Next-Generation iMacs to See Price Cuts?

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/26/next-generation-imacs-to-see-price-cuts/)

AppleInsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/06/26/briefly_more_affordable_imacs_from_apple_expected_by_fall.html) that Apple is considering dropping the price points for its iMac line alongside the introduction of next-generation models later this year. The cuts, which Apple is rumored to be considering in the 7-10% range, would be in line with the significant price cuts seen in Apple's latest notebook offerings introduced earlier this month at its Worldwide Developers Conference.iMacs were just recently refreshed in March but will see another update by fall, at which time they'll also be repositioned as more affordable offerings. Apple is reportedly mulling similar 7% - 10% price reductions alongside the introduction of those models, people familiar with the company's thinking say.AppleInsider had reported in late April (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/04/30/apple-to-introduce-cheaper-macs/) that Apple was considering price cuts for its Mac lineup, targeting the MacBook and iMac as likely candidates for the new pricing. While the MacBook price cuts did come to fruition as part of the broader notebook price drops and reorganization, the iMac has yet to see any such changes.

Article Link: Next-Generation iMacs to See Price Cuts? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/26/next-generation-imacs-to-see-price-cuts/)

[ceezy3000]

i would think so after all the price of the MBP's have dropped

[Ricanlegend]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

[corinhorn]

Hopefully the prices will drop a bit. I will want to get the new iPod touch in addition to a new iMac. A lower iMac price would make this possible.

[techfreak85]

and by "cuts" they meen: cut and replace the bottom model with the mid model, slide the rest down(etc), introduce a new model at the old highest price.:rolleyes:

we are not going to get anything for less then 1199 and say
hardly price cuts

[zedsdead]

I can see this happening. Same basic specs for the most part, $100 less.

[gkarris]

No Core i7 then, or perhaps low-end ones... ;)

[techfreak85]

No Core i7 then, or perhaps low-end ones... ;)
nope its still possible. read my above post

[syklee26]

what they should do is not just the price cuts at the cheapest level but elimination of 20 inches and start with 24 inches. and I would appreciate 27 or 30 inch model too.

24 inches
4GB RAM
2.53ghz C2D
500GB HD
Nvidia 9400m
Superdrive

$1,099

[SilentCrs]

No matter what Apple does, people on the MacForums iMac board will still complain about color gamut and light bleed. :P "This consumer Mac doesn't meet the standards of the professional machine I should've spent my money on. Oh noes!!!"

[iGuardian]

Hopefully price cuts will make it hard for Microsoft's ad team to make another Lauran ad.

[Eddy Munn]

A 32-Incher glossy iMac, Yeah, could and should happen!

[wolfshades]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

*hangs head*

Yes.

[Le Big Mac]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

I was torn, but decided that lugging around a 24" notebook didn't really cut it.

[mdriftmeyer]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

99.99% of my time. I can't stomach laptops. Then again I don't need to walk around the globe with a laptop as an appendage.

[ayzee]

iMacs are brilliant, but ridiculously overpriced. I almost feel ashamed when someone asks me how much i paid for mine

[cocky jeremy]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Why wouldn't we? 24" compared to 17" of the biggest MacBook Pro.

[QCassidy352]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

But of course. More power and a bigger screen for the same or equal money. Unless you put an (expensive) SSD in a notebook, the 3.5" 7200 rpm HD in an imac will, by itself, make it a faster machine than a notebook. Macworld's benchmarks show a $1200 2.66 ghz imac with nvidea 9400 benchmarking higher (overall - not in games, obviously) than a $2300 macbook pro. Desktops also run cooler and quieter than laptops, by a lot, and that makes a big difference to me.

[iMacmatician]

iMacs were just recently refreshed in March but will see another update by fallI'm a bit surprised it's this soon, they could see CPU bumps but unless Apple goes with quad-core (or "special" CPUs), I'm thinking it'll be similar CPU speeds, lower prices.

We might see Clarksfield if we're lucky.

[manu chao]

i would think so, after all, the price of the MBP's have dropped
I had started reading it as: 'I would think so after all the price [drops] of the MBPs' when I realized that the sentence does not finish like this and I had start afresh.

[ayzee]

But of course. More power and a bigger screen for the same or equal money. Unless you put an (expensive) SSD in a notebook, the 3.5" 7200 rpm HD in an imac will, by itself, make it a faster machine than a notebook. Macworld's benchmarks show a $1200 2.66 ghz imac with nvidea 9400 benchmarking higher (overall - not in games, obviously) than a $2300 macbook pro. Desktops also run cooler and quieter than laptops, by a lot, and that makes a big difference to me.

I think desktops will start getting popular again, as iPhone "like" devices get more & more popular.

[Demosthenes X]

Boring "news". Apple didn't extend their USA price cut to Canada - even though the Canadian dollar improved relative to the USD compared to where it was in October. :(

[HarleyMan]

Lower Price, Great!
Free is better but lower price is great, and I don't see free coming down the pike any time soon! :D

[bilbo--baggins]

The cost of Mac's have gone up across the board this year, so bringing the price down is definitely needed.

However, I wonder if they will really drop the price of iMacs? Their recent 'price drop' of the MacBook Pro 15" actually involved removing the dedicated graphics card. To get the same specs as the older model actually involved a price rise.

[crees!]

I think desktops will start getting popular again, as iPhone "like" devices get more & more popular.

Point well taken. I'll be picking up a new iMac when the next update cycle hits to replace my then 6-year old PowerBook. An Apple tablet or the next gen iPhone will be my mobile device.

[bobr1952]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Some of us are quite content to stay at home...

[dagamer34]

nope its still possible. read my above post

Core i7 doesn't get mobile chip support (what the iMac uses) until next year.

[malone46844]

I think desktops will start getting popular again, as iPhone "like" devices get more & more popular.
I'.d have to agree. After 4 years with a 15.4" laptop, I've recently switched back to a desktop and netbook (along with iphone) and very much like it. I pulled out my old laptop the other day to pull the wifi card out and couldn't believe how **huge** it seemed. Couldn't imagine using a 17" laptop and considering it portable.

[iMacmatician]

Core i7 doesn't get mobile chip support (what the iMac uses) until next year.Clarksfield is called Core i7 and will be here in Q3 2009.

I'm slowly becoming more confident that Clarksfield will go in the iMac (and MacBook Pro). A rumored Q3 update makes me a bit more confident. A refresher after months of pessimism. :)

Either that, or it's Penryn speed bump until early/mid-2010.

[Zoboomafoo]

Well, I'd appreciate it if they did this before the ipod back to school promo ends!

[will0407]

About time. £950 is too much for an entry level imac.

[elgrecomac]

Microsoft is laughing their ass off about this. Clearly Microsoft's commercials, along with a slowing economy, have had an impact on Apple's pricing strategy. And Apple realizes that Window 7 has significantly narrowed the gap at the OS level and must do something to keep their 8% market-share and noT loose ground.

:eek:

[Eidorian]

and by "cuts" they meen: cut and replace the bottom model with the mid model, slide the rest down(etc), introduce a new model at the old highest price.:rolleyes:

we are not going to get anything for less then 1199 and say
hardly price cutsI expect the same. Just take the current model and slide it on down to a "cheaper" price. Use processors, pretty much pointless, and the graphics to make the real difference to upsell people.

[QCassidy352]

I think desktops will start getting popular again, as iPhone "like" devices get more & more popular.

That's exactly how I feel (and it's one of the reasons I don't understand the rise of netbooks). I have my imac at home and my iphone for mobility. There will always be people who need to do real work on the road, but for those who toted around laptops just to check email and otherwise "stay connected," smartphones do the job at a fraction the size.

[RichardI]

How can anyone complain about a price reduction? Amazing. The iMac is the best computer in the world, with the best OS in the world on it. How could lowering its price or offering a wider choice of models cause dissent. Tsk, tsk people :confused:.

Rich :cool:

[ravenvii]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Yes I do. It's much, much more comfortable to use a desktop. Yes, you could connect a keyboard and mouse and display to a laptop, and get the same result. But an iMac is much cheaper than that option, and I never take my laptop off my desk, it's silly to pick a laptop over an iMac. For outside the house, I use my iPhone :)

[SpaceKitty]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Yes. I sold my MacBook and MacBook Pro last summer because I have a Mac pro and an iMac and an HP laptop.

[guzhogi]

Free is better but lower price is great, and I don't see free coming down the pike any time soon! :D

But Apple paying US to get them is best. :D

[motulist]

Microsoft is laughing their ass off about this. Clearly Microsoft's commercials, along with a slowing economy, have had an impact on Apple's pricing strategy. And Apple realizes that Window 7 has significantly narrowed the gap at the OS level and must do something to keep their 8% market-share and now loose ground.

:eek:

I was wondering about this for a while, I didn't understand how Apple was able to keep their prices so high for the past year or two without seeing a slow down in sales. I mean the economy is bad, non-Apple computer hardware was selling for significantly less money, Windows OS improving, etc.

[randomusername]

what they should do is not just the price cuts at the cheapest level but elimination of 20 inches and start with 24 inches. and I would appreciate 27 or 30 inch model too.

24 inches
4GB RAM
2.53ghz C2D
500GB HD
Nvidia 9400m
Superdrive

$1,099

That there is just crazy. I think they're going to stick with a 20" and 24" iMac until they change the whole design (like when they went from the polycarbonate iMac to the aluminum iMac). I can see this...

20"
4GB RAM
2.96 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo (maybe 2.66Ghz)
640GB HDD
NVIDIA 9400m
Superdrive
SD card slot (under super drive)

All of this at $999 or $1099.

Then the 24" model will see the same or very similar specs for $200 extra, and the two higher end iMacs will finally get quad-core CPUs. Every model drops $100 or $200 in price. I can see this happening.

[Marx55]

NEEDED:

- Quad-core iMac.
- NO-glossy but matte screen!

- Mac miniTOWER.
- NO-glossy but matte diplays!

- Mac tablet (300 g or less and pocketable).
- MacBook Air mini (1/4 footprint size of current one) with many more ports!

[OldTimey]

Point well taken. I'll be picking up a new iMac when the next update cycle hits to replace my then 6-year old PowerBook. An Apple tablet or the next gen iPhone will be my mobile device.

Politics should be banned from these forums.

[randomusername]

NEEDED:

- Quad-core iMac.
- NO-glossy but matte screen!

- Mac miniTOWER.
- NO-glossy but matte diplays!

- Mac tablet (300 g or less and pocketable).
- MacBook Air mimi (1/4 size footprint of current one) with many more ports!

Apple likes their glossy. They will never change. Maybe they'll offer matte options, but they'll never ever have them be the only choice.

And MacBook Air Mini is a horrible name. If they do release and netbook MacBook Air I think they'll just add the screen size to the end of every product, like MacBook Air 13, MacBook Air 11, MacBook Pro 15, iMac 20, etc.

[amac4me]

Price cuts are one thing, margins are another. In my assessment, Apple appears to be wiling to accept lower margins on Macs as they are seeing margin expansion in other products lines such as the iPhone, and products/services such as MobileMe.

[chrmjenkins]

Clarksfield is called Core i7 and will be here in Q3 2009.

I'm slowly becoming more confident that Clarksfield will go in the iMac (and MacBook Pro). A rumored Q3 update makes me a bit more confident. A refresher after months of pessimism. :)

Either that, or it's Penryn speed bump until early/mid-2010.

Penryn doesn't have anymore headroom. They'd have to remove the high-end BTO option on the 15-inch to bump them again. It makers more sense for them to sit on both of them until Arrandale, even if Clarksfield is used or is an option. If they didn't wait, there'd be less than 6 months between the product updates.

[duncyboy]

Great news if true.

Not in the market for a desktop myself but at £800 my then-entry-level iMac is great value for me and I love it as much now as the day I bought it.

It'd be nice to see other people get the chance to get an iMac, if not for £800 then at least cheaper than £950.

[mdriftmeyer]

what they should do is not just the price cuts at the cheapest level but elimination of 20 inches and start with 24 inches. and I would appreciate 27 or 30 inch model too.

24 inches
4GB RAM
2.53ghz C2D
500GB HD
Nvidia 9400m
Superdrive

$1,099


Give me a Headless Tower:
1000 W Power Supply [CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139007)]
P45 based board
Intel Core2 Q8200S Yorkfield 2.33GHz/Intel Core2 Q9400S Yorkfield 2.66GHz/Intel Core2 Q9550S Yorkfield 2.83GHz
4GB RAM [Upgradeable to 16GB]
1TB Drive
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 512MB base line upgradeable to
Nvidia GTX285 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500)/ATi 4790 HD (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4890/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4890-specifications.aspx)
Super Drive
2 Full-length x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots Double-wide
4 HDD slots with RAID Card option
Digital Audio specs akin to the Mac Pro

Starting at $1699.

[Eidorian]

Penryn doesn't have anymore headroom. They'd have to remove the high-end BTO option on the 15-inch to bump them again. It makers more sense for them to sit on both of them until Arrandale, even if Clarksfield is used or is an option. If they didn't wait, there'd be less than 6 months between the product updates.Penryn does have headroom if you overclock. ;)

[PeterM11]

What I would like to see is an 800 dollar White Polycarbonate Macbook :D.
I don't care if the specs are lower than they are now. I really want a Mac. But I need it to be a laptop. And a grand isn't within my price range. (not that 800 dollars is either but it would be easier to get.)

[Eidorian]

What I would like to see is an 800 dollar White Polycarbonate Macbook :D.
I don't care if the specs are lower than they are now. I really want a Mac. But I need it to be a laptop. And a grand isn't within my price range. (not that 800 dollars is either but it would be easier to get.)Hunt around for refurbished MacBooks.

[Cboss]

Hunt around for refurbished MacBooks.

Agreed, $850 and as good as new. Keep checking back to see what they have.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/macbook

[slicecom]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

wow :eek: people still think laptops will take over the world ?

[Eidorian]

Agreed, $850 and as good as new. Keep checking back to see what they have.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac/macbookThe Refurbished WhiteBook 9400M G 2.0 GHz hit $749.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I don't see why we can't have it at $999. It must be the cost of the Al. Apple should put the white iMac back into the lineup if that is the case (no pun intended). Transplant the current low-end internals into it, get rid of the glass and replace the IPS display with a TN one.

[chrmjenkins]

wow :eek: people still think laptops will take over the world ?

Who are you.....WHO SENT YOU? What are you doing.... no, no, no not the backlit keyboard...NO! ARGGGGHHHHHH!

[Eidorian]

I don't see why we can't have it at $999. It must be the cost of the Al. Apple should put the white iMac back into the lineup if that is the case (no pun intended). Transplant the current low-end internals into it, get rid of the glass and replace the IPS display with a TN one.I don't know about you but the price of my aluminium cans has dropped more than half.

A ton of steal is cheap too. You could afford one. Seriously...

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I don't know about you but the price of my aluminium cans has dropped more than half.

A ton of steal is cheap too. You could afford one. Seriously...

Sure, but you know Apple likes to charge more for the same stuff.

I think you mean "steel." But steel rusts and it is heavier as well.

[Eidorian]

Sure, but you know Apple likes to charge more for the same stuff.

I think you mean "steel." But steel rusts and it is heavier as well.Quite the amusing typo I made.

My point still stands that metal prices for aluminium and steel are even lower than they were at this point last year.

[Icaras]

Give me a Headless Tower:
1000 W Power Supply [CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139007)]
P45 based board
Intel Core2 Q8200S Yorkfield 2.33GHz/Intel Core2 Q9400S Yorkfield 2.66GHz/Intel Core2 Q9550S Yorkfield 2.83GHz
4GB RAM [Upgradeable to 16GB]
1TB Drive
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 512MB base line upgradeable to
Nvidia GTX285 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500)/ATi 4790 HD (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4890/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4890-specifications.aspx)
Super Drive
2 Full-length x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots Double-wide
4 HDD slots with RAID Card option
Digital Audio specs akin to the Mac Pro

Starting at $1699.

Oh boy, here we go again

[Umbongo]

Give me a Headless Tower:
1000 W Power Supply [CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139007)]
P45 based board
Intel Core2 Q8200S Yorkfield 2.33GHz/Intel Core2 Q9400S Yorkfield 2.66GHz/Intel Core2 Q9550S Yorkfield 2.83GHz
4GB RAM [Upgradeable to 16GB]
1TB Drive
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 512MB base line upgradeable to
Nvidia GTX285 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500)/ATi 4790 HD (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4890/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4890-specifications.aspx)
Super Drive
2 Full-length x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots Double-wide
4 HDD slots with RAID Card option
Digital Audio specs akin to the Mac Pro

Starting at $1699.

So basically you want the current Quad Mac Pro with a $100 cheaper board, $70 cheaper processor, 1GB more base memory and a faster graphics card. For $800 less. Good luck with that ;)

[11800506]

A possible return to the $999 price point? That's the lowest I can see them going although it seems like too large of a cut. Any price cut though would certainly be welcomed although I'm sure there will be some sort of compromise for the lower price.

[zw-gator]

Meh, let's get some juiced up Mac mini's

If I was buying a "desktop", I'd MUCH prefer a MM to an all in one iMac

[whatever]

Don't think so. Last Friday my sister's Apple Store sold 65 Macs along with their inventory of iPhones. That's not a bad day for one retail store.



Microsoft is laughing their ass off about this. Clearly Microsoft's commercials, along with a slowing economy, have had an impact on Apple's pricing strategy. And Apple realizes that Window 7 has significantly narrowed the gap at the OS level and must do something to keep their 8% market-share and noT loose ground.

:eek:

[mdriftmeyer]

So basically you want the current Quad Mac Pro with a $100 cheaper board, $70 cheaper processor, 1GB more base memory and a faster graphics card. For $800 less. Good luck with that ;)

No. The updates would include appropriate updates to the higher end lines to offset this line.

Besides, the Quad Core Nehalem 2.66Ghz with 8MB L3 is > $1000, per CPU.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117182

The 2.93 Model is nearly $1500.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117180

Apple's getting a discount for sure which means they'll get a discount on the lower Quad Core2 Duo I cited.

[rgarjr]

iMacs are brilliant, but ridiculously overpriced. I almost feel ashamed when someone asks me how much i paid for mine

Haha, yeah it is pretty shameful to tell them the price for them aint it..

[NinjaHERO]

Cool. Maybe I do need an Imac to compliment my MBP

[windywoo]

The time is ripe for a 12" macbook mini. My iBook is 12", the keyboard isn't cramped and I use it just like a netbook. Maybe the 12" could use an atom processor and use the old intel onboard graphics. A smaller hard drive too.

[meagain]

I desperately need a new iMac. Mine is wonky. I've been holding off for this update.

My Applecare expires Nov. 9th. Think I'll be good to go before that?

[wywern209]

No Core i7 then, or perhaps low-end ones... ;)

this is not possible due to the fact that the imac uses laptop processors. So, unless intel comes out w/ core i7 laptop processors, its not happening. maybe next year gkarris.

[badNameErr]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

wow :eek: some people use laptops AND desktops!

I know, it's shocking.

[wesleyh]

If they found a way to use desktop cpu's they'd save a bunch of money right there and still have a big profit margin... :)

[Xibalba]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

wow - :eek: - are there people really that ignorant?

all of the above people made perfect responses for the reasons desktop exist for both consumers and commercial purposes.


anyways, i have been holding off buying an iMac and this fall will be the perfect time with another round of models and a small price break to boot. glad i waited but feel for those frustrated with the march models to have another come so soon. similar to how i feel with my macbook from christmas seeing another improved release in less than 6 months. oh, well.

[SactoGuy18]

I do have one potential gripe about cutting the price on the iMac: Apple may start skimping on features to make the price point. Can you imagine an iMac lacking IEEE-1394 ports in favor of more USB 2.0 ports or eventually switching to the USB 3.0 port?

[Umbongo]

No. The updates would include appropriate updates to the higher end lines to offset this line.

Besides, the Quad Core Nehalem 2.66Ghz with 8MB L3 is > $1000, per CPU.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117182

The 2.93 Model is nearly $1500.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117180

Apple's getting a discount for sure which means they'll get a discount on the lower Quad Core2 Duo I cited.

No the quad core systems use Xeon 3500s, $284 for the 2.66, $562 for the 2.93, same as the Core i7s. Apple just have like a $1,000+ premium over the retail cost of Mac Pro hardware. That alone is why I don't think we will see any sort of headless non-Mac Pro desktop, but there are many other reasons. Major ones being notebooks sell more and with iMacs Apple also get to make sure they get a profit on the display.

[maclancer]

7% and 10% price cut is really nothing when the original price cost $1,199.00, they should at least price it at $899 the entry iMac.

[Bubba Satori]

Give me a Headless Tower:
1000 W Power Supply [CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139007)]
P45 based board
Intel Core2 Q8200S Yorkfield 2.33GHz/Intel Core2 Q9400S Yorkfield 2.66GHz/Intel Core2 Q9550S Yorkfield 2.83GHz
4GB RAM [Upgradeable to 16GB]
1TB Drive
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 512MB base line upgradeable to
Nvidia GTX285 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500)/ATi 4790 HD (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4890/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4890-specifications.aspx)
Super Drive
2 Full-length x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots Double-wide
4 HDD slots with RAID Card option
Digital Audio specs akin to the Mac Pro

Starting at $1699.

Uhh..... I sell at least a dozen Gateway, Dell and Hp quadcore towers a week with that configuration, except with 6-8GB ram, for around $1K. Some of them to Mac owners who already have an LCD and don't want a mirror iMac and won't pay $2,300 for a quadcore Mac Pro.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I do have one potential gripe about cutting the price on the iMac: Apple may start skimping on features to make the price point. Can you imagine an iMac lacking IEEE-1394 ports in favor of more USB 2.0 ports or eventually switching to the USB 3.0 port?

I can imagine that. In fact, it has happened. Cough, uMB, cough. Cough, 13'' and 15'' MBP, cough. :rolleyes:

[puffnstuff]

They should bring back the 17" and price it at $999 like it was before

[Shake 'n' Bake]

They should bring back the 17" and price it at $999 like it was before

Nobody wants a 17'' desktop. But if it were brought back, with a TN panel, it could be $899 or less. A 99% no on this one, though.

[freiheit]

I'd still rather see price cuts on the single-chip Mac Pros, maybe with a slight reduction in expansion (1 optical drive instead of 2, 3 hard drives instead of 4 and a smaller case as a result) with a sub-$2,000 price point. I recently set up a new Shuttle XPC for my mom and I really, really like the size of it, the overall look of it and it's expansion capabilities. Something a bit larger than that but smaller than today's Mac Pro would be fabulous.

[JoeG4]

I hope this means a price cut in the Mac Pro. If a $1500 model came out I'd really dig THAT!

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I hope this means a price cut in the Mac Pro. If a $1500 model came out I'd really dig THAT!

Never :rolleyes:. Pros usually have a business, or are going to start one, and can afford it with no problem.

[cg0def]

No Core i7 then, or perhaps low-end ones... ;)

When are you people going to get it that iMac DONOT use desktop CPUs? Every iMac comes with a low powered processor in it i.e. the same thing that you get in your notebook. i7 will come when Intel actually releases i7 for mobile computers. FYI that means the 2nd half on the year or something like that. But if you really want i7 you can get a windows computer and then it really won't matter that you have a faster CPU ( most of the time ).

[Eidorian]

When are you people going to get it that iMac DONOT use desktop CPUs? Every iMac comes with a low powered processor in it i.e. the same thing that you get in your notebook. i7 will come when Intel actually releases i7 for mobile computers. FYI that means the 2nd half on the year or something like that. But if you really want i7 you can get a windows computer and then it really won't matter that you have a faster CPU ( most of the time ).The E8435 started off with a 55W TDP.

[macjiro]

I desperately need a new iMac. Mine is wonky. I've been holding off for this update.

My Applecare expires Nov. 9th. Think I'll be good to go before that?

I'm in the same boat. I think to answer your q, it depends on what you are using your comp for? If you 'need it' now, it is something you buy now cause of money or a current project is waiting. Or you can't get your school art/animation work done. If you can wait 3 months and work on a slower system that will get the job done even though it dogs the machine...i think its ok to wait.

From the comments on this thread, it looks like an i7 imac will not come out next update. I believe it will require a more significant change in design then just throwing in a new chip...so guessing it will most likely be a year a way for that. I think i will buy an Imac for now and wait and see how things are next year. I haven't bought a Mac in 10 years and i am SOOO looking forward to my next comp.

[little.one.der]

Blarrgghh.
As one of those people that gets stuck in the "waiting for new technology" game, this has created another predicament for me!
I got some money from school and I really really want to upgrade my iBook G4 and replace it with a desktop unit.

I was planning on using the Education Discount just before it runs out... any opinion if I should wait and see if the price does go down and the power goes up?

I can't even look at youtube vids because I can't get flash to work. :(

[Justinf79]

Never :rolleyes:. Pros usually have a business, or are going to start one, and can afford it with no problem.

I'm hoping though that the base Mac Pros get dropped in price to at least $1999 sometime. :D

[corinhorn]

I desperately need a new iMac. Mine is wonky. I've been holding off for this update.

My Applecare expires Nov. 9th. Think I'll be good to go before that?I'm still using my iMac G3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_G3). My AppleCare expired a long time ago. :D

[AidenShaw]

I desperately need a new iMac. Mine is wonky. I've been holding off for this update.

My Applecare expires Nov. 9th. Think I'll be good to go before that?

Didn't you pay extra for Applecare to fix "wonky" computers?

You should make Apple fix the one that you bought.

Or, next time, don't buy Applecare because it sounds like you are afraid to use it.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I'm hoping though that the base Mac Pros get dropped in price to at least $1999 sometime. :D

A $500 drop? I don't think so. I hope you already know that Apple rarely drops the prices on anything for any reason. There was a time when prices just went down and you could get an iMac for $800 :).

I'll have to look into it, but it seems to me that when Apple computers, or their GUI, were first introduced they were expensive, i.e. the Lisa. Then they got cheap, i.e. the iMac G3. And now they're on the upswing again. Just a theory. Computers haven't been around long enough to tell.

[Feng Shui]

What about deflation and strong dollar? :)

[Lone Deranger]

Actually... I fear they'll also resort to using cheaper components to offset their loss of profit. It would be a very Apple Inc. thing to do. :(

I expect the same. Just take the current model and slide it on down to a "cheaper" price. Use processors, pretty much pointless, and the graphics to make the real difference to upsell people.

[applepro123]

now im exciteeddd

[DELLsFan]

Clarksfield is called Core i7 and will be here in Q3 2009.

I'm slowly becoming more confident that Clarksfield will go in the iMac (and MacBook Pro). A rumored Q3 update makes me a bit more confident. A refresher after months of pessimism. :)

Either that, or it's Penryn speed bump until early/mid-2010.

Hellooooo, Clarksfield!

:::::insert Family Guy's Herbert impression here::::::

MMMmmmMMMmmmm!! :D

[MacLover4491]

haha i knew that apple have to give in because of slow sales. Even iphone 3g is only 100 dollars now. Who said apple prices dont drop. haha

[archer75]

Price cuts are always welcome. I'd also like to see a Core i7 and a optional high end video cards. Yes, there are high end laptop cards now.

[Eidorian]

Actually... I fear they'll also resort to using cheaper components to offset their loss of profit. It would be a very Apple Inc. thing to do. :(I don't understand this. The prices of components drops over time. The $316 processor drops to $266 and Apple doesn't drop their prices silently. They just wait a few months and slide that down to the next model down. The SAME components a minute ago on the Apple Store were more expensive. How is this using a component of lower quality?

Didn't you pay extra for Applecare to fix "wonky" computers?

You should make Apple fix the one that you bought.

Or, next time, don't buy Applecare because it sounds like you are afraid to use it.Given the price of the hardware and inability of a DIY fix you're greatly tempted to pay for this insurance even if you never use it. I never get extended warranties on any of the individual components that I buy. You become paranoid for an entire machine and more so given the price of a Mac.

More profit for Apple but it is a gamble for both parties.

[archer75]

I would also like a headless desktop. Not a workstation like the mac pro. I'll take the same case but standard desktop parts. These can be very inexpensive due to the wide availability of parts that are also inexpensive. But then we would have something with greater upgrade options too. I'd get one in a heartbeat.

[MacAndy74]

:eek:

(..)next-generation models later this year(..)

/passes out

Sweet :D

[DaBrain]

Give me a Headless Tower:
1000 W Power Supply [CORSAIR CMPSU-1000HX (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139007)]
P45 based board
Intel Core2 Q8200S Yorkfield 2.33GHz/Intel Core2 Q9400S Yorkfield 2.66GHz/Intel Core2 Q9550S Yorkfield 2.83GHz
4GB RAM [Upgradeable to 16GB]
1TB Drive
Nvidia GeForce GTS 250 512MB base line upgradeable to
Nvidia GTX285 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500)/ATi 4790 HD (http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/graphics/ati-radeon-hd-4000/hd-4890/Pages/ati-radeon-hd-4890-specifications.aspx)
Super Drive
2 Full-length x16 PCI Express 2.0 slots Double-wide
4 HDD slots with RAID Card option
Digital Audio specs akin to the Mac Pro

Starting at $1699.

A 1 KW Power Supply? Yeah Right! :rolleyes:

[GoKyu]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Definitely - I can't stand laptops. I have a Mac Pro to do my real work on, and all I ever need to do when I'm out and around is check email or something similar. I'm not about to buy a laptop (or "netbook") just for that - that's what my iPhone is for :)

If it ever comes to me needing to take work "on the road" with me, then I'll consider a 15" MBP.

[GoKyu]

A 1 KW Power Supply? Yeah Right! :rolleyes:

I think my early 2008 Mac Pro has a 1000 watt PSU...

[Bubba Satori]

Price cuts are always welcome. I'd also like to see a Core i7 and a optional high end video cards. Yes, there are high end laptop cards now.

Yep. I put up a HP 2185DX laptop on display today. 17.3", Quad core 9000, 6GB ram, 500GB HD and an ATI 4650 video card with 1GB of it's own memory.:eek: $1,300 :eek:

[beginnersview]

I don't see why we can't have it at $999. It must be the cost of the Al. Apple should put the white iMac back into the lineup if that is the case (no pun intended). Transplant the current low-end internals into it, get rid of the glass and replace the IPS display with a TN one.

Based on fact that the current low-end iMac has lots of color shifting and yellow off-axis, I would say they are already using TN on the low-end 20" iMac. They might be using IPS or IPA or similar on the 24". I wish they would actually say.

And give me/us an Option to have a non-glare screen.
(some call it 'matte' but in reality, it would be non-glare, anti-glare. Matte finish is a photo-finishing, printing-finish term... ;)

[gianpan]

I think my early 2008 Mac Pro has a 1000 watt PSU...

so you don't need a macTower but a Mac Pro....

Your Mac Pro is made to run multiple CPUs and GPUS....

the MacTower, if there ever was one, would be with specs around the same of iMac but with desktop parts and a better graphics card (ok and a quad core).

[elgrecomac]

Don't think so. Last Friday my sister's Apple Store sold 65 Macs along with their inventory of iPhones. That's not a bad day for one retail store.

But is Apple GAINING market share? I don't think so. Maybe treading water, at best. And the recent market analysis posted on this site and others substantiates this fact. Win 7 IS a big deal to Apple, regardless of what you may think. I have it installed on my MBP and those of us that do, actually see how the gap has narrowed: we're not just drinking the Kool-aid. Apple is worried...and they should be. Apple is cutting prices. Apple has, essentially, made 10.6 a 'free' upgrade for OS-X systems, compared with Win 7's just announced pricing scheme. These are all the right moves in anticipation of the Win 7 marketing juggernaut that is going to hit in a few months.

[PhixionFilms]

Based on fact that the current low-end iMac has lots of color shifting and yellow off-axis, I would say they are already using TN on the low-end 20" iMac. They might be using IPS or IPA or similar on the 24". I wish they would actually say.

And give me/us an Option to have a non-glare screen.
(some call it 'matte' but in reality, it would be non-glare, anti-glare. Matte finish is a photo-finishing, printing-finish term... ;)
just sold my iMac 24" tonight for 1110, im so happy its gone because at any givin moment, they can come out with new models, and kill my value on the imac.

[WeegieMac]

It's interesting to see people say the 20" should be discontinued, because having recently upgraded from the first white Intel iMac to a 20" aluminum model in March, the size difference is superb and feels "just right" for an entry level model.

I've looked at the 24" in the Apple Store here in Glasgow and while it's a stunning piece of kit, the screen is just too big for my needs ... 20" is a nice entry level size, it's big without being overpowering.

And I read someone say that while they love their iMac, they get embarrassed when asked how much they paid for it. I'm the opposite ... when I tell people who much I paid for mine in March I am greeted with the usual expression, which is :eek: .... followed by the question, "How"?

Corporate Business Discount, £612 ... even the Refurb Store couldn't beat it.

[WeegieMac]

just sold my iMac 24" tonight for 1110, im so happy its gone because at any givin moment, they can come out with new models, and kill my value on the imac.

I disagree with that comment mate, simply on past experience selling on old iMac's after new models launch.

Provided you have the original box, all the discs and paperwork, etc then you find the value is still exceptional, even after new models have been introduced.

Unfortunately the one part of your post that's true regardless is that Apple can come out with something new at any time ... something that is far more likely from Apple than any other electronics manufacturer. I am pleased they strive to stay ahead, but the rate of their "refreshes" is somewhat bizarre at times, and I can see why consumers are getting annoyed, especially with the current prices, when their new computer is superseded so soon.

[Maserati7200]

- Mac miniTOWER.

Apple will definitely not do that. Apple emphasizes with the iMac, their consumer desktop, that it is superior because it does not have the mess of a tower and that it is an all in one simple design.

The Mac Pro is a different story.

[Veri]

It's only in the US that prices have gone down. Everywhere else, i.e. for the majority of people, prices have gone up.

Before I hear an exchange rate argument: Apple didn't make stuff proportionately cheaper when the dollar was weaker, and China isn't paid in dollars.

[SactoGuy18]

I can imagine that. In fact, it has happened. Cough, uMB, cough. Cough, 13'' and 15'' MBP, cough. :rolleyes:

I think it was a mistake for Apple to drop the ExpressCard slot on the 15" MacBook Pro, since many photographers like the ExpressCard slot when working with digital SLR's. That is unless Apple will offer the ExpressCard 2.0 slot with USB 3.0 ports during the regular MacBook hardware refresh cycle in October 2010 (ExpressCard 2.0 and USB 3.0 hardware will be available in 2010).

Apple will definitely not do that. Apple emphasizes with the iMac, their consumer desktop, that it is superior because it does not have the mess of a tower and that it is an all in one simple design.

The Mac Pro is a different story.

I have to disagree on this! Remember, most desktop tower computers already have all the port connections on the main system box itself, and the only external connection you need is the video cable from the computer to the monitor. I do think if the economy continues to be poor Apple may be forced to build such a minitower to replace the iMac, especially nowadays when you can get a highly-loaded top-end PC plus 24-25" widescreen monitor for around US$1,400 (to get the Mac equivalent you have to shell out around US$2,000).

[iPhoneNYC]

I think Apple would see huge sales of an iMac that boasts a $999 price tag. So that's $200 bucks from where we are now. But I do agree with comments that most new users will be attracted to laptop.

[celtikmind]

It's only in the US that prices have gone down. Everywhere else, i.e. for the majority of people, prices have gone up.

Before I hear an exchange rate argument: Apple didn't make stuff proportionately cheaper when the dollar was weaker, and China isn't paid in dollars.

I agree and that's the best sum up I've seen in a long time! :cool:

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Based on fact that the current low-end iMac has lots of color shifting and yellow off-axis, I would say they are already using TN on the low-end 20" iMac. They might be using IPS or IPA or similar on the 24". I wish they would actually say.

And give me/us an Option to have a non-glare screen.
(some call it 'matte' but in reality, it would be non-glare, anti-glare. Matte finish is a photo-finishing, printing-finish term... ;)

They are IPS and have been since mid '07, except the 20'' which was TN then. I'm sure the 20'' has an IPS display now.

[fef714]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

Ya, I have an iMac and I love it!!!!

[Drag'nGT]

Hopefully we see quads in the laptops and the iMacs next year... and a better Mini. ;)

[Shake 'n' Bake]

Hopefully we see quads in the laptops and the iMacs next year... and a better Mini. ;)

That reminds me of my C2Q rant.

http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr214/TheDavidFrom1988/sj1-1.png

Originally posted here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=709265&page=2

[AidenShaw]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

And if Apple would come out with a Core i7 MiniTower at a reasonable price, there'd be a lot more people using desktops. Apple's laptop sales are a high proportion because their desktops turn a lot of people off...


Would anyone like the new Apple xMac at $749

Intel® Core™ i7-920 Processor (quad core, 8MB L3 Cache, 2.66GHz)
3GB DDR3 Tri-Channel SDRAM at 1066MHz - 3 DIMMs
500GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache
16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
ATI Radeon HD 4350 512MB
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
1Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis
Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit

(Actually, the specs and price are for a Dell Studio XPS. (http://www.dell.com/us/en/home/desktops/desktop-studioxps-435mt/pd.aspx?refid=desktop-studioxps-435mt&s=dhs&cs=19&ref=dthp))

[twoodcc]

i think a price cut in that range makes sense, and i hope to see it.

[deconstruct60]

It's only in the US that prices have gone down. Everywhere else, i.e. for the majority of people, prices have gone up.

Before I hear an exchange rate argument: Apple didn't make stuff proportionately cheaper when the dollar was weaker, and China isn't paid in dollars.

The Chinese actively peg their currency to the dollar minus an offset. May or may not being paid in dollars, but to assert that the Chinese currency doesn't or may not reflect moves in the dollar is a huge stretch. China is hugely dependent upon a hugely tilted trade imbalance in their favor. They tweak their currency to help make sure that happens.


The operating costs for Apple is not the same in every country. Unless things have radically changed Apple doesn't even distribute in every country (in some places there are "middle men" distributors who add their own mark-up. )

Finally, if Apple's competitors in other countries are not competing as hard, prices will be higher. Very straightforward market segmentation.

[grapefruitx]

Apple have to be careful, they position the brand as a premium product discounting is never a good idea for premium branding, but windows 7 is coming and (if MS can get it right this time) should close the gap on OSX.

[Stephen123]

But is Apple GAINING market share? I don't think so. Maybe treading water, at best.

Apple is gaining market share by dollars and units in US and internationally. Their dollars are also up year over year. The one measure that is not up year over year is desktop units. But it fell less then their competitors.

[mdriftmeyer]

A 1 KW Power Supply? Yeah Right! :rolleyes:

The Nvidia GTX 285 peaks at 305W per card.

The ATi 4870 peaks at 385 W. The ATi 4890 peaks at equal or a bit less.

So, yes. If I have dual cards in, plus the CPU, accessories plugged in [RAID and more options] I'm going to need >= 1kW.

The Mac Pro 2009 Power is at 1KW and it can't push Dual ATi 4870 HDs.

It's one of the reasons you can have dual double wide high end GPGPUs on the Mac Pro.

More and more PSUs are > 1kW.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010320058%20113142550&name=1001W%20above

[Tallest Skil]

The Mac Pro 2009 Power is at 1KW and it can't push Dual ATi 4870 HDs.

No, the Mac Pro is 980w, and it can't run dual 4870s because it doesn't have enough power connectors on the motherboard! The PSU can handle them, no sweat, but you can't plug the second one into anything unless you use the ODD SATA power.

[windywoo]

Finally, if Apple's competitors in other countries are not competing as hard, prices will be higher. Very straightforward market segmentation.

But isn't America Apple's best market? Surely their competitors must be doing better in other countries and therefore apple should be getting the finger out. Or is it more likely they don't give a monkey's.

[ZipZilla]

Sorry Apple...

But the iMac line has completely stagnated and there has been *zero* innovation since the iMac G5 was introduced 5 years ago. It's basically the same computer.

We have the same dinky screens, essentially the same form factor and the same Cadillac pricing. There is no compelling reason to upgrade. Where is the innovation?

For example:

Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?

Where is the revolutionary new form factor?

Why the laziness? :(:(:(:(

[AidenShaw]

Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?

Where is the revolutionary new form factor?

Why the laziness? :(:(:(:(

And, where is the quad core Nehalem that other companies have for under $800?

The Imac has become a joke...

[Eidorian]

And, where is the quad core Nehalem that other companies have for under $800?

The Imac has become a joke...The iMac has been going down hill since the Q6600 became affordable.

[Sehnsucht]

WTF! Cheaper? The iMacs are cheap enough already!!! :confused: Apple, go for "better", not "cheaper." :rolleyes:

[SleepyHead157]

Point well taken. I'll be picking up a new iMac when the next update cycle hits to replace my then 6-year old PowerBook. An Apple tablet or the next gen iPhone will be my mobile device.

I'm in the same boat as you although I currently use an iMac. I'm waiting for the Apple tablet/netbook to come out for my daily needs and using my iMac at home. I had a macbook but sold it to get a cheaper imac at the time.

I expect the prices for the iMacs to go down especially after the cuts on the Macbook pros.

[corinhorn]

Apple have to be careful, they position the brand as a premium product discounting is never a good idea for premium branding, but windows 7 is coming and (if MS can get it right this time) should close the gap on OSX.I want Windows 7 to be a hit because I really want Apple to retain a small market share. It seems that the bigger they get, the more the Apple magic is spread too thin and quality takes a dip. My Titanium PowerBook from nearly 8 years ago is still plugging along fine with Tiger and I still love using it. My 3 year old MacBook Pro is close to death.

[Jeve Stobs]

no blu-ray = no buy.
i'm looking forward to getting a desktop next to my MBP, but it is not happening before it gets blu-ray. I want to burn video from my HD camcorder to a blu-ray + it'd be nice if i could view blu-rays on my desktop if i wanted to, have a ton of them already.

[gregorsamsa]

Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?

Where is the revolutionary new form factor?

Why the laziness? :(:(:(:(

Agree they could offer bigger options & I'd like a matte one, but it'd be difficult to significantly change the design without sacrificing Apple's obsession with thinness. Doing away with the chin would necessitate having it thicker from the side - I wouldn't mind this at all, but making things thicker seems aesthetically anathema to Apple right now.

I expect £50 price cuts in UK &, hopefully, they'll improve the specs - IMO, it's ridiculous having only integrated 9400M graphics in a 24" iMac costing well over £1K. While I'm at it, how about sticking a 9600M in the higher-end Mini? :rolleyes:

Overall, I think we'll see only minor updates (no blu-ray, etc.), though I hope I'm wrong.

[Anuba]

Agree they could offer bigger options & I'd like a matte one, but it'd be difficult to significantly change the design without sacrificing Apple's obsession with thinness. Doing away with the chin would necessitate having it thicker from the side - I wouldn't mind this at all, but making things thicker seems aesthetically anathema to Apple right now.
On the other hand the Cinema 30" is much thicker from the side than the iMac 24" is... in fact it's twice as thick as most 30" monitors. Not sure why they made it so bulky, especially given their obsession with thinness. But they could certainly fit the innards of one if not two iMacs inside the current 30".

I'm always ambivalent about Apple cutting prices. On one hand their prices are ludicrous and any cuts should be welcome, but on the other hand I know from their history that these price cuts are never done by just shrinking their extreme profit margin down to normal levels, it's usually done by cutting corners on the hardware while preserving the extreme profit margin. Given that they already use a lot of second rate, cheapo stuff in the iMacs and MBPs, where will they go? Will all new iMacs be made with refurbished components? Will they revert to USB 1.0 and remove firewire? Will they buy damaged/discarded components from cheapo brands like Acer and Packard Bell? Will they get a bargain deal on screens with dead pixels? Will they scavenge the lo-tech scrapyard for remaining 4200 RPM, 40 GB hard drives? It will take a lot of corner cutting to lower the prices while still preserving the profit margin at one trillion percent.

[WeegieMac]

It's hilarious to read people demanding Blu-Ray in the next iMac refresh.

Why?

Because if you're holding out on Apple giving you your first taste of Blu-Ray via your shiny new iMac, you're robbing yourself of a proper HD experience.

Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.

I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.

[gregorsamsa]

Interesting about the 30" ACD's thickness. Other than indicating no compromise in the quality of the technology Apple use inside the ACDs, I can't imagine why so thick.


I'm always ambivalent about Apple cutting prices. On one hand their prices are ludicrous and any cuts should be welcome, but on the other hand I know from their history that these price cuts are never done by just shrinking their extreme profit margin down to normal levels, it's usually done by cutting corners on the hardware while preserving the extreme profit margin.

Good point. Apple have always been loath to sacrifice their (approx) 30% profit margins. If we see prices fall too steeply, sales may increase but quality will drop, which would be counter-productive to the Apple brand. However, as all components are always steadily falling in price anyway, even quality ones, I don't see any problem here for Apple offering price-cuts on the scale of perhaps those recently seen with their MBPs.

Given that they already use a lot of second rate, cheapo stuff in the iMacs and MBPs, where will they go? Will all new iMacs be made with refurbished components? Will they revert to USB 1.0 and remove firewire? Will they buy damaged/discarded components from cheapo brands like Acer and Packard Bell? Will they get a bargain deal on screens with dead pixels? Will they scavenge the lo-tech scrapyard for remaining 4200 RPM, 40 GB hard drives? It will take a lot of corner cutting to lower the prices while still preserving the profit margin at one trillion percent.

I assume you missed the winking smiley for that bit. Otherwise I'm not sure where you get the idea from that they already use such "cheapo" low-grade components. :rolleyes: Certainly the 2 Macs I own (iBook & alum 20" iMac) continue working efficiently for me for many hours each day & appear to be well engineered, quality products. Apple's consistently excellent performance when it comes to customer satisfaction surveys, strongly suggests that many Mac owners feel similarly. :)

[PCMacUser]

Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.

I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.

My HD LCD TV and my HD projector are capable of 720p/1080i, but my 24" Dell monitor can do 1080p, so there are some benefits to be had.

But yep, I'd rather watch upscaled DVDs on my 720p projector at 150-200" (oh yeah!) than 1080p bluray on my computer monitor.

[Anuba]

I assume you missed the winking smiley for that bit. Otherwise I'm not sure where you get the idea from that they already use such "cheapo" low-grade components. :rolleyes:
Smiley? No. They do use second rate stuff. Just look at the MBP 17" I'm typing on. Looks great on the outside to feign the illusion of top notch stuff, but what's inside it? Let's see. Bottom-of-the-barrel AGERE firewire chipset, which has replaced the high-end Texas Instruments chipset they used in the past. AGERE is the bane of audio professionals everywhere. Then, we have the underwhelming midrange NVidia 9600M, which has no place in a "pro" machine. Broadcom WiFi (I suppose Intel's PRO line was too expensive so they went to the Wal-Mart of communication components), Broadcom Bluetooth, NVidia Ethernet (buggy crap on every PC I tried so I doubt this is any different). A cheapo Hitachi 5400 RPM drive which WD's 5400 RPM drives run circles around. Pro? Mmmmmkay. Sometimes they use components so antiquated that people sue them (read the Criticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#Criticism) part of this entry on iMacs).

Certainly the 2 Macs I own (iBook & alum 20" iMac) continue working efficiently for me for many hours each day & appear to be well engineered, quality products. Apple's consistently excellent performance when it comes to customer satisfaction surveys, strongly suggests that many Mac owners feel similarly. :)
Good for you. My iMac 24" died after 13 months. Had it been a Dell I would've made one phone call and had it repaired in my home within 24 hours, but since it's Apple"care", I had to pack it up and drive 60 miles roundtrip to drop it off at the nearest Apple place. It took them 3 weeks to replace the power supply. I drove 60 miles again to pick it up. It worked for 30 minutes before it died again, so now I have to do the whole thing over again, only this time I'll also have to ask them to remove the dust and smudges they put behind the screen glass during their last attempt to fix this piece of junk. I'm sure their service is "excellent" if you live next door from their flagship store, but internationally, their support is more like something out of the Monty Python parrot sketch.

My brand new MBP 17" only had 91% battery health out of the box, and calibration didn't help, but I'm more or less forced to keep it because the alternative is to wait X number of weeks for those morons to replace it, and god knows what brand new faults the machine would get in the process.

[gregorsamsa]

Smiley? No. They do use second rate stuff. Just look at the MBP 17" I'm typing on. Looks great on the outside to feign the illusion of top notch stuff, but what's inside it? Let's see. Bottom-of-the-barrel AGERE firewire chipset, which has replaced the high-end Texas Instruments chipset they used in the past. AGERE is the bane of audio professionals everywhere. Then, we have the underwhelming midrange NVidia 9600M, which has no place in a "pro" machine. Broadcom WiFi (I suppose Intel's PRO line was too expensive so they went to the Wal-Mart of communication components), Broadcom Bluetooth, NVidia Ethernet (buggy crap on every PC I tried so I doubt this is any different). A cheapo Hitachi 5400 RPM drive which WD's 5400 RPM drives run circles around. Pro? Mmmmmkay. Sometimes they use components so antiquated that people sue them (read the Criticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#Criticism) part of this entry on iMacs).


Good for you. My iMac 24" died after 13 months. Had it been a Dell I would've made one phone call and had it repaired in my home within 24 hours, but since it's Apple"care", I had to pack it up and drive 60 miles roundtrip to drop it off at the nearest Apple place. It took them 3 weeks to replace the power supply. I drove 60 miles again to pick it up. It worked for 30 minutes before it died again, so now I have to do the whole thing over again, only this time I'll also have to ask them to remove the dust and smudges they put behind the screen glass during their last attempt to fix this piece of junk. I'm sure their service is "excellent" if you live next door from their flagship store, but internationally, their support is more like something out of the Monty Python parrot sketch.

My brand new MBP 17" only had 91% battery health out of the box, and calibration didn't help, but I'm more or less forced to keep it because the alternative is to wait X number of weeks for those morons to replace it, and god knows what brand new faults the machine would get in the process.

I see your point. Though some people who've had bad luck with a product most other people find generally reliable are bound to have opinions skewed on the negative side, I think you're 100% right that not all Apple products have been up to the standard people expect for the good money they pay.

As well as the iMac article, there have been a fair few other recent issues where Mac users have apparently been quite innocent of neglecting their Macs, yet still experienced, for eg., easily broken screen-hinges on the MacBook Air, screens cracking on MacBooks, etc. all which Apple refused to accept under AppleCare. If I'd been on the receiving end of something so duff after paying good money, I'd definitely feel the same way! Examples like these strongly suggest these are product defects, which Apple continue to deny.

Also agree that AppleCare is quite poor value for the money charged. I too don't live close to an Apple Store. So if my iMac stopped working, not being allowed to pack the thing & send it to Apple, IMO, really isn't good enough. I'm facing at least one round trip a good distance, possibly 2, when many PC companies offer a collect & return service for less cost. :rolleyes:

Apple make some great products, I have 2 of them, but I agree they could certainly do better in some depts for the relatively high prices charged! Love Macs, but not necessarily Apple's business practices.

[Anuba]

I see your point. Though some people who've had bad luck with a product most other people find generally reliable are bound to have opinions skewed on the negative side, I think you're 100% right that not all Apple products have been up to the standard people expect for the good money they pay.
Yeah... I feel that for the premium we do pay for Macs, we shouldn't have to bother ourselves with scrutinizing every new model to find out what they put in them in order to avoid unpleasant surprises later. We should be able to take for granted that whatever the best LCD screen, the best hard drives, the best chipsets etc are on the market right now, that's what Apple used.

As well as the iMac article, there have been a fair few other recent issues where Mac users have apparently been quite innocent of neglecting their Macs, yet still experienced, for eg., easily broken screen-hinges on the MacBook Air, screens cracking on MacBooks, etc. all which Apple refused to accept under AppleCare. If I'd been on the receiving end of something so duff after paying good money, I'd definitely feel the same way! Examples like these strongly suggest these are product defects, which Apple continue to deny.
It's not the first time there are problems with hinges, either. The hinges on the Titanium PowerBooks were notorious for cracking and snapping off... and then there was the Cube which developed cracks in the plastic. I don't think they stress test these things thoroughly. A Fujitsu-Siemens PC may be ugly, but I know that they stress test every new model thoroughly to check stuff like the hinges being able to withstand opening and closing the lid a million times, etc. Apple excels in industrial design from a visual POV, but many of these designs are unconventional if not unique and haven't undergone extensive real-world testing, so the customers have to act as guinea pigs.

Also agree that AppleCare is quite poor value for the money charged. I too don't live close to an Apple Store. So if my iMac stopped working, not being allowed to pack the thing & send it to Apple, IMO, really isn't good enough. I'm facing at least one round trip a good distance, possibly 2, when many PC companies offer a collect & return service for less cost. :rolleyes:
It's certainly a problem, especially from a business point of view. I rely on my computers for a living (not my iMac, fortunately), and getting them up and running quickly when they break down is essential. Due to Apple's dodgy service and support I can't go 100% Mac, I need at least one Dell PC so that if for some weird reason all my computers would go down simultaneously, I know that I can have at least one of them up and running the next day, and not have to wait three effing weeks like I did with the iMac.

[WeegieMac]

My HD LCD TV and my HD projector are capable of 720p/1080i, but my 24" Dell monitor can do 1080p, so there are some benefits to be had.

But yep, I'd rather watch upscaled DVDs on my 720p projector at 150-200" (oh yeah!) than 1080p bluray on my computer monitor.

In fairness though, anyone who says they notice a huge difference (if any) between big screen 720p and small screen 1080p, must have superb, better than 20/20 eyesight. 720p on a 42/51/60" screen and 1080p on a 24" monitor would look near identical.

HD was created not only for better resolution and more detail, but first and foremost it was created to give better clarity on bigger screen televisions.

[windywoo]

Regardless of whether or not the built in screen can display HD, there is always the option of connecting to another one that can. In this respect surely it would be worth adding BR.

[Anuba]

Why?

Because if you're holding out on Apple giving you your first taste of Blu-Ray via your shiny new iMac, you're robbing yourself of a proper HD experience.

Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.

I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.
I beg to differ. The difference between a Quicktime HD 720p or 1080p trailer and a DVD on an iMac 24" is monumental. After you've watched one of those trailers fullscreen, DVD looks like a poor DivX rip. Furthermore, Blu-ray is just as much about storage capacity. Backing up stuff to DVD is kind of useless, but 50 gigs would actually make optical useful again (I've barely used it since the CD-R days).

[gregorsamsa]

Yeah... I feel that for the premium we do pay for Macs, we shouldn't have to bother ourselves with scrutinizing every new model to find out what they put in them in order to avoid unpleasant surprises later. We should be able to take for granted that whatever the best LCD screen, the best hard drives, the best chipsets etc are on the market right now, that's what Apple used.

I agree, people have every right to expect those standards, however, as only Apple offer OS X & many users, particularly those long-term pro level users who've invested serious money in the OS X platform have no viable alternative, it's little wonder Apple continue getting away with some of the shoddier side of their QC.

It's not the first time there are problems with hinges, either. The hinges on the Titanium PowerBooks were notorious for cracking and snapping off... and then there was the Cube which developed cracks in the plastic. I don't think they stress test these things thoroughly. A Fujitsu-Siemens PC may be ugly, but I know that they stress test every new model thoroughly to check stuff like the hinges being able to withstand opening and closing the lid a million times, etc. Apple excels in industrial design from a visual POV, but many of these designs are unconventional if not unique and haven't undergone extensive real-world testing, so the customers have to act as guinea pigs.

True there have been a number of serious QC failures, but a bigger concern for me would be if things are getting worse in this respect than they used to be, hence I used recent examples. I have no statistics to make a judgement either way, but my feeling is that as Apple continue to grow their user base, we're likely to see only a proportionate rise in duds, only giving the impression things may be worse.

Interesting about the Fujitsu-Siemens & those stress tests. I wonder how well a MacBook Air would fare in comparison? :rolleyes: I think you're spot on about how Apple's aesthetic, innovative priorities can often turn out be their achilles heel. FWIW, personally I'd go for one of the Levono Thinkpad laptops over any MacBook Pro, if only they ran OS X.

It's certainly a problem, especially from a business point of view. I rely on my computers for a living (not my iMac, fortunately), and getting them up and running quickly when they break down is essential. Due to Apple's dodgy service and support I can't go 100% Mac, I need at least one Dell PC so that if for some weird reason all my computers would go down simultaneously, I know that I can have at least one of them up and running the next day, and not have to wait three effing weeks like I did with the iMac.

I think your personal experience with AC (& many others with similar), touches upon one of the fundamental reasons why Macs (regardless of overall good reputation for reliability) will most likely always have limited market share. As well as relatively high prices, a lack of compatibility with the general business industry, etc., unless Apple improve their customer services to specifically address the concerns of those using Macs daily for a living or in the business community, I expect most of Apple's customer-base will likely remain restricted to consumers. Considering all the abuse Dell gets on this forum, I find it rather ironic that people such as you have to rely on a Dell PC as back up. :)

Frankly, I sometimes wonder whether Apple care that much, or as much as they used to do, about those using Macs for business. Even changes to the so-called MBP range in recent years seem more targeted to cater to well-off consumers rather than the interests of pro users. For eg., expensive brand PC laptops aimed at business users offer a number of quality matte-screen options. Meantime, Apple appear to increasingly reduce choices across their range, despite growing its cash reserves to some $29 billion plus. Most consumers, I imagine, will be far less fussy in this respect than those sitting at their Macs 8+ hours daily for a living.

[randyhudson]

My HD LCD TV and my HD projector are capable of 720p/1080i, but my 24" Dell monitor can do 1080p, so there are some benefits to be had.

Movies are shot at 24 frames per second. If you're TV accepts 1080 lines at 60i (or, 30 fps), that's more than sufficient to display every last detail in the film. You'd only benefit from 1080p if you're watching something with a frame rate higher than 30, e.g., your PS3 and Gran Turismo 5.

Your 24" Dell has native resolution of 1280, so 1080 content is going to be stretched (resampled) and will lose some of the detail/sharpness.

[randyhudson]

I beg to differ. The difference between a Quicktime HD 720p or 1080p trailer and a DVD on an iMac 24" is monumental.

If you had two versions of a trailer, both 720p, with one almost double the size of the other, you'll see the roughly the same monumental difference.

[AidenShaw]

Your 24" Dell has native resolution of 1280, so 1080 content is going to be stretched (resampled) and will lose some of the detail/sharpness.

It will be letter-boxed, the Dell is 1920x1200 - there will be 60 black rows at the top and bottom.

[armoguy94]

No matter what Apple does, people on the MacForums iMac board will still complain about color gamut and light bleed. :P "This consumer Mac doesn't meet the standards of the professional machine I should've spent my money on. Oh noes!!!"
Something "consumer" should not be so expensive anyways. The current iMacs are worth probably around $700.

[SactoGuy18]

I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.

I have to loudly disagree here!

Yesterday, I was at Fry's Electronics and I saw a playback of a Blu-ray movie on a 20" LG Electronics W2053TQ 1600x900 LCD display fed from an HP Pavilion Elite d5200t with an ATI Radeon HD 4650 graphics card, with playback using PowerDVD 9 software. It was very sharp with excellent color details, to say the least; when the salesperson switched to a regular DVD the loss in detail is VERY visible, especially with a big loss in sharpness. If you can see the difference between DVD and Blu-ray clearly on a 20" widecreen monitor, you can see it even more vividly on a 24" monitor used by the higher-end iMacs. Remember, because you are working at a desktop computer you are sitting a LOT closer to the screen than a regular home theater setup, and as such even on a 20" monitor you can tell the superior sharpness of a Blu-ray disc.

Because Apple's current hardware is ready to support Blu-ray discs (Apple only needs to add a Blu-ray optical drive and appropriate extensions to MacOS X 10.5 and 10.6, since all the Apple hardware is HDCP-compliant), I would not be surprised that Apple will offer Blu-ray support on the higher-end iMacs and Mac Pros as early as October 2009.

[gregorsamsa]

I have to loudly disagree here!

Yesterday, I was at Fry's Electronics and I saw a playback of a Blu-ray movie on a 20" LG Electronics W2053TQ 1600x900 LCD display fed from an HP Pavilion Elite d5200t with an ATI Radeon HD 4650 graphics card, with playback using PowerDVD 9 software. It was very sharp with excellent color details, to say the least; when the salesperson switched to a regular DVD the loss in detail is VERY visible, especially with a big loss in sharpness. If you can see the difference between DVD and Blu-ray clearly on a 20" widecreen monitor, you can see it even more vividly on a 24" monitor used by the higher-end iMacs. Remember, because you are working at a desktop computer you are sitting a LOT closer to the screen than a regular home theater setup, and as such even on a 20" monitor you can tell the superior sharpness of a Blu-ray disc.

The perceived differences are a subjective issue. You & some people can see a clear difference on even smaller screens, many others can't. Fact! It's been proven times over with double-blind trials showing that on screens much smaller than about 50", most people can't tell the difference between proper HD 1080p TVs showing Blu-ray, & relatively cheap, 1080i (interlaced) TVs, showing standard DVDs. AFAIC, unless you can afford & have room for a large HD TV, standard DVDs on 1080i TVs seem to provide a good enough viewing experience for many people.

FWIW, I don't want Blu-ray putting iMac prices up even further, but I think Apple should offer it only in the more expensive iMacs for those who want it, leaving it out of the cheaper iMacs for those who don't give a fig for it. :)

[QuantumLo0p]

IMO, if Apple continues to use low speed dual core chips instead of current speed quad core chips then they should lower prices.
:D

[Anuba]

Something "consumer" should not be so expensive anyways. The current iMacs are worth probably around $700.
Exactly. If they're going to sell a desktop with underwhelming performance (the $1499 model only has a 9400M fer chrissakes!), light leaks, shifty viewing angles etc then price it accordingly and the complaints will stop. As long as they're asking up $1499-2199(!) for an iMac 24", it can and will be held to pro standards.

The original iMac G3 retailed for $1299 which was a fairly attractive price for consumers back then, at a time when there weren't any $400 netbooks or $500 entry-level desktops. That was the whole point of the iMac... entry-level switcher bait. Over time, it's been elevated to boutique status and today it's priced like a MacBook Pro.

[Master Chief]

The Nvidia GTX 285 peaks at 305W per card.

The ATi 4870 peaks at 385 W. The ATi 4890 peaks at equal or a bit less.

So, yes. If I have dual cards in, plus the CPU, accessories plugged in [RAID and more options] I'm going to need >= 1kW.

The Mac Pro 2009 Power is at 1KW and it can't push Dual ATi 4870 HDs.

It's one of the reasons you can have dual double wide high end GPGPUs on the Mac Pro.
/me ducks – Who was the first person to fry a MacPro 2009 PS?

[deconstruct60]

Fact! It's been proven times over with double-blind trials showing that on screens much smaller than about 50", most people can't tell the difference between proper HD 1080p TVs showing Blu-ray, & relatively cheap, 1080i (interlaced) TVs, showing standard DVDs.


Double blind on what content? You can have the mechanics of a double blind study but if the content is whacked, it is still an whacked experimental design.

Is this content shot with HD cameras scaled down for DVDs and then scaled back up the 1080i? Or is this shot with pre-HD cameras and scaled up vs. something shot / projected straight through with HD 1080p resolution?

If scale down and then back up somewhat likely to recover at least some of the separating HD content. What you need is a starting DVD source that has no HD lineage, if really talking no perceptible difference. (could throw in high end film lineage if the scale down and reverse have similar effects also. )

[JDW]

The iMac is the best computer in the world..
While I agree many aspects of the iMac are great (I have the 2009 24" 3.06GHz sitting on my desk at the moment), it is a stretch to call it the "best in the world." This is especially true in light of the uneven backlight problem (http://www.flickr.com/photos/66071596@N00/3588054275/). (Yes, there are indeed backlight issues even with the newest model iMacs. What is more worrying though is that this appears to affect ALL iMacs, not just a select few.)

[Shivetya]

It's hilarious to read people demanding Blu-Ray in the next iMac refresh.

Why?

Because if you're holding out on Apple giving you your first taste of Blu-Ray via your shiny new iMac, you're robbing yourself of a proper HD experience.

Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.

I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.

Seriously. Blu-Ray (or HD/DVD for those who have it) was meant for real screens, not itty bitty computer screens. Then top it off with SOUND! Yeah, without a large screen and great sound you might as well be watching something you downloaded off the net.

[johnyboy]

Have been happy with my 20" imac for three years,,, looking forward to getting the 24" soon alsø,,,,, love it

john

[MacAndy74]

I'm not totally understanding the rumor of next-gen iMacs / Price Cut's clearly.

Are these next-gen iMac's going to have appreciable hardware updates? See: Apple iMac 2010 - What would you like to see changed? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=720568) or are Apple most likely to leave the model's pretty much the same and just cut prices?

I'm in a quandary as I am also looking at buying an iMac very soon.

[whatever]

But is Apple GAINING market share? I don't think so. Maybe treading water, at best. And the recent market analysis posted on this site and others substantiates this fact. Win 7 IS a big deal to Apple, regardless of what you may think. I have it installed on my MBP and those of us that do, actually see how the gap has narrowed: we're not just drinking the Kool-aid. Apple is worried...and they should be. Apple is cutting prices. Apple has, essentially, made 10.6 a 'free' upgrade for OS-X systems, compared with Win 7's just announced pricing scheme. These are all the right moves in anticipation of the Win 7 marketing juggernaut that is going to hit in a few months.
Yes, Apple is gaining market share.

The assumption that you're making about Windows 7 is that people will rush out and buy new PCs just because it's out. However, many of the people who have reviewed Windows 7 are saying the same thing. It's breathing new life into older machines. So although MS will make money from it, don't be surprise if the PC mfgs out there only see a modest increase of business.

[Gasu E.]

The cost of Mac's have gone up across the board this year, so bringing the price down is definitely needed.

However, I wonder if they will really drop the price of iMacs? Their recent 'price drop' of the MacBook Pro 15" actually involved removing the dedicated graphics card. To get the same specs as the older model actually involved a price rise.


I have the same concern, that they will "cut" the price on the line overall by cheapening it. As I am looking to buy a (current) high end model, personally I am just fine with it if they drop the current entry model and move the other existing models down one price slot.

[AidenShaw]

It's breathing new life into older machines. So although MS will make money from it, don't be surprise if the PC mfgs out there only see a modest increase of business.

Many stories talk about businesses which have delayed many purchases - keeping their XP machines and "skipping" Vista.

If the economy continues its slow improvement, there will be a lot of large upgrades as businesses make the jump from XP to Win7.

Don't believe too much about the "new life into old machines". Win7 runs better on a Vista machine than Vista due to better memory utilization, but an old XP machine won't have enough memory or a good enough graphics card to run Win7 well. There are a lot of those systems that will be turned over in the next year.

If a system can't run Vista Aero today, replace it with a new system for Win7. If the system struggles to run Aero, then it might make sense to upgrade to Win7.

[raygungirl]

Don't believe too much about the "new life into old machines". Win7 runs better on a Vista machine than Vista due to better memory utilization, but an old XP machine won't have enough memory or a good enough graphics card to run Win7 well. There are a lot of those systems that will be turned over in the next year.

Isn't it possible to just keep Aero turned off on the older machines? It probably wouldn't ever get activated to begin with because the video card wouldn't be supported.

I thought I also heard that Windows 7 used less memory than Vista, but don't quote me on that. :)

[whatever]

Many stories talk about businesses which have delayed many purchases - keeping their XP machines and "skipping" Vista.

If the economy continues its slow improvement, there will be a lot of large upgrades as businesses make the jump from XP to Win7.

Don't believe too much about the "new life into old machines". Win7 runs better on a Vista machine than Vista due to better memory utilization, but an old XP machine won't have enough memory or a good enough graphics card to run Win7 well. There are a lot of those systems that will be turned over in the next year.

If a system can't run Vista Aero today, replace it with a new system for Win7.
Also your measurements of success are somewhat dated. The fact that Dell may sell more computers than Apple and have a larger market share does not mean that they're a more successful company.

If Apple is able to sell one computer for every 3 PCs sold and an Apple computer cost 3 times more than those PCs, then Apple is doing just as good.

Also how many businesses need improved video for work stuff. The corporate world will rapidly adopt Windows 7 if it's cheap and if the upgrade is painless.

[Goona]

Desktops are dead.

[Shiner]

wow :eek: people still use desktop ?

You guys do know that the iMac IS a laptop with a screen. ALL of the components are from a laptop except the stupid hard drive.

[AidenShaw]

Isn't it possible to just keep Aero turned off on the older machines? It probably wouldn't ever get activated to begin with because the video card wouldn't be supported.

Yes, but it's a waste to turn Aero off on Windows 7. Some of the most useful time savers in Windows 7 involve the taskbar and thumbnail previews. These are done with Aero, so you miss out on some very useful things if Aero is off.

Note that Microsoft has even enhanced RDP (Remote Desktop Protocol) so that Aero can be supported even for remote sessions.


I thought I also heard that Windows 7 used less memory than Vista, but don't quote me on that. :)

That's what I meant by "better memory utilization". It still needs a hefty amount of memory compared to XP, though.


Desktops are dead.

Apple's certainly are... ;)

[Shiner]

On the other hand the Cinema 30" is much thicker from the side than the iMac 24" is... in fact it's twice as thick as most 30" monitors. Not sure why they made it so bulky, especially given their obsession with thinness. But they could certainly fit the innards of one if not two iMacs inside the current 30".

I'm always ambivalent about Apple cutting prices. On one hand their prices are ludicrous and any cuts should be welcome, but on the other hand I know from their history that these price cuts are never done by just shrinking their extreme profit margin down to normal levels, it's usually done by cutting corners on the hardware while preserving the extreme profit margin. Given that they already use a lot of second rate, cheapo stuff in the iMacs and MBPs, where will they go? Will all new iMacs be made with refurbished components? Will they revert to USB 1.0 and remove firewire? Will they buy damaged/discarded components from cheapo brands like Acer and Packard Bell? Will they get a bargain deal on screens with dead pixels? Will they scavenge the lo-tech scrapyard for remaining 4200 RPM, 40 GB hard drives? It will take a lot of corner cutting to lower the prices while still preserving the profit margin at one trillion percent.

+1. I agree with all of your posts. People think apple places the best hardware into their laptops. My recent venture into the MBP 13" has really tainted my view on apple. I have owned different apple computers for 20 years. This most recent laptops quality is just horrible. I am so glad I kept my MBP 15" core duo. I just brought back my new MBP 13" and they asked my I am returning it. I had a list of things and also pointed out the better remove the name pro from that piece of crap machine.

[Ubuntu]

They had better cut the prices. I looked at another computer the other day, and while it has nothing on the iMac in terms of aesthetics, the specs were far better. I mean, 6GB RAM, a quad processor, terabyte HD (5400rpm) and far better graphics card with 1gb VRAM, all for £1000, including an average 24 inch monitor.

The £1800 iMac matches the HD, but nothing else (although it has a faster processor speed I think).

Ridiculous.

[windywoo]

The iMac would have a better quality screen, but even after factoring that into the cost you would still be around £500 richer for purchasing the PC.

[Goona]

Apple's certainly are... ;)

Apparently not just Apple:

http://gizmodo.com/5301401/so-long-desktop-pc-you-suck?skyline=true&s=x

[Eidorian]

Apparently not just Apple:

http://gizmodo.com/5301401/so-long-desktop-pc-you-suck?skyline=true&s=xMobile computing entails too many sacrifices for cost and performance.

It's nice to have my Macbook but I can't really do much with it or expect much of it. I spent most of my time on my desktop. Now if Apple made a desktop computer worth buying I'd consider it.

[techfreak85]

as for the Desktop being dead, i hope Apple will bring it back.

[raygungirl]

In regards to desktops being dead... Maybe I've been looking at prices wrong, but I ordered an iMac instead of a Macbook/Macbook Pro because I could get more and pay less. Unlike a lot of students, I don't use my computer only as an email/music/internet/homework box, but rather for medium gaming, Photoshop/Illustrator/etc, video editing, website coding and designing, and lots and lots of multi-tasking.

Portability is all well and good, but my idea of "getting out of the office" means leaving my home computer room and going to the couch or the bedroom. I also think that when I go on a vacation, it's an excuse for me to finally get away from the computer, so having a laptop wouldn't be good for me. :)

Though it would be tempting, and nice, to get a small Macbook or MBP as an extension of my desktop, the only way I would completely forgo a desktop is if I had a monitor, mouse, and external speakers to plug the laptop into. But since I needed to replace everything but my external speakers, the 24" iMac (3.06GHz & ATI Radeon 4850) was the best deal for me. It was worth it for that screen alone.

Guess all I'm trying to say is... If you want to do any sort of graphics-intensive work or play, you're gonna pay up the backside to do it on a laptop. If you can afford it, awesome. But I can't, yet.

(Before anyone says anything: Yes, I know; I could have gotten a lot more for my money if I bought some chintzy desktop from Dell or something. But I waited 6 years to get a Mac, and I didn't say I bought the iMac because it was the cheapest thing available. It was just the cheapest Mac I could afford that met all my qualifications. :p )

[Bregalad]

No matter what Apple does, people on the MacForums iMac board will still complain about color gamut and light bleed. :P "This consumer Mac doesn't meet the standards of the professional machine I should've spent my money on. Oh noes!!!"

Just because I'm a "consumer" and not a "professional" doesn't change the fact that a $1499-$2299 computer shouldn't have uneven backlighting.

Those advocating Core i7 for the iMac really haven't done any research. The iMac is using a CPU that only draws about 35W. The Core i7 draws 130W. The iMac would need to be twice as thick to accommodate all the cooling requirements.

As forum threads for years have pointed out there is no desktop computer in Apple's lineup. For many that's enough to decry the entire lineup as a joke, but I prefer to see some nice niche computers and a huge gaping hole where the majority of desktop buyers should be.

The mini is a terrific little machine. I'm planning to buy one after Snow Leopard ships for my young children who currently suffer from terrible Flash performance at their favorite websites. Their current G4 tower is also annoyingly loud so I won't miss it.

The iMac is OK for the single threaded universe, but is woefully inadequate for the Snow Leopard future that's fast approaching. Problems like badly uneven backlighting, excessive gloss, high repair rates and nightmare procedures for basic repairs/upgrades keep me far away from them.

Apple promotes the iMac as a green choice, but there's nothing green about having to replace both your computer and display frequently. By virtue of having faster components and more upgrade options a true Mac desktop would last at least a year longer than an iMac and the separate display would last two Macs, but Apple thinks that would cost them a lot of sales so it ain't gonna happen.

The Mac Pro is built for a specific professional audience using some of the most expensive parts available. "The rest of us" aren't supposed to look at the Mac Pro and professionals aren't supposed to notice that they're being sold a $50 graphics card with their $2500+ machine.

For the past 5 years Apple has shown no interest in the desktop market and I don't expect that to change. For the past 5 years I've avoided giving Apple any of my money and I don't expect that to change either. The used Mac market should be able to provide my kids with adequate Flash performance and me with a replacement for my G5 tower.

[AidenShaw]

Those advocating Core i7 for the iMac really haven't done any research. The iMac is using a CPU that only draws about 35W. The Core i7 draws 130W.

The iMac would need to be twice as thick to accommodate all the cooling requirements.

And that would be bad? Why?

Except for some "form over function" fashionistas - what would it hurt to make the Imac a little thicker -- and give it some useful power?

[Sehnsucht]

Do away with the iMac altogether, and stick a Core i7 Mac Pro tower in its place.

There, I said it. :D

[Eidorian]

And that would be bad? Why?

Except for some "form over function" fashionistas - what would it hurt to make the Imac a little thicker -- and give it some useful power?Sadly Core i7 is going to apply to the 4 core, 8 thread Clarksfields as well. :confused:

The current iMac's CPU is at 44W over the previous stepping's 55W.

[AidenShaw]

Do away with the iMac altogether, and stick a Core i7 Mac Pro tower in its place.

The Mac Pro is a humonguous behemoth of an over-sized high-priced workstation.

The Mac "desktop" should be a mini-tower or small midi-tower - like the Dell Studio XPS.

Apple and Jony Ive could do so much with a mini-tower using Core i7 desktop parts - so sad that they don't.

And no need to get rid of the Imac - it's a nice laptop-on-a-stick for people who want a pretty computer. (Although, they should get rid of the "chin" once and for all. The tacky white plastic Imacs had a huge, ugly chin. The Alu ones hide some of it under the glass - but no chin would be better.)

[badNameErr]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/29/intels-32nm-clarkdale-cpus-moved-up-to-q4-a-full-year-ahead-of/

I think I'll wait for a 32nm.

[Maserati7200]

(Although, they should get rid of the "chin" once and for all. The tacky white plastic Imacs had a huge, ugly chin. The Alu ones hide some of it under the glass - but no chin would be better.)

I personally like the chin :rolleyes:

[MacAndy74]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/29/intels-32nm-clarkdale-cpus-moved-up-to-q4-a-full-year-ahead-of/

I think I'll wait for a 32nm.

Great sign for a new iMac refresh then :eek: glad I'm holding off now.

[skviki]

No matter what Apple does, people on the MacForums iMac board will still complain about color gamut and light bleed. :P "This consumer Mac doesn't meet the standards of the professional machine I should've spent my money on. Oh noes!!!"

That is totally stupid. Their "pro" line is hideously expensive and thus innapropriate for many uses. A graphic designer doesn't need the power of macpro!.
And Apples bragging about quality and all that makes it inexcusable that they use inferior hardware. iMacs lcd have been problematic from the start and the common symptom for those lcds is that in time they develop hideous dark spots.

http://nanchatte.wordpress.com/2008/08/12/my-intel-aluminium-imac-24-roasting-with-dark-spots-on-screen/

It used to be designers choice, photograšhers liked it (the white one). There is no reason why it should be crap now and why I should rationalise it in the "ah it's consumer afterall" way.
Now for this price you should get the premium hardware. If they used the best - the price would be right. The price is just a bit over the system you could put together yourself with poremium hardware but the small difference is worth it for the added value in aestethics - but unfortunately some of the key imac hardware is low quality OR the build, the design is flawed. And the argument that "it's not a pro machine, it's consumer" doesn't cut it. It's a well powered machine, too thin and that is why it gets too hot, the lcd is bad . maybe because of this design error the components overheat and get weird - but this isn't excusable. All imacs with this problem should be recalled and fixed for free even if out of warranty if apple cares for it's brand.

[skviki]

iMacs are brilliant, but ridiculously overpriced. I almost feel ashamed when someone asks me how much i paid for mine

If they used proper lcds or adapt the design so the case and components inside would't heat eachother and shorten eachothers life or hamper the performance it wouldn't be THAT overpriced - if you take one of the best - 24" Dell monitor, and other computer hardware (same motherboard type and graphic card, other components like power supply, , a very good case etc etc) you would get very close to the iMac regarding the price. The only thing I can think of at the moment apple overprices terribly in computers is RAM for god knows what reason.

[skviki]

That's exactly how I feel (and it's one of the reasons I don't understand the rise of netbooks). I have my imac at home and my iphone for mobility. There will always be people who need to do real work on the road, but for those who toted around laptops just to check email and otherwise "stay connected," smartphones do the job at a fraction the size.

I agree.
But laptops are nice for a freelancer for example, who are free to do work where ever they want or for taking their work with them to a client, make corrections there etc... otherwise for mail or limited internet use - hand applications are best. But netbooks also have their use - especially if you work with texts it is a welcome tool to do work on the fly, where ever you are and get on with other things. My girlfriend uses it constantly (10" screen MSI 100) and keeps it in her handbag along with lipstick and girly stuff :). She is a translator and with a netbook she isn't glued to her desk the whole day and can roam around and if there is some relatively small text to do she does it while having a cup of coffe or two in the cafe.

[skviki]

How can anyone complain about a price reduction? Amazing. The iMac is the best computer in the world, with the best OS in the world on it. How could lowering its price or offering a wider choice of models cause dissent. Tsk, tsk people :confused:.

Rich :cool:

The question is whether this is a price cut or just stripping down the hardware as it was with the 15" macbook pro or in fact a hidden increase masking as a decrease.
Apple is behaving badly recently and these questions are in place when Apple makes new moves.

[butterfly0fdoom]

The question is whether this is a price cut or just stripping down the hardware as it was with the 15" macbook pro or in fact a hidden increase masking as a decrease.
Apple is behaving badly recently and these questions are in place when Apple makes new moves.

Well, now, the 13" MBP was price dropped with an increase in hardware while the cheaper 15" option involves paying more for a larger screen (making it the same kind of premium the 17" commands over the high-end 15"). It's not really stripping down the hardware (unless you're a glass half-empty kind). It's just enlarging the high-end 13" model.

[TK2K]

switching to 20" was good but i mean the problem is it means the price stays high

[Sehnsucht]

The Mac Pro is a humonguous behemoth of an over-sized high-priced workstation.

A Core i7 Mac Pro would be cheaper, would not be a workstation, and the size is good. The current Mac Pro is actually too small, and needs to be bigger.

And no need to get rid of the Imac - it's a nice laptop-on-a-stick for people who want a pretty computer. (Although, they should get rid of the "chin" once and for all. The tacky white plastic Imacs had a huge, ugly chin. The Alu ones hide some of it under the glass - but no chin would be better.)

More cosmetically appealing than the Studio XPS. :cool:

[SactoGuy18]

The perceived differences are a subjective issue. You & some people can see a clear difference on even smaller screens, many others can't. Fact! It's been proven times over with double-blind trials showing that on screens much smaller than about 50", most people can't tell the difference between proper HD 1080p TVs showing Blu-ray, & relatively cheap, 1080i (interlaced) TVs, showing standard DVDs. AFAIC, unless you can afford & have room for a large HD TV, standard DVDs on 1080i TVs seem to provide a good enough viewing experience for many people.


Here's a problem with desktop computers playing back DVD's: they don't have upconversion in the playback software and/or hardware like you have console Blu-ray players and newer DVD players connected to the appropriate display using the HDMI connection. As such, it doesn't try to "upscale" the resolution to take advantage of the sharpness available with 20" or later widescreen monitors that have HDCP, and even on a well-mastered DVD like the Extended Editions of the Lord of the Rings movies you can see the very distinct "fuzziness" in the background details. Meanwhile in the setup I mentioned originally, when you play back a real Blu-ray disc you get the full resolution of the disc, and on a movie like Disney/Pixar's Cars (my "reference" disc to demonstrate the amazing sharpness of Blu-ray format) looks totally amazing even on a 20" widescreen computer monitor. :)

As for Apple not supporting Blu-ray, up until very recently getting a license for the technology was a complicated, expensive process. But now that you can get a simplified, "single-point" license for this technology, it also means dramatically lower licensing costs, and that could point the way for Apple to support Blu-ray technology on the iMac, Mac Pro and higher-end MacBook Pro laptops.

[Anuba]

Desktops are dead.
Yeah, for people who use their computers for surfing, mailing and watching YouTube clips.

As long as high-end laptops only offer 1/4 of the performance of high-end desktops (Mac Pro vs MBP geekbench high scores: 18765 vs 4584) and are plagued by various bottlenecks, they will remain semi-useless for audio production, video production, 3D animation, serious gaming and many other heavy-duty tasks that neither laptops nor iMacs can handle gracefully. The laws of physics will see too it that headless desktop computers will be around for decades to come.

[NintendoFan]

http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/29/intels-32nm-clarkdale-cpus-moved-up-to-q4-a-full-year-ahead-of/

I think I'll wait for a 32nm.

I don't think we will be getting Clarkdale chips, their TDP is 73 watts according to Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)

[Sehnsucht]

Yeah, for people who use their computers for surfing, mailing and watching YouTube clips.

As long as high-end laptops only offer 1/4 of the performance of high-end desktops (Mac Pro vs MBP geekbench high scores: 18765 vs 4584) and are plagued by various bottlenecks, they will remain semi-useless for audio production, video production, 3D animation, serious gaming and many other heavy-duty tasks that neither laptops nor iMacs can handle gracefully. The laws of physics will see too it that headless desktop computers will be around for decades to come.

+1. Anyone who thinks laptops will eventually replace desktops (and I know quite a few people who say that) have probably never used a Mac Pro or other large workstation for serious heavy-duty stuff. The Mac Pro is extremely powerful, and nobody who's really serious about their work would trade a MP for a friggin' laptop. That and the fact that heavy, non-portable towers sit under a desk and aren't subject to being dropped and beat on like laptops are.

[Eidorian]

+1. Anyone who thinks laptops will eventually replace desktops (and I know quite a few people who say that) have probably never used a Mac Pro or other large workstation for serious heavy-duty stuff. The Mac Pro is extremely powerful, and nobody who's really serious about their work would trade a MP for a friggin' laptop. That and the fact that heavy, non-portable towers sit under a desk and aren't subject to being dropped and beat on like laptops are.Which is another reason I think my next Mac is going to be the MacBook Air. I just need something to complement my desktop on the road. I'll hold out until 2010 when my AppleCare finishes on my Macbook and hand it off to a sibling that's using an iMac G4 right.

My Mac isn't my livelihood so it doesn't need that much power. Just keep dropping the price on it Apple. ;)

[deconstruct60]

However, I wonder if they will really drop the price of iMacs? Their recent 'price drop' of the MacBook Pro 15" actually involved removing the dedicated graphics card. To get the same specs as the older model actually involved a price rise.

I have the same concern, that they will "cut" the price on the line overall by cheapening it. As I am looking to buy a (current) high end model, personally I am just fine with it if they drop the current entry model and move the other existing models down one price slot.

The embedded quote isn't quite aligned with history. There were two variations on the 15" before. Now there are three. You can't get the same specs as the older "low end" model as they upgraded the specs you get at the "old" lowest price. If you wanted a 9600 graphics chip in your 15" it is same cost now as then (minus variations on currency exchange). Dropping the 9600 is a new config.

Typically, the slide down with minor tweaks is what happens (minor things like hard drive adjustments or not so minor minimum RAM adjustments. ) So the current high end will likely shift to being the "mid range" model. Although, the GT 130 is likely to get replaced by the GT 230 more computational horsepower for same max TDP watts.

The 9400M will be older and even cheaper at that point too. Another way to cut costs is not to move up if chip supplier is making longer run with older part at lower costs. Apple has to be getting a big volume discount here. Practically everything at this point has a 9400M in it.

A price cut would seem to suggest that Apple won't be aggressive in shifting to the i3/i5 Arrandale (sub 36W) mobile solutions if they were to wait till late into Q4 for the update. Intel should be charging a price premium when these first hit the market so that seems doubtful that would end up being a net cost reduction. But perhaps Intel would be very aggressive in trying to kick Nvidia back out of the Apple's core I/O chipset budget.

Sticking with one last refresh of Core 2 Duo would allow Apple to wait a bit longer before jumping into Arrandale which may get them to the first price cut point for that line.

[deconstruct60]

+1. Anyone who thinks laptops will eventually replace desktops (and I know quite a few people who say that) have probably never used a Mac Pro or other large workstation for serious heavy-duty stuff.

I think the problem is in the imprecision in talking about market scope.
For the overall "Personal Computer" market, laptops form factors will become the dominating category.

There will always be hard core gamers and business folks who need workstations. The percentage of the overall market that they represent is shrinking (and will continue to shrink) over time. If pushed down to into less than 10% (or lower) of the overall market then "desktops have been replaced" effectively. Is it going to drop down to zero percent? No.

The gap between lowest cost "desktop" and "laptop" is getting smaller and smaller. At some point the deskstop can't limbo under the bar anymore.

[deconstruct60]

I don't think we will be getting Clarkdale chips, their TDP is 73 watts according to Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)

It is Clarksfield, not Clarkdale, that is a possible choice for the iMac. It is a mobile class processor package.
The non top end Clarksfield are 35-45W TDP which conceptually would work (some power radiation is being moved around from chipset to processor). Would be somewhat of a stretch though running 4 cores (and some half dozen, or more, of GPU cores ) full blast inside of an iMac case. However, not sure if you could do a whole line-up of iMacs with largely the same motherboard if tried that though. Wouldn't make sense to have iMacs with vastly different boards. For example bottom two on Core Duo and upper two on i7/i3 designs. Not going to get maximum scale on parts.

Clarksfield was to be priced a bit high for iMacs though.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-will-only-launch-three-mobile-nehalem-clarksfield-cpus-in-2009-20090421/


Longer term it is Arrandale ( 32nm) is Apple wants to keep the iMac pegged at 2 cores max. Staying at 2 cores would also help them move the prices down. Those arrive has been pulled back from Q1 2010 to Q4 2009 ... but can the iMac wait that long for a refresh?

[NintendoFan]

It is Clarksfield, not Clarkdale, that is a possible choice for the iMac. It is a mobile class processor package.
The non top end Clarksfield are 35-45W TDP which conceptually would work (some power radiation is being moved around from chipset to processor). Would be somewhat of a stretch though running 4 cores (and some half dozen, or more, of GPU cores ) full blast inside of an iMac case. However, not sure if you could do a whole line-up of iMacs with largely the same motherboard if tried that though. Wouldn't make sense to have iMacs with vastly different boards. For example bottom two on Core Duo and upper two on i7/i3 designs. Not going to get maximum scale on parts.

Clarksfield was to be priced a bit high for iMacs though.
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/intel-will-only-launch-three-mobile-nehalem-clarksfield-cpus-in-2009-20090421/

Longer term it is Arrandale ( 32nm) is Apple wants to keep the iMac pegged at 2 cores max. Staying at 2 cores would also help them move the prices down. Those arrive has been pulled back from Q1 2010 to Q4 2009 ... but can the iMac wait that long for a refresh?

Ah, I see, well you linked to an article talking about Clarkdale...

I would love to see Clarksfield in the iMac but I don't know how Apple is going to approach the lower clock speeds.

[badNameErr]

Longer term it is Arrandale ( 32nm) is Apple wants to keep the iMac pegged at 2 cores max. Staying at 2 cores would also help them move the prices down. Those arrive has been pulled back from Q1 2010 to Q4 2009 ... but can the iMac wait that long for a refresh?

I was thinking we'd see a minor update in the next 1-2 months (and the price drop) then a switch to Arrandale early in 2010.

Sound plausible?

edit: I'm busy trying to figure out when to buy. Can't you tell? ;)

[gregorsamsa]

Double blind on what content? You can have the mechanics of a double blind study but if the content is whacked, it is still an whacked experimental design.

Is this content shot with HD cameras scaled down for DVDs and then scaled back up the 1080i? Or is this shot with pre-HD cameras and scaled up vs. something shot / projected straight through with HD 1080p ?

If scale down and then back up somewhat likely to recover at least some of the separating HD content. What you need is a starting DVD source that has no HD lineage, if really talking no perceptible difference. (could throw in high end film lineage if the scale down and reverse have similar effects also. )

Sorry I didn't get back sooner (been away for a couple of days). I don't recall all the details to be able to answer your questions specifically & can't find the tech forum which had the links but, IIRC, one link had a comparison between Blu-ray DVDs & standard DVDs upscaled, shown on proper HD 1080p & 1080i 32" TV screens.

Most people in the test couldn't see much difference on these 32" screens when sitting more than a few feet away. The recommendation was that in order for most average viewers to appreciate a significant difference in the quality of the Blu-ray DVDS on a 1080p TV, whilst sitting the same distance away, they needed at least a 50" screen. :rolleyes:

[NintendoFan]

I was thinking we'd see a minor update in the next 1-2 months (and the price drop) then a switch to Arrandale early in 2010.

Sound plausible?

edit: I'm busy trying to figure out when to buy. Can't you tell? ;)

That is probably what will occur, as that is what would be the cheapest solution for Apple.

[gregorsamsa]

Here's a problem with playing back DVD's: they don't have upconversion in the and/or like you have console Blu-ray players and newer DVD players connected to the appropriate display using the HDMI connection. As such, it doesn't try to "upscale" the resolution to take advantage of the sharpness available with 20" or later widescreen monitors that have HDCP, and even on a well-mastered DVD like the Extended Editions of the Lord of the Rings movies you can see the very distinct "fuzziness" in the background details. Meanwhile in the setup I mentioned originally, when you play back a real Blu-ray disc you get the full resolution of the disc, and on a movie like Disney/Pixar's Cars (my "reference" disc to demonstrate the amazing sharpness of Blu-ray format) looks totally amazing even on a 20" widescreen computer monitor. :)

As for Apple not supporting Blu-ray, up until very recently getting a license for the technology was a complicated, expensive process. But now that you can get a simplified, "single-point" license for this technology, it also means dramatically lower licensing costs, and that could point the way for Apple to support Blu-ray technology on the iMac, Pro and higher-end .

Thanks for the links & I can appreciate the visual distinction between desktops & more dedicated Blu-ray viewing technology. I think that Apple ought to strike a balance here by offering the latest Blu-ray technology on at least their 2 highest-priced 24" iMacs. However, I wouldn't want it included across the Mac range just yet due to Apple's relatively high pricing on newer technology.

Remember that, as well engineered as Macs generally are (with some inevitable exceptions), Apple only dropped DVD-ROM drives from certain Macs fairly recently. :) With Apple reluctant to compromise their (roughly) 30% profit margins, adding Blu-ray without also an extortionate price increase seems rather unlikely.

[AidenShaw]

Wouldn't make sense to have iMacs with vastly different boards. For example bottom two on Core Duo and upper two on i7/i3 designs. Not going to get maximum scale on parts.

Look at mobo companies like Asus, Gigabyte and the others. They offer lots of different models with minor parts variations.

Asus has 9 different Core i7 models, Newegg has 46 models of Asus motherboards for Core 2 CPUs.

Since we hear that desktops are "dead" and that nobody does DIY anymore - one has to assume that Asus sales volumes per board are tiny compared to any model of Apple.

So, if one is trying to argue that Apple couldn't afford two motherboards - how does one explain the huge number of motherboard models that are available for the niche desktop DIY market?

Answer: mobos are designed and manufactured by computers, the fixed design cost for a mobo is really quite small. You don't need a huge production run to hit a low price - the per unit manufacturing cost is the major part of a mobo's price.

[deconstruct60]

I was thinking we'd see a minor update in the next 1-2 months (and the price drop) then a switch to Arrandale early in 2010.

Sound plausible?

edit: I'm busy trying to figure out when to buy. Can't you tell? ;)

Plausible. Depends a bit on how quickly Intel wants to kill off the Core Duo 2 Peryns (e.g, scale back volume discounts). Doubtful Apple is going to get something faster than 3.06 GHz out of Intel to "move" the line down driven primarily by speed bumps to the processor package.

Apple could do something like put eSATA ( or some kind of "power user" differential ) on the top 1 or 2 units and leave that off for the ones farther down the line. ( akin to when they had the iMacs split with 400 vs. 800 firewire). Other power user options are something like a small PCI-e flash drive so that the high end version got two storage drives instead of one. Or an early stab at USB 3.0. [ Historically though, Apple has tried out things like this on the Mac Pro and/or Xserve first. The only one above done so far is something similar to the flash drive on PCI-e. If iMacs got USB 3.0 first that would be interesting different move. ]

There seems to be a set of power users at the top end of the iMac scale that could use faster I/O (need small RAID on 3.0GBs bus set up) than what can get out of the iMac right now, but don't really need the horsepower of the Mac Pro. (that would shutdown a portion of the "I need a mini tower" crowd. ). Those folks wouldn't see any faster CPU, perhaps move the 3.06 to the top two slots instead of just the top, and would use "more I/O" to justify the price.

That way Apple could coast till May-June for a switch to Arrandale. If Apple were to switch to Arrandale in the March-April time frame then the Oct-Nov iMac intro I'd expect it to be will be extremely minor (like same stuff , maybe bigger hard drives, and cheaper prices). Only have a fixed set of iMac engineers probably not enough to pipeline two different efforts.

[deconstruct60]

Look at mobo companies like Asus, Gigabyte and the others. They offer lots of different models with minor parts variations.

Asus has 9 different Core i7 models, Newegg has 46 models of Asus motherboards for Core 2 CPUs.


And zero of those companies have the margins that Apple has.
Even though there are 40+ of them, many of those Asus boards will see run rates higher than that of the iMac.

It isn't just the motherboard designs. It is the more complicated inventory/contracting, variations on cases (which may feed back into inventory also), testing/qualification , long term maintenance/support costs, etc. It is total system costs.


The only way a split line up would work is if the top level boards were the pre-cursors to the mainstream line of the next year. (e.g., top line gets USB 3.0 on next bump. That spreads to the entire line over next 18 months. ) I don't think Apple wants to go to a mainstream iMac with a Clarksfield thermal envelope issues. I think they want to stay in the sub 36 W window. Going to be hard to sell slower clock speed but got more cores when have been using clock speed to move this line along for so long. How many iMac uses are chomping at the bit being short on cores?

While Arrandale says Q4 2009... that is likely latter in 2009 rather than sooner. Second Intel is being aggressive here ( pulled in the timeline) in part to compete with AMD. That's is a risk for Apple if Intel ends up with a quirk.

Apple hasn't used an i7 class part. No reason to see why they'd start to know. Just isn't likely to happen.

The DIY custom built market is probably just as big as Apple's whole Personal Computer market share. The major players in the PC market are those who crack 10%. They are mega gaints if can creep on 20%. It is a highly fragmented market. That's says nothing major about Apple as a whole system and service delivery vendor total lifecycle costs.

[macjiro]

Thanks for all the great details about chips, dates, etc.
So, i feel pretty good that now is a good time to buy an Imac
then wait cause its only going to be a nominal gain. My beef with
the current models is the 9400M. But there's no way i'm gonna
spend over 2K for any comp even though i dig the Pro.

[elgrecomac]

Apple is gaining market share by dollars and units in US and internationally. Their dollars are also up year over year. The one measure that is not up year over year is desktop units. But it fell less then their competitors.

Sorry to disagree with you. Your position has been Apple's mantra for 15 years where they grew from 2% to 8% market share. Apple has brand loyalty at the individual level but major corporations have not jumped all over Apple for one big reason: price. Mac loyalists will argue that Macs are cheaper in the long run but USA and international corporation are just not willing to toss out their existing installed base.

Win 7 is good not great. It is not OSX but it is stable, fast and feature rich. I easily installed it on a 3 year old sony Vaio with 1gb of ram...and it runs almost as fast as OSX on my MPB with 4gb of ram. The irony of it is that Win 7 will run on a tremendous number of older PCs. Can the same be said for OSX 10.6?

And another issue Apple has to address-- Netbooks. They are cheap, fast and can run any OS they choose...including OSX, albeit illegally.

[elgrecomac]

x

[albusseverus]

The irony of it is that Win 7 will run on a tremendous number of older PCs. Can the same be said for OSX 10.6?

Considering Vista didn't run on those machines, even though some were sold with Vista, Microsoft needs to make up for how badly they let their customer down over the last 3 years. Apple on the other hand has always served its customers exceptionally well and while VERY old machines can't move much further forward, Leopard eats even Vista 2.0 (tell the truth, MS) for lunch on so many levels.

Back on topic - Lower prices ≠ quad cores (or better) + Blu-ray. I wish it did, but it seems Apple will be stringing the C2Ds along at least until the new year. Good news for current iMac owners (our machines stay 'current' longer), but bad news for Apple. Quad cores are quite common now in the Windows world. I doubt they perform better than a Mac with C2D and properly designed guts, but most of us were hoping iMac would get quad cores in January this year, not next year.

[badNameErr]

Thanks deconstruct60, and all the other contributors.

This is a great thread.

[Anuba]

I think the problem is in the imprecision in talking about market scope.
For the overall "Personal Computer" market, laptops form factors will become the dominating category.
Maybe, but I don't think laptops will ever take over completely even in the consumer segment because they will always be the wrong form factor for some people.

Not everyone needs or wants a portable computer because [mobility + computing] simply isn't part of their lives. They consider the computer a home appliance. They don't want a mobile computer any more than they want a mobile TV, a mobile fridge or a mobile dishwasher. As pieces of interior decoration, laptops suck. Not even a MacBook Pro can make a desk look half as good as an alu iMac can. A laptop isn't living room-ish, it belongs in a messy student dorm.

If you never use your computer on the road, a laptop is so many kinds of wrong it's ridiculous. Even the biggest ones have tiny screens. The keyboards are cramped. I've seen so many examples where people absolutely shouldn't have bought a laptop. It never leaves their desk, and when they work on it they sit in an uncomfortable hunched up position, vulture-necked, frowning and peering at the microscopic text. Fail. Get an iMac.

[deconstruct60]

Maybe, but I don't think laptops will ever take over completely even in the consumer segment because they will always be the wrong form factor for some people.


The iMac is almost the laptop form factor. It is hardly any different than those 9-11 lbs "desktop replacement" laptops which are almost never transported either. Some folks get those when have limited space and want to be able to "put away" the computer when want to do other things with that deskspace.


Other than a detached keyboard (and the associated clam shell effect for transport when it is attached), the monitor and computer are all in one device. Between All-in-ones and laptops... that will be the major formats. Especially as things shrink down to 2-4 major chips packages being practically the whole computer and the thermal problems come more under control. Couple that with screen implementions getting thinner and there is fixed, irreplaceable backlight and priced in the commodity zone.


Even if not going to take it on the road, fewer and fewer folks want the computer to suck up living space. Should take "less" space. That is a very similar major design constraint that laptops take on. Less space and vertical orientation certainly allows for 20+ inch screens much better than the classic laptop (clam shell) approach does.

Sure there are going to be people who need slots , massive heat sinks, and/or stuff that requires a box.

[Anuba]

The iMac is almost the laptop form factor. It is hardly any different than those 9-11 lbs "desktop replacement" laptops which are almost never transported either.
Well, the iMac 24" has about 94 pixels per inch while the MBP 17" has 133. I have both, and while I'm no stranger to tiny pixels I really wouldn't recommend the MBP 17" to anyone with less than 20/20 vision. A laptop is a huge compromise in terms of ergonomics, screen real estate, performance, speakers, connectivity and expandability, and the bang for buck is abysmal. You can get a 3.06 GHz iMac 24" w/ 1 TB HDD and NVidia GT130 512 MB for $2199 -- a MacBook Pro 17" 3.06 GHz is $2799. The only advantage it has is portability, and if you don't need that, the iMac is clearly the way to go.

All-in-ones would probably be outselling headless desktops among consumers right now if the price was right, but Apple sticks with their premium pricing and PC manufacturers like Dell and HP who both offer iMac ripoff models (OK, the HP has a touchscreen, but still) didn't make them inexpensive, they wanted a piece of that premium pie. If iMac and its PC clones were competing with entry-level headless desktop in terms of price, consumers wouldn't be buying as many laptops as they do, and they wouldn't be buying headless minitowers at all.

[froggyhenry]

1st off for my 1st post, a big THANKS to everyone that's contributed to this thread. It's came timely for me as I've been debating when to buy my first iMac. We just bought the wife a 15" MBP at the end of May and promptly got stung 15 days later when Apple decided to lower the price and then on top of that I recently read that folks that have bought on/after 8 Jun 09 get an upgrade to Snow Leopard for next to nothing.....so we got blasted on this front as well. :mad: In short, I've been gun-shy about getting stung again.

As life-long PC users (we're nearing 40yrs old now) we've been totally amazed with how cool Apple stuff is and are kicking ourselves in the butt for not switching over long ago. We credit some friends that are an Apple freak household to finally pushing us over the edge/showing us the light. We started with iPods, moved to more/bigger iPods and now it's growing from there.

Upon buying the Mrs her MBP I started wondering if I should buy a laptop as well, but the more time I spend on it I've realized I'm a desktop type of user so it's iMac for me. Anuba, your post below sums up exactly how I am/see the issue....great post.





Not everyone needs or wants a portable computer because [mobility + computing] simply isn't part of their lives. They consider the computer a home appliance. They don't want a mobile computer any more than they want a mobile TV, a mobile fridge or a mobile dishwasher. As pieces of interior decoration, laptops suck. Not even a MacBook Pro can make a desk look half as good as an alu iMac can. A laptop isn't living room-ish, it belongs in a messy student dorm.

If you never use your computer on the road, a laptop is so many kinds of wrong it's ridiculous. Even the biggest ones have tiny screens. The keyboards are cramped. I've seen so many examples where people absolutely shouldn't have bought a laptop. It never leaves their desk, and when they work on it they sit in an uncomfortable hunched up position, vulture-necked, frowning and peering at the microscopic text. Fail. Get an iMac.

[iAlexG]

That would be good since I spent a lot on my Macbook Pro a few weeks ago because I really want a iMac

[chrisdee]

I just don't se imac with quad core. I ranted about quad core imacs back in october 2008. Now, 3 months short of a year after they still cant get their finger out. Anything other than a Core I7 inside IMAC would be an insult for the next imminent update.

But I dont expect it. Apple is a company thats more occupied with making products based on apperance than content, but thats just my ranting uneducated opinion.:)

[MorphingDragon]

Just in time for University next year? Please, Macs are ridiculously expensive and the last time you gave "cuts" you raised our prices!!!

www.apple.com/nz to see for yourself. After conversion we have a European Country Premium of about $200-$1K for MacBooks. About $500-2K for Desktops. That goes for the UK too.

[jb1280]

Just in time for University next year? Please, Macs are ridiculously expensive and the last time you gave "cuts" you raised our prices!!!

www.apple.com/nz to see for yourself. After conversion we have a European Country Premium of about $500-$1K for MacBooks non Mac-Pros. About $2K for Mac-Pros. That goes for the UK too.

Can we say exaggeration?

Base 13" Macbook Pro in the United States is $1199 (excluding sales tax).
Base 13" Macbook Pro in New Zealand is $1344 (excluding GST)
Base 13" Macbook Pro in Finland is $1316 (excluding VAT)
Base 13" Macbook Pro in the United Kingdom is $1275 (excluding VAT).

So for that machine, in New Zealand you are paying a USD145 Difference.

[MattInOz]

Just in time for University next year? Please, Macs are ridiculously expensive and the last time you gave "cuts" you raised our prices!!!

www.apple.com/nz to see for yourself. After conversion we have a European Country Premium of about $500-$1K for MacBooks non Mac-Pros. About $2K for Mac-Pros. That goes for the UK too.

Same here in Oz but both our dollars did have a rather rapid fall against the green as the all U.S. investors in markets pulled out to shore up the homeland.

so that update price in here where priced and 60c in the dollar plus gst, compared to the update before running at 85c in the dollar plus gst. So all the price drop was eaten plus some in currency moves.

Good news is the most recent laptop revision was back above 70c and our currencies have been gain strength. So if Apple can do a revision with U.S. price cuts then it's looking good for that price drop plus some to be passed on here and there.

We are hanging out for something to trigger a repricing of the iMacs to current conditions and update would be nice to go with it.

[zw-gator]

I just don't se imac with quad core. I ranted about quad core imacs back in october 2008. Now, 3 months short of a year after they still cant get their finger out. Anything other than a Core I7 inside IMAC would be an insult for the next imminent update.

But I dont expect it. Apple is a company thats more occupied with making products based on apperance than content, but thats just my ranting uneducated opinion.:)

Exactly. Intel's Q series is dying.

i3/i5/i7 is what Apple should be focusing on.

[MorphingDragon]

Can we say exaggeration?

Base 13" Macbook Pro in the United States is $1199 (excluding sales tax).
Base 13" Macbook Pro in New Zealand is $1344 (excluding GST)
Base 13" Macbook Pro in Finland is $1316 (excluding VAT)
Base 13" Macbook Pro in the United Kingdom is $1275 (excluding VAT).

So for that machine, in New Zealand you are paying a USD145 Difference.

I was talking in NZD price difference. Apple sells more than MacBooks.

(Excluding Taxes)
Base 8-Core Mac Pro:
3,299.00 USD, Should be 5,230.73 NZD. Really it's 6,488.00. Thats a difference of $1257.27.

Base 24" iMac:
1,499.00 USD, Should Be 2,376.74 NZD. Really it's 2,932.44. Thats a difference of $555.70.

The 24" iMac I want to get: (2.93, GT130, 640GB, 4GB, Remote)
1,949.00 USD, Should be 3,090.24 NZD. Really it's 3,900.45. Thats a difference of $810.21.

Can you say Mhur?

[MorphingDragon]

Same here in Oz but both our dollars did have a rather rapid fall against the green as the all U.S. investors in markets pulled out to shore up the homeland.

so that update price in here where priced and 60c in the dollar plus gst, compared to the update before running at 85c in the dollar plus gst. So all the price drop was eaten plus some in currency moves.

Good news is the most recent laptop revision was back above 70c and our currencies have been gain strength. So if Apple can do a revision with U.S. price cuts then it's looking good for that price drop plus some to be passed on here and there.

We are hanging out for something to trigger a repricing of the iMacs to current conditions and update would be nice to go with it.

But we still have a European Tax. It doesn't cost $100 ship a computer and it's even less in bulk.

[jb1280]

$145 US equals $229 New Zealand - a number far less than the artificially high price discrepancy of $500-$1000 that you stated.

You stated:

fter conversion we have a European Country Premium of about $500-$1K for MacBooks non Mac-Pros

This statement is categorically false.

[MorphingDragon]

$145 US equals $229 New Zealand - a number far less than the artificially high price discrepancy of $500-$1000 that you stated.

You stated:



This statement is categorically false.

Read the Edit(s).

And yes I still hold my statements. Maybe you would like it if Apple charged you an extra 10%-30% extra for no reason hmm!?

[Drag'nGT]

Read the Edit(s).

And yes I still hold my statements. Maybe you would like it if Apple charged you an extra 10%-30% extra for no reason hmm!?

So what... you think they just said "Hey! Screw New Zealand! Let's charge more!!!" :rolleyes: There's something factored in that you nor I see/know about.

[MrBean]

Read the Edit(s).

And yes I still hold my statements. Maybe you would like it if Apple charged you an extra 10%-30% extra for no reason hmm!?

Yeah, you're right. It's Apple that is fluctuating the value of your currency :rolleyes:

[AidenShaw]

Chuckled when I saw this in Fry's weekend sales section....

[Sehnsucht]

Bring on the huge, ginormous Core i7 Mac Pro. :cool:

[AidenShaw]

Bring on the huge, ginormous Core i7 Mac Pro. :cool:

That's been shipping for several months - in Xeon garb. ;)

Bring on the true Core i7 mini-towers.... Keep the name "Mac Pro" for the over-sized, over-priced workstation market -- and those who use the Mac Pro as a status (or phallic) symbol.

[Sehnsucht]

That's been shipping for several months - in Xeon garb. ;)

Bring on the true Core i7 mini-towers.... Keep the name "Mac Pro" for the over-sized, over-priced workstation market -- and those who use the Mac Pro as a status (or phallic) symbol.

The Mac Pro isn't a status symbol. It is, however, the only desktop Mac that has user-upgradeable components, and full-sized PCIe graphics cards. It is also the only Mac that has more than two processor cores. It's the only Mac that can use more than 8 GB of RAM. It's the ideal, or serious Mac. I'd buy one immediately if I had the money.

The Mac Pro's case is bland and minimalist. A true phallic symbol would be something like this:

http://pcgamingcenter.ugo.com/images/case-modding/case-modding-part-3.jpg

[Eidorian]

Chuckled when I saw this in Fry's weekend sales section....OH U

Seriously Fry's ads and even the in store price tags have "Financing Available" plastered everywhere.

The Mac Pro isn't a status symbol. It is, however, the only desktop Mac that has user-upgradeable components, and full-sized PCIe graphics cards. It is also the only Mac that has more than two processor cores. It's the only Mac that can use more than 8 GB of RAM. It's the ideal, or serious Mac. I'd buy one immediately if I had the money.

The Mac Pro's case is bland and minimalist. A true phallic symbol would be something like this:

http://pcgamingcenter.ugo.com/images/case-modding/case-modding-part-3.jpgTrue words sir.

[MinorBidoh]

I do hope those two words rhyme with "Clucking bell". That is hideous, keep it simple, that must mess with your peripheral vision. Pah!

[iAlexG]

I've been saving up for an iMac this would be great

[AidenShaw]

The Mac Pro isn't a status symbol.

Anytime that anyone puts their computer in their signature, makes the computer a status symbol, Mr. "2.93 GHz 15" MacBook Pro (5,1)"....

:eek:

[Sehnsucht]

Anytime that anyone puts their computer in their signature, makes the computer a status symbol, Mr. "2.93 GHz 15" MacBook Pro (5,1)"....

:eek:

http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr214/TheDavidFrom1988/200388920.gif

I make about $13,000 per year. What is this "status" you speak of? :confused:

By the way, the debate wasn't about what some users choose to put in their signatures (listing one's computers is customary in this and many other forums) but rather the reasons why some people choose to purchase the Mac Pro. ;)

[Eidorian]

http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr214/TheDavidFrom1988/200388920.gif

I make about $13,000 per year. What is this "status" you speak of? :confused:

By the way, the debate wasn't about what some users choose to put in their signatures (listing one's computers is customary in this and many other forums) but rather the reasons why some people choose to purchase the Mac Pro. ;)That's more than enough to buy nice computer hardware if your other expenses are in line. Back in college I could get computer stuff all the time with the crazy tax credits and discounts I'd get.

Now that I have a car it's tough to justify not saving money. I need new brakes. ;_;

But guess what I lined up a few hours of contract work next week! :D

[gunraidan]

WTF! Cheaper? The iMacs are cheap enough already!!! :confused: Apple, go for "better", not "cheaper." :rolleyes:

Why not both?
And if Apple would come out with a Core i7 MiniTower at a reasonable price, there'd be a lot more people using desktops. Apple's laptop sales are a high proportion because their desktops turn a lot of people off...


Would anyone like the new Apple xMac at $749

Intel® Core™ i7-920 Processor (quad core, 8MB L3 Cache, 2.66GHz)
3GB DDR3 Tri-Channel SDRAM at 1066MHz - 3 DIMMs
500GB - 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache
16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
ATI Radeon HD 4350 512MB
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio
1Yr Ltd Hardware Warranty, InHome Service after Remote Diagnosis
Windows Vista® Home Premium Edition SP1, 64-Bit

(Actually, the specs and price are for a Dell Studio XPS. (http://www.dell.com/us/en/home/desktops/desktop-studioxps-435mt/pd.aspx?refid=desktop-studioxps-435mt&s=dhs&cs=19&ref=dthp))

Day 1.

[AidenShaw]

I make about $13,000 per year. What is this "status" you speak of? :confused:

I make a bit more than $13K/month - and I can't afford Apple stuff...

Or, more to the point - "won't afford". Apple has nothing interesting in any price band.

[Maserati7200]

I was talking in NZD price difference. Apple sells more than MacBooks.

(Excluding Taxes)
Base 8-Core Mac Pro:
3,299.00 USD, Should be 5,230.73 NZD. Really it's 6,488.00. Thats a difference of $1257.27.

Base 24" iMac:
1,499.00 USD, Should Be 2,376.74 NZD. Really it's 2,932.44. Thats a difference of $555.70.

The 24" iMac I want to get: (2.93, GT130, 640GB, 4GB, Remote)
1,949.00 USD, Should be 3,090.24 NZD. Really it's 3,900.45. Thats a difference of $810.21.

Can you say Mhur?

Thats because the European Union just loves your hard earned money. Basically, Europe generally has a lot higher taxes than the USA. It might not necessarily be sales tax that you pay which makes it more expensive. The EU probably taxes Apple more than the USA, so Apple raises the price in Europe.

[Shake 'n' Bake]

I don't remember if it was mentioned already, but...

What if this is just the introduction of the education-spec iMac to the consumer? If not, I really think Apple should.

The edu-Mac starts with the 20'' and bumps the CPU down to 2 GHz, reduces RAM to 1 GB (keeps DDR3), bumps HDD down to 160 GB, strips out Bluetooth and the IR receiver, and puts in a TN display if there isn't one already (at least I'd put a TN in). The 9400M is bumped down to 128 MB, but we know that it will go to 256 MB with a RAM upgrade. This "cheapening" reduces the price form $1199 to $899. That will surly entice some switchers like the iMac G3 must have (I wasn't a Mac person then).

I use a mid-'07 Mac mini (2 GHz, 2 GB) for most of my digital life. It is completely adequate for my purposes (for now). I think that the average Joe could get along just fine with the edu-Mac. I know I could.

Here's an original idea: put it in a white plastic case and call it the eMac! ;)

[Sehnsucht]

I make a bit more than $13K/month - and I can't afford Apple stuff...

Or, more to the point - "won't afford". Apple has nothing interesting in any price band.

We know, we know. You don't like Apple products. We get it. You can stop now.

Speaking of affordability, anyone know why the hell Windows 7 Ultimate is 320 bucks? :eek: I was going to buy it for use in Boot Camp, but then I found out the cost of the full version. There's no way I'm dropping that much on an MS product. That wily Mr. Ballmer doesn't need any more money, he's got quite enough as it is. :rolleyes:

[Eidorian]

We know, we know. You don't like Apple products. We get it. You can stop now.

Speaking of affordability, anyone know why the hell Windows 7 Ultimate is 320 bucks? :eek: I was going to buy it for use in Boot Camp, but then I found out the cost of the full version. There's no way I'm dropping that much on an MS product. That wily Mr. Ballmer doesn't need any more money, he's got quite enough as it is. :rolleyes:Why do you want Ultimate again?

[Sehnsucht]

Why do you want Ultimate again?

I want the 64-bit version, whichever one that is.

I've been using Windows as little as possible the past couple of years, I'm starting to get a bit unfamiliar with it. :D

[Eidorian]

I want the 64-bit version, whichever one that is.

I've been using Windows as little as possible the past couple of years, I'm starting to get a bit unfamiliar with it. :DThey're all 64-bit. :confused:

The media even ships with both 32/64-bit versions regardless of which SKU you pick.

[Xibalba]

I make a bit more than $13K/month - and I can't afford Apple stuff...

Or, more to the point - "won't afford". Apple has nothing interesting in any price band.

brag about your income and bash apple products...hmmm...maybe you are lost - this is a mac site.

of course it says something that one with so much hate spends so much time engaged with the object of their distaste...


i welcome newer and cheaper imacs - especially since i am in the market for one...

[Sehnsucht]

They're all 64-bit. :confused:

The media even ships with both 32/64-bit versions regardless of which SKU you pick.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/2/27e72286b1a116cf0d0f5136a8532040.gif

:o Thanks for clearing that one up.

:D

[Eidorian]

:o Thanks for clearing that one up.

:DI love that image but good lord it's huge.

I managed to pick up a copy of Vista Ultimate Retail here for dirt cheap. I'll be using a Home Premium upgrade with a copy of XP Home I have laying around.

Vista Ultimate is going on the HTPC I want to build once I get a TV for it.

[gunraidan]

The only difference between Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Ultimate is that Ultimate has some new security software or something like that.

[UtilitiesMajor]

Did you guys see the new patents that were just approved for apple? They look pretty awesome. The iMac one with the built-in ambient lights to adjust quality of the iSight camera recording.

[Sehnsucht]

The only difference between Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Ultimate is that Ultimate has some new security software or something like that.

What's "security software"?

:D :D :D

Like I said, it's starting to get rather unfamiliar.

But hey, now I know. :cool: