How about reducing the price of *all* of these overdue-for-a-refresh models rather than just introduce a single cheaper model that appeals to very few of us on this forum?
readers of this forum arent going to be interested in the lowest-end imac. ever. it's not designed for you.
I can't understand the release cycle for most of apples products. All we kinda know is iPhones and maybe iPods in the fall and that's it. It's really fustrating not knowing when a new Mac mini or MacBook comes out. Even the software, we only know when the an os will be out but other software who knows.
I would like to plan out certain upgrades for work. Mainly for budget purposes. I've been a customer for a fairly long time apple and I'm kinda pissed off with a poor schedule and not being able to plan stuff out.
re-read the article, if you even read it the first time.
I am starting to tire of Apple, yes their stuff can be good but boring now and these spec boost are futile, nothing to cream your pants about, even iPhone 6 is not that exciting.
the problem is you -- expecting mature product categories like all-in-one desktops to bring excitement to your life. that isnt what theyre in business for...
More like doubt of your sincerity or mental powers, pick one.
I'm hardly going to rely on you to assess my mental capacities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur
When you're called out for missing the point, you change your demand to across the board price reductions, never mind you needed the latest upgrade in the previous post. What's a person to think about your intentions?
I said I "need to upgrade my iMac" not "I need the latest upgrade." (You obviously missed the point.)
As for my "demand" for price reductions, I didn't use that word. You did. I suggested it might be a good idea (note the question mark after my statement about reduced prices).
A rational, informed consumer would not buy a new iMac right now, knowing a processor upgrade is right around the corner. If "right around the corner" has been delayed due to a third-party supplier, one might think Apple wise to try to compensate by adding some incentive for buying a current model now. Simply announcing a cheaper model in the lineup today without touching a single spec on any of the other models left some potential buyers (me included) cold.
More like doubt of your sincerity or mental powers, pick one. The story is about the uncertain availability of Intel's new processors. Then you say, "Good grief, Apple," because you don't know how much longer you can wait.
When you're called out for missing the point, you change your demand to across the board price reductions, never mind you needed the latest upgrade in the previous post. What's a person to think about your intentions? All this on a day when Rogifan is earning his keep with a new issue, so you get caught in the crossfire. (Him I don't even quote anymore out of respect for some good people who have him on ignore.) Apologies for that part.
I personally still believe Apple will be moving Macs to their ARM processor, you seeing it today they are making OSX look and act more like IOS. With their new development tools it will make it easier for companies to make apps for both OSX an IOS.
Also, if you look at apple past, they start high and as they market begins to slow they move down into the next level. Mac sale maybe slowing so now they are considering the next level down and this change is a low risk approach to testing the waters.
I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market.
I call it like I see it. And I'm not the only one who thinks this new iMac is overpriced. I do think its a bean counter move. Said the same thing about the 8GB 5C. At least Apple didn't send out a press release on that one.
There are so many great things about Tim Cook's Apple. They could have really given us a 'whoa' moment pricing this at $899 or even $999. Especially with Windows 8 being such a turd. And I hate seeing Chromebooks gain share in education markets.
The Chromebooks are great. I use one everyday. Cheap and good. Good for schools. Most students don't need a MacBook Air/Pro.
How much work would it take to shift to ARM? What do Intel CPUs do that ARM CPUs don't? I've heard acceptable GPUs might be a problem with ARM CPUs. Is the A7/8/whatever fast enough to power a desktop or is Intel still way ahead in this market?
I thought Grand Central was supposed to make it easier and automatic for applications to make use of multiple cores without any/much reprogramming. If so, why aren't we seeing two or three dual or quad core CPUs being used in an iMac? Wouldn't that be a way to improve the overall power of an iMac without having to wait for the latest Intel CPU? If this would work, then maybe the iMac needs to put on a little more girth to fit the extra CPUs. I don't see the iMac getting multiple GPUs, especially since the iMac isn't really geared toward the type of applications that use GPUs for computational power.
That's like asking why people don't drive SmartCars instead of Ford F350's. Different capacity and different purpose.
ARM's purpose is low-power, which is why it's perfect for mobile and lousy for everything else but microservers. (Because you can fill a data center cage with 12 4U rack servers filled with 2160 of them (4 x 45) in the same power envelope as 8 Xeon CPU's per 45 ARM parts.)
Until there is a dramatic shift in how programmers design programs to multithread efficiently (which just won't happen, people don't want to think different enough), there is no point in Apple considering switching to ARM parts in a desktop, and it would just sink their PC business, and send people back to Dell and Windows, which would also sink the Apple ecosystem by extension. As long as Intel is still producing parts, Apple doesn't need to switch.
There will come a time when the ARM parts might be of performance parity, but that's not happening anytime soon. Likewise Intel will never deliver on a x86 part that is power efficient enough for a mobile phone. Their parts are just too power-hungry. Atom/Celeron parts have never been good parts, and belong in interactive signage.
Never say never. Apple's shift from the 68000 (CISC) to PowerPC (RISC) was mostly seamless from the user's point of view. And who saw the shift from PowerPC to Intel? Apple said they were running their last few versions of Mac OS on Intel (for years) before that switch.
And Apple has accumulated companies and new hires for the A-series processor development. It is not out of the realm of possibility that Apple makes the switch to A-series for more products.
I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now?
Will we see any refresh in the fall? I don't know how much longer I can wait. Good grief, Apple.
I have a 2009 iMac too. It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7. About 8 months ago, I replaced my original 1TB hard drive with a 1TB SSD Samsung EVO840, which essentially turned it into a new machine and it is a serious screamer. Even with that, my iMac is beginning to show its age with the occasional creaky fan noise and other (very, very minor) annoyances probably due to its age and condition.
My business partner picked up his new iMac a couple months ago, and even though I was more than happy with mine, I was very much impressed with the quality of the new iMac, and very much liked the IPS display. It was a big difference compared to mine. The performance of the PCIe SSD drive was very much noticeable compared to my SSD, obviously because of my SATA 3gb/s interface.
The iMac probably won't get it's major refresh until near the end of the year anyways. That's Apple's semi-"normal" upgrade cycle fro serious updates on iMacs. So one way or another, you'd have to wait if you want the latest and greatest iMac.
If your iMac is causing you to lose precious time and money, you'll be more than happy with what's available now.
You said: "Anyone demanding Apple to do something about this is either willfully ignorant or trolling."
They can do something about this. They can reduce the price on their overaged hardware to incentivize buyers while they wait for beyond-their-control new components to materialize. Or bump up the stock HD sizes. Or add an SSD by default.
There's nothing unreasonable or "ignorant" about such a request. Product refreshes for Apple's desktop lineup have been woefully slow for years. They don't need across-the-board updates all the time to keep the product line fresh. Make some minor component tweaks or play with the price to juice sales.
Apple will do something, they will be moving away from Intel.
I have a 2009 iMac too. It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7.
Sadly my 2009 pre-dates yours with a CD2 processor.
I'm ready to buy, but not until we get the upgraded 2014 model, whatever that might be. I was foolish enough to buy just before the big upgrade in 2009. I'm not going to make that mistake again.
I was really hoping today's announcement would be "it."
I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market.
All of Apple in house apps probably already run on Arm cpu's, Apple for the third time in 12 years has a cpu's supplier screwing off, this time around Apple has an in house solution, I don't think they will wait for Intel, Adobe or Autodesk. The intro of Swift, Metal, and the future introduction of the A8 series cpu say's Apple is moving on.
All of Apple in house apps probably already run on Arm cpu's, Apple for the third time in 12 years has a cpu's supplier screwing off, this time around Apple has an in house solution, I don't think they will wait for Intel, Adobe or Autodesk. The intro of Swift, Metal, and the future introduction of the A8 series cpu say's Apple is moving on.
Nobody knows, but I still think it is unlikely. Releasing a new die shrink architecture happens about every two years. This time it looks like it will be around two and a half years instead. I would imagine as the dies get smaller the process becomes increasingly difficult, so I'm guessing it might take a little longer. Intel is two factors ahead of Apple in die shrink. Apple's A7 is 28nm the Broadwell is 14nm. What other chip foundry is Apple going to get that sort of manufacturing from? Apple doesn't make their own chips you know?
Comments
How about reducing the price of *all* of these overdue-for-a-refresh models rather than just introduce a single cheaper model that appeals to very few of us on this forum?
readers of this forum arent going to be interested in the lowest-end imac. ever. it's not designed for you.
I can't understand the release cycle for most of apples products. All we kinda know is iPhones and maybe iPods in the fall and that's it. It's really fustrating not knowing when a new Mac mini or MacBook comes out. Even the software, we only know when the an os will be out but other software who knows.
I would like to plan out certain upgrades for work. Mainly for budget purposes. I've been a customer for a fairly long time apple and I'm kinda pissed off with a poor schedule and not being able to plan stuff out.
re-read the article, if you even read it the first time.
I am starting to tire of Apple, yes their stuff can be good but boring now and these spec boost are futile, nothing to cream your pants about, even iPhone 6 is not that exciting.
the problem is you -- expecting mature product categories like all-in-one desktops to bring excitement to your life. that isnt what theyre in business for...
More like doubt of your sincerity or mental powers, pick one.
I'm hardly going to rely on you to assess my mental capacities.
When you're called out for missing the point, you change your demand to across the board price reductions, never mind you needed the latest upgrade in the previous post. What's a person to think about your intentions?
I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now?
Just buy a refurb and move on with your life.
It's just a computer after all.
They can do something about this.
No, that’s not this.
That one from you I will quote. Badge of honor.
What's your "bean counter" count today, here, on MacRumors, etc.?
I personally still believe Apple will be moving Macs to their ARM processor, you seeing it today they are making OSX look and act more like IOS. With their new development tools it will make it easier for companies to make apps for both OSX an IOS.
Also, if you look at apple past, they start high and as they market begins to slow they move down into the next level. Mac sale maybe slowing so now they are considering the next level down and this change is a low risk approach to testing the waters.
I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market.
I call it like I see it. And I'm not the only one who thinks this new iMac is overpriced. I do think its a bean counter move. Said the same thing about the 8GB 5C. At least Apple didn't send out a press release on that one.
There are so many great things about Tim Cook's Apple. They could have really given us a 'whoa' moment pricing this at $899 or even $999. Especially with Windows 8 being such a turd. And I hate seeing Chromebooks gain share in education markets.
The Chromebooks are great. I use one everyday. Cheap and good. Good for schools. Most students don't need a MacBook Air/Pro.
That's like asking why people don't drive SmartCars instead of Ford F350's. Different capacity and different purpose.
ARM's purpose is low-power, which is why it's perfect for mobile and lousy for everything else but microservers. (Because you can fill a data center cage with 12 4U rack servers filled with 2160 of them (4 x 45) in the same power envelope as 8 Xeon CPU's per 45 ARM parts.)
Until there is a dramatic shift in how programmers design programs to multithread efficiently (which just won't happen, people don't want to think different enough), there is no point in Apple considering switching to ARM parts in a desktop, and it would just sink their PC business, and send people back to Dell and Windows, which would also sink the Apple ecosystem by extension. As long as Intel is still producing parts, Apple doesn't need to switch.
There will come a time when the ARM parts might be of performance parity, but that's not happening anytime soon. Likewise Intel will never deliver on a x86 part that is power efficient enough for a mobile phone. Their parts are just too power-hungry. Atom/Celeron parts have never been good parts, and belong in interactive signage.
Have a look
http://www.notebookcheck.net/SoC-Shootout-x86-vs-ARM.99496.0.html
Yes, there is a similarity between the Air and iMac updates. It makes you wonder if Apple might switch to their own ARM CPUs at some point.
The switch to Apple chips is coming Intel is slowing down like Motorola and IBM.
Did you miss the point of this story? The problem is Intel's, likely the die shrink. What do you want Apple to do?
Move on from Intel.
Never say never. Apple's shift from the 68000 (CISC) to PowerPC (RISC) was mostly seamless from the user's point of view. And who saw the shift from PowerPC to Intel? Apple said they were running their last few versions of Mac OS on Intel (for years) before that switch.
And Apple has accumulated companies and new hires for the A-series processor development. It is not out of the realm of possibility that Apple makes the switch to A-series for more products.
Bam!
I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now?
Will we see any refresh in the fall? I don't know how much longer I can wait. Good grief, Apple.
I have a 2009 iMac too. It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7. About 8 months ago, I replaced my original 1TB hard drive with a 1TB SSD Samsung EVO840, which essentially turned it into a new machine and it is a serious screamer. Even with that, my iMac is beginning to show its age with the occasional creaky fan noise and other (very, very minor) annoyances probably due to its age and condition.
My business partner picked up his new iMac a couple months ago, and even though I was more than happy with mine, I was very much impressed with the quality of the new iMac, and very much liked the IPS display. It was a big difference compared to mine. The performance of the PCIe SSD drive was very much noticeable compared to my SSD, obviously because of my SATA 3gb/s interface.
The iMac probably won't get it's major refresh until near the end of the year anyways. That's Apple's semi-"normal" upgrade cycle fro serious updates on iMacs. So one way or another, you'd have to wait if you want the latest and greatest iMac.
If your iMac is causing you to lose precious time and money, you'll be more than happy with what's available now.
You said: "Anyone demanding Apple to do something about this is either willfully ignorant or trolling."
They can do something about this. They can reduce the price on their overaged hardware to incentivize buyers while they wait for beyond-their-control new components to materialize. Or bump up the stock HD sizes. Or add an SSD by default.
There's nothing unreasonable or "ignorant" about such a request. Product refreshes for Apple's desktop lineup have been woefully slow for years. They don't need across-the-board updates all the time to keep the product line fresh. Make some minor component tweaks or play with the price to juice sales.
Apple will do something, they will be moving away from Intel.
I have a 2009 iMac too. It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7.
Sadly my 2009 pre-dates yours with a CD2 processor.
I'm ready to buy, but not until we get the upgraded 2014 model, whatever that might be. I was foolish enough to buy just before the big upgrade in 2009. I'm not going to make that mistake again.
I was really hoping today's announcement would be "it."
I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market.
All of Apple in house apps probably already run on Arm cpu's, Apple for the third time in 12 years has a cpu's supplier screwing off, this time around Apple has an in house solution, I don't think they will wait for Intel, Adobe or Autodesk. The intro of Swift, Metal, and the future introduction of the A8 series cpu say's Apple is moving on.
Nobody knows, but I still think it is unlikely. Releasing a new die shrink architecture happens about every two years. This time it looks like it will be around two and a half years instead. I would imagine as the dies get smaller the process becomes increasingly difficult, so I'm guessing it might take a little longer. Intel is two factors ahead of Apple in die shrink. Apple's A7 is 28nm the Broadwell is 14nm. What other chip foundry is Apple going to get that sort of manufacturing from? Apple doesn't make their own chips you know?