It blows my old dual core 3 gigger out the water. Boot up times is electric. Super fast. 8 gigs of ram. Easy to add more.
Blazingly fast cpu, powerful gpu (10th fastest?), 8 gigs of ram...and a SSD/HD combo that gives me blazing fast boot up and program launch. (*Never thought I'd see the day, Photoshop launched in a second or two.)
AND?
It has a beautiful 27 inch monitor with an incredibly high resolution.
This is a workstation.
Sure, I payed over 2k over it...but you could hardly call any of Apple's desktops value for money compared to 'sane' PC prices.
Take £800 off for the monitor and you're left with a consumer cube 'tower'...for about £1200-£1400 for an i7, 680mx, 8 gigs of ram, fusion drive beastie.
I doubt it will ever happen. The iMac sells more units than the mini and the pro put together by double and then some I should imagine.
Time has passed the tower/cube by.
Like someone said above, Apple left that market. It's not like Apple is supported by lots of 3rd party gpus or anything...
It's laptops....biscuit tins or a laptop on a stand with a large monitor thrown in. That's the choice. Apple style.
I'm more than happy with this iMac workstation.
It really is an astonishing blend of art and tech'.
There's nothing compromising about it at all.
The last time I owned a 'tower' Mac it could handle Photoshop files at 72 dpi comfortably. This iMac is lightyears ahead of that. The shifting sands of computer power. It's mighty fine for 3d rendering. It can do lots of stuff at the same time. It's bladdy fast.
It blows my old dual core 3 gigger out the water. Boot up times is electric. Super fast. 8 gigs of ram. Easy to add more.
Blazingly fast cpu, powerful gpu (10th fastest?), 8 gigs of ram...and a SSD/HD combo that gives me blazing fast boot up and program launch. (*Never thought I'd see the day, Photoshop launched in a second or two.)
AND?
It has a beautiful 27 inch monitor with an incredibly high resolution.
This is a workstation.
It will fall to someone (Iomega? Newer?) to create a companion 'tower' to the iMac which is bootable, offers multiple hard drive options, and graphics card replacement via Thunderbolt. Maybe even a Blu-Ray option/slot.
If this is feasible, then I agree: the Mac Pro market is truly dead.
The last time I owned a 'tower' Mac it could handle Photoshop files at 72 dpi comfortably. This iMac is lightyears ahead of that. The shifting sands of computer power. It's mighty fine for 3d rendering. It can do lots of stuff at the same time. It's bladdy fast.
Blah I dealt with much larger files than that on a first generation G4 powerbook with maxed ram. I just had to limit layers and history, turn off all thumbnails, and a few other things. Photoshop isn't a good example these days. I have no experience with Lightwave specifically, so I cannot comment there.
Well last time this source was right about the new iPad Mini and iPod Nano, by new design of retina MacBook Pro, it probably means an added Multitouch screen keyboard area for universal language input, or just an update to the Mac OS.
The source doesn't talk about iRadio or if the iPad mini will get the iPhone 5's processor/gpu.
All I know is Apple stock keeps going down and I keep wondering why if there's flexible screen tech in the future, and iCloud's new servers are getting better. Apple just needs to start putting some NVidia's into their macs and stop using those intel integrated GPU's.
The 15" retina MacBook Pro should have the best nVidia graphics possible and should not use integrated graphics under any circumstance. Sorry Marvin.
It should receive decent graphics, but they have gimped the $1800 model in the past. Look at the low end early 2011. I tend to be a bit skeptical on intel's demos as they're likely to show something that favors their chips. Apple has kind of a smaller lineup, so these graphics chips might be subjected to a wide range of applications. For early references I typically look at barefeats. Even then the results have to be interpreted correctly. Also I suspect the cMBP may continue to last a while longer if they are supply constrained. Positioning it a bit higher in price helps control how many people will choose it. It may not solely be an issue of margins.
Not even to downshift to the lower power chip when raw power isn't needed? There's battery performance to consider here.
That's a good point that people often overlook. Typically people assume that Intel graphics can't drive the Retina display in the 15" but they already do when the graphics switch. The 15" models currently have both an Intel IGP and an NVidia GPU and the latter gets used for demanding tasks.
An Intel Haswell IGP would handle a 15" Retina no problem and removing the dedicated GPU could allow them to hit the lower price point and eliminate the old model but it would just be a single model. The higher up MBPs would continue to use the dedicated GPUs.
That's a good point that people often overlook. Typically people assume that Intel graphics can't drive the Retina display in the 15" but they already do when the graphics switch. The 15" models currently have both an Intel IGP and an NVidia GPU and the latter gets used for demanding tasks.
An Intel Haswell IGP would handle a 15" Retina no problem and removing the dedicated GPU could allow them to hit the lower price point and eliminate the old model but it would just be a single model. The higher up MBPs would continue to use the dedicated GPUs.
I understand though I don't think Intel's graphics are worthy in the 15" rMBP right now even if Haswell is supposed to be a big improvement from Ivy Bridge. Unless Apple were to really cut the price and have a 15" at $1,499, the top 13" at $1,299, and the base 13" at $1,099.
Why I tell the truth.This is my opinion. You act like he is a GOD . He is the CEO of a huge company making tons of money.
It is true that it is your opinion, but you don't know that your opinion reflects reality as it is. I'm pretty sure it doesn't. If they don't have a three year pipeline of products, I'd be disappointed, because probably every company with complicated products needs several years to bring a product to market. For example, Intel probably has at least three generations of chips in succeeding stages of design.
Apple keeps making small improved increments say in the Mac Mini but nothing substantial.Again when is this great television suppose to come out with the new Mac computer?Promises always.
Apple keeps making small improved increments say in the Mac Mini but nothing substantial.Again when is this great television suppose to come out with the new Mac computer?Promises always.
I don't think Apple ever publicly claimed they would make a television. The rumor has been out there for years. They may want to make one.
Comments
No.
The top end iMac is a fine desktop machine.
It is insanely powerful.
It blows my old dual core 3 gigger out the water. Boot up times is electric. Super fast. 8 gigs of ram. Easy to add more.
Blazingly fast cpu, powerful gpu (10th fastest?), 8 gigs of ram...and a SSD/HD combo that gives me blazing fast boot up and program launch. (*Never thought I'd see the day, Photoshop launched in a second or two.)
AND?
It has a beautiful 27 inch monitor with an incredibly high resolution.
This is a workstation.
Sure, I payed over 2k over it...but you could hardly call any of Apple's desktops value for money compared to 'sane' PC prices.
Take £800 off for the monitor and you're left with a consumer cube 'tower'...for about £1200-£1400 for an i7, 680mx, 8 gigs of ram, fusion drive beastie.
I doubt it will ever happen. The iMac sells more units than the mini and the pro put together by double and then some I should imagine.
Time has passed the tower/cube by.
Like someone said above, Apple left that market. It's not like Apple is supported by lots of 3rd party gpus or anything...
It's laptops....biscuit tins or a laptop on a stand with a large monitor thrown in. That's the choice. Apple style.
I'm more than happy with this iMac workstation.
It really is an astonishing blend of art and tech'.
There's nothing compromising about it at all.
The last time I owned a 'tower' Mac it could handle Photoshop files at 72 dpi comfortably. This iMac is lightyears ahead of that. The shifting sands of computer power. It's mighty fine for 3d rendering. It can do lots of stuff at the same time. It's bladdy fast.
Plenty fast for Photoshop, Lightwave 3D for me.
It kicks ass.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I haven't heard the fan once. But it isn't summer time in the uk, I guess...
It's ice cold to the touch.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon.
No.
The top end iMac is a fine desktop machine.
It is insanely powerful.
It blows my old dual core 3 gigger out the water. Boot up times is electric. Super fast. 8 gigs of ram. Easy to add more.
Blazingly fast cpu, powerful gpu (10th fastest?), 8 gigs of ram...and a SSD/HD combo that gives me blazing fast boot up and program launch. (*Never thought I'd see the day, Photoshop launched in a second or two.)
AND?
It has a beautiful 27 inch monitor with an incredibly high resolution.
This is a workstation.
It will fall to someone (Iomega? Newer?) to create a companion 'tower' to the iMac which is bootable, offers multiple hard drive options, and graphics card replacement via Thunderbolt. Maybe even a Blu-Ray option/slot.
If this is feasible, then I agree: the Mac Pro market is truly dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon.
The last time I owned a 'tower' Mac it could handle Photoshop files at 72 dpi comfortably. This iMac is lightyears ahead of that. The shifting sands of computer power. It's mighty fine for 3d rendering. It can do lots of stuff at the same time. It's bladdy fast.
Blah I dealt with much larger files than that on a first generation G4 powerbook with maxed ram. I just had to limit layers and history, turn off all thumbnails, and a few other things. Photoshop isn't a good example these days. I have no experience with Lightwave specifically, so I cannot comment there.
The first quarter of the year has now gone by and Apple has yet to release any new or significantly updated hardware.
It's a good thing that product pipeline was chock full, or we'd be really bored.
The source doesn't talk about iRadio or if the iPad mini will get the iPhone 5's processor/gpu.
All I know is Apple stock keeps going down and I keep wondering why if there's flexible screen tech in the future, and iCloud's new servers are getting better. Apple just needs to start putting some NVidia's into their macs and stop using those intel integrated GPU's.
The 15" retina MacBook Pro should have the best nVidia graphics possible and should not use integrated graphics under any circumstance. Sorry Marvin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter
The 15" retina MacBook Pro should have the best nVidia graphics possible and should not use integrated graphics under any circumstance. Sorry Marvin.
It should receive decent graphics, but they have gimped the $1800 model in the past. Look at the low end early 2011. I tend to be a bit skeptical on intel's demos as they're likely to show something that favors their chips. Apple has kind of a smaller lineup, so these graphics chips might be subjected to a wide range of applications. For early references I typically look at barefeats. Even then the results have to be interpreted correctly. Also I suspect the cMBP may continue to last a while longer if they are supply constrained. Positioning it a bit higher in price helps control how many people will choose it. It may not solely be an issue of margins.
But it does have nVidia.
Not even to downshift to the lower power chip when raw power isn't needed? There's battery performance to consider here.
Originally Posted by darkdefender
Apple just needs to start putting some NVidia's into their macs and stop using those intel integrated GPU's.
That has nothing to do with it, either. And I'm not sure I'd want nVidia over Intel in that regard.
Tim Cook is full of crap about his new pipeline of stuff.
Originally Posted by marvfox
Tim Cook is full of crap about his new pipeline of stuff.
Stop saying things.
That's a good point that people often overlook. Typically people assume that Intel graphics can't drive the Retina display in the 15" but they already do when the graphics switch. The 15" models currently have both an Intel IGP and an NVidia GPU and the latter gets used for demanding tasks.
An Intel Haswell IGP would handle a 15" Retina no problem and removing the dedicated GPU could allow them to hit the lower price point and eliminate the old model but it would just be a single model. The higher up MBPs would continue to use the dedicated GPUs.
I understand though I don't think Intel's graphics are worthy in the 15" rMBP right now even if Haswell is supposed to be a big improvement from Ivy Bridge. Unless Apple were to really cut the price and have a 15" at $1,499, the top 13" at $1,299, and the base 13" at $1,099.
Why I tell the truth.This is my opinion. You act like he is a GOD . He is the CEO of a huge company making tons of money.
It is true that it is your opinion, but you don't know that your opinion reflects reality as it is. I'm pretty sure it doesn't. If they don't have a three year pipeline of products, I'd be disappointed, because probably every company with complicated products needs several years to bring a product to market. For example, Intel probably has at least three generations of chips in succeeding stages of design.
Apple keeps making small improved increments say in the Mac Mini but nothing substantial.Again when is this great television suppose to come out with the new Mac computer?Promises always.
Originally Posted by marvfox
Again when is this great television suppose to come out with the new Mac computer?Promises always.
What "promises"? Rumors (read: lies).
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox
Apple keeps making small improved increments say in the Mac Mini but nothing substantial.Again when is this great television suppose to come out with the new Mac computer?Promises always.
I don't think Apple ever publicly claimed they would make a television. The rumor has been out there for years. They may want to make one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
What "promises"? Rumors (read: lies).
You should have used this instead.
I do not listen to crap like that on You Tube.Cook is full of himself.