Apple Releases Intel iMac

[Robert Scheide]

No offense to the people who've just found their new G5 iMacs and 15" PowerBooks have suddenly lost a whole layer of sparkle but how can anyone be silly enough to buy ANY Apple hardware and software this close to a Keynote?

It's not like this was a quiet Tuesday announcement that's caught people by surprise. MacWorld San Fran and WWDC are THE events for big announcments. Anyone with a Mac who follows the news and rumour sites knows this.

The golden rule when buying a new Mac: Never, ever, ever, ever buy a new computer in the few months running up to a Stevenote unless someone has a gun to your head. Don't assume, don't trust logic, don't second-guess, don't trust MacRumors buyers guide, don't trust Apple Store employees (they aren't insiders, they are cashiers) and for the love of all that's holy, don't trust ThinkSecret.

And that goes for iPods and software too!

Damn it, and I knew this too! It just didn't seem "logical" that they'd update the iMac so soon. None of the usual sources seemd to suspect it. At any rate, I knew this was gonna happen is six months anyway, so I'll sit back and see how Rev. A goes and wait unit after next year's MacWorld.

 

[Sark]

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.

Really? Gosh, the game is more hardware hungry then I thought if what you are saying is true.

I would have to disagree with "1gb being mandatory for other games" however. That is overkill for many games that would be only a year old. New games yes, but "all other games" is far too broad.

On another topic, I noted a post regarding the upgrading of x86 CPUs. In order to utilize another processor, your motherboard must support the FSB of the CPU, and it must be the same socket type. As far as specific clock speeds being supported (as well as dual core) that depends on the board. I've seen a brand new AMD Sempron work just fine on a very old Socket A board. Except the BIOS didn't see it as a Sempron, and it was underclocked by about 400 mhz

Still, the CPU worked, so it all depends.

 

[Josh396]

The x86 iMac came as a total surprise. No one even saw it coming. I had to ask myself that this was the shortest rev from a c to a d. Or is it considered a rev A.

Don't think I will be upgrading anytime soon, unless they offer a 23" or higher screen size.

It honestly didn't really surprise me that much. I mean sure, the Mac mini and Powerbook made a lot more sense, but the iMac is becoming Apple's main computer. I also remembered seeing something about the iMacs being the first Intel Macs a few months back so when my uncle was ordering new computers before the end of the year for the company I told him to not open the new iMacs he ordered until the expo was over. Looks like I got lucky enough to get a Rev. A Intel iMac. Of course, now it will probably be buggy.

Does anyone have any bencmarks on the X1600? I'm anxious to see how it performs and even more excited that WoW should be ready to go sometime soon.

 

[Mac_Freak]

Great news for Developers

I have just stumbled on this at developer section of apple.com, apparently developers that bought the TDK(intel based PowerMacs) can now exchange them for new Intel iMacs for free, here is a link, note the last bullet

 

[Peace]

I am frickin jumpin for JOY!!

I own a DTK...
Apple just told us we can exchange the DTK for a NEW,FREE forever Intel iMac!!!

Far friggin out!!

 

[archer75]

Really? Gosh, the game is more hardware hungry then I thought if what you are saying is true.

I would have to disagree with "1gb being mandatory for other games" however. That is overkill for many games that would be only a year old. New games yes, but "all other games" is far too broad.

On another topic, I noted a post regarding the upgrading of x86 CPUs. In order to utilize another processor, your motherboard must support the FSB of the CPU, and it must be the same socket type. As far as specific clock speeds being supported (as well as dual core) that depends on the board. I've seen a brand new AMD Sempron work just fine on a very old Socket A board. Except the BIOS didn't see it as a Sempron, and it was underclocked by about 400 mhz

Still, the CPU worked, so it all depends.

Well technically 1gb may not be mandatory but I sure would'nt want to play any game with only 512mb of ram. It would just be too painful.

Alot of the socket 939 boards support the Athlon 64's(san diego and venice, not sure if there's more), Athlon FX and Athlon X2's. And the sempron's as well.

I have a socket 478 that supports Intel Northwoods and Prescotts. I don't know the exact processors but I know it works from a 2.4ghz to a 3.4ghz cpu. I think it does support more.
And Asus makes an adapter that lets me run a Pentium M on it.

So yes, it all depends. And there just isn't enough info available from Apple as to what socket they are using now and what socket they are using in the future. Or what FSB Intel's chips will support.

I have to also wonder if other motherboard manufacturers will be able to make boards for the Mac if they also provide drivers for it. They do for windows computers. Essentially the only difference would be the driver CD and whatever Apples TPM ,or whatever it's called, looks for on the board.

 

[Bonked]

Install Windows as you like...

From the mouth of Schiller:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10789855/page/2/

Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in an interview Tuesday that the company won’t sell or support Windows itself, but also hasn’t done anything to preclude people from loading Windows onto the machines themselves.

“That’s fine with us. We don’t mind,” Schiller said. “If there are people who love our hardware but are forced to put up with a Windows world, then that’s OK.”​

 

[d.f]

just wanted to say....

i've done enough moaning in the macbook pro thread, but the iMac ROCKS.

seriously. for me it's classic apple. they make an amazing product even more brilliant, just cos they can..... i am sorely tempted to buy one and i reallyhave no use for one.

it's the same feeling i got when out of the blue they announced the iPod nano. a brilliant piece of kit.

(i feel the total opposite towards the new laptop i'm sorry to say)

 

[archer75]

Article about dual booting windows on the new Intel Macs:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10794396/from/RS.3/

 

[~Shard~]

Article about dual booting windows on the new Intel Macs:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10794396/from/RS.3/

Yeah, I saw this article earlier - very interesting implications.

 

[thedude110]

It seems to me that videoshooter has been vaguely justified, even if s/he hasn't logged in since s/he posted this thread ...

 

[macEfan]

i've done enough moaning in the macbook pro thread, but the iMac ROCKS.

seriously. for me it's classic apple. they make an amazing product even more brilliant, just cos they can..... i am sorely tempted to buy one and i reallyhave no use for one.

it's the same feeling i got when out of the blue they announced the iPod nano. a brilliant piece of kit.

(i feel the total opposite towards the new laptop i'm sorry to say)

same here: the only thing I don't like about it is that all of my software will not be compatable other than that it rocks!

 

[asencif]

I agree that I wasn't too impressed with the Macbook Pro. The iMac which was already an awesome machine and doing very well just became a beast. I would have preferred the Macbook Pro had more of the boost since it really needed it. Yes it is way more powerful than before, but only one model was upgraded and FW800 left out. Another FW400 port would have been great as well. SD is slower and no DL. This seems like a test run machine that I personally would not buy. The iMac is just out of this world at this point which I don't totally understand why Apple upgraded it. Yes it's the most popular Mac now, but did it really need the upgrade. Don't think any sales would have been lost without upgrade. A whole line of Intel laptops would have been a great showcase which leads me to believe that they were not completely ready to provide us with Intel Hardware on the laptop end. Maybe that's why the iMac gained even more points to showcase and Intel Mac. But this machine is now equal to the low end PM and maybe can give the 2.3 a run. At this point if I was buying a Mac I would totally wait if I needed a Pro machine or a laptop.

 

[~Shard~]

same here: the only thing I don't like about it is that all of my software will not be compatable other than that it rocks!

Why would your software not be compatible? What about Rosetta and fat binaries?

 

[ncoffey]

Anyone seen anything about stock in Apple stores? Just wondering when people will start to get the iMacs because I really want to see what it takes to get windows on one of these. (My MacBook is already ordered regardless of how big of a technical challenge this is. I want OS X 95% of the time anyway)

 

[Peace]

Anyone seen anything about stock in Apple stores? Just wondering when people will start to get the iMacs because I really want to see what it takes to get windows on one of these. (My MacBook is already ordered regardless of how big of a technical challenge this is. I want OS X 95% of the time anyway)

I was told 2-4 weeks for my iMac but I'm trading in my DTK for it..

 

[windowuser82]

Heh. I dunno how to feel about this. I wanted and expected a Mac Mini, but I'm also glad stock prices went so high (and glad I finally dumped) and made a great deal of cash.

An Intel iMac will not be sitting on my desk, tho, atleast not a rev.a. Now more than ever I'm tempted to buy a G5 iMac, which is very strange.

Apples plan is very clear. Macbook as a transition piece "Lets get it out there", iMac being such a huge, steady seller "We can release one NOW and still make a killing in 6 months when another is announced". Smart move, Mr. Jobs. I feel really bad for the guys who just bought one, tho. I'll be glad to take it off your hands but for half the price

 

[chicagdan]

Now more than ever I'm tempted to buy a G5 iMac, which is very strange.

That's the spirit! We need an iMac G5 club ... we're now officially the strangest Mac sub-community since the Umax clone users.

 

[Mac_Freak]

I was told 2-4 weeks for my iMac but I'm trading in my DTK for it..

I am glad that developers are getting repaid for their work/investment. That is a really nice thank you present.

 

[Nermal]

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

It's EFI.

 

[iEdd]

It would be pretty cool if WINE got fully optimised and stable for the new intel macs. Obviously for intensive things you would need to boot into windows, but this would be great for small downloads and things that bear the dreaded 'windows only' message.

 

[Peace]

Heh. I dunno how to feel about this. I wanted and expected a Mac Mini, but I'm also glad stock prices went so high (and glad I finally dumped) and made a great deal of cash.

An Intel iMac will not be sitting on my desk, tho, atleast not a rev.a. Now more than ever I'm tempted to buy a G5 iMac, which is very strange.

Apples plan is very clear. Macbook as a transition piece "Lets get it out there", iMac being such a huge, steady seller "We can release one NOW and still make a killing in 6 months when another is announced". Smart move, Mr. Jobs. I feel really bad for the guys who just bought one, tho. I'll be glad to take it off your hands but for half the price

I'll sell ya my dual G5 for TWICE what it cost me

 

[windowuser82]

That's the spirit! We need an iMac G5 club ... we're now officially the strangest Mac sub-community since the Umax clone users.

Makes more sense to me. I already have 2 Windows machines so the dual boot thing is of no use, games aren't that big of a deal for that reason also, more apps run on the G5 currently and the same will run on both platforms in the future, so why not?

Something seems very strange, tho. That gut of mine is going off and I feel there's something else. When are the next Apple events, or does Apple sometimes release products without an event? During the Keynote, didn't Steve say something like "Get one now" in reference to the Macbooks? That REALLY sticks in my mind. Even in context to his previous and following statements it seems out of place somehow.

Hmmm

 

[windowuser82]

I'll sell ya my dual G5 for TWICE what it cost me

Um...... *thinks* heeeeeeeeell nah :-D

Catch me in a few years when it'll be a collectors item heh.

 

[Sark]

Well technically 1gb may not be mandatory but I sure would'nt want to play any game with only 512mb of ram. It would just be too painful.

Alot of the socket 939 boards support the Athlon 64's(san diego and venice, not sure if there's more), Athlon FX and Athlon X2's. And the sempron's as well.

I have a socket 478 that supports Intel Northwoods and Prescotts. I don't know the exact processors but I know it works from a 2.4ghz to a 3.4ghz cpu. I think it does support more.
And Asus makes an adapter that lets me run a Pentium M on it.

So yes, it all depends. And there just isn't enough info available from Apple as to what socket they are using now and what socket they are using in the future. Or what FSB Intel's chips will support.

I have to also wonder if other motherboard manufacturers will be able to make boards for the Mac if they also provide drivers for it. They do for windows computers. Essentially the only difference would be the driver CD and whatever Apples TPM ,or whatever it's called, looks for on the board.

As far as the RAM goes, playing with less than a gig is hardly painful on many many games. It depends on each game. Lineage II is a big and beautiful 3D game for example, and it runs just fine with 512mb of RAM.