I wonder how much fannage you'd need for a single, sub 2.0GHz 970fx if the entire front and back were like the G5 Powermac? Perhaps PowerTune is one of the things holding up the new iMac?
If they can't get a single G5fx in a 2 inch high enclosure cool, then Apple has some serious problems on the horizon.
Louder then you will ever want, and then some. With FireWire 800 and USB2 expansion an AIO setup should be fine. Now... external PCIe... that would be something as well.
That might work, but the bevel around the screen needs work. Apple won't come out with a new form iMac that has any part that looks like the former version. 55 days and counting.
I think some are forgetting the audience here for the iMac. It is first-time buyers, as well as people who want ease of setup and modular (education) solutions. That means simple. That means less options. Basically, take it out of the box, and plug it in & it goes. Nothing to configure, nothing to attach, etc.
The original gumdrop was a blockbuster precisely because of that: power and simplicity: remember "there is no step 5"?/B]
There was a time when a microwave with more than a timer dial and a start button intimidated people. Today, microwaves have more features than traditional ovens and consumers are perfectly OK with that because they are no longer microwave neophytes. Same with dish washers, vacuums, and other household appliances. I do not believe it wise to bank your entire consumer line on people who don't know how to connect to the Internet. Why even bother sticking a G5 into the thing if it is nothing more than a glorified internet appliance. If you are going to under-spec the rest of it, just leave a G4 in it, drop the price to $899 and be done with it. The iMac has to become a whole lot more than an expensive Internet appliance for the clueless wealthy.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mandricard
[BSo, I think that the AIO thing is going to happen, with fewer options (e.g. not stackable external components with pci slots, etc.) Slots are for pros. iMacs are for the rest of us. And they will have FW2 and USB2 for external connectivity, when they need it (remember the gaggle of USB devices that we never dreamed possible that came out with the original?
I know Apple will never provide upgrade options for the masses. But they should. Consumers like the idea of being able to upgrade their technology without the need to replace it altogether. It doesn't matter what they actually do. It is what they want that is important. Most drivers don't feel comfortable changing the tires on their car but they will not buy a car with non-upgradable tires. I assure you, they will find someone who will do the work for them. Same with their computer. I have heard it said that most don't upgrade their PMs. Should Apple make AIO PMs? Absurd!
Quote:
Originally posted by Mandricard
So, I think it is possible: a limited graphics card, of course, good enough for most gamers, (but not a 256MB fan-cooled whopper that many seem to want). A decent and quiet disk drive, speakers not included, and a low-end G5 chip, shipping with way too little RAM and a front-side (and chip) bus that will have its speed governed by heat concerns and a 17-inch screen.
I think it is doable for 1299. Whether they can get that under 1000 as many seem to want, I doubt it. But hey, getting a G5 in your bedroom for 1299 isn't such a bad deal.
Hope springs eternal,
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
By definition, a limited graphics card will never be good enough for most gamers. Why would you want to look on any part of this flagship, iconic product as limited? What you call decent and quiet disk drives, I call slower and smaller than anyone else's at the same price. Anything less than 160 GB running at 7200 RPM will not qualify as decent for this type of machine. Are not a half decent set of speakers included with every PC on the market? I can understand an option to reduce the price by cutting the speakers. But I don't think that is what you mean. Why are you wanting a low end processor? The iMac is not at a low end price point. It should have the fastest G5 available. PCs have the fastest hyper-threaded monsters in them at that price range. Why should an equivalently priced Mac be crippled? We Mac users have developed such an inferiority complex, that we just don't believe we deserve the best hardware for a reasonable price. We think it is privilege enough just to be allowed to use a Mac no matter what. For the specs you mentioned, $1299 is still way too much. As long as people are telling Apple that it is OK to under-spec their systems with too little power, graphics, HD, modern i/o, (think card slots), and ram, well their just going to keep right on doing it. If Apple produces the system you envision at the price you envision, then it will be just as big a success as its predecessor was for the first three months, and as big a failure as it was for the rest of the time it is on the shelves.
Everybody seems to be expecting the impossible here. First off, Dell uses integrated graphics in their machines well into the iMac's price range. The GeForce 4 may not be the best card around for games, it sure as hell beats the pants off an integrated chip that shares system memory.
They ship CD-ROMS and 40GB drives in that range as well. And of course they use "crippled" processors in that price range. Everybody does that. In fact, most of Dell's cheap boxes don't even allow you to upgrade to the latest processors...they're stuck in the 2.4-2.8GHZ range.
Take a look at this side-by-side. Do you really think the Dell is a better value?
If you add in the LCD, which the first guy has, and Windows Professional, which is really the equivalent of OS X your setup comes out more expensive. So for more money you get a better system. Yes one would hope so.
So for an extra $147, I get a much, much faster CPU & FSB, a much better GPU with 4X the graphics memory, twice the RAM, and the equivalent of AppleCare.
The point is not that you can't configure a PC for less money with more power.
The point is that you don't have to configure a Mac to make it a worthy machine. Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers. Apple believes that there is a minimum level of quality that should be expected of every computer such as dedicated graphics, firewire on the logic board, and purposeful ergonomics.
It means that the Macintosh will never be the cheapest platform, or perhaps the fastest or the best for games, etc. But it will always be the most integrated, most elegant, and highest quality platform.
The Macintosh is not a commodity. It is sustainable. An educated consumer can trick-out a silly Honda Civic with all kinds of cheap, tacky third-party accessories that will make it superior in speed and handling to, say, an entry-level Porsche. I'll take the Porsche, thank you very much.
As far as I'm concerned, an eMac is worth more than any PC.
Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers.
Well, the Dell mentioned above doesn't have integrated graphics; in fact, it makes the iMac's GPU look piss-poor. Added to which, the iMac's GPU is non-ugradeable (unlike the Dell's).
Quote:
It means that the Macintosh will never be the cheapest platform, or perhaps the fastest or the best for games, etc. But it will always be the most integrated, most elegant, and highest quality platform.
'Elegance' is a subjective term; these days, Mac quality is debatable. Unfortunately, most people go for cheap+fast, whether Apple likes it or not.
Quote:
The Macintosh is not a commodity. It is sustainable.
What does that mean? Most PCs are far more upgradable than Apple's consumer desktops.
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, an eMac is worth more than any PC.
Apple's problem is that 98% of their target market do not share your view.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a long-time Mac user; but I am concerned about Apple's future in the consumer mass-market.
The GeForce FX 5200 is not that much better than the GeForce4 MX. Both are very lean GPUs. I suppose the 128 MB of VRAM is nice.
Except that the 5200 is capable of running CoreImage (without resorting to software fallbacks), Motion, and everything that requires Shader Model 2.0 (DX9), while the 4MX doesn't even support SM 1.0. It's getting more and more important every day.
I think there's one very obvious fact and that's that the iMacs were/are sorely in need of an update. They really haven't been touched in a year, that's poor by any standards.
Everybody seems to be expecting the impossible here. First off, Dell uses integrated graphics in their machines well into the iMac's price range. The GeForce 4 may not be the best card around for games, it sure as hell beats the pants off an integrated chip that shares system memory.
They ship CD-ROMS and 40GB drives in that range as well. And of course they use "crippled" processors in that price range. Everybody does that. In fact, most of Dell's cheap boxes don't even allow you to upgrade to the latest processors...they're stuck in the 2.4-2.8GHZ range.
Take a look at this side-by-side. Do you really think the Dell is a better value?
Not sure where you got that picture, but clicking on home or home office, and then clicking on the most expensive system on the page, I get this:
so for less money you get a DVD/CDRW, 16X PCI express Video card, 512mb ram, and a 17" LCD display.
The thing is that, once you configure it to be how you want it, ie, with software, firewire etc, then the price really does jump up.
IT is also misleading, as all those things at the top tab are optional. you pay more for them. But that inital price got them in the door.
That's what apple needs to do. Get them in the door to at least look at what they are selling.
7Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers.
and thats why apples only consumer desktop at the moment has a blindingly fast radion 9200 with a whopping 32 megs of ram, that model is at least 5 years young... and on the emac, Apple takes integration a step further by attaching the damn monitor.
So all said, these offerings dont suck in morons, they simpley bring blinde and ignorant apple cool-aid drinkers back to the troff to separate them from their money.
Comments
Originally posted by Mandricard
How would you cool that?
Speed Holes, of course
I wonder how much fannage you'd need for a single, sub 2.0GHz 970fx if the entire front and back were like the G5 Powermac? Perhaps PowerTune is one of the things holding up the new iMac?
If they can't get a single G5fx in a 2 inch high enclosure cool, then Apple has some serious problems on the horizon.
Originally posted by Mandricard
How would you cool that?
How do they cool a 1u dual 2.0 xServe?
Originally posted by MarcUK
How do they cool a 1u dual 2.0 xServe?
Louder then you will ever want, and then some. With FireWire 800 and USB2 expansion an AIO setup should be fine. Now... external PCIe... that would be something as well.
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
No, no. Here's what the new G5 iMac will look like (yeah, sure..)
If you can imagine that cone as a pyramid in brushed aluminum then you have it.
Originally posted by Mandricard
I think some are forgetting the audience here for the iMac. It is first-time buyers, as well as people who want ease of setup and modular (education) solutions. That means simple. That means less options. Basically, take it out of the box, and plug it in & it goes. Nothing to configure, nothing to attach, etc.
The original gumdrop was a blockbuster precisely because of that: power and simplicity: remember "there is no step 5"?/B]
There was a time when a microwave with more than a timer dial and a start button intimidated people. Today, microwaves have more features than traditional ovens and consumers are perfectly OK with that because they are no longer microwave neophytes. Same with dish washers, vacuums, and other household appliances. I do not believe it wise to bank your entire consumer line on people who don't know how to connect to the Internet. Why even bother sticking a G5 into the thing if it is nothing more than a glorified internet appliance. If you are going to under-spec the rest of it, just leave a G4 in it, drop the price to $899 and be done with it. The iMac has to become a whole lot more than an expensive Internet appliance for the clueless wealthy.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mandricard
[BSo, I think that the AIO thing is going to happen, with fewer options (e.g. not stackable external components with pci slots, etc.) Slots are for pros. iMacs are for the rest of us. And they will have FW2 and USB2 for external connectivity, when they need it (remember the gaggle of USB devices that we never dreamed possible that came out with the original?
I know Apple will never provide upgrade options for the masses. But they should. Consumers like the idea of being able to upgrade their technology without the need to replace it altogether. It doesn't matter what they actually do. It is what they want that is important. Most drivers don't feel comfortable changing the tires on their car but they will not buy a car with non-upgradable tires. I assure you, they will find someone who will do the work for them. Same with their computer. I have heard it said that most don't upgrade their PMs. Should Apple make AIO PMs? Absurd!
Originally posted by Mandricard
So, I think it is possible: a limited graphics card, of course, good enough for most gamers, (but not a 256MB fan-cooled whopper that many seem to want). A decent and quiet disk drive, speakers not included, and a low-end G5 chip, shipping with way too little RAM
I think it is doable for 1299. Whether they can get that under 1000 as many seem to want, I doubt it. But hey, getting a G5 in your bedroom for 1299 isn't such a bad deal.
Hope springs eternal,
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
By definition, a limited graphics card will never be good enough for most gamers. Why would you want to look on any part of this flagship, iconic product as limited? What you call decent and quiet disk drives, I call slower and smaller than anyone else's at the same price. Anything less than 160 GB running at 7200 RPM will not qualify as decent for this type of machine. Are not a half decent set of speakers included with every PC on the market? I can understand an option to reduce the price by cutting the speakers. But I don't think that is what you mean. Why are you wanting a low end processor? The iMac is not at a low end price point. It should have the fastest G5 available. PCs have the fastest hyper-threaded monsters in them at that price range. Why should an equivalently priced Mac be crippled? We Mac users have developed such an inferiority complex, that we just don't believe we deserve the best hardware for a reasonable price. We think it is privilege enough just to be allowed to use a Mac no matter what. For the specs you mentioned, $1299 is still way too much. As long as people are telling Apple that it is OK to under-spec their systems with too little power, graphics, HD, modern i/o, (think card slots), and ram, well their just going to keep right on doing it. If Apple produces the system you envision at the price you envision, then it will be just as big a success as its predecessor was for the first three months, and as big a failure as it was for the rest of the time it is on the shelves.
They ship CD-ROMS and 40GB drives in that range as well. And of course they use "crippled" processors in that price range. Everybody does that. In fact, most of Dell's cheap boxes don't even allow you to upgrade to the latest processors...they're stuck in the 2.4-2.8GHZ range.
Take a look at this side-by-side. Do you really think the Dell is a better value?
Mandricard
AppleOutsider
Dell Dimension 4600
P4 3GHz, 800MHz FSB
512MB DDR400
80GB 7200rpm
DVD + CD-RW drives
GeForce 5200 FX with 128MB VRAM
17" CRT
Try this
Not saying 3 GHz wouldn't be nicer but that's far closer to the 15" setup and the previous.
P4 3GHz 800 FSB
MS Windows XP Pro
3-year Warranty
512MB DDR400 RAM
80GB 7200rpm HDD
DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive
MS Works Suite
15" TFT Flat Panel Display
GeForce 5200 FX GPU with 128MB VRAM
SoundBlaster Live! audio card
2-button scroll mouse
FireWire adapter
So for an extra $147, I get a much, much faster CPU & FSB, a much better GPU with 4X the graphics memory, twice the RAM, and the equivalent of AppleCare.
But you're right, it is more expensive........
The point is that you don't have to configure a Mac to make it a worthy machine. Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers. Apple believes that there is a minimum level of quality that should be expected of every computer such as dedicated graphics, firewire on the logic board, and purposeful ergonomics.
It means that the Macintosh will never be the cheapest platform, or perhaps the fastest or the best for games, etc. But it will always be the most integrated, most elegant, and highest quality platform.
The Macintosh is not a commodity. It is sustainable. An educated consumer can trick-out a silly Honda Civic with all kinds of cheap, tacky third-party accessories that will make it superior in speed and handling to, say, an entry-level Porsche. I'll take the Porsche, thank you very much.
As far as I'm concerned, an eMac is worth more than any PC.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers.
Well, the Dell mentioned above doesn't have integrated graphics; in fact, it makes the iMac's GPU look piss-poor. Added to which, the iMac's GPU is non-ugradeable (unlike the Dell's).
It means that the Macintosh will never be the cheapest platform, or perhaps the fastest or the best for games, etc. But it will always be the most integrated, most elegant, and highest quality platform.
'Elegance' is a subjective term; these days, Mac quality is debatable. Unfortunately, most people go for cheap+fast, whether Apple likes it or not.
The Macintosh is not a commodity. It is sustainable.
What does that mean? Most PCs are far more upgradable than Apple's consumer desktops.
As far as I'm concerned, an eMac is worth more than any PC.
Apple's problem is that 98% of their target market do not share your view.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a long-time Mac user; but I am concerned about Apple's future in the consumer mass-market.
Originally posted by Eugene
The GeForce FX 5200 is not that much better than the GeForce4 MX. Both are very lean GPUs. I suppose the 128 MB of VRAM is nice.
Except that the 5200 is capable of running CoreImage (without resorting to software fallbacks), Motion, and everything that requires Shader Model 2.0 (DX9), while the 4MX doesn't even support SM 1.0. It's getting more and more important every day.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
Everybody seems to be expecting the impossible here. First off, Dell uses integrated graphics in their machines well into the iMac's price range. The GeForce 4 may not be the best card around for games, it sure as hell beats the pants off an integrated chip that shares system memory.
They ship CD-ROMS and 40GB drives in that range as well. And of course they use "crippled" processors in that price range. Everybody does that. In fact, most of Dell's cheap boxes don't even allow you to upgrade to the latest processors...they're stuck in the 2.4-2.8GHZ range.
Take a look at this side-by-side. Do you really think the Dell is a better value?
Not sure where you got that picture, but clicking on home or home office, and then clicking on the most expensive system on the page, I get this:
so for less money you get a DVD/CDRW, 16X PCI express Video card, 512mb ram, and a 17" LCD display.
The thing is that, once you configure it to be how you want it, ie, with software, firewire etc, then the price really does jump up.
IT is also misleading, as all those things at the top tab are optional. you pay more for them. But that inital price got them in the door.
That's what apple needs to do. Get them in the door to at least look at what they are selling.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
7Apple doesn't believe that suckering morons into buying integrated graphics is a good way to sell computers.
and thats why apples only consumer desktop at the moment has a blindingly fast radion 9200 with a whopping 32 megs of ram, that model is at least 5 years young... and on the emac, Apple takes integration a step further by attaching the damn monitor.
So all said, these offerings dont suck in morons, they simpley bring blinde and ignorant apple cool-aid drinkers back to the troff to separate them from their money.