They also say "The Dell XPS One ($2,399 direct) easily outclasses its all-in-one competitor (and namesake), the Gateway One, and matches or surpasses the Apple iMac, which has long been the gold standard of all-in-one PCs".
The iMac's design is nicer, and its cheaper. Fair enough, you don't get a Blu-Ray drive, but I'm finding myself wondering what you need one on a consumer desktop anyway, given that I watch movies on my TV. Oh, and there is one more crucial area in which the iMac absolutely outclasses the "One", and that's resolution. The One "doesn't" have 1080p, it has a 1050p 20" screen, whereas the iMac has 24" 1200p screen, which would be a deal-breaker in itself for me.
You also have to consider quality. In my experiences, iMacs have been nothing but problems, with numerous repairs from shoddy workmanship, and horribly part quality.
The only Macs worth considering are the PowerMacs. The iMac is just a waste, as you might as well just purchase a PowerBook or other brand laptop (or custom).
I tend not to trust any "all in one". Putting everything together may give you a nice form factor, but it leads to numerous design problems as well as making it a huge pain in the ass to go in and fix things.
@ Zeus the God, you never owned an iMac you liar. This one is my third and I never had one hardware problem. The quality of Apple's iMac hardware is quite good, and judging by all your comments over on Blogsmith, you seem a little biased.
Ireland, The iMac lacks the HDTV tuner as well. I have no idea why you are making up terms like 1050p and 1200p as if those had anything to do with HD video modes. They do not and, if they did, none of the machines you mentioned would actually do the modes you claimed they did. The iMac 20" has the same resolution as the Dell and the iMac 24" can do 1080p and no more.
"and the iMac 24" can do 1080p and no more" Check your facts Craig, I am on the 24" iMac right now, and it's resolution is 1920 x 1200 pixels. That is 1200p, not 1080p. It's your imagination that only goes to 1080p, not the 24" iMac. As for that tuner, I use my TV for that stuff, I get work done on my iMac (when not relying to comments).
"Check your facts Craig, I am on the 24" iMac right now, and it's resolution is 1920 x 1200 pixels. That is 1200p, not 1080p. It's your imagination that only goes to 1080p, not the 24" iMac. As for that tuner, I use my TV for that stuff, I get work done on my iMac (when not relying to comments)." I think he means that terms like 1200p and 1050p don't actually exist (outside of your mind). 1080p is a video standard, whereas there isn't any such thing as 1050p or 1200p content. It probably doesn't matter that it doesn't have 1900 by 1200 res, though, but if there's a bigger version coming out, it will. Afterall, it said in the review that blu ray movies looked spectacular.
It's pretty obvious you have no clue what you're talking about, Mr. "1200p". p is "progressive scan", not "pixels". Feel free to actually look up what the big words mean next time.
@ vdogg89, If you are going to call someone an idiot at least make sure you use the correct grammar, or even the correct spelling. You'll likely end up making yourself look like the idiot if you don't, and that would be embarrassing.
The word is "you're", as in "you are", you forgot the apostrophe. ;)
And yes guys, I was aware of the term progressive. As in, all 1,080 lines are painted on a frame at the same time, and if the vertical resolution of a monitor is less than 1,080, i.e. 1,050, full high definition cannot be displayed, at least not legitimately. And yes I'm also aware you would need the content to bring the 24" 1920x1200 iMac display to it's maximum, but that doesn't mean it's not capable of it, which it is. Thanks for playin' yall :P
1080p refers to video content with 1080 lines of pixels that is displayed in progressive scan, i.e. not interlaced. This refers to content, not the native resolution of hardware. There is no such thing as 1050p or 1200p (or 720i, for that matter) When talking about monitors: Wide SXGA+ = 1680 X 1050 Wide UXGA = 1920 X 1200 Both are in the 16:10 aspect ratio, the ratio for most wide monitors, as opposed to the 16:9 ratio of wide-screen TV. Note that WUXGA is the same width as 1080p and a little bit taller.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John @ Nov 17th 2007 12:28PM
They also say "The Dell XPS One ($2,399 direct) easily outclasses its all-in-one competitor (and namesake), the Gateway One, and matches or surpasses the Apple iMac, which has long been the gold standard of all-in-one PCs".
Ireland @ Nov 17th 2007 1:20PM
The iMac's design is nicer, and its cheaper. Fair enough, you don't get a Blu-Ray drive, but I'm finding myself wondering what you need one on a consumer desktop anyway, given that I watch movies on my TV. Oh, and there is one more crucial area in which the iMac absolutely outclasses the "One", and that's resolution. The One "doesn't" have 1080p, it has a 1050p 20" screen, whereas the iMac has 24" 1200p screen, which would be a deal-breaker in itself for me.
Zeus the God @ Nov 17th 2007 1:31PM
You also have to consider quality. In my experiences, iMacs have been nothing but problems, with numerous repairs from shoddy workmanship, and horribly part quality.
The only Macs worth considering are the PowerMacs. The iMac is just a waste, as you might as well just purchase a PowerBook or other brand laptop (or custom).
John @ Nov 17th 2007 1:54PM
I tend not to trust any "all in one". Putting everything together may give you a nice form factor, but it leads to numerous design problems as well as making it a huge pain in the ass to go in and fix things.
Ireland @ Nov 17th 2007 2:51PM
@ Zeus the God, you never owned an iMac you liar.
This one is my third and I never had one hardware problem. The quality of Apple's iMac hardware is quite good, and judging by all your comments over on Blogsmith, you seem a little biased.
JT @ Nov 17th 2007 2:52PM
@ Zues
Power Macs? Powerbooks? Things have changed a tad since those models were retired.
craig @ Nov 17th 2007 3:59PM
Ireland, The iMac lacks the HDTV tuner as well. I have no idea why you are making up terms like 1050p and 1200p as if those had anything to do with HD video modes. They do not and, if they did, none of the machines you mentioned would actually do the modes you claimed they did. The iMac 20" has the same resolution as the Dell and the iMac 24" can do 1080p and no more.
Ireland @ Nov 17th 2007 4:39PM
"and the iMac 24" can do 1080p and no more"
Check your facts Craig, I am on the 24" iMac right now, and it's resolution is 1920 x 1200 pixels. That is 1200p, not 1080p. It's your imagination that only goes to 1080p, not the 24" iMac. As for that tuner, I use my TV for that stuff, I get work done on my iMac (when not relying to comments).
Jacob @ Nov 17th 2007 7:18PM
"Check your facts Craig, I am on the 24" iMac right now, and it's resolution is 1920 x 1200 pixels. That is 1200p, not 1080p. It's your imagination that only goes to 1080p, not the 24" iMac. As for that tuner, I use my TV for that stuff, I get work done on my iMac (when not relying to comments)."
I think he means that terms like 1200p and 1050p don't actually exist (outside of your mind). 1080p is a video standard, whereas there isn't any such thing as 1050p or 1200p content.
It probably doesn't matter that it doesn't have 1900 by 1200 res, though, but if there's a bigger version coming out, it will. Afterall, it said in the review that blu ray movies looked spectacular.
John @ Nov 17th 2007 7:30PM
It's pretty obvious you have no clue what you're talking about, Mr. "1200p". p is "progressive scan", not "pixels". Feel free to actually look up what the big words mean next time.
vdogg89 @ Nov 18th 2007 1:09AM
@ Ireland,
wow your an idiot.
Ireland @ Nov 18th 2007 10:21AM
@ vdogg89,
If you are going to call someone an idiot at least make sure you use the correct grammar, or even the correct spelling. You'll likely end up making yourself look like the idiot if you don't, and that would be embarrassing.
The word is "you're", as in "you are", you forgot the apostrophe. ;)
And yes guys, I was aware of the term progressive. As in, all 1,080 lines are painted on a frame at the same time, and if the vertical resolution of a monitor is less than 1,080, i.e. 1,050, full high definition cannot be displayed, at least not legitimately. And yes I'm also aware you would need the content to bring the 24" 1920x1200 iMac display to it's maximum, but that doesn't mean it's not capable of it, which it is. Thanks for playin' yall :P
9bit @ Nov 19th 2007 12:22PM
1080p refers to video content with 1080 lines of pixels that is displayed in progressive scan, i.e. not interlaced. This refers to content, not the native resolution of hardware. There is no such thing as 1050p or 1200p (or 720i, for that matter)
When talking about monitors:
Wide SXGA+ = 1680 X 1050
Wide UXGA = 1920 X 1200
Both are in the 16:10 aspect ratio, the ratio for most wide monitors, as opposed to the 16:9 ratio of wide-screen TV. Note that WUXGA is the same width as 1080p and a little bit taller.