Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Plymouthbreezer said:
Today I installed Panther on my iMac G3... Oh god the fans went crazy!! I can only imagen what Tiger would do to it!

With that said, I don't know how well Tiger will really run of a G3 - Exposé works, but all buggy, and fast user swtiching isn't the 3D cube, but it just goes from user to user. If Panther put that much strain on the system, Tiger will only be worse.


Interesting. I run Panther on a G3 iBook (admittedly with a whopping 16MB of VRAM) and it cruises along nicely. Don't think I've ever even heard the fans....

I don't expect Tiger to strain it all that much.

However, like so many here, I reject the 'usage argument' wrt Apple's choice of GPU for the iMac. It doesn't matter to me what I intend to use it for; what does matter is that the 5200 ultra fails to represent good value for money on a close-to-$2000 computer.

They'll get my money when the GPU is more powerful. I'm not much of a gamer, but I'd like to have the option at least.

Perhaps the rumored dual-core procs will also make their way into the iMac. Then I'd be on the phone to the Applestore pretty much immediately.....
 
There is no way in hell they will put the geforce 5200fx in any new medium to high end models in the future. The reason for this is that the geforce 5200fx doesn't support the CoreVideo functions to be included in Tiger.

If they do, I don't know what to say... I'd be very dissappointed. The card is an old, outdated low end card. What is it doing a Mac? I simply do not know. The technology to put something better in it is there. For the amount the user pays the option should be there too. And if they don't update the powerbook line soon, they better change the name into AverageBook and drop the price by 50%.

The fact that they're still using 5200fx and 9700 mobile to this day... Sheesh. At least the 9700 mobile supports corevideo, but it is still 2 year old technology. What the hell?

While Apple really rules the software world, it seems like everybody is passing them by in the hardware world... It's really so sad, especially when they do take higher prices than their x86 competitors...
 
iMac & eMac updates...and how about a MacMax ??

I've been getting the itch to upgrade from my 2 yr old eMac (1-Ghz, 386MB upgraded RAM, & Combo-drive) and I'm happy to see the rumors that eMac and iMac updates are coming next month. I'm really glad to see the eMac may be sticking around longer than expected - I'm still not sold on spending the extra money for an LCD screen iMac when a high quality CRT still looks great and the eMac fits very nicely on my desk at home. And, some of the benchmarking I've seen on the G5 iMac has been disappointingly close to the performance of a G4 eMac.

Considering the cost to buy iLife '05, Tiger, and a RAM upgrade to 512MB would exceed $200, I'd rather use that money to buy a new eMac with a faster (1.5 Ghz) processor, faster front bus, better graphics card, and a SuperDrive and USB-2.0 connectors. If a high-end eMac stays at $999 or drops to $899 with the expected updates in April, I'll be 1st in line to buy one. Plus, I can sell my current eMac on eBay for a few hundred bucks to help defray the cost of upgrading.

Separately, I've found the MacMini to be a little underpowered & underfeatured for my tastes. If only Apple would release a sister/brother model with more power and features (ie: MacMax) for $699 or $799... I'd like to see a small monitor-less model like the MacMini with the power of an eMac or even the iMac (dreaming). It's pretty easy & cheap to pick up a monitor, keyboard, and mouse that could be used over an over, saving more money down the road as only the CPU would be replaced when upgrading to the next latest and greatest model. Guess we'll see what Apple's got up it's sleeve next as they continue working on gaining market share. :cool:
 
I agree with others who have said the graphics cards are much too weak. What's the deal with Apple and graphics cards anyway? Why can't we get a standard 128mb card in our machines instead of 32 or 64mb? It's obvious the extra video ram is needed with the larger monitors, games, and design apps we all use on our macs. Get it right this time Apple! No more wimpy graphics cards.
 
I think, if i'm not mistaken, that Macs handle graphics differently to other computers. They have special circuits in them, and software that pushes the graphics power of any card further, hence they don't require such a large amount of Vram. I was told this many times. Its something to do with the fact that a graphics chip is incorperated into the mother board, which improves the graphics overall. E.g if you got a PC with the same specs as a Mac and put the same graphics card in both of them, the mac would naturally perform better.

It is just like thier processor clock speeds, 1 mac ghz = 2 PC ghz, hence G4 1ghz is approximately = P4 2 ghz.

Someone said that they are waiting to see what Apple do to gain more market share. I hope they do nothing, just keep acting the way they are right now. I don't want to be common, I don't want everyone to have macs, I want them to be rare. If they become any more poplular then we will start to get virus's and crappy programs as there will be too much 3rd party support in both hardware and software terms to keep apple's own software compatibility up to date, like the problems windows has been encountering since it has been released. Ha Ha.

But yeah back to the point, i enjoy being unusual, we have a fairly nice little community hear I dont want it to be like the Windows Community.
 
personnaly i don't care if it rains or freezes, as long' as i've got my plstic Jesus and my IMAC 23" !!!
wisch for a bigger screen and firewire 800... see you next year dudes! may thoses dreams come true!
:rolleyes:
 
thoroughbred said:
I think, if i'm not mistaken, that Macs handle graphics differently to other computers. They have special circuits in them, and software that pushes the graphics power of any card further, hence they don't require such a large amount of Vram. I was told this many times. Its something to do with the fact that a graphics chip is incorperated into the mother board, which improves the graphics overall. E.g if you got a PC with the same specs as a Mac and put the same graphics card in both of them, the mac would naturally perform better.

It is just like thier processor clock speeds, 1 mac ghz = 2 PC ghz, hence G4 1ghz is approximately = P4 2 ghz.

I am familiar with the RISC vs. CISC based processing comparison. No doubt the PowerPC chips are faster. But as far as graphics go, I don't know. I am still seeing the same recommendations for vram on a Mac vs. a PC game - take Halo for instance. Halo requirements for PC are actually a little less than those on the Mac. Granted, this is only one example, but you can see where I think Mac graphics cards should still have more Vram. I wish someone would comment on what they know about Mac AGP graphics systems in the G4/G5 architecture vs. PC graphics architecture. It seems like the G5 architecture is dramatically better from what I've seen in keynote demonstrations, but I haven't seen enough about PC graphics to know.
 
Goatbert said:
You say that like it'll hold up any better in a room full of 12th graders. I'm an IT Manager for a public K-12 district and if they pull the eMac I'm going to have to buy Minis and CRTs and security locks to stop them from ending up in back packs. Not something I'm kooking forward too.


Personally if they get rid of the eMacs for the minis, my high schools are going Dell. Ghost Server and Deep Freeze Enterprise has made administering Dells even easier than Apples.

Funny story about high school kids and LCDs. Out of our 4 High Schools, we have one lab that has mostly Power Macs and LCDs, it's scary how much money has been poured into that lab. Anyways, we had some kids goofing around and tossing floppy disks around in the lab. One hit smack dab in the center of a brand new 20" Apple LCD(Before the pricedrop) killing all the pixels. I think of that every time someone says schools should go iMac.

On a related note to the rumor, the boss-lady called me today saying I need to attend a meeting Wed. because we have to buy our eMacs by a week from Friday since some sale price ends or something.
 
ManchesterTrix said:
Personally if they get rid of the eMacs for the minis, my high schools are going Dell. Ghost Server and Deep Freeze Enterprise has made administering Dells even easier than Apples.

Funny story about high school kids and LCDs. Out of our 4 High Schools, we have one lab that has mostly Power Macs and LCDs, it's scary how much money has been poured into that lab. Anyways, we had some kids goofing around and tossing floppy disks around in the lab. One hit smack dab in the center of a brand new 20" Apple LCD(Before the pricedrop) killing all the pixels. I think of that every time someone says schools should go iMac.

On a related note to the rumor, the boss-lady called me today saying I need to attend a meeting Wed. because we have to buy our eMacs by a week from Friday since some sale price ends or something.
Get those eMacs before they sell out!! ;)
 
There still is no "real" headless Mac...

In reading this thread I had a thought...no matter how much I love the Mac mini, and I'm glad that it is out there, it seems that there is still a desire for a headless, upgradable Mac. Now does the target market only consist of macrumors members? I don't know.

Steve said in the keynote that we always asked for "a computer with no screen". And he gave us the mini. That quote was actually wrong. It should have been, "if they just give us a small form factor, upgradable (video card), headless Mac".

mini: beginners/kids/living room. People who have a screen, want style.
eMac: education/beginners/kids. People who do not have a screen.
iMac: prosumer/style conscisous. People who use iLife to the fullest.
Power Mac: prosumer/power user/professional

A while back they gave us a crippled SP Power Mac. Then they gave the mini. Niether one of those is the right one. we still need a mini tower Mac with upgradable video.

ps--I may get a new iMac if they do bump video, RAM and drop price. If not, I may go for the rev A refurb 20" or just keep my iMac G4.
 
~Shard~ said:
Cool, thanks for providing the info Squire. :cool:

Don't thank me. Thank The Black Rock. I just...(burp)...regurgitated the info.

OnaMacSince1989 said:
Separately, I've found the MacMini to be a little underpowered & underfeatured for my tastes. If only Apple would release a sister/brother model with more power and features (ie: MacMax) for $699 or $799... I'd like to see a small monitor-less model like the MacMini with the power of an eMac or even the iMac (dreaming).

I agree. That would definitely be nice. But MacMax?! Come on. Don't you know the lingo, brother? It would have to be MacExtreme. How long have you owned a Mac anyway? ;)

Squire
 
There still could be some life left for the eMac

If the eMac is more durable in the classroom , since Apple would be making them for schools, why not continue selling them to the public ? Afterall , a sale is a sale. You can't guarantee that many third party companies wil continue making and selling CRT monitors. There are electronic companies that are starting to phase out the larger CRT televisions to replace them with LCD models. Summer 2006 is the deadline for 32" integrated HDTV models to be available for sale . How many of those models can really be expected to be CRT , when LCD models take less space in the stores' storeage/warehouse area, allowing more merchandise to be sold and delivered more conveniently , quickly, and easily ? I could see that happening with CRT computer monitors.

Also Apple gained a marketplace image when it introduced the first Macintosh
computer . Why should Apple abandon that one piece desktop design that helped them standout from most other computers like the IBM PC , Commodore 64 or Amiga, Atari ST, ect. ? Apple has sold one piece CRT Mac systems during the entire 21 year history of the Macintosh . It would as bad as Kelloggs firing Tony the Tiger .

The eMac has a faster hard drive than the Mac Mini . I would be hesitant to use a 4200 RPM hard drive with my Formac Studio .

Upgrading the eMac to 1.5 GHZ G4 is the right thing to do. Later down the road, the eMac and the Mac Mini can be fitted with a 90 NM 2 GHZ G5 ( When the G5 reaches 3 GHZ and the iMac is 2.5 GHZ. January 2006 ? )
 
I was glad Apple changed its mind after originally marketing eMacs only to schools. There were certainly plenty of consumers for whom an eMac was just right.

I agree that Apple might as well sell the eMac to anyone who wants one, but I would like to point out that there are a few differences between an ideal entry-level K-12 classroom computer and an ideal entry-level consumer computer:

1. Abuse. There is no pride of ownership at school, so computers have to be durable. The fewer cables, sensitive areas, and removable pieces, the better.

2. Games. Many or most consumers like to play games, where CPU speed and graphics speed can make a big difference. "Edutainment" games that are more likely to be used at school rarely have such needy requirements.

3. Networking. Homes can be networked either with cables or wirelessly. Classrooms rarely have much choice. Depending on the furniture and the number of computers, wireless may be the only choice.

4. Portability. Consumers are likely to get a desktop system if it won't travel and a notebook computer if it will travel. Some classrooms require notebook computers simply because there is no way to get a power cord where the students will use the computers and because computers must be "put away" somewhere when not in use.

5. Software. All our school computers have Quicken on them. I'm thrilled :rolleyes: that 6th graders can work on their taxes at school, but I know it's because our iMacs and eMacs came with the standard consumer software suite and not software intended for use at schools.
 
Noob question:

Why can't the emac go g5? It was already reported that there was a complete redesign of it's internals....
 
Zigster said:
Noob question:

Why can't the emac go g5? It was already reported that there was a complete redesign of it's internals....

It's not likely to happen until the iMac and PMac greatly outdistance them in speed. For example if the Power Macs get say a dual core then the top iMac could get 2 Ghz or better single cores(which might be difficult given the form factor) and maybe a 1.6 for the emac.
 
sigamy said:
In reading this thread I had a thought...no matter how much I love the Mac mini, and I'm glad that it is out there, it seems that there is still a desire for a headless, upgradable Mac. Now does the target market only consist of macrumors members? I don't know.

This echoes my sentiments 100%, though I'm a whole lot more confident that there's a good market out there for such a machine, if it were priced right.

It's easy to spec out this machine:

1) Start with the PowerMac SP
2) Get rid of the PCI slots (this can be debated; maybe leave one)
3) Keep the AGP slot (upgrade to PCI-E when available)
4) Shrink the freakin' enclosure

That's it. I'd be all over the PowerMac SP except for the fact that it's ridiculously huge, a fact made more annoying because it's mostly unusable empty space inside, with a ton of room allocated for second CPU and extra DRAM slots. Make it start at $1299 at most.

Oh, and there'd be no reason to limit this machine to the slowest CPU.

This would be the other switcher machine, and pretty appealing for lots of Mac upgraders as well.
 
andreas.b said:
There is no way in hell they will put the geforce 5200fx in any new medium to high end models in the future. The reason for this is that the geforce 5200fx doesn't support the CoreVideo functions to be included in Tiger.

If they do, I don't know what to say... I'd be very dissappointed. The card is an old, outdated low end card. What is it doing a Mac? I simply do not know. The technology to put something better in it is there. For the amount the user pays the option should be there too. And if they don't update the powerbook line soon, they better change the name into AverageBook and drop the price by 50%.

The fact that they're still using 5200fx and 9700 mobile to this day... Sheesh. At least the 9700 mobile supports corevideo, but it is still 2 year old technology. What the hell?

While Apple really rules the software world, it seems like everybody is passing them by in the hardware world... It's really so sad, especially when they do take higher prices than their x86 competitors...

What is core video :confused: do you mean core image if so,
The gfx 5200 DOES support core image but still a change to a new gen GPU would not hurt :p GF 6200 :rolleyes:
 
neilw said:
This echoes my sentiments 100%, though I'm a whole lot more confident that there's a good market out there for such a machine, if it were priced right.

It's easy to spec out this machine:

1) Start with the PowerMac SP
2) Get rid of the PCI slots (this can be debated; maybe leave one)
3) Keep the AGP slot (upgrade to PCI-E when available)
4) Shrink the freakin' enclosure

That's it. I'd be all over the PowerMac SP except for the fact that it's ridiculously huge, a fact made more annoying because it's mostly unusable empty space inside, with a ton of room allocated for second CPU and extra DRAM slots. Make it start at $1299 at most.

Oh, and there'd be no reason to limit this machine to the slowest CPU.

This would be the other switcher machine, and pretty appealing for lots of Mac upgraders as well.

With the MacMini at $499, I'd shoot for $999. To save money, I'd choose shuttle as the OEM provider and use the XPC formfactor.
 
Platform said:
What is core video :confused: do you mean core image if so,
The gfx 5200 DOES support core image but still a change to a new gen GPU would not hurt :p GF 6200 :rolleyes:

Core Video is a new Core technology in Tiger. Read about halfway down the page here under "Not Just for Still Images". Jobs talked about the Core tools on one of his keynotes, maybe you missed it...
 
RichardCarletta said:
can anyone guess when the new iMacs and eMacs wil be released ? :)

My uneducated guess would be that it (the iMac/eMac release) would be independent of the release of Tiger. I'm just guessing that Apple won't want anything taking the thunder from that release.

I could be wrong but I'll bet they announce the release of Tiger early in April. Then maybe later in the week announce the updated hardware and also announce they'll ship with Tiger installed.
 
~Shard~ said:
Core Video is a new Core technology in Tiger. Read about halfway down the page here under "Not Just for Still Images". Jobs talked about the Core tools on one of his keynotes, maybe you missed it...

Oh ok did not get that with me :eek:

But what cards are supported for core video then :confused:
 
Platform said:
Oh ok did not get that with me :eek:

But what cards are supported for core video then :confused:

No one knows. Apple hasn't really referred to Core Video much. They showed it off at WWDC last year. You can still find the video online at Apple's site. If you're looking on the QT clip go to the part with Phil Schiller and the "Electric Zebras".

I figure the next thing they put up on their developer pages will be Core Video stuff, just in time for NAB. After that it's Core Data... probably.

In case you need a visual cue to remember it, think of the open glass sphere from Core Audio except green rather than orange.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.