Apple ads hint at thinner iMacs, lighter MacBooks, cheaper Mac minis

1246789

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 177
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post


    Originally Posted by AppleInsider

    "Note: The cheapest Mac mini currently sells for ? 599 on the Netherlands online store."



    Yeah, thanks. They added that later.
  • Reply 62 of 177
    innoinno Posts: 2member
    If they were going to go so far to try to kill the optical drive (like the iMac helped to kill the floppy in mainstream use) they would have to use a bigger pulpit than just a keynote-less refresh.



    ... and the fact they consider DVD burning to be a major selling point of iLife and etc would keep them from making this plunge.



    We aren't going to lose optical storage until everyone has connectivity so insane that pulling down a HD movie, or a huge 10GB bunch of application code or data, is trivial.
  • Reply 63 of 177
    So, a thinner, lighter, faster MacBook? No mention of cheaper in the ad. \



    If it's thinner and lighter, I would expect removal of the optical drive to save space and weight. Which wouldn't bother me, unless it's not cheaper as a result.



    I've been planning to buy a new netbook soon after they're shipping with Win7. A cheaper MacBook might tempt me into going that route instead. I hope it happens.
  • Reply 64 of 177
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,167member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTel View Post


    Two reasons: The use of LED displays and the possibly smaller internal components (i.e. 1.8" drives and/or getting rid of optical drives altogether and going for SD). Apple tossed the floppy drive with the first iMac so why not toss the optical or make it optional. Thinner == better.



    Why all the way down to 1.8"?! Why not 2.5" HDD?!



    However, I don't believe Apple will trade down to lower capacity and more expensive HDD to make a desktop smaller for no reason. The iMac size and thickness is not and will not be an issue since it is desktop. Apple still need to improve the iMac graphics card and display. They also need to make it easier to upgrade the HDD and use better speakers.
  • Reply 65 of 177
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iMacmatician View Post


    I checked and I see "Configura tu iMac aquÃ*. ¡Ahora incluye Mac OS Snow Leopard!" without an "Air" mention. Plus the current starting price is 1079€ (the other ad does say 1003€).



    However, if there is an "iMac Air," that can explain the use of dual-core and thinner design as a distinction between the iMac Air and a more powerful (quad-core, like that Whirlpool poster) "regular" iMac.



    http://www.google.es/#hl=nl&source=h...2258d6d00a0e48



    Edit: it doesn't show up everytime, but here it is:

  • Reply 66 of 177
    mactrippermactripper Posts: 1,328member
    The "iMac Air" it is!





    It's a desktop AND a tablet.



    The monitor is the tablet and it's portable.





    In my opinion the reason Apple encouraged Intel with Light Peak is because in order to get more horsepower when the tablet is connected to the desktop based processors, graphic card, hard drive etc, Apple had to come up with a very fast interface.



    So they are capitalizing on that further, letting Intel get involved in all before the new Mac's are released and dissected.



    That's my opinion anyway.
  • Reply 67 of 177
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    What I want to hear from an iMac leak is 'the new larger, quad core, eSATA equipped, blu-ray burning iMac'.



    That's the only way I'll be buying one. I have no interest in a gimped PC with performance from 5 years ago.
  • Reply 68 of 177
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post


    What I want to hear from an iMac leak is 'the new larger, quad core, eSATA equipped, blu-ray burning iMac'.



    That's the only way I'll be buying one. I have no interest in a gimped PC with performance from 5 years ago.



    With you buddy... Looks like I'm stuck with my shaky hackintosh forever. Again:





    ENORMOUS + EXPENSIVE MAC PRO



    -- big gap -- << every other PC maker



    Weedy shiny skinny 5-year old gimped iMac
  • Reply 69 of 177
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Inno View Post


    ... and the fact they consider DVD burning to be a major selling point of iLife and etc would keep them from making this plunge.



    Where did you get that DVD burning was a major selling point of iLife in CE 2009? Check out the iLife page.



    While they still include iDVD in the suite, it hasn’t gotten any rich updates in sometime and they only showcase the other 4 apps (iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband and iWeb) from that page. There is only one link that leads to iDVD.



    On top of that we have an unchanged 32-bit version of DVD Player in Snow Leopard and DVD Studio Pro hasn’t been updated in 2 years despite the other pro apps in Final Cut Studio getting regular updates.



    Quote:

    We aren't going to lose optical storage until everyone has connectivity so insane that pulling down a HD movie, or a huge 10GB bunch of application code or data, is trivial.



    That is an all-or-nothing attitude. Like with most changes in life there is a transition stage. They have already done it with the MBA (which can use any Mac optical drive). Others have copied that format of a ultra-light notebook. Then there are netbooks that are selling droves. You don’t remove all optical drives at once and then pull all software support for it forcing customers to change their habits. You start with the niche devices, then you move to the mainstream devices that can most use the space saving (in this case notebooks). Later you remove it from other devices while you offer an external solution for those that need it. The current MBA SuperDrive is $99 but that price was set when it first came out if they were selling a lot more I bet it could go for under $49 now. The writing is on the wall, the only questions are when will Apple start to make the shift and how long before others follow suit.
  • Reply 70 of 177
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hattig View Post


    Shame I have no interest in a thinner, less featured iMac. For a desktop machine, I don't care if it is 1",1.5", 2" or 3" deep (with a curved back to disguise the depth). I care about CPU power, graphical power, memory capacity and expandability and storage capacity.



    Apple makes the exact product you want. It's called the Mac Pro.
  • Reply 71 of 177
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Making an internal optical drive optional help make the case smaller. Only making it external does Apple save some space, but the desktops should be the very last machines to even consider having the optical drive removed. Notebooks first where weight, size and port-side space is extra important.



    I agree. It makes much more sense to pull the optical drive from the notebooks first, where size and weight are much more important. I would expect the order in which the Macs lose the internal optical drive to be:

    MacBook Air (from the beginning)

    MacBook (hopefully this week)

    MacBook Pro (in a year or two)

    Mac Mini (in two or three years)

    iMac (in two or three years)

    Mac Pro (available optionally for at least another five years)
  • Reply 72 of 177
    kingkueikingkuei Posts: 137member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTripper View Post


    The "iMac Air" it is!





    It's a desktop AND a tablet.



    The monitor is the tablet and it's portable.



    you mean something like this:

    http://i.tuaw.com/?date=2008/01/03&s...&commentspage=



    or something like this:

    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...g_station.html
  • Reply 73 of 177
    The google ad that show Imac Air doens't appear all the time but yes sometimes you can see it and with a lower price than now.



    Also if it helps about the macbook it says:



    Nuevo MacBook de Apple®

    store.apple.com/es/macbook Más fino, más ligero y más potente. ¡Configúralo ya! EnvÃ*o gratuito.



    It means thinner, lighter and with more power.

    It looks this google ad is new!



    Hope it helps.



    The truth..CANT wait for Tuesday.

    I have the latest Imac but I think Christmas is around and maybe....I deserve a new Mac!!! I have been very nice all year..Santa!!
  • Reply 74 of 177
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,526member
    http://profile.imageshack.us/user/ko...36/imageef.jpg



    That's a french google ad someone found a few days ago
  • Reply 75 of 177
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    iMac Air name sounds wrong. I wouldn't put this trick past Apple. If it's called iMac Air I'll eat my hat.



    A better naming scheme would be to make it thinner call it iMac, and then make a far more powerful, thicker, QUAD-CORE version and call that iMac Pro. Or even iMac+ (plus), to keep from mixing it up with the Mac Pro. And perhaps offer iMac Plus in 24" and 30" only. Offering the new iMac in 20" and 24".



    This scenario would make sense, iMac Air sounds fishy to me.
  • Reply 76 of 177
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I agree. It makes much more sense to pull the optical drive from the notebooks first, where size and weight are much more important. I would expect the order in which the Macs lose the internal optical drive to be:

    MacBook Air (from the beginning)

    MacBook (hopefully this week)

    MacBook Pro (in a year or two)

    Mac Mini (in two or three years)

    iMac (in two or three years)

    Mac Pro (available optionally for at least another five years)



    The way I'm using my Mini, I think there could be a market for a stripped down device that goes without an optical drive built in. I have an external DVD burner (CD only on Mini) and several external hard drives. An even more compact Mini would be rather interesting as the heart of a system that handles expansion by way of plenty of connectivity.



    Running a 7200 RPM external via Firewire 800 would result in faster performance than running an OS off of an internal laptop 5400 RPM drive. So why not go instead with a low-capacity solid-state drive with enough room to handle the OS and applications, while using externals to store tons of data. I would imagine that even 64Gb of internal memory would be enough to handle the basics, i.e. the OS, applications, a few files stored here and there.



    Imagine how mini the Mini could become if you replaced the hard drive with an SSD and didn't include an optical drive. The power brick would be larger than the computer.



    I suspect Steve Jobs and Co. have imagined it but it's less a matter of the technology becoming available and more a question of timing. SSDs need to become affordable but if you're target is 64Gb rather than something a lot more ambitious, this can happen sooner than later. Operating minus an optical drive is something more workable as consumers start doing it more with other devices like netbooks and the like.



    I already have the external bits and pieces to take such a stripped down Mini and place it at the heart of a system that meets my needs. At the same time, 64Gb with Snow Leopard and ILife preinstalled, would serve the needs of a large percentage of computer users. Besides, external drives and burners are dirt-cheap, not to mention plug-and-play. One could easily bring home said Ultra Mini, get on the thing and do assorted useful stuff and go out and acquire the hardware to do more ambitious work as required. The beauty of this for companies like Apple is that not having to deal with optical drives is one less headache, i.e. one less component that can break down and cause Apple to have to rectify the situation.



    Externals have the advantage, also, of being incredibly easy to replace when they break down. No more taking the computer apart to replace a hard drive or faulty optical unit. No more caring that the Mini you buy now doesn't have Blu Ray capability because it's not the Mini that will be handling the Blu Ray discs directly.



    That said, I can't imagine that when Apple releases the new Mini in a few days, anything so drastic will be in the cards. I expect the revised Mini to have specs similar to the 13" MacBook Pro accompanied by a price reduction. Not sure if a 9400M update is going to be part of this but the 9400M is hardly a problem.



    I'm not going to buy a Mini this calender year. I have a new computer on the agenda for 2010. Still, a revised Mini now is great news for me because it means rumours of the Mini's death are greatly exaggerated. I would love to own a Mac Pro tower but the cost is way out of my range and I'm not making any money with the computer, just having some fun, doing a little bit of non-profit video work, etc. A Mini, even a stripped down, impossibly tiny one, would meet my needs. Hopefully next year when I'm ready to buy, the Mini, whatever form it takes, is alive and well. Now it looks like it will be.
  • Reply 77 of 177
    I hope the new one [wireless] includes a number pad.
  • Reply 78 of 177
    sheffsheff Posts: 1,407member
    I want a Blackbook to make a comeback here. Maybe make it thinner, make the plastic stronger (so it does not chip away slowly as my whitebook has been doing for the past three years).



    On the hardware side how about a higher res display, multitouch trackpad (one can dream) and an updated nvidia card. USB 3.0 anyone?



    Oh, and my most desired feature is a more durable powerbrick. Had to replace mine when it stopped charging and that is not fun.
  • Reply 79 of 177
    anonymouseanonymouse Posts: 6,681member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I agree. It makes much more sense to pull the optical drive from the notebooks first, where size and weight are much more important. I would expect the order in which the Macs lose the internal optical drive to be:

    MacBook Air (from the beginning)

    MacBook (hopefully this week)

    MacBook Pro (in a year or two)

    Mac Mini (in two or three years)

    iMac (in two or three years)

    Mac Pro (available optionally for at least another five years)



    Assuming that optical drives do eventually go away, your order is likely correct (except perhaps for the position of the mini, which should perhaps be before the MBP), but the schedule is far too ambitious, I think. I think we are still quite a few years away from the necessary bandwidth being plentiful and inexpensive enough that the network replaces optical as a medium.



    The situation is not really the same as eliminating the floppy drive. Other than supporting legacy disks, the floppy wasn't really necessary any more. Optical drives could do pretty much anything a floppy drive could and cheaper. Pretty much all software was already shipping on optical and it was cheaper to do so, and floppy disks were not used for anything outside of the personal computer industry.



    Today, optical has not yet been effectively superseded by another medium and it has uses -- music, video -- besides being strictly a data storage and software distribution medium. Consumer bandwidth is not increasing significantly at this point, nor is geographical availability. In fact, rather than building out networks, ISPs are looking at usage caps and higher and tiered rate structures. (Wired, ISPs, at least, and the wireless carriers are nowhere near being able to provide the necessary bandwidth.)



    Based on the current situation, I think your schedule would probably need to be at least doubled. Unless there's a major shakeup in the broadband industry, the network isn't going to be fast enough and ubiquitous enough that it can effectively replace optical for several years, at least, and eliminating optical drives would be problematic for many consumers. And, I don't really see another medium that's cheap enough and widely enough used that would replace optical either.



    Then again, optical may not go away entirely at all for a very long time.
  • Reply 80 of 177
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rebelmusik View Post


    Honestly, the iMacs are great computers already, and I can't wait for this next update. But without a matte or anti-glare option, I will never buy it.



    It's fantastic for all of you who love or can tolerate the glossy screen. But for those of us who don't, it's unfortunate that the option is not there yet.



    We will get it- Apple has realized the error of their ways. Al Gore or no Al Gore.

    The MacBook Pro adoption of matte points right to this very issue
Sign In or Register to comment.