% extra on a powerbook (compared to a comparable PC). but NOW, you can get a PC for 50% of the cost of an entry level imac and still have better performance.
Yes, Vista isin't great, but it sure beats a bit of cash on shit than a hole lot of cash on nothing. And that's what we are doing, with the new price hicks, we are spending our money on nothing,
Well...c'est la vie as they say. You want Apple to subsidize currency depreciation? Then don't ask for price cuts when they appreciate. It's a two way street.
the exchange rate is a farce! These prices are fucked!
This is complete BS on Apple's part, they have the hardware capabilities that all the other PC makers have access to so why couldn't they make a core i7 iMac with LED screen or at least given us the option of a bigger and bad ASS - iMac system - i guess the absence of SJ is really starting to show, given that they made us wait extra time for this crappy upgrade and i resent your whiner comments- i am a music producer and i work with video as well and i'm in IT field.
I have been begging my clients to wait for this update because of the expectations of all the 'new' chips and technology that most of us were waiting for.... WTF??!@#
PLEASE STEVE JOBS get well soon - APPLE NEEDS HELP!!!!
They are tied to Intel's roadmap which has been pushed forward nearly 6months due to economy... and....
The economy is failing because consumers and business's cut spending, oops. Housing market only started it (created the consious effort to cut spending, reduce waste, eliminate jobs, etc), what we are in now is less housing problem more spending, futures, options, market problems. If the market continued it's 3.4% growth from 06-07 we wouldn't have had a 62b right off from AIG who insured market calls, puts, options, xxxbacked securitys, interests, etc... that tanked because spending is off nearly 40% overall. We are also loosing jobs because in the US more jobs are service/customer direct then back in the 80's let alone the 20-30's where 4:10 jobs were direct, today it's more 6.5:1, so reduced spending from consumers/business has a faster impact on the economy.
You want to fix the economy? There are 300m US people. 170m with full-time work. Spend $1 a day extra and the economy will revive 2x's faster. Tip $1 extra. Buy one thing extra a week (I prefer you purchase something that helps the environment, LED Lightbulbs are a good start - 1 a week at $5 each).
Take out the middle man they said. Go direct they said. Where's the buffer now Mr. consumer?
Fix the economy, boost spending and Intel's inventory will get lower faster and newer units can be put into production quicker which means more R&D, faster design, quicker turnaround.
So, class, how do we get faster Mac's sooner?
A: Spend $1 a day more, tip $1 more. Buy one thing extra a week. If all 170m full-time emp's did this we would fix the economy twice as fast.
Comments
Go buy this:
http://catalog.belkin.com/IWCatProdu...duct_Id=164598
-D
The problem isn't just the loss of a FW400 port. Your adapter cable works in such a case.
The bigger issue for some (my dad included) is that this new iMac only comes with ONE (1) FireWire port of any kind. Every iMac since the original iMac G5 has come with TWO (2) FireWire ports. Initially they were both FW400. Then, with the advent of the aluminum bodies, Apple shifted to one FW400 and one FW800.
Now you only get a single FW800 port. Why does this matter? Well, for one, anyone who has multiple FW devices now MUST buy a FW hub. But try to find some decent FW800 hubs. Sure, FW400 hubs exist (my dad uses a Belkin 6-port unit), but if you use that--which implies using a cable like the one you mention to connect the hub to the iMac--you've just effectively killed the entire point of FW800.
So let's say you can get a FW800 hub. And let's say (as I'm not sure this is the case) that connecting a FW400 device to a FW800 hub using a cable such as you mention does NOT cause the entire hub to shift into lowest-common-denominator 400Mbps mode. Even with all that, what happens when most of your devices, such as camcorders, are still FW400? All those FW400 cables you have? Useless. Now you need to buy several of the cables above, one for each device.
And if the hub DOES shift down into FW400 mode if there's a single FW400 device attached, see same note above about making FW800 port useless. For folks like my dad who have a Drobo (I have it connected to his iMac G5 using a cable similar to the one above), so much for finally getting that FW800 performance. He got the 2nd gen Drobo specifically with the idea that when he bought a new iMac, he'd finally get the full performance that its FW800 port offered.
Why did Apple not simply replace the FW400 port with another FW800 port, giving users at least two FW800 ports? It's not like it would take up more real estate on the back of the unit. THIS is one thing that does disappoint me. My dad has been itching to replace his iMac G5 1.9GHz unit. But with all the FW devices he currently has connected, he won't be able to do a simple swap if he bought a new iMac today. If he wants to be able to use the Drobo at full FW800 speed, he'll have to buy a FW800 hub (good luck finding one that offers 6+ ports for less than $100 if at all) and a crapload of the cables above. This, compared to simply buying one such cable to connect to his FW400 hub, then having the Drobo connect directly to the 2nd FW800 port.
So while I applaud the rest of the features (sure, I was hoping Apple would put a quadcore into the iMac, but maybe next time), this to me IS, in fact, taking away functionality that users used to have.
This is a major recession "upgrade". Drop the prices and make small, incremental changes.
No, this is just an incremental update. It updates the cleanest, prettiest desktop computer there ever was. For all you looking for a NEW iMac, you should have known this was not it. Apple would never introduce a re-design in this way. No fanfare means no new design. It was ever thus.
One big advantage (if you want to call it that) with PC's is that they are infinitely customizable. It really is an undisputed fact and if you fall into the category of people who can't make the Mac options work for you, get a cheaper, better specked PC. The trade off is the OS but it is not the end of the world. Then, when you have your cheaper better specked perfect hardware you can always go back to Mac if the OS doesn't sit well. By that time there may be a 'perfect' Mac available for you. You never know.
For me personally, I live in happy union with both hardware AND software.
ok, wow. i just checked a dell, to see how much it costs to upgrade the same speed DDR3 ram. if you go from 6GB (standard) it costs $1300 to upgrade to 24GB. Vs. the iMac where you pay $1000 to go from 4GB to 8GB.
All in one desktops? Didn't know they existed, but then again, I don't know PC's.
I see a Dell with an i7 processor and a 24" display (tower) for $2000AU. I guess that's about what the new powermacs are, without a display for about $4500AU +
You want to compare, go ahead, I'm all ears....
You are a tool and this post simply makes you look uninformed, biased and ... stupid.
this is the fanboyism that i am talking about. lets just make a list, to sort things out.
1. people buy computers, PC or Mac, to get things done. they buy them to accomplish some kind of task, from finances o video games. some PICK Macs because they look better and they like OSX more than windows. this is stating the obvious. which i need to do with you.
2. Software is not better. while it does have some great apps, its just too limited to say it is "better" as a general statement, maybe you like it more because everything you use is on it, and you like the mac software better, but more than likely you like it because its pretty, and its all you know because you wouldn't touch a PC, which has so many different programs for so many different needs. personally everything i need is available on a mac, which is one reason i am looking for them (i also like them more) but there is a difference between you and i. i think its easy to see that difference.
2.1 "especially for creative people" you are so pretentious.
3. Specs count. its as simple as that. i would gladly pay a few bills more for a computer that i felt looked nice and was of high quality. but when you get to the point where you can have an all-in-one with the same sized screen with things like blu-ray drives, desktop graphics cards, and quad core CPU's included in a price slightly lower than the iMac? then a person starts to realize exactly what they are losing by getting the one that looks nicer on the desk.
4. I come here because i like the Apple iPhone, the iPod Touch, and i want to replace my old mac with a new iMac. I come here because i want to learn everything i can about the future products before i make my purchase. unlike you i come here with an open mind to things outside of the Apple Empire, and i will not blindly buy a new Apple product because it has been upgraded and the price dropped. i will continue to compare it to other products, and when these products continue to advance on the iMac, i will not ignore it and pretend that the products are worse than they are.
5. Most people do not blindly buy apple computers because they look nice. OSX users that i know tend to be far more knowledgeable about what their computer is capable of, than the average PC user i run into, that suggests that these people buy it for those functions more than they buy it for a pretty computer. sure it helps, but that is not why most people put their money down for it.
6. you stick with Apple because it is what you know, youve cornered yourself because you fear that a PC could not do what your Mac does, they can, for your information, but i understand why you stick with them nonetheless.
7. you've said i am claiming that specs alone matter, more times than i care to count. this is false, i have been one of the people that have stated they would spend more money on a computer that has the same specs if it means the computer looks a little nicer, but go back to the top and see what i said about the dell all in one that costs slightly less and offers a quad core/better graphics card/and blu-ray, thats not a small difference. if it was something like the apple having a 2.66 Quad core vs a 2.93 Quad in a dell? i'd stick with the mac. if the dell had a 8800gtx and the mac had 8800gt, id go with the mac... but these are HUGE leaps past the mac, i cant simply blindly ignore it, simply because i WISH the Mac was more comparable.
8. i'll state this one last time, and others will agree, the screen on iMacs are not GREAT, in fact they are average at best. glossy or not they are still average at best. they are old, outdated, and worse than what even apple was using years ago! finding a better screen is cheap and easy. it needs replacing. again, this is a case of a person that likes the design, likes everything about the computer, so they assume everything about it is GREAT when compared to everything else. in reality, this is not the case.
9. how about tossing in an alaskan joke. Members tend to revert to that on this forum. i like macs, ive made that clear, just because im not a blind follower of a company does not mean that i should not be on a forum talking about products i like... i think if anything people like me add a lot more to this forum than people like you.
First off your need to list things off is an indication of you teckyness. I use windows computers at work all day long, I am a professional graphic designer but my employer does not supply Macs mostly because the I.T. department is incompetent and incapable of supporting macs. So actually I use windows computes more than Macs, so guess what you?re wrong on that point.
Many times my employer asks me to produce video work, I have to do this work at home on my Mac because my windows based Dell computer at work comes with absolutely no software for video editing (or for photo editing and organization, or for DVD burning, or for...etc) and my IT department refuses to supply any. So no, I don?t use a Mac because the software is pretty. I use my Mac because it gets the job done, out of the box, unlike my Dell at work, and that?s the point I?m making! Out of the Box, Macs are more useful and easier to use. To equip a windowz computer with all that a mac can do in terms of software will cost several hundred dollars, if not more than a thousand, thus offsetting the extra cost of a Mac.
Macs are more suited for creative people, yes, that is not pretentious. Go into any news paper, graphic design house, high end art professionals all use Macs. That?s reality!
No I?m not afraid of PCs, I use them more than Macs actually and I hate them because of my experience with them, not because I?m misinformed.
Yes, they are. MacBooks/PowerBooks don't count because they never had a dedicated numeric keypad. However, the keyboards have always had numeric keypads, all the way back to the late 80's with the first ADB keyboard. Once Apple cut the keypad from the wireless model, the biggest complaint and request has been to offer a wireless keyboard with the keypad. Now Apple has two wired options, they should also have two wireless options.
I guess you don't work with numbers. If you did, you would find it impossible to work with such a limited keyboard.
So there aren't external keypads you could buy for laptops if you needed one?
You realize those who care enough about a dedicated keypad for their iMac can opt for a free keypad-sporting keyboard during online checkout, right?
Anyway, I think everyone would be a little happier about today's announcements had the iMac moved to LED backlighting. Perhaps those will come later this fall or even this summer at Snow Leopard's launch.
Which reminds me, when's that Snow Leopard demo?
Its a work computer. its not going to be nice, its not a representation of what is available on the market.
that was more simple than it should have been.
you have to purchase software to use on a desktop, just as you do with a mac, if you are happy with iLife then great, but if you think its the only option, your mistaken.
they are great right out of the box, i agree.
No they are not more suited for created people, this statement is absurd. that would be like me saying that windows is the best operating system for everyone because by far the majority of people use them. macs are good, but they are also hip.
you are misinformed. you use a worktop. a bare bones system. blah...
I read somewhere either earlier on this page or the previous someone saying "The iMac is a good mid-spec desktop computer" ..... that it may be ... but at the prices they're asking for a notebook with a stand....
I really want an iMac.... i was ready to drop £1500 on one today ... i was sat refreshing the store page .... but now they've come .... i'm struggling to justify spending almost £1600 on a computer with mediocre graphics and a non-LED backlit display
I'm genuinely stuck now ... i have a previous gen MacMini ... but i need more power .... i know i could get a kick-ass PC based system inc. good 24" monitor for the same price but i HATE windows more and more
My other problem is that i didn't really want a 24" display but the spec on the 20" means i might as well get a new mini and use my (slightly) old monitor..... i'm feeling pretty disappointed and i was hoping for at least LED or C2Q cpu's and maybe the 4870x2 mobility graphics
I have a couple of questions and I'm interested in thoughtful responses. Why no LED backlighting on the new iMac displays? I really thought that was a given for these new models.
It's now clear that all the new models are basically speed bumps (not complaining, just commenting). Why haven't we seen them sooner? The fact that they have been so long overdue gave the illusion that we would see all new external designs. Desktop sales have languished of late, due no doubt in part to the fact that they have been somewhat long in the tooth. It seems odd that the waited this long to do a speed bump.
Along these lines, the new models don't seem to be ideal for the OpenCL in SL either. I thought there was a possibility that the delay had something to do with that, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
Wow. Can we have 5 more pages of complaints on the new models?
I have a couple of questions and I'm interested in thoughtful responses. Why no LED backlighting on the new iMac displays? I really thought that was a given for these new models.
It's now clear that all the new models are basically speed bumps (not complaining, just commenting). Why haven't we seen them sooner? The fact that they have been so long overdue gave the illusion that we would see all new external designs. Desktop sales have languished of late, due no doubt in part to the fact that they have been somewhat long in the tooth. It seems odd that the waited this long to do a speed bump.
Along these lines, the new models don't seem to be ideal for the OpenCL in SL either. I thought there was a possibility that the delay had something to do with that, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
you basically hit the nail on the head for why there is 5 pages of complaining.
no LED because apple didnt completely redesign the computer, they will likely save that for the all new iMac, for one more reason to get people to upgrade to it. but if that doesnt come out in 6-8 months, they will be seeing a lot of mac people go to PC... sad as it may be. (including myslef)
They are really going down a horribly self righteous path to hell right now. Go Psystar!
What a let down, same specs, higher prices. Way to suck it up Apple.
They are really going down a horribly self righteous path to hell right now. Go Psystar!
The specs aren't the same. Try again.
but if that doesnt come out in 6-8 months, they will be seeing a lot of mac people go to PC... sad as it may be. (including myslef)
While I agree I find Apple's current hardware offerings a bit lackluster, I can't say I'll ever go back to Windows. OSX is just too good from my point of view, and Snow Leopard will probably only make it better.
When I bought my 1st gen Alu iMac in the summer of 07, there was simply nothing in the PC world that could compare, so it was good value for me anyhow, because it was unique. My Early 08 MacBook with 2.4GHz Penryn is something similar, since at that time, such a bleeding edge processor in a 13 inch enclosure at that price was damn nice.
Nowdays... Dell, HP and Sony are definately catching up from a hardware point of view if you ask me. But Apple MUST have something up its sleeve. The unibodies are an example of being ahead of the competition, but those are out the door now so I'm sure Apple's huge R&D team is working on something "insanely great".
Seems decent, but is the 9400M a good enough chip for a $1200 machine? I'm asking.
Yes. Keep in mind electronic company's are going to have the same pressure as auto's soon when it comes to the environment. This iMac should run in the GOLD standards maybe better, in real life it means your looking at an entire computer system consuming less than 60 watts.
As for the naysayers above and below. The 9400M is a VERY GOOD CHIP! You know it is! It's not 3 yr old junk that PC users create the illusion around being better ("oh I got 512mb memory, that means your 256mb is worse than mine... he he...") rather it's total output. Look at it this way... The specs... 1066mhz memory at 256mb is MORE than enough to run a 30" at it's highest resolution above 50fps (we humans only see at 32fps, not sure about the bionic geek gamers). It uses very little power and also runs your north and south bridge thus making the entire computer faster and more efficient. So is it decent? YES. Will you outgrow it? YES, but how long is the real question. Compared to the outgoing model this is better, faster and less power hungry while providing more overall computing power. So YES. You have to keep in mind the design constraints in building the thinnest all-in-one full power desktop on the market. There's only so much room, space, heat dissipation.
This upgrade should run much cooler than the outgoing units too.
While I agree I find Apple's current hardware offerings a bit lackluster, I can't say I'll ever go back to Windows. OSX is just too good from my point of view, and Snow Leopard will probably only make it better.
When I bought my 1st gen Alu iMac in the summer of 07, there was simply nothing in the PC world that could compare, so it was good value for me anyhow, because it was unique. My Early 08 MacBook with 2.4GHz Penryn is something similar, since at that time, such a bleeding edge processor in a 13 inch enclosure at that price was damn nice.
Nowdays... Dell, HP and Sony are definately catching up from a hardware point of view if you ask me. But Apple MUST have something up its sleeve. The unibodies are an example of being ahead of the competition, but those are out the door now so I'm sure Apple's huge R&D team is working on something "insanely great".
Keep in mind OS X runs graphics in a much faster way than windows by almost 3:1.
I'd like to know how many of you whiners use your Macs for anything more than social networking, browsing and email downloading porn etc...???
I'd like to know how much PURCHASED professional software you use on a full time basis that requires more than a Macbook...I'd like to know if you've ever in your pathetic whining lives ever needed more computing power than any of the new Macs offer....
I'd be willing to bet that most of the whiners here haven't even a clue, but will complain anyway, just because the internet affords every dog a throne ...
This is complete BS on Apple's part, they have the hardware capabilities that all the other PC makers have access to so why couldn't they make a core i7 iMac with LED screen or at least given us the option of a bigger and bad ASS - iMac system - i guess the absence of SJ is really starting to show, given that they made us wait extra time for this crappy upgrade and i resent your whiner comments- i am a music producer and i work with video as well and i'm in IT field.
I have been begging my clients to wait for this update because of the expectations of all the 'new' chips and technology that most of us were waiting for.... WTF??!@#
PLEASE STEVE JOBS get well soon - APPLE NEEDS HELP!!!!
Well...c'est la vie as they say. You want Apple to subsidize currency depreciation? Then don't ask for price cuts when they appreciate. It's a two way street.
Actually, the prices in Europe where never "lowered" when the US dollar was weak i.e. various European currencies were strong. This had the perverted effect that because you could get more dollars for the same amount of your own currency, it was cheaper to buy the Mac's in the states, That's why, in the summer of 2006 I went to New York, bought a bunch of Ipods. Added a 25% mark-up and sold 'em to my friends. I made a profit (per ipod of 25%) and my friends saved about 10% on buying them in Sweden.
What Apple has done know is to raise prices for us here in Europe.
Yes, Apple is NOT responsible for currency fluctuations, but they do not apply their policies equally pending what way the currencies swing - that's what's messed up.
Yes, I get it, Apple doesn't care and they make more money. I think that's great for them, but not for us.
Prices went up by about 30% on the entry level iMac. 30%!!!
The mini went up a staggering 40% compared to the old one AND the new high level mini is the SAME price as the old entry iMac.
Yes, Apple has better design, I LOVE it, and MUCH better OS, but in THESE times, regardless if you have the cash or not, who spend it on such hikes. At the end of the day, the average man cares about Mhz, GB, etc. They will let a bit extra for stability, security and design. That's why I didn't mind spending about 40% extra on a powerbook (compared to a comparable PC). but NOW, you can get a PC for 50% of the cost of an entry level imac and still have better performance.
Yes, Vista isin't great, but it sure beats a bit of cash on shit than a hole lot of cash on nothing. And that's what we are doing, with the new price hicks, we are spending our money on nothing,
Well...c'est la vie as they say. You want Apple to subsidize currency depreciation? Then don't ask for price cuts when they appreciate. It's a two way street.
the exchange rate is a farce! These prices are fucked!
This is complete BS on Apple's part, they have the hardware capabilities that all the other PC makers have access to so why couldn't they make a core i7 iMac with LED screen or at least given us the option of a bigger and bad ASS - iMac system - i guess the absence of SJ is really starting to show, given that they made us wait extra time for this crappy upgrade and i resent your whiner comments- i am a music producer and i work with video as well and i'm in IT field.
I have been begging my clients to wait for this update because of the expectations of all the 'new' chips and technology that most of us were waiting for.... WTF??!@#
PLEASE STEVE JOBS get well soon - APPLE NEEDS HELP!!!!
They are tied to Intel's roadmap which has been pushed forward nearly 6months due to economy... and....
The economy is failing because consumers and business's cut spending, oops. Housing market only started it (created the consious effort to cut spending, reduce waste, eliminate jobs, etc), what we are in now is less housing problem more spending, futures, options, market problems. If the market continued it's 3.4% growth from 06-07 we wouldn't have had a 62b right off from AIG who insured market calls, puts, options, xxxbacked securitys, interests, etc... that tanked because spending is off nearly 40% overall. We are also loosing jobs because in the US more jobs are service/customer direct then back in the 80's let alone the 20-30's where 4:10 jobs were direct, today it's more 6.5:1, so reduced spending from consumers/business has a faster impact on the economy.
You want to fix the economy? There are 300m US people. 170m with full-time work. Spend $1 a day extra and the economy will revive 2x's faster. Tip $1 extra. Buy one thing extra a week (I prefer you purchase something that helps the environment, LED Lightbulbs are a good start - 1 a week at $5 each).
Take out the middle man they said. Go direct they said. Where's the buffer now Mr. consumer?
Fix the economy, boost spending and Intel's inventory will get lower faster and newer units can be put into production quicker which means more R&D, faster design, quicker turnaround.
So, class, how do we get faster Mac's sooner?
A: Spend $1 a day more, tip $1 more. Buy one thing extra a week. If all 170m full-time emp's did this we would fix the economy twice as fast.