Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Gone with old iMac!!!

D

davethewave

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 30, 2007
50
0
Trieste, Italy
Hi all folks.
two days ago i went to local store to see the new iMac. first impression was very good. after reading some threads, i went again to the store this evening to buy... an old iMac. the screen is very good looking, but i think too reflective. i've choosed a 24" old gen iMac (tomorrow it will be in my desk), standard conf.
i made this valuations:
1) 2,16 vs 2.4 Ghz Santa Rosa: not so much difference (10%?)
2) 250 vs 320 Gb: not a big improvement (i liked 500Gb, but there was no bto on the store)
3) max 3Gb vs max 4Gb: why only 3Gb max??? why "odd number Gb"??? winner the new iMac...
4) Nvidia 7300 vs Ati 2600: not a big improvement (or maybe a regression)
5) keyboards: i liked the new one, maybe aftermarket. not so important
6) magnet vs no magnet, white vs black logo, sleep led vs no sleep led: regression...
and finally
7) matte vs glossy: regression... :(

so tomorrow i will be another happy iMac user.
i know i'm buying a year old technology, but a year ago i cannot give 2KBucks for iMac, now it is 1,5KBucks worth at least.
bye,
Davide
(sorry for my english...)
 
davethewave said:
Hi all folks.

i know i'm buying a year old technology, but a year ago i cannot give 2KBucks for iMac, now it is 1,5KBucks worth at least.
bye,
Davide
(sorry for my english...)
Click to expand...

I don't think the technology has improved that much at all. i mean the 1st base models they introduced were over a year an a half ago and they were 1.83 CD in that time the base has increased to a 2.0 C2D. In over a year an half that really isn't much of a leap at all. In that light it's kinda like buying a used imac and price has dropped to reflect that. I kinda want one but when i think about how far it really hasn't come i'm not that impressed. Meaning to say i don't think you should feel bad about 'year old technology as you say.
 
I just got back from the Apple Store to view the new 24" iMacs. Have to say that if you are just getting one, they are very nice. If you already have a 24" iMac, stick with what you have.

The screen wasn't too glossy for me, but something about the brightness was washing all of the colors out of the icons. Maybe it was just the unit I was looking at. Other than that, it was basically what I had at home already. I actually like my 'old' 24" iMac screen better.

I do like the keyboard. I'll probably pick one of those up as it will also compliment my 24" iMac as well. The new iLife seems nice as well. I might pick that up when Leopard comes out.

Oh well, thought I might get the bug to trade my iMac in for a new one, but the feeling didn't last long once I got in the store.
 
mashinhead said:
I don't think the technology has improved that much at all. i mean the 1st base models they introduced were over a year an a half ago and they were 1.83 CD in that time the base has increased to a 2.0 C2D. In over a year an half that really isn't much of a leap at all. In that light it's kinda like buying a used imac and price has dropped to reflect that. I kinda want one but when i think about how far it really hasn't come i'm not that impressed. Meaning to say i don't think you should feel bad about 'year old technology as you say.
Click to expand...

I agree that the changes haven't been huge, and that last year's iMac is still a fantastic machine, but I think you need to give a little more credit...the iMac is now on it's third generation of Intel CPU. The one you're referring to from a year and a half ago were the Core Duos; last September came the Core 2 Duos; now we have the Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa. Even though they're all roughly the same clock speed, the performance gains are pretty decent, especially if you compare the first Core Duo to the current Santa Rosa Core 2 Duo.
 
skubish said:
I think the new iMacs are much nicer.

7200rpm drives
a GPU upgrade
4GB RAM max
FW800
Click to expand...

Not compared to my last year's 24" Imac. I have a 500GB Samsung 7200rpm drive. A 7600GT GPU, which the current card 'might' equal in performance. The jury is still out on that one. 4GB of RAM is nice, but 3GB is not much difference. FW800 is great, but I find it hard to locate too many peripherals that will take advantage of it, and usually end up getting a USB 2.0 device. The new keyboard is great as it has two USB 2.0 ports instead of that 1.0 crap that was on the last revision.

I'll wait for the next cycle of iMacs to upgrade!
 
totally doing the same as you, buying a discounted older gen.
I just couldn't stand the new iMac look. Although I might get new keyboard separately. It somehow feels more comfortable.
 
mrogers said:
I agree that the changes haven't been huge, and that last year's iMac is still a fantastic machine, but I think you need to give a little more credit...the iMac is now on it's third generation of Intel CPU. The one you're referring to from a year and a half ago were the Core Duos; last September came the Core 2 Duos; now we have the Core 2 Duo Santa Rosa. Even though they're all roughly the same clock speed, the performance gains are pretty decent, especially if you compare the first Core Duo to the current Santa Rosa Core 2 Duo.
Click to expand...

Well you will notice that for the first time since the intel switch apple hasn't posted and 2x or 4x faster claims on the homepage with the image. Don't get me wrong i like it, but really CD to C2D even with SR is more a marketing leap than and actual performance leap. Which wouldn't be so bad if it hadn't been almost two years (because these will go at least 4 months without another upgrade) in between them.
 
1) 2,16 vs 2.4 Ghz Santa Rosa: not so much difference (10%?)
Click to expand...
So, definite upgrade (and don't forget the 2.8Ghz option!)

2) 250 vs 320 Gb: not a big improvement
Click to expand...
Bigger is bigger. And you've got a 1TB BTO option now!

3) max 3Gb vs max 4Gb: why only 3Gb max??? why "odd number Gb"??? winner the new iMac...
Click to expand...
Definite upgrade (you get the advantage of dual channel with the max amount of ram).

4) Nvidia 7300 vs Ati 2600: not a big improvement (or maybe a regression)
Click to expand...
I think this will, ultimately, turn out to be an improvement. PC benchmarks not withstanding...I've been hanging around the Blizzard forums and side-by-side comparisons seem to indicate better FPS across the board with World of Warcraft. Maybe it's better drivers? Who knows? (I think this is an improvement or, at the very least, a wash)

5) keyboards: i liked the new one, maybe aftermarket. not so important
Click to expand...
You like it. So, it's an improvement. :)

6) magnet vs no magnet, white vs black logo, sleep led vs no sleep led: regression...
Click to expand...
No magnet? If anything, there are MORE magnets on the new iMac. Magnets hold the front glass on and I'm pretty sure they will secure the remote without issue.

7) matte vs glossy: regression... :(
Click to expand...
So, you definitely dislike the glossy screen? Ok.

So 6-1 in favor of the new iMac!!! ;)
 
/\ /\ /\

Uh... your comparison isn't very good. First of all, you say 10% is a "definite improvement". 10% is not noticable for most people... so how is that a definite improvement?

You say the magnet should be secured by the magnets that hold the glass to the screen... I hope your joking.

But what you forgot to mention is how much of a turn off the glossy screen can be. If the new iMac had five TB of space, 20 gigs of RAM and a 5 GHz processor, that is all very nice, but people cannot stand the glossy screen! (myself included) Have you seen the thing? It is like a mirror! (not to mention I have a window to the back of me... getting the new iMac would = disaster!)

So sure, it is a nice computer, but it is a very dissapointing upgrade for something that took nearly a year to release. Its graphics card is hardly any better than the one in the older model! And the 2.8 processor is only about 15% faster than the 2.4 (which is only about 10% faster than the last gen 2.33) so for nearly two and a half grand $ you get a computer that is 25% faster (not bad), still weak in the graphics region, and that has a mirror for a screen! I wouldn't be as complain-ey if it would have been released less than 11 months after the previous model.
 
Zwhaler said:
First of all, you say 10% is a "definite improvement". 10% is not noticable for most people... so how is that a definite improvement?
Click to expand...
No. I say it is a definite upgrade. How can you argue that? :)

The excessive glare from the glass seems to be the most divisive feature. The glass is removable. I'm sure there will be something (3rd party of do-it-yourself process) that will allow you to cut down on the glare in the near future.
 
mavherzog said:
No. I say it is a definite upgrade. How can you argue that? :)

The excessive glare from the glass seems to be the most divisive feature. The glass is removable. I'm sure there will be something (3rd party of do-it-yourself process) that will allow you to cut down on the glare in the near future.
Click to expand...

Well yes, it definitely is an upgrade. :) I just wish Apple offered a matte option, because I don't think too many folks are going to be psyched to get their new iMac and then take it all apart just so they can look at it properly (for those who cannot focus on a glossy screen).
 
thanks all

thanks guys for your replies.
this weekend i was so busy, but today it's 830am and i am already sitting in front of my new iMac.
i found it amazing!
what i want to mean is that 10% or even 20% better specs cannot compete with 25% rebate and better screen. definately.
so thank you all for discussing your opinion with me :)
bye Davide
 
big.birdd said:
Why not get a mac mini then rather than buy an 1 year old imac
Click to expand...

However, the one year old iMac has the better graphics hardware, which was always the argument between the Mac mini and the iMac. The Mac mini would either have to have a much better processor than the iMac or a significant price break to make it desirable. At $599, the Mac mini isn't a good deal. It's merely a teaser.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back