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

Is THIS Mac fast?

Hi NutsNGum,
"Besides, if the OP is coming from a Vista environment, it's going to be like going from a walking frame to a sports car."
I'm more of a Mac person than a PC one, but I have 4 Macs & 3 PCs (and been using both for 20 years).
So I must conclude that with your 'limited' knowledge of both platforms your opinion doesn't mean too much...
But I don't wish you would put your iMac against my Hexa-core gaming PC & be anywhere close to winning...
 
Stan Mikulenka said:
Hi NutsNGum,
"Besides, if the OP is coming from a Vista environment, it's going to be like going from a walking frame to a sports car."
I'm more of a Mac person than a PC one, but I have 4 Macs & 3 PCs (and been using both for 20 years).
So I must conclude that with your 'limited' knowledge of both platforms your opinion doesn't mean too much...
But I don't wish you would put your iMac against my Hexa-core gaming PC & be anywhere close to winning...
Click to expand...

Why would you assume that I have limited knowledge? I'm sure your Hexa-core gaming PC is great 'n' all, but judging from the OP's statement he probably doesn't have one of those.

To clarify, I have used - and still use - both Windows and OSX for web development. Vista is a horrible resource hog. Windows 7 is better, but in terms of speed of workflow and shortcut commands, I find OSX to be a whole lot more user friendly.

I probably should have stated that the point I made wasn't intended to relate exclusively to the hardware specs of the machine.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

A 27 inch TN panel at 1920 x 1080. Nice pixels you got there bro.

It's a case of horses for courses.

If the OP wants a gaming PC and doesn't mind that it looks like a plastic waste disposal chute then he should go down your route.

If he wants a multimedia computer that's well suited to pretty much everything else and maybe a bit of gaming, I'd go for the iMac.

But then, that's just my opinion. There are no wrong or right answers. It fundamentally depends on what - to you - constitutes value.
 
NutsNGum said:
No it isn't. It's absolutely fine. Besides, if the OP is coming from a Vista environment, it's going to be like going from a walking frame to a sports car.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is pretty slow for that kind of money - check out the processors you get from Dell or others for that kind of money. They will be much much faster.

Of course, this doesn't mean the iMac is 'worse value' - you obviously pay more for the design/form-factor and amazing screen.

ps. I thought Vista was great - much much better than XP provided you aren't running it on a netbook or somesuch. Driver/software support was the issue but I never came across those issues personally (although lots of others did). And now Windows 7 is out and much better (my current OS along with linux) there's no reason to stick with it.
 
300D said:
Sure is. I can go out and buy a Quad-core computer with a 27" monitor for $700.
Click to expand...

And you're "Specturbating" with that. How many times did I see how the XOOM's specs "kick the iPad 2's ass"? Yet benchmarks show the iPad 2 is superior in almost every category.
 
room271 said:
Actually, it is pretty slow for that kind of money - check out the processors you get from Dell or others for that kind of money. They will be much much faster.

Of course, this doesn't mean the iMac is 'worse value' - you obviously pay more for the design/form-factor and amazing screen.

ps. I thought Vista was great - much much better than XP provided you aren't running it on a netbook or somesuch. Driver/software support was the issue but I never came across those issues personally (although lots of others did). And now Windows 7 is out and much better (my current OS along with linux) there's no reason to stick with it.
Click to expand...

You mean Windows Vista Service Pack 3, aka Windows 7?
 
PhantomPumpkin said:
You mean Windows Vista Service Pack 3, aka Windows 7?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean but if you mean my impression of Vista then no - I used Vista almost straight after release (happened to coincide with needing a new laptop at the time). And I found it very pleasant to use. I hated XP because it was ugly and generally represented a horrible UX (and it is responsible for the lingering on of the awful IE6 - as a web-designer this is a particular gripe. Where it was good was in support/resource-demands.

You are right though, that the differences between Vista and Windows 7 have been overstated; many of the UI improvements in Windows 7 were first found in Vista as well as the other back-end changes.
 
room271 said:
I'm not sure what you mean but if you mean my impression of Vista then no - I used Vista almost straight after release (happened to coincide with needing a new laptop at the time). And I found it very pleasant to use. I hated XP because it was ugly and generally represented a horrible UX (and it is responsible for the lingering on of the awful IE6 - as a web-designer this is a particular gripe. Where it was good was in support/resource-demands.

You are right though, that the differences between Vista and Windows 7 have been overstated; many of the UI improvements in Windows 7 were first found in Vista as well as the other back-end changes.
Click to expand...

That last part is generally what I was referring to. :)
 
NutsNGum said:
No it isn't. It's absolutely fine. Besides, if the OP is coming from a Vista environment, it's going to be like going from a walking frame to a sports car.
Click to expand...

As I am. :)

Probably will end up saving 300 pounds more to get an i5 with a 27" screen though, just to be sure. Hopefully my plan should work out to me getting an imac by Christmas '11 or Early '12.

I'm able to get the education discount (didn't know it catered to normal schools) too so that's took a lot of weight off my shouldiers regarding price.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

Oh well, you should be on to a winner then! New iMacs due soon, who knows - maybe even a redesign to coincide with OSX Lion if you're buying at the end of the year. You'll definitely be glad you waited!
 
Is the 21.5" screen big enough, I'd rather save a few hundred pounds tbh. 27" probably wouldn't fit on my desk anyway.
 
I currently work on a 22" screen, which is basically the same. It works nice, and a lot of people find the 27" iMac screen huge (however you get used to it). But it depends on what you use it for. If it's for photo's (organizing, viewing, photoshopping,...), or other things which benefit from a big screen, you'd better pick the 27". If it's for emailing, the internet, Word,... or just don't want to have a giant on your desk, pick the 21.5"

Just go to the local Apple store, and see for yourself
 
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