Firewire devices can be daisy-chained, that's why most FW hard drives have two firewire ports.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iMacs - ruined?
- Thread starter system16
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Firewire devices can be daisy-chained, that's why most FW hard drives have two firewire ports.
Well put. I can't believe someone would complain about how getting a larger display for the same price is something that would "ruin" the iMac.
If you don't like the screen, there's always the high-end Mac Mini, or Mac Pro which lets you buy your own monitor!
I, for one, won't be buying one of the new iMacs, but I thought they were pretty cool. It's about time they started having wireless accessories standard!
Energy efficiency, performance and screen quality improved!
I'm happy enough with my existing Mini and MacBook Pro, however.
I, for one, won't be buying one of the new iMacs, but I thought they were pretty cool. It's about time they started having wireless accessories standard!
Energy efficiency, performance and screen quality improved!
I'm happy enough with my existing Mini and MacBook Pro, however.
First of all, those video cards are pretty okay, they are good enough to run any app that is out right now (unless you're planning on developing your own applications, in which case, I'd recommend building your own computer and getting linux on it)
Second, who in the hell carries a fricking iMac around with them?!
That's definitely the dumbest thing I've ever heard!
If you need a portable computer.. it's called a laptop!
So, I'm pretty sure that Apple didn't make this iMac to be carried around with you, unless you want to carry a 21.5" model with you.. which still seems pretty stupid to me to carry a desktop.
And they had to upgrade the resolution, because of the big upgrade to the screen size. So, pretty much if they kept 1920x1200 resolution, it wouldn't look as good and as impressive to the eye.
So, bottom line is, you have nothing to argue about, because to me, it seems like you don't really need a iMac, you just need a laptop that runs windows and has a good graphics card on it.
In which case, I wish you luck in finding what you need, but for now, please don't make stupid complaints.
And no one is forcing you to buy anything, if you love your 24" so much, why not keep it? why b itch about it here?
IF you have a professional opinion that actually would matter to some people, please post that, not your stupid nonsense complaints.
Second, who in the hell carries a fricking iMac around with them?!
That's definitely the dumbest thing I've ever heard!
If you need a portable computer.. it's called a laptop!
So, I'm pretty sure that Apple didn't make this iMac to be carried around with you, unless you want to carry a 21.5" model with you.. which still seems pretty stupid to me to carry a desktop.
And they had to upgrade the resolution, because of the big upgrade to the screen size. So, pretty much if they kept 1920x1200 resolution, it wouldn't look as good and as impressive to the eye.
So, bottom line is, you have nothing to argue about, because to me, it seems like you don't really need a iMac, you just need a laptop that runs windows and has a good graphics card on it.
In which case, I wish you luck in finding what you need, but for now, please don't make stupid complaints.
And no one is forcing you to buy anything, if you love your 24" so much, why not keep it? why b itch about it here?
IF you have a professional opinion that actually would matter to some people, please post that, not your stupid nonsense complaints.
A 24" iMac that matched the 24" Led would have been nice I just traded down a 30" ACD for the 24" LED. The improvement was wonderful. I don't like the matte on the 30" im sure its been over coated 'too much" in antireflective gunk.The graphics card line up for the Mac Pro could have been improved for the MDP, Ahh well maybe next year.
Im chuffed that the scroll wheel has gone to heaven, If I could have a Multi touch pad on my key board now please Mr Jobs I can save myself half the batteries I would normally purchase. It cant be hard to interface it in to the bluetooth controller Its only got a couple of ribbon outs on it which are on the USB bus so it has to work in the wired keyboard.
Anyone know or can lay their hands on the trackpad pinout diagram
I have a spare Trackpad kicking about might make my own I don't need the Number Pad.
Im chuffed that the scroll wheel has gone to heaven, If I could have a Multi touch pad on my key board now please Mr Jobs I can save myself half the batteries I would normally purchase. It cant be hard to interface it in to the bluetooth controller Its only got a couple of ribbon outs on it which are on the USB bus so it has to work in the wired keyboard.
Anyone know or can lay their hands on the trackpad pinout diagram
I have a spare Trackpad kicking about might make my own I don't need the Number Pad.People did say that 24 would be too big and for a monitor that you use around 15 inches from your face, I think its probably the biggest you'd comfortably want (people who work on 30 inch displays correct me if you will). Apple do offer the smaller machine, but since its specs are quite poor it's not much of an option.
The fact that it's bigger to carry around isn't a dealbreaker just convinient for some of us to do every so often.
I think the resolutions and aspect ratios are the deal killer really. Fair enough hd video will look great filling up the screen, and I'm sure that's what apple's hoping for with their marketing and if that's what you want then get a hd tv, but for applications and games that resolution will make working space and running games very awkward.
Lastly, it is definitely faster and better equipped but I think many other people as well as me are probably asking why does the top end model still have last years graphics in it?
Honestly, the biggest thing that's made me sad in all of this?
The bottom of the screens now have square corners. The round ones looked more friendly.
Other than that, I guess I'm a bit sad that the back isn't black anymore. That was the sex.
Other than that, I'm still happy with my 20" 2007 alum iMac. Nothing to really be jealous of...
The bottom of the screens now have square corners. The round ones looked more friendly.
Other than that, I guess I'm a bit sad that the back isn't black anymore. That was the sex.
Other than that, I'm still happy with my 20" 2007 alum iMac. Nothing to really be jealous of...
It's not the fact that it's larger that bothers me mainly. Its the terribly awkward resolutions, 16:9 aspect and lack of graphics upgrade.
Ruined? No way.
A 24" option might have been a nice touch, but at what cost? I'm betting they'd be struggling to put that core i7 in there at that size.
What I'm stoked about is the price. In Australia the previous top end iMac (24") was $3699, the current top end iMac (27") is only $2599. $1100 cheaper, quad core and 3 more glorious inches of display.
A 24" option might have been a nice touch, but at what cost? I'm betting they'd be struggling to put that core i7 in there at that size.
What I'm stoked about is the price. In Australia the previous top end iMac (24") was $3699, the current top end iMac (27") is only $2599. $1100 cheaper, quad core and 3 more glorious inches of display.
Yes, those video cards are ok. But apple has to consider than when you pay $2000 for a computer you don't just want 'ok'. Especially when 'ok' is last years graphics card.
Who carries their imac with them? I do and so do a lot of other people. There is a company that makes carrying cases specifically for them. I have moved to a different part of the country to go to university so when I go home for holidays I want to take my mac back with me. Seriously it's great to be able to take your full desktop with you
Laptops generally suck and laptops from apple are too expensive and underpowered. I can get a better mac for less money and still carry it with me
I do have something to argue about and people have agreed with me that the aspect ratio and resolutions are bad things so I'm not bringing up stupid nonsense points. I do like my 24 inch but after 2 years you just feel like you want to upgrade.
And I'm not bitching I was just asking if anyone else felt a little dissapointed.
Some people always find a way to complain about everything.
If a 27" screen is too big for you, then don't buy it. Your 24" iMac is not going to be truly outdated for years. And if you don't like a 24" screen, then buy a 21.5" iMac or even a 20" refurb iMac. And guess what? If you don't like that, then there are 17", 15", and 13" laptops to choose from. And it doesn't stop there. There's even a device called the iPhone for the ultimate in portability.
So let's look at the choices in size that Apple offers today, right now:
3.5 inches
13 inches
15 inches
17 inches
20 inches
21.5 inches
24 inches
27 inches
And you can't find something that suits your style? Puhlease!
Bryan
ok i really have to chime in on this 16:9 vs 16:10 debate. i can see it being an issue on a 13" macbook where you only have 800px to begin with. but on a 27" display where you'd still be getting 1440px, i think its personal preference at that point, and not "apple ruined it."
also, i'm not getting this argument about "its the perfect height for fullscreen hd plus toolbars." what program are we talking about here? i don't think i've ever seen an edit/compositing setup where the video is maximized edge to edge with only 120px/160px for toolbar/titlebar/menubar/timeline/bin/effects/etc. about the only software i can think of that fills the screen like this is quicktime 7. and even if by some stretch your entire enjoyment of a computer centred on maximized (but not fullscreen) quicktime playback, these macs ship with quicktime x that incorporate the titlebar and controls as overlays on the video, so no added vertical resolution is needed for these elements anymore.
again, personal preference is fine, but this whole "OMG RUINED!!!1" response seems overkill.
also, i'm not getting this argument about "its the perfect height for fullscreen hd plus toolbars." what program are we talking about here? i don't think i've ever seen an edit/compositing setup where the video is maximized edge to edge with only 120px/160px for toolbar/titlebar/menubar/timeline/bin/effects/etc. about the only software i can think of that fills the screen like this is quicktime 7. and even if by some stretch your entire enjoyment of a computer centred on maximized (but not fullscreen) quicktime playback, these macs ship with quicktime x that incorporate the titlebar and controls as overlays on the video, so no added vertical resolution is needed for these elements anymore.
again, personal preference is fine, but this whole "OMG RUINED!!!1" response seems overkill.
Do you really need that much power? Laptops aren't supposed to be faster and cheaper than desktops. All you're saying is "my Ford is slower than my friend's Ferrari". Well of course! Ford isn't trying to compete with Ferrari.
Who cares about the graphics card? What are you doing that requires you to have the latest graphics card? Besides bragging rights, gaming doesn't require you to upgrade every year to the best graphics card. Not all games are "buy this X card or else it won't look good".
Practically, I think the screen was a bit overkill (27"?!?) but it is a higher resolution so it's not like it's 1920x1200 on a 27". It's a 30" resolution on a 24". Not bad. Saying that 27" is just stupid, to quote the OP, is really "just stupid". The chin is still there but it's not like it looks bad with it. They added a SD card slot and better graphics (ATI > NVIDIA at this point) and a blazing fast default CPU.
For most people, they don't play games that require them to have the latest graphics card. If I want to play Crysis on high settings, I won't buy an iMac.
To OP: Define "normal and sensible screen sizes". I remember a few years ago, 17" was "normal and sensible". I still have that Samsung 17" display that I got at that time. At the time, everyone wanted a 17". 15" was too small. 19" was too big/expensive. 17" was just right. Now? 23-24" is very popular. 20-21" is popular as well. 26-27" are gaining popularity. Things change, change with it.
Ruined? thats so funny, 1080 P. Just what I wanted, 24" was a little to big to be right in front of . The new screen is just better tech and viewable at all angles, plus up to 16 gig memory? a faster video card, faster memory a sleeker looking case, cooler mouse. Its just better in everyway and im comparing the original 2.4 /2600 pro that im typing on now. I needed another inch on the screen, little more cpu, faster memory and better graphics. Puurfect! Heck its even Green.
Homerun.
Should be here in 2 days.......going to be a long 2 days.
Homerun.
Should be here in 2 days.......going to be a long 2 days.
Yeah I know it is overkill, sorry. They haven't ruined them by any means and theyre still great machines.
The imac is just ruined in a way for me personally because 24 in was ideal for my needs and now it's unlikely that apple will make them in this size again and if they do decide to it won't be for a while.
+1. I used to use a laptop with 1440 on its horizontal! In every way, these iMacs are improvements. They put mine to shame, with its pitiful 1680x1050 resolution and its 2.4Ghz dual core (haha, dual
) processor.Apple is giving more for your money than ever these days; the only thing you can complain about here is its aesthetics.
system16,
You do realize that the 27" and 24" case dimensions are nearly the same don't you? Apple eliminated the bezel and filled it with extra screen. Since you like to haul your iMac around, you won't notice much difference, if at all, with the size. (weight will be heavier)
Bryan
You do realize that the 27" and 24" case dimensions are nearly the same don't you? Apple eliminated the bezel and filled it with extra screen. Since you like to haul your iMac around, you won't notice much difference, if at all, with the size. (weight will be heavier)
Bryan
Oooo. With regards to the overall size of the new one, since I like to carry mine around. The 27 inch is only 3 inches wider than the 24 inch and all other measuremeants are practically the same. Pretty good actually, 3 inch bigger screen and more or less the same size machine.
Edit:
hehe you just said it a min before thanks and good point Its only around 2 kilos more.
Edit:
hehe you just said it a min before
thanks and good point Its only around 2 kilos more.
A few years ago, 17" was the way to go. Do I still feel pissed that companies don't make 17" anymore even though it was "ideal for my needs and now it's unlikely that X company will them in this size"? Things change... like TVs. Some people still love the old 4:3 ratio, analog and CRT projection TV.
Oooo. With regards to the overall size of the new one, since I like to carry mine around. The 27 inch is only 3 inches wider than the 24 inch and all other measuremeants are practically the same. Pretty good actually, 3 inch bigger screen and more or less the same size machine.
Edit:
hehe you just said it a min before
You are the minority. No argument about that. Desktops are supposed to be DESK tops. Laptops are meant to be LAP tops. That's why people named/called them such. You can carry your desktop, but most people don't.
In the world of desktops, a few inches is nothing.
I doubt they're sold out....they're probably working out how to price the older gen refurbs now that the new models are available
When I bought my iMac 24", my previous screen was an 18.1" TFT and the iMac seemed huge! Now it seems "normal" after 2 years+ of using it. That was a 6" step up from what I had been using for a good few years prior.
Now we are talking about a 3" step up along with a sizeable increase in pixels and I for one think that it is fantastic! Sadly I'm not in a position to buy another iMac so soon after buying my current one (hope to get another couple of years out of it) but I would buy a 27" Core i7 machine in a heartbeat if I could.
It would be too expensive though......not the machine, the divorce I mean!
For those who want a semi-portable machine then the 21.5" model is a serious player now that it is also an IPS display. Or you can elect to buy a refurb 24" and save some cash. Still plenty of choices to suit most requirements I think.
Craig.
Now we are talking about a 3" step up along with a sizeable increase in pixels and I for one think that it is fantastic! Sadly I'm not in a position to buy another iMac so soon after buying my current one (hope to get another couple of years out of it) but I would buy a 27" Core i7 machine in a heartbeat if I could.
It would be too expensive though......not the machine, the divorce I mean!
For those who want a semi-portable machine then the 21.5" model is a serious player now that it is also an IPS display. Or you can elect to buy a refurb 24" and save some cash. Still plenty of choices to suit most requirements I think.
Craig.
I agree completely. Other than that, I think everything that has been added is awesome. Sure 16:9 is a bit silly, but it's better than 21:9
Plus, the 27" upgrade is freaking awesome. I can gloat that I have a bigger computer monitor than some people's television