[C-Bear]

I'm in the market for a new family desktop to replace our aged iMac DV Plus (ha!, I know). At first I simply figured to get a new iMac, but the advent of the G5 (too much computer for our needs, I suppose) has left the G4 Powermacs looking attractive and affordable.

I speced out a G4 Powermac like this:

• 1.25GHz w/ 1MB L3 Cache
• 512MB DDR333 SDRAM (PC2700) -1 DIMM
• 80GB Ultra ATA drive
• Optical 1 - Apple SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Optical 2 - None
• ATI Radeon 9000 Pro dual-display w/64MB DDR
• Apple Studio Display (17" flat panel)
• 56K internal modem
• AirPort Card
• Apple Pro Keyboard - U.S. English
• Mac OS - U.S. English
• APP for Power Mac (w/ or w/o display) - Enrollment Kit

Subtotal $2,651.00

And a new iMac like this:

• 512MB DDR266 - 1 DIMM
• AirPort Extreme Card
• Bluetooth Module
• Keyboard/Mac OS X - U.S. English
• APP for iMac/eMac - Enrollment Kit
• 17-inch widescreen LCD flat
• 1GHz PowerPC G4
• 80GB Ultra ATA drive
• 4x SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
w/ 64MB video memory
• Apple Keyboard
• Apple Pro Mouse
• Apple Pro Speakers

Subtotal $2,317.00

Either way, I'd order from Crucial and move up to 1Gig of RAM, but these I think are fairly comparable set-ups that come very close to each other in price. Use will be for general computing (browsing, e-mail, word processing, etc.), but it's always nice to have a cool system (at least).

Any thoughts or recommendations? Alternative advice or something (specs, options, upgrades) I'm overlooking?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[icruise]

If you're going to be spending that much on a Powermac, I'd probably step up to a G5. If you get a third party display (like the Samsung 172T, which actually matches the G5 better than the Apple monitors) you can save at least $200, which makes the two almost the same price. The 1.6ghz model should kick the 1.25Ghz G4's butt speedwise.

[cambro]

Well, just remember that the iMac only has 256k L2 cache. That's it. I was really hoping that they'd at least bump the cache to 512k because lack of cache on the G4 is a serious problem. The system bus/memory are pretty darn slow. It becomes very apparent when doing processor intensive tasks.

Adding either the much better L3 cache in the G4 Powermac or going the G5 route seems like a much better choice to me. Personally, I would go G5 all the way.

[Simon]

Originally posted by cambro:
Well, just remember that the iMac only has 256k L2 cache. That's it. I was really hoping that they'd at least bump the cache to 512k because lack of cache on the G4 is a serious problem. The system bus/memory are pretty darn slow. It becomes very apparent when doing processor intensive tasks.

Adding either the much better L3 cache in the G4 Powermac or going the G5 route seems like a much better choice to me. Personally, I would go G5 all the way.

The L2 is on-die, i.e. part of the chip design. If you use the same G4 as before (the 7455) you can't get more than the 256kB that are on that chip.

Moto does have a G4 with 512kB L2. It's called the 7457. But it's not quite ready for prime-time yet. See the PowerBook-wait.

[Bbazzarrakk]

Your specs look pretty good to me. To be honest, I'm not much of an Airport in the desktops fan though in most cases. If your computer is just going to sit there, running a line to the wall generally isn't a big hurdle and you get better performance if we're talking broadband.

I'm also not much of an Apple Care on desktops fan either. I've had so few problems there, the repairs themselves verses what I would have paid in Apple Care is not worth it. Ironically, the only two repair hardware problems I've ever had, were still covered under the machine's default warranty.

Finally though, I must agree with the others. The G5 is Apple's future and you can get one for the prices you're talking about, or very close to. That makes good long term sense to me.

Baz

[zigzag]

Based on your anticipated uses, I would get the iMac. You're just not doing anything that requires a tower. I have the original 15" FP iMac and at 800 MHz it's all the computer I need for general use. The free-floating monitor is great, and it's generally much quieter and easier to deal with than a tower.

That said, my uses have changed since I got it, and now I'm running up against its limitations. I'm doing more and more digital video, and I'm also putting my large CD collection (over 50 GB so far) onto iTunes (so I can move music to and from my iPod). I've solved the problem by using external Firewire drives, but I would prefer to have that storage built-in, and it's not practical to upgrade the iMac's hard drive. And as I do more video, I want more processing power.

So, if you don't anticipate any new uses, I think the iMac would be ideal. And it will handle a modest amount of digital video with no problem. But if you think you might develop more heavy-duty needs, then I would consider getting a tower. Myself, I'd shoot for a G5 - the 1.6 will probably handle anything you're likely to throw at it (based on your current usage, it's way more than you need), and it incorporates next-generation technology (it's also quieter, and I prefer quiet machines).

[villalobos]

Originally posted by Bbazzarrakk:
... you get better performance if we're talking broadband.

Baz

Where do you get that from? There is not perceptible difference between wireless and wired for internet browsing, except if your broadband is above 11 mbps that is, which in the States is probably not. I guess the only issue could be a ever so slightly higher ping, which would be a problem for online games.

villa

[villalobos]

Originally posted by C-Bear:
I'm in the market for a new family desktop to replace our aged iMac DV Plus (ha!, I know). At first I simply figured to get a new iMac, but the advent of the G5 (too much computer for our needs, I suppose) has left the G4 Powermacs looking attractive and affordable.

I speced out a G4 Powermac like this:

• 1.25GHz w/ 1MB L3 Cache
• 512MB DDR333 SDRAM (PC2700) -1 DIMM
• 80GB Ultra ATA drive
• Optical 1 - Apple SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• Optical 2 - None
• ATI Radeon 9000 Pro dual-display w/64MB DDR
• Apple Studio Display (17" flat panel)
• 56K internal modem
• AirPort Card
• Apple Pro Keyboard - U.S. English
• Mac OS - U.S. English
• APP for Power Mac (w/ or w/o display) - Enrollment Kit

Subtotal $2,651.00

And a new iMac like this:

• 512MB DDR266 - 1 DIMM
• AirPort Extreme Card
• Bluetooth Module
• Keyboard/Mac OS X - U.S. English
• APP for iMac/eMac - Enrollment Kit
• 17-inch widescreen LCD flat
• 1GHz PowerPC G4
• 80GB Ultra ATA drive
• 4x SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
• NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
w/ 64MB video memory
• Apple Keyboard
• Apple Pro Mouse
• Apple Pro Speakers

Subtotal $2,317.00

Either way, I'd order from Crucial and move up to 1Gig of RAM, but these I think are fairly comparable set-ups that come very close to each other in price. Use will be for general computing (browsing, e-mail, word processing, etc.), but it's always nice to have a cool system (at least).

Any thoughts or recommendations? Alternative advice or something (specs, options, upgrades) I'm overlooking?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah you should get the least amount of memory from apple. They OVERCHARGE, always.
You might try to look in the refurbished section of the Apple Store, especially if you plane to get the APP anyways. There you might be able to save money on the cpu, the monitor and the airport card. Finally, the Imac is definitely much more elegant and practical. The attached screen that you 'lose' when you change computers is the only real drawback. Apart from that very nice setup. They just upgraded them too. Looks even better now

villa

[Bbazzarrakk]

Where do you get that from? There is not perceptible difference between wireless and wired for internet browsing, except if your broadband is above 11 mbps that is, which in the States is probably not. I guess the only issue could be a ever so slightly higher ping, which would be a problem for online games.

My bad. I didn't check the facts well enough against a rumor I had heard. You're correct. I appologize.

Baz

[iDotMac]

Originally posted by C-Bear:
I'm in the market for a new family desktop to replace our aged iMac DV Plus (ha!, I know). At first I simply figured to get a new iMac, but the advent of the G5 (too much computer for our needs, I suppose) has left the G4 Powermacs looking attractive and affordable.

You and I are in the same boat except I posted my thread in the iMac forum! I'm really torn about what to get. I use photoshop and iMovie a good bit. Let us know what you choose!

[Starry Night]

Originally posted by iDotMac:
You and I are in the same boat except I posted my thread in the iMac forum! I'm really torn about what to get. I use photoshop and iMovie a good bit. Let us know what you choose!

I recently went through the same decision making process, FP iMac or PM. First, there's no wrong answer, either way you'll be ok. I ended up going with the PM and have been very happy with it. Here's why:

1) In practical use, the PM takes up less desk space because the CPU is on the floor, at least in my case. True, the imac is quieter, but the PM's fan doesn't bother me.

2) The all in one design of the imac grates against my sense of value and practicality. The display is eternally attached leaving no practical way to upgrade it down the road. The whole thing makes me feel like I'm being roped into some corporate strategy of being forced to buy a new computer if I want to upgrade. Quite simply the PM gives me much greater flexibility over the life of the computer.

3) When I did comparisons of different displays, I found I liked the adjustment ability of the imac, yet the display itself to be of mediocre image quality. It seems more like laptop display quality with its narrow viewing angles. Yet Apple is essentially charging a premium price for it.

Don't get me wrong, the iMac is very good computer. But I found that the PM simply offered more of what was important to me.

If either of you go PM, think hard about not getting the 17" LCD Apple Display. It is not of the cinema display's quality level and has very outdated specs as compared to third party displays like Samsung of NEC. Also, Apple only gives a one year warranty on the display unless you buy Applecare at the same time that you purchase both the CPU and display. They're trying to force Apple Care on you, something that is a questionable need on the G4 MDD. At the price Apple is charging their 17" LCD should come with a 4 year warranty!

I bought a NEC 1760V 17" display for about $400 and it's fantastic. 3 year warranty and, imho, a better display than Apple's $700 17" LCD. The Samsung 171T is also very good.

Apple's 17" LCD may be your cup of tea, but be sure to do some comparisons rather than just assume that because Apple made it, that it must be the best

[iDotMac]

Originally posted by Starry Night:
I recently went through the same decision making process, FP iMac or PM. First, there's no wrong answer, either way you'll be ok. I ended up going with the PM and have been very happy with it. Here's why:

1) In practical use, the PM takes up less desk space because the CPU is on the floor, at least in my case. True, the imac is quieter, but the PM's fan doesn't bother me.

2) The all in one design of the imac grates against my sense of value and practicality. The display is eternally attached leaving no practical way to upgrade it down the road. The whole thing makes me feel like I'm being roped into some corporate strategy of being forced to buy a new computer if I want to upgrade. Quite simply the PM gives me much greater flexibility over the life of the computer.

3) When I did comparisons of different displays, I found I liked the adjustment ability of the imac, yet the display itself to be of mediocre image quality. It seems more like laptop display quality with its narrow viewing angles. Yet Apple is essentially charging a premium price for it.

Don't get me wrong, the iMac is very good computer. But I found that the PM simply offered more of what was important to me.

If either of you go PM, think hard about not getting the 17" LCD Apple Display. It is not of the cinema display's quality level and has very outdated specs as compared to third party displays like Samsung of NEC. Also, Apple only gives a one year warranty on the display unless you buy Applecare at the same time that you purchase both the CPU and display. They're trying to force Apple Care on you, something that is a questionable need on the G4 MDD. At the price Apple is charging their 17" LCD should come with a 4 year warranty!

I bought a NEC 1760V 17" display for about $400 and it's fantastic. 3 year warranty and, imho, a better display than Apple's $700 17" LCD. The Samsung 171T is also very good.

Apple's 17" LCD may be your cup of tea, but be sure to do some comparisons rather than just assume that because Apple made it, that it must be the best

I wasn't looking at the Apple LCDs. My Jobsian Reality Distortion Field breaks down when it comes to that much money! I'm checking around and seeing what's available though I still haven't ruled out CRT (Yeah I know Jobs said they were dead but they still have great quality at great prices!) though the LCDs look nice!