iPodDailyNews - Where iPod news comes first

I wonder if I could use new IMac as a monitor for my windows box. Does anyone know if this is an option?

This is a question for anyone who wants to answer. I'm not very keen on how video cards work and how it helps the computer. I'm thinking of getting the new iMac G5, but most complains from people seem to be that the video card that comes with the new iMac is not the "top of the line." I use my mac for editing photos in Photoshop, manipulating graphics, laying out in Quark, illustraion in Illustrator, sometimes, i even do minor audio and video manipulation. i sometimes have a few images simultaneously open in photoshop. will this affect my use of the computer if i would get the new iMac? i apreciate any heads up on this.

Eric24601 -

The complaints about the video card are primarly from whiney gaming types. The GeForce 2MX that came in the last generation of iMacs was more than enough for Photoshop type work because that is all two dimensional. All of the video cards these days focus on 3D feature sets because 2D has been 'done' for years. Actually most 3D cards these days limit 2D somewhat.

So the Ultra 5200MX should be fine for photoshop work, quark, and illustrator.

Please give it up when it comes to the "headless Mac" because folks, it ain't coming back.

And didn't Phil say something like "we like the all-in-one" right at the beginning of the iMac G5 announcement during the keynote?

<rant>
Why do people keep hammering that topic to death? Is there really anything new to add to the argument? Everyone, Apple included, has gotten the message by now. Enough about it already.
</rant>

shouldn't a 20" iMac have a significantly better graphics board than the 12" PowerBook?

[If it were a board there'd be more hope for upgrading it ]
You'd think so. And the 15"/17" PowerBooks use the ATI Mobility Radeon 9700. Seems Apple is intent on keeping the iBook/iMac/eMac GPU about one generation behind what's in the PowerBook/Power Mac, with overlap at their respective high and low ends.

At least the iMac G5 is more user-serviceable than previous generations of AIOs. Having access to the hard and optical drives is nice. Plus a 1GB DIMM (~$200 @ transintl.com) is cheaper than a 1GB SO-DIMM for the G4 iMac.

In Expo photos like this I think the G5 iMac looks cooler than when it's alone... more svelt than the G4 iMac.

sjk -- no, Apple has not gottne the message by now. This proves that they can get a G5 cube out the door for $600-$1000. Drop it to a G4 and it could be even cheaper (and smaller). Make it 9" by 9" like Powerlogix's Powercube instead of 8" by 8". Make the RAM, HD, and GPU user-upgradeable. Maybe even include a spare PCI slot for something like an AlchemyTV DVR card.

Fact is, Windows users are not used to AIO designs. It smacks of inflexibility, even if it doesn't truly restrict flexibility. The eMac is a great computer, but I don't think it's winning over any switchers. The new iMac is fabulous, but some people aren't ready for the higher price and AIO design (which go hand in hand, btw). A cheap cube and a moderately priced iMac together would be a dynamite combination to get people to switch from Dells and Gateways.

Don't feed us the line about Apple making good computers rather than cheap ones. The new iMac proves that they can manufacture an inexpensive headless Mac of the same quality as the fancy Powermacs. Remember that BMW, everyone's favorite Apple comparison, is doing well selling Mini Coopers.

What next in the "iPod lookalike" line? A tablet iBook? Not a bad idea actually. It is a student computer and students take notes. As long as they can pull it of better than the tablet PC pieces of crap, they will probably do well. Computers, including laptops have come a long way. They've gotten thinner and lighter over the years. Man, with the weight and thickness of some of the PC's worth mentioning for power and functionality, those P.C.'s (Pieces of Crap) must have weighed like 50 pounds and been a foot thick! The PC's that come anywhere close to the Ti/AlumiBook are like expensive bricks. Oh, well. Keep up the good work, Apple.

milo -- you and others can keep parroting that same basic "headless Mac" argument hoping it'll influence Apple but it's really not bringing anything new to the party

It's not that I disagree with the idea but many will admit it's long since gotten to the point of reappearing over and over again like some monotonous infomercial pitch.

sjk:
<rant>
Why do people keep hammering that topic to death? Is there really anything new to add to the argument? Everyone, Apple included, has gotten the message by now. Enough about it already.
</rant>



Uhm.. people who think the monitor is going to last forever.. *sigh.. the computer will be 'less than top of the line' in 3 years (as is the norm with any technology)... so you'll want to buy a new computer anyway.. sounds lame at first, but when you consider how prices come down it makes sense...

again:the monitor will not last forever... 4-6yrs.. by which point your computer is so out of date you can cheaply get a better one with a monitor included...

is there anyway to recycle your iMac when it's toast (current and future versions)... I don't know the first thing about recycling computers.. :(

sjk, that Apple hasn't responded in no way means it's a bad idea, and I'll happily mention it when appropriate -- as when poeple complain about the iMac being too expensive. I and others discuss ad nauseam the battery problems with our 12" powerbooks; Apple refuses to suggest ways we might solve the problem, or even acknowledge it. But it doesn't mean my battery isn't messed up. They reacted the same way to iBook logic board problem, until one day they woke up and decided to do something about it. The same could happen here.

Fact is, the market has changed since 1998. An AIO design doesn't work at the low end. The low end is no longer $1300 or even $800. Having a monitor built in to a low end machine is like having bluetooth built in -- it adds cost for a feature many customers don't want or need. Worse: a display is the biggest part of such a computer, so elegant design must be sacrificed to accommodate it.

I'm not adding a notch t the death knell counter here. I know Apple is making money hand over fist with its current strategy. I just think that with a (horizontal) pizza box they could make more. And selfishly, since I could really use such a product, I clamor for it. So suck it up, I'm not gonna stop clamoring.

Duh, ad nauseum.

Mike's got a point..

The camera manufacturers were discussing exactly this argument in the early 1990's, whats more important to the customer, better features or longevity.
They chose the former, compare the build quality and general ruggedness between 1990 and 1993. You can see that cameras shot up in spec and features, and dropped in longevity almost to the point where they are disposible now. (Can you get a canon eos repaired..??)

The same applied to Printers. The average printer life is what? 18 months? 2 yrs? thats awful until you bear in mind you only paid $85 for it.

Will laptops go the same way?? Say $600 on a new mac laptop every 18 months-2 yrs. That keeps you up with the technology curve, and good regular revenues for apple.

Tugger

Booooooooooooooooooo. Ewwww. Booooooooooooooo. Looks like a piece of a crap to me. Would prefer my customized PC any day! Keep your Mac, I need a real computer. What am I going to do with that overpriced calculator anyway?

I am sitting here being so impressed with the new iMac G5! I have had 2 HP's which have served me well, but I am strongly leaning to this new Apple.
The fact that it is all built into a 2" deep screen is very impressive...and it seems as though all of you Apple users have loved your machines. I am tired of Windows and all it entails all of the time. What format is used for e-mail? Convince me more that this is the WAY TO GO!

Tony,
Hrmm...a user built computer a real computer? Does it actually compute something, or does it sit there constantly spewing illegal instruction errors and get infected by viruses, and gets upset over spyware and worms? No thank you. I'd prefer a Mac any day over your "real" computer.

funnybones.. email format!? gah! you're kidding right..??

macs are fully compatible with the internet and email and absolutely everything.. just not compatible with viruses or any of that stuff..

#1 - *drool* Nice system. I want one!!! But my 18 month old 17" iMac G4/1GHz still has a LOT of life left, so there's no reason for me to rush out and buy one. (In fact, my 12" iBook G3/800MHz still runs Panther fairly well!) I'll wait and see how well my iMac runs Tiger before thinking about replacing it.

#2 - Graphics suck, blah, blah, blah...Hmm, well, the iMac is an all-in-one system. Because of it's cramped internal space you think just maybe the reason they don't allow you to replace the built-in graphics chip set is due to the fact that there's not enough room? Or maybe they don't want brain dead gamers frying their computers because they installed a super fast, super hot graphics card?

#3 Hello. This is an iMac. These are it's features. This is what it comes with. Don't like it? Find another computer that fits your more specialized needs.

I was a pc user until this, apple's plan works. Windows has to many problems, adware, spyware, viruses. Im now a mAc0r with my iMac G5 never going back to windows

How is this the thinnest desktop computer? I have a desktop computer with the CPU and all the connections in the keyboard. Putting this on a keyboard tray and a flatpanel (LCD) monitor on the wall there is nothing on the desktop or floor. Hence its name Zero Desktop PC from Cybernet Manufacturing. The starting price is half that of this new Mac. We have three Macs, original iMac, clamshell iBook and iMac G4 at home, so I am not anti-mac. None is thinner than thinnest, ergo the comment.

Looking at the QuickTime VR of that thing, it's obvious the monitor ALONE is thicker than the iMac! The keyboard/cpu assemply looks like an old Commodore 64 or something. Get real.