The new Imac is really cool looking, but comes with some shameful specs.

[GooberPHX420]

Man, I gotta admit the new imac does look pretty cool. I know apple is notorious for gorgeous displays and graphics, but what is with the lame guts inside?! Can someone tell me why these things cost sooooooooo much? Is the price so much just because a few people out of a thousand are gonna pick the Imac over a PC?

Someone care to explain?

Imac specs

 

[Pr0Hawk]

What Imac? All I see is a lamp

 

[Random Variable]

The iMac commercial is actually quite ingenious, but I still wouldn't buy one.

 

[Instagib]

oh no not another mac vs. pc thread

 

[Valhalla1]

come on, everyone knows a single 800mhz G4 outperforms dual-P4-2.0ghz any day..

 

[GooberPHX420]

<< oh no not another mac vs. pc thread >>



Rofl, you catch on quick And I too like the new imac commecial, where to dude is making faces n stuff, very smart commercial.

 

[Transition]

Concept is great - performance is disappointing.

Yes, i am a Mac user (at work only) - at home it's always a PC.

 

[kami]

It's plain fugly.

Looks like you're also limited to 1024x768...wow, now that's user friendly. "Here at Apple, we'll decided what you need and don't need."

They also try to advertise that they have the best gaming computers in the world with that lightning fast Geforce 2 MX! Yep, sounds like an iMac exclusive! Sure, it's been available on PC longer than my grandmother has been living, but IT'S AN IMAC EXCLUSIVE!

Not to mention that, but the iMac supports Quake3 engine games! Sure it's several years old, but IT'S AN IMAC EXCLUSIVE!

God I hate their marketing.

 

[Yomicron]

<< Someone care to explain? >>



I would say it is largely Motorola's fault. They have had really slacked off on their CPU development. Which in turn would effect the Chipset, which would in turn result in slower memory and other components.

 

[RGN]

<<

<< oh no not another mac vs. pc thread >>



Rofl, you catch on quick And I too like the new imac commecial, where to dude is making faces n stuff, very smart commercial. >>



your such a tard. After Carbonyl's thread you start this one.

 

[yakko]

 

[erikiksaz]

It's for all the "trendy" people, what didja expect?

 

[fatbaby]

But wouldn't a shuttle s550 with a p4 1.6 (or the highest it supports) and a pci gf2 mx400 outperform it?

About $400 for the above, add 60 gb hd, 17 inch lcd, keyboard/monitor, comes out to around $1200

 

[b0mbrman]

<< oh no not another mac vs. pc thread >>


ONYAMVPCT!

 

[GooberPHX420]

<< your such a tard. After Carbonyl's thread you start this one. >>



Aww welcome back RGN! I missed you

Why dont you explain to us why Mac's are so good again?

 

[Nefrodite]

its a dumb comparison. frankly i see no pc's with that level of design with that level of capability. sure you can build a big towered pc with geforce 4's and cables and fans all over the place, but then you compare apples to oranges.

 

[GooberPHX420]

<< its a dumb comparison. frankly i see no pc's with that level of design with that level of capability. sure you can build a big towered pc with geforce 4's and cables and fans all over the place, but then you compare apples to oranges. >>



Examples? No seriously, I really want to see what people see in Macs. What justifies the massive price tag?

 

[Yomicron]

<< Looks like you're also limited to 1024x768...wow, now that's user friendly. >>




The vast majority of 15" LCDs are limited to 1024x768, and few iMac users will be using an external monitor

 

[RGN]

<< Looks like you're also limited to 1024x768...wow, now that's user friendly. "Here at Apple, we'll decided what you need and don't need."

>>




I guess you haven't spent quality time with an LCD display. FYI, they are designed to work at a specific res, if you change to a lower one, quality goes to hell (or you only use a portion of the screen). Couple this technology limitation with Apple's obsession with clear video... anyway you can use a lower res for games and such.

 

[kami]

<<

<< Looks like you're also limited to 1024x768...wow, now that's user friendly. "Here at Apple, we'll decided what you need and don't need."

>>




I guess you haven't spent quality time with an LCD display. FYI, they are designed to work at a specific res, if you change to a lower one, quality goes to hell (or you only use a portion of the screen). Couple this technology limitation with Apple's obsession with clear video... anyway you can use a lower res for games and such. >>


Yeah but with PC you get the choice if you want LCD or CRT. With the type of work I do, I need a much bigger work area than 1024x768. 1280x960 bare minimum. How can a Mac be good for design purposes when you only have 1024x768? That is Macs main use, and I'm sorry but 1024x768 is just pathetic. Or are they targeting this to Mr. and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack? I'll never understand that either because IMO Macs are the worst type of computer for an average computer illiterate. I use them several times a week and will always choose PC, and it's not because of some bias...I have tried to see what all the fuss was about, but I was continually unimpressed. Any Mac I've worked on has also crashed more than any Win2k or WinXP PC I've been on. This is using apps such as Adobe Premiere, Macromedia Director, and many other design apps.

Most
Applications
Crash,
If
Not
The
Operating
System
Hangs

 

[RGN]

<<

Yeah but with PC you get the choice if you want LCD or CRT. With the type of work I do, I need a much bigger work area than 1024x768. 1280x960 bare minimum. How can a Mac be good for design purposes when you only have 1024x768? That is Macs main use, and I'm sorry but 1024x768 is just pathetic. Or are they targeting this to Mr. and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack? I'll never understand that either because IMO Macs are the worst type of computer for an average computer illiterate. I use them several times a week and will always choose PC, and it's not because of some bias...I have tried to see what all the fuss was about, but I was continually unimpressed. Any Mac I've worked on has also crashed more than any Win2k or WinXP PC I've been on. This is using apps such as Adobe Premiere, Macromedia Director, and many other design apps. >>






umm, Kami, shut up... you have Noooooo idea what your talking about.

The iMac, is not the workhorse of the mac line. Its the bottom of the line. The regular desktops can have _any_ monitor, be it CRT or LCD attached to them. If fact, one could have both...

Also there are not too many 15" LCD's that run at a higher res than 1024.

I'm glad you are at a user level to require a high resolution. However, most users do not require a res that high. Even photoshop and casual web development can be done on a 1024 screen.

 

[fatbaby]

<<

<< its a dumb comparison. frankly i see no pc's with that level of design with that level of capability. sure you can build a big towered pc with geforce 4's and cables and fans all over the place, but then you compare apples to oranges. >>



Examples? No seriously, I really want to see what people see in Macs. What justifies the massive price tag? >>



Maybe because Imacs (not the powermacs) were built for simplicity? With monitor/speaker built in, its very simple to use. All you do to setup is plug keyboard in usb port, plug mouse in keyboard, plug power supply in outlet, though the same is with most pcs these days

But anyone with half a brain can plug in a few wires, and oem pcs these days require you just activate windows and you are basically set

imacs=pos

 

[kami]

<<

<<

Yeah but with PC you get the choice if you want LCD or CRT. With the type of work I do, I need a much bigger work area than 1024x768. 1280x960 bare minimum. How can a Mac be good for design purposes when you only have 1024x768? That is Macs main use, and I'm sorry but 1024x768 is just pathetic. Or are they targeting this to Mr. and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack? I'll never understand that either because IMO Macs are the worst type of computer for an average computer illiterate. I use them several times a week and will always choose PC, and it's not because of some bias...I have tried to see what all the fuss was about, but I was continually unimpressed. Any Mac I've worked on has also crashed more than any Win2k or WinXP PC I've been on. This is using apps such as Adobe Premiere, Macromedia Director, and many other design apps. >>






umm, Kami, shut up... you have Noooooo idea what your talking about.

The iMac, is not the workhorse of the mac line. Its the bottom of the line. The regular desktops can have _any_ monitor, be it CRT or LCD attached to them. If fact, one could have both...

Also there are not too many 15" LCD's that run at a higher res than 1024.

I'm glad you are at a user level to require a high resolution. However, most users do not require a res that high. Even photoshop and casual web development can be done on a 1024 screen. >>


Don't take it so personally. Or are you on Apple's payrole?
I KNOW its not the workhorse...that is why I was talking about who Apple was targetting the imac at. The Macs I work on are normal G3's and G4's in tower cases so I've had experiences with them all and IMO they all suck donkey balls.

<------loves pissing off macheads

 

[RGN]

<<
Don't take it so personally. Or are you on Apple's payrole?
I KNOW its not the workhorse...that is why I was talking about who Apple was targetting the imac at. The Macs I work on are normal G3's and G4's in tower cases so I've had experiences with them all and IMO they all suck donkey balls.

<------loves pissing off macheads >>




I'm not taking it personally. I just find it disturbing that users of this forum have to spread FUD about Macs when usually they are "misinformed"

I'm not a "machead" I don't even own one. I am in charge of supporting several (11) and usually I don't even know that the machins are in the building. They are an admin's dream.

 

[bonk102]

i give Apple credit, they keep trying, even though they never seem to win the battle