G5 iMac Specs?

[Hattig]

It's Intel that produce the 3.6 🙄 You can get 'em in Alienware systems right now.

Well duh, that's why I mentioned Intel twice in that sentence. 🙄

Intel aren't exactly flooding the market with them. They are hot, they have a tendency to throttle thermally. If you'd been reading PC hardware sites since Intel paper released the processor way back when you'd have realised this.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

ok i have reread the thinksecret post, and there are a few things i am not sure about, they say that there will be 4 new models of which the two 20inch models will be EXACTLY the same except for the HD, so i wonder perhaps that that model could perhaps have a 2GHz processor.
And
CmdrLaForge you are wrong, i am a teenager and the new iMac G5 sound perfect for me, I am Definetly buying one within the next year because i am going to university next year and with this iMac I will have the latest hardware(except Graphics) and i can do everything that i want to do on a computer right in the iMac.

Congrats for your decision. Looks like you are NOT average Joe. I think the new iMac will be a great machine. Just it lacks a good graphics card (if specs are true).

But I still believe that average Joe is
- a home user
- teenager or in his/her twenties
- likes to play games random/sometimes/often
- makes simple comparisons like:
CPU speed Mac < CPU speed PC
RAM Mac < Ram PC
Graphics Mac < Graphics PC
Price Mac > Price PC
Decision: gets a PC

 

[BenRoethig]

The "average joe" doesn't play graphics-intensive or use graphics-intensive programs, for that matter. The average joe writes documents, composes email, plays light online games, visits websites, chats etc.

This new iMac--if the design is as good as it sounds--is exactly what Apple needs. (No, Apple doesn't need a headless iMac. It doesn't make sense business-wise, or in any other way.)

Let's see here: The no optical drive model replaces The $800 iMac (which outsold the previous iMac 3:1 by the way) at $1300. Which also means the lowest priced consumer desktop is going to come in at $1400-$1500. In what way does this make sense? A quarter of all Mac sales will go to windows machines.

Oh, by the wa, the average joe does not spend $1500 on a computer anymore. Especially an all in one. If this is true, Steve just killed Apple.

 

[Moonlight]

maybe not

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.

I don't buy it, they would sell an eMac without a CD drive if that were the case....

 

[Moonlight]

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.]

Don't buy that either...Floppies were taken out because CD-ROM was replacing it. So, what technology is replacing CD-ROM right now ? Maybe DVD? you still need an optical drive for that...

 

[Hemingray]

In my opinion the top iMac at these prices MUST have:

2Ghz G5
9600XT 128MB (minimum)
160GB HD
512MB DDR 400 (pairs are need for G5 no? so we get 2 X 128MB crap?)
Bluetooth
Airport Extreme
USB 2
Firewire 800
Excellent speakers
Optical audio

...

Apple will lose me unless I get these specs.

Bye. 🙄

 

[kcmac]

This is a pretty interesting article from AMUG comparing the 1.25gig eMac to a dual 2gig PowerMac.

This supports a couple of repetitive issues in this thread.

1. The average user won't notice much difference in speed between the 2 different processors. (aka specs aren't everything)

2. Pricing is important.

I am not trying to throw this thread off track and certainly not selling the emac or its features (or lack thereof).

 

[Hattig]

Bye. 🙄

Given the average response to these (possibly incorrect) specs, I think that he is more in the majority. Apple are making a product that isn't going to increase iMac sales. They aren't making a product that people here want. I think it is a good product to have, but Apple need a non-integrated low-end PowerMac without a screen, single processor, etc, for us potential switchers with monitors already, but who aren't willing to splash out a lot of money.

 

[aldo]

Oh god. This is a terrible machine.

The trouble is this machine has no market - it's not even got a niche anywhere.

Schools don't tend to buy TFT machines (nor all in one - a lot easier to repair tower units) as they easily get smudged and broken. They'll choose the emac which is a hell of a lot cheaper.

'Average Joes' won't buy this because they can get machines which do all they need, plus a user friendly, secure, linux distro for $299 from wal mart.

Students won't buy this because of price, lack of expandability and general lack of games, and crappy graphics cards.

This may sell well, but I wouldn't buy it and I wouldn't recommend anyone to buy one. I don't think it will sell well at all though, imo. Getting people to buy an iPod is easy - they just plug it in. Getting them to switch is a lot lot harder - a task that I think Apple isn't up to.

 

[vuc78000]

Conculsion- For graphic intensive: get a PC <eom>

Conculsion- For graphic intensive: get a PC.

The new iMac will be known in history as the time when PC graphics over took Mac.

.V

 

[Frobozz]

Oh, by the wa, the average joe does not spend $1500 on a computer anymore. Especially an all in one. If this is true, Steve just killed Apple.

That's wild conjecture at best. If you have some numbers to back that up, I'd be interested in seeing them though. Steve didn't (won't) kill Apple with something so trivial. People are buying Latops instead of desktops as a trend, which is why roughly 50% of Apple's sales are Laptops this year and last... which is slightly above the average. The trend is there.

Let's not forget that the ThinkSeret article specifically stated that their source(s) would NOT confirm prices. They suggested this would mean they'd be in similar price range to today's iMacs.

$1,500 for a computer with a monitor is completely normal... though we have no price confirmation to base all our complaints on anyway.

 

[Nawlins]

TCO and other comments...

Can someone explain the concept of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) to me? Is it the sum of the initial purchase price, and the costs upgrades, repairs, etc.?

Thanks, Alex

 

[arkmannj]

No Way

I personally don't think they would make any of the models without a optical drive, there are other (better) ways to provide lockouts
I thinkthe specs provided are bunk. (I hope) keep in mind that the iMac (And even the eMac to some degree) are not just aimed at eductional institutions, but also to average consumers, without an optical drive no one would buy it. Apple would also be shooting themselves in the foot if they did, there goes your advertiment capabilities for burning CD's out of iPhoto or iTunes, there goes iDVD.
all this with the sad video card adds up to a sad day.

on a compleatly different note, I think Mac users get jacked on our price for video cards. the same card PC version is often 1/2 as much.

I think if these specs are true Apple would scare away many consumer buyers, and small business buyers. all that would be left are high end users.

anyhow just my thoughts and opinions

 

[rickag]

...My neighbor is still using his 7 year old PowerMac G3 running Panther, alongside his 6 year old Apple display...

That's nice, I don't suppose your neighbor is into home videos a'la iMovie or Final Cut Express. Or much into music. I can only imagine how painfull their experience in encoding and burning a DVD home movie would be. I have a 1.25GHz Powerbook, which serves my needs adequately, but I personally would like a desktop to take over these functions and increase my efficiency. I will not pay $1300 to $2200 for these rumored iMacs based on these spec.'s. If these spec's and prices are true, my option then becomes finding a refurb(probably too expensive) or a used/rebuilt dual G4 or G5 through some one like Small Dog.

It is not a good thing that Apple refurb and used towers are competing against new consumer Apple computers.
🙁

 

[Frobozz]

Conculsion- For graphic intensive: get a PC.

The new iMac will be known in history as the time when PC graphics over took Mac.

.V

Pass the ganga, man.

Name one consumer PC that comes with a better GPU out of the box. There's not many, if any. While it's true the PC world might have options to upgrade from integrated/shared or low-end seperate graphics cards, not many do.

The 5200 sucks. Don't get me wrong... but I will keep saying it: this is a CONSUMER machine. If you want performance, buy a PowerMac. If you want portability, like roughly 50% of all people who buy a mac, get a laptop.

I have a real gripe with Apple's GPU lineup but it sure as hell is better than it used to be! We now have 2 major vendors instead of just one. We now have multiple aftermarket cards from ATI. Most are 1 generation old at worst. The only thing that sucks is that the 6800 is so expensive as an upgrade. $600! Yowser. Won't stop me from getting one in a new PowerMac, though. 🙂

 

[nacl99]

'Average Joes' won't buy this because they can get machines which do all they need, plus a user friendly, secure, linux distro for $299 from wal mart..

yeah your in touch with the average joe.... you think they would run linux a any price? At least a cheap ass e-machine.

 

[h00ligan]

don't get too carried away..

Don 't get too carried away, M$ is having some problems, but mostly that is in corporate environments..companies that replace MS servers are not replacing with xservs.. sorry. Linux/unix is threatening MS corporate model and so they are adjusting. Selling more copies of XP would be nice but is not necessary..

Just to top it off, they are no where near being ****ed or out of business.. they are still the market leader by a landslide.

The iMac was never meant to be revolutionary spec-wise. It's a computer for the masses; the catalyst for the overthrow of M$.

(And by the way, will people PLEASE stop complaining about games? Macs will get games, okay? Increased market share is coming soon. Also, M$ is in deep trouble as a company. If their software license sales slow down, they are ****ed. Period. It is a good time to be a mac user.)

 

[GFLPraxis]

Hardware Development faster?

Is that why the processors are suck at 3.2 FOREVER.....?

And I don't want to start naming all the things that came out first on a mac (hardware wise)

It's actually at 3.6, but don't forget, in the time it went from 3 to 3.6, the G5 went from dual 2 to dual 2.5, which is a much higher percentage increase.

Although there are reports of 3.4 ghz P4's outperforming the 3.6's in many cases...

 

[h00ligan]

btw

The first thing i thought of when i was reading this is that it's going to be like a more modern version of the 20th anniversary mac.. the one that cost like 10 grand.. seinfeld had it on his show.. remember

obviously teh scren will be up front and everything else will come out the sides.. i.e. cd rom etc.

 

[aldo]

Can someone explain the concept of Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) to me? Is it the sum of the initial purchase price, and the costs upgrades, repairs, etc.?

Thanks, Alex

Don't ever listen to it. It's regually spouted by platforms that are worse than others so you use statistics that are highly conextual and generally useless.

But the idea is that you take the hardware price, plus software, plus upgrades and repairs over a certain length of time.

Windows says it's cheaper than Linux for servers using TCO, but they are highly flawed and require very specific needs.

I don't know about you, but I find it hard to belive that a $499 PC with the same spec as a $1500 iMac can be more expensive over the course of 3 years. As long as you use a firewall (or are behind a NAT router) and some decent anti-virus, you'll be fine when it comes to viruses and worms. A decent web browser will stop spyware, and so will WinXP SP2 with the new IE installed (not that I would recommend it).

As for repairs, both Apple and PC use nearly the exact same components apart from the motherboard and CPU.

TBH, I think this is the nail in the coffin for me moving to Mac on the desktop. I like their laptops, but PC laptops have got a hell of a lot better latley and I can see the current iBook I own as the last Mac I own.

 

[aldo]

It's actually at 3.6, but don't forget, in the time it went from 3 to 3.6, the G5 went from dual 2 to dual 2.5, which is a much higher percentage increase.

Although there are reports of 3.4 ghz P4's outperforming the 3.6's in many cases...

But percentages mean nothing. It's performance that counts, and the 3.6GHz P4 will be faster than the dual 2.5s in nearly every case.

 

[GFLPraxis]

A 900Mhz Celeron is already an old piece of sh*t. Longhorn is early alpha, it'll run like a dog whatever you put it on simply because nothing is anywhere near to being finished. Say that PC's will age faster if you like (simply because hardware development is faster on the x86 side), but to use this as your example is complete ignorance.

Considering that XP runs on it well, it's fine.
What I'm saying is that a computer that runs XP perfectly well (XP's minimum requirement is what, 233 mhz?), can barely run Longhorn in the ALPHA stage. The final version is gonna be deathly slow.

On the other hand, *most* computers that can run OS 9, can run OS X.

 

[AirUncleP]

As an educator I'd take machines with no optical drives. I don't use the drives now. All students do is break them. Every thing is imaged or network installed. Easier and Faster.

 

[Porchland]

No optical drives on the low end? How do I load Tiger when it comes out? I dunno about the rest of it, but they will have at least a CDR drive. At least. Seriously, how would you install anything?? And a CDR is like $10 more than a CD-ROM these days. At least a CDR.

-p-

That's ComboDrive around these parts. (Just trying to protect you from the Geek Nazis!)

 

[GFLPraxis]

Oh gee, you're totally right. I'm going to go play Doom 3 right now on my mac. And then I'm going to play some Final Fantasy XI, because on a first-rate platform, I have more to choose from than just one type of game. And then I'm going to play some Vice City, even though that game has been out for YEARs. I half half-life 2 on the way, along with Far Cry. All on the Mac. Because it's a first-rate gaming platform, no doubt.

Microsoft bought the last good Mac game developer. What do we get now? Starcraft released two years after it's out on PC? Game developers don't care about the Mac because of the market share. And if there aren't many games, there aren't many gaming cards.

How can you possibly debate this? Name five top-tier games that came out on the Mac at the same time as the PC, within the past year. OK, within the past two years.

I don't deny that the Mac COULD be a good platform, but the market just isn't going to allow it to be.

-d

Please.
The Mac is a good gaming platform. It's third party developers that make the difference between the amount of games available. Don't count this against the Mac.

Besides, most of the big titles are ported to Mac anyway. Check out Aspyr and the other Mac developers.