And we shouldn't confuse a description with an exact representation. Tapered with a curve is probably more accurate but far too abstract to be useful as a description.
Exactly! This probably will have as much stock to it as the "teardrop iPhone". And it might even be a complete mistranslation.
Well most of us hope that Apple does more than just stick an Ivy Bridge processor in there. USB 3.0 and a cheaper SSD option would be huge improvements for me. Do I do professional video editing work? Yes, but I am also planning to drop 1.5k or more on a computer. Is it weird to want the best possible for that price point?
Ivy bridge comes with USB 3 automatically- so that's a lock (like the new Pros and airs)
If they kept the current iMac size would they be able to increase the heat dissipation and fit in a non M GPU? That would be the upgrade everyone really wants.
Not right now. A desktop gpu would give me a suntan. Both my iMacs get hot from hours of use as it. I know it's hot to dissapate- but wow. Now dropping the optical, putting in a 2.5" standard sdd boot drive, and adding a fan- all while adding ivy bridge. That'd be enough for me- "redesign" or not.
I'd love a Blu ray burner somewhere too- but id also like to win the lotto...
Ok well I waited and waited for the new iMac to come out. Every site forum u name it said wait wait wait. So I set aside my projects And sat back and waited. Well that was quite awhile ago now. And now iam regretting that decision. I bought a refurb iMac 27 with the 3.4 i7 and after using it for a bit I'm wondering why all the hype? Now I'm out a lot of time that if I would of bought much sooner I would be well into my projects and using my iMac to fuel my video editing, I feel like people shouldn't wait for a update if the current model will do the job and do it well. If ur so worried and gaming then go buy a ps3 or Xbox. iMac and Mac pro is amazing for work. I felt worried at first but shortly realized it is a amazing machine and wish I would have got one much sooner. Now gonna try and make up for lost time, so in short stop wishing and start doing and don't be afraid to buy what works for u. There will always be a new upgrade and just buy what works not what is coming. If u wait for what might be coming u will just fall further behind.
Thinner means less material. Less material generally means more environmentally friendly.
Yes, it also depends on what you put in there, but PC innards are more or less the same when you boil them down to raw materials, so any design that reduces material count is a win. And yes, repairability matters, too, but thinner parts generally imply fewer parts count, which in turn generally results in less breakage. This is especially the case for desktops, where making thinner cases doesn't penalize you against drops, shocks, etc.
It'll be more environmentally friendly on freight, too, as others have noted, as Macs are typically flown from China to their destinations. Lighter Macs = less jet fuel consumed.
All of these are assuming that they don't sacrifice functionality, of course. I'd be disappointed if they get rid of the optical drive from the iMac--unlike laptops and even the Mini, there should be enough space inside an iMac to accommodate a DVD-RW, and I still rip enough CDs to want one built-in. But we'll see.
The bigger issue is that Apple shot themselves in the foot with FCPX. Say what you like about it, but I know not a single sole in the professional world that still edits on it.
Then don't hang around heels. /s
First, you're wrong. There are a lot of professionals who use FCP.
Second, it's irrelevant. This thread is about the iMac - which is not really sold as a professional level machine.
I've got to admit, the "teardrop" description confused me, too.
Anyhow, I'm looking forward to a new model. I LOVE my Late 2009 iMac. But I've also been waiting for something new and different to come around, as I want to upgrade. We'll see, once they actually announce it.
One question: I've heard a few people mention a "quieter" machine. My iMac is almost silent, then again I'm not doing pro video editing. Are people's machines really loud? Is it just that I'm doing more consumer oriented stuff, so it's quiet? I don't get it.
Your computer is less than 3 years old, do you really need a new one? I understand sometimes the envy to buy something new touches us all, but it's also good to try to distance ourselves from this over-consumerist world. I'm wondering myself if I should wait since my iMac works still very well.
Having trouble imagining a 27" retina screen. If they are having trouble making enough 13" retina screens, how bad will it be for 27"? However I'd hate to see them making it thinner and losing functionality in the process. Thinner is fine, but not if it means integrated graphics only for example.
All of this assumes Apple will continue to make the 27 inch model. I wouldn't be surprised to see a single 21-23 inch iMac with a "retina" display and watch the 27 inch go the way of the 17 inch macbook pro.
As for the thickness issue, all I'm concerned about his heat dissipation. Keeping it the same thickness or even a smidge thicker is fine if it runs cooler. Some technical considerations are actually important, and ultimately even Apple can't fight physics.
First, you're wrong. There are a lot of professionals who use FCP.
Second, it's irrelevant. This thread is about the iMac - which is not really sold as a professional level machine.
FCP7, yes please still use it, but how much longer? Maybe 2 years. FCPX may be used by some professionals, but NO ONE is cutting a feature length film on it. I mean the program dumbed down a lot of the capabilities that FCP7 had. Not to mention that Adobe Premiere came in and created a settings tab that practically duplicates FCP key commands. Premiere took the FCP7 market and the rest switched to Avid. True story.
I challenge your 2nd point for a number of reasons.
1- video editing can now be done on lower level machines. At first it required all the manpower possible to edit low res stuff. Now, iMacs are actually great machines to edit on. The iMac also still starts at 1k, so it deserves to be a competitive machine. Which my original point was, yes it should have been updated 6 months ago to be competitive.
2- With the MacPro being absent for a while, the iMac filled that void for a short time.
3- We've noticed a convergence of consumer and professional technology in almost all realms. I'm sure you've heard the term "prosumer." So yeah, I think the iMac fits that description.
But continue to argue that the iMac doesn't need an update, because that makes sense...
I want the iMac to be as thin as possible without losing functionality. Apple wants to lose weight and volume on all their products if they can do so while gaining, or at least not losing, functionality. It's simply more profitable to do so.
Also, maybe it's just me, but iMacs and Mac Pros are really heavy and look positively chunky.
Mac Pro is not a consumer machine. Stuff it under a desk and no one sees it and no one really cares. I don't think Apple makes enough of them anymore to justify a redesign. Making it much smaller compromises the acoustics. Smaller workstations and servers tend to be loud.
iMacs, I can see going thinner because the 3.5" drive and ODD are probably going away on the next update. Maybe 5mm thinner overall.
I really don't want to get excited for this, as great as it is to hear about. I want a redesign, sure, but "so thin you can barely see it" doesn't fly on a DESKTOP.
It makes no sense when you still have a base that can't be made shorter or you lose stability. That base is a constraint on packaging thickness. One might be able to shave a few percent on weight.
When people see my iMac, no one is complaining about the thickness. What I don't like is the sound. It's very good "for a computer" but they're still computer speakers. I'm considering adding a couple bookshelf speakers to the desk to make up for what I removed when switching to an iMac.
I used to think that "thin" on a desktop was too much about elegance, too.
However...I have an orig. intel 20" white. But my GF brought home her new 21" iMac for me to configure for her.
I was amazed at the difference in weight compared to my orig. iMac. The new iMac seemed to be at least a third lighter. This saves fuel in shipping and less materials in production. I think Apple is on the right track with focusing on thinner, lighter and therefore, more elegant systems.
He said it would be more expensive than the current iMac, which doesn't sound right.
Unless they're retina.
Maybe - they could get away with 2560 x 1440 on the 21.5" and 3200 x 1800 on the 27" but I'm thinking SSD as standard is more important.
The default configuration of the iMac could be 128GB boot drive with a 1TB 2.5" 7200 rpm HDD. That might make it $100 more expensive - would have been more had it not been for the optical removal.
The rounded edges would make it better for pulling down to use for touch input. I can't think of another reason for getting rid of the squared-off design. I also wonder how that will affect the RAM slots at the base. Maybe it is curved at the top and sides and flat at the base.
I doubt they'd go the soldered RAM route with the iMac but you never know. 8GB minimum and up to 32GB. I think Apple will do this on more and more machines. 4GB on the entry Mini up to 16GB.
You just got in you, don't you? Being aggressive with everybody all the time. You need treatment.
Is that a sentence? Or, rather, is there a point here other than insulting me by claiming I'm insane? Because I don't really see why you can't just answer the question I asked.
Originally Posted by Aktroutbum
Every site forum u name it said wait wait wait. So I set aside my projects And sat back and waited.
You should never have done that. The saying that many new Apple users ignore when telling others what to do is "If you need it now, buy it now. If not, wait." Which means that if you have work, you clam up, buy whatever is available immediately, and you never look back. NEVER hold off on work for an update.
Originally Posted by Conrail
All of this assumes Apple will continue to make the 27 inch model. I wouldn't be surprised to see a single 21-23 inch iMac with a "retina" display and watch the 27 inch go the way of the 17 inch macbook pro.
Of course they will. It's the only display they make, too. These are desktops. That's a laptop. The laptops are going to be slowly killed off while the desktops see a resurgence. I'll guess that in five to seven years, the 27" iMac will be one of the smallest ones they make.
Originally Posted by Marvin
The rounded edges would make it better for pulling down to use for touch input. I can't think of another reason for getting rid of the squared-off design.
I'm still trying to work on a stand design that affords this capability with one hand, like all the other iMac designs. Not going well.
When Apple does it, it'll be spectacular. And they have to do it before they can switch over OS X to fully multitouch.
FCP7, yes please still use it, but how much longer? Maybe 2 years. FCPX may be used by some professionals, but NO ONE is cutting a feature length film on it. I mean the program dumbed down a lot of the capabilities that FCP7 had. Not to mention that Adobe Premiere came in and created a settings tab that practically duplicates FCP key commands. Premiere took the FCP7 market and the rest switched to Avid. True story.
I challenge your 2nd point for a number of reasons.
1- video editing can now be done on lower level machines. At first it required all the manpower possible to edit low res stuff. Now, iMacs are actually great machines to edit on. The iMac also still starts at 1k, so it deserves to be a competitive machine. Which my original point was, yes it should have been updated 6 months ago to be competitive.
2- With the MacPro being absent for a while, the iMac filled that void for a short time.
3- We've noticed a convergence of consumer and professional technology in almost all realms. I'm sure you've heard the term "prosumer." So yeah, I think the iMac fits that description.
But continue to argue that the iMac doesn't need an update, because that makes sense...
I never said that the iMac doesn't need an update. Please stop putting words into my mouth.
What I've said is that raw performance is no longer the driving force for most people to upgrade. For the average person, even a low end computer today is more than fast enough to handle all their needs. So upgrade cycles will slow down (which we've seen) and decisions are likely to depend on more than just raw performance.
The tiny percentage of pros using their iMacs for video editing doesn't change that.
Is that a sentence? Or, rather, is there a point here other than insulting me by claiming I'm insane? Because I don't really see why you can't just answer the question I asked.
Comments
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
And we shouldn't confuse a description with an exact representation. Tapered with a curve is probably more accurate but far too abstract to be useful as a description.
Exactly! This probably will have as much stock to it as the "teardrop iPhone". And it might even be a complete mistranslation.
Ivy bridge comes with USB 3 automatically- so that's a lock (like the new Pros and airs)
Not right now. A desktop gpu would give me a suntan. Both my iMacs get hot from hours of use as it. I know it's hot to dissapate- but wow. Now dropping the optical, putting in a 2.5" standard sdd boot drive, and adding a fan- all while adding ivy bridge. That'd be enough for me- "redesign" or not.
I'd love a Blu ray burner somewhere too- but id also like to win the lotto...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Because you certainly can't now.
You just got in you, don't you? Being aggressive with everybody all the time. You need treatment.
edit : maybe not agressive, but certainly annoying.
if only I could block you.
Yes, it also depends on what you put in there, but PC innards are more or less the same when you boil them down to raw materials, so any design that reduces material count is a win. And yes, repairability matters, too, but thinner parts generally imply fewer parts count, which in turn generally results in less breakage. This is especially the case for desktops, where making thinner cases doesn't penalize you against drops, shocks, etc.
It'll be more environmentally friendly on freight, too, as others have noted, as Macs are typically flown from China to their destinations. Lighter Macs = less jet fuel consumed.
All of these are assuming that they don't sacrifice functionality, of course. I'd be disappointed if they get rid of the optical drive from the iMac--unlike laptops and even the Mini, there should be enough space inside an iMac to accommodate a DVD-RW, and I still rip enough CDs to want one built-in. But we'll see.
Then don't hang around heels. /s
First, you're wrong. There are a lot of professionals who use FCP.
Second, it's irrelevant. This thread is about the iMac - which is not really sold as a professional level machine.
I've got to admit, the "teardrop" description confused me, too.
Anyhow, I'm looking forward to a new model. I LOVE my Late 2009 iMac. But I've also been waiting for something new and different to come around, as I want to upgrade. We'll see, once they actually announce it.
One question: I've heard a few people mention a "quieter" machine. My iMac is almost silent, then again I'm not doing pro video editing. Are people's machines really loud? Is it just that I'm doing more consumer oriented stuff, so it's quiet? I don't get it.
Your computer is less than 3 years old, do you really need a new one? I understand sometimes the envy to buy something new touches us all, but it's also good to try to distance ourselves from this over-consumerist world. I'm wondering myself if I should wait since my iMac works still very well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
The 21.5" iMac would be 3840x2160.
The 27" iMac would be 5120x2880.
That's INSANE for an integrated chip to push.
Quote:
Originally Posted by old-wiz
Having trouble imagining a 27" retina screen. If they are having trouble making enough 13" retina screens, how bad will it be for 27"? However I'd hate to see them making it thinner and losing functionality in the process. Thinner is fine, but not if it means integrated graphics only for example.
All of this assumes Apple will continue to make the 27 inch model. I wouldn't be surprised to see a single 21-23 inch iMac with a "retina" display and watch the 27 inch go the way of the 17 inch macbook pro.
As for the thickness issue, all I'm concerned about his heat dissipation. Keeping it the same thickness or even a smidge thicker is fine if it runs cooler. Some technical considerations are actually important, and ultimately even Apple can't fight physics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Then don't hang around heels. /s
First, you're wrong. There are a lot of professionals who use FCP.
Second, it's irrelevant. This thread is about the iMac - which is not really sold as a professional level machine.
FCP7, yes please still use it, but how much longer? Maybe 2 years. FCPX may be used by some professionals, but NO ONE is cutting a feature length film on it. I mean the program dumbed down a lot of the capabilities that FCP7 had. Not to mention that Adobe Premiere came in and created a settings tab that practically duplicates FCP key commands. Premiere took the FCP7 market and the rest switched to Avid. True story.
I challenge your 2nd point for a number of reasons.
1- video editing can now be done on lower level machines. At first it required all the manpower possible to edit low res stuff. Now, iMacs are actually great machines to edit on. The iMac also still starts at 1k, so it deserves to be a competitive machine. Which my original point was, yes it should have been updated 6 months ago to be competitive.
2- With the MacPro being absent for a while, the iMac filled that void for a short time.
3- We've noticed a convergence of consumer and professional technology in almost all realms. I'm sure you've heard the term "prosumer." So yeah, I think the iMac fits that description.
But continue to argue that the iMac doesn't need an update, because that makes sense...
Mac Pro is not a consumer machine. Stuff it under a desk and no one sees it and no one really cares. I don't think Apple makes enough of them anymore to justify a redesign. Making it much smaller compromises the acoustics. Smaller workstations and servers tend to be loud.
iMacs, I can see going thinner because the 3.5" drive and ODD are probably going away on the next update. Maybe 5mm thinner overall.
It makes no sense when you still have a base that can't be made shorter or you lose stability. That base is a constraint on packaging thickness. One might be able to shave a few percent on weight.
When people see my iMac, no one is complaining about the thickness. What I don't like is the sound. It's very good "for a computer" but they're still computer speakers. I'm considering adding a couple bookshelf speakers to the desk to make up for what I removed when switching to an iMac.
However...I have an orig. intel 20" white. But my GF brought home her new 21" iMac for me to configure for her.
I was amazed at the difference in weight compared to my orig. iMac. The new iMac seemed to be at least a third lighter. This saves fuel in shipping and less materials in production. I think Apple is on the right track with focusing on thinner, lighter and therefore, more elegant systems.
Maybe - they could get away with 2560 x 1440 on the 21.5" and 3200 x 1800 on the 27" but I'm thinking SSD as standard is more important.
The default configuration of the iMac could be 128GB boot drive with a 1TB 2.5" 7200 rpm HDD. That might make it $100 more expensive - would have been more had it not been for the optical removal.
The rounded edges would make it better for pulling down to use for touch input. I can't think of another reason for getting rid of the squared-off design. I also wonder how that will affect the RAM slots at the base. Maybe it is curved at the top and sides and flat at the base.
I doubt they'd go the soldered RAM route with the iMac but you never know. 8GB minimum and up to 32GB. I think Apple will do this on more and more machines. 4GB on the entry Mini up to 16GB.
Originally Posted by ClemyNX
You just got in you, don't you? Being aggressive with everybody all the time. You need treatment.
Is that a sentence? Or, rather, is there a point here other than insulting me by claiming I'm insane? Because I don't really see why you can't just answer the question I asked.
Originally Posted by Aktroutbum
Every site forum u name it said wait wait wait. So I set aside my projects And sat back and waited.
You should never have done that. The saying that many new Apple users ignore when telling others what to do is "If you need it now, buy it now. If not, wait." Which means that if you have work, you clam up, buy whatever is available immediately, and you never look back. NEVER hold off on work for an update.
Originally Posted by Conrail
All of this assumes Apple will continue to make the 27 inch model. I wouldn't be surprised to see a single 21-23 inch iMac with a "retina" display and watch the 27 inch go the way of the 17 inch macbook pro.
Of course they will. It's the only display they make, too. These are desktops. That's a laptop. The laptops are going to be slowly killed off while the desktops see a resurgence. I'll guess that in five to seven years, the 27" iMac will be one of the smallest ones they make.
Originally Posted by Marvin
The rounded edges would make it better for pulling down to use for touch input. I can't think of another reason for getting rid of the squared-off design.
I'm still trying to work on a stand design that affords this capability with one hand, like all the other iMac designs. Not going well.
When Apple does it, it'll be spectacular. And they have to do it before they can switch over OS X to fully multitouch.
I never said that the iMac doesn't need an update. Please stop putting words into my mouth.
What I've said is that raw performance is no longer the driving force for most people to upgrade. For the average person, even a low end computer today is more than fast enough to handle all their needs. So upgrade cycles will slow down (which we've seen) and decisions are likely to depend on more than just raw performance.
The tiny percentage of pros using their iMacs for video editing doesn't change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia
Also unfounded is that it's probably just me. Sure, I left myself open with a personal statement, but you followed with an ad hominem attack,
Paranoid much? Tallest Skil is often exasperating, but here he definitely did not.
If you want to get back at him anyway, just do it like that:
"Tallest Skil, how do you like iPhone 5?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'll guess that in five to seven years, the 27" iMac will be one of the smallest ones they make.
Are you joking, or are you seriously doing drugs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Is that a sentence? Or, rather, is there a point here other than insulting me by claiming I'm insane? Because I don't really see why you can't just answer the question I asked.
No, that was a critic.