Apple Introduces New G5 iMac

peatbakke writes "Well, here it is. Looks like the rumors of computer+monitor combined into a sleek little case were true." It's mostly what you'd expect both design-wise and specwise. And I want it.

iPod + New iMac == Steve Earns His Pay

[Anonymous Coward]

Way to build a brand.

Much sleeker than previous versions...

[TheWart]

While I never really liked the look of previous iMacs, I must give Apple kudos on this one.

It looks *extremely* slick, and I these would look so much better as the terminals in librarys and what have you, although probably way overkill.

And the one cord in the back is a far cry from my desk, lol.

remember the monrail

[acomj]

It looked like this but was black and had a smaller lcd (which was the style at the time) with a blazingly fast 486 processor...

http://www.monorailcomputer.org/index.html

Impressive new addition

[sessamoid]

Design-wise, it's in keeping with the home line with the white minimalist aesthetic. It matches the iBook and iPod well. The brushed aluminum stand gives it a design relationship with the G5 towers. At this size, it looks like the perfect dorm-room computer (as long as you lock it down!). The 17 inch version weighs in at a light 18.5 pounds and only 6.8 inches deep.

The most amazing space-saving feature is that it holds it's own power supply in that thin enclosure, so no ugly power bricks sitting on your desk or floor. If I didn't already have a dual 2.5Ghz G5 coming, this would look pretty attractive.

pretty close....

[FaasNat]

The new iMac design is pretty similar to the "spy shots" [macbidouille.com] that popped up on the net a few days back (which itself turned out to be a hoax). I wonder if the person who took those picturew knew how close he actually was......

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow!! They made a dell desktop that's only 2 inches thick?!?!?

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[FuzzieNorn]

In order to be vaguely comparable in terms of components (the Dell's RAM/FSB is slower but the iMac's CPU is slower, so whatever), you need to look at upgrading the Dell to have a DVD writer when compared to the Superdrive models, to replace the video card in the Dell with something remotely sane, and to replace the hard drive with something of a larger capacity.

Really amazing

[sg3000]

At first, I was a little underwhelmed with the design. Hey, it just looks like their monitor; big deal. But after looking at it for a while, I like it.

Conceptually, this is even more impressive than Apple's previous G4 Cube [apple-history.com] design. In that case, you had a Kleenex-sized box that housed the computer. Now it's all housed in the screen, along with the slot loading drive. Leads me to think they'll have a G5 PowerBook sometime soon.

I also like the way Apple is explicitly marketing it as an upsell to their wildly successful iPod.

Re:Apple hate RAM.

[byolinux]

RAM prices keep the price down. If they sold the machine with a more decent amount of RAM, they'd not be able to offer it at the price they do.

Re:Apple hate RAM.

[notthepainter]

Because Apple doesn't want to play the memory game. Apple knows that the customers know they can price shop and buy it elsewhere, that's all. It is often very easy to install (Original iMacs were quite the exception) and if you can't do it, the Apple Store will do it for you for $35 I think.

As for the 2GB limit, this prevents the low end machines from cutting into the high end machines.

Shipping Date

[mizidymizark]

Now we get to see if postponing all of the iMac sales a couple months ago allowed them to get ready for the demand these new computers will have. It will be interesting if the delay will mean shipping dates closer to now than X-Mas.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:So this is Apple's answer to the Tablet PC

[foo12]

Errr, it's not made for that... it's 17 pounds, lacks an internal battery, lacks a touchscreen, lacks a stylus....

Re:new imac

[sammaffei]

I agree with the TV tuner lacking quip.

I mean, Apple advertises it as being widscreen (almost 16:9). So, why don't they go the extra step to put a tuner and video inputs (S-Video and Component).

If this thing had that, I could ditch my 17" LCD TV.

Re:new imac

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a pretty rad computer considering what it is.
What it is: laptop - keyboard + stand. I guess I don't see what makes it such a big deal.

price, price, price

[beavis88]

Apple always seems to do this on their low-end machines as a cost-savings measure, and yes, it is somewhat annoying. BUT, if you really need more than 2GB of RAM, you may as well just spend a little extra money and get one of the dual G5 desktops, where you can get 4 or 8GB. Let's be honest, I can't imagine most home users are going to be craving 2GB+ of memory in their ~$1500 iMac.

I'd be willing to bet the FSB thing is also a cost saving measure, and perhaps a way to better differentiate their "pro" desktop line from the iMacs.

Re:Apple hate RAM.

[Mwongozi]

It's a home computer. If you're a power-using geek you don't buy this, you buy this [apple.com]

Although I agree 256MB is a bit stingy, what possible use could a home user have for more than 2GB or RAM?

OS X hate ram too...

[Biotech9]

click this!

I have 1 GB of ram and a 1 GHz G4, and yet I can't run out of ram, despite running 61 programs (as shown above).

And REAL programs, Photoshop, Word, etc.

OS X handles Ram well.

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[Illissius]

Looks like the iMacs are a very comparable value :). Much better video card and hard drive, slightly to somewhat worse processor (G5s are a lot more MHz-efficient than P4s - last I checked, a 2GHz G5 was comparable to a 2GHz Opteron/A64, which is in turn somewhere around a 3GHz P4, so these should be comparable to 2.4-2.8GHz ones) - though this is very hard to compare directly as it's an entirely different platform/architecture. Especially the video card cannot be overestimated -- integrated Intel "Extreme" Graphics is so bad, it's awful. (The 5200 Ultra isn't too good in the realm of discrete cards, but it's pretty decent, and magnitudes better than integrated.)
Speaking of which... doesn't the integrated video eat up 64MB of main system memory, meaning the Dell actually only has 192MB? Given that, and the iMac's better aesthetics and OS, and -- leaving PC/Mac partisanship aside -- I'd even call the iMac a better buy. The 20-incher should've gotten 512MB memory, though :/.

Unlikely

[Anonymous Coward]

There will be a new iMac before theres time to design one.

There are two groups that apple needs to appeal to with this model, gamers and the hard core corporate client. Until now they have been neglected at huge cost to the company. They had a chance to break into both of those markets with one machine with this release!!! And they clearly have taken a different road. Well time will tell.

Look, Ive used macs since the orignal - that just had 1Mb of ram! - and I always will. I just hope that Jobs starts putting comercial realities ahead of his personal ipod manic agenda and starts putting the boot into Gates at long last.

(sorry for the AC but I'm posting away from my home computer and dont have the login here)

Re:Not Enthusiast Friendly

[presearch]

Yes. It's an iMac. One unit. If it breaks, they'll fix it.
After almost 10 years of Apple doing this,
you would think that people would get the concept.

Competetive offer, Much convenience

[Anonymous Coward]

I really like the new iMacs. To me they seem to have a quite reasonable price tag. Considering what you get (20" at 1600-something, 1.8Ghz G5, perfect design) in the top machine around 1800$ do not seem that expensive.

Another thing that is really really perfect about these new machines is the lack of cables. The iMac G5 seems to be destined to be operated wirelessly in any way. You get Airport Extreme for networking, Bluetooth for Mouse&Keyboard and Airport Express for sound transfer. The only cable remaining is the power cable. You can practically put this machine anywhere you want without creating chaos. Very very sweet.

*sigh*

[Bruha]

My wife just saw the new imac and she hates it. Said she still wants one of the old ones.

On another note I really dont like the idea of the proc and other devices so close to the monitor, it's probably harder to update than the older design and with considerations for heat updates beyond adding memory would void the warranty.

The End of Computer Design

[aluminumcube]

Yup, meet the future look of pretty much every computer... I should begin by saying that I am an industrial designer and I therefor have a pretty hardcore Apple fetish. That being said, the coolness of the new iMac has nothing to do with design and everything to do with some extremely impressive engineering to shoehorn the G5 into that small a space... Fact of the matter is, processing speed has gotten to the point where computers are 'Fast Enough' for most people and they would rather have a smaller form factor then a quicker computer. It began hitting a few years ago when the office wonks started lusting after laptops more and more and that trend is going to continue. In 5 years, laptops are going to have enough CUP and GPU horsepower to satisfy even the most dedicated gamer, 3D and motion picture geeks. When that happens, expect even high end desktop workstations to be nothing more then an LCD panel with a "computing module" snapped onto the back. Unfortunately, I wonder what this is going to do for Apple. Having a huge ID department is great when you have these big products that people want and you can make them look pretty, but once our computers become a thin box with an LCD on the front, is anyone going to care? Sure the devil is in the details (look at how uber sex the lineup of ports on the back of the new iMac is!), but those aren't very hard to get right. Look at the market for Plasma TVs- nobody cares about style because they are all identical, so people make purchase decisions based on what they can afford first and which unit offers the best performance/$ within that price range. Style is never a consideration. What happens to Apple when the form factor of computers get standardized and simplified to a point where there is simply no room for an industrial designer to work with?

Re:Future of computers

[victor_the_cleaner]

Obviously you have not seen the new Apple Cinema Displays [apple.com] in person. They're rather impressive.

Re:Apple hate RAM.

[Macka]

How many people do you know who have more than 1GB of RAM in their home or office PCs? I could probably count them on one hand.

Your objection is noted, but pointless.

Re:*sigh*

[Bruha]

Also lets not forget the swivel base that made it easily adjustable for just about anyone. Good job apple you just innovated a design that's been tried and failed many times since the late 90's.

Re:Uh Steve? Gateway called....

[sessamoid]

The Gateway is bulky and ungainly in comparison. It's not the same design, aside from being an all-in-one LCD computer. The iMac's board, hard drive, optical drive, ports, and power supply all fit behind the lcd within a 2 inch thick case. The Gateway and the also-mentioned Monorail have what are basically thin desktop cases under the lcd screen. Those designs are really nothing more than thin desktop cases with an LCD mounted on top.

This is a true all-in-one, even more so than the previous iMac. I was never particularly enamoured of the desklamp iMac, but this is both elegant and conservative enough to be found on a business desktop.

Re:Just wondering

[BlueTooth]

Could it be that they are in such a position for air flow reasons? Apple's website has a nice little pic of cool are going in the bottom and coming out a slit in the top. This cornrow arangement of capacitors looks like it is conducive to air cooling, even if they are too close to other hot components.

I dunno.

Missing feature!

[JaredOfEuropa]

But if it's purpose is that lazy kind of home desktop, it should have TV

This design just cries out for a touchscreen, so that you can control simple functions without having to use the keyboard or mouse.

This computer, at least the display, looks pretty enough for me to consider placing it in the living room. I don't know about a TV tuner, but if I had a computer in the living room, I would definitely want to use it as a home entertainment system, to play MP3s, DVDs etc. And in that case, I want a way to control the computer without an ungainly keyboard and annoying mouse in plain view. (Yes, nice as the Mac keyboards are, I still don't want to have one on the desk all day).

Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better

[mblase]

1. You will now see a million wires coming out of the right side of the machine, hanging in mid-air and visible at all times.

They actually attach behind the right side, and can be threaded through the base to keep them out of sight. And if you don't like 'em, get it configured with Bluetooth and WiFi -- like the sidebar sez, all you'll need then is a power cord, which connects to the back center of the machine and is even harder to see.

2. All that white space at the bottom of the display makes it look like a waste of space (of course it's probably used for the internal electronics, but geez, couldn't they think of a better design?).

You'd better have a PhD in industrial design if you're criticizing Apple on those grounds. I think it looks just fine, and besides, they gotta put the Apple logo somewhere.

3. The display now only rotates in one single dimension (either tilts up or down) as opposed to the previous iMac multi-dimensions of fredom).

Well, yeah... you can just turn the whole base now, can't you? I imagine turning the monitor on the base would make it potentially unstable, but I'm certain it would make it uglier.

4. That base seems awefully inadecuate for so much weight on top of it. Seems like if it is very easy to drop the display sideways if you have a crouded desk and move things around a lot.

Yes, it's a convincing illusion, isn't it? C'mon, they have people to think of things like that.

5. This design has been created before by the big guys (IBM and Compaq/HP I think had/have something similar), why not come up with something as cool as the iPod? (it's a shame they say on the website "from the creators of iPod" - if I was one of the iPod designers I'd be shamed...).

Open your eyes, please... the design is supposed to remind you of the iPod, both from the front and the side views.

6. And how about a $999 model?

Want to have your cake and eat it too, don't you? Maybe next year when this year's models are on clearance.

Re:new imac

[Paulrothrock]

Tip: Buy after-Market RAM at LOW LOW PRICES!

Re:new imac

[Matthias Wiesmann]

Really, they have taken a laptop, removed the keyboard and touch pad and given it a stand.

If you a look at the inside of the machine [nyud.net], you will notice that while it is a compact design it is much thicker than a normal laptop mother board, the hard-drive is also a 3 inch model and the power-supply is included in the box. The design is much closer to a pizza-box design as a laptop design. There have been other models done in this way (like for instance the 20th anniversary Mac [lowendmac.com].

When you think of it this way, one really does have to ask the questions, "Why the hell hasn't this been done to death already?". :P

Extensibility, this kind of design means that the machine will not be extensible, no PCI slots, no possibility of changing the video card, in short most of the drawbacks of the laptop design.

How stylish and slick does it really look...

[bobbinFrapples]

...with a bunch of heterogenious wires (usb, firewire, ethernet, audio, etc) sticking out of it? How about getting a single cable (stylish: curly, textured, fuchsia) port replicator thing going on....

Re:Am i the only one...

[alphan]

Come on now, here is the old one:

http://www.theimac.com/info/graphics_2002/top_grap hic_left_side.jpg [theimac.com]

Now which one is cool?

Plus, a 19-inch laptop is still a keyboard+monitor and can be much better looking than the new iMac.

Re:Missing feature!

[martinX]

Amen to the touchscreen.

Living room? Try kitchen. It would be part of the household network, stream music, videos, and the recipe database. IM the kids. All it needs is that TV tuner...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Just wondering

[mausmalone]

Also just wondering, does anyone else think this is ugly? Now, I normally think Apple does a great job of product design, but this thing looks like a total lapse in judgement. Also, it looks like the screen on this one isn't adjustable like it is on the iLamp, which, though easily ridiculed, was a nice feature.

Re:Unlikely

[Graymalkin]

The only way an iMac is going to run some particular game as well as a "gaming PC" is if they stick a GF6800 in it and a 2.5GHz G5. Such an iMac would obliderate sales of the PowerMacs. So they come out with this model which will play games pretty well, especially the ones currently available for the Mac and even future games like Doom 3. For the hardcore corporate client I don't see how this doesn't work. It is small and thin and takes up less desk real estate than even the lampshades and their 10" base. They're also reasonably powerful with a lot of screen real estate.

I think this iMac is going to be a huge seller this year. They're as powerful as last year's G5 PowerMacs for a thousand dollar price difference. They also come bolted to nice LCD screens and have enough I/O (including optical audio out) to suit just about anybody.

Did Ive Retire??

[pretentiousPPC]

Did Jonathan Ive retire or something, this seems butt-ass ugly.

Oh well I was expecting the new iMac to be a Tablet connected to a WiFi base station, where the Tablet would hold the processer and harddrive and the base could carry the Superdrive, airport and the ports.

Re:Apple hate RAM.

[dmdimon]

C'mon, show me, what really for you'll need more than 2 G of RAM?
I'm working on everyday basis with multiple 500 Mb+ Photoshop files and guess what? Never, NEVER Photoshop CS or 7 uses memory in such chunks.
And if you'll set more than 1 Gb to Photoshop, it'll just get mad.
And real bottleneck in such a system is harddrive speed, not RAM amount as there are more than 1 Gig.
And this imac is not intended for such an operations ever.

Re:Just wondering

[danamania]

I don't think it's anywhere near the style of the G4 iMac either. The screen tilts back & forth (and with cables moving back & forth as it tilts, I fear some may end up pulling out). To me it's plain, but not plain in that simple excellent design way, just a bit dull.

That being said, I own an eMac. Hardly a stunning piece of equipment to look at, but using it I don't notice the bulbous rear end. I rather suspect using the iMac you wouldn't notice how thin it is either.

At least it's nicer on the inside, upgradewise.

Re:Reasons to like the previous iMac design better

[jcostantino]

1. I'm sure someone will design an "iCable" thingie or whatever for this new unit. Apple does leave some of its accessory design to 3rd party developers.

2. All that white space at the bottom makes it tie in to the eMac's look. They could have probably just centered the display but it looks better this way.

3. The display still rotates if you turn the entire unit. That arm was freakishly expensive ($300), would get loose after a while and was a pain in the ass to replace, if necessary. 4. I'm sure that anything will topple over if given enough of a push. Apple has more than likely looked into this and found this to be stable.

5. Errrr... it's hard to give a URL but if you go to apple.com and refresh enough, you'll see the profile shot of the iMac and iPod together. They look quite the same. Are you referring to the iMac's lack of a b&w LCD screen and scroll wheel?

6. They call it the eMac. Wait a year and the new iMacs will be refreshed to slightly cheaper/slightly faster.

1. You will now see a million wires coming out of the right side of the machine, hanging in mid-air and visible at all times.

2. All that white space at the bottom of the display makes it look like a waste of space (of course it's probably used for the internal electronics, but geez, couldn't they think of a better design?).

3. The display now only rotates in one single dimension (either tilts up or down) as opposed to the previous iMac multi-dimensions of fredom).

4. That base seems awefully inadecuate for so much weight on top of it. Seems like if it is very easy to drop the display sideways if you have a crouded desk and move things around a lot.

5. This design has been created before by the big guys (IBM and Compaq/HP I think had/have something similar), why not come up with something as cool as the iPod? (it's a shame they say on the website "from the creators of iPod" - if I was one of the iPod designers I'd be shamed...).

6. And how about a $999 model?

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[Beatbyte]

I agree with you on the hardware prices but I agree with the parent of the thread that it's got more value.

You don't get the iApps with the Dell. Nor OS-X. Nor quality support.

You get XP Home and the rest is left up to you.

Re:new imac

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Priced a new TV lately? The manufacturers are opting out of including tuners in most cases, because for a lot of customers a built-in ATSC tuner would be a waste of money. Those folks get their programming via a cable TV or satellite set-top box.

Apple couldn't include just an analog tuner. That would be a terrible idea. We're already in the second half of 2004; analog tuners will be junk in less than 30 months, well within the life-span of a computer like this.

Agreed

[bogie]

Technically its of course neat. But a generic white box is pretty uninteresting IMHO. Without the Apple logo I think most Apple users wouldn't look twice and just assume its a another LCD monitor. Of course Apple fans will just respond saying THAT'S THE POINT. Yeah well its boring.

In short its got no style. We have seen this lcd-all-in-one design before now its just happens to be a G5 inside. The previous Imac and things like the Cube were much more interesting. Maybe they'll offer Colored versions to spice it up? Too bad you can't buy the old version with a G5 in it.

Powerbook G5 soon?

[kalleh]

If they can fit a G5 inside that box we should be seeing powerbook G5's soon. The heat issue with the G5 seems to be solved.

Re:Just wondering

[malfunct]

I differ in opinion. This is a beautiful machine. Its one where people will be looking for the cable that hooks the "monitor" up to the computer. It will be especially perfect looking with the bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Then you will have a single cable to the power outlet and that is it. This is the first computer from apple in ages that actually has me thinking "man I wish I had that". I'm not a super apple fan (nothing against them just no reasons to buy them) but its about time that someone builds a computer with that form factor and those lines and it sounds like this one will even perform decently.

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[rawg]

I'm sorry, I can't find a all in one 64 bit LCD desktop computer at Dell? What one are you looking at? You need to compare Apples to apples, not Apples to cans of soda.

Re:The End of Computer Design

[UncleBiggims]

Just look at the iPod for your answer. How much smaller/standardized/simplified can you get. It competes with other cheaper HD based players with the same basic features. And who is winning? Apple. Why? Better design. And not just physical but design of every aspect of use and functionality. This will hold true in the desktop market as well.

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[CountBrass]

Really? Since when did Dell start selling G5 machines running OSX?

It's easy to come out with any old crap when you pick and choose some specs (and completely ignore others). I'd like to see you come up with a comparable box from a top brand (which basically means IBM: I don't think anyone could mistake Dell for a quality brand!)

Try again if you like:

1. top brand: support+quality count
2. *quality* 17" LCD
3. 1.6Gig 64bit CPU
4. 256MB memory
5. 80GB ATA HDD
6. GeForce 5200 video card
7. Less than 2" thick
8. Doesn't look like a pile of shit.

Up for the challenge?

Gateway's Doesn't Even Compare....

[AtOMiCNebula]

Are you kidding? Maybe the design is semi-alike, but then again, how many ways can you arrange a computer inside a tiny box?

Take a look at that gateway. All the pieces are outside the monitor. It's quite bulky, and not nearly as easy on the eye. Gateway didn't want to work as much, they just attached the LCD to the box. Apple shoved all the parts into a backing of a LCD, and it's only two inches thick (give or take .2 inches). Honestly, are you just trying to find a reason to beat on them?

There are only so many ways to package up a computer, and I'd say Apple's new way is quite different from that Gateway model. Sure, it's closer in resemblance to that gateway when compared to a traditional desktop with external CRT or LCD...but come on. Give Apple credit where credit is due.

Re:new imac

[sammy baby]

Base 20-inch iMac, with 256 megs of RAM: $1899 [apple.com].

20-inch Apple Cinema Display: $1299 [apple.com].

From where I'm standing, it sounds like you're valuing the non-display parts of the iMac at $600 or less. Plenty of folks think Apple's stuff is overpriced, but that's pushing it a little bit, I think.

Re:The End of Computer Design

[edw]

Greg, you've made a great point. At some point the computer will disappear, just like the flat screen TV: All that will remain is the experience of using it. I don't think such a development is so bad for Apple, as they have always been about the fusion of hardware and software into a unified experience.

I enjoy working with my PowerBook, and I enjoy using OS X. When I think about them. But most of the time, I'm not thinking about them; I'm simply being productive. I think that's what Apple products are about: getting stuff done, thinking about the problem at hand, not the computer that you're using to solve the problem. The drool-inducing industrial and UI design is there to as much to draw the attention of non-users as it is to enhance the experience of using -- and justify the purchase of -- Apple products.

But does it become more difficult to sell an experience when it has a less-tangible physical manifestation? This may be a problem for Apple, but it may also solve one of their problems: When there's less physicality to the experience of owning a Mac, perhaps there will be less resistance to purchasing one. The more invisible the hardware, the less difficult it may be for Apple to convince people to replace their invisible Gateway computer with an invisible Mac that works better.

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[tempest303]

Or one could just go get an Athlon 64 box, which is true 64 bit and beats the shit out of the G5 [pcworld.com]. Way to see the trees and not the forest. The other poster's comment about the value of OS X and the iApps was a much better argument.

Re:Unlikely

[tverbeek]

Why did they make the screen so short? The bezel along the bottom edge looks 3" thick.

Apple's been pushing the "widescreen" aspect ratio for displays, so this is the shape they wanted, and designed around. It's the same shape as the 17" G4 iMac's.

If they made it a more traditional aspect ratio, there'd probably still be 3" along the bottom. They need that to fit some of the thicker components inside without making the whole enclosure more than 2" thick.

I find this design reminiscent of the original Macs, which had a similar screen-above-the-blank-area face.

Re:Just wondering

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's ugly. I've always had a lot of respect for the Apple designs, but I expected a lot more from this machine. Technically, it looks like quite an achievement until you start considering the newer tablet PCs that will be out soon. Apple hasn't done much that is particularly clever here. Apple has a name for making revolutionary designs. This isn't a revolution, it's a one man protest. That said, one of the key things that Apple can do is push forward standards in it's own technology in a way that PC makers can't, simply due to the immensity of the PC industry. What I'm hoping this thing does is start spurring the PC market into wide adoption of miniaturising and widescreens.

Re:Yeah yeah ...

[lee7guy]

Imho neither Microsoft nor Apple is a company you would like to be dependant on.

Konfabulator, anyone.

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[SoTuA]

which is nicer than having somebody sell me incredibly expensive repairs and replacement parts, or, once, telling me to just buy a new one.

Bought a powerbook in NYC.

Had battery failure.

Got it replaced, for free. In Chile.

How is that bad service?

Re:Unlikely

[timts]

why bother? real games dont buy Mac any way since there's merely not enough games on it and the game release of mac edition is much slower than pc edition. sad but true for mac fans.
oh, mac fans cant get the latest version of video cards either, and the choice is very limited.

How bout Apples to Sonys

[mastagee]

Sony PCVV300G

http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php?m as terid=2932674&found=1&search=Sony%20PCVV30 0G

Sony Vaio PCV-V300G - P4 2.8 GHz - 15" TFT Type - Personal computer Form Factor - All-in-one Dimensions (WxDxH) - 15 in x 7 in x 13 in Weight - 16.8 lbs Processor - 1 x Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz Cache Memory - 512 KB L2 cache Cache Per Processor - 512 KB RAM - 512 MB (installed) / 1 GB (max) - DDR SDRAM - 333 MHz - PC2700 Storage Controller - IDE Hard Drive - 1 x 200 GB - standard - DMA/ATA-100 (Ultra) Optical Storage - 1 x DVDdRW Card Reader - Card reader Monitor - Flat panel display - 15" - TFT active matrix Graphics Controller - SiS 651 Video Input - TV tuner Audio Output - Sound card - stereo Communications - Fax / modem - 56 Kbps ( V.90 ) Networking - Network adapter - Ethernet, Fast Ethernet OS Provided - Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition

$1560

Admittedly not as clean looking, or as large an lcd, but a more worthy comparison. I'd go over the obvious differences, but anyone here should be able to figure them out. . .

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[dasmegabyte]

The best value for Apple computers is to buy a refurbished model shortly after a new model comes out. Generally, the price is substantially less than the decreased price of the older model and it comes with a year of Applecare. I got last year's TOL Powerbook for $1900, my buddy got the g4 800 iBook for $700

Re:Unlikely

[kannibal_klown]

"The only way an iMac is going to run some particular game as well as a "gaming PC" is if they stick a GF6800 in it and a 2.5GHz G5."

I'll bite.

The video card, yeh, I agree with.

But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today. Right now, a 2.5GHz P4 or Athlon will make just about any game fly (except DOOM 3). A P4 2.5GHz is not top of the line, but it's more than enough for gaming, so long as you have a decent video card.

I'd say a 2GHz G5 would perform very well with the right video card, on par with at LEAST an Intel 2.4GHz machine with similar RAM and video card.

The only thing current Macs need to run particular games well are the particular games. DOOM 3 will have an OSX port eventually, but there are a lot of NEW games that haven't been ported yet (if they ever will be).

I'd still like to buy a G5 PowerMac with Dual G5's (not the fastest ones, but medium). That would be nice.

If it wasn't for the Windows development I do for work (when I'm at home), I'd be using my PowerBook as my main machine ALL THE TIME when I'm at home.

Re:Unlikely

[NatasRevol]

Sure but you need twice as many support/OS-reinstaller/virus&spyware-remover people for those Dells.

Re:new imac

[dasmegabyte]

Apple explains the one mouse button in its HI Guidelines. The idea is simple: there are people who can only use one mouse button, for reasons of disability or what have you. Coding for one mouse button allows you to avoid having to program especially for these people, while allowing those who want a second mouse button to use it however they like. You don't lose any functionality, because you can just modify mouse drags and clicks with meta kets. Four meta keys = 4 additional actions by a single meta and a further 6 actions adding two meta keys. Ctrl-Click is generally used to pull down context menus a-la Windows, and this is the default functionality of the second mouse button.

Apple does not ship computers with more than one mouse button mostly because of this philosophical choice, but partly because doing so would give developers justification to require the use of more than one mouse button for their target market.

Incidentally, I hadn't realized how confusing the two button paradigm was until I got a mac and tried to learn Blender. Blender is a mess of multiple mouse clicks, metas, rolls, etc. It's a good program, but you really need the tutorial before you can even figure out where you are. This isn't good design...an interface that does not lend itself to exploration will go unexplored, and you might as well write for the command line at that point.

Re:Ports location

[d_p]

You could run all the cables through the hole in the stand, jsut like the power cable.

Integration is fine till it breaks.

[Shivetya]

While I like the idea behind iMacs I would like to be able to swap out certain elements at my leisure.

So, if paying a premium to lose flexibility is your boat then so be it. Me, I would like the option of upgrading the monitor without throwing away the machine behind it.

Comparing overall value is what the previous poster was getting at. That is one hell of a premium your willing to pay to have it in a design which looks like but offers less flexibilty.

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[general_re]

In order to be vaguely comparable in terms of components....

Okay. Where's the option where I upgrade the iMac to have PCI/AGP slots?

Mac == Resale Value

[theManInTheYellowHat]

Whatever anybody says about the price one thing is for sure. There is no PC on the planet that will hold its value better than a Mac.

Take a look at a 1 year old Dell or IBM anything even servers and then take a look at a 1 year old Mac. The PC will be at least 50% less and the Mac will have dropped about $100.

After a year the PC becomes worthless and the Mac still has a good value. 2 yr old iMacs are still worth quite a bit of their original price, especially if they have the SuperDrive. How much is a 2 year old Dell worth?

When ever a person asks about buying a PC vs. a Mac that is the first thing I try to explane to them.

Re:Please Apple hear our pleas

[OSeXy]

I agree with your plea for a Mac MATX board... Oh the possibilities!

But having numerous Macs over the years, I disagree on the service time. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I've only had three equipment failures in twelve years. I have a Dell Latitude that has required many more service visits in the last eighteen months, but thats for another post.

I had the firewire port on my PowerBook go out after two years, contacted Apple and they shipped me a box for it the next day. I had my laptop back with a new board a day and a half later.

Our first iMac, a 600 Graphite, had an issue when my son broke the CD/RW drive by forcing a disk in. AppleCare took care of that as well, we got it back in three days.

When I factor in what my time is worth for driving around picking up parts and doing the repairs my self, Apple's warranty service is a deal. In some cases it was faster than waiting fot the Dell service technician to show up, but again I digress.

Re:Unlikely

[mrchaotica]

I agree that the old lamp-shaped ones look nicer. It's too bad, really -- I was hoping for something that looked more like their new monitors (thin aluminum bezels and such).

Of course, now's a good time to buy a G4 iMac : )

Re:new imac

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Well, why not include video inputs?

Because it's not a monitor. It's a computer.

Also, TV tuners are dirt cheap. What's $20 on a machine like that?

ATSC tuners cost considerably more than $20. But aside from that, what's $20? It's a $1319 computer instead of a $1299 computer.

Re:new imac

[Derang()]

Yep. We all know how well the Mac TV [everymac.com] sold.

Ah yes, because a computer that was last sold 9 years ago is a good indicator of what the market is like today.

Re:Ports location

[hattig]

that thing will have 8 cables just hanging there, on the side of the machine, with no support whatsoever.

Pretty much like any other computer then, silly!

Yeah, I agree that it will look tattier with the cables hanging down. There shouldn't be anything stopping you using the cable guide on the stand however as far as I can see.

Re:Compare Apples and dells

[NtroP]

You need to add a Gigabit Ethernet card, another 40 Gig Hard drive, a firewire card and an anual virus subscription to the price of the Dell.

OTOH, you could remove the windows license cost by having them ship without an OS or ship with RedHat

Seems pretty price-competitive to me. I'm thinking it's time to upgrade my old dual G4/500, my daughter's G4/450 and replace my son's G3 iMac/500

Um, this isn't a new thing.

[umshaggy]

I fail to see how this is anything but a laptop with the keyboard and the battery removed.

Closer still are TabletPCs, but again, with less functionality and portability.

G5 in there is nice, but with the base model only having 256MB of ram, all that nice processing power will go to waste as the hard drive thrashes away.

Once you add in enough ram to make it nice, I am sure the price will put it at about the same place as a mid-to-high end laptop.

Re:Unlikely

[twenex]

Uh, because the price of a computer is only a little bit of the total cost of ownership, and Macs have been shown to have much lower requirements for support, more resistance to virii, less user time to do tasks, etc, etc.

piracy encouraged!

[sootman]

from: http://www.apple.com/imac/ [apple.com]:

"Back up your iTunes collection or make a mix CD for that special someone. [emphasis added]"

Um, that would be a CD full of songs to which you own the copyright, right? Riiiiight...

Now, before we get into the "slashdotters don't have teh g1rlfriends LOL OMG BBQ" jokes, or the "my iMac is my special someone" crowd, I'd like to say that this just really, really makes me sick. You can't have it both ways. We are either allowed to share music, or we aren't. (I know Apple != RIAA etc., but they are a Large Corporate Entity, and presumably wouldn't encourage something that is 100% against the wishes of the **AA) So what's the deal? I can see it now: "All Combo-drive Macs come with Shrink [dvdshrink.org]! Share your DVDs with your friends!"

Re:Unlikely

[BasilBrush]

Lets not be too quick to decide. Plenty of people thought the G4 iMac and the white iPod were ugly when they first came out. Now they are design classics. It takes a little while to get used to radical new designs. Mind you the eMac looked ugly from the start, and still does...

Re:new imac

[Bricklets]

This thing looks like a pizza box. Well, why didn't Apple include pizzas with it!? Sarcasmn aside, if the iPod taught us anything it's that we don't always have to pack in every possible feature out there, that sometimes less is more.

Just noticed in the tech specs...

[umshaggy]

...that the 17" versions only have 80GB hard drives, and th 20" has only 160GB. Makes me questions this:

"all your music, all your photos, all your movies, all your email -- in a computer as fun and useful as an iPod?"

Sorry, that might be enough for all of my music, maybe even all of my photos. But I have very little music (in comparison to most of my friends. ) and almost no photos. I know people who cannot fit even half their music on an iPod. There is a reason that people lobbied to get 80gig hard drive packs for their Neuros.

I like that the hard disks are SATA though! That is pretty cool.

Re:new imac

[Golias]

I've always said that the iMacs/eMacs are the ultimate dorm room computers, especially when paired with a TV tuner. Set it on your desk, position the desk so you can see the screen from anywhere in the room, and you've got all of your school and entertainment needs in one little box, leaving you plenty of space for a full-size hand-me-down refrigerator. I wish they had em' back when I was in college. My TV and stereo dominated the room, while my poor 8086 just slouched in the corner whenever I wasn't actually working and/or BBS-ing on it.

Re:piracy encouraged!

[dowobeha]

Um, that would be a CD full of songs to which you own the copyright, right? Riiiiight... You can't have it both ways. We are either allowed to share music, or we aren't.

Well, you have a point, but just to play devil's advocate...

Maybe you purchased the songs on iTunes Music Store and you are giving those songs to your special someone in the form of a mix CD. Maybe you then delete the original from your hard drive, or transfer the song electronically to them (not sure if this is possible, but anyway...). Maybe the person is your spouse, and the mix CD is staying in the house.

There are ways of doing what they're saying without straying off the straight and narrow wrt copyright.

New design?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow... they built a laptop. Congratulations.

apple's one flaw continues

[steak]

for the love of christ, steve jobs please put a damn link light on the nics. this has been the one thing that has bothered me about macs. link lights are one of those things that you take for granted until you don't have one, trouble shooting is so much easier with link lights.

Re:Powerbook G5 soon?

[zhenlin]

A PowerBook should be 1 inch thick, this iMac is 2 inches.

Re:Unlikely

[BasilBrush]

Erm... that $600 computer from Dell is a consumer PC.

Take your basic Dimension 2400 ($680) and upgrade the OS from XP Home to Professional, upgrade the HD from 40 to 80GB, and the monitor to a basic 17" LCD and that computer costs $947.

The price is looking a lot closer now. And that's just to get the computer to a sensible corporate starter spec, I'm not even trying to match the iMac's superdrive or graphics card, or quality of components.

Re:The inside layout is far better for an all-in-o

[Neophytus]

Absolutely. There's big money to be made from print quality images.

As someone who doesn't use a MAC

[essreenim]

..its looks like a damn nice piece of hardware.
It is exactly what I would reccomend for the person who has:

A)some money.
B)taste.
C)no interest in games.
D)only multimedia / mail /office needs.
E)no interest in spending time on maintenance.

Re:Unlikely

[telbij]

But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today.

Maybe on a benchmark, but games (or any performance intensive app) are all about optimization.

Any game that comes out for the Mac will be at least somewhat optimized for what's currently available. For the casual gamer, the Mac has a reasonable selection of games and the new iMac will provide reasonable performance.

However, for the hardcore gamer, there's no arguing that you need a PC. That's where most of the game optimization goes (regardless of theoretical hardware performance), and that's where the bleeding edge graphics cards are available first.

With that in mind, I don't think the hardcore gaming market would be very profitable to Apple. Aside from convincing the game and graphics card developers to give Apple equal development (not gonna happen), then they would have to sell systems optimized for gaming. They already optimize for other high-end applications like video and audio production, and making the systems gamer-ready would just push the price higher. The alternative would be to offer gamer-specific models, but that would cost a lot more R&D for the hardware AND all the software (more hardware to support), and for what? A very small market that already has a bad impression of Macs.

Much better to go after the casual gamers. They may buy a Playstation instead, but any customers it gains will come 'for free' without a lot of extra development dollars.

Re:new imac

[IamTheRealMike]

For the general case I'd agree, but Blender and similar apps are designed to be powerful first, easy to use second. For instance, emacs could also be described as a mess of keyboard shortcuts, mouse clicks etc - it actually assumes you have a 3 button mouse!

Yet, once you learn it, it is a very usable app that does promote exploration via its extensive online help, apropos command and so on.

For the types of non-technical market the Mac traditionally targetted yes a one button mouse may have made sense (if you ignore all the people now used to it), but that doesn't mean it makes sense for everybody.

Re:Unlikely

[Anonymous Coward]

So, one megabit (1Mb) of ram is how much again?

Re:Now you can all stop whining. . .

[sabNetwork]

HAAHAHAHAH

You're kidding, right?

Premier?

An outdated version of Photoshop? (Intentionally chosen because the new one is G5-optimized.)

Two completely arbitrary tests run on Word of an unknown version? (Who uses auto-summarize?)

All of the PC's are using RAID except two, one which gets smoked by the high-end G5?

These benchmarks are funny shit.

--

Re:Unlikely

[tverbeek]

I think some people were put off by the iLamp being so obviously "designed". Sure, it looks cool in a well-decorated post-modern office, but in your average person's home, it sticks out a bit. This may look ordinary enough to fit in better.

Re:new imac

[poot_rootbeer]

Priced a new TV lately?

Yeah, the 15" model they sell at the supermarket. It has a tuner built in. Most low-end and midrange models do, and will for the foreseeable future.

We're already in the second half of 2004; analog tuners will be junk in less than 30 months

Unlikely. Despite any FCC mandates which state we'll be all-digital in 2006, it just flat-out Ain't Gonna Happen. Even with ten years of advance notice, the manufacturers are still far from switching all their production to HDTV -- because there simply isn't any consumer demand for it outside of the home-videophile market.

My only point is that a TV tuner would have cost Apple maybe $40 per unit to integrate into the device and would have been useful for several years at least. But I can't complain really, for one because the G5 iMac is a beautiful machine otherwise, and for two because I have no plans to buy one either way.

Re:Unlikely

[mojowantshappy]

Actually, the G5 can not be run to it's full potential right now. Panther is not a true 64-bit OS, but instead is a 32-bit OS with extensions that allows it to address up to 8 GB of memory. Mac OS 10.4 (tiger) will be the first truely 64 bit OS from Apple.

Re:Unlikely

[Macka]

No, you just need to lock down the config tight enough so that can't happen

And who do you think is going to lock down the config for you, the security fairies? No, an expensive team of hardworking IT staff who are going to take away your admin rights to stop you from screwing up their company network with the latest virus ridden screen saver. You can't even connect a new MS PC to the internet these days without being 0wned in the time it takes you to make a coffee. Do we get these problems with Mac OS X, not in the 2 years I've been running it. And I've not had to lock it down, the default settings are already secure.

Btw, your sig is very offensive. Python & Ruby are excellent programming languages.

Re:Unlikely

[bnenning]

Mac OS 10.4 (tiger) will be the first truely 64 bit OS from Apple.

True, but that just means individual processes will be able to see a 64-bit address space. It won't actually make the G5 run any faster (in fact, 64-bit apps will probably be slightly slower because pointers will take up twice as much space in the caches).

Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious

[twenex]

This is a false argument, and clearly from someone who has never used OS X. Why would you have to hire three? Why not one, or one part time since OS X needs so little support? As people migrate over to Mac OS X, you will need less admins. There's your cost savings.

Perhaps you are a windows admin yourself.... hmmmmmm.

god what a waste.

[zaqattack911]

either create a gaming PC, or a media/office/ PC.

This in-between shit is no good. And their price point is too high. for 1500 I can build myself a kickass gaming PC that's double the performance of that one. Sure it'll be an ugly tower, but christ.. I can still HIDE a tower.

Re:Unlikely

[LookSharp]

more resistance to virii,

Less exposure due to lack of viruses being written != more resistance.

Nobody writes Mac viruses when 95% of the user base is ripe and too dumb to know not to open attachments just because they offer free pr0n. :)

Re:Mac == Resale Value

[mrklin]

Used Mac sells more not because a Mac's inherently worth is higher.

It is due to 1) the high price one originally paid for the Mac, 2) the even higher price of a new Mac, and 3) the limited supply to begin worth (not enough G5s or the 1.42ghz G4s, for example)

Re:Unlikely

[tbone1]

Nobody writes Mac viruses when 95% of the user base is ripe and too dumb to know not to open attachments just because they offer free pr0n. :)

Yes, it's all about market share! That's why all the web server worms and virii are written for Apache!

...... Hang on a minute ....

Facts of life...

[Geiger581]

The PC industry tends to have cheap hardware and relatively pricey integral software ($300 for XP Pro non-upgrade, MS Office even more) while Apple, being a singluar source, can subsidize its software development with hardware sales. People scoff at the yearly $150 OSX upgrades, but I can assure you that without $2k starting model towers and pricey iPods, it would be a lot worse.
I do not own any Apple hardware, but I would love one of the new 30" displays if nVidia or ATI would release a consumer-level PC-based 2xdual link graphics card. (These monitors are one area where they are probably not making off too much like bandits...)

Re:Powerbook G5 soon?

[Raptor CK]

Not quite, but we're close, at any rate.

There's a huge difference between cramming a G5 system into a 2 inch 25-pound box, and doing the same in less than an inch of space, with a 4-8 pound maximum weight.

With the Powerbook, we'll need to cram all of that in, leaving room for a large Li-Ion/Li-Polymer battery, cooling hardware, and there will be similar performance tradeoffs (3x vs 2x clock multipliers, etc.)

That said, I'm going to have to start saving up for a 2nd gen G5 Powerbook now, since this is at least a good first step in that direction.

Re:Unlikely

[Lars T.]

And not to mention the Win64 virus.

Re:Unlikely

[Anonymous Coward]

The widescreens are much better for programming, because you can fit more windows side-by-side. If you only write projects that have one source file that might not matter, but when you need to refer to multiple files you want a wide screen. I'd much rather have a 20" widescreen display than a 21" standard one; it's a no-brainer.

Re:Apple needs more configurability

[Lars T.]

Why does your secretary need 1.8 GHz instead of 1.6 GHz?

just too expensive

[vaporland]

sorry, as a lifelong mac user (well, since 1984) i am disappointed. why not release a LCD-free imac in the same form factor for $499 that I can plug my own monitor into?

i know apple is not about market share, it's about the "user experience", but until apple gives the unwashed masses a lower price point the mac will remain a boutique item. a recent survey show that a majority of people looking to purchase a new computer were interested in buying a mac - until sticker shock set in.

apple simply must address the lower end of the consumer market if they are going to play in that space . . .

Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious

[kaltekar]

Of these support calls how many were "how do I change my wall paper", "Where is 'My Computer'", "How do I make a short cut", "I can't eject the cdrom", and other such requests that would normaly come from a person that has used nothing but MicroCrap there whole computing life. I work for a school district with 75% mac, we have 2 admins, one for our legacy OS 9 stuff and the other for OSX, we have two full time mac repair techs and 2 that that do both pc and mac. We have 16 techs for PC repair and 4 people for the Administration. This is for over 5000 computers total both mac and PC.

Where is the TCO savings? Lets see 6 people to support 3750 Macs and 20 people to Support 1250 PC's With the average cost of 166k/yr (three admins for 500k/yr) per employee from the Parent post, the cost per unit to support is

Mac is $265.60 per year
PC is $2656.00 per year

Support for the macs is one tenth the cost of the PCs. There is your cost savings. This is based on real numbers of employees and Computers. You do the math and prove me wrong.

Side note, I started of in PC only support and moved to Mac only. Mac is much easier to learn and to support. Yes Macs crach but a hell of lot less often the PC's do.

Re:Apple needs more configurability

[John_Booty]

My department doesn't need the secretarial staff to have 80GB drive nor a DVD-R burning SuperDrive. Yet, I'm forced to buy those components if I want the 1.8GHz machine instead of the 1.6GHz.

Yeah. Because there's no way your secretary could get her work done on a 1.6ghz machine. Moving up to 1.8ghz is an absolute necessity because she is absolutely going to wring that last 200mhz of performance out of her workstation.

Seriously, care to explain your reasoning there?

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Unlikely

[1nhuman]

Run the cables through the whole in the stand? http://images.apple.com/imac/gallery/images/imacba ck20040831.jpg/ [apple.com]
Or use bluethooth keyboard/mouse etc.

Re:Unlikely

[djh101010]

I've considered getting one of the last model iMacs for my Mom....from my tests on OSX, I think she'd be able to use it easier than the windows box I tried to put together for her.

Been there, done that. Went _very_ well. It started with a phone call from my dad, who was uncharacteristically upset. Words included "printer", "computer", "reboot", "again", and "shotgun". With a $1000 budget, I set 'em up with a mid-low eMac (the CRT rather than the flatscreen). They've both gone from calling me for "It crashed and the printer doesn't work", "it crashed and now the printer doesn't work", "the scanner stopped working _again_", and so on, to the very occasional call for less-than-obvious application usage questions. I'm not chasing viruses, they're not getting popups, and I taught 'em how to block that one relative's email (you know, the one who sends _every old recycled email glurge and hoax there is_.

Point is, set 'em up, give 'em their own accounts (which aren't the admin account), and turn 'em loose. They can't break the important stuff because the OS won't _let_ them break the important stuff, the hardware is rock-solid, it's easy to use, and when I want to do remote support, I ssh in and take care of stuff remotely if I want. Can't beat it.

Re:Unlikely

[legirons]

"Less exposure due to lack of viruses being written != more resistance."

Ignoring the apache/iis argument for a minute (Apache is really good software, but not all non-Microsoft software is so good), why haven't we seen 2-5% of viruses written for the Mac? People successfully write viruses for *Amigas* for goodness' sake, and where is their 95% market share?

When Oracle claimed that their system was unbreakable, it took less than a day for 3 different people to publish a score of exploits against it. Each new DRM system or web-application or console is cracked, just for the challenge of beating a security puzzle. Yet Apple-users have been claiming for years that they're invulnerable. That's not obscurity, that's red-rag-to-a-bull...

Apple's operating system seems to be shrugging-off all the attacks thrown at it, just as BSD itself is famous for doing...

Re:Unlikely

[Anonymous Coward]

Less exposure due to lack of viruses being written != more resistance.

The lack of viruses is a fact. Your reasoning why is only supposition.

Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious

[saha]

Why do you need three admins for a Mac? Why can't you use one fulltime? In fact, why don't you grab two of your current PC guys and train them to use OSX and Apple Remote Desktop? I bet they would become become proficient with in a week's time.

I'm sorry I don't see your argument or it doesn't hold water. Deploying software on a Mac and maintaining updates and administration on a Mac OSX is far lower than any other computer I've come across. We have a hetrogenous enviroment in our department. Aside from Windows PCs we have SGI Irix, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, Linux and Mac OSX.

Re:Bull, Apple TCO arg is fallacious

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, just goes to show how poor your techs were. I worked at a research hospital were I supported over 2000, yes OVER 2000, macs running OS 8, OS 9 by myself. You know what I spent most my time doing, surfing the internet waiting for a ticket to come in, while the PC guys were swamped with tickets trying to support about 250 systems a piece. Once things went to OS X, they made me run PC calls to help out the PC techs, I spent 95% of the time doing PC work, and probably 4% was helping users with specialized lab equipment and software.

I know people who support Mac installations just as large part time with no problems. Ask school teachers who have had to deal with IT dorks coming in and forcing them to switch to PCs which they prefer and how much their IT costs went through the roof. Most school that did this went from having someone come out when they had a problem to having to have a IT staff there 5 days a week, all day long.

Re:new imac

[tupps]

Plus you need to build a different machine for each part of the world that has different standards.

After that people will want cable and digital hookups etc etc etc. It easier to allow people to buy the firewire or usb tv tuners of choice.

Re:Powerbook G5 soon?

[MarcosL]

This is vertical, one full inch wider, and has fans of a type a notebook can not have. Try 1 inch thick, horizontal and small fans. Oh, that slot where the air flows out, no can do too. I think it is not solved at all. This is a step 'towards' a G5 Powerbook. I was about to buy a Powerbook. Now my impression of the G4 being slow is much grater. With much less money I get same or better screen, much better processor, although I loose the portability. I might wait for the G5 Powerbook, but I do not see it coming any soon, which is my point above. In a broad sense I dunno what'a do.

Re:Mac == Resale Value

[Anonymous Coward]

Macs retaining their value is a scam not far from "eternal diamons" (ie. diamonds that retain their value). Fact of the matter is that it's quite hard to get rid of the diamond unless you reduce the price significantly, or if you manage to convince some other ignorant person of the "myth". This is why this myth still has a grain of truth in it, but we're not far from a point where people realize the truth. Already a lot of people are buying second hand PCs and building PCs from budget components (you can get a serious gaming rig for $250 - $300 (!), just shop around!!).

The inherent value of used Macs and diamonds is equally low.

20in iMac - 20in Display = $600 G5 Mac

[Johnny Mozzarella]

20" iMac $1899
20" CinemaDisplay $1299
difference $ 600

This shows that Apple could reintroduce a G5 cube and price it aggresively under $1000.
Would you buy a Cube if it had the following?
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
512K L2 cache
600MHz frontside bus
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Slot-load SuperDrive
Bluetooth
One empty PCI slot

Ditch the clear plastics, make Bluetooth standard and sell it without a mouse and keyboard.
Give customers the option of buying Apple's wired or Bluetooth mice/keyboard or third party peripherals.
It would be a switcher friendly Mac.

Re:Unlikely

[Dominatus]

"why haven't we seen 2-5% of viruses written for the Mac? "

The same reason that Ralph Nadar doesn't get 2-5% of TV and press coverage. The same reason 2-5% of video games aren't marketed towards girls. The same reason 2-5% of TV shows aren't marketed towards asians (in America). Need I go on? Market Share and Target Audience are not directly proportional to products made for them.

Re:Mac == Resale Value

[toddestan]

Exactly - people can pick up perfectly usable high end PIII systems that do everything they want to do for $100-$200. A system that would have no problem with the latest Linux distro, or Windows XP SP2. A $100-$200 used Mac is a lower end G3 that would barely run OSX. What do you think people are going to choose?