toggle

AAPL Stock: 423 ( -8.77 )

http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/01/10/apple.unveils.intel.imacs/

Apple unveils Intel iMacs

updated 01:40 pm EST, Tue January 10, 2006

 

Apple unveils Intel iMacs


Apple today debuted its highly-anticipated new iMacs featuring Mac OS X running on the new Intel Core Duo processor, delivering up to twice the speed of their G5 predecessors. Two versions--the 17-inch model running at 1.83Ghz ($1,300) and the 20-inch model running at 2.0Ghz ($1,700)- are already available via . Both models boast 512MB of 667Mhz DDR2 SDRAM--expandable to 2GB--, an 8x SuperDrive with dual-layer support, and a PCI Express-based ATI Radeon X1600 graphics card with 128MB GDDR3 memory. The new Macs ship with a 160GB Serial ATA hard drive running at 7200rpm.

Included features on both models are built-in iSight video camera, built-in Airport Extreme wireless networking and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR, built-in stereo speakers and microphone, infrared Apple Remote, Mighty Mouse, and Apple keyboard, and mini-DVI out (with adapters for DVI, VGA and Composite/S-Video sold separately).

Also found in the new iMacs is iLife '06 with new versions of iPhoto, iMovie HD, iDVD, GarageBand, and iWeb, a new iLife application for creating websites with photos, blogs and Podcasts which can be published on .Mac. All iLife '06 applications are Universal applications that run natively on the new Intel-based Macs. Apple's Front Row comes standard on new iMacs, as well as Photo Booth, iChat AV, Mail, iCal, and Mac OS X Tiger including Safari.


by MacNN Staff

Post tools:

TAGS :

 Apple

Related Articles

Recent Articles

toggle

Comments

  1. automorrow

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 2000

    0
    01/10, 02:39pm | report spam | Reply |

    Benchmarks ..

    I would like to see the benchmarks of the new iMac dual core against a dual PowerPC .. so I know if I should sell mine for the new Intel machines before everybody gets wind of it and loads up eBay...

  1. testudo

    Forum Regular

    Joined: Aug 2001

    0
    01/10, 04:01pm | report spam | Reply |

    Oooh!

    Well, we now see how they got past the "new ibook vs old powerbook" issue. They just went with a whole new stupid name, the Macbook.

    And these computers are going to sell like hot cakes, once people see how much cheaper they are then they used to be, just like everyone predicted.....What do you mean they're the same price with the same specs, just different processors? That doesn't sound like Apple. Charging an arm and a leg for a computer. I thought the intel move was a switch to lower costs!

  1. jasong

    Mac Elite

    Joined: Mar 2000

    0
    01/10, 05:14pm | report spam | Reply |

    who said that?

    Who said the Intel move was a switch to lower costs? I heard Steve said it was to be able to make the products they wanted to make. Please post a link to an Apple spokesperson saying lower costs.

  1. ronjamin

    Baninated

    Joined: May 2002

    0
    01/10, 05:30pm | report spam | Reply |

    Classic Support

    I havn't heard that Classic was or wasn't supported. Unfortunately, some IDIOTS out there are refusing to update their software, which runs on OS9.

    Classic should run on Rosetta. Curious how it performs.

  1. testudo

    Forum Regular

    Joined: Aug 2001

    0
    01/10, 05:30pm | report spam | Reply |

    Re: who said that?

    Who said that? Well, sure, no one at Apple. But it seemed everywhere I was turning on these mac boards, the "Apple is poised to take over the world!" crowd would claim "And once the new intel macs come out, PC users will flock because the computers will be competitively priced" and use the word "cheaper" a lot. I've never believed it myself.

  1. testudo

    Forum Regular

    Joined: Aug 2001

    0
    01/10, 05:36pm | report spam | Reply |

    Re: classic support

    Nope, no classic support. Does it work? Who knows, but I doubt it. But even if it does, its not going to be supported. Apple killed OS 9 years and years ago. They don't care anymore about it, nor anyone who uses software that requires it.

    And, yes, anyone who doesn't go around and update their software must be IDIOTS. They certainly couldn't be, I don't know, out of business, or moved on to other software, or just not care because there's not enough users out there willing to pay an upgrade price to a new OS X version to justify spending the money. Nope. They're just idiots... Of course, you could just blame apple. If they didn't include classic support, there might be more impetus for developers to get their software updated to OS X versions. But if classic support is good enough, who cares?

    Oh, and if they're going to sell new iMacs that are 2-4 times faster then the previous models, wouldn't you think apple could cut the price of the previous models by at least $100?

  1. ender

    Junior Member

    Joined: Mar 1999

    0
    01/10, 06:21pm | report spam | Reply |

    "Cheaper"

    Actually, I laughed every time I read a pundit/journalist state with authority that the move to Intel would mean cheaper Macs. I don't think any Apple rep ever made that claim. And the idiots who did make that claim only proved one thing in my mind...that they didn't have a clue why Macs cost [a little bit] more than PCs. It's not just the CPU (in fact, weren't PPC chips supposed to be cheaper than Intel?). It's the higher build quality (real graphics chips, quality components), extra features (Firewire, Gbit Ethernet), and software extras (iLife) that bump up the cost compared to low-end, low-quality PCs. Every comparison of prices concluded that Macs and PCs cost about the same once you add Firewire, a graphics card, and a few iLife-like apps.

  1. ronjamin

    Baninated

    Joined: May 2002

    0
    01/11, 12:07pm | report spam | Reply |

    Those "Idiots"

    Testudo, of course those, who after how many years still refuse to port to cocoa, or at least carbonize their apps......well, idiots. And those who go out of business are, by default, the biggest idiots of all.

    This is, all however, beside the point.

    Frankly, my experience with companies that cut Mac versions is that they assume that the transition to Windows is a temporary pain-in-the-a** and can be tolerated. I have one user out of 30 in an office that needs a reletively simple OS9/Windows app. They refuse outright to update to OSX. Why????

    Windows versions are easily ported to Mac. I've seen it done time and time again and have participated in this process.

    The problem is ATTITUDE. Most companies who's Mac base represent a small portion fail to see that they are still CUSTOMERS. And remember the old saying "the CUSTOMER is always right"? One company refused to update a program even after "I" offered to fund the conversion. It certianly isn't R&D costs. What gives???

  1. beverson

    Mac Enthusiast

    Joined: Oct 1999

    0
    01/11, 10:03pm | report spam | Reply |

    re: idiots

    Testudo, get a life. I wish Classic weren't still needed. But it is. My school district was supposed to be moving our attendance and scheduling software to something Web-based. They've hit snags, and so we're stuck with old, crappy Classic client software for next year. They've already spent way too much on this conversion to go any other way. I'm not even sure if there is an OS X version of what we use, but they surely won't buy it if it exists. No Classic supports means we won't be buying an Intel Macs through at least the end of the 2006-07 school year. Thankfully there are still PowerPC Macs to be had, but we all know that won't last forever. AND, this is in a district that is trying very hard to phase out Macs completely in favor of Dell boxes and thin clients (Citrix), but some of the teachers are fighting it. Is our IT department full of idiots? Sure. Is it Apple's fault? Nope. Does it sure suck for us, and would continued support of Classic help us try and do our jobs? h*** yes. Oh, but I forgot, you always know best. Idiot indeed.

  1. whelkboy

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: May 2003

    0
    01/12, 07:18am | report spam | Reply |

    Lack of Classic

    The lack of Classic support (and cash!) will prevent me from switching over just now. I've got quite a few apps that I still use and don't have the cash to update… and then there's one or two defunct apps that I do use that aren't available and finding modern day equivalents would cost me yet again.

    So Testudo, it's well rude to call people who can't afford to upgrade everything 'idiots'.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

Logitech FabricSkin Keyboard Folio for iPad

Since the fourth-generation iPad didn't evolve much over its predecessor, the market for iPad accessories has remained somewhat static ...

Huawei Ascend Mate

The Huawei Ascend Mate is a phone that fits the screen-size gap between the 4 to 5-inch smartphone and the seven-inch or more tablet, ...

MaxUpgrades MaxConnect for 2006-2008 Mac Pro

Nobody outside of Cupertino's privileged bunch knows the future of the Mac Pro line for sure. Despite Apple's reluctance to tell us wh ...

toggle

Most Commented

 

Popular News