Apple Releases Intel iMac

Qoxiivi · Jan 10, 2006

Robert Scheide said:
I've been a Mac user for twenty years. I purchased a G5 iMac 10 days ago, thinking that the iMac wouldn't be updated until June of 2006, as most sources had predicted. Now, today, I go to the Apple website and I'm told that the new Intel iMac is "twice as fast and twice as amazing" and yet priced exactly the same as the PPC-based machine I purchased 10 days ago. Usually, there's a price reduction in such cases, but so far, my calls to Apple and to my Apple reseller (MacConnection) seeking a rebate have been rebuffed. I'm feeling burned, but should I? Some posts have questioned whether Apple's speed claims for the new Intel machines really matter that much. If the higher speed does make a signifcant difference, does anyone know if I have any recourse for seeking a rebate/discount on a brand new machine that the manufacturer now claims is obsolete. Am I just an idiot? Am I the only person feeling this way?

This is exactly what I was thinking - that the iMacs wouldn't be updated until mid 2006. And I don't think this is just unjustified moaning - I was expecting some kind of speed increase obviously but over 2x! And in such an incredibly short space of time - even in computer industry terms. I think every new iMac owner has every right to feel a little hard done by.

Someone used the analogy of taking back a year-old car. That's not quite accurate - imagine if the newer model was twice as fast, accelerated twice as quickly and was the same price as your older model - at just a month newer. I think you'd have every right to be very peeved.

KindredMAC · Jan 10, 2006

Misunderstandings galore!

I keep seeing people say that their new iMacs are faster than a Dual Core PPC PM G5.... this is a misunderstanding at this point.

Right now, after reading Apple's Rosetta web page and hearing what Steve had to say at the Keynote, these new iMacs and MacBook Pros will not be able to touch the performance of a PPC G5 PowerMac when it comes to Pro level apps, ie; Adobe CS and Macromedia Studio, for some time.

Remember everyone, in order to take full advantage of these new Intel chips, you need to run these apps as Universal Binaries. Adobe will probably announce a Universal version with CS3 and Studio 9 next year. Which means that CS,CS 2, Studio MX 2004 and Studio 8 will run, most likely, faster on a PPC chip until they upgrade the binary.

Sure all of Apple's apps that are Universal will probably run a tad faster on the new Intels but come on.... how much faster do you need iPhoto to do red eye reduction???

For Consumers, this is a great thing. For Pros this is an "Ehhh" thing. I will be buying the Dual 2GHz Power Mac next week for my home office and it will runn all of my graphics apps flawlessly. Then when the iBook is updated I will get that for all of my "consumer" type play.

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

GorillaPaws said:
So assuming this is true (it does seem likely), what would be the implications for pc gaming on an iMac? Would it run like a $2000 pc? or more like the $500 variety?

It would run the same as a PC with the same specs in that case. Assuming you are comparing windows on both.

It essentially is a PC, just running OSX.

You can assign a price tag to performance either as you can build some pretty high end PC's for alot cheaper than say, Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc.

t^3 · Jan 10, 2006

Like many other people, I'm excited about today's announcements, but personally, I will be holding off on a purchase until at least the end of this year. The Core Duo processor is a transitional product between the old Pentium M's and the new architecture (Conroe/Merom/Woodcrest) that Intel will have sometime the middle of this year. These will have 64-bit functionality, 4MB L2 cache, Hyperthreading, and other goodies and performance improvements that were left out of today's Core processor (Yonah). Also, there is of course the serious lack of Intel native or universal binary apps. Sure, there's Rosetta, but there are bound to be bugs with that.

Since the Core Duo only goes up to 2.16GHz, there is very little chance that PowerMacs will be updated until Conroe, a desktop processor, is released. With regards to the name, I'd bet Apple is doing away with the "Power" since the PowerBook line extends far longer than the PowerPC, which was when PowerMac originated. Maybe something like MacTower?

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

KindredMAC said:
I keep seeing people say that their new iMacs are faster than a Dual Core PPC PM G5.... this is a misunderstanding at this point.

Right now, after reading Apple's Rosetta web page and hearing what Steve had to say at the Keynote, these new iMacs and MacBook Pros will not be able to touch the performance of a PPC G5 PowerMac when it comes to Pro level apps, ie; Adobe CS and Macromedia Studio, for some time.

Apple announced native pro apps in March. So Final Cut, apature, etc. will be running at full speed then.

As for Adobe/Macromedia, who knows. It would'nt suprise me if they had apps ready to go very soon.

I'm more concerned with gaming on the new Intel Macs.

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

t^3 said:
Like many other people, I'm excited about today's announcements, but personally, I will be holding off on a purchase until at least the end of this year. The Core Duo processor is a transitional product between the old Pentium M's and the new architecture (Conroe/Merom/Woodcrest) that Intel will have sometime the middle of this year. These will have 64-bit functionality, 4MB L2 cache, Hyperthreading, and other goodies and performance improvements that were left out of today's Core processor (Yonah). Also, there is of course the serious lack of Intel native or universal binary apps. Sure, there's Rosetta, but there are bound to be bugs with that.

Since the Core Duo only goes up to 2.16GHz, there is very little chance that PowerMacs will be updated until Conroe, a desktop processor, is released. With regards to the name, I'd bet Apple is doing away with the "Power" since the PowerBook line extends far longer than the PowerPC, which was when PowerMac originated. Maybe something like MacTower?

You're dealing with x86 processors now. Those of us using PC's simply swap our processors with the latest and greatest. So if the motherboard supports it, and that is yet to be seen, you could just buy a CPU off of newegg and slap it in there. It would be nice. Instead of throwing out your mac you have very easy and fairly inexpensive upgrade options.

GregA2 · Jan 10, 2006

Abercrombieboy said:
I used to be a PowerPC person, but now I can see that x86 is so much better and more advanced.

The demons in hell are surely snowboarding by now...

MacsRgr8 · Jan 10, 2006

~Shard~ said:
Yikes, you're right! Hmm, this makes things interesting then, as Apple will not be going Intel on the PowerMacs until 2007, with Conroe/Woodcrest - so what will they do in the meantime? I guess we'll be seeing a significant speed bump to the dual core G5s by WWDC to compensate, but for now, the iMac appears to be the Mac of choice in terms of power and price point.

So clock for clock the Yonah and the G5 are very similar....

But not all apps are Universal / Intel binaries yet.

Try Doom 3 on a new Intel iMac.....

Na, the Dual Core G5's are still the real Power-Macs.
The Intel iMacs are powerfull in iApps...

It's all about the software.

t^3 · Jan 10, 2006

archer75 said:
You're dealing with x86 processors now. Those of us using PC's simply swap our processors with the latest and greatest. So if the motherboard supports it, and that is yet to be seen, you could just buy a CPU off of newegg and slap it in there.

Not necessarily true. There are ways to limit processor speed, etc. on the motherboard. Even pin-compatible Intel CPU's need to be supported by their motherboards. The current Pentium D line will only work with motherboards with a 945 or higher chipset.

aswitcher · Jan 10, 2006

srobert said:
What will I get if I plug:

iMac >*Mini DVI to DVI adapter >*DVI to HDMI Cable >*HDTV ?

Will the iMac output to my TV in HD?

What about content protection?

Sorry, I'm a little clueless.

Thanks

DVI can support HDCP which is the copyright protection... Not sure if new Macs have this built in...

chibianh · Jan 10, 2006

for all those that want to dual boot.. why?!?! I would NEVER boot into windows unless I had too. If anything, I would like to run windows in a window IN OS X.. natively.

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

t^3 said:
Not necessarily true. There are ways to limit processor speed, etc. on the motherboard. Even pin-compatible Intel CPU's need to be supported by their motherboards. The current Pentium D line will only work with motherboards with a 945 or higher chipset.

Correct, that's why I said "if your motherboard supports it". They tend to support many generations of CPU.

And the bios comes from the motherboard vendor. If the motherboard uses the same socket as a newer chip then it's just a bios update from the vendor.

Or a 3rd party bios from someone else. There has been many cases of this for video cards. A 3rd party bios that would unload the features of a card to essentially turn it into a higher end card.

Of course we won't know for sure for awhile yet.

mac-er · Jan 10, 2006

Atlasland said:
Had hoped for a lower price with the coming of Intel.

And wheres FronRow for those of us already with Macs.

My question is why the G5 one is the same price as the new Intel one.
Hello, Apple, the G5 one is now obsolete....lower the price!

Flowbee · Jan 10, 2006

~Shard~ said:
Yikes, you're right! Hmm, this makes things interesting then, as Apple will not be going Intel on the PowerMacs until 2007, with Conroe/Woodcrest - so what will they do in the meantime?

I believe Steve said during the Keynote that all Mac lines would be running Intel processors by the end of 2006.

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

chibianh said:
for all those that want to dual boot.. why?!?! I would NEVER boot into windows unless I had too. If anything, I would like to run windows in a window IN OS X.. natively.

Because alot of us have to. There are many apps in Windows that are not available in OSX. Or if they are they aren't as good. It all depends on what you need.
I found OSX better for everything aside from Personal Finance software(I hate quicken) and DVD backup software.

And then there is gaming.

KindredMAC · Jan 10, 2006

new name thoughts...

here's what we know:
iMac G5 --> iMac
PowerBook G4 --> MacBook Pro

here's what I think:
Mac mini --> Mac mini
iBook G4 --> iBook or MacBook
Power Mac G5 --> Pro Mac or Mac Pro

anyone?

Sark · Jan 10, 2006

GorillaPaws said:
So assuming this is true (it does seem likely), what would be the implications for pc gaming on an iMac? Would it run like a $2000 pc? or more like the $500 variety? Also, is anyone concerned that Apple will release DVR-type stuff in the Rev. B release that'll make everyone who's buying these things now wish they'd waited? I really want this thing, but these are a couple of sticking points for me.

1.8ghz dual core pentium
512mb ram
x1600

If you put together a Windows PC with those parts, you would have a pretty good gaming machine. The major downside is the 512 ram, 1 gig tends to help out games that are graphic intensive, like Battlefield 2 or Far Cry.

amateurmacfreak · Jan 10, 2006

BOOMBA said:
Agreed, this is really lame.

Seems like a kind of crappy Keynote, aside from the new hardware, which is actually pretty sweet.
I don't want either, I am waiting for the intel PMS (or MacMacs) but I like the potential perfromance boost based on what we are seeing in these!

LOLOLOLOL!!!
Now that Apple computers are using Intel, they will soon have PMS.

Um, that reminds of an interesting conversation today with my odd adolescent friends about Macs being gay guys, Windows comps lesbians (the Windows lovers claimed bisexual for compatibilty), and my quote.
"In the computer world, it's best to be bisexual."

Not that it's not ok normally.... won't get into that again.

Anyone remember last night?? XD

archer75 · Jan 10, 2006

Sark said:
1.8ghz dual core pentium
512mb ram
x1600

If you put together a Windows PC with those parts, you would have a pretty good gaming machine. The major downside is the 512 ram, 1 gig tends to help out games that are graphic intensive, like Battlefield 2 or Far Cry.

1gb isn't enough for BF2. It bogs down pretty bad. People are recommending you have 2gb of ram for that. 1gb should pretty much be mandatory for all other games.

MacsRgr8 · Jan 10, 2006

archer75 said:
Apple announced native pro apps in March. So Final Cut, apature, etc. will be running at full speed then.

As for Adobe/Macromedia, who knows. It wouldn't suprise me if they had apps ready to go very soon.

I'm more concerned with gaming on the new Intel Macs.

Adobe said their CS 3 suite, which will be Universal, would be ready end of 2006 / beginning 2007.
That's a long time.

Games?
Was the port from x86 Windows to PPC Mac a simple one? Then I assume the "Universal update" to be ready quite soon.
I have no idea how quickly we can expect the universal binaries of MOHAA, COD, BattleField 1942, Nascar 2003, Doom 3, Halo, UT 2004.....
What about the drivers used for the 3d grfx cards?
Are these the exact same hardware as the x86 PC cards?
In the PPC Macs these cards were "flashed" with some firmware to make it a Mac-only card.

Can we assume that a PC Radeon X1800 XT will be exactly the same card as the ones used in future Intel PowerMacs?

I'm pretty disappointed that Apple hasn't finished their universal version of the Pro-Apps today!
Apple knew a very long time that the Intel-transition was coming, and knew quite a long time that today would be that "big" day.

Even Apple themsleves were not finished!!!!

I wonder.....

amateurmacfreak · Jan 10, 2006

Qoxiivi said:
This is exactly what I was thinking - that the iMacs wouldn't be updated until mid 2006. And I don't think this is just unjustified moaning - I was expecting some kind of speed increase obviously but over 2x! And in such an incredibly short space of time - even in computer industry terms. I think every new iMac owner has every right to feel a little hard done by.

Someone used the analogy of taking back a year-old car. That's not quite accurate - imagine if the newer model was twice as fast, accelerated twice as quickly and was the same price as your older model - at just a month newer. I think you'd have every right to be very peeved.

Yep. Agreed. I'm in the same situation as the first person. One person said "that's like me whining about my 2005 Prius not having leather seats!"
My reply:
"No, it's like the Prius coming out as an SUV with the same gas mileage and price as the original."
Or is that a bad analogy too?

amateurmacfreak · Jan 10, 2006

Qoxiivi said:
I feel pretty pissed off I have to admit - having only just bought my iMac under a month ago. I was led to believe (by a guy working in the Apple store in London) that the Intel Macs wouldn't be launched for a while yet. Had I known they were coming out in January, I'd have waited.

I'm actually quite f**king cross.

Haha, same.

arkmannj · Jan 10, 2006

Another question

I currently have:
1) duel G4 1.0GHZ radeon 9800 pro 128mb vram 1.5GB ram (quicksilver)
2) Powerbook G4 Titanium 667Mhz 16mb vram, 512mb ram

I use apps like:
Adobe CS, Macromedia studio 8, Motion 2, FCP 4.5hd, DVD SP3, Warcraft3.
(obviously no fat/universal binaries for these at the moment)

How well (compared to my current computers) do you think these apps will runon a new intel imac / macbook-Pro, (emulation through Roseta of course).

since I'm not going from a G5, I'm wondering if I would still take a performance hit,
run the same, or see even a small increase in speed.

any thoughts ?

~Shard~ · Jan 10, 2006

Flowbee said:
I believe Steve said during the Keynote that all Mac lines would be running Intel processors by the end of 2006.

Okay, fair enough, Conroe and Woodcrest is scheduled for late 2006, so I suppose, barring delays (which there will be), Apple could indeed get the Intel PowerMacs out by the end of 2006. I'll believe it when I see it though.

GregA · Jan 10, 2006

Abercrombieboy said:
I know Apple made no mention of it, but I don't think they would do anything to stop Windows XP from booting on the Macs.

If the Apple Intel machines use EFI and DON'T have backwards/BIOS compatibility mode, then Windows XP would have to support EFI natively.

Microsoft says they'll support EFI in Longhorn/Vista. Which is a bit of a wait. Of course, any of the PC emulators (Virtual PC, VMWare, etc) should emulate a BIOS - but that's not dual boot.

I wonder what BIOS/Open-Firmware/EFI is on the new Macs!?!

Apple Releases Intel iMac

macrumors regular

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68040

macrumors regular

macrumors 68040

macrumors 68040

macrumors member

macrumors G3

macrumors regular

macrumors 603

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68040

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68030

macrumors 68040

macrumors 6502a

macrumors newbie

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68040

macrumors G3

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68000

macrumors P6

macrumors 65816

Our Staff