"People bitching about expansion need to STFU and realize these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs. "
Not all mac users are newbies. Many are power users who appreciate the quality of build and design. The simple fact is, Macs don't need to be upgradable. They don't have a rapid depreciation due to operating system upgrades like Windows machines do. Instead, a Mac is designed to last for many years. Older machines remain capable. They don't "get slow" like Windows machines do. The only thing a mac user really needs to add over time is RAM. CPU power just isn't as much of an issue in the Apple world.
As for other peripherals, Macs either come with everything you could possible want, or else it can be added via USB or Firewire.
I've seen a lot of people essentially saying "these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs" or "Macs don't need to be upgradable"
Well -- that's one way to look at it. Another is that people who don't care about tech specs/upgrades could get conned if they make a blind purchase.
For one, I'm pretty certain I couldn't see slots for upgrading the RAM - that's a bit of a concern IMHO.
But much more importantly, from the specs on apple.com (800MHz FSB, 667MHz DDR2 RAM, 2 DIMMS, supporting upto 4GB) I basically gather that the Intel Santa Rosa platform (i.e. laptop platform) is being used in the iMac. i.e. There are only two components in this machine that will deliver better performance than a standard Santa Rosa based laptop -- the Hard Drive and the Graphics Card (which is just ok - not great). Now in all honesty I don't think this is a limiting problem -- OS-X is already quite zippy and will be quite quick on these specs. But the thing that does strike me as odd is Apple's pricing and positioning of the iMac -- performance-wise these are fairly entry-level machines -- yet they start at $1200 and go well past $2000! And again, while thier performance is, fairly entry-level, the ad on Apple's main page today says "You can never be too thin. Or too fast" -- doesn't that count as deceptive marketing since this is clearly not a fast machine?
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
"People bitching about expansion need to STFU and realize these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs. "
Not all mac users are newbies. Many are power users who appreciate the quality of build and design. The simple fact is, Macs don't need to be upgradable. They don't have a rapid depreciation due to operating system upgrades like Windows machines do. Instead, a Mac is designed to last for many years. Older machines remain capable. They don't "get slow" like Windows machines do. The only thing a mac user really needs to add over time is RAM. CPU power just isn't as much of an issue in the Apple world.
As for other peripherals, Macs either come with everything you could possible want, or else it can be added via USB or Firewire.
right...
that's why apple introduces updated products every few months...
Every year, you mean.
And you know why the do that, there's no need to mention it.
I've seen a lot of people essentially saying "these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs" or "Macs don't need to be upgradable"
Well -- that's one way to look at it. Another is that people who don't care about tech specs/upgrades could get conned if they make a blind purchase.
For one, I'm pretty certain I couldn't see slots for upgrading the RAM - that's a bit of a concern IMHO.
But much more importantly, from the specs on apple.com (800MHz FSB, 667MHz DDR2 RAM, 2 DIMMS, supporting upto 4GB) I basically gather that the Intel Santa Rosa platform (i.e. laptop platform) is being used in the iMac. i.e. There are only two components in this machine that will deliver better performance than a standard Santa Rosa based laptop -- the Hard Drive and the Graphics Card (which is just ok - not great). Now in all honesty I don't think this is a limiting problem -- OS-X is already quite zippy and will be quite quick on these specs. But the thing that does strike me as odd is Apple's pricing and positioning of the iMac -- performance-wise these are fairly entry-level machines -- yet they start at $1200 and go well past $2000! And again, while thier performance is, fairly entry-level, the ad on Apple's main page today says "You can never be too thin. Or too fast" -- doesn't that count as deceptive marketing since this is clearly not a fast machine?