G5 iMac Specs?

[flyfish29]

Umm, no optical drives on the low-end model? I mean, I understood why Apple stopped installing floppy drives in their machines, but I think it's a little to early to call optical drives obsolete.

I for one hope these rumors are untrue. Besides the processor and sata drives, these new iMacs would not be much of an improvement over the previous models.

They are stinkin consumer models! Look at them for what they are. I am so sick and tired of everyone crapping all over every new iMac. Has anyone ever been happy with the iMac on this message board besides me 🙄 😡 Apple has made a decision *long ago* that they would make the consumer iMac a machine that does a good job for most consumer needs and they decide to spend quite a bit on form factor designing something that catches the eye, etc. and makes the company more visible. It does cost more to design and produce the iMac. Sure they could take away the nice form factors and put in a better video card, etc. but they chose differntly and probably always will. Get over it and buy what fits you best.

Sorry to pick your post to reply to cause it is not just yours, but it is a huge improvement over the previous. New form factor which is desperately needed (I personaly love the form factor of the current iMac. My only complaint with the current iMac is the drive is too low and bumps into the keyboard when I eject.

Lets remember who these computers are for. You can't have the best computer specs and the cheapest prices.

<-------stepping off soap box now!

 

[bwintx]

Oh, one more thing...

Apple will NOT discontinue the $799 eMac and replace it with a $1299 low-end model. That would be corporate suicide...

Hope you're right. While some on these forums seem to be able to amass a stock of Macs that would put Jay Leno's fleet of collectible autos to shame, some of us find anything over $1,000 a real pain to afford.

 

[csubear]

I expect that they will keep there current price points and config. So lets not freak out.

17" 1.6 (not edu) 1399
17" 1.8 1799
20" 1.8 2100?

My guess is that they are going to look something like the current displays (except white)

 

[Adam Young]

Mocked up some iMac commercials in June. Looks familiar?

Wanna see a mockup of the new iMac G5?

http://homepage.mac.com/adamyoung/PhotoAlbum6.html

 

[Mord]

I Wish everyone would get over the whole graphic card deal. It's just an iMac and the graphic card is fine for everyday use. If you want to play games buy a playstation for $200.00. I have the same card in my 2.0 G5 and I have no vid quality problems so get over it.

the gpu dose not just effect games, your dual 2GHz g5 would be allot snappyer if you got a 9600xt it affects over all speed because a 5200 bottlenecks the speed.

it's fine for browsing but for video editing and photoshop it slices the speed in two

the price increase fo apple puting a 9600 in there is so small for such a huge proformence leap

 

[ShadowHunter]

You guys all need to get your panties out of a wad...

1. As far as no optical drive, it is EDUCATION computer. I've seen countless computer labs that NEVER used their external media drives. For any loading of software, just use the network. In those extremely rare, absolutely necessary cases, have you ever heard of an external CD drive? They're not expensive, and 1 could serve the needs of an entire school's labs.

2. What is wrong with the specs? People like us buy the PMs, for the raw power. The people purchasing these computers check their emails to grandma, type up essays, and a few even use iMovie.....these imacs will smoke the previous model.

3. What is this complaining about video card? You can't expect Apple to put dual G5 with 4 DIMM slots of RAM, and a Radeon 9800Pro in their low-end computer, good lord. Those video cards are perfectly adequate for everything, except the highest of gaming technology. If you want to buy a gaming computer, don't buy an imac....that's the way its been for years.

 

[Mord]

It does cost more to design and produce the iMac. Sure they could take away the nice form factors and put in a better video card, etc.

it would cost them like $25 more per imac to put a 9600 in there and it would not affect the form factor the 9600 has similar cooling requirements to the 5200 but it is a much better card

 

[Mord]

3. What is this complaining about video card? You can't expect Apple to put dual G5 with 4 DIMM slots of RAM, and a Radeon 9800Pro in their low-end computer, good lord. Those video cards are perfectly adequate for everything, except the highest of gaming technology. If you want to buy a gaming computer, don't buy an imac....that's the way its been for years.

none said put a 9800pro in (however nice that would be) see my previous posts the 5200 is a really bad card and will drag that g5 down and act as a bottle neck, it would only cost apple $25 more per imac and they would sell so much better

 

[ifjake]

i can see the processor speeds being what they are. in that compact type setting 2.0 Ghz would be too hot. hard drive's not to big a deal. nonoptical drive works for that network installation, though i did take stuff back and forth from school to home on disks. graphics cards do seem kinda lousy, but i guess if you want a gaming machine you'll have to get a powermac. the price is really bad though. the iMac shouldn't go above 2000 dollars unless you're customizing the heck out of it. i am starting to agree with people that the attached screen is starting to become the bane of the iMacs existance, forcing up the price. i saw a concept thing some german dude made of a headless G5 cube "iMac" that had the color schemes and look and feel of the iPod mini, and man it was the coolest looking thing i have seen in a while. yeah they have it on www.cubeowner.com now. i hope apple takes notice.

 

[tsheley]

I think everyone is missing the point with the gaming here. Sure a better graphics card would be nice but if I want to play games I am going to spend $149 on a xBox or PS2. I can't wait for these to be released. I sold my G4 Cube and can't wait for the 17" Combo-Drive model. I may even shoot for the 20" depending on price.

Just an opinion.

 

[iMeowbot]

I Wish everyone would get over the whole graphic card deal. It's just an iMac and the graphic card is fine for everyday use. If you want to play games buy a playstation for $200.00. I have the same card in my 2.0 G5 and I have no vid quality problems so get over it.

Yep, it's a safe bet that hardware-accelerated posterizing isn't going to make Xcode run a lick faster.

Yeah yeah yeah, can't be running Xcode on an iMac, 'cause it's not a "professional" machine 🙄 Yeesh, some residents of this board have a weird, warped and narrow idea of what constitutes professional applications.

 

[stockscalper]

Check out the latest graphics cards tests on barefeats.com. The 5200 straight out sucks. It gets blown away very badly in every single test. For the money the 5200 costs you can buy a much more powerful Radeon card.

 

[MacCoaster]

Bah

WTF. No optical drives on the entry model? How the heck do you expect to restore the darn thing? Specs absolutely blow.

If those are indeed real, I guess I won't be buying a G5 iMac or even recommend it, unless someone really doesn't know how to connect a monitor to a computer.

I'd have felt better with 2.0 GHz G5, a better gfx card.

 

[Lewisham]

2. What is wrong with the specs? People like us buy the PMs, for the raw power. The people purchasing these computers check their emails to grandma, type up essays, and a few even use iMovie.....these imacs will smoke the previous model.

I'm going to call shenanigans on that one.

People like us *want* PowerMacs. We can't all afford them.

PowerMac = Professional Workstation. If I hear it described as a gamer's equivalent I will scream (not at you though 🙂 ), it is far too expensive for that and hardcore gamers don't use Macs. That is true, but games are out there, and families are playing them. Families aren't buying PowerMacs for Mum to get recipes off the web, Dad typing emails and little Timmy playing Doom III.

iMac = Consumer. Which is pretty much everyone who can't afford the PowerMac.

eMac = Budget option, large business cheap-and-cheerful deployment.

As has been said over and over again, the iMac is for everyone. The PowerMac is priced too high for most. But the way you see the world, everyone should be using eMacs. eMacs do everything you said they would. Why have an iMac at all? The bigger screens make no use, the iMacs natural home is in a study or tucked away, people aren't watching DVDs on it.

So why are people buying iMacs at all? People are buying iMacs for more than typing letters. They're doing lots of other things. They'll be playing World of Warcraft, editing iMovies (as you rightly say), Photoshop Elements, a bit of Doom III, running loads of Office apps in one go. This sort of stuff. PowerMacs are for businesses who do real heavy duty Maya/Lightwave, Photoshop.

But mainly, they're buying security. Safe in the knowledge that their iMac will last. iMac buyers have a right to expect that it will be sweet running today's software, and pretty good for the next year whatever comes. That's not going to be the case. That's what consumer PCs do now, so why not the consumer Mac? PowerMacs are running everything now fantastically, and will perform well for years and years.

iMacs should be looking for a 3 year shelf-life, until the user decides that Quake 4 and Photoshop Elements 3 is running too slow for them. These specs don't go near enough 🙁

Chris

 

[Hattig]

For what the iMac is - a limited market product for an integrated, high cost, low performance machine, the specs seem reasonable.

I personally don't like having integrated computers - I don't see the purpose, especially when they cost so much. I'd rather get a Powerbook. Apple need to release a sexy powerful small form factor system without an integrated monitor.

This new imac, if the specs are correct: The processor speed is more than adequate. The RAM is okay, there will be BTO upgrade option, and it isn't the cruel 128MB that Dell and the like will happily sell you on their low end, and get the BTO upgrade whilst listing a low "base model" price. The hard drive is okay for most of the target audience, but again, there should be BTO options for 160GB, 300GB and so on.

The graphics are weak. They aren't upgradable because it is an iMac, and going with the FX5200 is a very bad decision. Maybe it will be enough for Tiger. Will it be enough for Tiger+1 though? If the graphics was on a daughter-board within the system that would be okay, someone could make a replacement with better graphics, or Apple could offer better graphics as a BTO option. But no, every iMac is stuck with the 5200. On the other hand, it beats integrated graphics on the low end PCs, but most of these also have an AGP slot for upgrades. The card is not enough for casual gaming, unless someone who has just paid $2000+ for a new computer wants to play Doom 3 at 640x480 and low frame rates ... and people will wonder why their new $2000 computer cannot do that and complain.

Hopefully people who buy these machines can get 5 years use out of them. I certainly don't expect any less from a monitor, and this will have the problem of being attached to a sub-par computer in just a couple of years. That's why I like separate components.

 

[MacsRgr8]

none said put a 9800pro in (however nice that would be) ...

I did (check a couple of hundred of posts back 😛 ) .

Well, at least I was suggesting the option for the "high-end" iMac. The Radeon 9800 Pro (not XT) is more than a year old, and by no means only for the highest of gaming performance.
I would love to see Apple giving the consumers options:
Multiple configs, or CTO. Like being able to choose between hard disks and/or grfx cards. Don't think Apple will do so though 🙄

 

[bwintx]

Don't judge them too much on the edu model though: that's for a specific need and won't be available to most of us anyway. It's for basic no-frills computer labs. So the lack of a modem, optical drive--and maybe even Core Video support--could all make perfect sense as cost-saving measures.

In the real world, "basic no-frills computer labs" almost always have minimally acceptable (and often quite old) PeeCees, usually with aging CRTs unless the labs got a deal on a large quantity of LCDs. I don't mean just labs in inner-city schools, either; I mean also labs in substantial colleges and universities. Those who stock them are concerned with (a) price, (b) Micro$oft compatibility, and (c) price. Would that it weren't true, but it is. Those of you going to schools where they do have the sense to go with Macs are fortunate.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

the gpu dose not just effect games, your dual 2GHz g5 would be allot snappyer if you got a 9600xt it affects over all speed because a 5200 bottlenecks the speed.

it's fine for browsing but for video editing and photoshop it slices the speed in two

the price increase fo apple puting a 9600 in there is so small for such a huge proformence leap

I agree with most everyone that the rumored graphics cards are less than spectacular. However, what current video editing app or Photoshop version even cares what video card you have? FCP HD sure doesn't. When CoreGraphics is available, though, hopefully you'll be right.

Motion does, but it's not video editing (and I'd have to guess that in order export anything you do in Motion to a .mov file, there's going to be rendering time - not sure if that can be offloaded to the GPU)

PS: The earlier coments someone made about the 64 bit-ness of the G5 not be a big deal are, somewhat, true except that the massive front-side bus speed difference makes the G4 just look silly.

 

[Mord]

I did (check a couple of hundred of posts back 😛 ) .

Well, at least I was suggesting the option for the "high-end" iMac. The Radeon 9800 Pro (not XT) is more than a year old, and by no means only for the highest of gaming performance.
I would love to see Apple giving the consumers options:
Multiple configs, or CTO. Like being able to choose between hard disks and/or grfx cards. Don't think Apple will do so though 🙄

if only the world could understand how bad a 5200 is

 

[Mord]

I agree with most everyone that the rumored graphics cards are less than spectacular. However, what current video editing app or Photoshop version even cares what video card you have? FCP HD sure doesn't. When CoreGraphics is available, though, hopefully you'll be right.

Motion does, but it's not video editing (and I'd have to guess that in order export anything you do in Motion to a .mov file, there's going to be rendering time - not sure if that can be offloaded to the GPU)

renders get a boost in speed and the general spped of the mac increases as the gpu takes the load from the cpu, the 5200 bottlenecks it as it cant deal with the info being sent from a g5 cpu. check out benchmarks that have many apps testing the 5200 vs a 9600 or a better nvidia card a like a 5600.

 

[crap freakboy]

I would love to see Apple giving the consumers options:
Multiple configs, or CTO. Like being able to choose between hard disks and/or grfx cards. Don't think Apple will do so though 🙄

that'd be nice, or a gpu that can be changed would be more than nice. Least that way I could upgrade when I needed to. Bottom line is for me I'd rather save for a Dual G5 PM with a CRT. Thats me though isn't it? 🙂
Must admit I need something sooner than later, this G4 sawtooth is really showing its age...be sad to see it go.

 

[applekid]

My breakdown:

- The Education Machine: Fair game. Seems alright.
As far as our consumer machines go:
- The CPU: quite alright. Just as expected. I was hoping for 2.0 GHz at the high-end, but 1.8 GHz will do fine.
- Optical Drives: We should get to SuperDrives. And maybe dual-layer...
- HD: plenty. I've yet to fill my 80 GB on my G4 iMac.
- RAM: Uh-oh! We need 512 MB. I can only hope both slots are accessible unlike the current iMac line. I doubt a BTO iMac with at least one 1 GB stick is cheap.
- Graphics card: Alright, it's just crap. And I never heard of a GeForce MX 5200 Ultra. Search Google, you'll find typos and some weird looking foreign stuff, but not the real card. Either it's new, or it's really the FX. But, let me just say an MX is not reassuring at all. However, let's not rule out upgradability. ThinkSecret hasn't ruled or ruled out upgradability of the graphics card and other parts. It probably won't be upgradable, but we've still got a couple of weeks for things to show up.

 

[blakespot]

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-

Across the network.



blakespot

 

[phasornc]

Labs don't need optical drives

In many school lab situations an optical drive is just a security hazard. Another way for people to install their own OS and install trojans/worms or spam servers. The lack of optical drive makes sense when you have students that have network space or (in Apples dreams) iPods.

Having said that, the prices are a joke. Apple needs to stop living with 1998 prices. Computer are cheap now. I for one won't buy one, 80gb HD? Do they even still sell drives that small? 80gb is a joke for the consumer market if you are pushing people to digitize there music and make imovies. At 20gb per hour DV takes up a lot of space.

phasor

wait.. mounted on the back.. isn't that the same as the original imacs?
and weren't those annoying because they took up a lot of desk space....?
and I should think that even schools with their limited needs would want an optical drive... I mean will the mac OSX install discs be on USB drives?

some parts of this seem very odd...

 

[NusuniAdmin]

only 2 gigs of ddr memory...yuck.

Crappy video card.