Originally posted by New
The G4 was a great design, but some things always bugged me about it.
The G5/intel is for me the perfect symboiosis of function and form, it solves all my issues withe the G4.
It has looks destinctly as a natural evolvement of the first imac, while the G4 looks more like a danish design experiment.
The worst thing about the G4, where it actually became less functional than the original imac was the cable clutter. Going for external speakers and a base where the cables had to run around it was not a brilliant design move.
Also going back to tray-loading was always a mystery to me, the way it hit the back of the keyboard was a joke.
Lastly, while being great engineering, the arm was an answer to a problem that wasn't there. why have a turnable screen, when the whole machine turns easily by itself?
I disagree...somewhat. While the G5's form is certainly functional, it's not perfect (well nothing really is). The inability to swivel it's screen like the G4 isn't the biggest issue, but rather it's inability to adjust height wise. The sleek aluminum stand is damn sexy, but leave little to function.
As far as the G4, the external globe speakers really give it that added personality. The tray-load was probably a cost issue, but yeah never understood why it never went slot loading especially with later revisions.
Not sure about your last comment, as turning the whole machine around is actually rather awkward..given the dome is rather difficult to grip on to.