backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by KoolAidMan1.. on Jan 26 at 7:09 PM


Demand, and possibly quality issues, have caused Apple to delay shipments of the bestselling new 27-inch iMac (right) 3 weeks.  (Source: Apple)
Delay puts a damper on the best-selling desktop

The new Apple iMacs, released in October 2009 have been much maligned for quality control issues, including broken screens, failure to boot, graphical glitches, and, most recently, yellowed screens.  However, it's important to note that they've also been a terrific sales success story for Apple, topping desktop sales charts in Q4 2009.  Customers who haven't suffered problems have fallen in love with the improved hardware, seamless aluminum enclosure, and edge-to-edge glass design.

That said, Apple seems to be enduring more struggles with the popular model.  About a week ago, Apple had said that it was shipping iMacs within less than a week from the order time.  Now it says the delay on 27-inch units has been pushed to three weeks according to Apple Insider.  The 27-inch unit features a better GPU (ATI Radeon HD 4850) and offers the 2.8GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor as a customization option (these options are not available for the 21-inch unit.

Demand likely is playing a heavy factor.  Apple may also be trying to weed out "lemons" -- iMacs with screen yellowing that are reportedly quite abundant.  Apple in December pushed the delay window for 2 weeks, following reports of graphical issues, chiefly affecting the new 27-inch iMac.  Apple has released a patch to fix this problem, and since has been delivering on a quicker timeframe.

Those problems may actually be playing a role in the delay, in addition to the demand and yellowing issues.  Many users on the Apple's customer support forums [1] [2] say that the graphics patch did not fix their issues.

Apple is constantly trying innovative case designs and packing hardware in tight spaces, but recent issues with the MacBook Pros and iMac series have illustrated that quality issues can bedevil such unproven efforts.  Apple has not officially addressed these recent quality slippages on a whole, but its surely a major concern for the company, which has built a small, but significant market share based largely on a strong brand image.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Wow
By DominionSeraph on 1/21/2010 1:28:48 PM , Rating: 5
For $1999 + tax ($119.94 for me) I get the "privilege" of waiting the better part of a month for a computer with the fourth-tier of the previous generation of video cards?

Let's try throwing together a real computer from Newegg:
Same CPU
Same amount of RAM
27" monitor
1.5TB drive instead of 1TB iMac (combo deal)
80GB X-25M SSD
Radeon 5850

$1500. No tax.

So adding a $250 SSD and a $300 video card still comes out $600 cheaper?
5850 in crossfire would be $300 cheaper?
5870 CF would still be $120 cheaper!!

Jesus Christ. I really need to get into the, "Selling trendy crap to morons," business.




RE: Wow
By Motoman on 1/21/2010 1:32:07 PM , Rating: 5
Too late. Apple, Bose, and Monster Cable (the unholy trinity) have that market locked up.


RE: Wow
By CHAOQIANG on 1/26/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wow
By ksherman on 1/21/2010 1:35:44 PM , Rating: 3
while mostly true, you are likely underestimating the cost of the display. Its a 27" S-IPS with an LED backlight. Those are price as heck, like most likely upwards of $1,000 alone. Also look at the resolutions. Most of those 27"ers on Newegg are only 1080p resolution, these have the horizontal resolution of a 30" monitor (2560).

There is no doubt that a stand-alone desktop will be cheaper, but that doesn't always meet everyones need. The iMac is very portable (heavy, sure, but WAY easier than a modular desktop) and comes in a VERY compact package. That means a lot to some people.

The prices aren't as wildly different if you consider the REAL value of each component.


RE: Wow
By Desslok on 1/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wow
By Motoman on 1/21/2010 2:38:26 PM , Rating: 2
Epic fail.

20 seconds on the HP site, not picking HP for any particular reason, you can quickly come up with a HPE150t series PC with the same CPU, hard drive, video card, 2 extra Gb of RAM (free upgrade), 2.1 speakers, 27" monitor, blah blah blah for $1,550.

I'm sure if you were actually shopping, comparing other vendors, you could do even better.

At a minimum, you're utterly wasting $400 on the iMac.


RE: Wow
By monomer on 1/21/2010 3:19:33 PM , Rating: 3
You seem to have missed the OP's point. The fact is, the $1550 price you quoted is not directly comparable, since you are comparing an El Cheapo 27" 1900*1200 TN panel, to a high end 27" 2560*1440 S-IPS panel, which would cost significantly more.

That said, most of the iMac purchasers probably don't care about the technology and the resolution of the panel, and just buy it for the shinies.


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/21/2010 4:23:34 PM , Rating: 1
You're missing a point as well.

I do not have to buy a monitor . I use the one that I have which is better than the Apple. Furthermore when I go to upgrade my hardware (for much less than buying a new apple) I don't have to throw my monitor away.

Yet another point: the Apple machine is shipping with hardware that cannot handle my monitor! That video card would drive 3D Games on my screen at single digit framerates....that brings up still another point but Apple users already know what it is. tee-hee.


RE: Wow
By ClownPuncher on 1/21/2010 6:21:59 PM , Rating: 5
Who used a Mac for games? Seriously, most users are just using them to look at pictures of kittens and check out prices of the Prius online.


RE: Wow
By themaster08 on 1/23/2010 2:37:37 PM , Rating: 2
Not forgetting Twittering their friends!


RE: Wow
By Calin on 1/22/2010 2:17:26 AM , Rating: 2
What better monitor you have? If it's something better than a 27", 2650 by 1400, S-IPS monitor we'd like to know.
As a side note, the S-IPS are the holy grail of LCD monitors in terms of image quality (viewing angles, especially from below)


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/22/2010 2:03:32 PM , Rating: 2
It's an NEC something or other. I don't remember if it's a 27 or a 30...Runs at 2650x1600.

S-IPS isn't all that and a bag of chips. Put down the apple juice. I don't plan on playing my games from the next room over so viewing angle matters not.

Besides the iMac can't even drive that monitor properly with that video card.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 5:39:24 PM , Rating: 2
You're seriously going to defend TN and *VA displays against IPS.

Your opinion is officially worth nothing, congratulations.


RE: Wow
By ChristopherO on 1/23/2010 6:47:32 PM , Rating: 2
Wait a minute.. Were talking about defending IPS screens with yellow tint, right?

I mean, in all fairness, one could say the TN screens are vastly better given that Apple seems to have a bit of an issue shipping in volume without yellow screens...


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/24/2010 5:05:37 AM , Rating: 2
This is based on the assumption that all of the 27" iMacs ship with yellow tinted screens. Mine doesn't have it, my friend's doesn't have it, and none of the ones I've seen in offices or retailers that I've seen (Apple Store, Best Buy, my indie retailer) have it.

A small percentage of iMacs have them. Its a good thing this is being taken care of since they are clearly out there, same as Microsoft replacing faulty XBox 360s (I'm on my third, which is par for the course among my friends) but to say that a large percentage of iMacs ship with yellow IPS panels is FUD, plain and simple.

Nice try.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/24/2010 5:16:28 AM , Rating: 2
I'll take it further and say that I'd take a yellowed IPS display over a "good" TN any day of the week.

"Good" is in quotes because such a thing doesn't exist. :)

As it stands it isn't an issue for the consumer since you can easily exchange an iMac with a faulty display for one that isn't, so no big deal, lots of FUD about nothing.


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/25/2010 2:21:59 PM , Rating: 2
Are you saying there is no such thing as a good display if it's not an overpriced IPS?

They are nice monitors to be sure but the price premium *at this time* is not worth it. It's also especially not worth it if that monitor is PERMANENTLY tied to a video card that is incapable of properly driving it...like in the iMac.

Like I said... Set down the apple juice there KoolAid.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/26/2010 2:55:04 AM , Rating: 2
In my opinion, absolutely, good is good and bad is bad. TN panels look like crap, especially in larger sizes due to the problem of narrow viewing angles getting magnified by the extra height. *VA panels are too contrasty and have weird motion artifacts and inverse ghosting problems, not to mention that they have horrible input lag which is a major problem for games. IPS panels have good input lag, no dithering, excellent viewing angles, and the best color and contrast in an LCD. The only thing that would be better is if you were using a high quality plasma display like a Panasonic G or V series or a Kuro (RIP), but that wouldn't make any sense unless you were sitting over 6 feet away since they're all so damn big.

So yes, in my opinion anything less than an IPS LCD is not good. Now, I can justify buying a TN or *VA display if that's all you can afford, budget is always a concern, but that doesn't automatically make that display good.

Its like saying a Ford Focus is a good car because its cheap. No, it isn't good, its simply cheap, just like those TN displays.

And again, the video card in the 27" iMac is more than capable of driving a 30" display that has greater vertical resolution. You are completely 1000% wrong in saying that it can't drive a 27", its crazy to think that.

As for being permanently tied to that computer, its actually a tremendous help in terms of resale value. Two years holding onto a 24" iMac yields only a 40%-50% depreciation in value. I wish I could get as much back when selling my old PCs. A big part of it is the display, which in the case of the 24" iMac is still the same as in the $1000 NEC 2490WUXi. It helps to retain its value, and you sell the old display but you get a new one that's even better.

So long as Apple keeps putting best in class LCDs into their iMacs, they're a good value. It'll change when this stops, but high quality displays has always been a high priority with their desktop displays (now if only someone would make IPS panels for notebooks...)


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/26/2010 10:06:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And again, the video card in the 27" iMac is more than capable of driving a 30" display that has greater vertical resolution. You are completely 1000% wrong in saying that it can't drive a 27", its crazy to think that.


http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics...

It's pulling 39fps at 19x12 on a year old game.

It's going to run like sh*t at 2560x1600 and if you stick with 19x12 it's going to look like big greasy sh*t on that monitor.

If you're going to run a 2560 monitor you need a top end video card or a pair. Apple basically put in enough graphics to ensure a beautiful 2D display and at least claim 3D capability.

It's like Paris Hilton designed a computer.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/26/2010 7:09:48 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, and its pulling ~75fps in another year old game, L4D. It'll bench similarly for TF2 or L4D2. It is also likely using a Core 2 processor and not an i7. It won't make a huge difference since games are all GPU limited these days, but the difference is still there.

As it stands, the card is more than enough to drive a desktop with multiple HD video windows running at once. 3D performance, given how gaming is a lower priority on Macs, is gravy as far as I'm concerned. If you want to game then you build an ATX desktop. I did, got an i7 860 with GTX 285 here. I'll bump up the GPU when I eventually get the upcoming NEC 27" to match the iMac next to it.

If you don't game, and the vast majority of users don't do hardcore 3D gaming on a PC, well doesn't, matter, you still can with this display. Check out 4850 benchmarks on Crysis at 2560x1600 and medium settings, it does surprisingly well at 30fps. Not as fast as my machine, but its not a big deal given that you can probably count the number of people with iMacs that will run Crysis on one hand.

Think USAGE. I use the iMac for my main desktop and Final Cut Studio HD. It handles both perfectly, everything is super smooth. To say that the GPU cannot handle the display for its intended use is retarded. Gaming performance is there but its gravy IMHO. Anyone gaming on an iMac is most likely going to play WoW or Sims 3, both of which will run great on that setup.

That said, it'll be awesome once 5000 series ATI GPUs are cool enough to get into all-in-one and notebook enclosures (well, notebooks that don't weigh 12lbs...)


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/24/2010 6:27:07 AM , Rating: 2
BTW, I checked out benchmarks with the Radeon 4850 on 30" 2560x1600 displays, a higher res than the 2560x1440 on the iMac. The CPUs in the tests were Core 2 Duos at a little under 3ghz, slower than the i7 860 in the 27" iMac, which in my machines automatically ramp up to 3.5ghz without me manually overclocking them (yay Turbo mode).

At that 2560x1600 resolution it averaged at around 30fps in Crysis. Drop down to 1920 and you're at around 40fps. That's the worst case scenario you're going to see with games. With Modern Warfare 2 or Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead 2 you're looking at much higher framerates, and more than playable if you drop down to 1920 res. I played TF2 for a year on my prior gaming rig with an 8800GT and it ran great. Blame lower system requirements because of consoles lowering the performance ceiling, but there you go. A 4850 at 1920 or 2560 res will run games fine. Not GTX 285 levels like I'm playing with now, but fine.

It'll do way better than run games at "single digit framerates".

In any case, I use a 27" iMac for my main desktop, work, and Final Cut Studio for my portfolio, not gaming. The GPU drives the full desktop with multiple uncompressed HD video windows running and everything with no issues whatsoever. I have a multiple computers (I haven't quite shaken the DIY habit and never will) so the toy PC that my Mac pays for is what I play games on. If I had to though, it'd be fine firing up L4D2 or Dawn Of War 2 on the iMac, the biggest hassle would be rebooting between OS X and Windows. As it stands its a waste of buying another Windows license.

The thing you should ask is why can't other PC manufacturers get comparable GPUs into their own all-in-ones. The best Dell or HP could manage for the longest time are Intel integrated graphics and have just bumped up to G200 and 9400M GPUs. Now those are poor for driving games at the 1920x1200 or 1920x1080 those desktops come in...


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/26/2010 10:02:28 AM , Rating: 2
Dude.

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics...

It's pulling 39fps at 19x12 on a year old game.

It's going to run like sh*t at 2560x1600 and if you stick with 19x12 it's going to look like big greasy sh*t on that monitor.

If you're going to run a 2560 monitor you need a top end video card or a pair.


RE: Wow
By ClownPuncher on 1/21/2010 6:23:47 PM , Rating: 3
A TN panel that doesn't turn the screen yellow? Clearly these are El Cheapo too, or they wouldnt be having problems, right?


RE: Wow
By monomer on 1/22/2010 1:27:57 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, look, I'm not commenting on the quality of the product, but there is a huge price to pay to get an IPS monitor. Interestingly enough, Anandtech just so happens to have posted a review of a 27" IPS 2560*1440 monitor from Dell, which runs for... $1050.

I am not trying to defend Apple for their shoddy products or high pricing, but if people want to compare their prices, they need to use comparable items.


RE: Wow
By ChristopherO on 1/23/2010 6:51:49 PM , Rating: 2
Which is impossible till the quality issue is resolved. However, if Apple is selling these, because they managed to find a way to cut costs. And that method leads to a huge defect rate...

Obviously the screen really isn't that good.

The modern Xbox 360 is good... Because they worked out their issues. Likewise comparing the 27" iMac to anything is pretty much pointless until they hit standard defect rates.

People should just brand it "keep away", and then Apple will have the impetus to fix it.

Still, I admire what they *tried* to do, it's just that their execution was a bit off.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/24/2010 5:13:11 AM , Rating: 2
The screen is absolutely gorgeous. I actually prefer it to my NEC 2490WUXi, an $1100 24" H-IPS display which uses the same panel as the prior 24" iMac. IMHO it is still the best 1920x1200 24" LCD out there, but this new 27" is frigging fantastic.

As soon as NEC ships their version of the 27" based on the same panel in the current iMac I'll probably swap my 24" out for it. I'll do as I do now and use it as the primary display on my Windows machine and the secondary on my iMac, can't wait.


RE: Wow
By foolsgambit11 on 1/21/2010 8:05:03 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, it costs more for a yellowed monitor? Lucky us!

But seriously, you are correct that when comparing roughly equivalent parts, while Macs do have a premium based on style and compactness, it's not as big as some might make it out to be. But those people perceive the price premium as being larger because they don't need an S-IPS panel, and thus don't need to factor that in to the price. (Or even worse, they don't want a S-IPS because they want the faster response times a TN can give them.)

Apple balances the price and performance of specific hardware differently than those people. People like the above poster place a higher value on performance from their video card, or storage, or whatever, while Apple places the emphasis on the screen, user interface, build quality (until recently?) - basically all the aesthetic parts.

Don't get me wrong, they can build higher performance machines - and they do. But when they have to make choices in their "lower end" offerings, they make different trade-offs than others. From a business standpoint, their way seems to be working just fine. But understand that the perception of bad value isn't necessarily based on misinformation, but different priorities.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 5:37:54 PM , Rating: 2
You need to learn something called "reading comprehension".

A 27" TN monitor with 1920x1200 resolution is not the same as a 27" H-IPS LED backlit display at 2560x1440 resolution. Dell just released theirs yesterday and it is over $1000 by itself while being CCFL backlit and not LED backlit. NEC is supposed to be releasing theirs soon and it will be closer to the $1500 mark.

The fact that the iMac puts that level of a display with a fast computer in an all-in-one design that starts at $1700 is pretty amazing.

Know what you're talking about before you post.


RE: Wow
By DominionSeraph on 1/21/2010 2:31:26 PM , Rating: 2
Ah yes, because 4% market share is really indicative of a low margin high volume business model.

Do you think before you post?


RE: Wow
By Motoman on 1/21/2010 2:46:10 PM , Rating: 2
Yup. Do you? Apparently, you think you've made a point...


RE: Wow
By BZDTemp on 1/21/2010 4:22:16 PM , Rating: 1
At least you're consistent :-)

Let me guess - when you're not writing before you think here on DT you do not exactly do anything in the business world (unless you selling burgers in which case I am sorry).


RE: Wow
By 67STANG on 1/21/2010 2:57:00 PM , Rating: 2
LOL. How is not taking their screen into consideration any factor? Almost every single unit they ship out has a defective screen... Just look at the comments on the 'net from everyone that has purchased one.

Let's be honest. All an iMac consists of, is standard PC components built into a custom (in this case, defective) monitor case. You are paying for the case and the logo. Period.


RE: Wow
By bobny1 on 1/21/2010 8:38:44 PM , Rating: 2
Don't blame Apple for cracking Monitors!. We all know how UPS guys treat the boxes...LOL


RE: Wow
By themaster08 on 1/23/2010 2:39:09 PM , Rating: 2
Still Apple's fault. They could use another courier :P


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 5:42:53 PM , Rating: 2
My 27" iMac from December is fine. I haven't' seen a faulty one yet. Clearly it is enough of a problem where they are slowing shipments but to say that almost every single screen they've shipped is defective is ridiculous.

My only beef is that it puts the NEC 2490WUXi on my PC (aka the best 24" LCD on the market) to shame. I'm almost positive that I'll end up putting down huge bucks for NEC's 27" using the same panel whenever it comes out.


RE: Wow
By Marlonsm on 1/21/2010 3:21:47 PM , Rating: 2
Right, as everybody knows, all the parts in Macs are superior, that's why they will never break, never get yellow and never refuse to boot.


RE: Wow
By ralniv on 1/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wow
By bearxor on 1/21/2010 3:05:32 PM , Rating: 2
Among other things:
Built in 802.11 a/b/g/n wifi?
Bluetooth?
Bluetooth Keyboard/Mouse?

Thats at least another $100 there.

Also in comparisons, you never see anyone mention a copy of Windows. Tack on another $280 for a copy of Win7 Pro (Remember, OEM is technically for resellers).

Is a Mac more expensive? Sure. Is it tragically overpriced for what you get in the box IF YOU WANT WHAT COMES IN THE BOX? No, not really.


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wow
By Calin on 1/22/2010 2:26:08 AM , Rating: 1
"I build my own machine which requires knowledge that many Mac users don't have. "
Many PC users don't have that knowledge, so there is value in already-built Windows-based computers.

Also, Apple gives you decent software for the price (that software might be worth nothing to _you_, but still.
As for your upgrades, you can't put any video card in a Mac with OS X, so the value for games is close to zero.

Based on your responses to the four points, it is clear you are not a part of the 5% market share that buy Macs - but you're also not a part of the 90% market share that buy preconfigured PC


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/22/2010 2:27:36 PM , Rating: 2
I'm also in that 90% market as well.

I build my main box but I also have a HP laptop.

My dad has a Macbook Pro that he picked up a few months back. He paid some 2-2.5k for it. My laptop was purchased prior to that and has more memory, faster CPU (double the cores and higher clockspeed), and I believe the same or slightly better video card, same screen size and res, and a blue ray drive.

I paid ~1.3-1.4k for mine. He's got better battery life and lighter weight but just like me he basically uses it as a portable desktop so the benefits are useless. He also had to fork over for Windows XP so he could play games and is now doing so again for Windows 7.


RE: Wow
By xpax on 1/21/2010 5:47:38 PM , Rating: 2
1. You can get a good case for $100 that includes the power supply -- and if you think that iMac has a power supply worth $100 in it, you're sorely mistaken. A machine like that doesn't need 750 watts or more.
2. Your definition of "premium" doesn't ring true to me. iLife contains nothing that would compel me to value it at $100. But admittedly, this one is the most subjective of your points. It may be worth the Apple tax to you.
3. I think I could get a better display for $300. The ones I've looked at aren't yellow or cracked. But maybe that's the "premium" angle you're pushing. Also, what's the use when the machine includes a low-end GPU?
4. It could be argued there is value in this, but when you take into account the inability to repair or upgrade the unit without manufacturer intervention, the result is at best a wash.

When it comes to reliability, Apple is fourth behind ASUS, Sony and Toshiba (at least in laptops -- and with the subject of the article above, I'd be slightly more than hesitant to push the reliability argument for desktops);

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/17/laptop-reliabil...

Those numbers come from somewhere more reliable than even Consumer Reports - SquareTrade. As a company that sells extended warranties on various products, they do a thorough actuarial analysis to determine the risks involved and thus the price to charge for said warranties.


RE: Wow
By BZDTemp on 1/22/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wow
By harshw on 1/22/2010 8:25:33 AM , Rating: 2
That display is 30 bit color, CCFL backlit to give you 102% gamut (the Mac has only 72% gamut) and has an internal hardware scaler + a host of inputs.

Anyone thinking of using a 27" iMac for professional color design isn't really into professional color design :)


RE: Wow
By BZDTemp on 1/22/2010 12:27:05 PM , Rating: 1
I never claimed they were the same or that the Mac is for pro color design.

Once again it is Apple and oranges :-)


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 6:09:56 PM , Rating: 2
Its funny you say this, wide color gamut is a serious bummer on the Dell from a pro standpoint. The 12bit LUT is the only thing keeping that monitor viable for color work since you can then do a conversion back to sRGB gamut (aka - 72% NTSC).

Whoever does any work on it needs to do calibration and brings it back into proper color space if they're doing any sort of design work.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 6:19:57 PM , Rating: 2
Boy, I like Anandtech's reviews a lot but I really don't know what to think of the author's opinion after reading his feedback in the comments section:

quote:
"Again, I'm not sure how having a wider gamut is supposed to oversaturate colors. Just because a display has a potentially wider gamut doesn't mean you have to use it. Oversaturated reds and blues is a calibration problem, not something inherently wrong with having a higher gamut."


/facepalm


RE: Wow
By Smilin on 1/26/2010 3:05:15 PM , Rating: 2
You're going to have to explain your distaste. I don't follow myself.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 6:13:22 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely, its like comparing an ATX desktop with a notebook, it makes no sense. All-in-ones are a completely different beast, total custom engineering in the same way that notebooks are.

No, you compare the iMac with the Dell XPS One or any of HP's all-in-ones. The iMacs have faster CPUs, faster GPUs, more hard drive storage, and significantly better displays (IPS versus *VA or TN) for the same price or even less, which was the case with the prior 24" iMacs versus the 24" XPS One.


RE: Wow
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 5:48:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
3. Premium Display -- Apple makes divine displays. Nice to look at when on or off. You'll need a good 27" display to match Apple and those cost $400.


Its actually way more than that. The 24" H-IPS display in the prior 24" iMac was for years only found in the $1200 NEC 2490WUXi. The iMac's 27" as of yesterday is also found in Dell's new $1100 LCD, which is CCFL backlit and not LED backlit like the iMac. NEC will come out with their 27" soon and it will cost more than the Dell, I reckon between $1200-$1500, and it will probably be the benchmark for quality with that specific panel.

So yeah, you underestimate the cost to get the same display quality you get with an iMac. It is arguably the biggest value in the whole iMac package.


RE: Wow
By OKMIJN4455 on 1/24/10, Rating: 0
Are these S-IPS panels?
By Hulk on 1/21/2010 12:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
After literally years of my Mom and her Mac friends telling me she should get a Mac she did. She got the one with the 24" screen and I was really disappointed to find it came with a crappy TN screen. I thought one of the great things about Macs is that they came with good screens.




RE: Are these S-IPS panels?
By jonmcc33 on 1/21/2010 12:43:11 PM , Rating: 1
These are LED backlit AFAIK.


RE: Are these S-IPS panels?
By PJMODOS on 1/21/2010 1:27:28 PM , Rating: 1
What does LED to do with anything? Anyway, yes they are IPS (even the 21.5" one).


RE: Are these S-IPS panels?
By ksherman on 1/21/2010 1:30:36 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, and they have either a S-IPS pr the S-PVA types, I'm pretty sure...

For the 24" you got with the TN panel, was that one of the older white plastic models? That wouldn't surprise me. But supposedly the 24" aluminum models started shipping with 8-bit S-PVA panels...


RE: Are these S-IPS panels?
By vortex222 on 1/21/2010 1:57:58 PM , Rating: 2
LED backlit what? Backlit TN matrix or IPS matrix?


RE: Are these S-IPS panels?
By KoolAidMan1 on 1/22/2010 5:57:15 PM , Rating: 2
The only iMac that has ever carried a TN display was the first gen 20" aluminum iMac, which is because the production of 20" IPS displays completely stopped. NEC also discontinued selling theirs and switched to TN at the same time. The higher quality panels simply didn't exist anymore, panel manufacturers were perfectly happy cranking out crap 22" TN displays that people just gobbled up at Best Buy/Fry's/Newegg/etc.

This was notable because there was actually a lawsuit against Apple since that particular iMac used TN panels when the customer believed he was still getting an IPS like the other models.

Every other iMac has used an IPS panel of some sort.


Hmmm
By iFX on 1/21/2010 1:00:54 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Delay puts a damper on the best-selling desktop


Is this meant to imply Apple's best selling desktop? Surely it has to be.




RE: Hmmm
By Motoman on 1/21/2010 1:14:40 PM , Rating: 3
It doesn't imply anything. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of cognitive thinking by the speaker.

PCs are universally interchangeable - hence, one enormous reason why the world runs on PCs. To make any meaningful statement such as this, you would have to tabulate the sales of ALL the PCs sold from every brand, mom & pop shop, and BYO builder and compare that to the sale of this iMac.

...and then you'd realize that Apple is still irrelevant.

4% marketshare does not a news-worthy company make.


RE: Hmmm
By sapiens74 on 1/21/10, Rating: -1
RE: Hmmm
By mellomonk on 1/22/2010 9:50:21 AM , Rating: 1
4% marketshare isn't news-worthy? Well I guess you had better tell the rest of the world that. Seems that quite a few people including Anand himself like those sexy AL desktops, and their iPhones and the like. Are any of them 'bargains'? Absolutely not. But so what. It is about inspiration.

I've built more PCs then most of the 'kids' on this forum. Built my first in 91'. In the early days it was about saving money. Now it is about getting exactly what I want. My latest in a beautiful Antec Mini p180 is taking shape on the desk next to me. They are usually powerful and great bang for the buck. Great tools that I use every day. But I've owned a few Macs as well. Currently I use a unibody Macbook Pro as my laptop of choice after years of Toshibas then ThinkPads. It was relatively expensive, but worth every penny. It is just a joy to use and frankly is probably the coolest looking piece of tech I have every owned. It comes down to how you feel about your individual purchase. If getting a bargain at walmart makes you feel good, great. If an expensive tailored suit inspires makes you feel good, more power to you. Regardless of what you may believe, most Mac users started on PCs, usually in school or from hand-me-downs. They make the choice to spend the coin for today's Macs, and usually love them, other then the cost.

I've worked hard (on a PC primarily!) and can afford to indulge myself a bit. Traded in a much loved Jetta for a little 'inspiration' from BMW recently. Does that make me stupid or a bad guy? Could I have gotten 'more' for my money? Depends on your definition of 'more'. Maybe money is everything to you and you are inspired by the almighty bargain. But how many Hyundai Accents have you seen on the cover of magazines or in the news lately?

In the meantime the world awaits what inspirational and undoubtably expensive device that poor little low marketshare company will introduce next week. How stupid we all must be......


RE: Hmmm
By steven975 on 1/21/2010 2:30:14 PM , Rating: 2
It might be the best selling SKU.

3 SKUs for Apple desktops versus...heck I have no ideal...for Dell alone? Of course it will be a best seller...from a certain point of view.


RE: Hmmm
By themaster08 on 1/22/2010 1:58:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Delay puts a damper on the best-selling doorstop

I think that is what he meant.


?
By damianrobertjones on 1/21/2010 3:21:42 PM , Rating: 2
Is it 'the' best selling desktop or 'their' best selling desktop.

You see, I have to know which one it is as a new person browsing this page could think that Apple have the best selling desktop in the world




RE: ?
By xpax on 1/21/2010 5:31:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Is it 'the' best selling desktop or 'their' best selling desktop.

You see, I have to know which one it is as a new person browsing this page could think that Apple have the best selling desktop in the world

Any person who thinks that would fall squarely into Apples desired target demographic.


Apple
By 2bdetermine on 1/21/2010 9:34:04 PM , Rating: 2
Heck, I could get a dozen of apple from a local supermarket for a lot less money and garantee it still be fresh when I get home.




“Then they pop up and say ‘Hello, surprise! Give us your money or we will shut you down!' Screw them. Seriously, screw them. You can quote me on that.” -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng referencing patent trolls














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki