Early iMac Reviews Praise Design and Display Enhancements

[PBG4 Dude]

Never mind

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by KurtangleTN

Not trying to be a dick but if you're even semi serious about gaming on a PC you might as well just build your own and get a cheaper iMac, by the time you pay for all the upgrades it's probably going to be a cheaper option than souping up an iMac that isn't going to be able to cut the mustard now and into the future.

I agree it's not a hardcore gamers platform, but it's not exactly a shrimpy performer, either. For people like me, who play games, but aren't building custom SLI rigs to push out games at 8x AA, 16x AF, every option set to the absolute mat at as high a resolution as they can go, it's more than enough.

To me, this new iMac with the 680MX is the first truly do-everything-well Mac I've seen outside the Pro line.

...cept for when you need to swap out your harddrive.

----------

Originally Posted by THOPMedia

Touch screen is even worse for graphic artists and drafters because you need to be able to quickly make pixel perfect clicks and drags with out missing 3 times with your big finger in the way of what you are trying to see to click on.

That's why you use a stylus, which is just as pixel perfect, and much more immediate.

Keep in mind that when I'm talking about touchscreens, I'm also assuming they'll have a digitizer onboard as well. Touch by itself is COMPLETELY useless on a desktop.

[WorldTravelBro]

Originally Posted by paulbennett95

Adopt me please?

I spend very little on my wife. I think I spend more on my daughters and my Chihuahua. My wife gets mad often!

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

The GPU on the high end 27" is pretty damn close to one. You'll easily be able to run just about any game at native resolution with all the settings bumped up about as high as they'll go.

Not even close. The mobile 650m gets 1282 on passmark while the desktop version of the 650 gets 2727. Thats more than a little difference. Not to mention the desktop 650 is hardly high end. In fact even the highest end 675m scores lower than the desktop 650 despite having a higher series number.

675m scores 2490 on passmark.
670 desktop scores 5253.

Even the desktop 640 is faster than the 650m. You can buy a gt 640 for 59.99. So apple gpu is outperformed by 60 dollar parts which is considered entry level for dedicated gpus. The highest end option you can get on the imac is outperformed by the gtx650 which costs less than 100 dollars.

[ChrisA]

Originally Posted by nastri83

I can't help but think that I can undercut apple here and make a profit. Wanna do business??

So you are going to re-implement all of Mac OS X for $2,000? You have to factor in the engineering cost and the manufacturing costs. It took thousands of people working for decades to create all the software.

[iChrist]

.

Well, since the new laminated screen is the best part, I shall await the Thunderbolt Display update.

I would rather have my notebook outside the monitor than inside it

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

Not even close. The mobile 650m gets 1282 on passmark while the desktop version of the 650 gets 2727. Thats more than a little difference. Not to mention the desktop 650 is hardly high end. In fact even the highest end 675m scores lower than the desktop 650 despite having a higher series number.

675m scores 2490 on passmark.
670 desktop scores 5253.

The high end GPU on the iMac is a 680MX, which is about...I think...20% faster than the 675MX.

...maybe I'm overestimating the power of the thing. I guess I'll have to go look it up later and see how right or wrong I am.

[steve119]

Originally Posted by KPOM

There will be a time and a place. Niche machines with the features you describe have been around for years. However, Microsoft is betting that 2012/2013 is when touchscreen desktops become mainstream. Apple is betting that now is not the time. I tend to agree with Apple as far as desktops are concerned. Most users don't need touchscreen desktops right now, and they don't really add much now.

.

I agree but reckon that Siri will be on macs before very long....I feel apple would rather go all Star Trek on us and have us talk to the computer.....probably not great for the business side(imagine the noise levels)but great fun for the personal user.

Also explains the two microphones for noise cancellation(yeah and the FaceTime obviously)

[mw360]

Originally Posted by gpat

I was saying that, even without VAT and every tax in the book, the EU price is still bloated in comparison with the US one.

It's "bloated" by 10%. That's hardly offensive compared to the likes of Adobe's pricing scams.

And besides, that 10% is Apple's buffer against shifting exchange rates. They don't like to change their product pricing during its shelf life. It causes people to hold off for bargains that may never appear.

[Mactendo]

Originally Posted by WorldTravelBro

Purchased 3 fully loaded iMacs. 1 27 for me and 2 21 inchers for my 8 year old twin daughters (they hate sharing).

Mr. WorldTravelBro, the iPads you ordered for your Chihuahua are ready for pickup.
Apple Store Team

[topmounter]

Originally Posted by unlimitedx

maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem too ergonomic to have a touchscreen for a desktop. a tablet.. yes.. but desktop my arms would have to keep hovering in the air frequently to do tasks if i were to really forego the traditional keyboard/mouse

I can't even reach the screen on my 24" from the normal seating position at my desk (ie from a comfortable viewing distance).

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

The high end GPU on the iMac is a 680MX, which is about...I think...20% faster than the 675MX.

...maybe I'm overestimating the power of the thing. I guess I'll have to go look it up later and see how right or wrong I am.

Still slower than everything above and including the gtx660. It also costs a a minimum of 2200 dollars to even get the gtx680. At that price you could afford a much better gpu. In fact at that pricepoint you should be getting multiple gpus and an i7 but your only getting an i5. There is zero benefit that apples new imac design brings the user. No one was asking for a thinner desktop. They certainly didn;t ask for the base price to rise 100 dollars either especially since the thing was already priced too high. The base configs gpu is the equivelent of a 30- 40 dollar gpu. Its a joke considering its in a machine that starts at 1300.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by unlimitedx

maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem too ergonomic to have a touchscreen for a desktop. a tablet.. yes.. but desktop my arms would have to keep hovering in the air frequently to do tasks if i were to really forego the traditional keyboard/mouse

That would be why they didn't try to do a touchscreen

What I loved about this review were things like him claiming it is wider than Apple said. Uh no, they showed the bulge themselves. And the implication Applesaid it is reflection free,which they didn't.

[topmounter]

Originally Posted by WorldTravelBro

Purchased 3 fully loaded iMacs. 1 27 for me and 2 21 inchers for my 8 year old twin daughters (they hate sharing).

Therapists thank you for insuring their job security.

[jmgregory1]

[QUOTE=KPOM;16401503]There will be a time and a place. Niche machines with the features you describe have been around for years. However, Microsoft is betting that 2012/2013 is when touchscreen desktops become mainstream. Apple is betting that now is not the time. I tend to agree with Apple as far as desktops are concerned. Most users don't need touchscreen desktops right now, and they don't really add much now.

Notebooks may be a different story. It will be interesting to see how the Surface Pro and other Windows 8 Ultrabooks fare over the next year or so. They could potentially replace 10" tablet devices as the road warrior machine of choice, though I think that the 7-8" tablets such as the iPad mini will exist as a separate device for a lot longer.

If Apple does add touch capabilities to OS X, it will be to the MacBook line first, not the iMac, and likely as a specialty product. That's my prediction.[COLOR="#808080"]

----------

The idea of touchscreen computers in desktop or laptop form just physically don't make sense from a real-world use sense. Even in the case of the AIO touch screen PC's that tilt so that they operate more like a drawing or drafting table, it's not natural to move from screen touches to keyboard/mouse/trackpad as you physically need to back away from the screen. It might be different if computer use were simply pushing buttons or sliding sliders across a screen, but that is NOT where we are at right now.

Yes, there are use cases like photo or art manipulation that don't necessarily require keyboard input and may be perfect for a touch screen computer form factor that can be used in a horizontal position on a desk, but that isn't the general use case MS is promoting for their touch screen os.

My guess is that the better idea for on-screen manipulation will be the non-touch hand, eye and voice controlled gestures and operations - but technology isn't there yet.

[rdlink]

Originally Posted by sinitry23

Are all four memory slots located in the back near the power cord? Would it make sense to purchase the 27 iMac with 8gb of memory and upgrade my self to save money?

Yes.

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple/memory/iMac

[gpat]

Originally Posted by mw360

It's "bloated" by 10%. That's hardly offensive compared to the likes of Adobe's pricing scams.

And besides, that 10% is Apple's buffer against shifting exchange rates. They don't like to change their product pricing during its shelf life. It causes people to hold off for bargains that may never appear.

Well, 10% is 100€ on a 1000€ purchase or 200€ on a 2000€ one. That's relevant to a lot of people.
And overcharging in order to protect margins from eventual exchange rate shifting does not feel like a very customer-friendly policy to me.
Also, Apple did not hesitate to increase 120-150€ on the prices of Macs when they were forced by the UE to provide a 2-yr warranty for their products, like everybody else does.

[WRP]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

Or this...

Image

...which is the second time I've posted this picture today, in response to the same tired argument.

Most people griping about monkey arms or whatever are only doing so because Steve Jobs said something back in the day, and now they're regurgitating it nonstop in an attempt to look smart.

You know, he was right...when it comes to vertically standing monitors. But for screens you can slide right in front of you and tilt back? There's no reason not to have them touch enabled. They'll be as comfortable to use as an iPad.

No, it's a stupid argument ESPECIALLY for designers like in the picture. A wacom cintiq like have been around forever with a pen is awesome. But putting your grubby fingers on a screen you are designing on is completely stupid.

I almost hit someone for touching my screen trying to point something out to me. "jerkface, your fingers don't belong on my color calibrated screen."

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by WRP

No, it's a stupid argument ESPECIALLY for designers like in the picture. A wacom cintiq like have been around forever with a pen is awesome. But putting your grubby fingers on a screen you are designing on is completely stupid.

That's why I said...

Originally Posted by Me Again

Keep in mind that when I'm talking about touchscreens, I'm also assuming they'll have a digitizer onboard as well. Touch by itself is COMPLETELY useless on a desktop.

Cuz really, what can touching your giant 27" screen with a finger do that your mouse can't? Not a damn thing.

But a touchscreen and a wacom style digitizer? I could be using two fingers to rotate and zoom a picture in PS while drawing directly to the screen. That's awesome.

I almost hit someone for touching my screen trying to point something out to me. "jerkface, your fingers don't belong on my color calibrated screen."

FINGER SMOO NO!

[WorldTravelBro]

Originally Posted by topmounter

Therapists thank you for insuring their job security.

My physical therapist was expensive but I can now walk without any problems.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by longofest

No mention of the RAM or upgrade pricing? I'd say some folks are drinking the coolaid.

I know, he goes to the point of showing where the ram is but stops there.m

Not to mention not showing the computer in action, with perhaps less of his face. And using a soured up unit anyway. On a model that isn't shipping. A review of the baseline 21.5 would have been more useful at this point

[WorldTravelBro]

Originally Posted by rdlink

Yes.

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/apple/memory/iMac

Thank you for this. I did not know I could upgrade my macbook air even further.

[Jeans89]

Originally Posted by WorldTravelBro

My physical therapist was expensive but I can now walk without any problems.

Thats due to a lighter wallet in your back pocket.

[charlituna]

Originally Posted by alfistas

Surely that price can't be right! The same system costs 2.649,00 euros ($3.444,79) in Germany...

1. Import taxes raise prices
2. Apple doesn't adjust for currency every day. More like once a quarter if that (might be only once or twice a year)
3. Every state in the Us has different sales tax so it is never put in prices. Unlike ow the VAT is the same country wide so it's 'in the tag'. Add the percent of your VAT to the US price for a better comparison

----------

Originally Posted by sketchygargoyle

I was about to buy a 27 inch, but noticed its over $100 in sales tax. I was under the impression buying online will void sales tax. There is also a gray-ed out option to pick up in store. Do you think when the 27 inches are available in stores, I will be able to purchase then, tick that box, and go pickup in store before some people that ordered today are even shipped their imacs?

Nope. Many states tax online flat out. Others tax it if the company has brick and mortar in the state.

[scottsjack]

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer

Anyone praising Windows 8 will never realize the total power of UNIX and never mind the quality of materials this iMac provides.

Windows 8 might not be able to "realize the total power of UNIX", whatever that might mean, but on my Mac Pro 3.2 quad it is amazingly more responsive than Mountain Lion. Don't get me wrong, I'm still a big Mac fan but W8 really moves. While W8 Geekbench scores are only a little faster than ML's on Cinebench it's no contest.

In the end it's all about what applications you want to use. Obviously an iPhoto, FaceTime, Aperture fan will need to use Mac OS. For a gamer or Photoshop user Windows would work better.