POLL: New iMac, like or no-like?



  • Reply 41 of 86
    Gulp...sweat...I've just seen the promotional video for the iMac G5.

    It IS a grower..!


    Ives has an RDF field ala potent. Could he be the heir apparent..?

    That iMac G5 looked gorgeous on the couple's desk.

    The back of it is really sexy...a real sexy ass...

    ...Apple should use this as their advert to advertise the iMac.

    It says what needs to be said.

    Quicktime. DVDs. Music. iLife. Hub. Tools. Empowering. Simplicity. Ties in the iPod success.

    A masterstroke to tie in the iMac to the iPod.

    Designed by the iPod team indeed..!

    Ride the wave Apple.

    Time to buy some Apple stock...this could be as successful as the first iMac...we've got a sleeper folks!

    Lemon Bon Bon

    PS. I'm seriously considering the iMac G5 as my Photoshop machine until a 3 gig Antares machine hits to be my 3D Mac machine...

    PPS. If ONLY it had a 2 gig G5 with better (9800 or 9700 mobility) graphic card option...I'd have blown my credit card at the store. As it is...I'm seriously thinking about it. You don't need anything better than a 5200fx for 2D work anyhow.


    20 inch. 2 gig. 9800xt. I'd pay £1595. Easy. Maybe more.

    Storm the gates of Infinite Loop...I want a S.E iMac G5...CHARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR GE!!!!
  • Reply 42 of 86
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    Lets see:

    1. Its White. White and shiny-two things I dont want in a monitor. Glare, white is too bright to stare at, the main thing that turned me off about the eMac is that its white and shiny.

    2. The base doesnt look too sturdy but I would have to touch it first.

    3. Another interesting design from Apple that will sell well for 6 months then taper off until another swell design is expected from them.

    4. Apple needs to dump White already. And dont make it glossy-obnoxious glare is the result.

    Bottom line-if Apple would spare the design expense and build a $700 tower they would increase market share and not have to come up with expensive designs that turn some people on and turn some people off. Basically the same story as always.

    Apple needs to place the focus on the superiority of MacOSX vs Windows. All the problems people face now with spyware, viruses, microsofts intrusive policies have many people considering buying a Mac instead until they realize they are forced to buy an expensive all in one-For the OS, NOT the fancy all in one computer.

    Apple-focus on the OS, people are quite happy with towers. If you cant live without an all in one (and they can be helpful to schools), then keep the eMac(change the freaking color already) and build a consumer tower for $700. Thats the ticket.
  • Reply 43 of 86
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member

    Originally posted by Yevgeny

    God NO! My Dell laptop and desktop at work are black. SO stinking ugly. The white look is a wonderful thing, and oddly, it gives Apple some wonderful free marketing- the white motif makes them visually distinctive from the competition.

    White is the new black

    2 years ago. Dump the white. I was expecting a metallic look
  • Reply 44 of 86
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    You're right, MacOSX has come a long way and works quite well. Apple should focus on that point and just make a freaking affordable tower. They turn as many people off as they turn on with these designs.


    Originally posted by NaplesX

    Maybe not you, but i can't even begin numbering the people that criticize every little aspect of this line. I bought a new sunflower and it is a great machine from top to bottom. I bought a new iBook... same thing. I have used every machine that apple has made for the past 6 years and have no real complaints. After they got rid of OS 9, they won me over, lock, stock..

    Reliability is my biggest issue and apple has that all sown up.

    Speed is down the list a couple, for me.

    I am also impressed with the compatibility. I plugged in an old usb epson printer with no documented driver support and within seconds it found a driver that would work and i was printing using CUPS, I think.

    I have found that so many things that "just work" with the new macs that even that is no longer an issue. rendezvous is incredibly useful.

    It seems like connectivity is becoming exponentially more important than some of the things that used to be requirements.

    I keep talking myself into buying another Mac...

  • Reply 45 of 86
    placeboplacebo Posts: 5,767member

    Originally posted by Yevgeny






    Boring ugly computer.

    That's what the Mac community collectively called the Powermac G5, and look at the consensus now.
  • Reply 46 of 86
    iposteriposter Posts: 1,560member
    I like, for the price/performance ratio, if nothing else. Not as sexy as the Sunflower, but I could get a better machine with the same screen (17") for up to $400 less than what I paid last year for my G4 iMac!!

  • Reply 47 of 86
    My two cents' worth: it's always the case that you can't judge it until you've seen it for real. I was dubious about the new Cinema Displays till I visited the store and got the chance to see how sleek and solid a presence they actually have. And the stand was very stable, so any complaints should be purely about the psychology of the look.

    As for the bezel, firstly I think it was a smart idea to reference the eMac if they really had to compromise. And they probably had to: consider that a lot of heavy and hot electronics have to go SOMEWHERE. We're talking the power supply, the G5 cooling block (I wouldn't want something that hot sitting behind the screen), hard drive, etc. Having to stack all this on the back destroys the flat form factor, and on the sides probably makes it a tipping hazard.

    Yeah, I dig it.
  • Reply 48 of 86
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    no can't say that I do. However, I will reserve final judgement until I see it in person.
  • Reply 49 of 86
    i like it, i really do, i like the simple design, i like almost everything, i mean, i don't like what a lot of people here seem to not like, the bezel, the graphix card, and that kind of thing, but i really like it, there's something about it, and i really want one
  • Reply 50 of 86
    moosemanmooseman Posts: 126member
    ...crap, crap, crap, and more crap.

    Christ, I can't believe how many people are lauding this POS.

    Nvidia MXM upgradeable video? Uhh, no.

    But hey, if you want a $1299 computer without wi-fi or bluetooth ($1430 with both) that you get to toss every two years, then by all means, you just MUST buy the new iMac.

    Damn it, I wish everyone would finally just turn their nose up the crap Apple keeps peddling and force them to give us what we want.
  • Reply 51 of 86
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member

    Originally posted by mooseman

    Nvidia MXM upgradeable video? Uhh, no.

    But hey, if you want a $1299 computer without wi-fi or bluetooth ($1430 with both) that you get to toss every two years, then by all means, you just MUST buy the new iMac.

    Um, hello... thats what Apple wants

    Seriously though, why would Apple put upgradable video in an AIO they intend to make just-upgradable-enough to pass on something to the consumer. Most people understand hard drive space, some even more the purpose of RAM, but where does an Nvidia MXM upgradable video module offer people who use iPhoto? GarageBand?

    Processor, Memory and Storage are whats most important to the average consumer. Lets not confuse "gamer boyz" with the majority. Apple doesn't address gamers, haven't yet and don't see them doing it now. Can you hear me Aurora, over your Alienware? pfft. anyway...

    Yes, I also need to see this thing in person to pass final judgment but all looks good. Was considering upgrading my Cube and picking up a 20" ACD for work but the 20" iMac G5 beats it on price, power, almost everything. Why risk Cubey having a meltdown when I can keep him quiet for other low-power uses.

    Colors would be nice, but didn't we all say that about the original iPod? They finally introduced them later and I have a feeling Apple will do similar with the iMac. We will see.
  • Reply 52 of 86
    Love it
  • Reply 53 of 86
    I like its hardware pretty well. The main problems are a lack of base RAM and the lukewarm GPU, but I'm sure those will be taken care of within six to eight months or so (remember how soon minor revisions came to the original iMac and iBook). The internal design is great, very clever and impressive. Like when I open up my 512k or iMac 333.

    The design, of course, I'll need to see in person, but I already like it better than the iMac G4. The iMac G4, to my eyes, had some incongruent design features. The round base was particularly stupid-looking to me, especially in person. I also found the "floating screen" aspect sort of ugly, except to the user, for whom it was beautiful. It was a little awkward-looking all around.

    The iMac should be a modern interpretation of the original Mac. When I put my 512k and my iMac next to each other, there's an obvious and attractive family resemblance. The figure that they share is the ideal all-in-one CRT design. I'm not sure if we've found that ideal for an LCD-based all-in-one, but this new iMac looks to be much closer to it than was the iMac G4. There was no family resemblance in the iMac G4, but there is a subtle one in the iMac G5 that could easily be made more pronounced in a future revision. The rounded corners could be more pronounced, for example.

    The large bottom bezel isn't attractive in pictures, but I'd bet that it's a lot less distracting in person.

    I would have preferred a few more character lines. I don't think that would have detracted from the minimalist aesthetic.

    These issues might all be addressed in the next update.
  • Reply 54 of 86
    lucidalucida Posts: 104member
    After a day of hating it I've just ordered the 17" superdrive version, with bluetooth keyboard and mouse (to save me having to have wires dangling down the back.

    Looks good on the promo video!
  • Reply 55 of 86
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    I think the 20"er is going to be scary in the flesh.

    I was packing my 20" Sunflower up last night and I placed the protective bag over the screen (the bag is roughly a 4:3 aspect ratio, as fold arounds the bottom of the screen and is secured at the back of the screen). I didn't secure the bag, but instead let it hang there, whilst I walked out of the room to fetch something else.

    On returning to the room is occured to be that this 4:3 bag had the same surface area as the new iMac. That's going to be one big ugly wall of white. If this new iMac has a personality, then it's an in your "face" staring-you-out kind of a personality.
  • Reply 56 of 86
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    they were headed in the right direction, but it seems like they just flipped the display over and put a stand on a pwr book prototype. the result is cool, but still, frighteningly close to the gateway profile units.
  • Reply 57 of 86
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member

    Originally posted by lucida

    After a day of hating it I've just ordered the 17" superdrive version,

    <voice of steve> thats right...drink the koolaid...drink it....all of it...aw thats a good lad.</voice of steve>

    you hated it so mutch that you dropped 1500+ on it??? wow... what would you have spent if you liked it...
  • Reply 58 of 86
    This probably sounds really stupid, but i'm in a slow mood...

    It's a 20" viewable screen right, the 20" isn't the 4:3 enclosure?

    Either way, i think it's great and i'll be saving up for a 20" model. It looks even better in the expo pictures, where it's 'real'.
  • Reply 59 of 86
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member

    Originally posted by Maffrew

    It's a 20" viewable screen right, the 20" isn't the 4:3 enclosure?

  • Reply 60 of 86
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member

    Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon

    Initially disappointed it wasn't more...then...if you take off £26...and bang(!) you got £895 inc VAT. For a G5 processor and board. Not bad at all. Psychologically much better. So much so...I'm surprise Apple didn't squeeze the margins in Rip-Off Britain to breech those price points.

    In fact, the next model up with 1.8 gig G5 isn't that far off the £995 mark.

    That would have both models under £1K!

    That might happen, after Apple uses the initial excitement to pad their coffers a little (and, to be fair, to pay off the costs and inefficiencies in ramping up the line). I can see this design being updated regularly, and scaling down price-wise, in a way that the iMac 2 never could.


    What has gnarked me is that the entry iMac 3 comes in at £720.79 quid from the $1299 currency convertion.

    That's outrageous mark-up for Apple UK. Not impressed. They have the chance to got for a £795 or even £895 model and, impossibly, go for the weird £919?

    It would be 795 not including VAT, right? 20% VAT pushes it up around 850 pounds, and then they're not really padding that much. Unless I'm missing something?


    No doubts. The high end model should have 512 megs min'. Should have a 9800xt. Even if a/ they have to raise price or b/ intro another 20 inch model as a special edition with said price hike.

    I've griped about Apple's RAM policy before. I understand why they skimp (so that the resellers can offer free RAM, since the MAP doesn't allow them to lower the price much), but I really wish they'd get over that. In the mean time, buying from a reseller will probably get you a machine with 512MB RAM for $4 less (in the US) than the Apple Store charge for the base model.


    I hope Amorph aint lurking...I don't want him thinking I'm going soft on the AIO concept...

    Heh. It's just a matter of being able to appreciate something on its own merits, rather than universalizing your own tastes. I defended the AIO concept from the comfort of my internally-expanded PowerMac 8600 back in the day, you know.

    BTW, the absolute consistency of the GPU in the iMacs does have an advantage beyond cost reduction: It makes the hardware much more consistent, "console-like" (as John Carmack described the original iMac line), and therefore an attractive target for low-level optimization. The punchline of the hardcore obsession with tweaking and overclocking up-to-the-instant hardware is that it makes hardware a wildly instant and constantly moving target, which means that developers can't optimize for any particular machine, which means that all those carefully spec'd and tweaked machines are actually inefficient relative to their potential.(OC'ers also got a splash of cold water from DOOM 3 recently, when id noted that overclocked GPUs might not be able to run the game at all!)

    That's not to say that this iMac will ever own all comers at a LAN party, only that game developers should be able to eke out much more of the iMac's potential. Absolute consistency of hardware is one reason why the XBox can get away with a 733MHz Celeron and a tweaked GeForce2MX.
Sign In or Register to comment.