iMac 17" vs. 20" display?

[ywuwu]

I heard they are quite different. Went to Compusa and checked them out myself.

20" seems clearer, brighter, crispier with better viewing angles, but also costs $500 extra, or a whopping 50% more.

Can those who have real experience with them comment on this please? Should I bite the bullet and shell out the dough to get the 20" and be done with it?

 

[Murlyn]

I haven't really used the 17", but I love my 20". I have no complaints here.

 

[ywuwu]

Another point is the 20" seems quieter than the 17" in the store. Perhaps, the bigger computer has more room inside to dissipate heat/not to let heat accumulate?

 

[mcsenerd]

My question is...what is the resolution difference between the two? ...Or is there a difference?

 

[ywuwu]

Sure there is a difference but they are of different sizes, which sorta makes up the difference, i.e., the pixel size (or relative resolution) should be similar.

The question is the quality difference and other factors that make them apart?

 

[djlee12]

What you should buy depends on your needs. If you plan on watching a lot of DVD's or using a lot of programs that have a load of palletes such as Final Cut Pro or Photoshop, then get the 20". If you will be listening to music, using word, surfing the web, etc etc, get the 17". Or, you may consider the 20" because it provides more flexibility when it comes to running many apps at one time, or any other reasons such as resolution.

Personally, I own the 20" and absolutly love it. I think that it was certaintly worth shelling out the extra case. However, for some, it might not be. It pretty much depends on your needs/desires.

 

[nicklwj]

i have an iMac G5 (17 inch 1.8 GHz), bought last December. March this year it went under from the infamous motherboard problem. Last week I got Tiger. Is 1GB of RAM too small to run this thing? It has been really slow all the way.
Should I get one of the newer 2 GHz G5s too? Personally I preferred Panther.

 

[djlee12]

1 gb of ram should be more than enough. Your iMac should be fine, once you solve the motherboard problem. Obviously, you purchased apple care and that is covered under warranty, correct?

 

[Mr Bobbins]

I've got the 17" imac G5 and it's a great machine, really fast, fantastic screen, isn't noisy, a really good computer.

If I had the money I would have bought a dual G5 with 23" cinema display, that goes without saying.

Bear in mind that it's not just the cost of the computer, it's a good idea to upgrade the ram and this is an extra cost which you should take into consideration.

 

[RGertner]

I just purchased a 17" two days ago. I have been working on an IBM Thinkpad for the past 10 years, so I have grown accustomed to smaller screens. My current Thinkpad is a 14.1 inch that I run at 1400 x 1050, so I assumed that a widescreen 17" would be more than enough. I was wrong. In the land of PC's, I could get a 17" that would run at 1280 x 1024 just fine, and everything would be small enough to fit on the screen, but the 17" has a max resolution of 1440 x 900. This has been rather limiting b/c I am used to a much higher resolution where I can fit more information on the screen. While I can live with the lower resolution, if I had known in advance, I would have definately spent the additional $$$ on the 20 Inch to do 1680 x 1050.

Thanks,
Ray

 

[EvoMac]

I have a 20 inch widescreen monitor hooked up to my mini and I have to say the 1680x1050 resolution that I have is amazing.
Now my next comment is going to get me slaughtered on here, but I will say it for opinions sake.. I think the 20 inch iMac is nicer with the screen size but the frame itself looks worse. There is too much "white space" below the LCD section for my liking on the 20inch model. The 17 inch model looks better from a external apperance in my opinion.

That aside the resolution and extra screen space, plus it being pretty much the same monitor as their standalone retail model makes it a nice package.

 

[djlee12]

I think that usability in the real world is more important that looks. However, I don't mind at all the white space below the LCD. And, I don't think that there is much more in the 20" then there is in the 17".

 

[EvoMac]

I agree w. u DJ, the 20inch has a much better resolution / lcd size and if I were in the market for an iMac I would go with that model. I was just commenting on the external apperance in general. The amount of white space is pretty noticeable though, the apple store that I goto has a 17 and a 20 inch next to each other and you can definitly tell. Still for the extra money the 20inch is worth it.

 

[rman]

Just remember the area below the screen (white space), is for your post-it notes.

 

[walkerj]

Just remember the area below the screen (white space), is for your post-it notes.

If you really want to get the Mac purists riled up you need to say that not only does the white space below the screen bother you, but to 'fix' it you applied some black electrical tape (or better yet, duct tape!) to break it up a bit. :biohazard

As for the difference between the 17" and 20", my experience at the Apple store was that the 17" was "oh, this is pretty okay", but he 20" was "hey, this is sexy! Hmm..think I'm gonna buy me one!"

I don't know why, but it seemed that the difference was somehow worth the $500 extra.