The slotless Mac mini design is not new. It existed two years ago in the Mac mini server (Mid-2010), side-by-side with the single-HDD Mac minis.
In 2011, Apple just switched to the slotless design which had already been around for an entire year.
I know, but OS X only has an icon for the latter, not the former (for whatever reason) and my point wasn't compromised by using the new design.
Fun fact: the icon for the Retina MacBook Pro doesn't have "MacBook Pro" on the screen bezel… which I'm now just noticing is a reflection of the actual device… why didn't I notice that or hear it before anywhere?
Taking out the optical drive and making it thinner definitely qualifies as a 'full redesign'. Anything that alters the exterior casing is a redesign. And no, there won't be retina display yet. It just is still too much of a technical hit at this point.
Perhaps SSD standardized too? Or is that overall for a non-mobile computer?
15' MBP was a great choice to start with introducing retina, because it's a tool of choise for photo community where resolution and clarity matters. Most photographers won't touch iMac with 100ft pole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Photographers, care to chime in here?
My wife is a photographer and does phenomenal work... on an iMac. I, too, am confused why photographers wont touch an iMac? There are no viewing angle/color changes like a laptop has, and you have 27" to work with full screen. If you think Photoshop takes a lot of juice to run- you're wrong... its pretty minor.
If they chunk the optical and replace it with a 32gb SSD instead- I am so for this it's ridiculous.
If they redesign- I agree wholeheartedly. I would hope they wouldn't make it thinner as it gets crazy hot as it is. I'd like for them to put a small sdd boot drive in place of the optical and add an extra fan and push air right to left as well as bottom to top.
crazy hot is relative. If the iMacs where too hot we would have a constant flow of reports of them overheating. As it is right now only a few seem to have trouble.
As to right to left fans heat rises, if you want to remove it efficiently you don't work against that. On top of that Ivy Bridge, SSDs and a host of other technologies would lower the heat profile. It would not be impossible to actuall see a thinner and cooler iMac.
I would be shocked beyond belief if they had retina- I'd bed my house payment against it.
Retina would be easier in an iMac assuming a longer viewing distance.
Although I, too, hope for a redesign... my gut tells me that won't happen until retina... which means we won't see it until late next year. Ivy Bridge, updated GPU, and 1666 ram... I think that's all we see (much like the macbook pros).
That said- if the base 27" is as fast or faster than my BTO 27" 2010 i7s- I'll upgrade one of them.
It isn't speed that keeps me from upgrading to an iMac. I rather hate it's anti service designs. I wouldn't even consider an iMac unless serviceability was addressed.
That being said we have yet to hear any Mini rumors or even replacements for the Mini. This is a big concern as they need something other than iMac on the desktop.
It will probably have USB3, no cd-dvd, bump in speeds and no retina.
Everything but the retina makes sense above
Why is everyone so obsessed with Retina iMac? Retina works on closely controled walled garden, with applications specifically designed for it.
However this makes no sense at all. Retina displays are in no way tied to the walled garden. I really don't see how such a foolish statement could be made in public.
Half of the apps on iPad still don't support retina resolutions and their products show that. Time Inc. are you listening?
Lack of support doesn't imply anything other than developers can drag ass just as well as Apple can. As for Time magazine have you considered that it is another liberal magazine in failure mode? Sometime apps don't get updated because there is no economic reason to do so.
15' MBP was a great choice to start with introducing retina, because it's a tool of choise for photo community where resolution and clarity matters. Most photographers won't touch iMac with 100ft pole.
Yeah right.
So, my guess is we will see retina ACD way before we see the iMac. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the first retina wouldn't come in 24' size, instead of 27'.
The problem with an ACZd is how do you feed it? This would require yet another port upgrade/switch from Apple.
What I hope to see instead is the screen advancements of retina MBP less resolution bump (removing the extra layer of glass to make it less reflective).
So, Apple, if you improve the screen, deliver USB3, remove CD rom drive and slim down the chasis (unlike what you've done with mac mini when you removed the cd drive), I'll upgrade. If not, I'll wait and see. My purchase decission clearly have no impact on your stock price.
Nor does any other single persons purchase decision. What drives stock prices is mind share, if Apple maintains a buzz and clearly innovates the stock won't have pricing issues.
Every time I hear about them upgrading the iMac, I am torn. I have a Late-2009 27" model. I'm sure a brand new one would be SO cool. OTOH, the one I have now works damned well, so I'm not sure I could justify getting a new one.
Thinner on a phone, iPad, or laptop makes sense. Thinner on an iMac really doesn't. If they remove optical drives I hope they add least add something to compensate for that loss.
I would think if they do, they'll just make another drive bay available like they did on the mini. It's an easy change. Removing the optical drive on an iMac doesn't change the thickness profile at all since the 3.5 internal drives are already far thicker than any optical, but it does free up space in that area for a new component.
Considering the only major improvement over the 2009 which I also have is the bus speed, I would be more interested in the Disk subsystem getting some perks.
Far more interested in this than the retina topic. The resolution on a 27" iMac is already one of the best on the market, and the PPI is decent and the display is a quality one.
Worse case, I wait another year or two for a refresh and by then I'll be ready to update my late 2009
I have a "late 2006" model iMac. I'd be happy with a 27' with updated internals.
i don't understand this fetish for being thin [i wouldn't mind losing more than a few pounds] The iMac sits on a desk/table. Very few people [make that none in 6 years] have ever commented on it's waist size
I just don't get the benefit of an anorexic desktop!
Thinner on a phone, iPad, or laptop makes sense. Thinner on an iMac really doesn't. If they remove optical drives I hope they add least add something to compensate for that loss.
Even though I basically agree with you that thinness on an iMac (and it's not like they're huge now) isn't necessarily a big deal, I do also understand how the aesthetics could be improved with a slightly thinner look.
Honestly, I don't care either way, since I can't remember the last time I used the optical drive on my iMac.
No, it's not insane. iMacs are now commonly set up in living rooms, kitchens, etc and are part of the decor of the room instead of being relegated to the basement in shame as other desktops are. Anything that makes it even take less space, weight, and generally add to the attractiveness of the environment is a good thing. I agree that thinness shoudnt be an absolute priority like their portable machines, but I'm not going to complain if they do make it thinner without compromising other things. Taking out the optical drive should help a lot in that, as it will free up a ton of space. Also, their reason for removing the drive would be primarily because they want to wean everyone off optical media, not because of thinness. In terms of overheating, I've never had an iMac overheat, so no clue what you're talking about.
You don't wean people off optical media by removing the drive, you do it by making digital alternatives that are cheaper and better. Optical is often cheaper, sometimes dramatically so (box sets in particular), so only a fool would want that option removed. Unless of course, you're rich, in which case, bully for you, but don't spoil things for the rest of us.
Personally I use the optical drive in my Win 7 desktop often, in fact it's in use this very second to rip a DVD.
Every time I hear about them upgrading the iMac, I am torn. I have a Late-2009 27" model. I'm sure a brand new one would be SO cool. OTOH, the one I have now works damned well, so I'm not sure I could justify getting a new one.
So torn. So torn.
A PC should last at least 5 years. The tech is mature and evolves very slowly now.
My desktop is 7 years old. It still works fine, but is feeling a little stale, so I may buy a new system this year.
The option to use an optical isn't being removed, it's just changing to be an optional external peripheral. This is better for poor people because it means you aren't forced to pay Apple's expensive charge for an optical unit so Apple takes that money off or puts it towards something more valuable and you can buy a faster 3rd party DVD drive for $30-50 or even a Blu-Ray drive for as little as $140.
The option to use an optical isn't being removed, it's just changing to be an optional external peripheral. This is better for poor people because it means you aren't forced to pay Apple's expensive charge for an optical unit so Apple takes that money off or puts it towards something more valuable and you can buy a faster 3rd party DVD drive for $30-50 or even a Blu-Ray drive for as little as $140.
An external drive is a wonderful idea for an all in one computer, nicely undoing the removal of desk clutter such a design strove to eliminate.
I'd be interested to see the stats of how many DVD/BD drives are commonly used in desktop computers, should should such a stat exist of course. My own view is that a desktop should include options for everything a user could ever want to configure, and all in the same case. It makes PC makers lives more difficult, but that's not my problem.
No, you do it by removing the drive. This has worked for every technology Apple has removed from devices.
So feel free to continue to use last century's technology while Apple moves everyone else forward.
DVDs and BDs are still very much current technology. If you can show me a streaming site which can match BD quality, then I'd like to see it. Or a place to buy TV series box sets digitally which matches the prices on Amazon perhaps?
I just like choice. If a digital option makes sense, then I'll use it, but if optical makes sense, I'll use that too. Choice is good, a reduction of choice is very, very bad.
An external drive is a wonderful idea for an all in one computer, nicely undoing the removal of desk clutter such a design strove to eliminate.
Did'ja ever notice that there aren't too many (read: any at all) external floppy drives around anymore?
Did'ja ever wonder why that might be?
My own view is that a desktop should include options for everything a user could ever want to configure, and all in the same case. It makes PC makers lives more difficult, but that's not my problem.
That's right; your problem is wanting that in the first place.
What graphics do you put in the iMac? Would the GTX 680M run too hot? Since the display isn't expected to increase, is 1 GB enough or do you at least give 2 GB for the ultimate as standard?
I'd be interested to see the stats of how many DVD/BD drives are commonly used in desktop computers, should should such a stat exist of course.
About 30-35% of Apple's customers buy desktops. The amount of that portion of users watching DVDs on their computers is probably very small because you can't really sit comfortably in front of a desktop computer. Optical drives can be noisy too, I'd rather not have drive noise interrupting a movie.
I just like choice. If a digital option makes sense, then I'll use it, but if optical makes sense, I'll use that too. Choice is good, a reduction of choice is very, very bad.
There is no reduction of choice though. You aren't forced to use a digital option. You just don't have to pay for a drive you might never use.
What graphics do you put in the iMac? Would the GTX 680M run too hot? Since the display isn't expected to increase, is 1 GB enough or do you at least give 2 GB for the ultimate as standard?
The GTX 680M looks like a good choice. They can also use the 7970M but from this site, it looks like the 680M would be a better choice:
Comments
Originally Posted by cvaldes1831
The slotless Mac mini design is not new. It existed two years ago in the Mac mini server (Mid-2010), side-by-side with the single-HDD Mac minis.
In 2011, Apple just switched to the slotless design which had already been around for an entire year.
I know, but OS X only has an icon for the latter, not the former (for whatever reason) and my point wasn't compromised by using the new design.
Fun fact: the icon for the Retina MacBook Pro doesn't have "MacBook Pro" on the screen bezel… which I'm now just noticing is a reflection of the actual device… why didn't I notice that or hear it before anywhere?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Taking out the optical drive and making it thinner definitely qualifies as a 'full redesign'. Anything that alters the exterior casing is a redesign. And no, there won't be retina display yet. It just is still too much of a technical hit at this point.
Perhaps SSD standardized too? Or is that overall for a non-mobile computer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jw2003
15' MBP was a great choice to start with introducing retina, because it's a tool of choise for photo community where resolution and clarity matters. Most photographers won't touch iMac with 100ft pole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Photographers, care to chime in here?
My wife is a photographer and does phenomenal work... on an iMac. I, too, am confused why photographers wont touch an iMac? There are no viewing angle/color changes like a laptop has, and you have 27" to work with full screen. If you think Photoshop takes a lot of juice to run- you're wrong... its pretty minor.
If they chunk the optical and replace it with a 32gb SSD instead- I am so for this it's ridiculous.
As to right to left fans heat rises, if you want to remove it efficiently you don't work against that. On top of that Ivy Bridge, SSDs and a host of other technologies would lower the heat profile. It would not be impossible to actuall see a thinner and cooler iMac. Retina would be easier in an iMac assuming a longer viewing distance.
It isn't speed that keeps me from upgrading to an iMac. I rather hate it's anti service designs. I wouldn't even consider an iMac unless serviceability was addressed.
That being said we have yet to hear any Mini rumors or even replacements for the Mini. This is a big concern as they need something other than iMac on the desktop.
Nor does any other single persons purchase decision. What drives stock prices is mind share, if Apple maintains a buzz and clearly innovates the stock won't have pricing issues.
Every time I hear about them upgrading the iMac, I am torn. I have a Late-2009 27" model. I'm sure a brand new one would be SO cool. OTOH, the one I have now works damned well, so I'm not sure I could justify getting a new one.
So torn. So torn.
Hopefully with a matte display option. Or else it is a deal-braker, since it is a serious health and productivity issue. MacMatte.
Thinner on a phone, iPad, or laptop makes sense. Thinner on an iMac really doesn't. If they remove optical drives I hope they add least add something to compensate for that loss.
I would think if they do, they'll just make another drive bay available like they did on the mini. It's an easy change. Removing the optical drive on an iMac doesn't change the thickness profile at all since the 3.5 internal drives are already far thicker than any optical, but it does free up space in that area for a new component.
Considering the only major improvement over the 2009 which I also have is the bus speed, I would be more interested in the Disk subsystem getting some perks.
Far more interested in this than the retina topic. The resolution on a 27" iMac is already one of the best on the market, and the PPI is decent and the display is a quality one.
Worse case, I wait another year or two for a refresh and by then I'll be ready to update my late 2009
I have a "late 2006" model iMac. I'd be happy with a 27' with updated internals.
i don't understand this fetish for being thin [i wouldn't mind losing more than a few pounds] The iMac sits on a desk/table. Very few people [make that none in 6 years] have ever commented on it's waist size
I just don't get the benefit of an anorexic desktop!
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
Thinner on a phone, iPad, or laptop makes sense. Thinner on an iMac really doesn't. If they remove optical drives I hope they add least add something to compensate for that loss.
Even though I basically agree with you that thinness on an iMac (and it's not like they're huge now) isn't necessarily a big deal, I do also understand how the aesthetics could be improved with a slightly thinner look.
Honestly, I don't care either way, since I can't remember the last time I used the optical drive on my iMac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
No, it's not insane. iMacs are now commonly set up in living rooms, kitchens, etc and are part of the decor of the room instead of being relegated to the basement in shame as other desktops are. Anything that makes it even take less space, weight, and generally add to the attractiveness of the environment is a good thing. I agree that thinness shoudnt be an absolute priority like their portable machines, but I'm not going to complain if they do make it thinner without compromising other things. Taking out the optical drive should help a lot in that, as it will free up a ton of space. Also, their reason for removing the drive would be primarily because they want to wean everyone off optical media, not because of thinness. In terms of overheating, I've never had an iMac overheat, so no clue what you're talking about.
You don't wean people off optical media by removing the drive, you do it by making digital alternatives that are cheaper and better. Optical is often cheaper, sometimes dramatically so (box sets in particular), so only a fool would want that option removed. Unless of course, you're rich, in which case, bully for you, but don't spoil things for the rest of us.
Personally I use the optical drive in my Win 7 desktop often, in fact it's in use this very second to rip a DVD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AaronJ
Every time I hear about them upgrading the iMac, I am torn. I have a Late-2009 27" model. I'm sure a brand new one would be SO cool. OTOH, the one I have now works damned well, so I'm not sure I could justify getting a new one.
So torn. So torn.
A PC should last at least 5 years. The tech is mature and evolves very slowly now.
My desktop is 7 years old. It still works fine, but is feeling a little stale, so I may buy a new system this year.
Originally Posted by kotatsu
You don't wean people off optical media by removing the drive, you do it by making digital alternatives that are cheaper and better.
No, you do it by removing the drive. This has worked for every technology Apple has removed from devices.
…only a fool would want that option removed. Unless of course, you're rich, in which case, bully for you, but don't spoil things for the rest of us.
Personally I use the optical drive in my Win 7 desktop often, in fact it's in use this very second to rip a DVD.
So feel free to continue to use last century's technology while Apple moves everyone else forward.
The option to use an optical isn't being removed, it's just changing to be an optional external peripheral. This is better for poor people because it means you aren't forced to pay Apple's expensive charge for an optical unit so Apple takes that money off or puts it towards something more valuable and you can buy a faster 3rd party DVD drive for $30-50 or even a Blu-Ray drive for as little as $140.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
The option to use an optical isn't being removed, it's just changing to be an optional external peripheral. This is better for poor people because it means you aren't forced to pay Apple's expensive charge for an optical unit so Apple takes that money off or puts it towards something more valuable and you can buy a faster 3rd party DVD drive for $30-50 or even a Blu-Ray drive for as little as $140.
An external drive is a wonderful idea for an all in one computer, nicely undoing the removal of desk clutter such a design strove to eliminate.
I'd be interested to see the stats of how many DVD/BD drives are commonly used in desktop computers, should should such a stat exist of course. My own view is that a desktop should include options for everything a user could ever want to configure, and all in the same case. It makes PC makers lives more difficult, but that's not my problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
No, you do it by removing the drive. This has worked for every technology Apple has removed from devices.
So feel free to continue to use last century's technology while Apple moves everyone else forward.
DVDs and BDs are still very much current technology. If you can show me a streaming site which can match BD quality, then I'd like to see it. Or a place to buy TV series box sets digitally which matches the prices on Amazon perhaps?
I just like choice. If a digital option makes sense, then I'll use it, but if optical makes sense, I'll use that too. Choice is good, a reduction of choice is very, very bad.
Originally Posted by kotatsu
An external drive is a wonderful idea for an all in one computer, nicely undoing the removal of desk clutter such a design strove to eliminate.
Did'ja ever notice that there aren't too many (read: any at all) external floppy drives around anymore?
Did'ja ever wonder why that might be?
My own view is that a desktop should include options for everything a user could ever want to configure, and all in the same case. It makes PC makers lives more difficult, but that's not my problem.
That's right; your problem is wanting that in the first place.
About 30-35% of Apple's customers buy desktops. The amount of that portion of users watching DVDs on their computers is probably very small because you can't really sit comfortably in front of a desktop computer. Optical drives can be noisy too, I'd rather not have drive noise interrupting a movie.
There is no reduction of choice though. You aren't forced to use a digital option. You just don't have to pay for a drive you might never use.
The GTX 680M looks like a good choice. They can also use the 7970M but from this site, it looks like the 680M would be a better choice:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-GeForce-GTX-680M-vs-Radeon-HD-7970M.77110.0.html
1GB of memory should be enough at the current resolution. Apple is always tight with video memory for some reason.