September launch pegged for Apple's 13" Retina MacBook Pro, new iMac - Page 2

You know tiny changes can add up especially incrementally. I look at several MBPs before me from several years span ... the oldest being a white MacBook G4 ... each one was gorgeous in its day ... but wow they look like antiques a few years later next to my latest one. I'm sure in five years what ever gorgeous Mac we have (if they even exist it might be an iPadPro or something not yet imagined by us mortals) it will make today's Air look cute and old fashioned.

Think laterally though. Who says the storage has to be inside the box in the future? A stack of SSDs in a slot machine with either TB or some futuristic blindingly fast form of local wifi (triple chips are being announced already) would mean a desk top could be far smaller without any sacrifice to storage.

As to power yes I agree ... Apple have to retain Pro machines. Oh boy do I miss my Mac Pro. MBPs simply cannot do several things at once, copy a few GIGs of small files to another drive and you can hardly use Safari ... I used to run FCPro, render copy, surf and FTP all at the same time without a blink from those sweet Xeons' multi core goodness. /sigh

 

Thinking out loud here...

 

What if Apple has a new iMac in the wings and waiting for a "companion" product (or products)  to make the new announcement a "big deal".

 

It could be Thunderbolt-related hardware like Optical Thunderbolt, external RAM and CPU/GPUs, Graphic Card cages...

 

It could be sharing/scheduling capability to exploit the above on a network.

 

It could be retina displays -- even touch screen retina displays.

 

It could be a better integration of iMac and iPad -- the iPad becomes a legitimate iMac accessory -- display, I/O device, Back to My Mac, etc.

 

It could be new or upgraded iMac applications.

 

it could include companion iDevice applications.

 

 

Here's one possibility:

 

On June 21, 2011 Apple really pissed off their high-end video editors by releasing Final Cut Pro X, and simultaneously EOLing Final Cut Pro 7/Studio.  Bad, bad move, Apple.

 

Since that time, Apple has upgraded FCP X 5 times, adding some major (missing) features (FCP X was lucky to get 1 upgrade every 18-24 months).  Now, FCP X is beginning to get another look by open-minded editors... It has some compelling advantages:

 

• total rewrite to remove bloat, modernize codebase (for next 10 years) and ability to add features and make upgrades
• inexpensive -- $300 per seat vs $1,000+ per seat (prosumers -- $300 -- 1 copy for all your Macs)
• easy to learn and use
• runs wicked-fast on today's 27" iMac
• instant on editing -- edit while media is being ingested
• powerful, flexible media organization
• database-driven advantages 
• background rendering
• resolutions up to 4K
• fast, flexible fun to use

• state-of-the-art implementation of features like multicam

 

 

So, the current version of FCP X is getting long in the tooth -- it hasn't been upgraded in over a month.

 

The major feature lacking is collaboration -- multiple editors editing the same project concurrently.

 

Apple was just granted some patents on the above.

 

A few weeks ago, Apple made a minor preso to the LAFCPUG (a most influential FCP user group)... I speculate that Apple planned to do more, but trimmed their sails at the last moment.

 

Apple likes to spread out their announcements/upgrades through the year -- this simplifies logistics, keeps Apple in the news [momentum], and helps assure that products are "ready".

 

 

I could envision, Apple announcing a new iMac 27" with some Thunderbolt Accessories and an PCP X upgrade --  before the end of this month -- Available in August.

 

 

Oh, BTW, you will be able to use an iPad 3 to control/mirror FCP X running on the iMac in another room (or another town).  Alternately, you will be able to use that iPad to manipulate FCP X running on that iMac while the iMac display is mirrored to the HDTV (via ApplleTV).

 

You make some good points.  Plus there are a lot of people out with large CD collections they've yet to fully rip to their hard drive and iTunes.  If the selling point of iTunes Match is that you can upload your non-iTunes purchase music to be available anywhere, you have to leave them a way to get it on there.

P.S.  I don't work for Apple, but they'd be lucky to have me ;)

Matte is not essential for "actual work". That statement is stupid and just as "Fan Boy" as the statement made by the other person for glossy screens.

Firstly, you do not define what "work" you are referring too. SOme work will require a glossy screen, where others are better suited to Matte.

 

If you do a quick internet search, you can see the pros and cons of each display type. But to save time, I shall summarise.

 

MATTE

Pros:

-Does not suffer from mirror-like reflections

-Easier to read in bright light

-Can be viewed for longer

 

Cons:

-Matte Display cover reduces sharpness

-Light diffusion by the Matte display cover reduces contrast ratio and colour saturation

-Crystalline texture is noticeable and distracting

-Light diffusion means a Matte display has a lower overall brightness level

 

GLOSS

Pros:

-Sharp and crisp image

-Better contrast ratio and colour saturation

-Brighter

-No texture

-Better to read in low to moderate light

 

Cons:

-Mirror like reflections in bright light

-Smudge and pick up dirt instantly

-Viewing times are not as long as Matte

 

It all depends on your work... If you were looking at a LOT of text, tend to work outside or view a screen for a prolonged time, Matte. For quite literally everything else from watching films to graphics, get a glossy.

He's right matte is terrible. This doesn't mean glossy is the only way.
Anti reflective coatings can be very effective.

J.

 

You are correct...

 

Except the large HDD doesn't have to be in the iMac (computer), itself.  I have gotten rid of all my external HDD drives (now on the shelf as archives) and replaced them with 2 12-Terabyte Promise Pegasus RAIDS connected via Thunderbolt.  The external Pegasus does I/O faster than the internal HDD on the iMac 27" (2011, Maxed out).

 

Also, Michael Cioni made an interesting point when discussing his experience in processing/rendering the 4K/5K resolution video for The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.  Michael explained that the entire edited video (before special effects) was 55 terabytes... and playing it required I/O of a Gigibyte per second (snapping his fingers) -- a gigabyte, a gigabyte...  Michael's experience showed him that you needed many smaller HDDs as opposed to fewer larger HDDs -- the smaller drives have a higher transfer rate (as does a RAID).

An iMac without a hard disk and optical drive would be the ideal machine.
ssd memory would make it much much faster and without the irritating disk noises.
Thunderbolt will make it the ultimate expandable machine and the attached drives - if you would like to use them - would be as fast as internal ones.
Optical disks are yesterday, it's very likely you already have an older machine that can do that if you really need it.

J.

As an FCP7 editor, I really don't want this to devolve into an FCPX debate, but you should really check out AutoDesk's Smoke. It's going to completely change the industry instead of just making iMovie2.0 http://usa.autodesk.com/smoke-for-mac/ 

 

 

And I see your point, and hopefully you're right. I just find it hard to believe we're going to be getting something totally unique and new with 0 rumors floating about. It's 2 months away. We heard MBP rumors back in February. So I'm skeptical, but hopeful. 

 

Your link is bad... some extraneous characters at the end.

 

Smoke looks real nice...

 

First time I've seen Schechtman giving a preso where he wasn't standing in a store window and sounding like Chef Ramsey of Hell's Kitchen.

 

I like Smoke's all-in-one approach to avoid round-tripping... but they still need to: 1) allow plug-ins;  or 2) round trip to something that provides needed capability not in Smoke.  I noticed that AD touts that they can conform to all [most] of the competitive NLEs.

 

I don't have enough experience with node-based compositing -- though lots of people liked Shake before Apple EOLed it.  The bulk of node-based work I've done was with Quartz Composer...  While great at first, it deteriorates rapidly as you add lots of processes... it becomes a can of worms... er, ah, noodles.  A pictorial representation is not necessarily the best or easiest way to represent a process...  As evidence, consider the difference in how a noob and a pro display the file system in Mac's Finder.  The noob uses CoverFlow and/or Icon view.  The pro use hierarchical text (outline) view.

 

I've always thought that Motion 5 and Compressor 4 were meant to be included in FCP X -- but they just didn't get all the work done in time for the FCP X rollout.  That might explain why there is no round-tripping from FCP X to Motion... or no [real] DVD support in FCP X.

 

As to your last point... I mentioned the LAFCPUG thing, because, in my experience (34 years) Apple doesn't go sniffing around around user groups asking questions, looking for ideas/input...  Apple is there to "Strut Its Stuff" and to show us what we should be doing (buying)...  Apple says:  "Well, enough about me -- lets talk about you!  What do you think of our wonderful new... whatever?"

 

Edited by Dick Applebaum - 7/24/12 at 12:18pm

Pretty dead on.  At least for the time being.  Optical drives will become a thing of the past- but not for years, hopefully- until a more functional or cost-effective alternative comes around.

 

I agree.  The change from white iMac to Aluminum iMac was huge.  But everything apple has released has been glass and aluminum- where do they go from there in the next couple years?  Likely nowhere.  I don't think we'll see a carbon fiber iMac this year ;-)  If it changes it will be minimal because there just isn't that much more to change.

 

 

My wife does photography.  She will edit over a thousand raw pictures in most cases.  How do you suggest she get those pictures to her client without an optical drive?  Upload the huge files to Dropbox and have the client download them from there?  Maybe get a thumb drive and give that to them?  I guess that's an option- but for now, Optical drives are the most cost effective and fastest way to get those out.

 

I have grandparents and parents.  They want to see my kid's sports game I recorded.  Do I upload that movie to dropbox and have them download it from there?  How about get a thumb drive, transfer it to their iTunes, erase my thumb drive, and then show them how to stream it via Apple TV?  I'm all game for that, but a DVD sure does make it easier for the majority of the population.

 

Bottom line- Optical drives on a desktop are still today- not yesterday.  They won't be around forever, but its a freaking desktop- it doesn't need the space or to be portable.  This isn't the floppy drive (going from one physical media to another).  Physical media is still a need and as a desktop- it should be there and there is absolutely no reason it shouldn't be ($30?)

 

I think you are right about the optical disks.... but tomorrow is coming sooner than you think!   Some new frequency allocations will make more, higher-speed and wider bandwidth available.

 

As to your wife's need to exchange those thousands of large raw photos with a client... I think that iCloud/Photo Stream is pointing the way of the future.  If you haven't tried it, here is how it works:  On any of your iDevices or Mountain Lion Macs:

 

1. photos are automatically uploaded to iCloud as they are taken or ingested
2. photos are automatically downloaded from iCloud, as they arrive, to all registered iDevices or Macs
3. there is no manual upload or download process
4. you are always only one image away from having all the images -- the last one processed

 

Your wife could easily set up an iCloud account dedicated to each client -- and they would always have the latest photos.

 

 

For the grandparents (and other non-techies) the optical disk is reliable because it is tangible and doesn't require any effort other than to open the package (mail) and play the disk...

 

...but, as soon as you burn it -- the optical disk content is out of date!  

 

...and at least one of the recipients won't be able to "play" the DVD on his computer.

 

My granddaughter  lost her paternal grandmother and uncle this year -- about 5 months apart.  She was given the responsibility of creating an iMovie of remembrances (mostly photos) and then creating a DVD.  She would give this to her father (whom she usually sees twice a week) for approval/suggestions... rinse repeat.  This drove my granddaughter crazy -- it took many iterations and many weeks for each DVD... she is still making corrections to the one from 6 months ago.

 

How much easier would it have been:

1. create a version
2. upload to YouTube (until iCloud supports this)
3. her dad downloads and critiques

 

Then, instead of burning a DVD, she could just upload the final version to YouTube and make it accessible and downloadable to all her relatives (even grandma knows how to use YT).

 

And if a later revision is necessary, it can be available to everyone, ASAP, by just repeating the process... no Buying DVDs, Burning DVDs, Buying DVD/Case Labels, Printing DVD/Case Labels, Buying/Finding a DVD Label Pounder, Label Pounding the DVDs, Buying Cases, Inserting DVDs and Case Labels into Case, Buying Mailing Labels, Printing Mailing Labels, Buying Mailing Envelopes, Inserting DVDs into Mailing Envelopes, Sealing Mailing Envelopes, Buying Stamps, Applying Stamps, Taking packages to post office...

 

If you plan perfectly, and everything goes without problems -- you could do it all with a single shopping trip and a single trip to the post office... realistically, it is about 10 trips to buy/replace additional or defective supplies, a stop at the gas station to buy gas...

 

...Then you have all these leftover supplies (hot dogs and hot dog buns) that you put away (with the Label Pounder), somewhere (that you immediately put out of your mind as a bad memory).

If she edits 1000+ raw photos an ssd drive will be an enormous performance boost and will save her lots of time and irritation.
If quality is that important - since your editing raw - presenting it to clients must be in the best way possible.
You have two ways to do that: one, iPad3 with retina display, two, MacBook pro 15 inch with retina display.
The iPad display is of exceptional quality especially with colors and cost a lot less than the MacBook (-1500$), response to its form factor and ease of use if phenomenal, so your clients will be impressed from the start.
The iPad works equally well for parents and grandparents. Just think a little out of the box (into the iPad).

J.
Edited by jnjnjn - 7/24/12 at 1:53pm

I really hope that the Mini isn't dead. At least not until a new desktop model replaces it.

You see I want a desktop affordable Mac where the Current iMac is a no go. That could mean an upgraded Mini but I'd rather have a bit more powerful machine than what we see in the current Minis. Yes I'm talking XMac, a machine that could best be called a midrange desktop machine.

In any event the absolute deadness of the rumor mill is less than satisfying. There is nothing in the rumor mill that explains what is going on with the iMac nor the Mini. For all we know they could both be dead. You would think that the rumor sites would start to shake a few trees to free up a rumor or two.

Is the Mini dead?
Is it being replaced with something else?
Does XMac exists?
What is the real problem with the iMac?
Does Apple even give a damn about the desktop?
What is the new Mac Pro going to have that makes the wait till 2013 worthwhile.

You guys in the blogosphere call yourselves reporters, well I think it is about time you dig up a story. If nothing else go to a local bar and get a few Apple employees drunk and see if you can't shake out a story. Reporting is a dirty business embrace it.

++++++++++++++

Well worth a repost, buying a matte MBP was a big mistake on my part.

Baloney!

This from a MBP owner with a Matte screen. They suck and are a big negative to getting work done.

You have been brainwashed by the matte screen zealots just as I was. You can get over it and get on your way to greater productivity. Frankly it is a bit like being brain washed, after a bit of reconstruction you will actipually be embarrassed that you fell for the line of BS that is the matte screen.

Just a point for those that don't know, iPad 3 eats a lot of power when the ack light is turned up. Some USB ports can not supply that much power to the iPad so they will drain battery even when plugged in. Depending on the port you are plugged into you can overcome this by lowering the screen backlight to the lowest possible setting. The iPad might not charge very fast but you can minimize most battery run down this way.

That's one reason I wish Apple would add a Thunderbolt cable option and the internal HW to handle the increased power. Having 10W instead of 5W for the iPad would be great, however, as I'm saying this I'm realizing that the heat and wear on the battery and certain internal components would be considerably increased which could be a reason why even the USB wall charger is still limited.

I understand your concerns below but I think you are a minority now.
I think that time has arrived for many already. Right now it is the vast majority that don't use the optical at all. Myself I'm someplace in the middle with usage every couple of months. First let me say I'm no fan of the iMac. However I believe it has great potential and as such hold out hope that it will morph into something I would like.

In any event why does the screen need to be encased in anything? If Apple really wanted to set the industry on fire they would offer up a transparent screen much like we often see in Sci-fi movies. Frankly this is a good example of where a technology doesn't have a direct replacement. However to play devils advocate Apple can't make hardware for a minority of users. As such external drives are the best solution for legacy users.

Another option is to make customers pay a $20 deposit on a USB flash dongle. In a way this is a better solution and one that can be marketed as a greener solution. I use to use a lot of CDs at work up until thumb drives became a better solution. In the end CDs aren't very fast at all. Cost effective maybe, but the reality is thumb drives can be reused numerous times. I really don't know how adaptable you grand parents are to technology but let's be honest thumb drives aren't that difficult. All they have to do is plug in the chip and double click on the video files. This is a reality, it is uch easier to accept opticals going away on portables. However again you are already in the minority with respect to your usage of optical tech and more so a minority that is rapidly shrinking. What you fail to realize is that thumb drives are physical media too.

Maybe just maybe your wish will come true with that new dock connector.😃

Other than the physical size not much has been leak with regards to that new dock connector. However if it has reduced pin count then the likely replacement for all of the dedicated pins would be a high speed digital port. Thunderbolt to be exact. USB as in USB3 would still have to be supported as would analog audio, which would mean a minimal of 9 pins so the question becomes can TB be supported on ten pins?

It would be a massive win for Apple if the could support TB next to USB 3 on that port. It certainly would justify the change to the new configuration.
Heat has really never been a serious issue on my iPad 3. Of course I live in the rather cold northeast. However there have been times where I wish that I couLd quick charge my iPad via a MagSafe connector.

As to USB the limitations I believe are with the connectors and cabling. These have historically been designed for limited wattage.

As a side note I'm sitting here typing this on my iPad3, with my MBP sitting near by. After a short stint and a bit of frustration with iPad one I'm rather shocked by the amount of usage my iPad gets. IPad 3 is a massive improvement over the original which makes me wonder just how much better the next release will be. Double the processor performance as well as flash and this iPad might end up on waiver faster than I first thought.

IPad is one of the reasons I'm thinking seriously about a desktop machine instead of another portable. That is still a purchase decision for 2013 but expanding capabilities with iOS6 and a more capable iPad might have me on a different path.

There is the rumour about it being only 19 pins which seems about right by my count of FW, iPhoto Color and unused pins being removed. That said, your "next to" comment is interesting because of the nature of Thunderbolt. Apple doesn't need to have separate pins for TB and USB, it needs to be able to do one or the other as needed.

Even if heat or beefier (ie: larger and more expensive) components aren't needed for the added heat double the wattage would add there is the issue of what benefit data speeds would be (if you bought what I assume would only be an optional TB cable) since NAND is still very slow in these devices.

Of course, that will change over time but it doesn't look to be moving quickly. It's charging that's most important. But will even that be a big issue next year when the lithography is shrunk?

I don't know, I hope they go toward TB but I have my doubts.

Anti_glare is essential for tasks like Database Administration. The"classic" revised Macbook Pro 15 with Anti-glare is purrffect, Many people still live in a mono-chrome world. Simple color palette sufices when I need to communicate tuning issues to developers.

 

I can enjoys hi-res on my IPad3 and save my eyes

Apple has mitigated the glossy reflection on the new MacBook Pro.  It's not 100% perfect but it's a lot better than it was.  I just don't know why Apple didn't fix this issue sooner.  I own a 17 inch MacBook Pro with an antiglare screen. I love it. But I also love my iPad & iPhone too where the glass screen's reflections don't really bother me.  I will say this: the matte screen MacBook Pros are lighter than the ones with the glass/glossy display.  The glass ads some weight to the computer.  And this is probably why there is no glass screen on the MacBook air because weight is very much an issue with that product line.

You can have mass storage - on SSD. Internal vs. external is a moot debate at the moment, connections exceed drive speed by a fair margin, except for the super high end, and it's far more than enough for spinning disks.

I see a lot of new computers without BD, so I think it's false to say it is the standard now.


The portable music revolution happened a many years ago, MP3s in the late 90's, the 11th anniversary of iPods this year, and so on. Why are those people so behind on importing their music? There is also still the option to use an external optical drive.


I think it's a matter of personal preference and the use environment. To just say that someone has been brainwashed by other people is pretty low in my opinion, even if you try to hedge it by claiming you were too.

I have a matte screen connected to a new iMac. I think the matte is a lot more comfortable. My ideal is a stronger anti-reflective, better than matte in many cases. On a lark, I just pulled the front glass on my iMac. It's even nicer without the extra reflections, and the base screen does have a higher degree of anti-reflective coatings than the cover glass.
Edited by JeffDM - 7/27/12 at 5:49am

Isn't it quite vulnerable to the elements that way? I have a matte display, a display hood, and lighting flagged off from it. Methods of cutting reflections that don't interfere with transmissive light would be nice. In some ways the anti-glare treatments received by quality crts and some of the non LG tft panels were vastly superior to what we have now (hitachi had a good coating system and they actually pioneered IPS). As to Wizard, I think he hates their implementation rather than a lack of reflection.

There is less protection, but I don't know how much of a problem it is. I did pretty well with a 30" monitor for six years without any glass on it.

I wasn't sure how well the imac is protected without its glass relative to displays that are not designed to be covered by a glass panel.

Interesting idea but I'm not too sure the two standards are that compatible. I think flexibility is the big deal. TB could be used to drive a monitor or establish communications to slave devices.
I'm not convinced that a performance improvement is that hard to obtain in the flash subsystem. Asto charging the device takes all that the USB port can give it. I suspect Apple will keep charging demand constant for the long run if users find it tolerable. This allows them to increase capacity and performance as process technology shrinks by keeping power usage constant.

So what I'm saying is that next years process shrink most likely will go to improved performance and new capabilities. Apple could easily double overall performance next year and at the same time double storage. As nice as my iPad is, performance is a problem, new hardware could go a long way towards beefing up performance if power usage is keep constant.

I saw nothing to indicate that it is any different, or any less protected, than any other LCD panel.

I wasn't sure as I haven't really pulled apart any recent imacs. That makes me wonder why the glass is there.

I think additional protection, a smoother look and increased consistency with the broader product line.

Perhaps. I'm just not big on added reflections. Others have complained about dust buildup underneath the glass.

 

You can have mass storage on SSD? Really?  Doing a quick check online - 

 

Seagate 3tb internal SATA 3.5" hard drive - £115

 

OCZ Octane 1tb  2.5" internal SSD - £1718

 

 

So if a 3tb SSD existed, and they currently don't, they would cost somewhere in the region of £5000. That's only 48x more expensive. Quite a deal.  I have 8tb of storage on my Win 7 PC and it cost peanuts. I won't be able to replicate that with SSD drives for many, many years.

 

 Also, isn't the whole point of the iMac to reduce desk clutter and keep everything you need in one super tidy unit? If you have to then start adding a plethora of external drives that will mess up your desk in no time.

 

As for BD drives in PCs, well if you go really low end, you may find a few with DVD drives, but they're pretty rare now. There's no reason not to use BD drives as they're incredibly cheap now.

Where in his comment did he say that you can have SSD mass storage at the same price point as HDD mass storage? 1TB is mass storage. Very few consumers even come close to needing that much capacity.

Not even close to the truth. If you want to talk about low-end PCs you are talking about most PCs sold throughout the world which makes your point invalid right there. If you talk about the high-end PCs you are talking about Macs which doesn't have BRDs. Therefore you're pretty much left with the high-priced, low-volume PCs from Apple's competitors who are trying to add features that will make their machines look better to their target audience. That audience being those that wouldn't have bought a Mac anyway and look at a spec sheet for rudimentary feature listings over more important aspects of a PC.

Where are these cheap BRDs? It was only in around 2010 that I first saw an ultra-slim BRD and I think it wasn't until a year later that I first saw an ultra-slim slot-loading BRD. The price was about $500-600 for the upgrade over the DVD burner in the Sony notebook and I don't think the first ones even had burners.

But that was a long time ago. What does BRD have to do with PCs today? Notebooks are moving away from moving parts because they are more prone to wear out and break. They are also very large and use a lot of power. The DVD drive takes up 25% of the 13" MBPs internal space and it gets used so very little. You try watching a movie on a notebook with that BRD spinning in front of you and you'll not only have noise pollution to contend with but have a very short window before your battery needs to be recharged. Hopefully you'll be able to get through the film before your machine dies. Storing the video on your internal drive is more efficient in many ways.

Let's not forget this is 2012. With each passing day the likelihood lessens that Apple will ever support Blu-ray. It's the last optical media for PCs but it will remain 2nd to DVD until both are removed from OEMs PCs, starting with the notebook.

 

The current MBP 15" Retina can hold 768 GB Flash, so I'm sure the next iMac could hold even more than that.

But would the cost be worth it?

I keep my big storage on a wired network.

I looked at ASUS's web site and found zero desktops with BD.

I go to Dell's site and found 44 desktops with DVD, 6 with Blu-Ray.

I don't believe yields for Retina Displays will improve fast enough for a Retina iMac to be possible in 2012.  The only additional Retina Mac I expect in 2012 is the 13" MacBook Pro.  All the other Macs will probably have to wait for 2013 to get Retina Displays.

The New iMac will be a sealed unit like the rMPB.  Soldered RAM, specialized SSD, no optical drive.  Basically no reason to open it because of zero expansion capabilities.  Two models, both 21.5 inches, with the retina iMac being the new high end model.  No more giant honking monitors.  Same resolution as the 27 inch in the same physical space as the 21.5 inch.  

 

Same with the mini.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the New Mac Mini is the same size as the appleTV.