I guess I completely fail to understand Apple when it comes to the iMac line. Or the PowerMac line for that matter...
I admit, I'm currently a PC user. I have been a Mac user in the past and would VERY much like to switch back, but the current line of hardware offerings just doesn't make it for me. I spend a great deal of money on my computer, being what the marketing people call an "enthusiast", so the price point of a Mac isn't my issue.
The new iMac G5 doesn't cut it from a hardware perspective, when you consider a user like myself: I like to tinker a little, upgrade RAM, upgrade video card, etc as I go along, and I like to squeeze as much performance out as I can, but in a small form factor.
The new iMac can't be upgraded from a video perspective, and its CPU/FSB is a crippled version of a PowerMac. Some of which is understandable, but that makes it unsuitable for me.
The PowerMac line is just too massive for me. I currently use a Shuttle XPC box which is perfect for me. It lets me upgrade when I want (to a certain extent of course), I can use my existing monitor or change it when I feel like it, and unlike the PowerMac line, it doesn't weigh in a 50lbs+ and doesn't take up most of the leg room under my desk
What I personally ask for from Apple is a single CPU, video upgradeable, PowerMac box that is about 1/3 the size of the existing chassis. Make it even look the same as the exisiting PowerMac, just shrink it down.
Until I can find an Apple product that gives me the flexibility I need in a form factor I can stand, I'm stuck in the PC world, wishing I could play in the Mac world
but I seriously doubt that our computer after that will be a Mac.
I heard Amiga is coming back with a vengeance; you should try that OS for a while. Runs on PowerPC tech so your not jumping the hardware platform just OS. Seriously though why bring this up; wow is I for not having the best technology in my current choice of computer manufacture. Would you work harder, longer or create better content with your decision to change OS. The answer is probably no, just bragging rights on the forums. What makes an Apple and Apple is the OS and frankly they have best desktop OS on the market, hands down. Windows is not a viable solution except for gaming; I am 40% percent more productive with an Apple OS then Microsoft. I believe many other people on this forum agree as well.
I honestly don't understand why you all continue to bitch....
We've been hearing "Pizza Box" design for a long... long... time now; and when Apple actually makes good on that design and does something revolutionary with it... all you can do is bitch about the design...
Not to mention the people who bitch about the graphics card.... this sounds bad... but: YOUR RUNNING A MAC! WHAT GAMES DO YOU EXPECT TO PLAY! If games are that important to you, buy an Alienware.
Finally... the price. You know Apple is going to charge a premium for their systems. You cant go to Dell.com and say "Look here! This 'Dull' Has twice the ram blah blah blah. AND its $200 less.". That "Dull" also isnt only 2" thick with a large LCD monitor strapped to the front of it. I would also be willing to assume that many of the parts Apple uses are of much higher quality than the ones used by many low budget PC manufacturers. Thats why Alienware can charge a premium for their PCs... quality parts in quality cases... who cares if Apple choses to do the same.
I remember back to when we didn't know for sure if the next gen iMac was even going to have a G5... imagine how much bitching there would be if the iMac still ran a G4. There are so many positives here that the majority of people choose to ignore because it didnt have the 1 extra feature they wanted, but in no way needed and it doesnt cost $300 less than it should.
I guess I completely fail to understand Apple when it comes to the iMac line...snip...I'm stuck in the PC world, wishing I could play in the Mac world
Most people are not tinkerers. When their monitor won't come on they don't check to see if it's plugged in, they take it to the nearist pc shop to see if it needs serviced.
Though a headless Mac would be a great idea, but an AIO has it's market too.
I think it looks great...but why put a powerhouse cpu in it, then give it a horribly old GPU? i mean, not even industry standard 128MB ram!! The 5200 is very long in tooth and can't handle any current games at a decent resolution and with any anti-aliasing options. Well, Apple strikes out with this one, they should have put a better GPU in, at bare minimum a 9600pro/xt. They have limited this CPU to a web browsing/digital media computer. No gamer in his/her right mind would buy the iMac G5 since the graphical requirements of todays games are far beyond that of what the 5200 Ultra can handle. I'm sure Doom 3 will eventually be out for mac, but when it does will anyone have a computer that will be to handle it (no)...even the Powermacs are coming with the lowly 9600XT.(which is a sub $150 card in the PC world.) Such is why as a Mac user for many many years I have built my own PC for gaming...Mac's simply aren't any competition.
Macs are not game machines and they never really have been. Do we have to go through this again? Apple is delivering much better value with this new iMac and still people complain. The 5200 ships with some of the PM models still - do you think the iMac would have a better graphics card? And if you have the money to buy a separate PC just for games than why do you care whether the new iMac fails as a game machine? The iMac is a machine for people who use the iLife suite and it will do this very well. Anything more advanced where the software itself runs into the hundreds if not thousands than people buy the PM. It is that simple. To say Apple struck out with this new iMac is ignoring all the things they have done right with this new version. The design is stunning in its execution, it is much more powerful than the model it replaces and it is considerably cheaper as well. To me, Apple did their homework on this one.
Is it me or does the new iMac have a worse SuperDrive than the eMac?
iMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 4x speed, reads DVDs at up to 8x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 16x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 8x speed, reads CDs at up to 24x speed
eMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed
The iMac is a nice machine though, but 4x SuperDrive? GeForce FX5200 Ultra?
Is it me or does the new iMac have a worse SuperDrive than the eMac?
iMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 4x speed, reads DVDs at up to 8x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 16x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 8x speed, reads CDs at up to 24x speed
eMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed
The iMac is a nice machine though, but 4x SuperDrive? GeForce FX5200 Ultra?
well, conventional wisdom says that slot-loading and non-horizontal drives are generally slower... i don't know if that's to ensure good operation, but it seems to be the standard. same held true for the cube's "toaster" and other such drives. apparently if you use a tray, you can do some sick rotation speeds.
Why this obsession with upgrading video cards? Some explain, please?
I've owned computers at home for close to 20 years (starting with a BBC Micro and have never once thought of upgrading a video card. Am I unique? I currently have the FP g4 iMac 800Mhz - how would a 'better' video card improve my work experience?
The trade-off for this is a superb design, a quiet computer, and a computer that 'just works'. Pretty good trade-off for me.
I'm not a gamer, but for those that are - get an Xbx, PS2 or whatever, not a g5 iMac!
This new iMac may well replace my wife's original iMac.......
What percentage of the entire computer buying public are gamers?...(uninspiring rant)... Anyways, buy an xbox, playstation, or a gamecube if you want to play games.
Your missing my point. Basically what I'm saying is that for the price Apple is asking consumers to spend on Macs they should at least put in current technology. Macs these days always seem to be 1 step behind current technology but still charging top dollar. Apple has limited their potential buying group by not including, or offering a current GPU with the iMac (as well as powermac) line.
I leave you with 2 questions:
How many kids use computers? How many kids like videogames?
Your mssing my point. Basically what I'm saying is that for the price Apple is asking consumers to spend on Macs they should at least put in current technology. Macs these days always seem to be 1 step behind current technology but still charging top dollar.
Dell Dimension 4600
P4 2.8GHz
Win XP Pro
256MB DDR SDRAM <-- same
80GB Ultra ATA HDD <-- same (iMac probably better off with SATA)
Dual drives DVD-ROM and CDRW
128MB GeForce FX 5200 <-- more memory than iMac
Added speakers (cheapest ones)
Firewire (had to add this for $50)
17" Ultrasharp flat panel
Free printer
$1287 with discounts
The iMac stacks up well against this for a very similar price with a *much* better software package.
Also Sony V series AIO
2.6GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
120GB Ultra ATA drive
Combo drive
Wireless mouse and keyboard
15" Xbrite screen
starting at...
$1499
Sony W series AIO
2.8GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
200GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD±RW / CD-RW Drive
17.5" LCD
15" Xbrite screen
Starting at...
$1999
The new iMac is fine (not perfect but fine) and some of you are mixing up fantasy with reality of actual retail PC prices. People often mix "build it yourself" prices with those of actual off the shelf prices you would pay at CompUSA/Bestbuy/Circuit City or even off the web (where I just got these prices).
Check out those nice *Non upgradeable* graphics Sony offers.
I'm sure with more effort I could find some cheaper ones but overall I picked decent (as decent as PCs get) examples.
Apple is really not asking consumers to pay a whole lot more than Dell or Sony...
I have to agree on the upgrading of the video card. In all my years of owning powermacs, I've never once upgrade the video card. Ram yes...HD..yes...video card..... NO
That's why i have an xbox that i NEVER use
I especially like the whining about the looks....umm looks like a kickass display to me....guts included.
I didnt see anyone else mentioning this but I appoligize if I missed it...If heat was the issue that held-up the release (along with supply shortages) then is it concieveable that the crappy video card selection is the result of additional heat reduction? I think they probably stuck this $16 card in this machine as an initial offering to get all the money from people who have been waiting for ever and a day to get the new iMac. This logically buys them enough time to resolve any heat issues associated with a larger video card and then release a revised version in November or December with the option of a more substantial graphics option. This is only a theory obviously but its my only answer to their decision to use such an underpowered video card on their sexy new iMac.
Comments
I admit, I'm currently a PC user. I have been a Mac user in the past and would VERY much like to switch back, but the current line of hardware offerings just doesn't make it for me. I spend a great deal of money on my computer, being what the marketing people call an "enthusiast", so the price point of a Mac isn't my issue.
The new iMac G5 doesn't cut it from a hardware perspective, when you consider a user like myself: I like to tinker a little, upgrade RAM, upgrade video card, etc as I go along, and I like to squeeze as much performance out as I can, but in a small form factor.
The new iMac can't be upgraded from a video perspective, and its CPU/FSB is a crippled version of a PowerMac. Some of which is understandable, but that makes it unsuitable for me.
The PowerMac line is just too massive for me. I currently use a Shuttle XPC box which is perfect for me. It lets me upgrade when I want (to a certain extent of course), I can use my existing monitor or change it when I feel like it, and unlike the PowerMac line, it doesn't weigh in a 50lbs+ and doesn't take up most of the leg room under my desk
What I personally ask for from Apple is a single CPU, video upgradeable, PowerMac box that is about 1/3 the size of the existing chassis. Make it even look the same as the exisiting PowerMac, just shrink it down.
Until I can find an Apple product that gives me the flexibility I need in a form factor I can stand, I'm stuck in the PC world, wishing I could play in the Mac world
In other words if you already have PowerMac, could you use this iMac display as a standalone monitor?
That way you could harness the power of your Dual 2.5 G5 for serious work at the office, and then detach and bring the iMac home for play.
Originally posted by Osakans
but I seriously doubt that our computer after that will be a Mac.
I heard Amiga is coming back with a vengeance; you should try that OS for a while. Runs on PowerPC tech so your not jumping the hardware platform just OS. Seriously though why bring this up; wow is I for not having the best technology in my current choice of computer manufacture. Would you work harder, longer or create better content with your decision to change OS. The answer is probably no, just bragging rights on the forums. What makes an Apple and Apple is the OS and frankly they have best desktop OS on the market, hands down. Windows is not a viable solution except for gaming; I am 40% percent more productive with an Apple OS then Microsoft. I believe many other people on this forum agree as well.
We've been hearing "Pizza Box" design for a long... long... time now; and when Apple actually makes good on that design and does something revolutionary with it... all you can do is bitch about the design...
Not to mention the people who bitch about the graphics card.... this sounds bad... but: YOUR RUNNING A MAC! WHAT GAMES DO YOU EXPECT TO PLAY! If games are that important to you, buy an Alienware.
Finally... the price. You know Apple is going to charge a premium for their systems. You cant go to Dell.com and say "Look here! This 'Dull' Has twice the ram blah blah blah. AND its $200 less.". That "Dull" also isnt only 2" thick with a large LCD monitor strapped to the front of it. I would also be willing to assume that many of the parts Apple uses are of much higher quality than the ones used by many low budget PC manufacturers. Thats why Alienware can charge a premium for their PCs... quality parts in quality cases... who cares if Apple choses to do the same.
I remember back to when we didn't know for sure if the next gen iMac was even going to have a G5... imagine how much bitching there would be if the iMac still ran a G4. There are so many positives here that the majority of people choose to ignore because it didnt have the 1 extra feature they wanted, but in no way needed and it doesnt cost $300 less than it should.
Originally posted by Banana Nut Bread
I guess I completely fail to understand Apple when it comes to the iMac line...snip...I'm stuck in the PC world, wishing I could play in the Mac world
Most people are not tinkerers. When their monitor won't come on they don't check to see if it's plugged in, they take it to the nearist pc shop to see if it needs serviced.
Though a headless Mac would be a great idea, but an AIO has it's market too.
Originally posted by trajik78
I think it looks great...but why put a powerhouse cpu in it, then give it a horribly old GPU? i mean, not even industry standard 128MB ram!! The 5200 is very long in tooth and can't handle any current games at a decent resolution and with any anti-aliasing options. Well, Apple strikes out with this one, they should have put a better GPU in, at bare minimum a 9600pro/xt. They have limited this CPU to a web browsing/digital media computer. No gamer in his/her right mind would buy the iMac G5 since the graphical requirements of todays games are far beyond that of what the 5200 Ultra can handle. I'm sure Doom 3 will eventually be out for mac, but when it does will anyone have a computer that will be to handle it (no)...even the Powermacs are coming with the lowly 9600XT.(which is a sub $150 card in the PC world.) Such is why as a Mac user for many many years I have built my own PC for gaming...Mac's simply aren't any competition.
Macs are not game machines and they never really have been. Do we have to go through this again? Apple is delivering much better value with this new iMac and still people complain. The 5200 ships with some of the PM models still - do you think the iMac would have a better graphics card? And if you have the money to buy a separate PC just for games than why do you care whether the new iMac fails as a game machine? The iMac is a machine for people who use the iLife suite and it will do this very well. Anything more advanced where the software itself runs into the hundreds if not thousands than people buy the PM. It is that simple. To say Apple struck out with this new iMac is ignoring all the things they have done right with this new version. The design is stunning in its execution, it is much more powerful than the model it replaces and it is considerably cheaper as well. To me, Apple did their homework on this one.
Originally posted by zpapasmurf
I honestly don't understand why you all continue to bitch....
What else are we going to do after a keynote but, bitch, bitch, and bitch.
The new iMac sucks and so do the people who do not agree with those who think it sucks, it makes them suckers.
http://www.macobserver.com/gallery/Booth-MacG5
Originally posted by satchmo
I wonder if this new iMac could serve as a display in itself.
In other words if you already have PowerMac, could you use this iMac display as a standalone monitor?
That way you could harness the power of your Dual 2.5 G5 for serious work at the office, and then detach and bring the iMac home for play.
No, but you connect them both to the same subnet (gigabit Ethernet is a must here) and view the Powermac 2.5mhz through Apple Remote Desktop.
On behalf of Steve Jobs I apologise for everyone not being canvassed on the new iMac or explaining the complexities of contemporary industrial design.
Sweet suffering baby Jesus.
iMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 4x speed, reads DVDs at up to 8x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 16x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 8x speed, reads CDs at up to 24x speed
eMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed
The iMac is a nice machine though, but 4x SuperDrive? GeForce FX5200 Ultra?
Originally posted by gedboy
Why doesn't everyone feck off? Seriously.
On behalf of Steve Jobs I apologise for everyone not being canvassed on the new iMac or explaining the complexities of contemporary industrial design.
Sweet suffering baby Jesus.
Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick would have been my choice of blasphemy, but hey all each to his own.
Originally posted by triotango
Is it me or does the new iMac have a worse SuperDrive than the eMac?
iMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW): writes DVD-R discs at up to 4x speed, reads DVDs at up to 8x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 16x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 8x speed, reads CDs at up to 24x speed
eMac Superdrive spec:
SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW); writes DVD-R discs at up to 8x speed, reads DVDs at up to 10x speed, writes CD-R discs at up to 24x speed, writes CD-RW discs at up to 10x speed, reads CDs at up to 32x speed
The iMac is a nice machine though, but 4x SuperDrive? GeForce FX5200 Ultra?
well, conventional wisdom says that slot-loading and non-horizontal drives are generally slower... i don't know if that's to ensure good operation, but it seems to be the standard. same held true for the cube's "toaster" and other such drives. apparently if you use a tray, you can do some sick rotation speeds.
I've owned computers at home for close to 20 years (starting with a BBC Micro
The trade-off for this is a superb design, a quiet computer, and a computer that 'just works'. Pretty good trade-off for me.
I'm not a gamer, but for those that are - get an Xbx, PS2 or whatever, not a g5 iMac!
This new iMac may well replace my wife's original iMac.......
Originally posted by fahlman
What percentage of the entire computer buying public are gamers?...(uninspiring rant)... Anyways, buy an xbox, playstation, or a gamecube if you want to play games.
Your missing my point. Basically what I'm saying is that for the price Apple is asking consumers to spend on Macs they should at least put in current technology. Macs these days always seem to be 1 step behind current technology but still charging top dollar. Apple has limited their potential buying group by not including, or offering a current GPU with the iMac (as well as powermac) line.
I leave you with 2 questions:
How many kids use computers? How many kids like videogames?
Originally posted by trajik78
Your mssing my point. Basically what I'm saying is that for the price Apple is asking consumers to spend on Macs they should at least put in current technology. Macs these days always seem to be 1 step behind current technology but still charging top dollar.
Dell Dimension 4600
P4 2.8GHz
Win XP Pro
256MB DDR SDRAM <-- same
80GB Ultra ATA HDD <-- same (iMac probably better off with SATA)
Dual drives DVD-ROM and CDRW
128MB GeForce FX 5200 <-- more memory than iMac
Added speakers (cheapest ones)
Firewire (had to add this for $50)
17" Ultrasharp flat panel
Free printer
$1287 with discounts
The iMac stacks up well against this for a very similar price with a *much* better software package.
Also Sony V series AIO
2.6GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
120GB Ultra ATA drive
Combo drive
Wireless mouse and keyboard
15" Xbrite screen
starting at...
$1499
Sony W series AIO
2.8GHz P4
Integrated SIS graphics w/32MB shared memory
512MB DDR SDRAM
200GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD±RW / CD-RW Drive
17.5" LCD
15" Xbrite screen
Starting at...
$1999
The new iMac is fine (not perfect but fine) and some of you are mixing up fantasy with reality of actual retail PC prices. People often mix "build it yourself" prices with those of actual off the shelf prices you would pay at CompUSA/Bestbuy/Circuit City or even off the web (where I just got these prices).
Check out those nice *Non upgradeable* graphics Sony offers.
I'm sure with more effort I could find some cheaper ones but overall I picked decent (as decent as PCs get) examples.
Apple is really not asking consumers to pay a whole lot more than Dell or Sony...
It's not about upgrades
It's not about FW800 or lack of RAM
It's not even about whether it's white or aluminium
It's about the fact that it looks ugly
top heavy
bad proportions
cheap looking alloy stand
1980s square corners
(I dont like the new flat screens very much either)
So flame me
After waiting and waiting, I'm off to buy an eMac dammit
That's why i have an xbox that i NEVER use
I especially like the whining about the looks....umm looks like a kickass display to me....guts included.