Low End PowerMac G5?

[MacRumors]

A last minute tip indicates that Apple will also be introducing a new PowerMac G5 model as early as tomorrow alongside the rumored iBook updates.

The new PowerMac g5 will be a low end single processor 1.8GHz machine with 256MB of RAM, 80GB HD, GeForce FX 5200, and SuperDrive for $1499.

The new machines provides Apple with a lower end "headless" Mac. However, a (less expandable) 1.8GHz iMac with built-in 17" LCD is priced at $1499 and otherwise comparable specs.

[homerjward]

it's about time! apple needs to compete in this critical market, and it would be nice if they intro'd a cheap 17" alu lcd but meh...

[Chaszmyr]

Despite the fact that many people have asked for such a machine, I have a hard time believing many will sell.

[Bear]

Apple still needs to get real on the minimum memory.
512MB should be the minimum memory they ship these days and more like 1 GB minimum on the top 15" and 17" Powerbooks and the top Powermac model (or 2).

[GFLPraxis]

A last minute tip indicates that Apple will also be introducing a new PowerMac G5 model as early as tomorrow alongside the rumored iBook updates.

The new PowerMac g5 will be a low end single processor 1.8GHz machine with 256MB of RAM, 80GB HD, GeForce FX 5200, and SuperDrive for $1499.

The new machines provides Apple with a lower end "headless" Mac. However, a (less expandable) 1.8GHz iMac with built-in 17" LCD is priced at $1499 and otherwise comparable specs.


This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

[yoda13]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

Not neccessarily. I already have a great studio display and the new PM would be more expandable in terms of hard drive, PCI, and graphics card. It would probably hold more memory as well. I for one think that this is a great idea, and will get one as soon as I have the cash, if true/

[AoWolf]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

You can change the GPU on this and it is more expandable. It will sell.

[wPod]

er how is that low end? if its the same price as the iMac G5 why would anyone buy it?

the e-mac is low end!!!! and this is about twice as much as that! you can go to dell and get something low end !!!!

(sorry i want a mac about the price of the e-mac w/o the built in monitor!)

[atomiton]

...you can do monitor spanning and attach a 23" cinema display... and upgrade to a DUAL when you get the cash.

not everyone wants to buy an AIO!

Many are afraid of ALL in ONES!

[mklos]

I don't think this will suck...In fact, I think this is a great thing for Apple. This will shut everyone up about Apple releasing a lower end headless G5 based Mac. Like the others said, you can order it anyway you want, so if you want to spend the extra $100 or so for the ATI Radeon 9600XT then you can do that.

Heck, I might even think about getting one now. I think I'd like a single processor G5 PowerMac with expandability. I could probably even get this even cheaper if I have my friend who's an educator to order it for me. Take that $1499 PowerMac G5 with a $1299 display and I'll have a nice fairly cheap, expandable Mac that will last me a long time. Everything except for the processor will be upgradable, and heck, maybe someone will be selling G5 processors on eBay when they upgrade, or whatever.

[Wonder Boy]

do you love me, uh-huh whatever.

here you go, your precious headless mac. you people better buy them, cause i for one never asked for it.

[Garissimo]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card

It'll have the same GeForce 5200 Ultra the rest of the PowerMacs come with standard, and you should be able to upgrade to one of the ATI cards.

The question is, will it come in a more compact form factor or will it use the same big freakin' aluminum enclosure the rest of the PowerMacs use? My guess it'll be the same size as the rest of the PowerMacs. Anyways, after you put in 1Gig of Ram, a 128MB video card and 20" display you're right at $3,000. Not too bad a deal, but the 20" iMac with a better video card is stilll the computer I want.

[hob]

Many are afraid of ALL in ONES!

I'm afraid of Laptops let alone AIO's! But "unfortunately" all I have is a powerbook! I would definately buy one of those without doubt - what's my student loan for?!

edit: that is if it's a good price...

Hob

[Phat_Pat]

i wouldn't buy this when i could get a dual......

[Xtremehkr]

While I really like the new iMac, this new headless machine makes for an interesting dilemna. All in one, or upgradeable one. I really like the convieniance of the all in one design but then I may get slightly more mileage out of the headless one. Do I need that expandability though? Not really. At least they are offering gamers an option now, I think it is a smart move. Gaming aside though, I still like the iMac.

[Bear]

It'll have the same GeForce 5200 Ultra the rest of the PowerMacs come with standard, and you should be able to upgrade to one of the ATI cards.

The question is, will it come in a more compact form factor or will it use the same big freakin' aluminum enclosure the rest of the PowerMacs use? My guess it'll be the same size as the rest of the PowerMacs. Anyways, after you put in 1Gig of Ram, a 128MB video card and 20" display you're right at $3,000. Not too bad a deal, but the 20" iMac with a better video card is stilll the computer I want.Actually at that point, a 20" iMac G5 will be less expensive and be 1.8GHz. Think carefully on what you want and need. And then make your purchase.

I know what I would need to upgrade from my Powermac G4, and it's gonna be sometime next year probably before it's available. (I need a noticeable speed improvement from the dual 1.42GHz Powermac and it would be nice for it to be 2 years old at least before I replace it.)

[Analog Kid]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.
You've got a choice-- built in display and the cost that goes with that, or expandability and the cost that goes with that. Apparently they're about the same.

I really wish I understood how people think though-- why would expanding an "all dual lineup" to include a single processor unit suck?

It also ruins their "all $2k+ lineup"... :rolleyes:

[AndrewMT]

Apple needs to update its 17" cinema display to widescreen format and the new aluminum look to give the headless G5 owners more options.

I'm hoping for a cube-style G5 desktop.

[Phat_Pat]

I'm hoping for a cube-style G5 desktop.

that would be awsome :D

[AoWolf]

Maybe it will come in a sphere form. ;)

[Stella]

Sounds good :->
!

I take it, the 1.8Ghz G5 processors can't be in short supply any more..

[DTphonehome]

Wow...if this is true, it'll make a lot of people happy. I ended up getting a 20" iMac G5 instead of the lowest-end PM I could configure, but this would have been a nice compromise. Still a little expensive when you factor in the screen, but it fits a nice spot in Apple's lineup. With periodic upgrades, it could last a long, long time.

--DT

[Garissimo]

Actually at that point, a 20" iMac G5 will be less expensive and be 1.8GHz.

No question. The iMac is also more elegant, smaller footprint, probably quieter too.

Again, we'll see if there's any change in form factor with this new PowerMac but knowing the cooling requirements for the G5 running with full speed FSB, it's not likely.

[swissmann]

If I'm spending that kind of money I might as well be getting the iMac G5. Headless mac good but not at this price. That is why the Cube didn't sell - it cost too much.

[AoWolf]

Apple needs to update its 17" cinema display to widescreen format and the new aluminum look to give the headless G5 owners more options.

I'm hoping for a cube-style G5 desktop.

There is no more 17 inch display.

[mklos]

er how is that low end? if its the same price as the iMac G5 why would anyone buy it?

the e-mac is low end!!!! and this is about twice as much as that! you can go to dell and get something low end !!!!

(sorry i want a mac about the price of the e-mac w/o the built in monitor!)

Good luck with that one! You can go to Dell and get a POS $499 with generic parts that they didn't design, and they didn't build, low RAM that you have to share with for the video, poor HD Specs, and no CD-RW/DVD (Combo Drive). Also, you don't get any real software, no office suite.

You get what you pay for son!

[Pedro Estarque]

This is a crippled PowerMac and not a Headless iMac, which is what we have been asking for. It should be U$ 999 otherwise you will always have the feeling that you're losing a great 17"monitor and a better graphic card in exchange for some PCI and memory slots that you might need some day. But Apple will never price a Pro product cheeper than a consumer one for obvious reasons so this a shoot in the foot. Save more 400 bucks and you get another processor and a better card.

[ijimk]

This is good for people looking for a qualit machine that dont have a lot of money. Will they be introducing a new emac as well??? :confused:

[slowtreme]

Didn't they already sell these, when the G5 first came out?

[Slipperyskates]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.


If you had a spare $600, why would you be buying an affordable, low end system?

[g4cubed]

Apple needs to update its 17" cinema display to widescreen format and the new aluminum look to give the headless G5 owners more options.

I'm hoping for a cube-style G5 desktop.
A person after my own heart. Cube all the way. :D

[AndrewMT]

There is no more 17 inch display.

Why is that?

[Deltan]

Gahhhhh!
I have a new G5 iMac in the mail right now coming to me. I wanted to pony up for a PowerMac but I just couldn't spare the extra cash, now all the sudden there's gonna be a low end PowerMac? ARGH

[g4cubed]

Why is that?
They only make 20, 23, and 30 :rolleyes:

[Duane Martin]

Hmmm, interesting, but I think doubtful. Who would be the market for these machines? Sure, you can upgrade the video and hard drive, but then you are spending more money. So you wait two years and put in a killer video card. Into a single processor machine. Why? I know there are people on this forum that are yelling "me, me, I'll buy one", but really? Really?

This product would just confuse the product line-up and really just seems like another Cube. Sure, "everyone wants one", but in the end most will buy the 17" iMac because it comes with a monitor and the Single G5 price will be determined to be "too high". Hey, the Cube was cool. It just didn't sell.

As the one poster said, he wants this computer for the price of an eMac, which is what I think most "headless Mac" advocates want. Who wouldn't? But that's not what this is, and that "dream" price/power ratio seems unlikely to ever happen (note, I did not say "never").

[Daveway]

Looks like tomorrow will be a busy one. Oh, yea, then we have next weeks concert! :D

cant wait

[BornAgainMac]

It's a huge disappointment. It probably will look cool. Probaby it's biggest selling factor will be that you can take out the slow graphics card and upgrade it with something faster compared to the iMac.

[Gherkin]

why does Apple decide that a Superdrive should be the standard on these machines, yet 256 MB of ram is good enough?

I predict the Powerbook G5s will be Apple's first line of computers to offer 512 MB as the standard.

[segundo]

Anyone else get this when they try to check their order status?

Thank you for shopping at the Apple Online Store

Apple's Online and phone Order Status services are temporarily unavailable due to a scheduled upgrade to our systems.

We apologize for any inconvenience.

[mactarkus]

Noone mentioned whether or not they thought this "headless" Mac would share the same case as the towers. From the price, it must. The headless Mac I want shares more with an iMac than the Power Macs. It would have just enough horsepower to run OS X well, small enough to place on a bookshelf or tuck in a home theater, and cost much, much less than a grand. It would be the perfect second or third Mac. For me it would be my 111th Mac.

I read an excellent online article a few months back. It ran the numbers and pointed out how making such a Mac would not be profitable unless it caused their number to increase by an order of magnitude -- tough to envision even with the great Apple news of late. Profitable or not, I'd still like one!

[nuckinfutz]

This is a crippled PowerMac and not a Headless iMac, which is what we have been asking for. It should be U$ 999 otherwise you will always have the feeling that you're losing a great 17"monitor and a better graphic card in exchange for some PCI and memory slots that you might need some day. But Apple will never price a Pro product cheeper than a consumer one for obvious reasons so this a shoot in the foot. Save more 400 bucks and you get another processor and a better card.

You obviously don't know what "crippled" means. I guess my Honda is "crippled" because it doesn't have a 8 cylinder engine :rolleyes:

Hmmm, interesting, but I think doubtful. Who would be the market for these machines?

Jeebus folks this isn't a mensa question. A $1499 Powermac G5 would benefit anyone who cannot budget a $1999 Powermac but can budget a $1499 one. Yes people still need expandability..yes some people still need bigger graphics cards and more storage. The iMac is a nice consumer computer but it doesn't address the sub $2k prosumer market that well. If this PM does happen I'll change my plans from buying a iMac and get this PM because I value having more expandability at this point.

I know the audio guys would love it. Sure Dual Procs are nice but so is saving $500 or having a better resale value.

[Bunzi2k4]

If i had a job, I would buy a single 1.8 ghz PM for 1.5k... makes my powerbook look like a terrible buy... >_< 1794 for an 867 mhz laptop... very nice apple!

[DTphonehome]

This is a crippled PowerMac and not a Headless iMac, which is what we have been asking for. It should be U$ 999 otherwise you will always have the feeling that you're losing a great 17"monitor and a better graphic card in exchange for some PCI and memory slots that you might need some day. But Apple will never price a Pro product cheeper than a consumer one for obvious reasons so this a shoot in the foot. Save more 400 bucks and you get another processor and a better card.

You also get (presumably) a faster bus, more connectivity, potential for more internal storage (you can put 4 250GB drives in there with 3rd party add ons), gigabit ethernet, firewire 800, much more memory capacity, upgradeable graphics, upgradeable CPU, and, when you finally get a new Mac, you can take your screen with you. For many people, the expandability is well worth it.

As for the next model only costing 400 more, go ahead, buy it. Apple would love to sell you one. That's called an upsell; it's standard marketing.

--DT

[Jovian9]

I believe this is a good decision. Not everyone buys an Apple LCD (though I would if I bought a PowerMac). People now have the chance to buy an upgradeable PowerMac G5 and a generic LCD for under $2K, or they can keep the monitor they may already have and spend less than that. Being an owner of a new iMac G5, I may have considered this option over the iMac if there had been that choice when I ordered mine.......though I love my G5 iMac:)
It would be great if they went ahead and released a 1.6 G5 PowerMac with it.......for say $1199 (with the same specs as the 1.6 G5 iMac).

[nuckinfutz]

It's a huge disappointment. It probably will look cool. Probaby it's biggest selling factor will be that you can take out the slow graphics card and upgrade it with something faster compared to the iMac.

Think a little harder ...I'm sure you can come up with more than just a graphics card.

why does Apple decide that a Superdrive should be the standard on these machines, yet 256 MB of ram is good enough?

I predict the Powerbook G5s will be Apple's first line of computers to offer 512 MB as the standard

Because Apple knows that the Maczone, MacMall, MacConnection etc will toss in $512MB for free to get the sale. Thus Apple doesn't have to expend the cash...sounds like a smart business strategy to me.

People need to forget about low headless Macs. How many times does Apple keep stating they don't want to "play" in the sub $800 arena. This generally means the eMac starts at $799 with built in crt of course and then the next step is the iMac. Begging for it isn't going to make it come any sooner. The Mac market isn't ready for a low cost headless computer primarily because Apple's business initative is quite pathetic and consumer sales of low end desktops are not profitable.

[GFLPraxis]

Maybe it will come in a sphere form. ;)

*imagines Mac rolling off desk*

[aswitcher]

It would be nice if this rumored model was a bit different.

A cut down box still with PCI slots...not quite a cube :)

or

Cheaper than $1500...

or

better speced than rumoured...

[soosy]

I agree with those saying this sounds like more of a crippled PowerMac than a headless iMac. The headless iMac (iCheap) concept is meant to be cheap as possible... $699-$799 is probably too low to hope for, but $999 would be a sweet spot. $1499 way overshoots what is meant to be "iCheap". A new form factor (cube) would make it more appealing... we can dream....

But still, a cheaper single processor PowerMac is welcome. It does lower the barrier to entry... and some people think a second proc is unnecessary.

[dongmin]

This is definitely NOT the headless low-end Mac that people've been pining for. It's merely a stepped-down Power Mac. Not much to get excited about.

For an entry level machine (not an AIO), Apple would do a lot better designing something from ground up that's cheaper to produce and more compact than the towers. They may even be able to recycle the iMac motherboard. Bascially take the iMac, strip out the LCD, fold/chop it down to a more boxy form, and sell it at $1299. It seems a $999 price point is unrealistic for Apple. Maybe they can make a decent profit at $1299.

[applekid]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

Why do people keep getting this wrong?

The Power Mac G5 comes with the ATI Radeon 9600 XT or NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics card installed in a AGP 8X Pro slot for a maximum bandwidth of 2.1GB per second. And that’s a good thing, because the Power Mac G5 uses graphics cards not only to accelerate the latest video games, but the entire system as well.

And then there’s the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics processor with 64MB of DDR SDRAM. It’s a combination that delivers unparalleled 2D and 3D graphics performance and an immersive, photorealistic gaming experience with three times the frame rate of previous-generation processors.

I have to disagree with you. A dual processor machine is not completely important. In higher-end professional software, the dual processor will help, but the single 1.8 GHz is still a force to be reckoned way.

Apple sure has a lot of 1.8 GHz chips laying around... The 17-inch iMac has a 3-5 shipping day (I think) and the 20-inch iMac is taking weeks for some reason. Maybe the new PowerMac is for dealing with the iMac demand?

I also like the idea that maybe this is a separate G5 with its own case. Cut back on PCI/PCI-X slots and maybe a few RAM slots and all will be good. It's almost ideal for a gamer (more CPU power would be nice, but not completely necessary yet). Perhaps there can be a single-processor line with a smaller mobo and size? Would be nice...

[segundo]

Okay, so there are many of you who don't think this would work for you or you think that that this isn't a feasible product. Let me assure you, and any Apple employees out there that may be reading, that this is a viable product for some of us and here is why:

- I have no use for a second processor. I mean none. Would it get used if it was in a system while I was working? Sure, a little, but not enough to justify the extra costs.

- I want to use a KVM with a 20" Apple monitor. I could use one between my powerbook, my powermac, and possibly a pc if I needed to use one for a specific application.

- I want more customization of my system than what can be easily done with the iMac line. I want a combo drive (faster at ripping and burning cd's), I want a fast video card (for games and general graphics speed), I want the ability to have two hard drives installed in a RAID configuration (or just two drives for lots of space). The new iMacs are great but they have limitations based on their design.

So that's a gut reaction to the possible availability of a single proc PM. Definitely welcome as far as I'm concerned.

Let's also remember that whatever was planned for the product line up will most likely start to pop off now because the iMac line was late. This could mean we have a flurry of activity in the coming weeks.

[Duane Martin]

Jeebus folks this isn't a mensa question. A $1499 Powermac G5 would benefit anyone who cannot budget a $1999 Powermac but can budget a $1499 one.
Oh, well, that certainly clears up the question. Those people.
but it doesn't address the sub $2k prosumer market that well.
No it doesn't, assuming there is such a market in numbers large enough to justify this machine. This is the concept I am questioning. Saying something does not make it so.
I know the audio guys would love it.
Ah, there we are. That's the market. And I agree, I know a few audio guys who might be interested in this. Most are still running OS 9 because the plug-ins they want have not been written for X yet, and they are forever trying to find used G4s, but anyhow. So, potentially there is a small market. Enough to justify the machine? I say no. That's my opinion, Mensa (http://www.mensa.org/home.php) failure such that I am.

[timster]

My 2c:

I think that such a product should have a horizontal "pizza box" form factor. Something like the Macintosh LC II from the early 90s, but with the magic Ive touch. Aluminum pizza box, drool!

Specs: 1.6 GHz, 256 MB or NO memory, FireWire 400 only, entry level nVidia card, replaceable.

Priced at $999. They would sell so quickly they would outstrip iPod sales per quarter! Mac marketshare would double, and these forums would have a *lot* more visitors.

Well, that's what I think. But it's not going to happen as Apple would like to encourage people up to the more "deluxe" units where they can sustain 20-27% margins.

Listen to the conference call at http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq404/

There is an analyst's question: "Are you going to bring out a lower cost Mac to increase marketshare?"

Answer: "We've looked at it, but frankly we don't think we can make any money there."

I respectfully disagree, but then I can't keep my bedroom tidy, let alone run an $8.5 billion company!

[dubbz]

I don't need dual, but I want something that's more expandable than the iMac...so I guess this could be interesting, but not for $1499...

[AoWolf]

*imagines Mac rolling off desk*


No no no it will be suspend on 3 legs like a UFO.

[~Shard~]

Well, now all you people who have been incessantly complaining for a cheaper headless Mac etc. ad nauseum finally get your wish. All I can say is if this indeed comes out, those people better not complain and they better go out and buy one. I personally don't want this and have no need for it, but I've heard people whining for one for I can't remember how long, so here ya go... :cool:

[nuckinfutz]

Many times in Apple's past their low end Powermac wasn't a good seller. Mac users tended to ignore the low end unit and the expensive high end and focus on the midrange unit.

A Powermac for $1499 is good even if it's for mindshare only. Think "Powermacs starting at $1499!" banners and the like. Sure it's easy to say "just spend the money on a dual" but $500 gets me a lot of things and will a dual proc really justify the extra expenditure in time savings? That's debatable.

Lowering the cost of entry is always an important thing. It's important to realize that CPU power soon will not be the only metric we use for judging speed. Tiger's reliance on a fast GPU could make a single proc Powermac with a fast card superior to a dual proc Powermac with an entry level card.

This lower cost Powermac also paves the way for Apple's future lineup. Say for instance Apple is ready to ship dual core Powermacs next summer. Well then it would be quite easy to offer something like

$1499- Dual Core 1.8Ghz
$1999- Dual Core 2Ghz
$2499 Dual Core 2.4 x2 (Quad Cores total)
$2999 Dual Core 2.8 x2(Quad Cores total)

This allows Apple to amortize the single socket motherboards but still offer SMP configs and extend the midreange and high end with Quad processing. Why is this important. Because Tiger offers better SMP with fine grain locking and the ability to differentiate between physical versus logical processors. The die has been cast and we might just be see the intermediate steps.

[Nermal]

If this is true, I'll buy one almost instantly.

[Macmaniac]

I think people are missing the point behind this kind of computer. Finally you can upgrade a graphics card in a sub 2K Mac!!! This is the modding mac we poor gamers have been waiting for! You could get a great GPU in this machine as long as its removable, and with 2 PCI slots you could do so much! This is the long awaited Pizza box mac, I would buy one right away! If it had 4 ram slots, a second HD bay, 2 PCI slots, a 8x AGP slot, I would buy it! Who needs an Apple display? I could get a nice CRT for $180, this is the kind of computer Apple needs!

[Phat_Pat]

No no no it will be suspend on 3 legs like a UFO.

not a bad idea...

attached is a very detailed concept of this idea

be amazed at the beauty of my drawing skills :rolleyes:

[MikeBike]

Many times in Apple's past their low end Powermac wasn't a good seller. Mac users tended to ignore the low end unit and the expensive high end and focus on the midrange unit.


If Apple starts selling to a Bell Shaped Curve, then, they've got the correct price points in place. I believe that's the goal. But, I'm no marketing major.
;)

[MikeBike]

I couldn't convince my sister to get an Apple.
So, I helped her buy a Dell, no, she would only look at Dells, I couldn't get her into an AMD 64 bit core.

P4 3.0 Ghz
1 gig Ram
SATA 160 Hard Drive
Ati X800 something graphics card
WinXP Pro / Sp2 / Norton AV / Internet protection / Firewall / Email check...
Her machine comes up clean in a virus / trogan scan.

And Guess What? It runs like ****.
It's at least 2x SLOWER then my Powerbook G4 1.5 with 1 gig of ram.
It runs like a PIII 500mhz. Lots of Think Time.
Windows users have really been suckered.

- I can't Imagine just how bad a $500 dollar Dell would run.

Other interesting info:
She first called Dell and ordered a machine by phone.
They wanted to charge her $3000 for a piece of Junk that would have cost $2000 if ordered online.
She ordered it.
When I found out I told her to CANCEL the order.
They called back and offered to take $500 off the price of the machine if she'd still accept it. She said NO, They Shipped it Anyway!
She refused delivery.

- Dell has fallen on hard times.
- Buyer Beware of Dell.




:mad:

[rickvanr]

I think it should look just as the other G5's do. Everything that the dual 1.8 is, but a single chip. Plain, simple, and less expensive then a dual.

[Centris 650]

Ok,as a married man with 2.1 children (we just found out about #3) with a clamshell ibook that is about dead and on a tight budget THIS is the computer for me! I owned a Bondi iMac and loved it...until I needed to upgrade. I hated selling the WHOLE system, however couldn't afford the powermacs. I was trying to persuade the wife to get me a new iBook but now...I'll get this new powermac!

[DTphonehome]

I couldn't convince my sister to get an Apple.
So, I helped her buy a Dell, no, she would only look at Dells, I couldn't get her into an AMD 64 bit core.

P4 3.0 Ghz
1 gig Ram
SATA 160 Hard Drive
Ati X800 something graphics card
WinXP Pro / Sp2 / Norton AV / Internet protection / Firewall / Email check...
Her machine comes up clean in a virus / trogan scan.

And Guess What? It runs like ****.
It's at least 2x SLOWER then my Powerbook G4 1.5 with 1 gig of ram.
It runs like a PIII 500mhz. Lots of Think Time.
Windows users have really been suckered.

- I can't Imagine just how bad a $500 dollar Dell would run.

Other interesting info:
She first called Dell and ordered a machine by phone.
They wanted to charge her $3000 for a piece of Junk that would have cost $2000 if ordered online.
She ordered it.
When I found out I told her to CANCEL the order.
They called back and offered to take $500 off the price of the machine if she'd still accept it. She said NO, They Shipped it Anyway!
She refused delivery.

- Dell has fallen on hard times.
- Buyer Beware of Dell.




:mad:


I've pretty much used that exact argument whenever converting someone to Mac. I whip out my 2.5 year-old PB 667 DVI, and compare it to any year old Dell. I win every time, and make Apple another sale.
I think I've converted about 10 people so far...is there some sort of commission program? There should be.

--DT

[Jonathan Amend]

I love it! I might actually buy it (and I'm a PC user) =)

I wouldn't buy it if it were a different design that the current PowerMacs though.

[Jigglelicious]

I couldn't convince my sister to get an Apple.
So, I helped her buy a Dell, no, she would only look at Dells, I couldn't get her into an AMD 64 bit core.

P4 3.0 Ghz
1 gig Ram
SATA 160 Hard Drive
Ati X800 something graphics card
WinXP Pro / Sp2 / Norton AV / Internet protection / Firewall / Email check...
Her machine comes up clean in a virus / trogan scan.

And Guess What? It runs like ****.
It's at least 2x SLOWER then my Powerbook G4 1.5 with 1 gig of ram.
It runs like a PIII 500mhz. Lots of Think Time.
Windows users have really been suckered.

- I can't Imagine just how bad a $500 dollar Dell would run.

Other interesting info:
She first called Dell and ordered a machine by phone.
They wanted to charge her $3000 for a piece of Junk that would have cost $2000 if ordered online.
She ordered it.
When I found out I told her to CANCEL the order.
They called back and offered to take $500 off the price of the machine if she'd still accept it. She said NO, They Shipped it Anyway!
She refused delivery.

- Dell has fallen on hard times.
- Buyer Beware of Dell.




:mad:


Format the HDD and install a clean copy of windows. Its all that crap that Dell installs which slows down the computer. With the specs you listed, that computer should be very fast.

[Mechcozmo]

Because Apple knows that the Maczone, MacMall, MacConnection etc will toss in $512MB for free to get the sale. Thus Apple doesn't have to expend the cash...sounds like a smart business strategy to me.

You actually need to pay a "$40.00 Professional Installation Fee" if you read the fine print. As if a trained monkey couldn't do it...NO FREAKIN TOOLS!!! :mad:

I was looking to get my PowerBook like that, because of the extra RAM, but when I learned that I would need to pay for the installation of the RAM w/o educational discount...it wasn't worth it.

[MikeBike]

Format the HDD and install a clean copy of windows. Its all that crap that Dell installs which slows down the computer. With the specs you listed, that computer should be very fast.

Thanks! I should have thought of that.
Dell has made me really look like an Idiot with my sister.
I, too, thought this machine should have been fast.

[DTphonehome]

Thanks! I should have thought of that.
Dell has made me really look like an Idiot with my sister.
I, too, thought this machine should have been fast.

When you buy a Corvette, should you have to take in for an overhaul before you drive it anywhere? Hell no. Macs just work. Right out of the box. No futzing neccessary. 95% of computer users couldn't format the HD and reinstall Windows if their lives depended on it.

[solvs]

Dell makes me look like a genious... thanks to all of the ones i've had to fix for people. I have a lot of people interested in Apples as their next computers. Shoulda bought a Mac, I always say.

This is nice, but it will not shut the headless Mac wanting people up. They expect something under $999, preferable as cheap as possible. Of course, most of these same people will complain about 256MB of RAM and a crappy video card, but not me. I was going to buy an iMac now that I'm going back to work. And would have preferred a $1299 (or cheaper) 1.6 with combo drive or something. But who knows now. Maybe this might be cool. Especially if you can take out the SuperDrive for another $100 off and/or it is smaller than the normal Tower case. And I can add my own RAM cheaper.

It'll probably only have 4 slots and PCI slots (if it even has those), but I can take those out and stick them in my PC. :D

Edit: BTW, the XP discs that come with that Dell are probably just install discs. They'll usually just re-install all that crap with it as bundled apps. Sometimes they give you the option to not install them with XP, but sometimes they don't.

[macidiot]

Think a little harder ...I'm sure you can come up with more than just a graphics card.



Because Apple knows that the Maczone, MacMall, MacConnection etc will toss in $512MB for free to get the sale. Thus Apple doesn't have to expend the cash...sounds like a smart business strategy to me.

People need to forget about low headless Macs. How many times does Apple keep stating they don't want to "play" in the sub $800 arena. This generally means the eMac starts at $799 with built in crt of course and then the next step is the iMac. Begging for it isn't going to make it come any sooner. The Mac market isn't ready for a low cost headless computer primarily because Apple's business initative is quite pathetic and consumer sales of low end desktops are not profitable.

Why can't Apple do a low end headless mac profitably? All they would have to do is delete the monitor from the current iMac, flip it sideways or lay it flat and you have a ~$900-$1000 machine. Admittedly, thats not the same as a $300 costco special, but it would still be the cheapest G5 machine and would appeal to a lot of people. Of course, it might conflict with Apple's quest to be perceived as ultra-superduper-extra-deluxe premium but hey, they do make that lame eMac...

Still, the low cost G5 tower, if its true, sounds decent enough and fills a gap, though it still isn't what a lot of people are looking for when they talk about a headless iMac. Maybe because that G5 tower, while quite nice, is pretty freaking huge. Now if they came out with a half height tower with say, only 1 or 2 pci slots... ;)

[lha72]

Good luck with that one! You can go to Dell and get a POS $499 with generic parts that they didn't design, and they didn't build, low RAM that you have to share with for the video, poor HD Specs, and no CD-RW/DVD (Combo Drive). Also, you don't get any real software, no office suite.

You get what you pay for son!

You can't get much more generic than LG drives, samsung monitors, and no-name korean batteries - all of which Apple uses. Speaking of poor HD Specs, how about them powerbook drives, not to mention the underwhelming displays of Apple laptops. As for office suite, Apple includes the same office suite as Dell - nothing. I've been an Apple user for years, but the premium price Apple demands is definitely not for its generic hardware, it's for their operating system.

[MikeBike]

When you buy a Corvette, should you have to take in for an overhaul before you drive it anywhere? Hell no. Macs just work. Right out of the box. No futzing neccessary. 95% of computer users couldn't format the HD and reinstall Windows if their lives depended on it.

This little experience points out the pointlessness of Micro-Benchmarks.
You know, Integer speed tests...
A Micro-benchmark can lock the cpu up to perform the test by forstalling task switching, and make an Intel box produce fast numbers.
But, in the real world, with all that AV / Firewall / AutoUpdate / IM client ... services burning up cpu cycles, the simple task of downloading an a page from the internet can take forever.

Another problem, the software my sister wanted me to install, won't load under Win XP SP2! Kodak Easyshare, and there's no update at this time.

Buyer's remorse: Now, her next machine will be a Mac.

[JasonElise1983]

I would buy this in a second when i get the money. Don't get me wrong i love using my Dual 2.0 Ghz G5 at work, and i love the look of the new iMacs, but i am a graphic designer. LCD monitors just don't hold a candle to a good CRT when it comes to color and depth, and i don't need a $1300 20" monitor or a $700 17" monitor. I would like a second processor, but i can't spend more than $2K on a computer. So, lets see. EDU discount and all...

PowerMac G5
Single 1.8Ghz G5
1Gb Ram
160Gb HD
128Mb 9600xt
Airport
Bluetooth
$1500-$1600 (remember...with EDU discount)

LaCie Electron BlueIV 19" Monitor

$350

Total $1850-$1950

Which means the extra money i was going to save to buy a Dual can go toward software now (adobe CS, Office, and Apple Production Suite)

I hope this is right :)

[MikeBike]

Edit: BTW, the XP discs that come with that Dell are probably just install discs. They'll usually just re-install all that crap with it as bundled apps. Sometimes they give you the option to not install them with XP, but sometimes they don't.

I think she paid for a REAL copy of Windows XP Pro. Not a Ghost disk image. But, I'll have to check.

This machine runs so poorly I asked her if she was running Oracle Database in the background! Just a joke. Just about 100 processes, seemingly useless processing, running in background. My question is does anyone from Dell actually use the machines they sell? Or do they just not give a Damn.

[maya]

If I'm spending that kind of money I might as well be getting the iMac G5. Headless mac good but not at this price. That is why the Cube didn't sell - it cost too much.

the Cube was not very expandable at all.

If this system is the same form as the current PM, there is a good chance it will last for a good 3 years.

This makes a great gaming system for all those nutz out there who spend $$$$ to modify they systems to be the best.

[nagromme]

A sub-eMac bottom-end headless would sell for sure, but Apple just said publicly that they don't plan to offer anything in the sub-$800 market because they can't make much money at it. So that's buried for now--although I suspect they DO have a low-end headless in the works for some FUTURE date, maybe with a G5.

Now, that leaves MID-range towers. THAT's what this is, and why not?

Maybe you won't but it, maybe it will be the least popular Mac in the lineup, but it will still sell.

And here's the clever part.... Apple didn't have to design a whole new machine. That makes this smarter than pizza boxes, cubes, headless eMacs, and many other concepts that sound good at first glance.

(But they really ought to drop the plastic 17" LCD and put a widescreen 17" LCD in an Al case.)

[maya]

I think she paid for a REAL copy of Windows XP Pro. Not a Ghost disk image. But, I'll have to check.

This machine runs so poorly I asked her if she was running Oracle Database in the background! Just a joke. Just about 100 processes, seemingly useless processing, running in background. My question is does anyone from Dell actually use the machines they sell? Or do they just not give a Damn.

Hmm, I say they don't give a damn :D

[pigwin32]

here you go, your precious headless mac. you people better buy them, cause i for one never asked for it.
My goodness Wonder Boy, it would be tragic if no-one bought it, then you would quite rightly be able to say "I told you so", and imagine how silly we would all feel.

Personally I believe this plugs a gaping hole in their lineup. If Apple wants to expand into non-traditional markets such as large corporates, a slimline headless option is essential to complement their server offerings. Corporates buy these (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/12454-64287-89301-321860-f10-316727.html) by the truckload. Plus Windows' users who are rightly scared by the security vulnerabilities inherent in the Windows platform but are unwilling to throw away their entire investment in hardware just to shift to Mac. This is surely a burgeoning market, especially with Apple's profile being through the roof due to the success of the iPod.

And frankly, if Apple gets it wrong again with the pricing, I'll happily wait a couple of years and pick one up second-hand to replace my (also second-hand) Cube. But face it, Apple is unlikely to slap a G5 in a beige box with a noisy fan.

[maya]

People make up your mind either you do or do not want a "headless mac". From what I gather from the responses on this thread people will choose the iMac over this "headless" abomination. :D


How many mac people really run out to the local store to max up they mac's. Not many unless you are a gamer. If you want a "headless mac" at the price of an eMac not going to happen Apple might as well just close it doors and put a sign saying,"Out of Business" try the "Windows" ;) :D

[maya]

My goodness Wonder Boy, it would be tragic if no-one bought it, then you would quite rightly be able to say "I told you so", and imagine how silly we would all feel.

Personally I believe this plugs a gaping hole in their lineup. If Apple wants to expand into non-traditional markets such as large corporates, a slimline headless option is essential to complement their server offerings. Corporates buy these (http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF05a/12454-64287-89301-321860-f10-316727.html) by the truckload. Plus Windows' users who are rightly scared by the security vulnerabilities inherent in the Windows platform but are unwilling to throw away their entire investment in hardware just to shift to Mac. This is surely a burgeoning market, especially with Apple's profile being through the roof due to the success of the iPod.

And frankly, if Apple gets it wrong again with the pricing, I'll happily wait a couple of years and pick one up second-hand to replace my (also second-hand) Cube. But face it, Apple is unlikely to slap a G5 in a beige box with a noisy fan.

I am with Wonder Boy on this one. :o

[earthtoandy]

man everytime apples plans to release a product you all say "it wont work, what are they thinking...they will fail" :rolleyes: they havent made many missteps lately... once again you will be proved wrong!

[pigwin32]

I am with Wonder Boy on this one. :o
Wow so lucid, actually I can really see your point now, what was I thinking, please disregard my previous post.

[AidenShaw]

$1507
Dell Dimension 4600 3.4 GHz
512 MiB
80 GB
DVD + CD-RW (dual optical)
19" 1280x1024 LCD Flat Panel
128 MiB GeForce FX 5200 Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI
5.1 Audio
Windows XP
Microsoft Works
Color printer
3 yr at home warranty
_______________________

This new G5 isn't the headless iMac people have been talking about. For that price you can get much more in an Intel box - *and* a 19" LCD display!

Knock at least $500 off the price, and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

[~Shard~]

Wow so lucid, actually I can really see your point now, what was I thinking, please disregard my previous post.

Hey, easy now pigwwin32, maya made several significant comments there and numerous potent points within his epic essay - it actually took me quite a while to read that reply of his, so go easy on him - it takes a lot of effort to simply say, "Yah, you know, what that guy said"... :p ;) :cool:

[QCassidy352]

It's a good idea. I have a single 1.8 G5 and I love it. I don't want an imac because I plan to keep the display a lot longer than the computer and I want to be able to use my Radeon 9600 instead of a 5200 Ultra. Also, faster bus and more RAM slots. No, it's not for everyone, but I for one could never justify the cost of the dual G5s but would go for this one (if I didn't already have one... :) )

[segundo]

$1507
19" 1280x1024 LCD Flat Panel

This new G5 isn't the headless iMac people have been talking about. For that price you can get much more in an Intel box - *and* a 19" LCD display!

Okay, I see your point, but the dramatics of a 19" LCD are somewhat lost since this is the same resolution of a standard 17" LCD. However, you still have a good argument that Apple's hardware is overpriced.

Yet, I still find Apple computers to be an overall excellent value. Yes, I still have to convince myself of that, but it works eventually. :)

[feakbeak]

When you buy a Corvette, should you have to take in for an overhaul before you drive it anywhere? Hell no. Macs just work. Right out of the box. No futzing neccessary. 95% of computer users couldn't format the HD and reinstall Windows if their lives depended on it.

You are correct you shouldn't have to fix it up. However, that's not the fault of x86 hardware. It is the fault of Dell, who partners with many crappy third-party software vendors to preload a ton of useless software on their consumer systems.

Many small-time Windows apps setup services or call programs to run in the system tray on startup using the Run key. So you end up with dozens of processes running that most users don't even want. Often times, these apps are poorly written and inefficient. This grinds the machines to a halt. You are also correct that most Windows users are dumb and can't resolve these issues themselves. Still, a well maintained x86 based system can run fast, provided you are not running a 9x versions of Windows. WinXP is a good OS in my opinion. *waiting for the insults*

Apple, on the other hand, maintains the "whole package" - hardware and software. They write efficient software, optimized for their own hardware. Plus, because of Apple's minimalist approach they ship their systems very clean in terms of software, so it only makes sense they run faster out of the box.

I own a 1.4 GHz Athlon, 512 MB machine running Win XP SP2 and my machine still runs fast enough for my needs. It's over three years old, and while I have had to do some upgrading in the way of A/V cards and adding another HD, I haven’t put much time/money into it. I can run Far Cry on the medium graphics settings with my ATI 9600 SE. I consider that good for three-year-old hardware.

I'm a Windows software developer, so I need to have an x86 machine around the house for doing work at home. I'm an iPod owner and I am considering buying a Mac for my next machine sometime in the next 12 months.

I would like a PM, but the dual 1.8 system specs don’t seem worth $2000 in my opinion. I believe the dual 2.0 GHz system, with the faster CPUs, FSB, PCIX and more default RAM seem well worth the $500 to upgrade from the dual 1.8 system. However, I just can't afford a $2500 system (and, no, I don't think Apple should offer an awesome system for dirt cheap. I don't blame them for charging $2500 for that system, it is reasonable, it just doesn't fit my current budget).

A single proc PM might be for me, because I could add extra RAM and up the GPU a bit and still easily be under $2000. I already have a nice 19" Trinitron CRT and Acoustic Energy Ego2 speakers... I'd just need a KVM. I'm in the market for a consumer Mac, but the expandability of this new entry-level PM outweighs the benefits of the AIO design of the iMac, IMHO.

[nagromme]

$1507
Dell Dimension 4600 3.4 GHz
...

Sounds nice, if you find Windows an acceptable OS. It's good that those folks have options beyond the PowerMac.

I agree with you that Apple could sell a truly LOW-end headless, but that's not what this PowerMac is. This just brings the PMG5 entry point lower--and if you need a G5 tower, that could be a good thing.

[rotorblade]

I also like the idea that maybe this is a separate G5 with its own case. Cut back on PCI/PCI-X slots and maybe a few RAM slots and all will be good. It's almost ideal for a gamer (more CPU power would be nice, but not completely necessary yet). Perhaps there can be a single-processor line with a smaller mobo and size? Would be nice...

I agree. My idea of a headless iCheap is along those same lines. 1 graphics card slot, 1 PCI/PCI-X slot, space for 1 extra HDD, ample memory capacity. Heck. Sell it without a graphics card and let the user install their own if the want. Out the door for 699.00.

[Garissimo]

<...>
Knock at least $500 off the price

And watch your iMac inventory sit on the shelves and gather dust. The price is exactly where it needs to be.

<...>
and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

This I agree with. The PowerMac enclosure is pretty obtrusive. Something along the lines of a modified XServe form factor would be pretty interesting, if they can cool it and keep it quiet.

[rugonnaeatthat]

Don't the G5's have more cache? Would this not mean faster 'feeling' computer? My emac 700 has so many unexpected spinning balls even with 640mb ram and I've compared this with my friends 867 powerbook and the difference is huge - simply put abslutely no lag. I've always put this down to cache and motherboard speed - couldn't the same difference convince someone to buy a Powermac over the imac?

[earthtoandy]

two things are complained about...price too high and eating into imac sales. But these are related. Supply and demand. Raise the price and demand goes down. They dont want to sell too many of these things that the imac dies so the price may seem a little high. just a small deterrent. and they arent worried about PC prices cause if you are gonna buy the mac you are gonna buy it. and non power users that are just getting in on a mac always will go for the imac.

[melgross]

$1507


Knock at least $500 off the price, and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

I basically agree. I've been saying this for a long time now.

As someone who has designed audio equipment for my own concern for the professional market, I can see how it could be done.

Remove the handles-very expensive.
cut down the motherboard-3 1/2 inches and much simpler.
smaller power supply-don't need 450 watts for this.
eliminate Toslink audio-VERY few people use this-have a i/o board for $75 for those who do.
smaller case-no need for full height case now-can be almost 8 inches shorter.

The result is the mini-tower.

manufacturing costs are lower
boxing costs are lower
shipping costs are lower
warehousing costs are lower
more room for dealers.

I believe that this could be brought in for $999.
Is it a good idea? I don't know, esp. in light of the new iMacs.

But, I do think that it would sell.

[~Shard~]

Since they can fit the G5 into the new iMac enclosure, maybe they'll do something along the same lines for this lower-end PowerMac. One of the main detractors for the PowerMac is the huge case, so maybe Apple can remedy that with a smaller, sleek case, a slightly stripped down system (no duals, less slots/bays/whatever) and come up with a real winner.

[macidiot]

Many times in Apple's past their low end Powermac wasn't a good seller. Mac users tended to ignore the low end unit and the expensive high end and focus on the midrange unit.


I think its a result of the way Apple(and many computer makers) configures its product mix. Typically, the sweet spot machine is the middle one. Usually, the middle config offers a lot more value compared to the low end model even though its more expensive. Also, usually, the high end model offers lower value vs. the middle model. Mostly its for those that absolutely need (and can justify)that incremental boost. Either that or they want bragging rights. :D The same situation happens a lot in tech, for example, cpu's.

[maxvamp]

Has anyone thought of this machine as a cheap(er) Mac OSX server that could be used in a smaller cluster, or as a file / web / print server, as a good developer / test machine? Maybe for something for the cross platform power user / switcher?

For any of those uses, this machine may turn out to be more attractive than an XServe and is configured appropriately.

Another point.... I have a 4 year old PM 733. This might be a great replacement for those of use on a very tight budget ( as opposed to a $800 proc upgrade, and a $350 video card upgraded ), and where we do not want to give up any hardware that we have in our older systems ( capture cards, raid controllers, etc. ).

Max.

[alexf]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

It would be an FX 5200 Ultra for sure; there is no way a normal FX 5200 would be in there.

Also, the price of $1499 would only make sense if the other prices are lowered, as otherwise to get the exact same machine plus one more processor would cost $500 more, which does not make sense; a dual should be no more than $300 more than an exact same single.

[iDave]

Since they can fit the G5 into the new iMac enclosure, maybe they'll do something along the same lines for this lower-end PowerMac. One of the main detractors for the PowerMac is the huge case, so maybe Apple can remedy that with a smaller, sleek case, a slightly stripped down system (no duals, less slots/bays/whatever) and come up with a real winner.
Gosh, I hope so. The Power Mac case is humongous!

[thevessels]

oof a g5 cube sounds killer

buuuut..

ISNT THERE ANYONE ELSE WANT AN ALUMINUM KEYBOARD MOUSE TO MATCH ALL THIS AWESOME STUFF AS MUCH AS ME??

[sw1tcher]

If I'm spending that kind of money I might as well be getting the iMac G5. Headless mac good but not at this price. That is why the Cube didn't sell - it cost too much.

The reason the cube didn't sell well is because it was considered overpriced for a machine that couldn't really be upgraded/didn't have all the expansion capabilities as the PowerMac.

[Windowlicker]

Sounds good! Especially if it has a smaller enclosure than the current G5 line-up. $1499 for such a machine isn't a bad price, when thinking that for $500 more ($1999) you get only a second processor.

[iDave]

Sounds good! Especially if it has a smaller enclosure than the current G5 line-up. $1499 for such a machine isn't a bad price, when thinking that for $500 more ($1999) you get only a second processor.
It might be good if they just take the feet and handles off. A Power Mac case won't fit under my desk.

[segundo]

oof a g5 cube sounds killer

buuuut..

ISNT THERE ANYONE ELSE WANT AN ALUMINUM KEYBOARD MOUSE TO MATCH ALL THIS AWESOME STUFF AS MUCH AS ME??

Not if the mouse only has one button and the keyboard is not an ergo one.

[Devie]

If tihs is priced at a decent area in which I can get it and a 20" ACD for only a bit more than the iMac 20" ($600.00+ AUD max)... definate buy over 'ere! :D

[paxtonandrew]

I want one now. I have always liked the 64 bit architecture, and have a great screen (on desk at work, but owned by me) which can be connected, and this will be a great way to get into the 64 bit lifestyle, and the best thing, is that the computer is expandable, which the iMac cannot do in terms of graphics, and when Other World Computing get their act together, a G5 upgrade card. This will not (hopefully) end up like a cube. The only problem is the lack of memory, but wee will have to wait and see...

[iMeowbot]

It might be good if they just take the feet and handles off. A Power Mac case won't fit under my desk.
...or horizontally in a rack, which I believe is the reason they made it so tall. I'd expect any compact Power Mac to be configured in a way that it doesn't work well as an Xserve substitute.

[dejo]

Not if the mouse only has one button and the keyboard is not an ergo one.

Oh, no! Please don't start with the two-button mouse gripe again! Hasn't that dead horse been beaten enough in the MacRumors Forums?

[gekko513]

So if this price is correct, does this mean that the monster aluminum cabinet is worth $600?? .... ok $400 for the cabinet and $200 for the PCI slots, digital audio and firewire 800. It's still to much. Maybe with a price tag of $1399

[paxtonandrew]

Does anybody know if it will use the 130 or the 90 nanometer chips from IBM? If it used the 90, it may signal more production coming out of the Fishkill factory - hopefully.

[alexf]

So if this price is correct, does this mean that the monster aluminum cabinet is worth $600?? .... ok $400 for the cabinet and $200 for the PCI slots, digital audio and firewire 800. It's still to much. Maybe with a price tag of $1399

Agreed - the estimated price does not seem to make sense.

[alexf]

Does anybody know if it will use the 130 or the 90 nanometer chips from IBM? If it used the 90, it may signal more production coming out of the Fishkill factory - hopefully.

If I'm not mistaken, the 130nm (970) chips are not being used anymore.

[aafuss1]

I huess it might use say, a 900 FSB and a new stepping of the U3 IC.

[paxtonandrew]

If I'm not mistaken, the 130nm (970) chips are not being used anymore.

Ok, thanks for the info. I was under the assumption that the 2x1.8s were still using the 130nm (970's). Just something i read on them, i can't recall where though.

[cube]

Another crippled G5 without PCI-X slots

[Eric_Z]

Another crippled G5 without PCI-X slots

If you where going to say that you felt that this is aimed more at silencing the "cheaper headless Mac" critics then providing what the "cheaper headless Mac" crowd really wants, then yes I'd agree.

But to say that it will be worthless because it's not got PCI-X slots is IMO silly, I was under the impresion that OSX has very few supported PCI-X cards in the first place. Not to mention that the demographic that this is aimed at will most likely be more interested in adding a sound or/and tv card then some mega 1337 infiniband network card.

spelling

[caveman_uk]

Another crippled G5 without PCI-X slots
And the grand total of mac PCI-X cards you can buy is? It's not like we've got a lot of choice right now. Is it in double figures yet?

[takao]

wow finally a rumour i'm really interested in

but i still hope for a little bit less price wise (1300-1400$ so it will be below 1500€ retail over here)
man i'really was going to save up towards a iBook..but if this is true then everything is open again (my bank account is already screaming 'NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO')

man i need a additional job _fast_ to gain more money

if it isn't true it at least cheered me up after a stressfull weekend

switching iTunes to "Turbonegro - Gimme Some" ;)

[oeholmen]

Apple Store is down now! How exiting :)

[billyboy]

The UK Apple store is being updated as we type. If there is a headless G5 for around 1000 GBP, I'm in. We have plans for a new audio set up at work and a headless Powermac is where it is at for us.

[TorbX]

Oh, I would buy one of those... Prolly a rev b though.

I'm a rev. b kind a guy.

[Doraemon]

Low-end PM G5?

Bring it on!

That's what I've been waiting to replace my G4 tower. As long as its expandable and the graphics card can be replaced, I am going to get one!

[iProbot]

A last minute tip indicates that Apple will also be introducing a new PowerMac G5 model as early as tomorrow alongside the rumored iBook updates......

Well, who knows what's happening NOW! :D

[TorbX]

Yeah.... its just a speedbump on the iBook and a single G5 1.8.

HOPED for a pizzabox. Dont want that big thang..

Edit: Dudes, its updated.

[bwintx]

I think she paid for a REAL copy of Windows XP Pro. Not a Ghost disk image. But, I'll have to check.

This machine runs so poorly I asked her if she was running Oracle Database in the background! Just a joke. Just about 100 processes, seemingly useless processing, running in background. My question is does anyone from Dell actually use the machines they sell? Or do they just not give a Damn.

Spyware? Run AdAware (http://www.lavasoft.de/) on it and see. Then show her Mozilla Firefox (http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/) and tell her to sin no more with Internet Explorer. :)

[aethier]

well it is updated, identical to the rumors.

i don't mind even though they are close to the powerbook specs, its better to upgrade what they can, then cripple both lineups so that powerbook users are happy (and as i powerbook user, i couldn't care less if the ibook specs are getting better then that of my 1.25 ghz 15 incher) i still have a better gpu, ram, screen etc

aethier

[cube]

What's the point of having a 64-bit processor if you can only install 4 GiB of memory? Okay, don't tell me the rest is vmem on disk.

[Duane Martin]

What's the point of having a 64-bit processor if you can only install 4 GiB of memory?
What's the point of having a 32-bit processor if you can only install less than 4GB memory (in just about every 32 bit processor machine every made by any company)? So what were you hoping for? A model that supported more Ram than the base Dual G5? A model that supports the full 16 exabytes? If you only need a single processor, low-priced G5, you only need 4GB of Ram. No single piece of software can currently use more than 4GB of Ram, so in a single processor machine, why have more?

Forgive me. I really didn't think Apple would release this computer. Despite people on this forum clamouring for it, I do not believe there is enough of a market to justify the confused product matrix. But I was wrong! Wrong, wrong, wrong! At least about Apple releasing the machine. Let's see how many of the potential market don't buy this machine for reason's as stated above.

[Eric_Z]

What's the point of having a 32-bit processor if you can only install less than 4GB memory (in just about every 32 bit processor machine every made by any company)?

This sentence makes no sense, at all.

The point of a 32bit CPU is that memory transactions over 64k become more efficient and you get to use 32bit integers. Both theese two tasks are common enough to warrant a jump in "bitness". Tasks requiering over 4GB of mem (note that most "32bit" CPU's have more then 32bit adressing) or 64 bit integers has been rare, are rare and will be rare (though undoubtedly more common then now). Infact most of the integer operations used today are of a 8 or 16 bit nature, and we live in a 32bit world and have done so for quite some time...

What's so great about 64bit CPUs theese days is that they are in general better built then there 32bit counterparts.

[AidenShaw]

:eek:

Note that it has a 600 MHz bus, not the 900 MHz bus of the dual 1.8?

Now, who was it who complained about the use of the word "crippled" ???

[AidenShaw]

and this will be a great way to get into the 64 bit lifestyle...

Thanks for the laugh in the morning!

"64-bit lifestyle" :D

o I assume you realize that this doesn't exist yet - OS X is a 32-bit operating system. You won't have a chance of a "64-bit lifestyle" until 10.4 ships, and even then you'll need new applications written for 64-bit. (And, BTW, Windows and Linux for 64-bit IA64 and AMD64/EM64T are shipping (IA64 and Linux) or available for free preview downloads (Windows for AMD64/EM64T) - so any "64-bit lifestyling" is happening on the dark side. ;) )

o I assume that you realize that this crippled box cannot exploit the main advantage of 64-bit CPUs - the ability to use more than 4 GiB of RAM. It can only hold "32-bits" of RAM.

[wdlove]

well it is updated, identical to the rumors.

i don't mind even though they are close to the powerbook specs, its better to upgrade what they can, then cripple both lineups so that powerbook users are happy (and as i powerbook user, i couldn't care less if the ibook specs are getting better then that of my 1.25 ghz 15 incher) i still have a better gpu, ram, screen etc

aethier

Exactly where were these rumors posted about this upgrade? I visit here everyday, but saw no mention of a G5 update. Are there rumors for more updates in the future?

[cube]

This sentence makes no sense, at all.

The point of a 32bit CPU is that memory transactions over 64k become more efficient and you get to use 32bit integers. Both theese two tasks are common enough to warrant a jump in "bitness". Tasks requiering over 4GB of mem (note that most "32bit" CPU's have more then 32bit adressing) or 64 bit integers has been rare, are rare and will be rare (though undoubtedly more common then now). Infact most of the integer operations used today are of a 8 or 16 bit nature, and we live in a 32bit world and have done so for quite some time...

What's so great about 64bit CPUs theese days is that they are in general better built then there 32bit counterparts.

Wrong. Ask anybody who has been buying serious computers for years. The main point of 64-bit processors is addressing space (sorry, no hacks on non-junk CPUs).

[Eric_Z]

Wrong. Ask anybody who has been buying serious computers for years. The main point of 64-bit processors is addressing space (sorry, no hacks on non-junk CPUs).

From the perspective of the general consumer, this point is moot. Wich was what I was trying to say. Thanks for pointing it out. :)