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.
Which iMac design do you prefer?
- Thread starter macgeek2005
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I disagree, in part only though !
Of course this could not be more subjective.
Anyhow, I just loved the simplicity and clean lines of the current iMac 20", from the day it was announced.
I specify the 20" model because I don't particularly like the 17", I feel as if something is wrong in its proportions.
The G4 on the other hand was beautiful also, just a different design in nature: innovative and "technological" versus the current model being clean and simple.
Of course this could not be more subjective.
Anyhow, I just loved the simplicity and clean lines of the current iMac 20", from the day it was announced.
I specify the 20" model because I don't particularly like the 17", I feel as if something is wrong in its proportions.
The G4 on the other hand was beautiful also, just a different design in nature: innovative and "technological" versus the current model being clean and simple.
G4. I have to say, I think all G5's are pretty ugly. I just can't stand that lip under the screen. G3's are really innovative, but because I used them in elementary school, I can't get rid of the feeling they're more a child's plaything. I have to agree the G4 is just sexy
The G4s were a nice design, but I thought they sacrificed too much to get the shape. iMacs are meant as all in ones, yet the G4s had separate speakers. And tray loading drives are just not right.
I prefer the G5. Clean design, great sound, and doesn't take up too much footprint.
I prefer the G5. Clean design, great sound, and doesn't take up too much footprint.
I think from a purely visual aesthetic perspective the G4 wins hands down. The G5 is just a souped up white monitor. However, the iMac G5/Duo is well designed based on what's inside and included.
G4 is the sweetest design in my view, I dont care for the stretched screens the G5s/Intel have, nor the look. G3 imac is the one that saved this company
I still have a 500.
I still have a 500.
I agree with DHM.
Part of me wishes that I would have bought an iMac G4 instead of the dual PM I bought that day back in 2004, but the iMac just wouldn't cut what I needed to do. Awesome design - perhaps Apple's best ever.
Part of me wishes that I would have bought an iMac G4 instead of the dual PM I bought that day back in 2004, but the iMac just wouldn't cut what I needed to do. Awesome design - perhaps Apple's best ever.
iGary said:
I agree, that's why I'm in no rush whatsoever to get rid of my G4 iMac. I love the look of it, and much prefer it to a G5 iMac. If only there was some way I could transplant a G5 iMac's hardware into my G4 iMac enclosure...
I always liked the G4 iMac the most. My G4 is soon going to be fully taken out of commission and be used as a decoration in my room (maybe). I just always liked the design, the spherical base, the external speakers, etc.
I love the G4, I remember seeing it in a magazine and go "I want this!!!" that was back in the day when I didn't know what Mac is] and my father was all "no, nobody uses Mac" so I rejoice when I heard all design people use Mac thinking I'll finally get that awesome looking computer, but when I get to go and buy my own, they're no longer in production TT_TT
some of the later-revision g3 imacs were pretty trendy-looking if my recollection is anything intact. especially the 'imac dv se' in graphite.
the g4 imacs were uniquely cool... that said, the lack of a slot-loading drive kinda leaves something to be desired in my opinion.
finally, the g5 imac... i don't know. i mean, it's a computer. that's about all i can say on its behalf. as far as i'm concerned, there's nothing uniquely different about its aesthetic to make it at all noteworthy. a large screen, small footprint, and impressive specs make it a pretty practical desktop computer. but there's quite a difference between 'practical' and 'chic'.
the g4 imacs were uniquely cool... that said, the lack of a slot-loading drive kinda leaves something to be desired in my opinion.
finally, the g5 imac... i don't know. i mean, it's a computer. that's about all i can say on its behalf. as far as i'm concerned, there's nothing uniquely different about its aesthetic to make it at all noteworthy. a large screen, small footprint, and impressive specs make it a pretty practical desktop computer. but there's quite a difference between 'practical' and 'chic'.
Kinda the same deal with me.lem0n said:
I remember one day when I was in the 6th grade, we went to a CompUSA store, and they had the new G4 models on display. At the time, we had the G3 as our only computer. I remember being amazed at the G4 design. I told my mom we were going to get one someday, but she scoffed at the idea saying we didn't need something "so high-tech." Ironically, the next year (spring 2003), I broke the slot loading drive on the G3, and my mom couldn't play her Scrabble game which required the CD drive. On an impulse, I told her we should get a new computer. We drove down to the local Apple reseller (one of the few left even today) and said "we need a new computer." The guy there said "Do you like the iMacs? I have a custom built one that someone didn't want because the decided on a PowerMac. Just over $2,000, I'll thrown in a free printer too"
And then we had one. I think for the first month of using it I would spaz at how beautiful it was each time I turned it on. I still love the design, and even though it is starting to show its age speed wise (I only really notice after I use my friends MBP or my aunts Intel Mini), I can't bear to part with it. It runs PS, Illustrator, Garage Band, etc.. decently. I know I could easily get a good deal of money from selling it to help fund my desired MacBook purchase this summer, but then I wouldn't have my own G4. And that thought makes me sad.
I think the G4 was the most aggressive, courageous design Apple did, but I think the implementation fell a little short...particularly in needing external speakers and a tray-loading drive, as previously mentioned.... I think the current design is perhaps less edgy, but I personally think it's very elegant, has clean lines, and fits in with my decorative tastes at home. So I'm really happy with my G5. Not to mention that it has only one cable (for power). Just the way I like it.
On a purely aesthetic level, the iMac G4 is pretty silly looking, and easily made fun of -- but once you use one, it's difficult not to appreciate its functionality, and the elegant way Apple expressed it in the design. The iMac G4 is a real accomplishment, IMO one of the best we're ever likely to see in PC industrial engineering.
I'll go for the G3 model, but I freely admit I'm very biased I used to have one of the little darlings. A great computer and it never gave me a moment of trouble. I made sure it went to a good home when I got my Power Mac.
If I was to have my subjective hat on though, I'd have to go with the design of the G4. It was just completely different from anything else there was out there. Truly original.
If I was to have my subjective hat on though, I'd have to go with the design of the G4. It was just completely different from anything else there was out there. Truly original.
Its a close one; on one hand the current design has functionally zero desktop footprint and is amazingly sleek and compact. I agree that the 17" looks a tad off proportionally, but even that has a certain minimalist beauty to it. I also love how easy it is to get at the guts of the current design--SO different from any of the older iMacs.
That said, the screen on the G4 line was sheer brilliance--my parents have one, and it is so incredibly natural to swing it around when you switch position in your chair, or want to show something to someone standing beside you, or whatever, that it's really hard to appreciate any monitor design at all after using it.
Even the articulated arms you can get for LCDs (or older G5 iMacs) just aren't the same--the motion was so fluid and natural that it was hard to believe.
Don't know if it was worth the tradeoff of being an absolute bear to crack open and upgrade (though I've done it) and the reduced desktop space, but it was a heck of a design.
That said, the screen on the G4 line was sheer brilliance--my parents have one, and it is so incredibly natural to swing it around when you switch position in your chair, or want to show something to someone standing beside you, or whatever, that it's really hard to appreciate any monitor design at all after using it.
Even the articulated arms you can get for LCDs (or older G5 iMacs) just aren't the same--the motion was so fluid and natural that it was hard to believe.
Don't know if it was worth the tradeoff of being an absolute bear to crack open and upgrade (though I've done it) and the reduced desktop space, but it was a heck of a design.
The G4 was incredible
Not to mention that it had a leg up over the current G5/Core Duos in that they could pivot 180 degrees left or right, and it could move up and down, and tilt backwards and forwards.
Today's iMacs can only tilt backwards and forwards
Not to mention that it had a leg up over the current G5/Core Duos in that they could pivot 180 degrees left or right, and it could move up and down, and tilt backwards and forwards.
Today's iMacs can only tilt backwards and forwards
Copland said:The G4 was incredible
Not to mention that it had a leg up over the current G5/Core Duos in that they could pivot 180 degrees left or right, and it could move up and down, and tilt backwards and forwards.
Today's iMacs can only tilt backwards and forwards
I agree - definitely the superior design.
The G4 is the easiest to look at and use. The adjustment of the screen makes it great in itself. I've owned each design through the G4 and used regularly a G5. Even though the G5 is the fastest (obviously), I do not think there was much to improve upon in the design of the G4. Hopefully, we'll see a similar incarnation of it down the line.
