Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
1066MHz Front Side iMacs Benchmarked
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Glossy Screens?
Does anyone else hate these glossy screens? The matte options are down to Mac Pro or Mac Book Pro which is $500 to $1000 more than the iMac. Looks like Apple is forcing Designers and Photographers to buy Pro machines. I used to get by with the white iMac.
Sucks Sucks Sucks!!!!!!
Does anyone else hate these glossy screens? The matte options are down to Mac Pro or Mac Book Pro which is $500 to $1000 more than the iMac. Looks like Apple is forcing Designers and Photographers to buy Pro machines. I used to get by with the white iMac.
Sucks Sucks Sucks!!!!!!
This really "misses the boat". For most computer manufacturers this would be a product with a lifespan of a few months, at most, to use up the existing supply of motherboards & etc until the next actual improvement comes on line. Apple, on the other hand, will claim this to be a major step forward (when it clearly is not) and will keep selling yesterday's hardware for another nine months. (I really do wish is was wrong about this.)
On the other hand, this may be a "classic" Mac...one that overheats.
On the other hand, this may be a "classic" Mac...one that overheats.
Jeez, the guy just wants to watch movies in what is currently a pretty standard format for the highest definition, and you feel the need to insult him?
What is wrong with you, that you have to insult a complete stranger just because he wants something that is already widely available?
You could choose to simply inform him about what has to happen, the sequence, an expected arrival date... or why it's a harder problem than it seems... or why he's better off sticking to the current DVDs (which is what I do, since I don't like the high price of blu-ray disks one bit)... and you could that in a manner that doesn't make some of us a little nauseous to read.
But no. You have to resort to an insult, and a pretty witless one at that. As someone said elsewhere yesterday, how dull.
Of course, all right-thinking people do.
The matte options are down to Mac Pro or Mac Book Pro which is $500 to $1000 more than the iMac. Looks like Apple is forcing Designers and Photographers to buy Pro machines. I used to get by with the white iMac.
Sucks Sucks Sucks!!!!!!
You'll hear the defenders of the glossies gush forth, and well who am I to tell them that they can't have what they want; if only they showed the same magnanimous attitude towards us... but then they'd be right-thinking people, wouldn't they?
Should you ever have a moment of doubt, of crisis of faith, remember this: the overwhelming proportion of expensive computer LCDs are not glossies (including, naturally, all the ACD's). Why, go to
http://www.apple.com/displays/specs.html
and you will find this line as the only option for the ACD's:
Screen treatment || Antiglare hardcoat
Geez, its not a glossy screen, its friggin glass people, when have you ever seen a matt window, you dont get them, you only get frosted glass and i somehow get the idea that that would not be terribly good for a monitor. Remember good ol' CRT's they were glossy cos they were made of glass and people complained when they got one of these new fangled TFT's that didnt look as shiny.
I don't call Apple the BMW of computers but others often defend Apple's prices in that way. I was being snarky. Both HP and Dell offer BluRay options on their home machines. Apple doesn't.
Quite. You won't find many of them around here willing to speak up about it. If you look at other sites, you'll see that the overwhelming number of people out there seem to dislike the glossy screens.
I've never once seen anyone get nostalgic for the good days of the shiny monitors. I do recall many, many people griping and complaining about eyestrain and headaches prior to LCDs.
I hardly can call my comment as an insult.
Before making a sarcastic comment, people need to make sure that he has enough information in his mind to back the comment up that he/she is about to make. In this case someone just bashed how dull it is that Apple could not offer HD format optical drives. I say that Apple just waited before a HD format has won the war and then many more things has to be updated in order Apple to offer HD on it's machines.
Apple always decides to wait with a technology that has a competitor or is new. I simply cannot tolarate hasty people who whine like little kids and scream that he/she wants something without thinking enough about it.
Its a consumer desktop, and the majority of consumers want a glossy screen, and the way Apple have done it, make it look great with the said screen. A matte screen on the current imac would look retarded.
There is no possibility for blu ray at the moment.
And as already stated, they are using mobile parts, so stop asking for a quad core and ATi 4000 series. Correct me if I'm wrong, but has the ATI 3 series even gone mobile yet.
And if you compare this to the XPS One, this is an absolute steal.
There is no possibility for blu ray at the moment.
And as already stated, they are using mobile parts, so stop asking for a quad core and ATi 4000 series. Correct me if I'm wrong, but has the ATI 3 series even gone mobile yet.
And if you compare this to the XPS One, this is an absolute steal.
Yup... but, I get by... It isnt that big of a deal though but I do prefer a matte screen. Oh well...
Hence you must believe that the Apple Cinema Display looks retarded.
Oh dear. You have just--with great vehemence--referred to one of Apple's most beloved products as retarded. How will you be able to live with yourself now?
Hey, are you waiting for Apple to finally dump its Cinema lineup so you can FINALLY buy a decent monitor from them? And do you think that Apple put out a real loser with the Cinema displays?
Oh boy. I think I am about to propitiate an Apple fanboy meltdown. It's irresponsible, but it's so much fun.
Here we go, time to make little puffs of smoke come out of the ears of the Apple fanboys...
begin Fanboy_meltdown
print "Fanboys, you must rally to the defense of the iMac! You must hail the greatness of the glossy display!"
print "Fanboys, you must rally to the defense of the Apple Cinema Display! You must hail the greatness of the matte display!"
end Fanboy_meltdown
Here we go, time to make little puffs of smoke come out of the ears of the Apple fanboys...
begin Fanboy_meltdown
print "Fanboys, you must rally to the defense of the iMac! You must hail the greatness of the glossy display!"
print "Fanboys, you must rally to the defense of the Apple Cinema Display! You must hail the greatness of the matte display!"
end Fanboy_meltdown
Lame. No matte screen, no Blu-ray, no quad core... And with ATI 4000 series video cards due in a month or so, a two generation old video card. No surprise there.
WTF ? So Apple were supposed to release new machines with a graphics card that's not even available yet ? Somehow, I don't think Steve's Reality Distortion Field extends to performing time travel too....
BTW that graph is comparing all the CURRENT iMac models, not the new ones with the old.
Glossy vs. Matte: I recently bought a matt screen protector for my iPhone. As soon as I'd applied it, I realised why Apple had gone with a glossy screen (ie. glass) in the first place; in certain lighting conditions, the matte screen is LESS readable. It smears out the ambient light and makes what's underneath harder to read. A glossy screen makes it easy to slightly adjust the angle and totally banish any reflections.
My problem with the glossy laptop screens is that they appear to suffer more from colour shifting, although that could be more to do with Apple sneakily using 6-bit displays than anything to do with the gloss finish
My problem with the glossy laptop screens is that they appear to suffer more from colour shifting, although that could be more to do with Apple sneakily using 6-bit displays than anything to do with the gloss finish
Those are some pretty impressive numbers.
Did you run the 64 or 32 bit version?
32-bit. 1TB Striped RAID, 6GB RAM, 8800GT.
Hence you must believe that the Apple Cinema Display looks retarded.
Oh dear. You have just--with great vehemence--referred to one of Apple's most beloved products as retarded. How will you be able to live with yourself now?
I think you're misconstruing. He said the matte screen would look retarded on the current imac.
A built-in monitor doesn't need to be HDCP capable. HDCP encrypts the video stream between the graphics card and the monitor, so that you can't for example record a movie directly from the DVI output of the computer. When the DVI output is not accessible, HDCP is not needed. However, it would only be possible to watch a movie on the internal monitor, not on any external monitor.
why whine if you are uninformed?
OK, here goes. Apple designs their hardware to look different from anything else out there. They then make compromises based on the form factor chosen. If you dont like the form factor DONT BUY IT!
The iMac uses laptop components in order to achieve its slim look. this means at the moment it cannot have quad core or blu-ray. There are no low power quad cores available for mobile sockets. the new 45nm quads are still 95w TDP, too hot for the iMac. Yes there are low voltage Xeons (I think they are 65w TDP) but intel would have to repackage them for the s479 mobile. This is not likely, but not impossible of course. The problem is they are only 1.6Ghz. SO not a good fit into the product line.
Mobile quads are not in Intels road map until next year, using the Nehalem core.
There are no slot-loading blu-ray drives available, period. (yet)
Using the slim form factor also limits the graphic options due to the heat output. I dont think AMD/ATI have a faster mobile option available than the 8800m GTS so Apple have used the best available to them at the time.
Again, choices are limited by form factor.
Apple will never make an affordable, upgradable minitower. There is NO profit in it for them. It will bring into direct competition with Dell and HP, et, who can always undercut them due to volume. I'm so sick of hearing about it. If you dont like the iMac or Mac mini please give up and go and build your own frankenmac. Its not that hard if you know how.
Sheesh
OK, here goes. Apple designs their hardware to look different from anything else out there. They then make compromises based on the form factor chosen. If you dont like the form factor DONT BUY IT!
The iMac uses laptop components in order to achieve its slim look. this means at the moment it cannot have quad core or blu-ray. There are no low power quad cores available for mobile sockets. the new 45nm quads are still 95w TDP, too hot for the iMac. Yes there are low voltage Xeons (I think they are 65w TDP) but intel would have to repackage them for the s479 mobile. This is not likely, but not impossible of course. The problem is they are only 1.6Ghz. SO not a good fit into the product line.
Mobile quads are not in Intels road map until next year, using the Nehalem core.
There are no slot-loading blu-ray drives available, period. (yet)
Using the slim form factor also limits the graphic options due to the heat output. I dont think AMD/ATI have a faster mobile option available than the 8800m GTS so Apple have used the best available to them at the time.
Again, choices are limited by form factor.
Apple will never make an affordable, upgradable minitower. There is NO profit in it for them. It will bring into direct competition with Dell and HP, et, who can always undercut them due to volume. I'm so sick of hearing about it. If you dont like the iMac or Mac mini please give up and go and build your own frankenmac. Its not that hard if you know how.
Sheesh
OK, here goes. Apple designs their hardware to look different from anything else out there. They then make compromises based on the form factor chosen. If you dont like the form factor DONT BUY IT!
The iMac uses laptop components in order to achieve its slim look. this means at the moment it cannot have quad core or blu-ray. There are no low power quad cores available for mobile sockets. the new 45nm quads are still 95w TDP, too hot for the iMac. Yes there are low voltage Xeons (I think they are 65w TDP) but intel would have to repackage them for the s479 mobile. This is not likely, but not impossible of course. The problem is they are only 1.6Ghz. SO not a good fit into the product line.
Mobile quads are not in Intels road map until next year, using the Nehalem core.
There are no slot-loading blu-ray drives available, period. (yet)
Using the slim form factor also limits the graphic options due to the heat output. I dont think AMD/ATI have a faster mobile option available than the 8800m GTS so Apple have used the best available to them at the time.
Again, choices are limited by form factor.
Apple will never make an affordable, upgradable minitower. There is NO profit in it for them. It will bring into direct competition with Dell and HP, et, who can always undercut them due to volume. I'm so sick of hearing about it. If you dont like the iMac or Mac mini please give up and go and build your own frankenmac. Its not that hard if you know how.
Sheesh
So Apple ties itself into a bind by refusing to explore the numerous alternatives, therefore, there is no alternative, because Apple refuses to explore them, therefore, there is no alternative...
This is the sort of thinking that you associate with "being informed"?
I find this rant a bit astonishing. You buy into flawed, restrictive premises, then accuse anyone that doesn't do likewise of being uninformed, ignorant, then you proceed to use love-it-or-leave-it type epithets...
Alas, you don't own reality, anymore than Apple marketing does. Condescending and insulting attitudes don't get you there, either.
Then towards the end of your rant, your delusion drives you to imagine that you are in a position to issue orders: "If you dont like the iMac or Mac mini please give up and go and build your own frankenmac." What ever gave you the idea that we will do what you tell us to do? Just because you're obnoxious, rude and a victim of circular thought?
The iMac is a mediocre overpriced product, riding on the coattails of an excellent GUI. Those of us that see that may continue to criticize it on that basis, no matter how boorishly you shout.
I'm sorry that the critique of a machine makes you feel that you are being personally attacked--else, how can one explain the obvious pain that this critique causes you--but really, it's a machine, outside of your body, your mind, your bloodline... and not worth that emotional bond. Trust me, when we say the iMac is a mediocre machine, we are not commenting on you in the least.
Now go find somebody you can boss around if you must, but your application for that position here is hereby declined.
And?
Well, now you're talking like a whiny three-year-old, but please, don't take that as an insult.
Meaning i think what the OP was saying is you cant have a matte screen behind the current aluminum/glass design of the iMac...it wouldn't work well with for one 'AND' consumers for the most part like the glossy screen and the iMac is by definition a consumer desktop.
Not that matte screens are retarded in general which you were making the OP sound like (twist much?)
Also what's with the attitude?..."and?"...i mean seriously?