24" iMac
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Peter James on 20 Mar 2010 11:57 Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 09:59:50 +0000, pfjames2000(a)googlemail.com (Peter > James) wrote: > > >I saw a 24" iMac in the Apple refurb store yesterday and quite fancied > >it. Alas it's gone this morning. But I can wait until another comes > >up. > >Does anyone know of any reason why they wouldn't buy it, other than > >shortage of cash that is? > > Nope, they're lovely. I nearly did that, but then I saw that the > lowest-end 27"ers go for �1169 when they're in. The 4670 video card is > better than the GT120 in the 24", and the CPU/memory tech in general > is a year newer and rather faster for the same CPU clock speed. And > you get 4gig RAM and a 1Tb drive - factor that in. > > There were some of those available last weekend. > > Cheers - Jaimie Yes, I saw the 27" on the refurb site and was interested. I was just a little concerned at such a large dispaly in a small room and to be used just as a hobbyists computer. E-mail, Usenet, web browsing and WoW are my main uses for a computer. Seems a waste of technology for such a use. Peter -- He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled. P.G. Wodehouse 1881 -1975
From: SM on 20 Mar 2010 14:18 Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > >Yes, I saw the 27" on the refurb site and was interested. I was just a > >little concerned at such a large dispaly in a small room and to be used > >just as a hobbyists computer. E-mail, Usenet, web browsing and WoW are > >my main uses for a computer. Seems a waste of technology for such a > >use. > > You get an awful lot more WoW space on the 2560x1440 vs the 1920x1200, > I can tell you.... it's half again the pixel count. It is large, but I > think it's only 3" wider than the 24" iMac and about the same height. > And the 4670 plays WoW fine at full 27" res, most settings turned > right up. I've been using a 27" 2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5 on and off for a few weeks - beautiful machine. Stuart -- cut that out to reply
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 20 Mar 2010 16:58 On Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:25:06 +0000, pfjames2000(a)googlemail.com (Peter James) wrote: >Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > >> [Those 27" iMacs are grate, innit] > >You know, you almost convince me. Also, I guess at my age, 72, I'm not >going to buy too many computers from here on in. So maybe.....? There's one on there *right now*. Gwan, they're lovely. I'm expecting this one (i5) to last me 4+ years, with no more than a bit of RAM expansion. Actual measurements for your checking-it-fits pleasure - 25.5" wide (but allow another 8" to the right for the CD eject!) 20.5" tall (from base to top) or 18" for just the computer bit 9" deep at the foot. Cheers - Jaimie -- Is everyone acting like a solipsist in here, or is it just me?
From: David Kennedy on 20 Mar 2010 17:16 Peter James wrote: > You know, you almost convince me. Also, I guess at my age, 72, I'm not > going to buy too many computers from here on in. So maybe.....? > Go for it. You _will_ enjoy it. -- David Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: Martin S Taylor on 20 Mar 2010 18:33 Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote > Actual measurements for your checking-it-fits pleasure - > 25.5" wide I would have bought one, but the window it needs to sit in is {fetches tape measure} 25.25" wide. MST
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 Prev: /Really/ early adopter gets 10.6.3 Next: Mac Mini/HDTV: Overscan always coming up? |