Apple unveils the new iMac G5 - Page 5

I like it. Sure, the video card could be better, but this is a consumer machine, and hard-core gamers aren't usually looking to the iMac as the ultimate gaming machine.

What impresses me the most is the layout of the guts. It seems like the new design borrows more from the Xserve than anything else. Take an Xserve, shrink it down for one processor and one hard drive, stand it on its face, and slap and LCD on the lid-- presto, new iMac.

I think they'll do a little better than the "Sunflower" iMac G4, and as usual, the real thing in person will probably look and feel better than we're all thinking form looking at photos.

I guess I completely fail to understand Apple when it comes to the iMac line. Or the PowerMac line for that matter...

I admit, I'm currently a PC user. I have been a Mac user in the past and would VERY much like to switch back, but the current line of hardware offerings just doesn't make it for me. I spend a great deal of money on my computer, being what the marketing people call an "enthusiast", so the price point of a Mac isn't my issue.

The new iMac G5 doesn't cut it from a hardware perspective, when you consider a user like myself: I like to tinker a little, upgrade RAM, upgrade video card, etc as I go along, and I like to squeeze as much performance out as I can, but in a small form factor.

The new iMac can't be upgraded from a video perspective, and its CPU/FSB is a crippled version of a PowerMac. Some of which is understandable, but that makes it unsuitable for me.

The PowerMac line is just too massive for me. I currently use a Shuttle XPC box which is perfect for me. It lets me upgrade when I want (to a certain extent of course), I can use my existing monitor or change it when I feel like it, and unlike the PowerMac line, it doesn't weigh in a 50lbs+ and doesn't take up most of the leg room under my desk

What I personally ask for from Apple is a single CPU, video upgradeable, PowerMac box that is about 1/3 the size of the existing chassis. Make it even look the same as the exisiting PowerMac, just shrink it down.

Until I can find an Apple product that gives me the flexibility I need in a form factor I can stand, I'm stuck in the PC world, wishing I could play in the Mac world

I wonder if this new iMac could serve as a display in itself.

In other words if you already have PowerMac, could you use this iMac display as a standalone monitor?
That way you could harness the power of your Dual 2.5 G5 for serious work at the office, and then detach and bring the iMac home for play.

I heard Amiga is coming back with a vengeance; you should try that OS for a while. Runs on PowerPC tech so your not jumping the hardware platform just OS. Seriously though why bring this up; wow is I for not having the best technology in my current choice of computer manufacture. Would you work harder, longer or create better content with your decision to change OS. The answer is probably no, just bragging rights on the forums. What makes an Apple and Apple is the OS and frankly they have best desktop OS on the market, hands down. Windows is not a viable solution except for gaming; I am 40% percent more productive with an Apple OS then Microsoft. I believe many other people on this forum agree as well.

I honestly don't understand why you all continue to bitch....

We've been hearing "Pizza Box" design for a long... long... time now; and when Apple actually makes good on that design and does something revolutionary with it... all you can do is bitch about the design...

Not to mention the people who bitch about the graphics card.... this sounds bad... but: YOUR RUNNING A MAC! WHAT GAMES DO YOU EXPECT TO PLAY! If games are that important to you, buy an Alienware.

Finally... the price. You know Apple is going to charge a premium for their systems. You cant go to Dell.com and say "Look here! This 'Dull' Has twice the ram blah blah blah. AND its $200 less.". That "Dull" also isnt only 2" thick with a large LCD monitor strapped to the front of it. I would also be willing to assume that many of the parts Apple uses are of much higher quality than the ones used by many low budget PC manufacturers. Thats why Alienware can charge a premium for their PCs... quality parts in quality cases... who cares if Apple choses to do the same.

I remember back to when we didn't know for sure if the next gen iMac was even going to have a G5... imagine how much bitching there would be if the iMac still ran a G4. There are so many positives here that the majority of people choose to ignore because it didnt have the 1 extra feature they wanted, but in no way needed and it doesnt cost $300 less than it should.

Most people are not tinkerers. When their monitor won't come on they don't check to see if it's plugged in, they take it to the nearist pc shop to see if it needs serviced.

Though a headless Mac would be a great idea, but an AIO has it's market too.

Macs are not game machines and they never really have been. Do we have to go through this again? Apple is delivering much better value with this new iMac and still people complain. The 5200 ships with some of the PM models still - do you think the iMac would have a better graphics card? And if you have the money to buy a separate PC just for games than why do you care whether the new iMac fails as a game machine? The iMac is a machine for people who use the iLife suite and it will do this very well. Anything more advanced where the software itself runs into the hundreds if not thousands than people buy the PM. It is that simple. To say Apple struck out with this new iMac is ignoring all the things they have done right with this new version. The design is stunning in its execution, it is much more powerful than the model it replaces and it is considerably cheaper as well. To me, Apple did their homework on this one.

What were they thinking putting in a Nvidia 5200Ultra, that's road kill..... What a waste, you can't even upgrade the GPU.. just horrible.

What else are we going to do after a keynote but, bitch, bitch, and bitch.

The new iMac sucks and so do the people who do not agree with those who think it sucks, it makes them suckers.

More photos from the Apple booth... front shots too.

http://www.macobserver.com/gallery/Booth-MacG5

No, but you connect them both to the same subnet (gigabit Ethernet is a must here) and view the Powermac 2.5mhz through Apple Remote Desktop.

Why doesn't everyone feck off? Seriously.

On behalf of Steve Jobs I apologise for everyone not being canvassed on the new iMac or explaining the complexities of contemporary industrial design.

Sweet suffering baby Jesus.

Is it me or does the new iMac have a worse SuperDrive than the eMac?

iMac Superdrive spec:

SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 4x speed, reads DVDs at up to 8x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 16x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 8x speed, reads CDs at up to 24x speed

eMac Superdrive spec:

SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed

The iMac is a nice machine though, but 4x SuperDrive? GeForce FX5200 Ultra?

Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick would have been my choice of blasphemy, but hey all each to his own.

well, conventional wisdom says that slot-loading and non-horizontal drives are generally slower... i don't know if that's to ensure good operation, but it seems to be the standard. same held true for the cube's "toaster" and other such drives. apparently if you use a tray, you can do some sick rotation speeds.

Why this obsession with upgrading video cards? Some explain, please?

I've owned computers at home for close to 20 years (starting with a BBC Micro B) and have never once thought of upgrading a video card. Am I unique? I currently have the FP g4 iMac 800Mhz - how would a 'better' video card improve my work experience?

The trade-off for this is a superb design, a quiet computer, and a computer that 'just works'. Pretty good trade-off for me.

I'm not a gamer, but for those that are - get an Xbx, PS2 or whatever, not a g5 iMac!

This new iMac may well replace my wife's original iMac.......

Your missing my point. Basically what I'm saying is that for the price Apple is asking consumers to spend on Macs they should at least put in current technology. Macs these days always seem to be 1 step behind current technology but still charging top dollar. Apple has limited their potential buying group by not including, or offering a current GPU with the iMac (as well as powermac) line.

I leave you with 2 questions:
How many kids use computers? How many kids like videogames?

Dell Dimension 4600
P4 2.8GHz
Win XP Pro
256MB DDR SDRAM <-- same
80GB Ultra ATA HDD <-- same (iMac probably better off with SATA)
Dual drives DVD-ROM and CDRW
128MB GeForce FX 5200 <-- more memory than iMac
Added speakers (cheapest ones)
Firewire (had to add this for $50)
17" Ultrasharp flat panel
Free printer

$1287 with discounts

The iMac stacks up well against this for a very similar price with a *much* better software package.

Also Sony V series AIO
2.6GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
120GB Ultra ATA drive
Combo drive
Wireless mouse and keyboard
15" Xbrite screen

starting at...
$1499

Sony W series AIO
2.8GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
200GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD±RW / CD-RW Drive
17.5" LCD
15" Xbrite screen

Starting at...

$1999

The new iMac is fine (not perfect but fine) and some of you are mixing up fantasy with reality of actual retail PC prices. People often mix "build it yourself" prices with those of actual off the shelf prices you would pay at CompUSA/Bestbuy/Circuit City or even off the web (where I just got these prices).

Check out those nice *Non upgradeable* graphics Sony offers.

I'm sure with more effort I could find some cheaper ones but overall I picked decent (as decent as PCs get) examples.

Apple is really not asking consumers to pay a whole lot more than Dell or Sony...

It's not about graphics
It's not about upgrades
It's not about FW800 or lack of RAM
It's not even about whether it's white or aluminium
It's about the fact that it looks ugly
top heavy
bad proportions
cheap looking alloy stand
1980s square corners
(I dont like the new flat screens very much either)
So flame me
After waiting and waiting, I'm off to buy an eMac dammit

I have to agree on the upgrading of the video card. In all my years of owning powermacs, I've never once upgrade the video card. Ram yes...HD..yes...video card..... NO

That's why i have an xbox that i NEVER use

I especially like the whining about the looks....umm looks like a kickass display to me....guts included.

I didnt see anyone else mentioning this but I appoligize if I missed it...If heat was the issue that held-up the release (along with supply shortages) then is it concieveable that the crappy video card selection is the result of additional heat reduction? I think they probably stuck this $16 card in this machine as an initial offering to get all the money from people who have been waiting for ever and a day to get the new iMac. This logically buys them enough time to resolve any heat issues associated with a larger video card and then release a revised version in November or December with the option of a more substantial graphics option. This is only a theory obviously but its my only answer to their decision to use such an underpowered video card on their sexy new iMac.

Ah, we all have our crises of faith, don't we? But this is an odd time for one, nonetheless. This machine is clearly Switcher bait through and through ... it will sell like hotcakes.

As for your worries about market share, my own experience in large and small companies is that total production has an almost logarithmic relation to the size of the organisation. Smaller is usually *much* more efficient.

Its not really an obsession per say, more of a plea to Apple to include some FRIGEN value to my computer! As far as work is related, nuttin, zip, zero, well short of working for a game producer that is. I believe its more that Apple is forcing a mediocre two-year-old video card without the possibilities of upgrading on us. This card is valued at less then 30 dollars with an OEM bulk purchase. For a 2000 dollar computer (after an essential memory and wireless upgrade) this seems kind of chinsie. Now you and a lot of other people may not game but quite a few of us do, if not sometime. Which means were force to drop an additional $1000 on a Powermac to enjoy gaming. It pisses us off because for a cost of no more then 50 bucks we could have had a viable graphic solution.

Whew. It's a never ending cycle. The haters whine. Then the zealots bitch about the whining. Then the the complainers retaliate by whining about the bitching... etc.


My take? Everything is as it has always been.

Apple has released a new all in one that costs more than similarly spec'd wintel boxes.

Either the whiners are new to the game, naïve, or enjoy the lifestyle of perpetually ridiculing apple's business model...

Yep, everything is as it has always been.

As usual, I'll have to see one in person before making a final judgment. But from what I can tell, it looks to me like an excellent machine.

I have to say, I'm getting better at prognosticating. I called the general design, and the advantage (which a lot of people are overlooking, but it's right there on the iMac's page) that you can pop off the back and there are all the components laid out right there for you. I'm not sure why someone upthread complained about upgrading the drives, because (again, from what little information is out there now) it looks like that's easier than it would be in the average minitower. 256MB RAM is not great, but the claims that it's unusable are wildly overstated.

As for the graphics, OK, so they did use the GeForce FX 5200 Ultra. It still has more complete support for programmable textures than the ATI 9600 (future proofing for Tiger, natch, and also for games like DOOM 3 that explore the dusty, unused corners of most GPUs). It's still a decent GPU for a machine in its price range, as several posters have demonstrated. The GPU might yet be upgradable, if not user-upgradable. It depends on whether the iMac uses the GPU daughtercard developed for the big PowerBooks. If so, the few and the brave could attempt it themselves, and some others could ship their iMacs off and have, say, MCE attempt it for them.

Furthermore, the FX 5200 appears not to have been much of a bottleneck in the older iMac. Apple is claiming "three times the frame rate as the previous iMac in Unreal Tournament 2004," which, if it's even half true, means that the upgrade to the G5 and its associated architecture should make a big difference in games.

The price at the low end is OK. The prices at the mid and high end are better than I expected. They did, in fact, shave hundreds of dollars off the price of a computer with a 17" LCD. And they finally have all preconfigured iMac prices comfortably below $2000 as is Right and Proper. They didn't get it down to $999, but then they might have better luck scaling this design down.

VESA mounting, combined with the built-in computer and power supply, is a bonus that will not be lost on enterprise. Talk about saving desk space. The optical drive-less edu iMac is also going to be an excellent enterprise &mdash; well, I suppose it's still a desktop &mdash; at a very good price, with peerless ergonomics. Remember, when you consider the enterprise market and large edu institution purchases, they're buying in lots of thousands or tens of thousands, and they aren't paying anything near retail. The profit for the seller is in the multi-year support contracts.

Looks-wise, I think they did a great job. It does conjure the iPod in more ways than one. It's the perfect hub for your Digital Spoke! It's clean, friendly, it doesn't have the awkward proportion between the screen and the body that the 15" iMac did, and (with the wireless kb and mouse) it only has one cord. As my boss said of that last feature, it's about damn time.

I think this will do very, very well. I might think that because this is the computer that I really wanted when I bought my Cube, but I really believe this will take off. The 20" iMac is calling my name.

Double Post, ooooops.

Some comments I've read from the Expo say that the screen is much brighter then the current LCD iMac. When comparing off the shelf computers these new iMac's stack up very well as Bancho shows. We know that the iMac has never been a game machine. But doesn't Quartz Extreme help the video processor get more bang for the buck? I'm not technical, but comparing the way the iMac uses its CPU and other components to a PC is somewhat unfair.

Yeah, great. Let's see, my father's monitor's goes out, I can quickly get him a temporary replacement while he waits for his to be fixed. My mom's iMac's monitor goes out, she's out of a computer for a week (if she's lucky) waiting for it to get fixed.

Oh, that's right, people want computers to just send pictures to grandma (ignoring the fact that most grandma's don't use computers). Oh, and the people who just want a computer to download their pictures aren't the type to spend $2000 for a computer when they can get a cheap one from Dell (forget your stupid-assed 'similarly spec'd' machine, because what does a picture downloader and email care about such specs?). They're the ones who buy the Wal-Mart computers.

And for you bashing the video card bashers, keep in mind that OS X actually uses the video card itself very heavily, as would do any of the things you say people will use it for. Putting older, slower cards in the computer slows down the interface as you're trying to edit video or just see a slew of pictures. Video cards aren't just for the gamers.

Speaking of gamers, you all are right. There's no market for games on computers. No one buys computers to play games, and no one buys games. In fact, that's why when you go to Best Buy or CompUSA, you're lucky if you see a couple of shelves for games. [Yes, and for you mentally challenged, I was being sarcastic. The problem you all don't understand is that while not everyone plays games, the gamer market is one Apple should be going after, as they're the geeks who'll spend $3000 on a new computer, or $500 on a new graphics card. Why shouldn't apple want to go after that market? And shouldn't people ask "Why aren't they?"]

Sony's are overpriced...

btw, 256MB of memory standard in all 3 configurations!!! Come on people!!!

Actually, Quartz Extreme uses the video card to offset some of the display processing. So the more powerful card, the better the experience.

I think when it comes to the home theater / airtunes, and wanting to control music in any room in your house...or wanting the perfect machine for the kitchen, this imac hits right on the button. I think the mistake they made was advertising it as a gaming machine on the website, I do hope it wasn't thier intention to make this thing game orientated. Simply an advertising error is all...(fingers crossed)

Well, I wouldn't get one for myself, but I think it's going to do pretty good. That thing looks pretty hot.

i think its quite sexy.

ive got a pc for gaming, and a 5200 64meg is still an ok card.

my parents are ordering a 20" one very soon.

I like the new iMacs. I would recommend the two lower end models. Probably would not recommend the high end 20" model. Comparing to the old iMac G4:




This looks like Apple made some really nice improvements here. Hitting a 1299$ price point with a 17" LCD was what Apple needed to do, and dropping the price points for the 2 models upscale by 300$ was also good. These machines are very close to being twice as good as the previous models.

On the low end model, Apple increased the performance 50% on integer, probably 150% on FPU, increased the performance of the graphics, increased the performance of both the front side bus and memory, increased the performance of the hard drive, and increased the screen size to 17". All for the same price. I think that is very good.

The next two models also have nice performance improvements along with a $300 drop in price.

And of course, Apple can't just make everyone happy by simply offering build-to-order graphics and CPU options. That and a cheap headless machine would make everyone so much happier.

Was the Fx5200 Ultra in the old iMac also at AGP 8X? The performance gains of this card in the new iMac as claimed by Apple are impressive.

Sure, *everyone* has spare monitors lying about waiting to be used as temporary replacements.

The low end iMac is $1299, not $2000. Apple is not competing with the Walmart machines or the dregs of what Dell offers. You really *should* compare similar specced machines to be fair. Apple offers similar value to the Dell for $1299. Apple offers *superior* value to the Sony offerings.

As for the video card Amorph has given examples where the 5200 would actually be a better choice than the ATI 9600. OS X relies on OpenGL which is better supported by Nvidia than ATI.

I won't argue the games and I didn't in my post above. I don't think it will be the atrocity people are making it out to be though. I'm pretty sure Apple is way down on the list for hardcore gamers and a non-upgradeable machine would not suit them anyhow.

This new line of iMacs is going to get those 13, 14, and 15, year olds excited about getting a Mac, as well as those college bound teens who need a computer, but don't want a laptop for one reason or another. Also with the recent deal between Duke and Apple the future for total university Mac saturation is coming. Soon Schools will be using Xservs as servers and PowerMacs in their high end labs, and the new iMacs in their libraries. If teens and twenty-somethings buy this as their first Mac to compliment their iPod!!! Whoa they will never go back to the noisy dusty beige box again! The next few years should be big for apple, because they will be establishing the next generation of Mac users in a never before seen way.

Oh, so it's not ok to compare Apple to an expensively priced PC but it's fine to pit them against homebuilt or bargain basement ones?

Apple, like every other company looks for the best possible way to cut costs and increase profits by staying competitive. This is an AIO platform, Apple is comparable to price and performance of their PC AIO counterparts, hence their competitive. There will always be something thats missing from these machines or something not quite right. This is problem that plagues AIOs in general, if you find something wrong or something lacking then its not for you. Where Apple fails is not having a viable solution for us who do see something is missing. A $2000 dollar entry Powermac is not the answer. We need a cheap headless Mac or more BTO options for AIO's.

I couldent agree more, but what do you think about the heat issue? I still think this video card is on the low end of what it almost needed to be a consumer level machine these days. I feel like they would have spent the additional $8-10 per machine to put in a better GPU if there wasnt something else hindering the process.