Ars has reviewed the brand new iMac. They conclude: “The Intel Macs are fast, the majority of apps have been released as Universal Binaries, and Apple’s product line – including the new iMac – is in a good place. The iMac is also competitive on price with other all-in-one PCs, so if you absolutely love the all-in-one form factor, the iMac is one of lower-priced options available. If you’ve been holding on to your Power PC Mac and waiting for the right time to make the big switch to Intel, the appearance of the new iMac marks an excellent opportunity.” CNet also has a review.
but my bank account say no
But your credit card company says yes
well of course they are (buy one pay for 2 or 3 computers)
I think it’s great that the new iMac is available now but isn’t this bad timing on Apple’s part?
Well, on one hand it’s just in time for the back-to-school season (I don’t know, maybe there’s a student out there who is fine with their laptop and just wants an iMac) but Leopard is only a few months away. I’m sure a lot of people are still holding out on upgrades till Leopard. Like me for instance.
No it’s perfect. People that have no idea about Leopard will buy it now then have to pay again for an upgrade in only a few months.
Totally agree. I bought my iMac G5 on November 05 and intel iMac was released on January 06. I felt cheated.
Poor you. Unfortunately, that’s what the tech industry is like.
And on January 6th your G5 blew up and stopped working, oh, what’s that? it didn’t? hmm.. so should apple announce hardware they’re releasing a year in advance so you can plan your purchasing schedule accordingly? There is always something faster better coming, that’s the name of the game.
That’s why it’s great timing, some people will buy it now already and later buy leopard aswell, more $ for apple == good timing.
If MS acted this way, you’d all be spitting nails. Nice to see hypocrisy in the IT world is alive and kicking. And before you call me a MS Fanboy, I run Debian and FreeBSD at home, and I like Macs alot. I just can’t get over the blinders the Apple community wears.
Yeah, but Apple are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Pleople were begging for new iMacs, then they say they will wait until Leopard. And the thing with Apple is also that there is *always* a hardware or software update just around the corner.
er, if MS acted like what? Released a product people could buy, and then later released another product people could also buy?
The computer doesn’t stop working when Leopard comes out. Some may not even see the need for leopard. Or they could buy leopard in a year.
There is no travesty here.
I was responding to a comment that stated:
“That’s why it’s great timing, some people will buy it now already and later buy leopard aswell, more $ for apple == good timing.”
and I believe if MS did that, they would be vilified and cursed for forcing consumers to pay twice.
I personally don’t see anything wrong with it. But if you replaced Apple with MS, the same people in this forum saying it’s an opportunity for Apple would be up in arms about it.
I run Debian and OS X. If Microsoft sold workstations for the consumer and professional then your argument would be worth investigating.
Since Microsoft dictates much of their world they do act this way on releases.
They even splinter their platform into at least 5 version to spread it out. They do the same with Office.
If that isn’t stringing their customers along, then what exactly is it?
“Since Microsoft dictates much of their world they do act this way on releases.
They even splinter their platform into at least 5 version to spread it out. They do the same with Office. ”
Considering that it’s been 6 years since the last version of Windows was released, I don’t see how they act this way. They release service packs for free, apple makes you pay for every 10.x release, and only gives you patches for free.
Service Packs for Windows frequently provide new functionality, and MS also releases free updates to many other pieces of software.
What’s wrong with having Windows available in several different versions? That allows a user to purchase the minimum functionality that they need, at a price that they (hopefully) can afford. Now I will be the first one to admit that Vista is a bit more expensive than I think it should be, but segmenting the OS into different versions allow them to reach a larger market, which Apple isn’t interested in, as they control both the hardware and the OS, therefore it is in Apple’s best interest to not segment the OS, they segment the hardware.
What’s wrong with having Windows available in several different versions? That allows a user to purchase the minimum functionality that they need, at a price that they (hopefully) can afford.
Because stripping out functions to market the whole thing at a higher price is technically a very sad thing to do. I got a version of vista business and they stripped out dvdmaker and analog video in, which kind of sucks if you want to capture something.
That’s equally sad as to still include a combodrive with the basic mac mini.
Edited 2007-08-11 09:43
“I got a version of vista business and they stripped out dvdmaker and analog video in, which kind of sucks if you want to capture something.
That’s equally sad as to still include a combodrive with the basic mac mini. ”
True, but the mini comes with one of the crappiest Video cards known to man, segmentation comes in many forms
>Considering that it’s been 6 years since the last version of Windows
> was released, I don’t see how they act this way. They release service
> packs for free, apple makes you pay for every 10.x release, and only
> gives you patches for free.
6 years is about development missing deadline after deadline.
To remain mainstream on OSX only requires you to pay for alternate releases; which is every three to four years. (10.3 still gets security patches, until 10.5 hits the streets).
>Service Packs for Windows frequently provide new functionality,
> and MS also releases free updates to many other pieces of software.
Service packs are (almost entirely) rollups of patches and bug fixes (with the benefit of easing the load on the Microsoft servers).
OSX also has batched patch and bug fix releases with the occasional feature upgrade.
As a user of both: the models are quite close…
> What’s wrong with having Windows available in several different
> versions? That allows a user to purchase the minimum functionality
> that they need, at a price that they (hopefully) can afford.
Microsoft deal in a very large consumer market that has a life more important than computers; and to many of these folks the choices being offered are just confusing and off putting. “I am not paying megabucks for the top of the range but what will I miss if I don’t?”.
FWIW (not much) …. I think they should have roughly five editions:
Desktop, MediaBox, Server, ThinClient, and embedded. With the last two being pre-installed/OEM only.
Edited 2007-08-11 09:58
“Service packs are (almost entirely) rollups of patches and bug fixes (with the benefit of easing the load on the Microsoft servers). ”
That’s not quite true. Service packs for Windows commonly have new functionality provided as well. XP SP 1 gave USB 2 support, SP2 had a wealth of new features, improved firewall, security center, compatibility updates. NT SP 4 brought with it compatibility with NTFS 5 file systems.
The biggest thing to remember is that service packs are free. Apple charges for their upgrades. XP has been out for almost 7 years, and has had 2 service packs and 2 versions of Direct X. in the same time frame, Apple has released 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4, (plus point releases, which are free) and users had to pay for each one if they wanted it. and if you were stuck using 10.0 or 10.1, you REALLY wanted that upgrade.
“Microsoft deal in a very large consumer market that has a life more important than computers; and to many of these folks the choices being offered are just confusing and off putting. “I am not paying megabucks for the top of the range but what will I miss if I don’t?”
considering that most windows users get Windows with a new computer, they generally don’t know what they are missing. Vista Home basic sucks, but Home Premium has all the goodies a non-geek home user might want, and if you want more, you can just buy it, no need to download anything, because it’s already there, on the DVD
This update now, before Leopard is released, is good because there are a lot of people and businesses that are set up with Tiger and now they can upgrade their hardware and not have their software affected.
the old ones should be cheaper on ebay now. i used a g4 powerbook for about 3 years and then once the intel systems came out i upgraded to a 20in. g5 imac on ebay for $1200. which at the time was a steal.
What about the heat issue, since the new iMacs are using brush metal casing? Has it been resolved compared to some of the other heat related issues?
I wish I could get one though!
Same as before, I expect. The heat is pulled in from the bottom through the convection grills / speakers (why couldnt these be directly facing the user?) and the heat exits through the top of the unit.
If the speakers where against the user it wouldn’t look as good.
Metal conducts heat far better than plastic. Add to that: dark-colored surfaces radiate heat much better than white or shiny surfaces. If the back of that iMac is actually black anodized aluminum (not black plastic), then I’m sure it does a *far* better job of pulling heat away from the internal components than the previous white plastic back panel.
Edited 2007-08-10 00:13
Heat is not really an issue on iMac Core 2 Duos. Mine (2.16GHz) does, even under ridiculously heavy (as in “only for testing purposes”- ripping a dvd while simultaneously encoding wavs to aacs with iTunes and working in Parallels Desktop) workloads, not get warmer then 61 celsius. And the fans are barely audible at the most. Heat is an issue on especially Core Duo MacBooks(Normals and Pros), i guess Core2Duos are more power-efficient and don´t get as warm (I might be wrong, though). But i assume the metal housing of the MacBook Pro is beneficial in that it´s conducting the heat better. Or maybe you meant that the new iMac housing could cause problems? Unlikely, I´d say, since metal conducts heat better. (Redundancy galore, sorry bout that).
Edited 2007-08-10 09:13
Why in the world did they decide to put a glossy screen into the iMac! It completely makes it unusable outside a dark room unless you only keep bright images on display. Why oh why! Who likes glossy screens anyways?
for real! I HATE glossy screens. They ONLY reason anyone would like them is because they “make colors richer”. SO WHAT! I don’t want to see my reflexion, the rest of the room and whatever else happens to be near the screen. It’s like trying to read a glossy magazine. I.E., a pain in the ass!
You guys are funny. I’ve been reading reviews of Macs on this site for years, and there is always “one” excuse not to buy one. Gfx not good enough, not enough ram, HD could be bigger, couldn’t run XP etc. etc… Now it’s the screen.
If they had matte and glossy, you’d find another deal breaker…
Anyway, I’m not the biggest fan of glossy screens either, but they aren’t that bad, not as bad as you think. Some guys here have laptops with the glossy screens and they aren’t an issue at all to use actually…
Pretty much every TV ever sold has had glossy screens.
Anyway, awaiting the next deal breaker… Prob. too easy to use or looks too nice next to my Dell – lol…
BTW, there are some valid deal breakers out there, gamers for one, cost when you already have h/w is another and so on…
Gaming is definitely one and it’s a shame they’re ignoring that market. Now that you can dual boot or even triboot (linux!), gaming with a mac is possible. It’s just the insanely limited hardware selection that’s holding people like me back. I would seriously consider a mac as my next machine if:
1) had the ability to boot to windows and linux as well. This is already there in current macs I believe.
2) upgradeable graphics card.
3) decently low price ~1000$ would be fine.
Right now, I can build a pretty capable pc for $1000 that should be fast enough for even the latest games. I’d have to buy a mac pro (at least $2500) to get equivalent gaming performance from a mac.
I would like to have a dual boot machine, but with the Radeon Graphics Card and the crappy support ATI has for Linux. I would not prefer to purchase the new iMac, had Apple used an Nvidia Graphics Card things would have been different(for me atleast).
I just don’t get why people complain about macs not being able to run games. I’ve always been able to run modern games perfectly fine on it without a problem. It may just be that I don’t happen to play the kind of games that have intense 3D graphics.
Instead of complaining that they don’t run the latest games they should be saying that they don’t run the most ridiculously graphics intensive games.
(by “they” I mean middle of the line macs)
Gaming is a non-starter on the iMac. People wanted even slimmer iMacs, if you go all-in-one and as slim as they have heat is major issue. The reviews I’ve read for the card that’s in there now (HD2600Pro) all mention specifically that it’s silent, runs cool and is power efficient. It doesn’t take a genius to see why they went with it.
Gaming on the PC is a con anyway. How come the lifespan of a console is 5 years or more, but I need to upgrade my video card on the pc every year to play the latest gen games (if you believe “teh hardcore gamers”) ? I’m glad the mac is staying of that treadmill.
games and gammers…. SUCK! go take a shower, and get out of the house! Maybe hangout with your real friends some time… rather than your “guild member friends”…. Did you actually spend more money on your gaming PC then your car? what a fool! there is a reason why its been 5 years since you had a girl friend! what’s that smell any way? maybe you should clean your rat infested apartment!
I have the light shining in my window every evening, even with the shades closed, watching TV and using the computer screens are impossible… until I finally invested in a flat screen TV without a glossy screen. Now I can watch TV, but I still can’t exactly use my computer as I don’t have LCDs yet. They sure as hell won’t be glossy though, I hate glossy so much, its really irritating.
Why not invest in shutters. Cheaper.
I live in an apartment, there are shades on the window, and its not enough with the bright Florida sun. Plus its nice to be able to look outside. I’d rather just buy the right stuff next time around, it looks a lot nicer all the time anyways.
uh huh. I own a Powermac G4. I just haven’t bought a Mac in ages or any *new* computer because I don’t have the cash.
I was just ranting about glossy screens. Which suck
If I get another Mac, it sure as heck won’t be an iMac, but a Mac Pro of sorts. I hate all-in-ones. If I want near 0 upgradability, I’d get a farking laptop.
Edited 2007-08-10 12:19
Isn’t a laptop also an all-in-one?
you didn’t read my post very well, did you?
The term “all-in-one” is generally reserved for desktop computers that have everything built-in. I said if I wanted “near 0 upgrade possibilities, I’d get a farking laptop”.
Pretty much every TV ever sold has had glossy screens.
The benefit of those new LCD televisions is that they are matte and having a large screen that almost eliminates glare in a glare filled area is a “deal winner”.
I bumped up your score, and I’ll add that I’m scared that they didn’t even give customers an option, a bad trend.
If you are not in a dark room, glossy screens just don’t work as well as matte screen. When I go to the coffee shop, everyone with a glossy screen has to sit to one side, away from the windows.
You could put anti-reflection coatings on glossy screen monitors, but they just don’t seem to work as well as a textured screen, granted, at higher resolutions, you need a finer texture, as not to cause a morie patterns, but it seem some texture is needed.
Lastly, I’ll leave you with this: Windows Visa’s launch bar simulates glare, of all the stupid things simulate in a GUI: something that hinders visibility. Why stop there? Why not simulate chromatic abberation, out of focus images, dead pixels, or wait, why not take a picture of the room behind you, reverse it and paste it on your desktop to simulate the glare from a glossy monitor.
What’s really funny about Macs is this…
I was in the Apple store earlier this week and overheard someone talking to a customer service geek walking around. She couldn’t get her iPhone to synch with her Mac even though she has the latest iTunes… she couldn’t figure out why. Turns out she’s running on 10.3 and it won’t run on those…
Funny thing is, you can have any post-Win2000 version of Windows and it works on any and all as long as you have iTunes 7.3, but this check would have to purchase a $120 upgrade to be able to synch her new $600 phone.
What’s hilarious is her ignorance. The Download Link for iTunes 7.3 Reqirements List:
Macintosh Requirements
Mac OS X 10.3.9 or later or Mac OS X 10.4.7 or later required for iTunes
Mac OS X 10.4.10 or later required for iPhone
500MHz G3 processor or better
QuickTime 6.5.2 or later
256MB RAM
Combo/Super Drive to burn CDs
Broadband Internet connection (DSL/Cable/LAN) for buying and streaming music
F***’in Hilarious.
</endSarcasm>
Reading is Fundamental.
damn that sucks…
I must admit the new iMac is sharp looking but not for me. I would love to see a 1000$ or lower SKU based off Mac Pro. cause the way I see it, for ever A, apple as a B..but not with the Mac Pro.
iMac to macmini (not all in one but to me, same demo for of user
MacBook, MacBook pro
MacPro, ???
Come on people, hard core gamers would not be buying an iMac, nor would they be buying a PC in the same price range. This unit is intended for people who are casual gamers and could not care less if Quake only runs at 40 fps instead of 200 fps.
Would I buy one? Maybe for my wife, but for myself I would look at the Pros. But if my wife had one I would probably use it. 🙂
sux!
Any dell screen is better.
I quite like the amazing design. Looks like my Acer Al1951 monitor which doesn’t have the alluminum though.
I was a bit concerned how good the i-mac keeps it head cool.According to the article:”Using Temperature Monitor, I checked the temperature of the iMac’s innards during normal (and stressful) use. Overall, things stayed pretty cool. Under normal use, the CPU cores stayed around 40-45°; the hot spot was the graphics processor, which spiked at 61°. Under heavy load, the CPU cores rose as high as 56°.“, the temperatures are quite normal.
Indeed unless you are a gamer,tweaker, it’s good all-in-on PC.
It’s a bummer that there’s not an option for one of the high-end nvidia cards… yes heat generation may be an issue, but come on, nvidia have ‘cool’ models too you know (otherwise, what are Apple using in their Macbook Pro’s?).
Or an easy way to upgrade the graphics card.
Me, I’d be interested in getting one to triple-boot with OSX, Windows XP and Linux.
Well, guess I’ll be getting a custom-built x86 machine after all.
The Macbook Pro’s are also quite notorious for how hot they become and the fan noise that comes with it (the moo-ing macbook). From what I hear this iMac stays quiet even under high load. That’s important, the last major problem with an iMac model was the problems with the G5 overheating and its loud fan noise.
Well, I guess it’s not surprising that they want to keep that very, very thin ‘case’/screen cool and quiet.
It’s still a very nice system for consumers who do not think power is everything; and are happy to play the Sims instead. For those people it’s clean, beautiful (subjective) and they can load both Mac and Windose on it.
It would be nice to know how much iMacs Apple actually sells. In my thinking all-in-one means having all bad parts been between laptop and traditional desktop. Since you got all problematic repair, heat and extensibility problems from laptop side. Plus its not very movable compared to laptop. So why should anyone actually buy one now that we have 20 inch “laptop” that offer kind a same with better movability? I’m not saying kill it, but just wondering why buy one.
One reason could be to reduce clutter. One box less, that alone is quite appealing- given the uglyness of most PC boxes. Plus, less cables between the boxes. Another, in case of Apple products, of course is to totally avoid ugly-looking PC enclosures (see . I agree that depends on taste- that´s a given.
Edited 2007-08-10 10:29
So why should anyone actually buy one now that we have 20 inch “laptop” that offer kind a same with better movability? I’m not saying kill it, but just wondering why buy one.
Not everyone has the mobility need:-)
So where do I get my 24″ laptop with a 500GB drive and quad core? =)
> So why should anyone actually buy one now that
> we have 20 inch “laptop” that offer kind a same
> with better movability?
Accidentally took my wife into an Apple dealership and (being style oriented) she REALLY liked the appearance of the iMac20″. It was probably the first computer she would comtemplate having in our living room.
(IMHO a living room is a good place for a family computer, especially if you have kids).
> In my thinking all-in-one means having all bad parts
> been between laptop and traditional desktop.
As a long term geek, I hear you, but 18 months on and its OK. The older I get the more I think a machine should start with everything it will ever need. Expandability is often a way of spending money and making a good machine unreliable.
> Since you got all problematic repair, heat and
> extensibility problems from laptop side.
Cannot recall the fans (and I listen for these things). Memory upgrade was easy – I hope the HDD & DVD live forever.
> Plus its not very movable compared to laptop.
It is better to work with than a lap top; the display is at a much better height for me. Watching DVDs on a laptop is not as pleasant. Lastly it is easy to clean around in a way that mini tower systems really are not.
> I’m not saying kill it, but just wondering why buy
> one?
They are nice to live with – period. We got ours with a warranty that runs for five years. Am not a fanboy in any direction but take a computer out of the functional geek domain and into a (self respecting) home and suddenly a good all-in-one makes sense.
Apple is meeting the needs of consumers each of which have different requirements and budgets.
As for the 20″ laptop comment I’ve never seen 20″ laptops being practical. After all I had to special order my laptop case just for my 17″ MacBook Pro which is larger than what most people carry around these days. 20″ is just far to big to be portable and would be like carrying a painters portfolio case.
I’m considering the new iMac 24″ for the home office and to continue using the MBP on the road. I can always sync the two with .Mac service and the iMac is definitely more space concious than the Mac Pro desktop. My only real complaint is the graphics and keyboard. I thought Apple switched to using NVIDIA graphics for the MBP so why didn’t they do the same for the iMac? Also the keyboard doesn’t seem very ergonomic and would increase wrist strain with prolonged usage.
The display is terrible, not only for the glossy, but also for that black border… when it’s on, it looks like a ’70s TV (in the bad sense).
I have a MacBook, and have had for quite some time now. Because the MacBooks don’t offer the choice, it has a glossy screen.
Guess what? It’s absolutely fine, in pretty much any lighting conditions—far better than my old iBook (with its matte screen) was.
People hear “glossy” and think of the reflection on the glass of a CRT, when (on the MacBook, at least) it’s nothing like that at all.
I don’t know what the iMac’s screen is like; I gather it’s slightly different to the MacBook/MacBook Pro’s, but I wouldn’t write it off just because it’s glossy until you’ve actually tried it.
I have a MBP and I originally put in for matte screen but called an got the glossy instead. I get absolutely no glare at all and even when I take it outside the screen is so bright that everything is clearly visible. I doubt that the iMac is all that different, in-fact it might be better than the MBP’s screen.
This screenshot fromm the article says it all. I see a window with blinds in the background. The blinds are open with a small whiteboard with some orange and blue surrounding it.
http://media.arstechnica.com/journals/apple.media/metalimac5.jpg
I have to admit I was a bit wary about the glossy screens on the MacBooks when I got mine because my only experience with them had been the Gateway or whatever notebooks at best buy with the nearly mirror screens, but I don’t really have any problems with the MacBook and the screen looks great.
The fact that they include a rag to polish the damn thing indicates the design flaw.
Or just a “nice touch”, like having mats come with your new car.
I have to clean all the components in my office frequently (dusty Arizona). Using scratchy paper towels is not recommended.
I guess the iMac is cool, but I’m not impressed. But when I was at my local Apple store in Sacramento, I tried the Mac Mini and was totally blown away. This thing rocks.
You don’t have to deal with a trendy mouse, keyboard or monitor, and you have a certified Unix workstation ( or will in October with Leopard) and a Mac combined. It was very speedy and responsive.
For 600 bucks, it must be the best computer value on the planet. I don’t know why it’s being ignored.
It’s a slick, small computer but it’s not at all a good value compared to other desktops out there (slow, small hard drive, onboard graphics, etc).
You get slightly less power, but a whole less bulk and a whole lot more style. I think it’s a good trade. My mini is in our living room and it is whisper quiet, you can’t hear it over the ambient noise at all. Having a big and loud pc there wasn’t an option.
People always seem to forget that being small, beautiful and quiet offers value too (for some of us at least.)
We have iMacs (previous style), a MacBook and a mini. The iMacs are my kids’ computers, the macbook my wife’s and I use the mini. I really enjoy my mini (I’ve upgraded the HD and CPU). I am only an occasional gamer and do not do graphic-intensive work, so the graphics issue is a minor one for me with this computer.
There is only one thing that would make me happier… if Apple came out with a new Cube, all aluminum, with the same basic “pull out” design where we could do our own upgrades. IT would have a full-size HD, room for several slots of RAM, maybe even dual CPU slots. It would also be nice if they could somehow fit a normal sized graphics card in it (which shouldn’t be TOO hard with today’s shrinking components) that would meet the needs of people who do more graphic-intensive work.
They could cram that all in with notebook-like components and today’s notebooks are pretty darn quick.
i’m a big mini fan as well. it’s pretty much used for email, web browsing, music etc, two 500 gig drives plugged into it, one for music +video storage, the other is for back up. I have the mini plugged into my LCD tv
and then have a diNovo Edge keyboard +trackpad combo for controlling it from the couch.
I was hoping for something new on this announcement on tuesday, and the new mini was nice, but then i realized, i just don’t need a new computer right now. I just “wanted” to buy something.. perfect consumer i know.. so I got Overlord for my 360
I’ll say it again…
Why would anyone want to buy a 24″ display where you can only use the computer inside of it?
What a waste. I’m sure the display will outlast the usefulness of the computer.
There are still people using their cubes and their original iMacs. People throw away computers because they want to not because they have outlived their usefulness.
Yup. The actual human beings that buy the majority of these things will upgrade when they simply stop working, for whatever reason.
My primary reason for upgrading from my last PC (which was pushing 5 years old) was I needed more memory to run modern Java stuff. 768MB was just not cutting it, and I found that the MB simply wouldn’t take any more.
The one before that, also 4 years old, I think the power supply or something imploded, so I took that as an opportunity. Same with the one before that, also 4 years old.
I crammed new hard drives in the things, added some memory, and upgraded the video card on the last machine (because the fan died on the one I had).
Now I have a Mac Pro that will, frankly, NEVER run out of disk space, and most likely NEVER run out of memory (if I ever max it out to 16GB). So, it’s up to the power supply. And I seriously doubt in 4-5 years if/when that dies there will be a substantially better computer available to the consumer. With the current push to low power and more cores, I’m simply not concerned. I think the Mac Pro is the pinnacle of a home computer for some time. It will not surprise me if it lasts 10 years, assuming parts are available.
Maybe I’ll get a better video card in a few years for it.
We have a G3 800Mhz iBook that my wife uses everyday for web surfing and stuff that we up’d to 640MB. We still get great life out of that battery. That machine is painless. It’s still running 10.3. I debate on getting 10.4 for it, minimally for a better Safari, but I may be able to just get the WebKit version instead, or convert her to FireFox. That thing will just have to catch fire one day I guess.
To be blunt, I use these things everyday and I hate spending money on them. I’m a cheap bastard when it comes to this stuff, and sometime wish that I were a woodworker instead of a computer guy. If I had spent the money I’ve spent on computers over the years on shop equipment, I’d still 80-90% of it, and have a shop that makes Norm Abrams shop look under equipped.
Gamers are different, as their industry continues to push the envelope, but most folks aren’t gamers.
Aluminum iMac Unboxed and compared to previous version :
http://gadgetaholic.com/content/view/159/10004/
New iMac disassembled :
http://210.157.201.118/~kodawarisan/imac_2007_mid/imac_2007_mid_01….
Edit: review from PCWorld :
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135777-c,macs/article.html
Edited 2007-08-10 18:35 UTC
The new iMac is the first intel Mac I bought that I personally use and I must say I’m not totally thrilled with it. Yes it is much faster compared to my aging 17″ G4 powerbook, but it’s also less stabile: beachball-galore and I have no idea what causes it. Besides iWork08 and the latest updates, I haven’t installed any software on the new Mac. The iMac already locked up twice on me and that is something I’m totally not familiair with on the G4. I have been using that for almost 5 years now (wen through 3 OS updates with it), for say 12 hours a day and have experienced maybe a total of 2-3 lockups.
As a frequent user of iMovie I spent a lot of time with the new iMovie. The new applicaties looks nice and has it’s strong points, but it hasn’t stolen my heart. iMovieHD gives me more control on details, while the new iMovie targets the “I want to have an okay movie within 20 minutes” audience. I probably have to upgrade to Final Cut Express then … maybe that’s the whole gameplan anyways.
The screen is dead gorgeous. But that glance … let’s hope I get used to it.
A great hurray for the awsome keyboard and the overall built of the machine: no noise at all. Nothing.