New iMac G5's video card

Still; personally I think it's rather "bad" (in the absence of a better word) to release a personal computer in 2004 that in no way has the ability to handle 3D in the monitors native res.

But in any case, the only people I know who use iMacs are all middle aged women who use it for typing e-mails and doing their bank errands on the internet. Mostly only because they know Mac from their work or think the chassi colors are pretty.
But for that you don't really need a 2000 USD rig, 400 USD would do fine.

It's a niche, but I personally think the niche is a bloody joke.

On the other hand, PC OEMs should really start trying to make better designs to match what apple provides, at lower prices of course as what apple charge you is simply ridiculous.

 

Do You mean something like this : http://www.apple.com/emac/

 

Well, except for it being twice as expensive, yeah.

 

This is a Wintel alternative with a similar approach to the iMac.
Configurable, in fact there is no ready-baked solution, you have to "assemble" a complete system. It's an interesting comparison.
Wintel-iMac

 

What do you mean by "proprietary hardware"? Why is PPC "proprietary" where x86 is not?

What would you like to do with the hardware? How are you prevented from doing it?

 

PPC is not proprietary.

The BIOS however, is. Which is why you can't walk down to the store and buy a replacement motherboard for your G5 in the $200 range - you call Apple and spend $1000.

 

It's very difficult for me to judge books, or computers, by their covers, Guden... Just another sign of the incipient superficiality of the newer generation, even among Mac heads? [Just kidding!--sort of.]

Anyway, I think "the reason" Apple would stick a 5200 in a box is probably the fire-sale prices nVidia is having to tag them with in order to sell the darn things. At least in burying them in iMacs the "DX9" label is something that neither nVidia or Macolytes have to worry over... Your comments about Macheads are fairly spot on, though--as it doesn't matter what it is--if it's in a Mac it's both "better" and "more original" than anything else...

 

AFAIK it's not one bit more "propriatery" than PC-BIOS is. Apple uses OpenFirmware (also used by Sun, IBM and others), and there are free implementation available (Open BIOS). Just because there are very little third-party MoBo's available does not mean that it's "proprietary"

That's not Apple's fault. Compain to MoBo-makers. They are the ones who do not make OpenFirmware-MoBo's.

 

You are dreaming, I think. Let a single mobo maker announce a Mac-compatible motherboard and watch Apple sue them faster than you can say "Steve Jobs"... In fact, if a manufacturer even makes an empty plastic shell case that remotely resembles an iMac the odds are good Apple will sue (Apple did a lot of that a few years ago.) The fact really and truly is that for most products like motherboards and 3d cards if an IHV cannot get a bulk-purchase deal direct from Apple for the inclusion of his products inside a Mac at the time the box is purchased, there is little to no financial incentive for him to make such products. 3dfx, much to its chagrin, discovered that a few years ago before going under when Apple refused to offer their 3d-cards as a purchase option for the Macs it was selling at the time. 3dfx was pretty hot about it, too, from what I recall as Apple had strung them along without giving them a contract and after 3dfx had spent the money and time developing the products Apple double-crossed them and said, "Well, that's swell, but you'll have to sell them independently as retail products." That was that. Supporting the Mac wound up costing 3dfx much more than it was worth, and was just one of a string of poor management decisions that put 3dfx under--3dfx should never have wasted $1 developing for Apple without an iron-clad advance supply contract from Apple, imo. These days the percentage of total computer sales annually for Apple is about half what it was then, so the incentive for IHVs is really just not there in the absence of supply contracts direct from Apple (and for products that can also be sold into the x86 Windows market.)

I realize that many Mac fans imagine that everything's a conspiracy directed at hurting Apple ("It's the mobo maker's fault," etc.), but in truth the only conspiracy is the one foisted by Apple on the consumers of its products... Apple wants to control everything about the Mac market that it possibly can and is not in the least bashful about it, either.

 

Nah, Apple has very good customer service. They often replace parts free of charge. I even heard from a friend of mine that when someone's old iMac broke down, they sent a G5 iMac as replacement, still free of charge.

 

That's very insightful... I'm glad to know that Apple honors its warranties like every other computer maker on earth. Thanks for the tip.

I think what the guy was talking about though is what happens out of warranty (not to mention what happens if you want a choice of something other than what Apple sells in the way of motherboards.) I guarantee that your friend's iMac wasn't out of warranty. Apple over the years has been sued so many times over insufficient warranty coverage that I can't remember how often I've read about it. Please don't insult the intelligence of everyone here by implying that Apple is in the habit of sending free goods to people whose warranties have expired. Were that the case I cannot imagine them being in business today, can you? I can't imagine any system OEM remaining in business with such routine practices as you suggest.

 

Could you point to that review? The Sims 2 site says that the game needs 256MB.

It looks cool, although it looks like the exact approach that Apple has taken, with about the same number of choices but a Radeon 9000, which is inferior to the 5200 Ultra. It even costs about the same as the mid-range iMac.

 

hows that not apple fault? years ago you could buy mac clones, but apple went around a strong armed them all out of business with lawsuits.

 

What makes you think that? How on earth could Apple sue someone who just happens to make hardware that is compatible with their hardware? If that third party stole their stuff, then sure. But they don't have to steal. Reverse-engineering is perfectly OK.

I have seen cases similar to Apple designs, yet Apple hasn't sued.

What does that have to do with Macs being "proprietary"?

So, 3dfx could sell their vid-cards as a separate third-party device? Well, since Apple couldn't stop them from doing that, I guess Macs aren't that "proprietary" after all, eh? Of course Apple can refuse to include them in their machines by default. But that does not make them "proprietary".

Is Dell "proprietary", since they refuse to sell machines with AMD CPU's?

Again, that does not magically turn Mac "proprietary". It's just a question of whether third parties want to sell add-on hardware for Macs. If they choose not to, that does not mean that Macs are "proprietary". If Apple stopped them from doing it,then you could say that they are proprietary. But you can use off-the-shelf RAM, vid-cards (assuming dirvers are available), hard-disks etc. etc. in a Mac, so I fail to see how it's "proprietary".

Heh, I don't own any Apple hardware, I have never owned any, and I have used Macs for about 5 minutes total. So I don't consider myself to be a "Mac fan".

Point is that the MoBo-makers (for example) COULD build the stuff. If they choose not to, that is a different matter altogether.

 

Uh, Apple licenced them to make the clones. Then they realized that it wasn't working, so they bought them out. They can't drive them out of the market with lawsuits since it was Apple who made the deal with them in the first place!

 

Sorry this was in an german gaming magazine. They have an chart with the hardware-requirements for most titles. This chart says that Sims2 will (not?) work with 256MB (marked red in the review), will run sluggish even with 512MB (marked yellow) and with 1024MB it will run fluid (marked green) in the review.

The CPU-requirements are also quite high. Even with an 2GHz CPU (or 2000+) the game will run sluggish and only with an CPU with >2.5GHz (2500+) it will run fluid.


The Spec's on the website seem rather low for me. Maybe with 640x480 the listed requirements are ok.

 

What apple has done with the imac is the same thing they did with the iBook.

The cpu in the new imac is quite powerful and well within spitting difference of the "cheap" powermac, so to protect that sales-base they have to cripple it with the pos graphics.

The truth is that for 99% of the tasks done in regular offices and homes the imac will be entirely adequate and probably highly capable for years to come, and that's exactly what it's built for.

new apple advertising slogan:
"If you want to play DOOM3, buy a PowerMac you cheap git!".

If I could play games on a Mac I'd "switch" like a shot, but I can't, so I'm stuck with my 3800+/6800u, which isn't so bad, but I really wish PCs looked that cool.

 

When will the mac get doom3?
Oh and when it does, all those saps who bought the new imac will be pissed

 

I think it's still "when it's done", but I'd say it won't be too long after this first PC patch comes out.

One of the ID guys, maybe even ToddH, certainly gave the impression in one of his interviews around the time D3PC was launched that both the Mac and Linux versions weren't far behind.

 

What is the best video cards you can stick in a mac?
Even if the GPU and drivers were as good as pc, how's the G5 CPU for doom3?