Taking exception to the processor and other issues raised here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Well, the marketing angle is certainly reasonable, but we don't really know that the next iMac refresh is going to be purely cosmetic.
I think what most people here are saying is that the next iMac had damn well be more than a cosmetic upgrade. As much as Apple would like to you can't market around the facts to the majority of the people.
Quote:
It will almost certainly feature some kind of CPU boost, plus the usual upticks in ram and hard drive space, plus possible some hardware revisions we don't know about.
Which would not be good enough. In my case it would force me to not reccomend the iMac to anyone.
Quote:
Again, the value proposition for a potential buyer is a whole bunch of interrelated elements, not just "does it have the latest CPU", which I submit is fairly low on the list.
Then simply put you are wrong. The CPU is the biggest shortcoming in the iMac and I would put forth is the most important element on the list that informed shoppers use. An i7 derived or like processor is really what Snow Leopard was built for.
Except for the possibility on the lowest end machines I can't see dual core in Apples machines as being even remotely viable for leveraging SL. SL and GCD are meant to exploit highly parallel machines supporting many threads. Without quad cores and more the ability to leverage those new features is extremely limited. Frankly the development effort that went into SL indicates that Apple sees these parallel machines as it's near term future. So if you want to buy into this new world order you need to expect a minimal of 4 hardware threads.
Dave
Dave, at times, seems to be one of the few sane, balanced and reasonable non-'kool-aid' people on here at times.
He's right. It's amazing that people would side with Apple to say that the cpu isn't important...because (pick insane argument to fill in blank.)
And I do agree with Dave that the direction of Snow Leopard should be ample reason enough to warrant a quad core iMac. Or the fact that the rest of the 'sane' PC World have had consumer quad cores for how long now? And at cheap prices? And i7 class hardware that blows the mini, iMac and Mac Pro out the water for value for money.
Nice OS, sexy cases...poor value, out of date specs and bad value for the consumer. ie out of date hardware for the consumer desktop space.
Let alone the fact that i7 is a chip that clock for clock beats the snot out of the Core out of date Duo, it's equipped for the future, better performing and costs way less than the craptop parts Apple is using. Stubborn. Arrogance. Blind dogma. A lack of choice. Take yer pick.
I thought it would be inconceivable with the move to Intel that we would see hardware costing twice as much for out of date desktop parts. It's just like the PPC days again. But worse given the context of Inteldom.
Here's hoping the next iMac revision doesn't suck like that last two revisions which basically, in the words of Woody Allen, '98% of dancing is just turning up.'
You could see the line split into iMac and iMac Pro.
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
How about the iMac Plus?
The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable case (similar to the MacPros and the original G5 iMac) and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.
The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable base and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.
Hmm, speaking as a tech-geek, I think it's a great idea, but I don't see Apple doing that.
It's obvious that the next update is major, so nobody expects the unveiling without a media event.
So tomorrow's an impossibility. Given that Apple generally gives 5-7 days notice, next week Tuesday looks pretty iffy as well. Rumors of an event would already be flying.
There are only three other Tuesdays left. I say October 20th. Where the poll?
No idea what are you talking about but both the Us and Australian Apple site + the store are working OK and have been for the last couple hours so no panic needed...
If you're using a high end video program like Motion or other heavily GPU'd app, then you should also be able to afford a Mac Pro.
I can't see your logic mel...we buy iMacs to do low-end SD video and audio editing in FCS and Protools LE (moving to Logic someday maybe). They are great for that, as well as for 3D composition, however, we need to farm the rendering out to mac pros to keep things from getting bogged down. If iMacs had just a bit more oomph in all areas, we could use those for most work - and then just use mac pros for specialized applications only, like Protools HD and 10-bit HD video conversions/re compressions that require hardware. We have saved thousands of $$$ by using iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
This thread provides some interesting perspective, as well as some humor. It's obvious that Apple will never get the iMac "right" by the tech crowd. Of course, a 6 year old could understand why when you tell them its not made for the tech crowd, but unlike a 6 year old, techie adults ignore you when you tell them the truth.
I'm as techy and as semi-professional as it gets, and yes I find the iMac to be a bit sluggish. And yet, its still faster than all of the Apple Laptops including the top of the line Pro, so its really all relative, with a bit of circular logic thrown in.
The iMac is and will continue to be the piece of sex that can be dropped on anyones desk and its all the computer they'll ever need.
If you're doing lots of encodes and re-encodes, and large file edits and saves, well your life sucks because you're going to need to spend more than the avg joe on RAM and disk space, and likely need a Mac Pro model in the end anyway.
Comments
Because glare iMacs are the only thing offered- Are you that dense?
Which means that glare is obviously NOT a deal breaker .. are you that dense?
Well I might have bought one if there had been matte offered- so yes, you can consider that as one more sold.
Damn, we lost teckdud ... guess it's time to start shorting Apple stock for sure, now!
Taking exception to the processor and other issues raised here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox
Well, the marketing angle is certainly reasonable, but we don't really know that the next iMac refresh is going to be purely cosmetic.
I think what most people here are saying is that the next iMac had damn well be more than a cosmetic upgrade. As much as Apple would like to you can't market around the facts to the majority of the people.
Quote:
It will almost certainly feature some kind of CPU boost, plus the usual upticks in ram and hard drive space, plus possible some hardware revisions we don't know about.
Which would not be good enough. In my case it would force me to not reccomend the iMac to anyone.
Quote:
Again, the value proposition for a potential buyer is a whole bunch of interrelated elements, not just "does it have the latest CPU", which I submit is fairly low on the list.
Then simply put you are wrong. The CPU is the biggest shortcoming in the iMac and I would put forth is the most important element on the list that informed shoppers use. An i7 derived or like processor is really what Snow Leopard was built for.
Except for the possibility on the lowest end machines I can't see dual core in Apples machines as being even remotely viable for leveraging SL. SL and GCD are meant to exploit highly parallel machines supporting many threads. Without quad cores and more the ability to leverage those new features is extremely limited. Frankly the development effort that went into SL indicates that Apple sees these parallel machines as it's near term future. So if you want to buy into this new world order you need to expect a minimal of 4 hardware threads.
Dave
Dave, at times, seems to be one of the few sane, balanced and reasonable non-'kool-aid' people on here at times.
He's right. It's amazing that people would side with Apple to say that the cpu isn't important...because (pick insane argument to fill in blank.)
And I do agree with Dave that the direction of Snow Leopard should be ample reason enough to warrant a quad core iMac. Or the fact that the rest of the 'sane' PC World have had consumer quad cores for how long now? And at cheap prices? And i7 class hardware that blows the mini, iMac and Mac Pro out the water for value for money.
Nice OS, sexy cases...poor value, out of date specs and bad value for the consumer. ie out of date hardware for the consumer desktop space.
Let alone the fact that i7 is a chip that clock for clock beats the snot out of the Core out of date Duo, it's equipped for the future, better performing and costs way less than the craptop parts Apple is using. Stubborn. Arrogance. Blind dogma. A lack of choice. Take yer pick.
I thought it would be inconceivable with the move to Intel that we would see hardware costing twice as much for out of date desktop parts. It's just like the PPC days again. But worse given the context of Inteldom.
Here's hoping the next iMac revision doesn't suck like that last two revisions which basically, in the words of Woody Allen, '98% of dancing is just turning up.'
Lemon Bon Bon.
If people are looking for LED-backlighting in the next iteration I don't know how that's going to mesh with lower pricing.
The iMac not only needs quad cores to remain competitive, pricing needs to be lower, too.
If people are looking for LED-backlighting in the next iteration I don't know how that's going to mesh with lower pricing.
You could see the line split into iMac and iMac Pro.
You could see the line split into iMac and iMac Pro.
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
How about the iMac Plus?
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
How about the iMac Plus?
How about "iMac S"
(S=Speed)
Really? I think Apple would be wary of attaching the "Pro" moniker on the iMac line, a decidedly home consumer machine. First, because I don't think it will increase professional purchases, pros that were considering the iMac for certain jobs would go for it regardless of it's name. And second, It may have the opposite effect with consumers purchasing for their home; the Pro name may make them think it's too much computer for them.
How about the iMac Plus?
The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable case (similar to the MacPros and the original G5 iMac) and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.
... A user upgradable base...
Huh? What would you upgrade the base to? Or why?
EDIT: Oh, you mean the base RAM, not the stand, duh!
The iMac series could be the current case with CCFL displays in 20" and 24" varieties with chipset graphics and dual core CPUs. The iMac Pro could be a new base with the same 24" LED display as the cinema display, higher end graphics, and quad core CPUS. A user upgradable base and an extra pair of SO-DIMM slots wouldn't hurt either. The iMac's pair is utterly unacceptable for anyone beyond light duty home users.
Hmm, speaking as a tech-geek, I think it's a great idea, but I don't see Apple doing that.
Huh? What would you upgrade the base to? Or why?
EDIT: Oh, you mean the base RAM, not the stand, duh!
I hit the b instead of the c.
I hit the b instead of the c.
ah, case, exactly.
So tomorrow's an impossibility. Given that Apple generally gives 5-7 days notice, next week Tuesday looks pretty iffy as well. Rumors of an event would already be flying.
There are only three other Tuesdays left. I say October 20th. Where the poll?
Apple store is down.
Must have been routine maintenance............It is back up now and I don;t see anything "new"....
If you're using a high end video program like Motion or other heavily GPU'd app, then you should also be able to afford a Mac Pro.
I can't see your logic mel...we buy iMacs to do low-end SD video and audio editing in FCS and Protools LE (moving to Logic someday maybe). They are great for that, as well as for 3D composition, however, we need to farm the rendering out to mac pros to keep things from getting bogged down. If iMacs had just a bit more oomph in all areas, we could use those for most work - and then just use mac pros for specialized applications only, like Protools HD and 10-bit HD video conversions/re compressions that require hardware. We have saved thousands of $$$ by using iMacs instead of Mac Pros.
I'm as techy and as semi-professional as it gets, and yes I find the iMac to be a bit sluggish. And yet, its still faster than all of the Apple Laptops including the top of the line Pro, so its really all relative, with a bit of circular logic thrown in.
The iMac is and will continue to be the piece of sex that can be dropped on anyones desk and its all the computer they'll ever need.
If you're doing lots of encodes and re-encodes, and large file edits and saves, well your life sucks because you're going to need to spend more than the avg joe on RAM and disk space, and likely need a Mac Pro model in the end anyway.