# iMac - To Buy or Not To Buy - Plus new Intel Core Duo



## Mat (Jan 10, 2006)

Hi

Lately I have seriously been thinking about buying a new 17" iMac, my 14" 700 MHz iBook is getting a little outdated and not giving me the performace I would like.

First of all I was just after any opinions on whether the new iMac is a good purchase.  I did a degree in Multimedia, so all I use is a mac, but since my degree I have lost touch with the Mac world, and this forum, for that matter.

A few days ago I had a look at the Apple site and all was fine I knew that if I bought this new iMac all my apps would work and so on.  Today I had another look and there is this Intel Core Duo chip in it.  That doesn't bother me, but I have read that my apps may not work now.  Does anyone know whether Photoshop CS, Macromedia Suite and Office will work on this new chip?

Thanks

Mat


----------



## nixgeek (Jan 10, 2006)

Rosetta (the software that allows PPC software to run on the new Intel Macs transparently) will help you in this part.  Steve Jobs tested Photoshop PPC and said that performance was good enough for everyday users, but high end users might notice a bit of a slowdown.  But all of your older apps will work.

The other good news is that all the major software companies, including those that make the soft2ware that you're asking about, will make universal binaries available for today's apps and will also have a trade-in program if you want to switch to the universal binary version.  Today's upgrade of iTunes and QuickTime (which weren't really mentioned during the keynote but are there) are actually universal binaries (I checked myself ).

I say go for the Intel Core Duo iMac.  Test drive it over the weekend once the Intel iMacs are at the Apple Store so that you can get a feel for the new system.


----------



## Mat (Jan 10, 2006)

That's good news.  Thanks a lot nix.  You seem to answered it, but please feel free anyone else to add your opinions/ideas.


----------



## fryke (Jan 10, 2006)

Apple's own pro apps won't work until March. And if you already own a license to the newest version, you'll have to exchange the media for the Universal update (no free update from Apple for this, sadly...). But that's only for stuff like Aperture, Final Cut Pro etc. ...


----------



## Mat (Jan 11, 2006)

OK, cool.  Thanks fryke, that's also some good news.  So you would agree to get the Intel Core Duo iMac over the G5 iMac?


----------



## fryke (Jan 11, 2006)

That's not really a question. You can _only_ go with the intel, since it's _definitely_ faster and more future-proof. Right now, they both cost the same, yet the intel one's plain better.


----------



## Mikuro (Jan 11, 2006)

nixgeek said:
			
		

> Steve Jobs tested Photoshop PPC and said that performance was good enough for everyday users, but high end users might notice a bit of a slowdown.


Since Rosetta only emulates G3s, I think it's safe to say that apps like Photoshop would be a _lot_ slower. Most Photoshop filters are highly optimized for G4s and G5s. I still think it'd be perfectly usable, though. Maybe even faster than on a 700MHz iBook.



> The other good news is that all the major software companies, including those that make the soft2ware that you're asking about, will make universal binaries available for today's apps and will also have a trade-in program if you want to switch to the universal binary version.


Heyy, really?!? I've only heard Apple mention a "crossgrade" program. Have companies like Adobe, Macromedia and Microsoft made any similar promises? If so, then that's great. I had assumed that many of these apps wouldn't be ported until the next major (read: costly) update, as they've been known to do in the past. (Of course, it doesn't matter much to me since most of my apps are a version or two behind at this point anyway.)


If I had to buy an iMac now, I'd definitely go for the new Intel model....but I'd expect a bumpy road. For example, none of my QuickTime codecs would work (not even under Rosetta, from what I've heard), Photoshop would be slow, etc. But when I spend $1500 (give or take) on a computer, I expect it to last a good few years, and I think a year from now, an Intel iMac would serve me _so_ much better than a PPC iMac that it would outweigh the short-term troubles. I can't afford to buy a new computer every year or two, so I'd go with the one that, as fryke said, is more future-proof.

And it'd be refreshing to see a computer get _more_ useful and perform _better_ as time goes on, wouldn't it?


----------



## Mat (Apr 13, 2006)

Hey everyone, I really appreciate the feedback you all gave me.  I have been waiting anxiously.  I can't help but feel like Bart and Lisa from the Simpsons when they say "Are we there yet, are we there yet?" when I ask this, but what about now?  Do you still feel that I am best to wait until next year to purchase an iMac?  And if so, is that soley that Photoshop and the like are not yet universal?

Thanks, Mat.


----------



## Thank The Cheese (Apr 13, 2006)

I heard on TWiT that they tested Photoshop on a MacBook Pro and, while far slower than it could be, it was still just as fast as an iMac G5 running Photoshop. Not sure how much of this will transfer over to an imac CoreDuo, but sounds to me like it won't be THAT much of a performance decrease (in G5 terms that is). I've done some pretty hardcore Photoshop projects on some pretty low-tech machines. 

My pesonal opinion is to get it, becaue it will still be much faster than your iBook for Adobe apps (and one heck of a lot faster for everything else). And a year from now when CS3 comes out it will be like getting a whole new computer when you are able to run Adobe apps at native speeds!


----------



## Mat (Apr 18, 2006)

OK. So on the whole people think I should just get it.  In the short term use with Adobe and Macromedia apps will be alright but not at full potential.  In time these apps will be released as universal apps and then they will be super sweet and run beautifully.  For all the everyday stuff (iPod, iTunes, Safari etc.) it will be supremely excellent.  Is that what you're all saying?  It sounds good.  Now I just have to convince myself to fork out the cash.


----------



## Mat (Jul 28, 2006)

Alright, almost 8 months since I posted this thread, I am still without iMac.  I have been waiting, biding my time to see Photoshop and the like come to the new iMacs under a Universal release.  I am getting pretty keen again to buy one, but now I hear about the possibility of the new Core Duo 2 chips going into new iMacs.  Just wondering what you guys think.  I feel I should at least wait until the WWDC to see what happens.  But then what, when?  Does anyone have a clue as to when Adobe will release Universal applications?


----------



## Esquilinho (Jul 29, 2006)

I read somewhere that it will be only next year


----------



## jpb5151 (Jul 29, 2006)

Mat, if you've survived this long without upgrading, maybe you'd be able to stay pat until the next significant upgrade from Apple.

Also, I fully believe that almost all modern hardware is plenty fast (e.g., Core Duo vs Core Duo 2 may not matter), but if you hold off until the next version of Mac OS then you've just saved some money.


----------



## nixgeek (Jul 29, 2006)

ACtually, Core 2 Duo does matter, especially considering that it will bring EM64T to the Core CPUs.  That means we'll once again have Macs that support 64-bit computing.  Also, the performance gains on the Core 2 Duo are higher compared to Core Duo, which itself was pretty fast.


----------



## davebz (Jul 29, 2006)

The core 2 is the same form factor as the current CPU's.  Someone has already tested a pre-release core 2 duo in a mac mini at 2.16Ghz.  It worked just fine and blew the G5 off the map.  I'll be upgrading my CPU probably in several months.  BTW:  Core 2 Extreme is completely different form factor which is not compatible.


----------



## nixgeek (Jul 29, 2006)

From what I've read, using the Core 2 CPUs (non-Extreme) on the socket for the Core CPUs might require a BIOS updates on PCs even though they will fit on the socket.  I wonder if this was already taken care of with the firmware update that was released recently for the Intel Macs.


----------



## jpb5151 (Jul 29, 2006)

nixgeek said:


> ACtually, Core 2 Duo does matter, especially considering that it will bring EM64T to the Core CPUs.


Yes, thanks, I should've clarified -- my statement was meant to be subjective and only subjective.  For example, my MacBook 1.83 is plenty fast for me and the Dell PIII it replaced was slower but also fast enough (ran OpenBSD).

64-bit addressing is very handy, although I've only needed it on a system designed to handle super-large (>4.5 GB) datasets in R.  Mac users who do memory-intensive things will indeed benefit.

Please forgive me for remaining somewhat hesitant about the upcoming Core 2 performance.  This is not directed against any person (nor company for that matter), it's just that I've seen too many benchmarks.  The only processor upgrades that impressed me after real-world use were the 80286 to 80386, 80386 to 80486 and 80486 to "Pentium" jumps; everything else was sort of a letdown (including the initial PPC).


----------



## nixgeek (Jul 29, 2006)

No need to apologize.  However, it is considered to be a big thing.  Tests have already been conducted and compared to the AMD64 architecture, The Core 2 Duo trumps it.  See here for some articles from AnandTech regarding Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Duo Extreme (the latter might not be used on the Macs though).

http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=2800&p=1
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=1

There's also this article from bit-tech.net:

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/07/14/intel_core_2_duo_processors/1.html

I'm excited to see how the new Macs with the Core 2 Duos perform.  Even more, I'm excited to see how "Woodcrest" is going to perform on the upcoming Mac Pros if they are unveiled at WWDC.  Time to start drooling...


----------



## Mat (Mar 13, 2007)

Well hello.  Thanks to all who took a lil time to help me out on this thread.

I am now a very happy owner of a 20" iMac.  I am using it right now to type this.  It is superb.

Cheers, Mat.


----------

