New PowerMac 1.8GHz Released

[MacRumors]

Apple released (http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=9eASk0x48lo&subid=1&offerid=13301.1&type=10&tmpid=80&RD_PARM1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Feducation%2Fk12%2Filifeandkeynote%2F&u1=macrumors) a new low-end PowerMac model today as rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/10/20041018201516.shtml).

PowerMac 1.8GHz (Single Processor)
256MB RAM
80GB HD
GeForce FX 5200
SuperDrive
$1499

The new PowerMac can be found at the Apple Store (http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=9eASk0x48lo&subid=1&offerid=13301.1&type=10&tmpid=80&RD_PARM1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apple.com%2Feducation%2Fk12%2Filifeandkeynote%2F&u1=macrumors).

[cxny]

So why is that horrid picture of Bono still on Apple's homepage?

Edit: Wow, I guess they read this column he's outta there already!

[SilentPanda]

*raises hand*

Can I be the first to complain?

Why would you get this over the iMac G5 that's the same price? You get a 17" screen... I guess there's the whole expandability issue but...

I guess you can put more RAM in the tower, better vid card, more HD space, and a few other quirks but... even the FSB is at the iMac G5 level.

[brap]

Ah man, no new form factor. It's too... big, we all know the G5 1.8 can be cooled adequately in the smallest of environments, and not everyone wants a monster G5 tower, or a cutesy TFT iMac. This doesn't fill the niche at all.

Crappy FSB, too.

[kbonnel]

Man, and they lowered the FSB too!!!!! Damn apple, just when I think you get the picture, you do this :(

Kimo

[Dont Hurt Me]

Apple needs a low end powermac that can be configured for the customer, this is a much better machine then a imac in my view and could be considered a gamers mac. Add the videocard of your choice and you are in.FX5200 not included. I have allways wished that apple would sell its fastest single cpu in a powermac. On another note i dont think if sales were rocketing they would have brought back the single G5 machine. Must have some tower cases to get rid of why else bring back the single cpu machine? good for the consumer but so odd the games apple plays with configurations. I have allways felt when it comes to Macs its about what apple wants not what the consumer wants.

[aswitcher]

PowerMac 1.8GHz (Single Processor)
256MB RAM
80GB HD
GeForce FX 5200
SuperDrive
$1499



$2699, $900 AUD less here for the machine when compared to the dual.

Sorry, its still pretty exy when whole Dell packages are going for less than that...and the iMac...

[ijimk]

I still feel this is a bit over priced with the imac g5 just released. I think it should be about $999. then you would attract more sales to it and see it as another option to the lower priced macs. I think they would sell alot of g5s at this price. My vote $999.

[ntg]

$2699, $900 AUD less here for the machine when compared to the dual.

Sorry, its still pretty exy when whole Dell packages are going for less than that...and the iMac...


£1099 GBP - so we lose out in the UK yet again!!

(still, it's nice to see a headless G5 for aroung a grand!)

Nig.

[Zaty]

$2699, $900 AUD less here for the machine when compared to the dual.

Sorry, its still pretty exy when whole Dell packages are going for less than that...and the iMac...

$200-300 US less would have resulted in a great value. But $1499 is too expensive for what you get IMO.

Another thought, apparently, there seems to be no shortage on 1.8 GHz cpus anymore, which is a good sign.

[~Shard~]

Wow, good call MacRumors! You guys nailed that rumor...

I think this is an excellent move on Apple's part, this lower-end model (if you can even call a G5 PowerMac "low-end"!) really fills a market niche and will be a very attractive machine for many people, especially those who don't need dual processors in their days to day tasks. This definitely puts it at interesting price point compared to the iMacs too! (I'm sure that will spark a whole debate here as well!)

[homerjward]

*raises hand*

Can I be the first to complain?

Why would you get this over the iMac G5 that's the same price? You get a 17" screen... I guess there's the whole expandability issue but...

I guess you can put more RAM in the tower, better vid card, more HD space, and a few other quirks but... even the FSB is at the iMac G5 level.
yeah, and pci slots, audio in, optical audio out (that's not on the imac right?) fw 800, gigabit ethernet, front ports...i'd still buy the imac for my $1500

[~Shard~]

$200-300 US less would have resulted in a great value. But $1499 is too expensive for what you get IMO.

... Ah, I see the price point already has sparked a debate... that was quick... ;)

[Lancetx]

If you order it with the combo drive and can get the education discount, that knocks it down to $1,259. That's not too bad at all for an expandable G5 system.

[caveman_uk]

I suppose this is Apple's answer to those who moaned about the video card in the imac. You want a more powerful card then pay for it...

I do think it sucks that they've crippled the FSB on this. Why? Would it otherwise compete to closely with the dual on performance?

I guess this is a reasonable machine for those that

a) have a TFT already. (Like me)
b) Would like more upgradability
c) Are strapped for cash
d) Don't actually need a dual tower.

I can't see then selling an awful lot of these though. I reckon the ibook speed bump was a better move.

[zelmo]

Well, at least they released a lower priced PowerMac to fill the product gap. I don't think they spec's are all that, though. :confused:
Why would you buy the single 1.8 with 600MHz bus when you can double up the processors and add a sdcreaming 900MHz bus for $500 more?
At the $1499 price, you might as well get an iMac. The only selling point is the upgradeability of the GPU. woo-hoo!

Seems like it would have been better to keep a 900MHz bus and drop the price to $1199 or so.

At least it's nice to have something concrete to complain about :rolleyes:

[~Shard~]

For what its worth, I'd buy the iMac as well, since you get the display included, but for those with an existing display, or who need the expandability, more RAM, more HD, etc. I still think this is an attractive option.

[Rod Rod]

This fills a void left when the PM G4 1.25 single left... of course that was $1199 edu price...

But if you're lucky you can snag a 900MHz FSB, 8GB max. RAM, 1.8GHz PM G5 single-processor from Apple's Special Deals section, for $1499. That's a much better value than this.

33MHz PCI goes how far back ... maybe to the Digital Audio of 3 years ago, or what, the Blue and White G3 tower, or even earlier than that? Okay I know it's fine for a lot of purposes, except for super high speed I/O.

I'm happy they didn't downgrade the wireless networking to Airport 802.11b, and I'm also glad the ethernet is still gigabit and not 10/100. It's also wonderful they didn't slap a sticker or emblem on the front saying "Power Mac G5 Light" (or if you prefer, "Lite" in marketing speak).

All in all this rocks. Maybe I'll order mine with an nVidia 6800 just to get a lot of you to scratch your heads (or at least use that emoticon).

edit: Lancetx's example with the combo drive at $1259 is a better comparison to the PM G4 for $1199.

[aethier]

hmm, i like it, i used to want to update my powerbook with the dualcore g4 when it comes out, but that would come to 4319.40 with tax, educ discount (CAD) whereas i could keep the powerbook i have now, and get the powermac as a gaming mac (i know the pc is an option, but i hate windows) 1 gig of ram, and radeon 9800xt, for 3280.95 with tax, educ discount,... (and plus about 150 for a nice crt monitor)

apple... you sure make life difficult with all these nice choices

aethier

[wwooden]

For people like me who already have an external display to use, this is a good computer to consider. I like the new iMac, but it doesn't have the expandibility that i want. Also, since I am a student, I can get it even cheaper, $1349. If I change it to a combo drive, then it is around $1260, now that's not a bad deal at all for a G5 tower.

[caveman_uk]

£1099 GBP - so we lose out in the UK yet again!!

They're using the same 'Apple exchange rate' they use on all the other powermacs. I figured the price out from the US price earlier. I guess Apple realises we may go to the US and buy a laptop. We probably aren't gonna buy a powermac in the US so we get screwed on those. The UK price for the laptops makes it barely worth buying abroad.

[MacsRgr8]

Als added new GeForce 6800 too?

No more 9600XT (still there as a BTO though...)?

[Dont Hurt Me]

If you order it with the combo drive and can get the education discount, that knocks it down to $1,259. That's not too bad at all for an expandable G5 system.
I agree, at that price point Apple is back in the game for a lot of people wanting growth and expansion in a computer but dont have 2 grand to spend. $1259 gets you a very nice machine. I wonder how those that bought the single 1.8 a year ago feel about it?

[aswitcher]

Whilst the single proc PM might fill a niche, its going to be hard to convince would be switchers that this is there entry level machine, because when you add on more ram, a better graphics card, larger HDD etc, its getting pretty pricey compared to the PC world...

[Wonder Boy]

there's your headless mac. its just like apple to give people things they didn't know they needed (ipod) and things the dont want (an expensive headless mac). seems there is no pleasing us unless it's a totaly new product.

kinda sad, in a way.

[Zaty]

For what its worth, I'd buy the iMac as well, since you get the display included, but for those with an existing display, or who need the expandability, more RAM, more HD, etc. I still think this is an attractive option.

Yes, but this doesn't beckon potential switchers to cross the border. But at least it's a step into the right direction.

[salmon]

It seems a bit too expensive to me as well for what you get. Would be fine if it were $1200-1300, methinks.

But, in Canada it's even worse - $2099cdn

According to xe.com:
1,499.00 USD United States Dollars = 1,890.48 CAD

So we would have to pay an extra $200cdn+ because....

...I'm not sure why.

Stuff like this pisses me off.

[oeholmen]

I can se that many of you are sceptical to the new Power Mac, but I must say that it has made me think twice about what to do. I have an iMac G5 (20 inch) on order that is shipping nov. 1. Now I'm thinking maybe I shoud cancel my order and get a Power Mac G5 and a 20' Cinema Display. It will cost me about $1200 more, but I get a display that can last for many, many years to come. Plus I get more expandability. But is it worth it? To cansel or not to cansel, that is the question! :confused:

[Centris 650]

WoooHoooo! I'm happy! Ok, now to go talk to the wife and explain how I need to dump my clamshell and get a G5 PMac!

Needless to say I'm pleased. It would be nice to have this config a $100-$200 cheaper but...isn't that always the case?

[aafuss1]

Sweet!-finally a headless profesional Mac . Guess it may use the U3L like the iMac G5

[Stella]

That extra $500 may be too much for some people.

You could upgrade this thing far more than you can with an iMac. You have PCI slots free.

Because of the upgradable GPU this has a longer potential life than an iMac. Graphic Cards are outdated faster than CPUs.

The FSB does suck though.

Its always good to complain about something..

Moan: apple and exchange rates.
Once again, the rest of the world are subsiding the american prices with apple dodgy use of exchange rates!

That felt good.


Well, at least they released a lower priced PowerMac to fill the product gap. I don't think they spec's are all that, though. :confused:
Why would you buy the single 1.8 with 600MHz bus when you can double up the processors and add a sdcreaming 900MHz bus for $500 more?
At the $1499 price, you might as well get an iMac. The only selling point is the upgradeability of the GPU. woo-hoo!

Seems like it would have been better to keep a 900MHz bus and drop the price to $1199 or so.

At least it's nice to have something concrete to complain about :rolleyes:

[Dont Hurt Me]

Whilst the single proc PM might fill a niche, its going to be hard to convince would be switchers that this is there entry level machine, because when you add on more ram, a better graphics card, larger HDD etc, its getting pretty pricey compared to the PC world...
True, but if you compare machines built by manufactors of Pcs its a little closer then it was yesterday.

[wPod]

I agree, at that price point Apple is back in the game for a lot of people wanting growth and expansion in a computer but dont have 2 grand to spend. $1259 gets you a very nice machine. I wonder how those that bought the single 1.8 a year ago feel about it?

arent the single 1.8 that shipped a year ago more powerful? more FSB ? more expansion for RAM?

i guess im just dreaming, but i would love a headless G5 single processor for around a grand! couldnt they make a mini G5 tower? looks the same just smaller? that would be cool!

[tace]

To make this machine actually worth using we have up a couple of things and we get this:

• 1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
• 80GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• ATI Radeon 9800 XT w/25MB DDR SDRAM
• 8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English
- subtract the useless modem card

Subtotal $2,045.0

OK damnit, I finally admit, some Macs are more expensive than PCs.

[soosy]

I commented yesterday that the price point (and possibly huge form factor) doesn't make this the iCheap/headless iMac we were asking for.

However, I must admit this is a great move by Apple to lowering the barrier of entry to the PowerMac line.

At my interactive agency, IT always complains about the cost of the Macs compared to Dells. iMacs aren't really an option for us... all-in-ones aren't want we want and dual monitor support is desired for designing. This machine is a great option. We'll see how much the FSB affects speed...

[Lancetx]

arent the single 1.8 that shipped a year ago more powerful? more FSB ? more expansion for RAM?

Yes they were, but they also were priced about $600 higher at the time than this new model is today as well.

[tace]

Did Apple get a buy 10 for $5 deal on those nVidia 5200 GPUs or what? What's the deal with them already?

Apple, please stop bundling in yesterdays discards into your supposed-to-be the top of the line G5 towers.

[g4cubed]

Ah man, no new form factor. It's too... big, we all know the G5 1.8 can be cooled adequately in the smallest of environments, and not everyone wants a monster G5 tower, or a cutesy TFT iMac. This doesn't fill the niche at all.

Crappy FSB, too.
I agree with you on the case being to big. A waste of space. I was hoping for another cube style :(
Man, and they lowered the FSB too!!!!! Damn apple, just when I think you get the picture, you do this :(

Kimo
And why oh why did they cripple the FSB is beyond me. :mad:

[Diatribe]

If they had dropped the price tag to about $1200 with the SD or lower then it would have been THE machine and would have switched a lot of people. Now it is going to attract attention but far less.
When will Apple get it? More units sold makes up for a smaller price.
Sometimes I think Apple doesn't quite believe in the success of their products...

[jxyama]

Why would you get this over the iMac G5 that's the same price? You get a 17" screen... I guess there's the whole expandability issue but...

"BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO THROW AWAY THE MONITOR WITH THE POWERMAC!!! LOL!!!" :p

when will apple win? :rolleyes:

also, to the idea this would sell better if priced at $999 - of course it will. cheaper is better. but tell me how it will make apple money.

a switcher will not be convinced because of this machine. if all other products haven't, this one won't, regardless of the price. this one fills a niche - a small business (esp. artistic ones) clients who have no need for an all in one nor dual processor machines. this is a great cheaper option for clients looking to upgrade their G4 PMs.

[kbonnel]

I guess if you really want a cheap G5, one could pick up the 1.6 single refurb. I wonder how long it will be before CPU upgrades are created for G5's...

Power Mac G5 1.6 GHz 256MB/80GB/SuperDrive/GigE/56K - Apple Certified
Learn More
Price: $1,199.00

[macridah]

Not bad. I would use all the G5 chips for the super in demand iMac, and release a 2.0 single processor powermac with a 900Mhz board.

[baylormac]

Whilst the single proc PM might fill a niche, its going to be hard to convince would be switchers that this is there entry level machine, because when you add on more ram, a better graphics card, larger HDD etc, its getting pretty pricey compared to the PC world...

If you added more ram, a better graphics card and a larger HDD it wouldn't be an entry level machine anymore. If they want to start out with more they should get something else. If they don't mind waiting, they can upgrade their machine after-market for a lot less.

I do think that it is odd that a machine with pretty much the same specs down the line as the 17 inch iMac 1.8 costs the same even thought he iMac has a 17 inch flat-panel. Should expandability really cost that much?

As far as the FSB issue. I have a single 1.8 G5 PM with a 900 MHz FSB at work and a 20 inch iMac 1.8 with a 600 MHz FSB at home. I can tell you even when running things like Motion and FCP HD the difference is next to unnoticable. (and then the thought is if you need to run Motion and FCP HD you would probably not buy the low level machine anyway.) There will not be much of a performance hit for 97% of users of this machine by dropping the FSB to 600 MHz.

[g4cubed]

i would love a headless G5 single processor for around a grand! couldnt they make a mini G5 tower? looks the same just smaller? that would be cool! I was hoping for another cube form, but a mini G5 tower would fit in with the ipod mini theme. Definitely a cool idea :cool: Too bad it didn't happen. :(

[coconn06]

I think the major reason this new PowerMac isn't priced lower is because of the iMac. It would kill iMac sales, and Apple doesn't want that.

Unfortunately for us.

[solvs]

Als added new GeForce 6800 too?
The NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL graphics card will be available for order in early November.

Pretty much what I expected. Unfortunetly. I was going to write this big, long whine fest. But by the time I hit reply, there'd be a hundred people saying the same things. Ah well, maybe next month.

[Devie]

YES!!!
I think this will be my comptuer now :D. I'll just pick up a cheapish LCD 17" display and buy this (1GB, 9600XT)... comes to about the same price as the iMac G5 20".
Then I'll just slowly save up and get me a 20" ACD, and run dual head... THANKS APPLE! :D

One problem, the FSB... ah I'm over it ;)

[thevessels]

this might sound stupid, but how much faster is a dual proc?
is there any benchmarks comparinfg the old single 1.8 and the new dual 1.8?

hmmmmm...

but an extra $500 is half an ibook !! :D

[tiselday]

this SHOULD be a silent machine: 970FX 1.8 Ghz, the "lite" memory controller found in the iMac G5 (also using 90nm technology) a lots of space to dissipate heat...

[Devie]

this might sound stupid, but how much faster is a dual proc?
is there any benchmarks comparinfg the old single 1.8 and the new dual 1.8?

hmmmmm...

but an extra $500 is half an ibook !! :D
I beleive that the only difference in dual processors is when programms actually support them, usually only pro products (Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, 3D aps) utilise them.
Gaming I think doesnt use them at all... (I THINK)

[MacsRgr8]

The NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL graphics card will be available for order in early November.

Pretty much what I expected. Unfortunetly. I was going to write this big, long whine fest. But by the time I hit reply, there'd be a hundred people saying the same things. Ah well, maybe next month.

I hear you man...

I ordered the 6800 ULTRA DDL in July at a local reseller.... and they still have no idea when nVidia is going to deliver them... :(

Could be that ATi has launched their X800 series for Mac and even made it available before even one of those 6800 series come into this country :rolleyes:

I also assume that the buyers of the 30" display get their very rare GeForce included before the GeForce 6800 ULTRA-only buyers get theirs. :(

[JasonElise1983]

You know, i don't know why all of you complain so much about the price. Let's look back a couple of months. You could get a SINGLE 1.25Ghz PowerMac G4 with a 167Mhz FSB, 256Mb DDR333(which was a waste on the FSB), 80Gb HD, 64Mb ATI 9000, and a combo drive for $1299.

Now you can get a SINGLE 1.8Ghz G5 with a 600Mhz FSB, 256DDR400, 80Gb HD, 64Mb Nvidia GeForceFX5200, and a SuperDrive for only $200 more. I have to say that i think this is great. I do disagree with the FSB being crippled, but at $1499 ($1349 for me) i think it is great.

[BornAgainMac]

This is a trade and switch product. You will see the more expensive PowerMac as a bargin and buy that one. They never will have a headless mac under a $1,000. Darn!

[isgoed]

It still aint a PC gamers competitor. For 1500$ you can get a 3ghz pentium, 6800GT and a 17" screen. (notice that it's still short on the screen and graphics card)

Good deal that the 6800 GT will become available in november. Maybe apple really wants to please the game enthusiast.

Just one problem: They downgraded the 9800XT to 25MB! ;)
(BTW, a recent artice on macbidouille stated that the 9600XT is actually underclocked so it isn't even a XT, but more a regular 9600 or even an SE.

[wdlove]

Man, and they lowered the FSB too!!!!! Damn apple, just when I think you get the picture, you do this :(

Kimo

I hadn't heard any rumors, so this is a complete surprise to me.

We still have the awesome Power Mac G5 case and the Superdrive. It's still a G5, just another for the low end buyer.

[Mechcozmo]

Just one problem: They downgraded the 9800XT to 25MB! ;)
(BTW, a recent artice on macbidouille stated that the 9600XT is actually underclocked so it isn't even a XT, but more a regular 9600 or even an SE.

You beat me to it!

What is this new nVidia card, the GT model? Is it even better than the 6800 now?

I know who would buy this. People who have a screen, have the space, and have a couple of PCI cards. Example: G4 tower owners...ditch the Sawtooth and buy this new G5! Keep your screen, keep the same amount of desk space, increase the disk space...maybe drop in there your PCI video card, have some extra power there...

This new G5 is NOT for new computer buyers, it if for the people who need to upgrade.

[Chip NoVaMac]

*raises hand*

Can I be the first to complain?

Why would you get this over the iMac G5 that's the same price? You get a 17" screen... I guess there's the whole expandability issue but...

I guess you can put more RAM in the tower, better vid card, more HD space, and a few other quirks but... even the FSB is at the iMac G5 level.

There are those of us that have decent 17" or better monitors that the $1499 price point of the PM is sweet. Also the expansion capabilities is a bonus. The 4gb RAM is the main reason that I might look at this one.

[isgoed]

What is this new nVidia card, the GT model? Is it even better than the 6800 now?
No the GT is a slightly slower version of the 6800ultra. It is priced about 100$ cheaper, so the price/performance ratio is very good.

[segundo]

I can se that many of you are sceptical to the new Power Mac, but I must say that it has made me think twice about what to do. I have an iMac G5 (20 inch) on order that is shipping nov. 1. Now I'm thinking maybe I shoud cancel my order and get a Power Mac G5 and a 20' Cinema Display. It will cost me about $1200 more, but I get a display that can last for many, many years to come. Plus I get more expandability. But is it worth it? To cansel or not to cansel, that is the question! :confused:

I'm in the same boat. Maybe we should flip a coin?

[wdlove]

No the GT is a slightly slower version of the 6800ultra. It is priced about 100$ cheaper, so the price/performance ratio is very good.

So would it run the 30" Display? Putting lower grade items on the low end G5 is going to make it more confusing for the consumer.

[nagromme]

This replaces the outgoing G4 tower. That gap needed to be filled.

This is NOT "the entry-level Mac." It's not meant to be. That's the eMac and iBook.

An entry-level headless is a nice thought, but this isn't it. This is just an expandable G5 tower cheaper than previously available.

[Abstract]

So for the same price of an iMac, people are going to be willing to pay the money to get a computer that has the option of upgrading the GPU?

Does it make financial sense? Since you're not getting the LCD as with the iMac, and yet you're paying the same price, you're essentially paying $300 (or whatever the cost of the LCD is) for the "option" of paying more money for a better video card. So to upgrade the video card to something beyond the Nvidia 5200, you're paying an additional $300 (ie: cost of monitor) + the price of the GPU upgrade.

Doesn't it suck that in order to use an Apple with a better video card, you're essentially paying the cost of the card + $300 or so? If you don't need a better video card desperately, you're better off getting an iMac. If you need to get a better video card THAT desperately, you probably need a dual proc PM.

[almostCrazyasU]

good god guys! for the first time i felt I had to register, because no one is pointing out truly how stupid the cost of this machine is. some of you are trying hard, but its quite simple: you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac. here's the proof

lets just take the top iMac model with no added features as our example, that's $1899.
now, go and configure a powerMac with exactly the same specs (by upgrading to a 160GB HD) that's $1599...i guess that "saves" $300 but only if you already own a monitor ($300 for a 20" cinema display seems like a good deal to me)

so here's where it gets really pathetic: add a 20 cinema display to the powerMac total, even just for compare the two. It's the same display the top of the line iMac has already. The powerMac cost comes to, drum roll, $2898.

okay let me spell it out for those who still don't get it, for the exact same specs, monitor, FSB, EXACT! you are paying a $999 premium for a pretty silver (and humongous) BOX!

that should be enough to convince you, but some people are saying upgradability. is it really worth a thousand dollars out of the gate for the OPTION to upgrade, you still have to pay for the upgrade on top of that grand

if buying this new machine still makes economic sense to you, email me, i have some interesting investment optortunities for you

sincerely,
almostCrazyasU

[gekko513]

good god guys! for the first time i felt I had to register, because no one is pointing out truly how stupid the cost of this machine is. some of you are trying hard, but its quite simple: you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac. here's the proof

lets just take the top iMac model with no added features as our example, that's $1899.
now, go and configure a powerMac with exactly the same specs (by upgrading to a 160GB HD) that's $1599...i guess that "saves" $300 but only if you already own a monitor ($300 for a 20" cinema display seems like a good deal to me)

so here's where it gets really pathetic: add a 20 cinema display to the powerMac total, even just for compare the two. It's the same display the top of the line iMac has already. The powerMac cost comes to, drum roll, $2898.

okay let me spell it out for those who still don't get it, for the exact same specs, monitor, FSB, EXACT! you are paying a $999 premium for a pretty silver (and humongous) BOX!

that should be enough to convince you, but some people are saying upgradability. is it really worth a thousand dollars out of the gate for the OPTION to upgrade, you still have to pay for the upgrade on top of that grand

if buying this new machine still makes economic sense to you, email me, i have some interesting investment optortunities for you

sincerely,
almostCrazyasU


Good! Someone had to spell it out clearly. This proves two things.

1. The iMac is excellent value!
2. Apple makes a very nice profit on the PowerMac line.

It also means I'll buy an iMac soon.

[swissmann]

Good work MacRumors - you pretty much nailed it.

[Chip NoVaMac]

This replaces the outgoing G4 tower. That gap needed to be filled.

This is NOT "the entry-level Mac." It's not meant to be. That's the eMac and iBook.

An entry-level headless is a nice thought, but this isn't it. This is just an expandable G5 tower cheaper than previously available.

Good point.

A Mac with a G5 1.6 or 1.8 that uses external monitors with limited expandability (limited to RAM upgrades and the such) at $999 would be a nice thing to see. Is there enough demand for it though? Apple designs require so much in R&D that limited production runs don't make sense.

A thin PM with out the PCI slots would have been a killer in design and cost at $999.

[halse]

put in an airport card and another disk, toss it in a closet and this may be the "music server" Mac in my future for about $1400 (edu price), I'd like to see it for $1000 but this is worth thinking about

[nagromme]

You can subtract the modem and downgrade the SuperDrive to a DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive (which lots of people will do) and save some more.

With student/teacher pricing, that makes the cheapest PowerMac G5 config $1233. (Cheapest that can run a 30" screen... $1683 :D )

For the rest of us, $1370 is the bottom config.

[GroundLoop]

for $1638 I will have -

PM 1.8 Single Processor
ATI X800 XT 256MB
8x Superdrive (compared to the 4x in the iMac)
256MB RAM
no AE, BT, or Modem

Now I can add the things that I already own:
Dual 19" LCDs
An extra GB or RAM that I have sitting in my desk
an extra 80 GB SATA HDD that I have sitting around

Not a bad price for that setup. I understand that I am in tha minority in this group. But hey, that's a sweet deal. I just think it is funny how everyone was pissed about the upgradeability of the iMac's GPU, the slow SuperDrive, and the fact that you were stuck with that display (and the costly repairs if it needed to be fixed), and all of that is now forgotten.

You guys are a fickle bunch.

Hickman

[habibbijan]

good god guys! for the first time i felt I had to register, because no one is pointing out truly how stupid the cost of this machine is. some of you are trying hard, but its quite simple: you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac.

Clap! Clap! Clap!

I agree. Actually, I'm extremely disappointed in this "release." Why on earth would Apple release a Powermac rated at the same clock speed as its predecessor from ONE YEAR ago, and cripple it so that it's a mere shadow of its former self? Why did they needlessly reduce the FSB by one-third? Sorry, this machine is not going to impress anyone, especially not any potential switchers.

In fact, if Apple keeps making asinine judgments like this, I'm through with them.

[Lord Blackadder]

Right now the iMac makes more sense, but several years down the road that 5200 is going to really be wheezing - more than it is now - and the tower will come into its own since it will be able to take a new video card/display.

I don't like the hobbled motherboard though.

I think this is 3/5 the way towards a true "consumer" tower. Do we need one? I dunno, but people here are always throwing around the idea of a cheap, expandable, "headless" Mac. Trouble is, I don't see how the price of the new low-end tower could be slashed without further compromising performance or expandability. Maybe Apple's mad scientists are working on that.

[nagromme]

In fact, if Apple keeps making asinine judgments like this, I'm through with them.

Better start preparing for the wonderful world of Windows ;) How dare Apple add a model that meets some people's needs but is not what YOU would choose? :D

[dejo]

All those who think Apple needs to come out with a headless Mac, and feel this new PowerMac doesn't fit the bill, please explain to the rest of us how you would define a 'headless Mac', including things like expandability, price, etc.

[nagromme]

All those who think Apple needs to come out with a headless Mac, and feel this new PowerMac doesn't fit the bill, please explain to the rest of us how you would define a 'headless Mac', including things like expandability, price, etc.

I think what many people seem to mean is, they want a small tower that makes NONE of the sacrifices bargain PCs make, but costs the same as a bargain PC, while keeping all the benefits of a G5 pro tower too :D

What I mean when I suggest Apple could sell a low-end headless is take the screen and battery away from an iBook, and use cheaper non-portable parts (like the HD). Or take the screen and speakers away from an eMac. Either way would be cheaper than an eMac and equally powerful.

[Rod Rod]

you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac.

when attempting to convince people that you are correct, it helps to not insult them in the process. these forums have rules against name-calling (http://forums.macrumors.com/announcement.php?f=66), including when done indirectly.

I'll give you credit for comedy though. it's generous of you to have misspelled the word imbecile in this context.

congratulations on your first post, please read the rules and I'm sure you'll find it easy to contribute in a non-insulting manner.

concerning your post though, when a person doesn't need a 20" integrated display (as in the G5 iMac), that display just does not figure in the value equation.

[aethier]

good god guys! for the first time i felt I had to register, because no one is pointing out truly how stupid the cost of this machine is. some of you are trying hard, but its quite simple: you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac. here's the proof

lets just take the top iMac model with no added features as our example, that's $1899.
now, go and configure a powerMac with exactly the same specs (by upgrading to a 160GB HD) that's $1599...i guess that "saves" $300 but only if you already own a monitor ($300 for a 20" cinema display seems like a good deal to me)

so here's where it gets really pathetic: add a 20 cinema display to the powerMac total, even just for compare the two. It's the same display the top of the line iMac has already. The powerMac cost comes to, drum roll, $2898.

okay let me spell it out for those who still don't get it, for the exact same specs, monitor, FSB, EXACT! you are paying a $999 premium for a pretty silver (and humongous) BOX!


sincerely,
almostCrazyasU

GOOD GOD almostCrazyasU!!!111, i had to click 'quote" just to spell this out for you....

you are crazy, if you think the iMac's 20 inch display, is the same as the cinema display wich costs the price of the low end iMac...


from imac techspechs:
Display


Built-in 17-inch (viewable) widescreen or 20-inch (viewable) widescreen TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display

Millions of colors at all resolutions

Typical viewing angle:

17-inch models

120° horizontal

90° vertical



20-inch model

170° horizontal

170° vertical





Typical brightness: 200 cd/m (17-inch models); 230 cd/m (20-inch model)

Typical contrast ratio: 350:1
---

cinema display

Viewing angle (typical)
170° horizontal; 170° vertical

Brightness (typical)
250 cd/m2
270 cd/m2

Contrast ratio (typical)
400:1

Response time (typical)
16 ms

Pixel pitch
0.258 mm

EDIT: plus as many others have stated, the imac doesn't allow you to use it's display on another computer if you eventually get a tower. furthermore, you cannot upgrade the video card, you cannot put more then one harddrive, you cannot eventually upgrade the cpu (if it goes like the g4) you don't have pci slots, etc.

plus the g5 looks cool if you run it with the metal door off.

[habibbijan]

Better start preparing for the wonderful world of Windows ;)

Been there, done that. Though last time I checked, there were other operating systems out there as well. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux everyday, and am not zealous about any of them. Hardware interests me more than software.

Mockery of my post is fine, but it doesn't answer the question. Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"

[Lord Blackadder]

The form factor. The introduction of the "new" single 1.8 is Apple's attempt to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point.

I don't like the idea of a slower FSB either, but the cheaper motherboard probably accounts for a lot of the price difference between this and the dual 1.8, I would imagine. But a tower can handle peripheral devices (and PCI cards) that an iMac won't. That alone will be reason enough for some buyers to opt for this machine over the iMac.

[Rod Rod]

Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. as others have pointed out in other threads about other product lines, it's a waste of money for Apple to intentionally hobble products. the Kool-Aid justification is that Apple knows what it's doing, and who needs market share. :)

the only saving grace is that you can get a refurbished 1.8 single model for the same money.

I don't like the idea of a slower FSB either, but the cheaper motherboard probably accounts for a lot of the price difference between this and the dual 1.8, I would imagine..

I doubt that a 600MHz board costs less to make than a 900MHz one. I bet the only difference is a couple of resistors (if not just one), and otherwise the two are identical. I agree with your other points though.

[Chip NoVaMac]

You can subtract the modem and downgrade the SuperDrive to a DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive (which lots of people will do) and save some more.

With student/teacher pricing, that makes the cheapest PowerMac G5 config $1233. (Cheapest that can run a 30" screen... $1683 :D )

For the rest of us, $1370 is the bottom config.

Personally I think it is short sighted to remove the DVD recorder capability. At $1349 this is a good value IMO at the EDU pricing. Even better when they come to the "Red Tag" area.

[habibbijan]

The form factor. The introduction of the "new" single 1.8 is Apple's attempt to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point.

I understand the need to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point, but that's entirely possible without crippling the bus speed, so that doesn't really answer the question. Simply dropping one processor will reduce the cost significantly. Cutting the bus speed by a third is a below-the-belt punch.

If I recall, the single 1.6 Ghz Powermac G5 from one year ago had an 800 MHz FSB. This system had a "cheaper" motherboard as well. If Apple just had to cut the bus speed, why not knock it back to 800, like the original 1.6? That would not have been as stupid.

[habibbijan]

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. as others have pointed out in other threads about other product lines, it's a waste of money for Apple to intentionally hobble products. the Kool-Aid justification is that Apple knows what it's doing, and who needs market share. :)

Thanks for the explanation, Rod Rod. That confirms it: stupidity IS the answer.

[iMeowbot]

Mockery of my post is fine, but it doesn't answer the question. Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"
Given all the G5 production problems, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple got a deal on CPUs that had trouble meeting the higher specs.

[gekko513]

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. ...[snip]...
I doubt that a 600MHz board costs less to make than a 900MHz one. I bet the only difference is a couple of resistors (if not just one), and otherwise the two are identical. I agree with your other points though.

I think you'll lose that bet. The other PowerMacs have dual memory controllers hence the need for at least 800MHz bus (twice DDR400). If they only use one memory controller they don't really need a bus that is much faster than 400MHz:
"The Power Mac G5 128-bit memory controller supports fast 400MHz, DDR SDRAM, and enables main memory to address two banks of SDRAM at a time, reading and writing on both the rising and falling edge of each clock cycle. This effectively doubles the bandwidth, en..."

Apple probably saves the components cost for the 2nd memory controller. It could very well be that they use the same system controller chip in the single G5 PowerMac as in the iMacs.

[Rod Rod]

I think you'll lose that bet. The other PowerMacs have dual memory controllers hence the need for at least 800MHz bus (twice DDR400). If they only use one memory controller they don't really need a bus that is much faster than 400MHz:
"The Power Mac G5 128-bit memory controller supports fast 400MHz, DDR SDRAM, and enables main memory to address two banks of SDRAM at a time, reading and writing on both the rising and falling edge of each clock cycle. This effectively doubles the bandwidth, en..."

Apple probably saves the components cost for the 2nd memory controller. It could very well be that they use the same system controller chip in the single G5 PowerMac as in the iMacs.

you can prove your theory and win the bet by finding the RAM requirements for this new 1.8GHz / 600MHz fsb Power Mac.

according to the configurations available in the online store, it appears that the newest Power Mac requires matched pairs of RAM, unlike the G5 iMac.

[gekko513]

you can prove your theory and win the bet by finding the RAM requirements for this new 1.8GHz / 600MHz fsb Power Mac.

according to the configurations available in the online store, it appears that the newest Power Mac requires matched pairs of RAM, unlike the G5 iMac.
Yeah, you're right. That doesn't sound good. I'll cling to the hope that it's just an error in the specs :p Because if it isn't, then I too am very confused as to why they would lower the bus speed :confused: It's not like they need to cut back on the power consumption or anything!

[maya]

This system would be perfect if it was a:

2GHz with a FSB @ 1Gig.

or

1.8GHZ with a FSB @ 900MHz.


Well someone in the Apple DEV dept has been sleeping. :mad:

[Lord Blackadder]

I don't know a great deal about the chipsets Apple is using for the G5 motherboards, but why would they use a different (slower) set of memory controllers than the other machines, if not because they are cheaper?

I ask because I don't know and I'm trying (with my limited knowlege) to explain the facts in a way that doesn't accuse Apple of deliberately hobbling a computer to maintain product line identity and continuity, Which would have a strong whiff of the bad old days of the Performa series. But maybe they are doing just that. I just hope not.

I wonder what the difference (in cost to Apple) would be between this new single 1.8 and a dual 1.8 motherboard with a single 1.8 proc card. :confused:

[thevessels]

well answerig my own question ..

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

they put back the single 1.8's agains the rest of the gang

and as a pro tools user - i still the the dual proc and higher fsb might be worth the extra 500 in the long run ..

the single 1.8 is actually slower than some of the pc's they have up there :(

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...

i still am gonna say the dual 1.8 is the best bang for your buck

unless someone can convince me otherwise :rolleyes:

[JasonElise1983]

Well, i think everyone who hates this should call apple and tell them how stupid they are to lower the price of the PowerMac line so student (like myself) who are strapped for cash can possibly afford a decent computer and have what ever monitor they want. I am a graphic design student, so an fx5200 would probably be enought for me there, but i also do a little video editing on the side. I love the idea of being able to upgrade the video card to something real. Like a 9800Pro Special Mac Edition (that has TV outs!) that i can install myself and chunck that POS video card.

Oh, and for everyone complaining about the FSB (which i too am a little confused about, but i'm not irate) you should call apple and tell them to shove that FSB up their A$$ and bring back the 167Mhz FSB from the G4. That would be a lot better wouldn't it?

[Centris 650]

well answerig my own question ..

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

they put back the single 1.8's agains the rest of the gang

and as a pro tools user - i still the the dual proc and higher fsb might be worth the extra 500 in the long run ..

the single 1.8 is actually slower than some of the pc's they have up there :(

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...

i still am gonna say the dual 1.8 is the best bang for your buck

unless someone can convince me otherwise :rolleyes:

Let's look at the iPod and iPod mini. For just a little more you can get a bigger iPod. Does that keep the iPod mini from flying off the shelves? What Apple is looking at, I think, is the consumer like myself. I can squeeze out $1500 for a new computer but not $2000. The "It's just $500 more!" doesn't fly when you just can't spend it! I already have a 19" crt monitor that's perfect and waiting for use. I'm very pleased with this new machine. Now, to fight my wife for the credit card.... :D

[Macmaniac]

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

[ZildjianKX]

I beleive that the only difference in dual processors is when programms actually support them, usually only pro products (Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, 3D aps) utilise them.
Gaming I think doesnt use them at all... (I THINK)

Absolutely right.

As a SP 1.8 Rev A owner, I'm really surprised they crippled the FSB on this. The Rev A 1.8 is still the fastest and most expandible SP G5 Powermac... go figure.

I'm hoping Apple dumps the 2 GHz/1.8 GHz PMs soon, they've been out so long they shouldn't even be in the powermac line anymore. I'm hoping the next revision is DP 3, DP 2.5, DP 2.

[Lancetx]

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

I'm glad to see someone else has some sense about this. It's all about options, that's all. If someone needs the expandability as you do, then this new Power Mac is a great deal. For those that don't, then by all means, they should get the iMac then. I don't see what all of the fuss is over either. It's always good when additional options are made available and Apple has done just that with this new model Power Mac.

[thevessels]

belive me i do think this is an awesome product - and i know this is a perfect solution for alot of people

all i was trying to point out was how much fast the dual proc's actually are when benchhmarked ( ithought the diff would be smaller )

i know for students and consumers this powermac is killer , and belive me i wouldve been in line to buy one aswell if i didnt stumble across jpegs like this.. :(

[habibbijan]

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...


I certainly hope that was a joke, or you're going to have a lot of sleepless nights!

[Xtremehkr]

[thevessels]

ok maybee my comment was a little extreme..

but the blue line is longer than the green line!!!

*tear*

its just not right . . . ..

:(


(please dont take this too seriously)

[awesomebase]

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

Well, you're correct on the expandability aspect of it, but as far as the value goes, there isn't a whole lot of argument. Basically, what Apple is saying is this... to get the EXACT same iMac G5 in a PowerMac enclosure, we want you to pay an extra $900 ($1899 vs. $1500 + 1299 = $2799). I think the only difference is that the iMac has a 4x SuperDrive instead of an 8x on the PM. You can get a 16x Pioneer for under a $100 online, so, that isn't exactly adding a lot of value.
I think what the introduction of this system shows is just how far Apple has to drop their prices on the PMs. Look at it this way... the extra $1500 for the Dual 2.5GHz gives you PCI-X slots, an extra 256MB of RAM, a better video card and two faster CPUs. It just doesn't equate... the additional RAM and video cards may make up $50 of that difference... I doubt the PCI-X slots cost all that much more, so, what they are basically saying is that for the extra CPU power, you have to pay another $1500. Forget the comparison to the iMac, that makes it even worse.
I think this introduction just reinforces the fact that the iMac is looking like a much better deal... either that or just stick with a dual-configuration PM. The only people that I think would be attracted to this offer are those that already have displays and want the PM. But, you have to figure that for an extra $400, they can get the iMac G5 with the 20" display built in. Who knows if the market for those people that already have displays is quite large or not. In any case, it certainly can't hurt Apple to do this... it may just "polarize" the PM people from the iMac people because of the definite difference in value.

[Xtremehkr]

Even more so than Apple buyers, gamers are a niche market. Most people who play games make do with what they have or make minor upgrades. Because this machine is targetted at such a narrow group it's going to be more expensive. When I priced it with everything I wanted that I would have got in the 20" iMac it was easily $1000 more.

But then you do get that expandability, which is what everyone wanted. With the educational discount, it was only $1349. The Apple LCD was what made the darn thing so expensive.

Apple tends to sell completed products, rather than upgradable items. Sometimes I think that there is no pleasing people.

[dejo]

but the blue line is longer than the green line!!!


I wouldn't worry too much. That blue line proabably costs a lot more than the green line! Thousands more I would surmise.

[habibbijan]

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.

No one is upset because Apple released a cheaper Powermac. Try for just a moment to stop comparing the 1.8 GHz PM with the iMac G5, and actually compare it with the single 1.8 PM (or even 1.6) from last year. Crippling the FSB make NO sense, and should not affect the price at all. Can you logically explain why Apple did this?

I think it's great that Apple released a cheaper Powermac. Fantastic. However, I think it's incredibly stupid that they release a handicapped version of what would be a formidable processor. This is supposed to be a Powermac, and this latest release does not deserve that title. Period.

What? I'm just calling it like I see it. Am I supposed to be a lemming and say, "Horray! Apple crippled their low-end...again! Go Apple!" Sheesh.

[thevessels]

I wouldn't worry too much. That blue line proabably costs a lot more than the green line! Thousands more I would surmise.

gooood point bro!

hmm now im on the fence again! :confused:

[nagromme]

That confirms it: stupidity IS the answer.

If, as you've said, Apple putting a slower FSB in this model is so "stupid" as to move you toward abandoning all Apple products, then no mockery is needed. You will likely have to move on to Linux and Windows--and you'll find those are excellent options, since you say that hardware details are what matter to you (vs. the benefits of OS X), and the details of this model are not the ones you personally demand. You say that making the duals look better ("selling up") is not the reason for the FSB choice--and I'm sure you couldn't possibly be wrong. Therefore you're probably right that Apple is "stupid," as are all the people who already own a display--or want internal flexibility--and prefer this to an iMac for the same price.

If, on the other hand, you come to feel that the FSB in this model doesn't actually harm Apple's OTHER products, then you can leave this model to the people who DO want it, wish them the best since they find a dual not worth the money, and focus instead on the products that interest you :)

It's also possible that other companies besides Apple sometimes don't put the very top components and specs (like FSB) in their lowest model--even when costs are the same. They might do that to create a spectrum of prices and capabilities where costlier products offer things that cheaper ones do not. This is wild speculation on my part, though--perhaps Apple is the only one to do this. ;)

[TorbX]

I just cant grasp it, get it, understand it... WHY does Apple NOT release a cool little G5-box with a couple of PCI-spaces, an extra harddrive-bay, a slot-load cd-burn-only-thingy, a decent cooling-system, and an On/Off-button?

...WITHOUT a friggin LCD-screen attached to it!?

A small-form-factor-machine. What do IBM call those? SFF?

Why dont they do this!? Can anyone explain to me why this is impossible? I bet I'm not alone in wanting this. And I do NOT want that big, shiny, metal-bunker. No thanks. What I want is a stationary headless machine. Upgradable GPU. The works.

[dejo]

Crippled? Handicapped?

C'mon! You really think this new PowerMac will perform that poorly?

[dejo]

Can anyone explain to me why this is impossible?

It's not impossible. Probably just not profitable.

[thevessels]

I bet I'm not alone in wanting this. And I do NOT want that big, shiny, metal-bunker. No thanks. What I want is a stationary headless machine. Upgradable GPU. The works.

oh your not alone!

who remembers on april fools they had that pic of the g5 mini ?!? ( i should dig that up)
that was KILLER!
let me have one of those on my desks and ill be a happy camper :D

[thevessels]

this guy made one!!
I LOVE IT!

[Dont Hurt Me]

I just cant grasp it, get it, understand it... WHY does Apple NOT release a cool little G5-box with a couple of PCI-spaces, an extra harddrive-bay, a slot-load cd-burn-only-thingy, a decent cooling-system, and an On/Off-button?

...WITHOUT a friggin LCD-screen attached to it!?

A small-form-factor-machine. What do IBM call those? SFF?

Why dont they do this!? Can anyone explain to me why this is impossible? I bet I'm not alone in wanting this. And I do NOT want that big, shiny, metal-bunker. No thanks. What I want is a stationary headless machine. Upgradable GPU. The works.
Because this is what Apple wants, its not about you its about Apple. they want to force you into Powermac. they have played this game for many many years nothing new. You want a imac then take the crippling,and poor gpu machine. dont like crippling or a slow gpu then presto you are in the powermac category and this is where Apple wants you. Sorry. They dont want a upgradable imac because that eats into their holygrail called the powermac line. One point though powermac didnt save their stupid arses years ago the iMac line did!

[nagromme]

I just cant grasp it, get it, understand it... WHY does Apple NOT release a cool little G5-box with a couple of PCI-spaces, an extra harddrive-bay, a slot-load cd-burn-only-thingy, a decent cooling-system, and an On/Off-button?

I'd think that either a compact G5 like you say, and/or a low-end headless that matched the eMac or iBook specs, would sell well--especially with a choice of GPUs. Maybe a small desktop in BOTH G4 (cheap) and G5 (fast) options. And I think it's very likely that Apple has worked on such a thing--after all the Cube's main problem was price. So why hasn't something been released yet?

It's a mystery to me too.

The answer could be that Apple has done the research to know that, in fact, it would NOT sell in enough quantity to justify the cost of creating a new model line. Maybe they know that most of the people who clamor for a headless WILL settle for an eMac, iMac, laptop or PowerMac. Thus, Apple doesn't make that much money with a new headless--they cannibalize current products.

Complicating the demand question is that people want many different things from a new headless Mac... some want mainly compactness. Some want the lowest possible price on a G5. Some want the lowest possible price period. Some want expansion slots. Some want top-end gaming performance. Add up all the demands for a headless and they sound like a lot (at least on forums)... but are they all demands for the SAME thing?

A demand problem would surprise me even so, but that's my only guess. And times can change... Don't stop asking for a true low-end headless, because Apple listens from time to time!

[nagromme]

Try for just a moment to stop comparing the 1.8 GHz PM with the iMac G5, and actually compare it with the single 1.8 PM (or even 1.6) from last year.

Why does one spec (MHz) make it reasonable to compare to a product that doesn't exist any more, instead of to iMacs that DO exist?

Take ANY low-end computer from any vendor. Go back in time a little and you can find a higher-end product with the same Mhz. And yet that old higher-end machine will have some specs/features that are still better than the low-end today. What's surprising there?

900 is better than 600, but I don't see the issue in quite as devastating terms as you may.

[dejo]

And I do NOT want that big, shiny, metal-bunker. No thanks. What I want is a stationary headless machine. Upgradable GPU. The works.

So, your only problem with the new PowerMac is the case? Just buy one then and put it into a smaller case that satisfies your need for SFF.

[SiliconAddict]

and can get the education discount

Why do people continually throw this in as if the world has access to Apple's education discount?!?!!?
The reality is it’s still overpriced for a "low end" G5. Esp when you consider you are spending aprox the same (about $200 more for a PowerMac) amount as a iMac without the screen. I personally think $999 or $1199 would have been the sweet spot. Then there is the whole neutering of the system with 256MB of RAM on a $1500 system not even including Applecare which brings it remarkably close to $2,000 after tax and such.
I’m starting wonder if part of Apple’s so called innovation, that they obviously do, has just as much to do with playing fast and loose with their prices as much as anything else. Lets see add another 256MB stick of RAM. Add a solid video card. (OK so the included card isn’t BAD. It ain’t great though.) Add the ubiquitous Applecare. Well obviously you’ll need Apple Pro care or whatever that in store option is to get at the Genius bar fast. Wow that price just keeps climbing and climbing.
Why do I get this image of Steve in a pinstripe suit and straw hat rolling into town on a sales wagon selling Uncle Steve’s iMagic elixir? Guaranteed to cure what ails ya.
*shrugs* I guess it doesn't matter since I'm not in the market for a desktop anyways. Still its irksome to know that Apple keeps putting themselves in this position time and again. I know at least a half a dozen people where I work who want to get a Mac but won't because of price. I can't in good conscience tell them to get an eMac. And most if not all have perfectly fine monitors so an iMac is a waste of money. :( I’ve only gotten 4 people over the last year and a half to look at and actually get a Mac (All iMacs.) and in their cases they their computers from the monitor on down was in a condition to be replaced in total. Frustration. Thy name is Apple.

[isgoed]

This system would be perfect if it was a:

2GHz with a FSB @ 1Gig.

or

1.8GHZ with a FSB @ 900MHz.


Well someone in the Apple DEV dept has been sleeping. :mad:

It just dawned to me: this is the perfect gamers machine. The true reason apple crippled the FPS is not because they are stupid, but it is smart.

You can now buy a gaming machine for a low price with the graphics card of your choice. The only problem is that games thrive on (raw singlethreaded) mhz's. If the chip is the 90nm 970FX, the only thing you have to change now, is to overclock the FSB to 900mhz. With the 3x multiplier, can you say: "2.7Ghz Powermac"?

This will probably be relatively easy when you use rev A powermacs as reference designs!

[SiliconAddict]

Because this is what Apple wants, its not about you its about Apple. they want to force you into Powermac.

No it’s about what sells and I don't think Apple has a freaking clue as to what really sells. Oh sure that iMac is going to fly off the shelves and is going to make some serious bank for Apple. But how many NEW, not repeat but new customers are they going to get? Yes. The iMac looks freaking sweet. But sweet doesn't always == a sale esp when you are talking switchers. Apple thinks about the all in one package. That's great for those who are looking for a complete upgrade. Too bad there are A LOT of people out there who don't fit into that category and consequently Apple is all but saying my way or the highway which is so Jobs-ian.

[Rod Rod]

my prediction:
in a matter of weeks, someone will write to xlr8yourmac.com (http://xlr8yourmac.com) with a photo essay about how to de-underclock the FSB of the new 1.8 single Power Mac. then it will be empirically proven that the motherboard is identical to its forebears, except for one or two pesky resistors.

[areyouwishing]

It will be interesting to see how this machine performs next to the original single 1.8 or even the single 1.6.

They obviously took a look at the PowerMac sales numbers and realized that they were losing sales because not everyone wants to drop 2g's on a Dual, when not every program uses both. This is a great machine with two flaws... it should be 100 less, and there seems to be no logical reason to scale back the frontside bus... unless their chipsets/processors can't hit the 900mhz mark for the yield, so they scale them back to get better yields.

This is still a nice *big* computer, that fits a lot of education users budgets. You can configure the machine for $1233.00 that is really nice.

[Converted2Truth]

Over a year ago apple released a single 1.8ghz G5/900mhz bus/160GB HD/5200Ultra/etc/etc... and it cost 2k edu

NOW, in the present, apple releases a single 1.8ghz G5/600mhz bus/80GB HD/5200Ultra/etc/etc... and now it costs $500 less.

Is it just me? or is there something wrong with this picture? Ah, i just figured it out... THEY'RE MOVING BACKWARDS! so much for technological advancements. I guess that's nitch marketing for ya in a nutshell... we get screwed. We should be getting AT LEAST the year old model for 1.5k. This is irritating.

[gekko513]

It just dawned to me: this is the perfect gamers machine. The true reason apple crippled the FPS is not because they are stupid, but it is smart.

You can now buy a gaming machine for a low price with the graphics card of your choice. The only problem is that games thrive on (raw singlethreaded) mhz's. If the chip is the 90nm 970FX, the only thing you have to change now, is to overclock the FSB to 900mhz. With the 3x multiplier, can you say: "2.7Ghz Powermac"?

This will probably be relatively easy when you use rev A powermacs as reference designs!

Interesting ... I hope someone please tries this ... barefeats, perhaps or macbidoulalie who seem to be good at overclocking GPUs at least.

[SiliconAddict]

It just dawned to me: this is the perfect gamers machine. The true reason apple crippled the FPS is not because they are stupid, but it is smart.

You can now buy a gaming machine for a low price


Nobody buys a Mac for a gaming machine. Period. If you do you're delusional. Macs have their streignths. A lot of them actually. Gaming is NOT one of them.

[Lord Blackadder]

How much does this stuff ACTUALLY cost?

Without knowing that, we're just indulging in speculation, which will cause tempers to flare but not provide answers since we don't have the facts (and Apple won't tell).

And to those who seek a "headless" Mac, I fear that the only ones we'll see are the G5 towers. Apple has a history of all-in-one desgins, and I think that for the forseeable future all-in-ones will anchor the bottom end of Apple's product line.

After thinking about it, I believe that the single 1.8 is a good thing. It's a brand new $1500 G5 tower. With a BTO video card upgrade it will run anything you can throw at it, and 5 years down the road people will be upgrading them with HDs, video cards and processor upgrades and still running the latest software, just like those of us with G4 towers now.

A question for those more familiar with hardware: Are the components relating to the FSB located on the processor card, or the motherboard proper?

[habibbijan]

Is it just me? or is there something wrong with this picture? Ah, i just figured it out... THEY'RE MOVING BACKWARDS! so much for technological advancements. I guess that's nitch marketing for ya in a nutshell... we get screwed. We should be getting AT LEAST the year old model for 1.5k. This is irritating.

That's really funny, but sadly true. There's no way that I could convince someone to switch to a low-end Powermac when Apple makes decisions like this.

So much for "new and improved." This is more like "old and degenerate."

[scan300]

Every time Apple releases a product, it does what everyone has asked from Apple, it's faster, or it's cheaper, or it's better designed... and everytime most people complain they should of done something different. Well go out there and make you own better Mac.

I can think of a range of possible reasons why the fsb is set slower, mostly to do with clock timing and chip quality. I would guess that the batch of 1.8 CPU's in this machine and the iMac are a lower grade than in the Dual 1.8. If the fsb is set at 1/3 the rate of the CPU it would run cooler and not tax the chip so heavily so it can stay reliable. If there have been fabbing problems at Fishkil then you would expect there to be a raft of lower grade chips. This would be a way to put them to good use. Alternatively they could clock the chips at 1.6 and run the fsb at 1/2, but I don't think that would sell as well.

Plus Apple will still be looking to make a margin on this set-up as well as the retailers to make a business out of these machines.

If Apple were to cut margins and sell an $800 headless Mac tomorrow, they might sell a bucket load. But they would need invest heavily in the infrastructure to expand their delivery channels and support base, ie risk more money, work harder for less money. And if people still didn't buy large amounts of these machines because of some other 'it doesn't run Windows' reason, what will they tell the shareholder then when they post their quarterly losses.

15 years ago a Mac cost 2-3 times more than what you can get now. Considering a dollar buys less now than what it did then, a Mac in real terms is more like 5 times cheaper.And hardly anyone thinks this is good enough, only because someone can slap together a system that's even cheaper.

Apple is doing what you want them to do, but not as fast as you want it.

I'll crawl back in my hole now.

[ioinc]

*raises hand*

Can I be the first to complain?

Why would you get this over the iMac G5 that's the same price? You get a 17" screen... I guess there's the whole expandability issue but...

I guess you can put more RAM in the tower, better vid card, more HD space, and a few other quirks but... even the FSB is at the iMac G5 level.
Because...

there's the whole expandability issue
you can put more RAM in the tower
better vid card
more HD space
and a few other quirks

:D

[mymemory]

Apple needs a low end powermac that can be configured for the customer, this is a much better machine then a imac in my view and could be considered a gamers mac. Add the videocard of your choice and you are in.FX5200 not included. I have allways wished that apple would sell its fastest single cpu in a powermac. On another note i dont think if sales were rocketing they would have brought back the single G5 machine. Must have some tower cases to get rid of why else bring back the single cpu machine? good for the consumer but so odd the games apple plays with configurations. I have allways felt when it comes to Macs its about what apple wants not what the consumer wants.

No dude, you do not see the picture clearly... that is Apple strategy to keep the price high. The single processor is actually an empty egg sheel, it would be a real deal to find the lower end dual at that price.

Unfortunatly this new machine just works to keep the price of the rest ones up and to sell and "empty" egg shell at a very high price because there is not sense in having such big enclosure with such lack of features at that price. That computer only works for Apple.

[cube]

Today's releases or the last PowerMac G4 release?

"Rise of the crappy Macs"

[-hh]

Absolutely right.

As a SP 1.8 Rev A owner, I'm really surprised they crippled the FSB on this. The Rev A 1.8 is still the fastest and most expandible SP G5 Powermac... go figure.

Including the Rev A's ability to take in up to 8GB of RAM.

This offering does help out with the "Starting as Low As" marketing hype, but any consumer who's smart enough to mathmatically rub two sticks together will know that this is a "Trailing Edge of Technology" machine that's going to have a shorter useful lifespan than the other PM's. This new configuration will be obsolete before the year-older Rev A 1.8's because of those elements where it was lobotomized, for reasons only known to Apple.

For what I paid for my Rev A 1.8, I had some buyers remorse over the Rev B feature-to-price points. But this product doesn't make me jealous. If anything, it tempts me to sell my Rev A 1.8 now while I can get a better-than-last-week's price for it.


-hh

[Duane Martin]

I laugh. I cry.

When the speculation about this machine was posted yesterday, I said it would never happen. No market for such a beast. OH, the howling and gnashing of teeth. The users who swore to high heaven this is what they have been waiting for. Now, the exact machine, as advertised, is released and the board is howling and gnashing their teeth that it is too slow (compared to what, a dual G5?) or crippled (600FSB vs. my G4?) or too expensive. Reality check time. Am I now in an alternate universe?

Okay, I too want a dual G5 built to my exact specifications (as they happen to be this week) for as close to nothing as I can get it. I want it now, I want it my way, I don't care if it makes any logical sense whatsoever from a business point of view because I want it!!!

Well, at least I am able to recognize my inner five-year-old for what it is.

[takao]

Both Thumbs up Apple for this update... it will give a nice computer for those who have a screen ,already and want to upgrade

sadly it's 200 € out of my maximum price range (here it costs 1550€ with edu discount) when i put in bluetooth,airport and and adaptor etc

but with the 110€ + airport ibook price drop (which i didn't excpected) i guess i dicided which will be my first apple....

[inkswamp]

You can actually get it for slightly less by customizing it and dropping the built-in modem and downgrading the Superdrive to a Combo. If you do that, you get:

• 256MB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x128
• 80GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra w/64MB DDR SDRAM
• Combo (CD-RW/DVD-ROM)
• Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English

Subtotal $1,370.00

[maya]

That's really funny, but sadly true. There's no way that I could convince someone to switch to a low-end Powermac when Apple makes decisions like this.

So much for "new and improved." This is more like "old and degenerate."

Okay I will give this new abomination that its more expandable than a cube. Granted one for Apple.

However with that step forwards they took a couple backwards. FSB, Since when did Mac users begin over-clocking, the over-clocking sounds like a nitch thing and only few people on the Mac side even consider it. Besides it not 100% safe.

Here is Apple's thinking we will offer last years technology, call it new, cripple the FSB, pop in a crap GPU and charge $1500 USD for it.

The lest they should be offering is a 2.0GHz to separate it from the iMac G5. What are these people on, I think this is targeted towards people who don't know how to transport an iMac G5. :rolleyes:

Either IBM and Apple have too many 1.8GHz G5 chips or they are having a lot and I mean a lot of trouble with 2.0 and 2.5GHz chips.

This is not good at all. This is stagnating the market, with crap. :mad:

[maya]

All this is, is an expandable iMac G5 minus the LCD screen. At $1,200 USD without a crippled FSB and 4gig ram slots it would have been a steal.

Add a $600 USD LCD screen and you have a decent machine. This $1,500 USD price should be for a 2.0GHz G5 with 8 gigs of ram slots.

Well there is always next year. :(

[maya]

You can actually get it for slightly less by customizing it and dropping the built-in modem and downgrading the Superdrive to a Combo. If you do that, you get:

• 256MB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x128
• 80GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• Nvidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra w/64MB DDR SDRAM
• Combo (CD-RW/DVD-ROM)
• Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English

Subtotal $1,370.00

The options you are quoting above are BELOW standards compared to the rest of the PC world in this price range.

Apple really seems to have quite a few problems on its hands. :(

[dejo]

I still don't understand people's logic that a 600MHz FSB is "crippled". Can someone please explain this to me? Does that mean that the 1.6GHz iMac G5 with 533MHz FSB is also crippled? In fact, even more crippled. I would claim the low amount of RAM is more crippling than the FSB speed. And I'm wary of using that phrasing anyways. "Less powerful" perhaps.

[Rod Rod]

I still don't understand people's logic that a 600MHz FSB is "crippled". Can someone please explain this to me? Does that mean that the 1.6GHz iMac G5 with 533MHz FSB is also crippled? I would claim the low amount of RAM is more crippling than the FSB speed.

the idea is this: it's understandable that the G5 iMac has lower frontside bus speeds because of the heat / power budget. the Power Mac doesn't have the same restraints as the iMac. the logic, as I see it, is the motherboards are identical parts (600MHz & 900MHz) except for a couple of rearranged resistors.

you're right, the RAM as it ships is worse than the FSB speed. the difference is that you can upgrade your RAM without voiding the warranty.

for the person who contended that the lower FSB was necessary due to lower quality chips, well that doesn't make sense. the higher the ratio between processor and motherboard, the more stability problems you may run into. I am inferring this from the eMac 800MHz - 1.4GHz thread on these forums. the rest of the PM line, with the 2:1 ratio, is by comparison way more stable.

[takao]

The options you are quoting above are BELOW standards compared to the rest of the PC world in this price range.

well i wouldn't really mind if it was below standard, but better than my _current_ computer ;)
i want bluetooth,wireless ,better graphics-card than today,more HD space,DVD burner and at least the same amount of ram for my next _desktop_

for laptops i'm saving up money for my additional ibook already

i guess my desktop has to live another 1.5-2 years ... ;)

EDIT:like said before it's still a good _addition_ to the current line ..and i think it's good that it keeps the same case (that saves apple money) BTW and at this price point there is still lots of room for future upgrades/price drops

[maya]

I still don't understand people's logic that a 600MHz FSB is "crippled". Can someone please explain this to me? Does that mean that the 1.6GHz iMac G5 with 533MHz FSB is also crippled? In fact, even more crippled. I would claim the low amount of RAM is more crippling than the FSB speed. And I'm wary of using that phrasing anyways. "Less powerful" perhaps.

The iMac G5 is a pro-sumer machine it is expected to be crippled to some extent when compared to the high-end macs.

However there is not reason to cripple the FSB on the single chip 1.8Ghz G5. At this price what are you really paying for expandability (which is added cost). You have to add an lcd or crt if you have one great then again is it ADC or DVI (if it supports both great). This is supposed to make me want a PM over an iMac G5.

Let's Apply cost they seem to be using the same mobo technology since last year. using the same FSB controller as the iMac G5 to cripple this otherwise fine machine. Using the Same G5 case, and the still are asking for $1,500 USD. That looks like a large profit margin on these machines. :rolleyes:

I would have no problems if this machine's FSB was not crippled and offered a 2.0GHz instead of an imac g5, that way it fits right in as an upgrade to an imac and a starter to the PM line. Only Apple can cripple its own development. :(

Why does Apple always cripple they good hardware, I will never get it. They can do so much to have an edge however what do they do cripple it and say it's better. :rolleyes:

The duals are neat and are a different story.

[MacsRgr8]

IMHO this Mac is the perfect replacement for those G4 Tower owners who already have an ADC display, PCI-SCSI card (or other PCI cards) but weren't ready to pay $ 2000,-

Stick more RAM in and a Radeon 9600 and you got yourself the perfect upgrade.

Also I am really interested in benchmarks between the Rev A Single G5 (900 MHz FSB) and this one (600 MHz FSB). I truly wonder WHEN having the extra 300 MHz FSB really counts.

Maybe, just maybe... the FSB MHz myth has just started.... :rolleyes:

[maya]

well i wouldn't really mind if it was below standard, but better than my _current_ computer ;)
i want bluetooth,wireless ,better graphics-card than today,more HD space,DVD burner and at least the same amount of ram for my next _desktop_

for laptops i'm saving up money for my additional ibook already

i guess my desktop has to live another 1.5-2 years ... ;)

EDIT:like said before it's still a good _addition_ to the current line ..and i think it's good that it keeps the same case (that saves apple money) BTW and at this price point there is still lots of room for future upgrades/price drops

Notebooks are a different story if they cripple the FSB for heat and battery life reasons. Understandable. :)

This on the other hand I mean come on Apple, the iMac G5 has a 1.8Ghz top end with the rev.B iMac G5 the 1.8GHz will be low end, that means your single chip 1.8 GHz G5 will not even be worth it. At least give us a single 2.0GHz G5 in this offering. Keep the 1.8GHz for the iMac and PM duals.

I don't think they fired BOZO the clown yet from Apple, unless all his relatives work there as well.

Great we can look forward to the rev.B of this single G5 PM that will offer guess what 2.0GHz :rolleyes:

BTW if seems that IBM has more luck by either over-clocking the 2.0GHz chips to 2.3Ghz or clocking down the 2.5Ghz chips to 2.3GHz. That is what I gather from the whole Virginia Tech 2.3GHz cluster. So why not offer a 2.0 - 2.4 - 2.5GHz PM line up. :confused:

[aliasfox]

If you can buy Apple EDU, you can squeeze a full system (including CRT, decent graphics card, and speakers) in for under $2,000. I have it configured this way:

1 gig RAM
160 gig HD
9600XT
Mitsubishi 17" CRT
Klipsch Promedia GMX 5.1
no modem
no Superdrive

Wow. A credibly speedy single processor machine from Apple that has a replaceable screen, graphics, 5.1 sound, and easy upgradeability for $1,988. Granted, it's Educational pricing, uses a CRT (better for games?), and lacks a modem, but those are things many "gamers" out there can overlook, I'd imagine (many gamers probably have someone in their family- or a friend- that goes to school). They'd also likely drop the expensive speakers for some headphones and boost the graphics card to a 9800XT.

Conversely

With a single processor and cooler FSB (not to mention relatively cool stock GPU), this thing should run rather quietly- perhaps quiet enough to use in a recording studio?

[maya]

If you can buy Apple EDU, you can squeeze a full system (including CRT, decent graphics card, and speakers) in for under $2,000. I have it configured this way:

1 gig RAM
160 gig HD
9600XT
Mitsubishi 17" CRT
Klipsch Promedia GMX 5.1
no modem
no Superdrive

Wow. A credibly speedy single processor machine from Apple that has a replaceable screen, graphics, 5.1 sound, and easy upgradeability for $1,988. Granted, it's Educational pricing, uses a CRT (better for games?), and lacks a modem, but those are things many "gamers" out there can overlook, I'd imagine (many gamers probably have someone in their family- or a friend- that goes to school). They'd also likely drop the expensive speakers for some headphones and boost the graphics card to a 9800XT.


no SuperDrive :eek:

What are you smoking? :rolleyes: a DVD or combo drive is now standard, Apple is just looking at the profit rather than thinking of being competitive on this ground. Apple buys these parts cheap, since they buy in bulk, all I see is them being greedy on this offering. :mad:

And a CRT screen, so it would seem we are moving backwards. Well in this case lets just say that the eMac screen is better than the Apple LCD lineup :p ;) :rolleyes:

[xgsrpg]

What I want to see is a single processor Power Mac G5 2.5GHz. Or at least a single proc 2.0. But we know that won't happen since it will probably take some of the dual proc's territory since many apps like games don't support the second proc.

[Rod Rod]

Remember last year when people declared early on that the Power Mac G5 1.6GHz single was the Yikes! of the lineup? It was because of PCI (not PCI-X) and 4 RAM slots (not 8). I figured that PCI and 4 RAM slot business couldn't last very long in the latest and greatest Power Mac.

The PM G5 Yikes! lineup has expanded and now it has both single and dual processor versions. The single has been improved to a 600MHz fsb.

It's okay though, because these PCI G5s fill a niche... at least as paper tigers (pun intended)... because, of course, they're externally identical to the dual 2.5GHz monsters. :)

[stevehaslip]

I have a single processor 1.8Ghz G5 Rev a. I don't feel bad about the new single processor G5's because although they are $600 cheaper, I have had my computer for over a year, the fronside bus is larger and i have more ram slots. Now you may say that you'll never put 8 gigs of ram in there but having 8 slots means that i can put in lots of 512 over time and eventually have 4gig of ram. which if you ask me is more than you would need for graphic design!

My G5 does what i need pretty quick, its still faster than everyones powerbooks and emacs and imacs for that matter.

I won't feel bad until my computer stops working or apple release a 4.5ghz processor!

do i wish i hadn't spent so much money? no sir, you have to spend money to make money! lol! ;)

[chanoc]

Summary:

• 256MB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x128
• 160GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• ATI Radeon 9600 XT w/128MB DDR SDRAM
• Apple Cinema Display (20" flat panel)
• 56k V.92 modem.
• 8x Super Drive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
• Mac OS X - U.S. English


Subtotal $2,653.00
Estimated Ship:
3-5 business days

Now if only I had a permanent residence and 2,653.00! :rolleyes:

[paxtonandrew]

Finally Apple, us Aussies have a better deal than some other countries... The new SP G5 is AU$5,000 less than the top spec iMac, and i have believed the iMac to be underpriced. For an expandable and fast computer, this almost fills a niche for Apple, and I may buy one, but i will have to BTO it, as there is a crappy graphics card, and a 3rd party ram specialist will be visited too.

A decent computer for the price, and way less than the top spec iMac, which is a plus in itself.

[JasonElise1983]

This is my last HooRah on this issue. After this i give up on this one. You people will really never be pleased. Look at it this way. Let's say i need a new computer (which i do) and i happen to like CRT monitors better than LCD one's. It is true that the color, depth, and refresh rates are all better on these monitiors. So, with apple that give me two options. I can get an eMac which is $999 for the Superdrive model. It has a 1.25Ghz G4, a 167Mhz FSB, 32Mb 9200, 256Mb DDR333, and an 80Gb HD. Now for lets say $600 more dollars (that inclueds a 17" CRT monitor of the same quality as the eMacs) i can get a PowerMac G5 with a 1.8Ghz G5, 600Mhz FSB, 64Mb fx5200, 256Mb DDR400, and an 80Gb HD. It also features things like optical audio, and EXPANDIBLILTY and CHOICES. I'm sorry but performance alone makes this one worth it. Not only does it make it worth it, i would buy two! I love the iMac, but i would never buy one over this computer. Sure for $500 more i could have a dual, but i don't have $500 more. And i am sure that there are plenty of people out there that feel the same. Anyway, all you people who think this is a bad decision by apple, why don't you go start your own computer company, Build into a great comptuer company, run it into the ground, and then revive it and bring it back to life, and then try to tell Apple where they went wrong. Also, are any of you people out there who are dissing this computer really planning on buying one? because if not, it is really shaddy to try to talk might be switchers out of buying this great computer.

[Detlev_73]

Now if only I had a permanent residence and 2,653.00! :rolleyes:

If you qualify for Stafford Loans, you can use that money to pay for a NICE Dual 2.0 GHz G5, and a 20" Cinema display.

Or do you ACTUALLY use that money for credit hours, books, etc?

Then, go to your local Apple Store, present your student ID from any state university system, and pay for the darn system WITH an EDU discount.

I'm hoping you see this as well.

[nagromme]

This seems to be the mountains from molehills topic... people getting REALLY aggravated over the details of a minor addition to the lineup--one that SOME people want to buy, and are glad because last week they couldn't :)


Nobody buys a Mac for a gaming machine. Period. If you do you're delusional. Macs have their streignths. A lot of them actually. Gaming is NOT one of them.
Not to stray too far O/T, but yes some people do. People who are already convinced that the Mac platform is for them, but want to play games. Or people who are sick of dealing with Windows, and want to play games. Or people who want the benefits of a Mac for other tasks, and don't want to own two machines. Yes, in SOME ways a PC is a better gaming machine (you can build speed cheap if you have the knowledge and time, you have more than just a few hundred games to choose from, and you can enjoy the early buggy releases that the late Mac releases skip). So is a console if you accept no mouse control, no free downloadable demos, limited online multiplayer, no add-on communities, and low-res TV graphics. But in SOME ways a Mac IS the better game box. Many Mac benefits--like being easier to keep a Mac secure, or being quiet, or being easy to service--are benefits for everyone, and that includes gamers. So "nobody" is an overstatement. Nobody with YOUR priories would choose a Mac for a gaming machine. I would--and I have. So have friends of mine.

My next computer will be a PowerMac, and it WILL be for gaming--specifically--because that's the only thing my PowerBook won't still do just fine. I'll be as happy as I always have been with the games available, and I won't devote any time to patching or securing Windows.


no SuperDrive :eek:
What are you smoking? :rolleyes:
SuperDrives are great, but there are lots of compact external devices that can backup or transfer more data faster. That leaves iDVD--a great app, but not everyone needs it.

Neither myself nor ANYONE else I know with a Superdrive has ever actually burned a DVD! So saving money BTO by going with a combo DVD/CD-RW actually makes plenty of sense for many people. In fact, I think Apple might have done well to knock $100 off the single-1.8's standard price and make the Superdrive a BTO addition instead of standard.

[nagromme]

Over a year ago apple released a single 1.8ghz G5/900mhz bus/160GB HD/5200Ultra/etc/etc... and it cost 2k edu

NOW, in the present, apple releases a single 1.8ghz G5/600mhz bus/80GB HD/5200Ultra/etc/etc... and now it costs $500 less.

Is it just me? or is there something wrong with this picture? Ah, i just figured it out... THEY'RE MOVING BACKWARDS!
No, backwards would be offering less for the same price. You may wish prices had dropped even more than they have--you may wish things had moved forward faster--but this is not backwards.

Back then, the low-end was a G4 tower and the middle was a single 1.8. Now the low-end is a single G5 with SLIGHTLY lower specs than the old middle, for $500 cheaper.

That's moving forward, even if not in the way that meets your particular goals.

[Eaon]

Time and again in this thread people are quoting the educational price for this machine. I'm just curious, is there anyone here that ISN'T a student just talking about buying this machine even though, as a student, they clearly don't have any money left after tuition to actually make a computer purchase? Is there anyone here who works in the real world, actually makes money, might actually have the cash in their bank account at this moment to buy this thing? Has anyone stopped to ask THAT kind of person if they'd buy one? I am that kind of person, and I would buy this computer. I've got a 21" CRT that I'm quite fond of. I've got a 12" PowerBook, which got me into the Mac world. And I think this would be a great addition to my computer room. Something I could use to do a little more intense gaming than on the PB (my "intense" gaming is around the level of Zoo Tycoon and SimCity), something my wife could use (I hog the laptop, it's mine, all mine). Ya, it's a lot like the iMac, not as spiffy looking, no screen, but appeals to my geek need to be able to open the box every once in a while and toss something new in (ram, video, hard drive, whatever), while still not getting too far past the "anger the wife" price range.

It's nice to hear all the students talk about this machine and much cheaper they could get it if only student loans were given to cover the latest Apple hardware, but those of us who can actually afford one will buy one. Oh, and most people who buy Macs don't care nearly as much about the FSB than you all do, so again, I think it has a chance. :)

[iMeowbot]

for the person who contended that the lower FSB was necessary due to lower quality chips, well that doesn't make sense. the higher the ratio between processor and motherboard, the more stability problems you may run into. I am inferring this from the eMac 800MHz - 1.4GHz thread on these forums. the rest of the PM line, with the 2:1 ratio, is by comparison way more stable.
That would be working from the very broad assumption that the G4 and G5, with entirely different CPUs, would display identical characteristics, and that the weak spot involved frequency multiplication.

A much simpler explanation is that some interface logic simply does not work at higher frequencies. Speculation on a higher speed being more stable would be irrelevant if the higher speed doesn't work at all.

[Macmaniac]

People need to stop automatically adding an Apple FP to the price, you can get a great LCD($600) or CRT($200), so this machine is easily under $2000, people have been looking for a low cost expandable Mac, the common person does not even know what the FSB is. All they care is that they can add HDs, RAM, and video cards.
You can get extra RAM for under $200, and another HD for under $100, this gives you a great system thats good for gaming, or video editing.
Yes gaming is a niche market, but a low cost video system is viable from this system as well.

[nagromme]

People need to stop automatically adding an Apple FP to the price

Especially if you already OWN a display.

[aswitcher]

Finally Apple, us Aussies have a better deal than some other countries... The new SP G5 is AU$5,000 less than the top spec iMac, and i have believed the iMac to be underpriced. For an expandable and fast computer, this almost fills a niche for Apple, and I may buy one, but i will have to BTO it, as there is a crappy graphics card, and a 3rd party ram specialist will be visited too.

A decent computer for the price, and way less than the top spec iMac, which is a plus in itself.

$5000 AUD less....?

No...top end iMac is under $4K AUD and this thing is only like $1300 AUD less at $2700 AUD.

$1300 cheaper gets you an ok machine (with room for future expansion) but with no 20" LCD ($2299 AUD), smaller HDD, no WiFi or BT...which when added on (and Apple care) are all going to add up...

[Blue Velvet]

Why all the passion and fury?

If you don't want/need to buy it, then don't.

It's a marketplace -- if it doesn't sell then it will be withdrawn.
If you're so clued up about Macs, then you won't want it, will you?

When you add up all the things that are missing... :)
It does seem aimed at the educational market, however.

But... I can think of one friend of mine that will be tempted...

[nek]

Als added new GeForce 6800 too?

No more 9600XT (still there as a BTO though...)?

With the 6800 GT coming in November and the X800 coming in the near future, I would expect Apple to drop both the GeForce 5200 and the Radeon 9600 from the Powermacs. That would leave the Radeon 9800 as the base graphics card, with the 6800 GT, 6800 Ultra, and X800 as options.

[The Red Wolf]

...Doesn't it suck that in order to use an Apple with a better video card, you're essentially paying the cost of the card + $300 or so?...

Optical audio is not available on the iMac. Gigabit Ethernet is not available on the iMac. Firewire 800 is not available on the iMac. 4 GB of RAM. PCI slots. Space for more than one drive. Sorry, the PowerMac doesn't come with the option of wall mounting the whole machine like the iMac. But seriously, think about what you're saying when all you care about is the GPU...

If I feel like it, I can slam a ATI 9800 Mac Special Edition Pro 256MB VRAM Board into my Cube. Who says it can't be done to the iMac with a little engineering and some luck. But upgrading to one of the newer machines would be a bit more price worthy. However perfection of the Cube is absolute. Resistance is futile. Or so I hear.

[rcs128]

There are so many Mac users that every configuration has a potential market. Think about the thousands of ad agencies out there... this new single processor mac would be a great buy for graphic artists who use quark/indesign, some occasional photoshop, illustrator, web apps, etc. It'd be much easier to convince the boss to buy one of these than to drop $3000 for a 2.5DP, and they'd still have tons of processing power over an old G3/G4. Plus there's the easy expandibility, they can use exisiting displays, etc... this new Mac should sell just fine.

[Garissimo]

this SHOULD be a silent machine: 970FX 1.8 Ghz, the "lite" memory controller found in the iMac G5 (also using 90nm technology) a lots of space to dissipate heat...

Won't it still come with the full complement of fans found in the other PowerMac towers?

Can anyone with a single 1.6 G5 (last year's model) comment on noise?

[Converted2Truth]

I've read in a number of threads (including this one) that the G5 is 'upgradable'. Indeed it is. But can the CPU/FSB be upgraded?

For the FSB, i think we'd need a hack (bust out the soldering tools)

but i emailed sonnet (along with some ther CPU upgrade companies) and sonnet wrote me back! Here's what the dude said:

Well, you'd be the first person requesting such an upgrade that's for sure. For most G5 owners, they haven't tapped the potential of them yet. But I know our engineers have looked into possible G5 upgrades. The drawback at this point is that the fastest G5 upgrades require the fastest G5 chips and Apple is getting them all. They tend to lock up the production runs on the newest G5 chips for about six months.

The only thing we know is that a single processor G5 can't be converted to a dual processor G5 machine. The only thing that will be available will be a faster single processor upgrade.

Not sure when such upgrades will come out. This is very future stuff. Right now there is literally no demand for such an upgrade.

So we do know a little from this. Mainly, a single cannot be upgraded to a dual. And probably vice versa. Anyway, for what it's worth...

[HelloKitty]

I wonder if this means we're not gonna see any updates until June next year.. Hope we'll hear from Apple in between..

For my personal opinion, I think this is what Apple should come up with today:

2.5 GHz Dual G5 PowerMac
2.2 GHz Dual G5 PowerMac
2.0 GHz Dual G5 PowerMac (I'll buy one right away)
2.0 GHz Single G5 PowerMac (USD $1499, 800MHz FSB..etc..)

But I guess this isn't happening..

[Ups85]

First of all I don't buy the "apple is moving backward arguement". Apple saw a hole in their lineup, and is just adding in a "low cost" machine to fill that gap. If they had kept the single 1.8Ghz on the market, no one would be complaining they were moving forward (yes they lowered the fsb, don't know what that was about)

I also don't see why this is a good value. Sure, I understand the compatability aspect. But why is it the same price as the iMac? I'm sure apple priced the iMac to maximize the profit margin. Can you imagine the profit margin for this machine? They make whatever they would make on an iMac plus the extra money for no screen! And, they are using an old form factor, so there's no extra money to create a new case. I think this is ridiculous. It certainly makes me wonder how overpriced my powerbook was. This can't help their image.

[Dr. No]

Does this new single 1.8 GHz use dual-channel RAM?

[angerson]

Honestly I don't think this is that bad of a deal. I run a small web design business and I've been using an upgraded G4 Cube 1 Ghz with a 32MB GPU for quite some time as my main work machine. It'd be kind to say that this little trooper is on its last leg, I mean it requires 3 fans just to stay on. The trouble is I have *maybe* $1300 to allocate to a new system so I keep using the cube until a viable option presents itself.

Prior to this G5 Tower 'lite' my options were:

1. The new G5 iMac. Truly a great machine for the price. Biggest problem? I prefer dual displays and the thought of a non-upgradeable video card scares me. Plus I don't like all-in-ones and I have a perfectly serviceable brand new Sony 17" LCD display.

2. A PC. Right now I can grab a brand new Dell Dimension 3000 P4 2.80Ghz, 265MB, 40GB, CD-RW Drive, 17" LCD for $529 with Free Shipping. That's tempting especially since as a web designer working on a PC does make sense. And again the thought of buying a machine at less than half of my budget is quite nice. The problem is all of my apps are Mac (obviously) and, man, I really hate Windows.

If you add this new pro Mac into the mix you can see how it becomes a viable option to someone like me. I get to keep my software investment plus I can utilize some of the hardware I have now (17" Sony LCD, etc.), I don't have to forgo the expandability and I don't have to invest more than $1500. Not a bad deal.

[Santaduck]

yeah, and pci slots, audio in, optical audio out (that's not on the imac right?) fw 800, gigabit ethernet, front ports...i'd still buy the imac for my $1500

actually you do indeed get the line in *and* optical audio out in the imac g5 in a neat dual-use port... think the iLife strategy, and it makes sense.

the price point for that fsb is definitely an odd choice. . .

[mrwheet]

I'm guessing that this is loosely heat-related. Basically, yields are low on 2.0 GHz+ processors, meaning more and more 1.8s. So, they're trying to find a nice way to unload all those 1.8s that they'd hoped would pass at 2.0...(???) maybe?

[Converted2Truth]

I'm guessing that this is loosely heat-related. Basically, yields are low on 2.0 GHz+ processors, meaning more and more 1.8s. So, they're trying to find a nice way to unload all those 1.8s that they'd hoped would pass at 2.0...(???) maybe?
what's that got to do with the FSB chop? that's what everyone is pissed about.

[Converted2Truth]

Apple needs only two powermac line-ups:

Single CPU line-up: $1k - 2.5k stock
-choose CPU, GPU, RAM, ETC

Dual CPU line-up: $1.5k - 3k stock
-choose CPU, GPU, RAM, ETC

Give all the options. let someone have a dual 1.6 if they want. Now that would please everyone. no doubt.

[MacinDoc]

This is currently the worst rip-off by Apple Canada. At the current exchange rate, this machine should be priced at $1899 or less, but it's $2099 CDN! Even the 17" 1.8 GHz iMac (still a rip-off, in terms of exchange rate), which has the same U.S. price as the new Power Mac, only costs $1999 CDN! Or, for $2099 Canadian, you can buy a 12" Porwebook! What makes Apple Canada think it's entitled to an extra $200?

I know this isn't the first exchange rate beef, but I'm amazed that Apple Canada doesn't even rip us off for the same amount on products that have the same U.S. price!

[dejo]

This is currently the worst rip-off by Apple Canada. At the current exchange rate, this machine should be priced at $1899 or less, but it's $2099 CDN! Even the 17" 1.8 GHz iMac (still a rip-off, in terms of exchange rate), which has the same U.S. price as the new Power Mac, only costs $1999 CDN! Or, for $2099 Canadian, you can buy a 12" Porwebook! What makes Apple Canada think it's entitled to an extra $200?

I know this isn't the first exchange rate beef, but I'm amazed that Apple Canada doesn't even rip us off for the same amount on products that have the same U.S. price!

If Apple Canada used the current exchange rate (which, even that, varies depending on WHO you go to), they would have to change their prices daily, at least. Perhaps there is more to the equation than a simple currency conversion.

[mrwheet]

Converted2Truth,

Too true... but why should anyone be suprised that Apple did something really ********* up with the "bottom of the line" model. They've been doing that for years! I mean, why did they go out of their way to put the current dual 1.8 on the old 1.6 single mobo?

I was only talking about why there might be another 1.8 *anything*.

People can be pissed if they want. I just found a great deal on a previous generation dual 1.8 -- full RAM/bus/bandwidth, 160 GB HD, 512 MB RAM, all "standard". I'm happy!

[~Shard~]

This is currently the worst rip-off by Apple Canada. At the current exchange rate, this machine should be priced at $1899 or less, but it's $2099 CDN! Even the 17" 1.8 GHz iMac (still a rip-off, in terms of exchange rate), which has the same U.S. price as the new Power Mac, only costs $1999 CDN! Or, for $2099 Canadian, you can buy a 12" Porwebook! What makes Apple Canada think it's entitled to an extra $200?

I know this isn't the first exchange rate beef, but I'm amazed that Apple Canada doesn't even rip us off for the same amount on products that have the same U.S. price!

First of all, there are more factors at play here than just the exchange rate, secondly, Apple Canada can't be expected to adjust its prices daily based on the continually-fluctuating dollar strength, and lastly, if it's a better deal to buy direct from USA Apple, then do it and bypass Canada - whatever gets you the best deal, I say! That's what I did when I bought my iPod at the SoHo store in NY in April - saved well over $100 CAD by doing that.... :cool:

[dejo]

That's what I did when I bought my iPod at the SoHo store in NY in April - saved well over $100 CAD by doing that.... :cool:

Did you have to pay any extra at the border or did they have no idea? ;)

P.S. I doubt you could order from Apple USA and have it shipped to Canada.

[macidiot]

Sweet!-finally a headless profesional Mac . Guess it may use the U3L like the iMac G5

umm, not to nitpick, but every "professional" mac since the Mac II has been headless.

[macidiot]

lets just take the top iMac model with no added features as our example, that's $1899.
now, go and configure a powerMac with exactly the same specs (by upgrading to a 160GB HD) that's $1599...i guess that "saves" $300 but only if you already own a monitor ($300 for a 20" cinema display seems like a good deal to me)

so here's where it gets really pathetic: add a 20 cinema display to the powerMac total, even just for compare the two. It's the same display the top of the line iMac has already. The powerMac cost comes to, drum roll, $2898.!


The iMac 20" display is not the same as the ACD. Its inferior in several key specs.

However, your right, Apple is making you pay extra to get something in a metal case. Guess aluminum is expensive... :rolleyes:

[macidiot]

for $1638 I will have -

PM 1.8 Single Processor
ATI X800 XT 256MB
8x Superdrive (compared to the 4x in the iMac)
256MB RAM
no AE, BT, or Modem

Now I can add the things that I already own:
Dual 19" LCDs
An extra GB or RAM that I have sitting in my desk
an extra 80 GB SATA HDD that I have sitting around

Not a bad price for that setup. I understand that I am in tha minority in this group. But hey, that's a sweet deal. I just think it is funny how everyone was pissed about the upgradeability of the iMac's GPU, the slow SuperDrive, and the fact that you were stuck with that display (and the costly repairs if it needed to be fixed), and all of that is now forgotten.

You guys are a fickle bunch.

Hickman

Sounds like your the target buyer for this mac.

BTW, I know where Sewell, NJ is. :eek:

[Nermal]

Well, I've almost ordered a G5. By 'almost ordered' I mean that I've emailed a local reseller and requested a price for a custom config (getting rid of the modem and pushing the video card up to the 9600 XT). My current G4 is sitting on an auction site at the moment :)

[aswitcher]

Well, I've almost ordered a G5. By 'almost ordered' I mean that I've emailed a local reseller and requested a price for a custom config (getting rid of the modem and pushing the video card up to the 9600 XT). My current G4 is sitting on an auction site at the moment :)

So this is the new single G5? How much ram are you going to shove in? :)

[Nermal]

Yes, it's the new single G5. I'm not going to pay Apple prices for RAM*, so I'll order it with 256, then throw in another gig (additional NZ$360 for Samsung, the same stuff Apple uses).

*Especially Apple NZ prices:
512 MB = $280 (vs NZ$220 from Apple US)
1 GB = $550 ($440)
2 GB = $1190 ($1750) - much cheaper in NZ :confused:

I have no idea what Apple Australia's prices are like - I can't find RAM on the Australian store (it's obviously in a different place from the US and NZ stores).

[aswitcher]

Yes, it's the new single G5. I'm not going to pay Apple prices for RAM*, so I'll order it with 256, then throw in another gig (additional NZ$360 for Samsung, the same stuff Apple uses).

*Especially Apple NZ prices:
512 MB = $280 (vs NZ$220 from Apple US)
1 GB = $550 ($440)
2 GB = $1190 ($1750) - much cheaper in NZ :confused:

I have no idea what Apple Australia's prices are like - I can't find RAM on the Australian store (it's obviously in a different place from the US and NZ stores).

So you making sure you pair your ram to maximise the speed? If so you might want to get another 256 and 2 * 512s... (not an expert but this apprently is the deal - it must be paired...)

You getting anything else, like the FCE deal ?

[Nermal]

That gigabyte for $360 is two 512s :) (and it comes with 2 128s)

I didn't know about the FCE deal, but I can't really afford it anyway. Hopefully I'm not going to be ripped off with the video card upgrade (on the US store, upgrading to 9600 XT and removing the modem adds $21 to the price).

[aswitcher]

That gigabyte for $360 is two 512s :) (and it comes with 2 128s)

:o

Of course.

Nice and when you have the cash you can easily toss the 2 * 128s for another couple of 512 sticks.


I didn't know about the FCE deal, but I can't really afford it anyway. Hopefully I'm not going to be ripped off with the video card upgrade (on the US store, upgrading to 9600 XT and removing the modem adds $21 to the price).

FCE for $150 AUD not $500 AUD. Only with a new Mac. Think about it, you only get it with a new mac...

[Nermal]

Well I might download the 'demo' from MTKA and see whether it's worth it ;)

[billyboy]

This is a great computer to release, for us at our school at least. By stripping any non-essentials like an internal modem, no superdrive and even with 1GB Apple RAM and a 128MB video card, it comes out at under 1100 GBP with the educational discount. Very very nice considering I was thinking of shelling out not much less on a second hand dual PowerMac, plus we can use existing monitors, external fw hard drives... If Apple could have made the mouse and keyboard optional too, even better.

[~Shard~]

Did you have to pay any extra at the border or did they have no idea? ;)

P.S. I doubt you could order from Apple USA and have it shipped to Canada.

I declared it at Customs, but it was under my $700 limit for the week so they didn't care whatsoever. :cool:

[HiRez]

So you making sure you pair your ram to maximise the speed? If so you might want to get another 256 and 2 * 512s... (not an expert but this apprently is the deal - it must be paired...)
Pretty sure I remember reading that with Apple's "crippled" G5s (the original single 1.6, the new dual 1.8, and I'm going to assume the new single 1.8), the memory bandwidth is 64-bits and cannot be doubled by dual-banking DIMMs (as opposed to 128-bits for the "uncrippled" machines). Probably the reason they can only have a max of 4 GB is that they only have a single bank. I'm just guessing about that but it seems reasonable. Better check this out before you go crazy with trying to match DIMMs...

[virividox]

hmmm looks like a good alternative for someone who doesnt want a 1.6 but something more than an imac

[dejo]

I declared it at Customs, but it was under my $700 limit for the week so they didn't care whatsoever. :cool:

Ah, good. Those higher limits can be quite handy now...

[dejo]

Pretty sure I remember reading that with Apple's "crippled" G5s (the original single 1.6, the new dual 1.8, and I'm going to assume the new single 1.8), the memory bandwidth is 64-bits and cannot be doubled by dual-banking DIMMs (as opposed to 128-bits for the "uncrippled" machines). Probably the reason they can only have a max of 4 GB is that they only have a single bank. I'm just guessing about that but it seems reasonable. Better check this out before you go crazy with trying to match DIMMs...

Your guess is correct. The single and dual 1.8GHz G5s only have 4 DIMM slots, while the dual 2.0 and 2.5 GHz G5s have eight DIMM slots, as stated near the bottom of the specs page on the Apple site: http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html

[toughboy]

I still feel this is a bit over priced with the imac g5 just released. I think it should be about $999. then you would attract more sales to it and see it as another option to the lower priced macs. I think they would sell alot of g5s at this price. My vote $999.

same vote over here.. Powermac G5 single doesnot give anything but upgradability over iMac...

[Rod Rod]

Your guess is correct. The single and dual 1.8GHz G5s only have 4 DIMM slots, while the dual 2.0 and 2.5 GHz G5s have eight DIMM slots, as stated near the bottom of the specs page on the Apple site: http://www.apple.com/powermac/specs.html

HiRez's guess is incorrect. HiRez was not guessing about the number of DIMM slots. He/she was guessing about whether the newest G5 required matching RAM. DIMMs must be matched in the PCI G5s.

The 4 DIMM slots are two banks of two, whereas the PCI-X models have two banks of four.

Please refer to the information on the tech specs page:


Memory

128-bit data paths for up to 6.4 GBps memory throughput

Single and dual 1.8GHz systems:

256MB of PC3200 (400MHz) DDR SDRAM

Four DIMM slots supporting up to 4GB of main memory



Dual 2GHz and dual 2.5GHz systems:

512MB of PC3200 (400MHz) DDR SDRAM

Eight DIMM slots supporting up to 8GB of main memory



Support for the following DIMMs (in pairs):

128MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 128- or 256-Mbit)

256MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 128- or 256-Mbit)

512MB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 256-Mbit)

1GB DIMMs (64-bit-wide, 256-Mbit)

[Xtremehkr]

I read so many threads where people were demanding a headless Mac, so Apple delivered, same specs for the most part, and it's not enough. Wow.

[Telomar]

I read so many threads where people were demanding a headless Mac, so Apple delivered, same specs for the most part, and it's not enough. Wow.You sound surprised? You can never please some people.

[dejo]

I read so many threads where people were demanding a headless Mac, so Apple delivered, same specs for the most part, and it's not enough. Wow.

My general impression was that people wanted a headless iMac for under a thousand dollars. But it would need to be heavily upgradeable, with PCI slots, an extra drive bay, plenty of DIMM slots, and the ability to replace the video card. I'm not sure how that would still be considered an "iMac". Maybe they think the "i" just means cheaper than the PowerMac line.

[HiRez]

HiRez's guess is incorrect. HiRez was not guessing about the number of DIMM slots. He/she was guessing about whether the newest G5 required matching RAM. DIMMs must be matched in the PCI G5s.
Ah, sorry. I must have been thinking about the G5 iMacs then.

[Doctor Q]

My general impression was that people wanted a headless iMac for under a thousand dollars. But it would need to be heavily upgradeable, with PCI slots, an extra drive bay, plenty of DIMM slots, and the ability to replace the video card. I'm not sure how that would still be considered an "iMac". Maybe they think the "i" just means cheaper than the PowerMac line.I was one of those headlesshunters because I wanted (for a second system) a low-end consumer-performance (read "cheap") Mac with a huge monitor back when my choices were:

* flatscreen iMac -- screen too small
* CRT eMac -- screen too small
* Power Mac + separate monitor -- paying for unnecessary performance and expandability (and having to pay separately for AppleWorks)

I was about to settle for a low-end Power Mac one generation behind when the 20" iMac solved my problem.

If I had wanted an even bigger screen, say 23", I'd still be hoping to see a headless iMac.

[aswitcher]

I was one of those headlesshunters because I wanted (for a second system) a low-end consumer-performance (read "cheap") Mac with a huge monitor back when my choices were:

* flatscreen iMac -- screen too small
* CRT eMac -- screen too small
* Power Mac + separate monitor -- paying for unnecessary performance and expandability (and having to pay separately for AppleWorks)

I was about to settle for a low-end Power Mac one generation behind when the 20" iMac solved my problem.

If I had wanted an even bigger screen, say 23", I'd still be hoping to see a headless iMac.

I note Apple in the quaterly said there was no money to be made in that market which annoys me a bit because whilst the margins might be minimal it would be a nice entry switch machine for PC users (basically the headless emac) who have a nice LCD they have been using with their PC.

If they did a headless G4 low spec emac (1Ghz, 256 ram, 32 vid, 40 gig hdd - options for up to a gig or even 768, 64 vid, 160 gig hdd, BT and Wifi, ethernet, modem options) at above cost neutral it would allow them to switch allot of home users who dont want a CRT and can't afford anything else. An old argument I know.

Such a machine would be sweet for me to have as a second machine - dont need another portable (plus still a bit rich for what I need), dont want a CRT and iMac is too exy.

[atomiton]

I declared it at Customs, but it was under my $700 limit for the week so they didn't care whatsoever. :cool:

Here's the "rip-off" break-downs:

These how much more Macs cost in Canada, UK, and France

All funds are USD

Canada:
Additional Cost (USD)
17" iMac 1.6 $104.84
17" iMac 1.8 $105.50
20" iMac 1.8 $106.83
PowrMac 1.8 $185.77

Great Britain
Additional Cost (USD)
17" iMac 1.6 $121.55
17" iMac 1.8 $122.51
20" iMac 1.8 $186.23
PowrMac 1.8 $199.79

France
Additional Cost (USD)
17" iMac 1.6 $172.33
17" iMac 1.8 $214.22
20" iMac 1.8 $266.45
PowrMac 1.8 $256.24

And the highest price is... France!... the 20" iMac costs $266.45 USD more.
$100 is hardly worth going south of the border... unless I can get it from the US tax-free... My best bet is to get a native friend to buy it on the reserve...

All European prices are EXCLUDING VAT. 17.5% in UK... and I don't know in France.

[Xtremehkr]

My general impression was that people wanted a headless iMac for under a thousand dollars. But it would need to be heavily upgradeable, with PCI slots, an extra drive bay, plenty of DIMM slots, and the ability to replace the video card. I'm not sure how that would still be considered an "iMac". Maybe they think the "i" just means cheaper than the PowerMac line.

There was much less demand for something like this, because of that, the few that are supplied are going to cost more. If this initial model takes off, the next one will be much better. I would say that this is a bit of a risk though.

Economies of Scale (http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/economies_of_s.htm)

I think I've said it a few times now, gamers are a niche market, especially so for Mac gamers. I hope that non gamers pick up a few of these so that the sales are good enough to invest more in them. A company as small as Apple doesn't try to extort people like a M$ monopoly does, at least, not anymore. They squandered their first opportunity to gain real market share by charging ridiculous amounts of money.

But for Apple, I would say that reacting to consumer demands like this is a big step. If it works, they will more than likely put more effort into it.

[scan300]

I hope that non gamers pick up a few of these so that the sales are good enough to invest more in them..

I think the non-gaming market will be the bigger market share for this machine.

They will service the creative market nicely who have been slow to uptake OSX, who already have their preferred monitors, but need cheap, easily serviceable, powermacs to mix with higher end power macs. They're perfect for the music industry who need to add custom DSP cards, but struggle to outlay for the high end powermacs. Newspapaer and design studios who need variability in pricing to replace their existing powermac line. Architecture, manufacturing etc.

This machine will also make an excellent low cost server.

[~Shard~]

hmmm looks like a good alternative for someone who doesnt want a 1.6 but something more than an imac

I agree - although it may not be for everyone, it definitely fills a void if nothing else. Apple hasn't made too many bad calls before (not saying there haven't been any of course!), so I'm thinking this is going to sell quite well for them. Of course, maybe it'll turn into a Newton, Cube, or 1.6 GHz PowerMac too... ;)

[~Shard~]

Ah, good. Those higher limits can be quite handy now...

It was quite handy, as the minimum stay for that limit was 7 days, and I left on my 7th day. ;) I also picked up a digital camera in NY (Canon PowerShot S410 - SWEET camera, highly recommend it) and had my girlfriend declare it, so we didn't have to do anything at Customs - worked out quite well!

[MacinDoc]

If Apple Canada used the current exchange rate (which, even that, varies depending on WHO you go to), they would have to change their prices daily, at least. Perhaps there is more to the equation than a simple currency conversion.
My point was that although the 17" iMac and the new Power Mac are the same price at U.S. retailers, the new Power Mac is more expensive than the iMac in Canada, although the Canadian dollar has been rising steadily. It should have been priced the same as or less than the 17" iMac.

[dejo]

My point was that although the 17" iMac and the new Power Mac are the same price at U.S. retailers, the new Power Mac is more expensive than the iMac in Canada, although the Canadian dollar has been rising steadily. It should have been priced the same as or less than the 17" iMac.

True. That's why I suspect there is something else behind their pricing. It's obviously not just a currency conversion formula. Maybe you should contact Apple Canada and ask them "WTF?"

[dejo]

If they did a headless G4 low spec emac (1Ghz, 256 ram, 32 vid, 40 gig hdd - options for up to a gig or even 768, 64 vid, 160 gig hdd, BT and Wifi, ethernet, modem options) at above cost neutral it would allow them to switch allot of home users who dont want a CRT and can't afford anything else. An old argument I know.

But, unfortunately, even in Apple did that, there would be enough people in here griping that they "crippled" it with a G4 CPU instead of a G5. Or only a 1GHz CPU instead of 2. Or probably the front-side-bus was too slow. ;)

[Dr. No]

How well does the iMac G5 with the 600 MHz bus perform??

[Mencius]

This is a move in the right direction. But a little while ago I put together this PC machine for gaming (while retaining a G4 imac for work):

AMD Athlon 64 3400+ (2.4Ghz)
1024MB PC3200
1x80GB SATA 1x160GB SATA 7200RPM
16x DL DVD Burner
Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
6xPCI slots Digital Audio in/out Gigabit Ethernet
54Mb/s Wireless

Cost me: AUD $1,600

That G5 is AUD $1,000 more before upgrades. With the RAM, Vid Card etc. that I would want it costs AUD $4,352 =/ difference is still pretty big and arguably the PC is faster in some areas. I'd pay more just for OS X but I can't afford that much more. Just thought I'd contribute a real example.

[Devie]

This is a move in the right direction. But a little while ago I put together this PC machine for gaming (while retaining a G4 imac for work):

AMD Athlon 64 3400+ (2.4Ghz)
1024MB PC3200
1x80GB SATA 1x160GB SATA 7200RPM
16x DL DVD Burner
Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
6xPCI slots Digital Audio in/out Gigabit Ethernet
54Mb/s Wireless

Cost me: AUD $1,600

That G5 is AUD $1,000 more before upgrades. With the RAM, Vid Card etc. that I would want it costs AUD $4,352 =/ difference is still pretty big and arguably the PC is faster in some areas. I'd pay more just for OS X but I can't afford that much more. Just thought I'd contribute a real example.


There have been many times where I look at the price for me to build a PC compared to a Mac where I just think "go for it". I have almost built a PC about five times, but each time I just look at the Mac's, and I just cant look away...
I have finally convinced myself that the Mac is the way to go. I am a gamer, I love games, I am always playing them (a bit to much :( ), then I just had a think about it, I play my Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube a hell of a lot more than my PC, the only PC games I play are Blizzard titles and UT. So then was the next decision- which mac was right for me? Before, I was reluctently going for the iMac G5 but wasnt to sure, until now thanks to this new G5 :D.

I also was about to buy a Powerbook, then build a PC for my games... then I realised I don't need a laptop... I'd be to stupid to bring a $4,000.00 AUD laptop to school.

[gekko513]

Yes, when you compare prices with PCs that you put together yourself, then all Macs look expensive, and especially on hardware sites, those are the arguments that you'll get why Macs are expensive.

On the other hand, if you compare prices on Dell PCs with PCs that you put together yourself, you'll find that the Dell PCs also come out looking very expensive.

When you buy a Dell or an Apple computer, you also pay for having it shipped ready to go, with components that are sure to match, with software installed, with warranty and with less hassle.

It's sort of a shame that it's not possible to build your own Mac in the same way, but as I hear, that was possible once, but was stopped by Apple for some reason that I'm not sure of. I didn't really consider Apple/Mac an option in those days :)

[Mencius]

I play my Xbox, PS2 and Gamecube a hell of a lot more than my PC, the only PC games I play are Blizzard titles and UT.

Yeah I don't use consoles or I may have reached the same decision. Heh I used to only play those games too... now I realise there's a whole different world. Farcry and Dawn of War are the pick of the moment.

Anyway I suppose the conclusion you could draw from my post is that I don't think this is really a gaming machine; I mean that in the sense that it won't convert many gamers to OS X. It will never able to compete with the PC options. Furthermore, I think a lot of gamers spend enough time with computers that building one isn't a serious challenge to them.

However Apple probably know this, as has been said many times mac gamers are a real niche market, and it has also been mentioned above that this G5 appeals to a market beyond gamers. In many ways Apple markets to Apple people, I can't see someone who wasn't buying a mac already buying this as a gaming machine.... there would have to be wider reasons.

[CTerry]

It seems a bit too expensive to me as well for what you get. Would be fine if it were $1200-1300, methinks.

But, in Canada it's even worse - $2099cdn

According to xe.com:
1,499.00 USD United States Dollars = 1,890.48 CAD

So we would have to pay an extra $200cdn+ because....

...I'm not sure why.

Stuff like this pisses me off.
Hazarding a guess Id probably say cos of sales tax. The reason Macs (and computers and everything in general) is more expensive in the UK than elsewhere is we have a stonking 17.5% sales tax. If Canadas taxation is similar that'd probably explain it.

[Eaon]

Hazarding a guess Id probably say cos of sales tax. The reason Macs (and computers and everything in general) is more expensive in the UK than elsewhere is we have a stonking 17.5% sales tax. If Canadas taxation is similar that'd probably explain it.

Doesn't work that way, actually. Canada doesn't have a VAT built in to the price. We have the national GST (Goods and Services Tax) which is 7%, and every province but Alberta has a provincial sales tax which varies in rate depending on the province. Together they can total as much as 18% in some places (I think - I live in Alberta, so I don't care about PST :D ), but none of that is included in the $2099 price listed on Apple's page. All prices are "+ tax".

[MacinDoc]

Doesn't work that way, actually. Canada doesn't have a VAT built in to the price. We have the national GST (Goods and Services Tax) which is 7%, and every province but Alberta has a provincial sales tax which varies in rate depending on the province. Together they can total as much as 18% in some places (I think - I live in Alberta, so I don't care about PST :D ), but none of that is included in the $2099 price listed on Apple's page. All prices are "+ tax".
Further to that, the GST, which is added to the list price at the time of purchase, replaced a manufacturing tax that was previously hidden in the price of goods. Did I read somewhere that the U.S. still does have a hidden manufacturing tax? It seems that in countries other than the U.S., Apple is making a much higher margin on each computer. It was interesting to see the comparison that was posted earlier on this thread between different models and different countries. I'm not surprised that in Europe, it's even worse than in Canada, because I've previously read many complaints about European prices. I think Apple has to have more reasonable international prices if it wants to improve its worldwide market share. Isn't its worldwide market share even less than its U.S. market share? The unreasonable prices of Apple products outside of the U.S. is probably a large contributor to that.

[Mac Dummy]

$200-300 US less would have resulted in a great value. But $1499 is too expensive for what you get IMO.

Another thought, apparently, there seems to be no shortage on 1.8 GHz cpus anymore, which is a good sign.

Maybe this means that 1.8Ghz is where the PowerBook G5's will start at. :D
I'm thinking 12" G5 Pbook. :cool:

[takao]

Isn't its worldwide market share even less than its U.S. market share? The unreasonable prices of Apple products outside of the U.S. is probably a large contributor to that.
yes it is ..(except switzerland perhaps..but there the mercedes marketshare is bigger as well ;) )

example
imac G5 base model 1299$ in the US
here 1470$ with exchange rate in mind

this powermac 1764.85 $
with exchange rate and without tax
perhaps i update my excel files where i calculated the price differences for all apple products on average....

between 8% and 30% higher prices last time i checked on average i think it was 18%
i have time this weekend i jsut put updating the file on my to-do list i can send the stats to you in a prvt msg.

[Sun Baked]

The Developer Note (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=94356) is out on this, and...

1. It is a headless iMac

2. It is the machine from the linked Service Manual page we saw awhile ago.

3. And there are a couple new design elements.

[BanditBill]

How well do you think these machines will perform against each other with equal amounts of RAM, same video chipset etc?

Wouldn't the iMac's onboard video chip perform worse than a dedicated card with it's own processor?

What is with the optical audio out on the iMac. I understand the Toslink connector on the PowerMac. Are they the same thing but a different connector? Does the PowerMac process sound differently?

I'm inclined to purchase the PowerMac as I already own a nice 17" CRT and the prices of a 20"+ replacement LCD with higher specs than the built in iMac monitor are continually dropping. I will also be hooking up my home stereo via optical (it only has Toslink connectors). The dual layer DVD burners are out and can be put into a PowerMac at a very low price.

[MegaSignal]

. . .a little while ago I put together this PC machine for gaming (while retaining a G4 imac for work):

AMD Athlon 64 3400+ (2.4Ghz)
1024MB PC3200
1x80GB SATA 1x160GB SATA 7200RPM
16x DL DVD Burner
Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB
6xPCI slots Digital Audio in/out Gigabit Ethernet
54Mb/s Wireless

Cost me: AUD $1,600

That G5 is AUD $1,000 more before upgrades. With the RAM, Vid Card etc. that I would want it costs AUD $4,352 =/ difference is still pretty big and arguably the PC is faster in some areas. I'd pay more just for OS X but I can't afford that much more. Just thought I'd contribute a real example.

I just threw a whole lot of dollars and GHz at a Dell box and guess what - now more than ever I'm committed to Apple and their products. (Service Pack 2 almost made me think that there was a glimmer of hope for this PC...) After all was said and done, this Dell 4600 still cannot come close to the performance of my "old" dual 1.25 G4 - even with a 3.4GHz Northwood. But: this is only in terms of video editing, encoding, and audio CD ripping. As far as browsing the internet and writing the occasional letter, it's still OK for that. In terms of gaming: this is where I do not know much about computers, and will rely upon the comment from others as I do not game at all...

Attempting to stay on topic, and in conclusion: Literally, the money I spent on this Dell 4600 upgrade ALONE is within 10% of the cost of a NEW SP 1.8! (I've learned my lesson well!) Again, my hat's off to Apple marketing!

[Mencius]

I just threw a whole lot of dollars and GHz at a Dell box and guess what - now more than ever I'm committed to Apple and their products. (Service Pack 2 almost made me think that there was a glimmer of hope for this PC...) After all was said and done, this Dell 4600 still cannot come close to the performance of my "old" dual 1.25 G4 - even with a 3.4GHz Northwood. But: this is only in terms of video editing, encoding, and audio CD ripping. As far as browsing the internet and writing the occasional letter, it's still OK for that. In terms of gaming: this is where I do not know much about computers, and will rely upon the comment from others as I do not game at all...

Attempting to stay on topic, and in conclusion: Literally, the money I spent on this Dell 4600 upgrade ALONE is within 10% of the cost of a NEW SP 1.8! (I've learned my lesson well!) Again, my hat's off to Apple marketing!

Fair enough. However this has not been my experience in the matter. Personally I wouldn't consider Dell an option.

My point of comparison to my "old mac" is, as I mentioned, the G4 imac. It's an 800mhz superdrive. Naturally I performed a few tests to see performance differences. Encoding a two hour length of video to mpeg4 takes 30mins on the PC I built. It took 12-18 hours on my old G4. Aiff to AAC encoding runs at 26.0x, CD ripping also 26x on the PC. That's compared to 6.0x-6.5x and 6.5x-7.0x on the G4. I have never had any experience with the dual 1.25 though. In terms of expenditure besides a few more $6 case fans for the Australian summer I'm not spending any more money on this for one or two years.

Admittedly windows causes me much pain, grief and trouble. It is miles worse than OS X. But these problems have never cost me anything.... If I run into trouble I can most always solve it myself (eventually) or with help from friends.

[DaLazernet]

Alright, I've been following macrumors for so long - it was about time to register and have my first post! (Especially since I have my own two cents on this topic).

Let me paint a quick picture for you (and I'm sure I'm probably not unique in this scenario). I used to be a big apple fan (performa 475, pm 6100). Somewhere after OS 8, I looked towards the windows world and switched to PCs. Having unix experience and hearing of apple's OS X, I kept a keen eye open towards apple. Then it happened...they changed things which started drawing my attention back to them. First the new imacs (the previous model), then their gorgeous laptops, etc.

So here I am in the PC world, used to upgradability (except for our laptops of course), getting back into the apple world. The day they announced the new Powerbook 1.33Ghz 12", I custom ordered mine and decked it out (within reason). This was my taste into apple and I was loving it! I'd love to replace my tower with an apple product, but alas, I have more than one HD (and like working in that fashion), three 15" sony flat panels (digital input on all of them), etc. So the eMac and iMac are both out because they are simply not enough for what I want. This only left the pricey and seemingly overkill-for-my-purposes PowerMac G5 dual processor towers. (I'm currently a student, aspiring to become a biology teacher, who also has a small business designing web sites and graphics/logos).

Enter the new single 1.8 powermac -- looks mighty tempting, and oooh with the student discount! I'd need at least one of the PCI slots for an additional video card so I can keep my 3 monitors, and everything seems like just what I'd need. I'm sure I'm not alone in having this perspective, so I'm sure these units will sell. Heck, I'm even tempted. Unfortunately, the 600 MHZ fsb is troubling me (although still higher than the bandwidth of the memory, so it should be more than sufficient - and maybe thats apple's point of view). I'll tell you this much, I am seriously considering this unit because I'm sure it would suit my purposes of corel painter, macromedia studio MX, and normal web browsing/email/stuff. Mighty mighty tempting!

Sorry for the long post, and I look forward to many chats with you all!
- Eric Lozauskas

[MacinDoc]

Wouldn't the iMac's onboard video chip perform worse than a dedicated card with it's own processor?
The iMac does have a dedicated video card (in fact, it's the same card that comes standard with most Power Macs). The GPU is just soldered to the midplane assembly and therefore difficult to upgrade without replacing the whole assembly. It even has an AGP 8X connection, just like in a Power Mac.

[Qianlong]

hello everybody

I just read this news on a French mac site : http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-10-23#3093

One more thing... on the mono 1.8 G5 - Lionel - 13:09:12

We’ve said a lot on the “anatomical” differences between the mono 1.8GHz G5 and his big dual processor brothers. There’s a major difference that escaped us (it has only one processor! ;-) ).
The processor is SOLDERED to the motherboard, just like on iMacs and ‘books. In the event of a failure, Apple has to replace both of them.
This design choice, along with those mentioned earlier, has the only purpose of reducing the production costs. It still is a great step backwards, as the last Powermac with a soldered CPU was the 7200, almost 10 years ago (it’s the great karmic wheel rolling on my friends).

It seems the CPU of the single 1.8Ghz G5 is soldered onto the motherboard? Can anyone confirm this?????
that can't be good, especially when I want to buy one :eek:

[Dr. No]

Go to hardmac.com and look at the other details. They talk about it being a matured product that has been worked on for several months. Good news??

I don't know much about the soldered processor, though.

[BanditBill]

The iMac does have a dedicated video card (in fact, it's the same card that comes standard with most Power Macs). The GPU is just soldered to the midplane assembly and therefore difficult to upgrade without replacing the whole assembly. It even has an AGP 8X connection, just like in a Power Mac.

So I assume the video performance will be equal, or so close it wouldn't make a difference. I'm used to PC's where onboard video is sucking its memory from system RAM and providing nowhere near the same performance as a dedicated card with the same chipset.

Whats up with the optical out on the iMac is there a 1/8" to Toslink cable out there or do you need 1/8" optical input on an amp to connect the audio? Will there be a difference in sound quality (iMac vs. PowerMac).

I'm not try to knock/praise the iMac or PowerMac. I'm just trying to make an informed purchase.

[jstock]

I wanted to add my opinion on this discussion. First a little history. I was basically raised on Apple products, then in '95 I started using PCs. I was a PC/Unix geek until 2002. When I was exposed to OS X and its Unix base, it was my holy grail. All the goodness of the Unix command line, with a polished GUI and quality apps.

I bought a G4 in August of '02 and I was happy. Last month my G4 found a new home, and my plan had been to return to the PC world. So I built a nice, fast Shuttle XPC box. To my surprise, I couldn't go back. So last friday I ordered the new sigle CPU 1.8 Power Mac.

Why did I do this? Quite simply because it fits my needs. I like the display I purchased for the Shuttle. I'm one of the rare people it seems that can't stand LCDs. I like the option to expand and upgrade later, and the price is justifiable. Do I care about half the maximum RAM or the lower FSB? No. I didn't give it more than a passing thought. I've built all of the PCs I've used during that time and I always went for the most bang for my buck each time.

This time I looked at the difference between this and my 700Mhz G4 and I said I'm not going to notice. It's going to run circles around it regardless. Perhaps my opinion is biased because OS X truly matters more to me than getting every last drop of performace possible. Windows and Linux annoy me after two years of OS X and this has taught me that I won't be leaving it anytime soon if ever.

That's pretty much my piece. As others have said there is a niche for these and I happen to fit it. Those that don't can get what they need, after all choice is a good thing.

[Dr. No]

Also, the Power Mac G5 hard drives all come with an 8MB buffer, the iMac hard drives don't seem to have this.

[MacinDoc]

So I assume the video performance will be equal, or so close it wouldn't make a difference. I'm used to PC's where onboard video is sucking its memory from system RAM and providing nowhere near the same performance as a dedicated card with the same chipset.

Whats up with the optical out on the iMac is there a 1/8" to Toslink cable out there or do you need 1/8" optical input on an amp to connect the audio? Will there be a difference in sound quality (iMac vs. PowerMac).

I'm not try to knock/praise the iMac or PowerMac. I'm just trying to make an informed purchase.
Video performance of a 1.8 MHz SP Power Mac with the standard GeForce 5200 FX video card should be pretty much identical to that of the iMac. Having said that, you can upgrade the video card of the Power Mac substantially at the time of purchase, for a price (more than you would expect if you're coming from the PC/Windows world).

So, if you have the extra money and really want the very best in graphic performance (especially for best 3D gaming or 3D rendering performance), or if you already have a great monitor, go for the Power Mac and upgrade the video card, but if you want the best web surfing/email/MS Office value in the Mac world (with the exception of the eMac), and especially if you're looking for quiet, elegant simplicity, consider the iMac.

I will look into the audio in/out jack and see if I can give you more info on it...

[tiselday]

If so, what are the initial impressions? How silent is the machine?? Any pics?

:)

[hauer]

Yes, I am really looking forward to hearing reactions to it.

jstock, you pretty much sumed up how I feel about it. It's more powerful than my iBook, and I don't think I'd ever want more than 4 GB of RAM. In fact, I don't think I'd ever even want 4 GB. I have a screen already. Is it as nice as a 20" flat panel? No. However, I feel that I will be getting a better value by purchasing a PowerMac, so the screen doesn't bother me. I can use what I have now and be happy with it. Also, this computer (with the discounts I can get on it) will fit my budget now and in the long run much better than an iMac would. The upgradability is a big deal to me - I believe that it will prolong the effective life of the computer. As someone who doesn't have a ton of money to spend on a new computer every couple of years, that's important to me.

I am a bit concerned about the rumor that the CPU's soldered to the motherboard. That seems rather disingenuous to me. Can anyone confirm or deny it?

Look forward to seeing pics of people's rigs.

[jstock]

My Ship Date is on or before 10/29. I just had to customize a few things. I'll admit to being like a kid waiting for Christmas morning. I'll post my initial impressions when it arrives if people are still interested.

[Abulia]

I'm interested in hearing what it's like as well. Provided I can get Apple to take back my iMac (long story) this seems like my next, best option.

- Don

[hauer]

cool, look forward to hearing your report.

[~Shard~]

My Ship Date is on or before 10/29. I just had to customize a few things. I'll admit to being like a kid waiting for Christmas morning. I'll post my initial impressions when it arrives if people are still interested.

Definitely want to hear your review, keep us posted. And ideally, you should find a friend who has a new G5 iMac and run comparison performance tests!

[jstock]

It shipped sometime after my last post. Delivery is set for November 2nd. It shipped from Anaheim CA. I was amazed it didn't start oversees somewhere.

[tiselday]

According to the xbench results site, some people have already received them:

http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/comparesubindex.xhtml?machineTypeID=22&sort=date#tableTop&minVersion=1.1.3

the highest result there is 144. (w/ Radeon 9600xt)

I am quite surprised that no one has yet publised any pictures or reports about the new heatsinks and the noise levels. Not even macbidouille.com has a word about them, and they tend to be very fast with these things!

[Abulia]

According to the xbench results site, some people have already received them:

http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/comparesubindex.xhtml?machineTypeID=22&sort=date#tableTop&minVersion=1.1.3

the highest result there is 144. (w/ Radeon 9600xt)
Doesn't that seem rather low? The iMac has been scoring in the 160s (high 166). Am I missing something about the xbench results?

- Don

[tiselday]

Doesn't that seem rather low? The iMac has been scoring in the 160s (high 166). Am I missing something about the xbench results?

- Don

xbench is very erratic in its results. In addition to that, there are only a few people registering for the moment, and we do not know anything about how their tests were performed.

Anyway, there is at least one machine now reaching the 160s, showing that both the iMac G5 and the new Power Mac are very similar indeed, as expected.

But why don't we have any pics of the new heatsinks or reports on the noise, yet!??? I have placed my order 6 six days ago through a local reseller and I want to know if I did right! :)

[areyouwishing]

Im in the process of selling my Powerbook to get one of these singles, they just fit my needs better now.

For all reading, i am also looking forward to hearing about noise, benchmarks, etc.

[Abulia]

Got Apple to take back my iMac and, after some blind luck, found a local store with the "old" SP 1.8 PowerMac in stock, brand new. ("Yea, just sitting back here. Never sold it.") Got a great deal on it. If it wasn't for that I would have gotten the "new" SP 1.8.

I'll download xbench and put up my own results but I'd be curious to see how the two compare against each other. (I have the bad Nvidia 5200 graphic card, the only downside of the unit.)

[tiselday]

For all reading, i am also looking forward to hearing about noise, benchmarks, etc.

MacBidouille has just published some pictures in its main page

http://www.macbidouille.com/niouzcontenu.php?date=2004-11-02#9858

The discussions in the forums have just started, but there is no first hand reports on the noise levels yet (seems that the guy who got the mac just sent the pictures)

In addition to that, there are new benchmarks in barefeats:

http://www.barefeats.com/g518.html

[hauer]

boy, the motherboard in there is tiny. Makes the case look quite empty. With the fewer fans does that mean that the case no longer has the "cooling zones"? It almost looks like you could take everything out of the case and put it in something smaller...wonder if that would make the fans go nuts though.

Looking forward to hearing some user reports when you all get your machines. Waiting to get mine until expenses from the upcoming ski season go away :(

[TorbX]

I want the new PM g5 1,8, but cant afford it before after christmas. When will this thing become a "bad purchase", e.g. when is it likely that they update it?

I AM a rev. b kind a guy, so maybe I should wait for the single proc. 2.0...?

:confused:

[JasonL]

I want the new PM g5 1,8, but cant afford it before after christmas. When will this thing become a "bad purchase", e.g. when is it likely that they update it?

I AM a rev. b kind a guy, so maybe I should wait for the single proc. 2.0...?

:confused:

It's only a 'bad purchase' if it is unable to do what you need it to do. I understand what you mean, though. It does stink to buy a model right before the next revision comes out (what happened with my PB). This system was just released, so I wouldn't expect a revision (move to the 2.0) incredibly soon.

[TorbX]

It's only a 'bad purchase' if it is unable to do what you need it to do. I understand what you mean, though. It does stink to buy a model right before the next revision comes out (what happened with my PB). This system was just released, so I wouldn't expect a revision (move to the 2.0) incredibly soon.

question is, how smart would a february-ish purchase be?

These lunchbox-PowerMacs has been on the marked for a while now... Maybe we will start seeing som 1.6 ghz second hand anytime soon?

1.6 ghz could do for me. With a good grphx-card it would roll games neatly enough, would it not? Not that I'm a gamer or anything crazy like that. Thing is, with my rev a pb 12" g4 867, I dont even have the opportunity...

[Chip NoVaMac]

boy, the motherboard in there is tiny. Makes the case look quite empty. With the fewer fans does that mean that the case no longer has the "cooling zones"? It almost looks like you could take everything out of the case and put it in something smaller...wonder if that would make the fans go nuts though.

Looking forward to hearing some user reports when you all get your machines. Waiting to get mine until expenses from the upcoming ski season go away :(

Noticed that too. Made me wonder, other than a cost perspective, why we didn't see a slightly different form factor for this new PM.

[areyouwishing]

Noticed that too. Made me wonder, other than a cost perspective, why we didn't see a slightly different form factor for this new PM.

The only reason is uniformity, and to not over shadow the new iMac design.

Apple tries to never release a ho-hum product, and they would have had to for the 1.8 or it would over shadow the iMac design.

[Rod Rod]

With all that empty space in front where the logic board used to extend, maybe there's room for four hard drives (instead of three) to be mounted on one of those accessory brackets such as the Swift Data 200.

http://www.macbidouille.com/news/photonews19/G5181.jpg
http://www.macbidouille.com/news/photonews19/G5182.jpg

http://www.transintl.com/store/swiftdatamovie.cfm
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=51036&item=5728240200

[kbonnel]

With all that empty space in front where the logic board used to extend, maybe there's room for four hard drives (instead of three) to be mounted on one of those accessory brackets such as the Swift Data 200.

http://www.macbidouille.com/news/photonews19/G5181.jpg
http://www.macbidouille.com/news/photonews19/G5182.jpg

http://www.transintl.com/store/swiftdatamovie.cfm
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=51036&item=5728240200

I just watched a bit of that video, and I had the strange feeling I was listening to a porn movie!!!! LOL

Kimo