Apple Releases New iMacs

[CWallace]

I would not be surprised if Boot Camp was driven by the idea of giving Windows users access to Windows for the handful of applications that either do not exist on the Mac ("vertical market") or where an acceptable OS X analog does not exist.

I would be surprised if Boot Camp was driven by the idea of allowing Mac users to boot Windows to play video games under that OS.

Hence the focus on not having the "latest and greatest" video cards as BTO options...

I expect Apple's view is if you really want to play Windows video games, buy a Windows machine for that purpose and use the Mac for other functions.

 

[macrumorino]

1 - iMac $2199
2 - consumer lvl desktop from alienware with very similar specs - $1998 (and that includes a 24" samsung monitor) add shipping which is free at Apple and you are set at around $150 difference.

Now $150 difference and very similar specs.

Now answer yourself one question. Do you prefer a system that you can easly upgrade in the future but use Windows only or go few $ more and enjoy both worlds at the same time with a million less software trouble.

Question is why you call hi end iMac weak cause for sure last refresh made it far above good if not awesome. Ignorance?

"Ignorance?" I see, you argue by insult.

As long as we're on the topic of ignorance, why do you ignore the more obvious comparison? The stock model here,

http://alienware.com/Configurator_P...SysCode=PC-AREA51-7500-R5&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

(heavens only knows how long that link will continue to work, but it's the Alienware Area-51 7500 stock model) well, this stock model ships at $1200, which is $268 cheaper than the cheapest 20" iMac after you slap on three years of Applecare. Now, the Alienware comes with a mere one year warranty, and you'd have to spend an extra $190 for the next two years... but you don't have to, because... yes, you guessed it...

UNLIKE THE IMAC, YOU CAN SERVICE IT YOURSELF.

In my book--and, I suppose, you might think it a consequence of my "ignorance"--that is a superior design, and trivially so.

There is more to be said, of course. The Alienware lets you choose whatever monitor you want, so you can spend less than $200 for a monitor that is vastly superior to the iMac's,

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824112007

or, or course, spend around $600 for something more or less as nice as the 23" ACD.

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE FROM THIS "IGNORANT" RANT:

You can also, sooner, or later, as you desire, add one, two, or three hard drives. Hey, just like with a Mac Pro! And, later, you can upgrade the video card... well, maybe like with a Mac Pro (if Steve gets around to giving you the drivers, a linux-like experience that all "knowledgeable" Apple people seek to avoid). And the RAM... well, it seems that this is the one place where the Alienware machine is a bit sucky, as it only goes up to the same 4GB of RAM as the iMac.

There's other considerations, of course--e.g. the possibility of upgrading the CPUs as time goes on, or the superior ventilation of that case over the all-in-absurdly-skinny-one design of the iMac.

And if you fritz your monitor--or your best friend hits it with his beer mug--hey, you don't have to toss your entire computer, you just replace the monitor and you are on your way to post another "knowledgeable" followup on macrumors!

Wow, how "ignorant" of us, to imagine that this option could possibly trump the option for an iMac.

You know what would close the deal, of course: the ability to run OSX. So if this thing can be hackintoshed, that's it, end of argument, obvious superior choice for less money. For now, Steve makes that a bit tricky; if he makes it even harder, then maybe we'll start to reconsider whether it is better to continue to put up with inferior--yet expensive--hardware for the sake of an ever-inclosing OS X, or to bite the bullet and dive (back, for some of us) into linux.

But I suspect that the hackintosh idea will continue to be technically viable, and to the extent that "knowledgeable" iMac shoppers continue to pony up too many dollars for inferior hardware, then the "ignorant" rest will have the opportunity to hack their machines to boot whatever OS they want.

 

[mjsla]

http://www.betanews.com/article/Intel_denies_new_iMac_has_new_Montevina_platform/1209573561

"Is it a first peek at an entirely new class of Intel CPU that Apple is offering in its latest refresh of iMacs, or is it an older class of CPU that is being overclocked at customers' requests? Intel is indicating that the iMac's new high-end CPU is neither.

The latest round of the old "telephone game" amid several online news sources yesterday resulted in two unusual interpretations of Apple's news on Monday that its top-of-the-line iMac was getting a speed boost to 3.06 GHz.

One interpretation was that Apple was getting first pick of Intel's forthcoming Centrino platform architecture, code-named "Montevina;" and some sources actually went ahead and clicked "Publish" on that story.

But as an Intel spokesperson told BetaNews, the new 3.06 GHz option -- which customers may request in place of the standard 2.83 GHz processor -- is a 45 nm Penryn-class Core 2 Duo CPU. It is not, therefore, the yet-to-be-released X9100, which will be a Core 2 Extreme at 3.06 GHz that supports the 1066 MHz front-side bus.

What was missed in all the confusion were several factors, the most obvious one being that the X9100 would require an entirely new chipset. The Montevina architecture doesn't run on the iMac's current Intel Santa Rosa chipset. It awaits an entirely new chipset, code-named "Cantiga," which is still slated for release in this quarter according to Intel's current roadmap. But for iMac buyers to have requested a swap from the standard 2.8 GHz chip to the X9100, they would have naturally had to have requested an entire motherboard swap.

In an attempt to remove the egg stains on account of that obvious omission, some blogs yesterday alleged that the 3.06 GHz chip actually is the 2.8 GHz chip, just overclocked -- set to run at a clock speed higher than the factory recommendation. That would contradict reports stating that Intel spokespeople specifically said it provided Apple with a special SKU of an existing E8xxx-series chip, one that supports the iMac's (non-swappable) G965 Express chipset.

A check of Intel's parts specifications reveals that running a 45 nm on a G965 chipset was a special feature to begin with: The 45 nm Penryn-class E8xxx series processors weren't rated for the G965 Express anyway.

So it should not therefore be any feat of rocket science for Intel to do whatever it does to its 2.83 GHz E8300 for Apple, to its 3.06 GHz E8400 instead. Still, the mess of mangled misinterpretations has become so thick that Intel is going back to the drawing board on its public interpretation of the news, and may yet have a clarification for BetaNews later today.

Meanwhile, Apple itself has gone completely silent, perhaps in hopes that saying nothing (which it already knows how to do quite well) may make the misinterpreted news just go away."

 

[D4F]

"Ignorance?" I see, you argue by insult.

As long as we're on the topic of ignorance, why do you ignore the more obvious comparison? The stock model here,

http://alienware.com/Configurator_P...SysCode=PC-AREA51-7500-R5&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

(heavens only knows how long that link will continue to work, but it's the Alienware Area-51 7500 stock model) well, this stock model ships at $1200, which is $268 cheaper than the cheapest 20" iMac after you slap on three years of Applecare. Now, the Alienware comes with a mere one year warranty, and you'd have to spend an extra $190 for the next two years... but you don't have to, because... yes, you guessed it...

UNLIKE THE IMAC, YOU CAN SERVICE IT YOURSELF.

In my book--and, I suppose, you might think it a consequence of my "ignorance"--that is a superior design, and trivially so.

There is more to be said, of course. The Alienware lets you choose whatever monitor you want, so you can spend less than $200 for a monitor that is vastly superior to the iMac's,

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824112007

or, or course, spend around $600 for something more or less as nice as the 23" ACD.

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE FROM THIS "IGNORANT" RANT:

You can also, sooner, or later, as you desire, add one, two, or three hard drives. Hey, just like with a Mac Pro! And, later, you can upgrade the video card... well, maybe like with a Mac Pro (if Steve gets around to giving you the drivers, a linux-like experience that all "knowledgeable" Apple people seek to avoid). And the RAM... well, it seems that this is the one place where the Alienware machine is a bit sucky, as it only goes up to the same 4GB of RAM as the iMac.

There's other considerations, of course--e.g. the possibility of upgrading the CPUs as time goes on, or the superior ventilation of that case over the all-in-absurdly-skinny-one design of the iMac.

And if you fritz your monitor--or your best friend hits it with his beer mug--hey, you don't have to toss your entire computer, you just replace the monitor and you are on your way to post another "knowledgeable" followup on macrumors!

Wow, how "ignorant" of us, to imagine that this option could possibly trump the option for an iMac.

You know what would close the deal, of course: the ability to run OSX. So if this thing can be hackintoshed, that's it, end of argument, obvious superior choice for less money. For now, Steve makes that a bit tricky; if he makes it even harder, then maybe we'll start to reconsider whether it is better to continue to put up with inferior--yet expensive--hardware for the sake of an ever-inclosing OS X, or to bite the bullet and dive (back, for some of us) into linux.

But I suspect that the hackintosh idea will continue to be technically viable, and to the extent that "knowledgeable" iMac shoppers continue to pony up too many dollars for inferior hardware, then the "ignorant" rest will have the opportunity to hack their machines to boot whatever OS they want.

Yes you can do it all and I stated it clearly what's the decision you have to make between Mac and OS X. So please read better next time.
Besides what you see is only numbers that I don't really care about as workflow is way more important to me than 'top of the line system with a crap as hell software'. And since I know it from experience your explanations don't mean anything to me as I know I am right.
I will do a lot more on a slower system runing OS X than superb setup on Windows. And that IS WORTH the $$ I pay.

 

[crockett]

i would have a hard time choosing between:

a) a top of the line imac

or

b) the cheapest mac pro, and then getting an old CRT for free

the prices would be comparable, and the CRT would be a better display than the imac display, which for me is the biggest turn off. but the imac would have the better gfx card and bigger HD...

You can do that now.. You can buy a refurb Mac Pro for the same price as the high end iMac.

 

[s1m]

You can do that now.. You can buy a refurb Mac Pro for the same price as the high end iMac.

Aren't you buying a different form factor though?

I got approval from mrss1m to buy a new iMac (still in the budget stages) and the first iMac partly because of the form factor. We don't have a tower on or under the desk which gives us more space. Also I am not reaching down below the desk everytime I want to put in a disc etc.

I dont think I could get a tower comp through the approval process in future and for my own needs the top end iMac meets the system requirements (some gaming but not high end FPS) and is supplemented by a WIi and Xbox360.

The same comparison between a iMac and ALienware super machine is for me flawed as the form factor is a consideration.

 

[macrumorino]

Yes you can do it all and I stated it clearly what's the decision you have to make between Mac and OS X. So please read better next time.

You insulted another poster by stating that he derived his opinion from ignorance. Then you proceeded to demonstrate your ignorance.

When asked to observe that contradiction, you reply with this.

The sad part of it is that there is pretty widespread ignorance from "Apple fanboys" nowadays, whenever they rise to defend this deplorable iMac platform.

See, I think that's the essence of the problem here. Apple is downgrading 1/3 of its desktop line (in terms of choice), possibly much more in terms of gross sales, and people are relying on some pretty loud, ignorant, and in cases like yours, downright obnoxious and condescending rhetoric to guide their decision.

But in a couple of years, as more and more non-Apple machines show up looking better, and with better specs, then the naked emperor will be easily seen.

There was a time when buying Apple hardware indicated a savvy purchase, with a good eye towards all-around quality. Nowadays, that's becoming only a good eye towards choice of OS; as a hardware choice, for the money, the only machine put out by Apple that really merits its price tag is the Mac Pro.

That is the essence of *your* ignorance, and that you should choose the very word that applies to you towards another poster is, unfortunately, becoming all too common-place in the Mac community.

What worries me about all this is that the end result will be that we will get crappier and crappier hardware from Apple (although I'm sure they'll still try to make it look pretty), so that eventually the choice will be to either run a great OS on crappy--yet expensive--hardware, or a not-so-great OS on excellent--and possibly inexpensive--hardware.

I want it all, like it used to be with the white iMacs: I want a great OS on great hardware, for a reasonable price premium. Ignorant rants like yours will make that wish of mine harder to attain.

 

[50548]

The sad part of it is that there is pretty widespread ignorance from "Apple fanboys" nowadays, whenever they rise to defend this deplorable iMac platform.

But in a couple of years, as more and more non-Apple machines show up looking better, and with better specs, then the naked emperor will be easily seen.

The moment you say the iMac is "deplorable" is the moment when you lose any credibility in your argument which proves itself, after all, totally ignorant. Just go read any major review of the iMac both on PC and Mac magazines, and go check how many of them are flying off the shelves.

Non-Apple crappy machines have always shown a lot of specs. But Apple is the only one to see that specs are not enough for ordinary customers.

Again, please read it slowly:

1 - 99% of the users couldn't care LESS about replacing their HDs;
2 - 99% of the users have no damn idea about which GPU powers their machines;
3 - 99% of users don't even know how to open their CPUs, and have no interest in buying an extra nerd PCI card;
4 - ALL of the MacBook users I have met are MORE than satisfied with their laptops, even if we here at MR keep on babbling that the GMA sucks;
5 - Show me ONE report that puts a PC maker above Apple in terms of quality, design, customer service and reliability. Customer Satisfaction Reports have put Apple on TOP for years;
6 - Only a handful of geeky gamers strive to buy a monstrous AlienWare; most of us DON'T CARE about SLI, about expensive gigantic boxes, about ridiculous design, about a DAMN UNSTABLE AND VIRUS-RIDDEN operating system.

And yes, we are fanboys because we know we use the BEST in terms of overall computing experience. And millions of switchers are starting to see the light by their own as well, without being forced to buy a ridiculous beige box just because a certain "majority" OS is forced upon them. We can have it all in our Macs anyway. And we are, funnily, the MOST POWERFUL Windows notebooks, too.

So please, before calling the best desktop on Earth "deplorable", go do some research before subscribing to a Macintosh-specific forum. Otherwise just buy your behemoth CPU and be happy with Vista; we don't need such rants here.

 

[macrumorino]

The moment you say the iMac is "deplorable" is the moment when you lose any credibility in your argument which proves itself, after all, totally ignorant.

...

Again, please read it slowly:

1 - 99% of the users couldn't care LESS about replacing their HDs;

No need to read anything else. The conjunction of the two statements you write above, and the place where you get your "statistic" of 99%, is too goofy to bother with the rest.

 

[BongoBanger]

Just go read any major review of the iMac both on PC and Mac magazines, and go check how many of them are flying off the shelves.

Yes, it consistently scores lower than the equivalently priced high quality PCs.

Your 99% list is a bit rubbish really. 99% - well, in fairness, 94-97% of computer users don't care about Apple and are happy enough with Windows so it's all a bit moot even if you're right, which you aren't.

And yes, we are fanboys because we know we use the BEST in terms of overall computing experience.

For you. I'd take the Alienware over the iMac anytime because they're better machines. Mind you, there are several manufacturers of high end PCs that I'd choose over Alienware but you get the point.

And millions of switchers are starting to see the light by their own as well, without being forced to buy a ridiculous beige box

Biege box? How 1990's of you.

just because a certain "majority" OS is forced upon them. We can have it all in our Macs anyway.

And we can have Hackintoshes. Of course the difference is that MS let you install Windows legally, something that Apple with their closed business model don't allow with OSX because we all know what would happen to Apple's hardware sales if they did.

And we are, funnily, the MOST POWERFUL Windows notebooks, too.

Except they're not. There was much ado about the MBP running Windows quicker than other tested machines in PC World magazine's reviews but this:

a) Didn't count the ones they hadn't tested several of which were more powerful
b) Only lasted for a couple of months anyway on the ones they did test.

So please, before calling the best desktop on Earth "deplorable", go do some research before subscribing to a Macintosh-specific forum.

I think he has. That's why he knows it's not the best desktop available. Any independent magazine will tell you this.

Otherwise just buy your behemoth CPU and be happy with Vista; we don't need such rants here.

In other words you know you're wrong and are using the "Well, it's a Mac forum, you shouldn't be here!" card. How... dull of you.

 

[D4F]

You insulted another poster by stating that he derived his opinion from ignorance. Then you proceeded to demonstrate your ignorance.

When asked to observe that contradiction, you reply with this.

The sad part of it is that there is pretty widespread ignorance from "Apple fanboys" nowadays, whenever they rise to defend this deplorable iMac platform.

See, I think that's the essence of the problem here. Apple is downgrading 1/3 of its desktop line (in terms of choice), possibly much more in terms of gross sales, and people are relying on some pretty loud, ignorant, and in cases like yours, downright obnoxious and condescending rhetoric to guide their decision.

But in a couple of years, as more and more non-Apple machines show up looking better, and with better specs, then the naked emperor will be easily seen.

There was a time when buying Apple hardware indicated a savvy purchase, with a good eye towards all-around quality. Nowadays, that's becoming only a good eye towards choice of OS; as a hardware choice, for the money, the only machine put out by Apple that really merits its price tag is the Mac Pro.

That is the essence of *your* ignorance, and that you should choose the very word that applies to you towards another poster is, unfortunately, becoming all too common-place in the Mac community.

What worries me about all this is that the end result will be that we will get crappier and crappier hardware from Apple (although I'm sure they'll still try to make it look pretty), so that eventually the choice will be to either run a great OS on crappy--yet expensive--hardware, or a not-so-great OS on excellent--and possibly inexpensive--hardware.

I want it all, like it used to be with the white iMacs: I want a great OS on great hardware, for a reasonable price premium. Ignorant rants like yours will make that wish of mine harder to attain.

From Wiki Ignorance is the condition of being uninformed or uneducated, lacking knowledge or information.

How are my post ignorant if they cover my view on all angles?
Over 15 years PC user with last 5 on hi end dedicated systems with audio cards alone exceeding price of $1000.
And on the other hand 2 years with Mac and last 4 months with a Mac Pro loaded with 32GB RAM and all the goodies you can imagine with 14 identical networked machines used as rendering farm. Macbook and iMac are my home systems and they are heavily used aswell.
So where do you see ignorance in my post when i tell you that pure numbers are nothing when they are put together with a unstable system and that comes from years of experience?
Where's my ignorance if my Macs can run for several weeks rendering animations not choking even once??

READ CLEARLY - POWER IS NOTHING WITHOUT CONTROL.

What you call downgrading quality I call a piece of mind with a good workflow.
If for some reason Windows gets a version that will run as smooth as OS X I will jump on it. I just clearly see the benefits of running worry free enviroment over big numbers that don't mean crap in the real hard core system exploiting enviroment.
You say you want it all. Fine - go and get it but stop acting like a spoiled kid crying to prove how wrong we all are as apparently you use your system for nothing else than documents BUT you want it to look nice. All your arguments appear to come from a black/white side by side comparision which is as pointless as what you wrote.

Wanna call me a fanboi?? Go ahead lol. At least now I have a good reason to be one.

 

[purfledspruce]

he has a good point, people

"Ignorance?" I see, you argue by insult.

As long as we're on the topic of ignorance, why do you ignore the more obvious comparison? The stock model here,

http://alienware.com/Configurator_P...SysCode=PC-AREA51-7500-R5&SubCode=SKU-DEFAULT

[snip]

But I suspect that the hackintosh idea will continue to be technically viable, and to the extent that "knowledgeable" iMac shoppers continue to pony up too many dollars for inferior hardware, then the "ignorant" rest will have the opportunity to hack their machines to boot whatever OS they want.

Look, folks, everything this poster says is true. It's just missing the point.

I am a "switcher" and just ordered a new 24" refurb iMac the day the upgrade came out. I ordered the cheapest, best Mac that I could. It was STILL overpriced from a specs point of view.

I'm also a techie, I'm able to replace HDDs and motherboards and videocards and whatever on a computer. I've run linux, I've run Microsoft computers since 1989 or so.

The thing about all of that replacement stuff is...I don't want to do it any more. I'm tired of tinkering, having parts fail, reinstalling software after a crash, etc. My time has become more and more valuable to me, and now I hate even spending the time necessary to build a new computer, much less replace something that's gotten old or repair something that's broken.

To get into the Mac world, I bought a used Powerbook G4 a couple of months ago. It was just an experiment. Thing is... It's SIX FREAKIN' YEARS OLD, AND IT STILL WORKS. I've never had a PC last six years. Never. So I went ahead and ordered the iMac. I expect that my $1400 investment will still work pretty well five or six years from now, and I won't have to change any hardware. When you look at it on a per year cost basis, that's not all that expensive.

That doesn't invalidate what the original poster said, it's just a different value system. He values power for cheap. I value reliability and total cost of ownership. My estimate is that he'll buy two computers, or two computers worth of parts, over the next six years, and possibly spend several weekends upgrading or repairing. I'll spend those weekends doing something else, and I'll only buy one computer.

Let the original poster have his powerful machine. I'll take my iMac and, in the long run, save money and have the same computer for twice as long. Yes, it'll be less and less powerful as it gets older, but I don't really care to play the latest and greatest video games--I have a Wii for that!

 

[Eidorian]

That doesn't invalidate what the original poster said, it's just a different value system. He values power for cheap. I value reliability and total cost of ownership. My estimate is that he'll buy two computers, or two computers worth of parts, over the next six years, and possibly spend several weekends upgrading or repairing. I'll spend those weekends doing something else, and I'll only buy one computer.

Is there something wrong with buying/building your own machine? I fix and tinker with my minitower as a hobby and it's *gasp* fun. I also use my quad core to crunch video a heck of a lot faster then my MacBook. A lot of the posters make it seem like it's a chore or outright trouble. I can build two or even three machines for the price of the 3.06 GHz iMac. That doesn't make either option less valid.

Short of the Power Mac/Mac Pro you have to make the compromise that you're not going to be opening this thing up for upgrades down the road. I bought my MacBook knowing that was the case. There are a lot of users not willing to make the compromise of not being able to upgrade. Even if it is with more expensive and sometimes more limited Mac compatible components.

 

[crockett]

The moment you say the iMac is "deplorable" is the moment when you lose any credibility in your argument which proves itself, after all, totally ignorant. Just go read any major review of the iMac both on PC and Mac magazines, and go check how many of them are flying off the shelves.

Non-Apple crappy machines have always shown a lot of specs. But Apple is the only one to see that specs are not enough for ordinary customers.

Again, please read it slowly:

1 - 99% of the users couldn't care LESS about replacing their HDs;
2 - 99% of the users have no damn idea about which GPU powers their machines;
3 - 99% of users don't even know how to open their CPUs, and have no interest in buying an extra nerd PCI card;
4 - ALL of the MacBook users I have met are MORE than satisfied with their laptops, even if we here at MR keep on babbling that the GMA sucks;
5 - Show me ONE report that puts a PC maker above Apple in terms of quality, design, customer service and reliability. Customer Satisfaction Reports have put Apple on TOP for years;
6 - Only a handful of geeky gamers strive to buy a monstrous AlienWare; most of us DON'T CARE about SLI, about expensive gigantic boxes, about ridiculous design, about a DAMN UNSTABLE AND VIRUS-RIDDEN operating system.

And yes, we are fanboys because we know we use the BEST in terms of overall computing experience. And millions of switchers are starting to see the light by their own as well, without being forced to buy a ridiculous beige box just because a certain "majority" OS is forced upon them. We can have it all in our Macs anyway. And we are, funnily, the MOST POWERFUL Windows notebooks, too.

So please, before calling the best desktop on Earth "deplorable", go do some research before subscribing to a Macintosh-specific forum. Otherwise just buy your behemoth CPU and be happy with Vista; we don't need such rants here.

Why is it every time you refer to someone who wants a machine to play games on.. You call them whiners, geeks or some other degrading name.. as if their needs are below yours?

I used to do cable modem installs, so I worked on countless PC's and Macs and have a very good understanding what people use their machines for. Granted maybe 15 to 20% of all computer users are capable of replacing parts on their own machines.

However gaming takes up a very large portion of the computer users. I would guess at least 40% of the installs I did had users whom played some sort of games or had someone in their house whom played some sort of games.

In 2007 there was $18 billion in the game industry sales in the US alone. That's not even world wide. That doesn't even include hardware sales on the computer side of things.

So get over yourself with your elitist mentality, about how gamers mean nothing and shouldn't be considered as a viable market for Apple. Gamers are one of the biggest groups of users to target and we damn sure know with Apple's prices they sure as hell can't target the coprate world.

 

[iFizz]

...Short of the Power Mac/Mac Pro you have to make the compromise that you're not going to be opening this thing up for upgrades down the road. I bought my MacBook knowing that was the case. There are a lot of users not willing to make the compromise of not being able to upgrade. Even if it is with more expensive and sometimes more limited Mac compatible components.

It all comes down to what users are willing to pay (not just literally) for the OSX experience.

 

[k2spitfire88]

The moment you say the iMac is "deplorable" is the moment when you lose any credibility in your argument which proves itself, after all, totally ignorant. Just go read any major review of the iMac both on PC and Mac magazines, and go check how many of them are flying off the shelves.

Non-Apple crappy machines have always shown a lot of specs. But Apple is the only one to see that specs are not enough for ordinary customers.

Again, please read it slowly:

1 - 99% of the users couldn't care LESS about replacing their HDs;
2 - 99% of the users have no damn idea about which GPU powers their machines;
3 - 99% of users don't even know how to open their CPUs, and have no interest in buying an extra nerd PCI card;
4 - ALL of the MacBook users I have met are MORE than satisfied with their laptops, even if we here at MR keep on babbling that the GMA sucks;
5 - Show me ONE report that puts a PC maker above Apple in terms of quality, design, customer service and reliability. Customer Satisfaction Reports have put Apple on TOP for years;
6 - Only a handful of geeky gamers strive to buy a monstrous AlienWare; most of us DON'T CARE about SLI, about expensive gigantic boxes, about ridiculous design, about a DAMN UNSTABLE AND VIRUS-RIDDEN operating system.

And yes, we are fanboys because we know we use the BEST in terms of overall computing experience. And millions of switchers are starting to see the light by their own as well, without being forced to buy a ridiculous beige box just because a certain "majority" OS is forced upon them. We can have it all in our Macs anyway. And we are, funnily, the MOST POWERFUL Windows notebooks, too.

You hit the nail on the head. The majority (i wont give a percentage) of computer users dont care about replacing their HD's, because they just want one that is large enough, and when it needs to be replaced, they buy a new computer, b/c they don't care about replacing/fixing things on their computer. They either take it to a store to be fixed, or they just buy a new one, and Apple is trying to make their system as easy to use as possible, not as upgradeable as possible. That is the key difference. If you dont like it, your more than free to build a hackintosh or buy a mac pro, so you can upgrade it, but their business model is netting them large profits, and an expanding market-share, so it is working for them. Their goal is to make money, and it looks like they are succeeding. If you dont like it, buy something else.

 

[D4F]

Is there something wrong with buying/building your own machine? I fix and tinker with my minitower as a hobby and it's *gasp* fun. I also use my quad core to crunch video a heck of a lot faster then my MacBook. A lot of the posters make it seem like it's a chore or outright trouble. I can build two or even three machines for the price of the 3.06 GHz iMac. That doesn't make either option less valid.

Short of the Power Mac/Mac Pro you have to make the compromise that you're not going to be opening this thing up for upgrades down the road. I bought my MacBook knowing that was the case. There are a lot of users not willing to make the compromise of not being able to upgrade. Even if it is with more expensive and sometimes more limited Mac compatible components.

Well... Is there something wrong in not wanting to do that?
Just look at both sides of the stick. You like it and have time to it. I don't. My time has great value and all left of it I have I prefer to spend with my kids than working on some PC that needs attention way too often.
As you can see I am not bashing PC users. I just simply ask you all to look around once in a while cause what you think is good, for others might be a waste and from a technical point of veiw BOTH SIDES ARE RIGHT it just all comes to the side you choose to suit YOU good.
No need insulting others especially if you can't see the whole picture and that is exactly what i see on this boards. People without perspective talking more they understand.

 

[Eidorian]

You hit the nail on the head. The majority (i wont give a percentage) of computer users dont care about replacing their HD's, because they just want one that is large enough, and when it needs to be replaced, they buy a new computer, b/c they don't care about replacing/fixing things on their computer. They either take it to a store to be fixed, or they just buy a new one, and Apple is trying to make their system as easy to use as possible, not as upgradeable as possible. That is the key difference. If you dont like it, your more than free to build a hackintosh or buy a mac pro, so you can upgrade it, but their business model is netting them large profits, and an expanding market-share, so it is working for them. Their goal is to make money, and it looks like they are succeeding. If you dont like it, buy something else.

Sadly hard drives aren't the problem today. In most cases it's the video card.

I'll go tell grandma to buy a yet another new Mac to play her grandchild's game.

Well... Is there something wrong in not wanting to do that?
Just look at both sides of the stick. You like it and have time to it. I don't. My time has great value and all left of it I have I prefer to spend with my kids than working on some PC that needs attention way too often.
As you can see I am not bashing PC users. I just simply ask you all to look around once in a while cause what you think is good, for others might be a waste and from a technical point of veiw BOTH SIDES ARE RIGHT it just all comes to the side you choose to suit YOU good.
No need insulting others especially if you can't see the whole picture and that is exactly what i see on this boards. People without perspective talking more they understand.

There's nothing wrong in wanting an appliance like experience with your computer but I have had the same with running Windows. I turn my tower on and it works. I run my software and it just works. I'd love to apologize for your experiences but they're not my fault.

 

[chazmangus]

Memory.

I think i'll skip this Speed bump i am waiting for a iMac that supports more then 4GB of Memory, However i am interested to see what the increased bus speed does for everyday tasks.

 

[k2spitfire88]

Sadly hard drives aren't the problem today. In most cases it's the video card.

I'll go tell grandma to buy a yet another new Mac to play her grandchild's game.

That is what the majority of people do with pc's anyways, they just buy a new stock, off the shelf model from circuit city or best buy, and when it stops working with games, etc., they go and buy a new one, because they don't know any better.

 

[Eidorian]

That is what the majority of people do with pc's anyways, they just buy a new stock, off the shelf model from circuit city or best buy, and when it stops working with games, etc., they go and buy a new one, because they don't know any better.

So you suggest buying and entirely new computer immediately after purchasing one to get a better video card?

 

[BenRoethig]

That is what the majority of people do with pc's anyways, they just buy a new stock, off the shelf model from circuit city or best buy, and when it stops working with games, etc., they go and buy a new one, because they don't know any better.

That's usually 3-4 years. What Macs used to be before the focus turned almost entirely consumer. If you want that kind of longevity out of an iMac, you need to get a 24" with the card upgrade. I have the 2.4ghz model and its already getting long in the tooth.

 

[crockett]

Well... Is there something wrong in not wanting to do that?
Just look at both sides of the stick. You like it and have time to it. I don't. My time has great value and all left of it I have I prefer to spend with my kids than working on some PC that needs attention way too often.
As you can see I am not bashing PC users. I just simply ask you all to look around once in a while cause what you think is good, for others might be a waste and from a technical point of veiw BOTH SIDES ARE RIGHT it just all comes to the side you choose to suit YOU good.
No need insulting others especially if you can't see the whole picture and that is exactly what i see on this boards. People without perspective talking more they understand.

There is nothing wrong with not wanting to work on a PC. Hell I build my own but I don't like to work on them. I only build my systems, because it allows me to get the best parts at the best price.

I think a lot of you go way over board about how often you have to work on a PC. I built my system I think about 8 months ago. Other than formatting it once to get rid of Vista and installing XP.. I've yet to have to do "anything" at all inside the machine.

I use Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, and 3D Studio max on the machine among a few games and I've yet to have any software or driver issues. I haven't had to do anything at all to this machine and it stays on 24/7 with maybe 1 reboot a month if the power doesn't go off. (I'm serious when I say that too.. I never turn my machine off)

So with that being said, I'm also somewhat content with the idea my iMac will be here in 2 days. I think it will be nice to have a all in one unit that I hopefully have to do nothing with.

However it will only be a back up machine and used mainly for use with one specific software. So if the machine breaks down it wont be the end of the world. However I can tell you this, no iMac will ever make me a switcher to Apple from PCs.

The only way I would switch over to Apple from PC's is if I could buy a Mac Pro and have the ability to run high end graphics cards with out paying $6k for the pleasure of getting bent over.

Give me a quad core system, with a 8800gt card with the ability to update it later for say $2k-2500 and then maybe we can talk about being a Apple switcher.

 

[k2spitfire88]

So you suggest buying and entirely new computer immediately after purchasing one to get a better video card?

No, just commenting that for most people don't worry about the video card, and when it doesnt work for their games anymore, they buy a new one, so most people wont care on a mac either. Obviously you wouldnt go buy a new computer right afterwards, because it would work with your games/whatever you use the card for when you buy it, but after it stops working with their new games etc., they buy a new computer.

That's usually 3-4 years. What Macs used to be before the focus turned almost entirely consumer. If you want that kind of longevity out of an iMac, you need to get a 24" with the card upgrade. I have the 2.4ghz model and its already getting long in the tooth.

Very valid point

 

[D4F]

Sadly hard drives aren't the problem today. In most cases it's the video card.

I'll go tell grandma to buy a yet another new Mac to play her grandchild's game.

There's nothing wrong in wanting an appliance like experience with your computer but I have had the same with running Windows. I turn my tower on and it works. I run my software and it just works. I'd love to apologize for your experiences but they're not my fault.

And that is my point. Both sides are right it's just a matter of preference.
For what I do windows systems do not give me nothing but trouble and waste of time and Mac does all it needs to do without a choke so higher price for even slightly worse system is something that is totally justified for me. On top of it all that worse like you call it system does it's job faster in the end so it's a win for me.