Apple predicted to release new iMacs, MacBooks in weeks - Page 2

I agree with the first part. But I want a glossy screen. I don't know what you mean by a real keyboard. I actually bought the apple aluminum wired keyboard for my PC and I love it.

As much as i like my macbook, it's a real pain plugging and unplugging my phone, external drives, tablet, etc. every time i wanted to go portable and i was hoping to get a desktop mac at some point.

But i was really waiting for the imac to go quad, which seems impossible

hopefully they'll adjust prices downwards as well, it may not be as big an issue in the US, but in the UK the price of the desktop range leapt up in the last update (by about 3 or 400 on average), as they 'adjusted' the price. despite them adjusting the macbook range downwards recently they imacs remain high.

Glossy screens are fine. All that's needed is an available Monitor Hood that matches the iMac and allows a passthrough slot for the DVD on the side.

LaCie monitors have come with hoods for a long time.

I have a 24" iMac purchased in July '08 and I don't seem to have any problems. What problems are you referring to? Do you even own an iMac or do you just spout some drivel you read on the internet.

I'd like to see a USB port that remains "hot" (for power) when the iMac is asleep (or powered off).

If you are referring to the heating issue get your facts straight and pull out a dictionary.

For instance, a "problem" usually means that something actually goes wrong.

While the metal at the top of the aluminium iMac, especially on the left hand side, does get warm, there are no "problems" created by this. There are no widespread failures of the computer do to heat related issues. There are no reports of fans running endlessly and loud because of this. The place where I work has literally hundreds of these units in service through hot summers and cold winters and I have never heard of a single one of them having a heat related issue or heard complaints about the fans spin up. They are the most solid, silent "workhorse" computers I've ever seen installed in our labs and have practically zero issues.

The one that I use daily, is one of the earliest models and has hardly been turned off more than once or twice the whole time I've had it. It's never overheated or had any heat related issues and I've never even heard the fan turn on at all.

I will never use a laptop for my main computer - absolutely never. Never, never, never.

Come on guys. Obviously by "problems" he meant the limitations imposed by the design.
We've been discussing this since the first post.

No one has claimed iMacs are spontaneously combusting.

Doesn't it do this? I thought that was a selling point when they introduced the Al+SiO2 iMac.

Grab a nice display (I've got a 24-inch Sammy) and attach it to your notebook. Instant desktop. And if you must, you've got portability as well.

I will never buy a desktop again. My old iMac (2006) was great. Loved it. But using a Macbook Pro as a main desktop machine (while still having portability) is wonderful.

Never seen that happen. In fact iMacs are notable for how stiffly the cord stays in and how hard it is to pull it out. If you use a non-iMac power cord they fall out easily and if the power cord is locked down and the computer still moveable maybe, but otherwise not at all.

Also, if you don't want it to go through the hole, you don't have to thread it through the hole.

As far as actual improvements to the iMac that would make deployment of them in a lab easier, I would focus on the power supply to the keyboard and the ports available on it. All the ports are on the back of the iMac, which looks great in your home, but in a lab environment where things are plugged and unplugged dozens of times a day it's very difficult indeed. We run short custom cables from the firewire port and leave it dangling so that people can connect/disconnect their video cameras, but USB keys are a constant problem.

Apple's response is to use the USB ports on the keyboard for thumbdrives, but 90% of the time there isn't enough power (or at least the system says there isn't), to access a USB device that way. If the keyboard is supposed to be a USB hub, it should have enough power to work with every device. I know aesthetically it looks bad to have the ports on the front, but there has to be some way of plugging and unplugging a simple thing like a USB key without turning the entire computer around.

What limitations imposed by design?

only reason to own a desktop if to play games

nvidia and ATI are still releasing GPU's with amazing performance increases and there are new games coming out with some nice graphics if you have the hardware. and that usually means a discrete desktop GPU

I want them to go back to the full-sized keyboard as standard, offer a Bluetooth keyboard with numeric pad, and also offer them with black keys, a la Macbook. Backlit would be nice too. Other than those (few!) things, I like the current keyboards a lot.. keyswitches, materials, etc., all spot-on.

Correction. The only reason to buy a PC is to play games. PC should also be your choice if you feel smart doing clean installs, rebooting, cleaning malware, and getting 100 third party crap software to work simultaneously.

If serious work (and some games) is what you want then buy a Mac. Laptops are more convenient. But sometimes you want a bigger screen and don't need the portability, so iMacs are ok too.

For professionals there is the Mac Pro. I may need to buy one in the near future.

No, not the only reason. What if you do video editing? The more power the better. I do blu ray ripping and such and a desktop gives me the power I need.

And I can't use a laptop keyboard and trackpad for long. I'd have to get another keyboard and mouse. And then i'd want a bigger screen so i'd be using a monitor too and then at that point having a desktop would just be cheaper.

Well I, (and I think others) assumed he was talking about heat, because "limitations imposed by the design" makes no sense.

What limitations? How could it being thinner possibly have any bearing on anything at all with an all-in-one computer? There's room for a mother board, a hard drive, an optical drive, ports, fans, and all the regular stuff that's in any computer. The power envelope is the same, and there is nothing being "left out" because of it's thinness unless you count something like a graphics card slot which is never going to happen in an all-in-one unless it stops being an all-in-one and turns into a mini-tower.

The only thing that makes any sense when someone says "problems with it's thinness" is the always mentioned heat issue (which doesn't actually exist), or that tired old argument that all-in-ones are lame in and of themselves and everything should be a tower of some kind.

For the last 15+ years, the target date for the release of a refreshed iMac (or consumer Mac) has been October 15, five or six weeks to a month before the U.S. Thanksgiving Day, and has varied between October 5 and October 29.

iBooks and MacBooks have often been released in November, between November 5 and November 22, again to coincide with the american Christmas shopping season beginning on Black Friday (the day following Thanksgiving Day).

There is not much of a prediction here. If one thing, Apple has been consistent throughout the years.

I look forward to refreshed, fortified Nehalem iMacs. But I have a feeling that I will be disappointed with anorexic, dementedly thin iMacs. Unfortunately.

Apple is always right. Customers know nothing. And buyers do and buy as they are told. Steve Jobs is back. Forget about the new Apple. Unfortunately.


\\\

I'd be all in favor of making it thinner if performance can also be improved at the same time, and they can keep it quiet or quieter, no fans at all would be best. (I hate computer noise more than SJ.) The current design is a little clunky, although, not so much that it's a problem in terms of space, but, aesthetically, it's definitely had its run. And I definitely don't want a tower under my desk, that's where my legs go.

Apple doesn't use mobile CPUs in the iMac line purely for fun. The size of the computer clearly limits the type of CPUs and graphics cards that can be used within it. Hence the use of the phrase 'limitations of the design."

Spot-on. I have no need for the fastest CPU, nor do I want to pay more for it. All one needs to do to confirm Apple's strategy is look at the sales numbers and GP% vs. the Dells and white-box systems out there.. the numbers don't lie, the path that Apple has chosen is the right one.

Notice where you said "I have no need". Don't start thinking you speak for everyone. Many people do have a need.
Just because apple is doing well with their current strategy doesn't mean that can't do better. And the PC market is VASTLY larger than the apple market. So obviously there is room for apple to improve. Competition is a good thing.

The fastest CPU is a desktop CPU. You would not be paying more for it, you would be paying less. The CPU's in imacs are laptops processors and are more expensive.
An imac with desktop parts would be alittle bit larger but it would also be cheaper. And more powerful for those who do need it.

He might be referring the reported problems people had with condensation forming inside the glass screen they put on to make the display nice and glossy

He could also be speculating that if they make it thinner they'll have the same problems the air and some other macbooks had with overheating - where Apple's 'fix' was a firmware upgrade that merely made the system run slower.

A few things first. The Mac Mini is not useless. It is a perfectly servicable lower end desktop (hell it could be portable given it's size and weight). It comes with a core 2 duo, and 1 gig of ram. The vast majority of computer users use e-mail, internet, and a smattering of word processing apps. It will handle any of those tasks without breaking a sweat even at the base configuration. Upgrading it is also dead simple. You can pop in 4 gigs for about 80 bucks minus the cost of a putty knife and a screwdriver. It litterally takes all of 10 minutes tops. It will easily handle Aero in Windows 7 and scores rather well with 4 GB (my 2009 scores 4.9 under Aero). Game performance should be adequate although I do very little on the Windows side. Anyone desiring more wouldn't be buying a Mac Mini to begin with.

As far as the iMac, my only wish would be to get actual desktop components for the Video card, larger SSD storage options, faster Optical drives (all of the mac drives suck for speed), and at least a BD-Rom. Not really interested in burning them.

Trying to turn the iMac into a desktop is kind of silly as it's not meant to replace a desktop. If anything, it's more of a hybrid between a desktop and a laptop. Self contained, but not portable in any typical sense. I do wonder if they will come up with a desktop counterpart to the iMac some day that is more midrange in design however. The desktop market is definitely on the downslide, but there will always be power users more interested in flat out performance at the expense of heat and noise.

C'mon Al, that's a laughable suggestion.

Is this the REAL Al Bundy? Sounds like something he would say.

Agreed. That was a silly statement. There are all sorts of power users who require the extra hardware for something other than gaming. Mac's have never been huge gaming platforms. Boot Camp changes the picture somewhat. About the only thing I ever boot into Windows for is for video and audio editing as the tools on the Mac side are lacking or too expensive.

Is your father Steve Jobs?

you can do it on a laptop unless the task specifically takes advantage of the GPU. but pretty much every mobile GPU these days supports the same feature set as desktop GPU's.

you can't run Boot Camp on a laptop?

Like many other mac users, I really do want a mid-range Mac tower. That being said, as long as the performance per dollar increases, I'll be satisfied with a new iMac. I have a PCI-X G5 tower that needs replacing.

No quadcores on apple laptops. Some people need those. They come in handy for any kind of video or photo work. Mobile GPU's lag behind discrete desktop GPU's.

You're going to pay more for a laptop and if you don't need the portability than way get it?

I'm not interested in mobile features. That's not why I want desktop hardware. I want the freedom to install drivers on my schedule, rather than on Apple's. Not on the mac side but on the Windows side. I find it very irritating the vendors won't release Mobile drivers while anyone with a desktop video card is free to upgrade them as soon as they are available.

I bet that use voids AppleCare.

I'm with you there!

Apple should create computers with easy to switch matte/glossy screens, makes everyone happy.


Far as I know, the present iMac's glass/plastic screen can be removed and there is a matte LCD underneath. There is no reason why that concept can be advanced to make glare and reflections a issue for only those who desire it.

iMac's are used a lot in business/schools etc and the glossy screens are a real fscking pain in the ass, makes Mac's look like cheap PC crap machines of desperation.

Matte is more classy and practical, all it needs is the right hardware designed around it to make it look rich and lusty.

I say the new iMac's will be thin, quad core, aluminum with either matte or glossy screens.

Arh..... i want faster Mac, not Slimmer Mac. Slimmer will properly mean it is slower.

Nice, but it is in back? Somewhat of a pain to get to.

Skip

It's been WAY to long with the current designed case. It's time for a re-design of the desktop unit!

Skip

High-end PC notebooks will already have Clarksfield by then, so the MacBook Pro won't be any better off in the CPU area than now (maybe worse since there isn't a direct successor to the 3.07 GHz).

Anyone willing to go out on a limb and say "unibody"?

Your joking right?


Why go back to the CRT "hood and glare screen days" of yesteryears when one can simply remove the iMac's glassy screen with a suction cup?

Underneath is a nice, cool to the eyes, matte screen.


The Lacie monitors look ugly, but functional for accurate color without stray light sources.


So stupid to have to buy something extra to fix a problem that wasn't a problem in the first place.

Matte is on all the best TV's, I can understand glossy being on small handheld touchscreen devices which one can quickly tilt to avoid the glare/reflections, but anything 13" or larger screen needs a matte option. You can have your glossy too, both can co-exist. PC's come with glossy or matte screens, it's just OS X won't run on them well or without hacking it somehow, that's the problem, lack of hardware choice with OS X.

Nothing looks worse than having a cheap ass PC matte monitor hooked up to your classy Mac. People automatically assume the name on the monitor is the type of computer you have.

In laptops I would agree with you. But in desktops it makes no difference. It's at a fixed place in your house and you can control the glare on it.
Hell when the light shines through my window it washes out my matte monitor. So it's no better.
In the end I just end up closing the blinds.
So i'd still rather have a glossy on a desktop.