Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
whooleytoo said:
No, but it might cut into sales of other products, in particular the PowerMacs. Bear in mind, Apple expected to have 3GHz G5s by this point in time, so might have designed the iMacs accordingly - perhaps up to 2GHz?

If so, they might now be too close in performance terms to the current PowerMac range, so they're keeping them quiet for now?

Possibly, but I doubt whether the iMacs will be dual processor though (assuming of course they are G5's) and they almost certainly won't be roomy enough for PCI cards and extra hard drives or eight RAM slots.

I reckon they're just trying to whip the Mac faithful up into a bit of a frenzy before showing their hand. If that's the case they had better make sure it's something special...
 
whooleytoo said:
No, but it might cut into sales of other products, in particular the PowerMacs. Bear in mind, Apple expected to have 3GHz G5s by this point in time, so might have designed the iMacs accordingly - perhaps up to 2GHz?

If so, they might now be too close in performance terms to the current PowerMac range, so they're keeping them quiet for now?

Apple has been a creature of habit (though that seems to be changing a bit). Using the Mac Rumors buying guide history shows the following roadmap:

eMac update next due Sept/Oct
Most likely a bump to 1.33 IMO

Powerbooks/iBook update next due Sept/Oct
iBook's would likely see speed bumps to the next level. The PB's are more of a question. It seems that Apple may have heat issues to deal with that make a G5 PB problematic for this year. So what would that leave Apple with for the PB's?
 
I smell a nice product in Paris...

And also it doesn't have a screen, so you have to add $699 for Apple's cheapest screen offer. So Apple's cheapest computer offer with an LCD screen is currently a single G4@1,25 with Combo drive and a 17" screen for $1998 ........


Still under $2000 :D
.....

Paris, wait for me, I'm only 4 hours away :)
 
jakemikey said:
Alright I'm running the risk of repeating someting that's already been said (I haven't read the whole thread).... BUT....

Do you realize what this means?!! ThinkSecret was WRONG!!!

New iMacs WERE announced during WWDC...just not in the way everyone thought! So much for their "immaculate" record!

Where's your snide tone now, TS?!

Yeah, and they are being smug since delays meant no iMac announcement. Sort of a win/lose.
 
there is no way the imac is going to be dual g5. no way apple is going to move them so close to the powermac line.

g5 powerbook is also a negative this year. my 1ghz 12" pb gets really warm when it sits on my lap, a g5 laptop would probably burn through my lap. ;)
 
m.r.m. said:
there is no way the imac is going to be dual g5. no way apple is going to move them so close to the powermac line.

g5 powerbook is also a negative this year. my 1ghz 12" pb gets really warm when it sits on my lap, a g5 laptop would probably burn through my lap. ;)

If it weren't for what some talk about Tiger, I would think a dual G4 iMac would make great sense.
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
If it weren't for what some talk about Tiger, I would think a dual G4 iMac would make great sense.

question there is simply how long they plan to continue using the g4 chip. if they want to move all models to g5 asap, i'd say it's going to be single g5 imac, otherwise dual g4 imac.
 
Wow, lots of good discussion going on here. I just noticed this thread late last night and now already there's 400+ posts! Kind of odd when you think about it, since this isn't even a rumor - it's fact, straight from Apple's mouth! Usually these rumors end up in a lot of debate, but even with nothing to really debate about the validity/truth to the article (since it's pretty cut and dried), there's still a good discussion going on and a high post count!

Obviously of course, the big question is will the new iMac be a G5 or a G4 - I'm cautiously optimistic it will be a low-end G5 - makes more sense if they're giving the machine a new form factor to dramatically change it's guts as well. Hopefully they'll throw in a 8x SuperDrive, DDR400 RAM, a suped-up video card and a nice large SATA Hard Drive...
 
m.r.m. said:
question there is simply how long they plan to continue using the g4 chip. if they want to move all models to g5 asap, i'd say it's going to be single g5 imac, otherwise dual g4 imac.

A dual processor machine would be wasted on consumer level machines.
 
~Shard~ said:
Obviously of course, the big question is will the new iMac be a G5 or a G4 - I'm cautiously optimistic it will be a low-end G5 - makes more sense if they're giving the machine a new form factor to dramatically change it's guts as well. Hopefully they'll throw in a 8x SuperDrive, DDR400 RAM, a suped-up video card and a nice large SATA Hard Drive...

Actually a new form factor could have been designed for both a dual G4 and future use for a G5.
 
Bendit said:
A dual processor machine would be wasted on consumer level machines.

How so? I see an iMac as a bridge computer. Fitting a budget that allows someone to move to the PM's later on if needed.

I would assume that programs like PS and ID can take advantage of a dual G4.
 
JFreak said:
actually even a single 400MHz is enough for most people. you know, all the regular joes out there who replace their computer when the old one doesn't work anymore. it's not a speed contest with the imac at all - it's all about making it easier for regular joe to use it.

i have such a 400MHz G3 imac sitting on a kitchen table, and it's far more powerful than my wife needs for regular web surfing and emailing. way more powerful for that. she never complains about it being too slow - the only thing she ever has had a complaint about it was to get rid of the ethernet cable, so i put in an airport card. see? it's not about what cpu is inside and how many bounces does it take for safari to open. if it works, it works. if it some day doesn't work anymore, then she has a need for a new one. not before

now...

those people who think they are some kind of design/audio/video professionals and cannot afford a powermac, they are the people who complain about imac being too slow. the only people. and they cannot see the real problem: it all comes down to money - theirs - and the fact that they cannot buy the tool they claim they need. for god's sake, if you are a pro, then get a pro tool for it. you can get money from a bank and being such a pro you think you are, the money comes back very fast.

i have a G4 powerbook because i need more power than the trusty old G3 imac can provide. and i use that power daily to the point that i wonder why the bottom of the thing hasn't melted yet. i don't however complain about imac speed.

400Mhz may be enough for basic web browsing and email but even for web browsing a 400Mhz machine running OSX trying to visit complex sites with heavy Java Script or Flash will bog down. Have you tried dealing with large PDF files on a 400MHZ machine? I would say dealing with PDF's is a very normal average joe kind of thing. How about dealing with an iphoto library of 2000 pics? oh and forget about gaming, forget about isight. Encoding CDs into itunes with already 2500 plus songson a 400Mhz machine? Have fun. Converting files,Virtual PC, Divx Playback etc etc.. all these things are withing the range of normal Consumer Computing. You don't need to be a pro to benefit from increased speed. I remember when I had a 400 MHz G3 encoding an hour long CD took like 20 minutes on a new G5 it takes less than 2 minutes. I could go on and on with just everyday examples but really saying that a 400Mhz machine is good enough for 95% of the population is nuts maybe more like just 20% of the populations who have no real interest in computers and just want to check email but even then they could benefit from a faster machine.

A Faster Computer does make a difference and it does make sense. Buying a fast machine is not like buying a fast expensive car. A faster Computer actually does let you do more and explore and take advantage of techonolgies that one otherwise would have forgone, it allows users to get more done in less time a faster machine will also last longer before needing to be replaced. While on the other hand a Fast and expensive car will really do no good at all as it will still take the same amount of time to get to point A to point B unless you are at the Race Track.
 
iMac in September... What about EDUCATION?

It seems to me that Apple is really dropping the ball on this one. While they are doing the right thing by telling us, they really need to have that iMac out by August MAX. August is the peak buying time for graduates going into college, etc.

While it is true that the eMac is still available to education buyers, the fact of the matter is that most people are going to want an iMac over an eMac. I know my school (University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, VA) prefers the iMacs because of the efficency of having flat-panels over CRT's. Hopefully, Apple will be able to convince education buyers that the eMac can satisfy their needs while the iMac is prepared for rollout.

As for specs... a single G5 is a definite for the new iMac. It would only make sense with a big form-factor change (the last form-factor change brought about the G4, so this form-factor change will bring a G5). Don't be expecting 2Ghz though... That will leave the eMac as the last desktop line with a G4 in it (and I think we can expect that to be either upgraded with a g5 or discontinued soon after).
 
MikeH said:
Possibly, but I doubt whether the iMacs will be dual processor though (assuming of course they are G5's) and they almost certainly won't be roomy enough for PCI cards and extra hard drives or eight RAM slots.

I very, very much doubt the iMacs will be dual-processor.

But I think a lot of potential iMac customers at the moment would have been tempted to opt for a low-end PowerMac because of the iMacs slow CPU/graphics card. If Apple announced there's a 2GHz iMac on the way, they'd be tempted to hold off for 2-3 months and buy then. That would be bad, bad news for Apple (though at least Apple's not stuck with lots of outdated inventory).
 
longofest said:
It seems to me that Apple is really dropping the ball on this one. While they are doing the right thing by telling us

In fairness, they didn't have much choice!

What else could they say? "Sorry, you can't buy an iMac here - none left. Be seein' you.. " ? ;) They had to say something.
 
forgive me if this has been pointed out...

but, technically, Think Secret was right in that no new imacs were announced at the keynote on Monday and they did say imacs were in the works. Apple Insider was right in that new imacs were around the corner but not announced officially at the WWDC.

I think people are getting too excited about which rumor site has it right when in fact rumors will always be rumors until they are official announcements and will never be the "Truth" until then.

I look at all the rumor sites because I love apple products and the fun of speculation but really people are taking this "who's got the best info?" thing way too seriously. We still don't really know what apple will release until the rest of the world knows it, that's the nature of speculation.
 
Apple has stopped taking orders for the current iMac...

wow, this is really going to hurt iMac sales.

KIDDING, people. yeah, this is pretty out of character for Apple. on one hand, i'm glad to see that honesty won out over secrecey, but at the same time, this is going to hurt sales AND stock prices for the next couple months. driving down stock price & investor confidence is NOT a marketing ploy, folks. someone/something f'ed up for it to come down to this.

we were wondering why some of the 3rd party vendors got so much airtime at WWDC? can't you see some event coordinator going up to some of the vendors going, "yeah, i know you were scheduled for 10min, but can you stretch it to 30?? ummm...yeah, Steve said 'don't ask why, just do it'..."

also, if it's anything less than a G5 in the iMac, Steve is going to have a firestorm of PO'ed consumers on his hands having waited that long.
 
Little Endian said:
400Mhz may be enough for basic web browsing and email but even for web browsing a 400Mhz machine running OSX trying to visit complex sites with heavy Java Script or Flash will bog down. Have you tried dealing with large PDF files on a 400MHZ machine? I would say dealing with PDF's is a very normal average joe kind of thing. How about dealing with an iphoto library of 2000 pics? oh and forget about gaming, forget about isight. Encoding CDs into itunes with already 2500 plus songson a 400Mhz machine? Have fun. Converting files,Virtual PC, Divx Playback etc etc.. all these things are withing the range of normal Consumer Computing. You don't need to be a pro to benefit from increased speed. I remember when I had a 400 MHz G3 encoding an hour long CD took like 20 minutes on a new G5 it takes less than 2 minutes. I could go on and on with just everyday examples but really saying that a 400Mhz machine is good enough for 95% of the population is nuts maybe more like just 20% of the populations who have no real interest in computers and just want to check email but even then they could benefit from a faster machine.

A Faster Computer does make a difference and it does make sense. Buying a fast machine is not like buying a fast expensive car. A faster Computer actually does let you do more and explore and take advantage of techonolgies that one otherwise would have forgone, it allows users to get more done in less time a faster machine will also last longer before needing to be replaced. While on the other hand a Fast and expensive car will really do no good at all as it will still take the same amount of time to get to point A to point B unless you are at the Race Track.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak
actually even a single 400MHz is enough for most people. you know, all the regular joes out there who replace their computer when the old one doesn't work anymore. it's not a speed contest with the imac at all - it's all about making it easier for regular joe to use it.

i have such a 400MHz G3 imac sitting on a kitchen table, and it's far more powerful than my wife needs for regular web surfing and emailing. way more powerful for that. she never complains about it being too slow - the only thing she ever has had a complaint about it was to get rid of the ethernet cable, so i put in an airport card. see? it's not about what cpu is inside and how many bounces does it take for safari to open. if it works, it works. if it some day doesn't work anymore, then she has a need for a new one. not before

now...

those people who think they are some kind of design/audio/video professionals and cannot afford a powermac, they are the people who complain about imac being too slow. the only people. and they cannot see the real problem: it all comes down to money - theirs - and the fact that they cannot buy the tool they claim they need. for god's sake, if you are a pro, then get a pro tool for it. you can get money from a bank and being such a pro you think you are, the money comes back very fast.

i have a G4 powerbook because i need more power than the trusty old G3 imac can provide. and i use that power daily to the point that i wonder why the bottom of the thing hasn't melted yet. i don't however complain about imac speed.


--------------

He's talking about most people and then you add : Large PDF files , Isight and Gaming ...iPhoto with 2000 pics, Virtual PC... you're getting out of range...

I know a man who really wants to run Photoshop in his old Pentium II and doesn't bother about speed, is crazy, with the money he has been giving away to me and other guys for repairing his PC and system... (GOD, he is running XP there) ,,, he could have already a nice G5 with the nice 30" ... abit off topic but I still have fun everytime I say him about macs and he doesn't want to hear me, he loves his machine... one of this days I'll stop bothering me about him... but yeah, most people don't know about speed, just if it does what they want, no matter how slow... then it's nice and even ROCKS!!! :D ...
 
September must mean September!

If Apple have made a major screw-up in their planning, and are admitting it whole-heartedly - surely, if they are stating 'The all-new iMac line will be announced and available in September' then this is what they mean. - Think about it - they've screwed-up once, so they won't want to screw-up again by announcing something they can't deliver on!

I reckon the under-par G5's have something to do with the delay. If iMac G5's are on the cards, they are not going to be slow-enough to create a big-enough performance leap between the iMac and the G5 Tower. If they were able to hit the Dual 3Ghz G5 Target then I think it would be a different story. They could have produced Dual 2Ghz, Dual 2.5Ghz and Dual 3Ghz in the professional line-up, then Single 1.6Ghz G5, Single 1.8Ghz G5 and Single 2Ghz G5 in the iMac range.
 
Chaywa said:
but, technically, Think Secret was right in that no new imacs were announced at the keynote on Monday and they did say imacs were in the works. Apple Insider was right in that new imacs were around the corner but not announced officially at the WWDC.

I think people are getting too excited about which rumor site has it right when in fact rumors will always be rumors until they are official announcements and will never be the "Truth" until then.

I look at all the rumor sites because I love apple products and the fun of speculation but really people are taking this "who's got the best info?" thing way too seriously. We still don't really know what apple will release until the rest of the world knows it, that's the nature of speculation.

I think that it had more to do with Think's smug attitude.
 
jakemikey said:
Alright I'm running the risk of repeating someting that's already been said (I haven't read the whole thread).... BUT....

Do you realize what this means?!! ThinkSecret was WRONG!!!

Think Secret correctly predicted that the iMacs would not be revealed at WWDC, but the rationale they gave for its no-show was completely wrong.

They said — with every ounce of smugness they could muster — that "...the bottom line is this: June is too early to roll out a consumer product that needs just the right amount of momentum entering the holiday buying season. "

And that's a load of crap. The summer months are the ideal time to introduce a new consumer-focused computer so that the company can capture valuable back-to-school sales.

Of course, Apple has admitted that it was an issue of poor planning and I think it's safe to say that we're all inferring it has to do with a delay in manufacturing; possibly due to constrained supplies of the 970FX G5.

Think Secret also noted that "Employees tell us that Apple is laughing at the rumors on this one ... and the company is loving the hype." Yeah, I'm sure Apple is *laughing* at the fact it has an outmoded computer model in the lineup and a serious supply issue preventing its replacement. Hoo-boy, that's a real larf.

Think Secret needs a good kick in the nuts.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.