Meet the New iMac (1 Viewer)

[Michael*K]

If my memory serves me correctly, Windows XP is about 4 months old now and I have yet to find a piece of software that is not available for it.

Haven't seen iTunes for it yet.

 

[Joseph S]

or BBEdit or Final Cut Pro or DVD Studio Pro or Brickhouse or ...

 

[Mike Sogge]

C. Only need a machine that can speed through simple tasks, not something that will plow through the work

I take it you haven't paid any attention to the various hardware intensive Photoshop and other image/video/audio tests that the computing magazines have conducted over the past few years...

 

[KeithAP]

The design looks nice but can't Apple engineers figure out a way to make different display types/sizes available in this price range and still have a great design? Why can't they just separate the monitor from the rest of the computer and give consumers a choice?

To me the Cube was a better design than this iMac. Unfortunately the Cube was overpriced. I don't need the expandibility of the towers but I would like a larger/higher resolution monitor than the iMac line provides. The base level iMac has a 700MHz G4, 128MB of RAM, a 40GB hard drive and a CD/RW for $1,299 (available in March). If it didn't have the 15 inch LCD, it could probably be sold for $999. Then I could use my existing 19 inch CRT, or maybe splurge on a 18 in LCD and I would still be under $2K for a very nice machine. Going to the Apple store now and configuring a 733 tower with a 17 inch display, comes to about $2700.

Apple has always made great products. However, they seem to be a bit behind when it comes to flexibilty in hardware configurations.

-Keith

 

[Chris Wittry]

Apparently my comments were misunderstood. I was merely commenting on the fact that Woody's analogy of the PC vs Mac debate to exotic cars vs utilitarian cars was flawed. I have used Macs in the past and respect them, but a long time ago I made the choice to use Windows and I've never looked back.
Mike Sogge - Yes I have paid attention to the various comparisons of PC to Mac over the past decade, but I have to say that I've never been impressed with the results. I've built myself PC's over the years and they run at a speed that equals most Macs, at a price that has run from 1/8 to 1/4 of the cost. So by that reasoning, for the same price as a Mac, I could build myself a cluster that would run 4-8 times faster. Not that any normal person would do this, but then again, arguments about operating systems are hardly normal!

 

[JasenP]

The new iMac looks like a desklamp to me.
And as for the off-topic arguments going on here: As soon as all software that is available for the PC is available for the Mac AND the bloated pricing structure for Mac hardware is tamed, I would consider looking into a Mac.
Otherwise, I think it's a fashion/desire to be noticed thing to own one.

 

[WoodyH]

Repair Costs on all my Macs...$30

I think that's infinitely more than I've ever spent repairing any of my Macs! Mac Classic, IIvx, 6100, 6500, original iMac, Blue and White G3 - haven't put a penny into any of them that wasn't voluntary yet, after about 10 years of owning Macs.

 

[Mike Sogge]

Woody,

Very well put.

And if there is a PC program that you absolutely have to use that isn't yet available for the MacOS, there's always Virtual PC. Granted it's not really all that great for running hardware heavy programs such as AutoCAD or what have you, but it gets the job done respectably for just about everything else.

 

[Michael*K]

Ugh! I don't want all the software for PC's available for Macs!

I agree. There isn't a piece of productivity or design software that I need that I can't get for the Mac. The Mac gaming community is under-represented, but that's fine for me. If I had my choice of all the game titles on the PC side, I'd weigh 400 pounds and wouldn't have a life. Hell, I'm moving there anyhow with Rogue Spear and GameRanger for the Mac.
I could care less that there are 1000 times more programs available for the PC. It's like going to a grocery store and having 40 varieties of ketchup on the shelf...once you find one you like, you usually stick with it. Same goes for my software selections.

 

[Ken Chan]

Apple has always made great products. However, they seem to be a bit behind when it comes to flexibilty in hardware configurations.

Part of it might be to keep the costs down, considering that price is a reason people cling to for not buying Macs. Maybe they have some market analysis that says that the "middle" segment between the all-in-ones and towers is too small, so they keep their product line simple with good profit margins so they don't go out of business, another reason people cling to for not buying Macs
The MHz argument is also flaky; even AMD is trying to get away from it. The funny thing is I remember Andy Grove defending his then Pentium-90s against the Alpha chips running at 200-odd MHz: "what do you want, a chip or an FM transmitter?"
//Ken