Apple apologizes for iMac delays, keeps mum on DOA / display issues
By Vlad Savov 
posted December 14th 2009 5:25AM
posted December 14th 2009 5:25AM
Some contrition is better than none, we suppose, and upon being probed about lengthy delays on top of two-week shipping times for its slick 27-inch iMacs, Apple has this weekend tossed its expectant fans an overdue apology:Considering the 27-inch Core i7 machines are both the major attraction of the latest iMac refresh and the source of the most headaches for Apple, it's quite appropriate that the company would address its failure to make more prompt deliveries, but we're troubled that there's no further acknowledgement of the widespread issues plaguing those who have received their deliveries. Ah well, we'll take what little corporate humility we can find, and if you're fretting about your own machine, you can check it out for some of the more common defects at the link below.The new iMac has been a huge hit and we are working hard to fulfill orders as quickly as possible. We apologize for any inconvenience or delay this may cause our customers.
As usual, Apple is acting like the true monopoly that it is.
@ThrillBill
Go find a dictionary, look up the word "monopoly", read the definition until you understand what a monopoly is, then come back here and explain why you think Apple is a monopoly so we can all laugh at you.
@Jack Thank you for your ridicule. It aptly demonstrates to everyone here what type of individual you are. There is no room for anyone that does not meet your editorial litmus test. Apple monopolizes by controlling the operating system AND the hardware which they run on. Duh.
@ThrillBill
No, seriously. GO LOOK IT UP. You still obviously don't understand what a monopoly is or we would not be having this conversation.
What is Apple's market share? 12%? How can they have 12% market share if they're a monopoly? If they were a monopoly they would have 100% MARKET SHARE. But since Apple does compete in the same market as Microsoft and Dell, HP, etc. they cannot be a monopoly.
Is Apple preventing anybody from buying Windows? Are they preventing anybody from buying PCs? How EXACTLY are they a monopoly then? Sony makes PS3 hardware and software, are they a monopoly? Microsoft makes Xbox hardware and software, are they a monopoly? Ford makes cars AND the engines that power them, are they a monopoly?
And yes, I am ridiculing you because what you are saying is ridiculous. If you are going to continue to defy logic, common sense and basic facts, then I will continue to ridicule you.
@Jack
According to Wikipedia:
"In economics, a monopoly exists when a specific individual or an enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it. Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition for the good or service that they provide and a lack of viable substitute goods."
Apple certainly matches the first sentence, since they love to control the hardware that goes with their software. However, since Windows is a "viable substitute good", Apple is not a monopoly (unless you don't consider Windows a "viable substitute good" :) )
All in all, I agree with Jack... Apple isn't a monopoly. Although I still don't like Apple as a company much (although I like their products).
@Hex
That's not good enough. Apple isn't even CLOSE to a monopoly. They don't even match that first sentence, which is summarized by the second sentence: "Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition".
There is ZERO lack of competition. Z-E-R-O. Microsoft competes with Apple and so does every other hardware computer company. This is so far away from a monopoly it's not even vaguely up for debate. AT ALL.
I know you agreed with me in general, but I think it needs to be made significantly more clear than that. At 90% market share, Microsoft is MUCH closer to a monopoly than Apple is. And even they're not a monopoly. Why? Because they have COMPETITION.
People like to say iPods are a monopoly. Why, because they sell well? Last I heard, you can still buy other PMPs, and Apple isn't stopping you from doing that. NOT A MONOPOLY. Some people are really mentally challenged and try to claim the iPhone is a monopoly. ORLY? So you've never seen another smartphone for sale, ever? Never heard of Droid or the Pre? Or Nokia? HTC?
So many people seem to be so completely clueless about what a monopoly is that this point cannot be made clear enough. The only way Apple could possibly have a monopoly is if they controlled the entire desktop/laptop computer market, or smartphone market, or PMP market. That is the definition of the word monopoly.
@Atkins
Well, I was thinking of OS X as a particular product. Sorry if that wasn't clear. And since you can't (legally) use OS X without using Apple-branded hardware, isn't that technically a method to restrict access to OS X?
@Jack
I wouldn't go so far as to say Apple is not even close to being a monopoly. That said, most of America's companies are SOMEWHAT monopolistic today. That's because they all sell goods that are not completely homogeneous, although they are still acceptable substitutes for each other (Big Mac =/= Whopper, Wii =/= Playstation 3, OS X =/= Windows).
Remember, market share isn't the only thing that determines monopolism. I don't think there is a completely agreed upon measure for monopolism yet. Yes, market share is one such measure, but there's also the elasticity of demand, and profit rate. Last I checked, wasn't Apple making ridiculous profits?
@Atkins
Oh yes, I completely agree. They restrict access, but still aren't a monopoly. And OS X does become more stable with restricted hardware. Apple may act a bit monopolistic, but that's just for the good of their own product. I'd start getting worried if OS X ever exceeded 50% market share (which I don't think they will, at least for a very long time).
You know what they say about revision A Apple products.
No mention about the AirPort cards that are not installed, or installed and not connected? My 27" was one of those...
@Beretta1526 This was most likely due to shipping. Your Mac probably got bounced around and unseated the wifi card. This happens with ram all the time.
Could someone enlighten me on what sort of display issues they've been having? I haven't heard about any issues with the panel/display yet, and I'm excited to hopefully see that panel be released soon as a standalone display, so any information would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
They should apologize for not making a matte version. *sigh* I was going to buy one of these but the mirror is unbearable. Why isn't anyone making a plexy frame for these yet?
@jfine Have you actually used one of Apple's glossy displays? I've had both matte and glossy on various Macs, and really don't mind the glass. The new LED screens are so bright when you turn them up all the way that it minimizes the reflection. In fact, on my new MBP, I cannot hardly stand to turn it up all the way because it is so bright.
@mbushnell They do get very bright and for casual usage that's not a problem. However I do a lot of programming and I tend to keep my monitor down low to reduce eye strain. I also have glasses which reflect quite a bit as well. With reflective monitors I tend to get the whole hall of mirrors effect.
I've seen plenty of videos showing how easily the glass (or is it lexan) is to remove which is why I'm really surprised Apple or a 3rd party hasn't built a replacement bezel. I was tempted to just outsource the cutting of a bezel but I'm nervous that it plays some integral part to keeping the LCD or components dust free.
I may end up just getting the 21" version and try it out.
@jfine So you're telling me that in order to counteract the mirror coating that distracts me, I should go max brightness and increase eye strain and give myself headaches?
Umm - i'll just take a Matte display thanks!
@Phen I think you meant @mbushnell ;-) I'm in the anti-gloss, low light, non-reflective camp.
@jfine He probably did. What you all need to realize is that for the vast majority of people the glossy display is just fine. You are in the extreme minority. There is no telling how much it costs Apple to have the option for a matte display. I'm sure they have very smart people that have run the #s and decided that glossy is the way to go on most of their products.
@mbushnell Glossy looks "better" for most, that's why. Professionals all over the world complained about the non-matte MPB's. Now they all feel Apple's gone retarded with their iMacs and cinema displays.
Got mine on Friday. Twenty-seven inch Core i7, and so far so good right from good 'ol Shanghai via FedEx w/ earlier than expected delivery.
I've had 4 different (brand new) 21.5" iMacs now, and all 4 have had a problem where the new LED backlight flickers/strobes/pulses when you turn the default (9/10)brightness down to 1-4/10. It is a huge issue. I am now going through a screen replacement.
This issue is different from the issue with the 27" model (the actual LCD screen flickering out in chunks) which is video card based I believe, but I am curious to know if 27" users also experience this issue with the backlight flickering at low brightness?
@neglector That's no fun. I hadn't heard about that issue. Seems like if your going 4 for 4 that it's a design flaw.
@jfine My 4th unit came directly from China to my doorstep and still flickered incessantly. Their LED backlight controller seems to be out of sync with the screens refresh rate causing usually imperceivable flicker to be quite noticeable.
Dell UK is troubled with delays as well. My Inspiron Zino HD just got postponed for another 2 weeks and it means I'll have to wait for 5 weeks in total. They haven't even sent me a notification about it and I have to check the status of the order myself
Apple ignores the fact that one of their hugely expensive products is shipping with defects, and instead apologizes for being SO popular and SO in demand! Yeah, some acknowledgement.
@senorkasio
Who said they're ignoring it?
@Jack if my plumber doesn't tell me he's fixing my sink I don't assume he's fixing my sink. If Apple doesn't at least say they are looking into the problem, then a rational person can assume they are ignoring it.
@Atkins maybe but Apple are notoriously among the worst at acknowledging their mistakes. And even if they were the same as everyone else, why defend bad behaviour? I used to be an Apple user and I still might go back, but I truly hate this culture of jumping to the company's defense even when they are in the wrong, which believe me is unique to Apple. It's like being a battered wife. "He doesn't acknowledge the problem but I just know he's working on it and he surprises me with pretty things and anyway all husbands are like this."
@Jack ok,if we talk gaming-with pc you are able to choose from tons of configs(or DIY) without paying some big money for mac. You know what,just to end it all-everyone chooses the best variant that suits him most. Most of us(euros) choose windos, and you ,americans,choose what was first of all made for you,for your needs and market.
And that incident doesnt mean anything-things happen, even when you think different
@(Unverified)
That really didn't make any sense out of context like that, but yes obviously people choose what they want. And you're aware you can pay a lot more money for PCs than you do with Macs, right?
Hi,
I ordered an iMac 27 i5 on Dec. 10th and was still waiting for it on Jan. 10th. What a failure for X-Mas!
So I cancelled my order and went on the refurb, and picked up a 27 C2D 3.33 MHz. Three days later, it was delivered.
Are iMac's taking the same path as some sport cars, where used and available second-hands cars are more expensive than bold new ones on very long waiting-lists?