TS reports on new imac specs

Mostly as expected. But what's up with the graphics card?

Nice ... and EXPENSIVE.

So much for my dreams of a cheap, headless, single processor, minimally upgradeable G5. Hopefully they have something else up their sleeves for later release.

I am kinda glad I didnt wait for an iMac now and got my 1.5 Powerbook instead .. I was thinking if the iMac didnt hit with at least 2ghz then I wouldnt buy it.. looks like I guessed right. The graphics card in the rumors are a bit of a let down again.. with tiger leveraging more and more on the GPU the powerbooks ATI card and 128mb will be just a treat.

Looks like a Rev B G5 powerbook is my next purchase :)

Cant wait to see the pics tho, hopefully they do look a fair bit nicer than that sony which is very ickky..

Originally posted by BeigeUser
Mostly as expected. But what's up with the graphics card?

The educational (GeForce4 MX) won't support Core Image.
All of the consumer models (GeForce 5200 Ultra) meet the spec for Core Image.

Differentiates from the PowerMac.
If the eMac gets a G5, even money says edu stays GF4 and consumer gets 5200 Ultra to match.

Or maybe it's all RDF and the real GPU rocks. "Way beyond the rumour sites"

Cool that the 20th Anniversary iMac will echo the design of Spartacus/"Twentieth Anniversary Mac"

the thinksecret article has me confused

is the edu optical driveless model the 1300 model or an even cheaper model?

17 inch iMac
1.6Ghz G5
80GB HD
Geforce 5300 Ultra 64MB RAM
256MB RAM
airport, firewire, usb, ethernet
$1299 is not bad

problem.....no superdrive. if that had a superdrive it'd be a pretty nice effort. without it, you go into the unaffordable zone since you cant BTO iMacs.

we'll have to see. i'm suspicious since I think the iMacs are a very tightly kept secret and this is a fairly early leak...but thinksecret has a great record.

little dissapointed Apple isn't being more aggressive

Originally posted by hmurchison
Look I don't care about product differentiation. NOcomputer over $1k should come without a DVD Burner. The memory isn't a big deal as 512MB is what $70 or less. But someone that buys a Mac over a grand should be able to burn DVDs with iDVD period. And what's with the lack of Gigabit? A freakin $120 taiwanese motherboard has gigabit now.

I'm ok with the GPU for this first generation, I'm ok with a 1.6 or 1.8Ghz G5 but for chrissakes please don't cut the Macs in areas that don't need to be cut.

agree with every word you said. that could be a first.

DVD burners are so cheap...so in desire...and so popular right now that it would be a crime for apple to not include on the low end when they have the best software for the drives.

if that had a dvd burner I'D buy one.

Originally posted by zenarcade
As Jamil has so eloquently put it: The Sony VAIO is damn ugly.

I hope that the new iMac can do as the first generations did, it made people fall in love with it.

I have an iMac450DV+ , and everyone who sees it for the first time, have to touch it. They shake their heads, with a smile and a laughter.

The iMac is not a pc, it is something more than that. We all know this, lets hope Apple knows it too !

Zon

Hey that's cool man I'm glad it's not a PC but if I'm spending $1300 clams I want a DVD burner and something that can run Doom III a little faster than 8fps. I'll cut Apple some slack because this computer was supposed to be shipping already but Rev B needs a little juicing up in some areas.

Originally posted by applenut
:no:

i cant believe we're already looking towards rev b.

why can't apple just do it right the first time:\

I'm not steamed because I have to wait until next spring anyways so I'll hang tight for whatever Apple has for a followup.

I will say I'm happy that Steve is back on board but I don't share the Press' irrational fear that if Steve where to somehow give it up Apple is in trouble. In ways the iMac shows what's wrong with Apple. They are still still in love with "Props over Property". Apple would trade 10,000 sales for the adjulation of the press over one of their products or at least it seems that way.

I think it is possible that the specs may change. I do find it strange that Apple has stated that that the G5 is constrained. The iMac would be the only current shipping computer with 1.6Ghz G5s and it would share the 1.8s with the lowend Powermac.

I'm sure it'll look sexy though and make me forget some of it's issues other than a DVD Burner. I just can't believe Apple would ship iLife on an iMac G5 that can't burn DVDs. My mind won't accept it.

Originally posted by BeigeUser
Only the entry-level model won't have a Superdrive right? And it is still possible that it may have a Superdrive option as BTO. Why is everyone so worked up?

1299 is a high entry point. the next model will surely be 1499. an even higher entry point if you want a superdrive.

apple doesnt do BTO on iMacs.

Originally posted by BeigeUser
Okay, so the problem is not necessarily Apple's lineup but rather Apple's pricing. If the entry model was $999, then things would have been better.

I don't think Apple's lineup can be changed at this point but maybe they will read these posts and readjust the prices.

if that were 999 i dont think anyone would be complaining.

1299 is a pricepoint on the high end of most people buying home desktops these days. for that price you should have a dvd burner. hell you can get them for 90 bucks retail now. 8x drives

Originally posted by Messiah
What happens when you manufacture to many of the 17" backplates and everybody's buying the 20"?

Nobody has the answer to that yet. But if the past is any indication, Apple will come up with a clever way to work around that. Don't forget that Apple has Jonathan Ives.

Perhaps Phil Schiller should/is going to do the keynote ala Paris..?

(Pictures Phil on stage...sounds of crickets chirping when the feature/price spec are announced...)

Lemon Bon Bon

Fear not Lemon, help has arrived.

1299 and NO SUPERDRIVE!!!

1299 and a 1.6Ghz G5 which we know is only marginally better than the fastest G4.

1299 and fixed 17" screen.

1299 and no internal expansion/upgradability

1299 and an absolutely anemic 256MB of base ram

1299 and a pitiful 64MB of VRAM

1299 and a stingy 80GB HDD

Fvck, that's a seriously weak misguided new product. When is Apple going to understand that disposable computer needs a more affordable price? All they've done is create another boutique computer. They forced you to take the bundled display, and haven't offered any sort of deal on it. WHat's more they've anchored it so that you can't ever do anything about it.

There is no smilie that makes for an adequate reply to the priceland fantasy in which Jobs operates. Maybe they pulled out the last of his sense along with that tumor.

IDIOTS!

I almost forgot, they may as well add that folding screen from the Sony, and take AIO concept to it's most absurd conclusion.

There aren't any families going to be buying desktops in that range after about 3 months -- or once all the die-hard mac heads order theirs.

Apple hasn't released this thing yet, so we shouldn't be getting ourselves into a twist, but if the news turns out to be true, Apple hasn't learned a damn thing from the past few years. Just slapping a G5 into it isn't going to make it a significantly better product than what it is currently; the other components have to be just as good. :no:

Originally posted by Jim Paradise
Apple hasn't released this thing yet, so we shouldn't be getting ourselves into a twist...

Sure, you are right... however... I don't know how much you have followed Think Secret's predictions and reports, but people here have a very valid reason to worry. Think Secret has such a good reputation as a rumor site, that when they say something, it is almost a given it will be so.

I am afraid that Apple will screw it badly this time. And it will be no next big chance for Apple's anniversary year before the end of this year. Unless they plan to release something completely different and the Think Secret report is 100% out of phase.

Originally posted by Zapchud
Golden rule: The real specs are never better than those reported in advance by Think Secret.

I mean, a GeForce FX 5200 in a non-upgradeable, $1299 computer? 256MB RAM isn't enough to have OS X running, and play one modern game. It's enough for surfing, listening to music and maybe one more task - then it starts jumping and chopping. This is just sick.

Wouldn't the 1299$ price tag be for the Edu model though, the one with no optical drive, 56k modem and a GF4 MX with 32MB VRAM?

But what's up with the graphics card?

Well, Apple ships their "Power" Macs with a crap 5200 nVidia card so its no shocker that the new iMac gets the same.

How about the 4MX in the lowend iMac.

Didn't that come out like 10 years ago?

well, folks, here's your G5 powerbook. :)

Here we go again!
The same comments and arguments come up every-time Apple introduces a revised iMac. Apple cannot bring the computer in at Dell's commodity prices. Apple needs higher margins. Apple cannot buy "off the shelf" components from a choice of vendors as Dell and HP do. It's always been that way. Sure some parts are already out there, but most are specifically designed for the iMac. $999 iMacs would be hard to produce with any down the line profit to Apple. This is a public corporation. They cannot produce "loss leaders" to mollify a handful of people without losing money for their shareholders. It is in fact illegal to deliberately do so. Rant over. :devil:

LOL did you say 4mx?lol lol did you say fx5200? lol lol iF Apple uses the worst & old video like 4mx & fx5200 they can expect to have a lot of imacs laying around. who in there right mind would buy any new machine with these dog video chips. If this holds true then its easy to see that some idiots are running and ruining Apple. 4mx was old garbage and fx5200 is garbage. a poor video sysytem with no upgrade has killed imac yet they are going to do more of the same? idiots runnning apple just dont get it do they. 64bit fx5200 will kill off sales faster then sky high prices.

CONFIRMED!

If these specs are true I'm not buying. Period. Think Secret has been on the money recently also.

I really was hoping for a display-less single G5 system but I know Apple will never make it because too many of us want one. I don't need dual CPUs, and I don't need an Apple display. Why can't Apple get this, and make a box for the rest of us??

Originally posted by Kickaha
The optical-drive-free low end model makes *perfect* sense for two arenas: education, and... wait for it... business.

Why?

No one can boot off a CD and bypass the permissions on the drive.

The drive is ghosted off of a network boot system.

It's perfect.

Make that sucker $999, and it'd be the perfect machine to sell in lots of 50 bundled with an Xserve.

This would be an ideal machine for corporate networks. I wholeheartedly agree.

Poor video systems will kill this machines sales to consumers.the fact is fx5200 has no business in any Mac. its cheap crap thats cheap for apple to buy and is last in performance. They should be ashamed for using fx5200 in powermac. This machine will be another looser from the artist at Apple who have forgotten performance and dont seem to get what the video card option has done for the PC market. Apple has become to busy at styling games instead of just building a machine for consumers. its like they dont want to sell computers. these video specs are a freaking joke.

I'll bet the specs are almost correct. I read that there is a mistake in the number on the graphics card? You'l probably be able to get a build to order so you can play your games. We'll see. I think its interesting that this upcoming new iMac may actually be the design that Steve rejected when he introduced the Sunflower iMac... or at least a variation on the original. Just a guess of course.

Now, finally, AI can publish their illustration of the new iMac!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. Kickaha. Don't post something that makes sense. There's no room on AI for reasoned thought! :lol:

Originally posted by Aurora
Poor video systems will kill this machines sales to consumers.the fact is fx5200 has no business in any Mac. its cheap crap thats cheap for apple to buy and is last in performance. They should be ashamed for using fx5200 in powermac. This machine will be another looser from the artist at Apple who have forgotten performance and dont seem to get what the video card option has done for the PC market. Apple has become to busy at styling games instead of just building a machine for consumers. its like they dont want to sell computers. these video specs are a freaking joke.

I disagree. Sure, they could have put an option for better graphics in it but for people like my parents, my job, schools and a good many other places. A lot of PC's are using integrated graphics Intel or NForce or other and a lot of those are purchased by consumers and business as well.

The prices are higher than people wanted. I'm not sure how that's a big surprise. I don't think they are near as bad as people make them out. I fully expected 17" at $1299 in another thread here.

Those who realistically expected a headless iMac were truly deluded. I could see where a smaller tower (maybe single processor) would be nice but I can't see the cube making a return soon.

I'm interested to see what the machines look like. I'm hoping they have more of the appeal the original iMacs had. The original iMacs had at best a Rage Pro video chip (with 2 to 16 MB) and still sold like mad.

There are still a couple weeks until it's officially unvelied. TS may have gotten some info but perhaps it is not 100%. Who knows?

Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.

The other specs are fine,G5 at 1.6 and 1.8 is nice but this video system will kill off sales. this is absurd

I'm fine with an iMac 3 for around 750 with 17 inch LCD, 1.6 G5 and p*ss poor graphics. Most PCs around this mark have integrated graphics or a graphic card of comparable 'low' quality. Only 256 megs of ram in a machine of this price is poor. 512 sticks cost nothing these days. And I bet Apple gets them loads cheaper. But if its 995 inc VAT then it's P*SS POOR!

If Apple can sell an iBook for 795 then they sure should be able to get a low end desktop around this mark if not lower. Alot of PCs are now at this price, offering 512 megs of ram and a 17 inch LCD and crap graphics, if Apple can near match that? Fine. Nothing new here.

A 1.6 G5 and 32 meg graphic card? Erm. 64 megs, surely? Should be able to run Tiger okay and be an 'okay' edu desktop and a fine X-Serve client in bunches of '50'. Fine. No optical drive. Fine. So a bulk sell iMac barebones can go for 600?

Who knows.

But I echo previous sentiments. Yeesh, for the price difference in the low end consumer machine...offer a goddamn superdrive. They're dirt cheap now. Bout worth skimping on. What? An extra 35 to the price?

But what irks me is that no upgradeable graphics slot. NO decent graphics card option in the top end version which will chime in at 1500 no doubt. OUCH.

KarMARRRRN! For said price. Okay. No 6800. Get that. I do. But what about a Radeon 9800xt? A Radeon 9700 at least. It's in the Powerbook!

Apple are in a constant quandry. Pants specs. Less people buy. Less profits.

Take a hit on margins. Decent specs. More people buy. More profits. Market(!) share!!!

How much do an extra 256 megs, a superdrive and a decent graphics card add up to anyhow?

200? Tops? I expect that on a 'high end' machine.

And don't get me started on the graphics card choices in the PowerMac...

It's about value. Take away the G5 and it looks like Apple haven't learned their lesson...bend over Apple...here we go...one more time...

Lemon Bon Bon

why can't apple just do it right the first time

Shrugs...

Lemon Bon Bon:\

How hard would it be for Apple to make a plain alu box/mini tower/pizza horizontal/vertical/shuttle/cube... and let the end user configure what they want from base price/spec points?

They've done the R&D for said device 'tween the PowerMac, Cube and iMac 3.

Bundle with 17 inch alu version of same alu LCDs and hey...

We're all happy... AIO freaks can hide the 'cube' and pretend the alu monitor is an AIO and Cube fans can show it off with pride. And mini-tower freaks (myself included) can say dey got a mini-tower with a single G5 in it and an upgradeable graphics slot... WIN WIN WIN!!!

I hope the 32 megs of video ram is a joke... I almost whizzed myself laughing...

"Fear not Lemon, help has arrived."

:)

(Image of Lemon kicking the iMac 3 specs over to the tag-team corner...) 'Okay ''tag'', Matsu, it's you're turn again...'

Lemon Bon Bon

This seems like some BS, doesn't it? Here's the things that just don't make any sense:

1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer (http://www.dolby.com/manufacturers/). Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.

If it smells like a rat...

i don't knwo what is wrong with some of you.

Read the thinksecret link again...

Lemon Bon Bon :grumble:

OT: Why can't I accesss TS website? Using 10.3.5 and latest safari?

These specs if even close will not grow marketshare for Apple. in fact by getting so carried away with monitors and all in ones this machine will almost make sure that market will be lost. we all know iMac has to be crippled because of Powermac but having such poor video means this machine will chase away buyers. Apple has taken its eye off the ball and is still chasing the failure of all in ones. This machine seems to be a step backwards from current iMac except for its cpu. looking at hard drive,memory and video this thing is going to be a looser big time when it comes to market share. are they trying to kill the iMac? i would say yes.

Originally posted by PB
Sure, you are right... however... I don't know how much you have followed Think Secret's predictions and reports, but people here have a very valid reason to worry. Think Secret has such a good reputation as a rumor site, that when they say something, it is almost a given it will be so.

I am afraid that Apple will screw it badly this time. And it will be no next big chance for Apple's anniversary year before the end of this year. Unless they plan to release something completely different and the Think Secret report is 100% out of phase.

Yeah, Think Secret is usually spot-on. I think this is one of the first times that I'm hoping they're wrong! But I'm equally as worried that Apple will screw this one up.

Originally posted by Aurora
These specs if even close will not grow marketshare for Apple.<sarcasm>I could have sworn that Apple stated that they wanted to increase market share, so you must be mistaken.<sarcasm>
I sincerely hope that ThinkSecret got bad information.

Needs 512MB for the base model.
Needs a Radeon 9600 at the bottom end.
Needs a Radeon 9600XT at the top end.
Needs a 160GB HD - my 80GB is way too small, and I'm deleting stuff all the time.

It's not that with a 5200 it wouldn't be able to play games etc, it matters when customers see a mac next to a pc, and the imac specs are practically half as good as the pcs. I've seen this happen, and customers just stay away for that exact reason. It needs to be competitive, doesn't matter if you get a built in LCD, it still needs to have the goods.

If these are the real specs the new iMac has "flop" written all over it. :lol:

A new form factor means it needs a serious hardware upgrade as well, and this according to TS won't be delivered. :p :)

The cube returns! and not in a good way. It's the same thing all over again. High price + cool design + not up to date internals = a poor selling failure.:devil:

Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.

i believe the only person with the same old whine is you.

1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer. Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.

1. not disastrous, just not good. i don't expect them to release an imac with better graphics than their towers anyways. and the towers, the low end at least, has shitty graphics.
2. I'm pretty sure they mean processing inside and outputting as a 5.1 decoded stream? i don't know. the powermac outputs fine so I am not worried and instead excited that optical is now on the iMac...or will be
3. i guess we'll find out
4. Thinksecret is unclear as to the edu price. the emac will still be around, as will the iBook. education should not be a concern with this product.

Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
I'm just pointing out the fact that unverified specs are posted and the barage of negativism from the same people begins. Why not wait until the real specs are revealed. I use my "lousy" 17" iMac to design artwork, make CDRs, surf the net, and download photos and other things. I've made iMovies and DVDs on my iMac. It fits its purpose for me. It's kind of funny that PC centric magazines and writers are more inamored with the iMac then so-called Apple "supporters". When the current model came out it got great reviews. Certainly the iMac is not for everyone. But you have another choice called the PowerMac.

Also, Think Secret has not always been perfect/correct in their advanced pronouncements by the way.

In the end, wait until it's time, then whine if you don't like something!

you can do all the things you said on an iMac from 2 years ago. Just because all of that is possible does not mean Apple does not have an obligation to improve performance...maybe even to a level where most people won't benefit from it.

Apple basically contradicts themselves. When they talk software they say the GPU is the future, alleviates all the CPU problems, the faster the better, can do all these cool real time effects that mere mortals will benefit from. And they when they talk hardware, they give you the bare minimum.

that all goes for the low end though. the high end imac does not compare well at all to the competition and is clearly where apple is killing us by their margin greed

Originally posted by Jamil
Check out the Think Secret story on the new Imac specs. 17 & 20 inch widescreen, confirms AIO pizza box design similar to Sony, priced from 1300 - 2200,
Geforce MX 5200 ultra graphics (any good?).

A GeForce MX 5200 on a brand new computer - oh come on now are Mac users that stupid that they would accept this. Esepcially in the context of having already told the world where they are going with software excelleration in the future.

Still crippled RAM.

This is probally the biggest complaint that most people have had recently with respect to the hardware Apples sells. Agian this is just going to drive customers away. The majority of PC's now adays come with 512MB and often 1 gig in this price range. Again the question that pops up is are Mac users this stupid?

No pics though.

If the top of line is $2200, considering the 20" cinema display is 1300 by itself, seems like a good price.

Why would the price of a cinema display have any bearign on the precieved value of a consumer machine. This is a wholly different class of hardware.

The value of the iMac will be determined by comparison to like priced models targetting the same market.

Al though the edu $1300 model seems too high for schools. Why take this over an Emac? Lack of an optical drive can't be the only attraction. Might as well release a optical drive less Emac and reduce the price by $100-$200. They'll gobble it up.
The eMac certainly has its attractions, but it does seem that Apple is oblivious to those qualities. Apple also doesn't seem to understand why a machine like the eMac is so desirable for many applications.

I don't know how accurate TS is with this but it is beginning to sound like Cube Mac all over agian. The toaster died due to high price and really terrible specs, sounds like the new machine is being configured to follow in the cubes foot steps.

I have not read the whole thread but I am sure someone has complained about prices.

Just remember these will be in excess demand for a while after announcement. High prices are good then. I hear the whole reason for the redesign was because the manufacturing costs of the arm just bever came down.

A new design might allow lower pices in the future as these have been out for a while. That never really happened on the iMac(2).

All in all looks like good specs. Lets just hope its not too bulky like that Vaio

Originally posted by applenut
yea, you have fun with your 17 and 20 inch tablets:rolleyes:

hmmm... yeah, you have a point. a rude one, but a point nonetheless. ;)

but what exactly is the difference between a 17" LAPtop and a 17" tablet? now the 20", um, yeah, that's a cafeteria tray.

Here's to hoping that this information was designed to find out the leak to TS.

Otherwise, this is just BAD NEWS all around.

A 1.6 powermac can be had cheaper from apple, refurbished of course. With a super drive it's a way better deal.

Gaming is an important feature of a "consumer" computer. The iMac does the other things very well: Internet, e-mail, digital hub, and the occasional word processing/taxes. But if Apple is serious about increasing marketshare in the consumer space, gaming cannot be ignored.

Some say that iMac users should buy a PS2 and forget about games on their Mac. But that's the kind of thinking which keeps the Mac in the niche computer status. Most serious gamers and many casual gamers will play games on both their consoles and their PCs.

Why would Apple introduce new hardware models that do not support Tiger's Core Graphics?

TS is wrong.

And their prices are TOO high. The iMac2 had 2 problems: high price and perceived mediocre performance.

I hope Apple is awake enough to solve them both.

YOu guys don't get it. For education, unless you are in digital video class, they are all using computers that are 10+ years old and are some of the wose peaces of crap you will ever use. For education, also, most will still be getting the eMac, at $750, it does everything you need and more. Though the iMac is good enough for iMovie and pretty much everything else a normal user would do. If you are looking for a computer for games get a powermac g5 or just get a freaking xbox or ps2. Look around on bestbuy, almost every computer at the $1300 price range will have the built-in intel shit. Also I know one of those will be great for my family, does everything a normal user would need.

I think your being a bit generous in calling these people idiots. This is a computer whose major sales will come in 2005 - the configuraiton simply sucks.

Maybe it is Jobs desire to simply shut down the Mac division at Apple. He offers up such hardware and when the time comes can blame the lack of consumer interest. The reality is they will be selling less of these than the old iMac2 in four months time. So maybe it is a matter of evil intentions and not idiotcy that is the problem.

I'm rather hopeing though that TS has had the wool pulled over their eyes. That would be the best explantion.

One has to wonder if Apple has even heard of Linux and the hardware that it runs on. Apple isn't the only alternative to MS these days, they really need to pay more attention to the market.

Dave

Originally posted by Aurora
LOL did you say 4mx?lol lol did you say fx5200? lol lol iF Apple uses the worst & old video like 4mx & fx5200 they can expect to have a lot of imacs laying around. who in there right mind would buy any new machine with these dog video chips. If this holds true then its easy to see that some idiots are running and ruining Apple. 4mx was old garbage and fx5200 is garbage. a poor video sysytem with no upgrade has killed imac yet they are going to do more of the same? idiots runnning apple just dont get it do they. 64bit fx5200 will kill off sales faster then sky high prices.

Originally posted by Rhumgod
As for the gaming nonsense, Apple is the one advertising the iMac as a gaming machine (http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html).

Hmm, not only there, but here (http://www.apple.com/games/hardware/) also. Guess what is the desktop for casual gamers. And guess what is the desktop for intermediate gamers.

You people need to shut up about the gpu. The 5200 is a consumer gpu and the imac is a consumer machince. Don't make it what it is not by adding a pro card. The 5200 will do the job as a consumer gpu.

Originally posted by brianru
Look around on bestbuy, almost every computer at the $1300 price range will have the built-in intel shit.
With an AGP slot.

Originally posted by quagmire
You people need to shut up about the gpu. The 5200 is a consumer gpu and the imac is a consumer machince. Don't make it what it is not by adding a pro card. The 5200 will do the job as a consumer gpu.

I'm glad you're so sure what I need in a computer. There is no way I will buy a G5 that has a lesser GPU than my almost 1 year old PowerBook G4. I'm not playing the "I got a better CPU but a suckier GPU" game.

If TS is correct, I hope Apple sees this thread and reconsiders. If these specs are what will be in next month's iMac, the iMacs just won't sell.

Originally posted by quagmire
You people need to shut up about the gpu. The 5200 is a consumer gpu and the imac is a consumer machince. Don't make it what it is not by adding a pro card. The 5200 will do the job as a consumer gpu.

im a consumer. i want a better graphics card. since i can't change it, apple better offer me one that will last. as it is, it is already dated and can't run current games well nevermind next year.

and dont tell me to go spend 2000 on a powermac and 1300 on a cinema display simply because i want a computer that will last and be somewhat modern when i purchase it.

Just a few things I'd like to say:

Sources would not confirm specific pricing, but did acknowledge that MSRP will probably fall in the same range as current iMac models -- between US$1,300 and $2,200 -- but could venture slightly higher.

That's just really vague. I'm hopeful those are the prices for the entry-level, sandwich iMac and the top-of-the-line machine.

The edu model is certainly NOT Included in this price range. So, things as usual. These are the iMac G4 prices for a G5 machine. I say great. As for the superdrive, you might like to notice that the $1,300 iMac G4 didn't include a superdrive either. The entry-level iMac G5 is actually better than the current entry-level iMac G4 (larger screen).

The edu model will be priced at 1099 or 999 to have a machine priced between the eMac and the entry-level iMac and that's it.

The prices for the other 3 models seem fine. It's understandable if you look at the iMac G4 prices.

Originally posted by applenut
and dont tell me to go spend 2000 on a powermac and 1300 on a cinema display simply because i want a computer that will last and be somewhat modern when i purchase it.

well, the $2000 would get you a dual 1.8 G5. how much more modern do you want? plus you get the flexibility to toss the GPU card whenever you feel it's not up to speed. and finally, buy a CRT. they're friggin' dirt cheap these days.

but you are right in that apple doesn't seem to see the need for a low-cost gaming machine, instead leaving that market up to the DIY PC crowd and platformers.

edit: and you know what? i can't say i blame then. hardcore gamers go through graphics cards, new hard drive arrays and processors like toilet paper. just cruise some of the gamerz sites to see that. it's insanity to try to keep up with that demographic, when they're sneering at the mac as it is and will never change their minds.

Originally posted by rok
well, the $2000 would get you a dual 1.8 G5. how much more modern do you want? plus you get the flexibility to toss the GPU card whenever you feel it's not up to speed. and finally, buy a CRT. they're friggin' dirt cheap these days.

but you are right in that apple doesn't seem to see the need for a low-cost gaming machine, instead leaving that market up to the DIY PC crowd and platformers.

edit: and you know what? i can't say i blame then. hardcore gamers go through graphics cards, new hard drive arrays and processors like toilet paper. just cruise some of the gamerz sites to see that. it's insanity to try to keep up with that demographic, when they're sneering at the mac as it is and will never change their minds.

you going to give me the money?

cuz i sure as hell don't have it.

Originally posted by hmurchison
I'm beginning to change my thoughts here. The 17" iMac is more competitive than I orginally thought. Sure it's missing RAM but that can be upgraded. The Superdrive missing is a bummer but that's not a showstopper either. The graphics card is light on RAM but it is the same core chipset being sold in PCs at $1k and above.

You all have been suckered by Matsu and others of the $999 Klan. Most of us have been telling you to reign in your day dreams to no avail. The iMac G5 will sell especially if it is in a handsome shape.

Good points. Realize too that Apple's iMac is supposed to be less powerful than their PowerMacs but in the GPU realm, it just looks bad. When having Safari, Fugu and Dreamweaver open on my PowerBook (GeForce4 MX) the screen draws crawl to a halt. And this is a 1-1/2 year old model! No, that card just will not due in a "new" iMac.

The $999 Klan? :lol: That is rich.

But they should be able to do it with an iMac. Just add the LCD as an option.

Originally posted by hmurchison
Then tell my why Gateway uses the 5200 All the way up to their $1800 710 systems (http://www.gateway.com/home/products/hm_dtp_710.shtml?clv=LNav)

Or how about Dell using the 5200 on their $1k+ computers (http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/features.aspx/featured_desktop2?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs)

Because they suck?

Originally posted by rickag
Go to the link for the Dell computer you posted. The 5200 you reference is for a 128MB DDR NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI Now if the rumored spec's are referring to this same card/specs then I take back some of my objections.

Yes, people need to understand we are talking about an all-in-one graphics chip here, not a graphics card. An ATI Radeon 9600 is two to three times faster. Jeez, anything but a 5200. Anything. Otherwise I think it sounds okay. The top model likely has Airport and Bluetooth standard and should have a wireless keyboard and mouse as well.

By the way, the TS article first says there are two 17" models and one 20" model then goes on to say there are two 20" models so it is not impossible for some of the specs to be messed up as well. Let's hope they meant 5600 for the graphics and not 5200.

I just got the latest Dell Catalog in the mail. And I looked through all their desktop offerings.

The truth is... as painful as it is for me to admit, the graphics chip is not the problem. If those specs are accurate, Apple competes amazingly well and if the 17 inch truly is 1299, it'll be a very good deal. it's near impossible to find a desktop with similar specs and also buy a 17 inch Dell LCD for 1299....In fact, I can't.

The bigger issue i see is processor speed. Apple finally has clockspeed at their use...but are opting for 1.6 and 1.8. if they went for 1.8 and 2 they'd not only be comparable on other specs but also on processor speeds...which would be a first in many years.

Still hoping for 1299 to include superdrive.

Interesting, all this discussion of the new iMac's price/value ratio...

Yet not one word devoted to ergonomics or form factor?

Speed is increasinly trivial to many consumers. While I agree that the iMac2 and possibly the iMac3 are overpriced, it seems that the problem is overstated. People purchasing botique machines (like the iMac2 and iMac3) are likely more impressed by design than teraflop mongering.

Discussion of the iMac's price/value is useless unless the form factor is factored in.

Originally posted by applenut
I just got the latest Dell Catalog in the mail. And I looked through all their desktop offerings.

The truth is... as painful as it is for me to admit, the graphics chip is not the problem. If those specs are accurate, Apple competes amazingly well and if the 17 inch truly is 1299, it'll be a very good deal. it's near impossible to find a desktop with similar specs and also buy a 17 inch Dell LCD for 1299....In fact, I can't.

The bigger issue i see is processor speed. Apple finally has clockspeed at their use...but are opting for 1.6 and 1.8. if they went for 1.8 and 2 they'd not only be comparable on other specs but also on processor speeds...which would be a first in many years.

Still hoping for 1299 to include superdrive.

:lol: Applenut I just have the same revelation this morning. It was an "oh shit" moment when I realized that the typical PC that had what I wanted was $1499 and that was using a 5200fx. I do agree though on the processor speed. Apple could have utilized 1.8 and 2Ghz speeds because while the G5 is fast it cannot beat out a P4 system running twice its clock.

Again, they do come with AGP slots, so you can easily and cheaply upgrade. The iMac needs either an upgradable GPU (which is exceptionally unlikely), or a decent one out of the box.

Yeah I know but at $1300 I question about how important that really is. These computers are tossers in 2-3 years. In that same timeframe it's likely that you've spent more money on your cable connection than your iMac G5.

Apple is suprisingly competitive at this pricing and that is unique because they're not shipping commodity boxes. This is custom design for a small pittance increase over a ATX PC. That's impressive.

Originally posted by applenut
All of Apple's products are visually appealing. Looks work for things that don't involve cracking open the savings account. The iPod mini sells on looks. a 1500 dollar computer only has looks as a factor...not the deciding one. Every person I talk to, who doesn't own a mac, says they are too much money and underpowered. Looks? Form is not synonymous with looks.

Fixation upon looks and speed is common amoung youth and lessons with age. At a certain point in life, usability and ergonomics overtake speed and looks as the paramount criteria.

The same phenomenon is true amoung car buyers. Youth make decisions based upon speed and looks while elderly are more concerned with seat comfort and cup holder placement.

I think the demographics here tend to skew our eveluations toward the gamer and spec whore perspective. ;)
(myself included)