Support NeoGAF

[Phoenix]

 

[Shogmaster]

I'm a Graphic Designer, as in packaging, corporate IDs, brochures, catalogues; not illustration, I can't draw by hand for shit and I'm not ashamed to admit it I admire those who can.

Hey I never said everyone should get a Cintiq. But having it called an "input device" by a graphic designer no less is a sad sight to see.

It's different priorities clearly - you're willing to spend $2500 on a Wacom thing, and I'm not. I'm willing to spend $2500 on a Mac system, and you're not.

The difference here is, Cintiq makes sense for those who draw and paint. The new iMacs is a product turned worse by bad marketing driven design, and makes sense only if you worship Apple.

To say that one platform is for posing and the other is for working is just bullshit. I find my workflow to be much faster using OS X on Mac than using any Windows OS on PC, and that is because I use programs that all fit in very well with each other (the Adobe CS package for example).

Talk about bullshit. Adobe products works exactly the same on both platforms.

Yes, I could use these programs on PC also, but I find things like Expose in OS X to be extremely helpful, not to mention digital lifestyle apps such as iTunes, iPhoto and iMovie.

"Digital Lifestyle"? Is there ANY Apple marketing BS that you don't swallow wholesale?

I'm on a PC right now (at home), which I use to play the only PC game I play (Warcraft), and I've had this one for a couple of years. I use my iBook whenever I'm doing graphics work at home.

To each their own; you're certainly not going to convince me that the iMac G5 is not an innovative and worthwhile machine, and I'm not going to convince you that you could just draw things on paper and scan them in.

You see, that just shows you how limited in thinking Mac users are. "Durr~ Why don't you just draw it and scan it in?" Gee I don't know Johnny.... Why do they bother with none linear digital editing? Digital photography? Digital Special FXs for movies? Could it be that it's a more flexible and provides for more possibilities?

Drawing and painting digitally is an incredibly freeing experience. So much possibilities, so much flexibility. You are not limited by physical boundries. Zoom in all you want. Flip the image in a flash. Don't worry about harming the paper: There is no paper! Try anything and everything. Want to draw with an image hose? Why the hell not? Transpose dry media on wet without fear. Scale and distort the image. Undos. UNDOS! Layers and snaps to paths. The options are endless!

That's why you do it, Johnny: for Jesus and the kittens.

 

[Timbuktu]

Wacom and Macs aren't mutually exclusive you know. A lot of Mac users have wacom products and vice versa.

You see, that just shows you how limited in thinking Mac users are. "Durr~ Why don't you just draw it and scan it in?" Gee I don't know Johnny.... Why do they bother with none linear digital editing? Digital photography? Digital Special FXs for movies? Could it be that it's a more flexible and provides for more possibilities?

err... a lot of Macs are used because of those things you mentioned. How about Final Cut Pro HD, Motion and DVD Studio Pro, Logic, Shake and Soundtrack? That's the worst generalisation of Macs users I've ever heard.

The new iMacs is a product turned worse by bad marketing driven design, and makes sense only if you worship Apple.

I actually have a feeling that this is the first attempt from Apple for a while to expand beyond their established market. And I think it does it well. It isn't perfect and I wouldn't say it's that innovative, but the design will be loved by the people it's marketed to i.e. the iPod generation.

 

[Mustang]

Summerize: Macs = for posing. PC = for working.

How about working on your spelling a little bit with that PC.

$2500 for a input device?

Makes the iMac look damn inexpensive.

You are right though. I can't run Photoshop, Illustrator et al on a Mac because you can't do any work on it.

 

[Shogmaster]

Wacom and Macs aren't mutually exclusive you know. A lot of Mac users have wacom products and vice versa.

They would, but they've busted their budget on the computers.

err... a lot of Macs are used because of those things you mentioned. How about Final Cut Pro HD, Motion and DVD Studio Pro, Logic, Shake and Soundtrack? That's the worst generalisation of Macs users I've ever heard.

Isn't generalisations what's made this forum great? I love it! Gimme them big fat brushes for broad strokes!

I actually have a feeling that this is the first attempt from Apple for a while to expand beyond their established market. And I think it does it well. It isn't perfect and I wouldn't say it's that innovative, but the design will be loved by the people it's marketed to i.e. the iPod generation.

Yes, the braindead generation.

How about working on your spelling a little bit with that PC.

Spelling is for spellers! Yeah.....

Makes the iMac look useless.

fixed it for ya.

You are right though. I can't run Photoshop, Illustrator et al on a Mac because you can't do any work on it.

You could do work on it, but you'd rather pose with it.

 

[Pochacco]

 

[Shogmaster]

Posting same joke twice in one thread guarentees you a special medal I heard.

 

[Prospero]

The New York Times reviews the new G5 iMac today.

link (reg/password: mefimefi/mefimefi)

To be fair, it's written by David Pogue, which means an automatic pro-Mac bias.

Apple's slogan for the new iMac is "From the creators of the iPod." From a certain perspective, it's a little depressing that this is how Apple chooses to bill itself, considering it also made standard components of the mouse, CD-ROM drive, laser printer, wireless networking, Bluetooth and so on. It certainly looks like Apple is trying to boost the Mac's small market share by capitalizing on the iPod's tidal wave of popularity.

On the other hand, the marketers have a valid point; anyone who's captivated by the iPod should try a Macintosh. In this case, you won't even pay the fabled Mac price premium. The iMac models' prices range from $1,300 (17-inch screen, 80-gigabyte hard drive) to $1,900 (20-inch screen, DVD burner, faster chip, 160-gig drive). That's actually less expensive than comparably equipped guts-behind-screen PC's like the Gateway Profile 5 (which costs $125 more). Sony's V310P costs $50 less than the G5, but has only a 15-inch screen.

Of course, considering that you can pick up a starter Dell box for only $450, $1,300 is still a lot of money. When you buy a computer that incorporates a gorgeous flat-panel screen and the miniaturized, more expensive components of laptops, that's the way the ball bounces.

The iPod experiment has proved, however, that in the right circumstances, people will pay for Apple elegance, beauty and simplicity. The MacPod may not have the radical design of the first two iMac generations. But with its appealing combination of power, portability and panache, the iMac G5 may be just radical enough.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I want one but I need to get used to the look, right now I'm seating at the Airport waiting for my fight and I loves my powerbook