Forums | MacLife

Czachorski wrote:

For the sake of Mr. T's point, we could assume the iMac uses the same exact quality of panel as the Dell monitor he spec'd.  That would mean, hardware wise, the Dell is a better value.  Software wise, the user would have to factor in the subjective value of running OS X, iLife and the value (or detraction) of the elegant hardware design.  Of course, taking into account the proper value of Windows (which I would argue should be a penality not a benefit).  If all you want to do is run Windows - get the Dell.  The iMac is not a good value there.  If you want OS X and iLife and the other Apple niceties, the iMac may start providing a compelling value.  (as it is for record numbers of customers last quarter).

Thinking more about Mr. T's point - his contention is simple.  If laptop parts in the iMac are more expensive than desktop parts, then it stands to reason that Apple is putting out a more expensive machine in order to achieve the trade-off of the elegant small-form AIO design.  They could provide a more compelling value by simply using desktop components, redesign the case appropriately and lower the price.  Got it.  Have to acknowledge the logic of that, or risk the appearance of focusing more on the "zealot" than the "logical" part of my description.

Thanks for acknowledging my point; that's all I was saying.  Apple could deliver a better better value in the iMac by using all-desktop components.  This would necessitate a thicker enclosure, however.

Supergoo wrote:

Oh I do not know Czachorski, I think that upgrades are about the same or alittle better, from the people I chat with upgrade parts like Memory, DVD Recorders,TV Tuners and Hard Drives are doing quite well, lets face it 160 gigs ( what I have in my iMac is feeling alittle tight right now, we are a media intense people, videos,pictures,songs can eat alot of room. Upgrades are a way to keep a current machines useful, I know I just picked up a new 300gig drive for my PC Tower for 79 bucks and there are drive much bigger out there, I just wish I would be able to add more drive space to my iMac without using a external drive.

supergoo

Not to mention lack of eSATA on all Mac's. Why Apple touts iLife and the "digital life friendly Mac" but forgot to include the fastest  modern high speed mass storage interface........... Digital media eats up lots of space

FW 800 is fast yes but its going to get trashed by SATA I at best you get a cheap SATA II drive then have to super gimp it in a USB external case or spend a considerable amount of cash getting a good FW 800 to SATA external enclosure and still drop a considerable amount of xfer bandwidth for something as simple ad adding HD space to your computer.....

That's probably true now, but it might not be true in a few years.

Mr. T wrote:

That's probably true now, but it might not be true in a few years.

What? You make decisions based on what you think might happen "in a few years"?
Are you saying that when considering a computer purchase, you look for a machine that will be upgradeable to whatever technology is available "in a few years"?
Are you walking to work, 'cause you think Ford will be selling flying cars "in a few years"?
No matter what technology is on the horizon, or what applications are just over the hill, or what light there is at the end of the tunnel, the computer you buy today will be shackled by todays technology, at some point, no matter how upgradeable it is. No matter how many bays its got, or ZIFs ,or boards, or wires, eventually, you will run into an incompatibility.  Even if you upgrade that, something else will need to be upgraded, untill the only part you've got left of your original computer is the wire that plugs into the wall. By that time, you've spent enough money, time ,and effort that you could have gotten a whole new computer.

The way I see it: Buy the most computer you can afford. Forget about upgradeability.
Save your money, and in three or four years, buy a new computer.

DukeofNuke wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

That's probably true now, but it might not be true in a few years.

What? You make decisions based on what you think might happen "in a few years"?
Are you saying that when considering a computer purchase, you look for a machine that will be upgradeable to whatever technology is available "in a few years"?
Are you walking to work, 'cause you think Ford will be selling flying cars "in a few years"?
No matter what technology is on the horizon, or what applications are just over the hill, or what light there is at the end of the tunnel, the computer you buy today will be shackled by todays technology, at some point, no matter how upgradeable it is. No matter how many bays its got, or ZIFs ,or boards, or wires, eventually, you will run into an incompatibility.  Even if you upgrade that, something else will need to be upgraded, untill the only part you've got left of your original computer is the wire that plugs into the wall. By that time, you've spent enough money, time ,and effort that you could have gotten a whole new computer.

The way I see it: Buy the most computer you can afford. Forget about upgradeability.
Save your money, and in three or four years, buy a new computer.

The thing is there are different ways to upgrade. It's not just about upgrading individual components by replacing them, it is also about adding new capabilities. The best current example that will effect many of todays new Mac users will be the availability of affordable high capacity optical media, be it BluRay or HDdvd or perhaps a combo drive that might combine them in the same way the several different DVD formats were unified in modern drives.
That is a very obvious upgrade candidate and has nothing to do with making a computer faster.
One can upgrade to get faster performance but you can upgrade to increase the things you can do with a computer. Personally I would like to have a TV tuner and a hardware encoder to make compressing video blazing fast. That's something I can't do with any Mac except a "Professional" one yet watching TV and saving shows is hardly a professional activity.

Upgradibility is not just about speed, it's about versatility.

The hardware is not slowing though; it's the software, and only to an extent.  For example, if you want to playback 1080p in QuickTime without dropping frames, you'll need at least a 2GHz Core Duo or a Dual 2GHz G5.  That's not high-end per-se but it's a lot more than most people have.  I remember 15 years ago when playing back full-screen video first became possible.  Today, we still have the same problem, only with higher-res content. 

But yes, on the whole, CPU speed is less important than it used to be.

Last edited by Mr. T (2007-09-05 8:47 pm)

So where did the original poster, Phoxphorus go?  He/she only has 2 posts, both in the first page.  They probably saw all this crazy discussion and decided Apple users were too crazy and obsessed to want buy some of that crack-cocaine.

Czachorski wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

The hardware is not slowing though; it's the software, and only to an extent.  For example, if you want to playback 1080p in QuickTime without dropping frames, you'll need at least a 2GHz Core Duo or a Dual 2GHz G5.  That's not high-end per-se but it's a lot more than most people have.  I remember 15 years ago when playing back full-screen video first became possible.  Today, we still have the same problem, only with higher-res content. 

But yes, on the whole, CPU speed is less important than it used to be.

I understand the concept that you and Pariah are speaking of - the dual core and more efficient chips have kept the performance moving up even though the GHz has not.  I understand that very well.

It's the applications.  They seems to be slowing.  Slowing in their frequency, compellingness (is that a word) to drive new hardware sales, slowing in the amount of power they require.  Still increasing, yes, but slowing in the rate of increase.  (edit:  not countering you here - it seems we are both saying this).

Now, that being said - if computer speed is increasing at the same rate, but the need for speed is slowing because of the slowing of compelling applications, then that means the need for upgrading will become less compelling and necessary over time.  Both upgrading your whole machine, or upgrading in pieces.  Yes, there will always be a need to upgrade and get more speed, just at a slower pace then before (late 90s, for example).  This may start a shift in computing needs, and make the iMac, or the computer as an applicance just a little more compelling, and buying computers based on upgradeability a little less.

You just can't wrap your mind around the idea that "upgrading" is not always about speed can you?
While performance enhancing upgrades may be less important, something I would dispute. Expanding the capabilities of a computer is the big thing I want and I would like to be able to do it without creating a rats nest of cables, peripherals and power blocks.
When some computers are already shipping with HD players it's really silly to contend that expandability is irrelevant anymore.

Last edited by Pariah (2007-09-06 6:10 am)

Here are two examples.

Bluray drives are available from fast mac.

Here is s link to the iMac version yes they actually make one

http://store.fastmac.com/product_info.p … cts_id=195

The MacPro version is here Its a standard 5.25 optical drive

http://store.fastmac.com/product_info.p … cts_id=201

Care to guess prices?

It will set you back $899.95 for the slim line laptop drive for the iMac and its only 1x blueray write speed

The standard optical drive for the Mac Pro is still a hefty $595 (close to half the price) but its twice as fast as the blueray write at only a measly 2x

DukeofNuke wrote:

Pariah wrote:

DukeofNuke wrote:

What? You make decisions based on what you think might happen "in a few years"?
Are you saying that when considering a computer purchase, you look for a machine that will be upgradeable to whatever technology is available "in a few years"?
Are you walking to work, 'cause you think Ford will be selling flying cars "in a few years"?
No matter what technology is on the horizon, or what applications are just over the hill, or what light there is at the end of the tunnel, the computer you buy today will be shackled by todays technology, at some point, no matter how upgradeable it is. No matter how many bays its got, or ZIFs ,or boards, or wires, eventually, you will run into an incompatibility.  Even if you upgrade that, something else will need to be upgraded, untill the only part you've got left of your original computer is the wire that plugs into the wall. By that time, you've spent enough money, time ,and effort that you could have gotten a whole new computer.

The way I see it: Buy the most computer you can afford. Forget about upgradeability.
Save your money, and in three or four years, buy a new computer.

The thing is there are different ways to upgrade. It's not just about upgrading individual components by replacing them, it is also about adding new capabilities. The best current example that will effect many of todays new Mac users will be the availability of affordable high capacity optical media, be it BluRay or HDdvd or perhaps a combo drive that might combine them in the same way the several different DVD formats were unified in modern drives.
That is a very obvious upgrade candidate and has nothing to do with making a computer faster.
One can upgrade to get faster performance but you can upgrade to increase the things you can do with a computer. Personally I would like to have a TV tuner and a hardware encoder to make compressing video blazing fast. That's something I can't do with any Mac except a "Professional" one yet watching TV and saving shows is hardly a professional activity.

Upgradibility is not just about speed, it's about versatility.

First, I just want to say that, I respect your opinion even though I disagree. (Keepin’ it friendly here, ‘cause I want to talk to you about my pit bull puppy)

I don’t think Blue Ray or HD will be a big problem for computers for some time. First, there has to be a resolution to the smurf in the entertainment industry. Second, how many files of humongous size do you have that will require archiving on BR/HD, and could you not just, you know, use two CDs. If you plan on creating content/media that is to be distributed on BR/HD, then you are a pro user and should not even consider an AIO.
Look at the DVD. When I bought my first iMac in ’99, I could have bought one with a DVD player, but, since I don’t watch movies on my computer, I decided to save the $100.
I thought that, should software come out that I had to have, and it was released only on DVD, than I would by an external DVD player at that time. So far, the only software I have on DVD is the OS that came with my new computer six years later.
My point is, if I were buying a new computer today, Blue Ray and HD-DVD compatibility, now or in the future, would not be something I would base my decision on, or even give much weight to.

A couple of CDs?? More like 37 to match a HDdvd disk.

I guess it all comes down to your basic philosophy. I think one should be prepared for things that are probable. Like wanting/needing a new capability. Apparently others seem to think the only eventualities one should allow for are absolute certainties.
The typical home Mac cycle is around 4 years. I just simply don't understand the thinking that says "Buy only based on todays needs" when you are going to be using something for years.
I don't think I am unique in that I do sometimes enjoy watching a movie on my Mac. I have a nice big, very high quality screen.
If the limitations and constraints of an iMac are fine by you keep getting them. I never much worried about iMacs, they were for other people and that was fine since Apple had a nice line of desktop towers to use.
But now the Steve has declared Laptops for everyone except people who need heavy server iron. Laptops and servers is not a mix that suits my needs and that's why I am going to build my own not long after 10.5 goes shrink wrap and run OSX on hardware that suits me.
I would much prefer buying a Mac. In the 4 years since I got married one thing I was really looking forward to was buying a nice brand new Mac once we got things sorted out with buying a house and my wife's schooling. Here I sit on the cusp of that long awaited day and much to my disappointment there is nothing Apple makes that I want to buy.
It will be weird, after almost 20 years of nothing but Apple hardware on my desk to have something else.

ScifiterX wrote:

I still prefer using DVD for whole sale backup storage myself. It has good storage density (a little over 9 CDs worth) and every system I have has at least a DVD-ROM. When Blu-Ray and/or HD-DVD burners & media get cheap and common enough then I'll reconsider but not a moment before.

When do you think that will be?  About 4 years from now? 

You know, if the price drop curve is that steep, it kinda kills the arugment of iMac users paying more for external burners.  More like wait 2-3 months until the external drops below $100 too.