Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel iMac disassembled...
- Thread starter yvovandoorn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Proves that Apple is using the Mobility X1600 in the iMac. Oh well, should make MacBookPro <> iMac comparisons easier anyway (17" iMac screen res. is the same too).
Would you like the optional cold fusion power supply to go with that?frome said:I think apple should upgrade the imac and make it thinner (it has spare space left), make the back open and clean up the insides up so that it looks better than even the iMac G5 Rev A and B (like the Powermac G5).Also it would be nice for it to come in gloss black.
You know, I really don't see what all the fuss is about.
How many people are going to be looking at the inside of their machine on a regular basis, it's not exactly dinner table conversation, "Oh, the inside of my computer is so much sexier than the inside of yours..."
We asked for a quick transition to Intel, we got a quick transition to Intel. The outside of the machine is totally unscathed, so I say we should be greatful for how quickly and expertly Apple has gotten this product to us.
Subliving.
How many people are going to be looking at the inside of their machine on a regular basis, it's not exactly dinner table conversation, "Oh, the inside of my computer is so much sexier than the inside of yours..."
We asked for a quick transition to Intel, we got a quick transition to Intel. The outside of the machine is totally unscathed, so I say we should be greatful for how quickly and expertly Apple has gotten this product to us.
Subliving.
Agreed...but
I completely agree, but how much fun is it to not complain, analyze and flame Apple.
Subliving said:
I completely agree, but how much fun is it to not complain, analyze and flame Apple.
Eidorian said:
For me, I don't really care how it looks inside, but I do care how easy it is to upgrade. As an example let's take the hard disk. Does it really matter if the insides are messy? I've usually experienced things the other way around with Apple: Looks great, but impossible to access (changing the hard disk in my iBook G3 was a nightmare). So does aesthetics really mean easier access?
Granted, that posted PDF does not make opening the iMac look like fun. Personally, I'd favor simple screws over prying off some case. But on the inside it doesn't look too difficult to access the main components, even if they are scattered around the interior like socks around my bedroom.
Has anyone ever upgraded components of the Rev. C? How did that work out?
magi.sys said:Aha! Apple IS using the intel sockets rather than soldering on the cpu. Does that mean we might be able to do cpu upgrades by our selves
Looks like it - just turn the screw next to the CPU and there you go. The only problem you might get is whether the EFI firmware and/or OS X support faster chips.
I wonder if there is any way of overclocking these CPUs? Pentium Ms seem to overclock quite well from what I've seen.
Rosetta not so slow?
Has anyone seen this?
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=281987
Seems Rosetta and Photoshop are not as slow as expected.
Has anyone seen this?
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=281987
Seems Rosetta and Photoshop are not as slow as expected.
Eidorian said:
That's why I am pretty happy with my Rev. B iMac G5...and it seems speedier than any other PC too...
SiliconAddict said:
Ahh OK...good to know that...does it look as nice as any other iMac from the back, then? Good!
Welcome to my world, bitches!
A mess!
Why do y'all care what the inside of an all in one looks like? What do you guys DO in your free time? Take the front of the machine off and touch yourselves? That is madness to care what it looks like on the inside when you NEVER see it.
Not the inside of your body, people......
All b.s. aside, I've thought of buying one. Intel or G5. I want Intel (cuz that's what i'm used to) but I have so many questions I dunno who to ask.
A mess!
Why do y'all care what the inside of an all in one looks like? What do you guys DO in your free time? Take the front of the machine off and touch yourselves? That is madness to care what it looks like on the inside when you NEVER see it.
Not the inside of your body, people......
All b.s. aside, I've thought of buying one. Intel or G5. I want Intel (cuz that's what i'm used to) but I have so many questions I dunno who to ask.
First the iMac G5 Rev C is hard to open and it looks weird.. but why? The Rev is thinner than Rev A or B, so Apple redesigned the interieur. Therefore you can't let space unused like the Rev A or B models. These were designed to let the customer repair his iMac on his own. By the way: you have to open the Rev C like Intel iMac with a card! And another problem is that we the the front which is next to the LCD and to keep it as far as possible away from heat you now see a film on the components which destroys the look!
Since the whole program was a fault because customers destroyed their iMacs, Apple decided to stop this program.
I can understand the guys here who are complaining about the craftmenship, but I prefer the new thinner design of the iMacs. Surely it would be cooler to have a thinner iMac and a beautiful interieur...
Since the whole program was a fault because customers destroyed their iMacs, Apple decided to stop this program.
I can understand the guys here who are complaining about the craftmenship, but I prefer the new thinner design of the iMacs. Surely it would be cooler to have a thinner iMac and a beautiful interieur...
wildmac said:
I agree! I cant believe everyone with these machines, with the ONE big burning question...will it, does it, could it run XP! Hell, i dont get my MBP for a month, but Im ready to take the 15% restocking fee at the mac store just to find out..
SiliconAddict said:You, sir, are childish. Only someone who is irrational, petty, and pretty much immature cares what is inside a computer you would open maybe once or twice in its lifetime to upgrade. If the system is a screamer. If the system looks sexy from the outside. If how its arranged inside doesn't affect performance. (Or do you think the iMac's fung sui is important.
I care. I don't consider myself petty, childish, irrational or immature.
I agree that probably 95% or more of consumers aren't going to care what it looks like inside. Most will never see the insides and those that do will look only for curiosity or might be slightly inconvenienced during a DIY upgrade.
However, I am an engineer. I have a fairly good understanding of Electronics and have worked closely in the past with hardware engineers. While there is no law of physics that dictates a well-laid out PCB or computer will perform better, be higher quality or more reliable than a messy layout, I can tell you that it is likely to be so.
Just like many other professionals, hardware engineers generally take pleasure in their work. The precise, complex, puzzle-like nature of fashioning intricate parts that work together like clockwork unsurprisingly means that hardware engineers tend to have excellent attention-to-detail, be perfectionist and consider themselves craftsmen (yea, they tend to be male).
Given enough time, hardware engineers will try to find elegent solutions to problems. A solution might be a more elegent PCB layout, a more efficient heat profile, simplifying a circuit to reduce component count or power consumption, sourcing a more reliable, cheaper or more efficient part, or most likely some combination of these.
So, no, in of itself the prettiness of the insides don't matter. To consumers, the insides rarely matter. But for the Engineers among us, messy internals hint at the possibility of a sub-optimal design and potential problems.
Now, give me the choice between a Rev. B iMac and a Rev. D (Intel) iMac and I'd choose the Rev. D with barely a pause for thought. But offer me the choice between two iMacs with essentially the same spec. but where one looks like the Rev.D and the other is $100 more but has a beautifully elegant internal layout and I'll choose the later. There is a good possibility that the later machine has a better design and quality and I'm willing to pay a bit extra for that. After all, those are two of the main reasons I buy Apple.
SiliconAddict said:You, sir, are childish. Only someone who is irrational, petty, and pretty much immature cares what is inside a computer you would open maybe once or twice in its lifetime to upgrade. If the system is a screamer. If the system looks sexy from the outside. If how its arranged inside doesn't affect performance. (Or do you think the iMac's fung sui is important.
I guess it doesn't apply to the iMac as much since it's not really user upgradable, but part of the joy of the PMs is that the guts are arranged in an orderly fashion, as opposed to many PCs which have no real order. This is a real time saver when it comes to upgrading. I love how the HDs in the G5 PMs just slide in. And how the fan cages just slide out. When I buy a PM I feel that IS one of the reasons I pay a premium for a Mac.
Chupa Chupa said:
You, sir, have not seen a pc for the last 5 years. All pc cases that are worth more than 30$ are completly screwless, you can even slide the motherboard out.
I guess its why youre all so afraid of intel, most of you havent used a pc since windows 3.11 or something.
What the heck is a pc in order. At the end of a cable, theres a device, in my cpu socket, theres a cpu. Thats messed up!
Typical.
32bit?
so the intel dual core is a 32 bit processor?
um does anyone else think thats a lil loony?
i mean amd and intel have been in the pc news for the past couple years fighting over whose 64bit processor is better and/or cheaper, so wtf is apple doing downgrading us to 32bits? wasn't that part of the hype of osx? it's a 64bit operating system and whatnot.
i can only pray that they're just entry level chips for this first dance with intel.
if there's a 32bit processor in the Powermac, or whatever they decide to change that name to, then i'll just have to give up on apple. dual core or not, that would straight be ridiculous after the Quad.
so the intel dual core is a 32 bit processor?
um does anyone else think thats a lil loony?
i mean amd and intel have been in the pc news for the past couple years fighting over whose 64bit processor is better and/or cheaper, so wtf is apple doing downgrading us to 32bits? wasn't that part of the hype of osx? it's a 64bit operating system and whatnot.
i can only pray that they're just entry level chips for this first dance with intel.
if there's a 32bit processor in the Powermac, or whatever they decide to change that name to, then i'll just have to give up on apple. dual core or not, that would straight be ridiculous after the Quad.
poe diddley said:so the intel dual core is a 32 bit processor?
um does anyone else think thats a lil loony?
i mean amd and intel have been in the pc news for the past couple years fighting over whose 64bit processor is better and/or cheaper, so wtf is apple doing downgrading us to 32bits? wasn't that part of the hype of osx? it's a 64bit operating system and whatnot.
i can only pray that they're just entry level chips for this first dance with intel.
if there's a 32bit processor in the Powermac, or whatever they decide to change that name to, then i'll just have to give up on apple. dual core or not, that would straight be ridiculous after the Quad.
Get over the 64 bit nonsense. It won't be mainstream for a while. Mac osx has never been pure 64-bit. It doesn't really offer a big performance advantage, just lets you access more than 4 GB of ram.
Cfg5 said:
Exactly. If it makes him feel better, Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest are supposed to be 64-bit.
poe diddley said:so the intel dual core is a 32 bit processor?
um does anyone else think thats a lil loony?
i mean amd and intel have been in the pc news for the past couple years fighting over whose 64bit processor is better and/or cheaper, so wtf is apple doing downgrading us to 32bits? wasn't that part of the hype of osx? it's a 64bit operating system and whatnot.
i can only pray that they're just entry level chips for this first dance with intel.
if there's a 32bit processor in the Powermac, or whatever they decide to change that name to, then i'll just have to give up on apple. dual core or not, that would straight be ridiculous after the Quad.
Seeing how nothing uses 64bit, who cares heh.
Intel has a 64bit bus data,with which it can reach the memory bandwidth of the g5 (and actually surpass by 300mb/s at 5.3gb/s). The only thing not 64bits in the intel processor is the GPR size, which software has to be written for in order to use it, and well, nothing much is. And even there, the gap is minimal. But hey, the number of bits is twice as high!
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp
with all pc's running 32bit windows, therefore 32bits apps.
For those of you wanting to install Windows on a Mac, you may have to wait until Vista.
In the most recent episode of Patrick Norton's Digital Life TV ( http://digitallifetv.com/ ) they said something about Vista being the first version of Windows that you will be able to install on a Mac because XP requires something in the BIOS that the Macs don't have.
In the most recent episode of Patrick Norton's Digital Life TV ( http://digitallifetv.com/ ) they said something about Vista being the first version of Windows that you will be able to install on a Mac because XP requires something in the BIOS that the Macs don't have.