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 think you have a good point here The only time the back is seen is when some cord has to be plugged in or out. It sure wouldn't matter to me but I'm sure it did to Steve.
Been working on my new iMac since last Tuesday - Report
OK, so I had been waiting since last year to upgrade my old G4 lampshade iMac. So when the new ones came out, I was ready to buy even if I was not totally thrilled. Got the standard 24" configuration. After a week of using it, here are my comments:
- The 24 is big! Now that I have it home on my desk, I see that I could have been very happy with the 20". Not a biggy but something to keep in mind if you are on the fence.
- The glossy screen is great for my use and office. Not an issue at all.
- I was worried about the new keyboard but I actually like it. The keys are more responsive than they look. Works better than my old keyboard that was prone to entering double characters even after tweaking preferences.
- The new keyboard is not backlit! Damn, seems that I read somewhere that it was going to be. If they can do it for the MBP, then why not the iMac?
- Wireless reception is fine. I have my router upstairs and the iMac downstairs... no reception problems, never drops.
- Design wise, I'm not thrilled. It's a pretty machine, but I was hoping for something a little more distinctive. I completely skipped the last generation of iMacs because I was so let down after having the gorgeous lampshade design. But I could not wait another three years for the next update so I had to buy.
- I agree with others that the white mouse seems out of place design wise. But I took my gray and black wireless USB mouse that I was using on my old Windows laptop and plugged it in just to see ... and it worked great. So my white mouse is gone.
- Migration Assistant sucks!!!! I can't say enough bad things about it. I had many calls to Apple support and none of them really helped. If it can't be used to go from a PowerPC machine to an Intel machine... just say so!!!! The first few times it just locked up and ran for 12 hours or so... would have gone on forever. Then it actually ran and completed after 9 hours but only migrated my accounts... nothing else. Nothing like having a brand new iMac on your desk for 2 days and not being able to use it!!! I finally had to migrate everything manually. I got it all done and only lost my iTunes play lists for the iPod. I'll have to rebuild those. Firewire Target Disk worked great though, it's a great feature.
- All my old non-UB apps work great - which is frankly more than I expected.
- My only current frustration is trying to get Front Row to run on an external monitor. I have my 106 inch projection system hooked up to the iMac to watch movies I have stored on my big external HD. But FR always launches on the main screen. I could always use mirroring if I have to. I'll figure it out eventually.
- I wish I had more control of the external audio port. I'd like to be able to keep the connector plugged in all the time without killing the sound from my internal speakers. Like to be able to mute the internal speakers while using my external theater sound system. I know that's a software issue, but it needs to be addressed if Apple wants to move Macs into the living area and serve as a home theater server.
Overall, I love my new iMac. The design is way too conservative, but it is attractive and works great for what I need.
OK, so I had been waiting since last year to upgrade my old G4 lampshade iMac. So when the new ones came out, I was ready to buy even if I was not totally thrilled. Got the standard 24" configuration. After a week of using it, here are my comments:
- The 24 is big! Now that I have it home on my desk, I see that I could have been very happy with the 20". Not a biggy but something to keep in mind if you are on the fence.
- The glossy screen is great for my use and office. Not an issue at all.
- I was worried about the new keyboard but I actually like it. The keys are more responsive than they look. Works better than my old keyboard that was prone to entering double characters even after tweaking preferences.
- The new keyboard is not backlit! Damn, seems that I read somewhere that it was going to be. If they can do it for the MBP, then why not the iMac?
- Wireless reception is fine. I have my router upstairs and the iMac downstairs... no reception problems, never drops.
- Design wise, I'm not thrilled. It's a pretty machine, but I was hoping for something a little more distinctive. I completely skipped the last generation of iMacs because I was so let down after having the gorgeous lampshade design. But I could not wait another three years for the next update so I had to buy.
- I agree with others that the white mouse seems out of place design wise. But I took my gray and black wireless USB mouse that I was using on my old Windows laptop and plugged it in just to see ... and it worked great. So my white mouse is gone.
- Migration Assistant sucks!!!! I can't say enough bad things about it. I had many calls to Apple support and none of them really helped. If it can't be used to go from a PowerPC machine to an Intel machine... just say so!!!! The first few times it just locked up and ran for 12 hours or so... would have gone on forever. Then it actually ran and completed after 9 hours but only migrated my accounts... nothing else. Nothing like having a brand new iMac on your desk for 2 days and not being able to use it!!! I finally had to migrate everything manually. I got it all done and only lost my iTunes play lists for the iPod. I'll have to rebuild those. Firewire Target Disk worked great though, it's a great feature.
- All my old non-UB apps work great - which is frankly more than I expected.
- My only current frustration is trying to get Front Row to run on an external monitor. I have my 106 inch projection system hooked up to the iMac to watch movies I have stored on my big external HD. But FR always launches on the main screen. I could always use mirroring if I have to. I'll figure it out eventually.
- I wish I had more control of the external audio port. I'd like to be able to keep the connector plugged in all the time without killing the sound from my internal speakers. Like to be able to mute the internal speakers while using my external theater sound system. I know that's a software issue, but it needs to be addressed if Apple wants to move Macs into the living area and serve as a home theater server.
Overall, I love my new iMac. The design is way too conservative, but it is attractive and works great for what I need.
hmmmm. Any more details? I've used to from machine to machine for many years, and would be surprised that it doesn't work now. Any specific issues?? Were you moving from an old ilamp or something newer? (and I'd hate to move 200GB by hand, and lose any kind of library or playlist...)
Has anyone else yet used the target disk/auto transfer method on the new machines yet?
I think this has been on a lot of our wish lists for years. All this technology, and the 1/8" jack in back is a simple 'defeat' mechanism... How about a preference - alerts to here, other sounds to there...
Well crap! I have an iMac G5 and was planning on using Migration Assistant to get everything over. Is it an issue with your particular model or all PowerPC machines to the new one? :'( Was this an issue before with going from PPC to Intel?
This is the first time I've used Migration Assistant so it's new to me. I was migrating from an old 800 mhz G4 lampshade iMac to the newest iMac just released on Tuesday. On the first call to Apple Support they told me to just try it again. So I did and that didnt work. Then I called back and they told me to just manually move my Documents folder, then delete it from the old machine, then retry. So I did and that didnt work. So I called back and they upped me to a higher level of support. This guy told me to skip this process during setup, and then try again using the app in the Utilities folder (this app starts automatically when you start the machine for the first time. It asks if you want to move data from another Mac. He said to skip this process.) So I did and that didn't work. So I found a good post on Apple's Support forum about how to move things manually and all went well. Everyone at Apple Support was very nice and helped as much as they could, the app just wouldnt work. It would just run for hours and hours and transfer nothing but the account information (over and over agian so I wound up with like 8 accounts on the new iMac.
OK now I'm scared. I have an PowerPC G4 that I need to migrate to my new iMac and I run my business on this thing. I need to have my apps up and running ASAP.
Does anyone know where I can find instructions on the best way to manually migrate if it comes to that?
Drag the contents of the home directory from one machine to the home directory on the other.
Be wary of keychain issues though.
Will that "downgrade" my apps that are shipping on the new machine? For example, it's coming with iLife '08 and I'm on a prior release.
Thanks,
Brian
You'd only be moving your user files and not your applications. Migration Assistant does handle application migration and version checking when you choose to move applications as well.
When I asked about this on Apple Discussion Forum, I was pointed to this file: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=435350
Like I said, by doing it this way everything worked OK, except I lost my iTunes Playlists. But that might have ben my fault, maybe I forgot to migrate something. I guess that's the problem with migrating manually.
Thanks. This is very helpful. If I only lose my iTunes Playlists, I'll be very happy (besides they're in my iPod). I'm more concerned about losing documents and settings.
holy crap...
The amount of dumb ignorance in this thread is astounding.
First, as a former DIY PC user/gamer and someone who through a 12" PowerBook grew to love Macs after formerly scorning them for ages and who bought an Intel iMac the day it was announced - this thread is just ridiculous.
There is plenty of reason to complain to Apple about the GPU whether or not you are a casual or hardcore gamer. Any casual player, if they even play ONE game or want to play the new Quake Wars game is going to have a terrible time on ANY iMac. Please, I played Doom 3 and Quake 4 on my iMac and it was mediocre at best. Choppy framerate even on low settings. Seeing brand new $2000 computers struggle to play games from 2004 and 2005 like WoW and Quake 4 is horrendous.
I can build a rig myself for around $1000 that will smoke any Mac at games but maybe a $3500+ Mac Pro configuration. This is where the complaint is.
I don't need a workstation, my only option is the iMac. I want to play a few games that happen to get native Mac ports (see John Carmack at WWDC... he must surely be pissed about the new iMacs). I grew out of building my own machine and tweaking the **** out of everything, but I'd like the ability to purchase a reasonably priced Mac with good video. There is NO option for this.
The 2400 and 2600 series is just crap for games. Why couldn't they have included the 8600 GT in the MBP ? That would have been 3-4x faster than what they put in the iMac. Hell the older 7600 GT is faster.
This is the complaint. A 3rd revision Intel iMac is shipping with video no faster than that of my 1st revision Intel iMac - ridiculous.
I can deal with Mac's limited game library, since there are only a few I really care about and they are all here but I'm sorry - I want value for my money. Apple has no real option for me right now and after buying 3 Macs within 3 years for me and my family and recommending and getting others to buy quite a few, I'm thinking they might be pushing me back into the Wintel world because there's no option for me at all.
How does Apple not care about that again?
The amount of dumb ignorance in this thread is astounding.
First, as a former DIY PC user/gamer and someone who through a 12" PowerBook grew to love Macs after formerly scorning them for ages and who bought an Intel iMac the day it was announced - this thread is just ridiculous.
There is plenty of reason to complain to Apple about the GPU whether or not you are a casual or hardcore gamer. Any casual player, if they even play ONE game or want to play the new Quake Wars game is going to have a terrible time on ANY iMac. Please, I played Doom 3 and Quake 4 on my iMac and it was mediocre at best. Choppy framerate even on low settings. Seeing brand new $2000 computers struggle to play games from 2004 and 2005 like WoW and Quake 4 is horrendous.
I can build a rig myself for around $1000 that will smoke any Mac at games but maybe a $3500+ Mac Pro configuration. This is where the complaint is.
I don't need a workstation, my only option is the iMac. I want to play a few games that happen to get native Mac ports (see John Carmack at WWDC... he must surely be pissed about the new iMacs). I grew out of building my own machine and tweaking the **** out of everything, but I'd like the ability to purchase a reasonably priced Mac with good video. There is NO option for this.
The 2400 and 2600 series is just crap for games. Why couldn't they have included the 8600 GT in the MBP ? That would have been 3-4x faster than what they put in the iMac. Hell the older 7600 GT is faster.
This is the complaint. A 3rd revision Intel iMac is shipping with video no faster than that of my 1st revision Intel iMac - ridiculous.
I can deal with Mac's limited game library, since there are only a few I really care about and they are all here but I'm sorry - I want value for my money. Apple has no real option for me right now and after buying 3 Macs within 3 years for me and my family and recommending and getting others to buy quite a few, I'm thinking they might be pushing me back into the Wintel world because there's no option for me at all.
How does Apple not care about that again?
The ignorance is in your reply. I can buy a Honda and build it up to smoke a BMW 335i. It still doesn't make it a BMW. There are many cars that can outperform a 328i at a lower price. If you want the BMW you pay for it. If you want the Apple you pay for it. Apple never claimed to give you the best bang for your buck. They gave people an all in one system that will satisfy most. If it does not satisfy you then I suggest you move on. It is that simple. How do people not understand that they chose to build 4 different systems and if those do not fit your need get something else. Car manufacturers do the same thing. When my wife wanted a minivan she wanted an LX Odyssey with some of the "touring edition" features. Guess what? It didn't work that way. So she "manned" up and bought the Touring.
Ah, car analogies. Delightful.
When I wanted an AIO Mac, I wanted one with the video processor that a computer in the $1500-$2000 range deserves, which should be respectable if not superb. I didn't care too much about the exact price; I'd have cheerfully paid $100 more or however much it would take to put a good GPU in the the thing. Guess what? It didn't work that way; no upgrade path as usual, no BTO graphics options at all. So I "manned" down, bought the new iMac anyway, and will probably regret it when the new crop of games we were promised at WWDC come out and run terribly on my brand-spanking new donation to Apple. (Didn't Apple mention something about a "commitment to gamers" at that conference as well?)
I could have "manned" up and bought the Mac Pro instead, but I'm incensed that either Apple is ignoring those people who enjoy playing the occasional high-end game completely, or thinks it's perfectly alright to make them pay considerably more money, make an additional cash outlay for an LCD, and put up with the bulk and noise of having a Mac Pro in their room instead of offering them a midrange option that suits them. I don't mind the Apple Tax, but when it becomes almost the same amount extra as the price of computer I really wanted, it feels to me like nothing short of extortion.
Do I really have no right to complain simply because something bigger, better (and possibly cheaper) then what I wanted to buy exists, whether it be a Mac Pro or a beige box? Am I 'ignorant' for being annoyed that the past revision of the iMac, and the past two revisions of the Mac Mini, have done hardly a thing to improve the graphics? Sure, they're cheaper, but people who want to save a little money (or just like the form factors, like me) shouldn't be punished with the same graphics technology that gets more outdated revision after revision. If Apple keeps treating their low-end consumers like this, some of us may head on back to PC land.
When I wanted an AIO Mac, I wanted one with the video processor that a computer in the $1500-$2000 range deserves, which should be respectable if not superb. I didn't care too much about the exact price; I'd have cheerfully paid $100 more or however much it would take to put a good GPU in the the thing. Guess what? It didn't work that way; no upgrade path as usual, no BTO graphics options at all. So I "manned" down, bought the new iMac anyway, and will probably regret it when the new crop of games we were promised at WWDC come out and run terribly on my brand-spanking new donation to Apple. (Didn't Apple mention something about a "commitment to gamers" at that conference as well?)
I could have "manned" up and bought the Mac Pro instead, but I'm incensed that either Apple is ignoring those people who enjoy playing the occasional high-end game completely, or thinks it's perfectly alright to make them pay considerably more money, make an additional cash outlay for an LCD, and put up with the bulk and noise of having a Mac Pro in their room instead of offering them a midrange option that suits them. I don't mind the Apple Tax, but when it becomes almost the same amount extra as the price of computer I really wanted, it feels to me like nothing short of extortion.
Do I really have no right to complain simply because something bigger, better (and possibly cheaper) then what I wanted to buy exists, whether it be a Mac Pro or a beige box? Am I 'ignorant' for being annoyed that the past revision of the iMac, and the past two revisions of the Mac Mini, have done hardly a thing to improve the graphics? Sure, they're cheaper, but people who want to save a little money (or just like the form factors, like me) shouldn't be punished with the same graphics technology that gets more outdated revision after revision. If Apple keeps treating their low-end consumers like this, some of us may head on back to PC land.
I agree.
That is wrong. The Mobility 2600XT is faster than the 8600M GT. Desktop cards cannot be used in the slim casing of the iMac so please don't compare the iMac to a desktop tower. Apple has a gap for a desktop tower below the Mac Pro but I think they would rather let the PC market deal with that.
I was talking about the 2400 and 2600 pro they chose to include... not the XT which wasn't ever a blip for Apple's radar.
Sorry, but the iMac is priced well above most PCs, it deserves better graphics. Its a "BMW" class computer. Maybe not the Ferarri that the Mac Pro is, but even the Mac Pro is doing poorly graphically.mikef07 said:
I'm sorry you are so willing to get bent over. I love Apple, OS X is the best thing I've ever used on a computer, but I'm not so blind as you are to not see when they are being extremely lazy. There is a blatant gap in their lineup and it is not in their interests to just tell people to suck it up and "buy a PC" instead. The Apple tax is justifable, but a having to pay $3000+ for a Mac comparable gaming wise to a $1000 PC is not - a PC that is far above being a Honda.
They cannot parade game developers on conference and then not ship machines incapable of playing them adequately.
LOL! That's exactly where I'm headed...
A better video card BTO option is all we ask for. But really, Apple badly needs to wake up and offer a lower end tower or higher end mini. There really is a tremendous gap. But at least offering a BTO video upgrade would be a great step.
Some relevant articles:
http://blogs.smugmug.com/don/2007/08/08/wheres-the-mac/
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2007/06/midrangemac/index.php
Here's my take on the gaming thing (coming from a former occasional gamer). When I bought my first iMac almost 5 years ago I gave up on the idea of gaming on my computer. The iMac is clearly not a gaming machine. With all the relatively cheap consoles on the market now I can't imagine why people get upset that their iMac isn't a gaming machine. If you're that into it, why wouldn't you want to play on a PlayStation or X-Box or whatever? (rhetorical question).
Here's the deal. Apple does have a huge gap in their product line. Before I started buying Macs I would never have dreamed of buying an AIO (just figured out what that means). I was constantly upgrading my PC, adding memory, a bigger hard drive, new graphics card, whatever. I don't know why Apple doesn't build a middle-of-the-road machine that is upgradable. But, they don't. If you're a hard-core PC gamer, this is probably not the product line for you.
I know when I buy my iMacs to just be happy with what I've got for the next several years. It's one of the trade-offs you make for a small, quiet, elegant machine that "just works".
Maybe some day Apple will make the machine you gamers want. But, right now I don't think they do and I don't see the iMac becoming that. It just goes too far against its design objectives of being small, quiet, elegant and working flawlessly.
Peace,
Brian
Agree, BTO option for video card sounds great, along side the standard configs offered, there should be another, on which you can configure a custom iMac, select CPU, select GPU, select RAM, select HD, select optical drive (blueray, superdrive etc)
They could do this with all their Macs , and everybody happy
Apple made a business decision on what they wanted to do. No one is ignorant for being annoyed and there are a lot of "negative" posts that are good. The posts saying "I wish Apple had done this", or "I wonder why Apple didn't do this", or "Had Apple done this I would have.... There are other posts where people are pissed and act as if Apple has insulted them and taken their children. They chose what they chose just like the car makers do. I have a Satellite dish that has about 400 channels I never use. I would love to buy an a la carte package but that isn't the way it works. I know what is offered and I make my choice based on the choices. You know what Apple offers, make your choice. For all the people saying it would have only been $20 more for another card, if they sell 1,000,000 of these iMacs that is $20,000,000 in profit that they would not have gotten otherwise. Learn how business works people. Jobs' #1 priority is to his Shareholders and if he can maximize sales and slip in an extra $20 in profit he is going to do so. He has taken their stock from $15/share up to $120/share. There is a reason for this.
Wholly agree with your initial points, not so re graphics card. For many people it's not just about having better, more expensive video cards for zilch. It's more so about having some choice in non-upgradable AIOs.
I've said previously, these cards on upgradable computers would be fine (for me at least); but on newly-rleased AIOs they're quite disappointing. I'd far rather Apple charge us a few dollars more than not & at least give us a choice of better graphics on non-upgradable computers, which you're unlikely to want to replace for years to come.
Also I disagree that SJ's "#1 priority is to his Shareholders" (as important as they are). Surely it's to his customers, without which all his shareholders end up counting their losses.
Then you don't know business, especially a public business. His #1 priority is to the owners of the company (shareholders), then his customers. If it was to his customers he would just sell everything at cost which would benefit his customers and not his shareholders. You think doctors #1 priority is to their patients? It isn't. Their #1 priority is to their business and then to their patients. That is not to say that they will make bad decisions for their patients jsut to make money however decisions are made as far as treatment goes with profitability in mind. Second, by offering a $30 video card upgrade as an option the expense is much more than $30. There is inventory, tracking, accounting, manufacturing processes, testing, and a ton of other expenses that go with carrying more than one option.