Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line

11921232425

Comments

  • Reply 401 of 486
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Amorph View Post


    That depends on what they want to emphasize. 16:9 is cheap because HD video is 16:9. If you're viewing HD video, it's perfect. If you're authoring video, it's not. You'd like some space for the editing interface. Apple, of course, has skin in that game.



    Apple has been using unorthodox screen sizes since the Titanium Powerbook's odd 3:2 ratio. If they cost more? Apple's a premium brand. If Apple does adopt 16:9 it will be on the consumer machines only. The professional machines can soak the extra cost, especially in the quantities that Apple orders displays.



    With the iMac, I think Apple will avoid that being a Pro machine as far as possible. Meaning, 16:9 for viewing, not authoring HD video. iMac will be as consumer a desktop as possible, in Apple's eyes. As for the MacBook Pros, I think those are safely 16:10 for another year or so, while the MacBook white may be 16:9 in this coming revision. Wait, scratch that, I think besides the iMac no other displays will be 16:9 for another year or so.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    The one problem is that while they're prevalent in in the TN ranks, you don't see a lot of IPS displays with a 16:9 panel yet. The only one can think is the brand new 23" from NEC. It does come with a pretty considerable price decrease versus 16:9 IPS screen though. Then again, its lower resolution than the new 23" TN screens.



    I think Apple will not use IPS displays in their iMac 16:9 LED backlit panels. IMO. Apple could be offsetting the cost of LED backlighting by using purely TN panels.



    All this speculation is making my head hurt. I'm getting future hardware overload after this past few weeks.
  • Reply 402 of 486
    Quote:

    Do you ever get tired of taking Apple's position no matter what it is? They could offer only the $999 macbook for $5000, cut out all third party software, and require you to drive to Cupertino for service and they'd still be in the right with you.



    LOL. Heh.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 403 of 486
    Ben, I caught your post. I have to say I agree with your comments.



    I think everyone seems to forget that the 'candy' iMacs had 3 models under a grand at one point! And only a couple over!



    There was plenty of overlap for a 'Cube' prosumer machine. But Apple and yes, Steve Jobs, stuffed it up by being, YES, the outrageous margin huggers that they are. History.



    However, it points to the design flaw of the iMac trying to be all things to all people.



    It has no right being in a prosumer price bracket unless it has the latest quad core technology.



    It costs £1800 for quad core Apple Macs. That is outrageous.



    PCs have consumer priced quad cores starting at £260 for a duo build and about £60 pound to upgrade to quad core.



    I look at the Mini, iMac and Pro and shake me head. Reality bending insane. Still, no arguing Apple are selling iMacs.



    I'd argue they'd sell more, more often with up to date specs.



    I guess we won't know until Apple ships the iMac.



    But maybe they need add the mid-tower design to complement the desktop range?



    Maybe they need to split the iMac into a 'cheapo' Macbook version and a proper prosumer 'specced' out version with a decent quad core and gpu. If that means adding thickness. I'm for it.



    So be it. For me, the next iMac can't be another side-grade. Something Has to give this time.



    Until consumers complain more, or Apple fan bois stands up and let Apple have it...or stop buying outdated junk...then will things change?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 404 of 486
    [QUOTE=Lemon Bon Bon.;1494394]Ben, I caught your post. I have to say I agree with your comments.



    "Maybe they need to split the iMac into a 'cheapo' Macbook version and a proper prosumer 'specced' out version with a decent quad core and gpu. If that means adding thickness. I'm for it.



    So be it. For me, the next iMac can't be another side-grade. Something Has to give this time."



    I totally agree! Who cares for a few more mm or kg, if it is about a descent updated machine to handle home and semi-pro stuff in 2010? Even if it would cost 10% more from todays' prices, i would go for it!



    [QUOTE=Lemon Bon Bon.;
  • Reply 405 of 486
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    With the iMac, I think Apple will avoid that being a Pro machine as far as possible. Meaning, 16:9 for viewing, not authoring HD video. iMac will be as consumer a desktop as possible, in Apple's eyes. As for the MacBook Pros, I think those are safely 16:10 for another year or so, while the MacBook white may be 16:9 in this coming revision. Wait, scratch that, I think besides the iMac no other displays will be 16:9 for another year or so.



    The 24" iMac is definitely being pitched to professionals. If my hunch is right and the iMac line bifurcates the way the 'book lines have, I could see an even broader distinction between the "consumer" iMac and the "pro" iMac.



    But then there's iMovie. Unless they switch it to a HUD-style interface, that pretty much necessitates 16:10. If Apple orders enough of them to justify their own production line (which is what they usually do) then price will not be much of an issue for them. They don't buy what the display makers offer: They tell the display makers what to make for them. They order in quantities that make that not only possible, but the obvious choice.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    I think Apple will not use IPS displays in their iMac 16:9 LED backlit panels. IMO. Apple could be offsetting the cost of LED backlighting by using purely TN panels.



    All this speculation is making my head hurt. I'm getting future hardware overload after this past few weeks.



    Or, they just won't bother with LED lighting for the 20" display until they can figure out how to make it economical.
  • Reply 406 of 486
    Quote:

    The 24" iMac is definitely being pitched to professionals. If my hunch is right and the iMac line bifurcates the way the 'book lines have, I could see an even broader distinction between the "consumer" iMac and the "pro" iMac.



    Well, my cousin was telling me how the local collage has a suite of 40 iMacs running Final Cut Pro. That kinda speaks for itself. If you have quad core i7 class power and any recent mainstream gpu...the iMac becomes the consumer desktop of choice...leaving the notion of paying £1800 and upwards...for people...who ah...'really think they need it.'



    I hope it happens. It would appease the calls for an 'X-Mid-Tower' to a degree. I'm amazed we're still debating a consumer quad core and whether Apple will do it. Only serious Apple fans could delude themselves into thinking £1500 is ok for a computer to still be dual core on it's 3rd revision in light of the fact that quad-cores of many descriptions and prices have been common place in PC land for a while now!



    It's like a bad dream I'll wake up from... I'd happily take a quad core i7 with decent gpu cube mid-tower with a single 'light port' cable jammed into a 24 inch LED Apple monitor. Now, that's what I'm talking about...der-rool. That would be my 'good dream' scenario.



    Bifurcates.



    We'll see, I guess...



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 407 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Could these specs be the real thing?



    24-inch

    1.6GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    640GB HD

    8x double-layer SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT120 with 256 MB memory

    $1,099



    24-inch

    1.73GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    8x double-layer SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT120 with 256 MB memory

    $1,399



    24-inch

    1.73GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    6x double-layer Blu-Ray Disc SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT230 with 512 MB RAM memory

    $1,599



    30-inch

    2GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    6x double-layer Blu-Ray Disc SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    Optional LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700 with 512 MB memory

    $2,599
  • Reply 408 of 486
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,837member
    I've always questioned the wisdom of a 30" iMac. Where are the specs from? A rumour or just speculation?
  • Reply 409 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    I saw it an another forum and although it's probably a Photoshop job, it seemed like it could be possible.
  • Reply 410 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post


    Could these specs be the real thing?

    24-inch

    1.73GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    6x double-layer Blu-Ray Disc SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT230 with 512 MB RAM memory

    $1,599



    I'm in for this baby!!! Come to papa my sweet Core i7 LED backlit 24" iMac
  • Reply 411 of 486
    superdsuperd Posts: 32member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by matejay View Post


    I'm in for this baby!!! Come to papa my sweet Core i7 LED backlit 24" iMac



    I'm not too sure that I'd bite on the ones that Dhagan posted. The top end 24" only has a gt230? That seems a little too weak to me, the new HP laptops are sporting Radeon 4730's, which wouldn't be bad, still not great, but not bad at all...



    Dave (I just sold my iMac, I really need a replacement ASAP.)
  • Reply 412 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by superd View Post


    I'm not too sure that I'd bite on the ones that Dhagan posted. The top end 24" only has a gt230? That seems a little too weak to me, the new HP laptops are sporting Radeon 4730's, which wouldn't be bad, still not great, but not bad at all...



    I agree, the GT230 is a pathetic GPU. On the desktop, it's a re-branded 9600GT. I think the mobile version that would probably be used in an iMac is a 48-shader chip, which is even worse.
  • Reply 413 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Guys, I'm just relaying what I've read...it wouldn't be un-Apple to use a shitty graphics card now would it?
  • Reply 414 of 486
    superdsuperd Posts: 32member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post


    Guys, I'm just relaying what I've read...it wouldn't be un-Apple to use a shitty graphics card now would it?



    No, it wouldn't be un-apple like at all, but the Machine I just got rid of was over 2 years old, and was using a 2600xt, which, was not more than just a little worse than the current Gt120, If I was looking for a decent card, the new machines would have at a minimum the 9600gt in the current MBPro's.



    Apple obviously doesn't cater to gamers, they never have really, but at least include a decent low end card, something capable of running older/games that are about a year old. At a decent level. Heck, even as good as the old 8800gs would be nice. But really, How about doing something crazy and giving us at least a card that isn't more than a year old.... gt260? 265?



    Dare to dream...
  • Reply 415 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post


    Guys, I'm just relaying what I've read...it wouldn't be un-Apple to use a shitty graphics card now would it?



    No... no, that would be very Apple.
  • Reply 416 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    No... no, that would be very Apple.



    I'd almost prefer instead of Apple cutting prices, they put in a killer graphics card.



    Oh yeah, that's right...it has to be thinner.
  • Reply 417 of 486
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,837member
    Of course, the low end iMac has the same GPU as the Mini.



    So even if the iMac's underpowered, Dhagan's specs would mean that the Mini would be that much closer to a real desktop machine.
  • Reply 418 of 486
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    30-inch iMac with Quadro? Rubbish. No bl**dy way.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post


    Could these specs be the real thing?



    24-inch

    1.6GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    640GB HD

    8x double-layer SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT120 with 256 MB memory

    $1,099



    24-inch

    1.73GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    8x double-layer SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT120 with 256 MB memory

    $1,399



    24-inch

    1.73GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    6x double-layer Blu-Ray Disc SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA GeForce GT230 with 512 MB RAM memory

    $1,599



    30-inch

    2GHz Intel Core i7

    4GB RAM

    1TB HD

    6x double-layer Blu-Ray Disc SuperDrive

    SD card slot

    Optional LED-backlit display

    NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700 with 512 MB memory

    $2,599



  • Reply 419 of 486
    Gateway's new All-In-One for Windows 7 puts the current iMac line at risk. It is a touch screen btw.



    http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/gat...?tag=mncol;txt







    Type Intel Core i7 Q8200 / 2.33 GHz

    Installed Qty 1

    Max processors supported 1

    Core voltage technology Energy Efficient

    Upgradability Upgradable

    RAM

    Installed Size 8 GB / 8 GB (max)

    Technology DDR3 SDRAM

    Memory speed 1333 MHz

    Storage

    Hard Drive 1 x 1 TB - Standard - S-ATA - 7200 rpm

    Optical Storage

    Type DVD±RW (±R DL)

    Graphics Controller

    Graphics Processor / Vendor RADEON HD 4670

    Video Memory 1 GB

    Networking

    Networking 10/100/1000 Gigabit Ethernet - Internal

    Wireless LAN Supported Yes

    Data Link Protocol IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g , IEEE 802.11n (draft) , Bluetooth

    Compliant Standards IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g , IEEE 802.11n (draft)



    Cost: $1,399



    ---------------------



    Apple needs to come up with a better form factor and restart the "that is the ultimate cool" reality distortion field.
  • Reply 420 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    Gateway's new All-In-One for Windows 7 puts the current iMac line at risk. It is a touch screen btw.



    http://reviews.cnet.com/desktops/gat...?tag=mncol;txt







    Type Intel Core i7 Q8200 / 2.33 GHz

    Installed Qty 1

    Max processors supported 1

    Core voltage technology Energy Efficient

    Upgradability Upgradable

    RAM

    Installed Size 8 GB / 8 GB (max)

    Technology DDR3 SDRAM

    Memory speed 1333 MHz

    Storage

    Hard Drive 1 x 1 TB - Standard - S-ATA - 7200 rpm

    Optical Storage

    Type DVD±RW (±R DL)

    Graphics Controller

    Graphics Processor / Vendor RADEON HD 4670

    Video Memory 1 GB

    Networking

    Networking 10/100/1000 Gigabit Ethernet - Internal

    Wireless LAN Supported Yes

    Data Link Protocol IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g , IEEE 802.11n (draft) , Bluetooth

    Compliant Standards IEEE 802.11b , IEEE 802.11g , IEEE 802.11n (draft)



    Cost: $1,399



    ---------------------



    Apple needs to come up with a better form factor and restart the "that is the ultimate cool" reality distortion field.



    and for the same price apple puts in 9400m that uses system ram and this has 1gb of video ram + 8gb system.
Sign In or Register to comment.