27-Inch iMacs Set to be Shipped to Early Buyers

[zakislam]

Those looking to pre-order face wait until January.

27-Inch iMacs Set to be Shipped to Early Buyers : Read more

 

[vaughn2k]

I'm pretty sure the price does not justify its performance.

 

[halcyon]

^It does remain the most stylish all-in-one available. That affects its price.

 

[WithoutWeakness]

[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]^It does remain the most stylish all-in-one available. That affects its price.[/citation]
"Style" is very subjective. Lucky for Apple, there are people willing to wait a few weeks after dropping ~$2 grand for a "stylish" computer monitor with under-powered hardware inside.

 

[tuffjuff]

[citation][nom]vaughn2k[/nom]I'm pretty sure the price does not justify its performance.[/citation]

I'm pretty sure you're not paying for performance when you buy any Mac computer.

 

[zubikov]

Withoutweakness, is everything you pay for in life directly correlated to it's performance and specs? We're not all robots. Also, every single all-in-one PC on the market right now is a joke, just take a look.

Look at HP: blatantly copies the iMac yet still manages to make it look like shit. It's the same price as the iMac when spec'd out, starting at $1899! iMacs also offer pretty sick processors/SSD options at a higher price and btw, you're looking at a 27" IPS 2560*1440 monitor that's almost an industry standard in graphic design at this point. Also, you're not going to go build your own all-in-one alternative, so you can't really use desktop boxes as a proxy for price/performance.

Care to explain where you see under-powered hardware given the price?

 

[TheBigTroll]

apple fanboys are going to roar over this

 

[Guest]

"Apple had changed the shipping time for the larger iMac from three to four weeks to January, 2013"

I'm pretty sure 3 weeks from now IS January...

 

[ivanto]

[citation][nom]vaughn2k[/nom]I'm pretty sure the price does not justify its performance.[/citation]
Is performance the only value everyone needs in a computer?

 

[apone]

@ Zubikov

You don't have to be a hardware spec robot or have a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering to conclude that Apple's underpowered hardware doesn't justify its ridiculous price premium. Regarding HP's AIO computers, the current HP ENVY 23-c010xt AIO has a Core i5 3330S quad-core CPU, 8GB RAM, 1 TB HDD, and a 23" Full HD screen starting at $849.99. Also the 27" HP Omni 27-1210xt AIO starts at $1099.99 with similar hardware and both can be upgraded to have dedicated graphics.

You're saying HP is copying Apple's iMac? You sure you want to make Apple sound like the victim here? Because Apple has been guilty of copying, infringing, and claiming originality for many of its "patents" and products for the longest time.

Also IPS monitors are nothing new (been around since 1996 courtesy of NEC), the only reason it's showing up more on consumer-grade products now is because it's been super expensive in the past which is why it's been only been utilized in expensive Enterprise-level applications such as graphic design, CAD workstations, etc.

I think what Withoutweakness was saying in terms of underpowered hardware relative to price is the fact that most consumers just need a computer to do simple tasks such as word processing, email, Facebook, FireFox, Excel, Twitter, etc. which means $1899+ for a Core i5 and 27" LCD is overkill when you can get a similar-hardware-spec'd machine with a bigger screen (ahem, 27" HP Omni 27-1210xt AIO for $1099.99) for much less.

 

[WithoutWeakness]

[citation][nom]zubikov[/nom]Withoutweakness, is everything you pay for in life directly correlated to it's performance and specs? We're not all robots. Also, every single all-in-one PC on the market right now is a joke, just take a look. Look at HP: blatantly copies the iMac yet still manages to make it look like shit. It's the same price as the iMac when spec'd out, starting at $1899! iMacs also offer pretty sick processors/SSD options at a higher price and btw, you're looking at a 27" IPS 2560*1440 monitor that's almost an industry standard in graphic design at this point. Also, you're not going to go build your own all-in-one alternative, so you can't really use desktop boxes as a proxy for price/performance.Care to explain where you see under-powered hardware given the price?[/citation]
GeForce 660M graphics with 512MB memory running a 2560x1440 screen is underpowered to me. The idea of sacrificing performance for form factor at this point is absurd. Power consumption and size for components is dropping lower and lower in both the portable and desktop markets. The technology to fit powerful hardware in a smaller package exists. Look at the rise of mITX and other small form factor PC's in the last year. Yet Apple insists on running laptop-grade GPU's in their consumer desktops.

 

[halcyon]

Apple is not about value...it never has been. This is not new. The folks looking at Macs aren't looking for the best value. They're paying for designs that many think are trend setting (except in the case if the Mac Pro). I don't like the iMac...never have. If you want the best value build your own or get a Dell/HP. ...That's not Apple's market.

 

[Guest]

I got my first Mac a few years ago. It is a MacBook Pro "Early 2008" with 4GB of RAM and a 250GB HDD. It shipped with Leopard and was just upgraded to Mountain Lion. It also boots to Win7 and Ubuntu. I can't think of a better platform for an IT pro who has to support as many platforms as possible. I had several design firms hold back on purchases of iMacs in order to wait for this model to be released. They'll be using Win7 and OSX. Apple definitely offers value once you allow BootCamp into the equation.

 

[halcyon]

^+1