USA Today's review of intel iMac

[theBB]

USA Today has a review of intel iMac

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2006-01-18-imac-intel_x.htm

It is a bit of a mixed bag, because he claims that he had problems with Quicktime (could not view Job's keynote) and his GarageBand program froze up, requiring a "manual shut down". (Does he mean a reboot?)

He says: "Intel is Microsoft's longtime partner, and I'm not suggesting guilt by association. But my first encounter with the new Mac was the kind of experience I might have expected to see on a Windows machine." That does not sound too good, does it?

 

[azzurri000]

I agree, the review was mixed, but it was more positive than anything. The last line was:

"Rough patches aside, Apple has raised the bar on what a home computer should be. With or without Intel, its mix of hardware and software remains the one to beat."

He mentions a few of the glitches that he encountered, but this review is so upbeat that it could practically be one of Apple's own press releases lol!

For the most part, I'm happy with what I've heard about the new intel imac, but I am hoping to eventually switch to mac from windoze, so I'm hoping that the glitches mentioned in the new intel imac will be fixed soon.

 

[tribe3]

For once I'm glad I'm sitting on the fence with these IntelMacs. I'm sure they will end up being great machines, but it will take at least one year to get everything going right

 

[Deepdale]

I agree, the review was mixed, but it was more positive than anything. ... He mentions a few of the glitches that he encountered, but this review is so upbeat that it could practically be one of Apple's own press releases.

USA Today tech columnist Edward Baig definitely has a pro-Apple viewpoint. He will not just assign a rating of four stars blindly (the iMac received 3.5 out of 4), and his opinions are worthy of being read before making a purchase.

 

[azzurri000]

USA Today tech columnist Edward Baig definitely has a pro-Apple viewpoint. He will not just assign a rating of four stars blindly (the iMac received 3.5 out of 4), and his opinions are worthy of being read before making a purchase.

<- this was a comment on my last post

Objectivity is supposed to be what journalists strive for. In my last post I commented that the review was mixed (therefore objective.) I merely compared it to Apple's press releases because the review was very positive overall, and that in no way undermines his opinions. The fact that he described the glitches he encountered makes his account seem very credible.