I just love the "similarly configured" machine arguments. yeah, great, they're evenly priced at a similar configuration. Shouldn't someone point out that while EVERY OTHER PC manufacturer that you're comparing it to allows you to really change the configuration. I went to Dell's site to configure the 4600, and a couple things I noticed:
- Its like $75 less to get the RAM from 256 to 1GB. 4 DIMM slots total.
- Its $60 less to get the HDrive to 250GB, plus there's room for a second drive.
- I can get a floppy drive (floppies rule!)
- Choice of CD/DVD drives, including getting two separate drives
- Choice of displays, from LCD to CRT, at a wide range of sizes, quality, price
- choice of video card (hey, and you can change it later!)
- choice of sound card (hey, and you can change it later!)
- choice of mouse and keyboard that fits you, not what they force you to have (what, you want two buttons, go buy one yourself, you losers!)
Apple let's you change the memory and harddrive, and allows you to add Bluetooth (don't forget that's required if you want a wireless keyboard/mouse) and airport. Wow, the customization options!
[Oh, and the dell will get to you within a week. Who knows when Apple will ship the first iMac, let alone yours.]
Yeah, so if you spec up the dell to meet the iMac's specs, they cost the same, but the problem is, you HAVE to take the iMacs specs. If I have no desire for DVD writing, I can forgo the drive (or, if I want a DVD-R drive, but hate their slowness for CD reading, I can get two drives!). You have a myriad of options with the PC side of things. With Apple, you take what they give you.
No need to get emotional about it. I'm just pointing out that while you get less choice on Apple's side they are not gouging like some claim. You can configure a machine almost infinitely at Dell's site. That's great and for some that is what they want. I think it's a bit lame when people try to claim things that are just not true though and you finally did agree that similarly specced machines cost the same .
To hear some of the arguments made by people here you'd think an identically specced machine cost $500 less on the PC side and that is completely untrue. Apple is going to cost more for many reasons including economy of scale so for them to get a machine (albeit an AIO with only drive/RAM upgradeability) so close to PC prices is a notable achievement.
No they haven't. This is your dream. Consumers haven't spoken about anything. The last best selling computer(original iMac) wasn't headless. I love they way some of you make stuff up to support your wishes.
97%, you are the one dreaming if you can't see something that telling.
I love the way some of you are too blinded by your own desires to see the truth that is right in front of you.
Like all previous Ive designs it looks a little bland at first in photographs. Then you notice the little details and seen in a real context (check the picture in the 'Software' section) it starts to look darnright cute. Like the iPod I suspect that photographs don't do the design justice and in the flesh it will be very cool.
The design is perfectly logical and to be honest where else could you go now with an AIO? I too would love to see a mildly expandable cube or slab (for commercial reasons) but for an iMac this is fine. Reductions in weight and cost are good and the syling is clearly talking to the iPod generation, which is probably a very smart move. VESA mounting option is also very smart and I think the machine is an indication of Apple's future push into the Home.
I would love to see 3rd parties produce a touch-screen version (Troll?) and some new sexy VESA arms (most existing arms are pretty ugly). The iMac would make a great Bar/Restaurant music machine, or even customer operated jukebox.
I think the machine also posesses the important Office Receptionist and TV Gameshow potential.
Can someone tell me, just out of curiosity, does the new iMac have a little white light on the front like the old one, to tell you it's on and when it's asleep?
I would be interested in why you wouldn't recommend the high end.
I think it's simple: the high end iMac is not such a jump from the previous high end generation as the other two (we compare always machines of the same rank between generations). For example, it could have a better video chip or a 2 GHz processor or some other plus to make it more appealing. It has however a much nicer screen than the 17" models.
The iMac is an All-In-One and always will be. You are talking about a totally different machine.
Fine where is this totally different machine? There isn't one w/in the same price brackets is there? So therefore I am forced to either not buy a mac in the first place (which oddly enough lots of the people on this board seems to think is a good alternative or buy a used tower, which btw I did knowing Apple as well as I do)
Oh and I do believe I was one of the few if not the only one saying Apple would give these iMacs a 3:1 bus ratio so I guess I get to pat myself on the back just like Amorph did, wooo.
Specs are very similar to the iMac. It still runs Windows and is as ugly as sin. Apple got the features and price of the new iMac perfect. If I wasn't waiting for an updated iBook (and I wanted to be attached to a desk at home after sitting at one most of the day at work), I'd order an iMac today.
I for one am the gaming type so my iMac cannot provide for me in that department so i've decided to save up for a maxed out DELL desktop exclusively for my games , aye now i can have the best of both worlds . 8)
And for you bashing the video card bashers, keep in mind that OS X actually uses the video card itself very heavily
And Tiger 10.4 uses the GPU even more, with CoreImage/CoreVideo.
Quote:
As for the video card Amorph has given examples where the 5200 would actually be a better choice than the ATI 9600. OS X relies on OpenGL which is better supported by Nvidia than ATI.
On the PC side of things, nVidia and ATI write their own drivers. Apple write 'em for the Mac, so this might not be valid.
Another problem with the iMac 3 as a gaming machine may be insufficient RAM. When games of TEH FUTAR come out, they'll probably need 512MB o' RAM, even if they play acceptably on a 5200 Ultra.
I'm convinced that consumers will love the iMac. Why? Because in many households the wife holds sway. Do you think it's chance that the iPod Mini has struck a chord with women with the colors and all. Women also seem to detest big bulky computers. The iMac will gain new homes because it is easy to setup...has the power people need and now a 17" model can be had for $1299 starting. Macintosh has always had a AIO available. Why people keep acting like today's computer market doesn't support AIO is beyond me.
Components tend to get smaller over time as production efficiencies rise. Laptops sales are skyrocketing..it only makes sense to make the iMac as thin as possible.
And Tiger 10.4 uses the GPU even more, with CoreImage/CoreVideo.
On the PC side of things, nVidia and ATI write their own drivers. Apple write 'em for the Mac, so this might not be valid.
Another problem with the iMac 3 as a gaming machine may be insufficient RAM. When games of TEH FUTAR come out, they'll probably need 512MB o' RAM, even if they play acceptably on a 5200 Ultra.
Apple has always skimped on RAM and their prices are usually nasty for upgrading. Most of the time though resellers offer deals like free RAM/Printer/etc... so even this is no huge problem. It also looks to be pretty easy to pop the back off and stick memory in yourself.
ps - as for the ATI vs. Nvidia part. I was refrring to Amorph mentioning that Nvidia's hardware offered superior OpenGL performance. I'm not sure about the driver issue and who writes those (I think it's Apple)
A cheap headless box is a toy for some geeks (not all geeks, or I'd want one). It's not a consumer product.
What sort of ignorant statement is this? Take a look at what the vast majority of computer buyers buy. They sure as hell aren't flocking to LCD AIO PCs.
97%, you are the one dreaming if you can't see something that telling.
97% (the market share, not the installed base - big difference) buy Windows. Since their only real choice for Windows machines is a tower + separate display, that's what they buy.
The tower + separate display is the thirty-year-old design that the commodity market settled on out of inertia. Whether it's the best design for the job is irrelevant: If you want to use commodity components, that is what you ship.
So, in fact, the "97%" number means nothing. The fact that people might be resigned to a tower + display running Windows — because they might not even be aware that there's a viable alternative — doesn't mean that it's the best choice in their eyes. The most you can say is that it's what they're familiar with.
Quote:
I love the way some of you are too blinded by your own desires to see the truth that is right in front of you.
And how. The fastest-growing market in the consumer sector is the ever-so-expandable "portable" computer, including desknotes as well as laptops. So much for expandability as a major consumer selling point.
Sure it's an Apple and looks it but the overall design and functionality doesn't look like something Jonathan Ive would come up with. Did I hear correctly that he was not involved much with this project if at all?
Well, Macbidouille in today's live coverage of Apple Expo, say that the new design is a work of the iPod team. In particular, they say that just after the iMac's introduction, a presentation video has been projected, where Apple insisted that the design came from the creators of iPod. It could be a marketing trick, but it could easily be 100% true.
Comments
Originally posted by Louzer
I just love the "similarly configured" machine arguments. yeah, great, they're evenly priced at a similar configuration. Shouldn't someone point out that while EVERY OTHER PC manufacturer that you're comparing it to allows you to really change the configuration. I went to Dell's site to configure the 4600, and a couple things I noticed:
- Its like $75 less to get the RAM from 256 to 1GB. 4 DIMM slots total.
- Its $60 less to get the HDrive to 250GB, plus there's room for a second drive.
- I can get a floppy drive (floppies rule!)
- Choice of CD/DVD drives, including getting two separate drives
- Choice of displays, from LCD to CRT, at a wide range of sizes, quality, price
- choice of video card (hey, and you can change it later!)
- choice of sound card (hey, and you can change it later!)
- choice of mouse and keyboard that fits you, not what they force you to have (what, you want two buttons, go buy one yourself, you losers!)
Apple let's you change the memory and harddrive, and allows you to add Bluetooth (don't forget that's required if you want a wireless keyboard/mouse) and airport. Wow, the customization options!
[Oh, and the dell will get to you within a week. Who knows when Apple will ship the first iMac, let alone yours.]
Yeah, so if you spec up the dell to meet the iMac's specs, they cost the same, but the problem is, you HAVE to take the iMacs specs. If I have no desire for DVD writing, I can forgo the drive (or, if I want a DVD-R drive, but hate their slowness for CD reading, I can get two drives!). You have a myriad of options with the PC side of things. With Apple, you take what they give you.
No need to get emotional about it. I'm just pointing out that while you get less choice on Apple's side they are not gouging like some claim. You can configure a machine almost infinitely at Dell's site. That's great and for some that is what they want. I think it's a bit lame when people try to claim things that are just not true though and you finally did agree that similarly specced machines cost the same
To hear some of the arguments made by people here you'd think an identically specced machine cost $500 less on the PC side and that is completely untrue. Apple is going to cost more for many reasons including economy of scale so for them to get a machine (albeit an AIO with only drive/RAM upgradeability) so close to PC prices is a notable achievement.
Originally posted by hmurchison
No they haven't. This is your dream. Consumers haven't spoken about anything. The last best selling computer(original iMac) wasn't headless. I love they way some of you make stuff up to support your wishes.
97%, you are the one dreaming if you can't see something that telling.
I love the way some of you are too blinded by your own desires to see the truth that is right in front of you.
Originally posted by etai_s15
Damn its ugly.
err...no its not?
Like all previous Ive designs it looks a little bland at first in photographs. Then you notice the little details and seen in a real context (check the picture in the 'Software' section) it starts to look darnright cute. Like the iPod I suspect that photographs don't do the design justice and in the flesh it will be very cool.
The design is perfectly logical and to be honest where else could you go now with an AIO? I too would love to see a mildly expandable cube or slab (for commercial reasons) but for an iMac this is fine. Reductions in weight and cost are good and the syling is clearly talking to the iPod generation, which is probably a very smart move. VESA mounting option is also very smart and I think the machine is an indication of Apple's future push into the Home.
I would love to see 3rd parties produce a touch-screen version (Troll?) and some new sexy VESA arms (most existing arms are pretty ugly). The iMac would make a great Bar/Restaurant music machine, or even customer operated jukebox.
I think the machine also posesses the important Office Receptionist and TV Gameshow potential.
Originally posted by Dazaran
97%, you are the one dreaming if you can't see something that telling.
I love the way some of you are too blinded by your own desires to see the truth that is right in front of you.
The iMac is an All-In-One and always will be. You are talking about a totally different machine.
Originally posted by vinney57
I would love to see 3rd parties produce a touch-screen version (Troll?)
Here you go (Troll?).
Originally posted by Powerdoc
I just ordered one (Christmas in advance) : I expect that I did not make a mistake (I didn't checked the noise : if it's noisy my wife will kill me
According to the iMac tech specs page (it would be nice if this was actually checked by more people
Originally posted by kcmac
THT. Nice post.
I would be interested in why you wouldn't recommend the high end.
I think it's simple: the high end iMac is not such a jump from the previous high end generation as the other two (we compare always machines of the same rank between generations). For example, it could have a better video chip or a 2 GHz processor or some other plus to make it more appealing. It has however a much nicer screen than the 17" models.
Originally posted by vinney57
The iMac is an All-In-One and always will be. You are talking about a totally different machine.
Fine where is this totally different machine? There isn't one w/in the same price brackets is there? So therefore I am forced to either not buy a mac in the first place (which oddly enough lots of the people on this board seems to think is a good alternative or buy a used tower, which btw I did knowing Apple as well as I do)
Oh and I do believe I was one of the few if not the only one saying Apple would give these iMacs a 3:1 bus ratio so I guess I get to pat myself on the back just like Amorph did, wooo.
Originally posted by Bancho
I already did in another thread:
The Vaio has:
15" screen
Integrated SIS graphics with 32MB shared memory
2.8GHz P4
512MB DDR SDRAM
Combo drive
All starting at $1499!
It looks like the iMac is the winner. Now how 'bout Gateway's...
Profile 5X-C
Operating System: Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition
Application Software: Microsoft® Works Suite 2004 - including Microsoft® Word and Encarta
Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor 2.8GHz w/ Hyper-Threading Technology, 800MHz FSB and 1MB L2 Cache
Memory: 512MB 333MHz DDR SDRAM (1-512MB modules)
Hard Drive: 80GB Ultra ATA100 7200rpm hard drive
Floppy Drive: Integrated 1.44MB 3.5" floppy diskette drive
Optical Drive: Integrated 24x/10x/24x CD-RW / 8x DVD combo
Expansion Slots: (1) Type II PC card slot
External Ports: (6) USB 2.0 ports (2 side, 4 rear), (1) Serial (back), (1) Parallel, (2) PS/2
Input/Output Jacks: Line-in, line-out and mic (back), headphone and mic (front), VGA-out (in back on NVIDIA® graphics configurations), VGA-in
Dimensions: 15.38" x 17.33" x 7.25" (WxHxD), approximately 20.8lb.
Screen: 17" LCD flat panel display
Video: Integrated Intel® Extreme Graphics 2 with 64MB shared memory buffer
Keyboard and Mouse: Multifunction keyboard and Logitech USB Optical Wheel Mouse
Multimedia Package: Integrated sound and stereo speakers
Modem/Wireless: V.92 56k modem
Network Adapter: Integrated Intel® 10/100 Ethernet Adapter
Specs are very similar to the iMac. It still runs Windows and is as ugly as sin. Apple got the features and price of the new iMac perfect. If I wasn't waiting for an updated iBook (and I wanted to be attached to a desk at home after sitting at one most of the day at work), I'd order an iMac today.
And for you bashing the video card bashers, keep in mind that OS X actually uses the video card itself very heavily
And Tiger 10.4 uses the GPU even more, with CoreImage/CoreVideo.
As for the video card Amorph has given examples where the 5200 would actually be a better choice than the ATI 9600. OS X relies on OpenGL which is better supported by Nvidia than ATI.
On the PC side of things, nVidia and ATI write their own drivers. Apple write 'em for the Mac, so this might not be valid.
Another problem with the iMac 3 as a gaming machine may be insufficient RAM. When games of TEH FUTAR come out, they'll probably need 512MB o' RAM, even if they play acceptably on a 5200 Ultra.
Components tend to get smaller over time as production efficiencies rise. Laptops sales are skyrocketing..it only makes sense to make the iMac as thin as possible.
Originally posted by Stoo
And Tiger 10.4 uses the GPU even more, with CoreImage/CoreVideo.
On the PC side of things, nVidia and ATI write their own drivers. Apple write 'em for the Mac, so this might not be valid.
Another problem with the iMac 3 as a gaming machine may be insufficient RAM. When games of TEH FUTAR come out, they'll probably need 512MB o' RAM, even if they play acceptably on a 5200 Ultra.
Apple has always skimped on RAM and their prices are usually nasty for upgrading. Most of the time though resellers offer deals like free RAM/Printer/etc... so even this is no huge problem. It also looks to be pretty easy to pop the back off and stick memory in yourself.
ps - as for the ATI vs. Nvidia part. I was refrring to Amorph mentioning that Nvidia's hardware offered superior OpenGL performance. I'm not sure about the driver issue and who writes those (I think it's Apple)
Originally posted by Amorph
A cheap headless box is a toy for some geeks (not all geeks, or I'd want one). It's not a consumer product.
What sort of ignorant statement is this? Take a look at what the vast majority of computer buyers buy. They sure as hell aren't flocking to LCD AIO PCs.
Originally posted by Dazaran
97%, you are the one dreaming if you can't see something that telling.
97% (the market share, not the installed base - big difference) buy Windows. Since their only real choice for Windows machines is a tower + separate display, that's what they buy.
The tower + separate display is the thirty-year-old design that the commodity market settled on out of inertia. Whether it's the best design for the job is irrelevant: If you want to use commodity components, that is what you ship.
So, in fact, the "97%" number means nothing. The fact that people might be resigned to a tower + display running Windows — because they might not even be aware that there's a viable alternative — doesn't mean that it's the best choice in their eyes. The most you can say is that it's what they're familiar with.
I love the way some of you are too blinded by your own desires to see the truth that is right in front of you.
And how.
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
Sure it's an Apple and looks it but the overall design and functionality doesn't look like something Jonathan Ive would come up with. Did I hear correctly that he was not involved much with this project if at all?
Well, Macbidouille in today's live coverage of Apple Expo, say that the new design is a work of the iPod team. In particular, they say that just after the iMac's introduction, a presentation video has been projected, where Apple insisted that the design came from the creators of iPod. It could be a marketing trick, but it could easily be 100% true.
Originally posted by powermacG6
Bring on the iMac mini!
Can I get one in blue ?
Originally posted by nagromme
The removable foot opens up tons of possibilities.
Where does it say the foot is removable? Or am I missing something?