iMacs in September?

[wizard]

I'm not convinced that the G4 needs to be replaced in the IMac, but I'm convinced that it needs a much better implementation than it currently has. As with the Laptops the big question is can Motorola deliever an improved processor, and can Apple integrate it into a reasonable mother board.

If niether of them can do this then they really need to rethink the consumer line. The problem is that most people looking at the consumer line don't need or want the cost of the PowerMacs, but do need reasonable performance. To get this with the G4 you need the L3 cache and good supporting video. Apple hasn't gotten the video equation right on the G5 so I'm not to sure they will get it right on the IMac line. Its like they don't know who is buying the machines or why. Now if Motorola can't deliver significant processor improvements then I relaize that Apple has no choic bu to go with the G5, I'm jsut not sure they can do it in the form factor of an IMac at this time.

I do have to totally agree with you suggestion to fire the marketing person / team responsible for the IMac lines. Even a novice can recognize a castrated machine sitting next to a more robust implementation. This doesn't mean get rid of the low cost machine, but to sell models of IMacs with real distinctions and differrences in value for the money charged.

In the quest for a new PC I did look briefly at the IMacs, believe it or not I like the IMac appearance, but you talk about too little for the money!!! If nothing else you would think that Apple would stuff these things to the gills with RAM to make up for some of the other ommisions. Nope; instead they just let the market slip away. I can just imagine the marketing person trying to put a spin on this during a meeting. I understand that there may be a market for a minimalist configuration of a machine, but you really shouldn't apply that thinking to everything in a specific product line.

Thanks
dave

Originally posted by rog
I doubt it will be a G5, and if so, they'd probably have to redesign the case. The iMac is an overprice, slow, joke. In 18 months it's gone from 800 MHz, no L3 to 1000MHz, no L3. Sadly, they are unlikely to go above 1.4 GHz given how stuck the G4 is. They will likely still hobble it by leaving out the L3 cache. No wonder iMac sales are in the toilet. I'd like to see prices down to $1299 for the SuperDrive model, $1149 combo, and $999 15" combo. Even that would be pricey.

What PC out there is only 20% faster in the real world after 18 months? None. The iMac 2 was competetive for about a month when it was introduced. But it shipped in volume about 3 months later than it was supposed to, so from the moment it was out it was not a very good deal. Then they had the idiocy to raise the price while sales were already weak. Apple's latest brilliant move is to heavily advertise the G5 which nobody can get their hands on and likely won't for 2 months. People who need computers need them now! They don't think, well gee, I'll go back to a typewriter or a pad and pencil for 3 more months since my PC died because I'd like to wait for a G5. Apple should fire whoever is in charge of their marketing and pricing. They've been totally unable to grow Apple market share and the reasons why aren't hard to figure out.

 

[bluedalmatian]

"they need to kill the G3 by mid-next year"

the G3 has got Life eXtension Technology (tm) which has allowed it to be the only processor to be used in a PC for almost six years.

it must be eligable for some sort of award

 

[crenz]

Originally posted by bluedalmatian
the G3 has got Life eXtension Technology (tm) which has allowed it to be the only processor to be used in a PC for almost six years.

But is it because if its inherent qualities, or because there were no qualified successors...?

PC users could still be using Pentium IIIs if Intel hadn't finally gotten their act together and released a usable version of the P4.

 

[Sun Baked]

Re: iMacs in September?

Originally posted by Macrumors
The only info available to MacRumors at this time is that the new iMacs will sport USB 2.

Pangea does NOT support USB 2.0, therefore this would mean a move to the single chip DDR chipset (Intrepid) at the least and killing of OS 9 bootability.

Basically it's the Intrepid chipset that's in the PB12/PB17/DDR iMac -- though the PowerBook17 is the best representation of what the chipset is capable of, right now.

Hopefully the Intrepid chipset is USB2.0 capable. It would be expected that it would be, and Apple is known to build in capabilities into the Chipsets that are not used.

---

Chipsets are a little scattered right now.

eMac/TiBook - UniNorth/KeyLargo
iBook/SDR iMac - Pangea
XServe/MDD PowerMac - UniNorth2/KeyLargo
PB12/PB17/DDR iMac - Intrepid
PowerMac G5 - UniNorth3/KeyLargo2

 

[rice_web]

Specs we need on the high-end... well, need is subjective. However, I'd say that these specs would make the iMac an attractive purchase next to the PowerMacs.

- 1.4GHz G4 Processor
- 256K L2 Cache
- 200MHz System Bus
- 400MHz DDR Memory
- SuperDrive
- 120GB Hard Drive
- GeForce FX 5200 Ultra

A top-of-the-line system like this is plenty fast, and may actually be faster, if we see the 7457 in action, which would bring twice the L2 cache and full-DDR memory support.

 

[capitalhood]

no offense but i think thats a stretch

for one Apple needs to make the imac middle line, not top line, and a g-4ce fx is not middle end. Second 120 gb is huge bigger than the basic g5! so that i think is out. as for 1.4 ghz, yes but not for a few months, that would eclipse the g4 desktop and the future powerbooks so i think they'll aim lower than you say but it would be great if they did make it high end like that at a good price!

 

[bennetsaysargh]

argh! i figured it all out!

everything was waiting for the PMG5. by this, the iMacs couldn't get too close to the old powermacs, so there would be a difference. because of this, the eMac was also slow, as to not be faster than the iMacs. also, the powerbooks weren't as fast as they could have been because i don't think apple would want powerbooks for more $ being slower than the iMacs for less $.

please give me some input. i think that i may have messed up in there. it's late

 

[rice_web]

Re: no offense but i think thats a stretch

Originally posted by capitalhood
for one Apple needs to make the imac middle line, not top line, and a g-4ce fx is not middle end. Second 120 gb is huge bigger than the basic g5! so that i think is out. as for 1.4 ghz, yes but not for a few months, that would eclipse the g4 desktop and the future powerbooks so i think they'll aim lower than you say but it would be great if they did make it high end like that at a good price!

But I'm talking about the top-of-the-line iMac, which has often eclipsed the low-end PowerMac, especially in overall value.

 

[rice_web]

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
argh! i figured it all out!

everything was waiting for the PMG5. by this, the iMacs couldn't get too close to the old powermacs, so there would be a difference. because of this, the eMac was also slow, as to not be faster than the iMacs. also, the powerbooks weren't as fast as they could have been because i don't think apple would want powerbooks for more $ being slower than the iMacs for less $.

please give me some input. i think that i may have messed up in there. it's late

I'd say you've hit the mark perfectly, since Apple was trying to salvage any PowerMac sale they could during this most recent slump (which I'm guessing they effectively shattered with the G5 website mistake). Now that the PowerMacs are finally up to par, the iMacs can see an equal or similar performance increase, with the PowerBooks likely mirroring or slightly edging the iMacs.

The only real piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit is the iBook. G3 or G4? Update schedule? Hell, we even have to question screen sizes.

 

[bennetsaysargh]

The G3

i think since the Powerbooks can't go G4 yet, they will stay G4 as will the iBooks. The iBooks should go G4 as soon as possible, which means the PowerBooks must go G5. as for the screens, i think that the screens will stay pretty much the same, maybe getting a little largewr by .1 inches or do.

 

[Lanbrown]

Originally posted by Freg3000
Well, if we assume the PowerBook rumors are true (which I admit is a stretch) then the 7457 will be ready and in production, so the iMac would be able to use them. Therefore we could get higher clock speeds, as well as more cache, both L2 and the addition of L3 in the iMac. I agree though that Apple has left the iMac to sell on its looks alone and that ain't gonna cut it no more.

I would not expect any L3 cache. Cache is very expensive so I cannot see them installing it. They could, but highly doubtful. The 7457 is supposedly cheaper then the 7455 so they could take that money and put it towards the cache though. Or they could drop the price of the machine down. I really hope they do more then just a new processor. A new GPU, Serial-ATA and FW800, DDR400 memory and support for more then 1GB would be very nice additions.

 

[daveg5]

Re: Extended iMac

Originally posted by Brother Mugga
I've just 'switched' a couple of friends to iMacs (yesterday, in fact) because they only want to do the email/wordproc/tetris thing.

And they lurve the design.

Personally, I'd have got an iMac ages ago if it had (a) proper extended desktop (just think how many people (and, perhaps more importantly, switchers) already have a decent monitor) and (b) USB 2.0. Yes, firewire is better (blah blah); I agree with you. But an awful lot of consumer peripheral manufacturers don't, it would appear.

Fingers crossed for September, then.

Brother Mugga

PS: On this theme (or possibly one involving a 'headless' (cubelike?? Please say it's true...) box): I wonder what happened to all those 1.4 Gig G5s that were supposed to be churning out of Fishkill?

Like I said; here's hoping for September, eh?

Albeit in a completely unrealistic 'yeah-right-like-Apple-is-going-to-knacker-its-Pro G5-sales' kind of way...

there is a hack that allows extended desktop on ibooks and imacsg4 on http://www.xlr8yourmac.com