I actually plan on buying the refurb mini. Will the refurb mini CD come with Leopard in October?
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.
iMac Review, iMac Software Update 1.0
- Thread starter mchank
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I actually plan on buying the refurb mini. Will the refurb mini CD come with Leopard in October?
It's by no means out of the question to have some refurb Minis selling with Leopard in October, but it'll be far more likely that most will still have Tiger. It's something you'll need to watch out for when you buy. But after October, you should certainly get a steadily increasing number of refurb Minis selling with Leopard.
You couldn't have been more wrong than this,i have a G5 with the isight,before that i had a powerbook g4 15" with 1.5ghz cpu and before that an imac g4.
Most people say that apple sould put a 8600GT or 8600GTS as an option at list for BTO,they can but they didn't and thats a mistake from apple for sure.
On the other hand i really can't wait to see how apple will handle-support EA,epic and id when they announce that there games are ready to ship for mac's(WWDC07 remember)
It's interesting how the previous post by BRLawyer became bold. As for the 8600GT or 8600GTS are they not slightly longer and run hotter which could be a problem in the tight confines of the iMac.
As for EA, Epic and id don't you think if they are designed for the iMac and not just for the PC everything should run just fine? IMO.
Computers Suck!
I used to sell computers on a retail level, 5 to 6 days a week. I sold IBM, HP, Apple, Toshiba, Packard Bell, Compact, and more. Out of all the computers I sold, Apple had the least problems. Most problems were OWNER related! I would disagee that all computer makers get their parts from the same source! PC's in general get there parts from a parts bin (so to speak) and mix an match etc. When I had to take a computer apart, I found that Apples parts were made much better.
Apple is the only computer manufacturer that controls hardware and software, not like other PC manufacturers...not saying something can't go wrong, but my experience in the 7 years I sold computers was that Apple made a superior product!
I used to sell computers on a retail level, 5 to 6 days a week. I sold IBM, HP, Apple, Toshiba, Packard Bell, Compact, and more. Out of all the computers I sold, Apple had the least problems. Most problems were OWNER related! I would disagee that all computer makers get their parts from the same source! PC's in general get there parts from a parts bin (so to speak) and mix an match etc. When I had to take a computer apart, I found that Apples parts were made much better.
Apple is the only computer manufacturer that controls hardware and software, not like other PC manufacturers...not saying something can't go wrong, but my experience in the 7 years I sold computers was that Apple made a superior product!
This review , from an acquaintance :
Ill try to categorize this:
The hardware: The best build quality youve ever seen in a PC. The previous iMac looked like a toy an iPod desktop sort of but this one looks like a high-end consumer device, maybe a flat panel TV. The glare from the glass is over-hyped, I dont even notice any glare now. The thin keyboard was uncomfortable at first, but now I love it and Im a long-time touch typist whos finicky about keyboards. Chin?? What chin? Seriously, they look much better in person than in photos.
OS X: Very easy to get used to just by playing around. Everything works fast and is well-polished.
An example, I bought a new UPS for this, same as I have for my PC. I plugged it in and ran around looking for the software to install so I could configure it, etc., just like I did on the PC, and couldnt find any on the disk or at the manufacturers site. I was frustrated! Then I noticed that there was now an UPS section under power management in OS X that allowed me to configure the UPS. Things just seem to work easier on the Mac.
IOW, Im totally happy.
I also installed Windows XP using Boot Camp, and games run reasonably well. I game, but Im not a hardcore gamer, so the system was enough for me.
And if you want to use it as a DVD player, Front Row really makes this look like a high-end TV.
I was going to wait for Leopard, but its a tradeoff. Macs are the best deal hardware-wise when they first get updated, then they lose ground as chips get faster but the Mac models stay the same. So I bought now, and Ill upgrade to Leopard later.
Suggestion: Buy the base model of what youre getting and upgrade from other sources. Apple charges $100 for 1 GB more memory, and I got an extra 2 GB stick for about $120. Apple charges $100 to go from 320 GB HDD to 500 GB, and I bought a whole extra 500GB external drive for just a little more.
Good luck!
Ill try to categorize this:
The hardware: The best build quality youve ever seen in a PC. The previous iMac looked like a toy an iPod desktop sort of but this one looks like a high-end consumer device, maybe a flat panel TV. The glare from the glass is over-hyped, I dont even notice any glare now. The thin keyboard was uncomfortable at first, but now I love it and Im a long-time touch typist whos finicky about keyboards. Chin?? What chin? Seriously, they look much better in person than in photos.
OS X: Very easy to get used to just by playing around. Everything works fast and is well-polished.
An example, I bought a new UPS for this, same as I have for my PC. I plugged it in and ran around looking for the software to install so I could configure it, etc., just like I did on the PC, and couldnt find any on the disk or at the manufacturers site. I was frustrated! Then I noticed that there was now an UPS section under power management in OS X that allowed me to configure the UPS. Things just seem to work easier on the Mac.
IOW, Im totally happy.
I also installed Windows XP using Boot Camp, and games run reasonably well. I game, but Im not a hardcore gamer, so the system was enough for me.
And if you want to use it as a DVD player, Front Row really makes this look like a high-end TV.
I was going to wait for Leopard, but its a tradeoff. Macs are the best deal hardware-wise when they first get updated, then they lose ground as chips get faster but the Mac models stay the same. So I bought now, and Ill upgrade to Leopard later.
Suggestion: Buy the base model of what youre getting and upgrade from other sources. Apple charges $100 for 1 GB more memory, and I got an extra 2 GB stick for about $120. Apple charges $100 to go from 320 GB HDD to 500 GB, and I bought a whole extra 500GB external drive for just a little more.
Good luck!
I currently have an older computer, but most games worth playing are playable.
Games I Play:
Civilization IV
Sim City 4
(Used to play WOW, no time now)
Warcraft III
Battlefield 1942
Now... I tried Roller Coaster Tycoon, and it works... just unstable. Now these new games EA is throwing through Cidega well most of them are crap.
Game I am anticipating: Starcarft 2.
Game I can't play due to processor speed: Doom 3
Game I could play if it weren't intel only: Heroes 5.
My config:
1.2 ghz PPC G4
768 MB RAM
ATI Raedeon 9600 w/ 256 MB VRAM
Siritek SATA adapter with 150MB Hard Drive (Civ IV never worked right with standard ATA, the Disk I/O slowed everything down).
I've had this thing for almost 4 years. I could possibly play Doom 3 if I upgraded the processor. At this juncture I am going to save for a new Mac Pro. I got the G4 when the G5 came out for $1200. In all honesty the best investment is a Mac Pro. I probably can play Starcraft 2, the only thing stopping me from playing some of the other new games is the cidega not working on ppc.
Here is also something to think about: A Good Game is playable without spectacular graphics. I think for someone who doesn't have the space, cant afford a laptop will find the iMac acceptable. Especially in college where Counterstrike (boot camp i guess), wow, warcraft 3 will be what is popular. Even if Quake IV is the rage 39fps is still good considering network lag is going to kill that anyhow.
Games I Play:
Civilization IV
Sim City 4
(Used to play WOW, no time now)
Warcraft III
Battlefield 1942
Now... I tried Roller Coaster Tycoon, and it works... just unstable. Now these new games EA is throwing through Cidega well most of them are crap.
Game I am anticipating: Starcarft 2.
Game I can't play due to processor speed: Doom 3
Game I could play if it weren't intel only: Heroes 5.
My config:
1.2 ghz PPC G4
768 MB RAM
ATI Raedeon 9600 w/ 256 MB VRAM
Siritek SATA adapter with 150MB Hard Drive (Civ IV never worked right with standard ATA, the Disk I/O slowed everything down).
I've had this thing for almost 4 years. I could possibly play Doom 3 if I upgraded the processor. At this juncture I am going to save for a new Mac Pro. I got the G4 when the G5 came out for $1200. In all honesty the best investment is a Mac Pro. I probably can play Starcraft 2, the only thing stopping me from playing some of the other new games is the cidega not working on ppc.
Here is also something to think about: A Good Game is playable without spectacular graphics. I think for someone who doesn't have the space, cant afford a laptop will find the iMac acceptable. Especially in college where Counterstrike (boot camp i guess), wow, warcraft 3 will be what is popular. Even if Quake IV is the rage 39fps is still good considering network lag is going to kill that anyhow.
Exactly what I meant above; pretty much every game out there is more than playable on the new iMac; you talk from a G4's perspective, I talk from a G5, and we are both happy campers with our "geriatrical" GPUs.
Once and for all, it's time to put down the spec and FPS talks and see the real facts behind normal gaming by normal users. As for the informal review above, it only corroborates how far ahead Apple is of the usual PC scum pack...the iMac rocks, and has always rocked.
They're nice computers, but they certainly 'aint gaming powerhouses. Apple need to release some kind of Mac with high graphics capability because they have no product in that area. With all this talk of new games on Macs you have to wonder what machine people are going to play them on. ID always make games that push hardware, and no consumer Mac as much graphical hardware to push. What are people going to play their Tech 5 game on?
It's interesting how the previous post by BRLawyer became bold. As for the 8600GT or 8600GTS are they not slightly longer and run hotter which could be a problem in the tight confines of the iMac.
As for EA, Epic and id don't you think if they are designed for the iMac and not just for the PC everything should run just fine? IMO.
I really don't know my friend,but i think the ati ones run hotter,in any case i was talking for a BTO in a 24" imac,... i mean it has lots of space more than the MBP is in it?
As for the game company's i think if in the end transfer this games also for the mac it will be made for mac not specifically for imac, that maybe means that A) apple will have a BTO gpu for the 24" that can handle the games in decent fps(frames per sec) B)a revision of all the imacs with buffed gpu's or C)some totally new mac that is on the works(something that i doubt).
An "Apple Insider" report a few weeks ago accurately predicted the new iMacs, demise of 17" iMac & claimed that the Mini would receive one more minor update, before it too was retired. This apparently wasn't based on rumour, but sources whose reliability AI had complete faith in.
If the Mini goes, Apple may introduce a new headless Mac with upgradable graphics. SJ's recent comment that future Macs would be "off the charts" leaves room for some doubt that these new iMacs will finalize their desktop line-up for the foreseeable future.
Also, I think that the Cube was well ahead of its time & if Apple released something similar today, it could sell really well.
I hope you're right. Because I don't see how these imacs are "off the charts" given they are barely faster than the prior gen and the only big design difference is a black border around a glass screen -- whoopee!
These are OLD OLD games in the gaming world.
Just wondering when you get your mini will your name change?
Haha, maybe!
Surely it makes sense for Apple to release a new box in case the Mini is retired; a new Cube could happen, although I still doubt they wanna enforce that "fully upgradable" concept...but it's possible to have the fabled headless Mac with a bit more expandability in the near future, following the Mini's demise.
BRLawyer keeps suggesting anyone here not liking the video decision wants a GeForce 8800 series and is a hard core gamer.
Even though no one is suggesting that and is labeled a whiner just for daring to question the decision. (Quite easy to see how Mac users are labeled zealots from reading this thread.)
Yes. That is why we questioned Apples desire for 2" deep. Why not 3" and give yourself more options now and for future models. I highly doubt any customer would or wouldn't buy this model over that 1" difference.
Even the XT model would have been good for me. Some posters keep talking about the barefacts link and even it says:
Well that leaves me less than inspired, why shouldn't I just get the previous model than? (.24GHz isn't gonna make much difference)
Other than that I don't have an issue with these Macs. (Haven't seen the glossy screen yet.)
I don't understand the color complaints.
Who cares what color the back is, you don't see it! My Dell LCD has a gray border and black edges and it looks great.
I think the biggest incentive to buy the newer iMac over and the previous generation is the inclusion of iLife '08.
Anyone hear any official word if these new models are entitled to a free upgrade to Leopard?
I am planning to buy a new IMac, my first Apple computer since the Apple II, this week. My original reason for looking at the Mac line (besides a distrust of Vista) was that I have a lot of digital photos, and some movies, that I wanted to organize and edit. From the preliminary reviews of IPhoto and IMovie in the new ILife, it looks like they made a very good product better.
I also was one of the irritating "Should I buy an IMac now" posters. I am unfamiliar with Apple and how it publicizes/handles upcoming hardware releases and this is an aspect of Apple that I don't like. If I had known when and what the releases were going to be, I would have bought last March. Styling that doesn't improve performance doesn't mean much to me. Sure, in a battle between 2 roughly comparable computers I'd pick the better looking one. But in a battle between a 'cool' computer and a hideous one with great perfomance, I'd go ugly.
Speaking JUST for me, the AIO/tower battle doesn't mean much. The last 2 computers I purchased I kept for around 4 years each, and although they were mid-towers I never did more than add memory. I bought them with the largest hard-drive, a near top speed processor and a very good (not best) graphics card, and by the time something significantly better was out in all 3 of these categories, I felt I was better off buying a new machine than trying to upgrade the old one because of ALL of the hardware/software that I would need to change/upgrade. And upgrading MS software and drivers has been a real pain ever since Windows 95. I once was, but no longer am, a build it yourselfer. I feel that, with the very notable exception of the video card, that this machine keeps with my philosophy.
I too wish that they had stuck at least a medium high end gamer card in this machine. It is one of the reasons I waited. The 'cost' of adding an inch or so to the thickness of what was, to me, an already very thin IMac so that you could install or cool a more powerful graphics card was not a cost at all. Although I currently don't play games on my computers (for ME, consoles are for gaming) I know that Starcraft 2 is coming out, and this game might change my attitude on this point. But the main reasons for me for buying an IMac: a stable OS, very good photo and video editing , good (if not great) IWorks or other reasonably priced 'Office' type products and fewer virus worries, are all still true, so hopefully by Friday I'll have my new IMac.
Anyone ever thought tha market for this new imac is the people who like my self buy a nice mac + a nintedo Wii.
To be fair the new AMD Radion HD is a good card and very low power, and heat compared to the geforce 8. What this really means is that for the first time Apple is using a AMD made graphics card on a new machine and could be proving ground for letting intel know that steve will not bend i can see intel trying to push something on steve and this being a personal up yours we still use AMD tactics.
ATi is dead btw, AMD is ATi. Welcome DAMMIT(the term the inquirer pulled out there behind for the merger)
To be fair the new AMD Radion HD is a good card and very low power, and heat compared to the geforce 8. What this really means is that for the first time Apple is using a AMD made graphics card on a new machine and could be proving ground for letting intel know that steve will not bend i can see intel trying to push something on steve and this being a personal up yours we still use AMD tactics.
ATi is dead btw, AMD is ATi. Welcome DAMMIT(the term the inquirer pulled out there behind for the merger)
Thanks for that info. I've been using Flash, some mild PS as of late and just started using Maya PE without any issues. I find most posts funny about the Pro/non-Pro issue with concerns about software. Well mostly you can't do "PRO" stuff on an iMac
I use my iMac (see sig.) to do illustrtations, cartoons and some animation (2D as of now) but to some people I wouldn't be a "PRO" because I use an iMac My issue with this line of thinking (if it really is that) is getting/using a Mac Pro makes a person a true professional and not based on what they can do. So going along with that thinking should mean any of us using our iMacs to make a living or create artwork in various forms is telling us, were not Pro's, even though the money we make and the jobs we've done or are doing shows this different Hey if a Mac Pro makes my left hand create better art, guess I needed a better GPU and not a vacation So based on this thread title I'd really like to see some numbers or more like real life work flows/reports as to how the new iMacs are handling some projects. Yes, an actual review from members that make a living using iMacs or use them at school in design departments (If any new ones are placed in upcoming classes for the fall please post even if this is wishful thinking).
I'd love to have an iMac that could have 4GB RAM and a bigger screen than I have now. What I don't want is to spend my money on (about $2000 more) something that won't really matter if I'm not using programs that need extra power even once in a great while.
Let's keep reviews on the new iMacs rolling in and if anyone uses Adobe programs please give some results. Maybe using Flash, Illustrator and PS or even another program like Painter.
My personal preferences aside, I too doubt Apple will ever do a "fully upgradable" consumer-priced computer, not least because it'd be directly competing with cheap PC towers. As you well know, Apple's business is currently so profitable they simply don't need this kind of product.
But if the Mini has seen its final update, I'd expect either a new headless consumer-priced Mac, or for Apple TV to evolve into a viable games/media computer. I feel Apple TV still needs that something extra before it captures the public's imagination. The addition of some kind of gaming facility here could do the trick.
Then again, SJ also quite recently said he can see a time when Apple "sell 80-to-90 per cent notebooks", so who knows. Maybe his new "off the charts" Macs are just new iMacs & a surprise new range of Mac laptops in the near future (but not to replace the highly-successful MacBooks).
My money is on a new headless Mac, not radically different from the Mini, but with discrete (though not cutting-edge) graphics. I also think such a Mac would be far more successful with switchers than the Mini with its GMA 950.
This'll be my first post and i've been reading the forum for some time, i'll try to keep it short but i wanted to touch on a few points.
1) For Artful Dodger: I am a professional photo retoucher out here in L.A.. And i'm also an EX- pc tech of many years. I have a brand new "old" 24" imac, just bought about 3 weeks ago from the local apple store. At work i edit on a couple different mac pros that utilize intel and mac chips. anyhow, i had been tossing around holding out for the new silver imac or going for the white unit. considering i needed a new computer, was sick and tired of windows (vista being the final straw), and enjoyed the ease of os x at work, and the fact that i am getting married in november and wanted to have a big screen well powered machine to design some grapic intense invites on; i went ahead for the 24" in white and purchased the 3GB RAM upgrade from crucial.
To the point- my imac with it's 2.16 cpu, 7300gt gpu and 3GB of RAM is an EXCELLENT editing machine with the entire CS3 suite. i mainly use photoshop and illustrator and edit and retouch and work on some pretty huge files in both of these apps. so PERFORMANCE wise the new imac will do as well and probably SLIGHTLY better than my white 24", also considering you can pop 1GB more RAM in there and you get a bigger nudge. as far as the new screen though for me and most other photo editors it's a deal killer.
2) As mentioned i worked on windows PC's for many years. imagine sitting and waiting for a living for PC's to boot for 30 minutes, drivers to load, apps to uninstall, i even did a job at a small business where they had on 5 machines- 30,000 viruses, incompatible hardware issues, phone calls at 2am because the owner had screwed up what i had fixed earlier that day. and then vista...
This misconception that an IMAC is a mid level consumer machine is not correct. IMO the mini is a mid level machine. The AVERAGE windows machine i worked on from the average EVERYDAY customer is more like a $500 dell or HP, with 512 mb (1GB max) of RAM and an intel celeron or the lowest common denominator cpu. and funny, the average BUSINESS customer was much lower speced than that. Heck- my fiance recently purchased a dell with 1GB of ram an AMD 3800+ dual core, and a 19" LCD shipped for $700. she will get my imac when apple upgrades the imac respectably.
the absence of a tower is a non-issue to the average joe. all they want nowadays is a pretty 19" LCD. which can be had for $200. the tower can be tucked away out of sight in their little pre-fabbed "desktop hutch". in other words a $2000 imac with it's hardware configuration- is not a lowest common denominator machine.
3) the gpu. i'm no longer an avid custom rig building gamer like i once was. But, i can see where so many people are coming from. for $2000 you can roll your own pretty mean gaming machine that will trounce the imac. BUT, the reason many more KNOWLEDGABLE consumers (yes there are a few) wish to switch to mac is for the OS. yes you can get os x to run on a pc but not optimally. the styling of the mac does come into play but, it does take a back seat to the performance freaks.
4) aesthetically the imacs (old and new) are very pleasing but, it amazes me how many mac freaks consider that to be the deciding factor. especially out here in L.A.
5) to say that Jobs does want this or that type of consumer is nutso IMO. he constantly is bashing microsoft (rightfully so) in his ads, now has intel chips, and is forever touting the fact that mac can run windows. what is apples market share in the computer market? 6-7%? do you not think he wants a piece of that windows purse? isn't that what his ad campaign is geared for (and working better towards)? isn't the announcement of new modern games for mac another selling point to draw folks from windows?
6) the new imac. i'm glad i got my "older" one. the glossy screen is a deal breaker. the increase in performance is nice but not earth shattering. the looks are ok but, not mind numbingly briiliant or new. i've had a black and silver LCD for my (now unused) PC for 3 or 4 years. but performance/ hardware wise (gpu not included) it is a very nice machine.
don't get me wrong i love my imac. IMO it bridges a gap (in many ways but, not all) between a high end mac pro and something i could afford and justify with huge beautiful screen that i can do my work on at home. i no longer support anything windows, i won't even install an MS program on my mac. i'm done with them. but, with that being said if Jobs wants to corner the windows market he needs to keep evolving. with vista MANY, MANY ms customers are ready to jump ship. and many more will when xp is no longer supported by them. But, then again he is not an idiot is he? i have a feeling the new imac is a holdover for a while and something new that will drop all of our jaws will come, maybe not "soon" but in a fair amount of time. which is another reason i'm glad i just went an got my new "old" imac a few weeks ago.
sorry for the long post there.
whiteyanderson said everthing I was trying to say but he said it better.
The exception for me is that I am not a graphic designer, and therefore glossy screens do not make a difference to me as pure color matching is not necessary for what I expect to be doing.
The exception for me is that I am not a graphic designer, and therefore glossy screens do not make a difference to me as pure color matching is not necessary for what I expect to be doing.