New iMac disassembled
By Ryan Block 
posted August 8th 2007 10:31PM
posted August 8th 2007 10:31PM
Update: Looks like we took down (Engadgeted?) Kodawarisan's site. Sorry guys! They sent us a mirror to use though, go here.
posted August 8th 2007 10:31PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I've seen a lot of people essentially saying "these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs" or "Macs don't need to be upgradable"
Well -- that's one way to look at it. Another is that people who don't care about tech specs/upgrades could get conned if they make a blind purchase.
For one, I'm pretty certain I couldn't see slots for upgrading the RAM - that's a bit of a concern IMHO.
But much more importantly, from the specs on apple.com (800MHz FSB, 667MHz DDR2 RAM, 2 DIMMS, supporting upto 4GB) I basically gather that the Intel Santa Rosa platform (i.e. laptop platform) is being used in the iMac. i.e. There are only two components in this machine that will deliver better performance than a standard Santa Rosa based laptop -- the Hard Drive and the Graphics Card (which is just ok - not great). Now in all honesty I don't think this is a limiting problem -- OS-X is already quite zippy and will be quite quick on these specs. But the thing that does strike me as odd is Apple's pricing and positioning of the iMac -- performance-wise these are fairly entry-level machines -- yet they start at $1200 and go well past $2000! And again, while thier performance is, fairly entry-level, the ad on Apple's main page today says "You can never be too thin. Or too fast" -- doesn't that count as deceptive marketing since this is clearly not a fast machine?
Speaking of which, now my name is only slightly "gayer" than yours.
Grow up.
I wonder if it would also blend?
Of course, but piece by piece.
Well, with the limitations of current blender technology, I doubt that it would blend. I do believe, however that someday in the future we will develop a blender that is up to the task.
hey he took off the glass! maybe it won't be glossy anymore!
also the LCD is an LG PHILIPS LM201WE3. That seems to be a TN panel in case anybody wondered
Sometimes I find myself reading the comments posted to these globs and inevitably I come away thinking "there goes 10 minutes I'll never get back."
Keep up the good work. Someday I'm sure you'll win if you just keep at it.
Trolling in Engadget comments: it's like pissing in an ocean of piss.
THAT is amazing.
Lots of laptops out there with a 24" screen? No? Well, there's your answer, huh?
[quote]People bitching about expansion need to STFU and realize these systems are for the non-techy who couldn't give less of a shit about tech specs.[/quote]
[quote]CPU power just isn't as much of an issue in the Apple world[/quote]
[quote]PC makers have it all wrong--no need to ship a computer in a large tower with lots of empty space and easy access when the vast majority of people will never even open the thing up![/quote]
PC power is not growig as rapidly as we think it is, after all, after a whole year of new CPUs there's the 1 year old iMac is still comparable to what is sold at stores unless you get in to really expensive CPUs.
The graphics are a point I'd expect Apple to push. They have just 100% switched hardware, that means everyone has very new stuff and they could have pushed the PC industry bar very high. This push of integrated or value graphics is uncalled for. Apple charges more than enough for hardware to cover for better stuff. I don't expect top of the line, I expect well above the curve though. I do expect a $1500 to $2000 machine to be gaming ready when you can build an "ugly" hobbyest machine for half that with better graphics. I'd expect a machine at that price point to have specs to play any game released right now. They have more than enough CPU and RAM... it's like buying a sports car that can't actually go FAST because they put a small engine in it.
At this point the only machine interesting to PC gamers is the MacBook Pro (even the Mac Pro has a wrong and expensive build for gameres), and that only has adaquate graphics not really good. Apple had an opportunity to OWN PC gaming for the next 5 years and totally blew it. I've found macbook equivenalnts at similar price points with at least upgraded Nvidia graphics... it's better than "intel integrated" which NO Apple should have. Hopefully we'll get our mac-mini "cube" or something with real PCI & PCI-E slots. Apple makes the very best small system in the mini (the only deficency is graphics) and cripples it by allowing no additional hardware that embeded designers might really like. Not to mention all the geeks drooling over the OS but not willing to give up sane gaming specs by being totally locked out. That hole makes no sense.
James,
Yes, Apple updates its products every now and then. The difference is that I could use the new iWork'08 suite on a Mac bought 5 years ago and everything would run smoothly and flawless.
Try to do the same with a Windows based machine. Even the new version of the OS (Vista) would not run on it.
Best regards.
Its a nice piece of hardware, well thought out too. To those that think not being upgradeable is a big downer? well with a Mac, its not. You fool yourselves into believing that you are technically gifted if you think that changing a processor or graphic card makes you an "Engineer" it doesn't just a mug who keeps pouring cash into their beige boxes to get an extra couple of frames. Want to get the best gaming experience? get a console! Xbox, play station, etc. By the time you learn that an extra 10-20% improvement in performance actually means F*** all in real use, you'll have spent hundreds of pounds, possibly thousands, as you endlessly upgrade to stay ahead. Yes you'll have a pile of old cards, graphic, sounds, ram modules that are practically worthless, but the corporations that churn out new cards every 6 months will have your cash, and that's all that matters (to them). Apple computers actually have a good second hand value too, just look at ebay.
I suppose tinkering with these things is just part of growing up, cars, PCs etc, then you realise that you need something reliable to actually do something other than tinker.
When you've grown up a bit you'll find other uses for your computer.
I have a mac for everything important and a Shuttle SB75G2 for games.
my two cents
Call me when an Xbox plays Supreme Commander.
Or an iMac can play it at native resolution on that 24" panel.
You've tried too hard to find the other end of the spectrum, and end up sounding like a retard. I play PC games and console games. You might be surprised to find out that a lot of PC games don't make it to the Xbox, and vice versa.
You might also be surprised to learn that for people like me (and trust me, there's millions of us), an iMac represents overpriced, underpowered technology. Yeah, it looks pretty, and yeah, OSX is a pretty good OS. But it's still not worth the money if they can't plug in a GPU that can actually drive the pixels they offer.
You might enjoy playing a blur, because from what I can gather, a lot of people who Boot Camp and try to play games don't know two shits about native resolution. Whatever. But some of us do actually care, and would like to think our hard-earned cash is going towards something tangible rather than something that just looks nice. I like nice things, don't get me wrong, but I like nice things not only because they look good, but because they work good. For my tastes, the iMac just doesn't cut it. Too much marketing, too much RDF and nowhere near enough actual reality.
But cheers, because if there's one thing you can count on Apple fans for, it's for them to be so condescending about other people's purchasing decisions that it could only be purchase anxiety. I refuse to believe a functioning human being can be so blind as to not appreciate the obvious drawbacks in the iMac form factor and design.
For all this, I still think the Macbook Pro is a nice bit of kit. So before you start lol'ing about MS (or whatever) get that I don't give a fuck. I use what works, not what makes me feel good because it cost a lot and impresses my friends.
internal two way speakers with fabric dome tweeters? gotta think whichever designer that was who went the extra mile... nice.
My two cents...
The iMac has not been thought as an upgradable system. If you want something you can upgrade, go for the Mac Pro (I mean... they wrote "pro" for some reason).
The iMac is for the average user that wants a computer that does many multimedia tasking well, without filling a whole room with cables and peripherals.
Add all the peripherals to a PC and the price will skyrocked to one that is actually close to an iMac than what you might think of (and you will still have A LOT of cabling in your room).
Apple upgrades the iMac because the needs of the average person increases, and the possibilities of software increase and NOT, as many PC manufacturers do, just for the sake of having "the fastest machine out there".
I buy an iMac, turn it on.. I can edit movies (made in high definition (that's why they had to increase storage and clock speed), create music, create a blog, edit, store and print all the pictures I take with my new dSLR in RAW format and so on..
I buy a PC, turn it on. First off I have to uninstall tons of crapware, then I'll have to get a solid antivirus. Then I'll have to purchase 5 separate programs to do everything.
Ok, the PC might be X% faster on paper... But is the software I use always going to profit from the architecture, are there going to be huge bottlenecks I am not even aware of?
iMac is more expensive, a LOT more... But scratch beneath the surface and you will see why people buy it. It's easy, and does (well) the most things the most people do (and it does that well).
Some of the PC comments sound so full of envy....
Why is it Mac users tend to think ALL PC users run Windows? And why is it games are the ONLY selling point for a PC?
The thing is though I can get a santa rosa laptop with the same specs for the same price.
With a geforce 8600gt.
The only real difference is that the imac has osx in it. ON a lot of laptops they have dvi ports or hdmi ports for a bigger monitor.
Keep in mind from the base 20 inch model if you want iworks and a 1 year protection plan it raises the price by $250 dollars from its base $1,199
So yes it miight be stylish but features wise and cordless wise its not very different.
The only real difference between this and a santa rosa laptop is OSX.
When was the last time you:
* Removed a main logic board and changed clock speed by unsoldering the clock chip and setting wire traces to an additional clock chip so the bus would run at once speed and the CPU at a faster speed (4.77MHz vs 6MHz).
* Replaced an eight inch single sided floppy 160k, for a double sided, double density 5.25 floppy 360k
* Entered debug mode on a HD controller to change the interleave from 1:3 to 1:1.
* Burned a boot EPROM with DOS 2.0 and watched it boot to a prompt - thing of beauty!
* Spent $5,000 for 10 Megabyte full height hard drive – wondering how in the world to fill it.
* Wrote and compiled a SCSI driver, because the operating system didn't know how to address the controller.
Back in the 86-92 time frame I used to design server hardware for PC clone companies. Those were the fun days of computers. Because of the VLSI chips sets, and secondary systems integration there really isn't anything to “hot rod” on a computer anymore.
These days I purchase a system for a specific purpose. My Linux server is for firewall, DNS, DHCP functions, etc. to guard my network. I purchased an iMAC for video and image work. I did max out the RAM at the time of purchase, so I'm good for the life of the unit. I did recently add one Tera-byte of HD for the video file storage. To say Apples are for noobs or clueless isn't correct.
Some of us really don't want to open the hood any more, that thrill is gone. I want a computer that will function correctly each time I turn it on. I don't want virus riddled, BSOD at critical times, an interface that still has hooks to MS-DOS under the covers and the worst OS / App code bloat I've seen in twenty years in this industry. Nope, I switched – I'm happy without all the headaches.
Exactly!
i agree TheAxMan
apple system are easy to use and simple for the average user, and i know you can do lot of stuff if you know what you are doing but...
1200 buck ? dell offer $800 base computer that will do everything a average want to do and the monitor is included and for 50 buck you get a laser printer
money rule this world peeps, $1200 for a computer that does the minimum might be too much for your average user
and please, some idiot said
"Lots of laptops out there with a 24" screen? No? Well, there's your answer, huh?"
you just jumped to $1800
it has a bigger screen, OK
it has a little faster processor, OK
it has a little bigger hard drive, OK
it has a little better video card, OK
having a little better computer for $600 ??? not OK
but can you move around with your 24" computer? its heavy no?
exemple of average user: my sister, she doesnt play games, she listen to music, check news site, chat, check the weather, watch video on youtube and read fanfiction.net
she has a part time job and she want a computer in her room cause she dont like being disturbed, she know what apple is, she bough a ipod, she know they make white computer with an apple on them and they look cool and i shopped with her for her computer and we went on apple.ca and dell.ca, "ok here you have a $1200 computer ad $800 computer, they do the same thing and they will do everything you want without major difference, which 1 do you want?"
she doesnt have $1200 buck to spend with a part time job, and its summer! she work 35hours/week
some ppl might be thinking i dont like apple, no, i thx apple for my ipod nano, it work well, and the first computer i used was a mac in primary school 12 years ago and it made me love computer, but i really dont like the fact that everything they make cost a lot and dont do much more than other company
they are like Nike, you pay for the name
Too be quite honest, when I really need to upgrade my computer, I build a whole new computer. Rarely does upgrading one or two components really get me that leap in performance that I look for when I decide to upgrade. For instance, I built a P4 2.8ghz computer with 1 gb of good ram and a 9800pro back when those were pretty near top of the line and brand new. A couple years later, when I felt it was getting long in the tooth, Core 2 duo's were just hitting and pcie and ddr2 slots were replacing agp and ddr1 respectively. So basically if I wanted the new technology and the respective performance games, I had to build a new computer from the ground up. It wouldn't have made sense to get the fastest socket 478 processor since for the money, going to socket 775 got me so much more power (that needed less power). So, in the end, not having something easily upgradeable like a laptop or an iMac isn't really that big of a deal. In a couple years, we will have new technology that will be incompatible with the old.
I do wish there was better graphics options for the iMac, but whatever, I am starting to get too busy to play games anyways. I have only ever built my own computers, and it has been fun, but I am starting to get to the point that I would consider something that looks nice and just works. Beyond gaming, the iMac is fine for any normal computer use. As for the newest iMac's styling, I hate the black bezel and glossy screen. If it were just the aluminum face with the normal matte finish of an LCD, I would seriously consider one for my wife or to replace an aging laptop that has only been used as a desktop for the last couple years. I still have a nice Core 2 box that I built that could be upgraded with a better gaming card should I really feel the need to play a game that is exclusive to the PC, but it is looking less and less likely that I will do that. It has also been said before, and it is still true that most enthusiasts who build their own rigs are not the target demographic of Apple. They want mid to upper middle class homes that are looking for style and simplicity. Just because something isn't right for you, doesn't mean that it isn't right for anybody or that it sucks.
Looks weird. I wonder how your gunna upgrade parts without taking it to a "certified" apple store??
Well, honestly, I am a PC fan, I've built around 20 different PC. My own PC is well modded machine, cool and quiet. But, since I bought macbook I don't use my PC at all. I used to play a lot of games, now I play them on Wii:)Anyone bitching here on apple should try to use it to understand what's going on there. It isn't about performance, modding...It is about how easy it is to use. Buy, unpack, turn on and enjoy! I want to use computer and don't want computer to 'use' my time to tweak it and troubleshoot it. And the price? how much is an average 24" display? £450? how much is a XP Pro or Vista? £200? well, take off £650 from the price for 24" Imac and you'll get really close to a simillar IBM-PC box. :)
Blue pcb. It's even stylish on the inside! o_O
Looks much nicer this way. Black bezel and logo on brushed aluminum and glass is so teh icky-poo.
Looks like i just took down the mirrors server too. They might wanna get more bandwidth.
Its still down oh well.
Ok, i'm new to mac and i'm considering buying a new 20"imac for my graphic design major. Lots of my friends use them and so far i didn't hear any complains.
The thing is i like to leave my comp online overnight or even couple of days, and i heard that mac get hot quickly. Is it really matter if i leave my mac on for days? And do i need any additional spec to my new-gonna-be mac to help me do the design fast?
Any help will be appreciated. Regards.