iMac for Mom?

[armoguy94]

If you're wanting something cheap for the family and you have no need to get a mac specifically, why not save some money and get an even better PC? You can save bunches of money getting a PC and a nice, big monitor for cheaper than an iMac - much cheaper, and more powerful.

People over exaggerate the malware/spyware/virus issues and how slow a PC is, as long as you have good hardware you're good to go - then just get one simple antivirus. With good hardware, an antivirus shouldn't slow your computer down too much.

I can't seem to justify buying a Mac anymore, and my next computer will be a PC. Apple computers are just way too overpriced and underspec'd. Don't get me wrong, I love the OS - but frankly, that's the only reason why I have an Apple computer. I'll just go the hackintosh route if I really want to use a Mac next time. Really, it's a waste of money to buy an Apple computer just to be able to use the OS unless you're using it for professional use.

 

[Demosthenes X]

I'm not saying it can't handle basic computing tasks (most of which don't even utilize the GPU). I just feel wary when I hear the word integrated. I'm not on a tight budget, but this computer has to last at least another 4-5 years. My Mom watches YouTube videos and the Intel GMA really sucks. I know the 9400M is 5x or 4x better but I just want some real world feedback, not benchmarks.

My Intel GMA 950 runs YouTube without a hitch. The 9400M will be fine. Again, Apple would not have put this chip into 5/6 of their models if it wasn't capable.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

If you're wanting something cheap for the family and you have no need to get a mac specifically, why not save some money and get an even better PC? You can save bunches of money getting a PC and a nice, big monitor for cheaper than an iMac - much cheaper, and more powerful.

People over exaggerate the malware/spyware/virus issues and how slow a PC is, as long as you have good hardware you're good to go - then just get one simple antivirus. With good hardware, an antivirus shouldn't slow your computer down too much.

I can't seem to justify buying a Mac anymore, and my next computer will be a PC. Apple computers are just way too overpriced and underspec'd. Don't get me wrong, I love the OS - but frankly, that's the only reason why I have an Apple computer. I'll just go the hackintosh route if I really want to use a Mac next time. Really, it's a waste of money to buy an Apple computer just to be able to use the OS unless you're using it for professional use.

Dude, if you believe that PCs aren't like that then you must be a complete novice. I have personally experience and never want to do so again, the uninstalls of trialware on PCs.

Actually, Macs are not overpriced, PCs just have a lower starting point. It's not underspec'd either. I didn't have a lot of external hardware, and my XP box had a thick snake of cables everywhere. Unless you have a MP, you won't have many cables.

For seniors, Macs are zero maintenance, and very family friendly. My Mom can do 99% of her daily tasks once she opens (or I open) the box. PC? I got like 10+ boxes from Dell and I only bought the basics. I only get one relatively small box from Apple should I order that iMac.

For me, it's not all about hardware, its the fusion of hardware + software. And Microsoft still doesn't understand that today.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

My Intel GMA 950 runs YouTube without a hitch. The 9400M will be fine. Again, Apple would not have put this chip into 5/6 of their models if it wasn't capable.

Well, my X3100 is like fan on drugs when I play a short YouTube video... But yea, I think the 9400M will be good enough for her.

 

[QCassidy352]

...less than $35 - $40 to max out the RAM as a DIY project should extend the life of the machine with out hurting anyone's budget - then you could decide if a new machine was really worth it...

There's some truth to the idea that it's not a substantial investment either way, but really, how much longer is that dell going to keep chugging anyway? If it were me, I'd just go for the imac now rather than doing a DIY upgrade now and then a new computer in 6 months or a year when I still wasn't happy with the dell.

Well, my X3100 is like fan on drugs when I play a short YouTube video... But yea, I think the 9400M will be good enough for her.

I'm with you on the fan noise with intel integrated graphics, but you're talking about a laptop. Not only is the 9400m worlds better than the x3100, any imac is going to far, far quieter than a macbook. My imac (20" 2.66 with radeon 2600) is *silent* no matter what I do, with the execption of using the optical drive (rare for me). My old macbooks (core duo with GMA950 and core 2 duo with x3100) would both get very very loud when doing anything even slightly taxing.

I don't know how the 9400m macbooks do on noise, but an imac is going to be silent whether it has the 9400m or a dedicated card like the GT120.

 

[longwood]

I'm not saying it can't handle basic computing tasks (most of which don't even utilize the GPU). I just feel wary when I hear the word integrated. I'm not on a tight budget, but this computer has to last at least another 4-5 years. My Mom watches YouTube videos and the Intel GMA really sucks. I know the 9400M is 5x or 4x better but I just want some real world feedback, not benchmarks.

The iMac will definitely last you 4-5 years. My iBook from 2003 is still running strong, granted I don't use it much anymore, however, it is a very capable machine.

 

[peskaa]

I bought my mum a 20" 2.66Ghz/2GB iMac in 2008 (last generation of Alu iMacs) with the 2600 Pro 256Mb graphics card in it, and it has been a perfect machine for her. It handles all her email, internet browsing, Skype, Office tasks and iPhoto without any problems what-so-ever.

For you, the 20" iMac of the current generation would be perfect. The 9400M is still a good GPU solution, and you seriously won't need to increase the RAM over 2GB. As for the "poor" quality screen in the 20", I'll guarantee your mum will be impressed - she's not a design professional after all. My mum's iMac screen looks pretty damn nice, and she looks straight at it, so viewing angles certainly aren't an issue.

Oh, and I run my MBP on the 9400M about 99% of the time. Works fine for everyday tasks.

 

[kenned]

The 9400M should be plenty for your mom, as long as she isn't playing 3D games at the full res of the 20" iMac.

I run WoW and HL2 etc with no problems on my alu MB 2.0, youtube isn't causing any trouble either.
- this is at the 1280*800 resolution though.

 

[armoguy94]

Dude, if you believe that PCs aren't like that then you must be a complete novice. I have personally experience and never want to do so again, the uninstalls of trialware on PCs.

Actually, Macs are not overpriced, PCs just have a lower starting point. It's not underspec'd either. I didn't have a lot of external hardware, and my XP box had a thick snake of cables everywhere. Unless you have a MP, you won't have many cables.

For seniors, Macs are zero maintenance, and very family friendly. My Mom can do 99% of her daily tasks once she opens (or I open) the box. PC? I got like 10+ boxes from Dell and I only bought the basics. I only get one relatively small box from Apple should I order that iMac.

For me, it's not all about hardware, its the fusion of hardware + software. And Microsoft still doesn't understand that today.

I used to own a PC too so I know how it's like. It was horrible, but that was so many years ago and the hardware was complete crap which made everything unbelievably slow. Now that I am much more knowledgeable in this area than I was before I know that I have to get a computer with good specs and it will run good.

Windows isn't bad. If you want to avoid viruses: Download Firefox, and only go to trusted websites. If you want to, sure, go ahead and get a simple antivirus in the case that you do happen to get infected.

I just don't understand how one can justify paying so much for a simple underspec'd computer especially in this economy. You can NOT say that it's not overpriced and underspec'd. First of all an iMac uses mobile parts that are slower and less efficient than normal desktop hardware. Why does Apple do this? To make the computer thin. Why does it need to be as thin as a finger? I don't know.

I'm really not going to bother arguing about how iMacs (or any Mac - desktop mac at least, i'm not really into their laptop line) are overpriced. Just go compare prices with parts in your computer to the prices of the same parts from somewhere else.

Mac OS X is good about Apple. That's really the only reason I own an Apple computer. But that doesn't mean Windows is horrible at all, either.

I don't care about the elegance of a machine, how thin it is, the aluminum case and the black apple logo it comes with - a computer is meant for using, not to look at. With a PC all you do is look into a simple plain monitor, and you don't concentrate on how your monitor looks.

So PLEASE, if you're going to start defending Apple computers do not start saying how sexy it looks. Right now as I use my iMac I'm not concentrating on the aluminum case or the black border around the screen - I do not care about that, who seriously appreciates that when they're using the computer? If someone happens to be a person who cares more about the looks of a computer case than the hardware, then they're a fool - in this economy, especially.

To have a "sexy" case shouldn't cost hundreds of extra dollars. As I said before, I just want to use the operating system that comes with Apples because it's the best one out there for me - and I'd have no problem with buying an Apple computer in the future if they change their prices to something reasonable and have better specs.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

I used to own a PC too so I know how it's like. It was horrible, but that was so many years ago and the hardware was complete crap which made everything unbelievably slow. Now that I am much more knowledgeable in this area than I was before I know that I have to get a computer with good specs and it will run good.

Windows isn't bad. If you want to avoid viruses: Download Firefox, and only go to trusted websites. If you want to, sure, go ahead and get a simple antivirus in the case that you do happen to get infected.

I just don't understand how one can justify paying so much for a simple underspec'd computer especially in this economy. You can NOT say that it's not overpriced and underspec'd. First of all an iMac uses mobile parts that are slower and less efficient than normal desktop hardware. Why does Apple do this? To make the computer thin. Why does it need to be as thin as a finger? I don't know.

I'm really not going to bother arguing about how iMacs (or any Mac - desktop mac at least, i'm not really into their laptop line) are overpriced. Just go compare prices with parts in your computer to the prices of the same parts from somewhere else.

Mac OS X is good about Apple. That's really the only reason I own an Apple computer. But that doesn't mean Windows is horrible at all, either.

I don't care about the elegance of a machine, how thin it is, the aluminum case and the black apple logo it comes with - a computer is meant for using, not to look at. With a PC all you do is look into a simple plain monitor, and you don't concentrate on how your monitor looks.

So PLEASE, if you're going to start defending Apple computers do not start saying how sexy it looks. Right now as I use my iMac I'm not concentrating on the aluminum case or the black border around the screen - I do not care about that, who seriously appreciates that when they're using the computer? If someone happens to be a person who cares more about the looks of a computer case than the hardware, then they're a fool - in this economy, especially.

To have a "sexy" case shouldn't cost hundreds of extra dollars. As I said before, I just want to use the operating system that comes with Apples because it's the best one out there for me - and I'd have no problem with buying an Apple computer in the future if they change their prices to something reasonable and have better specs.

This is the main argument point of the "PC is cheaper than Mac" threads. the point remains that the iMac still does pretty well in benchmarks with laptop components. It's not exactly a "desktop" computer. It's an AIO or All-In-One. Dell/HP/Sony's offerings of AIO form factor computers perform much worse than the iMac if you have the same budget.

There is absolutely no way to use desktop components in an AIO design or else the case will be very thick and that defeats the purpose. The case has other functions besides "sexy". It's a heat sink of sorts too. Metal dissipates heat much more efficiently than plastic or carbon fiber can.

I also want to point out that having better/more expensive hardware doesn't guarantee you better performance. If I had the same hardware under Vista, it wouldn't perform as well as OS X. There is this nVidia graphics card that has 1GB of VRAM and cost >$1000. Does it have better gaming performance than ATI Radeon 4570? Probably not. Just because a PC has more expensive components does not make it a better or faster computer. It's how the OS USES the hardware. I could deliver pizzas better in a Ford than say a Rolls-Royce.

PCs will have their niche and so will Macs. Saying how one is overpriced and underspec'd without sufficient evidence is simply just ignorant thinking. Even if that's the case, it doesn't make the PC the winner. Just because it slips a bit in one category doesn't make it a loser overall.

 

[armoguy94]

This is the main argument point of the "PC is cheaper than Mac" threads. the point remains that the iMac still does pretty well in benchmarks with laptop components. It's not exactly a "desktop" computer. It's an AIO or All-In-One. Dell/HP/Sony's offerings of AIO form factor computers perform much worse than the iMac if you have the same budget.

There is absolutely no way to use desktop components in an AIO design or else the case will be very thick and that defeats the purpose. The case has other functions besides "sexy". It's a heat sink of sorts too. Metal dissipates heat much more efficiently than plastic or carbon fiber can.

I also want to point out that having better/more expensive hardware doesn't guarantee you better performance. If I had the same hardware under Vista, it wouldn't perform as well as OS X. There is this nVidia graphics card that has 1GB of VRAM and cost >$1000. Does it have better gaming performance than ATI Radeon 4570? Probably not. Just because a PC has more expensive components does not make it a better or faster computer. It's how the OS USES the hardware. I could deliver pizzas better in a Ford than say a Rolls-Royce.

PCs will have their niche and so will Macs. Saying how one is overpriced and underspec'd without sufficient evidence is simply just ignorant thinking. Even if that's the case, it doesn't make the PC the winner. Just because it slips a bit in one category doesn't make it a loser overall.

Hardware is hardware, I'm talking about just the hardware alone, not the speed of hardware and the software it runs. Of course OS X is faster than Vista, most definitely, OS X is a great system. However if Vista was as efficient as OS X then that wouldn't be the case.

BTW, my thick G5 iMac using desktop components is not that thick for a computer and is perfectly pleasant to look at, more so than a normal desktop.

Apple should make a lower-end Mac Pro that has a bit better hardware than the iMac, and all desktop components. So it's just like a normal PC, but with OS X on it.. and it should be cheaper than the iMac.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Hardware is hardware, I'm talking about just the hardware alone, not the speed of hardware and the software it runs. Of course OS X is faster than Vista, most definitely, OS X is a great system. However if Vista was as efficient as OS X then that wouldn't be the case.

BTW, my thick G5 iMac using desktop components is not that thick for a computer and is perfectly pleasant to look at, more so than a normal desktop.

Apple should make a lower-end Mac Pro that has a bit better hardware than the iMac, and all desktop components. So it's just like a normal PC, but with OS X on it.. and it should be cheaper than the iMac.

But Vista isn't as efficient as OS X. Your G5 iMac uses older components. Hardware has changed. Chips have gotten much smaller, but the main point is that Apple wants to be green/environmentally friendly. Desktop components use much more power than their laptop counterparts. In most cases, the extra power used is wasted. It's not like you get 2X better performance. It's nearly the same. And... it's easier to buy because notebooks are selling faster than desktop towers. It's also easier to design because Apple's notebook line uses some of the same/similar processors. And finally, it's thinner and uses less power.

Apple could do that, but the time is long over. Last year, notebooks sold more than desktops. The market is not geared toward desktops. For the gamers about to whine about this, it's the truth. Not everyone is a gamer. The entire consumer computer industry is shifting toward mobile systems.

 

[J&JPolangin]

...Not everyone is a gamer. The entire consumer computer industry is shifting toward mobile systems.

...the whole post was well put but this line was great...

If I want games, that's what my PS3 and Wii are for... the 20" iMac 2.4 Ghz and eeePC1000H round out my computer needs...

 

[chrono1081]

I didnt read the whole thread but get an iMac. I got one for my parents and they've been showing it off ever since. They are absolutely in love with it.