17" iMac is amazing...
I was at the Apple Store playing around with the new iMac and all I can say is how amazing it is. People who think it's ugly are totally wrong. The LCD is great, I was really impressed. And it's pretty fast too. It was running Jaguar. Window resizing was much improved compared to 10.1.x. All apps opened before or within one bounce. Overall it was a great experience.
Comments
I figure by then, it'll have an even BETTER graphics card, a 100GB hard drive, 1GHz (or higher?) G4, 133MHz bus, etc.
I'll have no trouble at all selling my current 15" LCD iMac when/if that time comes.
I wouldn't/couldn't make the move right now, just for the 17", 20GB more hard drive and the new graphics card. Isn't my style.
I ain't no murbot!
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Besides, who knows what it will be like (the LCD iMac) a year or so from now? Perhaps a 19" display? I was impressed at how fast they took to get it to a 17"...6 months!
Took the CRT iMac FOUR YEARS to get one...then they go and call it something else entirely!
There are definite advantages for sticking your monitor on the end of a little pole: EASY updating/enlarging as needs/demand warrants!
<strong>the screen is wobbly</strong><hr></blockquote>
It wasn't on the one I tried.
As far as the graphics cards go, I am wondering why they didn't just use the 64MB NVIDIA Ti 200. It's an affordable yet powerful AGP card. What's with this MX shite?
I also forgot to look at the HD properties while I was there. Does anyone know if they are using quality HDs? I should hope they are 7200rpm quiet drives from Western Digital or IBM. I hope they aren't using the POS HDs that are in the eMacs and the older iMacs (Maxtor - the slow and loud ones).
<strong>Hey since you are talking about HDs in Macs why is it that Apple tends to use slower RPM drives??</strong><hr></blockquote>
Cause Steve's a dick. Actually, in Apple's eyes, that helps make it a "consumer" machine. Total bullshit.
<strong>I was at the Apple Store playing around with the new iMac and all I can say is how amazing it is. People who think it's ugly are totally wrong. The LCD is great, I was really impressed. And it's pretty fast too. It was running Jaguar. Window resizing was much improved compared to 10.1.x. All apps opened before or within one bounce. Overall it was a great experience.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Do you all realize the significance of this post?!?!
It's a legitimate, content-filled post! EmAn! I'm proud of you!
That's 1.
<strong>
Do you all realize the significance of this post?!?!
It's a legitimate, content-filled post! EmAn! I'm proud of you!
That's 1.
Pretty surprising, eh? ( <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> murbot... im trying to be like you)
I have the feeling that Apple holds out on making these improvements is because it hasn't really done any (now badly needed) improvements to the PCI Macs & wants to make them seem still relevant, rather than due to increased cost (Is a 133 Mhz bus really that much more expensive to install than a 100 Mhz?) So we won't see any of these improvements until towers with G5 processors are available. As a result, Apple seems to be lagging in making improvements in contrast to PC's. Apple has shifted it's marketing strategy to get people to buy an all-in-one system that people simply replace, rather than continuously upgrade. If people are going to buy into this, they need to feel the system they are buying is the best possible system at the time of purchase that is available (when buying the top model of a particular product line) to warrant replacing (over upgrading or making do).....same goes for the iPod. $499 for an MP3 player? No Thanks. I'll continue with the annoyance of burning CD's & hooking my portable CD player to my car's cassette deck until either the price comes down (by a lot), or the iPod has the ability to record (in MP3 like a mini cassette player & in AIFF w/ a stereo microphone.).....then I'd be willing to shell out $499 for it, as I'd no longer also have to consider buying a portable DAT machine.
Apple seems to have lost sight of the fact that because Apple customers pay more for their machines, they expect more in their machines.....and that all the fancy design awards are just icing on the cake.
Whether that's true or not, I thought the machine was excellent.
Too bad desktops are yesterday's computer.
TING5
<strong>I wouldn't/couldn't make the move right now, just for the 17", 20GB more hard drive and the new graphics card. Isn't my style.
I ain't no murbot!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, don't worry about that, pscates, just be happy with who you are. I'm sure you can squeeze a few more months out of that little iMac...
Oh. Wait, that wasn't envy, was it? Uh.. nevermind.
And yes, conrats to EmAn for a nice post.
<strong>It's also stupid to have only 256 MB of Ram in a computer that needs to be taken to the shop to upgrade its RAM....The top model should have 512MB in its interior slot.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not everyone would be willing to pay the little extra that Apple would have to charge for doing this. They're happy with going to 512 or 768 MB of RAM after dropping a chip in the outer slot. You can always BTO this at the Apple Store if you want to, anyway.
This is one reason I prefer to buy my machines from the same local dealer. I get a decent discount on hardware, and they do these little things for me free. They swapped out the 256 in my last iMac for a 512 for nothing (I had a 512 sitting here). A lot of shops do these little things to try and keep people from ordering online.
The hard drive size onthese things is really climbing, 80GB's! That's pretty big. Hopefully apple have an asic upgrade in the works for all the non-PM models aswell. We need ATA-100/ATA-133 soon. Before anyone chimes in with the one drive can't possibly saturate ATA66, yes, I know, neither can two. However, 80GB is getting pretty close to the partition size limit for ATA66 (approx 127GB, I can't remember exactly). A hard-drive upgrade is on of the few upgrades MANY people do to even iMacs. It looks like all the consumer macs and the TiBook get the same ATA-controller, PM might follow Xserve but it really doesn't matter since you can add a card to the PM's) I realize that you could still add the bigger drive and make a couple of partitions, but that doesn't seem very 'mac-like' to me.
There's always firewire, but that's not the same, maybe a faster version? Anyway, not to complain about controllers and such, just that it could be a concern for anyone who'll keep their mac for more than 3 years. But, man, 80GB seems like a lot of storage right now. Someone who doesn't keep a multi-GB MP3/porn collection on their hard-drives could comfortably do some video editing on that guy.
Give me ATA100/133, a faster bus and 4X AGP please. I'm still waiting to throw some money at you Apple. However, anyone who isn't as cheap as I am should consider the ne iMac. It, along with the 12" iBook 700, are the only decent deals in Apple's line-up ATM.
<strong>I took a walk down to the new SoHo store today and was amazed. The new iMac is insane! The display is SO much nicer than the 15" (in terms of clarity, sharpness and color) and the wideness looks great with the base now. You can fit a lot of icons in the dock with that iMac LCD!
As far as the graphics cards go, I am wondering why they didn't just use the 64MB NVIDIA Ti 200. It's an affordable yet powerful AGP card. What's with this MX shite?
I also forgot to look at the HD properties while I was there. Does anyone know if they are using quality HDs? I should hope they are 7200rpm quiet drives from Western Digital or IBM. I hope they aren't using the POS HDs that are in the eMacs and the older iMacs (Maxtor - the slow and loud ones).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry Patchouli....but the Western Digital drives are complete and utter garbage!!!! They had them in a batch of older iMacs and PM's. We seem to get HD failures at around the 12-18 month mark...and they are mostly WD drives....
Although, recently, once regarded as the best in IDE drives, the IBM's are starting to fail more regularly too now...but not at the rate that WD's go!!
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>So now you're a mod, huh, Murbot? Well, that's good, 'cause I don't think anyone short of an Apple product tester has used more current Mac hardware than you have. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
True enough.
I'm still trying to find that perfect machine for me... or the perfect therapist to help me put an end to this. I'm hoping to do the first, I'm sure it will be much cheaper.
Oh, and I'm still contemplating adding a Mr. to my screen name now.
[quote]<strong>Someone who doesn't keep a multi-GB MP3/porn collection on their hard-drives could comfortably do some video editing on that guy.<hr></blockquote></strong>
Hmm, I'll have to look into FireWire drives, I guess.
<strong>
Sorry Patchouli....but the Western Digital drives are complete and utter garbage!!!! They had them in a batch of older iMacs and PM's. We seem to get HD failures at around the 12-18 month mark...and they are mostly WD drives....
Although, recently, once regarded as the best in IDE drives, the IBM's are starting to fail more regularly too now...but not at the rate that WD's go!!
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>Yeah, I know that IBM were having problems here and there, but I hear nothing but good things about Western Digital drives. I have the 80GB model and you literally can not hear it at all. It's 7200rpm and has an 8mb buffer so it's performance is amazing. So far so good - lets hope it stays that way!
So, what is a decent HD these days? It's gotta be fast and quiet as well as reliable. The HD in my iMac (700MHz 2001 G3) is the pits. I mean Apple couldn't have possibly used anything cheaper. It's a Maxtor POS that has this horrifying constant 'florescent light' buzz coming from it as well as loud access noise and it is also just SLOW. How ironic, a noisy HD in a computer which was designed without a fan to keep it nice and quiet? I had to put a folded fleece blanket under the iMac so it would absorb some of the buzz. You still here it the moment you walk into the room. I was horrified to see that the same exact HD model is what they are currently using in the new eMacs. Perhaps the fan in the eMac will suppress the HD whine?
Good HDs are not expensive anymore - especially 40-60GB ones. So why is Apple using crappy ones? That?s what pisses me off. It's one thing not to have the hardware to make the Macs faster (mobo, processor, ram, etc.) that's all fine - do what you can. But, to not utilize the readily available hardware to compensate for these other limitations to increase overall performance is just maddening!
So, does ANYone know what kind of HDs are going into the new 17" iMac? Sure, 80GBs is nice - but not if it's a cheap drive.
Would never buy a WD. I have personally lost 2 Caviars the 'knock'
I would look at a <a href="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?submit=manufactory&catalog=14&manu factory=1305&DEPA=1" target="_blank">Seagate Barracuda IV</a> and then a Maxtor DiamondMaX.