Forums | MacLife

Actually, they do offer the full KB, but as a CTO option. It doesn't cost any more however. But the full KB is wired. In any case, KBs are relatively inexpensive so if you don't like the included one, buy another one.

No white MacBooks in the refurb store yet. Anybody see a good deal on the older ones at any of the resellers? They must be saving them for school purchases or something?

SomeOneOrOther wrote:

Nefarious wrote:

eastwoodcc wrote:

Nice work on the iMac line. 21.5 or 27-inch screen!

Sweetness.    Piling on with the Magic Mouse  http://www.apple.com/magicmouse/    The video looks outstanding.

The curve of the mouse looks VERY sleek. Very nice.

Sucks for folks like me with big hands.  The original Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer was perfect.  I'm just glad mine still works.

I'm not doubting the coolness of the new mouse as I've obviously yet to use one. But my thinking is that any mouse that you need to learn how how use is a downer to a new Mac buyer. But maybe it works so well that it will be a no brainer and so good people with stick with it. Call me skeptical after the "Mighty Mouse".

Orion wrote:

SomeOneOrOther wrote:

The curve of the mouse looks VERY sleek. Very nice.

Sucks for folks like me with big hands.

Speak for yourself. I like small, flat mice and I'd wager my hands are bigger than yours.

.tsooJ

jerwin wrote:

knobtwirler wrote:

Is the NVIDIA graphics processor much worse than the ATI in the more expensive iMacs?

Let's put it this way. In Call of Duty 2, using the modern rendering scheme, I get about 20 frames per second at 1680*1050.

What does " I get ...." mean? Are you using the NVIDIA, and is that a good result, or a bad one?

knobtwirler wrote:

jerwin wrote:

knobtwirler wrote:

Is the NVIDIA graphics processor much worse than the ATI in the more expensive iMacs?

Let's put it this way. In Call of Duty 2, using the modern rendering scheme, I get about 20 frames per second at 1680*1050.

What does " I get ...." mean? Are you using the NVIDIA, and is that a good result, or a bad one?

It's a bad result, and the 9400 is a weak, integrated video card that does very poorly at high resolutions. This becomes a big problem when your screen res is 1920x1080 like on a new iMac.

~Coxy wrote:

knobtwirler wrote:

jerwin wrote:

Let's put it this way. In Call of Duty 2, using the modern rendering scheme, I get about 20 frames per second at 1680*1050.

What does " I get ...." mean? Are you using the NVIDIA, and is that a good result, or a bad one?

It's a bad result, and the 9400 is a weak, integrated video card that does very poorly at high resolutions. This becomes a big problem when your screen res is 1920x1080 like on a new iMac.

Correct. Perhaps I was being a bit obscure, but I'll lay it out for you.

1680*1050 is the native resolution of a 20 inch imac, which came equipped with, at most, a 9400M. COD2 offers two rendering paths. The first is roughly equivalent to DX7, i.e geometry complicated enough for hardware transform and lighting, but nothing more. The 9400m can render 50-60 fps, maybe a lot more. It's very playable. The second path, which is roughly equivalent to DX9, makes use of ARB_vertex_program and ARB_fragment_program. This features glare, smoke effects, lens flares,and so on. It looks great, but it halves the framerate, and makes some of the missions unplayable. Yes, you can render to a lower resolution but it looks blocky on the imac's fixed pixel LCD.

And that's at 1680*1050. I'd imagine that at 1920*1080 or whatever resolution the 22" uses, the effect is even worse. The 27" would be likely to crawl. (which is why the ATI 4670 is the base card in the larger model)

Better than a GMA? Sure. Good enough for casual gamers? Maybe not for much longer. Good enough for the latest games? You must be joking.

Last edited by jerwin (2009-10-21 2:57 am)

Jokotai wrote:

I was afraid for a second that they would do away with them.  They've always "upsold" their bluetooth model as they espouse the idea of the cleaner looking wireless desktop.

Sure doesn't make the desktop look cleaner when you have to have a separate number pad. I have yet to see one that looks decent.

let alone bluetooth and decent looking.

Pariah wrote:

But they aren't offering a full KB anymore, just that laptop style no num pad thing.

*shrug* I'd just use one of these anyway...

agree

In the end, it's whatever gets the job done, no matter what it looks like.

Mr. T wrote:

Jokotai wrote:

I decided to go for Apple's $50 when replacing my previous generation keyboard (aka dirt magnet)

Dude, the dirt magnet was the best keyboard Apple ever made!  Toss it in the dishwasher, let it dry out for a few days, and it's good as new (for reals).

I much prefer this:



over dirt magnet: