PDA

View Full Version : Apple Releases Core 2 Duo iMac, Adds 24" Model


Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

AppleinJapan
Sep 6, 2006, 10:28 AM
Im in Japan and before I click the "buy now" button.....Is the new 24 inch Imac HD compatible...Is it true HD or just a very nice screen ?

Sorry since this doesnt have a TV tuner...i was hoping it could replace my TV as well (if i use a third party HD tuner)

ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 6, 2006, 10:29 AM
As a MBP owner who bought a rev1 model right when they came out -- and has been sending it in to fix its many, many problems constantly, and is now seeing it lag behind the iMacs in speed and power -- I feel like I bought a lemon. Thanks, Apple, for pissing in my face.

Although you ought to complain about having your Rev A MBP have problems, there's no reason why you should feel like your MBP is a "lemon" with the new iMacs coming out.

Your notebook computer is now slower than a desktop. Big whoop?

Just be thankful you weren't like me, and had bought a Rev D Powerbook a year ago, just before the intel switch.

AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
well, I've ordered my 24" iMac.

Stock-standard, 2-4 days shipping. Well, stock-standard barring the 2 x 1GB Corsair sticks I've already bought to go in it... :P

My first mac :)

Congratulations! Take some pictures for us when you get it...:)

jholzner
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
Macbooks say 5-7 working days

It's said that for the last few weeks. They've had high demand due to the back to school season. If you check the edu store it lists 1-3 working days. I'm sure they are trying to get them out to students first. I don't think the delay has anything to do with updates.

AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
Im in Japan and before I click the "buy now" button.....Is the new 24 inch Imac HD compatible...Is it true HD or just a very nice screen ?

Sorry since this doesnt have a TV tuner...i was hoping it could replace my TV as well (if i use a third party HD tuner)

It's 100% true HD - 1080p compatible baby! :) :) :)

Selenolycus
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
I definitely see an iMac in my future.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
Expect an update to the Macbooks (not necessarily pros) tomorrow or friday.

blackstarliner
Sep 6, 2006, 10:30 AM
They all still have that big fugly chin. Headless conroe mac and new displays next tuesday?

*pulls hair out*

Fotograffiti
Sep 6, 2006, 10:31 AM
You honestly think that if you buy an iMac you are only interested in running Mail and Safari? There are alot of people that successfully use an iMac for work with Photoshop and other pro apps. I would bet there are alot of people using Macbook Pros to write term papers, check their mail, and use Safari as well.

What happened to the MacBook Pros with Merom? Not that I'm complaining about the iMac, but don't you all think that the professionals are the ones most in need of the Core 2 Duo right now? Most average Joe iMac consumers aren't even going to notice that the Core 2 Duo is in their machine, and even if they do, it's probably not going to make that much of a difference running Mail and Safari.

I hope Apple has enough Merom chips to launch MBP Merom soon...wasn't there some sort of rationing going on from Intel because of the high demand?

Argh.

-Obnoxious waiting-for-the-mbp Guy

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:31 AM
Im in Japan and before I click the "buy now" button.....Is the new 24 inch Imac HD compatible...Is it true HD or just a very nice screen ?

Sorry since this doesnt have a TV tuner...i was hoping it could replace my TV as well (if i use a third party HD tuner)

It's 1920x1200 - fully HD compliant. To be called HD all it needs to do is display 1280x720 video, Apple go with the bigger, better HD spec of 1920x1080 so yeah, it's the brand new iMac HD.

macridah
Sep 6, 2006, 10:32 AM
Nice ... I guess the sep 12 announcement is going to so big that apple didn't want to include the iMac 24" news.

FlyNolJ
Sep 6, 2006, 10:33 AM
You'd think that with a 24 inch screen, they'd replace that ugly ass chin...disgusting. :(

FFTT
Sep 6, 2006, 10:33 AM
These new iMacs are an amazing value now.

Yesterday I ordered a MacBook 2.0 GHz for my daughter.

It still hasn't shipped and the estimated time is 5-7 business days

Crossing my fingers for an update.

AppleinJapan
Sep 6, 2006, 10:34 AM
It's 1920x1200 - fully HD compliant. To be called HD all it needs to do is display 1280x720 video, Apple go with the bigger, better HD spec of 1920x1080 so yeah, it's the brand new iMac HD.

Ive just clicked the buy now button my fellow Aussie.....Thank you

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:37 AM
Ive just clicked the buy now button my fellow Aussie.....Thank you

I'm fair-dinkum jealous of you mate. Hope it's a bonza, bloody little ripper of a machine.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to take a shower, I feel so dirty...

God I want a 24" iMac now. Anybody feeling benevolent?

~Shard~
Sep 6, 2006, 10:37 AM
Enough already with Mini-Tower crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Yeah, you'd never see Apple moving to an Intel architecture or running Windows on a Mac - yep, never... :rolleyes: :p :cool:

Except for swapping out a video card, why would anyone need one! You have two options, an iMac or a Mac Mini.

What about those who want the power of the iMac without it being an AIO? What about people who have their own monitors? What are their non-AIO options? A mini or the Mac Pro - there is a huge gap between these 2 models, no? And don't say that's where the iMac goes - it's an AIO so it's in its own category. :cool:

I doubt it will ever happen as well, but I still see the gap which it could theoretically address.

amac4me
Sep 6, 2006, 10:37 AM
Awesome updates. Glad to see Apple release an all Core 2 Duo line. The 24" system is a great addition.

Apple will see an amazing response to these new systems. Apple's quarter will kick you know what. I expect a lot of people to purchase thier first Macs this holiday season.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:38 AM
These new iMacs are an amazing value now.

Yesterday I ordered a MacBook 2.0 GHz for my daughter.

It still hasn't shipped and the estimated time is 5-7 business days

Crossing my fingers for an update.

I ordered mine last tuesday, its not due to come til the day after Showtime. I hear a lot of others saying the same thing about their MacBook orders, ordered both before and after mine. I think we're getting updates.

Apple says it ships friday, so who knows what'll happen :-p

DMPDX
Sep 6, 2006, 10:38 AM
3GB Of Ram at max??? WOW. But why if theyre putting in 1x2GB + 1x1gb sticks, why cant it move to 4GB With 2x2GB?
-dsm

DavidLeblond
Sep 6, 2006, 10:38 AM
You honestly think that if you buy an iMac you are only interested in running Mail and Safari? There are alot of people that successfully use an iMac for work with Photoshop and other pro apps. I would bet there are alot of people using Macbook Pros to write term papers, check their mail, and use Safari as well.

Just think about how many emails/websites you could view AT ONE TIME on a 24" display. Is that not worth the cost??!? ;)

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:40 AM
3GB Of Ram at max??? WOW. But why if theyre putting in 1x2GB + 1x1gb sticks, why cant it move to 4GB With 2x2GB?
-dsm

They may have custom-designed 1GB sticks to fit in the space in the imac, maybe one slot cant take a full-height DIMM? Or, heat concerns. 2GB puts out more heat than 1GB.

jodders
Sep 6, 2006, 10:40 AM
Yikes !£2,388.01 (including VAT) for everything...........

this is a 24inch..

ouch man.....

how much is student discount?

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 10:42 AM
I think this put the nail in the coffin on the headless desktop between the iMac and the Mac Pro.

That's funny, this announcement makes me think the exact opposite. And a headless midtower wouldn't be "between" the iMac and anything. It's a completely different model.

Exactly why it wouldnt happen, cause Apple doesn't want to give people choice at one price point. Its either desktop or portable.... pick ur price... and low beho thats the mac for you. Period. No disputing the great Oracles at Cupertino.

Which is an incredibly stupid philosophy, I hope they drop it.

What happened to the MacBook Pros with Merom? Not that I'm complaining about the iMac, but don't you all think that the professionals are the ones most in need of the Core 2 Duo right now?

What do you mean, what happened? Apple will release them in a few days. RIGHT NOW, nobody is really shipping merom notebooks in quantity.

I will leave your personally offensive remarks aside, suggesting instead that you get a transvestite, oops, Dell PC, dude. I am sure you can find a better desktop in their highly confusing webshop.

Well insults aside, he IS right. The statement that the imac is the "most powerful desktop" is simply wrong. It's a great box at a great price, but let's not make statements that flat out aren't true.

My girlfriend is required to buy a MacBook Pro for interior design, and I keep telling her to wait because Merom has got to be right around the corner.

What about the laptops???? MBP's haven't been updated once and iMacs have been getting all the love. Count it!

Keep your pants on, they ARE right around the corner. And you're right, the MPB hasn't been updated once...they've been updated TWICE (once before they even shipped).

The Mac Pro dude, the Mac Pro is the desktop.

Nice try, thanks for playing, but we've been there already. The MP isn't a desktop, it's a workstation. Everyone else offers a headless desktop with expansion in the $1000-1500 range. Where's that option from Apple?

ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 6, 2006, 10:42 AM
Just think about how many emails/websites you could view AT ONE TIME on a 24" display. Is that not worth the cost??!? ;)

For me, that number would be.... 2 :p

But being as I'm on a 12'' PB, yeah, it's worth the cost

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:42 AM
3GB Of Ram at max??? WOW. But why if theyre putting in 1x2GB + 1x1gb sticks, why cant it move to 4GB With 2x2GB?
-dsm

Whilst the processor can now support massive amounts of RAM, I would wager that the current chip set can't address more than a tad over 3GB of RAM. Santa Rosa next year might change that, but then, you're still stuck with having to purchase a 2GB SO-DIMM - still pretty exxy.

DavidLeblond
Sep 6, 2006, 10:42 AM
3GB Of Ram at max??? WOW. But why if theyre putting in 1x2GB + 1x1gb sticks, why cant it move to 4GB With 2x2GB?
-dsm

What I want to know is how they figure 1 GB extra costs $175 while 2 GB extra costs $750.

Buh? Looks like one of those slots DOES take different ram... :-/

skellener
Sep 6, 2006, 10:44 AM
Awesome! I've been waiting for a larger iMac! I'm so getting a 24"!!! One question....what's with the 8x optical drive? I mean 16x drives are like $30. retail these days. Couldn't they find one to fit in the iMac? Not a deal breaker, but what's up with that? Looks to be an awesome machine!

AppleinJapan
Sep 6, 2006, 10:44 AM
I'm fair-dinkum jealous of you mate. Hope it's a bonza, bloody little ripper of a machine.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to take a shower, I feel so dirty...

God I want a 24" iMac now. Anybody feeling benevolent?

Now I can finally get to my 3D animation...Ive been waiting almost a year to buy a new Mac and this just made me BUY !!

can anyone recommend a good HD tuner ?

Foggy
Sep 6, 2006, 10:44 AM
What about those who want the power of the iMac without it being an AIO? What about people who have their own monitors? What are their non-AIO options? A mini or the Mac Pro - there is a huge gap between these 2 models, no? And don't say that's where the iMac goes - it's an AIO so it's in its own category. :cool:

I doubt it will ever happen as well, but I still see the gap which it could theoretically address.

Seriously - give up - some people really just dont understand that there could possibly be someone who wants a none all in one machine that is somewhere between a mini and a pro.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:45 AM
Awesome! I've been waiting for a larger iMac! I'm so getting a 24"!!! One question....what's with the 8x optical drive? I mean 16x drives are like $30. retail these days. Couldn't they find one to fit in the iMac? Not a deal breaker, but what's up with that? Looks to be an awesome machine!

There are no slot-loading DVD burners at 16x. The iMac uses a slot-loading drive.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:45 AM
What I want to know is how they figure 1 GB extra costs $175 while 2 GB extra costs $750.

Buh? Looks like one of those slots DOES take different ram... :-/

the 2GB sticks are /much/ more expensive than their 1GB counterparts. Much.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:46 AM
Now I can finally get to my 3D animation...Ive been waiting almost a year to buy a new Mac and this just made me BUY !!

can anyone recommend a good HD tuner ?

Search the Apple store for "Miglia"

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:46 AM
Now I can finally get to my 3D animation...Ive been waiting almost a year to buy a new Mac and this just made me BUY !!

can anyone recommend a good HD tuner ?

Check out ElGato's stuff, they make some good TV tuners for Mac that come with the eyeHome software - it's supposedly very good.

daneoni
Sep 6, 2006, 10:46 AM
Seriously - give up - some people really just dont understand that there could possibly be someone who wants a none all in one machine that is somewhere between a mini and a pro.

Hear hear.

Kingsly
Sep 6, 2006, 10:47 AM
:eek: :eek: :eek: That came out of nowhere!!! So.... something even bigger than iMac refreshes on the12th??


*excitement*

sonarghost
Sep 6, 2006, 10:48 AM
I'm so glad I found this website a week ago! I had already ordered my Imac last week and immediately canceled when I read about the possible updates.

Just ordered a new 24" Imac (2.33 dual) with 2 gigs ram, 7600 card and 500 gig hard drive...$3100.00 dollars OUCH!!!

In a way I wish I didn't know about the new release so I could have saved a couple hundred with the 20" lol!:p

rockthecasbah
Sep 6, 2006, 10:48 AM
I think this iMac update is simply fantastic. The prices are astounding now and pack a real value, especially with the Edu. discount they start at $899!!, and i admit the 24'' would be tempting if i got in front of it. Definitely a plus and a well done upgrade. The 17'' additional cost for the Apple Remote is a little cheap but you can't get everything :)

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:48 AM
Seriously - give up - some people really just dont understand that there could possibly be someone who wants a none all in one machine that is somewhere between a mini and a pro.

I agree. Some people don't like the chin on the iMac, or already have their own screen, or anything else that they wouldn't want an iMac. Plus, there's a huge spec gap between the two even now. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a Conroe 2.4Ghz in a mini-tower called just "Mac" very soon.

By the way, this is my 30th post since last tuesday. I am now a "member". Wootage.

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 10:49 AM
Enough already with Mini-Tower crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Enough already with mp3 player crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Enough already with "mini-computer" crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

:rolleyes:

zap2
Sep 6, 2006, 10:49 AM
That's funny, this announcement makes me think the exact opposite. And a headless midtower wouldn't be "between" the iMac and anything. It's a completely different model.


Nice try, thanks for playing, but we've been there already. The MP isn't a desktop, it's a workstation. Everyone else offers a headless desktop with expansion in the $1000-1500 range. Where's that option from Apple?


Are you looking for speed or being able to upgrade? Because Apple has what your looking for. the iMac is fast, not with Merom its even faster! As for upgrading get a Mac Pro..if it cost to much money get a 2.0Ghz one, and sell one chip, you would make good money.

I think the reason Apple doesn't have a Prosumer Mac because the market is not there. Tons of people buy Tower PCs but never upgrade them, and the people who do often buy high end PCs, or build there own.(I know you want it, and so do a few others but Apple doesn't think there is a big enought market for it)

AppleinJapan
Sep 6, 2006, 10:49 AM
Search the Apple store for "Miglia"

Thanks mate.....Apple in Japan only has the TVmicro model....guess i'll have to look else where....

dizastor
Sep 6, 2006, 10:49 AM
Enough already with Mini-Tower crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.


We'll never see a Mac with an Intel processor either.

Seems like lately there aren't many "never happen" items in the Mac realm.

FFTT
Sep 6, 2006, 10:50 AM
i just completed the wire transfer this morning and the Order Status refreshed still says Not Shipped, so I'm hopeful to say the least.

In fact the MacBooks had the longest shipping delay of any of the stock offerings.

Everything else was 24 Hours, or 1-2 days when I ordered.

I'm also looking at the prices now.

Apple needs to either lower the price of Yawnah products or bump them up to Core Duo 2.

A 17" Core Duo 2 iMac is now (edu) priced at $899.00

Base 1.83 MacBook $1049.
2.0 GHz MacBook @ $1199.00

zap2
Sep 6, 2006, 10:50 AM
[QUOTE=TheKrillr] I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a Conroe 2.4Ghz in a mini-tower called just "Mac" very soon.

/QUOTE]
The only reason they would call it "Mac" would be in Johnathn Ives was either dead or VERY drunk when he named it

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:51 AM
Enough already with mp3 player crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Enough already with "mini-computer" crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

:rolleyes:

I hereby request that all references to "PC"s be changed to Wintel or something similar, since technically any general-purpose computer designed for single-user or non-industrial multiuser use is, technicaly a Personal Computer (PC).

Yannick
Sep 6, 2006, 10:52 AM
This new "HD iMac" is great news. I've been waiting for it for some time. I will buy one when Leopard pounces on the shelf. :D

Yannick

iGary
Sep 6, 2006, 10:52 AM
Christ, can we not turn this into another "mini" tower thread?

Pretty please? :)

rjgonzales
Sep 6, 2006, 10:52 AM
I suppose there is still no aux input....

milozauckerman
Sep 6, 2006, 10:53 AM
A nice computer, and I suspect it will sell well, but I'm not sold.

Basically, with Apple Student Developer prices, I can get an iMac 24"/7600GT/1GB/500GB for the same price as a MP 2.66/1GB/160GB/X1900XT. While I'd like the 24" HD screen, I already own ye old 20" ACDs.

'Power' users (or prosumers) are still better served with the various flavors o' Mac Pro - and would be served better yet by a mid-tower option.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 10:54 AM
Just think about how many emails/websites you could view AT ONE TIME on a 24" display. Is that not worth the cost??!? ;)

But how many can you read at once!? :p

jameshopkins
Sep 6, 2006, 10:54 AM
If release products is standard during a week with a holiday in it. Then I cant see them updating the MB next tuesday at a big event, seeing as a 24" iMac is much bigger news. The only reason they will have the MBP at the event, is if there is a new case design, but it is a pro machine, and the event will more likely be consumer based.

So I would say its going to be iPod/iTunes or maybe a new iTunes, as now its movies too?!?

alexf
Sep 6, 2006, 10:55 AM
In case you guys were wondering (I had to search around a little), the res on the 24"er is 1900x1200.

Yes, which means that it is exactly the same resolution as the 23" cinema display (meaning it might as well be 23", with slightly bigger pixels). Too bad Apple could not have increased the resoltion a little; I wonder why?

However, I am not about to complain... This is a very nice release indeed. :)

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 10:55 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a Conroe 2.4Ghz in a mini-tower called just "Mac" very soon.


The only reason they would call it "Mac" would be in Johnathn Ives was either dead or VERY drunk when he named it


Amen to that. No way in hell would Steve allow them to call a Mac "Mac." Mac is the term for all the computers with the Mac OS running on them. You'd go into the store and say "I'd like to buy a Mac" and they'd say "OK, which one?" to which you'd reply "A Mac" and so on and so on.

It's like when Americans come into the café and ask for a coffee to which I say "What type of coffee" and they say "A Coffee." I then run through the usual options (all espresso based, we drink no brewed coffee here) and confused, they pause and say "Can I get a coffee." I then belt them round the head.

There would be a lot of belted heads if Apple called a Mac "Mac" and I worked in an Apple store.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:55 AM
A nice computer, and I suspect it will sell well, but I'm not sold.

Basically, with Apple Student Developer prices, I can get an iMac 24"/7600GT/1GB/500GB for the same price as a MP 2.66/1GB/160GB/X1900XT. While I'd like the 24" HD screen, I already own ye old 20" ACDs.

'Power' users (or prosumers) are still better served with the various flavors o' Mac Pro - and would be served better yet by a mid-tower option.

Would be interesting if they introduced a mini-cube... something looking like a mini, but instead os a rectangular solid (6.5x6.5x2 inches) it'd be a cube at 6.5x6.5x6.5 (inches).

whatever
Sep 6, 2006, 10:56 AM
Enough already with mp3 player crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Enough already with "mini-computer" crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

:rolleyes:
MP3 player? What are those. Apple sells a digital music player and heavly promotes AAC. MP3, come on that's so Y2K.

Alright you got me. But mini towers just are so ugly and useless. How about a Cube. Would that satisfy the mini tower people.

dornoforpyros
Sep 6, 2006, 10:56 AM
thank you apple for releasing on a wed instead of a tuesday! may have just been because of the long weekend but for once we can all stop crying on tuesdays.

jameshopkins
Sep 6, 2006, 10:57 AM
Would be interesting if they introduced a mini-cube... something looking like a mini, but instead os a rectangular solid (6.5x6.5x2 inches) it'd be a cube at 6.5x6.5x6.5 (inches).

Sounds fmailiar, lol

http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macreleased/Cube072000.html

fabsgwu
Sep 6, 2006, 10:57 AM
I suppose there is still no aux input....

# Headphone/optical digital audio output (minijack)
# Audio line in/optical digital audio input (minijack)

http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html

slffl
Sep 6, 2006, 10:58 AM
Wow this is awesome! Now I have to decide between a 24" iMac or the next rev of 17" MBP.

EGT
Sep 6, 2006, 10:58 AM
*Suddenly feels the urge to sell Powerbook and buy 24" iMac*

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 10:59 AM
Sounds fmailiar, lol

http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macreleased/Cube072000.html

Well, ya, that's where the idea that they would go cubish came from :-p

Though the G4 Cube was huge in comparison to what I'm thinking.

CJM
Sep 6, 2006, 11:00 AM
Ok... I can't decide whether just under £400 is worth it for the 4 inches of extra screen and the better GPU...

What do you think?

If I bought either that machine or the next one down, they'd have the 256MB card upgrade.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 11:00 AM
the iMac is fast, now with Merom its even faster!

Compared to Conroe machines?

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 11:00 AM
*Suddenly feels the urge to sell Powerbook and buy 24" iMac*

-sticks you in a padded room with big guards and keeps your powerbook in a safe until you recover from this insanity-

There's probably a reason you have a laptop, so you should keep it. You'd look silly carrying a 24" imac around in your briefcase/backpack/whatever anyway :P

jholzner
Sep 6, 2006, 11:01 AM
Enough already with mp3 player crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Enough already with "mini-computer" crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

:rolleyes:

I really don't see the ligic in your statement. Creative was making MP3 players before Apple. Are they the "PC world?" No, they are not, they don't even make computers.

alexf
Sep 6, 2006, 11:01 AM
Just think about how many emails/websites you could view AT ONE TIME on a 24" display. Is that not worth the cost??!? ;)

Well, it is the exact same number as one can with an Apple 23" display, as Apple kept it at the same resolution instead of taking advantage of that extra inch. (1900 x 1200) :confused:

daneoni
Sep 6, 2006, 11:02 AM
A nice computer, and I suspect it will sell well, but I'm not sold.

Basically, with Apple Student Developer prices, I can get an iMac 24"/7600GT/1GB/500GB for the same price as a MP 2.66/1GB/160GB/X1900XT. While I'd like the 24" HD screen, I already own ye old 20" ACDs.

'Power' users (or prosumers) are still better served with the various flavors o' Mac Pro - and would be served better yet by a mid-tower option.

Agreed, a MacPro sporting a 2GB/2.66GHz Xeon/X1900XT/BT+AE/160GB drive would cost me £1780, a maxed out 24" iMac would cost me £1668 and i'll have to throw it away when i fill up the HDD and use up the 3GB RAM or outgrow the Graphics card....or even processor.

There is just no point really....well for me anyways

whatever
Sep 6, 2006, 11:03 AM
Yeah, you'd never see Apple moving to an Intel architecture or running Windows on a Mac - yep, never... :rolleyes: :p :cool:



What about those who want the power of the iMac without it being an AIO? What about people who have their own monitors? What are their non-AIO options? A mini or the Mac Pro - there is a huge gap between these 2 models, no? And don't say that's where the iMac goes - it's an AIO so it's in its own category. :cool:

I doubt it will ever happen as well, but I still see the gap which it could theoretically address.

But Apple does not see it to be a gap. Adding another machine will just confuse consumers. Have you been to Dell's website lately.

Apple did try this before. It was called the Cube. A computer that everyone loved, but no one bought. I for one serously looked at it and in the end decided to spend the extra money and get the tower. I assume most other people also went that path. And at the time the iMac or the Mini (which didn't exist) weren't even a option.

vendettabass
Sep 6, 2006, 11:03 AM
Ok... I can't decide whether just under £400 is worth it for the 4 inches of extra screen and the better GPU...

What do you think?

If I bought either that machine or the next one down, they'd have the 256MB card upgrade.

Im in the same boat bro!
I think the 20' is still a great size tbh! (£800 in the edu store is way cool!)

typecase
Sep 6, 2006, 11:04 AM
Great news. But where are the Merom MBPs:confused: :confused:


Or a merom macbook for that matter ...

ksz
Sep 6, 2006, 11:04 AM
*Suddenly feels the urge to sell Powerbook and buy 24" iMac*
You know, this probably means that PowerBook upgrades are imminent.

BlizzardBomb
Sep 6, 2006, 11:05 AM
For those wondering about graphics performance...

"Benchmarks revealed that the 7600GT seriously outperformed its original market opponent, the ATI Radeon X1600 XT, ATI reduced prices of its Radeon X850XT PE (the fastest video card of its previous-generation product line) and introduced the X1800 GTO, which was slighty more expensive than the 7600GT but slightly faster thanks to its 256 bit memory bus, higher peak pixel fill rate and more raw shading power."

daneoni
Sep 6, 2006, 11:06 AM
You know, this probably means that PowerBook upgrades are imminent.

PowerBook G5 next tuesday?

ksz
Sep 6, 2006, 11:07 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?
I'm sorry you haven't caught the wave of nausea on that retired joke. ;)

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 11:08 AM
But Apple does not see it to be a gap.

I hate this "Apple gives us what they want and we like it or lump it" attitude many of you have.

I doesn't MATTER if Apple sees a gap or not. If consumers see one then those are potential Mac customers that are lost.

And they WILL see a gap when they're looking at Conroe PC desktops compared to laptop based iMac's.

Apple, like any company, should be bending over backwards to get every customer they can. Not the other way around.

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 11:08 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?

I agree with everyone else who has responded to one of these, this is getting frikkin OLD.

Knock it off, its not funny anymore.

SHeesh.

EGT
Sep 6, 2006, 11:09 AM
PowerBook G5 next tuesday?

Someone tell Arn/Demis to impose a compulsory 4 week ban on anyone that uses this joke again.

:p :D

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 11:10 AM
Someone tell Arn/Demis to impose a compulsory 4 week ban on anyone that uses this joke again.

:p :D

Amen

Stecchino
Sep 6, 2006, 11:11 AM
I dont see the MacBook going core 2 duo, but i reckon the MBP will, maybe with a new case design on the 12th?

I DO see the MacBook going Core 2, but maybe not simultaneously with the Macbook Pros.

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 11:11 AM
You'd think that with a 24 inch screen, they'd replace that ugly ass chin...disgusting. :(

Hey, I love that "ugly ass chin", it makes the iMac look cooler, IMO. Love that Apple logo right in the middle at the bottom.

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 11:14 AM
Just think about how many emails/websites you could view AT ONE TIME on a 24" display. Is that not worth the cost??!? ;)

Damn, Imagine a 16-pane "Spaces" interface on such a huge screen :eek: :eek: :eek:

slffl
Sep 6, 2006, 11:17 AM
I hate this "Apple gives us what they want and we like it or lump it" attitude many of you have.

I doesn't MATTER if Apple sees a gap or not. If consumers see one then those are potential Mac customers that are lost.

And they WILL see a gap when they're looking at Conroe PC desktops compared to laptop based iMac's.

Apple, like any company, should be bending over backwards to get every customer they can. Not the other way around.

Why do you want Apple to grow so much? I for one think it's fine where it is. They are making a healthy profit, making innovative hardware and software, and providing great products. The larger they get, the less we'll see of all of this, well except for the profits that will goto the board members.

Keep the mass market out.

MattDell
Sep 6, 2006, 11:17 AM
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=56747&stc=1&d=1157554536

Under Buy options when you spec out a new iMac or Mac Mini.
I see. I was looking at buying them seperately at the Apple store.


Hopefully you can do the same with the MBP.

-Matt

ericdano
Sep 6, 2006, 11:18 AM
Are the new iMacs and MiniMacs socketed? Are the CPUs socketed?

Mike Teezie
Sep 6, 2006, 11:18 AM
Hot damn!

I want that 24" iMac. That might be my next machine, instead of the Mac Pro + 30" ACD I had been planning on.

In any case, I have to recover from the massive camera gear purchases that are about to take place around here.

mazola
Sep 6, 2006, 11:18 AM
Apple does realize they have a Special Event to fill next week, right?

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 11:18 AM
Are you looking for speed or being able to upgrade? Because Apple has what your looking for. the iMac is fast, not with Merom its even faster! As for upgrading get a Mac Pro..if it cost to much money get a 2.0Ghz one, and sell one chip, you would make good money.

I think the reason Apple doesn't have a Prosumer Mac because the market is not there. Tons of people buy Tower PCs but never upgrade them, and the people who do often buy high end PCs, or build there own.(I know you want it, and so do a few others but Apple doesn't think there is a big enought market for it)

Apple doesn't have what I'm looking for. The imac is not upgradable, it's not an option for someone who doesn't want AIO, and it's not as fast as it could be. And the mac pro is way overpriced for someone who just wants a reasonably fast machine with some expandability. On the PC side you can get a desktop with expandability for under a grand, apple has no excuse for not making such a machine.

And just because some people don't upgrade towers doesn't mean there's no market for them.

Christ, can we not turn this into another "mini" tower thread?

Pretty please? :)

Nope. Sorry.

MP3 player? What are those. Apple sells a digital music player and heavly promotes AAC. MP3, come on that's so Y2K.

Alright you got me. But mini towers just are so ugly and useless. How about a Cube. Would that satisfy the mini tower people.

Useless? What is a mini tower missing that other macs have that makes it useless? If you're not interested in one that's cool, but quit drinking the kool-aid already.

I really don't see the ligic in your statement.

That's fine, I really don't see the logic in yours. :rolleyes:

But Apple does not see it to be a gap. Adding another machine will just confuse consumers. Have you been to Dell's website lately.

Apple did try this before. It was called the Cube. A computer that everyone loved, but no one bought. I for one serously looked at it and in the end decided to spend the extra money and get the tower. I assume most other people also went that path. And at the time the iMac or the Mini (which didn't exist) weren't even a option.

Dell has a million models, and their website sucks. Apple would go from two desktops to three. You think the average consumer is so dumb they'd get confused by small/medium/large?

And the cube failed mostly because of pricing. It was a great machine, but way overpriced for what you got (it cost almost as much as the tower!). A minitower could be made extremely cheaply and priced very competitively, which would fare completely differently than the cube did, I think it could be one of apple's biggest sellers, especially to switchers.

prady16
Sep 6, 2006, 11:19 AM
Still waiting for the MBP upgrades!

GForce
Sep 6, 2006, 11:20 AM
Why do you want Apple to grow so much? I for one think it's fine where it is. They are making a healthy profit, making innovative hardware and software, and providing great products. The larger they get, the less we'll see of all of this, well except for the profits that will goto the board members.

Keep the mass market out.
I totally agree with this one, amen.

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 11:21 AM
I bet you a BT Might Mouse we won't see a Conroe Mac in the next 4 months.

I'd like to take this bet. For "four months" can we just say on or before January 6, 2007? If apple ships a mac with conroe before that, you buy me a BTMM, otherwise I buy you one when that date passes.

Are you in?

MacinDoc
Sep 6, 2006, 11:21 AM
I hate this "Apple gives us what they want and we like it or lump it" attitude many of you have.

I doesn't MATTER if Apple sees a gap or not. If consumers see one then those are potential Mac customers that are lost.

And they WILL see a gap when they're looking at Conroe PC desktops compared to laptop based iMac's.

Apple, like any company, should be bending over backwards to get every customer they can. Not the other way around.
You can't compare the iMac with a Windows tower, you have to compare it with something that has a similar form factor. The iMac is all about the quiet, non-obtrusive all-in one form factor. Combined with OS X, it's the essence of simplicity. That's why it has Merom and not Conroe in it.

Apple may yet introduce a Conroe-based minitower on Sept 12. I suspect the reason the iMacs and Minis were introduced today was to spread out the announcements to keep Apple in the spotlight, and because there is too much else to talk about on Sept 12.

And for those who need a monitor, these iMacs represent great value, IMO.

sbarton
Sep 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
Well, it is the exact same number as one can with an Apple 23" display, as Apple kept it at the same resolution instead of taking advantage of that extra inch. (1900 x 1200) :confused:

Maybe there is a reason most 23"/24" LCD panels are 1900 x1200? Apple doesn't make LCD panels and there are also ideal resolutions for DPI etc....I'm sure it wasn't to short change anyone.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
You can't compare the iMac with a Windows tower, you have to compare it with something that has a similar form factor. The iMac is all about the quiet, non-obtrusive all-in one form factor. Combined with OS X, it's the essence of simplicity. That's why it has Merom and not Conroe in it.

Apple may yet introduce a Conroe-based minitower on Sept 12. I suspect the reason the iMacs and Minis were introduced today was to spread out the announcements to keep Apple in the spotlight, and because there is too much else to talk about on Sept 12.

And for those who need a monitor, these iMacs represent great value, IMO.

I agree with you.

My point is: What Mac is comparable to a windows tower (the best selling form factor)?

They have a gap in their lineup.

And I gap that I, unfortunately, fall into. :(

I would be so happy if a tower was unveiled on the 12th!

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
I see. I was looking at buying them seperately at the Apple store.


Hopefully you can do the same with the MBP.

-Matt


It's not $60 for them, it's $60 to UPGRADE to them. You're already paying the price for the regular KB and mouse in the price of the iMac.


On the Mac mini page it's $99 US for the wireless KB and mouse - that's cheaper than buying them separately. Not a bad deal to be honest.

Seasought
Sep 6, 2006, 11:23 AM
Weird timing. Just last weekend I had an extensive discussion with my wife concerning Macs and why I think she'd enjoy having a Mac more than her current Dell machine. Her initial concerns were reduced to preferences that could be turned on or off in the OS, and she opened up to the prospect of having one.

Well, before we knew it, we were over at the local Apple retail store and I was showing her one of the iMacs. In the end, she decided to wait a couple of months and then buy.

Glad she did given the update released yesterday, now she has even more of an incentive to buy. :D

TheKrillr
Sep 6, 2006, 11:24 AM
Dell has a million models, and their website sucks. Apple would go from two desktops to three. You think the average consumer is so dumb they'd get confused by small/medium/large?

This is exactly what apple needs to do. Mac Mini low-end for budget-concious people, Mac (insert enidng here) for the midsumer, and the Mac Pro for the prosumer.

And no, the iMac does not count as a machine for the midsumer. Its not headless, and lots of people would rather have a tower than a... monitor with a built-in computer. I know its odd, but, its the truth. They don't want to have to junk the whole thing if they want to upgrade.

xli_ne
Sep 6, 2006, 11:25 AM
so do these require notebook or desktop DDR2 memory?

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:28 AM
Maybe there is a reason most 23"/24" LCD panels are 1900 x1200? Apple doesn't make LCD panels and there are also ideal resolutions for DPI etc....I'm sure it wasn't to short change anyone.

It's 1920x1200, not 1900x1200. They are all ~100 pixels per inch which is currently considered an optimal density for text and image display. With resolution independence coming in Leopard we will be able to use much higher pixel densities without changing the apparent size of the UI elements.

For example, you could have a 13" widescreen on a MacBook with 1920x1200 resolution but the menu bar, buttons and everything would look the same size but much clearer because there are more pixels in each element. So you'd have the readability of larger UI elements with the ability to play HD content natively.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 11:29 AM
Why do you want Apple to grow so much? I for one think it's fine where it is. They are making a healthy profit, making innovative hardware and software, and providing great products. The larger they get, the less we'll see of all of this, well except for the profits that will goto the board members.

Keep the mass market out.

Well firstly I would like a mid-tower for my own use. As it stands Apple do not offer a machine that suits my needs. I want to buy a Mac, I know how much better OSX is and all that, but they simply don't offer a computer that's acceptable for my usage.

Secondly, you think Apple being more successful would be a bad thing? I really don't get the "Mac snobbery" that makes people write comments like "keep the mass market out".

The more successful Apple are the better for them and the better for us Apple fans.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:30 AM
so do these require notebook or desktop DDR2 memory?

Go to apple.com and see.

They require DDR2 PC5300 667MHz SO-DIMMs. So laptop RAM.

Ohmu
Sep 6, 2006, 11:32 AM
So... Apple say you can stick 3 Gb of RAM in the iMac on the site, but I keep wondering: 2 Gb + 1 Gb doesen't pair up that good does it?
If I were to buy an iMac I'd go with the speed that 2x1Gb stick would give me rather than having 1 Gb extra. Or have they skipped the "pairing" of RAM on these machines?

Any thoughts on this?

alexf
Sep 6, 2006, 11:32 AM
Maybe there is a reason most 23"/24" LCD panels are 1900 x1200? Apple doesn't make LCD panels and there are also ideal resolutions for DPI etc....I'm sure it wasn't to short change anyone.

Well, the 20" iMac has the exact same resolution as the 20" display, so why can't the 24" iMac have a slightly higher one than the 23" display?

Perhaps Apple purposely did this so that they will have room to upgrade; I predict that eventually they will increase the resolution on the 24".

What is the big advantage of having a 24" screen over a 23", if the resoltion is exactly the same? Movies? Perhaps it is easier on the eyes... :confused:

Again, I don't mean to be a troll, but this is the one disappointment for me with this release.

Kenya
Sep 6, 2006, 11:33 AM
Dude that thing is like dude, like dude dude

LOL!! Love it. :D

Clix Pix
Sep 6, 2006, 11:34 AM
I got all excited about this 24" machine until I saw that it can only be maxed out to 3 GB RAM. 3???? Why not 4?????

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 11:35 AM
I tried to setup a Dell system as close as possible, just for the kicks of it. Now, they don't offer the Geforce 7600 GT, they offer a much lamer ATI X1300 Pro, or a high end Geforce 7900 GS. I setup the system with the X1300 ONLY, but added spysweeper and norton anti virus which I believe are a must for a windows machine. I should also point out that this system is based on Conroe, while the iMac is based on Merom.

The total?

2086$.

This includes the 24" Dell display. More expensive than the iMac, and boy do you get a MUCH uglier machine, plus Windows XP instead of Mac OS X. this iMac looks like a true bargain...

I should note that there are quite a few coupons running around the net that might reach up to 20-25% discount. However, Apple on the other hand offer nice Education discounts.

------------------------------------------------------------

Print Summary
Add to My Wish List
Add To Cart
Compatibility Instructions
REVIEW MY SUMMARY
Congratulations! Your system is ready to be built.
We have some recommendations for you highlighted in green below.
Components
PROCESSOR Intel ® Core™2 Duo Processor E6400 (2.13GHz, 1066 FSB) edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows® XP Media Center 2005 Edition with re-installation CD edit
MEMORY 1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 DIMMs edit
HARD DRIVE 250GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache™ edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Single Drive: 16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability edit
MONITORS 24 inch UltraSharp™ 2407FPW Widescreen Digital Flat Panel edit
VIDEO CARD 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro edit
SOUND CARD Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio edit
Accessories
SPEAKERS Dell A525 30 Watt 2.1 Stereo Speakers with Subwoofer edit
KEYBOARD Dell USB Enhanced Multimedia Keyboard edit
MOUSE Dell Optical USB Mouse edit
TUNERS & REMOTES Remote Control edit
FLOPPY & MEDIA READER No Floppy Drive Included edit
MODEM No Modem Requested edit
OPTIONAL PORTS IEEE 1394 Adapter edit
Software
PRODUCTIVITY No productivity suite- Includes Microsoft Works 8. DOES NOT INCLUDE MS WORD edit
ANTI-VIRUS & SECURITY PC-cillin Internet Security with AntiVirus and Spyware removal 15-months edit

Dell Recommends
Help Protect Your New PC!
PC-cillin™ Security Software, 24 months!
Help Me Choose
Upgrade to PC-cillin Internet Security with AntiVirus and Spyware removal 24-months [add $20 or $1/month1]
DELL DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT Deluxe pack- Music & photo: Corel Photo Album, MusicMatch Plus, Games edit
OTHER UTILITIES Webroot - Spy Sweeper edit
OTHER UTILITIES Norton SystemWorks 2006 edit
Service
HARDWARE WARRANTY 1Yr Ltd Warranty, 1Yr At-Home Service, and 1Yr HW Warranty Support edit

Dell Recommends
An Additional Year of Service!
Upgrade Your Years of Service. Choose 2 Years of Service and protect your investment!

(If Complete Care selected, number of years must match warranty term)
Help Me Choose
Upgrade to 2Yr Ltd Warranty, 2Yr At-Home Service, and 2Yr HW Warranty Support [add $100 or $3/month1]

rickvanr
Sep 6, 2006, 11:35 AM
I'm so glad I'm in Microcomputer Apps right now and have access to the internet, I just glanced at these specs and OMG they're pretty amazing, 24 inches instead of the 23 inch wow just wow.

I can't wait to walk into an Apple store and check these things out, that 24 inch screen has to be amazing!

Meat sauce. The 24 has the same resolution, it won't make much of a difference.

I wonder if they're using the same panels as the Dell displays..

thejadedmonkey
Sep 6, 2006, 11:35 AM
I got all excited about this 24" machine until I saw that it can only be maxed out to 3 GB RAM. 3???? Why not 4?????
Maybe it only has 3 RAM slots?

thedonga
Sep 6, 2006, 11:37 AM
I wonder if they're using the same panels as the Dell displays..

let's hope not for iPhoto's (and photoshop's) sake.

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 11:37 AM
I got all excited about this 24" machine until I saw that it can only be maxed out to 3 GB RAM. 3???? Why not 4?????

I don't think anyone knows for sure. It's a 64 bit cpu, so that doesn't make sense. I haven't heard an explanation that sounds right, other than intel dropped the ball on the mobo and only wired it to allow that.

Maybe it only has 3 RAM slots?

Two slots. 2g+1g max. Which is why it's so puzzling.

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 11:38 AM
Wow this is awesome! Now I have to decide between a 24" iMac or the next rev of 17" MBP.

My thoughts exactly.

At this point in time, i'll get a 24"er, and get a dirt-cheap second generation macbook what that comes out. I had a 20" iMac, and returned it for a Macbook Pro 15.4", which was also returned due to overheating. I enjoyed the iMac much more, but sure loved the portability of the MBP. Still, now this gap is bigger with the great offering of the 24" machine.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:39 AM
I don't think anyone knows for sure. It's a 64 bit cpu, so that doesn't make sense. I haven't heard an explanation that sounds right, other than intel dropped the ball on the mobo and only wired it to allow that.



Two slots. 2g+1g max. Which is why it's so puzzling.

Not puzzling at all.

The chipset can't address much more than 3GB, the processor can but the chipset can't. Santa Rosa might be able to address more.

sbarton
Sep 6, 2006, 11:42 AM
Well, the 20" iMac has the exact same resolution as the 20" display, so why can't the 24" iMac have a slightly higher one than the 23" display?

Perhaps Apple purposely did this so that they will have room to upgrade; I predict that eventually they will increase the resolution on the 24".

What is the big advantage of having a 24" screen over a 23", if the resoltion is exactly the same? Movies? Perhaps it is easier on the eyes... :confused:

Again, I don't mean to be a troll, but this is the one disappointment for me with this release.

I don't think you understand how LCD's work.. They are fixed resolution. I would just forget the extra 1" if I were you....your over thinking it. They probably found a cheaper source for LCD's (probalby the same one that Dell has been using) and have started using it.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:42 AM
Well, the 20" iMac has the exact same resolution as the 20" display, so why can't the 24" iMac have a slightly higher one than the 23" display?

Perhaps Apple purposely did this so that they will have room to upgrade; I predict that eventually they will increase the resolution on the 24".

What is the big advantage of having a 24" screen over a 23", if the resoltion is exactly the same? Movies? Perhaps it is easier on the eyes... :confused:

Again, I don't mean to be a troll, but this is the one disappointment for me with this release.

24" panels are cheaper because more companies use them. The 23" was a bit of an oddity, Apple are moving to more industry-standard panel sizes - they went from 15.2" to 15.4" for the MacBook Pro because they were more common in the marketplace.

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 11:44 AM
Well, it is the exact same number as one can with an Apple 23" display, as Apple kept it at the same resolution instead of taking advantage of that extra inch. (1900 x 1200) :confused:

Actually they did, the resolution is 1920X1200, not 1900X1200 like the 23" ACD. This is a true HD display.

alexf
Sep 6, 2006, 11:46 AM
Actually they did, the resolution is 1920X1200, not 1900X1200 like the 23" ACD. This is a true HD display.

No, they are both 1920x1200; exactly the same.

sbarton
Sep 6, 2006, 11:46 AM
Actually they did, the resolution is 1920X1200, not 1900X1200 like the 23" ACD. This is a true HD display.

No, the 23" ACD has always been 1920x1200.

macman2790
Sep 6, 2006, 11:47 AM
man i'm still waiting for core 2 duo in macbooks and macbook pros. This is getting rediculous. September 12 better be the day

rockstarjoe
Sep 6, 2006, 11:47 AM
It's like when Americans come into the café and ask for a coffee to which I say "What type of coffee" and they say "A Coffee." I then run through the usual options (all espresso based, we drink no brewed coffee here) and confused, they pause and say "Can I get a coffee." I then belt them round the head.

If the Simpsons has taught me anything, it is that in Australia "coffee" is spelled "B-E-E-R".

Lynxpoint
Sep 6, 2006, 11:48 AM
The 23" ACD is 1920x1200, not 1900x1200

hdsalinas
Sep 6, 2006, 11:48 AM
About the 3Gb max ram limit, would the new 64Bit processor limit the amount of memory available to the non 64bit OS?

I love the fact that I now get 1GB as default. I will definetively add more ram later when I recuperate from the imac investment. I can live with 1GB but not with less.

BTW, could I ask people not to make more coments about the headless mac that you all want. I get your point, its valid, but it has been discussed so much already. Please focus on the new imacs. This is a very special day for all of us who own an imac or want one. Please respect that. You will get your day in the sun someday.

alexf
Sep 6, 2006, 11:49 AM
I don't think you understand how LCD's work.. They are fixed resolution. I would just forget the extra 1" if I were you....your over thinking it. They probably found a cheaper source for LCD's (probalby the same one that Dell has been using) and have started using it.

Yes, this is obvious. Yet you did not answer the question: what is the real advantage of a 24" screen over a 23" one if they are the same resolution? Everyone seems to be raving about what a great surprise that the screen size is one inch larger than predicted, so I am simply asking: why? Anyone? :confused:

Supa_Fly
Sep 6, 2006, 11:50 AM
Although I applaud the new 24" iMac, I have to say this upgrade is a horrible upgrade.

1) the 17" goes 1.5 years in the paste with video memory to 64MB!! Ridiculous! Just like the previous lineup the memory was at 128MB.

2) with 24" of screen I half expected the top of the line would be bumped to 256MB of video memory.

ImpressedByAppl
Sep 6, 2006, 11:53 AM
Firstly, I think the upgrade is fantastic and also the release of the 24" iMac makes me believe we soon will have 24" Display instead of the 23" too and probably 49.99 Bucks cheaper?

Also this makes the event on 12th very interesting for the fact that iMac/Mac Mini are out and which only leaves out the MBP's and iPod's for upgrade and ofcourse any other surprise Apple may pull out on that day.

My question here is if you buy a 24" iMac can you hook your xbox360 to it like you can to a regular LCD?

Also if this does not include a tv-tuner built in can i use standard RGB cables from my cable box to watch TV on this?

Also anyone think Bluray/HD-DVD can play a important role on the event on 12th?

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:53 AM
Yes, this is obvious. Yet you did not answer the question: what is the real advantage of a 24" screen over a 23" one if they are the same resolution? Everyone seems to be raving about what a great surprise that the screen size is one inch larger than predicted, so I am simply asking: why? Anyone? :confused:

CHEAPER.

More companies use 24" panels for their 1920x1200 displays. The 23" ACD is an industry oddity. Apple can get the panel for less by going with one that more people buy.

daneoni
Sep 6, 2006, 11:53 AM
Yes, this is obvious. Yet you did not answer the question: what is the real advantage of a 24" screen over a 23" one if they are the same resolution? Everyone seems to be raving about what a great surprise that the screen size is one inch larger than predicted, so I am simply asking: why? Anyone? :confused:

Moving to industry standards as someone suggested would be my guess. 15.2-15.4, 23-24. Makes things simpler,easier and maybe cheaper for Apple

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 11:55 AM
Firstly, I think the upgrade is fantastic and also the release of the 24" iMac makes me believe we soon will have 24" Display instead of the 23" too and probably 49.99 Bucks cheaper?

Also this makes the event on 12th very interesting for the fact that iMac/Mac Mini are out and which only leaves out the MBP's and iPod's for upgrade and ofcourse any other surprise Apple may pull out on that day.

My question here is if you buy a 24" iMac can you hook your xbox360 to it like you can to a regular LCD?

Also if this does not include a tv-tuner built in can i use standard RGB cables from my cable box to watch TV on this?

Also anyone think Bluray/HD-DVD can play a important role on the event on 12th?

There are no video inputs on the iMac, you'll need a USB tuner to watch TV on the iMac.

GForce
Sep 6, 2006, 11:55 AM
Although I applaud the new 24" iMac, I have to say this upgrade is a horrible upgrade.

1) the 17" goes 1.5 years in the paste with video memory to 64MB!! Ridiculous! Just like the previous lineup the memory was at 128MB.
Why is that when the 'old' iMac 17" is still there, even for a lower price? The 64MB model is way cheaper, that's what you pay for IMO...

flyguy451
Sep 6, 2006, 11:57 AM
Well, ya, that's where the idea that they would go cubish came from :-p

Though the G4 Cube was huge in comparison to what I'm thinking.


The G4 was an 8" cube. Not much bigger than what you suggested.

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 11:57 AM
The chipset can't address much more than 3GB, the processor can but the chipset can't. Santa Rosa might be able to address more.

So why did intel build a chipset that couldn't access more? Other macs have been going beyond 4 gigs for years now, it doesn't seem like it's that great a technical hurdle.

About the 3Gb max ram limit, would the new 64Bit processor limit the amount of memory available to the non 64bit OS?

I doubt it...if that were the case then wouldn't the G5's and Mac Pros be limited as well?

Although I applaud the new 24" iMac, I have to say this upgrade is a horrible upgrade.

1) the 17" goes 1.5 years in the paste with video memory to 64MB!! Ridiculous! Just like the previous lineup the memory was at 128MB.

2) with 24" of screen I half expected the top of the line would be bumped to 256MB of video memory.

The base model is a stripped down one for people who want the cheapest machine. It's obviously not the machine for you, get the $1199. I think it's a great idea, why not let people who have minimal graphic needs save some money?

On the 24, you can upgrade to 256 if you want it as well.

kadajawi
Sep 6, 2006, 11:57 AM
Yes, this is obvious. Yet you did not answer the question: what is the real advantage of a 24" screen over a 23" one if they are the same resolution? Everyone seems to be raving about what a great surprise that the screen size is one inch larger than predicted, so I am simply asking: why? Anyone? :confused:
Well... it's bigger. Guess that's all. Why do most people prefer a 19" over a 17" screen, when they all have the same resolution? Although I think that 1" isn't really alot, especially if you already have 23"...

thedonga
Sep 6, 2006, 11:59 AM
Yes, this is obvious. Yet you did not answer the question: what is the real advantage of a 24" screen over a 23" one if they are the same resolution? Everyone seems to be raving about what a great surprise that the screen size is one inch larger than predicted, so I am simply asking: why? Anyone? :confused:
advantage? cheaper
disadvantage? not as crisp...you are taking something that displayed on a 23" and streching it so it will display on a 24"

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 12:00 PM
So why did intel build a chipset that couldn't access more? Other macs have been going beyond 4 gigs for years now, it doesn't seem like it's that great a technical hurdle.


Other Macs didn't use INTEL's Napa chipset. Santa Rosa next year should remedy this.

LimeiBook86
Sep 6, 2006, 12:00 PM
Well I noticed the only major difference in the 20" model is that they upgraded the CPU and lowered the price. I have the previous 20" Intel iMac and I'm very happy with it, although the "2x faster CPU performence" got me thinking. Oh well...I remember someone put a Meron CPU (Core Duo 2) inside an existing intel iMac before. So I guess if I really wanted to upgrade it and void my AppleCare...I could :p (makes me feel better about the iMac being updated) :D

Cougarcat
Sep 6, 2006, 12:01 PM
I wonder why they didn't announce MBPs along with the new consumer macs. Perhaps it's getting a case redesign, to get the nice magnetic latch and accesible hard drive the macbook has. Steve will want to show it off.

DavidLeblond
Sep 6, 2006, 12:05 PM
Meh I think I'm going with the 20".

Here's how I see it:

I budgeted myself ~ $2k for a computer upgrade.

With that I can either get the 24" with 2 gb ram upgrade, or the 20" with 2gb ram upgrade, proc upgrade to 2.33, video card upgrade to 256. And still have $200 to spend on taxes and Paralells.

I don't have a use for Firewire 800.
The brighter monitor is good, but the iMac still bests my iBook
The larger monitor is good, but 20" still beats 14".
The better speakers are good, but 24 watts is still piddly anyway.
The video card was originally a deal breaker for me. But then again, the specs page (http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html) states that the 20" tested was a slower model AND only had a 128 mb video card. So I suspect the one I'm getting will be better than that. Sure its no 7300 but #1 I'm not sure how many games I'll be playing and #2 it sure beats my iBook's ATI 9200 mobility. ;)

amin
Sep 6, 2006, 12:06 PM
This is fantastic, fantastic news! It is so so so cool, and its really made my day. I have been waiting for the imac update and glad that it came around this time. I have been waiting since March and it has been agonising.

Congratulations for those who have been waiting for one. The time has come...

Exactly how I felt. I've been waiting for this for months now, and ordered right away this morning. I do wish they had Conroe, but no big deal to me. Would have liked the 20", but money is too tight for that right now!

thedonga
Sep 6, 2006, 12:07 PM
proc upgrade to 2.33
there's not much difference in a 2.16~2.33

joshwest
Sep 6, 2006, 12:11 PM
For those wondering why Apple came out with the new iMacs today.A Wednesday. It's probably because Steve Jobs didn't want the media to think the keynote was going to be about the 23" iMac..( now 24" )

Get the iMac's out of the way now so the media can speculate on other things.

Agree'd but I do belive he's going to say but there is One more thing, introduce the release of the new 24" and say but there is still another size we wanted to focus on because we just turned 30.... 30th aniversary 30" iMac in black or white...

wisredz
Sep 6, 2006, 12:11 PM
Well I noticed the only major difference in the 20" model is that they upgraded the CPU and lowered the price. I have the previous 20" Intel iMac and I'm very happy with it, although the "2x faster CPU performence" got me thinking. Oh well...I remember someone put a Meron CPU (Core Duo 2) inside an existing intel iMac before. So I guess if I really wanted to upgrade it and void my AppleCare...I could :p (makes me feel better about the iMac being updated) :D

exactly my thoughts :D and I'd really love to have the 24" version. The bigger the better. But I fiddled with the configuration a little bit and got myself a price which was close to $3100. If I hadn't got a 20" iMac before, I'd rather go with the mac pro in this case... Of course there would be the extra price of a screen, but I'd probably go with the mac pro.

Needless to say, I was a bit pissed off after seeing the 24" version. I don't care that much for core 2 duo, which won't make that difference for me.

kresh
Sep 6, 2006, 12:13 PM
Apple doesn't have what I'm looking for. The imac is not upgradable, it's not an option for someone who doesn't want AIO, and it's not as fast as it could be. And the mac pro is way overpriced for someone who just wants a reasonably fast machine with some expandability. On the PC side you can get a desktop with expandability for under a grand, apple has no excuse for not making such a machine.

And just because some people don't upgrade towers doesn't mean there's no market for them.



Nope. Sorry.



Useless? What is a mini tower missing that other macs have that makes it useless? If you're not interested in one that's cool, but quit drinking the kool-aid already.



That's fine, I really don't see the logic in yours. :rolleyes:



Dell has a million models, and their website sucks. Apple would go from two desktops to three. You think the average consumer is so dumb they'd get confused by small/medium/large?

And the cube failed mostly because of pricing. It was a great machine, but way overpriced for what you got (it cost almost as much as the tower!). A minitower could be made extremely cheaply and priced very competitively, which would fare completely differently than the cube did, I think it could be one of apple's biggest sellers, especially to switchers.

Point taken. You can't use Apple's all-in-one for comparison purposes to a mid-tower pc. They are without a doubt different classes of machines.

That's why everyone is so upset that every single thread about the iMac gets hijacked into a rage against Apple for not having a headless mid-tower.

I would also like to have one, but why always hijack the iMac threads with the same crap, time after time.

As you claim, they are not in the same class, they are totally different, ect...

It's well documented by now, in every single thread about iMacs, that some people want a headless mid-tower $1200.00 Mac just please stop the thread hi-jacking!

scmacdaddy
Sep 6, 2006, 12:15 PM
are the hard drive and processor upgradeable by user (sorry if this has been answered but this is a huge thread)

thedonga
Sep 6, 2006, 12:16 PM
Agree'd but I do belive he's going to say but there is One more thing, introduce the release of the new 24" and say but there is still another size we wanted to focus on because we just turned 30.... 30th aniversary 30" iMac in black or white...

yea why not just sell a 30" with a 750GB drive that works in tandem with the new iTunes movie downloads so people can use it in the living room as a pc, media center, etc

rjgonzales
Sep 6, 2006, 12:18 PM
# Headphone/optical digital audio output (minijack)
# Audio line in/optical digital audio input (minijack)

http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html


Thanks, but I was refering to an aux video input.... sorry:o

daneoni
Sep 6, 2006, 12:19 PM
are the hard drive and processor upgradeable by user (sorry if this has been answered but this is a huge thread)

Officially..No, unofficially..yes

Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 6, 2006, 12:20 PM
Enough already with Mini-Tower crap. It will never happen. Apple does not like to copy the PC world.

Except for swapping out a video card, why would anyone need one! You have two options, an iMac or a Mac Mini.
What about MediaMac the 12th? You could fit a TV tuner in a minitower and a 3.5'' HD to store movies from iTunes or record from the TV tuner

jbembe
Sep 6, 2006, 12:24 PM
I ordered a 20" iMac a couple of weeks ago, but it hadn't been dispatched yet (in fact, it was due to be dispatched today). The Apple order status site was down earlier, until just after the Apple Store came back up with the new iMacs, and lo and behold, my order has been replaced with a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo!

They've even upgraded the RAM to 2GB (I'd paid for an upgrade to 1GB on the original order), and dropped the price I pay!

So top marks to Apple - a brand new iMac, specced higher than the original, for £80 less! I don't know many other manufacturers that would do this - it's the kind of service that keeps Apple customers loyal.

The only downside is, I was expecting it to be delivered on Friday but now I have to wait until the 19th! But really, I don't mind!


Now that is just spectacular! Apple ROCKS! :D

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 12:24 PM
Has anyone ordered a Macbook Pro lately and have the ship times? I think i saw someone post saying its not supposed ship until the 13th....

The site still says 24 hours, but then again, so did the imacs before they got the update.

Phazotron
Sep 6, 2006, 12:25 PM
I'll have to sell my 20inch intel imac now. I never thought they'd put out a 24 inch imac! Argh!

Geez I only had this thing for 8 months and it's already surpassed. I'm seriously having some jealousy over that 24 inch screen.

Anonymous Freak
Sep 6, 2006, 12:25 PM
The Intel chipset (http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945gm/index.htm) in the iMacs can address 4 GB of RAM.

My guess is that this is purely money-based. As you can see, a 2 GB DDR2-667 SO-DIMM is insanely expensive. Adding this much memory to the low-end iMac would double the cost of the iMac. It's $575 to upgrade one 1 GB chip to a 2 GB chip. That's $1150 just for the memory, starting at 2x1GB. Add $175 more to start at the 2x512 the 2.0 GHz 17"er starts at, and you're spending more on the memory upgrade than the stock cost of the computer. ($1325 for the memory upgrade vs. $1199 for the stock computer.) For a consumer machine, that's just not worth it.

Of course, there could be another cause. It could be that Apple's design somehow limits one slot to only 1 GB. We won't know for sure until someone takes delivery, and tries two (insanely expensive) 2 GB modules. Pricewatch doesn't even list any 2 GB DDR2-667 SO-DIMMs, at any price. CDW lists (http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=1010813) them at $982 per module... (Crucial is $1600 per.)

zwida
Sep 6, 2006, 12:26 PM
What about MediaMac the 12th? You could fit a TV tuner in a minitower and a 3.5'' HD to store movies from iTunes or record from the TV tuner

Seems pretty unlikely that they'll be revving Macs on Tuesday at this point.

Maybe we'll see some action on that front if they ever decide to swallow Elgato.

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 12:27 PM
Nice job by Apple on the 24". Very tempting system.

The 7600GT isn't a bad card at all for gaming. The only thing to rememeber is that it has to push 1900x1200 in those games unless you drop the resolution. I think the 7600GT has a 128 bit memory bus. All in all it should do fine for the games that are availible right now.

Yeah, I almost bought one this morning out of pure excitement, then I stopped myself and realized, "Hey! I'm waiting for the C2D MBP. What the heck do I want a 24" iMac for?" Answer... because I'm insane. The 24" is very tempting.

zwida
Sep 6, 2006, 12:28 PM
It's well documented by now, in every single thread about iMacs, that some people want a headless mid-tower $1200.00 Mac just please stop the thread hi-jacking!

Truer words were never spoken.

t^3
Sep 6, 2006, 12:29 PM
are the hard drive and processor upgradeable by user (sorry if this has been answered but this is a huge thread)
Yes, but as far as the processor, what's available now is all you can upgrade to (2.33GHz max). The next Core 2 Duo's, ie. the next iMacs, will have a new socket and 800MHz FSB.

Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 6, 2006, 12:31 PM
Seems pretty unlikely that they'll be revving Macs on Tuesday at this point.

Maybe we'll see some action on that front if they ever decide to swallow Elgato.
Not revving, adding. Besides Apple needs to sell some sort of a device where you can watch the movies. Most people prefer to watch movies on their TV over their computer or iPod. You don't want a MacPro next to your TV... (ok you might, but it would be a terrible waste of money)

apfhex
Sep 6, 2006, 12:33 PM
advantage? cheaper
disadvantage? not as crisp...you are taking something that displayed on a 23" and streching it so it will display on a 24"
Dell does it with the 2405/2407. It's going to have a lower pixel density, is all. Bad from a perspective of having finer detail by providing smaller pixels, good from a perspective of larger pixels are easier to see (until we have full resolution independence) and it's one step closer to the 1:1 (72 DPI) for print work we used to have (also moot once we have resolution independence... more or less).

What /I/ wonder is, how's the quality? Is it going to have any of the problems of the 23" ACD? Is it going to be as nice looking (the previous iMac LCDs don't even compare)? What does this mean for the ACD, are they going to release a 24" update soon?

edesignuk
Sep 6, 2006, 12:33 PM
Incredible. Wow. These iMacs really are great value. Holy ****.

sbarton
Sep 6, 2006, 12:34 PM
Although I applaud the new 24" iMac, I have to say this upgrade is a horrible upgrade.

1) the 17" goes 1.5 years in the paste with video memory to 64MB!! Ridiculous! Just like the previous lineup the memory was at 128MB.

2) with 24" of screen I half expected the top of the line would be bumped to 256MB of video memory.

Well, I think the 17" is kinda geared as the as cheap as we can go model. I think it's a good idea, especially for schools. Look at the price, they did a great job IMO.

256 mb on the 7300 is a waste. More texture ram does not necessarily mean more speed. That card is a decent low-midrange card, but it's going to be busy enough with most modern games and really doesn't have the horsepower to manipulate larger textures. Maybe someone with more 3D knowledge could elaborate.

An then of course 256 is availible on the 24" as a BTO. It would have been nice to see the 7600GT as an option on the 20" as well.

ChrisA
Sep 6, 2006, 12:34 PM
...with 24" of screen I half expected the top of the line would be bumped to 256MB of video memory.

It is. Look at the Apple web site. 256MB is an available option for less than $100.

But unless you play 3D games that extra video RAM will go unused. Games use the video ram to cache textures but iWork, iLife and the like have no use for it so for most uses it just adds heat (added fan noise) and to the electric bill.

I doubt many people would buy a $2000 iMac for games. Betterto buy a $400 Xbox.

crazycat
Sep 6, 2006, 12:44 PM
Very nice specs, its everything i ever wanted from my iMac but to bad i already have my Mac Pro.

Macmaniac
Sep 6, 2006, 12:45 PM
I am pleased Apple finally has offered a decent BTO graphics card option in the iMac. It would have been nice to have the option for the 7600GT in the 20in as well, but you can't win all your battles I guess.

For those of you curious about the 7600GT I have one in my PC, becasue it was $150 cheaper then a decent 7800GT, and I don't regret it. The 7600GT is a great card, I am running games like FEAR, Battle for Middle Earth 2, and Half Life 2 all at close to max settings and the games fly, and look great. So if you plan to bootcamp a 24 incher with a 7600GT you will not be dissapointed. Although Apple's 7600GT may be a little bit different from mine becuase mine was made by MSI and was designed to be overclocked, still its a good card. Although it sucks you have to shell out $2k to even upgrade to it.

Multimedia
Sep 6, 2006, 12:48 PM
Sorry if this has been asked before but are the 24"ers High Def?Sorry if this has been answered but yes. 1920 x 1080 is HD. So you get a perfect native HD picture with 60 pixel bars above and below the image exactly the width of the screen. All you need add is a $150 EyeTV hybrid (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) and a $50 Terk TV5 Antenna (http://www.audiovox.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10001&storeId=10001&productId=14204&langId=-1) and you're good to go.Very nice specs, its everything i ever wanted from my iMac but to bad i already have my Mac Pro.Yeah crazycat, we feel your pain. :)

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 12:48 PM
too bad i already have my Mac Pro.

This has to be the funniest sentence ever. You have a Map Pro dude. I REALLLLY envy you, with your quad-xeon kick-ass-spec-till-you-die-for-good machine :)

xli_ne
Sep 6, 2006, 12:48 PM
Of course, there could be another cause. It could be that Apple's design somehow limits one slot to only 1 GB. We won't know for sure until someone takes delivery, and tries two (insanely expensive) 2 GB modules. Pricewatch doesn't even list any 2 GB DDR2-667 SO-DIMMs, at any price. CDW lists (http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=1010813) them at $982 per module...


:eek: jesus... apple memory is cheaper than someone else

kresh
Sep 6, 2006, 12:49 PM
I wonder if Intel put any pressure on Apple to move away from ATI to nVidia.

I know Apple has a history of using both, but it seems strange that the iMac 24" designed after AMD bought ATI uses nVidia, but iMacs designed pre AMD-ATI uses ATI. I guess I see conspiracies everywhere :)

acslater017
Sep 6, 2006, 12:50 PM
i'm waiting for a merom macbook and i'm just glad to see that they're not necessarily going to wait until after the rebate deal ends to upgrade their hardware. hopefully they'll stick the merom in the macbooks soon - i told my friend i'd give him my free iPod...

sfwalter
Sep 6, 2006, 12:51 PM
I'm having a little problem with the memory. If it has 2 memory slots why is it limited to 3gb and not 4gb? Also to upgrade the 20" or 24" it costs $750 extra for a 2GB memory stick. From what I have seen, 2GB memory sticks are very hard to find and usually priced over $1000. So how is Apple able to offer them at such a good price?

scott.

Courthold
Sep 6, 2006, 12:52 PM
Well, I just ordered my new mac :D Have been waiting on this update for a while. I got the 20" with 2GB of Ram (I noticed they are now shipping the 1GB as 2x512 chips rather than 1x1GB, which means if you want to upgrade later you are wasting RAM) and the upgraded video memory. ETA is 7 days until shipping and then another for delivery. This will be a big step up from my first gen mac mini :D

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 12:54 PM
I doubt many people would buy a $2000 iMac for games. Betterto buy a $400 Xbox.

Or a $1K PC, god forbid.
Yeah, I'm not buying a mac for games, though I'm sure I will run some games on my MBP when I get it just for kicks. I'm going to keep my PC for awhile since it still plays games pretty well, but it's getting long in the tooth. I'm going to have to get a new gaming PC probably in the next year or too (saving up for my marriage though will unfortunately take priority :) )

And you're right on the console front as well. My Xbox 360 will do me for games for quite awhile even if I don't get a new gaming PC. I'm certainly not even going to attempt to try to get a PC that can handle Crysis though. That game is designed to make people spend buttloads of cash on the latest/greatest PC's. But it does look damn good though.

Macmaniac
Sep 6, 2006, 12:55 PM
I am curious as to whether these chips are soldered on to main logic board. It would be cool if you could pop the chips out and put new ones in. If the past iMac's show anything they should be removable.

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 01:00 PM
I'm having a little problem with the memory. If it has 2 memory slots why is it limited to 3gb and not 4gb? Also to upgrade the 20" or 24" it costs $750 extra for a 2GB memory stick. From what I have seen, 2GB memory sticks are very hard to find and usually priced over $1000. So how is Apple able to offer them at such a good price?

scott.

This seems to be a recurring concern in this thread. I always understood that 64-bit processors coupled with 64-bit OS's and applications would function more efficiently with 4GB of ram. If this is the case, why does apple only offer 3GB of ram for the C2D iMac? Can you stick 2 sticks of 2GB ram in there?

Teddy's
Sep 6, 2006, 01:01 PM
I want a BLACK choice!!!
In the mean time, I will wait for a black iMac. I know that there are some stores that can 'paint' them but it would be like a caucasian after a week in Cayman Islands. Will Apple do a black model...

helto
Sep 6, 2006, 01:06 PM
I have been the proud owner of a 20" Imac for 6 days and am not very happy at this moment in time. Do you think I could return under Apple's 14 returns policy and order a new 24"?

Helto

matttrick
Sep 6, 2006, 01:06 PM
i'm waiting for a merom macbook and i'm just glad to see that they're not necessarily going to wait until after the rebate deal ends to upgrade their hardware. hopefully they'll stick the merom in the macbooks soon - i told my friend i'd give him my free iPod...

the merom macbooks might not be eligible for the free ipod. i am reading thats how its working with the new iMacs, at least in the US

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 01:08 PM
I have been the proud owner of a 20" Imac for 6 days and am not very happy at this moment in time. Do you think I could return under Apple's 14 returns policy and order a new 24"?

Helto

Unless it was BTO, I think you can for a restocking fee.

DavidLeblond
Sep 6, 2006, 01:08 PM
I want a BLACK choice!!!
In the mean time, I will wait for a black iMac. I know that there are some stores that can 'paint' them but it would be like a caucasian after a week in Cayman Islands. Will Apple do a black model...

Good point, I had forgotten.

No black and no glossy screen either.

Huh.

Multimedia
Sep 6, 2006, 01:09 PM
Although I applaud the new 24" iMac, I have to say this upgrade is a horrible upgrade.

1) the 17" goes 1.5 years in the paste with video memory to 64MB!! Ridiculous! Just like the previous lineup the memory was at 128MB.Most people don't need more than 128MB which is the step up size for the $1199 17" model.2) with 24" of screen I half expected the top of the line would be bumped to 256MB of video memory.Plus $125 for the 256MB option on both the 20" + $75 and the 24" + $125 models.

dondark
Sep 6, 2006, 01:10 PM
I only need a 10.6" MBP mini!!!

joshwest
Sep 6, 2006, 01:10 PM
I have been the proud owner of a 20" Imac for 6 days and am not very happy at this moment in time. Do you think I could return under Apple's 14 returns policy and order a new 24"?

Helto


yes...id do it asap

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 01:10 PM
the merom macbooks might not be eligible for the free ipod. i am reading thats how its working with the new iMacs, at least in the US

Yes, that looks to be correct. When you click on the free iPod offer, iMac isn't listed as an option for purchase. That kind of sucks for new imac owners, and especially for me if the merom MBP's come out before the 16th.

ipacmm
Sep 6, 2006, 01:13 PM
I personally think this is a great update. It is nice to see the 24" screen, I guess Apple will be updating their cinema display's to include a 24" display.

Most people don't need more than 128MB which is the step up size for the $1199 17" model.

That is very true, there are still people that just use a computer to do email and MS word and they don't need the best GC.

Flyinace2000
Sep 6, 2006, 01:13 PM
Unless it was BTO, I think you can for a restocking fee.

I fyou ask nicely they will wave the restocking fee. We used to do it all the time for customers.

ro2nie
Sep 6, 2006, 01:15 PM
There is something I dont understand about the memory slots in the new iMacs

The Core 2 Duo is 64-bit. That means it's able to address up to 16 Gb of RAM, but the maximum RAM in the 24" iMac is only 3 Gb!
Bigger screen means more space for internal components like RAM slots and yet we only get 3 RAM slots!

I'm not asking for more RAM as a standard, I just want more memory slots for better upgrading...

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 01:15 PM
I fyou ask nicely they will wave the restocking fee. We used to do it all the time for customers.

I will keep that in mind. Perhaps I will bake some muffins for them if I have to return a major purchase. :)

Multimedia
Sep 6, 2006, 01:16 PM
I have been the proud owner of a 20" Imac for 6 days and am not very happy at this moment in time. Do you think I could return under Apple's 14 returns policy and order a new 24"?This is helto's FIRST POST EVER. She/He Just Joined This Morning. Welcome to MacRumors helto. Better late than never. Now get cracking sending that old iMac back.yes...id do it asapDefinitely. Do it NOW and ask for a supervisor to get the restocking fee waved. They will do it if you ask politely and persist. If they refuse to give you full credit for a significant upgrade to the 24" model hang up and call back and ask for another supervisor. Keep doing that until you get a sympathetic ear on the other end. Someone will give you full credit. They'll jsut shuffle what you have to the refurb store. No biggie.

What were you thinking? Why didn't you wait? You knew these updates were coming didn't you? :confused: :eek: :rolleyes:

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 01:16 PM
Other Macs didn't use INTEL's Napa chipset. Santa Rosa next year should remedy this.

That doesn't answer my question. Why did intel design Napa to only support 3 gigs of ram? Is there some technical limitation they had to do this, or were they just cutting corners?

Are there any PCs on that chipset that can use more ram?

It's well documented by now, in every single thread about iMacs, that some people want a headless mid-tower $1200.00 Mac just please stop the thread hi-jacking!

I wouldn't get your hopes up. So where do you suggest talking about that topic?

Seems pretty unlikely that they'll be revving Macs on Tuesday at this point.

Why? I don't think we'll see bumps of existing models, but introducing a new one on tuesday would be perfect.

Not revving, adding. Besides Apple needs to sell some sort of a device where you can watch the movies. Most people prefer to watch movies on their TV over their computer or iPod. You don't want a MacPro next to your TV... (ok you might, but it would be a terrible waste of money)

But that device sounds like it will just be an airport with video outs. You don't need to have a computer in your living room. Still, it is possible they could introduce a mid desktop along with that.

Bigger screen means more space for internal components like RAM slots and yet we only get 3 RAM slots!


Actually there are only TWO ram slots. I completely agree that they should go to at least four slots, but it sounds like there are other limitations.

akadmon
Sep 6, 2006, 01:17 PM
I stopped at my local Apple Store (Cambridge, MA, USA) during the lunch hour to check out the new iMacs. Not only are they not on display, but the old prices are still posted next to the old models.

While I was there a sales rep was actually in the process of trying to sell an open box 17" core due iMac to an older lady for $1099! I took pity on the poor thing and shawed her the online store iMac page with the new models. She was flabbergasted to say the least. Not sure what happened next -- I walked out of there in disgust!

Is this what typically happens at the b&m Apple Stores, or should they update their info as soon as the online store starts carrying new stuff? I just can't believe Apple would not ship at leats one floor model to each of their b&m locations in time for the release of new products. Hate to think how many people will buy the more expensive old models and never realize they've been had.

mazola
Sep 6, 2006, 01:18 PM
Hot tip: I hear they're going to be refreshing the iMac line on Tuesday!

FunkyChicken
Sep 6, 2006, 01:20 PM
Can somebody please give me a quick compare between the Power Mac Dual G5 2.0 and the new Core 2 Duo 2.16 iMacs? How much faster are these new beasts?:confused:

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 01:20 PM
There is something I dont understand about the memory slots in the new iMacs

The Core 2 Duo is 64-bit. That means it's able to address up to 16 Gb of RAM, but the maximum RAM in the 24" iMac is only 3 Gb!
Bigger screen means more space for internal components like RAM slots and yet we only get 3 RAM slots!

I'm not asking for more RAM as a standard, I just want more memory slots for better upgrading...

You get 2 RAM slots. The 3GB configuration is 1x2GB + 1x1GB.

Aiden reckons it's because Intel's Napa chipset which the current Core 2 Duo is a part of can only address about 3.1GB of RAM (regardless of the processor's capability) max because it allocates any more to the kernal for some reason - I don't know, I'm no expert but the Santa Rosa chipset next year should fix it.

Santa Rosa includes a new socket for the second gen Merom chips, an 800MHz FSB and a bunch of other improvements.

BenRoethig
Sep 6, 2006, 01:21 PM
Can somebody please give me a quick compare between the Power Mac Dual G5 2.0 and the new Core 2 Duo 2.16 iMacs? How much faster are these new beasts?:confused:

A lot.

840quadra
Sep 6, 2006, 01:21 PM
Wow!

Great systems, and value for the iMac now. This is quite tempting considering the speed of these systems over my Powermac G5 Dual 2.0.

I could (with some luck) sell my Powermac and LCD, and buy a 20" imac.

Choices choices!

acslater017
Sep 6, 2006, 01:22 PM
Yes, that looks to be correct. When you click on the free iPod offer, iMac isn't listed as an option for purchase. That kind of sucks for new imac owners, and especially for me if the merom MBP's come out before the 16th.

darn you guys are right...was the old (Yonah) iMac previously listed though? I mean, was iMac REMOVED when they upgraded it, or was it never on the rebate list?

if it was REMOVED, then it looks like i have to choose between backing out of the deal with my friend, or being forced to go with the Yonah MacBook. The latter wouldn't be too bad, I've heard they're great anyway, and I could stop this ridiculous waiting game...

Multimedia
Sep 6, 2006, 01:23 PM
Can somebody please give me a quick compare between the Power Mac Dual G5 2.0 and the new Core 2 Duo 2.16 iMacs? How much faster are these new beasts?:confused:Yeah the iMac Core 2 Duo is a LOT faster. NO DOUBT.:eek:

50548
Sep 6, 2006, 01:26 PM
I tried to setup a Dell system as close as possible, just for the kicks of it. Now, they don't offer the Geforce 7600 GT, they offer a much lamer ATI X1300 Pro, or a high end Geforce 7900 GS. I setup the system with the X1300 ONLY, but added spysweeper and norton anti virus which I believe are a must for a windows machine. I should also point out that this system is based on Conroe, while the iMac is based on Merom.

The total?

2086$.

This includes the 24" Dell display. More expensive than the iMac, and boy do you get a MUCH uglier machine, plus Windows XP instead of Mac OS X. this iMac looks like a true bargain...


Thanks Oded...now we can ask our fellow Winblows fanboys...are ya gonna get a Dull, dude?

Dell is DEAD. Microsoft is DEAD.

MAN THE PUMPS! GO APPLE!

ro2nie
Sep 6, 2006, 01:29 PM
You get 2 RAM slots. The 3GB configuration is 1x2GB + 1x1GB.

Aiden reckons it's because Intel's Napa chipset which the current Core 2 Duo is a part of can only address about 3.1GB of RAM (regardless of the processor's capability) max because it allocates any more to the kernal for some reason - I don't know, I'm no expert but the Santa Rosa chipset next year should fix it.

Santa Rosa includes a new socket for the second gen Merom chips, an 800MHz FSB and a bunch of other improvements.

Yep... you are right... TWO slots.. sorry, I thought there were three :D

50548
Sep 6, 2006, 01:31 PM
Just calling a spade a spade, Mr Lawyer. You made a comment that was a lie. The iMac is NOT the "most powerful desktop in the world". Not by a long shot.

If you don't want people to say you're full of crap then don't talk crap. Simple as.



You know what I mean! :p

What do people buy if they want desktop performance? Apple currently offer NOTHING with desktop performance, it's either mobile or workstation.

First, show me something better than an iMac. No, it doesn't exist.

Second, the MacPro IS a desktop. If it's too much for you, get a 24" iMac and be happy, instead of playing with a crappy PC.

Third, my opinion about computers doesn't mix with personal offenses...so chill out, Dell dude.

Reep
Sep 6, 2006, 01:35 PM
The 24" iMac looks very sexy and my finger is on the order button. However, for about the same price, I could get a refurb macbook and a refurb 20" iMac ($1100*2). Or, I could get a refurb iMac with Logic Pro and Aperture (I'll have to wait a while if I go for the 24"). This would be a pretty flexible setup. Anyone want to convince me to go for the two refurbs? I'm an old timer, but have been out of Mac for about eight years.

chillywilly
Sep 6, 2006, 01:38 PM
There is something I dont understand about the memory slots in the new iMacs

The Core 2 Duo is 64-bit. That means it's able to address up to 16 Gb of RAM, but the maximum RAM in the 24" iMac is only 3 Gb!
Bigger screen means more space for internal components like RAM slots and yet we only get 3 RAM slots!

I'm not asking for more RAM as a standard, I just want more memory slots for better upgrading...
I was curious about that as well. At least allow both slots to be filled with 2gb DIMMs.

I can see for size purposes, that only two DIMM slots are on the iMacs. So even though the chip can access up to 64gb of RAM, they limited that on the iMacs.

But why only 3gb? Why not 4gb?

artifex
Sep 6, 2006, 01:39 PM
Am I the only one who thinks that the big Apple logo under the iMacs is lame? I can't imagine watching a movie for hours with that thing hovering in the lower part of my vision.

Please, Apple. Shrink and move the logo discreetly into the corner, or be bold and remove the logo entirely! We all know it's a Mac!

kadajawi
Sep 6, 2006, 01:39 PM
First, show me something better than an iMac. No, it doesn't exist.

Second, the MacPro IS a desktop. If it's too much for you, get a 24" iMac and be happy, instead of playing with a crappy PC.

Third, my opinion about computers doesn't mix with personal offenses...so chill out, Dell dude.
Oh well... get the top of the line Alienware or so, one or two 30" TFTs, ... bet it will be faster than the 24" iMac? Or just get a Mac Pro... should be faster than the iMac. ;)

The MacPro has Xeons... two of them. Sounds pretty workstation to me. And $2000 is a bit hefty.
So Apple still doesn't have a desktop... MacPro is too expensive, iMac is uninteresting because it's an AIO. Add another HD? External. Add BR or HD-DVD? External. Soundcard? External. etc. etc.

Multimedia
Sep 6, 2006, 01:41 PM
The 24" iMac looks very sexy and my finger is on the order button. However, for about the same price, I could get a refurb macbook and a refurb 20" iMac ($1100*2). Or, I could get a refurb iMac with Logic Pro and Aperture (I'll have to wait a while if I go for the 24"). This would be a pretty flexible setup. Anyone want to convince me to go for the two refurbs? I'm an old timer, but have been out of Mac for about eight years.If you need both and the money is tight, go for the refurbs. If you wait, you can get the 1.83GHz MacBook for only $949 when more come back to the page. On the other hand, if you go with the new iMac you are getting much more advanced tech ala 64-bit Leopard ready. Tough choice. Maybe 1.83GHz MacBook + $1199 17" iMac Core 2 Duo.

NOTE: MacBook will also be going Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. So if you can stagger your purcahses, you're better off going Core 2 Duo all the way in the long run.

And all will wind up on the SAVE refurb page as well.

milo
Sep 6, 2006, 01:44 PM
darn you guys are right...was the old (Yonah) iMac previously listed though? I mean, was iMac REMOVED when they upgraded it, or was it never on the rebate list?

if it was REMOVED, then it looks like i have to choose between backing out of the deal with my friend, or being forced to go with the Yonah MacBook. The latter wouldn't be too bad, I've heard they're great anyway, and I could stop this ridiculous waiting game...

They didn't remove anything, but if you look at the coupon, it specifies exactly which models are included. All the models listed say "core duo" and even list clock speeds. So it's pretty much limited to any models shipping before today.

First, show me something better than an iMac. No, it doesn't exist.

Second, the MacPro IS a desktop. If it's too much for you, get a 24" iMac and be happy, instead of playing with a crappy PC.

Conroe machines go up to almost 3ghz. Those will definitely run faster than the imac. Why are you so insistent that such things don't exist?

And if you consider the Mac Pro a desktop, how could the iMac be the most powerful desktop? You don't seriously think the iMac is more powerful than the MP do you?

NOTE: MacBook will also be going Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving.

That's total speculation on your part. I don't think there's any question that the MBP is going merom soon, but nobody really knows how quickly the MB will.

helto
Sep 6, 2006, 01:45 PM
Hi Multimedia

I am a fiirst time Mac owner. I wasn't aware that a model relaunch was due, only that I was p..s.d off with Windows problems and fancied a change. I am a compete but, until 2hrs ago, happy novice.

Helto

lseven
Sep 6, 2006, 01:45 PM
Ironically, the ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB GDDR3 memory that supports rotation on an external Dell monitor is not available on the 24" model. NVIDIA does not support Dell Rotation. So if you want to be able to rotate a Dell 24" monitor, you will have to buy the 20" iMac. Now that's crazy!

I agree. I would like to get the 24" model but won't if it doesn't support rotation. However, my 20" iMac has a bug from 10.4.7 that breaks the rotation support anyway. :mad: So the rotation support only matters if the bug in the 20" iMac gets fixed!

matttrick
Sep 6, 2006, 01:47 PM
First, show me something better than an iMac. No, it doesn't exist.

Second, the MacPro IS a desktop. If it's too much for you, get a 24" iMac and be happy, instead of playing with a crappy PC.

Third, my opinion about computers doesn't mix with personal offenses...so chill out, Dell dude.

are you serious? do you honestly believe what you typed? :confused:

Reep
Sep 6, 2006, 01:49 PM
If you need both and the money is tight, go for the refurbs. If you wait, you can get the 1.83GHz MacBook for only $949 when more come back to the page. On the other hand, if you go with the new iMac you are getting much more advanced tech ala 64-bit Leopard ready. Tough choice. Maybe 1.83GHz MacBook + $1199 17" iMac Core 2 Duo.

NOTE: MacBook will also be going Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. So if you can stagger your purcahses, you're better off going Core 2 Duo all the way in the long run.

And all will wind up on the SAVE refurb page as well.

I think you are right about waiting for the MB. It will come down even lower on the refurb price shortly. I just have to decide if I want the older processor and the software, or get the extra HD real estate and wait on the software. Hmmm. I guess their pricing is good because it is a tough decision.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 01:50 PM
I agree. I would like to get the 24" model but won't if it doesn't support rotation. However, my 20" iMac has a bug from 10.4.7 that breaks the rotation support anyway. :mad: So the rotation support only matters if the bug in the 20" iMac gets fixed!

Rotation? On an iMac? What are you doing, turning your head sideways?

alexeismertin
Sep 6, 2006, 01:54 PM
Am I the only one who thinks that the big Apple logo under the iMacs is lame? I can't imagine watching a movie for hours with that thing hovering in the lower part of my vision.

Please, Apple. Shrink and move the logo discreetly into the corner, or be bold and remove the logo entirely! We all know it's a Mac!

I totally agree, there must be enough space to fit all the components behind the 24" screen - perhaps the evolution in design will make the 24" imac like this, with a black casing so it looks more like high end HD TV's.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 01:59 PM
Thanks Oded...now we can ask our fellow Winblows fanboys...are ya gonna get a Dull, dude?

Dell is DEAD. Microsoft is DEAD.

MAN THE PUMPS! GO APPLE!

How insightful.

First, show me something better than an iMac. No, it doesn't exist.

Define "better". It's a subjective term, especially when it comes to something like a computer which people can use for vastly different things. For someone who doesn't need brillant graphics or super-fast processors and wants a decent all-in-one solution the iMac is perfect.

But that wasn't what you said. You said the new iMac is "the most powerful desktop in the world". Which is, frankly, a load of bull.


Second, the MacPro IS a desktop. If it's too much for you, get a 24" iMac and be happy, instead of playing with a crappy PC.

The Mac Pro isn't a desktop, it's a workstation. It says it right on the box, and on the website. The 24" iMac still isn't what I want either, something in-between would be perfect. 2.66Ghz C2D, 4Gb RAM, PCIe and 2 HDD bays would do me nicely. But Apple simply doesn't offer a machine in that performance bracket, just above and below. It's where the gap in their "product matrix" is.

Third, my opinion about computers doesn't mix with personal offenses...so chill out, Dell dude.

Funny how you love to throw derogatory inferences around like they're going out of fashion then, isn't it? :D

But I'm glad oh-so-witty puns like refering to Windows as "WinBlows" amuse you so. You must get on really well with kids. ;)

50548
Sep 6, 2006, 02:00 PM
Oh well... get the top of the line Alienware or so, one or two 30" TFTs, ... bet it will be faster than the 24" iMac? Or just get a Mac Pro... should be faster than the iMac. ;)

The MacPro has Xeons... two of them. Sounds pretty workstation to me. And $2000 is a bit hefty.
So Apple still doesn't have a desktop... MacPro is too expensive, iMac is uninteresting because it's an AIO. Add another HD? External. Add BR or HD-DVD? External. Soundcard? External. etc. etc.

Wrong. "Top of the line" Alienware would dispute the upper range of workstation-like machines, like the MacPro. Second, the price range is simply outside that of any iMac.

MacPro have Woodcrest Xeons, not Tulsa ones, so they may qualify as normal desktops as well.

iMacs ARE interesting because they are AIOs...another HD? What for? A BR drive? What for? Soundcard? Huh?

No thanks...I will stick with Apple for now.

cgmpowers
Sep 6, 2006, 02:01 PM
My thoughts exactly. Now don't argue the "monitor or not a monitor" in the price but here's the figures that have me aiming to a MacPro. Special note that I do have a 23" Cinema Display.

iMac 24", maxxed memory, hard drive & video card. $3,324
2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
3GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x2GB, 1x1GB
500GB Serial ATA Drive
NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB SDRAM
SuperDrive 8X (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
Apple Keyboard & Mighty Mouse + Mac OS X (US English)
24-inch widescreen LCD
AirPort Extreme
Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR


MacPro, (2GB of ram, not 3, HD same, video upgraded/better) $3,249
Two 2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
2GB (4 x 512MB)
500GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB (2 x dual-link DVI)
One 16x SuperDrive
Apple Keyboard and Mighty Mouse - U.S. English
Mac OS X - U.S. English

Without the monitor and picking MIDDLE OF THE CATAGORY of MacPro processor and MIDDLE OF THE CATAGORY video card..and 2GB of ram (3GB not available in configuration choices)..you save $75 and have a BETTER video card and have a quad processor machine.

Dump the processor to 2.0 instead of 2.66 and lower the graphic card to the lowest choice and your at $2699, a saving of $625.. The cheapest Apple screen is $699 for the 20" cinema display.

This doesn't take in consideration 3rd party ram or 3rd party displays which will also help lower the cost.

MacPro, easy choice.

UPDATE: My pricing of the MacPro models did NOT include the Airport/Bluetooth module. That you'd have to add $79 for both BT&Airport, or $49 for just Airport.


You don't win any prizes for that... :rolleyes:

New iMac looks nice. 24"? never would have guessed it

at the $1999 price though, the $2499 Mac Pro starts to look attractive (or the downgraded to 2Ghz Mac Pro which is $2199)...

EDIT: then again, I don't have a big screen at home, so the 24" iMac would be a huge upgrade in both screen and computing power

psymac
Sep 6, 2006, 02:01 PM
Wondering which Mac to get, the most I'm doing is some burning to CD home movies (and general surfing/word processing). Right now on my dual 1gz G4 (noisey Quicksilver), it seems to take forever just to encode and burn to disc a 50 minute home movie.

How long might that take on a 20" new iMac versus a low end Mac Pro?

Or should I (wishfully perhaps) wait a week or two and see if a headless Conroe tower from Apple is released?

50548
Sep 6, 2006, 02:01 PM
are you serious? do you honestly believe what you typed? :confused:

Yes, I honestly believe that. Can you show me a better offer than the 24" iMac right now? Oh, running the best OS in the globe, please...thanks!

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:02 PM
I totally agree, there must be enough space to fit all the components behind the 24" screen - perhaps the evolution in design will make the 24" imac like this, with a black casing so it looks more like high end HD TV's.

Am I the only one that kind of likes the "chin"? It's what makes an iMac an iMac, it would just be a boring LCD screen without it!

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:03 PM
Yes, I honestly believe that. Can you show me a better offer than the 24" iMac right now? Oh, running the best OS in the globe, please...thanks!

Hey, Lawyer, don't change what you said. You wouldn't try that in court, would you?

mmignano
Sep 6, 2006, 02:04 PM
Does anyone know the differences between the 2.16 Ghz and the 2.33 Ghz in the new iMacs? I'm having trouble finding benchmarks on the web that compare the two...

guzhogi
Sep 6, 2006, 02:04 PM
I think that Apple should make a midlevel desktop for those people who want more expansion than an iMac/Mac mini but don't need a Mac Pro. Something in a midtower case, 2 optical drive bays, 2 hard drive bays, 4 RAM slots & 3 PCIe. Also Core 2 Duo, not Xeons. Make it cheap, too. Under $1000 a must.

50548
Sep 6, 2006, 02:05 PM
Hey, Lawyer, don't change what you said. You wouldn't try that in court, would you?

Huh? Ya mean the best desktop on the planet? I am just reinforcing that...no worries...you may keep your Dell, maboy.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:06 PM
Wrong. "Top of the line" Alienware would dispute the upper range of workstation-like machines, like the MacPro. Second, the price range is simply outside that of any iMac.

MacPro have Woodcrest Xeons, not Tulsa ones, so they may qualify as normal desktops as well.


Mac Pros use WORKSTATION parts. Ergo, they are workstations.

AlienWare PCs use DESKTOP parts. Ergo, they are desktops.

And you never mentioned price in your original statement.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 02:07 PM
Does anyone know the differences between the 2.16 Ghz and the 2.33 Ghz in the new iMacs? I'm having trouble finding benchmarks on the web that compare the two...

The 2.33GHz one is quicker. ;)

mattcube64
Sep 6, 2006, 02:09 PM
I just got my 2GHz MB a couple months ago to get me through my last year of highschool and through college. I was pretty sure I'd want to get a desktop at the end of the school year so I'd have it for college. The Mac Pro was a near perfect candidate, but the price was just too much for the lack of the monitor.

However, for only $2000 after education discount, I can get a smokin' processor, a gig of RAM, a 7600GT (More than enough for decent gaming through Windows), better sound, and a freakin' 24" LCD!

I think I may just have to cut the PS3 out of my budget, and try to save for this before my birthday comes in January!

I think this is the best deal Apple has, period. Too bad the iPod deal is defunct now.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:10 PM
Huh? Ya mean the best desktop on the planet? I am just reinforcing that...no worries...you may keep your Dell, maboy.

I think I'm going to move to the US and start being a Laywer, since you don't even seem to know the first thing about debate or even what basic statements mean.

You never said it was the "best" desktop on the planet, or that it was the "best" for the price. You said the iMac is "the most powerful desktop". Which is wrong. It isn't. Your statement is false.

Really rather simple stuff, especially for a lawyer.

j26
Sep 6, 2006, 02:10 PM
I ordered a 20" iMac a couple of weeks ago, but it hadn't been dispatched yet (in fact, it was due to be dispatched today). The Apple order status site was down earlier, until just after the Apple Store came back up with the new iMacs, and lo and behold, my order has been replaced with a 20" iMac Core 2 Duo!

They've even upgraded the RAM to 2GB (I'd paid for an upgrade to 1GB on the original order), and dropped the price I pay!

So top marks to Apple - a brand new iMac, specced higher than the original, for £80 less! I don't know many other manufacturers that would do this - it's the kind of service that keeps Apple customers loyal.

The only downside is, I was expecting it to be delivered on Friday but now I have to wait until the 19th! But really, I don't mind!


Interestingly my delivery date is the 19th too on the MacBook that I ordered this morning.

Possible sign of MB upgrade???? (prays to Allah, Budda, Yahweh and assorted others)

HecubusPro
Sep 6, 2006, 02:12 PM
Wrong. "Top of the line" Alienware would dispute the upper range of workstation-like machines, like the MacPro. Second, the price range is simply outside that of any iMac.

MacPro have Woodcrest Xeons, not Tulsa ones, so they may qualify as normal desktops as well.

iMacs ARE interesting because they are AIOs...another HD? What for? A BR drive? What for? Soundcard? Huh?

No thanks...I will stick with Apple for now.

Then it just comes down to what you consider "top of the line" in a specific price range, and taste.

You can't argue taste. Might as well bang your head against a wall because that's more productive.

j26
Sep 6, 2006, 02:14 PM
Hi Multimedia

I am a fiirst time Mac owner. I wasn't aware that a model relaunch was due, only that I was p..s.d off with Windows problems and fancied a change. I am a compete but, until 2hrs ago, happy novice.

Helto

Hi and welcome to the madhouse.

You still have a great machine, be happy and use it to it's limit if you can (you probably can't!)

odedia
Sep 6, 2006, 02:14 PM
Another point needs to be said:

Didn't we have enough of the 8X superdrives? 16X drives are definetly the standard these days, even on most Laptops. Isn't there a normal slot-loading 16X dvd burner in the market yet???

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:16 PM
The 24" iMac has a Mobile Express Module inside, MXM type II video card.

I think thats good? not too sure? can anyone tell me if this is a standard type of card?

enigmatic2
Sep 6, 2006, 02:17 PM
Does anyone have experience of installing 3rd party memory in an iMac? Is it tricky?

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:19 PM
Then it just comes down to what you consider "top of the line" in a specific price range, and taste.

You can't argue taste. Might as well bang your head against a wall because that's more productive.

Problem is that the statement we are all disputing never made mention of price or taste. It was that the iMac is the most powerful desktop in the world, which is plainly not true.

BRLAWYER has simply altered his postition to make it seem more reasonable, but it doesn't change the fact that the original statement is false and him altering his position proves that he cannot support the original assertion. :P

VeganBryan
Sep 6, 2006, 02:19 PM
it seems pretty likely that the 17" model will be dropped from the line when they finally do a full re-design of the iMac.

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:20 PM
Also the left and right speakers are duals and much larger. Quad speakers!!!

840quadra
Sep 6, 2006, 02:20 PM
I think I'm going to move to the US and start being a Laywer,

Not to Pick and poke (much like you two are doing to each others posts).

But...

Location: Currently in Switzerland

:D

MacinDoc
Sep 6, 2006, 02:20 PM
Does anyone have experience of installing 3rd party memory in an iMac?
Yes.
Is it tricky?
No.

mmignano
Sep 6, 2006, 02:20 PM
The 2.33GHz one is quicker. ;)


I know its quicker, but trying to figure out if its worth the extra $225.

KingYaba
Sep 6, 2006, 02:20 PM
Graphic cards suck in those machines. Wow 64mb for low end. 128 for highest? Where is the 512?

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:22 PM
Graphic cards suck in those machines. Wow 64mb for low end. 128 for highest? Where is the 512?

It appears that you can upgrade on the 24" need somebody to confirm my post on this thread a couple of mins ago.

thedonga
Sep 6, 2006, 02:22 PM
I know its quicker, but trying to figure out if its worth the extra $225.
considering it's only a 170MHz bump, you're not going to notice the difference.

jaduffy108
Sep 6, 2006, 02:24 PM
I think I'm going to move to the US and start being a Laywer, since you don't even seem to know the first thing about debate or even what basic statements mean.

You never said it was the "best" desktop on the planet, or that it was the "best" for the price. You said the iMac is "the most powerful desktop". Which is wrong. It isn't. Your statement is false.

Really rather simple stuff, especially for a lawyer.


### I'm happy to see I'm not the only who gets involved in silly arguments....that add nothing to these forums. Thank you. It helps me see how silly I look. *I* shall try to change my ways...

Reep
Sep 6, 2006, 02:24 PM
Also the left and right speakers are duals and much larger. Quad speakers!!!

Where did you see this?

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:25 PM
Where did you see this?

A little bird told me.:)

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:25 PM
Not to Pick and poke (much like you two are doing to each others posts).

But...



:D

Noticed that, however I'm betting that he's from the US. Which is presumably where he was trained and passed his Law degree, meaning he is of a US standard.

And of course, I was joking :p

jaduffy108
Sep 6, 2006, 02:26 PM
Graphic cards suck in those machines. Wow 64mb for low end. 128 for highest? Where is the 512?

### That's pretty much true regarding Apple in general..and when they *do* offer a good card, it has horrible, performance crippling drivers. Despite this, I think the new iMac 24" is pretty rockin'.

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 02:28 PM
A little bird told me.:)

You've got the developer's notes haven't you? Cheeky bugger, where'd you get those? Post them so we can all have a look, that Video Card thing sounds interesting if true - possibly user upgradeable if it's modular...

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:28 PM
### I'm happy to see I'm not the only who gets involved in silly arguments....that add nothing to these forums. Thank you. It helps me see how silly I look. *I* shall try to change my ways...

There's nothing wrong with standing up for the truth, and not letting people get away with being misleading (or lying). No matter how silly it is. ;) If they think they can get away with it they'll just continue doing it!

I just have a personal, perhaps irrational, hatred of people who refuse to admit anything they said is ever wrong. No matter how obviously wrong it is, as in this case. To go on and then pretend you said something else just makes me madder. :P

meanmusic
Sep 6, 2006, 02:28 PM
For those who have placed orders, what are your shipping dates?

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:28 PM
Here.....http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=56762&d=1157570880

Chundles
Sep 6, 2006, 02:29 PM
### That's pretty much true regarding Apple in general..and when they *do* offer a good card, it has horrible, performance crippling drivers. Despite this, I think the new iMac 24" is pretty rockin'.

Mate, what's with the 3 hashes? Looks silly.

alexprice
Sep 6, 2006, 02:31 PM
Also.....

840quadra
Sep 6, 2006, 02:32 PM
Originally Posted by enigmatic2
Does anyone have experience of installing 3rd party memory in an iMac?

Yes.

Originally Posted by enigmatic2
Is it tricky?

No.



Ok, so that was really helpful to the poster asking wasn't it ;)


enigmatic2 ::EDIT:: so it isn't similar to the G5 iMac, as the G5's didn't have an access door to the memory modules I guess :( .

http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/iMac_(Early2006)_UG.pdf

Page #69 (no joke) contains information about accessing the memory port and doing memory upgrades.

Manic Mouse
Sep 6, 2006, 02:32 PM
You've got the developer's notes haven't you? Cheeky bugger, where'd you get those? Post them so we can all have a look, that Video Card thing sounds interesting if true - possibly user upgradeable if it's modular...

Probably the reason they went with nVidia, rather than any AMD buyout stuff.