We have 10 at last count and they're reconfigured constantly, get RAM swapped and cards pulled in and out to meet the rolling needs of a post facility - different IO for FCP, Avid, PPro, DaVinci - different GFX card requirements, different internal storage, different PCIe lane speeds (on the older ones).
For us, no number of iMacs will work as well or as flexibly. No combination of Thunderbolt RAIDs tethered to some yet-to-be-announced external HDSDI box and monitors will deliver what we need, down that skinny cable. Speed is one thing, low-latency parallel IO grunt is another and if we could buy a 4 x 6 core with built in Thunderbolt (for the small jobs) and more slots of course we would. We're not nearly as price sensitive as the iMac market, and that puts us in a tiny niche - rather like those who buy high end HP, Dell or IBM workstations - yet those companies still make them, along with their retail candy.
For us the Mac Pro makes solid financial and operational sense, even with price discrepancies and exchange rate gouging. An iMac sits on the desk at reception but I wouldn't make a real film on it. It'd just be silly. So rumour of the Mac Pro's demise, coming as it does on the back of the death (yes) of Final Cut, doesn't fill me with joy. If Apple's as committed to the professional space as Larry Jordan claims he's privately told, they should scotch this rumour before everyone just migrates to Linux. Or, God forbid, Windows on a big HP. Please!
Right now, I have a previous generation (non-thunderbolt) 27" iMac. If I upgrade next year and buy another, I will have 16 cores - all I need to do is combine the two machines through networking protocols that already exist. That's also a nice way of keeping my old computer (which is still very powerful) active and used.
I'd be really interested in seeing a thread on how this is done.
I'm very curious about the Mac Pro. Since the 27" iMac came along the Mac Pro struck me as really awful value compared to the iMac.
With the iMac, the 27" display is just plain fantastic, and with the latest Thunderbolt model you can attach up to two extra 27" displays, which seems like it should be more than enough for 99.99% of users.
I notice that on a message board where people were bragging about their setups, a majority were using 27" iMacs where only a few years ago they would have had Mac Pros.
So there are a couple of reasons why people would buy Mac Pros.
First is more processor cores. Hopefully next year's redesign of the iMac can give us those. Otherwise why not get multiple iMacs? Right now we have the i7 (which I own) with 8 processor cores; two iMacs are 16 processor cores and still much cheaper than the 16 core Mac Pro. With Apple's distributed computing setup, I would think this could work out.
Right now, I have a previous generation (non-thunderbolt) 27" iMac. If I upgrade next year and buy another, I will have 16 cores - all I need to do is combine the two machines through networking protocols that already exist. That's also a nice way of keeping my old computer (which is still very powerful) active and used.
Second is those who hate glossy displays. I feel your pain. But isn't a matte display just a different kind of coating? Could someone make a surprising amount of money running a business taking the 27" glossy displays and converting them to matte?
Finally we have more storage options - but with Thunderbolt RAID storage we can duplicate that at much lower cost.
Unless the Xeon processors are a lot more powerful than the i5/i7 in the iMacs, it seems to me that multiple iMacs would be how to go - and you get free additional displays each time you upgrade. So if you, like me, want an office like Dr Evil's lair, you can work towards that each time you buy a new iMac .
Thoughts?
D
Yes, David. I'm working hard to become Doctor Evil too! :>
Second is those who hate glossy displays. I feel your pain. But isn't a matte display just a different kind of coating? Could someone make a surprising amount of money running a business taking the 27" glossy displays and converting them to matte?
There are actually more issues in pricing than you recognize. You mentioned two imacs adding up to a similar number of processors. Say you are using them in some kind of grid formation or using one as a server for the other. You will incur a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second which are a factor in determining how to structure purchases like this. The concept of multiple machines is really meaningless anyway unless you have a planned solution for the full integration.
The screen on the imac isn't that good for anyone that deals with color, graphics, layouts, or any kind of visual editing. The coatings are done at the factory. LG coatings have always been irritating. The issue with LG is either it's that horrible shiny finish or you have to deal with their aggressive anti glare coating and some potential residual sparkle effects. Third party solutions aren't really a solution at all, and it wouldn't solve every problem with that model. By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tru_canuk
Correct me if I'm wrong, it's been at least 2 to 3 years since the current aluminum-body iMac has been kicking around, so it's due for an overhaul.
The imac doesn't seem like as big a focus with the push being on mobile devices. I do expect an updated display panel generation at some point. There isn't a lot they can really do with it next year. The 6 core chips will still be too hot to put in an imac unless the numbers change drastically. Thinning it further is dumb. It has heat issues as it is. There's no reason to make it hotter or potentially noisy by thinning it further.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearless
If Apple's as committed to the professional space as Larry Jordan claims he's privately told, they should scotch this rumour before everyone just migrates to Linux. Or, God forbid, Windows on a big HP. Please!
Linux is in a weird spot, and it's missing a lot of the features and vendor support found on Windows.
Let me get this sraight. Over the course of 2012, we're going to get revised versions of all of Apple's products. Wow. And I thought that once Jobs stepped down, the company would just get out of the habit of updating it's products. Go figure.
If you look at the Mac range they all follow the same basic design so if they radically change one they will probably change them all. That's what they've done in the past so no reason to suspect they will change it now. Remember the move from white to silver then to silver/black?
As for the iPad well I guess it could make sense to move it into the iPod camp and move the release cycle to Sept to maximise holiday sales as the iPod starts to decline. They also sell a lot to schools now so you would catch the back to school market as well. It also reduces the pressure to update the design every year as it could alternate with the iPod. New design iPad one year, new design iPod the next year with spec bumps in between. That would also allow them to debut new tech (such as the A6) in the iPhone first and then roll it out to the iPad/iPod later that same year.
Maybe if they do move the iPad to Sept we will see a Mac media event every year again in March. That would certainly be more in line with the business buying season which in my experience tends to be at the beginning of the year once departmental budgets have been set. I still maintain that the MBP will adopt the MBA design and the MBA will morph into a tablet format. A lot of businesses have already adopted the iPad but it's not really a business product. Add a MBA tablet with a 15" screen, faster processor, etc and you could have a game changer for Mac sales.
"The versatility of the Thunderbolt connector is also expected to reduce some of the Mac Pro's niche appeal."
So its losing appeal because they don't update it, they know why, yet they want to pull the plug on it rather than give people something interesting to buy? Well, its all rumors for now, but you would think the professional oriented machine would get Thunderbolt more quickly than it is.
What and when it comes out, who knows. Will Apple come out with up-grades, duh, yes.
2012 WILL be a very important year for Apple. They WILL need to show that even though SJ is gone, Apple isn't.
Will we all get what we WANT, hell no! Will some of us get what we WANT, hell yes! Will any of us get what we NEED, now that is another question altogether.
I'd love to see (even if it's a last issue):
- New Tower Unit options
- 30" or larger Monitor
- A Very Cool Tower, that will be worth keeping, and stopping me an 1,000's of others from having to jump the fence to the darkside. SOME of us, just WANT a BadASS Apple to show off, and use
To me this smacks of a 'let's start a rumor on how Apple will be different in a post SJ world'. Apple don't and never will make such sweeping announcements as 'next year we will change everything'. It would be totally stupid as marketing strategy for starters.
There are actually more issues in pricing than you recognize. You mentioned two imacs adding up to a similar number of processors. Say you are using them in some kind of grid formation or using one as a server for the other. You will incur a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second which are a factor in determining how to structure purchases like this. The concept of multiple machines is really meaningless anyway unless you have a planned solution for the full integration.
The screen on the imac isn't that good for anyone that deals with color, graphics, layouts, or any kind of visual editing. The coatings are done at the factory. LG coatings have always been irritating. The issue with LG is either it's that horrible shiny finish or you have to deal with their aggressive anti glare coating and some potential residual sparkle effects. Third party solutions aren't really a solution at all, and it wouldn't solve every problem with that model. By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor.
The imac doesn't seem like as big a focus with the push being on mobile devices. I do expect an updated display panel generation at some point. There isn't a lot they can really do with it next year. The 6 core chips will still be too hot to put in an imac unless the numbers change drastically. Thinning it further is dumb. It has heat issues as it is. There's no reason to make it hotter or potentially noisy by thinning it further.
Linux is in a weird spot, and it's missing a lot of the features and vendor support found on Windows.
Just to set a couple of things straight, there is at least one really inexpensive way to cluster or "beowulf" your macs - you don't have to go into gridding or serving to do this as Apple ported over NeXTstep Api into MacOS X, which fully supports clustering.
Moreover you can redeploy older Macs into clusters and gain further value from what would have been retired equipment - without incurring what you described as "a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second". And this solution is meaningful, is a proven and robust technology used world-wide.
I guess I would also have to challenge you on the statement "By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor." I would ask you to more closely quantify that "tons" into something more meaningful - as in "most of the graphics people I know", or "long lines of disgruntled iMac users at the Apple Store clamoring for matte/antiglare displays" (which curiously haven't materialized in my neck of the woods). I would make the point that if there was a large enough market for anti-glare or matte glass panels for the Apple displays, there would be a 3rd party solution providing them. I mean, it's simply coated glass held in place by a series of very strong magnets - how hard could it be to come up with an easy replacement solution if there were, as you put it "tons" of people demanding it. That would be a huge untapped market of people willing to pay a premium to get their required anti-glare display glass. If it is as big as you claim.
And finally, Linux has a huge library of features, easily comparable to Windows, the issue is have to ferret them out across so many sources, and then coming up with an acceptable common interface that is supported by Red Hat or one of the other Linux vendors.
On topic, DigiTimes is trolling hits and stirring the pot for the investors: as long as Apple's stock can be kept in flux, the investors can leverage the induced volatility to make more money off of Apple, since it is the most reliably performing and undervalued stock out there right now.
- A Very Cool Tower, that will be worth keeping, and stopping me an 1,000's of others from having to jump the fence to the darkside. SOME of us, just WANT a BadASS Apple to show off, and use
None of those will ever happen?
Particularly the monitor. If Apple wanted to sell a 30" monitor, they would have been selling one for years now. They don't. If they had any intention of changing their mind about not selling one, the Thunderbolt Display would have been 30". It isn't.
To me this smacks of a 'let's start a rumor on how Apple will be different in a post SJ world'. Apple don't and never will make such sweeping announcements as 'next year we will change everything'. It would be totally stupid as marketing strategy for starters.
I think you hit the nail on the head...... post SJ Apple will be completely different........NOT!
People can get worked up over a "rumor" as innocuous as this? A rumor that was the opposite of this would be outrageous and rightly ridiculed: "During the 12 months of 2012 one or more of the Apple product lines will remain completely unchanged."
Really? Which product line does someone think is going to no attention in the next 14 months?
People can get worked up over a "rumor" as innocuous as this? A rumor that was the opposite of this would be outrageous and rightly ridiculed: "During the 12 months of 2012 one or more of the Apple product lines will remain completely unchanged."
Really? Which product line does someone think is going to no attention in the next 14 months?
Well if history is a guide, the Mac Pro. It's last update was July of last year, minus the addition of the Server option. Whether the MP gets replaced w/a new line, updated or discontinued is an open question.
As for the iPad well I guess it could make sense to move it into the iPod camp and move the release cycle to Sept to maximise holiday sales as the iPod starts to decline. They also sell a lot to schools now so you would catch the back to school market as well. It also reduces the pressure to update the design every year as it could alternate with the iPod. New design iPad one year, new design iPod the next year with spec bumps in between. That would also allow them to debut new tech (such as the A6) in the iPhone first and then roll it out to the iPad/iPod later that same year.
Maybe if they do move the iPad to Sept we will see a Mac media event every year again in March. That would certainly be more in line with the business buying season which in my experience tends to be at the beginning of the year once departmental budgets have been set. I still maintain that the MBP will adopt the MBA design and the MBA will morph into a tablet format. A lot of businesses have already adopted the iPad but it's not really a business product. Add a MBA tablet with a 15" screen, faster processor, etc and you could have a game changer for Mac sales.
While on the surface that argument makes sense, government agencies make glacier movement seem speedy ... In order to get iPads into the schools in September, the purchase decision will need to be made a few months in advance, and have to be accounted for in budgets etc. The iPad would have to be available to be "spec'd" by June/July at the latest to be in the plan for a school purchase.
Comments
More like 99% of the time. Which makes me think their source is Shaw Wu.
Oh, so he's "The 99%" the Occupy Wall Street people were talking about.
For us, no number of iMacs will work as well or as flexibly. No combination of Thunderbolt RAIDs tethered to some yet-to-be-announced external HDSDI box and monitors will deliver what we need, down that skinny cable. Speed is one thing, low-latency parallel IO grunt is another and if we could buy a 4 x 6 core with built in Thunderbolt (for the small jobs) and more slots of course we would. We're not nearly as price sensitive as the iMac market, and that puts us in a tiny niche - rather like those who buy high end HP, Dell or IBM workstations - yet those companies still make them, along with their retail candy.
For us the Mac Pro makes solid financial and operational sense, even with price discrepancies and exchange rate gouging. An iMac sits on the desk at reception but I wouldn't make a real film on it. It'd just be silly. So rumour of the Mac Pro's demise, coming as it does on the back of the death (yes) of Final Cut, doesn't fill me with joy. If Apple's as committed to the professional space as Larry Jordan claims he's privately told, they should scotch this rumour before everyone just migrates to Linux. Or, God forbid, Windows on a big HP. Please!
Right now, I have a previous generation (non-thunderbolt) 27" iMac. If I upgrade next year and buy another, I will have 16 cores - all I need to do is combine the two machines through networking protocols that already exist. That's also a nice way of keeping my old computer (which is still very powerful) active and used.
I'd be really interested in seeing a thread on how this is done.
I'm very curious about the Mac Pro. Since the 27" iMac came along the Mac Pro struck me as really awful value compared to the iMac.
With the iMac, the 27" display is just plain fantastic, and with the latest Thunderbolt model you can attach up to two extra 27" displays, which seems like it should be more than enough for 99.99% of users.
I notice that on a message board where people were bragging about their setups, a majority were using 27" iMacs where only a few years ago they would have had Mac Pros.
So there are a couple of reasons why people would buy Mac Pros.
First is more processor cores. Hopefully next year's redesign of the iMac can give us those. Otherwise why not get multiple iMacs? Right now we have the i7 (which I own) with 8 processor cores; two iMacs are 16 processor cores and still much cheaper than the 16 core Mac Pro. With Apple's distributed computing setup, I would think this could work out.
Right now, I have a previous generation (non-thunderbolt) 27" iMac. If I upgrade next year and buy another, I will have 16 cores - all I need to do is combine the two machines through networking protocols that already exist. That's also a nice way of keeping my old computer (which is still very powerful) active and used.
Second is those who hate glossy displays. I feel your pain. But isn't a matte display just a different kind of coating? Could someone make a surprising amount of money running a business taking the 27" glossy displays and converting them to matte?
Finally we have more storage options - but with Thunderbolt RAID storage we can duplicate that at much lower cost.
Unless the Xeon processors are a lot more powerful than the i5/i7 in the iMacs, it seems to me that multiple iMacs would be how to go - and you get free additional displays each time you upgrade. So if you, like me, want an office like Dr Evil's lair, you can work towards that each time you buy a new iMac
Thoughts?
D
Yes, David. I'm working hard to become Doctor Evil too! :>
I
Second is those who hate glossy displays. I feel your pain. But isn't a matte display just a different kind of coating? Could someone make a surprising amount of money running a business taking the 27" glossy displays and converting them to matte?
There are actually more issues in pricing than you recognize. You mentioned two imacs adding up to a similar number of processors. Say you are using them in some kind of grid formation or using one as a server for the other. You will incur a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second which are a factor in determining how to structure purchases like this. The concept of multiple machines is really meaningless anyway unless you have a planned solution for the full integration.
The screen on the imac isn't that good for anyone that deals with color, graphics, layouts, or any kind of visual editing. The coatings are done at the factory. LG coatings have always been irritating. The issue with LG is either it's that horrible shiny finish or you have to deal with their aggressive anti glare coating and some potential residual sparkle effects. Third party solutions aren't really a solution at all, and it wouldn't solve every problem with that model. By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor.
Correct me if I'm wrong, it's been at least 2 to 3 years since the current aluminum-body iMac has been kicking around, so it's due for an overhaul.
The imac doesn't seem like as big a focus with the push being on mobile devices. I do expect an updated display panel generation at some point. There isn't a lot they can really do with it next year. The 6 core chips will still be too hot to put in an imac unless the numbers change drastically. Thinning it further is dumb. It has heat issues as it is. There's no reason to make it hotter or potentially noisy by thinning it further.
If Apple's as committed to the professional space as Larry Jordan claims he's privately told, they should scotch this rumour before everyone just migrates to Linux. Or, God forbid, Windows on a big HP. Please!
Linux is in a weird spot, and it's missing a lot of the features and vendor support found on Windows.
Japanese Firm Develops ?Invisible Glass?
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english...0111028/199970
Amazing Invisible Glass Kills Glare Dead
http://gizmodo.com/5854321/amazing-i...lls-glare-dead
?Invisible glass? could reduce display glare, fails as food-in-teeth mirror
http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/31/i...s-as-food-in-t
Apple, please, it is a health and productivity issue. Thank you.
this the worst post and worst thread I've ever seen on this site in almost seven years
Boy, you sure must have missed a few then in those 7 years
As for the iPad well I guess it could make sense to move it into the iPod camp and move the release cycle to Sept to maximise holiday sales as the iPod starts to decline. They also sell a lot to schools now so you would catch the back to school market as well. It also reduces the pressure to update the design every year as it could alternate with the iPod. New design iPad one year, new design iPod the next year with spec bumps in between. That would also allow them to debut new tech (such as the A6) in the iPhone first and then roll it out to the iPad/iPod later that same year.
Maybe if they do move the iPad to Sept we will see a Mac media event every year again in March. That would certainly be more in line with the business buying season which in my experience tends to be at the beginning of the year once departmental budgets have been set. I still maintain that the MBP will adopt the MBA design and the MBA will morph into a tablet format. A lot of businesses have already adopted the iPad but it's not really a business product. Add a MBA tablet with a 15" screen, faster processor, etc and you could have a game changer for Mac sales.
So its losing appeal because they don't update it, they know why, yet they want to pull the plug on it rather than give people something interesting to buy? Well, its all rumors for now, but you would think the professional oriented machine would get Thunderbolt more quickly than it is.
2012 WILL be a very important year for Apple. They WILL need to show that even though SJ is gone, Apple isn't.
Will we all get what we WANT, hell no! Will some of us get what we WANT, hell yes! Will any of us get what we NEED, now that is another question altogether.
I'd love to see (even if it's a last issue):
- New Tower Unit options
- 30" or larger Monitor
- A Very Cool Tower, that will be worth keeping, and stopping me an 1,000's of others from having to jump the fence to the darkside. SOME of us, just WANT a BadASS Apple to show off, and use
Skip
There are actually more issues in pricing than you recognize. You mentioned two imacs adding up to a similar number of processors. Say you are using them in some kind of grid formation or using one as a server for the other. You will incur a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second which are a factor in determining how to structure purchases like this. The concept of multiple machines is really meaningless anyway unless you have a planned solution for the full integration.
The screen on the imac isn't that good for anyone that deals with color, graphics, layouts, or any kind of visual editing. The coatings are done at the factory. LG coatings have always been irritating. The issue with LG is either it's that horrible shiny finish or you have to deal with their aggressive anti glare coating and some potential residual sparkle effects. Third party solutions aren't really a solution at all, and it wouldn't solve every problem with that model. By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor.
The imac doesn't seem like as big a focus with the push being on mobile devices. I do expect an updated display panel generation at some point. There isn't a lot they can really do with it next year. The 6 core chips will still be too hot to put in an imac unless the numbers change drastically. Thinning it further is dumb. It has heat issues as it is. There's no reason to make it hotter or potentially noisy by thinning it further.
Linux is in a weird spot, and it's missing a lot of the features and vendor support found on Windows.
Just to set a couple of things straight, there is at least one really inexpensive way to cluster or "beowulf" your macs - you don't have to go into gridding or serving to do this as Apple ported over NeXTstep Api into MacOS X, which fully supports clustering.
Moreover you can redeploy older Macs into clusters and gain further value from what would have been retired equipment - without incurring what you described as "a lot of additional costs picking up additional software licenses for the second". And this solution is meaningful, is a proven and robust technology used world-wide.
I guess I would also have to challenge you on the statement "By the way the Apple store has tons of complaints from users who purchased the thunderbolt or cinema display and hated it simply because of the gloss factor." I would ask you to more closely quantify that "tons" into something more meaningful - as in "most of the graphics people I know", or "long lines of disgruntled iMac users at the Apple Store clamoring for matte/antiglare displays" (which curiously haven't materialized in my neck of the woods). I would make the point that if there was a large enough market for anti-glare or matte glass panels for the Apple displays, there would be a 3rd party solution providing them. I mean, it's simply coated glass held in place by a series of very strong magnets - how hard could it be to come up with an easy replacement solution if there were, as you put it "tons" of people demanding it. That would be a huge untapped market of people willing to pay a premium to get their required anti-glare display glass. If it is as big as you claim.
And finally, Linux has a huge library of features, easily comparable to Windows, the issue is have to ferret them out across so many sources, and then coming up with an acceptable common interface that is supported by Red Hat or one of the other Linux vendors.
On topic, DigiTimes is trolling hits and stirring the pot for the investors: as long as Apple's stock can be kept in flux, the investors can leverage the induced volatility to make more money off of Apple, since it is the most reliably performing and undervalued stock out there right now.
- New Tower Unit options
- 30" or larger Monitor
- A Very Cool Tower, that will be worth keeping, and stopping me an 1,000's of others from having to jump the fence to the darkside. SOME of us, just WANT a BadASS Apple to show off, and use
None of those will ever happen?
Particularly the monitor. If Apple wanted to sell a 30" monitor, they would have been selling one for years now. They don't. If they had any intention of changing their mind about not selling one, the Thunderbolt Display would have been 30". It isn't.
To me this smacks of a 'let's start a rumor on how Apple will be different in a post SJ world'. Apple don't and never will make such sweeping announcements as 'next year we will change everything'. It would be totally stupid as marketing strategy for starters.
I think you hit the nail on the head...... post SJ Apple will be completely different........NOT!
Really? Which product line does someone think is going to no attention in the next 14 months?
People can get worked up over a "rumor" as innocuous as this? A rumor that was the opposite of this would be outrageous and rightly ridiculed: "During the 12 months of 2012 one or more of the Apple product lines will remain completely unchanged."
Really? Which product line does someone think is going to no attention in the next 14 months?
Well if history is a guide, the Mac Pro. It's last update was July of last year, minus the addition of the Server option. Whether the MP gets replaced w/a new line, updated or discontinued is an open question.
As for the iPad well I guess it could make sense to move it into the iPod camp and move the release cycle to Sept to maximise holiday sales as the iPod starts to decline. They also sell a lot to schools now so you would catch the back to school market as well. It also reduces the pressure to update the design every year as it could alternate with the iPod. New design iPad one year, new design iPod the next year with spec bumps in between. That would also allow them to debut new tech (such as the A6) in the iPhone first and then roll it out to the iPad/iPod later that same year.
Maybe if they do move the iPad to Sept we will see a Mac media event every year again in March. That would certainly be more in line with the business buying season which in my experience tends to be at the beginning of the year once departmental budgets have been set. I still maintain that the MBP will adopt the MBA design and the MBA will morph into a tablet format. A lot of businesses have already adopted the iPad but it's not really a business product. Add a MBA tablet with a 15" screen, faster processor, etc and you could have a game changer for Mac sales.
While on the surface that argument makes sense, government agencies make glacier movement seem speedy ... In order to get iPads into the schools in September, the purchase decision will need to be made a few months in advance, and have to be accounted for in budgets etc. The iPad would have to be available to be "spec'd" by June/July at the latest to be in the plan for a school purchase.