[theTechyDork]

Is it worth waiting for the Intel iMac G5? I want to purchase one within the next couple of months, but I don't know if it will be worth it to wait for the Intel.

[tomrock]

No one can answer this. Well, maybe Steve Jobs could but he doesn't post here very often.

If you need a machine now, buy one. Avoid the 1.0 Intel Macs. Skip that generation.

If you can wait, wait. We really don't know when Intel iMacs will be introduced.

In the meantime, read some of the other threads on this subject.

[Volks]

i love it, tomrock correctly points out that nobody can answer the original posters questions.

Then, tomrock points out that everyone should "avoid the 1.0 intel Macs" based on unfounded superstition.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by Volks

i love it, tomrock correctly points out that nobody can answer the original posters questions.

Well, yes, but there is ground for some educated guess. Since there won't be anytime soon (in the coming 6-9 months at least) a 64-bit CPU from Intel, with the thermal characteristics of the G5 now in use in the iMac form factor, one cannot hope for an Intel iMac in the immediate future. This means that probably even the next iMac update will be PPC.

[monkeybrain]

Originally Posted by Volks

i love it, tomrock correctly points out that nobody can answer the original posters questions.

Then, tomrock points out that everyone should "avoid the 1.0 intel Macs" based on unfounded superstition.

Well I think tomrock meant to avoid the first generation intels because they're 1st generation. They are more than likely to have niggling problems - many first generation Macs do, there have been Powerbook issues, G5 issues etc if I remember correctly.

For the original poster, I would advise buying an iMac now. They have never been better value and are powerful enough to last you a long time. It will probably be the laptops and then Mini that go intel first, so you could have a long wait even if you bought a first gen intel iMac.

[Will C]

An Intel G5???.......I thought IBM made G5s!......

(I know what you really meant - sorry)

[tomrock]

I was giving the two possible answers you'll find -- buy now and skip the 1.0 generation and/or wait for the Intel Macs.

At least until Steve comes along and tells us what to do :-)

[techtrucker]

I sympathize with the OP, I need a new machine but am sitting on the fence wondering if I should try and hang in there...with an aging B&W G3 400 as my only machine!

[P]

I suspect that it will be about a year before the Intel iMacs. Of course I could be wrong - they could arrive at Macworld (no sense in calling it MWSF anymore, is it?), but then they could be a year and half away as well.

[iMacfan]

The G5 in the iMac is a pretty capable processor - it's the underperforming G4s for low power uses (Mac mini and laptops) that are the reason why Apple are switching.

Get one of the new iMacs now, and you'll have a decent, elegant, stable and good value computer which should last you a long time.

David.

[Coug-it]

I'd say if you want to get something now, but have a "wandering eye" for the next big thing
that comes out, find a really good price on a Apple certified refurbished system. I keep
looking at the previous generation 17" 2 Ghz iMac (and occasionally see some new ones pop
up now and then for $1000) and hoping that the 2.1 Ghz iMacs starts to show up on Apple's refurbished site.

[techtrucker]

I too am eyeing up the refurbs...but if nothing really zings me I'll probably go with a new 17" iMac. I've also eyed up Powerbooks but for the money I'd rather have the G5. Don't need portability.

[SierraDragon]

The refurbs are a bargain as long as you don't need Bluetooth. I just ordered a 20" for an internet cafe client.

IMO it does not make any sense to wait for a Mactel iMac; BUT at the end of November it invariably makes sense to wait to see what flushes out at Mac Expo SF if you can.

[alex_kac]

The funny thing is everyone always says to avoid 1st Gen. Yet, the current PowerBooks seem to be getting more complaints than any first gen I've seen.

Just goes to show - the only sense to use is common sense. Avoid superstition and see for yourself. Go to an Apple store when they are released and play with them. Read reviews both good and bad (i.e. Slashdot is not a good place for reviews).

[Eug Wanker]

The only iMac refurb available right now is a 20" G5 1.8 GHz iMac with GeForce FX 5200 Ultra. I'd avoid these if you're wanting to run Core Image stuff.

For example, Aperture won't even run at all on this machine, cuz the GPU is unsupported.

[Fonzie]

But Eug Wanker, I have an 17" 1.8Ghz iMac(rev.a) with the same type of gfxcard and I can run Core Image stuff. Although not as good as any Mac with a higher cpu rate would do. But I get the splash in Dashboard and all that jiff. Core Image Fun House also works flawlessly. But Aperture might be a too big of a mouthful for my machine I would agree if it were to run on it.

[techtrucker]

Tough call - I can go with just about any Mac in the lineup, desktop or portable. First thought was a 15" PB but the refurbs could have the white spot issue, and the new ones are apparently having display issues too (lines). iBook is out, don't want a 12" screen and I'd only want the 14" if the resolution was higher.
That leaves either the iMac, or use my current display for a mini or Powermac. I'd like to eliminate desk clutter, so I'm leaning towards the current iMac, which with a little extra memory is just about within my budget.
OT I know, but does anyone know if the current iMac fixed the fan noise and capacitor issues? WIll search the forum to see....
But I am no longer worried about getting an Intel machine, the iMac was just revved and will be a good machine for a long time. I'll wait for a year or so and see what's happening then.
Random thoughts, I know, sorry for babbling.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by Fonzie

But Eug Wanker, I have an 17" 1.8Ghz iMac(rev.a) with the same type of gfxcard and I can run Core Image stuff. Although not as good as any Mac with a higher cpu rate would do. But I get the splash in Dashboard and all that jiff. Core Image Fun House also works flawlessly. But Aperture might be a too big of a mouthful for my machine I would agree if it were to run on it.

Yeah, Core Image stuff should run (slowly), but in the case of Aperture, the compatibility checker Apple has released says the GPU in the version A G5 iMac is not supported at all. (The version B G5 iMac and the recent version C G5 iMac with Front Row both are supported.)

[Coug-it]

Originally Posted by Coug-it

I'd say if you want to get something now, but have a "wandering eye" for the next big thing
that comes out, find a really good price on a Apple certified refurbished system. I keep
looking at the previous generation 17" 2 Ghz iMac (and occasionally see some new ones pop
up now and then for $1000) and hoping that the 2.1 Ghz iMacs starts to show up on Apple's refurbished site.

Well, in a moment of weakness I finally broke down and picked up the iMac 2.1 Ghz model
from Apple during their Thanksgiving sale (got $200 off on it).

Anyone know what the delivery time on these systems is now?

[driven]

I'd say for notebooks *IF* you need to run Windows applications as well then the Intel-Powerbook *might* be worth the wait. (Assuming that it *WILL* run Windows applications faster than VPC does.) <-- For myself this would make travel much easier as I'd only have to bring a single notebook.

Now: For the PowerMac G5 as far as I can tell Intel doesn't have anything yet that compares favorably with the current G5. (Other than clock-speed, but on a pure technology level the G5 is the cat's pajamas.) So .. without having to speculate on what Apple might do I'm comfortable staying with my G5 for now and for at least the next year. (Since I've already had it for nearly 2 years I'd say that it has been a great investment so far.)

As things go I'll probably stick with my Powerbook G4 for another year or so as well. (But maybe they will come out with something sooo compelling that I'll have to write another check.) <-- We'll see.

[JeffHarris]

Forget waiting for vaporware and rumor machines. Get a G5 iMac now!

tomrock is correct suggesting to skip a version 1.0 Intel Mac.
These Macs won't be just speed or feature bumps, like all the current Macs, they'll be an entirely new and completely different system architecture!

Bugs should be plentiful.

Besides, if you want to run all your current PPC applications in emulation mode, at who knows what kind of speed hit, then by all means get a version 1.0 Intel Mac.

FYI, I just got one of the new 15" PowerBooks (with a 7200 rpm hard drive) and it's a fine machine! The screen is gorgeous, it's fast and quiet. No complaints!

[CharlesS]

While AppleInsider claims that the iMac is going to go Intel in January, ThinkSecret is reporting that it's actually the iBook that will make that transition. Personally, I think the iBook is more likely since the iMac was just updated last month.

I'd just go with the current iMac. It's really a great machine - I would buy one if I didn't already have a G5 iMac.

[SEkker]

Clearly, the mac mini, iBooks, and powerbooks are first in the queue for mactel release just for the advantages of the newest dual core Intel mobile processors. And the powermacs, with dual core G5s just announced, clearly has another 2 years of legs (Jobs said the conversion will take 2 years, and the high end Intel chips won't be 64 bit or dual core for some time yet).

For the iMacs, the real question is: will Jobs go with a dual core G5 before going dual core Intel? If so, they might not go Intel for another 18+ months. I wonder if this decision has simply not been made - if the mactel rollout gets bumpy, they just buy time with the dual core G5s on their flagship consumer machine. If the software transition is smooth, then they can push going to Intel.

In my mind, this means the current iMacs are a pretty stable form factor -- mature, most of the bugs worked out, and have the cool embedded iSight. A quality machine.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by driven

Now: For the PowerMac G5 as far as I can tell Intel doesn't have anything yet that compares favorably with the current G5. (Other than clock-speed, but on a pure technology level the G5 is the cat's pajamas.) So .. without having to speculate on what Apple might do I'm comfortable staying with my G5 for now and for at least the next year. (Since I've already had it for nearly 2 years I'd say that it has been a great investment so far.)

For the PowerMacs, no, but this thread is about the iMacs. The G5 uses too much power to work quietly inside the current iMac enclosure; the Pentium M uses about half as much power while performing about 50% better than the G5s currently in the iMacs.

As far as cat's pajamas, I'm sure they'd look good with some Vanderpool love.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by mduell

For the PowerMacs, no, but this thread is about the iMacs. The G5 uses too much power to work quietly inside the current iMac enclosure; the Pentium M uses about half as much power while performing about 50% better than the G5s currently in the iMacs.

As far as cat's pajamas, I'm sure they'd look good with some Vanderpool love.

I have a Rev. B iMac G5, and it works plenty quietly.

[slugslugslug]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I have a Rev. B iMac G5, and it works plenty quietly.

I second that.

[Eug Wanker]

Yeah, my version B iMac (G5 2.0 with 20" screen and Radeon 9600) is pretty quiet. It's not anywhere near as quiet as my Cube though.

[drewcifer]

I don't think they could fit two G5's in there and still retain the sleek design. not to mention it would drive the prices up.

[P]

Originally Posted by mduell

For the PowerMacs, no, but this thread is about the iMacs. The G5 uses too much power to work quietly inside the current iMac enclosure; the Pentium M uses about half as much power while performing about 50% better than the G5s currently in the iMacs.

As far as cat's pajamas, I'm sure they'd look good with some Vanderpool love.

Notice all those Dell and HP desktops with Pentium M's on their websites? Oh, there are none? Fancy that. Intel does NOT like people putting Pentium M's in desktops.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by P

Notice all those Dell and HP desktops with Pentium M's on their websites? Oh, there are none? Fancy that. Intel does NOT like people putting Pentium M's in desktops.

Consumers still like their jiggahertz! Dell and HP don't have any desktops that really need a low power chip, they're mostly larger boxes. Also, the Pentium M chips are relatively pricey; I think Dell/HP would prefer to keep their margins higher.

There are a couple motherboard OEMs making ATX Pentium M boards for the desktop (Asus and Shuttle, IIRC). Intel is more than happy to sell boxed, retail versions of the Pentium M complete with a heatsink and fan (that won't fit in a laptop). The preview platforms for Jonah/Yonah are desktops.

Do you have any source where Intel says "don't put Pentium Ms in desktops"?

[wilsonng]

My guess would be to get an intel iMac only if your PPC-coded applications will work without too much pain under Rosetta.

I remembered waiting for my mission-critical applications to be OS X compatible before I made the jump from OS9 to OS X. I'm expecting the same wait for 3rd-party developers to create intelligent-binary versions of the programs.

Programs that use the AltiVec procesor and are CPU-intensive will be hardest hit. These would be the Photoshops, FInal Cut Pros, and most video programs in the OS X world.

Programs that should probably work fairly well under Rosetta would be things like Microsoft Office.

For me, it's a matter of seeing which programs I can run under Rosetta and waiting for CPU-intensive programs to become intelligent-binary.

Otherwise, get the iMac G5. You'll be able to run your programs more efficiently with your current software.

[BrianZeit]

im waiting to see what apple have in store for us in january-if its worth it a check with apples name is already on hold

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by P

Notice all those Dell and HP desktops with Pentium M's on their websites? Oh, there are none? Fancy that. Intel does NOT like people putting Pentium M's in desktops.

Intel doesn't really care whether or not Dell puts Pentium Ms in desktops. The reason Dell doesn't usually do it is because it costs more. The reason it costs more is because they have low wattage, something which isn't as necessary in large desktops. I will note however that several small form factor desktops use Pentium M already today.

However Intel will soon be is switching even its desktop chips to dual-core Pentium M derivatives. Netburst is getting near the end of its useful life, and Intel is shifting away from it.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

However Intel will soon be is switching even its desktop chips to dual-core Pentium M derivatives. Netburst is getting near the end of its useful life, and Intel is shifting away from it.

As far as I know the post-Yonah mobile (and accompanying desktop) chips are not Pentium M (P6) derivatives, but rather a whole new core (P8). P8 uses some of the ideas from P6 (short pipelines, big caches) and P7 (symmetric multithreading, execution trace cache). Netburst was a neat idea, but it's time for deprecation is coming soon.

[P]

Originally Posted by mduell

As far as I know the post-Yonah mobile (and accompanying desktop) chips are not Pentium M (P6) derivatives, but rather a whole new core (P8). P8 uses some of the ideas from P6 (short pipelines, big caches) and P7 (symmetric multithreading, execution trace cache). Netburst was a neat idea, but it's time for deprecation is coming soon.

Correct - although it remains to be seen how different the architechture is from P6. Could be that the actual integer core is still the same old P6. Rumors even have it that it's not going to be called Pentium at all, just "Intel Core" and that the architechture is going to be the one that's branded.

[P]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker

Intel doesn't really care whether or not Dell puts Pentium Ms in desktops. The reason Dell doesn't usually do it is because it costs more. The reason it costs more is because they have low wattage, something which isn't as necessary in large desktops. I will note however that several small form factor desktops use Pentium M already today.

Rumors do have it that Intel is bending arms to keep the Pentium M out of desktops for now. Of course, that's hard to prove, but go to some site that sells computer stuff in parts. The Pentium M socket is Socket 479. How many motherboards do you find? When I checked my local stores, I only found one - an MSI board with a mobile chipset for the Northbridge and a desktop chipset for the Southbridge. newegg.com lists two, from AOpen. How many boards do they list for Pentium 4, Socket 478?

Now go to dell.com and find the Optiflex desktops - they're in the business section. Really tiny boxes for the smaller ones. What do they use? Pentium 4 and Pentium D. The smallest don't even have regular sized optical drives, but they do sport a Pentium 4 at least. Dell has obviously sacrifised a lot and made some specific engineering to make the box that small. You're telling me that they wouldn't put a Pentium M in there if they were free to do so?

Anandtech has pre-release Yonah outclassing the Pentium D, so one has to wonder how long Intel is going to keep this up.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by P

Rumors do have it that Intel is bending arms to keep the Pentium M out of desktops for now. Of course, that's hard to prove, but go to some site that sells computer stuff in parts. The Pentium M socket is Socket 479. How many motherboards do you find? When I checked my local stores, I only found one - an MSI board with a mobile chipset for the Northbridge and a desktop chipset for the Southbridge. newegg.com lists two, from AOpen. How many boards do they list for Pentium 4, Socket 478?

Some of the S478 Asus boards can accept a S479 processor with an adapter card from Asus. I agree that they're not common, but I wouldn't expect every mobo OEM to put the time/effort into designing/testing such a board for such a small market.
They're available if you want them, but not many people are demanding them.

Now go to dell.com and find the Optiflex desktops - they're in the business section. Really tiny boxes for the smaller ones. What do they use? Pentium 4 and Pentium D. The smallest don't even have regular sized optical drives, but they do sport a Pentium 4 at least. Dell has obviously sacrifised a lot and made some specific engineering to make the box that small. You're telling me that they wouldn't put a Pentium M in there if they were free to do so?

The slim Optiplex enclosure was designed around the Pentium 4 before the Pentium M was a viable competitor on the desktop. Given that their current enclosure has no problem with the Pentium 4 power/heat requirements (my friend has one of the slim Dimensions, it is pretty quiet) why would Dell spend the time/effort to integrate a more expensive chip?

Consumers and corporations aren't demanding Pentium M desktops (for whatever reason), so Dell and the other big OEMs aren't offering them.

[techtrucker]

I've been following this thread, all the while being frustrated with my old B&W G3. Finally had some money to spend, and couldn't wait. Went to the Apple Store today, and am happily typing this on my new iMac 1.9 17"! Upgraded to 1.5 GB ram, am currently copying files over. It's a wonderful machine, I don't care what comes out at MWSF. Glad I pulled the trigger!
I do believe that it will be the iBook or mini that will get the Intel processor first anyway, the iMac was just revved. So this machine will do just fine for the next year or two, will wait till the dust settles from the Intel transition.

[Macpilot]

No.

[Brad5689]

I actually just got done talking to an apple rep and she said don't hold your breath for the Imac with instel chipset. The only thing that is supposedly different is the manufacture but the chip will be the same. Also that it will be one of the last things to be "changed" over and she said it won't be finished until the end of 2007 so prolly won't see the G5 IMacs on intel for at least another year or year and a half.

BUY ONE NOW that's what i'm doing haha

Just thought it may be useful

[Macpilot]

Originally Posted by Brad5689

I actually just got done talking to an apple rep and she said don't hold your breath for the Imac with instel chipset. The only thing that is supposedly different is the manufacture but the chip will be the same. Also that it will be one of the last things to be "changed" over and she said it won't be finished until the end of 2007 so prolly won't see the G5 IMacs on intel for at least another year or year and a half.

BUY ONE NOW that's what i'm doing haha

Just thought it may be useful

Unless that "apple rep" is Steve Jobs, that apple rep is full of it.

[quiklee]

I say wait . . . . i need more people to buy the intel iMacs so my stock goes up . . . .

[alex_kac]

My thinking is this. I don't believe in first, second, third Rev junk about which is better. Every rev fixes issues from the previous one and adds new ones. I have a Rev A Dual 2Ghz G5 that's super quiet, no noise and works wonderfully as my server now (was my desktop). I have a Rev 2 Al Books, some other Rev iBooks, iMac G5s, etc... All have different "issues" for that rev.

When the first Intel books come out, we'll get them if the specs are good enough. If they use Intel graphics - then no way. To me its the specs and quality that matter, not some rev.

[jwoods]

Originally Posted by Macpilot

Unless that "apple rep" is Steve Jobs, that apple rep is full of it.

That's probably true. However, the info this rep passed is probably correct. I, for one, would be surprised if the imac was announced in Jan with Intel chips. Couple of reasons....

1. They just did a minor change to it (slightly faster processor, isight built-in, remote, etc.).

*Why would they do this, and then two months later, release a new version?

2. SJ said, I believe, that the intels would come in on the high end stuff and migrate down.

*Contrary to the rumor sites, has there been anything to suggest otherwise?

*Statements from people outside of Apple, are just that. (i.e., speculation)

Of course, I could be wrong.

[driven]

Actually didn't he say that the first machine to get the intel chips was the Mac Mini? (Is that the high-end stuff?)

[thiagofll]

Well I am not 100% sure but I heard rumors that, the Intel chips are for the Apple's Laptops first then slowly changing the PowerPCs. They haven't upgraded the laptops to the G5 Processor because of overheating and the battery life was bad (from what I heard), that's why they've kept the laptops using the G4 Processor till today's date. What i think they will do is, Intel has developed a processor like Pentium M(Centrino), that is fast and has longer battery life and Apple will start using it on their laptops starting 2006...Now the desktop machines will continue using IBM's G5 processors and might be upgraded to Intel chips by early 2007(MIGHT, NOT FOR SURE)...so don't wait, go ahead and buy your iMac, if you want to change to Intel's when it comes out, sell your computer on Ebay.

CHECK THIS OUT:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

PS: I had an Sony FS660 Intel Centrino Laptop, a Toshiba Centrino Laptop, Pentium 4 HT desktops, and let me tell you, they were LOUD! I think G5 processors are the quietest I've ever heard (and faster too).
I rather have IBM's G5 than Intels....Just my opinion...

[jwoods]

Originally Posted by driven

Actually didn't he say that the first machine to get the intel chips was the Mac Mini? (Is that the high-end stuff?)

Um, no, but that's why I said I "believed" he said.....

My impression from the speech was that the higher end stuff would get it first. Am I right? Dunno, we'll all know in a month, eh?

Either way.....I doubt the iMac is going to intel for a while.

Cheers

[slugslugslug]

I'm really gonna have to go and listen to the whole WWDC speech again. I remember right afterwards folks were saying they were gonna move the low-end stuff over first. I also remember thinking that I hadn't heard anything about it on 'NN or the sites that had live reports from the speech, so I wondered if it was speculation that somehow got spun into fact. I'm pretty sure I ended up listening to the whole thing and didn't hear Steve mention which machines were gonna get Intel first. But it was a long speech, and it was months ago, and my memory is for s***.

Still, I don't think he really said anything about consumer models first. I'll watch/listen again this weekend if someone hasn't provided confirmatory/contradictory evidence by then.

[bookofjames]

Originally Posted by thiagofll

Intel has developed a processor like Pentium M(Centrino), that is fast and has longer battery life and Apple will start using it on their laptops starting 2006...

You mean the Intel Yonah dual core chips.
That is the chip most possibly going to ship with the new MacIntels this Jan.

So far all the rumors point to the iBook (13.3" widescreen) and possibly the Powerbooks and the Mac Mini.

Don't think the iMac G5 will switch to Intel anytime soon, cos they just upgraded it few months back.

[Simon]

Here's the deal. The Power Mac is, well, powerful. The iMac is very competitive. The PowerBooks isn't. The G4 is old and limited. Yonah is where the low-end and mobile future is.

MWSF in January will probably bring Yonah in a new Mac mini, 13.3" widescreen iBook and possibly new 15"/17" PowerBooks (although the 17" will likely arrive 2-3 months later than the 15"). The 12" PB is history.