# 24" iMac



## Ohenri (Nov 7, 2002)

IS it me or do i see no threads about it?? no comments??


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

24" Holy crap!!!! :yikes:  :yikes:


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

Ohenri said:


> IS it me or do i see no threads about it?? no comments??


It's you


----------



## ColBalt (May 16, 2005)

My desire for an iMac has never been so great.​


----------



## JAMG (Apr 1, 2003)

nice boost, although at the lo-end 17"...

why would anyone want an iMac that does not burn DVD's...

seems like a gulability test there.

I'm sure there are some who don't want to burn DVD's but I don't know any...


----------



## djstp (Mar 10, 2006)

ColBalt said:


> My desire for an iMac has never been so great.​



my desire for a 24 inch imac cannot be put into words:love2: ..... unless there is swearing involved...

and there really is no emoticon that can express the way i feel right now


----------



## Ohenri (Nov 7, 2002)

> It's you


Funny. I wish. I wanted to talk about this one pretty badly - reading all rumor sites. But with immediate family working @ hq, I am sworn to absolute secrecy.  LOL.

Anyhow, might look to dump my 17" iMac as well for this one... this is sick!


----------



## Trose (Feb 17, 2005)

24" iMac, that's just ridiculous. I thought our 20" iMac looked huge when we got it.


----------



## gridtalker (Mar 23, 2006)

ColBalt said:


> My desire for an iMac has never been so great.<iframe border=0 frameborder=0 framespacing=0 height=1 width=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0 name=new_date noResize scrolling=no src="http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=*H4hz/ywH9w&offerid=77305.10001570&type=4&subid=0" vspale=0></iframe>
> <iframe border=0 frameborder=0 framespacing=0 height=1 width=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0 name=new_date noResize scrolling=no src="http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=*H4hz/ywH9w&offerid=99467.10000155&type=3&subid=0" vspale=0></iframe>​


Same here those screens are awesome


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

JAMG said:


> why would anyone want an iMac that does not burn DVD's...


Schools.
Internet cafes.
First time computer users.
Kiosks.
Sales Terminals.
Prop Masters.
People without cable & high-speed internet, living in Alert.


----------



## gastonbuffet (Sep 23, 2004)

holy shine!!!!

they are brighter!


----------



## gastonbuffet (Sep 23, 2004)

djstp said:


> and there really is no emoticon that can express the way i feel right now


I know how you feel. Is there any "eroticons" out there? This machine does just does it for me!!


----------



## fyrefly (Apr 16, 2005)

Anyone called Eaton Centre or Yorkdale to see if they have the 24" in stock? I can't get an answer on the phone...! :S


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

JAMG said:


> why would anyone want an iMac that does not burn DVD's...
> 
> seems like a gulability test there.
> 
> I'm sure there are some who don't want to burn DVD's but I don't know any...


2nd computers in the house.


----------



## ColBalt (May 16, 2005)

djstp said:


> ... there really is no emoticon that can express the way i feel right now


This one is close to how I feel.


----------



## djstp (Mar 10, 2006)

ColBalt said:


> This one is close to how I feel.



Rock on! :clap:


----------



## pmoyniha (Dec 13, 2004)

Those of us who already own decent-good external DVD burners may not care if it has a burner 

-P.


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

Love the BTO capabilities that have accompanied it (although you can create one smokin' expensive iMac with them). Nice that the graphics can be upgraded on most of the machines. $2049 edu for the standard config 24" iMac is pretty sweet (adding $82 for the 7600 card is definitely worth it though).

Are the processors soldered on the the mobo in the previous gen Core Duo iMacs?


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

ehMax said:


> 2nd computers in the house.


I'm on my third (or is it fourth) computer in the house, and they've *all* got Superdrives.


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

Only the 24" can be VESA mounted.


----------



## fyrefly (Apr 16, 2005)

mycatsnameis said:


> Are the processors soldered on the the mobo in the previous gen Core Duo iMacs?


No, the iMac Core Duo (17" and 20") have removable processors. It's just a BITCH to get them open and get at the processors to upgrade them.


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

Hi,

I'm not in the market for a new computer but for the price of the 24" iMac I would rather bump $200 to the Quad Pro and allow myself easier upgrades in the future. That's just me though.

s.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

JAMG said:


> nice boost, although at the lo-end 17"...
> 
> why would anyone want an iMac that does not burn DVD's...
> 
> ...


Try being in the shoes of a single mother working $7 an hour wanting to get a computer for her two children in just so they can get ahead. I reckon the $1099 iMac will be a Godsend for a lot of families in Canada, yet not even low enough for millions more.


----------



## mikef (Jun 24, 2003)

mr.steevo said:


> I'm not in the market for a new computer but for the price of the 24" iMac I would rather bump $200 to the Quad Pro and allow myself easier upgrades in the future. That's just me though.


Make that bump $1299... the Quad Pro doesn't include the 24" display.


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

mr.steevo said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm not in the market for a new computer but for the price of the 24" iMac I would rather bump $200 to the Quad Pro and allow myself easier upgrades in the future. That's just me though.
> 
> s.


You know I've been thinking the same way but with that screen you're looking at minimum 1500 more to get a tower which I figure is more than half way to your next iMac. I had told myself I would swear off the non-upgradable all-in-one machines but that price point for the 24" is hard to beat (unless there is a big reduction coming for the Cinema Displays). 

Yes I know quadcore to dualcore is not a fair comparison ...

However, this machine will likely have an upgradable processor so you can argue that it does have some head room.

The other weird thing is the 3 gig max memory limit. They are both SODIMM slots so I can't figure out why Apple would max one of them a a gig and the other at two. Maybe it's a chip thickness problem with the two vs. the three, who knows?


----------



## mikeinmontreal (Oct 13, 2005)

A mother making $7 an hour with 2 kids will not buy an $1100 computer.


----------



## NewGuy (Jun 23, 2005)

Does anyone know if the new processor is the Conroe or the Merom?


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

AppleInsider assumes it Merom http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2021 and if I heard right, the Merom chip would be the only pin compatible upgrade with the current chip in the iMac. If they had chosen Conroe, they would have to have changed the motherboard.


----------



## CanadaRAM (Jul 24, 2005)

*3 Gb Memory??*

Interesting memory configuration 

the 17" 1.83 has the previous RAM setup - 2 x 1 Gb DDR2-667 SODIMMs for 2 Gb max. (and also drops to using shared video RAM, for that spanking new low price point)

The 2.0GHz and up 17, 20 and 24" machines have a 3 Gb max. with 1 x 1 Gb SODIMM plus 1 x 2 Gb SODIMM.

As usual, check with your preferred memory vendors for better pricing than Apple's

Thanks
Trevor 
CanadaRAM


----------



## saxamaphone (May 18, 2004)

still the memory is limited. Its nice they boosted to a maximum of 3GB but you would think they could find some more room for another slot on the 20 and 24 inchers.

the towers are still untouchable for the enthusiast or pro. 16GB of memory, room for 4 internal hard drives, kick-a$$ X1900XT video card...


----------



## Digital_Gary (Sep 18, 2003)

saxamaphone said:


> still the memory is limited. Its nice they boosted to a maximum of 3GB but you would think they could find some more room for another slot on the 20 and 24 inchers.
> 
> the towers are still untouchable for the enthusiast or pro. 16GB of memory, room for 4 internal hard drives, kick-a$$ X1900XT video card...



Exactly. And they want it that way


----------



## Apple101 (Jan 22, 2006)

like ehmax said.....HOLY CRAP!!!!!    

I don't think I will probably trade in my Intel Core Duo iMac for the latest one like some people will probably do because I am more then happy with the one I have now.


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

looks like apple has finally acknowledged that 512mb is not enough ram to run OS X.


----------



## comprehab (May 28, 2005)

I'm buying one!


----------



## saxamaphone (May 18, 2004)

TroutMaskReplica said:


> looks like apple has finally acknowledged that 512mb is not enough ram to run OS X.


512MB is laughable
1GB gets you by
2GB is sufficient with a few programs, but OSX likes 2GB for itself
4GB you can run a few hardcore apps, and OSX has room to flex
8GB has got you covered for almost anything
16GB will probably cause me to have to change my sheets


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

Hey - Just realized that the 24" has FW800 too. Neat


----------



## applebook (Aug 4, 2004)

Do you have any idea how hot the X1900 runs, especially as opposed to the relatively cool 7300 and 7600 GT? 

The X1900 is too hot, while the 7600 GT can run any Windows game at 1280x or better. 



saxamaphone said:


> still the memory is limited. Its nice they boosted to a maximum of 3GB but you would think they could find some more room for another slot on the 20 and 24 inchers.
> 
> the towers are still untouchable for the enthusiast or pro. 16GB of memory, room for 4 internal hard drives, kick-a$$ X1900XT video card...


----------



## zoziw (Jul 7, 2006)

I mentioned in a previous thread that my birthday is September 16 and the 2.0 ghz 17" iMac looks like a great deal from where I am sitting. :greedy:


----------



## genexxa (Jun 10, 2006)

I bought my 20¨ with 512mb of Ram and it's ridiculious... I don't know what they wre thinking at that time...


----------



## Oakbridge (Mar 8, 2005)

guytoronto said:


> Schools.
> Internet cafes.
> First time computer users.
> Kiosks.
> ...


Office users who have other backup devices...


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Remember the days when 512 MB of RAM was sweetness?


----------



## anachronism (Aug 13, 2006)

The most RAM I've ever used is 640 so I think anything over a 1GB, a more than 4x faster processor, and way better graphics card would leave me :yikes: 


I can't wait . . . if only they would release 10.5 sooner since I don't want to buy a system with 10.4 on it.


----------



## Kirtland (Aug 18, 2002)

My patience, albeit running thin, has paid off. I have waited and now I have ordered a 24" iMac decked out with 2GB RAM, 500 GB hard drive etc etc!  
There is not much that matches the excitement of a new computer, especially one like this :clap:


----------



## Blain_132 (Aug 22, 2005)

hmmm, unfortunatly i think im in the market for a laptop maybe a macbook mayber MB pro not sure but i can honestly say that i thought the 20" looked pretty rad but the extra 4 inches is just wicked.....you will be able to fit atleast 4 more 1 inch file icons diagnally......ha ha, i like it


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

Kirtland said:


> My patience, albeit running thin, has paid off. I have waited and now I have ordered a 24" iMac decked out with 2GB RAM, 500 GB hard drive etc etc!
> There is not much that matches the excitement of a new computer, especially one like this :clap:


Please tell us you also upgraded the video card to the 7600. It would be a terrible waste if you had not ...


----------



## fyrefly (Apr 16, 2005)

mycatsnameis said:


> Please tell us you also upgraded the video card to the 7600. It would be a terrible waste if you had not ...


Is the upgraded video card really gonna matter to anyone who doesn't play games on their mac? I'd honestly like to know...

Also... The only thing holding me back from making the 24" plunge is that the 4" of screen space cost $500 - that's seriously $125 an inch. Dunno if I'm willing to shell out that much coin for 4"... When are the stores getting these, I really wanna take a look at one.


----------



## Ohenri (Nov 7, 2002)

dona83 said:


> Try being in the shoes of a single mother working $7 an hour wanting to get a computer for her two children in just so they can get ahead. I reckon the $1099 iMac will be a Godsend for a lot of families in Canada, yet not even low enough for millions more.


The real Godsend will be the angelic macdoc.com, when he comes swooping in with wings fully extended offering key deals and OSX packages that start @ $99! Ain't that correct MacDoc??



H!


----------



## Ohenri (Nov 7, 2002)

Anyhow, this is a great look for Apple. Not sure about that 500G HD. That is a little big, and that simply means that you need a bigger backup now no?? Also noticed that they offered a 5400rpm option... in a tower?? What for? Are those not antiquated tower HDs @ this point?? Could they be throwing that is for heat dissaption issues?? *500G @ 7200 might feel like an old Judas Priest song*:

"Free-wheel burn-ing, [guitar] Free-wheel burn-ing!"

Hmmm...

I'm still all in. Want to this this one with my own eyes. Trying to picture the old Cinema with this slot on the side and an iSight. Could be cool.

H!


----------



## Kirtland (Aug 18, 2002)

mycatsnameis said:


> Please tell us you also upgraded the video card to the 7600. It would be a terrible waste if you had not ...


Yes I did, I don't do much gaming, but do alot of photography work and plan to experiment in video. I also took the higher end processor (2.33 MHz). This will be my 7th Mac in 15 years, they just get better and and better.


----------



## mojoprofilms (Nov 17, 2002)

I've ordered mine! Upgraded video card (of course), 2GB of RAM (it is _reccommended_ by Final Cut Pro after all..., 24" model...very excited. And thinking about the $125/inch thought, it is also brighter and better at all angles, and screen real estate is very important in video editing...so....

One thing I struggled with was whether to pay the 300+ for the 2.33 processor, and in the end decided that the 7% gain was not worth it, especially when in 6 months 2.33 will probably be the low end one. The cache etc. is the same in the 2.16, so there aren't any other gains than the processor...just not worth it. Now is when I cringe hoping everyone doesn't say otherwise...


----------



## iMatt (Dec 3, 2004)

fyrefly said:


> Is the upgraded video card really gonna matter to anyone who doesn't play games on their mac? I'd honestly like to know...
> 
> Also... The only thing holding me back from making the 24" plunge is that the 4" of screen space cost $500 - that's seriously $125 an inch. Dunno if I'm willing to shell out that much coin for 4"... When are the stores getting these, I really wanna take a look at one.


No no no, it's an extra ±500,000 pixels at the low, low price of *.1 cents each* each!  (50,000 cents for 500 k pixels, right? For some reason I've forgotten all math today.) 

Seriously, I thought I had finished with the tech lust phase of my life when Apple came out with this beast. 

I thought my 20" G5 iMac would be plenty for another two years, but now I may have to think in terms of two months instead.  Too bad the G5 doesn't have a remote/FrontRow; it would have been a great home entertainment centre.


----------



## Atroz (Aug 7, 2005)

fyrefly said:


> that's seriously $125 an inch. Dunno if I'm willing to shell out that much coin for 4"


You also gain the FW800 port, brighter screen (less contrast through), different/better video GPU/RAM options and 2X more powerful speakers. 

I want one. My 20" iMac is less than 4 months old though.


----------



## Akira (Apr 8, 2006)

Apple has a thing for making you obsolete in the shortest amout of time.


----------



## FishWheels (Jul 19, 2004)

Akira said:


> Apple has a thing for making you obsolete in the shortest amout of time.


I have a Powerbook 1400 that came in useful today


----------



## NewGuy (Jun 23, 2005)

There are some that think Rev A products are risky. Would you consider this a Rev A product?


----------



## DoNotPokeTheScreen (Jun 9, 2005)

Nope. It's a not Rev A.



NewGuy said:


> There are some that think Rev A products are risky. Would you consider this a Rev A product?


----------



## modsuperstar (Nov 23, 2004)

Akira said:


> Apple has a thing for making you obsolete in the shortest amout of time.


Get used to it. I think these out-of-the-blue announcements will become the norm for releasing upgrades instead of making the big fanfare they have in the past for product releases.


----------



## NewGuy (Jun 23, 2005)

DoNotPokeTheScreen said:


> Nope. It's a not Rev A.


Instinctively I agree with you, but I do wonder about the combined affect of a new processor, new RAM configuration, and new video card. 

I sure felt for some of those Macbook and Macbook Pro owners that had to deal with all their assorted issues.

I might wait a week or two to see what, if anything, emerges...


----------



## mikeinmontreal (Oct 13, 2005)

modsuperstar said:


> Get used to it. I think these out-of-the-blue announcements will become the norm for releasing upgrades instead of making the big fanfare they have in the past for product releases.


I hope so...Imagine next week.....Oh yeah! One more thing! See this Nano, well, it's like 8 gigs now!


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

Akira said:


> Apple has a thing for making you obsolete in the shortest amout of time.


Obselete???? Hardly


----------



## Atroz (Aug 7, 2005)

NewGuy said:


> Instinctively I agree with you, but I do wonder about the combined affect of a new processor, new RAM configuration, and new video card.


The new RAM configuration is more of an Official configuration. Folks have put 2 gig sticks in to the previous generation of machines. However, I don't recall if they did a 2 gig and a 1 gig together.


----------

