Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > Thoughts on the new iMac?

Thoughts on the new iMac? (Page 5)
Thread Tools
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 08:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
For 2.1, I'd recommend the Harman/Kardon Soundsticks or the equivalent JBL model (can't seem to find it at the moment).
Harman-Kardon Soundsticks seconded. They're excellent value.

FAR better than JBL Creature/Spot/Flower-or-whatever-that-pink-thing-is-called
     
tavin64
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 08:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Meritocracy View Post
Sorry, but that supposed advantage is rendered utterly meaningless, as the OSX drivers don't leverage the capabilities of UVD by offloading to the GPU. All things considered, the ATi cards included here leave much to be desired, particularly when taking into account Jobs recent pronouncement at WDCC about how games are coming back to the Mac platform. Most were expecting we'd at the very least see the same nVidia GeForce 8600m GTs included in the MBP update and we didn't even get them. Some BTO options here would be nice.
How do you know the OSX drivers do not support UVD? Did you write them? Until benchmarks are released there is no way of telling if that is true or not. And knowing apple why tout the HD in the radeon HD if you are not going to take advantage of their main feature?
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 01:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by KarmaSuture View Post
OK first post, be gentle.
I'm really not sure about the design of the new iMac. I find it odd that Steve critisized the visual styling of the Dell system, and then moved the iMac a step closer to it with the two-tone black and alumium look. Pretty much any PC built by a major vendor in the last 5 years has been black and aluminum, (ok, silver plastic) and while the iMac still looks better than the lot of them, It's not exactly innovative.




Secondly, Is THE lifestyle computer a reputation you want to ditch? My sister liked the iMac because it was "cute". She didn't want a menacing looking piece of technology lurking in the corner of her bedroom. I think because it was white, round, clean and soft looking, she trusted it more.. It didn't look like the type of thing that would delete her homework.

The new look is certainly more aggressive. I wonder if "lifestyle" users are going to trust it as much.

OK, now onto the design. I don't like the black surround on the screen. I understand that the black will make the colours on screen appear more vivid.


Keyboard. OK It's super thin and sexy, but why white keys? Adding another shade to the Black/Aluminum two-tone confuses the design.

OK Enough of my whinging. The point is, I was all set to buy a new iMac to replace desktop PC when leopard is released, but I dislike the new design so much, I'm not sure I'll bother.. Maybe I'll keep the PC, and buy a mac mini to get my OS X fix at home.

Well, it looks like you're sold and you won't be buying the new iMac just because of certain aesthetics? Remember it's a "Computer", you are not buying it from a furniture store to decorate your house.

The "cute" look needed to go away. Along with getting a Mac in everyone's home Apple is trying to move to the enterprise world and a cute white computer with clear plastics will never look right in a corporate atmosphere. The iMac is a perfect office machine as it's a real space saver.
You are certainly critiquing the looks of this beautiful machine but then you say you can't believe Steve Jobs would criticize that dull looking Dell machine?

The black border around the screen is actually part of the screen, it's not just a black border. The whole screen is black when the iMac is off. The idea is to give off a cinema look when watching movies. Remember the white iPod vs. the black? Movies definitely look better on the black one.
Lastly, again, "cute" needs to go away especially for a lifestyle machine. The white iMac, while it looks cool just never fit into most entertainment systems in the home. Most people have a black plasma screen darker furniture and darker cabinet and then they go an stick this big white iMac in the middle of it all? Doesn't work.
     
mfbernstein
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 01:39 PM
 
The new iMac is styled in the same way as the iPhone - it looks like a slick piece of consumer electronics. Which is hardly the sort of thing businesses are going to be aiming for. For some people, the computer is a part of the whole entertainment center. For plenty of us, though, it's a tool, and the less distracting the better.

The other problem is the coolness factor drops off pretty quick. These things get dated. I doubt it'll be as bad as the B&W G3, which looked gaudy and annoying from the start, but I don't think it'll age as well as the G5 or even the old TiBook styling.

I definitely agree that the Mini is the best desktop Mac available for less than 2 grand. Simple. Unassuming. Functional.
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by mfbernstein View Post
The new iMac is styled in the same way as the iPhone - it looks like a slick piece of consumer electronics. Which is hardly the sort of thing businesses are going to be aiming for. For some people, the computer is a part of the whole entertainment center. For plenty of us, though, it's a tool, and the less distracting the better.
iPhone inspired yes, but it doesn't look like some consumer electronics toy that businesses wouldn't use. On the contrary the new look will work very well in business atmosphere's as well as home entertainment. Also who says businesses don't want to look state of the art?
     
VetPsychWars
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
Interestingly, Apple has thrown the *graphics* pros a loop with the new iMac, because while the machines *look* more "pro" and now come with Firewire 800 across the line, the glossy displays are no good for graphics work, because the colors are oversaturated.
I need this explained to me. I've been reading that real graphics professionals are using CRTs, and CRTs don't have matte screens at all, many of them, while assuredly many do.

Colors are colors, and they're either true or they're not. The underlying LCD still has the same response curve, regardless of whatever diffusion you lay over the top of it. Any LCD can be calibrated, as well, and for a graphics professional, more than likely will.

If anything, a glossy screen will be better for graphics professionals, because the LCD isn't artifically blurred by the anti-reflective screen.

Personally, I think this complaint about glossy screens just don't work. Think of photographic prints from the old days... lots more glossy prints than matte!

So, other than repeating what someone else has said (not just you, but anyone)... how do you know that matte is better for anything other than what it was designed for, anti-glare?

Tom
     
ReardenMetal
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by alex_kac View Post
I disagree. The mini is the living room computer. The AppleTV is. The iMac is not.
Then why, oh why, does the iMac have optical out for hooking up to a surround sound system, a massive widescreen LCD, a remote, and frontrow? Do the math.

I think it looks great
That is because you are biased. It looks like a badly adjusted CRT.

The Glossy screens are awesome. At first I hated Glossy, but the latest Glossy screens are very very very good.
No, they aren't. All glossy screens have lots and lots of glare. TV manufacturers strive to REDUCE glare, because it makes what's on the screen easier to see. Why go the other direction? For what reason? Oh, there isn't one. Other than it's cheaper.
     
ReardenMetal
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by kenna View Post
Firstly, how good are the speakers on an old iMac? Is there really a need for more speakers if say you did want to have loud speakers that filled a living room?
Crappy. You can't get good sound out of such small speakers. They will be okay for computer noises, like alerts, but that's about it. They will be pretty horrid for movies, games, and music.

And Secondly, how are the new speakers on the new iMac compared to the old???
Probably exactly the same thing. Crap.
     
ReardenMetal
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by Veltliner View Post
Why did they put in a slower videocard?

Looks like the iMac is now more a lifestyle machine, an entertainment center rather than a serious computer.

I also find that curve of the black frame around the screen does not look good, and it is a definite step away from those great-and-simple Apple designs.
To save money, apparently because they think the only people who like to play games at an acceptable FPS will buy a $2000 mac Pro PLUS an LCD. Screw that.

And yes, the black is ugly. It looks like a badly adjusted CRT.
     
ReardenMetal
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by kenna View Post
Thanks a lot :tu Would you recommend speakers then if you wanted the clear clarity sound for movies and games etc??? Thanks
Yes, and if you have the room, buy an old receiver from anywhere, and a small pair of studio monitors. They'll blow the crap out of ANY set of 'computer' speakers.
     
ReardenMetal
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 03:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by tavin64 View Post
And knowing apple why tout the HD in the radeon HD if you are not going to take advantage of their main feature?
To sell computers. Duh. It sounds good, it doesn't matter if is actually good or not, they will paint it up like it's the best decision ever, you will buy it, and you will LIKE IT! If not, Lateralus will ban you for complaining about it.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 04:01 PM
 
I have this feeling you won't be sticking around here for very long.
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 04:03 PM
 
What's everybody complaining about? It's not like Apple is the first to force the glossy technology in our faces. HP's touch screen AIO is glossy. Sony's AIO is glossy. For the past 3 years nearly every Windows notebook is glossy and the consumer has had no choice. Apple is the absolute last company to get on the glossy bandwagon. Some of you need to stop acting like Apple has burdened us with glossy and it's the first time you've seen it.
     
ajprice
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 04:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by Simon View Post
I have this feeling you won't be sticking around here for very long.
I get the same feeling

Originally Posted by hldan View Post
What's everybody complaining about? It's not like Apple is the first to force the glossy technology in our faces. HP's touch screen AIO is glossy. Sony's AIO is glossy. For the past 3 years nearly every Windows notebook is glossy and the consumer has had no choice. Apple is the absolute last company to get on the glossy bandwagon. Some of you need to stop acting like Apple has burdened us with glossy and it's the first time you've seen it.
Here's a link to an LCD site, Sony's glossy screen equivalent was first released on a Vaio in 2003.

It'll be much easier if you just comply.
     
Meritocracy
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 05:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by tavin64 View Post
How do you know the OSX drivers do not support UVD? Did you write them? Until benchmarks are released there is no way of telling if that is true or not. And knowing apple why tout the HD in the radeon HD if you are not going to take advantage of their main feature?
Both ATi and Nvidia GPUs have dedicated hardware for H.264, MPEG-2, and VC-1 decoding. All Apple would have to do is write drivers for the GPUs they've had in their Macs for years. Still, Apple proves every day that they are apparently reluctant to write said drivers. The fact is ever since hardware DVD decoding was dropped, Apple has relied on the CPU to do the heavy lifting and so far it's been the exact same story with HD video. The GPU has had HD video decoding capabilities from the earlier ATi X1600 era at least and Apple has yet to release drivers making use of this.

I'll be the first to stand up and praise Apple when they prove otherwise.
What exactly is rotten in Denmark?
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 10, 2007, 07:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by ajprice View Post
I get the same feeling



Here's a link to an LCD site, Sony's glossy screen equivalent was first released on a Vaio in 2003.
Your point??? Why the link to the Sony screen technology?
     
ajprice
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 06:15 AM
 
Backing up your point that glossy isn't new just because Apple are doing it now. Sony was an example, nothing more.

It'll be much easier if you just comply.
     
sushiism
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 08:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by ReardenMetal View Post
To save money, apparently because they think the only people who like to play games at an acceptable FPS will buy a $2000 mac Pro PLUS an LCD. Screw that.

And yes, the black is ugly. It looks like a badly adjusted CRT.
I never knew nerds playing computer games are the most important market in the in the world
     
CheesePuff
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 12:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by sushiism View Post
I never knew nerds playing computer games are the most important market in the in the world
It's a huge one though.
     
tavin64
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 01:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Meritocracy View Post
Both ATi and Nvidia GPUs have dedicated hardware for H.264, MPEG-2, and VC-1 decoding. All Apple would have to do is write drivers for the GPUs they've had in their Macs for years. Still, Apple proves every day that they are apparently reluctant to write said drivers. The fact is ever since hardware DVD decoding was dropped, Apple has relied on the CPU to do the heavy lifting and so far it's been the exact same story with HD video. The GPU has had HD video decoding capabilities from the earlier ATi X1600 era at least and Apple has yet to release drivers making use of this.

I'll be the first to stand up and praise Apple when they prove otherwise.
First of all UVD is a new thing existing so far only on the 2400 and 2600 Radeon HD cards. They have only been out on the street for a couple of months. While it may have been true that apple left out the decoding/encoding features of nvidia and ati video cards in the past, UVD is the 2600 HD's biggest selling point. So until actual benchmarks are out, there is no way to know if the drivers actually support it.
     
sushiism
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 01:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by CheesePuff View Post
It's a huge one though.
Console games are huge yes… but the gamer pc market? absolutely miniscule, just because a small bunch of people have a lot of time on their hands to be very vocal on the internet doesn't mean its a massive market
     
Meritocracy
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 03:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by tavin64 View Post
First of all UVD is a new thing existing so far only on the 2400 and 2600 Radeon HD cards. They have only been out on the street for a couple of months. While it may have been true that apple left out the decoding/encoding features of nvidia and ati video cards in the past, UVD is the 2600 HD's biggest selling point. So until actual benchmarks are out, there is no way to know if the drivers actually support it.
I'm familiar with UVD on the new series of ATi cards and its intent. My point is simply that I expect history to repeat itself on this subject. Hell, the last iMac used the x1600 cards whose main selling point was the inclusion of AVIVO technology (MPEG-2, MPEG-4, DivX, WMV9, VC-1, and H.264 decoding and transcoding etc.). Did Apple's drivers support it? No. Will that change this time around with UVD...which ATi essentially states is merely AVIVO w/HD capability? I'd like to think so, but doubt it. You're right in that Barefeats, whose benchmarks arrive next week, and others will help to fully settle the matter.
( Last edited by Meritocracy; Aug 11, 2007 at 03:25 PM. )
What exactly is rotten in Denmark?
     
tavin64
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 11, 2007, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Meritocracy View Post
I'm familiar with UVD on the new series of ATi cards and its intent. My point is simply that I expect history to repeat itself on this subject. Hell, the last iMac used the x1600 cards whose main selling point was the inclusion of AVIVO technology. Did Apple's drivers support it? No. Will that change this time around with UVD...which ATi essentially states is merely AVIVO w/HD capability? I'd like to think so, but doubt it. You're right in that Barefeats, whose benchmarks arrive next week, and others will help to fully settle the matter.
I hear ya on that, and now would the time for apple to get off their butts and actually write some proper video drivers for once. The PC UVD benchmarks are pretty impressive with an average cpu offloading of 15%-20%. This would help imovie users a lot.
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 08:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by VetPsychWars View Post
I need this explained to me. I've been reading that real graphics professionals are using CRTs, and CRTs don't have matte screens at all, many of them, while assuredly many do.
CRTs do have anti-glare coating and for very good reason.

I followed this debate with some interest, unsure where to stand on the issue as I hadn't been able to get out and actually see one of the new Macs first hand.

Now that I have, in fact in several locations, I have gone from impatient lust to buy one to putting my hand right back in my pocket.

This is not some small laptop screen, where you can get away with a miniature shaving mirror experience, because you are largely looking down at the screen. This is a major piece of very shiny glass.

Sitting down in front of both models, but particularly the 24", I was terribly aware of any bright areas behind me. It got even worse when the screen showed a dark background or areas of black (NB the frame is black!). Then I could actually see myself reflected in the screen. This is NOT a machine for anyone in the graphic arts of any description and will prove annoyingly difficult to view for even amateurs just web browsing and doing email anywhere without extremely controlled lighting.

I do not need to buy yet another Mac lemon.

Hopefully Apple won't stubbornly try and force this down their customers' throats but will come to their senses and apply some degree of anti-glare.

How big is the market for narcissists? It's the only area I can see this selling.
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
dbranham
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Raleigh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 04:34 PM
 
Originally Posted by sushiism View Post
I never knew nerds playing computer games are the most important market in the in the world
Hahaha, tell me about it. Science has proved that these nerds are, beyond reasonable doubt, the most vocal cry-babies in the universe. They complain incessantly about anything and everything. This very week, I witnessed a computer-game-nerd given a bag full of money. His response was simply (and tastefully) to initiate a rant, to which there could be no rational response, until the donor became wise to this nerd's negative mentality and hastefully left the premises. I suggest each of you do the same by ignoring all the world's nerds who live to complain (and would, if truth were known, die for a new iMac!)
Old Times There Are Not Forgotten
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 04:49 PM
 
I've been largely without internet for a week, so my only posts here have been 2 "it's fugly"s (the second was unintentional.)

Here are my more in-depth, and changed, thoughts....

The reason I thought it was fugly is because in the promotional material, it looks like the "black-eye" extends all the way to the edges. While I still hate the black ring, as long as the aluminum at the bottom forms a full border, however thin, I can live. I think it looks more attractive now, but I can see the glossy screen being an issue, given that my computer desk has a window opposite it, contributing mucho glare.

The wireless keyboard sucks. I can handle carrying around a number pad, and I would like a number pad, thank you very much, Steve Jobs.

The Mighty Mouse, while fine, doesn't match really with the iMac.

The biggest point is, has anyone realized that there is really nothing better about the baseline iMac? The ONLY differences between the bottom line 20" iMac and the old 20" iMac is the look, a FireWire 800 port, and a graphics card. depending on the exact model, a few more things may differ, but honestly. You can get virtually the same computer now on eBay for a lot cheaper, even when you factor in buying Leopard and iLife '08 for it.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by rubaiyat View Post
CRTs do have anti-glare coating and for very good reason.

I followed this debate with some interest, unsure where to stand on the issue as I hadn't been able to get out and actually see one of the new Macs first hand.

Now that I have, in fact in several locations, I have gone from impatient lust to buy one to putting my hand right back in my pocket.

This is not some small laptop screen, where you can get away with a miniature shaving mirror experience, because you are largely looking down at the screen. This is a major piece of very shiny glass.

Sitting down in front of both models, but particularly the 24", I was terribly aware of any bright areas behind me. It got even worse when the screen showed a dark background or areas of black (NB the frame is black!). Then I could actually see myself reflected in the screen. This is NOT a machine for anyone in the graphic arts of any description and will prove annoyingly difficult to view for even amateurs just web browsing and doing email anywhere without extremely controlled lighting.

I do not need to buy yet another Mac lemon.

Hopefully Apple won't stubbornly try and force this down their customers' throats but will come to their senses and apply some degree of anti-glare.

How big is the market for narcissists? It's the only area I can see this selling.
Well, to be fair, it's especially bad in the store.

I still find the glare on my MacBook annoying under certain lighting, but it's nowhere near as bad in my house as it is at the Apple Store. (I keep my lighting at home much dimmer.)
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 09:33 PM
 
The small screen, low down, of a laptop is no match for the very large area of glass on these iMacs.

The extent to which we all seem to kowtow and compromise to meet Apple's whims is ridiculous. So much has been surrendered, for so long, to Apple's constant and often pointless fiddling, that many in these forums can't even remember when the problems didn't exist.
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
wolfen
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: On this side of there
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 09:46 PM
 
I was adamantly against a glossy screen. But I was dying for an iMac. I didn't know how to reconcile the two. I did not want a white iMac for a number of reasons. Anyway, I went with the new 24". I think the glossy screen is a distraction for about 15 minutes of every day. The rest of the time this screen is a joy. I've got no complaints.
Do you want forgiveness or respect?
     
woodie
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 12, 2007, 10:21 PM
 
It seems the comments on the glassy screen have been: "you get used to it" or "it's not that bad". Some even suggest covering the display with a matte plastic film.

Just to experimemt, I put some glass in front of my monitor to simulate the iMac. Unless I wear black shirts and turn out all the lights, there are reflections that will interfere with photo retouching and illustration.

It seems that Apple's intention was to discourge graphic/photographic pros from using the iMac. They want them to buy the more expensive Pro which now is in sore need of an upgrade.

IMHO
     
rubaiyat
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 01:45 AM
 
Worked for me. I'm not buying the iMac 24" that I had planned.

Unfortunately for Apple I am not going to buy the MacPro either. So it is just no sale.

Long gone are the days where Apple dictated my purchasing decisions.
I look forward to a future where the present will be in the past.
     
I WAS the One
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 09:03 AM
 
Yesterday I saw the iMac for the first time. When I saw it on Apple.com I was looking foward to visit any Apple Store to try it. My First impression was a battle of my fanatic self and my realistic self... My Fanatic side of my brain LOVED IT! (In fact I'm planning to upgrade my MDD G4 with it) but my Realistic side notice a similar appareance to any regular PC out there... the brushed metal look (Aluminum plus glass) looks great on Mac Pros but the iMac was better looking on White. My wife told me It looks nice now, but it was cooler in white, she told me that when the iMac color was white you knew it was an iMac no matter what, and now you need to look twice... that got me thinking... I love the specs, I love the look, but I think is less iMac than before...
Enjoy My Mac Comic @ BLAST COMICS
     
imacman
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 04:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by dbranham View Post
Hahaha, tell me about it. Science has proved that these nerds are, beyond reasonable doubt, the most vocal cry-babies in the universe. They complain incessantly about anything and everything. This very week, I witnessed a computer-game-nerd given a bag full of money. His response was simply (and tastefully) to initiate a rant, to which there could be no rational response, until the donor became wise to this nerd's negative mentality and hastefully left the premises. I suggest each of you do the same by ignoring all the world's nerds who live to complain (and would, if truth were known, die for a new iMac!)
Actually, gaming on a computer is a HUGE market:

http://www.physorg.com/news67831276.html

"Users in the United States spent $1.4 billion on video games for PCs in 2005, according to research released by analysts NPD Group this week. "

And that was in the beginning of 2006. It's even bigger now. The videogame industry is now much bigger than the entire movie industry.
     
lunaticbunny
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 05:30 PM
 
My two nickles...

Finally got to see the aluminum iMacs today. They had the 24" on display. Personally, I find them gorgeous. Great high end look at entry level prices. I feel Apple made the right decision going with this new look rather than sticking with the white plastic.

The keyboard is gorgeous as well. Looking at the new keyboard and comparing to the old style keyboard, the actual surface area of keys look about the same. Honestly, I had no problems using it.

Ah... the glossy screen. Watched a few HD trialers on it, simply eye-popping! Although when the scenes are dark, you do see your good looking self. While browsing on the web, the reflections are quite negligible. Although, I'd still prefer having a matte screen. Especially if you consider using two monitors; one is matte and one is glossy, that'd be kind of annoying.

Anyhow 2 thumbs up.

I picked up the low end 20" for my front office to use. Order a mini for the warehouse. (I use the previous gen 20") Most likely order the 24" for home use when Leopard is out and another one for the front office in the near future.
17" PowerBook 1.33GHz
1GB Ram
     
Mojo
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 05:49 PM
 
Here is a very detailed post at DP Review about calibrating a new iMac monitor: First iMac calibration impressions...: Mac Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

It should give pause to anyone thinking of using a new iMac for photo/graphics work.

One person who worked on a new iMac for a couple of hours reported experiencing eye strain, apparently due to the screen glare. One thing I like about matte LCD monitors is the lack of eye strain I experienced when using a CRT.

Another post I read was interesting... he said that the new iMac screen glare is equivalent to the glare of the white border around the current iMacs, except it is visible on the entire screen. From that description I can tell that I would have a significant problem in my homw office and I am not willing to work in near total darkness in order to accomodate the glare problem.

I am now seriously considering picking up the previous 24" model; it is selling for $1600 at my wife's university bookstore.
     
imacman
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 06:16 PM
 
Seriously, get the previous 24" model. It has a faster GPU, and the CPU can easily be upgraded. Now that apple is hell bent on selling crap outdated GPUs again, I guess I'll start upgrading this model. I'm thinking a dual 3.0ghz Core2Duo sounds pretty good.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 06:31 PM
 
I've been saying, with the old iMac prices going down, get them. The old 2.16 GHz iMac compared to the new 2 GHz iMac is identical in every way but the processor, which is faster. An added bonus is that soon even with the added $208 for iLife and Leopard, they will be cheaper.

Unless your a hardcore glass/aluminum/gloss/firewire 800/ crap graphics fan, you can get more bang for your buck with an older iMac.
     
dbranham
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Raleigh
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 06:56 PM
 
The negative feedback on this glass monitor is astounding. I wonder if that's just a message board phenomenon, or if the general consumer population will echo the concerns I'm reading on here. For the casual user who merely wants a pretty computer, the glass screen might go over well. Anyone know of an online poll that is measuring how people are receiving the glossy display?

Personally, I'm more annoyed by the lack of a number pad on the wireless keyboard and the lack of a magnetic attachment for the Apple remote. Those would have been such simple things to keep (they wouldn't even be additions, for crying out loud, since they were already on the previous models!!). Mark my words, those omissions will become annoying to a lot of folks. The iMac is all about being tidy. So, why make us clutter our desks with number pads and remotes that have no home?

This jury is still out on the glossy screen. I've owned 3 LCDs in my day, and all have been matte. After playing with the new iMacs at the Crabtree Valley store for about 5 minutes, I wasn't bothered. But I did enjoy the brightness.
Old Times There Are Not Forgotten
     
gregarios
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 06:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by CheesePuff View Post
Yea, the glossy is not going anywhere and matte won't become an option in the future.
I hear a good wiping with a Makita orbital sander with 400 grit will fix people's glossy problems for good. ;-)

(Disclaimer: bla, bla, bla)
     
mindwaves
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Irvine, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 07:04 PM
 
I have absolutely no problems with my iMac's glossy screen, but then again, I'm no photographer/image guy.

I love it so far. The black bezel is kind of weird, but looks good in movies as it kind of expands the screen which I think was the main motivation for Apple to incorporate such a design. I would rather have the entire back to be Al color as the front, but ideally, I would rather have the entire computer to be white as before. Looks more elegant IMO. I also wish the keyboard was elevated a bit more.
{{{ mindwaves }}}
     
kenna
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 07:52 PM
 
Thanks for all replies to the speakers! Very helpful indeed!

No just need that extra hundred pounds....hmmmmm

Soundsticks sound great i'll definitely buy them in the long run
     
imacman
Baninated
Join Date: Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 13, 2007, 11:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by mindwaves View Post
I love it so far. The black bezel is kind of weird, but looks good in movies as it kind of expands the screen which I think was the main motivation for Apple to incorporate such a design. I would rather have the entire back to be Al color as the front, but ideally, I would rather have the entire computer to be white as before. Looks more elegant IMO. I also wish the keyboard was elevated a bit more.
Of course you love it. You just spent a bunch of money on it. But that black border really does NOT expand the screen.... when watching movies, I have the lights off or dimmed, and I can't even see the 'white' border around mind, so I really don't know how you're seeing the black scre... OH WAIT! GLOSSY! Duh, you're probably just seeing the glare, the screen is just reflecting the light that the monitor emits in the first place. BRILLIANT!
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 01:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by imacman View Post
Of course you love it. You just spent a bunch of money on it. But that black border really does NOT expand the screen.... when watching movies, I have the lights off or dimmed, and I can't even see the 'white' border around mind, so I really don't know how you're seeing the black scre... OH WAIT! GLOSSY! Duh, you're probably just seeing the glare, the screen is just reflecting the light that the monitor emits in the first place. BRILLIANT!
Oh relax imacman, why do you have to be so sarastic by taking the joy out of someone's new purchase? I'm sure there are plenty of Mac Pro users who are laughing at you for buying the white iMac as many people tend to look at it as a girly toy.
     
Veltliner
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 02:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Here is a very detailed post at DP Review about calibrating a new iMac monitor: First iMac calibration impressions...: Mac Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

It should give pause to anyone thinking of using a new iMac for photo/graphics work.

One person who worked on a new iMac for a couple of hours reported experiencing eye strain, apparently due to the screen glare. One thing I like about matte LCD monitors is the lack of eye strain I experienced when using a CRT.

Another post I read was interesting... he said that the new iMac screen glare is equivalent to the glare of the white border around the current iMacs, except it is visible on the entire screen. From that description I can tell that I would have a significant problem in my homw office and I am not willing to work in near total darkness in order to accomodate the glare problem.

I am now seriously considering picking up the previous 24" model; it is selling for $1600 at my wife's university bookstore.
The calibration tests only confirm what you can see right away when you look at that new glossy screen in the store.

I'm also due to upgrade and consider either one of those last generation white 24", or a MacPro - that means, when Apple finally stops forgetting to upgrade them (It also has, oh wonder, an outdated GPU, and some other features of laid back product development, for which I would not pay premium - which is what you do, when you buy apple).
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 02:23 AM
 
^^^ Hmmm... Exactly what I was afraid of:

Better, but not great and clearly worse than the previous 24" model, cannot compare to the 23" ACD. aRGB images displayed more accurately, gradients were a lot smoother, but still far from the ACD or the previous 24" model

I personally cannot stand the keyboard - it has a nice weight and does not move around on the table, but the keys feel like jelly with no feedback whatsoever

And from another one of his posts:

For professional work I would not consider the new iMac (the glossy display will get me nothing but trouble with employees and unions and increase imaginary sickness and lawsuits - no thanks). Within limitations (or using a second display) it is certainly usable for photo editing and calibration is possible to a certain degree. It is just unfortunate that they degraded (the display part of) the machine that much - the old model was almost perfect, SWOP certified and good for almost anything at any location - with the new model you have to find workarounds and plan carefully where you want to position it.

I used to recommend the iMac to anyone blindly (unless they had special performance requirements) - I will not risk to do that anymore. I will rather tell people to look at it personally.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 02:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by imacman View Post
Of course you love it. You just spent a bunch of money on it. But that black border really does NOT expand the screen.... when watching movies, I have the lights off or dimmed, and I can't even see the 'white' border around mind, so I really don't know how you're seeing the black scre... OH WAIT! GLOSSY! Duh, you're probably just seeing the glare, the screen is just reflecting the light that the monitor emits in the first place. BRILLIANT!
Your car sucks.
     
Simon
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 05:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by imacman View Post
Now that apple is hell bent on selling crap outdated GPUs again, I guess I'll start upgrading this model. I'm thinking a dual 3.0ghz Core2Duo sounds pretty good.
Ranting and spreading misinformation all in one post. Awesome.

No matter how good "3.0 GHz C2D" sounds to you it's not gonna happen. If you care to take a look at your iMac's specs you'll notice that its C2D is a T7x00 series, IOW it's a Merom. These mobile C2Ds max out currently at 2.4 GHz (T7700) or 2.6 GHz if you get a Merom XE X7800. The T7900 which runs at 2.8 GHz is currently being sold exclusively to Apple. A 3 GHz Merom XE isn't even on the road map yet. Overclocking is an option with Merom XE, but I'm pretty certain Apple has suppressed that due to thermal issues in the iMac.

Intel indeed has plans to start selling mobile CPUs at 3.0 GHz later next year (Penryn XE). However from the rumors I've seen, they will require the Cantiga chipset which you don't have in your iMac (Napa chipset). So that's not an option either.
     
JKT
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 07:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by dbranham View Post
The negative feedback on this glass monitor is astounding. I wonder if that's just a message board phenomenon, or if the general consumer population will echo the concerns I'm reading on here. For the casual user who merely wants a pretty computer, the glass screen might go over well. Anyone know of an online poll that is measuring how people are receiving the glossy display?

Personally, I'm more annoyed by the lack of a number pad on the wireless keyboard and the lack of a magnetic attachment for the Apple remote.
The magnetic attachment for the remote is still there (apparently), only it has moved to the front. Also (although it doesn't look like it from the photos I've seen so far), doesn't the wireless keyboard have a keypad that is activated by the fn key, like the laptop keyboards?

Fwiw, Apple already has an internal poll on the popularity of glossy screens - the MBP. My suspicion is that, with the MBP, the glossy screens are outselling the matte by a significant margin and it is for this reason that they feel that they can get away with only offering a glossy option on the iMac.
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 08:41 AM
 
You would think Apple would be smarter than that. A 17" Laptop is a lot different than a 20 or 24" desktop.
     
osxpinot
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 14, 2007, 08:52 AM
 
I saw one of these in the Apple Store, and I've gotta say, I'm pretty unimpressed.

First off, I went in expecting them to be a lot thinner than the white iMacs, but they were not that different.

While the black glass looks pretty cool in the pictures, in person it looks cheap and ugly.

The new keyboard is a total joke. I think they are too damn lazy to design a new mouse, so they had to make the keyboard have white keys. There is no need for white keys or a white mouse when you have a black and silver computer. We have been begging Apple for years to make a pro series keyboard and mouse, but they just sit on their asses and keep this white ****.

There are no notable new features in this machine. First of all, Apple should've built in a battery to this. When a major selling point of a computer is it's portability and ease of installation, then people want a battery so they can move the computer from room to room without shutting it down. Furthermore, when you get into 24" screens, the built-in iSight needs to be on a motor so it can be adjusted. There are oh so many more cool things that this could've had that Apple was too lazy to implement. I feel this was just slopped together. It's been a long time since I've been really excited about a Mac design (Titanium Powerbook was probably the last one). Sometimes I wonder if Apple has lost it.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:16 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,