Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Have a problem with the "chin"?

H

Hexley

Suspended
Original poster
Jun 10, 2009
1,641
505
BbEjZ0H.jpg


Generic design vs Apple design.

From a great distance I know I'm looking at PC/Android or an iMac/iPhone.

For many people buy Apple products because of its physical design and build quality.

I do agree that a < 5mm top/left/right bezels would be nice but the bezel color & non-bezel colors for a consumer device is understandable.

Based in the litany of whining on the "chin" and bezels the ideal redesigned iMac would look like this, a Lenovo ThinkVision monitor
  • Color black
  • < 2mm top/left/right bezels
  • < 2cm bottom bezel

KQbj0dr.jpg


ThinkVision_T27h_20_CT2_06.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: primarycolors and Icaras
Many manufacturers strive to make their products distinctive in some manner or other. Apple doesn’t want its products to look like anything else. And why should they? Something immediately recognizable is a great way to advertise and market your product.

The iMac’s coloured chin makes it readily identifiable and sets it apart from the competition. It lends to its identity so I’m fine with it.

It’s funny how people complain Apple doesn’t do what so many others are doing even while a significant part of Apple’s appeal is because they aren’t doing what others are doing. You can’t have it both ways.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Shawn Llewellyn, snakesayan, Serban55 and 5 others
Warped9 said:
Many manufacturers strive to make their products distinctive in some manner or other. Apple doesn’t want its products to look like anything else. And why should they? Something immediately recognizable is a great way to advertise and market your product.

The iMac’s coloured chin makes it readily identifiable and sets it apart from the competition. It lends to its identity so I’m fine with it.

It’s funny how people complain Apple doesn’t do what so many others are doing even while a significant part of Apple’s appeal is because they aren’t doing what others are doing. You can’t have it both ways.
Click to expand...
A Ferrari, Honda, Hyundai, MG and Proton gets you from point A to B. The difference is how you got there.

Are you in a piece of art or a piece of work?
 
Last edited:
The original VW Beetle was ridiculed because of the way it looked at a time when domestic cars epitomized pointless excess. An entire generation embraced the Beetle as a way to display their rejection of the excessive consumerist mindset. For many the Beetle represented frugality and a simpler, more down-to-earth lifestyle. And they laughed at those who ridiculed them.

The new Beetle played mostly on nostalgia. And while some younger buyers liked the new Beetle it no longer had the cache it once had thirty plus years earlier. It was a thoroughly modern car yet it didn’t hold enough appeal for a market that now had other values and demanded something else from a car.

In my eyes the last version of the new Beetle was cool. I really liked it and it worked for me. But I could see why it wasn’t clicking with many. Today everyone wants some version of a box-on-wheels to haul around all their excess stuff. And at a time when people should be thinking more frugally and somewhat greener countless people are rushing out to buy pointlessly oversized fullsize pickups. 🙄

Explain to me how a farm, commercial and construction vehicle is now embraced as a choice ride swathed in leather, chrome and metallic paint. 🤨

Today I would say the Kia Soul could be seen as the spiritual descendent of the original Beetle.


Apple represents different things to different people. For many Apple is an overpriced cash grab for glitzy products allowing you to be a poser. In their own snobbery they reject Apple as something for snobs. 😄 Yet others embrace Apple for its very distinctiveness and belief in it being a generally superior product worth the investment for what you get in return.

I would say I fall in the latter category, but I’ve met plenty of the former.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SRQrws, valleian and nambuccaheadsau
Warped9 said:
Many manufacturers strive to make their products distinctive in some manner or other. Apple doesn’t want its products to look like anything else. And why should they? Something immediately recognizable is a great way to advertise and market your product.

The iMac’s coloured chin makes it readily identifiable and sets it apart from the competition. It lends to its identity so I’m fine with it.

It’s funny how people complain Apple doesn’t do what so many others are doing even while a significant part of Apple’s appeal is because they aren’t doing what others are doing. You can’t have it both ways.
Click to expand...
HP have a similar chin on their all-in-one’s, it’s not a unique feature. Unless Apple have a patent on a coloured chin and it takes off with the public, other manufacturers can easily bring out their own coloured versions.
 
Warped9 said:
Execution is key. I’ve seen HP AIOs. At work I sell them alongside Macs. No contest in that the Macs make the HPs look cheaply put together.
Click to expand...
Fine if you see them side by side in a store, but most people will buy online.

Not doubting the superior build quality of the Mac (though I had an HP laptop that was built like a tank), but the iMac’s chin isn’t unique, and unless patented, there’s nothing stopping rivals adding colours to theirs too.
 
I wasn't ok with the chin when I saw it.

I WAS ok with the chin when it was explained why it is there (not for looks).

The logo removal and the white/gray bezel is on purpose because if the bezel was black and these iMacs were only Silver they would, from the front, look EXACTLY like the old iMacs.
 
MistrSynistr said:
I wasn't ok with the chin when I saw it.

I WAS ok with the chin when it was explained why it is there (not for looks).

The logo removal and the white/gray bezel is on purpose because if the bezel was black and these iMacs were only Silver they would, from the front, look EXACTLY like the old iMacs.
Click to expand...
And they definitely want the new iMac to be immediately distinguishable from the previous iMac.
 
I honestly couldn't care less about it or the bezels. I don't know why people have such a problem with it. They have to put the components for a all in 1 computer somewhere. I've had my current iMac since 2010, and its never been something I've even thought about until I saw it discussed on here honestly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SsSsSsSsSnake and za9ra22
When you're looking at the screen, the off-white bezels and chin do kind of fade in to the background, its a bit strange at first....
 
  • Like
Reactions: SsSsSsSsSnake
esphil said:
I honestly couldn't care less about it or the bezels. I don't know why people have such a problem with it. They have to put the components for a all in 1 computer somewhere. I've had my current iMac since 2010, and its never been something I've even thought about until I saw it discussed on here honestly.
Click to expand...
Same here
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warped9
For what it's worth here are a few numbers for comparison, particularly for those hung up on the chin.

I compared the frontal area of the previous 21.5 iMac with the new 24.

I mentioned somewhere in another thread that the 24 has a display about 20 percent larger than the 21.5 it replaces.

Here are a few other numbers:
The 21.5
- display is 63% of frontal area.
- display is 75% of blacked out area.
- chin is 16% of frontal area

The 24
- display is 75% of frontal area.
- display is 88% of blacked out (whited out?) area.
- chin is 14.5% of frontal area.

So all the noise about how awful and obstrusive the chin is on the new 24 is not backed up by the numbers. The actual display area is significantly larger in relation to the total frontal area of the computer. And the chin is notably smaller in relation to the total frontal area. Consequently the bezel area is also significantly reduced.
 
Last edited:
Hexley said:
A Ferrari, Honda, Hyundai, MG and Proton gets you from point A to B. The difference is how you got there.

Are you in a piece of art or a piece of work?
Click to expand...
Ferraris diff how you get from a to b is part of the design and air flow and every detail in that car design. So ferraris art, is also part of the functionality/aerodynamics
 
A Ferrari is a insanely expensive, high maintenance, truly expensive to operate machine of limited use as a car. An iMac is not (comparatively) expensive, is generally reliable and (as a computer) pretty damned capable and versatile. An iMac, in my opinion, is a vastly safer investment than a Ferrari.

A “work of art” is in the eye of the beholder. Certainly not all Ferraris are works of art.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back