If an Imac hard drive fails - you have to take the Imac apart to replace it. If an external stacked hard drive fails on a Mac Mini it's simple to replace.
If the Imac motherboard fails - well I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini - at least the Display is unaffected.
If the Imac Display fails - well again I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini the computer is unaffected.
And similar arguments apply to upgrading one or other elements of the computer. I think that is the downside of an all-in-one design, but I don't see a reason why it has to be like that - it could be re-designed so that a component failure doesn't write off the whole computer. If you look at the side-elevations of the Imac that have been published on the thread - there's actually lot's of space available behind it for something clever - because of the back-projection of the stand.
>The real story here is what a blatantly racist person Jonathan Ives truly is.<
Real in what way? And racist against whom?
What comes through on the latter front (in the full Torygraph interview) is that, vis-a-vis receiving a Knighthood from his Head of State for excellence in designing and making things, Ive is proud of his birth-country's historical achievements in designing and making things. (I suggest Brunel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunel as his example).
The ODD in the iMacs takes up very little internal space and thickness. In the notebooks it's a much different story with the ODD taking up 25% in the 13" MBP.
I can surely image the ODD being removed (it's already been done in the Mac mini) and I can conceive of Apple making their iMac thinner (just as they've done many times before) but the ODD removal would just be a part of that change and not the reason.
I don't suppose I understand, and for that I apologize. I find no trouble with the 27" Cinema Display that I use nor do I or my family with the 17" white iMac we still have.
Gosh, I certainly hope not. Just use the space freed up by the removal of the ODD for the world's best cooling system. We need more power in the iMac, not less, particularly if that idiotic crap about discontinuing the Mac Pro is true…
I think a lot people don't really understand the positioning of the initial mac pro. You got something really competitive in the base design, which likely leveraged a portion of the headless imac crowd that wanted features beyond those of the imac. With the imac, even today thunderbolt disk options aren't really there yet. We don't have many options, and depending on disk configuration, I wouldn't be willing to take my chances on what Promise puts in there. It's entirely stupid really. They state RAID 5 support, yet there isn't any mention of what is used to populate it or if spare drives are available, and I would not wish to leave a RAID 5 sitting while waiting for a replacement drive. The Apple store also has a few complaints of DOA drives with that setup. You'd think for the price they could at least test it properly. Anyway I'm getting off track. I'm concerned that with the trend toward cheap hardware on the low end of the mac pro line, they've kind of driven that crowd off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Always thinner:
Yes... thinner. It appeals to stupid people and possibly those with poor taste in literature (not sure if anyone will get that joke). When I say stupid, the problem is that some people jump on a new design whether it's an improvement or not, just because something has changed. That's more about chasing bright shiny objects than computing needs. Considering how much heat some of these machines kick off and the fan speeds on the macbook pros under heavy loads, I wish they'd go in favor of better cooling rather than as thin as possible. Some amount of sealing or baffling would be nice too given the amount of spill threads I've noticed on macrumors, and no one ever expects it to happen to them. There are just better functional improvements they could make beyond thinning down every design. With the imac you're past the point of gaining real desk space anyway. Even shaving off a whole cm of density wouldn't give you that entire cm in usable space.
Ah, thank you. But that's the only thing I can think of, unless he considers the AirPort family "add-ons" because of their footprint.
Also you can get stackable third party hard drives.
Anyway, Tallest, where are we? You asked - Can the Imac design be improved on? Well I agree it's a beautiful design, but so far we more or less agree that the cooling needs to be improved and that the hard drive could be made more easily swappable and I'm also suggesting detachable parts - as I had to replace a whole Imac because a tiny chip failed - and I think that's simply poor design. So. yes I think there's quite a lot of functional improvement that can be made - but we kind of get blinded by the beauty of the thin design - but the thinness doesn't add anything to the function.
Also you can get stackable third party hard drives.
Anyway, Tallest, where are we? You asked - Can the Imac design be improved on?
There are very few things that become classics that people have a hard time improving upon. The iMac on the other hand is a study in continuous improvement.
Well I agree it's a beautiful design, but so far we more or less agree that the cooling needs to be improved and that the hard drive could be made more easily swappable and I'm also suggesting detachable parts - as I had to replace a whole Imac because a tiny chip failed - and I think that's simply poor design.
That is bad for you but realize that detachable parts greatly reduce reliability. In general with electronics you want to minimize connections/connectors if you want good reliability. If there is one quality that justifies single board computers it is reliability. Of course if you are owner of a board that fails it might not feel all that great.
As to that board that failed, if it was one little chip you do have the option of reworking the board.
So. yes I think there's quite a lot of functional improvement that can be made - but we kind of get blinded by the beauty of the thin design - but the thinness doesn't add anything to the function.
This is certainly true. Thinnest can actually take away from functionality. So any attempt to make the iMac thinner at the expense of performance is a mistake. However technologies march forward should give Apple new design opportunities.
This is an iMac we are talking about. So I have to ask what makes you beleive a bit thinner iMac suddenly becomes that much more functional? In a portable device thin and light do impact functionality, on the desktop the impact of going to thin can actually be negative.
There is no Steve Jobs in the new Apple. There probably never will be.
One of Steve's greatest successes was realizing that no one else could do what he did and he created an ORGANIZATION that embodied his beliefs and style. Ives brings design. Cook brings supply chain and general management. Schiller brings marketing. And so on. From the outside, the management team at Apple appears to work extremely well by corporate standards and so there's no need for one demigod to run the show.
It is astounding to me how little recognition Steve Wozniak gets in these discussions. There would be no Apple/Mac computers without him. Steve Wozniak (Woz) is the real mastermind behind 90% of all the technology we use today from not only Apple but ALL computers! He invented the keyboard / monitor interface using a TV for heaven’s sake! He invented the mouse. He put color on the screen. He made it possible to go on the internet. He invented the touch tone phone. He even invented remote control. He was the first to invent a real game to play on a computer. I could go on and on; the man is a genius! Not trying to belittle Steve Jobs I greatly honor the man; He was a mastermind of aesthetics, quality, and marketing but there would be no Steve Jobs, Ive, Cook, Microsoft, Android, or any other tech company today without Woz !
I have read Steve Job’s bio and Steve Wozniak’s bio - many here would do well to do the same. Then you would know how Apple and many other companies really came to where they are and who deserves the credit.
I will not put up with being called a lyre when I KNOW what I am talking about.... GOOD BY!!!
All the things you have said absolutely were mentioned in the book. Woz wasn't the inventor of any of them.
He wasn't the first to play a computer game. He built a hardware Pong to play on his TV, is all.
He had nothing to do with the invention of the mouse. Xerox' PARC team did that.
He wasn't the first to do color screens, either.
He had nothing to do with the creation of the Internet.
He didn't make a touch-tone phone at all, and the remote he made wasn't the first by any stretch of the imagination. It was an incredible remote, to be sure, given that it had an entire Apple ][c in it.
Comments
If an Imac hard drive fails - you have to take the Imac apart to replace it. If an external stacked hard drive fails on a Mac Mini it's simple to replace.
If the Imac motherboard fails - well I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini - at least the Display is unaffected.
If the Imac Display fails - well again I think the Imac is a right-off. But with a Mac Mini the computer is unaffected.
And similar arguments apply to upgrading one or other elements of the computer. I think that is the downside of an all-in-one design, but I don't see a reason why it has to be like that - it could be re-designed so that a component failure doesn't write off the whole computer. If you look at the side-elevations of the Imac that have been published on the thread - there's actually lot's of space available behind it for something clever - because of the back-projection of the stand.
>The real story here is what a blatantly racist person Jonathan Ives truly is.<
Real in what way? And racist against whom?
What comes through on the latter front (in the full Torygraph interview) is that, vis-a-vis receiving a Knighthood from his Head of State for excellence in designing and making things, Ive is proud of his birth-country's historical achievements in designing and making things. (I suggest Brunel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunel as his example).
The ODD in the iMacs takes up very little internal space and thickness. In the notebooks it's a much different story with the ODD taking up 25% in the 13" MBP.
I can surely image the ODD being removed (it's already been done in the Mac mini) and I can conceive of Apple making their iMac thinner (just as they've done many times before) but the ODD removal would just be a part of that change and not the reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't suppose I understand, and for that I apologize. I find no trouble with the 27" Cinema Display that I use nor do I or my family with the 17" white iMac we still have.
Gosh, I certainly hope not. Just use the space freed up by the removal of the ODD for the world's best cooling system. We need more power in the iMac, not less, particularly if that idiotic crap about discontinuing the Mac Pro is true…
I think a lot people don't really understand the positioning of the initial mac pro. You got something really competitive in the base design, which likely leveraged a portion of the headless imac crowd that wanted features beyond those of the imac. With the imac, even today thunderbolt disk options aren't really there yet. We don't have many options, and depending on disk configuration, I wouldn't be willing to take my chances on what Promise puts in there. It's entirely stupid really. They state RAID 5 support, yet there isn't any mention of what is used to populate it or if spare drives are available, and I would not wish to leave a RAID 5 sitting while waiting for a replacement drive. The Apple store also has a few complaints of DOA drives with that setup. You'd think for the price they could at least test it properly. Anyway I'm getting off track. I'm concerned that with the trend toward cheap hardware on the low end of the mac pro line, they've kind of driven that crowd off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Always thinner:
Yes... thinner. It appeals to stupid people and possibly those with poor taste in literature (not sure if anyone will get that joke). When I say stupid, the problem is that some people jump on a new design whether it's an improvement or not, just because something has changed. That's more about chasing bright shiny objects than computing needs. Considering how much heat some of these machines kick off and the fan speeds on the macbook pros under heavy loads, I wish they'd go in favor of better cooling rather than as thin as possible. Some amount of sealing or baffling would be nice too given the amount of spill threads I've noticed on macrumors, and no one ever expects it to happen to them. There are just better functional improvements they could make beyond thinning down every design. With the imac you're past the point of gaining real desk space anyway. Even shaving off a whole cm of density wouldn't give you that entire cm in usable space.
The external Superdrive?
All this photo shows is that Jonathon Ive and Apple are designing CNC machines to make MacBook Airs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The external Superdrive?
Ah, thank you. But that's the only thing I can think of, unless he considers the AirPort family "add-ons" because of their footprint.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The external Superdrive?
Quote:
Ah, thank you. But that's the only thing I can think of, unless he considers the AirPort family "add-ons" because of their footprint.
Also you can get stackable third party hard drives.
Anyway, Tallest, where are we? You asked - Can the Imac design be improved on? Well I agree it's a beautiful design, but so far we more or less agree that the cooling needs to be improved and that the hard drive could be made more easily swappable and I'm also suggesting detachable parts - as I had to replace a whole Imac because a tiny chip failed - and I think that's simply poor design. So. yes I think there's quite a lot of functional improvement that can be made - but we kind of get blinded by the beauty of the thin design - but the thinness doesn't add anything to the function.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave2012
but the thinness doesn't add anything to the function.
I emphatically disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slang4Art
I emphatically disagree.
You could elaborate on that. What could you possibly gain from a thinner imac? You don't see linear gains in desk space by reducing density.
As to that board that failed, if it was one little chip you do have the option of reworking the board.
This is certainly true. Thinnest can actually take away from functionality. So any attempt to make the iMac thinner at the expense of performance is a mistake. However technologies march forward should give Apple new design opportunities.
This is an iMac we are talking about. So I have to ask what makes you beleive a bit thinner iMac suddenly becomes that much more functional? In a portable device thin and light do impact functionality, on the desktop the impact of going to thin can actually be negative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
This propagates a misleading concept.
There is no Steve Jobs in the new Apple. There probably never will be.
One of Steve's greatest successes was realizing that no one else could do what he did and he created an ORGANIZATION that embodied his beliefs and style. Ives brings design. Cook brings supply chain and general management. Schiller brings marketing. And so on. From the outside, the management team at Apple appears to work extremely well by corporate standards and so there's no need for one demigod to run the show.
It is astounding to me how little recognition Steve Wozniak gets in these discussions. There would be no Apple/Mac computers without him. Steve Wozniak (Woz) is the real mastermind behind 90% of all the technology we use today from not only Apple but ALL computers! He invented the keyboard / monitor interface using a TV for heaven’s sake! He invented the mouse. He put color on the screen. He made it possible to go on the internet. He invented the touch tone phone. He even invented remote control. He was the first to invent a real game to play on a computer. I could go on and on; the man is a genius! Not trying to belittle Steve Jobs I greatly honor the man; He was a mastermind of aesthetics, quality, and marketing but there would be no Steve Jobs, Ive, Cook, Microsoft, Android, or any other tech company today without Woz !
I have read Steve Job’s bio and Steve Wozniak’s bio - many here would do well to do the same. Then you would know how Apple and many other companies really came to where they are and who deserves the credit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
Steve Wozniak (Woz) is the real mastermind behind 90% of all the technology we use today from not only Apple but ALL computers!
That's patently false. And yes, you may enjoy the slight literalistic pun in there.
Quote:
He invented the keyboard / monitor interface using a TV for heaven’s sake!
Did he, now?
Quote:
He invented the mouse.
No.
Quote:
He put color on the screen.
But wasn't the first.
Quote:
He made it possible to go on the internet.
Just… stop lying.
Quote:
He invented the touch tone phone. He even invented remote control.
None of these things happened.
Quote:
He was the first to invent a real game to play on a computer.
And that's not even true.
Quote:
I have read… …Steve Wozniak’s bio…
You're going to want to read it again, but actually read it this time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's patently false. And yes, you may enjoy the slight literalistic pun in there.
Did he, now?
No.
But wasn't the first.
Just… stop lying.
None of these things happened.
And that's not even true.
You're going to want to read it again, but actually read it this time.
I can see you haven't read it....
No need to respond I'm done with Apple insider...
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
I can see you haven't read it....
Long, long before the Jobs biography, absolutely I did.
I will not put up with being called a lyre when I KNOW what I am talking about.... GOOD BY!!!
Good luck
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
I will not put up with being called a lyre when I KNOW what I am talking about.... GOOD BY!!!
All the things you have said absolutely were mentioned in the book. Woz wasn't the inventor of any of them.
He wasn't the first to play a computer game. He built a hardware Pong to play on his TV, is all.
He had nothing to do with the invention of the mouse. Xerox' PARC team did that.
He wasn't the first to do color screens, either.
He had nothing to do with the creation of the Internet.
He didn't make a touch-tone phone at all, and the remote he made wasn't the first by any stretch of the imagination. It was an incredible remote, to be sure, given that it had an entire Apple ][c in it.
I think you've simply misread the biography.