Aluminum iMac Disassembled and First Impressions

[armani]

Have you upgraded your version of OSX?

My guess is you either need to install the drivers which came on the CD with the Mighty Mouse, or upgrade (for free, via Software Update) to a version of OSX which includes those drivers.

I upgraded it when we first started the computer. Yesterday I checked for updates and it said there were no updates. That is weird. And there were two cd's only, install disc 1 and 2.

 

[kingtj]

Not that I work for Apple or anything, but ....

I'm still sorry to hear about your problems! I slowly migrated over to Apple products back in 2000 and 2001, when I started working for a guy who was using them. I was blown away by how far they'd come from the "bad old days" of 1996 or so, when I bought a Mac Performa with MacOS 8.1 on it to experiment with. (Ick... I sold it in 2 months and went back to my Windows PCs!)

I'm using all Macs now, save for an old PC full-tower I've upgraded things in here and there over the years, to keep it "viable". But it's quickly becoming little more than a spare computer for my 5 year old to play her Internet kids' games on.

I've had great experiences with the quality of Apple's products, overall, but the few exceptions I had were with newly released products of theirs. (EG. Bought a Macbook Pro in the first month they were released, and it was completely dead on arrival! Then, the second one had battery problems, and then the bluetooth quit working in it a while ago too!) But to Apple's credit, everything was replaced under warranty with good, working equipment.

For what it's worth, reports are coming out that the 24" iMacs have a far superior LCD panel in them than the 20'" models. (Much more contrast, brightness, etc.) Sucks, because I'm just about to buy a new iMac myself, but I just can't quite afford a 24" model right now. I think the higher-end 20" configuration is about right for me.

I just switched over yesterday to mac and bought an iMac yesterday. Very sad to say that my experience has actually been pretty bad. The new iMac is great I bought the 20" 2.4 the only thing is the first one that I bought had a dot on the screen which looked like a dead pixel but when I took it to mac genius they said it was probably that something got stuck in between the glass and the screen.
I got a brand new iMac. It's been working fine today and then guess what? I notice another dot on the screen.

I'm not down with paying 1500 for an apple iMac to have to return it twice already because the screen is screwed up. It's a bit ridiculous to have this happen twice...Not very happy about switching over to apple. http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/mad.gif

 

[BuzWeaver]

They copied the Black and Gray color from PC's.

 

[mongoos150]

They copied the Black and Gray color from PC's.

Yeah. Because gray-and-black was never before used together until PC boxes rolled around. You can't "copy" something as common as a color scheme. That would be like saying Honda copied Ford Motor Company by having headlights on their vehicles.

 

[BuzWeaver]

Yeah. Because gray-and-black was never before used together until PC boxes rolled around. You can't "copy" something as common as a color scheme. That would be like saying Honda copied Ford Motor Company by having headlights on their vehicles.

The irony.

 

[k2k koos]

new iMac is a great deal!

Im impressed with the iMac.

Starting at $1199,-

Now take the Mac mini (base $599,-), add a 20" cinema dispaly ($599,-), add a keyboard and a mouse ($49,- each)
total: $1298,-
YOu get a nice looking system, but with inferior specs to the iMac, for more money..... (slower processor, inferior graphics card, smaller and slower harddisk, no FW 800, no "n' draft airport, need I go on?

Apple should adjust a few prices on the display, and the base Mac mini (both should go down to at least $499,-) And still you'd only be saving about $100,- and get an inferior system. (personally, I think the mini back to 499, and the display should go to 399, that would be highly competitive, and a great package for the money $996,- including keyboard and mouse..., now that is worth considering )

Of course I know that the Mac mini is designed for those switching to the Mac platform, without having to spend high end prices, but still, for those who would like to build their own system with Apple hardware, around a mini, get a bad deal..... and will have to switch to an iMac (be stupid not too)

 

[maccompaq]

Im impressed with the iMac.

Starting at $1199,-

Now take the Mac mini (base $599,-), add a 20" cinema dispaly ($599,-), add a keyboard and a mouse ($49,- each)
total: $1298,-
YOu get a nice looking system, but with inferior specs to the iMac, for more money..... (slower processor, inferior graphics card, smaller and slower harddisk, no FW 800, no "n' draft airport, need I go on?

Apple should adjust a few prices on the display, and the base Mac mini (both should go down to at least $499,-) And still you'd only be saving about $100,- and get an inferior system. (personally, I think the mini back to 499, and the display should go to 399, that would be highly competitive, and a great package for the money $996,- including keyboard and mouse..., now that is worth considering )

Of course I know that the Mac mini is designed for those switching to the Mac platform, without having to spend high end prices, but still, for those who would like to build their own system with Apple hardware, around a mini, get a bad deal..... and will have to switch to an iMac (be stupid not too)

Why not use desktop components, that are cheaper and faster than the components in the Mini and iMac and put them in a mini tower? Apple could buy the mini tower case from Dell and have Dell put on the Apple logo. (Just kidding). Price the Apple Maxi Mini at $599 without keyboard and mouse to make more profit than on the Mini.

 

[Ron Aldrich]

It's also too wide to fit on the left side of the Macbook's screen. Still, there's a magnet to hold the remote. It's useful after presentations. The Pros don't have it tho... I guess it would mess up the aluminum to put the remote up there?

I'm guessing that the main reason they dropped the magnet is because aluminum is a very poor conductor of magnetic fields (it actually is repelled by a magnetic field). If the aluminum is thin enough I suppose it would be possible to get a field through it, but it would take a rather expensive rare earth magnet to do it.

 

[matticus008]

And you continue to go back to the same thing over and over (see the outside comment above). I have not seen anything from you to support your position.

The position that the overblown histrionics are childish and inappropriate? The threads speak for themselves. Why do you feel you have to malign a perfectly sensible, customer-pleasing product in order to make a point?

I understand why you need to rail against reflections--it's the only place you can get traction. Color accuracy certainly doesn't work. Some other, equally destructive acts to color accuracy on matte panels: overbright lighting washing out the panel, adjusting the tilt or cross angle of the panel, adjusting the brightness setting on the panel, switching to a different brand of panel. To top it off, the color gamut on these panels is unimpressive to begin with, and any real professional knows it.

But you see, if you feel the colors are oversaturated, you can recalibrate the glossy display to suit your tastes. You can't fix a consumer matte panel's weaker black levels, lower contrast or brightness limitations.

What I don't understand is why there needs to be validation for your view. Why can't you just say that you don't like them? I don't like the MacBook keyboards. I don't like the MacBook Pro name. I don't like the black Apple logo. I don't need to justify myself by maligning the products and throwing tantrums on the Internet, talking about how this glossy business is inferior, a business disaster, or how I'll be taking my money to another vendor (as if anyone cared), or how it's a conspiracy to get people to buy up, or how it ruins my life with a piece of broken technology. None of that is true. If you could do your "professional" graphics work on the old iMac, you can do it on the new one.

Again, popular doesn't equal better. And I doubt the "it's the glossy ones" statement based on personal observations.

Popular also doesn't equal worse. Your "personal" observations about PCs and HDTVs is also contrary to your view: Samsung's best-selling HDTVs are glossy. Plasma panels are glossy. Most LCoS DLPs are glossy. Glossy PCs and glossy HDTVs outsell matte ones in the consumer bend, and it's obvious to see why.

Suppose the glossy offerings existed first, and these matte ones were the new option. Would a consumer say "yes, please, give me weaker colors, grey-blacks, lower brightness, worse contrast, and a harder-to-clean and less durable surface"? Of course not. The few people truly bothered that much by the occasional reflection might well choose them, but most people are capable of making the proper adjustments.

If a business made a choice to offer just one, it's pretty clear which would be the better choice for the widest audience. Hence the iMac.

I bet in the same place that you can find "dozens of threads about skeptics who changed their mind after a few days from when the glossy displays first became available. "

You're evading the question, but I'll take the bait:
Here
here

Here
Here
Here

Not to belabor the point or anything, but the number of people switching back to matte after having owned or used extensively a glossy one...well, you can basically count them on two hands. The detractors are basing their expert opinions on photos and Apple Store walk-bys.

If it was such a magnificent invention, why are the high end panels predominantly matte panels?

Because professional panels have different needs and are used in controlled environments. The lighting is designed, the screens are professionally calibrated using tools more expensive than your computer, and they are not touched or tweaked. Consumer panels are meant to be used in the home, outside of lab-like control, and people neither want to pay nor care for the color accuracy offered by high-end displays. You know this because even if you step away from the glossy v. matte issue, the color gamut and product consistency are inferior from the outset.

 

[mavherzog]

I'm guessing that the main reason they dropped the magnet is because aluminum is a very poor conductor of magnetic fields (it actually is repelled by a magnetic field). If the aluminum is thin enough I suppose it would be possible to get a field through it, but it would take a rather expensive rare earth magnet to do it.

Just stick the remote on the front edge (much like you'd do with a MacBook). The magnets that hold the glass in place should be able to hold the remote as well. (just a guess as I don't have a new iMac)

 

[greg555]

I'm currently using a ViewSonic PF790 CRT. It has some sort of real AR (anti-reflection) coating on it. If I shine my flashlight at the screen I see a fairly dim blue-tinted reflection except where the kids have put finger prints on the screen. There the quarter-wave coating is no longer quarter-wave and I get a white reflection.

So it is possible to make a glossy screen that doesn't have a lot of reflections. I have one.

I have also used glossy CRTs that don't have AR coating and they are annoying. I.E. you can see the reflection of your white shirt in the dark portions of the screen, etc.

Cheers - Greg

I don't see what everyone's problem is with the glass. We all used CRT displays with glass screens back in the day, but I don't recall anyone complaining about those.

People who call off their purchase because of something so trivial have issues.

 

[wyrmintheapple]

Hmm, don't like glossy screens...I'll have to see it in person.

24in, full HD, decent graphics, ability to dual boot Windows (when will Boot Camp allow Linux dual booting/triple booting? Will the 'final' BC have this?). This iMac's starting to sound pretty good, and good value compared to Macs of old. Still don't know if it's value enough compared to PCs though for my next computer.

You CAN dual boot/triple boot linux. When you put the XP CD in the drive, once boot camp has made your new partition it restarts and boots the XP CD to start the install. Pop in a Linux disk, hold down C and install to the Partition BootCamp made. Real simple.
BootCamp does not DO anything other than repartition the disk and make you a driver CD. Windows does not run IN or UNDER BootCamp. The firmware on the intel Mac's now contain a CSM for Booting with BIOS support and they'll actually do this without BootCamp, or even having Mac OS anything installed. No, the final version of BootCamp will not support Linux, since the only thing preventing it running Linux is your lack of understanding of what BootCamp actually does.

 

[gregorsamsa]

Wow! What a difference the "old" keyboard and a matt screen make. It's no contest from where I stand in the Palo Alto Apple Store. This keyboard rocks and I just got my Bluetooth version today that I ordered yesterday from the refurb store for $49 after I saw what is replacing them yesterday morning.

There are ZERO reflections from behind me and looks plenty bright to me. I gotta stick with matt for the rest of my life so I guess I won't be buying any iMacs for this lifetime anyway. My keyboards need to have real traveling distance and cups for my fingers to feel rested in before they press down a significant distance. The "new" iMac is probably the WORST new Mac to come along since I can't remember when. Total disaster from where I stand.

Agreed. Of course it's about personal taste, etc., but every previous Mac I can remember has said "wow" to me; these new iMacs just jar my perception. Unsightly PC towers hidden under one's desk is one thing, but being unable to appreciate the design/style of the AIO atop your desk for years to come, well, a purchase is very unlikely in these circumstances. I could live with the black Apple sign & rear panel, but that black frame... if only consumers had a choice here.

Apple have given us some aesthetically timeless-looking computers, but these just remind me of certain inexpensive LCD TVs that have been around for years & which I wouldn't buy in any circumstances. I'll therefore be looking to buy either a new Mini or a refurb white iMac instead.

 

[TBi]

(Unfortunately, I don't have the option of visiting an Apple Store, not without flights anyway..)

The O2 store on Pana will hopefully have one on display soon. Or else maybe one of the many 3 shops which have mac's!

 

[Thunderbird]

The position that the overblown histrionics are childish and inappropriate?

Which overblown histrionics?

What I don't understand is why there needs to be validation for your view. Why can't you just say that you don't like them?

Many people are saying they don't like them, and giving reasons. Apparently you don't like THAT.

I don't need to justify myself by maligning the products and throwing tantrums on the Internet,

What tantrums? Talk about strawmen.

or how it ruins my life with a piece of broken technology.

Who said glossy screens ruined their life? Now who's being melodramatic

Not to belabor the point or anything

You've been belaboring the point over several posts in different threads. Why do YOU feel the need to keep trying to validate your defense of glossy screens? Try look in the mirror (or glossy screen) before chastising other people for what you yourself are doing.

The detractors are basing their expert opinions on photos and Apple Store walk-bys.

B.S. People who don't like glossy screens are basing their opnions on actually viewing them, first hand, with their own eyes. The reason they haven't switched back is because they chose not to buy the glossy screened computers in the first place.

 

[k2k koos]

iMac PRO

I guess the road is open to an all Black iMac, with silver (brushed ALu) Apple logo on the front, and as Steve said these new iMacs look more Pro than the previous line up, perhaps an all Black version is the PRO of tomorrow...
Even if it isn't , I'd sure like to see a black one released, it would blend that screen in very nicely

 

[wilmor42]

Sooo...
for those of you that have seen the original link on the first post..

i guess if the glass part of the screen is only held on by magnets then its feasable to suggest that some company could in the near future manufacture a not so glossy or indeed matte subsititute replacement part for these new machines.. there's some money to be made there for sure.. im sure people that prefer a matte screen (i know i would im planning on hooking one up to my 20" ACD and i dont really like the idea of having one glossy screen and one matte-just asking for some eye trouble there) would invest in such a product, what do you think?

next.. how to get rid of that awful black apple logo ...
perhaps a light brush of a small angle grinder could improve the look..

 

[matticus008]

Which overblown histrionics?

"is Apple really trying to kick all their cheap stuff down so that students like me who work with graphics and digital arts HAVE TO get those professional macs?"
"The problem is that with a 24" mirror in front of you, you will always see the reflection of *something* no matter which way you point it."
"Try staring at it 14 hours a day, 6 days a week and tell me how your eyes are."
"It is cheaper to build glossy LCDs...The glossy displays will bring you headaches for free!"
"I just can't stand glossy screens and would not buy a glossy Mac. Why Apple doesn't listen to its users?"

There's just a brief selection for you of all the posts you seemed to have skimmed over when choosing to respond here. Either you don't know what histrionic means or you have some bizarre sensitivity that includes my posts, which are calm and rational. I haven't attacked matte panels. I haven't attacked people for liking matte panels. The same can't be said for the other side in this argument.

Who said glossy screens ruined their life? Now who's being melodramatic

"This just pushes people who use their macs all day up past the $3000 bracket if they want a decent-size screen. "It's an all-in-one world", so long as you don't use the computer for too long (or in an office)"
"WHY are they forcing glossy displays on their "consumer" models? [...] What, "consumers" are supposed to suffer with horrid reflections all the time?"

I can keep going about the evil conspiracy and give you some of the posts about people threatening to take their money elsewhere and how they're being forced away from Macs to do their "professional" work on midrange displays with mediocre color gamuts.

You've been belaboring the point over several posts in different threads. Why do YOU feel the need to keep trying to validate your defense of glossy screens?

I'm not validating anything. It's called counterpoint. As I've said countless times, it doesn't matter what your preference is. I use both types of displays. It does matter that people are trying to convince others that they're inferior, broken technology. They're not. It's as simple as that.

People look to these forums for advice and buying tips, and if all they hear is the dull roar of some people complaining about a display technology they've never actually used, spreading myths and complaints that simply aren't true, those potential customers will get bad information. A glossy panel is in no way technically inferior to a matte panel. They're not cheaper, lower-quality, or less useful to "professionals" than any other relatively low-end panel. The only flaw, and an overblown one at that, is that shiny things reflect. But it's not a mirror. It's a light source, which counters almost any glare that would be produced on a glass mirror.

The reason they haven't switched back is because they chose not to buy the glossy screened computers in the first place.

...and therefore do not have the requisite experience to make determinations for others. The people that have owned and used them extensively have delivered quite strong support on the whole. Does it seem valid to you that people who have never owned a Macintosh should come on here and tell everyone to buy a Dell because they couldn't figure out a Mac in the five minutes they spent with one in the store?

 

[maccompaq]

I was hoping for a new Mac Mini Maxi, but no luck. All of my Macs and Compaqs are user serviceable, and I have had to replace hard drives and optical drives in them myself. Because I really want to have a new Mac when Leopard is released, I will probably have to buy an iMac. A Mac Mini is lacking and a Mac Pro is overkill.

Reading about the crisp display on the glossy iMac, I am anxious to have a look at it. Also, I want to try out the new keyboard for myself. Then I will make my own judgement about the screen and the keyboard.

I recently read a post by someone here: "Do not buy iWork 08 because Numbers does not do error checks on extreme scientific calculations". I wonder how many people will now avoid the marvelous new iWork because of that careless post. Probably 99.9% of users would not even use a function like that or even be aware that it exists.

 

[3D-Troll]

Checked out the new iMac in the store, they finally had them on display. All I could see were lights and iPhone displays. The glossy display is just awful.
As for the keyboard ... I never really like the Apple designs, I got the Logitech Mac keyboard and mouse combo and like it a lot.

Steffen

 

[Thunderbird]

"is Apple really trying to kick all their cheap stuff down so that students like me who work with graphics and digital arts HAVE TO get those professional macs?"
"The problem is that with a 24" mirror in front of you, you will always see the reflection of *something* no matter which way you point it."
"Try staring at it 14 hours a day, 6 days a week and tell me how your eyes are."
"It is cheaper to build glossy LCDs...The glossy displays will bring you headaches for free!"
"I just can't stand glossy screens and would not buy a glossy Mac. Why Apple doesn't listen to its users?"

There's just a brief selection for you of all the posts you seemed to have skimmed over when choosing to respond here. Either you don't know what histrionic means or you have some bizarre sensitivity that includes my posts, which are calm and rational.

Sounds like you don't know what histrionic means. Either that, or you are hyper-sensitive to any form of disagreement and simply see drama everywhere. Histrionic NOUN: Overemotional exaggerated behavior calculated for effect: dramatics, melodramatics, theatrical (used in plural), theatrics. See FEELINGS, STYLE.

None of the quotes you selected are examples of histrionics. The first quote is merely rhetorical, questioning Apple's motives for their product positioning. It may be conspiratorial, but not histrionic. The second is making a claim about the mirror-like quality of the glossy screen --which may or may not be true; the third is an example of sarcasm, as is the fourth; the fifth quote is stating an opinion and again asking a rhetorical question. No melodrama, nothing "overblown", no hyper-emotionality. Nothing to see here... move along.

I haven't attacked matte panels. I haven't attacked people for liking matte panels. The same can't be said for the other side in this argument.

But you've attacked people who dare to complain about glossy panels:

"Most persnickety whiners have never used them, but even worse can't seem to grasp the relatively simply science that disproves their biggest gripes."

"This just pushes people who use their macs all day up past the $3000 bracket if they want a decent-size screen. "It's an all-in-one world", so long as you don't use the computer for too long (or in an office)"
"WHY are they forcing glossy displays on their "consumer" models? [...] What, "consumers" are supposed to suffer with horrid reflections all the time?"

And you think this expression of frustration with a display is equivalent to saying "their lives are ruined?" Can you not see the exaggeration you have projected onto this?

I'm not validating anything. It's called counterpoint.

Right, it's always different when you do it. Then allow other people the same opportunity for their "counterpoint" without interrogating their motives.

People look to these forums for advice and buying tips, and if all they hear is the dull roar of some people complaining about a display technology they've never actually used, spreading myths and complaints that simply aren't true, those potential customers will get bad information.

But it's not "all they here". As you yourself pointed out, there are a lot of posts by people who rather like the glossy screens and are quite happy with them. There is no shortage of positive reports. Others state they don't like the reflections in a glossy screen: how is this "bad information"? It's one thing to correct someone on technical matters, but who's to say their visual preference is incorrect?

...and therefore do not have the requisite experience to make determinations for others. The people that have owned and used them extensively have delivered quite strong support on the whole. Does it seem valid to you that people who have never owned a Macintosh should come on here and tell everyone to buy a Dell because they couldn't figure out a Mac in the five minutes they spent with one in the store?

Your analogy doesn't hold, as nobody here is telling other people they SHOULD buy a matte screen. No one is making determinations for others. You seem to be reading too much into what people are actually saying on this topic, not to mention how they are saying it. Nor is technical proficiency at using program applications analogous to visual preferences for screen coatings. If some people are really bothered by the reflections from a glossy screen, something immediately noticeable, then there is no need to accuse them of never having used one or experienced them, much less not having owned one.

Most of the people who have posted negative reports have stated their reasons, and most of those have based their judgements on first hand direct experience. It's simply offensive to accuse them of not having used a glossy screen or had no experience with one. Indeed why would someone who disliked glossy screens after using one in a store or at a friend's go out and buy one? Just to see if they could get used to it? That's an expensive gamble. The people who ended up buying glossy screens are the ones who, likewise tried them out in a store or at a friend's and decided they liked them. Naturally, those who bought them, liked them. But you don't need to buy one to decide whether you like them or not. That makes no sense.

 

[matticus008]

None of the quotes you selected are examples of histrionics.

If those aren't, then certainly none of mine are, and yet you seem to perceive differently.

But you've attacked people who dare to complain about glossy panels

That is not an attack. It's an observation, and nowhere does it lump "people who complain about glossy panels" into the group of people being discussed.

And you think this expression of frustration with a display is equivalent to saying "their lives are ruined?" Can you not see the exaggeration you have projected onto this?

Do you need more quotes? Having to buy a $3000 computer to get a decent screen isn't overblown and exaggerated? Refusing to buy an iMac and getting a PC for "professional" work because the iMac is glossy isn't a grotesquely overblown way of creating drama? Calling the machines useless isn't melodramatic? You sure have some twisted definitions. "I'm a longtime Mac user and I'll never buy another Apple again if they don't give us a matte iMac/complaint du jour" is a common theme on these threads, and it's overblown, childish, and histrionic. If you don't like something, don't buy it. Feel free to say you don't like it. But don't try to make other people think the product is broken just because it's not your taste.

Then allow other people the same opportunity for their "counterpoint" without interrogating their motives.

Then do it. No one has backed up their complaints of inferiority with rational information, because there is no such deficiency.

It's one thing to correct someone on technical matters, but who's to say their visual preference is incorrect?

I wouldn't know. I have stated countless times that visual preference is an unobjectionable personal choice. My problem is with the accusation that the displays are worse in some tangible way, which is, again, clearly stated.

then there is no need to accuse them of never having used one or experienced them, much less not having owned one.

There's no point for them to claim that these displays are a step backward either, or that they're inadequate in any technical measure, but you don't seem to have a problem with that.

But you don't need to buy one to decide whether you like them or not. That makes no sense.

You're arguing a point no one's making. The people I take exception to are calling them technically inferior products worthless for people who use computers for more than ten minutes at a time, and it's wrong. They're not simply saying "I don't like them." They're saying "no one should like them and anyone who does doesn't know what a good display is and we want them gone forever."

 

[Maxx Power]

They should have used the back panel as a heatsink with fins to passively cool some of the components, that was my idea a while back for an integrated computer.

Also, NeoVo was one of the first (if not THE first) company to offer glass protected LCD monitors, but unfortunately their products didn't do so well. People who first picked up on the whole LCD technology were really fed up with the glare of the CRT's. I was my self.

The right direction to go would be to go with tri-coloured LED backlit panels with a colour gamut much much greater than an conventional CRT, or OLED's, or even a very mundane technology by Samsung whereby the backlight is LEDs on a grid, and each 64x64 pixel grid's backlight LED can be individually adjusted in brightness to correlate with the relative black-level in that 64x64 grid, that technology looks better than most tube TV's.

 

[Frisco]

Bottom line: Apple F*cked up big time. Many companies are now buying PCs because of the matte iMac screen. They need the matte screen and simply can't afford the MacPro.

I will be switching myself-making a 360 myself--bad pun intended. Apple is no better than Microsoft. I choose MS because I have more choice, for less $

Think Different

 

[appleforever]

No Back Panel on 24"

You sure about there? The store I work at has the last gen 24inch on demo and the back comes off to access the hard drive.

I know for fact the back doesn't come off on the 24" you must open the computer from the front. And remove the LCD to access the hard drive.