# Apple's new iMac 24"



## ElDiabloConCaca (Sep 6, 2006)

Woot!  New iMac: 24" of bright, shiny goodness.  Wow, that could replace my TV!

Check it:

http://www.apple.com/imac


----------



## ora (Sep 6, 2006)

Wahay, and the first Core 2 Duo machine too - which gives me hope for the new MacBookPro I am dearly hoping they release soon so I can buy one .


----------



## MacGizmo (Sep 6, 2006)

The only bummer about this (IMO) is that they don't offer a "glossy" display option on the 24" iMac. Other than that, this rocks!


----------



## ora (Sep 6, 2006)

I guess maybe the glossy would be good for desktops, but I'm still unsure about using it on laptops, I have enough trouble in sunlight already!


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Sep 6, 2006)

On a side-note, the Mac mini has been updated, too, with a faster processor.


----------



## garymum4d (Sep 6, 2006)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> On a side-note, the Mac mini has been updated, too, with a faster processor.


Not a Core 2 Duo though. Disappointing!


----------



## Viro (Sep 6, 2006)

Aside from having 64 bit support, is there anything special about the Core 2 Duo processors?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Sep 6, 2006)

They're more power efficient than the original Core Duo, have a larger L2 cache, and offer something like 30% better all-around performance (along with other improvements, like an extra ALU, faster FSB, among other things).

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808


----------



## ora (Sep 6, 2006)

Faster, not that much in terms of gigahertz, but they perform better per clock cycle I hear. Apple claim 1.5x performance increase on the previous Core Duo iMacs. For me I'm waiting for them as I'm hoping the next MacBook Pros', presumably using Core 2 Duo (Merom flavor, not sure if the iMacs use Conroe or Merom) will also iron out some of the hardware bugs.

For info on the large range of intel chips around now check this article predicting the MacPro would use the Xeon 5100 from the excellent Ars Technica: http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/promacs.ars .


----------



## Viro (Sep 6, 2006)

I just got my Macbook less than a week ago .


----------



## nixgeek (Sep 6, 2006)

Very nice.....makes my 17" iMac G5 look like a Mac Classic.   Even still, I love my iMac G5. 

Can't wait for the MacBook/MB Pro updates.


----------



## Esquilinho (Sep 6, 2006)

I already thought that the 20" iMacs were too big and unelegant&#8230; This one must look like a monster!


----------



## eric2006 (Sep 6, 2006)

.. and I thought my iMac G5 17" was big. I think I'd rather opt for a cinema display, and be able to use it when I get a new computer. But that's me.


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 6, 2006)

The new iMac's use Core 2 Duo processors (Meroms, I assume, but can anyone confirm?).

Also, Apple has made their education-only low-end model available to the public. (Raise your hand if you saw that coming!) This is good news. However, since the next model up has been dropped $100, the low-end seems overpriced now. It definitely offers less bang for the buck than the next in the line, which has more RAM, a SuperDrive, a dedicated video card, a faster processor and a remote for just $200 more. At this point, $799 or $899 seems like the right price for the low-end iMac, not $999. And why no remote? That's a bummer, since it makes it noticeably worse than a Mini.

Still, I'm glad Apple is finally offering a complete sub-$1000 system again.

And the high-end iMac now sports a true HD display. Niiiice. Man I want one of those monster iMacs.

Edit: Wait a second...didn't the old iMacs have 256MB of VRAM? The current high-end only has 128. That seems odd.


----------



## DeltaMac (Sep 6, 2006)

Mikuro said:


> ... Wait a second...didn't the old iMacs have 256MB of VRAM? The current high-end only has 128. That seems odd.



Yes, the older iMacs had 256MB on custom order only. standard was 128MB, same as today.
However, the video is a big step up in performance, and 256MB is also available as a custom order, and is an upgraded vid card, not just more video RAM.
The big 24-inch video is NOT built-in to the logic board, but is a separate video card (a Mobile Express Module (MXM) type II card), possibly upgradeable to future mobile-type vid cards ?? It would be a big job to do that, the iMac has to be completely disassembled to get at the video card, which is underneath the logic board.


----------



## HateEternal (Sep 6, 2006)

Viro said:


> I just got my Macbook less than a week ago .



Some people have predicted that the "consumer" lines will retain the core duo where the "pro" line gets the core 2 duo. The Mini upgrade kind of supports this, in which case it's probably not a big deal, unless, you forgot to type Pro after MacBook ;-)


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Sep 6, 2006)

HateEternal said:


> Some people have predicted that the "consumer" lines will retain the core duo where the "pro" line gets the core 2 duo. The Mini upgrade kind of supports this, in which case it's probably not a big deal, unless, you forgot to type Pro after MacBook ;-)


Doesn't the fact that the iMac, the best-selling "consumer" desktop Apple sells, just got a Core 2 Duo disprove that?


----------



## Qion (Sep 6, 2006)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> Doesn't the fact that the iMac, the best-selling "consumer" desktop Apple sells, just got a Core 2 Duo disprove that?



Yeah, it definitely looks like we're repeating what the initial switch to Intel was. iMacs got Core Duo's, Mini's got Solo's standard and Duo's as an upgrade option, and both sets up laptops got Core Duo's. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple put Core 2's in both flavours of MacBook, possibly with the MacBook having the Core 2 as an upgrade option.


----------



## HateEternal (Sep 6, 2006)

ElDiabloConCaca said:


> Doesn't the fact that the iMac, the best-selling "consumer" desktop Apple sells, just got a Core 2 Duo disprove that?



God, such a smart-ass.


----------



## hawki18 (Sep 7, 2006)

The should also make a dedicated video card a option for Mac Book since Apple is taking the cheap way out and using the Intel built in video option.  I think a real video card should be the stanard not a option, but that is my opinion.


----------



## Esquilinho (Sep 7, 2006)

hawki18 said:


> The should also make a dedicated video card a option for Mac Book since Apple is taking the cheap way out and using the Intel built in video option.  I think a real video card should be the stanard not a option, but that is my opinion.




Yep, but then what would be the difference between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro?
It seems to me that people just want a MBP for the price of a MB


----------



## Viro (Sep 7, 2006)

Esquilinho said:


> Yep, but then what would be the difference between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro?
> It seems to me that people just want a MBP for the price of a MB



Very true. The only difference between the MacBook and the Macbook Pro really is the aluminum casing, and the integrated video card. Right now, the performance of the two lines are so similar in everything apart from 3D, that it would be detrimental to the Macbook Pro if the Macbook had a dedicated 3D card. What would be the point of the Macbook Pro then? It's larger, costs more, and performs the same as the Macbook.


----------



## ora (Sep 7, 2006)

I don't mind the price, I'd just prefer a Pro machine in a small form factor as portability is key for me. That said for me a MacBook comes out more expensive than a a MacBookPro so it seems I will crumble and take the 15: beast.


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 7, 2006)

Personally, the problem I have with the MacBook is that it offers too _much_ standard (with pricing to match), not too little.


----------



## Viro (Sep 7, 2006)

Too much? What would you remove from the Macbook?


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 7, 2006)

Viro said:


> Too much? What would you remove from the Macbook?


Definitely the iSight, probably the remote, and maybe Bluetooth, too. Even Airport is not needed by lots of people, so it shouldn't be standard on the cheapest machines. A Core Solo model at the bottom would be appropriate as well. If they took out all the non-essentials, they could offer a machine to compete with the low-end PC laptops, which are perfectly adequate for a large market.

The MacBook is, IMO, the most appealing machine on the market, but I still think it fills its role (as an _entry-level_ notebook) very poorly. Same goes for the Mini.


----------



## Viro (Sep 7, 2006)

I think Apple has always billed itself as being ahead of the technological curve. Macs were shipping with USB and Firewire ports long before such devices were common places. As such, I don't see the Macbook as deviating from this tradition. Does it have stuff that most entry level laptops do not have? Sure, like the iSight, remote control, and firewire port. However, most laptops these days do have wireless as standard, even the £350 ones in the UK (Macbooks cost £670 at the minimum).


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2006)

I guesss it's just not that interesting for Apple to make a MacBook model without AirPort/Bluetooth/iSight and with a Core Solo processor. You'd have to actually create different bezels (no iSight), AirPort/Bluetooth are part of the standard platform Apple's using cheaply (and crippling the features off doesn't save money) and I'm not sure they'd save that much by going Core Solo as well. So the price difference between that (imagninary) low-cost model to the cheapest _available_ model would probably be too small. But that's _all_ off-topic imho.

Back on topic... I've said it when they released the 20" iMac first and I'll state it again: The CPU loses its worth _MUCH_ faster than the display does. Seriously: The upgrade path for a Mac mini with gorgeous Cinema Display is so much better... But I guess they _will_ actually sell quite a few of these monsters. I'm sure they're awesome desktop machines. (I'm just not a desktop-machine user...)

I still think for consumers and pros a higher end Mac mini (a "Mac", what a nice product name...) would make a better deal - and attract more switchers.


----------



## Mikuro (Sep 7, 2006)

I agree completely about the iMac, Fryke. I've been saying that for years, actually, except that back in the CRT days, it was more because the CPU would outlive the monitor than the other way around! (In my experience, CRT iMac monitors started getting slightly "funky" in a year or two, and nearly unusable in 4-5.) I will probably never buy another all-in-one system, because there will always be some parts that are more valuable or live longer than others.

But _man_ that 24-inch iMac looks nice! 

The Mini is perfect for me, except I would like more power, and would definitely be willing to pay a little more  just not quite as much as the Mac Pro. As a Mac user, I've always had to settle on hardware, because Apple has never offered a machine that fit me to a T. (Well, maybe in the 68k era, before I was really paying attention or making buying decisions.)

A consumer-level tower would probably shut me up for good, along with most people who don't like Apple's desktop offerings.

What would also be nice is a CPU that acted like a monitor "dock". It'd give you the elegance of an all-in-one design without all the drawbacks. But then, we don't want another non-standard monitor connector, that's for sure...


----------



## ora (Sep 7, 2006)

Mikuro said:


> A consumer-level tower would probably shut me up for good, along with most people who don't like Apple's desktop offerings.



I agree actually. At the movement I use my PowerBook much fo the time, and have an old sawtooth G4 with a few cards chucked in the back as a file/media server and to drive a decent sized display for movies. I'd like something like a not-quite-mini mac more along the size of some of the smaller atx cases. Some more ports, space for a second drive and maybe a couple of pci slots (I massively extended the life of my sawtooth with a 6 port usb2 card to drive some external burners and HDs etc). I'd also want to be able to open it up without a putty knife, but I understand that on the mini as its not means to be upgradeable.



The iMac's are great for some, often people who aren't regulars on boards like these . My mum has a G5 iMac and its pretty much perfect for her  work. She spends all day at it so the screen quality is important. Its has enough ports for here limited needs, it has a small footprint. I guess what me and Mikuro would like is a low buget-prosumer machine . I just can't justify all that money on a MacPro just to be a companion machine to a portable. Neither the iMac or mini fulfill that need for me but maybe its too small a niche for Apple to want to fill..


----------



## MorganNiemand (Sep 7, 2006)

They could bring back the beautiful cube design and pack it full of expandable consumer desktop features, another problem presented by a consumer level desktop would be Apple's extremely high prices of the monitors themselves, sure, they are of great quality and look beautiful, but people buying a sub-$1000 machine are not going to want to pay $700 for a monitor.  Perhaps a lower standard monitor in the $300-$500 price range.


----------



## fryke (Sep 7, 2006)

Well, there's tons of monitors outside of Apple's for those.  ... By cube design, do you mean Apple's Cube or NeXT's Cube? Because Apple's wasn't really expandable. NeXT's had more space, I guess.  ... Hm. I'm thinking more of a wider mini, really. Space for a 3.5" harddrive inside as well as a real graphics card.


----------



## MorganNiemand (Sep 7, 2006)

Apple's, but making more like a Shuttle PC in the way of expanding. Yes, other companies put out monitors, but do any in a cheaper price-range have the Apple name or aesthetically pleasing looks?


----------



## Trip (Sep 7, 2006)

24" of Apple love is about to replace everything I own that is visually appealing.


----------



## hawki18 (Sep 8, 2006)

Esquilinho said:


> Yep, but then&#8230; what would be the difference between the MacBook and the MacBook Pro?
> It seems to me that people just want a MBP for the price of a MB



No not looking for a Mac Book Pro at a Mac Book price, I own a MBP.  I saying for the price point of MB it should have video card.  But for 1200 buck you can get win lap top with 100gb hd 128 ati 1600 video card which is the same card the MBP uses and a 15.4 inch wide screen.  When I am working in photo shop with a few other apps open do not want my ram being used to do my video work but that is just me. also before you say it can't a dual core machine it has the same 1.83 ghz dual core my MBP has.  So it shows Mac is really making a really good profit on the MB.


----------



## hawki18 (Sep 8, 2006)

Viro said:


> Very true. The only difference between the MacBook and the Macbook Pro really is the aluminum casing, and the integrated video card. Right now, the performance of the two lines are so similar in everything apart from 3D, that it would be detrimental to the Macbook Pro if the Macbook had a dedicated 3D card. What would be the point of the Macbook Pro then? It's larger, costs more, and performs the same as the Macbook.



The point being leave the MB using dual core  32bit chips and the MBP upgrade to the 64bit chips and leave the price point alone and make the 256mb card standard on the MBP and only put a 64 bit card in the MB.


----------



## steven_lufc (Sep 8, 2006)

MorganNiemand said:


> They could bring back the beautiful cube design



Maybe...


----------



## speXedy (Sep 8, 2006)

aww i just bought my 20"  iMac like two or three weeks ago, if I would have known this was coming out I would have waited ... ah well.


----------



## ora (Sep 8, 2006)

steven_lufc said:


> Maybe...



Yeah, I saw this at ars technica with the subtitle (in my rss reader): Patents for an "ultra compact computer arrangement" look a lot like a more upgradable Cube.


----------



## MorganNiemand (Sep 8, 2006)

steven_lufc said:


> Maybe...



That would be beyond amazing.


----------



## Veljo (Sep 9, 2006)

The 24" iMac was definitely unexpected, but a welcome update. All I'm really hoping for now is a Core 2 Duo update for the MacBook Pros, I've been waiting about 6 months for one and I can't wait any longer!


----------



## chevy (Sep 9, 2006)

I just ordered a 24". I should receive it on Oct 5th. Cannot wait for having it on my desk... and run Mac OS X iLife and Windows games on it (I'm crazy about IL-2).


----------



## Qion (Sep 9, 2006)

Wow, October 5th? It's September 9th! 

I would have difficulty waiting that long.


----------



## chevy (Sep 9, 2006)

The non-modified version has faster delivery, but I increased RAM and choosed the faster 7600.


----------



## eric2006 (Sep 9, 2006)

It usually comes a lot earlier than the given date, but they don't want people to get mad if their computer comes a little late.


----------

