Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
G5 iMac Specs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
whooleytoo said:
Haha, that's what I have been thinking. The iMac is Apple's consumer computer. For the prices they are asking it better damn well be able to do more then simply surf the web, run iLife, and create documents. From the logic of some posters here you would think the iMac is nothing more then a low end Emachine.
dragonslive said:
Let me get this right, Dragonslive.
I am delusional, yet you know better than the legions of people who work for Apple. The product designers, who work with the buyers, and let's not forget the market researchers who figure out what people will pay for. Do you think they just pull these prices and specs out of their butts?
But YOU know better. You know better than ALL of them. Even though Apple as a company has been in business for decades. And has a market cap of $12 billion. And your major claim to fame is what, exactly?
You're an egomaniac if you think you know better. You don't. None of us do, because none of us have the information that Apple has, and none of us runs Apple.
That ringing in the background? That's the clue phone. Pick it up.
Moonlight
macrumors 65816
FAKE
this story is bogus
First of all, there is NO WAY they would make a mac without a CD drive, how would you install software, run games, or burn CD's from iTunes ?
Second, they would try to put a super drive in as many of the models as they could, so people could take advantage of iDVD. The high end 1.6 17inch would not have a combo drive. Third, there would probably be firewire 800 in atleast the hi end model. Why would apple not want to promote there own technology?? Fourth, where are they getting the hard drives that they could only afford to put 40 gig in the bottom 2 models ? Do you know how cheap hard drives are ? 60 - 80 gigs atleast for the mid level model.
Then there are little things like:
No Bluetooth ?
1.6 g5 ? (are they making that just for the iMac?)
No 15 inch LCD model? (LCD's are still not the cheapest thing out there)
Only 2 gigs of RAM max ? (g5's can take so much more, why not 3 or 4 gigs)
Lack of anything new and exciting (iMacs are born from a new mold, this seems like a old rehash)
I don't buy this story for a moment...Who is with me ?
this story is bogus
First of all, there is NO WAY they would make a mac without a CD drive, how would you install software, run games, or burn CD's from iTunes ?
Second, they would try to put a super drive in as many of the models as they could, so people could take advantage of iDVD. The high end 1.6 17inch would not have a combo drive. Third, there would probably be firewire 800 in atleast the hi end model. Why would apple not want to promote there own technology?? Fourth, where are they getting the hard drives that they could only afford to put 40 gig in the bottom 2 models ? Do you know how cheap hard drives are ? 60 - 80 gigs atleast for the mid level model.
Then there are little things like:
No Bluetooth ?
1.6 g5 ? (are they making that just for the iMac?)
No 15 inch LCD model? (LCD's are still not the cheapest thing out there)
Only 2 gigs of RAM max ? (g5's can take so much more, why not 3 or 4 gigs)
Lack of anything new and exciting (iMacs are born from a new mold, this seems like a old rehash)
I don't buy this story for a moment...Who is with me ?
Lepton
macrumors 6502a
It should look like a Pro PowerBook, closed, with the screen facing out. The screen should be REMOVABLE, and not necessarily usable with a cable, it is either on or off. They should sell a version without a screen.
The screenless version should be quite a bit cheaper. And there are already several other ways on the machine to get video out, digital and analog. This inexpensive, compact, headless Mac would have TONS of uses.
The screenless version should be quite a bit cheaper. And there are already several other ways on the machine to get video out, digital and analog. This inexpensive, compact, headless Mac would have TONS of uses.
@tibor
Just because a company is big/old doesn't mean that all it's decitions are right, just think of Commodore, SEGA or Atari(the old hw producing company, not the new rebadged Infogrames[spelling?] one).
Just because a company is big/old doesn't mean that all it's decitions are right, just think of Commodore, SEGA or Atari(the old hw producing company, not the new rebadged Infogrames[spelling?] one).
Well, on the Intel side you'd be lucky to get a 3.6 because of their manufacturing issues. Also the latest core is less performant than the previous one, which makes it even worse for Intel.edesignuk said:
On the other hand, AMD has gone from 3200+ to 3800+ although their clock speeds haven't increased a lot due to architectural enhancements. By all accounts, the AMD Athlon64 ratings are very reasonable.
tibor said:
That phone call.......it is for you. Apple wants to employ you for their propaganda campaign and keep the secrets of their chinese pc parts safe n sound to increase profit margin and stagnate market share.
I never claimed to know more than apple about making obscene profits......I am just not so stupid as the people such as you who allow them to continue the practice...
Idiot.....
bwintx
macrumors 6502
jocknerd said:
...but that would pretty much leave it to schools (who won't buy them because they can get PCs much more cheaply and, as the more vocal parents insist, "That's what the kids will really use in the workplace, anyway") and graphics pros (many of whose bean-counting bosses always want to know why they need "those damned overpriced Apples" when apps like DreamWeaver, QuarkXPress, InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc., are available for Windows also). 🙁
Frump
macrumors member
Moonlight said:
I think you might be right. The whole Ilife setup is of no use if you don't have CD burner. Schools are worried about security, then what about USB pen drives, 40 Gig Ipods and all the other stuff you can attach to up/download!
Sounds like there is something wrong with the specs. After all it is only a rumor.
rog said:
2001 PC? Um...to get a 64 bit PC in 2001 you'd have to spend at least $8000. Slow? Honestly, I don't think you've read:
http://forgetcomputers.com/~jdroz/pages/09.html
I don't believe there is even a 2004 PC that comes as fast. And don't give me the Athlon stuff. If you want to do your own custom built PC and run Linux that's fine, but Linux for the average Joe is not easy to understand. And Windows is simply too insecure to even be considered on a fast machine. It slows you down everytime you have to reinstall the whole system because of spyware or a virus. Apple keeps all its network ports closed by default, and root user is turned off.
The amount of money you have to spend on a system adminsitrator to make sure you stay up to date and safe on a PC is ridiculous compared to the zero cost you need on a Mac for that. The Mac lets you get things done without the ills of society getting in your way. In the long run, the Mac lasts longer, and is easier to maintain, and costs less to maintain. Speed is fast enough for all but the most demanding users who need a supercomputer. But then again, the US Army has taken 1500 XServes and made the second fastest supercomputer for 100 times less than the first or next 50 fastest supercomputers. Hrmm...costs too much and too slow?
wizard said:
I could say the same for the Pentium M - a dressed up Pentium 3.
I would hazard to guess that some of these statistics are wrong. The graphics card seems last gen, and even though apple typically doesn't put the newest, best graphics card in a system, they won't use the one listed.
Since you clearly have a picture of what the consumer wants, why don't you e-mail Apple. I imagine the letter would be as follows.
Dear Mr. Steven P. Jobs,
As an outside and clear minded individual, I think your rumored step into the hardware of the G5 iMac is a little off base.
During my extensive polls and questionaires of what a consumer wants, I found consumeres demand at least 512 of this megabyte thingy. And atleast 80 of those gigawhatevers.
-Reguards,
Dave
Honestly what consumer needs a G5? Granted I will know the difference between 512 and 256 of ram, but will my mom? Probably not.
A consumer is just that. Consumers are the type of people that really don't know what they want. They have little to no knowledge of what goes in a computer and what makes it run. Typically they like doing the following things: e-mail, web browsing, instant messaging, word processing, excel, download music/update iPod.
Please tell me which of these tasks will eat 100 percent of the processor/ram.
Even when you throw in iPhoto you're slowed down the most by disk access time and read/write time from your digital camera.
Middle of August is very little time left? Last time i check we were only 1/3 the way through the year. Cnet speculates early/late september. I'd say that's a safe bet. Seeing the design apple took with the iPod and iPod mini I don't believe anyone is going to be dissapointed.
Also, 64-bit processing isn't 2003 technology, unless you were using the Itanium. In which case I'm jealous. Face it. Technology hasn't changed much from 2003. My powerbook i bought in November is still pretty much top of the line even though it doesn't have the fastest processor.
Also, you should replace us with me. Apple for me has been excellent. They just replaced the logic board and my harddrive in my iMac, and copied over all the data from a previously corrupted harddrive.
If anyone Apple is screwing over themselves.
If you want a high end system I encourage you to look at the Powermac G5.
I'd consider this machine to be average. Exactly what most computer users are. If you want something to game/photoshop/final-cut on, I suggest you look at the Powermac.
/where are the sensible people these days?
these specs are way underwhelming. Many have said it already, but a $2200 computer should be able to play games at a decent framerate. 'Average' people don't spend $2k on a computer, they get the $600 special from whoever runs it, currently, on the mac side, that is the emac.
I think that pro equipment should offer dual chips and expandiblilty (the next gen g5 needs room for 4 internal HDs and hopefully another optical drive) , the consumer machines should be single g5s with integrated but decent video cards. the sad part for this current batch is that the expected high-end imac won't be able to run doom3 at the 20" screens native resolution (or very poorly - When quake 3 came out an imac could at least run it decently). maybe you can say its not supposed to be a gaming machine, but it never will be unless they start giving premium equipment for the premium cost.
i understand the reasoning for such low end equipment, its partially cost, and partially heat (this will all be jammed into a thin little box and competing with a large lcd - not much heat, but enough). the reasoning for a pATA hd in the low end is that there will be a pata port on the mb, there just aren't many SATA optical drives out there.
I think that pro equipment should offer dual chips and expandiblilty (the next gen g5 needs room for 4 internal HDs and hopefully another optical drive) , the consumer machines should be single g5s with integrated but decent video cards. the sad part for this current batch is that the expected high-end imac won't be able to run doom3 at the 20" screens native resolution (or very poorly - When quake 3 came out an imac could at least run it decently). maybe you can say its not supposed to be a gaming machine, but it never will be unless they start giving premium equipment for the premium cost.
i understand the reasoning for such low end equipment, its partially cost, and partially heat (this will all be jammed into a thin little box and competing with a large lcd - not much heat, but enough). the reasoning for a pATA hd in the low end is that there will be a pata port on the mb, there just aren't many SATA optical drives out there.
gopher said:
Macs do last longer. I have my dad playing tetris on an LC II. It's rock steady. The last thing replaced on it was the internal battery (7 years ago).
However, this athlon stuff isn't overblown. I just ordered a 64-bit laptop from PCTorque for about 2500. About the same price as a Powerbook.
Also, it runs windows. Microsoft came out with a 64-bit version in January I believe.
Moonlight said:
the alleged no-optical model is only for the education market. i can definitely see how these can be useful in a large computer lab, in which software is installed from a central fileserver, and running games and itunes cd burning aren't going to be an issue.
bwintx
macrumors 6502
Moonlight said:
And now, we enjoy a brief flashback to UseNet posts in 1998 along the general lines of: "OMG!!!! Apple just introduced a new computer called the iMac that has NO FLOPPY DRIVES!!!! WTF were they THINKING?!?!?!?"
😀
[Rest of my pre-edit post, Ruud had already said it.]
CmdrLaForge
macrumors 601
