Speculation on next iMac's....

Discussion in 'iMac' started by iBunny, Sep 13, 2006.

  1. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #1
    I want to speculate on what the next iMac might offer. If nothing else, at least some recommendations.

    I for one, would finally like to see a new design. One similar to what it is now would be fine, with 50% off the Chin.

    Hardware wise I would like to see the whole line upgraded to Core 2 (Conroe) Processors. The 17'' could come with a 2.4GHz Conroe, 20'' with a 2.66GHz Conroe, and the 24'' could be either the extreme Version at 2.93GHz or have a 2.4GHz Quad Core Kentsfield CPU.

    I would like to see all of them be able to have a 4GB Max ram, and at least all have Mobile GeForce 7800 video cards, with the 24'' have a 512MB Option.

    Finaly, I would like to see HDMI in/out on them as well.

    Your thoughts?
     
  2. sigamy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2003
    Location:
    NJ USA
    #2
    My wish list for the new iMac:

    1. A design that is somewhere between the iMac G4 and the current iMac. Basically, I want the screen to be thinner and I want the iMac G4's swing arm to return.

    2. Integrated DVR. Continue on the path of making the iMac a complete media hub.

    3. Integrated memory card readers. Continue with eliminating cables! I hate having to plug in my firewire CF reader every few days to load pics.

    4. BT keyboard and mouse standard.

    5. 802.11n

    6. Maybe a few more ports (USB ports, FW 800 and FW 400). Maybe a USB and FW on the front?

    7. Remove the chin

    8. Bring back the colors!
     
  3. crazzyeddie macrumors 68030

    crazzyeddie

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Florida, USA
    #3
    It will never happen. Steve's complete media hub solution includes you dumping your cable provider and buying all your TV off of iTunes... which makes sense, financially speaking, unless you're a TV-aholic.
     
  4. iBunny thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #4
    I think a built in TV tuner would be cool, but I also agree it will never happen.

    As somone mentioned earlier, more USB ports is a must. This thing should have no less than 6 USB2.0 ports, 1 FW400 and 1 FW800 port.
     
  5. ECHINODERM macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    #5
    Screen sizes

    Everyone seem sto be assuming that the display sizes will be limited to 20 and 24 inches - wiuth teh 17 inch scrapped.
    My wish list includes new options altogeter - perhaps a 19 and a 22. These are currently the most popular screen sizes available, and 24 is too big for most desks. If you want to include a desktop graphics card, but not be forced to go for the oversize 24 inch, then 22 may be the compromise.

    who else wishes that you could get more advanced graphics optiojs on a screen size a little smaller than 24 - Am I th eonly one who thinks its too big for a normal desk set up?
     
  6. Firebar macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
  7. superlatic macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    #7
    Processor: if the enclosure is as was said 2 inches thick, then forget conroe. I think the processors will max out on the 24" imac with intels new mobile quad 2.6ghz as a BTO

    RAM: Definately 2GB ram as standard on the 24", more than likely on the 20".

    HDD: Think 320GB will be the new standard from 250GB, with the option of a 1TB drive in the 24".

    GPU: 8600GTM in the 20" maxing out at 256mb vram, 8600GT as the stock option in the 24", outside chance of 8800 GTS with 320mb of vram as a BTO

    BT + AE 802.11n across the line

    HDCP compliant displays

    Possibility of Blu Ray combo drive as BTO
     
  8. roland.g macrumors 603

    roland.g

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Location:
    One mile up and soaring
    #8
    I think the chin will shrink. But you won't get Conroes. They are desktop chips with higher power consumption and heat. In reducing the chin and keeping or reducing the size, you can't throw a Conroe in there. Now there are new mobile extremes at 2.6 and I think coming very soon are 2.8s if I remember correctly, but most probably we will see the same Santa Rosa Meroms in the MBPs at 2.2 and 2.4. Certainly no quad kenstfield.

    Yes SR will give you 4GB max ram, and I would expect some improvement in GPUs. I don't think however that HDMI will make the cut this time.

    1. Won't happen.

    2. Definitely won't happen.

    3. They will never clutter a Mac with media card slots.

    4. I like them, but not everyone wants wireless input devices.

    5. They already have n.

    6. I don't see front ports coming, but would like to see an esata port.

    7. I think the chin will get reduced.

    8. If you want colors, go Colorware or get a Nano or Shuffle. We don't need that in the iMac again.
     
  9. pcorajr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    #9
    I would like to see the following Specs.

    Better CPU, if possible The new quad core CPU's But more then likely Santa Rosa Chips will be used.

    Better GPU's , This is imnportant for me because I like playing WOW with all settings cracked up. Plus with all the gaming hype or EA and ID we need something that will be able to run the new games coming down the pipe. Nvidia is the way to go right now, 8600GT with 256 Megs of ram and the option of upgrading to the 8800 GTS with 320 Megs of ram. I would hope for a Desktop GPU instead of the modile options.

    System ram should be default to 2 Gig and upgradable to 4 Gig

    I would like to see more USB ports as well as more firewire ports. Maybe support for eSata.
     
  10. Toddgabweg macrumors member

    Toddgabweg

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Location:
    PA
    #10
    I really want the HDMI in/out:)
     
  11. MartinW macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Location:
    England
    #11
    What I want more than anything is some kind of video in so I can use my 360 with it. This would save students a lot of space and money as there would no need for a second monitor.
     
  12. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    #12
    Conroe NOT a problem

    Putting ANY speed Conroe in the iMac would not be any sort of problem. Remember they stuffed a fire breathing G5 in that thing. Two conroes are not even as hot as that, The desktop chips available now are very economical power and heat wise compared to any powerPC processor in the G5 series. Heat is NOT ANY concern with regard to why mobile chips are in the iMac. Most likely it has to do with volume when it comes to ordering and ease of uniformity among lines.

    Trout
     
  13. RichardI macrumors 6502a

    RichardI

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Southern Ontario, Canada
    #13
    superlatic: I like your spec's. :) I hope you are right on, except that I'd like to see desktop class processors (at least in the 24"). Am I the only one that likes the chin?

    Rich :cool:
     
  14. Umbongo macrumors 601

    Umbongo

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #14
    Do you have any Maximum TDP numbers for G5 chips, or typical TDP of Intel, to back this up?
     
  15. Sped macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 30, 2003
    #15
    Wirelessly posted (Moto V3xx: MOT-RAZRV3xx/96.71.95R BER2.2 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; 11063081) Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Opera 8.00 [en] UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    eSATA all the way
     
  16. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    #16

    Thermal Design Power value for Conroe is 65W, but thermal design and operating power is another thing. Ill look for G5 TDP numbers.
     
  17. Trout74 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    #17

    The iMac with the 2.1G5 had TDp numbers of 55W, so conroe is a hotter chip at 65W, however conrow had the ability to shut one core down and run cooler than the G5 did, and as previously mentioned operating power is lower than Thermal design numbers, the motherboard has alot to say about the power consumtion of a chip.

    anywho, Conroe could work in an iMac,

    Trout
     
  18. TheSilencer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    #18
    The G5 2.5GHz had a TDP of 100W maximum. BUT, the G5 low power (yep, they existed in some way) got this:

    Speed, Voltage, TDP min/normal/max
    1.4GHz, 1.0V, 7W/15W/19W
    1.6GHz, 1.0V, 9W/19W/21W
    1.8GHz, 1.15V, 13W/30W/37W
    2.2GHz, 1.2V, 30W/48W/60W

    Well, at all the conroe is the better choice in performance and watts, as we know.
     
  19. Nick12945 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Location:
    Michigan
    #19
    Im pretty sure you are in the minority here
     
  20. discodave macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    #20
    I like the chin, and think it adds to the design. In it's current implementation, the iMac would look silly without the chin.
     
  21. iDave macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2003
    #21
    Just you and discodave. :D

    I've always thought it looks weird, but I've always thought the whole iMac all-in-one desktop concept is weird, so what do I know?

    I bought an iMac G4 because of the articulating arm and liked it, until it was time to replace the computer. I had to replace the display as well as the computer...not for me thanks.

    Sorry, perhaps I should keep my nose out of this thread. :D
     
  22. mavherzog macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Columbus, WI
    #22
    I'd settle for Dual-Link DVI out.
     
  23. dan-o-mac macrumors 6502a

    dan-o-mac

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    #23
  24. j26 macrumors 65832

    j26

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Location:
    Paddyland
    #24
  25. Scarlet Fever macrumors 68040

    Scarlet Fever

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Location:
    Bookshop!
    #25
    damn straight, it was dormant for almost a year!
     

Share This Page