G5 iMac Specs?

[nuckinfutz]

While I'm not ecstatic about the specs, I'm suprised nobody is talking about the alleged design. Computer in the back of the screen? Sounds ugly as hell, and its been done. Honestly, I don't see why they couldn't just tweak with the current design which is brilliant. Anyone see the sony vaio link? Thats what they compared the new imac to?!? Ughh...talk about a step backwards. ThinkSecret has an excellent track record, but I hope to God they are wrong. 🙁 🙁

Have you not learned why Apple is special?

HD based Digital Music Players were done before- Apple bettered it.
GUI Interfaces were done before- Apple improved it
Webcams were done before- Apple's iSight beats them


It doesn't matter than Gateway or whoever created a crappy version. They aren't Apple. I expect this iMac to look great and if it starts at $1299 it'll sell well and become very popular.

 

[afields]

Have you not learned why Apple is special?

HD based Digital Music Players were done before- Apple bettered it.
GUI Interfaces were done before- Apple improved it
Webcams were done before- Apple's iSight beats them


It doesn't matter than Gateway or whoever created a crappy version. They aren't Apple. I expect this iMac to look great and if it starts at $1299 it'll sell well and become very popular.

Well, I hope you're right. Right now though, the "computer in the back" sounds unappealing to me.

 

[intrepkid21]

Have you not learned why Apple is special?

HD based Digital Music Players were done before- Apple bettered it.
GUI Interfaces were done before- Apple improved it
Webcams were done before- Apple's iSight beats them


It doesn't matter than Gateway or whoever created a crappy version. They aren't Apple. I expect this iMac to look great and if it starts at $1299 it'll sell well and become very popular.

I anticipate the iMac looking much more refined than that Sony..perhaps something that can be wall-mounted..that will be awesome.

 

[stockscalper]

If it's that crappy pizza box design that's been shown it's going to run hot as hell besides being ugly as a Bush.

 

[Frobozz]

overpriced and slow, what a surprise Apple. 2001 PC speed at 1981 PC prices.

LOL. Go use your PC and leave us be!

 

[rdowns]

Honestly what consumer needs a G5? Granted I will know the difference between 512 and 256 of ram, but will my mom? Probably not.

You're right, they'll just marvel at the free beach ball every 256MB Mac comes with.

 

[7on]

Maybe Thinksecret read the memo wrong? You know, instead of "No CD" it read "No LCD"?

 

[job]

Maybe Thinksecret read the memo wrong? You know, instead of "No CD" it read "No LCD"?

Now that would be cool.

Although I think it would be hard to mis-read something like that, especially when the memo further mentioned the lack of an optical drive to prevent misuse in an educational environment.

 

[XForge]

A sans-optical model would probably make a kick-booty kiosk. Great-looking and more durable than your average Winbox.

 

[Ibjr]

How could any company release a "high end" comsumer system that is too pathetic to play current games descently? If this comes to pass, then its clear to me that Apple has no intention of ever increasing marketshare and gaining new customers.

Where is the Macintosh for the average person? You know the single processer 2-2.5Ghz mid-tower, with a mid-range to highend graphics card, and 512MB of ram, in the $1000-1500 price range. Something that can show off OS X, play modern games, and not leave you broke. Something to actually stand up against the PC competition, to increase marketshare and keep developer interest alive?

HAHA. The average person doesn't want to play games. When you understand that you do yourself a great service. You don’t win most mac converts by showing them a game. For 150 dollars they can buy a Xbox with graphics that far surpass anything we will see on the mac.

You win mac converts by showing them stable machines that do what they want to do, video, pictures, music, e-mail, and internet.

Apple won’t be able to make great inroads in the gaming market (which btw: in the x86 world is shrinking. Its more profitable to make a game for Xbox, PS2, or the Cube than for the PC) because their release schedule lags behind how Alienware and co sell their products.

 

[risc]

why?

Everytime Apple brings out specs for new machines (or some rumour site gets quoted) so many people come out of the wood work to complain. I've been watching it for a year and I have to say it's pretty boring. Example all the complaints about the "cut down" Dual G5 1.8 GHz, well I have a Rev B Dual 1.8 GHz and when I can play games like Call of Duty, with every setting on full, at 1680x1050 32 bpp on my AL 20" monitor I have to say I'm completely happy. My Dual G5 does everything I want, and the iMac will do everything it needs to, the only valid complaint here is with the video card, and even that isn't very valid since it is the default card in 2 of the Power Macs. The people who complain constantly about all of the Apple hardware, have you actually considered using it? Or is it your full time job to do nothing but complain?

 

[scibry]

A guarantee: It will be very fashionable

Steve Jobs has produced many successful products since he came back to Apple. The first smash hit was the iMac, with its many colors and cool look---an instant HOT fashion item, as well as a special computer.

Arguably, his other successful product launches, like the iPod and mini (5 colors) have all been fashion hits as well as technological feats.

The features don't matter so much as it's very usable and stylish. This new iMac or tablet or whatever else Apple creates will come in colors or be very sleek and sexy.

Expect that, because Apple knows its profits depend on keeping those pink iPod mini buyers excited 🙂

 

[Doctor Q]

How could you rationally want to place an order for this crap? I truely mean crap too, except for the processor, this is as minimalist as one can get hardware wise. There is no way that this machine can be described as high end. Not even middle end. More likely it will take on the term "yesterdays computer" as the technology is certainly fine for a PC built a couple of years ago, but certianly not something that will serve a consumer going into 2005.

There really is very little time left in the year, knowing Apple of Late we will be lucky to get the hardware in September. So we basically have a computer for the year 2005 that is using technology that would be considered good in 2003. Apple is doing us really good here.

Maybe the TS story is completely wrong and thus this rant is out of place, but I doubt that is the case. So I do urge you to step back in think about what the machine offers for the money after they are released. It will be difficult to describe this machine as high end in any shape or form. Unless of course you considered the Cube to be a high end PC, if that is the case this whole discussion is sensless.

I'm a little behind reading this thread (I only move at the speed of light), but I'll answer. I'm in need of a second system. I love Macs, so the brand is settled. I want an all-in-one system with a large flat screen. No plans to upgrade in the future other than the RAM. I'd like a fast processor, don't need a high performance video card, and want it to be new (best chance to last the longest before becoming unable to use the latest software). I'm not going to quibble over a hundred dollars here or there as long as it's priced fairly compared to other choices. What do you suggest?

 

[Mord]

I'm a little behind reading this thread (I only move at the speed of light), but I'll answer. I'm in need of a second system. I love Macs, so the brand is settled. I want an all-in-one system with a large flat screen. No plans to upgrade in the future other than the RAM. I'd like a fast processor, don't need a high performance video card, and want it to be new (best chance to last the longest before becoming unable to use the latest software). I'm not going to quibble over a hundred dollars here or there as long as it's priced fairly compared to other choices. What do you suggest?

a powerbook and a 20" crt

you will love the portability and a good sharp crt is always nice to have

 

[King Cobra]

I'm not even going to bother catching up on the past 400 or so posts, but whoever originally reported to ThinkSecret that the education model iMac G5 has no optical drive must be talking out of a certain end of himself that isn't his mouth. Using a CD-RW to transport docs from Mac to Mac makes education more manageable...hence, I see no reason why not to put in the damn optical drive. Right, somebody else said that on post 181, right?

Look, we need a cheap desktop Mac for educational facilities, and that's where the eMac is right now. I mean, it doesn't get much better than the eMac, except if you reduce its price. The eMac is fast enough at 700MHz to get things done. Just make that $799, and put in the flat panels and all the more modern enclosures in the iMac.

 

[Doctor Q]

a powerbook and a 20" crt

you will love the portability and a good sharp crt is always nice to have

I know well the tradeoffs between notebooks and towers and all-in-one systems, and between CRTs and LCDs. I have used them all depending on the purpose of the system. In this case, I want an all-in-one with an LCD so it looks like the right system for me. If I'm the only customer whose needs suit these iMacs, fine - maybe I won't have to wait so long for delivery!

It's only a rumor, but still fun to start complaining about delivery time, eh?

 

[ffakr]

HAHA. The average person doesn't want to play games. When you understand that you do yourself a great service. You don’t win most mac converts by showing them a game. For 150 dollars they can buy a Xbox with graphics that far surpass anything we will see on the mac.

You win mac converts by showing them stable machines that do what they want to do, video, pictures, music, e-mail, and internet.

I disagree with this.
For a childless household, Apple's current approach is fine. Give the public a pretty machine that's fast enough, more stable then Windows, and vastly more secure than Windows and you've got a compelling argument. An iMac does everything a 30-90 year old needs, if they aren't interested in Gaming.

Every house that has a kid (or an adult that occasionally like to play a video game) will want to go for the PC though.
I MUCH prefer the Mac OS and the Macintosh over Windows.. I make my living from my Mac knowledge. I've been spending my money on my PC lately though to play video games. I've been wanting to save up for a G5.. since last summer, but my timeline has come and gone. I've got no idea when my next Mac purchase will be because the work iBook is plenty for my at home web browsing and email.

If i could play all my games on the Mac, I'd want a mac to do everything. I'd forget about the PC and I'd buy a hot mac.

I do buy Mac games.. in fact, I try to buy the Mac version of PC games I play if it's available for LAN play with friends (and so I can *borrow* the G5 from work).

Bottom line, as technically proficient but otherwise average guy..
I want a New mac bad.. but webpages don't push adoptions. Games push adoption.
I'd buy one of these iMacs (high end) this fall if it, at least, came with a reasonable video card like a 9600 (pro hopefully). I won't buy one if it has a 5200 because, although it'd be a slick machine, it wouldn't be a good gaming machine. I'll eventually buy a new mac, but I don't feel any compelling pressure right now because I'm so much better off dropping a couple hundred $$ on the PC from time to time and using the iBook for general computing.
And consider this... I don't even have kids. What are the odds I'd go for a Mac over an upgraded PC if my kids played on line games?

I do agree, however, that Apple isn't likely to garner a huge game market share, but pushing insufficient hardware won't help. You can't ever hope to get one without the other.

I'm still of the opinion that Apple should invest in Gaming companies. They should provide hardware grants, investment, free developement training, software distribution, free advertising.. to Game Developers.. hell, even buy a company like Bungee and release your software for the Mac 4 months ahead of the PC. Apple's always been fantastically creative, I bet they could make some impressive games.

 

[zelmo]

Two Lincoln's

I stopped reading after the first 80 posts, content that I'd gotten the gist of the posts. Forgive me if I'm being redundant, but...

I do not believe these specifications are accurate, preferring to believe that Apple's new consumer/prosumer flagship computer will be able to handily run all aspects of their pending OS and also current games. The graphics card and RAM specs WILL be better than the posted rumor, people, so relax already.
When both prior iterations of the iMac were released, the specs were solid. They will be again. Apple is not stupid enough to release a non-upgradeable computer which is already behind the technology curve.

And for the record, I hate the behind-the-screen idea. I still think the design will have most of the guts in a wide, short base, and the display will be suspended by a VESA-compliant stand attached to said base and appearing quite similar to the new CD design.

 

[Phobophobia]

Wow, so much ignorance in this thread.

Most computer users don't know the specs of their graphics card, let alone how fast their processor is. This is the iPod Mini fiasco all over again. Most of the people on this website can't relate to the majority of consumers. People don't care about the specs of a computer. It's all about marketing, and having a usable product backing it.

If you don't like the specs, get a Powermac. If you want to use Motion, get a Powermac (no one in their right mind would buy an iMac to use Motion).

 

[ffakr]

I stopped reading after the first 80 posts, content that I'd gotten the gist of the posts. Forgive me if I'm being redundant, but...

haha.. I only went to the top of page 2 before I went to the end. ;-)

I do not believe these specifications are accurate, preferring to believe that Apple's new consumer/prosumer flagship computer will be able to handily run all aspects of their pending OS and also current games. The graphics card and RAM specs WILL be better than the posted rumor, people, so relax already.

The big difference, however, is that the relatively low end chip that shipped in the original LCD iMac (gf2mx) was cheap to produce yet it was still played the games of the time reasonably well.
Today, with the new games recently released, the lower end of the video chipset market isn't in the same position anymore. If you want to go cheap, you're playing last years games slow.. not playing this years games slow.
I don't see Apple spending too much on the video chipset for the iMac because they haven't yet. I think the 5200 Ultra will be considered a good option from Apple's perspective... as it is quite a bit faster than a 4mx. It's a low cost part too.
MOSR is claiming that the higher end will have a 9600 chip, but I don't believe MOSR. They too often get stuff wrong, and they insist the new iMac will use 970 (not 970fx) chips. This seems silly as the 970 chips were about twice as hot as the fx at the same clock.. and because Apple blamed IBM's .09 micron delays for the delay of the G5 iMac.

I'd love to see a G5 iMac with decent video, but i'm not holding out hope.
I would LOVE to see Apple adopt ATI's moble chipset socket and ship the G5 iMac with a Radeon Mobility 9700! That would rock, as the 9700 mobility keeps up with a desktop 9600 Pro with less heat output. If they adopted the ATI mobile graphic socket, they'd also get an easy upgrade path to the Radeon 9800 Mobility which currently performs on par (often beats) a Desktop 9600XT.. a very respectable chip.
Imagine.. fast graphics, respectable thermal output, and the ability to upgrade your iMac video. I'd charge my life away! 🙂

 

[ffakr]

Most computer users don't know the specs of their graphics card, let alone how fast their processor is. This is the iPod Mini fiasco all over again. Most of the people on this website can't relate to the majority of consumers. People don't care about the specs of a computer. It's all about marketing, and having a usable product backing it.

If you don't like the specs, get a Powermac. If you want to use Motion, get a Powermac (no one in their right mind would buy an iMac to use Motion).

Most people currently targeted by the iMac don't know their video card specs, but people who play video games know something about their video card specs. You're saying most people don't know anything detailed about their car engines.. but a good number of people into sports cars (or off road) know the details of their engine.. at the very least the basics.

The problem, IMHO, is that Apple should continue to go after the people who don't know a 5200 from a 9600 Pro.. but they should also go after the 'gear heads' who only stick with the PC to play games.

Your iPod mini anology is not appropriate either. I'm pretty techinically savy and immediately after launch, I said i'd prefer a mini to my iPod because I use it primarily in the gym and I'd prefer the smaller size. Also, the ipod is a consumer device. People, in general, are more interested in the internal specifics of their computer than the internal specifics of their ipod (or toaster).
The difference between the iPod Mini and the iPod is much closer to the choice between a laptop and a desktop. Both cost close to each other but the desktop is bigger and badder in most cases. People don't buy laptops because they outperform desktops, they buy them because the function differently (they are more mobile).

 

[unsigned]

the display will be suspended by a VESA-compliant stand attached to said base and appearing quite similar to the new CD design.

Why VESA compliant? To let you change to a new monitor? Do you imagine a long external cable that will reach to a wall mount or arm or other VESA compatible display mounting?

 

[zelmo]

Why VESA compliant? To let you change to a new monitor? Do you imagine a long external cable that will reach to a wall mount or arm or other VESA compatible display mounting?

VESA compliance will allow the consumer to buy whichever Cinema Display they want to go on their headless iMac (the entry level, sub-$1,000 option),or use a monitor they already have. It would also allow the iMac user to upgrade to a PowerMac and simply buy a CD stand to move their iMac display to if they didn't want to foot the bill for a new display.

I'm a dreamer 😛 😛 😛

 

[eagle steve]

eMacs without optical drives: but only for education

I can't see how they could possibly have no optical drive. MAYBE they mean no optical burner? but even the low-end eMac includes a combo drive

The low-end consumer eMac may have a combo drive, but here in the UK (and elsewhere?) educational institutions are offered two lower-spec machines: a low-end model with a CD-ROM drive and a bottom-of-the-range model with no optical drive at all. This latter model is intended for use in situations where all administration and software installation is going to be done over a network from a machine running MacOS X Server.

It's perhaps worth remembering that the eMac was originally marketed as an education-only offering: Apple only released it to the general public when it became clear that many consumers were more interested in the cheap and cheerful CRT-based eMac than they were in the much more expensive LCD-based G4 iMac. Apple's decision to offer diskless eMacs for use in networked classrooms was simply a return to the machine's roots. The eMacs may not be great powerhouses, but they are OK for most educational uses, and the three low-end models are sufficiently keenly priced to make educational purchasers sit up and pay attention. I'm not convinced Apple will be able to convince lots of educational institutions to pay the extra for G5 iMacs, diskless or not.

 

[thirdwaver]

Great. So if these rumors are true, my grandmother can now type 20WPM on an even faster processor she can't afford. When's Apple gonna get it? Give us a low end, $500 pizza box. PLEASE!!!

Sean