LCD iMacs Confirmed For Macworld SF 2002

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by Brad147, Dec 4, 2001.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2001
  2. Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #2
    hmmm... still looks like a rumor.

    but the building rumors are gaining steam.

    but i got a question in referrence to the statement at the beginning of the article regarding the g5.

    if apple releases these revolutionary new jmacs (what the hell does the j stand for? am i missing something?) will apple want to release a g5 as well. a jmac is enough to cause a new apple craze woudlnt apple want to spread out the big announcements? i kinda wanna say "bah apple would love to revamp its entire desktop line and declare a new era of apple computing with a new ear of OS!" but im torn between these two views. so if jmac is real does this impact the g5 appearance or not?
     
  3. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2001
    #3
    >hmmm... still looks like a rumor.

    I think that we here should start archiving each and every rumour we see,
    and how it matches up with reality once the predicted time passes ;).


    >if apple releases these revolutionary new jmacs (what the hell does the j
    stand for?

    ... `j' follows `i' in the alphabet.


    > am i missing something?)

    ... it's the journalists' arbitrarily assigned nickname, not Apple's official moniker AFAIK.


    >will apple want to release a g5 as well.

    ... of course not. They'd be happy to see their Pro line stagnate FURTHER.
    Wouldn't we LOVE to see THAT?


    > a jmac is enough to cause a new apple craze

    I wouldn't count on it...


    > woudlnt apple want to spread out the big announcements?

    Rabbit-from-the-hat syndrome: when one is expecting big stuff from an expo
    for whatever reason (e.g. last expo had many hot new products announced
    and one grew accustomed to the feeling, or rumors wound everyone up, or...)
    and is disappointed (rumors didn't pan out, or whatever). So yes, Apple
    indeed has a strong motive to conserve big announcements so they have a
    steady flow for MW expos, seybold, etc.

    OTOH, Apple has so many sources of big announcements, I can't see them
    falling short. During the days when Apple's hardware was head and
    shoulders above everyone else's, their software didn't rate huge mentions
    at Expos ... a few years later we have FCP, iMovie, iDVD, (rumored)
    iPhoto, iTunes, OS X, all while Apple has performance obstacles on the
    hardware side.


    > so if jmac is real does this impact the g5 appearance or not?

    I wouldn't think so IMHO (add salt to taste).
     
  4. Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #4
    so my question is...

    who started the LCD iMac rumor first....some sort of leak from Apple or one of us?!
     
  5. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2001
    #5
    jMac?

    I think the "jMac" simply means January Mac.
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    California
    #6
    Why doens't Apple ever go the extra mile? I'm not saying they make horrible products (things like iPods & iPDA & iPhone are actually the top of the line), they actually near the upper rank of the I.T. industry. Why don't they just launch a 800mhz G5 iMac? The pro line would get a 1.6ghz G5. At least I hope this revised iMac will have a G4 (please, please!). I also do hope this iMac has a nVidia GeForce 2 MX & if pro lines are upgraded a GeForce 3 should become a standard (with GeForce 3 titanium as BTO option)! I also hope the "TOP, TOP" of the line G4/G5 Powermac will come BUNDLED with a display! How many of you guys think that would be a good idea (without a change in price, or very little change in price). Apple certainely has the niche in laptops, hands down no laptop can compete -in price and in speed... I think the desktops could be "a" little bit better... We aren't getting the tip, top of the line...

    Why don't apple go loose and include 15 Ram slots, 2 optical drives, Soundsticks a 17" Studio Display, 8 PC slots & 8 G5's!!! (Mac OS X can support up to 32)

    I would care if I paid $5999 for the above... At LEAST I would have the top of the line in the world!

     
  7. Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #7
    you know as ridiculous as dantec is getting i totally have to agree. apple is so holding out on us. apple keeps their margins very high compared to other companies you kinda wonder why they dont either drop the prices and open up the doors to new customers or make a truly pro computer and keep the price the same.

    "(things like iPods & iPDA & iPhone...)," whatthef--- nuf said. (trying to slip something past us?)

    as far as eyelikeart's comment hmm... you know seems to me i started seeing lcd imacs back about 2 years ago as mostly optimistic jokes and such like a lot of things we talk about now. internal firewire, bluetooth, lcd keyboards, etc. there was never any poof from our minds to apples sort of thing, i guess it just slowly grew from imagining to rumors about apple actually doing it without us really noticing. so if apple does give them to us you have to wonder if apple design techs visit sites like these or if its some convergent event.

    o and sorry about the vernacular, im in that sort of mood.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    evildead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2001
    Location:
    WestCost, USA
    #8
    Top?

    I dont know if that would be the best in the world. At work I order Sun boxes that compe with 20 CPUs and terabites of RAM. And we are not full production yet. Sun Makes even bigger boxes.


    For home use or pro use a Apple like that would not be that usefull. And it would cost $50,000.00 at least. Sun Enterprise servers with 4 CPUs (Ultra Spark III) and 4 gb RAM, 2 internal fiber HD's, cost $35,000.00 and you only get 4 PCI slots.
     
  9. Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #9
    well yes evil, dantec got a lil carried away, but it doesnt mean he isnt right. i mean apple could drop a g4 or a 800mhz g5 into an imac. apple could offer 1.6 or 1.8 ghz g5s in very low quantities. and yes 8 or 32 processors might seem a bit over the top but why has apple limited itself to dualies? drop an extra thousand and get 3 maybe? the gforce2 standard is a joke. imacs should have gforce3s. why? because imac kids are gonna wanna play games! and as stupid as it sounds gaming ability sells computers. lets face it apple computers cant handle a lot of games out there, and appple is just making this worse. so is apple holding out on us a bit? yes. we all know there are limits, and despite dantec's overly ambitious computer design i think it speaks to something a lot of us feel. why not go all out on something? if for nothing else than just to say weve done it!

    apple, fly me to the moon!
     
  10. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    California
    #10
    Maybe I got a little carried away after reading evildead's post, but why couldn't they at least include 5 Ram slots, 2 optical drives, soundsticks and a 17" display. I have the latter 3 but they all came at a price! Anyway... Lets hope this time that rumors wasn't as untruthful all the other ones where about this years Macworld July... :(
     
  11. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    California
    #11
    By the way... Me being 13, it is very important to have a good performing 3d card. That's why I have a Quicksilver (oubiously upgraded with a GeForce 3). But what I like with Macs (after switching from the dark side) is that any game you buy actually works! Not like windows not marking you need a 3d card on the box of a game... And when you finally install it (3 hours later) it tells you ... "This game requires a 3d card which you do not have". Basically telling you your screwed until you buy newer hardware.

    Is it possible to run Mac OS X on one of those Sun boxes? 32 processors working at OS X is sweet!!!

    Also, (I have no clue on this one)... Is it possible to have dual 3d cards (kinda like dual processor macs) to work at a game?
     
  12. macrumors 6502a

    Foocha

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2001
    Location:
    London
    #12
    Own flavour of UNIX

    Sun have their own flavour of UNIX, called Solaris. Whilst theoretically Apple could port OS X to UltraSPARC, Sun's processors, I don't think we'll see that any time soon.

    Now OS X on Intel... That would be another thing all together.
     
  13. Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #13
    frankly i dont think most intel chipsets could handle osx. hell most apple processors cant!
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    California
    #14
    Abitions lemon is true... Very true. Why can't Apple make the 3d card break into a sweat. I mean every mac has one. Not like the Peecee population where barely 5% have one!
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Foocha

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2001
    Location:
    London
    #15
    AmbitiousLemon, I've been running 10.1 on my PowerBook for weeks non stop. Show me a Mac running OS 9 that can do that.
     
  16. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2001
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    #16
    OS 9 is stable...

    RE: Foocha

    I beg to differ about os 9. I do prepress production and design. My G4 Desktop would be running nonstop for months running 9.0.4. This was being used everyday for hours a day browsing, email, running Illustrator, Photoshop, Quark and GoLive. That's one thing I really hate about the press, is that they will beat the hell of out of OS 9 calling it so unstable. I dunno, maybe I was just lucky.
     
  17. Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #17
    i run 9.2 day and night all the time and havent had to had any problems since my logic board blew about 6 months ago. the only times ive restarted have been to boot up in osx. im not saying osx is unstable hell no, it is definitely more stable than 9, but 9 isnt so bad itself.

    no im talking about the fact that i sit down at work on a dual 800mhz machine and osx is still slow. those of us who use it can only stand it because we dont compare it to 9. we compare 10.1 to 10.04. and 10.04 to pb. and pb dp. every time i boot back into 9 i smile. everything is so much faster. i feel like i just bought a new machine. i get so much more work done. i do miss a few apps that are only on x. and x is a thing of beauty. but until apple can make some hardware that will run osx well im not making the permanent switch. (i wont even mention glaring bugs still in x that often make it the most annoying os ever).

    osx is the future. its beautiful. has incredible potencial, but dont pretend your hardware can handle it.
     
  18. macrumors 68040

    MacAztec

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    #18
    Dantec, what kind of computer do you have? I am running a G3/333 iMac, runing perfecto on 10.1. I dont know about that 32 processor mac, its possible, but not probable. THe only people who need the dual processors are those who have the progs that support them. I also am only 13, and I hope soon to get my new computer. When i got to h/s i get a pick. Probly a G5 tower, or G5 powerbook, whatever one is out, and has speed, space, and is upgradable.
     
  19. Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #19
    damn....we didn't get fun gadgets like that when I was 13!!
     
  20. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    #20
    I think some people are equating mhz to cost for the G5. While an 800 mhz chip would certainly be cheaper than a 1.6 ghz chip, it still would probably not be into "consumer" prices. I'd be happy to see G4's in the iMac lineup.
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Foocha

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2001
    Location:
    London
    #21
    True, there are still some outstanding performance issues on OS X - some of them really silly, like the way that Apple Talk in Connect to Server does not cash file server names resulting in a 20 second delay before the list is displayed.

    I have to say I wasn't convinced OS X was ready for me until I made the plunge with 10.1. Now whenever I'm faced with an OS 9 machine I wince.

    Regarding OS 9's stability as a platform for desktop publishing - if you had GoLive,Quark & Photoshop running on a Mac for that long without crashing, you are to be congratulated - it is a very rare occurence.
     
  22. Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #22
    thank god for

    ...10.1

    i wish i could get os 10.1 but i only have an original, late-1999 ibook with 160MB RAM maxed out

    maybe it's time for a new mac

    ...i like the idea of a more crashproof unix system like 10.1 running on my computer which runs photoshop and illustrator and i hate it when i crash which os 9 seems to do too often

    it is good to hear positive news on the os x front lines
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Location:
    California
    #23

    Mac_User > I recommend a Powermac G4. A 733 is good enough "IF" you have a GeForce 3. I too started with an iMac (a Rev. D) then moved to an iBook and then moved to another iMac (summer 2000, DV+). Now I have my G4, and feel the urge to change to the G5 when it comes out. But I don't think that will happen :(!

    Jetahhatfield > I too have an iBook (but one of those indigo ones)... I must admit it isn't very zippy in OS 10, but try changing the colors down to "Thousands" and you will see quite a speed boost! (I have 192 ram)
     
  24. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2001
    Location:
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    #24
    osx

    I was one of the first to use OS X in the public. I got to use it two days early because I was working for a local mac store at the time. And one day before, we had a large corporate store party, where everyone had a chance to see how it worked, ect.
    I guess what I am getting too is -QUIIT COMPLAINING!- :)

    You people are all complaining about how slow OS X runs on your G4's and G3's.. I am stuck here on my old 8500 (which only I upgraded to 8 months ago, from an archaic performa[oxymoron btw]).

    When I get the money to buy a new Mac, hopefully a G5, when they come out, I plan on usin OS X too, but after 8.6 on 180mhz, im looking forward to it!

    My biggest concern, though, is how a, I going to be able to run older games or programs such as QuakeWorld that will never be ported to OS X?

    Consider yourself lucky before you get angry at how slow your OS is running on your 'waybetterthanmine' computers lol..


    :D
     
  25. macrumors 68040

    MacAztec

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    #25
    perfect

    This new iMac will be perfect. I dont think it should have been released before X-Mas. If it was, all the Peeeceee companies would have said "hey, our computer is only 399" Apple is waiting for those undecided new computer buyers, who are waiting for the next genereations.
     

Share This Page