I think new iMac HAS to = G4

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
here is why. It is one thing to buy a new machine and have it speed bumped by XXX number of megahertz in 4 months, but a whole other thing to have a brand new kind of processor in there. I would think sticking in a G3 would keep the iMac and most likely the iBook with said processor for at LEAST a year. And would Apple then sometime this year (maybe even this keynote?) bump the PowerMac to a G5, leaving the TiBook as the ONLY model with a G4 in it?



Just a random thought. My brain is mush after reading here WAY too much today.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 35
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Well I think it is a given that the iMac will get a G4 if the Power Mac gets a G5.
  • Reply 2 of 35
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

    <strong>Well I think it is a given that the iMac will get a G4 if the Power Mac gets a G5.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I think they both can have a G4.



    Especially if the new G4 Pms have multiple processors and DDR ram and all that jazz...



    -Paul
  • Reply 3 of 35
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    I think if the Power Mac doesn't get a G5 then both the iMac and PM should have G4s but I don't know if Apple's gunna do it.
  • Reply 4 of 35
    o and ao and a Posts: 579member
    i think its feasible for a g4 imac if it was not an LCD all in one thingamagig



    This is the way i see and its purely raw and has little fact behind it but...



    Okay the powermac g4 733 cost 1699 ... that thing is EOL with friggin new g4s so those chips wiht cube stuff shoved into an imac for 1499 i think is feasible lets remember guys that the 733 just a few months ago was the top of the line at 3500 bucks and then was dropped to the bottom of the line.



    733 g4 imacs would be cool but i dunno with an lcd display it could be feasible just not sure how economicly plausible it would be though
  • Reply 5 of 35
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by O and A:

    <strong>733 g4 imacs would be cool but i dunno with an lcd display it could be feasible just not sure how economicly plausible it would be though</strong><hr></blockquote>



    If Apple wnated to do it then they would. The G4 isn't that much money that it'd stop them from having an LCD if it was used.
  • Reply 6 of 35
    I think the iMac has to have everything bumped up if is to be a three year deal. DDR and so on. Maybe this would mean a g3 to keep prices down for the time being but would mean the iMac would remain relevant for a decent period of time. Just like the original was.
  • Reply 7 of 35
    glurxglurx Posts: 1,031member
    The current iMac is completely played out. The next iMac needs to have an LCD screen and a G4 processor. The iBook needs to move to the G4 ASAP as well.
  • Reply 8 of 35
    jerombajeromba Posts: 357member
    When Steve introduced the first iMac, he said that it was not a computer with last year components...



    So... Revolution 2... here we are !

    Blow us away!
  • Reply 9 of 35
    cobracobra Posts: 253member
    Exactly how fast can IBM get the G3's clocked?



    Is there an incentive for them to really take it more than 1 GHZ?



    If that were the case, a G3 iMac could well be maxed out by the 2nd rev.



    If they started on the G4 at say, 700, they will be able to get a good number of revisions from the G4's, especially if they get them to the rumored 1.4-1.6 range.



    G4's in the iMac seem to make more sense really.



    And for the length of time the G4 has been out, I just cannot seeing it costing so much more than a G3 that it makes it impossible to incorporate a G4 in the iMac. Whew!



    [ 01-03-2002: Message edited by: Cobra ]</p>
  • Reply 10 of 35
    Good point, Cobra.



    But they still have to up ALL the specs, otherwise even a G4 will not cut it for long.
  • Reply 11 of 35
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by Ape_Man:

    <strong>I think the iMac has to have everything bumped up if is to be a three year deal. DDR and so on. Maybe this would mean a g3 to keep prices down for the time being but would mean the iMac would remain relevant for a decent period of time. Just like the original was.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Would DDR for the consumer make all that much sense? I mean I would rather have the cheaper PC 133 (It is cheaper right, I havent looked @ DDR ram prices lately, errr ok at all.)



    Plus, are people in the iMac really going to push the computer all that much to need DDR. G4 makes sence b/c of AltiVec, but DDR just seems like gravy.



    -Paul
  • Reply 12 of 35
    ryukyuryukyu Posts: 449member
    [quote]Originally posted by psantora:

    <strong>



    Would DDR for the consumer make all that much sense? I mean I would rather have the cheaper PC 133 (It is cheaper right, I havent looked @ DDR ram prices lately, errr ok at all.)



    Plus, are people in the iMac really going to push the computer all that much to need DDR. G4 makes sence b/c of AltiVec, but DDR just seems like gravy.



    -Paul</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes DDR ram is definitely more expensive. I don't think the added performance would be worth the extra expense for the average iMac user.
  • Reply 12 of 35
    falconfalcon Posts: 458member
    I see no problem with the new imac coming with a G3. As long as it comes in with a 1Ghz G3 it will be sweet. There is really not all that much difference between the G3 and G4. In OS X you would notice it a little, but a 1Ghz G3 would be pretty kick ass. Also the cost of G4's are really high right now. Like around 450 per chip for the 7450. It would be very difficult to have a decent sized LCD (like 14inch and up, remember that the iMacs current monitor only has like a 13.8 viewable screen at its pretty crappy. So a 14.1 or higher flat display would be a major step up) and a G4 in the same comp. Along with all the other components. I would rather have a iMac with a 15 inch LCD or so and a 1Ghz G3 and a Geforce2MX (or equivilent.) Than a smaller LCD to compensate for cost, and some 733mhz G4 with a Geforce2MX.
  • Reply 14 of 35
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by Falcon:

    <strong>I see no problem with the new imac coming with a G3. As long as it comes in with a 1Ghz G3 it will be sweet. There is really not all that much difference between the G3 and G4. In OS X you would notice it a little, but a 1Ghz G3 would be pretty kick ass. Also the cost of G4's are really high right now. Like around 450 per chip for the 7450. It would be very difficult to have a decent sized LCD (like 14inch and up, remember that the iMacs current monitor only has like a 13.8 viewable screen at its pretty crappy. So a 14.1 or higher flat display would be a major step up) and a G4 in the same comp. Along with all the other components. I would rather have a iMac with a 15 inch LCD or so and a 1Ghz G3 and a Geforce2MX (or equivilent.) Than a smaller LCD to compensate for cost, and some 733mhz G4 with a Geforce2MX.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Umm the g4 is not that much more exensive to make think like $50 MAX more per chip.

    Yeah, a 1GHz G3 would be better then a 733G4, but I don't think we will see a 1GHz G3.

    G4 makes a BIG difference in OSX and apps like iMovie and iTunes. Also if the iMac were to ever get a superdrive, iDVD basicaly all but NEEDS a G4 to run decently.



    Also, the more computers that have AltiVec the more programmers will code for it. Giving Apple a boost in speed ACCROSS THE ENTIRE G4 LINE!!!

    This is the kicker as to why the iMacs will get G4s



    -Paul
  • Reply 15 of 35
    o and ao and a Posts: 579member
    psantora i totally agree





    g4 would totaly make the iMac an OSX machine and again THE SUPERDRIVE IS COMING TO THE IMAC EVENTUALLY LIKE JOBS HIMSELF SAID



    SO IT NEEDS A G4 EVENTUALLY



    why not start now?
  • Reply 16 of 35
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    DDR RAM DOES NOT COST A LOT MORE THAN PC133 RAM.



    a few bucks at most. most of the time the prices are nearly the same
  • Reply 17 of 35
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>DDR RAM DOES NOT COST A LOT MORE THAN PC133 RAM.



    a few bucks at most. most of the time the prices are nearly the same</strong><hr></blockquote>



    How come so many people think it costs more?
  • Reply 18 of 35
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by EmAn:

    <strong>



    How come so many people think it costs more?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    probably because they think faster must= more $
  • Reply 19 of 35
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>



    probably because they think faster must= more $</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Makes sense.
  • Reply 20 of 35
    ryukyuryukyu Posts: 449member
    [quote]Originally posted by EmAn:

    <strong>



    How come so many people think it costs more?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Probably because it DOES cost more. The only person who said A LOT more is applenut.
Sign In or Register to comment.