15" vs 17" iMac

[Slamdunk]

I am about to buy a new computer for personal use, and had set my sights on the 17" iMac, as it had better memory, hard drive, screen, video card and mem (old specs). However, now that new new versions are out, the only real difference is the processor speed (1gig vs 1.25), the video card and mem, and the screen size.

What is the real difference between the 2 systems? is the extra processor and video options worthy of the price hike?

 

[tazo]

If you have any intentions of gaming get the 17" since one you can get it with a bto 160 gb hard drive (great for games), and it will have a better video card. But if all your doing is normal tasks, like websurfing, itunes and occasional photoshop, you might even want to look cheaper at the eMac.

 

[Ambrose Chapel]

it doesn;t look like there are many differences other than those you mentioned...but IMHO the 17" screen alone is worth the extra cost. go to an apple store and take a look in person if you already haven't. that screen is mesmerizing...

 

[eyelikeart]

Personally, I'd opt for a bigger screen & slightly slower processor over the opposite. Having worked on many screen sizes in the past, the 17" widescreen has been the most useful approach so far.

 

[Slamdunk]

I do use it for games as well as home use, so was also wondering about the video card (ie how much better it is over the older version). most people i have asked have said that the larger screen is worth it, but i still feel it is about 500 quid extra for basically a larger (although smashing) screen!

 

[dmcphoto]

I just bought a 15" powerbook and it's quite wonderful. When I'm at home, especially when using Photoshop, I have a 17" CRT connected and run in dual display mode. While the 17" screen is vey impressive, I think the extra size of the 17" Powerbook makes it a bit cumbersome to haul around with you.