Wintel's new iMac Killa!

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 59
    [quote]OS and design are all a matter of personal taste.<hr></blockquote>



    Aesthetics wouldn't mean anything if design were all a matter of personal taste. That PC will never win any meaningful design awards. The problem with my argument for aesthetics is people's lack of taste.
  • Reply 22 of 59
    [quote]Originally posted by Gandalf the Semi-Coherent:

    <strong>



    Now back to your regularly scheduled JYD thread.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Dare I say... best post ever?
  • Reply 23 of 59
    So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.



    Amazing.



    So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?



    Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.
  • Reply 24 of 59
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Except for games, pretty everything I do can be done faster on a Mac than Windows PC.
  • Reply 24 of 59
    eupfhoriaeupfhoria Posts: 257member
    [quote]Originally posted by rightnow 92:

    <strong>



    Dare I say... best post ever?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    You may.



    And I'll agree.
  • Reply 26 of 59
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    You know I just feel dirty defending any aspect of Apple hardware right now, but I think the design philosophies are evident between the two.



    If any design went into that PC thing it probably went like this, "We got this flat screen, make it look cool."



    The iMac design conference went something like this, "We've got this flat screen, make it work"



    The results are what you see before you. The iMac is strong because it's 'engineered' to solve problems -- space and ergonomics primarily. The PC looks like it does, because some guy just tried to make it look 'cool'



    Personally, I think the iMac looks great, but whatever you may think of it's looks, you can't deny that it is a strong space/ergo efficient design. Design! The PC in question is, for lack of a better word, 'styled.' I think there's a difference there. And it doesn't even look good to boot.



    Same goes for the iPod, the El Capitan case, ADC... Their industrial design is top notch. There are a few 'stylistic' quirks that would do better to give way to 'design' solutions -- Front facing notebook drives, slot load drives in general, the lack of force eject pin access, mainly. But in general you can't beat Apple's design for ease and efficiency.
  • Reply 27 of 59
    eupfhoriaeupfhoria Posts: 257member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.



    Amazing.



    So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?



    Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I use my mac because I love the OS, I hate the alternatives, I love the available software, I love the design, my G4 is quite easy to get into.



    When will you get the point JD? The reason we are using macs is because we realized that a bigger number doesn't mean a better computer.



    We know that PC's are cheaper. We know that they are probably faster. That doesn't mean i'm gonna buy the rice rocket over the cadillac.



    I like to be comfortable when I use my computer. I like it to handle well. I like it to have a good resell value. I like it to not break down because it was built with all the cheapest parts with the only intrest being the speed.

    &lt;/car analogy&gt;





    Sure speed is important, but for someone who spends as much time reading and posting to a forum like this as you do, you should know that you would be able to browse the net just as fast on a G3 333



    [ 07-25-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</p>
  • Reply 28 of 59
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.</strong>



    That's a part of it!



    <strong>So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?</strong>



    Because, in case you aren't aware, they were actually faster than any Wintel machine. Period!



    <strong>Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software.</strong>



    And that's why forums like these go rampant when a Macworld nears, eh? Get a life. They make a lot more money with software sales, but their hardware gets our balls bouncing.
  • Reply 29 of 59
    trevormtrevorm Posts: 841member
    Looks like real Crap.....

    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />



    ...Just stating it as it is!
  • Reply 30 of 59
    bodhibodhi Posts: 1,424member
    Not quite sure what that has to do with FUTURE hardware since we are comparing that ugly thing to the current iMac form factor.



    Off to General Discussion....
  • Reply 31 of 59
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    At least the iLamp looks like it belongs on a desk. This thing looks like a damn funnel.
  • Reply 32 of 59
    cubitcubit Posts: 846member
    JD I'm worried about you. Apple hardware does not "suck". That is too lame to even credit. You are right that operating software is the real key to the Macintosh experience and I would not trade it for anything. What worries me is that someone worried by this thing you post here seems to be thinking style. How could you put that on your desk with all the drawbacks and claim it is better than a PowerMac? How does that compare to the new iMac G4. Do you think they are close?



    Of course, I know that those who are not embarrassed by PC boxes will hardly feel shame at putting any knockoff design on their box, but those are people who did not buy Blue Dells... :eek:



    Of course, millions of people have computers and could care less about the Mac's beauty or ease of use or anything. These people think they are getting a bargain when their new color TV costs only $149.99. Such a machine is a tote home then trash machine.



    Is that the market Apple should target? Is it winnable? Do YOU, as a Mac User (I think) want Apple to make its hardware/software appeal to that group? When will people stop playing speed games and forget ease of use and pride of ownership?



    Sure, I admit I own Cubes, have a new iMac?gad, I was a 3rd day purchaser of the original 128K Macintosh--so I've been drawn in on numerous occasion. But I've never had negative feelings about my mac even when I was given the run of the PC universe in gov't or university.
  • Reply 32 of 59
    nonsuchnonsuch Posts: 293member
    Matsu: great post.
  • Reply 34 of 59
    johnhenryjohnhenry Posts: 152member
    I think JYD makes some valid points and doesn't deserve the harshness you guys give him. I agree with all of you that this thing is UGLY, but most people don't care about what their computer looks like. They care about 1. PRICE 2. Does it run MS office (so many people don't know mac's do...really!)... 5. Speed (because really, most 3 year old computers can [speedwise] do the few things most consumers do with a computer. ... 10. What it looks like ... 15. Does it have 1 firewire port or 2



    In the end JYD just wants what's best for all of us, and that is apple getting a bigger slice of the marketshare pie! However, I don't believe the speed argument is as valid this section of consumerville...move that one to the powermac.



    Put yourself in the uninformed PC buyers shoes and pocketbook for 2 seconds and pretend you know nothing of the mac experience and all of your friends run PC's...
  • Reply 35 of 59
    squashsquash Posts: 332member
    [quote] Put yourself in the uninformed PC buyers shoes and pocketbook for 2 seconds and pretend you know nothing of the mac experience and all of your friends run PC's... <hr></blockquote>



    Most of my friends do use PC's , that is when they are running. Almost half of them have hardware or software problems and don't understand the way windows works well enough to troubleshoot them.



    Ever wonder why you can be certified on a windows machine for just about everything we do on our own. I always have, and honestly I don't understand why people stay with Windows.
  • Reply 36 of 59
    pastapasta Posts: 112member
    [quote]Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg:

    <strong>Interesting how a Wintel maker can offer the same features as Apple's iMac for $1100. Apple says it's the LCD prices....I say it's the margins Apple needs.



    Here's the iMac Killa, and it packs more processing power than any iMac will even a year from now.







    <a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4624"; target="_blank">iMac Killa</a>



    Scary. Apple's got to do something about the performance gap NOW, not next year.



    [ 07-25-2002: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    cheap graphics chipset which uses main memory as a frame buffer = lousy graphics performance



    cheap ANALOG LCD display = lousy DVD playback, fuzzy appearance, overall poor quality compared to digital LCD



    512MB maximum RAM = enough for now, but quickly outdated



    Windows XP home = 'nuff said



    Pentium 4 w/o RAMBUS = mediocre performance



    Pentium 4 = mediocre performance unless code is rewritten specifically for this processor!



    Integrated Firewire on x86 architecture = Firewire, USB, PCI, IDE, Keyboard, Mouse, Ethernet and Audio sharing the same bus = bottleneck when multitasking and DROPPED FRAMES WITH DV!!!!



    Windows XP & Firewire = unreliable



    Software modem = extra processor load, increased bus traffic



    I'll take an iMac over this any day. The sad thing is most consumers don't know this and will think they're getting a great deal.
  • Reply 37 of 59
    cindercinder Posts: 381member
    If raw computing power was the most important thing about a computer - we would all be using CRAY systems.



    for a vast majority of computer users SPEED IS NOT THE MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE.



    Usability is.

    Usability in the sense that they know how to work the computer, and usability as in features that improve or streamline their user experience.



    Power features, customization, and speed are only important to Professionals, hardcore Gamers or Pro-sumers. (aka tinkerers!)



    I'm not saying Apple should cease processor developement. We do need to catch up.



    I am saying Speed is NOT the most important feature of a computer. Period.
  • Reply 38 of 59
    johnhenryjohnhenry Posts: 152member
    Nice post Cubit. Great point!

    I guess you can't have it both ways. Apple will always be the BMW of the computer world and that is a good thing...I think
  • Reply 39 of 59
    I love what they wrote about that computer(NOT), I think any one looking for an all in one design that looks nice and works well is going to look at the iMac generally the reason why I switched was because OSX is much better not because of what the computer looks like to me that is some thing extra.



    One other thing Northgate isn't that well known it isn't like Dell or Compaq, they have commercials running all the time. I think the most Northgate does with TV is the Home Shopping Network, so really how is some one going to come across this computer.



    [ 07-26-2002: Message edited by: BrianMacOS ]</p>
  • Reply 40 of 59
    chweave1chweave1 Posts: 164member
    I do not think that most people understand that its branding that sells pc's to the uninformed pc users out there. They do not think style in the sense of how well designed the total package is.



    To a lesser extent than and even in conjunction with branding, once a perception grows in the PC community, it lingers for years. The "But its a Mac" mentality has been a factor for years, with no real evidence supporting it. Look at the floppy drive... Mac users have survived and prospered since its death, while PC users never use it anymore, but hold onto it like its the only thing they own.



    As long as the case says "Intel Inside," "Running Windows ___," and "Dell" or even "Compaq" on the front, it will sell. Rarely do these small time PC companies with their relatively "stylish" designs make a huge impact. The proof of this is in your college dorm. The next time any of you walk into a college dorm, count how many Black and Grey Dell towers you see. Then count how many Dell laptops you see. Its the brand that sells the computer in the Windows PC sector. Styling is a secondary consideration.



    That said, all bets are off once the buyer knows a thing or two about computers.
Sign In or Register to comment.