It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:16 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 17" Apple iMac: The Official SPCR Review
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:29 am 
Offline
SPCR Reviewer

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 11:23 am
Posts: 1845
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Cool, quiet, and energy efficient, SPCR's official review of the 17" Core-Duo-based iMac is here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 6:48 am
Posts: 171
Location: UK
Great review as always... Something on the last page caught my attention;
Quote:
The one exception is Apple's "Mighty Mouse". Although it pretends to have a scroll wheel and "two button" functionality, using the tiny, hypersensitive ball to scroll up and down was frustrating, and it took one of us the better part of an hour to master right clicking. The arrow movement is also too slow, even at maximum speed.

Come on... who was it?!

Al


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Posts: 5085
Location: UK
Definitely the best-looking PC I have ever seen. The lack of cable clutter and the sheer visual attractiveness of the iMac are the two big selling points for me, as well as the minimal footprint on a desk (hardly bigger than a normal TFT screen). However, that power-saving thing that the LCD screen does by reducing brightness, can that feature be turned off? That would be very annoying if you were reading a large chunk of text.

PS. There's a typo on page 3, currently says "since no airflow could not be felt at the bottom even with the system running full tilt."; either the "no" or the "not" shouldn't be there.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 15
Good to see you finally giving macs some attention .

About some of your power and screen troubles, like those stated in "Much of the power savings in the low power mode seems to come from a reduction in the brightness of the LCD screen, which drops to the lowest possible brightness. This sometimes got quite irritating, since the low power mode sometimes kicked in while reading a large block of text on a web page and the mouse would have to be moved around to boost the brightness back up." : have you played around with the energy/power settings on the System Preferences panel?

Undoubtedly, the iMac is one of the most silent, power efficient and powerful computers out there, as you've discovered.

Congratulations for your article.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
The only glitch I have with this system -- and I think someone else pointed it out in one of the iMac threads in here -- is the blank area underneath the screen. It looks a bit silly and out of place. I wonder if it would look better if it was thicker, but shorter. Go slim bezel!

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 10:29 am
Posts: 2299
Location: Bellevue, Nebraska
qviri wrote:
The only glitch I have with this system -- and I think someone else pointed it out in one of the iMac threads in here -- is the blank area underneath the screen. It looks a bit silly and out of place. I wonder if it would look better if it was thicker, but shorter. Go slim bezel!


that was the first thing that caught my eye. that HUGE WHITE blank space below the actual screen itself. they should have put somthing here to make it seem like it has an actual use for being their. like inputs or buttons or lights or somthin.

ive always had a thing for apples, but never owned one. just never had the money to keep my PC's up to date and buy a mac.

i do however always recommend macs to people who dont know anything about computers. like my parents n shit. it'll do what they want. surf the net and check email.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
Aris wrote:
i do however always recommend macs to people who dont know anything about computers. like my parents n shit.


I don't think that was the most fortunate use of the admittedly popular phrase...

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:39 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Posts: 11822
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Al wrote:
Great review as always... Something on the last page caught my attention;
Quote:
The one exception is Apple's "Mighty Mouse". Although it pretends to have a scroll wheel and "two button" functionality, using the tiny, hypersensitive ball to scroll up and down was frustrating, and it took one of us the better part of an hour to master right clicking. The arrow movement is also too slow, even at maximum speed.

Come on... who was it?!

Al

Must've been the old dude, right? :lol:

An aside about bylines at SPCR: Devon spent a lot more time with the iMac, he worked it long enough to have to deal with the right button issue, and he wrote 98% of the review. That's what's meant when the byline says "by so-and-so with who-and-who" The first person credited did the bulk of the writing, the with person helped. When it says "and" then the first person is the primary author, but got lots of help from the second.

_________________
Mike Chin,
Editor/Publisher, SPCR
Support SPCR with your donations!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 15
Aris wrote:
qviri wrote:
ive always had a thing for apples, but never owned one. just never had the money to keep my PC's up to date and buy a mac.

If you wish to try Mac OS X you can do it with a PC. To learn how to do it go to www.osx86project.org.

I'm doing it with an Asus board and a Celeron D 331 and it runs smooth.

After that I think you'll be hooked on OS X and you'll see Macs with different eyes and buy one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 2:26 pm
Posts: 413
"The only glitch I have with this system -- and I think someone else pointed it out in one of the iMac threads in here -- is the blank area underneath the screen. It looks a bit silly and out of place. I wonder if it would look better if it was thicker, but shorter. Go slim bezel!"

I think this applies only to the 17 inch iMac.

If you look at the dimensions of the 20 inch iMac, you will see that it is more rectangular, while the 17 inch iMac has an odd, squarish profile.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
Uh, not according to the picture I found on the ordering page (one of the few with pictures of the 20", surprisingly):

Image

It's a bit better; but still looks odd to me.

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:03 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1628
Location: Portugal
I'm puzzled... Why don't they use 2.5" HDDs ? :?

_________________
Antec Solo (NB XL2 120mm @ 5V + XE1 92mm @ 5V), Corsair AX750, Asus P8P67 Rev 3.0 (B3), Intel Core i5 2400 @ 3.6GHz w/TRUE 120 Rev. C @ 5V, 8GB G.Skill RipJawsX DDR3-1600, Sapphire HD 7970 3GB Dual-X OC, Crucial m4 128GB + WD10EALX + WD6400AAKS + WD20EARS, Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer, JVC HA-RX900, Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD, SteelSeries 7G, SteelSeries Xai, SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:15 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:45 am
Posts: 1775
Location: At Home
Those power consumption figures are amazing for a whole dual core system; I guess they are close to laptop figures!

I would have liked to have seen some sound recordings posted, especially since the system is in effect a closed box and there is no easy way of tweaking anything to shave a dB here or there; in this situation the subjective noise quality is paramount. Admittedly, the system is very quiet but if I were thinking of buying one I’d like to hear what the hard drive sounds like when stressed.

It sounds a very impressive piece of kit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 8:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
rpsgc wrote:
I'm puzzled... Why don't they use 2.5" HDDs ? :?


Perhaps because Apple had difficulty sourcing 160 GB (17") and 250 GB (20") laptop drives for cheap?

Heck, they're even offering 0.5 TB if you're willing to cough up the cash.

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:00 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1628
Location: Portugal
It's expensive but it exists... 160GB 2.5"
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article298-page1.html

With what as been said so far I don't know how the "typical" iMac user would need 250 or 500GB.
There's always external storage... but oh well, it's quiet as it is. I was just curious to why...


Oh and they could also have a version without the X1600, say a X1300 or something IGP for even lower power consumption! :P I reckon it would work for most people who would just use it to browse the 'Net / do office work.

_________________
Antec Solo (NB XL2 120mm @ 5V + XE1 92mm @ 5V), Corsair AX750, Asus P8P67 Rev 3.0 (B3), Intel Core i5 2400 @ 3.6GHz w/TRUE 120 Rev. C @ 5V, 8GB G.Skill RipJawsX DDR3-1600, Sapphire HD 7970 3GB Dual-X OC, Crucial m4 128GB + WD10EALX + WD6400AAKS + WD20EARS, Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer, JVC HA-RX900, Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD, SteelSeries 7G, SteelSeries Xai, SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 15
rpsgc wrote:
It's expensive but it exists... 160GB 2.5"
http://www.silentpcreview.com/article298-page1.html

With what as been said so far I don't know how the "typical" iMac user would need 250 or 500GB.
There's always external storage... but oh well, it's quiet as it is. I was just curious to why...


Oh and they could also have a version without the X1600, say a X1300 or something IGP for even lower power consumption! :P I reckon it would work for most people who would just use it to browse the 'Net / do office work.

So...the "typical" iMac user just browses the Net and do some office work.

That's a bit presumptuous, sorry to say.

If you search for several of the reviews made around the iMac Core Duo, you'll see its as powerful or even more than the best Pentium D 900 series and challenges the much more costly AMD FX series.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:26 pm
Posts: 1421
Location: Finland
learning_bird wrote:
So...the "typical" iMac user just browses the Net and do some office work.

That's a bit presumptuous, sorry to say.

If you search for several of the reviews made around the iMac Core Duo, you'll see its as powerful or even more than the best Pentium D 900 series and challenges the much more costly AMD FX series.
No need to make this thread a PC vs Mac battle...
rpsgc wrote:
I reckon it would work for most people who would just use it to browse the 'Net / do office work.
Maybe you didn't understand what rpsgc wrote?

_________________
Antec Solo case /w Seasonic S-12 430W, Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-SH2, X2 4850e /w Scythe Ninja, 2x2Gb DDR2800, WD Raptor 150GB, 500GB WD GP in Antec MX-1, BenQ G2400W, Logitech diNovo Laser, Logitech z-680


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 3:01 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1628
Location: Portugal
From the review:

Quote:
Long story short, the iMac is a computer for the connoisseur and for "Everyman", just as Apple intended. Power users, enthusiasts, anyone who wants to tweak the hell out of everything should probably stick to building their own systems — they'll be happier molding the computer to their own personal quirks. However, for those who want to use a computer, not take up computer building as a hobby, the iMac is among the best there is.


Now take it as you will. I still can't see how I implied, in any way, that iMacs were inferior to PCs. And how is that accomplished by HDD size alone?

I'll even reiterate: Unless the user has a PVR / buttloads of pr0n / huge media library OR does movie editing ... they don't need 500GB. That's what I said.

_________________
Antec Solo (NB XL2 120mm @ 5V + XE1 92mm @ 5V), Corsair AX750, Asus P8P67 Rev 3.0 (B3), Intel Core i5 2400 @ 3.6GHz w/TRUE 120 Rev. C @ 5V, 8GB G.Skill RipJawsX DDR3-1600, Sapphire HD 7970 3GB Dual-X OC, Crucial m4 128GB + WD10EALX + WD6400AAKS + WD20EARS, Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer, JVC HA-RX900, Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD, SteelSeries 7G, SteelSeries Xai, SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:01 am
Posts: 25
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Great review! Made me want one of those ...

Someone suggested that they should use 2.5" hard drives, but I really can't see the point of using a slower, more expensive drive with significant less storage capacity with only a barely noticeable (for most people that is) noise difference. Maybe a silent seeker can change the HDD to a 2.5" himself?

Frankly, Mac users are probably using P2P-software to download music, movies, games, apps (pr0n!) as much as non-Mac users. So a big hard drive is probably good marketing for Apple and makes them sell more Imacs.

_________________
AMD Athlon XP in SLK3000B
AMD XP 2100+, NF7-S + Zalman passive NB heatsink, SI-97 + 92mm Nexus @ ~10V, 512MB, GF4 Ti4200 Zalman Heatpipe, Nexus 9003 SFB, 2x120mm Nexus Real Silent @ 5V, 120GB Seagate 7200.7, modded Antec SLK3000B stuffed with AcoustiPac


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:11 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1628
Location: Portugal
jonasy wrote:
Great review! Made me want one of those ...

Someone suggested that they should use 2.5" hard drives, but I really can't see the point of using a slower, more expensive drive with significant less storage capacity with only a barely noticeable (for most people that is) noise difference. Maybe a silent seeker can change the HDD to a 2.5" himself?

Frankly, Mac users are probably using P2P-software to download music, movies, games, apps (pr0n!) as much as non-Mac users. So a big hard drive is probably good marketing for Apple and makes them sell more Imacs.


Fine... no point in beating a dead horse Image

_________________
Antec Solo (NB XL2 120mm @ 5V + XE1 92mm @ 5V), Corsair AX750, Asus P8P67 Rev 3.0 (B3), Intel Core i5 2400 @ 3.6GHz w/TRUE 120 Rev. C @ 5V, 8GB G.Skill RipJawsX DDR3-1600, Sapphire HD 7970 3GB Dual-X OC, Crucial m4 128GB + WD10EALX + WD6400AAKS + WD20EARS, Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer, JVC HA-RX900, Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD, SteelSeries 7G, SteelSeries Xai, SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:16 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7366
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
Greetings,

The 17" iMac is the quietest computer I have heard since...a 286, I think. The PS and hard drive in my 486 made a lot more noise -- and went a lot slower, too. I actually had no problems with either the scroll ball, or the right button...though I would have to get more used to how the Mac OS works -- it has changed a lot since the days of my Mac IIcx. (Which was also very quiet, come to think of it!)

Typo Patrol: on the front page lead in:
Quote:
The iMac is quiet, energy effient...

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:25 am
Posts: 6
What about Intel based Mac mini? Is it at least as silent as this iMac?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 7:06 am
Posts: 167
Location: Germany
With regards to the higher power usage even in idle mode in Windows: Maybe Apple underclocks the graphics card in OS X? That's what they're doing on the new Powerbooks ("MacBook Pros").

_________________
I get my kicks on channel six.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:48 pm
Posts: 198
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
moritz wrote:
With regards to the higher power usage even in idle mode in Windows: Maybe Apple underclocks the graphics card in OS X? That's what they're doing on the new Powerbooks ("MacBook Pros").


Exactly what I thought...

_________________
P150 | Q6600 | 4GB RAM | TRUE | 2x Nexus 120mm | 7800 GTX


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:35 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Boston
My only issue with this is that this is not a desktop. Its a laptop on a stand. In other words, you can't upgrade this mother.

So in a couple years you just toss it and get a new one if you want to run a newish computer game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
As opposed to replacing "just" the motherboard, CPU, graphics card and RAM in a desktop?

edit: okay, being forced to upgrade the LCD -- now there's a drawback. Didn't think of it at first.

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 12:35 pm
Posts: 17
Location: Boston
qviri wrote:
As opposed to replacing "just" the motherboard, CPU, graphics card and RAM in a desktop?

edit: okay, being forced to upgrade the LCD -- now there's a drawback. Didn't think of it at first.


Also the stuff you mentioned is about $600 for descent stuff. Thats still less than $1500. Plus I hate having to tell people, nope, you can't upgrade that. Just toss it or use it the way it is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 11:35 pm
Posts: 41
Location: Amsterdam
Admiral Ackbar wrote:
qviri wrote:
As opposed to replacing "just" the motherboard, CPU, graphics card and RAM in a desktop?

edit: okay, being forced to upgrade the LCD -- now there's a drawback. Didn't think of it at first.


Also the stuff you mentioned is about $600 for descent stuff. Thats still less than $1500. Plus I hate having to tell people, nope, you can't upgrade that. Just toss it or use it the way it is.

As a Mac user, I agree with you on that one. When I switched to Macs 1.5 years ago, I was afraid it would bother me, but it actually doesn't. In PC world, I was used to upgrade things because something newer was available, but with a Mac, I just don't feel the need for upgrade. It's like not feeling the need to upgrade your fridge. And actually, that is much nicer than constantly having the feeling that your computer is outdated because something newer appears every 2 weeks.
It's also sort of an ironic luck that games for Mac are way behind those for windows.
So from a PC point of view, the non-upgradability of an iMac is an issue, but Mac owners are rarely bothered by it. And if you are, buy a Powermac. Not as silent as an iMac admittedly, but the way it's built makes you drool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 2:42 pm
Posts: 606
Location: UK
how easy is it to actually open up? .. do they go out of the way to make it hard, or easy?.
as u say its not upgradeable.. yes its not very easy but should upgrade as easily (i use that term losely) as a laptop.. u should be able to change the RAM and hard drive
apparently u will (may) be able to drop a merom into a mac mini.. so maybe this too?

_________________
i3-530, Gigabyte H55M-D2H, CM hyper212+ | Sempron64 3000+, Biostar Tforce 6100, AC Freezer 7, picopsu. 0 fans.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:32 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7366
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
Greetings,

The iMac's do support an external monitor. Also, you can upgrade the RAM and the hard drive, so what's the big deal? Like a laptop, it is not possible to upgrade the CPU, video, or the motherboard -- but since these are integral to the design, why would you want/need to?

Do you want to have a separate box on the desktop? Then get the Mac Mini. If you want expandability or upgradability, then wait for the CoreDuo Mac midtower. And if you don't like a super quiet, elegant and sleek machine, with a secure OS, all w/o any work on your part -- then build a PC; by all means! :P

By the way, on the cost comparisons, some things that may not have been taken into account: the iMac's built-in web cam, and it's built-in wireless networking. Also, the dual core CPU?

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group