PDA

View Full Version : Any chance of cheaper Powermacs?




Willy S
Mar 31, 2006, 03:52 AM
I have now been an iMac G5 owner for about a year and I haven´t encountered a single software problem, viruses or just any problems with e.g. setting up peripherals, except my Epson printer, but I managed to fix that.

I cannot say the same thing about my experience with Windows or Linux, so I would like to keep on using Macs. I need to upgrade one of my iMacs since they only have VGA out instead of DVI and they have TN panels that I cannot use for critical Photoshop work. It would also be nice to have Lightroom run faster.

I have looked at Apple´s offerings and I´m not willing to buy any of them for the following reasons.

Mini: Lacks sufficient graphics card, uses expensive laptop ram.

iMac:
*I have no use for its 17" TN panel, so I would have to buy external monitor anyway.

*20" is far overpriced and perhaps it also has a TN panel. 17" iMac + decent 20" S-IPS cost about the same.

*It has useless iSight (the camera is too close to your face so the angle is terrible, so you look silly in it...too big nose etc)

*It uses expensive laptop ram even though it is a desktop! That is about 150$ more for 2GB of ram than if it was a desktop ram.

*2GB ram isn´t enough anymore!

Powermac: You can get similar fast PC around half the price!

iMacs don´t fit me needs but they don´t cost double the price you would have to pay for a PC with the some TN panel LCDs. If I had money to burn, I would just buy a Powermac and enjoy it, but I don´t and I need much, power, so I think I have no alternative but to buy a PC even though I like Tiger much, much more than Windows...unless Apple comes with cheaper Powermacs anytime soon? :confused:



localghost
Mar 31, 2006, 04:48 AM
I agree there is a gap in Apples lineup if you don't want an all-in-one, and i would love to see a (slower) sub 1500 PowerMac, too.

The 'Macs are to expensive' issue has been beaten to death - personally I believe there is not a big difference (if at all) in price IF a) you want all the features that come with a PowerMac and b) don't compare it to custom built PCs.

I do not really see your problem though. First, if you need a machine for professional Photoshop work on a daily basis, the PowerMac should pay for itself. That said there ARE other options, albeit not as elegant as a new Powermac + ACD: sell both IMacs, get a refurbished PM + Dell (or a CRT if this is to expensive), or simply add a good CRT to one of the Imacs and sell the other.

Willy S
Mar 31, 2006, 05:35 AM
I need 2 computers....one is for my wife.

17" iMacs are not expensive if you can use the features it provides. Powermacs are on the other hand way overpriced. I would pay 1300-1500$ for a PM that is as powerful as a 1000$ custom built PC.....but not $1900 or more.

Apple doesn´t sell refurbished macs here in Italy.

My problem is that Apple doesn´t give my any value for my money when my needs are considered, and I don´t think that is unfair of me.

Takumi
Mar 31, 2006, 05:35 AM
The 'Macs are to expensive' issue has been beaten to death
Lets flog the dead horse some more then.

Fact: CPU's from the mac mini have been replaced with faster after market products.

Fact: Given time all mac products are going to migrate to intel based CPU's

Theory: when the powermac's migrate, by the lowes't model and pop in your faster aftermarket chip and save the dollars

Takumi

thegreatluke
Mar 31, 2006, 06:12 AM
That would be a very interesting idea.

A silent, sub-$1500 US PowerMac.

I know they're going to be Intel, but in PowerPC terms... maybe a 2.0 GHz G5? That wouldn't be bad! I can't tell all of those Intel chips, but something like that. Still fast, but not super-fast-and-expensive.

miloblithe
Mar 31, 2006, 06:15 AM
Used or refurbished PowerMac is probably your best bet.

SmurfBoxMasta
Mar 31, 2006, 07:06 AM
1 word for ya:

eBay!.......................

many DP 1.25 & 1.42 towers for <<$1500..........

And CRT's are relatively inexpensive nowadays. I have seen many 17" ones for under $100, and bunches of 21"ers for ~$400

evil_santa
Mar 31, 2006, 07:59 AM
Powermac: You can get similar fast PC around half the price!


When i got my G5 d2.7 last year i did some speed comparisons with some of the PC at work, the only machines that matched or beat the performance of my G5 was the high end PC workstation (i think they were HP), the main reason they had a bit more speed was because the had 2x10,000rpm drives set as a RAID 0 (speed)

These machines cost a more than the G5.

Willy S
Mar 31, 2006, 09:17 AM
I did some price search and I have come up with this:

Intel D805 (2x2.66Ghz) 130 euros
Asus P5800 SE motherboard 70 euros
4x 1GB MDT DDR2 Ram 260 euros
DVD drive 40 euros
Asus 128mb EN6600GT graphics card 120 euros
PSU Antec Smartpower ATX 2 400w 50 euros
Some midi/big tower 50 euros
Sound blaster audigy 4 60 euros
Keyboard+mouse 70 euros


Total: 850 euros

In my case, I have usable graphics card, keyboard, mouse and a tower, so I would only have to spend 610 euros.

When you consider that this machine has 4GB of ram, Apple should been able to make a lowend PM for as low as 850-200(512mb ram instead of 4GB)= 650 euros. The cost of producing the OSX is fixed, so I don´t know how much a contribution should be calculated, but I would guess 50 euros would be fair with a new machine. Thus the total cost could be 700 euros and Apple might been able to get a better deal that customers from stores.

So Apple could sell the lowend PM for 1000-1200 and make 300-500 euros for each Mac sold. That is a very healthy margin.

gekko513
Mar 31, 2006, 09:23 AM
It isn't a good starting point to select components for a build it yourself computer and then add some vague margin to come up with a possible Apple product.

The economics for a complete package PC/Mac are very different from a do it yourself.

It is more realistic to start with an existing PC package offer from a large PC vendor and then create the Apple product of your dreams compared to that.

Timepass
Mar 31, 2006, 10:56 AM
this tread is a key example of a problem with apple line up. They make good pro computer and they make good computer for average people but they leave a huge group out in the cold. This group does not need nor do they want to speed the money for a power mac but the non pro models did can not meet the needs or wants they have. Now they have to choose to either pay more than they want or give up the needs they want.

I for one hate the all in one boxes because they can not be upgraded or added to but at the same time I dont need the power of the Power mac. I need something inbettween those.

I general hate apple desktop and think they are over priced (now the laptops on the other had I think are great computers and very well valued). But like the orginal poster stated I can (and have current PC is home built) that is a lot cheaper than the power mac. When I built it the total cost came to about $1500. That $1500 included all the software I needed and wanted (minus games). All of it was legit and legally gotten. No extras so I didnt have to pay for the extra software apple or any other OEM would include that I dont want or never would use (dont need office or a word processor, Got Office pro for free though my school you know the drill). At the time I did a test build on the apple sight with EDU to see how much it would take me to build a simmlar apple product. Started with the lower end power mac (base price around 2grand) and started upgrading to match. Came out to be around $2500.

But then again I never want to buy a desktop from an OEM again so i as it stands I never will by an Apple desktop. I enjoy building my computer to much to give it up.

I am still wanting an macbook pro though. Just need to get 5-6 grand in the bank first. I have several things that I need to get in the next year (new tires brake work on my car, replacing the grade I took out of emergany funds for speeding tickets things like that. A new laptop is a want not a need)

Keebler
Mar 31, 2006, 11:21 AM
this talk about having a cheaper powermac is like comparing cars. I"m sorry, but this rant is a rant and not directed at anyone in particular.

really, yes, powermacs are a bit expensive, but with their specs, their included software and their VALUE in being a MAC, i find the prices fair (ok...the quad is out there in terms of pricing :) Plus, you have to add in the factor of market demand. as much as WE love macs, there are simply too many mom and pop shops selling PCs, therefore the prices are cheaper.

That said, back to the cars....ya, you could want a lexus and you could want a sunfire or grand am. You could be looking at buying either or.

We all know which one is:
more expensive
rides much nicer
better sound system
more included features
built better
LASTS LONGER
has more 'prestige' if you will
retains its value

bingo...the lexus.

now, given all those features and its value...do you think they'd make a sub-$39 K car? no

why?

because people who understand value will buy it.

you get what you pay for. also, if you want something bad enough or if you NEED something bad enough, you can always find a way to get what you need..ie. get a bank loan, borrow from parents. if you really need a PMac for power, I assume you need it for work, for a business... if that's the case, then get a loan and your business will pay it off. you have to spend money to make money. first line of business in my mind. i dreaded spending the cash for my G4 dual 1.25 and then a year later, my G5 dual 2.0. but you know, they are now all paid off. i tried the pc world and it sucked...knew i needed the best..got the best...it all worked out.

if you want an ugly operating system, want to worry about viruses, then get a pc.

i may be wrong here, but i've always looked at macs in the particular order of greatness:
emac
ibook
imac
powerbook
powermacs

i think the powermacs are designed for professional work whereas the imacs are designed for the home users. the main feature of the PMs is simply expandability.

i agree with the others, look for a refurb or ebay mac. some great prices out there.

best of luck,
Keebler

Timepass
Mar 31, 2006, 11:53 AM
this talk ab......
best of luck,
Keebler

Not going to go though and pick apart you post. This thread is not about that. I think you are missing the point of his complaints and what others have been pointing out.
He not complaining about Macs being much more expensives than there PC counter parts.
The complain it in the fact that Apple lacks this entire middle ground in there Desktop line up.
They have the dirt cheap (Mac Mini) Low end to middle (where most people computer needs are). Those to lines are with in an acceptible range of prive.

And they have high end. They are missing the entire part bettween mid and high end. The jump bettween the iMac to the Power mac is huge. The jump bettween the mac mini and the iMac is not that large.

What the orignal post wants is something bettween power mac line and the imac. And he is correct the Power macs are pretty over priced. When things get up in that end in power. Custom built computers start becoming very good opition to go to and are quite a bit more common place. For the most part I see more home builts up there in that range of power then one from OEMs.
As I pointed out in my last post the Desktop I am running is home built for $1500. Nearest mac that came even close when I built it was around 2grand. I did not cut cost out for software. all of it on the computer is legit.
Apple really needs something bettween the iMac and the Pro line. Some tower that has a starting price of 1200 or so. No monitor. It would give that nice middle ground to peope that a lot of people want.

Right now a lot of people are kind of getting screwed by apple in this case. They need/want something more powerful than the iMac and needs to be upgradible with things like PCI cards hard drives and so on but they dont need the power that the pro line offers or can afford it. Now there choice are either give up the profomces out of the rig or pay a lot more money than they need to get what they need.

Apple lacks a Prosumer line (something bettween a consumer and a pro computer) And for that reason I personally never will by an apple desktop. My needs and wants are in the prosumer area. The orginal poster based on what he said needs and wants is in the prosumer area.

And to top it off the pro desktop line of apple are really massively over priced.

Keebler
Mar 31, 2006, 12:12 PM
Not going to go though and pick apart you post. This thread is not about that. I think you are missing the point of his complaints and what others have been pointing out.
He not complaining about Macs being much more expensives than there PC counter parts.
From Keebler: I was making the point b/c someone compared the price of a built pc to a mac...

The complain it in the fact that Apple lacks this entire middle ground in there Desktop line up.
From Keebler: how many different levels do they need? i think the imac serves the middle ground too no? if you need something more than that, time to get a powermac

They have the dirt cheap (Mac Mini) Low end to middle (where most people computer needs are). Those to lines are with in an acceptible range of prive.

And they have high end. They are missing the entire part bettween mid and high end. The jump bettween the iMac to the Power mac is huge. The jump bettween the mac mini and the iMac is not that large.

What the orignal post wants is something bettween power mac line and the imac. And he is correct the Power macs are pretty over priced. When things get up in that end in power. Custom built computers start becoming very good opition to go to and are quite a bit more common place. For the most part I see more home builts up there in that range of power then one from OEMs.
As I pointed out in my last post the Desktop I am running is home built for $1500. Nearest mac that came even close when I built it was around 2grand. I did not cut cost out for software. all of it on the computer is legit.
Apple really needs something bettween the iMac and the Pro line. Some tower that has a starting price of 1200 or so. No monitor. It would give that nice middle ground to peope that a lot of people want.

From Keebler: again, i agree that the quad is overpriced, but you're missing my point - you can't compare apples to oranges (no pun intended). i completely disagree that the line of macs is overpriced. it's overpriced in your opinion and sure a pc can be built for cheaper, but you're getting a PC. not a mac. there is inherrent value to that. seriously, go to a pontiac dealership and drive their model which 'rival's a lexus in terms of speed, specs. then go to a lexus dealership and repeat. now, which one will you buy? different vehicles...ie. different computers.


Right now a lot of people are kind of getting screwed by apple in this case. They need/want something more powerful than the iMac and needs to be upgradible with things like PCI cards hard drives and so on but they dont need the power that the pro line offers or can afford it. Now there choice are either give up the profomces out of the rig or pay a lot more money than they need to get what they need.

From Keebler: well, i think apple has a smart busienss plan. you and others may think they are getting screwed, but if i'm correct, dells marketshare and value has dipped. what happened? oversaturated the market with way too many types and variations of machines. have a few, be good at them and people can choose.

Apple lacks a Prosumer line (something bettween a consumer and a pro computer) And for that reason I personally never will by an apple desktop. My needs and wants are in the prosumer area. The orginal poster based on what he said needs and wants is in the prosumer area.

from keebler: again, how many lines do they need? i've never heard of a prosumer and as far as i'm concerned, you're either a consumer or a professional..how can you be both? that's not supposed to be smart aleck either...what do you do with your pc which puts you in between? i'm seriously curious.

And to top it off the pro desktop line of apple are really massively over priced.
disagree :)

good chat!

Timepass
Mar 31, 2006, 12:24 PM
disagree :)

good chat!


explain why because right now I am not seeing it.

I pointing out my problem and many people other problem with apples desktop line up.
The complete lack of a middle ground bettween the iMac and the Power mac

Currently if you list only the desktop line you have Mac Mini, iMac and then powermac

Now the differnce bettween the Mac Mini and the iMac is not to big and is find for a line up and argueblly you can get a mac mini close to an base iMac in power.

But when you go from iMac to Power mac it is a huge jump and it is not possible to really make the jump small. the iMac lacks upgradiblily. It very limited on its upgrades that you can put on there.

What apple needs is something bettween those 2. Right now it just a bad set up. His needs and my needs are somewhere bettween the iMac and the power mac. iMac is to weak and lacks the ablility to be upgraded to my needs. Power mac has a lot more than my needs so I am paying a lot of money for stuff I dont need or want.
That is the problem right now is everyone who needs fall in that huge area bettween the iMac and the Power mac. Apple leaves those people out in the cold and the only place to turn to fill those needs is to a PC. Plus it a lot cheaper to go that route if you choose to home build. As I point out earily 1k difference is price for the same level of power. Even if you put in the extra unneeds software you are still talking about over a 700 difference in price.

Are you telling me people who need the middle ground bettween the iMacs and the Power mac dont really matter. And are stupid for not understanding apple. It is a much larger segment of the market that people who want/need pro computers.

CanadaRAM
Mar 31, 2006, 12:42 PM
*It uses expensive laptop ram even though it is a desktop! That is about 150$ more for 2GB of ram than if it was a desktop ram.


Not true. Today's prices at Data Memory Systems

1GB DDR2-667 (PC2-5300) 128x64 CL5 1.9v 240 Pin Non-ECC DIMM DM50 632 US$116.00 "desktop RAM"

1GB 200 Pin DDR2-667 PC2-5300 128x64 CL5 1.8V SODIMM DM50 189 US$113.00 "laptop RAM"

You can construct whatever artificial comparisons you want to make your pre-conceived argument ("The iMac monitor is no good so I have to buy another") but at least check your facts.

Willy S
Mar 31, 2006, 01:22 PM
Not true. Today's prices at Data Memory Systems

1GB DDR2-667 (PC2-5300) 128x64 CL5 1.9v 240 Pin Non-ECC DIMM DM50 632 US$116.00 "desktop RAM"

1GB 200 Pin DDR2-667 PC2-5300 128x64 CL5 1.8V SODIMM DM50 189 US$113.00 "laptop RAM"

You can construct whatever artificial comparisons you want to make your pre-conceived argument ("The iMac monitor is no good so I have to buy another") but at least check your facts.

Crucial.com/eu prices:

iMac G5, rev C: 1GB CT477886 DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64
€111.61 inc. VAT

iMac intel: 1GB CT500622 DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64
€180.94 inc. VAT

2GB would cost: 360 euro for intel iMac and 222 euro for G5. The difference is 138 euros.

Lord Blackadder
Mar 31, 2006, 01:42 PM
*It has useless iSight (the camera is too close to your face so the angle is terrible, so you look silly in it...too big nose etc)

That had me rolling on the floor, LOL. I imagine an iSight with a fish-eye effect. :D

On a more serious note, look into a refurb PowerMac G5 at the Apple Store...they often have dual core 2.0GHz models for under $1500. If you can't stand the price then you'll have to stick with a homebuilt PC for the present.

dr_lha
Mar 31, 2006, 02:50 PM
Crucial.com/eu prices:

iMac G5, rev C: 1GB CT477886 DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64
€111.61 inc. VAT

iMac intel: 1GB CT500622 DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64
€180.94 inc. VAT

2GB would cost: 360 euro for intel iMac and 222 euro for G5. The difference is 138 euros.

Funny. On the US Crucial site I get the following:

iMac G5:
DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64 US $165.86

iMac Intel:
DDR2 PC2-5300 • CL=5 • UNBUFFERED • NON-ECC • DDR2-667 • 1.8V • 128Meg x 64 US $153.25

So its actually cheaper for the Intel Mac.

Keebler
Mar 31, 2006, 02:55 PM
explain why because right now I am not seeing it.

I pointing out my problem and many people other problem with apples desktop line up.
The complete lack of a middle ground bettween the iMac and the Power mac

Currently if you list only the desktop line you have Mac Mini, iMac and then powermac

Now the differnce bettween the Mac Mini and the iMac is not to big and is find for a line up and argueblly you can get a mac mini close to an base iMac in power.

But when you go from iMac to Power mac it is a huge jump and it is not possible to really make the jump small. the iMac lacks upgradiblily. It very limited on its upgrades that you can put on there.

What apple needs is something bettween those 2. Right now it just a bad set up. His needs and my needs are somewhere bettween the iMac and the power mac. iMac is to weak and lacks the ablility to be upgraded to my needs. Power mac has a lot more than my needs so I am paying a lot of money for stuff I dont need or want.
That is the problem right now is everyone who needs fall in that huge area bettween the iMac and the Power mac. Apple leaves those people out in the cold and the only place to turn to fill those needs is to a PC. Plus it a lot cheaper to go that route if you choose to home build. As I point out earily 1k difference is price for the same level of power. Even if you put in the extra unneeds software you are still talking about over a 700 difference in price.

Are you telling me people who need the middle ground bettween the iMacs and the Power mac dont really matter. And are stupid for not understanding apple. It is a much larger segment of the market that people who want/need pro computers.

Timepass, i'm being serious here...what tasks do you do to be 'middle ground'? or do you mean to hit the 'middle pricing' tier? my thinking is that the imac is the middle ground - you can burn dvds, edit movies, play games, do email, do webcam etc..etc. what more could you do, that wouldn't require a pro machine? i'm not trying to be smarta$$ here - quite serious. I think you're talking more about a middle ground price point.

It's too bad though. i don't think you'll ever buy a mac and you're missing out on some good stuff. in fact, far better than a home built pc will ever get you.
if you doubt me, check out expose on a friend's mac or how to colour code folders/files or better yet, think of a cool app you need, do a search on versiontracker and i'll bet you'll find it b/c folks code stuff for the macs all the time.

i really think macs cover the middle ground.

dr_lha
Mar 31, 2006, 03:00 PM
That said, I checked the EU crucial site and see the price disparity you quote. Clearly you guys in Europe are getting hosed.

Eric5h5
Mar 31, 2006, 03:05 PM
It would be nice if Apple made something between the Mini (with its sucktastic integrated graphics chip) and a Power Mac--something semi-expandable, sans monitor, so that leaves out the iMac. However, the Power Macs are a decent value for what you're getting. Whatever the Intel equivalent of a Power Mac will be, one thing's for sure: they won't be a penny cheaper.

--Eric

dr_lha
Mar 31, 2006, 03:07 PM
Timepass, i'm being serious here...what tasks do you do to be 'middle ground'? or do you mean to hit the 'middle pricing' tier? my thinking is that the imac is the middle ground - you can burn dvds, edit movies, play games, do email, do webcam etc..etc. what more could you do, that wouldn't require a pro machine? i'm not trying to be smarta$$ here - quite serious. I think you're talking more about a middle ground price point.

It's too bad though. i don't think you'll ever buy a mac and you're missing out on some good stuff. in fact, far better than a home built pc will ever get you.
if you doubt me, check out expose on a friend's mac or how to colour code folders/files or better yet, think of a cool app you need, do a search on versiontracker and i'll bet you'll find it b/c folks code stuff for the macs all the time.

i really think macs cover the middle ground.

The trouble is that this guy wants Apple to be like Dell, and make machines scaling from doorstop to mega server with a million steps in between. Apple prefers to simplify things and have a few easy steps.

Mini -> iMac -> PowerMac.

Personally I think he'd be fine with a 2Gb Core Duo Mini, unless he's a gamer the GFX card will be fine for everything he does, as I've said many many times on this forum, I think the Intel Graphics thing is way over hyped and have found the perfomance of the graphics on my Mini to be extremely satisfactory. I'm not a PC gamer, gaming is done on the couch in my house, so I don't give a crap about the lack of vertex shaders making Doom 3 run slow. The fact is that UI responsiveness is great, Core Image stuff runs great (smoothest ripple I've seen), and even OpenGL stuff like Google Earth runs quicker on my Mini than on either of my Mac laptops, and its running under Rosetta.

That said, its difficult for me to really recommend an Intel Mac right now for doing Photoshop as its going to be running under Rosetta.

QCassidy352
Mar 31, 2006, 03:12 PM
The complain it in the fact that Apple lacks this entire middle ground in there Desktop line up.
They have the dirt cheap (Mac Mini) Low end to middle (where most people computer needs are). Those to lines are with in an acceptible range of prive.

And they have high end. They are missing the entire part bettween mid and high end. The jump bettween the iMac to the Power mac is huge. The jump bettween the mac mini and the iMac is not that large.


That's just not true. The imac is a perfect mid-range computer, both in terms of price and performance. If you disagree, please tell me what you would consider to be mid-range components at a mid-range price. The only reason the imac does not work for the OP is that the screen does not meet his requirements, and that is not going to be the case for many people.

Timepass
Mar 31, 2006, 03:17 PM
Timepass, i'm being serious here...what tasks do you do to be 'middle ground'? or do you mean to hit the 'middle pricing' tier? my thinking is that the imac is the middle ground - you can burn dvds, edit movies, play games, do email, do webcam etc..etc. what more could you do, that wouldn't require a pro machine? i'm not trying to be smarta$$ here - quite serious. I think you're talking more about a middle ground price point.

It's too bad though. i don't think you'll ever buy a mac and you're missing out on some good stuff. in fact, far better than a home built pc will ever get you.
if you doubt me, check out expose on a friend's mac or how to colour code folders/files or better yet, think of a cool app you need, do a search on versiontracker and i'll bet you'll find it b/c folks code stuff for the macs all the time.

i really think macs cover the middle ground.


Ok I think apple laptop are great.

I talking about the huge gap in power and upgradiblity bettween the Power mac and the iMac. the iMac has very little ablity to be upgraded (ram being the only real upgrade to it.) I think the best way to look at is take the iMac and put it in side a tower no monitor. That way you have the ability to add more internal hard drives, Upgrade the graphic card, Add PCI add on as needed.

And you are right the huge jump in price is also an issue. It almost a 1k jump to go from a 20in iMac to a cheapest power mac (after you add in a 20 in wide screen monitor of same quility was the one on the 20in) 1k is way to large of a jump. The power jump and the price jump is way to large.

Apple is leaving the entire area bettween Consumer and Pro out in the cold with there desktop. That is what I talking about middle ground. Right now Apple computer go from Low end to about middle (little short of it) and then up to very High end.
The are leaving the entire area from middle to very high end in the cold.

That's just not true. The imac is a perfect mid-range computer, both in terms of price and performance. If you disagree, please tell me what you would consider to be mid-range components at a mid-range price. The only reason the imac does not work for the OP is that the screen does not meet his requirements, and that is not going to be the case for many people.

But to answer the person above me that killing the iMac in my book. Lock in middle of the road at best graphic card, No ablilty to add in PCI cards if something new comes out. No way to really add more hard drive space minus going to external drives which are aways slower than internal drives. Simplest answer is the CPU is a good middle ground. But the lack of everything else takes it down a lot. Start trueless headless iMac and give it the ability to be upgraded like a tower with add on cards and hard drives. That is the middle ground that is just lacking. It would of saved people who got screwed over by the orginal cards in the g5 not supporing core imanage if they could just upgrade them or a lot of other software. The lack of upgrading cuts heavily into a lifespan of a computer. For lets say $200 bucks invested in like year 2 or 3 a computer life span can go from 3 years up to 5 years and still be just as funitional. It basicly saying with minor upgrade later on you can add years to the life of the computer

Eidorian
Mar 31, 2006, 03:19 PM
Honestly in my opinion Willy S just got stuck in a bad revision with his iMac G5. I've had a long discussion with him in another thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=189409). The biggest complain was the lack of Aperture/Core Image support that Apple gave on the FX5200 GPU and the LCD panel quality.

Keebler
Mar 31, 2006, 03:28 PM
Ok I think apple laptop are great.

I talking about the huge gap in power and upgradiblity bettween the Power mac and the iMac. the iMac has very little ablity to be upgraded (ram being the only real upgrade to it.) I think the best way to look at is take the iMac and put it in side a tower no monitor. That way you have the ability to add more internal hard drives, Upgrade the graphic card, Add PCI add on as needed.

And you are right the huge jump in price is also an issue. It almost a 1k jump to go from a 20in iMac to a cheapest power mac (after you add in a 20 in wide screen monitor of same quility was the one on the 20in) 1k is way to large of a jump. The power jump and the price jump is way to large.

Apple is leaving the entire area bettween Consumer and Pro out in the cold with there desktop. That is what I talking about middle ground. Right now Apple computer go from Low end to about middle (little short of it) and then up to very High end.
The are leaving the entire area from middle to very high end in the cold.



But to answer the person above me that killing the iMac in my book. Lock in middle of the road at best graphic card, No ablilty to add in PCI cards if something new comes out. No way to really add more hard drive space minus going to external drives which are aways slower than internal drives. Simplest answer is the CPU is a good middle ground. But the lack of everything else takes it down a lot. Start trueless headless iMac and give it the ability to be upgraded like a tower with add on cards and hard drives. That is the middle ground that is just lacking. It would of saved people who got screwed over by the orginal cards in the g5 not supporing core imanage if they could just upgrade them or a lot of other software. The lack of upgrading cuts heavily into a lifespan of a computer. For lets say 200 bucks a computer life span can go from 3 years to 5 years and still be just as funitional.

Thanks for clarifying timepass. I think the problem, and it's not your fault, is that you have seen the pc world so much and seen how it has been mostly a 'build-to' market. ie. most everyone builds their own machine and pcs have the ability to upgraded pretty much anything. that i get and understand. the issue is that apple, to my knowledge, has NEVER worked this way. they've always had just a few new machines each year specifically created.

That would be why it seems they don't cover this elusive middle ground of being able to upgrade the imac. It's just not apple's philosophy to create consumer machines for which you can upgrade the heck out of.

you can sure upgraded the powermac tenfold.

does that make sense? i don't think they'll ever chg.

dr_lha
Mar 31, 2006, 03:30 PM
Honestly in my opinion Willy S just got stuck in a bad revision with his iMac G5. I've had a long discussion with him in another thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=189409). The biggest complain was the lack of Aperture/Core Image support that Apple gave on the FX5200 GPU and the LCD panel quality.
FX 5200 supports CoreImage, I know because my G5 has one of those in it. I guess the problem with Aperture is that the FX52000 only has 64Mb VRAM.

Timepass
Mar 31, 2006, 03:38 PM
Thanks for clarifying timepass. I think the problem, and it's not your fault, is that you have seen the pc world so much and seen how it has been mostly a 'build-to' market. ie. most everyone builds their own machine and pcs have the ability to upgraded pretty much anything. that i get and understand. the issue is that apple, to my knowledge, has NEVER worked this way. they've always had just a few new machines each year specifically created.

That would be why it seems they don't cover this elusive middle ground of being able to upgrade the imac. It's just not apple's philosophy to create consumer machines for which you can upgrade the heck out of.

you can sure upgraded the powermac tenfold.

does that make sense? i don't think they'll ever chg.

Yeah neither do I which is the reason you will never see me owning an apple desktop. I enjoy home building so that going to kill the Power mac off the bat since I can make a better one for quite a bit cheaper (500-1k or more). Laptops have never been able to upgraded so I am fine with that. Now if the iMac was put into a tower of some type it would be a much better value. That issue is a huge turn off for a lot of people like me. We like apple laptops and are willing to get them and do buy them. But we will not buy there desktops because they are so badly gimped and limited.
Orginally apple currently way was good. It only been in more recent times that the move has gone from not really having much way to upgraded to adding a lot of add on is common place. Apple I think seem to fail at making that transition.

But then again apple doesnt seem to target these people. Apple cares about looking pretty and all that. We are the ones that care about funitionally first, looks 2nd so apple looks get very few if any points from there looks. A good example is when people here bash a PC case because it looks plan. I look at it and see hmm it has quite a bit of room it for me to add stuff on and to work in. It looks very funitional to me and that all that matters. (Power mac Case inside looks good. I dont like the lack of extrnal 5.25 inch and 3.5in bays but besides that I think it is a great case)

2nd I hate all in one designs a lot because that what a laptop is. If something goes wrong on it I cannt just replace that part and keep most of it causing my replacement cost to go higher. (like computer needs to be replaced but the monitor still good. I am out the monitor because I can not reuse it same way the other way). I like having basic upgrades to my desktops.

Lastly I am part of the growing number of people who homebuilt there towers and you will be admazed at how much you learn just by building your own computer. I enjoy that a lot more than buying from dell. I like choosing which areas I can cut cost and which areas to increase cost in. And as an added bonus I once the thing is booted and has everything installed they general have better reliablity than all other OEMs out there (including apple). Since most of the problems that I ran into in building computers came in up in stuff that would of been noticed during the stress test back at manufactoring of lets say a Dell so that is the only time I had to replace hardware. Once the system up and running I tend to trust them a lot more. Better parts in general. (which is the reason I love apple laptops they general have better parts than other makers)

generik
Mar 31, 2006, 03:41 PM
Thanks for clarifying timepass. I think the problem, and it's not your fault, is that you have seen the pc world so much and seen how it has been mostly a 'build-to' market. ie. most everyone builds their own machine and pcs have the ability to upgraded pretty much anything. that i get and understand. the issue is that apple, to my knowledge, has NEVER worked this way. they've always had just a few new machines each year specifically created.

That would be why it seems they don't cover this elusive middle ground of being able to upgrade the imac. It's just not apple's philosophy to create consumer machines for which you can upgrade the heck out of.

you can sure upgraded the powermac tenfold.

does that make sense? i don't think they'll ever chg.

Apple's Philosophy is not a religion.

Charging a premium to use discrete components that can be had easily like graphics cards? Please! :rolleyes:

THX1139
Mar 31, 2006, 04:13 PM
...They are missing the entire part bettween mid and high end. The jump bettween the iMac to the Power mac is huge. The jump bettween the mac mini and the iMac is not that large...

I think you are missing something. You forget about the Laptop line. When you consider that, if fills up the niche quite nicely. I don't think there is a huge market (Apple) for low-cost, mid-power desktops. Most folks who need decent power go with a laptop solution instead of being chained to the desktop. The only reason I would buy a desktop is to high-end work and for that, I would need a PowerMac. The middle ground is always going to be filled with the laptop line. Why buy a mid-powered desktop if you can get the same thing with a laptop and have portablity?

MacTruck
Mar 31, 2006, 04:35 PM
Computers always get cheaper, but not by much. My titanium powerbook was $3000 new. Now you can get alot better config for $2000.

Eidorian
Mar 31, 2006, 04:36 PM
FX 5200 supports CoreImage, I know because my G5 has one of those in it. I guess the problem with Aperture is that the FX52000 only has 64Mb VRAM.The FX5200 barely supports Core Image and some Radeon 9600's out there have only 64 MB of VRAM.

Aperture is heavily dependent on Core Image for it's editing and the FX5200 doesn't cut it. I was surprised to see it being supported normally under OS X.

Timepass
Apr 1, 2006, 12:48 AM
I think you are missing something. You forget about the Laptop line. When you consider that, if fills up the niche quite nicely. I don't think there is a huge market (Apple) for low-cost, mid-power desktops. Most folks who need decent power go with a laptop solution instead of being chained to the desktop. The only reason I would buy a desktop is to high-end work and for that, I would need a PowerMac. The middle ground is always going to be filled with the laptop line. Why buy a mid-powered desktop if you can get the same thing with a laptop and have portablity?


no I am not. Laptop line again lacks upgradiblitily of a desktop or the hard drive space of a desktop. I am only looking at the desktop line. Apple laptops are great. It the desktops that have problems

localghost
Apr 1, 2006, 02:51 AM
most of the desktop market is about sub 1500 boxes and apple ignores it completely.

and it's NOT good versus cheap - just because they put slower components doesn't mean the whole design suddenly becomes crap. they already had the old single core G5 mobos, just keep selling them ... .

they did have a 1500 PM btw (last G4 revision i think).

and while we are at it when the design the new intel mobos give the PM a ********** 3d HDD. putting the digital lifestyle on your agenda and making the customer pay >2 grand for everything with more than one HDD is ridiculous!

Willy S
Apr 1, 2006, 11:19 AM
I think I´ll build a fast and cheap PC for my power hungry apps, but still use iMac for iLife and other stuff that is not available for PC.

Then when Apple comes with a powerful but not very expensive headless Mac, I´ll upgrade to it, at least the rev B.....don´t want to buy more rev A. :)

dr_lha
Apr 1, 2006, 11:44 AM
most of the desktop market is about sub 1500 boxes and apple ignores it completely.

Funny, last time I looked the Mac Mini was a sub 1500 desktop box. Hell it even comes with an upgradeable Dual Core CPU.

Yeah, I know, the Mini has a crap GFX chip. *sigh*

Willy S
Apr 1, 2006, 12:24 PM
Funny, last time I looked the Mac Mini was a sub 1500 desktop box. Hell it even comes with an upgradeable Dual Core CPU.

Yeah, I know, the Mini has a crap GFX chip. *sigh*

Yeah!

The hard drive can be upgraded to 7200RPM..and laptop ram can be found cheaply as Canadaram pointed out....but...just the damn graphics.....soooo close!