iMac Review, iMac Software Update 1.0

[soosy]

As a graphics designer, doesn't the sub-par GPU effect your work? I assume video editing is effected by the GPU as well?

Well that's part of what's holding me back and making the decision so frustrating, argh!

I'll probably end up getting one, I'm sure it'll be better than the 3 year old card I'm using now (ati 9600xt).

It just means I'll probably want to upgrade the entire machine earlier... which means discarding a perfectly good 24" display... DAMN YOU SEXY AND AFFORDABLE ALL-IN-ONE! (I'd certainly rest easier if there was a way to use an iMac as a second display for another computer.)

What would really be a fit for me is a small low-end tower like the old Cube. Maybe someday Apple will bridge the gap between Mac mini and Mac Pro.

 

[WannaGoMac]

Well that's part of what's holding me back and making the decision so frustrating, argh!

I'll probably end up getting one, I'm sure it'll be better than the 3 year old card I'm using now (ati 9600xt).

It just means I'll probably want to upgrade the entire machine earlier... which means discarding a perfectly good 24" display... DAMN YOU SEXY AND AFFORDABLE ALL-IN-ONE! (I'd certainly rest easier if there was a way to use an iMac as a second display for another computer.)

What would really be a fit for me is a small low-end tower like the old Cube. Maybe someday Apple will bridge the gap between Mac mini and Mac Pro.

Yep. I think the AIO is a nice idea, but also feel it is very wasteful. My 2yr old 20" LCD is gorgeous and still about $450 because it is 1600x1200 unlike the lower resolution "wide-screen" 20/20.1 LCDs (including the iMacs). I plan to use it for many years to come. Why should I have to re-invest in another LCD when I have a very nice one now that is STILL better quality than most LCDs out today?

 

[mavherzog]

It just means I'll probably want to upgrade the entire machine earlier... which means discarding a perfectly good 24" display...

Why? If I buy a new 24" iMac, I will most surely ALSO buy a 24" LCD display to go with it. Dual displays is the ONLY way to go!

 

[iMacMike]

Going to check one out today....

Heading over to the store to have a look at one. If the screen isn't an issue, I will walk out with one too....

I find it funny how everyone rips the graphics card on the machine and states that it cannot be used to play games. It all depends on the GAMES you play. I am using a G4 850 MHZ for pitty sakes and running WOW on it - just about THE most popular game out there. Sure, I have the settings down on it and yes I do have slowdowns at times - but it is perfectly playable. Heck, when I get the new iMac, I will probably be BLOWN AWAY by the speed of WOW.

I have to agree with many of the posts about this - if you want to play serious, hard-core games with the latest graphics, etc, get an x-box or whatever. The iMac isn't for you. But - if you are like me and enjoy playing card games, puzzle games, many sports type games and WOW - then this machine is a great fit. The iMac is made for people exactly like me who fit right in the middle of the consumer computer market.

Ease up everyone!

Regards,
iMacMike

 

[jpirizarry]

I'm glad I didn't wait for this update

I bought an Imac 24 for home use a few months ago when the rumors of an update started to show up in this forum. The new model looks pretty good, and I'm sure people are gonna love it, but there's really not a big hardware difference from last model. I honestly don't like glossy screens, they reflect to much light. The blacks looks better, but is really annoying to use in daylight
:-(

The aluminum case is fine, but I was hoping to see a bigger difference in design terms, like the one we got from the lamp like G4 (a model that I had and it worked beatifully for 4 years until it was to slow for me) to the one piece G5. But I guess that was a hard design to beat.

About gaming, well I thinks most mac users don't play games anyway. I don't care about games, I care about video editing, music and web design, and there's is no doubt that if you want a hassle free system to do this things mac is definitely the best choice.

For the ones that waited for this release, enjoy

 

[Artropolis]

First 24" failed.. I'm on my 2nd.

As posted earlier - I bought a 24" on Wednesday and it pretty much failed out of the box. I took it in today (to the Genius Bar) where they took a look at it and pronounced Time of Death... 10:32am (my appointment was at 10:30). They went in back, grabbed another (the last one) and sent me home with a new unit. Of course, I'm at work now.... so I won't be able to check it out until I get home tonight... but I just wanted to chime back in that while I had a disappointing initial experience with my 24 - (my first issue with a Mac in 20 years) - I was extremely pleased with Apple's handling of the problem. It really is great to have the Apple Stores and Genius Bars!

 

[Headrush69]

I find it funny how everyone rips the graphics card on the machine and states that it cannot be used to play games. It all depends on the GAMES you play.

Yes and there are current games that struggle with modest settings now.

I have to agree with many of the posts about this - if you want to play serious, hard-core games with the latest graphics, etc, get an x-box or whatever. The iMac isn't for you.

We're not worried about high end games, its more mid range. Go try RCT3 on an iMac with medium graphics.

But - if you are like me and enjoy playing card games, puzzle games, many sports type games and WOW - then this machine is a great fit. The iMac is made for people exactly like me who fit right in the middle of the consumer computer market.

If you make the argument that the iMac is only for these type games why bother changing the video card at all? Leave it with a X1600 which is going to be dirt cheap and save us on the overall cost.

Ease up everyone!

Don't read too much into comments. I don't think we are angry or anything, but for me if I am investing $2000 for any computer, since this computer doesn't have upgrade options, I want to make sure that the current hardware is going to at least somewhat usable on anything released for the next year.

About gaming, well I thinks most mac users don't play games anyway. I don't care about games, I care about video editing, music and web design, and there's is no doubt that if you want a hassle free system to do this things mac is definitely the best choice.

It's an assumption that most users don't care, and were do you draw the cut off? Well only 25% care about this, so it doesn't matter. 30%?
Everyone is quite to say, "well that's not the iMac's target audience."

And I think that is the question some of us are asking, WHY NOT?
Apple could have pleased everyone and have the iMac considered a gaming machine for all but hardcore gamers with only minor changes to machine and cost. Obviously size was a driving force for this model.

So that begs the question who is Apple targeting with these changes?

• It's hardware changes aren't enough for most current iMac users to want to upgrade.
• Is the new look going to attract more new iMac users than the old style? Maybe?
• Is it going to attract new iMac users because it is only 2" deep instead of 3" or 4"?

I still might end up getting one, but with such small changes I have to re-consider that purchasing a previous model with the NVidia video chip is a cheaper/better alternative.

So you people with the new models, help us out, post some benchmarks.
You can only see so much reading generic PC benchmarks on this video chip.

 

[mikef07]

Wow!! People just do not get it.

Honda could put a V8 into their Accord and lower their profit margin and make everyone happy because it could have 375HP but they chose not to. They chose to put a V4 engine into and then set a price. Either you pay for it or you don't. If you want a V8 don't get a Honda.

Same with this. Apple decided on the specs they wanted that "they" felt would make this sell at a maximum profit while achieving maximum sales. The are a company. They have shareholders. This is where their allegiance lies. Not to some kid or adult who wants to play a little Unreal Tournament. There are many more that don't care about gaming than do. These same people don't want to pay even $100 more for a better video card because they will never use it. If you don't like it DON'T FREAKING BUY AN iMAC. Go buy something else. Apple is trying to gain market share. People who play games are not going to increase their market share. People who do everyday things on a computer will. This is their target audience.

Honda wants to go after daily commuters. Do some of those daily commuters want to drive fast and would they prefer a V8? Sure but it is not their target audience. You go after your target audience. Apple has said that their target audience is the normal day to day user, not a heavy gamer.

Why then would Jobs talk about gaming? So that it sells more to the Mom and Dad and Grandma that know junior may use it for games without knowing what games need hardware wise today. It is the same reason Honda publishes its 0-60 times on their V4 even though they know it isn't as good as a BMW 335i. So the daily commuter knows that when he need a little pep he will get it.

 

[mongoos150]

It just means I'll probably want to upgrade the entire machine earlier... which means discarding a perfectly good 24" display...

Not really. Just sell your iMac when you want to upgrade on eBay. I always recover about 75-85% of my original sale price. No display going to waste. And you get to buy the next, newer machine for approx. 20% of its cost. No waste, no pain.

 

[Red-red]

I
Anyone want to complain how their $299 Wii can't play PS3 Blu Ray games and that the Wii should have put a better video processor in?

No because a Wii is £180, A new imac is £1200, there is a "slight" difference.

Also don't take me for just wanting a imac for playing games because I don't, I want one for many things, OSX being the main reason. Now im complaining about the graphics chip not because I want a 8800GTX in it all I ask is for a average graphics chip capable of running some games. Not the sh*te that they put in that a £600 laptop will be able to run the same....

You people who are saying we who just want to play the odd game don't "get it" but imo, it is the other way round and Apple are just ignoring something that could potentional make them a lot bigger then they already are.

Again when they unveiled the new imac, no one really maked a noise and steve jobs had to practically tell the audience to clap. No one cared about it being thinner, no one cared about it looking how to it did for the most part, it looks good yes but nothing so drastically better you just have to buy it. I can garrentee you that if they had put a better graphics chip in, kept it the same thickness I would garrentee people would be a lot happier because with the current spec, we can't even run year old games on it, let alone games that are coming out now. So leave it a year it will be practically obsolete when it comes to gaming and we are meant to pay top doller for it.

 

[mikef07]

No because a Wii is £180, A new imac is £1200, there is a "slight" difference.

Also don't take me for just wanting a imac for playing games because I don't, I want one for many things, OSX being the main reason. Now im complaining about the graphics chip not because I want a 8800GTX in it all I ask is for a average graphics chip capable of running some games. Not the sh*te that they put in that a £600 laptop will be able to run the same....

You people who are saying we who just want to play the odd game don't "get it" but imo, it is the other way round and Apple are just ignoring something that could potentional make them a lot bigger then they already are.

Again when they unveiled the new imac, no one really maked a noise and steve jobs had to practically tell the audience to clap. No one cared about it being thinner, no one cared about it looking how to it did for the most part, it looks good yes but nothing so drastically better you just have to buy it. I can garrentee you that if they had put a better graphics chip in, kept it the same thickness I would garrentee people would be a lot happier because with the current spec, we can't even run year old games on it, let alone games that are coming out now. So leave it a year it will be practically obsolete when it comes to gaming and we are meant to pay top doller for it.

Jobs doesn't give a crap about applause. He cares how many he sells and he will sell more with this. Of course people will be happier if it had a better video card. They would also be happier with 2GB Ram and even happier if it came with a supermodel that you get to take home with you. It doesn't though. He priced it according to what they put into it. He lowered the price and put more into it. Good enough for me and good enough for most. It isn't a gming machine. When are you guys going to understand that.

 

[Headrush69]

Wow!! People just do not get it.

We do, we're just disappointed because we thought Apple could do both.

Apple decided on the specs they wanted that "they" felt would make this sell at a maximum profit while achieving maximum sales. The are a company. They have shareholders. This is where their allegiance lies. Not to some kid or adult who wants to play a little Unreal Tournament.

You're assuming this is the sweet spot for features, you don't know and can only assume. If this is true, why upgrade and not stay with the cheaper X1600? Do you really think the market you keep suggesting they are after cares or knows the difference between the X1600 and HD 2600 Pro?

There are many more that don't care about gaming than do. These same people don't want to pay even $100 more for a better video card because they will never use it.

There are better options for the same price and whether they care is hardly quantifiable. Apple has never made what most would consider a high end gaming machine so how do you know?
(Don't say market research as early reports also suggested no one would pay the price for early intel Macs and they are selling incredibly well.

If you don't like it DON'T FREAKING BUY AN iMAC. Go buy something else.

Easy fella. What is wrong with discussion about what people may or may not see as issues that they felt could have been improved?

Apple is trying to gain market share. People who play games are not going to increase their market share.

How do you know that?
(It's a guess by you and Apple)
Well if I go back to running OS X on PC hardware than their market share is down 1!

Apple has said that their target audience is the normal day to day user, not a heavy gamer.

Who keeps arguing heavy gamers, no one. We know how computer software/requirements change, why start on the bottom?

Why then would Jobs talk about gaming? So that it sells more to the Mom and Dad and Grandma that know junior may use it for games without knowing what games need hardware wise today.

I don't buy that. Apple isn't showing off The Sims, they're marketing high end games like Madden 08, Gears of Ware, etc.

Its just a discussion people, take it easy.

 

[k2k koos]

iMac a great deal

Im impressed with the iMac.

Starting at $1199,-

Now take the Mac mini (base $599,-), add a 20" cinema dispaly ($599,-), add a keyboard and a mouse ($49,- each)
total: $1298,-
YOu get a nice looking system, but with inferior specs to the iMac, for more money..... (slower processor, inferior graphics card, smaller and slower harddisk, no FW 800, no "n' draft airport, need I go on?

Apple should adjust a few prices on the display, and the base Mac mini (both should go down to at least $499,-) And still you'd only be saving about $100,- and get an inferior system. (personally, I think the mini back to 499, and the display should go to 399, that would be highly competitive, and a great package for the money $996,- including keyboard and mouse..., now that is worth considering )

Of course I know that the Mac mini is designed for those switching to the Mac platform, without having to spend high end prices, but still, for those who would like to build their own system with Apple hardware, around a mini, get a bad deal..... and will have to switch to an iMac (be stupid not too)

 

[WannaGoMac]

Personally, I am frustrated because Apple won't make a computer form factor (i.e. upgradeable) or an AIO with enough power, so I don't have to buy 2 computers (Windows & Mac) in order to switch to Mac.

As I posted, the only thing I can come up with is to buy a cheap dell and then a Mini. But it is silly that I have to buy 2 computers in order to do all I need with a computer. Wasteful....

 

[soosy]

If you don't like it DON'T FREAKING BUY AN iMAC. Go buy something else.

At the risk of repeating myself... the problem is there isn't anything else to buy short of the high end Mac Pro. There needs to be a mid range Mac with a decent graphics card. I don't see any reason to intentionally ignore this market.

 

[mikef07]

At the risk of repeating myself... the problem is there isn't anything else to buy short of the high end Mac Pro. There needs to be a mid range Mac with a decent graphics card. I don't see any reason to intentionally ignore this market.

Apparently there doesn't need to be. They will gain more market share over the next year and continue to do well. Apple is doing very well. They did upgrade the video card, albeit not very much but it is better than the old one. People wanted more. I can understand that but it is what it is.

 

[sbarton]

I'm not at all surprised by the GAMING COMMUNITY coming out once again to talk down the iMac and the lackluster video card/processors/etc. that it is under the hood. They're here at every speedbump and reinvention of the iMac, but they simply don't get it:

The iMac is NOT FOR YOU.

Great, here is another person that desperately wants to pigeon-hole anyone who want's to play a couple of modern 3D games into the "GAMING COMMUNITY". Mr. Jobs has reset your expectations perfectly. The rest of us live in the real world where 4 - 5k is too much for a "home" computer...So where is the compromise?

 

[WannaGoMac]

Great, here is another person that desperately wants to pigeon-hole anyone who want's to play a couple of modern 3D games into the "GAMING COMMUNITY". Mr. Jobs has reset your expectations perfectly. The rest of us live in the real world where 4 - 5k is too much for a "home" computer...So where is the compromise?

Dude! You're getting a Dell!!

 

[Red-red]

How deluded some of you are is untrue. Me and many other seem to be repeating our self to you yet you come out with the same rose tinted view that what ever the imac is it's perfect because its apple.

Again, the imac is for your average consumer, your average consumer's play games. Apple like to put across this image of the mac as a family computer. In a family there is the off chance that some of those children or parents might want to play a game on it god for bid.

The key argument here is that you say the imac "isn't for gaming" and im repeating my self ONCE again to get in your head. Why would apple come out announce games for the mac, big games at that. The new imac is coming out which is what you would expect to play them on as apple seriously cannot expect people to buy a "professional" computer to play a game on surely. Yet they release the imac in-capable of running anything other then a 3 year old game in a low resolution but it's okay because its "apple" so we just have to be quiet about it being stupidly underpowered a work station graphics chip.

 

[jpirizarry]

Upgrades

What about the mac pro? I'm a professional video editor, and at work I have a Mac Pro with plenty of upgrades, including a AJA KONA3 and a SATA 5TB RAID. This beast can handle Uncompressed 10 bit video like only a $120,000 system could do three years ago.

I bet that if you can afford a mac pro, you would be able to play any game at it's best settings, given that you have the right video card which you can always upgrade.

 

[mongoos150]

I don't by that.

You don't what that?

 

[owen-b]

Oh for God's sake this is pathetic.

Here's how this thread will pan out for the next dozen pages:

Camp 1 will repeatedly whine that the current iMac is not built for gaming and that this is UNACCEPTABLE STEVE JOBS AND APPLE!

Camp 2 will point out that, well, that's just the way it is and there's no point repeatedly asking why this is because nobody here is from Apple and therefore nobody hwere can give you an answer, and can you just stop going on about it now because while it's a shame that iMac owners have been sold so short, there are some games that will run, but there's not a lot we can do about it, now is there?

Camp 1 will huff and puff and repeatedly reiterate their DEMAND to have it explained to them WHY APPLE DID THIS and WHY ARE GAMERS SO SHORT CHANGED and WHY DOES APPLE HATE GAMERS. And so on.


I'm with Camp 2. It's a shame. It's annoying. But that's the way it is. Email Steve Jobs and ask him why he places so much emphasis on style over content (making the iMac thinner is totally pointless - nobody gives a cr*p except him and it's the reason the components are underpowered, for heat reasons).

People should read Apple Confidential 2.0 and realise that Steve Jobs is a control freak who has absolutely no understanding WHATSOEVER about how things work and how to code them to work better - he just likes to be at the head of the ship being boss, whether he's making good decisions or not.

 

[owen-b]

Jobs doesn't give a crap about applause. He cares how many he sells and he will sell more with this. Of course people will be happier if it had a better video card. They would also be happier with 2GB Ram and even happier if it came with a supermodel that you get to take home with you. It doesn't though. He priced it according to what they put into it. He lowered the price and put more into it. Good enough for me and good enough for most. It isn't a gming machine. When are you guys going to understand that.

I'm with red-red.

Mike, you could add all sorts of things to that 'ideal speclist' that you pulled out of your cleverclogs locker there.Why isn't there a top performing sports car thrown in, huh? And why oh why aren't Apple giving me a PS3 free with every iMac, eh? Not to mention a free HDTV, come ON APPLE.

Don't be silly. There is a better graphics card out there than that one and it would have made a big difference. Steve Jobs DOES do it for the applause. AND the money. But red-red is right - the new iMac looks lovely but it's made compromises so that it can be thinner. Well we look at the iMac from the front, not the side, and shaving half an inch off does nothing for me frankly.

The point is that people like to play games. Now, some people REALLY like to play games, and for that reason they build custom-designed PCs from people like Alienware or wherever, and have ridiculously slick FPS rates.

The Apple comparable system would be a Mac Pro. Expensive, huh! So, what do all the none-Alienware/Mac Pro gamers use? Well, the PC people can buy a reasonably priced PC, put up with Windows and all it's flaws (in my opinion) and can slot a decent graphics card in there. The Apple comparable computer is the iMac. We can't put new cards in there because the iMac is so slickly designed that it can't be upgraded. As such, it's not unreasonable to ask that a card be in there that allows us 'consumers' to play recent games reasonably well, and the card they put in there will play a 3 year old game 'quite well' on a low resolution.

That, to me, is a perfectly reasonable motive to be p*ssed off about the graphics card.

 

[BKKbill]

How deluded some of you are is untrue. Me and many other seem to be repeating our self to you yet you come out with the same rose tinted view that what ever the imac is it's perfect because its apple.

Again, the imac is for your average consumer, your average consumer's play games. Apple like to put across this image of the mac as a family computer. In a family there is the off chance that some of those children or parents might want to play a game on it god for bid.

The key argument here is that you say the imac "isn't for gaming" and im repeating my self ONCE again to get in your head. Why would apple come out announce games for the mac, big games at that. The new imac is coming out which is what you would expect to play them on as apple seriously cannot expect people to buy a "professional" computer to play a game on surely. Yet they release the imac in-capable of running anything other then a 3 year old game in a low resolution but it's okay because its "apple" so we just have to be quiet about it being stupidly underpowered a work station graphics chip.

I don't think anyone has said or even thinks the Imac is perfect because it's Apple far from it there are many things that should be of higher specifications.
That being said the fact is the Imac isn't for high end gaming and it doesn't really matter how many times you repeat yourself we do get it. I think the computer is for photo, video, and music enthusiasts—perhaps even graphics professionals. I think the planners at Apple designed it this way and are marketing it this way. It is what it is. You don't have to be quiet and you certainly haven't been about thinking it is a stupidly underpowered work station graphics chip. As said we can all put our two-cents worth in.
Hopefully for the people who want to play "big games" there will be something new in the works. Sorry about having a rose tinted view but I guess that also will have to be blamed on Apple for building a computer that I will buy as soon as Leopard come out.

 

[hms84]

I fell so much better with my Mac Pro after this review

These tests ROCK!!