I Hope they get rid of the chin because it looks like crap,I also hope they dont go cheapo on the GPU like they did in Mini & Mac Pro. Wouldnt it suck if they get rid of ati and use a Intel GPU? knowing Apple it could happen.
The chin is THE ONLY reason I have not bought the new iMacs. I own a G4 12" Powerbook and sold my dual 800 almost 2 years ago. I want a machine for gaming, mapping, etc., but I don't want to spend the full amount for a tower. I may buy a tower if the iMac isn't chinless or way more affordable than the tower.
Will the towers have any limitations to playing games (OS X) because they are Xeons?
The iMac is selling fine as it is. The real growth rates are in laptops these days anyway, so that's what Apple should be (and is) focusing on.
Even though the laptop market is growing faster in repect to the desktop market Apple only has a small percentage of the destop market. As I understand it the desktop market is still quite a bit larger than the laptop market. This means that Apple has a lot of room to grow in the desktop market in respect to their current standing. I think that it is a mistake not to go after the desktop market with the same zeal that they are going after the latptop market, if they did this then they could have at least double the potential market share growth than they saw in the last 12 monts.
I think AI is basing this story on major speculation on their own part. Basically they are lost for real information, and have no idea why Apple wouldn't release a new iMac when Conroe is already out. I'm not buying into it.
Personally, I like the chin. It'd otherwise be way to low without it ,or there would be a big gap. And without it you'd need an external power brick.
At first I slightly disliked my 20" iMac G5's chin but that impression quickly wore off and it's been a convenient spot for stick-on items. Plus there'd be more negatives like you've mentioned without it.
Quote:
Heck, just bring back the first G5 iMac design - it was better externally.
The more user-servicable rev. A/B design, please. Being able to easily remove the HD from my rev. B before taking the system in for repair (twice) has easily been worth more to me than having the rev. C would be. The performance of an Intel iMac occasionally tempts me to upgrade but losing the self-service convenience has helped talk me out of that. And since my iBook G3 died a few months ago it's made more sense to eventually replace that first, maybe waiting to see what the hardware offerings are when Leopard's released.
It doesn't offer built-in audio recording or radio tuning. But that's more about profit motive, because they want to charge fees to third parties to get more money for add-ons that enable what's already built-in, at least audio recording is built in, I don't know if 5G and nano have a radio tuner chip.
Another example is the Mighty Mouse. They didn't want to add real buttons so they make it use touchy proximity sensors and to make it worse, the ball jams up.
True, but are we comparing Apple as a whole to Wintel or MP3 as a whole or cherry picking the best bits from Wintel or MP3 against the worst of Apple?
Apple aint perfect by any means, but as a whole it tastes better than Wintel
I'd have to say that the nippled mighty mouse is half arsed/ half baked (bit like the original click wheel), when you compare to the way the trackpad works (The whole two finger thing is great.....well I like it!)
I certainly think Apple needs pushing from somewhere otherwise complacency will set in.
Will the towers have any limitations to playing games (OS X) because they are Xeons?
The Xeon chips are fine. This time around, there's not much to slow them down. With the old bus system, having two CPUs on the same bus meant that the FSB was slower by as much as a third, and with a lot more bus contention too The only problem is that they are pretty expensive systems, the second CPU module is an added expense that won't help speed up games any time soon.
True, but are we comparing Apple as a whole to Wintel or MP3 as a whole or cherry picking the best bits from Wintel or MP3 against the worst of Apple?
Apple aint perfect by any means, but as a whole it tastes better than Wintel
I'd have to say that the nippled mighty mouse is half arsed/ half baked (bit like the original click wheel), when you compare to the way the trackpad works (The whole two finger thing is great.....well I like it!)
I think the software is generally fine but complaints are generally around the hardware and hardware usability.
The trackpad is great, and the backlit keyboard is great to have though. But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling. Another issue is that Apple really only offer three consumer computer models, which cannot be considered a diverse or comprehensive product line. There's no long-battery-life subnotebook, no tablet, no consumer tower. Every add-on requires using the more expensive external version (and messier, another box and two more cables per device), on top of the premium one often pays for device compatibility with OS X.
But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling.
Where it's fugly.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
I think the software is generally fine but complaints are generally around the hardware and hardware usability.
The trackpad is great, and the backlit keyboard is great to have though. But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling.
...you keep shooting down my arguments with perfectly valid counterpoints!!
The funny thing about the iMac in a reall world use is the amount of cable clutter.... unless of course you purchace all the peripheral stuff like, airport and wireless mouse/keyboard.
You know, I would have to say that the best, by far laptop I ever had was the Pismo. All the ports were at the back and the optical media came out the side. Inserting a DVD into the Macbook Pro feels ergonomically awkward compared to the pismo. And when you have a gazillion cables launching out the side of a MacbookPro you end up with a very untidy desktop.
Still, I think the whole Apple thing is better (As you obviously do, other wise you'd be happy on something beige.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
Turning the unit around like that has a good chance of disconnecting the cables. That actually happened to me a lot when I owned a mini. Almost none of the connectors have any sort of positive lock, USB and Firewire were generally, though not always adequate but the audio cable almost always disconnected on me when I rotated the unit around to get to other ports. So, yes, I would consider it a usability problem. Two or three small jacks on the side would have made this a lot easier for temporary device connections, which for me, could be several times a week.
Besides, who stares at ports? Is that really such a horrible thing? Besides, I suggested several times having ports on the side as a compromise but you seem to ignore that possibility. The notebooks have ports on the side so it's not without precedent. It's not tidy for permanent cable connections, but necessary for quick, temporary ones.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
Perhaps the answer is to only provide ports at the front (Like Mac Pro) that are either for temporary connection (such as a camera) or for things like headphones which directly interface with the user.
Beyond that I think ports out the back is more functional for cable control! and is obviously less fug
I really like having USB ports in the keybord but it would be nice if more power could get to the keyboard to make a greater variety of things work
USB ports in the keyboard is an excellent idea but current designs fall short because they are low power, so they can barely charge a Shuffle, it charges slowly, if at all, and those ports are only USB 1.1 or equivalent, not good for the faster USB devices. Who's going to turn their computer every other day to refill/recharge that sucker?
USB ports in the keyboard is an excellent idea but current designs fall short because they are low power, so they can barely charge a Shuffle, it charges slowly, if at all, and those ports are only USB 1.1 or equivalent, not good for the faster USB devices. Who's going to turn their computer every other day to refill/recharge that sucker?
I suspect there must be some technical reason why you can't daisy chain usb in a manner that will supply sufficient power
I do think on another point, that apple has done well rationalising the available ports: we can be thankful that we don't have some of the legacy ports like parallel ports.
hope APPLE finds a way to put conroe in it or it could be just 6 to 12 months to the next architecture with four cores (when the performance gap between desktop cpu and laptop cpu were minimal if not zero)
now no one interested in Macbook/MacBook Pro with Merom? NO?
What I have really been looking forward to is a 20" Conroe iMac with a Radeon X1800 to replace my iMac. I have a sinking feeling it will be a a 23" Merom with a Radeon X1650. Rats.
No, the G5s were in the 45-55 Watts range, Conroe is around 60-65 Watts.
The G5's were in the 65 watt range. Remember that IBM doesn't rate the chips as to MAX power use as Intel does. They rate them for average power, so the numbers look better upon first glance, and are more confusing.
Quote:
But I believe a 23" model could handle the heat of a Conroe. If the rumor is proved to be true, that would mean that Apple is just reluctant to redesign the motherboard for the high end model. Merom is just a drop-in replacement. Big savings for Apple.
Comments
?, he probably wants to get high-def screens in front of as many customers as possible, ?
Wow, I can barely believe you'd post on this forum referring to customers instead of consumers. Thank you!
I Hope they get rid of the chin because it looks like crap,I also hope they dont go cheapo on the GPU like they did in Mini & Mac Pro. Wouldnt it suck if they get rid of ati and use a Intel GPU? knowing Apple it could happen.
The chin is THE ONLY reason I have not bought the new iMacs. I own a G4 12" Powerbook and sold my dual 800 almost 2 years ago. I want a machine for gaming, mapping, etc., but I don't want to spend the full amount for a tower. I may buy a tower if the iMac isn't chinless or way more affordable than the tower.
Will the towers have any limitations to playing games (OS X) because they are Xeons?
The iMac is selling fine as it is. The real growth rates are in laptops these days anyway, so that's what Apple should be (and is) focusing on.
Even though the laptop market is growing faster in repect to the desktop market Apple only has a small percentage of the destop market. As I understand it the desktop market is still quite a bit larger than the laptop market. This means that Apple has a lot of room to grow in the desktop market in respect to their current standing. I think that it is a mistake not to go after the desktop market with the same zeal that they are going after the latptop market, if they did this then they could have at least double the potential market share growth than they saw in the last 12 monts.
Whoooa dude was that a rumor siting?
Personally, I like the chin. It'd otherwise be way to low without it ,or there would be a big gap. And without it you'd need an external power brick.
At first I slightly disliked my 20" iMac G5's chin but that impression quickly wore off and it's been a convenient spot for stick-on items. Plus there'd be more negatives like you've mentioned without it.
Heck, just bring back the first G5 iMac design - it was better externally.
The more user-servicable rev. A/B design, please. Being able to easily remove the HD from my rev. B before taking the system in for repair (twice) has easily been worth more to me than having the rev. C would be. The performance of an Intel iMac occasionally tempts me to upgrade but losing the self-service convenience has helped talk me out of that. And since my iBook G3 died a few months ago it's made more sense to eventually replace that first, maybe waiting to see what the hardware offerings are when Leopard's released.
It doesn't offer built-in audio recording or radio tuning. But that's more about profit motive, because they want to charge fees to third parties to get more money for add-ons that enable what's already built-in, at least audio recording is built in, I don't know if 5G and nano have a radio tuner chip.
Another example is the Mighty Mouse. They didn't want to add real buttons so they make it use touchy proximity sensors and to make it worse, the ball jams up.
True, but are we comparing Apple as a whole to Wintel or MP3 as a whole or cherry picking the best bits from Wintel or MP3 against the worst of Apple?
Apple aint perfect by any means, but as a whole it tastes better than Wintel
I'd have to say that the nippled mighty mouse is half arsed/ half baked (bit like the original click wheel), when you compare to the way the trackpad works (The whole two finger thing is great.....well I like it!)
I certainly think Apple needs pushing from somewhere otherwise complacency will set in.
Will the towers have any limitations to playing games (OS X) because they are Xeons?
The Xeon chips are fine. This time around, there's not much to slow them down. With the old bus system, having two CPUs on the same bus meant that the FSB was slower by as much as a third, and with a lot more bus contention too The only problem is that they are pretty expensive systems, the second CPU module is an added expense that won't help speed up games any time soon.
True, but are we comparing Apple as a whole to Wintel or MP3 as a whole or cherry picking the best bits from Wintel or MP3 against the worst of Apple?
Apple aint perfect by any means, but as a whole it tastes better than Wintel
I'd have to say that the nippled mighty mouse is half arsed/ half baked (bit like the original click wheel), when you compare to the way the trackpad works (The whole two finger thing is great.....well I like it!)
I think the software is generally fine but complaints are generally around the hardware and hardware usability.
The trackpad is great, and the backlit keyboard is great to have though. But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling. Another issue is that Apple really only offer three consumer computer models, which cannot be considered a diverse or comprehensive product line. There's no long-battery-life subnotebook, no tablet, no consumer tower. Every add-on requires using the more expensive external version (and messier, another box and two more cables per device), on top of the premium one often pays for device compatibility with OS X.
But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling.
Where it's fugly.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
I think the software is generally fine but complaints are generally around the hardware and hardware usability.
The trackpad is great, and the backlit keyboard is great to have though. But temporarily connecting headphones or devices to something like the iMac is awkward because it's on the back rather than the front, or IMO better compromise, on the side like the notebooks. Typical PCs have stuff like that on the front where it's easier to get to with less chance of fumbling.
...you keep shooting down my arguments with perfectly valid counterpoints!!
The funny thing about the iMac in a reall world use is the amount of cable clutter.... unless of course you purchace all the peripheral stuff like, airport and wireless mouse/keyboard.
You know, I would have to say that the best, by far laptop I ever had was the Pismo. All the ports were at the back and the optical media came out the side. Inserting a DVD into the Macbook Pro feels ergonomically awkward compared to the pismo. And when you have a gazillion cables launching out the side of a MacbookPro you end up with a very untidy desktop.
Still, I think the whole Apple thing is better (As you obviously do, other wise you'd be happy on something beige.
Where it's fugly.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
Turning the unit around like that has a good chance of disconnecting the cables. That actually happened to me a lot when I owned a mini. Almost none of the connectors have any sort of positive lock, USB and Firewire were generally, though not always adequate but the audio cable almost always disconnected on me when I rotated the unit around to get to other ports. So, yes, I would consider it a usability problem. Two or three small jacks on the side would have made this a lot easier for temporary device connections, which for me, could be several times a week.
Besides, who stares at ports? Is that really such a horrible thing? Besides, I suggested several times having ports on the side as a compromise but you seem to ignore that possibility. The notebooks have ports on the side so it's not without precedent. It's not tidy for permanent cable connections, but necessary for quick, temporary ones.
Where it's fugly.
How much of a chore is it really to swivel the iMac around on it's slippy base? They even made it easy for you by using the same slippy plastic they use on the bottom of mice.
Very minor inconvenience once a month maybe v staring at fugly ports all day?
Perhaps the answer is to only provide ports at the front (Like Mac Pro) that are either for temporary connection (such as a camera) or for things like headphones which directly interface with the user.
Beyond that I think ports out the back is more functional for cable control! and is obviously less fug
how many times have I truned my iMac around, only to rip the power cable out
I really like having USB ports in the keybord but it would be nice if more power could get to the keyboard to make a greater variety of things work
I really like having USB ports in the keybord but it would be nice if more power could get to the keyboard to make a greater variety of things work
USB ports in the keyboard is an excellent idea but current designs fall short because they are low power, so they can barely charge a Shuffle, it charges slowly, if at all, and those ports are only USB 1.1 or equivalent, not good for the faster USB devices. Who's going to turn their computer every other day to refill/recharge that sucker?
USB ports in the keyboard is an excellent idea but current designs fall short because they are low power, so they can barely charge a Shuffle, it charges slowly, if at all, and those ports are only USB 1.1 or equivalent, not good for the faster USB devices. Who's going to turn their computer every other day to refill/recharge that sucker?
I suspect there must be some technical reason why you can't daisy chain usb in a manner that will supply sufficient power
I do think on another point, that apple has done well rationalising the available ports: we can be thankful that we don't have some of the legacy ports like parallel ports.
hope APPLE finds a way to put conroe in it or it could be just 6 to 12 months to the next architecture with four cores (when the performance gap between desktop cpu and laptop cpu were minimal if not zero)
now no one interested in Macbook/MacBook Pro with Merom? NO?
It's extremely convenient for post-it notes, and I think it just plain looks good anyways.
I can't believe you said that!
I thought the exact same thing when I read his post.
No, the G5s were in the 45-55 Watts range, Conroe is around 60-65 Watts.
The G5's were in the 65 watt range. Remember that IBM doesn't rate the chips as to MAX power use as Intel does. They rate them for average power, so the numbers look better upon first glance, and are more confusing.
But I believe a 23" model could handle the heat of a Conroe. If the rumor is proved to be true, that would mean that Apple is just reluctant to redesign the motherboard for the high end model. Merom is just a drop-in replacement. Big savings for Apple.
I agree with that.