I think apple will try their darnest to get the G5 into the imac, and if what all these sources say are true, I think it will look like the Sony Vaio W pc, basically the pizza box look, a box where everything is behind the monitor and a adjustable stand comes out the back to hold it up.
According to sales reports the sony vaio w sells extremely well, to the point that they can hardly keep it in stock.
Personally I like the look of the imac right now compared to the vaio w
i posted this already @news Comments » Apple burnt by iMac G5 heat issues
but this is an idea:
(don't know someone metioned this already)
maybe the imac 3 is a pizzabox with a vesa mount to mount the lcd screen on it.
Do you suppose there's any chance of a single PCIexpress slot for the upgradeable graphics that you seem to want ??
(Naturally, the would have to announce PCIexpress for the Powermacs at the same time.)
This would seem like a good move to me, but Apple's history shows that they like to hang on to old stuff WAAAY too long before they adopt what has become the "new" standard (example: look how long it took them to accept USB2)
Anyway, I don't see this as likely, just wondering if anyone else DOES think it's possible...
example: look how long it took them to accept USB2
And DVI...
As for USB 2.0, it was co-developed by Intel and a few other nimbles, and Apple don't like Intel, and Intel don't like Apple. You can fill in the rest ? I'm too lazy. m.
This is all fine, but don't forget that Apple inteded to ship the PowerMacs right now as dual 3GHz screamerz. So, why would Apple aim low with the iMac3?
I think apple will try their darnest to get the G5 into the imac, and if what all these sources say are true, I think it will look like the Sony Vaio W pc, basically the pizza box look, a box where everything is behind the monitor and a adjustable stand comes out the back to hold it up.
According to sales reports the sony vaio w sells extremely well, to the point that they can hardly keep it in stock.
Personally I like the look of the imac right now compared to the vaio w
The Vaio w is nice looking, but it doesnt really compare to the iMac we currently have (had). I hope Apple can solve the bulky appearance issues with such a design, if they indeed decided to go with that "style" of a design.
I can't see Apple releasing an imac/headless unit with ANY kind of upgradability, (other than ram) or it'll just steal market share from the powermac line. And that's also a reason why there won't be a single G5 processor Mac priced much lower than the low end powermac. Another cube type situation, I think.
The Vaio w is nice looking, but it doesnt really compare to the iMac we currently have (had). I hope Apple can solve the bulky appearance issues with such a design, if they indeed decided to go with that "style" of a design.
Maybe, as long as the keyboard is not integrated like the Sony! Tried one at Best Buy, it's impossible to get the display at a comfortable distance unless you like typing at arms length! What's up with that?
Integrated SiS graphics? Oooo boy! And people complain about the 5200...
I can't see Apple releasing an imac/headless unit with ANY kind of upgradability, (other than ram) or it'll just steal market share from the powermac line. And that's also a reason why there won't be a single G5 processor Mac priced much lower than the low end powermac. Another cube type situation, I think.
The original iMac sold many times more than the PowerMac, and at the time of its introduction it was close to the PowerMac in terms of speed.
I expect the new iMac to give the PowerMac a run for its money. I wouldnt doubt a 1.8 or 2 GHz G5 (single) in them.
1.6 ghz w/ 533 mhz fsb ( 3:1 ratio to prevent cannibilzation of towers, while still fast enough to feed cpu)
128 megs of ram (2 ram slots for a max of 2 Gb of ram)
Cheapest video card they can get in an 8X AGP slot (to be changed to PCIe at a later date)
One open PCI slot (possibly PCI-X but doubtful, again to be replaced at a later date w/ newer architecture)
expect the rest to be same or similar to current imacs except form and hopefully, assuming they want more marketshare, it's headless.
For the highend I'd expect 2.4 ghz w/ 800 mhz fsb and 512 megs of ram and a better video card, hard drive and such.
In between would be a 2.0 ghz system w/ 667 mhz fsb and 256 megs of ram and so forth.
Oops forgot to say G5 not G4 though that should be obvious.
Why would you want to screw with bus speed at all? Single vs. Dual processor is not differentiation enough? I also don't think you can order *any* current machine with less than 256MB.
Since when is a 15" display not suitable for wide format? I love the shape and size of my PowerBook's wide 15" display and think it should be perfectly suitable for the new iMac.
While I like the idea of a vertical pizza box, I can't help but think it would be extremely unbalanced, regardless of the type of arm/stand. Even if they were to use laptop components, which would be way too expensive, the pizza box would weigh-in at 6 or more pounds. That means that the arm/stand will either be really heavy or, well, really heavy.
As far as graphics are concerned, I definitely wouldn't get my hopes up for a swappable card. An built-in card solves many of the space/cooling issues that go hand-in-hand with all iMacs. I'll bet all those cube owners are so happy they have that AGP slot since virtually no after market cards fit in the case anyway. The iMac would be a similar situation.
I think a G5 at as little as 1.2 GHZ would be fine, so long as it features the same 2:1 FSB.
While I like the idea of a vertical pizza box, I can't help but think it would be extremely unbalanced, regardless of the type of arm/stand. Even if they were to use laptop components, which would be way too expensive, the pizza box would weigh-in at 6 or more pounds. That means that the arm/stand will either be really heavy or, well, really heavy.
It so happens that Apple has a stand that holds up a giant 30" beast of a display...
Quote:
As far as graphics are concerned, I definitely wouldn't get my hopes up for a swappable card. An built-in card solves many of the space/cooling issues that go hand-in-hand with all iMacs. I'll bet all those cube owners are so happy they have that AGP slot since virtually no after market cards fit in the case anyway. The iMac would be a similar situation.
I think a G5 at as little as 1.2 GHZ would be fine, so long as it features the same 2:1 FSB.
I wouldn't expect a swappable card either, but Apple might borrow that nifty little daughtercard they use in the 17" PowerBook so that they can use ATI or nVIDIA parts without making two different motherboards. That leaves a third party opportunity.
As for the G5, it's designed for high clock speeds. You really don't want to clock it like a G4. I'd expect to see the G5 in an iMac clocked north of 1.5GHz. Preferably closer to 2GHz.
It so happens that Apple has a stand that holds up a giant 30" beast of a display...
That's true. But the truly great thing about the current iMac is the mobility of the display. While the Cinema Display foot could certainly support a pizza box, it would most likely be at the expense adjustability.
Of course, had someone described the current iMacs form before I'd seen it, I would have doubted it's ability to balance as well. If anyone can balance a computer on a stand, it's Apple.
That's true. But the truly great thing about the current iMac is the mobility of the display. While the Cinema Display foot could certainly support a pizza box, it would most likely be at the expense [of] adjustability.
Certainly. But then, the adjustability comes at the expense of affordability.
The iMac as Cinema- er, Home Theater Display has several cost advantages, including one I haven't mentioned: Apple no longer has to run wires up through that elaborate arm and through two extremely mobile joints. The whole thing becomes much simpler.
It would have much, if not all, of its old versatility: The Cinema Display stand allows the monitor to be rotated up and down, and you can pivot it side to side simply by moving the whole thing, which should be fairly easy because of the relatively small and centrally located stand. That's close enough given that the new design should be much cheaper to build.
Quote:
Of course, had someone described the current iMacs form before I'd seen it, I would have doubted it's ability to balance as well. If anyone can balance a computer on a stand, it's Apple.
They do their homework, it's true. I don't think anyone expected Apple to be able to stick that big 20" display on that arm, but they did.
Comments
Originally posted by Ichiban_jay
I think apple will try their darnest to get the G5 into the imac, and if what all these sources say are true, I think it will look like the Sony Vaio W pc, basically the pizza box look, a box where everything is behind the monitor and a adjustable stand comes out the back to hold it up.
According to sales reports the sony vaio w sells extremely well, to the point that they can hardly keep it in stock.
Personally I like the look of the imac right now compared to the vaio w
i posted this already @news Comments » Apple burnt by iMac G5 heat issues
but this is an idea:
(don't know someone metioned this already)
maybe the imac 3 is a pizzabox with a vesa mount to mount the lcd screen on it.
problems solft
cheap headless imac. for the aio haters $999.00
17" imac (17" imac only) $ 1599.00
20" imac (hey) $ 2099.00
23" imac $2799.00
(Naturally, the would have to announce PCIexpress for the Powermacs at the same time.)
This would seem like a good move to me, but Apple's history shows that they like to hang on to old stuff WAAAY too long before they adopt what has become the "new" standard (example: look how long it took them to accept USB2)
Anyway, I don't see this as likely, just wondering if anyone else DOES think it's possible...
Originally posted by KingOfSomewhereHot
example: look how long it took them to accept USB2
And DVI...
As for USB 2.0, it was co-developed by Intel and a few other nimbles, and Apple don't like Intel, and Intel don't like Apple. You can fill in the rest ? I'm too lazy. m.
Originally posted by gar
cheap headless imac. for the aio haters $999.00
17" imac (17" imac only) $ 1599.00
20" imac (hey) $ 2099.00
23" imac $2799.00 [/B]
This is all fine, but don't forget that Apple inteded to ship the PowerMacs right now as dual 3GHz screamerz. So, why would Apple aim low with the iMac3?
That's the comming of THE iMac3:
2.5GHz G5FX single
30" LCD w/ 2 NVIDIA 6800 (this explains the heat problems, doesn't it?)
1GB RAM
400GB SATA
FW800, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, DVI out etc.
All THAT for not $999, not $799, but $499 (10 easy payments)
Originally posted by Ichiban_jay
I think apple will try their darnest to get the G5 into the imac, and if what all these sources say are true, I think it will look like the Sony Vaio W pc, basically the pizza box look, a box where everything is behind the monitor and a adjustable stand comes out the back to hold it up.
According to sales reports the sony vaio w sells extremely well, to the point that they can hardly keep it in stock.
Personally I like the look of the imac right now compared to the vaio w
The Vaio w is nice looking, but it doesnt really compare to the iMac we currently have (had). I hope Apple can solve the bulky appearance issues with such a design, if they indeed decided to go with that "style" of a design.
Originally posted by NittanyLionTosh
The Vaio w is nice looking, but it doesnt really compare to the iMac we currently have (had). I hope Apple can solve the bulky appearance issues with such a design, if they indeed decided to go with that "style" of a design.
Maybe, as long as the keyboard is not integrated like the Sony! Tried one at Best Buy, it's impossible to get the display at a comfortable distance unless you like typing at arms length! What's up with that?
Integrated SiS graphics? Oooo boy! And people complain about the 5200...
Originally posted by YYZ
I can't see Apple releasing an imac/headless unit with ANY kind of upgradability, (other than ram) or it'll just steal market share from the powermac line. And that's also a reason why there won't be a single G5 processor Mac priced much lower than the low end powermac. Another cube type situation, I think.
The original iMac sold many times more than the PowerMac, and at the time of its introduction it was close to the PowerMac in terms of speed.
I expect the new iMac to give the PowerMac a run for its money. I wouldnt doubt a 1.8 or 2 GHz G5 (single) in them.
1.6 ghz w/ 533 mhz fsb ( 3:1 ratio to prevent cannibilzation of towers, while still fast enough to feed cpu)
128 megs of ram (2 ram slots for a max of 2 Gb of ram)
Cheapest video card they can get in an 8X AGP slot (to be changed to PCIe at a later date)
One open PCI slot (possibly PCI-X but doubtful, again to be replaced at a later date w/ newer architecture)
expect the rest to be same or similar to current imacs except form and hopefully, assuming they want more marketshare, it's headless.
For the highend I'd expect 2.4 ghz w/ 800 mhz fsb and 512 megs of ram and a better video card, hard drive and such.
In between would be a 2.0 ghz system w/ 667 mhz fsb and 256 megs of ram and so forth.
Oops forgot to say G5 not G4 though that should be obvious.
Originally posted by Dazaran
Lowend
1.6 ghz w/ 533 mhz fsb ( 3:1 ratio to prevent cannibilzation of towers, while still fast enough to feed cpu)
128 megs of ram (2 ram slots for a max of 2 Gb of ram)
Cheapest video card they can get in an 8X AGP slot (to be changed to PCIe at a later date)
One open PCI slot (possibly PCI-X but doubtful, again to be replaced at a later date w/ newer architecture)
expect the rest to be same or similar to current imacs except form and hopefully, assuming they want more marketshare, it's headless.
For the highend I'd expect 2.4 ghz w/ 800 mhz fsb and 512 megs of ram and a better video card, hard drive and such.
In between would be a 2.0 ghz system w/ 667 mhz fsb and 256 megs of ram and so forth.
Oops forgot to say G5 not G4 though that should be obvious.
Why would you want to screw with bus speed at all? Single vs. Dual processor is not differentiation enough? I also don't think you can order *any* current machine with less than 256MB.
While I like the idea of a vertical pizza box, I can't help but think it would be extremely unbalanced, regardless of the type of arm/stand. Even if they were to use laptop components, which would be way too expensive, the pizza box would weigh-in at 6 or more pounds. That means that the arm/stand will either be really heavy or, well, really heavy.
As far as graphics are concerned, I definitely wouldn't get my hopes up for a swappable card. An built-in card solves many of the space/cooling issues that go hand-in-hand with all iMacs. I'll bet all those cube owners are so happy they have that AGP slot since virtually no after market cards fit in the case anyway. The iMac would be a similar situation.
I think a G5 at as little as 1.2 GHZ would be fine, so long as it features the same 2:1 FSB.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
While I like the idea of a vertical pizza box, I can't help but think it would be extremely unbalanced, regardless of the type of arm/stand. Even if they were to use laptop components, which would be way too expensive, the pizza box would weigh-in at 6 or more pounds. That means that the arm/stand will either be really heavy or, well, really heavy.
It so happens that Apple has a stand that holds up a giant 30" beast of a display...
As far as graphics are concerned, I definitely wouldn't get my hopes up for a swappable card. An built-in card solves many of the space/cooling issues that go hand-in-hand with all iMacs. I'll bet all those cube owners are so happy they have that AGP slot since virtually no after market cards fit in the case anyway. The iMac would be a similar situation.
I think a G5 at as little as 1.2 GHZ would be fine, so long as it features the same 2:1 FSB.
I wouldn't expect a swappable card either, but Apple might borrow that nifty little daughtercard they use in the 17" PowerBook so that they can use ATI or nVIDIA parts without making two different motherboards. That leaves a third party opportunity.
As for the G5, it's designed for high clock speeds. You really don't want to clock it like a G4. I'd expect to see the G5 in an iMac clocked north of 1.5GHz. Preferably closer to 2GHz.
this way your "overpriced" imac will still be useful sitting in the kids room in 5 years.
All old macs will then have a useful afterlife and decent resale value.
my .02
Originally posted by Amorph
It so happens that Apple has a stand that holds up a giant 30" beast of a display...
That's true. But the truly great thing about the current iMac is the mobility of the display. While the Cinema Display foot could certainly support a pizza box, it would most likely be at the expense adjustability.
Of course, had someone described the current iMacs form before I'd seen it, I would have doubted it's ability to balance as well. If anyone can balance a computer on a stand, it's Apple.
Originally posted by TednDi
clustering- built right in (10.3.6?)
this way your "overpriced" imac will still be useful sitting in the kids room in 5 years.
All old macs will then have a useful afterlife and decent resale value.
my .02
You could cluster in Panther from the get go.
Originally posted by onlooker
You could cluster in Panther from the get go.
is is as easy as rendevous?
or is there more than a few steps. And which programs are configured to be helped by the cluster?
We are talking imac.
computers for the rest of us-
we can obviously cluster G5's and xserves
imac and a powerbook and maby throw in an emac then run some cool (killer) app <read game here> and off you go!
something that windows can't even get close to.
ebay would be dry of all the used mac's in no time and apple backordered for months.
BUZZ galore! stock prices BOOM!
can you see my thinking here!
everybody gets a supercomputer. the ghz debate is rendered moot.
people will be talking in teraflops.
then i can get my cute little Knowledge Navigator!
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
That's true. But the truly great thing about the current iMac is the mobility of the display. While the Cinema Display foot could certainly support a pizza box, it would most likely be at the expense [of] adjustability.
Certainly. But then, the adjustability comes at the expense of affordability.
The iMac as Cinema- er, Home Theater Display has several cost advantages, including one I haven't mentioned: Apple no longer has to run wires up through that elaborate arm and through two extremely mobile joints. The whole thing becomes much simpler.
It would have much, if not all, of its old versatility: The Cinema Display stand allows the monitor to be rotated up and down, and you can pivot it side to side simply by moving the whole thing, which should be fairly easy because of the relatively small and centrally located stand. That's close enough given that the new design should be much cheaper to build.
Of course, had someone described the current iMacs form before I'd seen it, I would have doubted it's ability to balance as well. If anyone can balance a computer on a stand, it's Apple.
They do their homework, it's true. I don't think anyone expected Apple to be able to stick that big 20" display on that arm, but they did.
is that they will come in matching colors of the predicted "new iPod's"...
it kinda seems like they are phasing out white completely!
$ 999 15" 3:2 iMac LCD AIO 1.6GHz G5
$1499 17" 16:10 iMac LCD AIO 1.8GHz G5
$1999 20" 16:10 iMac LCD AIO 1.8GHz G5
$ 999 1.8 GHz G5 headless desktop, 1 AGP 4x slot, 1 PCI slot
$1299 2.0 GHz G5 headless desktop, 1 AGP 4x slot, 1 PCI slot
$ 399 15" aluminum 3:2 LCD (the Powerbook one)
$ 599 17" aluminum 16:10 LCD (the iMac/Powerbook one)