And I honestly feel that improved aesthetics is itself enough of an advantage to pursue a thinner device.
None of those matter in the slightest. As the Mac Pro is essentially dead (for now) the iMac needs to be Apple's powerhouse. It should have the biggest and fastest CPUs and GPUs available, and crazy amounts of storage. It needs power above everything. Also as a desktop it should be moved rarely, if ever.
Nice of you to read attentively. I explicitly said: "And before you say the RMBPs are more expensive, take a cMBP and swap in the SSDs that Apple offers, now compare the price to the RMBP. What do you notice? It is the same or more expensive, and has lower specs on RAM, VRAM, screen tech, and has cheaper speakers. Enough with this nonsense about Retina screens costing more. Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
Now, of course it's Apple's price, they are the ones selling you the machine. You can throw in aftermarket SSDs to save cost if you want, but that introduces warranty issues. I'm talking about Apple's offerings not hybrids that include some Apple parts and some third-party parts. So again, if you compare Apple's products and their pricing, Apple does not charge you more for the Retina screen. They might charge you more compared to other vendors for their SSDs and RAM, but that is an entirely separate issue. I'm not asking if Apple has higher prices compared to other vendors. I'm not asking if Apple has higher margins than other vendors. I'm comparing Apples to Apples.
[quote name="johndoe98" url="/t/151063/production-of-apples-next-imac-to-begin-this-month-for-october-launch-report/40#post_2139376"]Nice of you to read attentively.[/QUOTE]
I already addressed that point. You're giving too much leeway to the price there.
Apple tried as hard as they could. And they did a marvelous job. This is as close as they could come to not raising the price. And they did spectacularly. But they raised the price.
[QUOTE]but that introduces warranty issues.[/QUOTE]
I already addressed that point. You're giving too much leeway to the price there.
Apple tried as hard as they could. And they did a marvelous job. This is as close as they could come to not raising the price. And they did spectacularly. But they raised the price.
Quote:
but that introduces warranty issues.
Nope.
But so far as I can tell the price increase is due to the more expensive Apple RAM and Apple SSDs, it isn't clear how the Retina screen is responsible for the price increase. That's something you haven't explained. It's your conjecture, and it may be sensible, but you didn't really address the point.
As for warranty. You claim it doesn't introduce problems, but the issue is if something were to happen to any of your internal components, could you actually prove it wasn't as a result of your installing third-party upgrades? If you aren't properly grounded when working on the machine, you can short-circuit pretty much any component inside the machine, so the only way to prove that the damage wasn't caused by the upgrade/repair is if Apple was the one to install those upgrades for you. So far as I know, Apple will not install your SSDs or RAM if you bring it in to them. So yes, they could easily deny your warranty claim if they wanted. Will they do so? Probably not, but they could.
[quote name="johndoe98" url="/t/151063/production-of-apples-next-imac-to-begin-this-month-for-october-launch-report/40#post_2139390"]But so far as I can tell the price increase is due to the more expensive Apple RAM and Apple SSDs[/QUOTE]
You don't think the display with a higher resolution than any ever produced at that size would factor in?
[QUOTE]As for warranty. You claim it doesn't introduce problems, but the issue is if something were to happen to any of your internal components, could you actually prove it wasn't as a result of your installing third-party upgrades?[/QUOTE]
The installation of a third-party hard drive does not void the warranty. That's moot.
You don't think the display with a higher resolution than any ever produced at that size would factor in?
The installation of a third-party hard drive does not void the warranty. That's moot.
Does the higher resolution display factor in? Surely. Can I prove that is what is responsible for the prices of the RMBP? No. It seems just as likely to me that Apple absorbed the costs of these screens so as to push their marketshare as would the alternative, namely, that they decreased their margins on the RAM and SSDs in those machines.
You claim third-party installations, of hard-drives for instance, do not void the warranty, and that the point is moot. Again, that isn't clear to me. Please be patient an explain it. So far as I can tell, if Apple were to deny to provide warranty on your machine, your only resort would be to take Apple to court, and the onus would be on you to demonstrate damages. The first thing an Apple lawyer would ask is if you installed third-party hardware. As soon as you say yes, he/she will follow up and say it is entirely possible that you damaged the components you are requesting warranty coverage for during your installation and that until you can demonstrate that you were not responsible for the hardware failure, they are at liberty to deny your warranty claims. They could easily say as soon as you fulfill that burden (which you won't be able to do) they will happily cover the repair costs.
In short, what this effectively means is that it wasn't the third-party hardware that voided the warranty, but your installation of that hardware and the damage that you caused that voided the warranty. To win your case you have to demonstrate no damage was caused by you during the installation process. I don't see how you could do that.
I appreciate your laying out some reasons for thinness on a desk top. I don't think anyone here would disagree that thinner looks cool, which really is your main point. The problem that I, Rob5, and others have is whether the compromises made for thinness in the new MBP, where there are additional compelling advantages in terms of weight and portability - are too high a price for improved aesthetics.
Well said. I equally appreciate your thoughtful response. And I'll admit, I'm a sucker for aesthetics.
When has Apple ever bumped the price when introducing Retina screens? iPhone? Nope. iPod? Nope. iPad? Nope. MBP? Nope. Why would you expect one for the iMac when all the evidence suggests otherwise?
And before you say the RMBPs are more expensive, take a cMBP and swap in the SSDs that Apple offers, now compare the price to the RMBP. What do you notice? It is the same or more expensive, and has lower specs on RAM, VRAM, screen tech, and has cheaper speakers. Enough with this nonsense about Retina screens costing more. Apple has historically always absorbed the cost.
The introduction's a matter of timing - depending on factors in the supply chain I doubt either of us know. There are "Moore-like" laws applicable to the supply and price of various components that get more economical at varying rates. E.g., battery performance has NOT doubled while declining in price every 18 months as CPU's have, though there have been more improvements of late. So we're not disagreeing on the "retinization" of more Apple products over time (and HDTV will go 4K in time as well. It's inevitable in a functioning world tech industry). Just on when 27" retina screens will fit into the pricing and are readily available in the time frames and volumes they need.
But you do have to be taken to task (well I'm going to at least) over your assertion that "Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
No. Way. In their main line of business products at least - i.e., personal computers, phones, iPod and iPads, Apple historically (from the beginning to the present) almost never "absorbs the costs" - rather they've chosen to maintain margin over market share. Which is why their percentage of industry profit, since Jobs returned and refocused the company on mission at least, is always hugely greater than their share of industry sales. There are exceptions in parts of the supportive ecosystem and some products may be maintained to complete the company's range (e.g., keeping the Pro so that average Mac users know they have a path to using their Apple skill set at the highest level), but basically Apple's DNA is to be a company that makes great widgets and sells them at a very healthy gross margin.
Also despite their cash pile, their percentage of income devoted to R&D lags far behind other firms like MS and other names in the news. (But that may be because they spend it in a more focused and planful way than most of their competitors which flail about. I could fill a long post with all of the failures MS has thrown cash at alone.)
Meanwhile it's Amazon that introduced the Fire at or below cost - the old give away the razor to sell blades model that Apple's always eschewed), and Google that announced (or let slip - you decide) that the new Nexus 7 will be sold on its Play store at essentially their cost. Which has to make the rest of their OEM's as happy as clams. Clams in a net headed for being cooked at least.
Does the higher resolution display factor in? Surely. Can I prove that is what is responsible for the prices of the RMBP? No. It seems just as likely to me that Apple absorbed the costs of these screens so as to push their marketshare as would the alternative, namely, that they decreased their margins on the RAM and SSDs in those machines.
Guess we can't know until we get more information. We'll get some when the 13" retina is released and even more by knowing the date that the old style MacBook Pro will be discontinued.
In short, what this effectively means is that it wasn't the third-party hardware that voided the warranty, but your installation of that hardware and the damage that you caused that voided the warranty. To win your case you have to demonstrate no damage was caused by you during the installation process. I don't see how you could do that.
You wouldn't have to… no problem could arise on its own that would have been from hard drive installation mishaps. And if you do have a problem, swap the drive back to stock. Of course if you did cause something and did that, this would be insurance fraud, but then they'd be able to see that you had opened it in the first place.
Guess we can't know until we get more information. We'll get some when the 13" retina is released and even more by knowing the date that the old style MacBook Pro will be discontinued.
You wouldn't have to… no problem could arise on its own that would have been from hard drive installation mishaps. And if you do have a problem, swap the drive back to stock. Of course if you did cause something and did that, this would be insurance fraud, but then they'd be able to see that you had opened it in the first place.
This is beside the original point, however,
Agreed on both counts (other than that there couldn't be installation mishaps).
PS: how do you respond by splitting up my quotes? I just get your entire message lumped in one go and the response field is below it all. Do quote and /quote tags work like on other forums?
But you do have to be taken to task (well I'm going to at least) over your assertion that "Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
I was hopping to be taken to task, as I might have learnt something, but then you went on a long explanation that didn't address what I said in any way. So, simply put. Did the iPhone cost more once it had the Retina screen? Did the iPad? I'll leave the RMBP out for now because I don't want to get into the same debate twice in one thread. If it didn't, then I consider that cost absorption.
PS: how do you respond by splitting up my quotes? I just get your entire message lumped in one go and the response field is below it all. Do quote and /quote tags work like on other forums?
Well, I'm forced to use the BBCode editor right now because Huddler doesn't support Safari 6, so I do it the same way I had always done it before by just manually typing
[QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Or just highlighting and hitting the quote button on specific sections. I… shoot, I KNOW I did it before with the new editor, but I can't remember how it was done… Hang on; I'll go to one of my older machines.
Edit: oh, wow, this editor… I'd say that I can't believe I'd forgotten how terrible it is, but I can believe it, because my memory's that bad.
Yeah, I would split quotes in that editor by selecting everything in the post but the section I wanted to quote, cutting it (which gets it out of the way and preserves its formatting), and then doing some spaces below and pasting it.
Of course it's completely broken and WYSINITSWYG (what you see is not in the slightest what you get), so you have to remember where extra whitespace is chucked in so that you don't wind up with tons of extra returns. Of course, there's no way to stop that in the BBCode editor, so since I always made such an effort to make my posts look clean with the old editor, you can pinpoint exactly when I upgraded to Safari 6.
Yeah, the BBCode editor is a lot nicer than this stupid thing in terms of formatting (and how it doesn't pointlessly keep background color, etc.), but I miss the new editor for its keyboard shortcuts (though I don't miss how it thinks it has the right to take away my right-click menu) and how it gives a near-perfect preview of your post without clicking preview (though, again, it has serious issues with whitespace).
Have you ever seen a Retina Display from Apple? Compared it to the previous gen screen? The display on my iPad 3 is worlds better than my 21.5" iMac. It's immediately noticeable on switching between the two.
Yes I agree the iPad3 screen is great for stuff designed to take advantage of it. I use mine to watch the news with the TWC app and the news graphics that they display during show is sh*t. Many TV watching is fed out no ware near HD let alone being retina. Even purchased movies are not great watching on an iPad retina no matter what distance you hold it. I suggest retina IS a marketing gimmick and will be until media content compression and broadband speeds become reality capable of serving such content. Retina is not worth spending any extra money on it yet.
Thinnest isn't the only technology that can or should go into a new IMc. The reality is iMacs plateaued years ago when Apple stopped innovating with the machine and set eyes upon laptops.
However some of the arguements or concerns here with regard to iMac thickness are bogus. Number one is that it doesn't matter how hot the case gets as long as it doesn't injure people. What matters is how hot the chips get inside, that can only be determined by measuring their temperatures. Many chips provide such temperature measuring functionality inside so it is fairly easy to determine if the iMac is actually overheating. Also overheating should lead to throttling of the CPU clock. If this happens a lot on the iMac then we have a problem but I've yet to see reports that this actually happens often.[/QUOTE]
Test1
[QUOTE]
As a side note you can always find an optimal workload that will thermally stress a chip and cause a bit of throttling. You should not see this though throughout a work day where a variety of tasks are accomplished.[/QUOTE]
Test2
[QUOTE]
In the end even though I see the complaints of hot iMacs as bogus I do not think the focus on the thickness of the iMac is the right view. The iMac is in grave need of an overhaul to address a number of issues. It could end up thinner and address those issues at the same time but the focus of design efforts should not be thinnest specifically but rather the goal should bea better iMac.[/QUOTE]
Thinnest isn't the only technology that can or should go into a new IMc. The reality is iMacs plateaued years ago when Apple stopped innovating with the machine and set eyes upon laptops.
Maybe Apple are already preparing to make iMacs their next floppy/optical drive? ;-)
[LIST=1] [*] Since 2011 you can noy use as target. Output only. Yes. There are conversion boxes got an i5 2.7. Plent for audio. Saving for new Mac pro. Heard possible 24 cores on 1dye!!! [*] [*] [/LIST]
Well, I'm forced to use the BBCode editor right now because Huddler doesn't support Safari 6...()
Would you happen to know the reason for the migration from vBulletin to Huddler Tech? Seems many are rightfully complaining and I don't read many 'positives'
I would argue that we have AIO desktops specifically because portability is a significant feature.
If that were true, wouldn't carrying cases for iMacs be a lot more readily available, and a much more common sight? They're available, but I think I've personally seen one, compared to thousands of laptop bags.
I just don't buy portability as a significant reason for the existence of the AIO, I think it's just a bonus rather than design intent for the very few people that would carry around an iMac enough to justify a special design. I need something with good evidence to show that it's not the simplicity. With an iMac, you can fully operate using only one cord on the desk, for power. With a tower system, you have three power cords, tower, monitor and speakers, and you have at least three data cords, for monitor and two speakers. Then you have at least for four large devices: two speakers (three if a subwoofer is involved), a monitor and a tower. Given that towers often target a budget market, you also generally have cords for a mouse and keyboard.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009
To mount on a wall.
Reduce size of footprint.
May lead to reduced bezel thickness.
Increased portability.
Improved aesthetics.
And I honestly feel that improved aesthetics is itself enough of an advantage to pursue a thinner device.
None of those matter in the slightest. As the Mac Pro is essentially dead (for now) the iMac needs to be Apple's powerhouse. It should have the biggest and fastest CPUs and GPUs available, and crazy amounts of storage. It needs power above everything. Also as a desktop it should be moved rarely, if ever.
If you want portability, by a laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's an Apple SSD. Their margins don't count.
Nice of you to read attentively. I explicitly said: "And before you say the RMBPs are more expensive, take a cMBP and swap in the SSDs that Apple offers, now compare the price to the RMBP. What do you notice? It is the same or more expensive, and has lower specs on RAM, VRAM, screen tech, and has cheaper speakers. Enough with this nonsense about Retina screens costing more. Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
Now, of course it's Apple's price, they are the ones selling you the machine. You can throw in aftermarket SSDs to save cost if you want, but that introduces warranty issues. I'm talking about Apple's offerings not hybrids that include some Apple parts and some third-party parts. So again, if you compare Apple's products and their pricing, Apple does not charge you more for the Retina screen. They might charge you more compared to other vendors for their SSDs and RAM, but that is an entirely separate issue. I'm not asking if Apple has higher prices compared to other vendors. I'm not asking if Apple has higher margins than other vendors. I'm comparing Apples to Apples.
I already addressed that point. You're giving too much leeway to the price there.
Apple tried as hard as they could. And they did a marvelous job. This is as close as they could come to not raising the price. And they did spectacularly. But they raised the price.
[QUOTE]but that introduces warranty issues.[/QUOTE]
Nope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
Nice of you to read attentively.
I already addressed that point. You're giving too much leeway to the price there.
Apple tried as hard as they could. And they did a marvelous job. This is as close as they could come to not raising the price. And they did spectacularly. But they raised the price.
Quote:
but that introduces warranty issues.
Nope.
But so far as I can tell the price increase is due to the more expensive Apple RAM and Apple SSDs, it isn't clear how the Retina screen is responsible for the price increase. That's something you haven't explained. It's your conjecture, and it may be sensible, but you didn't really address the point.
As for warranty. You claim it doesn't introduce problems, but the issue is if something were to happen to any of your internal components, could you actually prove it wasn't as a result of your installing third-party upgrades? If you aren't properly grounded when working on the machine, you can short-circuit pretty much any component inside the machine, so the only way to prove that the damage wasn't caused by the upgrade/repair is if Apple was the one to install those upgrades for you. So far as I know, Apple will not install your SSDs or RAM if you bring it in to them. So yes, they could easily deny your warranty claim if they wanted. Will they do so? Probably not, but they could.
You don't think the display with a higher resolution than any ever produced at that size would factor in?
[QUOTE]As for warranty. You claim it doesn't introduce problems, but the issue is if something were to happen to any of your internal components, could you actually prove it wasn't as a result of your installing third-party upgrades?[/QUOTE]
The installation of a third-party hard drive does not void the warranty. That's moot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You don't think the display with a higher resolution than any ever produced at that size would factor in?
The installation of a third-party hard drive does not void the warranty. That's moot.
Does the higher resolution display factor in? Surely. Can I prove that is what is responsible for the prices of the RMBP? No. It seems just as likely to me that Apple absorbed the costs of these screens so as to push their marketshare as would the alternative, namely, that they decreased their margins on the RAM and SSDs in those machines.
You claim third-party installations, of hard-drives for instance, do not void the warranty, and that the point is moot. Again, that isn't clear to me. Please be patient an explain it. So far as I can tell, if Apple were to deny to provide warranty on your machine, your only resort would be to take Apple to court, and the onus would be on you to demonstrate damages. The first thing an Apple lawyer would ask is if you installed third-party hardware. As soon as you say yes, he/she will follow up and say it is entirely possible that you damaged the components you are requesting warranty coverage for during your installation and that until you can demonstrate that you were not responsible for the hardware failure, they are at liberty to deny your warranty claims. They could easily say as soon as you fulfill that burden (which you won't be able to do) they will happily cover the repair costs.
In short, what this effectively means is that it wasn't the third-party hardware that voided the warranty, but your installation of that hardware and the damage that you caused that voided the warranty. To win your case you have to demonstrate no damage was caused by you during the installation process. I don't see how you could do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jbach67
I appreciate your laying out some reasons for thinness on a desk top. I don't think anyone here would disagree that thinner looks cool, which really is your main point. The problem that I, Rob5, and others have is whether the compromises made for thinness in the new MBP, where there are additional compelling advantages in terms of weight and portability - are too high a price for improved aesthetics.
Well said. I equally appreciate your thoughtful response. And I'll admit, I'm a sucker for aesthetics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
When has Apple ever bumped the price when introducing Retina screens? iPhone? Nope. iPod? Nope. iPad? Nope. MBP? Nope. Why would you expect one for the iMac when all the evidence suggests otherwise?
And before you say the RMBPs are more expensive, take a cMBP and swap in the SSDs that Apple offers, now compare the price to the RMBP. What do you notice? It is the same or more expensive, and has lower specs on RAM, VRAM, screen tech, and has cheaper speakers. Enough with this nonsense about Retina screens costing more. Apple has historically always absorbed the cost.
The introduction's a matter of timing - depending on factors in the supply chain I doubt either of us know. There are "Moore-like" laws applicable to the supply and price of various components that get more economical at varying rates. E.g., battery performance has NOT doubled while declining in price every 18 months as CPU's have, though there have been more improvements of late. So we're not disagreeing on the "retinization" of more Apple products over time (and HDTV will go 4K in time as well. It's inevitable in a functioning world tech industry). Just on when 27" retina screens will fit into the pricing and are readily available in the time frames and volumes they need.
But you do have to be taken to task (well I'm going to at least) over your assertion that "Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
No. Way. In their main line of business products at least - i.e., personal computers, phones, iPod and iPads, Apple historically (from the beginning to the present) almost never "absorbs the costs" - rather they've chosen to maintain margin over market share. Which is why their percentage of industry profit, since Jobs returned and refocused the company on mission at least, is always hugely greater than their share of industry sales. There are exceptions in parts of the supportive ecosystem and some products may be maintained to complete the company's range (e.g., keeping the Pro so that average Mac users know they have a path to using their Apple skill set at the highest level), but basically Apple's DNA is to be a company that makes great widgets and sells them at a very healthy gross margin.
Also despite their cash pile, their percentage of income devoted to R&D lags far behind other firms like MS and other names in the news. (But that may be because they spend it in a more focused and planful way than most of their competitors which flail about. I could fill a long post with all of the failures MS has thrown cash at alone.)
Meanwhile it's Amazon that introduced the Fire at or below cost - the old give away the razor to sell blades model that Apple's always eschewed), and Google that announced (or let slip - you decide) that the new Nexus 7 will be sold on its Play store at essentially their cost. Which has to make the rest of their OEM's as happy as clams. Clams in a net headed for being cooked at least.
Guess we can't know until we get more information. We'll get some when the 13" retina is released and even more by knowing the date that the old style MacBook Pro will be discontinued.
You wouldn't have to… no problem could arise on its own that would have been from hard drive installation mishaps. And if you do have a problem, swap the drive back to stock. Of course if you did cause something and did that, this would be insurance fraud, but then they'd be able to see that you had opened it in the first place.
This is beside the original point, however.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Guess we can't know until we get more information. We'll get some when the 13" retina is released and even more by knowing the date that the old style MacBook Pro will be discontinued.
You wouldn't have to… no problem could arise on its own that would have been from hard drive installation mishaps. And if you do have a problem, swap the drive back to stock. Of course if you did cause something and did that, this would be insurance fraud, but then they'd be able to see that you had opened it in the first place.
This is beside the original point, however,
Agreed on both counts (other than that there couldn't be installation mishaps).
PS: how do you respond by splitting up my quotes? I just get your entire message lumped in one go and the response field is below it all. Do quote and /quote tags work like on other forums?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpics
But you do have to be taken to task (well I'm going to at least) over your assertion that "Apple has historically always absorbed the cost."
I was hopping to be taken to task, as I might have learnt something, but then you went on a long explanation that didn't address what I said in any way. So, simply put. Did the iPhone cost more once it had the Retina screen? Did the iPad? I'll leave the RMBP out for now because I don't want to get into the same debate twice in one thread. If it didn't, then I consider that cost absorption.
Well, I'm forced to use the BBCode editor right now because Huddler doesn't support Safari 6, so I do it the same way I had always done it before by just manually typing
Or just highlighting and hitting the quote button on specific sections. I… shoot, I KNOW I did it before with the new editor, but I can't remember how it was done… Hang on; I'll go to one of my older machines.
Edit: oh, wow, this editor… I'd say that I can't believe I'd forgotten how terrible it is, but I can believe it, because my memory's that bad.
Yeah, I would split quotes in that editor by selecting everything in the post but the section I wanted to quote, cutting it (which gets it out of the way and preserves its formatting), and then doing some spaces below and pasting it.
Of course it's completely broken and WYSINITSWYG (what you see is not in the slightest what you get), so you have to remember where extra whitespace is chucked in so that you don't wind up with tons of extra returns. Of course, there's no way to stop that in the BBCode editor, so since I always made such an effort to make my posts look clean with the old editor, you can pinpoint exactly when I upgraded to Safari 6.
Yeah, the BBCode editor is a lot nicer than this stupid thing in terms of formatting (and how it doesn't pointlessly keep background color, etc.), but I miss the new editor for its keyboard shortcuts (though I don't miss how it thinks it has the right to take away my right-click menu) and how it gives a near-perfect preview of your post without clicking preview (though, again, it has serious issues with whitespace).
Just remember that the Thunderbolt that we have is a slowed down version of what it will be when they activate it with an update.
Currently it's copper cables but it wasn't originally called Lightpeak for nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smiles77
Have you ever seen a Retina Display from Apple? Compared it to the previous gen screen? The display on my iPad 3 is worlds better than my 21.5" iMac. It's immediately noticeable on switching between the two.
Yes I agree the iPad3 screen is great for stuff designed to take advantage of it. I use mine to watch the news with the TWC app and the news graphics that they display during show is sh*t. Many TV watching is fed out no ware near HD let alone being retina. Even purchased movies are not great watching on an iPad retina no matter what distance you hold it. I suggest retina IS a marketing gimmick and will be until media content compression and broadband speeds become reality capable of serving such content. Retina is not worth spending any extra money on it yet.
Are we sure existing ports can do 100 gig?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
[QUOTE]
Thinnest isn't the only technology that can or should go into a new IMc. The reality is iMacs plateaued years ago when Apple stopped innovating with the machine and set eyes upon laptops.
However some of the arguements or concerns here with regard to iMac thickness are bogus. Number one is that it doesn't matter how hot the case gets as long as it doesn't injure people. What matters is how hot the chips get inside, that can only be determined by measuring their temperatures. Many chips provide such temperature measuring functionality inside so it is fairly easy to determine if the iMac is actually overheating. Also overheating should lead to throttling of the CPU clock. If this happens a lot on the iMac then we have a problem but I've yet to see reports that this actually happens often.[/QUOTE]
Test1
[QUOTE]
As a side note you can always find an optimal workload that will thermally stress a chip and cause a bit of throttling. You should not see this though throughout a work day where a variety of tasks are accomplished.[/QUOTE]
Test2
[QUOTE]
In the end even though I see the complaints of hot iMacs as bogus I do not think the focus on the thickness of the iMac is the right view. The iMac is in grave need of an overhaul to address a number of issues. It could end up thinner and address those issues at the same time but the focus of design efforts should not be thinnest specifically but rather the goal should bea better iMac.[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Thinnest isn't the only technology that can or should go into a new IMc. The reality is iMacs plateaued years ago when Apple stopped innovating with the machine and set eyes upon laptops.
Maybe Apple are already preparing to make iMacs their next floppy/optical drive? ;-)
[*] Since 2011 you can noy use as target. Output only. Yes. There are conversion boxes got an i5 2.7. Plent for audio. Saving for new Mac pro. Heard possible 24 cores on 1dye!!!
[*]
[*]
[/LIST]
Would you happen to know the reason for the migration from vBulletin to Huddler Tech? Seems many are rightfully complaining and I don't read many 'positives'
Haha good one!
Nowhere near as fast as PCIe, I bought one 2 months ago. But don't take my word for it:
Come to think of it; you're probably not comparing SSD vs PCIe but vs soldered cards, like the rMPB...
Do you take that beautiful white table cloth with you as well? lol
If that were true, wouldn't carrying cases for iMacs be a lot more readily available, and a much more common sight? They're available, but I think I've personally seen one, compared to thousands of laptop bags.
I just don't buy portability as a significant reason for the existence of the AIO, I think it's just a bonus rather than design intent for the very few people that would carry around an iMac enough to justify a special design. I need something with good evidence to show that it's not the simplicity. With an iMac, you can fully operate using only one cord on the desk, for power. With a tower system, you have three power cords, tower, monitor and speakers, and you have at least three data cords, for monitor and two speakers. Then you have at least for four large devices: two speakers (three if a subwoofer is involved), a monitor and a tower. Given that towers often target a budget market, you also generally have cords for a mouse and keyboard.