digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at engadget.com

Official: Apple updates iMac

engadget.com — As rumored last week, Apple just updated it's iMac all-in-one desktop.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • guardianx, on 04/28/2008, -69/+13but where's my 3g iphone?
    • timusca, on 04/28/2008, -8/+29I another castle
    • cawpin, on 04/28/2008, -0/+29It's coming in June. Go away.
    • dajernts, on 04/28/2008, -2/+15not in this post.
    • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -6/+9Why do you "think" you need 3G? Do you even know what it is or you just a broken record like everyone else whining about 3G?
      • jgtg32a, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6because follows the standard rule of ISP. take the max connection speed of you device and you get 10% of that for any transmissions. 3G is 14mb/s so 1.4mb/s which is slow. Therefore the iPhone is slow.
      • humperdeath, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4Because 3F is just so last week.
    • keozen, on 04/28/2008, -0/+10Be a patient boy and wait until WWDC, you'll get it then.
    • zongamin, on 04/28/2008, -5/+2why don't you ***** off to a relevant story
    • gcman94, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1up your but and around the corner
  • dweeb79, on 04/28/2008, -16/+155Why don't they have 2gigs in all models? I don't to read "well because it cost more" since RAM is dirt cheap.
    • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -6/+112strategery, my friend. strategery. u know how you can go into the apple store looking for a nano and then a 50 dollar double your memory here and a 50 dollar get a touch screen there you are looking at the top of the line ipod? same thing with the imac. apple has mastered the skill of price points and getting people to buy higher than their original intent (or need).
      • dweeb79, on 04/28/2008, -22/+5First off when you said "my friend" the only thing that came to mind was............

        "Stephen Abootman: I'm not your buddy, friend!
        Phillip: He's not your friend, guy!
        Stephen Abootman: I'm not your guy, buddy!
        Terrance: He's not your buddy, friend!
        Stephen Abootman: I'm not your friend, guy!"

        Apple has mastered it, but its always the same with them. Its always just a little bit overpriced for what the user is getting. They do a great job at marketing the product to a group of people who want to be different; the only real way to distinguish between a consumer base is by charging more (like Scientology and Harley Davidson).

        I just feel that in today's market 2GB should be the standard.

        • KibibyteBrain, on 04/28/2008, -2/+2I think on Macs 4GB should be the standard honestly for desktops at least. Macs currently don't have the 32-bit problem so there aren't any possible issues about lost memory, and also use extra memory excellently, a mac will almost always run faster with more memory. Plus its great to leave apps like photoshop preloaded in the background if you use them a few times a day without having to suffer page outs. That said, I wouldn't get it from Apple unless it really is cheaper, which it probably isn't.
      • Kyan, on 04/28/2008, -22/+14First off when you said "my friend" the only thing that came to mind was............

        Wait a minute - my friends know how to spell "strategy".
        • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -3/+35strategery is a reference to an old SNL skit. when asked to sum up their campaign in one word, george bush said "strategery" and al gore said "lock box".
      • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -11/+6Good Point. Apple is a schiesty sneaky giant corporation only in it for the cash.
        /cheap shot

        I don't understand why they can't go that last 5% of the stupid crap they do, like the iPhone not having a compatible plug with all headphones, or iPods that they force the screen to stay on the whole time you're listening, even though the screen takes more power than your headphones, and therefore kills your battery life from 20 hours to 8 hours. C'mon Apple, step it up and kick ass in every way, not just 95% of ways.

        4GB of ram costs 65$, every iMac should have 4GB of ram., PERIOD.
        • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -4/+6i know, its almost as if apple existed just to make money or something! Im sure all their stock holders would really appreciate it if they just put aside their greedy ways and stopped worrying about that whole "cash" thing.

          /sarcasm
          • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -6/+4Yea, because stepping on consumers is the most proven way to increase your popularity and thus market share. And just think of the millions they made off trying to force everyone to use the $15 iPod earbuds. They're rolling in the dough no doubt. They probably earn $2 per set of earbuds sold, and they only piss off half of those iPhone owners who want to use other headphones, but hey, they got your extra $2!

            The problem is that when Apple steps on it's users, noone complains.
          • championchap, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3So the Apple Stocks would decrease in value of they made it so the screen on the iPod stayed off when skipping tracks and the like?
            I don't think so.

            I think they made some good points to be honest.. the iPhone not being able to use other headphones pisses me off a tad.. though I guess I wouldnt live without the clicker.
          • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1@ championshp I was referring to the RAM prices, not the ipod dilemmas. charging more for ram = more profit = better stock value. i doubt anyone would disagree with you that more consumer friendly products are beneficial to all parties.
        • Dakk, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4"iPods that they force the screen to stay on the whole time you're listening"

          Just nitpicking, but my nano's backlight turns off even with music playing ... in 30 seconds... something I selected in the settings.
          • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2So does my Nano.... Backlight turning off is good.... but the screen doesn't turn off, even after hours and hours of not being touched. Until you stop using it of course. All they'd have to do is make is so that any button activing and the screen comes on.
          • Kerrigore, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4I don't know what they are talking about... my iPod touch screen turns off just fine while I'm playing music, and I haven't had any trouble getting a variety of headphones to work with it.
          • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1Then maybe they fixed it. The original iPhone has a design flaw that limits any non-Apple earbuds from fitting into it, and as far as I know there is not a version of the iPhone yet that has seen this flaw fixed.

            And yea, it makes sense they'd turn off the huge iPod touch screen, but my little nano screen never turns off, and there is not an option to turn it off without stopping listening to whatever it is you're listening to.
        • humperdeath, on 04/28/2008, -2/+1OHHHHHHH!, So it's a PROFIT DEAL, huh!?!?!?
      • PoopStick, on 04/28/2008, -14/+7No one said Mac users are smart....
        • jimthenglishman, on 04/28/2008, -1/+8well they are able to come up with better arguments than
          "lololol MACs are gai cuse i heard u cant play games on them lololol"

          actually, forget that. i'm going to go crazy if i hear "it just works" one more time
        • KibibyteBrain, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1How is a computer a sign of intellect? That would be like saying a surgeon's choice of scalpel determined his skill level. He might just like a certain kind, geeze. I'd love to see the AMA review the license of a doctor who went around attacking others for being "ACME Gauze users". Why are IT professionals so full of themselves?
    • SinkToTheBeat, on 04/28/2008, -10/+274 models, the cheapest one comes with 1g, and can be upgraded with a click of a button to 2 or 4. The others all start at 2g.

      Is there something wrong with offering an option to those who only want a computer for simple non memory intensive purposes?
      • exomni, on 04/28/2008, -3/+10Not when you price the 1gb one at the level people expect to pay for a full-featured computer, and then advertise it as "starting at $1xxx", and then force them to pay extra (and way more than what it's worth -- i.e. $100 for a $20 ram upgrade) to add in what should come standard for that price.
    • Natfly, on 04/28/2008, -1/+13I was going to say the same thing, 1 GB can be had for under 20 bucks these days. Yet they charge $100/GB to upgrade. It might have something to do with the fact that RAM prices don't always go down and tend to fluctuate.
      • crashingechelon, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4Yeah like from a place like Crucial.com, I know their prices are pretty good yet for my G4 PowerBook a 1gig card is like 26 bucks and for my 5 year old Dell Desktop it's like 46 bucks for a 1gig card. I have seen the prices fluctuate before, RAM is a funny thing.
        • bobartig, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5It's called supply and demand. Older RAM, which is no longer in high manufacture starts to gradually raise in price again back to a more regular price. Current RAM is extremely cheap because there's so much of it, the market is flooded, and the margins are nil.
          • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2yay! economics!
          • KibibyteBrain, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Even worse, a lot of supercorp workers and government workers can get component upgrade budgets approved, but not computer upgrade budgets approved just because of lame policies. So then they can go ahead spending $50 a machine upgrading 5 year old computers and no one cares. You will also see some art/print/media firms upgrading old macs and wanting a demand for mac parts, but those can sometimes be more reasonable. Sometimes they'll have an old G3 running an expensive printer with custom software and just don't want to fix it if it ain't broke.
      • dweeb79, on 04/28/2008, -4/+2The argument for this is how Dell does it. Dell charges lets say 1k for a laptop but they offer rebates and discounts which help to reflect the cost of a components.
        • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3i prefer more upfront pricing. rebates and the such always seem shady to me, just give me the end price up front.
          • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Dell rebates and discounts are all instant.... so it is "up front pricing", it's really just discounts that reflect "what is on sale today"

            No Computer sales anywhere is more upfront about what you get than Dell, IMO. Their purchase pages are very concise and very efficient, and the proof is in their 35% of Computer marketshare.
        • gh0st3000, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2the only reason they use rebates is because for everyone who gets the rebate, there will always be a couple people who forget or screw up the application or don't have time or something like that. That and the fact that most rebates are one per household. Anything to bump the margins up while making no effort.
      • synthesis811, on 04/28/2008, -0/+14RAM does fluctuate, but it has been at least 1/3 to a 1/2 the price that Apple charge for it for over a year (of course its more like 1/4 of the price now), Apple are just plain and simply ripping you off. There's no other way to put it. They never change their prices (only bring in new models), and they stay pretty much constant, yet component costs will drop everywhere else.
    • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -16/+171G on low end machines can multitask fine since OS X is more memory efficient then Windows. It keeps a separation between models.
      • specialK16, on 04/28/2008, -10/+4Oh oh....

        It's than*, by the way.
        • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -4/+5thank you internet grammar nazi!
          • naio, on 04/28/2008, -5/+1STFU.
          • Musicmonkey34, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1wow, i havent seen a "STFU" in a while, i think since my days of middle school AIM...actually kinda made me smile. sorry if that wasnt your intent :-/
          • fixthecomments, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1He was actually twittering that he'd just eaten some STale foFU and got lost on the internet.
      • dualboy24, on 04/28/2008, -1/+11Can you show some proof that OSX is more memory efficient than windows? I have both macs and PCs and would say that the Mac requires at least 1GB if not more for long term, while windows XP (not vista) can do fine on 512 or more, heck a clean install of XP with just windows updates, and basic antivirus can boot at under 200mb
        • BossKey, on 04/28/2008, -8/+2If you were to compare the current versions of both operating systems (instead of cheating by sneaking XP in there) the Mac has a clear advantage. I know Mac systems running Leopard satisfactorily on 1GB while everyone Windows user I know complains about Vista not really working right until you have 2GB on board.
        • Ignignokt01, on 04/28/2008, -2/+8Umm. I'm running vista on a 4 year old computer with only 1 gb ram and a 3 ghz processor. I'm tired of this fanboy *****
          • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3im running leopard (and cs3, btw) with only 1 gb on my powerbook g4 (which is 3+ years old).
          • fixthecomments, on 04/29/2008, -1/+0I'm running Leopard and my Mac definitely took a performance hit when I installed it. Apple is as guilty as MS for adding processor load to their 'latest and greatest' operating systems. Difference is, Apple is using it to sell new hardware, while MS is... erm... um... look Yahoo!
          • BossKey, on 04/29/2008, -0/+13GHz?

            I know of two 4+ year old PowerBooks running Leopard on 1GB RAM and only a 1.25GHz processor (I own one of them).

            BTW, it isn't fanboy ***** if it's long-time Windows users complaining to me about how their relatively new PCs creak under Vista.
          • danomagnum, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Oh yeah? Well I'm running virtualized instances of xp, vista, osx, and linux on my abacus!
      • Misos, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1OS X may be more efficient than Windows in memory usage -- if you have a lot of it. For example, running OS X with 2GB of RAM for me feels faster than running a similarly specc'd XP machine with 2GB of RAM, the XP machine would perform faster than OSX with 1GB. Make sense?
    • 24imac, on 04/28/2008, -16/+1http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World%20Com ...

      So your telling me cheap assws such as yourself cant afford a 100.00 for a 4 GB memory kit?.

      If you dont like the specs, dont buy the equipment.

      Go back to Dell.
      • Sabin, on 04/28/2008, -0/+12And if we don't want to be associated with elitist assholes such as yourself then we shouldn't buy Macs. Dick heads like you make me almost feel embarrassed to own a Mac.
    • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -0/+18i actually always opt for the lowest amount of ram possible for apple. that way, i can pay 20-50 bucks per gb when in install in myself instead of paying 1-200 from apple.
      • unionaire, on 04/28/2008, -13/+2well, 20-50 makes sense, but where you get that 1-200 from? i mean, they sell ram for 1 dollar?
        • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9i meant 100-200. just too lazy to type the extra "00". Great, now see what you've made me do?
          ahhhh!!!!!!!!
        • gr3yn3t, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1but your epenis just grew!
      • gr3yn3t, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2stupid digg reply system.
        • Musicmonkey34, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1i know. makes me reply to my own comments sometimes when i really want to reply to someone who replied to ME....sorry if that doesnt make sense.
      • thetanman, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Do they give you the one gig in a one or two-dimm configuration? When I bought my macbook pro a couple of years ago, it came in 2 x 512mb dimms :( so my mom's old iMac got a boost while I just bought 2gb aftermarket.
    • iMoth, on 04/28/2008, -7/+2dweeb79 is a pretty cool guy. eh don't to read and doesn't afraid of anything.
    • redragon104, on 04/28/2008, -6/+1hey guys, its called a business model, they don't make a fancy looking hardware just so they can charge you a fair price for an upgrade. Don't like it? get a PC
    • Pittance, on 04/28/2008, -1/+7Upgrade: 4GB 800MHz DDR2 SDRAM - 2x2GB [Add $300]

      wtf? I bought 2gigs in 2 1gig sticks last year for $50. How the hell do they charge you $100 per gig?
      • blackjack75, on 04/28/2008, -1/+24That Ram is personally blessed by Steve Jobs in an applefication ceremony. It will preserve the harmony in your mac.

      • Trigonometron, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6When/if you buy a mac, you always always buy the least amount of ram possible, then upgrade it 3rd party.
        • Zera, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2Its sad apple doesn't make it easy for my Grandma and Grandpa and their siblings who I've advised to buy Apple, and would have no ability to install their own ram. Is it too much to expect a fair deal once in a while? Even the majority of my peers would be far too worried to do their own ram upgrade. I've personally helped three friends with eMacs upgrade their ram.

          I don't know, I just think that Apple should make a decent effort to not be a pain in the ass for their customers. The idea that everyone has to go out an "finish building" their computers once Apple sells them is just absurd. That or pay 6 times more than the ram costs. 4 GB = $65

          Shame on Apple, but I just think too many Apple users don't care enough to complain, so I guess people are getting what they want.
      • gr3yn3t, on 04/28/2008, -2/+1*some* people insist on apple branded memory to ensure the "total hardware software compatibility." Also, apple memory does have a ridiculously low rate of errors / failure.
        • Zera, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Ram goes bad? I've built 50 systems in the past 10 years, and reformatted 500+ and I have encountered a total of three bad sticks of ram, all crap brands, and one died in a ***** eMachines that had a PSu fail and took the ram and mobo with it.
      • iLemon, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Apple buys ram from movie theaters.
    • etcimon, on 04/28/2008, -3/+3Ok, Laptop CPU, Laptop Video, Laptop RAM. Isn't laptop specs usually just more pricey? So they put a laptop in a screen, and they say it's better than a regular desktops. Still then, their Mid-Tower-based desktops are called Mac Pro when it's built by Apple. If the price was the same, what would you prefer, an iMac or a Mac Pro? Bottom line, if you say Mac Pro, you're looking for a real desktop. If you still think an iMac is worthy, you're getting a non-portable laptop (for the same price as a real one). Digg me down if you want, I'm just saying the facts
      • AdmiralKarelia, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4There's not too many laptops out there with a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo and a 512MB Geforce 8800. It may be using laptop components, but it's got the thermal budget to support better parts than any laptop could handle, at least any laptop for $2299.
      • bobartig, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3iMac's don't use laptop GPU's that often (they have in the past), although they tend to use underclocked desktop chips to save on the heat budget.
        Laptop components aren't "just" more pricey, they're also cooler and use less energy.
        Personally, I love the "hybrid" approach of desktop/laptop that the iMac consists of. It's perfect for a feature-rich desktop that takes up minimal space. Just not that usable for gaming unless you shell out for the ultimate model.
      • hongkongjapie, on 04/29/2008, -0/+3In the olden days computers where SLOOOOW, a highend expensive or carefully tuned home-build computer was still SLOW but at least a little bit more bearable. Unless you're a fanatic gamer (in that case skip Mac anyway), most computers nowadays are quite decent in speed for normal usage like software development or the usual office stuff. I use the first gen intel 20" imac and still think it's okay for what I do, software development, the biggest limitation is the 2GB max. memory it supports, but even with that I can live. When you develop, you normally can build incremental, and to save time I develop with building only for x86, not ppc. When compiling takes a while I can always do some surfing because on modern computers you actually CAN multitask without pulling out your hair. Although if Apple would come out with a headless beast between the mini and the pro, I would be tempted, but one of the main reasons to go with the imac was it is really quiet and less clutter on my desk. Have bought before that I bought an shuttle xpc or how they where called, and although it was quite expensive compared to normal pc's it was noisy as hell. Could of course have bought a new powersupply, and a new videocard (the one I had was supposed to be reasably silent, except that the shuttle pc casing was so small that even in normal non-3d use the fan had to spin up), but it when you already have spend quite some money on a compact and silent pc and you have to spend again a few 100 bucks to get it really silent, the fun is already over.

        Also, I've just bought an HP/Compaq PC and although it was quite cheap, the frustration of not having the OS disks, having the machine preloaded with crap, having a 64-bit processor but still you get the 32-bit version, the build in video even lacks DVI, and VISTA actually IS crap with 1GB ram, I think that the premium you pay for apple hardware at least gives you something. If it's worth it probably depends on how much you like to tinker yourself, but I'm way past the build it myself phase.
    • goldenratiophi, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3because people will buy it.
    • jabberwolf, on 04/29/2008, -4/+1I'm glad Apple made it to Nvidia 8800 before nvidia went to their 10 series models... they are already at the 9 series.
      But then any PC user would already know that.
  • clesch, on 04/28/2008, -11/+723.06 Ghz Penryn and a 8800 GS (a G92 with a 192 bit memory bus) with 512 MB – these machines are shaping up quite nicely.

    For those (like me) who aren't familiar with the 8800GS:

    http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_conte ...
    • firepowered, on 04/28/2008, -48/+21Hello I'm a Mac - and I'm a Pc
      *MAC: So whats doing PC?
      PC: Well I upgraded to 4gigs of RAM, a faster video card (not that you would need one) and a new sound card to replace my onboard one. How about you Mac?
      *MAC: Ive been refreshing the Apple Store, hoping i get upgraded. Gee i Hate waiting to get upgraded.

      ^^ epic fail? perhaps!
      • HoratioHellpop, on 04/28/2008, -10/+5What?
      • timusca, on 04/28/2008, -8/+19maybe not epic, but definitely fail.
      • SinkToTheBeat, on 04/28/2008, -5/+26Glad to see your copy paste skills aren't going to waste.
        Most users would never need to replace the video cards in these iMacs unless they held on to them for several years, and by that time, the rest of the system will be just as outdated. Then the iMac can be sold for twice what you could get for your pc on ebay.
        • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -10/+11Yeah, but the iMac cost twice as much in the first place....
          • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -12/+11No, it doesn't. But you just go on thinking it does. Wouldn't want to frustrate you or anything
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -12/+6Yeah, I just checked, the very lowest end iMac costs 2x as much as a comparably equiped system from HP. Only the system from HP comes with 2gig of ram and a faster and bigger hard drive...
          • solidus636, on 04/28/2008, -2/+1@MacParrot...
            What the hell are you smoking? I can make a custom PC for $1,000 using parts from Newegg, including a monitor and an equally good graphics card as the iMac.
          • MacParrot, on 04/29/2008, -0/+4I won't bother to discuss it with b1663, since he has a closed mind and really only comes to digg it seems to taunt people, but if that's what gets him through the night...
            @solid...You are absolutely correct and I have never argued that you couldn't make an cheaper equivalent or better computer than a Mac if you buy the parts and build it yourself. But most people don't do that. I could easily cobble together a frankenMac. I've worked in electronics since 1979. As an installer, a tech, a security systems programmer and integrator, a designer, an engineer (in the loosest sense of the word), and now as a manager. It's not that hard to put a computer together. But with a career, a marriage, and two kids, I don't have a lot of spare time. I'd rather be using a Mac than building one. With that in mind, Macs do not cost twice as much as any computer with similar specs from any other manf.
        • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -6/+4Your a6400z series - $648.99

          Operating system Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (32-bit) edit
          Processor AMD Athlon(TM) 64 X2 5000+ dual-core - 2.6GHz edit
          Memory 2GB DDR2-800MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x1024) edit
          Graphics Card Integrated NVIDIA GeForce 6150 SE edit
          Networking 56Kbps Data/Fax Modem for dial-up Internet access edit
          Hard Drive FREE UPGRADE to 320GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive from 250GB edit
          Primary CD/DVD Drive LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive edit
          Front Productivity Ports 2 USB, front audio ports edit
          Sound Card Integrated 5.1 Capable Sound w/ front audio ports edit
          Security Software No additional security software (60-day Norton Internet Security trial) edit
          Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works 9.0 edit
          Keyboard and Mouse HP keyboard and HP optical mouse edit
          Your additional options:
          Click edit to modify. NOTE: These items are in stock and will ship immediately.
          Monitor HP w2007 20" LCD Wide Flat Panel Monitor edit
          • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6Soooo, no Intel C2D? Guess we can let that go. No video card? Sorry, even the base iMac has one. No wireless? You can't even add an 802.11n, b and g is the best you can get. No FireWire? Must be an option for that somewhere...nope. No productivity software beyond MS Works? No iLife eqivelant? Going with Vista Home premium? Please. Vista Business at a minimum if you're going to compare it to OS X. There are PCs with better hardware specs than the iMac that cost less, no argument from me. This isn't one of them.
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4Yeah, I thought as much, you are making a buch of excuses why the equivalent computer that runs windows costs half of what a mac costs.

            Lets see what we can do at the other end of the spectrum, shall we?

            Your m9200t series: $2,208.99


            Operating system Upgrade to Genuine Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 (64-bit) edit
            Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad processor Q6700 (2.66GHz) edit
            Memory FREE UPGRADE to 3GB DDR2-800MHz dual channel SDRAM from 2GB edit
            Graphics Card 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT, 2 DVI, TV-Out edit
            Networking Wireless LAN 802.11a/b/g/n & Bluetooth(R ) edit
            Hard Drive 320GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive edit
            Primary CD/DVD Drive Blu-ray / HD DVD player & Lightscribe SuperMulti DVD burner edit
            Front Productivity Ports 15-in-1 memory card reader, 2 USB, 1394, video, audio edit
            TV & Entertainment Experience ATSC-NTSC TV tuner with PVR, FM tuner, remote edit
            Sound Card Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports edit
            Security Software Norton Internet Security(TM) 2008 - 15 Months edit
            Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works 9.0 edit
            Premium Photography Software SALE! Adobe(R) PhotoShop(R) Elements 6.0 - Save $20 edit
            Keyboard and Mouse HP keyboard and HP optical mouse edit
            Your additional options:
            Click edit to modify. NOTE: These items are in stock and will ship immediately.
            Monitor HP w2408h 24in Wide flat panel, integrated speakers edit

            There you go, that computer beats the pants off of any iMac, and costs less than the highest end iMac in its default configuration.

            Sorry about the C2D though, I went with the quad core processor instead. Oh also, this configuration fails your test as well because it does a bunch of things that you can't do on any Mac at any price.
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -3/+1Wow, check this one out. Is it even possible to buy a Mac in this type of configuration???

            HP Integrity Superdome with sx1000 chipset—64 processor/128 core server Intel Itanium processor or mx2 dual-processor modules (128 CPUs)

            processors: 6-128
            Ram: 1Tb
            PCI Slots: 192 (w/ I/O expander)
            Operating systems:HP-UX 11i v3 and HP-UX 11i v2;
            Microsoft® Windows® Server 2003, Datacenter Edition for 64-bit Itanium-based systems;
            No Linux support





            OpenVMS v8.3; OpenVMS v8.3-1H1
          • MacParrot, on 04/29/2008, -1/+4You're really hopeless. I conceded that you can get a Windows PC for less than a Mac. Honestly, it doesn't mean that much to me. But the example you gave (the HP a6400z) was NOT as good as far as hardware goes as a standard iMac. Even to get close added hundreds of dollars to the price you gave. If you're going to do a Mac PC comparison, at least use similar hardware, as close to same specs as possible with options as close as possible. Don't put out some PC that doesn't even have a graphics card or Wireless n and expect a fair comparison.

            You talk about Mac users having some kind of neurotic compulsion...dude we're not even close to your brand of crazy
          • B1663r, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Wow man, the only thing insane here is your comparison standards. Ok, you want to compare comparable equipment, I can do that. The equivalency will come from price this time.

            Your a6460t series : $1,218.99

            Operating system Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit) edit
            Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Quad processor Q9300 edit
            Memory 4GB DDR2-800MHz dual channel SDRAM (4x1024) edit
            Graphics Card 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 8600GT and TV Tuner / PVR edit
            Networking No Modem edit
            Hard Drive FREE UPGRADE to 500GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s hard drive from 320GB edit
            Primary CD/DVD Drive LightScribe 16X max. DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive edit
            Front Productivity Ports 15-in-1 memory card reader, 1394, 2 USB, audio edit
            Sound Card Integrated 7.1 channel sound w/front audio ports edit
            Security Software No additional security software (60-day Norton Internet Security trial) edit
            Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works 9.0 edit
            Premium Photography Software SALE! Adobe(R) PhotoShop(R) Elements 6.0 - Save $20 edit
            Keyboard and Mouse HP keyboard and HP optical mouse edit
            Your additional options:
            Click edit to modify. NOTE: These items are in stock and will ship immediately.
            Monitor HP w2007 20" LCD Wide Flat Panel Monitor edit

            By the time you go to a third party to buy your wireless n card the exact same way mac buyers go to third parties to buy the proper amount of ram, this one still costs less, so it still doesn't match up to your insane comparison standards some how...

            But there you go more than 2x the computer for the same price as the lowest end Mac... And if you don't use wireless n (and most people don't) this one is ready to go out of the box, no need to grab the screwdriver to add your third party ram.
        • PSUstoekl, on 04/28/2008, -3/+7Good for you. I'll go back to OS X now.
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -5/+2Well, just don't count on selling that imac from 2 years ago for any significant money, which was my only point... Here is your two year old iMac selling for.... About shipping costs...

            http://cgi.ebay.com/USED-iMAC-1-6-GHz-WITH-17-SCRE ...
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -5/+3Here is that old g5 failing to even get the sellers reserve. Wow, smug much?

            http://cgi.ebay.com/Imac-G5-New-parts-Great-Condit ...
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -4/+3LOL, here is a month old iMac selling for less than half what the guy paid for it, ONE MONTH AGO... Because his iMac inspired design firm has gone out of business.

            http://cgi.ebay.com/20-Apple-IMAC-250GB-HD-2-0-GB- ...
          • chad78, on 04/28/2008, -3/+8Um, you do realize that those auctions aren't over yet, and most of ebay's bidding happens within the last few *minutes*. That iMac is $850 with over a full day left. Try searching for "Completed Auctions" to see actual final bids. That would give you a better feel for resale value. Otherwise, I'm sure you could find an auction for a brand new MacBook for $0.01. - zero bids, and reserve not yet met. You know, one that was just listed.
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -3/+3Chad,

            You mean like this one???

            http://cgi.ebay.com/20-iMac-IN-BOX-Core-2-Duo-2-16 ...

            Sad fact is, ebay has changed over the last few years. That one only had thre bids on the last day and those only amounted to $30...
          • DarkPrince11, on 04/28/2008, -3/+2That's a refurbished G5 iMac going for close to the price of a new base model iMac at the Apple Store. You can't just compare prices. You have to also compare the age and condition of the products.
          • B1663r, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1DarkPrince,

            I posted it because it was ironic. The guy has an ancient computer that is worth ~$50 and he has set a reserve for more than $300 because he has to much Apple smug... Well either that or he just wants everyone to know he has a Mac...
    • dpcamp, on 04/28/2008, -13/+6Yep, always a generation behind whats latest and greatest in the computer hardware world. Shaping up very nicely..
      sigh..


      Am I the only one that doesn't get why they're not putting Core2Quads in their iMacs? A beefier video card would have been nice too..
      Oh well I guess thats why i stick to my OS x86 machine..
      • diggimator, on 04/28/2008, -2/+3You can get a Mac Pro instead which has better hardware access anyway, unless you're going for the form factor and your OS x86 machine's is closer to that of the iMac's.
        • DarkDx, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1Show me a 9600 in a mac pro (which has the same performance than a 8800gt at HALF the price), sorry, I LOVE mac os x and macbooks, but they need to make a consumer tower asap, or they have to ask their fanboys to stop saying "get the mac pro then".
    • stinger666, on 04/28/2008, -9/+11I'd have a beast of a PC for 2 grand.
    • BlackKnight6, on 04/28/2008, -4/+16http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce_8800.html

      8800 GS comes with top of the line iMac? Welcome to the bottom of the last-generation Nvidia card...
    • Dobby156, on 04/28/2008, -4/+3yeah, put together a Machine at a fraction of the cost, it knocks out the spec of this, how mcuh do they really need to charge to put it together.
    • etcimon, on 04/28/2008, -8/+4Notebook twice as powerful for the same price as this desktop: http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=29288&v ...

      Compare the specs, this even beats the 2200$ desktop model. Back in the time, desktops were twice the price of a laptop... Digg me down if you don't like it, but I'm just saying the facts.
      • Verdanic, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3That.... really doesn't come close to the 24", or the 20" for that matter. At all. It's also an Acer. But really, it doesn't even come close by a long shot. I don't know where you saw specs on the page that beat any of the iMac's specs.
    • clesch, on 04/28/2008, -7/+9To all the people claiming they can put together a 10 times faster machine for half the price:

      Do they run and support Mac OS X? No.

      You're missing the point.
      • BlackKnight6, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4I don't think "the people" like the idea of paying out the ass just for OSX, especially if you are a gamer and have to get Windows anyways which adds more cost to the Mac solution...
      • jabberwolf, on 04/29/2008, -3/+1The point being that OTHER OSes arent locked down to hardware (even if the same exact generic hardware is in a another machine)
        Yes, people could overlook that fact, but they're not.
      • tomz17, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Actually... yeah... if you do your homework you CAN run OSX on something that costs 10x less!
        • BlackKnight6, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Not legally or easily or as wide of hardware.
    • borninda818, on 04/28/2008, -2/+2Remember that although it may be 3.06 GHz, it's still dual core. Quad core is shaping up to be the new standard these days, even if 90% of the applications out there don't use the extra cores. So really, this little guy is WAY too overpriced. Your paying for the name and the sexiness. You could make an argument for OSX but I could make just as strong an argument against it.
      • hongkongjapie, on 04/29/2008, -1/+3Boring! It just like cars, one that can go 200MPH is faster than one that goes 150MPH tops, but when the speed limit is 60MPH who cares? Unless you're gaming (don't buy a Mac), most of the time your processors are idling, and because a compile job or a photoshop filter or whatever your job requires you to do on your compy, is limited to more than the processor alone, the advantage of a faster processor is often not quite that stellar, so you gain a whopping 10% compile time. That means just 10% less time to read digg ;-). Also many people just want a nice, clean, clutter free solution and don't care that they don't have the fastest rig.
        Also, a mac is sold with OS disk that allows you to install the stuff yourself and isn't loaded with the amount of ***** that at least HP/Compaq tries to f*ck you up with (you don't get the disks, you can only burn an image that gives you back the ***** up factory install). So yes, there's lots of people that are probably happier with a PC, I'm glad for them, I and many others like the easy, silent, clutter-free solution of an imac and coming from Unix background I prefer mac os X over Vista or XP (when I switched to my first mac, an ibook, Linux power management was still very limited so that was not really an option yet, otherwise I would have sticked to Linux, now I don't want to switch back from Mac OS X).
        • BlackKnight6, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Yea because PCs have speed limits, bad analogy man.
    • jabberwolf, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Yes we all know what the 8800GS is,
      The PC's have had it for a while now... thanks (pats the mac user on the head) but we already know
      And they above is right, a pc for the same price and specs would be hauling a quad core.
      ;-)
  • firepowered, on 04/28/2008, -26/+8The graphics card downgraded from GT to GS edition? Or does GS=GameSupported edition? (stolen from engadget comment)
    • ethamajin, on 04/28/2008, -3/+4it is a downgrade from GT.
    • archer75, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2that's disappointing. Seeing how it has to drive a 1920x1200 resolution for gaming. They could have gone better.
  • Calcio, on 04/28/2008, -85/+13half a gig of RAM.
    half a gig...
    half...a gig.
    Unbelievable
    • remiserg, on 04/28/2008, -5/+91... of video RAM.
      • Protoss, on 04/28/2008, -5/+31Maybe he couldn't believe a graphics card can have half a gig of RAM?
    • mike17032, on 04/28/2008, -22/+12Well remember these computers dont run the joke that is Vista, so it doesnt take 2 gigs just to get the OS loaded.
      • bigsteve, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6I prefer OS X, but it is very RAM intensive. I'd say somewhere in between Windows XP and Windows Vista (probably closer to XP on that scale...)
      • dpcamp, on 04/28/2008, -3/+3If you really want to be productive on a mac, rather than surfing teh internets, you're gonna need at least 2 gigs of ram as well..
      • digjam, on 04/28/2008, -6/+4Now thats a tru fanboy comment...
        "I dont need more than what Steve farking jobs gave me...because he knows I dont want it.."
        • bigsteve, on 04/28/2008, -3/+2Now that's a 'tru' Apple hater commenter.

          You know, inability to comprehend what they read...
    • jscotttaylor, on 04/28/2008, -3/+9half a gig of GPU ram in the 24". The 20 comes with 1gb of system ram and the 24 comes with 2gb. As cheap as ram is they should have went with 2 in the 20 and 4 in the 24
      • SinkToTheBeat, on 04/28/2008, -2/+3There are two 20" models, only the cheaper one comes with 1g by default, and can be upgraded to 2g or 4g on the customization page.
    • zongamin, on 04/28/2008, -2/+18I bet you wish you had ***** read the article
  • shyboy2008, on 04/28/2008, -24/+43*****, i just bought an imac on saturaday
    • Aazlain, on 04/28/2008, -6/+28It's not too late to have it replaced by one of these for free. (8 days I think?)
      • paradox2222, on 04/28/2008, -3/+12Even if you don't get it returned Apple can pay the difference. Same thing happened to me when I bought a MacBook Pro and they gave me $600 back.
    • Flashman, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3314 days. I know because I bought mine 16 days before a processor bump and they wouldn't hook me up.
      • Vanstuke, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4*****'s weak man, i remember i bought my G5 about 3 weeks or something before they came out with the slimmer, built in eyesight, upgraded, and $100 cheaper ones.
    • Tinendo, on 04/28/2008, -1/+13Call Apple and ask for a replacement iMac. Worked for me in 2005 (Powerbook).
      • unionaire, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2you kinda have to break it first without touching the warranty, any good suggestions? I know how to ***** up a hard drive but man if you have to open your iMac, it voids the warranty right?
        • repick3, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Magnets! Apply directly to the hard drive!
          • sdschramm, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2that won't do anything. Hard drives can't get erased or messed up from magnets. Its not like a VCR tape in there!
    • Dobby156, on 04/28/2008, -9/+2why there *****
    • ritter99, on 04/28/2008, -1/+11I think you're a hero since you stopped the waiting and actually bought one.
      • ParticleMan420, on 04/29/2008, -2/+2yes, he's a true hero, he got overcharged for an already overpriced computer.
    • aepyx, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I bought one for my mom on Friday, apple went ahead and upgraded it to the newer one before it shipped today. I'd say they should have done the same for you. I didn't even have to ask, i have to admit I'm impressed by the company already.
    • godmode, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1balls....i bought mine for school a about 3 weeks ago. And i need that extra power since im doing graphic design.
      • dudefaceguyman, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Well you shouldn't of got the imac for that. Glossy screens are terrible for graphic designers. Riiiidiculous you can't give the imac a standard screen..
        • godmode, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1I couldnt really afford the 4000 dollar quad core.
  • Mickeh65, on 04/28/2008, -31/+5Nice.
  • elanders, on 04/28/2008, -25/+11where is the quad-core?
    • Steinr, on 04/28/2008, -4/+16in the Mac Pro!
      • dpcamp, on 04/28/2008, -0/+8thats a xeon dude (which would make those 8 core). there is a core 2 quad floating around for the last year if you haven't noticed. I don't think people should have to pay astronomical prices to have 4 cores.
    • zongamin, on 04/28/2008, -8/+1***** off idiot.
    • etcimon, on 04/28/2008, -0/+10Why are you digging him down? I totally agreed. Those quad cores cost almost half the price of the laptop CPU they are putting in the core 2 duo 3.06ghz model and you can't even imagine the performance boost.

      My Idea: Get a Real Desktop if You Want One.
  • joltcola, on 04/28/2008, -36/+10lame....all i need is my eMachine...
  • ziptnf, on 04/28/2008, -55/+13When you really look at it, the specs for these machines are absolutely horrible.
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -3/+10How so? This makes them much more competitive. Sure, you can probably build a PC for much cheaper, but how many average consumers build their own boxes or even want to try? Stop thinking like a geek and start thinking like a mainstream customer and these are a fine deal.
    • iChainsaw, on 04/28/2008, -4/+13No, don't even think mainstream consumer! OSX doesn't require the same specs as Windows does. Osx requires less than windows to operate.
    • stinger666, on 04/28/2008, -17/+3Seriously, why buy a PC when you can get a machine with half of the capabilities and twice the price? Oh and it's pretty
      • mywhitenoise, on 04/28/2008, -3/+6you can buy a computer with the same specs and a 20" monitor for $600?
        Number 1 reason why I go mac: It doesn't run Windows.
        • DarkPrince11, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6It runs Windows just fine. You can use VMWare, Parallels, or Boot Camp. =|

          And why would the lack of an option to choose your operating system be a buying point?
          • mywhitenoise, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1I said the number one reason I DO buy a Mac. I know it can run Windows...but why the hell would you want to?
          • AdmiralKarelia, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2His point was that the number one reason he goes with a Mac is because it's not a Windows machine. Sure, it can run it, but getting a Mac to run Windows (with the exception of for Windows-only software) defeats the purpose.
        • EwigRomanze, on 04/28/2008, -3/+4It not only runs windows, it runs windows much faster than any pc
        • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1TwigRomance. I hope you are joking. You can't be that stupid.

          What makes it run windows faster then? EFI? Shiny case?
  • msmearcheck, on 04/28/2008, -23/+8come on! still no blu-ray drive?
    • dajernts, on 04/28/2008, -3/+4The Macbook Air doesn't even have an optical drive. I don't think Apple is too concerned about staying up to date on optical technology.
      • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2it does have an optical drive, its just external.
    • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -1/+8Why would you want to watch blu ray movies on a 20-24" screen when you should have a big screen HDTV for that? Adding a $200 hardware piece for movies is dumb.
      • dyranios2, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6Burning Data/ Backing up to 25gb/50gb Discs? Creating Blu-ray movie discs?
        • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3you can burn and back up to blu ray discs now with an external burner, just ask rush limbaugh. that need is not for everyone however. external hard drives are still cheaper and hold more information. Very small minority of people have HD camcorders and can just play HD through apple tv or hooking their computer to an HDTV. Again blu ray in a computer is over rated.....
  • Auzy, on 04/28/2008, -40/+10Its a minor speed bump, and a video card upgrade. I worked at a Apple premium reseller and even I don't care.

    In fact, if Asus upgraded the EEEPC to 1GHZ would anyone care? Probably not! Dugg down. Just cause its apple doesn't mean its front page worthy. Barely any customer, except some 24" customers would actually notice the improvements
    • revjustin2, on 04/28/2008, -5/+33Apple has customers that are only 24" tall?
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2That's funny, I work at an Apple retail store/service center, and I'm stoked about this. Very nice bump all around. I only wish they'd give it a better enclosure as these are an absolute pain in the ass to get into. Apple sends you what amounts to a mini clean room to carefully handle that goddamned glossy panel.
      • Auzy, on 04/28/2008, -4/+1But is that because you make more commission? Theres nothing special about them really.. You can get much cheaper PC's with those features.. And its not front page material
        • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3and viruses and spyware too! How much does your store charge the consumer for anti virus and anti spyware? Times that by how many years your customer wants to keep their Windows machine. That "cheaper" PC is now about the same, if not more then a Mac. Not even counting iLife-like software for the windows machine either.
        • revjustin2, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1I believe that front page material is anything that gets voted to the front page and/or gets submitted by MrBabyMan.
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -0/+31. I work in service.
          2. Because of numerous factors, there is no commission on Apple goods because margin is so low.
          3. You could if you wanted to build it yourself, but the vast majority of the population has no desire to try it.
          4. Shove it.
    • TJATL, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4minor speed bump? Did you not notice the 6MB cache? I take it you didn't. That in conjunction with the speed bumps and the ram speed increase make's an almost 20%-30% increase in performance from 2.4-2.8GHz. What the hell is a "premium" reseller? lol...
  • Steinr, on 04/28/2008, -23/+10blogspam, at least link to the apple website.
    • chad78, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5You can't link to the Apple Website. Where would you link to? The iMac page? They use the same URL for info about the iMac as they have for years. I'm sure that URL has been dugg already - a lot - and you can't link to the Apple Store since it puts session ids in the URL. And even if you could - again, they recycle URLs. You have to link to a blog or a news website or something. Heck, even the news section of the Apple website doesn't have archive pages of individual stories. I think it's just an RSS feed.
  • kidal25, on 04/28/2008, -26/+35i just want the macbook's to be updated soon.
    please apple hear me out.
    • ross., on 04/28/2008, -2/+22Didn't we just get that? 2 months ago? They can't update them _every_ month.
      • jsebrech, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1"Didn't we just get that? 2 months ago? They can't update them _every_ month."

        If we got it, it's a joke. The macbooks haven't gotten a meaningful upgrade since last summer, when I bought mine. Same with the mini, which doesn't even come with a dvd burner unless you pay 700 euro (belgium). For 700 euro for the box alone I can buy a really nice desktop machine on the windows side of things that even when you take the software into account makes the mini look pathetic.

        I'm all mac at home, but I would not buy a mac at the current prices.
    • FDDIcent, on 04/28/2008, -3/+3agreed, multi touch needs to be on all the laptops.
      • ross., on 04/28/2008, -1/+2except the macbooks have been updated since multitouch was released. apple says no.
    • ScornForSega, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3I dunno. I think the "to" belonging to the macbook isn't in need of an update currently.
    • ritter99, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3I'm getting one tomorrow. So hopefully they don't update another year or two ;-) *g*
      • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -1/+0You do not update Apple, Apple updates you.
    • gr3yn3t, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Need....aluminum....macbook !
      • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1Need....spell....check         !
  • nickcozy, on 04/28/2008, -58/+16Apple sucks.
    • ErikHarrison, on 04/28/2008, -34/+7Apple is still not as good as a PC. Put them side by side and compare across all boards, and PC will win 75% AT LEAST. Apple always mismatches and never provides a wholly superior product. It will come with time, but that time is not now, and I just wish that Mac users would understand that instead of being so whiny and defensive about it. To get the same use as a PC you have to install third party software to run most of the windows softwares. Let's face it, it's just not as good...
  • Interestingness, on 04/28/2008, -27/+3oh yeah, "can you dig it!" - sirus
    http://ThunkDifferent.com
  • Sniper4790, on 04/28/2008, -32/+7I have no useful comment to say.
  • neolyn, on 04/28/2008, -22/+6Before someone else does it: OGC
  • over900000, on 04/28/2008, -30/+18Hehe, if you want to update your machine, you have to wait for Apple to do it.
    • SinkToTheBeat, on 04/28/2008, -7/+23I am witty because I can repeat what 5 other people already said.
    • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -2/+5As much as I would like to digg over90000 down, I can't help but agree (conditionally). While I have no desire to constantly swap out graphic or sound cards because the standard equipment that comes with most iMacs and MacBook Pros are just fine for what I need, the fact that I can't put in larger internal drives (except for the MacBooks) without major surgery and voiding my warranty is ridiculous
      • ross., on 04/28/2008, -4/+6You can swap out the iMac's hard drive and RAM quite easily.

        I don't think this voids your warranty, as Apple publish pdf's on how to do these tasks.
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -2/+6RAM, yes, but you have obviously never tried pulling a hard drive out of an iMac since the first G5 line, and ESPECIALLY not out of the glossy ones. Apple does NOT tell you how to get into that. I work as a Mac tech, and you need a mini clean room just to open the ***** things. Can't let any crud get on the interior of that glossy panel, you know, so when you pull it off with suction cups (it's held on by magnetic pins) and the lint-free gloves, you have to quickly get it into the special storage bag, then use the lint-catching cloths and tacky lint roller on it if any speck of debris gets on the inside of it. After that, it's a bunch of torx screws to pull the front of the case off. No, Apple does NOT let the customer do that. Read up before you post.
          • ross., on 04/28/2008, -5/+2The last Mac I bought was a G5 iMac, so ***** YOU.
          • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2No, ***** you for assuming that a 3-4 year old model would be the same thing as a brand new one with a very different case design.
          • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Pah, shut up petty *****.
          • ross., on 05/15/2008, -0/+1well generally things get better with time, not worse you daft prick.
  • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -8/+33digg me down for being off topic, but i have a question. Everyone is always complaining that there is no mid range tower mac, and a big part of that complaint is that people want to use their own monitors (graphic designers cant use those glossy imac screens, after all). So why isnt the imac a viable option with a dual monitor set up? I know its not a perfect solution (not as upgradable as we'd like) but still, why have i never seen anyone do this?
    • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -4/+6Actually that's exactly what many people do. As soon as I change out my too small desk, it's what I will do.
    • timusca, on 04/28/2008, -5/+11My parents own a print shop and all of their graphics computers are iMacs... there's no problem with it at all. The problem is that you can't upgrade anything but the RAM.
    • tiuk, on 04/28/2008, -5/+5People do it, but you've got to keep in mind the cost factor. When they say they want a "mid range tower Mac" they mean they want to pay less than what the iMac costs, or at least as much but have better hardware/the ability to upgrade.
      • nextyoyoma, on 04/28/2008, -7/+3so they want to pay less than 1k for a decent computer? I doubt anyone doing graphic design wants to pay less than that. Anyone who wants something truly "mid-range" should look at a mac mini.
        • gravityboard, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1A decent computer, but hardly what someone who's looking for a "mid range tower" would want. Presumably the feature they are most interested in is upgrade and expansion possibilities that are only available with the Mac Pro, a beautiful but very expensive machine.
        • DarkDx, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3You can build a super pc for 800$ duh. (the thing is, that imac uses laptop parts thus it's more expensive).
      • sarchosis, on 04/28/2008, -1/+6When people say they want a midtower mac they mean they want a Mac Pro that isn't so damn expensive. For having an integrated monitor the iMac's have pretty decent prices, considering how ridiculous the Apple Displays are.
        • KMartSheriff, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1No one said you _have_ to buy a Apple Display. Even Apple lovers know better than to buy an Apple Display.
    • aliguana, on 04/28/2008, -2/+13part of it is symmetry: I have a two monitor setup, and they are two IDENTICAL monitors, side by side (effectively making one big screen). If I had an iMac and another monitor side by side... well, for one they wouldn't line up, and would look generally weird. If you could buy a monitor that was identical to an iMac in every way (without being a computer) to balance it out, then fine.

      But then, I'd want two £100 monitors, not two £1000 monitors.
      • jazzcat251, on 04/28/2008, -4/+3You can. There are Dell and Samsung monitors on the market that use the same panel as the iMac.
        • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1No, he wants another LCD with a chin. Dell and Samsung LCDs are chinless.
      • Vanstuke, on 04/28/2008, -8/+1That is absurdly nit picky, I'd be fine if a second monitor wasn't exactly identical to my first. but i guess most mac users are more desktop design oriented so everything has to be perfect.
        • str1fe, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Sweeping generalizations FTL
        • aliguana, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1actually, you're right. But I'm not a Mac user, I'm a PC user. I used to have one 19' LCD and one 17" CRT running side by side, and while it worked, it was hideous and generally gave me eye-strain. So I got two identical monitors, and it's a totally different experience.
          While I love Macs, I would need the "two identical monitor" (or three) setup or I wouldn't feel comfortable using it for any length of time. And god forbid I would have to go back to one monitor, unless it was huge
    • jazzcat251, on 04/28/2008, -5/+34I'm a graphic designer, and I use a 24" iMac with a Dell 24" screen attached.
      In a dark room (which I prefer) the glossy screen isn't so much of a problem - in fact, its quite alot nicer to look at than the Dell and has better color accuracy and consistency across the viewing angle.

      However, having bought an absolutely maxed-out 24" 2.8 with 4G ram when they first came out, I do feel a little bit stupid for not getting something upgradeable. I figure the resale value when it's 2 years old will (almost) make up for the cost of upgrading to a newer mac, vs. the cost of upgrading the components of a PC, so I'm willing to pay the premium to use OSX and have something pretty to look at.
      Best thing about it, though, is that in 6 months of use using CS3 on large images all day every day, it has only crashed once.
      • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -4/+12actually very helpful- thank you.
        • jazzcat251, on 04/28/2008, -1/+9No worries. I consider myself to be a Mac user who uses a Mac out of personal preference and utility rather than die-hard brand loyalty.

          Plenty of mates of mine use PCs quite successfully and productively, and I have in the past - but Macs just seem to suit me better for my line of work.
        • iiBeLiEvE, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Ah. A sensible Mac user. Dugg.
      • smrekar, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6My mac pro runs Tiger and it hasn't crashed in the CS suite. My MBP at home came with leopard. It has crashed a few times. I eventually pinned it down the the "stacks" in the dock. Ever since i removed the "stacks" it hasn't.
        FYI - CS3 does have a pretty big bug. If you Rasterize an AI file into JPG using PS it creates a file only viewable on macs w/ CS3 or lightroom installed. It will crash outlook and mail. Apple is blaming CS3 for this issue.
        Being a poster printer and knowing you want to send proofs to peoples emails, i thought this could be an issue for you.
        work-around - "Save for Web" can be time consuming, but it works. Strips some meta-data and it works.
        • jazzcat251, on 04/29/2008, -0/+0Thanks for the heads up. Of course, the CS3-Leopard crop tool value bug annoys the heck out of me, as did the PDF printer bug in Acrobat 8.1.1. Apple's co-operation with Adobe has been less then stellar of late, but I hope for it to be sorted out soon.
      • ilikechaitea, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2dude, you say you work in lower lighting conditions....do you have a special monitor cover or something? I ask because I like working in lower lighting too (not pitch black, just lower lighting)...but people say its bad for your eyes (fair enough cos your pupils open up)....so whats the secret?
        cheers
        • jazzcat251, on 04/29/2008, -0/+0No monitor cover, I just have a 20w lamp behind the monitor that points up into the ceiling for some subtle ambience. I can see everything on my desk and in the (home) office just fine, and it provides just enough light around the monitors to avoid eyestrain while producing no glare.

          I'm really not sure if it's bad for my eyes or not, but I definitely find that my eyes are less tired after using this setup than after using my (fully halogen-lit) work office setup.
      • jabberwolf, on 04/29/2008, -5/+1Funny you should mention that as being a "graphic designer" you got stuck at 4GB.
        You might be stuck at 4GB anyway as Adobe's new Photoshop only makes their 64 bit program for the PC side and not for the mac side. Oops, but I'm sure it looks good.
        Maybe you should have gotten all Dell.
        • jazzcat251, on 04/29/2008, -0/+0Are you sure? Adobe docs seem to suggest that it can use up to 3GB of memory on Leopard. Correct me if I'm wrong.

          In either case, I'd still rather the stability over sheer spec's performance, but that said, I'm sure there are PC/Vista users out there who use CS3 to its full potential without stability problems. As far as my experience goes, my office had 2 Vista PCs (Dells with 2GB ram and 512MB gfx cards) and they ran horribly, and were replaced with good ol' G5's much to the pleasure of their operators.
    • CIAVT, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4I've found my mac to be very stable, it rarely crashes as a whole. But I do find Safari, Mail, and a few other random apps crashing more often then I like. This never brings down the whole machine, I can just relaunch the app, but still annoying.
    • bobartig, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1What if you want to put in a better GPU? Or, if you want to have 2-4 internal hard drives? These are easy upgrades with any low-midrange tower computer, but impossible with the iMac. Plus, think if you could get the hardware of the iMac but without the cost of the screen. You could get a sub $1k Mac tower that will upgrade nicely down the road and keep you productive.
  • Teej, on 04/28/2008, -18/+27...but it's got a glossy screen. Ugh.
    • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -11/+6yup- unusable to any serious graphic designer.
      • wyrdness, on 04/28/2008, -3/+10Unusable to anyone who sits near a window. Apple should give us the choice.
      • timusca, on 04/28/2008, -6/+14WTF ever... tons of "serious" graphic designers use them.
        • Teej, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2I also know several who won't go near them for professional work. The point is Apple should provide a choice like they do with the MacBook Pro.
      • ucg1, on 04/28/2008, -10/+7Unusable by anyone who doesn't want to see a reflection of themselves in the monitor whenever there is a large amount of black on the screen. Glossy screens suck. The MacBook is crap because of it. I'd never get an iMac in any case, desktop computers that combine both the monitor and keyboard should have died in the 80's.

        I was pretty much forced to get the Mac Pro because that's the only one of Apple's desktop machines that don't totally suck.
        • elbonito665, on 04/28/2008, -1/+4...desktop computers that combine both the monitor and keyboard should have died in the 80's.

          have you seen an iMac? Its keyboard is not combined with the machine.
          • ucg1, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1"have you seen an iMac? Its keyboard is not combined with the machine."

            Typo, monitor and computer.
      • coolbru, on 04/28/2008, -4/+6I really have zero problems with my MacBook's glossy screen.
        • KMartSheriff, on 04/28/2008, -2/+2Seriously. I've sat in so many coffee shops that have sun glaring in everywhere and had zero problems. I think you guys are just being too sensitive.
          • Teej, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Different strokes for different folks dude, I can't stand the clear reflections glossy screens provide.
          • hearty, on 04/29/2008, -2/+1It's true, the other day I crashed into a tree that wasn't there all because of my glossy windshield :(
      • blackjack75, on 04/28/2008, -1/+4I for one live in my father's cellar in Austria and I don't see what's this reflection problem you guys have? What is this "sun" thing you're all whining about?
    • Flashman, on 04/28/2008, -5/+5I know! I can't work with a glossy screen thanks to an inconvenient window. Apple's making it really easy to not upgrade, especially when their machines work so well for so many years.
      • Vanstuke, on 04/28/2008, -4/+2i've had my G5 for about 3 years now and it's still working great.
    • Cybrwolf, on 04/28/2008, -7/+12The glossy screens are great, you just need to be able to control your lighting.
      • Teej, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3You can't move windows. I shouldn't have to reconfigure a room to use a computer. They offer the MacBook Pro in both versions, they should do the same with the iMac.
    • DCstewieG, on 04/28/2008, -4/+10I thought the glossy screen was stupid too. But when I bought my MacBook Pro I took a hard look at both at the store and read a bunch of reviews. I surprised myself and went with the glossy and 3 months later I still love it.
      • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -0/+7I actually agree with you. I LOVE the way glossy screens look, but working in advertising they are impractical. Because they way something looks on a glossy screen is NOT how its going to look in print. It may be finite details, but get the shade of a company's logo wrong on a giant billboard and you wont live to hear about it.
      • Teej, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2I went to an Apple store and used both flavours of MacBook Pro side by side for 15 minutes, and eventually found the glossy to be too hard on the eyes. I'm a student and have to take it to lectures in different rooms and situations where I can't control the lighting.
    • diggimator, on 04/28/2008, -0/+5Glossy is like the optical mouse: it doesn't work in some situations. Your optical mouse will cease to function on a bare glass table. If your back is facing a large window on a sunny day you won't see a thing on your screen except the reflection. If you want a better monitor go with the Mac Pro or the Mac mini and drop a ***** of cash on an expensive monitor. Most expensive monitors are really awesome and worth every penny.
      • championchap, on 04/28/2008, -2/+1Isn't that against health and safety regarding the use of computers?
        I hope this is a home problem and not at work.
    • m00nmaster, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Give me the option of a non-glossy on a 24" and I'll buy one TODAY.
    • digitalpencil, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Agreed.. some like them, but they throw off my spyder and the reflections are a bitch. Strange that apple aren't offering a matte option given iMacs are becoming more common in arthouses.
  • Pherdnut, on 04/28/2008, -4/+59Was I the only one who liked the lamp designs? Those things seemed really solid compared to the other iMac(I used to send them back on lease returns at an office of ~700) and I liked the swiveling screen.
    • Musicmonkey34, on 04/28/2008, -2/+4you can actually get a TOUCHSCREEN imac g4 (lamp-edition) on ebay now for like 250 bucks. i always thought those things would be sweet for a kitchen.
      • chad78, on 04/28/2008, -4/+1there's no such thing as a touchscreen imac. And, just to be sure - I searched ebay for "touchscreen imac" - and sure enough no results. Stop lying on the internet.
      • antipoet, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Well, I'll be. Musicmonkey is right. Indeed, that would be cool in a kitchen.
    • levitron, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2Pherdnut, I heartily agree. My current mac is a used lamp design, and I have completely fallen in love with it. At work I have the new g5, and it's nice, but the lamp has more personality, IMHO.
    • diulei, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1From a user of the current generation of iMacs, my favorite was the iLamp. The "floating" LCD was great.
    • Macskeeball, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Heck yeah, I've got a poster of that iMac.
    • inkswamp, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1I own one, still use it everyday even though it's only 700Mhz G4. When the book is written about Apple's industrial designs, the "iLamp" is going to be centerstage. It wasn't a huge seller because I think a lot of people looked at it and thought it was too weird looking. My wife was opposed to getting it at first even, but after a few hours of using it and seeing how adjustable the display was, she was in love.

      I would have already replaced the thing by now with one of the newer iMacs except I can't because that wretched glossy display stops me. I wish Apple would either offer a matte screen option or just put out a freakin' mid-range box. Until they do, I have no intention to buy a new Mac.
    • Iggins, on 05/18/2008, -0/+1I have one on my bar at home. It's snazzy.
  • lorductape, on 04/28/2008, -13/+6I almost bought one yesterday... almost..
    • blackjack75, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2Are you going to almost complain about how you almost got screwed?
    • ORBAT, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3I almost dugg you up... almost..
  • MihaiM, on 04/28/2008, -7/+77Apple forgot about the Mac Mini?
    • timusca, on 04/28/2008, -3/+18Yes, because we should assume this is the last thing Apple will ever upgrade. Ever.
    • aliguana, on 04/28/2008, -5/+13... and they're always telling us NOT to make hackintosh's, cos minis are far better. NOT.
    • samuelcotterall, on 04/28/2008, -8/+1There isn't much you could do, or would want to do, with the Mini.
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -0/+7It'll be along within a month, I'll bet.
    • archer75, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3Hopefully it will get the Intel G45 when it comes out in June. Full HD video acceleration. Might just make a nice HTPC at that point.
      • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/28/2008, -0/+7The Mini can already handle 1080p video just fine.
      • blackjack75, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Indeed. The mini is very nice as a silent media center. Typing this on my tv :-)
        • dbsmoker, on 04/28/2008, -0/+2Yeah, I use mine on my 42" HDTV and it works GREAT! I know 1360x768 isn't the best resolution, but it works just fine for me. I could easily be using it on my 19" Samsung fancy-shmancy LCD monitor (it was top of the line when I bought it) and admittedly the monitor has better resolution, but working with Aperture on my TV is AWESOME! And watching hi-def TV shows and movies on it just rocks.
    • jeriqo, on 04/28/2008, -1/+1Huh, it was also upgraded... at least on the french store.
  • rowlodge, on 04/28/2008, -5/+88wish they'd upgrade the poor little mac mini.
    • dbsmoker, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3They need to make a Mac Mini with built-in HDMI and S/PDIF and just make IT the new AppleTV. I mean, you can surf the web with an iPod but not an AppleTV (I know it's *possible* but not out-of-the-box). Blu-Ray would be nice too. Apple should REALLY be working hard on their TV-set top box strategy. Either Sony, Microsoft, or Apple is going to own the living room, but Apple is already losing ground to video game consoles. C'mon Apple, I'm rooting for ya!
      • Kale, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Don't know if you're aware of this: You can buy A DVI-2-HDMI cable for ~$10. The signal is the same, but DVI doesn't have audio. And the audio out port is fiber-optic S/PDIF (and 2 channel analog mini-jack) in the Intel Mac Minis.

        I definitely agree about the Blu-Ray. Apple needs to get the DVD player updated with some HD decoding, at least, so DIYs can add it themselves.
  • clesch, on 04/28/2008, -3/+25Turns out they are actually come with the new "Montevina" Platform and the Cantiga chipset:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrino#Montevina_pl ...

    almost 2 months before the platform is officially released.
    • BlackKnight6, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Montevina is a laptop chipset. I assume Apple wanted it for the iMac because of smaller design, less heat and power.
  • Pumaman, on 04/28/2008, -56/+92I'm going to see just how far down I can get dugg, because with what I am about to say, it will happen.

    At one point, I was going to buy a mac, then I realized exactly what is going on here. Apple is charging a premium for the same "made in Taiwan" parts that everyone else is using. So what the hell makes them charge so freaking much for hardware, and people love them for it?

    I just bought an Acer Aspire desktop bundle. For $1000 (Canadian) I got a Quad Q6600, 4 Gigs of ram, 750GB hard drive, a Radeon 2600HD, and a 22" Widescreen monitor. For an additional $200 I threw in an 8800GT. So for $1200 I got twice, if not more, computer than the $2100 iMac. Sure, the screen is 2 inches smaller, but I can also upgrade it at any time I want without throwing out the whole computer.

    I simply do not understand why mac's cost so much. I suppose it is true, a fool and his money are soon parted.
    • stewdog1, on 04/28/2008, -21/+34Mac OS and the iLife suite and build quality for starters.
      • Pumaman, on 04/28/2008, -8/+13I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at here. My machine came with Windows Vista (included in the price) so I am not sure what the OS has to do with the price we are evaluating here.

        Build quality? As I mentioned in my original post, these are all using the same parts. Apple doesn't manufacture any of it. It's the same parts you can buy yourself, and I bet it's not all that different from what is in my Acer.
        • coolbru, on 04/28/2008, -7/+11They do however put it in a rather neater box than you could. The 24" iMac is about half the thickness of my 24" LCD monitor, and that doesn't have a computer in it!
        • stewdog1, on 04/28/2008, -4/+10Pumaman,
          Some people view the OS as being superior. Same with the iLife suite that is included.

          As for build quality, that includes everything to the footprint and how it is built, and fit and finish.
        • aussieNickuss, on 04/28/2008, -7/+13If you buy parts off the shelf....could you bunch them all together into a slim, cool package like Apple have?
        • fangorious, on 04/28/2008, -4/+5Just because parts came from the same factory, doesn't mean the delivered batch is the same quality. Apple may very well specify higher QA thresholds for their orders, which would drive up the cost to them, and hence the cost to you. Given Apple's consistently higher consumer ratings and higher resale value, one has assume they're doing something differently, even if they're buying parts from the same factories.
        • ParticleMan420, on 04/29/2008, -1/+1"If you buy parts off the shelf....could you bunch them all together into a slim, cool package like Apple have?"
          i guess that "cool package" is worth over $1100 to you?
          i think that little cubby thats built into my desk is a cool enough package to hide my computer
          and it didnt cost me an extra $1200 bucks
      • coolbru, on 04/28/2008, -5/+7These days they'll probably give you money off to have Vista.
      • dajernts, on 04/28/2008, -1/+5Then why aren't they priced for starters? I know tons of people who know absolutely nothing about computer and just want to browse the internet all day and the Mac would prob be perfect for them. But being as they don't need their computer for much they don't want to pay much for it either.
      • digjam, on 04/28/2008, -1/+3build quality??? I agree OS X looks way better than Vista or XP.. but then would you pay for the glossy look or just get somtehing that works and is used by 99% of the indsutry..?? I would go with later since..the amont of software available for windows .. is not nearly same as the ones available for Mac... though I m not a windows fan, I would like to stick with one which has more options..!
      • ScornForSega, on 04/28/2008, -8/+6Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        Hardware != Operating System
        • dema, on 04/28/2008, -2/+15So what you are saying is that the Hardware and Operating System are the same thing?
    • Commodus, on 04/28/2008, -18/+67Your system also came in a standard mid-tower, has no wireless features, and probably came preloaded with at most a basic version of Office or Works.

      To get to such a thin (and quiet, for that matter) design, Apple has to use a mobile Core 2 Duo CPU, notebook memory, and a notebook optical drive. It comes with 802.11n Wi-Fi and Bluetooth out of the box. And iLife... well, Apple might overvalue it a bit, but iMovie/iDVD/iPhoto/iWeb stomp the living daylights out of what you get with Vista.
      • Kazbaeden, on 04/28/2008, -20/+20Not really sure why wireless internet is an important feature in a desktop computer...
        • FDDIcent, on 04/28/2008, -9/+20no wires. nice clean setup.
        • ucg1, on 04/28/2008, -2/+16Maybe he was including Bluetooth when he said "wireless." Also, a wired connection isn't always available, even for desktop machines. I have two desktop computers in my house that aren't on wired connections. I don't own the house, so don't want to run ethernet everywhere (which I'd totally do if I owned the house), so am stuck using wireless.
        • aussieNickuss, on 04/28/2008, -3/+9Flexibility.
        • Cryptopsy, on 04/28/2008, -4/+22You are not sure why wireless internet is an important feature in a desktop? My god man. Have you ever tried to run cat 5 in a house before? Sometimes it is not easy task. Having a wireless PC means you can put your router near your modem and have the flexibility to put your computer anywhere you want and not have to worry about fishing wire to it.
        • repick3, on 04/28/2008, -3/+7Wireless cards are cheap and easy to install >_>
          $20 on newegg.
        • Killwize, on 04/28/2008, -1/+2Durka Durka? You know, if it didn't come with it you would probably bitch too.
      • dajernts, on 04/28/2008, -14/+2"iMovie/iDVD/iPhoto/iWeb" could software sound any more infantile? Besides the incredible amount of time the marketing team took to create those names I don't exactly see how this values the iMac over Pumaman's computer. The basic utilities that come with Vista work just fine. MS couldn't get away with bundling anything more comprehensive into the OS even if they wanted to.
        • kazem, on 04/28/2008, -0/+6It's not about working "just fine". It's about being better. It's about something that works. No, it's actually about many things that work...and not only that, they work well together. The software that comes with Vista is buggy, slow, and not pleasant to work with. For years, windows has provided a very inconsistent interface.
        • Killwize, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Old naming scheme. That is all.
      • MaxMWood, on 04/28/2008, -5/+4Since when has an Operating System been able to compete with an entire Computer? Never, and it never will. Compare operating systems and then maybe you will have a fair point.
      • etcimon, on 04/28/2008, -8/+7Laptop CPU? Laptop Memory? It's a freaking desktop! Who would be nuts enough to buy an overpriced laptop computer that's not even portable? Oh.. I see...
        • DarkPrince11, on 04/28/2008, -4/+7A laptop CPU isn't inferior to a desktop CPU. Maybe there are slight differences in speed and in applications where CPU work is intensive, but not so much that you will see a difference. The iMac lineup is actually quite solid and the base model actually runs pretty smooth and quick. I can have Photoshop, Flash, Dreamweaver, and Bridge open at the same time with barely any delay in switching between the applications.
          • ScornForSega, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1The laptop CPU may not be inferior in speed or specifications, this is true. But the laptop CPU pales in comparison to the desktop CPU when you start getting into price/performance ratio.
        • ParticleMan420, on 04/29/2008, -0/+2the same people that are willing to pay $1200 more for a "cool case"
      • smrekar, on 04/28/2008, -1/+7Transfer files over the network with your vista computer and then try it with a mac and you will see a difference.
        /me hits vista below the belt
        • drouk1556, on 04/28/2008, -2/+5In Vista's defense, SP1 does address this issue.
    • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -5/+19I wouldn't argue that some Macs cost more than their PC brethren, but Apple is also a relatively small fish in a much bigger pond. Also, Acer isn't supporting an OS, Pro and consumer level software, a line of Digital Audio/ Video players, and a cellphone
    • aliguana, on 04/28/2008, -17/+3Macs cost so much because they're the only hardware you can run OSX on. Period. Apple aren't selling you top-range hardware (obviously), they're selling you one big TPM chip so you can run their OS. Which is what everyone wants, really, despite everyone saying otherwise.

      OK Jobsfans, if Apple started selling iMacs tommorow with Windows preinstalled instead of OSX, would you buy them? thought not....)
      • MacParrot, on 04/28/2008, -1/+16"OK Jobsfans, if Apple started selling iMacs tommorow with Windows preinstalled instead of OSX, would you buy them? thought not....)"
        Did you really think that through before you wrote it? If we pr