Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If you have to use a PC at home, it isn't really that bad. Not a great value, but neither is an iMac.
 
If you have to use a PC at home, it isn't really that bad. Not a great value, but neither is an iMac.

Take that back :p

I bought my 20" 2.4ghz iMac for £1000 and I think it's GREAT value. Seriously.

I don't care if you it could have had more features or whatever at that price - It's still worth it to me!

Macs aren't for the people who care LOADS about specs :p
 
it looks like a perfectly fine computer to me. It seems people want to bash it solely because it "looks" like the iMac. Have any of the critics used it? No.
 
The video card is so much worse, right? :rolleyes:
My bust I didnt know about the other models with a ....2600xt. very interesting that Gateway could use the xt but the Mac couldnt. The Xt is really a better gaming card by a good margin over the pro. Plus they come with a TV tuner...wait a minute maybe that Mac isnt looking so good:eek:
 
Speaking as a huge Mac supporter and equally-huge PC basher, I think this is actually decent looking (ducks rotten tomatoes being thrown at head).

Don't get me wrong, I love my iMac and nothing comes close, but this isn't hideous.

That said, it's not that impressive for an all-in-one given that it still has a huge power brick. You would think they'd be able to hide it in that giant Brian Mulroney style chin.
 
My bust I didnt know about the other models with a ....2600xt. very interesting that Gateway could use the xt but the Mac couldnt. The Xt is really a better gaming card by a good margin over the pro. Plus they come with a TV tuner...wait a minute maybe that Mac isnt looking so good:eek:

http://www.tuaw.com/2007/08/29/new-imac-video-card-stealth-upgrade-mobility-radeon-hd-2600-xt/

it seems like it is a xt card even though apple calls it a pro card. so maybe the graphics card is the exact same.
 
It also appears in the specs the memory in the top model is 800 mhz not 667 like the base and middle model. Its screen though is to small for $1799. A 22" would be fine. Interesting though its memory is 800 and its XT is allowed to run at XT speeds. Interesting indeed.
 
I agree with the above that the site design is horrible and slow, and that the price - features ratio isn't as good as the iMac's. And I certainly agree that the iMac looks better, no question.

But I think you guys are being a bit harsh on the machine's design. I actually like it, and think it's pretty cool. This is as minimal as you can get.

The keyboard, remote and mouse are ugly, though.

(And to someone who said that this includes a remote, therefore it's a ripoff, come on. Including a remote might have been popularized by Apple, but it's one of those things that when one includes it, it's a good thing. Hardly a rip-off IMO)
 
Took 30 seconds using my powerbook (see signiature)

Better than their last effort - http://www.gateway.com/programs/profile6/

What's with that web page though? It took about three minutes to load - if you think Flash on OS X is slow, try it on Linux. And you can't tell what the images link to until you click on them, and even then you're not sure what you're being shown. Terrible web design.
 
Speaking as a huge Mac supporter and equally-huge PC basher, I think this is actually decent looking (ducks rotten tomatoes being thrown at head).

Don't get me wrong, I love my iMac and nothing comes close, but this isn't hideous.

That said, it's not that impressive for an all-in-one given that it still has a huge power brick. You would think they'd be able to hide it in that giant Brian Mulroney style chin.

Better than having a Joe Clark chin, eh? Joe who? :D

I think it looks OK. The remote is ugly but Apple's doesn't colour match and the keyboard/mouse on the iMac is somewhat "different" as well. The huge power brick does make me wonder about the heat.

I wish Apple would make the backs removable to upgrade the hd and so forth.
 
Ok, it's not the worst thing... but it sure is close. It really is laughable... 4" more inches than my screen and they can't manage more pixels of space? It really just looks like a photoshopped 5 gen iPod. And WTH does one do with 7 USB ports, hook up everyone on your block's printer?
 
Ok, it's not the worst thing... but it sure is close. It really is laughable... 4" more inches than my screen and they can't manage more pixels of space? It really just looks like a photoshopped 5 gen iPod. And WTH does one do with 7 USB ports, hook up everyone on your block's printer?
USB devices are plentiful. The iMac is rather lacking with only 3 ports.
 
Another POS attempt to copy Apple. They can try all they want but it can't "float" like the iMac and it runs Vista. Good try tho, but still sucks...
 
USB devices are plentiful. The iMac is rather lacking with only 3 ports.

While I would never go for the Gateway One unless a PC is all I could ever have a choice to get I have to say it's not bad looking. Looks like a giant 5th gen iPod.
Now Eidorian, I have to disagree with you. In all fairness the Gateway only has 3 usb ports on the machine just like the iMac but the iMac also has 2 more on the keyboard unlike the Gateway. If you want to use the other USB ports on the Gateway they are on that stupid power brick which sits on the floor, hideous. At least the keyboard usb ports on the iMac are easily accessible.
 
Now Eidorian, I have to disagree with you. In all fairness the Gateway only has 3 usb ports on the machine just like the iMac but the iMac also has 2 more on the keyboard unlike the Gateway. If you want to use the other USB ports on the Gateway they are on that stupid power brick which sits on the floor, hideous. At least the keyboard usb ports on the iMac are easily accessible.
I found it quite strange the remaining USB ports were on the power brick. They'd still be useful for printers and such.
 
I found it quite strange the remaining USB ports were on the power brick. They'd still be useful for printers and such.

I found it quite strange that there's a power brick when the Gateway is much thicker than the iMac. The iMac's power supply is built in.
 
I found it quite strange that there's a power brick when the Gateway is much thicker than the iMac. The iMac's power supply is built in.
I noticed a lot of empty space inside. The internals aren't hair thin like the iMac.

I don't know why the external power supply wouldn't make the machine itself smaller then it is.
 
it looks like a perfectly fine computer to me. It seems people want to bash it solely because it "looks" like the iMac. Have any of the critics used it? No.

I think the problem is that whilst it looks nice enough, it just isn't quite good enough. It is an obvious iMac copy, but a Windows PC, which is fair enough. Except that if you're going to try that, you have to make it AT LEAST as good as the iMac.

Anything less than that and it will fail. It is all about design with the market it's aimed at and the product it is trying to be. If the design isn't even slightly up to scratch, it's failed. Not because it is a bad machine, but because it exists to be a 'PC' iMac. It's set itself it's own goals and it fails because a) it isn't thin enough b) the chin's too big and c) it doesn't do anything at all better (except upgradeability, but maybe if that's important to the buyer they won't be buying and all in one.

I can't comment on the materials, but they have to top notch too.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.