Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line

1101113151625

Comments

  • Reply 241 of 486
    pbpb Posts: 4,238member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    What, exactly, are the folks in this thread proposing the impact of quad core is going to be on 95% of what people do with their computers? Is Firefox going to load pages 4 times as fast? Is Office going to make letters appear on the screen before you type them? Will your emails fly off your computer like missiles? Will your music sound better?



    Right now and for some time to come, the impact will be minimal for most users, no doubt about it. But if Apple is serious about pushing the new SL optimization technologies to exploit the hardware potential at its maximum, then it absolutely needs to introduce quad core computers for the masses (the Mac Pro is for really few people). Otherwise the developers will have little interest to invest in the new technologies.
  • Reply 242 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleWiz67 View Post




    Someone I know is constantly fighting malware in windows



    aW



    Well he or she should stop downloading it then.
  • Reply 243 of 486
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    And here we go!



    Can't wait to see the new enclosure.



    i feel more power for gamers coming !!



    9
  • Reply 244 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Man, when you decide someone is "against you" you really kinda lose your shit, don't you?



    So you think people who buy Apple's wares are stupid, you have nothing but contempt for anyone who thinks otherwise, yet here you are, posting angrily on an Apple enthusiast site.



    I would urge you to figure out what you like, even love, and think about that. Talk to people who share your interests. It's really a better way to live. Goodbye.



    Umm, who's the one that started the argument that people don't read specs, I do believe that was you. You are the one who started with the insulting comments, I was simply trying to carry on a lively debate to your point that people should just be happy with whatever Apple throws out there.



    I've happily bought Macs over the years including an Apple iBook, Mac Mini, and a black Macbook most recently. I buy Apple when they make sense, and when their products are competitive to the rest of the personal computer market. I haven't bought anything from them for awhile because their incremental upgrades over the last 4 years are not worth the upgrade price. When they decide to offer something truly revolutionary again, then I will buy in again. I did just buy Snow Leopard recently, and so far its better than Leopard, but I still am getting a lot of application crashes with Adobe CS4 applications. So Apple isn't the king $hit. So far CS4 has been a lot more stable on Windows 7. That it just my experience, but that is comparing the results of two clean installs, so Apple has some catching up to do. In my opinion, OS X 10.4 was their best and most stable operating system to date and it is what we run on our PowerMac G5s at work. I have maybe one support call a week with those machines and usually it's software and not hardware related.



    Just because you want to play Apple fanboy and I take a more moderate view of Apple based on their merits, doesn't make me any less pro-Apple or make me an angry poster.
  • Reply 245 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    Perhaps you only look at synthetic benchmarks. but if you ever read REAL tests from Anandtech and others, you will see that real world performance rarely has anything to do with those.



    Your splitting hairs with that remark. Show me your evidence that any one performance testing suite or method is better than another. Test results collected from many users of a performance suite is going to give a much broader and more real-world look into the performance of various chips in various systems - especially over the basic batch tests, by one author, on one specific machine like Anandtech does. Geekbench, which also collects tests from their users, also show a similar trend that the Intel Core i7 processors provide better performance than Xeons in desktop and workstation scenarios.
  • Reply 246 of 486
    I made one pessimistic post above, but when I think about that we really should cool down and wait and see what Apple actually delivers. The last MacBook transition to Pros was a pretty successful step. I think those laptops are good value for the money. Apparently lots of people agree.



    Even if the "Core 2 Duo" part turns out to be true for all updated iMacs, we still know nothing about the other part of the equation: the price. Apple may decide to go the MacBook route, being even more aggressive and competitive in the mid-range with a slight speed bump/price cut for the high-end, with a new high-end models coming later, say, January. I am too lazy to investigate the Intel roadmap to check how this strategy would align with their roadmap, but it makes sense for the holiday season, dominated by the low-to-mid range purchases.
  • Reply 247 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GregAlexander View Post


    I get that you didn't read the replies, but did you even read the article?



    Yes, I read the article.



    However, I failed to see any reference to an actual release date or a final set of new features.



    As I'm quite interested in obtaining one of these new machines, knowing the actual date they're going to be released, and their exact specs would be helpful.



    From what I've read in this thread, there's a lot of speculation, but little cold hard fact.



    If someone could actually cough up the information, I bet I'm not the only one who would appreciate it.
  • Reply 248 of 486
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I don't think the iPhone argument works here. as soon as the new iMacs came out, sales went up by a good percentage. That was too coincidental.



    Anytime a new form generation of any Mac product comes out, sales % goes up. I surely don't have explain the reasoning for that to you- do I?

    We're talking over the last 2 years here anyway.

    Also the switch to Intel cause tons of switchers as well. People want a MAc but have had no choice in matte. That is until now.
  • Reply 249 of 486
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post




    if they go and put in a built in blu-ray they are backpedaling on this issue.





    I wouldn't be so sure they call it a mistake. After all, how many computers have they sold recently.

    and before you bring up the whole LED display as an example, remember that it lacks a lot of the innards of an imac so it simply has no need for 'the chin'. and that could be why that detail is lacking



    Backpedalling? What do you call the return of matte sacreen and firewire then? Groundhogs Day?
  • Reply 250 of 486
    http://store.apple.com/at/product/TW...co=MTA0MzEyMTE



    looks like somithing new with all aluiminum
  • Reply 251 of 486
    I'd buy a new iMac only if both of the following are featured in the update:



    1) LED display



    2) Clarksfield processor



    Anyway I think that both of them will not be featured this time :-(
  • Reply 252 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hugomodel View Post


    http://store.apple.com/at/product/TW...co=MTA0MzEyMTE



    looks like somithing new with all aluiminum



    It's the 24" LED cinema display (all alu, 3 USB ports on the back).
  • Reply 253 of 486
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    It's the 24" LED cinema display (all alu, 3 USB ports on the back).



    The back of that looks so much better than the current iMac. That would be so cool if it comes to be.
  • Reply 254 of 486
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    This guy seems to know what he's talking about

    http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...5768&ux=275907



    It's interesting that one of the first things he mentions in subtle changes in screen size (half inches), which might suggest a move to LED, which is not the first thing someone would make up if they were pulling the whole thing out of thin air.
  • Reply 255 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    They need a new keyboard that has no numeric keypad but still has the cursor/pageup/pagedown keys.



    Yikes! What's wrong with you man, the numeric keyboard is a MUST have... you can always order the smaller one instead.
  • Reply 256 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post


    One reason I love these forums... I actually thought people were wrong that the back of the current iMacs were black plastic. I was a little embarrassed to peek back there and realize, for the first time, how not-exactly-beautiful the rear end is.



    Yup, there's nothing like a beautiful rear end!
  • Reply 257 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    So once Apple went all glossy they started selling ever more iMacs and laptops even though everybody hates them, because that's all the could get. So I guess we could use the old "the would have sold even more if they had offered matte", because there's no way on earth to test that for truth.



    I think you are venturing into your own post hoc fallacy here. Based on the publicly available information, I don't think we can safely conclude anything about whether glossy has fueled sales, or whether matte would have sold more.



    It could be that the majority of buyers are completely indifferent to the issue but just want a Mac and that Apple's marketing and image have made it an increasingly compelling choice irrespective of the type of display. It could be that people are attracted to the glossy screens but, then, annoyed by them after living with them for a while. It could be that most people actually love the glossy screen and aren't bothered by it at all.



    About the most we can safely conclude is that, for those who bought a glossy Mac, is that the glossy screen was not a deal breaker for them at the time of purchase -- i.e., they bought it with a glossy screen.
  • Reply 258 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PB View Post


    Right now and for some time to come, the impact will be minimal for most users, no doubt about it. But if Apple is serious about pushing the new SL optimization technologies to exploit the hardware potential at its maximum, then it absolutely needs to introduce quad core computers for the masses (the Mac Pro is for really few people). Otherwise the developers will have little interest to invest in the new technologies.



    ++++



    Great point.
  • Reply 259 of 486
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by planetMitch View Post


    Yikes! What's wrong with you man, the numeric keyboard is a MUST have... you can always order the smaller one instead.



    I never use it. I ordered by iMac with the smaller keyboard but I missed pageup/pagedown and cursor keys too much so I went to Apple Store and bought a long one. But now the numeric keypad sticks out and makes my mousepad hang off the side of the desk. Both of Apple's solutions don't match my needs.
  • Reply 260 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    I think you are venturing into your own post hoc fallacy here. Based on the publicly available information, I don't think we can safely conclude anything about whether glossy has fueled sales, or whether matte would have sold more.



    True.



    Quote:

    It could be that the majority of buyers are completely indifferent to the issue but just want a Mac and that Apple's marketing and image have made it an increasingly compelling choice irrespective of the type of display. It could be that people are attracted to the glossy screens but, then, annoyed by them after living with them for a while. It could be that most people actually love the glossy screen and aren't bothered by it at all.



    Maybe. But one thing we should know is that Apple hasn't stumbled into this blindly, and that know how buyers respond to various features. One of the reasons why Apple has managed to succeed is precisely because they do have a handle on these issues.



    Quote:

    About the most we can safely conclude is that, for those who bought a glossy Mac, is that the glossy screen was not a deal breaker for them at the time of purchase -- i.e., they bought it with a glossy screen.



    You are taking this one step too far, I think. it's easy to conclude that one or another feature produces hostility or indifference, but where's the evidence? Not geek ranting in places like this, I hope. That would be, as you called it -- a post hoc fallacy.
Sign In or Register to comment.