Home > Apple > Apple feeds Tiger to iMac and eMac lines Apple feeds Tiger to iMac and eMac lines Submitted by François Vincent 2005-05-03 Apple 33 Comments Apple Computer sped up its iMac line on Tuesday, adding faster processors and graphics chips along with its just-released Mac OS X Tiger operating system. My Take: The high-end eMac model seems like an awesome deal. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 33 Comments 2005-05-03 9:08 pm The new models seems resonable. I will be purchasing an imac shortly. Keep up the good work apple. 2005-05-03 9:13 pm I still think the “lamp” model was the prettiest. I guess the only way of getting those are buying them second hand. 2005-05-03 10:03 pm So now … The iMac is more powerful than the PowerMac (by a good margin), costs the same, AND comes with an awesome LCD monitor. What, exactly, are you paying for in the PowerMac then? 2005-05-03 10:24 pm Expandability? The ability to use really high-end monitors/video cards? It doesn’t look like a thick LCD? Actually, one of my first thoughts when I saw the largest flat iMac was that they could shovel a dual CPU system in there without too much trouble. Maybe that’s where they’re going. (or maybe I’m just delusional) 2005-05-03 10:31 pm Expandability and the “ability” to use high-end monitors/video cards is worth ~$900? What a fucking joke. 2005-05-03 10:47 pm They need to speed up the CPU in the mini. 2005-05-03 10:58 pm Dual 2.7, 2.5, or .2ghz processors plus expandability to 8 gigs of memory is hardly a joke to a Graphics, video or photo professional. Not all of us buy equipment like this for looks, or idiotic games you moronic troll. 2005-05-03 11:09 pm You make a very good point, I hadn’t noticed that. I just checked the low end powermac v iMac. You get a smaller drive, graphics don’t seem as good, half the memory too… You do get the ability to expand (internally) though iMac expands nicely externally however, esp. with USB 2 and Firewire. You can always upgrade the graphics later (not that many people would though I guess, just get the next model)… Ummm, it has a faster bus? Nice case… Ummm… My guess is these models will be updated very very soon Tom, until then, don’t buy one unless you really need to… 2005-05-03 11:12 pm Opps, didn’t realise the PowerMac’s have just had a face lift, so the 1.8 may not be revisited anytime soon… If that is the case, then an iMac may be an option… The eMacs look pretty cool for the price too… I’m waiting for 512Mb with the Mini’s personally, nicer graphics too… 2005-05-03 11:30 pm I believe the FSB on the iMac G5 runs at 1/2 the speed of the FSB in the G5 powermacs. eMacs look decent, they could do with a bit more VRAM though (better than the 32mb in the mini, at least). 2005-05-04 12:08 am The iMac is more powerful than the PowerMac (by a good margin), costs the same, AND comes with an awesome LCD monitor. What, exactly, are you paying for in the PowerMac then? —————- How are the iMacs more powerful than the PowerMac? WTF are you talking about. What you are paying for is a second processor and expandability. It’s a workstation. 2005-05-04 12:26 am now what we need, is a imac without a screen, dont tell me “the mini”. The mini to be viable (for me at least), need, G5 minimum, better HD, better videocard(less important of the three) I’ll buy today. Imac without screen, well tomorow. @adaot “How are the iMacs more powerful than the PowerMac? WTF are you talking about. What you are paying for is a second processor and expandability. It’s a workstation.” Imac $1,599.00 CAD 17-inch widescreen LCD 1.8GHz PowerPC G5 600MHz frontside bus 512K L2 cache 512MB DDR400 SDRAM 160GB Serial ATA hard drive Slot-load Combo Drive ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR video memory 56K internal modem PowerMAC lowend $1,899.00 CAD 1.8GHz PowerPC G5 600MHz frontside bus 512K L2 cache 256MB DDR400 SDRAM Expandable to 4GB SDRAM 80GB Serial ATA 8x SuperDrive Three PCI Slots NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory 56K internal modem But I shall repeat : How are the iMacs more prowerful .. WTF … 2005-05-04 1:08 am If apple released a G5 mini tomorrow, you’re the type who would just go on to say, “well if they would release a dual processor mini, THEN I’d buy”. I’ve got a 1.42GHz Mac mini with 1GB RAM plugged into a 23″ Apple Cinema HD display and the performance is stellar. What exactly are you planning to do with your machine that the mini wouldn’t be sufficient. Maybe you should, I don’t know, TRY a machine before you dismiss it for the reason that “5 is a bigger number than 4”. 2005-05-04 1:21 am Anyone have any thoughts about the use of a mini for personal DV. Vacation, recitals, family stuff like that? How much RAM, 1GB? in comparison to an iMac? 2005-05-04 1:40 am It’s called an XServe!! 2005-05-04 2:06 am seriously I was planning to stay with intel+linux, but I somehow tired to always have to do administation every time I plug something new, tried new thing (camera + printer + fax (modem always a lot of fun and time waste). There is always something with every distro. I want something that work, and let me work. I was keeping that strategy because it was easy to dual boot and test and build my application on windows (python+wxpython). I was planning to code the applications I didn’t like in linux, but the list was growing everyday.On the other hand, Mac does already have the kind of application I like, business application I need, so paying the a little bit more will serve me well. I know this is a really personnal liking, but it is so. If apple release a mini G5 (note that it could be “less mini” I wont care as long it is quiet) or not, I will buy a Mac when I will return in july. I have choosed to use virtualpc for testing and bundle windows version, then use OSX for the rest. Beside, I really like to play x-plane. I already tried a powerbook with a similar configuration of the mini – it was simply ok. I would like the entry level Imac, but with a 20″ monitor later (I already have a 15″ now), which is an impossible option as long as it come in one piece. Plus I have 2 computers connect to a KVM, with a screen builtin, to bad for me, I will have to keep 2 screens. ;-( For sure in 2 months a Mac will stand on my desk, but not the perfect one. 2005-05-04 2:07 am I’m not so sure about the personal DV, but I know that I’m turning my mac mini into a PVR once the new G5s come out (the next itteration after this one) I was quite disapointed in the latest powermac updates, so I’m going to wait a while longer. at any rate I think the mac mini has a lot of potential in the PVR department. Best thing it has going for it is the sound, and the looks. The thing borders on silent. I haven’t found that in any other computer I’ve looked/listened at. as a developer who programs in .NET all day, It is an absolute treat to come home and work with OSX and cocoa. Although I catch so much grief from the other devs at the office for it. I’m looking forward to a PVR project with some nice Cocoa / opengl interface, and quicktime recording. I was able to buy the cheaper mini, and spent 100$ on 1 gig of ram, and am quite pleased with the performance. unfortunatelly the mini doesn’t have enough horse power for the new h.285 or whatever number it is, (at least at the 1080 resolution) but that’s ok, I will settle for a lower resolution considering the price point. anyone who uses OSX would do themselves a serious injustace to have anything less then 512mb of ram, and should have 1 gig. makes all the difference, and it’s borderline insulting that apple doesn’t increase the default RAM to what it should be, considering the price of RAM these days. I paid the same price for the higher end mini, 500 + (100 for ram) and I’ll guerantee you that my machine has better performance then the default 1.42 mini. (sorry that was a rant) at any rate, I think the mini has a really nice nitch that it can fill, it’s my default machine right now, and I have a PC that’s a good 3 times faster, and cost twice as much, that’s collecting dust, but it’s still good for half life 2 I guess. 2005-05-04 2:58 am …looks really good. My wife has the first 1.8 model of the G5 iMac. Nice machine (noisy fan). Still, I am with anonymous and will stick with my new mini and wait for the next generation G5’s to come out. My mini rocks. 1.42/1GB ram/100GB 5400 HD/160GB FW/bluetooth/airport running Tiger. Love it! 2005-05-04 3:32 am I have an “old” Powerbook G4 1.25 (15′) with the standard 512MB Ram (this is the ‘high-end’ 15” AL with Retroiluminated Keyboard, AirportExtreme, etc.). I have just loaded tiger (update, no problems, in 15 minutes tiger was up and running) and the box performs quite well. You Can perfectly use it for everyday use. I’d like to double the RAM, but it’s not cheap and I’d have to throw 256 mb since it comes with two DIMMS x 256 (sigh). Anyways, I don’t understand when people says it needs more power. For what? I have an Intel PIV 3.2 HT with 1 GIG of ram and XP Professional and believe me, I don’t miss it. Like Anonymous (IP: —.hsd1.co.comcast.net), I am also programming in .NET all day long so I can’t use my Powerbook, otherwise, I see no reason to use Windows XP. Tiger is really amazing. I am considering one of these iMacs, but I am usure whether to jump for the dual 2.0 or the iMac… First I have to buy this powerbook more memory 2005-05-04 4:23 am I agree with you Martin, the only reason I use windows is to program for windows. and perhaps some high end gaming. Other then that it’s all mac. The biggest arguments against mac come from those who haven’t given it a chance. and by the way I also have a powebook 667 that runs faster today then it did the day I baught it. Works fine for what I need it for. I think the mini is going to be the same way. Use it for what it’s good at. Don’t expect it to run doom 3, keep your expectations in check and you won’t have any problems. I believe the IMac is the same way. plunty of power, as long as you keep in mind what it was designed for. On kind of a side note, I got into a friendly argument with a co worker today, who thought that the PowerMac looked Girly. this baffled me, I think it looks way powerful and manly. his biggest argument was that it had curved corners, and a handle. What? I had a good laugh when he told me that the Dell XPS looked more manly. huh? anyway, thought that was a good laugh. If anything the Mac Mini might look a little “girly”. But I’m secure enough with myself to cope. 2005-05-04 4:41 am I’m a bit annoyed about the upgrade I should have waited 2 months 😉 Oh well, Apple is now NZ$3,500 richer because of me; considering I don’t play games, I probably would have wasted that extra grunt from the GPU upgrade. The eMac looks like a bloody good deal. It would be nice if there was some way Motorola could boost the FSB of their G4 up to 400Mhz, at minimum – that would really show the true performance of a G4 once the enemic FSB is made a little gruntier. Regarding the PowerMac etc: 1) The FSB is the same as the iMac – it doesn’t matter anyway, as the maximum memory it can support is 400Mhz, so its never going to reach the peak anyway. 2) The PowerMac range is targeted at a different market; just look at Dells Precision workstations, do you see people complaing that the graphics in their workstation lines aren’t as wizz-bang as their consumer/gamers high end machine, such as the Dimension 8200? of course not, they two machines are targeted at a different cliental. 3) GPU and CPU power aren’t everything when purchasing a computer – if they were, no one would purchase an HP or a Mac – consumers would be all out purchasing Dells by the millions. The fact remains, other considerations come into play when purchasing something. 2005-05-04 5:01 am This is slightly off topic, but I’d appreciate answers anyway. First, does anyone know when the powerbooks will be updated? I’m thinking of buying one and don’t want to buy one a few months before they’re updated. I’m not sure if this is done regularly or not. Second, is it difficult to replace the RAM with store bought RAM? Upgrading to 2GB at Apple costs $750, and I could save about $500 by buying it myself. Oh, and third, is 2GB the max supported or could I theoretically go up to 4? Thanks. 2005-05-04 7:21 am The G4 bus now runs 166mhz. The latest 1.6ghz powerbooks use the 7447B CPU. Freescale have a replacement 7448 which supports 200mhz 2005-05-04 7:29 am When do they ship Tiger with the powerbooks and ibooks. And when do they plan to upgrade the ibooks? I heard that the graphics card they use isn’t fully supported by Core Image (or was it Video or sonething like that..). Can’t 100% remember.. 2005-05-04 7:38 am I don’t know how much RAM a PowerBook will take, good question. Adding more RAM certainly helps the system although I’ve heard that 2 Gigs of RAM doesn’t seem to be doing very much more good than 1 Gig [but you certainly want 1 Gig]. Apple has lowered the RAM prices [sheesh] but you could probably still get a better deal elsewhere. Do pay close attention to the RAM you buy for your computer. Make sure it is compatible and when you have the opportunity to buy BOTTOM OF THE BARREL cheap versus good, reliable RAM, believe me: you want the reliable chips [my machine takes the PC2700 DDR SDRAM 333 ones, which is what Apple sells. Probably not the fastest dog in the pound, but I have no complaints about it]. Bad RAM will cause all sorts of problems with your apps and will make your machine enjoy awe inspiring crashes. Don’t go there. 2005-05-04 9:25 am I am seriously considering getting a Mac Mini as a home machine. I am shure it has enough power to serve me well with all the daily tasks like writing e-mail, surfing the net, writing letters,… at least if I would get it with 512 MB RAM. However, I also do some Java programming (just for fun, trying out a few ideas, since I work in the Computer Science research domain), so I wonder if the Mac Mini will be able to run the Eclipse IDE well enough… Has anybody any experience with Eclipse on the Mini? Right now, I am running a Pentium-III 800 on Windows 2000 + Cygwin (since I prefer Office *and* Unix command line tools :-), and I am quite happy with the performance of Eclipse on that platform. OS X would be therefore perfectly fit my needs — all nicely wrapped in a really nice looking GUI 🙂 2005-05-04 10:00 am Wow, iMac G5 with R9600 is faster than Dell 4700c with RX300SE!! Wonder! Magic! OMG! What a fair comparison again! Congratulations, Apple! comparison at the bottom of the page: http://www.apple.com/imac/graphics.html 2005-05-04 6:12 pm Why is there always somebody who wants to have a G5 in the macmini, or the powerbooks. The G4 provides propably a much better tradeof in respect to power consumption and heat generation. And this in turn provides two advantages: longer battery life for the notebook, and a low noise system. And these two issues are far more important than the hypotetical superiority of the raw computing power. -Richard 2005-05-04 7:11 pm Well, I’d like a powerbook with a G5 because I’d mostly use it as a desktop replacement. Battery life wouldn’t be a big deal. But obviously for a mobile laptop you’d want a G4. As far as wanting a G5 in the macmini, I believe that’s just people wishing for a cheap G5 mac. Which isn’t going to happen any time soon. 2005-05-04 8:14 pm Well, the point I was trying to make is, that I believe the G4 is the “better” processor. Therefore, to me a macmini G5 would be a bad thing, hopefully it won’t happen 😛 2005-05-05 12:02 am You got me curious about eclipse on the mini. So I downlaoded it to give it a try. While I was in school I used eclipse 3.0 on my powerbook 667, that was last year. it was usable but barely. On my mini (1.25 with 1 gig of ram) exlipse is very usable. It still takes a while to compile, and the interface is a little sluggish. But it is definitally usable. I haven’t used XCode for Java. But I believe it has auto-complete now, which was my main reason for not using it before. It may be a better alternative to Eclipse. I like eclipse and I give IBM so much credit for ditching swing, and it’s absolutely unacceptable design in favor of a better one (SWT). at any rate. Eclipse is functional on my mini. and you’ll most likely be happy with it. keep in mind that I have 1 gig of ram on the mini, which helps a lot, eclipse is a memory hog, so is OSX for that matter. L8er 2005-05-05 8:28 am @thebassist: Thanks for trying Eclipse on your Mini. Sounds good enough for me… What do mean by “the interface is a little sluggish”? (It’s a pity that the Apple resellers here in Germany don’t have demo machines where I could try stuff like Eclipse myself…) I was thinking about buying the Mini with 1G RAM, but in my opinion Apple is charging too much for it and I am not shure, whether I want to open the case myself and add 3rd party RAM to it. (After all, it may happen that I don’t like the Mac and have to resell it ) Apart from that, are you happy with your Mini? Another open question for me is, how capable the Mini is for playing videos, like recorded DVB MPEG2 streams, Xvids and smaller video clips that you have in online news mags. Mostly the latter are encoded as Realvideo or WMVs… Do you have any experience with that? A assume you have to go with Realvideo than, right!? 2005-05-05 4:43 pm Natt: “the interface is a little sluggish” means that it takes a split second for the menus to appear, and context menus take a split second to appear. It’s not bad once you use it (after a few minutes), but the initial feeling of eclipse is that it’s not as snappy as XCode. But it is still quite a bit better then any swing app. What I did was buy the cheaper mac mini, and baught a gig of ram from OWC and the total cost was close to that of the more expensive mini. I am quite pleased with the mini, considering I spent about $650 on it in total. it’s a pretty good machine for that price. Opening the case was a little hairy, but I’ve built my PCs for the last 10 years so I’m all about the “hands on”. I did however put a small scratch in the bottom of the case, but you only see it when you turn the mini upside down. Took about 20 minutes to complete the task. VIDEO: I’ve been playing quite a bit of video on this guy, and it all seems to be very smooth. even the new h.### is pretty smooth, with the exception of the higher 1080 encoded video. The streams from the web are very smooth. Divx works well, WMV is a little sketchy because you have to use the windows media player, at least that’s what I’ve found so far. and the Windows media player for mac is one step up from crap. So I try to avoid WMV. I’m very pleased with the mini, best part is that I can leave it an 24/7 and it’s silent, laudest thing is the external hard drive.