MoreAwesomeDanU
macrumors 6502
not sure if you're serious... Touch screen desktop computers are nothing more but a gimmick, and the overall experience is TERRIBLE. And did you really expect an iMac with blu-ray or HDTV tuners? lol.
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.
Why so much hate for the new iMac?
- Thread starter adildacoolset
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
not sure if you're serious... Touch screen desktop computers are nothing more but a gimmick, and the overall experience is TERRIBLE. And did you really expect an iMac with blu-ray or HDTV tuners? lol.
turtlez
macrumors 6502a
Well you can get a desktop card if you get a Mac Pro. Just wait for early next year and you will be happy. Mac Pro has always been the Professional user machine. The iMac is consumer so you cannot cry to Apple for not putting the best in there.
I'm a video-editor as well. I have a MBA with i5, 8gigs of ram and 256 SSD. I make video's of about 10 minutes in screenflow and imovie and I have no problems whatsoever. Processorspeeds are way overrated IMHO. SSD and RAM is what you need. If you're a very serious video-editor using FCPX and making video's of 30 min + then ofcourse, use a maxed out mac. But i don't think he/she's gonna need it.
the8thark
macrumors 601
Why so much hate for the new iMac?
Easy.
The new iMac (for me at least) is the first iMac model ever that didn't make me go "wow this is better then the previous model in every way". The new iMac is better is lots of ways but also a compromise is others. And that gets us thinking about it.
And it's this thinking that makes some of us hate. Cause we're not used to thinking is the next model better. We're just used to expecting it to be better and it is. Well this time it's better with compromises.
Some people will like this, others will not.
Easy.
The new iMac (for me at least) is the first iMac model ever that didn't make me go "wow this is better then the previous model in every way". The new iMac is better is lots of ways but also a compromise is others. And that gets us thinking about it.
And it's this thinking that makes some of us hate. Cause we're not used to thinking is the next model better. We're just used to expecting it to be better and it is. Well this time it's better with compromises.
Some people will like this, others will not.
beyond
macrumors member
MoreAwesomeDanU
macrumors 6502
the real people that should be complaining are the people getting the rMBP 13"... $1700 for a dual core 13" laptop? Its basically now an Air with retina,but thicker, heavier, and $500 more expensive. Now thats a joke.
bitcloudrzr
macrumors 6502
PS3, old one still going strong since 2006 and games still look better than they did before. No upgrades, no fuss, no OS bloat and I never have to worry about gaming specs for my computer(currently 2011 MPB 15) ever again. This is a really nice place to be in.
It's important, no doubt about it. But for the average video-editor there no significant difference in an i5 of i7.
Lancer
macrumors 68020
Same here in Australia, we hav a 10% GST (Goods & Services Tax) and I've noticed recently Apple changed the store to remind the price includes $xx amount of GST.
As a point of reference here the base iMac went up by just $30, the top model went DOWN $100... including GST 🙂
Or, I could just ask that there was a desktop card in a desktop machine. There is just no real reason for a thinner iMac except vanity.
And in an all-in-one, you are basically admitting that your monitor is on the same upgrade cycle as your CPU, etc. So a bit more capability under the hood would be nice.
Because no one cares how thin their non-portable machine is. We want powerful hardware in there, and with them consistently shrieking it, we will never get that.
So to make it thin on the edges and still almost as thick as the old one, you lose a ton of performance, your 3.5" drive bay, and optical drive. The new shape is ugly and pointless since it is almost as thick.
Plus it's a DESKTOP. Make it 5" thick if you have to, but give me decent cooling and real desktop parts, a GTX 680 will run rings around a 680MX at the same price. We're not talking about pro hardware here, just the consume hardware in the same price range that every PC consumer-grade user gets to enjoy
----------
Amazing how anything you don't like you can dismiss as a gimmick. At least everyone except Apple is willing to innovate, and whatever these other companies come up with that turns out well, Apple will just copy and all the fans will pretend Apple invented it. It's been years since Apple's come up with any innovation on any product except "make it thinner and more crippled" or "add more pixels and don't worry about performance".
And what do you mean by not expecting blu-ray or HDTV? Do you mean it would be nice to have but another tradeoff you're willing to make to be another iSheep? Or it's another gimmick that's not worth having? It's sad that your dismissals of the competition have become so flippant it's not even clear how you're dismissing them.
Thank you so much! My videos never reach an excess of 15 minutes, so your input has been great!
A GTX 680 simply cannot go into an all in one. Simple, it'd have to go into th Mac Pro
Yeh, some people don't see to get that. They think it's trivial, and that Apple is just avoiding Desktop GPU's in the iMac because they like screwing with us.
Honestly, the 680MX looks like the closest they've come to putting one in there.
Sure, maybe some small-box places have tried but I'm wager the machines run into more problems than you can shake a stick at... not that Apple is without its QA and design issues.
I don't loose a ton of performance without an OD, in fact I get rid of stuff I never use. If you loose a ton of performance without the OD, then probably you are not a power user, because OD has nothing to do with performance.
Who said the cooling is not decent? Ave you any proof to validate your premise or is just your illuminated guess based on pictures. Geez you can already tell how well the heating is gonna work with just a picture! You must be a genius, why aren't you working at apple.. ok ill stop there.
About your GPU complain, please... tell me how many AIOs have a better GPU? Because an iMac is an AIO you know? Its not a Mac Pro, if you want a real mac desktop get a Mac Pro. You can whine its 2010 Hardware in the Mac Pro section thank you.
And so far no one knows if its a 3.5" drive or not.
No, Apple is know to adopt existent technologies in a usable way and comfortable way that actually makes sense to use? Is that clear?
Touch screen phones were available before the iphone, but why is the iphone an all time best seller? Because it works, thats why people buy Apple.
THe machine has an incredible GPU that no one in this forum even thought about, and believe me we thought a lot. They increased the max ram to 32GB , there is an option for a 756SSD and they even introduced a new drive function.
Who cares if the imac is 1/2 inch as long as it keeps providing that good performance its hardware provides in running a rock stable OS. In the end isn't that why we buy Apple?
turtlez
macrumors 6502a
yeah i agree with the upgrade cycle of the screen being limited to the other components. I think that an AIO just cannot take a bulky desktop GPU. Look at all the other brand's AIO all mobile chips. Apple still to this day make the best AIO and it needs to disperse heat so mobile it is. If you wanna complain about it you can't just target Apple, you have to target the laws of physics and the other companies making AIO too.
Mac Pro is there for the taking.
----------
nope you won't just like any other brand AIO won't. What would be the point of having a 10" thick AIO? I surely would want a box separate from my screen for that space usage and then I wouldn't have to upgrade the screen for a new computer. Think a little harder about what you are wishing for. It all points to a desktop tower and external screen space usage.
forty2j
macrumors 68030
Really the root of the complaint is that Apple doesn't manufacture a computer with non-server 100% desktop components. My wife opted out of Mac for her primary computer because of that. It will be interesting to see what they do with the 2013 Mac Pro - if it's possible to get it with Ivy Bridge/Haswell rather than Sandy Bridge-E/Ivy Bridge-E, there should be a segment of the market interested in that.
the8thark
macrumors 601
This a very good point. Made by a fellow Aussie too. It was not hard to work out the GST component of your Apple purchase. But it's nice to have it there without having to work it out.
I'm a total newbie to this forum. Did the last iMac release not have as many complaints? or was it about the same as this go around?
forty2j
macrumors 68030
This one's getting more attention because it's a total redesign. Last time was just a silent refresh of internals in the same design they'd be using since Fall 2009.
nuckinfutz
macrumors 603
Yes in those "years" that Apple hasn't innovated in your eyes their stock has doubled, their cash holding have doubled, their sales have increased faster than the PC market.
Yesirree they are obviously doing something wrong.
This will be my first (hopefully not last) iMac. While I've been holding out for almost a year to get one I actually see this as being a really good bump from the previous iteration. I can see that people with the current iMac were expecting something fantastical, but I really don't see that as a realistic expectation.
QCassidy352
macrumors G5
My view:
- Making a desktop ever thinner is a gimmick. It's fine, but it's not going to make me buy a new one.
- I prefer an optical drive on a desktop. I hardly use it, I grant you. But even if it's a few times per year, that's something. On a laptop, the size/weight gain is not worth such infrequent use. On a desktop, it is.
- I have always liked the 21" better than the 27", but they have crippled the 21. That graphics card, no user replaceable RAM, and a 5400 rpm hard drive in a 12 pound desktop computer is just not acceptable.
I do like the new design (if it didn't require so many compromises), and the high end options are really great (large fusion drives, good graphics). But the gap between the low end and the high end is now enormous, and it didn't use to be.
So I'll be keeping my 2011 another year, or two, or however long it seems as fast and capable as it does now, and I'll see where we are at that time.
- Making a desktop ever thinner is a gimmick. It's fine, but it's not going to make me buy a new one.
- I prefer an optical drive on a desktop. I hardly use it, I grant you. But even if it's a few times per year, that's something. On a laptop, the size/weight gain is not worth such infrequent use. On a desktop, it is.
- I have always liked the 21" better than the 27", but they have crippled the 21. That graphics card, no user replaceable RAM, and a 5400 rpm hard drive in a 12 pound desktop computer is just not acceptable.
I do like the new design (if it didn't require so many compromises), and the high end options are really great (large fusion drives, good graphics). But the gap between the low end and the high end is now enormous, and it didn't use to be.
So I'll be keeping my 2011 another year, or two, or however long it seems as fast and capable as it does now, and I'll see where we are at that time.