Retina iMac - MacRumors Forums
Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 4, 2013, 06:32 PM   #1
Osullivan1
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Retina iMac

When do you guys think we'll see an iMac with Retina Display -- and how much will it cost?

I want to upgrade my late 2009 iMac, but refuse to upgrade until there is a Retina Display on it. Do you guys think it will be sold alongside the non-retina iMac as a more expensive model, or do you think it will just outright replace the older generation. Plus, how much do you guys reckon it would cost?

With Mavericks including 4K sized wallpapers suitable for a retina iMac, I guess it could be as early as late this year, but more likely sometime next year. Really hope it's sometimes soon as my current iMac is starting to slow and crash on me :/
Osullivan1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2013, 07:45 PM   #2
Bear
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sol III - Terra
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
When do you guys think we'll see an iMac with Retina Display -- and how much will it cost?

I want to upgrade my late 2009 iMac, but refuse to upgrade until there is a Retina Display on it. Do you guys think it will be sold alongside the non-retina iMac as a more expensive model, or do you think it will just outright replace the older generation. Plus, how much do you guys reckon it would cost?
This has been discussed in several threads over the past few weeks. Don't expect a 4K display iMac to be this year and likely not next year. Also, technically the 27" iMac is near Retina already. An iMac with 2816x1584 would be a Retina iMac.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
With Mavericks including 4K sized wallpapers suitable for a retina iMac, I guess it could be as early as late this year, but more likely sometime next year. Really hope it's sometimes soon as my current iMac is starting to slow and crash on me :/
I would say the 4K wallpapers are for the expensive displays that people will be using with the Mac Pro.
__________________
-----Bear
Bear is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2013, 08:39 PM   #3
mrmarts
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Why Retina this year, No Content not many apps at the moment are optimised for Macbook retina display. No Desktop Wallpaper from the sites i subscribe to CGWallpapers and Gamewallpapers or from free wallpaper sites, plus the higher cost seemingly makes a retina display a lemon, therefore I can live without it until Apple is ready to announce it.
__________________
Late 2013 13" MacBook Pro Retina | Time Capsule 2TB | Iphone 5 64GB Black | Apple TV 3 Bedroom | iMac 27" Late 2013: i7 3.5 GHz, 16GB Ram, 3TB Fusion, 780M, Pre Ordered |Ipad Air 128Gb Space Grey
mrmarts is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2013, 08:44 PM   #4
tomwvr
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Frederick Maryland
I also do not understand the issue, the 27 inch Imac I have has the best screen I have ever seen on a computer.

It is also fast, silent and I could not imagine the extra 2k it would cost for the "retina" on top of the price of the machine - 4-5K is my guess - and that is too much for a machine that cannot be upgraded easily and will be replaced in 3-4 years.

Tom
tomwvr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2013, 10:29 PM   #5
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
yet another guy with the magnifying glass to look for those pixels from a very short distance.. at the desktop screen..
that brainless retina-everywhere-mania truly frustrates me.
__________________
21.5 iMac 2012 Custom: i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD | iPhone 5 16gb

Last edited by kaellar; Jul 4, 2013 at 10:49 PM.
kaellar is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2013, 07:55 AM   #6
KaraH
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmarts View Post
Why Retina this year, No Content not many apps at the moment are optimised for Macbook retina display. No Desktop Wallpaper from the sites i subscribe to CGWallpapers and Gamewallpapers or from free wallpaper sites, plus the higher cost seemingly makes a retina display a lemon, therefore I can live without it until Apple is ready to announce it.
Agreed. Programs not built with retina in mind will have some components of their GUI smaller than other things. People are already complaining about specific issues with different programs. Until there is a solution to fix things across the board I would consider it a step backwards: Apple has always been "it just works".

It is a moot point for the near future though. They can not make large retina screens economically enough. They would need to raise the price points.

I suspect when we do first see retina (no pun intended) it will be a BTO option. That way the base price is unaffected and those that want to pay for it can. I have no idea what the price would be ... predicting costs of technologies a year or so in the future is a fool's game at best.
__________________
through the years: Apple ][ eventually upgraded to a //e (and it never really died), Centris 660AV, PowerMac 7600, Macbook, iPod 5G, eMac, a couple of aluminium iMacs, STILL hoping for a 2013 MP

Last edited by KaraH; Jul 9, 2013 at 08:42 AM.
KaraH is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2013, 08:00 AM   #7
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
I would imagine you'd see a retina option on iMac sometime after they discontinue the non-retina MBP.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 5  Apple TV 2  iPad 2 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2013, 10:26 AM   #8
smiddlehurst
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
When do you guys think we'll see an iMac with Retina Display -- and how much will it cost?

I want to upgrade my late 2009 iMac, but refuse to upgrade until there is a Retina Display on it. Do you guys think it will be sold alongside the non-retina iMac as a more expensive model, or do you think it will just outright replace the older generation. Plus, how much do you guys reckon it would cost?

With Mavericks including 4K sized wallpapers suitable for a retina iMac, I guess it could be as early as late this year, but more likely sometime next year. Really hope it's sometimes soon as my current iMac is starting to slow and crash on me :/
No, it almost certainly won't be this year and the problems facing the iMac going Retina are the same as ever they were:

1) Cost and availability of a suitable panel. A 3k iMac might be an option as a niche product but not if it's the starting price for the range

2) CPU and GPU power, especially for gaming use. Think about it for a moment, the best Retina-equipped Mac right now is the 15" rMBP and that has issues getting high end games (e.g. Crysis 2, BF3) to run at a Retina resolution. If the iMac was given a Retina panel at 4x the pixels you'd be looking at a resolution of 3,840 x 2,160 on the 21" model and 5,120 x 2,880 on the 27". Right now I can't think of a way you could get enough graphics grunt into an iMac chassis to get anything like acceptable performance. It's not just games of course but it's the easiest example to illustrate the problems.

That being said... I can see Apple introducing a Retina display this year but as a standalone model to supplement the current Thunderbolt display to compliment the new Mac Pro. From what we've heard that machine will have dual graphics cards as standard and Thunderbolt 2 should be able to support 4K video out. Plus Asus have already shown off a 31" 4k display, albeit with a somewhat painful $4k price point, and I can't see Apple being too happy about not having a horse in that particular race. I wouldn't expect it to be the only external they offer as it'd just be too expensive but there'd be a small market in high end pro kit for it and it'd be a good way of gaining experience with those panels for mass market in a few years.
smiddlehurst is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2013, 12:52 PM   #9
Serban
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Just make a retina but with HDPI, thats all.. and in applications top max 1440p
Serban is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 06:32 PM   #10
Osullivan1
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Okay, I understand.

Do you guys think there could be one maybe in two-three years years then, as that is when I am likely to be upgrading mine.

If not, how long do you think a late-2009 iMac will last before it becomes either (too) slow or unsupported - I'd like to know how long I'll be able to last waiting for it!

------

PS: for those wandering why anyone would want a retina iMac: I work with Photoshop a lot for photo editing and design, a retina iMac would really benefit me as I'd be able to see everything in the same quality as a printed copy. So there's no need to bash me for being

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaellar View Post
yet another guy with the magnifying glass to look for those pixels from a very short distance.. at the desktop screen..
that brainless retina-everywhere-mania truly frustrates me.

Last edited by Osullivan1; Jul 9, 2013 at 11:45 AM. Reason: meant to say late instead of mid-2009...
Osullivan1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 07:14 PM   #11
Bear
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sol III - Terra
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
...
If not, how long do you think a mid-2009 iMac will last before it becomes either (too) slow or unsupported - I'd like to know how long I'll be able to last waiting for it!
Too slow is subjective and it depends on the software you use and what the upgrades to the software you use do to performance. Also, if you start to work with larger images, that will affect performance.

If by unsupported, you mean no longer able to get OS upgrades, it could happen next year or it could be 2 or 3 years or more.

If you mean Apple being willing to repair your computer? Mid 2017 for California, and mid 2015 everywhere else if Apple continues to use the same vintage and obsolete definitions.
__________________
-----Bear
Bear is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 08:45 PM   #12
DELTAsnake
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
If not, how long do you think a mid-2009 iMac will last before it becomes either (too) slow or unsupported - I'd like to know how long I'll be able to last waiting for it!
Not sure which iMac you have. There was no Mid 2009 iMac, there was an Early 2009 and Late 2009. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1758

I have an Early 2009 iMac and a 2010 Mac Pro. Because I have SSD's in my Mac Pro it makes the iMac seem very slow, plus the C2D was a much slower chip than the Xeon. I can't stand how slow it is now so I'm replacing mine when the Haswel iMac's ship.

Plus I think it will only be supported until the end of Mavricks life because I was told that almost every Mac from before 2008 is unsupported by Mavricks. I wasn't even expecting the Early 2009 iMac to be supported under Mavricks so I was pleasantly surprised when I found that it was.
__________________
iPhone 5 S⃣64gb, iPad 64gb (3rd gen), ATV3
Mac Pro 2010, iMac 27" Late 2013

Last edited by DELTAsnake; Jul 8, 2013 at 08:54 PM.
DELTAsnake is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 09:15 PM   #13
CWallace
macrumors Demi-God
 
CWallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osullivan1 View Post
With Mavericks including 4K sized wallpapers suitable for a retina iMac, I guess it could be as early as late this year, but more likely sometime next year. Really hope it's sometimes soon as my current iMac is starting to slow and crash on me :/
The Developer Editions of OS X Lion shipped with wallpapers sized at 3200x2000 and yet it was another year before Apple shipped a Mac that could make use of it (the 15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display at 2880x1800).
CWallace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 09:41 PM   #14
mm201
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaellar View Post
yet another guy with the magnifying glass to look for those pixels from a very short distance.. at the desktop screen..
that brainless retina-everywhere-mania truly frustrates me.
Your viewing distance and visual acuity are not the same as everyone else's, so don't dismiss their experiences just because yours are different.
__________________
2012 15" Retina MacBook Pro 2011 Mac Mini+6630M 2006 custom Windows box iPhone4 32GB iPad3 32GB+LTE
mm201 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 8, 2013, 10:59 PM   #15
kaellar
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm201 View Post
Your viewing distance and visual acuity are not the same as everyone else's, so don't dismiss their experiences just because yours are different.
Are you sitting ten inches from the desktop screen, or what? What distance range do you think we have here? There's absolutely no way anybody will sit closer than 20-25 inches before their iMac for the long time, and from that distance it's next to impossible to say if it's retina or not.
__________________
21.5 iMac 2012 Custom: i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD, 1TB HDD | iPhone 5 16gb
kaellar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 12:59 AM   #16
SoAnyway
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2011
2560x1440 resolution at 27" viewed from a normal viewing distance of at least 2.5' gives current iMacs and Thunderbolt Displays a retina display. The big problem is the fact that there isn't that much content for these devices. Everything tops off at 1080p and there isn't much steaming at 2k resolution.

Bottom line, we won't see 4k displays for a few more years.
SoAnyway is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 04:53 AM   #17
Chippy99
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaellar View Post
Are you sitting ten inches from the desktop screen, or what? What distance range do you think we have here? There's absolutely no way anybody will sit closer than 20-25 inches before their iMac for the long time, and from that distance it's next to impossible to say if it's retina or not.
I am not sure I agree with that. I don't have brilliant eyesight but I probably do sit closer than that and I can see pixels.

That said, it's really not an issue. If the screen resolution was increased, the improvement would be so marginal I really could not be bothered. And if it cost significant extra - which it would - I would not want to pay it for such marginal improvement. Not to mention the huge processing overhead of driving all these pixels that you can barely see anyway.

The bottom line for me is that Retina on an iMac only makes sense when 27" 4k screens are so cheap and the graphics power so huge, that it makes no sense to leave it out. Until then, it is a very expensive waste of time.

That said, who knows whether Apple will get caught up in a pixels race - a bit like the digital camera industry - and feel obliged to offer it anyway, even if it does make no sense right now.
Chippy99 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 05:42 AM   #18
mrmarts
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
I would prefer a HDMI port and a bump of graphics, than a retina display atm.
__________________
Late 2013 13" MacBook Pro Retina | Time Capsule 2TB | Iphone 5 64GB Black | Apple TV 3 Bedroom | iMac 27" Late 2013: i7 3.5 GHz, 16GB Ram, 3TB Fusion, 780M, Pre Ordered |Ipad Air 128Gb Space Grey
mrmarts is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 11:47 AM   #19
Osullivan1
Thread Starter
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAsnake View Post
Not sure which iMac you have. There was no Mid 2009 iMac, there was an Early 2009 and Late 2009. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1758
I have the late 2009 iMac, not sure why I typed mid...

----------

Okay, so the general view is... not soon!

I'll ask again when I need to upgrade - thanks for the replies!
Osullivan1 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 11:56 AM   #20
forty2j
macrumors 68030
 
forty2j's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmarts View Post
I would prefer a HDMI port and a bump of graphics, than a retina display atm.
The person who delivers a simple, lag-free method to get HDMI In on a Thunderbolt iMac will receive a chunk of my money very quickly.
__________________
 2012 iMac 3.2GHz 27" 680MX Fusion  iPhone 5  Apple TV 2  iPad 2 
forty2j is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 9, 2013, 11:59 AM   #21
Moonjumper
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincoln, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoAnyway View Post
The big problem is the fact that there isn't that much content for these devices. Everything tops off at 1080p and there isn't much steaming at 2k resolution.
There is lots of content for these devices. Photos for example.
Moonjumper is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2013, 04:24 AM   #22
SoAnyway
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonjumper View Post
There is lots of content for these devices. Photos for example.

I meant streaming video.
SoAnyway is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2013, 08:37 AM   #23
Moonjumper
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincoln, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoAnyway View Post
I meant streaming video.
If you are only using your computer for streaming video, then a retina display will not be of benefit. But many computers are used for much more, so your reasoning of lack of content meaning higher resolution screens are not needed does not apply to a large part of the user base.

I will take as much resolution as I can get, especially for software such as Illustrator and Photoshop.
Moonjumper is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2013, 05:00 AM   #24
EntropyQ3
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
I'm in exactly the same position as the OP. And as him, I'm not interested in upgrading before a significant increase in resolution is available. (I work with photos, and am nearsighted.)

I don't see it happening until we have reasonably priced panels in Apple volumes. Furthermore, increased graphics performance allowed by 20nm GPU process would be preferable. So - mid 2014 for the GPU at the earliest, and possibly 2015 for the panels. My iMac hums along nicely, so waiting is not a problem.
EntropyQ3 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2013, 07:31 PM   #25
toddzrx
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by DELTAsnake View Post
Plus I think it will only be supported until the end of Mavricks life because I was told that almost every Mac from before 2008 is unsupported by Mavricks. I wasn't even expecting the Early 2009 iMac to be supported under Mavricks so I was pleasantly surprised when I found that it was.
Almost, but not all. If your machine can run ML, it'll run Mavericks. I would expect a 2009 iMac to run the follow on to Mavericks as well (but that's just my own gut-feeling).

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/...-109-mavericks
toddzrx is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > iMac

Tags
imac, release date, retina display mac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can we expect a Retina iMac or Retina Thunderbolt Display First? gmanist1000 iMac 11 Dec 9, 2013 11:12 PM
TB and retina MBP vs iMac and iPad mini retina Cyborg21 Buying Tips and Advice 4 Oct 29, 2013 08:17 AM
Retina MBP v Non Retina - Retina Luxury or Necessity? Checklist smoking monkey MacBook Pro 23 Jun 11, 2013 07:23 PM
My guess for the ridiculous iMac refresh delay: Retina iMac TV redirector iMac 45 Oct 13, 2012 04:19 PM
Should I buy iMac 2012 or wait for the Retina iMac? chocolateschips iMac 17 Aug 27, 2012 09:02 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC