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

whats up with everyone?

My god. I can't believe all of the incessant whining that is going on here! I also can't believe the inaccuracies that some of you are stating and then complaining about.

For example, one person is mad that you can't get a dedicated graphics card in an iMac. Take another look, and you'll see that there are plenty of options for a dedicated graphics card.

And my favorite line in this thread? "iMacs need to have dedicated CPUs too" If you are going to complain about something, at least have an idea of what is coming out of your mouth. There's no such thing as a "non-dedicated" CPU.

Look folks, if you think that Apple does not provide a good product line, or if you think they are over-priced, then you have plenty of options waiting for you in the land of PCs. The door is right over there.

Bryan
 
Bryan Bowler said:
My god. I can't believe all of the incessant whining that is going on here! I also can't believe the inaccuracies that some of you are stating and then complaining about.
Click to expand...

Look in the mirror.

Bryan Bowler said:
For example, one person is mad that you can't get a dedicated graphics card in an iMac. Take another look, and you'll see that there are plenty of options for a dedicated graphics card.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you actually read the comments you would see that you have to pay at least $1,799 to get the option for a dedicated card, before you got one with every model. Reading does help before you make comments on them.

Bryan Bowler said:
Look folks, if you think that Apple does not provide a good product line, or if you think they are over-priced, then you have plenty of options waiting for you in the land of PCs. The door is right over there.Bryan
Click to expand...

And no one asked you to come and complain about everyone's complaining so guess what you also win the hypocrite award, congrats. I think I'm running out of these babies.
 
I hear people complain about the Mac Mini update, and I don't completely get it. OK, I know they didn't upgrade as much as they could have, but look at this:

I was contemplating getting a Mac Mini as a "throwaway" system that I could use for a while, then either give to a friend or family member when I was through with it, or keep it as a backup.

Before the update, my choices were the baseline model new, or a refurb higher-end. When I compare those choices with the new updated baseline, I think Apple just did us a favor!

Picture 18.jpg​
 
DoFoT9 said:
gah i was close.. so what is the GT130 equivalent to then??

the imac NEEDS a dedicated DESKTOP grade GPU, (and CPU aswell)..
Click to expand...
The GT130 would be a 9650M GT. Which is just a much higher clocked 9600M GT.

nVidia has a ton a 32 shader mobile video cards where the differences are only in core, shader, and VRAM speeds. Now imagine having those rebranded from the 9M Series which are 8M series rebrands.

Now lets just hope that Apple has been sticking with mobile components for the video cards again. Yikes!
 
The stupid thing is, lots of people are comparing the prices of the new macs to a pc they could buy. You can't compare both as they are just too different. The other reason is people have been waiting for a price drop, instead the prices went up!
 
GGJstudios said:
I hear people complain about the Mac Mini update, and I don't completely get it. OK, I know they didn't upgrade as much as they could have, but look at this:

I was contemplating getting a Mac Mini as a "throwaway" system that I could use for a while, then either give to a friend or family member when I was through with it, or keep it as a backup.

Before the update, my choices were the baseline model new, or a refurb higher-end. When I compare those choices with the new updated baseline, I think Apple just did us a favor!

Click to expand...


Thanks for the chart!

What you highlighted in yellow are the changes that have me excited about getting a mini. FW800 and Dual display are huge for the mini. 4 GB Ram (I'm still waiting to see proof that 6 GB works) is an absolute necessity, in my mind, and makes the mini a lot more useful. I'm glad these changes were in there.
 
GGJstudios said:
Before the update, my choices were the baseline model new, or a refurb higher-end. When I compare those choices with the new updated baseline, I think Apple just did us a favor!

Click to expand...

I accept that prices have roughly remained the same / maybe reduced in the states, unfortunately for us in the uk it's a very different story. the basic mac mini has increased by just over £100 from the previous £391 to £499. The high end mac mini is £649, over £120 more than it used to be.

the basic imac price has increased by £150 from the old £799 price tag to £949, and now there is only integrated graphics at that price point. I realise the exchange rate has hit us hard in the uk, as £1 = $1.4 now, rather than the £1 = $1.9 it was this time last year.

certainly from this side of the atlantic, it looks like a big price hike considering the modest speed bumps. and with the new prices, these computers are now a lot more expensive than windows based pc's of the same spec (note that i don't mind paying a slight premium for apple products, but that premium is now far too large). As it stands i wasn't in the market for a new computer anyway, but i still can't help but feel disappointed seeing the prices go up so much over here, and i'm sure others are thinking the same.
 
Proji said:
...The high end mac mini is £649, over £120 more than it used to be....
Click to expand...
You're comparing apples and oranges. The high-end Mac now has a 320GB drive, compared to 120GB on the previous high-end. Compare spec-for-spec if you want to compare.
 
GGJstudios said:
You're comparing apples and oranges. The high-end Mac now has a 320GB drive, compared to 120GB on the previous high-end. Compare spec-for-spec if you want to compare.
Click to expand...

Ok:

2007 : £499 got you 2.0Ghz, 1GB RAM, 120GB HD, Superdrive, Wireless G, Intel GMA 950

2009 : £499 gets you 2.0Ghz, 1GB RAM, 120GB HD, Superdrive, Wireless N, Nvidia 9400M

I think Apple have good business strategy in keeping prices JUST too high for most, but unfortunately because of the £-$ exchange rate, it looks like very poor value for those in the UK.

But in fact, it's not, because the 2.0GHz in the new machine will also benefit from DDR3 RAM, more of it, a new processor architecture which improves speed despite the same clock rate (20-30% faster), and the 9400M wipes the floor with the GMA 950, and its much more energy efficient.

To look at it another way, if exchange rates had stayed the same, and one added a couple of upgrades, it WOULD have looked like this:

2007 : £499 got you 2.0Ghz, 1GB RAM, 120GB HD, Superdrive, Wireless G, Intel GMA 950

2009 : £499 gets you 2.0Ghz, 4GB RAM, 500GB HD, Superdrive, Wireless N, Nvidia 9400M

Which is a VERY useful machine for that sort of money. Don't blame apple, blame the £.
 
GGJstudios said:
You're comparing apples and oranges. The high-end Mac now has a 320GB drive, compared to 120GB on the previous high-end. Compare spec-for-spec if you want to compare.
Click to expand...
Why is Apple going nuts on hard drive pricing and 1 GB of RAM? $200 for that paltry upgrade? Sheesh...
 
Eidorian said:
Why is Apple going nuts on hard drive pricing and 1 GB of RAM? $200 for that paltry upgrade? Sheesh...
Click to expand...
We all know (or SHOULD know) that Apple overcharges for RAM and drives. That's nothing new. Why do you think there are so many who upgrade their own RAM and drives with parts from 3rd party vendors?
 
Here's why people are angry/disappointed:

Computer technology is advancing at a rapid pace. While many people do not need to keep up with this (e.g. having a 5 to 10 year old computer is just fine)... very many like or even need to have one that keeps up with all the latest hardware and software coming out. In the PC world, computers start becoming obsolete in 2-3 years.

Mac users are angry/disappointed at Apple, because Apple is not keeping up in the tech race. After a year of waiting (a year is a lifetime in the timescale of computers), Apple's "new models" are basically the same as last years. Even the same as 2-3 years ago.

Computer technology is getting faster, better, and cheaper. Apple is not. (well, at least their desktop models. The laptop line is still doing pretty well)
 
The mini and pro had a good update. the Imac midrange has a nice screen and HD/RAM bump... but the 9400M...ugh.. I am going to assume that Snow Leopard will take advantage of the 9400m with ddr3 to be smoking fast, but for now, I don't think that pathetic GPU can drive a 24" screen with 1920X1200 resolution.

Most complaints are coming from Brits and the pricing structure they are getting and people who have been waiting for quad core iMacs.
 
Decent Update

Let me start off by saying, the update was nothing to wet yourself over, but decent nonetheless. I'm relatively new to macs, and perhaps I've jumped into the realm of the apple fanboys. To me, Apple makes aesthetically pleasing functional machines. For what I do, they are far superior to any other computer I've owned. With that being said, I'm not a hardcore pc builder. If your need for a computer exists in a niche market and you feel compelled to use os x, then I suggest you spend $18,000 on a tricked out mac pro or go back to using windows/pcs.

Also, sorry for the long windedness, I just started using my wireless keyboard (this thing's awesome!).
 
edgew8 said:
The mini and pro had a good update. the Imac midrange has a nice screen and HD/RAM bump... but the 9400M...ugh.. I am going to assume that Snow Leopard will take advantage of the 9400m with ddr3 to be smoking fast, but for now, I don't think that pathetic GPU can drive a 24" screen with 1920X1200 resolution.

Most complaints are coming from Brits and the pricing structure they are getting and people who have been waiting for quad core iMacs.
Click to expand...

Well you are dead wrong - the 9400m runs WoW fine at 1920x1200 for a gaming example and any DVD/movie I've tried without issue

Also it runs a session of Fusion with Vista in it while still running another movie fine also

It's more powerful than you think -

Crysis at 1920x1200 of course not , but for reasonable uses it's plenty fast

Some just like to whine and make assumptions they have no clue about before they even have hands on experience with things
 
The only thing that's confused me is why the new iMac's didn't get the Core2Quad mobile processor. :confused:
 
RebootD said:
Maybe if you actually read the comments you would see that you have to pay at least $1,799 to get the option for a dedicated card, before you got one with every model. Reading does help before you make comments on them.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should learn how to read -- talk about the pot trying to call kettle black. I said there are plenty of options if you want a dedicated graphics card, and there are. I never said it was in the lower end models. I was referring to the multiple options you have for the two upper-end models.

I still stand by my original statement: there sure are a lot of people crying over these updates. People expect the world instead of setting realistic expectations, especially for a tech refresh.

Bryan
 
Bryan Bowler said:
Perhaps you should learn how to read -- talk about the pot trying to call kettle black. I said there are plenty of options if you want a dedicated graphics card, and there are. I never said it was in the lower end models. I was referring to the multiple options you have for the two upper-end models.

I still stand by my original statement: there sure are a lot of people crying over these updates. People expect the world instead of setting realistic expectations, especially for a tech refresh.

Bryan
Click to expand...

I don't think people want the world. They are disappointed when the discontinued models are more appealing than both new low-mid models. Let's face it, when you spend as much as you do for a Mac, you have high expectations.

Cheers,
 
DoFoT9 said:
heat, price, imacs intended market, interferes with macpro..as well as other things i guess
Click to expand...

But the new Mac Pro's are based on i7 (nehalem) processors, a step up from Core2Quads, as far as heat - I was sure that Core2Quads are now available in mobile revisions, so that's the heat problem done.
 
mac.andy said:
But the new Mac Pro's are based on i7 (nehalem) processors, a step up from Core2Quads, as far as heat - I was sure that Core2Quads are now available in mobile revisions, so that's the heat problem done.
Click to expand...

just because its mobile doesnt mean that its cold. just look at the whole line of dual core intel CPUs....especially the CoreDuo originals (like my laptop). its a friggen furnace!
 
DoFoT9 said:
heat, price, imacs intended market, interferes with macpro..as well as other things i guess
Click to expand...
Probably not heat, as the last revision had a 3.07 GHz 55 W CPU. But there are a lot of other reasons (as you say)…

Bryan Bowler said:
I still stand by my original statement: there sure are a lot of people crying over these updates. People expect the world instead of setting realistic expectations, especially for a tech refresh.
Click to expand...
Even those who were pessimistic were disappointed in many areas.
 
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