Sony Vaio Z Canvas release date, price and specs: Another Surface Pro rival but for the US
When I read PCA's review of the new iMac, I could hardly believe my eyes. The review is so full of errors and mistakes as to be useless.
For those, like me, considering an iMac, please visit Apple 27 inch for hte correct information
A word of warning, make sure you read an independent review. I have a very strong suspicion that an Apple review will be a very one sided affair.
I changed from Windows to iMAC in April 2012 and have been so disappointed with it and the other Apple "bolt ons". There appear to be a lot of problems that a great deal of people suffer with yet no tangible fix or patch is ever forthcoming to right the problem. Take a look at the Apple Support Forums and you will see what I mean.
It is an expensive piece of equipment to be disappointed with after the event.
Without doubt they are fast machines, but so unstable as to be laughable. Wireless connections drop out many times a day which can cause problems with reconnecting again, but as I say, have a look at the Forums mentioned above.
FE The review states " there’s a small speed-bump from 2.7GHz to 2.9GHz, now backed with 8GB of RAM and 1TB hard drive" implying that this is the higher spec. The top spec is 3.4GHz boosted to 3.9GHz, a 3TB HDD or a combined fusion drive and 32GB Ram; its graphic processor is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 NOT GTX 660M as stated.
"Bankers with a nice fat Christmas bonus to play with can also opt for a 3.2GHz model with a GTX 675M for an additional £200". Incorrect, see above.
I need say no more. The review was very off-putting and, I feel, heavily biased against the iMac; had I not already read the specs of the new iMac I would have discounted it based on the review. As it is, I shall order one after 31st March
We're taking a look at it now and will amend any errors. For the record, however: 'there's a small speed-bump from 2.7GHz to 2.9GHz, now backed with 8GB of RAM and 1TB hard drive' is correct. It's the model we tested (the model Apple gave us to test). How you took from that the implication that it was the top spec, I don't know. The line about 3.2GHz model with a GTX 675M costing an additional £200 is also true. It's not the top spec - so I understand your confusion - but it is a spec you can buy for that price.
Personally I'd say it is a very positive review, albeit not a hagiography. We're not biased for, or against, any manufacturer or product. We'd be stupid to be so as our business is based on independent testing. Can you say the same thing, HondaMan? As you've said yourself you are already committed to buying the iMac, and your comments read to me as those of someone who refuses to hear any negatives about your personal choice of PC.
The facts you indicate are wrong only if you misunderstand that we're talking about the specs of the entry-level 27in iMac, which we tested. We have therefore added the point that the 2.9GHz model is the entry level so there's no confusion on that point, and expanded on the top-end model's specs and options later on.
The graphics processor on the tested entry-level iMac is indeed the 660M, as we stated. The 680MX is an option on the higher-level iMac only.
Of course you are welcome to your opinion but we don't agree that the review is heavily biased against the iMac, as the verdict states: "For many people the 27in iMac will be the machine of their dreams".
A more Mac-centric iMac review is available on our sister title Macworld.
"The top spec is 3.4GHz boosted to 3.9GHz, a 3TB HDD or a combined fusion drive and 32GB Ram; its graphic processor is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5 NOT GTX 660M as stated."
Yes, which is why I said "There are two new 27" iMac models, the review was of the 2.9GHz version"
I think you've based a judgement on a misunderstanding of what you read.
Duly chastened :-(0(
Ha! It was a bit of a ganging up. Possibly overkill... You are entirely entitled to your opinion.
Matt's right - no need to feel chastened. A new iMac is a sizeable investment, and you're right to look closely at reviews before taking the plunge.
I'm just jealous really.
I think that the OP and TonyV have given rise to a very interesting question namely, whatabout a dispassionate and in-depth 'real-world' look at the issues arising when switching from Windows to Apple?
Some of my work colleagues are Apple fanatics and trying to get an accurate unbiased view from them, of switching from Windows to Apple, is a waste of time. Some people (FE if I remember correctly) have switched from Windows to Apple and are very pleased with the result. However, there are also people like TonyV who, after switching, appear to have a detailed list of issues/grievances with Apple and regret the move.
I doubt whether - at least, initially - the forums are the right place to explore this but maybe there's an article to be had which focusses in detail on actual user experiences (both positive and negative), rather than just looking at the OS differences. For sure, there are plenty of articles on the web but the vast majority of them seem to either have an axe to grind or don't focus on comparing actual user experiences. From my point of view, a 'True Confessions'-type article featuring users (both happy and unhappy) who'd made the switch and discussed the reasons why they were happy/unhappy would be a valuable reference in helping me decide whether to spend the sort of dosh that needs to be laid out for an iMac.
Just a thought :-)
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.