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
Does anyone else find it interesting that the G5 has now set a record for being the largest AND the smallest Apple desktop to date? Very strange...
BTW, if the G5 chip can now fit into an enclosure this small, why are we still stuck with these montrous towers on the power user end?
BTW, if the G5 chip can now fit into an enclosure this small, why are we still stuck with these montrous towers on the power user end?
What a lousy port set up. And, as for usability, having at least some of the ports (FW, headphones!, USB) on the front, along with the power button would be smart, but oh well. Ugly too. Flame on.
CholEoptera36 said:
Nice ports
So I'm guessing this will keep most of your external devices on the right side of the desk, or behind the LCD?
Some_Big_Spoon said:
I much prefer them exactly the way Apple has done them. It keeps all of the wires hidden behind the display and not out in front distracting from look of the unit. Of course if you absolutely need them out front, you can always plug in a USB or FireWire hub and set it out in front of the iMac.
pffff.
Right-sed-fred. ...C'mon you people! Make Apple hear us scream...
WE WANT:
better graphics! (hey man, ...I can play games now, but what about the games released in a year or so??? Buy me another imac then for another 2000?? Nope, I DON'T think so.
better/faster superdrive! ...this "thing" they put in is almost vintage. I'll say. Crap, crap, crap, cra... (like Homer Simpson)
Don't even get me started about RAM. ...again, c'mon... There bloody system will not work for the full 100% with less then 512 and they are selling with 256? ...pffff. I'm getting tired.
And the looks?... Put everything behind the screen, that'll do it. ...that's what they think, but I would have to say... No thanks mister! It's to simple with no inovation in design. Let's hope that this thing will die asap!! ...and bring that cube back please. That little thing with a fine flat is ...grrrroovy.
I have money and I want to buy something! Really!
But no G5 because it's to big and to expensive (for my use that is) ...and no iMac G5, for the reasons mentioned above.
Nothing to do but wait I guess.
Wake up Apple. ...please. I'm not the only one who feel this way you know.
dili
Celeron said:
Right-sed-fred. ...C'mon you people! Make Apple hear us scream...
WE WANT:
better graphics! (hey man, ...I can play games now, but what about the games released in a year or so??? Buy me another imac then for another 2000?? Nope, I DON'T think so.
better/faster superdrive! ...this "thing" they put in is almost vintage. I'll say. Crap, crap, crap, cra... (like Homer Simpson)
Don't even get me started about RAM. ...again, c'mon... There bloody system will not work for the full 100% with less then 512 and they are selling with 256? ...pffff. I'm getting tired.
And the looks?... Put everything behind the screen, that'll do it. ...that's what they think, but I would have to say... No thanks mister! It's to simple with no inovation in design. Let's hope that this thing will die asap!! ...and bring that cube back please. That little thing with a fine flat is ...grrrroovy.
I have money and I want to buy something! Really!
But no G5 because it's to big and to expensive (for my use that is) ...and no iMac G5, for the reasons mentioned above.
Nothing to do but wait I guess.
Wake up Apple. ...please. I'm not the only one who feel this way you know.
dili
horizontal axis
No, really, I did rotate it every which way. When I had my G4 iMac on my coffee table, everytime I switched positions, I adjusted it to point straight at me. It now drives me crazy when I have to use a computer at more than a 10-degree angle. It was so perfect. I can imagine a mount that sticks out from the wall that swivels, and that would work for my current setup, but not on a coffee table.
Electric Boris said:
No, really, I did rotate it every which way. When I had my G4 iMac on my coffee table, everytime I switched positions, I adjusted it to point straight at me. It now drives me crazy when I have to use a computer at more than a 10-degree angle. It was so perfect. I can imagine a mount that sticks out from the wall that swivels, and that would work for my current setup, but not on a coffee table.
Keynote Questions
A few things I was wondering...
...could one of our bi-lingual members translate what Bertrand said in French? I got about 4 words in but he talks so fast!
- iChat icon has changed again, was made really clear this time.
- Were there a lot of changes to System Preferences? It looked that way, but the video was a bit blocky...anyone notice it too?
- Definitely a newer Tiger build shown, various changes.
- If anyone is there can they post what build it is, Phil said there are Tiger machines to play with.
AppleMatt
A few things I was wondering...
...could one of our bi-lingual members translate what Bertrand said in French? I got about 4 words in but he talks so fast!
- iChat icon has changed again, was made really clear this time.
- Were there a lot of changes to System Preferences? It looked that way, but the video was a bit blocky...anyone notice it too?
- Definitely a newer Tiger build shown, various changes.
- If anyone is there can they post what build it is, Phil said there are Tiger machines to play with.
AppleMatt
iMeowbot said:
Erm no. I think GPU is the biggest requirement that people need. Yes, if you are going to just do email, browsing and stuff you won't need it. But, if you do any gaming that is what counts the most (as well as good memory bandwidth speeds which the iMac has crippled!)
Nice but will it sell?
I Like It. Its bee u tee full.
Design
It makes perfect sense to place the computer out of sight/waybehind the display (dead space becomes useful space). Although its not a new design paradigm, its the sleekest implementation Ive seen to date (+ it looks like a big iPod).
Will it sell better than its predecessor?
Its a better value than its predecessor but is the ~$300 price-difference enough to make a demand-difference?
Putting aside the processor, Apple has, essentially, taken the dome G4, repackaged it into a pretty form factor and dropped the price by ~15%. Will Joe Consumer take a second look?
For the techno savvy, the G5, although snappier than the G4, is crippled and the GPU (apparently) doesnt support Motion and will <marginally> run Tigers CoreVideo.
Apple, of course, knows all of this and I suspect theyre hoping form wins out over function and people buy with their hearts and not their heads.
I Like It. Its bee u tee full.
Design
It makes perfect sense to place the computer out of sight/waybehind the display (dead space becomes useful space). Although its not a new design paradigm, its the sleekest implementation Ive seen to date (+ it looks like a big iPod).
Will it sell better than its predecessor?
Its a better value than its predecessor but is the ~$300 price-difference enough to make a demand-difference?
Putting aside the processor, Apple has, essentially, taken the dome G4, repackaged it into a pretty form factor and dropped the price by ~15%. Will Joe Consumer take a second look?
For the techno savvy, the G5, although snappier than the G4, is crippled and the GPU (apparently) doesnt support Motion and will <marginally> run Tigers CoreVideo.
Apple, of course, knows all of this and I suspect theyre hoping form wins out over function and people buy with their hearts and not their heads.
dili said:
Sorry, the Cube was a flop (although I dug it) and it ain't coming back. If you need a faster graphics card, SuperDrive and more memory capacity, there is always the Power Mac. Again, the iMac is a consumer grade machine, not a Pro machine. If you need the Pro features you have to pay the pro price. The only way they can keep the iMac at $1,299-$1,899 while integrating a 17" or 20" widescreen is to leave out a few of the "pro" features naturally. And I don't see anyone on the PC side offering as much for these prices either when you also factor in having to buy the widescreen LCD display separately.
VESA goodness
Here's a VESA example--the very first one I found: the Peerless LCLC 100, just $134 from MacConnection.com. (Cheaper options exist I'm sure.)
http://www.peerlessindustries.com/flatpan_awa_channeled_photos.htm
(Note: their example LCD is smaller than an iMac.)
It's got simple (even a bit Apple-like) aluminum styling, a cable channel, and it folds totally flat to the wall. 360-degree tilt-pivot (35 degrees up/down) ball on the iMac end. You can fold out just one of the three "segments" to move your Mac just a little from the wall, or unfold the whole thing to 2 feet. Holds 25 lbs. displays up to 22". I like it!
Use with the little $29 Apple iMac VESA bracket seen here:
There are lots of other VESA options too--like rackmount arms and ones that clamp to a desk with no bolting.
Here's a VESA example--the very first one I found: the Peerless LCLC 100, just $134 from MacConnection.com. (Cheaper options exist I'm sure.)
http://www.peerlessindustries.com/flatpan_awa_channeled_photos.htm
(Note: their example LCD is smaller than an iMac.)
It's got simple (even a bit Apple-like) aluminum styling, a cable channel, and it folds totally flat to the wall. 360-degree tilt-pivot (35 degrees up/down) ball on the iMac end. You can fold out just one of the three "segments" to move your Mac just a little from the wall, or unfold the whole thing to 2 feet. Holds 25 lbs. displays up to 22". I like it!
Use with the little $29 Apple iMac VESA bracket seen here:
There are lots of other VESA options too--like rackmount arms and ones that clamp to a desk with no bolting.
The reason that Apple didn't use the arm btw is simple: cost. It cost too damn much for all the assembly that goes into it. Nothing to do with innovation.
BTW: Motion requires 512MB but the iMac starts at 256MB . It also will chew up a fx5200, because it uses the really advanced pixel shaders that the fx5200 is rubbish at doing.
Shame on you apple for not listening to people's number 1 concern about this machine. It's not 1997 anymore where any old peice of video card is fine as long it outputs to a monitor. We require full 3D performance nowadays.
BTW: Motion requires 512MB but the iMac starts at 256MB
. It also will chew up a fx5200, because it uses the really advanced pixel shaders that the fx5200 is rubbish at doing.Shame on you apple for not listening to people's number 1 concern about this machine. It's not 1997 anymore where any old peice of video card is fine as long it outputs to a monitor. We require full 3D performance nowadays.
Ordered Mine!
I too wasn't overwhelmed by the look at first but the value sold me.
I've been waiting for a sensibly priced/speced Mac for some time.
I'm still running the Power PC 7600/132 I bought in 1997 with 80mb ram and System 8.6. It's never given me a day's trouble and I run it 6-8 hrs a day.
I've got a ViewSonic 17" crt so the whole setup is a sea of beige!
I'm looking forward to the white and chrome/aqua OSX world I've been missing for years! Delivery is by September 29, until further notice anyway!
I too wasn't overwhelmed by the look at first but the value sold me.
I've been waiting for a sensibly priced/speced Mac for some time.
I'm still running the Power PC 7600/132 I bought in 1997 with 80mb ram and System 8.6. It's never given me a day's trouble and I run it 6-8 hrs a day.
I've got a ViewSonic 17" crt so the whole setup is a sea of beige!
I'm looking forward to the white and chrome/aqua OSX world I've been missing for years! Delivery is by September 29, until further notice anyway!
kangaroo said:
While I mostly agree with your points, how many users in the iMac's target audience will ever use an application like Motion? Maybe 1 or 2% tops? Motion is a pro application, not a consumer app and it's targeted at Power Mac/PowerBook users, not your typical iMac/eMac/iBook user. And by the way the new iMac is fully compatible with both Motion and Core Image according to the system requirements for each that are posted on Apple's website.
daddy-mojo said:
Superdrive is 4x apparently. This is due to it being a notebook drive, and therefore slow as ****.
It can only burn CDs @ 16x, aswell. I doubt it wil get above that reading aswell :/
jeffmc425 said:
One big difference - the Alpha has *no* 32-bit mode whatsoever. Pointers are always 64-bits in the registers, even in 32-bit programs.
Since the PowerPC architecture has a defined 32-bit mode, it does not need to do the signed extension trick at the generated assembly code level. The hardware can do the "right thing" with a 32-bit pointer.
(Any POWER programmer's around who can clarify how pointer registers are used in 32-bit mode???)
jeffmc425 said:
No need to double-pump for 64-bit float or 128-bit SIMD on a G3, G4 or Pentium. These wide datatypes are native.
jeffmc425 said:
Actually, databases love big physical RAM space - having virtual memory without physical RAM behind it would be a performance disaster. You want to eliminate disk accesses - not move them from the database disks to the paging disks.
If you only have 2 GiB of RAM, there's almost no advantage to using a 64-bit operating system. The main benefit of a 64-bit OS is the ability for a single program to use more than 4 GiB of RAM. If you don't have the RAM, why bother?
- Status