New iMac G5 Announced

[takao]

So what about the LCD? A quick looksie at the 20" monitor suggests that the 20" iMac internals can be had for the low, low, affordable, Switcher-friendly $600. So why doesn't Apple just come out with that much-discussed headless Mac? It could be the form factor similar to my good ol' Mac IIsi, or better yet, the size of something that can be stacked ontop of my A/V equipment. Apple, are you listening??!!

it won't happen...because it would hurt imac and powermac sales (where they pretty obviously make a big margin)
heck i would say people would even by the imac minus the lcd for something like 1000$ ...
will it happen ? i doubt it

 

[ChrisH3677]

How do you adjust the HEIGHT?

Dell made the same mistake with their early LCD screens - i.e. no height adjustment. So now they have stands that pivot and go up and down.

Obviously this was no issue at all with the G4 iMac.

I know that you can attach these G5 iMacs to third party stands - but how much is that going to add to the price?? We bought one for a Dell monitor 18 mths ago and it cost us 15% of the cost of the original PC package.

If you're buying these iMacs for the office but need better ergonomics (height adjustable) will you be prepared to pay the additional 15% to get a height adjustable stand?

Oh well - at least I'll know where my phone books are...

 

[ij3ffy]

Okay, a lot of people are bashing the video card bashers out there saying iMac's don't need fast graphics because its a consumer machine or whatever, but come on... this is 2 year old technology people. Geforce FX series was a failed/flawed graphic card series for the pc, and to put the bottom of the line 5200 into a brand new machine is insulting. A 5200 for the pc (128MB) can be picked up for about 55 dollars. In response to people saying “Get a G5” well, most people can’t through 2000+ on a whim, plus a monitor. For 1299, I don’t see the problem for asking for a decent graphics card.

 

[gorkonapple]

eek! is that true? I have a 20" iMac and was going to order motion.... thanks for the warning, now I am sad

* Macintosh computer with 867MHz or faster PowerPC G4 or G5 processor
* 4X AGP slot
* 512MB of RAM (2GB or more recommended)
* Mac OS X v10.3.5 or later
* QuickTime 6.5.1 or later
* Display with 1024 x 768 resolution or higher (1280 x 1024 resolution recommended)
* One of the following graphics cards:
— ATI Radeon 9800 XT (R360)
— ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (R350)
— ATI Radeon 9700 Pro (R300)
— ATI Radeon 9600 XT (RV360)
— ATI Radeon 9600 Pro (RV350)
— ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 (RV M11)
— ATI Mobility Radeon 9600 (RV M100
— nVidia GeForce Go5200 (NV34M)
— nVidia GeForce FX 5200 Ultra (NV34)
* 10GB of disk space for application, templates and tutorial
* DVD drive for installation

Hmm....maybe it's not your VRAM....maybe it's the card itself? Looks like alot of the recent cards will work but your Quicksilver is quiet old now comparitively. Also, the conversation below on Apple's Support Discussions seem to suggest that the nVidia card in the current and past 12 inch Powerbooks should work. My 12inch has 32 MB of VRAM. You want to try again? If there is a restriction on VRAM, then Apple needs to add that to it's list. I am guesing (just guessing) that you may have a Mac supported card, but one that Apple did not sell included with your Quicksilver. Anyone remember what those Quicksilver's had?

http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?127@100.WCR2amwavVJ.0@.ee6b280

 

[blissed]

iMac whatever

it's so not innovative. they made it look like a big white iPod. barf.

where are the new powerbooks? get on with it apple. sheesh.

 

[Trekkie]

It's quite a tear really since I've used macs since 1987 but I'm going to build myself a PC box and run linux. And one thing's sure that PC box will have one whopping graphics card that I may decide to UPGRADE in a year or two. I suppose I'm just outside Apple's target market but I'm still torn I can't get one of these.

Oh come on, I have to call shenanigans on this one. Buying Linux with a killer video card? What the hell is the point of that? The reasons you'd want a great 3D card is for Windows and Gaming, that's it. 2D photo work isn't going to be faster, you didn't say you're out to render some 3D animation so I really think you're just whining to whine.

 

[CholEoptera36]

A lot of people on here are complaining about the video card, it's hard to please everybody. Shard has done a good job of gunning those folks down as soon as they pop up, but just to add a few things...

This video card thing always gets debated. It's not necessary to up the price on the new iMac by putting a badass video card in it that an average consumer won't need anyway. If you want to play games, there's a thing called a console. If you are part of the very small percentage of true, hardcore gamers, then go PC who cares. If you aren't for gaming but need a better video card, go 6800 with a dual G5 PowerPC. You'll spend just as much money with the right processor, high performance memory, and video card as a G5 PowerPC on a gaming PC. Look at Alienware prices for that matter... insane.
kudos~

 

[Ton Palmans]

Two small questions.... (again)

Sorry to ask these questions again (I posted them firstime on page 26), but maybe they drowned in all the barking about the graphics card, PC's and/or older Macs. So I thought I'll try it a second time...

Personally I like the design really very much and it fits well to my needs, but two things are not yet clear to me:

1. Noise levels. It seems to be a quit design, but has anybody actually heard one of these in Paris and reported on the noise levels? Quiteness is really important to me.

2. Responsetime of the display. Is this the new 16 ms or the old 25 ms, anybody know? I can live hapilly with the FX 5200, but 25 ms would be a big disappointment. I could not read it on the apple site, which worries me a bit.

Thanks for any help on these questions

 

[mkjellman]

my how quickly people forget that people were bull about the "lamp" imac. now apple changes the design to a very elegent and small and thin design and people say they liked what they said they hated before. everyone here seems to know whats best but when apple does what you did not like in the first place you all want the old thing. grow up...

when the ipod 3g came out everyone on this board hated the buttons. apple moves the buttons back to the location of the 1g and people want the 3g back...

 

[vga4life]

You simply stated that the original iMac sold so well because it was 1) powerful and 2) well-priced. This is simplistic and only partially correct.

I happen to think that the latter reason had far more to do with it than the speed, and the all-in-one "cute" design had at least as much to do with its sales as its competitive price.

Again, the original iMac was marketed towards people who wanted to use the Internet (and by the way, no, I don't work in marketing).

I don't agree with you that the iMac is no longer competively priced either. Please find me a similar PC configuration for around the same price and I will stand corrected.

The imac has been $1300 and "all-in-one 'cute'" since 1998, but doesn't sell like it used to. Reason: cute only goes so far in covering up a price/performance gap.

The gap didn't really exist in 1998. It's yawning huge now. Look what $1000 will buy you in the PC world now:

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/guides/MVGSBG/article.php/3394901

If you don't feel like reading it, you can get put together a complete Athlon 64 3000+ or P4 2.8E system with 512 MB RAM, Radeon 9800 128MB, 80 gig HD, combo drive, 19" flat CRT, 5.1 speakers, mouse, keyboard, etc for $1000. Replace the $185 19" CRT with a 17" LCD for $400 and you're still under the lowest of the low-end imac.

Such a system will absolutely spank any Mac short of a Dual 2 GHz G5, up to and including this new imac. Total performance humiliation. Yes, the PC will be big and ugly and run windows or linux. It'll also be expandable and fast.

Look, I hate to rag on Apple - I'm a huge MacOS fan and long-time Mac owner. I just wouldn't feel the need to trash Apple if they'd stop crippling their consumer hardware. I simply feel that a 64 MB GeForce 5200FX has no place in a premium computer. I'd be willing to overlook it in the $1300 imac if the $1500 and $1900 versions came with something better - but they don't.

Frankly, I'd also be happier with the guts of the 1.6 GHz G5 imac in a headless case with an agp slot for $1000. I don't need another monitor.

-vga4life

 

[gorkonapple]

2) Ethernet needs to be Gigabit. I buy the Gateway Profiles and they have gigabit, it cant' be that hard to put it in and the price should be not much higher.

Ok...what home user is goign to come close to saturating a Gigabit card? Hell what office user is going to do that??

 

[aswitcher]

Ok my 0.02 Aussie dollars...

First the disappointments

Graphics card...damn thats going to kill sales. My PB17G4 upgraded for $75 AUD to 128, why not the iMac...bizzare...wonder if its a supply, heat or space issue...or to keep their PM line sales up...can't beleive they are pushing games when the reality will be that the card wont handle them...or the new Tiger stuff next year, as well as a 128 for little more on the tco.

Big ass lower white space...shame they couldn't have done something with that.
I really think a few front mounted ports would have looked fine (usb 2, fw 400), even side mounted for usb thumb drives (would have felt a bit minority report )
Lots of people will go wireless keyboard (so no usb 1.1 easily accessible) and then need to buy a hub to stop reaching around the huge screen to get to their usb ports which will be fidley given the number of cables that might be there.

White plastic...well its the "i" mac theme, its cheaper, it doesn't muck with wireless but still if this baby had been metal look as PM new screens then I think it would really have rocked visually

Foot - Well the swivel was a selling point and distinctly mac, and now its gone. It would have been nice to see a new "leg" which allowed swivelling. Guess a thrid party will bring out a super swivel hub to both allow swivel and to provide those missing usb ports.

Ram - Apple keeping the price point down although I am glad to see that ram seems a little cheaper down under from Apple.

No dual display - really annoying having this software cripple...but given the poor graphics card thats probably needed.

Good stuff

G5 - even if its cripple with bus and ram, its a G5 and appears to finally have decent legs in an imac. Great to see.

20" - new display type, superior to 17. Very nice and the price dropped like $700 on the old 20"imac so its a great deal now.

wireless keyboard/BT/mouse combo - nice to see for ~$160 the whole upgrade that would have cost 50% more if purchased seperately.


Price...great to see the big drop Down Under.

 

[JLS]

my how quickly people forget that people were bull about the "lamp" imac. now apple changes the design to a very elegent and small and thin design and people say they liked what they said they hated before. everyone here seems to know whats best but when apple does what you did not like in the first place you all want the old thing. grow up...

when the ipod 3g came out everyone on this board hated the buttons. apple moves the buttons back to the location of the 1g and people want the 3g back...

getting off topic but.. its the grey circle people don't like, not the fact the buttons were moved (which is good).

 

[HiRez]

Philnote now available:

http://stream.apple.akadns.net/

You really think Steve is coming back? Hah! Clearly Phil has made his move after years of lying in wait in the shadows. He tells the masses he can't wait for Steve to come back while in reality he knows Steve's bloody body is rolled up in a carpet in the trunk of his car, awaiting a midnight drive-by dumping in a roadside ditch. Oh yes, very well played, Phil, very well played indeed. I only hope you remembered to steal the RDF coil first.

 

[Dessert Whip]

RAM'n

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.

And by the way what part of "Motion requires 512MB but the iMac has only 256MB" was hard to understand? Do you work for Apple? Maybe someone should look at the OS X system calculator, could be buggy? Overall a great buy, (but) why the ****ty graphics card and lack of RAM?

 

[takao]

my how quickly people forget that people were bull about the "lamp" imac. now apple changes the design to a very elegent and small and thin design and people say they liked what they said they hated before. everyone here seems to know whats best but when apple does what you did not like in the first place you all want the old thing. grow up...

when the ipod 3g came out everyone on this board hated the buttons. apple moves the buttons back to the location of the 1g and people want the 3g back...

personally i didn't even bother to look at the macs before the came up with the G5 last year..that sparked the interest of a lot of people who switched to PCs in the past and others who always liked them..
hell i don't even know what an 1G iPod looks like...
i like the new ipod better than the old
i like the laptops better than before
about the imac..only time will tell..now i'm highly spectical..perhaps apple pulls out a updated next year when our family pc is ready for an upgrade...untill that happens the imac is on the "hasn't impressed me" list together with the emac

 

[dragonslive]

You can't be serious!!

Thank you......this compter is aimed at people who want to e-mail and use word.Not play the latest games,buy a powermac for that and leave the iMac alone.

Peace
DjVoTeZ

This is about the most retarded thing I have heard on the net!!

Why on earth if you just want to email and use word would you want to waste $1200 on any computer????

You certainly don't need a Mac for this and certainly not a G4, let alone a G5.

Take a break fanboy........or at least mention iLife in your crazy defense of the ancient specs herein.

 

[Flowbee]

And by the way what part of "Motion requires 512MB but the iMac has only 256MB" was hard to understand?

The new iMac supports up to 2GB of RAM. Want more than 256mb... just add it yourself.

 

[jsw]

And by the way what part of "Motion requires 512MB but the iMac has only 256MB" was hard to understand?

It's expandable to 2GB. Is some part of "expandable" hard to understand? The iMac will run Motion. Period.

Edit: Just see above. That'll teach me to grab a drink while composing a reply.

 

[Trekkie]

I'm not saying this has been done before. I'm just saying that anyone with an IQ above Bush's could think of putting a computer in a box. Nonetheless, I do acknowledge the fact that Apple managed to make it so small, even though this is just a reason to buy a PowerMac.

Think about it? Sure. Do it and have it not sound like a hair dryer running all day long, not really.

That being said I'll give you a link, hard to find but the Netvista X series from IBM had them. in 2000.

Review from 2000 on Netvista x40

 

[Lancetx]

And by the way what part of "Motion requires 512MB but the iMac has only 256MB" was hard to understand? Do you work for Apple? Maybe someone should look at the OS X system calculator, could be buggy?

And what part of this is hard to understand? To answer your question, no, I don't work for Apple, I just bothered to actually read the specs on the system. Last time I checked the calculator, 2GB was greater than 512MB.

iMac G5 Memory: 256MB PC3200 (400MHz) DDR SDRAM, supports up to 2GB

 

[iMeowbot]

The reality is that most professionals don't seek out the top of the line stuff--they don't need the fastest graphics cards, they don't even need the fastest processors. Every design professional I've talked--and I know a lot of heavy-hitters--makes a decision of cost vs performance and goes from there. A friend of mine who has one countless publishing design awards heads up a shop that up until this year were still running entirely on blue and white G3s.

It's just the nature of these boards that there are posters who zoom in on boundary cases, and utterly fail to understand the vast majority of work done in the real world on these machines.

It doesn't help much that MR readers also seem to suffer from delusions that there are clear distinctions between Apple "professional" and "consumer" products. There is some of that in the marketing and advertising, but the engineering tells a different story.

 

[HiRez]

But if it is off, don't Macs still turn on using the keyboard?

Unfortunately, no. They for some stupid reason removed this capability a few years ago, and it's really annoying because I have a PowerBook that I usually run with an external monitor (lid closed). To restart I have to pull it out of its little cubbyhole, dragging the cables with it, open it up, press the power button, and then quickly close the lid and put it back. PITA.

 

[512ke]

I predict boffo sales for the new iMac. It's clean, modern, iPod-like and it's CONVENTIONAL. A COOL and AFFORDABLE thing that's not TOO different.

Joe Consumer buys a computer for what it does, what it looks like and what it costs. Joe doesn't know what a graphics card is. Joe wants to play three games that came with the box, edit home movies, play iTunes, watch DVDs on a big screen, provoke envy, get online and open Powerpoint emails.

99% of PC users that I know do nothing more than Word, Explorer and Outlook. They can do much more with an iMac. Even video chat. Function, style and price. Not innards. I think Apple will hit a home run with this!

 

[Dessert Whip]

The new iMac supports up to 2GB of RAM. Want more than 256mb... just add it yourself.

Your new Audi supports 5 gears, but only comes with 2. Need more, just add them yourself? Those two gears will get the average user from A to B, but those pro drivers that want to take "highways" and such, you're on your own... or maybe you should have bought a Ford with all gears out of the box.

Hey thats no less confusing than trying to figure out why a brand new G5 comes with 256 RAM and a ****ty graphics card.