I think Apple is going to sell a ton of these new iMacs.
Not to me and to many people in Europe. Apple this time did not adjust prices to the new currency balance like they did many times in the past.
Example: high end iMac, 27". It costs 2000 USD. In Belgium, without VAT it is 1570 euros. This makes today 2335 USD. Yep, $335 more to start with. Including tax the equivalent is 2825 USD. Tax is not Apple's fault but this time Apple has a share to this because the computer is overpriced from the beginning with respect to the USA prices by $335.
Uh... What? Have you not been paying attention for the past... forever?
Apple couldn't care less about games.
ALTERNATE REPLY:
So now that we finally have a top-level GPU in the iMac instead of mid-level, you decide to whine about something else to satiate your need to complain? Good going.
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
The new iMac's don't even support SATAIII. FPS!
Both these options could have been made BTO or fitted as standard at very little manufacturing cost.
Even if one were to consider gaming as a reason for increasing GPU's alone, hasn't the iPhone and iPad opened SJ's eyes to the indisputable fact that gaming helps sell computers?
Not to me and to many people in Europe. Apple this time did not adjust prices to the new currency balance like they did many times in the past.
Example: high end iMac, 27". It costs 2000 USD. In Belgium, without VAT it is 1570 euros. This makes today 2335 USD. Yep, $335 more to start with. Including tax the equivalent is 2825 USD. Tax is not Apple's fault but this time Apple has a share to this because the computer is overpriced from the beginning with respect to the USA prices by $335.
Isn't everything (except for beer) in Europe expensive?
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
I've been meaning to ask, but I assumed that the Radeon GPUs do in fact support OpenCL?
Isn't everything (except for beer) in Europe expensive?
Certainly more expensive than in the US with some glaring exceptions like French cheese and wine, and fine quality Belgian chocolate and beer.
But as I said, in the past Apple often tried to align the prices after updates according to currency balance. Of course, even then, the computers were still more expensive before considering tax but not as much as this time. Probably they are right, in the bigger scheme of things, to do so from their own perspective as a company in an unstable financial climate, but I believe that the iMac sales are going to suffer in Europe.
Hope I can run Dual Monitors off the Thunderbolt port...
Apparently you can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red
Why no Crossfire option with the mobility Radeon? Once again Apple drags its heels in the graphics dept.
Probably no point, it's not a high end chip as you say. Double a not so good chip doesnt make it a best in class gaming computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra
Did you miss the part where I said the new iMacs should come with SAS drives?
I think it's a questionable intermediate stage, cost per performance, heat and noise issues don't seem to be in the favor of a SAS drive in a consumer computer, especially an all-in-one. I know nothing about the cheap controllers, I hope they're reliable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mac-sochist
I can't understand how anyone can claim to see a screen better when it's covered with an obscuring, resolution-reducing semi-opaque coating. And even on the subject of reflections—with a glossy screen you have some chance of turning the screen so as to minimize the problem. With the matte overlay, any light hitting the screen is going to diffuse and obscure the screen worse than it's already obscured.
I call it a false dichotomy. All along, I've been asking for a good optical anti-glare coating, most people don't seem to notice or know what I'm talking about. Matte isn't good, but that doesn't mean I want the shine either. I know it is possible to do on a large panel as it is on my 50" TV, one of the reasons I chose it over a glossy or matte TV. Apple's pre-glass "glossy" notebooks had such a coating too, just milder.
it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's
I googled 'Radeon 8xxxM and Radeon 7xxxM'. They don't exist. It's hard to refute my point when you're just making crap up.
Quote:
(which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer...
With a desktop processor and hard drive. Just stop talking about things you don't understand.
Quote:
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
Of course not. Could you show me any actual implementations of real-world software that would use CrossFire for this purpose?
Quote:
The new iMac's don't even support SATAIII.
Link? The newest MacBook Pros have a SATA III port.
Perhaps. But I can't say from experience. In over 20 years of Mac ownership, I've never once taken a machine in for service. Call me lucky!
That's not to say that I've never had parts fail--but that was long after the warranty expired, and after said model was EOL'ed, so hardly worth the hassle of repair.
But, I am annoyed that Apple chooses to fill at least two RAM slots with their "minimum" RAM configuration. It's such a waste. I'm not saying they should max out the RAM, but it would be much less wasteful to use up just one slot for the minimum configuration.
I wish that I could say the same on the service issue. My first Mac was a 2008 Mac Pro, and I have had the logic board go out and the video card go out. Fortunately, both of these occurred before the warranty expired. Currently I'm having two other issues that I believe are software related and this is that the system shuts down whenever it goes to sleep, and the keyboard detection pops up on every boot. Once Lion comes out I'll start over with a clean install and that will hopefully resolve those issues.
The RAM issue seems a bit of an odd complaint to me. I mean, how many people really need 16GB of RAM? For those that could use 16GB of RAM, how many of those can do just fine with 12GB? Personally, if I'm ever able to get a new iMac I would simply bump it up to 12GB as this is more than I would need but a very practical upgrade. I would also be very inclined to toss in an after market 256GB SSD. That would make for one screaming machine.
For those considering the switch, I made the switch with an early 27" and love the machine. The new one sounds awesome so I'll start by saying I'm jealous.....but on to my information.
1) I have 8 gig of ram in my machine and normally operate with 2-3 gig free and unallocated. If I also have parallels (windows emulator) running, then I'm using all 8 gig. Order the machine with 8 gig if you can or upgrade it to at least 8 gig.
2) The SSD option sounds nice but boot time on the mac is so much faster than a PC it is crazy. With my 8 gig of ram I'm never swapping so the SSD option IMHO is better left for MAC books. If money was no object, I would love to have a 512 SSD so I'm not knocking it.
3) I have no idea what the 2gig option does for the video card. Mine has a lowly 512 and that doesn't seem to be an issue except for a few games which I cannot run at max-max-max resolution. I would probably stick with the 1gig and faster GPU and be completely happy.
4) with the money I saved above, I would try to get a couple of 1TB thunderbolt external drives. They sound crazy good.
There's 4 SODIMMS so you can just add two more 2GB chips to get 8GB total...
I know that the argument here was getting 8GB of RAM, but... If you were going to upgrade to 8GB, it would really be pretty foolish not to go ahead and go to 12GB. Right now you can get the 4GB upgrade for just under $50 and the 8GB upgrade for $95. More importantly though is the fact that if you decide later you need/want more than 8GB you now have to toss RAM if you go with only the 4GB upgrade. To make it even worse, if you went with the 4GB upgrade and decided to max the system you would have to toss not only the original 4GB in the system, but also the 4GB you bought as an upgrade.
Why no Crossfire option with the mobility Radeon? Once again Apple drags its heels in the graphics dept.
This does sound like it would be the way to go to me too. Since Apple is limited to using a mobile chipset due to heat concerns, this option would seriously up the ante on the iMac being a gaming capable system that can actually be gamer friendly for the entire 3+ year lifespan of the system. Maybe next time, but somehow I doubt it.
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
The 6970M that is found in the top end 27" is the current top end mobile GPU from AMD. So no it isn't 2 generations behind and yes it is a top end card. Not as good as the desktop version maybe, but one of the fastest mobile GPUs w/o going into SLI or Crossfire options.
Let's see. Much faster CPUs, Dramatically faster GPUs, Addition of Thunderbolt port which will blow away any other external transfer mechanism. Sure, just a 'mild' refresh according to Daharder.
I'm not sure what the original poster's intent may have been, but I would agree that this refresh was very predictable. That said, this appears to be a very smokin' refresh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
For a CPU-intensive app like Logic, I'd definitely go with the i7. For $200 (roughly 10% of the price of the bare-bones machine), you get 10% higher clock speed and twice the number of cores. No brainer. Then add $100 for 4 GB more RAM and you're set.
Actually, if you are going to be adding RAM, you can get an 8GB upgrade for $100 and this is absolutely the option I would go for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
That is the conventional logic, but may no longer apply. Thunderbird is faster than the SSD, so even putting the SSD into an external box may make sense. In fact, one great solution might be to buy an external TB RAID box and add multiple SSD drives (since there will be several, you can choose smaller, less expensive ones). This solution should be even faster than an internal SSD.
Now I really LIKE this idea. If only I had the funds to buy the new iMac, RAID box, and SSD drives that would be something very cool to play around with. Launching apps would be like don't blink.
Pretty much the fastest drive you can find that will drop straight into an iMac or Mac Pro. Yeah, the guy touting the SAS drives apparently has money to burn.
And how has that petition worked out for you? Have you gotten that matte option yet? How long has it been going on?
What are these people going to say when holographic displays come out? "Umm, Steve, the light goes right through the images to my eyes. Can we not have matte hologram options?"
The 1TB and 2TB Seagate SAS drives over at newegg cost triple what the SATA versions cost. The IBM versions are all ridiculous like a 2TB for a grand. Also, what is the volume level like on the SAS drives? The drives they put in the iMac are basically silent
Great points here, but I would argue that Apple has an even bigger reason for not using SAS drives. GREEN. Spinning these things up at 15k has got to take a LOT more juice than spinning a disk at less that half that speed. This is the reason that they offer the SSD drives for those with the money, they are very green in terms of power consumption.
Pretty much the fastest drive you can find that will drop straight into an iMac or Mac Pro. Yeah, the guy touting the SAS drives apparently has money to burn.
Whatever, my gaming PC I built which puts the iMac to shame cost a hell of a lot less. And yes, I use both PC's and Macs - been using Macs since the SE.
The point I was trying to make is that Apple should offer SAS as a middle range option instead of forcing consumers to choose between slower SATA and fast but expensive SSD. But apparently people on here are just to stupid to understand.
Whatever, my gaming PC I built which puts the iMac to shame cost a hell of a lot less. And yes, I use both PC's and Macs - been using Macs since the SE.
The point I was trying to make is that Apple should offer SAS as a middle range option instead of forcing consumers to choose between slower SATA and fast but expensive SSD. But apparently people on here are just to stupid to understand.
The rebutlle: Sounds like you are too stupid to understand that Apple isn't forcing you to buy any of their products.
Seriously, if you don't like what a company offers then don't buy it. If they are the least objectionable of the imperfect options then buy it. It's really that simple.
The rebutlle: Sounds like you are too stupid to understand that Apple isn't forcing you to buy any of their products.
Seriously, if you don't like what a company offers then don't buy it. If they are the least objectionable of the imperfect options then buy it. It's really that simple.
"Announcing the new Apple product. It comes in blue."
Yay! I love blue! Blue is awesome!
I wish it came in red.
What? How dare you! If you don't like blue you can
go elsewhere simple as that.
But isn't this a discussion of Apple products?
No! It's a um, er, well, sputter, oh just go away!
Comments
I think Apple is going to sell a ton of these new iMacs.
Not to me and to many people in Europe. Apple this time did not adjust prices to the new currency balance like they did many times in the past.
Example: high end iMac, 27". It costs 2000 USD. In Belgium, without VAT it is 1570 euros. This makes today 2335 USD. Yep, $335 more to start with. Including tax the equivalent is 2825 USD. Tax is not Apple's fault but this time Apple has a share to this because the computer is overpriced from the beginning with respect to the USA prices by $335.
Uh... What? Have you not been paying attention for the past... forever?
Apple couldn't care less about games.
ALTERNATE REPLY:
So now that we finally have a top-level GPU in the iMac instead of mid-level, you decide to whine about something else to satiate your need to complain? Good going.
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
The new iMac's don't even support SATAIII. FPS!
Both these options could have been made BTO or fitted as standard at very little manufacturing cost.
Even if one were to consider gaming as a reason for increasing GPU's alone, hasn't the iPhone and iPad opened SJ's eyes to the indisputable fact that gaming helps sell computers?
Not to me and to many people in Europe. Apple this time did not adjust prices to the new currency balance like they did many times in the past.
Example: high end iMac, 27". It costs 2000 USD. In Belgium, without VAT it is 1570 euros. This makes today 2335 USD. Yep, $335 more to start with. Including tax the equivalent is 2825 USD. Tax is not Apple's fault but this time Apple has a share to this because the computer is overpriced from the beginning with respect to the USA prices by $335.
Isn't everything (except for beer) in Europe expensive?
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
I've been meaning to ask, but I assumed that the Radeon GPUs do in fact support OpenCL?
Isn't everything (except for beer) in Europe expensive?
Certainly more expensive than in the US with some glaring exceptions like French cheese and wine, and fine quality Belgian chocolate and beer.
But as I said, in the past Apple often tried to align the prices after updates according to currency balance. Of course, even then, the computers were still more expensive before considering tax but not as much as this time. Probably they are right, in the bigger scheme of things, to do so from their own perspective as a company in an unstable financial climate, but I believe that the iMac sales are going to suffer in Europe.
Hope I can run Dual Monitors off the Thunderbolt port...
Apparently you can.
Why no Crossfire option with the mobility Radeon? Once again Apple drags its heels in the graphics dept.
Probably no point, it's not a high end chip as you say. Double a not so good chip doesnt make it a best in class gaming computer.
Did you miss the part where I said the new iMacs should come with SAS drives?
I think it's a questionable intermediate stage, cost per performance, heat and noise issues don't seem to be in the favor of a SAS drive in a consumer computer, especially an all-in-one. I know nothing about the cheap controllers, I hope they're reliable.
I can't understand how anyone can claim to see a screen better when it's covered with an obscuring, resolution-reducing semi-opaque coating. And even on the subject of reflections—with a glossy screen you have some chance of turning the screen so as to minimize the problem. With the matte overlay, any light hitting the screen is going to diffuse and obscure the screen worse than it's already obscured.
I call it a false dichotomy. All along, I've been asking for a good optical anti-glare coating, most people don't seem to notice or know what I'm talking about. Matte isn't good, but that doesn't mean I want the shine either. I know it is possible to do on a large panel as it is on my 50" TV, one of the reasons I chose it over a glossy or matte TV. Apple's pre-glass "glossy" notebooks had such a coating too, just milder.
it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's
I googled 'Radeon 8xxxM and Radeon 7xxxM'. They don't exist. It's hard to refute my point when you're just making crap up.
(which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer...
With a desktop processor and hard drive. Just stop talking about things you don't understand.
Are you also completely unaware of OpenCL, (CUDA) GCD and other technologies that utilise multiple processors and which scientific community apps could exploit.
Of course not. Could you show me any actual implementations of real-world software that would use CrossFire for this purpose?
The new iMac's don't even support SATAIII.
Link? The newest MacBook Pros have a SATA III port.
Link? The newest MacBook Pros have a SATA III port.
2011 iMacs: No SATA 6Gb/s, Yes to Multiple Drives.
There is apparently a bug with it and this may explain why Apple left it out.
Perhaps. But I can't say from experience. In over 20 years of Mac ownership, I've never once taken a machine in for service. Call me lucky!
That's not to say that I've never had parts fail--but that was long after the warranty expired, and after said model was EOL'ed, so hardly worth the hassle of repair.
But, I am annoyed that Apple chooses to fill at least two RAM slots with their "minimum" RAM configuration. It's such a waste. I'm not saying they should max out the RAM, but it would be much less wasteful to use up just one slot for the minimum configuration.
I wish that I could say the same on the service issue. My first Mac was a 2008 Mac Pro, and I have had the logic board go out and the video card go out. Fortunately, both of these occurred before the warranty expired. Currently I'm having two other issues that I believe are software related and this is that the system shuts down whenever it goes to sleep, and the keyboard detection pops up on every boot. Once Lion comes out I'll start over with a clean install and that will hopefully resolve those issues.
The RAM issue seems a bit of an odd complaint to me. I mean, how many people really need 16GB of RAM? For those that could use 16GB of RAM, how many of those can do just fine with 12GB? Personally, if I'm ever able to get a new iMac I would simply bump it up to 12GB as this is more than I would need but a very practical upgrade. I would also be very inclined to toss in an after market 256GB SSD. That would make for one screaming machine.
1) I have 8 gig of ram in my machine and normally operate with 2-3 gig free and unallocated. If I also have parallels (windows emulator) running, then I'm using all 8 gig. Order the machine with 8 gig if you can or upgrade it to at least 8 gig.
2) The SSD option sounds nice but boot time on the mac is so much faster than a PC it is crazy. With my 8 gig of ram I'm never swapping so the SSD option IMHO is better left for MAC books. If money was no object, I would love to have a 512 SSD so I'm not knocking it.
3) I have no idea what the 2gig option does for the video card. Mine has a lowly 512 and that doesn't seem to be an issue except for a few games which I cannot run at max-max-max resolution. I would probably stick with the 1gig and faster GPU and be completely happy.
4) with the money I saved above, I would try to get a couple of 1TB thunderbolt external drives. They sound crazy good.
There's 4 SODIMMS so you can just add two more 2GB chips to get 8GB total...
I know that the argument here was getting 8GB of RAM, but... If you were going to upgrade to 8GB, it would really be pretty foolish not to go ahead and go to 12GB. Right now you can get the 4GB upgrade for just under $50 and the 8GB upgrade for $95. More importantly though is the fact that if you decide later you need/want more than 8GB you now have to toss RAM if you go with only the 4GB upgrade. To make it even worse, if you went with the 4GB upgrade and decided to max the system you would have to toss not only the original 4GB in the system, but also the 4GB you bought as an upgrade.
Just a little food for thought.
Why no Crossfire option with the mobility Radeon? Once again Apple drags its heels in the graphics dept.
This does sound like it would be the way to go to me too. Since Apple is limited to using a mobile chipset due to heat concerns, this option would seriously up the ante on the iMac being a gaming capable system that can actually be gamer friendly for the entire 3+ year lifespan of the system. Maybe next time, but somehow I doubt it.
It is not a top level GPU...far from it. It is a mobile GPU which is good but not bloody good. Plus, it is already a couple of gens behind what is currently/imminently going into laptop PC's (which is all the iMac is really...a glorified laptop computer with a fabulous but cumbersome monitor).
The 6970M that is found in the top end 27" is the current top end mobile GPU from AMD. So no it isn't 2 generations behind and yes it is a top end card. Not as good as the desktop version maybe, but one of the fastest mobile GPUs w/o going into SLI or Crossfire options.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...D_6xxxM_Series
Let's see. Much faster CPUs, Dramatically faster GPUs, Addition of Thunderbolt port which will blow away any other external transfer mechanism. Sure, just a 'mild' refresh according to Daharder.
I'm not sure what the original poster's intent may have been, but I would agree that this refresh was very predictable. That said, this appears to be a very smokin' refresh.
For a CPU-intensive app like Logic, I'd definitely go with the i7. For $200 (roughly 10% of the price of the bare-bones machine), you get 10% higher clock speed and twice the number of cores. No brainer. Then add $100 for 4 GB more RAM and you're set.
Actually, if you are going to be adding RAM, you can get an 8GB upgrade for $100 and this is absolutely the option I would go for.
That is the conventional logic, but may no longer apply. Thunderbird is faster than the SSD, so even putting the SSD into an external box may make sense. In fact, one great solution might be to buy an external TB RAID box and add multiple SSD drives (since there will be several, you can choose smaller, less expensive ones). This solution should be even faster than an internal SSD.
Now I really LIKE this idea. If only I had the funds to buy the new iMac, RAID box, and SSD drives that would be something very cool to play around with. Launching apps would be like don't blink.
300GB 15k sas drive = $269.99
240GB SSD drive = $649.99
Must be nice to have money to burn...
At least give us something to compare to...
WD Velociraptor 10k 300GB = $104.99
Pretty much the fastest drive you can find that will drop straight into an iMac or Mac Pro. Yeah, the guy touting the SAS drives apparently has money to burn.
And how has that petition worked out for you? Have you gotten that matte option yet? How long has it been going on?
What are these people going to say when holographic displays come out? "Umm, Steve, the light goes right through the images to my eyes. Can we not have matte hologram options?"
The 1TB and 2TB Seagate SAS drives over at newegg cost triple what the SATA versions cost. The IBM versions are all ridiculous like a 2TB for a grand. Also, what is the volume level like on the SAS drives? The drives they put in the iMac are basically silent
Great points here, but I would argue that Apple has an even bigger reason for not using SAS drives. GREEN. Spinning these things up at 15k has got to take a LOT more juice than spinning a disk at less that half that speed. This is the reason that they offer the SSD drives for those with the money, they are very green in terms of power consumption.
At least give us something to compare to...
WD Velociraptor 10k 300GB = $104.99
Pretty much the fastest drive you can find that will drop straight into an iMac or Mac Pro. Yeah, the guy touting the SAS drives apparently has money to burn.
Whatever, my gaming PC I built which puts the iMac to shame cost a hell of a lot less. And yes, I use both PC's and Macs - been using Macs since the SE.
The point I was trying to make is that Apple should offer SAS as a middle range option instead of forcing consumers to choose between slower SATA and fast but expensive SSD. But apparently people on here are just to stupid to understand.
Whatever, my gaming PC I built which puts the iMac to shame cost a hell of a lot less. And yes, I use both PC's and Macs - been using Macs since the SE.
The point I was trying to make is that Apple should offer SAS as a middle range option instead of forcing consumers to choose between slower SATA and fast but expensive SSD. But apparently people on here are just to stupid to understand.
The rebutlle: Sounds like you are too stupid to understand that Apple isn't forcing you to buy any of their products.
Seriously, if you don't like what a company offers then don't buy it. If they are the least objectionable of the imperfect options then buy it. It's really that simple.
The rebutlle: Sounds like you are too stupid to understand that Apple isn't forcing you to buy any of their products.
Seriously, if you don't like what a company offers then don't buy it. If they are the least objectionable of the imperfect options then buy it. It's really that simple.
"Announcing the new Apple product. It comes in blue."
Yay! I love blue! Blue is awesome!
I wish it came in red.
What? How dare you! If you don't like blue you can
go elsewhere simple as that.
But isn't this a discussion of Apple products?
No! It's a um, er, well, sputter, oh just go away!