# Watercooling on iMac G5???



## Zenzefiloan (May 3, 2005)

If you check out the pictures of the iMac G5 you can see that the water cooling mechanism has been changed a bit? 

Would anyone think that the new system woul prompt us to a possible G5 PB in the distant future?


----------



## mi5moav (May 3, 2005)

Apple is trying very hard to get the watercooled features out of the powermac(though they did improve it in this version, not in imacs) I doubt very much we will see it in a portable with the chance for failure probably increasing 5 fold. Portables with G5s have been spotted but they are bulky and the fans are still to loud at this point in time. 80% chance sometime between March 2006 and August 2006 for a G5 or whatever they want to call it in what we would call a powerbook.


----------



## Zammy-Sam (May 3, 2005)

Iirc there was no watercooling in the iMac G5. Can you take a screenshot and point at the "suspicious change"?


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 3, 2005)

The iMac G5 is most definitely not water-cooled.  The only Macintosh that is water cooled is the dual-2.7GHz PowerMac G5.

All the iMacs are air-cooled.

Who has "spotted PowerBook G5s?"


----------



## Zenzefiloan (May 3, 2005)

http://images.apple.com/r/store/infoblock/imac/imac_openback.jpg

Have a look here guys tell me what you think!!!


----------



## Zammy-Sam (May 3, 2005)

I see a fan, a cpu, ram... but not watercooling unit.


----------



## Captain Code (May 3, 2005)

There's no watercooling in the iMac.


----------



## Convert (May 3, 2005)

It's air, I saw a diagram somewhere showing the air system.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 3, 2005)

fans blow cold air up, and out through the line in the back of the imac, near the top.  hot air rises, and they play on this fact


who has spotted G5 powerbooks MI5moav?


----------



## JetwingX (May 3, 2005)

um... right. i have taken my iMac apart many times and have never seen any water... it's all air.

and i seriously doubt mi5moav has seen G5 powerbooks


----------



## DCD (May 3, 2005)

I'll be placing my order for the 2GHz iMac G5 in the morning.  

Do you guys think its worth going for 2 GB RAM or is 1 more than enough?  I work with large size photos in Photoshop so need a bit of RAM to keep things going at an acceptable rate.

Good to see the option for the 400GB HD...a lifesaver for people than need lots and lots of storage!  I'll be getting this too

Been waiting since Feb for this computer...so happy it finally came out...and to get 10.4 with it as well as an airmac card is just a big bonus!!


----------



## pds (May 3, 2005)

Gee, 5 Powerbooks


----------



## JetwingX (May 3, 2005)

^Nice^

DCD if you are working with large images, go for the 2 gigs


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 3, 2005)

...especially since Apple apparently dropped prices on RAM.  I'd be willing to pay a little more than normal for extra sticks from Apple, since they'll be covered under warranty should one go bad (and it seems like the percentage of bad sticks is higher than it's been in a while).


----------



## kainjow (May 3, 2005)

2GB's help out tons when you have 15-20 apps open (mostly heavy apps) and need to switch back and forth a lot especially with Expose shrinking and expanding those windows. It's great you won't be disappointed if you get more.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 3, 2005)

DCD said:
			
		

> I'll be placing my order for the 2GHz iMac G5 in the morning.
> 
> Do you guys think its worth going for 2 GB RAM or is 1 more than enough?  I work with large size photos in Photoshop so need a bit of RAM to keep things going at an acceptable rate.!


If manipulating large images in Photoshop is what you do, then you want plenty of RAM and fast access to that RAM.  The iMac is not the system for you.  The low-end dual 2GHz G5 with its fast FSB is the way to go.


----------



## gerbick (May 3, 2005)

mi5moav said:
			
		

> ...I doubt very much we will see it in a portable with the chance for failure probably increasing 5 fold...



I think you mean Apple is the one where you might not see water cooling in a portable.  Others have already done it... years ago.  Hitachi did it in 2002.  Google search it on your own.


----------



## lilbandit (May 4, 2005)

Where do you get these crazy statements mi5moav? "Portables with G5s have been spotted but they are bulky and the fans are still to loud at this point in time. 80% chance sometime between March 2006 and August 2006 for a G5 or whatever they want to call it in what we would call a powerbook." I'm not having a go, just wondering where the authoritative tone is coming from


----------



## HomunQlus (May 4, 2005)

pds said:
			
		

> Gee, 5 Powerbooks


 
Good one!!


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 4, 2005)

lilbandit said:
			
		

> Where do you get these crazy statements mi5moav? "Portables with G5s have been spotted but they are bulky and the fans are still to loud at this point in time. 80% chance sometime between March 2006 and August 2006 for a G5 or whatever they want to call it in what we would call a powerbook." I'm not having a go, just wondering where the authoritive tone is coming from



if you press the quote button at the bottom of the post you would like to quote, it takes to a new message screen with the quote laid out for you


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 4, 2005)

lilbandit said:
			
		

> Where do you get these crazy statements mi5moav? "Portables with G5s have been spotted but they are bulky and the fans are still to loud at this point in time. 80% chance sometime between March 2006 and August 2006 for a G5 or whatever they want to call it in what we would call a powerbook." I'm not having a go, just wondering where the authoritative tone is coming from



Heh... have you been a part of a discussion with mi5moav before?  If so, I apologize for reiterating what you already know, but if not, read on:

mi5moav comes here, every now and then for a few days or a week/month at a time, makes some outrageous claims (and some just downright ridiculous) and never backs them up with any information or links or anything.  He/she also rarely responds to questions like, "where did that information come from?" and "who is your source?" and "what the hell are you talking about?"

Then he/she disappears... Only to reappear sometime later.  Never can tell how long the stretch between appearances will be.  One time, it lasted a few months, IIRC.

My theory is that mi5moav is actually Steve Jobs, posing as a forum member and that everything said is absolutely, 100% truthful... it's one of the only explanations I can come up with to explain his/her behavior.

 

To keep this on topic: it would be silly for Apple not to have toyed with the idea of a PowerBook G5 (with watercooling is a stretch, but, still possible).  As part of any testing process, mock-ups are built (remember Apple's old secret "red" PCBs?  And the fact that all non-release Apple computers have red motherboards, while release computers had blue or green?) that may or may not fully function.  So, the "sighting" of a PowerBook G5 is completely possible, but limited to a select, secretive few.  Either mi5moav is one of, or a person close to, one of those select few and this board has a member who brings us a secret "link" deep inside Apple now, or... well, hmm... or what?


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 4, 2005)

i was thinking about this. if you wanted some accurate market research, wouldn;t you go to the more respected forums?  how high profile is this forum? if so, there must be at least one or two high-level apple people posting, or at least reading here.... wonder who it could be... obviously not fryke, or spotlight would be different...


----------



## Ricky (May 5, 2005)

Oscar Castillo said:
			
		

> If manipulating large images in Photoshop is what you do, then you want plenty of RAM and fast access to that RAM.  The iMac is not the system for you.  The low-end dual 2GHz G5 with its fast FSB is the way to go.


I'd have to disagree with you there.  Although it's a bit slower, my iMac definitely isn't a slouch when working with large images in Photoshop.  I have 2 GB of RAM installed.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 5, 2005)

Sounds like you're saying the same thing.  Not a slouch, but the iMac is slower.   Sure it's usable, but if he is manipulating large images the additional horsepower you get from the low-end dual 2GHz PowerMac can't be beat.


----------



## Convert (May 5, 2005)

Do you think that Apple would up the processor on the 1.8Ghz Powermac now? Seems weird having a 2Ghz iMac and a 1.8Ghz Powermac.


----------



## fryke (May 5, 2005)

Oscar: By a 2.3 or 2.7 GHz duallie?


----------



## Pengu (May 6, 2005)

Convert: some people want the expandability of a Tower but 1.8ghz is enough i guess.. and they have a "low" dual 2.0 ghz...


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 6, 2005)

fryke said:
			
		

> Oscar: By a 2.3 or 2.7 GHz duallie?


I think the dual 2.0 is the sweet deal.  Might also get a 23" Cinema, but also considering dual 20" setup.   Although I think the 20" seems vertically challenged in my opinion anyway.


----------



## Pengu (May 6, 2005)

i have the dual 2.0 (PCI-X, 8 slots) and a 20". it's gorgeous.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 6, 2005)

Pengu said:
			
		

> i have the dual 2.0 (PCI-X, 8 slots) and a 20". it's gorgeous.


There are plenty of times the widescreen aspect would come in handy for me, but the display looks so small in the store I convince myself it's not what I want, but at $799 though I'm tempted to buy 2 instead of the 23".


----------



## Qion (May 6, 2005)

Damn this 17" screen.....  

I'm actually looking on eBay right now to buy a second display and using Screen Spanning Doctor to span them.... 17" just sucks when you do high-res pictures.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 6, 2005)

I went to CompUSA today and roughly measured it and although the width on the 20" ACD is about the same as my 21.3" Samsung, I lose a little over 2" of screen height.  Now I have to think about that.  The 23" ACD is just perfect, but I can't see myself spending $3k for two of those.


----------



## Oscar Castillo (May 6, 2005)

Qion said:
			
		

> Damn this 17" screen.....
> 
> I'm actually looking on eBay right now to buy a second display and using Screen Spanning Doctor to span them.... 17" just sucks when you do high-res pictures.


I thought the same after I had my 17" Apple display for a while, but it was my first LCD and I just thought it was the best thing I ever spent money on.


----------



## Qion (May 6, 2005)

To save a new thread, how much better/worse is LCD than CRT? I've naturally seen both of the types working before, but just can't put my finger on the difference. I know that CRT's are different in that they "flicker", or don't show a constant image(IE refresh rate), but LCD's do. What are your opinions?


----------



## Pengu (May 7, 2005)

CRT is supposed to be better for colour-perfect pictures, from any viewing angle.

LCDs will remove the problem of refresh rates on monitors (which is usually the biggest cause of eye-strain using a computer), and give a much brighter, crisper, clearer picture.

that said: while i'm no design/print specialist, the colours on my 20" look as good, if not better than they did on my ADC equipped 17" Studio Display CRT..

LCDs also use less power than compareable (size) CRTs, and take up MUCH less room.

personally, i couldn't go back to CRT again. Some people at work have IBM (a few Compaq) CRT monitors, and while they aren't especially bad (we have some IPEX CRTs that are really shocking), even compared to a crappy IBM LCD (15" 1024x768, VGA connector) even looking at them for a few seconds, I can see the whole picture is a little bit blurry (if you're lucky)

Hope all of that helps.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (May 7, 2005)

competely agree. repped.


----------

