I never understood Apple's anorexic obsession! As for me, I look at the front of my iMac and never, ever, see how thin it is. If they can continue this without sacrificing features, then I don't care, but there comes a point where it does not make sense.
It's way more than that. And Apple is not known for "not making sense".
Here's just a couple of sense-points for you to latch onto (from a current user of the previous generation iMac):
- the new iMac reduces internal heat dramatically, which extends the life and overall performance of the machine. It is also noticeably quieter as a result.
- the new design eliminates the "dust ghosting" prevalent on the earlier version iMacs. You'd have to own one to really get what I'm talking about. Dust gets behind the glass, making it look dirty, typically in the upper corners. Over time they form broad "fans" down from the corners. You have to lift the glass off and clean it to remove them, exposing the LCD and risking a loss of warranty in the process. If not readily cleaned, the LCD itself could be permanently "stained" by these 'ghost' fans… the new design eliminates this problem.
- the reflectivity of the screen is FAR less on the new iMacs, in part due to the same solution that solved the dust problem. The laminated system they devised, reduces glare and creates a sealed system.
Much more than simply "stupid, aesthetically-based design choices" wouldn't you say?
Hmm again - Let's see if we can get this right for our forum colleagues:
1. Your position seems to be that you can be as offensive and rude as you like, while all the time, telling members how they should think - and how, in your opinion, they are lesser beings.
2. Gosh - "my insulting comments" - I'm so sorry dear, did you delete them when you were in the bathroom crying?
3. My position is that you should be more collaborative and collegial - more like a real human.
4. More particularly, addressing your pitiful whining, what exactly were my insulting comments?
4. Again: address the specific issues, present a viable alternative view or just be quiet.
I suspect you haven't notice, but this forum is intended to be for considered adult conversation rather than a twelve-year-old's rant forum.
Over to you TS sweety, let all of us on this forum know what you think.
The iMacs need a higher resolution screen. Especially the 27 inch which has almost the same pixel count as an iPad.
They have put too much money in the form factor. The super thin form factor is expensive to manufactuer. Most people would rather have a thicker back panel (the thinner panel looks cool but does not offer any space savings at all) UHD screen, and slighter cheaper price.
I'm thinking of buying a 27 iMac but the screen resolution and price is bothering me.
Yeah, because of all the other 27" 2560x1440 AIO computers on the market.
Oh, wait..... :no:
Hint: Dell and HP both offer AIO computers. The problem is that their top end is around 23" and 1920x1080 - hardly a threat to the iMac for screen specs. And that doesn't even et into the quality differences.
Hmm again - Let's see if we can get this right for our forum colleagues:
1. Your position seems to be that you can be as offensive and rude as you like, while all the time, telling members how they should think - and how, in your opinion, they are lesser beings.
2. Gosh - "my insulting comments" - I'm so sorry dear, did you delete them when you were in the bathroom crying?
3. My position is that you should be more collaborative and collegial - more like a real human.
4. More particularly, addressing your pitiful whining, what exactly were my insulting comments?
4. Again: address the specific issues, present a viable alternative view or just be quiet.
I suspect you haven't notice, but this forum is intended to be for considered adult conversation rather than a twelve-year-old's rant forum.
Over to you TS sweety, let all of us on this forum know what you think.
Ah, such silence. No comments from you yet TS (mega AI guru)? We await your guidance. Even you, maybe, get the concept of sarcasm. Talk to us.
It's way more than that. And Apple is not known for "not making sense".
Here's just a couple of sense-points for you to latch onto (from a current user of the previous generation iMac):
- the new iMac reduces internal heat dramatically, which extends the life and overall performance of the machine. It is also noticeably quieter as a result.
- the new design eliminates the "dust ghosting" prevalent on the earlier version iMacs. You'd have to own one to really get what I'm talking about. Dust gets behind the glass, making it look dirty, typically in the upper corners. Over time they form broad "fans" down from the corners. You have to lift the glass off and clean it to remove them, exposing the LCD and risking a loss of warranty in the process. If not readily cleaned, the LCD itself could be permanently "stained" by these 'ghost' fans… the new design eliminates this problem.
- the reflectivity of the screen is FAR less on the new iMacs, in part due to the same solution that solved the dust problem. The laminated system they devised, reduces glare and creates a sealed system.
Much more than simply "stupid, aesthetically-based design choices" wouldn't you say?
Yes, the new design of the lamination process reduced glare. Proper sealing would eliminate any dust issues. Neither have anything to do with the form factor itself being thinner.
I never said anything near "stupid" in my description of their design choice. Actually, I do not have a problem with it as you would imply. I only stated my observation of their anorexic obsession.
Further, the reduction (more accurately, the perceived reduction) is more viewing angle than anything as the iMac is still fat in the back but really thin on the sides. So yes, this was simply a design choice.
Frankly I don't think anybody at Apple cares about the numbers. They know sales bounce back with updates and further there is a lot of buzz around Haswell.
I've been a bit disappointed with Mac sales. And while I can see that iPad and laptops are cannibalizing Macs a bit I really thought that halo effect would've added more to bottom line Mac numbers.
I agree that iMacs should be designed not only for beauty/aesthetics but also for value (i.e. cost). The new thin iMacs are a little over done.
But with all my smallish complaints, Apple continues to produce great desktops and they will improve demand with Mavericks and possibly new/improved Mac Minis. I really think that Mavericks will give dramatic boost to iMac sales.
Apple is starting to seriously kill it in education. Wonder how long it'll take for this younger generation to buy iMacs in droves...after they graduate?
When did Intel say Thunderbolt 2 was being released, September? Then September.
Actually they haven't been real clear on the release date for TB 2. There are a large number if Haswell processors and XEONs coming in September though.
You're certainly right about numbers, though.
At this point anybody half tuned into the market would realize that Haswell based Macs are not far off. As such sales will be down waiting for the new hardware to debut.
What do you think will be the next GPU on the new 22" imacs. We have the 650m at 1250 G3D mark. The new 750m has 1650 G3D mark, so about 30% faster.
Intel HD 4000 has 464 and HD 5000 has 576. The new MBA used the build in HD 5000. I think retina macs that relay on those chips are abominations, but I understand that some people only needs web browsing and word processing.
On the 27" side, I think the 680MX will be replace by the 780m, which is about 30% faster. I personally have 680MX, which is very good but still wont allow me to run World of Warcraft at max settings.
Current Mac offering is really not superb, if you look at it. Exception is Air, of course, you cannot expect more from it at the time. However, Macbook Pro Retina and iMac are not at their best.
I write this on Retina Macbook Pro and while being really satisfied with the screen (I don't need my glasses anymore !!), I miss ruggedness and firmness of "Classic". It was an overkill on design, I find it hardly acceptable that it tweeks and squeeks almost like plastic case and bottom aluminum cover is too soft and prone to bend in. I actually got the new bent in, I found quickly why... Also the price has gone over the acceptable reef barrier. They've kept the "classic" though, but it is a bitter consolation...
iMac 27" could be a great machine, but now, when I'm used to retina on Macbook and iPad it is hardly likely to toss away my 2011 iMac for a new one. iMac 20" is another funny story, because I believe it was killed by not making it memory upgradable. I had plenty of macs and I remember the memory upgrade on every single one. This was extreme trade-off, an overkill on design, actually, what we can see in many places in iOS7 as well. Ive as a design nuclear reactor needs better moderator, because it seems he wants to explode sometimes. He should think of miniaturization and slimness more within his iPad Mini achievement, because there he actually succeeded in full.
My general feeling is that Phil is missing on vital product decisions. Or not. But someone does. Jonny The Moderator, perhaps ?
My 3 yrs old MBP has 16GB RAM in it. To justify an upgrade I need my next MBP to be expandable to at least 32 or 64 to last me another 3-4 years. Anyone else in the same boat? I see all the discounts are on the low ram model and the ones with 16gb never discounted. I'm guessing those sell well.
For the poster who said they is waiting for their Mac to die; it's gonna be a long time. Better to hand it down. You will run out on need for ram expansion before it dies. I've never had a Mac die. I've got machines from 1999 still humming along. Some a bit louder than humming now due to noisy ball bearings.
My 3 yrs old MBP has 16GB RAM in it. To justify an upgrade I need my next MBP to be expandable to at least 32 or 64 to last me another 3-4 years. Anyone else in the same boat? I see all the discounts are on the low ram model and the ones with 16gb never discounted. I'm guessing those sell well.
For the poster who said they is waiting for their Mac to die; it's gonna be a long time. Better to hand it down. You will run out on need for ram expansion before it dies. I've never had a Mac die. I've got machines from 1999 still humming along. Some a bit louder than humming now due to noisy ball bearings.
you do realize that a similar MBP with 4gb of ram would be much faster, right?
I mean, your RAM is what? 1033? the new ones are 1600 and faster.
You might say this is because Apple hasn't updated their products in a while, but I think its because its getting to a point where you don't need to upgrade your Mac as much. The speed of any computer is getting to the point where a general everyday user doesn't feel the need to update as much. You take this into account, and add the fact that someone may have an iPad and then you really don't feel the need to buy a new Mac.
So sure, maybe Apple will see a slight surge in sales once they do release new Macs, but the actual performance gains won't be huge. Something you might gain if its a laptop is battery life. That may be a reason to upgrade depending on what you already have.
I'm not screen expert but just a layman. When i see a $499 iPad have a superior screen than a $2200 iMac it makes me puzzled. And I'm sure many others think the same. I know its a tech issue but I'm just trying to explain my personal reasons why I held off from buying an iMac to replace my 5 year old Wintel.
I also believe that Apple has gone extreme in trying to make the iMac as thin as possible. First of the 22" model has no option of upgrading memory also it houses a small and slow 1TB drive (the 27" model has a bigger faster drive). Adding the fusion drives helps but in the reviews it shows that the slow drive in the 22 model actually is a bottle neck making performance worse than the older model. Sorry that right there is sacrificing performance/flexability for pure design. Not to mention the new design is expensive. A special welding tech, ect. While everyone elses desktops are getting way cheaper, the iMacs are getting more expensive.
The combination of a screen that will disappoint many and very high prices to pay for the ultra thin design probably scared many away.
This is probably because its a hell of a lot cheaper to put a retina display in a 9" device than a 27" or 21.5" device. These screens are most likely very expensive. You can't compare a handheld to a regular computer. These are 2 separate things. So, Apple will put a 27" retina panel in, but then don't bitch because it costs $3500 now. The thinness has nothing to do with the quality of panel in the iMac. Its the cost of the panel itself.
Apple's products have been priced the same for years and its never been an issue. If you want a Mac, you're going to pay for it. If you think its not worth it, then go buy a cheaper PC. Apple is not going to lower its prices, especially if you want higher quality parts inside it. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
I never understood Apple's anorexic obsession! As for me, I look at the front of my iMac and never, ever, see how thin it is. If they can continue this without sacrificing features, then I don't care, but there comes a point where it does not make sense.
It's way more than that. And Apple is not known for "not making sense".
Here's just a couple of sense-points for you to latch onto (from a current user of the previous generation iMac):
- the new iMac reduces internal heat dramatically, which extends the life and overall performance of the machine. It is also noticeably quieter as a result.
- the new design eliminates the "dust ghosting" prevalent on the earlier version iMacs. You'd have to own one to really get what I'm talking about. Dust gets behind the glass, making it look dirty, typically in the upper corners. Over time they form broad "fans" down from the corners. You have to lift the glass off and clean it to remove them, exposing the LCD and risking a loss of warranty in the process. If not readily cleaned, the LCD itself could be permanently "stained" by these 'ghost' fans… the new design eliminates this problem.
- the reflectivity of the screen is FAR less on the new iMacs, in part due to the same solution that solved the dust problem. The laminated system they devised, reduces glare and creates a sealed system.
Much more than simply "stupid, aesthetically-based design choices" wouldn't you say?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumergo
LOL? Is that a good, bad or ugly comment, Teamracer. Agree, dissent, just laugh? Any words? Talk to me.
Whatever it was, it clearly left him speechless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, your insulting comments were just deleted.
And it will be deleted again. My stars.
Hmm again - Let's see if we can get this right for our forum colleagues:
1. Your position seems to be that you can be as offensive and rude as you like, while all the time, telling members how they should think - and how, in your opinion, they are lesser beings.
2. Gosh - "my insulting comments" - I'm so sorry dear, did you delete them when you were in the bathroom crying?
3. My position is that you should be more collaborative and collegial - more like a real human.
4. More particularly, addressing your pitiful whining, what exactly were my insulting comments?
4. Again: address the specific issues, present a viable alternative view or just be quiet.
I suspect you haven't notice, but this forum is intended to be for considered adult conversation rather than a twelve-year-old's rant forum.
Over to you TS sweety, let all of us on this forum know what you think.
In fact, doesn't Apple generate more profit from desktop and laptop computers than the top five competitors in the markets combined?
Yeah, because of all the other 27" 2560x1440 AIO computers on the market.
Oh, wait..... :no:
Hint: Dell and HP both offer AIO computers. The problem is that their top end is around 23" and 1920x1080 - hardly a threat to the iMac for screen specs. And that doesn't even et into the quality differences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumergo
Hmm again - Let's see if we can get this right for our forum colleagues:
1. Your position seems to be that you can be as offensive and rude as you like, while all the time, telling members how they should think - and how, in your opinion, they are lesser beings.
2. Gosh - "my insulting comments" - I'm so sorry dear, did you delete them when you were in the bathroom crying?
3. My position is that you should be more collaborative and collegial - more like a real human.
4. More particularly, addressing your pitiful whining, what exactly were my insulting comments?
4. Again: address the specific issues, present a viable alternative view or just be quiet.
I suspect you haven't notice, but this forum is intended to be for considered adult conversation rather than a twelve-year-old's rant forum.
Over to you TS sweety, let all of us on this forum know what you think.
Ah, such silence. No comments from you yet TS (mega AI guru)? We await your guidance. Even you, maybe, get the concept of sarcasm. Talk to us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical
It's way more than that. And Apple is not known for "not making sense".
Here's just a couple of sense-points for you to latch onto (from a current user of the previous generation iMac):
- the new iMac reduces internal heat dramatically, which extends the life and overall performance of the machine. It is also noticeably quieter as a result.
- the new design eliminates the "dust ghosting" prevalent on the earlier version iMacs. You'd have to own one to really get what I'm talking about. Dust gets behind the glass, making it look dirty, typically in the upper corners. Over time they form broad "fans" down from the corners. You have to lift the glass off and clean it to remove them, exposing the LCD and risking a loss of warranty in the process. If not readily cleaned, the LCD itself could be permanently "stained" by these 'ghost' fans… the new design eliminates this problem.
- the reflectivity of the screen is FAR less on the new iMacs, in part due to the same solution that solved the dust problem. The laminated system they devised, reduces glare and creates a sealed system.
Much more than simply "stupid, aesthetically-based design choices" wouldn't you say?
Yes, the new design of the lamination process reduced glare. Proper sealing would eliminate any dust issues. Neither have anything to do with the form factor itself being thinner.
I never said anything near "stupid" in my description of their design choice. Actually, I do not have a problem with it as you would imply. I only stated my observation of their anorexic obsession.
Further, the reduction (more accurately, the perceived reduction) is more viewing angle than anything as the iMac is still fat in the back but really thin on the sides. So yes, this was simply a design choice.
Which might not happen this quarter anyways.
Frankly I don't think anybody at Apple cares about the numbers. They know sales bounce back with updates and further there is a lot of buzz around Haswell.
I've been a bit disappointed with Mac sales. And while I can see that iPad and laptops are cannibalizing Macs a bit I really thought that halo effect would've added more to bottom line Mac numbers.
I agree that iMacs should be designed not only for beauty/aesthetics but also for value (i.e. cost). The new thin iMacs are a little over done.
But with all my smallish complaints, Apple continues to produce great desktops and they will improve demand with Mavericks and possibly new/improved Mac Minis. I really think that Mavericks will give dramatic boost to iMac sales.
Apple is starting to seriously kill it in education. Wonder how long it'll take for this younger generation to buy iMacs in droves...after they graduate?
Originally Posted by wizard69
Which might not happen this quarter anyways.
When did Intel say Thunderbolt 2 was being released, September? Then September.
You're certainly right about numbers, though.
At this point anybody half tuned into the market would realize that Haswell based Macs are not far off. As such sales will be down waiting for the new hardware to debut.
What do you think will be the next GPU on the new 22" imacs. We have the 650m at 1250 G3D mark. The new 750m has 1650 G3D mark, so about 30% faster.
Intel HD 4000 has 464 and HD 5000 has 576. The new MBA used the build in HD 5000. I think retina macs that relay on those chips are abominations, but I understand that some people only needs web browsing and word processing.
On the 27" side, I think the 680MX will be replace by the 780m, which is about 30% faster. I personally have 680MX, which is very good but still wont allow me to run World of Warcraft at max settings.
Originally Posted by herbapou
What do you think will be the next GPU on the new 22" iMacs.
Expect Intel 5000, pray for something better alongside it.
We have the 650m at 1250 G3D mark. The new 750m has 1650 G3D mark, so about 30% faster.
What's the TDP on the 750? If it matches the 650, that's a good bet.
I for one have been holding off on replacing a macbook until the haswell mbps come out.
Current Mac offering is really not superb, if you look at it. Exception is Air, of course, you cannot expect more from it at the time. However, Macbook Pro Retina and iMac are not at their best.
I write this on Retina Macbook Pro and while being really satisfied with the screen (I don't need my glasses anymore !!
iMac 27" could be a great machine, but now, when I'm used to retina on Macbook and iPad it is hardly likely to toss away my 2011 iMac for a new one. iMac 20" is another funny story, because I believe it was killed by not making it memory upgradable. I had plenty of macs and I remember the memory upgrade on every single one. This was extreme trade-off, an overkill on design, actually, what we can see in many places in iOS7 as well. Ive as a design nuclear reactor needs better moderator, because it seems he wants to explode sometimes. He should think of miniaturization and slimness more within his iPad Mini achievement, because there he actually succeeded in full.
My general feeling is that Phil is missing on vital product decisions. Or not. But someone does. Jonny The Moderator, perhaps ?
For the poster who said they is waiting for their Mac to die; it's gonna be a long time. Better to hand it down. You will run out on need for ram expansion before it dies. I've never had a Mac die. I've got machines from 1999 still humming along. Some a bit louder than humming now due to noisy ball bearings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova
My 3 yrs old MBP has 16GB RAM in it. To justify an upgrade I need my next MBP to be expandable to at least 32 or 64 to last me another 3-4 years. Anyone else in the same boat? I see all the discounts are on the low ram model and the ones with 16gb never discounted. I'm guessing those sell well.
For the poster who said they is waiting for their Mac to die; it's gonna be a long time. Better to hand it down. You will run out on need for ram expansion before it dies. I've never had a Mac die. I've got machines from 1999 still humming along. Some a bit louder than humming now due to noisy ball bearings.
you do realize that a similar MBP with 4gb of ram would be much faster, right?
I mean, your RAM is what? 1033? the new ones are 1600 and faster.
I would expect this...
You might say this is because Apple hasn't updated their products in a while, but I think its because its getting to a point where you don't need to upgrade your Mac as much. The speed of any computer is getting to the point where a general everyday user doesn't feel the need to update as much. You take this into account, and add the fact that someone may have an iPad and then you really don't feel the need to buy a new Mac.
So sure, maybe Apple will see a slight surge in sales once they do release new Macs, but the actual performance gains won't be huge. Something you might gain if its a laptop is battery life. That may be a reason to upgrade depending on what you already have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
I'm not screen expert but just a layman. When i see a $499 iPad have a superior screen than a $2200 iMac it makes me puzzled. And I'm sure many others think the same. I know its a tech issue but I'm just trying to explain my personal reasons why I held off from buying an iMac to replace my 5 year old Wintel.
I also believe that Apple has gone extreme in trying to make the iMac as thin as possible. First of the 22" model has no option of upgrading memory also it houses a small and slow 1TB drive (the 27" model has a bigger faster drive). Adding the fusion drives helps but in the reviews it shows that the slow drive in the 22 model actually is a bottle neck making performance worse than the older model. Sorry that right there is sacrificing performance/flexability for pure design. Not to mention the new design is expensive. A special welding tech, ect. While everyone elses desktops are getting way cheaper, the iMacs are getting more expensive.
The combination of a screen that will disappoint many and very high prices to pay for the ultra thin design probably scared many away.
This is probably because its a hell of a lot cheaper to put a retina display in a 9" device than a 27" or 21.5" device. These screens are most likely very expensive. You can't compare a handheld to a regular computer. These are 2 separate things. So, Apple will put a 27" retina panel in, but then don't bitch because it costs $3500 now. The thinness has nothing to do with the quality of panel in the iMac. Its the cost of the panel itself.
Apple's products have been priced the same for years and its never been an issue. If you want a Mac, you're going to pay for it. If you think its not worth it, then go buy a cheaper PC. Apple is not going to lower its prices, especially if you want higher quality parts inside it. You can't have your cake and eat it too.