G5 iMac?

[njmac]

I know everyone seems to want a PB G5, iMac G5 and a PM 3Ghz G5 at WWDC. I just wish apple would spread out their updates. When they announce something new often over a period of a few weeks it is exciting, but then the rest of the year is waiting.. waiting....waiting.
If we do get new iMac's I would love to see decent advertising for it.

 

[blakemsf]

If they do put the G5 in the Imac then count me in for a lab of 20+ of them. We were about to buy a lab of the new Emacs but are deciding to wait till later for the upgrade. 1.6, 1.8 or 2.0 G5 with a 17inch LCD with at least 512MB Ram for $1500 and I would be happy 🙂

 

[mklos]

The next iMac upgrade won't be completely to the G5. It'll be:

17" G4 1.5 GHz iMac with combo drive
17" G4 1.5 Ghz iMac with superdrive.
20" G4 1.5 GHz iMac with superdrive.
20" G5 1.6 GHz iMac with superdrive.

There is no way in hell they can do that because it would never cool correctly with the G5 in a current iMac form factor. Why would Apple design a logicboard just for that 1 particular model? Doesn't make sense. If Apple was going to do that they would of released it by now.

Applle has to be doing something big with the iMac or else they would of just slapped a 1.42 GHz and/or 1.5 GHz G4 in it and released an update like they did with everything else (besides the PM). If Apple is going to announce new PowerMacs at the WWDC in June with faster processors in all 3 models then this leaves Apple plenty of room to put at least a 1.6 to 1.8 GHz processor in the iMac, or possibly even a 2 GHz G5, again, depending on how much faster these rev B. PowerMac G5's are going to be.

As far as a headless iMac goes, well I'm all for it. I think its time Apple quit doing this consumer/pro-sumer thing. To me its a bunch of crap and they need to target all of its models toward anyone. There are actually people out there (like me) who want a PowerMac. Now I may not need all the power of the high end G5, but Apple shouldn't punish people like me because of that. If Apple is going to continue doing this consumer/pro-sumer thing then they absolutely need to bring out a consumer level expandable headless Mac. I think the iMac is a perfect thing for it. I mean with the current iMac you get this beautiful display with it and when you want to sell or give it away for a new Mac you have to give this beautiful display away with it. Then say you buy a PowerMac you have to buy the damn display all over again! I know a lot of Windoze users that won't buy a Mac because its not expandable. They know the PowerMac G4/G5 is expandable, but they aren't going to pay $2000 for it either. If Apple truelly wants to get people to switch they need to do create some kind of cunsumer Mac that has the ability to change the HD, Graphics Card, and things like that instead of just 1 RAM Slot and an AirPort Extreme Card.

 

[Chaszmyr]

When Macrumors' own sources say we should expect a G5 with the next iMac revision, it might as well be written in stone

 

[NOV]

Certainly you and 365 may be onto something, as the all-in-one is a rather out of date concept that was good back in 98, but rather showing it's age as a tired idea.

I don't think the concept is out of date, on contrary. If only I think of senior people (> 55), that
* have money to spend (no need for bottom prices),
* have a taste for more luxurious and stylish goods
* have time to spend (iLife)
* have little computer knowledge and
* have seen the benefits from computer/internet using from their (grand)children

I still think the iMac is the ideal machine and we're not speaking of a niche market here, but a very fast growing market for the forthcoming decades.

 

[mklos]

I just don't see why they'd put a G5 in an iMac before getting one in a PowerBook. I know it would be easier, but that doesn't make sense to put a G5 in a consumer line computer before getting it in all of the pro line. Obviously we could get at least a 1.5 in there, maybe even a little more. A 1.5 or 1.6 G4 wouldn't be much slower than a 1.6 G5 (which the iMac would almost have to be) yet it would keep the consumer line more consumer.

You see....this is the exact problem I see with Apple doing this stupid consumer/pro-sumer thing. It traps them in a hole because just like limelite just said, why would they make their consumer models faster than their pro-sumer models? If Apple marketed all of their models to everyone they could update the damn things when ever they got it working instead of holding a perfectly working G5 iMac off until they get a perfectly working G5 PB. Pretty soon I'd say 1.5 or 2 years down the road they will all at least have either a G5 or G6 in them, so then what makes them different, or say the G6 isn't ready then you may have a G5 PM, iMac, and PB all with similar specs. Then what do you do? You see, it puts them in a corner with updates unless they do in fact just say the hell with it and when they get the next revision working release it like I hope they do with the iMac. One model shouldn't hold the other model back I guess is what I'm trying to say.

 

[Squire]

There is no way in hell they can do that because it would never cool correctly with the G5 in a current iMac form factor. Why would Apple design a logicboard just for that 1 particular model? Doesn't make sense. If Apple was going to do that they would of released it by now.

Applle has to be doing something big with the iMac or else they would of just slapped a 1.42 GHz and/or 1.5 GHz G4 in it and released an update like they did with everything else (besides the PM). If Apple is going to announce new PowerMacs at the WWDC in June with faster processors in all 3 models then this leaves Apple plenty of room to put at least a 1.6 to 1.8 GHz processor in the iMac, or possibly even a 2 GHz G5, again, depending on how much faster these rev B. PowerMac G5's are going to be.

Thanks. You just saved me a lot of typing. 😉

Think of the engineering man-hours and money that go into a new enclosure for one of their (supposedly) top-selling machines. If they're going to re-engineer the thing, they'll do it for a G5. And as for people saying it's not possible, heat issues, blah, blah, blah...the company is working with freakin' liquid cooling for crying out loud. Engineers are paid to make that stuff work. Besides, from what I've heard, this Johnny Ive fella's a pretty talented guy.

One thing is for certain, though- the new iMac has to be amazing. I bought a 17" iMac and its appearance still amazes me. How are they going to trump that? I can't wait to see.

Squire

 

[ts1973]

And as for people saying it's not possible, heat issues, blah, blah, blah...the company is working with freakin' liquid cooling for crying out loud. Engineers are paid to make that stuff work. Besides, from what I've heard, this Johnny Ive fella's a pretty talented guy.
Squire

I agree with you on this : liquid cooling is the future and Apple should be the first to implement it on a larger scale.

 

[Phobophobia]

In response to "OMG THE g5 will never work in an imac, too hot!!! omg lol wtf11!!!!shiftone!!eleventy~~!!"

Bumble bees shouldn't be able to fly, but that won't stop them 🙂

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Certainly you and 365 may be onto something, as the all-in-one is a rather out of date concept that was good back in 98, but rather showing it's age as a tired idea.

98 ? The Mac was always a all-in-one. Even the first one.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

98 ? The Mac was always a all-in-one. Even the first one.

You mean there have always been all-in-one Macs, correct? Not ALL Macs are all-in-one (for example, the B&W G3, the PowerMac G4, the PowerMac G5, and earlier Macs like the PowerMac 7200/75 weren't all-in-one). You are correct in stating that Apple has historically had at least one all-in-one Mac in its product lineup.

 

[sparks9]

I think Apple knows the iMac is dead without a G5 in it. The sooner Apple goes G5 the better. I don't think they should wait for the Powerbooks to have the G5 first even though the iMac is a consumer machine, because the main distinction between the 2 is portability.

The two other questions are:

1) Are they going to make a headless iMac?

2) Are they going to allow it to be upgradeable?

These are 2 weaknesses of the current iMac's sellability.

Apple has NO reason at all to make a headless iMac. It wouldn't fit into their product line in any way. The hole point in the iMac is that is a complete working computer - everything included.
Headless iMac --> will never happen.

 

[jeffbistrong]

cooling

I just don't see why they'd put a G5 in an iMac before getting one in a PowerBook. I know it would be easier, but that doesn't make sense to put a G5 in a consumer line computer before getting it in all of the pro line. Obviously we could get at least a 1.5 in there, maybe even a little more. A 1.5 or 1.6 G4 wouldn't be much slower than a 1.6 G5 (which the iMac would almost have to be) yet it would keep the consumer line more consumer.

The G5 processors produce an amazing amount of heat!! To put one of those in a laptop . . . .we definately talking a liquid (vodka would be nice . . .lol) cooling system to keep that puppy cool. That would be a hazard . . Are the other extreme coooling methods besides using a liquid to do it?

 

[gekko513]

To think that G5s are too hot for the iMac is all backwards thinking. The current iMac has a design(not looks) based on the possibilities and limitations on the technology that was available at the time, including the G4 processor with it's low power consumption.

The new iMac will have a design based on the technology that is available now (G5 among other things). The 90nm G5 has slightly higher power consumption, so the design will have to take that into consideration. Maybe it isn't possible to make a quiet G5 computer with a base as small as the current iMac. If so, then Apple will just have to make a larger design.

It's clearly not impossible to put a new G5 in a consumer computer if you take into consideration that it produces approximately a third of the heat from a P4.

 

[AidenShaw]

Boiling Water Cooling Is Already Common

Are the other extreme coooling methods besides using a liquid to do it?

Many laptops (including Apple's) use closed cycle liquid cooling today, where water under low pressure boils at the CPU and the vapor carries the heat to the fins.

Here's a picture of a Dell Centrino's cooling system:

The tubes contain the water - it boils on the plate at the bottom, and the steam goes into the radiator (fins) at top.

The fan blows air through the fins, the steam condenses, flows back into the tubes and to the CPU, where it boils....

 

[Mr. Anderson]

what Apple systems use liquid cooling?

D

 

[Wonder Boy]

whatever the update is, whenever the update is, i would like to see price cuts. just imagine "the fastest mac ever, the macs lowest price ever" that could generate a lot of interest.

IF tiger is available this fall, im not sure how much that will effect my time of purchase. im so jacked up for new hardware, the os really isnt an issue right now.

 

[nmk]

Oh great. The G5 Powerbook rumors ended now we have the G5 iMac rumors. I mean, thats the deal with you people and the G5 processor anyway. Its a decent processor, but most real world benchmarks show that it isn't any faster than a G4 Mhz for Mhz. This has been mentioned repeatedly on these forums, and yet people seem to simply ignore this fact. I think there is a strong desire, so strong infact that it eclipses logic, to believe that sticking G5's in the iMac will somehow transform it into an uber consumer mac. A 1.6 Ghz G5 will simply produce an enormous amount of heat, causing Apple to create a noisy compromised iMac, without providing any perceptible improvement in performance over a 1.5 G4. Why would you want a 1.6 G5 in an iMac. I would much rather see Apple simply upgrade to the current crop of G4's. Maybe with the additional room in the iMac they could overclock it to about 1.6 Ghz.

Performance wise G4 machines can not hang with the AMD's or Intels. this has been fact for 2-3 years now and apple knows it has to correct this if its going to ask high dollar. my guess is we will see a 1.6 1.8 and a 2.0 G5 imac and il buy the 2.0 Imac G5

Ok, and technically neither can the current G5's (nor could they when they were released). Macworld itself tested the G5's against AMD 64's and Pentium 4's and concluded that the latter two were faster in most cases. Why do you think the 1.8 was so quickly upgraded to dual. It take TWO G5's to compete with a Pentium 4. But it doesn't really matter, as the G5 is fast enough for professional video and audio editing. It is fast enough for professionals. Its just not any faster than a G4 at the same clockspeed.

Repeat over an over and over
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4

This is not my opinion, it is a fact (as has been shown in tests done by Mac benchmarking websites).

 

[jelloshotsrule]

This is not my opinion, it is a fact (as has been shown in tests done by Mac benchmarking websites).

where are there 1.6 ghz g4 chips out there?


i think the fact is, if apple goes with the g5, they will most likely redesign the imac's form... in which case, they are going to be open to more possible upgrades in the architecture, beyond just the chip itself... that's where the speed gains could come from...

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Oh great. The G5 Powerbook rumors ended now we have the G5 iMac rumors. I mean, thats the deal with you people and the G5 processor anyway. Its a decent processor, but most real world benchmarks show that it isn't any faster than a G4 Mhz for Mhz. This has been mentioned repeatedly on these forums, and yet people seem to simply ignore this fact. I think there is a strong desire, so strong infact that it eclipses logic, to believe that sticking G5's in the iMac will somehow transform it into an uber consumer mac. A 1.6 Ghz G5 will simply produce an enormous amount of heat, causing Apple to create a noisy compromised iMac, without providing any perceptible improvement in performance over a 1.5 G4. Why would you want a 1.6 G5 in an iMac. I would much rather see Apple simply upgrade to the current crop of G4's. Maybe with the additional room in the iMac they could overclock it to about 1.6 Ghz.



Ok, and technically neither can the current G5's (nor could they when they were released). Macworld itself tested the G5's against AMD 64's and Pentium 4's and concluded that the latter two were faster in most cases. Why do you think the 1.8 was so quickly upgraded to dual. It take TWO G5's to compete with a Pentium 4. But is doesn't really matter, as the G5 is fast enough for professional video and audio editing. It is fast enough for professionals. Its just not any faster than a G4 at the sam clockspeed.

Repeat over an over and over
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4

This is not my opinion, it is a fact (as has been shown in tests done by Mac benchmarking websites).

There's one problem with these facts - right now, no (official) 1.6 GHz PowerPC G4 exists. How on earth, then, did the testers come up with this conclusion without extrapolating, overclocking, or both???

 

[Steven1621]

apple is in dire need of a mid-range consumer computer with more power than the emac. the present setup just doesn't cut it for the price range. a g5 imac would fit the bill nicely.

 

[AidenShaw]

what Apple systems use liquid cooling?

D

PBG4

http://www.medicalmac.com/mac103.html

MDD 1.42

http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/MDD_copper_heatsink_swap/mdd_copper_heatsink_swap.html

emac, ibook, G5, ...

 

[nmk]

Let me clarify what I said before people decide to dismiss it. I am referring to two sets of test performed here. The first is a number of tests that Barefeats performed between a number of computers including a 1.5 G4 and 1.6 G5. This showed that there was a very marginal difference between the two. This could be accounted for with the G5's extra 100 mhz.

The second test was performed by Macworld between all the G5's and the best of the crop that Inteal and AMD had.

Agreed there is no 1.6 G4, but there is a 1.5. The difference in speed between this processor and the 1.6 G5 is almost nothing. If there was a 1.6 G4, then there would be no difference between the two.

So you can repeat over and over.
If there was a 1.6 G4, it would be the same speed as a 1.6 G5

or

The i.5 G4's performance is almost identical to the 1.6 G5.

 

[elo]

I would love to see a G5 iMac introduction this summer and think it would be technically feasible. Whether or not they can do it that quickly remains to be seen, but I'm optimistic.

I suspect it *won't* be headless (though I don't have any information one way or the other), but I wish it were. Those who argue that a headless iMac is basically just some sort of mini-tower are missing the point. Lots of people who wouldn't care at all about upgrading internal components would like to buy one nice, large flat-panel display and know that they can keep it when they upgrade the computer a year or so later.

With such a strategy, people would probably buy more computers, as it's much easier to upgrade a cheaper, headless box every year or so than it is to upgrade an entire iMac (particularly one with a larger monitor). The Cube seemed like a great idea in this respect, but it was hampered by two flaws: first, it was too expensive for the consumer market, and they are the ones who have the most need for something like this. Second, it was slower than comparable G4 towers. Even people who don't want expandibility still want the fastest chip they can get.

elo

 

[Mr. Anderson]

Repeat over an over and over
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4
A 1.6 G5 is not faster than a 1.6 G4

This is not my opinion, it is a fact (as has been shown in tests done by Mac benchmarking websites).

not only is there an issue with the fact the there is no 1.6 GHz G4, if you take into account the bus speed of a G5 vs. that of a G4 system, there's no contest. You get a 800 MHz bus on a 1.6 GHz G5 and a 167 MHz bus on the G4 iMac. Access to more RAM, too (don't think they'll go to 4 Gigs, but even 2 Gigs would be nice 😀).

All things considered, the future of the iMac is much stronger using the G5.

D