Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > When the HELL is apple going to make an iMac with a decent video card?!?!?!

When the HELL is apple going to make an iMac with a decent video card?!?!?!
Thread Tools
george68
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 08:53 PM
 
Look, I don't WANT a tower. I like the iMac because it's smaller, more compact, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I like how it includes the screen.

But since it's inception, Apple has always stuck a complete **** video card in the imac, making it pretty embarassing to play games with. Why!?

Look at an average person who'd like to play games. Chances are, they don't have the bling for a nice G5 tower setup with the monitor and accessories. But they like macs, so they get an iMac. For the past 5 years I've owned iMacs exclusively, and htey've ALWAYS been subpar when it comes to gaming.

WHY!?!?!

WAKE THE HELL UP APPLE. Make a GAMING edition with a decent video card!

Christ.... they'll never get this concept. It'd sell like hotcakes, but whatever.

- Ca$h
     
Mrjinglesusa
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Why do you care?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:17 PM
 
Originally posted by george68:
Look, I don't WANT a tower. I like the iMac because it's smaller, more compact, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I like how it includes the screen.

But since it's inception, Apple has always stuck a complete **** video card in the imac, making it pretty embarassing to play games with. Why!?

Look at an average person who'd like to play games. Chances are, they don't have the bling for a nice G5 tower setup with the monitor and accessories. But they like macs, so they get an iMac. For the past 5 years I've owned iMacs exclusively, and htey've ALWAYS been subpar when it comes to gaming.

WHY!?!?!

WAKE THE HELL UP APPLE. Make a GAMING edition with a decent video card!

Christ.... they'll never get this concept. It'd sell like hotcakes, but whatever.

- Ca$h
It would sell like hotcakes but cost $200-300 more. People ALREADY complain about the price.
2.3GHz i7 15" Retina Macbook Pro (Late 2013)
     
Dex13
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bay Area of San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:25 PM
 
Cash as an imac owner owner as you are, I feel your frustration totally and like you will not snatch up a new imac because of the crappy irreplaceable video card .

     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:05 PM
 
Originally posted by Mrjinglesusa:
It would sell like hotcakes but cost $200-300 more. People ALREADY complain about the price.
The GEForce 5200 isn't that bad, it should play current Mac 3D games fairly decent. I donot work for Apple but you have got to understand that the Apple Macintosh has a bad reputation for appearing to be expensive and most people won't take the time to compare Apples for Apples when it comes to the competition. They are really not a lot more expensive considering they look 10 times better than the competition.

Look what we got last year. A 20" iMac G4 with 1.25 Ghz and 256k L2 cache and 167 Mhz system bus and 80GB HD for $2199.00,
Now we get a smaller machine with the same size screen with 1.8Ghz G5 and 512k L2 cache and 600Mhz system bus and 160GB HD but for $300.00 less.

Apple wants to give the most bang for the buck. Last year consumers complained more about the processor speeds of the consumer Macs and now that all changed.
If Apple slaps in a high end graphics card then the price goes up. Not everyone needs a gaming machine and may not want to pay for what they are not using.

Last year the G5 processor needed a large metal housing with 9 fans, this year the engineering got better with only 2 fans behind a small enclosure. Now we get pro speed at consumer level.
No computer is for everyone. Next revision may change, Apple needs to get response first.
iMac 24" 2.8 Ghz Core 2 Extreme
500GB HDD
4GB Ram
Proud new Owner!
     
george68  (op)
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:09 PM
 
Originally posted by hldan:
Not everyone needs a gaming machine and may not want to pay for what they are not using
I never said they did. However, a large portion of computer users are YOUNGER PEOPLE. A large portion of GAMERS are younger people.

HENCE, a large portion of younger people use computers and want to play games....... so they look at the choices....

well, I can either get a PC that costs 1500 and plays games extremely well......

or I can spend upwards of 3 grand on a dual G5 tower that plays games only alright.....

or I can spend $1500 on an incredibly designed iMac with all the processing power I need in one great package with an OS that's light years ahead of windows and I just love the thing but alas I cannot play games because the graphics cards are outdated before I've even opened the box.

That's not much of a choice.

- Rob
( Last edited by vmarks; Sep 3, 2004 at 07:33 AM. )
     
Disgruntled Head of C-3PO
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In bits and pieces on Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:51 PM
 
Why is a 64 meg video card considered horrible?
"Curse my metal body, I wasn't fast enough!"
     
mac freak
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park, IL / Santa Monica, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:53 PM
 
Would it really be THAT hard to include the iMac graphics card in an actual AGP slot? They could still ship it with the POS GeForce FX 5200 Ultra, but just make it REPLACEABLE and wammo, we have a nice cheap game-capable Mac.

@ disgruntled head person: The GeForceFX has always been considered an awful card. It was slower than ATI's previous generation products before and after its release. That changed with the 6800 series... but the FX 5200 is old a stupid at this point. We'd be better off with a 2-year-old Radeon 9700 Pro... and ideally, we could get a new midrange card, like a plain 128MB GeForce 6800 or a Radeon X600...
Be happy.
     
george68  (op)
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:30 AM
 
Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Why is a 64 meg video card considered horrible?
Because 64 megs is the MINIMUM required for new games. I have a 64 meg card, and it plays halo like ****.

- Rob
     
Disgruntled Head of C-3PO
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In bits and pieces on Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:03 AM
 
Originally posted by george68:
Because 64 megs is the MINIMUM required for new games. I have a 64 meg card, and it plays halo like ****.

- Rob
Get an xbox for under $150 and it comes with a controller.
"Curse my metal body, I wasn't fast enough!"
     
AstroBoyMoto
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 02:17 AM
 
okay, so it's not designed for games, yeah, we got that....

so you should have an xbox/ps2/etc as well? okay I'll do that...

but now I have to buy a TV... if not for inbuilt graphics capabilies, why couldn't a 'TV' mode and AV connectors be included so at least you could play something THROUGH it at least then you don't have issues of duplication in miniture apartments
     
george68  (op)
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 02:32 AM
 
Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Get an xbox for under $150 and it comes with a controller.
It isn't the same. Gaming on a console is fun, but a FPS with broadband on a computer with a mouse is great also, yet completely different.

- Rob
     
Mike Pither
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 07:09 AM
 
Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Why is a 64 meg video card considered horrible?
I don't think that the problem is the fact that it comes with 64mb rather than 128mb (or more) but rather the card itself.

From what I have read on macNN and other sites the frame rates in games are the same on the Powerbook 15AL with the 64mb std mem as with the optional 128mb, the extra memory makes zero difference it seems. The bottle neck on that computer is not the memory but the card, processore or something else. It could be same on the new iMac but at the moment I guess we don't know. Anyway on Apples site it says that the frame rates in Unreal tournament are 3 times thoese of the old model so it will be interesting to see what it's like.
iMac DVSE 400 640mb + AL PB 15" with 1 gig + iMac 2,8 with 4gb + MacBook Pro 2,53 with 4gb
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 07:13 AM
 
Maybe if you were really so upset, you'd not buy an iMac. If people buy what's out there, Apple has less incentive to change.
Besides, for the great majority of the line's target market, I'm sure the iMac video card is just fine.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
chris v
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 07:33 AM
 
I personally think that even if it shipped with an ATI 9800 in it, the hard-core gamers would think of another reason not to buy it. It's not as big of a market as you might think for one, and for two, the kids who mainly want a PC to play games on are pretty well already hung up on Windows boxes, and would more than likely stay there.

Gamers just have an overly-vocal online presence, which makes it seem like they're an imprtant segment of the computer-buying world, but I suspect that the raw numbers of units sold to people buying a new computer expressly to play Doom by adding a better vid. card would not make up for the cost, because of the non-gamers who were turned off by the higher price.

When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
     
mibok
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 08:41 AM
 
I donīt care wether there are thousand of great consoles that play games well... i want the choice of an better graphics chipset on my imac. i would have bought one for games to complement my ibook. But i wonīt. Actually i donīt have a need for an iMac, but the new ones are pretty sleek and if they came with an good graphics card (BTO) i would have ordered it. Right now theres no reason to buy it, my ibook G4 does all I need.
They could have used the new mobile graphics chips that are exchangable...
     
neverwind
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Rockhampton, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 09:38 AM
 
Originally posted by Mrjinglesusa:
It would sell like hotcakes but cost $200-300 more. People ALREADY complain about the price.
Yeah but Apple should have a BTO video card option that you can specify IF you want it.
     
solbo
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 09:46 AM
 
Originally posted by neverwind:
Yeah but Apple should have a BTO video card option that you can specify IF you want it.
Exactly. Ship the default models with the crap card and charge people who want a better card a hundred or two more.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 09:57 AM
 
What do you think revb might have? Built-in wireless as the default, 2Ghz, improved video card. 23" max size?

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Jim Paradise
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 10:23 AM
 
Has anyone actually checked to see if the graphics card is soldered on for sure? I'm sure it is, but has anyone actually checked yet?
     
Mrjinglesusa
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Why do you care?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 10:27 AM
 
Originally posted by george68:


or I can spend upwards of 3 grand on a dual G5 tower that plays games only alright.....


- Rob
See, that is the point. Mac gaming is poor not because of video cards but sloppy ports. Even gaming on a a dual G5 with a kick ass video card is only "alright" according to most posters in the gaming lounge. Until the ports get better, you could have a 1 GB ATI 12000 and it still wouldn't be that great.
2.3GHz i7 15" Retina Macbook Pro (Late 2013)
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:03 AM
 
Shut up, Ca$h !

Get a PowerMac or a freakin' PC if you need GPU power.
The reasons have been made clear in many threads.

There is a bitchin' thread for folks like you, please rant out there !

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=226373

-t
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:10 AM
 
Guys, stop trying to explain away Apple's oversights just because you are Mac fanatics. The fact that a $1900 iMac comes with a $40 video card is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't matter if it is 'enough for people who aren't gamers'. You should get what you pay for.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:16 AM
 
Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Guys, stop trying to explain away Apple's oversights just because you are Mac fanatics. The fact that a $1900 iMac comes with a $40 video card is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't matter if it is 'enough for people who aren't gamers'. You should get what you pay for.
You get what you pay for, a GEForce 5200.

As D'Espice pointed out, there is virtually NO difference in 2D performance as compared to high-end cards, so the only difference is for 3D. For 99% of the iMac user's, it's NOT an issue !
So WTF should I pay a dime more ? Just because some 0.1% minority needs more GPU power ?

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...=4#post2158964

-t
     
galarneau
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canastota, New York
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:17 AM
 
Who is more likely to play games on their Mac, a consumer or a professional?

What Mac is built for consumers?

It's simple logic, and I just don't understand why Apple would choose a GeForce5200 over a Radeon 9600.

The Radeon wouldn't cost that much more and runs cooler (I believe), and would be better suited for a small enclosure like the new iMac.

And for all the people who say get an xbox for gaming?... I did, and then sold it. Playing FPS type games with a controller is annoying if you're used to WSAD and a mouse.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:20 AM
 
Originally posted by galarneau:
Who is more likely to play games on their Mac, a consumer or a professional?
Wrong question !

Who is more likely to buy an iMac ?
A consumer or a hardcore gamer ?

Apple knows the answer and made the iMac accordingly !

-t
     
atlcane
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 11:51 AM
 
I would say buy a pc if you are that into gaming. The mac has a horrible selection of games. If apple had a larger selection of games I could see them adding a new graphics card.
     
Cincinnatus
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:02 PM
 
Who knew there were so may qualified, but sadly unemployed, manufacturing engineers and hardware designers lurking on these fora. Perhaps we should all get together and come up with a design that is compact (but has expansion slots), low in power consumption (and hence heat dissipation), quiet as a result of requiring fewer fans, completely customizeable at the factory - "where the magic happens" - so that everyone is happy, and cheap - under $1000, but preferrably $500, because thats all it really costs to build a PC that could trounce the iMac anyway. Then, with this design in hand, either (A) smugly sell it to Apple, knowing that they could have done it all along, but just didn't get it; or (B) start our own company and build the thing in volume (it can't be that hard to develop manufacturing contacts in Taiwan and source all of the necessary components).

/Cincinnatus

PS - Please don't mention the Cube. Yes it was expandable. No, it was not an all-in-one. It didn't sell well (I wanted one, but at the time didn't have any money); it was not a consumer PC in the same way that the iMac has been. Either purchase the iMac, save your money for the computer you really want, or start a company and build the computer you know everyone wants. At any rate, stop starting new threads that beat the same dead horse.
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:10 PM
 
Originally posted by atlcane:
I would say buy a pc if you are that into gaming. The mac has a horrible selection of games. If apple had a larger selection of games I could see them adding a new graphics card.
It's this attitude that keeps the mac game market in such sad shape, that and apple purposely crippling their "consumer" machines. I myself have had enough of this B$, I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore! For the people saying the card is fine and alright and they don't the $10 increase in price, I wish the new iMac came with 8 MB ATi rage card to satisfy your computing needs and desires, maybe it would make the iMac another $5 cheaper for you as well!
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:14 PM
 
Originally posted by the_glassman:
It's this attitude that keeps the mac game market in such sad shape
Who cares ?
Again, why should a 0.01% minority dictate the design ?

-t
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:17 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Who cares ?
Again, why should a 0.01% minority dictate the design ?

-t
Most iMac users wont need anything more than a 1GHz G5. Are you saying that is what Apple should have equipped them with for $1,900?
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:24 PM
 
Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Most iMac users wont need anything more than a 1GHz G5. Are you saying that is what Apple should have equipped them with for $1,900?
Disagree. That's what the eMac is for.

As a matter of fact, the lack in processor speed was one of the main reasons why people where not buying the G4 iMac any more. Compared to the eMac, it was not competetive. So people bought the eMac instead.

And again, for most Mac applications, the processor speed DOES matter.
e.g.: all iLife apps, FCP, any music app, Flash...

But do they need or benefit from a 3D GPU ? Not at all !

-t
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:25 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Who cares ?
Again, why should a 0.01% minority dictate the design ?

-t
Where do you get you statistic numbers from, I would really like to know where you pulled that number from, I have a feeling where you pulled from but will reserve saying so for now. You do realize that the gaming market is huge and had potential for further growth don't you?
I wish apple would design a computer just for you folks, it would come with a top of the line 300 MHz G3 and a top of the line 4 MB VRAM card. To further appease the lemmings it would come in fruity colors! Oh wait, they already made it, it's called a first generation ibook.
Seems to me like that is more of the minority then the people who request value for their dollar, stop trying to make excuses for apple and accept with crap they come out with blindly just because it's the next best thing. There is nothing wrong with expecting something better out of a $1800 machine, otherwise so many people would have not voiced there disdain already.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:29 PM
 
Originally posted by the_glassman:
Where do you get you statistic numbers from, I would really like to know where you pulled that number from
Of course, that is based on my own research and expertise

Originally posted by the_glassman:
You do realize that the gaming market is huge and had potential for further growth don't you?
No, neither I nor Apple do realize that.

Apple tries to catch some of the "I-might-want-to-play-a-game-now-and-then" user, but serious hardcore gamers will most likely not chose a Mac, and they are NOT a financially interesting market.
It's a niche, if you know what that means !

-t
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:33 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Disagree. That's what the eMac is for.

As a matter of fact, the lack in processor speed was one of the main reasons why people where not buying the G4 iMac any more. Compared to the eMac, it was not competetive. So people bought the eMac instead.

And again, for most Mac applications, the processor speed DOES matter.
e.g.: all iLife apps, FCP, any music app, Flash...

But do they need or benefit from a 3D GPU ? Not at all !

-t
This is where you wrong, your talking about a consumer machine and people needing FCP??? Why would they need something so powerful, why not use MS paint?
Lots of applications depend on the power of the graphics card. Not sure if you noticed but the card included with this machine just barely meets the requirements for some software applications. Motion being a prime example. Have you ever used Expose on a dual screen setup? It's much better with a high end card, not to mention you need the 32 MB minimum to run quartz on each screen. I think what you fail to realize by apple including such a week card in the iMac is that it will be effecting how future programs run on your computer 6 months down the road where originally it barely meet the specifications, it will no longer meet them. Do you plan to purchase a new imac after every revision just to have a computer that is just good enough?
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:39 PM
 
Besides, I don't think turtle is being an apologist for Apple as much as he is trying to add some common sense to a few people griping about something that really will be a non-factor for the vast majority of users and potential users.
It's not like you have to buy an iMac.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:40 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Of course, that is based on my own research and expertise



No, neither I nor Apple do realize that.

Apple tries to catch some of the "I-might-want-to-play-a-game-now-and-then" user, but serious hardcore gamers will most likely not chose a Mac, and they are NOT a financially interesting market.
It's a niche, if you know what that means !

-t
I don't think apple thinks it's just a niche market, they spend considerble time and money promoting games at shows as well as including them with their systems. How many games are included with a Powermac G5 BTW? If you want to base it on that argument the whole mac market is niche. Does this mean apple should just close up shop now? All the software companies should just stop developing programs and we should all just go Wintel?
     
Sparkletron
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:43 PM
 
Originally posted by george68:
Make a GAMING edition with a decent video card!
This is an excellent suggestion. On the PC side you've got minis like the Shuttle and the ICE-Cube 2 that are designed for games and LAN parties (where you play games). Of course you can use these machines to do anything, but the focus is on games.

The difference is all in the configuration. You take a standard config and improve the memory and GPU and toss a cold cathode light in there and maybe stencil "I-MOD" on the front and now you've got a game machine.

Apple already does this to some degree so it's a no-brainer. Providing more configurations would obviate the need for another model like a minitower.

That being said, I really wish we could get a headless i-Mac, preferably in the shape of a Cube.

-S
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:48 PM
 
Originally posted by Randman:
It's not like you have to buy an iMac.
No I don't and with those specifications I won't. However as a stock holder I am disappointed that an option is not offered, I do believe the new iMac could very well be the new Trojan horse, much like the ipod is in getting people to switch or at least look at the platform. However there will be people who will pass just because of the lame card. There are threads all over the place where even current Mac users are disappointed, and for good reason. When the rumor sites had specifications posted weeks ago with the graphics card people didn't want to believe that apple was using such a weak card in their new system. But as no surprise to me they have, and many of us continue to think that it's acceptable.
We finally have G5 "consumer" machine with ibook (pb) graphics card.
     
Sparkletron
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 12:54 PM
 
Originally posted by the_glassman:
For the people saying the card is fine and alright and they don't the $10 increase in price, I wish the new iMac came with 8 MB ATi rage card to satisfy your computing needs and desires, maybe it would make the iMac another $5 cheaper for you as well!
Perfect! The 5200 is OVERKILL for these guys.

-S
     
Sparkletron
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:05 PM
 
Originally posted by chris v:
Gamers just have an overly-vocal online presence, which makes it seem like they're an imprtant segment of the computer-buying world, but I suspect that the raw numbers of units sold to people buying a new computer expressly to play Doom by adding a better vid. card would not make up for the cost, because of the non-gamers who were turned off by the higher price.
The gaming market is a $30 billion-dollar-a-year industry. To put this in perspective, the gaming market is larger than the movie industry's market. The gaming market is in fact one of the largest markets in the computer industry. Education? DTP? Not even close. For Apple to ignore this market is fiduciary madness.

-S
     
galarneau
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canastota, New York
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:12 PM
 
Originally posted by Sparkletron:
The gaming market is a $30 billion-dollar-a-year industry. To put this in perspective, the gaming market is larger than the movie industry's market. The gaming market is in fact one of the largest markets in the computer industry. Education? DTP? Not even close. For Apple to ignore this market is fiduciary madness.

-S

Bravo!!! What he said ^^^
     
Mike Pither
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:19 PM
 
If the video card is soldered on, offering a slot and a custom build option would probably cause the std model to cost more without making it any better. I am also like some others here not convinced that there is a significant market for a lowish priced gaming mac. At present the quantity of good up to date mac games is tiny compared to windows boxes and consoles (almost zero here in Europe).

I would have to also presume that the people who would choose this gaming spec mac would be existing pc owners since no current suitable mac exists to upgrade from. That then means they would have to keep their old pc to play their old games on and then get used to waiting for the new games to get ported long after they have come out on pcs etc. (if they get ported).

I would like to think that apple could "grow" this market but apple is a niche player and I suspect that gaming macs would be a niche of a niche.
iMac DVSE 400 640mb + AL PB 15" with 1 gig + iMac 2,8 with 4gb + MacBook Pro 2,53 with 4gb
     
solbo
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:22 PM
 
I am firmly in the camp where I believe that apple should offer better cards as a BTO option. That said I can't imagine this is really going to affect sales to potential switchers(Windows users).

These are the same people that are buying Dells with onboard video and a Celeron processor and thinking they are getting some great deal. If that is their market then I doubt this is going to be a problem. As a matter of fact, no PC gamer is going to buy a Mac for games. Period. For the iMacs target market this is the best card they could use and keep the cost down. The lack of games for OS X is more of a detriment than having an underperforming card.

Sales lost to this will be negligible and they know it, and most people probably won't ever notice the difference. I wish they would offer an option to the people who do, but it isn't a bad decision on their part from a sales perspective.
     
gioele
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:29 PM
 
If this can make you feel better, PowerBook and iBook users share the same fate
     
solbo
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:31 PM
 
Originally posted by gioele:
If this can make you feel better, PowerBook and iBook users share the same fate
Can't you get a 128MB Radeon Mobility 9700 in the Powerbook?
     
capuchin
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:33 PM
 
Originally posted by george68:
THey probably are too busy eating quiche and wearing turtlenecks to even realize what a huge marketshare they're missing.

- Rob
Okay, that's actually a pretty funny image.
All opinions are entirely those of my employer. It's not my fault.
     
Mike Pither
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:34 PM
 
Originally posted by solbo:
Can't you get a 128MB Radeon Mobility 9700 in the Powerbook?
Yes and it gives no improvement in games frame rates in bench mark tests published here. Zero.
iMac DVSE 400 640mb + AL PB 15" with 1 gig + iMac 2,8 with 4gb + MacBook Pro 2,53 with 4gb
     
Sparkletron
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 01:58 PM
 
Originally posted by Mike Pither:
At present the quantity of good up to date mac games is tiny compared to windows boxes and consoles (almost zero here in Europe).
In fact, "tiny" is an understatement. But by crippling all their offerings with third-rate GPUs, Apple will see the number of titles shrink even more. Developers now have even less incentive to target Macs.

Originally posted by solbo:
Sales lost to this will be negligible and they know it, and most people probably won't ever notice the difference.
I agree. But a loss in profits in the short-term to grow your market in the long term is a common business strategy.

Apple needs to salvage the Mac's continuously down-spiralling reputation as the worst game machine on the market. Either that or report to their shareholders that they are either unwilling or unable to get a slice of the $30 billion-dollar-a-year industry.

-S
     
george68  (op)
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 06:58 PM
 
Originally posted by Randman:
Maybe if you were really so upset, you'd not buy an iMac.
THATS THE POINT!

I WOULD sign up RIGHT NOW to get a G5 iMac IF it came with a decent video card. I am an APPLE user, I do not LIKE pcs. I would like to play games without SUCKVILLE framerates, and right now the only option is the G5, which is not only way too expensive, it's too big!!!

Apple has LOST a sale here because of the outdated video card they used.

- Rob
( Last edited by vmarks; Sep 3, 2004 at 07:38 AM. )
     
Dex13
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bay Area of San Jose
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2004, 07:07 PM
 
Guys, stop trying to explain away Apple's oversights just because you are Mac fanatics. The fact that a $1900 iMac comes with a $40 video card is absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't matter if it is 'enough for people who aren't gamers'. You should get what you pay for.
GeForce 5200 64mb Prices
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:32 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,