[turtle777]

http://macnn.com/news/25001

Bummer !

Waiting suxx.
The current iMac lineup is overpriced, compared to the eMacs or PowerMacs...

If the new G5 iMacs are not due till next year, there has to be some revision this year. Apple can't let the iMac's untouched for a whole year.

-t

[rareflares]

...

More Details


All the guy says, is that it "was a challenge to get it into the consumer line". he never said we wouldn't be seeing it soon.



iMac G5 make a lot of sense to me to be announced at WWDC. here's why:

1.) All iMac G4's have been discontinued as of last week.
2.) It hasn't been updated in a long time. They could have easily put another G4 update in it by now.
3.) Apple wants developer to create products that take advantage of the 64 bit G5. If the G5 is in a consumer machine, that really gives developers an incentive to take advantage of it because more people will have G5's
4.) The iMac is grossly underpowered/overpriced and a horrible deal compared to the other product lines. A G5 would revive it.
5.) An all dual PowerMac lineup screams a single G5 lineup elsewhere in the Macintosh line. iMacs will be getting the single G5's.
6.) It's at a perfect level for people interested in a G5 but are at a sub-$2000 price level.
7.) The iMac can't wait for the Powerbook to go G5 before updating. It will take too long and Apple cannot sacrifice other lines just because they are having problems putting G5's in the PBs.



I expect a complete redesign of the iMac to support the G5 (just like a complete redesign happened when the transition from G3 to G4 occured).

[DoeJury]

I agree, what's up.

The iMac is dying - because of people like me. I'm just waiting for the revision.

I don't even want/need a G5, I just want the thing to be updated (mhz bumps, cache faster, better gpu in low end). The eMac is cheaper and more powerful.

Apple, update the iMac!!!

[turtle777]

Originally posted by rareflares:


iMac G5 make a lot of sense to me to be announced at WWDC. here's why:

1.) All iMac G4's have been discontinued as of last week.

So ?

That probably means a G4 revision.
Far more likely !

-t

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by turtle777:
So ?

That probably means a G4 revision.
Far more likely !

-t

I agree. Look at what happened to the Power Mac line and draw your conclusions. Unless the situation does improve rapidly in IBM, concerning 970FX yields, there won't be a G5 iMac anytime soon. Really.

[anoetic]

I don't think the problem is yields. The article doesn't say there is a problem with the yields for the current speed G5 processors it only says that it is difficult to make them work in the current architecture. I think the yield for G5 chips is fine for the speeds the iMac will need. And while Apple waits for IBM gets there new process working for higher speed chips Apple seems to be investing on new architecture for current and future G5s. Just look at the liwuid cooled system in the new Power Mac. I think it is entirely likely that the new iMacs will have G5. Remeber that most people didn't expect the G4 to be place in the iMac as quickly as it was and there currently are no single processor G5s available. That is a huge whole in the lineups.

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by anoetic:
I don't think the problem is yields. The article doesn't say there is a problem with the yields for the current speed G5 processors it only says that it is difficult to make them work in the current architecture. I think the yield for G5 chips is fine for the speeds the iMac will need. And while Apple waits for IBM gets there new process working for higher speed chips Apple seems to be investing on new architecture for current and future G5s. Just look at the liwuid cooled system in the new Power Mac. I think it is entirely likely that the new iMacs will have G5.

If you believe yield is not an issue, I invite you to go to the Apple Store and configure an XServe G5 or a Power Mac 2.5 GHz (the other ones seem to have the old 130 nm G5 and are delivered in 1-3 days). You will be surprised to see that the estimated shipping time for the Power Mac is July and for the XServe is 4-6 weeks (even for the mono-processor system), almost unchanged from its very introduction back in January! That's why Apple did not use the 90 nm G5 in the two other Power Mac models. How they would fill all orders for Power Macs and XServes with no sufficient numbers of 90 nm G5s in their hands? So, no question to bring the G5 in the iMac line. Not now. Later in the year or early next year perhaps.

However, yields is one issue. The other one is heat. A parameter rather underestimated here, because IBM's numbers for power consumption give only the typical and not the maximum levels.

[Eriamjh]

The iMac G5 could come out at WWDC. My guess would be at 1.6GHz.
If it's just another iMac G4, it couldn't be faster than 1.5GHz. I'm not aware of the G4 ever being faster than that (see Powerbook).

New displays too, but maybe not a new form factor/design for iMac.

[no1allowed]

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
The iMac G5 could come out at WWDC. My guess would be at 1.6GHz.
If it's just another iMac G4, it couldn't be faster than 1.5GHz. I'm not aware of the G4 ever being faster than that (see Powerbook).

New displays too, but maybe not a new form factor/design for iMac.

And all the previous rumors had a touch of truth to them, except one little one. Most of them said a single 1.8GHz for the entry level - hmmmmm wonder where that went? Will we also see a liquid cooled iMac for July?

[anoetic]

Originally posted by Pierre B.:
If you believe yield is not an issue, I invite you to go to the Apple Store and configure an XServe G5 or a Power Mac 2.5 GHz (the other ones seem to have the old 130 nm G5 and are delivered in 1-3 days). You will be surprised to see that the estimated shipping time for the Power Mac is July and for the XServe is 4-6 weeks (even for the mono-processor system), almost unchanged from its very introduction back in January! That's why Apple did not use the 90 nm G5 in the two other Power Mac models. How they would fill all orders for Power Macs and XServes with no sufficient numbers of 90 nm G5s in their hands? So, no question to bring the G5 in the iMac line. Not now. Later in the year or early next year perhaps.

However, yields is one issue. The other one is heat. A parameter rather underestimated here, because IBM's numbers for power consumption give only the typical and not the maximum levels.

Nobody is disputing that the 90 nm yields are low but those aren't the chips that would be going into an iMac. You said it yourself, the wait for the 1.6 and 1.8s are 1-3 days. The lines for these chips are mature and able to put out a large number. IBM and Apple would love to get as much out of that process as possible, until the 90 nm process can be perfected. And the issue of heat is a problem but Apple has been investing in methods of cooling the boxes for quite some time. Look at the innovative ways they implemented cooling in the original G5 and the new liquid cooled. I'm sure a process has been in the works that would work for the iMac.

[BrunoBruin]

Originally posted by DoeJury:
I don't even want/need a G5, I just want the thing to be updated (mhz bumps, cache faster, better gpu in low end).

This is an excellent point. Never mind the clock speed; ANY G5 would bring greatly improved performance because of the system architecture (massively faster bus, true DDR RAM implementation, etc.).

I continue to believe that if all we were going to see was 1.5GHz G4s, we would have seen them already. The line was last revised in September; there's nothing that should keep faster G4s out of iMacs if that's the plan.

Then again, my other favorite theory is that we might see the G5 in something besides iMacs. The pricing of the G5 towers certainly seems to leave lots of room for something to slot in below them.

[gururafiki]

Originally posted by anoetic:
Nobody is disputing that the 90 nm yields are low but those aren't the chips that would be going into an iMac. You said it yourself, the wait for the 1.6 and 1.8s are 1-3 days. The lines for these chips are mature and able to put out a large number. IBM and Apple would love to get as much out of that process as possible, until the 90 nm process can be perfected. And the issue of heat is a problem but Apple has been investing in methods of cooling the boxes for quite some time. Look at the innovative ways they implemented cooling in the original G5 and the new liquid cooled. I'm sure a process has been in the works that would work for the iMac.

Originally posted by rareflares
iMac G5 make a lot of sense to me to be announced at WWDC. here's why:

1.) All iMac G4's have been discontinued as of last week.
2.) It hasn't been updated in a long time. They could have easily put another G4 update in it by now.
3.) Apple wants developer to create products that take advantage of the 64 bit G5. If the G5 is in a consumer machine, that really gives developers an incentive to take advantage of it because more people will have G5's
4.) The iMac is grossly underpowered/overpriced and a horrible deal compared to the other product lines. A G5 would revive it.
5.) An all dual PowerMac lineup screams a single G5 lineup elsewhere in the Macintosh line. iMacs will be getting the single G5's.
6.) It's at a perfect level for people interested in a G5 but are at a sub-$2000 price level.
7.) The iMac can't wait for the Powerbook to go G5 before updating. It will take too long and Apple cannot sacrifice other lines just because they are having problems putting G5's in the PBs.

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by anoetic:
Look at the innovative ways they implemented cooling in the original G5 and the new liquid cooled. I'm sure a process has been in the works that would work for the iMac.

You forget perhaps that the original G5 is housed in the huge Power Mac case, where you have the luxury to waste space if needed. And I believe it would work in the eMac, which is a voluminous computer. But the iMac is too compact. Unless Apple abandon the current design for another one, adapted to the G5 requirements.

[no1allowed]

Originally posted by Pierre B.:
You forget perhaps that the original G5 is housed in the huge Power Mac case, where you have the luxury to waste space if needed. And I believe it would work in the eMac, which is a voluminous computer. But the iMac is too compact. Unless Apple abandon the current design for another one, adapted to the G5 requirements.

True, but the XServe with 2 x 2.0GHz 970FX is extremely small as well as have room for an optical drive and 3 hard drives. It is long and wide, but still a small package nonetheless. You do bring up a good point, though because the iMac motherboard would have to provide room for dual DDR modules as well as get rid of heat produced by a 970FX. It's already crowded inside the iMac case and the iMac is encased in plastic, which makes for a poor heat conductor. If they are careful they could redesign the case a bit to look like it has "chrome" effects that are actually part of a weird heat sink/pipe. The Apple engineers do seem "gifted" when it comes to design, so I wouldn't put anything past them.

[Pierre B.]

Originally posted by no1allowed:
True, but the XServe with 2 x 2.0GHz 970FX is extremely small as well as have room for an optical drive and 3 hard drives. It is long and wide, but still a small package nonetheless.

It is true that the XServe is much smaller in volume than the Power Mac (around 1/3 in volume). But the same analogy holds between the XServe and the iMac: if you do the volume calculation for the two machines, you will find (approximatively) a volume of 14000 cm^3 for the XServe and 5150 cm^3 for the hemisphere of the iMac. An XServe is literally almost 3 iMacs in volume. That's why I say the iMac is too compact to accommodate comfortably a G5. It remains to see if Apple can do a miracle here, but I am not holding my breath for this update. Unless they choose to make a bigger (in volume) machine.

[scottkleinberg]

Ok. Read carefully.

For all of you expecting an iMac G5, dream on. Not happening. I have sources. If there was one, I'd tell you to stay tuned.

Here is what you will see at WWDC

1. Tiger preview -- a long one.
2. Preview of Apple's new spoken interface -- part of Tiger
3. New displays touting end of AVI connection
4. Display of newest G5s announced last week
5.Display of how Airport Express works with Airtunes/iTunes 4.6
6. 50-60GB iPods
7. Introduction of latest Quicktime compression codec

Here is what you will NOT see at WWDC

1. iMac G5
2. Powerbook G5
3. Speed bumped iMacs
4. Headless Macs
5. Mini macs
6. Macs on keychains

Here is what is possible at WWDC

1. iPods with color screen, 4G features
2. Digital photo frame integrated with iPhoto
3. Remote Desktop 2 demonstration.

It's not going to be the new product fest you are all droolling over. I'm sorry. I want the same, but I can tell you that it's not.

[aplmd]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:
Ok. Read carefully.

For all of you expecting an iMac G5, dream on. Not happening. I have sources. If there was one, I'd tell you to stay tuned.

Whatever!! Your opinion has no more merit than any others. Sources, we have hear that one before. By you putting that in your post, you have lost all creditability, Personally, I think there will be an announcement for the iMAC G5 at WWDC. There has been too long of a wait, and the points RAREFLARES are excellent. I have 2 friends ready to ditch their PC and get a new iMAC when it comes available. The question I think is not are they going to announce it, the question is when are they going to ship it. If they put shipping dates 6 weeks after WWDC, that would give them 60 days from today to start shipping. Apple can do a lot in 60 days.


And lets not forget Boger's statement the other day:

While Boger didn't give a timeframe for an iMac G5, he did say the company faced similar challenges getting a G5 to work with their consumer desktop.

"It's the same story -- the challenges are obvious when you look at the G5 and the size of the heatsinks and the enclosure; that would be a heck of a challenge as well."

Noticed the word faced?? It is past tense. If they haven't already done it, then it would have been "faces".

20" iMAC G5 1.8 GHz -- come to papa.

[shatten22]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:

Here is what you will NOT see at WWDC

1. iMac G5
3. Speed bumped iMacs

so then, by your logic, the imac is dead?? if there won't be a g5 inside or a speed-bumped G4, then there's no more imac line, cause every single store in the country has stopped receiving shipments of imacs.

i think your source sucks.

g

[Commodus]

I think there's every likelihood that the iMac G5 will show up at WWDC. The evidence:

1. The "PowerMac 8,1" entry in the list of Mac models contained within OS X. We know that even-numbered major revisions are reserved for the iMacs, and obviously there have been no Macs announced in the 8 series yet. Why not add another 6 series if it's just another G4 iteration of the existing design?

2. Timing of computer updates. If the plan was really to have a 1.5 GHz G4 in the iMac, Apple would have put it in by now - it was obviously ready right away for the PowerBooks in late April, and May was quiet as far as hardware releases went. More importantly, every other hardware line has had its revision: the Xserves, then the eMacs, the iBooks and PowerBooks, they've all had their turn. The iMac is actually slower than both the eMac and iBook at the moment! Apple is holding off for something, and it doesn't take a genius to figure out what that is.

3. The flurry of general updates in advance of WWDC. Obviously the PowerMacs were the biggest update, but so far we've had AirPort Express, iTunes 4.6, and we're going to see at least the European launch of the iTunes Music Store this coming week. Those are pretty big launches to perform when the keynote speech could probably cover at least one or two of them. Room is being made in the keynote for bigger items. iPods? Not so likely at a developer conference...

4. Low stocks of iMacs. Apple has been letting their iMac stock run low for awhile now. Again, if they'd wanted to give the iMacs a speedbump, the stocks were low enough to do that weeks ago.

[Simon]

Good evidence indeed.

If they don't update the iMac at WWDC the entire line is dead. That would leave the entire desktop area between the $999 eMac and the $2000 PowerMac completely empty.

No way that can happen.

[gomariners]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:
Here is what you will NOT see at WWDC

1. iMac G5
2. Powerbook G5
3. Speed bumped iMacs
4. Headless Macs
5. Mini macs
6. Macs on keychains

Speaking for the macs-on-keychains holdout crowd, let me say: phlbbt! We will be vindicated at WWDC. After all, at 1.4ghz, the g5 heatsink could easily be shrunk to that size...

[scottkleinberg]

I'm very sorry you think you have a better source than I do. Truly I am. I am on your side. I want these things as much as the next person. It pains me that they aren't coming.

The very day the powerbook G5 comes out, I will be the proud owner. But I know it's not coming at WWDC. I also know the iMac G5 is not coming at WWDC.

And to the poster who can't read English .. I never said it was dead. I simply said it wasn't going to be a G5.

Is the G5 iMac coming in 2004? Yup.

Is it coming at WWDC? Nope.

[OldManMac]

We'll remember you and your "sources". Unless you're a very high level Apple employee, who's risking his job, or you know someone who's risking their job revealing inside info, you don't know squat.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by aplmd:
Whatever!! Your opinion has no more merit than any others. Sources, we have hear that one before.

Did anyone of you notice that there are quite a handful of so called "insiders" that know the G5 iMac is NOT going to happen at WWDC, but NO ONE who has inside information that it is going to happen !

I think it's some indication, too.

-t

[Commodus]

scottkleinberg:

Given that all the evidence seems to be pointing to the contrary, and that your own claims of what's likely at WWDC, I suspect that you're just making things up (or drawing on sketchy sources). I can even illustrate where the flaws are.

First: Apple rarely, if ever, performs demonstrations at WWDC of hardware that has already been announced. Why would they need to show off Airport Express or the new PowerMacs when developers will have had weeks to study the benchmarks, documentation, and more. Furthermore, these aren't even truly "new" products, so it's not like developers won't have an idea as to how they work already.

Second: what you claim is possible is really either tenuous, or unlikely to be given much beyond a passing mention in a keynote speech. I mean, you really think a Remote Desktop Connection 2 demo will be given? It's basically a streamlined VNC connection. You say "50-60 GB iPods" when it's a fact (not a rumour) that Toshiba has a contract to supply 60 GB 1.8" drives to Apple, and that those drives are two-platter (thus making the next logical step down to be a single-platter 30 GB drive). And finally... an iPhoto-connected digital picture frame? Talk about stretching it! Those devices make even Tablet PCs seem like runaway hits.

So in short: while no one here truly knows whether or not iMac G5s will be at WWDC, your conspicuous lack of knowledge about Apple's practices or product pipelines really isn't helping anyone.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Commodus:
scottkleinberg:

Given that all the evidence seems to be pointing to the contrary, and that your own claims of what's likely at WWDC, I suspect that you're just making things up (or drawing on sketchy sources). I can even illustrate where the flaws are.

Could you please point out the EVIDENCE ?
Links, please.

So far, I have only seen speculation.
The only "fact" that we have is that conspicous "PowerMac 8,1" entry in the list of Mac models, which is far away from being ANY evidence.

While I agree that scottkleinberg arguments don't prove anything, your's don't either. So far, no one has produced compelling evidence or insider information PRO a G5 iMac at WWDC.

-t

edit: formatting

[Commodus]

I've already mentioned evidence earlier in the thread. Some of it is circumstantial (all other model lines having been updated, lots of updates coming in advance of WWDC and yet the iMac hasn't changed, and so forth) but there's certainly more evidence in favour of an iMac G5 at WWDC than against it.

[scottkleinberg]

Whatever it is that I know and don't know will no longer be shared with you losers. Why? Because there are people on other sites who appreciate tips and inside stuff and those people don't make someone who takes the time to post feel like they never should have bothered in the first place.

Be well and enjoy the WWDC. And then, order your imaginary computers. Or better yet .. since none of you actually ever order anything -- you just complain -- come back here and complain some more. That will help the future of Apple.

Meanwhile, Apple shareholders who actually have info -- like myself -- who take the time to come back to forums to share said knowledge -- will go somewhere where we're appreciated. That way, you can listen to people who "know exactly why my information is flawed" and "of no use."

And I know I'll get flamed like crazy, but you just cost everyone the most complete information you'll ever get. But that's ok. Because the other people in here with all the answers -- that's what you want to read.

Have a great day.

[Stolfi1]

I work at Compusa in our pos(point of sale) system we have a UPC in our system for a dual 1.25 Imac we cant order then but the sku is there.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Stolfi1:
I work at Compusa in our pos(point of sale) system we have a UPC in our system for a dual 1.25 Imac we cant order then but the sku is there.

Now THAT would be some news !

A dual G4 1.25 GHz is not a bad choice as compared to a say 2 GHz G5.
Still, sounds unbelievable that Apple would be able to squeeze in 2 processors.

We'll see...

-t

[Commodus]

He's bluffing you, or else it's an SKU which won't ever be used. No dual iMacs exist or will exist for awhile to come. Why?

Cost: adding a second CPU immediately ramps up the price, not just for the extra CPU itself but also for the mainboard. The performance gains to be had probably wouldn't justify the cost.

Space: room inside the iMac case (at least as it is now) is at a premium. Fitting two G4s in there would be a tight fit.

Heat: an extra CPU, even if it was a 7447A-era G4, would probably add to the heat inside the case.

Marketing: a dual-1.25 GHz G4 is still a G4. Apple practically needs an iMac G5 at this point, because having a 1.6 or 1.8 GHz 64-bit processor sounds much better than a 1.25 GHz 32-bit processor, even if it is dual-processor. Not to mention that going to the G5 would allow Apple to update the whole internal architecture (Serial ATA, improved audio, the possibility of Firewire 800, and so forth).

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:
Whatever it is that I know and don't know will no longer be shared with you losers. Why? Because there are people on other sites who appreciate tips and inside stuff and those people don't make someone who takes the time to post feel like they never should have bothered in the first place.

Be well and enjoy the WWDC. And then, order your imaginary computers. Or better yet .. since none of you actually ever order anything -- you just complain -- come back here and complain some more. That will help the future of Apple.

Meanwhile, Apple shareholders who actually have info -- like myself -- who take the time to come back to forums to share said knowledge -- will go somewhere where we're appreciated. That way, you can listen to people who "know exactly why my information is flawed" and "of no use."

Originally posted by Stolfi1:
I work at Compusa in our pos(point of sale) system we have a UPC in our system for a dual 1.25 Imac we cant order then but the sku is there.

LOL. Captured for posterity.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Stolfi1:
I work at Compusa in our pos(point of sale) system we have a UPC in our system for a dual 1.25 Imac we cant order then but the sku is there.

Yeah, and even though you participate on this board and you claim to work for CompUSA you can't properly write iMac. I call bullsh!t Nice try, but no cigar.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Simon:
Yeah, and even though you participate on this board and you claim to work for CompUSA you can't properly write iMac. I call bullsh!t Nice try, but no cigar.

Hey, who said that CompUSA employees have a real clue

-t

[storer]

if you check out MacWorlds website, there is a news article about the iMac and PowerBook not likely to be having a G5 at any time soon.

[aplmd]

Originally posted by storer:
if you check out MacWorlds website, there is a news article about the iMac and PowerBook not likely to be having a G5 at any time soon.

I don't know storer, I must be getting blind. Where does it say no new G5 iMacs anytime soon??

[storer]

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/06/09/apple/

[aplmd]

Originally posted by storer:
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/06/09/apple/

Storer, read my post about half way up in this tread. It doesn't say anything in the article that iMACs are not coming soon (it does specifically state that Powerbook G5 are not coming soon as is the PM 3Ghz.) What the article states is the Apple faced similar problems when putting a G5 into the iMAC, and the way I read it, it is past tense (ie already done). Otherwise, it would have been faces.

[Simon]

Originally posted by storer:
if you check out MacWorlds website, there is a news article about the iMac and PowerBook not likely to be having a G5 at any time soon.

Beep. Wrong answer. Let's look at the original quote a bit closer:

Tom Boger, Apple's Director of Power Mac Product Marketing:
I think it's important to realize that the technical challenges are not trivial putting that G5 in a PowerBook or anything else and not to expect a G5 anytime soon in a PowerBook - certainly not before the end of the year

He says it's difficult to put the G5 into a PowerBook or "anything else". And that we should not expect to see a G5 in a PowerBook before the end of the year.

Isn't it interesting that he never mentioned the iMac? And when he talks about the end of the year he specifically only talks about the PowerBook.

If you read the quote carefully you will see that he never rules out a G5 in an iMac. Not even in 2004. That doesn't mean that the G5 iMac will arrive soon, but it certainly doesn't say "no G5 iMac in 2004". Actually, this statement would not even contradict announcing G5 iMacs at WWDC.

[no1allowed]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:
I'm very sorry you think you have a better source than I do. Truly I am. I am on your side. I want these things as much as the next person. It pains me that they aren't coming.

The very day the powerbook G5 comes out, I will be the proud owner. But I know it's not coming at WWDC. I also know the iMac G5 is not coming at WWDC.

And to the poster who can't read English .. I never said it was dead. I simply said it wasn't going to be a G5.

Is the G5 iMac coming in 2004? Yup.

Is it coming at WWDC? Nope.

You know, I kinda agree with you. After all what does the WWDC have to do with iMacs? They are developers who are more than likely to have PowerBooks and PowerMacs. Also the fact they have never intro'd any of the consumer line at the WWDC is another impetus to agree with you. I still stand by my earlier prediction of an August time frame for G5 iMacs - you know, new blood for the end of the fiscal year and all that. August and November have been traditional times for G5 iMac introductions. And I believe it will have a bigger base.

[storer]

Originally posted by aplmd:
Storer, read my post about half way up in this tread. It doesn't say anything in the article that iMACs are not coming soon (it does specifically state that Powerbook G5 are not coming soon as is the PM 3Ghz.) What the article states is the Apple faced similar problems when putting a G5 into the iMAC, and the way I read it, it is past tense (ie already done). Otherwise, it would have been faces.

Yes, however he said that it WOULD be a challenge to fit the G5 into an iMac, indicating that they hadn't already tried.

ALSO, I saw a picture of the G5's cooling system: its nearly bigger than the iMac hump thing itself, so unless there is a new design coming with a bigger footprint, who knows?

Oh and simon, BEEP, Read It Again! (all of it)

[Commodus]

An iMac G5 would be perfectly relevant to developers. After all, if you're coding an app you need to know what your user base will be running by the time you release your product. Developers don't just need to know what the G5 itself can do; they need to know about the system architectures they'll be working with.

For example, there's a good possibility that an iMac G5 would use single-channel memory if it's an AIO (as upgrading memory in pairs is not especially reasonable in such a tight spot). They might also want to know the case design, so that they know what kinds of peripherals are feasible. And let's say that Apple introduces Firewire 800 to the iMac. Wouldn't a developer want to know that they could start building devices with the expectation that more than just the PowerMac owners could use them?

[mosespatrader]

There has to be some form of an iMac very, very soon. Take a look at local retailers in your area no one has any iMacs in stock. I live in Dallas and none of the CompUsa's have any iMacs in stock.

Also the mail-order retailers (macmall, maczone, macwarehouse) are very low on stock.

I am willing to bet that something is coming very soon

[storer]

Originally posted by mosespatrader:
There has to be some form of an iMac very, very soon. Take a look at local retailers in your area no one has any iMacs in stock. I live in Dallas and none of the CompUsa's have any iMacs in stock.

Also the mail-order retailers (macmall, maczone, macwarehouse) are very low on stock.

I am willing to bet that something is coming very soon

i know what you mean: and i can't decide.
every little bit of "evidence" we are looking at contradicts another.
so, i don't know. maybe skottkleinberg is right: not at WWDC but some stage in 2004.

[Simon]

Originally posted by storer:
Oh and simon, BEEP, Read It Again! (all of it)

You're stubborn alright. But unfortunately for you by now I know this article pretty much by heart, so let me try to explain again.

Read the interview carefully!

Nowhere does he talk about the iMac G5 and any date. With regard to the iMac G5 he says "it would be heck of a challenge". Well yeah, obviously. But nowhere does he mention any dates when he talks about the iMac. And when he does talk about dates he never mentions the iMac. Doesn't that seem interesting?

Fact is, we don't know squat. And this is all just speculation. But to come here and say there will be no iMac G5 in 2004 as if there were some Apple statement that would prove this is just plain ridiculous. Apple hardly ever says when they will introduce this or that future model. Actually, when it comes to consumer level Macs, they never pre-announce.

Originally posted by storer:
ALSO, I saw a picture of the G5's cooling system: its nearly bigger than the iMac hump thing itself, so unless there is a new design coming with a bigger footprint, who knows?

We have gone through this countless times on this board. The large cooling system (of the fastest PowerMac with dual G5s albeit) has to do with the high heat density of dual 90nm 970fx's as well as the high core frequency and maybe even the 1.25GHz system controller.

It has nothing to do with the overall dissipated heat of a lower-clocked single 130nm 970. People like Eug have posted links on this board countless times that show an equally fast G5 dissipates less heat than a G4. If a 1.6GHz 970 puts out less heat than a 1.44GHz G4, why should the G5 not fit into the present iMac? Actually, I think the mentioned G4 could even be more expensive for Apple to buy than 1.6GHz 970s.

You can adhere to an assumption all you want, but when you try to convince people of it, at least get the facts straight.

[storer]

but he also does not say that they have already tried to do it: it WOULD be a challenge. But hey, who knows, maybe im just stubborn...

and why are you lecturing me about my interpretation of the article - you said yourself that it was all just speculation: there is no details

so how am i wrong or right????
and BTW, i wasnt trying to be rude, i was just saying what i thought

[Simon]

Originally posted by storer:
and why are you lecturing me about my interpretation of the article - you said yourself that it was all just speculation: there is no details

Of course this all just speculation. The speculation is not the problem. And you can believe as you please. What you can't do is say that your belief is a fact due to something Apple said, when actually Apple said something else.You don't think the G5 iMac will arrive at WWDC. Fine. But Apple never said it wouldn't. So you could turn out to be wrong. Just as everybody else here. Nobody knows what's going to happen. I think we should keep that in mind, shouldn't we?

Personally, I'm really not sure what to think. I believe the G5 iMac should come at WWDC and I would really like to see it happen. There is some good evidence that it could happen. But there is also some evidence against it. I'd say it's a 60-40 that it will arrive, but that's just my guess.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by storer:
but he also does not say that they have already tried to do it: it WOULD be a challenge. But hey, who knows, maybe im just stubborn...

and why are you lecturing me about my interpretation of the article - you said yourself that it was all just speculation: there is no details

I think people are reading way too much into that article regarding the iMac. All that was said that was definitive was about the PowerBook and Power Mac.

Personally, I have full confidence that a G5 iMac will be released at WWDC, but we'll just have to wait. Fortunately, it's only another 2 weeks.

[Loco Engr]

This morning, I read that Xilinx dumped IBM as a 90 nm chip partner. Things aren't looking too promising for the PowerPC camp. Ever since it's inception over a decade ago, the MIA alliance has been big on promises and short (or late) on delivery.

Isn't Intel already shipping 90 nm chips in volume?

[bradoesch]

Originally posted by scottkleinberg:

Meanwhile, Apple shareholders who actually have info -- like myself -- who take the time to come back to forums to share said knowledge -- will go somewhere where we're appreciated. That way, you can listen to people who "know exactly why my information is flawed" and "of no use."

How many shares must I buy before Apple lets me in early on product announcements?