or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › New iMacs expected to quadruple Apple's dismal Q3 desktop shipments
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New iMacs expected to quadruple Apple's dismal Q3 desktop shipments

post #1 of 51
Thread Starter 
Apple's newly introduced iMac lineup is expected to dramatically boost the company's desktop shipments, which are forecast to be down 79 percent year-to-year for the third calendar quarter, according to one analyst's estimates.

In a research note to investors obtained by AppleInsider, KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo estimated that Apple's desktop shipments will be down to 264,000 for the company's fourth fiscal quarter of 2012, representing a huge 79 percent drop from the year ago period.

The analyst cut his forecast of Mac desktop shipments by over 63 percent mainly due to the new iMac's later-than-expected arrival. In August, Kuo's supply chain checks pointed to a September launch date for Apple's newest all-in-one, however production stalls blamed on low display lamination yields pushed the announcement back to October. Combined with a ramp-down of the previous iMac models, which began in July to August, overall sales plunged.

Despite the dismal third-quarter forecast, Kuo believes shipments will pick up during the holiday season, growing 434 percent quarter-on-quarter mostly thanks to expected strong demand for the newly-announced iMac, which is set to hit stores in November.

New iMac


Even with the huge quarter-to-quarter growth, Kuo estimates iMac shipments to hit 1.4 million at the end of the year, representing a 5 percent decline from the year ago period. With shipping difficulties lingering into October, overall Mac desktop performance is expected to hit 3.8 million units in the fourth quarter, down 21 percent year-to-year.

The report comes just one day ahead of Apple's quarterly conference call, which is scheduled to take place
post #2 of 51

Ask Clive Sinclair (is he still with us?) about the devastating effect of releasing a new model late (or later than expected).  Apple will cope.

 

I for one will be helping boost shipments!

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #3 of 51

The new iMac is a total disappointment. Apple is going for cosmetic changes instead of addressing the needs of people who use their computers for serious work. Until the 27" iMac gets a higher resolution screen, I'm not going to update.

post #4 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartmann View Post

The new iMac is a total disappointment. Apple is going for cosmetic changes instead of addressing the needs of people who use their computers for serious work. Until the 27" iMac gets a higher resolution screen, I'm not going to update.

Can't tell if trolling...

... at night.

Reply

... at night.

Reply
post #5 of 51
I wonder how much less aluminium the new imac uses compared to the old model. As devices become smaller and thinner, the stockpile of material should cost less and less... Shouldn't this translate to at least cheaper prices?
post #6 of 51
I wonder most about the benchmarks and the possibility to (finally) install Windows via Bootcamp via a USB stick/HD (for the occassional game). Install via USB has never been possible before on an iMac as far as I can tell (and I looked around and tried like my life depended on it!) 1smile.gif

I'm absolutely loving the iMac's new lower glare screen and thinness, and the USB3 connectors, but there are a few questions that remain unanswered at this moment.
post #7 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by simtub View Post

I wonder how much less aluminium the new imac uses compared to the old model. As devices become smaller and thinner, the stockpile of material should cost less and less... Shouldn't this translate to at least cheaper prices?

 

But newer manufacturing techniques, that might keep the cost savings from the use of less material needed to make the iMac, mute.  Also, the new 27" iMac pricing is several hundred dollars less then the price I paid for the 2006 iMac I have.  So prices have come down a bit and you get a larger screen iMac with better technology like faster processor, more RAM, bigger hard drive, and the like.  So you're getting a good deal if you look at it from that point of view.  That's what I tell myself anyway. 1biggrin.gif

 

Also when some were griping about the $329 pricing of the iPad Mini, the following was written...

 

"Amidst a raft of analysts who don’t, Janney analyst Bill Choi gets it, writing, “We don’t think Apple needs to compete aggressively on price against mini-tablets from Android; Apple continues to sell a premium product in the fast growing tablet market at premium price points.”

Listen, if you can’t afford an iPad mini, you’re not in the target market. Stop whining. Nobody cares. Developers aren’t interested in those who can’t muster at least $329 for iPad mini. Neither are advertisers. Neither is Apple, who are running a business, not a charity. If you want an iPad mini, but you can’t afford it, either save up for one or trot on over to Costco and settle for a cheesy, plastic, tiny screen pretend iPad."

/

/


Edited by Rot'nApple - 10/24/12 at 4:15am

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #8 of 51

The problem is that Most non techies do not mind using an ipad .  Most people Just use a computer or tablet for web browsing.  It all comes down to how important is the desktop space for apple?  I can actually see apple dropping desktops totally if sales keep dropping. I see apple doing what windows 8 tablets are doing in the future. Eventually apple will stop with desktops and make docks for the ipad. 

post #9 of 51

Apple really screwed up on the iMac refresh. 18 months was just taking the piss. The new models are very nice, shame about the rubbish 5400RPM Hard Drives as standard but you can configure a very nice spec if needed.

 

Personally I wish they had gone with higher performance over thin design, but that's just my personal view.

 

I'll keep my 2010 iMac for a bit longer and upgrade next year, that is if they care enough to do an update within 12 months of course......

iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #10 of 51

It's a tough situation for Apple since the 27 inch doesn't even arrive until December and currently Apple isn't selling an iMac you can go to their online store and purchase.  Too bad they weren't able to keep the prior generation in production for a few more months so they'd at least have stock to sell (particularly the 27inch) as we head towards the holidays.

post #11 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasparilla View Post

It's a tough situation for Apple since the 27 inch doesn't even arrive until December and currently Apple isn't selling an iMac you can go to their online store and purchase.  Too bad they weren't able to keep the prior generation in production for a few more months so they'd at least have stock to sell (particularly the 27inch) as we head towards the holidays.

But a situation that they created, I doubt any of their parts suppliers would turn around and say "sorry, but we won't sell this to you". Apple cocked up really badly, someone took their eye off the ball.

iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #12 of 51

I heard that in theory, a 5400rpm disk can be as fast (or faster) than a 7200rpm disk depending on the amount of platters it uses. A 5400rpm disk with less platters could (unless I've been misinformed) be faster than a 7200rpm disk with more platters. But that still doesn't make it strange that Apple chose for such a disk. If they wanted to reduce space and chose to use a 2.5" instead of a 3.5" HD, they could still choose a 2.5" 7200rpm HD instead.

 

And the Fusion HD upgrade is an easy 250 bucks on top of the regular price, which feels like a steep increase… especially since I feel almost forced to do so because of the apparently slow 5400rpm standard HD.

 

But looking at GPU comparisation charts, the GT650M seems like a decent upgrade, and the new Ivy Bridge CPU's are looking quite nice as well. I'm quite positive that they'll prove to be a very nice speedbump compared to my current 2009 iMac, especially since the Sandy ánd Ivy Bridge CPU's offer a surprisingly large speedbump in general over the first generation of iX-CPU's.

 

An impossible ram and/or HD upgrade as a user-replacable part does feel really shitty though… that will prove to become a very expensive repair if either of them ever breaks outside of your warranty. Plus RAM not being upgradable is definitely a bad choice as far as I'm concerned. A new system 2-3 years from now that might need more ram will suck immensely. And we all know that RAM at Apple cost a premium if you do consider a BTO.

 

A nice 5400rpm vs 7200rpm discussion on Apple's forum:

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3011064?start=0&tstart=0

From the looks of it you can actually lóse about 20% snappyness. Why on earth would Apple increase the speed of the CPU, GPU and RAM, while lowering the speed of the already main bottleneck on a computer's speed… the HD? Fusion HD or not, it's a painfully harsh move to "force" people to use it by crippling the standard HD.

 

p.s.:

I honestly believe Apple deliberately stopped selling the previous model because they're concerned a lot of critics would pass the new model (which obviously has a somewhat higher production cost looking at the thinness and monitor), and would instead buy the previous model in order to keep the Superdrive and other elements they'd otherwise miss out on.


Edited by flabber - 10/24/12 at 5:34am
post #13 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

Ask Clive Sinclair (is he still with us?) about the devastating effect of releasing a new model late (or later than expected).  Apple will cope.

 

Sir Clive Sinclair is still with us and still working on electric vehicles!

post #14 of 51
I believe demand is lower for several simple reasons.

They are built to last. The previous iMacs still perform well. My first iMac has been handed off to a cousin who is a professional photographer. He uses it daily and it is as fast as ever.

The people who want a new iMac have been waiting a little longer to get a new one. Since they perform so well, it is possible to keep them a little longer in order to get the new one. Keep the money in the bank until what you want is available.

The economy, but those who want an iMac will get them when they become available. Cannot get one before that. Many follow what Apple does or mentally figure out where we think they are headed and want the new product. I know I do and I was right about every single product - not to the every little detail of how they look, but what they would be like and have - Right down to the fusion drive. I thought they might put one in the MacBook Pro, but they did not - at least not yet.

I have a Fall 2010 Air, it is a great little product. Don't want to get rid of it. It is better than the competition. Sure it does not have some of the ports, but it has all I need today and I am keeping it. But I will get another notebook soon. I will not wait much longer now that Apple has tipped their hand. Price will not deter me that much. I will not wait in line. I am 67 and time is valuable to me. I will not buy a windows pc - they have given me too much trouble in my career and when I retired - I retired them with me. Big pains in the rear, but if someone wants one go get it, but don't ask me to help you - those days are gone.

I love the Apple software and the Apple eco-system. Macs, iPads, & Phones - they work great. Sure you can only talk so fast on the phone, especially if you are Southern like I am, but I feel the need for speed and have a 5 and am waiting for the 6. There is always so much improvement and things just happen faster and they work.

Where I often think about is where Apple is going in the future. They are very creative - others may be creative, but they are not as creative as the Apple Organization.

Finally an iMac I can Carry with Me and I will Have one Because my Eyes are not getting any younger and I will also have a Retina 15" MacBook.
post #15 of 51

the RPM of the drive does not matter as much as you think. It application dependent, if the application you are using is very data intensive and requires hitting the drive all the time and required the drive to seek to find the data then faster is always better, However if you are not hitting the drive hard and fast you will not notice the difference between 5400 and 7200. Yes on boot up when you're loading the memory up with OS and such you may see some performance difference. But if you sleep your system verse doing a complete shut down then that is a mute point.

 

Also, since the standard drive in 1TB and I am assuming that apple is using the latest single platter 1TB product performane of this drive over the single platter 500GB from before and the 2 Platter 1TBs this drive performance is better than the old 7200 RPM counter parts. Also because of the technology in the single platter 1TB going to a 7200 RPM is serious cost adder for minor improvements. This is way Apple came up with their Fusion Drive concept, adding SSD and 5400RPM drive you can well out perform the 7200RM drive alone. With SSD pricing now well below $1/GB SSD cost performance is worth the cost.


Edited by Maestro64 - 10/24/12 at 6:24am
post #16 of 51

Ivy Bridge Mac Pro? Where are you? What about the proverbial X-Mac positioned between the Pro and the mini? There are LOTS of people who do not want and never will want an AIO.

 

The market as a whole is moving away from desktops, especially the consumer market. Apple has always been a consumer market company. The last bastion of the desktop is big business; Apples weak place.

 

Is this any reason for surprise or alarm? Apple is selling iphones and iPads now. Letting HP and Dell duke it out losing bucks on corporate desktop boxes.

post #17 of 51

7200 rpm drive = Heat. The smaller the case, the less tolerance for heat. This new fusion drive is a smart move. Take Seagates crippled Momentus hybrid idea and make something workable with it. Why beat up over old technology when the market is moving to SSD's?

post #18 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary54 View Post

Ivy Bridge Mac Pro? Where are you? What about the proverbial X-Mac positioned between the Pro and the mini? There are LOTS of people who do not want and never will want an AIO.

 

The market as a whole is moving away from desktops, especially the consumer market. Apple has always been a consumer market company. The last bastion of the desktop is big business; Apples weak place.

 

Is this any reason for surprise or alarm? Apple is selling iphones and iPads now. Letting HP and Dell duke it out losing bucks on corporate desktop boxes.

Not necessary true, more companies are now moving away from PCs. Working for a company who used nothing but PC for the last 20 yrs I am seeing more Macs showing up and these are not people bring in their own, it the company buying them for employees. With so many business systems going to a web/cloud base systems there is no need for a PC and PC only systems tools. Unless you running an application that has to run on a PC at your desk, there is no specific need for a PC these days. In the past company used PC because business system required a PC to use them.

post #19 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

the RPM of the drive does not matter as much as you think. It application dependent, if the application you are using is very data intensive and requires hitting the drive all the time and required the drive to seek to find the data then faster is always better, How every if you not hit the drive hard and fast you will not notice the difference between 5400 and 7200. Yes on boot up when you loading the memory up with OS and such you may see some performance difference. But if you sleep your system verse doing a complete shut down they that is a mute point.

You're right, but with iMacs being used as professional ánd semi-professional machines, a lot of the programs used on it do have a benefit from a normal fast HD. A lot of people (pro or prosumer) have Photoshop, iPhoto, some games and other HD-intensive software on their computers. And turning a computer off is still more energy-efficient if you only use it in the evenings (letting it sleep for 14 hours a day will still consume energy after all). So for a lot of people boot time is also a relevent factor :)

 

I do agree with the fact that single/lesser platter 5400rpm HD's cán be faster compared to multi platter 7200rpm HD's, but it's not (yet) a given that Apple is using these type of 5400rpm HD's. So untill tests have been done (which will surely be done to check the actual HD speed this time) the standard HD's will appear to be slower than the regular 7200rpm HD's. 

 

p.s.: and don't forget that there are also single/lesser platter 7200rpm HD's, which would make it seem even stranger to go for their 5400rpm counterparts… at this moment it really does feel like a cheap cost-effective but non-realistic choice from Apple's side. :)

post #20 of 51

Back to this subject, I think this analysis has not clue, yeah Apples numbers may have dropped due to the reduce number of older product available in the channels, but not 60%+ down. Again a guy with FUD hoping to affect the stock in a way to make money of a decline.

post #21 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Back to this subject, I think this analysis has not clue, yeah Apples numbers may have dropped due to the reduce number of older product available in the channels, but not 60%+ down. Again a guy with FUD hoping to affect the stock in a way to make money of a decline.

 

iMacs will be down, iPods will be down. iPhones will be down. iPads will be down.

 

Nobody will have to try to drive the price down after the Q4 release... it's going there on its own.

 

The forward statement should be interesting, though, and I'm expecting it to deposit a Christmas bonus in my stocking.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #22 of 51
Originally Posted by benanderson89 View Post
Can't tell if trolling...

 

Completely trolling.

post #23 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTBuzz View Post

I believe demand is lower for several simple reasons.
They are built to last. The previous iMacs still perform well. My first iMac has been handed off to a cousin who is a professional photographer. He uses it daily and it is as fast as ever.

 

I think there's some truth in that.  My iMac is three years old now, and it still runs great.  Much though I'd like one of the new ones, I'm finding it hard to justify buying one, since my current one continues to do what I need it to very well.

 

Ten years ago, I would have upgraded my compter (which at the time was a PC - shudder) every couple of years, since the increased processor speed made a very appreciable difference in general computing tasks, but now, I don't think that's the case - you only need a faster machine if you do "pro" stuff with your computer.

 

Since I switched to Macs in 2004, I now upgrade when I'm forced to by the OS.  I kept my orignal iMac until 2009 and only got rid of it then because it couldn't run Snow Leopard.  I suspect I'll keep this one until they ditch support for the Core 2 Duo.

post #24 of 51

The real reasons desktop computer shipments are down:

 

1. It's the economy, stupid.

2. Tablets and lower cost computers are good enough for most purposes.

3. Apple has already supplied most of the all-in-ones that anyone is going to buy.

4. Apple still hasn't built the desktop computer that people really want.

post #25 of 51
Originally Posted by mytdave View Post
The real reasons desktop computer shipments are down:

 

1. It's the economy, stupid.

2. Tablets and lower cost computers are good enough for most purposes.

3. Apple has already supplied most of the all-in-ones that anyone is going to buy.

4. Apple still hasn't built the desktop computer that people really want.

 

1. Nope. Apple's still up above everyone else there.

2. Desktops are the lowest-cost computers they sell.

3. lol, "saturation". That's not it, either.

4. And they never will. Because people don't actually "want" that.

post #26 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Apple really screwed up on the iMac refresh. 18 months was just taking the piss. The new models are very nice, shame about the rubbish 5400RPM Hard Drives as standard but you can configure a very nice spec if needed.

 

Personally I wish they had gone with higher performance over thin design, but that's just my personal view.

 

I'll keep my 2010 iMac for a bit longer and upgrade next year, that is if they care enough to do an update within 12 months of course......

I'm going to do the same thing- I'll hold onto my 2 2010 BTOs until the 2013 model (maybe even 2014).  The 5400 Drives are insane- luckily, that's only for the 21.5.  I would love to hear the argument about how much better a 5400rpm drive is from the typical people who apologize and defend apple for every move.  So far, all we know is that the new fusion drive for the mini is 5400- but hopefully just because its the mini.  If the fusion is 5400 on the 27" iMac.... I think I might scream (I definitely won't be getting it- I'll just settle for a 1 or 2 TB)

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #27 of 51
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post
On your second point you can't have it both ways.
Okay. So they sell tablets. No reason to sell laptops, and the desktop takes over again.
post #28 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by flabber View Post
.....  So for a lot of people boot time is also a relevent factor :) ....

 

 

This sounds to me as being a complaint just for the sake of complaining. Just how much longer does it take to boot from a 5400 than a 7200 HD ... 40 seconds or so?  Jeez Louise, I can't even fart 3 times in a row in that time frame. Get real.

See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
See, in the record business, you can show someone your song, and they don’t copy it. In the tech business, you show somebody your idea, and they steal it. (Jimmy Iovine)
Reply
post #29 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartmann View Post

The new iMac is a total disappointment. Apple is going for cosmetic changes instead of addressing the needs of people who use their computers for serious work. Until the 27" iMac gets a higher resolution screen, I'm not going to update.

 

Why do you need a higher resolution on such a large screen? The resolution is perfectly adequate. I don't know of any third party monitors that offer retina quality on such a large screen. I say that because you were expecting a retina screen. Right? I guess if it was a retina screen you wouldn't have a problem paying $4000 for it. If I were you. Id' stop bitching about the screen and I'd ask a more important question. Why didn't Apple include 802.11 ac WiFi in its new macs.

post #30 of 51
Originally Posted by gimpymw View Post
Why do you need a higher resolution on such a large screen? The resolution is perfectly adequate.

 

Personally, I'd prefer a higher resolution. I can see the pixels on mine. "Adequate" is exactly right. It's just adequate, nothing more.


I don't know of any third party monitors that offer retina quality on such a large screen.

 

Of course not. Apple hasn't made them yet.


Why didn't Apple include 802.11 ac WiFi in its new macs.

 

"Why do you need networking that fast in a computer? The networking is perfectly adequate. I guess if it had 802.11ac, you wouldn't have a problem paying $whatever more for it."

 

I'll get ahead of it and say, "Touché," for you. 😉

post #31 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post

 Eventually apple will stop with desktops and make docks for the ipad. 

iPads are great but there is so much you can't do with them.  Most of my work happens on an iMac, my fun happens on an iPad.

post #32 of 51

The new iMac is a stunning design.

 

I'm still wowed 24 hrs after.

 

GPU is unprecedented for an iMac...let along one this 'thin.'

 

CPU is as fast as quad cores currently are.  Turbo'd to 3.9 gig.  (We could only dream of that in a tower under PPC.)

 

8 gigs of ram.  Expandable to 32 gigs?

 

Hello workstation.

 

Sure, it's not a tower.  But they're losing their relevance...and have been for a long time.

 

Fusion drive and SSD sound good as options.

 

But there in the rub.

 

UK gets prices hikes, AGAIN!  SSD drives are so DIRT cheap now, Apple could have included a 128 gig SSD as standard.  The prices on these have fallen like rocks.    128 gig SD and a TB HD and kept the prices the same.  

 

iMac used to be the affordable iMac.  Now?  It's entry price is as high as when the bubble iMac was 1st released.

 

...and I wonder how much more expensive the 'top end' model is going to be when you add i7 (which should be standard on machines about 1200£.  No doubt.  And the bto of the 680MX should be standard on a top end model.

 

They're still creaming and nickle and diming.

 

It's a forward looking design.  Though some will moan about the lack of DVD (how to boot camp windows?) and the SD card being awkward on the back.

 

Much to like.

 

Design.

Ram 8 gigs...and bigger limit?

GPU power upto 2 gigs of vram and 12th fastest gpu on the planet?

CPU power.  As good as it gets for now, consumer wise./prosumer wise.

Thunderbolt of course.  ...and USB 3.

 

Some things to quibble.

 

Price.

SSD not standard.

i7 and

gpu not standard...on high end machines.

 

It's the modern workstation....come prosumer come gamer's paradise.  The ultimate consumer all in one.

 

Is anything without it's faults though?

 

...and it's not retina.  Though the new lamination process is some appeasement.  Should look gorgeous.

 

With Haswell round the corner (wonder how many cores the consumer version will have?  And what speed?)...and that 8xxx Radeon beastie...this seems like the testbed for 'more powerful' tech' to come.

 

Though if we don't get Retina (will we?) on a 27 inch Haswell, you could say you may as well buy now.  But they high end with SSD drive, gpu options maxed won't be cheap.

 

Buy now or get a last gen Sandy to sandbag until Haswell?  Decisions, decisions...

 

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 #33 of 51
The only reason they let a 5400 drive into the base model was to come under a price point.
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

 

Is anything without it's faults though?

 

Outside of the 21.5" hard drive- nope

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

The new iMac is a stunning design.

I'm still wowed 24 hrs after.

GPU is unprecedented for an iMac...let along one this 'thin.'

CPU is as fast as quad cores currently are.  Turbo'd to 3.9 gig.  (We could only dream of that in a tower under PPC.)

8 gigs of ram.  Expandable to 32 gigs?

[...]

Also, when you choose the 16GB option you get 2x8GB instead of 4x4GB.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #36 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Also, when you choose the 16GB option you get 2x8GB instead of 4x4GB.

That's pretty awesome- didn't catch that Sol.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #37 of 51
Sadly I tend to agree, it isn't just the iMac that sucks though the Mini update is a big regression too. Frankly I don't even care about the screen resolution, it is the focus on thinnest at the expense of performance that really hurts.

The best thing people can do is hold off buying and make sure Apple knows why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hartmann View Post

The new iMac is a total disappointment. Apple is going for cosmetic changes instead of addressing the needs of people who use their computers for serious work. Until the 27" iMac gets a higher resolution screen, I'm not going to update.
post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Sadly I tend to agree, it isn't just the iMac that sucks though the Mini update is a big regression too. Frankly I don't even care about the screen resolution, it is the focus on thinnest at the expense of performance that really hurts.
The best thing people can do is hold off buying and make sure Apple knows why.

I am very excited for this new iMac. Even better than I had hoped.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #39 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by flabber View Post

I heard that in theory, a 5400rpm disk can be as fast (or faster) than a 7200rpm disk depending on the amount of platters it uses. A 5400rpm disk with less platters could (unless I've been misinformed) be faster than a 7200rpm disk with more platters. But that still doesn't make it strange that Apple chose for such a disk. If they wanted to reduce space and chose to use a 2.5" instead of a 3.5" HD, they could still choose a 2.5" 7200rpm HD instead.
What you have heard is not technically correct. Newer drives have higher recording densities which result in faster data transfers for a given spindle speed. However this is in respect to older drives, given the same tech a drive with a faster spindle will still be faster.

I know many will not want to hear this but this really appears to be Apple trying to sell the expensive hybrid technology in place of modern performance drives. Sad really because the hybrid approach they are offering is grossly over priced.
Quote:
And the Fusion HD upgrade is an easy 250 bucks on top of the regular price, which feels like a steep increase… especially since I feel almost forced to do so because of the apparently slow 5400rpm standard HD.
It is extremely steep if you ask me. We don't know all the implementation details yet but you are basically paying $250 for 128GB of flash storage or almost 2.5 times the going rate.
Quote:
But looking at GPU comparisation charts, the GT650M seems like a decent upgrade, and the new Ivy Bridge CPU's are looking quite nice as well. I'm quite positive that they'll prove to be a very nice speedbump compared to my current 2009 iMac, especially since the Sandy ánd Ivy Bridge CPU's offer a surprisingly large speedbump in general over the first generation of iX-CPU's.
I'm so disappointed with the GPU being dropped from the Mini that I haven't looked closely at iMac options. However it is a given that it will be much faster than the 2009 machine.
Quote:
An impossible ram and/or HD upgrade as a user-replacable part does feel really shitty though… that will prove to become a very expensive repair if either of them ever breaks outside of your warranty. Plus RAM not being upgradable is definitely a bad choice as far as I'm concerned. A new system 2-3 years from now that might need more ram will suck immensely. And we all know that RAM at Apple cost a premium if you do consider a BTO.
The 27" is listed as having so-dimm capability. Apple has actually gotten better pricing RAM, but it still is expensive. The whole serviceability issue with iMacs though is very significant in my mind. The new iMac does not inspire any confidence that serviceability hs gotten better.
Quote:
A nice 5400rpm vs 7200rpm discussion on Apple's forum:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3011064?start=0&tstart=0
From the looks of it you can actually lóse about 20% snappyness. Why on earth would Apple increase the speed of the CPU, GPU and RAM, while lowering the speed of the already main bottleneck on a computer's speed… the HD? Fusion HD or not, it's a painfully harsh move to "force" people to use it by crippling the standard HD.
Frankly it is a good reason to leave your money in the bank.
Quote:
p.s.:
I honestly believe Apple deliberately stopped selling the previous model because they're concerned a lot of critics would pass the new model (which obviously has a somewhat higher production cost looking at the thinness and monitor), and would instead buy the previous model in order to keep the Superdrive and other elements they'd otherwise miss out on.
Err no the general do stop selling older models once new ones are announced. Frankly I don't care about the SuperDrive, it is the other factors that tweak me in the negative direction with respect to the iMac. I really never have liked the flat panel iMacs but this rendition just seems to focus or enhance everything I dislike about the iMac. It is a good thing I had no intention of buying a Mac this year. It would have been a Mini but frankly neither of these machines impress me one bit.
post #40 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I am very excited for this new iMac. Even better than I had hoped.

Really?

In my mind they took everything I hate about the iMac and made it worst. Maybe my mind will change once we get better data on the machines. For me it is even more frustrating because they castrated the Mac Mini even more, with no GPU in the $799 model. In a nutshell it totally looks like Apple has lost its way on the desktop or simply decided to shove crap down our throats.

I'm not trying to dismiss the value of Ivy Bridge in the iMacs, that is certainly a vast improvement. What bothers me is serviceability, the focus on thinnest over performance and the performance regressions in things like the disk dives. It will be real interesting to see how these machines perform under load, specifically the amount of thermal throttling and temperature rise of the case.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AAPL Investors
AppleInsider › Forums › Investors › AAPL Investors › New iMacs expected to quadruple Apple's dismal Q3 desktop shipments