Apple ready and waiting with redesigned iMac line

11920222425

Comments

  • Reply 421 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    That's thicker and uglier, we don't know the specs on the display...and who wants to grease up their display with fingerprints and swipe marks?



    I don't know about touch screens on an iMac.



    From what I have seen, the Core i7 processors in announced products aren't shipping yet. Those announced products will begin shipping later this month. So this could be the reason for Apple's perceived delay. I suspect if there's a media event on Tuesday the 13th invites will be going out later today.
  • Reply 422 of 486
    jupiteronejupiterone Posts: 1,564member
    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



    ...

    ...



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



    That was a lukewarm review, at best.
  • Reply 423 of 486
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    Type Intel Core i7 Q8200 / 2.33 GHz



    The Q8200 is not from the Core i7 family, but a cheap/ugly/95W C2Q, the DC 3.06GHz cpu in the iMac is probably faster than this one in most tasks.

    AIOs with Q8200 have been available for ages from Dell/Lenovo/HP and probably others, Gateway is just late in the game.

    I guess you (and cnet) have your own RDF.
  • Reply 424 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    The Q8200 is not from the Core i7 family, but a cheap/ugly/95W C2Q, the DC 3.06GHz cpu in the iMac is probably faster than this one in most tasks.

    AIOs with Q8200 have been available for ages from Dell/Lenovo/HP and probably others, Gateway is just late in the game.

    I guess you (and cnet) have your own RDF.



    I suspect they're using the Q8200s, the 65W version, based on the "core voltage Energy Efficient" line in the specs. And how thin the thing is.
  • Reply 425 of 486
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    My gut tells me the next iMac will be using Clarkdale CPUs. Granted, they are "only" dual core, but they are hyper-threaded and demonstrate some really good performance. Plus, they are supposed to be out the last quarter of this year. Not too keen on the integrated graphics but it is optional.
  • Reply 426 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    The Q8200 is not from the Core i7 family, but a cheap/ugly/95W C2Q, the DC 3.06GHz cpu in the iMac is probably faster than this one in most tasks.

    AIOs with Q8200 have been available for ages from Dell/Lenovo/HP and probably others, Gateway is just late in the game.

    I guess you (and cnet) have your own RDF.



    I am typing this from my iMac 9,1, so I enjoy the RDF.



    The fact remains that the form factor of that Gateway is catching up to the iMac and it is a touch screen with upgraded hardware and a SSD + a HDD. The price is quite good too. iMac leads the pack with it's all-in-one form factor and design. That design appeal will go away if they don't do something new.
  • Reply 427 of 486
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    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.'



    [...]



    Bifurcates.



    We'll see, I guess...



    Yes, we will. But since Intel has released a new line of CPUs that are not heat-dissipation nightmares like the G5s were, and since the industry is moving to them, Apple has every interest in moving along with them. I don't think that it's any accident that Apple is preparing to update its entire desktop line in the wake of Intel's latest releases.



    The mini will get a nice kick from even the lower-end chips in the new architecture, and the higher end iMacs should be quite capable of heavy lifting.



    I wouldn't worry about an embedded GPU, either. Remember, OS X treats GPUs as additional computational resources. It can handle more than one. You might not want the GPU on the CPU die to drive, say, Assassin's Creed 2, but why would you turn down a specialized, multi-core vector engine with minimal-latency access to and from the CPU that all applications can easily use, and have access to the greater but higher latency computational power of the GPU driving the display when it's not doing much?
  • Reply 428 of 486
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Amorph View Post


    I wouldn't worry about an embedded GPU, either. Remember, OS X treats GPUs as additional computational resources. It can handle more than one. You might not want the GPU on the CPU die to drive, say, Assassin's Creed 2, but why would you turn down a specialized, multi-core vector engine with minimal-latency access to and from the CPU that all applications can easily use, and have access to the greater but higher latency computational power of the GPU driving the display when it's not doing much?



    I assume you refer to the Intel IGP that's going to be on die on the next wave of Intel Nehalem cpus. Are you *sure* they are OCL compatible? I've seen people say they are and and some say they are not going to be OCL capable.



    It will make a big difference given that NVIDIA IG is not going to be an option, at least for a while. While Apple could put dedicated gpus across the whole lineup, I doubt they will on the low end. So it could mean that minis and MBs could have limited OCL capabilities.
  • Reply 429 of 486
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    I suspect they're using the Q8200s, the 65W version, based on the "core voltage Energy Efficient" line in the specs. And how thin the thing is.



    That doesn't make the performances any better. That just shows how poorly the information on this computer have been described and reported by the manufacturer, "journalists" and "users" alike.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post


    The fact remains that the form factor of that Gateway is catching up to the iMac and it is a touch screen with upgraded hardware and a SSD + a HDD. The price is quite good too. iMac leads the pack with it's all-in-one form factor and design. That design appeal will go away if they don't do something new.



    This is not the first time that PC manufacturers are trying to catch up with Apple designs, and computers like this Gateway have been available at those prices from Dell/Lenovo/HP. This Gateway in particular doesn't offer way more than the others. My guess is that people reacted on the "Core i7" mention which was completly wrong. Even cnet or another article mentionned that the touch screen was really poorly implemented. SDD+HDD? Great. Most people don't even know how to manage one drive, let alone two. This will be so funny for customer service people. I don't think Apple is in any way "afraid" of this one.



    Now don't get me wrong, I don't think that the iMac should stay as it is right now, it has to be upgraded (soon and a lot), but not this (Gate)way.
  • Reply 430 of 486
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,121member
    What's interesting is that performance of Intel's new 2 core chips is better than the performance of their current 4 core chips.



    We have to be aware of this. The new models all have (except for the very bottom) hyperthreading, and, unlike older model Core 2 chips, have the ability to adjust their processing speed upwards significantly, while using less power.



    Why would Apple find it necessary to go to the more expensive and power hungry 4 cores, except, maybe, on the top model?



    I can't think of a good reason.



    If games are why, then it must be known that except for one or two, they don't use 4 cores, and 4 threads are almost as good anyway.



    As for pro apps, well, pro's will move to the 24", where the best specs are anyhow.
  • Reply 431 of 486
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    OK, so when do you reckon they'll be out?



    Next Tuesday? Or the Tuesday before the Windows 7 launch.. or later?
  • Reply 432 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by piot View Post


    OK, so when do you reckon they'll be out?



    Next Tuesday? Or the Tuesday before the Windows 7 launch.. or later?



    Well I was expecting them two Tuesdays ago so next Tuesday sound like a good idea and would make sense regarding the Apple quartely results... please uncle Steve, make it happen!
  • Reply 433 of 486
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    They are either coming next week or skipping a week after next and coming the week after earnings. Apple doesn't release major new hardware during their earnings week.
  • Reply 434 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mjteix View Post


    That doesn't make the performances any better. That just shows how poorly the information on this computer have been described and reported by the manufacturer, "journalists" and "users" alike.



    Just saying. The Core 2 Quads are obsolete, but Intel does make lower-TDP versions of its desktop processors for small-form desktops like this. If Gateway can cool a 65W processor in that machine, Apple can do it in the iMac. That's less heat than the G5 put out.



    There will be- they may be out already- "s" models of Lynnfield processors, the i5 720s, i7 860s, and i7 870s, all 82W instead of 95W. That's equivalent to the older processors when you factor in the northbridge on the CPU.
  • Reply 435 of 486
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by FuturePastNow View Post


    Just saying. The Core 2 Quads are obsolete, but Intel does make lower-TDP versions of its desktop processors for small-form desktops like this. If Gateway can cool a 65W processor in that machine, Apple can do it in the iMac. That's less heat than the G5 put out.



    There will be- they may be out already- "s" models of Lynnfield processors, the i5 720s, i7 860s, and i7 870s, all 82W instead of 95W. That's equivalent to the older processors when you factor in the northbridge on the CPU.



    When you figure they put a 'hot' G5 in there, and they went to Intel for PPWatt, I'm amazed we can't have a desktop i7 in there when we had a desktop G5 in there?



    Weren't Intel cpus supposed to be better performing and cheaper and cooler?



    What's Apple's excuse this time?



    Meh.



    I'd like an iMac without a crappy sidegrade cpu, without a crappy sidegrade gpu masked under a 'better performing' higher number. ie it's just rebranded an older gpu.



    Just stick in a quad core i7 class, stick in a decent desktop gpu and use more innovation with styling and cooling.



    It seems to have been a while since Apple actually innovated with the consumer desktops. Just rehashes and sidegraded specs. They have been on Intel for a while now. The 'promise' of innovation on the desktops? Where is it? Where's the choice?



    It's been like this since the PPC days.



    Can we have a different 'model'? More choice? Different design choices? Apple have sat and sat on the consumer desktop line. And the time between updates is yawning.



    Big meh.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 436 of 486
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    The 'promise' of innovation on the desktops? Where is it? Where's the choice?



    Stating the obvious, but if you want choice, then you've come to the wrong PC maker. Apple is more interested in the iPhone and iPod than anything PC related.



    I suggest you try computers running Win 7. Plenty of choice there, and the very, very latest CPUs, GPUs, BD drives and anything else you fancy.
  • Reply 437 of 486
    Re: Gateway/Dell/Etc ... Why would you need a touchscreen all-in-one? Pure gimmick, I think. It might be fun for the first few days/ weeks, after that, well...
  • Reply 438 of 486
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,121member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post


    Stating the obvious, but if you want choice, then you've come to the wrong PC maker. Apple is more interested in the iPhone and iPod than anything PC related.



    I suggest you try computers running Win 7. Plenty of choice there, and the very, very latest CPUs, GPUs, BD drives and anything else you fancy.



    But the choice is between bad and worse.
  • Reply 439 of 486
    kotatsukotatsu Posts: 1,010member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    Re: Gateway/Dell/Etc ... Why would you need a touchscreen all-in-one? Pure gimmick, I think. It might be fun for the first few days/ weeks, after that, well...



    Funny you should say that. Yesterday I was in an Apple Store and saw a woman trying to press the icons with her fingers on a MacBook Pro screen.
  • Reply 440 of 486
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kotatsu View Post


    Funny you should say that. Yesterday I was in an Apple Store and saw a woman trying to press the icons with her fingers on a MacBook Pro screen.



    Apple should make a lickable iMac screen. That will blow the market away! The iPhone is lickable, now that *that app* is out. Next up ... iMac!
Sign In or Register to comment.