iMac 800 or PowerMac 800???

**Jasoco** · April 17th, 2002, 11:12 PM

Well, I was sold on the iMac 800 up until now. Apple has now put SuperDrive as an option on the low end PowerMac.

Now, my question to you is, Besides the lack of screen and speakers on the Low End PowerMac 800, is there any other reason to not go for the PowerMac 800 instead of the iMac 800?

I was reading my MacWorld mag and they said the 800MHz processor in the iMac isn't as fast as the Desktop Tower versions.

Now, I can either spend $1899 + Tax for an iMac or $1799 + Tax for the PowerMac. That's the $1599 PowerMac + $200 SuperDrive Upgrade.

Is there any benefit to the iMac anymore? Sure, it looks cool, but I originally wanted upgradability.

Like a bigger monitor. But now that Apple went and did something I wasn't expecting, I am undecided again!

With Apple, you never know what will happen!

**dricci** · April 17th, 2002, 11:15 PM

It depends on what you want to do. If you want to use a variety of monitors at high resolutions, you need a tower. If you want to add expansion/pci/video cards and internal drives, you need a tower. If you want to do Final Cut Pro, you need a tower.

If you want to do casual internet surfing, email, iMovie editing, and some office/photoshop/iphoto, then an iMac is fine.

**rinse** · April 17th, 2002, 11:18 PM

the tower has the faster bus speed (100mhz vs 133mhz) doesn't it?

**benpoole** · April 18th, 2002, 06:40 AM

Dead on. The PowerMac has a 133MHz bus, the iMac 100MHz.

**simX** · April 18th, 2002, 09:41 AM

Remember, though, if you don't have a screen or speakers, you need to add that to the price. And make sure that you have all the right connectors to connect them to the PowerMac, or you'll be spending more for converters.

Also, I'd just like to point out that you probably won't get a monitor as adjustable as the iMac's. That's one downfall of going with the PowerMac, and you also won't waste a lot of desk space with the iMac.

**Leonis** · April 18th, 2002, 07:15 PM

Also.

Think screen resolution

iMac's 1024x768 is a nightmere for working with palette heavy apps like all those today's graphic programs.

**divibisan** · April 19th, 2002, 09:27 PM

iMac:
Smaller
Cheaper
Cooler looking
More pre-installed programs
More adjustable

Tower
Faster (bus)
More expandable
Bigger, higher res monitor available
Multiple drives
Better graphic card

**ksv** · April 21st, 2002, 11:28 AM

If you want a machine which you want to keep for a while, get a PowerMac. You can replace the graphics card, add PCI cards (USB 2, bluetooth, etc), put 6 HDs and a second optical drive etc etc etc. It also has a 33% faster bus, faster HD and more L2 cache. In the future, you can put a dual 1 GHz G4 module in a tower, the iMac has no way of replacing the processor.
On the other side, if you can wait a little, I'd wait for MacWorld in July