Why I just love the new iMac (and why you might, too)

David Coursey,
Executive Editor, AnchorDesk
Monday, February 4, 2002

It's been a week since I started using a new iMac as my full-time desktop and a PowerBook G4 as my portable PC, all as part of my month-long challenge to see if I, long a loyal Windows user, could make Apple the center of my computing universe. There are still a few problems--specifically related to getting PDA data in and out of Microsoft Office.

But besides that, I've made a very smooth transition. I have even started using the Apple key instead of the Control key when cutting and pasting.

None of the photos I've seen do the new iMac justice. It's hard to take a picture of a white computer with a clear frame around the screen and make it look good. It is especially difficult to do this against a white background, as Apple is prone to do. They had the same problem with the iPod, which people thought was much larger than it is because they had seen it only on a billboard. Now, they didn't think it was that big, but...

If you are trying to show off the iMac base--about the size of a big salad bowl turned upside down--it's hard to have the monitor in a normal position. This is probably why the best pictures of the new iMac, such as they are, have been taken from the side. That shows off the arm that connects the screen to the base rather nicely.

IN USE, the base of the iMac, which contains the computer itself, essentially disappears from view, hidden by the screen. The screen--a 15-inch flat panel--has all the predictable benefits of LCD displays, but the mounting mechanism is really special. This is the first time I've been able to position a screen precisely where I want it.

Mac OS X also does an excellent job of driving the screen, with great graphics performance. I am not quite so wild about the characters that show up while I am typing using Word or the other Microsoft Office apps. Microsoft has yet to fully implement the features of OS X that put great-looking fonts onto the screen.

This was likely lost in the rush to get a version of OS X to market and will be resolved in a future release. The "poor" quality of the Microsoft fonts is noticeable because the rest of the computer looks so great, not because it's putting my eyes out or anything.

The iMac has no fan--actually it has a fan, but I've never heard it--meaning my office is quieter than it used to be. The fan is thermally controlled, so it turns on only if the machine heats up. The iMac also has a very small footprint, leaving me with a lot of unused desk space.

If I were making any changes to the iMac, I'd increase the screen resolution (1024x768 is standard) or go to a 17-inch screen. The higher resolution is a personal preference (I need more open windows sometimes), and boosting the screen size would make the machines too expensive. To think of it, so would the increased resolution.

I'VE DISPENSED with the Apple one-button mouse that came with the machine. I replaced it with a Microsoft optical mouse with all the buttons and a thumbwheel. I just plugged it in, and it worked immediately. While the stock Apple mouse--with its single button--doesn't support right clicking, all the iMac apps seem to. This gives me access to a wide range of shortcuts I've grown used to under Windows. "Real" Apple users know you can control-click the one-button mouse to access the right-button features, but I still like my extra buttons and the thumbwheel.

The transition to the Mac way of doing things has been pretty easy, once I got the hang of the docking bar that is the OS X equivalent of the Windows start menu. Now that I have all my frequently used apps in the dock, I am a pretty happy camper.

Based on my experience, I have no reservations whatsoever recommending an iMac as a family's new or next home computer. Only really hard-core gamers would have trouble with a Mac, and those people should be looking at the new gaming consoles anyway.

I'M TEMPTED to say that Apple should have waited to make OS X the standard operating system for its consumer Macs, at least until there was better support for things such as Palm PDAs, media players for Windows Media, and Real Networks file formats. But as Steve Jobs told me on Day 1 of my Mac odyssey, there are some things that simply won't happen until the OS becomes the Apple standard.

I can't really disagree with that logic, so this is more a warning that you may find yourself working in classic mode from time to time. I am doing my very best to remain totally in OS X, so I have to admit that my concerns about this issue may be inflated.

As for working from the iMac, I can only hit the corporate Exchange mail server using a POP client or a Web browser. This isn't a problem for me, but it may be for a few of you. I also have not tried to find a VPN client, so I need to call our IS department and inquire.

The lack of OS X support for both Palm and Pocket PC devices is, however, troublesome. I think this will be worked out, at least for Pocket PC (and only with the help of a third-party developer) in a few weeks. Palm OS support will doubtless come, though I cannot today tell you when with any level of confidence. Six months seems likely.

I'VE HAD NO trouble exchanging files with colleagues, sending and receiving e-mail, or browsing the Web. And the free mail client Apple provides, though lacking a calendar function, works very well. Actually it's a better pure mail client than Microsoft's Entourage, its office productivity suite for the Macintosh platform.

It's for this reason that so many Mac users have separate calendar, contact management, and e-mail programs. The single-solution approach, àla Outlook and Entourage, is very attractive, but I am looking at other options as well.

The iPod is a fantastic MP3 player, and iTunes does a good job of managing my music. I want to find a "disco" software package, which I believe exists, to do some mixing, but the basic dubbing of music from CD (or Internet) to computer to iPod works very well.

THE MORE I USE IPHOTO, the more useful I find it. The program is not a photo editor, although it will allow you to crop a photo, correct red eye, and convert color images to black and white.

But iPhoto really shines in managing a large photo collection, thanks to its ability to vary thumbnails of the photos from very tiny to full-screen. This means you can zoom back and easily scroll through hundreds or, more likely, thousands of photos and then zoom in to pick the one you want.

iPhoto is also great for sharing your images. While the program does not have an easy way to resize and e-mail an image, it does a very nice job of collecting photos into books, which you can print at home or have commercially printed by Apple ($30 for 10 pages, and the books are really quite nice). iPhoto can also be used to create slide shows, HTML photo pages, and, of course, order prints.

OVERALL, I'D RATE the Macintosh photo "experience" significantly superior to Windows XP, although XP has the basics covered.

I have not played with iMovie, but finally have an idea for a home movie project (lacking kids, I have no ready players), so I am planning to compare the Mac and XP cinematic experiences this weekend.

Another area in which OS X has a little maturing to do is support for streaming media. Microsoft Media Player doesn't support all its formats on the new OS, meaning I can't listen to a number of online radio stations. Real doesn't seem to have announced an OS X version of RealPlayer, though I suspect one will appear.

So that's where things stand after the first week of "Mac Month" here in my office. About the only thing I am still using the XP box for is some instant messaging (especially during the radio program) and to keep the Outlook telephone directory open when I need to make a quick phone call.

Except there's plenty of betamax that runs on the Mac. Pretty close to 75-90% of users could run the same programs on a Mac, better and with a lower Cost of Ownership.

MS has it's advantages for some things, but I think ITS niche should be smaller: 20-30%.

Until you print the type, all ya got is a video game. And, even onscreen PS type is superior. Like I said it's more of a hassle, you have different font sizes, screen and printer files and ATM to mess with. Still it's superior software with higher quality typography (there is a great deal more to typography than the resolution and anti-aliasing of the monitor display). To be expected since Adobe invented postscript, the language that makes WYSIWYG/Laser printing work.

MS type is dumbed-down typesetting. Fine if you have a low standard; which again is my point, quality is not the key selling point for MS software.

Thanks, I can't seem to find a Dell laptop with one.

Dell calls the option "Dual Point Mouse", as it looks like it still comes with the touch pad, but you at least have the option. I looked past Dell in the past because they didn't have the "Track Stick", though this option will help them get another look. Here's one of their models with this option:

Dell Inspiron 8100

We have some toshiba laptops at work (Library circulation) and they have the sticks, but they are complete POS.

They break down all the time, get hung up on booting daily- wont wake up when they go to sleep, and have terrrible battery lives. These are machines are three months old, and most of the patrons have given up on successfully using them.

APPLE IS DEAD, I TELL YOU!!! DEAD DEAD DEAD

Actually, you are correct. Apple is dead to anyone who ever bought one and then lost all support for their "obsolete" hardware. Few people willingly choose to repeat such a mistake.

Of course, the same thing happened to HP, Compaq, et al. when they sold substandard PC's to build market share. They are effectively dead to previous customers.

Gotta weigh in on this;

Ever notice that Mac users tend to demand that Windows users try out their machines?

Ever notice that Mac users also tend to insult the OS itself, insult those who disagree or who are perfectly happy with Windows? (as you did, gratefulwharffratt)

Here's a hint, Mac users.

Some people just plain don't like your product for good reasons.

Some of those reasons are:
6. No Interest in Graphic Software (many people don't give a hoot about photo albums, music, or graphic arts)
5. High Priced Software
4. Low availability Software
3. Scant variety of Software
2. Comfort and enjoyment of current setup
and the number one reason why a lot of Wintel users get tired of you Mac Evangelists:
1. Mac Users Are Rude and Insulting On The Whole

It's verrry "in" with the Chardonay-and-Brie crowd in Marin County.

That is an interesting way to criticize a technology product. It has the virtue of being customized to the audience at Free Republic, unlike so much of the one-size-fits-all FUD that most Munchkins use. You must be a very special Munchkin to be able to use your own material.

Is it really so scary that 8 or 9 per cent of the people buy something other than Wintel boxes? Surely there is room for product variety in your universe. Why denigrate people for not being just like you? I don't own a Mac either, but I don't sit here making up fantasies about Mac owners being cheese-eating Democrats. What's in that for you?

. For example, I'd just be toast with Unreal Tournament in emulation, but Links 2001? What? I wouldn't sail into the rough as quickly?

And here is where the problem lies. You cannot gaurantee that I would be able to do everything I indicated with an iMac (or any Mac). Why would I want to purchase something that I cannot possibly use?

I'm not a Mac user, but the vast majority of insults I see here are actually from Windows advocates. Maybe it's just because there are more Windows advocates, but I don't really see a lot of insults coming from Mac advocates. I reserve the right to disagree with some of the claims from both sides, however.

I'm a Linux-x86 guy, but there are some things about Macs that I like, and I think it's a good thing that they finally have a decent operating system, based on UNIX.

Apple is dead to anyone who ever bought one and then lost all support for their "obsolete" hardware.

Umm, what do you consider to be 'obsolete' HW?? Would a Pentium I running at 100 Mhz be 'obsolete' to you??

Well, this message is being composed on a Power Mac 8100/100. Circa early 1995.

It is running OS 9. Any other mis-informed remarks you care to make??

1. Mac Users Are Rude and Insulting On The Whole

Yawn...

Thank you for your humble, meek, pleasant, good-natured ~~rant~~ ~~diatribe~~ ~~nonsense~~ post.

"But... but... but... wouldn't posting remarks like the one above on a Macintosh related thread be considered to be a 'chafing' post??"
And both my bondi blue imac and my current 500Mhz DP G4 have been the easiest computer to maintain at a good dependable level that I have ever used. I felt the same about pre-win95 MS OS's. I also like using my PC at work that others are payed to maintain. I'm just practical about things.

"And just to insure that there is no pesky double standard issue, I guess you posted how you would like to end OS related threads, on the plethora of Pro Winbloze threads posted here daily too, right???"
agreed.

Umm, what do you consider to be 'obsolete' HW?? Would a Pentium I running at 100 Mhz be 'obsolete' to you??

Can you buy parts for it? Yes.
Can it fulfill a useful computer function? Yes.
Doesn't sound obsolete to me.

Well, this message is being composed on a Power Mac 8100/100. Circa early 1995.

Oh, yes, we all remember the great promise of Apple when they started up the company in early 1995.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.