Anyone disappointed?

[kevin2223]

The previous generations of iMacs (likely current, too) can support 24 and 32GB of memory, although price is quite high. However, prices are already beginning to drop (down $100 for 16GB (2x8GB)/24GB (2x8GB + 2x4GB) and $200 for 32GB) in two months. Still, you'd see more benefits buying a second high-end iMac than buying these upgrades (priced at ~$3K).

You're going to spend ~$600 to $800 on 24 to 32GB of Mac Pro memory, so prices will remain higher there across the board, compared to the iMac memory.

Who knows how affordable prices of RAM become in the future? When the late-July 2010 iMacs were released, it was about $550 to upgrade to 16GB, now it is more than 60% cheaper at ~$200. Apple wanted double that (and 3-4 times that currently) for this upgrade.

What happens when 16GB RAM modules are released and begin to become "affordable" in 2-5 years? Will the iMacs support 64GB of RAM?

 

[iSayuSay]

iMac is king of all-in-one PC .. PERIOD

No HP, Dell, Acer or any industrial PC maker can make all-in-one PC as good as .. they looks fugly, made of cheap plastic, using crappy GPU and CPU, small and slow HDD, puny touchscreen and have Winblows on it.

Yes, granted. iMac may not as good as Dual or Quad GPU counterparts. But in return, they looks as fugly as hell

And of course that ¨super¨ PC would give you insane electric bill as well. Also, AFAIK gaming pc is used for gaming, which hardly give something in return but more and more expense bill. Bad investment item.

Case is different with iMac, it´s beautiful, it´s quiet, it´s relatively energy saver and still can do a decent gaming with high graphic setting, much better than today´s console.
And of course it can be used as productivity machine with low-cost-energy while you working on it

Think iMac is a factory default Ferrari or Aston Martin. And those gaming rig PCs as heavily tuned car like Subaru, Mazda or Mustang on steroid.

Which do you prefer? Tuned car might be faster than stock parts Ferrari, but I´d prefer Ferrari anyday. Thank you

 

[izcóatl]

no matte option?

Count me on the disappointed crowd about the mandatory freaking bright displays. I'll have to wait till the new mac mini.

And in another news, for the person who's asking why people write down their macs in their signature, well, here's the thing: In the ancient days, when world was younger, in the dawn of mankind, when first appeared the black squared monolith, the forums were supposed to be a place where a lot of folks could find help, and it was really annoying asking, and responding, all the time "exactly which model do you have?", "how much ram?", "which OS?", "what processor?", "do you have any peripheral attached somehow to your main machine?" and the like.

So, that's the fascinating and true story about the macs in the signatures.

Cheers

 

[sinser]

Yes, disappointed. The high end 21.5" looks fine for me, but the annoying mirror display is a deal breaker At this point I think we will never see a matte option on the iMacs

 

[theSeb]

Disappointed with 16GB of ram? Really? If you really need that much Ram then jump up to a Mac Pro!!!

It will handle 32 GBs. It's a feature of Sandy Bridge. Apple does not list that because buying four 8 GBs sticks right now is not really feasible.