PowerMac Buying Advice

[gabriel_uk]

Does the current 9600 outperform the 9650, really?

I don't think I was clear enough back there - in trying to say that the 9650 isn't according to the tests better than the 9600XT but has got to be better than the 9600.

That doesn´t sound nutty to me! I´m also a hi-fi fan, but I find 196kbps+ AAC-encoding sufficient for me. Thus, I can have all my 500+ records on my iPod...

I read thouroghly tests of hi-fi experts comparing different encoding techniques, and the baseline was: if you encode at 196kbps or more, you don´t´hear differences at all. Even experts on 10K$+ setups...

But, of course Apple Lossless is a nice format to build up a music archive, without being concerned about a possible loss in quality - which is mostly a psychological loss, not an audible... however, I understand you well.

Oh s**t! - I'd better cancel that extra HD order... Just kidding!

That's very interesting info and I'm actually pleased to hear it.

For the best encoder, BTW, check out http://blacktree.com/apps/iTunes-LAME

You probably know about it.

I think I´ll probably leave my 20" and wait for a significant price reduction of the 30". The jump from 20" to 23" is not that big I think.

Good idea.

 

[DrRock]

^

Ok, so now, I'm debating just getting the dual 2.3 setup from the Apple store. That way, I can get the educational price and possibly even get the 20" display for the same price as the dual 2.7 setup without the display. I will be doing mostly video editing and photoshop with it, so my main concern is the speed of those programs. I will be running motion as well, and I've read that it needs a good graphics card, so if anyone has experience with this setup and that program, let me know. Also, can I have them ship it without a graphics card, and then buy something on my own and install it? And if so, how hard is it to do that?

But the big question is do I go for the dual 2.3 over the dual 2.7? It seems that the difference would be negligible, as well as the difference with the bus speed. I can save like $400 if I go with the 2.3, and I don't have to worry about the potential problems of the liquid cooling system. Opinions?

 

[gabriel_uk]

Ok, so now, I'm debating just getting the dual 2.3 setup from the Apple store. That way, I can get the educational price and possibly even get the 20" display for the same price as the dual 2.7 setup without the display. I will be doing mostly video editing and photoshop with it, so my main concern is the speed of those programs. I will be running motion as well, and I've read that it needs a good graphics card, so if anyone has experience with this setup and that program, let me know. Also, can I have them ship it without a graphics card, and then buy something on my own and install it? And if so, how hard is it to do that?

But the big question is do I go for the dual 2.3 over the dual 2.7? It seems that the difference would be negligible, as well as the difference with the bus speed. I can save like $400 if I go with the 2.3, and I don't have to worry about the potential problems of the liquid cooling system. Opinions?

Okay, there is no hard and fast evidence that the liquid cooling system is problematic, but I'm too cautious to ignore the concerns, so I've gone with a 2.3 - which is 90% as fast as the 2.7 according to the benchmark tests. The fact that it's cheaper is a nice bonus!

No, you won't be able to save money by telling Apple that you don't want any video card at all, unfortunately - it's not an purchase option. The best thing you can do is have it shipped with the Radeon 9600 and buy a Radeon X800XT - which according to my painstaking research is the best card available. The NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Utra DDL is about as fast but occupies an extra card slot. However, it IS a BTO option (albeit an overpriced one) - which will save you having to install a Radeon X800XT yourself.

Regarding graphics cards, check this out - http://barefeats.com/rad9650.html

Everyone has told me that installing your own graphics card is easy.

 

[DrRock]

^

Thanks for the advice, it will definitely help me decide.

 

[wiseguy27]

advice, advice, advice

However, I thought about it, and will probably take the 400gig disk too. Regarding the hassle of selling the 250g and reinstalling the 400g, it is not so much of a price difference.

I am still not sure, if I shouldn´t go for the 2x512MB default. Mainly because it takes long for the 2x1GB sticks (Kingston. after-market) to arrive (about 3 weeks) - and I don´t´want to have my nice machine with 512MB for the first two weeks It would be such a bad experience probably.

For the HDD and RAM, I would strongly recommend with the lowest one Apple offers and upgrading with after market ones later. It will save a ton of money that you could put in for another video card or something else.

In the US, internal SATA HDDs cost around 50 cents a GB (or even lesser). I recommend only Seagate and Hitachi, since they provide 3 or 5 year warranties for their products (depending on the model). This is way better than other manufacturers who provide only a 1 year warranty. If you could get a 5 year warranty for almost the same price (or sometimes even lesser), why wouldn't you want to go for it? Moreover, I've read a lot less negative reviews about Seagate and Hitachi than about Maxtor and Western Digital. Of course, this doesn't mean that Maxtor and WD are junk, but somehow their failure rates in recent years, combined with their 1 year warranty, fail to convince me to buy their products.

As for the manufacturer of the HDDs Apple uses, I think it would be WD. On my 2.3GHz dual Power Mac with 250GB HDD I see WD when I see the details in "About this Mac" from the Apple menu. Not sure about other capacities though.

As for RAM, 512MB sticks are in the current sweet spot - they're reasonably cheap (and not as costly as the 1GB or yikes, the 2GB sticks). I just bought 512MBx2 from OWC (http://www.macsales.com) and installed it myself yesterday - the cost - $105 (including shipping and tax). I've heard people recommend OWC (http://www.macsales.com) and Datamem (http://www.datamem.com) for Mac RAM. These sellers are recommended because they test the RAM on Macs to ensure that there are no issues. Crucial is also highly recommended by many users, but they're usually a lot more expensive (and the additional irritant being that their prices vary quite a bit depending on which browser and/or OS you use to check their products) - something I saw myself personally and wasn't happy about.

With 8 RAM slots, you wouldn't have to worry about selling the default 256MBx2 soon. By the time you have a need to (maybe after a couple of years), RAM prices would be a lot cheaper. For my upgrade, I was undecided about 512MBx2 vs. 1GBx2 and decided on the former mainly because of the total cost. Maybe the $100 saved could go as a subsidy for an iPod.

In your first two weeks, I doubt if you'd see any major hassles with the default 512MB RAM. If at all you do, all that you need to do is run the heavy duty apps by themselves (without simultaneously running other heavy duty apps). The OS manages virtual memory very well.

I have a 20" currently, which is nice when hooked up to my PowerBook, but could be too small when used solely on the PowerMac. So I thought about adding another 20" - two 20" offer more space than one 23", of course they consume also more energy and space... Or I could go for the 23" (which would be sufficient) and sell the 20"... What would you do?

The 23" displays are a lot more expensive than the 20" ones. Apart from that, the 23" displays have exhibited some major issues not seen in the other two (20" and 30"). You might want to do a search with the words '23" display problems' on search engines as well as different forums. I haven't kept track of how the recent 23" ones fare or whether they've improved.

 

[gabriel_uk]

The 23" displays are a lot more expensive than the 20" ones. Apart from that, the 23" displays have exhibited some major issues not seen in the other two (20" and 30"). You might want to do a search with the words '23" display problems' on search engines as well as different forums. I haven't kept track of how the recent 23" ones fare or whether they've improved.

I've taken a cursory look on the MacRumors site and found this thread from May 2004 - https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/96225/

It is followed by a post that says: "For all the 23" owners who have a pinkish tone to their gray finder and safari windows, you will be pleased to know that the default profile has now been fixed! (in 10.3.6) Like me, I guess lots of you have calibrated the pinkish tone out, but you had to sacrifice some other tones for that, so if you switch back now, you will not have a pinkish tone anymore!"

If you have any links that clarify your cause for concern about the 23" display, I'd be very grateful.

 

[salmacis]

For the HDD and RAM, I would strongly recommend with the lowest one Apple offers and upgrading with after market ones later. It will save a ton of money that you could put in for another video card or something else.

I made a calculation about the 400GB HDD: Here in Austria a 400GB SATA costs about 270 Euros (Seagate Barracuda), whereas a 250GB costs about 150 Euros. If I would go for the stock 250GB drive, I could sell it for lets say max. 130-140 Euro and buy the 400GB for 270 Euro. So I would have paid 150 Euro for the upgrade. At the Apple Store (educational) I pay 180 Euro for the upgrade - yes thats 30 Euros more, but without any hassles of installation and selling. So not a bad deal I think.

Of course the second 400GB is overpriced.

For the RAM: You´re surely right with the overpriced Apple Store sticks. Nevertheless I will decide to take the 2x512 as standard (100 Euro more), and add 2x1GB. So I can start with 1GB while waiting for the additional RAM, and I´m only using 4 slots. The other choice was to take the 2x256MB and put in 4x512MB at about 200 Euro, but I thought paying 100 Euro more for half a gig more and only using 4 slots, is it worth. But I struggled with that decision I have to admit.

Just an info: 2x1GB cost 220 Euros, and 2x512MB cost 100 Euros, so I would go for the GB sticks, if possible.

As for the manufacturer of the HDDs Apple uses, I think it would be WD. On my 2.3GHz dual Power Mac with 250GB HDD I see WD when I see the details in "About this Mac" from the Apple menu. Not sure about other capacities though.

Thanks for that info. In the 2.7 model a Maxtor disk is used.

In your first two weeks, I doubt if you'd see any major hassles with the default 512MB RAM. If at all you do, all that you need to do is run the heavy duty apps by themselves (without simultaneously running other heavy duty apps). The OS manages virtual memory very well.

You´re right, but 512MB is really the barely minimum for working with the system. Of course I could probably live with that for two weeks, but it wouldn´t´be fun And the first impression counts (most).

salmacis

 

[salmacis]

At last: I did it!

Hi all,

Just wanted to say, that I´ve just ordered the 2.3 with 2x512MB, 400GB SATA , Radeon 9650 and Bluetooth-Module. I will add 2x1GB of memory to it (after-market).

Thanks for all your valuable comments and hints! In the end most of the willing buyers here got nearly the same machine But, i feel very confident about my choice, and will have it hard to wait.

I would be happy to hear about your experiences with your new babies, as soon as they arrive...

Thanks again.

salmacis

PS: On my order the Radeon 9650 was called 9650XT, so the 9600 is probably the 9600XT too. Weird.

 

[DrRock]

Hey Wiseguy!

You said you have the dual 2.3 setup with the 250 SATA HDD. Do you run Final Cut Pro, or any other video editing on it, and if so, what is your experience with it? Does it perform adequately? Are render times reasonably fast? I'm curious to find out if I should go with that system and spend the extra $$ on upgradng RAM, my display, video card, etc. Anyway, if you can advise, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[wiseguy27]

I've taken a cursory look on the MacRumors site and found this thread from May 2004 - https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/96225/

It is followed by a post that says: "For all the 23" owners who have a pinkish tone to their gray finder and safari windows, you will be pleased to know that the default profile has now been fixed! (in 10.3.6) Like me, I guess lots of you have calibrated the pinkish tone out, but you had to sacrifice some other tones for that, so if you switch back now, you will not have a pinkish tone anymore!"

If you have any links that clarify your cause for concern about the 23" display, I'd be very grateful.

This was quite sometime ago, so I had to search on the net again. I found some reviews on Amazon that indicated this same problem (search for 'Apple Cinema 23" HD Flat-Panel Display' on http://www.amazon.com and look for the reviews). I also saw that some people pointed to http://www.macfixit.com and the Apple discussion forums - check out http://discussions.info.apple.com and go to the "Apple Displays" section on the left and then to the "Apple Cinema Displays (Mid 2004)" forum. There have been varied responses on this model, so personally, I'm a little bit skeptical about it. The Apple discussion forums seem to have a lot of recent posts about this. I would suggest reading through them to get an idea about the state of the newer 23" displays. If you're able to check several 23" displays at a physical store, your confidence in them may be better.

One of the other reasons I didn't consider the 23" was the HUGE price gap between the 20" and the 23" (even after the price drop a few months ago) - almost $700 more in the US and £500 more in the UK! That seems to be a high margin for HD capability and 3" increase in size.

 

[wiseguy27]

not much help

You said you have the dual 2.3 setup with the 250 SATA HDD. Do you run Final Cut Pro, or any other video editing on it, and if so, what is your experience with it? Does it perform adequately? Are render times reasonably fast? I'm curious to find out if I should go with that system and spend the extra $$ on upgradng RAM, my display, video card, etc. Anyway, if you can advise, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

[Disclaimer: my experience with video editing is very less]
Unfortunately, I do not have Final Cut yet. I plan to buy FC Studio in the next one or two weeks. So I do not have anything to share about that.

The only video editing I've attempted is editing/rendering on iMovie (with 512MB RAM) on some .avi files I got from Windows (that's an entirely different story - I didn't have a 6 pin FireWire cable to import directly into the Mac). The import from the 60 minute .avi movie (which was about 16GB or so) took several minutes (I guess 15-20 minutes) - this was to convert it to the format the Mac can natively handle. But after the import, everything seemed fine. If there's something I've learned about video rendering, it's that even the latest Power Macs would take noticeable time (depending on the kind of video and the length of the movie). I just can't imagine how people can even bear to do it on a single processor Windows machine with lousy software. Maybe they don't know that their overnight video jobs could be done much faster...maybe they don't even know that they're probably losing a lot of frames while importing. [I learned about this the hard way by asking my Windows app to read without losing frames - it kept rewinding back again and again to re-get some lost frames - I had to finally give it up since it didn't seem like it would get past that point]

I understand that whatever I've said above may be useless to you, but I would suggest getting a lot more RAM. I just added an additional 1GB yesterday and brought my system to 1.5GB total - I'm guessing that would be adequate for FC Pro (although the recommended RAM for Motion is 2GB).

As for the video card, I read somewhere in the MR forums about video cards that neither OS X nor the apps take advantage of them for rendering - not sure about that though. If that's the case, getting a much faster video card would only help in gaming and probably playing multiple movies on the same display or for driving multiple displays. But that's not to say that OS X and the apps would not pass on the rendering tasks to the video card in future versions.

So if you're undecided between the 2.3 and the 2.7, considering the marginal improvement in performance from the 2.3 to 2.7 (and the added possibility of any hassles with the liquid cooling in the future) I would still suggest that you go for the 2.3 and recommend that you add an additional 2GB (or more) RAM to it with after market RAM (http://www.macsales.com or http://www.datamem.com) and upgrade the video card later. The ATI X800XT Mac edition seems to be the best card for Power Macs right now (at a relatively good price point compared to the best nVidia cards that are not only more expensive but also block available PCI-X slots because of their huge size).

Lastly, if you have specific questions about the performance of FC Pro on the latest Power Macs, you may get better responses by posting in the "Digital Video" forum on MR.

 

[gabriel_uk]

This was quite sometime ago, so I had to search on the net again. I found some reviews on Amazon that indicated this same problem (search for 'Apple Cinema 23" HD Flat-Panel Display' on http://www.amazon.com and look for the reviews). I also saw that some people pointed to http://www.macfixit.com and the Apple discussion forums - check out http://discussions.info.apple.com and go to the "Apple Displays" section on the left and then to the "Apple Cinema Displays (Mid 2004)" forum. There have been varied responses on this model, so personally, I'm a little bit skeptical about it.

At first I wasn't convinced, but when I read the barefeats comparison with the 24" Dell - http://barefeats.com/lcd.html - and the CNET reviews, I was like shocked!

So I've just cancelled my 23" ACD order and have ordered the Dell instead.

Sure, the Apple display is far more attractive, but I'm more concerned with how a screen looks inside the frame than outside the screen, if you get my drift.

It's weird - because I've spent the last few years using a pefectly good but rather boring looking 18" NEC - dreaming of the day I'd buy a nice big Apple display! And here I am, at the very last minute, buying a Dell!

I'm a big Apple fan because I always thought (and still do, usually!) that Apple is the best. But I refuse to buy Apple simply because it's Apple. Yes, design is important, but only when matched by equally attractive perfomance.

 

[DrRock]

^

Thanks, I'll check those links out!

 

[wiseguy27]

At first I wasn't convinced, but when I read the barefeats comparison with the 24" Dell - http://barefeats.com/lcd.html - and the CNET reviews, I was like shocked!

So I've just cancelled my 23" ACD order and have ordered the Dell instead.

Sure, the Apple display is far more attractive, but I'm more concerned with how a screen looks inside the frame than outside the screen, if you get my drift.

The price difference on the 23" ACD vs. 24" Dell is probably too high, but from what I've seen about the Dell 20", it looks plain ugly in front of the Apple 20". The backside looks so neat and elegant on the Apple. Anyway, I always had my mind on the 20" because of the price, and I went for the 20" ACD even though it was about $250+ more than the Dell. The performance was almost the same between the two (based on the review on http://www.anandtech.com).

I think it was worth it for me to go for the ACD - it looks very good and I just love the clutter free look with the easy to use interface. Moreover, I really don't have a need for different kinds of inputs or the picture-in-picture feature. Adjusting the monitor height and orientation was something I didn't even think of having for a desktop. Even though the LCD panel is the same between the ACD and Dell 20" models, I have a slightly worse impression about Dell products.

The 23" and 24" are entirely different though (the panel as well as the internal electronics). It all boils down to the price one's willing to pay - in the US, the Dell monitors are a lot cheaper than Apple (even when the Dell is not on the best sale). Another thing I noticed about the Dell is that they give a 3 year warranty whereas the ACD is sold with a 1 year warranty (unless you take AppleCare while buying it with a Mac).

 

[DrRock]

^

Ok, well I think I'm pretty much decided on the dual 2.3 setup, but now I'm thinking about displays. I had originally just thought about getting two 17" Viewsonic LCDs, because I fond some for $200 each after rebates. I have two 19" CRTs at work, and It works fine for FCP. But I'm now considering getting the
20" ACD because I can get it for $699 thru Apple with educational pricing. Any thoughts? I really don't mind having the gap in between, and I do like having the extra room for the viewing window. However I do have a Sony 13" monitor I can use for viewing, so would i then benefit from having the widescreen setup to have a more complete look at my timeline? I dunno, I guess I'm just trying to figure out if it's worth it to spend the extra $300.

I was also thinking long term, in that I could buy the cheaper monitors now, and then when I cet an ACD down the road, use the money I saved for a bigger display. As always, opinions are appreciated.

 

[wiseguy27]

Ok, well I think I'm pretty much decided on the dual 2.3 setup, but now I'm thinking about displays. I had originally just thought about getting two 17" Viewsonic LCDs, because I fond some for $200 each after rebates. I have two 19" CRTs at work, and It works fine for FCP. But I'm now considering getting the
20" ACD because I can get it for $699 thru Apple with educational pricing. Any thoughts? I really don't mind having the gap in between, and I do like having the extra room for the viewing window. However I do have a Sony 13" monitor I can use for viewing, so would i then benefit from having the widescreen setup to have a more complete look at my timeline? I dunno, I guess I'm just trying to figure out if it's worth it to spend the extra $300.

The widescreen monitors are really worth going for. There's a big difference between using a "squarish" monitor compared to using a widescreen (cinema) display.

I was also thinking long term, in that I could buy the cheaper monitors now, and then when I cet an ACD down the road, use the money I saved for a bigger display. As always, opinions are appreciated.

You could do that, depending on your current needs. For movie and photo work, a widescreen is a lot better. For heavy duty movie work, a 23" or bigger would be a much better choice than a 20". The 20" is like a bare minimum. The "HD" resolution on the 23" and bigger displays is a plus. But if you'd want to go for a better monitor in the future, you could try using your current monitors (without buying a new one), and go for a 23" ACD a year or so later (only after the prices go down further - Apple is a little slow in updating the displays compared to updating the Macs).

 

[deadfrog]

well, my 2.3 shipped on wednesday.... my extra memory arrived that day too... so will keep you informed, if you like, when the machine turns up...

in the mean time, im currently helping my brother test out returned dell flat screens.... including 2405fpw and 2005fpw models... some are totally buggered, others have like one faint line on the screen and others appear to be perfect....

my only dilemma is it worth spending around £450 on a 24" or £200 on a 20" if i can get hold of one... (those are perfect working condition prices but only comes with 30days warranty)

any thoughts would be appreciated....

 

[wiseguy27]

well, my 2.3 shipped on wednesday.... my extra memory arrived that day too... so will keep you informed, if you like, when the machine turns up...

in the mean time, im currently helping my brother test out returned dell flat screens.... including 2405fpw and 2005fpw models... some are totally buggered, others have like one faint line on the screen and others appear to be perfect....

my only dilemma is it worth spending around £450 on a 24" or £200 on a 20" if i can get hold of one... (those are perfect working condition prices but only comes with 30days warranty)

any thoughts would be appreciated....

Personally, I wouldn't want to take a chance with a 30 day warranty - I feel it's too short a warranty for a display that's supposed to outlast a computer.

But if you decide to go for one of these, the 24" might be better since you get a lot more screen space (could be very useful while dealing with videos and photos).

 

[DrRock]

^

Ok, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to get the dual 2.3 setup with the 20" ACD. I'm going to order from the Apple Store, as long as I can get the educational price. I will order it either today or tomorrow. If anyone has any last minute warnings or advice, let me have it now. Thanks!

 

[gabriel_uk]

Ok, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to get the dual 2.3 setup with the 20" ACD. I'm going to order from the Apple Store, as long as I can get the educational price. I will order it either today or tomorrow. If anyone has any last minute warnings or advice, let me have it now. Thanks!

My 24" Dell display arrived yesterday and is 10 out of 10. My 2.3 G5 should arrive tomorrow or Friday.

You are clearly used to working with about that size screen, so I don't see a problem with your 20" decision. I am only aware of problems with the 23" ACD - not the 20". So go for it!

 

[Pluckie]

[

The import from the 60 minute .avi movie (which was about 16GB or so) took several minutes (I guess 15-20 minutes) - this was to convert it to the format the Mac can natively handle. But after the import, everything seemed fine. If there's something I've learned about video rendering, it's that even the latest Power Macs would take noticeable time (depending on the kind of video and the length of the movie). .

RANDOM QUESTION: I didn't think you could play .avi movies in iMovie, I've never been able to with Quicktime. How did you play those with iMOvie???

 

[skwoytek]

I've been reading this thread for a while and appreciate all the advice. I'm a first time Mac buyer and I finally ordered my Power Mac 2.3 last Thursday, June 23rd - with a student discount. It was scheduled to ship yesterday, Tuesday. Then I wake up Tuesday, and Apple is offering the 850XT video, figures. However, I come home to an email stating my "order has been delayed and is expected to ship on July 6th, I may cancel or change my order", if I wish. Well, well, well... Thank you very much. I called the very friendly staff this morning and they changed my video card from the 9650 to the 850XT ~$300 increase. I'm still not sure why I was going with the 9600 to begin with. They had to place the computer on a new order and are sending documentation to validate my Cinema Display/Power Mac Applecare (since they are now separate orders.) The only thing I lost was the $100 rebate since I had ordered before the 27th and my new order is under the $179 ipod rebate - the rep said try for both. We'll see.

I have to agree and disagree on the Dell 24", although I've never used it. I have worked off a friends ACD 23 for a time now and with no complaint. I'll stick to the Apple look since I'm getting the 2.3 anyway, it functions and in my office aesthetics are important.

Once again, thanks for all the advice. This was a great thread during my decision making process.

 

[salmacis]

Ok, so I'm pretty sure I'm going to get the dual 2.3 setup with the 20" ACD. I'm going to order from the Apple Store, as long as I can get the educational price. I will order it either today or tomorrow. If anyone has any last minute warnings or advice, let me have it now. Thanks!

This is the same setup I´m going for too. My PowerMac shipped on Monday. I bought the 20" ACD before, and it was hooked up to my 15" PowerBook - wonderful combo. About the 20" ACD: It is really the best LCD I´ve ever seen. Picture Quality & design are top. The only thing I miss is a second input (maybe dvi-analog), this could be really handy.

About screen-size: Hooked up to the 15" it was really enough, but I don´t know, maybe it could get too small running it solo. I´m working with multiple windows (SW-development, video, photo) and I think a 23" would very noce... But regarding what I´ve read about the 23"... I´m´happy to have the 20" anyway, and is it a good deal IMHO. I would possibly go for the 30" somewhere in the far future. Or add a second 20"

 

[gabriel_uk]

I've been reading this thread for a while and appreciate all the advice. I'm a first time Mac buyer and I finally ordered my Power Mac 2.3 last Thursday, June 23rd - with a student discount. It was scheduled to ship yesterday, Tuesday. Then I wake up Tuesday, and Apple is offering the 850XT video, figures. However, I come home to an email stating my "order has been delayed and is expected to ship on July 6th, I may cancel or change my order", if I wish. Well, well, well... Thank you very much. I called the very friendly staff this morning and they changed my video card from the 9650 to the 850XT ~$300 increase. I'm still not sure why I was going with the 9600 to begin with. They had to place the computer on a new order and are sending documentation to validate my Cinema Display/Power Mac Applecare (since they are now separate orders.) The only thing I lost was the $100 rebate since I had ordered before the 27th and my new order is under the $179 ipod rebate - the rep said try for both. We'll see.

I have to agree and disagree on the Dell 24", although I've never used it. I have worked off a friends ACD 23 for a time now and with no complaint. I'll stick to the Apple look since I'm getting the 2.3 anyway, it functions and in my office aesthetics are important.

Once again, thanks for all the advice. This was a great thread during my decision making process.

Yes, I could still cancel my own 2.3 order and add an X850 XT but I don't at the moment use any programs I would actually need it for...

Even though I decided to go for the 24" Dell, I'm sure that most people will have a perfectly good experience with the more sleek 23" ACD. Personally, I just didn't want to risk any problems.

Good luck with your new PM!

 

[gabriel_uk]

Shure E3c
Elgato EyeTV 200 & EyeHome
iCurve

salmacis, do you mind telling me how you like you Shure E3c earphones, and whether they're good for walking/ jogging - in terms of whether the cord can create interference for example, as some people mention.

Also, what the heck is an iCurve?