or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple releases new iMac desktops with Intel Sandy Bridge CPUs, Thunderbolt ports
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple releases new iMac desktops with Intel Sandy Bridge CPUs, Thunderbolt ports - Page 8

post #281 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post

Certainly more expensive than in the US with some glaring exceptions like French cheese and wine, and fine quality Belgian chocolate and beer.

But as I said, in the past Apple often tried to align the prices after updates according to currency balance. Of course, even then, the computers were still more expensive before considering tax but not as much as this time. Probably they are right, in the bigger scheme of things, to do so from their own perspective as a company in an unstable financial climate, but I believe that the iMac sales are going to suffer in Europe.

Apple did adjust the Cdn prices for the iMac this time, I'm not sure why they didn't do it for Europe (or even Asia for that matter).
post #282 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssls6 View Post

2) The SSD option sounds nice but boot time on the mac is so much faster than a PC it is crazy. With my 8 gig of ram I'm never swapping so the SSD option IMHO is better left for MAC books. If money was no object, I would love to have a 512 SSD so I'm not knocking it.

That's a good point - with lots of free RAM there is no need for swapping. In that case, upgrading to 12GB in the new iMacs sounds like a no brainer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssls6 View Post

4) with the money I saved above, I would try to get a couple of 1TB thunderbolt external drives. They sound crazy good.

My thoughts exactly!

I think my mind is made up - I'm going to pick up a base 21.5" iMac on my next visit to the US. As much as I want a 27" iMac, unfortunately it will not fit in standard luggage with the original packaging.
post #283 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by AIA View Post

Apple did adjust the Cdn prices for the iMac this time, I'm not sure why they didn't do it for Europe (or even Asia for that matter).

Yep, no dice in Australia where our dollar is streaming ahead of the greenback. Then again I noticed a guitar pedal that retails $150 in the US is marked up by several retailers here to an astonishing $749. And it's a piece of rubbish to boot. Nothing to do with our GST, or import duties, it's just a goldmine that will rapidly dwindle as people get more and more savvy to online purchasing. Good riddance.
post #284 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodychoir View Post

Yep, no dice in Australia where our dollar is streaming ahead of the greenback. Then again I noticed a guitar pedal that retails $150 in the US is marked up by several retailers here to an astonishing $749. And it's a piece of rubbish to boot. Nothing to do with our GST, or import duties, it's just a goldmine that will rapidly dwindle as people get more and more savvy to online purchasing. Good riddance.

I noticed the $200 price difference between the US and Australian Apple stores for the 21.5". Is it possible to order from the US store in Australia? Or don't the US models run on 240v AC?
post #285 of 301
Whoops, let's try this one again.
post #286 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

No the key phrase is that the comment happened 3 hours before you posted you had vision problems. Unless you believe your blindness also provides the ability to warp space and time. In which case I feel pretty ripped off. You aren't the only one with vision problems.

And you sound like a bitter little piss who apparently was flowing heavily this afternoon. I don't announce in every forum that I have vision problems and if you'd bothered to read the rest of my post, you would have noticed that I apologized for being cranky that day

As for me having the ability to warp space and time, I guess I left my sonic screwdriver in the Tardis. But hey, thanks for setting me straight sonny
post #287 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by AIA View Post

I would say that for RAW processing there won't be a huge difference between quad-core i5 and i7..

Not true.

Look at:
http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-sa...ance-review/3/

Now, look at the i5 and i7 Sandy bridge processors (2500 and 2600). The i7 is much faster in many of the tests - and that underestimates the difference in the iMac because Hardcore's test uses a 3.3 GHz i5 vs a 3.4 GHz i7 while the iMac uses a 3.1 GHz i5 vs a 3.4 GHz i7.

Depending on what you're doing, the speed difference could be significant.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #288 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwight View Post

I noticed the $200 price difference between the US and Australian Apple stores for the 21.5". Is it possible to order from the US store in Australia? Or don't the US models run on 240v AC?

No, don't think so on the ordering bit, but as far as the voltage I'm pretty sure it's merely a plug head difference, most high end electronics are switchable. We're not likely to be treated as well as Canada by Apple in this instance and in any case Customs will sting you enough on an iMac to make it irrelevant - however if it were a Mac Pro the diff between a US ordered and a locally bought is immense and might be worth your while to go down a 3rd party seller line. We're talking over a grand tacked on here.
post #289 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Not true.

Look at:
http://www.hardcoreware.net/intel-sa...ance-review/3/

Now, look at the i5 and i7 Sandy bridge processors (2500 and 2600). The i7 is much faster in many of the tests - and that underestimates the difference in the iMac because Hardcore's test uses a 3.3 GHz i5 vs a 3.4 GHz i7 while the iMac uses a 3.1 GHz i5 vs a 3.4 GHz i7.

Depending on what you're doing, the speed difference could be significant.

Actually I was referring to RAW image (format) processing - I'm not aware of any photo processors that can efficiently make use of more than 4 cores. But you are right, the clock speed difference could be noticeable here.

Anyways, thanks for pointing out that review as I hadn't realized there was such a large performance gain in the Sandy Bridge over the previous series.
post #290 of 301
The new iMacs aren't bad at all. But some of the things on them are a couple of years over due.

eg a decent GPU at all price points. Quad core at all price points. This could have been done last year at least. (If not the year before. Quad core had been out ages at all prices points for years on the PC side...) But they clung to death to that Core 2 duo.

The 6970...with a 2 gig GPU option? *Are my eyes deceiving me? Mind you, it's not like on the PC side that 2 gig cards haven't been fairly popular for some time now. But none the less, it's a welcome addition. It's a very decent card that stacks up to the desktop competition very well. It's the kind of card you need to run a 2500x1400 display.

The Sandy bridge platform finally sees the iMac coming of age. It welcome, if (I feel) long over due.

The iMac is now a workstation in all but name. Yesterday's workstation? Today. The 27 inch iMac with quad core i7s (Speedboost.2 upto 3.8 gig?) is something yesteryear's Power Mac could only dream of.

I'd quibble that the top of the line iMac should have the 2 gig gpu, i7 and 8 gig of ram standard. As optional extras it takes the price up to £2045.

What next for the iMac? 6-8 cores next year? When Ivy comes to town? Can monitor sizes get any bigger? Now that it packs some gpu muscle (at last...) will it push further with the next update? Will the 'i7s' come as standard on the top two modesl (as they should be presently...)

Apple 'almost' gave it everything they got. (But you still have to pay for some of those as extras...) It's a worthy update. But as the Mac Pro heads off to 8 cores x 2 for 32 threads...maybe the iMac has one surprise left for us. We may just have to wait until next year for it.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #291 of 301
...AND it has Thunderbolt. I wonder what the possibilities are for the iMac now...

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #292 of 301
Indeed Lemon Bon Bon, indeed! Ah well, Apple gives with one hand and takes with the other (ya have to love the upsell tactics, they're very effective) Who could resist the i7 with all its speedy goodness?

Its good to know that ThunderButt will keep these machines fairly future proof for a while.
post #293 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamiltonrrwatch View Post

Still no matte screen, but with LED back lighting, I wonder if you could adjust the levels so that you don't notice the glare?

It's the same screen as before, and as a result of glare + inability to color calibrate [engineering doesn't know what brightness you should calibrate from] meant I sent it back to replace with a Mini + Dell matte display. It's incredibly bright [and hard on most eyes] if you crank it up anywhere close to max brightness, unlike previous matte LCD cinema displays. And it is like having a big mirror, so even lowlight backgrounds will bounce off it in a distracting way to me.

Can't understand why Apple acts like it's impossible to deliver a reasonable matte option, when they have a number of BTO options for other things.
post #294 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamiltonrrwatch View Post

And you sound like a bitter little piss who apparently was flowing heavily this afternoon. I don't announce in every forum that I have vision problems and if you'd bothered to read the rest of my post, you would have noticed that I apologized for being cranky that day

Right, after berating mstone for not being blind you kinda sorta apologize for offending folks but don't really care if you do because your sorry excuse is you're old and blind. What? Still cranky today?

Of course you don't announce in every forum that you're blind. No one cares that you have vision problems, on the internet everyone is equal. But it appears that you feel it entitles you to be obnoxious. When folks posted that you can move the screen position to reduce glare they meant for folks with normal vision. You called that idiotic because lo and behold (or not in your case) you're partially blind. So what? It wasn't about you or folks with vision problems.

And frankly, if what you have is tunnel vision you don't know what it's like to be completely blind either and neither do I. There is a world of difference between legally blind and the real thing.
post #295 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post

It's the same screen as before, and as a result of glare + inability to color calibrate [engineering doesn't know what brightness you should calibrate from] meant I sent it back to replace with a Mini + Dell matte display.

Which is better than an iMac + Dell display? I guess from a size standpoint but certainly not from a performance standpoint. I have the mini combo at the moment and might just go the 21" iMac instead unless we see a good mini bump in the nearish future.
post #296 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Right, after berating mstone for not being blind you kinda sorta apologize for offending folks but don't really care if you do because your sorry excuse is you're old and blind. What? Still cranky today?

No, I had my meds and feel much better now.

Of course you don't announce in every forum that you're blind. No one cares that you have vision problems, on the internet everyone is equal. But it appears that you feel it entitles you to be obnoxious. When folks posted that you can move the screen position to reduce glare they meant for folks with normal vision. You called that idiotic because lo and behold (or not in your case) you're partially blind. So what? It wasn't about you or folks with vision problems.

I wouldn't say it's an ENTITLEMENT, more of an age before beauty.

And frankly, if what you have is tunnel vision you don't know what it's like to be completely blind either and neither do I.

I was completely blind before I had a series of operations that restored my sight to where it's at now. If you'll PM me your address, I'd be glad to send you the documentation from my surgeon.

There is a world of difference between legally blind and the real thing.

Not a world of difference nht. In my case, I was pitch-black blind-period. I can see better than shadows now after three operations. And glare for me, and folks that have the same problems I have, is a real problem. But as I stated previously to another member, I hope you never have to experience vision problems.

There is software installed on my computer that I sometimes use to read on-screen text to me. It doesn't always get everything which might explain the three hour lag between my posts. As I stated before, if I offended you, or anyone else, I am sorry. There is a level of frustration here that's hard for others to comprehend.
post #297 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Which is better than an iMac + Dell display? I guess from a size standpoint but certainly not from a performance standpoint. I have the mini combo at the moment and might just go the 21" iMac instead unless we see a good mini bump in the nearish future.

It's a LOT cheaper to go with a mini [I did a refurb], as well as the obvious space issue. It's also a problem going back & forth between a glossy/matte display, so I have my old 20" cinema display next to the 24" Dell.

Who knows when they'll update the mini - but they're overdue, and I suspect it won't be too long considering everything else has gone SandyBridge.
post #298 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

...What next for the iMac? 6-8 cores next year? When Ivy comes to town? Can monitor sizes get any bigger? Now that it packs some gpu muscle (at last...) will it push further with the next update?

Lemon Bon Bon.

I'm curious about this too. Is there a six-core option in the current or planned CPU lineup? Would Apple be able to retain their margins in the iMac if they went octo-core? Will Ivy Bridge bring significant improvements in the lineup?

Edit: Good grief. 3346 days since I registered and I'm one short of 400 posts...
post #299 of 301
Would like to see an IMAC with a few more options. A good start would be Gloss or Matte screen, 64GB SSD to be used as a Boot Drive with a HDD etc.
While the IMAC is a dynamic piece of equipment Apple seems to be paying less attention to it as sales are flat to down at around 750000 per year.
post #300 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post

Would like to see an IMAC with a few more options. A good start would be Gloss or Matte screen, 64GB SSD to be used as a Boot Drive with a HDD etc.
While the IMAC is a dynamic piece of equipment Apple seems to be paying less attention to it as sales are flat to down at around 750000 per year.

Where did you get this number for ANNUAL iMac sales from? The below quote from this past quarter's conference call notes at Macworld stated, that while desktop sales are a lower percentage of total Mac sales, they were still over 1,000,000 LAST QUARTER. It doesn't break out how many Mini's and MacPro's were in the total, but I doubt they made up over three quarters of that total.

"Mac Sales

Apple sold 3.76 million Macs during the second quarter, an increase of 28 percent over the 2.9 million Macs sold during the year-ago period. That set a record for Mac sales during the March quarter, Oppenheimer said. In particular, Mac sales compared favorably with the overall PC market, which contracted at a rate of 3 percent during the quarter, according to figures from IDC. That marks the twentieth consecutive quarter that Apple has outgrown the PC market, although sales numbers were*below those posted by Apple for the last two quarters.

Laptops continue to be the big driver for Mac sales, with the 2.7 million portables making up 73 percent of the Macs sold during the quarter. In addition to the February revamp of the MacBook Pro line, Apple also reaped the benefits of last years MacBook Air updates. The 1 million desktops sold were only more than during one of the last five quarters."

You can also purchase iMacs with a 256GB SSD + 1TB (or 2 TB) HD today if you want to use an SSD for your startup volume, and the traditional hard drive just for data (go to Apple Store online).

- Dave Marsh
iMac Intel 27" 3.4GHz, iPad Air 64GB, iPhone 5 32GB

Reply

- Dave Marsh
iMac Intel 27" 3.4GHz, iPad Air 64GB, iPhone 5 32GB

Reply
post #301 of 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra View Post

Whatever, my gaming PC I built which puts the iMac to shame cost a hell of a lot less. And yes, I use both PC's and Macs - been using Macs since the SE.

The point I was trying to make is that Apple should offer SAS as a middle range option instead of forcing consumers to choose between slower SATA and fast but expensive SSD. But apparently people on here are just to stupid to understand.

I thought I'd come back and see how this "conversation" went. Wow. I see what you did there.

I think it takes a mature person to understand that other people aren't stupid for not having the same opinion. But maybe you're unwilling to accept such a thought.

I think we understand that SAS is a middle ground in terms of price/performance, you don't even seem to try to understand there might be several reasons why it's not compatible with the the iMac ethos. You also need to understand that an iMac isn't intended to compete with a purpose-built game PC on the same turf, you're trying to make it be something it isn't.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple releases new iMac desktops with Intel Sandy Bridge CPUs, Thunderbolt ports