[Parky]

Originally posted by Spliff:
This picture was posted at Ars Technica forums. Look at all the improvements in features over four years, except the GPU.

I suppose this could be valid if the iMac specs were actually correct !! 2Ghz?

[Spliff]

Originally posted by Parky:
I suppose this could be valid if the iMac specs were actually correct !! 2Ghz?

LOL. I just noticed that. Hmm, we'll see what the original poster over at Ars Technica [Link] has to say about this.

[waltham845]

I did notice that the Nvidia card uses a heat sink. So most of the newer cards have fans. They probably wouldn't fit anyway. I also notice that Doom3 for PC requires 128mb video card so no maximum playable doom3 for imac?....

I wish it did have a 128 mb video card. 64 mb seem a little small since it is non-upgradable.

lw [/B]

[cc_foo]

My thoughts on the iMac G5:

1. Cosmetically, looks fantastic. Much better than expected.

2. Cheaper than I expected.

3. Pleasantly surprised that Apple managed to make the 17" the baseline, and so cheap.

4. I feel bad that the iMac G4 form factor is gone forever. It is a pity that just because an outstanding new computer is released, all the ideas behind the previous one is totally discarded. I personally think the iMac G4 design is equally fantastic.

5. The VESA mounting capability should inspire a cottage industry of mounts and stands.

6. The iMac G4 was released 2.5 years ago. At the time optical drives needed to be horizontal, to reach high speeds. Is this a non-issue 2.5 years later?

7. About 10kg each. But is this the first iMac with no handle (or handle equivalent)?

[tigas]

Originally posted by Landos Mustache:
What in the hell are you talking about? How much could your CRT be possibly worth that you can't sell it and get an awesome computer with a 17 or 20 inch LCD built in?

You really think Apple should make a headless iMac just so cheapskates can use the old $200 CRT sitting around? Look at just the cost of the LCD and you will see you are getting the computer itself for a low price.

If you think the 20" LCD of the iMac is even remotely the same as the one on the Cinema Display, you're in for quite a surprise!

As a matter of fact, I myself LOATHE LCDs (the low viewing angle, the strange colors, the interpolation artifacts of having 18bit displays try to show a 24bit image) and have a 1500Euro Sony GDM-F520 21 incher. Yes, it heats, yes, it's big, move on. My only Mac desktop choice, which I have been postponing for a long time, would now be the same G5 tower I have dismissed as overpriced, overhyped and impossible to upgrade (no second optical drive, no third hard disk, going backwards to 3 slots again -well, two really, because they didn't leave the mandatory empty slot space the new AGP cards' cooling systems require? What were they smoking in Cupertino?)

So, my Pismo will definitely get a G4/550, and no desktop Mac for now - mind you, my desktop computer is a Wintel.

So, Yes, I'm a Wintel user, I got an old pismo, loved it, loved the expandability, loved the MacOS, and would like to switch. And I want that minitower.

The Cube was NOT a minitower. It should have full-lenght slots. It will have a fan. It will have an easy to acess interior with few brackets to get in the way.
I could live with only two slots + AGP (or PCIEx) in a minitower. I could live with only one optical drive. I could live with only one hard disk. In fact, what I want is a G5 tower cut in half with a proper cooling system to retrieve all that space lost to the "CPU partition", and since I work with Macs, a real tower with internal space for 4 hard disks, two optical drives and at least 4 (pref. 5) slots in two PCI-X and one regular PCI bus. In fact, my workplace just scrounged the last Dual G4 MDD's they could find in Europe just not to get huddled with G5's...

Really, all of Apple's lineup is a bit lopsided because of trouble at the top. [/off-topic]

[Zoom]

Originally posted by scottiB:
Zoom, and I mean this respectfully, what do you define as a "prosumer"? What software does a prosumer use? What makes an iMac not enough and a PowerMac G5 too much?

Prosumer, by definition, is somewhere between a consumer and a professional. These people tend to be above average income and know more about computers than mom and pop, but aren't buying a computer to use for professional purposes. I'm making this up - I'm sure you could get a better definition from a marketing/MBA type, but this is what I'm thinking. I am certainly in this category.

I actually find it hard to believe that the iMac G5 will run all those apps well. If so, then I probably misjudged its power (not having owned one yet). Still, prosumers tend to want "best of breed", they like component vs AIO designs, they aren't afraid of and tend to enjoy upgrading these components. My mother couldn't explain the difference between RAM and a hard drive - as long as the thing works and doesn't look bad, her standards are met. She's an average consumer. Were I a graphics professional or scientist or software developer (okay, I am a SW engr) and I were going to use a computer for this function, I would want (and probably need) something with a lot of horsepower and that could be expanded/upgraded (to satisfy the IT guys and the CFO).

But what about the guy who understands computers, is willing to spend a little extra to get exactly what he wants, but doesn't need dual 64-bit processors and a HUGE tower (the PowerMac is full of wasted space)? What about me? I really think I'm not alone.

Look at home stereos. There's entry level stuff, usually for high school kids and old people who don't know or care about quality. Lots of AIO, cheap shelf systems and jamboxes for them. Then there are people who like separate components and they buy the best of breed for each one that they can afford, focusing the most money on the parts they care most about: receiver/amp, DVD player, VCR, tape deck, speakers, etc. And then there are the "audiophiles" that blow obscene amounts of money on the really esoteric stuff.

I can find lots of other markets that fit this mold, but you can still look to computers. Dell has at least three levels of computer: Dimension, OptiPlex, Precision. I'm sure you can find this at HP, Gateway, IBM, Toshiba, Sony... Apple has two: iMac & PowerMac. As I said in the earlier post, if you roughly adjust for the cost of the monitor, the top end iMac is $1400 cheaper than the low end PowerMac (with a 20" LCD). That's almost double the cost and an enormous product void.

Without the LCD, the iMac price is somewhere in the $600 range. I would pay $1000 for a headless Mac with a single 2 GHz G5, a replaceable GPU, at least one PCI slot, FW800, 8x SuperDrive, GigE, and a 900MHz FSB. Put it in a simple but elegant case where the components are easy to get to. It would be cheaper to manufacture than the new iMac (less cramped, fewer custom parts) and the upgrades I rattled off don't really amount to much - the profit margin would probably be higher than on the iMac. And then I might still buy a 20" LCD, though I probably wouldn't buy one next time I upgraded. (Granted, I might not buy an Apple LCD.)

[owl_luvr]

The power switch is on the back again...yuck.

[scottiB]

Fair enough. I see the term prosumer bandied about so often that I wanted an individual's definition.

I'd think that a iMac G5 would run my software swimmingly. My DP800 does well enough though Combustion really kicks its a$$, but I'm a rank amateur and use it for kicks.

[lpetschauer]

I'm looking forward to seeing one in person. I'll probably wait until the revision B models, mostly because of my own worries about the graphics card.

anyone know the response time on the LCD?

Also, I think it's BS that they don't give you a price break on a bluetooth keyboard/mouse when you buy it along with the system.

[kiwibabe]

I saw somewhere that someone called the iMac G5 the Jay Leno of computers, and I think its true.

[SpaceMonkey]

I've been away from the debate for most of the evening, but Zoom's posts have been pretty much on-target for what I was getting around to saying.

Part of the problem with Apple's iMac designs post-CRT is that I feel like Cupertino sees the iMac as an art project first--a chance to show off innovative and functional aesthetics--and an actual computer made up of technical capabilities second. The design dictates the components. IMHO, that's not the way to design a computer, and I feel like Apple is seriously missing out on a substantial mid-range market.

My own humble analysis:

The CRT iMac was an EveryComputer: cheap monitor, proven components, practically indestructable. The introduction of the eMac complicated the previous line-up and altered the product line so that the iMac had no definite purpose--to me, at least, the current iMac feels like an excuse to mount the optical drive sideways. With the G5, Apple has a chance to develop a really killer mid-range system, and let the eMac take up where the CRT iMac left off. What happens when the eMac gets the G5 (assuming Apple will be keeping the eMac form factor around)? We'll just enter another period of eMacs cannibalizing iMac sales. Keeping two AIO designs that have essentially the same upgrade path is just asking for more trouble down the road.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by SpaceMonkey:
Part of the problem with Apple's iMac designs post-CRT is that I feel like Cupertino sees the iMac as an art project first--a chance to show off innovative and functional aesthetics--and an actual computer made up of technical capabilities second. The design dictates the components. IMHO, that's not the way to design a computer, and I feel like Apple is seriously missing out on a substantial mid-range market.

Yup. Exactly. Form over function, vanity over value.

The original AIO iMac with a CRT made great sense. The CRT was huge and bulky - adding the CPU to it saved space and made it nice and convenient. With an LCD, it makes little sense. The new G5 iMac is basically a laptop that's not portable. Also, CRTs were relatively cheap. Having to pitch it along with the CPU wasn't that big of a deal. However, pitching a $1300 LCD just so you can upgrade the $600 CPU is nuts.

It may be that the LCD married to the iMac is lower quality (and therefore cheaper) than the standalone 20" LCD Apple display. (Apple is also almost surely making killer margins on the standalone displays, too.) That would throw off the numbers a bit, but even if you figure the display is half the cost of the iMac, it's nuts to have no other option than to throw it away in order to upgrade the CPU. What Apple has done is lengthen the time that people will sit on their iMac before they buy a new one. I think they would do better to separate the display from the CPU and let people upgrade them individually.

Can you imagine how pissed off you would be to get a few dead pixels on your iMac 13 months after you bought it? You're screwed.

But ya know, people will still buy this new iMac and let's hope Apple makes lots of money on it. If you like it, great - buy one. The real point I'm making is that Apple is missing an entire market segment that I believe could make them money and expand their market share. Okay, and obviously I want one so I'm arguing for it.

[thunderous_funker]

Just when I was all about to drop some serious Opinion on this subject, I realize that Zoom and Spacemonkey said it all in their last 2 posts.

Thank you very much.

I really like the new iMac. It is a very cool machine and I'm sure they will sell a lot of them.

However, I still think there is a very big gap in the product line. The video card is the first thing to go out of date on a PC. I upgrade video 3-4 times more frequently than CPUs. Hell, my Celeron 800 has had 4 video cards to keep up with the times. The CPU is only now showing its age.

And I would love to be able to upgrade/replace a display on a seperate timetable than the entire PC. A good display lasts practically forever.

These are freedoms that I don't really consider "special requests". I would consider them to be common sense and very practical. I don't even consider them "prosumer". I guess my definition of "consumer" suggests drastically lower level of disposable income than Apple's marketing team's definition of "consumer". Most consumers I know are trying to stretch their money by making quality componenets last (like a good display or a spicy video card).

If an upgradable video card or being able to swap out a display are "prosumer" features, then Dell's "prosumer" product line starts under $500. other brands even lower.

Again, I really think the new iMac is slick and very appealling. And I think the price point is right on. They should sell a ton of them.

But I still wish that Apple could fill the gap between $1300 disposable AIO and $2000 Dual CPU Mega Tower.

One final thought: what happens to iMac G5 sales when the G5 PowerBook hits the street?

[Jim Paradise]

Are the GPU's soldered on for sure on the new iMacs?

[hldan]

Originally posted by kiwibabe:
I saw somewhere that someone called the iMac G5 the Jay Leno of computers, and I think its true.

What does that mean, the Jay Leno of computers?

[legacyb4]

They are probably counting on people mostly sleeping their machines rather than powering on and off regularly would be my guess... besides, a power switch on the front would have spoiled the clean, white space!

Originally posted by owl_luvr:
The power switch is on the back again...yuck.

[owl_luvr]

Originally posted by kiwibabe:
I saw somewhere that someone called the iMac G5 the Jay Leno of computers, and I think its true.

How so?

[Eugene Fields]

Originally posted by waltham845:
I did notice that the Nvidia card uses a heat sink. So most of the newer cards have fans. They probably wouldn't fit anyway. I also notice that Doom3 for PC requires 128mb video card so no maximum playable doom3 for imac?....

Sure its only 64megs This is the 'WAY' They Do It! You Just know come RevB there IS gonna be a 128 meg option Prolly even standard in the 20". Maybe the Color case 'at will' with the lights, we all expect, will show in RevC or maybe it comes in RevB . Old Italian Saying..... The Noise is Good for the War.

[realitybath]

Originally posted by owl_luvr:
How so?

white hair, big chin

besides the gpu, i like it.

edit: i'm a pc user thinking of getting a mac now.. anyone have a guess as to length of time before gen2 imacs might be released? I'd buy one of these if it had a high end mobile card in it(or option for it).

[deminisma]

Looks good. I prefer the iMac G4 design, as that was truly revolutionary and very elegant, but this one does the job.

However, it won't sell, just like the iMac G4. The only purchasers of these will really be design shops, boutiques and a few home users. Once again, it boils down to price; I have always considered the iMac (and the Mac in general) to be the "people's computer". $1200 is no price for the people in this day and age.

Honestly Apple, how about this, same design, but...

- ~800 MHz G3 (maybe G4) processor
- 128MB RAM (yes, I know everyone slags this measly amount off, but my eMac runs OK with it) - expandable to 512MB
- Low-end video card (perhaps a Radeon 9200, they go pretty cheap these days)
- A copy of OS X, performance tuned to suit this hardware with all the geeky stuff in Utilities and some of extraneous UNIX stuff like Emacs removed.
- All the standard home software; AppleWorks, iTunes, Safari, WorldBook, some games for the kids, Quicktime, iPhoto, Mail - leave iMovie, Garageband as a seperate purchase.
- A 14 inch LCD with a max resolution of 1024x768, no output for extra monitors, projectors OR a CRT ~14" in the classic mac style, but updated for 2005.
- 3 USB ports, no Firewire, 10/100 Ethernet, software modem
- Combo drive or perhaps just a CD burner.
- 40GB Ultra ATA hard drive

Sell it as a computer for people who want nothing more than to surf the internet, track household finances and send e-mail. Since it has such limited expandibility, there's no way it will cripple sales for the pro line - no one who seriously wants to get creative work would buy this thing. Keep the eMac around but make it education only again.

Sell it for $~550, you could still make OK margins on that, and if marketed right, leveraging off the success of the iPod (perhaps even do bundles, really push the center of your digital life angle), it could go through the roof.

I'm sure Apple know a lot more than me about the current market and have made sensible decisions accordingly, but as an armchair commentator, I like it.

[Spliff]

Originally posted by realitybath:
edit: i'm a pc user thinking of getting a mac now.. anyone have a guess as to length of time before gen2 imacs might be released?

At least 8-9 months. That's how long it's been since the last update.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

[D'Espice]

Originally posted by Spliff:
This picture was posted at Ars Technica forums. Look at all the improvements in features over four years, except the GPU.

Even so that is quite some improvement. A video card is not being defined by its video ram only but mainly by its GPU. And the difference between Radeon (notice that this is the original Radeon! Not even 7500 yet) and GeForce 5200 is like day and night. If you don't believe me, try to play an about one year old game on said Radeon then on a GeForce 5200.

Also I would like to have known that you're comparing apples and oranges (well actually not you but the guy on Ars... still, you mentioned it so you'll be my outlet for criticism ). The Cube was a PowerMac whereas the iMac is definitely not. If you wanna make that a fair comparison, make it either Cube vs. PowerMac G5 or make it iMac vs. iMac.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by D'Espice:
The Cube was a PowerMac whereas the iMac is definitely not. If you wanna make that a fair comparison, make it either Cube vs. PowerMac G5 or make it iMac vs. iMac.

Except that the Cube was not a traditional Power Mac. It had a Power Mac price, but it had more "prosumer" specs, in a nice package. It can be argued that the iMac 2 "Hemisphere" was the successor to the Cube, not the original iMac.

[slider]

Just chiming in. I personally love it. I am sitting here thinking of selling my 867 QS with 17" CRT for the 17' iMac. I mean, really, it's a huge jump. Of course I don't need it since the QS is a second machine to my PB, but still. I think it's great and I think the price point is right. 17"LCD, G5 Chip, 64MB video ram, 80GB HD and ports galore. I wonder how upgradeable it will be with the back able to come off like that. I bet we can expect to see monitor spanning in the next round of updates too, it just seems to follow. And I love that it is wall mountable. Apple might not have thought of everything, but they covered a lot.

[D'Espice]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
Except that the Cube was not a traditional Power Mac. It can be argued that the iMac 2 "Hemisphere" was the successor to the Cube, not the original iMac.

That's not right. In terms of upgradibility the Cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of name the Cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of price the cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of philosophy the Cube was a PowerMac G4. Now where exactly is the Cube not a traditional PowerMac? It just has a different design, that's all. Basically, it's like a PowerMac but in a new dress.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by D'Espice:
That's not right. In terms of upgradibility the Cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of name the Cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of price the cube was a PowerMac G4. In terms of philosophy the Cube was a PowerMac G4. Now where exactly is the Cube not a traditional PowerMac? It just has a different design, that's all. Basically, it's like a PowerMac but in a new dress.

No it was a quiet small form factor single-CPU machine for those who didn't need the expandability of the Power Mac towers. Sounds just like a iLamp to me, but one that was priced like a Power Mac. It's no wonder the Cube had dismal sales.

[owl_luvr]

Originally posted by realitybath:
white hair, big chin

besides the gpu, i like it.

edit: i'm a pc user thinking of getting a mac now.. anyone have a guess as to length of time before gen2 imacs might be released? I'd buy one of these if it had a high end mobile card in it(or option for it).

Thanks, realitybath. I appreciate the explanation. I use a Mac, but I'm not up on all the jargon and abbreviations.

[D'Espice]

Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
No it was a quiet small form factor single-CPU machine for those who didn't need the expandability of the Power Mac towers. Sounds just like a iLamp to me, but one that was priced like a Power Mac. It's no wonder the Cube had dismal sales.

Still it did offer one the possibility to upgrade the hardware. One could easily replace the video card since it was standard AGP. One could also replace the optical drive and the harddrive. It was just a smaller form factor than the PowerMac but in terms of performance, it was a PowerMac as well. I probably don't have to remind you that the consumer products back then were still G3 based whereas the Cube was a PowerMac G4?

[adamschneider]

Originally posted by Landos Mustache:
What in the hell are you talking about? How much could your CRT be possibly worth that you can't sell it and get an awesome computer with a 17 or 20 inch LCD built in?

As I said -- and you apparently chose to ignore this -- there are a number of reasons I prefer CRT monitors. And I'm not alone.

I don't like that LCDs have different colors depending on which angle you view them from; when doing graphic design work, this is a problem. And I don't like that you can't adjust the resolution without getting a fuzzy picture. Some days I want 1280x960, and some days 800x600 feels better.

(I think there are a LOT of consumers out there who are buying LCD displays because they're "cool" and don't realize that a CRT might fit their needs much better -- I especially see this with older people who are farsighted and don't like squinting at the itty-bitty pixels on their flat-panel monitors.)

I don't think Apple should stop putting LCD displays in iMacs. I just wish that we had the choice to use a CRT with a G5 processor while spending less than $2000.

[D'Espice]

Originally posted by adamschneider:
I don't think Apple should stop putting LCD displays in iMacs. I just wish that we had the choice to use a CRT with a G5 processor while spending less than $2000.

Sooner or later we're gonna see an eMac G5. I don't expect that to happen anytime soon though.

[realitybath]

Originally posted by Spliff:
At least 8-9 months. That's how long it's been since the last update.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/

thanks for that link spliff.

[ddma]

Introducing iMac Post-It.

I like the new iMac G5. But I just can't stop thinking of having lots of Post-It under its screen :-P

[Spliff]

Originally posted by ddma:
Introducing iMac Post-It.

I like the new iMac G5. But I just can't stop thinking of having lots of Post-It under its screen :-P

Thanks. I've been waiting for someone to Photoshop some Post-It notes on that thing.

[ddma]

I just can't stop laugthing it when I finished it.

[Lancer409]

Originally posted by WOPR:
Prices are up now, starting at �919. Way too much, the eMac will carry on nicking sales.

Design looks like a Packard Bell to me. And that's quite an insult...

i keep hearing packard bell... considering my first computer EVER was a packard bell (worse thing i ever owned .. darn parents) ... which packard bell is everyone referring to?

[Parky]

Originally posted by Zoom:
I can find lots of other markets that fit this mold, but you can still look to computers. Dell has at least three levels of computer: Dimension, OptiPlex, Precision. I'm sure you can find this at HP, Gateway, IBM, Toshiba, Sony... Apple has two: iMac & PowerMac. As I said in the earlier post, if you roughly adjust for the cost of the monitor, the top end iMac is $1400 cheaper than the low end PowerMac (with a 20" LCD). That's almost double the cost and an enormous product void.

Apple actually have 3 - eMac, iMac and PowerMac

[Parky]

My estimated ship date is on or before 28th September 2004.

Which means it won't arrive until October.

I'm not quite sure how that equals 'mid-september'

Ian

[Zoom]

Originally posted by Parky:
Apple actually have 3 - eMac, iMac and PowerMac

I heard they were discontinuing the eMac with this release, but now I can't remember where I heard that. I also heard (and I do recall the source) that there was supposed to be an "education" version of this iMac, without an optical drive.

You're right, though, there is that eMac thing out there now. That doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, though.

By the way, cost alone doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, either. It's actually not that expensive, if you factor in the cost of the LCD.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Zoom:
I heard they were discontinuing the eMac with this release, but now I can't remember where I heard that. I also heard (and I do recall the source) that there was supposed to be an "education" version of this iMac, without an optical drive.

You're right, though, there is that eMac thing out there now. That doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, though.

By the way, cost alone doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, either. It's actually not that expensive, if you factor in the cost of the LCD.

God, I hope they don't discontinue the eMac. I work at a school with grades K-8 and I can't count the number of times a day that the younger ones touch the screens even though you remind them over and over again not too. This would DESTROY the pixels on an iMac in no time. As far as the iMac without an optical drive, here are the specs:

$1,099.00
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.6GHz PowerPC G5
512K L2 cache
533MHz frontside bus
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
NVIDIA GeForce4 MX
32MB DDR video memory
40GB Ultra ATA hard drive

The GPU sucks even more in this one. I love the design, love the look, I would love to trade in my 17" G4 iMac for one, but two things are stopping me. The GPU and the fact that it has NO firewire 800. Why does Apple make a new standard in firewire and then not use it. Someone posted earlier to my griping about Firewire 800 that it is a pro feature. WHY IS THAT?? The G5 with a faster firewire would be great for video editing with an external firewire drive. Right now I use a external firewire drive to save my dv files, but iMovie slows down to a crawl, especially if I am rendering lots of things at one time.
My 2�

[Parky]

Originally posted by Zoom:
I heard they were discontinuing the eMac with this release, but now I can't remember where I heard that. I also heard (and I do recall the source) that there was supposed to be an "education" version of this iMac, without an optical drive.

You're right, though, there is that eMac thing out there now. That doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, though.

By the way, cost alone doesn't make the iMac a prosumer machine, either. It's actually not that expensive, if you factor in the cost of the LCD.

I don't beleive there are any plans to scrap the eMac, it still sells well and education customers need it.

It may stay G4 for a while, but I guess a G5 eMac will come along eventully, cooling should not be a problem.

Ian

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Parky:
I don't beleive there are any plans to scrap the eMac, it still sells well and education customers need it.

It may stay G4 for a while, but I guess a G5 eMac will come along eventully, cooling should not be a problem.

Ian

Speaking of cooling, if they can cool it in a two inch computer, why not in a powerbook? Didn't they say that was why it wouldn't be in the powerbook line for a while because of cooling??
Sorry for off topic, was just wondering.

[macdaemon]

Just have look this home page http://homepage.mac.com/morgan68/App...toAlbum31.html

And found out that acutally iMac have got almost Xserve motherboard.
Probably when iMac's will be out for sale in Russia, I'll get one iMac 1.6Ghz 17" for web server.

[Parky]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Speaking of cooling, if they can cool it in a two inch computer, why not in a powerbook? Didn't they say that was why it wouldn't be in the powerbook line for a while because of cooling??
Sorry for off topic, was just wondering.

I'm sure they have a PowerBook with a G5 in it right now, the problem is it would have a very short battery life.

The power used by the current G5 and the 3 fans in the iMac would drain the battery very quickly.

It's not just about cooling.

Ian

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Parky:
I'm sure they have a PowerBook with a G5 in it right now, the problem is it would have a very short battery life.

The power used by the current G5 and the 3 fans in the iMac would drain the battery very quickly.

It's not just about cooling.

Ian

Thanks Ian, I wasn't sure, but I thought I heard them say it was a cooling issue. I never thought of the battery issue.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by ddma:
Introducing iMac Post-It.

I like the new iMac G5. But I just can't stop thinking of having lots of Post-It under its screen :-P

Cool !

So how is Stickies gonna handle that ?

-t

[turtle777]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Speaking of cooling, if they can cool it in a two inch computer, why not in a powerbook? Didn't they say that was why it wouldn't be in the powerbook line for a while because of cooling??
Sorry for off topic, was just wondering.

Who wants a Powerbook 2" thick ?

The problem is to squeeze it down to 1", get the cooling issue under control, and still maintain 3-4 hours battery life.
Now THAT'S a challenge !

-t

[zeebe]

Originally posted by turtle777:
Who wants a Powerbook 2" thick ?

The problem is to squeeze it down to 1", get the cooling issue under control, and still maintain 3-4 hours battery life.
Now THAT'S a challenge !

-t

Hmm Turtle, if you look at my post, I was not wanting a 2" powerbook, what I was asking is, if they could do it at 2", why not at powerbook size.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Hmm Turtle, if you look at my post, I was not wanting a 2" powerbook, what I was asking is, if they could do it at 2", why not at powerbook size.

So, doesn't my answer tell you why ?

-t

[BZ]

56K Modem... why don't they ship with a built in ADSL modem or cable modem?

10/100!!! Everyone know that most people at home need GB ethernet! CRAZY APPLE!



BZ

Originally posted by Spliff:
This picture was posted at Ars Technica forums. Look at all the improvements in features over four years, except the GPU.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by BZ:
56K Modem... why don't they ship with a built in ADSL modem or cable modem?

10/100!!! Everyone know that most people at home need GB ethernet! CRAZY APPLE!

Hahaha !

-t