New iMac G5 Announced

[Flying Llama]

im sure they put in a lot a research for the gpu. i dont think they just said, hmm lets not put an option so that everyone wil cry mwahahaha!!!

maybe they couldnt cause already its hot enough and this is the coolest one. there has to be a reason...

 

[daveg5]

Problem is, with all the digital television setups and standards, putting an "old TV tuner" in the iMac was a backwards idea (where I live, it's less expensive to get basic digital cable then basic regular cable. Shows you how much they want to kill regular, old cable).

As for not having the wireless stuff built-in, it's to keep the cost down (since you can have it with BTO (same with bigger HD) or later on by installing it yourself, just like the RAM).

Besides, I'm probably not the only one who *doesn't* want wireless (doesn't the keyboard/mouse need batteries? I got enough crap that requires batteries already, I'd rather have a wired keyboard/mouse that won't stop working in the middle of what I'm doing).

this is one reason I wanted a PCcard slot for that option, even my digital cable box still has the standard video adapters, that has only changed with HD cable, which is still in its infancy and overpriced. I believe we will see more low-cost video adapters in usb2 and firewire for this. I wish they had a dvi in so I could use the 20" with my current computer and just switch between the IMac, that could have also been used for HDtv HDDVD in all 720p-420p not the higher 1920X1080P, but It could have scaled that to fit in the 1680x1050 spot. and I could watch tv/play xbox/playstation in a window while computing, neat, we will see this in the future.but no dvi in was included yet. shucks!!

 

[daveg5]

im sure they put in a lot a research for the gpu. i dont think they just said, hmm lets not put an option so that everyone wil cry mwahahaha!!!

maybe they couldnt cause already its hot enough and this is the coolest one. there has to be a reason...

they are probably just left overs from the overly high sales predictions of the imac 17-20". might as well get rid of those first for no cost and then later in Jan. add a BTO option.?

 

[tex210]

The lip

That bottom lip was necessary to make it look like a mac... I guess some of you are to young to remember. anyway, I'm sure it will evolve into the space for chameleon. Notice the sleep light? If the face were all monitor, it would have looked really ugly. As for everyone telling people to go buy some other computer/console for games... stop. Really. I have a gamecube and an iMac 600 crt. Guess which one gets more gameplay? If you said the iMac, you'd be right (still love Starcraft)! I'm sure the nividia will be more than enough oomph for MOST players. Not for the ones who use FPS as a phallic measurement, but most reasonable players. Try it before you knock it. Sure a game will come along and drag if you have every option turned to highest, but that's why there are powermacs. Go ahead and save your money so you to can say you have the biggest joystick, but me... I'm old enough to realize that some of the BEST games I've ever played ran on 16k machines!

 

[Yvan256]

And while we're on the subject of Gamers... while Apple really "owes" you nothing (as this has never been really touted as a Gamer's Computer), it's quite amazing to me that two very popular games (Halo & Unreal Tournament), run 189% and 212% faster, respectively.

Give Apple a freakin' break!

First of all, even Apple talks about games on their iMac G5 pages. So *yes* Apple owes us something. They're writing about Doom 3 and World of Warcraft on their iMac G5 pages, so we expect to have at least a *decent* gaming experience on that machine. And *decent* never meant "lowest resolution, lowest quality settings, low FPS".

Halo and Unreal Tournament use old 3D engines with lower requirements for the GPU. The iMac G4 also had a crappier GPU to begin with, so it's *normal* the FX 5200 Ultra will run those old games faster. This is like saying you're faster today with your new bicycle than you were using your old running shoes while the rest of the industry is riding motorbikes.

Would you be impressed with a computer that runs 30 times faster than... an Apple II GS? Forget the numbers, look at WHAT they are comparing.

The new **** will always outclass the old ****, but it's still ****.

 

[daveg5]

I guess I didn't make my point obvious...
I think what apple has to do (as their shareholders require) is to increase market share, even by a little bit, and I just don't see this machine doing that for them. I sort of like the design, but at the same time, I don't have a flat panel monitor yet. If I had a flat panel, that means I had lots of dollars to buy one and I don't want to spend more money on ANOTHER one, or I just bought a new peecee system which came with one free. This machine doesn't give me any reason to switch or upgrade. I WANT TO SWITCH FOR REASONS I CAN'T TELL YOU .
The problem is I don't have the disposable cash for the PM I want, and this new imac doesn't have that much appeal.

If Apple would put a little more faith in it's consumers that buy the prodicts and a lil less in the share holders, it would help them in the long run with increase market share and loyaty, rather than short term, high profits, when a product is just released, and a long period of slow sales while the underpowered product languishes.

 

[Timelessblur]

im sure they put in a lot a research for the gpu. i dont think they just said, hmm lets not put an option so that everyone wil cry mwahahaha!!!

maybe they couldnt cause already its hot enough and this is the coolest one. there has to be a reason...

I know the reason. they why they choose it.
*apple thinking*
People are idoits as a whole and dont see the graphic card or the ram. All they will see is it has a G5 chip and most people think that the CPU is all that matters. It cost us 10-20 buck less per computer to use a graphic card that is is not even really entry lv and hell by cutting the ram in half we get 2 graphic cards for the price of one. This card will get by.
It is so nice most people have never seen a computer with a desent graphic card. I love how most people dont understand the ram and the graphic card are just as imporant as the CPU. I love how we have maccy out there that will blindly defind what over s*** we put out. We get to pocket the extra money WOO HOO we get rich of the dumbass public

*End of apple thinking****

 

[drlunanerd]

Orginal the iMac could briged that gap but now well the iMac has fallen down to just a cheap computer with a LCD. it is basicly almost an Emac with an LCD.

Er... an eMac with an LCD *and* a 1.8GHz G5 CPU and attendent faster architecture? It's not "basically" an eMac then is it, come on?

Agree that the GPU could be better - I think Apple have dropped the ball on that one. But as someone has already suggested the Rev B will undoubtedly be upgraded in this department. If the GPU won't cut it for you now, vote with your wallet and don't buy.

 

[Yvan256]

I wait 6 months for a new computer. I wait patiantly...month.. after month...And they give us this crap? How stupid do they think we are? It is ugly and if they were going to pick form over function then why choose to make it look so childlike? The idea obviously didn't work (among other things) due to the blank space at the bottom. Even from what you can see they were trying to do.they failed.

I think you missed their whole idea. See their website front page, their iMac G5 pages. iPod references everywhere. Look at the 4th generation iPod.

Now, try to morph that into a computer. It's the iMac G5. They did a *perfect* job at morphing the iPod shape into a computer.

You can dislike the actual concept, but the end result is stunning for what they wanted to do.

As for "form over function" I don't really see what function this form conflicts with...

 

[daveg5]

My question is what is out there for the people who need something more powerful than the iMac but they dont need to power of the Powermac?

Orginal the iMac could briged that gap but now well the iMac has fallen down to just a cheap computer with a LCD. it is basicly almost an Emac with an LCD.

I know there are a lot of people who need and want something that is in the middle ground not an one end or the other.

THe graphic card is one of the largest things keeping the iMac from filling that massive void.

Dont rule a mini G5 tower out yet, 1 pci, 1 pccard (for optional firewire 800), 1 AGP, 4 ram slots, 1 G5 or dual core G4, at 400 or more buss. without screen.$799-$999.
the Powermac G4 is now gone at $1299, so there is no PCI/AGP expandable mac for under $2000 anymore, thats the first time in many years.
What are the options. Refurb/ used upgraded powermac G4 or G5, seems to be the only option. this is a market apple has abandon completely for the time being. we are told you must spend 2 bills for upgradablity, even if we dont need that dual power. Maybe they should sale the single 1.6 1.8 PM G5 for $999-$1299 for those.

 

[nagromme]

I think what apple has to do (as their shareholders require) is to increase market share, even by a little bit, and I just don't see this machine doing that for them.

Time will tell. Many analysts are predicting the opposite, and reaction to this machine is already better than any Apple product I can think of in a long time--including super-successes like the Al PowerBooks and iPod Mini.

You want something cheaper than Apple has. I think a low-end headless Mac is a GREAT idea (but not an iMac). That's frustrating but it doesn't change all the people who DO want this G5.

 

[Lancetx]

I posted this earlier but it seems to have been lost in all of the hoopla. Are we sure that these aren't upgradable? Not the graphics mind you, but the hard drive, optical drive, AirPort, memory are mentioned as being "easily upgradable" in this story that was run this morning. This would be a departure from the G3 and G4 iMacs. Here is the link to the story. Apparently there was a demo of one at the SF Apple Store yesterday that is referred to here.

 

[rdowns]

I've been reading a lot of things what this new imac is NOT FOR (motion, etc...). Will someone please tell me what it IS FOR besides web surfing, text editing, chat-room stuff. There must be some creative, apple specific apps this machine will run without running into limitations imposed by the graphics card or small system memory. it doesn't even have firewire 800!

If there aren't any killer apps that this machine can handle, then apple really is a glutten for punishment because you can do all the "normal" stuff in a $400 pc. I really don't see a lot of people flocking over as switchers just because of a cool design. Not only is this more expensive, but people would have to learn a whole new OS, which in actuallity becomes a chore, not an adventure. The sad part is, by the looks of this thread, apple has even alienated about 50% of their stable marketshare.

I see this machine as being good for older people new to the world of computing, or small children (of parents that can afford $1300 on a computer for their child).

A lot of what you read in here is crap. Too many can't see beyond their own noses, needs and wants. And they surely don't understand sales and marketing. The new iMac can run Motion (will need more than the standard RAM) and the other Apple pro apps. Of course, they won't run as fast as a dual processor PowerMac.

The fact is, Apple put a G5 in their iMac line and lowered the prices over what the G4s cost. Many say the graphics card is weak but it will do the job for the vast majority of users - pro or consumer.

 

[jaw04005]

Hmmm. The dark side has 64-bit processors (amd64/em64t), 64-bit operatings systems (linux/xp 64-bit preview), CPUs at up to 3.6 GHz, all kinds of chassis, expandable with PCI/PCI-X/PCI Express/AGP, just about every video card made (easily upgradeable), and every optical drive that's out there.

The new iMac has a low end 64-bit CPU with a completely 32-bit OS, only 2 DIMM memory slots, one highly constrained chassis without any slots, a definitely low-end non-upgradeable video card, and a fairly low-end non-upgradeable laptop optical drive.

What *is* your argument? Are you saying that the iMac isn't competitive?

My argument was with...

... Obviously you're quite removed from the reality of consumer computers. Dual layer is strictly the realm of enthusiasts and professionals right now. Even DVD burning in general isn't a very widespread activity among the bulk of computer users.

Just because the average user doesn't *need* the feature, doesn't mean Apple shouldn't use it. Apple should continue do everything they can to remain on top of their offerings and remain competitive.

Jumping on members who want daul-layer burners or faster video cards in the iMacs just because you think that user doesn't "need" that feature is a bit ridiculous.

I personally believe the new iMac is very competitive, would have liked a different style and a nicer video card. But, you can't argue with the aggressive pricing. Although it does look like an eMac with a flat screen.

Now its time for a product that will fill the gap between the consumer and professional line! It would be nice to be able purchase a new Apple tower with an Apple display for around $1800.

 

[Timelessblur]

well not having a dual layer burn is not really a big deal as it being made out to be. Mainly because there is no media for it yet and they media is going to be quite expiseve. Now DVD burners have been out for what 2 years now and DVD are just starting to get in range of a ok price but they are still pretty expised. it going to another year just for DVD to get to a desent price (under 1 buck a DVD). Dual layer disk are going to take at least 2+ years before they are in the range of a OK price and over another year before they will be easy to find on store shelves

 

[myapplseedshurt]

check out this article

Time will tell. Many analysts are predicting the opposite, and reaction to this machine is already better than any Apple product I can think of in a long time--including super-successes like the Al PowerBooks and iPod Mini.

You want something cheaper than Apple has. I think a low-end headless Mac is a GREAT idea (but not an iMac). That's frustrating but it doesn't change all the people who DO want this G5.

funny, I JUST came across this article
www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2004/tc2004091_5017_tc056.htm

here's a few highlights:
"If history is any guide, simply building a pretty box isn't enough to entice people to buy into the Mac-o-sphere. While analysts and others agree that the new product should spur strong sales increases for at least the next few quarters, Apple could have difficulty sustaining that momentum. For a company that still gets 60% of its revenues from PC sales, that's an issue"

"Trying to sell form over function, ultimately, could prove a losing proposition for Apple. That's really too bad."

I want this product to do well, don't get me wrong, I just have that feeling in my gut that it wont.

 

[nagromme]

Some hilarious criticisms (and lots of praise) of the new iMac over at Macintouch.com.

Some of the best, paraphrased:

* Everything is NOT behind the screen... some components are below or slightly outside the borders of the actual screen! Apple are liars!

* No FM radio! How can this be the digital hub??

* It's bigger than a Sun thin client!

 

[alexf]

I've been reading a lot of things what this new imac is NOT FOR (motion, etc...). Will someone please tell me what it IS FOR besides web surfing, text editing, chat-room stuff. There must be some creative, apple specific apps this machine will run without running into limitations imposed by the graphics card or small system memory. it doesn't even have firewire 800!

Get real, please!

The new iMac will do everything any "prosumer" wants to do EXCEPT:

- Run some high-end professional apps well (e.g. Motion)
- Run some 3D games well (it will run many games fine)

And you really expect more from an iMac.

Let me ask you: what percentage of iMac buyers do you think have these requirements?

(BTW, up until recently I was working as a graphics professional on a 3.5 year old Cube and the only real thing that held me back was the CPU speed.)

 

[alexf]

Can anyone please explain to me how in the world they got to cool the G5 sufficently in this case? Look at the cooling system of the G5 tower (im not even thinking about the new liquid cooled ones) and look at the imac G5, i just dont understand how its feasable.

The original PowerMac G5 cases were designed for the orginal 970 chip, which was considerably larger and required a more elaborate cooling system.

Now that Apple is using the 970FX chip, which draws less than half the power of the 970, the huge G5 tower cases are already outdated and unnecessary (except for, perhaps, the 2.5GHz), yet Apple has invested too much into the design to change them until at least a year or two (or maybe even longer) down the road.

As I remarked in another post, it is ironic that the G5 chip has made history by finding its way into both the largest AND the smallest Apple desktop ever. Strange indeed...

 

[weldon]

I'm always disappointed in the iMac (and PowerBook) GPU's but isn't the 5200 FX Ultra the same card as the stock offering on the dual 2.0GHz G5?

 

[Patrick Thistle]

My thoughts on the new iMac

I like it. Everybody in the office likes it, I can see the 20" making it's way onto a few desks in the studio (15 macs, 10 G4s, 5 G5s).

Looks good, much better than similar offerings from Sony etc., and is powerful enough for our meagre needs (Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark/Indesign, Flash, Filemaker Pro, Word, Powerpoint, Excel + iTunes, iPhoto etc, etc. will ALL run fine). Strata 3d? not sure, but hey we'll stick that on the G5 towers. I'm afraid I'm another "pro" user who's never given a second thought to the GPU.

What I look for is a fast processor, big hard disk, decent screen, and large amount of max Ram. (Biggest gripe to Apple - increase the standard amount of RAM - 256 is just silly now - every time you look at new mac prices factor in more for a RAM upgrade!).

So who's going to buy it?
1. Me. (& people like me). for home AND work.
2. All those PC users who've bought an iPod, because its cool.
3. Mac users who are still on System 9 on a G3 iMac.(They'res a lot of 'em out there)

Will it be a success... Yep, they'll sell a shedload of them. IMHO This is the best computer Apple have made since the original iMac. Not so revoultionary, but will look just as good at home or in the office. Nice price too.

Only thing I don't get is if you can hang it on the wall, (which they reckon you can...) how do you access all the ports on the back?? Ok, you can have a bluetooth keyboard & mouse, but what about everything else? digital hub anyone! If the ports were all on the side it would make more sense in this configuration.

Ok. Said my peice. Another great product Apple... sit back & watch the plaudits run in from the press....

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Well, besides pro applications (Motion, etc) and games (because of the crappy GPU and low VRAM) there's not much the iMac G5 can't do.

I said that before, but I can repeat it. The iMac can run Motion.

 

[alexf]

I'm always disappointed in the iMac (and PowerBook) GPU's but isn't the 5200 FX Ultra the same card as the stock offering on the dual 2.0GHz G5?

It sure is.

 

[Timelessblur]

I said that before, but I can repeat it. The iMac can run Motion.

yeah it CAN run motion but it will run it like crap. When ones hardware barely makes the system requirements then it means that it barely will run.

 

[JGowan]

First of all, even Apple talks about games on their iMac G5 pages. So *yes* Apple owes us something.

No, they DON'T. There will be games that run absolutely stellar on the iMac G5 and there will those that don't. They have to meet people with the most advanced technology they can while maintaining certain costs and certain price points. Don't you GET IT? A lot of people LIKED the "Lamp" iMac but felt it was too pricey. Apple had to do several things in introducing this new unit (1) stay true to "the soul of the imac"; (2) better specs; (3) more innovative design; (4) lower price... and in my opinion (and many people that will speak with their wallets), they succeeded.

This is like saying you're faster today with your new bicycle than you were using your old running shoes while the rest of the industry is riding motorbikes.

Goofy analogy. You're still stuck on the processor & video card. Again, Apple could've intro'd an iMac that would fit your gaming desires, but guess what?... you would have to PAY for that beefed up hardware. And EVERYBODY (including YOU, Yvan) would've pitched a bitch. Again, this computer is not aimed at you. Go get a PC. Nobody's stopping you. In fact, I challenge you to go and put together a list of your DREAM GAMING PC, along with actual costs associated with Video Card, Ram, etc. and POST IT HERE. I would love to know what you deem to be GAME-READY actually costs. And be honest as I'm sure there will be plenty of people ready to flame you if you cheat on price points.

I like Games and Playtime as much as the next guy, but THERE IS WORK TO BE DONE the other 95% of the time and I feel the iMac G5 definitely will meet more needs than not... and I also think Apple's about to sell a lot of these new computers.