Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!

Intel based iMac unveiled

Random ChaosRandom Chaos Actually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
Associated Press is reporting that Steve Jobs has just unveiled it.

[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/10/AR2006011000134.html[/url]

No other news about it yet. Even Apple's website doesn't have a press release about it yet.

Comments

  • that's because the keynote ended just now:

    [URL=http://www.apple.com/imac/]apple intel imac[/URL]

    [URL=http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/]apple intel macbook pro[/URL]

    hmmm :alien:
  • Entil'ZhaEntil'Zha I see famous people
    Ahhh i was waiting for this announcement. although the rumor i had heard was that the Intel Mini was coming first, pity, a sub $500 intel mac would have been nice.
  • Can't wait to hear the hands on reviews once they come out.
  • RickRick Sector 14 Studios
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PSI-KILLER [/i]
    [B]Can't wait to hear the hands on reviews once they come out. [/B][/QUOTE]

    MacBook Pro will probably be my next PC.

    Should Run WindowsXP great too :)

    -R.
  • shadow boxershadow boxer The Finger Painter & Master Ranter
    as much as that sounds like heretical alchemy of the first order... it would be grand to run everything I like, than I can run under Mac -OS and still have Windows for the stuff I have to run in that OS...

    hmmmm...

    brings up a plethora of issues tho...

    ...cross platform virii...

    ...loss of Mac identity, drive to be different...

    ...a billion Geeks and Nerds crying out in horror about having one of thier favourite circular arguments destroyed in one fell swoop..:)

    ...games on a Mac actually meaning something...

    ~~~

    to name but a few
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    I hate to say it, but shifting to intel doesn't mean squat for games on the mac. Macs using PowerPC hasn't stopped games being able to be developed for it, the issue is the operating system resources available. Macs have had the same video cards as PCs for a while now and it's just about trivial to recompile a game's code (barring any hand-optimised ASM code, which is rare these days because of the wider variation in processors and general compiler technology) for another processor that is similar in capability to the original target architecture. But games rely heavily on the underlying operating system resources to function. The larger proportion of Windows games rely on DirectX (even if not for graphics, then often for other things such as input and sound), which is deeply emebedded into Windows and simply not available on MacOS. Those that rely on cross-platform libraries such as OpenGL and OpenAL are in a better situation, but will still require a little bit of porting. But this is the same as before, nothing has changed there. So don't expect a flood of games that run under both Windows and MacOS any time soon. The only advantage the shift to intel brings for games is, as SB mentioned, and assuming that the Macs can run Windows, you'll be able to dual boot and run games under Windows then pop back over to MacOS for everything else. While MS could conceivably produce a MacOS version of DirectX, I wouldn't count on that happening.

    This all goes for virii, too. Almost all virii take advantage of flaws in the operating system, not in the hardware.

    Now, the loss of Mac identity could be a problem. :) As a programmer, Macs have lost one of their key attractive features now: they were a different architecture, and thus something different to program for. They probably arn't any more.
  • Entil'ZhaEntil'Zha I see famous people
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Rick [/i]
    [B]MacBook Pro will probably be my next PC.

    Should Run WindowsXP great too :)

    -R. [/B][/QUOTE]

    I think i'm going to pick up an iMac if i cna get someone to buy my old van.

    Course my wife isn't happy "you wont let me spend money on shirts for the kids, but you can buy a $1299 computer?"

    she does have a point... hrm..
  • go build them a nice stylish shirt out of the imac box :D
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Just give them the box! Everyone knows that kids love playing with boxes more than what's inside. :D
  • David of MacDavid of Mac Elite Ranger Ca
    You know, it's sad. Everyone hates the "MacBook Pro" name. And best reason given for it (since there's no longer a PowerPC chip in it, it isn't a "Power" Book) is irrelevant, since all the early Powerbooks lacked PowerPC chips, too. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure that the Powerbook line predates the PowerPC chip as a whole.

    Anywho, I have a feeling that it's going to blow over. "MacBook Pro" is probably just there to differentiate it from the G4 PowerBooks. Once those are gone, the MacBook will probably go back to being a PowerBook. Sort of like how the "iPod Photo" went back to being just plain "iPod" once the whole line had color screens. Once it stops being special, it'll lose the special name.

    Still, it'd be nice if some of those MacBook features made it onto the PowerBook. Especially that magnetic power cord. In fact, just the magnetic power cord would be fine. [i]There's[/i] an idea that took entirely too long to be invented. ;)
  • Random ChaosRandom Chaos Actually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
    Uh, hate to say it, but I'm pretty sure that powerbook doesn't predate the PPC. Every current Mac (until these new Intel ones) uses a PowerPC chip. In fact, the last Mac that didn't was produced in 1995? It was called the Mac Classic, and was a nice grey screen in a very ugly rectangular box that include both mobo and CRT monitor. The G4 and G5 are built on PPC chips.

    I remember my school started switching to PPC based systems in 1994 when they first came out, and by 1998 all but a few tertiary labs (and the English department that still used Apple IIe's!) were entirely PPCs running OS8.

    Mac's have only used two lines of chips until now:
    68000 series from Motorola until ~1994/5 (running through Mac OS-OS6).
    PPC series from 1994-present for OS7-OSX.

    And now, 2006, we get the Intel based Mac's running OSX.

    --RC
  • RickRick Sector 14 Studios
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Entil'Zha [/i]
    [B]I think i'm going to pick up an iMac if i cna get someone to buy my old van.

    Course my wife isn't happy "you wont let me spend money on shirts for the kids, but you can buy a $1299 computer?"

    she does have a point... hrm.. [/B][/QUOTE]

    ...and her point is.....?
  • RickRick Sector 14 Studios
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by David of Mac [/i]
    [B]
    Still, it'd be nice if some of those MacBook features made it onto the PowerBook. Especially that magnetic power cord. In fact, just the magnetic power cord would be fine. [i]There's[/i] an idea that took entirely too long to be invented. ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

    Actually, I hate that power cord....because it means I can't use my iBook cord on the bloody thing.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
    [B]Uh, hate to say it, but I'm pretty sure that powerbook doesn't predate the PPC.[/B][/QUOTE]

    I don't hate to say it, but you're wrong. :D Well, wrong to the point that Apple did have non-PPC powerbooks. The powerbook line has been around since 1991. We used to have one of the early ones no loan from somewhere. They were nice laptops.

    For confirmation, I checked the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerbook]wiki page.[/url] :)
  • David of MacDavid of Mac Elite Ranger Ca
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
    [B]In fact, the last Mac that didn't was produced in 1995? It was called the Mac Classic, and was a nice grey screen in a very ugly rectangular box that include both mobo and CRT monitor. [/B][/QUOTE]

    No, the Mac Classic was produced from '90 to '92. The last of the computers with a 68000 series processor was probably a model of Performa or maybe one of the clones.
  • Mr_BesterMr_Bester Earthforce Officer St Louis MO
    Quadra was the last "Pro" line before the powerpc.
    Dug
  • Random ChaosRandom Chaos Actually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
    You're not supposed to correct me.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Yes we are. :)
  • Mr_BesterMr_Bester Earthforce Officer St Louis MO
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Random Chaos [/i]
    [B]You're not supposed to correct me. [/B][/QUOTE]

    I'm pretty sure Quadras and Performas were out at the same time, one was pro one was home.
    Dug
  • SanfamSanfam I like clocks.
    That they were. Then there were the LCs

    The apple lineup around then was really messy. Models overlapped like crazy, with expansion and "feature inclusiveness" being the differentiating factors. But in the end, the differences were so few that models like the quadras would be overpriced to the point of becoming undesirable. Performas also had the silly problem, for a while, with being gigantic. the all-in-one formfactor in some of the models meant the could not be easily upgraded to better screens, nor the interior bits and pieces tinkered with.

    No idea why I just went on that rant. I think I should go back to Escape Velocity on the Quadra :P
  • Falcon1Falcon1 Elite Ranger
    Indeed Sanfam the latter days of Apple prior to Job's return was just plain chaos. They had too many models, too many configurations and no real strategy. Its one thing I've hated with the pc market, they show you a system which has a stupid long number to represent the configuration and expect joe blogs customer to understand what it means. No sir I'm not sure if I'm interested in buying the "1730nxbultra2400" today thanks very much :D

    For those needing clarification on when specific macs came about go to [url]www.everymac.com[/url]
    All the info you need there.

    Biggles... from reading comments from quite a few game developers most are optomistic that the move to Intel will make it easier to make mac games. Some say it won't, others maybe etc etc. There are lots of grey areas of course none of which I'd have understanding of. I'm sure at this stage the vast majority know what the score is. Heck even Blizzard have WoW running under Rosetta emulation and say its playable. And their next patch will be dual binary format too and reports from the recent Expo say the native Intel version screams. Having the pretty decent Radeon x1600 in the new iMacs is a pretty good move by Apple... makes a change from their usual attitude in sticking a crappy 2yr old non gaming card in their "consumer" macs.
  • MundaneMundane Elite Ranger
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Falcon1 [/i]
    [B]Indeed Sanfam the latter days of Apple prior to Job's return was just plain chaos. They had too many models, too many configurations and no real strategy. Its one thing I've hated with the pc market, they show you a system which has a stupid long number to represent the configuration and expect joe blogs customer to understand what it means. No sir I'm not sure if I'm interested in buying the "1730nxbultra2400" today thanks very much :D

    For those needing clarification on when specific macs came about go to [url]www.everymac.com[/url]
    All the info you need there.

    Biggles... from reading comments from quite a few game developers most are optomistic that the move to Intel will make it easier to make mac games. Some say it won't, others maybe etc etc. There are lots of grey areas of course none of which I'd have understanding of. I'm sure at this stage the vast majority know what the score is. Heck even Blizzard have WoW running under Rosetta emulation and say its playable. And their next patch will be dual binary format too and reports from the recent Expo say the native Intel version screams. Having the pretty decent Radeon x1600 in the new iMacs is a pretty good move by Apple... makes a change from their usual attitude in sticking a crappy 2yr old non gaming card in their "consumer" macs. [/B][/QUOTE]

    well, it will not make more games available on the Mac that easy...Most games depends on DirectX, which I doubt Microsoft will port in the near future to Mac. Only OpenGL games would be simpler to get working on the Mac I suppose.
  • Falcon1Falcon1 Elite Ranger
    Yeah that is where the problem lies. This is where Apple needs to support game development more. They apparently have a large OpenGL dev team now, obviously for working on the OS but also supposedly on games. Making it easier to port will make it more attractive for developers.
  • BigglesBiggles <font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
    Is WoW OpenGL or DirectX based? As I said in my earlier posts, games that use things like OpenGL instead of DirectX are as easy to port as they were before unless they rely on a lot of hand-optimised ASM code.
  • SanfamSanfam I like clocks.
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Falcon1 [/i]
    [B]No sir I'm not sure if I'm interested in buying the "1730nxbultra2400" today thanks very much :D [/B][/QUOTE]

    And "Performa 5200A CD-M/AV2" was better? ;) or perha

    gah. I'm so glad those days are gone.
  • [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Biggles [/i]
    [B]Is WoW OpenGL or DirectX based? As I said in my earlier posts, games that use things like OpenGL instead of DirectX are as easy to port as they were before unless they rely on a lot of hand-optimised ASM code. [/B][/QUOTE]


    Since WoW is available for the Mac, I'm quite certain that it's OpenGL based (DirectX isn't supported in MacOS, I believe).
  • Falcon1Falcon1 Elite Ranger
    Its Open GL based. So that would mean a lot of work for Blizzard to keep both versions on par. But then Bungie did this as well before they went the way of M$.

    Sanfam, well yes those were part of the "bad days" when Apple was run by an idiot who used to run Coca Cola, or was it Pepsi.

    Don't worry, there's no sugar ;)
  • RickRick Sector 14 Studios
    [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Falcon1 [/i]
    [B]Its Open GL based. So that would mean a lot of work for Blizzard to keep both versions on par. But then Bungie did this as well before they went the way of M$.

    Sanfam, well yes those were part of the "bad days" when Apple was run by an idiot who used to run Coca Cola, or was it Pepsi.

    Don't worry, there's no sugar ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

    That was John Sculley, former CEO of PepsiCo.And yes, those were indeed dark days for Apple. I don't fault Sculley, though. He tried to run Apple "like any other normal Fortune 500 business." It's not. Apple, no pun intended, is an iCon ( ;) ) that has as much status in it's image as it has in it's financial portfolio---i.e. it's a legacy in itself, like the Stones, Greatful Dead, Beatles...and if you try to cookie cutter it to compete in an area that doesn't suit that image, you will make it fail.

    Sculley didn't see that.

    Steve Jobs KNOWS that.

    Also, Apple is one of those few companies that needs a magnanimous and charismatic CEO to energize the customer base. Someone totally in touch with the culture the company creates outside it's four walls as well as within them. Sculley tried to improve the internal corporate culture, but never "got" the culture outside the walls of their Cupertino Headquarters.

    Steve Jobs *is* the best man to helm Apple...he loves his job and the rock-star like status it comes with.

    My fear is what will happen when he can no longer serve his post...

    -R.
  • Random ChaosRandom Chaos Actually Carefully-selected Order in disguise
    There is now an Intel based mac mini out.

    --RC
Sign In or Register to comment.