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

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.

It is me, or have things really changed? Is Apple gaining more credibility with longtime Windows users like me? What about with you? TalkBack to me, and take my QuickPoll below!

Wow! A diehard Windows supporter looks like he has caught the Mac fever. Even more interesting, Ziff Davis has been Microsoft's lapdog for years on end. I concur with his Palm PDA situation. The syncing is still not top notch in MacOS X, yet. Palm really needs to improve their Palm Desktop app. What is ironic, the Microsoft Windows PocketPC PDAs sync beautifully with MacOS X. Go figure.

PING! er, or Sosumi!

Purr!

Nice post, toupsie. Mine's on order..... CAN'T WAIT!!

Cheers, CC :)

This was posted days ago. Take your spam home.

Where? Spam? Why is this spam?

What's your major malfunction? :)

Yea, I know. It takes up so little deskspace compared to the big, bulky HP, its hard to see it behind the 15" LCD monitor.

I think the desk lamp behind the CPU looks more modern than retro.

As is usual with people who are given equipment to rave about, this person has neglected what matters to the real people in the real world:

What is the price?
What are the expansion possibilities and costs for this (still) "closed" proprietary system?

While Mac again sets the standard for innovation, I don't see this as taking a significant share of the PC market.

Mac's ultimate undoing will be that it does not license it's operating system to other manufacturers. Despite innovations like this, most home computer users will continue to select PC systems because of the price and variety of products available.

Similarly software developers will continue to concentrate on the PC market, because of the larger number of potential users.

I see this as much like the situation of the Sony Beta video system competing with the rival VHS system in the early 1980's. VHS won out not because of having superior features or better quality, but that consumers could buy VHS machines from an increasing number of manufacturers at an increasingly lower price. Pre-recorded video producers simple followed this market and Sony Beta simply disappeared.

At $1,700 with a DVD burner I think everyone should own one. I plan on having one by Summer.

Thank you.
About 50% more than an equivalent PC.
And expansion hardware is probably 200% more.
Must be nice...

What are the expansion possibilities and costs for this (still) "closed" proprietary system?

With 2 firewire ports and 4 USB ports you can add literally hundreds of items to an iMac. As for being proprietarty, I don't know what you are talking about. MacOS X has an "Open Source" core called Darwin that anyone on the web can download the source code. You can't do that with Windows XP. There is not one chance in hell that Bill Gates will let you read the source code for the core of Windows XP.

At $1,200, an iMac is cheap compared to buying a base PC and adding all the features that the iMac supports such as firewire, Nvidia graphics card, 15" LCD, dual monitor support, 60 gig HD, 384MB Ram (can't find one with 128Mb to buy -- all the stores give you 256MB with purchase for free), etc.

This was posted days ago. Take your spam home.

That's right! We had to suffer through this pap about the new iPaperweight 2 days ago. The consensus being that Macs are for fairies and Democrats, and that real men and Republicans use Windows. 'Nuff said.

About 50% more than an equivalent PC.

Can you present a PC with the same features of the top of the line iMac (w/ 15" LCD & DVD-Burner) for the same price. So far, Ziff Davis has only come up with a Compaq that cost $2,200 that had the same features.

I would be interested in what you come up with. Most likely a computer that you have to build by hand with noname Taiwanese parts. Nothing you could buy at Best Buy, etc.

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.



		Why I just love the new iMac (and why you might, too)
		David Coursey, Executive Editor, AnchorDesk Monday, February 4, 2002