The mac pro can't go any higher as the gap from the mini to pro is to big as it is. That can make the price of the EFiX Dongle + OS X in your own system look good.
The gap between the Mac mini and the Mac Pro may matter to you, but not to Apple. They may care about a price gap betwwen the iMac and the Mac Pro, but this is easily done: get a quad-core option to the high-end iMac ($2499) and start the Nehalem Mac Pro at $2799 with a dual quad 2.53GHz, problem solved.
People can get 2.4 GHz quad-core desktops for $1199 now, with mostly the same specs as the iMac. Or get a 2.4 GHz dual-core for $800. Apple has to do something to get into performance or spec parity at the $1199 price points and above.
I think the bottom end has to be at least 2.4 GHz dual-core with 1066 MHz FSB, Nvidia core logic with 9400 iGP, 2 GB DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 128 MB Nvidia discrete graphics, 500 GB hard disk. Above that, they should use 2.33, 2.4, 2.53 or 2.66 GHz quad-cores, with 2.8 and 3.06 dual-cores as options. Corresponding increases in graphics performance, memory size, storage size too, and screen size. Obviously DisplayPort will be there. I think Firewire will stay.
They could go crazy and do the 30" 2.4:1 aspect ratio screen! That would be pretty cool, and productivity enhancer too.
Heh. Dell will sell you a 2.4GHz quad core (Q6600) desktop for under $500. Add a 20" monitor for $200 and a Radeon HD 4670 for $80, and that's a lot of computer power for not much $$$. It'll hold a couple of hard drives and a PCIe graphics card, too.
This Nvidia stuff raises interesting possibilities for the iMac. A version with the 9400 integrated graphics- and no discrete GPU- could be a great machine for schools and non-gamers. Like the short-lived "education iMac" that had Intel graphics, only much better.
Apple could conceivably switch from mobile to desktop processors, too. The 45nm Core 2 Duos run cooler than the G5s the iMac was using just a couple of years ago. For example, although they have a 65W TDP, the actual power consumption of the E8000 series CPUs is less than 40W.
Apple will not kill or reduce to one their Cinema displays line. This clearly shows you are not a professional that depends on a Mac.
30" display is a God send for creative professionals. If Apple kills it will outrage professionals. Plus it will limit the choices out there big time. Just 24" makes no sense.
Plus Apple do not need to kill or reduce these Cinema displays to "differentiate" anything relate to their HDTV (if they ever do that). One is for work with much higher resolutions on the 30", the other for mostly pleasure with 1920x1080.
Apple will update their displays,20", 24" with LED and if available on the 30" as well. They will probably keep the DVI port (so old mac can still plug) and add the display port and iSight. The look might be just like the new 24", hopefully with a matte option, since glossy is horrible for color accuracy.
Did you see the stuff Apple released yesterday?
I don't think Ireland's predictions are that off base at all. That doesn't it will come to pass but after Tuesday they sure look possible IMO.
Yes, I did but you have to see there are 3 displays on the Cinema family. 20", 23" and 30".
Apple has now a 24" that seems was create specific to be a companion to the MacBook/Pro. (glossy screen/no DVI)
MacPro is one of the computers that offer the highest margins of profit for Apple. Professionals that buy hi-end desktops also are looking for displays as well. Apple has to offer at least 2 to 3 options that include DVI, so it could be use on old desktops as well. That's why I feel is highly unlikely they will drop or killed it.
As for HDTV, like I said earlier, they do not apply for professional work, because 1920x1080 is not high enough, specially if you go larger screens. Also take in consideration that the next MacOS is supposed to have resolution Independence, that would apply well to even larger displays.
So there is no need IMHO to kill or downsize the Cinema Display family in order to Apple to sell HDTV if they ever create such a thing. They are two different things.
Heh. Dell will sell you a 2.4GHz quad core (Q6600) desktop for under $500. Add a 20" monitor for $200 and a Radeon HD 4670 for $80, and that's a lot of computer power for not much $$$. It'll hold a couple of hard drives and a PCIe graphics card, too.
Yeah, I've been pricing at Dell.com, and after bumping the Dell machines to include near-equivalent wireless goodies, speakers and such, it ends up around $900 to $1000 for a comparably spec-ed machine. It does add up. But Apple is always typically $200 higher so it's no surprise, and it's a price which many people (me too) are gladly paying. Design counts.
The current iMac is just particularly egregious right now due to it being at the end of its cycle. When Apple updates it, I expect it to be competitive at the price points they sell it at. Perhaps it doesn't mean quad-cores all around, or they'll move up the CPU clock rates 2.53-3.06 GHz, or some mixture (1333 MHz FSB with DDR3). Apple always has something unique or a spec-ed such that it makes comparisons to PCs very difficult.
Like the current MB/MBP have DDR3-1066 SDRAM and a nice IGP for which other laptops typically don't have. Or the lighted keyboard.
Quote:
This Nvidia stuff raises interesting possibilities for the iMac. A version with the 9400 integrated graphics- and no discrete GPU- could be a great machine for schools and non-gamers. Like the short-lived "education iMac" that had Intel graphics, only much better.
Perhaps. It can get them down to $999, but integrated graphics is rather anemic for desktops at $999.
Quote:
Apple could conceivably switch from mobile to desktop processors, too. The 45nm Core 2 Duos run cooler than the G5s the iMac was using just a couple of years ago. For example, although they have a 65W TDP, the actual power consumption of the E8000 series CPUs is less than 40W.
Probably not. However, like they have before, they can ask Intel to build some tweener CPUs that gets them what they want. Ie, they'll ask Intel to bin up a 50 W TDP Penryns for the iMacs to take care of any testing issues that may occur. Many 65 W TDP Penryns run much cooler, but it's not a guarantee that they all do.
Perhaps it'll be quad-core 2.4, 2.53 and 2.8 with 1066 FSB and DDR3-SDRAM, Nvidia core logic and discrete GPU.
I do really really like the superwide, cinemascope-esque aspect ratio screen. 2.4:1 or even 2.5:1. Make a 30" iMac with a 2.5:1 screen at 3200x1200 ratio (or 2560x1024) would be sweet! It's equivalent to two 5:4 screens, enhances productivity, lets one really enjoy those 2.4:1 movies, and would allow Apple to put in 2 disk drives, more memory, better CPU/GPU, just more stuff.
Perhaps it'll be quad-core 2.4, 2.53 and 2.8 with 1066 FSB and DDR3-SDRAM, Nvidia core logic and discrete GPU.
I do really really like the superwide, cinemascope-esque aspect ratio screen. 2.4:1 or even 2.5:1. Make a 30" iMac with a 2.5:1 screen at 3200x1200 ratio (or 2560x1024) would be sweet! It's equivalent to two 5:4 screens, enhances productivity, lets one really enjoy those 2.4:1 movies, and would allow Apple to put in 2 disk drives, more memory, better CPU/GPU, just more stuff.
I don't think Apple is trying to give more processing power to their Macs right now. If we follow the trend of the new MB/MBPs, I think that Apple will offer the iMacs with LED-BL displays (they already have the 24" panel) with probably newer nvidia GPUs, real "montevina" cpus of about the same speed as today (anyway there are no faster chips yet), for about the same price as today. A BTO option for a quad 2.53GHz for the 24" is still possible.
But I expect a move to mobile Nehalem quads later in H2 2009, after the release of Snow Leopard (at least on the 24" model).
Yeah, where are those huge panoramic displays that Alienware and NEC demonstrated at CES earlier this year or so? they were like 4 vertical panels or whatever...
Found them:
NEC
ALIENWARE
Those are 37", 2880×900, though.
****
If Apple wants to make the iMac even more unique, they could use LV Xeons (L52XX/L54XX series) that have a TDP of 50W (quads) or 40W (duals). Those chips are way more affordable than mobile quads of fast duals and they can be used with a low(er) cost MCH5100 chipset (ECC DDR2-RAM instead of FB-DIMMs as in the current Mac Pro). I really don't think it would cost more that the current mobile/hybrid platform of the iMac.
Models available right now are:
L5430 quad 2.66GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $562
L5420 quad 2.50GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $380 vs $1,038 for the mobile quad 2.53GHz at 45W
L5410 quad 2.33GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $320 vs $851 for the mobile quad 2.26GHz at 45W
L5240 dual 3.20GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 40W $669 vs $851 for the mobile dual 3.06GHz at 45W!!!
I can assure you one you go bigger, you never want to go back. I have one 30" and one 23" and once Apple updates the displays, I will get another 30" and sell my 23". It is so nice to work on a big canvas. Makes you so more productive and the process more enjoyable IMHO.
o what about a mighty mouse with an ipod click around the ball then you could scroll quicker than using the stupid ball .... probably isnt possible but just an idea
or a mouse pad thats lifted straight from a macbook just larger as that would allow you to use it like a wacom tablet but you could also use it to control your itunes and surf the web.... or even build it into a keyboard like logitechs keyboard
and finally an imac where some of the compounets where built into the stand of the imac, like the harddrive and memory, which could then be easily accessed by removing a panel ...... and then you could almost have a imac with an e-sat port on it ... (again dont know if thats possible...
But those have the same black contour as the iMac and the new MacBooks!!!
So obviously they are an Apple design. And I've seen them in an elevator at CES. Can't be fake!
I'm pretty sure the future Apple TVs will have a form factor ? 16:9:
SJ: We thought that 1080p was not enough to display movies, so we made a semi-circular panel to display more stuff on the side, like the microphone booms, the light screens, the cameras, etc... not only you watch the movie, but you can see how it was made at the same time... more than 16:9, more than 16:10, here is the 32:10 Apple TV. Available next year for just $29,999.
To heck with all of y'all!!!! Now listen closely cause I'm only going to say this once....erm maybe more than once....but anyways shuddup and listen.........
Come January its gonna be the MACTOUCH FTW!!!!11111
Macmini: either bumped as per macbooks or replaced by an xmac
iMac: speedbumped possibly a Quadcore highend, if so no xMac.
MacPro: If Nehalem arrives in time, it might be time to also revise/replace the case. Not that I think that the internal layout is bad, it is brilliant. But the externals. If Nehalem is not ready it will just be more MHz more MB.
I don't think Apple is trying to give more processing power to their Macs right now. If we follow the trend of the new MB/MBPs, I think that Apple will offer the iMacs with LED-BL displays (they already have the 24" panel) with probably newer nvidia GPUs, real "montevina" cpus of about the same speed as today (anyway there are no faster chips yet), for about the same price as today. A BTO option for a quad 2.53GHz for the 24" is still possible.
But I expect a move to mobile Nehalem quads later in H2 2009, after the release of Snow Leopard (at least on the 24" model).
I think they'll have to. Design counts. Counts for a lot, but only for so much dollars. If people can get desktops with quad-cores at equivalent MHz as the iMac dual-cores, and for 60% or 70% of the price, it will be difficult for Apple to overcome that performance disparity with design. By January, after Nehalem starts rolling out, Penryn quad-cores are going to be cheap, cheap, cheap! In 3 or 4 months, a $900 quad-core Dell (basically equivalent to a $1199 iMac in other specs, except for having 2x the CPU capacity) probably could be had for $700. I know I would be swayed.
So, I don't think they'll have choice with the iMac. Leaving it at such a large price/performance disparity is dangerous to the bottom line. Also, counting on Nehalem to hit schedule is dangerous for Apple due to Intel's current no-competitor situation. They won't have a problem with delaying.
Quote:
Yeah, where are those huge panoramic displays that Alienware and NEC demonstrated at CES earlier this year or so? they were like 4 vertical panels or whatever...
They were 2 rear projection screens projecting at 1440x900 side by side in the same box. Only way for them to make it curvy. Anyways, it's just simpler to create an LCD screen.
Quote:
If Apple wants to make the iMac even more unique, they could use LV Xeons (L52XX/L54XX series) that have a TDP of 50W (quads) or 40W (duals). Those chips are way more affordable than mobile quads of fast duals and they can be used with a low(er) cost MCH5100 chipset (ECC DDR2-RAM instead of FB-DIMMs as in the current Mac Pro). I really don't think it would cost more that the current mobile/hybrid platform of the iMac.
Models available right now are:
L5430 quad 2.66GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $562
L5420 quad 2.50GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $380 vs $1,038 for the mobile quad 2.53GHz at 45W
L5410 quad 2.33GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $320 vs $851 for the mobile quad 2.26GHz at 45W
L5240 dual 3.20GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 40W $669 vs $851 for the mobile dual 3.06GHz at 45W!!!
Nah. Just ask Intel for the high quality desktop quads that can meet 50W TDP. They likely exist in large quantities in the 65W bin, but they just have to test them for 50W instead of the current 65W. This should be even cheaper than asking for the low voltage Xeons. Though, what you and I are saying aren't really that significant a difference as they are the same parts. Whatever process gets Apple the cheapest CPUs...
I think Ireland is on the money with the TV market. I also think we should see an Apple DVR option given the mess that is the Apple TV. I think if they're going to do TVs they'll want to get it all so a DVR option makes sense.
Comments
The mac pro can't go any higher as the gap from the mini to pro is to big as it is. That can make the price of the EFiX Dongle + OS X in your own system look good.
The gap between the Mac mini and the Mac Pro may matter to you, but not to Apple. They may care about a price gap betwwen the iMac and the Mac Pro, but this is easily done: get a quad-core option to the high-end iMac ($2499) and start the Nehalem Mac Pro at $2799 with a dual quad 2.53GHz, problem solved.
People can get 2.4 GHz quad-core desktops for $1199 now, with mostly the same specs as the iMac. Or get a 2.4 GHz dual-core for $800. Apple has to do something to get into performance or spec parity at the $1199 price points and above.
I think the bottom end has to be at least 2.4 GHz dual-core with 1066 MHz FSB, Nvidia core logic with 9400 iGP, 2 GB DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 128 MB Nvidia discrete graphics, 500 GB hard disk. Above that, they should use 2.33, 2.4, 2.53 or 2.66 GHz quad-cores, with 2.8 and 3.06 dual-cores as options. Corresponding increases in graphics performance, memory size, storage size too, and screen size. Obviously DisplayPort will be there. I think Firewire will stay.
They could go crazy and do the 30" 2.4:1 aspect ratio screen! That would be pretty cool, and productivity enhancer too.
Heh. Dell will sell you a 2.4GHz quad core (Q6600) desktop for under $500. Add a 20" monitor for $200 and a Radeon HD 4670 for $80, and that's a lot of computer power for not much $$$. It'll hold a couple of hard drives and a PCIe graphics card, too.
This Nvidia stuff raises interesting possibilities for the iMac. A version with the 9400 integrated graphics- and no discrete GPU- could be a great machine for schools and non-gamers. Like the short-lived "education iMac" that had Intel graphics, only much better.
Apple could conceivably switch from mobile to desktop processors, too. The 45nm Core 2 Duos run cooler than the G5s the iMac was using just a couple of years ago. For example, although they have a 65W TDP, the actual power consumption of the E8000 series CPUs is less than 40W.
Lower entry point for MacBook
32 or 64 Touch
iMac revamp
Yet I have a sneaking suspicion that none of that is going to happen.
No way, you are lost here buddy.
Apple will not kill or reduce to one their Cinema displays line. This clearly shows you are not a professional that depends on a Mac.
30" display is a God send for creative professionals. If Apple kills it will outrage professionals. Plus it will limit the choices out there big time. Just 24" makes no sense.
Plus Apple do not need to kill or reduce these Cinema displays to "differentiate" anything relate to their HDTV (if they ever do that). One is for work with much higher resolutions on the 30", the other for mostly pleasure with 1920x1080.
Apple will update their displays,20", 24" with LED and if available on the 30" as well. They will probably keep the DVI port (so old mac can still plug) and add the display port and iSight. The look might be just like the new 24", hopefully with a matte option, since glossy is horrible for color accuracy.
Did you see the stuff Apple released yesterday?
I don't think Ireland's predictions are that off base at all. That doesn't it will come to pass but after Tuesday they sure look possible IMO.
Did you see the stuff Apple released yesterday?
Yes, I did but you have to see there are 3 displays on the Cinema family. 20", 23" and 30".
Apple has now a 24" that seems was create specific to be a companion to the MacBook/Pro. (glossy screen/no DVI)
MacPro is one of the computers that offer the highest margins of profit for Apple. Professionals that buy hi-end desktops also are looking for displays as well. Apple has to offer at least 2 to 3 options that include DVI, so it could be use on old desktops as well. That's why I feel is highly unlikely they will drop or killed it.
As for HDTV, like I said earlier, they do not apply for professional work, because 1920x1080 is not high enough, specially if you go larger screens. Also take in consideration that the next MacOS is supposed to have resolution Independence, that would apply well to even larger displays.
So there is no need IMHO to kill or downsize the Cinema Display family in order to Apple to sell HDTV if they ever create such a thing. They are two different things.
Heh. Dell will sell you a 2.4GHz quad core (Q6600) desktop for under $500. Add a 20" monitor for $200 and a Radeon HD 4670 for $80, and that's a lot of computer power for not much $$$. It'll hold a couple of hard drives and a PCIe graphics card, too.
Yeah, I've been pricing at Dell.com, and after bumping the Dell machines to include near-equivalent wireless goodies, speakers and such, it ends up around $900 to $1000 for a comparably spec-ed machine. It does add up. But Apple is always typically $200 higher so it's no surprise, and it's a price which many people (me too) are gladly paying. Design counts.
The current iMac is just particularly egregious right now due to it being at the end of its cycle. When Apple updates it, I expect it to be competitive at the price points they sell it at. Perhaps it doesn't mean quad-cores all around, or they'll move up the CPU clock rates 2.53-3.06 GHz, or some mixture (1333 MHz FSB with DDR3). Apple always has something unique or a spec-ed such that it makes comparisons to PCs very difficult.
Like the current MB/MBP have DDR3-1066 SDRAM and a nice IGP for which other laptops typically don't have. Or the lighted keyboard.
This Nvidia stuff raises interesting possibilities for the iMac. A version with the 9400 integrated graphics- and no discrete GPU- could be a great machine for schools and non-gamers. Like the short-lived "education iMac" that had Intel graphics, only much better.
Perhaps. It can get them down to $999, but integrated graphics is rather anemic for desktops at $999.
Apple could conceivably switch from mobile to desktop processors, too. The 45nm Core 2 Duos run cooler than the G5s the iMac was using just a couple of years ago. For example, although they have a 65W TDP, the actual power consumption of the E8000 series CPUs is less than 40W.
Probably not. However, like they have before, they can ask Intel to build some tweener CPUs that gets them what they want. Ie, they'll ask Intel to bin up a 50 W TDP Penryns for the iMacs to take care of any testing issues that may occur. Many 65 W TDP Penryns run much cooler, but it's not a guarantee that they all do.
Perhaps it'll be quad-core 2.4, 2.53 and 2.8 with 1066 FSB and DDR3-SDRAM, Nvidia core logic and discrete GPU.
I do really really like the superwide, cinemascope-esque aspect ratio screen. 2.4:1 or even 2.5:1. Make a 30" iMac with a 2.5:1 screen at 3200x1200 ratio (or 2560x1024) would be sweet! It's equivalent to two 5:4 screens, enhances productivity, lets one really enjoy those 2.4:1 movies, and would allow Apple to put in 2 disk drives, more memory, better CPU/GPU, just more stuff.
...
Perhaps it'll be quad-core 2.4, 2.53 and 2.8 with 1066 FSB and DDR3-SDRAM, Nvidia core logic and discrete GPU.
I do really really like the superwide, cinemascope-esque aspect ratio screen. 2.4:1 or even 2.5:1. Make a 30" iMac with a 2.5:1 screen at 3200x1200 ratio (or 2560x1024) would be sweet! It's equivalent to two 5:4 screens, enhances productivity, lets one really enjoy those 2.4:1 movies, and would allow Apple to put in 2 disk drives, more memory, better CPU/GPU, just more stuff.
I don't think Apple is trying to give more processing power to their Macs right now. If we follow the trend of the new MB/MBPs, I think that Apple will offer the iMacs with LED-BL displays (they already have the 24" panel) with probably newer nvidia GPUs, real "montevina" cpus of about the same speed as today (anyway there are no faster chips yet), for about the same price as today. A BTO option for a quad 2.53GHz for the 24" is still possible.
But I expect a move to mobile Nehalem quads later in H2 2009, after the release of Snow Leopard (at least on the 24" model).
Yeah, where are those huge panoramic displays that Alienware and NEC demonstrated at CES earlier this year or so? they were like 4 vertical panels or whatever...
Found them:
NEC
Those are 37", 2880×900, though.
****
If Apple wants to make the iMac even more unique, they could use LV Xeons (L52XX/L54XX series) that have a TDP of 50W (quads) or 40W (duals). Those chips are way more affordable than mobile quads of fast duals and they can be used with a low(er) cost MCH5100 chipset (ECC DDR2-RAM instead of FB-DIMMs as in the current Mac Pro). I really don't think it would cost more that the current mobile/hybrid platform of the iMac.
Models available right now are:
L5430 quad 2.66GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $562
L5420 quad 2.50GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $380 vs $1,038 for the mobile quad 2.53GHz at 45W
L5410 quad 2.33GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $320 vs $851 for the mobile quad 2.26GHz at 45W
L5240 dual 3.20GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 40W $669 vs $851 for the mobile dual 3.06GHz at 45W!!!
I can assure you one you go bigger, you never want to go back. I have one 30" and one 23" and once Apple updates the displays, I will get another 30" and sell my 23". It is so nice to work on a big canvas. Makes you so more productive and the process more enjoyable IMHO.
Just a guess, but I expect Macworld 2009 to almost exclusively iPhone. New modesl? New capabilities? New applications?
I could buy that. 32GB storage. Copy & Paste done right. New Apple apps etc. They are building up to this Mac touch like a mofo.
This is Apple we're talking about.
I could buy that. 32GB storage. Copy & Paste done right. New Apple apps etc. They are building up to this Mac touch like a mofo.
I forgot in my post to mention that Apple's computers will have already been upgraded before MacWorld 2009 we'll see.
or a mouse pad thats lifted straight from a macbook just larger as that would allow you to use it like a wacom tablet but you could also use it to control your itunes and surf the web.... or even build it into a keyboard like logitechs keyboard
and finally an imac where some of the compounets where built into the stand of the imac, like the harddrive and memory, which could then be easily accessed by removing a panel ...... and then you could almost have a imac with an e-sat port on it ... (again dont know if thats possible...
This is Apple we're talking about.
What?
But those have the same black contour as the iMac and the new MacBooks!!!
So obviously they are an Apple design. And I've seen them in an elevator at CES. Can't be fake!
I'm pretty sure the future Apple TVs will have a form factor ? 16:9:
SJ: We thought that 1080p was not enough to display movies, so we made a semi-circular panel to display more stuff on the side, like the microphone booms, the light screens, the cameras, etc... not only you watch the movie, but you can see how it was made at the same time... more than 16:9, more than 16:10, here is the 32:10 Apple TV. Available next year for just $29,999.
Come January its gonna be the MACTOUCH FTW!!!!11111
Yeah!!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!
A key component for my forthcoming Command Center...
iMac: speedbumped possibly a Quadcore highend, if so no xMac.
MacPro: If Nehalem arrives in time, it might be time to also revise/replace the case. Not that I think that the internal layout is bad, it is brilliant. But the externals. If Nehalem is not ready it will just be more MHz more MB.
A MacTV perhaps?
I don't think Apple is trying to give more processing power to their Macs right now. If we follow the trend of the new MB/MBPs, I think that Apple will offer the iMacs with LED-BL displays (they already have the 24" panel) with probably newer nvidia GPUs, real "montevina" cpus of about the same speed as today (anyway there are no faster chips yet), for about the same price as today. A BTO option for a quad 2.53GHz for the 24" is still possible.
But I expect a move to mobile Nehalem quads later in H2 2009, after the release of Snow Leopard (at least on the 24" model).
I think they'll have to. Design counts. Counts for a lot, but only for so much dollars. If people can get desktops with quad-cores at equivalent MHz as the iMac dual-cores, and for 60% or 70% of the price, it will be difficult for Apple to overcome that performance disparity with design. By January, after Nehalem starts rolling out, Penryn quad-cores are going to be cheap, cheap, cheap! In 3 or 4 months, a $900 quad-core Dell (basically equivalent to a $1199 iMac in other specs, except for having 2x the CPU capacity) probably could be had for $700. I know I would be swayed.
So, I don't think they'll have choice with the iMac. Leaving it at such a large price/performance disparity is dangerous to the bottom line. Also, counting on Nehalem to hit schedule is dangerous for Apple due to Intel's current no-competitor situation. They won't have a problem with delaying.
Yeah, where are those huge panoramic displays that Alienware and NEC demonstrated at CES earlier this year or so? they were like 4 vertical panels or whatever...
They were 2 rear projection screens projecting at 1440x900 side by side in the same box. Only way for them to make it curvy. Anyways, it's just simpler to create an LCD screen.
If Apple wants to make the iMac even more unique, they could use LV Xeons (L52XX/L54XX series) that have a TDP of 50W (quads) or 40W (duals). Those chips are way more affordable than mobile quads of fast duals and they can be used with a low(er) cost MCH5100 chipset (ECC DDR2-RAM instead of FB-DIMMs as in the current Mac Pro). I really don't think it would cost more that the current mobile/hybrid platform of the iMac.
Models available right now are:
L5430 quad 2.66GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $562
L5420 quad 2.50GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $380 vs $1,038 for the mobile quad 2.53GHz at 45W
L5410 quad 2.33GHz, 12MB cache, 1333FSB, 50W $320 vs $851 for the mobile quad 2.26GHz at 45W
L5240 dual 3.20GHz, 6MB cache, 1333FSB, 40W $669 vs $851 for the mobile dual 3.06GHz at 45W!!!
Nah. Just ask Intel for the high quality desktop quads that can meet 50W TDP. They likely exist in large quantities in the 65W bin, but they just have to test them for 50W instead of the current 65W. This should be even cheaper than asking for the low voltage Xeons. Though, what you and I are saying aren't really that significant a difference as they are the same parts. Whatever process gets Apple the cheapest CPUs...