Apple expected to hold iPad & Retina iMac event on Oct. 16

1235710

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 184
    chasmchasm Posts: 2,467member
    I'm dubious about the Thursday date. Apple likes to announce stuff early in the week so that the media can chew on it for days on end.

    I also think the presentation will be focused on things that logically tie together, like iPads and iOS 8.1 (and Yosemite tagging onto that). No minis, no iMacs. This is not to say they won't happen around the same time, just that Apple will handle those more quietly, not part of this event.

    All these guys expecting a Retina iMac -- I don't know if you'll get one, but I guarantee you'll be right back here howling about the price ... :)
  • Reply 82 of 184
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanukStorm View Post

     



    Actually, most normal, everyday users upgrade their iPhone every 2 years, when their contract is over,  some even wait 3 years.  I still many iPhone 4S in use.




    That's true, most contracts are 24 months. But it's still true that phones are upgraded more frequently than tablets and computers in general.

  • Reply 83 of 184
    ascii wrote: »
    It's interesting that they now put the iPad and iMac together in an event, with the iPhone separate. Their phone is something people upgrade nearly every year, but their computer or tablet is something they only upgrade every few years. In terms of form factor you'd think the iPhone and iPad belong together, but in other aspects the iPad best fits with the Mac.

    Flawed analysis.

    I don't think most people replace their phones every year.

    Edit: I see you have already confessed the error of your ways.
  • Reply 84 of 184
    What about Mac Mini?
  • Reply 85 of 184
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    Flawed analysis.



    I don't think most people replace their phones every year.



    Edit: I see you have already confessed the error of your ways.

    The analysis never depended on the 12 month figure in the first place, just the fact of Mac and iPad update frequency being closer than that iPhone and iPad (which I stand by). People are more vein about their phones than their computers and tablets.

  • Reply 86 of 184
    ascii wrote: »
    Flawed analysis.


    I don't think most people replace their phones every year.


    Edit: I see you have already confessed the error of your ways.
    The analysis never depended on the 12 month figure in the first place, just the fact of Mac and iPad update frequency being closer than that iPhone and iPad (which I stand by). People are more vein about their phones than their computers and tablets.

    I won't be quite as harsh on that statement, but I still think the iPad is closer to the iPhone on the replacement cycle, though it's too early to tell now, as the iPad has only been out for four years. I know some people replace their Macs every three years, but I think most keep them going for longer.

    I would guess the average is about:

    iPhone: 2 years
    iPad: 3 years
    Mac: 5 years+
  • Reply 87 of 184
    brlawyerbrlawyer Posts: 828member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    Well, the best speaker was always Steve Jobs, so there's not much Apple can do about that.

     

    The fingerprint issue will probably be resolved by keeping the iMac non-toucscreen, so that you don't need to put your fingerprints on it.




    Indeed no touchscreen, please - what a ludicrous idea.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chasm View Post



    I'm dubious about the Thursday date. Apple likes to announce stuff early in the week so that the media can chew on it for days on end.



    I also think the presentation will be focused on things that logically tie together, like iPads and iOS 8.1 (and Yosemite tagging onto that). No minis, no iMacs. This is not to say they won't happen around the same time, just that Apple will handle those more quietly, not part of this event.



    All these guys expecting a Retina iMac -- I don't know if you'll get one, but I guarantee you'll be right back here howling about the price ... image



    Trust me, I won't - as long as those basic elements are covered (display quality, GPU power and expandability), I will pay whatever price they ask.

  • Reply 88 of 184
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    So, now that the iPhone 6 Plus has edged into iPad size territory, and had been called an iPad Nano—

    [B]I'm hoping, even expecting, that an iPod touch-like device will be based on the same display, and maybe even called the new, smallest iPad.[/B]

    The usefulness and attractiveness of such a device is self-evident, like any other iPod touch or iPad, but the price might be a bit much at this point. And those displays are still probably in short supply.
  • Reply 89 of 184
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    chasm wrote: »
    I'm dubious about the Thursday date. Apple likes to announce stuff early in the week so that the media can chew on it for days on end.

    I also think the presentation will be focused on things that logically tie together, like iPads and iOS 8.1 (and Yosemite tagging onto that). No minis, no iMacs. This is not to say they won't happen around the same time, just that Apple will handle those more quietly, not part of this event.

    All these guys expecting a Retina iMac -- I don't know if you'll get one, but I guarantee you'll be right back here howling about the price ... :)
    In 2012 and 2013 Apple's fall iPad event included Macs. 2012 included 13" rMBP, Mac mini and redesigned iMacs. Last year was updated MBPs and more information on nMP. Believe me if Apple is introducing 4/5K iMacs that's not going to be a silent update on the Apple store or just via press release. If Apple is going to talk about Yosemite then it makes perfect sense to talk new Macs too. Especially if all we're getting with iPads is A8 and Touch ID. Not much to talk about there.
  • Reply 90 of 184
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,731moderator
    flaneur wrote: »
    So, now that the iPhone 6 Plus has edged into iPad size territory, and had been called an iPad Nano—

    I'm hoping, even expecting, that an iPod touch-like device will be based on the same display, and maybe even called the new, smallest iPad.

    The usefulness and attractiveness of such a device is self-evident, like any other iPod touch, but the price might be a bit much at this point. And those displays are still probably in short supply.

    The iPod had a 50% decline year over year since 2013. They've dropped the Classic now. The iPad outsells it by about 5:1. What's the use case for a big iPod that negates the use of an iPad Mini? In portable use cases, the phone has replaced the iPod so it's for scenarios where you'd be in a fixed location for gaming, reading, browsing, social media etc so why would you choose a 5.5" display over a 7.9" display?

    If they update the iPod line at all, it makes sense to move to the same styling as the iPhone but I could see them just dropping the line entirely to promote the Watch and Beats. If it's not this year, it will be soon. Due to the added cost of the 5.5" display, I don't expect that size in the iPod.

    The Shuffle hasn't been updated for 4 years.
    The Nano hasn't been updated for 2 years.
    The iPod Touch hasn't been updated for 2 years. It was just a price cut last year.

    http://www.macrumors.com/2014/01/27/ipod-declining-category/

    They mentioned controlling music from the Watch so that's a new music player category but the Watch is not going to sell in large numbers either. Beats will likely be the main focus for music along with the associated services.
  • Reply 91 of 184
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member

    Is there is a 5K iMac on offer it will probably be expensive, but just imagine how it will look at the store next to the other brand computers. That gorgeous thin aluminium case with a 14 million pixel monitor. It will blow away everything else on the shelf, make them look out of date. And with the Beats acquisition, I wonder if the new iMac will have Beats speakers?

     

    Edit: HP all in ones already have Beats speakers

     

     

     

  • Reply 92 of 184

    I'm really looking forward to this event. Not so much for the iPads, which really doesn't seem that exciting of an update (in my opinion) since I haven't heard many rumors for either iPad outside of a gold colored option and touch ID. If I had to make a prediction, I'm willing to bet Apple will release the new iPads with some kind of accessory that mimics what Microsoft did with it's Surface Pro line.  

     

    I'm looking for a new Mac Mini, an iMac with a retina display (possibly 4K or 5K resolution screen), a retina MacBook Air, of course a OS X Yosemite release, and possibly dark colored MacBook Pro's. 

  • Reply 93 of 184
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    Marvin wrote: »
    The iPod had a 50% decline year over year since 2013. They've dropped the Classic now. The iPad outsells it by about 5:1. What's the use case for a big iPod that negates the use of an iPad Mini? In portable use cases, the phone has replaced the iPod so it's for scenarios where you'd be in a fixed location for gaming, reading, browsing, social media etc so why would you choose a 5.5" display over a 7.9" display?

    If they update the iPod line at all, it makes sense to move to the same styling as the iPhone but I could see them just dropping the line entirely to promote the Watch and Beats. If it's not this year, it will be soon. Due to the added cost of the 5.5" display, I don't expect that size in the iPod.

    The Shuffle hasn't been updated for 4 years.
    The Nano hasn't been updated for 2 years.
    The iPod Touch hasn't been updated for 2 years. It was just a price cut last year.

    http://www.macrumors.com/2014/01/27/ipod-declining-category/

    They mentioned controlling music from the Watch so that's a new music player category but the Watch is not going to sell in large numbers either. Beats will likely be the main focus for music along with the associated services.

    These are reasonable arguments, though I might add that the screen-focused iPod touch never really belonged with the audio-focused iPod line. But they had to put it somewhere, and not just call it a phoneless iPhone.

    But now we have seen the next level of LCD display evolution, and it's not the compromised iPad mini retina, which was crippled by not having an IGZO or LTPS backplane, like the IGZO-enabled iPad Air did. Presumably the production of IGZO tech was still a problem last year.

    LTPS was also out of the question for the iPad mini last year, maybe this year as well. They're already said to be having yield problems with the iPhone 6 Plus displays, perhaps mostly because of the pixel density or some other peculiar detail like the dual domain feature, who knows but a display expert . . .

    The point is, photographers, videographers, visual artists, color and sharpness fetishists of all kinds have no pocketable way to carry their work around to show to others or to look at other good stuff. So either Apple might want to improve the mini's display, or take advantage of the amazing new screen they've come up with for the Plus, which for the use case i'm describing, is hobbled by being a too-big phone for many people.

    Anyway, a 5.5 video player and all-purpose computer should not, you're right, be placed in the declining iPod category. It more belongs in the iPad category, and then it has to compete with the mini, which Apple is not afraid to try, IMO. May the best use-case win.
  • Reply 94 of 184
    Am I the only person who thinks 5k is preposterous?
    TB2 can't sling 5k around, so that would limit the ability of Apple to make a 'dumb imac' as monitor, and have it work as both a 2nd display for the new imac and as the long sought after new display for the 2013 Mac Pro.
    I suppose they could frankenstein together two TB2 connectors. But that would really suck to have to give up that much bandwidth for a single display, when one connection can drive a display that is only 10% smaller.

    IT really must be UHD or 4k.
    5k just has to be some echo chamber BS.
  • Reply 95 of 184
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanukStorm View Post

     



    I don't think so.  I was under the impression that the TouchID secure enclave was "baked" onto the A7 / A8 SoC.  If that's the case, you won't see Macs with TouchID until they (if they) adopt Apple's custom ARM chips.




    No reason they cant have an A7 sitting on a motherboard with a regular intel CPU doing the regular work.

    A lot of computers in the corporate PC world have a TPM, trusted platform module, that is used for encryption. Which is similar in concept.

  • Reply 96 of 184
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    williamh wrote: »
    Two people quickly observed what I forgot, which is the secure enclave.  I suppose they could use an ARM coprocessor or they'd have to implement it another way.  Continuity is a great idea for payments but I don't know if it would address authenticating to the computer in the first place.  In any case, I think you successfully quashed my idea for a touch id on the desktop.

    By the way, I would have put it on the Magic Trackpad for the desktops.  Yes, there would be a problem securing the path between the trackpad and the computer.

    Nothing is quashed, TouchID authentication on Mac is a great idea, but it should only be initiated by an iPhone. Even if they found a convenient place to stick a TouchID sensor on a Mac (there isn't one), I wouldn't want it that way, and I wouldn't want to manage two separate Touch ID sensors/databases.
  • Reply 97 of 184
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    ascii wrote: »
    Is there is a 5K iMac on offer it will probably be expensive, but just imagine how it will look at the store next to the other brand computers. That gorgeous thin aluminium case with a 14 million pixel monitor. It will blow away everything else on the shelf, make them look out of date. And with the Beats acquisition, I wonder if the new iMac will have Beats speakers?

    Edit: HP all in ones already have Beats speakers


    <img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="50152" data-type="61" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/50152/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 257px">



    I had no idea there were Beats speakers in products like that. Pretty cool.

    My guess however, will be no way not a chance. Unless they are completely invisible as the iMac speakers are now and it's just a casual mention of "powered by Beats" or something.
  • Reply 98 of 184

    Honestly the main thing that has kept me from considering an iMac in recent history is the absurd adherence to the glossy screen.

    Ditto for the ACD.  I work in a well lit place, not a cave. It's just brutal trying to read stuff all day with that kind of visual noise.

    PLEASE give us an antiglare screen this time. Especially if bumping the resolution.

  • Reply 99 of 184
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,364member
    pmz wrote: »
    I had no idea there were Beats speakers in products like that. Pretty cool.

    My guess however, will be no way not a chance. Unless they are completely invisible as the iMac speakers are now and it's just a casual mention of "powered by Beats" or something.

    In related news Bose offered a deal to the NFL that was too hard to resist. No more Beats products will be shown on NFL broadcasts with the new exclusive Bose tie-in. Not sure how they're going to police players walking around with Beats in pre-game shots but those are banned too.
  • Reply 100 of 184
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by calaverasgrande View Post



    Am I the only person who thinks 5k is preposterous?

    TB2 can't sling 5k around, so that would limit the ability of Apple to make a 'dumb imac' as monitor, and have it work as both a 2nd display for the new imac and as the long sought after new display for the 2013 Mac Pro.

    I suppose they could frankenstein together two TB2 connectors. But that would really suck to have to give up that much bandwidth for a single display, when one connection can drive a display that is only 10% smaller.



    IT really must be UHD or 4k.

    5k just has to be some echo chamber BS.



    DisplayPort 1.3 supports 5K monitors and was finalised a few weeks ago, presumably Apple has known about it for some time. So internally at least the iMac could have a 5K monitor in a standards compliant way. In terms of external machines using the iMac's monitor in target display mode, I don't know how that would be done. I don't think they'd put a straight DisplayPort on the iMac without it also being a Thunderbolt port, and I don't think Thunderbolt 3 is ready yet (is it?). Maybe target display mode will be limited to lower resolution.

Sign In or Register to comment.