Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Blazing Review of the New iMac

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the non-nitty-gritty-reviews dept.

boxturtleme writes "Despite the sometimes lackluster reviews of the new Intel iMac over the past several weeks, what with speed tests and hardware bugs, the New York Times sure seemed to like it. And beyond the blazing review, the Times seems fully confident that someone will soon have Windows and OS X dual booting."

7 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. MSN by metlin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Web pages appear startlingly quickly: nytimes.com pops open in about 1 second (versus 2), Amazon is ready in 2 seconds (versus 4) and MSN appears in 6 seconds (versus 8).

    *giggles like a little girl*

  2. Uh, oh... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Blazing...

    I know the new Macs are fast, but does that mean the new CPUs are smoking (i.e., Oh God, oh God, the CPU is on fire and we all gonna die!). That would be bad.

  3. Forgive him by spac3manspiff · · Score: 3, Funny

    He suffers from "widespread befuddlement"

  4. Of course it's a blazing review! by chrism238 · · Score: 3, Funny

    David Pogue's got forthcoming books to sell.

  5. Windows on Mac by tidewaterblues · · Score: 5, Funny

    From TFA: "Just turning the machine on is a joy, because starting up now takes 20 seconds instead of 60, like the previous model; you'll want to do it again and again." Sounds like we have yet another reviewer who is eager to run Windows on his Mac...

    --


    ...En að Besta Sem Guð Hefur Skapað Er Nýr Dagur
  6. Re:So the real question is by slughead · · Score: 3, Funny

    will it copy a 17MB file in under 20 minutes?

    Did you seriously hold onto that blog entry for SEVEN YEARS to post it?

    --
    Latewire
  7. Re:So the real question is by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't want to start a holy war here but what is the deal with this seven-year-old Mac troll? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig browsing slashdot when I should be working for about twenty minutes while it attempts to to make me laugh 17 times. At home, while looking at the *BSD troll, which by all standards should be a lot less funny than the Mac troll, I'd be giggling in two minutes, if that.... From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Mac troll is a superior troll. 7-year-old Mac troll addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use the Mac troll over other faster, funnier, more reliable trolls.