New iMac G5 Announced

[Geetar]

Why not say the 5200 is fine because Logic runs great with it? wtf.

Er... as a fairly cautious, but been-in the-business-long-enough-not-to-habitually-make-an-arse-of-himself pro-audio person (who's about to do some location tracking on a 1.5 PBook, mLAN pre's and no safety net, Lord help me! ), I think- and you can quote me- that the 5200 is fine because Logic runs great with it.

"macidiot", eh?

 

[kugino]

Simply because this thread isn't long enough - I've updated the frontpage with the info about the $1099 Edu model iMac which is in fact reality - sporting a GeForce video card and lacking an optical drive. This seems to be a available ONLY to educational institutions, and not to individual education customers.

yep, if you view the store as a purchaser for your school, you see that there's an optical-less version w/smaller HD and less vram for $1099...so i don't see why they couldn't offer a better video card in the top of the line one...

 

[dswoodley]

Wrong many people buying this machine do need a 128 card to justify it, soon Games will need that, Apple themselves brag on it being a game machine, I guess you disagree with them, I doubt those are the only thing people will do with this machines 1.6-1.8 G5 processors, thats a put down,on Apple BIGTIME!!.
THe Problem is the G5 is being crippled by a crappie graphics card. with that bus and memory and power. why bottleneck it with a crappy card. people are not asking for the ATI x series or even 9800 or Nvidia's 68000. they are asking for a chip better than the Imac G4 chip, progress you know, and with 128MB memory, and they will pay BTO to have it.
A good incentive is BTO and the $$$$ it makes with Apple being the only provider of the cards. This may happen. some people dont want or need the hhuge dual powermacs and the fastest video cards, they need the Imac G%with a simple recent fast card with 128MB.
Get over it yourself, take a poll of Macrumors, and you would see that many would like that paid option. but you are correct many dont, along with schools, businesses, light computer users. but for them there is the Emac, and old left over Imac G4's, shouldnt the Imac G5 have a better card than the outcoming Imac G4, at least as an BTO option.
I think that is a fair question, and Apple may have one planned for later, in fact I am almost sure they do.

This is too rich...are you saying a Macrumors poll should be used as a scientific analysis of consumers?? Like I said, Apple's marketing research determined that a great number of buyers would buy an imac g5 with a 64mb graphic card, other wise they wouldn't have released the thing into production (sort of like how we didn't see the Apple PDA that was developed and never released - there was no market for it). Last year Fred Anderson reported during an investor call the profit margins on the imac g4 were very slim (meaning very little profit). A year later Apple puts out an incredible bargain of a machine aimed at schools, office users, home users who btw AREN'T GAMERS by and large, and the only thing zealots focus on is the GPU. Apple dropped the price on the imac by $500! If the profit margins of the imac g4 were slim, I cringe at what they must be now. Adding a BTO option just isn't feasible. Every component you do that for costs more during the manufacturing process and delays the manufacturing process - plain and simple. Apple production makes these things in bulk for bulk sales and bulk shipment (why else can you buy them in bulk and get a discount?) BTO has never been a mainstay of the iMac except for Ram and HD, and it never will.

Buyers don't want old leftover G4 imacs (even if there were any -which there aren't in case you missed that) or emacs (meant for bulk purchases in tight education markets). They want what is new, stylish and reasonable in price - the imac.

I can admire the enthusiam of wanting a better and affordable gaming machine, but Apple will not go that direction with the iMac.

 

[macidiot]

Were any of those released under the Job's regime? I don't think so...

Certainly they do make mistakes; you'd be a fool to say they didn't. Come on, who doesn't? But they're a lot smarter now than in the mid-to-late 90s.

BTW, what was wrong with 7.5.3?

True, Jobs wasn't there for most of that. But there was the cube. Unless I'm mistaken, he was there for that. I thought it was cool. But it failed miserably in the marketplace.

7.5.3 was a serious nightmare. Actually, 7.5.2, 7.5.3, 7.5.5, 7.6, and 7.6.1 all had issues. There were fixes coming out every month or so. It crashed all the time, and wasn't really fixed decently until system8 was released. And System 8 was no rock of Gibraltor... 7.5.3 was a highlight of and indicative of the dark days of Amelio-run Apple. 7.5.3 was a real contributor to a lot of switching to pc.

 

[davey-nb]

From our friend John "Grumpy Old Man" Dvorak

the machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum white. "The [iMac G5] design is hardly inspirational. In fact, if you put two headlamps on it and a metal sun visor over its "windshield," it would be reminiscent of a 1954 DeSoto.

The architecture is risky. First of all, they jammed the entire computer into the screen, making the idea of changing "monitors" or screens impractical.

The Apple design team was obviously held to this design by edict, since the result is hardly jazzy or interesting. What's worse, the engineering required that all of the USB, audio, Ethernet and modem connectors (10 of them, not including the power line) are awkwardly and inconveniently placed on the back of the bulky monitor-computer. With all these wires running off the back of this top-heavy machine, there's a good possibility that one will get tripped over. I suspect the iMac will go flying. This lash-up just does not look stable. "


Youch, this bear has a big thorn in his paw!

 

[chanoc]

Hell Yes!!!

I want one! Just have to save my money. By the time I have enough maybe they will have an update!!!!

 

[kugino]

the machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum white. "The [iMac G5] design is hardly inspirational. In fact, if you put two headlamps on it and a metal sun visor over its "windshield," it would be reminiscent of a 1954 DeSoto.

The architecture is risky. First of all, they jammed the entire computer into the screen, making the idea of changing "monitors" or screens impractical.

The Apple design team was obviously held to this design by edict, since the result is hardly jazzy or interesting. What's worse, the engineering required that all of the USB, audio, Ethernet and modem connectors (10 of them, not including the power line) are awkwardly and inconveniently placed on the back of the bulky monitor-computer. With all these wires running off the back of this top-heavy machine, there's a good possibility that one will get tripped over. I suspect the iMac will go flying. This lash-up just does not look stable. "


Youch, this bear has a big thorn in his paw!

ummm...it's one thing drawing it up, another thing to actually implement it...the design may be so-so (i like it, though), but it's quite amazing how they fit all that stuff in there. so even if you don't like the looks or don't think it's original, it is nice engineering.

and don't you think apple's r&d played around with having stuff connected and seeing how stable it was? you think they'd just throw something out there that would tilt and fall at the slightest wrong movement? i agree that it looks unstable, but c'mon, you haven't even seen one or handled one yet and you're already complaining that it's unstable?


p.s. this is for the grumpy old guy, not davey-nb

 

[emw]

the machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum white. "The [iMac G5] design is hardly inspirational. In fact, if you put two headlamps on it and a metal sun visor over its "windshield," it would be reminiscent of a 1954 DeSoto.

The architecture is risky. First of all, they jammed the entire computer into the screen, making the idea of changing "monitors" or screens impractical.

The Apple design team was obviously held to this design by edict, since the result is hardly jazzy or interesting. What's worse, the engineering required that all of the USB, audio, Ethernet and modem connectors (10 of them, not including the power line) are awkwardly and inconveniently placed on the back of the bulky monitor-computer. With all these wires running off the back of this top-heavy machine, there's a good possibility that one will get tripped over. I suspect the iMac will go flying. This lash-up just does not look stable. "


Youch, this bear has a big thorn in his paw!

Now that's a surprise - Dvorak not liking a Mac?

I love the statement about all the connectors being on the back of the computer. Yep, now that's something you don't see everyday - connectors on the back of a computer. Gawd, what was Apple THINKING?! Morons, all of them I tell you.

And they'll get tripped over? Um, the iMac is on MY DESK, not the floor, where most CPUs reside. Hopefully I'm not walking on my desk (although I would be dancing there in excitement if I actually had one of these).

 

[slughead]

the machine comes in one old-fashioned color: 1988 platinum white. "The [iMac G5] design is hardly inspirational. In fact, if you put two headlamps on it and a metal sun visor over its "windshield," it would be reminiscent of a 1954 DeSoto.

The architecture is risky. First of all, they jammed the entire computer into the screen, making the idea of changing "monitors" or screens impractical.

The Apple design team was obviously held to this design by edict, since the result is hardly jazzy or interesting. What's worse, the engineering required that all of the USB, audio, Ethernet and modem connectors (10 of them, not including the power line) are awkwardly and inconveniently placed on the back of the bulky monitor-computer. With all these wires running off the back of this top-heavy machine, there's a good possibility that one will get tripped over. I suspect the iMac will go flying. This lash-up just does not look stable. "

He's right. The speaker design is lousy, the plugs should be in the center, the screen needs to be more easily replaceable (if you drop the computer, that's probably what will break the most).

But really, all I care about is that crappy video card of theirs!

 

[macidiot]

Would a snob correct your grammar?

Anyway, I never said I would look down on others based on what they do or do not own, or consider them lesser than me, or that I consider myself special. Where you came up with all of that, I'm not sure.

All I was saying is that its not your God-granted right to own a Mac. Or whatever else you think the best computer might be. As long as I can afford them, and Apple can keep making them, I will keep buying them. As I said before: I appreciate nice things, and I'd rather have a few really nice things than a mountain of junk.

I suppose you might label this the same brand of minimalism that Apple is digging further and further into. It isn't a coincidence.

As somebody with a dual MDD G4, I'd have thought you'd feel the same way.

well, my response might have been a bit harsh. Obviously, I can afford more than an iMac. I'm just tired of all the apologists. I like Apple products a lot, as one can see from my sig. I failed to include an Apple IIe, because its not a Mac, but I had one of those too.

But I do not blindly buy Apple products and I do not think that everything from Apple is the best. As I've said in previous postings here(probably a thousand or so back) I don't mind the iMac design(though its kind of boring), I don't mind the rest of the hardware, or the price. The 2 issues I have are the video card and the all-in-one design. Since many have pointed out that the iMac is inherently all-in-one, I guess I can't expect any change there. They still should make a low cost headless mac, but whatever.

Point is, because its the iMac, comparisons will be made to PC's. And rightly or wrongly, macs are considered premium machines, and people expect premium hardware(in its segment). The 5200 is a joke in the G5 tower and its a joke in the iMac. No one bags on ibook or powerbook video because its generally considered very competitive. In fact, not many people complain about the laptops at all because they are right there with PC laptops spec for spec.

As for the MDD, don't even get me started. I waited and waited for a G5. Instead of a G5, they came out with the MDD. Unfortunately, at the time I could wait no longer. My B&W G3 was far too slow. And all the people that talk about how they can still run this and that on a B&W G3(or anything else of that ilk) need to get over themselves. I had it(still do), and it barely ran OSX. I fire it up occasionally and its a dog compared to the MDD, let alone a G5. Getting back the the MDD, its basically a fine machine, but ridiculously loud. Talk about seriously POOR engineering there. And Apple handling of that issue was poor, to say the least. But people complained about it, and Apple did take noise into consideration when the G5 came out. Point is, if Apple comes out with something with a flaw, or poorly implemented, like the weak video in the new iMac, people should complain, Apple might address it. Don't drink the Kool-Aid.

 

[macidiot]

Er... as a fairly cautious, but been-in the-business-long-enough-not-to-habitually-make-an-arse-of-himself pro-audio person (who's about to do some location tracking on a 1.5 PBook, mLAN pre's and no safety net, Lord help me! ), I think- and you can quote me- that the 5200 is fine because Logic runs great with it.

"macidiot", eh?

Well, that was my point. Logic will run fine with a 5200. But its performance isn't really tied to a gpu is it? I thought my post made that clear...maybe not.

 

[iJon]

He's right. The speaker design is lousy, the plugs should be in the center, the screen needs to be more easily replaceable (if you drop the computer, that's probably what will break the most).

But really, all I care about is that crappy video card of theirs!

wait a second. last time i checked, the old imac or any apple computer for that fact does not drop well. if your main thoughts of buying a computer is how to replace the monitor when i drop it then you probably shouldn't get a computer. also you don't need to worry about getting to the monitor, that is reserved for authorized techs anyways, who will know the proper instructions to it.

also i don't see why the cables should be in the center. its easier to tilt it a little bit and peek around the corner and plug something in then reach around to the very back of the machine and plug something in.

i must say this thread surprises me everyday with the ideas people come up with to complain about.

iJon

 

[zim]

Maya.

I am running Maya on my 20" iMac right now... what is your point?

 

[kugino]

wait a second. last time i checked, the old imac or any apple computer for that fact does not drop well. if your main thoughts of buying a computer is how to replace the monitor when i drop it then you probably shouldn't get a computer. also you don't need to worry about getting to the monitor, that is reserved for authorized techs anyways, who will know the proper instructions to it.

also i don't see why the cables should be in the center. its easier to tilt it a little bit and peek around the corner and plug something in then reach around to the very back of the machine and plug something in.

i must say this thread surprises me everyday with the ideas people come up with to complain about.

iJon

yes, yes, and yes...

 

[i_am_a_cow]

HAH the 5200 is fine quit complaining. Just because games in 2 or 3 years will need more, that doesn't mean the iMac will need more. My brother has an iBook with a mobile 32mb card and WC3 runs outstandingly. Games will run great on it for at least a year. If you are the kind of person who gets nervous and starts to sweat when you can't run your games with a 2 year old consumer lever Mac on the very highest settings, then you need to get a Powermac.

 

[macidiot]

Ton Palmans

I just thought you'd like to know...the new iMac is apparently 25db quieter than the old one...

 

[macidiot]

I am running Maya on my 20" iMac right now... what is your point?

He asked for one app that would be helped by a better graphics card. Yes, you can run Maya on an older/slower machine. I run it on my g4. But it would run better with a faster video card. Hey, you can run photoshop on a bondi imac. They could have edited the Lord of the Rings on an iMac. In fact, what's the point of a Powermac when everyone here seems to think the imac is perfectly suitable for "professional" apps.

Whatever, this argument is old. Clearly, the iMac is the answer to our prayers. It has no faults or limitations. It is beyond reproach. Apple has given us EXACTLY what we need and want. Apple will sell billions and dominate the world with its all-conquering iMac. I was foolhardy to point out what I thought was a flaw. I must have missed my regular Kool-Aid dosage...now its back and I'm back on the bandwagon.

 

[Timelessblur]

I just thought you'd like to know...the new iMac is apparently 25db quieter than the old one...

I really just dont bye the number. Mainly because that last iMac was so damn quite and droping it anohter 25 would be well almost impostebile. so much as 1 fan would make it possible to hear it running. Basicly the current Computer on a stick out there dont make any noise.

 

[iJon]

I really just dont bye the number. Mainly because that last iMac was so damn quite and droping it anohter 25 would be well almost impostebile. so much as 1 fan would make it possible to hear it running. Basicly the current Computer on a stick out there dont make any noise.

WTF man? are you saying Phil lied to us . sorry, i'm in a funny/happy mood cause i'm trying to do this task from the brain multitasking thread.

iJon

 

[takao]

WTF man? are you saying Phil lied to us . sorry, i'm in a funny/happy mood cause i'm trying to do this task from the brain multitasking thread.

iJon

_that_ really explains your happy mood

i thought it was "25db" and not "25 db less" but i haven't watched the keynote...

edit: aka "prepare for silent running" *click* (light switched to red)

 

[Geetar]

Well, that was my point. Logic will run fine with a 5200. But its performance isn't really tied to a gpu is it? I thought my post made that clear...maybe not.

Logic and a whole bunch of other pro- and semi pro-apps will, of course, run fine on this mac.... but you say you're aware of this, so.....?



The card really is such a side-issue for so many folk. It's my belief that the game-obsessed among us tend to wilfully ignore this; in much the same way that their chief pleasure exists in playing in a fantasy world, so does their ideal computer exist in a fantasy world, where the needs of the many are outweighed by the needs of the few [knew I could slip that in somewhere]


My 2¢ on this- I doubt that the new iMac is intended as a suicide note from Apple to the world at large. They're moderately smart at Apple, and we will see how it goes down over the next few quarters. Whatever, they've got two sales in this house already

 

[slughead]

This is what the dvorak guy was talking about. I found this on another forum.

 

[iJon]

_that_ really explains your happy mood

i thought it was "25db" and not "25 db less" but i haven't watched the keynote...

edit: aka "prepare for silent running" *click* (light switched to red)

but seriously, have you tried it. ive been trying for the past 10 minutes and its impossible. i just keep laughing, it seems so simple.

iJon

 

[takao]

but seriously, have you tried it. ive been trying for the past 10 minutes and its impossible. i just keep laughing, it seems so simple.

iJon

jope tried it just again ..on the first tried it seemed to nearly work...
it gets harder every time i try it
(actually it is 3:30 AM here..so perhaps it's just a lack of concentration or the lack of vodka)

back on topic : does anybody have a guess when they might be available in showrooms in apple shops/centers ..how long does that take normally ? (a question for the european users)

you know i want to look at them as soon as possible in real life
(actually before the 20th i won't have the ability to see them)

 

[~Shard~]

Funniest post in the whole thread (well, that one and its parent about the FX5200 being enough for Photoshop). If you don't why it's funny, it's no wonder you people think the FX5200 is "good enough".

Photoshop doesn't use the GPU on graphic cards. Those professionnals could be running Photoshop on an ATI Rage Pro 8MB and they wouldn't see any difference.

Funniest post in the whole thread? Nah, I think you won that contest hands down with this post:

Listen up people: the GPU is *only* used by games (well, for now anyway. That will change once CoreImage/CoreVideo is here).

... As I said in a previous post, you could be using an ATI Rage Pro 8MB and you wouldn't see any difference (again, speaking for today without CoreImage/CoreVideo).

I'll admit that Photoshop was a flawed example of mine, as I was simply trying to reference Pro apps. However, video editing software relies on the GPU to a great extent, so you're statement regarding the GPU *only* being used by games is simply false. And as a result, now your completely incorrect reply can be considered funny, if you like playing that game.