[Dan Frakes]

Quote:

---

"This is one of my keyboard pet peeves, and probably my biggest criticism of the new Apple keyboards."
I don't get it. All the F keys run together on most keyboards. It makes no sense to criticize the new Apple keyboard for a design feature that it shares with virtually every other keyboard in the universe.

---

I'd wager that far more keyboards use the "groups of four" layout than a continuous line of F-keys.
As for my criticism, note that I said it's one of my keyboard pet peeves (a general statement) and probably my biggest criticism of Apple's new keyboards (a specific statement). In other words, I criticize every keyboard that uses the continuous-row design.

[hautster]

Quote:

---

All is well, but can anyoone tell me, why in Europe the 1199 Us$ iMac costs 1199 Euros (excluding tax) when at the current rate it should cost 948 Euros??.

---

A couple of things. The import tarifs of the EU is high (Switz. as well) and depending on where you live, companies can get away with charging more for merchandise. For instance, if the average income of country A is 1.0 and the average income of country B is 1.4, a corporation will set the price of their merchandise accordingly.

[xen]

You may be right, it could be the import tariffs, but I have checked various Apple Sites around Europe and they all give the same price. To me, it looks like it's an Apple policy; for some reason Apple believes that Europeans are stupid so they deserve to pay the extra price

[ColinB]

When can we expect benchmarks for the 2.8GHz model?

[Pelao]

Quote:

---

1 GB of RAM on a 2007 "prosumer" machine -- and the only one engineered to easily run dual operating systems -- is a joke. What "pro" is going to force all this beautiful tech to run with all those calls to virtual RAM??

---

I disagree. The imacs are far from 'sluggish' with 1GB RAM. Further, it makes sense to allow users to upgrade via after market pricing, which is way more attractive. If Apple used 2 slots to give 2 GB RAM people would wine about having to throw a stick away (or try to sell it, which is a pain) to put more in. Of course, Apple could put a 2GB stick in, but then the pricing would suffer.
An empty issue. It's a great machine at a great price.

[bigpics]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

1 GB of RAM on a 2007 "prosumer" machine -- and the only one engineered to easily run dual operating systems -- is a joke. What "pro" is going to force all this beautiful tech to run with all those calls to virtual RAM??

---

I disagree. The imacs are far from 'sluggish' with 1GB RAM. Further, it makes sense to allow users to upgrade via after market pricing, which is way more attractive. If Apple used 2 slots to give 2 GB RAM people would wine about having to throw a stick away (or try to sell it, which is a pain) to put more in. Of course, Apple could put a 2GB stick in, but then the pricing would suffer.
An empty issue. It's a great machine at a great price.

---

One users' snappy is another's sluggish. I've upgraded the RAM on my last three computers (Win and Mac) after feeling frustrated by all the beach balls and hour glasses, and in every case the upgrade has been more than cost-effective in improving performance, ESPECIALLY on my Mac -- with the benefit proportional to the number and kind of programs being run. More RAM has long been known as the cheapest, simplest and best investment of upgrade $ on any computer.
Even iLife apps can chew up a lot of RAM, let alone higher-level video editing or large Photoshop files. And several reviewers consider 2 GB a minimum amount for running Parallels with multiple OS's loaded. Apple itself touts Parallels and VMWare, while OS X itself LOVES more RAM. Steve Jobs himself at the Q&A after the iMac intro said Apple will only sell machines it can be "proud of."
At most, 1 GB is probably nicely adequate for 40-60% of users, and 20% of of "patient power users." If price is the consideration, I'd suggest 1 GB as the standard on the base level machine, with 2 GB standard on at least the 24" and optimallly on the higher end 20" model.
If I as a retail customer can buy a 1.0GB PC-5300 DDR2 667MHz SO-DIMM Memory Module from OWC for $49, what can Apple buy it for in quantites of hundreds of thousands? $35? $30? For a machine that will be everything 80-90% of users will need right out of the box, instead of half that number?
Remember, most computer buyers never upgrade anything, and many or most Mac buyers are primarily looking for a truly premium machine (the rest are seeking ease of use, easy security, status, cool design, easy integration into the Apple iCology, are replacing Macs out of habit -- or all of the above), not a commodity box, and this regard Apple's selling the latter rather than the former. And deserve to be called out on this, for this standard config is nothing to be especially "proud of."
"Empty issue?" I think not.

[speedkat]

I have the 20" imac and I am returning it. The display is defective. Color is great at the top of the screen and fades as you look towards the bottom of the screen. It does not matter what angle you look at it from or the display setting or the gamma. I talked to an apple care rep today about it and ran hardware tests on it. The tests do not detect a problem but the eye definately does especially if you put a solid color on the screen. I am upgrading to a 24" as I have read on the forums that it is not a problem with them. As for apple they will not acknowlege that there is a problem with them at this point. Yet they insisted that I return it. I suspect that they will be as secretive as ever and fix the problem with the future generations of the imac.

[isean]

What's taking so long to test the 2.8GHz model? I got mine like 5 days after they were announced. Anyway, the system is awesome! I've been putting off buying a new Mac for a long time now, my previous new purchase being an Alum 1GHz PowerBook G4, which by the way has served me faithfully for the last 4 years. i am SOOOO glad I waited, too. This 24" iMac is awesome. For all those complaining about the new iMacs, you must see these in person, they are truly amazing machines, I am in awe... They are very fast, very quiet, and the glossy screen is BEAUTIFUL!!! I would like to see the benchmarks, though.... surely Macworld should have their system by now???

[cpoff]

Quote:

---

What's taking so long to test the 2.8GHz model? .... surely Macworld should have their system by now???

---

Surely not.
It's on order, supposed to be shipping soon. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[davidosus]

I'm looking forward, too, to Macworld's review of the 2.8 GHz iMac. I'd like to know if the processor upgrade is worth the cost.

[nechama]

Did Macworld by an chance order the 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo Extreme with a wireless keyboard? That would hold it up for a long time. Perhaps switching the keyboard to the wired kind would speed up the order by weeks.
I plan to buy a 24" imac before 9/16 and would love to get some guidance from Macworld before that re: whether it's worth the extra $225 to get the 2.8GHz processor.
Unfortunately, funds aren't limitless, and I also plan to buy 2 GB of RAM from Crucial ($160) and need to pay $350 to get Adobe CS 3 Design Premium. I'm thinking of sticking with the 320 GB SATA drive to save some money.

[zeejay]

Quote:

---

1 GB of RAM on a 2007 "prosumer" machine -- and the only one engineered to easily run dual operating systems -- is a joke. What "pro" is going to force all this beautiful tech to run with all those calls to virtual RAM??
Apple positions itself as the BMW of computing and then offers no standard iMac configs with any engine more powerful than a semi-crippled fuel injection system. And since most folks do NOT get any BTO options, especially if they buy through the Apple Stores, their experience is compromised by the inevitable sluggishness -- and that does not impress their fence-sitting friends.

---

On paper, that sounds great... but have you actually done any work on a newer Intel Mac w/ 1GB of RAM?
I'm using a first-gen 17" MBP (Core Duo) that I got w/ 1GB RAM, meaning to upgrade it later, but just haven't gotten around to it yet. Right now, I'm running Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, Pages, and Safari, with lots of stuff open in each app, and "sluggish" is the last word I'd use to describe it. I still plan to upgrade my RAM someday soon, but really, 1GB does not suck.

[brilor]

Since Apple's hard drive prices are often several hundred dollars more than the cost from several reputable online retailers, I'd like to see more specs on the size of the hard drives used (i.e. 3.5" or whatever it is) and the process to replace one in the new iMacs. The RAM access is great but I'm assuming the entire screen needs to be disassembled to replace the hard drive. Given how simple it is to add a hard drive to a Mac Pro, it is surprising Apple didn't provide simpler access in the iMac.
Brian S.

[Biallystock]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

All is well, but can anyoone tell me, why in Europe the 1199 Us$ iMac costs 1199 Euros (excluding tax) when at the current rate it should cost 948 Euros??.

---

A couple of things. The import tarifs of the EU is high (Switz. as well) and depending on where you live, companies can get away with charging more for merchandise. For instance, if the average income of country A is 1.0 and the average income of country B is 1.4, a corporation will set the price of their merchandise accordingly.

---

In Australia we have a "Free Trade Agreement" with the USA and our income is no way higher than the States yet Apple charges a consistent 23% more than the States.
Theory shot!
BTW the introduction of the"Free Trade Agreement" brought no commensurate reduction in price of American goods. The US companies involved simply pocketed the savings.