Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 15, 2013, 08:18 PM   #101
Fifteen20s
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
I purchased my first Apple product ever April ’12, it was my iPhone 4s. I loved it. Soon after I bought an iPad, iMac and now a new MacBook Air.

I have built many of my past PC’s and used to want only the latest and greatest. As I have aged and become busier and more professional in my life I am less concerned with benchmarks and FPS and more interested in functionality, user experience and usefulness.
__________________
Mid 2011 27in 3.4 i7 iMac | 2013 13in rMBP 2.8/16/512 | iPhone 4s
Fifteen20s is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2013, 02:46 AM   #102
Chippy99
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arfdog View Post
What's the saying about fools and money and parting?
There's some weird (i.e. wrong) logic on this thread.

First someone picks $1,000 out of the air. Then it's $10,000. Both figures are wrong.

A really high quality 27" monitor is perhaps $2,000.

Now is that worth it? Well it depends what you want to do with it. Just surfing the web? Maybe not, but it's a personal choice and if you hate clouding, blacklight bleed and other horrors, perhaps it is. I bought an Eizo partly for these reasons.

But the main reason is colour accuracy. If you need to produce photographs or art work and you want the finished output to look exactly as it did when you created it or worked on it, you need a colour-accurate monitor, and ideally with a wide gamut so you can actually see on screen the full range of colour you might ultimately send to the printer.

You will need to calibrate the screen, of course. But you also need one that has consistency of colour across the screen, from side to side and top to bottom. It's not just a case of getting a crap screen, calibrating it, and then it becomes a brilliant screen. Ideally you want the calibration done in hardware (not software), so are you correcting how the screen is performing at its base level.

All of the above costs money, hence the $2,000 price tag. First, they only use the best panels - the ones with no dead pixels and the best uniformity. And they add to this sophisticated electronics and calibration features.

Personally I do NOT think it would have been sensible for Apple to build all this into iMacs. It would probably have increased the base price by maybe $300, for features most people don't need. And if they offered it as an option, it would be like admitting that the standard screen is a bit crap really.

So I think they made the right choice. But that does not mean the iMac screen is superb - it isn't.
Chippy99 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2013, 06:02 AM   #103
Hildegerd
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Norway
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arfdog View Post
What's the saying about fools and money and parting?
Do you mean partying?
__________________
One is a drunk, two is a party.
Hildegerd is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2013, 09:16 AM   #104
gargalen
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: May 2013
I love my iMac. I use it for all my computing / entertainment needs (even watch TV through the Elgato EyeTV). The best part of the iMac is its stability / security (make sure Java is disabled). It's a worthwhile investment.
gargalen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2013, 09:52 AM   #105
jtrainor56
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sinking Spring, Pennsylvania
After 20+ years using a PC I love the fact that I don't have to be bothered with constant updates, freezing up and just the general bull crap associated with PC's. I still us a PC for work since I am a network support engineer and I finally had to install VM Fusion on my iMac for two specific applications, but otherwise I love this thing.

I use mine for the basics plus Lightroom and Steam and pay around with DAZ 3D so it fits my needs nicely.
__________________
2012 27" iMac: i7 3.4GHz: GTX 680 MX: 24 GB RAM; 3TB Fusion HD| Apple TV | iPad 16gb 1st Gen|
Nikon D5100, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
jtrainor56 is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 16, 2013, 03:54 PM   #106
wes2006ag
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Houston
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hildegerd View Post
So the 21" screen is not too small?
I was worried about that as well, but after having my 21.5 imac for a week now I can say that the screen is a very nice size. Full disclosure, I am coming from a 13.3 macbook, so this new screen feels huge. I also think the screen looks alot bigger when its not sitting next to an 27 iMac.
wes2006ag is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2013, 04:47 AM   #107
Hildegerd
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Norway
Quote:
Originally Posted by wes2006ag View Post
I was worried about that as well, but after having my 21.5 imac for a week now I can say that the screen is a very nice size. Full disclosure, I am coming from a 13.3 macbook, so this new screen feels huge. I also think the screen looks alot bigger when its not sitting next to an 27 iMac.
I see your point.
__________________
One is a drunk, two is a party.
Hildegerd is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 17, 2013, 11:55 PM   #108
Arfdog
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippy99 View Post
There's some weird (i.e. wrong) logic on this thread.

First someone picks $1,000 out of the air. Then it's $10,000. Both figures are wrong.

A really high quality 27" monitor is perhaps $2,000.

Now is that worth it? Well it depends what you want to do with it. Just surfing the web? Maybe not, but it's a personal choice and if you hate clouding, blacklight bleed and other horrors, perhaps it is. I bought an Eizo partly for these reasons.

But the main reason is colour accuracy. If you need to produce photographs or art work and you want the finished output to look exactly as it did when you created it or worked on it, you need a colour-accurate monitor, and ideally with a wide gamut so you can actually see on screen the full range of colour you might ultimately send to the printer.

You will need to calibrate the screen, of course. But you also need one that has consistency of colour across the screen, from side to side and top to bottom. It's not just a case of getting a crap screen, calibrating it, and then it becomes a brilliant screen. Ideally you want the calibration done in hardware (not software), so are you correcting how the screen is performing at its base level.

All of the above costs money, hence the $2,000 price tag. First, they only use the best panels - the ones with no dead pixels and the best uniformity. And they add to this sophisticated electronics and calibration features.

Personally I do NOT think it would have been sensible for Apple to build all this into iMacs. It would probably have increased the base price by maybe $300, for features most people don't need. And if they offered it as an option, it would be like admitting that the standard screen is a bit crap really.

So I think they made the right choice. But that does not mean the iMac screen is superb - it isn't.
I agree with that. Apple knows their market, and they know the market wouldn't appreciate $300 worth of some minor bells and whistles (as far as the average consumer is concerned).

Apple does what most companies do, they optimize the cost/performance ratio to a sharp degree, with mass production paying Apple the big profit margins. I'm confident the iMac is pretty much the lowest cost you can pay for the quality of hardware you get, not because they pay for the cheapest components, but because they make/order a lot of good quality components. What sense does it to make a lot of crappy products?
Arfdog is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2013, 03:33 AM   #109
robertosh
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Spain
A lot, i'm enjoying it everyday i use it from the first day. It was my first mac, in fact, it's the only mac that i've bought new. (i have a second hand iBook). Now, i will keep it until the retina iMac comes out.

I'm really happy to use it with the latest OSX release (and i think that 10.9 supports it as well) and with good speed an performance. I can't belive that is a 5 years old machine...
__________________
2008 iMac 24" 3.06Ghz 6Gb 1Tb
2010 Macbook 13.3" 2.4Ghz 8Gb 250Gb SSD
2010 iPod Touch 4G 32Gb
2012 iPad Mini Cell 16Gb
robertosh is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 23, 2013, 06:29 AM   #110
lomenak
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
I got the new 27" iMac 3 weeks ago and I am completely in love! I cant believe that i have been waiting so long to try Mac OS (on PC since 386 so all the way through the all versions of Windows). Now I cannot go back on my work computer without complaining!

The new iMac is absolute pleasure to use, I have nothing to mention that I wouldnt like about it!
__________________
2012 iMac 27" i7,32GB,Fusion,680MX | iPhone 5
lomenak is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC