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 > here's the iMac b*tching thread

here's the iMac b*tching thread
Thread Tools
jamesa
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: .au
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 08:41 AM
 
yep, there's got to be one

let me preface it by saying I think it's a way cool design, and it's great they managed to get a G5 in the case

that being said, here's why I'm disappointed:
1. The graphics card, as usual, sucks. This is a consumer machine, a quite pricey one at that, and they're shipping the bottom of the pile nVidia graphics card in it. It's ok in the PowerMac G5s - you can swap the thing out if you want. With the iMac, you're stuck.
2. The thing about the original shaped iMacs that was so awesome was that they really pushed some relatively early adopted technologies forward. First off, they shipped 100bT ethernet, which was unheard of at the time on a relatively consumer machine. Next, they put in Firewire. It would be great if Apple again pushed the envelope - putting on gigabit ethernet, and Firewire 2 on the iMacs.

Ah well. They're more wishful. But there's no excuse for the graphics card.

-- james
ps It's nice having a new product release when I'm actually up and awake

edit: if there's anything you'd like to see changed for the next release, make sure you hit up http://www.apple.com/feedback
( Last edited by jamesa; Aug 31, 2004 at 10:12 AM. )
     
BigDaddy
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pflugerville, Tx
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 08:50 AM
 
I only wish the wireless keyboard and mouse option was standard not another 100 dollars. I like the look. Does the screen tilt like the new displays?
     
leperkuhn
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 08:57 AM
 
as usual, cool looking but I wouldn't buy one. if the price of that LCD usually costs $700, why can't there be a headless box for around $1,000?

I'm not pleased.
     
mdc
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY²
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:09 AM
 
Originally posted by BigDaddy:
I only wish the wireless keyboard and mouse option was standard not another 100 dollars. I like the look. Does the screen tilt like the new displays?
i just went to the imac page on apple's site and there is an animation of the monitor tilting.
     
Adrian2043
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:12 AM
 
Australian prices seem to have dropped. 1.25 G4 iMac 17 was double the retail of the equivalent eMac, ie approx A$3200. 1.8 SD G5 retail is A$2500. Indicating 3-4 weeks. Was going to going to order eMac SD with 512 RAM, but an extra for $900 for LCD screen and 3x higher bus rate seeems worth it. Don't play games so carry over card not an issue
Don't ask me,I only work here
     
BigDaddy
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pflugerville, Tx
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:19 AM
 
Originally posted by mdc:
i just went to the imac page on apple's site and there is an animation of the monitor tilting.

Yea I noticed that after I posted the question. I think for the money the 20 inch is a good buy.
     
solbo
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:21 AM
 
I think the Graphics Card is the real kicker for this one. I could probably live with the 2GB RAM limit and the AIO design, which is slick, but that graphics card is just too weak.

Most new games have recommended system requirements of 128MB VRAM, with 64MB just making the cut as "Minimum", and it is only going to get worse.

How shitty is it going to be when some clueless Mac user gets this as a family computer and then when Doom 3 comes out they can't play it because it is crawling like molasses?

I thought maybe it could be switched out since you can access the whole innards this time, but I didn't see the card unless it is under the cover in the upper left. That doesn't really show what kind of connection it has though.

Some people have said that consumers don't care about the graphics card. That is crap, one of the most common uses for a family computer is for games.
     
atlcane
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 09:52 AM
 
I imagine that the next release of the machine will have a 128 MB graphics card. I will wait till then.
     
eddiecatflap
Baninated
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://www.rotharmy.com
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 10:18 AM
 
well , my mind's been made up for me

i'm DEFINITELY waiting until feb 05 and the G5 pm w/ pci-express

this is a BACKWARD step imho , the sunflower fp is so superior in every way

no swivel ( which is actually rather useful ) , looks boring ( packard-bell made a similar design ages ago !!! ) and the videocard is a joke
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 10:52 AM
 
Originally posted by eddiecatflap:
no swivel ( which is actually rather useful )
Um, you can swivel the whole machine. . .

and the videocard is a joke
Actually, it's perfect for a consumer machine.
     
rozwado1
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Miami Beach
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:02 AM
 
Originally posted by eddiecatflap:
no swivel ( which is actually rather useful )
...and the videocard is a joke
You can mount it on a VESA arm and have it swivel any which way (you choose the arm).

Videocard - not everyone plays videogames. Buy a PowerMac if you're addicted. This iMac is a family machine; it's not made for power computing per se.
     
pgolf
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:09 AM
 
Originally posted by leperkuhn:
why can't there be a headless box for around $1,000?

I'm not pleased.
The new iMac is ALL HEAD A headless one would actually be Macless. lol
     
Evan_11
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:20 AM
 
Originally posted by rozwado1:
Videocard - not everyone plays videogames. Buy a PowerMac if you're addicted. This iMac is a family machine; it's not made for power computing per se.
Major disagreement here. Regarding gaming: The iMac should be more than a computer for your grandma to use. A lot of kids will take these to college. The boys will want to boot up Doom 3 and do some fragging. Simple as that.

Second and most important is that OS X is very graphics card dependent. Quartz Extreme relies on a good graphics card. Tiger is going to utilize the graphics card even more! New software like Motion require a good graphics card.

Apple purposely crippling their hardware is stupid. Gawddamn they even make the thing where you can open it up. Why not make the graphics card at least upgradeable?!

Regarding the new design, it's what I expected, a Cinema Display with a Mac inside. I do like it though and it was definately the right direction to go in. The old iMac G4 looks bulbous and outdated in comparison. Some will miss the swivel arm but since you can now easily swivel the whole computer it should be a non issue. I also like the sorta' nod and wink old school look. Apple always manages to out design their last iteration. The question is how minimal can they go?
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:22 AM
 
I noticed that the location of the ports means that if you use a wired keyboard, the cord will be dangling down in an ugly and non-Apple like fashion. Also, if there's such a freakin' huge blank white space on the front, why not put speakers there to make it look more interesting? More importantly, there are no ports on the front, which is fairly ridiculous considering the huge number of devices these days that want to be plugged and unplugged on a regular basis. There's room, the G5 has front ports... why not put 'em on the iMac? Another problem is the lack of a monitor spanning option. I swear, Apple has some huge problem with people buying extra monitors to use with their computer or something, because they absolutely refuse to let you connect two displays to any computer other than a PowerBook or PowerMac.

On the plus side, the overall specifications are very nice for the price, and competitive with the various PC offerings out there. The one huge shortfall is the inability to even custom configure the video card. You're stuck with the crappy FX5200 no matter what you do. But it is very difficult to configure a comparable Dell with a digital (not analog) 17" flat panel monitor.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:22 AM
 
Originally posted by Don Pickett:
Um, you can swivel the whole machine. . .



Actually, it's perfect for a consumer machine.
Until.......you consider the RAM,VIDEO,FW etc.

We're talking 2GB,1 per DIMM. Run out and check prices on 1GB sticks of PC3200.

I do like the look of it, but if you think your going to do much more than email with it without a few GB of Ram. Order a 20" with 2GB, $3000+. Order a Duel 1.8 G5 with 2GB and a 20" ASD, $3800. so for $800 you'd get 3pci-x slots 1 more 1.8 G5 6 more ram slots FW800 8x AGP PRO SLOT. Put it under your desk, takes less room now!

OK, price....... you don't want to spend $3000+, EMAC $799. The iMac won't be much faster.

If you are looking to save space and can live with 1GB of Ram and don't want to Play Games, don't need FW800. The iMac is for you@ $1300-$2000.

It is however a work of art.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
eddiecatflap
Baninated
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://www.rotharmy.com
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:26 AM
 
you can swivel the whole mac

big deal

and you have to swivel all the wires that trail out of the back too and hope they don't get snagged up while you're at it

personally , the new imac seems like a total waste of time , why not get a laptop ?

total non-event , no wonder steve didn't bother getting out of bed for it
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:30 AM
 
Don't buy Apple RAM. Apple charges $600 (yes, $600) for a 1 GB RAM module. Similar one, PC3200 1 GB DIMM, is around $200 from NewEgg. So you can have 2 GB for an extra $400, minus the amount of money you'd make from selling the original 256 MB (probably $40 or so).

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:33 AM
 
Originally posted by jamesa:
yep, there's got to be one

let me preface it by saying I think it's a way cool design, and it's great they managed to get a G5 in the case

that being said, here's why I'm disappointed:
1. The graphics card, as usual, sucks. This is a consumer machine, a quite pricey one at that, and they're shipping the bottom of the pile nVidia graphics card in it. It's ok in the PowerMac G5s - you can swap the thing out if you want. With the iMac, you're stuck.
2. The thing about the original shaped iMacs that was so awesome was that they really pushed some relatively early adopted technologies forward. First off, they shipped 100bT ethernet, which was unheard of at the time on a relatively consumer machine. Next, they put in Firewire. It would be great if Apple again pushed the envelope - putting on gigabit ethernet, and Firewire 2 on the iMacs.

Ah well. They're more wishful. But there's no excuse for the graphics card.

-- james
ps It's nice having a new product release when I'm actually up and awake

edit: if there's anything you'd like to see changed for the next release, make sure you hit up http://www.apple.com/feedback

Why do you need an iMac bitching thread? Could you make one better? If so there's always room to create another computer company. Stop complaining, if you don't like it you ain't gotta buy it.
iMac 24" 2.8 Ghz Core 2 Extreme
500GB HDD
4GB Ram
Proud new Owner!
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:42 AM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
If you are looking to save space and can live with 1GB of Ram
Live with 1 GB of RAM? Huh? That's more than enough for most CONSUMER stuff. I have one GB in my Powerbook, and it's fine. If I want to do really heavy lifting I come to work and use the dual G5s.

don't want to Play Games
Serious gamers make up a tiny percentage of all computer buyers. They are a very vocal minority. I ain't one, so I'm fine.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:43 AM
 
personally , the new imac seems like a total waste of time , why not get a laptop ?
Because:

1) No 20 inch laptop;
2) My Powerbook rarely ever leaves my desk;
3) No G5 Powerbooks currently exist.
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:48 AM
 
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
Don't buy Apple RAM. Apple charges $600 (yes, $600) for a 1 GB RAM module. Similar one, PC3200 1 GB DIMM, is around $200 from NewEgg. So you can have 2 GB for an extra $400, minus the amount of money you'd make from selling the original 256 MB (probably $40 or so).
That does make it look better.

The price is better than the old FP iMac, but the design is not. The Cube like iMac that was floating around was looking good to me. I don't want a ******* GF5200FX or any other non-upgradable GPU. I love the New DVI ASD. A Cube like iMac with 1 8X AGP SLOT and FW800 @ $999.99 and I'll buy a 20" Apple DVI(later).

For me now, I'll be getting an eMac to hold me over until Feb '05 and hope to see a G5 in my Price range that has 4x Ram Slots 1 AGP Slot. I don't need PCI slots and can do without FW800. I'd buy a G5 Tower, it's just over my $head.

This is me a lost iMac G5 sale.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 11:57 AM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
I don't want a ******* GF5200FX or any other non-upgradable GPU.
Then you were never in the running for an iMac. It has NEVER been upgradable, and it never will be. Why do people have so much trouble understand this?
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:00 PM
 
Originally posted by hldan:
Why do you need an iMac bitching thread? Could you make one better? If so there's always room to create another computer company. Stop complaining, if you don't like it you ain't gotta buy it.
This thread helps keep the bitching out of the other iMac threads.

If you don't like it you don't have to read it.

If you have a better counter point to some constructive criticism please state it. If you don't," Move along, nothing to see here!"
Joy!peffpwpc
     
ender2002
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: nyc
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:11 PM
 
I can just imagine every time you put a CD or DVD into the drive the entire machines starts vibrating and the LCD begins to pulse. great engineering.
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:15 PM
 
Originally posted by Don Pickett:
Then you were never in the running for an iMac. It has NEVER been upgradable, and it never will be. Why do people have so much trouble understand this?
We understand just fine. Apple does not, we are not fools. The iMac is in the highend of my price range. At this point my needs for a desktop is G5 and I need it to last me a few years @$1300, but Apple is not offering what I need in the Price Range I can afford. I understand only too well why the iMac's GPU is not in a slot. It takes away from tower sales.

Apple does what is best for $pple, not what is best for me. I can live with that, but I still need what I need so I'll voice it, and hope to have it someday.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
CatOne
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:16 PM
 
Originally posted by Evan_11:
Major disagreement here. Regarding gaming: The iMac should be more than a computer for your grandma to use. A lot of kids will take these to college. The boys will want to boot up Doom 3 and do some fragging. Simple as that.
Right. And the video cards necessary to play Doom 3 (well) START at $400 (Radeon 9800). So that adds $300 to the price of the iMac, which kinda blows the whole thing out of the water.

The power market that wants to do hardcore gaming needs a faster machine, with a state of the art video card. And these same people WILL replace the video card on their own every 18-24 months (probably once mid-lifespan of the machine), which is also counter to the iMac way of doing things.

The benchmarks do show the iMac as being 3x faster than the old one on UT2004, so the graphics card isn't THAT awful, but if you think the iMac is going to compare to a PC running a 6800 Ultra for FPS gaming, you're living on the wrong planet.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:21 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
Apple does what is best for $pple, not what is best for me. I can live with that, but I still need what I need so I'll voice it, and hope to have it someday.
Apple, like all companies, does what it needs to do to stay in business. I'm sorry you're in a financial bind, but so am I: I will be saving up for the next five or six months for a new iMac.
     
Evan_11
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:29 PM
 
Originally posted by CatOne:
Right. And the video cards necessary to play Doom 3 (well) START at $400 (Radeon 9800). So that adds $300 to the price of the iMac, which kinda blows the whole thing out of the water.
Well you conviently skipped the part where I said that OS X is very graphics card dependent. Most just want the option of 128mb of ram which isn't asking much.
     
hldan
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:30 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
This thread helps keep the bitching out of the other iMac threads.

If you don't like it you don't have to read it.

If you have a better counter point to some constructive criticism please state it. If you don't," Move along, nothing to see here!"
You are absolutely right except for one thing, it's not constructive criticism if you are just bitching.
The machine hasn't even come out yet and you show nothing but contempt. Also I have a right to read anything and help the people that complain understand the good points as well since most people use these forums just to say negative things.
iMac 24" 2.8 Ghz Core 2 Extreme
500GB HDD
4GB Ram
Proud new Owner!
     
jamesa  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: .au
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:30 PM
 
Originally posted by hldan:
Why do you need an iMac bitching thread? Could you make one better? If so there's always room to create another computer company. Stop complaining, if you don't like it you ain't gotta buy it.


there's always an apologist, in every thread

I'm stating this because I think the machine is good, but with a little bit extra it could be great

they could do a BTO or offer a high end version with these specs. It seems a lot of people in here agree with me, too

-- james
     
Dave N
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Illinois, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:45 PM
 
OK, here's my official gripe:

Why doesn't Apple put "real world" photos of their products on their site? All of the pictures of their products look like some sort of idealized artist's rendition of the real thing. When a new Apple item comes out, I always have to wait until someone here buys it and posts some pics before I can tell what it really looks like. Those photos that someone put up of the iMacs at the Apple Expo were better than what's on the Apple site.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 12:56 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
This is me a lost iMac G5 sale.
So get yourself a stupid PC, put in a mighty graphics card and STFU !

-t
     
WinTroll
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: South Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:03 PM
 
Originally posted by CatOne:
Right. And the video cards necessary to play Doom 3 (well) START at $400 (Radeon 9800). So that adds $300 to the price of the iMac, which kinda blows the whole thing out of the water.

The power market that wants to do hardcore gaming needs a faster machine, with a state of the art video card. And these same people WILL replace the video card on their own every 18-24 months (probably once mid-lifespan of the machine), which is also counter to the iMac way of doing things.

The benchmarks do show the iMac as being 3x faster than the old one on UT2004, so the graphics card isn't THAT awful, but if you think the iMac is going to compare to a PC running a 6800 Ultra for FPS gaming, you're living on the wrong planet.
The 32 meg DDR ATI 9200 mobility chip in my Compaq 1360 centrino based laptop plays DOOM3 perfectly at default settings.

So why would this faster nVidia card with twice the memory and twice the power not be able to play UT2004, DOOM3, Call of Duty, etc?

That video card in the new iMac will easily be able to handle 3D games now and going forward........
     
rozwado1
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Miami Beach
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:04 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
So get yourself a stupid PC, put in a mighty graphics card and STFU !

-t
I'm with T.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:07 PM
 
Originally posted by WinTroll:
The 32 meg DDR ATI 9200 mobility chip in my Compaq 1360 centrino based laptop plays DOOM3 perfectly at default settings.

So why would this faster nVidia card with twice the memory and twice the power not be able to play UT2004, DOOM3, Call of Duty, etc?

That video card in the new iMac will easily be able to handle 3D games now and going forward........
Exactly. This is true for about 99.9% of the iMac users.

The remaining 0.01% power-hardcore-gamers complain because they have to compete with the latest souped-up PCs. In this area, Apple will NEVER be competitive, and there is no reason to go for this niche.

-t
     
Chinasaur
Senior User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Out West Somewhere....
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:13 PM
 
The iMac just Jumped The Shark.�
iMac - Late 2015 iMac, 32GB RAM
MacBook - 2010 MacBook, 1TB SSD, 16GB RAM
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:14 PM
 
Originally posted by hldan:
You are absolutely right except for one thing, it's not constructive criticism if you are just bitching.
The machine hasn't even come out yet and you show nothing but contempt. Also I have a right to read anything and help the people that complain understand the good points as well since most people use these forums just to say negative things.
That was a far better post. Yet, you still seem to misunderstand, this is the "iMac bitching thread". The "I love every POS Apple puts a logo on" thread has it's own politics. We don't like some points of it. If it did have more ram slots and better or upgradeable GPU more VRam someone would then bitch about the bus speed or lack of hyper-threaded Ram or whatever.

Contempt is to strong, more like disappointment. No one has said I'll buy a PC, those folks have their own politics.

Overall it is a good Mac a few $100 overpriced, not a POS. There is a real market for a Mac under the Tower in Price without Built-in video. I'm sure Apple see it, they just don't think it can bring them what they need.

I disagree, however my viewpoint is bias.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:20 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
There is a real market for a Mac under the Tower in Price without Built-in video. I'm sure Apple see it, they just don't think it can bring them what they need.
Yes, there is a market.
But NO, it's not an attractive market, none that would generate good cash-flow and earnings.

Since Apple is not stupid and has to think beyond some game kiddies opinion, they chose to come out with a versatile all-in-one Mac for a good price. The iMac G5.

-t
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:28 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
So get yourself a stupid PC, put in a mighty graphics card and STFU !

-t
I have a PC with a GF5200FX. It sucks. Rather use OS9 with my voodoo3 on my 7200/120.

As to "STFU" if that's the best insult your obviously under funded replacement brain can coax your fingers to type, I won't even bother to retort.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:31 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
I have a PC with a GF5200FX. It sucks.
So what ?
Originally posted by macgfx:
Rather use OS9 with my voodoo3 on my 7200/120
Enjoy.
Originally posted by macgfx:
As to "STFU" if that's the best insult your obviously under funded replacement brain can coax your fingers to type, I won't even bother to retort.
I can do more. But you're not worth more.

-t
     
jamesa  (op)
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: .au
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 01:32 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Yes, there is a market.
But NO, it's not an attractive market, none that would generate good cash-flow and earnings.

Since Apple is not stupid and has to think beyond some game kiddies opinion, they chose to come out with a versatile all-in-one Mac for a good price. The iMac G5.

-t
ha!

"some kiddies opinions"

WWDC - at one of the special conferences when Apple threw open the floor soliciting feedback from developers - you know what the first thing that was asked for?

A headless mac. Everyone cheered, then started chanting "cube! cube! cube!"

These are not kiddies. They're the same people you'll see requesting it over on /., on ars tech, and here. They're developers - and they're sys integration experts who could put Apple in a lot of enterprises, if they'd make a reasonably priced machine that was decoupled from a monitor.

Not to get too distracted from what we're talking about though.

The graphics chips do not get optimised to the same extent on OS X - therefore Apple need to put in a better chip than the equivalent PC to get similar performance. The 5200 is woeful... I know, because I have one in my Powerbook.

-- james
     
macgfx
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 02:01 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Yes, there is a market.
But NO, it's not an attractive market, none that would generate good cash-flow and earnings.

Since Apple is not stupid and has to think beyond some game kiddies opinion, they chose to come out with a versatile all-in-one Mac for a good price. The iMac G5.

-t
Sure Apple is not stupid, but that does not mean that it can't be wrong.

Even a 1.5Ghz G4 with an AGP Slot in a small form-factor with room for 1 Cd/dvd drive and 3 HD @$599.99 without a build-in display. I can see Apple Gaining Market Share and making money. I understand that it would undercut the eMac ,iMac,G5 Tower, I just don't think that folks sold on an iMac or G5 would be all that moved to downgrade. However, folks who are looking for value, schools, small biz, etc. could be moved from the flaws of Windows. The G4 has better Altivec at this point, it's just the lack of true DDR that puts it behind the G5 unless you need 64bit or more than 2GB of ram.

Apple does well in the market of need, but to grow they should do better in the market of want. When I try to get PC folks to come to the Mac every other word is want.

It's our money we are going to buy what we want.
Joy!peffpwpc
     
the_glassman
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Anywhere but here.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 02:02 PM
 
Originally posted by turtle777:
Yes, there is a market.
But NO, it's not an attractive market, none that would generate good cash-flow and earnings.

Since Apple is not stupid and has to think beyond some game kiddies opinion, they chose to come out with a versatile all-in-one Mac for a good price. The iMac G5.

-t
I remember when Steve first came back there was an interesting article in NG (Next Generation) stating how much the gaming market meant to apple and how he wanted them to become a leader in the industry and be an innovator. Sigh.
Now on to my rant.

Not sure if you are aware of this, but gaming is a huge industry that rivals the movie industry in annual sales so it not just kiddies spending money. Microsoft or Sony would have never ventured into the market if they didn't believe there would be some money involved.
Do you think for a minute that switchers or potential switchers to the Mac platform wouldn't ever want to play decent games?
I'm willing to bet a lot more people would be willing to switch or looking into getting a Mac if there where more available games that came out at the same time as their PC counter parts.

For the people bitching that adding a better graphics card would drastically increase the price of the iMac or you insane? A simple VRAM upgrade would be negligible to the consumer and would hardly affect apple at all. (They do already have great profit margins.)Does the VRAM upgrade increase the price of the Powerbook substantially?

I find it Ironic that they are promoting the new iMac as a great game player and specifically mention Doom 3. I happen to think that Doom would crawl on any of the iMacs with anything but the lowest settings.

There shouldn't be any reason not to have a 128 MB card on at-least on the two high end iMac or bare minimum with a BTO option.
It's not just for games either, the graphics card plays a role in many other functions of the OS. One of the more familiar aspects being Quartz Extreme, but what about upcoming updates to OS X, such as core?

The point being, I'm sick and tired of Apple purposely handicapping their computers to differentiate between Pro vs. consumer (which I think is stupid anyway) and people thining it's ok to do so.
Is having a better graphics card in the new iMac a bad thing? I don't think so.
I can't understand how people fail to see that.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 02:18 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
It's our money we are going to buy what we want.
Have you ever worked in a large company and been involved with strategic marketing and planning, target costing, integrating R&D efforts as well as production ?

Developing a new product like an iMac or Cube costs millions of $ from the first draft to SOP (start of production). A good estimation of possible sold units is crucial for success, because that determines how much of the general OH (overhead) costs (R&D, Admin, Sales & Marketing) are going to be spread over the total sold units, hence, what share is applied on a per-piece price.

If you come up with a product that sells only in small numbers (less than hundreds of thousands, and also, less than planned), you're going to make a HUGE loss. That's what happened with the Cube.

It doesn't matter that some people would buy it. It has to be enough to make it financially sound. The Cube wasn't. Even with its too high price, it still wouldn't bring in the money needed.

-t
     
PookJP
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 02:22 PM
 
Originally posted by Evan_11:
Major disagreement here. Regarding gaming: The iMac should be more than a computer for your grandma to use. A lot of kids will take these to college. The boys will want to boot up Doom 3 and do some fragging. Simple as that.

Second and most important is that OS X is very graphics card dependent. Quartz Extreme relies on a good graphics card. Tiger is going to utilize the graphics card even more! New software like Motion require a good graphics card.

Apple purposely crippling their hardware is stupid. Gawddamn they even make the thing where you can open it up. Why not make the graphics card at least upgradeable?!
1. As a guy who went to college using a first generation iBook, I never once needed more processing power for gaming, but I was certainly happy with the low price. The computing aspect of my college life saw me writing papers, sending emails, listening to music, talking on AIM, and doing minimal graphic design. I think you're overestimating the need for a powerful gaming machine, especially given that price is crucial to the college market. Don't extrapolate your college experience, or your view of a typical college experience, onto the whole market. I, for one, didn't know anyone in school (I graduated in 2002) who played video games.

2. I agree with the Quartz Extreme comment, but the Motion point is unfounded. I think the OS X experience should be as beautiful and smooth as possible, and for that a graphics card is important, but not if it makes the machine too expensive in the first place. Motion is a professional application that is designed to work in conjunction with another professional application (FCP), which is designed to work on a professional computer.

3. I agree the graphics card should be upgradeable. I wonder if there are other issues -- heat comes to mind -- for why they don't allow this.
It's the devil's way now.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 02:29 PM
 
Originally posted by PookJP:
I wonder if there are other issues -- heat comes to mind -- for why they don't allow this.
You are right, that is probably the MAIN issue at hand with all-in-one machines.

The well respected German IT news Heise points out that better cards like the Nvidia GeForce 6800 Ultra or ATIs Radeon 9800 Pro have to be ACTIVELY cooled. This, of course, is not a viable option for an affordable all-in-one Mac.

Here the link for those who speak German:

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/50506

-t
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 03:02 PM
 
This launch reminds me of a time almost exactly five years ago. The first slot-loading iMacs were launched, with a good CPU (G3/400) and a good mobo (U-ATA, AGP, 100 MHz bus). There wasn't enough RAM (only 64 megs), but that was easily fixed. The HD was a bit small, at 10 gigs, but that too could be fixed. It had the ports it needed (if no more than that) and the price was quite allright - $1299 for the iMac DV I picked. The killer, however, was a crippled Rage 128 card (memory interface was only 64 bits, only 8 megs of RAM) that meant that it was a constant struggle to get good games to work almost from the start. You CAN play Unreal tournament and Deus Ex etc on it, but you have to work a lot on it.

That time I got one, only to see the facelift bring a Rage 128 Pro with 16 megs RAM and not much else. The first facelift fixed the main flaw (this was the same board that the G4 had at the time) and if I had waited 9 months I could at least have played Warcraft III. I don't really regret it - this has been an awesome machine that still runs great after five years (with 512 megs of RAM and a 120 gig HD), and I don't really play all that much 3D games, but still...

The Doom III test is important, for three reasons. One is that it will be the game to beat for a while, at least graphics wise. The other is that there will likely be more games based on that engine. The third is that since people want to play Doom III, they will get a board that can handle it, so designers will set the lower limit there for future games. With the Geforce 5200U, the iMac'll have a board that is just on the limit - just like 5 years ago. In Doom III at 800*600, Low Quality, it gets about 25 frames with all effects on in the tests I've seen. That's really not enough, but you can make it work. Trust me, I've done it for five years now.

The part I'm afraid of is that the games I do want to play, like Deus Ex 2 if it ever gets here (what did you say? Invisible War? I can't hear you, I can't heeeaaar you..), will use an engine like this. So now I am where I was back then: Should I get one of these machines , should I get a BTO G5 Tower and put a 9600 in it or should I tough it out and wait for a facelift with this five year old machine?
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 03:25 PM
 
Originally posted by P:
Should I get one of these machines , should I get a BTO G5 Tower and put a 9600 in it or should I tough it out and wait for a facelift with this five year old machine?
It's a no brainer.

If you need GPU power, you should NOT get the iMac.

For the rest of us (99.9%), the iMac's GPU is just right.
I wouldn't pay any more for more GPU power, and I sense that the majority of users is with me.

But even if not, I don't give a sh.., because Apple is with me !

-t
     
Parky
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 03:50 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
I do like the look of it, but if you think your going to do much more than email with it without a few GB of Ram. Order a 20" with 2GB, $3000+. Order a Duel 1.8 G5 with 2GB and a 20" ASD, $3800. so for $800 you'd get 3pci-x slots 1 more 1.8 G5 6 more ram slots FW800 8x AGP PRO SLOT. Put it under your desk, takes less room now!
What a load of rubbish, 512 MB would be ample for any of the iApps, no need for 'a few GB of RAM'. 1GB would be nice and that is not so expensive as you can install 2x512MB.

Ian
Computers - Au MacBook 2.4Ghz, iMac 24" 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo
iPods - 5GB original iPod, 4GB nano - Red, 1GB 2G shuffle - Silver, 4GB 3G Shuffle - Black, 16GB touch, 16GB nano Red, 16GB iPhone 3G.
OSX User Since Public Beta, current OS 10.6.1, iTS UK purchases - 5377 songs.... and growing!
My website - www.idparkinson.co.uk
     
Parky
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2004, 03:59 PM
 
Originally posted by macgfx:
Sure Apple is not stupid, but that does not mean that it can't be wrong.

Even a 1.5Ghz G4 with an AGP Slot in a small form-factor with room for 1 Cd/dvd drive and 3 HD @$599.99 without a build-in display. I can see Apple Gaining Market Share and making money. I understand that it would undercut the eMac ,iMac,G5 Tower, I just don't think that folks sold on an iMac or G5 would be all that moved to downgrade. However, folks who are looking for value, schools, small biz, etc. could be moved from the flaws of Windows. The G4 has better Altivec at this point, it's just the lack of true DDR that puts it behind the G5 unless you need 64bit or more than 2GB of ram.

Apple does well in the market of need, but to grow they should do better in the market of want. When I try to get PC folks to come to the Mac every other word is want.

It's our money we are going to buy what we want.
And people that would have bought an eMac, iMac and PowerMac would have bought the cheaper machine with some rubbish cheap monitor. All Apple would then be doing is shifting tin and that is not what they want to do.

A $599 headless iMac would loose Apple money and devalue the brand by entering the 'cheap' end of the market.

It's a premium brand and they want to stay that way.

If you can't afford one that meets your needs then go with a cheaper option or save up.

Even if they did make one, along would come another load of folk wanting even more for the same money, on and on and on.

Ian
Computers - Au MacBook 2.4Ghz, iMac 24" 2.8Ghz Core 2 Duo
iPods - 5GB original iPod, 4GB nano - Red, 1GB 2G shuffle - Silver, 4GB 3G Shuffle - Black, 16GB touch, 16GB nano Red, 16GB iPhone 3G.
OSX User Since Public Beta, current OS 10.6.1, iTS UK purchases - 5377 songs.... and growing!
My website - www.idparkinson.co.uk
     
 
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 09:44 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.,