Who Else Is Disappointed In The Imac G5

[BakedBeans]

I know its to early to tall but from the rumors the g5 is going to be something like the sony viao w700g, which to me looks like a hatched up half laptop half tower....now... im kind of hoping that this isnt the case,,, and that maybe what the deal is is that the screen comes of and you can use it to wirelessly control music ect ect...

i was just wondering how everyone felt about it..

[edesignuk]

There are already quite a few threads where many have made their opinions (good or bad) quite clear on this subject :)

But if we're gonna do this again...

The CPU is ok, the HDD, RAM & video card are a joke!

[Mr. Anderson]

But this is all speculation at this point.

I'd wait to make the call until you actually see one in person :D

D

[Chip NoVaMac]

I think that Apple's take on the basic design will be a notch ahead of anything else out there.

The shame is that the current iMac is so right for so many uses. Maybe it is becuase Apple uses it in their stores, but I am seeing other stores starting to use them. So ergonomic compared to anything else out there.

[BakedBeans]

There are already quite a few threads where many have made their opinions (good or bad) quite clear on this subject :)

But if we're gonna do this again...

The CPU is ok, the HDD, RAM & video card are a joke!q

is there..sorrry i did a quick scan...but might be opinion blind, any way im particularly interested in the design...

[ThomasJefferson]

I want to trust the Apple design team on this, they always seem to toss a hail Mary pass and score. I have always liked the iMac design and have always wanted to own one. I admit, I stared at it the first few weeks and tried to figure it out, but the design grew on me. Silly G4 tho. Evil Motorola.

I trust they will keep up the tradition and come up with something stunning.

[slughead]

The video card and RAM is unacceptable.

I know exactly why the video card sucks though--the case design is going to be REALLY small. The 5200 is a clocked down 5900 (a decent card), usually it's used in small, less ventilated cases.

The 5200 is now a REALLY low range card. The LEAST they could put in would be an ATi 9600 or 9800 (now mid-range cards).

[quagmire]

There are already quite a few threads where many have made their opinions (good or bad) quite clear on this subject :)

But if we're gonna do this again...

The CPU is ok, the HDD, RAM & video card are a joke!

The CPU is ok. These are consumers we are talking about. These people would be doing email, chat, web browsing, and some video and photo editing. So the HD is ok. What consumer needs an 80 GB HD for that much stuff. By the time they fill it up the most of the stuff would be old and time to be trashed. The video card is acceptable. Yes, the 5200 is a crappy card in pro products. But, dells still put them in as standard in >$1k machines. Consumers aren't going to do gpu intensive work. I played x plane on my pbook that has a 5200 with 32 mb. So the gpu can handle some games. The only thing that is not acceptable is the ram.

[edesignuk]

The CPU is ok. These are consumers we are talking about. These people would be doing email, chat, web browsing, and some video and photo editing.They will likley be buying in to thew whole iLife thing and be wanting to put they're home movies to DVD, manage they're digital photos etc. CPU power is a must.
So the HD is ok. What consumer needs an 80 GB HD for that much stuff. By the time they fill it up the most of the stuff would be old and time to be trashed.A large iTunes library will eat half of that. People will rip their entire CD colection to their Mac and boom, half their disk space is gone. With broadband people are downloading more, and bigger files than ever, no matter who they are. 80GB is no where near enough, especially for a computer with no room for an extra drive (and don't go giving me ***** about external ones, the iMac - the all in one remember!?)
The video card is acceptable. Yes, the 5200 is a crappy card in pro products. But, dells still put them in as standard in >$1k machines. Consumers aren't going to do gpu intensive work. I played x plane on my pbook that has a 5200 with 32 mb. So the gpu can handle some games. The only thing that is not acceptable is the ram.The video card is a piece of *****, I don't understand how any of you can defend its use in such an expensive computer.

[quagmire]

A large iTunes library will eat half of that. People will rip their entire CD colection to their Mac and boom, half their disk space is gone. With broadband people are downloading more, and bigger files than ever, no matter who they are. 80GB is no where near enough, especially for a computer with no room for an extra drive (and don't go giving me ***** about external ones, the iMac - the all in one remember!?)


The video card is a piece of *****, I don't understand how any of you can defend its use in such an expensive computer.


Are the files they are going to use going to be used forever? No, they would trash them once they are done with them. I know alot of people that own the current G4 imac and they all say that there 80 GB HD is plenty. These people also have big itunes libraries. If you know you have a big library then bto the imac to 120 GB or 160 GB(if the 120 GB is offered). After 2-3 years you still don't have enough room buy an external HD.

As I said before many pc makers still use the 5200 in there $1k and over machines standard or BTO. We know macs are not gaming machines so the need of a 9600 or 9800 in a consumer machine is not necessary. But, I do agree the 5200 has no business in a pro machine. You people make it sound you are all hardcore gamers. Then go out and buy or build a cheap pc for your gaming needs and use the mac for everything else. The gpu is an acceptable card.

[BakedBeans]

They will likley be buying in to thew whole iLife thing and be wanting to put they're home movies to DVD, manage they're digital photos etc. CPU power is a must.
A large iTunes library will eat half of that. People will rip their entire CD colection to their Mac and boom, half their disk space is gone. With broadband people are downloading more, and bigger files than ever, no matter who they are. 80GB is no where near enough, especially for a computer with no room for an extra drive (and don't go giving me ***** about external ones, the iMac - the all in one remember!?)
The video card is a piece of *****, I don't understand how any of you can defend its use in such an expensive computer.

on the cpu i completely agree, everything needs to be done quickly these days....
and the gpu also.... 5200 isnt acceptable...

however... IF the hd is upgradeable then i think 80gb is fine... ive got a 1.5sd powerbook with 80gb hd.. andwith everything ive got on here ive got 61gb free... ive got a decent ammount of songs and quite a few pics... loads of apps.. final cut pro and express, photoshop cs,image ready soundtrack, shake and ms office....

so i think that unless your putting a quite a few dvds on your hd then there isnt a great need in the imac...
although a pro user (which you may or may not be) need 160-500gb deffo.

[Timelessblur]

My thoughs are the Graphic card is a joke and makes the enitre computer a POS. that goes double due to the lack of ablitly to upgrade it later. Hopefuly they will put a real card standarnd in it.

80gig standard HD is fine. The people who think that it pushing the limites should opt to put a bigger HD in there and HD can easily be gotten externally. I personly would just upgrade it to a 160 any how but for most 80 gigs is really just fine.

Ram 256 is fine most people should upgrade that to 512 and ram can easily be added later any how.
CPU is fine

It just the graphic card right now that makes the new iMac and over priced POS

[LethalWolfe]

Besides the fact that I don't know how people can be disappointed w/a product that hasn't come out yet I think the 80gig HDD is fine. Sure there are people that need more than 80gigs. And there are people that will never fill up 80gigs. I think it 80 is a good size to start at.


Lethal

[BakedBeans]

ok lets cut the crap with the cpu.... its great 1.8g5 is a good processor...
very good.... i think 256 is a bit rubbish it takes that to run anything at all properly,,,, ive got 512 in the p/b and am going to upgrade to 1gb so it will be very efficient for me..

Besides the fact that I don't know how people can be disappointed w/a product that hasn't come out yet I think the 80gig HDD is fine. Sure there are people that need more than 80gigs. And there are people that will never fill up 80gigs. I think it 80 is a good size to start at.


Lethal

yeah sorry about the complaining about the unknown... im simply complaining about rumors.... macrumorscomplaints.com if you like

[Jo-Kun]

Who Else Is Disappointed In The Imac G5

what a ****ty question... it doesn't exist yet, so why be disapointed allready???

while we're busy:

Who Else Is Disappointed In The 40" Cinema Display?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The 5G 100GB iPod?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The G5 PowerBook?
Who Else Is Disappointed In ...?

my big question starts to be

Who Else Is Disappointed In Numerous Threads Filled With Useless Complaints About Possible Future Releases By Apple?????

J

[BakedBeans]

Who Else Is Disappointed In The Imac G5

what a ****ty question... it doesn't exist yet, so why be disapointed allready???

while we're busy:

Who Else Is Disappointed In The 40" Cinema Display?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The 5G 100GB iPod?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The G5 PowerBook?
Who Else Is Disappointed In ...?

my big question starts to be

Who Else Is Disappointed In Numerous Threads Filled With Useless Complaints About Possible Future Releases By Apple?????

J

firstly re-read this thread... the stop making stupid and confrontational remarks...

secondly i said based on rumors.... thats all i can go on...and its widely thought they are accurate, so if the release something different then i will say sorry...

thirdly i am allowed an opinion

fourthly who is dissapointed with the number of people that jump down fellow mac users throats in an attempt to make them look better than everyone else..but in turn make themselves look pompous , edesignuk managed to put his point across without making himself looking like a gimp.. he obviously thought that because there have been other posts on the same wavelength as this that is was a slight waste of space, however he divulged in a conversation and we all brought up some interesting points about hardrive sizes and gpu specs... so unless you have something constructive to say, please dont say anything

jerk

[edesignuk]

Who Else Is Disappointed In The 40" Cinema Display?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The 5G 100GB iPod?
Who Else Is Disappointed In The G5 PowerBook?
Who Else Is Disappointed In This dumb pointless waste of space post of mine?Fixed :D
Who Else Is Disappointed In Numerous Threads Filled With Useless Complaints About Possible Future Releases By Apple?????Oh, did no one tell you on the way in? This is MacRumors, the purpose of which is to discuss rumors. This is a thread based on a rumor, which we are discussing, you with me so far?

[BakedBeans]

Fixed :D

naughty naughty... nice mini btw...checked it out....

[iGav]

I don't understand how any of you can defend its use in such an expensive computer.

Expensive is a relative term though... this can be seen when comparing any desirable brand, with a less fashionable one. Cost doesn't necessarily equate to being greater or having a better spec. There might be other variables to consider.

It's not all that long ago (about 10 years or so) that Mercedes didn't actually supply a car stereo/radio with their cars as standard, they were a cost extra. No pay, no boogie-woogie.

[Brother Michael]

What I find sad is the fact that the HDD is not bigger. My family and I always run out of disk space on our computers. That actually is the reason why we went with an HP...It had more HDD space.

Mike

[edesignuk]

Expensive is a relative term though... this can be seen when comparing any desirable brand, with a less fashionable one. Cost doesn't necessarily equate to being greater or having a better spec. There might be other variables to consider.It's still the same basic ******* card that you can buy for £42 (and even that price is for a 128MB version!!!)

[Daveman Deluxe]

I think that the GeForce 5200 is just fine as a standard graphics card in a consumer machine right now. Most consumers aren't into games. That said, I think it would be a HUGE mistake for Apple not to offer the Radeon 9600 and 9800 as BTO options, so that those consumers who ARE gamers can have a graphics card that meets their needs as well.

[Chaszmyr]

I think that the GeForce 5200 is just fine as a standard graphics card in a consumer machine right now. Most consumers aren't into games. That said, I think it would be a HUGE mistake for Apple not to offer the Radeon 9600 and 9800 as BTO options, so that those consumers who ARE gamers can have a graphics card that meets their needs as well.


Precisely. Most may not be, but some are, and for those who are, a 5200 just won't cut it and it needs to be upgradable. If it's not, Apple will have made a grave mistake.

[slipper]

if prices start out at $1300 w/ a g5 processor for the educational model, i think this is great.

[iGav]

It's still the same basic ******* card that you can buy for £42 (and even that price is for a 128MB version!!!)

Well maybe the actual specs will feature the 128MB card, but the price will undoubtedly reflect that extra £42.

Or Apple may offer it as a BTO option, for those that need the extra power.

But it's all hearsay until Apple release the final specs... but as LethalWolfe has said, I don't know how people can be disappointed w/a product that hasn't come out yet.

[vouder17]

Ok considering the all in one design i really don't think you should worry, apple is usually very good in this department, and if you read the TS post they say that it is the same principal as the Sony but it doesn't look anything like it, and the TS report even says that it will look good.

Ok well considering the specs, yeah i am slightly dissapointed but they are afterall rumors, and MOSR has a completly and much more optimistic view on the iMac G5, but i am not sure on there validity.

Well anyway lets wait and see.....
DjVoteZ

[AliensAreFuzzy]

It's all PURE SPECULATION at this point. There are NO COMFIRMED SPECS out right now. We should find out in about 2 weeks and 1 day.

[sigamy]

OK, here is my view. I think the line up is changing. I think Apple (Steve) has finally moved passed the product matrix that was introduced with the original clamshell iBook. For those who don't remember this matrix called for a consumer desktop (iMac) and a pro desktop (PowerMac), then a consumer laptop (iBook) and a pro laptop (PowerBook). This matrix was broken when the eMac was released and I think we are now seeing the final transistion.

Does anyone remember the rumors of a 17" CRT iMac back in 1999/2000? I remember because that is the machine I was waiting to purchase. But Apple just kept introducing minor speed bumps and new colors to the original 15" CRT iMac. Then in 2001 the radical redesign brought us the flat panel iMac.

Do we even know if the eMac was a planned product? Or was it a reaction to the education market's need for a more durable iMac? Remember, that the eMac was originally only available to the edu market until consumers kicked and screamed and got Apple to sell it to everyone. I think Apple had the 17" CRT iMac sitting on the shelves of their labs, destined to never be introduced. Then the edu market needed a more durable machine and the 17" CRT iMac became the eMac.

Remember the intro of the flat panel iMac? In one of his many miscalculations Steve said, "the CRT is officially dead". I don't think Apple EVER planned to release the 17" CRT all-in-one under either iMac or eMac.

They were wrong about the CRT--both due to price considerations and due to the need for a durable, kid-friendly machine.

The other quotes that stick with me from the flat panel intro are all the talk about keeping the flat screen FLAT. Steve said, "make each part true to itself". Brilliant design-speak. Why have a flat LCD and then slap 8" or 6" or even 2" of crap on to the back of it? Is it still flat? They had that idea--actually Ive's first prototypes where of that design--and they dropped that design.

I don't think the rumored specs and design are for what we (today) consider the iMac--I think they are for the eMac replacement. I think they fit the requirement for making a somewhat more durable machine for the edu market and for households with kids. They'll have a smaller footprint than the eMac and a G5. They will have an LCD, which is an upgrade to the eMac. The rest of the specs, simply, do not matter for these markets.

Everyone second-guessed Apple when they removed the floppy drive from the original iMac. Guess what? Apple was right and consumer adapted. No one seemed to second guess the 2001 decision to not have a CRT-based machine. Guess what? Apple was wrong, it was too early for an all LCD line up. Now in 2004 the time is right. This is truely the death of the CRT.

Then I think we will see a true iMac replacement that will WOW us. It may be this rumored tablet thing, I don't know. It may offer a headless option (I hope). No matter what, it will be insanely great.

This is what I hope happens. I can't see Apple going backwards with the iMac in terms of design. I think they will keep the iMac as a pro-sumer machine (except for the video card!) or a machine for the design conscience customer.

This new computer-behind-the LCD is the new eMac. That is an impressive upgrade for the eMac and still leaves something wonderful for the iMac.

[dontmatter]

OK, I know it's been said, but... processor=awesome. Plenty.
HD space=perfectly practical. I'm about to get an external for my PB, because my 60 gigs are totally full and fragmented. But I have a rediculously huge music collection, and I know almost nobody who has more. Few people use more than 40-50 GB, so 80 is just fine for the majority, and a hard drive is one of the easiest and cheapest things for people to upgrade. Not to mention, whether people need it or not, they can see if they have extra ram or processor speed, but extra hard drive space and you're just raising the prices with no gain for 80% of people. The way HD prices are falling, the other 20 can wait a year as they use up there current space and then get it cheaper.
Graphics card I can't speak to, b/c the most graphics intensive thing I ever do is itunes visualizer (which actually, I'm dissapointed in the smoothing on for my PB).

BUT THE RAM IS SHAMEFUL. Everybody can see the change in performance there, whether or not they know what it's coming from. Apple is being cheap, and it's majorly crippling what many would call their signature computer.

Let's just hope it's a little better than this, or cheaper, and comes with a design so stunning and appealing that it'll make the ipod mini look only kind of like a hot product, in demand.