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.
New iMac G5 Announced
- Thread starter MacBytes
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
This one isn't a fugly profile with its external power supply. These are the 610 media center models. More like a TV video recorder with a computer built in. And yes they were selling for 799 and up. I bought one for my daughter in first grade. To keep her on the same platform she uses in school. She got a TV for her bedroom, a TiVO unit built in and a peecee for school work and to practice typing. All in this slick little unit.
blakemsf said:
Not a big deal. The last model's power button was located on the back of the base. I don't see it as a problem because, with the exception of the random power outage or if I go away for an extended time, I never need to turn it on or off, it stays on or in sleep mode all the time.
If I recall, my apple ][e's on off button was on the back too
jsw said:
I wonder if Apple considered using a 9600 Mobility? It's slightly bigger, but much faster. Adding another 64MB VRAM to the FX5200 (for a total of 128MB) whould mean nothing in games, it whould still be painfully slow. Adding a 9600 Mobility (w/64MB VRAM) whould be a world of difference.
...and my PC box is in black aluminum
big difference
There's a HUGE difference in terms of 2" (the iMac) and the PowerBook at 1"
What I don't understand is how Apple will justify selling what is essentially a laptop (same optical drive) - relatively same screen for $1000 less than a G5 PowerBook that just has different RAM and different sized hard drive!
makkystyle said:
There's a HUGE difference in terms of 2" (the iMac) and the PowerBook at 1"
What I don't understand is how Apple will justify selling what is essentially a laptop (same optical drive) - relatively same screen for $1000 less than a G5 PowerBook that just has different RAM and different sized hard drive!
drift said:I'm gonna miss being able to put the screen low. I always found it the most comfortable viewing position. Then up and admire the design when i'm not working.
Why couldn't they just G5 the swing arm...no technical replies please
Yes, I agree. This computer is definately a step backward from the G4 iMac in both design and - more importantly - ergonomics. The ability to raise lower the screen is extremely important for neck / upper body health.
I can't believe that Apple did away with this feature! One could argue that they sacificed ergomics for aesthetics, but this isn't even true, as this thing is simply not attractive! (But I'm hoping that it will somehow redeem itself when seen in the flesh.)
Two design failures in a row (1st one being the new displays). Did Apple recently completely change its design team?
blakemsf said:
Yes, but you're assuming people will actually leave the iMacs long enough for someone else to come in while it's off!
You could always just post a nice sign near the Macs that says "Power button in the lower back right." Sure, not elegant, but if you're trying to convert, sometimes you have to resort to these things...
So poorly designed I can't beleive it came from Apple! The ports on the back are an unexcuseable disaster! EVERYTIME YOU ADJUST THE SCREEN YOUR PERIPHERALS COULD BE POTENTIALLY MOVED OR UNPLUGGED, CABLES FEEDING THROUGH THE HOLE IN THE STAND OR NOT!
Dude, relax. The force required to unplug a USB/Firewire cable is substantially more than that generated by dragging a couple of lines through a hole much, much larger than the cables. Nothing will come unplugged.MacRumorSkeptic said:
Stellar Achievment
Persoanlly, I think it's a work of art.
People here complaining about the lack of a swing arm, like they were rotating it every which way. C'mon, all you did was set it and type.
No HEAVY base stand and it's VESA compliant. Want a swing arm, buy one.
Empty space at the bottom.. Theu had to put the speakers somewhere. People think Apple is in the magic business and computer guts just magically fit into nothing.
Once you SEE it and FEEL the thing, you'll wonder, now why didn't I order one when it was released? Now I have to wait through the whole x-Mas rush.
Persoanlly, I think it's a work of art.
People here complaining about the lack of a swing arm, like they were rotating it every which way. C'mon, all you did was set it and type.
No HEAVY base stand and it's VESA compliant. Want a swing arm, buy one.
Empty space at the bottom.. Theu had to put the speakers somewhere. People think Apple is in the magic business and computer guts just magically fit into nothing.
Once you SEE it and FEEL the thing, you'll wonder, now why didn't I order one when it was released? Now I have to wait through the whole x-Mas rush.
The iMac is not that ugly... it's nice, it would be a lot nicer if we would have received it from Steve ... we miss the, isn't it great? it's really cool! it's amazing!
emw said:
haha LOL
i hope that i will see one of these new imacs outside of a store...i really do
(actually i have seen 3 desktop macs outside of a store within private ownerships, 1 crt iMac and two old pre G-3 powerpcs)
but i'm somehow sceptical if this machine will attract a lot of switchers...
i personally found the G4 version much more attractive from the concept and definatly more unique..except the inner parts (G5) there is nothing new with this
and making bluetooth standard would have been a wise add on
but lets wait untill october when i'm going to see it in person in the shop
Ordered one!
I had been contemplating a dual 1.8 GHz Power Mac and a 20" Cinema display, but considering how closely the 20" iMac is priced to to 20" display (only $600 more in the U.S., only $800 more Canadian at the Apple Canada store), I'm going for the iMac instead, at a considerable cost saving. I think that for my purposes, the new iMac is a tremendous value, although I do agree that the specs are in the consumer range. I imagine that someone will eventually come out with a video upgrade that will void the manufacturer's warranty, but by the time that happens, we should have dual core Power 5 derivatives anyway, and the G5 itself will seem dated.
In any case, this will be a great upgrade from a beige desktop G3...
I had been contemplating a dual 1.8 GHz Power Mac and a 20" Cinema display, but considering how closely the 20" iMac is priced to to 20" display (only $600 more in the U.S., only $800 more Canadian at the Apple Canada store), I'm going for the iMac instead, at a considerable cost saving. I think that for my purposes, the new iMac is a tremendous value, although I do agree that the specs are in the consumer range. I imagine that someone will eventually come out with a video upgrade that will void the manufacturer's warranty, but by the time that happens, we should have dual core Power 5 derivatives anyway, and the G5 itself will seem dated.
In any case, this will be a great upgrade from a beige desktop G3...
UWF404 said:
Yeah better to be in '05 with a G4, slow bus, slow small HDD, SODIMM memory, slower clock, blah blah blah. Yeah that makes sense.
Everyone complaining about the 5200 - I mean come on. i have a PC with a GeForce 2 GTS with 32MB ram and I can play games 1600x1200 on a P4 1.8. 5200 would smoke that video card. Is it the 5200 the fastest card? Of course not. But if you want a gaming machine, buy an xbox!
Personally, I think the new iMac is very cool!
Keynote Broadcast?
will there be a quicktime of the keynote available for download? Would be nice to see the whole thing rather than grabbing all infos and pics from different places in the web...
will there be a quicktime of the keynote available for download? Would be nice to see the whole thing rather than grabbing all infos and pics from different places in the web...
Look at it, its so not aesthetically pleasing. The bottom bits TOO big. Think Nadia (BB4), the big jaw did not work there and it sure doesnt work here. It looks unbalanced. "Where did the computer go?"- Behind the firggin Apple sign. Ive liked all Apple stuff, but this, how, whyyyyyy?
alexf said:
I thought that way about the new displays as well. Until I actually used one for awhile and found that it is ingenious. It does exactly what you want a display to do - it "floats" at a nice height above the desk while the display case is essentially invisible - the screen itself takes up the bulk of your visual space. The older displays were quite bulky and dominated the desktop, and with about 2 1/2" of surround, you could never get the enclosure out of your mind.
I now think the iMac will be the same - the CPU is unobtrusive - it does the work but doesn't clutter the desk (especially if wall-mounted). Yes, there is some significant real estate below the screen, but you have to put the guts of the CPU somewhere, and this is really pretty slick.
displaced said:
But the G3, the G4, and the Pentiums all do full native 64-bit floating point today. (As well as 128-bit SIMD....)
The only new thing that the G5 brings to the math picture is native support for 64-bit integers. All the 32-bit systems support 64-bit integer arithmetic, but it's a bit slower due to the need to do at least two 32-bit operations to do a 64-bit operation.
Fortunately, few programs use 64-bit integers heavily, so by itself 64-bit integers aren't a big reason to move to a 64-bit processor except for some rare applications.
_________________________________
But anyway, I was using "64-bit OS" in the usual sense of an operating system that provides 64-bit virtual addressing to user processes.
There's little point in putting a 64-bit OS on a 2 GiB machine, the main 64-bit advantage of large user memory space cannot be utilized.
As for the libraries, there are several factors to take into consideration.
First, a "PPC970-optimized" library can be completely 32-bit in addressing and integer operations.
Or, it could be completely 32-bit in addressing yet have 64-bit integer math when needed (and of course, it could not use the 64-bit math on a 32-bit machine - so you'd need separate libraries or some form of fat binary).
Finally, the library could be true 64-bit - using both 64-bit addressing and 64-bit integer math. Of course this doesn't exist today - OS X does not have 64-bit virtual addressing.
MacG said:
the 5200 is in fact a MX 420 with direct X 9 features
and the MX 420 was in fact a beefed up geforce 2
believe it or not the geforce 2 GTS comes closer to the 5200 in performance than you think
I really dont know why so many people are poo pooing the new imac. The facts are that it has a new 1.8 G5 processor and a faster bus and is $300 less then the one it replaces a $300 price cut for a new machine with better stats is a winner in my book
- Status