One of the most significant things Apple could do to aid gaming on the Mac is to make OpenGL perform as well on comparable hardware as DX9 does on Windows. I love Macs and hate Windows. But DX9 runs faster than OpenGL, which handicaps even good Mac hardware, and reduces the credibility of the Mac as a gaming platform. So better drivers in general and better OpenGL performance would go a long way toward attracting more developers and gamers.

I wonder if it can play Guitar Hero 3 with all graphics settings at maximum without lagging.

The problem is that the good games that come out for the Mac have already been out far too long on other platforms for people to want to shell out the extra money to get them to play them on their Macs. The iMac line could do with a way to upgrade the graphics, add more drives, maybe even exchange processors and add more memory. Until then, they aren't going to be very well suited for most gamers, especially those who play against others in the online realm. You'll only find it fun until you get blasted away a half dozen times in less than 3 seconds by the same person who's running a system that's much, much, much faster than the current Macs. Mac Pro's are totally unsuited for gaming, so don't even go there. I'll have to disagree though that the screens aren't fast enough or good enough and that gamers want to use CRT's for that, I for one gave up my CRT a long time ago. Any screen that is capable of at least a 8ns response time is generally good enough, though the faster ones seem to do better with tearing. Though the glossy screens are harder on the eyes, especially in well lit environments. When in BootCamp running Windows XP and playing Need For Speed:Most Wanted, I noticed no tearing at all on my 24" iMac w/nVidia 7600-GT graphics, (late 2006 model.) It was plenty fast enough for me playing against the machine but, it's not something I would use to play online against other players with. Had I been able to plop in the 3.06GHz processor then, a much better graphics card, and maybe a faster hard drive, I may have considered it but, not at it's current specs. As mentioned previously, until Apple does something, gaming on the Mac platform is going to be limited to outdated titles or boring old flash games. Sure there aren't all that many choices for video cards on the Apples of today, then again the two video card makers aren't going to waste their time building the fastest and best graphics cards for the platform until they are upgradable by the consumer as they don't feel the need to have to be competitive on the platform. So long as Apple sticks with the laptop motherboards in it's iMac lineup, it's processor choices are going to be limited as well. I'm sure there are many gamers out there that would be willing to compromise the silence factor for a slightly larger, (thicker,) iMac that includes a fan or two, (they can be large fans to assist in the quiet factor,) and the extra buck to add the few extra screws to make them accessible. As far as using a Mid Range Tower for a Mac, they used to have the cube, if they were to release that today designed to look like an Apple, people would probably snap it up and create a gaming rig out of it that could be a worthy competitor to where the bigger name titles will do well enough that they could come to the Mac at the same time as they're released elsewhere. Given that they're not limited and sealed like the rest of the Mac lineup save the Mac Pro.

I think we can do without the casual insults. The 8800 is not a card. GeForce 8800 describes an entire product line. The 8800GS is a most assuredly mid-range chip. It's based on the same core G92 chip architecture that the 8800GT uses, but with fewer stream processors, fewer texture units and a smaller number of raster operators. The bottom line is that the 8800GS is not as capable as beefier chips. And let's not even get into the GeForce 9000 series. Nvidia's own designation gives the mid-range placement away: that "GS" designates it such. Regardless, you miss the whole point of my editorial: That whatever graphics Apple puts in the iMac won't matter if no one is buying games, or if no one is making them.

Unfortunately this is true: a good set of cross-platform games along with great system exclusives is what makes a game platform. This is what you have on the PS3/Xbox360/Wii/PSP/DS, and it's what you have on the PC. That being said, I'd settle for just more cross-platform games and a good set of lower-budget exclusives on the Mac. Apple could really do a lot to spur development of good Mac-exclusive games, by investing in game studios and bankrolling the development of Mac-exclusive games. It could also take a page out of Sony's book by rolling unique games on the iPhone/iPod and then migrating them up to the Mac as well. To become a must-have system for gamers, the Mac would ideally have at least one top-tier, must-have Mac-exclusive game on the level of Halo, Zelda, or Metal Gear Solid. However, I'd be pretty happy if it had Mac-exclusive games on the level of Patapon, LocoRoco, Geometry Wars, etc., all available through iTunes. As far as cross-platform gaming is concerned, Apple should try to get more Mac games on Steam, GameTap, and iTunes - this will help solve the problems of fighting for shelf space and attributing Mac sales. Perhaps Steam and GameTap (or at least all of their games) should be available through iTunes. This would make Mac games a lot easier to find, try, and buy. If you look at PSN and XBLA, it's clear that making it easy and inexpensive to buy good-quality games (often cheap, good system exclusives) is a great strategy. Some of my favorite games on the PS3 are PSN titles like LocoRoco, Super Stardust HD, Everyday Shooter, etc.. I am also sorely tempted to buy expansion content (e.g. songs for Rock Band) when it is easily available for purchase/download. By the way, every new song on iTunes should have Rock Band/Guitar Hero versions, and there should be an easy way of getting the game tracks and audio tracks simultaneously. Also, Apple should provide incentives to developers and publishers to make Mac versions available at the same time as PC versions, and at the same price - the current system of delaying six months or more and still charging launch price has got to go. If gamers can buy the same game, at launch, for the same price, they are more likely to consider a Mac version. Right now, the Mac gaming horizon doesn't look so great; I doubt Apple will do most of these things (after all, they're making piles of money with the current non-gaming strategy.) Nonetheless, I have some hope that the iPhone/iPod will emerge as a gaming platform, and that some of the good (and Apple-exclusive) games will migrate up to the Mac and perhaps start building a Mac equivalent to PSN or XBLA through iTunes.

I've never seen any numbers on how big the hardcore gaming market is, but it's certainly big enough for Dell, HP and other computer manufacturers to dedicate product line segments to. Dell has its XPS line, HP acquired Alienware and so on. Admittedly purely anecdotal, but the point is that it *is* a sizeable part of the enthusiast PC market.

Noone NEEDS a high end gaming rig but, the gamers are the ones who are most likely to drop the most cash into their systems, just like with a race car driver and a normal driver, should we discount the racers because they are small group and not produce any fast, exotic cars?!? Actually there's over 6.66 billion of people on the earth, as of the last census, so that would come out to less than 1/6th the population. And with the number of sales of the top games out there and players in each one that compete, I was guessing it close to that, yes. I'm sure hooker isn't on that list either, but they are out there and moreso than the very small group as you think that they are.