Are some Apple PCs priceworthy?

[bloody000]

- considering you can get the same hardware for 900 bucks (without the monitor) and the iMac goes for 2000 the display in the iMac costs you over 1000 - so i take it you agree that it's rather expensive? not to mention that you can't keep your monitor if you change hardware.
- 8bit sRGB is perfectly fine - 10bit sRGB is just better - and it's again beside the point. the gamut of the mac displays are just noticeable worse than what i see on my EIZO - and they are both calibrated.
- so because the apple iMac display performs roughly as bad as the current apple Cinema Display your conclusion is that it must be of incredible quality. nice logic!

the displays apple builds into their iMacs aren't bad. they are perfectly in the usable range. they aren't great either though - so you are lying to yourself if you buy a iMac for it's great display.

-similiar specs in a self-built tower for 900, yes. but in the same form factor pre-built? No. By this logic no one would ever buy brick-like unportable desktop replacements when a tower is much cheaper. If he is not looking for a compact all-in-one then he has no need to pay for it.

-assuming that there's a full 10-bit path end-to-end and the panel is true 10-bit not dithered 8-bit, yes it is better. In fact at true 10-bit wide-gamut banding ceases to be an issue. but if you put any sRGB display(2490WUXI2 for example) next to a bigger-than-sRGB one it's obviously gonna look "worse".

-I'm only saying that because you mentioned ACD.

-it doesn't have to be one of the top dogs to be considered high quality.

so stop it, both costs a grand, i`d rather grab a u2711 for 800$ and be done with it. bloody000's own link backfired imho u2711>iMac for less the price as well.

Do you even understand those numbers? Because that ultra wide gamut is gonna burn you and your retina becasue nobody fucking color manage anything. And banding is fun.

[krumm]

This is a pointless topic just due to the fact that mac fanboys will never be persuaded.  That said, macs use to be good for multimedia, but now are only good for having a locked down os and draining your bank account.  Mac's also, to add to the list, have next to no security or 3rd party software support.

Macs use to be known for there better media editing, but that does not hold true anymore.

Macs are always hailed for there quality, but they use parts no better then dell and charge you more.  Windows is always nailed for its security, but it is better then apple can hope to get for a long time.  Macs are always hailed for there media design software, but have they looked at windows 3rd party media design software. I think not.  There is next to no reason to get a mac, but advertising and clueless buyers/fanboys work. 

Apple laptops do have their cool magnetic power plug but not much else.

Linux is good for servers and some workstations.  Windows is good for business, gaming and personal computer work. Mac is good for taking peoples money and keeping Microsoft from being a monopoly.

[undetz]

-it doesn't have to be one of the top dogs to be considered high quality.

Now, I'm no tech geek, but I do know something about debating and debate strategies, so... Would you like a straw to grasp at? Because currently you appear to be grasping at nothing.

[bloody000]

-it doesn't have to be one of the top dogs to be considered high quality.

Now, I'm no tech geek, but I do know something about debating and debate strategies, so... Would you like a straw to grasp at? Because currently you appear to be grasping at nothing.

Eizo is the high end brand of high end. Not as good as an Eizo =! not high quality. Especially in a market saturated by cheap TN crap.

[rostheferret]

It's a smooth, elegant all-in-one. With the default keyboard and mouse there aren't even wires except the power cord, later this year even iOS devices can be sync wirelessly(officially anyway). Not some HAF 932 abomination with puke green CCFL.

It looks like shit, because that white colour makes it look like my fridge, my washing machine and all other appliances.

It looks like shit. Prove me wrong 

Give me an apple product, plenty of laxative and half an hour and i'll prove you shouldn't use a hyperbole until you really mean it.

[undetz]

-it doesn't have to be one of the top dogs to be considered high quality.

Now, I'm no tech geek, but I do know something about debating and debate strategies, so... Would you like a straw to grasp at? Because currently you appear to be grasping at nothing.

Eizo is the high end brand of high end. Not as good as an Eizo =! not high quality. Especially in a market saturated by cheap TN crap.

"Hiqh quality" is always relative to the highest quality, and if you can't compare even in the slightest, then you're not there, sorry.

It doesn't matter how crappy everything else may be, high quality is measured against the top, not the bottom.

[bloody000]

"Hiqh quality" is always relative to the highest quality, and if you can't compare even in the slightest, then you're not there, sorry.

It doesn't matter how crappy everything else may be, high quality is measured against the top, not the bottom.

It competes with a bunch of similar 27" displays which all use one of the two LG panels. They are all considered high quality displays. Just because there are some more expensive and better options out there does not mean it's suddenly not high quality. the "quality" here is of course image quality.
Similarly, GTX 570 is a high performance video card even if Radeon 6990 is 50% faster nad over twice the price. A D90 does not suddenly produces mediocre instead of high quality images because of the release of the vastly superior D3X.

[kitamesume]

ok tell me which you're gonna buy between these two.
pure salt -----------------: pure salt
lab tested and safe ------: lab tested and safe
1kg/100$-----------------: 1kg/200$
made by some no name : made by apple

what this comparison means is that theres some other manufacturers producing products with the same specification and quality for less the price.

so i`d rather buy the cheaper one or buy an equal priced with better specs.

[bloody000]

ok tell me which you're gonna buy between these two.
pure salt -----------------: pure salt
lab tested and safe ------: lab tested and safe
1kg/100$-----------------: 1kg/200$
made by some no name : made by apple

what this comparison means is that theres some other manufacturers producing products with the same specification and quality for less the price.

so i`d rather buy the cheaper one or buy an equal priced with better specs.

And how does this relate to the built-in displays of iMacs?
If you are just looking for a display for your PC, you are not going to buy an iMac or ACD. An iMac is a complete package, an all-in-one, there are similar products from lenovo, Dell, Acer and pals. The fact that you can built a tower system for less is irrelevant because if you can accept or want a hackintosh you wouldn't need to look at iMacs in the first place. That companies like eurocom and sager are still alive and well means that even though a tower system is much cheaper there is still a market for gigantic and heavy " laptops"(an all-in-one isn't that much different really, if anything it's more like a big desktop replacement laptop with no keyboard and generally better thermal management and potentially faster parts).

[kitamesume]

ok tell me which you're gonna buy between these two.
pure salt -----------------: pure salt
lab tested and safe ------: lab tested and safe
1kg/100$-----------------: 1kg/200$
made by some no name : made by apple

what this comparison means is that theres some other manufacturers producing products with the same specification and quality for less the price.

so i`d rather buy the cheaper one or buy an equal priced with better specs.

And how does this relate to the built-in displays of iMacs?
If you are just looking for a display for your PC, you are not going to buy an iMac or ACD. An iMac is a complete package, an all-in-one, there are similar products from lenovo, Dell, Acer and pals. The fact that you can built a tower system for less is irrelevant because if you can accept or want a hackintosh you wouldn't need to look at iMacs in the first place. That companies like eurocom and sager are still alive and well means that even though a tower system is much cheaper there is still a market for gigantic and heavy " laptops"(an all-in-one isn't that much different really, if anything it's more like a big desktop replacement laptop with no keyboard and generally better thermal management and potentially faster parts).

i could pick up an i7-2600 + HD6950(and of course other stuffs plus table and chair) with 27" monitor downtown for 2000$( aproximately same price as the iMac but better specs)if i had the money... bah, i still see apple as a "buy my name" company.

[blubart]

that's really another argument - one of your arguments was that people by macs because they "b) want a high quality display".
considering they can get a considerably higher quality display if they buy a pc for a similar package price as the iMac (or a display of equal quality for a lower price) and only loose some (for the workflow completely irrelevant) space below their desk that specific argument simply does not hold.
if anything it fortifies the argument that people buy iMacs mainly for the style (compact all-in-one + neat looking is basically the same) and the OS.

[mgz]

that's really another argument - one of your arguments was that people by macs because they "b) want a high quality display".
considering they can get a considerably higher quality display if they buy a pc for a similar package price as the iMac (or a display of equal quality for a lower price) and only loose some (for the workflow completely irrelevant) space below their desk that specific argument simply does not hold.
if anything it fortifies the argument that people buy iMacs mainly for the style (compact all-in-one + neat looking is basically the same) and the OS.

most people couldnt actually tell you the good points of OSX or w/e. At this point a majority of the people who buy macs want them cuz of the aesthetics of it, or because they feel its cool to have.
The less popular response being that they have been using apple for years and enjoyed their computers for a while now.(a large portion of these people were graphics designers and what such back when powerpc chips loaded shit like adobe notably faster and ran better on an apple)




And specifically you posed the question of whether or not it was a good deal to buy the mac vs DIY and now complain its not a real comparison to DIY and buy a nicer monitor for the same price

[kitamesume]

the reason why their products are so retardedly high priced(not including the monitor) is because they're buying "parts" on "third parties" and reselling them with 10-50% additional price header(duh, they wouldn't get any profit if they dont do it). if you're smart enough you could've just bought your own "parts" on the "third parties" where apple gets them.

[bloody000]

that's really another argument - one of your arguments was that people by macs because they "b) want a high quality display".
considering they can get a considerably higher quality display if they buy a pc for a similar package price as the iMac (or a display of equal quality for a lower price) and only loose some (for the workflow completely irrelevant) space below their desk that specific argument simply does not hold.
if anything it fortifies the argument that people buy iMacs mainly for the style (compact all-in-one + neat looking is basically the same) and the OS.

I wrote those points as a whole package, not "or" but "and". You could just buy a Mac mini or even just the disc and build a hackintosh but that is not the point of this thread. Thread starter considered an iMac, I listed reasons to look at an iMac or "don't bother".

[kitamesume]

hackintosh all the way lol, cheaper and better.

ohh yea, OP is MIA.

[mgz]

hackintosh all the way lol, cheaper and better.

ohh yea, OP is MIA.

or use linux and have more shit you can do with the limited pool of software

[bloody000]

hackintosh all the way lol, cheaper and better.

ohh yea, OP is MIA.

or use linux and have more shit you can do with the limited pool of software

Implying repos are the only way to get software on common free OSes and that OS X is not also UNIX.

[blubart]

I wrote those points as a whole package, not "or" but "and". You could just buy a Mac mini or even just the disc and build a hackintosh but that is not the point of this thread. Thread starter considered an iMac, I listed reasons to look at an iMac or "don't bother".

... pointless to argue but here it goes: you don't get a high quality display - you get a decent quality display. so even if it is an "and" that point simply does not belong in the "package". if you get the thing in better quality for the same price outside the package it can not be an argument for the package.
there is no such thing as equal weighting - you either put more weight into a neat looking (not my opinion) design and get an iMac or you put more weight into having a high quality display and go the display+selfbuild road.

you cannot argue that the display is of high quality because it's in a unibody -> a unibody is what "they" want -> "they" want a iMac because it has a display of high quality. that's circular logic.

[bloody000]

I wrote those points as a whole package, not "or" but "and". You could just buy a Mac mini or even just the disc and build a hackintosh but that is not the point of this thread. Thread starter considered an iMac, I listed reasons to look at an iMac or "don't bother".

... pointless to argue but here it goes: you don't get a high quality display - you get a decent quality display. so even if it is an "and" that point simply does not belong in the "package". if you get the thing in better quality for the same price outside the package it can not be an argument for the package.
there is no such thing as equal weighting - you either put more weight into a neat looking (not my opinion) design and get an iMac or you put more weight into having a high quality display and go the display+selfbuild road.

you cannot argue that the display is of high quality because it's in a unibody -> a unibody is what "they" want -> "they" want a iMac because it has a display of high quality. that's circular logic.

I agree there is no point. You think it's only decent, I think it's very good.

[kitamesume]

I wrote those points as a whole package, not "or" but "and". You could just buy a Mac mini or even just the disc and build a hackintosh but that is not the point of this thread. Thread starter considered an iMac, I listed reasons to look at an iMac or "don't bother".

... pointless to argue but here it goes: you don't get a high quality display - you get a decent quality display. so even if it is an "and" that point simply does not belong in the "package". if you get the thing in better quality for the same price outside the package it can not be an argument for the package.
there is no such thing as equal weighting - you either put more weight into a neat looking (not my opinion) design and get an iMac or you put more weight into having a high quality display and go the display+selfbuild road.

you cannot argue that the display is of high quality because it's in a unibody -> a unibody is what "they" want -> "they" want a iMac because it has a display of high quality. that's circular logic.

I agree there is no point. You think it's only decent, I think it's very good.

a conclusion. now stop it.