New iMac G5 Announced

[Neodym]

Watercooled Dual2.5GHz-PowerMac is LOUD!

I don't think you can separate the two. To say the liquid cooling system was not necessary for cooling and then to say only a few sentences later that Apple balances silence and specs is contradictory. You make the point brilliantly that the liquid system is for cooling AND noise.

German Computer magazine c't tested the 2.5GHz PowerMac in its latest issue. According to the review there it gives a good 25% performance increase, somteimes even more - thus scaling perfectly with 25% more clock frequency. But soundwise it is about TWICE as loud as the Dual 2.0 GHz Powermac (5.1 Sone vs. 2.5 Sone, with Sone scaling linear). They say that the noise itself is not that disturbing due to the frequencies, but still... i'm a little bit disappointed
So the watercooling unfortunately does NOT give noise reduction, but noise increase instead! However, if i recall that article correctly they said one of the main reason was that compared to the 2.0-Dualie the fans on the 2.5PM start earlier and run faster to shuffle out all that heat from the housing. So the watercooling system itself (like pumps etc.) is not to blame.

If anyone wants more information, let me know and i can look it up (the test was roughly 2 A4 pages in length).

Ciao
Neodym
(waiting for the next PM revision)

 

[paulsecic]

External Firewire hard drive is probably a better solution for you. Unless you have 20GB of unique video footage everyday, then the iMac is not what you want.

I think most will agree that the days of burning optical disk is almost over. I can't think of a reason to burn one now. I can see small business burning DVDs for sale or if you want to send you mom and dad videos. Faster internet will probably make both of these options obsolete.

Chomo

A Korean Co. just a PC like the new Imac. Not sold here. Its butt ugly. Go to news.com.

 

[Fukui]

A Korean Co. just a PC like the new Imac. Not sold here. Its butt ugly. Go to news.com.

Yea not as pretty, but I could, unfortunately see people getting this instead (PC Users) of the iMac... depending on the price. Though, its not like Apple has a giant presence in Korea anyways (which they probably in all likelihood could).

 

[Mike Teezie]

At first glance, I didn't like the new iMac.

But after I watched the video, and saw it in a real life setting, I think it's really cool looking. I still like the FP iMacs the best though!

 

[floatingspirit]

Hey all,

I got a couple questions if you have a second. My friend wants my computer and I kinda want the new iMac, but....

Is there any difference in screen quality between the 20" iMac and the previous generation 20" screens?

Would there a be much of a difference in responsiveness between the "old" 1.6 G5 tower (single processor) and the new iMac 1.8? I see the bus speeds are different...

Thanks

 

[munkle]

Didn't want to start a new thread so I thought I would just plonk this here.
Seems like Woz isn't such a big fan of the new iMac, link.

I wasn't a big fan at first but it has grown on me...now at the stage where I want one!!

 

[segundo]

Didn't want to start a new thread so I thought I would just plonk this here.
Seems like Woz isn't such a big fan of the new iMac, link.

I immediately went to the link to see what Woz had said and was dissappointed to see his comment that he basically doesn't "consider it especially attractive." Then I thought for a second . . . so what? I like Woz a lot (my first computer was an Apple II+) but I'm not sure I care what he thinks is attractive or not.

I wasn't a big fan at first but it has grown on me...now at the stage where I want one!!

I had been waiting for the G5 iMac to come out before buying a desktop Mac so you can bet I was looking forward to the Paris announcement. First impressions were mixed . . . but then I saw some pictures in context from the event. I liked it a lot. I don't believe the promotional pictures Apple has up on the site do it justice. Needless to say I went big and ordered a 20".

Furthermore, the more and more I read about the new iMac's the more I like them. Here's a thought that someone had before me but that I'd like to focus on since this thread has been 40% about the video card:

What if this really is the first upgradeable iMac?

With all the information that has been published by Apple about how to do parts replacments, why wouldn't it be possible to purchase a new logic board (with new G5 and graphics) two years from now? And SATA drives will likely get even bigger, those are simple to replace in the new iMac. And the slot loading optical drives, won't those become faster with more capabilities in the future (like dual layer dvd)? And won't there likely be new wireless cards available someday (like support for the upcoming N standard)? And, and, and . . . .

Just order one already!

 

[danviento]

Pricing

With this design being so slim, I can see the G5 in a laptop in a year or so.
That would be great, but there's just one issue: $$$. I know I couldn't afford one. It's amazing that Apple has managed to make the new iMacG5 even less expensive than the G4. Would anyone see that happenning with a G5 powerbook? Current powerbook prices are too high for me, and I actually need one for classes in about a year, so do you think a G5 powerbook woulkd be less expensive than the G4, or would it drive the G4 prices down, or no change to G4 prices at all and G5 is even more expensive? I just want some educated guesses here if you could please.

 

[MacinDoc]

What if this really is the first upgradeable iMac?

With all the information that has been published by Apple about how to do parts replacments, why wouldn't it be possible to purchase a new logic board (with new G5 and graphics) two years from now? And SATA drives will likely get even bigger, those are simple to replace in the new iMac. And the slot loading optical drives, won't those become faster with more capabilities in the future (like dual layer dvd)? And won't there likely be new wireless cards available someday (like support for the upcoming N standard)? And, and, and . . . .

Just order one already!

There actually is a precedent for this - Apple offered upgrades for the Mac II family logic boards, with a rebate for the return of the original board.

 

[zelmo]

With this design being so slim, I can see the G5 in a laptop in a year or so.
That would be great, but there's just one issue: $$$. I know I couldn't afford one. It's amazing that Apple has managed to make the new iMacG5 even less expensive than the G4. Would anyone see that happenning with a G5 powerbook? Current powerbook prices are too high for me, and I actually need one for classes in about a year, so do you think a G5 powerbook woulkd be less expensive than the G4, or would it drive the G4 prices down, or no change to G4 prices at all and G5 is even more expensive? I just want some educated guesses here if you could please.

My guess is that you will be able to hold a G5 PowerBook in your hands in the next 12 -18 months (WWDC'05 - MWSF'06), with a list price within $100 of current PB G4 pricing. I doubt Apple will sell a reduced price PB G4 - when the PB G5 is here, that will be the only PB available. You might see the very last iteration of the G4 iBook offering 1.5GHz or higher G4 for a better price, though. At least, until the iBook goes G5, too.

 

[zelmo]

There actually is a precedent for this - Apple offered upgrades for the Mac II family logic boards, with a rebate for the return of the original board.

And then Apple could put those returned (& refurbished) boards in low cost headless G5 systems!

 

[paulsecic]

Who cares about Apple's market share? As long as they stay in business and make products that *I* like at price points *I* can afford, then I am happy.

And since they've turned a profit for several years in a row, and have built up a substantial bank account, I would say that we're safe for a little while. Apple is on the right track to keep making cool products for ME.

If you don't like it, I couldn't care less. (I'm assuming you probably do, but are just playing devil's advocate.) The truth is if I woke up tomorrow and every single person in the US had bought an iMac, it would lose some appeal to me. I don't want what everybody else has, I want something better.

Just like a band that goes on MTV...if I've not heard them myself I assume they are probably crappy. The mass public (in the US for sure) likes crappy music, so if a band has found mainstream success that is a red flag for me.

I own the best computer, I bought the best video game system, and I own the best MP3 player. Call me a snob, but I'd rather have the best or nothing at all.

Ain't that the truth: crappy music, crappy TV.

 

[drastic]

Music for the masses

Hey, what's going on out there? 1,500 posts outta 1,600 are about the graphics processor!!!
Well, I am a musician and I just don't give a "fps" about it: I gotta a PS2 for 3D Tetris and all you complaining 4D Pac-Man lovers should get one.

Now, is the new iMac a shure bet for music composers? I know Garage Band works 70% better with a G5 engine (more virtual instruments etc), but is there a HUGE difference with the dual 2.0 PowerMac G5? I'm planning to get a 20" iMac and fill it with 2GB of RAM (plus an external HD and an audio interface): is it a time-proof (3-4 years) setting for a home studio?

Please post your comments about the new iMac G5 and music...

Thank you!

Peace.

 

[paulsecic]

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!!

Hey go to http://www.dbstalk.com and tell them HDTVs are overpriced. They'll say you're nuts.

 

[cxny]

Best Deals Available??

Anyone seen any great deals on the 20" 250GB w/ built in BT and wireless keyboard/mouse bundle?? I can take care of the RAM myself. Apple's base price for that is $2,098 but they add tax (NY!)


Thanx!!

 

[arealmacman]

graphics card is upgradeable

I don't know what all the beef is about the graphics chip. Since it is part of the mid-plane assembly (upgradeable) along with the CPU, don't you think upgrade companies will come out with a plethora of CPU/GPU upgrades?

 

[gopher]

Hey all,

I got a couple questions if you have a second. My friend wants my computer and I kinda want the new iMac, but....

Is there any difference in screen quality between the 20" iMac and the previous generation 20" screens?

Would there a be much of a difference in responsiveness between the "old" 1.6 G5 tower (single processor) and the new iMac 1.8? I see the bus speeds are different...

Thanks

The truth is, nobody knows because nobody has the new iMac yet. It should be out sometime between the middle and the end of the month.

 

[Raveny]

I heard that the new iMac supports dual-channel ram. So my question is: should I buy 2x512 MB ram or 1x256 MB+ extra 1gig ram? which combination is more efficient?

 

[AidenShaw]

single channel

I heard that the new iMac supports dual-channel ram. So my question is: should I buy 2x512 MB ram or 1x256 MB+ extra 1gig ram? which combination is more efficient?

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86814

iMac G5 computers work with memory modules (DIMMs) that meet all of these criteria: PC3200, 2.5V, unbuffered, 8-byte, nonparity, 184-pin, 400Mhz DDR SDRAM.

There are two RAM slots. The maximum amount of RAM you can install is 2 GB. You can use RAM module sizes of 256 MB, 512 MB and 1 GB, in either slot.

DIMMs with any of the following features are not supported in the iMac G5 computer: registers or buffers, PLLs, ECC, parity, or EDO RAM.

Note that "dual channel DDR" (as in the Power Mac G5) means "a pair of single channel DDR modules". The Power Mac does not use "128-bit" DIMMs, it uses two "64-bit" DIMMs in parallel.

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86414

(For the Power Mac G5):
DDR SDRAM DIMMs must be installed in matched pairs. "Matched" in this context means that the two DIMMs have the same capacity and speed. A valid pair would be two 512 MB PC2700 DIMMs, for example.

Go with the 1 GiB + 256 MiB. Not only you'll have 1280 MiB total (better than 1024 MiB from 2 512's), but you'll only have to throw away 256 when you upgrade to 2 GiB .

 

[awesomebase]

Not quite right...

Some of you guys are saying this is comparable to a PC in features/price.

I think the iMac is fairly priced for what it's competing with and the size as an important feature. Otherwise, I think you're mainly paying for form, not function, if you compare it to a www.pricewatch.com computer:

Since the 17" iMac has sales tax in 49 states (??), at 8% $1,299 is $1,402.92, so keep that in mind. Also keep in mind that both of these configurations carry a monitor with more pixels and a higher contrast ratio, measuring 20". The 20" iMac is $1,899 ($2,050.92 with 8% sales tax), so keep that in mind as well. Also note that all of these parts may be purchased without sales tax in 48-49 states.

$50 - GeForceFX U 5200 128MB
$27 - 256MB DDR 3200 RAM
$268 - P4 3.2Ghz with Mobo + 8X AGP 800MHZ FSB
$49 - soundcard with Optical I/O
$62 - SATA 80GB HD
$588 - 20" LCD, 1600x1200, 600:1 Contrast, with speakers and microphone. Aluminum enclosure.
$65.50 - NEC 8X DUAL/DOUBLE LAYER DVD BURNER DVD±R
$64 - Antec case w/350watt PSU (also antec)
======
$1,173.50

~$1,400 system:
$208 - Radeon 9800 128MB
$110 - 1,024MB DDR 3200 RAM
$268 - P4 3.2Ghz with Mobo + 8X AGP 800MHZ FSB
$49 - soundcard with Optical I/O
$62 - SATA 80GB HD
$588 - 20" LCD, 1600x1200, 600:1 Contrast, with speakers and microphone. Aluminum enclosure.
$65.50 - NEC 8X DUAL/DOUBLE LAYER DVD BURNER DVD±R
$64 - Antec case w/350watt PSU (also antec)
======
$1,414.50

The emboldened text means it is better than what's in the iMac by any measure. The display was not emboldened because some people might value a 16:9 display over the 4:3 compared here, instead of the better contrast ratio/more pixels.

[edit: I should also point out that ALL the shipping rates were included in the parts' prices (as is the case with all pricewatch numbers). In addition, you can buy the new iMac from somewhere other than the Apple Store and not have to pay sales tax.]

Hey there, I like the comparison, but, I think that you're missing a couple of very crucial things in your estimates. First off, you do not include any OS. You can get an OEM OS cheaper, but it will only work with that particular machine (i.e. it can not be used with an additional portable system like a laptop). Otherwise XP Home/Pro easily will run you $100 to $300 depending on where you purchase it and whether it is OEM or not.
Second thing is that the 20" display on an apple is 1680 x 1050 for the 20" and 1440 x 900 for the 17". If you try to find separate LCD displays with these resolutions, they are at best 60% more than the regular 4:3 aspect ratio LCDs of similar size. I haven't even seen a 20" widescreen available and the argument that only SOME people may think it is worth paying more for it than the 4:3 aspect is about as accurate as saying that widescreen TVs should cost less than the 4:3 aspect ones... it doesn't hold in the market and the vast majority of people have already proved that they DO pay more for it. Just go to any COMPUSA, BestBUY, Fry's, etc. and have a good stroll down the TV/Flat Panel section and see if you can convince anybody in the store that they should pay more for 4:3 TV than the Widescreen. Then ask them if both are priced equally, who will by the 4:3 as opposed to the widescreen. Doubtful anybody would, let alone the majority.
Third thing you didn't consider is the actual ability to obtain free shipping on each and every one of those items. It is unlikely that the lowest price products are all coming from the same place. If they do, then there is the chance that you can get free shipping and you've made your case for free shipping successful. However, seeing as using PriceWatch myself, it is difficult to find even TWO things at their lowest price from the same place which means that a) you're either paying prices higher than what you quoted, or b) you are paying the lowest prices as quoted but you will be charged individual shipping costs on each of those items, which, very conveniently do not appear in your price quote.
Fourth thing that you are missing is the reliability aspect of dealing with those places. Not to say that those places are not reputable, but, can you say with 100% certainty that you will receive what you ordered? If I order from Apple directly, I not only get exactly what I ordered, I'm guaranteed to get all the U.S.-based warranties and support that come with it. You would need to show that this is possible with each of the low-priced vendors you quoted for each product.
The fifth thing missing, and I consider this to be a big one, you're assuming that the person building the system actually knows how to do it. Quite frankly, few people do, even though I feel that it is at least 10 times easier to do now than it was to do 15 years ago. Are you going to build in some price for the labor? What if the person builds it wrong and destroys a power supply or motherboard? Even if everything goes well and there is no cost involved in getting it together, what percentage of the population do you think is able to do this? My guess (and this is being VERY generous) is that no more than 5% of people can do this... a more likely number is somewhere between 1 to 2%.
Lastly, your assumption that most people ordering from Apple will pay sales tax. Not only will most people NOT pay sales tax, they also will not pay shipping. It is plain to see on their web-sites. Apple resellers will even match and beat these offers while offering free memory, printers, scanners and such. Even if I go into an Apple store here where I live, sales tax is 5%. Two of the states immediately beside mine have 0% sales tax and 5% sales tax. In fact, there isn't a single state with 8% sales tax. Most states are between 4% and 5%. Look here: http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/sales.html
Even without that reference, most people that order online from Apple or a reseller will not pay sales tax at all. Orders of items over $300 have no shipping from Apple and most resellers don't charge for shipping or charges are very small.
Small correction in that the 20" model comes with a 160GB SATA drive, not 80 as with the 17".
In summary, I think you should weigh these two types of options together properly for a good comparison. You may still see that there is a premium for Apple products, but, not to the extent you make it out to be, and, in many cases you actually save a lot more getting an Apple. That is even before you factor in things like the form factor, ease of use, better OS, seamless integration of hardware and software, numerous included applications (that easily cost you $$$ on PCs) and a computer that actually looks good (hey, there's a concept!). My Athlon64 3000+ laptop is more frustrating to use and certainly slower when it comes to anything internet related than my 3-year old 550MHz G4 PowerBook. My wife easily prefers the PowerBook to it because it does everything she needs it to do quickly and easily. Take a look at most Apple users here and you will see that their machines easily last them 5 years and more before they upgrade. Just my $0.02.

 

[Rantipole]

The truth is, nobody knows because nobody has the new iMac yet. It should be out sometime between the middle and the end of the month.

Speaking of which, do you think I will get the new iMac quicker if I order it right now online, or if I wait for it to arrive in stores (either apple, or other official distributor)?

 

[Daveway]

Definetly a distro, ther tend to get it first. My compusa guy said he was told he would get some around the 16th.

 

[-hh]

Actually, a recent study of PC marketshare surprised everyone when it discovered that Dell was not the market leader. In fact, whitebox pc's dominated. So I don't know about grandma, but the rest of the US seems pretty comfortable with whitebox pc's.

In simplest definition form, a "whiltebox" PC is merely an "assemble-it-yourself" PC that the consumer has paid a little extra for assembly service.

With "most" end item customers being willing to pay this little more for an assembled box, their deference away from brand names means that they essentially consider Windows PC's to be a simple commodity and not a brandname-recognition product market.


-hh

 

[Xtremehkr]

No more Apple Credit

It didn't stop my purchase of the new iMac but I was wondering if anyone else had noticed that there is no more Apple credit payment calculator at the bottom of the store screen anymore. The student loan option for credit was scarey, the payments were dirt cheap but the you didn't pay anything but interest for the first two years. I wonder if they are going to bring that back or not, if it came down to it I would go ahead and do it I think. My G3 iMac was going to be replaced months ago but when I logged on they had stopped selling the G4 ones. I wonder if Apple is moving away from that or whether they predict that people are just going to buy this product.

 

[KeareB]

DDR SDRAM DIMMs must be installed in matched pairs. "Matched" in this context means that the two DIMMs have the same capacity and speed. A valid pair would be two 512 MB PC2700 DIMMs, for example.

Go with the 1 GiB + 256 MiB. Not only you'll have 1280 MiB total (better than 1024 MiB from 2 512's), but you'll only have to throw away 256 when you upgrade to 2 GiB .

1. "Matched = same capacity AND speed": I'm not sure it's confirmed that a CL-2 512KB stick plus a CL-3 512KB stick would not in fact run dual channel at the slower CL-3 speed.

2. I gotta think that 2x512KB will be faster. By how much we will know in a few weeks. If your RAM "sweet spot", given what you do, is near 1GB, the dual channel speed bump might favor 2x512.

3. If you use currently, or think you may in the future, many memory-hungry applications at once, or graphics / video, then I think the best path to the future is 1x256 + 1x1GB. Under this scenario, you have a bit more RAM initially (although slower - by how much we do not yet know), and it will obviously be easier to upgrade to 2GB in the future.