It's just given what I know about Apple's firmware. Yeah, on the PC side it usually just needs you to change some clock multipliers and bus ratios. You do need an update to go from single core AMD Socket 939 to dual core though.AidenShaw said:
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
applekid said:They keep complaining, but keep on buying.
And, since it obviously hasn't been mentioned enough already:
THE iMAC IMAGES YOU HAVE SEEN ARE ALL FROM THE FRONT PANEL WHICH LOOKS JUST LIKE THE OLD iMAC G5's!
No they dont. Perhaps you need glasses.
Same layout: yes. Same attention to detail: no.
Yeah the Rev. C and Intel iMac's were shot from the front. Nermal even posted the instructions and tool needed to dismantle the new iMacs. I guess the new configuration allows for technician serviceable parts instead of user ones. They're a lot quieter too.minimax said:
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've been following your posts for quite some time now, both here and ars, and without trying to make this into an ad hominem attack, i have to get it off my chest I have some problems with your attitude. You seem obsessed about intel + mac to say the least. Take it less personal with perhaps a little bit more respect for someone else their opinion and all will be well in the land of the blind.
The only differences that I've noticed between the iMac G5 Rev. C and the iMac Duo Rev. A is that the heatsink is smaller on the Intel. Can you point anything else out to me?minimax said:
@Eidorian: did you look at both pictures from Ghibli (post #74)?
The Rev c was much more structured (in an orthagonal fashion), there werent these wires all over the board, and there also wasnt all that tinfoil (not sure what the purpose of it is). The rev c wasnt a pretty sight perhaps, but it was decent enough. The rev d really looks like a rush job.
The Rev c was much more structured (in an orthagonal fashion), there werent these wires all over the board, and there also wasnt all that tinfoil (not sure what the purpose of it is). The rev c wasnt a pretty sight perhaps, but it was decent enough. The rev d really looks like a rush job.
After checking the pictures the Rev. C had a much cleaner interior. The wires aren't a mess in there.minimax said:
In order, the old G5 from the back. That's followed by the Rev. C from the front. Finally at the bottom, the Rev. A Intel from the front as well.
Eidorian said:
Note that the image of the Intel iMac has the mother board and others things removed... so many cables are not connected to what they normally will be (or covered by...). The mother board layout in the last generation iMac and Intel iMac are basically the same form factor and general layout.
The SuperDrive is the right side on all models. The right side if the LCD is facing you. It's the left side if the LCD is facing away from you.skythefly13 said:
minimax said:
If that is true, then there is no way there are going to be easy processor upgrades. The processor itself (based on its serial #) would dictate to OSX "this is a mac"
Yeah, that's what I think too. I think one uses a SO-DIMM and the other a regular DIMM for the external RAM slot. I forget which one though.minimax said:
I've been a lurker on these forums for some time, but this thread inspired me to finally register so I could respond.
Some people are taking the internal appearance of the new Intel iMac (and the Rev. C G5 iMac) in far too a negative light. Since its inception, the iMac was never really intended to be a "user-servicable" machine, beyond installing an Airport card and additional memory. If you want a machine that you can dive into and adjust to your particular needs, Apple wants you to buy a PowerMac.
The latest generation iMac is essentially a laptop computer on its side. If you've ever taken apart a laptop, you'll know that they are not user friendly at all, aside from being able to add additional memory and maybe a few other things. I've completely disassembled a Titanium Powerbook as well as two late model iBooks and they require great patience and care to take apart and reassemble without damaging the machines.
Internal aesthetics of a machine that is not intended to be viewed by end users is less important than sound engineering practices that go into making the machine. It appears that the latest iterations of the iMac were redesigned internally to better facilitate cooling. This is a Good Thing, and means that your computer will be quieter and probably last longer if the internals are not roasting all the time. I doubt Apple engineers and managers sat around at a meeting one day and decided, "Hey, let's take our sleek iMac motherboard and turn it into a jumbled mess so users can't upgrade it as easily!"
From looking at the pictures, it's obvious that the switch to Intel processors had nothing to do with the latest internal iMac design since the motherboard and components layout appear similar to the Rev. C design. While there may be some legitimate gripes with regards to these new machines, it's my opinion that this is not one of them.
..Al
Some people are taking the internal appearance of the new Intel iMac (and the Rev. C G5 iMac) in far too a negative light. Since its inception, the iMac was never really intended to be a "user-servicable" machine, beyond installing an Airport card and additional memory. If you want a machine that you can dive into and adjust to your particular needs, Apple wants you to buy a PowerMac.
The latest generation iMac is essentially a laptop computer on its side. If you've ever taken apart a laptop, you'll know that they are not user friendly at all, aside from being able to add additional memory and maybe a few other things. I've completely disassembled a Titanium Powerbook as well as two late model iBooks and they require great patience and care to take apart and reassemble without damaging the machines.
Internal aesthetics of a machine that is not intended to be viewed by end users is less important than sound engineering practices that go into making the machine. It appears that the latest iterations of the iMac were redesigned internally to better facilitate cooling. This is a Good Thing, and means that your computer will be quieter and probably last longer if the internals are not roasting all the time. I doubt Apple engineers and managers sat around at a meeting one day and decided, "Hey, let's take our sleek iMac motherboard and turn it into a jumbled mess so users can't upgrade it as easily!"
From looking at the pictures, it's obvious that the switch to Intel processors had nothing to do with the latest internal iMac design since the motherboard and components layout appear similar to the Rev. C design. While there may be some legitimate gripes with regards to these new machines, it's my opinion that this is not one of them.
..Al
Don't get me wrong, I truly appreciate Apple's design aesthetics (the internals of my PowerMac G5 are a work of art relative to most computers), but I just don't feel they are truly relevant with the latest iMacs (and iMacs in general). If Apple can make the internals "beautiful" without sacrificing function (and to some extent, price), then great! However, I'm not going to cry if the internals of a machine that 99% of its users will never see are not appropriate to frame and hang on the wall.minimax said:@AtariAge: welcome and great first post. I think most of us agree with your POV. That doesnt take away the aesthetic macintosh fetishism a lot of users here succumb to, myself included
..Al