Slashdot Mirror


iMacs Freshened with 2.0 GHz G5, Bluetooth, WiFi

amichalo writes "Apple has updated the popular consumer level Mac, the iMac G5. So better support the now standard Mac OS X Tiger, Apple has made significant improvements to all standard configurations including 512MB RAM, Radeon 9600 128MB graphics, and on 2.0 GHz models (17" and 20"), a slot-loading dual-layer 8x SuperDrive is standard. The 1.8 GHz 17" model includes a slot-loading Combo Drive. Also standard are Apple's AirPort Extreme 802.11g WiFi and Bluetooth. Pricing remains at $1300, $1500, and $1800 respectively for 1.8 GHz 17", 2.0 GHz 17", and 2.0 GHz 20", though 2.0 GHz models include additional upgraded features. These improvements are significant as this line has not seen a refresh in about a year and the upgrade to a Radeon 9600 graphics card will allow the new iMac to take better advantage of Tiger features such as Core Image, which is significant because the video card cannot be upgraded. Lastly, Apple is continuing the interactive chat and QuickTime support program for the iMac G5."

790 comments

  1. I see a trend .. by PriceIke · · Score: 3, Funny

    Must be Slashvertisement Day ..

    --
    It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
    1. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not funny mods... it's just sad.

    2. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually it is National Teacher Day.

    3. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? Windows can't even run on these machines.

    4. Re:I see a trend .. by delta_avi_delta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you're referring to the clock speeds mentioned, vs the clock speeds of Intel or AMD chips in 2002 (which has, oh, nothing to do with the OS), then I suggest you do some reading as to the actual comparative performance, especially in the graphics processing areas where macs are traditionally strong.

      I'm not a fanboy, but I've never liked the way chips are advertised by clock-speed, it's quite misleading.

    5. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      you misspelled 2007.

    6. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so this slashvertisement is misleading... I cant disagree with that

    7. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      then I suggest you do some reading as to the actual comparative performance, especially in the graphics processing areas where macs are traditionally strong.
      tradition!=reality
      Fanboys. You can only shake your head at them.
    8. Re:I see a trend .. by indy_Muad'Dib · · Score: 5, Informative
    9. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's that, the year of the James Bond?

    10. Re:I see a trend .. by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      As someone who gets occasionally pedantic about English, can I ask why people refer to speed upgrades as "speed bumps", given the term, in real life, refers to areas of road that have been raised in order to force vehicles travelling across them to slow down?

      I mean, what's the deal with that?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhh...because the speed is being bumped up (or down).

    12. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Comment hijacking. How cute.

      For those that don't know, comment hijacking is where you reply to someones post that is high up just to increase your chances of getting moderated up.

      I might just log in from a different IP and mod you as troll for that once I finish my coffee.

    13. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see why some would think this is off topic. I mean, this is a UNIX forum and the Mac OS is UNIX based.

    14. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the parent post was replying directly to a point made the grandparent post, which you didn't see because it was eventually modded down to -1.

      I might just log in from a different IP and mod you as troll for that once I finish my coffee.

      Yet another example of how idiots like you are screwing up the moderation system for everybody.

    15. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the link

      If your computer feels slow at that speed it's because the OS has not been optimised for responsiveness, it's not the fault of the CPU - just ask anyone using BeOS or MorphOS.


      Can anyone please explain how, I can tune my Gentoo linux for responsiveness?

    16. Re:I see a trend .. by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      How about we just run some Doom 3 benchmarks against an AMD box built with the same budget?

    17. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a fanboy either, but I've nver liked the way chips are advertised by carefully crafted Photoshop routines, it's quite misleading.

    18. Re:I see a trend .. by Lally+Singh · · Score: 1

      Actually you'd have to find a top-tier OEM to make it fair. You're not building the mac from parts, you're getting a fully assembled unit.

      --
      Care about electronic freedom? Consider donating to the EFF!
    19. Re:I see a trend .. by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      True, Dell isn't an option because of their no-AMD policy. Let's stack it up against an Alienware Aurora 55, plain vanilla config with a 17" NEC LCD runs 1319$.

      Unfortunately I'm not up to the point of spending 2600$ US to prove a point on slashdot.

    20. Re:I see a trend .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and could someone also explain how I can tune OSX for responsiveness?

  2. Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by ari_j · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Thanks for the ad, and all that insightful commentary about this important (and not at all incremental) development. Your creative (ab)use of the English language was also particularly entertaining this morning.

    1. Re:Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by andreMA · · Score: 4, Funny
      Schills for nerds, stuff that matters
      I think you meant Schillers for nerds...

      Mods: it's a joke. Phil Schiller is Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing. Sad that I had to explain that to (hopefully) avoid being modded "Flamebait"

    2. Re:Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by ari_j · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mod points are not given to anyone who has ever posted a +5 Funny comment or otherwise made anyone laugh. Only those with absolutely no sense of humor are allowed to moderate comments, around here. (And when I get mod points, it's always when I'm hungry, grumpy, or otherwise unwilling or unable to find anything funny.)

    3. Re:Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by Gorbag · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I've posted a +5 Funny at least once in my lifetime, and I do get mod points. Though I have noticed even my own comments moving from -1 offtopic to +n funny (once someone actually gets the joke), I've "corrected" such moderations more than once myself as well.

      --
      -- I speak only for myself
    4. Re:Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by ari_j · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow. You can't take a joke, either.

    5. Re:Slashdot: Schills for nerds, stuff that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude! Maybe you've posted +5Funnies, but by replying so seriously, you have at least proven the point that the only people who get mod points are those without a sense of humour, and can't say which is serious and which is funny.

  3. game by bosz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Does it have that puzzle game with the apple logo? Best game on the mac.

    1. Re:game by henrywood · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Best game on the Mac". Are there others?

      --
      Something is happening here but you don't know what it is, do you, Mr Jones.
    2. Re:game by bosz · · Score: 3, Funny

      Like I said. Best game on the mac.

    3. Re:game by Golias · · Score: 1

      Another World of Warcraft hater, huh?

      Personally, I think it's kind of fun. I was just logged into WoW last night on my 119" projection system via the Mac mini.

      Even with Toast encoding a DVD of one of my HDTV archives in the background, it ran really smoothly.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:game by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1, Informative

      "There are a lot of great games on the mac... like warcraft 3.................. uh .......... um..... that puzzle game with the apple logo! THATS a great game. I... I beat it, but it's still fun."

      "The confusing thing about PC's is you go to the store, and there are just SO MANY games. EVERYWHERE you look! But on the mac... there are just six."

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    5. Re:game by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      No way - best mac game has to be the game you got free with a Mac Perfoma (I think) where you had to enclose areas of the screen with lines without the bouncing thingies hitting them. I spent *hours* playing that game. Can't remember what it was called though.

    6. Re:game by phaxda · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Look, some tasty troll snacks right here in my pocket. Feeding time!

      Macs have plenty of games. Check out gameranger.com for a fairly comprehensive list.

      I like computer golf the best--if you're a Mac golfer, pay us a visit at http://www.linksgolfcommunity.com/

    7. Re:game by jspoon · · Score: 1

      I don't remember if it came bundled with any computers, but a game from that era that era that meets your description is Barrack, by Ambrosia SW. Did the game you're recalling feature a cartoon shark?

    8. Re:game by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      It's called Qix. That's an old arcade classic from back in the day. I've got a version for Game Boy that I can still play for hours on end.

    9. Re:game by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's the one. Fiendishly addictive. Searching for "lines and bouncing thingies" didn't bring up much on Google ;)

    10. Re:game by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Funny, but I have both an iMac G5 and a PC. My two kids are always playing games on the PC. But when they do their homework it's on the Mac. One is in college and the other starts in the fall. I have asked both of them what computer do they want for school. They both wanted powerbooks, like mine. I talked to them about games, they said that their playstations are much better at gaming than either the Mac or the PC. So I guess a PC has alot of games, but to do real work it's best to have a Mac.

    11. Re:game by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 4, Funny
      Macs have plenty of games. Check out gameranger.com for a fairly comprehensive list.

      Good start...

      I like computer golf the best

      ...bad finish.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    12. Re:game by jbrader · · Score: 1

      a clone called kbounce is available for KDE

      --
      You are so boring that when I see you my feet go to sleep.
    13. Re:game by ExKoopaTroopa · · Score: 1
      --
      Don't Tell Me What I Can't Do!
    14. Re:game by timster · · Score: 1

      check out KBounce, if you have KDE. Don't know of one for the Mac though.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    15. Re:game by generic-man · · Score: 1

      The really sad thing is that with Mac OS X 10.0-10.3, Apple didn't even have "that puzzle game with the Apple logo." It was restored in the form of a Dashboard widget in 10.4.

      So in short, yes it does.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    16. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best game on the mac.

      I agree. I beat it, but it's still fun

    17. Re:game by drsmithy · · Score: 3, Funny
      Rubbish. Shufflepuck Cafe was *far* superior.

      (Speaking of which, has anyone still got a copy floating around ? I need something for my Mac Plus to do when it isn't being a clock...)

    18. Re:game by eclectic4 · · Score: 1

      I monopolize my Mac playing games (those are just recent "Action" games listed). While at times we have to wait for the most popular titles to arrive for the Mac, most still arrive (the only one I miss is Half-Life/Counter Strike). I don't want for games, and jealousy over release times do not overtake me. They come when they come, it's new to me.

      Now, back WoW...

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
    19. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "but to do real work it's best to have a Mac"

      didn't you mean a playstation?

    20. Re:game by trans_err · · Score: 1

      No :C, now it's a tiger puzzle and only in Dashboard.

    21. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just because you like one game doesn't mean everyone has to. On the Windows side, you have an insane variety of games to choose from. If you don't like one genre, or one company, or one game, you can chose any number of others.

      On the Apple side, you have a good, what, 5 games? In all seriousness, the markets aren't even remotely close in size. And just because you like running around with your dainty gnome warlock doesn't mean everyone else wants to play hide the salami.

      With that said, I have no problem running any game and doing multiple tasks in the background. If you buy a real computer, you're fine. Remember, a top of the line PC is still a few hundred dollars less than a midrange Apple.

    22. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that the one about the guy with a Kenyan Dad who goes on to be president ?

    23. Re:game by ztirffritz · · Score: 1

      Install fink on your Mac and then you can install all of the KDE games. There is an entire package of KDE games available. Heck, you can even run the KDE desktop if you want. I don't know why you would do that on a Mac, but some people do prefer KDE, so you can do it if you want.

      --
      Why doesn't anything interesting happen when I have mod points?
    24. Re:game by phaxda · · Score: 1

      Hey, not everyone needs WoW. I like a nice mellow golf game. I can sit back, have a beer, hit some good shots, watch the ball game at the same time. I'm not the only one--the Tiger Woods franchise is huge on consoles and the PSP, and there's plenty of virtual tours and the like for computer players. Just not so many for the Mac, which is why I decided to Slashvertise our little group.

      Mock if you like, but I'm not ashamed of my habit!

    25. Re:game by Angostura · · Score: 1

      Here you go

      http://home.planet.nl/~pulle071/firemac/games.htm ... Sound doesn't seem to work in classic on my set-up, but other than that....

    26. Re:game by Golias · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the Apple side, you have a good, what, 5 games?

      I couldn't tell you. There's only one game on the Mac I like, and that's WoW.

      For all other gaming, I fire up the X-Box.

      Nothing on the Windows side really piques my interest, but when the GTA MMORPG comes out in 2007 or so (assuming it's not vapor), I may end up shopping for an AMD or Intel box if it's Windows-only.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    27. Re:game by jskiff · · Score: 1

      ObMacGamesJoke

      C'mon, there are lots of games for the Mac

      Zork...Breakout...Super Breakout...Photoshop...

      --
      It's "no one," not "noone." Who the hell is noone anyway?
    28. Re:game by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      I hate replying to myself, but for the people who didn't get it:

      http://www.unknowngeek.com/files/macgamer.mov

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    29. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you can get off your ass and go to a real golf course, hit a few lousy shots, and get some exercise.

    30. Re:game by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      And have a beer...

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    31. Re:game by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 2, Informative
      Barrack by Ambrosia Software.

      Also might want to check out:

      http://www.pangeasoft.net/index2.html
      http://www.udevgames.com/
      http://www.apple.com/games/
      http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx/cat/games
      http://www.macupdate.com/games.php

      As a side note, the Mac platform has never been known for a wide range of shrink-wrapped software; the main place to find software has always been "online", even before the internet was popular, and people got their software from BBSes.

    32. Re:game by bprime · · Score: 0

      Warcraft...breakout...superbreakout.... ...

      photoshop?

    33. Re:game by Skye16 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When you enjoy playing games other than FPS games, then an Xbox is worth it. But after trying to play Halo 2 for the last 2 months, it fucking sucks. Sure, you can get good. But nothing replaces a good mouse and keyboard. And the poor Mac community still has about zero worthwhile FPS games to play. The ones they do have are all DM oriented.

      Not that the Mac users can do much about that, really. But I, personally, wish I weren't locked into one particular architecture just because I enjoy playing games. I probably would never, ever use a Mac (I would rather build a computer myself, thanks), but I really wish I could make Linux my primary operating system. Indeed, I wish I could make it my only operating system.

    34. Re:game by ABaumann · · Score: 1

      Oh, so funny! I never thought that I'd see another comment along the lines of "Macs don't have as many games as PC's." I mean, it's not like it's in EVERY thread containing the Apple logo or anything.

      But seriously, the article could be about Steve Jobs playing tennis with George Lucas and some bonehead would say, "Yeah, that's the only game Jobs can play, cause he sure can't use his Mac to play any," or some shit like that.

      As far as computer gaming goes. Computer games suck. I'd rather play XBox or PS2 games. The only game I bother playing on my Mac is WoW. For those of you PC owners that keep bitching about the lack of Mac games, maybe us PS2 and XBox owners should complain about the lack of games for the PC. I mean, web browsing is more stable on the PS2 anyway.

    35. Re:game by mjpaci · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, but can you format a floppy while doing all of that as well?

      I thought not.

      PC's RULE!!!

      (For the youngins: The "format a floppy while..." is one of the arguments used back when Macs had floppies and cooperative multi-tasking and Windows PCs had pre-emptive (to a degree) multi-tasking to prove that PCs were superior.)

    36. Re:game by Golias · · Score: 1

      I agree with you that FPS sucks on the X-Box. HALO is a cool game, but I could not get used to aiming with a console controller. (Also, driving the wart-hog on a big screen made me a little motion-sick.)

      But I kind of burned out on FPS several years ago. (I comfortably say without false modesty that I was a freakish "Quake god" once upon a time.) The FPS games of the last five years or so have done little to rekindle my interest. I'd much rather play GTA III on my X-Box (or GTA-SA when it finally gets ported... damn you lucky PS2 owners!) than play Yet Another Half-Life Mod.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    37. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I talked to them about games, they said that their playstations are much better at gaming than either the Mac or the PC. So I guess a PC has alot of games, but to do real work it's best to have a Mac.

      Your anecdotal evidence is irrefutable! You, sir, are a true scientist.

    38. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, that argument always baffled Mac users, as they were long used to buying their floppy disks pre-formatted, and almost never needed to reformat them the way Win95 users were constantly stuck doing.

      "Drag the files to the trash... empty the trash... viola! Blank disk, ready to use!"

      "yeah, but what if you want to format it as a boot disk?"

      "Drag the little 'System' suitcase into the little picture of the disk. Viola! Boot disk!"

      "yeah but... if you do need to format it, everything stops."

      "I guess I won't format it, then."

      Ah, good times, good times.

      I miss the flamewar days when windows users didn't just come right out and agree with you that they are using a crappy OS. Maybe Longhorn can revive a little bit of that spirit. You know... if it ever arrives.

    39. Re:game by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, I'm a true ./'r! If you want facts and statistics , I am afraid you are in the wrong place. May I suggest you buy a Mac mini and try it out for yourself. If it's not true for you you can always sell it on ebay.

    40. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, to do work you need a nice wide screen laptop that runs gnu linux and kde.

      to fuck around with one button mouse on a overpriced hardware you need a Mac ;)

      to play you need a girlfriend.
      to play really hard, you need 2+ girlfriends at the same time in your b... :)

      play with PC, xbox etc is not even for wankers!

    41. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I think it's kind of fun. I was just logged into WoW last night on my 119" projection system via the Mac mini.

      Yeah, it only gets one frame per 45 seconds, but it actually can run on a mini!

    42. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Funny you say that because console gaming sucks.

      Maybe us PC gamers should complain about all the shitty button mashers, linear RPGs with no real role playing, crappy console FPSs, and 3rd person platforms, just to name a few.

    43. Re:game by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      The Mac has native versions of Enemy Territory, Nethack, and Armagetron, which is good enough for me.

    44. Re:game by Goth+Biker+Babe · · Score: 1

      They have to be young. Windows has only been vaguely pre-emptive since Windows 95. I remember I used to have exactly the same argument with Windows 3.0/3.1 uses when I had my old 1989 Acorn A3000 running RISC OS. I could format a disk and use the machine whilst they couldn't.

    45. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was the last non-linear console game you played on ANY system?

    46. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...non-linear RPG rather

    47. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've obviously never played it. It actually runs very smoothly as long as you have enough memory installed.

    48. Re:game by ABaumann · · Score: 2, Informative

      You'd need a complete lack of a story line and a complete lack of quests for a game to be non-linear. That being said, the last "non-linear" game of any sort that I can remember playing was the Sims. (And sadly, it's available for XBox, PS2, and yes, even the Mac.) In addition, button mashers and 3rd person platformers are a privilege of owning a console. Another great benefit of consoles is the friends perspective. See, I'm not your typical nerd. I have friends. Now I know you PC users love your LAN parties, and I did those when I used to own a PC too. However, taking an hour to get everybody set up and their (unstable) PCs running just to play one of the many crappy FPSs out there all night long. It's a lot easier to just switch the CD out and have an 8-player game ready to go. As far as the FPS thing is concerned, I could try the Halo defense, but I realize that Halo is a crappy game, though it's also available for the Mac. Other FPS games available on Mac include: UT2K4, Doom 3, and STILL my personal favorite FPS, Raven Shield. So what are we missing out on for not owning a PC? Half-life 2. Maybe Guild Wars. Thanks, I'll keep my stable mac and my enjoyable consoles around the house.

    49. Re:game by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      The upcoming George Lucas Segway-Tennis (available exclusively for the mac) will make you shit your pants.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    50. Re:game by BeerCat · · Score: 1

      The other, similar one, was floppy to floppy copying (with only one drive).

      The PC crowd would go on about "eject the disk, leaving it's image on the desktop? How unintuitive is that? All I do is 'copy a: a: ' "

      The Mac crowd would then respond with "ah yes, but at least the system will spit out the disk when it wants the other one, and will check that you have put in the disk asked for before carrying on. If you get confused between which disk is 'source', and which is 'destination', then you end up overwriting your source with an incomplete copy of itself"

      --
      "She's furniture with a pulse"
    51. Re:game by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Halo, Quake3, Alice, the Unreal series, Elite Force 1 and 2, Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic, SpiderMan 2, James Bond: Nightfire, and Myst IV aren't "about zero." (Note I'm only going with the 3D games the Apple Store has, there's plenty more)

    52. Re:game by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Rubbish. Shufflepuck Cafe was *far* superior

      Shufflepuck Cafe was fun, but actually, I had more fun breaking the copy protection on it, than I did actually playing it. They did some nice tricks that made breaking that one a bit of a puzzle.

    53. Re:game by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 1
      to fuck around with one button mouse on a overpriced hardware you need a Mac

      All my systems use logitech wheel mice. I'm not too cheap to spend $18 at CompUSA. You can alway buy a Mac mini $499.

    54. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, don't worry! Even mac users get to play "Taunt Users of the Other Platform"! EVERYONE can play - it's like, cross platform or something.

      Well, everyone that has access to a computer. But those no-computer-access having scrubs aren't even reading this! Ha HA! IN YOUR FACE, NO PLATFORM SUCKAS!

      Eh, but it sounds like ABaumann is already losing that game.

    55. Re:game by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

      As a side note, the Mac platform has never been known for a wide range of shrink-wrapped software; the main place to find software has always been "online", even before the internet was popular, and people got their software from BBSes.

      That's especially true for Photoshop.

      --

      In Soviet America the banks rob you!
    56. Re:game by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      Relative to the plethora of games out for the PC, yes, yes it is.

    57. Re:game by Maserati · · Score: 1

      Virtual golf + a good buzz = a fun evening. It's a good quasi-party or dorm room game even if you hate actual golf.

      Can't help those who can't stand those who abhor the very thought of golf, but they could use a good buzz as much as anyone.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    58. Re:game by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      I don't care, as long as the bestsellers I care about are there. For example, I don't care if none of The Babysitters Club books are out in audiobook form, but if they have America:The Book, then I'm happy to pay to listen to it on my iPod.

    59. Re:game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (For the actual youngins: A "floppy" was a type of portable storage device. Like an iPod, only it didn't play music. Or like a USB keychain, only bigger on the outside and smaller on the inside. Floppies have been extinct since about 1998.)

    60. Re:game by damsa · · Score: 1

      yeah, I loved it when my mac would spit its disk out. Although, that's one the reasons why Mac floppy drives cost 100 bucks plus whatever the price of paperclips was, whereas a pc one would cost 10 negating the use of paperclips until the Zip drive became popular. The Mac was truly ahead of its time.

    61. Re:game by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Floppy? Dude, Clinton's not the president anymore.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    62. Re:game by bynary · · Score: 1

      Well, it is quite old, but if you ever get the chance, check out Marathon (not 2 and 3, the original). It was quite amazing for its time.

      --
      http://www.bynarystudio.com
  4. Any other Mozilla users... by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    my AdBlock doesn't seem to be working correctly. I still see ads on Slashdot.

    Any tips or regexps I can use?

    1. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by ari_j · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, but here's a trick:

      echo "127.0.0.1 slashdot.org www.slashdot.org" >> /etc/hosts

    2. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      Just change your preferences to block taco's posts...

    3. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by ksaville00 · · Score: 1

      lol pop ups or ads as in this post?

    4. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by Speare · · Score: 1
      Yeah, here's the regexp:
      s/.*[Ss]lashdot.*//;
      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    5. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by gdbear · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by dascandy · · Score: 0

      Try http:///*ads* and http://ads/ for blocking most (if not all) ads. You might want to refine them though, I can see them blocking www.dadswebsite.com.

    7. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by Scaba · · Score: 1

      http://ads/? Who runs an ad server on the local network?

    8. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by dascandy · · Score: 1

      ok, screw niceness. Slashdot screwes up the url.

      h t t p : / / * / * a d s *

      h t t p : / / * a d s *

      but then without spaces.

    9. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 1
      But what if I want to look at pictures of "nads?"

      I mean...

      Nevermind.

      --
      The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
    10. Re:Any other Mozilla users... by spac3manspiff · · Score: 1

      thank you sir.

  5. Freshend? by worst_name_ever · · Score: 4, Funny
    iMacs Freshend

    Freshend - is that like Freshmeat for your backend? Uh, wait, on second thought... that's really naughty...

    --

    In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
  6. That's Bluetooth 2.0 by jeffhot · · Score: 5, Informative

    just to clarify.

    1. Re:That's Bluetooth 2.0 by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      So is that "high speed" or "full speed"?

      Oh wait, that's that Uther Stupid Bus...

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  7. I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    everyone rips into this Apple ad like the Star Wars Ad although I have a suspicion everyone will
    foam at the mouth. Apple, Yipeeee. Star Wars boooo.

    1. Re:I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing as there were several posts complaining about the slashvertizement before you even opened your trap, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

    2. Re:I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This doesn't seem to be the case now. Most of the post on the Star Wars topic are still bashing. This no longer seems to be the case with this one. oh the Apple Love can't be stopped. Peace Brother.

    3. Re:I hope by dangitman · · Score: 1
      oh the Apple Love can't be stopped. Peace Brother.

      That's because it runs on a rock-solid UNIX base. I've run Apple Love for years without having to restart. Beat that uptime!

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  8. don't forget the emac by squarefish · · Score: 5, Informative

    they've also update the emac

    --
    Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
    1. Re:don't forget the emac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, Apple has emacs?

    2. Re:don't forget the emac by FidelCatsro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Speaking as someone who got an emac last month i must say this , GAHHHH.

      And does anyone have any info on if apple still runs an upgrade program(if it was bought just before a refresh , i think this one was purchased in february or so ) and how long before the refresh would count. I am going to dig around and call apple myself , but any insight would be much apreciated.

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    3. Re:don't forget the emac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its pretty much if you bought the machine and then it was upgraded before it was shipped to you.

      I've heard some people getting 30 days...but it doesn't happen often and they know someone in the company. 3 months doesn't really cut it...

    4. Re:don't forget the emac by squarefish · · Score: 3, Informative

      you're screwed. you should always check here before buying a mac. they keep pretty good details on upgrade history for all mac hardware. Don't turn around and get an ibook today either.

      --
      Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
    5. Re:don't forget the emac by robbieduncan · · Score: 3, Informative

      February? You are screwed.

      According to http://www.apple.com/support/store/postpurchase.ht ml you have 10 days.

    6. Re:don't forget the emac by bobtodd · · Score: 2, Informative

      I know, it sucks. Just last Friday my folks ordered a 1.6Ghz iMac G5. I even had them waiting to see if this rumoured upgrade was going to be announced, but eventually they had to buy. Now I feel like I steered them badly, seeing as they could have had a nicer machine for their outlay. Thanks Apple.

    7. Re:don't forget the emac by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      ;) not too much of a loss really as i didn't pay for it , it was a gift from a happy customer ( i gave them another box as some software they needed for work required an x86 machine , so in truth i spent next to nothing other than bits i had laying around the house.)

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    8. Re:don't forget the emac by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Read some of the previous comments dude ;) you could be in luck .

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    9. Re:don't forget the emac by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      Just checked it was actualy bought at the end of march(i recived it as a gif in the middle of april so was unsure). so i guess im just outside the region of an upgrade , ah well , its still a great machine and for the price i paid i really can't complain(Read : 0.00)

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    10. Re:don't forget the emac by robbieduncan · · Score: 1

      If it was ordered last Friday and has not yet shipped you will get a free upgrade to the 1.8Ghz base model.

    11. Re:don't forget the emac by bobtodd · · Score: 1

      > If it was ordered last Friday and has not yet shipped you will get a free upgrade to the 1.8Ghz base model.

      They ordered it via one of the Apple retailers they know in town here, so they actually got the machine Friday night. I'm still going to chase this up for them. Allowing people to order the slower machines 2-3 working days before a line upgrade is just not good enough in my book.

      Not like it's the first time someone has vented on /. :) Thanks for the tips though, guys. If it doesn't work out at least I know my mum will have a decent computer.

    12. Re:don't forget the emac by Gumph · · Score: 1

      I sympathise with your predicament, but blaming Apple is hardly going to solve anything.
      They have to release new product at some point, they can't hold off until NO-ONE in the world is thinking of buyinh a mac and then release then can they?
      as the saying goes - shit happens, have another beer.

      --
      'By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes'
    13. Re:don't forget the emac by Diomedes01 · · Score: 1

      I ordered the 1.6 GHz iMac last week and was pissed that it hadn't shipped yet. Now on the Apple site it says "Replaced with new product"... and I am getting the 1.8 GHz machine for a total of $200 less than what I was going to pay for the 1.6 (and now I get Bluetooth!)

      --
      "To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking: Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!"
    14. Re:don't forget the emac by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      I think if it's within a month you might be able to get them to refund some of your money, but he's definitely screwed if he got it in February.

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    15. Re:don't forget the emac by bobtodd · · Score: 1

      > I sympathise with your predicament, but blaming Apple is hardly going to solve anything.

      I agree fully, and basically stipulated in my second post that I was whining. That aside, even if they can't get the upgrade, they still have a great computer, and I still won't be doing unpaid Microsoft tech support for the next few years.

      It would be nice if perhaps, when people order an imminently upgraded model, the order could be mysteriously delayed until presto! you get a call 'uh, we have your computer, but it's faster than the one you ordered, for the same money'. Done within a week or two of upgrade time, it would lead to some much happier customers. And that way Apple doesn't have to confirm upgrade leaks.

    16. Re:don't forget the emac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      i recived it as a gif in the middle of april

      So they only sent you an image of it? Ripoff.

    17. Re:don't forget the emac by peebeejay · · Score: 1

      Dude: your sig links to the funniest fucking thing I've EVAR read! It's time we kick some ass over those hypocrites!

    18. Re:don't forget the emac by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Have they received it yet?

      If not, I betcha they'll get the new gear.

      In other news, computers get faster and cheaper as time goes on. Wow...who knew?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    19. Re:don't forget the emac by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, those darn sales guys allowing people to, like, buy stuff. I can see why you're annoyed.

      not.

      Talk to Apple. Bet they'll hook you up.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    20. Re:don't forget the emac by sammy+baby · · Score: 1
      It would be nice if perhaps, when people order an imminently upgraded model, the order could be mysteriously delayed until presto! you get a call 'uh, we have your computer, but it's faster than the one you ordered, for the same money'. Done within a week or two of upgrade time, it would lead to some much happier customers. And that way Apple doesn't have to confirm upgrade leaks.

      In fact, Apple does exactly that: it's just a question of timing.

    21. Re:don't forget the emac by Issue9mm · · Score: 1

      And the reason I can see that failing is because I guarantee that one out of every 20 people is paying for the rush ordering process, expedited delivery, etc., just so they can have their new machine as soon as possible.

      Perhaps their old one died, and they need a replacement pronto, or perhaps it's a present for someone, or perhaps they're even temporarily staying at a hotel room or business suite... whatever the case, those unannounced delays would undoubtedly cost Apple (or its distributors) lots of money that they just don't need to pay.

      -9mm-

    22. Re:don't forget the emac by brentyl2 · · Score: 1

      According to http://www.apple.com/support/store/postpurchase.ht ml you have 10 days. And when they say 10 days, they mean it. I bought a G5 iMac *1* day outside the upgarde window for one of the new software suites (iLife 05, I think). Apple was unwilling to throw me a bone and give me the $20 upgrade price, either at the local Apple Store or over the phone with Apple themselves. Check whatever rumor site you like, but bear in mind that deadlines are DEADLINES to Apple.

      --
      Regards, John Hancock.
    23. Re:don't forget the emac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be nice if perhaps, when people order an imminently upgraded model, the order could be mysteriously delayed until presto! you get a call 'uh, we have your computer, but it's faster than the one you ordered, for the same money'.

      Well, that's precisely what just happened to me. I ordered an iMac for my Mother last week, but they were out of stock, waiting on a new shipment. I read this article and contacted the sales reps, they told me the next shipment will be the upgraded model. The shipping will be a week or so, but my Mother is getting a surprise bonus for her money!

  9. One significant thing about the iMac by 8127972 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    is that it now comes with gigabit ethernet. It basically makes this machine usable in a variety of environments such as graphic arts and rich media where throwing around tons of data is a daily fact of life.

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
    1. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. That is interesting.

    2. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      *scratches head* Not with that video card... Maybe use a group of them as a rendering farm or something for a dual-processor G5.

    3. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by delta_avi_delta · · Score: 0

      Though if you had a gigabit ethernet kitted out in your place of employment, chances are you're at the professional end of the scale, and more interested in the PowerMacG5 than the iMac, no? It seems silly to be kitting these out with Gb cards when most of these will just be used for home surfing.

    4. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by jandrese · · Score: 1

      The majority of people don't have Gigabit now, but in a few years a 10/100 card will look like 10 meg cards look today. Apple generally designs its products to have a longer lifespan than your average PC, so this makes sense. Also, Gig-E chipsets have come down in price enough that it's probably only a few dollars difference.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    5. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, with that video card. You don't need an X800 to run Photoshop and InDesign. They won't even take advantage of it if you have one.

    6. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

      That video card does 2D just fine.

      People do more than 3D rendering!

    7. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Power Mac G5 is overkill for many applications. If you don't need more than 2 GB of RAM or the ability to add PCI cards, an iMac is usually a good alternative. Particularly the 20" model, which is just freaking huge.

    8. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      we bought 10 20" imacs 3 months ago that came with gig ethernet

    9. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by david.heyman · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or to pass those tiny M$ Word files to someone else on the network.

    10. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Ubergrendle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Given that a 9600 (not even a 9600 pro) is at least a generation behind in terms of graphics chipset, at the bottom of the line for that ATI generation, marketing this as a significantly upgraded video card would be a bit disingenious IMHO.

      Apple may have upgraded the bundled videocard just on the basis of component availability/price point, but I doubt this is a significant selling feature.

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    11. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by hunterx11 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Given that a 9600 (not even a 9600 pro) is at least a generation behind in terms of graphics chipset, at the bottom of the line for that ATI generation, marketing this as a significantly upgraded video card would be a bit disingenious IMHO.

      You mean it's one generation behind the latest, which most people haven't adopted yet. As for bottom of the line, that's simply untrue--what's a Radeon 9200? This card isn't going to play Doom 3, but it's fine for what most computer users will be doing, and it certainly a welcome upgrade over the GeForce 5200 FX.

      --
      English is easier said than done.
    12. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 1

      Is the difference an upgrade? Yes. Is the difference? Arguable, but I think the objective answer is yes. Therefore it's a significant upgrade.

      There is zero need to put the latest, and most expensive, 3D graphics processor in a mid-range computer like the iMac. Doing so would accomplish nothing but driving up the cost.

    13. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      marketing this as a significantly upgraded video card would be a bit disingenious

      Or disingenuous, even.

    14. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 1

      Coffee first, then Internet. Coffee first, then Internet.

      I left out an important word from the above comment, obviously. The third sentence should read, "Is the difference significant?" I think that's clear from context, but you never know.

      Coffee first, then Internet.

    15. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      considering the 9600 was not even out when Adobe released CS, the 9600 is fine for that work.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    16. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      Even my Radeon 9200 runs Doom3 just fine. You don't HAVE to turn on all the eye-candy. I'm sure the 9600 will be plenty for most people.

    17. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      will Gb Ethernet run over 4 pair cat 5? I just need to upgrade the NICs and the router right?

      also, having a wireless connection will not slow down the network will it?

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    18. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sure it will play Doom3.
      I've got Doom3 on an AMD box with a Radeon 9600 and it runs just fine.
      And while Doom3 tends o run a bit slower on macs with equivalent GPUs, the gap is much wider on high end hardware (that benchmarking geeks tend to obsess over) than it is on something like a 9600, as Aspyr chose to spend their resources optimizing for middle of the road machines like this.

    19. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      "It seems silly to be kitting these out with Gb cards when most of these will just be used for home surfing."

      Gigabit ethernet doesn't cost that much more for a vendor to include, and it's basically mandatory for anyone that does anything serious with network drives.

      "Professionals should get a PowerMac" is no excuse for artificially castrating a computer.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    20. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by MagnusDredd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, no...

      This is a marketable point given that the 9600 will take full advantage of Quartz 2D extreme GUI acceleration, whereas the video card below this one will not. So it's a matter of Quartz 2D Extreme support or not. Quartz 2D extreme should make a very large difference in GUI speed, which being a place that OSX has lagged, is a big deal.

    21. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by dmh20002 · · Score: 0, Troll

      So the consensus answer to your comment is :

      "yes the video card is old and sucks, but since that is all you can get from Apple, its wonderful, and besides, you don't really need a real video card".

    22. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by zsazsa · · Score: 1

      Apple may have upgraded the bundled videocard just on the basis of component availability/price point, but I doubt this is a significant selling feature.

      Acually, it is a signifigant selling feature: ...the upgrade to a Radeon 9600 graphics card will allow the new iMac to take better advantage of Tiger features such as Core Image...

      Now with Core Image, even just "2D desktop graphics" employ the video card's GPU using OpenGL vertex and pixel shaders. While the FX5200 is capable of supporting Core Image, its shader speed is laughably slow.

    23. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up! The difference between the 9200 and the 9600 is huge because of this one point.

    24. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Obviously you need a Gigabit switch/router and Cat 6 (well, you can get away with Cat 5 as long as you don't run it too far). Also, if you want to push traffic through at the maximum rate possible, you're going to need Gigabit Ethernet or faster from your Mac to wherever the data is going. This doesn't include any of the current-generation Wi-Fi technologies, although in the future it might. The wireless connection won't slow you down unless you have to actually send over it though.

      Network technology is not magic. You can only go as fast as the slowest componenet. Upgrading to a Gigabit connection on your PC won't make your cablemodem run any faster. That said, in a few years it will probably be commonplace for you to walk into BestBuy or CompUSA or wherever and pick up a 5 port Gigabit switch for your home network. When this is commonplace, your Mac will be ready to integrate nicely into your network. Before then, well, it still integrate nicely and you just had to pay a bit more for some functionality you aren't using (yet).

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    25. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      No. That is what you got from it.
      The Consensus is.
      For the price point the video card is fine.
      It does what most people will want to do.
      It is as good as the video board you get with most midrange computers.
      If you want a hot gaming machine then do not get an IMac.
      I am glad I could explain it to you in simple terms.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    26. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quartz 2D Extreme and Motion support is a very significant selling feature. The 9200 can't handle it. The 9600 can. Check and mate.

    27. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Conanymous+Award · · Score: 1

      You mean like 640K of RAM?

    28. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quartz 2D hardware acceleration (no idea where this "Quartz 2D Extreme" name came from) only applies to programs that actually use Quartz. Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign are all QuickDraw applications. They would receive no performance boost from hardware-accelerated Quartz 2D.

    29. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      I just want to be able to send my backups from my mac (about 5-6 GB) to my Linux NFS export in a few minutes rather than a few hours.

      I need to buy the Gb cards for both machines and but a new router. my Powermac is hardline connected, so the wifi for my laptop will not slow down the data-rate between my desktop and server then?

      also, I do not think I am running the signal more than 100 feet at the most.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    30. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by gozar · · Score: 1
      Quartz 2D hardware acceleration (no idea where this "Quartz 2D Extreme" name came from) only applies to programs that actually use Quartz. Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign are all QuickDraw applications. They would receive no performance boost from hardware-accelerated Quartz 2D.

      Everything you wanted to know about Quartz 2D Extreme from Ars Technica. Basically, Apple is dropping Quickdraw, and in Tiger they made that very compelling by making Quartz 2D Extreme very fast, even in software only mode.

      --
      What, me worry?
    31. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by AstroDrabb · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Apple generally designs its products to have a longer lifespan than your average PC
      No, Apple designs throw away computers. Apple doesn't want you to be able to upgrade, they want you to have to throw away your investment and give them more money for a new product. I am sure that the Apple fans will come and mod me down, however it is still true. Look at Apple's computer line. ONLY the top of the line most expensive macs are upgradeable. The iMac line is not upgradeable, that is why it is a big deal what type of video card Apple puts in it. The same goes for the eMac line and the new Mac Mini.

      Now, imagine that you just bought a brand new iMac a few weeks ago just before Tiger came out. You are all excited about buying and installing the latest version tiger, however the video card that came with your few weeks old iMac will not be able to take advantage of Quartz 2D extreme GUI acceleration in Tiger. Oh, well you can either throw away your iMac, sell it on eBay or live with not being able to take advantage of newer features in Tiger. (This just happened to my brother-in-law who purchased a 17" iMac in January. A little more than 3 months old and it is outdated and can't take advantage of some features of Tiger!)

      There is really no reason for Apple to not allow a few basic upgrades in their computer line. Video card, hard drive and memory is all that Apple needs to make upgradeable and then a Mac would be a good purchase IMO. However, as it is with most of the Apple computer line, you will be locked into a video card that will be outdated in 1 - 2 years and you will run into a wall when you find out that your video card cannot take advantage of newer features in Mac OS X. Simply allowing the video card and hard drive to be upgradable would stop your Mac from becoming obsolete to soon, however that would mean less hardware sales for Apple. I will stick to my basic build-it-myself-PC that I can upgrade at my pace and not the pace of Apple.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    32. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um. Yeah. I know. But I've never heard the name "Quartz 2D Extreme" inside the company. It's possible that it's just a new name that never made it over this way.

      In any case, it doesn't really matter one way or the other. Because Adobe doesn't use Quartz 2D at all. They use QuickDraw. And we're hardly going to stop supporting QuickDraw. We've deprecated it, sure, but it's not going away, specifically because there are thousands of applications out there that depend on it.

      Long story short, a fancy-ass graphics card is not going to make Illustrator any faster.

      (On a sidebar, I'd be careful about taking things that Siracusa says as gospel. He's certainly one smart cookie, but there are some things he's written lately that are just plain wrong. His fascination with extended attributes is an example. He concluded that it was part of some bizarre filesystem-dependent metadata scheme. It's not. It's something we added at the API level to support POSIX ACLs. So just let the buyer beware regarding his stuff, okay?)

    33. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Ubergrendle · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wow, even my typos are denoted as informative. ;)

      And it ~was~ a typo, 'i' is right beside 'u' on the keyboard. :)

      --
      John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
    34. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You fell into ATi's marketing trap. The 9200 is not a DirectX 9 card. It is not in the same generation as the 9500/9600/9700/9800. It's actually a generation behind them (essentially a rebranded 8500).

    35. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by anagama · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do make some valid points about upgrade potential with component based systems compared things like the iMac. I tend to see the iMac as more akin to a laptop than a desktop for this very reason.

      On the other hand, PC hardware changes so rapidly that sometimes an upgrade is practically new system anyway. About a year and a half ago, my 800mhz duron system failed -- cpu fried. I decided I'd use that opportunity to move to an athlon -- this meant a new video card due to incompatability between MB and video card, new ram because old ram wouldn't fit, and a new power supply just to be safe (old one was a 350, I moved up to 500). So by the time I got done, all I had of the "old" computer was the case, burner, and hard drive.

      Anyway, it is also true that if you want to upgrade the video on a PC, you might just have to change out the motherboard as well because of rapidly changing plug shapes, voltage levels, or what have you.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    36. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Have+Blue · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That is a valid point, but neither you nor your brother-in-law represent the average user. "Normal" people see computers as appliances; they don't know what a video card is or what Quartz 2D Extreme is or anything like that. To them, paying for a new computer that comes in a box and is easy to set up is far preferable to buying and installing a video card. And you can upgrade the memory and hard disk in all Macs.

      Also, as a large number of people have pointed out, the low-end Power Mac now costs exactly the same as a midrange iMac, so you really can make a pure tradeoff between expandability and a free monitor.

    37. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      He's certainly one smart cookie, but there are some things he's written lately that are just plain wrong. His fascination with extended attributes is an example. He concluded that it was part of some bizarre filesystem-dependent metadata scheme. It's not. It's something we added at the API level to support POSIX ACLs.

      I think he didn't say that extended attributes were the beginning of metadata everywhere, but he wished they were. There's a difference.

    38. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you want a hot gaming machine then do not get an IMac.

      I think you have put an extra "I" before Mac :-)

    39. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by pomo+monster · · Score: 1

      You know what's an interesting Google query? "leo mcgarry" "as seen on tv" site:slashdot.org

    40. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by tyrione · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Deprecated APIs last one major OS revision at best. Since you are saying you work at Apple I know you can't make bold commentaries regarding the shift to Cocoa but since I no longer work there and being a former NeXT employee all I can say is, "7 years is 5 years longer than we were promised."

    41. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iMac is more upgradable than you might think. From Apple:

      The iMac G5 is designed to make it easy for you to install replacement parts if you need to. The parts you can install yourself are:

      AirPort Extreme Card
      Memory - DDR 400 MHz (PC3200) SDRAM
      Hard drive
      Optical drive
      Power supply
      LCD display
      Modem card
      Mid-plane assembly (contains the main logic board, the G5 processor, fans, NVIDIA graphics processor, and so forth).

    42. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Apple designs throw away computers. Apple doesn't want you to be able to upgrade, they want you to have to throw away your investment and give them more money for a new product.

      Really? Then why do they keep making the durned operating system run faster every year, on the same hardware?

      How many 6-year-old, 300 MHz PCs do you know running the latest version of Windows? Or running at all, for that matter?

      BTW, you misspoke: you can upgrade the hard disk and memory in an iMac.

      As for video card, no, you can't upgrade it. But it hardly seems fair to say that there's something wrong with old hardware not being able to take advantage of all features introduced more recently. It'll still work just fine -- even faster than when you bought it, in fact, since they keep making Mac OS faster.

      If the 17" iMac was good enough for your brother-in-law in January, and it'll run significantly faster and have gobs more features with Tiger, why isn't he happy? If he's not happy unless he always has the best-of-the-best, he should have boought a top-of-the-line PowerMac, and then thrown it out and bought a new one last week. It's not as if Tiger won't run on his iMac even better than Panther did.

      Are Apple not supposed to add new features to the OS if they can't be supported in *every* computer? Should they not add gigabit ethernet and Firewire-800 support to Mac OS because an old G3 can't handle them, even with upgrades?

      They make the OS noticably faster with each release and maintain compatibility with 5-year-old computers. That's a lot more than *some companies I could mention*cough* happen to offer.

    43. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by hackstraw · · Score: 0, Troll

      On the other hand, PC hardware changes so rapidly that sometimes an upgrade is practically new system anyway.

      But Macs have been known for years to stock their computers with all of the latest and greatest. My PowerBook has a nice widescreen display, Firewire, USB, DVI, Svideo, modem, 1/8" sound inputs and outputs (yeah, thats not the best), built in working microphone, gigabit ethernet, bluetooth, and an 802.11g wireless card. Not to mention that it looks nice and not like some bulky piece of black plastic. There is very little that I could do to upgrade from this laptop. In fact, I would believe that anything in the PC land would actually be a downgrade.

    44. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by SpiceWare · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The extra video memory(increased to 128 MB from 64 MB) is very significant in light of Quartz 2D Extreme
      A huge number of common drawing operations fit this "upload, cache, and reference" mold. For example, nearly every user interface element in Mac OS X is a bitmap: buttons, checkboxes, window widgets, window background textures, etc. The first time these UI elements are drawn, the bitmap graphics are uploaded to the video card and cached in VRAM. All subsequent UI widget drawing commands can then execute as fast as possible, pulling bitmaps from the VRAM cache as needed.

      Perhaps surprisingly, text is the other common example. The first time text is drawn at a particular size with a particular font, the characters shapes (glyphs) are read from the vector-based font definition and then rasterized into bitmaps at the specified size. These rasterized glyphs (bitmaps, really) are then uploaded to the video card and cached in VRAM. All subsequent text drawing using the same font and size can then simply issue small drawing commands ("draw a capital letter 'A'") without any further need to upload bitmaps. Since most text consists of relatively long sequences of glyphs in a few fonts and sizes, this is a big win in practice. Of course, ransom notes that use a different font and size for every single character might not benefit as much...but then, that really depends on how much VRAM you have, doesn't it?
    45. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have a point, but only for those of us who don't prefer laptops; I haven't bought a desktop system in 7 or 8 years, and, for my needs, I don't forsee a need to ever buy another. For upgradability, Apple's laptops are no worse than anyone else's, although some lack a PC Card slot. But with 802.11g, Bluetooth, modem, audio, ethernet, USB, and Firewire all built-in, a PC Card slot isn't something most users are likely to miss.

    46. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why is that interesting?

    47. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it ~was~ a typo, 'i' is right beside 'u' on the keyboard. :)

      OK, I'll guve you that.

    48. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by kayak334 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In fact, I would believe that anything in the PC land would actually be a downgrade.

      ...and that is precisely what makes you a fanboy/radical/fanatic.

    49. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by rixkix · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Troll.
      Quartz 2D Extreme has been a long time in the making. It's more likely you clean the toilets at Apple than it is that you do any programming or OS design work.
      You're trying to convince us that Adobe doesn't use Quartz 2D at all? Very funny.
      http://kb.indiana.edu/data/ajeb.html?cust=760016.5 9534.30
      http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/ 14

    50. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's right. Adobe's Mac products are all Carbon. They use QuickDraw, not Core Graphics. There was a big thing about it at last summer's WWDC, about Quartz 2d and how ISVs are gonna be forced, like it or not, to rewrite their old QD-based apps. It was all very "cough*adobe*cough" if you know what I mean.

      He's also right that somebody else made up the Quartz 2d Extreme name. Somebody probly just got confused between Quartz Extreme and Quartz 2d. The names are confusing.

    51. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by joshmccormack · · Score: 1

      Linksys has an $80 gig 4 port router with 802.11g. It's hit the price point where everyone can have it without even knowing it.

      Having gig ethernet is a selling point, and not having it could be like the floppy issue was. For what it costs them, I think it's a wise move.

    52. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Ravnsgaard · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing a video from WWDC 2004 (a graphics and media session), where Q2DX was presented on slides. ..So Apple used it at that point. Then again maybe WWDC isn't "inside the company"

    53. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Ravnsgaard · · Score: 1

      It's also used in Quartz Debug. Take a look in the "Tools" menu. Coffee first, then internet ;)

    54. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      "Having gig ethernet is a selling point, and not having it could be like the floppy issue was. For what it costs them, I think it's a wise move."

      I would say "not having it was an unwise move".

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    55. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by CausticPuppy · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't want you to be able to upgrade, they want you to have to throw away your investment and give them more money for a new product.

      Actually you get back a lot of your investment if you decide to sell your mac and get a new one.
      Go to eBay and compare the prices on 3-year-old macs vs. 3-year-old windows PC's, keeping in mind how much each originally cost.

      If your brother-in-law wanted to, he could sell his outdated 17" iMac for nearly what he paid for it, and then get the latest model.

      When an updated Mac Mini comes out, I'll dump mine for about 75% of its original cost and get the newer model.
      When my Athlon64 box becomes outdated, I'll just give it to a family member and buy new components to build the next one.

      --
      -CausticPuppy "Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
    56. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Johnny+Mozzarella · · Score: 1

      Also much better for NetBooting and NetInstall.
      The design of the iMac makes me think thin client.
      It would be nice if there was a tin client option with no disk drives and lots of RAM.

    57. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      It's not the fault of Apple or any other manufacturer to continue the march of progress. I am disappointed that my spiffy new PowerBook cannot take advantage of QuickTime 7's H.264. Does this mean that Apple should not offer the software to render H.264 in HD until their entire product line can support it? Of course not. The requirements are what they are based on the way the software is engineered.

      While I would agree that memory and hard drives are very necessary upgrades, I do not think that the video card belongs on that list as well. For the majority of users, their computer experience is not limited by their video card. I have many clients that are still getting good use out of original iMacs, with their Rage Pro Turbo (6 MB) chips. If the Rage card were mounted on an AGP slot, would it really be cost effective to upgrade? The limiting factor on their computer's performance is first RAM and second CPU/chipset/bus speeds. Hard drive capacity gets increased when your drive is full, not generally a performance issue. For those that are interested in lots of power and upgradability, you can pay more $$$ for the PowerMac line.

    58. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 0

      Thanks for reminding me. The slide said, and I quote,

      Quartz 2D Goes "Extreme"

      That's where the misnomer came from. And yes, Quartz Debug does refer to "Quartz 2D Extreme," so maybe it is an internal name. But it's not one I've ever heard before.

      And what I have seen is instance after instance in message boards like this one where people get completely befuddled about the difference between Quartz, Quartz Extreme, Quartz 2D and "Quartz 2D Extreme." It's really confusing. So if everybody stopped calling Quartz 2D "Quartz 2D Extreme," that'd be fine by me.

    59. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by NRP128 · · Score: 1

      Here's my thoughts, i agree that apple designs throwaways, in the sense that they aren't upgradable.

      But when it comes to laptops there isn't much that can compete. i'll take a Powerbook long before i'll take another PC laptop (my current toshiba is on deck to be replaced this summer with a new PB). My parent's next computer i will either be an iMac or a Mac Mini, and my father's next laptop will probably be a powerbook or an iBook.

      While i'm like you, i've been building PCs for quite some time, and am not about to stop, There are many things Apples does well. Those among us who are hardware junkies who want to stay on top of things will keep building PCs. But for the 'family' computer that does record keeping and web surfing, or the web-browsing laptop, there isn't much that can beat Apples in terms of longetivity, quality, and in most cases, price.

    60. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coffe first, then work.

      10.4.1 is awaiting - Steve don't tolerate slackers :-)

      Now, what's my job again...

    61. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1
      No, Apple designs throw away computers.


      And yet so comparatively few Macs out of the total pool get thrown away, compared to PCs. I wonder why?

      Video card, hard drive and memory is all that Apple needs to make upgradeable

      Simply allowing the video card and hard drive to be upgradable would stop your Mac from becoming obsolete



      Just so you know, hard drives and memory are upgradeable in iMacs.

    62. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by anagama · · Score: 1

      Well, the talk was about desktops, not laptops. The imac seems somewhere between in terms of "upgradeability". But if you read what I said, I was talking about how doing an upgrade on a PC frequently requires installing an almost completely new system -- that's what happened to me on my last upgrade at least. So, the criticism that many make of Apple computers, that they don't allow upgrades - you can only purchase of new systems, is really kind of moot. Even in PC land that is often the case.

      FWIW, I love my 15" 1.5ghz PB. I don't doubt that a 20" iMac is in my future -- even stopped by my local store today but they don't have it in stock yet.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    63. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1
      And yet so comparatively few Macs out of the total pool get thrown away, compared to PCs.
      Huh? Did you do some large scale study to come up with this? Any real stats to back it up? Or are you just talking out your arse?
      Just so you know, hard drives and memory are upgradeable in iMacs.
      Yes, I know that. However you should have read my complete sentence. In this case it was the lack of upgradeability of the iMac that has mac a _brand-new-only-about-three-months-old_ iMac not be able to take advantage all the features of Tiger. You would never see something like this happen in the PC world.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    64. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what would I ever do without my FX-69 with mercury cooling at 4GHz and 8 GB of RAM and my 8 drive 4TB RAID array and my dual GeForce 6800 Ultras? Let's see your Mac do THAT!

    65. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that computer was what? 4 years old? Of course there's going to be an incompatibility with some things. Besides, they make top of the line cards with AGP, and motherboards have certainly had AGP slots since then (perhaps not 8x, but it's still compatible, and I think the performance hit is exaggerated). The only reason you have a point at all there is because of the massive switch to the PCIe slot that is going on, but companies haven't ditched the AGP lines yet.

    66. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by ischorr · · Score: 1

      Er, I'm having a tough time finding that model - which one is it?

      I see that they have a Wireless-G router with a 4-port 100mbps switch for something *around* $80 (WRT54G, WRT54GS, WRT55AG, even WRT54GC)...and that they have gigabit switches around the price you're talking about (EG005W)...but definitely no 4-port gigabit switch/router with 802.11g, especially for *$80*...

    67. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Graymalkin · · Score: 1

      The iMac can be expandable at the expense of its design or require expensive customer expandsion cards. Let's say Apple managed to stick an upgradable video card in the iMac. They would be able to sell custom made video cards specifically for the iMac or let a third party do so. In either case most iMac buyers would not be upgrading their cards so the production volume would be very low. If they were able to use commodity graphics cards there is no way they would be able to maintain their current form factor. You would then end up with a PowerMac...which you should have bought in the first place if you're concerned about expandability.

      It's untrue that your brother's iMac won't be able to use Quartz 2D Extreme. The requirements are either a GeForceFX or Radeon that can handle programmable pixel and vertex shaders (ARB_fragment_program OpenGL extension). The iMacs have a GeForceFX 5200. While this isn't the most powerful graphics card in the world it will handle Q2DE. Complaining that it is "outdated" is a little silly.

      Most PCs sold by the likes of Dell and HP aren't much more expandable than the iMac or eMac. Macs are hardly any more disposable than any other manufacturer's computers. The iMacs, even the previous model G5s have Firewire, USB, optical audio, modem and Ethernet ports. An Airport card can be added internally. That doesn't leave a whole lot of need for extra devices to be added to the system. The new ones have Bluetooth built-in as well as gigabit Ethernet.

      Lots of features out of the box doesn't make the system disposable, it makes it a good investment. You can sit down at a several year old G3 iMac and be pretty productive on them even running Tiger and Office 2004. They had enough features packed into the box that they're still as useful as they were when they were new. In fact they might even be a bit faster now than they were running previous versions of OSX. Just because you can't stick a new video card in your computer doesn't mean it is disposable.

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    68. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by TonyMillion · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe thats because you dont work for the company, ANYONE with developer tools installed can load up Quartz Debug and select 'Enable Quartz 2D Extreme' from the Tools menu

      There has been discussion that you are just a troll sucking down mod points, I tend to believe them since you have no clue about this technology.

      For the uninitiated, its a lot like offloading graphics rendering (and not just compositing) to the GPU, rather like NeXT used to do in some of their more expensive systems.

    69. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by CousinDave · · Score: 1

      Bzzt.

      If Apple designs throw-away computers, then explain why I have three PCs in storage and use my G3 tower at home? If you believe that not being able to use the latest features somehow changes the utility of the system you're using, you might think again. Usually, it's only your perception that's changed, and usually it's in response to marketing hype. For most users, yesterday's machines are just fine. If you really need to have a bleeding-edge machine, you might be surprised at how much value a used Mac retains.

      CousinDave

      --
      It's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around.
    70. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um. Yeah. I know. But I've never heard the name "Quartz 2D Extreme" inside the company.

      Maybe you should put something like "I work for Apple, in case you've been under a rock." in your sig. It's funny seeing people try to correct you on things that you clearly have first-hand knowledge of.

    71. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *scratches head* Not with that video card...

      This might surprise you, but most graphics work is 2D. The video card doesn't especially matter beyond a certain point -- and that point was passed many years ago.

    72. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    73. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that he clearly doesn't. Those of us who actually do work on Mac OS at Apple find him at turns amusing and irritating.

    74. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      doing an upgrade on a PC frequently requires installing an almost completely new system

      I agree, PCs are so cheap nowdays that upgrades make little sense in most cases (unless you are trying to improve Intel Inside video or something). Just buy a new one in 2 years.

      I don't doubt that a 20" iMac is in my future

      And then you go and destroy your own point out of the water by hyping a future boat anchor with a nice $500 LCD permenently attached. :)

      [I actually have some sort of point here -- Apple's pricing isn't that different from the PC market, but they sell more expensive all-in-one bundles, which have higher profit margins, but also tend to retard how quickly Apple users replace their machines. And that inflates resale values.

      Oh, before anyone commments, there's no special Macmagic which makes the machines last longer -- it's all the pricing/specs of the current lineup which 'value' the older machines. Old PCs are expendible because new PCs are really fast and really cheap.]

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    75. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G3 Macs suck. At least with OS X. No debate, they suck.

      Look if you can't afford a new Mac, stop living in denial and buy $300 clone at Walmart. Macs are marketed towards upper class people, and there's no point pretending with some bottomscraper machine from 7 years ago. You're like one of those sad ghetto guys driving an old rusty 1983 cadillac thinking it's the pinnacle of automotive achievement.

    76. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the problem with your new powerbook is that the G4 CPU has not "continued the march of progress", at least relative to other laptop CPUs that can decode HD video and use less power while doing so. Apple should share some of the blame.

    77. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by damsa · · Score: 1

      I think there is some Macmagic. I have had PCs and Macs. And to this day I have not sold a Mac yet. I have on the other hand sold, given my pcs away. Something about them you just want to keep. Doesn't make any sense. I think the reason why Macs might last a little longer than Pcs is that Macs come with better power supply on average than the average PC.
      Also, like the parent said, because Macs cost more, you tend to take care of it better than a PC.

    78. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Well, I've got a Quadra 950 in my junkpile, so I can't disagree with the emotional attachment. But that computer was easily $10,000 as shipped. Which is one big reason Mac users percieve that their machines last longer -- they paid more for them and got better equipment. I don't know how well that applies to eMacs/Minis though.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    79. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by damsa · · Score: 1

      Nowadays, Macs are made subcontracted to Taiwanese computer manufacturers. I read that the iBook is made by Asus. Mini is probably made by Asus or some other Taiwanese manufacturer. The first Powerbooks were made or designed by Sony I believe. So I think alot of it has to do with perception. The quality between a well made PC and a mac is neglible. But since there are so many crap pcs out there. Macs have gotten the reputation as being more reliable.

    80. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by justzisguy · · Score: 1

      Apple does not design processors anymore than Dell does. You can bet that if Motorola or IBM starts offering a faster chip, Apple will jump on it. To switch architectures may become an option at some point, but that's going to be a huge mess.

      I apologize for my ignorance, but which laptops can decode HD video using less power? Do they have dedicated hardware to do so or are they throwing a desktop class processor in the box?

    81. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This guy works for Apple???????

      I attended last years WWDC and spoke with a number of guys on the Quartz team - THEY were calling it Quartz 2D Extreme.

      As for the extended attributes - they ARE filesystem-dependent metadata. If the file system is HFS+ they are implemented using the HFS+ attributes tree. Whats all this "API level" guff about? In HFS they implemented by the HFS VFS plugin, Thats NOT API level.

      A question for As Seen on TV: Who wrote the bulk of the Spotlight DB code?

    82. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But it's not one I've ever heard before.

      Which doesn't actually mean anything, because you're employed by Apple the same way I'm employed by Apple - as an end user, and nothing more.

    83. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Quite. There's no way anyone so arrogant, pretentious, and smugly superior could possibly work for a company known for its relaxed, you're ok and I'm ok and that's all gooood, attitude like Apple.

    84. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by joshmccormack · · Score: 1
    85. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by TonyMillion · · Score: 1

      Then why dont you just load up Quartz Debug, its in developer tools under performance apps.

      Right there in the Tools menu you'll see a nice big menu option that says 'Enable Quartz 2D Extreme'.

      At least try to read up somewhat on what you are talking about before you suck down mod points.

    86. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      however the video card that came with your few weeks old iMac will not be able to take advantage of Quartz 2D extreme GUI acceleration in Tiger.

      Whoopie fuckin' doodah. Out of the box, no video card supports Quartz 2D Extreme. Not even the biggest, fastest card on a G5 Power Mac. It's disabled in Mac OS X 10.4.0. Obviously they must still have some problems to work out.

      And regardless, they significantly improved the speed of non-GPU operations in Quartz 2D. Line drawing operations are 10x faster in Tiger than Panther, with plain old software drawing. Not too fuckin shabby! My "ancient" 733 MHz G4 with Radeon 7500 is downright frickin snappy in Tiger as compared to Panther. Windows finally pop up instantaneously, scrolling and resizing is way faster. I'm inclined to think that at this point, until newer more demanding apps come out, the software rendering is more than good enough. Who's gonna notice that a window drew itself in 0.00001 seconds instead of 0.001 seconds? Nobody!

      And the "old" G5 iMac is still light years ahead of my "snappy" system.

      What an idiot troll.

    87. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Know what's funny? You corrected ASOT for missing something that HE SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO IN HIS COMMENT. That's fucking hilarious.

      ASOT said, "Yes, Quartz Debug says that, but nobody calls it that here."

      You said: "IDIOT! Look at Quartz Debug!"

      You look stuuuuupid right now.

    88. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1
      Bzzt.
      Great sound effects, it reall y adds to your post.
      If Apple designs throw-away computers, then explain why I have three PCs in storage and use my G3 tower at home?
      Huh? How in the world am I supposed to know your reasoning? If I have to take a stab at it, I would have to guess because your a ninny?
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    89. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by anagama · · Score: 1

      • And then you go and destroy your own point out of the water by hyping a future boat anchor with a nice $500 LCD permenently attached. :)

      I guess I'm having a really hard time making myself understood. I don't think the non-upgradeability of an imac is a big deal. I think PCs are often equally non-upgradeable. At least that has been my experience. So my point is, I think the "you can't upgrade it" argument against buying a mac is not all that valid.
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    90. Re:One significant thing about the iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, imagine that you just bought a brand new iMac a few weeks ago just before Tiger came out.

      Well, I wouldn't do that, I only buy Macs soon after upgrades. I don't necessarily buy the upgraded mac, I might buy the older version at a discount.
      However, even if I were a naive Apple shopper, I would have had to assess my needs, determine whether the older iMac satisfied those needs or not, and whether I felt that I would want to be able to take advantage of future hardware advances. If so, perhaps I should be willing to shell out for the PowerMac. Otherwise I need to realize that I'd need to sell my iMac and buy a new computer (iMac or otherwise) to take advantage of new hardware capabilites.

  10. To Better Support... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "So better support the now standard OS X Tiger,..."

    Or else!!

  11. Nearly a year? by el_womble · · Score: 3, Informative

    I ordered my iMac in September and it arrived in October. I wasn't the first, but I wasn't far off. OK, it may be 7-8 months since the line has been introduced, but isn't that statement a little 'glass-half-empty'?

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
  12. Re:Freshend? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Funny

    No no no. It's FreshenD a new daemon that works in conjunction with LaunchD to add a fresh pine scent. It is used in conjunction with the new iSmell software/hardware introduced in the latest iMac.

  13. Goodlie English, there! by spungo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Whell, I gess litteracie be over-reighted, these dayz. Who needz, it, huh? Seeing others miss-uze the langwidge, like me do, haz brightend up my day!

  14. looks like the end of the PowerMac by jest3r · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Am I missing something or is the PowerMac severely under spec'd and overpriced compared to the new iMac? I mean the iMac even comes with a display. I really wish they would take a look at improving the PowerMacs price / performance. It is sad when the iMac outpowers the PowerMac and comes in at the same price even after the recent PowerMac updates. These are the latest specs from the Apple store:

    iMac $1,499.00
    17-inch widescreen LCD
    2GHz PowerPC G5
    667MHz frontside bus
    512K L2 cache
    512MB DDR400 SDRAM
    160GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load 8x SuperDrive (double-layer)
    ATI Radeon 9600
    128MB DDR video memory
    56K internal modem

    PowerMac $1,499.00
    1.8GHz PowerPC G5
    600MHz frontside bus
    512K L2 cache
    256MB DDR400 SDRAM
    Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
    80GB Serial ATA
    8x SuperDrive
    Three PCI Slots
    NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
    64MB DDR video memory
    56K internal modem

    1. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Winterblink · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I suppose that means we'll be seeing updated PowerMacs soon. :) Also, until the iMac goes dual processor (or dual core, whichever), it will not compete with a very high end PowerMac. Keep in mind that you're looking at the base specifications. The PowerMac can be ordered with MUCH more powerful configurations.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    2. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by shashi · · Score: 1

      Well there's still one main advantage to the Power Mac over the iMac... upgradability. Once you buy an iMac, you're pretty much stuck with it aside from RAM and HDD. The Power Mac has expansion slots, a removable graphics card, upgradable processor, etc.

      If you don't plan on radically upgrading your system until you buy the next one, then yes the iMac is a great deal for price/performance ratio. However if you're a person that like to tinker and upgrade your system piece by piece, you're better off getting a Power Mac.

    3. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by MKalus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Expandability?

      I would agree that the low end Powermac is abit... MMhhh weak, but then the advantage of it is that you can expand it more, another HDD, GFX, more memory.

      So for a "family" the Powermac really isn't the right machine but if you need an entry level Workstation for grafic work I'd say the Powermac is still the way to go.

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    4. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by calibanDNS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doubtful, since Apple just upgraded the PowerMac line last week. The real reason that a less capable PowerMac is the same price as the more capable iMac is upgradeablility. The iMac is designed for the home user who just needs basic computing functionality, whereas the PowerMac is targeted at professional users who may need to upgrade their Mac to support their work.

    5. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by fakedupe · · Score: 1

      Hm... Well, I think the bus speeds on the g5s are a bit faster. The processors are faster too, oh and there're two of them. So I wouldn't say that an imac overpowers a g5.

      But I see your point. Unless you're doing tons of video or something that requires you wring out every bit of computer power then you're probably ok with an imac or less.

    6. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suppose that means we'll be seeing updated PowerMacs soon. :)

      Quite unlikely, since they were updated a couple of weeks ago (to the 2.0-2.7 GHz family). The 1.8 single CPU model - the one used by jest3r in his comparison - was introduced last year and it was never the king of performance. It was even slower than the "original" 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5, due to slower bus clock. It's market niche are the customers who don't want to pay the hefty price for the "real" PowerMacs, but they want a modular computer, so iMac/eMac/Macmini is not an option. This model probably will be updated soon, but it will be purposedly crippled not to make it run too good to damage the high-end models sales.

    7. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "upgrade" to a mac user means "buy a whole new computer"

    8. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by timtwobuck · · Score: 1

      what happens with your iMac on one year, when the new one is released with a blazing new videocard? You either buy a new one, or you cry yourself to sleep everynight.

      With the PowerMac you just slot in a new card to one of the built in slots.

      To summarize, the PowerMac offers a lot more potential than the iMac, you're paying for all of the future possibilities...

    9. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by pla · · Score: 1, Interesting
      Sigh. I just know this will cost me some karma, but here goes...

      Athlon64 PC $1,095.00
      • BenQ FP731 17 inch Thin Bezel 450:1 (Beige) LCD Monitor
      • AMD Athlon 64 3200+ (2.0GHz), 512K, Socket 939, Retail Box Processor
      • ABIT AV8, AMD 64/64FX, Socket 939, K8T800PRO Chipset, Dual DDR400, H-Transport 2GHZ, 6-Ch Audio, GLAN, SATA, RAID150, AGP 8X, IEEE 1394 Motherboard
      • 512 MB DDR PC3200 (400MHz) (Major brand)
      • Maxtor 160 GB Serial ATA 7200 RPM 8MB Hard Drive
      • Sony DW-D26A 16x16 Dual Layer IDE Optical Drive Beige
      • ATI Sapphire Radeon 9600 128Mb, AGP 8X, CRT/DVI/TV-Out, Video Card
      • MPC CASE 450Wt Black, 2 Front USB 2.0/Audio
      • PS/2 Keyboard
      • PS/2 Scroll Mouse


      And... You can upgrade the video card!
    10. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's specifically comparing the $1499 iMac against the $1499 PM. Why don't you just take a look at the specs in his post? It seems that unless you really need PCI slots there is no reason anyone would buy the $1499 PM.

    11. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not 'purposely crippled' or targeted at people who want cheap upgradability. The low end power mac G5 is, and always has been, about backwards compatibility with 5V PCI cards that don't work in the PCI-X G5s.

    12. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget to add a couple bucks for the roll of duct tape to hold it all together.

    13. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sigh. I just know this will cost me some karma, but here goes...

      You're right. You deserve to lose karma for trolling like that. Funny how you did it anyway.

    14. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by david.heyman · · Score: 1

      Only if you need that blazing new video speed. Most people don't. We keep Macs actively in use for years and are pretty happy. Check out the amount of use that the Engsts get out of theirs in the last issue of Tidbits. Not even every Slashdotter needs the latest and greatest all of the time.

    15. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, no wireless or bluetooth, for a tiny bit less. Plus, you either run Linux, or, gah, Windows. Some people don't play games.

    16. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      PS/2 Keyboard
      PS/2 Scroll Mouse


      You're kidding right? They still make PS/2 keyboards and mice?

    17. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would add two things to this, to be fair. First, the cost of XP Pro should be added (which will offer the same range of software and usability (sort of on usability) as OS X). Second, the keyboard should be of the highest quality you can get for a PC, as Apple keyboards are very well built.

    18. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was the fucking joke you moron! I'm not a big fan of emoticons, but I understand what the fucking smiley face means. Are you a fucking retard?

    19. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by aikon29 · · Score: 3, Informative

      When doing these comparisons, everyone always forgets one BIG cost: Windows.
      Windows XP Home: $199 Windows XP Professional (Much closer to OSX): $299
      So, now your $1095.00 computer just became $1394. Add in the other little things you forgot such as bluetooth, gigabit ethernet, and case and you've got a machine about on par with the Powermac.

    20. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      maybe because they are bitching and complaining about wanting a headless version?

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    21. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by ahsile · · Score: 1

      There's nothing sleek here. You just quoted components. What about the size? What about the sexiness? What about the ease of use on an Apple?

      I'm not an Apple fan, personally, but this isn't a bad computer for Ma and Pa who don't have much space and just want something "That Works."

    22. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by be-fan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They keyboard on the G5 iMacs is not that well built. It's kinda mushy, to tell the the truth.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    23. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      uh.. no.. I upgraded my old G4 powermac 400 mhz system ro a 1 Ghz Processor, a 64 MB GF3 ti GFX card and plopped a gig of Ram in it.. plus added a dual layer DVD-RW.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    24. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Wow, that's amazing! You must be extraordinarily sharp of wit to craft such a clever post, not to mention generous for sharing with those of us who never would've thought to compare prices between Macs and PCs.

      Now, if you'd be so kind as to let me know how well the Athlon will run my OS X software, you'll earn all the karma you deserve.

    25. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      IBM Model M keyboard.

      Only queers use keyboards that were manufactured less than 10 years ago.

    26. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Predius · · Score: 1

      Agreed, first thing to go on my DP 2.5ghz G5, the keyboard. What a mushy, badly angled, pile. Fortunatly, I had a base MS USB keyboard handy, that and my Nyko airflow mouse, and I'm set.

    27. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Add in the other little things you forgot such as bluetooth
      Every single bluetooth device I have seen, without exception, comes with its own (usually USB) receiver.

      gigabit ethernet

      "...H-Transport 2GHZ, 6-Ch Audio, GLAN, SATA, RAID150..."

      and case
      "MPC CASE 450Wt Black, 2 Front USB 2.0/Audio"

      and you've got a machine about on par with the Powermac.
      No comment.

      Windows XP Home: $199
      Linux: $0
    28. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It runs Linux you insensitive clod!

      How much tech support you'll be doing for your grandma compared to giving her an OSX box, remains to be seen...

    29. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Holi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually if you go to the site you will see that XP Pro is 159 and XP Home is 99. The quoted motherboard does have gigabit ethernet, and the case was included. So all you need is a bluetooth adapter if you really want one.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    30. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sigh. I just know this will cost me some karma, but here goes...

      Steak dinner $29.76
      • eight ounces USDA prime beef
      • one teaspoon safflower oil
      • one quarter teaspoon salt
      • one quarter teaspoon black pepper
      • twelve spears of asparagus
      • eight ounces fingerling potatoes
      • four ounces butter
      • four cloves garlic
      That $60 bill they handed me in the restaurant last night was completely unreasonable.
    31. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Cecil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "upgrade" to a mac user means "buy a whole new computer"

      By and large, yes it does.

      But you're not telling the whole story. You left out the part where the mac user sells the old mac on eBay for far less of a discount than you'd need to put on a similarly aged PC. Easily over half the original price, in my experience. Sometimes ends up being as much as 2/3rds the price of a new mac just by selling your old one, depending on how frequently you upgrade.

      Upgrades are for chumps.

    32. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. You deserve to lose karma for trolling like that. Funny how you did it anyway.

      I wonder, does it really count as trolling to post the truth, in a manner that nicely illustrates a stated absurdity?

      The GGP said Mac #2 would mean the death of Mac #1, because based on price and specs, it appeared in every way the superior machine.

      So does the GP posting comparable specs at a much lower price for a PC really seem all that bad?

    33. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by brontus3927 · · Score: 1

      When I bought my last wireless keyboard/mouse combo (granted it was 3 generations ago in the Logitech Desktop line), they were still recommending the use of PS/2 over USB if available. Is it really neccessary for your keyboard and mouse to be connected by a 400Mb/s USB 2.0 connection?

    34. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by clickster · · Score: 2, Informative

      First, you might try getting ahold of an OEM copy of XP Pro since you're building a system from scratch.
      As for whether XP Pro or OSX is better, that depends on what you do. And that's a different discussion.

      OEM XP Pro from Newegg $139
      (Adjusted Price $1234)

      Gigabit Eth WAS included. As for bluetooth, I own an adapter for my PC (costs $10-20) and have yet to use it.
      ($1234+$20 = $1254) Still much cheaper than the Mac.

      And before anyone flames me, I love Macs. Personally, I prefer OSX to XP, but that's because I do a lot of work with my Linux servers and like having something very similar to Linux at the command-line level while having a GUI that looks great. If I just wanted to play games and do basic thing, I'd probably pick Windows because there are far more programs/games available.

      --
      If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
    35. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      It's market niche are the customers who don't want to pay the hefty price for the "real" PowerMacs, but they want a modular computer, so iMac/eMac/Macmini is not an option.

      I myself own a 17" iMac G5, and I have to question the point of the modularity of it. Every component inside the case has been designed so it can be replaced or upgraded independent of the others, including the screen. Obviously you can't put a BIGGER screen in, so I'll give you that one. :) But as far as modularity goes, it's nice to be able to upgrade it to a larger hard drive or a better burner without having to invest in a whole new system. For Apple, this is obviously a new thing for their all-in-one line, and makes it that much more attractive to users who otherwise would be turned off by the old iMac line's static hardware.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    36. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every single bluetooth device I have seen, without exception, comes with its own (usually USB) receiver.

      Your phone came with its own USB receiver?

      GLAN

      Ah, yes, of course, how silly of me. Not to know that RANDOM ACRONYM #76 actually meant "Gigabit Ethernet."

      Linux: $0

      Functionality: 0.

      You lose.

    37. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, another thing you forgot:

      $5000 for active noise phase-cancellation hardware so you don't drive everybody in the house nuts with the whirrring noise of the cooling system on that sucker.

      Total cost $6,095... with no Airport, no Bluetooth, and most importantly, no OS X. What a waste of money!

      (I suppose you could just buy each member of your family a set of $200 noise-reducing headphones and tell them to wear them at all times, but changing the batteries every few hours would get old after a while.)

    38. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      This model probably will be updated soon, but it will be purposedly crippled not to make it run too good to damage the high-end models sales.

      It'd be nice if they canned it and replaced it with a headless iMac (something some of us have been waiting for for years)...

      They could call it..."PowerMac Mini"...

    39. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by kamasutra · · Score: 1

      My phone didn't.

    40. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      With the PowerMac you just slot in a new card to one of the built in slots.

      Although the price premium you pay for those cards - assuming you can even find one (difficult here in Australia, at least) probably covers the difference between selling your old iMac and buying a new one...

    41. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      As I just stated here, the iMac's upgradability is not an issue as it was in the past with other Apple all-in-one solutions. That being said, the PowerMac line can DEFINITELY be configured at the start to have much more powerful specifications.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    42. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Your phone came with its own USB receiver?

      The Samsung D500 supports USB, as do a number of others.

    43. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      Second, the keyboard should be of the highest quality you can get for a PC, as Apple keyboards are very well built.

      That was true of the old ADB Pro keyboards, but they've been pretty poor ever since - mushy keys, bad angle, missing/small keys and very cramped.

    44. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The highest quality keyboard costs $9 from Newegg. http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N8 2E16823126129. The best keyboard I've ever used.

      And yes, Windows XP Pro should have been included in that price. Easily adds another $150 to the cost.

    45. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Am I missing something or is the PowerMac severely under spec'd and overpriced compared to the new iMac?

      Considering you're comparing the top of the line iMac to the base model Power Mac, I think so...

    46. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Well, the PM is up to twice as fast. Unless I've missed something and this iMac is twin processor, like the PowerMac.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    47. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by beattie · · Score: 1

      When doing these comparisons, everyone always forgets one BIG cost: Windows.

      Windows? No... Linux. And that's free.

    48. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Ok, ignore this, I didn't realise Apple was still selling the "old" 1.8 PowerMac. I thought they'd just replaced the old line with the new models, all of which are twin processor. Go on, mod me down.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    49. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not using a real keyboard unless it sounds like golf ball sized hail hitting your doublewide roof when you type.

    50. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder, does it really count as trolling to post the truth, in a manner that nicely illustrates a stated absurdity?

      The GGP said Mac #2 would mean the death of Mac #1, because based on price and specs, it appeared in every way the superior machine.

      So does the GP posting comparable specs at a much lower price for a PC really seem all that bad?

      Lots of trolling consists of facts. It's the context of these facts that make it trolling.

      Just about everyone knows you can get a comparably specced PC for less than a mac. People who don't know this won't be reading slashdot. It doesn't help that the GP doesn't even list a truly comparable machine (ignoring OS costs, component quality, and wireless features). That eliminates the informative angle, since it's making a specious comparison.

      If the post doesn't serve to inform people, then what is its purpose? To amuse people? Maybe. The problem is, this will only serve to amuse people who like to see mac users get inflamed and defensive. Frankly, I'm sick of that. Flamewars benefit nobody.

      So really, if it's an attempt to inform, it's an inaccurate comparison, and thus deserves karma docking. If it's an attempt to amuse, it's trolling and flamebait, and deserves karma docking. My original point stands. But I'm always open to rebuttal.

    51. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      So, now your $1095.00 computer just became $1394.

      I tried to come up with a witty FireWire joke here, but I just couldn't do it.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    52. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Threni · · Score: 1

      I didn't think you had $60 bills in the US!

      Hilarious joking aside, I think it's standard practice (in the UK at least) to charge around 160% of the cost of the ingredients, so unless Steve Jobs runs restaurants on the side, you were overcharged $12 or so.

    53. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know it is somewhat traditional to post complete and utter bullshit on Slashdot, but this is ridiculous. At least check out the specs instead of just inventing them.

      He was comparing the SINGLE-processor 2.0 Ghz iMac G5 to the SINGLE-processor 1.8 Ghz PowerMac G5.

    54. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by dubiousmike · · Score: 1

      they also get filthy looking within 10 minutes of use

    55. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that you can't upgrade the video card though. Unfortunately that's about the only think I'd WANT to upgrade...

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    56. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Jord · · Score: 1

      Try washing your hands before using the computer. I have one in my house with a teenager using it daily. It stays clean since he learned as a child to wash his hands if they are dirty.

    57. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by MoneyT · · Score: 1

      Every single bluetooth device I have seen, without exception, comes with its own (usually USB) receiver.


      You're kidding right? I can barely stand to have the wireless reciever for my mouse let alone every other device I might want to use. Where the hell do you put all those recievers? I don't know about you, but my desktop doesn't have a lot of room for random recievers.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    58. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but it sure is nice to embrace the extinction of legacy ports.

    59. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by KillerDeathRobot · · Score: 1

      A... headless iMac? Isn't that essentially what it already is?

      By the way I believe they already internally refer to the low end PowerMac as the PowerMac Mini. :)

      --
      Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
    60. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is it really neccessary for your keyboard and mouse to be connected by a 400Mb/s USB 2.0 connection?

      It makes sense if you remove the PS/2 port and stick 2 USB ports where it used to be, adding expandability.

    61. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by speleo · · Score: 1

      What, the iMac won't compete with the more expensive Power Mac line? What are those folks in marketing at Apple thinking? How dare they....

      Next you'll tell me that Honda's don't compete with cars from Lexus.

    62. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Now that's a comment. Everybody else is posting "YOU'RE STUPID" flames and just generally being an ass, and along comes this guy who quietly and elegantly makes his point.

      I thought maybe his whole "I work for Apple" thing was just a story until I saw this. Now I think it just might be true.

    63. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      I can't put a Quartz 2D Extreme-capable graphics card in my iMac. That makes the lack of upgradability important to me. The fact that I can now buy a new iMac that does support the new technology, but won't be upgradable when they come up with some even cooler graphics acceleration that needs a better video card doesn't make it any less of a factor now.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    64. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's USB, it's not Bluetooth, shitwit.

    65. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by alpha264 · · Score: 1

      There are some advantages to the PowerMac:

      -They're almost certainly going to run a lot cooler with aluminum case, big fans, and uncluttered cable design
      -The 2.7 Ghz PowerMac has liquid cooling.
      -You can't upgrade the video on the iMac
      -The PowerMacs come with FireWire 800 and optical audio
      -The 2.3 and 2.7 Ghz come with PCI-X slots
      -The PowerMacs can support up to 8GB RAM, while the iMacs can go up to 4GB
      -PowerMacs have 64-bit processors
      Some stuff I don't quite understand that the PowerMac has:
      -Parallel data structure supporting up to 215 simultaneous in-flight instructions
      -Simultaneous issue of up to 10 out-of-order operations
      -Dual-pipeline Velocity Engine for 128-bit single-instruction, multiple-data (SIMD) processing
      -Two independent double-precision floating-point units
      -Advanced three-stage branch-prediction logic
      -Point-to-point system controller
      -128-bit data paths for up to 6.4-GBps memory throughput

      As far as I can tell, the PowerMac has stronger hardware even if it's running at the same (or lower) speeds. Plus it's easier to upgrade it.

      Or maybe I'm just trying to make myself feel better because I just bought a PowerMac. ;)

    66. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by bwalling · · Score: 1

      I would agree that the low end Powermac is abit... MMhhh weak, but then the advantage of it is that you can expand it more, another HDD, GFX, more memory.

      Well, you can always add an external drive, and the iMac supports 2GB of RAM. If you need more than 2GB, you'd probably benefit from more CPU than the PM has anyway. Sure, you can't upgrade the video card, but you just bought the cheapest PM available, what are the odds you're going to fork out for an X800? Those two machines are just poorly matched, and I'm surprised Apple did it.

    67. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Well, they only upgraded the dual-processor PowerMacs, not the low-end single processor one. Which is also 3 month younger than the "old" duals.

      --

      Lars T.

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

    68. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by brontus3927 · · Score: 1

      You mean like the serial port my LaserJet 4 is connected to? The parallel port is busy being used by the DeskJet 640C. And the second serial port on my PII-400 is used to connect to my homebrew robotics project. All of this is run with 384MB of PC100 SDRAM, 16MB AGP graphics (original ATi All-In-Wonder Radeon), PCI audio, and ISA 10/100 ethernet card. I don't see a need to abandon working technology in favor of a new one when the equipment doesn't utilize the "benefits" of the newer tech

    69. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by jdbo · · Score: 1

      Sure, the 1.8 low-end model doesn't compare well with the mid-high-end iMacs, for the particular specs that you've focused on.

      However, these specs aren't much applicable to the primary reason to pick a Powermac over an iMac: expandability.

      drive expansion:

      iMac (all models)
      One internal hard drive bays (1 occupied); one slot-loading format optical drive bay (occupied)

      Powrmac (all models)
      Two internal hard drive bays (1 occupied); one optical drive bay (occupied)

      memory expansion:

      iMac (all models)
      512 PC3200 (400MHz) Supports up to 2GB

      Dual 1.8 GHz & Dual 2.0 Ghz
      256MB PC3200 (400MHz) Supports up to 4GB

      and for the Dual 2.3 and Dual 2.7 Ghz models
      512MB PC3200 (400MHz) Supports up to 8GB

      PCI expansion:

      iMac (all models)
      no PCI slots

      for the Dual 2.0
      Three open full-length 33MHz, 64-bit PCI slots

      and for the Dual 2.3 and Dual 2.7 Ghz models
      Three open full-length PCI-X slots: one 133MHz, 64-bit slot and two 100MHz, 64-bit slots

      Expandability-wise, the Powermacs leave the iMac far behind.

      That said, I think that Apple could've boosted the 1.8 on the specs that you mentioned. However, if someone has a PCI(-X) card that they NEED to use, they're not going to get an iMac, period, and Apple obviously knows that.

      Not the nicest way to behave, but as a company Apple does like to make "the money".

    70. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, even your grocery store is ripping you off. Eight ounces of tenderloin should run you about 6$, 12 spears of asparagus will be less than three dollars (probably less than two), about 50 cents for the potatoes (hell, we'll go 1.50$ so we can get some of the blue and yellow taters for flair). Garlic is about 5 heads for a dollar, and butter is about 3$/pound. Salt. pepper ond oil are negligible, as those are kitchen staples.

      Total cost: 11.95.

      You need to stop shopping at those Apple Grocery stores. Either that or quit trying the hide the bottle of wine you tacked onto the bill and drank on the way home...

    71. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by PurPaBOO · · Score: 1

      all gentically modified, and extra growth hormones in the beef. Bully for you.

      --
      If it weren't for the rocks in its bed, the stream would have no songs.
    72. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Winterblink · · Score: 1

      You CAN, technically. From what I've read it requires replacing the mainboard of the unit. Obviously that a bit of an issue for some considering the CPU is on it as well. However I think when it's time to upgrade the CPU, they'll probably have a better video subsystem to go with it so it will be a good decision overall.

      --
      "I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
      -Hoban Washburn
    73. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      "PowerMacs have 64-bit processors"

      So do G5 iMacs...

      "-Parallel data structure supporting up to 215 simultaneous in-flight instructions
      -Simultaneous issue of up to 10 out-of-order operations
      -Dual-pipeline Velocity Engine for 128-bit single-instruction, multiple-data (SIMD) processing
      -Two independent double-precision floating-point units
      -Advanced three-stage branch-prediction logic
      "

      All on the G5 iMcs.

      "-Point-to-point system controller"

      Without more information I don't know what this means. If it means what I suspect it does there's no point on having this on a single-CPU system.

      "-128-bit data paths for up to 6.4-GBps memory throughput"

      Only for the dual-processor PowerMacs. And you have to have pairs of DIMMs to take advantage of this anyway.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    74. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows? No... Linux. And that's free.

      But some people want to actually do stuff with their computers. You know, stuff outside of messing with the operating system itself.

    75. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay. Now cram all that into the back of the BenQ FP731 LCD monitor case. What? You can't? Oh, my mistake. I thought you were trying to do a COMPARISON of LIKE machines.

    76. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by nunchux · · Score: 1

      Another thing the Powermac has is dual monitor support (the iMac needs a potentially warranty violating firmware hack to do this.)

      It's also much easier, of course, to upgrade and replace drives (optical drives particularly are the first thing to fail) and the iMac won't take additional internal hard drives.

      And keep in mind the Powermac isn't targeted towards consumers. It's a production computer, designed for heavy and extended use (and abuse) by businesses such as sound, video, animation and graphics houses. For these customers initial price isn't as much of a concern as longevity and adaptability: They may cost significantly more, but Powermacs tend to live forever. All-in-ones, on the other hand, become dated quickly, and are useless once the monitor or innards fail. As my friend with a perfectly good G4 iMac with a dead 20" screen can attest to.

      I guarantee you there are far more blue and white G3 towers in use than G3 iMacs.

    77. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eight ounces of tenderloin should run you about 6$

      The dollar sign goes in front of the number, you illiterate tool. More important, though, aged USDA Prime beef is about $40 a pound, and fingerling potatoes are considerably more expensive than you seem to think they are. So his prices were right on.

      Oh, and if you think salt and pepper are negligible, you've obviously never neglected them.

    78. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Quietly and elegantly makes his point"? That so-called point is so full of holes it isn't even funny (dubious cost of ingredients, being charged double cost of said ingredients, no mention of the kind of restaurant, etc--see this for another rebuttal).

      If that's all it takes to convince you that this phony works for Apple, I'd say you're bought on the cheap.

    79. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      Nevermind the PowerMac. Why is the PowerBOOK line still so expensive compared to the new iMacs?

      A box with a 17" LCD and 512MB of RAM will set you back about $1300 for the iMac, and about $2600 for the PowerBook.

      For twice the price of a low-end desktop, you get a notebook with an integrated keyboard, trackpad, and battery. You also get a slower, last-generation CPU, a slower, smaller hard drive, and an inferior graphics card.

      Where's the value?

    80. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i hear you can customize your own steak dinners at www.cybersteakpower.com

    81. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Altus · · Score: 1



      that must be a pretty old iMac... I doubt it is your inability to run Quartz Extreme that is hampering your performance.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    82. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      No iMac released before today supports Quartz 2D Extreme, which is a new feature in Tiger. It supports Quartz Extreme, which isn't the same thing, quite well.

      If older than 1 day is "pretty old" to you, I bow before your superior source of funding.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    83. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by dogbowl · · Score: 1
      Never mind the 64bit CPU, how about this:

      Dell Dimension 3.0Ghz $650.00
      • 512MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz
      • 160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM)
      • 48x CD-ROM Drive + FREE 48x CD-RW Drive
      • 17" LCD
      • PCI Express x16 based Radeon X300 SE with 128MB
      • XP Home included
      deal here
      --

      These pretzels are making me thirsty.
    84. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by jest3r · · Score: 1

      Expansion in the PowerMac is weak ... considering how big it is ... no extra external drive bays, and only 1 extra internal bay??? and only 3 PCI slots (actually only 2 if you use the new Nvidia card)?? Remember the PowerMac is massive ... it should have huge expansion, you should not have to stack drives on top. Furthermore CPU upgrades for the new PowerMac G5's don't exist and Apple engineers have been quoted as saying they may not be possible.

    85. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Waaah, waaah - it's too loud for my precious ears. I'm a scared little girl. I tuck my tiny little dick between my legs and make mommy wipe my ass. Waaaah, waaaah." -you

      GO FUCK YOURSELF CUMSTAIN!!!

    86. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by CrawlingEvil · · Score: 1

      The PowerMac, besides things like expandability, have one huge advantage over the iMacs - bus speed. I was up at an Apple store when the new iMacs were first release and I did an informal benchmark where I transcoded a DVD straight from disk into a DiVX mpeg 4 file. Here's a rough idea of the results:

      • Power Mac G4 - Dual 1.0 Ghz - 12 fps
      • Power Mac 1.8Ghz - 13 fps
      • Power Mac G5 - Dual 1.8 Ghz - 64 fps

      Yes, this is comparing a one processor system to a two processor system, but the particular program I was using didn't take strong advantage of the two processors.

      So, looking at the specs, what's the big difference? Bus speed. This tests the bus speed because the computer is contantly moving data from from disk to memory back and then back to disk. And it's moving so much data around, you're testing the bus, not the on board chip cache.

      That being said, the new iMac's also have a faster memory bus, although only modestly so. Still the bus speed on the Power Mac's is twice the speed, and it also uses dual channel memory. This all leads to a significant performance boost for anyone doing large data processing, like photoshop, video encoding, etc...

      This just goes to show, there's a lot more to a fast computer than raw CPU speed.

      PS. I threw the G4 PowerMac in there because it represents my current system, and I wanted to know how the new computers compared to that.

    87. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's USB, it's not Bluetooth, shitwit.

      Tell that to my mouse, keyboard, and headphones, shitwit.

    88. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by gmplague · · Score: 1

      However, this is slashdot, where we're all supposedly master chefs.

      Apple's TDI may be right for some buyers, but certainly isn't for all.

      Now, if you don't feel like making your steak dinner yourself, and want to get 5-Star service and somebody waiting on you, then maybe Ristorante Apple is the place to go. There are other restaurants too that are just as good, but some of us like the way they make their steak at Apple.

      --
      __________________________________________
      Take comfort in your ignorance.
      Grandmaster Plague
    89. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever modded this down is a fucking tool.

    90. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you just say "You're a doodyhead for contradicting me" and then stamp your foot prettily? It's easier than Anonymous Cowarding around and I *promise* you won't hurt your foot.

    91. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your rebuttal got rebutted when you weren't looking, idiot.

    92. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by noewun · · Score: 1
      No iMac released before today supports Quartz 2D ExtremeM/blockquote>

      Wrong. Any card which can run CoreImage can run Q2DE (hardware support for the ARB_fragment_program extension is required). This includes the 5200 in the original G5 iMac.

      --
      I am a believer of momentum and curves.
    93. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      I sell back my old hardware and get 90% of its current value. So let's say my 9800 Pro that I bought almost a year ago for 300$(new retail box from canadacomputers.com). Right now it's priced 321$, so my computer store will give me back 288.90$ of my upgrade. So I can get an X800 XL for 439-289= 150 bucks (canadian).

      This case is a little odd because I couldn't understand why the 9800 pro was so cheap when I bought it, but in most cases I win a lot. This little computer store has saved me a bundle, best deal I have found.

      But anyhow, upgrades are not for chumps. Even if I didn't have that deal I can always easily unload my computer at 70-80% of current price because all components are top notch.

      P.S: canadacomputers.com is not the store I buy from, but my store uses their price list to set his prices.

    94. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT BACK UP. And while we're at it, get rid of the fucking "overrated" mod.

    95. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by nuxx · · Score: 1

      Actually, give it a go. The keyboard *is* mushy, but it's also really well built. When I got my G5 a year and a half ago I thought that the keyboard was crappy, but I gave it some time. After a while you realize that the smooth, squishy keys are really nice, and most standard PC keyboards start to feel clunky in comparison.

      Also, removing the standard gap between the number row and the F-keys seems odd at first, but after a while you'll start to appreciate not having to stretch your fingers as far when typing.

    96. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      Another use of the low-end 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5 is for a workgroup server. Runs headleass, can stack quite a few of them together, up to 800 GB internal storage, FireWire 800 for external, slot to put fiber channel card, slot to put extra NIC, slot to put extra FW 800 card.

      It would do quite well as a web/mail server for a small company as well.

      I wouldn't run an iMac as a workgroup server.

      --Mike

    97. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by PSXer · · Score: 0

      Suuure. Next you'll tell me that it probably isn't a good idea to unshell peanuts while sitting at my computer.

    98. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by archer75 · · Score: 1

      Windows is bundled with computers alot of times. And I can find copies of windows for much much cheaper than what you posted. And most motherboards now have onboard Gigabit ethernet and bluetooth is pretty much usless.
      Besides, who really pays for software anymore?

    99. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      What do you use the function keys for? On my iBook, all I tend to use them for is adjusting the volume and using Exposé.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    100. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by nuxx · · Score: 1

      There's a couple of keyboard shortcuts, but mostly just Exposé. I also use them in various terminal apps at times, too... On my PowerBook I really don't use them that often, either.

      Still, I think it's nice that they are right up against the top of the keyboard. The same goes for the lack of blank space along the right half of the keyboard, too. It's all full-size keys, but there's much less reaching that has to be done.

    101. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by dr.badass · · Score: 1

      Am I missing something or is the PowerMac severely under spec'd and overpriced compared to the new iMac?

      You're missing something. Namely this: Apple doesn't want to sell low-end PowerMacs.

      I have no idea how much they make off of each system, but I think it's probable they make more selling a high-end iMac than a low-end PowerMac. They undoubtedly cost less to make overall. I imagine even the shipping costs make a difference. The PowerMac weighs almost 20 pounds more than the iMac. Multiply by thousands of units, and you get a big number.

      There's also the feature differences between the two lines that might be important to some customers. Gigabit Ethernet, Firewire 800, dual-monitor support, PCI slots, etc. Some PowerMac customers may need these things more than raw performance.

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    102. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dollar sign goes in front of the number, you illiterate tool.

      Yes, I know where most folk put the dollar sign, I don't put it there because it makes more sense to me syntacticly to put it after, and I've yet to meet a person who couldn't parse a figure with the sign ater the numbers.

      More important, though, aged USDA Prime beef is about $40 a pound, and fingerling potatoes are considerably more expensive than you seem to think they are.

      a: The OP never mentioned aged beef (I assume you're talking dry aged loins here), just beef.
      b: Only a sucker buys aged beef when it can easily be done at home (particularly if you have a second refrigerator). Add a 20% markup in cost if you're going to age it yourself.
      c: If you're paying more than 3$/pound for fingerling potatoes, you are being shafted by your grocer. But hey, feel free to waste your cash, 'cause... well... it's your cash.

      Oh, and if you think salt and pepper are negligible, you've obviously never neglected them.

      Unless you're going with something like smoked salt, then yes, the cost is negligible. And we have been talking cost here... try to keep up.

    103. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Psykechan · · Score: 1

      Original poster makes a good point. There really isn't that much of a big deal between them.

      However, there are still viable needs for a low end PMac. Not only is there PCI slots, but also AGP. This brings up the fact that the PMac will support dual (and more) displays and the iMac will not. This is actually a big selling point for the high end laptops (although you can hack the iBooks) so it would make sense, at least to Apple, that this would be a big selling point. Still, it's only 500 more to go to a dual.

      Apple has actually tried in the past to have their entry level PMac be at $2000 and just have 3 in the line, but customers demanded a lower one so they re-released the single 1.8 at $1500. Now that the iMacs are more on par, they *might* try again. Who knows.

    104. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by wembley · · Score: 1

      As long as we're comparing Apples and, um... (what's a beige fruit?), one should mention the cost of a good PC DVD authoring system, movie editor, photo organizer/editor.

      iLife is all a home user will ever need for most media uses, comes free, and is beautifully integrated as a suite.

      --

      Share and Enjoy!

    105. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      O, we can parse it. It parses into "six dollars and by the way I'm an illiterate dumbass."

      a. Oh, well, okay then, you're my king and I bow down before you.
      b. It's not only stupid but actually hazardous to try to age beef in a refridgerator. You can't control the humidity or the airflow, nor can you keep the air clean.
      c. you wouldn't recognize a fingerling potato if I shoved one up your ass

      But most important of all.....why are you arguing about a metaphor? The OPs point was 100% on the nose, and you missed it like the dumbass you are.

    106. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by MKalus · · Score: 1

      Well...

      I guess it has quite a bit to do with the "look, I am cool, I have a Powermac" in comparision to: "I could only afford an iMac" kinda deal.

      Personally I am waiting for my 2.3GHz Powermac right now :)

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    107. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by NRP128 · · Score: 1

      you really dont' get out much do you? A single Logitech DiNovo bluetooth hub will support upwards of 30+ Bluetooth devices. Same goes for just about every bluetooth reciever i've had to deal with.

    108. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by NRP128 · · Score: 1

      iTunes, free. Picasa (google's picture system) free. Movie Editor, if i can only afford an iMac or a budget PC, what makes you think i can get my hands on a $500 DV camera that takes movies WORTH editing? Do people REALLY edit that much video?

      That said, iLife is the shit, and i can't wait to get my PB to really get into it. i just hope the next version of iWork makes it just as useful as iLife!

    109. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "That $60 bill they handed me in the restaurant last night was completely unreasonable."

      No, paying for a Mac is more like $200 for the same thing. Now that's why we call it unreasonable.

    110. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being the happy vegetarian I am, I have to ask: WTF is aged beef?

      (And please don't talk about "dry aged loins" anymore. Makes me think of someone's grandmother. eeewww)

      and (c) made me laugh fucking loud. Well done!.

      Another AC.

    111. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by oudzeeman · · Score: 1

      Ageing beef is basically letting some of its moisture dry out. Beef has a large amount of water in it, and by removing some of that you concentrate the flavor. You can safely age your own beef by placing it in a tupperware container with some holes poked in it - leave it in the fridge for a few days - if it smells just a little funky that is fine (just don't grind it and make a medium rare hamburger out of it...)

    112. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by FooGoo · · Score: 1

      You forgot to account for:
      The Sous Chef
      The Executive Chef
      The Wait Staff
      The Cleaning Staff
      Property lease/mortgage
      Utilities
      Equipment
      Insurance
      A tmosphere

      --
      People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
    113. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by dadragon · · Score: 1

      A... headless iMac? Isn't that essentially what it already is?

      No. A Mac Mini is a G4 1.25/1.42ghz. The iMac is a G5 1.8/2.0ghz. The Mac Mini is closer to a headless eMac.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    114. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not aging beef. That's just letting it sit in your fridge.

      Aging is done in special drying rooms with ventilation and HEPA filters to keep airborne microorganisms to a minimum. And it takes place over a span of weeks, not "a few days."

    115. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by drsmithy · · Score: 1
      A... headless iMac? Isn't that essentially what it already is?

      Not really. Firstly there's the price (way too high) and then there's the stuff the iMac doesn't have (like PCI slots).

      The machine I envisage (and I've been doing so roughly since the first iMacs appeared) is a small enclosure (no PCI slots) with hardware specs equivalent to the iMacs. It would (now) be priced at about US$1000.

      I was particularly disappointed Apple didn't do this with the previous model iMac, as its hardware design would have made such an option extremely cheap to offer, simply by make the LCD+Arm a modular attachment (even if it had to be factory fitted).

      When I first heard rumours of the Mac Mini, I fervently hoped that Apple would make it a headless iMac, but instead it turned out more like a headless iBook or eMac.

      I'm not particularly interested in internal expansion (because on Macs the options are so limited and/or irrelevant as to be nearly pointless), but I do want a machine that performs at the same level as the "Pro" machines. Hence, I want a headless iMac :).

      By the way I believe they already internally refer to the low end PowerMac as the PowerMac Mini. :)

      I've heard that as well. It would be nice if they put their money where their mouth was and actually *made* a "PowerMac Mini".

    116. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Expandability?

      That's the reason, but still an almost enirely artificial one. Apple is obviously ignoring a fairly big range of prices/configurations in order to make a nice clean sepration between consumer and higher margin pro machines.

      The good thing about today's comparison is that this is the first iMac in years which doesn't seem like it was deliberately underspeced to keep it out of PowerMac territory.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    117. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by IntlHarvester · · Score: 1

      Apple hasn't sold a motherboard upgrade in many years. and back when they did (mid 90s), it was 80% of the price of a new system. Don't get your hopes up that any iMac logic board will be economic to upgrade even if possibly possible to do so.

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    118. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like yours, moron.

    119. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look in the mirror--the tool is you.

    120. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT DOWN. It's an outright troll and factually wrong. Not to mention a completely inappropriate analogy.

    121. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a) if you're representative of a typical Apple user than all Apple users are beligerent, pompous jerks

      b) the only thing stupid and hazardous about aging beef in a refridgerator is listening to clueless idiots who pontificate on how it's stupid and hazardous to do so

      c) what do you know about my knowledge of fingerling potatoes besides nothing? You yet again expose your ignorance and stupidity in one fell swoop

      d) the OP's point was NOT 100% on the nose no matter how much you want to to be. talk about being a dumbass--you should look in the mirror

    122. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know what the OP's point was? His point was that a list of parts with the prices added up is not the right way to judge value.

    123. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by be-fan · · Score: 1

      I've been using the things for a couple of years now, and I still don't like them. They're to "indecisive" for my taste. I'm rather partial to Cherry's keyboards, myself.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    124. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course I know what the OPs point was. I was just pointing out that it was a bad analogy/invalid point.

      Feel free to disagree.

    125. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by MKalus · · Score: 1

      Actually I just realized that even the FSB is lower on the Powermac.... that's a shame, really. They should just have dumped the low end PowerMac and only sell them Dual once more....

      Maybe they had too many left in stock?

      --
      If you want to e-mail me, use my PGP Key.
    126. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by IntlHarvester · · Score: 0

      But, I bet the margin on that lowend PowerMac is ridiclous. A system with those basic specs should cost about $1000 and would still have great margins.

      One thing that's always bothered me about Apple is how their product line is designed to punish you if you don't see things their way (iMacs or Duals -- I want neither!).

      --
      Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
    127. Re:looks like the end of the PowerMac by oudzeeman · · Score: 1

      that's not what a chef told me. It's not quite the same, but it has similar effects

  15. What about DVI by BibelBiber · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What about DVI? Is it now part of the iMac? This is my personal long awaited feature. Without DVI it's only half the fun. A second display is always a good thing.

    1. Re:What about DVI by Golias · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry, no DVI. Mini-VGA is the only video-out option on these things.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:What about DVI by sootman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And, based on history, I can't imagine the "consumer" (key word thre) Macs ever supporting multiple digital displays. In other words, it'll never happen. (Or at least, not until far enough into the future that it won't matter.) So if you're waiting for it, give up, and if you can live without it, jump in any time, 'cause it'll never change.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    3. Re:What about DVI by euxneks · · Score: 1

      It has a mini DVI jack that you can connect to an external monitor - I believe that it comes included with the necessary cables in the box. - However, just with the regular OSX and software included with the machine, it's only Mirrored screen - there is probably a hack somewhere you can download to make dual desktop.

      --
      in girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
    4. Re:What about DVI by mazulauf · · Score: 1

      Except you're wrong. It's already here:

      http://www.rutemoeller.com/mp/ibook/ibook_e.html

      Enjoy!

      (if you follow the link, you'll see that many other models are supported, not just the ibook)

      Mike

    5. Re:What about DVI by sootman · · Score: 1

      I wasn't making a distinction between mirroring and extended desktop, I was talking about analog vs. digital out. iBooks and iMacs have, and will continue to have, VGA (analog) out. They will not have DVI for quite a while. The parent was asking when DVI out would be available. My guess is, not any time soon.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  16. Re:Not interested, however... by Legato895 · · Score: 1

    hate to rain on your parade, but even apple's top of the line g5's aren't really gaming worthy. if you aiming at wow, than yes, i haven't heard anything bad (blizzard does a great job) but just scrounge up reviews of doom 3 *shudder* also, you need mac edition gpus :( so you can't pop in whatever your using and call it good

  17. Re:Not interested, however... by rokzy · · Score: 1

    you must be new here, otherwise you'd know Doom 3 is a running joke since it doesn't run well on ANY computer.

    didn't you think the limit of 4 players on multiplayer was a bit of a hint?

  18. Re:Freshend? by spungo · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why is it that when someone (rightfully) comments on the level of English employed here, people will moderate them down? Isn't correct language usage important? More proof that 90% of /. moderators are ignorant, humourless wankers.

  19. Re:DAMNIT by BoomerSooner · · Score: 1

    eBay. They retain value well, assuming you kept all the packaging and docs that came with it.

  20. Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by am46n · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Until today, the eMac G4 could outperform the iMac G5 due to some low level issues, see http://www.macintouch.com/perfpack/comparison.html .

    If it hasn't been fixed, the eMac may still give better bang for buck. If this matters to you then hold off buying until you see an accurate performance comparison.

    1. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're misreading that page. The disk issue is real, but only affects disk-intensive tasks (of course this depends on what you intend to do with the iMac). The high/auto stuff is a software issue that's very easy to correct.

    2. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by gcantallopsr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Isn't it insane to do performance benchmarks with power-saving options enabled!? It would make sense if you were comparing laptops, but... workstations? WTF!?

      --
      Try Ubuntu GNU/Linux, it's great!!!
    3. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are off moron, except when stated (high vs auto).

    4. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      Well, I believe that Automatic was the out-of-the-box setting; i.e. the setting that is being used by... maybe 80% of users?

      --
      Random is the New Order.
    5. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it hasn't been fixed, the eMac may still give better bang for buck.

      I think you're being very selective in your reading. The problem was limited to certain kinds of disk-intensive activity. The fix is a single setting in Energy Saver preferences.

      Unless you: 1) spend most of your time duplicating files and 2) are incapable of changing a single setting, the iMac G5 is still superior overall.

    6. Re:Low level design flaws? Hold off buying. by am46n · · Score: 2

      Believe it or not the average mac user is not some slashdot geek type.

      The average mac user will not upgrade the stock RAM. This usually results in thrashing when the average user runs word and safari at once. Painful. All the more painful with a slower HD. The average user will also not touch the energy settings. Disk access makes a big difference on these machines (speaking also from experience of upgrading HD and RAM in my pb).

      Looking again at the first chart on http://www.macintouch.com/perfpack/comparison.html you can see that the imac is not pulling its weight in CPU-intensive tasks either. Factor in also the fact that the emac is half the price and you have a serious case for buying the emac.

  21. Re:Not interested, however... by Legato895 · · Score: 1

    hmmm, yeah, i guess your right, you seem to know FAR more about me, than even i do i own 2 macs and i would have my first gaming pc, but my motherboard is shot and im sending it back. apple's top of the line flagship tower can't play doom 3, and regardless of if its bad code or whatnot doesn't matter. abandoning a gaming pc for a 'gaming' mac is stupid right now, no matter how gaming obsessed you are

  22. Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by alistair · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm very pleased to see they have finally started shipping 512 Mb RAM as standard as this has to be considered the minimum to see OS X in its full glory. The prices to go to 1GB are much better, $125 extra for 1GB using up both DIMMs and $175 for the memory in one stick, leaving you free to buy the additional elsewhere (if you need it on this level machine).

    It leaves me puzzled why they are still shipping 256 Mb on the Power Macs (why, why?). However, this looks like a very sensible feature improvement which should provide the perfect all in one home machine and stop the iMac from having their sales canibalised by Mac Minis at the lower end. Sadly my previous generation iMac, which is now 4 years old, is still running perfectly, especially now it has Tiger, so this may still be a hard sell to buy this year.

    1. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by 68kmac · · Score: 1
      It leaves me puzzled why they are still shipping 256 Mb on the Power Macs

      You seem to have missed last week's upgrade of the PowerMac line. They, too, now ship with 512 MB (with the exception of the single processor model, which is a bit odd, addmittedly).

    2. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It leaves me puzzled why they are still shipping 256 Mb on the Power Macs

      We ship 256 MB only in the economy model, the single-processor 1.8 GHz configuration. The other three SKUs come with 512.

      Sadly my previous generation iMac, which is now 4 years old, is still running perfectly, especially now it has Tiger

      While a flat-panel G4 iMac certainly should run Tiger well, we first shipped them in January 2002. Your iMac can't be more than just over 3 years old.

    3. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      umm.. the powermacs HAVE 512 standard

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by alistair · · Score: 1

      OK, but "you" still ship 256 Mb in one of the Workstation lines, surely it would make sense to ship 512 Mb in the economy workstation and 1 Gb in the larger lines, especially if you give all home users 512 Mb.

      As for my iMac, I bought it in February 2002, so you are right, it is over 3 years old rather than 4 years old. I just noticed that the 3 year Apple Care package ran out the other day so I started thinking of it as 4 years old

    5. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 4, Informative

      Obviously it makes more sense to ship more base RAM in a machine that the average buyer will never open than in the machine that is designed (and priced) to be expanded internally.

      Besides, the RAM thing is always a tightrope for us. Yes, the iMacs need to have more RAM in their base configurations than the Power Macs do because market research tells us that only something like one iMac owner in 10 ever opens his computer, while five out of six Power Macs get upgraded in some way during the first year of ownership. Our iMac customers want more RAM in the Mac, while our Power Mac customers want less RAM in the G5 (because our RAM is naturally more expensive than third-party RAM; it's a volume issue). But at the same time they don't want the iMac to ship with more RAM than the Power Mac because then Power Mac buyers feel ripped off. "This expensive computer only came with 256 MB of RAM! Cheapskates!"

      So it's a tightrope. Bottom line is, no matter how we configure the RAM in our SKUs, a third of our customers are gonna complain about it. And 100% of Slashdotters.

    6. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 1

      "because our RAM is naturally more expensive than third-party RAM; it's a volume issue"

      If you can't get RAM cheaper than your customers, there is something seriously wrong with your supply chain.

      Why should a person buying 4 DIMMs or a company buying 400 be able to get them for a lower price than Apple buying 40,000?

      It doesn't make sense. The fact is, people buy 3rd party memory because you charge a pretty substantial markup. HP does the same thing.

    7. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Drakonian · · Score: 1

      A volume issue?? Apple, who ships thousands of Macs, can't get better volume pricing on RAM than a consumer, who buys one stick? I have trouble with that.

      --
      Random is the New Order.
    8. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One doesn't feel that we should be using the Royal 'we' when talking of Apple, it makes one look a touch silly.

    9. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing he might work at an apple store.

    10. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Here's a lesson in economics for you, free of charge.

      Every retailer buys RAM from a manufacturer. For sake of argument, let's say that manufacturer is RAMCO. If you go to RAMCO and ask to buy RAM, they're going to say no, because they're not a retailer. They're a wholesaler. They only sell to people who intend to re-sell their RAM.

      So instead you go to a retailer. You have two choices. One, BIGCO, does sixty-five skrillion box tops a year in business with RAMCO. The other, LITTLECO, only does ten thousand box tops a year in business. So BIGCO is able to negotiate a lower price per unit with RAMCO, while LITTLECO has to pay more.

      Consequently, BIGCO sells RAM cheaper than LITTLECO can.

      We're LITTLECO. Somebody like Crucial is BIGCO. See?

    11. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry. Apple is NOT little any more. They made 6 BILLION in 2003 (only reference I could find that was free) and are 301 in the Fortune 500 (for 2003). I am SURE they are higher now.

    12. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have proven that you don't know jack about economics.

      If the buyers at Apple are buying RAM at retail instead of wholesale, they'd be fired in a heartbeat.

      Nice try, loser.

    13. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Apple buys RAM differently then you. If Apple's orders (for RAM)don't ship on time, its likely their manufacturing will grind to a halt in short order. So Apple sends out for bids for say 10,000 256 MB DIMMS to be delivered every day for 3 months.

      This locks every one into a contract for the same price. Which means if a plant or two catches on fire, which results in a sudden supply shock to RAM prices. Apple is still locked in on their RAM prices. And there are disincentives written into the contract that most likely the RAM manufacturer doesn't want to incur.

    14. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to completely fail to understand his comment, loser.

    15. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      A better answer would be "We *don't* ship more RAM in the iMacs than in the Power Macs. The recent Power Mac updated bumped all the configs except the low end up to 512MB too." What department in Apple do you work at again? ;)

    16. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by As+Seen+On+TV · · Score: 1

      Um. That answer would be incorrect. We ship iMacs with 512 MB. We ship the single 1.8 GHz Power Mac G4 with 256 MB of RAM. I'm pretty sure just out-and-out lying isn't the right answer.

    17. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      Totally offtopic, but aren't you the least bit worried of posting on public forums and talking on behalf of apple? I would never answer to a thread concerning a company I work for and use the term "we" or even openly declare that I work for them.

      Unless you
      - are cleared and designated by the PR department to do this
      - have written permission to do so from your boss
      - have no boss (in which case nice to meet you Steve)

    18. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by atverd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As many pointed before this is really hard to believe that Apple paying for memory more than single customer with his puny mail order at some small online shop . I think there is another explanation. Instead of selling memory at market price you selling it simply twice more and in result loosing roughly half of orders. So in total you have same amount of profit, but twice less custom orders (which are pain and cost more of course). I don't mind actually. The only problem I have with your "memory politics" is that you don't offer 0 memory option! So I still had to pay premium price for that idiotic 256MB as part of my Mac Mini standard package, then order an upgrade and sell old memory on ebay for totally miserable money. Even with all these movements and cost of putty knife (to open Mini) this was cheaper then Apple's upgrade to 512.

      But of course, we still love Apple :)

    19. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      Apple isn't the only company that 'overcharges' for RAM. Look at IBM, HP, and Dell. I'm sure you could also find 400 GB SATA drives cheaper as well on pricewatch.

      --Mike

    20. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 3, Insightful


      We're LITTLECO. Somebody like Crucial is BIGCO. See?

      Sounds to me like Apple should buy it's RAM from Crucial, then. If your negotiated price with RAMCO is still higher than Crucial's retail price, or better, whatever price you could negotiate with Crucial, it sounds like you'd be better off. Really.

      --

      --
      $tar -xvf .sig.tar
    21. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      Agreed. My company has business conduct guidelines that prohibit this sort of behavior. I would guess that Apple has even stricter rules, given how they like to keep things secret as long as possible. This guy gets off on representing himself as an Apple employee. Maybe a janitor?

    22. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      This guy gets off on representing himself as an Apple employee. Maybe a janitor?

      He knows an awful lot for a janitor. A prolific a poster as he has been, and attracting so many nay-sayers, it's pretty darn impressive that no one's been able to take him to task on anything he's said. Maybe a few nibbles around the edges, but that it. I couldn't do it, and I've been involved with Macs since the original 128k.

    23. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      Either it is part of his official job to post to /. and answer questions (which he would never confirm) or he is doing this unofficially. I would love to know what Steve thinks of his constant use of "we", as if he is a company spokesperson.

    24. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      either way, you're now entertained. you should thank him.

    25. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      no, I'm merely annoyed. I also think that he makes snarky AC followup comments that he wouldn't make using his /. username.

    26. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      annoyed, entertained, whatever. point is you're still reading. apple thanks you and slashdot thanks you and slashdot's advertisers (incl. apple) thank you

    27. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by John+Harrison · · Score: 1
      You don't get it. He (you?) is either an astroturfer and therefore not genuine, or he is deceiving his employer, and therefore dishonest.

      I will admit that I would probably read a blog of his if here were to blog on what it is he himself is doing at Apple (assuming it is more than posting on /. all day), but the self-appointed mouthpiece of all things Apple thing is annoying.

    28. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe. Translation: "I've thought of two ways to make him look bad!"

      Your jealousy is showing.

    29. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't believe he's an astroturfer in the traditional sense. He's clearing up numerous misconceptions about product lines and explaining the rationale for certain things, but he's generally not touting Apple's superiority over anyone else. If he really is working for Apple, and clearly spending a lot of time posting to /. during working hours, I see nothing wrong with it as long as there is some ethical oversight. Also, if he's official, this type of thing was bound to happen; how often do you see people stupidly bashing products due to one bad experience, or simply declaring mistruths about a company's products? This guy pushes back at these people, and if what he's saying is generally factually accurate, I believe that the net benefit of such intervention is positive.

    30. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      yeah are crucial prepared to gaurantee shiments of X units per day for a few months at a fixed price though.

      and if so will that fixed price be higher or lower than todays retail? (i would guess higher)

      the thing is with retail if you can't get stock of a product (in this case ram) easilly then you can just jack up your prices to match and many customers will hold off on purchasing that particular product until the price comes down.

      if on the other hand you are making pcs to standard specs you need a gauranteed supply of sufficiant ram to keep your production line going or you loose big time

      there is the option of holding lots of stock (say a couple of months supply) and buying when you can get it cheap but that has issues of its own (depriciation storage capital)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    31. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      I have to admit that after reading a story about people being paid to surf web sites and promote stuff for different companies I have become very skeptical of some posters on web boards.

    32. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by dangitman · · Score: 1

      "As Seen On TV" - you have still not told us who you are, even though you claim to represent Apple. Why do you never reply to posts that ask this very valid question? You reply to dozens of other posts, but always ignore requests for identification.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    33. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He knows an awful lot for a janitor.

      I thought so too, until I realised I could find every single piece of info he provided on Spotlight (and more) in one well-written Ars Technica review.

      Right down to his Microsoft Entourage anecdote.

      I doubt he works for Apple. He is just a Mac enthusiast who gets off on making non-Mac users look stupid. If he really worked for Apple, portraying that attitude (like Dilbert's "condescending Unix user"), he would get slapped down quick and hard.

    34. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'll find you already know the answer to that question.

    35. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what makes you think you are intitled to that information? its clear that asotv doesn't care whether anybody beliefs him or not. he just posts what he wants.

      of course, he seems to be right about everything. that's a little freaky, don't u think? he says all this real specific stuff, and gets all the details exactly right? weird huh?

    36. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the fact that he posted it all two weeks before that review was published.

    37. Re:Memory Prices (somewhat) improved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have the patience to go back and actually confirm that, but it's irrelevant anyway.

      The point is that if an Ars author can write that article without inside knowledge of Apple, then so can ASOT. Pretty much anyone with an ADC account can download previews of Tiger months before it is released.

      Everything he's said about the system could be 100% correct (although he has been called out for mistakes before), but it's no indication that he is employed by Apple.

      Without some kind of identification, his words are suspect. I don't dismiss what jkh has to say, because we know who he is and what he does. All I can say of ASOT is that he posts to slashdot a lot.

  23. Re:Not interested, however... by sokoban · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm running WOW on a 2x1.8 G5 with 1GB RAM and a Radeon x800. I run WOW as a 1600x1200 window with mail, firefox, itunes, and eyeTV open as well. Normally, I get a good 30-40 fps with every option maxed, including the terrain distance. The only time I notice any slowdown is really when I have eyeTV open and playing a TV show. I would really recommend though to go with the x800, or an x850 as they are coming out soon for the mac. Also, a quieter card cooler might be a good idea, as the stock ATI fan kinda kills the whole "quiet mac" thing.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
  24. Maybe I missed something... by Immercenary_2000 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    OSX Tiger is now standard? Didn't it just come out a week or two ago? There are probably tons of mac users running earlier versions of the OS. It seems to me that the standard is whatever the majority of people are using at that time. I know some people rushed to upgrade but i'm sure most haven't yet.

    1. Re:Maybe I missed something... by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      They still support the older OSX's. However Tiger now comes standard on new machines. It's not like the old days where Dell would let you choose between Windows Me and Windows 2000. When Apple releases a new OS then their machines either come with it installed or they give you the new OS DVD with your purchase.

  25. Re:DAMNIT by lithandie · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why did I have to buy the mac mini? I want one of these guys instead!
    because you are cheap?
  26. Thats cool by gorrepati · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The cool thing about this imac is that the bluetooth, airport extreme and ethernet card are all included in the base price, which was not the case previously.

    --
    You will never have experience until after you needed it.
    1. Re:Thats cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Ethernet was included before. It's been included in every iMac since the very first G3 IIRC.

      The difference is with this version they appear to have upped it to gigabit ethernet. That's a major boon for using the iMac in a design studio as increasingly the iMac is used there. For Photoshop/InDesign and web work it's easily powerful enough with PowerMacs becoming increasingly less needed.

  27. Re:Not interested, however... by am46n · · Score: 1

    Adding RAM can make a big difference in macland. 1gig of RAM on a dual 1.8G5 and doom stutters significantly less often. Not perfect, but significantly better.

  28. A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    A new /. troll named As Seen On TV will post ~20 posts to this story claiming insider knowledge of all things Apple and will subsequently get modded up as +Insightful or +Interesting. Apple fanboys will blast anyone who dares to question anything this troll has to say.

    Furthermore, the Apple faithful, afraid of the truth, will mod this down as -Flamebait. That is all.

    1. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If that guy worked for Apple he would've been fired by now.

    2. Re:A Prediction: by fakedupe · · Score: 1

      Um... for what? Leaking um.. nothing?

      Let's hang him!

    3. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      for making Apple employees look like a bunch of assholes.

    4. Re:A Prediction: by Golias · · Score: 4, Insightful

      His comments don't really display much in the way of "insider" knowledge, but they are usually factual, so he gets modded up as "Informative" a lot, which is the way moderation is supposed to work.

      I don't think he's an Apple guy of much significance. For all we know he works the "genius bar" at a really, really slow Apple Store somewhere, and surfs slashdot to kill time... if he works for Apple at all.

      Whatever the case is, he can claim to be whoever he likes. It doesn't matter. What matters is that his comments tend to contribute to the discussion, while your comment is just whining flame-baiting.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    5. Re:A Prediction: by Golias · · Score: 1

      Yes, ASOTV has spread (and continues to spread) misinformation here, and you idiots eat it all up.

      Misinformation such as what, exactly?

      The only statement of fact he's made in this thread so far is "You don't need an X800 to run Photoshop and InDesign" which is true.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    6. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's see... Here and here just for starters. There are many more but you can find them yourself if you really care (I'm guessing that you don't). And I guess you can't seem to grasp the disconnect between someone who claims to be an Apple insider (which seems to be a demonstrably false claim) and the truth or falsity of the claims he subsequently makes.

      I guess it doesn't matter to people like you--as long as he sounds plausible, it doesn't matter if what he claims about being an Apple employee is the truth or not. After all, just because he's very possibly lying about one thing doesn't mean he's lying about all the rest... does it?

    7. Re:A Prediction: by Golias · · Score: 1

      The first post you linked, he said launchd was part of Darwin 8. It was, wasn't it?

      The second is a thread of you ranting about how he's not an actual Apple employee, which (as I just said) is irrelevant.

      So again, I ask: Given that I don't give a flying fuck whether he is who he says he is or not, is there anything about his statements fact on the subject at hand that could be called "misinformation", or are you just a bitter troll yourself.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    8. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The truth doesn't matter to you. Gotcha.

      BTW, can you prove that his statements on the subject at hand are factual?

      Didn't think so.

    9. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The truth doesn't matter to you. Gotcha. BTW, can you prove that his statements on the subject at hand are factual?
      It's not necessary, and anyone who would suggest that it is necessary is clearly mentally incapable of understanding the discussion anyway.

      Now, if you would like an example of a reasonable request: Can you post any statement that he has made that is demonstrably false? Not that you disagree with, not that you misinterpret (which you do a lot, understandably) but demonstrably false. The way you do that is to quote him verbatim, with reference, and then show that what he has said is false. If you can't do that, then stop wasting bandwidth.

    10. Re:A Prediction: by pomo+monster · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm a longtime Apple fanboi, but I highly doubt that ASOTV works for Apple. I think he's Leo McGarry under a new username.

    11. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well there is that $60 steak dinner. I can get a pretty good steak dinner for $30. And a not so good one for $15

    12. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "BTW, can you prove that his statements on the subject at hand are factual?"

      Re:Cheap updates? (Score:2)
      by As Seen On TV (857673) on Friday April 01, @11:00AM (#12110329)
      Motion does not include Core Image. The currently-shipping version of Motion can't take advantage of Image Units. (The update to be announced in a few weeks at NAB will.)

      Direct link.

      ---

      At least this poster in question got that right - two weeks before the announcement!

    13. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I can Google for that stuff and look like a big shot too. BFD.

    14. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I completely agree. I've seen him talking about some cocoa stuff before and thought, if this moron is working for apple, thats the only way to explain the suckyness of iPhoto.

    15. Re:A Prediction: by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Apple fanboys will blast anyone who dares to question anything this troll has to say.

      Bullshit. I'm an Apple fan, and it's my policy to question "As Seen on TV" in every thread i read that he posts to. I want to know who the fuck he is, and why he's posting to Slashdot. I certainly question a lot he has to say.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    16. Re:A Prediction: by dangitman · · Score: 1
      The second is a thread of you ranting about how he's not an actual Apple employee, which (as I just said) is irrelevant.

      It's not irrelevant. It's directly relevant to his integrity as a person. Furthermore, I get extremely annoyed at the way he claims "we" did such-and-such, which implies he is personally involved in all the projects he talks about. This is extremely bad form. No matter how accurate his comments are, he should not be taking credit for the work of others, or using "we" to refer to other Apple engineers. he should also be disclosing who he is, if he claims to work for Apple.

      For these reasons, he should not be modded up or taken seriously until he ceases this insulting and unethical behavior. Once he addresses his issues of honesty and accountability, then I'm perfectly happy if his posts are modded up for being insightful or whatever. But until such a time, it's prudent to assume he is a fraud.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    17. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      two weeks in advance of it happening? what, do you use future.google.com or something?

    18. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he's Twirlip of the Mists.

    19. Re:A Prediction: by As+Seen+On+Slashdot · · Score: 1

      I'm collecting theories about who As Seen On TV is on my journal. Please come and add your ideas. We'll get to the bottom of this!

    20. Re:A Prediction: by As+Seen+On+Slashdot · · Score: 1

      Why do you think that? Please come to my journal and share you're theory!

    21. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you realize that you've just engaged in a textbook ad hominem attack? I mean, if I'd TRIED to think of an example of an ad hominem attack, I couldn't have come up with a better one.

      "Ignore what this person says. It doesn't matter if he's right or wrong. I don't like him, so his words are invalid."

      Seriously, dude. I couldn't have come up with a better example of what NOT to do if I'd tried.

    22. Re:A Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your retarded.

  29. I want this machine headless! by SamSeaborn · · Score: 3, Funny
    Come on, Apple. I want this 17" iMac HEADLESS!

    Make a better double-sized Mac Mini now!

    2GHz PowerPC G5
    667MHz frontside bus
    512K L2 cache
    512MB DDR400 SDRAM
    160GB Serial ATA hard drive
    Slot-load 8x SuperDrive (double-layer)
    ATI Radeon 9600
    128MB DDR video memory
    56K internal modem

    Sam

    1. Re:I want this machine headless! by bhima · · Score: 4, Funny

      thatt's called a "Power Mac"

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:I want this machine headless! by iainl · · Score: 1

      If you look at the specs, it's pretty clear that the Mac Mini is to a fair extent an iBook without all the screen and keyboard gubbins. So my guess is that you won't see an upgrade on the Mini front until they solve the G5 power-and-heat problem for the laptops. Try again around September/October.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    3. Re:I want this machine headless! by bunratty · · Score: 1

      Power Macs are upgradable and therefore cost far more than a headless iMac would.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    4. Re:I want this machine headless! by bunratty · · Score: 1

      That's only because they put the Mac Mini in such a small case and therefore had to limit the power consumed. They could make the case bigger than the Mac Mini and smaller than the iMac -- just take the monitor out of the iMac and rearrange the components a bit. Of course, it would take at least several months to do the engineering, but there are no technological hurdles to overcome as you imply.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    5. Re:I want this machine headless! by mblase · · Score: 3, Funny

      Make a better double-sized Mac Mini now!

      What would that be called... a Mac maxi? I can just see female Slashdotters falling over themselves in laughter at that one...

    6. Re:I want this machine headless! by iainl · · Score: 1

      The thing is, though, that there are really only two defining features of the Mac Mini in relation to the rest of the range. If you get rid of its 'mini'ness, that just leaves the entry-level price, and a 2GHz G5 isn't going to leave it particularly cheap. All you've really got is a low-end PowerMac that you can't upgrade.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    7. Re:I want this machine headless! by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 3, Funny
      I can just see female Slashdotters falling over themselves in laughter at that one...

      Yeah, both of them think it's hysterical.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    8. Re:I want this machine headless! by bunratty · · Score: 1
      That's an interesting take on it. Here's another:

      If I want a Mac without a monitor, I can buy a Mac Mini for $500-$600. If I want more than the Mac Mini has to offer, I have to spend at least $1600 for a Power Mac. Do you see the $1000 hole where a mid-range headless Mac line could fit?

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    9. Re:I want this machine headless! by CountBrass · · Score: 1

      I'm astonished that none of the other people responding to your post, including the mods, seem to realise your post was a joke!

      I didn't think it was even all that subtle a joke so I'm at a loss to explain why no-one else noticed.

      --
      Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    10. Re:I want this machine headless! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As it stands now, I'd just be happy if they shoehorned the Radeon 9600 into the Mac Mini and shipped it with Tiger.

      -Mike

    11. Re:I want this machine headless! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joke or not, the spec is inconsistent.

      Apple designed their PPC G5 systems to use 2x multipliers. A 2 GHz PPC G5 system will use 1 GHz FSB. I just don't see Apple spending effort to offer less performance.

    12. Re:I want this machine headless! by SamSeaborn · · Score: 1
      Er... wasn't a joke. Sorry. :-)

      I want a headless iMac with those specs. The Mac Mini is too underpowered, and the PowerMac is too expensive (not to mention big, bulky, and not much of an asthetic improvement over my current Sony VAIO desktop machine).

      The 2Gig G5 iMac is perfect, but I don't want the built-in LCD. Sell it headless for about $1099 US and Apple has a best-seller on their hands.

      Sam

    13. Re:I want this machine headless! by xgamer04 · · Score: 1

      Make a better double-sized Mac Mini now!

      You want fries with that?

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
    14. Re:I want this machine headless! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want a commodity product, you're welcome to buy a system from Dell; they have a supply chain in place that makes plain boxes their forte. At a company like Apple where you're using a lot of custom parts, you have to wonder how difficult it is to maintain a large product portfolio. You may think that a cheap, headless G5 would be a best seller, but their current lines are performing very well. The mini is for switchers; it's cheap and one of its major benefits is that users can use their existing screens. The iMac is more expensive, but it forces users to use a decent 17" LCD instead of the shitty CRT they might have gotten with a Dell (and were too cheap to elect to upgrade). The marketing decision may be a matter of user experience; OS X thrives on screen real estate and you aren't going to get people into the OS X mindset if you don't make sure that they have suitable screens. If I didn't already have a 19" LCD when I got my mini, I don't think I would have realized the full benefit of the platform.

      If Apple ever prepares to woo the cheap geek market, we might see a machine like you describe, but at this time the machines are definitely geared towards affluent consumers, not cheap geeks. You can't get a lot of people around here to part with their 6 year old PC's here; these are generally the last people you want as customers.

    15. Re:I want this machine headless! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, why not just buy the Mac with a monitor? That might hurt your geek karma but hell, you might actually like it. Like I recently posted, if you want a machine that has exactly what you want, go to Dell; I bet you can find it. Apple is going after a different type of customer and saving themselves a tremendous amount of overhead by not having a million product lines.

    16. Re:I want this machine headless! by SamSeaborn · · Score: 1
      How about this, smart ass. I buy expensive electronics -- I have a Sony VAIO desktop and a 17" Sony LCD. I used to have an iBook and now I'm thinking I'd like to switch to Mac.

      I'd like to replace my P4 3GHz Sony wintel with a Mac. The Mac Mini is too underpowered, I don't like the PowerMac because it's big, bulky and expensive for its specs.

      The new 17" iMac is perfect, but I don't want to replace my 17" Sony LCD which is top notch.

      Apple DOES NOT MAKE A MAC FOR ME!!

      You're being a total dink, and that attitude will keep Apple at 5% market share for years to come.

      Sam

    17. Re:I want this machine headless! by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      someone fitted a mac mini inside a pc case and hooked up desktop drives which at least solves the issue of the general shittyness of laptop drives

      he did however have to make a custom adaptor to do it though (the adaptor plugged in to the hard drive connector on the riser and was then connected to a standard ide cable running to the hdd and cdrom fitted in the pc case).

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    18. Re:I want this machine headless! by iainl · · Score: 1

      Don't they sell those any more, then? I bought one for my Amiga 1200 way back, as they took 2.5" drives as well.

      All the 44-pin 2.5" drive connector needs is the standard 40 pins of a 3.5" IDE drive, and the remaining 4 are the same as on your basic molex connector. So it's fiddly, but not brain surgery.

      Ultimately, though, it completely negates the point of the Mini being Mini. If you want a full-size box, Apple would much rather sell you a rather expensive PowerMac. If you don't need the performance of a new one, you're much better off hitting the Bay for a second-hand one.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
    19. Re:I want this machine headless! by Johnny+Mozzarella · · Score: 1

      Is this what you are looking for?

    20. Re:I want this machine headless! by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      i've only ever seen adaptors for sale for putting 2.5 inch hard drives in PCs never ones for putting 3.5 inch hard drives in systems designed for 2.5 inch.

      not saying they don't exist but i would guess they are only availible through suppliers for retro computing etc rather than suppliers who aim at pc modding.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  30. Re:When does... by chucks86 · · Score: 1

    Just registered it today...

    --
    Help a poor college student. Send a couple cents via paypal to chucks86@gmail.com
  31. Re:My Problem With iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Broken record anyone?

  32. Re:Freshend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    When the so-called editors finally get to doing their job and edit the headline. Subsequent to that they moderate down the complaints about it.

  33. Re:Not interested, however... by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 1

    I play the odd game of WoW, Age of Empires, Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR on my 1.33GHz PB, a vastly inferior machine to the dual G5s and they play the game fine. Then again I like playing the games rather than watching some random fps counter tell me whether my experience is good or not.

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  34. Re:Not interested, however... by Skye16 · · Score: 1

    Err, my computer doesn't have any problems with it at all. I had to leave my antialiasing at 4x, but for the most part, it runs nice and smooth.

  35. Re:Not interested, however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    "One of my gaming machines?" Would you please stop posting these thinly disguised anti-Apple trolls? If you're the kind of person who has a set of gaming machines, then you are not an Apple customer. You are a hobbyist. You are a child playing with toys. You have no more use for a Mac than you would have for an AS/400. Doesn't mean they suck.

    Now stop trolling the Apple stories.

  36. Not bad... by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1, Informative

    ... The stuff that should have been built-in in the first edition (wifi,bluetooth) are now built-in, and the base memory isn't a joke.

    The video chipset is still a bit jokey, but this whips the Powermac refresh like the family pig.

    Still, I'm pretty sure I'm building a new box by hand this time 'round, I don't feel like waiting another year for Apple to get its PCIe act together...

  37. Re:My Problem With iMacs by calibanDNS · · Score: 1

    If you're looking to buy a Mac without a bundled monitor, then the iMac/eMac lines aren't for you. Look at the PowerMac or Mac mini lines instead and then plug one of those into your existing monitor. You said you've gone through 3 computers in the 6 years that you've had your monitor, so that's a new computer on average every 2 years. I imagine the Mac mini and low-end Power Mac would both last for at least two years (unless you're wanting to use these for gaming, but you say you don't care about the speed of the CPU, so that's probably not the case).

    For some people, the integrated monitory/computer is nice though. People buying their first computer, or a 2nd computer may not have a monitor around and/or may not want to drop a large sum on a high end LCD. The iMac is also a great space-saver making it fairly appropriate for dorm life.

  38. Re:My Problem With iMacs by MPHellwig · · Score: 1

    You could go for a Mac mini or if thats to less power go for the Power Mac. Don't really understand your complaint btw.

  39. Re:My Problem With iMacs by rokzy · · Score: 1

    you've answered your own question. buy a separate monitor then.

    the iMac is good for people who don't need to be on the cutting edge and want something simple with a small footprint. what advances in emailing, web browsing, word processing etc. do you foresee in the next 4 years that will make a 1.7GHz PPC not useful, especially given that I do all of my scientific research with a 1.2GHz PPC (bit of a cheat since I ssh to clusters but that's not going to change in the next 4 years either)?

  40. No correct language usage is not important by PartyBoy!911 · · Score: 1

    As there are loads of International users who do not speak english fluently and there are also differences between US english and UK english I do not see it as very important unless the point the comment is trying to make can be interpreted wrong.

    1. Re:No correct language usage is not important by spungo · · Score: 1

      In neither UK nor US English does the word 'Freshend' exist. The point of correct usage is not to humiliate those who fail to grasp it, but to maintain it as a means of communication - without which, understanding each other would be very difficult, wouldn't it?

    2. Re:No correct language usage is not important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly boy. People who don't speak American English correctly and perfectly aren't real people, and thus what they say is always suspect. Further, as they're not real, they don't feel pain, and that's why we get to bomb the brown people of the world. Now if only we could find a way to bomb the AOLers, we'd be set.

    3. Re:No correct language usage is not important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is simply incorrect, it is a word. For example, given a partially decomposed carrot, you could talk about the 'rottenend' or the 'freshend'.

    4. Re:No correct language usage is not important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the word "freshened" does exist, according to dictionary.com:

      freshen
      v. freshened, freshening, freshens
      v. intr.

      1. To become fresh, as in vigor or appearance: freshened up after the day's work.
      2. To become brisk; increase in strength. Used of the wind.
      3. To lose saltiness.
      4. To calve and therefore begin to produce milk. Used of a cow.

      However, I agree that it was an awkward word choice.

    5. Re:No correct language usage is not important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She/he never claimed that 'freshened' isn't a word, rather 'freshend' isn't a word.

  41. Upgraded to Radeon 9600? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Popular consumer level Mac updated to Radeon 9600 and the video card cannot be changed?

    As a PC gamer i wonder why did they put obsolete video card in their new pricey machine? What are the most popular Mac games currently, and how do they compare to PC versions?

    1. Re:Upgraded to Radeon 9600? by JaseOne · · Score: 1

      Do you really think PC Gamers make up the majority of people that purchase PC's? Do you see Apple trying to target PC gamers? Do you think they even care about PC gamers?

  42. Other way around, really by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    I have the opposite problem. My mac is ~6 yrs old, but my monitor is brand new. I'm glad I bought a PowerMac, or I'd have been stuck with a CRT.

    On the other hand, if I'd bought an iMac I'd probably have replaced it by now, and I'd have a faster computer with a better monitor, and the same overall expenditure over the last 6 years since powermacs are so expensive. So, it really does work out well to buy the iMac.

    Besides, if you don't care about CPU, why not just buy the Mac Mini?

  43. Advertisements by Ummagumma · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Well, goodbye slashdot, it was a good few years. Now that ads are appearing as front page stories, Im on to find my 'news for geeks' elsewhere.

    Adios.

    --
    "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Advertisements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

    2. Re:Advertisements by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      I hope you find what you are looking for elsewhere. I left MacSlash about a year ago (different username) after frustration with acaben (the admin there) basically endorsing piracy. The worst part about leaving was that after putting so much time into commenting where appropriate, giving hints, etc, when I left all people said was "don't let the door hit you on the way out" or "good riddance." It was basically a big F U to someone that was a part of the community and helped make Macslash what it was.

      We've never crossed paths, and I don't know how you may have contributed to /., but as a member of the community, well, sorry to see you go. Take care.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    3. Re:Advertisements by fakedupe · · Score: 1

      Peace out!

    4. Re:Advertisements by freeplatypus · · Score: 1

      Frankly speaking, even if it is advertisement, take a look at the comments count. Apparently this is news for readers of /., or at least good opportunity to make laugh/shout/insult/etc.

  44. Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by mslinux · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We've had several of these things go bad after 3 to 4 months of use. Apple claims there is no problem with them. Google for it and you'll find lots of unhappy iMac owners:

    http://helicon.macbay.de/iMac_problems/iMac.html

    http://www.macintouch.com/imacg5part07.html

    Reminds me of the defective G3 iBooks...

    http://www.apple.com/support/ibook/faq/

    Apple refused to admit a problem with those either until they were threatened with a class action lawsuit... then, magically, they admitted the defect and began repairing them... beware of anything from Apple that starts with an 'i'

    1. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iSue?

    2. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by Inigo+Montoya · · Score: 1

      My Titanium had the EXACT same problem, as well as many others I found by googling. The number of TiBook owners is much smaller than the iBook owners so we don't count. Apple wouldn't admit the problem also existed in the TiBooks and refused to fix it, I had to pay $600 for a new logic board.

    3. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Keep in mind that there are only so many parts in the iMac G5 - you can basically break it down to: SATA drives, PSU, Midplane, Inverter, Display (+ memory). Things that are separate parts in many machines but not the iMac G5: video card, speakers, bluetooth, antennae, modem, fan(s), cables, and sometimes even the processor(s) and ports.

      Considering that drive and LCD failures are unlikely to be heavily seen in any computer's first 6 months on the market, it's not surprising that most of the failures we hear about are the Midplane or PSU. PSU is an easy one - "won't power on/won't stay on." Inverter typically presents itself as a "no backlight" issue. That leaves a laundry list of problems that all reside on the midplane: Fans stop spinning, unit overheats. Fans spin too fast constantly, too loud. No AirPort signal. Bluetooth not recognized. Video scrambled. Ethernet port not working. Memory not recognized. Kernel panics on startup. Bad FireWire port. No sound. ALL of these require replacing the midplane.

      My point? Not all iMac midplane failures are equal, and unless they are all failing for the same reason at the same point, there is no larger issue. Apple simply chose to put "the whole computer" on the midplane, so yes it gets replaced more frequently than many other parts (there are hardly any other parts to replace!), however from a customer service standpoint it makes repairing your own computer a heck of a lot easier. There are really only so many parts to go bad in an iMac, and surprise, a few of them have. Also realize that this computer has been flying off the shelves since day 1, so there's going to be a larger number of reports than usual. Add to this people who were shipped a PSU to replace and really needed a midplane, or vice versa, but consider the problem a 'dual failure' because both parts ended up being replaced (I've seen this case a lot online). This was a failure on Apple's support end to accurately identify the problem, but nonetheless does not constitute a dual-failure epidemic. The iBook G3 logic board recall, on the other hand, represents a specific widespread failure that manifests itself in the exact same way every time.

      Sorry to go on a bit of a tirade, but I really feel that - like with the iPod 'battery issue' - the majority of iMac owners are happily enjoying their purchases and the fact that anyone with a sad story and no technical knowledge can post to a website really tends to have a run-away effect in the Mac community. It would be nice to see more people address these failures with some consideration for how the thing is built.

    4. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by compactable · · Score: 1
      Not all iMac midplane failures are equal

      ... however the volume of a single issue being seen is massive for a company with relatively good quality control. Other major issues also exist with the G5 - I'm only flagging this because the first one stung me after 5 months of use.

    5. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by LABob · · Score: 1

      Looks like the 'Mac Fanatics' are modding you down LOL. This went from a 4 to a 1 in under a minute. Keep drinking Steve's Koolaid kiddies ;) and keep buying their hardware.

    6. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by constantnormal · · Score: 1

      I wonder...

      can an "old" G5 iMac be upgraded to a "new" G5 iMac by simply replacing the midplane board?

      At least in so far as the video is concerned?

      If so, midplane failures might be more of a blessing than a curse -- provided one could persuade Apple to replace the failed midplane with a new model midplane ...

    7. Re:Midplane PSU & Inverter Defect in iMac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are often architectural changes over time within a single "revision" of an Apple product. I'm sure Apple pays particular attention to newly released products, but as you might imagine it takes a number of months to sample, analyze, revise, test and ship any change to a product or part.

      Take the iBook G3 debacle for example. I'm sure that at first Apple had no idea what was going on, but that they of course needed to replace these boards to get working computers back in customers' hands. A number of these replacement boards probably also failed before Apple identified the problem and fixed it in the part supply. But I imagine that nowadays if you send in an iBook G3, even though it comes back with the same specs, you're getting a different rev of the board that is issue-free.

      A certain degree of this is to be expected with any new product/architecture - no way to simulate how millions of anything will act in the wild except to do your best and get it out. Hopefully when problems crop up a company is good about taking care of it instead of blaming it on the software you are running or sending you to the part vendor rather than taking care of it directly. To that end, I've always been happy with Apple's service.

  45. Re:BULLSHIT by otis+wildflower · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    someone answer me the question, what exactly do you BUY for $1300 thats actually worth it?? what can you POSSIBLY do that you CANNOT do on a regular PC for $1300 ??

    iPhoto, GarageBand, Keynote, iMovie, iDVD for starters...

    But, because Apple is so retarded regarding video adapters (why stay with ATI if you're not ready to go to PCIe, dumbass Steve? NVidia is the only corp building decent AGP stuff anymore, sub in 6600GT/6800/6800GT for all that outdated ATI garbage for fucks sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), I am probably doing a handbuild for my next system. I can handbuild a hawt 2x6600gt GV-3D1 system _with_ 16ms 20.1" 1600x1200 LCD for less than just a 2.7ghz Powermac with crap video...

  46. Teeth by mushupork · · Score: 1

    Just wondering out loud...does this release deliberately coincide with the release of the long-awaited NIN album With Teeth? Myself, I was up at 5:30 this morning downloading and burning it off iTunes.

    Mr. Reznor did release The Hand That Feeds Garage Band tracks, a first, and a nice Apple marketing ploy to boot. Again, just wondering...

    Also, this morning I realized that the only damn reason to keep Windows now that I've discovered Ubuntu is iTunes.

    --
    Currently bidding on sig
    1. Re:Teeth by NtroP · · Score: 1
      Also, this morning I realized that the only damn reason to keep Windows now that I've discovered Ubuntu is iTunes.
      I've tried Ubuntu and liked it. It's very polished. I still chose Xandros though for several reasons, which I won't get into here, but one of them is that iTunes runs great on the "Pro" version.

      Xandros (and to a lesser extent Ubuntu) is a Linux distro that I'd have no qualms at all about giving to my mother to install on her (remaining) Windows PC.

      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
    2. Re:Teeth by trans_err · · Score: 1

      Other then actual iTMS support-- Amarok has completely replaced any need or want to run iTunes in or next to Linux-- I'd even compile it in for my mac.

    3. Re:Teeth by Formula420 · · Score: 0

      AmaroK rules, and be sure to sign up for an Audioscrobbler account, it rules too, you can add Formula420 to your friends list to get some good music going. THC

    4. Re:Teeth by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      if you're up to spending ~40 bucks codeweavers crossover office supports itms very very well, works quite nicely on my debian box.

      If you're not willing to spend but want to get rid of windows, a comnination of rhythmbox/juk for playback, gtkpod for feeding your ipod, and pymusique for buying from itms store might be what you're looking for.

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    5. Re:Teeth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tip: you can run Windows iTunes on Linux, using Wine.

  47. buy a power mac and shut your yappin' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    What's wrong with you? if you want a component system buy a component system. If you want an all in one buy one of those. this is not hard to figure out.

    as for mac monitors they tend to be the finest quality you can get so there's no issue about compromise there. And as for matching the longevity of the CPU and monitor, well mac CPUs historically have much longer service lifes than winboxes so they are infact pretty well matched.

    if your worried about a monitor death clippling the CPU then you have two solutions. First think for a second, what would you do if the monitor blew out on your component system? well you'd buy a new one to replace the old one and you'd still have two components right? Well just buy a new monitor and plug it into the mac, since it mirrors the display your all fixed up. Only change is you now have a two component system rather than an all in one. The other solution is to buy an applecare policy for three worry free years, then sell it. Since macs retain there retail value after three years you'll get a lot of money for the sale, and shipping that all-in-one is cheaper to boot. Your winbox wont be worth poop for re-sale in 3 years.

  48. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

    have you explicitly opened the ichat required ports on your router?

    also, the video chats were all ic3 - ic3

    the only performance hits I have heard of were ic3 - ic2.1

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  49. This is not news by zorander · · Score: 2, Interesting

    News is "Apple releases G5 Powerbook" or "Apple releases new operating system" not "Apple bumps the processor speed and makes a few optional features standard equipment". I don't get it.

    Yes I care. I'm an apple user and my powerbook is the item I own that gets the most use each day, but apple doing a routine feature bump (hint: every product line gets one every nine months) is the stuff of thinksecret and macrumours, not slashdot.

    Is this really 1/12 of the interesting news for the day? Is there no other article of value that could have been posted? Come on.

    1. Re:This is not news by Gorbag · · Score: 1

      On slashdot, an Apple speed bump is equivalent to a major new machine from a Dell or HP.

      --
      -- I speak only for myself
    2. Re:This is not news by mihalis · · Score: 1

      It was useful news to me. The iMac may have just crossed the threshhold for me into "good enough compromise since I can't really afford a powermac plus screen"

    3. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Agreed. More signs of the deterioration of slashdot. Apparently the editors can't even bother to troll the obvious places for stories, such as the Tech section at Yahoo News.

      Or they would have noticed more interesting Apple-related stories to post today, such as Tiger Bugs Break Networking Software

    4. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is a G5 powerbook (read processor bump) or a new OS (making optional features standard) any more news worthy than this?

    5. Re:This is not news by relaxed · · Score: 0

      Remember that most Slashdot editors would suck Steve Job's schlong if given the chance.

    6. Re:This is not news by zorander · · Score: 1

      G4-G5 is an architecture change, if nothing else, from 32 to 64 bit. It's much more than a processor bump of 166Mhz or whatever they tacked on this time around. It means a new series of powerbooks based on different hardware. This doesn't happen on a fixed cycle and hasn't happened for a long time. Besides that, a lot more people are waiting for the powerbooks to hit G5 than for a routine, minor bump in processor speed.

      I'm going to assume that your assertion that tiger 'made optional features standard' is a weak attempt at trolling. There was no 'optional' version of spotlight, CoreImage, Safari RSS, CoreData, or Dashboard (arguable). Apple only updates the OS every 12-18 months (whereas they bump a product line by minor amounts much more often).

      Is longhorn worth a slashdot article? After this long, I hope so. Likewise, there are new features there and it is a major release.

    7. Re:This is not news by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      > not "Apple bumps the processor speed and makes a
      > few optional features standard equipment". I
      > don't get it.

      Yea, I just don't get it either. It is just a freaking refresh, and they already carried an Apple refreshes line story about a week ago. Are these paid placement pieces or has Taco & co become so enamoured with their powerbooks they have crossed the line to Apple zealot?

      It gets even worse. They didn't even file this story in the Apple catagory where the 90% of us who don't own a Mac or give a rat's rear about what would be a minor story on a MAC SPECIFIC SITE wouldn't have to see it. I smell spamvertizements.

      What next, similar stories when Dell refreshes their crappy consumer models? Or perhaps only when they bump the speed on the slightly higher quality Optiplexes? If it is clearly marked as an advertisement I might could tolerate it, but this article blows whether it is a paid for ad or just Apple fanboys gone wild because we don't know which it is.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    8. Re:This is not news by dangitman · · Score: 1
      On slashdot, an Apple speed bump is equivalent to a major new machine from a Dell or HP.

      Since when did Dell or HP ever release "major new machines"? Their whole business model is incremental.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  50. Re:My Problem With iMacs by bunratty · · Score: 1

    Mac Mini has too little power and Power Mac is too expensive. I'd like to see a Mac Mini G5 line that has the same specs as the iMac line except without the built-in monitor. Along with a 17" Cinema Display, that would hit the sweet spot for me.

    --
    What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
  51. Price: $1,000 by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

    You didn't list the price. How does ~$1,000 sound?

  52. Re:BULLSHIT by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    someone answer me the question, what exactly do you BUY for $1300 thats actually worth it?? what can you POSSIBLY do that you CANNOT do on a regular PC for $1300 ?? NOTHING.. NOT A FUCKING THING AND YOU KNOW IT!!!

    I paid $2400 for a Powerbook a year ago, and you know what I got that I can't get on any PC?

    I enjoy using a computer again. A bargain.

    i'm tired of fucking dumb ass macs.. i dont care how good they are, i'm not paying $1300 for a Mac that isn't even CLOSE to their higher end models..

    You probably think that the 1000 pc. socket set at Walmart is fantastic. I mean, look how many sockets you get!

    Quality over quantity, sweet teats.

  53. MOD up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    parent tells it like it is.

  54. Re:My Problem With iMacs by sootman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "My problem with iMacs is the following: there is no separation between the monitor and the computer."

    Then don't buy one.

    "...I highly doubt that an iMac will be useful after 4 years."

    Depends on who you are and what you do. I did a website for a guy when the 266 MHz iMacs were brand new. (1999, 2000?) He bought one at the time and still uses it to this day. As long as his email works and he can visit his site and a few others, he's happy.

    Besides, it'll *always* work as a kick-ass DVD player. Add an eyeTV and it's a PVR. I mean, it's not like you have to throw it away once you get a new machine.

    "Ultimately, I do not care about the speed of my CPU, because sitting in front of a computer is the last fucking thing I want to do after working 60 hour weeks."

    Then why are you buying computers at all?

    "With iMacs, you seem to pay for both: a computer and a screen."

    Well duh. But compare the price to a base PowerMac and it's suddenly pretty impressive. Other than expandability and small differences in bus speed, max RAM, etc., the iMac has it all over the base PowerMac.

    "Why bother? You can pick up a nice 20" LCD from Apple for $800 ($700 if you can get educational discount) and that is all I want."

    Then buy it. Sorry, but your 'rant' is really lame--"Mack trucks are stupid. I'll never need to haul that much. I'm buying a Prius instead."

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  55. Re:BULLSHIT by comet69 · · Score: 0

    HELLO!! ITS CALLED THE ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE!!!

    especially now that they bought the Cooledit software..

    just about everything you listed is a mere alternative for the amazing products of adobe, which i'm sure you are aware of, run on both the PC & Mac platform..

    sorry to be a dick.. i do agree with you about the video card.. if they are going to charge that much, they might as well give you something bad ass...

    --
    - Hi I'm Linus Torvalds and I pronounce Linux, Lih-nix..
  56. *gasp* If I mod down a flamebait, I'll be LABELED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nt

  57. Re:Not interested, however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Serioulsy dude, buying a computer to play games? Don't you have a fucking life?

  58. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    someone answer me the question, what exactly do you BUY for $1300 thats actually worth it??

    A secure, mainstream operating system that kicks the shit out of Windows, and the hardware on which to run it.

    what can you POSSIBLY do that you CANNOT do on a regular PC for $1300 ??

    Go to any site on the net without fear of the machine getting owned-- WITHOUT running anti-malware and antivirus apps.

    Buy a peripheral, plug it in, and have it just work-- WITHOUT dicking around with any stupid configuration wizards.

    Delete the bundled web browser completely (removing all traces of it from the system), and use the one that I prefer to use instead.

  59. don't forget the link tracking on your link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    oh yeah i see you didn't forget that

    1. Re:don't forget the link tracking on your link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, I saw that, but wanted to get the information up rather then fuck with the link- it worked well enough. I did test it in preview to make sure it wasn't total crap.

  60. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    use the disk doctor "repair permissions" function

    Disk Doctor, yes. Go out and buy Norton so it can screw up your drive the first time you run it.

    Or you can run "repair permissions" in Disk Utility. There's a fine distinction between the programs, but it does exist.

  61. Re:Not interested, however... by unknown_goth · · Score: 1

    i can run WoW (tier 0 settings w/ a few things bumped up) on my 1ghz G4 w/ 512MB ram & 32MB video card. i manage to run bitTorrent in the background while playing and only have problems (and it's bad) in Ironforge, but who doesn't there. my connection speed is my only problem which varies from 22kbps on the farm, which is sad . . . then while i'm in class at college playing on a 8mbps it's goes smooth.

    --
    Force of Will = Glue 'nuff said.
  62. Montreal? by Montreal!!hahahahaha · · Score: 0, Funny

    hahahahaha

    Mods: it's a joke. Montreal is a city in Canada. Sad that I had to explain that to (hopefully) avoid being modded "Flamebait".

    --
    My child, it is a pleasure to lend you some of my wisdom
  63. jezzball? by Tharkban · · Score: 1
    --
    Tharkban (It is a signature after all)
  64. Re:Not interested, however... by Slashcrap · · Score: 1

    you must be new here, otherwise you'd know Doom 3 is a running joke since it doesn't run well on ANY computer.

    Yes, that's right. It's not a case of Macs being bad for games, it's a case of John Carmack being a shitty programmer.

    Seriously, I've seen some truly hilarious must-defend-chosen-platform-at-all-costs shit from Mac zealots over the years, but you take the fucking biscuit.

    PS. It runs just fine on my AthlonXP 2500 with it's shitty GeForce 5700. Maybe your Mac isn't as fast as Apple led you to believe?

  65. Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now if only my relatives would listen when I tell them to buy a Mac, instead of insisiting on buying a PC and getting an unusable spyware ridden box in 2 months they want help with because they of course, use Internet Explorer and open BirthdayCard.vbs.exe the Outlook Express attachment.

  66. You forgot the greatest Mac game ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Photoshop :-)

  67. Must find a way... by DoctorPepper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    To break existing 800 MHz iMacs! Those damn things just keep running!!! How is a self-respecting hardware junkie supposed to talk his wife into letting him purchase the latest and greatest from Apple, when they just keep working :-(

    We have two matching 17" LCD, 800 MHz iMacs, purchased in November, 2002. They have run 24x7 since we purchased them, with the exception of the power outages caused by the hurricanes in September of 2004.

    --

    No matter where you go... there you are.
    1. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read your post again. You already found a way:

      "... caused by the hurricanes in September of 2004."

      You just need to take advantage of them, that's all.

    2. Re:Must find a way... by DoctorPepper · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, in order to do that, we would have to have another round of them this year. I think I'd rather keep the older technology and stay hurricane-free! ;-)

      --

      No matter where you go... there you are.
    3. Re:Must find a way... by azpcox · · Score: 1

      Ditto on that. We have a Snow (500 MHz G3) and an 800 MHz Flat Panel (15") and they've just sat together running without hitches for years. Haven't loaded Tiget on them yet.

      Come to think of it, having two Macs on the desk makes them happier since they have a friend to talk to....

      --
      What exactly do you mean by "Don't touch this button?"
    4. Re:Must find a way... by peebeejay · · Score: 2, Funny

      While I personally would never recommend it, a straightened paper clip stuck into every available hole and wiggled usually does the trick. I used to sell them for $19.95 at my old office in a package that said "Computer Upgrade Kit." Sales were low - never got the &*^%$ patent on it!

    5. Re:Must find a way... by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1
      Well, if there was any way to get her interested in Doom3 :-)

      I have an 800Mhz model on my desk here at work. Neat computer, but it's getting long in the tooth. It's too bad that it's crippled by the lack of L3 cache; it would have made a huge difference. The things are a bitch to take apart and the new iMacs are so easy to get into, but it still would have been cool if Apple could've put a G5 inside and kept the design around.

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    6. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's not the worst of it! Apple keeps releasing new versions of Mac OS that make old Macs run *faster*.

      The best excuse I can come up with for buying a new Mac is the hard disk space -- the performance of an old Mac is good enough these days for virtually everything I do.

    7. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the same machine. Except that mine no longer works. Unfortunately the heat got the better of my monitor and meltdown was achieved only months after my extended warranty expired. I wish they had opted for a large, slow fan inside instead of relying on convection. It surely wouldn't have been louder than the harddrive.

    8. Re:Must find a way... by JasontheMason · · Score: 1

      I don't know how to convince your wife, but I'll trade you one for my parents Bondi Blue iMac that just lost it's analog board two weeks ago...

      --
      "Ad infinitem et ultra!" - Buzz Lightyear
    9. Re:Must find a way... by JasontheMason · · Score: 1
      No! Wait! I meant to say I'd trade for an iMac - not your wife.

      Darned submit button.

      --
      "Ad infinitem et ultra!" - Buzz Lightyear
    10. Re:Must find a way... by BeerCat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ahem, I think this may help...

      ...but if your wife asks, you could always say that you thought it was the cable you needed for gigabit Ethernet.

      Or just get a good pair of running shoes.

      --
      "She's furniture with a pulse"
    11. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell them! How much do you want for one? Will you ship it? What version of Mac OS X?

      rosenkks at netscape dot net

    12. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still have a functioning Macintosh IIsi. Seriously. Which I use occasionally because there's one thing this box can do like no other.

      But I have still found excuses to upgrade several times since then.. ;) The web being one of them.

    13. Re:Must find a way... by alms · · Score: 1

      Quote I want to make the decision about the Macintosh purchase before or at the same time as the decision about your trip to France to visit your sister unquote.

      Now it's a little embarrassing that at this point in my life I would rather get a new iMac than spend a week in spring in the south of France. But there are some extenuating circumstances.

      And in any case, it was effective.

    14. Re:Must find a way... by dangitman · · Score: 1
      While I personally would never recommend it, a straightened paper clip stuck into every available hole and wiggled usually does the trick.

      Ow! That just hurts my ass! Oh ... you meant the holes on the computer.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    15. Re:Must find a way... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, it's disappointing. All this talk of G4 iMacs makes me laugh. I have a 350 MHz GEE THREE iMac (indigo) that I've had for FIVE YEARS. It just keeps going. No, it's not a screamer, but it runs Tiger great (upgraded with external DVD) and handles all my core tasks like writing and using Safari for reasearch perfectly.

      It's so annoying. I want a new Mac, but the one I have still does everything!

  68. Re:Not interested, however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude it runs smoth as silk on my power-mac g4(1ghz) with a radeon 9600pro (mac edition) ... You really dont need duel g5s and a radeopn 6800 ULTRA to play the game. Unless you intend to do it on a 30" apple display.

    That said , yes it does ahve a standard AGP port , no you cant jsut slot in a card without doing some bios mods

  69. Proof Reading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would it kill you to proof read your summary befor posting? GEEZ the T and S keys aren't even next to eachother...

    1. Re:Proof Reading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Pot, Kettle, Black. Proofread is one word. Before not befor. Each other is two words.

      Enough with the fucking spelling nazi bullshit from morons. At least present a coherent argument.

    2. Re:Proof Reading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GEEZ the T and S keys aren't even next to eachother...

      They are on my QWERTSY keyboard.

  70. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My computer cost more than that, and it was PC made mostly of Newegg components... of course, it's a pretty damn good computer, if I do say so myself. Still, one could see where some people would trade raw power for the MacOS.

  71. Re:My Problem With iMacs by $criptah · · Score: 0, Troll

    All this cute and dandy. I guess my biggest mistake was forgetting to metion that I have a Mac already. Otherwise, it looks like every retard with "I Love Apple" tattoed on the brain is trynig to fuck me in the ass.

    What I wanted to say was: iMac is not such a great deal as you, fuckers, play it to be. If a pixel dies on your damn LCD, then you have a fuckedup monitor and a fucked up computer that you cannot separate. I bought my latest computer, PowerMac, 2 years ago. It was a sweet deal, considering the fact that I had a monitor already.

  72. Yes, you are a waste of space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you proud of being a narrowminded dumbass?

  73. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by Brackney · · Score: 1

    My bad, I meant Disk Utility.

  74. Re:My Problem With iMacs by Eccles · · Score: 1

    The concern is "gaps" in the line. The Mac Mini is a nice little machine, but if I want a little more power (a G5 or video card), I have to spend a lot more money for an all-in-one machine or even an absolutely stripped PowerMac.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  75. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by Brackney · · Score: 1

    The chats in question were ic3-ic3. Oddly enough, ic3-ic2.1 framerates were at 30, then dropped to 15 once the ic2.1 person upgraded to ic3.

    Ports are open.

  76. Who mods this shit informative? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All it informs me about is that "peetoose" is a pig ignorant loser living in his parent's crawlspace, and cannot comprehend anything beyond his own foreskin. He's just another living atrocity that views the word as WhatILike=Good and EverythingElse=Stooopid.

    Are mod points only given to the trolls these days so they can mod up other trolls?

  77. Re:Not interested, however... by rokzy · · Score: 1

    I haven't tried running it on my mac. it runs crap on my PC. and on every PC that doesn't have a graphics card that cost at least 1/3 the price of my complete iBook.

    you're the one full of BS. I said people joke about Doom 3 because it is well known for playing badly. you're the one turning it into zealotry.

    there is no biscuit. stop inventing the biscuit so you can accuse other people of taking it and feel good about yourself accusing them. it's not big and it's not clever.

    I said people joke about Doom 3. they do. I was right, you are wrong. go fuck yourself.

  78. New G5 Accessories? by Cursive23 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Do the new models ship with turtle-shell rimmed glasses and pompous hipster attitude? The other models only came with mildly revolutionary bumper stickers so my level of Mac-induced techno-pretense is at a minimal level. =(

  79. Now Update The Mini! by ThatDamnMurphyGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now Apple needs to do something about the Mini. 256MB of ram is an insult, especially if they start shipping them with Tiger in the near future. It wouldn't suck to update the video to the 9600 too so CoreImage can be better utilized. Go ahead and leave the drives smaller and the CPU 2.0, but at least take care of the memory issue.

    A "sub $500" mac looses it's luster real quick when you have to stuff memory on top of it just to get decent performance. When they almost never leave stock 1.25/Gh/40Gb models at 256MB in the Apple stores, Best Buy, and Comp that says something about the performance.

    1. Re:Now Update The Mini! by ThatDamnMurphyGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, it looks like they just changed the Mini page. It now says OSX 10.4 Tiger is now included:

      What's included - Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger
      The Mac mini comes with Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger, Apple's powerful yet easy-to-use operating system that's as stable as only a UNIX-based system can be. Today thousands of software applications and peripherals take full advantage of its power and versatility.

    2. Re:Now Update The Mini! by aziraphale · · Score: 1

      Yup - bought my Mac Mini in the brand new Birmingham (UK) Apple Store on Friday night, within a couple of hours of Tiger shipping. In the box, a 'drop-in' Tiger upgrade DVD, with which I upgraded the mini as soon as it had finished booting and acquired its first ethernet address.

      And Tiger runs fine on the Mini, albeit without _all_ the core Image bells and whistles. Still the cheapest way for me to upgrade the CPU, graphics, memory, hard disk and optical drive of my old Sawtooth G4 to something more inkeeping with the media-centric uses I'm now putting my mac...

    3. Re:Now Update The Mini! by ThatDamnMurphyGuy · · Score: 1

      Which Mini model did you get? And did you stick with the stock 256MB, or did you add more ram at the store?

    4. Re:Now Update The Mini! by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 1

      the point of a sub $500 mac is that it's not a speed demon. And Mac OS X runs just fine with 256 (it's similar to XP, 256 is good for your average stuff, 512 and up is optimal).

      My original powerbook was 128MB with OS X 10.1 and it was perfectly fine. Sure I went up to 768 because I found a good deal on RAM but thats because I was developing and wanted certain things to pick up. If you're insulted because a value box doesn't come with the benefits of the higher end models, well, c'est la vie (or however you spell it). The point of a mac mini is for people like my parents who only run Safai, Mail, and iTunes. You want to run the OS with the full benefits? Go up to an iMac or something.

      XP can take advantage of 3d cards and advanced graphics units... do you complain that eMachines have crappy graphics adaptors so you can't run XP at full blast with all the bells and whistles? Didn't think so.

      --
      Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
    5. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mac mini is meant to be cheap, not set any speed records.

      And they seem to be selling just fine, despite your insistence that Apple "needs to do something".

      The limiting factor of the average person using a PC today is the human and the interface. The Mac mini excels at having a great interface. Adding more RAM won't let my mom check her email any faster. But it would make the mini more expensive (their margins on this one are super-thin), which means my mom might not have bought it in the first place.

      Sure, if they could make a Mac mini with quad G5's for $100, that would be sweet. But they can't, and not everybody wants to run Doom3 and Final Cut Pro all day on their Macs anyway.

      They never leave stock 256MB models in stores because they probably don't sell terribly well. But if people didn't see "Starting at $499" on the sticker, would they even consider buying a Mac in the first place?

    6. Re:Now Update The Mini! by yeremein · · Score: 1

      This page still says it comes with Panther. Where are you looking?

      I'd consider a Mini if Apple would include gigabit Ethernet and at least 64MB of video memory (preferably 128MB)...

    7. Re:Now Update The Mini! by ThatDamnMurphyGuy · · Score: 1

      I was looking at the "Buy Now" page here...What's Included column in the middle of the page....

    8. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Apotsy · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's on the way -- Apple publicly promised all machines would ship with 512MB minimum standard starting in Q3 of this year. I can't find a link, but I know it was annouced a while back, and the general reaction was basically "it's about time!"

    9. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now Apple needs to do something about the Mini.

      They can hardly keep up with demand as it is. Maybe they need to do something for you to buy one, but there is no "memory issue".

    10. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This page still says it comes with Panther. Where are you looking?

      The current stock ships with Tiger on a DVD, so technically, it does come with Panther -- you have to install Tiger yourself (though it's included). It will take a few weeks for pre-installed systems to hit the shelves. You wouldn't really expect Apple to keep shipping Panther-only, would you?

      I'd consider a Mini if Apple would include gigabit Ethernet and at least 64MB of video memory (preferably 128MB)...

      Why on earth do you need GigE on a $500 home system? The disk couldn't even begin to keep up. It's a pro feature -- maybe you own a GigE switch or something, but if you think you "need" it, you're nuts.

      The VRAM issue is pretty dumb, too. The GPU itself is pretty low end -- why strap 128MB on a card that doesn't perform like other 128MB cards? And if you're concerned with 2D -- you shouldn't be. 32MB is plenty for anything you can do on a 1.25GHz G4 -- more would just be a waste.

      If you're thinking about buying one, just buy it. It won't make your dick smaller to buy a Mac.

    11. Re:Now Update The Mini! by xgamer04 · · Score: 1

      Well, the target market for minis is not us, the power users. They're more for the average technophobe and perhaps grandma. These people usually are doing one thing at a time, for example e-mail or web browsing, and MAYBE listening to some music.

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
    12. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if it had gigabit ethernet and 128MB of video memory, I bet you'd then complain that it didn't have a 7200rpm disk, and then maybe that it only had one firewire port. I have to agree with the other poster who suggested that you just buy one if you want one. If you want a special computer you can spend a couple million bucks to have it made for yourself, or you can just buy something off the shelf like everyone else. Apple doesn't sell what you want? Sorry, you're stuck with XP or (gag) Linux.

    13. Re:Now Update The Mini! by jacobito · · Score: 1
      32MB [of VRAM] is plenty for anything you can do on a 1.25GHz G4 -- more would just be a waste.

      I'm not sure if the conventional wisdom about VRAM -- that it's only used as a dumb framebuffer and so the amount you need is a strict function of the screen resolution and color depth that you use -- is necessarily true anymore. The impression I got from reading the Tiger review on Ars Technica is that Tiger basically uses the GPU for everything it possibly can in order to avoid system bus bottlenecks, and thus it actually helps to have more VRAM.

      However, this isn't really an area in which I can speak comfortably or with any sort of authority, so I might be dead wrong, and please correct me if so.

    14. Re:Now Update The Mini! by jacobito · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely correct, and this makes sense from Apple's perspective; their offerings cover the gamut from low-end (Mac mini) to midrange (iMac) to high-end (Power Mac), and that's that. When looking at Apple's lineup, an average consumer would probably find it simple to pick a model to suit their needs and their budget. Contrast this with Dell's overabundance of choices and rather opaque model names.

      It's a shame, though, because my needs don't quite fit Apple's schema. I'd like a desktop Mac to use as my primary machine, but it needs to share a monitor with my PC, it ought to be relatively small, and it needs to cost well under $2,000. None of Apple's three choices quite works. The Mac mini is unsatisfactory because it's a little too underpowered; I have an Apple laptop already, and if I buy an Apple desktop, I'd want it to be a noticeably better performer. The Power Mac is both too expensive and too big -- it's ridiculously big. The iMac, meanwhile, is perfect from a price/performance perspective, but I don't need the display. So what I'd like is either a more powerful Mac mini (say, with a low-end G5 CPU and a decent hard drive) or a headless iMac.

      I'm hoping that in a year's time, the Mac mini will be sufficiently powerful to be a compelling purchase.

    15. Re:Now Update The Mini! by xgamer04 · · Score: 1

      It's a shame, though, because my needs don't quite fit Apple's schema.

      You know, it just ocurred to me: Apple is like the Henry Ford of computing. They made a product better than most things at the time, and you can have them any way you want them, as long as it fits in their demographic-marketing plan.

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
    16. Re:Now Update The Mini! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are basically dead wrong.

      There are many optimizations in Tiger related to graphics, but most of them require a GPU that supports pixel shaders. How much VRAM you have isn't going to be a factor. And frankly, even these improvements are so marginal as to be hardly worth talking about. There's nothing that you're going to want to do on a mini that you'll be unable to do because you lack such-and-such graphics card.

    17. Re:Now Update The Mini! by aziraphale · · Score: 1

      they don't stock many models in the store - just the base model, and a configuration called 'Mac Mini Ultimate', which has the 1.42GHz G4, 80G HD, 512M RAM, DVD Combo drive, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth. Basically, all the options except the 1G RAM upgrade.

      I got the Ultimate, of course.

    18. Re:Now Update The Mini! by jacobito · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? You make no indication of having read the article that I linked from Ars Technica, which more or less states in its discussion of Quartz 2D Extreme that Tiger will use all of the VRAM that you throw at it. FWIW, today's post about ATI's 512MB video card discusses this topic as well. See, for example, this and this.

  80. So skip the article, and stop fucking whining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enoguh with you "why was this posted" dumbasses, already! If the headline doesn't interest you, move on. No one on the planet gives a flying rat's fuck if you think the article is somehow unworthy the wonderful glory that is you. Get over yourself. You are nothing.

    1. Re:So skip the article, and stop fucking whining by zorander · · Score: 1

      Is wanting to improve the quality of a forum I frequent by giving feedback merely an expression of my "wonderful glory"? I don't think so. I gave several objective reasons as to why it is not news (i.e. the updates are routine and minor). It's a waste of space.

      I should know better than to respond to AC's...

  81. max. ram size? by Lima1 · · Score: 1

    is the max. ram size still 2 gigs? i like these imacs, but this is not enough for a lot of bioinformatic tools i have to use :( (hm, or better for the bad tools i write ;) )

    1. Re:max. ram size? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:max. ram size? by Mistah+Blue · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to bang on you or anything... but if you need more RAM than 2GB the iMac is not the machine for you. The PowerMac is the machine. The i line is a consumer class machine and is equipped accordingly. That is why I got a PowerBook instead of an iBook. I wanted the GigE, 2GB RAM, and 128MB VRAM.

    3. Re:max. ram size? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      If you need more than 2 GB of RAM, you're probably not in the target market for the iMac. You're probably getting close to the target market for the Xserve cluster nodes, actually.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  82. Re:BULLSHIT by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    Do your research.. look up the parts.. give yourself a $1300 budget.. you'd be surprised.. shit, pricewatch.com could give you a hell of a deal with some pretty damn good parts.. If you want to buy on price alone, then more power to you. I'll buy the stuff that doesn't need constant maintenance, lasts longer, and holds it's resale value.

    Why would you bother trying to talk someone out of something they like? I don't need 'saving'. Are you upset that you can't afford one? Trying to reconcile your decision?

    Try it. You'll like it. You know you will. It's just like crack. Oh so delicious crack.

  83. Maybe they will upgrade the capacitors? by paperclip2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is a common problem:
    http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid= 665&pid=25 29
    I don't think they were using "quality" capictors.

    I also have an entire series of imacs where I work that almost every one has had a hard disk failure. Granted they are 5 years old, purchased in 2000 and are only 400mhz. But started failing one by one after we purchased them, 1 or 2 every month until almost all 60 had hard drives replaced.

    Both Xserves I had purchased has had bad slot loading cdrom drives that I had Apple replace. I tried the firmware update that supposidly fixes the problem, but the drives still did not work.
    Powerbooks with the same type cdrom seemed to be having similar problems. Ended up sending the drives in to be replaced.

    We have had several other Macintosh Computers that could not keep time even after firmware resets and battery replacements.

    I have had lots of bad memory, capicitors, and power supply failures -- much higher than all other computers combined (PCs, PPC IBM Servers). Failure has increased with newer models.

    Apple used to produce quality computers back in the early 90's that would last for years. Now they are on par with emachines or packard bell.

    We purchase many computers and it is not uncommon to see entire series of Macintosh Computers to have to same failure again and again. That does not mean a consumer can see this because he or she may have the "lucky" computer that is not the lemon.

    APPLE, PLEASE GET BACK TO QUALITY!

    1. Re:Maybe they will upgrade the capacitors? by fork420 · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the off chance that you weren't trolling.....

      I have a bondi blue iMac from 1996, a lime iMac from 1999 or so, a PowerMac G4 from 2000, Xserve G4 version1 (with tray loading CD), and Xserve G4 version 2. Hell, I have a NeXTStation Turbo Color from 1991.

      My friends and relatives have iMacs from 1999, 2002, 2004, 2005 iBooks from 2001, 2004, 2005, and powerbooks from 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005.

      My current computer is a Powermac G5 purchased in 2003, among the first batch shipped. The internal DVD drive has started being a little flaky, but I think it just needs to be cleaned with compressed air.

      The point is, they all work fine. My experience with all apple hardware has been exactly the opposite of what you describe.

      <sarcasm>
      Maybe I'm just lucky.
      </sarcasm>

    2. Re:Maybe they will upgrade the capacitors? by bpbond · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The plural of "anecdote" is not "data," as they say.

      The problem with generalizing from your woes--as much as I'm sure they've sucked--is that Apple consistently is very highly ranked in customer satisfaction surveys (though I don't have a link for this). Unless you have some data to back up your anecdote, I'm going to stick with my personal experience: Apple makes really good machines, typically much higher quality than Dell et al., and supports them well.

      --
      "Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible" -Jacob Bronowski
    3. Re:Maybe they will upgrade the capacitors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you've had some bad luck buddy.

      Here at work we have 15 eMacs, five iMac G4's, one iMac G5, three Power Mac G4's, five original iMacs, and two xServers.

      When we first got one Xserve it had some problems, 24 hours after calling Apple a contracted guy came in and replaced both RAM DIMMs and gave us new OS install media (all sans charge). Since then it has been problem-free. And on Friday our OS X 10.4 Server CDs showed up in the mail, that was a fun surprise.

      Sorry about your ttroubles though :\

    4. Re:Maybe they will upgrade the capacitors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a common problem:

      I don't think you understand what the word "common" means.

      Even if you and a few dozen other people experience these problems -- the vast majority do not. There are millions of Macs out there, with hundreds of thousands shipped each year. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't amount to any statistically significant amount -- Apple's hardware failure rate is no higher than any PC manufacturer.

      Five minutes on Google will find experiences just like yours with ANY company's product. I've had awful, awful, experiences with Dell systems -- but I don't go around claiming that Dell needs to "get back to quality".

  84. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

    strange... I wonder if it has something to do with QT.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  85. Firewire 800? by Evangelion · · Score: 1


    Does this use Firewire 800 or just 400?

    No indication on their site anywhere that I can see.

    1. Re:Firewire 800? by hadleyhope · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html Looks like it is still 400

  86. Just accept that you are a troglodyte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't understand the attraction of the Macs, because you are a human turd. It's really quite simple, as others have responded, but you simply are too stupid to understand anything outside your own extremely limited experience. You are utterly useless. Congrats. You have entered the class of the unwashed masses.

  87. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by sickofthisshit · · Score: 3, Funny

    Hey, how's the Tiger upgrade work out on your 3.6 GHz machine? Snappier? 64-bit support working for you?

  88. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Well for starters you can't run iThis, iThat..."
    Well let's see /you/ run WinTunes, WinDvd, or WinPlayer...

  89. Re:Not interested, however... by bdsd76 · · Score: 1
    apple's top of the line flagship tower can't play doom 3
    bullshit...i use my G5 almost exclusively for actual work and not for gaming, so i don't have a whole lot of things to compare it to but...i run Doom 3 on a dual 1.8 GHz with 1.5 GB RAM and a Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB Spec. Ed. and it runs just fine and smooth, not eleventy-million-frames-a-second-or-whatever-compl etely-ridiculous-and-arbitrary-number-the-gaming-g eek-gods-have-decided-is-the-minimum-acceptable-th is-week smooth, but no less smooth than than the xbox version (and that is with ATI's Open GL overrides jacked up)... and Unreal Tournament 2004 runs like a fuckin' dream...

    its all about RAM and video card...
  90. Time for a new icon by TintinX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Don't we need to update the iMac icon?
    Either the new design iMac or, at least, the original 'classic' iMac would better represent it, surely?

  91. Re:Montreal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you're still here?

  92. Could you do us a favor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Could you not log into Slashdot again until you are older than three years old?

    Honestly, you don't make any points for your side with this apporach. I know two people who went with a Mac recently. They got the initial nudge by observing the unvelievable and incoherent vitriol by low grade intellects such as yourself. They followed the rule that if X is stirring up such irrational bile in group Y, then X must be doing something right, especially if group Y is composed of narrowminded losers incapable of expressing themselves without vulgarity.

  93. My GOD you are stupid beyong comprehension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    And the complete Adobe creative suite costs more than your theoretical $1300 computer YOU UNBELIEVABLE SHITHEAD!

    Dude! You're getting your ass handed to you here. Bail out and change your username. "Comet69" is now the laughing stock amongst anyone with more than one brain cell. Not that "comet69" wasn't a idiotic name in the first place. Ooooo! You have "69" in you name! Wow! That is so BOLD and CLEVER! Heh heh heh... sex and stuff, Beavis!

  94. Re:BULLSHIT by clickster · · Score: 1


    iPhoto, GarageBand, Keynote, iMovie, iDVD for starters

    iPhoto and iDVD are the only two that most home users would use. And frankly, iDVD SUCKS!!!!. You have so little control over it and I have yet to figure out how to simply fast-forward from the "remote control" on the screen. I have to do it from the icon on the Dock. All I can do from the remote is skip to the next scene.

    Regardless of the quality of GB, KN, and iM, your average home user has no use for them.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  95. macgamestore.com also launched today by cyfer2000 · · Score: 3, Informative

    macgamestore.com, there are several other games. I read this piece of news from mac world this morning.

    --
    There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  96. RE: the cost of Windows by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    I totally agree with your basic point, but to be fair, the argument of "XP Pro" being MUCH closer to OS X than "XP Home" is usually moot.

    The only real significant difference between XP Pro and Home is the fact that Pro is required to authenticate against a server in a domain and support "roaming profiles" from said domain server. It's exceedingly rare that I find a home user who actually needs his/her machines to join a domain, instead of simply do peer-to-peer workgroup type sharing.

    For that matter, if a business uses Novell Netware, they'll find that installing Novell's client for Windows on an XP Home box gives them all of those capabilities via Netware anyway. (Novell states on their web site something about XP Home being "unsupported", and recommends XP Pro - but that seems to really only be relevant for folks trying to use Microsoft's built-in Novell connector support rather than loading the free Novell client.)

    If Apple was willing to shave even another $25 or so off the price of OS X for a version that couldn't work with NT/2000/XP domains and only handled workgroups, I imagine quite a few Mac users would opt to save the money and go with that one....

  97. Re:BULLSHIT by fork420 · · Score: 1

    And how much will Adobe CS add to the cost of the PC?

    I would submit that the average computer user can get more done with iLife than they can with Adobe CS, but I've not used Adobe CS, so I won't try to defend that position. I do know that there are lots of non-tech-savvy people using iLife to do some very groovy things.

    Capabilities and ease-of-use issues aside, iLife is included with a new mac, Adobe CS is not bundled with anything in the iMac's price range. And as you so astutely pointed out, if a mac user wants CS, they can go get it, just like a PC user. Advantage mac.

    I don't yet have the Adobe CS tools, because iLife gets the job done, right out of the box. Now *that* is why people buy computers-to get things done. Apple has realized this and has made a good user experience across their product line. Good for them.

  98. Oh, look! An anti-Mac troll! How sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    i'm tired of fucking dumb ass macs.

    So stop fucking them.

    But seriously, ever think people are tired of ignorant little trolls with the communication skills of stillborn fetuses? How old are you? 12?

  99. Re:Montreal? by DarKnyht · · Score: 1

    Tell that to the people that live there!

    While I was there I saw a building with, "Go home Canadians!" spray painted on the side of the building.

    --
    Voting them all out of office, now that's change I can believe in.
  100. Re:BULLSHIT by drsmithy · · Score: 1
    Go to any site on the net without fear of the machine getting owned-- WITHOUT running anti-malware and antivirus apps.

    I do that on Windows every day.

    Buy a peripheral, plug it in, and have it just work-- WITHOUT dicking around with any stupid configuration wizards.

    That to.

    Delete the bundled web browser completely (removing all traces of it from the system), and use the one that I prefer to use instead.

    I doubt that. You do realise there's more to the "bundled browser" than that little Safari icon in /Applications, right ?

  101. ATI 9600 - is it good enough by hadleyhope · · Score: 1

    I had been putting off getting the new iMac due to the 64mb graphics. I would like to play Generals, Rise of Nations, WoW and Rome Total War. Will this graphics card meet my needs, gaming is only a secondary requirement and the iMac fully meets all my other needs. I currently have a 800Mhz 15" FP iMac and have costed out a PowerMac and the saving between that and the new iMac is a thousand pounds for my required configuration.

    1. Re:ATI 9600 - is it good enough by otis+wildflower · · Score: 1

      For iMac resolutions it should be adequate, though I don't know offhand how far you can set WoW's terrain distance.

      Still, for anything short of Doom3, it should probably be adequate. OpenTTD runs like shit thru a goose on my 667 PBG4!

    2. Re:ATI 9600 - is it good enough by Jord · · Score: 1

      I have last year's 1.8 17" iMac and WoW runs on it just fine. I would suspect that even a properly tuned Doom3 would run fine on this latest model.

      BTW, WoW also runs fine on last year's powerbooks.

    3. Re:ATI 9600 - is it good enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I play C&C Generals just fine on a PB 867 Mhz with a Radeon 9000.
      Its about half the posted requirements, but I play it fine anyways.

  102. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by dcstimm · · Score: 1

    that windows xp must be working beautifully for you too..

  103. Powerbook base price out of sync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey - did anyone else notice that the Powerbook base price is out of sync? On the main Apple Store page, it says "PowerBook from $1599", but on the Powerbook page, it says the cheapest model is $1499. Did I miss a rumor somewhere? Is there an update to the line coming sooner than October?

    Sorry, just possibly in the market for a Powerbook, and listening for every scrap of news I can get about them right now. (Anyone also hear if they've fixed their non-Synaptics touchpad yet?) Stupid jitters from watching every site (e.g. Amazon recently) for an unintentional slip. :P

    And no, I'm not trolling for the illusive "G5 Powerbook" upgrade. Please don't post that silly crap.

    1. Re:Powerbook base price out of sync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back to normal now ($1499 everywhere). Crisis averted?

  104. 8G Byte RAM in a highend power mac by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

    The high end power mac can handle 8G byte RAM. Search "8GB" in this link.

    --
    There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
  105. given the prior lackluster gaming performance... by constantnormal · · Score: 1

    ... of Doom 3 on the iMac G5, and the Quartz Extreme changes in OS X 10.4 outlined by John Siracusa over at ars technica, one wonders if the G5 iMac is now a credible gaming machine -- at least for OpenGL games.

    It seems like the hardware should be up to the task, and now, with OS X 10.4, the software can properly use the hardware.

  106. Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Obviously it is the year that SPECTRE clones James Bond!

    fuckin' mor-on.

    1. Re:Sigh... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      It's speeled Mor-an!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  107. Re:BULLSHIT by voidstin · · Score: 1

    ummm... are you talking about DVD player? iDVD is for burning your own DVDs - not sure why you would want to fast forward with a remote.

    And to fast forward with the remote UI, just hold down the button. Command-Shift-Arrow works nice too.

  108. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by NeoBeans · · Score: 2, Funny
    that windows xp must be working beautifully for you too..

    Actually, Windows XP runs fine on my Mac.

  109. Re:BULLSHIT by zulux · · Score: 1

    you know what I got that I can't get on any PC? I enjoy using a computer again. A bargain.

    Well said! I realized the same thing a year ago - I had a FreeBSD server under the desk and a iMac on the desk - the fun was back!

    It was like I had my old TRS-80 back again - I was fun using my computers again.

    --

    Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

  110. Re:BULLSHIT by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Funny

    1000 sockets? Weak. I got 65,536 sockets free with my computer.

  111. Screw karma by EvilStein · · Score: 2, Funny

    Now I want lunch, and it's only 8:49am. Goddamn it. :P

  112. Re:BULLSHIT by wheatwilliams · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why by a "fucking dumb ass mac when you could get an AWESOME PC" for the same money?

    "What can you POSSIBLY do that you CANNOT do on a regular PC?" Many things. I'll tell you.

    I guess I'm using my computer for different things than you are using your computer for.

    There is no way to get anything even remotely approaching the functionality, power and ease of use of GarageBand 2.0.1 on a PC, at any price. If composing and recording music is a priority for you, and it's the main reason I'm buying a new computer, an iMac is a huge value. GarageBand 2.0.1 is FREE.

    Not to mention iMovie and iPhoto. How much extra money would you have to pay to add a program as good as iMovie HD to your PC? It's free on the Mac. Would your PC come stock with a FireWire port (the big-plug kind) with power-over-FireWire? That would cost you extra money. All models of Mac have them stock.

    Then there's the little fact that you don't have to worry about viruses or spyware on a Mac. They don't exist. Besides, the OS is secure enough to keep such threats away. How much money and time and grief do you spend defending your Windows PC from these scourges? I don't give them a single thought.

    The operating system of the Mac has much better and more readable on-screen display of fonts, and better scalability when you want to zoom in. I consider the ease on my eyes and lack of fatigue, and more precise display, as big plusses. There is no way to get these on a Windows computer regardless of the graphics hardware or monitor being used.

    I could go on, but you're an inarticulate troll who can't use decent language to discuss something you obviously have no clear concept of in your clouded little mind.

    Go ahead, buy a Mac for once in your computing career. You'll enjoy it. You might actually get some work done. We won't tell your friends at the bowling alley. We won't call you a sissy, or tell your mother. We promise.

  113. Re:BULLSHIT by clickster · · Score: 1

    My bad on iDVD vs. DVD player. Yes, I'm referring to the DVD player. Why is there no FF/RW on the remote? I would think that would be used far more often than the buttons for skipping chapters.

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  114. What a load. by EvilStein · · Score: 2, Informative

    10 Dell PowerEdge 1750 servers. Dual Xeon, gigs of RAM.. 2 were DOA.

    I've had caps on supposedly "quality" PC motherboards blow, from Soyo, Abit, and Asus. I've had ECS boards die. We've gotten hardware from Sun that was defective.

    To say that Apple is on par with Packard Bell or eMachines is just ridiculous. Computer stuff can and will fail.
    We've had excellent luck with the Apple stuff.

    1. Re:What a load. by delire · · Score: 1

      Asustek make the Apple iBook range, Quanta computing the G5 Powerbooks...

      http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050114A7040.html

      One cannot talk about 'PC' brands anymore, as Apple is essentially comprised of these components. Asustek's designs are themselves comparable to the PB; however being carbon fibre they do outdo the PB where robustness is concerned:

      http://store.agearnotebooks.com/asusv6vphotos.html

  115. Like the good ol days! by simpl3x · · Score: 1

    I just configured a top of the line PowerMac with a 30" display! Nearly $10K... It's like the days of the Mac FX! Only, you know, with a thirty inch display, and two 400 gig hard drives.

  116. Would have been nicer if... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    better support the now standard OS X Tiger

    Would have been nicer if earlier iMacs had received this upgrade so that those buyers could reasonably upgrade to Tiger someday.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Would have been nicer if... by Mistah+Blue · · Score: 1

      The iMac is not an upgradeable machine. If you want upgradeable, get a PowerMac.

    2. Re:Would have been nicer if... by shidoshi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm running Tiger just fine on a 550MHz G4 TiBook.

      Call me crazy, but I'm pretty certain that a G5 iMac starting at 1.6GHz can run Tiger.

    3. Re:Would have been nicer if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a 450Mhz G4 Cube that runs Tiger very nicely.

  117. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by pecko666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, I suppose, you got also full and legal version of WindowsXP, Windows Office, Nero burning ROM, Adobe Premiere and Cakewalk. (to be at par with the preinstalled software you get for free, when you buy Mac).

  118. Pine scent?! by protein+folder · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh, how bourgeois! This is an Apple Macintosh! The FreshenD feature would never be used to exude a smell of something so crass as pine! Macintosh users expect and demand more, and the FreshenD daemon delivers--a light, ethereal scent with notes of jasmine and citrus, evoking memories of a mountain lake after a spring rainfall.

    Maybe you're thinking of Microsoft's SmellMe feature (which is rumored to be included with Longhorn). It's a shame--they throw all this money at this cool new feature, but it winds up smelling like a freshly cleaned toilet.

    --
    Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
    1. Re:Pine scent?! by SlowMovingTarget · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bah! Proprietary smell technology... On Gentoo linux you just

      emerge --odor
      and you get the freedom of open source smell technology. Granted, it makes compilation smell like burnt cooling fan, but it's open source, man!

      I hear that the GNU/Aroma will be far superior when it's finished. I wonder what Hurd will smell like then.

    2. Re:Pine scent?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      smelling like a freshly cleaned toilet.

      Keep your pron on your PC I see.

    3. Re:Pine scent?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you get the freedom of open source smell technology

      I'm sorry, sir, but "open source smell" is not something I wanted to think about today.

    4. Re:Pine scent?! by dr.badass · · Score: 1

      a light, ethereal scent with notes of jasmine and citrus, evoking memories of a mountain lake after a spring rainfall.

      I don't want to remember my family being attacked by ethereal citrus at a mountain lake after a spring rainfall, you insensitive clod! I want to forget! I want to forget!

      --
      Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
    5. Re:Pine scent?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your ignorance of geography pales only in comparison to your appalling ignorance of botany.

  119. Re:Freshend? by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's a German present participle, which means "to make fresh or cause to be in a state of freshness." In other words, "das freshende iMac" means "iMac: the freshmaker!"

    --
    Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
  120. Refresh rate by Refrag · · Score: 1, Informative
    These improvements are significant as this line has not seen a refresh in about a year...
    The previous version of the Imac was introduced on the last day of August 2004. Eight months is not a year.
    --
    I have a website. It's about Macs.
    1. Re:Refresh rate by Mistah+Blue · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you not notice the poster said "about a year." Eight months is about a year.

    2. Re:Refresh rate by Refrag · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I don't consider 66% to be "about" anything. If 66% is all it takes to make "about," then I know a lot of people that will be glad to know they "about" got a 4.0.

      --
      I have a website. It's about Macs.
  121. Re:BULLSHIT by MoneyT · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I doubt that. You do realise there's more to the "bundled browser" than that little Safari icon in /Applications, right ?

    Not really there isn't. Sure there's WebCore but you can delete that too. The great thing about OS X is 99% of the applications are self contained. Delete the little icon in /Applications and it's gone. Even MS Office manages to not fill your computer with worthless garbage in random directories.

    --
    T Money
    World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
  122. Re:BULLSHIT by thefinite · · Score: 1
    Umm, iDVD is *not* DVD Player. I think you meant DVD Player. Hold down the forward chapter button and it will scan forward.

    By the way, you don't exactly add credibility to your Mac complaints by confusing iDVD with DVD Player. Mac users don't brag about DVD Player, because we know any PC with a DVD drive can play DVD movies. We brag about iDVD because our wives and mothers who don't know much about computers can *make* DVD movies.

    My wife is about as average as a home user gets and she made a DVD of home movies edited in iMovie for her whole family for Christmas two years ago. They still talk about it.

    --
    Boom Shanka
  123. Bad Capacitors - Known Problem by Thu25245 · · Score: 2, Informative

    A number of "quality" capacitor manufacturers have been having problems recently. There wasn't much Apple could do about it.

    References:
    http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2003Feb/bch20030 207018535.htm

    http://home.earthlink.net/~doniteli/index27.htm

    http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/feb0 3/ncap.html

  124. Where did you get the keyboard? by crovira · · Score: 1

    I just bought an iMac G5 (updated RAM to 2GB) and the keyboard that came in the box was good enough (NO mushy keys, bad angle, missing/small keys and very cramped) that I have used the new keyboard and put away my old keyboard since.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
  125. Re:BULLSHIT by clickster · · Score: 1

    I've corrected myself over the iDVD / DVD Player mixup, but I should also note that iDVD also belongs in the "the average user will rarely/never use this" category. Rather than packaging iLife, they should have packages a good (emphasis) office suite.

    Hopefully, Mac Minis will help Macs gain a larger share of the home desktop market and Apple can start concentrating on creating an office suite to compete with MS Office. Until they have enough market share, their existence is still largely due to MS wanting to keep them around as "proof of competition"

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  126. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

    Since when do Macs ship with software on par with Microsoft Office or Nero?

    I'm not familiar with Premiere or Cakewalk (or their Apple equivilants), but since you exagerated things I am familiar with, I strongly suspect you exagerated those as well.

    --
    I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
  127. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up please

  128. Well by Mycroft_514 · · Score: 1

    I got a full XP pro, and Office Pro was on a special deal from work $20 for the whole thing. Nero sucks, I bought another better package for about 70$ and Adobe Acrobat and Photoshop round out the beginings of what run on the machine.

    Plus, there are many more packages available for Win XP than there are for the Mac, and the performance is better and always will be.

    As for being Modded a troll, I expected that fromt he bigots on this site.

    1. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no! You aren't a troll, you are off topic.

      I just hope the better package wasn't "Easy" CD Creator. A product I am familiar enough with that I can walk poor slobs through using it _over a phone_. Try that with someone you know real well to test your patience (and theirs!).

      I swear, Toast is almost enough in itself to keep me using Macintoshes.

  129. Tiger, you mean the latest Unix thingy? by Mycroft_514 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I tried Unix years ago. Yuck, what a horrible OS.

    Vi - Virtually Impossible. The most user HOSTILE editor ever written.

    1. Re:Tiger, you mean the latest Unix thingy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, vi is NOT the most user HOSTILE editor ever written. You just aren't well traveled enough to have experienced truly awful editors.

      vi is actually a great editor with a near vertical learning curve. If you make it over the top, you can really fly. If not, like most people who just want to make a quick small edit, you get your nose pushed in by said learning curve.

      So don't feel I'm disagreeing all that much :-)

  130. money yo money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At the Apple shareholders meeting Steve Jobs said there making most of there money on there consumer products. (this was after he was asked about slugish powermac sales)
    They might just be catering to the market thats bringing in the cash.

  131. No, you're not alone by metamatic · · Score: 1

    I'd like a PowerMac G5, but the 1.8GHz is underpowered compared to the iMac, so the cheapest worth getting is the dual 2GHz. Unfortunately I'm not sure I have that kind of money just now.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  132. Re:Freshend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As long as we're talking about it, don't they edit the body either?

    1. "So better support the now standard OS X Tiger, ...". Is that supposed to be "To better support..." or what?

    2. " the now standard..." Do they mean the "new" standard? or the standard that is current?

  133. Neither of those examples work for your case by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I mostly read the second one - where yes he said it was a not a deaamon because he thought of deamons as more servers, instead of just any non-interactive program. Seems kind of reasonable opinion to me if you're used to old-school deamons.

    At any rate it's hardly "misinformation", which is what you seem to be going for.

    I've read a few of ASOTV posts and they do all seem actually informative. If you find one that's not, please let us know. In the meantim you might also try out an ID for size so people would take you seriously.

    Personally, I'm pretty sure you're the one trolling. Trolls always latch onto actually useful posters and try to ride the coattails of greatness as it were.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Neither of those examples work for your case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see. You've bought in. Whatever. You can believe what you want to believe. At least until someone who really works at Apple posts logged in and shows you what a fool you've been made out to be.

      If you think ASOTV is greatness, you're sadly deluded. As for the reason I'm not posting logged in--re-read what the starter of this thread wrote.

    2. Re:Neither of those examples work for your case by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know what? I think YOU are ASOTV. I think he really does work for Apple, and he logs out to post as AC to troll people who believe him, just to fuck with them.

      It's the only explanation that makes sense.

  134. no specific complaints by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

    I was annoyed that Apple was artificially restricting the performance of iMacs with 100 mb ethernet, as gigabit chipsets don't cost much more than the others these days. Doing anything serious with network drives requires gigabit and an iMac can't be upgraded. Now that that's fixed, they're a computer I would consider buying.

    The video chipset seems a bit weak, but it's enough for anything I'll do with it.

    One thing I'd like to see is a laptop card slot for upgrades, but I know that'll never happen.

    --
    I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
  135. Design or Branding? by fm6 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    You follow the link to the Apple site and you see the embeded monitor iMac, which is now the only iMac available. It's a decent design, but not nearly as good as the pedestal iMac, which has to be the acme of system design that maximizes ergonomics and usability, while minimizing desk footprint.

    But being a sound, usable design seems to be a minor concern for Apple's product strategy. The big selling point with all iMacs, starting with the original candy iMacs, is that they look cool. Once familiarity has blunted the coolness factor, an iMac design is discarded -- no matter how good it is.

    Pretty sad. When the pedestal iMac came out, I rather hoped that competitors would imitate it. Not its overall appearance -- Apple is notoriously intolerant of that kind of imitation. But the more general idea of a pedestal computer. Alas, nobody did, and now even Apple has lost interest in the idea. It's all about branding these days, not usability. And though Apple's designers are the best, they only live to serve that purpose.

    1. Re:Design or Branding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The iMac G5 is wall mountable. I'd say that kicks the desktop-footprint ass of the pedestal version.

      I don't see the problem for most users anyway. I have tons of space under my desk - I could literally fit 4 full towers down there and still have perfect legroom. I suspect most people can squeeze in a beige box or two, and will only regret it on moving day.

    2. Re:Design or Branding? by smcavoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      iMacs can have a 0 foot print. Their VESA mountable so you could put it on the wall or even on a vesa monitor arm. So instead of having a large base with a monitor that is movable, the entire unit is.
      Far better design then the previous one, IMHO.

    3. Re:Design or Branding? by fm6 · · Score: 1
      Wall mounts are nice -- if want to spend $200 for an ugly VESA mount, and your desk is right next to a suitable wall. Monitor arms are also ugly and expensive, and are awkward to work with. Neither would work in my home office -- my desk wouldn't handle a monitor arm, and my landlord doesn't like me drilling holes.

      I suppose VESA stuff suits some people -- but for most of us, a simple all-in-one system that doesn't use up a lot of desk space is much more practical.

    4. Re:Design or Branding? by smcavoy · · Score: 1

      so based on your requirements the design is inadequate for all users?

    5. Re:Design or Branding? by ekc · · Score: 1

      There is more to design than just aesthetics. Form has to follow function. In the case of the iMac G5, heat dissipation was a much bigger issue than with the G4. A tightly packed spherical CPU is just about the worst possible design for getting rid of heat. I can see why Apple engineers would have had to abandon it whether they wanted to or not.

      Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. They're thinking, "The best way to get rid of heat is to build a thin enclosure with lots of surface area. Orient it vertically and we can even take advantage of convective cooling. So how can we achieve this with minimal impact to our existing popular iMac design? Hmm..."

      FWIW, I think it was a stroke of genius what they did. The question now is whether they can come up with a similarly clever solution to the PowerBook G5 dilemma?

    6. Re:Design or Branding? by inkswamp · · Score: 1
      Cannot believe such a brainless comment got modded "interesting." I guess you just throw in a few links and it looks like you know what you're talking about.

      Design encompasses more than just looks and Apple has an understanding and mastery of all aspects of design that is light-years beyond anyone else in the industry... hell, light-years beyond most companies in any industry. Have you ever actually sat down and used one of these machines? It would only take a few minutes of usage to figure out that just as much thought has gone into how it works as how it looks.

      And yet, Apple critics continue to focus on how "pretty" the machines are, all the while accusing Mac users of being hung up on looks... oblivious to the irony of their own accusations. In fact, it is precisely those who can't see beyond the aesthetics of the machine's looks who are hung up on it. The rest of us take it as icing on the cake.

      --
      --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
    7. Re:Design or Branding? by fm6 · · Score: 1
      It gets really old -- people keep arguing with the things they thought you were supposed to say, not the things you actually said. I admire the pedastal iMac, therefore I'm one of those Mac geeks who judge their toys by how cool they look.

      Wrong. I'm one of the philistines who considers a computer just another appliance -- something you'd know if you taken any care reading my previous post. I admire the pedestal iMac for its usability and ergonomics. I could give it shit that it looks cute.

    8. Re:Design or Branding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      If you can imagine a G5 processor embedded inside one of your testicles, you can imagine a G5 pedestal iMac.

      Do you know what the warmest type of old school hat is? The bowler, which is a big felt dome. Shaped just like the ol' pedestal iMac. The dome's incredible heat retention properties are one of the key points behind Bucky Fuller's inhabitable domes. Not to mention igloos.

      Seriously, would you stick a 3.6 ghz p4 in the old pedestal iMac just because the design is ergonomically and aesthectically advantageous? Wouldn't you be afraid of the searing white plastic napalm hurtling into your face an hour after booting?

    9. Re:Design or Branding? by ekc · · Score: 1
      Okay, I re-read your original post carefully. I see your point in that you are not one who cares about aesthetics. I apologize for implying so.

      What had originally caught my attention was your contention that even Apple has lost interest in the idea [of a pedestal computer], that it's all about branding these days, not usability and that once familiarity has blunted the coolness factor, an iMac design is discarded -- no matter how good it is.

      Now, I realize this is just one opinion versus another, but I don't see it that way. As far as the iMac line is concerned, Apple only seems to make radical changes when engineering obstacles necessitate them. I have yet to see a case in which upper management threw out a good design on a whim, thinking it wasn't cool enough anymore. For one thing, it costs a lot to start from scratch every time.

      They kept the original CRT enclosure for years, and it still lives on, more or less, in the eMac. The iMac G4 had to be redesigned because the LCD display was a totally different shape. The iMac G5 had to be redesigned because they couldn't fit a PPC970 with all its cooling requirements into a tight little box. Were that possible, we would probably be seeing PowerBook G5s and maybe even Mac mini G5s by now, but I'm not holding my breath.

    10. Re:Design or Branding? by fm6 · · Score: 1
      The iMac G4 had to be redesigned because the LCD display was a totally different shape.
      So they threw out the whole pedestal computer concept just so they could use a new kind of LCD? You're making my case for me -- you're saying that Apple considered the pedestal concept a minor design feature. Once its novelty wore off, it was history.
    11. Re:Design or Branding? by heeeraldo · · Score: 0

      other way around, I think:

      when going from the G3 iMac to the G4, a redesign was necessary to facilitate the usage of the LCD display instead of the CRT.

      the change from the G4 to the G5 revolved around the different thermal requirements of the G5 processor and the desire to make a more easily upgradeable package.

      that's just what I read out of the other guy's comment, though.

    12. Re:Design or Branding? by ekc · · Score: 1
      So they threw out the whole pedestal computer concept just so they could use a new kind of LCD?

      Oh no, I was referring to the transition from the old G3-based iMacs to the iMac G4 at that point. I guess I might have been a bit ambiguous there. By that time, Apple had developed expertise in LCD technology and decided to apply it to the iMac line. Losing the bulky CRT meant the old case no longer made any sense, and after some head-scratching, the pedestal computer was born.

      Look, all I am trying to say is that it's more than a question of design versus branding. Any decision has to be tempered by the reality of what is possible with the technology at hand. Where the iMac is concern, I feel that Apple engineers have thus far done about as much as they could within the limits set out for them. They have certainly done a lot more than any other PC manufacturer.

  136. And such a pretty PC too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mmmm, a pedestrian black plastic box. Plus a matching beige monitor. So color coordinated!

    http://www.milegroup.com/store/imgitems/667.gif
    http://www.itreviews.co.uk/graphics/normal/hardwar e/h541.jpg

    Compare to that ugly iMac:

    http://www.apple.com/imac/design.html

  137. Doom 3 by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    The most recent release was Doom3, and it will be OK for that (obviosuly not set to highest settings).

    Other than that the most popular is probably World of Warcraft right now, and that already runs just fine.

    Consoles are a good enough replacement for me for games that don't make it to a Mac quite yet - after all they don't even come out for the PC first anymore either!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  138. For The Win by ad0gg · · Score: 1
    Why build your own computer when you can get it already built for 2/3 the price.

    Dell

    2.8ghz 512Ddr2
    ATi x300 128 video
    17" LCD
    $972

    Or you can wait for a sale/coupon and get same computer for $700 with a 19" lcd. Or upgrade to $24" lcd for $750(with coupon).

    --

    Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  139. Also inetresting but too low-level for Slashdot by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mostly it seems like it will get cleared up in short order, only VPC users will have to wait very long. Mid-May is not bad for a Cisco fix which is probably the majority of users having an issue now.

    In general Slashdot could have a story of Tiger incompatibilities but that seems a little off-target for Slashdot. Those kind of stories are more a thing you'd go to Macslash for, or mentuion it in the context of some other article as you've done.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  140. Raw power and PC's do not mix by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    The PC's might start off with Raw Power. But after you put firewalls and firus scanners on 'em they are definatley not in the domain of Raw Power any longer.

    I have a 28GHz PC at work, and a dual 1.8 G5 at home. The g5 feels MUCH faster for day-to-day use. Especially comparing finder to explorer, which is sadly bogged down in network shares. I use a few network shares at home but at least Finder only slows down a bit when you're using the shares, not for general operations on local drives.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  141. Ok whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    better support the now standard OS X Tiger.....

    Ok the existing G5 iMac would not run Tiger?? Ok whatever.

    1. Re:Ok whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  142. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're missing the point... There has yet to have been a Macintosh released with ultra cool neon lights and a side window so you can see all the 'leet components and custom wiring job. Jeesh. Who cares about what you can DO with a computer, it's all about how "cool" it looks. (in that special trailer park fashion sense)

  143. Scientists are also ... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... in the habit of signing their name to their words, at least he had the guts to do that.

    But lets not dwell on the snide tone of your comment. Have you ever tried to get work done on a Mac vs. Windows/Linux PC? I have done serious work all three and I rate the OS.X as first (and it took a major step forward with Spotlight), Linux comes in as a quite close second (largely because it is a bit chaotic and less polished than OS.X) and Windows comes in at a distant third and it's saving grace is mostly the fact that it has a larger and more varied flora of applications than the former two.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
  144. Re:BULLSHIT by ad0gg · · Score: 1

    For $1500 I can get a great laptop, then use the $900 for a vacation package to Hawaii. I'm quite amazed what people will blow their money on, looking at quality surverys for cars. You'd think the higher priced cars are the ones with better quality. Its quite funny to see Jaguar, Land rover, and porsche at the bottom of list below hyundia and Daewo. I guess if you need to burn you money, go right ahead. You can buy your 20" Apple LCD monitor which has less quality than the dell 20" while the dell is less than half the price. Review.

    --

    Have you ever been to a turkish prison?

  145. not in my experience by SethJohnson · · Score: 2, Interesting



    Apple designs throw away computers.

    I paid $1800 for a B/W G3 450mhz box in 1998 and used that sucker for desktop publishing and even DV editing until mid 2004. Then I finally bought a G4 powerbook and retired the G3. Mac OS X (everything up through Panther) ran fine for me on that G3 and I never noticed a bottleneck in terms of the video card nor did I upgrade any internal components other than memory and hard drives. Six years on the same computer does not sound like a throw-away product to me.

    1. Re:not in my experience by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1

      But what does your old B/W G3 450mhz box have to do with most of the new line of Macs now? Your old box was upgradeable, the newer Macs are not. So if you buy a Mac Mini, eMac or iMac your only option for upgrading is to buy a new one.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    2. Re:not in my experience by shking · · Score: 1
      But what does your old B/W G3 450mhz box have to do with most of the new line of Macs now? Your old box was upgradeable, the newer Macs are not


      The difference between now and then is that apple has expanded its consumer offerings both upward and downward from the original mid-priced G3 iMac into

      • low cost replacement: mini ($500 and up)
      • low cost all-in-one: eMac ($800 and up)
      • mid-to-high-end consumer(iMac $1300 - $3000)

      The pro and "prosumer" G5 towers start at a few hundred more than the cheapest iMac ($1500). This series is the successor to his old G3. It is the (expandable) mac you should have compared his old G3 to but somehow (deliberately?) ignored.

      --
      -- "At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1" -- PC Magazine, Nov. 1994
    3. Re:not in my experience by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1
      It is the (expandable) mac you should have compared his old G3 to but somehow (deliberately?) ignored.
      Why would I compare his old G3 to that? My reply to the GP was that his post had nothing to do with what I said. With what I said being: that most of the Apple personal computers are not expandable. You can only get an expandable Mac by going into the high-end offerings of Apple.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    4. Re:not in my experience by shking · · Score: 1

      ...because his old G3 was the high-end expandable mac of its day. Today's 17" iMac is gumdrop iMac of the B+W G3's era. Thus, the equivalent modern replacement for the B+W G3 is the powermac; not the iMac. You don't get a different kind of tool unless your needs change

      --
      -- "At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1" -- PC Magazine, Nov. 1994
    5. Re:not in my experience by jo_ham · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can add a new HD to an iMac, and upgrade the RAM. Both are user installable parts. As is the airport card if you don't already have one.

      And yes, the HD and RAM are standard parts, not proprietary Apple stuff. The Airport card is proprietary though.

  146. G5 iMac is only 8 months old by Deslock · · Score: 1

    These improvements are significant as this line has not seen a refresh in about a year

    The G5 iMac was initially announced last September (8 months ago).
  147. Re:BULLSHIT by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    You'd think the higher priced cars are the ones with better quality. Its quite funny to see Jaguar, Land rover, and porsche at the bottom of list below hyundia and Daewo.

    One question. Which ones are more fun to drive?

    And please don't bring up Dell's quality control. I'm on my 3rd drum assembly in 3 weeks for a 3100cn color laser printer, made by Dell. My boss bought it because it was cheap. I've wasted the savings in time trying to get it to work right, and waiting for replacement parts.

    meh.

  148. Compare Processor "Speeds" at this site by Vandil+X · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
  149. Re:iChat AV 3 Performance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Virex and related processes

    Until a virus or worm that targets OS X comes out, why bother with virus programs?

    At some point Macs may become vulnerable and / or targeted. Once they do, by all means, go ahead, install an anti-virus program. Until then it's a pointless.

  150. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We were able to post the truth before the mac fanboys started their circle jerk comments!

    But now prepare for them to mod all these comments down, or dismiss them and get an instant 5+.

  151. Re:BULLSHIT by advid · · Score: 1

    Okay, okay, you're a troll. We get it.

    Last time I looked into it (and I can't imagine it would have changed much) Macs were price-competitive on a feature level. That is, if one looks into what it would take to build a PC that would have the same features (including equivalent software, etc) and performance as any particular Mac, it would cost about the same amount of money.

    So nyaa.

    --
    - "I'll probably get modded down for this."
  152. Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I must disagree with you here.

    If you're excited about "minimizing desk footprint", the iMac G5 has the iMac G4 beat, hands down. The new foot sits flat, so you only have a narrow band of metal where it turns up. You can put papers directly *under* the iMac G5. And the iMac G4 had its ports around the outside of the base, at desk level, so they took up even more room on my desk -- the G5 has them on the back, above the desk, pleasantly out of the way.

    Ergonomics is improved with the slot-loading drive. I've often reached to put a disc in, remembered the drive isn't "out", then had to reach back to hit "eject" on the keyboard (I've seen many other people do this, too -- or even not know where the eject key *is*). It's also mounted high on the case, so again, you can pile stuff around your iMac G5, where on the G4 you'd have to clear a space around it. Saving a couple seconds may sound trivial, but if you're inserting a lot of CDs (like, say, ripping into iTunes), a couple seconds times a lot is a lot. Also, if you have a cup of coffee in your other hand, it's *much* easier to do.

    Oh, and the stereo speakers are built-in now, so it takes up still less desk space than the G4 did. (And if you turn the display, the speakers turn to face the same direction. This makes getting ready to show a movie even easier.)

    True, it doesn't swivel quite as much as it used to. But in practice, I never saw anybody move it forward-and-back much in normal usage. If you want to move it left or right, it's not hard to just turn the whole computer. Harder than the iMac G4, true, but still far easier than any CRT. If you need to do this a lot, you can get a standard (VESA) mounting stand for your iMac G5, something the G4 couldn't use at all: if you were in a lab or other place where you required *zero* desk footprint, you were just plain screwed with the iMac G4.

    It also has lots of other little benefits: easier to pack and ship, easier to push up against the wall if I want to use my desk for something else, and easier (possible!) to open and replace parts myself.

    I consider this the first step on the path to the "ideal" desktop form factor: one that looks pretty much like an Apple Cinema Display -- just a thin display.

    It sounds like you're just upset because you think the G5 isn't as pretty as the G4. Can you explain specific problems you think exist with the iMac G5 design? It seems to be better in virtually every way.

    1. Re:Disagree by fm6 · · Score: 1
      True, it doesn't swivel quite as much as it used to. But in practice, I never saw anybody move it forward-and-back much in normal usage. If you want to move it left or right, it's not hard to just turn the whole computer.
      Forward/backward is not a big deal ergonomically. But up and down is. People complain a lot about eye strain -- that's why so many people shade their windows and minimize their overhead lighting. But one of the best -- and most neglected -- ways to minimize eyestrain is to position the monitor just below eye level. The pedestal iMac was ideal for that. To get the same effect with the current model, you have to get a VESA mount (clunky, ugly, expensive) or an adjustable desk (really expensive).

      Anyway, whatever the merits of the current model, the pedestal model obviously worked better for some people. It wasn't abandoned because it was obsolete -- it was abandoned because it was passé.

    2. Re:Disagree by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Or you do something as revolutionary as... stacking something under the base! *gasp!*

      The other reason they switched away from the pedestal iMacs is that that arm was really expensive to manufacture.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    3. Re:Disagree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like there might be an interesting story to that. Have a link?

  153. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by Knara · · Score: 1
    Premier is a NLE that is similar to Final Cut Pro. Macs come with iMovie or iDVD these days I think (or maybe Final Cut Express, something of that sort, perhaps?)

    Cakewalk is some sort of audio editor. I'm thinking that the poster was referring to "Garage Band", which is part of the standard install for OS X

    That said, neither of those are the pro-level tools that Premier or Cakewalk are. The poster was exaggerating. Not that they aren't excellent tools, but no professional editor of video or audio would use them over say, Final Cut Pro and Pro Tools, respectfully.

  154. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by joetheappleguy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I bought a 3.6 GHZ PC a month ago with a 17 inch screen, 1.25 GB of RAM an 80 GB HD and a dual layer DVD drive, all with built in Wi-Fi G. What's the big deal here?
    All that computing horsepower and you still can't troll properly...

    You forgot to add "And all this for only $399" to your comment.

    Try again.
  155. Re:Not interested, however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What, as opposed to a Crapple fan who will not admit that games on Crapintosh OSsuX run like shit?

  156. Re:BULLSHIT by beattie · · Score: 1

    The problem is simple. Probably everyone here on slashdot wants a mac. We all think OSX is a cool OS and we all want to play with/use it. But we cant justify spending so much money on a system that's really already out of date, so we bitch. Telling people to "buy an x86 system" or whatever doesnt help because that's not what we want.

  157. And probably a good thing, too by Nice2Cats · · Score: 1
    Apple doesn't want you to be able to upgrade

    To be honest, I'm not sure this is a bad thing anymore. Being able to upgrade stuff was all good and well when that stuff was increasing power at a breakneck pace, but now that everybody, including even Intel, has realized that clock speed doesn't equal penis size, and DVD burners are standard, why do I need to upgrade that often? If all I am going to do is surf, write e-mail, chat, and write a bit, a Mac Mini should be just fine for years and years. Gamers will be gamers, but they're not out there buying Apples anyway.

    This way, Joe Averages like me are at least not led into temptation to get the Next Great Thing I don't really need -- a P4 2.4 GHz after a P4 2.0 GHz or whatever. You mentioned video cards: My current card has 32 MByte (it's an iBook G4) and doesn't support Core Image. And you know what, Mail and Firefox and NeoOffice/J work just fine anyway, so big fat stinking deal. If I want my computer to get faster, well, Apple has given me that with every update of the operating system so far. I realize that is not true of all operating systems out there (cough) -- but Tiger is probably worth more than a few MHz more. Can't wait to see what they do for OS X 10.5 "Felix" or whatever it will be called.

    On the financial side, I'm not sure if upgrading piecemeal over three years (roughly my cycle) gives me that much more of a savings than a totally new computer once you factor in the high resale value of Macs. Go on eBay, check out the prices for a last generation iMac, and subtract that from the new price, and you're a good way there. And lastly, since a lot of us own iBooks or PowerBooks rather than iMacs -- laptops are never really updated anyway even in the PC world. No difference between my iBook and a ThinkPad here.

  158. Re:Of course you're screwed, you bought a Mac by CritterNYC · · Score: 1

    Hey, how's the Tiger upgrade work out on your 3.6 GHz machine? Snappier? 64-bit support working for you?

    Not too bad in PearPC. Usable for testing websites n such. Snappier with the beta of PearPC. My CPU is only 2 GHz, though (even though the box said 3200+). And 64-bit Windows and Linux work just fine. Why? You having problems with em? :-D

  159. Gigabit ethernet by ekc · · Score: 1

    Think of what all that extra network bandwidth could do for a Beo...ah, forget it.

  160. You think you have it bad... by rjung2k · · Score: 1

    ...I've got a 450MHz G3 iMac that's still running. Give me an excuse to upgrade already, dammit! ;-)

  161. Ewww... by MattHaffner · · Score: 1

    "...larger and more varied flora of applications than the former two..."

    That's not necessarily a bonus when 90% of them stink to high heaven...

    1. Re:Ewww... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      90% of them stink to high heaven

      So you've been to sourceforge recently?

  162. Re:BULLSHIT by nmk · · Score: 1

    Very simple. You can't use OS X.

  163. BS by DrCode · · Score: 1

    BS -- That's what I'd expect Longhorn to smell like.

    I'd expect an Apple to smell...well... like an apple.

  164. Memory complaints by GauteL · · Score: 1

    When Apple ships 256MB memory, people complain that it is not enough (even though you can easily upgrade your option through the web site).

    The other major complaint is that their memory is too expensive.

    Surely, if their memory is too expensive, isn't it better they simply ship less of it, so you can fill in 3rd party memory yourself?

    I'm a bit confused.

  165. Why oh Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why won't Apple enable ECC memory support on any of the G5 models?

    I don't want to use a large noise Xserve as my 3D graphics workstation just to get ECC memory support. I want a dual CPU G5 Powermac WITH ECC MEMORY. I can't replace my existing intel and alpha workstations until they include this critical feature.

    Apple, are you listening?

  166. Re:Not interested, however... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Games and piracy. I weep for the future.

  167. 20" iMac G5 Price cut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder why nobody notice that the 2005 ver of 20" iMac G5 is $100 cheaper than the 2004 ver one.

  168. Re:My Problem With iMacs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Besides, it'll *always* work as a kick-ass DVD player.

    Actually, as a DVD player (using Apple's DVD Player software), the iMac sucks ass. I'm sure this will be fixed in the future, but the scaler and de-interlacer are horrible. Since the iMac's native resolutions are 1440x900 and 1680x1050, scaler performance is very important.

    Here's Anand's take on Apple's DVD player:

    The Mac mini as a Media Computer: Page 5
    The Mac mini as a Media Computer: Page 6
    Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger Review: Page 14
  169. Re:Freshend? by wembley · · Score: 1

    More proof that 90% of /. moderators are ignorant, humourless wankers.

    <informedhumor>
    The above is a sentence fragment.
    </informedhumor>

    --

    Share and Enjoy!

  170. You insensitive clod... by kybred · · Score: 1
    Yeah, but can you format a floppy while doing all of that as well?

    My Mac doesn't have a floppy drive!

    kybred

  171. Re:Freshend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does this sound like a comment for a female hygine product?

    Does the new G5 stop burning and iching too?

  172. Re: the cost of Windows by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    the other significanct difference is in home is that they disable the network secuity features and force you to use "simple file sharing" mode.

    which essentially means open access to everyone on your network read only access to everyone on your network of no access at all to your network.

    to put it bluntly the network features in XP home are far far worse than those in 9X which it replaced and basically mean you either have to totally trust your network or not use it at all

    iirc there are cpu count support differences too (though theese won't effect most users)

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  173. Re:BULLSHIT--er...no. a Tax Write Off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tax Deduction.
    you can write it off as a business expense.
    A lot of Mac users are individuals or small firms who use their computers for work. And, quite a few will buy a new one annually to both upgrade to the latest and greatest and to write off the expenses.
    Now, you could do the same with your $400 Windows PC, couldn't you?If you only play games on that PC, you probably can't deduct the expenses for it. But, with a $3000 PowerMac, plus $800 monitor, you can maximize your investment in numerous ways.

    That could be part of the reason Mac users have said for years:
    It Just Works!
    They use the box they own TO work.

  174. Buy the 20" Screen and the faster Mini Mac + RAM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Macs, eMacs, and iMacs are designed to be consumer products. You buy it - you use it. No mucking around with the parts inside. Think of your new shiny toaster. Just use it. Don't stick a butter knife in it.

    The macs are not about technology, they are all about packaging and target marketing customers. PowerMac users most likely will not want a mini or an eMac. Mini users have no need for a PowerMac, nor do they have an understanding of all the parts inside their shiny new little computer box, they got to go with their iPod.

    If your new to macs, skip the eMac and the iMac, just get the more powerful Mac Mini, upgrade it's RAM as much as you want, and toss on a 20" flat monitor.

    In a little over a year, you can decide if you want the new Mac Mini 1.5 GHz G5, or the new PowerMac Quad Processor running @ 3 GHz, to go along with your 100 GB iView MP3, Photo, Game and Movie watching device.

    Never, Ever buy the top of the line.
    Buy second from the bottom, unless someone else is picking up the tab. (Billable Hours counts here too...)

  175. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, and us mac fanboys would *never* obsess over things such as how cool the mini or our desktops look!

    We don't give a shit about your HUGE ugly PeeCees, leave us to our purdy white macs and small mini laptop in a box with no screen/keyboard/etc.

  176. Re:Freshend? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, let's have less of the 'ignorant' and 'humourless' if you don't mind ...

  177. ASOTV? BFD. by crackerjack314 · · Score: 1

    I work for Apple. You're out of line, Coward.

    1. Re:ASOTV? BFD. by dangitman · · Score: 1
      I work for Apple. You're out of line, Coward.

      So then, what's your name and position?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:ASOTV? BFD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seriously doubt you work for Apple. You're out of line.

  178. Re:BULLSHIT by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

    You're just plain wrong on that 20" monitor bit.

    They both use the same panel, and the difference in sticker price is very small (here in Australia it's AUS$150). The quality is about equal on both.

    Look up the review at anandtech.com if you want verification. Anandtech recommends the Dell, but only because of the pricing difference (and the warranty on the Apple monitor is pretty poor unless you buy a computer with it).

  179. If you don't care... by GaryPatterson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... then why are you posting about how much you hate them?

    I think the answer is that you *do* care, and being a PC fanboy, you hate the fact that Apple are making real strides and doing things that Microsoft can't seem to (like stick to their OS schedules).

    Realistically, this doesn't impact you in any way whatsoever, as you've got your PC, and you're probably happy with what you paid for it.

    So why do you hate the concept of the Mac so much?

    Is it because you hate anything *different*?

    Is it because it threatens to invalidate your choices?

    Face yourself - you care, and the proof of that is in your post. You're coming across as someone who's upset about something that really shouldn't affect you.

    Oh - to your 'point'... I'll go out on a limb and say that most Slashdot readers know about technology - where it's been, where it is now and some vague idea of where it's going next. Most people are reasonably well educated around here. They're capable of making their own choices, and they're capable of making informed choices.

    Apple are gaining a lot of mindshare around here because they're doing a lot of things right. OS X is the best OS out there, and is actually innovating. People can read the source code for Darwin if they like, and contribute to it if they want to. Macs are easier to use than ever, and people like that.

    What can we do on our Macs that you can't on your PC? We can forget the computer and use the things as the tools they are. I don't have to screw around on my iBook to get things working, or to maintain the system integrity. The OS takes care of that for me. I don't have to worry about it. I can get on and just use the apps to get stuff done.

    I've used computers since 1981 (when I was 10), and I've seen pretty much everything that's happened in the industry. I've used Windows since 3.1, and before that DOS, CP/M, Amiga-OS and others. I know what I'm talking about. In my view, OS X is the current pinnacle of operating systems. People are noticing it, and people are buying Macs.

    If you don't like it, you'll have to learn to live with it.

  180. I don't get it by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

    Why are so many people finding him annoying? I don't find him arrogant or deceptive at all. He's entertaining and usually quite insightful. And often makes some of the posters around him look like idiots (because they were in the first place).

    Furthermore, the use of the royal "we" is something I often do when referring to my employer in writing (even publicly).

    As for calling him a "self-appointed mouthpiece", that really sounds like sour grapes. Just ignore him if you don't like it, you come across as almost jealous otherwise.

    --
    -Stu
    1. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are so many people finding him annoying?

      Why? Because he claims to work for Apple, but no-one from Apple will back him up. Because he's sometimes a complete cunt in his replies to others. Because he makes no distinction between an idiot spreading bullshit and someone asking genuine questions in ignorance. Because he never actually responds to requests for information of any kind. Because he speaks as if he has had more than an observational role in key Apple technologies when people in a position to know have never heard of him.

      Also, stop using this phrase "the royal we". His usage is the normal usage of "we", there's nothing royal about it at all. The royal usage is a monarch speaking as a nation rather than a person. ASOTs usage is as if he's part of a group.

  181. Floppy formatting by Sulka · · Score: 1

    Sure, sure. I remember distinctly how poor drivers ground my PC to a halt when formatting a floppy under Win 95's "semi-co-operative almost-pre-emptive" multitasking. Macs at least were honest about the machine not letting you do anything when formatting. :)

    --
    "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
  182. He never claimed to represent Apple. by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

    I don't think he's ever claimed to be an official spokesperson, he doesn't have the air of sanitized PR anyway. He seems like either an employee seeking to set people straight at the grass roots, or a non-traditional PR plant, or a non-Apple employee with some reasonable knowledge and ability to craft entertaining prose. Or a bit of all three.

    The worst accusation you can make at the guy is over-use of the royal "we". Which is generally fine, I do it all the time when referring to my employer (BEA), though i'm careful to add a disclaimer when I'm making a statement of opinion.

    Why does his identity matter? Or whether he's paid to do this or not? I'm not seeing a lot of obvious spin going on in his posts, if there were more, these things may carry more wait.

    --
    -Stu
    1. Re:He never claimed to represent Apple. by dangitman · · Score: 1
      I don't think he's ever claimed to be an official spokesperson, he doesn't have the air of sanitized PR anyway

      Why does it matter? I just want to know if he's misrepresenting himself.

      The worst accusation you can make at the guy is over-use of the royal "we". Which is generally fine, I do it all the time when referring to my employer (BEA),

      I don't think it's fine, especially not the way he does it. It basically amounts to plagiarism, which is the worst "intellectual" offence that one can commit. Especially as he studiosly avoids answering any question about who the hell he is. He won't just give his name, he won't even say which division of Apple he works for. He's just using the "Apple connection" to karma-whore.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:He never claimed to represent Apple. by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's fine, especially not the way he does it. It basically amounts to plagiarism, which is the worst "intellectual" offence that one can commit.

      Ehm. What's stealing and claiming as his own? He's repeatedly referred to other teams within Apple when its out of his area of experties.

      What does it matter anyway what his identity is? Don't we encourage handles & aliases on the Internet for a reason?

      Horray for unbridled cynicism.

      --
      -Stu
    3. Re:He never claimed to represent Apple. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're obviously new here.

      1. Internet nicknames are only socially acceptable when they're lifted from Japanese cartoon shows.

      2. ASOT's first unpardonable sin was writing things in support of his employer. If he had written horrible things about his employer, he would have been beatified by the Slashdot crowd for speaking truth to power and fighting the machine.

      3. ASOT's second unpardonable sin was writing things derogatory of the dominant Slashdot groupthink. Gnu is bad, proprietary innovations are good, computers suck, IT is a waste of money. These are unspeakable here.

      4. ASOT's third unpardonable sin was doing #2 and #3 while being so fucking smart and right about everything. He's never stepped out, never been modded down, never been caught in a mistake. Jealousy runs rampant here.

      The reaction youre seeing isn't merely representative of Slashdot. It's positively mandatory here.

      (I've got ASOT on my friends list too. His comments are almost always the best thing in a given article.)

    4. Re:He never claimed to represent Apple. by Lovejoy · · Score: 1

      Oh, crap! Am I supposed to be using an alias?

  183. Why? by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

    People do this all the time, in message boards and on blogs, usually with a standard disclaimer that opinions expressed are not of their employer.

    There are so many examples of this... Look at how many Microsoft employees have blogs like Scoble or Don Box, or Oracle's Tom Kyte, or IBM's Kyle Brown, or BEA 's David Orchard (I work for BEA as well) , or Google's Bosworth.. Do you really think these people are vetted by PR? How many employees post to newsgroups or public tech support forums... I see people get into public flamewars too.

    On the other hand, there is a problem here with what constitutes a company's "voice". Bosworth, for example, gets into controversy for people confusing his opinions with Google's (or BEA's , previously).

    Frankly, I tend to side with the cluetrain. As long as you don't claim to hold the "official" position, and don't talk about internal confidential information, it's beneficial to the company, its investors, customers, and prospects for employees to engage in open and honest dialogue with others.

    I guess it depends on how paranoid you are about your company firing you for speaking your mind. Generally I don't get too concerned about it, if they did such a thing, I wouldn't want to work for them anyway.

    --
    -Stu
    1. Re:Why? by John+Harrison · · Score: 1

      and obviously Apple people are doing it too. But they say who they are and what they do, so you have some clue as to how authentic/informed they are. In any case, any serious company has formal policy on speaking on behalf of the company.

    2. Re:Why? by Stu+Charlton · · Score: 1

      But they say who they are and what they do, so you have some clue as to how authentic/informed they are.

      Why not just look at the merits of his arguments? How does someone's identity have anything to do with how informed they are? One can have a small role and be very informed, or a very large & important role and poorly informed. Happens all the time.

      The argument is what matters. Motives are a messy and mixed affair; and they don't have an effect on the quality of the argument.

      If an astroturfer was making a crappy argument, it's a crappy argument, period. If it's a good argument, what does it matter that they're paid to do it?

      In any case, any serious company has formal policy on speaking on behalf of the company.

      Sure, except, he never claimed that he was speaking on behalf of the company.

      I can state lots of opinions about what I think "we" are doing or should do, so long as it doesn't divulge actual proprietary plans or information. This could get me into political trouble if I don't use common sense, but not legal trouble.

      Anyway, I don't know why I'm going to bat for him, I just find this Slashdot cynicism-fueled witch-hunt rather exasperating.

      --
      -Stu
  184. Screen spanning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Screen spanning hack

    Keep your monitor, buy an iMac, have double the screen real estate. Tasty.

    As for Apple not making a Mac for you... sorry? They can't make a product for every single combo of desires. They're just the one company, where the PC market has a thousand trying to make a buck catering to individual whims.

    They sell their computers to the people who want them and they make money. I'm not sure they even look at market share as a reasonable goal anymore. They just sell stuff. You buy it or you don't.

    Most people who actually make the switch find that the amount they gain from it is so huge, any niggling grumps over the exact specs of a machine are wiped out by the saved time.

  185. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly correct!

  186. Re:BULLSHIT by zpok · · Score: 1

    The big difference between you - and yours - and the average computer user (whatever OS) is that you know and care about parts.
    Your arguments are very stupid when looking at the whole of the bundle (OS X, decent hardware, good looks, very fair connectivity to whatever you want to plug into it, iLife, ...), because whatever you cook up for yourself won't be anywhere close to a mac out of the box. That's not looking at individual parts or even the whole computer, which I bet will work perfectly for what you have in mind. Not the point. Most people aren't capable or willing to go through that and will order a Dell, in which case they won't get a better specs computer than a similar priced mac - unless they are one of the few mythical people who actually get a coupon reduction as advertised.

    Oh and some people actually pay for their software. Do you have any idea what Adobe CS costs? Especially the superdeluxe edition that you'd need to come close to iLife (because they're totally different beasts)? If you care as much as your flaming indicates, go check out some macs in an Apple store and let them show you how the iApps work.

    In short:
    1) your hardware appreciation stands in the way of valuing a 'normal' computer experience.
    2) the people I know that think like you are actually into the little challenges their computers offer in compatibility and such. This makes you a minority, most people hate that shit and will end up paying for things that don't work and cost them hours of frustration.
    3) you don't seem to know the mac, which makes preaching against them a waste of (your) time
    4) lighten up, they're only computers.

    --
    I think, therefore I am...I think.
  187. Re:BULLSHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the hell would Apple want to compete with MS Office?

    There is a version of MS Office that you can buy for your Mac!

  188. Re:BULLSHIT by clickster · · Score: 1

    *cough* cheaper version would be nice *cough*

    Aplle seems to be doing a very good job of taking good-quality, Open-Source projects and kicking them up about 6 notches. Hell, look at Tiger Server. Almost completely made of pre-existing open-source applications, but improved upon and packed in an easy-to-use way. I would love to see Apple improve upon something like Open Office and turn it into a truly competitive office suite, then include it with the OS or sell it at a significantly lower price than MS Office (say $25-$50).

    --
    If you mod me down, I shall become less powerful than you could possibly imagine.
  189. Are you trying? by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

    Are you just trying to be obstinate?

    "The iMac G5 had to be redesigned because they couldn't fit a PPC970 with all its cooling requirements into a tight little box. "

    This one fact nullifies your whole argument. The pedestal was not abandoned because it was passé. The venerable sunflower was abandoned because the G5 and its giant heat sink couldn't be quietly cooled inside the same footprint.

    "Wrong. I'm one of the philistines who considers a computer just another appliance -- something you'd know if you taken any care reading my previous post. I admire the pedestal iMac for its usability and ergonomics. I could give it shit that it looks cute."

    Right, so now that we agree that the iMac G5 doesn't have a pedestal because it can't we'll have to address the usability and ergonomics with a $200 arm and some elbow grease. That's the trade-off: enjoy some order of performance improvement at the cost of the dead weight in the base to anchor a built-in arm. I guess they could have just shipped the iMac G5 with a leaded base (or a big brick with a chromed arm) to the same dimensions as the sunflower pedestal (or is that too obviously lame?). Since it's fuck-all to aesthetics I don't see why one wouldn't drill a whole in one's desk to mount an arm.

    See: http://www.lcdmonitorarm.com/lcd_arms_3.htm

    Anyway, it's a tough call to live with. Using a G5 for a while makes me notice the difference in a G4. Does usability include how fast you can get work done? Nothing personal. Cheers.

    --
    Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
    1. Re:Are you trying? by fm6 · · Score: 1
      The venerable sunflower was abandoned because the G5 and its giant heat sink couldn't be quietly cooled inside the same footprint.
      So all of a sudden, it was totally uncool to sell Apple's based on G4s? Certainly not iMac users -- that product line has always been targeted to basic user, as opposed to high-powered systems that come in big boxes.

      So you're basically saying that the pedestal iMac was abandoned to provide extra processor power that would never be used -- but which adds a big coolness factor. You're really making my case for me.

    2. Re:Are you trying? by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

      me: The venerable sunflower was abandoned because the G5 and its giant heat sink couldn't be quietly cooled inside the same footprint.

      you: So all of a sudden, it was totally uncool to sell Apple's based on G4s? Certainly not iMac users -- that product line has always been targeted to basic user, as opposed to high-powered systems that come in big boxes.

      First, I'm not perfectly clear on what you are saying... the iMac has the same performance as the bottom end Power Mac.

      But, if I understand correctly, you are saying that Apple should have kept it's Middle of the Line consumer model with last generation's processor? Are you serious? For how long? You really think that "basic users" can't tell the difference in speed between a 1 GHz G4 and a 2 GHz G5? That "they aren't gonna use it" argument is totally played -- the iMac is targeted at the iLife suite. iLife '05 can totally take advantage of more horse power: The UI in iPhoto, the production time in iMovie, the flexibility in Garageband (more tracks, less bouncing to disk, less waiting when bouncing to disk); I could go on.

      Lemme know, I'm dying to see how you justify that. If you justify it by saying "they could have lowered the price" then let me ask how? The pedestal iMac is much more expensive to manufacture than the all-screen iMac -- there is no way Apple would have started taking a loss (reducing their margins to keep a last-gen all-in-one competitive).

      --
      Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
  190. It's easy to drop $60 on dinner in Manhattan by David+Rolfe · · Score: 1

    Well there is that $60 steak dinner. I can get a pretty good steak dinner for $30. And a not so good one for $15

    Doesn't that only prove that you can't patronize the best restaurants or that you live in an area with a significantly reduced cost of living? I mean what does saying "I can get a good-enough steak at Outback" really prove?

    Oh, oh, I know, it's like how everyone hates that bourgeois elitism! Damn you Mac owners and your expensive restaurants and foreign cars!

    --
    Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
  191. re: simple file sharing mode by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Yes, it appears you're correct - although most home users I encounter make absolutely no use of security restrictions on their home LANs anyway.

    The biggest concern they tend to have is making sure outsiders (on the Internet) can't view/access their local shares - and this is usually accomplished by a decent firewall/router.

    Even on my own LAN at my house, all of my computers have full access to whichever resources I've chosen to share. In a controlled environment such as one's home or apartment, you typically don't have concerns such as "Will one of my employees run off with my confidential data I keep in folder X?"

    XP Home is just as it says, a version of XP appropriate for most *home* applications.

  192. they last about 8 years... by Scudsucker · · Score: 1

    ...if my Rev A is any guide. It finally went tits up this summer - power supply? So you'll be cursed for a few years yet. Or you could try talking her into getting a refurb...I just got a dual 2.5 refurb for $2300. I got a couple more gigs of ram for it, and another 160 gig hard drive in a striped raid, and omfg is it fast.

  193. Re:BULLSHIT by unshavenyak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    While I'll concede to your point about GarageBand, you are kind of off in regards to the rest of your points.

    If you buy any retail DVD reader or have your PC pre-built with one software akin to iMovie and iPhoto are absolutely free, just like on a Mac.

    As for FireWire, my PC I just built recently has FireWire built into the motherboard and it's just a common nForce4 motherboard. It cost me zero extra dollars at all and so you are slightly off on that point.

    As for spyware or viruses, any moderately computer literate person can avoid tehse with ease. Simply allow Windows Update to do the critical updates when its needed and when browsing the web make sure your software firewall is on, which all Windows PCs that are SP2 or greater have, or browse behind a router which will keep you safe from spyware.

    One could also go ahead and spend the ~$50-$60 CDN dollars for antivirus software as well, but I've never, ever, had a virus following the basic advice that I gave above. That's one more point you have to tick off your pro-Mac list.

    As for on-screen font, CTRL + mousewheel really is a beautiful thing as it allows fast zooming in Windows. Additionally, the more readable font for Macs is arguable as some people find the Mac OS X font hinting harder on their eyes than the generic Windows font rendering or the ClearType Windows fond redering.

    Me, I'm indifferent and find ClearType and the Mac OS X rendering to be pretty much interchangeable. I suppose that's one more point that you should've researched a bit more on the Windows side as it is readily available for Windows computers.

    I will say that I enjoy my iBook and some of the features of Mac OS X Tiger very much, but the Windows trolls do have a few points in that some of the much lauded Mac features are really overblown and available in consumerate form on the Windows platform.