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

Locker

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Aug 22, 2007
291
0
Staffordshire, UK
For my 18th Birthday I'll be purchasing a brand new iMac. Up until yesterday I had my mind set on what I was getting, the 20" 2.4Ghz iMac with an upgraded HDD to 500GB and AppleCare. With my student discount, this would cost me £1063.38.

However, yesterday I walked into a Comet store and saw a 24" iMac on display, I was amazed at the size difference and am now thinking of investing in a 24" model. I guess once you've seen bigger, everything else seems small. I did initially think of going all-out and buying the top-end model (24" 2.8ghz). However, this would set me back £1,483.38, slightly too much.

As a compromise, I'm now thinking that a 24" 2.4Ghz model with an upgraded HDD to 500GB would be a decent solution. That'd cost £1,251.38.

I just have a few questions still in my mind though, as I want to make sure I don't regret my decision:
  • Is there much difference between the 2.4Ghz and 2.8Ghz processors?
  • I've read somewhere that you can't return your iMac if you've made a customised purchase, is this true?
  • Are 20" screens less susceptible to colour in-balance and dead pixels?
Any other general recommendations would be much appreciated :)
 
For my 18th Birthday I'll be purchasing a brand new iMac. Up until yesterday I had my mind set on what I was getting, the 20" 2.4Ghz iMac with an upgraded HDD to 500GB and AppleCare. With my student discount, this would cost me £1063.38.

However, yesterday I walked into a Comet store and saw a 24" iMac on display, I was amazed at the size difference and am now thinking of investing in a 24" model. I guess once you've seen bigger, everything else seems small. I did initially think of going all-out and buying the top-end model (24" 2.8ghz). However, this would set me back £1,483.38, slightly too much.

As a compromise, I'm now thinking that a 24" 2.4Ghz model with an upgraded HDD to 500GB would be a decent solution. That'd cost £1,251.38.

I just have a few questions still in my mind though, as I want to make sure I don't regret my decision:
  • Is there much difference between the 2.4Ghz and 2.8Ghz processors?
  • I've read somewhere that you can't return your iMac if you've made a customised purchase, is this true?
  • Are 20" screens less susceptible to colour in-balance and dead pixels?
Any other general recommendations would be much appreciated :)

1. no not much actual difference between the 2.4ghz and 2.8ghz.. only the numbers!!! everything else is the same.
2. yea i think u can return it within 20days if you dislike it.
3. each lcd screen technically will all last the same time/work the same. i wouldnt worry about that, not matter what you are going to love it.

personally, i would go the 24', because its just amazingly big. the extra screen size allows for 2 safari windows, or a word doc and something else you are writing about. it just saves time switching.

either way you are going to be superhappy man.
 
  • Is there much difference between the 2.4Ghz and 2.8Ghz processors?
  • I've read somewhere that you can't return your iMac if you've made a customised purchase, is this true?
  • Are 20" screens less susceptible to colour in-balance and dead pixels?

1) 17% faster clock speed for 14% more cost
2) Not sure about US law but in the UK we have distance selling regulations that allow us to return anything within 10 days for a full refund.
3) The 20" screen use a inferior TN panel that laptops use, where as the 24" use a high quality H-IPS which gives better color reproduction and a better viewing angle.
 
3) The 20" screen use a inferior TN panel that laptops use, where as the 24" use a high quality H-IPS which gives better color reproduction and a better viewing angle.

...but will by no means indicate a worser screen in terms of longevity and stability. just looks


i think....
 
...but will by no means indicate a worser screen in terms of longevity and stability. just looks


i think....

Good point, in terms of longevity and stability it would be interesting to know if a TN or H-IPS panel is better or are they much the same.
 
1) 17% faster clock speed for 14% more cost
So will this be a noticeable and worthwhile performance increase? I'm probably going to be encoding quite a few videos for my website, into various formats, the same with audio. I’ll also be producing a podcast and am a bit of a multi-tasker (my taskbar in XP is always crowded). I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver which are performance hogs on my current setup - is the 0.4Ghz increase really worth the £150 price tag?
 
So will this be a noticeable and worthwhile performance increase? I'm probably going to be encoding quite a few videos for my website, into various formats, the same with audio. I’ll also be producing a podcast and am a bit of a multi-tasker (my taskbar in XP is always crowded). I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver which are performance hogs on my current setup - is the 0.4Ghz increase really worth the £150 price tag?

in 2-3 years time it will be a noticeable increase. it would hold value longer and run newer versions of programs faster /whatnot.
 
So will this be a noticeable and worthwhile performance increase? I'm probably going to be encoding quite a few videos for my website, into various formats, the same with audio. I’ll also be producing a podcast and am a bit of a multi-tasker (my taskbar in XP is always crowded). I use Photoshop and Dreamweaver which are performance hogs on my current setup - is the 0.4Ghz increase really worth the £150 price tag?

imo yes, its little extra cash in the overall scheme of things, I will be ordering the very same one next month.

On another note I hear Leopard wont run on a 800Mhz G4 and you need a 867Mhz G4, bet there are some people who wish they got the faster chip at the time :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.