Apple iMac Available on November 30th

[Depth]

Nah, I don't like Apple. My friend had an iPod and it was full of bad music.

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

I guess what easy is saying is that apple is like wine and PC's are like beer. Rich people prefer wines elegant looks and high class curves when the middle class people love a good beer over the wine but knowing sometimes a good beer would do the job better than the wine.

lol no because i know rich people who prefer beer, the super micro brew $40/litre kind, and really dislike wine. i also know the "normal" people who like wine but they prefer it from a box

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by Depth

Nah, I don't like Apple. My friend had an iPod and it was full of bad music.

That would be your friend's problem, not Apple's

Originally Posted by repman244

HP Z1. Good build, UPGRADEABLE,...

Sometimes its pretty hard to upgrade 200+ computers scattered around a building. Getting it right in the first time, and then replace it completely when the time is up saves precious time (its not too difficult to lose over a million dollars with a 1hr downtime in a 200 worker company). Sure, if you are managing about 50-100 pc alone its just about manageable upgrading and building every single one of them, but when your duties include managing the network, servers, website, etc. suddenly it doesn't make any sense to save a couple of hundred by building rigs yourself.

Also, most commoners (non TPU people) seem to feel a bit more excited seeing shiny new Apples rather than boring HPs, boosting worker productivity is always a bonus.

[brandonwh64]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

lol no because i know rich people who prefer beer, the super micro brew $40/litre kind, and really dislike wine. i also know the "normal" people who like wine but they prefer it from a box

It was the thought that counts... :/

[repman244]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

Sometimes its pretty hard to upgrade 200 computers scattered around a building. Getting it right in the first time, and then replace it completely when the time is up saves precious time (its not too difficult to lose over a million dollars with a 1hr downtime in a 200 worker company). Sure, if you are managing about 50-100 pc alone its just about manageable upgrading and building every single one of them, but when your duties include managing the network, servers, website, etc. suddenly it doesn't make any sense to save a couple of hundred by building rigs yourself.

Also, most commoners (non TPU people) seem to feel a bit more excited seeing shiny new Apples rather than boring HPs, boosting worker productivity is always a bonus.

I agree but it's always a good option, and it also allows quick repairs to be made.

I can't see Apple giving better productivity in this case (consumer hardware vs workstation class hardware), perhaps I gave a wrong example of an alternative.

[XL-R8R]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

apple products are underpriced

Can I have what you're smoking, Sir??


You're either stupidly rich, insane, or immensely high..... I can't decide.




Apple charge top coin for what amounts basically to a really powerful tablet with a stand... its not new, glorious or anything else along those lines... its just in a white cover.

And while it may be 5mm at its edge, it isn't 5mm anywhere else



And for the record, I even own a fair selection of Apple products.

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by repman244

I agree but it's always a good option, and it also allows quick repairs to be made.

I can't see Apple giving better productivity in this case (consumer hardware vs workstation class hardware), perhaps I gave a wrong example of an alternative.

Quick repairs is always good, but the IT departments I know usually just call in someone else to fix it, while they provide a backup computer to the affected party. Somehow all the IT depts I know are always severely understaffed

Of course you want to give workstation class hardware to those who need them, but for most of the rest shiny new Apple stuff usually gets them happy (and hopefully work harder). I know I worked harder after they replaced the i7 860s with 3770's lol

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

The iMac comes with this 2560 x 1440 pixel.

Now that is pushing the consumer envelope.

It doesnt need the fastest CPU. That is for "PC enthusiasts". But it brings high resolution desktop to the consumer.

Why are PC OEMs lagging here? And still forcing 1080 down our throats. We do not want yesteryear resolutions. We want tomorrows resolutions, today.

Exactly what I keep saying. It's the screens that keep me interested in iMacs. It's the main part I stare at for hours on end, it's the part I want to look the best.

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

Huh? Apple only has two models of laptops and three of desktops. Look at any modest PC manufacturer and you'll find at least double that. Then for a comparison of computers that ship with Mac OS X, you need to compare to the entire arsenal of computers that ship with Windows: five compared to hundreds.

What's the last standard Apple introduced that had wide market acceptance? I'd say Firewire (IEEE1394) but that doesn't exactly qualify for "wide." I would say Ultrabook but it's Intel that made that possible, not Apple. Hmm...



Because the largest volume of PCs that sell are those $600 and less. When it really comes down to it, most people are unwilling to shell out $1000+ for a pretty screen they'll gawk at for a minute and then get straight to internet browsing.

And...because of the above, those high resolution monitors become a luxary item instead of the norm so they slap their highest markups on them.

You just made his point for him. If PC vendors upped the resolution, the prices on these screens would come down, causing them to be adopted as standard. Until then, we get to pay the premiums for them.

Originally Posted by radrok

This iMac just uses the classic 2560x1440 CinemaDisplay panel and afaik it's not new and for that price you could build a desktop and pair it with a 27 inch Dell or one of those korean monitors.

2560x1400/2560x1600 resolutions have been around for a good amount of time, heck let's say for too much, I've been on 2560x1600 for years.

What manufacturers need to do is to decrease prices on high resolution panels, shift high res onto smaller panels and increase resolution for 27-30 inch panels.

But not in all-in-ones. You can't directly compare a tower to an all-in-one. The people that buy AIO computers are specifically looking for that formfactor. In this case, the formfactor itself is a feature.

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Much wider and bulkier? The only reason the 23" version is wider is because it has a bigger screen than the 21" iMac, an even still it is only 2 inches wider, and it is only 1 inch deeper.

If you compare the 27" HP to the 27" iMac, they have identical widths, the HP is about 1/2" shorter and 1/3" deeper. Not a space savings worth writing home about, certainly not one worth paying over $800 more for.

The 27" HP is 1080p. Definitely an $800 improvement, considering quality 2560x1440 displays generally run in that range anyway.

While I wouldn't go as far as Rhino and say they are underpriced, they certainly are not overpriced.

[chinmi]

8 Gb Ram ??? 1 Tb HDD ?? i5 3470 ?? wow that's awesome.... and plus the 675mx gpu gonna be way faster then my 670 desktop version because it has 5 more points in number then the 670 desktop... this is by far the best and the cheapest totally used for productivity and office awesomeness computer system.... ups i mean mac system....



ps: lots of sarcasm on this post

[Depth]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

That would be your friend's problem, not Apple's

My sense of humour always gets a few extra layers of Depth during a migraine

To be fair I would probably have had gotten an iPod if I didn't have to use iTunes, but after Apple started suing everyone for everything (my S3 is a ripoff of the iPhone? How?) I've been avoiding Apple like the plague. They want a 100% market share by force. I will not contribute.

[laszlo]

not bad but who need all in one pc can choose & customize from these:

http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd

and many other manufacturers offer the option to customize even at lower price tag...

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by laszlo

not bad but who need all in one pc can choose & customize from these:

http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-one-27-2710-aio-t/pd

and many other manufacturers offer the option to customize even at lower price tag...

Can't customise that one to match Mac's offering, so you can treat it as a product targeting a different pricepoint.

[1nf3rn0x]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

show me a desktop PC with those specs/dimensions and that kind of build quality.



not a single pc desktop manufacturer can come close to pushing those specs in a body like that. apple products are underpriced and that has been pushing down the price of pc desktops as well since they cannot compete.



let's see a pc manufacturer push those specs in a case like that anytime soon...

My 700$ laptop manages to fit similar specs into a 15.6inch case whilst remaining under an inch thick and weighing less than 2kg. Point invalid?

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by 1nf3rn0x

My 700$ laptop manages to fit similar specs into a 15.6inch case whilst remaining under an inch thick and weighing less than 2kg. Point invalid?

Your laptop doesn't come with IPS 1440p screen, but I think we are getting out of topic.

[repman244]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

Of course you want to give workstation class hardware to those who need them, but for most of the rest shiny new Apple stuff usually gets them happy (and hopefully work harder).

I somehow doubt a company would splash that much cash (especially these days) just for a nicer design (and even if workers do work "harder" it's usually just for a short time).
Hardware upgrade is one thing but using wast amounts of money on design alone won't turn profits.