New PowerMac 1.8GHz Released

[aethier]

good god guys! for the first time i felt I had to register, because no one is pointing out truly how stupid the cost of this machine is. some of you are trying hard, but its quite simple: you are an absolute imbisle if you get this powerMac instead of the iMac. here's the proof

lets just take the top iMac model with no added features as our example, that's $1899.
now, go and configure a powerMac with exactly the same specs (by upgrading to a 160GB HD) that's $1599...i guess that "saves" $300 but only if you already own a monitor ($300 for a 20" cinema display seems like a good deal to me)

so here's where it gets really pathetic: add a 20 cinema display to the powerMac total, even just for compare the two. It's the same display the top of the line iMac has already. The powerMac cost comes to, drum roll, $2898.

okay let me spell it out for those who still don't get it, for the exact same specs, monitor, FSB, EXACT! you are paying a $999 premium for a pretty silver (and humongous) BOX!


sincerely,
almostCrazyasU

GOOD GOD almostCrazyasU!!!111, i had to click 'quote" just to spell this out for you....

you are crazy, if you think the iMac's 20 inch display, is the same as the cinema display wich costs the price of the low end iMac...


from imac techspechs:
Display


Built-in 17-inch (viewable) widescreen or 20-inch (viewable) widescreen TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display

Millions of colors at all resolutions

Typical viewing angle:

17-inch models

120° horizontal

90° vertical



20-inch model

170° horizontal

170° vertical





Typical brightness: 200 cd/m (17-inch models); 230 cd/m (20-inch model)

Typical contrast ratio: 350:1
---

cinema display

Viewing angle (typical)
170° horizontal; 170° vertical

Brightness (typical)
250 cd/m2
270 cd/m2

Contrast ratio (typical)
400:1

Response time (typical)
16 ms

Pixel pitch
0.258 mm

EDIT: plus as many others have stated, the imac doesn't allow you to use it's display on another computer if you eventually get a tower. furthermore, you cannot upgrade the video card, you cannot put more then one harddrive, you cannot eventually upgrade the cpu (if it goes like the g4) you don't have pci slots, etc.

plus the g5 looks cool if you run it with the metal door off.

 

[habibbijan]

Better start preparing for the wonderful world of Windows

Been there, done that. Though last time I checked, there were other operating systems out there as well. I use Windows, OS X, and Linux everyday, and am not zealous about any of them. Hardware interests me more than software.

Mockery of my post is fine, but it doesn't answer the question. Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"

 

[Lord Blackadder]

The form factor. The introduction of the "new" single 1.8 is Apple's attempt to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point.

I don't like the idea of a slower FSB either, but the cheaper motherboard probably accounts for a lot of the price difference between this and the dual 1.8, I would imagine. But a tower can handle peripheral devices (and PCI cards) that an iMac won't. That alone will be reason enough for some buyers to opt for this machine over the iMac.

 

[Rod Rod]

Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. as others have pointed out in other threads about other product lines, it's a waste of money for Apple to intentionally hobble products. the Kool-Aid justification is that Apple knows what it's doing, and who needs market share.

the only saving grace is that you can get a refurbished 1.8 single model for the same money.

I don't like the idea of a slower FSB either, but the cheaper motherboard probably accounts for a lot of the price difference between this and the dual 1.8, I would imagine..

I doubt that a 600MHz board costs less to make than a 900MHz one. I bet the only difference is a couple of resistors (if not just one), and otherwise the two are identical. I agree with your other points though.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

You can subtract the modem and downgrade the SuperDrive to a DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive (which lots of people will do) and save some more.

With student/teacher pricing, that makes the cheapest PowerMac G5 config $1233. (Cheapest that can run a 30" screen... $1683 )

For the rest of us, $1370 is the bottom config.

Personally I think it is short sighted to remove the DVD recorder capability. At $1349 this is a good value IMO at the EDU pricing. Even better when they come to the "Red Tag" area.

 

[habibbijan]

The form factor. The introduction of the "new" single 1.8 is Apple's attempt to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point.

I understand the need to bring the tower form factor to a lower price point, but that's entirely possible without crippling the bus speed, so that doesn't really answer the question. Simply dropping one processor will reduce the cost significantly. Cutting the bus speed by a third is a below-the-belt punch.

If I recall, the single 1.6 Ghz Powermac G5 from one year ago had an 800 MHz FSB. This system had a "cheaper" motherboard as well. If Apple just had to cut the bus speed, why not knock it back to 800, like the original 1.6? That would not have been as stupid.

 

[habibbijan]

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. as others have pointed out in other threads about other product lines, it's a waste of money for Apple to intentionally hobble products. the Kool-Aid justification is that Apple knows what it's doing, and who needs market share.

Thanks for the explanation, Rod Rod. That confirms it: stupidity IS the answer.

 

[iMeowbot]

Mockery of my post is fine, but it doesn't answer the question. Why would Apple purposefully cripple the bus speed of the single 1.8 GHz Powermac, especially compared to the similar model from one year ago? The answer is NOT "to make the higher-end Powermacs more appealing." What is the answer, besides "stupidity?"

Given all the G5 production problems, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Apple got a deal on CPUs that had trouble meeting the higher specs.

 

[gekko513]

the answer might have something to do with Apple's heritage / habits / history. when introducing a lower-priced model, they tend to hold back the specs (even though the components most likely cost the same). this practice of product differentiation by suffocation is artificial and inane. ...[snip]...
I doubt that a 600MHz board costs less to make than a 900MHz one. I bet the only difference is a couple of resistors (if not just one), and otherwise the two are identical. I agree with your other points though.

I think you'll lose that bet. The other PowerMacs have dual memory controllers hence the need for at least 800MHz bus (twice DDR400). If they only use one memory controller they don't really need a bus that is much faster than 400MHz:
"The Power Mac G5 128-bit memory controller supports fast 400MHz, DDR SDRAM, and enables main memory to address two banks of SDRAM at a time, reading and writing on both the rising and falling edge of each clock cycle. This effectively doubles the bandwidth, en..."

Apple probably saves the components cost for the 2nd memory controller. It could very well be that they use the same system controller chip in the single G5 PowerMac as in the iMacs.

 

[Rod Rod]

I think you'll lose that bet. The other PowerMacs have dual memory controllers hence the need for at least 800MHz bus (twice DDR400). If they only use one memory controller they don't really need a bus that is much faster than 400MHz:
"The Power Mac G5 128-bit memory controller supports fast 400MHz, DDR SDRAM, and enables main memory to address two banks of SDRAM at a time, reading and writing on both the rising and falling edge of each clock cycle. This effectively doubles the bandwidth, en..."

Apple probably saves the components cost for the 2nd memory controller. It could very well be that they use the same system controller chip in the single G5 PowerMac as in the iMacs.

you can prove your theory and win the bet by finding the RAM requirements for this new 1.8GHz / 600MHz fsb Power Mac.

according to the configurations available in the online store, it appears that the newest Power Mac requires matched pairs of RAM, unlike the G5 iMac.

 

[gekko513]

you can prove your theory and win the bet by finding the RAM requirements for this new 1.8GHz / 600MHz fsb Power Mac.

according to the configurations available in the online store, it appears that the newest Power Mac requires matched pairs of RAM, unlike the G5 iMac.

Yeah, you're right. That doesn't sound good. I'll cling to the hope that it's just an error in the specs Because if it isn't, then I too am very confused as to why they would lower the bus speed It's not like they need to cut back on the power consumption or anything!

 

[maya]

This system would be perfect if it was a:

2GHz with a FSB @ 1Gig.

or

1.8GHZ with a FSB @ 900MHz.


Well someone in the Apple DEV dept has been sleeping.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I don't know a great deal about the chipsets Apple is using for the G5 motherboards, but why would they use a different (slower) set of memory controllers than the other machines, if not because they are cheaper?

I ask because I don't know and I'm trying (with my limited knowlege) to explain the facts in a way that doesn't accuse Apple of deliberately hobbling a computer to maintain product line identity and continuity, Which would have a strong whiff of the bad old days of the Performa series. But maybe they are doing just that. I just hope not.

I wonder what the difference (in cost to Apple) would be between this new single 1.8 and a dual 1.8 motherboard with a single 1.8 proc card.

 

[thevessels]

well answerig my own question ..

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

they put back the single 1.8's agains the rest of the gang

and as a pro tools user - i still the the dual proc and higher fsb might be worth the extra 500 in the long run ..

the single 1.8 is actually slower than some of the pc's they have up there

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...

i still am gonna say the dual 1.8 is the best bang for your buck

unless someone can convince me otherwise

 

[JasonElise1983]

Well, i think everyone who hates this should call apple and tell them how stupid they are to lower the price of the PowerMac line so student (like myself) who are strapped for cash can possibly afford a decent computer and have what ever monitor they want. I am a graphic design student, so an fx5200 would probably be enought for me there, but i also do a little video editing on the side. I love the idea of being able to upgrade the video card to something real. Like a 9800Pro Special Mac Edition (that has TV outs!) that i can install myself and chunck that POS video card.

Oh, and for everyone complaining about the FSB (which i too am a little confused about, but i'm not irate) you should call apple and tell them to shove that FSB up their A$$ and bring back the 167Mhz FSB from the G4. That would be a lot better wouldn't it?

 

[Centris 650]

well answerig my own question ..

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

they put back the single 1.8's agains the rest of the gang

and as a pro tools user - i still the the dual proc and higher fsb might be worth the extra 500 in the long run ..

the single 1.8 is actually slower than some of the pc's they have up there

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...

i still am gonna say the dual 1.8 is the best bang for your buck

unless someone can convince me otherwise

Let's look at the iPod and iPod mini. For just a little more you can get a bigger iPod. Does that keep the iPod mini from flying off the shelves? What Apple is looking at, I think, is the consumer like myself. I can squeeze out $1500 for a new computer but not $2000. The "It's just $500 more!" doesn't fly when you just can't spend it! I already have a 19" crt monitor that's perfect and waiting for use. I'm very pleased with this new machine. Now, to fight my wife for the credit card....

 

[Macmaniac]

Wow

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

 

[ZildjianKX]

I beleive that the only difference in dual processors is when programms actually support them, usually only pro products (Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, 3D aps) utilise them.
Gaming I think doesnt use them at all... (I THINK)

Absolutely right.

As a SP 1.8 Rev A owner, I'm really surprised they crippled the FSB on this. The Rev A 1.8 is still the fastest and most expandible SP G5 Powermac... go figure.

I'm hoping Apple dumps the 2 GHz/1.8 GHz PMs soon, they've been out so long they shouldn't even be in the powermac line anymore. I'm hoping the next revision is DP 3, DP 2.5, DP 2.

 

[Lancetx]

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

I'm glad to see someone else has some sense about this. It's all about options, that's all. If someone needs the expandability as you do, then this new Power Mac is a great deal. For those that don't, then by all means, they should get the iMac then. I don't see what all of the fuss is over either. It's always good when additional options are made available and Apple has done just that with this new model Power Mac.

 

[thevessels]

belive me i do think this is an awesome product - and i know this is a perfect solution for alot of people

all i was trying to point out was how much fast the dual proc's actually are when benchhmarked ( ithought the diff would be smaller )

i know for students and consumers this powermac is killer , and belive me i wouldve been in line to buy one aswell if i didnt stumble across jpegs like this..

 

[habibbijan]

i just couldnt sleep at night knowing theres actaully a pc with a little more horsepower than my powermac ...

I certainly hope that was a joke, or you're going to have a lot of sleepless nights!

 

[Xtremehkr]

Gamers are a niche market.

 

[thevessels]

ok maybee my comment was a little extreme..

but the blue line is longer than the green line!!!

*tear*

its just not right . . . ..




(please dont take this too seriously)

 

[awesomebase]

Well, maybe....

I am stunned how mad everyone is. You people make me sick, everyone is so mad that Apple has released a $1500 Powermac.
Think for one second, think two years ahead from now, all of the people who bought the new iMac are going to be complaining like mad how they can't upgrade their graphics card, they are stuck with the same screen, they are crippled at 2GB, and they can't have extra HDs, and they can't do dual monitors.
Now think again, the people who bought the $1500 powermac can upgrade their GPU, they can install an extra HD easily, they can expand to 4gb of memory, they can add new cards to expand their USB and Firewire ports, it has Firewire 800.
For a person like me this is a great deal, I can get cheap RAM and a cheap HD, get a flashed GPU and have a great mac gaming machine, or a low cost video editing box.
This mac is going to be a viable mac 2 years from now, while people will be cursing the all in one new iMac.
Just stop and think for a minute.

Well, you're correct on the expandability aspect of it, but as far as the value goes, there isn't a whole lot of argument. Basically, what Apple is saying is this... to get the EXACT same iMac G5 in a PowerMac enclosure, we want you to pay an extra $900 ($1899 vs. $1500 + 1299 = $2799). I think the only difference is that the iMac has a 4x SuperDrive instead of an 8x on the PM. You can get a 16x Pioneer for under a $100 online, so, that isn't exactly adding a lot of value.
I think what the introduction of this system shows is just how far Apple has to drop their prices on the PMs. Look at it this way... the extra $1500 for the Dual 2.5GHz gives you PCI-X slots, an extra 256MB of RAM, a better video card and two faster CPUs. It just doesn't equate... the additional RAM and video cards may make up $50 of that difference... I doubt the PCI-X slots cost all that much more, so, what they are basically saying is that for the extra CPU power, you have to pay another $1500. Forget the comparison to the iMac, that makes it even worse.
I think this introduction just reinforces the fact that the iMac is looking like a much better deal... either that or just stick with a dual-configuration PM. The only people that I think would be attracted to this offer are those that already have displays and want the PM. But, you have to figure that for an extra $400, they can get the iMac G5 with the 20" display built in. Who knows if the market for those people that already have displays is quite large or not. In any case, it certainly can't hurt Apple to do this... it may just "polarize" the PM people from the iMac people because of the definite difference in value.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Gamers are a niche market.

Even more so than Apple buyers, gamers are a niche market. Most people who play games make do with what they have or make minor upgrades. Because this machine is targetted at such a narrow group it's going to be more expensive. When I priced it with everything I wanted that I would have got in the 20" iMac it was easily $1000 more.

But then you do get that expandability, which is what everyone wanted. With the educational discount, it was only $1349. The Apple LCD was what made the darn thing so expensive.

Apple tends to sell completed products, rather than upgradable items. Sometimes I think that there is no pleasing people.