The obsession with thin for the iMac is grossly overdone. A much better use of their engineering time would be making opening the damn thing up easier. It should not be easier to upgrade my laptop than my desktop.
This is precisely why I'm happy that the folks at Apple does not listen to what the tech-heads think. Time and time again it has been shown that most people will never open their computers or expand it after purchase. They just don't do that. I used to way back in the day when I made my own custom rigs. I liked doing it, but in the end is was just keeping up with the Joneses.
It would be nice if Apple allows the easy upgrade of RAM and perhaps use user-serviceable MBA-style SSD cards that can be upgraded like the RAM cards are in current iMacs. It would be nice. Would I ever do it? Probably not. I usually max my system out at purchase and be done with it. I won't lose sleep over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Thinner consumer tech always plays well, aesthetically. "Lighter and thinner" is a big deal. Why shouldn't it be?
It's a big draw for the bulk of the market. It doesn't take a lot to see why.
It's time to accept that and move on.
I think it's great. If Apple pulls of a great design, thinner, lighter, etc... and not sacrifice performance, then I'm all for it. Who wouldn't be?
NONE do natively. That's Haswell. Apple can add basically anything they want, though.
But they don't tend to, do they? They waited on the laptop chipsets until USB3 was supported natively to include them.
Plus, and we can only guess on timing on this, I think next year will see Apple add Retina support to the rest of the line. The 13" MBP will come this year, with the MBAir first half as they can commoditize the cost of the screens, and improve battery and CPUs to support them. Then to MacMinis, iMacs, and MacPros in the second half of the year, as the technology to push out 27" ACDs becomes available.
That's my guess anyway. And if that make sense to you, then the release of HassleBridge Xeon processors and availability of Retina ACD make the second half of the year a better bet. Plus, I think there's supposed to be a update to Thunderbolt next year as well.
I suspect the push to thinner iMacs is purely to leverage the emotional decision a purchaser makes, i.e. thinner = sexier = more desirable = more sales.
But they don't tend to, do they? They waited on the laptop chipsets until USB3 was supported natively to include them.
But didn't wait until Thunderbolt was natively supported to add it.
Plus, and we can only guess on timing on this, I think next year will see Apple add Retina support to the rest of the line.
You know, it'd be great to do it now, but it doesn't seem feasible with the 4000 series. I think Haswell still, but hopefully I'm wrong.
The 21.5" iMac would be 3840x2160.
The 27" iMac would be 5120x2880.
That's INSANE for an integrated chip to push.
Originally Posted by 11thIndian
That's my guess anyway. And if that make sense to you, then the release of HassleBridge Xeon processors and availability of Retina ACD make the second half of the year a better bet.
It's Haswell. And if so, they can say goodbye to virtually any Mac Pro sales between now and then, which kills a lot of their presence in that field.
Plus, I think there's supposed to be a update to Thunderbolt next year as well.
Optical's nowhere near ready for primetime, I thought. Though 100Gbps up/100Gbps down in a port would be… Man.
Removal of the optical drive will be a major contributor to the thinness. I don't think they can innovate the iMac anymore. It hasn't seen a major redesign since 2005.
I suspect the push to thinner iMacs is purely to leverage of the emotional decision a purchaser makes, i.e. thinner = sexier = more desirable = more sales.
Of course. For the average home user, performance is no longer the driver.
If Macs continue to sell well in their "thinner and lighter" incarnations, and if they continue to dominate PC consumer satisfaction, then Apple will have succeeded again. I see no reason they can't continue to keep Macs the Gold Standard of the industry. They're doing it with their Retina notebooks, after all. For now, it makes sense to assume they know what they're doing.
Frankly I could care less what you think. Apple has removed the optical drives from most of their products. And considering the iMac was vigorously redesigned for the first 7 years of it's life and hasn't changed much since then, why don't you tell us why you wholeheartedly disagree since you seem to be so well informed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It's like a quarter of an inch thick and barely contributes to the volume of the product.
If Macs continue to sell well in their "thinner and lighter" incarnations, and if they continue to dominate PC consumer satisfaction, then Apple will have succeeded again. I see no reason they can't continue to keep Macs the Gold Standard of the industry. They're doing it with their Retina notebooks, after all. For now, it makes sense to assume they know what they're doing.
And of course if there was no redesign but just an update of the innards people would be complaining because it looks just like the previous version. I'm very interested to see what they do here and with the MacPro.
Removal of the optical drive will be a major contributor to the thinness. I don't think they can innovate the iMac anymore. It hasn't seen a major redesign since 2005.
Stand in line for humble pie when Apple does their next one. To say Apple can't innovate a product anymore has more to say about the person saying that than Apple's capabilities.
I think there's a reason why Apple chose to wait so long to update their iMacs. Methink Apple was marinating the iMacs for something big.
So why should anyone listen to what you think, given that our opinions have equal worth? I care enough about what you think to at least have read it and replied to it. Show the same courtesy.
Apple has removed the optical drives from most of their products.
Yes, and? An iMac isn't a MacBook. The ODD, while still the bandwidth bottleneck, is not nearly as important a factor in internal space on the iMac as it is the MacBook family. It matters, just not nearly as much.
And considering the iMac was vigorously redesigned for the first 7 years of it's life and hasn't changed much since then…
Let's see… "Vigorously redesigned" means three case redesigns over fourteen years. If you want to call the move from the G5 to the Core Duo case a "redesign", feel free. That's still just four redesigns.
Unless you want to count all the changes. That'd be 8 case redesigns, most of which happened in the last seven years.
Frankly, I could care less about what someone who says Apple cannot innovate something thinks. How's that?
For those who are complaining that the current iMac isn't competitive enough in the PC specs wars, or that a redesign shouldn't focus on alleged thinness, I think you've completely forgotten what the iMac product is and has always been all about.
Apple's marketing message for iMac has always been pretty consistent, and it's not about the megahertzes.
If this doesn't appeal to you, then the iMac is simply not for you.
It's Haswell. And if so, they can say goodbye to virtually any Mac Pro sales between now and then, which kills a lot of their presence in that field.
It's my field (Pro Video) and people are already waiting. And 8-12 months passes pretty fast when you're busy. The people who are already deciding to leave Mac have already decided. Those who haven't will wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Optical's nowhere near ready for primetime, I thought. Though 100Gbps up/100Gbps down in a port would be… Man.
I think I ready somewhere that there was going to be an intermediary upgrade between copper and optical.
The people who are already deciding to leave Mac have already decided. Those who haven't will wait.
What about all these render people who buy the newest thing because it saves them seconds per frame, adding up to whatever over time? I've heard that argument a lot.
Forget the ultra-thin BS and give it a BluRay burner so I can produce HD video like it is supposed to be instead of compressed, banded, crummy web video.
Comments
Originally Posted by 11thIndian
Haven't iMacs been available with Desktop class chips for several years now? Not Xeon server class, but desktop class. That's my understanding.
Yep. Just several, though. Not always.
The IveyBridge Xeon clips don't support USB3 or Thunderbold.
NONE do natively. That's Haswell. Apple can add basically anything they want, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
The obsession with thin for the iMac is grossly overdone. A much better use of their engineering time would be making opening the damn thing up easier. It should not be easier to upgrade my laptop than my desktop.
This is precisely why I'm happy that the folks at Apple does not listen to what the tech-heads think. Time and time again it has been shown that most people will never open their computers or expand it after purchase. They just don't do that. I used to way back in the day when I made my own custom rigs. I liked doing it, but in the end is was just keeping up with the Joneses.
It would be nice if Apple allows the easy upgrade of RAM and perhaps use user-serviceable MBA-style SSD cards that can be upgraded like the RAM cards are in current iMacs. It would be nice. Would I ever do it? Probably not. I usually max my system out at purchase and be done with it. I won't lose sleep over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Thinner consumer tech always plays well, aesthetically. "Lighter and thinner" is a big deal. Why shouldn't it be?
It's a big draw for the bulk of the market. It doesn't take a lot to see why.
It's time to accept that and move on.
I think it's great. If Apple pulls of a great design, thinner, lighter, etc... and not sacrifice performance, then I'm all for it. Who wouldn't be?
Originally Posted by sflocal
If Apple pulls of a great design, thinner, lighter, etc... and not sacrifice performance, then I'm all for it. Who wouldn't be?
Kicker. But absolutely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
NONE do natively. That's Haswell. Apple can add basically anything they want, though.
But they don't tend to, do they? They waited on the laptop chipsets until USB3 was supported natively to include them.
Plus, and we can only guess on timing on this, I think next year will see Apple add Retina support to the rest of the line. The 13" MBP will come this year, with the MBAir first half as they can commoditize the cost of the screens, and improve battery and CPUs to support them. Then to MacMinis, iMacs, and MacPros in the second half of the year, as the technology to push out 27" ACDs becomes available.
That's my guess anyway. And if that make sense to you, then the release of HassleBridge Xeon processors and availability of Retina ACD make the second half of the year a better bet. Plus, I think there's supposed to be a update to Thunderbolt next year as well.
I suspect the push to thinner iMacs is purely to leverage the emotional decision a purchaser makes, i.e. thinner = sexier = more desirable = more sales.
Originally Posted by 11thIndian
But they don't tend to, do they? They waited on the laptop chipsets until USB3 was supported natively to include them.
But didn't wait until Thunderbolt was natively supported to add it.
Plus, and we can only guess on timing on this, I think next year will see Apple add Retina support to the rest of the line.
You know, it'd be great to do it now, but it doesn't seem feasible with the 4000 series. I think Haswell still, but hopefully I'm wrong.
The 21.5" iMac would be 3840x2160.
The 27" iMac would be 5120x2880.
That's INSANE for an integrated chip to push.
Originally Posted by 11thIndian
That's my guess anyway. And if that make sense to you, then the release of HassleBridge Xeon processors and availability of Retina ACD make the second half of the year a better bet.
It's Haswell. And if so, they can say goodbye to virtually any Mac Pro sales between now and then, which kills a lot of their presence in that field.
Plus, I think there's supposed to be a update to Thunderbolt next year as well.
Optical's nowhere near ready for primetime, I thought. Though 100Gbps up/100Gbps down in a port would be… Man.
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
Removal of the optical drive will be a major contributor to the thinness.
It's like a quarter of an inch thick and barely contributes to the volume of the product.
I don't think they can innovate the iMac anymore.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
Of course. For the average home user, performance is no longer the driver.
If Macs continue to sell well in their "thinner and lighter" incarnations, and if they continue to dominate PC consumer satisfaction, then Apple will have succeeded again. I see no reason they can't continue to keep Macs the Gold Standard of the industry. They're doing it with their Retina notebooks, after all. For now, it makes sense to assume they know what they're doing.
Frankly I could care less what you think. Apple has removed the optical drives from most of their products. And considering the iMac was vigorously redesigned for the first 7 years of it's life and hasn't changed much since then, why don't you tell us why you wholeheartedly disagree since you seem to be so well informed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It's like a quarter of an inch thick and barely contributes to the volume of the product.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
Removal of the optical drive will be a major contributor to the thinness. I don't think they can innovate the iMac anymore. It hasn't seen a major redesign since 2005.
Stand in line for humble pie when Apple does their next one. To say Apple can't innovate a product anymore has more to say about the person saying that than Apple's capabilities.
I think there's a reason why Apple chose to wait so long to update their iMacs. Methink Apple was marinating the iMacs for something big.
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1
Frankly I could care less what you think.
So why should anyone listen to what you think, given that our opinions have equal worth? I care enough about what you think to at least have read it and replied to it. Show the same courtesy.
Apple has removed the optical drives from most of their products.
Yes, and? An iMac isn't a MacBook. The ODD, while still the bandwidth bottleneck, is not nearly as important a factor in internal space on the iMac as it is the MacBook family. It matters, just not nearly as much.
And considering the iMac was vigorously redesigned for the first 7 years of it's life and hasn't changed much since then…
Let's see… "Vigorously redesigned" means three case redesigns over fourteen years. If you want to call the move from the G5 to the Core Duo case a "redesign", feel free. That's still just four redesigns.
Unless you want to count all the changes. That'd be 8 case redesigns, most of which happened in the last seven years.
Frankly, I could care less about what someone who says Apple cannot innovate something thinks. How's that?
For those who are complaining that the current iMac isn't competitive enough in the PC specs wars, or that a redesign shouldn't focus on alleged thinness, I think you've completely forgotten what the iMac product is and has always been all about.
Apple's marketing message for iMac has always been pretty consistent, and it's not about the megahertzes.
If this doesn't appeal to you, then the iMac is simply not for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It's Haswell. And if so, they can say goodbye to virtually any Mac Pro sales between now and then, which kills a lot of their presence in that field.
It's my field (Pro Video) and people are already waiting. And 8-12 months passes pretty fast when you're busy. The people who are already deciding to leave Mac have already decided. Those who haven't will wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Optical's nowhere near ready for primetime, I thought. Though 100Gbps up/100Gbps down in a port would be… Man.
I think I ready somewhere that there was going to be an intermediary upgrade between copper and optical.
I found this:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Thunderbolt-Cactus-Ridge-Redwood-Ridge-Falcon-Ridge-20Gbps,16369.html
TB is a developing technology. At 100Gb/s many of my problems go away. But as you say it's not there yet.
Originally Posted by 11thIndian
The people who are already deciding to leave Mac have already decided. Those who haven't will wait.
What about all these render people who buy the newest thing because it saves them seconds per frame, adding up to whatever over time? I've heard that argument a lot.
Originally Posted by justamacguy
…give it a BluRay burner so I can produce HD video like it is supposed to be instead of compressed, banded, crummy web video.
Talk about your BS…
Hi how do you get a printable version of Appleinsider+comments?
Cheers