New iMac G5 Announced

[QCassidy352]

Prob the second to last then because I agree. Once again a PC switcher is forced to buy a new monitor and the reality is the price isn't $1299. Its $1299 + another 256MB stick of RAM + Applecare (Since no one in their right mind buys a Mac without Apple care) = Around $1500

Sorry for a baseline device that is too expensive. IMHO baseline price should be $999.

Oh the thing will sell alright but once again the potential isn't near what it could be because Apple has priced themselves out of the average consumer range.

I never buy applecare and haven't regretted it yet. And the imac is NOT a "baseline" device; that would be the emac, coming in at $800.

 

[paulsecic]

LOL. We're already asking ship dates? Mine said 3-4 weeks as well.

Think October if Apple didn't order enough parts. The bulk of the price includes the LCD. You can get a stripped down Dell for: $499.00. Add $600 to that it equals the new Imac.

 

[drift]

can this be right???

I was looking at xbench results
http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/

and the old G4 1.25 imac is generally up there in terms of speed with the old G5 1.8 single.

 

[~Shard~]

Thnx. ... he was almost getting me on this.


ps: kidding

Nice try, but you're still "got" - and a word of advice, it's better for your image if you defend your comments yourself rather than letting other people do it for you and then just blindly agreeing with them.

 

[jsw]

C'mon. They put it in a box (read: behind the LCD). That's all!! ...where's the design??? I mean ...the iMac G4 was new in design. ...this is like mentioned somewhere before ...an eMac with the behind cut off ...and a G5 instead. No more. No Less.

If you don't see "new design" in the interior, you're blind.

 

[alexf]

sounds like you don't have any pci cards you need to install in your mac. i do. a few of them. that's why i got the g5 dual 2.5... pci cards. not unusual in audio/video work.

With all due respect, if you open up your G5 you will see that the space for PCI cards does not account for a large amount of the space in these oversized machines.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

This design is clearly targeted at PC-using iPod lovers. The similarities between iMac G5 and an iPod are obvious.

Edit:
Ah, a few people beat me to it.

I'll repeat myself. It would be great to have a "quick release" on the VESA mount. I can see this as a replacement for the PB that I use.

I don't truly need a battery. It is nice. But the 11.5 pound difference between the two is not a deal killer(17" G5 iMac and the 17" PB); in particular that I own the PB 12" right now. To be able to have a quick release mount and an BT keyboard and mouse; would be a small price to pay for my work.

 

[jsw]

With all due respect, if you open up your G5 you will see that the space for PCI cards does not account for a large amount of the space in these oversized machines.

I own one, and I love it, but I agree. There is a lot of wasted space in there which I can't believe is required.

 

[d.f]

1,000,000th post

all i want to say is i have a 400Mhz i-mac DVSE. i got it the moment is came out back in 1999 (maybe 1998). it runs panther well. i got a 1 mgbit Ethernet cable modem. it does everything i need it to.

people still play on it when they visit an remark how cool it is and how 'they'd lke one'....

clearly as i post on macrumors i am VERY aware of the newer tech my imac is missing.

if i AND 90% of the likley buyers bought the G5 imac it would easily last over 5 years. so all this talk of measley 5200fx cards, only 1 USB 2.0, 4 x DVD burning is crap. if it screams now, it'll scream in 5 years.

to the best of my knowledge Macs don't get any slower over time. they may get beat by newer chips arriving, but people who care that much would only buy a PowerMac.

the G5 iMac is the ****ing daddy. deal with it.

 

[Timelessblur]

to me this new iMac just widens the gap bettween apple Pro computer and there average consummer computers.

What apple really needs right now is something to fill the power gap and the price gap bettween the Powermac G5 and the iMac. (add in the cost of a monitor to get the price range)

the prosumer (some who needs more power but does not need the power of a PowerMac G5) and wants/needs upgradibling in more parts like oh I dont know THE GRAPICH CARD. Wider range of mointor choice maybe (not required) but they do need a more middle of the road computer. Right now apple as the low end and mid low end covered and they have the High end covered. But the have no mid to mid-high range computer in there. to make it to mid range you have to dump the integrated graphic card

 

[~Shard~]

That's right. I forgot about the new law where computers were required to have slot-loading drives.

It's not a law - but when it comes to the G5 iMac's design, it is a requirement and a necessity.

Or would you prefer to sacrifice the entire ingenious design of the new iMac and go with an inferior form factor just so you could have a precious 8x SuperDrive? If you put that much of a priority on burning mass media than perhaps a power user as yourself would prefer a PowerMac....

 

[jsw]

to me this new iMac just widens the gap bettween apple Pro computer and there average consummer computers.

Forgive me, but how does going from a 1.25GHz G4 to a 1.8GHz G5 widen the gap?

 

[emw]

but the keyboard takes one of those USB 2.0 ports

That's what Bluetooth is for.

...4 usb ports simply aren't enough in these days for a family computer...especially if the computer should be 'a digital hub'

5 ports is quite a few, although I'd potentially like to see a couple more firewire ports. But then again, throw a USB or Firewire hub under the desk to connect all of these peripherals to if you really have that many. Leave one firewire and a couple of USB open on the back for "instant access" and leave your other stuff connected and out of the way.

 

[Yvan256]

It's a consumer workstation so quit whining about the GPU.
Want better graphics, more this and more that, get a PowerMac

What is it with Apple zealots?

First you're telling us that it's a consumer workstation so it doesn't need a middle-class GPU. Then if we need more than a crappy GPU we should shell out the cash for a pro-grade workstation? For GAMES? And since when does a consumer workstation needs a G5? And since when does a pro-workstation needs a gaming-class GPU?

Stop defending Apple on this one, we're getting tired. Apple blew it with the iMac G5 rev.A (for the GPU/VRAM), let's hope they wake up a bit for rev.B

Here's what it should be:
- entry-level Mac (put G5 1.6GHz in eMac, put the damn FX 5200 Ultra 64MB in it and keep the same price point and you'll get lots of buyers)
- pro-sumer level Mac (current iMac G5 but with something better like a Radeon 9600XT with 128MB/256MB)
- professionnal level Mac (current dual G5 PowerMacs, best videocard available, i.e. currently something like the X800 with 256MB/512MB)

keep in mind what games will be played on the entry-level (low-res, low details - it's an entry-level price machine) and the pro-sumer level (hi-res, medium/high details) machines. Professionnal machines will only need better GPU because of CoreImage/CoreVideo (or else they would need a lower class GPU then the pro-sumer machines, same as entry-level would do just fine)

Also, stop saying the iMac is the entry-level Mac, the eMac fills that spot (it was for schools in the beginning only). Anyway if by your logic the iMac is the entry-level Mac and PowerMac is the pro Mac... what's in the middle? The iMac already has the middle class sticker price!

 

[jsw]

What is it with Apple zealots?

First you're telling us that it's a consumer workstation so it doesn't need a middle-class GPU.

Aside from new FPS games, in what way does the GPU in the latest iMac fail to perform? Seems like it will do anything the consumer would want it to do.

 

[kcmac]

all i want to say is i have a 400Mhz i-mac DVSE. i got it the moment is came out back in 1999 (maybe 1998). it runs panther well. i got a 1 mgbit Ethernet cable modem. it does everything i need it to.

people still play on it when they visit an remark how cool it is and how 'they'd lke one'....

clearly as i post on macrumors i am VERY aware of the newer tech my imac is missing.

if i AND 90% of the likley buyers bought the G5 imac it would easily last over 5 years. so all this talk of measley 5200fx cards, only 1 USB 2.0, 4 x DVD burning is crap. if it screams now, it'll scream in 5 years.

to the best of my knowledge Macs don't get any slower over time. they may get beat by newer chips arriving, but people who care that much would only buy a PowerMac.

the G5 iMac is the ****ing daddy. deal with it.

Sounds like you and I are in the same boat.

I can't wait for the new iMac to arrive at our house. Our current iMac does fine but this thing will be awesome. And we expect it to last just like the last one which just won't give up...

 

[~Shard~]

to me this new iMac just widens the gap bettween apple Pro computer and there average consummer computers.

Old iMac = G4, Power Mac = G5. New iMac = G5, PowerMac = G5. Yah, that's definitely widening the gap when you upgrade the processor like that...

What apple really needs right now is something to fill the power gap and the price gap bettween the Powermac G5 and the iMac.

Sigh... And here I didn't think it would be possible for someone to actually complain about the reduction in price of the new iMacs. But yes, I guess you're right, it does widen the price gap, damn you Apple....

 

[alexf]

I own one, and I love it, but I agree. There is a lot of wasted space in there which I can't believe is required.

Yes, I think the answer to my (rhetorical) question is simple: the G5 case was built for the original PowerPC 970 chip, whereas now, with the newer chip, which doesn't need such an elaborate cooling system, so much space is not required anymore.

And of course, I complete redesign within the next year or two is out of the question for Apple since it would cost too much.

And so we are stuck with an enormous (and now outdated) case... (strange how the PowerMacs seem to get larger with evolution while the iMacs get smaller)

That being said, I do have a G5 myself and the size doesn't really bother me anymore, since I am lucky enough to have a good amount of space under my desk where I can hide it.

 

[takao]

USB hubs are cheap.

I'll be nearby you in 2 days takao, I'm backpacking through Eastern Europe and I fly into Vienna for starters before I head into the Czech Republic! Well, I guess Innsbruck is far west of Vienna (opposite ends of the country pretty much, right?), but still, a lot closer than I am to ya right now!

well it all sums up
you know i just think that for an 'all in one' i would have to buy a hell lot of adaptors if i would switch to a desktop mac

except a powermac..but i don't need that power and i don't have that money either..perhaps i have to wait untill i finished studies... i'm actually quite sure that i will get together the money for an 12" ibook in spring ..i passed the 'ipod affordable' mark a few weeks ago..was pretty tempted to buy a green mini...

actully at the moment i'm in vorarlberg and because of that even more 'far away' from vienna than when i'm studing in innsbruck... when i look out of the window i can see switzerland ... about a lousy 6-8 miles away ... (actually smuggling a mac across the border would be an option if the rhine wasn't a little bit to dangerous to cross with rafts )

edit: have a nice backpacking holiday

for the video card thing: my 2 year old middle class Ti4200 outperforms a 5200 last time i checked with a ratio bigger than 50% on UT2004...

 

[SteveMentzer]

iMac pricing

....For those who are complaining about the iMac pricing.

I went to dell and priced out their base model dimension 2400 w/ the following specs.

2.4Ghz @ 533 FSB
17" Ultrasharp LCD
80 GB HDD
256MB of RAM
DVD Burner
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse
Win XP Professional

The price came out to $1277. Yes, you can get the base model for $499, w/ 128MB of RAM, a CD-ROM, a 40GB HDD, and a 15" CRT monitor. The P4/2.4 is roughly comparable to a 1.6 G5. The 2400 also offers NO AGP SLOT, and comes with the horrible intel extreme graphics 2 video chipset, which is 100% worse than the 'crappy 5200' everyone is whining about.

Pricing out the next step up (dimension 4600) with identical specs, except for the addition of a Geforce 5200FX and a 2.8Ghz processor brought the total up to $1397.

So, the same mac, with an all-integrated system, is in the same price range as a 'usable' PC.

Now, why is everyone whining over the price? Feature for feature, the mac is priced quite nicely.

 

[UWF404]

Will the new Imacs be able to run Adobe CS Suite ok??

 

[Timelessblur]

remeber the 2nd computer you price out has a upgradble graphic card. As you point out the integrate card like that pretty much shows that it on par with bottom of hte line computer from dell that been upgraded.

Go up a modle and yeah hardware wise it the same and price wise it about the same but you can put good graphic card in it. ALso dell has a wider range of computer going for very low end to high end with out a huge gaps in it

 

[_iCeb0x_]

(Now watch... people will take off the foot and put the thing in their laps... the Mac tablet is here...)

I saw this morning on MacNN that there's a company making a touchscreen add-on for all Apple Cinema displays. If you can use that on an iMac G5, it's almost an iTablet!

 

[dizastor]

sounds like you don't have any pci cards you need to install in your mac. i do. a few of them. that's why i got the g5 dual 2.5... pci cards. not unusual in audio/video work.

Can I get an AMEN!
Long live the giant power tower!

On topic, I really like the new design and the Graphics card is probably overkill for 90% of the computer users I know. The catalog company that I work for just switched to OSX in June, and I literally just heard a woman four desks down from me ask someone if they knew what iPhoto was for, and the person she asked didn't know. These are professional graphic designers! Just because everyone on this board (myself included) is a technology geek does not mean that everyone is. There are tons of people who rely on graphics power and RAM and would look at you crosseyed if you mentioned that their GPU wasn't powerful enough. In fact, they upgraded all 70 macs in the office and they aren't nearly as powerful as the new iMac, because no one knows the difference, we all got quicksilver g4s and everyone is psyched because they got new computers. I'm happy to not have to work in OS9 anymore.

So, in summary... hardcore geeks want specs, bragging rights, and the ability to upgrade if their friend buys something better. Professionals usually don't care... they just want a computer/OS that does what they want. Companies only upgrade when it's hurting their bottom line not to.

In other words... the new iMac rocks.

*Professionals in video are an exception... Everyone wants faster render times, but pro-video would't even consider an iMac, so

 

[Jigglelicious]

I love the way they show how the new iMac is over 200% faster than the previous iMac. 200% wow, it looks like such a big number. But in reality, its only twice as fast. And notice how the bar graph doesn't actually list the frames per second each computer is getting. For all we know, the old iMac was getting 5fps, which would bring the new iMac G5 up to a whopping 10fps! Either way, the game isn't playable! They are obviously ashamed of the performance since they neglect to list the actual FPS.

I also love how they incorrectly named "Worlds of Warcraft". Shows just how much they care about gamers.