Originally Posted by addabox
Yeah. Like that. What part of "Apple doesn't put desktop parts into their iMacs" are you not getting?
You do realize Intel just released it's i7 based laptop chips right? Quad core chips that might be ideal in an iMac.
Look at the relative growth of desktop machines vs. laptops and tell me that people are rejecting laptop level power. Just because internet tech nerds obsess over dick waving contests and who's got the latest generation tech doesn't mean the average buyer does.
Nope the average buyer cares about value for the money. If this report is true it represents a massive decrease in the value of the iMac. Contrary to your view it isn't dick waving at all, it is more about having the backbone to resist being taken to the cleaners.
The average buyer checks out a machine and makes a judgement based on a variety of factors-- price, looks, ease of use, apparent quality, etc.
I doubt you could find one person these days that does as you describe above. None of those concerns are as important as knowing your money was well spent on a machine that will remain viable for the long haul.
For a lot of people, an all in one machine that looks great and does everything they want it to in a snappy fashion is exactly what they want.
Snappy with three generations old technology, I highly doubt it. More so snappy is a relative concept, just because something appears snappy to a user today doesn't make it so in the face of better tech.
They have no idea and could care less where the innards fall within Intel's lineup. It's been a while since pretty much any system sold (excepting netbooks) didn't have plenty of power to do what most people do with their computers.
They may not care about the innards in the same way many don't care what is under the hood of their car, but yet they search out engines known to give better performance. Likewise for computers, people want to settle on what they consider is good performance for the dollar they have to spend.
In any event it is plain as day now that dual core machines are a very bad value on the desktop.
A lot of the proud owners of P Cs with i7 desktop parts will be running Office, email, internet, iTunes, and maybe some light photo editing software, all of which will are already going as fast as they can.
if they are going as fast as they can doesn't that highlight that the computer is a bit slow? Look it is like this, computers will be fast enough when you can have a fluid conversation with them. That is a ways off yet, so we incrementally get faster machines. These faster machines provide the platforms to run newer generations of software on.
When you highlight old worn software like you did above it is a sign that you are liking forward. That is sad and unamerican. Instead strive to improve in every way and expect the same from companies like Apple. A company needs to be given the opportunity to rise to your expectations and if it can't do that you need to question your relationship with the company.
It is sort of like my former relationship with Dodge, the last Truck I purchased from them was and is crap. So no more business for them, not unsurprisingly it looks like everybody else in the country gas the same attitude ( except for the Obama administration). Do I care that thousands will be out of work, hell no they deserve it frankly. The attitude wth Apple is the same thing, if they want to play the stagnation game then to hell with them and their employees. Apple can do better than dual core in the iMac and it is reasonable for people to pressure them to do so by not buying the product.
Now do I believe this report is true? I don't really know, it could just be somebody jerking Appleinsiders chain for all I know. What I do know is that we have the ideal processor for the iMac on the market right now, it would be absolutely foolish for Apple not to use it. Before you ask, no a pretty enclosure is not a good reason to avoid a quad core, there has to be some balance in the form and function equation.