or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The next iMac
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The next iMac - Page 4

post #121 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB

I did not even know it existed.

You see?

———————————

This new forum software is really annoying.

I left the first two words as my reply, but it said that my message was too short!! What's up here?

I quess no more as a post.

Too bad.
post #122 of 177
Apple won't introduce an alloy casing for the imac in my opinion, because it is not a pro product. perhaps an integrated isight.
post #123 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frediography

Apple won't introduce an alloy casing for the imac in my opinion, because it is not a pro product. perhaps an integrated isight.

Has someone suggested that? I don't remember it coming up. I think we can agree with that.
post #124 of 177
Am I the only one to think that after the price drop in the Apple displays ($999 for the 23"), it is more than ever probable to see a 23" Conroe-equiped iMac next month?
post #125 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB

Am I the only one to think that after the price drop in the Apple displays ($999 for the 23"), it is more than ever probable to see a 23" Conroe-equiped iMac next month?

I think it's possible. It would be a pretty sweet package. Are the 23" ACDs 1080p?
post #126 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcfsu

Are the 23" ACDs 1080p?

Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.
post #127 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB

Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.

That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.
post #128 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcfsu

That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.

Not such a big deal. The dual core Mini can as well.
post #129 of 177
Is there any reason why Apple can't allow self-service hardware upgrades for the iMac like they did for revision A of the G5 iMac?
post #130 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy

Is there any reason why Apple can't allow self-service hardware upgrades for the iMac like they did for revision A of the G5 iMac?

That's an interesting question. Is there any reason? Sure there is, they don't want to.

They could have kept a design similiar to the first one that allowed easy opening, and replacement. They decided that they didn't want it any more.

Why?

Who knows!
post #131 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

That's an interesting question. Is there any reason? Sure there is, they don't want to.

They could have kept a design similiar to the first one that allowed easy opening, and replacement. They decided that they didn't want it any more.

Why?

Who knows!

Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.

To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #132 of 177
Now that the 17" iMac has become the new eMac, I think it is more then likely that the 17" iMac will drop off as a consumer option and remain solely the EDU iMac. While that leaves the 20" as the base model, the argument for a 23" HD model becomes stronger. It also gives a little more creedence to the argument that the iMac will see a bit of a redesign. Probably nothing drastic, but enough (more then just size) to distinguish an iMac from an EDU iMac. Thoughts?
post #133 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by gar

Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.

To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.

You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
post #134 of 177
i think the 17" iMac is a nice size screen size.
post #135 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by gar

Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.

To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.

Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."

From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.

What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?
post #136 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy

You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?

Point, counterpoint!
post #137 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy

You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?

Does the minitower fit in the space of a LCD monitor? No? Gee...guess it fails the form factor requirement. At least the cooling is efficient.

Vinea
post #138 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."

From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.

What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?

Hell, I don't know, they also removed the infraredport on the front.

The reason to make a selfserviceable computer is that it spares costs at the serviceprovider and warranty site of the company. I mean Applecare etc.

I guess it didn't work out the way they hoped.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #139 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JavaCowboy

You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?

No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #140 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by gar

No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.

There is no reason why that has to be true. The first iMacs used chips with more power usage, and more heat production. When they redesigned the machines, they used another G5. Now with the Yonah, the chip uses half the power, and puts out much less heat as well.

So that argument doesn't work. If they stick with a mobile chip, and go with Merom, power requirements will remain about the same. even if they go with Conroe, it won't be worse than before.

They simply decided they didn't want it. No matter what they did, there was no reason why they had to change the design where the back came off easily, rather than going through all of that baloney to remove the front panel. The same is true for the Vesa Adaptor.
post #141 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by patr_1_8

Which Intel chip do you guys think Apple will put in there updated iMac?


I think the Conroe is probably what they would use. It would be nice to have the iMac and then a iMac Pro line with a 23 and 30 inch screens. Put Firewire 800 ports in it, with big hard drives, and maybe Blu Ray drives. I wonder when the Blu Ray drives will be an option for the Mac Pros.

I would love to see a Bluetooth keyboard that lights up and has color options. that would be nice.

How about a rechargable Wireless Mighty Mouse?

How about a Mac mini Pro with a Woodcrest chip in it?

I am sure there will be plenty more this year and in the next year. I think Intel and Apple are on a mission!

Redmond, start your Chapter 13 proceedings.......... :-)
post #142 of 177
They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!

This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #143 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub

They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!

This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.

While I certainly think that's possible, I prefer drblank's idea of a Woodcrest powered Mini.
post #144 of 177
How about TWO Conroe chips in the iMac Pro line? In a 23 or 30 monitor, I think they might have the room.

LOL
post #145 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank

How about TWO Conroe chips in the iMac Pro line? In a 23 or 30 monitor, I think they might have the room.

LOL

Don't push your luck.
post #146 of 177
I think the next gen MacBook Pros should have user replaceable drives like the MacBook. that is a cool idea.
post #147 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank

I think the next gen MacBook Pros should have user replaceable drives like the MacBook. that is a cool idea.

I thought they were!
post #148 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub

They will use Conroe in the 20" iMacs for sure. Write it down!

This is a different Apple. The iMac is a higher end desktop so they will use a higher end cpu.

Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.
post #149 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcfsu

Because the Mac Pro is an Woodcrest lineup, I'm going to agree with you. I don't see Apple ignoring the Conroe. Especially since they are very similar in price points to the current Yonah chips with a higher clock speed, FSB, etc. Now the only question is when.

I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.

Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.

I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #150 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub

I am guessing mid-September I will have one on my desk.

Don't write that down. I am a bit perplexed on the delay from Intel. It seems they are so anxious to get the good news out they may have put the cart before the horse. It seems they are so excited about the new chips sticking it to AMD they are pissing their pants a little ahead of when we will actually get this things in our freekn' computers.

I know, I know. The G5 powerbook is right around the corner.

Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.
post #151 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcfsu

Haha. Yeah, well maybe they wanted to get thier big announcement out before the AMD/ATi announcement. Who knows. But as you said, mid-September (also my birthday) seems to be like the last possible date we'll see a more powerful iMac. I highly doubt Apple Expo Paris will come and go before the Core 2 Duo hits the iMac.

I agree. I am hoping they will release a 23" iMac then. Freek, I need more screen with resolution independence. I will take the 23" iMac now and Leopard in the spring.

I will be in Paris just after the Expo. Complete bummer.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #152 of 177
My thoughts about Woodcrest chips in another form factor Mac.

There's a Xeon LV in the works that should be available in october or so:
Xeon 5148: dual-core 2.33GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 1333 FSB, DTP = 40W!!! Bulk price $519.

It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.

Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.

Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999

I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!
post #153 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix

My thoughts about Woodcrest chips in another form factor Mac.

There's a Xeon LV in the works that should be available in october or so:
Xeon 5148: dual-core 2.33GHz, 4MB L2 cache, 1333 FSB, DTP = 40W!!! Bulk price $519.

It is not an inexpensive chip but it is about the price of the 2.66GHz Conroe ($530, 1066 FSB, 65W) but cheaper than the 2.33GHz Merom ($623, 667 FSB, 35W).
It also uses FD-Dimms like the Mac Pro, expensive and hot, and currently needs an Intel 5000 series chipset, which Apple already uses in the Mac Pro.

Comparison:
Merom: expensive, not very fast chip, but easy, cheap drop-in replacement in current Yonah boards, very easy to cool.
Conroe: cheaper, faster, cheaper RAM, needs an all-new motherboard, and more cooling.
Xeon LV: well priced for the specs, needs a customized Mac Pro motherboard, RAM is expensive, easy to cool.

Not a chip for every Mac, but I could see it in an "executive" special series of:
Mac mini Pro (like it was suggested some posts above) bigger (3.5" HD), starting at $1499
or
XServe mini (same specs as above but different case, rack ears), starting at $1999
iMac special (23" or other color), starting at $2499
even
MacBook Pro special (17" or more?) stating at $2999

I had this line-up in my mind for quite sometimes, thanks for the opportunity to post it!!!

The LV model may not be much easier to cool. Except for the 3 GHz version, all the normal Xeons have a 65 watt max use draw. The problem is that the LV requires the same FB DIMMS, which have a much bigger draw than standard DIMMS. Using two of those DIMMS brings the total draw back up to the power requirements of the Conroe, with no real advantage in performance, but for substantially more money.

The performance advantage for a laptop is debatable when coupled with a 2 hour, or less, battery life, and much more heat than the Meroms will consume.

Don't forget that the Merom uses max 35 watts, with much less draw on the memory as well. Also, the cooling requirements for FB DIMMS, as we are seeing, are substantial.

I can see some 15 - 20 pound PC laptops using this. But not a Mac. The same argument holds for the Mini.
post #154 of 177
I wonder if Apple is going to make larger Xserves that are 2 or 4 U form. They have the Xraid enclosure. I think a rack mounted workstation would be great, lots of people do prefer rack mounted solutions like the video and audio crowd tend to have lots of outboard gear that is rack mounted.
post #155 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank

I wonder if Apple is going to make larger Xserves that are 2 or 4 U form. They have the Xraid enclosure. I think a rack mounted workstation would be great, lots of people do prefer rack mounted solutions like the video and audio crowd tend to have lots of outboard gear that is rack mounted.

This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.
post #156 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

This has been a question since the first X Serves came out. Apple is apparently not interested in those markets, because they are apparently not interested in Apple.

Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.

remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.
post #157 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank

Actually, my understanding thus far is that the 1U is the largest market. As time goes on the larger companies are going to be switching to Mac and will or may require larger servers. Either that or the Grid environment is working just fine and they don't really need the larger form factor is a guess.

remember, Apple JUST finished the Intel transition and Intel has more on the board. That was Apple's biggest hurdle.

That's wishful thinking.

large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:

Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.

Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do thateven for their large customers.

Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturersno substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.

On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.

Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.

Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.

There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.
post #158 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross

That's wishful thinking.

large companies are not interested in Apple for several reasons. among them are these:

Changing to a new OS. Even if they only use it for servers, it's an unnecessary hassle to have to service another enviornment.

Apple doesn't give a hardware roadmap. Other companies involved in big business, such as Hp, Dell, and IBM, telegraph their intentions for at least the next 12 months, and often the next 18. As we know quite well Apple won't do thateven for their large customers.

Locked in hardware specs. Large, and medium sized businesses, require their vendor to supply machines that are component, and software, exact for the length of a purchasing contract, usually three years. What this means is that the company will purchase say, 10,000 machines, to be delivered over a three year period. All the machines must be exactly the same, down to the resistors on the mobo. Same parts, same manufacturersno substitutions at all. This is for easy, and predictable, service over the life of the machines. The OS, and any related software must also conform.

On-site sales and service. Apple has very little of that.

Business, and software management. Apple has none of those services either.

Lack of software relaring to network control, security, business management, accounting, etc. Again, there is little third party software for those purposes on OS X, and none from Apple.

There are other problems as well, but it is a good start.


What's your background? What is your current job?
post #159 of 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank

What's your background? What is your current job?

You can look at my profile, and then ask me more.
post #160 of 177
So working in a Photo lab makes you an expert?

Hmmm.....

Well, let's see how much of what you said doesn't hold water. Just my 2 cents.

1. Apple currently sells Xserves to plenty of Fortune 1000 companies and many are waiting for the Intel Xserves to be released.
2. Oracle Database and 10G apps run on Xserves.
3. Apple does have user installable service parts for their Xserves.
4. Plenty of high end Enterprise apps run on xserves including Remedy, SAP, and others that Enterprise Customers need.
5. They don't need the security software like the others since you can lock down an Xserve so it doesn't get hacked into. There is a White Paper issued by the CIA. Oh, the CIA doesn't use Windows from my understanding. It isn't secure.
6. Plenty of abilities out there and it is always going to get better.
7. The Roll Out strategy of having computers for three years is not what companies do since the others are always changing their systems around just like Apple. Some may have these requirements, but not ALL. Computer technology doubles every 18 months.
8. Apple does support older computers. AppleCare is a three year service contract.
9. Apple does have a Consulting Services. http://www.apple.com/services/consulting/
10. What Audio Company did you work for?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The next iMac