LOL did you say 4mx?lol lol did you say fx5200? lol lol iF Apple uses the worst & old video like 4mx & fx5200 they can expect to have a lot of imacs laying around. who in there right mind would buy any new machine with these dog video chips. If this holds true then its easy to see that some idiots are running and ruining Apple. 4mx was old garbage and fx5200 is garbage. a poor video sysytem with no upgrade has killed imac yet they are going to do more of the same? idiots runnning apple just dont get it do they. 64bit fx5200 will kill off sales faster then sky high prices.
If these specs are true I'm not buying. Period. Think Secret has been on the money recently also.
I really was hoping for a display-less single G5 system but I know Apple will never make it because too many of us want one. I don't need dual CPUs, and I don't need an Apple display. Why can't Apple get this, and make a box for the rest of us??
LOL did you say 4mx?lol lol did you say fx5200? lol lol iF Apple uses the worst & old video like 4mx & fx5200 they can expect to have a lot of imacs laying around. who in there right mind would buy any new machine with these dog video chips. If this holds true then its easy to see that some idiots are running and ruining Apple. 4mx was old garbage and fx5200 is garbage. a poor video sysytem with no upgrade has killed imac yet they are going to do more of the same? idiots runnning apple just dont get it do they. 64bit fx5200 will kill off sales faster then sky high prices.
okay, to cut apple a LITTLE bit of slack here, is no one actually reading the low-end emac replacement educational model correctly? what do you need anything higher than a 4MX in there? it's not like the students are gonna be playing doom iii while the teacher tries to review chemistry lessons. and isn't 32MB of RAM the minimum to get quartz extreme working?
so yes, it's the bottom rung mac now. how many people here would actually buy the bottom rung mac at ANY point in time? i am guessing very few. i can't comment on the fx5200, as i don't know much about it.
Poor video systems will kill this machines sales to consumers.the fact is fx5200 has no business in any Mac. its cheap crap thats cheap for apple to buy and is last in performance. They should be ashamed for using fx5200 in powermac. This machine will be another looser from the artist at Apple who have forgotten performance and dont seem to get what the video card option has done for the PC market. Apple has become to busy at styling games instead of just building a machine for consumers. its like they dont want to sell computers. these video specs are a freaking joke.
I'll bet the specs are almost correct. I read that there is a mistake in the number on the graphics card? You'l probably be able to get a build to order so you can play your games. We'll see. I think its interesting that this upcoming new iMac may actually be the design that Steve rejected when he introduced the Sunflower iMac... or at least a variation on the original. Just a guess of course.
Now, finally, AI can publish their illustration of the new iMac!!!!!!!!!!
P.S. Kickaha. Don't post something that makes sense. There's no room on AI for reasoned thought!
Poor video systems will kill this machines sales to consumers.the fact is fx5200 has no business in any Mac. its cheap crap thats cheap for apple to buy and is last in performance. They should be ashamed for using fx5200 in powermac. This machine will be another looser from the artist at Apple who have forgotten performance and dont seem to get what the video card option has done for the PC market. Apple has become to busy at styling games instead of just building a machine for consumers. its like they dont want to sell computers. these video specs are a freaking joke.
I disagree. Sure, they could have put an option for better graphics in it but for people like my parents, my job, schools and a good many other places. A lot of PC's are using integrated graphics Intel or NForce or other and a lot of those are purchased by consumers and business as well.
The prices are higher than people wanted. I'm not sure how that's a big surprise. I don't think they are near as bad as people make them out. I fully expected 17" at $1299 in another thread here.
Those who realistically expected a headless iMac were truly deluded. I could see where a smaller tower (maybe single processor) would be nice but I can't see the cube making a return soon.
I'm interested to see what the machines look like. I'm hoping they have more of the appeal the original iMacs had. The original iMacs had at best a Rage Pro video chip (with 2 to 16 MB) and still sold like mad.
There are still a couple weeks until it's officially unvelied. TS may have gotten some info but perhaps it is not 100%. Who knows?
What Apple doesnt seem to get even with their gaming page is that yes consumers are gamers,yes there are many great games for Mac and more are on the way and yes people will want to game on their new $2000 iMac. 64mb video doesnt cut it,fx5200 doesnt cut it and having no upgrade for the poor video doesnt cut it. This machine is screaming to consumers not to buy and it hasnt even came out yet. MISTAKE! Apple has missed the consumer market again. to busy with art guys and bean counters to build a real consumer machine.
The other specs are fine,G5 at 1.6 and 1.8 is nice but this video system will kill off sales. this is absurd when videocard makers have x600,x800 6800s 9800s etc. Apple is lost. all they know is pods and have not a clue what makes for a top selling computer for the masses. consumers want the video option and apple refuses. stupid is as stupid does.
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.
While I would love for the iMac3 to have upgradable graphics, I doubt that it will happen. Sigh...
On the other hand, all these people who are slamming the 64Mb graphics card are a little over the top. It, in combination with the G5 and updated motherboard, will perform much better than the iMac2. It seems like a solid upgrade to the iMac line to me.
The iMac2 sold just fine; up until the last couple of quarters. The iMac3 will also sell well.
We may have wanted revolution (we always do ), but evolution is good!
The other specs are fine,G5 at 1.6 and 1.8 is nice but this video system will kill off sales. this is absurd
I'm fine with an iMac 3 for around £750 with 17 inch LCD, 1.6 G5 and p*ss poor graphics. Most PCs around this mark have integrated graphics or a graphic card of comparable 'low' quality. Only 256 megs of ram in a machine of this price is poor. 512 sticks cost nothing these days. And I bet Apple gets them loads cheaper. But if its £995 inc VAT then it's P*SS POOR!
If Apple can sell an iBook for £795 then they sure should be able to get a low end desktop around this mark if not lower. Alot of PCs are now at this price, offering 512 megs of ram and a 17 inch LCD and crap graphics, if Apple can near match that? Fine. Nothing new here.
A 1.6 G5 and 32 meg graphic card? Erm. 64 megs, surely? Should be able to run Tiger okay and be an 'okay' edu desktop and a fine X-Serve client in bunches of '50'. Fine. No optical drive. Fine. So a bulk sell iMac barebones can go for £600?
Who knows.
But I echo previous sentiments. Yeesh, for the price difference in the low end consumer machine...offer a goddamn superdrive. They're dirt cheap now. Bout worth skimping on. What? An extra 35£ to the price?
But what irks me is that no upgradeable graphics slot. NO decent graphics card option in the top end version which will chime in at £1500 no doubt. OUCH.
KarMARRRRN! For said price. Okay. No 6800. Get that. I do. But what about a Radeon 9800xt? A Radeon 9700 at least. It's in the Powerbook!
Apple are in a constant quandry. Pants specs. Less people buy. Less profits.
Take a hit on margins. Decent specs. More people buy. More profits. Market(!) share!!!
How much do an extra 256 megs, a superdrive and a decent graphics card add up to anyhow?
£200? Tops? I expect that on a 'high end' machine.
And don't get me started on the graphics card choices in the PowerMac...
It's about value. Take away the G5 and it looks like Apple haven't learned their lesson...bend over Apple...here we go...one more time...
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.
same stupid philosophy that guarenteed imac lcd was a sales failure. a computer is for many things but mostly entertainment for the consumer buyer music,media,games but you are going to buy a new machine for $2000 that has a fx5200???? they might as well keep making G4s because this thing is a dog from the get go. why even bother with a G5 if you are giving it a video system with specs from 3 years ago. laptops from last year have video systems that blow away this imac.
4MX = crap from 3+ years ago
Fx5200= crap from last year. cheap to make,cheap to buy and still worst video performance of any current made video.
Apple= no idea what a consumer wants in a machine. clueless and lost in its all in one dream but mostly thinking of pods pods and more pods.
The specs are fine with the exception of the graphics card. It looks TS is mistaking the GeForce FX series graphics cards with the GeForce4 MX series graphics card throughout the whole article. The current out-of-stock 17+ inch iMacs have a GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics cards, and the 15 inch model has GeForce4 MX. So maybe TS is confusing the new models with the old models here. I think if Apple is sticking with Nvidia, the FX 5200 Ultra would be the bottom end for new machines.
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices. Anything above $1500 for a single purchase is simply out-of-reach for most people in the consumer market. For the millionth time, Apple really needs, presuming they care about the market, a headless desktop for <$1000 and a 15"/17" monitors for $300 to $400.
How hard would it be for Apple to make a plain alu box/mini tower/pizza horizontal/vertical/shuttle/cube... and let the end user configure what they want from base price/spec points?
They've done the R&D for said device 'tween the PowerMac, Cube and iMac 3.
Bundle with 17 inch alu version of same alu LCDs and hey...
We're all happy... AIO freaks can hide the 'cube' and pretend the alu monitor is an AIO and Cube fans can show it off with pride. And mini-tower freaks (myself included) can say dey got a mini-tower with a single G5 in it and an upgradeable graphics slot... WIN WIN WIN!!!
I hope the 32 megs of video ram is a joke... I almost whizzed myself laughing...
"Fear not Lemon, help has arrived."
(Image of Lemon kicking the iMac 3 specs over to the tag-team corner...) 'Okay ''tag'', Matsu, it's you're turn again...'
Comments
Originally posted by rok
well, folks, here's your G5 powerbook.
Thank you very much, keep it for yourself
Why?
No one can boot off a CD and bypass the permissions on the drive.
The drive is ghosted off of a network boot system.
It's perfect.
Make that sucker $999, and it'd be the perfect machine to sell in lots of 50 bundled with an Xserve.
If these specs are true I'm not buying. Period. Think Secret has been on the money recently also.
I really was hoping for a display-less single G5 system but I know Apple will never make it because too many of us want one. I don't need dual CPUs, and I don't need an Apple display. Why can't Apple get this, and make a box for the rest of us??
Originally posted by Aurora
LOL did you say 4mx?lol lol did you say fx5200? lol lol iF Apple uses the worst & old video like 4mx & fx5200 they can expect to have a lot of imacs laying around. who in there right mind would buy any new machine with these dog video chips. If this holds true then its easy to see that some idiots are running and ruining Apple. 4mx was old garbage and fx5200 is garbage. a poor video sysytem with no upgrade has killed imac yet they are going to do more of the same? idiots runnning apple just dont get it do they. 64bit fx5200 will kill off sales faster then sky high prices.
okay, to cut apple a LITTLE bit of slack here, is no one actually reading the low-end emac replacement educational model correctly? what do you need anything higher than a 4MX in there? it's not like the students are gonna be playing doom iii while the teacher tries to review chemistry lessons. and isn't 32MB of RAM the minimum to get quartz extreme working?
so yes, it's the bottom rung mac now. how many people here would actually buy the bottom rung mac at ANY point in time? i am guessing very few. i can't comment on the fx5200, as i don't know much about it.
Originally posted by Kickaha
The optical-drive-free low end model makes *perfect* sense for two arenas: education, and... wait for it... business.
Why?
No one can boot off a CD and bypass the permissions on the drive.
The drive is ghosted off of a network boot system.
It's perfect.
Make that sucker $999, and it'd be the perfect machine to sell in lots of 50 bundled with an Xserve.
This would be an ideal machine for corporate networks. I wholeheartedly agree.
Originally posted by Bancho
This would be an ideal machine for corporate networks. I wholeheartedly agree.
Yeah, no doubt, but that's not all the story. There is the rest of the line too.
Originally posted by Aurora
these video specs are a freaking joke.
For what, pray tell?
Seriously.
Gaming? No serious gamer is going to be looking at the Mac anyway... and I still maintain your money is better spent on a console.
Professional video/image processing? *cough* PowerMac *cough*
This is for the casual home user and/or the business environment. And for those... these are fine.
Not every machine has to be a top performer in every category.
Now, finally, AI can publish their illustration of the new iMac!!!!!!!!!!
P.S. Kickaha. Don't post something that makes sense. There's no room on AI for reasoned thought!
Originally posted by Kickaha
For what, pray tell?
Seriously.
Gaming? No serious gamer is going to be looking at the Mac anyway... and I still maintain your money is better spent on a console.
Professional video/image processing? *cough* PowerMac *cough*
This is for the casual home user and/or the business environment. And for those... these are fine.
Not every machine has to be a top performer in every category.
But isn't a G4 still good enough for those users also?
Originally posted by Aurora
Poor video systems will kill this machines sales to consumers.the fact is fx5200 has no business in any Mac. its cheap crap thats cheap for apple to buy and is last in performance. They should be ashamed for using fx5200 in powermac. This machine will be another looser from the artist at Apple who have forgotten performance and dont seem to get what the video card option has done for the PC market. Apple has become to busy at styling games instead of just building a machine for consumers. its like they dont want to sell computers. these video specs are a freaking joke.
I disagree. Sure, they could have put an option for better graphics in it but for people like my parents, my job, schools and a good many other places. A lot of PC's are using integrated graphics Intel or NForce or other and a lot of those are purchased by consumers and business as well.
The prices are higher than people wanted. I'm not sure how that's a big surprise. I don't think they are near as bad as people make them out. I fully expected 17" at $1299 in another thread here.
Those who realistically expected a headless iMac were truly deluded. I could see where a smaller tower (maybe single processor) would be nice but I can't see the cube making a return soon.
I'm interested to see what the machines look like. I'm hoping they have more of the appeal the original iMacs had. The original iMacs had at best a Rage Pro video chip (with 2 to 16 MB) and still sold like mad.
There are still a couple weeks until it's officially unvelied. TS may have gotten some info but perhaps it is not 100%. Who knows?
The other specs are fine,G5 at 1.6 and 1.8 is nice but this video system will kill off sales. this is absurd when videocard makers have x600,x800 6800s 9800s etc. Apple is lost. all they know is pods and have not a clue what makes for a top selling computer for the masses. consumers want the video option and apple refuses. stupid is as stupid does.
On the other hand, all these people who are slamming the 64Mb graphics card are a little over the top. It, in combination with the G5 and updated motherboard, will perform much better than the iMac2. It seems like a solid upgrade to the iMac line to me.
The iMac2 sold just fine; up until the last couple of quarters. The iMac3 will also sell well.
We may have wanted revolution (we always do
The other specs are fine,G5 at 1.6 and 1.8 is nice but this video system will kill off sales. this is absurd
I'm fine with an iMac 3 for around £750 with 17 inch LCD, 1.6 G5 and p*ss poor graphics. Most PCs around this mark have integrated graphics or a graphic card of comparable 'low' quality. Only 256 megs of ram in a machine of this price is poor. 512 sticks cost nothing these days. And I bet Apple gets them loads cheaper. But if its £995 inc VAT then it's P*SS POOR!
If Apple can sell an iBook for £795 then they sure should be able to get a low end desktop around this mark if not lower. Alot of PCs are now at this price, offering 512 megs of ram and a 17 inch LCD and crap graphics, if Apple can near match that? Fine. Nothing new here.
A 1.6 G5 and 32 meg graphic card? Erm. 64 megs, surely? Should be able to run Tiger okay and be an 'okay' edu desktop and a fine X-Serve client in bunches of '50'. Fine. No optical drive. Fine. So a bulk sell iMac barebones can go for £600?
Who knows.
But I echo previous sentiments. Yeesh, for the price difference in the low end consumer machine...offer a goddamn superdrive. They're dirt cheap now. Bout worth skimping on. What? An extra 35£ to the price?
But what irks me is that no upgradeable graphics slot. NO decent graphics card option in the top end version which will chime in at £1500 no doubt. OUCH.
KarMARRRRN! For said price. Okay. No 6800. Get that. I do. But what about a Radeon 9800xt? A Radeon 9700 at least. It's in the Powerbook!
Apple are in a constant quandry. Pants specs. Less people buy. Less profits.
Take a hit on margins. Decent specs. More people buy. More profits. Market(!) share!!!
How much do an extra 256 megs, a superdrive and a decent graphics card add up to anyhow?
£200? Tops? I expect that on a 'high end' machine.
And don't get me started on the graphics card choices in the PowerMac...
It's about value. Take away the G5 and it looks like Apple haven't learned their lesson...bend over Apple...here we go...one more time...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.
same stupid philosophy that guarenteed imac lcd was a sales failure. a computer is for many things but mostly entertainment for the consumer buyer music,media,games but you are going to buy a new machine for $2000 that has a fx5200???? they might as well keep making G4s because this thing is a dog from the get go. why even bother with a G5 if you are giving it a video system with specs from 3 years ago. laptops from last year have video systems that blow away this imac.
4MX = crap from 3+ years ago
Fx5200= crap from last year. cheap to make,cheap to buy and still worst video performance of any current made video.
Apple= no idea what a consumer wants in a machine. clueless and lost in its all in one dream but mostly thinking of pods pods and more pods.
why can't apple just do it right the first time
Shrugs...
Lemon Bon Bon
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices. Anything above $1500 for a single purchase is simply out-of-reach for most people in the consumer market. For the millionth time, Apple really needs, presuming they care about the market, a headless desktop for <$1000 and a 15"/17" monitors for $300 to $400.
They've done the R&D for said device 'tween the PowerMac, Cube and iMac 3.
Bundle with 17 inch alu version of same alu LCDs and hey...
We're all happy... AIO freaks can hide the 'cube' and pretend the alu monitor is an AIO and Cube fans can show it off with pride. And mini-tower freaks (myself included) can say dey got a mini-tower with a single G5 in it and an upgradeable graphics slot... WIN WIN WIN!!!
I hope the 32 megs of video ram is a joke... I almost whizzed myself laughing...
"Fear not Lemon, help has arrived."
(Image of Lemon kicking the iMac 3 specs over to the tag-team corner...) 'Okay ''tag'', Matsu, it's you're turn again...'
Lemon Bon Bon