Analyst Speculates on iMac Delays: Quad vs Dual Core?

[MacRumors]

AppleInsider relays the latest analyst report from Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu claims that the iMac delays could relate to both technical and strategic decisions from Apple.

First, the analyst claims that even at this late date, Apple is still grappling with core design decisions:

Apple is in the midst of figuring out whether to power the new iMac with Intel quad-core processors or more high-powered dual-core processors with larger caches"

Wu also relays circulating speculation that the iMac cooling systems may see a redesign to deal with the higher heat dissipation of the quad-core processors. From a strategic perspective, Apple is said to be debating the use of Quad-Core processors to avoid cannibalization of the low end Mac Pro, but AppleInsider points out that this reasoning makes little sense given that Apple recently admitted that their desktop business is "primarily iMac".

Unfortunately, Wu's report reads as if it were based on circulating speculation about the iMac rather than any particular insight into the new machine's manufacturing process. Our tracking of Wu's previous predictions has shown a very poor track record.

Article Link: Analyst Speculates on iMac Delays: Quad vs Dual Core?

[Theophany]

This would suggest that there won't be iMacs until June at the very earliest.

I call BS on Wu.

[lftrghtparadigm]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

Unfortunately, Wu's report reads as if it were based on circulating speculation about the iMac rather than any particular insight into the new machine's manufacturing process. Our tracking of Wu's previous predictions has shown a very poor track record.

And what part of that makes you think this is reasonable article to post?

Macwildspeculation.com sounds like a more accurate description

[SwiftLives]

So...Apple isn't releasing a product because they're being indecisive?

I call shenanigans.

[lftrghtparadigm]

And to weigh in on the iMac, I say Dual Core, larger caches. Go that way Apple. Thats better low end performance, which is what you need on a consumer machine.

[Kilamite]

Possible I suppose.

I'm sure we'll hear all about it when the iMac's are released - we'll be briefed on what's what and why.

[Tallest Skil]

There will BE no cannibalization, "analyst". Anyone who needs the power of a Mac Pro is going to buy a freaking Mac Pro.

Let's say I'm a professional in, oh, any field.

Eight-core Gainestown Xeon with desktop GPU or quad-core LAPTOP CHIP with MOBILE GPU.

HMMM... Which will I choose?

[timotheezz]

I guess I can understand ... I guess................

[tbealmear]

I see them doing kind of what they did with the high end processors before. I see the quad core option being in the high end 24" model only. That is, if they put a quad in there at all.

[conradzoo]

Man, I am just getting tired of this.... I guess.

[iOrlando]

its clear that there is a segment of the population that would still prefer powerful desktops for mostly work-related matters, but to make a claim that these same people have been going out and buying macbook pros...hmm not so sure about that.

[morespce54]

So much for new iMacs...
Wouldn't a quad core be heat-intensive in a iMac enclosure?
I guess they want to test it for new generation of laptops..

[Lone Deranger]

Sounds like Mr. Wu's sources are the MacRumors forums.

[Kilamite]

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

There will BE no cannibalization, "analyst". Anyone who needs the power of a Mac Pro is going to buy a freaking Mac Pro.

Let's say I'm a professional in, oh, any field.

Eight-core Gainestown Xeon with desktop GPU or quad-core LAPTOP CHIP with MOBILE GPU.

HMMM... Which will I choose?

Money.

[7egend]

I say go with the Dual Cores, and Save the Quads for the Pro end of the line. Sure people like "more" but more really isn't always better, chances of the average consumer using 4 cores is slim, and plus with Snow Leopard on the Horizon that GPU is going to be doing some of the work for you.

I would however like to see a middle range Desktop that uses Quad Core desktop chips and not work station chips and just call it a "Mac" that would give consumers a buffer zone between the iMac and Mac Pro, with those two choices it's kinda like all or nothing, and no in between.

Just my opinion though.

[Tallest Skil]

Originally Posted by Kilamite

Money.

A quad-core iMac is going to be... what, $2,400? The Gainestown Mac Pro will start at $3,000, and potentially even less.

Is saving $600 really worth one quarter of the performance?

[Le Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Theophany

This would suggest that there won't be iMacs until June at the very earliest.

I call BS on Wu.

Or Wu's information is 3-5 months old.

Could Apple really go 14 months between updating its main desktop machine? The mini's bad enough, but the iMac?

[morespce54]

Aren't the new iMac becoming the next Powerbook G5?

[talkingfuture]

I always wonder which member of Macrumors Mr Wu is. Looking at his predictions he must be on here.

Hello Mr Wu

[gnasher729]

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

There will BE no cannibalization, "analyst". Anyone who needs the power of a Mac Pro is going to buy a freaking Mac Pro.

Let's say I'm a professional in, oh, any field.

Eight-core Gainestown Xeon with desktop GPU or quad-core LAPTOP CHIP with MOBILE GPU.

HMMM... Which will I choose?

There is also the saying: If you don't cannibalise your sales, someone else will. Keeping one product line down to support another one is a bad long-term decision, because competitors won't respect the limits that you set yourself.

[BRLawyer]

Originally Posted by SwiftLives

So...Apple isn't releasing a product because they're being indecisive?

I call shenanigans.

Absolutely BS, Wu is simply speculating on nothing. Apple would never delay the iMac because of a purported cannibalization with the MacPro. The MacPro does NOT relate to the same market as the iMac.

[JG271]

I really don't put much stock in analysts. Spending time over what chip to use? If there is a delay, it is probably because its taking longer to integrate new chips.Something like that!*


*Look, I'm an analyst too!

[SirOmega]

Apple needs to come to the realization that not everyone needs a Mac Pro, and some folks who need a little extra power (but not 8 cores) have been overbuying for a while now.

A QC mid-range desktop will suit the needs of a lot of people who have either not bought or have overbought with the Mac Pro.

Someone who needs the horsepower will never go with an iMac because of the built in display - when it comes time to upgrade to that new core revision in two years, they'll have to get rid of that monitor and the computer, rather than just sell the Mac Pro.

And besides, a 2.0GHz QC mobile chip in an iMac is not a replacement for a 4 or 8 core MP at 2.8+GHz.

[Kilamite]

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

A quad-core iMac is going to be... what, $2,400? The Gainestown Mac Pro will start at $3,000, and potentially even less.

Is saving $600 really worth one quarter of the performance?

If you are talking about the 24" iMac, then add a 24" display to the price too..

[Axemantitan]

Do regular consumers even look at the number of cores or do they look at the clock speed? I would think that a higher-clocked dual core will appeal more to the iMac consumer base than a lower-clocked quad core, especially when compared to the competition's offerings. They would otherwise see a higher-clocked PC and buy that. Leave the quad core to the pro market.