IF you use (or need in this case) to use something like DIskWarrior, one must be able to boot from a DVD or another drive. So, if we need to use utilities, optical drives are kind of still needed. Plus, some people like to make archival DVD/CD copies of audio/video/data and there are a LOT of people, like myself, that STILL buy CDs and transfer their music to HD for lossless audio rather than dl from iTunes like content suppliers. Some of use can hear the difference between compressed and uncompressed audio.
Thanks for bringing reason into the discussion. Now get ready for the backlash.
Actually, iMac 2011 does have a mild antiglare coating. I can tell by the color shifts and by comparing it with a real, untreated glossy glass surface. By bonding the front glass to the panel, you are reducing the number of reflective surfaces by two thirds.
The Retina MBP did indeed get a significant reduction in glare. To the point where I don't think it's a big deal anymore. Even matte surfaces get reflection, in reality, it's just blurred.
According to Apple, the Retina MBP cuts glare significantly. However, I find that the glare is still there, it just isn't as sharp (it's not like a mirror anymore, it kind of spreads the glare out to a wider area). It looks pretty unnatural to me. This sounds better, but we'll see how it actually looks.
I work at an Apple Specialist and the design of these things must be unbelievable. They shrunk every major component by an insane amount - power supply, fans, heat sinks... all must be positively micro to fit in a unit this size.
It's a wonder this unit doesn't melt the instant you turn it on.
Very impressive job, Apple.
Don't speak too soon - with Apple's quality control lately, some of them just might melt.
Awww ... show me what meanness you had in store for me; I can take it
Seriously, it's not a matter of thinness but rather the process getting there. There are two aspects to the process: First, Apple had to develop innovative manufacturing processes. Second, it's the process of introducing impossibly thin devices ALL ACROSS their product lineups!!
And third, they had to cripple some components (5400-rpm drive laptop drive in a desktop).
Amazon MP3 is still available. Netflix and Hulu are still available.
Live moves on.
That's great, if you like compressed music, obnoxious Hulu commercials, and watching Netflix through the Silverlight player (and not getting recent movies). That's how life should be - a descent toward the bottom.
I actually believed that it was 5mm thick throughout the machine, since unable to watch the launch presentation. Little disappointed that it is not and other people will be, once they see the machine in-store.
These people that suddenly show up with made-up statistics ("optical media less common today than floppies back in the day") dont add nothing to an educated well formed discussion.
Thank you for your reply. I was about to do the same thing and expose the same arguments. I'll also add, buying classical and opera albums on mp3 / iTunes format is a big no-no for me. Still go for optical there. And should I ignore my +1000 CD collection? my +1000 DVD collection?
Extra note. I work with a lot of 2 minute to 10 minute video spots, from various sources including TV stations and media companies, and their favorite storage solution is still the DVD. You try looking professional to a costumer by sending dropbox download links or through a USB drive. "Please return USB drive to us after you are done".. Uh... No.
Sorry. All in one this is not.
"What am I suppose to do with the hundreds of floppy disks I have" said by thousands when the original iMac came out.
I understand people still have a need for optical discs but in a couple of years it won't matter. There will still be a market for external optical disc drives for years to come and eventually those will be phased out just like floppy drives.
I'm sure apple's has looked at the statistics and realized the majority of users rarely use an optical drive and its just wasted space and stupidity expensive to repair for users when it fails while external optical drives run $40 or so.
Personally I haven't had a need for a optical drive in my MacBook Air since I got it in 2011. Every single program is downloadable and I usually do that when I have the disc just download the latest version to be safe like I always have done. Music is purchased online (amazon, iTunes etc) and movies are played on my Blu-ray player
Phil goes, "we actually merge the molecules" and I go "yeah, we're NEVER getting inside this thing again!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Anyone who thinks edge thinness is no big deal ... is really misunderstanding technology and should have free speech privilege revoked.
It's difficult to tell whether this is sarcasm. It should be sarcasm, but I'm not entirely sure. The reason thickness shouldn't matter much with a desktop is that it has virtually no effect on where it can be placed or how it can be used. The cords tend to ensure that it won't be moved around much, and this doesn't offer anything in the way of device consolidation. If you were sitting in front of one, you'd never notice the difference in density. What concerns me is that Apple has in the past prioritized aesthetics over things like quiet operation. The mini can generate a fair amount of fan noise, and this isn't something that should be necessary on a desktop. Desktops should not be subject to potential throttling or noise issues as you would have with a notebook. Otherwise that is yet another advantage ticked off the list. In terms of glare reduction, I like that part. Matte coatings apply a very small bump so that light is reflected in different angles or scattered. It's somewhat of a micro-faceted effect. Taking this approach of just trying to reduce glare as much as possible isn't so bad. If color viewing is critical, you should work in a light controlled environment anyway. It's just important that the user isn't obviously reflected due to the backlight from the display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Actually, iMac 2011 does have a mild antiglare coating. I can tell by the color shifts and by comparing it with a real, untreated glossy glass surface. By bonding the front glass to the panel, you are reducing the number of reflective surfaces by two thirds.
The Retina MBP did indeed get a significant reduction in glare. To the point where I don't think it's a big deal anymore. Even matte surfaces get reflection, in reality, it's just blurred.
It's trivial to boot from an external drive. I think it's a non-problem. I bought an external optical drive for an old iMac with a dying optical drive. A $30 external drive beat buying a $100 part and getting inside.
The bumpiness causes it to reflect in different directions when viewed from the front. I'm still disturbed by some aspects of this design. I've seen a bunch of imac problems, although I kind of want to like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
While I really love this new look, the question that worries me is what will happen when you use it for a long raytracing task that uses all the four cores to the max... will the CPU temp rise to 90ºC like in recent Macbooks (water evaporates at 100ºC) and will fans rotate at max speed like if it was a laptop rather than a desktop? As I said, I love this look, but I expect my desktop to be able to accomplish long and intensive CPU tasks without being worried with the CPU temp. If it's noisy when doing hard work, I'll be afraid of pushing it too much, and it won't be very useful.
The same applies to last generation games, or even not so last generation, like "Sims 3". Will they melt the CPU?
I hope the Mac Pro isn't the only choice for people who need all cores at 100% during long periods of time.
The 2011 imac can already get pretty hot as it is. You should wait for others to beta test these things for you or purchase it at a time when you'll definitely have time to test it thoroughly within the return period.
I think I'm beginning to understand where Apple and I started taking diverging paths. I base the value of the machine on what I can accomplish with it. Apple is responding to those for whom the primary measure is how it looks.
I get it, it really does look nice, but the BENEFIT is lost on me. Whether it's one inch deep or three it still occupies the same amount of workspace area. What does the user gain through a small reduction in depth? The footprint doesn't change. What am I missing?
FOR THE RECORD: No offense meant to anyone who really likes the new form. I'm not condemning it, I'm just saying I don't get it, that's all.
One benefit is that it looks a lot nicer on your desk. The other is that it will sell a lot more if it looks nice. By the way you are talking I am not sure you remember what computers looked like 15 years ago. Hideous. Most people take pleasure in using a beautifully piece of equipment. Most people like their offices and homes to look nice. As long as the new iMac is as good, or better than its predecessor it's a win win. Remember that design can never stay still - if it does it moves backwards. That applies to 'looks' as much as technological design / development.
So when you say you are diverging, do you mean to say that you'd be happy with a souped up Quadra and lots of cables and ports as long as you have a big monitor?
See, Apple does listen sometimes. I guess buying Anobit was a MAJOR part in it. I guess the other companies are gonna have tough time figuring that one out without Anobit controller chips. Maybe they have a TON of patents protecting them from being copied by the PC mfg.
I am wondering what everyone is gonna do if they get the iMac screen and make TVs. I think they might have cracked the TV screen problem at the same time. Maybe CES won't be the same........
I wouldn't think Anobit has anything to do with this. This is all making the OS know where to put files and making the file system see it as one drive. Anobit should be bringing up more reliable NAND and perhaps better controllers, of which I'm hoping means we can get faster and smaller NAND without the issues currently associated with them.
I'm an engineer, so I know something about technical design. The thinner a computer is, the more tightly packed the components, the hotter it will run, the more likely something will fail. This is just basic "laws of physics" stuff. In addition, the fact that they had to struggle with getting the "screen bonding" process to work is another indication that they're on the hairy edge of this thing failing (e.g. screen delaminating over time, air bubbles appearing, etc). Of course it looks cool, but let's face it, the older iMac looked extremely cool also (dare I say, "cool enough"?). By pushing the packaging envelope in this way, Apple has sacrificed reliability and robustness, just to go from "ridiculously thin" to "insanely thin". And who ultimately pays the price? We do -- either by having to pay for Apple Care to protect our failure-prone new toy, or (if we roll the dice) by having to replace it years before we should have had to. I would personally MUCH rather have an iMac that is less thin, has an optical drive, and will let me sleep at night not worrying that I'm "on the edge of failure" with my new toy.
1) Can't wait for December. Bought a desk and desk chair on Amazon last week in anticipation of my big move back to a desktop PC after about 12 years with a notebook.
One benefit is that it looks a lot nicer on your desk. The other is that it will sell a lot more if it looks nice. By the way you are talking I am not sure you remember what computers looked like 15 years ago. Hideous. Most people take pleasure in using a beautifully piece of equipment. Most people like their offices and homes to look nice. As long as the new iMac is as good, or better than its predecessor it's a win win. Remember that design can never stay still - if it does it moves backwards. That applies to 'looks' as much as technological design / development.
So when you say you are diverging, do you mean to say that you'd be happy with a souped up Quadra and lots of cables and ports as long as you have a big monitor?
I'm with you completely. I love the thinness around the edge. Hopefully it's just as fat or fatter in the middle where no one sees.
The no optical drive means nothing to me- I've had to burn a DVD for 2 bids in 3 years- I can plug something in a USB. Now my wife, on the otherhand, has to burn 2-3+ DVDs a week for her photo shoots. So that's a little tougher. I'll wait for our home upgrade for sure. Not sure how else to give someone 30+ raw pictures (or hundreds and hundreds for a wedding). I guess USB? Fine for expensive weddings but not $150 senior pics. USB DVD burner in the future here we come.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
IF you use (or need in this case) to use something like DIskWarrior, one must be able to boot from a DVD or another drive. So, if we need to use utilities, optical drives are kind of still needed. Plus, some people like to make archival DVD/CD copies of audio/video/data and there are a LOT of people, like myself, that STILL buy CDs and transfer their music to HD for lossless audio rather than dl from iTunes like content suppliers. Some of use can hear the difference between compressed and uncompressed audio.
Thanks for bringing reason into the discussion. Now get ready for the backlash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Actually, iMac 2011 does have a mild antiglare coating. I can tell by the color shifts and by comparing it with a real, untreated glossy glass surface. By bonding the front glass to the panel, you are reducing the number of reflective surfaces by two thirds.
The Retina MBP did indeed get a significant reduction in glare. To the point where I don't think it's a big deal anymore. Even matte surfaces get reflection, in reality, it's just blurred.
According to Apple, the Retina MBP cuts glare significantly. However, I find that the glare is still there, it just isn't as sharp (it's not like a mirror anymore, it kind of spreads the glare out to a wider area). It looks pretty unnatural to me. This sounds better, but we'll see how it actually looks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDBLACK
Yes. Very ugly.
Where's the cord?
Quote:
Originally Posted by enjourni
I work at an Apple Specialist and the design of these things must be unbelievable. They shrunk every major component by an insane amount - power supply, fans, heat sinks... all must be positively micro to fit in a unit this size.
It's a wonder this unit doesn't melt the instant you turn it on.
Very impressive job, Apple.
Don't speak too soon - with Apple's quality control lately, some of them just might melt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Awww ... show me what meanness you had in store for me; I can take it
Seriously, it's not a matter of thinness but rather the process getting there. There are two aspects to the process: First, Apple had to develop innovative manufacturing processes. Second, it's the process of introducing impossibly thin devices ALL ACROSS their product lineups!!
And third, they had to cripple some components (5400-rpm drive laptop drive in a desktop).
This was exactly what I was hoping for!
I'm looking forward to ordering a 21.5" with the 1 TB fusion drive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Amazon MP3 is still available. Netflix and Hulu are still available.
Live moves on.
That's great, if you like compressed music, obnoxious Hulu commercials, and watching Netflix through the Silverlight player (and not getting recent movies). That's how life should be - a descent toward the bottom.
I hope the 1TB HDD isn't a Seagate
http://www.apple.com/support/imac-harddrive/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
I agree. As a photographer needing to swap cards out frequently, this is not optimal. I would have rather it been on the bottom.
You need one of these
Very nice machine, but marketing pictures are little misrepresenting the true thickness.
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apples-new-imac-thicker-than-it-seems
I actually believed that it was 5mm thick throughout the machine, since unable to watch the launch presentation. Little disappointed that it is not and other people will be, once they see the machine in-store.
Maybe old fashioned and just like pure honesty.
Do the new iMacs support jumbo frames? My i7 27" iMac doesn't and I dream of one day being able to re-enable jumbo frames on the home LAN.
"What am I suppose to do with the hundreds of floppy disks I have" said by thousands when the original iMac came out.
I understand people still have a need for optical discs but in a couple of years it won't matter. There will still be a market for external optical disc drives for years to come and eventually those will be phased out just like floppy drives.
I'm sure apple's has looked at the statistics and realized the majority of users rarely use an optical drive and its just wasted space and stupidity expensive to repair for users when it fails while external optical drives run $40 or so.
Personally I haven't had a need for a optical drive in my MacBook Air since I got it in 2011. Every single program is downloadable and I usually do that when I have the disc just download the latest version to be safe like I always have done. Music is purchased online (amazon, iTunes etc) and movies are played on my Blu-ray player
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Absolutely stunning.
Phil goes, "we actually merge the molecules" and I go "yeah, we're NEVER getting inside this thing again!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
Anyone who thinks edge thinness is no big deal ... is really misunderstanding technology and should have free speech privilege revoked.
It's difficult to tell whether this is sarcasm. It should be sarcasm, but I'm not entirely sure. The reason thickness shouldn't matter much with a desktop is that it has virtually no effect on where it can be placed or how it can be used. The cords tend to ensure that it won't be moved around much, and this doesn't offer anything in the way of device consolidation. If you were sitting in front of one, you'd never notice the difference in density. What concerns me is that Apple has in the past prioritized aesthetics over things like quiet operation. The mini can generate a fair amount of fan noise, and this isn't something that should be necessary on a desktop. Desktops should not be subject to potential throttling or noise issues as you would have with a notebook. Otherwise that is yet another advantage ticked off the list. In terms of glare reduction, I like that part. Matte coatings apply a very small bump so that light is reflected in different angles or scattered. It's somewhat of a micro-faceted effect. Taking this approach of just trying to reduce glare as much as possible isn't so bad. If color viewing is critical, you should work in a light controlled environment anyway. It's just important that the user isn't obviously reflected due to the backlight from the display.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Actually, iMac 2011 does have a mild antiglare coating. I can tell by the color shifts and by comparing it with a real, untreated glossy glass surface. By bonding the front glass to the panel, you are reducing the number of reflective surfaces by two thirds.
The Retina MBP did indeed get a significant reduction in glare. To the point where I don't think it's a big deal anymore. Even matte surfaces get reflection, in reality, it's just blurred.
It's trivial to boot from an external drive. I think it's a non-problem. I bought an external optical drive for an old iMac with a dying optical drive. A $30 external drive beat buying a $100 part and getting inside.
The bumpiness causes it to reflect in different directions when viewed from the front. I'm still disturbed by some aspects of this design. I've seen a bunch of imac problems, although I kind of want to like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecs
While I really love this new look, the question that worries me is what will happen when you use it for a long raytracing task that uses all the four cores to the max... will the CPU temp rise to 90ºC like in recent Macbooks (water evaporates at 100ºC) and will fans rotate at max speed like if it was a laptop rather than a desktop? As I said, I love this look, but I expect my desktop to be able to accomplish long and intensive CPU tasks without being worried with the CPU temp. If it's noisy when doing hard work, I'll be afraid of pushing it too much, and it won't be very useful.
The same applies to last generation games, or even not so last generation, like "Sims 3". Will they melt the CPU?
I hope the Mac Pro isn't the only choice for people who need all cores at 100% during long periods of time.
The 2011 imac can already get pretty hot as it is. You should wait for others to beta test these things for you or purchase it at a time when you'll definitely have time to test it thoroughly within the return period.
So when you say you are diverging, do you mean to say that you'd be happy with a souped up Quadra and lots of cables and ports as long as you have a big monitor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth
Where's the cord?
It's white (^_-)
I wouldn't think Anobit has anything to do with this. This is all making the OS know where to put files and making the file system see it as one drive. Anobit should be bringing up more reliable NAND and perhaps better controllers, of which I'm hoping means we can get faster and smaller NAND without the issues currently associated with them.
I'm an engineer, so I know something about technical design. The thinner a computer is, the more tightly packed the components, the hotter it will run, the more likely something will fail. This is just basic "laws of physics" stuff. In addition, the fact that they had to struggle with getting the "screen bonding" process to work is another indication that they're on the hairy edge of this thing failing (e.g. screen delaminating over time, air bubbles appearing, etc). Of course it looks cool, but let's face it, the older iMac looked extremely cool also (dare I say, "cool enough"?). By pushing the packaging envelope in this way, Apple has sacrificed reliability and robustness, just to go from "ridiculously thin" to "insanely thin". And who ultimately pays the price? We do -- either by having to pay for Apple Care to protect our failure-prone new toy, or (if we roll the dice) by having to replace it years before we should have had to. I would personally MUCH rather have an iMac that is less thin, has an optical drive, and will let me sleep at night not worrying that I'm "on the edge of failure" with my new toy.
2) FW is gone!
If you are swapping cards out often I'd think you'd have an external USB card reader for that.
I'm with you completely. I love the thinness around the edge. Hopefully it's just as fat or fatter in the middle where no one sees.
The no optical drive means nothing to me- I've had to burn a DVD for 2 bids in 3 years- I can plug something in a USB. Now my wife, on the otherhand, has to burn 2-3+ DVDs a week for her photo shoots. So that's a little tougher. I'll wait for our home upgrade for sure. Not sure how else to give someone 30+ raw pictures (or hundreds and hundreds for a wedding). I guess USB? Fine for expensive weddings but not $150 senior pics. USB DVD burner in the future here we come.