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.
Do you like your iMac?
- Thread starter currahee2100
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't love mine.
It's just a computer. It has it's good points - quiet, OK looking, OS X. And its bad points - lack of upgradeability, overpriced, limited graphics (compared to a high end PC) and the screen is garbage.
But overall its OK. On balance I prefered my 2011 Mac Mini but I wanted a 27" screen and faster processor. In hindsight I might have bought a 2012 i7 Mini and quality monitor, but then the graphics are even more limited. Everything's a compromise.
It's just a computer. It has it's good points - quiet, OK looking, OS X. And its bad points - lack of upgradeability, overpriced, limited graphics (compared to a high end PC) and the screen is garbage.
But overall its OK. On balance I prefered my 2011 Mac Mini but I wanted a 27" screen and faster processor. In hindsight I might have bought a 2012 i7 Mini and quality monitor, but then the graphics are even more limited. Everything's a compromise.
The screen is garbage...if the IPS screen of the new imacs is garbage that means you have your own company that know to make a real good screen.
OT: I like my 21.5 late iMac its my second mac (2012 macbook air was and its my first) but now i like to go for the 27" because of the GPU, because i like to work and game on the same OS and that is MACOS, and games in MACOS does not have 60fps all the time, so im hoping a wifi ac and 780M GPU on the next upgrade.
Hmmmm, logic not one of your strong points then. If you taste some ice cream and decide you don't like it, you must own an ice cream factory, right?
How about this. "I wanted a Mac because Windows PC's suck with many annoying but fixable problems, and I've dealt with the suckage since Windows 95". At least Windows 3.1 was good. LOL
----------
"the 2012 iMac is one of the quietest computers ever" -- does not mean the same thing as "iMac is quietest computer ever? Means no one above it in term of quietness"
It means it's among the best, not necessarily the best.
I might be wrong, but wasn't is you who quested our ears, environment or deadsilent Imac?
I'll stop now.....
my point is that you must be an expert in display if you make such an argument, when all of the people on this Earth ,until the IPS retina macbook was released, says the iMac has one of the best displays.
Last edited:
Ok, enough of me being cheeky or rude. I will be serious now...
Honestly my friend, I am being serious when I tell you that the iMac display is not great. It's Ok ish, provided you get a good one (and many of them are really dreadful actually). The "good" ones are OK.
But they are very far from being one of the best. It's not only me who says this. What you will find is that anyone who is not experienced with high quality displays is likely to say its brilliant. And some people are not that fussy.
But if you are experienced, and you are fussy, the iMac display is underwhelming. To be exact, it has a limited colour gamut; poor uncalibrated grey-scale tracking; poor uniformity; clouding / backlight bleed issues and poor black levels.
If you compare it to an NEC Spectraview or Eizo ColourEdge, there really is no comparison. Having said this, these screens alone cost almost as much as an iMac, so it is not fair to compare them.
But nevertheless comparing these screens with the iMac shows you that the iMac screen is not very good. Eizo and NEC show you what is possible if you take a latest generation grade A panel and pair it with excellent electronics. The iMac is just not in that bracket. It would be useless for any colour-critical work: the colour uniformity is just not good enough.
so you are saying that if the iMacs get retina display which means only a higher pixel density..they are still behind..ok its only your opinion because i have my own and the world has their own. Even in the reviews of the latest iMacs says that the heart and soul is that IPS display from retina macbook and from the iMacs. The others has too much colours that make them to have pictures un-real. There are AMOLED that are cartoonish and there is iphones/ipad display panel that have real colours and more accurate
Agreed.. point is Apple displays 27" display is not really the best. They're okay for a consumer grade, but they're not really high end, per se.
The display costs $999 because 99% of the price tag goes to .. sleek aluminum chassis
All is well until you see yellow tinge, excessive backlight bleed, image retention, smudged and dirty display on an Apple display.
And since when the ability of a display rendering too much color makes the picture unreal? Care to back up the fact?
Many AMOLED display uses Pentile structure that use more green subpixels (RGBG) thus the color tend to be a bit greenish, cartoonish, whatever-you-want-to-call-ish etc.
----------
Samsung 27A850 which can be had for $800ish, has PLS display (better than IPS). Pure display haven more so than Apple's.
But then again I knew you would argue "The Samsung doesn't have built-in Thunderbolt hub, FW, LAN, Magsafe, and of course
logo"Four words buddy: I don't need those. Period.
All is well until you see yellow tinge, excessive backlight bleed, image retention, smudged and dirty display on an Apple display.
And since when the ability of a display rendering too much color makes the picture unreal? Care to back up the fact?
Many AMOLED display uses Pentile structure that use more green subpixels (RGBG) thus the color tend to be a bit greenish, cartoonish, whatever-you-want-to-call-ish etc.
----------
Samsung 27A850 which can be had for $800ish, has PLS display (better than IPS). Pure display haven more so than Apple's.
But then again I knew you would argue "The Samsung doesn't have built-in Thunderbolt hub, FW, LAN, Magsafe, and of course
Four words buddy: I don't need those. Period.
I never said anything like that. Until you wrote that last paragraph, I respected our opinion. I no longer do. Instead, my question would be, why doesn't Apple use it if it's better?
PLS panels are exclusively made by Samsung. There might be political and business reasons between Apple and Samsung. How would we know?
And why it's a surprise if Apple does not use a "better component" on its product?
It's not the first and only one.
For example:
Why Mac does not use K variant of Intel Core? It only costs a bit more and performs "better" than regular version even on stock clock.
Why Thunderbolt Display still uses USB 2.0 hub while implementing the fastest connection around.
Not all Apple products uses "the best" parts available.
I think the NEW iMacs Screens are GLUED in and upgrading the RAM is not as easy as it was on the Older iMacs.. Make sure.. I just ordered a 27" Laoded i7 16 ram, 256 SSD, and 680 GPU,, First I was going to get the standard 8GB then read theat you have to UN GLUE the Screen to get to the RAM.. So I had to pay the 200 for 16GB
... Didnt want to start un gluing the screen!I think the NEW iMacs Screens are GLUED in and upgrading the RAM is not as easy as it was on the Older iMacs.. Make sure.. I just ordered a 27" Laoded i7 16 ram, 256 SSD, and 680 GPU,, First I was going to get the standard 8GB then read theat you have to UN GLUE the Screen to get to the RAM.. So I had to pay the 200 for 16GB
On the 27" there is a hatch where you can put the extra ram in yourselfe, it is only on the 21" you need to open up the screen.
User serviceable, haha. I have completely torn down my late 2006 intell iMac and 1st G5 iMac to see the CPUs and get some new thermal butter. The both have new HDDs ODD and the intell has a new CPU.
I didn't say $1,000.
And Serban didn't either when he questioned my criticism of the iMac display. He just said everyone thinks the iMac has one of the best screens ever, and I said, no they don't and no it hasn't.
As I said in my last post, to get a better display, you have to spend a lot of money. The NEC Spectraview and EIZO ColourEdge are much, much, much better. But they don't cost $1,000.
The iMac screen is OK if you get a good one. But it isn't great. And the many bad ones are far from great.
So what good is a better screen if it costs much more than the screen you're trying to replace?? A truly better screen gives you the most bang for the buck. In this case, the iMac probably can't shoulder more than $1000 worth of screen anyway because people won't pay for it. That's what matters.
Sure the best screens period are probably $10,000. Doesn't mean it's worth it.
27 inch IMAC
Got my new one now for month--Love it--does all they said it would. New SSD is fast and quiet. Screen is great and resolution is outstanding.
Got my new one now for month--Love it--does all they said it would. New SSD is fast and quiet. Screen is great and resolution is outstanding.