The Michigan Review

Computers 7 October 1998

Looks Aren't Everything

by Matthew S. Schwartz

Apple has always been a unique company. While other computers are dull and void of spirit, Macintoshes try to be very friendly to the user. As soon as one powers up the machine, he is greeted by a smiling face telling him that his Mac is happy and ready to have fun!

Macintoshes have also always been able to call themselves the sexiest of the personal computer bunch, with their enticing curves and single-button mouse that I like to refer to as the “love button.” It therefore came as no surprise when Apple unveiled its latest seduction, the iMac. Standing for Internet Macintosh, the iMac truly looks like no other computer you’ve ever seen. Most computers usually have a big clunky monitor, a desktop case or some sort of tower housing the computer components, and separate speakers that can be placed on either side of the monitor. The iMac has just one blue and white case, which houses the monitor, computer components, and speaker. This greatly reduces the amount of area the computer takes up on a desk. Needless to say, whatever room a student can squeeze out of the small desks in his residence hall is very helpful.

The iMac has been a fantastic seller, doubling Apple’s market share in the space of one month. That’s not surprising, considering how important image is in today’s world. The best description of the computer I have heard was written in Time magazine, saying that if you’re looking for a cute little PC to go with one of those new Volkswagen Beetles, this is the one.

Is this the computer for you? I recently got my hands on an iMac, and after playing around with it for a while, I have come to the following conclusion: while it is fast, sexy, and it reeks of cuteness and simplicity, this is not the computer for you.

Size Does Matter

The iMac is small. It was intended to be small in order to attract those who do not want a large computer. But no matter how much you may have been reassuring yourself for the past however-many-years, size does matter.

First of all, the diagonal size of the built-in monitor is only 15 inches, with a viewable area of just 13.8 inches. This may seem fine, until you realize that most of the computers on the market today come with 17- or 19-inch monitors. There are notebooks on the market with larger monitors than the iMacs. What does this mean? It means that as your computing skills grow and you learn to love multitasking, the monitor will start to feel cramped to you. And if you go out and buy a new monitor, you will still be stuck with the old monitor since it is built-in. You can use two monitors with the iMac, but that would defeat the purpose of having a small computer that doesn’t take up much space. Also, the computer (and therefore the monitor) doesn’t swivel. It’s a luxury, yes, but most all other monitors on the market have some sort of swivel-capability. With the iMac, if I move my chair over and want to adjust the monitor, I will have to turn the whole computer, a process which could easily scratch my desk if I’m not careful.

Second, the mouse and keyboard are somewhat small and uncomfortable. I am used to large natural keyboards and mice which are perfectly contoured to my hand; the iMac has neither. Sure, you can always buy a new mouse and keyboard, but you are already paying a lot for those that come with the iMac.

Third, in order to save internal space, the built-in CD-ROM drive is not motorized. It looks somewhat cheap, like a removable drive one would find on a notebook computer. When I went to eject a CD from the drive, it didn’t eject all the way. It merely popped out a couple inches, and I had to pull the drive out the rest of the way in order to remove my CD. It’s nothing major, but since that is the only drive on the machine, one would think Apple could motorize it.

If you must "Think Different," don't think iMac.The only drive on the machine? What is he talking about? No, folks, I haven’t lost it. Apple lost it. In order to shrink this computer as much as possible, Apple chose to forego a 3.5 inch disk drive, claiming that no one uses disks anymore! And among all the others, this is the number one reason why I cannot recommend this computer. I don’t care what Apple’s focus groups said, or what their market department claimed, or what their warped engineers believe; a disk drive is necessary.

Let’s say you have a big term paper due tomorrow. You have been working on it at the Angell Hall computer lab all day, and at about eleven o’clock at night you print it out, put the document on a disk, and go back to your room, content that your paper is A-quality material. You awake the next morning and peruse your paper one last time before class, only to find that you forgot to cite something you paraphrased! Since plagiarism is grounds for expulsion, you quickly boot up your friendly iMac in order to fix the mistake. You wait two minutes for everything to load up, you take our your disk, and you frantically search for a disk drive but alas! There is none! You had completely forgotten! After all, what computer maker in their right mind would ever leave out the disk drive?! And now, in a drunken stupor, you stumble off to class with your plagiarized paraphrase, and you are expelled. All because of Apple and the iMac with no disk drive.

Okay, so this example is a little extreme. But just assuming that every user would be able to transfer his documents between computers over a network is a quite a large mistake on Apple’s part. Yes, you can always go out and purchase an external disk drive, but why go out and spend any more money than you are already spending? Going for around $1299, the iMac, while not extremely expensive, is not cheap. And with the introduction of sub-$800 PCs into the market, one should have a really good incentive to purchase this computer. And despite what Apple has been trying to tell you, most computers on the market these days are basically the same. The only thing cool about the iMac is the way it looks.

And looks aren’t everything.MR


This article was published in the 7 October 1998 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 17, Number 2).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.

Previous Article The Michigan Review's Home Page Next Article