Apple's redesigned iMac is 5mm thin with edge-to-edge glass

1456810

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 189
    bdblackbdblack Posts: 146member
    hillstones wrote: »
    You are so full of BS.  You are so clueless that you don't even realize that the optical drive is dual layer, so you can store 8 GB of data on a DVD.  Low durability?  Where is your evidence to prove that?  I have CD-Rs and DVD-Rs that are over 10 years old and in perfect condition, just like the data stored on them.  Just because you drink the Apple Kool-Aid, doesn't mean everyone else in the world thinks the removal of an optical drive in a DESKTOP computer is a wise choice.  Apple has never been about clutter and external parts...but now they are because they want you to spend $1299 to $1999 and not even get an optical drive that is not considered obsolete.  You will look like a dork when someone has a music CD and you can't even rip it to iTunes because your $2,000 iMac didn't come with one.  Go buy Adobe's Creative Suite and try and install it on your new iMac...oh, you can't.  Apple removed the disc drive.  That's why my May 2011 iMac just became more valuable.  Oh, the SD card slot on the back of the iMac is another retarded move.  The side was the perfect location.

    The laminated layers of a dvdr degrade very quickly. You can get archival grade discs however the cost per gigabyte is rather high. Ive seen cheaper media become unreadable within 5 years however some discs can last a long time its sort of a tossup.
  • Reply 142 of 189
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bob T View Post


    I'm an engineer, so I know something about technical design.



     


    So funny.


     


    (I'm a comedian, so I know something about funny.)

  • Reply 143 of 189
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    hillstones wrote: »
    Yes, in the 21.5 model only.  Most likely because it is a 2.5 laptop drive because they made a DESKTOP machine so damn thin for no reason.  The 27 model is bigger and fatter, so they squeezed in a standard 3.5 7200 RPM drive.

    Let's not jump to conclusions.

    Also, hop over to Apple's website and the 21.5 model does not have user upgradable RAM, only the 27" offers that.

    Ouch, you're right about that.

    solipsismx wrote: »
    If you are swapping cards out often I'd think you'd have an external USB card reader for that.

    Maybe someone wants to dump the external reader now the machine has one built in. But the location makes it inconvenient. SD cards are meant to be swapped. The only other use is to have the card slot occupied as expansion storage, which is silly. So I'm left to wonder if you really thought that comment through.
  • Reply 144 of 189
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    hillstones wrote: »
    The new iMac is a fat-ass in the back. The alleged 5mm thinness is misleading.  Only the very edge of the iMac is 5mm, the rest of the back panel balloons out to support the components, such as a 3.5 HD in the 27" model and crippled laptop drive in the 21.5.  Apple's website intentionally doesn't show the rear of the machine from the side.  But when Schiller spun it around during the keynote, it is the same thickness as the previous models, they just tapered out the edge to 5mm.

    It's 5mm at the edges. That was made quite clear during the event. What is misleading about that? Of course it's thicker toward the center. How else can you put desktop-grade components, the PSU in that casing and support the 20 lb with a stand if it's all 5mm? It's still 40% less volume.

    jeffdm wrote: »
    Maybe someone wants to dump the external reader now the machine has one built in. But the location makes it inconvenient. SD cards are meant to be swapped. The only other use is to have the card slot occupied as expansion storage, which is silly. So I'm left to wonder if you really thought that comment through.

    Of course I did. Apple doesn't care about SD cards. They added it because they feel they had to but it's not for someone like the person I posted to that wants to constantly swap out cards. If that's what you want to do and you want a new Mac what other option do you have (besides bitching) than to get a USB SD card reader to plug in conveniently on your desk? This goes for anyone with some usage need that going to the back of the machine constantly would be a chore.
  • Reply 145 of 189


    Apple has been pushing the edge in this way for some time now (notebooks, iPad, iPod ... reliability has not been an issue... if anything, they seem to be MORE viable long-term than their clunkier "competition".

  • Reply 146 of 189
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member


    I really like the new, thinner iMac. I would actually have liked them to go further and make it fully solid state and even thinner, and tell people who want more than 768MB storage to buy a Thunderbolt array. The Fusion drive technology I imagine will be rather short lived if Flash prices continue to drop. But maybe Apple can see, in their supply chain expertise, that the prices are starting to bottom out, so they thought this technology was a worthwhile investment.


     


    The GPU in the high end 27" is also a really primo one if you look it up on the Internet. That should make Feral and Aspyr happy, but maybe the integrated graphics in the Mac Mini will not. But roll on the next generation of GPUs and panels that can give us the dream of a Retina iMac.

  • Reply 147 of 189

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by elroth View Post


    I agree with you - I use the optical drive almost daily (I produce DVDs of martial arts workshops).



     


     


    I had to buy an external burner because we moved to BluRay in addition to DVD.  It is much faster than the internal drive.  

  • Reply 148 of 189

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    You are so full of BS.  You are so clueless that you don't even realize that the optical drive is dual layer, so you can store 8 GB of data on a DVD.  Low durability?  Where is your evidence to prove that?  I have CD-Rs and DVD-Rs that are over 10 years old and in perfect condition, just like the data stored on them.  Just because you drink the Apple Kool-Aid, doesn't mean everyone else in the world thinks the removal of an optical drive in a DESKTOP computer is a wise choice.  Apple has never been about clutter and external parts...but now they are because they want you to spend $1299 to $1999 and not even get an optical drive that is not considered obsolete.  You will look like a dork when someone has a music CD and you can't even rip it to iTunes because your $2,000 iMac didn't come with one.  Go buy Adobe's Creative Suite and try and install it on your new iMac...oh, you can't.  Apple removed the disc drive.  That's why my May 2011 iMac just became more valuable.  Oh, the SD card slot on the back of the iMac is another retarded move.  The side was the perfect location.



     


     


    I recently bought Creative Suite and it downloaded pretty fast.

  • Reply 149 of 189
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    It's 5mm at the edges. That was made quite clear during the event. What is misleading about that? Of course it's thicker toward the center. How else can you put desktop-grade components, the PSU in that casing and support the 20 lb with a stand if it's all 5mm? It's still 40% less volume.

    I think it brings to lie about the Apple event PR and fandom that talk down Android phones as needing to measure them at the thickest point, but we measure Apple products at the thinnest point. If that doesn't scream special pleading or a double standard, then I don't know what does.

    Of course I did. Apple doesn't care about SD cards. They added it because they feel they had to but it's not for someone like the person I posted to that wants to constantly swap out cards. If that's what you want to do and you want a new Mac what other option do you have (besides bitching) than to get a USB SD card reader to plug in conveniently on your desk? This goes for anyone with some usage need that going to the back of the machine constantly would be a chore.

    I think the SD slot's presence is a contradiction then. There's no point for it to be there, its meaning is left in a no-man's land. It's like saying they felt they had to add a slot, but then locate it so it's not convenient enough to use, so the suggested course of action is to get another SD card reader. So why did they add the slot at all? Does that really make any sense at all to you? Can you think of a reasonable use case? It just doesn't sound like an Apple train of thought to me.
  • Reply 150 of 189
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jeffdm wrote: »
    I think it brings to lie about the Apple PR and fandom that talk down Android phones as needing to measure at the thickest point, but we measure Apple products at the thinnest point

    And this Mac should be measured by it's thickest point, which includes the base, unless otherwise stated like in the presentation that mentions the edge.

    I think the SD slot's presence is a contradiction then. There's no point for it to be there, its meaning is left in a no-man's land. It's like saying they felt they had to add a slot, but then locate it so it's not convenient enough to use. So why did they add the slot at all? Does that many any sense at all to you? Can you think of a use case?

    You'll have to ask Apple that. They did this with the Mac mini years ago, too. I'd wager Apple is simply giving the least amount of service they can in some way but don't want to.
  • Reply 151 of 189
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,441member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post





    I think it brings to lie about the Apple PR and fandom that talk down Android phones as needing to measure them at the thickest point, but we measure Apple products at the thinnest point.


    I'd agree with Jeff. I remember dozens of posts claiming some Android smartphone maker was lying about the thinness of their product, forgetting to mention the camera bump or slightly thicker battery area. I don't know why you'd think Apple should get a technical pass for omitting the same details. It's certainly not 5mm overall. Misleading specs mentioned by other manufacturers is equally misleading when Apple does the same.

  • Reply 152 of 189
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    gatorguy wrote: »
    I'd agree with Jeff. I remember dozens of posts claiming some Android smartphone maker was lying about the thinness of their product, forgetting to mention the camera bump or slightly thicker battery area. I don't know why you'd think Apple should get a technical pass for omitting the same details. It's certainly not 5mm overall. Misleading specs mentioned by other manufacturers is equally misleading when Apple does the same.

    It's not as bad as I made it out to be, they were clear about it being the edge, but visually, it's a sleight-of-hand that's annoying to me, I don't like when TV makers do it either.

    Initially, I thought they made it even curvier and kept the thickest point of the body the same, but that wasn't true, it is maybe 10-15mm thinner overall
  • Reply 153 of 189
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jeffdm wrote: »
    It's not as bad as I made it out to be, they were clear about it being the edge, but visually, it's a sleight-of-hand that's annoying to me, I don't like when TV makers do it either.
    Initially, I thought they made it even curvier and kept the thickest point of the body the same, but that wasn't true, it is maybe 10-15mm thinner overall

    1) The 40% less volume is the more interesting stat here. It's hard to say that number is dishonest. In fact, I thought it was such an extreme reduction that I feared that the CPU may have gone back to being mobile. That doesn't appear to be the case as the've reduced the size of components and wasted space elsewhere to make it work. My only concern now is that 7200 RPM drive being noisy behind that display.

    2) We saw it with the MBA, too. I think it was 0.13" thin they showed us. They also made it clear is was 0.76"(?) at the thickest point. I've never heard them say "only x mm thin" and leave it at that.

    3) I guess I see your point. The thin edge of the MBA helps with sliding in and out of a bag but but with an iMac is all aesthetics, save for the extra curve allowing for a thinner metal backplate supporting more weight of the device.
  • Reply 154 of 189


    If you hurry you can still buy a bulkier iMac with your precious optical drive and now at an even reduced price. Sounds like a win-win. I have a little more faith in Apple's engineers than your armchair engineering, so I'm sure we'll all be just fine.

  • Reply 155 of 189


    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post

    I noticed that one too!  What a clusterfuck that is.  Apple's flagship desktop without audio input.  I guess Apple doesn't believe that anyone likes to record audio.  I am sure the fanbois will come up with a reason not to record audio, just like their BS reason for removing an optical drive.


     


    1. Use USB or Thunderbolt. Not that big a frigging deal.


    2. If you need an optical drive in 2012, stop buying Apple products entirely. You don't get it.





    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

    I think the SD slot's presence is a contradiction then. There's no point for it to be there, its meaning is left in a no-man's land. It's like saying they felt they had to add a slot, but then locate it so it's not convenient enough to use, so the suggested course of action is to get another SD card reader. So why did they add the slot at all? Does that really make any sense at all to you? Can you think of a reasonable use case? It just doesn't sound like an Apple train of thought to me.


     


    And to top it all off, the side is definitely thick enough that the SD card slot could still have been put there. Why didn't they just leave it there? It's in a very weird place.

  • Reply 156 of 189


    Oh Apple of my eye, these are beautiful just what I was hopping for 2 months to go until they go on sale!


    Like to see what the bto price will be. 

  • Reply 157 of 189
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,946member
    yeamac wrote: »
    If you hurry you can still buy a bulkier iMac with your precious optical drive and now at an even reduced price. Sounds like a win-win. I have a little more faith in Apple's engineers than your armchair engineering, so I'm sure we'll all be just fine.

    Who said the new product was less reliable?

    airbubble wrote: »
    Oh Apple of my eye, these are beautiful just what I was hopping for 2 months to go until they go on sale!
    Like to see what the bto price will be.

    That's about right, 21" available November, 27" available December, exact day unspecified for both.
  • Reply 158 of 189


    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

    That's about right, 21" available November, 27" available December, exact day unspecified for both.


     


    Anyone else notice that… Wait, did I say this here already? 




    Apple isn't selling the iMac right now. They have literally stopped selling a computer called "iMac". There's something wrong with that.

  • Reply 159 of 189

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post





    Who said the new product was less reliable?


     


     


    Well... I responded to a DIFFERENT THREAD about the reliability of the iPad... somehow it ended up in THIS THREAD, and I can't even FIND the thread I was responding to now.


     


    Oh well.  Sorry to have confused you.

  • Reply 160 of 189


    Gosh! what alot of wingers on this forum.... Get a life and get with the program,


    Apple have omitted their rather retro (none BD) mechanical drive less heat, less noise, slimmer, less to breakdown, true they shouldn't have bothered with even such a badly positioned SD slot that can be serviced by wi-fi even in most pro situations, but he-ho that's life.


     


    On the other hand what a step up for the display, as a photographer I'm certainly going to be auditioning this top end 27" ssd model, and as a professional user I'll be adding an external storage server device with an external BD burner as well as an Mbox pro for Audio synths and recording, that way the comp does the apps display work and studios easily plug-in the devices they need for their specialization spreading the heat generating load and still being a stand alone for the average user so maybe this is a near perfect design really, all modern software design apps ect will easily download or stream rent a faster professional isp link if you need it.


    ( pls note the average user does not pay $6000 for a gaming machine either if thats your bag buy one)


     


    I would personally have wished for more stream-lining but maybe in a future haswell iteration where a 1tbt ssd and ram VLSI could be pci-ed direct to the processor buss reducing the unfortunate legacy sata conversion, I'd also like a way of paralleling  imacs together sharing workload over 8 cores for example. but the one disappointment both with the imac and OS10 was the omission of a touchscreen, PCs are going to have a significant edge with pen and touch ability that creative people use everyday.


    I know the Wacom CintiqHD touch can be plugged in but the screen gamut and resolution is significantly different less contrast means more uncomfortable to use in tandem with the iMac. and a 27" hi res touch screen would make photo and video and logic sound editing alot easier imho, each to their own.


     


    At the end of the day if you like it you'll buy it, if not you can always choose something else.

Sign In or Register to comment.