LoopRumors: New iMacs On The Way

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
LoopRumors says updated iMacs with Firewire 800 and USB 2.0 will be introduced within 2 weeks (Paris Expo?). Minor cosmetic changes also. Sounds reasonable.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    othelloothello Posts: 1,053member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacsRGood4U

    LoopRumors says updated iMacs with Firewire 800 and USB 2.0 will be introduced within 2 weeks (Paris Expo?). Minor cosmetic changes also. Sounds reasonable.



    and a speed bump you would hope...
  • Reply 2 of 16
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by othello

    and a speed bump you would hope...



    Apple only gives speed bumps to the iMacs at the beginning of the year now, it's their new marketing strategy to get on top in the consumer market....
  • Reply 3 of 16
    Apple Store says "3 t o 5 day" for shipment of iMacs. Previously it was "available immediately". Ummmmmm.
  • Reply 4 of 16
    Yup, I am really holding out for the new 17". I have no problem with the price being 'mid-range' but would like to get a decent machine for my money. The video card badly needs updating, Nvidia does not even make the GeForce 2 or 4 mx any more. It needs at least an Fx 5200!!



    I can't wait until I get my shiny new 17"!!!!



  • Reply 5 of 16
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    I want new ones to come out at $300 less than they are currently so I can pick up a used 1 GHz 17" for cheap.



    There should be three models:



    17"

    1.25 GHz

    167 MHz bus

    512 MB PC2700

    120 GB hard drive

    Superdrive

    GeForce FX 5200 64 MB

    $1500



    17"

    1 GHz

    133 MHz bus

    256 MB PC2100

    80 GB hard drive

    Combo drive

    GeForce 4MX 64 MB

    $1300



    15"

    1 GHz

    133 MHz bus

    256 MB PC2100

    80 GB hard drive

    Combo drive

    GeForce 4MX 64 MB

    $1000



    That's basically putting new stuff into the top-end model, and recycling the components from the current top-end model into the new lower-end ones. I think there should be a lower end 17" for not too much money, I mean after all they are CONSUMER machines. I'd buy a $1300 1 GHz/Combo/17" iMac in an instant. But I'm afraid that despite my semi-conservative predictions, Apple will still manage to undercut them. I mean, they shouldn't have to hold the iMac back anymore except for price, because there are no towers that iMacs would steal sales away from. G5s are in a whole different category.



    Those would be good, but I think Apple will stay with a 15"/Combo and 17"/Superdrive setup, at 1.0 GHz and 1.25 GHz. And they'll probably still put 256 MB of RAM in each one. And they probably won't cut the price by as much as I'd like... instead of $300 like I thought would be good, they might only drop them by $100-$200. Still, any price drop is a step in the right direction.
  • Reply 6 of 16
    Unfortunately, prices will probably not go down. At the analyst meeting Apple said RAM prices are going up and LCD prices had bottomed out and would be increasing due to lack of production capacity.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacsRGood4U

    Unfortunately, prices will probably not go down. At the analyst meeting Apple said RAM prices are going up and LCD prices had bottomed out and would be increasing due to lack of production capacity.



    Crap on a stick. Wait... wasn't that Apple's excuse for raising prices a few months after the FP iMac came out? I just hope they don't raise the prices.



    That really got me wondering when the FP iMac will really become a great machine. For the year and a half that it's been out, it's always been behind the times or waiting too long for an update (except for the first few months after it came out, it was kickass back then). A lot of Apple's machines have had growing pains... the original iBook was slightly expensive and didn't have enough RAM, but that was fixed within a few months. The original iMac had a horrible graphics card and a slow modem, both of which were fixed quickly as well. But the flat panel iMac has been out for a long time and it still hasn't had all the problems addressed. I bet the update won't be as far-reaching as it should be, not to mention the lack of price drops.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    I am sorry to say, I suspect that you are both right...I forsee no price drops. Bottom line is that the iMac is no longer priced as an entry level machine, it's specs need to reflect it's now being mid-range.



    I really hope that Apple catches on to this little fact sooner rather than later.



    \
  • Reply 9 of 16
    Apple can lower prices on the iMac by doing what Dell does. Buy cheaper displays. I don't think they'll do that.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    thttht Posts: 3,062member
    Dual processor iMacs baby:



    iMac 17"



    2x1.25 GHz G4

    no L3 cache

    167 MHz bus

    256 MB PC2700

    2 accessible SO-DIMM slots

    64 MB FX5200 or equivalent ATI

    SuperDrive

    1440x960 resolution

    $1800



    BTO 17" LCD w/1600x1067 resolution

    +200 USD

    BTO w/combo drive

    -100 USD



    iMac 15"



    2x1.0 GHz G4

    no L3 cache

    167 MHz bus

    256 MB PC2700

    2 accessible SO-DIMM slots

    64 MB GF4 MX or equivalent ATI

    Combo

    1024x768 resolution

    $1300



    BTO 15" LCD w/1280x960 resolution

    +200 USD

    BTO w/SuperDrive

    +100 USD



    Of course, in my fantasy world, Apple would have headless Macs (G4 mini and G5 mini) that range the gamut of prices, and wouldn't have to worry about the iMac hitting a sub-1000 USB price point. It's a special boutique product.



    Come on Apple, make the iMacs dual processor.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by THT

    Dual processor iMacs baby:





    not going to happen we will see a headless consumer G5 before we see a Dual iMac.
  • Reply 12 of 16
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Yeah, but I understand where THT's coming from. OS X is so smooth and responsive on a duallie - and consumers are more likely to have multiple applications running than to do hardcore number crunching - that a DP iMac makes a lot of sense. That thing would run like butter.



    Too bad Apple's not likely to try it...
  • Reply 13 of 16
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    Yeah, but I understand where THT's coming from. OS X is so smooth and responsive on a duallie - and consumers are more likely to have multiple applications running than to do hardcore number crunching - that a DP iMac makes a lot of sense. That thing would run like butter.



    Too bad Apple's not likely to try it...




    How slow would the processors need to be to operate in an iMac 2's case at full throttle (ie. rendering an iMovie, surfing the web, and ripping songs into iTunes or burning a CD/DVD)? I would imagine that the answer would be a drop in processor speed, not the increase that Apple needs to give these computers due to market pressure. This is an assumption based off of the Cube upgrades, maybe if Moto gets the 7457's out they might be able to do it with 1ghz chips, but not with the 7455's. Also it would be in their best interest to maintain a single processor model, preferably at an entry price below where it is now (even if they had to drop the HD size down to 40 GB)
  • Reply 14 of 16
    thttht Posts: 3,062member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JCG

    How slow would the processors need to be to operate in an iMac 2's case at full throttle (ie. rendering an iMovie, surfing the web, and ripping songs into iTunes or burning a CD/DVD)?



    It depends on what the thermal budget for the iMac is. If it can handle a 30 to 40 watt processor budget, Apple can put 2 1.3 GHz 7457 processors in it. Right now, we don't have a good idea of what it can handle. If the current 1 GHz iMac 17 uses a 1.6V 7455 processor, than it is able to handle a processor with a maximum power consumption/dissipation of 30 watts.



    Quote:

    I would imagine that the answer would be a drop in processor speed, not the increase that Apple needs to give these computers due to market pressure.



    Even if it was a dual 0.867 and dual 1 GHz system, it would be a more attractive product than 1 GHz and 1.33 GHz systems. Remember, my fantasy world has a headless G4 mini in the sub-1000 USD range and G5 mini in the 1000 to 1500 USD range, so an iMac 17 has no choice but to be a boutique product.



    Quote:

    Also it would be in their best interest to maintain a single processor model, preferably at an entry price below where it is now (even if they had to drop the HD size down to 40 GB)



    From a consumer point view, it would be nice to have a 3 tiered range of products. Low-end (<$1k), mid-end ($1k to $1.5k), and high-end (>$1.6k) headless machines. All-in-one products would be left as specialty products.



    Apple's best interest seems rather curious...
  • Reply 15 of 16
    its to my understanding we try to keep the amount of threads here under control, correct?



    already an imac thread
  • Reply 16 of 16
    Gosh, a sub 1k imac would rock my world!!!



    :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.