Apple iMac 2010 - What would you like to see changed?

[MacAndy74]

I guess we're about half way to a new iMac release, so what would you like changed or improved in iMac 2010?

Here's my list:

- LED Backlit LCD Panels,
- 30" Model,
- Quad Core Processors,
- Faster Onboard nVidia Graphics,
- >1TB HD Options,
- Updated Mighty Mouse,
- Black keyed / backlit Keyboard,
- Aluminium Build - File the sharp edges.

That's my wishes please Mr :apple:

[Tallest Skil]

Possibly, since Apple was to have done that by the start of aught nine.
30" would be too expensive.
Arrandale isn't quad-core, so we won't see that.
Sure.
Doubt it.
If only. :rolleyes:
Doubt it.

[Salavat23]

Touch screen.

[MacAndy74]

Possibly, since Apple was to have done that by the start of aught nine.

Can always dream though, right? :o
Also, WD already have a Green Power 2TB HD so why would a HD capacity bump be doubtful?

Actually was going to also add that I'd like the possibility of a Blu-Ray drive too.

[Tallest Skil]

Touch screen.

NOT on a vertical screen, and not before OS XI.

Can always dream though, right? :o
Also, WD already have a Green Power 2TB HD so why would a HD capacity bump be doubtful?

Because Time Capsule would need to be updated, then, as well.

Actually was going to also add that I'd like the possibility of a Blu-Ray drive too.

Like to add, but it isn't happening.

[Satori]

I guess we're about half way to a new iMac release, so what would you like changed or improved in iMac 2010?

Here's my list:

- LED Backlit LCD Panels,
- 30" Model,
- Quad Core Processors,
- Faster Onboard nVidia Graphics,
- >1TB HD Options,
- Updated Mighty Mouse,
- Black keyed / backlit Keyboard,
- Aluminium Build - File the sharp edges.

That's my wishes please Mr :apple:

..plus the moon on a stick! ;)

[MacAndy74]

..plus the moon on a stick! ;)

Jalapeño (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47DT41m86N4) on a stick :D

[MinorBidoh]

Jalapeño (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47DT41m86N4) on a stick :D

Thankyou very much, bookmarked!
bmw on a stick...

As for 2010, a 30" iMac is a dream, although a new 30" ACD would be spot on. And I think its about time we shifted from white keys to black on keyboards. I doubt a re-design of the mighty mouse or even a black one for that matter.

[nuckinfutz]

2010 iMac
2 SATA drive bays + SSD options
Lynnfield 65 Watt Nehalem Quad Core procs
LED backlighting on displays.
Latest Nvidia or ATI GPU
SDHC slot
Wireless bluetooth kb/mouse standard
FW3200 Gbps
USB 3.0

[Mantronix]

Just these two for me:
Faster Onboard nVidia Graphics,
Black keyed / backlit Keyboard,

[Hellhammer]

-Quad-core or Arrandales
-LED backlight
-3 or 4 RAM slots
-Thicker iMac so it could handle desktop GPU and CPU
-New keyboard and Mighty Mouse
-SSD and two HD bays
-eSATA port
-FW3200 and USB 3.0

And of course new design

[nuckinfutz]

That's HOT

[BlizzardBomb]

iMacs with dedicated graphics should NOT start at £1,499/$1,799. Sure have some models with integrated, but don't make the price leap between the two ridiculous. This is turning into the old 15" MBP $1,999 vs. $2,499 gap (which they fixed with this revision thank god). Quad-cores and LED backlit would be nice too.

[zedsdead]

I am keeping mine (al iMac mid-2007) until the following occurs, (or I may just go Mac Pro next time):

(1) LED Screen
(2) USB 3.0
(3) Firewire 1600/3200
(4) Quad-Core
(5) SSD Drive
(6) Video Card with 1GB VRAM

[wetrix]

I'd really like a small and fast SSD boot drive with a huge HDD for storage (like the Xserve). The performance gains from SSD really do it for me.

[nuckinfutz]

I'd really like a small and fast SSD boot drive with a huge HDD for storage (like the Xserve). The performance gains from SSD really do it for me.

Exactly

If you move your Home folder to say a large SATA drive that frees up a lot of space on the boot drive and you could then go with a small but very fast SLC for the boot volume or MLC really since writing speed wouldn't be that critical though durability with a SLC drive would be nice.

[The Hammer]

Make them height adjustable.

[PhixionFilms]

i really cant see anything physically changed on the imac. Maybe easier corners?

[Kevin Mosley]

Blu-ray superdrive
LED or OLED screen. Or soething better than that. Basically a much better contrast ratio.
SSD
A mouse that I like. I don't like or use the mighty mouse.
I like the feel and quality of aluminium but I really want it painted matte black.

[MacAndy74]

-Quad-core or Arrandales
(..)

And of course new design

:eek: That is an amazing new concept, I would like that design to come true.
For me the aluminium iMac's are very attractive machines, but I think it's time for a design refresh too.

:o:apple:

[Hellhammer]

:eek: That is an amazing new concept, I would like that design to come true.
For me the aluminium iMac's are very attractive machines, but I think it's time for a design refresh too.

:o:apple:

Yea, that's amazing design. I found it on an accident, I was just Googling iMac and found that. Lets hope Steve has also seen that picture :cool:

[chewbaccacabra]

I am keeping mine (al iMac mid-2007) until the following occurs, (or I may just go Mac Pro next time):

(1) LED Screen
(2) USB 3.0
(3) Firewire 1600/3200
(4) Quad-Core
(5) SSD Drive
(6) Video Card with 1GB VRAM

I am with you there. I dont think I would even consider replacing my iMac AL 2.8 from 2007 with another iMac until USB 3.0.

[MacAndy74]

Yea, that's amazing design. I found it on an accident, I was just Googling iMac and found that. Lets hope Steve has also seen that picture :cool:

Sometimes I wonder if Steve's posse patrol these forums? :cool:

[Ice-Cube]

Make them height adjustable.

I think adjusting your chair would be an easier option.

[Duncan-UK]

I'd love to have a 30 inch iMac but truly shudder at how expensive it would be.

For all of the above wish lists, we should remember that Apple's business model appears to be to sell oldish hardware in a very shiny box at a very high price.

Hence quad core, blu-ray, usb 3??? I really doubt it.

I bought a 24 incher in Oct 07 and for me the biggest problem is the shortage of USB ports. I find it frankly criminal that Apple only puts three on the machine. Apologists parrot the line that there are two on the keyboard - well that means you use one on the machine, and other than a mouse or a USB drive (if you are lucky) these are always underpowered.

How can it be that the Mini in all but its PPC incarnations has had more USBs than the iMac? I know that the latest iMac has 4, but really given the puny hard drives inside the iMac, there should be at least 6 and really 8. I fail to see how this would be difficult.

Yes I could buy hubs - but given the price of an iMac, why the hell should I?

I could also buy a Mac Pro - but strangely enough dont want to spend £2000+ on a computer which has more power than I would ever need.

I love using OSX but the sheer price that you pay for this privilege sticks in the throat somewhat when you look at the specification of what you are getting.

[Hellhammer]

I'd love to have a 30 inch iMac but truly shudder at how expensive it would be.

For all of the above wish lists, we should remember that Apple's business model appears to be to sell oldish hardware in a very shiny box at a very high price.

Hence quad core, blu-ray, usb 3??? I really doubt it.

I bought a 24 incher in Oct 07 and for me the biggest problem is the shortage of USB ports. I find it frankly criminal that Apple only puts three on the machine. Apologists parrot the line that there are two on the keyboard - well that means you use one on the machine, and other than a mouse or a USB drive (if you are lucky) these are always underpowered.

How can it be that the Mini in all but its PPC incarnations has had more USBs than the iMac? I know that the latest iMac has 4, but really given the puny hard drives inside the iMac, there should be at least 6 and really 8. I fail to see how this would be difficult.

Yes I could buy hubs - but given the price of an iMac, why the hell should I?

I could also buy a Mac Pro - but strangely enough dont want to spend £2000+ on a computer which has more power than I would ever need.

I love using OSX but the sheer price that you pay for this privilege sticks in the throat somewhat when you look at the specification of what you are getting.

Have you heard of USB hubs?

[Duncan-UK]

Have you heard of USB hubs?

Have you heard of reading posts??

My point is why should a very expensive computer be so lacking in fundamental inputs. Apple make great play of their design, but this is immediately undermined if you have to plug in loads of powered hubs just to be able to use external devices.

The iMac is starved of ports. Fair enough if it was a cheap and nasty piece of kit but it isnt.

I ended up buying Iomega external drives which has USB ports built in, but once you start plugging even more external drives into those, then copying files becomes very slow indeed. I have terabytes of HD video recorded off BBC HD and backing these up, or editing and then copying off to other drives is a major drag via shares USB ports.

[RichardI]

A quad core processor
An improved video card
no price increase


Rich :cool:

[nuckinfutz]

Have you heard of reading posts??

My point is why should a very expensive computer be so lacking in fundamental inputs. Apple make great play of their design, but this is immediately undermined if you have to plug in loads of powered hubs just to be able to use external devices.

The iMac is starved of ports. Fair enough if it was a cheap and nasty piece of kit but it isnt.

I ended up buying Iomega external drives which has USB ports built in, but once you start plugging even more external drives into those, then copying files becomes very slow indeed. I have terabytes of HD video recorded off BBC HD and backing these up, or editing and then copying off to other drives is a major drag via shares USB ports.

It's simple it's because USB is designed to scale out with Hubs. Adding a bunch of ports just means Apple has to punch more holes in the metal casing. I think the response to your posting was probably more in part spurred by the incredulity you displayed.

I prefer a hub approach because it's cleaner and you can run a single cable to hub which then becomes the central area for USB peripherals rather than having 6 USB devices each with a longer cable coming right back to the computer.

You know us Mac users ...overly concerned with clutter :D

[MikhailT]

1) LED Screen wider and higher resolution, 30" for high end and 24" for the rest
2) Two Hard drive bays, one for SSD and other for HD. SATA 6.0Gbps support pls, no 1.5gbps crap they pulled off with the mid 09 laptops.
3) HDMI 1.3+ inputs, USB 3.0, eSATA 2.0, FW3200/1600
4) Upgradable graphic cards, probably won't happen
5) Blu-ray (it is possible with the new single licensing body)
6) 8GB+ RAM (many of us would like to run VM machines at same time)

[Frozentoast]

30"/Blu-Ray/HDMI?

[aabobster]

I think it would be better if they kept the stand that they are using now, but they made it so the screen could go up, down, and tilt. (like the iMac g4)

Also, maybe they could put a FireWire 800 port and a FireWire 400 port, for those of us still using FireWire 400.

I hate the idea of the touch screen. That is kind of odd.

[nuckinfutz]

HDMI cannot be used in all in one computers folks.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/E/6/5E66B27B-988B-4F50-AF3A-C2FF1E62180F/GRA-T583_WH08.pptx

Nor can you funnel it through laptop hinges. There "is" a reason why Apple went DisplayPort and it wasn't to frustrate people.

[Frozentoast]

HDMI cannot be used in all in one computers folks.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/E/6/5E66B27B-988B-4F50-AF3A-C2FF1E62180F/GRA-T583_WH08.pptx

Nor can you funnel it through laptop hinges. There "is" a reason why Apple went DisplayPort and it wasn't to frustrate people.
Thanks for clearing that up I've always wondered about that. Would there a way to connect a PS3 to iMacs? I wouldn't need to buy a new TV if a 30" model was available.

[nuckinfutz]

Thanks for clearing that up I've always wondered about that. Would there a way to connect a PS3 to iMacs? I wouldn't need to buy a new TV if a 30" model was available.

Hmmm I'll take a look and see if anyone has found a way to funnel video into a Mac from HDMI.

[TennisandMusic]

HDMI cannot be used in all in one computers folks.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/E/6/5E66B27B-988B-4F50-AF3A-C2FF1E62180F/GRA-T583_WH08.pptx

Nor can you funnel it through laptop hinges. There "is" a reason why Apple went DisplayPort and it wasn't to frustrate people.

That's odd. My girlfriends VAIO laptop has an HDMI out port.

[MikhailT]

That's odd. My girlfriends VAIO laptop has an HDMI out port.

HDMI output is allowed, just not the HDMI input.

Many of us wants to play our PS3/Xbox thur iMacs.

[TennisandMusic]

HDMI output is allowed, just not the HDMI input.

Many of us wants to play our PS3/Xbox thur iMacs.

Oh gotcha. It was worded above in such a way I thought the guy was saying no HDMI is allowed on all in one's or laptops, period.

[Duncan-UK]

It's simple it's because USB is designed to scale out with Hubs. Adding a bunch of ports just means Apple has to punch more holes in the metal casing. I think the response to your posting was probably more in part spurred by the incredulity you displayed.

I prefer a hub approach because it's cleaner and you can run a single cable to hub which then becomes the central area for USB peripherals rather than having 6 USB devices each with a longer cable coming right back to the computer.

You know us Mac users ...overly concerned with clutter :D

But isnt a more elegant solution to build the hubs into the computer, thus avoiding separate power cables and the need for more electrical sockets?

Again, people seem desperate to make apologies for the lack of basic functionality. It's like trying to justify the use of combi drives when the rest of the computing world moved to DVD burners only about five years ago...

Simple question - why have 5 USBs on a Mini and only 4 on an iMac - as I've said before keyboard USBs dont count - who wants a wired keyboard or mouse anyway?

I have 6 external drives plugged into my iMac along with four TV tuners - and whilst I would concede this isnt necessarily "standard", once you add in the iPhone, a printer, a card reader and a port for a USB drive, then the lack of onboard USBs becomes a major issue.

Anyway moving on, I'd like to see quad core asap and a decent graphics card to enable future usage of GPU and multi-core to be credibly available for all new iMacs from Q4 2009 onwards or Q1 2010.

Sadly all of the hardware launches this year have been laughable - slimmed down specs and through the roof pricing.

[nick9191]

LED screen
Cheaper $999 model, if Apple wants to stick around in the desktop market.
Quad Core optional
ATI 5*** mobile on high end models, dedicated Nvidia on lower models, no integrated.
Firewire 3200.
USB 3
Same design.
Easy access hard drive.

[amd4me]

-Quad-core or Arrandales
-LED backlight
-3 or 4 RAM slots
-Thicker iMac so it could handle desktop GPU and CPU
-New keyboard and Mighty Mouse
-SSD and two HD bays
-eSATA port
-FW3200 and USB 3.0

And of course new design

Very bueno

[trose]

Now, when you say "What would you like to see changed?" do you mean within logical reason, or in a fantasy world?

'Cause most of what you guys are predicting... eh, any idea how economics work and what the target consumer of the iMac is?

This is why people are always up in arms when Apple releases an updated product, they're just not realistic with themselves.

Asking for Quad Cores, possibly LED display, and some other minor changes such as additional/better USB ports or an SSD slot... OK, that may happen.

Expecting a 30" iMac, expecting desktop GPUs... not gonna happen.
Even Quad Core CPU is unlikely.

The iMac has, and continues to, fill its roll very nicely the way Apple equips them. There are always some minor gripes, such as the 9400M on the lower end models this time around, but that's life.

For the vast majority of iMac users (I.E.- Not us crazy fanatics who post on MacRumors) the iMac is more power than they'll ever use.

Apple will not do anything that is going to make the iMac more expensive or anything that will make it "uglier" by Apple standards. That means, it will never be thicker (for desktop parts or more RAM slots) or contain a plethora of ports.

If you want to have a realistic guess, take a look at what the current CPUs/video cards in an iMac cost. Whatever is around next year at the same price point/form factor will be something that Apple will consider.

[nuckinfutz]

trose

Apple can do what they want. If they want to continue to sell consumers a laptop on a stick then that's fine.

I'll continue to buy used Macs and non Apple monitors. You don't deliver what the power users want they don't buy your equipment.

Mobile Quad Core chips come at a premium. The 2Ghz Clarkfield chip is going to be a cool $1000+. Contrast that to a 2.9Ghz Lynnfield which will probably be in the $600-800 range and it's clear to those of use who actually want to get our work done faster without regard to "looking good" doing it.

Frankly if Steve Jobs has one major foible that he is a "form over function" guy. I don't need a pizza thin desktop with a cavern of empty space behind it.

[Hellhammer]

For the vast majority of iMac users (I.E.- Not us crazy fanatics who post on MacRumors) the iMac is more power than they'll ever use.

But who wants to pay over 1000$ for computer that is way too overkill and 400$ PC laptop does the same?

If you want to have a realistic guess, take a look at what the current CPUs/video cards in an iMac cost. Whatever is around next year at the same price point/form factor will be something that Apple will consider.

They are quite powerful but still, I can build high-end quad-core PC for price of an iMac



Mobile Quad Core chips come at a premium. The 2Ghz Clarkfield chip is going to be a cool $1000+. Contrast that to a 2.9Ghz Lynnfield which will probably be in the $600-800 range and it's clear to those of use who actually want to get our work done faster without regard to "looking good" doing it.


That's why Apple will likely use Arrandales. Lynnfields are too hot for current iMac's design and Clarksfield are too expensive and slower than Arrandales.

I would love to have thick iMac with desktop CPU and GPU or "xMac" but I'm doubt we will see one...

[nuckinfutz]

That's why Apple will likely use Arrandales. Lynnfields are too hot for current iMac's design and Clarksfield are too expensive and slower than Arrandales.

I would love to have thick iMac with desktop CPU and GPU or "xMac" but I'm doubt we will see one...


The only problem there is that the iMac is going to be competing with cheap Lynnfield systems from Q3 of this year on. I like the iMac and think it's an ideal system but consumers aren't going to buy a Dual Core $1499 iMac with a 24" when a Lynnfield system with 24" monitor is going to be $1099 in every store.

By the time Arrandale hits in Jan 2010 you'll have lower wattage Lynnfield coming.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,671997/Intels-65-Watt-quad-cores-on-the-way/News/

[Hellhammer]

The only problem there is that the iMac is going to be competing with cheap Lynnfield systems from Q3 of this year on. I like the iMac and think it's an ideal system but consumers aren't going to buy a Dual Core $1499 iMac with a 24" when a Lynnfield system with 24" monitor is going to be $1099 in every store.

By the time Arrandale hits in Jan 2010 you'll have lower wattage Lynnfield coming.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,671997/Intels-65-Watt-quad-cores-on-the-way/News/

65W is still too hot. Wikipedia says 65W or 45W for low-end one, 2.13GHz. Arrandales are still faster than Lynnfields and Arrandales high-end Arrandale is 35W only. Arrandales are quite cheap too, should be in same price range as current Penryns

[nuckinfutz]

65W is still too hot. Wikipedia says 65W or 45W for low-end one, 2.13GHz. Arrandales are still faster than Lynnfields and Arrandales high-end Arrandale is 35W only. Arrandales are quite cheap too, should be in same price range as current Penryns

Not if rumors that the iMac 3.06Ghz Core2 is custom and 55watt TDP. Arrandales won't be faster than Lynnfield if they don't have Turbo Boost which I haven't been able to confirm.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570

It's clear that Apple needs to redesign the iMac case and move to desktop CPU. Arrandale is a buzz kill.

[Hellhammer]

Not if rumors that the iMac 3.06Ghz Core2 is custom and 55watt TDP. Arrandales won't be faster than Lynnfield if they don't have Turbo Boost which I haven't been able to confirm.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3570

It's clear that Apple needs to redesign the iMac case and move to desktop CPU. Arrandale is a buzz kill.

Current 3.06GHz is 44W, '08 model's 3.06 was 55W. 65W Lynnfield is way too hot for current design. Arrandales are 32nm and Lynnfields are 45nm, they have difference in speed.

I would still love to have thick iMac, but I doubt we will see one

[nuckinfutz]

Yeah I'm kind of doubting we'll see it as well. Though the darkhorse is that Apple finally has an OS in Snow Leopard that makes multi-core programming easy easy easy. We'll see if they deliver easy to own imac computers.

If I can buy an iMac Quad Core for less than $1499 by tax return 2010, I'm in.

[iMacmatician]

Mobile Quad Core chips come at a premium. The 2Ghz Clarkfield chip is going to be a cool $1000+.The 1.6 GHz Clarksfield is $364, but you're still seeing a good premium.

That's why Apple will likely use Arrandales. Lynnfields are too hot for current iMac's design and Clarksfield are too expensive and slower than Arrandales.Pretty much. Apple may be avoiding lower-clocked quad-cores in the same lineup as higher-clocked dual-cores. However, Clarksfield can turbo boost up to 2.8/3.06/3.2 GHz for one core. That might mean that Apple is more willing to put those CPUs in the iMac (and the MacBook Pro).

Maybe Apple will use the Core i3/i5/i7 branding to their advantage. Something like "Every iMac comes with a new Intel Core i3 [Arrandale] processor. For additional performance for intensive applications, you can upgrade to a Core i5 [Arrandale] or a Core i7 [Clarksfield] processor" and skip the whole clock speed and core count issue completely.

Or maybe not. I still expect Arrandale for the next iMac and quad-core in 2011.

Current 3.06GHz is 44W, '08 model's 3.06 was 55W. 65W Lynnfield is way too hot for current design.Supposedly all iMac CPUs are 55 W.

[Hellhammer]

Supposedly all iMac CPUs are 55 W.

They are 35w and 44w.

[ecoons]

Do you guys expect to see new iMacs before the back-to-school special ends? (sept. 8, 2009).

I believe the past few years, Apple has released new iMacs in August/September, does anyone know if THESE were included in the back-to-school special?

[Tallest Skil]

Do you guys expect to see new iMacs before the back-to-school special ends? (sept. 8, 2009).

I believe the past few years, Apple has released new iMacs in August/September, does anyone know if THESE were included in the back-to-school special?

Absolutely not, since the chips won't exist.

[iMacmatician]

They are 35w and 44w.The last time I saw that they were 55 W. Looking through the history shows them changed in early June. Makes sense to me, since I always thought EVERY chip at 55 W was weird.

[trose]

But who wants to pay over 1000$ for computer that is way too overkill and 400$ PC laptop does the same?


The millions of people who have purchased Apple iMacs...

Including me and you.

For one, there is not a $400 PC laptop out there that will touch a $1000 iMac in all around performance and quality, but I don't want to digress into the "price war" argument.

All I'm saying is, in a fantasy world where we could all have what we wanted, it'd be awesome if there were a million different configurations of Macs and Apple catered to all of our niche needs.

In reality, they have a very very profitable and successful computer line in the iMac, so I don't think they feel like they need to dramatically change things up.

I totally admit that I'd be the first person to gobble up an "xMac", something that is officially supported by OSX but offers complete customizability. I have built many PCs in the past, I am comfortable with this, and it's a great thing for advanced users.

BUT, again, I know Apple is running a business and in the end their goal is to make a profit. This machine does not fit with their current goals, and I'm sure they've researched such options more heavily and in-depth than any MacRumors forum member ever has.

I purchased an iMac instead of building a PC because I want a machine that runs OSX without any tinkering or fighting with drivers (aka Hackintosh) and that will fit comfortably and relatively clutter free and quiet on my small desk. Why did you purchase an iMac instead of a $400 PC laptop?

[Hellhammer]

...

Why did you purchase an iMac instead of a $400 PC laptop?

Your point really makes sense, good post. What I meant with that 400$ PC thing was that Apple should make a cheap laptop for market, a netbook. There are plenty of people who uses computer couple of times a week, for checking e-mail or reading some news from net, so they don't need the power of Mini or White MB. Especially older people would love cheaper Mac because OS X is more simple than Windows and there's no virus risk. I would buy one for my grandparents immediately.

400$ PCs are crap, I know, but they do their job OK, I think. I was ready to pay extra and I'm still ready pay that extra to get OS X. It's worth me easily over 500$. iMac satisfies my needs of power and OS X makes it perfect. If I could choose between a high-end 8000$ PC or Mac Mini, I would go for Mini. Macs are wonderful, I have nothing bad to say about 'em, I just think that Apple has to build a netbook to get more customers. Many people thinks Macs are too expensive so they choose cheap PC instead, but they really aren't. Apple uses good components and usually is ahead of PC manufacturers (still at least 80% of PCs uses DDR2, what I've seen at store)

But yea, Macs are great what they are now, nothing has to be changed

[trose]

Your point really makes sense, good post. What I meant with that 400$ PC thing was that Apple should make a cheap laptop for market, a netbook. There are plenty of people who uses computer couple of times a week, for checking e-mail or reading some news from net, so they don't need the power of Mini or White MB. Especially older people would love cheaper Mac because OS X is more simple than Windows and there's no virus risk. I would buy one for my grandparents immediately.

400$ PCs are crap, I know, but they do their job OK, I think. I was ready to pay extra and I'm still ready pay that extra to get OS X. It's worth me easily over 500$. iMac satisfies my needs of power and OS X makes it perfect. If I could choose between a high-end 8000$ PC or Mac Mini, I would go for Mini. Macs are wonderful, I have nothing bad to say about 'em, I just think that Apple has to build a netbook to get more customers. Many people thinks Macs are too expensive so they choose cheap PC instead, but they really aren't. Apple uses good components and usually is ahead of PC manufacturers (still at least 80% of PCs uses DDR2, what I've seen at store)

But yea, Macs are great what they are now, nothing has to be changed


As far as the Netbook, I agree. I'd like to see something like that from Apple. I have a feeling they'll produce something more along the lines of a tablet, though, but who knows!

[Hellhammer]

As far as the Netbook, I agree. I'd like to see something like that from Apple. I have a feeling they'll produce something more along the lines of a tablet, though, but who knows!

Yea, iTablet is fine too! Just something which is portable and costs less than White MacBook, and I buy it immediately.

[MacAndy74]

Forgot to add: ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 4870 :cool:
Actually I would not have a problem with Apple making the iMac thicker so that they could use some of the slightly 'warmer' Intel CPU's ;)

[Tallest Skil]

Forgot to add: ATI Mobility Radeon™ HD 4870 :cool:
Actually I would not have a problem with Apple making the iMac thicker so that they could use some of the slightly 'warmer' Intel CPU's ;)

The 2xxM series is faster, I thought.

[Hellhammer]

The 2xxM series is faster, I thought.

250M would be nice and possible in high-end iMac

[SomeSwede]

Apart from the obvious - faster processor, more RAM, bigger HDD - i would like to see an eSata port, a couple of extra USB ports (both placed by the power button, on the left side of the computer, where there is room for more connectors), and an SD card reader opposite the DVD (above the aforementioned ports).

I would also love to see a BR drive, (DVD drives are yesterdays news), a user serviceable design (kinda like the iMac G5), and if possible USB 3.0 and Firewire S3200.

[MacAndy74]

The 2xxM series is faster, I thought.

Maybe the latest chips but not the ones that are available right now with iMac's. ;)

[Schtumple]

I remember doing this for another thread to make a point.

Just thought I'd post again in case it's resurfaced at all in this thread too :p

http://files.getdropbox.com/u/158723/Hosting%20Folder/30%22%20iMac.jpg

[MacAndy74]

I remember doing this for another thread to make a point.

Just thought I'd post again in case it's resurfaced at all in this thread too :p

http://files.getdropbox.com/u/158723/Hosting%20Folder/30%22%20iMac.jpg

Sweet! Actually, I probably would buy a 30-inch iMac over a 24-inch model - even if it took me 2 months more to save for it.

Although I think Apple would have to make a wider base stand for a 30-inch iMac ;)

[Schtumple]

I think it would prolly need 2 stands... :p

And for anyone else wondering, NO:

http://files.getdropbox.com/u/158723/Hosting%20Folder/42%22%20iMac.jpg

[Cynicalone]

The problem I see when reading this is that most people seem to really want a Quad Core Mac Pro at iMac prices. Or the fabled X-Mac and that isn't going to happen.

If you want multiple HDD's and more graphic options then you aren't in the iMac Market. You are in the Mac Pro market or you're getting a PC. I have two iMacs at the house, but the Octo Core Mac Pro does all the real work.

[Spacecamel23]

Is it realistic to hope for USB 3.0 in the next iMac? Is this the kind of technology Apple will add as soon as it is released?

[MikhailT]

Is it realistic to hope for USB 3.0 in the next iMac? Is this the kind of technology Apple will add as soon as it is released?

IIRC, Apple was the first to add USB to their products before anybody. There will be USB 3.0 support added to the macs but when is unknown. There is no 3.0 host controller in mass production at this moment, just barely finished their specification a while ago. We should start seeing USB 3.0 by the end of the year.

[Schtumple]

IIRC, Apple was the first to add USB to their products before anybody. There will be USB 3.0 support added to the macs but when is unknown. There is no 3.0 host controller in mass production at this moment, just barely finished their specification a while ago. We should start seeing USB 3.0 by the end of the year.

Apple was a lil slow to adopt 2.0 though, so who knows. Although I think I did remember Linux would be the first OS to effectively have drivers available, so who knows, how hard would the transition from Linux driver to OSX driver be?

[Mj2sL]

- Quad cores
- Dedicated graphics standard
- 16:9 aspect ratio + possibility to use as external monitor (for game consoles for instance)
- All connectivity in a external box, so that there's just one cable going to the iMac and all other connections can be hid underneath your desk for example
- Latest and legacy connections (FireWire, USB)
- The housing may be thicker on some versions (I personally don't care if it's double as thick as it is now, but I know there's some users who prefer a thin housing). The higher performance models should be the thicker ones. It would cut the cost and improve performance, since there would no longer be the need for laptop-spec parts.

[Schtumple]

- Quad cores
- Dedicated graphics standard
- 16:9 aspect ratio + possibility to use as external monitor (for game consoles for instance)
- All connectivity in a external box, so that there's just one cable going to the iMac and all other connections can be hid underneath your desk for example
- Latest and legacy connections (FireWire, USB)
- The housing may be thicker on some versions (I personally don't care if it's double as thick as it is now, but I know there's some users who prefer a thin housing). The higher performance models should be the thicker ones. It would cut the cost and improve performance, since there would no longer be the need for laptop-spec parts.

Keep dreaming :p I doubt you'll see any one of those...

[angemon89]

I think it would prolly need 2 stands... :p Beautiful...

[duncyboy]

Beautiful...

Oh dear God NOOOO! :eek: :D

I think it'll be another two years at least before we seen anything but spec changes to the iMac.

Maybe USB 3.0, a bit of chopping and changing of ports etc and maybe in the next 12 months they'll ditch the 20" model altogether (or will they still keep the 20" around a-la the white Macbook?)

If/when they do update the design I'd hazard a guess at much slimmer case, narrower stand, removing the metal 'chin' from the bottom to match the 24" cinema displays.

[nuckinfutz]

If/when they do update the design I'd hazard a guess at much slimmer case, narrower stand, removing the metal 'chin' from the bottom to match the 24" cinema displays.

I don't know how much slimmer they can go before they'll be forced to use ULV processors.

I've got a 27.5" LCD that sits about 12-14 away with an equal amount of "empty" space behind it. Apple's fascination with thin is perplexing especially considering they're still selling mobile processors because their "thin" case cannot handle a desktop CPU.

Classic form following function. I guess that's why I don't own an iMac. It's a great integrated system but if I'm not going to get much expandability I want performance and right now you, comparitive to competitors outside the AIO space, have neither with an iMac.

[MikhailT]

The problem I see when reading this is that most people seem to really want a Quad Core Mac Pro at iMac prices. Or the fabled X-Mac and that isn't going to happen.

If you want multiple HDD's and more graphic options then you aren't in the iMac Market. You are in the Mac Pro market or you're getting a PC. I have two iMacs at the house, but the Octo Core Mac Pro does all the real
work.

Most people don't need the Xeons that's in the Mac Pros and definitely not for 2700$. Mac Pros are overkill for majority of people and iMac is nearly perfect for us except it could use more stuff in it, which is why this topic was created, to see what people want in their iMac.

There are cheap quad processors that fits iMac's market. Granted, most people probably still don't need quad cores but Intel is practically getting rid of the dualcore and replacing it with quadcore at same price point.

If Apple could make it easy to replace HDs and go for upgradable graphic cards, it would sell craploads more units than ever in their history.

Apple can produce Mac Pros at cheaper prices by replacing the Xeons with the consumer-graded CPUs like quadcore core duo or the Core i5/i7. Just dropping the price to 1500-2000$ will be enough to satisfy people who are searching for the "xMac".


Apple was a lil slow to adopt 2.0 though, so who knows. Although I think I did remember Linux would be the first OS to effectively have drivers available, so who knows, how hard would the transition from Linux driver to OSX driver be?

It has nothing to do with drivers, Apple could develop the drivers anytime they want. The drivers are useless if you have nothing to use it with. They have to wait for the USB 3.0 host controllers to be developed and tested and than mass produce it. Once the controllers are ready, than the motherboard chipsets have to be developed with it built in so that Apple can use it in the next product line. Those all takes time.

[Fahrwahr]

Apart from the obvious - faster processor, more RAM, bigger HDD - i would like to see an eSata port, a couple of extra USB ports (both placed by the power button, on the left side of the computer, where there is room for more connectors), and an SD card reader opposite the DVD (above the aforementioned ports).

I would also love to see a BR drive, (DVD drives are yesterdays news), a user serviceable design (kinda like the iMac G5), and if possible USB 3.0 and Firewire S3200.
Instead of adding more USB ports on the back, why not relent and put a port or two on the front? It's annoying to plug a flash drive into the back of the iMac. While they're at it, they should restore a headphone jack to the front as there was on the original gumdrop iMac.

RAM and hard disks should be user-serviceable on every machine. It's ridiculous how difficult it is to get to either in the current design. (RAM is doable, but awkward with the foot in the way.)

[MikhailT]

Instead of adding more USB ports on the back, why not relent and put a port or two on the front? It's annoying to plug a flash drive into the back of the iMac. While they're at it, they should restore a headphone jack to the front as there was on the original gumdrop iMac.

RAM and hard disks should be user-serviceable on every machine. It's ridiculous how difficult it is to get to either in the current design. (RAM is doable, but awkward with the foot in the way.)

I think it is because Apple doesn't like how the front ports mess up the "beautiful" design of iMacs. I would be more happy of they just put it on the side instead of front including the headphone jack. Putting stuff on the front will also annoy people who has a keyboard in front of iMac, the cables will only get in the way.

[iMacmatician]

The problem I see when reading this is that most people seem to really want a Quad Core Mac Pro at iMac prices.It depends on the quad-core, but they are in the same price zone as the more expensive dual-cores used in the iMac. With the 65 W desktop quad-cores, you pretty much get double the cores for a similar price.

I don't know how much slimmer they can go before they'll be forced to use ULV processors. A lot slimmer, since the iMac (24") can handle 55 W and even the MacBook Air uses LV CPUs. If they use Arrandale, they could go thinner because Arrandale may top out at 35 W (25 W Penryn equivalent). But that means that if cheaper (than the $3xx of Penryn and Clarksfield) quad-cores come at 45 W, Apple won't use those.

There are cheap quad processors that fits iMac's market. Granted, most people probably still don't need quad cores but Intel is practically getting rid of the dualcore and replacing it with quadcore at same price point.They did that with the high-end mobile CPUs but it looks like the current price boundary between dual-core and quad-core will stay with Clarksfield. Dual cores at the low-end will stay through 2011 but it's not known what prices they will top out at. We could still see dual-core MacBook Pros and iMacs in 2011.

[nuckinfutz]

I think it totally makes sense to have dual cores at the low end particularly with Arrandale which will still offer threading so it'll appear like a quad core to the OS.

Apple's move to Grand Central Dispatch is being understated by most IMO. When you look at the influence of this new API in Snow Leopard it's amazing because it's everywhere. Xcode and Instruments and more all support GCD.

The time where we said "well most people aren't going to benefit from quad core or more" is rapidly coming to a close.

Yes they've had concurrency tools before and those still exist but GCD makes it easier than it's likely to ever get to get concurrent programming in SL apps without the extra code bloat and management headache.

I wouldn't buy an iMac without Quad-core knowing Snow Leopard is coming.

[iMacmatician]

I hope so, and with Intel's new branding which removes the dual/quad suffixes, maybe Apple won't have to go into core counts and clock speeds (which removes half the reasons for no quad-core).

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Here's what I want:

1. Quad core, like most others.

2. OLED or LED screen.

4. Matching keyboard and mouse.

5. New design, i.e. lose the chin.

6. User serviceable HHD.

7. Height adjustment and wall mountable.

[Cynicalone]

wall mountable.

They make that already.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB902ZM/A?fnode=MTY1NDA5OQ&mco=NDU2NTMzNA

[Shake 'n' Bake]

They make that already.

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB902ZM/A?fnode=MTY1NDA5OQ&mco=NDU2NTMzNA

I thought they got rid of that after one of the G5 revisions.

[Cynicalone]

I thought they got rid of that after one of the G5 revisions.

Supposedly a complete pain to mount but I've personally never tried it. Would be cool to have a wall of displays though. :)

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Supposedly a complete pain to mount but I've personally never tried it. Would be cool to have a wall of displays though. :)

People say that is what Bill Gates' house looks like. :cool:

[Hellhammer]

Supposedly a complete pain to mount but I've personally never tried it. Would be cool to have a wall of displays though. :)

"The holy wall of iMacs". Maybe Steve's house is made of different Macs :D

[Schtumple]

It has nothing to do with drivers, Apple could develop the drivers anytime they want. The drivers are useless if you have nothing to use it with. They have to wait for the USB 3.0 host controllers to be developed and tested and than mass produce it. Once the controllers are ready, than the motherboard chipsets have to be developed with it built in so that Apple can use it in the next product line. Those all takes time.

Host controllers, that was it, I knew it was something along those lines :p

"The holy wall of iMacs". Maybe Steve's house is made of different Macs :D

I hear Steves house has no windows... :rolleyes:



I can't believe I just said that...

[amd4me]

Beautiful...

God it looks squat and fat. There is really nothing that appealing about it.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

God it looks squat and fat. There is really nothing that appealing about it.

And you think the current iMac looks good?

Apple needs a new design. The chin is, in my opinion, totally unnecessary. The design needs to be something radical, like G3 -> G4 and G4 -> G5. And I thought that an optical drive's performance goes "way down" when it is mounted sideways.

[Fahrwahr]

I think it is because Apple doesn't like how the front ports mess up the "beautiful" design of iMacs. I would be more happy of they just put it on the side instead of front including the headphone jack. Putting stuff on the front will also annoy people who has a keyboard in front of iMac, the cables will only get in the way.
The side would work as well -- the Dell monitors in most of the computer labs at school have two USB ports on the left side. I just hope they could position them with the logic board in such a way that the innards don't get more complicated than they already are (my boss's iMac had on-site surgery for random shutdowns, and it wasn't pretty -- the on-site guy failed to do the job in three tries, so my boss had to take it to the Apple Store and leave it there for a week or two before he got it back in working condition).

[Thunderbird]

1). LED backlight

2). Matte screen option

3). SSD

4). Matte screen option

[macairhead]

I honestly think that if they made and imac that looked exactly like their new led screens that would be nice because the screens already have speakers usb ports what do you guys think:confused:

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I honestly think that if they made and imac that looked exactly like their new led screens that would be nice because the screens already have speakers usb ports what do you guys think:confused:

iMacs already have IPS screens, passable built-in speakers and a few USB ports. :rolleyes:

[Fahrwahr]

iMacs already have IPS screens, passable built-in speakers and a few USB ports. :rolleyes:
I think the poster's point is that he would prefer the design of the LED display and that because the display already contains USB ports and speakers, the poster believes it wouldn't be difficult to add the necessary innards to turn it into a full-fledged iMac. (Somehow I doubt it would be that easy, but it is a nice design, except that THEY PUT THE USB PORTS ON THE BACK! Grr.)

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I think the poster's point is that he would prefer the design of the LED display and that because the display already contains USB ports and speakers, the poster believes it wouldn't be difficult to add the necessary innards to turn it into a full-fledged iMac. (Somehow I doubt it would be that easy, but it is a nice design, except that THEY PUT THE USB PORTS ON THE BACK! Grr.)

Apple really needs to ditch the thick, black bezels on everything. It looks atrocious and makes extended desktop mode harder to make use of. Someone should make a bezel-less display that would be perfect for extended desktop.

[cloan00]

I sometimes dream that apple will announce an Imac Pro, 28 inch all silver chassis with a processing frequency of 3.5 ghz (more than likely the i7 quad core) 8gbs of ddr3 ram (with an option for 16gbs) Nvidia GTX 295 GPU.... and a track pad built into the keyboard. Oh and the keyboard is full sized with the numeric functions being accessible through the track pad... Oh and both the keyboard and mouse are new forms of wireless technology that enables them to work without batteries... And the mouse takes the shape and texture of the ipod touch.. basically the ipod touch with specific mouse duties.. (You know that would be awesome!) Blu ray would be ideal....... For some reason i like the idea of a 28 inch led as opposed to the desired 30 inch display... (It just seems more realistic to me...) You like'n that mouse idea aren't you? I am overly in love with the idea... Kensington makes mice that sorta mimmic that smooth texture and shape.. Apple could go where no other mouse has gone B4 by adding interface capabilities on the mouse and giving it that iphone/touch slickness....

[musio]

2 hard drives! or maybe one large 2tb> hard drive. Maybe by 2010 we'll get 4tb drives...

[nuckinfutz]

I'd be happy with two 2.5" bays.

While I'd love to have 2TB in a Mac at those levels it makes sense for me (a multi Mac household) to have that storage centrally located so that I can access it from multiple computers.

[BlizzardBomb]

For some reason i like the idea of a 28 inch led as opposed to the desired 30 inch display... (It just seems more realistic to me...)

Umm... I don't think any of what you said is realistic at all ;)

[ravishankarr]

Some folks have mentioned wall-mountable. Specifically I would like to see VESA mount on the iMac with a removable stand! Other than that, losing the chin would be another nice to see improvement.

[auto123]

imacs would so be cool again if they had flavors.

honestly, different colors would add some actual individuality to these clone trooper like computers.

also a interchangeable graphics card.

that way I wouldn't get sick looking at them, also I wouldn't get PO'd when my mac buddies ask me to upgrade their macs and get pissed when the best they can get is more ram and a better cpu,
-Tyler

[Tallest Skil]

I sometimes dream that apple will announce an Imac Pro, 28 inch all silver chassis with a processing frequency of 3.5 ghz (more than likely the i7 quad core) 8gbs of ddr3 ram (with an option for 16gbs) Nvidia GTX 295 GPU.... and a track pad built into the keyboard. Oh and the keyboard is full sized with the numeric functions being accessible through the track pad... Oh and both the keyboard and mouse are new forms of wireless technology that enables them to work without batteries... And the mouse takes the shape and texture of the ipod touch.. basically the ipod touch with specific mouse duties.. (You know that would be awesome!) Blu ray would be ideal....... For some reason i like the idea of a 28 inch led as opposed to the desired 30 inch display... (It just seems more realistic to me...) You like'n that mouse idea aren't you? I am overly in love with the idea... Kensington makes mice that sorta mimmic that smooth texture and shape.. Apple could go where no other mouse has gone B4 by adding interface capabilities on the mouse and giving it that iphone/touch slickness....

You just don't get it, do you? None of this is even remotely possible for reasons pertaining either to the laws of physics or what Apple doesn't want to do.

[jmauro]

If the 2010 iMac doesn't have USB 3.0 Apple will fall WAY behind the external connectivity curve. Existing users will be upset and new users will go where the action is. eSATA and the next gen firewire are really pro only connections so we might not see them but that is fine.

A second drive would be great! Boot off a small one for speed and store on the big one.

The heat issue has to be addressed, it causes a lot of other problems.The screen on my 2005 1.9GHz has a dead column and the logic board failures cause me to loose the firewire ports.

I wouldn't expect much in the way of access to the machine, none of the previous models have been designed for access/disassembly.

Apple always does innovative things (they are the only ones who do on the hardware system) we might just see some of the wild ideas proposed.

[nuckinfutz]

If the 2010 iMac doesn't have USB 3.0 Apple will fall WAY behind the external connectivity curve. Existing users will be upset and new users will go where the action is. eSATA and the next gen firewire are really pro only connections so we might not see them but that is fine.

A second drive would be great! Boot off a small one for speed and store on the big one.



Firewire isn't going anywhere it can easily co-exist with USB 3.0. There are too many FW devices out there to leave the connection and you still have the primary difference between FW and USB and that's FW is peer to peer and USB requires a host computer.

[crackbookpro]

-Quad-core or Arrandales
-LED backlight
-3 or 4 RAM slots
-Thicker iMac so it could handle desktop GPU and CPU
-New keyboard and Mighty Mouse
-SSD and two HD bays
-eSATA port
-FW3200 and USB 3.0

And of course new design

I'll take that...I like the part of handling desktop GPU and CPU, and maybe easily add/remove of RAM.

I personally feel the 24'' screen is great, so for now, I don't need a bigger display, but these lil additions mentioned will work for me ;)

[matthewscott661]

1-options for SSD
2-change the foot(it just doesn't please me)
3-extra ports for usb, firewire, and display on the SIDE so that if your desk is crowded or small you don't have to fiddle or turn the computer around to plug things in

[Jimmiews]

I really think Apple is going to go quad core on the 2010 iMac. Also I think they are going to remove the 20inch iMac out of the picture and go all 24inch where the base model iMac will probably be the 2.66Ghz or 2.93Ghz Core 2 Duo and the high end iMac will be a quad core. I dont they are going to do more ram in the next gen iMacs since the 8gb of ram it supports is plenty for Snow-Leopard and if you want a machine with more ram, just buy a Mac Pro.

[Tallest Skil]

3-extra ports for usb, firewire, and display on the SIDE so that if your desk is crowded or small you don't have to fiddle or turn the computer around to plug things in

Breaks the aesthetic. This won't happen.

I really think Apple is going to go quad core on the 2010 iMac. Also I think they are going to remove the 20inch iMac out of the picture and go all 24inch where the base model iMac will probably be the 2.66Ghz or 2.93Ghz Core 2 Duo and the high end iMac will be a quad core. I dont they are going to do more ram in the next gen iMacs since the 8gb of ram it supports is plenty for Snow-Leopard and if you want a machine with more ram, just buy a Mac Pro.

They're not dropping the 20".

Okay, so say we have quad core based on your idea. People would be choosing between a 2.93GHz dual core and a 1.8GHz quad core.

Guess which one they'll choose. People still believe the Megahertz Myth, and no amount of marketing can convince them otherwise. Besides, what software takes advantage of quad cores that a consumer would use? None. It would be a waste.

[G-Force]

To answer the topic's original question: a sleep light.

[Hellhammer]

[ Besides, what software takes advantage of quad cores that a consumer would use? None. It would be a waste.

True. Very few apps support quad-core so there's no reason to get one unless you'll be using one. Gaming wise, quad-cores sucks. Games that supports quad-core can be counted with one hand's fingers.

[Edensuko]

It still amazes me how people say "imac is too thin for a desktop processor"

AFAIK the g5 imac had a g5 desktop processor, a DAMN HOT DESKTOP processor inside.

"oh but the alu ones are thinner"
Yes, but also the shell materials are thinner, the actual internal space hasnt changed that much. Besides, current desktop chips are smaller than the g5 was, consume les energy and produce less heat (if you apply thermal paste correctly that is).

I just think apple doesnt want you to keep your imac for too long as a "power user". Hence putting a mobile processor, its more expensive to buy an aftermarket one and they make it really hard to upgrade it yourself. Now they even SOLDERED the damn thing.

If the put desktop components ,except maybe the gpu, which could anyways be an MXM slot(is that the name for the swappable ones?) you the USER could upgrade the thing down the road, instead of BUYING ANOTHER imac. And buying an imac is easier than buying a Mac Pro, specially with the puny GPU they put in the entry model (come on is a PRO machine, way to put a bottleneck).

I cant blame apple, they want money after all, but most people that defend imacs with that "space-heath-Power efficiency" argument cant really believe what they say, they just want to defend their purchase and thats ok, just dont spec every one believes that crap.

[wesleyh]

Quad core and a pixel qi like LDC screen (e-paper mode)

[philipt42]

I just want one, period!
Is fall (oct/nov) a good time to buy, or should i wait until 2010?

[Hellhammer]

I just want one, period!
Is fall (oct/nov) a good time to buy, or should i wait until 2010?

Yes, unless you need the newest and fastest.

[philipt42]

Yes, unless you need the newest and fastest.

Well, i would like something that will be current for 3-5 years (well, not current, but..you know, something that won't end up like my dell did after 2 - almost pointless)

20" screen maybe, 2.66ghz - will they be below $800 US by the time the new series come out? 9they are $999 refurb on the apple site right now)

(by the way, would i be able to play age of empires 3 on it?)

wish list:

quad core
above 3ghz
blue ray
16X dvd
sub $1000 option
no laptop cpu!



?????:rolleyes:

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Well, i would like something that will be current for 3-5 years (well, not current, but..you know, something that won't end up like my dell did after 2 - almost pointless)

20" screen maybe, 2.66ghz - will they be below $800 US by the time the new series come out? 9they are $999 refurb on the apple site right now)

(by the way, would i be able to play age of empires 3 on it?)

wish list:

quad core
above 3ghz
blue ray
16X dvd
sub $1000 option
no laptop cpu!



?????:rolleyes:

1. Sure, in a year or so.

2. Already done. ;)

3. Not unless Steve leaves Apple.

4. Wait a bit. There are some, but they still take up too much space.

5. Take a trip back to 2006 or 2001 or get a used one.

6. Go back to 2005.

[Hellhammer]

Well, i would like something that will be current for 3-5 years (well, not current, but..you know, something that won't end up like my dell did after 2 - almost pointless)

20" screen maybe, 2.66ghz - will they be below $800 US by the time the new series come out? 9they are $999 refurb on the apple site right now)

(by the way, would i be able to play age of empires 3 on it?)

wish list:

quad core
above 3ghz
blue ray
16X dvd
sub $1000 option
no laptop cpu!



?????:rolleyes:

AoE3 will play OK on that Mac. Current gen low-end iMac will be 900-1000$ when new ones comes.

Quad-core desktop CPU with +3GHz clock speed is impossible and Blu-Ray + 16x ODD as well. Sorry man.

Just buy one now. Get the 2.93GHz if you can because it has better GPU

[Shake 'n' Bake]

...Quad-core desktop CPU with +3GHz clock speed is impossible...


Impossible for the iMac, but look at this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115200).

[Hellhammer]

Impossible for the iMac, but look at this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115200).

Oh, sorry I forgot to put iMac in my sentence. Of course I knew 3.33GHz Nehalems exists but they're not possible in iMacs... :rolleyes:

[iGuardian]

I just want a new design :rolleyes:

[Halamolo]

One more vote for 30" model or even BIGGER!!! :D

24" is too small! ;)

And Solid State Drives!

[iMacmatician]

Okay, so say we have quad core based on your idea. People would be choosing between a 2.93GHz dual core and a 1.8GHz quad core.

Guess which one they'll choose. People still believe the Megahertz Myth, and no amount of marketing can convince them otherwise. Besides, what software takes advantage of quad cores that a consumer would use? None. It would be a waste.I think the only ways out of that would be to either focus on Turbo Boost speeds or focus on "Core i3/i5/i7" instead of clock speeds and core counts. I'm not sure if they'll go those ways.

I'm still standing by quad-core iMacs and MacBook Pros in 2011 for now.

[queshy]

For 2010, I'd like to see the following:

1) 4 GB Ram standard
2) 500 GB HD standard. 256 SSD BTO.
3) A new mouse. The mighty mouse scroll ball sucks.
4) Upgraded iSight camera
5) Maybe a small facelift...remove part of the chin, make the machine thinner, etc.
6) LED backlit displays across the board
7) Start at $1099 instead of $1199

Reasonable?

[MrZebra]

Out of curiosity, what kind of technology revolution is needed to bring desktop chips into the iMac?

[Edensuko]

Out of curiosity, what kind of technology revolution is needed to bring desktop chips into the iMac?

None on the tech side. Tech is there, the thing is, Apple wants the iMac to be thinner every new model, but they won let a fan or a vent thats not a straight line show on the outer case, so the computer cannot cool a desktop processor. Also, since is too expensive/impossible to upgrade anything but RAM and HDD, users will buy a new iMac when they feel it doesnt gevies them what they want, instead of buying a $200 processor and a $200 gpu.

Also the fact that they want the PSU built in, which i find lame, you could do so much more innovation with that free space, and put a brick next to the wall plug like the mini does, its not like you are going to see the damn thing anyways. All that extra space could be used for proper cooling, which will allow for desktop components to be inside again. Also, it might be possible to get rid of the chin by removing the built in psu.

Of course, i still find weird how the iMac g5 had one of the hottest DESKTOP processors inside yet 4-5 years later apple wont put a smaller, cheaper, more advanced, cooler and power efficient chip inside the damn thing.

[nuckinfutz]

Out of curiosity, what kind of technology revolution is needed to bring desktop chips into the iMac?

A thicker chassis for one.

[suburbia]

imacs would so be cool again if they had flavors.

honestly, different colors would add some actual individuality to these clone trooper like computers.

-Tyler

I hope not... "Fruity" options were fine for its time, but looks extremely cheap now (remember the options that included "Flower Power", "Leopard Spots", "Psychedelic Pattern", etc? Maximum tackiness).

The only option I ask for is the option for a matte display.

[Edensuko]

I think a black, silver and MAYBE a RED product iMac would do fine on retail

[zedsdead]

I think a black, silver and MAYBE a RED product iMac would do fine on retail

They already are black and silver.

[bembol]

I have 24" AL 2.0GHz.


I was thinking of getting another one but not until they upgrade to...so I just got the 13" MacBook Pro (Standard).

30" LED

What's the RMS rating for the current iMac speakers. Like thier Earbuds included with iPod's, the iMac Speakers suck! What's the chances we get something like this? polk audio's SurroundBar. LOL

http://www.polkaudio.com/images/site/surroundbar/long-42-title.jpg

As you can see, I'm hoping for a HomeTheater iMac.

[Edensuko]

They already are black and silver.

Yes, and i said i want 3 different models, a FULL black, a FULL silver and maybe a FULL red. Only different color on it should be the apple logo.

[MacMini2009]

Are there dual core chips faster than 3.06? If so, do you think Apple would put them in the iMac?

[Edensuko]

Are there dual core chips faster than 3.06? If so, do you think Apple would put them in the iMac?

No reason why they shouldnt. However, given that the enxt intel platform (arrandale) is around the corner, i can see new imacs early on 2010 with the new chips, and i dont really know what speed those processors will have.

[Hellhammer]

Are there dual core chips faster than 3.06? If so, do you think Apple would put them in the iMac?

3.06 is the fastest mobile dual core processor available. There's 3.33GHz desktop processor (E8600) but that pulls 65W so it's too hot

No reason why they shouldnt. However, given that the enxt intel platform (arrandale) is around the corner, i can see new imacs early on 2010 with the new chips, and i dont really know what speed those processors will have.

Arrandales clock speeds are still unknown.

[jaw04005]

The iMac line is a mixed bag. It was the product line that practically saved the company in 1998, yet sales have been decreasing steadily over the last few years in favor of portables.

Almost everyone I know has a notebook computer now. In fact, I'm probably one of the few in my family/social network that even owns a desktop computer (both an iMac and Dell XPS Studio).

It some ways, the writing is on the wall for consumer desktops. If Apple is going to keep the iMac line around, it's going to need to find another purpose for it other than the "kitchen/family" computer.

The iMac tends to be popular in lab setups like college computer labs, marketing/publishing groups, etc as a replacement for the Mac Pro. However, it's going to take more than these limited environments to keep it from extinction.

Personally, I would like to see it turn into sort of mini-Mac Pro. However, that's for selfish reasons. A newly designed iMac built from the ground up with desktop processors --- what a concept. :D

[veleciraptor]

1- LED Backlit LCD with 16:9 ratio
2- 20" iMac which have a graphics card that you can play at least TETRİS!!!
3- A new design mouse (ball is always problem)
4- Better sound system
5- Lower prices!!!

[nuckinfutz]

1- LED Backlit LCD with 16:9 ratio


Why 16x9 versus 16x10? Vertical space is precious on a widescreen LCD. Why do you want to reduce it by 120 pixels?

[zmttoxics]

Needs like 4x as many usb ports, and a user replaceable hard drive. :D

[ChrisN]

I just bought the last gen iMac so I hope it is not a huge update :) but I would guess processor/gfx card bump and maybe a small design change maybe similar to LED Display.

ChrisN

[iMacmatician]

If the fall update rumor is true then I'm considering the possibility of a "special" Penryn bump like what happened in 2008, and a Nehalem update in 2010.

[NintendoFan]

I'd love to see:

Clarksfield or any QuadCore processor
LED Display
Updated Graphics (also Larrabee if it fits and is a good performer)

[Maserati7200]

I disagree with all who say the design is outdated or who hate the chin. I think this is the best looking iMac ever.

Why 16x9 versus 16x10? Vertical space is precious on a widescreen LCD. Why do you want to reduce it by 120 pixels?

+1

[Leon575]

I'm going to buy an iMac right after the next update. (It will be my first Mac ever, by the way). I'm gonna wait until this update because I don't have an urgent need for a new computer right now.

I like the current aluminium design... so I don't mind if they stick with the same design. But I guess the new iMac will look great anyway.
And LED backlight would be great.

What I'm hoping for is an 24" iMac with this configuration, for around $1800:
- 3.06Ghz Core 2 Duo
- 8GB RAM
- 1TB HDD
- ATI Radeon graphics card

[tompon1923]

A LED Display would be a really nice addition,
Better screen in the 20" model (I'm talking non TN, preferably S-IPS),
A real DEDICATED graphic card in the lower-end models.

and price cuts are also welcome

[Saternoc]

Recently my aunt's iMac screen went completely black. She took it to the apple store and they told her that it would cost her about $700.00. I started doing browsing around and found that iMac's esp. the 24 inch screens are susceptible to getting spots or lines running through their screens.
I was wondering if you knew if Apple took of this issue because I am considering purchasing a "desktop" Mac. Would I just be better off with a mac mini and a separate screen? I don't do professional photo editing or heavy gaming incase you were wondering. However I do like that the iMac has better graphics, a stronger processor, and more hard drive space.

[zedsdead]

I'm going to buy an iMac right after the next update. (It will be my first Mac ever, by the way). I'm gonna wait until this update because I don't have an urgent need for a new computer right now.

I like the current aluminium design... so I don't mind if they stick with the same design. But I guess the new iMac will look great anyway.
And LED backlight would be great.

What I'm hoping for is an 24" iMac with this configuration, for around $1800:
- 3.06Ghz Core 2 Duo
- 8GB RAM
- 1TB HDD
- ATI Radeon graphics card

The 8 gigs of RAM will not be happening for that price. It is currently a $1000 by Apple's prices ($700-800 elsewhere).

[roski11]

quad core
faster everything
more hd space
a redesign
a crap load of options on specs

[Hellhammer]

The 8 gigs of RAM will not be happening for that price. It is currently a $1000 by Apple's prices ($700-800 elsewhere).

Not now but he said he'll be waiting for next update and getting one then from refurb I think. 8Gb will be a lot cheaper then

[zedsdead]

Not now but he said he'll be waiting for next update and getting one then from refurb I think. 8Gb will be a lot cheaper then

The next update is rumored to be by the end of the year? Do you really think Apple is going to drop their RAM price by $700?

[zedsdead]

quad core
faster everything
more hd space
a redesign
a crap load of options on specs

There are no quad-core chips yet, and the Clarkdale chips won't be at high enough clock speeds for Apple to likely put them in. Arrandale is far more likely, and runs only on dual-core levels (albeit with 4 virtual cores).

A redesign is not likely, especially since Apple matched the laptops recently to match the iMac.

More HD space is likely coming, now that WD has 2 gig drives available.

A lot of options, also, not likely.

[nuckinfutz]

There are no quad-core chips yet, and the Clarkdale chips won't be at high enough clock speeds for Apple to likely put them in. Arrandale is far more likely, and runs only on dual-core levels (albeit with 4 virtual cores).




You mean Clarksfield which is shipping this qtr. And don't forget Turbo Boost Tech. It means that the 4 cores may run at 1.66Ghz together but if you only need 2 cores you will likely get something like 2.2Ghz a core.

[Zooey]

I'd probably like to see a 27" or 30" screen.

And maybe a drop in price. :D

[Tallest Skil]

I'd probably like to see a 27" or 30" screen.

And maybe a drop in price. :D

27", no. 30" is the only possibility.

[Arcadie]

What i am personally looking for:
Quad Core
28 or 30" (actually rather have a 28)
2 HD
Access door on back of mac to access the HD, similar to the bottom of laptops.
a FULL SIZED wireless keyboard!!!
LED? no OLED!

Also, am i the only one who thinks we will see an update before january? November would be great.

[Tallest Skil]

28 or 30" (actually rather have a 28)

So get a 24". They're exactly the same as the 28".

Access door on back of mac to access the HD, similar to the bottom of laptops.

Ugh... no. A side tray, like the Mac Pro.

LED? no OLED!

Okay... go ahead and spend upwards of $2,000 on JUST the display.

Also, am i the only one who thinks we will see an update before january? November would be great.

Dependent on whether they choose Clarksfield or Arrandale.

[Arcadie]

So get a 24". They're exactly the same as the 28".



Ugh... no. A side tray, like the Mac Pro.



Okay... go ahead and spend upwards of $2,000 on JUST the display.



Dependent on whether they choose Clarksfield or Arrandale.

I just figure since SL is due in september, they will announce the new macs the same time and ship early november

[Hellhammer]

The next update is rumored to be by the end of the year? Do you really think Apple is going to drop their RAM price by $700?

3rd party? Apple RAM is always the most expensive and you should never buy it from them

[Hellhammer]

I just figure since SL is due in september, they will announce the new macs the same time and ship early november

Apple doesn't release hardware when they release software... Why announce something and ship it 2 months later? Makes no sense for me because Apple doesn't tell their plans to customers. November update is possible. Maybe we will see new laptops and iMacs on same day.

[Arcadie]

Apple has done a lot of things new this year, Random no press conference releases..

I think september is too soon for apple to release a new imac update, but i do think they will want to release some time of update before xmas. Isnt that one of the reasons they no longer do keynotes at macworld?

Also, Apple could deffinatley put a quad core server class chip in the new imacs. I doubt they would want to compete with the pro line but if they put last years xeon proc designed for a 1u server, i would purchase in a hearbeat.

[iMacmatician]

You mean Clarksfield which is shipping this qtr. And don't forget Turbo Boost Tech. It means that the 4 cores may run at 1.66Ghz together but if you only need 2 cores you will likely get something like 2.2Ghz a core.Turbo Boost for 1.6 GHz goes up to 2.8 GHz although that may be for 1 core.

Dependent on whether they choose Clarksfield or Arrandale.Or a speed bumped Penryn.

[zedsdead]

Turbo Boost for 1.6 GHz goes up to 2.8 GHz although that may be for 1 core.

Or a speed bumped Penryn.

Im expecting the end of the year update to be either a simple price reduction, or a speed bumped Penryn upgrade. Nothing major until Arrandale.

Trust me, I want Quad-Core chips, but I don't think Apple is ready yet, not with the current clock speeds. Unless Snow Leopard will make excellent use of the extra cores, I can't see Clarksdale coming to the iMac.

The Turbo Boost does sound interesting though, I wasn't aware of that.

[nuckinfutz]

Im expecting the end of the year update to be either a simple price reduction, or a speed bumped Penryn upgrade. Nothing major until Arrandale.

Trust me, I want Quad-Core chips, but I don't think Apple is ready yet, not with the current clock speeds. Unless Snow Leopard will make excellent use of the extra cores, I can't see Clarksdale coming to the iMac.

The Turbo Boost does sound interesting though, I wasn't aware of that.

Snow Leopard will make good use of the core zed but it's the heat that's killing Clarksfield's chances. 45 watts TDP estimated for Clarksfield is 10 watts higher than Apple's hottest processor (3.06Ghz).

Looks like we may have to wait for 32nm parts.

[iMacmatician]

Snow Leopard will make good use of the core zed but it's the heat that's killing Clarksfield's chances. 45 watts TDP estimated for Clarksfield is 10 watts higher than Apple's hottest processor (3.06Ghz). 45 W Clarksfield = 35 W Penryn since Clarksfield integrates the northbridge. Plus the 24" iMac can hold up to 55 W (Penryn). Clarksfield looks less good in the MacBook Pro though.

[martynmc7]

After the 13" MacBook Pro's I can almost guarantee we'll get SD card slots in the next generation of iMacs.

[nuckinfutz]

45 W Clarksfield = 35 W Penryn since Clarksfield integrates the northbridge. Plus the 24" iMac can hold up to 55 W (Penryn). Clarksfield looks less good in the MacBook Pro though.

<forehead smack>

I continue to overlook that fact though with the Penryn don't we still have an integated Northbridge with the 9400m chipset? The Nvidia is a 2 chips solution just like upcoming P55 Intel chipsets IIRC.

[Buzz Bumble]

The return of a proper keyboard! That piddly one without a number pad that they are shipping with the iMacs these days just looks plain silly in front of a 24" iMac! :( I know you can swap it online, but not from regualr stores. Apple should have made the option work the other way.

[zedsdead]

The return of a proper keyboard! That piddly one without a number pad that they are shipping with the iMacs these days just looks plain silly in front of a 24" iMac! :( I know you can swap it online, but not from regualr stores. Apple should have made the option work the other way.

They need a keyboard that doesn't have White keys that doesn't match anything but the Mini. The keys should be backlit, black, and have a glass trackpad.

[bking1000]

Matte Screen.

Oh, and the full keyboard (with num pad)

That's all I need.

[Hellhammer]

A new Mighty Mouse is welcome. Played with CS4 and here's the result:

The button in right is for volume, it sucks though, didn't have time to make it better. Tried to do 2 individual buttons but as you see, it was too hard. Also I added some buttons near the ball but it was ugly.

[amt2002]

I will not upgrade my 24" Alu iMac until such Apple provide me with:

- an SSD drive
- a quad core cpu

I'd LOVE a 30" version, and personally believe it will happen, maybe along with a 2011 design refresh. I think the new design will be similar to that of the 24" LED screen (aluminium back, no ugly chin).

[Buzz Bumble]

They need a keyboard that doesn't have White keys that doesn't match anything but the Mini. The keys should be backlit, black, and have a glass trackpad.

Yep, I second the need for a black and aluminium keyboard. The white one no longer matches the iMacs nor the Mac Books (except the cheapest). Plus the white keyboards can get very dirty very quickly.

[Irishman]

I'd take the same 24" screen size, just make the native resolution 1920 X1080 (at least), AND LED back-lit.

Add a Blu-Ray Drive (recording AND playing BD-ROMs).

Back several generations ago, Apple built a Mac that had built-in digital audio out. I'd return that, and bump it up to 5.1 Digital Surround (Dolby Digital and DTS).

Have a user-replaceable graphics card (I know. I can dream. But one of these days, Apple WILL build a true gaming Mac!)

The same tactile feedback Apple had on their in-house keyboards from 1997 (the golden age of Apple keyboards in my view!)

1.5 TB Hard Drive (in the high-end)
DDR5 in their upgrade video card option in the store
6GB RAM standard in the high-end
3.2 GHz C2D procs in the high-end
ATI Radeon 4870HD (or better that has 1 TB GDDR5)

Given time, I could add more, but that will do for now.

[zedsdead]

I'd take the same 24" screen size, just make the native resolution 1920 X1080 (at least), AND LED back-lit.

Add a Blu-Ray Drive (recording AND playing BD-ROMs).

Back several generations ago, Apple built a Mac that had built-in digital audio out. I'd return that, and bump it up to 5.1 Digital Surround (Dolby Digital and DTS).

Have a user-replaceable graphics card (I know. I can dream. But one of these days, Apple WILL build a true gaming Mac!)

The same tactile feedback Apple had on their in-house keyboards from 1997 (the golden age of Apple keyboards in my view!)

1.5 TB Hard Drive (in the high-end)
DDR5 in their upgrade video card option in the store
6GB RAM standard in the high-end
3.2 GHz C2D procs in the high-end
ATI Radeon 4870HD (or better that has 1 TB GDDR5)

Given time, I could add more, but that will do for now.

The 24" inch has a resolution of 1920x1200 already...can't believe they did add LED yet considering they already have the panels.

it will never have a user replaceable graphics card...lol...keep dreaming

Hard drive is possible, maybe even 2.0 TB, both are already available...I prefer SSD though, unless Apple adds the ability to drop the optical for a second media hard drive or something similar.

As for clock speed, I think the Arrandales will be lower, but they will preform better, so I don't think a 3.2 is happening, unless they stick with Penryn.

Blu-Ray ain't happening.

As for the video cards, I hope Apple does something that good, but I am not holding my breath.

Because of these things, I likely will go Mac Pro next time.

[nuckinfutz]

I'd take the same 24" screen size, just make the native resolution 1920 X1080 (at least), AND LED back-lit.

Add a Blu-Ray Drive (recording AND playing BD-ROMs).

Back several generations ago, Apple built a Mac that had built-in digital audio out. I'd return that, and bump it up to 5.1 Digital Surround (Dolby Digital and DTS).

Have a user-replaceable graphics card (I know. I can dream. But one of these days, Apple WILL build a true gaming Mac!)

The same tactile feedback Apple had on their in-house keyboards from 1997 (the golden age of Apple keyboards in my view!)

1.5 TB Hard Drive (in the high-end)
DDR5 in their upgrade video card option in the store
6GB RAM standard in the high-end
3.2 GHz C2D procs in the high-end
ATI Radeon 4870HD (or better that has 1 TB GDDR5)

Given time, I could add more, but that will do for now.

Why reduce the native resolution?
LED is a given. All LCD need to move towards LED backlighting.
Blu-ray is only interesting to me if it's a recording drive.
I don't care about 5.1 outputs on my Mac so long as I can send the signal to a Apple TV or some playback device that's HDMI enabled.

I'd love to see a keyboard with a trackpad like the Unibody Macs.

[zedsdead]

Why reduce the native resolution?
LED is a given. All LCD need to move towards LED backlighting.
Blu-ray is only interesting to me if it's a recording drive.
I don't care about 5.1 outputs on my Mac so long as I can send the signal to a Apple TV or some playback device that's HDMI enabled.

I'd love to see a keyboard with a trackpad like the Unibody Macs.

LED was given last time...not sure what happened.;)

Also, the chin is not going anywhere. There would be no room for the components (not that I wouldn't mind it leaving).

[Irishman]

Why 16x9 versus 16x10? Vertical space is precious on a widescreen LCD. Why do you want to reduce it by 120 pixels?

16 x 9 is an industry standard that will allow playback of HD video content at fullscreen (especially if the resolution is 1920x1080 or better).

16x10 is just....nothing. There's no reason to create something that noone else is doing like that.

[Irishman]

Why reduce the native resolution?
LED is a given. All LCD need to move towards LED backlighting.
Blu-ray is only interesting to me if it's a recording drive.
I don't care about 5.1 outputs on my Mac so long as I can send the signal to a Apple TV or some playback device that's HDMI enabled.

I'd love to see a keyboard with a trackpad like the Unibody Macs.

Then let's add HDMI to the list. Also, make that $35 bracket adapter for wall-mounts a BTO option instead of something you order separately. With as much trouble as ppl have been having with it, let Apple do the heavy lifting there.

Anyone use Firewave for DD audio in their Mac? I hear it's the only way, short of outputting to your AVR.

[nuckinfutz]

16 x 9 is an industry standard that will allow playback of HD video content at fullscreen (especially if the resolution is 1920x1080 or better).

16x10 is just....nothing. There's no reason to create something that noone else is doing like that.


16x9 isn't industry standard for computers though. Vertical height is very important. I don't see why it makes sense to reduce vertical height to make your screen look like a HDTV.

Then let's add HDMI to the list. Also, make that $35 bracket adapter for wall-mounts a BTO option instead of something you order separately. With as much trouble as ppl have been having with it, let Apple do the heavy lifting there.

Anyone use Firewave for DD audio in their Mac? I hear it's the only way, short of outputting to your AVR.


HDMI is a no go. They don't allow HDMI in AIO configs like iMacs.

Source:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/E/6/5E66B27B-988B-4F50-AF3A-C2FF1E62180F/GRA-T583_WH08.pptx

Slide 5

[Irishman]

Explain just how Microsloth can prevent HDMI ports from being installed on Apple computers?

About 16x9 being a standard for video and why should you want it on your Mac? Because no Mac is an island, and with more and more convergence happening (i.e. iPod video playing back through a dock in a 32" LCD HDTV, or Apple TV playing back 720p video in 16x9 format on your HDTV, or a Slingbox wirelessly streaming DirecTV content to your lappy toppy, it makes more sense than ever).

Lots of us want to be able to bring all of our various technologies together to play nice and standards help us do that.

[rkdiddy]

Ah the good ole turbo boost button. Brings me back to my OG computer - that baby put down 8mhz and a whooping 16mhz :eek: with the turbo button engaged. Ah the memories.

My list would be:

LED backlit panel (thinner overall unit)
Audio plug out to for sub (matching sub option)
Black/aluminum keyboard/mouse w/ ball track you can pull out easily
Matte display option

[Irishman]

Ah the good ole turbo boost button. Brings me back to my OG computer - that baby put down 8mhz and a whooping 16mhz :eek: with the turbo button engaged. Ah the memories.

My list would be:

LED backlit panel (thinner overall unit)
Audio plug out to for sub (matching sub option)
Black/aluminum keyboard/mouse w/ ball track you can pull out easily
Matte display option

Did CoreAudio ever add a LFE output for a sub? If not, I'm not sure how you'd accomplish this.

[Buzz Bumble]

Opps! I forgot. Alongside the black keyboard you'll of course need a black mouse. :)

[MacMini2009]

If Apple releases a new Mighty Mouse with a scrollwheel like the MX revolution, I'm buying.

[Irishman]

Since we're playing the fun, "what if?" game, how about this:

Would you buy a Mac with these specs?

2.93 Quad-Core Nehalem
6 GB DDR3 1333
1 TB 7200RPM SATA-2 (32MB cache)
6x Blu-ray burner/playback
GeForce 9800 (512MB)
Wireless N
Bluetooth
Firewire (3 ports - 800 and 400)
1 free optical bay
3 additional hard drive bays

(No monitor BTW)

All for $2702

[Leon575]

16 x 9 is an industry standard that will allow playback of HD video content at fullscreen (especially if the resolution is 1920x1080 or better).

16x10 is just....nothing. There's no reason to create something that noone else is doing like that.

On a computer, 16:10 (1920x1200) is more desirable than 16:9 (1920x1080). FullHD-video fits inside 1920x1200 anyway. You'll just get thicker black bars on top and bottom.

[zmttoxics]

Since we're playing the fun, "what if?" game, how about this:

Would you buy a Mac with these specs?

2.93 Quad-Core Nehalem
6 GB DDR3 1333
1 TB 7200RPM SATA-2 (32MB cache)
6x Blu-ray burner/playback
GeForce 9800 (512MB)
Wireless N
Bluetooth
Firewire (3 ports - 800 and 400)
1 free optical bay
3 additional hard drive bays

(No monitor BTW)

All for $2702

Why the 9800? What a lame choice for a dream computer. The GTX260M is out now I believe which would rip the 9800 (basically an 8800) apart.

[Tallest Skil]

16x10 is just....nothing. There's no reason to create something that noone else is doing like that.

Except 16:10 is the industry standard for computers.

On a computer, 16:10 (1920x1200) is more desirable than 16:9 (1920x1080). FullHD-video fits inside 1920x1200 anyway. You'll just get thicker black bars on top and bottom.

What content is 1920x1080, anyway? All movies are 2.39:1, anyway, so even on a 1920x1080 screen there will be black bars.

Give up, 16:9 crowd; no one wants your screens for their computers.

[Irishman]

On a computer, 16:10 (1920x1200) is more desirable than 16:9 (1920x1080). FullHD-video fits inside 1920x1200 anyway. You'll just get thicker black bars on top and bottom.

Well, let me come at it a different way.

With all the huge amounts of 16x9 HDTV LCD displays being made now, the economics of continuing to support 16x10 just because "we always have" is harder to defend.

It's cheaper to make a comparable 16x9 panel than a 16x10 panel. And it's only going to get more so as more ppl buy HDTVs.

[Irishman]

Except 16:10 is the industry standard for computers.



What content is 1920x1080, anyway? All movies are 2.39:1, anyway, so even on a 1920x1080 screen there will be black bars.

Give up, 16:9 crowd; no one wants your screens for their computers.

1920 X1080 is a full HD display. You know this. Don't play ignorant. All movies are not 2.39:1 either. You're just plain wrong there. There has been no standard for film. That's why so many films look so different on any monitor (not just 16x9. There are black bars on any pc monitor display OAR film content).

[Irishman]

Why the 9800? What a lame choice for a dream computer. The GTX260M is out now I believe which would rip the 9800 (basically an 8800) apart.

So? I did mine as a what if? You're ripping my card choice apart because you think it's lame? Did I say it was a dream computer? If it were, I'd at least doubled the RAM, added 3 more terabyte drives.

Come on. Calm down dude.

[Tallest Skil]

1920 X1080 is a full HD display. You know this. Don't play ignorant. All movies are not 2.39:1 either. You're just plain wrong there. There has been no standard for film. That's why so many films look so different on any monitor (not just 16x9. There are black bars on any pc monitor display OAR film content).

EDIT your posts instead of triple-posting. ;)

Define "full" HD. Do it. Where did I say that it wasn't an HD display? Where did I say anything about HD?

Movies from the major studios are released in 2.39:1. Television shows are generally 16:9.

So? I did mine as a what if? You're ripping my card choice apart because you think it's lame? Did I say it was a dream computer? If it were, I'd at least doubled the RAM, added 3 more terabyte drives.

Come on. Calm down dude.

You said the "what-if" game and then you post ludicrous specs with a two year old graphics card. Your choice of card is going to be called into question.

[zedsdead]

EDIT your posts instead of triple-posting. ;)

Define "full" HD. Do it. Where did I say that it wasn't an HD display? Where did I say anything about HD?

Movies from the major studios are released in 2.39:1. Television shows are generally 16:9.

It has nothing to do with major studios. Movies from studios are both 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 (which is reality is really 2.40:1, though people still refer to it otherwise. Then there are odd ratios every now and then, but those are the major two. To compare, 16x9= 1.78:1.

I hope Apple sticks with 16x10. I use that vertical space well.

[NSWMaps]

New mighty mouse please!
(sob)

[Tallest Skil]

It has nothing to do with major studios. Movies from studios are both 1.85:1 or 2.39:1 (which is reality is really 2.40:1, though people still refer to it otherwise. Then there are odd ratios every now and then, but those are the major two. To compare, 16x9= 1.78:1.

I hope Apple sticks with 16x10. I use that vertical space well.

Okay, thanks; I knew they used a slew of formats.

But see? Those would BOTH still have black bars on a 16:9 screen, so could the pundits thereof just clam it and let us have our extra screen space?:D

[iMacmatician]

But see? Those would BOTH still have black bars on a 16:9 screen, so could the pundits thereof just clam it and let us have our extra screen space?:DIsn't the 16:9 resolution one down from 1920x1080, 1600x900?

So if Apple went to 16:9 we'd have resolution drops in both models (although probably larger displays), or maybe they'll just go all one display size and 1920x1080 (probably not).

[GodWhomIsMike]

Since we're playing the fun, "what if?" game, how about this:

Would you buy a Mac with these specs?

2.93 Quad-Core Nehalem
6 GB DDR3 1333
1 TB 7200RPM SATA-2 (32MB cache)
6x Blu-ray burner/playback
GeForce 9800 (512MB)
Wireless N
Bluetooth
Firewire (3 ports - 800 and 400)
1 free optical bay
3 additional hard drive bays

(No monitor BTW)

All for $2702

9800 is already an outdated video card. The 200-series is the current generation. The Mac you list is something people can already get from Apple (Mac Pro).

[Tallest Skil]

Isn't the 16:9 resolution one down from 1920x1080, 1600x900?

So if Apple went to 16:9 we'd have resolution drops in both models (although probably larger displays), or maybe they'll just go all one display size and 1920x1080 (probably not).

Nope.

16:9 is 1920x1080.
16:10 is 1920x1200. That's what we have now.

Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vector_Video_Standards2.svg) a nice chart, but...

Why can't Safari open SVG files properly?! I can't scroll this thing! Wait... I can hold down the mouse and scroll? That's dumb.

[GodWhomIsMike]

9800 is already an outdated video card. The 200-series is the current generation. The Mac you list is something people can already get from Apple (Mac Pro).


$2704:
2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
6GB (3x2GB) DDR3
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
18x SuperDrive

[nuckinfutz]

Black bars with regard to watching movies in inevitable.

Not a fan of losing vertical space to appease HDTV makers. My computer is a computer I have a 32" for watching movies.

I'd love to see a 26" IPS iMac.

[Tallest Skil]

Black bars with regard to watching movies in inevitable.

Not a fan of losing vertical space to appease HDTV makers. My computer is a computer I have a 32" for watching movies.

I'd love to see a 26" IPS iMac.

You mean 30", right? 26" is the same as 24".

[nuckinfutz]

You mean 30", right? 26" is the same as 24".

No in this case I think even a 1980x1200 26" iMac would be a nice step up. And the 26" panel size is more popular than the cheaper (and lower quality) 28" panels that you see.

I realize there's no resolution increase but "size does matter" for some :apple:

[Leon575]

Isn't the 16:9 resolution one down from 1920x1080, 1600x900?

So if Apple went to 16:9 we'd have resolution drops in both models (although probably larger displays), or maybe they'll just go all one display size and 1920x1080 (probably not).

16:9 is aspect ratio... not resolution. 1920x1200 pixels for instance happens to be aspect ratio 16:10. Width:height.

[zmttoxics]

So? I did mine as a what if? You're ripping my card choice apart because you think it's lame? Did I say it was a dream computer? If it were, I'd at least doubled the RAM, added 3 more terabyte drives.

Come on. Calm down dude.

4 disks and a 3 year old video card in an iMac, that just seems like a whole mess of wrong. Or did you froget this was the wanted changes for the 2010 iMac?

[iMacmatician]

16:9 is aspect ratio... not resolution. 1920x1200 pixels for instance happens to be aspect ratio 16:10. Width:height.I don't think I phrased it right, "For 16:9, is 1600x900 one step down from 1920x1080?" is better.

[Irishman]

4 disks and a 3 year old video card in an iMac, that just seems like a whole mess of wrong. Or did you froget this was the wanted changes for the 2010 iMac?

I dare you to do better.

[Irishman]

EDIT your posts instead of triple-posting. ;)

Define "full" HD. Do it. Where did I say that it wasn't an HD display? Where did I say anything about HD?

Movies from the major studios are released in 2.39:1. Television shows are generally 16:9.



You said the "what-if" game and then you post ludicrous specs with a two year old graphics card. Your choice of card is going to be called into question.

Feel free to take me to task for anything I post. Just don't be a douche about it.

[Irishman]

Okay, thanks; I knew they used a slew of formats.

But see? Those would BOTH still have black bars on a 16:9 screen, so could the pundits thereof just clam it and let us have our extra screen space?:D

You knew it but said otherwise in a vitriolic post? That makes you dishonest at best, a jerk at worst.

[Irishman]

$2704:
2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
6GB (3x2GB) DDR3
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB
18x SuperDrive

Thanks for your constructive participation! That looks much better than mine. Did you mean to leave out the blu-ray?

[MattSepeta]

I bring my iMac home on the weekends in its original box, and I have cut my hands/fingers MULTIPLE times putting it into the styrofoam holder thingy.

These razor sharp edges have gotta go.

Also, black-keyed keyboard would make much more sense. Backlit would be nice too.

[Pagga]

I guess we're about half way to a new iMac release, so what would you like changed or improved in iMac 2010?

Here's my list:

- LED Backlit LCD Panels,
- 30" Model,
- Quad Core Processors,
- Faster Onboard nVidia Graphics,
- >1TB HD Options,
- Updated Mighty Mouse,
- Black keyed / backlit Keyboard,
- Aluminium Build - File the sharp edges.

That's my wishes please Mr :apple:

I can subscribe to this. But I would also like it to be alot lighter and slightly thinner - if poss ...


P

[anti-microsoft]

I can subscribe to this. But I would also like it to be alot lighter and slightly thinner - if poss ...


P

iMac Air...:D

Ams.

[MacAndy74]

I hope the next iMac has ATI 4890. I don't think I've suggested that before.

Either way, I really am quite excited to see what Apple have in store for the 2010 model. I should be ready to buy by about March 2010. :o

[MorphingDragon]

As much as I loathe nVidia, They're making Mobile versions of the GTX26X and above which run cooler than than before and equivalent ATi chip. Now if only their drivers worked. :rolleyes:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_gtx_gts_m_series.html#/features/

and...

As much as I loathe Intel, the iX series look pretty good. I wonder if they are good enough to break my love of AMD. :o (AMD is my childhood friend... ahh nostalgia)

If these were included it would be awesome. Oh and BR-D RW as I use them more often and my external drive annoys me.

[veleciraptor]

Summary (Everbody wants these)

Powerfull dedicated GPU in every model
Updated Mighty Mouse (Ball)
LED backlit display
More USB ports (also E-Sata)

[iMacmatician]

I just realized I (don't think I) have put up my wishlist, so here it is:

2-core (Arrandale) and 4-core (Clarksfield) variants
New GPUs
28" or similar high-end model
Easy-open case
Lower base price

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I just realized I (don't think I) have put up my wishlist, so here it is:

2-core (Arrandale) and 4-core (Clarksfield) variants
New GPUs
28" or similar high-end model
Easy-open case
Lower base price

All of us want an EZ-Open case, but Steve likes his computers to be appliances; it never really needs maintenance, it works every time till it dies, and it is generally not user-serviceable.

[ezekielrage_99]

I want to see:
- Dual Quad Core
- 6GB RAM
- 4X HDD in RAID 0/1
- Dedicated nVidia cards in SLI
- Memory card readers
- a 30" LCD

I would really like to see it come under the $2500 mark because if Dell can do Apple should be able to match it.

[MacMini2009]

I just realized I (don't think I) have put up my wishlist, so here it is:

2-core (Arrandale) and 4-core (Clarksfield) variants
New GPUs
28" or similar high-end model
Easy-open case
Lower base price

Plus a blacklit/black keyboard and a mouse with a scrollwheel like the MX Revolution.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I want to see:
- Dual Quad Core
- 6GB RAM
- 4X HDD in RAID 0/1
- Dedicated nVidia cards in SLI
- Memory card readers
- a 30" LCD

I would really like to see it come under the $2500 mark because if Dell can do Apple should be able to match it.

That's the Mac Pro. All that needs to be added is SLi. Get an external media card reader. When integrated, they become obsolete and they're ugly.

The price does need to come down.

[iMacmatician]

All of us want an EZ-Open case, but Steve likes his computers to be appliances; it never really needs maintenance, it works every time till it dies, and it is generally not user-serviceable.Which is why it's on my wishlist and not a prediction. :(

[Tallest Skil]

Feel free to take me to task for anything I post. Just don't be a douche about it.

That's your defense, eh?

Did you mean to leave out the blu-ray?

No, he has some sense of reality about him.

[alent1234]

i wish i could get a nice graphics card on the entry level imac. better than 9400M. No way i'm paying $2000 for a computer unless it's a MBP or a PC with 2 high end video cards

[Hellhammer]

2 x Intel Teraflops (80-core 3.2GHz)
64GB DDR5
4 x 1TB SSD
2 x nVidia GTX295 in SLi
64x Blu-Ray SuperDrive
30" LED display
10Mpex iSight
5.1 Surround speakers
4 x FireWire 3200
2 x eSATA
2 x HDMI

Starting at 999$

Sounds reasonable, right?

[ezekielrage_99]

2 x Intel Teraflops (80-core 3.2GHz)
64GB DDR5
4 x 1TB SSD
2 x nVidia GTX295 in SLi
64x Blu-Ray SuperDrive
30" LED display
10Mpex iSight
5.1 Surround speakers
4 x FireWire 3200
2 x eSATA
2 x HDMI

Starting at 999$

Sounds reasonable, right?

But if it's speced like that there would be room for only 2XUSBs...

[amt2002]

I'm going to revise what I said before. I shall only upgrade my 24" iMac when the following happens (I predict this will come when a new model is launched at the end of 2011 - and certainly not before):

- 30" screen
- SSD drive with with more than 256GB

As for graphics / cpus / LED screens etc - don't mind honestly!

If the new model comes out without this stuff then I'll probably splash out on a 30" ACD with Mac Pro, though I'd far prefer an all-in-one please!

[Jabbamk1]

20 inch model
______________________
2.8/2.93/3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo
4GB Memory
640GB Hard Drive
Nvidia GTS 250
Mac OS X 10.6

24 inch model
___________________
2.66GHZ-2.93GHz Core 2 Quad
4GB-8GB Memory
1-1.5TB HD
Nvidia GTX 260
Mac OS X 10.6

Never gonna happen :p

[Tallest Skil]

2010 iMac:

20"/24"
Arrandale (clocks unknown)
SuperDrive
500GB HDD standard, 640 and 1TB on higher models
Integrated graphics for 20" and low 24", GeForce 250M in the higher models with the 260M as an option for the high-end 24"
4GB standard (6GB on high-end 24"?)
Ports the same, design very probably the same.

[zedsdead]

2010 iMac:

20"/24"
Arrandale (clocks unknown)
SuperDrive
500GB HDD standard, 640 and 1TB on higher models
Integrated graphics for 20" and low 24", GeForce 250M in the higher models with the 260M as an option for the high-end 24"
4GB standard (6GB on high-end 24"?)
Ports the same, design very probably the same.

You don't think Apple is going to finally offer the 1.5 or 2 tb drives that are around? I think it's time...surprised they actually didn't already.

As for the graphics, if the Intel integrated suck like they likely will, I can't see Apple taking a performance dip. They may go to all integrated again.

I agree with most of this though, the update will not be substantial. I really would like to see LED and SSD's, but not expecting it yet.

[iMacmatician]

2010 iMac:

20"/24"
Arrandale (clocks unknown)
SuperDrive
500GB HDD standard, 640 and 1TB on higher models
Integrated graphics for 20" and low 24", GeForce 250M in the higher models with the 260M as an option for the high-end 24"
4GB standard (6GB on high-end 24"?)
Ports the same, design very probably the same.Sounds reasonable to me.

Fall 2009 iMac:
20"/24"
Price drop
Penryn (up to 3.33 GHz?)
SuperDrive
Same HDD sizes
Same GPUs (new 2x0 GPUs?)
4 GB standard
Everything else the same, maybe SD card?

You don't think Apple is going to finally offer the 1.5 or 2 tb drives that are around? I think it's time...surprised they actually didn't already.Probably as a BTO.

[Tallest Skil]

You don't think Apple is going to finally offer the 1.5 or 2 tb drives that are around? I think it's time...surprised they actually didn't already.

I believe that Apple is ignoring all 1.5TB drives because of the Seagate fiasco. If they weren't, the Nehalem Mac Pro would have had them.

The 1.5 would have been the perfect point for the highest-end drive, but since they're ignoring those, they won't go with the 2TB.

Besides, they can't do anything larger than 1TB until the Time Capsule is updated. What kind of operation would they be running if you could have more content than you could back up?

[alent1234]

You don't think Apple is going to finally offer the 1.5 or 2 tb drives that are around? I think it's time...surprised they actually didn't already.

As for the graphics, if the Intel integrated suck like they likely will, I can't see Apple taking a performance dip. They may go to all integrated again.

I agree with most of this though, the update will not be substantial. I really would like to see LED and SSD's, but not expecting it yet.


iMac is laptop internals and the large drives are desktop sizes

[zedsdead]

iMac is laptop internals and the large drives are desktop sizes

I am well aware. Doesn't mean I don't want an SSD option. And the 1.5 and 2 tb drives are 3.5 SATA drives, which is what fit in the iMac.

[Tallest Skil]

iMac is laptop internals and the large drives are desktop sizes

The iMac has always used 3.5" drives. How else do you think they got a terabyte in there?

[Jabbamk1]

Do you think apple will use the GeForce 250M + in the next iMac refresh or will they have the GT130/140.

[Hellhammer]

Do you think apple will use the GeForce 250M + in the next iMac refresh or will they have the GT130/140.

At least I think so but it wouldn't surprise me if it's renamed to GT140/GT150

[Shake 'n' Bake]

At least I think so but it wouldn't surprise me if it's renamed to GT140/GT150

I agree. Why do they change the names on the graphics cards? Jut to make it harder to compare?

[Hellhammer]

I agree. Why do they change the names on the graphics cards? Jut to make it harder to compare?

I don't really know but it sucks. Maybe there are few small differences so they want to call it what they want

[Shake 'n' Bake]

The only differences I can see is a Mac BIOS and drivers.

Oh well.

[Jabbamk1]

The GT 1xx series were renamed by nvidia all they are are the 9xxx series.

G100- 9400GT
G120- 9500GT
GT130-9600GS
GT140-9600? (does this exist)
GTS150-9800GT

[Hellhammer]

The GT 1xx series were renamed by nvidia all they are are the 9xxx series.

G100- 9400GT
G120- 9500GT
GT130-9600GS
GT140-9600? (does this exist)
GTS150-9800GT

and 9xxx series is basically just renamed 8xxx series...

[alent1234]

and to top it off, Nvidia does the same thing as Intel. They produce high end chips and then disable circuitry and sell it at lower prices.

All Intel desktop CPU's are essentially Xeon's with circuitry disabled to sell them at reduced prices and to sell Xeon's at higher prices.

[munkees]

and to top it off, Nvidia does the same thing as Intel. They produce high end chips and then disable circuitry and sell it at lower prices.

All Intel desktop CPU's are essentially Xeon's with circuitry disabled to sell them at reduced prices and to sell Xeon's at higher prices.

they did that with the 486SX, basically a failed DX chip in production, so they would sell them off as sx, They also do it with clock speed, those chips that fail at higher speed are sold as slower speed.

[Shiner]

Drop the entire pathetic iMac line and offer a real desktop that is a small form factor case (not mini size) and new gorgeous screens. Who gives a crap if the computer is in the screen if the damn computer is slow and outdated. The iMac was cool for its time but I hope apple adds a real desktop sometime!!!

[colourfastt]

Drop the entire pathetic iMac line and offer a real desktop that is a small form factor case (not mini size) and new gorgeous screens. Who gives a crap if the computer is in the screen if the damn computer is slow and outdated. The iMac was cool for its time but I hope apple adds a real desktop sometime!!!

If you don't like the iMac as a desktop system buy a Mac Pro.

[alent1234]

If you don't like the iMac as a desktop system buy a Mac Pro.


some of us want a desktop with desktop parts. it's more powerful than the laptop parts that the iMac's are mostly made of and a lot of us don't need an expensive workstation like the Mac Pro

[eelpout]

Apple seems to have little interest in satisfying we who would prefer a more standard desktop box when the Apple-shippers are buying iMac's in droves. This way they force people to upgrade their computer more often too as the non-upgradeable iMac goes out of date very quickly. Their marketing people may be a lot of things, but stupid isn't one of them.

For me, since Apple has become yet another PC clone maker (after the Intel switch), it's all about the OS. And one can't get run their OS without the hardware (Hackintosh aside) so you're stuck with Apple's scatter-shot, inflated price boxes. I wish they'd start offering the OS on its own and not tie it to hardware, but that's not going to happen either.

[nuckinfutz]

The iMac is a fine computer .

I just think there needs to be a $1999 Mac Pro.


The iMac makes for a very clean setup with great OoBE.

[bbydon]

THE KEYBOARD so that it has a keypad by default.

[bbydon]

A 30 inch version would be great!