Everyone seems to be forgetting that Blu-ray is for more than just movies. I installed Final Cut Studio 3 the other week - it had about 7 DVDs. I had to keep coming back every hour or so just to change the disc.
Large software installations (particularly games which might have large models, textures, cutscenes, etc) are perfect for Blu-ray, and it is also good for providing cheap data backups.
1. There is nothing good about bluray. Paying ~$200 just to save you a few disk swaps during once a year installations just does not add up when you take common sense into account.
2. Bluray is not a cheap data backup since you have to pay for the player. For that same money you can get a 2 TB disk and back up almost all the porn you have saved right now.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Blu-ray is for more than just movies. I installed Final Cut Studio 3 the other week - it had about 7 DVDs. I had to keep coming back every hour or so just to change the disc.
Large software installations (particularly games which might have large models, textures, cutscenes, etc) are perfect for Blu-ray, and it is also good for providing cheap data backups.
I can see them shipping software on an SD card. Talk about reducing packaging and shipping costs!
What, to just play $30+ Blu Ray discs, or to rip to your high capacity HD?
The ability to burn to Blu Ray is in the latest Final Cut. It would make sense for Apple to offer a turn-key solution instead of people having to find a drive to add to his or her machine.
Glass screen with an anti-reflective coating. They work on eyeglasses.
KVM mode to allow use of a laptop with the built-in monitor and attached keyboard and mouse
TV-tuner support in Front Row (why limit ourselves to hardware features)
an off-the-wall one: built-in UPS (if they insist on using laptop components, why not continue the similarities)
I really don't give a **** about Blu-Ray. I don't even watch DVDs on my iMac. And I share my HD videos online or over my home network. Never had a need to create a physical copy as a home user. But I can certainly see the desire for pros. But isn't that what the Mac Pro is for?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shookster
I'm not really sure what the point of this article is, as I would be surprised if the iMac did not come with new features.
Regardless, I'd like to see Blu-ray drives and an SSD in the new models. I'm hoping that Blu-ray support in FCS3 (albeit very basic) signifies a softening of Apple's policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benjamoon
Almost Certain
Speed bump in both processor and RAM
Better video card options
Slimmed down
SSD
Maybe
Quad Core(in higher end)
More ports
Blu-ray - people may say that they won't watch blu-ray, but you can burn blu-ray in fact FCP now supports it
1.5-2 TB support
eSATA(high end only)
5.0 MP iSight (many of you seem to have forgotten that Apple ordered 5 MP cameras a while back, more likely to go into an imac than a tablet.)
Definitely Not
Multi-touch
USB 3.0
Nehalem Xeon (will never happen in the imac xeon is a server processor)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logisticaldron
The problem I have with Blu-ray drives being included as an option is that we still don?t have support at the OS level to make AACS encrypted video play in HD. Apple could have included that and then let their customers buy external drives for Blu-ray playback but they haven?t. They also haven?t included it Snow Leopard as of yet. The licensing has been simplified more than enough time to at least get that ball rolling and it?s not in Apple?s favour to make Blu-ray on a PC a big to-do when they are clearly pushing their digital content as a "good enough" quality, convenient alternative to buying a Blu-ray player.
It?s a tactic that seems to be working when you consider that people with Blu-ray drives prefer them for large HD TVs, not relatively small PC screens, and when DVD and upconverting-DVD players still offer a "good enough" alternative for many over Blu-ray. Blu-ray?s resolution and bitrate is by far superior to anything Apple can push over the web at this point, but best doesn?t always win out in tech, it?s usually ?good enough? coupled with convenience.
But not the slim, slot loading drives that fit into the iMacs.
BLURAY NO WAY
I think we will see an apple tv set come out
And a uni body imac with some great gaming chips inside
I doubt blu-ray will be in the mix. Optical media is obsolete. An SD card reader is more likely going into the new iMac and it takes less space, hence a thinner system coupled with the LED monitor.
Maybe the higher end iMac will have a BTO for solid state drives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron
To paraphrase Steve "blow" Jobs:
Bluray is a bag of farts.
I would not give two fucks if the new iMacs came with a blu player because, as other have said, optical media for playing content is obsolete.
What I hope the new iMacs will have as a new feature is a DVD player that instantaneously destroys any DVD sold by Microsoft and spits out the fragments.
Optical media may be dead for data storage, although I still use it regularly as a secondary backup of my photos; but as a video playback source it's going to be around for awhile yet. Not everyone is on the bleeding edge with high-bandwidth internet connections and computer-centric home theater systems. And movies stored on SD cards are going to cost more to produce than stamping out optical disks on a machine press.
And what is the average consumer going to play these on? It's been hard enough for the blu-ray supporters to get people to buy new players that are at least backward compatible with DVDs. And now you want to convince people to buy yet another box to hook up to their TV, either to play SD cards or download video from the internet?
It's nice to sit in our advanced, high tech corners of the world with our 50 Mbps pipes and HTPCs, but the vast majority of consumers don't live in our world. And they are the ones who are going to determine the speed with which new technology gets adopoted.
I doubt blu-ray will be in the mix. Optical media is obsolete. An SD card reader is more likely going into the new iMac and it takes less space, hence a thinner system coupled with the LED monitor.
Maybe the higher end iMac will have a BTO for solid state drives.
When they start selling SD cards able to hold an HD movie costing roughly a buck a copy, well then, SD will indeed render optical discs obsolete. But right now, if you want to put a decent HD-grade movie file onto a such a card, good luck finding an SDHC card (SD doesn't have the capacity) for around a dollar. In Canada, a decent grade of 8G SDHC card sells for closer to $100 dollars. Even 4G cards are north of $40.
SD cards have their uses and optical media, even Blu-Ray, have theirs. Neither is obsolete or intended one to replace the other. They are complimentary technologies.
There is nothing good about bluray. Paying ~$200 just to save you a few disk swaps during once a year installations just does not add up when you take common sense into account.
It could for a business. Babysitting an install is not an effective use of labor. Considering overhead, a typical skilled employee costs $75-$150 per hour. If an IT technician is doing the "work" while the user is having downtime, that counts double! If that drive can save 2 or three hours over its lifetime, it's paid for.
Also, Blu-Ray authoring seems like it would be an essential capability for any professional video production company.
(As my wife and I are expecting our first child in December, I'm considering upgrading to a nice HD camcorder. At the same time we compete for the MacBook while the PC goes unused. I've got my eyes on an iMac. Being able to make Blu-Ray home movies would be SWEET! Unfortunately, both items will be difficult to justify - babies take priority! )
I agree that Blu-ray for mass data backup/transport is a joke. Hard drives are bigger, cheaper, faster, and more compatible.
blu-ray drives are cheaper. i saw one at newegg last week for $58. If apple buys 5 million a year then say $20 per drive for them. or maybe less
No, you simply confused a ~40mm thick desktop tray loading Blu-Ray drive with a 9.5mm thick mobile style slot loading drive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by geneking7320
As long as you're going with a card slot reader don't leave out CF cards.
I wonder how much of the user base would benefit from CF. An SD card is easy, it's hard to find a computer user that doesn't own an SD-based device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeyondYourFrontDoor
My predictions... 16GB of built-in SSD that will serve as the OS drive. A separate HD/SSD will sit along side it for apps/data. It will boot into an optional Internet mode, where Safari will load from a cold start in about 3 seconds.
I think a brand new platter hard drive gets close enough without adding needless complexity of hybrid storage.
Quote:
Blu-ray. Not because it is 'needed', but who can resist a $300 'upgrade' that only costs Apple $20?
First, show us a 9.5mm slot loading Blu-Ray drive that sells in volume for anywhere close to that price. I'm not even sure that kind of drive is available for sale, and I doubt it's anywhere nearly that cheap if it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHagan4755
2. A matte finish on the display for audio/video professionals, instead of the glossy glass
Matte isn't ideal either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
A lot of people say that a desk top processor is impossible in iMac, but I ten to agree with you it is not impossible. Cooling is a trick though as that heat does have to be removed from one concentrated spot. It is not impossible though as any body that has looked inside a 1U server box can tell you. Given that new heat conduction tech could be thrown at the problem.
Not impossible, but probably too expensive to be practical. Have you ever priced out a 1U server box? Compared against a similarly spec'd 2U box? Besides, most of them are noisy, I think I recall Apple's being noisy too.
Quote:
Lets face it Core 2 is a dead technology and is only applicable where the heat can't be tolerated. Core 2 Quad could potentially work well on something like the Mini that is ran at close to the same clock speed but giving users 2 more threads. Even here though some of Intels new tech processor might be a better choice, for the same reason you mentioned above; everything is integrated into the chip thus overall power usage is lower.
Core 2 Quad is still higher power for 33% less clock speed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
I can see them shipping software on an SD card. Talk about reducing packaging and shipping costs!
There are reasons to offer an SD card, but shipping cost really isn't one. The cost of the card vs. a pressed DVD has to far outweigh the cost savings in shipping. I wonder if there would be any cost savings at all. Unless you ship by First Class instead of Ground or Priority, there probably wouldn't be any shipping savings.
You should just change your handle to "contrarian."
What you want is a combination of the exact opposite of what most consumers want, and the exact products that Apple and most industry followers have determined they will never, ever produce.
Good luck with that.
Edit: Along with criticising them for something (noisy machines), when almost everyone agrees they makes the quietest machines on the planet in general.
The noise complaint is rather odd but I happen to likewise hope Apple would either beef up the mini (top-of-the-line Mac Pro performance) or replace it with a small tower.
I have a problem with the notion of buying an all-in-one like the iMac. It marries technology that reasonably could be expected to deliver roughly 12 good years of service (i.e. the screen) with internal computer components that can be expected, at best to operate maybe four years before requiring some servicing (usually the hard drive goes by then). Besides, most of us, I suspect, would be less than thrilled with the prospect of still using an iMac five or six years later on since technology improves dramatically over such a period of time. Five years ago, aka early August of 2004, the iMac was a G4 machine featuring an 80GB HD. A good computer, sure, but it would be woefully underpowered by today's standards and having a hard time handling HD files, etc.
So what do you do with a five-, or six-, or seven-year-old iMac? Certainly upgrade, I would think, and to me that's a ridiculous waste of a screen that is barely half-way through it's useful life.
I opted instead for a mac mini (G4) which I upgraded to a 1.83 Intel mac mini when those came to market in August of 2007. Later this year or possibly early next I'm going to upgrade yet again to get technology that can handle the HD Era. At the same time, though, I started off with a 10-year-old CRT that had been my monitor for several generations of Mac starting with a Power Mac 7200 and then switched to a 32-inch Sony LCD that doubles as my TV. The Sony is a fine product (120Hz XBR) that I happily will use as my monitor for quite some time yet, no doubt going through my share of computers attached to it.
So, yes, it's a "headless" mac that I want but the Mac Pro is overkill. The Mini, at least the version I'm using right now, isn't able to comfortably handle HD.
I'm a little concerned, though, that while so much is being said about Apple's plans for the iMac, and the laptops recently got overhauled, the mini, after a significant but not spectacular upgrade in March, seems to be a product that Apple is again reluctantly continuing to carry.
I can't be the only consumer around who has trouble spending money on a monitor that I likely will have to retire prematurely because of the computer attached to it. It's not as if having to attach a wire from my computer to my monitor has been a great hardship. It's very much a case of offering up a solution for a problem that really isn't one. I have never thought to myself, "If only I could get rid of that irritating cable connecting my monitor to my computer." I can't even see it and it has zero impact on my day-to-day use of the Mac Mini. Of course from Apple's perspective, if they can convince consumers to replace a monitor with a 12-year life span, only six years in, that makes them all the richer. It's bad for the environment and it's bad for our pocketbooks but it doesn't hurt Apple's cause, now does it.
The above comments apply equally to the notion of using a 17-inch laptop as a desktop replacement. If you don't need portability, a computer attached to a separate monitor is still the way to go.
I for one do not want to see Apple give design priority to making the iMac "slimmer." Slimmer means they might consider using a 2.5" HDD instead of the current 3.5" HDD (how much thinner could they get with the chassis while fitting a 3.5" drive, really?). As someone else said, it would also just further reduce the thermal room - when they're trying to cram faster CPUs in these things.
Of all the useless articles on AI... this one tops (bottoms?) them all...
Would anyone expect 'new' iMacs to have less features than the last? Of course there is going to be new stuff...
A bit dismissive about the article\
.....without this article I wouldn't have learned about your idea for "A separate HD/SSD will sit along side it for apps/data. It will boot into an optional Internet mode, where Safari will load from a cold start in about 3 seconds."
This is an brilliant idea! The article sparks discussion. Plus I learned "Independent analyst Turley Muller, who out-scored all of his colleagues on Wall Street in predicting the company's third-quarter results..." which is somewhat useful.
This thread shows just how out of touch many people are. Let me cover some of the key features being discussed.
Blu-Ray recorder: While not everyone needs Blu-Ray, particularly on a desktop, Blu-Ray can be added to most desktop PCs, licensing has become easier, and making it standard on higher-end configuration is not out of the question. Form factor is more of an issue, but iMac can accommodate one with a slight redesign (or perhaps there's new internal drive that will fit into it).
Display: As far as Apple is concerned, matte is dead. Aside from 30-inch Cinema Display and 17-inch MacBook Pro, every single Macs and dispalys are glossy. Whether you like it or not, this won't change. The real questions are whether Apple will offer larger, higher resolution LCD on higher-end configuration, and whether iMacs will adopt LED backlighting.
CPU: Faster CPU is guaranteed with strong possibility of quad-core on higher-end configuration to appease audio/video semipros and enthusiasts. But which CPU? Desktop grade CPUs (Lynnfield i5 and i7) will require more significant re-engineering effort, particularly to accommodate 95 W TDP power usage. Of the Mobile grade CPUs, only Core i7 (45 W TDP) is coming out within the required timeframe, at substantially higher price. My guess is that Apple will stick with the mobile platform, with higher-end configuration getting the new Clarksfield Core i7 while the rest remain with older Penryn dual-core.
Redesign: Although redesign will be refreshing to many, iMac looks okay for now. That said, I know some wants thinner profile, but I would like to see it getting thicker if it means Jay Leno's chin can be removed.
Connectivity: USB 3.0 is a long shot (it's just a bit too soon). FW1600 or eSATA? I would like them, but this is iMac and they aren't likely. I think it will get 5 USB ports, just like the mini.
Input devices: Backlit keyboard isn't happening. I would love to see redesigned Mighty Mouse though. But that probably isn't happening either.
Storage: SD slot is guaranteed. SSD? Possibly as build-to-order option, but given the cost, not as standard.
I think any person using a mac in any professional capacity craves beautifully designed tower which is small and light (mac pro is exp even cos of its case and shipping) - a single desktop class cpu will do (esp since quad and 6 core cpus are moving along. Space for 2 hard drives. Maybe space for 2 X 3.5 inch and 2X 2.5 (booting from an ssd is an option for xserves!). Single optical drive, memory card slot. Upgradable gfx card with both mini display port and dvi connectors and and perhaps 2 pci x slots for unternal expansion (sound video i/o). Esata doesn't need anything other that the right connectors off the motherboard so it would be nice but not essential as fw is still decent enough.
i think they could make a beautiful, compelling machine that might cannabalise their imac market but i think it will add a couple more % points to their overall marketshare. IT will also mean that people will replace their machines more often. If i buy a mac pro today i know i'll want 5 years out of it. If i buy somethin as above i'll expect to change it after 3.
Yup. Give me the modern version of the venerable and extremely popular Macintosh IIcx/IIci.
To comply with the Bluray DRM, some changes to the OS are necessary. It makes sense to roll these into Snow Leopard.
Well, Intel Macs have had a Trusted Platform Module that has sat pretty much unused by Apple. Along the same lines, I think there is a good chance that 10.6 will be the end of the hackentosh as we know it too.
On the plus side, having support like this in the OS would make it easier to get cable labs certification. Finally I could replace my Tivo with a Mac Mini....
EDIT: Whoops, it looks like the TPM has been off and on again and I'm still not certain it's in any currently shipping Mac's since there doesn't seem to be any way to find out for sure (no nice list that I have found). So using a TPM for this is probably unlikely unless it's universally present.
Blu-Ray - Not a chance. It is not a $20 Dollar item. It would properly be an upgrade option. But wont be standard with the current cost.
SD Card - Will definitely be there. Properly Support SDXC speed as well. Still wondering how SD Card choose M$ exFAT which Apple couldn't use. But Hardware wise an SDXC capable Card reader is not a far shot. And i dont see how packaging and shipping cost could make the substantial saving, DVD cost $0.1 while similar capacity SD card cost $3 with less capacity. That is 30 times different.
Graphics Card - Finally - the GT200 Architecture Mobile Series, i am hoping all the iMac get GTS 250 / GTS 260 with 96 shader. Since the GT 230 and 240 doesn't provide any improvement over current generation at all. OpenCL could make use of these GPGPU power.
SSD - SSD actually doesn't cost as much as most people think. It is nothing more then a bunch of NAND with a controller chip. NAND is cheap for Apple, since they account for more then a third of the world total Flash production capacity. And Indilinx or Samsung chip pricing are below $15. So a decent 64GB SSD should cost apple around $100 to make. Although i believe apple will wait for another generation before making it standard.
CPU - they dont have much choice, Mobile Variant of Next Gen CPU wont be out till Xmas.
So what is the next Big thing that Pro and even Consumer will like??
I am thinking on MUCH BETTER Display.
The 20" Mac, is based on TN panel. which is low viewing angle, and 24" while based on H-IPS, is expensive. Ever since apple signed the 5 year deal with LG on Display Panel, LG has 2nd Generation of E-IPS Panel, which is an cheaper version of IPS, provides true 178 degree viewing angle, better color accuracy, and is available in 20" - 23" size. ( Not sure about 24" ) Combine with WLED Backlight it should be even better then the current H-IPS 24" iMac while being cheaper to produce.
This article was so awkwardly written that I had to read the first few sentences a few times to understand what it was even about. I was then dismayed to find that it isn't about anything.
I love AppleInsider (and have been a reader for a long time), but it's sad to see articles like this.
Oh, I thought I was the only one. I can't really even call it an article though, just "we need hits, lets make something up".
Comments
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Blu-ray is for more than just movies. I installed Final Cut Studio 3 the other week - it had about 7 DVDs. I had to keep coming back every hour or so just to change the disc.
Large software installations (particularly games which might have large models, textures, cutscenes, etc) are perfect for Blu-ray, and it is also good for providing cheap data backups.
1. There is nothing good about bluray. Paying ~$200 just to save you a few disk swaps during once a year installations just does not add up when you take common sense into account.
2. Bluray is not a cheap data backup since you have to pay for the player. For that same money you can get a 2 TB disk and back up almost all the porn you have saved right now.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that Blu-ray is for more than just movies. I installed Final Cut Studio 3 the other week - it had about 7 DVDs. I had to keep coming back every hour or so just to change the disc.
Large software installations (particularly games which might have large models, textures, cutscenes, etc) are perfect for Blu-ray, and it is also good for providing cheap data backups.
I can see them shipping software on an SD card. Talk about reducing packaging and shipping costs!
Blu Ray?
What, to just play $30+ Blu Ray discs, or to rip to your high capacity HD?
The ability to burn to Blu Ray is in the latest Final Cut. It would make sense for Apple to offer a turn-key solution instead of people having to find a drive to add to his or her machine.
eSATA
Standard desktop memory instead of SO-DIMMs
user-replaceable hard drive
SSD
More USB and FireWire ports
Glass screen with an anti-reflective coating. They work on eyeglasses.
KVM mode to allow use of a laptop with the built-in monitor and attached keyboard and mouse
TV-tuner support in Front Row (why limit ourselves to hardware features)
an off-the-wall one: built-in UPS (if they insist on using laptop components, why not continue the similarities)
I really don't give a **** about Blu-Ray. I don't even watch DVDs on my iMac. And I share my HD videos online or over my home network. Never had a need to create a physical copy as a home user. But I can certainly see the desire for pros. But isn't that what the Mac Pro is for?
I'm not really sure what the point of this article is, as I would be surprised if the iMac did not come with new features.
Regardless, I'd like to see Blu-ray drives and an SSD in the new models. I'm hoping that Blu-ray support in FCS3 (albeit very basic) signifies a softening of Apple's policy.
Almost Certain
Speed bump in both processor and RAM
Better video card options
Slimmed down
SSD
Maybe
Quad Core(in higher end)
More ports
Blu-ray - people may say that they won't watch blu-ray, but you can burn blu-ray in fact FCP now supports it
1.5-2 TB support
eSATA(high end only)
5.0 MP iSight (many of you seem to have forgotten that Apple ordered 5 MP cameras a while back, more likely to go into an imac than a tablet.)
Definitely Not
Multi-touch
USB 3.0
Nehalem Xeon (will never happen in the imac xeon is a server processor)
The problem I have with Blu-ray drives being included as an option is that we still don?t have support at the OS level to make AACS encrypted video play in HD. Apple could have included that and then let their customers buy external drives for Blu-ray playback but they haven?t. They also haven?t included it Snow Leopard as of yet. The licensing has been simplified more than enough time to at least get that ball rolling and it?s not in Apple?s favour to make Blu-ray on a PC a big to-do when they are clearly pushing their digital content as a "good enough" quality, convenient alternative to buying a Blu-ray player.
It?s a tactic that seems to be working when you consider that people with Blu-ray drives prefer them for large HD TVs, not relatively small PC screens, and when DVD and upconverting-DVD players still offer a "good enough" alternative for many over Blu-ray. Blu-ray?s resolution and bitrate is by far superior to anything Apple can push over the web at this point, but best doesn?t always win out in tech, it?s usually ?good enough? coupled with convenience.
But not the slim, slot loading drives that fit into the iMacs.
BLURAY NO WAY
I think we will see an apple tv set come out
And a uni body imac with some great gaming chips inside
firewire will die soon
usb 3 and mini usb will be the ones
I doubt blu-ray will be in the mix. Optical media is obsolete. An SD card reader is more likely going into the new iMac and it takes less space, hence a thinner system coupled with the LED monitor.
Maybe the higher end iMac will have a BTO for solid state drives.
To paraphrase Steve "blow" Jobs:
Bluray is a bag of farts.
I would not give two fucks if the new iMacs came with a blu player because, as other have said, optical media for playing content is obsolete.
What I hope the new iMacs will have as a new feature is a DVD player that instantaneously destroys any DVD sold by Microsoft and spits out the fragments.
Optical media may be dead for data storage, although I still use it regularly as a secondary backup of my photos; but as a video playback source it's going to be around for awhile yet. Not everyone is on the bleeding edge with high-bandwidth internet connections and computer-centric home theater systems. And movies stored on SD cards are going to cost more to produce than stamping out optical disks on a machine press.
And what is the average consumer going to play these on? It's been hard enough for the blu-ray supporters to get people to buy new players that are at least backward compatible with DVDs. And now you want to convince people to buy yet another box to hook up to their TV, either to play SD cards or download video from the internet?
It's nice to sit in our advanced, high tech corners of the world with our 50 Mbps pipes and HTPCs, but the vast majority of consumers don't live in our world. And they are the ones who are going to determine the speed with which new technology gets adopoted.
I doubt blu-ray will be in the mix. Optical media is obsolete. An SD card reader is more likely going into the new iMac and it takes less space, hence a thinner system coupled with the LED monitor.
Maybe the higher end iMac will have a BTO for solid state drives.
When they start selling SD cards able to hold an HD movie costing roughly a buck a copy, well then, SD will indeed render optical discs obsolete. But right now, if you want to put a decent HD-grade movie file onto a such a card, good luck finding an SDHC card (SD doesn't have the capacity) for around a dollar. In Canada, a decent grade of 8G SDHC card sells for closer to $100 dollars. Even 4G cards are north of $40.
SD cards have their uses and optical media, even Blu-Ray, have theirs. Neither is obsolete or intended one to replace the other. They are complimentary technologies.
There is nothing good about bluray. Paying ~$200 just to save you a few disk swaps during once a year installations just does not add up when you take common sense into account.
It could for a business. Babysitting an install is not an effective use of labor. Considering overhead, a typical skilled employee costs $75-$150 per hour. If an IT technician is doing the "work" while the user is having downtime, that counts double! If that drive can save 2 or three hours over its lifetime, it's paid for.
Also, Blu-Ray authoring seems like it would be an essential capability for any professional video production company.
(As my wife and I are expecting our first child in December, I'm considering upgrading to a nice HD camcorder. At the same time we compete for the MacBook while the PC goes unused. I've got my eyes on an iMac. Being able to make Blu-Ray home movies would be SWEET! Unfortunately, both items will be difficult to justify - babies take priority!
I agree that Blu-ray for mass data backup/transport is a joke. Hard drives are bigger, cheaper, faster, and more compatible.
blu-ray drives are cheaper. i saw one at newegg last week for $58. If apple buys 5 million a year then say $20 per drive for them. or maybe less
No, you simply confused a ~40mm thick desktop tray loading Blu-Ray drive with a 9.5mm thick mobile style slot loading drive.
As long as you're going with a card slot reader don't leave out CF cards.
I wonder how much of the user base would benefit from CF. An SD card is easy, it's hard to find a computer user that doesn't own an SD-based device.
My predictions... 16GB of built-in SSD that will serve as the OS drive. A separate HD/SSD will sit along side it for apps/data. It will boot into an optional Internet mode, where Safari will load from a cold start in about 3 seconds.
I think a brand new platter hard drive gets close enough without adding needless complexity of hybrid storage.
Blu-ray. Not because it is 'needed', but who can resist a $300 'upgrade' that only costs Apple $20?
First, show us a 9.5mm slot loading Blu-Ray drive that sells in volume for anywhere close to that price. I'm not even sure that kind of drive is available for sale, and I doubt it's anywhere nearly that cheap if it is.
2. A matte finish on the display for audio/video professionals, instead of the glossy glass
Matte isn't ideal either.
A lot of people say that a desk top processor is impossible in iMac, but I ten to agree with you it is not impossible. Cooling is a trick though as that heat does have to be removed from one concentrated spot. It is not impossible though as any body that has looked inside a 1U server box can tell you. Given that new heat conduction tech could be thrown at the problem.
Not impossible, but probably too expensive to be practical. Have you ever priced out a 1U server box? Compared against a similarly spec'd 2U box? Besides, most of them are noisy, I think I recall Apple's being noisy too.
Lets face it Core 2 is a dead technology and is only applicable where the heat can't be tolerated. Core 2 Quad could potentially work well on something like the Mini that is ran at close to the same clock speed but giving users 2 more threads. Even here though some of Intels new tech processor might be a better choice, for the same reason you mentioned above; everything is integrated into the chip thus overall power usage is lower.
Core 2 Quad is still higher power for 33% less clock speed.
I can see them shipping software on an SD card. Talk about reducing packaging and shipping costs!
There are reasons to offer an SD card, but shipping cost really isn't one. The cost of the card vs. a pressed DVD has to far outweigh the cost savings in shipping. I wonder if there would be any cost savings at all. Unless you ship by First Class instead of Ground or Priority, there probably wouldn't be any shipping savings.
You should just change your handle to "contrarian."
What you want is a combination of the exact opposite of what most consumers want, and the exact products that Apple and most industry followers have determined they will never, ever produce.
Good luck with that.
Edit: Along with criticising them for something (noisy machines), when almost everyone agrees they makes the quietest machines on the planet in general.
The noise complaint is rather odd but I happen to likewise hope Apple would either beef up the mini (top-of-the-line Mac Pro performance) or replace it with a small tower.
I have a problem with the notion of buying an all-in-one like the iMac. It marries technology that reasonably could be expected to deliver roughly 12 good years of service (i.e. the screen) with internal computer components that can be expected, at best to operate maybe four years before requiring some servicing (usually the hard drive goes by then). Besides, most of us, I suspect, would be less than thrilled with the prospect of still using an iMac five or six years later on since technology improves dramatically over such a period of time. Five years ago, aka early August of 2004, the iMac was a G4 machine featuring an 80GB HD. A good computer, sure, but it would be woefully underpowered by today's standards and having a hard time handling HD files, etc.
So what do you do with a five-, or six-, or seven-year-old iMac? Certainly upgrade, I would think, and to me that's a ridiculous waste of a screen that is barely half-way through it's useful life.
I opted instead for a mac mini (G4) which I upgraded to a 1.83 Intel mac mini when those came to market in August of 2007. Later this year or possibly early next I'm going to upgrade yet again to get technology that can handle the HD Era. At the same time, though, I started off with a 10-year-old CRT that had been my monitor for several generations of Mac starting with a Power Mac 7200 and then switched to a 32-inch Sony LCD that doubles as my TV. The Sony is a fine product (120Hz XBR) that I happily will use as my monitor for quite some time yet, no doubt going through my share of computers attached to it.
So, yes, it's a "headless" mac that I want but the Mac Pro is overkill. The Mini, at least the version I'm using right now, isn't able to comfortably handle HD.
I'm a little concerned, though, that while so much is being said about Apple's plans for the iMac, and the laptops recently got overhauled, the mini, after a significant but not spectacular upgrade in March, seems to be a product that Apple is again reluctantly continuing to carry.
I can't be the only consumer around who has trouble spending money on a monitor that I likely will have to retire prematurely because of the computer attached to it. It's not as if having to attach a wire from my computer to my monitor has been a great hardship. It's very much a case of offering up a solution for a problem that really isn't one. I have never thought to myself, "If only I could get rid of that irritating cable connecting my monitor to my computer." I can't even see it and it has zero impact on my day-to-day use of the Mac Mini. Of course from Apple's perspective, if they can convince consumers to replace a monitor with a 12-year life span, only six years in, that makes them all the richer. It's bad for the environment and it's bad for our pocketbooks but it doesn't hurt Apple's cause, now does it.
The above comments apply equally to the notion of using a 17-inch laptop as a desktop replacement. If you don't need portability, a computer attached to a separate monitor is still the way to go.
It's slim enough.
Of all the useless articles on AI... this one tops (bottoms?) them all...
Would anyone expect 'new' iMacs to have less features than the last? Of course there is going to be new stuff...
A bit dismissive about the article
.....without this article I wouldn't have learned about your idea for "A separate HD/SSD will sit along side it for apps/data. It will boot into an optional Internet mode, where Safari will load from a cold start in about 3 seconds."
This is an brilliant idea!
Blu-Ray recorder: While not everyone needs Blu-Ray, particularly on a desktop, Blu-Ray can be added to most desktop PCs, licensing has become easier, and making it standard on higher-end configuration is not out of the question. Form factor is more of an issue, but iMac can accommodate one with a slight redesign (or perhaps there's new internal drive that will fit into it).
Display: As far as Apple is concerned, matte is dead. Aside from 30-inch Cinema Display and 17-inch MacBook Pro, every single Macs and dispalys are glossy. Whether you like it or not, this won't change. The real questions are whether Apple will offer larger, higher resolution LCD on higher-end configuration, and whether iMacs will adopt LED backlighting.
CPU: Faster CPU is guaranteed with strong possibility of quad-core on higher-end configuration to appease audio/video semipros and enthusiasts. But which CPU? Desktop grade CPUs (Lynnfield i5 and i7) will require more significant re-engineering effort, particularly to accommodate 95 W TDP power usage. Of the Mobile grade CPUs, only Core i7 (45 W TDP) is coming out within the required timeframe, at substantially higher price. My guess is that Apple will stick with the mobile platform, with higher-end configuration getting the new Clarksfield Core i7 while the rest remain with older Penryn dual-core.
Redesign: Although redesign will be refreshing to many, iMac looks okay for now. That said, I know some wants thinner profile, but I would like to see it getting thicker if it means Jay Leno's chin can be removed.
Connectivity: USB 3.0 is a long shot (it's just a bit too soon). FW1600 or eSATA? I would like them, but this is iMac and they aren't likely. I think it will get 5 USB ports, just like the mini.
Input devices: Backlit keyboard isn't happening. I would love to see redesigned Mighty Mouse though. But that probably isn't happening either.
Storage: SD slot is guaranteed. SSD? Possibly as build-to-order option, but given the cost, not as standard.
PERSONAL WISH: I want Mac mini extreme.
I think any person using a mac in any professional capacity craves beautifully designed tower which is small and light (mac pro is exp even cos of its case and shipping) - a single desktop class cpu will do (esp since quad and 6 core cpus are moving along. Space for 2 hard drives. Maybe space for 2 X 3.5 inch and 2X 2.5 (booting from an ssd is an option for xserves!). Single optical drive, memory card slot. Upgradable gfx card with both mini display port and dvi connectors and and perhaps 2 pci x slots for unternal expansion (sound video i/o). Esata doesn't need anything other that the right connectors off the motherboard so it would be nice but not essential as fw is still decent enough.
i think they could make a beautiful, compelling machine that might cannabalise their imac market but i think it will add a couple more % points to their overall marketshare. IT will also mean that people will replace their machines more often. If i buy a mac pro today i know i'll want 5 years out of it. If i buy somethin as above i'll expect to change it after 3.
Yup. Give me the modern version of the venerable and extremely popular Macintosh IIcx/IIci.
Snow Leopard.
To comply with the Bluray DRM, some changes to the OS are necessary. It makes sense to roll these into Snow Leopard.
Well, Intel Macs have had a Trusted Platform Module that has sat pretty much unused by Apple. Along the same lines, I think there is a good chance that 10.6 will be the end of the hackentosh as we know it too.
On the plus side, having support like this in the OS would make it easier to get cable labs certification. Finally I could replace my Tivo with a Mac Mini....
EDIT: Whoops, it looks like the TPM has been off and on again and I'm still not certain it's in any currently shipping Mac's since there doesn't seem to be any way to find out for sure (no nice list that I have found). So using a TPM for this is probably unlikely unless it's universally present.
Thanks for nothing AI.
lol
Bring back the matte display. period.
No, you simply confused a ~40mm thick desktop tray loading Blu-Ray drive with a 9.5mm thick mobile style slot loading drive.
i can buy a $1200 HP laptop with a bluray ROM and DVD-RW drive standard
i can buy a $1200 HP laptop with a bluray ROM and DVD-RW drive standard
That's a different issue than what you raised. It doesn't mean that HP got those drives for $20.
Is it a slot loading drive? is it a 9.5mm thick drive? If it's a tray load or 12mm thick, then it won't work in a Mac notebook.
SD Card - Will definitely be there. Properly Support SDXC speed as well. Still wondering how SD Card choose M$ exFAT which Apple couldn't use. But Hardware wise an SDXC capable Card reader is not a far shot. And i dont see how packaging and shipping cost could make the substantial saving, DVD cost $0.1 while similar capacity SD card cost $3 with less capacity. That is 30 times different.
Graphics Card - Finally - the GT200 Architecture Mobile Series, i am hoping all the iMac get GTS 250 / GTS 260 with 96 shader. Since the GT 230 and 240 doesn't provide any improvement over current generation at all. OpenCL could make use of these GPGPU power.
SSD - SSD actually doesn't cost as much as most people think. It is nothing more then a bunch of NAND with a controller chip. NAND is cheap for Apple, since they account for more then a third of the world total Flash production capacity. And Indilinx or Samsung chip pricing are below $15. So a decent 64GB SSD should cost apple around $100 to make. Although i believe apple will wait for another generation before making it standard.
CPU - they dont have much choice, Mobile Variant of Next Gen CPU wont be out till Xmas.
So what is the next Big thing that Pro and even Consumer will like??
I am thinking on MUCH BETTER Display.
The 20" Mac, is based on TN panel. which is low viewing angle, and 24" while based on H-IPS, is expensive. Ever since apple signed the 5 year deal with LG on Display Panel, LG has 2nd Generation of E-IPS Panel, which is an cheaper version of IPS, provides true 178 degree viewing angle, better color accuracy, and is available in 20" - 23" size. ( Not sure about 24" ) Combine with WLED Backlight it should be even better then the current H-IPS 24" iMac while being cheaper to produce.
This article was so awkwardly written that I had to read the first few sentences a few times to understand what it was even about. I was then dismayed to find that it isn't about anything.
I love AppleInsider (and have been a reader for a long time), but it's sad to see articles like this.
Oh, I thought I was the only one. I can't really even call it an article though, just "we need hits, lets make something up".