The iMac G5 Rave Reviews Keep Rolling In Plus One Clanger

Here are the latest highly positive reviews by,

PC Magazine and

The Straits Times Interactive

and the not-so-positive review by,

MercuryNews.com which has a few positive comments but contains a myth and an error that color the review as negative.

Here's what we wrote to the author, Mark Langberg:

Mr. Langberg,

Regarding your article on today's MercuryNews.com, I'll bet you've gotten some unhappy responses. You are, of course, welcome to your own opinion so if you do not like the looks of Apple's new iMac G5 as the headline implies that's fine with me. Go ahead and rage on about how it looks to you like a "laptop on a stick" or on some other criticism of its design. If I disagree, I'll just think you have poor taste and move on. But you really should check your facts before perpetuating a myth and making a just plain silly error.

Your offhand comments about price are biased and perpetuate a myth. You compared the iMac G5 with a $600-800 Wintel, not with another similarly configured and nearly similar quality Wintel. You won't find a similarly configured Dell, IBM or Sony Wintel for $600-800. Here's a couple of comparisons (<http://www.systemshootouts.org/shootouts/desktop/2004/0831_dt1300.html> and <http://www.systemshootouts.org/shootouts/desktop/2004/0831_dt1900.html>) but you can easily do the shopping for yourself instead of lazily repeating a myth. Apple consistently tops the Consumer Reports charts for quality. It's not that they are only more fashionable as your article clearly insinuates but that they have better quality and more features as well.

Your comment about poor eye height is a silly error. Don't be lazy, check the height of many, if not most, 17" LCD monitors sold and you will find the iMac G5 is not out of line as you alleged. C'mon, desk height and chair height are the real factors here.

Despite the shortcomings of your article, you make some good positive points about Mac OS X and the iMac G5. And I agree with your closing premise that most people buy simply on price, eschewing "elegant design and ease of use" but also quality and features, two factors that you forgot. But that basic economic rule applies to everything, not just a personal computer. Thankfully, not everybody is so inclined so that there are better things available than those that reside in the bottom of the pit.

Regards,

Bill Fox

and his generic response:

Dear Readers,

I've heard from many loyal Macintosh users in reponse to my Sept. 20
review of the new iMac G5, too many for me to write individual
responses.

The most common concern is that I made an unfair or incorrect comparison
between the cost of an iMac G5 and Windows systems. To pardon the
obvious pun, it's clearly impossible to make a perfect apples-to-apples
comparison. While I still regard the iMac G5 as somewhat more expensive
that [sic] comparable Windows PCs, I recognize there is much room for debate.
I hope we can agree to disagree.

And thanks for taking the time to write.

-- Mike Langberg, Personal Technology Columnist
San Jose Mercury News

Yes, we agree to disagree on that point and on the unanswered screen-height point.