Am I the only one to think that after the price drop in the Apple displays ($999 for the 23"), it is more than ever probable to see a 23" Conroe-equiped iMac next month?
Am I the only one to think that after the price drop in the Apple displays ($999 for the 23"), it is more than ever probable to see a 23" Conroe-equiped iMac next month?
I think it's possible. It would be a pretty sweet package. Are the 23" ACDs 1080p?
Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.
Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.
That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.
That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.
Not such a big deal. The dual core Mini can as well.
Now that the 17" iMac has become the new eMac, I think it is more then likely that the 17" iMac will drop off as a consumer option and remain solely the EDU iMac. While that leaves the 20" as the base model, the argument for a 23" HD model becomes stronger. It also gives a little more creedence to the argument that the iMac will see a bit of a redesign. Probably nothing drastic, but enough (more then just size) to distinguish an iMac from an EDU iMac. Thoughts?
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.
To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.
Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."
From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.
What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?
Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."
From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.
What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?
Hell, I don't know, they also removed the infraredport on the front.
The reason to make a selfserviceable computer is that it spares costs at the serviceprovider and warranty site of the company. I mean Applecare etc.
You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.
No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.
There is no reason why that has to be true. The first iMacs used chips with more power usage, and more heat production. When they redesigned the machines, they used another G5. Now with the Yonah, the chip uses half the power, and puts out much less heat as well.
So that argument doesn't work. If they stick with a mobile chip, and go with Merom, power requirements will remain about the same. even if they go with Conroe, it won't be worse than before.
They simply decided they didn't want it. No matter what they did, there was no reason why they had to change the design where the back came off easily, rather than going through all of that baloney to remove the front panel. The same is true for the Vesa Adaptor.
Which Intel chip do you guys think Apple will put in there updated iMac?
I think the Conroe is probably what they would use. It would be nice to have the iMac and then a iMac Pro line with a 23 and 30 inch screens. Put Firewire 800 ports in it, with big hard drives, and maybe Blu Ray drives. I wonder when the Blu Ray drives will be an option for the Mac Pros.
I would love to see a Bluetooth keyboard that lights up and has color options. that would be nice.
How about a rechargable Wireless Mighty Mouse?
How about a Mac mini Pro with a Woodcrest chip in it?
I am sure there will be plenty more this year and in the next year. I think Intel and Apple are on a mission!
Redmond, start your Chapter 13 proceedings.......... :-)
Comments
Apple won't introduce an alloy casing for the imac in my opinion, because it is not a pro product. perhaps an integrated isight.
Has someone suggested that? I don't remember it coming up. I think we can agree with that.
Am I the only one to think that after the price drop in the Apple displays ($999 for the 23"), it is more than ever probable to see a 23" Conroe-equiped iMac next month?
I think it's possible. It would be a pretty sweet package. Are the 23" ACDs 1080p?
Are the 23" ACDs 1080p?
Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.
Yes. The iMac even now is perfectly capable to decode full HD. If Apple enables hardware decoding (iMac's GPU can do that) and introduces a 23" one, this would be the perfect combination. And more than enough for virtually anything one would do for personal use. I dare say even beyond that.
That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.
That would be a pretty sweet set up. All it would need would be a USB (or dare I suggest a built in) TV-Tuner and it'd be the perfect dorm/apartment computer.
Not such a big deal. The dual core Mini can as well.
Is there any reason why Apple can't allow self-service hardware upgrades for the iMac like they did for revision A of the G5 iMac?
That's an interesting question. Is there any reason? Sure there is, they don't want to.
They could have kept a design similiar to the first one that allowed easy opening, and replacement. They decided that they didn't want it any more.
Why?
Who knows!
That's an interesting question. Is there any reason? Sure there is, they don't want to.
They could have kept a design similiar to the first one that allowed easy opening, and replacement. They decided that they didn't want it any more.
Why?
Who knows!
Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.
To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.
Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.
To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.
You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
Money.
It is more expensive to make a good and easy selfserviceable system.
It has to be foolproof and that way cheaper than servicing by a service provider.
Obvious it wasn't.
To make it conveniently arranged so everything is easy accessible, it also can be harder to cool the various parts, that need proper cooling.
That problem is solved iirc.
Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."
From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.
What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?
You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
Point, counterpoint!
You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
Does the minitower fit in the space of a LCD monitor? No? Gee...guess it fails the form factor requirement. At least the cooling is efficient.
Vinea
Nah, I doubt it. A friend of mine once said in a magazine interview: "Good engineering costs no more than bad engineering."
From my own designs, I can tell you that if Apple wanted to, they could have made the machine as expandable as they wanted, without raising the cost, perhaps a very little, if they wanted to get complex about it. These are policy decisions. Like the original iMac that had a "mezzanine connector". Other companies were making interesting, and useful plug-ins for use with it.
What did Apple do? They removed it. Why do you think?
Hell, I don't know, they also removed the infraredport on the front.
The reason to make a selfserviceable computer is that it spares costs at the serviceprovider and warranty site of the company. I mean Applecare etc.
I guess it didn't work out the way they hoped.
You mean, like a standard minitower PC is expensive to keep cool?
No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.
No, I mean, a selfserviceable iMac design is harder to cool than an iMac design where you throw in stuff at the place you can keep them cool instead at a place they are easily and foolproof accessible for stupid consumers like me.
There is no reason why that has to be true. The first iMacs used chips with more power usage, and more heat production. When they redesigned the machines, they used another G5. Now with the Yonah, the chip uses half the power, and puts out much less heat as well.
So that argument doesn't work. If they stick with a mobile chip, and go with Merom, power requirements will remain about the same. even if they go with Conroe, it won't be worse than before.
They simply decided they didn't want it. No matter what they did, there was no reason why they had to change the design where the back came off easily, rather than going through all of that baloney to remove the front panel. The same is true for the Vesa Adaptor.
Which Intel chip do you guys think Apple will put in there updated iMac?
I think the Conroe is probably what they would use. It would be nice to have the iMac and then a iMac Pro line with a 23 and 30 inch screens. Put Firewire 800 ports in it, with big hard drives, and maybe Blu Ray drives. I wonder when the Blu Ray drives will be an option for the Mac Pros.
I would love to see a Bluetooth keyboard that lights up and has color options. that would be nice.
How about a rechargable Wireless Mighty Mouse?
How about a Mac mini Pro with a Woodcrest chip in it?
I am sure there will be plenty more this year and in the next year. I think Intel and Apple are on a mission!
Redmond, start your Chapter 13 proceedings.......... :-)