Slashdot Mirror


Apple Introduces New G5 iMac

peatbakke writes "Well, here it is. Looks like the rumors of computer+monitor combined into a sleek little case were true." It's mostly what you'd expect both design-wise and specwise. And I want it.

135 of 1,595 comments (clear)

  1. new icon! by ack154 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So how long until we get a new slashdot icon that looks like this model?

    1. Re:new icon! by jb.hl.com · · Score: 4, Funny

      Before we get a Gentoo one and a KDE one from less than 5 years ago, obviously :)

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    2. Re:new icon! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're working on the Gentoo icon. It's still compiling.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    3. Re:new icon! by Master+Rux · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know right. It's just a non-portable portable. I got a computer that's built into my keyboard and the monitor's even attatched. I'm not saying it's a bad idea what they're doing, but if you're looking for something like this why not just get a laptop? Same thing, but portable right? But seriously don't get me wrong on this one. I still think there's going to be a lot of people that are looking for just this very thing. Not very innovative, but definitely a good idea. Bravo for Apple. I'll probably never own one, but man they sure are cool.

      --
      IMO the best browser game ever http://wittyrpg.com
  2. The inside layout is far better for an all-in-one. by danamania · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is a larger view of the inside of the machine. It's one hell of a lot more accessible than the last imac (or any of the imacs to date, for that matter).

    Reminds me of the layout of my favourite pizzabox machines - just standing up :)

  3. new imac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's a pretty rad computer considering what it is.

    Cue all the comments about 5200 geforce not being enough -- it's not meant for that.

    "They should have had a 2 gighz in there " - that would eat into the market above it.

    It is for offices and for homes -

    The criticisms are:

    If you are going to make it like a TV... they should have gone all the way and put a TV tuner in there - this is the killer app to beat microsoft on and to complete the iLife suite. An Apple (with all the associated easiness) TV center with maybe a grey one for corporate use with no TV.

    The other critcism is that they should have a place in their product line for a headless box, so that all the hackers can get their grubby paws onto it and innovate on OSX - but really that constitutes competition with their other product lines, and constitutes competition with their own software so they won't do it.

    They are family centric, gamers (yeah yeah, apple gamers, oxymoron, kekeke) can up the ante to a dual g5...so the only criticism left is that there aren't many good (I know there are options, but not outstanding ones) TV tuner /application bundles for the mac.

    I hope I've cleared up alot of the "OMG only a 5200 nvidia" bullshit here - that's not it's purpose. But if it's purpose is that lazy kind of home desktop, it should have TV. But perhaps apple is thinking ahead to a TCPIP broadband world and a movie service along the lines of iTunes (pixar distribution channel anyone?) - it does leave a gap in their product line though.

    Oh, and as slashdot still hasn't posted this story I'll add the "Looks like they were trying to get the g5 into a tablet/laptop but didn't quite make it" joke, which goes hand in hand with the "omg no g5 laptops yet". Slashdot is so predictable.

    Sidenote - IBM should bring out said headless box, black alu case like the NeXT with a single G5 in it clocked a 2gighz and a 100% linux compat mobo.... That would soon become a cult item I imagine - but apple would have a fit because it would encorage all the unix geeks on their platform to swap and it would encorage a strong user base of a ppc linux to get going. So, like I say, not going to happen. Actually, can someone enlighten the thread as to who *owns* the G5? Could IBM do this?

    speculation/discourse.... check

    questioning of realworld performance combined with gamer
    joke...... check

    omg look the graphs on game performance have no scale.... check..stfu you are boring me....

    g5 hotness jokes..... check

    256 mem ram not enough.... check

    wistfully wanting some other company to release a headless apple because apple won't.... check

    questioning of apple users sexual preferences.... check

    raise question of one buttoned mouse..... maybe they have a one buttoned mouse by default because it forces their app/UI designers to be creative - let those that want two buttons have them... but let all apps be designed with only one in mind (remember that gnome desktop designers who are hiding everything and anying, even if it should be there - although I don't mind spatial atm, I can see it going too far). Let us hear the end of the one buttoned mouse whinging.......

    and wait for it...."I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of one of the new iMacs (a 1.6gighz G5 w/256 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that."

    exhausting most of the pointless cliched bullshit in a slashdot thread before it's begun.... priceless^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hprofit!!!

    and hell, and I don't even own a fucking apple.

    1. Re:new imac by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The 256Mb of RAM is my major beef with the machine (not that I particularly like the pricing either.) OS X really needs much more than that to run smoothly running anything but the most trivial applications. Even "modern" games have problems in half a gig.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:new imac by sammaffei · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with the TV tuner lacking quip.

      I mean, Apple advertises it as being widscreen (almost 16:9). So, why don't they go the extra step to put a tuner and video inputs (S-Video and Component).

      If this thing had that, I could ditch my 17" LCD TV.

      --

      Political correctness is the newest form of slavery.

    3. Re:new imac by Matthias+Wiesmann · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Really, they have taken a laptop, removed the keyboard and touch pad and given it a stand.
      If you a look at the inside of the machine, you will notice that while it is a compact design it is much thicker than a normal laptop mother board, the hard-drive is also a 3 inch model and the power-supply is included in the box. The design is much closer to a pizza-box design as a laptop design. There have been other models done in this way (like for instance the 20th anniversary Mac.
      When you think of it this way, one really does have to ask the questions, "Why the hell hasn't this been done to death already?". :P
      Extensibility, this kind of design means that the machine will not be extensible, no PCI slots, no possibility of changing the video card, in short most of the drawbacks of the laptop design.
    4. Re:new imac by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It's kind of funny. It's expensive because it's an AIO, but it's not really an AIO, because it doesn't come with enough RAM, so it's a safe bet that the first thing a buyer will have to do is buy some. Either that, or the buyer will assume Macs are slow and underpowered, that they can't play perfectly ordinary games, let alone do at any reasonable speed the big multimedia operations the machine is sold to do, and will switch to Windows for their next machine.

      And the kicker is "AIO" actually ought to be cheaper. You're sacrificing expandability for an everything-in-one-unit design, and that design ought to mean cost savings (cases, bulk buying/guaranteed all unit sales, etc) for the manufacturer. But it isn't.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:new imac by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Priced a new TV lately? The manufacturers are opting out of including tuners in most cases, because for a lot of customers a built-in ATSC tuner would be a waste of money. Those folks get their programming via a cable TV or satellite set-top box.

      Apple couldn't include just an analog tuner. That would be a terrible idea. We're already in the second half of 2004; analog tuners will be junk in less than 30 months, well within the life-span of a computer like this.

      --

      I write in my journal
    6. Re:new imac by Bunji+X · · Score: 5, Funny

      Cue all the comments about 5200 geforce not being enough -- it's not meant for that.

      From Apple's iMac G5 pages.

      The iMac G5 offers formidable built-in graphics capabilities. Like, for instance, the gorgeous widescreen display. Mac OS X version 10.3 "Panther," provides you with the world's most advanced -- and most graphics-savvy -- operating system. And then there's the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics processor with 64MB of DDR SDRAM. It's a combination that delivers unparalleled 2D and 3D graphics performance and an immersive, photorealistic gaming experience with three times the frame rate of previous-generation processors.

      Ok, it is not a gaming box, but... Unparalleled 2D and 3D graphics performance with a GFFX 5200? That would be the day!

      --
      ---
      The combined human population is enough to feed every living tiger for app. 28000 years.
    7. Re:new imac by sammy+baby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Base 20-inch iMac, with 256 megs of RAM: $1899.

      20-inch Apple Cinema Display: $1299.

      From where I'm standing, it sounds like you're valuing the non-display parts of the iMac at $600 or less. Plenty of folks think Apple's stuff is overpriced, but that's pushing it a little bit, I think.

    8. Re:new imac by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Apple explains the one mouse button in its HI Guidelines. The idea is simple: there are people who can only use one mouse button, for reasons of disability or what have you. Coding for one mouse button allows you to avoid having to program especially for these people, while allowing those who want a second mouse button to use it however they like. You don't lose any functionality, because you can just modify mouse drags and clicks with meta kets. Four meta keys = 4 additional actions by a single meta and a further 6 actions adding two meta keys. Ctrl-Click is generally used to pull down context menus a-la Windows, and this is the default functionality of the second mouse button.

      Apple does not ship computers with more than one mouse button mostly because of this philosophical choice, but partly because doing so would give developers justification to require the use of more than one mouse button for their target market.

      Incidentally, I hadn't realized how confusing the two button paradigm was until I got a mac and tried to learn Blender. Blender is a mess of multiple mouse clicks, metas, rolls, etc. It's a good program, but you really need the tutorial before you can even figure out where you are. This isn't good design...an interface that does not lend itself to exploration will go unexplored, and you might as well write for the command line at that point.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  4. Compare Apples and dells by BoldAC · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not trolling... just giving something for discussion. If anybody buys me one, I promise I'll add an apple section to tech-recipes. :)

    $1,299.00

    17-inch widescreen LCD
    1.6GHz PowerPC G5
    512K L2 cache
    533MHz frontside bus
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    80GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load Combo Drive

    $1,499.00

    17-inch widescreen LCD
    1.8GHz PowerPC G5
    512K L2 cache
    600MHz frontside bus
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    80GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load SuperDrive

    $1,899.00

    20-inch widescreen LCD
    1.8GHz PowerPC G5
    512K L2 cache
    600MHz frontside bus
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    160GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load SuperDrive

    Dell Dimension 4600C Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor (2.80GHz, 533 FSB)
    Operating System Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition WHXP
    Memory 256MB Dual Channel shared DDR SDRAM at 333MHz
    Monitors Dell Multifunction LCD TV/Monitor Selected Below TV [320-2913] 5
    Video Cards Integrated Intel® Extreme Graphics 2 IV
    Hard Drive 40GB Ultra ATA/100 Hard Drive 40 [341-0836] 8
    Floppy Drive and Additional Storage Devices No Floppy Drive Included NFD
    Mouse Dell® 2-button scroll mouse SM
    Network Interface Integrated 10/100 Ethernet IN
    Modem 56K PCI Data/Fax Modem DFAX
    CD or DVD Drive FREE UPGRADE! 24X CD-RW/ DVD Combo Drive
    Dell W1700 LCD TV w/1 Yr Svc Qty 1
    FREE Dell 720 Color Printer with 1 Yr Advanced Exchange Service Qty 1
    TOTAL: $1,373.00

    1. Re:Compare Apples and dells by proj_2501 · · Score: 4, Informative

      they seem pretty competitive, right down to the free printer (check the apple store site, you can get a free hp printer with any cpu purchase until october)

    2. Re:Compare Apples and dells by Davak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If nothing else, this is starting to show that macs and PCs can be in the same price range. I am a pure PC kinda guy, but the hardware to price ratio on these new systems is very impressive IMHO.

      Do the prices of macs typically fall after an initial release... or do they just stay a set price for quite a while?

    3. Re:Compare Apples and dells by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow!! They made a dell desktop that's only 2 inches thick?!?!?

    4. Re:Compare Apples and dells by FuzzieNorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In order to be vaguely comparable in terms of components (the Dell's RAM/FSB is slower but the iMac's CPU is slower, so whatever), you need to look at upgrading the Dell to have a DVD writer when compared to the Superdrive models, to replace the video card in the Dell with something remotely sane, and to replace the hard drive with something of a larger capacity.

    5. Re:Compare Apples and dells by beavis88 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The prices of Macs rarely fall -- older models are just replaced by newer ones at the same price point. This isn't 100% true of course, but it's a lot more likely in my experience than Apple lowering prices across the board.

    6. Re:Compare Apples and dells by mirko · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The 20" G4 iMac was around 3500CHF, the new 20" G5 iMac is 2900CHF, so there has been an around 15-20% price drop.

      --
      Trolling using another account since 2005.
    7. Re:Compare Apples and dells by Illissius · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Looks like the iMacs are a very comparable value :). Much better video card and hard drive, slightly to somewhat worse processor (G5s are a lot more MHz-efficient than P4s - last I checked, a 2GHz G5 was comparable to a 2GHz Opteron/A64, which is in turn somewhere around a 3GHz P4, so these should be comparable to 2.4-2.8GHz ones) - though this is very hard to compare directly as it's an entirely different platform/architecture. Especially the video card cannot be overestimated -- integrated Intel "Extreme" Graphics is so bad, it's awful. (The 5200 Ultra isn't too good in the realm of discrete cards, but it's pretty decent, and magnitudes better than integrated.)
      Speaking of which... doesn't the integrated video eat up 64MB of main system memory, meaning the Dell actually only has 192MB? Given that, and the iMac's better aesthetics and OS, and -- leaving PC/Mac partisanship aside -- I'd even call the iMac a better buy. The 20-incher should've gotten 512MB memory, though :/.

      --
      Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
    8. Re:Compare Apples and dells by nolife · · Score: 5, Informative

      You just do not know how to shop at Dell. You need to go to the small business section and select "Outrageous Deals". The deals change a few times a week but they blow away the "Home" section of Dell plus they also provide free shipping. That same Dell you referenced was less then $700 from the small business section earlier in the week with an 80GB drive, free printer, free shipping, XP Pro, and a 17in LCD.

      Not to knock your compare but since you specifically chose to compare to a Dell, I thought I'd bring it up.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  5. long time coming by proj_2501 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    i remember reading a macworld in 1994 showing conceptual designs from the apple industrial design department.

    they had something like this (along with a mac based on the tizio lamp, and a tablet mac)

    too bad gateway got it to market a few years ago :)

  6. Like in the movies... by Thakandar2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I guess when someone shoots the monitor and says they destroyed the computer I can't laugh at the movie anymore.

    Leave it to apple to spoil my bad action movie jokes...

    1. Re:Like in the movies... by SnapShot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Speaking of monitors. Apple store is charging $1299 for the 20" monitor, but only $1899 for the iMac with the 20" monitor. Does that make sense to anyone?

      Can I skip the monitor and get a G5 for $600, please?

      --
      Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
  7. Much sleeker than previous versions... by TheWart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While I never really liked the look of previous iMacs, I must give Apple kudos on this one.

    It looks *extremely* slick, and I these would look so much better as the terminals in librarys and what have you, although probably way overkill.

    And the one cord in the back is a far cry from my desk, lol.

  8. Apple hate RAM. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This thing is only shipped with 256M of RAM by default? And only upgradable to 2GB?

    The old iMacs could hold 1GB. This one is about 10 times faster and maxes out at twice the memory. This is pretty poor. Why does apple insist on shipping systems with such little memory.

    Also, why is the FSB at 1/3 of the clockspeed of the CPU, as opposed to 1/2?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
    1. Re:Apple hate RAM. by notthepainter · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Because Apple doesn't want to play the memory game. Apple knows that the customers know they can price shop and buy it elsewhere, that's all. It is often very easy to install (Original iMacs were quite the exception) and if you can't do it, the Apple Store will do it for you for $35 I think.

      As for the 2GB limit, this prevents the low end machines from cutting into the high end machines.

    2. Re:Apple hate RAM. by Mwongozi · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It's a home computer. If you're a power-using geek you don't buy this, you buy this

      Although I agree 256MB is a bit stingy, what possible use could a home user have for more than 2GB or RAM?

    3. Re:Apple hate RAM. by Macka · · Score: 5, Insightful


      How many people do you know who have more than 1GB of RAM in their home or office PCs? I could probably count them on one hand.

      Your objection is noted, but pointless.

  9. Impressive new addition by sessamoid · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Design-wise, it's in keeping with the home line with the white minimalist aesthetic. It matches the iBook and iPod well. The brushed aluminum stand gives it a design relationship with the G5 towers. At this size, it looks like the perfect dorm-room computer (as long as you lock it down!). The 17 inch version weighs in at a light 18.5 pounds and only 6.8 inches deep.

    The most amazing space-saving feature is that it holds it's own power supply in that thin enclosure, so no ugly power bricks sitting on your desk or floor. If I didn't already have a dual 2.5Ghz G5 coming, this would look pretty attractive.

    --
    "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
  10. Re:The inside layout is far better for an all-in-o by peterprior · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nice pic but it is slow already.. :|

    I've mirrored the above image here

  11. Now you can all stop whining. . . by sabinm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's as inexpensive as a IBM clone and worth more in value.

    As an aside, this weekend I called apple care to get my logic board on my G3 Ibook replaced for the third time. I wasn't pleased, and I asked for a new one. Guess what? They're shipping a new Ibook G4 1gz for me. That's service. Barring the fact that the hard ware was faulty, they really came through on this one. That's why I buy apple.

    --
    http://cincyboys.blogspot.com/ Everything Cincinnati. Including the word 'Finnih'
    1. Re:Now you can all stop whining. . . by Beatbyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with you on the hardware prices but I agree with the parent of the thread that it's got more value.

      You don't get the iApps with the Dell. Nor OS-X. Nor quality support.

      You get XP Home and the rest is left up to you.

    2. Re:Now you can all stop whining. . . by rawg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry, I can't find a all in one 64 bit LCD desktop computer at Dell? What one are you looking at? You need to compare Apples to apples, not Apples to cans of soda.

      --
      The above is not worth reading.
    3. Re:Now you can all stop whining. . . by CountBrass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really? Since when did Dell start selling G5 machines running OSX?

      It's easy to come out with any old crap when you pick and choose some specs (and completely ignore others). I'd like to see you come up with a comparable box from a top brand (which basically means IBM: I don't think anyone could mistake Dell for a quality brand!)

      Try again if you like:

      1. top brand: support+quality count
      2. *quality* 17" LCD
      3. 1.6Gig 64bit CPU
      4. 256MB memory
      5. 80GB ATA HDD
      6. GeForce 5200 video card
      7. Less than 2" thick
      8. Doesn't look like a pile of shit.

      Up for the challenge?

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  12. Oh yeah? Well.. by Chordonblue · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...You can't price style, baby! :)

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
  13. Coverage from MacObserver by choas · · Score: 5, Informative

    As posted here: http://live.macobserver.com/article/2004/07/paris2 004_keynote.shtml

    Paris 2004 - Live Coverage of Steve Jobs Keynote

    3:00AM CDT, August 31st, 2004

    [4:44 AM] We aren't sure that the unit shown on stage was an actual working unit. It may have been a body with a paper display covering it. We aren't sure, of course, but we wanted to make note of that. - posted by Bryan

    [4:41 AM] We are seeing a video for the new iMac now. Apple is comparing it to the iPod, the way the music player sits in the Dock. Also, the video says "From the creator of the iPod," showing that Apple is trying to leverage the success of the music player. Jonathan Ive says it is "quiet and utterly serene" in the video. - posted by Bryan

    [4:38 AM] US$1299 - 17" 256 MB RAM, Combo Drive, 80 GB drive, 64 MB video card. This compares to US$1799 for the old starting iMac.

    US$1499 - 17", with 1.8 GHz.

    US$1899 - 20" display (1680 x 1050), 2.2" thick, 1.8 GHz G5, 256 MB RAM, 160 GB drive, SuperDrive, and same 64 MB video card.

    They will begin shipping in mid-September! - posted by Bryan

    [4:37 AM] You can unscrew three screws, and the entire back comes off. The crowd loves it!

    The G5 module, when looking at the back, is on the right side. There are three fans in the unit, and it is "quiet as a whisper." - posted by Bryan

    [4:35 AM] SuperDrive. 1.8 GHz G5. 600 MHz frontside bus. 400 MHz DDR RAM, up to 2 GB. Serial ATA hard drives, AGP 8X graphic slots. The speakers are mounted on the bottom, so they reflect off the desk, up to the user. The keyboard will slide underneath the display when you are not using it.

    There are three 5 USB (3 2.0, 2 1.1), two FireWire, a modem slot, Ethernet (10/100 Base-T), audio-in, audio-out, both headphone and optical), power button on the bottom. - posted by Bryan

    [4:34 AM] "Everyone is ging to be asking "where does the computer go?"

    All of the connectors are on the left side, all in a row. Again, the crowd is going wild. - posted by Bryan

    [4:33 AM] It's white in color, and the crowd is going wild. It has a grey Apple logo on front. Everyhting fits together right behind the display. - posted by Bryan

    [4:32 AM] It looks like just a Cinema Display with a DVD slot loader on right side towards the top. Aluminum foot. It's the world's thinest desktop computer, at less than 2" thick. - posted by Bryan

    [4:31 AM] The iMac G5 demonstration has begun. - posted by Bryan

    [4:31 AM] Apple has sold 7.5 million iMacs, which works out to2.38 per minute over six years. - posted by Bryan

    [4:29 AM] The iChat demo ended with Bertrand Serlet video conferencing in. The crowd loved his brief conversation in French. - posted by Bryan

    [4:20 AM] We're on to iChat now. The last time we saw such a demo, it included lots of people from around the world in Apple's very cool iChat AV update in Tiger. That does, of course, bring to mind the idea that perhaps will see a certain iCEO who is in northern California, and if we do, we might even see some new hardware... - posted by Bryan

    [4:19 AM] Mr. Schiller has moved on to demonstrating the iLife suite. This is the same demo that we have seen before... - posted by Bryan

    [4:09 AM] We've moved on to Dashboard, Apple's implementation of a Widget engine. - posted by Bryan

    [4:05 AM] For those keeping score at home, the US Apple Store is now, and finally, offline. - posted by Bryan

    [4:02 AM] Well, Mr. Schiller went on to a H.264 demo instead of the iMac. Go figure. Interestingly, he specifically did not mention any release dates for this new digital video technology.

    From H.264, we are moving on to a demonstration of Safari RSS. - posted by Bryan

    [3:54 AM] During Mr. Schiller's Spotlight demonstration, he "found" a document on his demo Mac called "New Products Demo." This will, undoubtedly, be the new iMac everyone is waiting to see. :-) - posted by Bryan

    [3:43 AM]

    --
    I will work to elevate you, just enough to bring you down
  14. pretty close.... by FaasNat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The new iMac design is pretty similar to the "spy shots" that popped up on the net a few days back (which itself turned out to be a hoax). I wonder if the person who took those picturew knew how close he actually was......

    --
    There's never enough when you have too little
  15. Touch screenversion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So when do we see the touch screen version?

    This would make for a perfect kiosk installation.

    I want one, or two...

    Torcuill

  16. I'm disappointed... by lonesometrainer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The graphics-card is lame, the bus-speed is lower compared to G5, but overall... the design. It's just plain boring. When was the last time that apple-addicts were bored when a new machine was introduced?

    Yes, Apple, I'm bored. The G4 iMac was a lot more interesting to look at than this machine. And design is what apple-addicts are really looking after.

    Here's some nice examples for great iMac designs: http://www.mackompass.de/

    PLUS: no heating problems here? Picture from iside: http://forum.macnews.de/forum/show?mid=8894.1839.- 5159

  17. Re:The inside layout is far better for an all-in-o by foo12 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Original source for the images. Apple's bandwidth and servers are probably a little more /. proof

  18. Media Center by StevenHenderson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Starting with the new headphone jack that's also a mini-optical plug. So you can watch DVDs and listen to them in 5.1 surround sound. You'll also find a passel of USB 2.0 and FireWire 400 connectors for your camera, camcorder or gamepad. Or if you want to connect your iMac to your TV or a digital projector, the mini-VGA port gives you the option. The line in jack lets you record an electric guitar into GarageBand

    Kind of funny, how silly this makes Windows Media Center PCs look. Even small form-factor cubes don't look as sexy as this. Exactly the type of machine that could adorn any room in a house. Good work, Apple.

  19. Re:Nice by CoolMoDee · · Score: 4, Informative

    i call bs. OS X runs perfect here on two different machines, one with 256 and the other with 384 megs of ram. Things may run a little bit slow if you try to run a zillion programs all at once, but for the average user, 256 is fine.

    --
    Jisho - A Japanese English German Russian French Dictionary for the rest of us.
  20. Alternatively... by Xenex · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can grab the images from Apple's iMac G5 PR images page.

  21. price, price, price by beavis88 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple always seems to do this on their low-end machines as a cost-savings measure, and yes, it is somewhat annoying. BUT, if you really need more than 2GB of RAM, you may as well just spend a little extra money and get one of the dual G5 desktops, where you can get 4 or 8GB. Let's be honest, I can't imagine most home users are going to be craving 2GB+ of memory in their ~$1500 iMac.

    I'd be willing to bet the FSB thing is also a cost saving measure, and perhaps a way to better differentiate their "pro" desktop line from the iMacs.

  22. Ports location by totoanihilation · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Looking at this picture, I don't want to imagine what an iMac setup would look like once you get some peripherals plugged in.
    Say you plug in a printer, a scanner, a digital camera dock, and iPod dock, some amplified speakers, your ethernet cable, perhaps the phone cable for faxing, and a firewire hard disk, that thing will have 8 cables just hanging there, on the side of the machine, with no support whatsoever. And since there's nothing below the connectors but thin air, what the user will see is a bunch of cables just hanging from the back of the machine. I'm no design engineering guru, but that wasn't too well thought-out, was it? Notice that all the photos are of the iMac with a bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
    They should've put the connectors on the stand, near the bottom. Or in the middle of the screen, with a cable guide on the stand.

    But as always, I'll wait to see one in person before passing a definitive judgement. I was wronged by the previous iMacs' pictures, this might be no different.

    1. Re:Ports location by victor_the_cleaner · · Score: 3, Informative
      If you look at this picture you'll see that the stand has a slot in it for cables to pass thru.

      I agree though the design won't be as clean, but I imagine that Apple counts on alot of 'design' freaks to upgrade to wireless options.

  23. side-loading CD/DVD? by mblase · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought the original reason Apple put the CD/DVD drive in the base of the iMac and avoided a design like this was because their engineers said it was better to have the disc spinning while flat. Did they change their mind, or is the hardware just better now that they can mount the CD behind the monitor at an angle like this?

    1. Re:side-loading CD/DVD? by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      IIRC, interviews with Jobs during the G4 iMac discussed his displeasure with some of the preliminary G4 designs because they looked just like this. He was indicating that he told his design engineers, "I want something new, not a computer attached to the back of a flat panel." (That's not a verbatim quote, btw). Maybe he feels that because they've had that concept out of the market for long enough that this will work, or maybe the old G4-era prototypes were a lot chunkier. Whatever it was, I certainly think it's nicer on the deskspace than the already small G4 model.

      I feel sorta lackluster about this one, though. The tech specs are nice, and I'm glad that it's finally easier to get to the hard drive, but the design just looks too much like the Gateway Profile. I was hoping for something that looked similar to this and priced similarly, but consisted of a slim, 2U sized case that could directly attach to the back of the monitor (and was designed explicitly for that purpose), but could also be purchased stand-alone and used with another monitor. I know, I know, all that junk about cutting into margins and such, but a man can dream, right?

      Re the horizontal drive: I don't remember anyone ever mentioning this, though I suppose it could've been cited. I've seen dozens of workstation-type cases going back at least 8 or 10 years, though, that used vertical mount optical drives, so I doubt that's an issue.

  24. Re:The inside layout is far better for an all-in-o by scoser · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was about ready to start cutting my wrists in despair at the thought of servicing it, but your picture has reassured me that Apple may be back on the right track for serviceability in the iMac models.

  25. Re:How stable is it? by TVC15 · · Score: 3, Informative

    i was worried about the stability of the apple flat screen monitors myself when they first came out. i went to look at them and pushed them around quite hard. even the 30" was extremely stable. since the imacs have a plastic case rather than aluminum and only come in 17" and 20" models, i have to assume its more than adequately stable.

  26. Sweet - here's my take by jht · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I like it a lot, based on initial impression. It also looks to be a lot more user-serviceable than the previous generation (where all you could swap out was the AirPort/Extreme card and the one RAM slot). That's nice.

    I see they kept the PowerMac/iMac performance differential in part by using a 3x multiplier instead of the 2x that the PowerMacs use. That's OK - a 533 or 600 MHz FSB is still zippy.

    The question I have is really about upgrades. Most importantly, can this model finally take an aftermarket internal Bluetooth module? All the previous versions only offer Bluetooth as a BTO option through the Apple Store online (except when it's standard equipment like on the PowerBooks). If you don't buy it at build time, you have to buy a 3rd party USB dongle. With access to the insides, that is now hopefully a thing of the past.

    Will more VRAM be available as a BTO option? Right now, all 3 models ship with 64MB, and in my brief look online there did not appear to be an upgrade option. If the iMac is going to sell at all in the gaming market, there will probably need to be a 128MB option available. I wouldn't count on a better graphics processor, though, anytime soon. Apple likes to underpower the iMacs.

    With this out there, will the eMac see a minor speedbump anytime soon? The two have traditionally had pretty much the same motherboard design - I don't expect a G5 eMac anytime soon, but maybe we'll get a 1.5 GHz G4 at some point now.

    Most importantly, will normal human beings actually be able to buy these in stores anytime this year, or are we going to have to wait for the Tooth Fairy to deliver more G5 chips?

    --
    -- Josh Turiel
    "2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
    1. Re:Sweet - here's my take by Twirlip+of+the+Mists · · Score: 4, Informative

      I see they kept the PowerMac/iMac performance differential in part by using a 3x multiplier instead of the 2x that the PowerMacs use.

      That was an engineering choice more than a marketing choice, though of course it was dictated by both. The largest single source of heat in a Power Mac G5 is the system controller ASIC. Low-temperature G5-based systems must necessarily eliminate that source of BTU's.

      Most importantly, can this model finally take an aftermarket internal Bluetooth module?

      The internal Bluetooth module is available as a BTO option only.

      Will more VRAM be available as a BTO option?

      No. You'll get more VRAM in 6-8 months when the Rev. B machines are announced, just like always.

      If the iMac is going to sell at all in the gaming market

      The "gaming market?" Surely you jest.

      With this out there, will the eMac see a minor speedbump anytime soon?

      Odds are slim. That's a Motorola issue, not an Apple issue.

      Most importantly, will normal human beings actually be able to buy these in stores anytime this year

      Depends on where you live. If you live near an Apple Store, you'll be able to buy one this week. But you'd better get there fast. ;-)

      --

      I write in my journal
  27. Reasons to like the previous iMac design better by eyefish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, I'm dissapointed at the design. The previous design with the rounded based and the moving screen was much nicer looking, plus more practical and functional as well.

    With this model I can see the following problems:

    1. You will now see a million wires coming out of the right side of the machine, hanging in mid-air and visible at all times.

    2. All that white space at the bottom of the display makes it look like a waste of space (of course it's probably used for the internal electronics, but geez, couldn't they think of a better design?).

    3. The display now only rotates in one single dimension (either tilts up or down) as opposed to the previous iMac multi-dimensions of fredom).

    4. That base seems awefully inadecuate for so much weight on top of it. Seems like if it is very easy to drop the display sideways if you have a crouded desk and move things around a lot.

    5. This design has been created before by the big guys (IBM and Compaq/HP I think had/have something similar), why not come up with something as cool as the iPod? (it's a shame they say on the website "from the creators of iPod" - if I was one of the iPod designers I'd be shamed...).

    6. And how about a $999 model?

    1. Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better by xutopia · · Score: 5, Informative

      I won't comment on the rest of your points but point #1 is factually wrong. If you look on the design page you'll see that the wires will hang out in the back, not on the side. Apple thought about that for you. They most likely thought about other things as well for you! :)

    2. Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better by mblase · · Score: 3, Insightful

      1. You will now see a million wires coming out of the right side of the machine, hanging in mid-air and visible at all times.

      They actually attach behind the right side, and can be threaded through the base to keep them out of sight. And if you don't like 'em, get it configured with Bluetooth and WiFi -- like the sidebar sez, all you'll need then is a power cord, which connects to the back center of the machine and is even harder to see.

      2. All that white space at the bottom of the display makes it look like a waste of space (of course it's probably used for the internal electronics, but geez, couldn't they think of a better design?).

      You'd better have a PhD in industrial design if you're criticizing Apple on those grounds. I think it looks just fine, and besides, they gotta put the Apple logo somewhere.

      3. The display now only rotates in one single dimension (either tilts up or down) as opposed to the previous iMac multi-dimensions of fredom).

      Well, yeah... you can just turn the whole base now, can't you? I imagine turning the monitor on the base would make it potentially unstable, but I'm certain it would make it uglier.

      4. That base seems awefully inadecuate for so much weight on top of it. Seems like if it is very easy to drop the display sideways if you have a crouded desk and move things around a lot.

      Yes, it's a convincing illusion, isn't it? C'mon, they have people to think of things like that.

      5. This design has been created before by the big guys (IBM and Compaq/HP I think had/have something similar), why not come up with something as cool as the iPod? (it's a shame they say on the website "from the creators of iPod" - if I was one of the iPod designers I'd be shamed...).

      Open your eyes, please... the design is supposed to remind you of the iPod, both from the front and the side views.

      6. And how about a $999 model?

      Want to have your cake and eat it too, don't you? Maybe next year when this year's models are on clearance.

    3. Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better by phillymjs · · Score: 5, Interesting

      1. There's a hole in the rear of the stand through which always-connected cables can be routed. And there's always the option of the Bluetooth module, keyboard, and mouse to remove *those* wires from the equation.

      2. Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize. Let's see you stuff all those electronics into a smaller space and still provide adequate cooling, Einstein.

      3. The new design allows them to use larger displays than 20", the weight of which the arm on the old iMac would not physically support (this is straight from the mouth of an Apple engineer who was visiting my office a few weeks ago).

      4. The Cinema Displays use the same base, and those are pretty damned stable. How much crap do you have on your desk?

      5. The granddaddy of the thin, LCD-in-front, guts-in-back computer is the 20th Anniversary Mac, released in May 1997. Apple is updating their own old design, not copying current designs of competitors.

      6. Yeah, yeah. If they were selling it for $2, there'd be some fool whining "I'd buy it, if it was $1.50!"

      ~Philly

    4. Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better by jcostantino · · Score: 3, Insightful
      1. I'm sure someone will design an "iCable" thingie or whatever for this new unit. Apple does leave some of its accessory design to 3rd party developers.

      2. All that white space at the bottom makes it tie in to the eMac's look. They could have probably just centered the display but it looks better this way.

      3. The display still rotates if you turn the entire unit. That arm was freakishly expensive ($300), would get loose after a while and was a pain in the ass to replace, if necessary. 4. I'm sure that anything will topple over if given enough of a push. Apple has more than likely looked into this and found this to be stable.

      5. Errrr... it's hard to give a URL but if you go to apple.com and refresh enough, you'll see the profile shot of the iMac and iPod together. They look quite the same. Are you referring to the iMac's lack of a b&w LCD screen and scroll wheel?

      6. They call it the eMac. Wait a year and the new iMacs will be refreshed to slightly cheaper/slightly faster.

      1. You will now see a million wires coming out of the right side of the machine, hanging in mid-air and visible at all times.

      2. All that white space at the bottom of the display makes it look like a waste of space (of course it's probably used for the internal electronics, but geez, couldn't they think of a better design?).

      3. The display now only rotates in one single dimension (either tilts up or down) as opposed to the previous iMac multi-dimensions of fredom).

      4. That base seems awefully inadecuate for so much weight on top of it. Seems like if it is very easy to drop the display sideways if you have a crouded desk and move things around a lot.

      5. This design has been created before by the big guys (IBM and Compaq/HP I think had/have something similar), why not come up with something as cool as the iPod? (it's a shame they say on the website "from the creators of iPod" - if I was one of the iPod designers I'd be shamed...).

      6. And how about a $999 model?

      --
      Reviews with a twist! http://www.sardonicbastard.com
  28. Not an iMac at all! by iamdrscience · · Score: 4, Funny

    What? You can open it up? And upgrade the RAM? And the hard drive too? This isn't an iMac at all!

  29. Re:weak video card by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 3, Informative

    A GeForce FX 5200 Ultra. You can get better video in a PowerBook. I guess that settles it: no Doom 3 for OS X.

    I don't think so - the top-of-the line powerbooks (15" and 17") should have enough horsepower for Doom 3 as well as the whole Powermac G5 family. Besides, the iMac family will certainly get another upgrade round before Doom 3 for Mac gets into beta phase. Half year would be a really optimistic estimate...

  30. Unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There will be a new iMac before theres time to design one.

    There are two groups that apple needs to appeal to with this model, gamers and the hard core corporate client. Until now they have been neglected at huge cost to the company. They had a chance to break into both of those markets with one machine with this release!!! And they clearly have taken a different road. Well time will tell.

    Look, Ive used macs since the orignal - that just had 1Mb of ram! - and I always will. I just hope that Jobs starts putting comercial realities ahead of his personal ipod manic agenda and starts putting the boot into Gates at long last.

    (sorry for the AC but I'm posting away from my home computer and dont have the login here)

    1. Re:Unlikely by Graymalkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only way an iMac is going to run some particular game as well as a "gaming PC" is if they stick a GF6800 in it and a 2.5GHz G5. Such an iMac would obliderate sales of the PowerMacs. So they come out with this model which will play games pretty well, especially the ones currently available for the Mac and even future games like Doom 3. For the hardcore corporate client I don't see how this doesn't work. It is small and thin and takes up less desk real estate than even the lampshades and their 10" base. They're also reasonably powerful with a lot of screen real estate.

      I think this iMac is going to be a huge seller this year. They're as powerful as last year's G5 PowerMacs for a thousand dollar price difference. They also come bolted to nice LCD screens and have enough I/O (including optical audio out) to suit just about anybody.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    2. Re:Unlikely by shufler · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think that's where the computer goes.

    3. Re:Unlikely by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why did they make the screen so short? The bezel along the bottom edge looks 3" thick.

      Apple's been pushing the "widescreen" aspect ratio for displays, so this is the shape they wanted, and designed around. It's the same shape as the 17" G4 iMac's.

      If they made it a more traditional aspect ratio, there'd probably still be 3" along the bottom. They need that to fit some of the thicker components inside without making the whole enclosure more than 2" thick.

      I find this design reminiscent of the original Macs, which had a similar screen-above-the-blank-area face.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    4. Re:Unlikely by NatasRevol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure but you need twice as many support/OS-reinstaller/virus&spyware-remover people for those Dells.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:Unlikely by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I can see what they were going for with this one, but, frankly, I think the previous one with the telescoping arm from the base to the screen was MUCH more appealing.

      I'm very new to Mac...just got an older iBook 800Mhz G3 which I've gotten to dual boot with Gentoo Linux. I like the box...and I've enjoyed playing with OSX too...it is a LONG was from the old Mac days.

      I've considered getting one of the last model iMacs for my Mom....from my tests on OSX, I think she'd be able to use it easier than the windows box I tried to put together for her. And I the the previous design would appeal to her too.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:Unlikely by Slack3r78 · · Score: 3, Informative
      But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today.


      Pure conjecture. As someone who's fairly platform agnostic, I'll admit that I love the G5 and feel that it's an excellent chip architechture, but I've gotten the distinct impression that it's about equal with the Opteron/Athlon64 line, clock for clock. It eats a P4 for breakfast in this domain, no doubt, but everyone is well aware of the P4/Netburst's extremely poor IPC.

      The big advantage right now is that a G5 can run software at its full potential *now*, whereas an Athlon64 is currently relegated to 32 bit mode (we're talking gaming, and therefore I assume Windows. For other applications you most certainly have 64bit Linux). The Athlon64 will only get faster as x86-64 software begins showing up, opening up the extra registers on the CPU that currently go unused.

      So I guess my point is, yes, the G5 is an amazing chip and a huge step forward for Apple, but don't believe that it's something that it isn't. This of course all comes with the usual disclaimer that it's all about your application, so pick the best in that regard.
    7. Re:Unlikely by Bender_ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This new Imac does only look good as long as you do not plug any cable into these misplaces connectors. How does it look with 10 cacbles coming out of the back?

    8. Re:Unlikely by David+Leppik · · Score: 4, Informative

      Look, Ive used macs since the orignal - that just had 1Mb of ram! - and I always will. I just hope that Jobs starts putting comercial realities ahead of his personal ipod manic agenda and starts putting the boot into Gates at long last.


      Just to nitpick, the original Mac had 128k. Six months later or so, they introduced the "Fat Mac" with 512k.
    9. Re:Unlikely by twenex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uh, because the price of a computer is only a little bit of the total cost of ownership, and Macs have been shown to have much lower requirements for support, more resistance to virii, less user time to do tasks, etc, etc.

    10. Re:Unlikely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Posting as AC 'cause I'm admitting where I work. . .
      As a member of the Intel R&D staff I can immagine the lynching I'm gonna get if this shows up on my desk, but gawd I want one!

    11. Re:Unlikely by BasilBrush · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Erm... that $600 computer from Dell is a consumer PC.

      Take your basic Dimension 2400 ($680) and upgrade the OS from XP Home to Professional, upgrade the HD from 40 to 80GB, and the monitor to a basic 17" LCD and that computer costs $947.

      The price is looking a lot closer now. And that's just to get the computer to a sensible corporate starter spec, I'm not even trying to match the iMac's superdrive or graphics card, or quality of components.

    12. Re:Unlikely by telbij · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today.

      Maybe on a benchmark, but games (or any performance intensive app) are all about optimization.

      Any game that comes out for the Mac will be at least somewhat optimized for what's currently available. For the casual gamer, the Mac has a reasonable selection of games and the new iMac will provide reasonable performance.

      However, for the hardcore gamer, there's no arguing that you need a PC. That's where most of the game optimization goes (regardless of theoretical hardware performance), and that's where the bleeding edge graphics cards are available first.

      With that in mind, I don't think the hardcore gaming market would be very profitable to Apple. Aside from convincing the game and graphics card developers to give Apple equal development (not gonna happen), then they would have to sell systems optimized for gaming. They already optimize for other high-end applications like video and audio production, and making the systems gamer-ready would just push the price higher. The alternative would be to offer gamer-specific models, but that would cost a lot more R&D for the hardware AND all the software (more hardware to support), and for what? A very small market that already has a bad impression of Macs.

      Much better to go after the casual gamers. They may buy a Playstation instead, but any customers it gains will come 'for free' without a lot of extra development dollars.

    13. Re:Unlikely by daviddennis · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have a feeling the photos don't do the new machine justice, but I really loved the fully adjustable screen on the previous generation iMac. I thought it was wonderfully practical and ergonomic to be able to bend it up, down and sideways. Frankly, I wished the standalone displays were designed as nicely.

      Unfortunately, I think they've pretty much sold out the previous generation iMacs, so I doubt that getting one of them is much of an option. And of course the G5 processor's going to be great.

      Interesting that they went to 17" only. I wish they'd kept a 15" model at $999. This lack of low end is Apple's greatest problem with consumers. With HP and others packaging a computer, monitor and printer for $999, I think a $999 iMac with a nice LCD would make a very nice package for many, considering that you can buy printers for next to free nowadays.

      D

    14. Re:Unlikely by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think some people were put off by the iLamp being so obviously "designed". Sure, it looks cool in a well-decorated post-modern office, but in your average person's home, it sticks out a bit. This may look ordinary enough to fit in better.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    15. Re:Unlikely by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 3, Informative

      You cannot get a Dell with an LCD screen for $600!

      The cheapest usable Dell with an LCD is over $1000.

      The cheapest Dell with comperable specs (good 17" screen, 256 MB DDR400 RAM, 80 GB HD, CDRW-DVD) is more expensive than the iMac.

    16. Re:Unlikely by Macka · · Score: 5, Insightful


      No, you just need to lock down the config tight enough so that can't happen

      And who do you think is going to lock down the config for you, the security fairies? No, an expensive team of hardworking IT staff who are going to take away your admin rights to stop you from screwing up their company network with the latest virus ridden screen saver. You can't even connect a new MS PC to the internet these days without being 0wned in the time it takes you to make a coffee. Do we get these problems with Mac OS X, not in the 2 years I've been running it. And I've not had to lock it down, the default settings are already secure.

      Btw, your sig is very offensive. Python & Ruby are excellent programming languages.

    17. Re:Unlikely by Buran · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think it has a VESA mount on the back which you can use to add your own swivel arm. I miss the swivel arm of the iMac G4, too, but I'm sure that someone sells, or will sell shortly, a VESA mount that will allow tilt and swivel just like the old system. It is nice to be able to push the screen with a fingertip to turn it to show someone something, or adjust it to a nice viewing angle easily, then walk away and have the next person to use the machine move it to wherever they want it. Sometimes, when I'm working on something on one for a while, I move the screen around a bit to vary how I look at it to avoid fatigue.

    18. Re:Unlikely by bnenning · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mac OS 10.4 (tiger) will be the first truely 64 bit OS from Apple.

      True, but that just means individual processes will be able to see a 64-bit address space. It won't actually make the G5 run any faster (in fact, 64-bit apps will probably be slightly slower because pointers will take up twice as much space in the caches).

      --
      How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
    19. Re:Unlikely by nmk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This design is certainly more unassuming than the iLamp, but I wouldn't necessarily say its less appealing. Apple designs have recently been becoming more functional and minimalist. This makes sense, since apples target demographic has been becoming more diverse since the release of OS X.

      Pre OS X Macs were primarily popular in art oriented industries. With OS X, Macs have increasingly starting to be used as UNIX workstation and servers. You would have never imagined Apple becoming a substantial player in the UNIX cluster computing market five years ago, but things have change (the views of people on this site are evidence enough).

      WIth this new image Apples design ethos has had to change too (how many of you would want a flower power iMac to administer your OS X network). If you look at all their current computers, they are very professional and minimalist, but at the same time ultra-slick. With the new iMac, as with the Powermac and Powerbook, the beauty is in the details. There is nothing obviously exciting about a PM or PB either. It's when you actually use one of these machines that you realize that they are actually aesthetically more appealing that Apples earlier more obvious designs.

      Anyway, I think this new iMac fits in really well with the current Apple lineup. Its got plenty of power for the prosumer, and would look at home in a corporate or home environment. Here's to a job well done.

    20. Re:Unlikely by tbone1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Nobody writes Mac viruses when 95% of the user base is ripe and too dumb to know not to open attachments just because they offer free pr0n. :)

      Yes, it's all about market share! That's why all the web server worms and virii are written for Apache!

      ...... Hang on a minute ....

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    21. Re:Unlikely by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting
      This isn't about marketshare, it's about marketshare in the relevent market - namely, what blackhats are using. And, as you might expect, it's even more complicated than that.

      IIS is generally installed on more Windows machines than Apache. So, in terms of relevent market (machines blackhats like using), it does have a higher marketshare.

      As long as a computer has a single remote root exploit, it's directly vulnerable. As long as a computer allows users to manage files - their own, other people's, etc - it's vulnerable to psychological attacks. The most targeted platform ends up being the one the blackhat programmers are most familiar with, or perhaps the ones they hate most, for obvious reasons.

      Back when the Amiga was a popular machine, it was still dwalfed by the over-all marketshare of the PC. Yet the Amiga was innundated with viruses. Why? Because blackhats had Amigas, PCs were boring office machines, but people bought Amigas to play games. Amigas had the marketshare in the relevent market. Now Windows PCs have the marketshare in the relevent market.

      Why not GNU/Linux, you might ask? Why has GNU/Linux so far not suffered much from these exploits when Windows has, and when GNU/Linux is a favourite of anyone technically inclined?

      Answer, in this case, it bucks the trend, not by being more secure, but by a variety of things that work in its favour. There's no single GNU/Linux distribution so no monoculture that can easily spread a virus; people "into" GNU/Linux tend to update it regularly, not so much because of security concerns (though many do), but because a high percentage are first adopters. GNU/Linux users tend to be more technical, meaning they're less inclined to blindly trust attachments, more likely to hear about bugs and install patches, and more likely to set up sane security measures. None of these have anything inherently to do with the security of GNU/Linux.

      OS X is unpopular with virus writers because virus writers do not own Macs. It's that simple. Apple releases security updates on a regular basis (proving there's nothing inherently secure about the code), OS X, like XP, in its default, user-encouraged-to-set-it-up-this-way-and-leave-we ll-alone configuration, gives the user full access to almost all areas of the disk, files can be "run" by double clicking (and quite right too!) In this case, it's all about marketshare.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    22. Re:Unlikely by legirons · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Less exposure due to lack of viruses being written != more resistance."

      Ignoring the apache/iis argument for a minute (Apache is really good software, but not all non-Microsoft software is so good), why haven't we seen 2-5% of viruses written for the Mac? People successfully write viruses for *Amigas* for goodness' sake, and where is their 95% market share?

      When Oracle claimed that their system was unbreakable, it took less than a day for 3 different people to publish a score of exploits against it. Each new DRM system or web-application or console is cracked, just for the challenge of beating a security puzzle. Yet Apple-users have been claiming for years that they're invulnerable. That's not obscurity, that's red-rag-to-a-bull...

      Apple's operating system seems to be shrugging-off all the attacks thrown at it, just as BSD itself is famous for doing...

  31. Ok, now the machine is in the screen, where next? by hauer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I grew up with a Commodore64 where the keyboard was holding everything. Now it is in the monitor. I am wondering who comes up with an in-mouse architecture.

  32. Re:Just wondering by bobba22 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I noticed this too. To pack all the capacitors into one place *right over* the nice hot PSU will do little but shorten their lifespan to no-time-at-all. I'd bet money that we see a hardware update from Apple which installs a heat shield. Don't buy one of these for the long-term folks.

  33. Re:Not Enthusiast Friendly by presearch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes. It's an iMac. One unit. If it breaks, they'll fix it.
    After almost 10 years of Apple doing this,
    you would think that people would get the concept.

  34. The End of Computer Design by aluminumcube · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yup, meet the future look of pretty much every computer... I should begin by saying that I am an industrial designer and I therefor have a pretty hardcore Apple fetish. That being said, the coolness of the new iMac has nothing to do with design and everything to do with some extremely impressive engineering to shoehorn the G5 into that small a space... Fact of the matter is, processing speed has gotten to the point where computers are 'Fast Enough' for most people and they would rather have a smaller form factor then a quicker computer. It began hitting a few years ago when the office wonks started lusting after laptops more and more and that trend is going to continue. In 5 years, laptops are going to have enough CUP and GPU horsepower to satisfy even the most dedicated gamer, 3D and motion picture geeks. When that happens, expect even high end desktop workstations to be nothing more then an LCD panel with a "computing module" snapped onto the back. Unfortunately, I wonder what this is going to do for Apple. Having a huge ID department is great when you have these big products that people want and you can make them look pretty, but once our computers become a thin box with an LCD on the front, is anyone going to care? Sure the devil is in the details (look at how uber sex the lineup of ports on the back of the new iMac is!), but those aren't very hard to get right. Look at the market for Plasma TVs- nobody cares about style because they are all identical, so people make purchase decisions based on what they can afford first and which unit offers the best performance/$ within that price range. Style is never a consideration. What happens to Apple when the form factor of computers get standardized and simplified to a point where there is simply no room for an industrial designer to work with?

    1. Re:The End of Computer Design by elysian1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I guess style is one reason why I buy macs, but the main reason I buy macs is for OS X. So, as long as they keep improving and innovating the OS, they'll keep me and many others as customers.

    2. Re:The End of Computer Design by UncleBiggims · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just look at the iPod for your answer. How much smaller/standardized/simplified can you get. It competes with other cheaper HD based players with the same basic features. And who is winning? Apple. Why? Better design. And not just physical but design of every aspect of use and functionality. This will hold true in the desktop market as well.

    3. Re:The End of Computer Design by edw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Greg, you've made a great point. At some point the computer will disappear, just like the flat screen TV: All that will remain is the experience of using it. I don't think such a development is so bad for Apple, as they have always been about the fusion of hardware and software into a unified experience.

      I enjoy working with my PowerBook, and I enjoy using OS X. When I think about them. But most of the time, I'm not thinking about them; I'm simply being productive. I think that's what Apple products are about: getting stuff done, thinking about the problem at hand, not the computer that you're using to solve the problem. The drool-inducing industrial and UI design is there to as much to draw the attention of non-users as it is to enhance the experience of using -- and justify the purchase of -- Apple products.

      But does it become more difficult to sell an experience when it has a less-tangible physical manifestation? This may be a problem for Apple, but it may also solve one of their problems: When there's less physicality to the experience of owning a Mac, perhaps there will be less resistance to purchasing one. The more invisible the hardware, the less difficult it may be for Apple to convince people to replace their invisible Gateway computer with an invisible Mac that works better.

  35. In the UK by Macka · · Score: 4, Interesting


    adding a TV tuner would be a disaster. If you didn't have one already, you'd be forced by Law to buy a TV license with your new iMac whether you wanted to use it as a TV or not. This would add an extra £121 ($216.90) to the cost of your computer.

    Most people don't buy a computer to watch TV on, so why should we pay extra for functionality we don't need?

    1. Re:In the UK by fyonn · · Score: 3, Informative

      you'd be forced by Law to buy a TV license with your new iMac whether you wanted to use it as a TV or not

      no you wouldn't. you have to buy a tv licence to watch broadcast TV. if you do not watch broadcast tv, you do *not* need a tv licence. it's that simple.

      need a licence:
      watching terrestrial tv including the bbc
      watching terrestrial tv excluding the bbc
      watching cable/satellite tv with or without the bbc
      watching tv on a computer with a tv tuner

      do no need a licence:
      using your tv just to play video games
      using your tv just to watch dvd's
      using your tv as a doorstop
      using your tv as a paperweight
      using a computer with a tv tuner, but not watching tv through it.

      got it? the tv licence company doesn't like admitting that you can own a tv without paying them money but it's the truth and they'll admit it if you force them into it.

      HTH

      dave

    2. Re:In the UK by Macka · · Score: 4, Interesting


      The only valid point you made was "using your tv just to play vidio games", and how many people are going to buy an iMac for that when they can get a real TV a hell of a lot cheaper. As for DVDs, a basic iMac can already do that without a TV tuner, so that's irrelevant.

      In my entire life I've only ever met one person who's brought a TV (actually a huge plasma screen) for watching DVD's and playing games. My mate Paul. He had a running battle with TV Licensing to prove he didn't need to pay it. In the end he had to physically walk them round the house and show them he didn't have an external aerial, a portable aerial, or a satellite dish capable of receiving transmissions before they would leave him alone.

      I hardly think that Apple are going to bundle a TV tuner so that a one in a million consumer like Paul will be happy, at the expense of adding extra cost.

  36. Re:The inside layout is far better for an all-in-o by Sindri · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just noticed on that picture that the electric cord goes into the back of the screen through a hole in the stand. This is guaranteed by Murphy to be eventually pulled out when you tilt the screen backwards.

  37. Re:Am i the only one... by alphan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Come on now, here is the old one:

    http://www.theimac.com/info/graphics_2002/top_grap hic_left_side.jpg

    Now which one is cool?

    Plus, a 19-inch laptop is still a keyboard+monitor and can be much better looking than the new iMac.

  38. Re:Just wondering by mausmalone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Also just wondering, does anyone else think this is ugly? Now, I normally think Apple does a great job of product design, but this thing looks like a total lapse in judgement. Also, it looks like the screen on this one isn't adjustable like it is on the iLamp, which, though easily ridiculed, was a nice feature.

    --
    -=-=-=-=-=
    I'd rather be flamed than ignored.
  39. The value of the 20" Cinema Display by dev32810 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    looks a little less today compared with its 'little brother' (the iMac 20")

    20" Cinema Display : $1299
    20" G5 IMac : $1899

    That's a lot of extra gear for $600.00, isn't it? So, is the iMac a great deal or the Cinema Display now less of one?

    And to think I was thiiiis close to picking up a Cinema 20" for my Powerbook...

  40. Re:Oh yeah? Well..(touche) by gosand · · Score: 4, Funny
    ..You can't price style, baby! :)

    Apparently, you can.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  41. Agreed by bogie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Technically its of course neat. But a generic white box is pretty uninteresting IMHO. Without the Apple logo I think most Apple users wouldn't look twice and just assume its a another LCD monitor. Of course Apple fans will just respond saying THAT'S THE POINT. Yeah well its boring.

    In short its got no style. We have seen this lcd-all-in-one design before now its just happens to be a G5 inside. The previous Imac and things like the Cube were much more interesting. Maybe they'll offer Colored versions to spice it up? Too bad you can't buy the old version with a G5 in it.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  42. Powerbook G5 soon? by kalleh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they can fit a G5 inside that box we should be seeing powerbook G5's soon. The heat issue with the G5 seems to be solved.

  43. Re:Just wondering by malfunct · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I differ in opinion. This is a beautiful machine. Its one where people will be looking for the cable that hooks the "monitor" up to the computer. It will be especially perfect looking with the bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Then you will have a single cable to the power outlet and that is it. This is the first computer from apple in ages that actually has me thinking "man I wish I had that". I'm not a super apple fan (nothing against them just no reasons to buy them) but its about time that someone builds a computer with that form factor and those lines and it sounds like this one will even perform decently.

    --

    "You can now flame me, I am full of love,"

  44. Jobs vs Physics by Digital_Quartz · · Score: 4, Funny

    I do not think that a man such as Jobs would ever let minor concerns such as sound engineering or the laws of physics get in the way of his vision.

  45. Gateway's Doesn't Even Compare.... by AtOMiCNebula · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Are you kidding? Maybe the design is semi-alike, but then again, how many ways can you arrange a computer inside a tiny box?

    Take a look at that gateway. All the pieces are outside the monitor. It's quite bulky, and not nearly as easy on the eye. Gateway didn't want to work as much, they just attached the LCD to the box. Apple shoved all the parts into a backing of a LCD, and it's only two inches thick (give or take .2 inches). Honestly, are you just trying to find a reason to beat on them?

    There are only so many ways to package up a computer, and I'd say Apple's new way is quite different from that Gateway model. Sure, it's closer in resemblance to that gateway when compared to a traditional desktop with external CRT or LCD...but come on. Give Apple credit where credit is due.

  46. Re:Apple Mouse by saddino · · Score: 3, Informative

    Also, for people who have added a scroll mouse to their Macs, how well supported are the additional buttons and scroll wheel across various Mac applications?

    I used to have a 2 button + scroll wheel mouse -- simply plugged it in and it worked in every app I tried it in.

    Now I use a Kensington Turbo Mouse with trackball, 4 buttons + scroll wheel. Works like a charm.

  47. Re:Just wondering by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 4, Funny

    To me it's plain, but not plain in that simple excellent design way, just a bit dull.


    Ahh, but if it were to be in basic black, even the Amish would consider getting one.

  48. Re:Just wondering by Megane · · Score: 3, Funny
    I think they learned their lesson from the 128K Mac.

    (Mmm... orange smoke...)

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  49. Failure mode? by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you think about what a capacitor is, I don't think it is all that thermally sensitive. After all, the biggest, crappiest and hottest capacitors are going to be inside the PSU.

    In my experience, electrolytic capacitors, which have a liquid dialetric, tend to fail as this liquid migrates from one end of the capacitor to another. Inside they're built like a jelly roll, and all the jelly leaks to one end, changing the capacitance value and sometimes creating shorts.

    I can see how heat might make this problem worse, but the biggest problem is gravity and the orientation of the capacitors. I don't know how many pieces of old equipment like video terminals I've "fixed" by having their users "put them to bed" by turning them upside down at the end of the day. These capacitors look like they're laid out horizontally, which I think will tend to make them last longer.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Failure mode? by alienw · · Score: 3, Informative

      First, it's not a liquid dielectric, it's a conductive liquid. The dielectric is the aluminum oxide that forms on the foil. Second, it can't "migrate", because of capillary action. Third, most capacitors die when the liquid dries out or leaks out, so hot temperatures cause them to die much more quickly. Finally, the PSU capacitors are usually the most expensive capacitors in the system, because they are designed for the hot temperatures and high voltages. Putting other capacitors near the power supply means they will die that much sooner.

    2. Re:Failure mode? by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's absolutely no question that electrolytic capacitors are a potential weak link in an old circuit. And you would expect them to be somewhat thermally sensitive especially once they start leaking. I also suspect that temperature variation may in fact be worse than just constant high temperature.

      That said, I stand by my assertion that the capacitors aren't that thermally sensitive. By which I mean a reasonably chosen component isn't going to give out on you in one or two years just because it's near a PSU, unless the PSU and case are so badly designed that the capacitors are practically cooked. I'd guess the thing will be ready for the trash heap for other reasons before the capacitors become a serious issue.

      WRT to the construction, I'll defer to your expertise. I have to confess that most of what I know about capacitors comes from the days of vacuum tubes -- seriously I remember building circuits on bakelite strips. But I do have a lot of experience with old and gimpy electronics. The orientation definitely makes a difference to capacitors. You can often resurrect old equipment by storing it upside down; the only components I can point to to explain this are the capacitors. What you say about capillary action makes sense though. I suspect what may happen in these cases is the capacitors have leaked and the quantity of liquid may be inadequate to ensure adequate coverage.

      You can also somtimes get a little work out of a piece of equipment by giving it a carefully calibrated, sharp, rap. This I think jars the gimpy capacitors and bad connectors enough. I don't like to let other folks see me do this though because it gives them ideas and pretty soon you have smashed up equipment all over the place.

      My experience is that connectors are a much worse problem than capacitors and a common source of flakiness, although you can often cure this temporarily by unplugging them and reseating them, without even cleaning.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  50. Re:Just wondering by dasmegabyte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you read their marketting literature, the goal here was to make a PC with the same ease and look as the iPod. Hence the white, the rounded edges and the locked angle mount. It's no aluminum beauty like the Power series, but it makes up for it with its light, compact design. And the movable screen, which I thought was a great idea, made the DVD Lamp look flimsy to a lot of people (even though it wasn't). I see definite improvements, and I *LIKED* the old iMac.

    Really, this is ingenious. This look builds off their strongest selling product in a way that encourages people satisfied with current offerings to branch out. And the price is right...$1300 is not that bad for a computer with a 17" flatscreen and a compact design. I'd say this thing has potential beyond even the original colored iMacs if they stress the key components: comparable performance and superior graphics with a smaller footprint, better service and few virus and spyware worries. Of course, they'll probably just do a commercial with Tobey Macguire or something, but marketed right, this could be a valuable product, one that could take the competition a while to clone.

    Incidentally, Sony did the whole slim-LCD-PC thing a while back and sold it for about $400 more. It was a cool unit, but WAY bigger than this in both width and depth.

    --
    Hey freaks: now you're ju
  51. I was just at the Paris Expo.. by apetime · · Score: 3, Informative
    ..and the pictures don't do the new iMac justice. But having said that, I was a little bit disappointed. I missed the keynote but I was at the expo venue when the banners and computers were uncovered. Everyone clapped and some people cheered, but the response seemed a bit muted. At one point, the girl doing the iMac presentation had to almost ask for applause. She seemed a little surprised by the response. The presentation alluded to an "in any room of your home" idea, which suggests to me that they might not have wanted something that stuck out too much, but rather blended in to its surroundings.

    It's a sleek and contained design, but it reminds me of one of the new cinema displays in plastic with serious underbite. The photos don't show it very well, but the top layer of the bevel surrounding the screen is clear plastic, which looks quite nice, but I don't think it completely saves the design. I was personally expecting something much more exciting, but looking at it straight on, you can almost fool yourself into thinking you are looking at an eMac missing its speakers.

    With this design to complete their lineup, its easy to see that they wanted the iMac to be to the Powermac, as the iBook is to the Powerbook. There are similar form factors between the consumer and pro lines (if you had one of the new aluminum displays for your powermac), and the same materials for each side of the divide.

  52. Re:Just wondering by danieljpost · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sorry, I gotta interject.

    It may just be possible that the apple guys intentionally built the thing for *low power consumption* which will translate to *low heat emission*, which means the thing might not run so darn hot that it burns itself out after all.

    As I often failed to teach my high school hardware classes, more heat disspiation (fans) does not make a computer better (sort of like more Mhz didn't really mean more performance-- at least not linear increases). More fans just mean more noise.

    Picture this if you will. I set up a computer lab in a round concrete room (echoes like crazy). I made the kids shut off all the Wintel boxen and hooked up an LTSP diskless workstation just to show them how much better it is NOT to have so much noise (the server was in the next room). Thing used like 30 watts, booted in no time, and made NO noise. The fucking kids couldn't comprehend that it was easier to get things done on this machine (KDE vs. Windows arguments ignored for this discussion-- they were using Netware-crippled windows so it's not like they could do anything but run Office/internet)

    [Yes if you didn't notice, I'm comparing the guy who thinks the iMac will burn out to my high school students who thought computers have to be noisy.]

    At least notice that the fans on the new iMac run at variable speeds, so after the thing's heated up for a while, they will kick in.

    --
    We must drive a sword through any hypothesis that is not strictly necessary.
  53. Mac == Resale Value by theManInTheYellowHat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whatever anybody says about the price one thing is for sure. There is no PC on the planet that will hold its value better than a Mac.

    Take a look at a 1 year old Dell or IBM anything even servers and then take a look at a 1 year old Mac. The PC will be at least 50% less and the Mac will have dropped about $100.

    After a year the PC becomes worthless and the Mac still has a good value. 2 yr old iMacs are still worth quite a bit of their original price, especially if they have the SuperDrive. How much is a 2 year old Dell worth?

    When ever a person asks about buying a PC vs. a Mac that is the first thing I try to explane to them.

  54. Wall mounting kit available by dowobeha · · Score: 3, Interesting
    This is interesting. From the Apple Store:

    iMac G5 VESA Mount Adapter Kit

    $29.00

    Available for order in October.

    Allows your iMac G5 to be used with VESA compliant mounting solutions such as wall mounts and articulating arms.

    --
    I am concerned about any program, any piece of hardware, any treaty, any law that treats me as a consumer, not a citizen
  55. Yeah ok... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sure, marketing people never get carried away. I'm sure that all the drivvle to come from Dell, Gateway, NVidia, ATI, VIA, AMD, Intel, and Microsoft is perfectly accurate, and never EVER stretches anything.

    Perhaps you like this better:

    The iMac G5 offers mediocre built-in graphics capabilities. Like, for instance, the so-so widescreen display. Mac OS X version 10.3 "Panther," provides you with the world's most mid-range -- and most graphics-using -- operating system. And then there's the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics processor with 64MB of DDR SDRAM. It's a combination that delivers middle-of-the-road 2D and 3D graphics performance and a semi-immersive, pixelated, and distorted gaming experience with half the frame rate of our professional systems.

    Yeah, that makes me want to buy one. Hell, I'll buy two after that stunning writeup. Here's my credit card!!

    Always remember that marketing people are SELLING product, and that by making a comparison to the last model, they can get away with saying things like "unparalleled performace"

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  56. piracy encouraged! by sootman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    from: http://www.apple.com/imac/:

    "Back up your iTunes collection or make a mix CD for that special someone. [emphasis added]"

    Um, that would be a CD full of songs to which you own the copyright, right? Riiiiight...

    Now, before we get into the "slashdotters don't have teh g1rlfriends LOL OMG BBQ" jokes, or the "my iMac is my special someone" crowd, I'd like to say that this just really, really makes me sick. You can't have it both ways. We are either allowed to share music, or we aren't. (I know Apple != RIAA etc., but they are a Large Corporate Entity, and presumably wouldn't encourage something that is 100% against the wishes of the **AA) So what's the deal? I can see it now: "All Combo-drive Macs come with Shrink! Share your DVDs with your friends!"

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  57. Just noticed in the tech specs... by umshaggy · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ...that the 17" versions only have 80GB hard drives, and th 20" has only 160GB. Makes me questions this:

    "all your music, all your photos, all your movies, all your email -- in a computer as fun and useful as an iPod?"

    Sorry, that might be enough for all of my music, maybe even all of my photos. But I have very little music (in comparison to most of my friends. ) and almost no photos. I know people who cannot fit even half their music on an iPod. There is a reason that people lobbied to get 80gig hard drive packs for their Neuros.

    I like that the hard disks are SATA though! That is pretty cool.
    --
    Did you buy a Neuros today?
  58. Compare to the lowest end dell spec'ed out ident by menace690 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Comparing Apples to Oranges....Dells

    Ok iMac is low-end so compare to cheapest Dell with almost the same functionality.

    Dell w 17 inch lcd = $1377 yet it is not an all-in-one

    Dell with 20" lcd = $1887

    Specs for the Dells otherwise:
    Pentium 4 at 2.8 Ghz (533 FSB)
    Windows XP Pro (Can't compare Home to OS X because OS X has all the features of Pro and more)
    256 Megs RAM
    80 gig hd/160 with 20 inch screen
    Single Drive: 16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+RW/+R) w/double layer write capability
    Fireiwre PCI adapter
    128MB DDR NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI

    What your not getting with the Dells:
    Gigabit Ethernet
    Widescreen LCD
    All in One enclosure
    64 bit capability->Especially for linux users
    A design that begs to be seen, not shoved under a desk.

    What your not getting with the iMac:
    64 extra megs in the viedo card.
    Crap trial software you have to remove

    The lower end Dell (17") was made to compare with the mid range iMac. $122 isn't all that much considering what benefits you will gain. (IMO).

    At the higher end, there is no question in my mind that the iMac is by far the better deal for merely 12 dollars extra.

    Feel free to try doing the spec work on your own elsewhere. Just make sure you don't compare OS X to Windows XP Home. OS X's capabilities far outstrip those of XP Home. And if your selling to businesses that need to join a domain, you would need Pro anyway.

    --
    A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward. -- FDR
  59. apple's one flaw continues by steak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    for the love of christ, steve jobs please put a damn link light on the nics. this has been the one thing that has bothered me about macs. link lights are one of those things that you take for granted until you don't have one, trouble shooting is so much easier with link lights.

  60. 3rd party accessory I'd like: mounting options! by timothy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd like to see various mounting solutions built just for this model.

    Imagine:

    - the 17" as a (passenger-area) movie machine in a car / van / minivan. (And I've seen some installs of much smaller and worse displays that cost more than this one's base model, too, and which couldn't do a lot of things a computer-based system could, like play any formats for which codecs exists, also act as a GPS display, or overqualified MP3 player, etc.)

    - a thin storage spot on the back or side of a desk; when you need the computer, swing it up from there (something like old typewriter table shelves, but not quite as dangerously spring-loaded ;)). When you want uninterrupted surface for writing or organizing, etc, swing the whole computer away.

    - ceiling-attached pole/arm mount that doesn't need a desk surface at all, except perhaps as a place to put a keyboard and mouse. With several mounting spots in a room, and somewhat of a gooseneck, you could move the machine around, adjust the height, etc. Movies in bed without a big cantilevered horizontal surface, a web-cam interface in the kitchen so you can keep an eye on driveway, apt. building entrance, etc.

    - An easel-type floor-mounted stand, turning one into a TV-for-the-evening, an art-gallery display, a temporary 2nd machine next to another one or next to a rack of machines in a data center, a less elaborate movies-in-bed machine, a demo screen for small-group presentations, etc.

    - An octopus cart; there are some smart laptop carts (mostly built for Apple laptops, though I guess there are others for Dells, etc), set up so laptops can be stored in, charged in, and locked up in one rolling cart -- they're basically marketed as portable computing labs. One for G5s might only hold 3 or 4, but in a way that lets people work side by side on their own machines, and later have the whole collection secured in in the deepest keep of the castle. And there could be some slots for iBooks or other laptops, too ;)

    Anyhow. That is a beautiful design -- congratulations, Apple.

    Tim

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  61. heat kills capacitors, and armchair engineering by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you think about what a capacitor is, I don't think it is all that thermally sensitive.

    Electrolytic capacitors are very heat sensitive, if you "think about what it is"; it's a liquid-filled device. They're rated for a fixed lifetime, and that lifetime is a certain number of hours at a certain temperature. The "fixed lifetime" bit is why electrolytic capacitors are NEVER milspec-rated; they can't be. Tantalum capacitors are, but they're a)expensive b)take up more space c)expensive d)expensive.

    The original poster you responded to was naive. For example- the capacitors could be high-temperature rated; the case will say so. I forget the ratings but 85 degrees C and 105 degrees C are coming to mind. The hour rating also varies drastically- you can buy some that will last 4-5 times longer than others. You can buy 'overvoltage' capacitors that are rated well above the voltage you'll be using(though they'll be larger). So on, etc. As previously mentioned, they could also be tantalum.

    Furthermore, he/she/it seems to think heat will be a problem off the PSU. No doubt it uses convection, and notice the PSU is at the bottom of the machine, getting the coolest air? my G4 17" PB power supply brick runs fairly cool under normal use- and it has no venting, it's a solid plastic case. In fact, I just found it buried under my jacket on the rug- well insulated- and it's lukewarm. Charging the battery is another matter, but the G5 imac doesn't have one of those.

    So, honestly, I think everyone is not giving Apple a chance on this one and engaging in a lot of slack-jawed armchair engineering. Given the potential for fire and whatnot, I'm sure Apple was very careful about thermal design. What I find more interesting is that none of the photos are real- they're very clearly CG mockups. 3-4 week delivery? Hahah. AHAHAHAHAHAH. AHAHAHAHAHAAH [collapses from heart attack from laughing fit].

    1. Re:heat kills capacitors, and armchair engineering by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 4, Informative

      -25 to 70 is commercial spec.
      -40 to 125 is industrial spec.
      -50 to 150 is military spec.

      Some companies/products differ from these (i.e. a lot of power ICs are designed for the 150 max in their industrial version), but those are the general guidelines.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
  62. Cost-Justifying a Mac Client - it's doable. by daviddennis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Macs have longer active lives than PCs since there is much less built-in obsolescence. I can run MacOS X well on my five-year old iMac or PowerMac.

    If you have a lousy monitor left in a corner the PC is much cheaper than the Mac. But if you want your employees to survive without eyestrain you probably want to fix its lifespan at three years. This means replacing the monitor at the same time as the PC.

    The cost of spyware and virus protection/removal solutions is about $50 per machine, plus $1,000-odd on the server level, plus about $100 per year per machine for roughly one technician hour a year of support.

    Mac ........... $ 1,299
    Visits ......... 1xlifetime = 100
    Lifetime ..... 5 years
    Total ......... $1,399
    Cost/year... $279

    PC ............. $ 600
    Visits ........3 year life x100 = 300 per lifetime of machine
    Spyware+AV Software... $100
    Total ......... $ 1,000

    Cost per year: $333
    If we add a cheap monitor for $100 it goes up to $366. But then you should really compare it to the $799 eMac, not the $1,299 iMac, which would actually increase Apple's advantage.
    if we add a 17" LCD for $500 it goes up to $458.

    Visits may be a gross underestimate. I've seen PCs messed up so badly that it's been cheaper to buy a new PC than to figure out what's wrong.

    This doesn't even include the server-based AV software you should also buy.

    See? The Mac isn't half bad when it comes to a reasonable cost perspective with all costs included. Not to mention that Apple Mail + iCal costs nothing, while Outlook + Exchange are obscenely expensive.

    D

  63. I disagree that locking down windows will work by saha · · Score: 4, Informative
    Besides, Apple could not get enough g5's to supply even 15% of the total corp market

    I agree with you with this point. Apple historically has always been behind on the supply side. They never seem to be able to estimate demand or scale up when well when it rises, resulting in delayed orders. Its a shame.

    No, you just need to lock down the config tight enough so that can't happen

    We have an entire team of guys at our college that specialize in one and only thing. Windows PCs. Yet, they have trouble locking down the computer because Windows and Windows programmers have picked up alot of bad habits over the years. Allowing Limited Userby default to even write to the root of the C:\ drive, the root of Program Files, last but not least the root of the Windows directory. Even after locking down most things. Our computers where hit by NetSky.

    Here is a short example C:\Program Files\Common Files\McNeel Shared\Teen Porn 16.jpg.pif has been deleted. C:\Program Files\Common Files\McNeel Shared\Virii Sourcecode.scr Found the W32/Netsky.c@MM virus !!! C:\Program Files\Common Files\McNeel Shared\Virii Sourcecode.scr has been deleted. C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Best Matrix Screensaver.scr Found the W32/Netsky.c@MM virus !!! C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Best Matrix Screensaver.scr has been deleted. C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\CDO\Best Matrix Screensaver.scr Found the W32/Netsky.c@MM virus !!! C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\CDO\Best Matrix Screensaver.scr has been deleted. C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\CDO\Dark Angels.pif

    It just goes to show that the Windows OS is inherited from a single user system, and doesn't think about where and how a user can install malware and virii ..etc throughout the system, infecting other users. We've been using Unix and now Linux for the last 20 years and I've never as many problems on Windows on other platforms like Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Linux and Mac OSX.

  64. Re:Shoulda bought one 10 minutes ago by karlandtanya · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, it seems there's been ANOTHER price change...

    17-inch:1.6GHz $1,299.00
    17-inch:1.8GHz $1,499.00
    20-inch:1.8GHz $1,899.00

    (back to what it was)

    My saved order W9259055 is back...and my saved order W9259862 is now gone...

    Yeah, I've got printouts of both "Choose you iMac G5" prices in front of me right now.

    What will the price be in the next 10 minutes?

    Hmmm...I wonder if there's folks day trading iMac futures?

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
  65. Apple needs more configurability by saha · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The one thing which doesn't help Apple is that the lack of configuration option severly limits the flexibilty I need to order from their website. I need that flexibilty to configure machines to fit into my department's budget.

    e.g. Our department specs maybe something like this

    1.8 GHz G5 processor

    40 GB harddrive

    CD-RW drive

    512 MB to 1 GB RAM

    3 Year service

    My department doesn't need the secretarial staff to have 80GB drive nor a DVD-R burning SuperDrive. Yet, I'm forced to buy those components if I want the 1.8GHz machine instead of the 1.6GHz. I don't expect Apple to be able to customize like Dell does (penny pinching moves like excluding a $2.41 mouse pad) , but I just feel that I lack the ability to squeeze the most out, by not being able to configure the machines to our needs hampers purchasing sometimes. For administrative and coporate jobs and people who need a basic terminal a 40GB HDD and a CD-RW burner are great. Our users typical need enough processor power, for 3-4 years down the road and enough RAM to run 5-8 concurrent applications as they typically do.

    1. Re:Apple needs more configurability by Lars+T. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why does your secretary need 1.8 GHz instead of 1.6 GHz?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  66. My idea for a killer iMac feature by multiplexo · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Putting a DVI input on the system that would allow you to use this as a standard monitor for an external computer. Now, this might sound insane, but think about it. You have a PC that you still have to use for some tasks, or a PC laptop. You plug your PC into the iMac DVI input and can switch over to the display for it, you've just made it easier for people to transition between Macs and PCs. Sure, you can use Microsoft's Remote Desktop Connection for this sort of thing, but not if you're doing anything graphics intensive on the PC. Given the pricing Apple is putting on these systems you could sell the system with the 20 inch monitor as a 20 inch 16:9 monitor for PCs that also runs Macintosh software. OK, I'll go take my medication now.

    --
    cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
  67. The margins on their monitors must be huge. by calstraycat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, let's see. I can get a complete, well-equipped G5 computer with a 20" monitor for $1899. Yet their stand-alone 20" monitor is $1299.

    My first thought was "wow, that means the cost of building the computer part must be less than $600". Then I came to my senses and realized that it really means the stand-alone monitors must have huge profit margins. I've always felt that their monitors were the most overpriced products in their portfolio. I think this proves it.

    No flames, please. I'm a major Mac-head. I just thought the cost difference between the products was revealing.

  68. G4 iMacs at the Apple Store POS by danielsfca2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to work in Apple's flagship retail store in San Francisco. All the POS systems ("cash registers," 7 of them) are iMac G4's, about one revision before the last ones. Just from the way the customers behaved when I worked there, I know that if they don't hurry up and replace those with a currently-shipping model, the customers are going to constantly be asking about them and they won't care what kind of processor, they'll be pissed. Some people are just going to still like the 'lampshade' iMacs better and of course my former coworkers are going to have to tell them they're not for sale. Oh man.

    Oh, and the "internet cafe" computers are also G4 iMacs. I also wonder if they're going to replace those. I think there are 16 of them. I think they should, in the interest of not getting people jazzed about a model you no longer sell.

  69. Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious by kaltekar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of these support calls how many were "how do I change my wall paper", "Where is 'My Computer'", "How do I make a short cut", "I can't eject the cdrom", and other such requests that would normaly come from a person that has used nothing but MicroCrap there whole computing life. I work for a school district with 75% mac, we have 2 admins, one for our legacy OS 9 stuff and the other for OSX, we have two full time mac repair techs and 2 that that do both pc and mac. We have 16 techs for PC repair and 4 people for the Administration. This is for over 5000 computers total both mac and PC.

    Where is the TCO savings? Lets see 6 people to support 3750 Macs and 20 people to Support 1250 PC's With the average cost of 166k/yr (three admins for 500k/yr) per employee from the Parent post, the cost per unit to support is

    Mac is $265.60 per year
    PC is $2656.00 per year

    Support for the macs is one tenth the cost of the PCs. There is your cost savings. This is based on real numbers of employees and Computers. You do the math and prove me wrong.

    Side note, I started of in PC only support and moved to Mac only. Mac is much easier to learn and to support. Yes Macs crach but a hell of lot less often the PC's do.

    --
    Ahh.. The mind what a wonderful trap!
  70. Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious by saha · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Why do you need three admins for a Mac? Why can't you use one fulltime? In fact, why don't you grab two of your current PC guys and train them to use OSX and Apple Remote Desktop? I bet they would become become proficient with in a week's time.

    I'm sorry I don't see your argument or it doesn't hold water. Deploying software on a Mac and maintaining updates and administration on a Mac OSX is far lower than any other computer I've come across. We have a hetrogenous enviroment in our department. Aside from Windows PCs we have SGI Irix, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, Linux and Mac OSX.

  71. 20in iMac - 20in Display = $600 G5 Mac by Johnny+Mozzarella · · Score: 3, Insightful

    20" iMac $1899
    20" CinemaDisplay $1299
    difference $ 600

    This shows that Apple could reintroduce a G5 cube and price it aggresively under $1000.
    Would you buy a Cube if it had the following?
    1.8GHz PowerPC G5
    512K L2 cache
    600MHz frontside bus
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    160GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load SuperDrive
    Bluetooth
    One empty PCI slot

    Ditch the clear plastics, make Bluetooth standard and sell it without a mouse and keyboard.
    Give customers the option of buying Apple's wired or Bluetooth mice/keyboard or third party peripherals.
    It would be a switcher friendly Mac.