I suspect the push to thinner iMacs is purely to leverage the emotional decision a purchaser makes, i.e. thinner = sexier = more desirable = more sales.
The "emotional decision" is what it is all about in terms of the look of the thing. And feel. Thinner and lighter are unquestionly better if the user experience remains as good or better as a result. Try putting an original white flat iMac on your desk and I guarantee at some point you will exclaim: "holy crap! This thing is heavy". Then when it's there you'll complain about the size and thickness. It's a beast by comparison to the present design.
The guy who posted the image said that the iMac is extremely thin on the side view but still has the chin on the front. He said it would be more expensive than the current iMac, which doesn't sound right.
It may just be the picture but this looks like the 21.5" model and it looks like a 2.5" hard drive judging by the size relative to the fan and screws. That might be a bracket that can hold two drives so the SSD just goes in the same bracket.
This is a view from the front so the screen still has to come out to get the to the drives. I wonder if they are actually going to hold the whole screen in place with magnets. What would be neat is if you could just pull the screen right off and it disconnects without messing with wires and you just clip it back on.
There's no GPU in the picture. That board below the HDD looks to be the PSU with the electricity symbol on it and the motherboard is on the right (basically the current layout rotated 90 degrees). I think the GPU will be plugged on where the red circle on the right is. This puts the CPU and GPU above the HDD and the cooling fans should keep the heat well away.
It certainly looks compact enough to get rid of the chin but they might have other reasons for keeping it.
I expect the Mini will tag along silently and the 13" rMBP less silently.
Also, under promise and over deliver is classic Apple. They know that folks as gunning for new desktops, which they might have thought wouldn't be ready for a few more weeks. But if they were wrong yes they might launch them now.get the holiday sales
Having trouble imagining a 27" retina screen. If they are having trouble making enough 13" retina screens, how bad will it be for 27"? However I'd hate to see them making it thinner and losing functionality in the process. Thinner is fine, but not if it means integrated graphics only for example.
Removal of the optical drive will be a major contributor to the thinness. I don't think they can innovate the iMac anymore. It hasn't seen a major redesign since 2005.
If you merely define innovate in terms of external design, sure
No they don't. Only spec-heads say that. Nice try in implying that there is some "perceived" urgency. Even the current iMacs are still a heckuva lot better than similar offering from the competitors.
Now don't get me wrong, I am one of those waiting for the next release. While I'm not necessarily a "spec-head" anymore since most PC's are generally fast enough for most regular use, I do want to stay right at the most current iteration simply because I can.
However, I will await the cue from "Oh don't ever buy the 1st generation of a new model even though the iMac is how old now?" whiners...
Well most of us hope that Apple does more than just stick an Ivy Bridge processor in there. USB 3.0 and a cheaper SSD option would be huge improvements for me. Do I do professional video editing work? Yes, but I am also planning to drop 1.5k or more on a computer. Is it weird to want the best possible for that price point?
What about all these render people who buy the newest thing because it saves them seconds per frame, adding up to whatever over time? I've heard that argument a lot.
The bigger issue is that Apple shot themselves in the foot with FCPX. Say what you like about it, but I know not a single sole in the professional world that still edits on it. Avid and Sony Vegas both work on PC (Vegas exclusively). So if the top tier of Apple doesn't shine, than people are gonna peace out for a computer that does.
And yeah, when you're sorting through over 200 hours of footage, every second counts (albeit with 64mb programs, rendering is starting to be a thing of the past).
I love MC6, I just want a computer that can run it now...
5 year old black MacBook still going strong with a whopping 35 minutes of battery life.
PS: There are on average 24 frames per second. If a new computer saves a second (let alone "seconds per frame"), then that's a SHIT ton of time saved in the end. Once again, most people are working with hundreds of hours of footage, and with digital people record EVERYTHING. I'm working on a doc with 5 years of non-stop footage. We have over 12tb of footage. Every god damn second counts.
The iMac is too this as it is. I would rather see it a little thicker and loose the dreaded iMac chin. Much like the new Apple Thunderbolt Displays. In addition, a larger volume could possibly help with heat dissipation.
The iMac is too this as it is. I would rather see it a little thicker and loose the dreaded iMac chin. Much like the new Apple Thunderbolt Displays. In addition, a larger volume could possibly help with heat dissipation.
If the biggest problem people have with a product is an aesthetic opinion then Apple is doing something right.
If they kept the current iMac size would they be able to increase the heat dissipation and fit in a non M GPU? That would be the upgrade everyone really wants.
The desktop Macs are more outdated today than they have ever been. While Ivy Bridge is only about six months old, USB 3 is now several years old. Likewise OpenCL has been around a long time. Beyond that the need to use special purpose hardware like the hard drives really needs to be addressed.
That would explain why they think a 7.85" iPad is more portable than a regular one, though. They're always wearing jackets!
Anyway, it's the same freaking argument at every update, isn't it? : "The currently sold iMac is so pathetically slow that it can't even turn on anymore; I demand a new computer with a processor 10% faster than the last one so that I can not use that processor to its fullest extent at any juncture."
Some arguements do sound silly but on the other hand most people see these machines as longer term investments. It just doesn't make sense to invest in severely outdated hardware if you expect to keep it for a few years.
Yeah, the current iMac is out of date, only because newer chips are being sold. Not physically and not usably. Spectacular machines, and certainly faster than whatever someone is using while waiting for the newer ones. Need now, buy now. If not, wait. Simple.
The update processor wise is minor. What is a problem is the rest of the architecture which is significantly outdated.
Water droplets are flat on the bottom due to air pressure. The "water droplet" symbol is almost as accurate as the "heart" symbol.
And we shouldn't confuse a description with an exact representation. Tapered with a curve is probably more accurate but far too abstract to be useful as a description.
Comments
I will wait for the next Mac I wish to buy to come out but in the meantime I may also buy a PC for a project I choose to use it for.
It may just be the picture but this looks like the 21.5" model and it looks like a 2.5" hard drive judging by the size relative to the fan and screws. That might be a bracket that can hold two drives so the SSD just goes in the same bracket.
This is a view from the front so the screen still has to come out to get the to the drives. I wonder if they are actually going to hold the whole screen in place with magnets. What would be neat is if you could just pull the screen right off and it disconnects without messing with wires and you just clip it back on.
There's no GPU in the picture. That board below the HDD looks to be the PSU with the electricity symbol on it and the motherboard is on the right (basically the current layout rotated 90 degrees). I think the GPU will be plugged on where the red circle on the right is. This puts the CPU and GPU above the HDD and the cooling fans should keep the heat well away.
It certainly looks compact enough to get rid of the chin but they might have other reasons for keeping it.
I expect the Mini will tag along silently and the 13" rMBP less silently.
Mini 1 - Intel i5 + HD 4000
Mini 2 - Intel i5 + 512MB 640M
Mini 3 - Intel quad i7 + HD 4000
13" rMBP Intel i5 + 512MB 640M, 256GB SSD, $1499
iMac 1 - Intel i5 quad + 512MB 650M, 21.5"
iMac 2 - Intel i5 quad + 1GB 660M, 21.5"
iMac 3 - Intel i5 quad + 1GB 660M, 27"
iMac 4 - Intel i5 quad + 1GB GTX 680M, 27" (BTO i7-3770)
Yes please! Option for i7 2.9 GHz and for 1 GB on graphics.
Originally Posted by Marvin
He said it would be more expensive than the current iMac, which doesn't sound right.
Unless they're retina.
But did he mean calendar 2013 or Fiscal 2013
Also, under promise and over deliver is classic Apple. They know that folks as gunning for new desktops, which they might have thought wouldn't be ready for a few more weeks. But if they were wrong yes they might launch them now.get the holiday sales
If you merely define innovate in terms of external design, sure
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
No they don't. Only spec-heads say that. Nice try in implying that there is some "perceived" urgency. Even the current iMacs are still a heckuva lot better than similar offering from the competitors.
Now don't get me wrong, I am one of those waiting for the next release. While I'm not necessarily a "spec-head" anymore since most PC's are generally fast enough for most regular use, I do want to stay right at the most current iteration simply because I can.
However, I will await the cue from "Oh don't ever buy the 1st generation of a new model even though the iMac is how old now?" whiners...
Well most of us hope that Apple does more than just stick an Ivy Bridge processor in there. USB 3.0 and a cheaper SSD option would be huge improvements for me. Do I do professional video editing work? Yes, but I am also planning to drop 1.5k or more on a computer. Is it weird to want the best possible for that price point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What about all these render people who buy the newest thing because it saves them seconds per frame, adding up to whatever over time? I've heard that argument a lot.
The bigger issue is that Apple shot themselves in the foot with FCPX. Say what you like about it, but I know not a single sole in the professional world that still edits on it. Avid and Sony Vegas both work on PC (Vegas exclusively). So if the top tier of Apple doesn't shine, than people are gonna peace out for a computer that does.
And yeah, when you're sorting through over 200 hours of footage, every second counts (albeit with 64mb programs, rendering is starting to be a thing of the past).
I love MC6, I just want a computer that can run it now...
5 year old black MacBook still going strong with a whopping 35 minutes of battery life.
PS: There are on average 24 frames per second. If a new computer saves a second (let alone "seconds per frame"), then that's a SHIT ton of time saved in the end. Once again, most people are working with hundreds of hours of footage, and with digital people record EVERYTHING. I'm working on a doc with 5 years of non-stop footage. We have over 12tb of footage. Every god damn second counts.
Originally Posted by pink unicorn
…I know not a single sole in the professional world that still edits on it.
I challenge that.
If the biggest problem people have with a product is an aesthetic opinion then Apple is doing something right.
If they kept the current iMac size would they be able to increase the heat dissipation and fit in a non M GPU? That would be the upgrade everyone really wants.
Some arguements do sound silly but on the other hand most people see these machines as longer term investments. It just doesn't make sense to invest in severely outdated hardware if you expect to keep it for a few years.
The update processor wise is minor. What is a problem is the rest of the architecture which is significantly outdated.
Can't really get my head around "new shell design is said to be curved like a water droplet".
Wouldn't this look a bit weird?
Originally Posted by hentaiboy
Can't really get my head around "new shell design is said to be curved like a water droplet".
Water droplets are flat on the bottom due to air pressure. The "water droplet" symbol is almost as accurate as the "heart" symbol.
Originally Posted by wizard69
The update processor wise is minor. What is a problem is the rest of the architecture which is significantly outdated.
But what can they do? Slightly faster RAM (still laptop RAM), same hard drive (spinning disc), and a modern GPU. Is that what you mean?
And we shouldn't confuse a description with an exact representation. Tapered with a curve is probably more accurate but far too abstract to be useful as a description.