Which is a better deal? It's an education price difference of $50 but the iMac comes with a screen and the Powermac comes with more upgrade options.
iMac vs. SP Powermac
well you sorta answered your own question. if you need the ability to upgrade, get the powermac. one other thing to check is the front side bus. i'm not sure how the two compare.
well you sorta answered your own question. if you need the ability to upgrade, get the powermac. one other thing to check is the front side bus. i'm not sure how the two compare.
The "new" PowerMac has the same system bus, 600mhz. The only advantages the PowerMac has is expandability and a faster Superdrive. If you've already got a good display then you've got a tough call to make.
Do you want a computer that will last a couple years, or 5+ years?
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
This new iMac is WAY ahead of the old ones in terms of up-gradeablity.
The Ram, HD, Optical Drive are all VERY EASY to access.
And since my old G3 iMac (266) is 6 years old and still runnning in the other room, I think it's safe to say that this iMac will last at least 5 years.
That said ... you'll be stuck with a 20" (or 17") screen for the life of the machine... the graphics card is probably NOT upgradeable (though that's never been a problem for me) and you have no PCI slots for future "unforseen" add-ons.
But with a base PMac + 20" screen running $2800 USD, that's $900 more than the 20" iMac.
$900 could net you a new iPod and a slew of other gadgets
Do you want a computer that will last a couple years, or 5+ years?
I want it to last about 4-5 years. The most CPU/graphics-intensive software I'll be using is Dreamweaver and Photoshop. Other than that, I'll be using iLife, Office, and the internet about 90% of the time.
"Lasting five years" can be looked at a couple of ways.
The PM is more upgradeable and could be upgraded to extend it's lifetime as a useful tool.
The iMac is less upgradeable. Yet, IMHO, is more likely to still be in use 5 years from now. Even when the iMac is starting to seem slow in comparison to computers in 2009, it will still be quite appealing because of it's size and utility for commom, non-computationally intensive tasks. It could easily find it's way into a kitchen, kid's bedroom, entryway... heck, even a worktable in the garage. It will be appealing as a secondary machine while a huge G5 and seperate screen would not.
Not that I'm advocating one over the other.
Each is the best chohice for some percentage of users.
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
I'm speaking from my own experience and here's the problem:
My mom currently uses an iMac 333 while I own the original Power Mac G4 PCI Graphics. Despite being bought at nearly the exact same time in 1999, the iMac has aged considerably worse. It's less than half as fast and not upgradable worth a damn. Just recently, the built in display has started flickering like mad and replacing it would cost more than the whole machine is worth. The G4 ran OS X 10.3 surprisingly fast even in the stock configuration. With some cheap upgrades I've staved off buying a new machine (which until very recently started at $2000). The machine flies and I have no forseeable reason to buy a new mac to replace it over the next few years. Meanwhile, the iMac feels like it should have been dumped 2 years ago.
I've gone the iMac route before and just can't bear to send anyone else down it. Anyone will pleased with a Power Mac purchase in the long run. On the other side, the current iMac ALREADY contains outdated hardware (non-upgradable GeForce 5200, 4x Superdrive)... so how's it gonna look 5 years from now?
Yes, the Power Mac cost me $200 more than the iMac to begin with. Best $200 I ever spent.
I'm speaking from my own experience and here's the problem:
My mom currently uses an iMac 333 while I own the original Power Mac G4 PCI Graphics. Despite being bought at nearly the exact same time in 1999, the iMac has aged considerably worse. It's less than half as fast and not upgradable worth a damn. Just recently, the built in display has started flickering like mad and replacing it would cost more than the whole machine is worth. The G4 ran OS X 10.3 surprisingly fast even in the stock configuration. With some cheap upgrades I've staved off buying a new machine (which until very recently started at $2000). The machine flies and I have no forseeable reason to buy a new mac to replace it over the next few years. Meanwhile, the iMac feels like it should have been dumped 2 years ago.
I've gone the iMac route before and just can't bear to send anyone else down it. Anyone will pleased with a Power Mac purchase in the long run. On the other side, the current iMac ALREADY contains outdated hardware (non-upgradable GeForce 5200, 4x Superdrive)... so how's it gonna look 5 years from now?
Yes, the Power Mac cost me $200 more than the iMac to begin with. Best $200 I ever spent.
But what about the fact that the Powermac AND the iMac both have 1.8 Ghz G5s? There's no speed difference.
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
Still running in five years? Sure. How long before you'll want to upgrade to a faster Mac? 1-2 years at most!.
Sure, it will run...so long as you use todays software...I dare you to run dream weaver/flash/fireworks mx and Adobe * CS on a beige G3.
Actually, I used to do that when I still owned a beige G3. The CPU was upgraded to 500MHz and I had a RADEON PCI. It was on the slow side but it was bearable.
Those with 1 GHz upgrades should comfortably run all those software.
But I heard somewhere that G5 processors are not expected to be upgradeable so maybe the PMG5s won't last as long.
We?ve said a lot on the ?anatomical? differences between the mono 1.8GHz G5 and his big dual processor brothers. There?s a major difference that escaped us (it has only one processor! ;-) ).
The processor is SOLDERED to the motherboard, just like on iMacs and ?books. In the event of a failure, Apple has to replace both of them.
This design choice, along with those mentioned earlier, has the only purpose of reducing the production costs. It still is a great step backwards, as the last Powermac with a soldered CPU was the 7200, almost 10 years ago (it?s the great karmic wheel rolling on my friends).
Somehow, with no pictures and no other corroborating evidence, I don't think they are entirely accurate. I believe these SP 1.8's are just like the original 1.6 models.
Comments
Originally posted by dferigmu
Which is a better deal? It's an education price difference of $50 but the iMac comes with a screen and the Powermac comes with more upgrade options.
iMac vs. SP Powermac
well you sorta answered your own question. if you need the ability to upgrade, get the powermac. one other thing to check is the front side bus. i'm not sure how the two compare.
Originally posted by ipodandimac
well you sorta answered your own question. if you need the ability to upgrade, get the powermac. one other thing to check is the front side bus. i'm not sure how the two compare.
The "new" PowerMac has the same system bus, 600mhz. The only advantages the PowerMac has is expandability and a faster Superdrive. If you've already got a good display then you've got a tough call to make.
Originally posted by yikes600
Do you want a computer that will last a couple years, or 5+ years?
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
The Ram, HD, Optical Drive are all VERY EASY to access.
And since my old G3 iMac (266) is 6 years old and still runnning in the other room, I think it's safe to say that this iMac will last at least 5 years.
That said ... you'll be stuck with a 20" (or 17") screen for the life of the machine... the graphics card is probably NOT upgradeable (though that's never been a problem for me) and you have no PCI slots for future "unforseen" add-ons.
But with a base PMac + 20" screen running $2800 USD, that's $900 more than the 20" iMac.
$900 could net you a new iPod and a slew of other gadgets
Originally posted by yikes600
Do you want a computer that will last a couple years, or 5+ years?
I want it to last about 4-5 years. The most CPU/graphics-intensive software I'll be using is Dreamweaver and Photoshop. Other than that, I'll be using iLife, Office, and the internet about 90% of the time.
The PM is more upgradeable and could be upgraded to extend it's lifetime as a useful tool.
The iMac is less upgradeable. Yet, IMHO, is more likely to still be in use 5 years from now. Even when the iMac is starting to seem slow in comparison to computers in 2009, it will still be quite appealing because of it's size and utility for commom, non-computationally intensive tasks. It could easily find it's way into a kitchen, kid's bedroom, entryway... heck, even a worktable in the garage. It will be appealing as a secondary machine while a huge G5 and seperate screen would not.
Not that I'm advocating one over the other.
Each is the best chohice for some percentage of users.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
I'm speaking from my own experience and here's the problem:
My mom currently uses an iMac 333 while I own the original Power Mac G4 PCI Graphics. Despite being bought at nearly the exact same time in 1999, the iMac has aged considerably worse. It's less than half as fast and not upgradable worth a damn. Just recently, the built in display has started flickering like mad and replacing it would cost more than the whole machine is worth. The G4 ran OS X 10.3 surprisingly fast even in the stock configuration. With some cheap upgrades I've staved off buying a new machine (which until very recently started at $2000). The machine flies and I have no forseeable reason to buy a new mac to replace it over the next few years. Meanwhile, the iMac feels like it should have been dumped 2 years ago.
I've gone the iMac route before and just can't bear to send anyone else down it. Anyone will pleased with a Power Mac purchase in the long run. On the other side, the current iMac ALREADY contains outdated hardware (non-upgradable GeForce 5200, 4x Superdrive)... so how's it gonna look 5 years from now?
Yes, the Power Mac cost me $200 more than the iMac to begin with. Best $200 I ever spent.
Originally posted by yikes600
I'm speaking from my own experience and here's the problem:
My mom currently uses an iMac 333 while I own the original Power Mac G4 PCI Graphics. Despite being bought at nearly the exact same time in 1999, the iMac has aged considerably worse. It's less than half as fast and not upgradable worth a damn. Just recently, the built in display has started flickering like mad and replacing it would cost more than the whole machine is worth. The G4 ran OS X 10.3 surprisingly fast even in the stock configuration. With some cheap upgrades I've staved off buying a new machine (which until very recently started at $2000). The machine flies and I have no forseeable reason to buy a new mac to replace it over the next few years. Meanwhile, the iMac feels like it should have been dumped 2 years ago.
I've gone the iMac route before and just can't bear to send anyone else down it. Anyone will pleased with a Power Mac purchase in the long run. On the other side, the current iMac ALREADY contains outdated hardware (non-upgradable GeForce 5200, 4x Superdrive)... so how's it gonna look 5 years from now?
Yes, the Power Mac cost me $200 more than the iMac to begin with. Best $200 I ever spent.
But what about the fact that the Powermac AND the iMac both have 1.8 Ghz G5s? There's no speed difference.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
The iMac is perfectly capable of lasting 5 years. The main thing you upgrade in a computer is the RAM, and HD. Well the HD looks upgradable, and there is always firewire, also you can easily upgrade the RAM.
When I buy a computer, I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
Still running in five years? Sure. How long before you'll want to upgrade to a faster Mac? 1-2 years at most!.
Originally posted by dferigmu
But what about the fact that the Powermac AND the iMac both have 1.8 Ghz G5s? There's no speed difference.
For now. The G5 has an upgradable CPU slot. You bet 3rd party companies will be making G5 upgrades in 1-2 years if not sooner.
Originally posted by Outsider
For now. The G5 has an upgradable CPU slot. You bet 3rd party companies will be making G5 upgrades in 1-2 years if not sooner.
In the smallest PM the CPU is soldered onto the mainboard. No way that you can upgrade that later.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
I expect ANY computer I have to be running for at least 5 years.
Sure, it will run...so long as you use todays software...I dare you to run dream weaver/flash/fireworks mx and Adobe * CS on a beige G3.
Originally posted by a_greer
Sure, it will run...so long as you use todays software...I dare you to run dream weaver/flash/fireworks mx and Adobe * CS on a beige G3.
Yeah. I would rather buy a new Mac in about 4 years instead of wasting money on upgrading an older machine.
Originally posted by a_greer
Sure, it will run...so long as you use todays software...I dare you to run dream weaver/flash/fireworks mx and Adobe * CS on a beige G3.
Actually, I used to do that when I still owned a beige G3. The CPU was upgraded to 500MHz and I had a RADEON PCI. It was on the slow side but it was bearable.
Those with 1 GHz upgrades should comfortably run all those software.
But I heard somewhere that G5 processors are not expected to be upgradeable so maybe the PMG5s won't last as long.
Originally posted by bka77
In the smallest PM the CPU is soldered onto the mainboard. No way that you can upgrade that later.
Oh really.... what makes you think so?
Originally posted by Outsider
Oh really.... what makes you think so?
It was mentioned here:
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu....004-10-23#3093
Originally posted by bka77
It was mentioned here:
http://www.hardmac.com/niouzcontenu....004-10-23#3093
I quote:
there?s only one processor slot (doh !) ;
then it says:
We?ve said a lot on the ?anatomical? differences between the mono 1.8GHz G5 and his big dual processor brothers. There?s a major difference that escaped us (it has only one processor! ;-) ).
The processor is SOLDERED to the motherboard, just like on iMacs and ?books. In the event of a failure, Apple has to replace both of them.
This design choice, along with those mentioned earlier, has the only purpose of reducing the production costs. It still is a great step backwards, as the last Powermac with a soldered CPU was the 7200, almost 10 years ago (it?s the great karmic wheel rolling on my friends).
Somehow, with no pictures and no other corroborating evidence, I don't think they are entirely accurate. I believe these SP 1.8's are just like the original 1.6 models.