backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 213 comment(s) - last by Kougar.. on May 7 at 3:05 PM
Apple says it is offering the fastest graphics ever in its iMac systems

Most of the product rumors surrounding Apple in 2008 have been related to the expected 3G iPhone this summer. However, some rumors have been circulating over the last few weeks that Apple was updating its line of iMac computers.

Apple confirmed these rumors today when it announced an updated iMac model range. Pricing for the new iMac models starts at the same $1,199 entry level price the new iMac carried when it was introduced in August of 2007. For the same money today, the iMac line gets a batch of new Intel Core 2 Duo processors with even the low-end model getting a 6MB L2 cache and a faster 1066 MHz front side bus.

The first batch of new iMacs had a known issue with their ATI HD series video cards that caused a freeze requiring a reboot acknowledged by Apple in August of 2007. While that bug has been worked out of the iMac, Apple says that it is now offering the fastest graphics card ever available in an iMac -- and it’s not from ATI.

Customers can opt for an NVIDIA 8800 GS graphics card with 512MB of VRAM offering what Apple claims is up to twice the performance on graphics intense applications. NVIDIA graphics are only available on the 24-inch iMac. Other features include AirPort Extreme 802.11n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 2.1+EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, iSight camera and five USB ports including the pair on the keyboard.

The base level 20-inch iMac has a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1GB of RAM, ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics and a 250GB HDD. The system retails for $1,199. Another pre-config 20-inch iMac retails for $1,499 and has a 2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 320GB HDD, Radeon HD 2600 Pro 256MB graphics and 2GB of RAM.

The pre-config 24-inch iMac retails for $1,799 and features a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo processor, 2GB of RAM, HD 2600 Pro graphics and a 320GB HDD. To get 4GB of RAM, the 3.06 GHz CPU, or NVIDIA 8800 GS graphics requires a built-to-order system. A 1TB SATA hard drive is also a built-to-order option. All new models and options are available now.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Have to love the Mac business model
By Reclaimer77 on 4/28/2008 2:47:50 PM , Rating: 5
They make it such a pain to upgrade, with such a short list of expansion cards available, that you end up buying an entire new Mac when you could just change one thing if it were a Pc.

Brilliant.




RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 2:53:04 PM , Rating: 4
Hence why I won't buy one. I want to be able to add or remove any part I choose. I want to be able to have more than one hard drive. My current file server has 5 drives with 2 more 500GB drives sitting on my desk.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Shadowself on 4/28/2008 3:04:33 PM , Rating: 3
The iMac is not intended as a server. To imply that you want it to be one shows you have no idea what Apple's intended customer base for this model is. A file server like you describe would most efficiently be built as a headless server -- which Apple's iMacs are certainly NOT.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 3:07:17 PM , Rating: 5
Yes but my file server with its current config cost less than an iMac. That's my point. I get less for more with a Mac.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By FITCamaro on 4/28/2008 3:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
And its not like my file server is anything special. It's a base install of MCE2005. My video drives are just shared on the network.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By Shadowself on 4/28/2008 3:24:29 PM , Rating: 3
I didn't mean to imply that your file server is anything special or that it isn't. It is simply that Apple's target market for the iMac is anything but as a file server (not the lack of eSATA -- and 800 Mbps 1394b [Firewire] is anything but a server interconnect).


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By omnicronx on 4/28/2008 4:22:55 PM , Rating: 5
So what you are saying is it is Mac's business plan to piggyback on MS, because they do not make a server OS?

Exactly what kind of hardware is this sold on?
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/

I don't see Apple marketing a server Mac, and it has to run on something.

I also find it funny that the first review on the Mac store for this product reads as such:
quote:
DO NOT BUY THIS VERSION! 10.5.2 is not stable!

Here is the one under it
quote:
You can't use the new features in a simple standard set-up.

and this..
quote:
10.5.2 is a huge disappointment. For all the efforts to make set up easier, this product makes it more difficult. Bells and whistles don't trump solid foundational reliability.

Makes me just want to run out and start using Macs as a business OS!


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By aliasfox on 4/28/2008 4:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
Apple actually makes a 1U server called the xServe.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By omnicronx on 4/28/2008 4:55:41 PM , Rating: 3
I am sure they do ;) I was just pointing out that there are probably people using non server Macs for their fileserver needs.


By robinthakur on 4/29/2008 12:09:35 PM , Rating: 2
Yer I'm sure lots of people look at an iMac and just think "Server". Come on, its a lifestyle ccomputer system, its painfully obvious looking at it! People buy them because they want a slick computer which looks pretty in one box, if you can't understand that then do us all a favour and register your displeasure silently by not buying one.

At the end of the day, most peopcle don't leave their computers on 24/7 these days, they put them to sleep, and this power profile doesn't exactly lend itself to a server role. To paraphrase Jurassic Park, "Just because you could, you didn't stop to think if you should..." JP ran on Unix, nuff said...


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/28/2008 8:01:02 PM , Rating: 4
As a Mac user, I can confirm that 10.5.2 sucks. It's horrible, upgraded my Macbook (2.16 GHz C2D w/ 2GB ram) to Leopard and as soon as 10.5.2 - it was even more trouble than Leopard originally was for me. I was getting Kernel panics at least twice a day, and had to hold the power button down for 7 seconds to get it to shut down so I could restart it. Software became buggy, start up took forever, etc...

My Leopard experience was so BAD, I completely have wrote off getting a new Mac as a desktop. I have since formatted my Macbook, and reinstalled it with Tiger (10.4.11).

Anyways, you can get a much more powerful system significantly cheaper on the Windows side. Considering a HP d4999t w/ the Intel Core 2 Duo Q9550, 4GB ram, nVidia GeForce 8800GT, Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer video card, Vista 64-bit, wireless card, 15-in-1 memory card reader, 750GB Hard drive, etc... for ~ $1470. That's a hell of a lot better than an iMac at that price. Add another $180, and I can upgrade it to 8GB of ram. Total is $1650. That would definitely hand Photoshop and Video editing far better than a top of the line iMac for $2400+.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:09:59 PM , Rating: 2
my experience with leopard was similarly horrible. Although I don't have a rant, it was buggy, incompatible, and they installed coverflow on it.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/28/2008 8:29:46 PM , Rating: 3
I work on a Mac all day long. I need stability, and that's why I loved my Macbook. I sacrificed some performance for rock solid stability by using the Macbook as my primary work/personal computer. When I had upgraded this computer to Leopard - I lost all the stability and it was much slower.

There were some nice bells and whistles, but I needed stability and Leopard was deeply disappointing, and exceptionally disappointing. Once Apple released the 10.5.2 update, it got far far worse - and my Macbook became significantly buggy and unstable.

I am back on Tiger (version 10.4.11) and it's all roses again. Only problem is, I am stuck. IF I want a faster machine - I have no options in terms of getting a better and faster Mac, because I would be forced to get one with Leopard.

So, I feel like the only choice I have is to go with Vista 64-bit, which I have tested extensively at work. I have tested 32-bit and 64-bit Vista Business on the same machine, and 64-bit Vista was faster and more stable. I've also worked with a computer lab manager, who deployed a few 64-bit Vista machines quietly in his Vista lab, and everyone who has used those machines preferred them because they were far quicker and more stable than the 32-bit version. This was the same thing I found on my Dell at work, that the 64-bit was faster and more stable.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:50:05 PM , Rating: 2
I use 32-bit on my laptop, and although it seems fine, I've been considering upgrading. Thanks for the review. :)


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By DEredita on 4/29/2008 12:44:50 AM , Rating: 2
Make sure you machine can support 64-bit Vista, make sure your machine has drivers for it, make sure the software you use can run, and make sure if you have any printers or devices - that there are drivers available.


By pxavierperez on 4/29/2008 7:02:03 AM , Rating: 3
Is there anything else i should make sure of?
Or should I get just get a Mac.
:D


By larson0699 on 5/2/2008 4:33:52 PM , Rating: 2
If anything sounded like cheap shots at Windows from a Mac fanboy, that did.

The fact is that your software will run on Windows as long as you're NOT running 128 megs of single-channel PC66 and trying to enhance the compatibility of your 16-bit apps.

I don't know where you come off with Vista x64 being faster and more stable, but (again, back to school) most of your apps are written in 32-bit, having to be sandboxed in a 64-bit OS becoming noticeably SLOWER; there are endless threads worldwide about--to put it nicely--substellar x64 driver support (mainly in Vista).

The point is that Windows et al. isn't the PC scare. Vista and especially its 64-bit half are. You probably don't even NEED x64 yet, just go on with that warm feeling like your apps are running "twice as fast".

If stability is priority, then you have overpaid and underachieved with the Mac. Since you've wasted enough money already, but your needs still linger, get Linux. The beauty is that it'll run on anything and run forever, if you don't end up porting all your Mac apps. AND x64 is available.


RE: Have to love the Mac business model
By ToeCutter on 4/29/2008 7:08:16 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
When I had upgraded this computer to Leopard - I lost all the stability and it was much slower.


It's not Leopard!

It's the crap applications you're running! Apple can't control every app written for Leopard and there's tons of sloppy code EVERYWHERE !

(Whoops! I've been reading WAY too many Vista posts!) <