Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Apple Unveils 24" iMac 487

beren12 writes "Apple today announced a new model in the lineup of iMacs, a new 24" HD model. It comes with a 1920x1200 LCD, 2.16GHz or 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor, 1-3 GB Memory, 250 or 500GB SATA Drive, NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT or 7600GT with 128MB GDDR3 Video card. Also posted is a new lower end iMac, which looks very similar to the education iMac. Also available is a small speed boost to the Mini line, which now sports a Core Duo 1.83GHz Processor. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Unveils 24" iMac

Comments Filter:
  • by cp.tar ( 871488 ) <> on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:11AM (#16051870) Journal
    Oooooooh, shiny!
  • No Link? (Score:5, Informative)

    by neonprimetime ( 528653 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:12AM (#16051879)
    At least provide a link to the iMac page []
  • by Alterion ( 925335 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:13AM (#16051882)
    well hopefully this will trigger an update for an apple 24" monitor as well to compete with the dell and Benq ones- as 24" has a slightly lower pixel density we could almost hope for a sane price on that one too- or maybe not
  • Wrong implication (Score:4, Informative)

    by ZachPruckowski ( 918562 ) <> on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:13AM (#16051887)
    The 7600GT has 256 MB of RAM. The summary implies it's still 128.
  • iPod (Score:4, Funny)

    by dk-software-engineer ( 980441 ) * on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:14AM (#16051895)
    How about a 24" Video iPod? That would be mad...
  • Give me a 24 inch display with a seperate tower at those specs and I would go for it in a minute, but an AIO at that level is sort of nuts; if your computer dies, you loose your huge canvas too, and if the display dies, you loose your HDD and data when sending it back fot a replacment.

    What is so bad about the idea of a tower for ~$12oo with theose specs and the option of adding a cinema display?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Recurve Boy ( 936129 )
      A tower would still take up more than 5 times the space of a 24" iMac. Say it with me: Size matters. Size matters. Size matters. Of course there are always trade offs.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by the phantom ( 107624 ) *
        Size matters. Size matters. Developers matters. Developers matters. Developers matter. Developers matter. Developers. Developers. Developers. Developers! Developers! Developers! DEVELOPERS!

        Stupid lameness filter...
    • by 955301 ( 209856 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:23AM (#16052004) Journal
      There's a video out as well, so you can make due for a bit if the display goes out. And personally I'd just pull the drive before sending it back - or better yet, encrypt it on the volume and rely on your backups.

      You are keeping backups, aren't you?
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) *
        And personally I'd just pull the drive before sending it back

        Except that you can't, because pulling the drive would void your warranty (it's not user-servicable). You can pull your drive or you can send it in for warranty repair, but not both.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Total_Wimp ( 564548 )

        There's a video out as well, so you can make due for a bit if the display goes out. And personally I'd just pull the drive before sending it back - or better yet, encrypt it on the volume and rely on your backups.

        But that doesn't really answer the implied question of the overall value of seperate components. In three to four years when you want to buy a faster computer, you're going to need to buy a new monitor as well, even though monitors tend to have a much longer usable life.

        On the other hand, if you d

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by 955301 ( 209856 )
          I think that this combined unit is more versatile and a better idea than even your assertions suggest. For example, there are no cords between the cpu and the monitor, there is a smaller footprint for the system. Buying a newer system leaves you with an "old" system. Do you throw it in the landfill? Less likely if it has a monitor built in and you can resell it instead. It does after all have value.

          As for having a large box to stow, the beige cases fall victim to that as well and I've never heard anyone com
    • by Shawn Parr ( 712602 ) <parr@shawnpa r r .com> on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:35AM (#16052130) Homepage Journal

      When the iMacs where still somewhat new, there was a vocal crowd yelling "we want an iMac without a monitor!"

      There were a lot of people saying it, and they were all very vocal. "We're not buying until we can get a headless iMac with a G4" they said

      So Apple made one, and it was called the Cube.

      And all the people who said they would buy a machine if this was available (the specs were pretty much exactly what was asked for), suddenly clammed up, and slowly backed out the door with a myriad excuses why they suddenly had something else to do.

      I think Apple learned an important lesson that day. The most vocal group of people demanding a specific product and promising to buy it will usually not actually buy what they say they want. They are just looking to get something they can't have, and when they can have it, they don't want it anymore.

      • by xjerky ( 128399 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:43AM (#16052190)
        Um, I think that had more to do with the ridiculous price of the cube.

        The mini is today's version of a headless iMac, and it's priced more reasonably. It's also selling better, I'm sure.
        • Indeed. Now all Apple needs is something exactly between the Mini and the Mac Pro, in terms of features, price, and size.

        • by mitchell_pgh ( 536538 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @12:14PM (#16053041)
          The problem is, the Mac mini isn't a headless iMac.

          - uses a smaller laptop hard drive (a bit slower than the iMac)
          - has no video card
          - "only" has a core duo (not a core 2 duo) [that may change]
          - doesn't include a keyboard or mouse
          - 2GB max of ram (ok, I'm stretching it a bit here)
          That being said, it's clear that the Mac mini is a subset of the iMac beyond simply not having a screen.
      • by Otter ( 3800 )
        The problem with the Cube, as I recall, was that it was priced at a point that just made no sense. For the same money (more or less, so idiot savants with a perfect recollection of Apple pricing please don't nitpick unless I'm way off), you could buy a tower with significantly better specs. The Cube was cool looking, but not that cool.

        Anyway, Forbes had a story on 50 Cent a few weeks ago where they talked about how he's working out a branding deal with Apple for a new low-priced model. (I submitted the stor

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Yvan256 ( 722131 )
        I don't see how that can be modded "Interesting". Sure, Apple once went that way. But they priced it so high that people could've bought PowerMacs instead (or almost).

        We now have the Mac mini (which is good but can't be upgraded) and the Mac Pro (which is the equivalent, upgradability-wise, to a 300$PC).

        What we're asking for is iMac specs in a low-cost tower. Literrally. Take the boards inside the iMac, make a new case for them, bam, you're done.
        • by topham ( 32406 )

          That would be an iDell.

      • The mistake apple made with the cube was price. A minimally expandable cube was the same price as a fully expandable powermac.
      • by gfxguy ( 98788 )
        The problem with (and always will be with all-in-ones) is that it's got all the limitations of the notebook (including the heavy pricetag), with none of the benefits.

        If you're going to spend that kind of cash, might as well get a notebook.

        The mini, on the other hand, IS great.
      • by mitchell_pgh ( 536538 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @11:09AM (#16052436)
        The cube wasn't an iMac without the monitor. It was a PowerMac packed into a very small case.

        Why it failed:

        Price... period.
        You could buy a cheaper and faster PowerMac for $200 less (with expansion bays [still important in 2000], space for a 2nd [or third] HD, space for a full sized video cad, etc. etc.) Benchmarks showed that the singe 400MHz PowerMac was faster than the 450MHz cube [Macworld]

        In my humble opinion, the cube would have sold much better if it had been $1199 ($100 less than the iMac of the time) while having the same feature set and a nice mini-tower type enclosure. It was VERY difficult to justify the price of the Mini in contrast to the PowerMac.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Absolutely not!

        The Cube was released at a price close to Apple's PowerMac range. The Cube certainly wasn't a "Headless iMac" in terms of price, it was actually more expensive than most iMacs. At that time, both the PowerMac and the Cube were priced in the mid $1,000s.

        The problem with the Cube is that it emphatically wasn't what was being asked for. People wanted a low cost, expandable, headless Mac, not a high cost, stylish headless Mac with poor expandability. Apple currently doesn't cater to that mar

  • Makes you wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RetlawST ( 997563 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:16AM (#16051927)
    I ordered a 17" MBP about 10 days ago, and the ship date was going to be on the 13th despite being "in stock and ready to ship."

    Perhaps a MacBook Pro upgrade next week, as well?
    • Ditto for me. About a week an a half ago, I ordered my MacBook 1.83GHz. The ship date is pegged as shipping out on the 11th and arriving on the 18th. I'd be a happy camper if that meant a speed bump!
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Niebieski ( 781986 )
      Perhaps a MacBook Pro upgrade next week, as well?

      Well I ordered an iMac 10 days ago and the shipping date slipped to September 12, and for a reason. It got upgraded to the Core 2 Duo 2.16GHz, all for $200 less. Sweet.
  • College Kids (Score:4, Insightful)

    by NilObject ( 522433 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:17AM (#16051929)
    The 17" iMac with 1.83GHz Core Duo processor comes in at $899. That's some seriously lucrative stuff for incoming college freshmen!
    • Just as long as I can get the 17" iMac with at 1 GB of RAM, I'll take it! :) Apple has finally gotten very nice machines that no longer burn a hole in your wallet.
  • FW 800 included (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jackjeff ( 955699 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:17AM (#16051932)
    And it has FireWire-800 too (in additon to FireWire-400).

    I'm not sure I understand Apple policy with FW800. Used to be there on the PowerBook... removed in the MacBook Pro (except the 17"). And it's never been in an iMac.

    I like FW-800 but odds are E-SATA would be more useful in future. I have seen profesionnal cameras using the FW-800 interface (Allied technologies), but never heard about mass market ones...
    • Re:FW 800 included (Score:5, Informative)

      by Rocketship Underpant ( 804162 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:25AM (#16052019)
      Apparently they weren't able to satisfactorily cram the FW800 controller into the 15" Macbook in time for launch. Someone at Apple has said this, either officially or semi-officially. I'm hoping the next Macbook revision will include it.
  • by 10Ghz ( 453478 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:17AM (#16051934)
    1.66Ghz Core Duo in the low-end, 1.83Ghz Core Duo in the hi-end. No pricedrop though :(.
    • by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:55AM (#16052304) Homepage Journal
      1.66Ghz Core Duo in the low-end, 1.83Ghz Core Duo in the hi-end. No pricedrop though :(.

      If you look at look at Apple's recent history, then you will see more often than not feature upgrades with maintained prices. Apple usually only drops prices on products they want to clear from the inventory. If you want a cheaper version of the Mac mini, they buying a recent one second hand is probably your best bet or seeing if anyone has discounted the previous model (assuming they have any left).
  • One would first think that the lack of Conroe would make a mid-range headless Mac a sure shot, but the new iMacs cover every price point from $1000 to $2000, including the "entry pro" market with a large 24" screen (which is normally out of home reach) and a BTO 7600 GT and FW800.
  • It is very important that you write a clear simple subject, and include relevant links in your story
    Anyway, this is pretty cool. The bigger, the better, is we talk about monitors.
    In other new, there's a 17 and 20 inch Mac too.
    17 Inch -- from 999$
    20 Inch -- from 1499$
    And the famous 24 Inch -- from 1999$ (ah, don't you just love those nines? :))
  • by IYagami ( 136831 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:21AM (#16051986)
    Previously, the cheapest model had a Core Solo inside.

    Now, all macs have dual core processors
    • by crow ( 16139 )
      Yes, but the Mini is still Core 1, not Core 2. And the graphics on the Mini make playback of HDTV problematic. Put in a low-end nVidia 5200 and make it Core 2 Duo, and I would buy a Mini.
  • Surely the most glaring error is that, out of the box the only way of getting HD content into this Mac is via the ethernet cable. Guess this will make more sense on the 12th?

    Why no HDMI/SCART/S-Video in? Surely a windowed HDMI input screen isn't beyond the Apple engineers, and Front Row would provide an excellent way of accessing it.
    • by dfghjk ( 711126 )
      "Surely a windowed HDMI input screen isn't beyond the Apple engineers..."

      Apple will invent it just as soon as ATI or nVidia does. Then they can negotiate an exclusive, just like they did for the superdrive.

      "...and Front Row would provide an excellent way of accessing it."

      Really? Wouldn't have thought of that. If only PC's had media center functionality.

      No one has done HDMI inputs yet though it would be desirable. The other inputs you mention aren't HD. I agree, though, that HD is somewhat of a misnomer
      • What have NVidia or ATi got to do with it? USB / Firewire HDMI capture devices shouldn't be on the video card.

        The technology is available, and its expensive (because its a niche technology), but its there.

        Being able to plug my Sky box / 360 / Wii / PS3 into my Mac would save me a lot space and money - I guess if I want it that badly I could just go out and buy the device myself.
    • Re:HD iMac? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Jasin Natael ( 14968 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:48AM (#16052233)
      Umm... Firewire (esp. FW800)? There are HDMI / SCART / DVI / etc. input boxes available that plug into it, and this way Apple doesn't have to produce region-specific versions of their hardware.
  • I am looking at a sweet return this year and now know what I am dropping it on...

    A dual Xeon Mac Pro with dual 24" monitors.

    And you thought I was going to say an iMac...

    • Check that. The fully tricked out one I want would likely require a mortgage. Looks like it is iMac time for me after all...
  • by ChibiTaryn ( 646855 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:29AM (#16052068) Homepage Journal
    Why do Apple magically release bigger, faster, shinier versions of things right after I buy something?

    Curse you, Apple!

    ... gimme.
  • No Apple Remote? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by aallan ( 68633 ) <alasdair@b[ ] ['abi' in gap]> on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:34AM (#16052110) Homepage

    An interesting point is that the base 17-inch model no longer comes with an Apple Remote [] by default, you have to cough up another $29 to get that bit of Apple goodness. Fine for those of us that have quite a few [] of them lying around, but not so good for people buying their first iMac. An odd choice for Apple IMHO.

    • Re:No Apple Remote? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Roadstar ( 909257 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:59AM (#16052348)
      An interesting point is that the base 17-inch model no longer comes with an Apple Remote by default, you have to cough up another $29 to get that bit of Apple goodness.

      The other 17" model does come with the remote, and that's the one that used to be the base model (it has an ATI X1600). The base model you're referring to now is the stripped-down model (Intel GMA950) that was previously sold only in the Apple Store for Education, and it didn't come with a remote back then either. So nothing has been done to the lineup remote-wise, it is just that the stripped-down model is now available to everyone instead of just students.

    • by omeg ( 907329 )
      Not really. It's meant for using the iMac as media center, and it isn't really viable to use a 17" inch computer as media center unless you like watching your shows very close by your computer. In that case, why not just watch them while sitting behind your desk? By removing the remote, they're further defining the 20" inch and 24" inch models as true media center computers.
  • Okay, within the last week I have built a rig consisting of a Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.4GHz), 2G RAM, 7600GT w/ 256M GDDR3, big shiny widescreen monitor yada yada...
    It may not be interesting to you, but to me it was like realizing Steve Jobs has been staring over my shoulder for the last week.

    On a side not, what's with the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo chip? The E6600 stock speed is 2.4, and the next one down is 2.1something. Where's that figure coming from? Or are they using lower-spec CPUs and overclocking them all? T

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by ppc_digger ( 961188 )
      On a side not, what's with the 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo chip? The E6600 stock speed is 2.4, and the next one down is 2.1something. Where's that figure coming from?
      The new iMacs use Meroms. That 2.33 GHz Core 2 is a T7600.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by frankie ( 91710 )
      The iMac uses Merom, not Conroe. Yes, it's a laptop chip. Yes, it's slower AND more expensive than Conroe.

      Yes, it's Steve Jobs.
  • Why such an outdated video card when every other spec is so advanced? There has just been a ton of new video card technology released - full of much better choices.
    • The iMac is supposed to be a small, silent computer (and it is). Perhaps faster cards were put off due to heat issues. It might simply be a case of going with what they know as well. If they konw the 7600GT works perfectly and the drivers are all sorted, perhaps they figure it isn't worth another round of QA to get an extra 15% speed boost at this time. Or perhaps they just have a really good deal on them. In either case, the price is amazing, so I can't complain. The high-end 17" costs as much as it would
  • Wow (Score:5, Funny)

    by bazorg ( 911295 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @10:48AM (#16052230) Homepage
    That's one Big Mac !
  • I just ordered my mini YESTERDAY.
    • I just ordered my mini YESTERDAY.

      I just got my 20 inch iMac last week. I waited until after the ADC or whatever in August to order just in case they announced something new. Bastards. The new 24' inch one comes with a better graphics card too. Damn Apple and their need to release new products.

      PS- I wonder how many dead pixels the 24 inch comes with out of the box, mine came with 2, but you need 5 to send it back.
    • by k_187 ( 61692 )
      apple's pretty good about upgrading recent orders. if they don't do it automatically, you can always call them. They'll either credit your account or give you the upgraded one. Either way, you have 2 weeks to return it I believe ;)
    • Since I ordered my Mac Pro, the price for one of the components dropped, so I got the following from Apple...

      To Our Valued Apple Customer:

      Apple is pleased to announce a price drop for the Mac Pro you recently
      ordered. We have automatically adjusted your order to reflect the new price.

      For up-to-date information on your order, please visit our Order Status
      website at []. Once your order is shipped, you
      can a
  • I selected all top top options (with the exception of software,) included AppleCare, and the thing came out to $3,553.00! Wow. That's certainly not the price point I think of when iMac crosses my mind.
  • by ProppaT ( 557551 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @11:01AM (#16052377) Homepage
    ...I couldn't imagine buying a computer built into a 24" monitor. If I'm gonna make an investment in a screen that nice, I'd darn sure want to be able to hook it up to any computer I had and be able to use in in a few years when I needed a system upgrade.
    • by jacobw ( 975909 ) < ... m minus language> on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @11:38AM (#16052701) Homepage
      The important thing to remember is: this is not an announcement. This is HALF an announcement.

      Apple has already invited the media to a special event [] on September 12, where it is widely expected to announce two things []. The first is that the iTunes music store is now going to sell feature-length movies. And the second thing is... well, nobody is quite sure, but it is rumored to be something major. Like, for example, an new version of Airport Express [] that allows you to stream video as well as music. This would be a big step on the road to making an Apple a true media center.

      The fact that Apple has announced its widest-screen-ever iMacs with so little fanfare is a sign that the rumor is true--that Apple does, indeed, have something pretty big up its sleeve. If Apple is indeed about to make a big step forward towards being a media center, a 24-inch iMac suddenly has a new use: it's big enough to start serving as a genuine TV replacement.

      Oh, and I'm going to add one more speculation to the mix. When Apple announced that some of the features of its upcoming operating system were "Top Secret", the explanation given was that they didn't want them copied by Vista. I always thought that was a bizarre explanation--is Microsoft really going to cram completely new features into Vista in the next few months? More likely, I thought, was that these "top secret" features depend on hardware that Apple wasn't yet ready to reveal. Specifically, I hypothesized that they were media-related features that would interface with a Mac-branded PVR. I was probably over-optimistic on the PVR thing, but I may have been right that these unnannounced software features tie into a Mac-branded audiovisual device. If so, expect the announcement of the new video-streaming base station to be accompanied by an announcement of new Leopard features to take advantage of it.
  • HTPC! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by djrogers ( 153854 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @12:17PM (#16053076)
    This would make a perfect HTPC for my living room... Think of it - hang a 24" HDTV on your wall and use it 85% of the time (for news, backround tv, etc) then when it's time for a movie, drop down the projection screen and have the same 24" PC feed your HD projector... I've thought about doing this for a while with a Cinema display and an iMac, but honestly this is even slicker!
  • by TheNetAvenger ( 624455 ) on Wednesday September 06, 2006 @12:55PM (#16053419)
    NVIDIA GeForce 7300GT or 7600GT with 128MB GDDR3 Video card

    Why should Mac users have to settle for middle of the road Video performance, yet again. 1920x1200 displays, and yet 128mb Video cards from last year that will have trouble rendering a game at the monitor's native resolution. How does this make sense?

    Where is the industry leader that the Mac name was built on? Everyone waited forever for a credible OS like OSX, and now Apple's hardware lineup has gone to middle of the road crap. Why?

    Please, Mac users stand up and scream at Apple for something that can at least compete with a freaking 7lb Dell Laptop. These are Macs not glorified eMachines. Argh!

It is not for me to attempt to fathom the inscrutable workings of Providence. -- The Earl of Birkenhead