Surely that price can't be right! The same system costs 2.649,00 euros ($3.444,79) in Germany...![]()
If you just took the second to go to apple.COM you could easily determine it is.
On the other hand - you'll probably never get so many quotations again.
Surely that price can't be right! The same system costs 2.649,00 euros ($3.444,79) in Germany...![]()
I have to say, I was really surprised to see how much better the screen could be without a single change to the actual technology -- but hey, I guess plastic surgery can work wonders. Both screens have fantastic color reproduction, are remarkably (like, blindingly) bright, and have near-180-degree viewing angles.
Most people griping about monkey arms or whatever are only doing so because Steve Jobs said something back in the day, and now they're regurgitating it nonstop in an attempt to look smart.
You know, he was right...when it comes to vertically standing monitors. But for screens you can slide right in front of you and tilt back? There's no reason not to have them touch enabled. They'll be as comfortable to use as an iPad.
I'm afraid it can be right.
The price in US$ is tax-free, and Apple always had a thing for screwing non-Americans.
"Touchcreen features” in an all-in-one are an outstanding idea!
If you want forearms like Popeye.
Me said:Most people griping about monkey arms or whatever are only doing so because Steve Jobs said something back in the day, and now they're regurgitating it nonstop in an attempt to look smart.
You know, he was right...when it comes to vertically standing monitors. But for screens you can slide right in front of you and tilt back? There's no reason not to have them touch enabled. They'll be as comfortable to use as an iPad.
I'd still prefer to have a slightly bigger machine with desktop-level graphics instead of a mobile GPU.![]()
You know, he was right...when it comes to vertically standing monitors. But for screens you can slide right in front of you and tilt back? There's no reason not to have them touch enabled. They'll be as comfortable to use as an iPad.
Hold on. I'm gonna quote myself...
...it was like 4 posts back.
No, it's non_american governments that that have a thing for screwing their citizens with purchase tax. I'm not sure what sales tax is in the US, but here in Switzerland it's about 8%. In some EU countries it's anything up to 25%.I'm afraid it can be right.
The price in US$ is tax-free, and Apple always had a thing for screwing non-Americans.
Purchased 3 fully loaded iMacs. 1 27 for me and 2 21 inchers for my 8 year old twin daughters (they hate sharing).
maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem too ergonomic to have a touchscreen for a desktop. a tablet.. yes.. but desktop my arms would have to keep hovering in the air frequently to do tasks if i were to really forego the traditional keyboard/mouse
It's not you. It's common sense, and exactly why Apple has _not_ entertained the idea of a touch-screen computer. That said, as people use touch more on tablets and phones, the expectation to touch the screen on regular computers is growing. I've even found myself trying to interact with the screen on my laptop only to realize that I wasn't using my iPad. hahaha
Macs will eventually have a touch-screen monitor, simply to stay in line with consumer expectations, but the time is not right just yet.
"Touchcreen features in an all-in-one are an outstanding idea!
If you want forearms like Popeye.
Image
Hold on. I'm gonna quote myself...
...it was like 4 posts back.
I'm afraid it can be right.
The price in US$ is tax-free, and Apple always had a thing for screwing non-Americans.
I'm kind of "of two minds" on this. I think that it would be nice to have an option to touch items. For example, the new iTunes begs to be touched. I could see reaching over to my display (even if it is upright) and selecting an album to play. I think as a primary interface, one would get tired, but lots of interactions could be very nice as a touch and not tiring.
On the other hand, I am a dirt nazi when it comes to my display. I even get a little frustrated with my iPad when it gets too greasy from fingerprints. I think I would have a seizure if my main display was constantly covered in fingerprints. But, time will tell. With the increasing "Back to the Mac" stuff I won't be surprised if Apple includes touch screens at some point.
And then the lawsuits will begin.When Apple eventually does release a touchscreen iMac, all childish insults towards touchscreen PC's will vanish overnight as people scramble to buy 12 each, and PC's who have touchscreen will have copied Apple.
It's not you. It's common sense, and exactly why Apple has _not_ entertained the idea of a touch-screen computer. That said, as people use touch more on tablets and phones, the expectation to touch the screen on regular computers is growing. I've even found myself trying to interact with the screen on my laptop only to realize that I wasn't using my iPad. hahaha
Macs will eventually have a touch-screen monitor, simply to stay in line with consumer expectations, but the time is not right just yet.
And why do you think that Renzatic is a macrumors 68030 yet joined after you?That picture shows someone working on a drawing, so the screen is reclined in a way that mimics what he would do on a piece of paper. Now imagine working all day long answering emails like that. Hello tired.... The touch in Windows 8 on the desktop will be pretty novel at best. Personally I think voice integration is more important than touch integration on the desktop...
The GPU on the high end 27" is pretty damn close to one. You'll easily be able to run just about any game at native resolution with all the settings bumped up about as high as they'll go.
no mention of the retarded location for the SD card slot.
Don't count on it, the top end games like BF3 is going to struggle at max on that 2560x1440 display. Even the MX.
The MX will be about 10-15% faster than the regular well benchmarked 680M in BF3 at 1080p you're looking at a 33FPS average, so if we're being generous and we see a 15% increase in FPS it's about 38FPS on 1080p. Pushing about 25% more pixels than 1080p you're looking at about 20-25FPS.
Turn down some settings and it might reach 60 but it's not going to be near max, I'd say medium to high, and I'm not too sure about the CPU as it's a fairly CPU taxing game.
I bet the MX options also going to cost a fortune, and here's the best part, in 1.5-2.0 years when games are pushing hardware forward you've got no upgrade avenue besides to turn down settings and down.
Not trying to be a dick but if you're even semi serious about gaming on a PC you might as well just build your own and get a cheaper iMac, by the time you pay for all the upgrades it's going to be worth it.
Bu... bu... but it's thin!
Surely that price can't be right! The same system costs 2.649,00 euros ($3.444,79) in Germany...![]()