Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

newportnews · Jul 9, 2003, 09:37 PM

Just got my new 1 Ghz 17" iMac today and here are my first impressions:

1. The Screen - Its almost too big.... I have seen it in CompUSA but it is staggering when you actually sit it on your desk at the pure size of the display.

2. Speed: Very peppy... When I first started using it with the 256 stock it would grind sometimes but since adding an additional 512 stick (768 total) it is flying... I was listening to iTunes, transferring 800 MB of files from a CD and browsing the web in Safari and nothing slowed down.

3. iPod - Also got my new 15 GB iPod today and it is gorgeous... I hadn't seen a 3G iPod yet but they are a major improvement over the former models... dock and case are great.

That's all for right now I'll post again once I have more to say.

MM

AlanApple · 07:05 PM

I also recently bought an iMac 17" and I am just so pleased with it. Previously I was using a Powermac G4 400 followed by an 800. I just came to the conclusion that I did not need the massive upgradability of this line.

The iMac is an absolute marvel. It looks fantastic and the performance is excellent. I like playing games and was worried it would not pay out but the 64 mb graphics card handles everything no prob.

I obviously knew about the iMac, being a bit of an Apple fanatic, but I just did not grasp what an all in one brilliant combination it was until I started using it. AND IT HAS A SUPERDRIVE!!!!!!

dfbennett · Jul 12, 2003, 10:30 AM

I'm in a similar situation. My current Mac is a G4/350 Sawtooth that is getting a bit, pardon the pun, long in the tooth

I've finally found a job so I think upgrading is going to be feasable within the next couple of months and am really thinking an iMac is a better value for me. I don't play games on my Mac(well I should say graphic intensive games), the 80gb HD would be more than adequate for me(I currently have a 30gb drive in my G4 that has 19gb free!) and I really don't need the expandability of the tower. That in combination with wanting more screen real estate(I currently have a very nice 17" Sony Trinitron monitor but can only run it at 1024x768 without the refresh rate going to low for my comfort) so I'm thinking a 1ghz iMac(or something similar if updated ones are released) is going to be the way to go for me. I'm a bit worried about having my CPU and monitor all in one but I've not heard any real reliablity problems with these FP iMacs so I think I should be good.

Big Fat Octopus · Jul 13, 2003, 09:09 AM

I have had my 17"iMac for about 3mths now and I still love it.

I am upgrading the base 256 memory with another 512 for 768 total because I do a lot of image scanning.

However, as I type, I have iTunes playing, Photoshop7 scanning 130mb transparency files in the background from a Canon FS4000US, MS Excel, Mail and Safari (obviously).....all at the same time! There is definitely a time lag when switching between apps but not significant enough to force me to shut anything down.

PLUS I have been using the machine in this manner for weeks without a single crashed OS or app.

Truly wonderful

Plus all my friends and family marvel at it! Unfortunately most have never seen one let alone knew they existed, which is a shame. Most of them are computer phobic and see Mac as a risk and something new they would have to learn. Frustrating!!!!

vmarks · Jul 13, 2003, 09:34 AM

wait a minute.
If your friends are already computer-phobic, wouldn't learning a PC be something new to learn too?

In which case, why not learn something that won't frustrate them horribly?
(broad generalizations abound!)

Frumpy · Jul 13, 2003, 06:52 PM

And my question becomes....I have 512 in my iMac right now. Would upgrading to 768 REALLY be worth the money? I would have to sell a 256 chip i have.....for whatever i can get......and buy a 512. But is it REALLY worth it?

brucewayne · Jul 13, 2003, 08:05 PM

Hmm...good question. I'm going to be getting myself one in the next few weeks and had originally thought I'd just get an extra 256 and settle in at 512. But then I thought, if I ever were to want to bump it up, I'd be in the position you're in now, namely having to get rid of a perfectly good 256 chip. So I kinda decided that I'd bite the bullet and pick up a 512 right off the bat.

But you've a valid question...how much difference DOES it make?

newportnews · Jul 13, 2003, 09:21 PM

The difference between 256 and 768 in my iMac 17" is like night and day... much faster all apps are more responsive.

It especially helps with multi-tasking.

Well worth the Money

iPhoto launch (256 MB RAM): 7 bounces
iPhoto launch (768 MB RAM): 2 bounces

Quicktime resizes are much faster as are all app launches.

Well worth the extra money.

Frumpy · Jul 13, 2003, 10:38 PM

Hey, i'm sure that 256 to 768 is a HUGE difference, but the question is whether the difference between 512 and 768 is worth it. iPhoto already launches in 2 bounces with 512. Any other tests out there between 512 and 768?!

Big Fat Octopus · Jul 15, 2003, 08:07 AM

Originally posted by vmarks:
wait a minute.
If your friends are already computer-phobic, wouldn't learning a PC be something new to learn too?

In which case, why not learn something that won't frustrate them horribly?
(broad generalizations abound!)

Allow me to clarify vmarks.

They are computer phobic PC users! They cling to what little they can do on their Winslug boxes and shudder at the thought of having to learn a new system when it took so long to learn Winblows Fricken 98 in the first place!

That is what I meant :-)

I know one guy who has spent double the price of an iMac on Windows Gear (capture cards and additional software) to do video editing and he still can't get it to work properly. He almost cried when I showed him how easy it was on my iMac.

Sometimes people stick with Winpig simply because they have invested too much to turn back.

brucewayne · Jul 15, 2003, 09:44 PM

Ahhh...ya beat me to it Frumpy. I was just going to point out that the question was about the difference between 512 and 768, not 256 and 768 (which I certainly HOPE there is a big difference between those two.)

So...the glove's been tossed...twice...whats the difference and is it worth the financial plop.

The Placid Casual · Jul 18, 2003, 04:27 AM

Originally posted by brucewayne:
Ahhh...ya beat me to it Frumpy. I was just going to point out that the question was about the difference between 512 and 768, not 256 and 768 (which I certainly HOPE there is a big difference between those two.)

So...the glove's been tossed...twice...whats the difference and is it worth the financial plop.

There will of course be a difference. However it will not be as much (less noticeable), as there was when you went to 512 from 256.

I always find it is a case of 'diminishing returns' unless you are using some really intensive apps.

You would probably notice the improvement most in games, and things like large photoshop files, but to honest, if you aren't using these kinds of apps, I would not bother...

BrunoBruin · Jul 18, 2003, 07:24 AM

newportnews, didn't you used to have a Blue Dalmatian iMac? I think you and I were the only people in the western hemisphere who bought one!

BOT, the 1GHz iMacs are great machines. People rag on them for being overpriced or underpowered and so on, but everyone I know who has one is absolutely thrilled with it.

Big Fat Octopus · Jul 18, 2003, 11:42 PM

Well I now have installed my extra 512mb and this thing rocks! Well worth it. Everything is faster and more responsive as you would expect BUT it hasn't made one bit of difference to window re-sizing!?!?!

What the???

I was expecting an improvement in window re-sizing but there has been no change at all. While this is annoying it is only a minor gripe and unfortunately is the only real blemmish with an otherwise exceptional machine.

Image editing in Photoshop is vastly impoved with the extra memory so I'm still happy.

Still loving my 17"imac.

Frumpy · Jul 19, 2003, 02:12 AM

So do we think that 768 would improve the performance of iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto over the 512?

dfbennett · Jul 19, 2003, 08:22 AM

I'd imagine window resizing is more CPU/GPU dependent than memory dependent so more ram wouldn't do anything to speed it up.

Link · Jul 19, 2003, 11:51 PM

According to a few friends of mine, panther has a reworked graphic engine, basically window resizing, sheets coming down, etc, are MUCH faster

sniffer · Jul 20, 2003, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by dfbennett:
I'd imagine window resizing is more CPU/GPU dependent than memory dependent so more ram wouldn't do anything to speed it up.

I'll add software/OS dependents as well to your list. I am looking forward to ?s �Panther�

sniffer · Jul 20, 2003, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by Big Fat Octopus:

I know one guy who has spent double the price of an iMac on Windows Gear (capture cards and additional software) to do video editing and he still can't get it to work properly. He almost cried when I showed him how easy it was on my iMac.

LOL!

Reasons for a pc user to stick with wintel:
-"No ones else I know uses mac" (Don't know where to obtain pirated software)
-"I want to play my gamez" (He is stuck and can't leave his 1300$ gaming machine investment..)

Oh well...

Azzgunther · Jul 21, 2003, 12:54 AM

When the DP 1.42 ghz systems came out I felt like it was time to upgrade from a 15" iMac 800mhz.

I still miss the little sucker and it's been like 5 months.

HOW MUCH LONGER UNTIL THE PAIN STOPS???

Seriously though, iMacs have an appeal to them that nothing else matches.