# Intel iMac 20" : First look



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Just arrived. No RAM for sale with it tho so full tests willahve to wait. 512 is hardly enough.

Standard power plug - a very deep chime seems to indicate a much more robust sound system. Apple appears to have something with the sound system tho I have not spent much time with the EyeSight iMacs. 

Beyond that at first glance no different than the previous model. More to come. Stay tuned.
Happy to answer questions - it will be disjointed as we play a bit.

Okay live on the iMac. FEELS quick. Much more like a big tower in feel. I'll see if Windows Bloom can detect it.

Straight forward ITS A MAC. :clap: This is something I heartily approve of. If I didn't know it was Intel inside no one could tell.

Just turned on the iTunes Radio that we usually listen to and both os impressed with depth and clarity tho it does not play LOUD - it's very well defined. Real good impact on the top and middle - we have mAudio near filed reference monitors on the back desk and these hold there own very well 

No software updates available. Stands to reason.

Hmmm no stuffit expander..  And with no email on here....how annoying.  ah you can dl it here - http://www.stuffit.com/mac/expander/download.html - don;t go throough versiontracker.

Feel is VERY quick. Okay 1,000 windows 12 sec. That very good as it's emulated. My 2.3 does 8 sec but 12 seconds up to 10.4.3 was as fast as it got.

For reference try it yourself http://www.vgg.com/rob/WindowsBloom.html

This indicates how responsive the finder is. Since the OS is native it's far faster than the 1k app indicates and just fine in emulation obviously. :clap:

Response on the internet is excellent. This may just end up on my desk with the big CRT as companion. No better way of testing. Anyone want a deal on a 2.3? ( seriously but don't get silly )

Hmmm the Mini DVi port is dual so I can't test it just now I only have Mini to VGA around - that suggests it will drive a 30"


----------



## briMac (Sep 18, 2004)

I read somewhere that the Intel Macbook Pro choked and stuttered when playing an HD trailer whereas the PowerPC version would not. Could you please play an HD trailer (preferably in full screen) and see how she runs. And let us know if any fans kick on because as a 1st Gen iMac G5 owner, I have become used to the whirl of the fan as I play HD content. 

Brian


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sure will do - these are perfect ideas.
Now here's where the rubber meets the road for non Native 
It's not bad in emulation but no pro work. The base line on this test would be a 2.0 G5.
getting 75% of a single G5 in emulation for the CPU is not half bad.
drive of course is not affected.


> *Results	56.40	*
> System Info
> Xbench Version 1.2
> System Version 10.4.4 (8G1165)
> ...


First glance in emulation the iMAc will perform perhaps on par with an earlier G5 iMac or 1.6 tower but remember that IS in emulation.
It will only get better as native apps are released.


----------



## MacDaddy (Jul 16, 2001)

Some other things to test as well:

Export to iPod (Especially from an HD Source if you can)
Multitasking: iTunes running, browser, Photoshop doing a large Gaus. Blur, iChat and maybe a few other things running.
If you happen to have Cleaner 6.5 (Newest version) try a few exports.

Thanks!


----------



## comprehab (May 28, 2005)

What kind of CPU temps are you seeing macdoc....is it running a lot cooler then the G5 iMac?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I doubt I can find anything to test temperature with as it needs an app for the specific sensors. 
••••

Very very quiet and very good sound.

Shanghaied the kid into trying Halo on it - have not got anything really firm but it is certainly playable. Kenz will try to determine where the lag starts.

Photoshop will have to wait a bit. The Pro apps are not installed yet. Once more I'll reiterate that these are not Pro ready at all but consumers are in for a treat that will only get better as native sofware is released.

We will however try some more extensive tests against a G5 dualie on rendering etc. We'll set up an external drive.

First impressions to date very favourable. :clap: Too bad i don't have that video adapter for the second screen 

When the Pro apps go native this will be a very good intermediate graphics station or video edit station.
Shows excellent promise for the MacBook Pro as a very capable Pro box to go.

This was our main goal here to evaluate the MacBook prior to release.

••••

If anyone is nearby with a G5 iMac that wants to volunteer some time - especially an iMac Power user doing video etc we'd be happy to do some shootouts. Sean ???
Around all weekend.

Had our latest sale in 20 years the other night - called at 1 am - picked up a dual G5 with 2 x 21" at 2.30.......crazy music guys  ..so we are around late.

There is SOME advantage to having to test sugar levels at 2.30 am.


----------



## Trevor... (Feb 21, 2003)

Does it have the 915 or 945 chipset?


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> Hmmm no stuffit expander..


I seem to recall reading that new Macs weren't coming with Expander anymore a few months back.



MacDoc said:


> I doubt I can find anything to test temperature with as it needs an app for the specific sensors.


iPulse should to the trick (at least for CPU temp): http://iconfactory.com/ip_home.asp


----------



## Evan Holt (Mar 8, 2002)

The speakers in the Intel iMac are the same as the ones in the previous iSight iMacs.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sound system - K - that answers that - certainly a point of recommendation for the design.

••••
Machine Name:	iMac
Machine Model:	iMac4,1
CPU Type:	Intel Core Duo
Number Of Cores:	2
CPU Speed:	2 GHz
L2 Cache (shared):	2 MB
Memory:	512 MB
Bus Speed:	667 MHz
Boot ROM Version:	IM41.0039.B00
Serial Number:	W8602263U2P
SMC Version:	1.1f2

Not sure how to find the chip set info . Will try the temperature gauge. iTunes ripping was very very quick according to Kid 2.

IPulse is interesting but no temp gauge at all that I can see or it's disabled in this..

I'm going to do a 10.4.4 update on the service drive and try iLife 5 in emulation should give us a good peek at the difference native makes.


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

I'm ready for testing when you are....let me know what you want me to test on my iMac G5 (2.1, 1.5 gigs ram)


----------



## Derrick (Dec 22, 2004)

I read that there are 2 slots for RAM ... are they easily accessed???


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

K have Photoshop 8 - reference photo 56 megs. 
Gaussian blur time set at Radius 4.0 pixels 7 seconds.

Save as highest quality jpeg progressive - same file 35 sec. 

11 sec to scale image up from 600 to 900. 154 meg file gaussian blur 4.0 radius at that size. 23 sec. I'd say not bad given the low ram.

I've signed up for the Quark beta as well.

•••••

TCB - 56 meg photoshop file as above.

••

Derrick haven't looked physically - they are sodimms - at the bottom the manual says. Looks straight forward.••••

Client just trying it - used to a G4 1 ghz with 1 gig RAM. Finds it "fast". Things like smudge much quicker than his G4.

iPhoto import on 280 photos at 16 megs each - less than two minutes ......now that's quick. Native shows there



Just trying Illustrator CS now. This client is just thinking about moving up off his G4 so it's an excellent test run.

Of coures this will be exactly indictative of performance on the Mac Book Pro.
If anyone wants test runs please feel free to come by with typical docs and try it on real work. Ideal if you clone your system to a backup and bring the drive along for a real world test.

10.4.4 only tho.

Client gets the feeling for 3d in Illustrator 11 about the same as his Dual 1.25 G4 at work. That puts it in production territory even in emulation. :clap:

••

Okay it needs RAM especially running multiple apps in Rosetta - when it hits the wall it hits pretty hard but we had a pot of apps open on 512 megs of RAM - not surprising.
The 2 meg ram limit WILL be hit but who knows maybe 2 meg sodimms are in the works


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

Thanks for posting this MacDoc.

I ran the bloom test on my imac G5. See image. 10 secs.


----------



## AppleAuthority (May 21, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Ideal if you clone your system to a backup and bring the drive along for a real world test.
> 
> 10.4.4 only tho.


Love to try that, but I don't think it'll work because I doubt 10.4.4 is entirely universal for PowerPC and Intel. I may be wrong though, considering I heard Target Disk Mode and the normal Startup Manager works.


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

K have Photoshop 8 - reference photo 56 megs. 
Gaussian blur time set at Radius 4.0 pixels 7 seconds.

Save as highest quality jpeg progressive - same file 35 sec. -21 seconds

11 sec to scale image up from 600 to 900. 154 meg file gaussian blur 4.0 radius at that size. 23 sec. I'd say not bad given the low ram.-14 seconds

My iMac 2.1 G5 has 1.5 gigs ram tho...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

AA right you are my 10.4.4 on my Firewire drive is not recognised tho I suspect easy enough to update, I'll try it later. I'm hoping a universal boot drive is feasible.

Just had another long time production client come in and he did a run through on PS and Illustrator.

Now he's on a intermediate G4 and not a fan of X but he felt Photoshop was about the same as his intermediate G4 but more important he woud buy it as his "secondary" machine for current work.

Clearly Rosetta/CS hit the wall pretty quick with light RAM so any thought of heavy work with huge files is not going to be practical until the native apps get released but strategically it's certainly acceptable.

The second monitor out is a very important aspect - the 17" loaded with at least 1.5 gigs of RAM looks to be a killer for those moving up who already have a monitor and are running G4s.

At least equal performance immediately with far more to come at under $2k with a full backup drive.


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

Does the ram have to be matched in the Intel iMacs??

"Memory

The more memory your computer has, the more programs you can run simultaneously, and the better performance you get from your computer. It's especially important to have sufficient memory if you work on large, graphics-intensive files or memory-hungry programs. Increasing the amount of memory is an easy way to improve performance. 

iMac computers contain 667MHz MHz double data rate, synchronous dynamic random-access memory (DDR2-SDRAM), one of the fastest memory technologies available today. All iMac systems include one 512MB SO-DIMM for a total of 512MB main memory. All systems will support up to 2GB of main memory using a maximum of two 1GB SO-DIMMs filling the two accessible memory slots. To maximize memory performance, it is recommended that memory SO-DIMMs be installed in pairs. 

Note: DDR2-SDRAM is closely correlated with your computer's processor. You should purchase PC2-5300 DDR2-SDRAM for iMac. If you don't purchase memory directly from Apple, be sure to check with the third-party manufacturer to verify compatibility before purchase. Refer to your user's manual for a detailed description of the memory used in your computer."


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Not size matched but I'd want to be careful. So far loading up to 2 gigs looks to be in the $400 range - not horrible.

I could use an audio guy with some spare time ( Logic etc ) to do some tryouts. Anyone in the west end want to play???

Someone with a current upper end G4 or G5.


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

So why does Apple recomend installing in pairs?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

You sure about that for Intel??


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

"it is recommended that memory SO-DIMMs be installed in pairs"

That's right from the Apple web site...


http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/W...OI129Rej28NLBxAfCAWJ1GH/3.2.0.8.1.3.13.1.11.0


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

wrong link..this is the one..

http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/W...WJ1GH/8.0.19.7.0.8.3.49.1.0.1.9.0.0.3.1.1.3.0


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Opens the data channel I guess but it's not NECESSARY...just recommended.


----------



## mr.steevo (Jul 22, 2005)

What about the post on this forum saying that the processor is upgradable? Can you see if this is a simple process? for that matter, how hard is it to get into the iMac? 

s.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I don't think you want to know about opening it- our tech is NOT happy.


----------



## planders (Jun 24, 2005)

TCB said:


> "it is recommended that memory SO-DIMMs be installed in pairs"
> 
> That's right from the Apple web site...
> 
> ...


Dual-channel DDR gets the best performance when there are an even number of SODIMMS (or DIMMs in full-size systems) because the channels (or SODIMM, in the case of the iMac) can be accessed in parallel. Works kind of like a striped drive array, and improves memory access efficiency dramatically.

So for instance, a 1 GB configuration made up of a pair of DDR-2 512 MB SODIMMs will outperform a 1 GB system with a single DDR-2 1 GB SODIMM. Possibly by a significant margin, though I've not done my own benchmarks on my DDR-2 PC.

The iMac will work just fine with a single SODIMM (and is sold that way in a couple of configurations), but you won't get the maximum performance with that configuration.


----------



## yatko (Oct 9, 2004)

What brand, model harddrive does it have. Could you report the noise issue while doing some disk extensive tasks (ie defrag, scandisc etc)


----------



## planders (Jun 24, 2005)

mr.steevo said:


> What about the post on this forum saying that the processor is upgradable? Can you see if this is a simple process? for that matter, how hard is it to get into the iMac?
> 
> s.


Not too likely, although from the photos linked elsewhere the Core Duo chip is in a ZIF socket should the mainboard be compatible with later versions of the CPU.

But the opening is probably not worth the trouble. Ah, Steve Jobs and his wacky sealed box concepts.


----------



## yatko (Oct 9, 2004)

mr.steevo said:


> What about the post on this forum saying that the processor is upgradable? Can you see if this is a simple process? for that matter, how hard is it to get into the iMac?
> 
> s.



From this picture it seems that is not soldered in so presumably it is upgradable


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

posted by macdoc


> I'm hoping a universal boot drive is feasible.


read in a mac mail list ( i think macaddict) that there is no universal boot
intel CD/HD will not boot Gx macs and Gx CD/HD will not boot Intel
possibly fixed in 10.5


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ah - two partitions it is....sigh and ANOTHER type of RAM. 
•
Yes paired RAM will help throughput but as with the original G5 real world benefits are sparse. Given the speed fill of the RAM I guess maybe it's worth squeezing the juice out•

Good Q on the drives. Western Digital 250 - we've found the WDs to have a speed and silence advantage over the Seagates lately and it shows here - ZERO drive noise and no hint of a FAN anytime.
I've been using two WDs in my 2.3 DualCore to quiet it down ( successfully) and there is some speed bump tho we are not sure why.
That was the missing piece of the Xbench puzzle for the their baseline 2.0 G5.

Internal burner is MAT****ADVD-R UJ-846 ( Panasonic ugh - damn auto bleeper  ) - yay - I'm a big fan of the company for reliable products and this one is quiet - quieter than say a powerbook or IBook mechanism. The entire chassis seems well damped.
Like the solid sound of Mercedes mechanicals this chassis and internals are quiet and solid.

*So far, count me verrrry impressed.* This does not feel like first gen. If the MacBooks are as solid Apple has a runaway hit on it's hands. That was a brilliant shakedown run doing a G5 version of the chassis but of course that's what gave the game away for me that thes were coming first. 

I agree Macbook sucks, so Intel Powerbooks it is from hence forth 

If I get a Pro taker on my 2.3 I suspect sooner or later one of these is on my desk tho lack of FW 800 sucks for backup and recovery. ( my main machine is also the prime recovery station.

Too bad that card slot is absent here...maybe next round.

•••

*Quick summary.*

Very quiet and stable, good sound systems and as Mac as they come - no sense of anything different under the hood.

Native apps are a treat and this is the epitome of "balance" in machine performance - something we've ragged about. No weak video card performance in this and dual monitor built in .......it's about bloody time.

Rosetta clearly has it's limits tho more to test with bigger RAM. That said it's "acceptable" performance similar to a middle to upper G4.

ANY consumer will love this thing even now, and it'll only get better as time goes on.

Would I bail on a G5 iMac just now??.....not if you are doing anything Pro. That likely goes for those with upper end G4s doing Pro work especially audio...sit tight. Consumers ...anytime you want tho gamers might wait a bit.

Video or graphics....g4 owners might jump now - no real downsides and lots of upsides soon enough tho a video Pro SHOULD go dual G5.

This machine is unlikely to disappoint unless you are doing heavy pro work - then Rosetta simply does not cut it tho it is "acceptable" for light work.

A "bit of everything" Power user like me?? - sweet box with heaps more sugar to come. :clap: Well done Apple.

•••

There WILL be more to come when RAM arrives and I corral some more clients with specialties for test drives.


----------



## Trevor... (Feb 21, 2003)

The Intel version of Mac OS X will boot on a PowerPC mac, atleast version 10.4.3 did.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Here's hoping- will let you know tomorrow.


----------



## Myradon (May 13, 2005)

Thank you very much for the information macDoc, writeups ssuch aas these realy help people in assessing the quality of a product.


----------



## mac_geek (May 14, 2005)

My system config:

iMac G5 2.0ghz (rev.B)
2gb RAM
400 gb HDD

Windows Bloom results: 10 seconds

Although results are really dependent on how many apps are open. 10 seconds is with everything else closed.. with my "usual" number of apps open (iChat, Safari, Mail, aMSN,) results slide to 14 seconds.


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

> My system config:
> 
> iMac G5 2.0ghz (rev.B)
> 2gb RAM
> ...


My 2.1 is more or less the same (posted earlier): 10 secs, then with all my ususal stuff open, including Photoshop, the results vary up to 16 seconds.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> writeups ssuch aas these realy help people in assessing the quality of a product.


Thanks - that's the idea of a community - we happen to have resources and time and comparative machines plus a deep client base to draw from. I'm informed as well by the questions and feedback but the members here have a much wider experience and use spectrum than I can ever hope to master so in that I'm just another user.

The Canadian Mac community adds to my information base enormously. I have to decide how to advise clients PLUS it's fun to put new Macs through their paces....and this one is a sweetheart.

Oddly enough I'm a bit MORE uncertain after the testing so far on what to advise the intermediate Pro users and those moving up to production boxes. The real world CS performance is very marginal but the day to day use is so nice it offsets that aspect more than I thought it would.

Need to assess video and in particular audio and get more RAM into the poor beast.

I do fear the audio crowd will be tail end Charlie - still need a audio tester - especially one that also uses Garageband extensively. The door is open....

Just so you know, people like the owner of OWC and Rob-Art at Barefeats are often in the exchange loop so what you ask about and the results often have a larger world impact than you might think.

The "upgradeable" aspect is one notable potential in that regard.

•••

Now I've got to something about the mouse I'm using for testing - it's firing up my RSI something severe but the machine is such a treat I'm reluctant to go back to the 2.3 just now.


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

Here's a little reality check for all the "Bloom" watchers. I just ran it on my old Wallstreet (G3 300Mhz) with OS9.1. 

9 seconds folks :heybaby: , How bout them apples.


----------



## Applelover (Mar 6, 2005)

Rob said:


> Here's a little reality check for all the "Bloom" watchers. I just ran it on my old Wallstreet (G3 300Mhz) with OS9.1.
> 
> 9 seconds folks :heybaby: , How bout them apples.



*Starts hooting like on a Jerry Springer episode*


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Rob said:


> Here's a little reality check for all the "Bloom" watchers. I just ran it on my old Wallstreet (G3 300Mhz) with OS9.1.
> 
> 9 seconds folks :heybaby: , How bout them apples.


Great. Next time I'm using a 300MHz G3 I'll keep this in mind... I assume that, seeing as it didn't crash during the test, you Got Info and reasigned preferred memory to the application tptptptp 

Mac OS Classic was great in its day, but come on; _IT'S OVER._ You and your sig should get over it.


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

MacDoc said:


> The "upgradeable" aspect is one notable potential in that regard.


I vowed never to buy another all-in-one machine after the eMac I got for general family use /bc of the lack of an upgrade path. Longevity-wise, it just did not make sense to buy something where I could not upgrade the CPU, GPU and monitor. Two out of three ain't bad on the new iMac but the lack of GPU upgradability will still keep me waiting for the a Pro tower.

Once you get a decent amount of RAM in this (and Btw, Apple offers a variety of single and double chip configs on BTO so I don't think that they think the paired chip thing is _that_ important) can you try a bunch of comparisons (b/w this one and a G5 iMac) of benchmarks with tons of apps open and/or multiple user accounts open? I've often thought that that would be where multicore machines would shine but no one ever looks at that.

In my real world situation my eMac (1 gig RAM) is often running with 4 or 5 accounts open at a time (big family, lots of lazy users) and you can definitely feel it in UI responsiveness and game performance compared to a single user signed in. Always thought a multicore machine would help a lot.


----------



## Vandave (Feb 26, 2005)

mycatsnameis said:


> I vowed never to buy another all-in-one machine after the eMac I got for general family use /bc of the lack of an upgrade path. Longevity-wise, it just did not make sense to buy something where I could not upgrade the CPU, GPU and monitor. Two out of three ain't bad on the new iMac but the lack of GPU upgradability will still keep me waiting for the a Pro tower.


I think computers have gotten to a point where faster processors have become less important. It seems like Moore's law isn't keeping up any more. An average Pentium 3 to 5 years ago was a 2.4 Ghz. Moore's law a doubling of power every 18 months. If Moore's law held, should we not be dealing with 5 and 10 Ghz chips right now?

Hard drive space and RAM have consistently gone up as has video card performance.

I think if you are buying a computer for anything but games, then the current crop of iMacs should last a while before the next upgrade becomes really tempting. I don't see the operating systems or programs becoming exponentially more complex.

Or maybe I am stuck in the Bill Gates mentality with 256 kb of RAM being more than anybody could ever want.


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

Vandave said:


> I think computers have gotten to a point where faster processors have become less important. It seems like Moore's law isn't keeping up any more. An average Pentium 3 to 5 years ago was a 2.4 Ghz. Moore's law a doubling of power every 18 months. If Moore's law held, should we not be dealing with 5 and 10 Ghz chips right now?
> 
> Hard drive space and RAM have consistently gone up as has video card performance.
> 
> ...


Well you don't have to be a hard core gamer to see the value in having a 3 year old computer that will not adequately handle a new mainstream game but knowing that for $100-300, without having to replace the entire machine, you can go out and buy a new gaphics card that will allow you to run it. If you've got a machine where you can also replace teh CPU as well then that's a huge potential value compared to buying a replacement machine. 

Also, as I outlined above, there are other scenarios where a machine capable of heavy lifting can be useful for more than just power users/gamers.

Apple would love us to think that an iMac is good enough for today and have us all replace them every two to three years. I love Macs but I don't believe we necessarily have to swallow all teh Kool-Aid.

If I had to bet, I would say that we owe Intel a vote of thanks for teh ZIF socket CPU and the desktop spanning GPU b/c this is an Intel mobo (which it appears has already turned up in other Wintel machines). If it was Apple designing this one (as they have previously done) then marketing would be knifing these options to drive new machine purchases a few years down teh road. Too bad Intel didn't find someway to make the GPU upgradable as well.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well if you are going to do video on the intel iMac you need RAM even in native mode for iMovie. We'll have to wait for video tests until I get RAM. 2 gigs looks like the ticket to get the best out of it. It's "not bad" according to a pro once we cleared the buffers and restarted, One gig minimum for sure.

The processor just idles while the i/o chokes according to the activity monitor 

Gotta feed the beasty.

*iPhoto clearly is a speed demon* and the desktop speed, boot speed and Safari are excellent even with 512 tho they will hit a wall with multple apps and especially multiple Rosetta.

Google Earth is surprisingly smooth given it's Rosetta based.

*iTunes ripping.*

22-23x speed. 10 sec per song in the 4 minute range. How does that compare??
( BTW this client is used to a Dual 1.8 G5 and is a professional video editor/event stager - think Canadian Music awards level) )

*Garageband feedback *- initial reaction was ..Holy bleep !  that's quick.

6 tracks blended very very fast according to him. That's a GOOD indicator for audio guys - few bottlenecks. :clap:

Okay make a DVD - 4.5 minute Movie with a moving menu and sound track to DVD.
Menu render 4 minutes.
Encoding ( much quicker he says ) 4 minutes to encode audio and video

Burning time about 2 minutes....he's comfortable WILL be buying a intel Powerbook


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

iPulse should have a CPU temp reading. I don't actually use iPulse but see this photo for reference:

http://iconfactory.com/graphics/ipulse/ip_info_shot2.jpg

Maybe you need a registered version to access it?


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

mycatsnameis said:


> I vowed never to buy another all-in-one machine after the eMac I got for general family use /bc of the lack of an upgrade path. Longevity-wise, it just did not make sense to buy something where I could not upgrade the CPU, GPU and monitor. Two out of three ain't bad on the new iMac but the lack of GPU upgradability will still keep me waiting for the a Pro tower.


I suppose if you have deep pockets, a Pro tower is your ticket. I initially had the same train of thinking. 

But with towers starting at $2400 and without the monitor, the price difference in savings by going with an iMac could almost allow you an all new iMac three years down the road. 

P.S. Frankly, I'm not sure any of these CPU's will be readily upgradable...just not something Apple would leave themselves vulnerable to loss revenues.


----------



## jdurston (Jan 28, 2005)

satchmo said:


> P.S. Frankly, I'm not sure any of these CPU's will be readily upgradable...just not something Apple would leave themselves vulnerable to loss revenues.


How many Mac users actually upgrade their machines? I'm guessing it is a very small percentage.


----------



## comprehab (May 28, 2005)

jdurston said:


> How many Mac users actually upgrade their machines? I'm guessing it is a very small percentage.


CPU upgrades are VERY common on machines with upgradable CPUS (ie. the G4 towers).


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

It's not by any means a small percentage. Video cards, drives and processors where allowed.

$700 can take a sluggish G4 400 and blow off a single G5 for processing.
People like choice.

BTW take bloom on a small screen with a grain of salt.


----------



## Atroz (Aug 7, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> *iTunes ripping.*
> 
> 22-23x speed. 10 sec per song in the 4 minute range. How does that compare??



My G4 powerbook does it in about 7-12X speed depending on where the song is on the disc. I just did 375 CD's over a week. I could have taken that down a few days.


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> $700 can take a sluggish G4 400 and blow off a single G5 for processing.
> People like choice.


I suppose if you're really strapped budget wise. 
Personally, in that scenario, I'd save $300, sell the G4 for $300 and pick up an iMac G5 or Intel Mac (of course unless you need expansion slots).
Frankly the G4 FSB is too slow.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yeah but no expansion, no os9 , no multiple drives. Not everyone wants a Miata.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

good gawd. How many more years are people going to continue to run OS 9? And why????


----------



## GratuitousApplesauce (Jan 29, 2004)

groovetube said:


> good gawd. How many more years are people going to continue to run OS 9? And why????


Ahh yes, the OS 9 retro-grouches! "I don't want any OS that has a command line, dammit!" 

I remember buying into that a few years ago, before I got some extra money to upgrade my equipment. I still need Classic for some of my old files that I haven't bothered to convert or update. It's always weird now to see that old interface. The word clunky, comes to mind.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Why do you so freely criticise other people's choices as if there is some inherent superiority.

X is only just now getting anywhere near the responsiveness of OS 9. Things like fileshareing were very straight forward,
Redoing a system a piece of cake and took 5 6 minutes to re-install not 60 minutes.

There are thousands of successful operations using OS9 - stable ( now it's not tinkered with).

IN many cases it's only that their clients are using X versions that they are forced to move forward.

X is very good in certain areas and only just getting there in others.

For a graphics company with say 10 production people that's a $50-70,000 bill for software and hardware to do exactly what they can do on modest machines in OS 9.

CHOICE is what it's about. If the OS and modest machine does the job quickly and successfully, why on earth should people switch their work flow just because it's flavour of the day.


----------



## a macklin (Dec 1, 2003)

*Intel iMac 17"*

Hey all

I bought a 17" iMac on saterday and have had some strangness.

When using a real inserment in Garageband the latency can be extream.
Starts out fin and after a few minutes lags to .5-1sec.
In the GB prefs the audio *outputs* are labled (built in mic and built in line in)!

I hope this is a Ram issue, I will be upgrading and will report back


----------



## iMatt (Dec 3, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> I'm going to do a 10.4.4 update on the service drive and try iLife 5 in emulation should give us a good peek at the difference native makes.


I don't know if you've seen this yet, but I think you'll find it interesting:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303120

("Intel-based Macs: Forcing a Universal application to run with Rosetta")


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

MacDoc said:


> Why do you so freely criticise other people's choices as if there is some inherent superiority.
> 
> X is only just now getting anywhere near the responsiveness of OS 9. Things like fileshareing were very straight forward,
> Redoing a system a piece of cake and took 5 6 minutes to re-install not 60 minutes.
> ...



Easy! I'm expressing the fact that it's quite a few years since we've moved into OS X and perhaps it's time to say it's over! I don't know anyone who is still running 9 for anything except one. Sure there'll always be someone who does, but for the love of christ if a company hasn't upgraded yet, they're going to soon because I don't think OS 9 isn't worth investing in anymore. We aren't talking 1 or 2 versions of software back anymore that supports OS 9. Companies I know have first bought software upgrades into X on their current machines, and are planning new machines when they require more power.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Macdoc,

Have you and/or are you willing to try to see if the machine will boot/install windows?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well it certainly won't as it is but we will be trying to get in the program listed elsewhere quickly. iEmulator has announced availability next month.
http://www.iemulator.com/


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Well it certainly won't as it is but we will be trying to get in the program listed elsewhere quickly. iEmulator has announced availability next month.
> http://www.iemulator.com/


There are reports out there that using Windows Media Center Edition or Windows Vista one can install Windows [both support EFI]. I'm talking about a dual boot scenario here and NOT emulation.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Vista may indeed work but how is the formatting to work? - if you have a copy of Vista or something else you think might work drop by and we'll format a fat 32 drive externally. and see if it fires up.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

I'm "obtaining" copies of both MCE and Vista. I live just down the street, I'll be by in a few hours


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Hmmmm that's disturbing - I cannot get the installer to recognize any external boot drive to install on. 

Superduper will not work on this OS. 

I have gotten Minmac to attempt a clone. Did not even get close.
THIS is seriously bad news if externals are not supported 

•••
*Yikes this will really back me off any recommendations at this point in time.*

I've never heard a word about no external boot.


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> I've never heard a word about no external boot.


I had heard the contrary on other forums. Wonder if there is a new "magic key" sequence.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

The installer puts an X through any external device even one formatted from the install DVD.

I'm currently trying a Disc Utility clone.
No luck on that will not create a bootable mirror - shows a "no such file" error 

Other forums.....hands on or speculating??

Maybe I will try USB 2.0

•••


> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:08:56 -0800
> Reply-To: Mac OS X enterprise deployment project
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Sender: Mac OS X enterprise deployment project
> ...


Well a limited answer - just because it Target modes does not mean it can be booted of an external - just means you can use it as a passive Firewire drive BUT it gives us an optional approach to get a clone of the drive.

sigh ohh what tangled webs we weave.......


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

Macdoc,

I have all the media that we need to try the installs, is this a good itme to come over [in about 15-20 mintutes or so]


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Well somebody is lying here

http://www.maconintel.com/



> Accelerate Your Mac published feedback from Apple that a user received in response to questions about certain capabilites of the new Intel-based MacBook Pro and iMac that were on the minds of many, myself included. According to the post, the new machines are indeed capable of the following:
> 
> Boot from external FireWire device
> Boot into Target Mode
> ...


 

Now if you can't install on an external device from the OS how are you to startup from an external 

Stranger and stranger...

*Okay Option key boot up*
Shows the inernal hardrive....DOES NOT SHOW THE INSTALL DVD  !

Target mode is fine for the Intel but *with a white FW logo.* instead of yellow.

Boot off the 2.7 G5 with the Intel in Target mode- EVERYTHING SHOWS UP AS BOOTABLE - including the Intel installer, the internal intel drive. 
Don't know if that is true. I'll try and boot the 2.7 off the Intel.

Just doing a clone with SuperDuper to an external FW drive.

Maybe I need a different format on the external drives........sigh - much to do.......

....tangled.....!!!!!????!!!  ....my head is starting to hurt.

Do some hunting people that are interested. Rob at Barefeats does not have his yet,\....need real reports on production machines.


----------



## mycatsnameis (Mar 3, 2000)

Here's some (potentially) useful commentary on the boot drive issue from MacInTouch today:



> [Scott Naness] This is something I have not seen discussed anywhere this week: Do the new Intel iMacs and MacBook Pro machines have the ability to boot from an external FireWire hard drive like all G4 and G5 Macs (and some G3s)?
> I know Windows can boot from USB 2.0 but not from FireWire, and Macs could boot OS 9 from USB or FireWire and OS X from FireWire only (at least, that is what was supported). Does using an Intel chipset make Mac OS X USB-bootable and remove FireWire-bootability?
> [John Carroll] I called Apple about this. The new MacIntels will boot only from Firewire drives. Other sites have noted that those drives need to be formatted by a MacIntel machine and then will not be able to boot PowerPC machines.
> [Daniel Fazekas]
> ...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I looked at the partitioning and did not see anything like that and was looking specifically but will after this cloning gets done.

So trying to parse this assuming I can locate the new partitioning format.



> Disks using the Apple Partition Map (APM) partition scheme *could be read, but not booted from, on Intel Macs. *


So you can read your data from previously formatted drives but not boot from them.




> Similarly, drives reformatted to use GPT won't boot on PPC Macs, and *will only be readable on Macs running Tiger.*


So you will need Tiger on all Macs you want to be able to mix and match Firewire drives formatted with the new "to be found" standard.

So bootable backup can be achieved once we find an app to do it AND you can retrieve your data from a GPT backup as long as the other machine s running Tiger but you can't boot from it unless it's an Intel Mac.

whew..........


----------



## Brian Scully (Jan 23, 2001)

*Claification Pls*



MacDoc said:


> Hmmmm that's disturbing - I cannot get the installer to recognize any external boot drive to install on.
> 
> Superduper will not work on this OS.
> 
> Mac Doc do you mean that Super Duper will not work under 10.4.4 or that Super Duper will not work under 10.4.4 on a MacIntel processor


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

This is from the osx86project forums

"our computer guy at school has xp running on his new imac he said you need to mac a partition on your imac's drive clone over the freedos install cd then mac another then in osx select the folder that says unknown then it will start free dos from there you put the xp disk in the drive and go to the i386 directory and install it. When you reboot you will be in osx again then you select windows as your startup disk and it completes the install. He says you have to boot osx first then you can run windows after making it your start disc"

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=6700&st=100


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

A further explanation of the same

I'm going to pose a possible translation of this, someone else feel free to correct me:

I know someone with Windows XP installed on their intel core duo iMac.

In order to accomplish this, you must create an unformatted/DOS partition on your hard drive.
(There is most likely an app, like Norton Ghost, that can take a cd image of FreeDOS and clone it to a portion of yourhard drive. Thus creating of the exact format of FreeDOS. Format another section of the drive to be 10+GB for your Windows installation. Format the rest of the drive to be OS X.. or, of course, just have mutiple hard drives and skip this step-- just make sure to clone FreeDOS to one of them)

Now, in OS X's system preferences select the "Unknown" (FreeDOS partition) as the start-up device.

FreeDOS will run, at which point you'll have to navigate to the location of the installer.. presumably located in D: \i386\setup.exe

From here, the installer will run and do some preliminary work- then the machine will reboot into OS X.

Now, select the partition you were installing Windows to (not the cloned FreeDOS partition) and Windows Installer will boot.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

arrrrrrrrrrrrghhghghhghghgghghgghgghgghhggh........sigh..

Okay. THERE IS NO OPTIONAL DRIVE FORMATING ON THE INSTALLER or on te Disc utility it's the same set as any Tiger version offers.
My eyes were NOT deceiving me.

It's the same set 
Mac OS extended (Journaled)
Mac OS extended
Mac OS extended (Case-sensitive Journaled)
Mac OS extended (Case-sensitive )
UNIX File system
MSDOS File system
Free space

But here is the kicker - despite claims to the contrary - cloning the Intel system to a regularly formatted Firewire drive ( Intel in Target - using SuperDuper ) - THE EXTERNAL BOOTS!!!!

Man am I confused.!!


----------



## kevs~just kevs (Mar 21, 2005)

So you were able to boot from the external drive??? this thread is getting to long...


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

What about booting from a USB2 drive? Does that work?


----------



## ender78 (Jan 23, 2005)

I'm really suprised that we're making new ground here. Why the hell has no-one else gotten this stuff straightened out yet. Looks like there are many people that are at this stage. I can't believe that no-one on the net has gotten XP or Vista to run on these dang machines.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Umm Kevs there are people all over the community interested in this -  It's NOT too long.
People are making decisions about their business both buying Macs in the near future and providing solutions for Mac users ) Larry from OWC is watching this along with others as it has a big impact on Firewire drive sales and solutions.

••

Yes I can boot off an external firewire formatted normally but only by cloning from another machine - 










I'm going to try another drive and try the MSDOS formatting and also hooking up through USB 2.0 but at this point the installer provided for the Intel iMac will not install directly to any device I've hooked up. 

*So this makes me think that a fix on SuperDuper gets us all back in business of bootable backups. Somebody rag on him Please.*

Will check on the USB 2.0 factor now.


----------



## TCB (Apr 4, 2003)

Very interested on the USB 2.0 factor...


----------



## jdurston (Jan 28, 2005)

ender78 said:


> I'm really suprised that we're making new ground here. Why the hell has no-one else gotten this stuff straightened out yet. Looks like there are many people that are at this stage. I can't believe that no-one on the net has gotten XP or Vista to run on these dang machines.


Ender78 I think your topic deserves a new thread. I'm very interesting in getting some concrete info on installing windows.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I agree the Windows boot deserves a seperate thread and now I have a full clone on the Intel iMac that is bootable I'm more inclined to try the Windows aspect.

Why there is little activity on the sites? - it's Martin Luther King day in the US. 

••

USB boot - nope.

••
Second screen doesn't work on the standard Powerbook Mini DVi adapter - have to chase a newer one 

•••

next up we try and boot the 2.7 from the iMacIntel cloned drive.

Okay that answers that - Kernel panic with the Unable to find driver for this platform. Wonder if a "universal" is possible. have to think about that.


----------



## jdurston (Jan 28, 2005)

Seems odd that more people aren't talking about booting Windows. It's a HUGE unanswered question to me.


----------



## kevs~just kevs (Mar 21, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> Umm Kevs there are people all over the community interested in this -  It's NOT too long.
> People are making decisions about their business both buying Macs in the near future and providing solutions for Mac users ) Larry from OWC is watching this along with others as it has a big impact on Firewire drive sales and solutions.



Sorry - I didn't mean to say this topic was not of imortance, just that this thread has been a confusing read for me...


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

It's a confusing WRITE for me  - I can only do things as clients with specific skill sets drop by and information comes up - I'll be able to summarize.

I've got a Garageband addict sometime soon and the Windoz tests tonight.

RAM is scarce as the US suppliers are closed for everyone so it's really hard to do more evaluation of Rosetta performance without it.

IF you are an everyday user you have lucked in big time. Jump right in - I'm sure back up will be solved soon.

Pros - sit tight - lots will come out this week. More soon - I have to take a break and actually get some work done.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ah now we can get some real shootouts - have a 2.1 G5 iMac on next desk.

•••

The tests here will also be indicative of performance for the MacBook and I have several clients agonizing over it. 

17" G4 2 gig ram proven in the $2700 range versus no native unproven MacBook. 

THIS might tip some scales tho - wish the slot was in the iMac as well.



> Let's talk about the new ExpressCard/34 slot in the MacBook Pro. The PowerBook has a PC card (CardBus) slot. Companies have created cards for that slot that add such functions as external video, 802.11g (AirPort/WiFi), flash card reading, *FireWire 800 (1394b),* and Serial ATA. The ExpressCard uses a serial data interface rather than the PCI parallel bus interface of CardBus, improving bus speed in data transfer while reducing the number of signals needed in the interface. *Expect third parties to offer ExpressCards with 2Gbits/s of raw throughput that add missing features to the MacBook Pro including FireWire 800 ports and eSATA II ports.*


 :clap:

http://www.barefeats.com/mwsf06.html


----------



## moonsocket (Apr 1, 2002)

Im a bit confused about the Intel iMac ram. Does it take sodimms or regular dimms? Sodimms are so damn expensive!!!


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Sodimms and to fully load the iMac is under $400( we are waiting on RAM pricing )


----------



## mikef (Jun 24, 2003)

$400 for 2GB of SODIMMs is right in line with DDR/DDR2 for a PC.


----------



## jonmon (Feb 15, 2002)

Would you be able to take a picture of the iMac spanned with a 20" cinema display? are the screens at the same height?


----------



## robert (Sep 26, 2002)

Hello David. 
Nice reviewing so far. Could turn into a TV movie or better yet a mini series.
Seriously though, could you elaborate more on the Illustrator results you referred to earlier?
I'm wondering if it is worth it to leave my dual boot G4 1.25 and join the world of intels.
Thanks for the info so far.
Robert


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Ars review is up.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/imac-coreduo.ars


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

My best friend in my whole life is going to NAMM. I have given him a list of exhibitors to try and squeeze some intel (pardon the pun) on their timeline for Universal Binary drivers and apps. The list I gave him was:

Mark of The Unicorn ("Digital Performer" software, midi and audio interface drivers)

Steinberg (Cubase, Nuendo, Virtual Guitarist instrument etc.)

Digidesign (Protools software and their hardware drivers)

Native Instruments -- particularly their software samplers Kontakt and Kompakt

Spectrasonics

FXpansion Audio UK Ltd. (their plugin instrument, called "BFD", which stands for Big Trucking Drums". I kid you not)

M-Audio

And of course to keep his ears pricked for any Logic info beyond what we heard in the Stevenote.

___________________________________

Did I miss any notables?


----------



## Eidetic (Oct 6, 2003)

Macaholic said:


> Native Instruments -- particularly their software samplers Kontakt and Kompakt?


Q4 2006 for those NI App's
thier web site lists the following:
<TABLE class=layout1 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD class=tableHead1 colSpan=2>Preliminary Release Schedule*</TD><!--###tableHead1_PRE### end --></TR><!--###header2Row_PRE### begin --><TR vAlign=bottom><!--###tableHead2_PRE### begin --><TD class=tableHead2>Product:</TD><!--###tableHead2_PRE### end --><!--###tableHead2_PRE### begin --><TD class=tableHead2>Scheduled compatibility: </TD><!--###tableHead2_PRE### end --></TR><!--###header2Row_PRE### end --><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>GUITAR RIG</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>GUITAR COMBOS</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>TRAKTOR DJ Studio</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>KONTAKT</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>ABSYNTH</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>FM7 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>REAKTOR</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>BANDSTAND </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>End of 2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>AKOUSTIK PIANO </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>End of 2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>B4 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>End of 2nd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>PRO-53 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>3rd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>BATTERY </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>End of 3rd Quarter 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>VOKATOR</TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>Until the end of 2006 </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --></TR><TR vAlign=top><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>NI-SPEKTRAL DELAY </TD><!--###bodytext_PRE### end --><!--###bodytext_PRE### begin --><TD class=bodytext>Until the end of 2006</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Expect big delays, and lots of glitches for first 
rev app's.
the transition will take some time.

Digidesign stuff will prob be longer
Ableton Live Q2 or Early Q3 is my guess only


----------



## vacuvox (Sep 5, 2003)

> Did I miss any notables?


Ableton... Waves... Universal Audio...

Universal Audio may be in a bind because their plugins run on a custom PCI card (the UAD-1) and Apple seems to have dumped PCI. I have two of these cards - and thankfully, a G5 tower with regular PCI slots. I wonder if they will go native (use the Mac CPU)? Might actually solve some headaches - and cpu overhead doesn't seem to be as much of a concern these days. Lots of power in a dual G5.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yeah Eric's review was good - basically drew the same conclusions- I exchanged a bit of info as he had not covered off the Firewire mess - he was pretty shocked.
His review had actual shootouts saving me the work tho we will still do some as clients wander in.

He was also frustrated with light RAM - we hope that is solved today. He had to restart frequently as we did as it really hits a wall quickly.

To answer the Illustrator questions and similar.

*IF you are out of 9 entirely and onto X - you have no downside moving out of the G4 you have into a DualCore Intel.*

You WON'T get a lot of speed - maybe none right away on apps like Illustrator or Photoshop but as Eric mentioned.....it's acceptable.
All the clients coming through felt that.

Video.....ugh - not for Pro work until it's native and music guys need to be really careful.

*Graphics guys can jump when ready* - the second monitor out is a sweet feature but a full blown migration to Quark and CS 2 is no cheap adventure.
Performance will be reasonable now and just get better. We've got a couple of clients buying as secondary machines.

Upper end graphics and pros of all sorts are much better served by the G5 duals and DualCores and there is no power advantage tho there is a price advantage.

The real winners will be "on the go pros" with the upcoming MacBooks and all consumers win big time with these.
•••••

Vacu and others inaudio - still need someone to do a run through to see what works and how well or badly.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

vacuvox said:


> Ableton... Waves... Universal Audio...
> 
> Universal Audio may be in a bind because their plugins run on a custom PCI card (the UAD-1) and Apple seems to have dumped PCI. I have two of these cards - and thankfully, a G5 tower with regular PCI slots. I wonder if they will go native (use the Mac CPU)? Might actually solve some headaches - and cpu overhead doesn't seem to be as much of a concern these days. Lots of power in a dual G5.


I'm aiming for a MacBook Pro sometime in the future. Given the form factor and the way I work (very little live recording), FW i/o would be the way to go. What I'd also want are some portable near field reference monitors like those new Genelecs but with an optical input right out of the 'Book. That would be awesome :love2:

Given your requests and Eidetic's post, I'll adjust the laundry list for my buddy accordingly.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Glad to see Kontakt on the near-term horizon. They licence that engine to several sample library manufacturers (Storm Drums, Percussive Adventures and VSL among others IIRC).


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

MacDoc said:


> - the second monitor out is a sweet feature but a full blown migration to Quark and CS 2 is no cheap adventure.


Exactly, I think software costs may be the biggest factor in many smaller graphics shops not going Intel anytime soon. 

Although perhaps Adobe and others will offer a $49 cross-grade like Apple has.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Oh there is no worry about costs to DualBinary- it will be low or it maybe part of CS 3 upgrade.
It's those that are taking the jump to CS just NOW - so $4k plus machine to get to something about the same speed as they are currently using is daunting.

Anyone WITH CS can jump now knowing it will just get better.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Dunno if this has been covered in the thread, here, but macfixit has "intel"  on problems installing OS X on FW drives:

http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20060118072340350

Wonder if a clone onto a FW drive from a Macintel would boot? Might want to reformated the FW drive under OS X/Intel first...?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Umm yes it does - we did that on the First look.
But there is no way to clone directly.


----------



## pismo923 (Dec 21, 2002)

Here's a brief review from Macworld

http://www.macworld.com/2006/01/features/imaclabtest1/index.php


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Gonna bump this = still need an audio guy to test the Intel iMac and we have 2 gigs RAM in the box right now.
It's feeling lonely after all the attention last weekend and it's twin G5 walked out the door first. 

Around most of the weekend.


----------



## thejst (Feb 1, 2005)

MacDoc, One good way to test it is to record say, six-eight tracks in GB of about a minute long, loop it and keep putting reverbs on (does GB do this?) untill the processsor starts to strain. 

It may not be worthwhile testing GB for the iMac's audio performance. Best to wait till Logic hits the streets...
I'm getting mine tomorrow, I can do some tests here and keep you posted if you want- What I'm really concerned about is potential Bottlenecks with the Beta m-audio drivers on the FW buss.


----------



## drehleierguy (Aug 8, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Gonna bump this = still need an audio guy to test the Intel iMac and we have 2 gigs RAM in the box right now.
> It's feeling lonely after all the attention last weekend and it's twin G5 walked out the door first.
> 
> Around most of the weekend.


Hey there MacDoc - 

I'm a Logic user and I'm keen to see the performance, not just in Logic, but with a suite of live-audio processing that I'm working on. I presume that I would have to run it all with the 'patch' for now.

I'd be happy to put it throught the paces this week (email me), or if you get someone to give it a go, I'd love to hear the reports. I may not be the best person for comparisons since I don't have my G5 anymore. I run everything off my 1G TiBook. But I'm currently thinking about rigging up a G5 iMac in to a rackmount or waitng for the new 'book.

Regards.


----------



## Bosco (Apr 29, 2004)

MacDoc said:


> Gonna bump this = still need an audio guy to test the Intel iMac and we have 2 gigs RAM in the box right now.
> .



The "standard" test I've run across is to run Logic Pro with as many Space Designer plugs as possible to test the CPU. 

I'd like to know how many trax of 96k/24 bit and 192k/24 bit audio you can run. It seems like some pros are having problems running enough trax at those rates. I've never seen a solution or if the problem was Logic or the Macs.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

JST
Yeah it's the drivers etc. If you are getting a DualCore then better you test it.
GB we already had a run through with a Pro video guy who also uses GB for quick and dirty and he said it was quick ( he uses a G5 dual 1.8 by comparison ).

It's more I'd like to see if Logic etc is even feasible in Rosetta or if like FCP it just won't work at all.

DG I have G5s out the ying yang for comparison and it would be interesting to see if Logic even runs in Rosetta and how it does against the Powerbook. That would be a very good comparison.

Anytime you want.


----------



## thejst (Feb 1, 2005)

I would imagine that it wont run at all due to the use of kexts 
but I'll let you know 
James


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

MacDoc said:


> It's more I'd like to see if Logic etc is even feasible in Rosetta or if like FCP it just won't work at all.


Apple says that Logic will not run under Rosetta ( http://www.apple.com/rosetta/ )Even if it did, it wouldn't be a fair test of Core Duo's mettle. Thankfully, Apple says Logic and the FCP suite will be UB by say March. Right? That, at least, is a good thing coming very soon.

Also, Steinberg announced at NAMM that their new VST update is UB.

Although CoreAudio will (or is?) UB, I suppose all the myriad of plugins out there will have to go UB or OS X/Intel. What the world might need is a wrapper or third party convertor to OS X/Intel. That would speed things along nicely. Maybe FXpansion will update their convertor?

http://www.fxpansion.com/product-auadapter-main.php



(Hey Bosco! Did you know that George Castanza's bank card password was "bosco"?  )


----------



## Bosco (Apr 29, 2004)

Macaholic said:


> (Hey Bosco! Did you know that George Castanza's bank card password was "bosco"?  )



No I didn't. That's probably cause I'm one of the few people in North America that doesn't like Seinfeld. I recently started watching it because of Kramer. He's funny.

Back on topic... In the past, when Logic ran on both PC's and Macs (5.5 and before), there was a site that compared the number of plugins that each platform could run. They were comparing P4's to G4's and the results were 3 to 1 to Intel. I can't find the site now. It probably changed after Apple dropped PC support.

I'm expecting some good audio benchmarks.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

I remember that site, thought I bookmarked it but cannot find it. The PC hardware was better. Could be different with the G5 now -- and will be different with Intel's next-gen stuff. Interesting times...


----------

