Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

20 inch iMac Released

The latest versions of Matlab and Maple run just fine on a G4. Maybe you need a console.
Originally posted by pgwalsh
Coming from the man/woman that just said "if you can't afford it then it's not for you". ha ha ha

We both know your FOS
Click to expand...
 
ok, i'll answer the question:

yes, i do want a 9600, g5 in an iMac enclosure with 20" monitor for $2200 and expect apple to eat the difference in price from the current situation.

there you go, geez.

:rolleyes:

now can you answer my question?

in the apple's matrix of pro/consumer vs. desktop/laptop, where does the iMac with 9600/G5 fit in? apple currently classify G5 and high-end videocards as "pro" features. just because it's in an iMac doesn't make it consumer if it's loaded with PM features... remember cube? that was an iMac (no expansion) with PM features priced at PM prices. yeah, it was a cool machine but went nowhere...
 
The only other thing I am going to add to this thread, besides by "pimply-faced geek" comment, is that the only game that interests me on the Mac -- Tranquility -- runs perfectly fine on my G4 450 Sawtooth w/ GeForce 4MX, will run even better on the iBook G4 800 I have coming next week, and would run even BETTER on the 20" iMac -- not to mention, Tranquility would be just breathtaking on that display!

If you have not "played" Tranquility, I recommend it. But it's a game for non-gamers, so I don't think the rabid gamers in this thread would be interested.
 
Originally posted by Nicky G
The only other thing I am going to add to this thread, besides by "pimply-faced geek" comment, is that the only game that interests me on the Mac -- Tranquility -- runs perfectly fine on my G4 450 Sawtooth w/ GeForce 4MX, will run even better on the iBook G4 800 I have coming next week, and would run even BETTER on the 20" iMac -- not to mention, Tranquility would be just breathtaking on that display!

If you have not "played" Tranquility, I recommend it. But it's a game for non-gamers, so I don't think the rabid gamers in this thread would be interested.
Click to expand...

I agree, Tranquility is definitely an experience all of its own...
 
Originally posted by 1macker1
The latest versions of Matlab and Maple run just fine on a G4. Maybe you need a console.
Click to expand...
ok.. you got me... But you know you could have saved yourself some money and bought an eMac.

if you do the home video or pictures or any other wonderful thing iApps allow you to do, faster processors are always welcom... Better video performance is always an eye catching marketing tool.. But alas you wont be upgradeing for a long long time. :cool:
 
I wonder could there be a way to take the graphics card out of the newer iMacs and put it in a 17" 800Mhz iMac. I think i'll send techtv a e-mail.
 
Oh dear god, what have they done, With a price tag of nearly$4000AUD, it's looking unlikley to sell great numbers in Australia.

Sorry apple but when you put a GeForce FX 5200 64mb, 256mb DDR333, and a 1.25GHz proc in a machine that is so expencive, I don't care how big the screen is people just don't want to spend that much on a machine with such lackluster specs.
 
I'm betting this is not the final form that by Jan. the whole line gets upgraded. This is just a push for the holiday season and thats all it is.

I'm looking for
1.25
1.33
1.42 line up coming in next few months.
 
Simply put: I feel like an idiot having some doubt in this. And it amazes me at the same time. :D

Well at least I got the part about no G5's in the iMac and no new enclosure :) *whew*
 
Yeah I think it's just for the holiday push too. The 20" screen is just for the cool factor, even though i could use the extra 3 inches.

Can you mirror with the apple displays with the 20"imac? I hate the VGA only mirroring that's available with my 800Mhz iMac .:(
 
Originally posted by pgwalsh
Ok... my apologies to all you iMac fans... Clearly I'm misguided in thinking you would want more performance in an iMac... My bad...

As it is a consumer targeted machine I thought for the price it could contain some better components. However, for the suggested use in these forums I guess it would compare to a Dell at $500 to $799 Dell. Of course it looks way better and has OS X.

See y'all avoided the Radeon 9600 and G5 question... As you all secretly don't want it in an iMac.. or do you? That would be killer wouldn't it... oh wait no.. it wouldn't... Blah!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Um, of course people want more performance in an iMac. People also want more performance in the PowerMacs. Once the 3 GHz G5s come out, people will be wondering when the G6s will be out. And on and on. What’s your point?

Who’s avoiding any questions? A G5 and a Radeon 9600 in an iMac – sure, that would be great. So would a ATI FireGL X1 9700 VPU with 256MB DDR RAM, AGP PRO-50, HydraVision, and dual DVI in the next PowerMac – a $1000 video card. Again, what’s your point? Lots of things “would be nice”, but that’s not the way Apple’s business model and the timing aspect of things work. With the recent introduction of the G5 and the Radeon 9600s to the Apple line-up, and since they’ve just been released in the PowerMacs, it is not reasonable to expect to see them in the iMacs so soon. Otherwise, the difference between pro and consumer line would start to blur. It’s called product differentiation.

Perhaps this comes down to an issue of timing and instant gratification. Some people are fine with waiting and understanding business reasons behind decisions, others are impatient. Fair enough.
 
Originally posted by Ensoniq
I'm sure it's all been said before, but Apple f'd up on the pricing. The specs, understandable when they have PowerBooks and G5s to sell. Pricing...way off.

Should have been:

15" - $999
17" - $1499
20" - $1999 (w/120 GB HD/512 MB RAM)
Click to expand...

I agree that the 15" and 17" could be priced a little lower, but when you consider the fact that Apple sells their 20" Cinema Display for $1299, its hard to expect the 20" iMac to be priced any lower. There is a $600 difference between 17" and 20" displays and only $400 price difference in iMac.

I'd like to see faster processors and better graphics in at least the 20" iMac, but I guess they don't want to get ahead of the PowerBooks like you said.
 
Originally posted by DGFan
Most consumers don't play games though. Less than 10% of the people I know who own computers play games on them.

They DO surf the web, read email, type up documents, store digital photos, etc....

(directed to the board in general and not just you)
I just don't understand why so many people do not know what the real world is like. Do you all get outside? Do you have real friends? Real friends who aren't "gamers"? Do you have a girlfriend?
Click to expand...

Getting a bit personal there DGFan, but I still agree with your initial comments. I don’t think people have a good grasp of what the true “consumer market” is, and gamers are classified as consumers – they are power users if anything. After all, think about PCs – if you like games, you have to run out and buy a top-of-the-line PC to do what? Use Office, IE6, e-mail, etc.? Nope – to play games. And you better update your RAM, video card, etc. every year or two. Why? Because the latest and greatest game pushes you to require that technology. Is it your e-mail program that requires gamers to have a P4 with 1 GB of RAM and a top-of-the-line video card. Don’t think so...
 
Originally posted by jxyama
i thought i wouldn't come back, but it's kind of tempting.

pgwalsh and DHM:

do you have any experience in business? marketing?

it's not as easy as "ok, here's g5 and the best videocard, we'll just charge the same price as before because we know that's what consumers want."

apple is a business, it's not a charity. they cannot just put in what "consumers want" (your claim, i don't believe it) and charge less for them. can they afford to put them in and charge less? probably, because apple has pretty a healthy margin. BUT WHY? to make gamers happy? to feel "good"? geez, if i were a shareholder in apple, i'd be mad at anyone who made that kind of a dumb headed decision BLINDLY.

if you eat into margins, you have to make it up elsewhere. unless you have solid analysis claiming that the decreased margins can be made up by increases in sales (from gamers, if what you say is right), then such a decision would be considered. otherwise, no. i'm sure apple considered it and decided against it.

you guys aren't really suggesting/asking for a better iMac. to me, it just sounds like you guys are complaining endlessly how useless it is and how expensive it is. it's not a very constructive argument to say, make it cheaper and make it better. OF COURSE it would be better if everything was better and cheaper. there's a reason it isn't.

tell me how iMacs can be made better (for gamers) without:
* eating into other Mac sales
* significantly decreasing the margins

then we'll talk. until then, all you are suggesting is apple blindly lower prices and raise specs.

Don't Hurt Me: "if imac was a real consumer machine it would have those things consumers want and be able to do those things consumers like to do such as gaming."

- you don't represent the consumers

and

-average consumer will not be obsessed about gaming performance to the same degree you are

by the way, those $500 to $800 dells you are talking about will have shared RAM, CD-ROM, CRT and/or celeron. those compare better with eMacs, not iMacs.
Click to expand...

jxyama - what can I say, we think a like and I like your style. :cool:

And just one more comment – in reference to the whole “wouldn’t you like a Radeon 9600 in the iMac, come on wouldn’t ya???” challenge, actually I’m indifferent, because I’m not a gamer. Right now I’m running a old PC with a GeForce2 32 MB card, and guess what? It runs fine for me. I can watch movies on my desktop, see all my applications fine, it displays my desktop very nicely... ;) In fact, if I buy an iMac a 5200 is probably overkill for what I need.
 
$$$$$

It was the price point of the 20" that surprised me. If Apple is going to charge almost $2200 for the G4 version of a large monitor iMac, what should we expect if/when it does go to G5?

If the future is a $3000 iMac, I should go ahead and buy my 17" now and load it up, no?
 
Really? Then what am I doing with this new 15" iMac?

Originally posted by the_mole1314
By all means, the iMac isn't what switchers buy, they either buy a G5, iBook, or eMac.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by jxyama
apple is a business, it's not a charity. they cannot just put in what "consumers want"

(by the way, those $500 to $800 dells you are talking about will have shared RAM, CD-ROM, CRT and/or celeron. those compare better with eMacs, not iMacs.
Click to expand...

The consumer wants to choose what goes into their computer. Hence apple should offer bare bone systems, 1or2 procs, 1 motherboard and a case, and maybe not even the case.(for the power mac/tower.) I reckon that that would sell like hot cakes since in Australia people spend between $700-1500AUD on a computer and if you could offer them an expandable, bare bone mac for that, well I for one would buy one.

In Aus I can Buy a PC With AMD Athlon 2600+, R9600, 52xCD-R/RW and 512mb DDR400 for less than $1000AUD~$700USD.
 
I'm surprised I haven't seen this mentioned...>

Real gamers don't use LCD displays. They use CRTs because of the faster refresh rate. That might be one reason Apple isn't "catering" to the gamer market with the iMac.



Originally posted by greenstork
All I have to say is that if you're worried about an x-bench score, you shouldn't be buying an iMac, you are not the intended market. That $2000 gets you $1300 of monitor so stop you bitchin. If you want a power user machine, buy a 1.6 GHz Power Mac and get your own monitor.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by ~Shard~
jxyama - what can I say, we think a like and I like your style. :cool:

And just one more comment – in reference to the whole “wouldn’t you like a Radeon 9600 in the iMac, come on wouldn’t ya???” challenge, actually I’m indifferent, because I’m not a gamer. Right now I’m running a old PC with a GeForce2 32 MB card, and guess what? It runs fine for me. I can watch movies on my desktop, see all my applications fine, it displays my desktop very nicely... ;) In fact, if I buy an iMac a 5200 is probably overkill for what I need.
Click to expand...
Shard... It is not just about games, it is about value for your money.. The 9600 is a consumer grade video card for use in consumer grade PC's, but it supports upcoming advanced games... You don't have to be gamer to benefit, but it adds the mid range gamer benefit. It's an appeal factor that might persuade someone to buy an iMac.. We're not talking pro game card here, but great performance for value.. Obviously there's a few people here besides me that see this obvious shortcoming in the iMac. I expect my mac to perform well for years to come and certainly with any software regardless of use for the next year or two. That's not too much to ask for, is it?

You pay a premium for an Apple computers and I expect premium parts whether itÕs a PowerMac, iMac, or eMac. There are premium grade parts for each level and thatÕs what I was correlating. ItÕs not too much to ask for not at all.
 
Originally posted by zyuzin4
20 incher weighs 40.1 pounds!

and the home page must be rotating between iMac and G5
Click to expand...

OMG!!!! Why would would the 20" weigh 40.1 pounds. That it like twice as much as the 17", which is what I have. I think that mine is even on the heavy side. The bigger monitor couldn't add on all the extra weight. Apple must have put in somthing heavy to support the new monitor.

But still, 40.1 pounds, I think they might have to get ride of the sayign that you can pick is up by the steel arm.
 
About the lack of more RAM or a larger HD...>

When you go to McDonalds do they ask you if you "want fries with that"? Apple didn't include a larger HD or more RAM because those are popular upgrades and are PROFIT centers for them.


Originally posted by Ensoniq
I'm sure it's all been said before, but Apple f'd up on the pricing. The specs, understandable when they have PowerBooks and G5s to sell. Pricing...way off.

Should have been:

15" - $999
17" - $1499
20" - $1999 (w/120 GB HD/512 MB RAM)

The 15" at $999 would have given potential eMac buyers an option for more class for a slightly higher price and slightly smaller screen. Good trade-off for some.

The 17" at $1499 would have only been $200 more than they are selling the 15" for right now. Excellent buy and price/performance combo.

The 20" at $1999 with more HD, more RAM, AND the awesome screen for only $200 more than the previous 17" sold for would have flown off the shelves, no questions asked.

I have no doubt that Apple will sell plenty of the 20" iMac as is. But if they had reworked the entire lineup as above, they could have seen their best holiday iMac sales ever.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back