PDA

View Full Version : iMac Update Might Be Coming Sooner Rather Than Later




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jun 13, 2012, 03:29 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/13/imac-update-might-be-coming-sooner-rather-than-later/)


Back in mid-May, a pair of Geekbench 2 benchmarks (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/14/unreleased-2012-macbook-pro-and-imac-models-showing-up-in-benchmarks/) that claimed to be from unreleased MacBook Pro and iMac models appeared, setting off speculation that updates to both lines might be imminent if the entries were indeed legitimate. But with Apple not updating the iMac earlier this week at its Worldwide Developers Conference keynote, those looking for an upgraded all-in-one desktop Mac have been left waiting.

With updated MacBook Pro models reaching the public, Primate Labs highlighted some of the benchmarks (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/benchmarks-for-mid-2012-macbook-pro-and-macbook-air/) yesterday, and the details for the non-Retina 15-inch MacBook Pro match up nearly exactly with what appeared in the entry from last month, all but confirming that it was indeed a legitimate leak.

Now with that information in hand, it pays to revisit the iMac benchmark that appeared around the same time, and while the two benchmarks aren't necessarily linked, it could generate hope that an updated iMac may still be right around the corner. The iMac benchmark referred to an "iMac13,2" model running a 3.4 GHz Core i7-3770 quad-core processor with 4 GB of 1600 MHz RAM, and while it is possible that the information could have been faked, Primate Labs previously reported (http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2012/05/ivy-bridge-macs/) that it believes the entry to be legitimate.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/05/geekbench_imac132.jpg


Further fueling speculation of a near-term iMac update is recent confusion in which it was initially reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/apple-spokesperson-confirms-new-mac-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/) that Apple representatives had told reporters that new iMac and Mac Pro models would likely be arriving in 2013. But following publication of those reports, Apple press relations staff specifically clarified those remarks to note that only the Mac Pro would be seeing the 2013 update. The assumption related to that clarification is of course that an iMac update is very likely to come sooner than the end of this year.

It has already been over 400 days (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac) since the iMac was last updated, and Ivy Bridge processors appropriate for the iMac have been available since late April (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/23/intel-officially-launches-first-quad-core-ivy-bridge-processors/). Consequently, it seems likely that the iMac will still be receiving an update in the relatively near future despite not making an appearance at this week's conference.

As for what improvements the next-generation iMac will see beyond Ivy Bridge, at least one mainstream news report has claimed that Apple is working on Retina displays (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/15/retina-displays-also-coming-to-next-generation-imac/) for the iMac, although we previously analyzed how daunting of a task it would be to support four times the number of pixels found on the current models, particularly on a 27-inch display. Other sources have claimed that Apple is working on anti-reflective glass (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/02/apple-to-utilize-anti-reflective-glass-in-next-generation-imac/) for the iMac, rumors that may have gained some support with Apple having touted this week that the Retina MacBook Pro's display produces 75% less glare than non-Retina models.

Article Link: iMac Update Might Be Coming Sooner Rather Than Later (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/13/imac-update-might-be-coming-sooner-rather-than-later/)



840quadra
Jun 13, 2012, 03:32 PM
This would make sense considering the processor and core changes to the Macbook line, and how both the Macbook and iMac share similar architectures to begin with.

I am totally in the market for a new iMac to replace a G5 system at my Parent's house, but I really would like to have the inclusion of USB3 and other tweaks.

Really hoping the 'sooner' is within a month or two!

grooveattack
Jun 13, 2012, 03:33 PM
Now i've got to choose between waiting for the iMac or jumping on the retina macbook. first world problems.

The MBP's were scoring 12,300 so how do they compare speed wise? the pro will be quicker than the iMac??


hmmm

theSeb
Jun 13, 2012, 03:34 PM
That's what I posted yesterday. I demand ROYALTIES!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

:D

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=15019854#post15019854


I am expecting the 2013 iMac redesign to include a high-resolution panel, the vibrating pen patent as an extra input device and the foldable iMac patent thrown together. This will be a direct attack and answer to MS's Metro interface.

http://www.cultofmac.com/169875/what...of-everything/

In 2012 I am expecting a spec bump to USB 3, Ivy Bridge and Nvidia for the iMac. It would be silly to keep the specifications different from the MBP

wickerman1893
Jun 13, 2012, 03:34 PM
I almost bought my new iMac today.... Now this is going to make me wait... Ughh!

dokujaryu
Jun 13, 2012, 03:34 PM
Great. My wallet just committed suicide.

fun173
Jun 13, 2012, 03:35 PM
Imagine a retina display with those pixel numbers. that would be insane!

I'm also pleased with all these Mac rumors we have been seeing :)

johnnyturbouk
Jun 13, 2012, 03:35 PM
this is precisely why i am not jumping up and down to get a macbookpro
retina imacs, imagine a 30" retina iMac :eek::eek::eek:.... dies and goes to heaven

I was considering a thunderbolt display - but a top-end iMac with SSD and itb drive in the second hdd slot would be awesome!

Stetrain
Jun 13, 2012, 03:35 PM
Makes perfect sense to me.

Small spec bump this summer. Ivy Bridge + Kepler.

Possible redesign next year.

iScott428
Jun 13, 2012, 03:36 PM
Might see iMac and Mac mini Spec bumps (Processors, USB 3.0, Etc...) with the release of Mountain lion.

CrAkD
Jun 13, 2012, 03:36 PM
I bet along side mountain lion

musio
Jun 13, 2012, 03:37 PM
Now i've got to choose between waiting for the iMac or jumping on the retina macbook. first world problems.

The MBP's were scoring 12,300 so how do they compare speed wise? the pro will be quicker than the iMac??


hmmm

I'd like an idea to. Maybe you can compare the old MBP to the iMacs and see?

Small White Car
Jun 13, 2012, 03:37 PM
Wait. I apparently didn't read the comments too closely yesterday. There were actually people who thought that news meant there would be no iMac updates until the bigger change next year?

Xavier
Jun 13, 2012, 03:40 PM
Just waiting for the announcement of a new iMac before I buy one.

Liquinn
Jun 13, 2012, 03:41 PM
Okay cool :P

DTphonehome
Jun 13, 2012, 03:42 PM
It doesn't have to be pixel-doubled to be Retina. It'll only take a small-moderate bump in resolution to get iMacs to the pixel density needed to be "retina". That goes for the Thunderbolt display as well.

nwcs
Jun 13, 2012, 03:43 PM
I've had MacBook pro 17 inchers for 5 years now. But this is what I want to upgrade to: iMac 27" retina with 16gb memory and desktop class processor. It'll beat the pants off my first gen i7 mbp.

marcusj0015
Jun 13, 2012, 03:43 PM
Interesting that it's only got 4GB or RAM...

olowott
Jun 13, 2012, 03:45 PM
Very welcomed Rumour:D

07dodge
Jun 13, 2012, 03:46 PM
As long as it's out by the time school starts again, I'll be happy. Honestly I'd be happy with the current, but that would suck to buy and a month later the new one is out.

Mr Rogers
Jun 13, 2012, 03:46 PM
I'd rather purchase an end of line upgraded iMac this year than wait for the supposed 'fantastic' revamp that in the offering for next year.

I've never been a early adopter, preferring any significant issues are removed before getting my hands on one - the current design suits me fine, the LCD issues are known - a big pain to get repaired - but known at least, and it works just fine - so, a move to Ivy Bridge, better GPU - I hopes its actually another AMD - and perhaps support for USB3 makes for quite a good machine - one actually that should last out its AppleCare warranty.

Still, I won't get excited anymore, after all the let downs of the past 4 weeks, its just wait and see - if Apple fail to upgrade, I'll spend a similar amount on a Hackintosh with top end GPU and 'K' class i7 processor - not sure what I'll do about FW800 support though?

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 03:47 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Hexley
Jun 13, 2012, 03:47 PM
I hope the iMac with Retina Display will not have soldered memory or SSD.

I want to buy 32GB of RAM from a third party and hopefully upgrade the hard drive past 4TB one day.

Also hope Apple use a serious GPU within the realm of a NVIDIA GTX 670, 680 or even a 690.

belltree
Jun 13, 2012, 03:50 PM
Prediction: Ivy Bridge updated iMac and Mac Mini released in mid-late July.

musio
Jun 13, 2012, 03:50 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

We don't buy to wait for something to break down..you have to send it for repair anyhow son what difference does it make for the UPS man to pickup a iMac or macbook?

Major benefits; screen size (duh)
Cooling
Faster than MacBooks
Cheaper
I/O

Mr Rogers
Jun 13, 2012, 03:51 PM
I've had MacBook pro 17 inchers for 5 years now. But this is what I want to upgrade to: iMac 27" retina with 16gb memory and desktop class processor. It'll beat the pants off my first gen i7 mbp.

The current iMac 27in display is already near to what most would call 'RETINA' and, if you look at what's happening in Korea, I don't see any large form factor LCD panels for sale - indeed, there is a big buzz about 100Hz refresh rates on the existing panels Apple use and costs for the panel itself are just over US$150 - me. I'd rather a 30in iMac based on present ISP screen with built in motion sensors based on Kinect and Leap Motion technology.

eh270
Jun 13, 2012, 03:51 PM
JUST ordered one of the refurbished 3.4GHz i7 iMacs for $1869, as I'd been holding out too long already. If they announce these in the fall, it will only bother me if it's a retina iMac, which seems extraordinarily unlikely.

wizard
Jun 13, 2012, 03:54 PM
That's what I posted yesterday. I demand ROYALTIES!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

:D

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=15019854#post15019854


I am expecting the 2013 iMac redesign to include a high-resolution panel, the vibrating pen patent as an extra input device and the foldable iMac patent thrown together. This will be a direct attack and answer to MS's Metro interface.

I'd e very surprised if that all comes in one machine.

I have to admit though that this idea that Apple has to go with a 2X resolution increase seems to be bogus. There is plenty of evidence in the SDK to indicate otherwise. So maybe a more modest resolution increase will get them to where they want to be.

http://www.cultofmac.com/169875/what...of-everything/

In 2012 I am expecting a spec bump to USB 3, Ivy Bridge and Nvidia for the iMac. It would be silly to keep the specifications different from the MBP

Except that NVidia is pretty sucky as a GPU. NVidia wouldn't even be my second choice.

Luap
Jun 13, 2012, 03:54 PM
Good ol Macrumors.. Yesterday it was a dead cert that new iMacs were not coming until "Later in 2013" Now they are around the corner?

I wouldn't mind all the rumours if you guys could somehow manage to cobble together some rather less contradictory ones ;)

niuniu
Jun 13, 2012, 03:54 PM
Wonder what sort of GPU it'll get.

dkersten
Jun 13, 2012, 03:55 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

Mr Rogers
Jun 13, 2012, 03:57 PM
JUST ordered one of the refurbished 3.4GHz i7 iMacs for $1869, as I'd been holding out too long already. If they announce these in the fall, it will only bother me if it's a retina iMac, which seems extraordinarily unlikely.

You should have waited another month - both the Nvidia and AMD mobile GPU solutions offer a huge increase of power over the existing GPU and ship standard with 2G VRAM - further, Leap Motion launches its technology at the tears end which will be a whizz for games or design on the iMac - a revamped iMac that is.

What's another month, if its not out by middle of July, then invest in a refurbished unit.

Wurm5150
Jun 13, 2012, 03:58 PM
iMac refresh will be announced and released next month along with Mountain Lion.

ProMod
Jun 13, 2012, 03:58 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

As it stands right now, today, yes the new Retina MacBook Pro is faster than the current iMac. But, before Monday's announcement, the top of the line iMac was a bit faster than its comparable MacBook Pro.

I get what you're saying, but if Apple updates the iMac with the same level of hardware it just included in the new MBP, the iMac should see i7 processors with higher clock speeds, maybe 32 GB of RAM as an option, and a more powerful GPU with the option of 2GB of VRAM.

So once the playing field is even, the iMac will be a bit faster and you will get that power at a lower cost than the MBP because you're not paying for the portability.

Hope this helps.

tonymillion
Jun 13, 2012, 03:59 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

I had an iMac for a while, now I'm a 27Inch Cinema Display & Laptop guy - I dont really see why the iMac still exists.

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 03:59 PM
We don't buy to wait for something to break down..you have to send it for repair anyhow son what difference does it make for the UPS man to pickup a iMac or macbook?

Major benefits; screen size (duh)
Cooling
Faster than MacBooks
Cheaper
I/O

Repairability has a direct connection with repair cost, no matter who does it.

Screen size: with a MacBook you attach whatever size display you want.

Faster: when I have looked at same generation Macs, the speeds were comparable.

Cheaper: No.

I/O: what are you referring too? The only "I/O" difference is the iMac doesn't have a SD Card slot.

wizard
Jun 13, 2012, 03:59 PM
I really want to see th Mini morphed into a respectable desktop machine. The lack of interest in the desktop from Apple is very frustrating. Just as the iMac needs a major overhaul and a rethinking of purpose so does the Mini. Or Apple could say screw it and make an XMac.

gatearray
Jun 13, 2012, 03:59 PM
Might see iMac and Mac mini Spec bumps (Processors, USB 3.0, Etc...) with the release of Mountain lion.

iMac refresh will be announced and released next month along with Mountain Lion.


Came here to post this, we cracked the code! :)

Why release an OS and settle for a minor press event when you can release awesome new desktop computers along with it! It was the retina MBP that got front page of the NY Times the other day, they can do it again when Mountain Lion is released.

I've been waiting for a new iMac, too, and was going to settle for a new MBA to tide me over since it benches just about the same as the current $1199 iMac, but now I think I'll just wait until ML hits and get what I really want.

theSeb
Jun 13, 2012, 03:59 PM
I'd e very surprised if that all comes in one machine.

I have to admit though that this idea that Apple has to go with a 2X resolution increase seems to be bogus. There is plenty of evidence in the SDK to indicate otherwise. So maybe a more modest resolution increase will get them to where they want to be.


Except that NVidia is pretty sucky as a GPU. NVidia wouldn't even be my second choice.

What's wrong with a 670m or 680m

ezdz
Jun 13, 2012, 04:00 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

The iMac is considerably cheaper than a macbook pro + display, so there's that. Personally I've been using an old macbook pro and a cinema display for a while, but I find running the laptop with the lid closed tends to make it hotter than it should be.

nicklaz0r
Jun 13, 2012, 04:00 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

Not an iMac user ( waiting to switch to the 2012 imac which will be my first mac ever) but here is why I'm choosing the iMac;

Mac mini - Not powerful enough, no "built in screen" (still a pretty neat computer though, but not for a user like me)

MacBook Pro - The iMac is/will probably always be the more powerful computer (excluding Mac Pro). I like the bigger screen, the hardware, the looks of it, the feel that you're completley surrounded by your work. I give that up for portability, not to mention, it's also cheaper than a MBP, (AND Mac Pro).

Mac Pro - Expensive and overkill for my needs. I dont need to buy a high res screen with a iMac, it's just right there!

Mr Rogers
Jun 13, 2012, 04:03 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is


Because as you state, its a 'All-in-One' and is aesthetically pleasing.

I've just looked at a 30in Dell Ultraspack LCD monitor - same panel as current iMac - and used they are about US$1000, it would be great to add a Mac Pro to this, but heck, I don't have Mac Pro money - the Mac Mini is a great little performer as far as being a media centre is concerned, but underpowered in terms of CPU and GPU - heck, if they could put a decent Sandy Bridge quad i7 in the MM and the existing AMD 6970m GPU with 1G VRAM, you have a bloody wonderful little machine that's even good for games - shame Apple won't go with a Mac Mini Pro as I'd be really tempted to go for a larger LCD display with a supercharged Mac Mini.

sebi247
Jun 13, 2012, 04:04 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

iMac for me: design, loudness, clean desk (everything I need is in front of me), powerful machine, perfect display :rolleyes:

oomingmak
Jun 13, 2012, 04:06 PM
Speculation on hard drive size options for a new iMac?

I've been holding out in hopes a 4TB option is available. If that's not in the cards I don't need to wait and will go with something stitched together.

mdunlap
Jun 13, 2012, 04:07 PM
Because the MacBook doesnt have a 27" display. Thats it.

For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Marx55
Jun 13, 2012, 04:08 PM
Hopefully with matte displays, at least as an option, even if more expensive:
MacMatte (matte petition)
http://macmatte.wordpress.com

BrightonMB
Jun 13, 2012, 04:09 PM
One question - why does the 'compare' link on the (barely) new Mac Pros compare them to a 2.8GHz 27" iMac that doesn't seem to exist?

Shivetya
Jun 13, 2012, 04:09 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

For myself, I have a place in my home where my computer resides. If I need something outside of that space I have an iPad/Kindle. Work provides all the computer I need/am allowed for work. On trips I need so little more than what an iPad can offer or even an iPhone can cover in a jiffy. (hell both can take pictures, the mbp cannot)

If I were to look into the homes of friends with laptops its quite common to see them never leave one room. Better yet the iMac has a beautiful LARGE display, something no notebook has unless you want more cords and such

HoopjeEllende
Jun 13, 2012, 04:11 PM
ah! there is still hope!
I love this sort of rumors :P

Spitfire411
Jun 13, 2012, 04:15 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Cost mostly. I have an iPad, and both my wife and I have iPhones, so as far as couch surfing or mobile access goes, we're covered. I need a rig store my iTunes and edit photos in Aperture. I picked up a refurb iMac for hundreds of dollars less than a MacBook Pro and get a 21" monitor to boot.

mdunlap
Jun 13, 2012, 04:17 PM
After the announcement of no new iMacs at WWDC, I dropped $2300 on a new 27in iMac. I am going to be SO pissed if they update it next week or something. :mad:

QCassidy352
Jun 13, 2012, 04:18 PM
It doesn't have to be pixel-doubled to be Retina. It'll only take a small-moderate bump in resolution to get iMacs to the pixel density needed to be "retina". That goes for the Thunderbolt display as well.

Seriously. The iMac displays are already damn sharp.

Also, I'm totally happy with my 2011, but anti-glare would make me very jealous.

classicaliberal
Jun 13, 2012, 04:19 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

A Macbook Pro with a display is a seriously cool setup... however it has some SERIOUS flaws, that an iMac solves:

1) STORAGE: The largest HD you can get on a Macbook is 1TB. For anyone that does HD video, or rips DVDs, this is filled up rather fast.
2) PRICE: The Macbook Pro w/ Display is usually going to be $1000 or $1500 more than an equivalent 27" iMac
3) REPAIRS/UPGRADES: Much easier on an iMac (important to a very small segment of the population.

It all comes down to whether or not you value storage or portability... price or portability... upgradability or portability.

Plus, iMacs can do a few things that Macbooks can't... like multiple Hard Drives setup in RAID, etc.


I was weighing all of these options recently --> http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1350677

iMcLovin
Jun 13, 2012, 04:20 PM
I just bought the top of the line imac. I need it badly. I dont care if they make a small specbump next month. If they release retina imacs with redesign im gonna go mad. But, I seriously doubt it...so Im without regret. If I read this before I ordered yesterday, I might reconsider and be back in the waiting game, which is not a fun place to be.

07dodge
Jun 13, 2012, 04:20 PM
I'm looking at an iMac for a couple reasons...

Screen. 27" vs 15" is a pretty big difference.

Storage. Top 15 MBP is 768GB, iMac is 1TB and 256GB SSD (I'm still researching, as it says, I'm a newbie. But SSD/flash seems to be quicker, and iMac runs off the SSD for basic functions I think but has that 1TB (or 2TB for $150) for everything else. I could be wrong or off in my thinking)

Price could be a consideration also. It's ~$100 cheaper (or $50 more for the 2TB/256 SSD) than the 15" MBP

Why no Mini? It's in the $200 MORE range than a faster, larger capacity iMac (when throwing in the Thunderbolt display and trackpad/keyboard).

My ideal setup would be a dual-monitor iMac/TBD and maybe an Air for portability.

If I'm off, please correct me...

ArcaneDevice
Jun 13, 2012, 04:22 PM
iMac needs a touch screen. Otherwise it's just a spec bump along the road to something more interesting.

Flood123
Jun 13, 2012, 04:22 PM
After the announcement of no new iMacs at WWDC, I dropped $2300 on a new 27in iMac. I am going to be SO pissed if they update it next week or something. :mad:

You can always return it, but honestly your computer is awesome.

Ryth
Jun 13, 2012, 04:25 PM
We don't buy to wait for something to break down..you have to send it for repair anyhow son what difference does it make for the UPS man to pickup a iMac or macbook?

Major benefits; screen size (duh)
Cooling
Faster than MacBooks
Cheaper
I/O

Screen size
2GB + Graphics card
2nd HD Slot for AE6 video cache

As much as I love the new MBP R-Type, a 1GB Nvidia 650GT doesn't cut it nor not having a 2nd HD drive for video caching (at least for me).

----------

After the announcement of no new iMacs at WWDC, I dropped $2300 on a new 27in iMac. I am going to be SO pissed if they update it next week or something. :mad:

I would return it. Seriously. iMacs are coming before the end of the summer and school starting.

I just bought the top of the line imac. I need it badly. I dont care if they make a small specbump next month. If they release retina imacs with redesign im gonna go mad. But, I seriously doubt it...so Im without regret. If I read this before I ordered yesterday, I might reconsider and be back in the waiting game, which is not a fun place to be.

Well...don't be surprised if they do in the next two months. I'm in the same position as you are. I need something but I'm waiting. Too much of a risk to buy an end of model iMac with a possible new version coming, especially retina displays. The next little even could be..

-Mac Mini
-iMac Retina
-Stand along Retina Displays

No matter what, you should be waiting at least for Ivy Bridge chips...the bump is coming soon beyond a doubt...probably August. Even if you need it, you are basically buying a car at the end of it's cycle while the new better engine is on the horizon in a short time.

Anlino
Jun 13, 2012, 04:25 PM
4GB RAM? Would've expected 8GB to be standard, tbh.

nickpro
Jun 13, 2012, 04:26 PM
does anyone with knowledge of display technology know where they are at with 21.5 and 27 inch retina displays? do they exist already?

haoqfu
Jun 13, 2012, 04:30 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

I prefer mac mini plus thunderbolt display setup. Current generation of iMac looks so ugly because of its big chin. Apple is capable of making mac mini as fast as iMac, but they simply choose not to do so.

dagamer34
Jun 13, 2012, 04:30 PM
GPUs and DisplayPort don't support anything higher than 4K, so I wouldn't expect any pixel doubled 27" displays. Instead, well probably see both the 21" and 27" have a resolution of 3840x2160.

iceborer
Jun 13, 2012, 04:31 PM
The iMac is considerably cheaper than a macbook pro + display, so there's that. Personally I've been using an old macbook pro and a cinema display for a while, but I find running the laptop with the lid closed tends to make it hotter than it should be.

Run it with the lid open :) I'm running the same rig (while waiting patiently for a bump in the iMac-- just want a more recent graphics card so my Mac will last me a bit longer on the other end: or so I hope)

If you're on Lion, you can tweak the settings to allow you to run lid up with no display on the notebook. I add a cheap USB fan stnd underneath and mine stays pretty cool. From Max OS X Hints http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20110901113922148

Ryth
Jun 13, 2012, 04:36 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

Well it's a few things. If you are comparing a MBPro to an iMac, I'd rather have the iMac just due to the screen size and cost.

To get the same thing, it's going to run you almost $4k for the new MBPR + a stand along display (and new displays are probably coming) and your MBP will still not be as fast.

The iMac when it comes out that has the Ivy Bridge Chip and possible retina display will be probably around 3K Im guess..so you'll get a faster desktop chipset, better graphics card and a 27" monitor all in one.

In terms of the mini...it just isn't powerful enough to do my graphics/editing/after effects needs...so that's out for me + a monitor.

Personally, I'd rather have a Mac Pro Tower small form factor (hoping 2013 brings it) with a stand alone monitor which I have at work. 30" Apple Display and 2008 Mac Pro Tower 8 core.

Gaelic2
Jun 13, 2012, 04:38 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.
Well, for one, I don't need portability. I use my iPad when I travel. I don't want to buy another screen, is another reason. The Thunderbolt screen in around another $900. Add that to the cost of your laptop and it adds up a lot more expensive than the $1195 - 1595 range for an iMac. Your needs are not the same for everyone!

noty
Jun 13, 2012, 04:40 PM
As awesome as that Retina MBP looks I was still disappointed that they didn't announce new iMacs. My MBP is on its death bed and I really want to replace it with an iMac but there is no way I'm buying one now. Hopefully we'll see an update this summer, preferably July.

CavalierLion
Jun 13, 2012, 04:40 PM
Repairability has a direct connection with repair cost, no matter who does it.

Screen size: with a MacBook you attach whatever size display you want.

Faster: when I have looked at same generation Macs, the speeds were comparable.

Cheaper: No.

I/O: what are you referring too? The only "I/O" difference is the iMac doesn't have a SD Card slot.


How do you do this? In looking at the MacBook pro, I thought its only port for connecting a display to the laptop is the thunderbolt port. Thunderbolt displays are too expensive in my opinion, and its cheaper to just get a 27" Imac than both a Thunderbolt display and a Macbook pro.

If there is any easy (and not overly expensive) way to set up a Macbook pro so that it is connected to a bigger screen and wireless keyboard/mouse, I'd do that instead.

gnasher729
Jun 13, 2012, 04:43 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

If someone (only) needs a machine that stands on a desk and isn't moved around, an iMac is a lot better value for money. The cheapest 21.5" iMac and the cheapest 13" MBP cost the same, but the iMac has a high quality monitor, quad core processor, and more practical keyboard and mouse.

Moonjumper
Jun 13, 2012, 04:43 PM
4GB RAM? Would've expected 8GB to be standard, tbh.

That could be the smaller sized screen. I would expect the larger to have more.

I'm still hoping for a Retina iMac. A Mac without retina now seems old tech. If there is, I expect the current style iMacs to operate alongside it, just as the older style MBP has survived.

samac92
Jun 13, 2012, 04:45 PM
It doesn't have to be pixel-doubled to be Retina. It'll only take a small-moderate bump in resolution to get iMacs to the pixel density needed to be "retina". That goes for the Thunderbolt display as well.

But with HiDPI mode on, you're get a quarter of the pixels in terms of real estate. So if Apple don't quadruple the number of pixels then you'll lose real estate. Unless they use some weird scaling, but as we've seen on the new MBP that reduces performance. I don't think they'll call anything retina without quadrupling the number of pixels.

But then again that would be an insane number of pixels that would probably be too much to support. Maybe with the iMacs the decrease in performance using scaling wouldn't be apparent because there isn't the need to use the IGP as much.

Moonjumper
Jun 13, 2012, 04:46 PM
How do you do this? In looking at the MacBook pro, I thought its only port for connecting a display to the laptop is the thunderbolt port. Thunderbolt displays are too expensive in my opinion, and its cheaper to just get a 27" Imac than both a Thunderbolt display and a Macbook pro.

If there is any easy (and not overly expensive) way to set up a Macbook pro so that it is connected to a bigger screen and wireless keyboard/mouse, I'd do that instead.

The Thunderbolt connector is also Mini Displayport connector, so you can use any monitor with that.

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 04:51 PM
A Macbook Pro with a display is a seriously cool setup... however it has some SERIOUS flaws, that an iMac solves:

1) STORAGE: The largest HD you can get on a Macbook is 1TB. For anyone that does HD video, or rips DVDs, this is filled up rather fast.
2) PRICE: The Macbook Pro w/ Display is usually going to be $1000 or $1500 more than an equivalent 27" iMac
3) REPAIRS/UPGRADES: Much easier on an iMac (important to a very small segment of the population.

It all comes down to whether or not you value storage or portability... price or portability... upgradability or portability.

Plus, iMacs can do a few things that Macbooks can't... like multiple Hard Drives setup in RAID, etc.


I was weighing all of these options recently --> http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1350677

I certainly would not (and was not) suggesting that a MBA with display would be competitive with an iMac. And, from my original post on the subject, repairs and upgrades were/are easier on the MBP than the iMac.

I have no good idea where you get $1000 to $1500 more for the laptop + display. For reference, I just ordered a 13" MBP for $1200 and a 27" display can be had for less than $200. Do you have a source where iMacs are free?

ezdz
Jun 13, 2012, 04:52 PM
Run it with the lid open :) I'm running the same rig (while waiting patiently for a bump in the iMac-- just want a more recent graphics card so my Mac will last me a bit longer on the other end: or so I hope)

If you're on Lion, you can tweak the settings to allow you to run lid up with no display on the notebook. I add a cheap USB fan stnd underneath and mine stays pretty cool. From Max OS X Hints http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20110901113922148

If I run it with the lid open, it can't output the full resolution of the cinema display. Also, it kind of blocks the monitor (I could put it to one side but I have limited desk space). Still on Snow Leopard as well... like you waiting (impatiently) for the next iMac.

NachoNoir
Jun 13, 2012, 04:54 PM
Personally, I'd settle with a slight resolution bump of 2880x1800 for the 27" model.

That would make a lot of sense: Same resolution as the new MBP (software wouldn't have to account for a new screen resolution), the display wouldn't be much more difficult to manufacture (=similar cost) than the current 2560x1440 display, and anyway the current resolution for the 27" model is quite awesome. I've had one for a couple of years and while not retina, it's quite high. I really don't see a 27-30" 4k display is a possibility at all.

Apart from that (and even I think it's very unlikely), I'm not hoping for much more than a speed bump in CPU and graphics, default 8GB RAM in the higher-end models, USB 3.0 (probably the most significant upgrade), a slight price decrease and maybe some surprise like a wireless full keyboard or a wireless keyboard+trackpad combo.

Not much for such a long wait, though :-(

Navdakilla
Jun 13, 2012, 04:55 PM
bring it

although I don't I'll be buying one to replace my 2011 27" iMac anytime soon

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 04:57 PM
How do you do this? In looking at the MacBook pro, I thought its only port for connecting a display to the laptop is the thunderbolt port. Thunderbolt displays are too expensive in my opinion, and its cheaper to just get a 27" Imac than both a Thunderbolt display and a Macbook pro.

If there is any easy (and not overly expensive) way to set up a Macbook pro so that it is connected to a bigger screen and wireless keyboard/mouse, I'd do that instead.

It has a Mini DisplayPort which converts to HDMI, DVI, or VGA. $29 from Apple.

fig
Jun 13, 2012, 04:57 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

As others have mentioned, other than costing $1000+ less?

I'm in the "what do I do" boat right now myself, I've got an older iMac that needs updating and a 13" Aluminum MacBook (just before it was rebadged as a MBP). I'd love to get an MBP with Retina and a Thunderbolt Display but I'd be looking at $3200 vs $1500-2000 for a new iMac.



I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

The Mac Mini is stuck with onboard graphics which isn't ideal for the work I'm doing (design and 3d) and the Pro is overkill and too expensive (and you have to add the display).

Yes, parts of the iMac will become obsolete but there's still some nice resale value in it when you need to upgrade. My rather old 20" iMac will still bring $400-500 on eBay.

potatis
Jun 13, 2012, 04:59 PM
They'll probably hold off retina for the iMac until it's redesigned. Panasonic has a new 20" panel of 3840x2160 btw.

morpheuzlal
Jun 13, 2012, 05:01 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.


iMac is a cheaper solution than a Macbook Pro + Display . And consider one thing...iMac screen is great, not only big but also really great! In my country buying a screen with this image quality can cost almost 400$. So its not the same. And another thing, there are people who hate laptops, because they can fall on the ground easily, and often they are not so durable.

eyebex
Jun 13, 2012, 05:03 PM
From front page (bold is mine)Apple press relations staff specifically clarified those remarks to note that only the Mac Pro would be seeing the 2013 update.


Don't they mean "muddied those remarks"?

As in: yeah, there will definitely not be Mac Pro refresh until sometime in 2013 but we're not saying anything about when the iMac may get a refresh.

urbanlung
Jun 13, 2012, 05:06 PM
Apparently Apple have now moved beyond just the Retina Display and will be introducing the new 'Cochlear Speaker' who's resolution will be so high that you cannot hear the individual samples. Unfortunately we will still have to wait a while for the 'Olifactory Stinkbulb' technology to mature sufficiently for public release.

Mike Valmike
Jun 13, 2012, 05:07 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?


I assume you meant what a MBP+display would NOT do for me. The answers are:

1. 256 SSD OS drive + 4TB internal media drive, optimal for iTunes serving of HD video to various AppleTVs, at much less cost than a bunch of Promise or LaCie TB rigs. No MBP anywhere can do this at all. iMac does it perfectly. Right now I have an older iMac and I can only put ~150GB of video into iTunes at a time. Just fine for the wife and I watching the occasional movie, but not as good with three kids who want to watch their cartoon videos every-single-day.

2. Speed and power under the hood per dollar spent ratio is much higher than for any MBP, since the MBP also has a cost for portability.

3. Includes display instead of additional $1000 cost.

12dylan34
Jun 13, 2012, 05:09 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.


A MacBook Pro with the same or a bit worse specs than an iMac + a 27 inch thunderbolt display will be more than $1500 more than a top-of-the-line 27 inch iMac. Portability is an issue to some, but I have an older MBP and an iPad, so buying an iMac now makes the most financial sense to me.

D.T.
Jun 13, 2012, 05:11 PM
The Mac Mini is stuck with onboard graphics which isn't ideal for the work I'm doing (design and 3d) and the Pro is overkill and too expensive (and you have to add the display).


Yeah, it’s too bad Apple never offered a small chassis desktop with a dedicated GPU, faster CPU options, user serviceable RAM and storage, basically a MBP15/17 in a box. It wouldn’t even have to be the “mid tower” some folks have wanted (i.e., it wouldn’t need slots or huge bays for storage).

Mike Valmike
Jun 13, 2012, 05:11 PM
Speculation on hard drive size options for a new iMac?

I've been holding out in hopes a 4TB option is available. If that's not in the cards I don't need to wait and will go with something stitched together.

The 2011 iMac can handle a 4TB drive; it's just not officially supported by Apple. An AAR will gladly install it for you for the cost of labor.

DeaconGraves
Jun 13, 2012, 05:13 PM
I certainly would not (and was not) suggesting that a MBA with display would be competitive with an iMac. And, from my original post on the subject, repairs and upgrades were/are easier on the MBP than the iMac.

I have no good idea where you get $1000 to $1500 more for the laptop + display. For reference, I just ordered a 13" MBP for $1200 and a 27" display can be had for less than $200. Do you have a source where iMacs are free?

If we're talking base-line MBP, then you can add "no dedicated graphics card" to the reasons why a person would choose an iMac over a MBP.

Also, please point me to a $200 monitor that has 2560 x 1440 native resolution. Most monitors that price are probably going to be 1080p tops.

Celli
Jun 13, 2012, 05:16 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me. Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

A lot of us couldn't care less about portability. I do 99% of my computer work in my home office. I need a computer that will park on my desk and stay there. Why spend $2000+ on a laptop and then still have to buy a seperate screen when I can spend $1000 less and get the sharp iMac screen with it?

For the other 1% away from home iPad does the job and it's easier to carry around than a Macbook Pro.

fig
Jun 13, 2012, 05:23 PM
Yeah, it’s too bad Apple never offered a small chassis desktop with a dedicated GPU, faster CPU options, user serviceable RAM and storage, basically a MBP15/17 in a box. It wouldn’t even have to be the “mid tower” some folks have wanted (i.e., it wouldn’t need slots or huge bays for storage).

Well, they did for a while :)

http://www.yesthisbig.com/img/uploads/Alex-20110826044817.jpg

But yeah, if I could have a Mini with simply a legit GPU I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

paradox00
Jun 13, 2012, 05:24 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Desktop processor and hard drive
Higher performance
Lower price
Better heat management
Larger screen
Clean design, smaller desktop footprint than a laptop and monitor

How many reasons do you need?

PS: The Macbook Pro you love so much probably won't be around in two years.

chrisdee
Jun 13, 2012, 05:27 PM
I'm sick of these rumors.

Rot'nApple
Jun 13, 2012, 05:43 PM
One question - why does the 'compare' link on the (barely) new Mac Pros compare them to a 2.8GHz 27" iMac that doesn't seem to exist?

I heard that it was due to a Apple webmaster asleep at the wheel and that those specs are from the 2010 iMac.
/
/
/

JayLenochiniMac
Jun 13, 2012, 05:47 PM
Maybe this isn't it, but the next-generation iMac won't have an optical drive.

Lancer
Jun 13, 2012, 05:47 PM
Thanks for the report.

I've been waiting a while to get a new iMac to replace my 2005 G5 PM and not about to drop $2000 on the current model. I really want USB3 and the new Ivy Bridge CPUs, a matte screen option would be a nice bonus.

I'm hoping the new iMac comes out with the next OS X update in July or August. So I can save a few more $$$ to get a better model.

Twixt
Jun 13, 2012, 05:51 PM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

You can use an iMac just for its screen as a second life.
I would advise to buy a steroid version for iMac. My late 2009 one still displays around 9000 at this well known benchmark which means it is still usable.

Usage wise I already have a pro HP laptop for excel, CAD etc, my iMac is all about multimedia (so less sensitive to obsolescence i guess)

jennyp
Jun 13, 2012, 05:54 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

It seems to me my iMac has better specs than the new MBP. 2TB disk too. And cheaper than the 15-inch MBP at the time.

Bendrix
Jun 13, 2012, 05:59 PM
Can anyone list what the projected specs are on the base model of this rumored iMac?

Based on the OP, we have:

Ivy Bridge Core i7-3770 quad-core processor
4 GB of 1600 MHz RAM
USB 3.0


What about the rest?

Hard drive?
SSD comes standard or as a BTO option?
ODD?

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 06:01 PM
...

PS: The Macbook Pro you love so much probably won't be around in two years.

Likely not. Reports from iFixit show that both the Air and the Retina are unrepairable and non-upgradable bricks. Too bad. I do hope that the new iMac does not follow suit, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I keep my computers for a while and things will change by the time I am in the market again. I have owned a Macintosh since 1984, but Apple did not always do right by me. For example, they produced crap hardware though most 1990s and I bought a clone during that time.

Thank you everyone for your comments. We all use different criteria when choosing a product. I wish you all success with your choices.

davidhildreth
Jun 13, 2012, 06:09 PM
I just want an Nvidia graphics chip. I need CUDA!

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 06:17 PM
I just want an Nvidia graphics chip. I need CUDA!

The 15" MBPs have the Keppler GPU in them. Go CUDA!

HurtinMinorKey
Jun 13, 2012, 06:23 PM
Apple has so much cash on hand, so....

How about they lower the margins on the i-Mac for once(and actually price competitively with Win systems), and get a flood of new users hooked on OSX? At the same price point, they could make the next-gen i-mac a beast.

Then they can slowly raise their prices.

OliOC
Jun 13, 2012, 06:23 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

This is one silly question!!

As others have stated...PRICE!

In the UK a 15" MBP + Apple TBD is £2700. You need this spec MBP to get the speedier processor and dedicated graphics card, 8GB RAM etc.

Base spec iMac (no doubt the next gen will match the latest MBP spec) is £1400.

That's pretty much HALF the price, for the same processing power. Not to mention a larger HD.

For business it's an absolute no brainer. We run a design consultancy. We have a few MBP's MBA and iPads, don't need Mac Pro's, so an iMac is the perfect fit.

scottrichardson
Jun 13, 2012, 06:25 PM
Begs the question - how close (in performance) will these new iMacs be to some of the 'current' Mac Pros?

Jbach67
Jun 13, 2012, 06:26 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Thats you and many others. not me. If you have just one I can see a case for either an iMac or a mbpro. But I like the big screen of the Mac for serious work and games. in that case, it's cheaper with more throughput than a Mbp without considering buying an additional large display one has to hook up before use. So your question boils down to why have an iMac and a mbpro. Or why not have just an iMac and iPad. Much cheaper to get an an ipad and an iMac with far larger storage than a new Mbp. If you're into games, the current 2011 imac has better performance than any of the 2012 mbps. And the iPad is more portable with longer battery life.

Everyone will have their own answer, but all three are still selling very well, with more voting for 13 inch MacBooks, airs, or Mbps. Probably many reasons, including yours for your original purchase of both iMac and Mbp.

A note on mbp maintenance - based on today's breakdown, good luck with an easy ssd repair on a new retina Mbp

Tezcatlipoca
Jun 13, 2012, 06:28 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

I won't be an iMac user until I get my first one this year, but...

1) Screen size. 21.5" or 27" is a lot bigger 13" or 15"... Sure, you can get a 27" Thunderbolt Display or Cinema Display, but then that leads to...

2) Cost. The iMac is a lot cheaper than buying an MBP plus an Apple display.



I don't need portability - I have an iPad for that. But I do need a new desktop...

OliOC
Jun 13, 2012, 06:32 PM
Can anyone list what the projected specs are on the base model of this rumored iMac?

Based on the OP, we have:

Ivy Bridge Core i7-3770 quad-core processor
4 GB of 1600 MHz RAM
USB 3.0


What about the rest?

Hard drive?
SSD comes standard or as a BTO option?
ODD?

I'm pretty certain these benchmarks are for the 21.5" model, as I'd think the 27" models will both come with 8GB RAM as standard. I'd also guess 1TB HDs across the board.

I'm gonna be surprised if we see a new design/ so called retina screen in the upcoming update - my guess is they'll be brought in line with the updated MBPs (not the retina MBP).

D.T.
Jun 13, 2012, 06:34 PM
Well, they did for a while :)

But yeah, if I could have a Mini with simply a legit GPU I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

Ahh yeah, the glorious []CUBE[] :) I totally forgot about it!

Jbach67
Jun 13, 2012, 06:35 PM
The 15" MBPs have the Keppler GPU in them. Go CUDA!

Yes, but notebook check shows generally lower frame rates for the 650m in the MacBook pros than the radeon in the 2011 iMac. I hope they go higher in the iMac refresh, not lower. The devil is in the details.

Constable Odo
Jun 13, 2012, 06:35 PM
I was checking the Apple refurbished iMacs and it seems there weren't any 27" i7 quad-cores available which is rather unusual. Maybe an update is right around the corner or the lack of high-end iMac refurbs is just a temporary thing.

:confused:

OliOC
Jun 13, 2012, 06:37 PM
Likely not. Reports from iFixit show that both the Air and the Retina are unrepairable and non-upgradable bricks. Too bad. I do hope that the new iMac does not follow suit, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I keep my computers for a while and things will change by the time I am in the market again. I have owned a Macintosh since 1984, but Apple did not always do right by me. For example, they produced crap hardware though most 1990s and I bought a clone during that time.

Thank you everyone for your comments. We all use different criteria when choosing a product. I wish you all success with your choices.

I disagree. I wouldn't be suprised AT ALL if apple dropped the 13" and 15" MBPs as we know them now next year, and release std def versions of the new MBP Retina. They are testing the water with this ATM, but there are too many laptops in their current line up. Next year we'll see updated laptops that loose the optical drive (perhaps not the 2.5" HD) and a redesigned Mac Pro that is smaller. The Mac Pro will open up the doors to Prosumers that can't afford the current Mac Pro but are concerned about the obsolescence of the iMac...

KonaBlend
Jun 13, 2012, 06:45 PM
GPUs and DisplayPort don't support anything higher than 4K, so I wouldn't expect any pixel doubled 27" displays. Instead, well probably see both the 21" and 27" have a resolution of 3840x2160.

my guess:

the 21" iMac will stay at 1920x1080
the 27" iMac will have a "retina" variant with 3840x2160, probably also including higher-end cpu/ram/storage options. This represents an approximate bump from 109ppi to 163ppi.

HurtinMinorKey
Jun 13, 2012, 06:47 PM
my guess:

the 21" iMac will stay at 1920x1080
the 27" iMac will have a "retina" variant with 3840x2160, probably also including higher-end cpu/ram/storage options. This represents an approximate bump from 109ppi to 163ppi.

Then they better come with a free RED Camera, so we record something to watch on our nice new 4K screen. :)

boto
Jun 13, 2012, 06:48 PM
I'm pretty certain these benchmarks are for the 21.5" model, as I'd think the 27" models will both come with 8GB RAM as standard. I'd also guess 1TB HDs across the board.

These are 27" models and they are running 32-bit mode, so it should actually be 13000+ scores on 64-bit. It's faster than the current top of the line MBPs.

pdadoc
Jun 13, 2012, 06:53 PM
Almost pulled the trigger myself on iMac after no announcement- now will hold off for a month to see..... Currently use MBP 2010 hooked to 24" cinema display. I typically have LOTS of apps open at same time, and am tired of the spinning beach ball. While upgraded specs will be nice, the ONE thing I'm really looking for is upgrade to 512 gb SSD drive. Expensive option, but well worth it to me to get everything on one drive.

I also have a 2011 MB Air, and the SSD drive makes all the difference in speed. Looking forward to getting rid of all the wires, and having a "top of line" iMac that will allow work to get done with no (or rare) beach balls! Given the upgrades to 512 SSD in MB Airs, would be surprised if that wasn't offered as an option.

faroZ06
Jun 13, 2012, 06:55 PM
And what about the Mac Pro? Still 2013?

Slow Programmer
Jun 13, 2012, 07:02 PM
Repairability has a direct connection with repair cost, no matter who does it.

Screen size: with a MacBook you attach whatever size display you want.

Faster: when I have looked at same generation Macs, the speeds were comparable.

Cheaper: No.

I/O: what are you referring too? The only "I/O" difference is the iMac doesn't have a SD Card slot.

iMacs have had SD Card slots for the last several years. It is just under the optical drive. Have you actually ever used a iMac? Does the new MacBook Pro have an optical drive?

OliOC
Jun 13, 2012, 07:08 PM
These are 27" models and they are running 32-bit mode, so it should actually be 13000+ scores on 64-bit. It's faster than the current top of the line MBPs.

Sweet! Thanks for clarifying that.

----------

iMacs have had SD Card slots for the last several years. It is just under the optical drive. Have you actually ever used a iMac? Does the new MacBook Pro have an optical drive?

Fair point. Plus it's worth mentioning the new iMacs will have twice as many USB 3.0 ports...

niuniu
Jun 13, 2012, 07:09 PM
I'm sick of these rumors.

Then why are you reading and posting on a site called MacRUMORS.

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 07:15 PM
I disagree. I would be suprised AT ALL if apple dropped the 13" and 15" MBPs as we know them now next year, and release std def versions of the new MBP Retina. They are testing the water with this ATM, but there are too many laptops in their current line up. Next year we'll see updated laptops that loose the optical drive (perhaps not the 2.5" HD) and a redesigned Mac Pro that is smaller. The Mac Pro will open up the doors to Prosumers that can't afford the current Mac Pro but are concerned about the obsolescence of the iMac...

I must not have been clear, we basically agree here: I believe that Apple will consolidate their laptop line. They will lose the optical drive (I thought they would lose it this time), and I suspect that they will lose the mechanical hard disk.

What I did not predict (I should have) was Apple making the laptops as monolithic, unrepairable, non-upgradable, throw-away products. Of course, that's what they have done with the iPods, the iPhones, and the iPads, so I shouldn't have been surprised.

Thankfully, they did not completely redo the non-retina MBP: they still are modular allowing for both easy repair and upgrade. I'm sure they will "correct" this in the next year or two, making them more like the Air and Retina.

BTW, I am not sure what Apple will do with the MacPro. The form-factor can clearly provide power that is not doable in the other Mac formats, but I don't figure that it is too big of a market for Apple. I would not be surprised at all if the dumped the whole MacPro line.

CycloneX
Jun 13, 2012, 07:15 PM
I was checking the Apple refurbished iMacs and it seems there weren't any 27" i7 quad-cores available which is rather unusual. Maybe an update is right around the corner or the lack of high-end iMac refurbs is just a temporary thing.

:confused:

I had one saved in my shopping cart last night, but didn't pull the trigger. Today, it's gone. One could interpret this as Apple clearing inventory --- seems mission accomplished today --- before an upgrade, or just biz as usual and means nothing. However, it makes no sense for Apple to have only one "up to date" line -- laptops -- for several months to a year. I can see the longer wait for the PM, as it likely will be a complete redesign, case and all, but Apple must have a desktop model that is up to spec with the MBP and Air -- at least USB 3.0, latest flavor from Intel, and new mobile GPUs on some models. My guess would be new-ish iMacs will be relased with Mountain Lion in July. So, I guess I'll wait a bit more *grumbles* before buying a new iMac. :rolleyes:

oLNutjob
Jun 13, 2012, 07:17 PM
I'd be first in line for a 27" if it's screen bottom started an inch or so above my workstation desk.

("Hello Apple. You need to lose the bottom aluminum panel and logo..... Lower your screen.")

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 07:19 PM
iMacs have had SD Card slots for the last several years. It is just under the optical drive. Have you actually ever used a iMac? Does the new MacBook Pro have an optical drive?

I have an iMac. Thank you for pointing out my miss on the SD Card slot; mine does not have one.

Yes, the new non-retina MBPs do have optical drives. Probably because they really didn't change that much from last year. I am surprised that they didn't drop them.

Lynn Belvedere
Jun 13, 2012, 07:19 PM
There will not be a retina imac until 2015 at the absolute earliest. The cost would be far too outrageous until that time.

2012 - Retina Macbook pro 15"
2013/2014 - Retina Macbook pro 13" and retina Macbook air 11"/13"
2015 - Retina imac

faroZ06
Jun 13, 2012, 07:23 PM
I'd be first in line for a 27" if it's screen bottom started an inch or so above my workstation desk.

("Hello Apple. You need to lose the bottom aluminum panel and logo..... Lower your screen.")

Remember the iMac G4 design? That was pretty good.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 13, 2012, 07:25 PM
Let's hope this iMac allows for RAM upgrades outside of Apple.

Ddyracer
Jun 13, 2012, 07:28 PM
I'm sick of these rumors.

Wait, you'd rather have those tired iPad and iPhone rumors? Enjoy it. It only comes once a year for each mac lineup.

iSayuSay
Jun 13, 2012, 07:30 PM
Only thing that bug me is they still include 4GB RAM as standard .. on highest end 27" too? (See the benchmark, it's i7 3770 .. must be the high end BTO 27").

For goodness, it's 2012 and 4GB RAM should be like .. minimum? I mean high end MBP came with 8GB as standard, so why not doing the same for iMac?

Yeah RAM is super cheap, but it's nice to have 8GB as standard, means you get 2x4GB and you can add 2x8GB for heavy workload instead 2x2GB as usual.

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 07:35 PM
Only thing that bug me is they still include 4GB RAM as standard .. on highest end 27" too? (See the benchmark, it's i7 3770 .. must be the high end BTO 27").

For goodness, it's 2012 and 4GB RAM should be like .. minimum? I mean high end MBP came with 8GB as standard, so why not doing the same for iMac?

Yeah RAM is super cheap, but it's nice to have 8GB as standard, means you get 2x4GB and you can add 2x8GB for heavy workload instead 2x2GB as usual.

Most of the new MBP do come with 8 GB standard. Although they claim differently, I suspect that they will work with 16 GB. I was happy to buy the base model with 4 GB and later upgrade directly to 16 GB when it becomes an issue. I get to avoid the Apple memory tax and (probably) run with more memory than they publish as possible.

paradox00
Jun 13, 2012, 07:38 PM
Likely not. Reports from iFixit show that both the Air and the Retina are unrepairable and non-upgradable bricks. Too bad. I do hope that the new iMac does not follow suit, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I keep my computers for a while and things will change by the time I am in the market again. I have owned a Macintosh since 1984, but Apple did not always do right by me. For example, they produced crap hardware though most 1990s and I bought a clone during that time.

Thank you everyone for your comments. We all use different criteria when choosing a product. I wish you all success with your choices.

The SSD will be upgradable, the battery is replaceable by Apple for a similar price to what they charge for the old Macbook Pros. The only non upgradable part you're losing with the retina mac is the ram. While Apple's upgrade price is definitely on the high side, it's still a reasonable enough price to max it out right away.

Tinyluph
Jun 13, 2012, 07:39 PM
Let's hope this iMac allows for RAM upgrades outside of Apple.

Is this not the case on the current iMacs? :confused:

oLNutjob
Jun 13, 2012, 07:42 PM
Remember the iMac G4 design? That was pretty good.


Yup. It was fine raising the screen to use the optical drive. I really wish I could find a cheap 20" G4 to use as a digital picture frame.

Those things had looks and class.

shompa
Jun 13, 2012, 07:42 PM
Apple loves to save money.
Examples:
Retina Iphone4 and Retina 5,1 have the same pixel density. They can use the same "LCD panels"*, just cut different sizes.

Same with iPad 7.65 inch. its exact the same pixel density as iPhone 3Gs. They can use the same LCD and just cut larger size.

How is it with Ipad3 and Retina macbook pro? Is it the same pixel density? Do they use the same "LCD panel". Probably.

The retina panel that is used for Macbook pro / iPad. Apple is probably just cutting larger panels for 22 inch and 27 inch. It should not be impossible.





*LCD panel is the wrong technical term, but you know what I mean.

iSayuSay
Jun 13, 2012, 07:45 PM
Most of the new MBP do come with 8 GB standard. Although they claim differently, I suspect that they will work with 16 GB. I was happy to buy the base model with 4 GB and later upgrade directly to 16 GB when it becomes an issue. I get to avoid the Apple memory tax and (probably) run with more memory than they publish as possible.

On the second thought yes .. only 2 MBP model (base 13" and 15") came with 4GB. Means it become minority.

I hope Apple had a change of heart and include 8GB as standard, reducing the chance to upgrade, and it's nice to have 2x4GB because it's 4GB/slot so you can add RAM much further to 24GB rather than 2x2GB as standard .. it's a waste of slot .. You can't dump Apple RAM either since it's included in warranty or the AppleCare.

BobCollins
Jun 13, 2012, 07:49 PM
The SSD will be upgradable, the battery is replaceable by Apple for a similar price to what they charge for the old Macbook Pros. The only non upgradable part you're losing with the retina mac is the ram. While Apple's upgrade price is definitely on the high side, it's still a reasonable enough price to max it out right away.

I hope that the Retina's battery is replaceable, at least by Apple. If you read the iFixit teardown report though, they found the the battery was cemented in and they worried that it would break if they tried to remove it. This is NOT the case with the batteries in the MBPs of the past few years. They were held in with screws and easy to replace.

Also, unless money is no object, not being able to upgrade the RAM is a big deal. You have to order and pay for the maximum configuration that you will ever use right at the beginning. I prefer to upgrade items like RAM and disk over the period I own a computer, upgrading if and when it is needed. I also benefit from the lower prices of these commodity items by doing it later.

mrmarts
Jun 13, 2012, 07:52 PM
As my iMac 2010 works fine and I just got a macbook pro retina I am curious to see whats coming I would be tempted to buy a new one if:


1. It offers 4k resolution with retina
2. it has a complete redesign hopefully not like the macbook pro retina if a part breaks down you break if you don't have warranty.
3. it has USB 3.0 at least two ports as my current iMac don't have it
4. better graphics and more memory i.e. 8gb on base config.

themcfly
Jun 13, 2012, 08:05 PM
Only thing that bug me is they still include 4GB RAM as standard .. on highest end 27" too? (See the benchmark, it's i7 3770 .. must be the high end BTO 27").

For goodness, it's 2012 and 4GB RAM should be like .. minimum? I mean high end MBP came with 8GB as standard, so why not doing the same for iMac?

I don't understand it either, ram is REALLY cheap nowadays... the only explanation i can find is that Apple does NOT consider the iMac a "pro" product in their lineup...

e-coli
Jun 13, 2012, 08:10 PM
Repairability has a direct connection with repair cost, no matter who does it.

Screen size: with a MacBook you attach whatever size display you want.

Faster: when I have looked at same generation Macs, the speeds were comparable.

Cheaper: No.

I/O: what are you referring too? The only "I/O" difference is the iMac doesn't have a SD Card slot.

Know what you're talking about before you drill people.

Screen size: sure, if you want to drop another $1k on a screen you can. Otherwise the iMac has a bigger screen (and as such is cheaper for what you get).

The iMac is indeed faster. The bus speed and read/seek times on the HDD's are faster. I have identical chips and memory in an iMac and MacBook Pro. The iMac is faster.

Cheaper: Yes. Try to find a MacBook pro with a screen res even close to an iMac. And a 15" MacBook Pro is still significantly more expensive than a 21" iMac.

I/O: the iMac has significantly more ports. And it even has an SD card slot.

Thunderbird
Jun 13, 2012, 08:11 PM
This makes sense. If the iMac were only getting a speed bump, it would have got one along with the laptops at WWDC. The fact that the iMac was conspicuously absent from WWDC announcments, seems to indicate the iMac is getting more than an Ivy Bridge speed bump. I think there's going to be a redesign, which may or may not include retina display, but more likely will involve aesthetic and form changes (e.g. the stand).

I say a new iMac will be announced together with Mountain Lion, or not too long after (by end of September).

paradox00
Jun 13, 2012, 08:12 PM
I hope that the Retina's battery is replaceable, at least by Apple. If you read the iFixit teardown report though, they found the the battery was cemented in and they worried that it would break if they tried to remove it. This is NOT the case with the batteries in the MBPs of the past few years. They were held in with screws and easy to replace.

Also, unless money is no object, not being able to upgrade the RAM is a big deal. You have to order and pay for the maximum configuration that you will ever use right at the beginning. I prefer to upgrade items like RAM and disk over the period I own a computer, upgrading if and when it is needed. I also benefit from the lower prices of these commodity items by doing it later.

There isn't an "I hope" about it. It is replaceable by Apple. Priced similarily to the 17" Macbook pro (there's actually more battery in these new macs than the old 15" ones).
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro/service/battery/

Ram is a $200 upgrade on a min $2200 computer. It's overpriced, but not by as much as past upgrades, and if $200 is going to do that much financial damage to you, you probably shouldn't be buying a $2200 computer.

I feel like you're driven more by ideology than anything else (the only good computer is an upgradable one). For instance, going back to your original point about the iMacs hard drive being tougher to replace than an old Macbook pros: Booting from an external drive on an iMac really isn't a big deal. It takes up less space (and costs less) than a monitor and a laptop, and since a desktop doesn't move, you only have to plug it in once. With Thunderbolt, there's zero performance loss as well, it's literally an extension of the PCIe bus outside of your computer. I'm not sure what external you used when your iMacs hard drive went, but maybe you didn't end up with a good one if you had problems (5400 rpm USB external?). Firewire has served as an excellent, bootable, port for years.

The only time buying a laptop makes sense is when you plan on using it as a laptop some of the time.

bflowers
Jun 13, 2012, 08:26 PM
1. Screen size - 27 in much better for getting some serious work done with multiple windows open

2. Dependability - I've replaced my Mac laptop twice during the 10 years I have had my desktop. A good old 17" G4 iMac. Slow, but works just fine for keeping track of the finances, and the rare game that was optimized for specific processors, and thus incompatible with newer hardware.

3. Durability - Kids... do I want the little ones banging on the keyboard when that keyboard is the computer? No, but it is hard to keep the little ones away. I have a couple older extended keyboards, they can play Alpha Baby on without killing the iMac.

I almost considered a refurb of the current system, but I can sit and wait until M Lion comes out, since i haven't bought a desktop in 10 years, I can wait a bit longer.

Daws001
Jun 13, 2012, 08:40 PM
I was seriously considering getting a retina MBP but then my iPad looked at me, with that puppy dog retina display, whimpering. So then I says, "iMac instead?" and my iPad got giddy and started yelping.

So, now I wait for the updated iMac :)

Jus11
Jun 13, 2012, 08:41 PM
I just bought the top of the line imac. I need it badly. I dont care if they make a small specbump next month. If they release retina imacs with redesign im gonna go mad. But, I seriously doubt it...so Im without regret. If I read this before I ordered yesterday, I might reconsider and be back in the waiting game, which is not a fun place to be.

Same here. I need it now and Mac Mini as a tempoeary solution for 5 months is enough. So no more waiting for me. iMac 3,4 ghz with SSD + 2 tb + 32 gb ram will serve me well for next 2-3 years :)

And I could not care less for Retina. I make music.

Another reason for updating now is that there is no guarantee that the music softwares I use (theres plenty) will be Mountain Lion compatible straight away. And now we know that the new iMacs (whenever they come) will have MT... Didn't want to wait just to end up waiting for software updstes, haha!

charlituna
Jun 13, 2012, 09:10 PM
Imagine a retina display with those pixel numbers. that would be insane!

I'm also pleased with all these Mac rumors we have been seeing :)

Yep. I could go for a 30 inch Retina iMac sans ODD with some hdmi, thunderbolt etc action. Two SDDs if not more

----------

I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro?

I use an iMac at work for Final Cut (networked to a render farm). Since we are farming the heavy action and media I didn't need a Mac pro but a mini isn't strong enough. Laptops don't have the screen real estate and I dont need portability

I use an iMac at home cause I was able to buy my old one when it was replaced for dirt. I have an iPad for the little bit for portable stuff I need which is just email and movies on the plane ride to our filming locations etc

Lancer
Jun 13, 2012, 09:11 PM
I very much doubt the 2012 iMac will get a retina display, that would push the cost up unless like the MBP the add a new model.

21.5" iMac 2x sepc levels
21.5" iMac with Retina LCD
27" iMac 2x spec levels

I'd say right now a 27" with Retina will cost way to much for the average iMac customer.

Right now I'm hoping July/August will bring updates like the MBP got with new faster CPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and USB3.

Matte screen option would be nice but I'm not counting on it given a new design iMac is coming in 2013.

Cygnus311
Jun 13, 2012, 09:12 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

Oh I don't know, saves me $1,000 and gives me better graphic performance? :rolleyes:

AndreGB
Jun 13, 2012, 09:14 PM
Is there a chance that this means Apple will completely abandon the iMac? As in, no more iMacs update ever?

Arcalle
Jun 13, 2012, 09:15 PM
I hope iMac in next Keynote with the new iPhone!!!

charlituna
Jun 13, 2012, 09:26 PM
About a year ago I was looking at jobs for apple and there were some for 3D design interface engineering,

Something like that would take more than a year to develop. Especially since it could have been the end of the year before they found the right people. A year of research at least after that to figure out what tech they need, at least six months to figure out who can make it at the needed amounts and quality etc

And even then they could table it as not possible, at least at this time

----------

Then they better come with a free RED Camera, so we record something to watch on our nice new 4K screen. :)

Not free but of course they are going to put that in the new iPad 4K

faroZ06
Jun 13, 2012, 09:33 PM
Yup. It was fine raising the screen to use the optical drive. I really wish I could find a cheap 20" G4 to use as a digital picture frame.

Those things had looks and class.

I rarely use the optical drive anyway. I wonder what an iMac G4 would look like in aluminum... Photoshop project #2 (I just got PS)?

12dylan34
Jun 13, 2012, 09:34 PM
Why I straight up don't want a retina iMac this refresh:

1. I use a lot of professional apps. Autodesk and Maxon aren't going to jump on the retina bandwagon anytime soon because not only does the Mac not represent the majority of their sales, but retina displays are currently the minority within the Mac lineup. There's also been no word on whether After Effects and other Adobe apps than Photoshop will be getting retina anytime soon. I also don't have CS6 because some of my After Effects plugins won't work with it, and I'm certain that CS5 probably won't get retina support.This is all a problem because as per Engadget's review of the retina MBP, non-retina apps look terrible on the screen. I don't want blurry crap.

2.Performance. The screenshot posted here of the new retina preference pane shows that you can't simply set the resolution to half and use it as a non-retina display: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/a-closer-look-at-the-new-macbook-pros-retina-display/ I need all of the graphics horsepower that I can get for viewport performance in 3D apps, and quadrupling the amount of pixels the card has to push doesn't help that at all.

3. Even browsing the web. Engadget's review said that images look pixellated on sites that are not retina-optimized. Will companies spend the money to upgrade their sites just to suit a few models from one manufacturer out of thousands and thousands of models of computers out there?

I just think that it will be a poor experience, especially for me in the beginning. It's a great trend to have such high quality displays, but I would prefer others to be the beta testers getting the third party stuff up to speed before I make the plunge.

All of this being said, I realize that I'm in the minority of users, and people just using it for day to day stuff probably won't have a problem with retina, but I'm actually really hoping for a non-retina iMac next refresh. Not until third party stuff is more ready.

Why not buy a Mac Pro and get whatever display that I want if I use so much professional stuff? Because I'm a college student that can't afford one, plus it's old tech at this point. The iMac with the included screen is a better value to me.

Just my 2 cents.

Macclone
Jun 13, 2012, 09:42 PM
I very much doubt the 2012 iMac will get a retina display, that would push the cost up unless like the MBP the add a new model.

21.5" iMac 2x sepc levels
21.5" iMac with Retina LCD
27" iMac 2x spec levels

I'd say right now a 27" with Retina will cost way to much for the average iMac customer.

Right now I'm hoping July/August will bring updates like the MBP got with new faster CPUs, more RAM, bigger HDD and USB3.

Matte screen option would be nice but I'm not counting on it given a new design iMac is coming in 2013.

Nobody knows if there will be a new design in 2013.

zeromeus
Jun 13, 2012, 09:45 PM
Perhaps in September, Apple will update the iMac and release the 13" MacBook Pro with Retina just as rumored due to whatever issue that pushed the 13" back.

Poor poor people who saved up their money for upgrades if Apple decides to release the new iMac and 13" MBPR in Sept. and then the new iPhone in Oct.

DHagan4755
Jun 13, 2012, 09:50 PM
I would guess that the new iMac will make an appearance sometime in July just before or when Mountain Lion goes public on the Mac App Store. It may have some of the MacBook Pro features, sans the retina display. The display in the current iMac is good, but it could really use the same treatment the next generation MacBook Pro just received with respect to minimizing reflection — and thankfully that is rumored. It will probably be thinner too & may have the ability to do the whole Power Nap feature for Mountain Lion.

akbarali.ch
Jun 13, 2012, 10:00 PM
Might see iMac and Mac mini Spec bumps (Processors, USB 3.0, Etc...) with the release of Mountain lion.

Most likely, Hope so

jonnysods
Jun 13, 2012, 10:02 PM
Can't wait for the iMac to get updated. They are my fav model for value and power.

scottwaugh
Jun 13, 2012, 10:14 PM
So release alongside Mountain Lion, add the updated processors, GPU, USB 3.0 and finally a screen that is somewhat glare reducing - for the same price as before...I'll take it.

This is what an update should be like....

As to the idea it would be released before Mountain Lion - that would make no sense at this point (after WWDC PR blitz) with Apple having to sell systems with two different operating systems within weeks of the 2nd operating system coming out. Just wait a few weeks and go with Mountain Lion.

I'll be really happy if they add that glare resistant glass in...(even regular anti-glare glass I'd be happy about)

akbarali.ch
Jun 13, 2012, 10:15 PM
Let's hope this iMac allows for RAM upgrades outside of Apple.

What apple does is anyone's guess but i think iMac will have removable ram. Firstly if they release it soon then it wont be a redesign, just a spec bump from last year. Secondly, if they re-design it next year, it still should have ram upgradable outside because unlike Retina MacBookPro space is not that tight in iMac or atleast not to a point that they have to take such drastic step to glue everything. iMac is desktop Computer which is going to stay on the desk not moved and tossed around like a notebook.
So i guess they will be still be upgradable. But as i said what Apple does is anyone's guess. We can all hope so.

docmordin
Jun 13, 2012, 10:23 PM
Does anyone with knowledge of display technology know where they are at with 21.5" and 27" retina displays? Do they exist already?

So-called retina displays in those sizes have existed for quite at while, at least for those in medical imaging and geophysical services. For example, Chimei Innolux offers a monitor with a 3840x2160 27.8" panel:

http://www.chimei-innolux.com/opencms/cmo/products/medical_display/products_medical_R278D1.html?__locale=en

Barco a 3280x2048 30.4" one:

http://www.barco.com/en/products-solutions/displays-monitors-workstations/medical-displays/diagnostic-displays/6-megapixel-wide-screen-diagnostic-color-display-system.aspx

and Eizo a 4096x2160 36.4" one:

http://www.eizo.com/na/products/duravision/fdh3601/

Of course, as it stands now, if you wanted to buy such monitors, or those with comparable resolution going up to around 50" in size, you'd be looking at spending anywhere from $10,000 USD to $50,000 USD, since the market is relatively small and thus only a scant amount of manufacturing resources have been allocated for it.

tkhan456
Jun 13, 2012, 10:26 PM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

Saves me about $1000-$2000 dollars comes with a better GPU, has more storage, larger screen....hmm what else? Probably won't lose an ethernet port or optical drive. Is that enough?

fig
Jun 13, 2012, 10:32 PM
I disagree. I wouldn't be suprised AT ALL if apple dropped the 13" and 15" MBPs as we know them now next year, and release std def versions of the new MBP Retina.

My question with regards to this is the software side as at the moment it sounds like non-optimized apps can be pretty ugly (at least if the Safari v Chrome comparison is any indication). What do all these other apps that a lot of people use look like on a Retina display? And are all said app manufacturers going to update their apps to high res versions if needed?

I need the Adobe Suite, Maya, Modo, etc., all running looking like they're supposed to, especially if I'm paying a premium for a high resolution display.

bretm
Jun 13, 2012, 10:32 PM
It doesn't have to be pixel-doubled to be Retina. It'll only take a small-moderate bump in resolution to get iMacs to the pixel density needed to be "retina". That goes for the Thunderbolt display as well.

Yeah, but if you don't it wreaks havoc on the apps that haven't upgraded. It's the only way really. Otherwise what do you map a pixel to? If it's 1pixel equals one pixel now, and then you don't quadruple (pixel double) the new display then non retina apps get mapped to what? They need to retain the same relative size. So they would get mapped to 1pix equals 1.5 or 1.7 pixels. Which means every pixel would be interpolated in some way and fuzzier than before. This is EXACTLY the problem with watching SD tv on HD. It's not sharp for that very reason.

kiljoy616
Jun 13, 2012, 10:42 PM
Retina display on iMac would be what 4k level? That would be a lot of pixels to be pushed by a M video card and if they made it even thinner well Apple has done it before so you know what bring it on Apple. :D

----------

Why I straight up don't want a retina iMac this refresh:

3. Even browsing the web. Engadget's review said that images look pixellated on sites that are not retina-optimized. Will companies spend the money to upgrade their sites just to suit a few models from one manufacturer out of thousands and thousands of models of computers out there?

Just my 2 cents.

Companies would be back still in the VGA era if they where not forced by companies like apple to move forward and innovate. Forcing change is now it happens companies for the most will not move forward on their own unless forced to at gun point. :rolleyes:

----------

So-called retina displays in those sizes have existed for quite at while, at least for those in medical imaging and geophysical services. For example, Chimei Innolux offers a monitor with a 3840x2160 27.8" panel:

http://www.chimei-innolux.com/opencms/cmo/products/medical_display/products_medical_R278D1.html?__locale=en

Barco a 3280x2048 30.4" one:

http://www.barco.com/en/products-solutions/displays-monitors-workstations/medical-displays/diagnostic-displays/6-megapixel-wide-screen-diagnostic-color-display-system.aspx

and Eizo a 4096x2160 36.4" one:

http://www.eizo.com/na/products/duravision/fdh3601/

Of course, as it stands now, if you wanted to buy such monitors, or those with comparable resolution going up to around 50" in size, you'd be looking at spending anywhere from $10,000 USD to $50,000 USD, since the market is relatively small and thus only a scant amount of manufacturing resources have been allocated for it. Granted, as I found out during medical school, they are a dream to work with.

Most things have existed for long time, but if the price is for the 001% of the population then who cares if it exist or not. Its no better than saying its a prototype. Its when it to the level that is possible for say at least 40% of the population that you then have a real product. I hear nuclear power plants have existed for some time, but not like I can buy one for 4 grand and spend the next 10 years not paying one cent of electricity.

bretm
Jun 13, 2012, 10:43 PM
You can probably expect the same shift with iMacs. New design like the rmbp AND an updated standard iMac. On the RiMac you'll see smaller size screens at first, and they might ditch the 27" on the standard iMac. Notebooks first. Work out unforeseen bugs. Introduce iMacs in a few months.

If you've got an iPad 3, you quickly realize everything looks amazing. I don't notice fuzzy anything. Nothing out of the ordinary. They definitely fixed the interpolation of the original Rex iPhone apps on it, and retina iPhone apps are amazingly good.

fig
Jun 13, 2012, 10:48 PM
Why I straight up don't want a retina iMac this refresh:

1. I use a lot of professional apps. Autodesk and Maxon aren't going to jump on the retina bandwagon anytime soon because not only does the Mac not represent the majority of their sales, but retina displays are currently the minority within the Mac lineup. There's also been no word on whether After Effects and other Adobe apps than Photoshop will be getting retina anytime soon. I also don't have CS6 because some of my After Effects plugins won't work with it, and I'm certain that CS5 probably won't get retina support.This is all a problem because as per Engadget's review of the retina MBP, non-retina apps look terrible on the screen. I don't want blurry crap.

I missed this and posted something similar a post or two back, but you nailed it. I need Illustrator, Flash, Maya, and a few other pro apps looking like they're supposed to, I've also got an older version or two of some apps that I know won't get updated.

I'm hoping one of the review sites will get around to testing out the Adobe suite in the next few days so we can get a better idea of what everything looks like.

ipedro
Jun 13, 2012, 10:54 PM
I believe that the Apple HDTV and the next generation iMac will be linked. An upcoming event -- probably in the fall -- will unveil Apple's tv offerings and the iMac will probably receive an AppleTV interface. This will be the appropriate time to announce it.

pschonig
Jun 13, 2012, 11:05 PM
Like everyone else here, I too was disappointed about no new iMac being announced this week, but here is my thought. As I understand it, you can't upgrade the new RMBP..ie RAM. Will this be the way Apple is going, to include the new iMac..whenever its announced? Apple RAM is too expensive..updated current MBP and iMac at a fraction of the cost of Apple RAM..current 27" iMac maybe the way to go for now...where is the crystal ball when you need it...

Swordylove
Jun 13, 2012, 11:51 PM
Ohhh a happy news (or rumor) for me!! :) Thank you thank you thank you!

I do hope for at least a minor redesign though. Maybe make it chinless, but please... not thinner!

lephelps
Jun 13, 2012, 11:52 PM
Thanks for the report.

I've been waiting a while to get a new iMac to replace my 2005 G5 PM and not about to drop $2000 on the current model. I really want USB3 and the new Ivy Bridge CPUs, a matte screen option would be a nice bonus.

I'm hoping the new iMac comes out with the next OS X update in July or August. So I can save a few more $$$ to get a better model.

Same boat here and I'm really hoping for just those few minor updates too (don't care about or want Retina or SSD, especially for the price) as we might be a winner in the "oldest Mac" category. :) I've been patiently waiting for a few months now for a 2012 iMac update to replace our 2002 PowerPC G4 MDD. :eek: While I would delight in throwing it a 10th birthday party in August, it is ready for retirement and heading downhill fast.

I love being able to say we've only had to buy two Macs to cover more than 16 years (can't complain about the premium pricing when you get that kind of ROI). That Mac history is actually the source of my only concern with switching over to an iMac -- we loved our PowerMac and PowerPC because we could upgrade and keep current for much longer than any Windows PC or Mac all-in-one system. Going to an iMac with very limited upgrade options will be something new for us but the MacPros are well out of our price range and computing needs.

So, while I would love a new Mac right now I can still limp along with what we have. Even the current iMacs are worlds above what we currently have so we'll be blissful owners of yet another new Mac regardless. :D Having said that, I'd much rather hold out a bit longer for that "latest and greatest" iMac to take us as far into the future as possible.

pimentoLoaf
Jun 13, 2012, 11:57 PM
My last desktop was a 6100/66 DOS Compatible :eek: circa 1997 or so. You think I should get something newer? :D

Ping Guo
Jun 14, 2012, 12:16 AM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

One reason would be the MBP + external screen is a much pricier proposition, especially if you go with the Thunderbolt Display. Base retina MBP w/TB display is $3200.

You could buy a base 27" iMac + a 13" MBA for $300 less, or a 21.5" + 11" MBA for $1000 less, and not have to worry about plugging and unplugging, overheating your expensive laptop, etc.

Another reason is some people don't want to carry a $2K laptop when they travel, that also happens to be their only computer. Risk of theft, damage, etc. For some, an iMac + MBA or netbook, or iPad, is a much better solution, and much cheaper too.

----------

I believe that the Apple HDTV and the next generation iMac will be linked. An upcoming event -- probably in the fall -- will unveil Apple's tv offerings and the iMac will probably receive an AppleTV interface. This will be the appropriate time to announce it.

As long as it can be jailbroken to run Plex. ;)

iSayuSay
Jun 14, 2012, 12:36 AM
Oh I don't know, saves me $1,000 and gives me better graphic performance? :rolleyes:

Spot on! .. and 1 TB 7200 HDD .. and desktop CPU .. and gorgeous bigger screen .. and user replaceable 4 RAM slots .. and who knows, updated SSD option :D

BobCollins
Jun 14, 2012, 12:57 AM
One reason would be the MBP + external screen is a much pricier proposition, especially if you go with the Thunderbolt Display. Base retina MBP w/TB display is $3200.

You could buy a base 27" iMac + a 13" MBA for $300 less, or a 21.5" + 11" MBA for $1000 less, and not have to worry about plugging and unplugging, overheating your expensive laptop, etc.

Another reason is some people don't want to carry a $2K laptop when they travel, that also happens to be their only computer. Risk of theft, damage, etc. For some, an iMac + MBA or netbook, or iPad, is a much better solution, and much cheaper too.

When I asked the question, I never considered the idea of buying the external monitor from Apple. While not exactly equivalent to Apples offering, you can get a fine 1080p 27" monitor for under $200. Couple that with the MBP of your choice and it should give an iMac a run for the money.

You do make an interesting claim w.r.t. carrying around your only computer. Obviously redundancy has a cost, but it may be important for you. I handle it this way: I always have a backup on an external drive using Time Machine. If my computer breaks or is lost, I can buy whatever the latest computer Apple has, restore to it from Time Machine, and I am back in operation in a couple of hours. I guess that may not work for everyone.

ScottishDuck
Jun 14, 2012, 01:23 AM
This will be a direct attack and answer to MS's Metro interface.

The only answer we need is laughter.

iSayuSay
Jun 14, 2012, 01:28 AM
When I asked the question, I never considered the idea of buying the external monitor from Apple. While not exactly equivalent to Apples offering, you can get a fine 1080p 27" monitor for under $200. Couple that with the MBP of your choice and it should give an iMac a run for the money.

You do make an interesting claim w.r.t. carrying around your only computer. Obviously redundancy has a cost, but it may be important for you. I handle it this way: I always have a backup on an external drive using Time Machine. If my computer breaks or is lost, I can buy whatever the latest computer Apple has, restore to it from Time Machine, and I am back in operation in a couple of hours. I guess that may not work for everyone.

It might be an old argument but you can't compare 27" 1080p display to high end 27" with1440p. Doesn't have to be Apple, even Dell and NEC sell them at similar price, and note that only Apple feature Thunderbolt hub on their display.

1080p for 27" is not high enough. Remember it's a monitor, not TV.

So yeah, it's quite fair to compare iMac vs MBP/A + Apple display.

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 01:31 AM
The only answer we need is laughter.

That is true, but the average consumer will think, "wow".

AppleMacFinder
Jun 14, 2012, 01:32 AM
If it will be locked down with proprietary shjt, like Retina Macbook "Pro", I will LOL

gibbo132
Jun 14, 2012, 01:49 AM
The MBP's were scoring 12,300 so how do they compare speed wise? the pro will be quicker than the iMac?



Finally, it's a pro machine vs a consumer machine (well a extremely powerfull computer thy can do pro work) :)

----------

I missed this and posted something similar a post or two back, but you nailed it. I need Illustrator, Flash, Maya, and a few other pro apps looking like they're supposed to, I've also got an older version or two of some apps that I know won't get updated.

I'm hoping one of the review sites will get around to testing out the Adobe suite in the next few days so we can get a better idea of what everything looks like.

Auto desk have already committed to making a retina autocad, and the same with adobe!
Surely you can wait to upgrade if you need all your apps looking amazing!

Macman45
Jun 14, 2012, 01:56 AM
Bringing the iMac closer to the Pro kind of messes up my upgrade path..AGAIN. After the WWDC I decided, okay I'll wait until the Pro refresh next year, this was my plan anyway as I didn't want to buy another maxed up 27" iMac.

The rumours gathering pace here, and around the interwebs point to some kind of refresh around ML now. If they do put a retina screen in the iMac, then my second-hand sale value will sink like a stone...AND I had an offer on the table for my iMac which was really good too.

I guess it's still plan A though, use what I have now, which compared to some folks who have been waiting is pretty good, and hang for the refresh on the Pro, take the hit on the secondhand value of my iMac.

BUT.....If Apple don't put Thunderbolt in the new Pro I'm back to where I started from...( I have a Pegasus R4, and probably will have another by purchase time) Instead of getting easier, it's getting worse.:mad:

MythicFrost
Jun 14, 2012, 02:22 AM
That's what I posted yesterday. I demand ROYALTIES!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

:D

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=15019854#post15019854


I am expecting the 2013 iMac redesign to include a high-resolution panel, the vibrating pen patent as an extra input device and the foldable iMac patent thrown together. This will be a direct attack and answer to MS's Metro interface.

http://www.cultofmac.com/169875/what...of-everything/

In 2012 I am expecting a spec bump to USB 3, Ivy Bridge and Nvidia for the iMac. It would be silly to keep the specifications different from the MBP
The 7970M has a better performance/cost ratio than the 680M and will support the 5120x2880 resolution of the next iMac whereas the 680M is limited to 4k resolutions.

gnasher729
Jun 14, 2012, 02:31 AM
Apple has so much cash on hand, so....

How about they lower the margins on the i-Mac for once(and actually price competitively with Win systems), and get a flood of new users hooked on OSX? At the same price point, they could make the next-gen i-mac a beast.

Then they can slowly raise their prices.

1. The reason that they have so much cash is their margins. So reducing margins isn't a good idea from that point of view.

2. It's called "iMac" not "i-Mac".

3. iMacs are priced very competitively with _comparable_ Windows systems. Take into account the actual hardware, the form factor (no ugly big mountain of plastic under the desk), design, the fact that you get a quality monitor, and the pro-version of the operating system, not a limited version.


"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history." Pat Robertson

With this disgusting signature, are you trying to make fun of Pat Robertson, whoever that is, or are you trying to insult Jews, evangelical Christians, and Germans, all in one go?

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 02:33 AM
The 7970M has a better performance/cost ratio than the 680M and will support the 5120x2880 resolution of the next iMac whereas the 680M is limited to 4k resolutions.

Apple will simplify their supply chain, driver development and save money by going with Nvidia across the entire range. Whilst the performance argument is completely valid, that's not always Apple's priority.

bobright
Jun 14, 2012, 02:37 AM
Where is the article/news tidbit that said only Mac Pros in 2013 and iMacs most likely sooner?

I know that was said n the article but no link to the clams?

MythicFrost
Jun 14, 2012, 02:55 AM
Apple will simplify their supply chain, driver development and save money by going with Nvidia across the entire range. Whilst the performance argument is completely valid, that's not always Apple's priority.
The 7970M actually offers less performance than the GTX 680M, but it's better value. They won't be going with NVidia for the high end 27 inch iMac if they intend to give it a retina 5120x2880 resolution, which I hope they will.

class77
Jun 14, 2012, 02:56 AM
The "new Mac Pros in 2013" comes from Tim Cook in an e-mail to a user named "Franz" who wrote asking about the Mac Pro line. It's been reposted on MacRumors elsewhere

ABG
Jun 14, 2012, 03:13 AM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

I notice a lot of responses ignoring the "and display" part of your alternative setup. :rolleyes:

I had a HDD fail on my 27" i7 iMac and it was a huge pain to have it collected. If I was planning on the basis of that I would agreed the iMac is a huge PITA to bring into the shop. Or wait in all day for a courier to collect. And again all day to deliver back a week later.

However the cost of a MBP and 27" screen is way more than a 27" iMac and, althought I don't have time ATM to check the benchmarks, my expectation is the iMac is more powerful.

But you make a good point - it can be a viable alternative if not right for all.
I may rethink my iPad/MBA/iMac setup when it comes to upgrade time.

nec207
Jun 14, 2012, 03:23 AM
A retina iMac base on what some people say here would be very very very very costly way up in $4,000 to $5,000 :eek:

I'm sure apple is going to do like they did with MacBook Pro:eek: Some iMac models retina and other iMac models non retina .

It will take time for the price of the retina to come down in price just like when the Macbook air came out it was extremely costly and next cool thing and still is for college and university kids on the go .

FlorenceFlasque
Jun 14, 2012, 04:40 AM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

iMacs are good for people who, like me, only use their computers at home, and never, ever take them out. If you're that person, you want the biggest display (in inches, not pixels, for aging eyes) possible, and you want the freedom to use a decent mechanical keyboard (I use the Happy Hacker compact 19 mm keypitch Topre key switch keyboard). I suppose you could use an external keyboard (and display) off of a notebook, but that would feel and look stupid.

In addition, iMacs, while compact (their footprint is smaller than a notebook when your put your compact keyboard on the base since the base doesn't have to be as wide as the display in an iMac), are not so massively compact that mega-miniaturization of parts needs to happen. Stuff is more fixable and less expensive per given spec point since it's not so miniaturized and custom built.

With iPhones (and iPads), I wonder why anyone bothers with a notebook anyway. I suppose if you travel on work and have to use it while traveling, it has merits. But in that case I would have my company buy and pay for the computer, and my own computer would be an iMac.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Apple will fix the disk for you, and they are fast and efficient, and it's free within the first 3 years with AppleCare.

But yes, of course, you should always boot off an external disk if you don't have an SSD, and you should put your data on an external disk if you do. If your Macintosh breaks and you have to send it to Apple, you don't want them to have access to the data on your disk, do you? You should order the smallest internal hard drive, wipe it blank, and never use it.

In addition, maximum available internal hard disks from Apple tend to be about half the capacity of the latest affordable third party hard disks, and the Apple disks tend to be a little small if you have music and photos and plan to use your computer for a few years.

Another reason to never use an internal hard disk is that for backup purposes you should use a problem like SuperDuper to clone your startup disk, and it's best to have a startup disk that is the same size as your clones, and as mentioned above, your external disks will be about twice the capaticity of your internal disk. You should boot from external 1, clone every night to external 2, and once a week or so clone to off-site external 3. If one of these breaks, take it apart, destroy the platters with a hammer and chisel, and buy a new one.

And booting off of externals and backing up to clones means you can work for the 2 days while your iMac is in the shop by booting a spare, old machine off one of your external disks.

urbanlung
Jun 14, 2012, 05:17 AM
Then why are you reading and posting on a site called MacRUMORS.

Yeah man! These guys bitching' 'bout the rumours they're so dumb they prolly haven't even heard of sarcasm. Idiots!

:)

urbanlung
Jun 14, 2012, 05:36 AM
1. The reason that they have so much cash is their margins. So reducing margins isn't a good idea from that point of view.

2. It's called "iMac" not "i-Mac".

3. iMacs are priced very competitively with _comparable_ Windows systems. Take into account the actual hardware, the form factor (no ugly big mountain of plastic under the desk), design, the fact that you get a quality monitor, and the pro-version of the operating system, not a limited version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisdee
I'm sick of these rumors.
Then why are you reading and posting on a site called MacRUMORS.
__________________
"Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history." Pat Robertson


With this disgusting signature, are you trying to make fun of Pat Robertson, whoever that is, or are you trying to insult Jews, evangelical Christians, and Germans, all in one go?


Being a member of one of those groups, I do not find the signature offensive at all, assuming of course (based on the fact that most people on this forum are almost as clever as me) that it is meant to point out the idiocy of Pat Robertson who is a right wing Fundamentalist nut job.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson_controversies

daveathome
Jun 14, 2012, 05:59 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/13/imac-update-might-be-coming-sooner-rather-than-later/)


Back in mid-May, a pair of Geekbench 2 benchmarks (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/14/unreleased-2012-macbook-pro-and-imac-models-showing-up-in-benchmarks/) that claimed to be from unreleased MacBook Pro and iMac models appeared, setting off speculation that updates to both lines might be imminent if the entries were indeed legitimate. But with Apple not updating the iMac earlier this week at its Worldwide Developers Conference keynote, those looking for an upgraded all-in-one desktop Mac have been left waiting.

With updated MacBook Pro models reaching the public, Primate Labs highlighted some of the benchmarks (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/benchmarks-for-mid-2012-macbook-pro-and-macbook-air/) yesterday, and the details for the non-Retina 15-inch MacBook Pro match up nearly exactly with what appeared in the entry from last month, all but confirming that it was indeed a legitimate leak.

Now with that information in hand, it pays to revisit the iMac benchmark that appeared around the same time, and while the two benchmarks aren't necessarily linked, it could generate hope that an updated iMac may still be right around the corner. The iMac benchmark referred to an "iMac13,2" model running a 3.4 GHz Core i7-3770 quad-core processor with 4 GB of 1600 MHz RAM, and while it is possible that the information could have been faked, Primate Labs previously reported (http://www.primatelabs.com/blog/2012/05/ivy-bridge-macs/) that it believes the entry to be legitimate.

Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/05/geekbench_imac132.jpg)


Further fueling speculation of a near-term iMac update is recent confusion in which it was initially reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/apple-spokesperson-confirms-new-mac-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/) that Apple representatives had told reporters that new iMac and Mac Pro models would likely be arriving in 2013. But following publication of those reports, Apple press relations staff specifically clarified those remarks to note that only the Mac Pro would be seeing the 2013 update. The assumption related to that clarification is of course that an iMac update is very likely to come sooner than the end of this year.

It has already been over 400 days (http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac) since the iMac was last updated, and Ivy Bridge processors appropriate for the iMac have been available since late April (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/23/intel-officially-launches-first-quad-core-ivy-bridge-processors/). Consequently, it seems likely that the iMac will still be receiving an update in the relatively near future despite not making an appearance at this week's conference.

As for what improvements the next-generation iMac will see beyond Ivy Bridge, at least one mainstream news report has claimed that Apple is working on Retina displays (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/15/retina-displays-also-coming-to-next-generation-imac/) for the iMac, although we previously analyzed how daunting of a task it would be to support four times the number of pixels found on the current models, particularly on a 27-inch display. Other sources have claimed that Apple is working on anti-reflective glass (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/04/02/apple-to-utilize-anti-reflective-glass-in-next-generation-imac/) for the iMac, rumors that may have gained some support with Apple having touted this week that the Retina MacBook Pro's display produces 75% less glare than non-Retina models.

Article Link: iMac Update Might Be Coming Sooner Rather Than Later (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/13/imac-update-might-be-coming-sooner-rather-than-later/)

I am also heartened by this news and just waiting to buy new imac but please explain why these benchmark tests could not have been the current 27" imac with optional i7 3.4G processor testing out ML?

iReality85
Jun 14, 2012, 06:23 AM
I'd rather purchase an end of line upgraded iMac this year than wait for the supposed 'fantastic' revamp that's in the offering for next year.

That will always be the case though. There will always be something more 'fantastic' coming out the next year. Such is the nature of technology.

However, Intel is currently on the 'tick' of its tick-tock cycle, meaning its next family of processors will feature architectural changes, as opposed to Ivy Bridge's refinement of Sandy Bridge architecture. Regardless, improvements are always made whether it's Intel, or Apple revamping the iMac's internal/external features.

musio
Jun 14, 2012, 06:26 AM
Buying an iMac which has an integrated screen vs buying a macbook + apple monitor is cheaper...plus a superdrive

Dre180
Jun 14, 2012, 06:29 AM
Hey all, long time lurker new to the forums. I have a 2007 MBP that's still running well, but I'm ever so patiently waiting to upgrade to an iMac. Like many here, I am hoping for a quiet release when ML comes out.

I was considering upgrading to the retina MBP before it got officially announced, but was somewhat disappointed with it. This is not meant to trash the retina MBP, it is a very nice machine but for that price i just cannot justify what is being offered. Lack of ethernet is beyond me. I know many will say it's not needed today, but to me that's simply untrue, and a big omission. Addition of HDMI is nice as well as the usb 3. As far as the retina, maybe i'm in the minority but I just don't see the need on a 15" screen. Am i nuts here? We're all ok with 1080p TV's 40" and up, but we must have this resolution on a 15 inch screen? Yes i'd like to see a retina iMac but I won't mind if it doesn't have it. Maybe next year apple will rethink the ram, ssd and battery design, and make them replaceable. Then, we'd be talking about a killer machine.

Sorry for the rant, just had to get that out! I'm not a huge fan of rev 1 products as you can see, so a quiet update to the iMac will suit me just fine. If it gets redesigned next year so be it. I'll wait until it becomes finely tuned and the displays become more cost effective before going down that road. Here's hoping that a iMac release date is fairly imminent...

necromorph
Jun 14, 2012, 06:59 AM
Horse Manure.

I'll believe it when i see it. :(

----------

AND I had an offer on the table for my iMac which was really good too

So you finally admit my offer was good :) Sorry now there are mew iMacs round the corner (apparently) I'll lower my offer to £450 cash ;)

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 07:21 AM
I would love to know why my post on page 1 upset so many people? Genuinely curious about this. :confused:

okeribok
Jun 14, 2012, 07:34 AM
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/745307/657744

for your comparing pleasure. Note where the 12,2 wins...

Virgule82
Jun 14, 2012, 07:45 AM
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/745307/657744

for your comparing pleasure. Note where the 12,2 wins...

You're comparing a 12,2 that is fully loaded with 32GB RAM to (what may be a) 13,2 machine with 4 GB Ram...

rubenvieira
Jun 14, 2012, 07:51 AM
Apple had way too many current iMac's in stock...

Think of the amount of people that were waiting to buy an iMac to replace their current equipment?

I was just about to bring home a 27" yesterday, thinking "damn... no updates to the iMacs, I might as well just buy it now".

So I really think they made a killing in sales of the current iMacs, the very same day after the event and the following... :cool:

Arghh.. I hate waiting :(

nelmat
Jun 14, 2012, 07:53 AM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

32 gigs of ram, user upgradable. Two terabyte internal hard drive with SSD alongside. One unit, one power lead, in front of me on the desk. I don't want a portable machine, when I'm not in the office, I'm not working. An 11 or 13 or even 15" screen is not big enough - doesn't matter how many pixels it may have. The 17" was an option, but I guess not any more.

So, why would I want a macbook powered up on my desk, alongside a 27" monitor and an additional keyboard, trackpad and my wacom tablet - it's a mess of hardware and cables and lacks in storage and easily upgradable ram.

Does that answer your question?

DTphonehome
Jun 14, 2012, 07:56 AM
... Lack of ethernet is beyond me. I know many will say it's not needed today, but to me that's simply untrue, and a big omission...

seriously? The overwhelming majority of people who will use this machine will do so with wifi. For those who do need Ethernet, there's a very reasonably priced Thunderbolt-Ethernet adaptor. The actual Ethernet plug is thicker than the body of the MBP, so it made perfect sense to ditch it.

nelmat
Jun 14, 2012, 07:56 AM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

Price, I/O, easily expandable ram (up to 32 gigs - do that on a mac mini), and as and when the components become outdated, you've got a great 27" monitor for other uses. The design is compact, fits on your desk.

The mac pro is beautiful, it's also massive and way too powerful for my needs, in benchmarks this top end iMac pretty much matches the low to mid level mac pros for about half of the price...

urbanlung
Jun 14, 2012, 08:02 AM
Does anyone know the exact dimensions of the rumoured iMac? I want to smack a hole in my living room wall to put one in and there is a special offer on sledge hammers this weekend at Lidl.

nelmat
Jun 14, 2012, 08:19 AM
Let's hope this iMac allows for RAM upgrades outside of Apple.

RAM upgrades for the iMac are easily available outside of apple (always have been), and the unit is designed to make this is as easy as possible - what's your point?

----------

Begs the question - how close (in performance) will these new iMacs be to some of the 'current' Mac Pros?

The current top end iMac already outperforms the current mac Pros, plus it has thunderbolt...

Dre180
Jun 14, 2012, 08:24 AM
seriously? The overwhelming majority of people who will use this machine will do so with wifi. For those who do need Ethernet, there's a very reasonably priced Thunderbolt-Ethernet adaptor. The actual Ethernet plug is thicker than the body of the MBP, so it made perfect sense to ditch it.

I respect your opinion, however there is no way you can truly know what the vast majority of people's intended use of wifi vs ethernet is. You are essentially guessing. There are many instances where ethernet provides a significant advantage. IMO wifi has come a long way, however is not as reliable or nearly as fast as ethernet. Plain and simple. The old style macbook is not overly thick or heavy. All i'm saying is there was no need to remove the jack just to make the thinnest device possible. I'd rather the focus be on a better connected product rather than making it ultra slim. That's what the MBA is for. I understand there is a cable, but why the need for adapters? how many adapters do we need? I just don't see why Apple felt the need to differentiate the pro line. I felt they could have and probably should have made 1 single device that was converged. Feels like a step backwards is all i'm saying..

kuhtang
Jun 14, 2012, 08:30 AM
RAM upgrades for the iMac are easily available outside of apple (always have been), and the unit is designed to make this is as easy as possible - what's your point?

I think he's referring to the fact that the MBA and new retina MBP cannot have its RAM outside of Apple (soldered in).

adildacoolset
Jun 14, 2012, 08:40 AM
Except that NVidia is pretty sucky as a GPU. NVidia wouldn't even be my second choice.

Why do you hate Nvidia so much? ATI and Nvidia basically have identical performance.

GeMenRe
Jun 14, 2012, 09:09 AM
statement got updated. redesign only on Mac Pro.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Small spec bump this summer. Ivy Bridge + Kepler.

Possible redesign next year.

fig
Jun 14, 2012, 09:11 AM
It might be an old argument but you can't compare 27" 1080p display to high end 27" with1440p. Doesn't have to be Apple, even Dell and NEC sell them at similar price, and note that only Apple feature Thunderbolt hub on their display.

1080p for 27" is not high enough. Remember it's a monitor, not TV.

So yeah, it's quite fair to compare iMac vs MBP/A + Apple display.

Beat me to it but agreed. You can get A 27" monitor for $200 but not one that's remotely comparable to the Thunderbolt display at that price.

Now you could invest $300 or so and get a solid 22-24" display that would do you fairly well, but if we're talking apples to apples (no pun intended) then there's some more cash needed.

----------


Auto desk have already committed to making a retina autocad, and the same with adobe!
Surely you can wait to upgrade if you need all your apps looking amazing!

That's two. Adobe has said there's a version of Photoshop in the works but haven't mentioned After Effects, Illustrator, Flash, and other that I use on a daily basis. Autodesk hasn't mentioned Maya that I use on a daily basis. If there's a timeline for those then that's one thing, but right now we have no idea.

GeMenRe
Jun 14, 2012, 09:12 AM
I have a serious question for iMac users (a.k.a. I'm not trying to troll). Why do you prefer an iMac (all-in-one) to something else such as a Mac Mini or Mac Pro? Do you feel the Mac Mini isn't suitable for your computing needs and a Mac Pro is too expensive?
Personally, I wouldn't want computer parts connected to such a beautiful screen because I feel like the parts would become obsolete way before the screen ever did. I'm just curious what your reasoning is

I Hate Cables! :o

xgman
Jun 14, 2012, 09:14 AM
----------



The current top end iMac already outperforms the current mac Pros, plus it has thunderbolt...

Only the entry level model.

----------

Does anyone know the exact dimensions of the rumoured iMac? I want to smack a hole in my living room wall to put one in and there is a special offer on sledge hammers this weekend at Lidl.

30.2237 inches. Swing that sledge hammer! :rolleyes:

GeMenRe
Jun 14, 2012, 09:15 AM
That's two. Adobe has said there's a version of Photoshop in the works but haven't mentioned After Effects, Illustrator, Flash, and other that I use on a daily basis. Autodesk hasn't mentioned Maya that I use on a daily basis. If there's a timeline for those then that's one thing, but right now we have no idea.

gets me to wonder how non-retina-optimised software actually looks on the new retina-MBP? Fuzzy, clear buttons and not so readable text, scrollbar sharper than the image your working in photoshop? :confused:

Jbach67
Jun 14, 2012, 09:21 AM
Hey all, long time lurker new to the forums. I have a 2007 MBP that's still running well, but I'm ever so patiently waiting to upgrade to an iMac. Like many here, I am hoping for a quiet release when ML comes out.

I was considering upgrading to the retina MBP before it got officially announced, but was somewhat disappointed with it. This is not meant to trash the retina MBP, it is a very nice machine but for that price i just cannot justify what is being offered. Lack of ethernet is beyond me. I know many will say it's not needed today, but to me that's simply untrue, and a big omission. Addition of HDMI is nice as well as the usb 3. As far as the retina, maybe i'm in the minority but I just don't see the need on a 15" screen. Am i nuts here? We're all ok with 1080p TV's 40" and up, but we must have this resolution on a 15 inch screen? Yes i'd like to see a retina iMac but I won't mind if it doesn't have it. Maybe next year apple will rethink the ram, ssd and battery design, and make them replaceable. Then, we'd be talking about a killer machine.

Sorry for the rant, just had to get that out! I'm not a huge fan of rev 1 products as you can see, so a quiet update to the iMac will suit me just fine. If it gets redesigned next year so be it. I'll wait until it becomes finely tuned and the displays become more cost effective before going down that road. Here's hoping that a iMac release date is fairly imminent...

For all those worried about Ethernet, apple has an adapter that will make that possible, so if you need it on a portable, you can get it.

JHankwitz
Jun 14, 2012, 09:34 AM
Interesting that it's only got 4GB or RAM...

You should run a RAM useage monitor while you work to see how much RAM you normally use. You will be very surprised. Unless you're a power user editing video, audio, or running too many apps at one time, you will seldom see the meter go over 4GB.

fig
Jun 14, 2012, 09:37 AM
gets me to wonder how non-retina-optimised software actually looks on the new retina-MBP? Fuzzy, clear buttons and not so readable text, scrollbar sharper than the image your working in photoshop? :confused:

I'm very curious myself and we have almost no indication at this point. Based on the Chrome v Safari comparison that was done at The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/12/3079887/retina-display-new-macbook-pro-apps) it may not be pretty.

wovel
Jun 14, 2012, 09:43 AM
For those of you who are anxiously awaiting an update of the iMac, I have a different question: why? What does it do for you that a MacBook Pro and a display would do for you?

I don't see any features that the iMac has that the MacBook doesn't have. Please educate me.

I have a several year old iMac that had its hard disk fail. Repairing it was such a miserable task that I just decided to run off an external disk as my main disk. Grrr. With the MacBook Pro (not Air or Retina), maintenance is easy and I wouldn't have has a problem replacing the hard disk.

Unless there is something I am missing here, I cannot imagine buying another iMac.

There are more than a few reasons, but the most obvious is the Cinema Display + MBP costs more than 2x what an equivalently spec'd iMac would cost...

----------

As far as the retina, maybe i'm in the minority but I just don't see the need on a 15" screen. Am i nuts here? .

Most of us don't spend 6+ hours a day reading our TV screens, but many people do with their computer. The other need is for people editing HD video to have enough screen real-estate in a portable machine.

Maybe you don't use a computer for work or spend a lot of time with one. In that case, maybe this model is not for you.

Flood123
Jun 14, 2012, 09:45 AM
I would love to know why my post on page 1 upset so many people? Genuinely curious about this. :confused:

I don't see why either man. That's a pretty heavy amount of down voting considering the content.
Maybe the royalties part?:confused: Even though it was obviously tongue and cheek. I mean if it's not that I don't have any idea. Even then it's hard to understand.
Sometimes I think one vote attracts more down votes. Like a moth to a flame. My guess is, at times folks may even down vote without reading just to watch the number grow because they find it humorous.

GeMenRe
Jun 14, 2012, 09:47 AM
I'm very curious myself and we have almost no indication at this point. Based on the Chrome v Safari comparison that was done at The Verge (http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/12/3079887/retina-display-new-macbook-pro-apps) it may not be pretty.

Thanks for the links - eye-opening!
and on the other side:
Since Schiller said that it's sharper than printed on paper I assume output on paper might give printer companies headaches as soon as people start complaining about the output quality looking worse on the proof... :D

Melbourne Park
Jun 14, 2012, 09:48 AM
We don't buy to wait for something to break down..you have to send it for repair anyhow son what difference does it make for the UPS man to pickup a iMac or macbook?

Major benefits; screen size (duh)
Cooling
Faster than MacBooks
Cheaper
I/O

Buy a Dell 27" IPS monitor, or a Samsung, for $600? Then attach it to the macbook pro. The older config pros can have their RAM and disks changed by users ... they don't have screen heat issues. And you can take them with you.

There are even nice Thunderbolt docks too ...

tdmac
Jun 14, 2012, 09:51 AM
Prediction will be new iMac's same day as Mountain Lion Release.

Combo will be used to pump up sales and interest in both the hardware and software.

MattUK
Jun 14, 2012, 09:51 AM
I am wondering if new mac book air with HD 4000 graphics or 13" mac book pro with same graphics will be powerful enough to use with 27" retina thunderbolt ????
I don't see how it can be fast enough to support that kind of resolution...
btw, why can't I have GeForce GT 650m graphic as an option in 13" macbook pro ??? GRRRR

AppleInLVX
Jun 14, 2012, 10:03 AM
You can always return it, but honestly your computer is awesome.

Have to agree with this. I spent this weekend doing a couple projects on my 2010 27" iMac, and I STILL get impressed with what I can do and the ease with which I can do it. Really, unless the software stops working, the rest is gravy. These updates are rarely essential. Any 27" iMac bought today will be awesome for quite some time.

FastEddiebags
Jun 14, 2012, 10:05 AM
Does anyone think maybe the 17" mbp might not be discontinued? Maybe getting a retina screen later this year too?

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 10:08 AM
I don't see why either man. That's a pretty heavy amount of down voting considering the content.
Maybe the royalties part?:confused: Even though it was obviously tongue and cheek. I mean if it's not that I don't have any idea. Even then it's hard to understand.
Sometimes I think one vote attracts more down votes. Like a moth to a flame. My guess is, at times folks may even down vote without reading just to watch the number grow because they find it humorous.

It was definitely a joke. Hence the faux mad face. Oh well. I would have loved to discuss the possibility of the iMac with a vibrating pen interface, but there does not seem to be any interest. Tough crowd.

richb330
Jun 14, 2012, 10:19 AM
Prediction will be new iMac's same day as Mountain Lion Release.

Combo will be used to pump up sales and interest in both the hardware and software.

Yup. if it's this year..

Flood123
Jun 14, 2012, 10:20 AM
I would have loved to discuss the possibility of the iMac with a vibrating pen interface, but there does not seem to be any interest. Tough crowd.
I think it is a fantastic idea personally. It would be nice to have something built in to take the place of a cintiq.

HurtinMinorKey
Jun 14, 2012, 10:52 AM
You should run a RAM useage monitor while you work to see how much RAM you normally use. You will be very surprised. Unless you're a power user editing video, audio, or running too many apps at one time, you will seldom see the meter go over 4GB.

Or doing stats or playing games. Good luck using STATA on large data sets with only 4GB of ram.

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 10:53 AM
I think it is a fantastic idea personally. It would be nice to have something built in to take the place of a cintiq.

It would combine all of the benefits of a touch interface with none of the drawbacks such as dirty smudges, clumsy fat fingers and bad ergonomics of holding your hand straight out for long periods of time. At last year's WWDC Craig Federighi (VP OSX Software) made it very clear that Apple does not think touch screens on a computer are sensible. But the vibrating pen patent does suggest that this could be the direction they want to take. I've also recently read about experimental glass covering that actively resists fingerprints.

HornetMontana
Jun 14, 2012, 10:57 AM
[deleted]

HurtinMinorKey
Jun 14, 2012, 10:57 AM
1. The reason that they have so much cash is their margins. So reducing margins isn't a good idea from that point of view.

2. It's called "iMac" not "i-Mac".

3. iMacs are priced very competitively with _comparable_ Windows systems. Take into account the actual hardware, the form factor (no ugly big mountain of plastic under the desk), design, the fact that you get a quality monitor, and the pro-version of the operating system, not a limited version.


1.It's called an investment: increasing the user base for the sake of future margins. And the reason they have so much cash on hand has little or nothing to do with the iMac. It's because of the ipod/iphone/ipad. They have a lot of room to grow their desktop user base.

2. The majority of users don't think the form factor justifies the price bump over a comparably priced PC; that's why less than 4% of desktop users in the U.S. are Mac users.

DTphonehome
Jun 14, 2012, 10:59 AM
I respect your opinion, however there is no way you can truly know what the vast majority of people's intended use of wifi vs ethernet is. You are essentially guessing. There are many instances where ethernet provides a significant advantage. IMO wifi has come a long way, however is not as reliable or nearly as fast as ethernet. Plain and simple. The old style macbook is not overly thick or heavy. All i'm saying is there was no need to remove the jack just to make the thinnest device possible. I'd rather the focus be on a better connected product rather than making it ultra slim. That's what the MBA is for. I understand there is a cable, but why the need for adapters? how many adapters do we need? I just don't see why Apple felt the need to differentiate the pro line. I felt they could have and probably should have made 1 single device that was converged. Feels like a step backwards is all i'm saying..


I don't know how many use wifi vs Ethernet, but I assure you Apple knows exactly how many do. On another thread, someone mentioned how they'd prefer if the case was slightly thicker to accommodate a standard HDD. So you want it thicker for Ethernet, he wants it thicker for an HDD, and there's plenty who want it a little thicker to accommodate an optical drive. Let's do all that, and we have the last gen MBP. Congratulations.

Apple clearly stated that they wanted to start from scratch, and threw out everything that was on the way out. That way they could do something radical, and not just refresh what's out there already. If Apple felt that Ethernet was necessary, it would be there. They don't, so it isn't. There were plenty of people who thought Apple was bonkers to eliminate the 3.5" floppy in the iMac.

Flood123
Jun 14, 2012, 11:06 AM
It would combine all of the benefits of a touch interface with none of the drawbacks such as dirty smudges, clumsy fat fingers and bad ergonomics of holding your hand straight out for long periods of time.

Yeah the "touch screen" would get zero use from me if introduced, however I would use the heck out of a cintiq type function for sure. Fingerprint resistant glass would be awesome too.

qpixo
Jun 14, 2012, 11:08 AM
I have a MBP 15" for 5 years now and the screen it's too small for use of Photoshop. There's no good reason for me to buy overpriced MBP 15". Besides it's freakin' overpriced. I'm waiting for new iMac.

When it will come out??

taylord22
Jun 14, 2012, 11:21 AM
I'm hoping for a specs update, USB 3.0, more thunderbolt ports and HDMI-in/out...playing xbox on my iPad screen (without lag) would be amazing, and would save me some cash on purchasing an office/mac-cave TV. :)

I can't help but think the iMac will be woven into whatever TV plans Apple holds, and I doubt we see a total refresh of the iMac anytime soon; therefore, I would imageine there would be some kind of future iTV compatibility with the iMac. So HDMI ports only make sense.

Also, the reason people buy iMacs over MBP is bang for buck...the iMac has had far and away the best purchase value of any Mac computer for a long-time now (re-sale value probably goes back to the MBP).

Dre180
Jun 14, 2012, 12:02 PM
Most of us don't spend 6+ hours a day reading our TV screens, but many people do with their computer. The other need is for people editing HD video to have enough screen real-estate in a portable machine.

Maybe you don't use a computer for work or spend a lot of time with one. In that case, maybe this model is not for you.


Indeed I do use my computer for work and a large portion of the day. If you read many reviews about the retina screen it is said to be excellent but not something that blows the old screens out of the water. I do not use it for HD video editing aside from casual editing here and there. If you speak to many who do, they seem to think the resolution may be too fine, and make their projects harder to work with. That remains to be seen.

On top of that, if you're a serious video editor, i highly doubt 15" is suitable for most. I'm all for retina, especially if it's reasonably priced. At this present time it is not. i'm not saying it doesn't have any advantages, it does. I personally am not going to be a beta tester for it, and pay a premium. If that's what others choose to do, more power to them.

You are right, this model absolutely isn't for me. I don't feel i'm getting all I need for a premium price that's going to run me well over $3,000. I will wait for the new iMac which should provide better performance at a better price.

Virinprew
Jun 14, 2012, 12:07 PM
Apparently Apple have now moved beyond just the Retina Display and will be introducing the new 'Cochlear Speaker' who's resolution will be so high that you cannot hear the individual samples. Unfortunately we will still have to wait a while for the 'Olifactory Stinkbulb' technology to mature sufficiently for public release.

Also don't forget to put cli* trackpad into the package.

Zudeo
Jun 14, 2012, 12:13 PM
Am I the only one who wants the ATD & ACD combined? Hell.. I really don't care what resolution it is; I just want two Thunderbolt inputs, maybe one DisplayPort (for our Windows PC folks) and then the bevy of inputs the ATD had. In the end, it shouldn't matter if Apple owning folks or Windows folks purchase a monitor; it's $999+tx to them either way. The ATD is currently the only Thunderbolt display on the market. Why not open it to all by adding DisplayPort compatibility? They'd one-up Dell by offering a better featured display with the same panel.

JGowan
Jun 14, 2012, 01:01 PM
I've always been a Mac Pro user**, but the iMacs are just getting so dang nice. I bought a 27" iMac for my father last year and it just beautiful and really quick. I imagine that with Retina Displays and such huge amounts of ram you can put in these things, I'll become an iMac user in the future.

The only thing holding me back are the four bays for HDs. They are so easy to pop in new ones and there's nothing to configure. I really like these days having a HD internally to do my SuperDuper backups to and getting away from external HDs which just stack up around the desk. I don't want to have to go back to that.

** Last one June 2010:
2 x 2.93 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon; 8GB 1333 MHz DDR3)

ebolamonkey3
Jun 14, 2012, 01:06 PM
As unlikely as it is, I'm really hoping to see a "retina" display iMac.

jpine
Jun 14, 2012, 01:22 PM
Can we please get more than 16 gig of RAM in the thing? :mad:

joopey
Jun 14, 2012, 01:28 PM
I can't wait for the new iMacs to be released. I watched the streaming blog posts hoping to read that Apple was refreshing the iMacs just before Father's day. I had my wife primed and ready to go, but alas, in a couple of more weeks, my hunger will be satisfied. I say weeks because I suspect the refresh will occur in July in order to make the back-to-school buying season. Right now, it's more of a graduation gift season than buying for back-to-school or going off to college.

I think the new retina MBP is a dream, but the fact that everything is locked down is a bigger turn off than it not having an Ethernet port. For that amount of money, I want a device that can be readily upgraded. Thus, for me, this is a great 1st step but I will wait for the 2nd or 3rd generation MBP when Apple decides to allow us to upgrade the SSD and RAM ourselves. Right now your stuck with what you initially get which to me is too limiting.

I think a retina Display would be cool but very expensive and probably a year or two away from being a reality. They are probably working on it, but it's may not ready for launching quite yet.

ScottishDuck
Jun 14, 2012, 01:57 PM
That is true, but the average consumer will think, "wow".

No the average consumer will be confused and annoyed.

Vista wasn't a huge change and people found that a nightmare to use. Metro is a total cluster****.

Paclypse71
Jun 14, 2012, 02:00 PM
Can we please get more than 16 gig of RAM in the thing? :mad:

I have 32GB in my 2011 27" i7 iMac. I also got a SATA 3.0 eSATA port, 480GB SSD and 3TB HDD installed with OWC's Turnkey Upgrade Program.

theSeb
Jun 14, 2012, 02:06 PM
No the average consumer will be confused and annoyed.

Vista wasn't a huge change and people found that a nightmare to use. Metro is a total cluster****.

When the self-confessed journalist fan boys hate it and call it "an unmitigated disaster" you know have a problem on your hands

In case you don't know and to give you some context, Dvorak is a huge MS fanboy. I think he is the only person that actually thinks BOB was good, hence why his review of Windows 8 is even more priceless.

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-06-01/commentary/31946299_1_windows-phone-windows-vista-desktop-screen

Train
Jun 14, 2012, 02:09 PM
The only reason I chose a MacBook Pro over an iMac was that I live at my place of study during the week and drive home on weekends and wanted to take my Mac with me. I only use my MBP at home or at my dormitory, I wouldn't even need a battery in it. If I were in a different situation I wouldn't think twice and buy an iMac (I always wanted to have one). You get more power for less money and the screen is a lot bigger.

Instead of spending a lot of money on a maxed out MacBook Air/MacBook Pro and an external display I would rather go with a maxed out iMac 27" and the cheapest MBA instead. That would cost nearly the same (if we talk about an external display which is comparable to the iMac's screen), but you have a really powerful machine at home AND a really portable machine on the go while an MBA/MBP with an external display seems like a bad compromise between power and portability.

Back to topic: My girlfriend is waiting desperatly for an iMac refresh, she is moving in August and we hope they give the iMac at least a spec bump by then. My personal bet is that they release the new iMacs and Mac Minis with Mountain Lion. They said there will be a new version of OS X every year now and it makes totally sense if they refresh their desktop line together with OS X at the same time, just as they handle it with the iPhone and iOS.

Someone asked if the benchmarks couldn't show the current 27" iMac - No, the one in the benchmarks has RAM with 1600 Mhz while the current models only have RAM with 1333 Mhz.

marcusj0015
Jun 14, 2012, 03:02 PM
You should run a RAM useage monitor while you work to see how much RAM you normally use. You will be very surprised. Unless you're a power user editing video, audio, or running too many apps at one time, you will seldom see the meter go over 4GB.

I've got 8GB of RAM over here and I NEVER use all of it, but Chrome is a memory hungry bitch, so I'm usually between 3-5 depending on what I'm doing.

classicaliberal
Jun 14, 2012, 04:24 PM
1.It's called an investment: increasing the user base for the sake of future margins. And the reason they have so much cash on hand has little or nothing to do with the iMac. It's because of the ipod/iphone/ipad. They have a lot of room to grow their desktop user base.

2. The majority of users don't think the form factor justifies the price bump over a comparably priced PC; that's why less than 4% of desktop users in the U.S. are Mac users.

Apple is all about profit share, not market share.

This is why Apple's iPhone business alone makes more money in a given year than the entire Microsoft corporation.

PC market share is high for one main reason... they sell Chevys, and Apple sells Lexuses. Unfortunately for the PC assemblers, there isn't much money in assembling bargain basement PCs.

Also, take into consideration Apple Computer's resale value. You can OFTEN sell a mac 3-4 years later for half of what you paid for it. Try that with a PC... you'll be throwing it away, or pushing it on relatives instead.

HurtinMinorKey
Jun 14, 2012, 05:26 PM
Apple is all about profit share, not market share.

This is why Apple's iPhone business alone makes more money in a given year than the entire Microsoft corporation.

PC market share is high for one main reason... they sell Chevys, and Apple sells Lexuses. Unfortunately for the PC assemblers, there isn't much money in assembling bargain basement PCs.

Also, take into consideration Apple Computer's resale value. You can OFTEN sell a mac 3-4 years later for half of what you paid for it. Try that with a PC... you'll be throwing it away, or pushing it on relatives instead.

Again, your trying to separate profits from market share. The reason why they are profitable is because of their smartphone market share. I'm sure their margins on iphones and iMacs are comparable. But it's the iPhones that bring home the Bacon.

And if you take away the smartphone business, Apple is back to bringing in less revenue than Microsoft. The reason why Apple has grown so much in the past 5 years is because of increasing market share. If they want to continue growing, they are going to have to expand in new markets. Maybe it won't be in desktop computing, but there is no reason why it can't

musio
Jun 14, 2012, 05:28 PM
I've always been a Mac Pro user**, but the iMacs are just getting so dang nice. I bought a 27" iMac for my father last year and it just beautiful and really quick. I imagine that with Retina Displays and such huge amounts of ram you can put in these things, I'll become an iMac user in the future.

The only thing holding me back are the four bays for HDs. They are so easy to pop in new ones and there's nothing to configure. I really like these days having a HD internally to do my SuperDuper backups to and getting away from external HDs which just stack up around the desk. I don't want to have to go back to that.

** Last one June 2010:
2 x 2.93 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon; 8GB 1333 MHz DDR3)

I there was a way to slot in SSDs like ram, it would help for the 'iMac Pro' line

ngdesign
Jun 14, 2012, 10:21 PM
I almost bought my new iMac today.... Now this is going to make me wait... Ughh!

Thats what they said 2 months ago, i am sick of waiting and just bought mine. Maxed out the spec and it's probably gonna last at least 2 good years.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 15, 2012, 12:14 AM
I've got 8GB of RAM over here and I NEVER use all of it, but Chrome is a memory hungry bitch, so I'm usually between 3-5 depending on what I'm doing.

I can routinely peg 32GB of RAM, but then I'm not surfing the web all day and still a browser will chew up memory fast, just not as fast compiling multiple source branches for development and working in Solid Modeling environments, not to mention Finite Element Analylsis.

marcusj0015
Jun 15, 2012, 12:41 AM
I can routinely peg 32GB of RAM, but then I'm not surfing the web all day and still a browser will chew up memory fast, just not as fast compiling multiple source branches for development and working in Solid Modeling environments, not to mention Finite Element Analylsis.

I didn't know compiling code was as/more demanding than rendering, Damn!