20" and 24" iMacs Due Mid-to-Late Summer

[MrCrowbar]

Of course, the iMac is supposed to be all about minimalism and simplicity, and it doesn't make things very minimal if you have to have a big external HDD cabled to your iMac all the time for Time Machine.

I think you're supposed to connect the backup drive to an Airport Extreme. This way, multiple Macs can share one backup drive and without wires, maybe even through the internet (hopefully encrypted). I think that's the ultimate solution. I would love to be able to have a USB Hub on the Airport Extreme and hook up a few drives there for big libraries (think 200GB iTunes library that the whole family can use without filling up their Macs' drives) and backup through time machine. It would just appear in Leopard's new Finder as a network drive.

 

[Mundy]

Thanks - read my post above as well which further elaborates on this.

Perhaps a mid-range tower is the answer for gamers? The Mac Pro is too much power and cost for many, an AIO such as the iMac isn't ideal, so perhaps a headless iMac and/or a Mac with some upgradeablity like the Mac Pro is needed to fill the gap between iMac and Mac Pro. Alas, I don't believe such a machine would fit Apple's current model.

And, when it comes down to it, apart form the AIO drawback, the current 24" iMac is a very capable machine and not llight years below the low end Mac Pro. But then again, who wants to spend lots of money on a 24" iMac and have to throw away the entire unit (along with a perfectly functioning 24" display!) in a couple years if the graphic card needs updating, the HDD goes, the SuperDrive dies, etc.?

I'm not much of a gamer, but I'm definitely the kind of user you are describing. In fact, my Mac Pro is currently for sale, as it is overkill for my needs, while an all-in-one like the iMac isn't sufficient.

Personally, I don't see the point in buying an all-in-one desktop like the iMac when a MacBook Pro can do the job just as well, with the added bonus of portability. In my opinion, the purpose of desktop machines is a little feature called "upgradability." The iMac doesn't have it, and therefore is not (for me) a practical desktop machine.

At the same time, the amount of money required to buy a Mac Pro in a configuration that gamers would actually find useful is absurd. While it's difficult to build a workstation similar to the Mac Pro for a lower cost than Apple charges, you can build a gaming system (2.66 Ghz Conroe, 2 GB of RAM, nVidia 8800GTX) for much less than a Mac Pro with 2 GB of RAM and an X1900XT. The aforementioned "gaming system" is the type of configuration I would like to see from Apple.

My 2 cents.

 

[shipdestroyer]

Cool, I started saving for an iMac a couple weeks ago.

How's AppleInsider's record with predictions? According to them, they were right about no aluminum iMacs at WWDC... but they're a little biased.

 

[rainydays]

?? Desktop parts run faster? And if the engineers can do it, why not...? It's not like there's battery life to worry about...

Speed isn't everything to everyone you know. The speed difference between mobile chips and desktop chips isn't all that big.
Mobile chips generate less heat, which means that they can make the computer a lot more quiet, which is important to many people (in fact it's one of the main things that attracts me to the iMac).
They also consume less power, which is good for the environment. You might not think that it's such a big deal. But compare the power consumption of 1 million computers running mobile vs desktop hardware and you'll see how big impact it really has.

 

[~Shard~]

I agree that the AIO is not necessarily the best option for gamers. Appleinsider did say this, "Those same people add that the Cupertino-based Mac maker may also have a few smaller surprises in store for fans of its Mac line around the same time." Am I reading too much into smaller surprises for fans of the Mac line or does that sound a lot like a new smaller Mac, maybe a new MacMini or possibly an upgradable Headless mac?

Something like that would be great, but when was the last time you heard anything about the Mac mini? I fear it might be headed down the same lonely road as the G4 Cube...

Again though, a mid-range solution between the iMac and Mac Pro would be nice - I just don't see Apple doing it. Prove me wrong Apple!

 

[cowman007]

Why the 17inch !!!

I still don't get why the 17 inch model is being discontinued and + the mini is going to be discontinued. I hope this is false because then the lowest priced macs would be close to $2000 Canadian!!!!!!!!!!1

 

[FoxyKaye]

Wow, well this really caught me by surprise. I just wasn't expecting Apple to keep updating the iMac, since it's so obviously moving out of the desktop computing industry. In fact, I've heard Apple is planning to go completely to an accessory driven model with complimentary laptops (MacBooks) within 3-5 years: iPods, phones, GPS systems, PDAs, and so forth. Small wonder we'll have Leopard at all when October rolls around - that could very well be the last revision to OS X for a long while, especially with all of it's resources being pulled in so many other new directions. I'm really grateful Apple spent at least a little time to give everyone in the desktop market a last hurrah before pulling the plug.

 

[MrCrowbar]

If they're dropping the 17", that means SOMETHING has to happen to the mini's, there would be too big a gap! (Although I am sad to the see the 17" go, it was either that or a mini for me, and i picked mini)

I know: They'll make the mini smaller.

 

[dartzorichalcos]

I still don't get why the 17 inch model is being discontinued and + the mini is going to be discontinued. I hope this is false because then the lowest priced macs would be close to $2000 Canadian!!!!!!!!!!1

The 20" iMac might get a price drop then.

 

[jcoop]

Too late for me. I've been holding out on a purchase for about six weeks, hoping for an update, but I need a new computer to be ready for a project in late July and early August at the latest. I can't risk slippage into mid-August. My order is in.

Now, of course, I wish I'd ordered six weeks ago.

 

[blashphemy]

touchscreen.... no. Just no. Not when you have a fricking remote and the whole point is to not use it right up close all the time.

LED backlights - yes. iMacs are pretty popular and it would help with the image of a greener Apple, plus, how expensive can it be to have an LED backlight? Apple wasn't really promoting it as a "pro" feature on the MBP, so don't count it as one.

no more 17".... i dunno. it doesn't make much financial success, especially when the common Joe Shmo still thinks that Macs are more expensive than comparable Win machines... but Apple may have to do it anyways for engineering purposes. I mean, make it thinner and you have less room to work with vertically so you need to stretch the amount of room you have horizontally, and it doesn't make much sense to have a 17" display surrounded by a 9" bezel or something now does it?

gaming... hopefully Apple will put in nicer graphics cards. The problem is that Apple right now just has a budget and an everything-comp for desktops, Mac Pro's don't count cause theyre too expensive for most consumers. If gaming's going to be a real part of the Mac platform it makes sense to outfit them with something more powerful than a simple multimedia card, but thats more expensive and hotter and besides, Apple seems to be doing all right right now with just the multimedia cards and considering that the only game that Jobs appears to play is WoW, which isn't demanding by any standards, Jobs might not be too enthusiastic about the tradeoff for a consumer platform when most of those consumers are not going to be real heavy gaming types.

what I would like to see is some concept drawings at least - a "striking new industrial design" strikes me more as the difference between the iMac G4 and the iMac G5, not the difference between the candy-colored iMac and the eMac.

I am thinking there is a possibility for a second HDD because with TimeMachine coming out with leopard in October, I expect Apple could use the second HDD to show that they are making a new machine that will effectively use a lot of the features coming out with the new OS. You are right though that it would be a challenge to put it in a "smiller" machine.

in all demos Time Machine has been purely with external drives. They have multiple internal drives in the Mac Pro but did His Jobsness discuss anything about that? no....

 

[~Shard~]

I'm not much of a gamer, but I'm definitely the kind of user you are describing. In fact, my Mac Pro is currently for sale, as it is overkill for my needs, while an all-in-one like the iMac isn't sufficient.

Personally, I don't see the point in buying an all-in-one desktop like the iMac when a MacBook Pro can do the job just as well, with the added bonus of portability. In my opinion, the purpose of desktop machines is a little feature called "upgradability." The iMac doesn't have it, and therefore is not (for me) a practical desktop machine.

At the same time, the amount of money required to buy a Mac Pro in a configuration that gamers would actually find useful is absurd. While it's difficult to build a workstation similar to the Mac Pro for a lower cost than Apple charges, you can build a gaming system (2.66 Ghz Conroe, 2 GB of RAM, nVidia 8800GTX) for much less than a Mac Pro with 2 GB of RAM and an X1900XT. The aforementioned "gaming system" is the type of configuration I would like to see from Apple.

My 2 cents.

Don't worry, you are not alone! The question is, will Apple address users such as yourself? In the past I would have bluntly said, "No - Apple doesn't target gamers. If you are a serious gamer buy a PC". But now Apple has basically put such a focus on gaming at WWDC. Let's hope they can follow through on their own challenge or if their intentions end up being empty and unfulfilled.

 

[Evangelion]

Besides iMac, that's when we will get new Mac Mini and iPods as well....

 

[iPhonePlaya]

i'll definately be buying a new redesigned 20" iMac whenever that comes out
touch screen capabilities would be awesome but probably wont happen
i agree that they will probably just look similar to the cinema displays

 

[rainydays]

Wow, well this really caught me by surprise. I just wasn't expecting Apple to keep updating the iMac, since it's so obviously moving out of the desktop computing industry.

Desktop computers aren't going anywhere for a good amount of time. Not updating the iMac line would really hurt Apple. In fact they would sell a lot less MacBooks if they didn't.

 

[~Shard~]

I still don't get why the 17 inch model is being discontinued and + the mini is going to be discontinued. I hope this is false because then the lowest priced macs would be close to $2000 Canadian!!!!!!!!!!1

If this were the case I'd expect to see the 20" model being moved to the price point of the 17" model.

 

[aswitcher]

I am hoping for:

Dual HDDs - user serviceable

More articulated neck

HDMI out or DVI out that copes better with HDTVs - What Apple TV does well.

4 user accessible RAM Slots / Comes with a single 1GB stick

Higher Definition screens (for 20" at least to have 1920)

? Quad core option ?

Dedicated H264 coder/decoder thingy like the one that has just been released

New multimedia Apple keyboard?

 

[Object-X]

No upgrading

Thanks - read my post above as well which further elaborates on this.

Perhaps a mid-range tower is the answer for gamers? The Mac Pro is too much power and cost for many, an AIO such as the iMac isn't ideal, so perhaps a headless iMac and/or a Mac with some upgradeablity like the Mac Pro is needed to fill the gap between iMac and Mac Pro. Alas, I don't believe such a machine would fit Apple's current model.

And, when it comes down to it, apart form the AIO drawback, the current 24" iMac is a very capable machine and not llight years below the low end Mac Pro. But then again, who wants to spend lots of money on a 24" iMac and have to throw away the entire unit (along with a perfectly functioning 24" display!) in a couple years if the graphic card needs updating, the HDD goes, the SuperDrive dies, etc.?

Here is the problem with this kind of thinking. Computers are commodities. There is very little that can be "upgraded" anymore. Next gen graphics and memory often have to be upgraded with the motherboard because the technologies change so fast. So, you buy that mid-range tower, but by the time you're ready to upgrade to a new graphics card, the motherboard doesn't support it.

I stopped upgrading my computers about six years ago just for this reason. It's often cheaper and easier just to sell your existing system and buy new; especially if you have a Mac. Mac's keep their value over time much better than PCs. I bought my 24" iMac almost a year ago, and by the time these revisions come along, I will just sell it for only a few hundred less than I paid and buy brand new. Even if I could upgrade the unit I wouldn't bother too; in fact, it would probably cost me more to do so.

There is really no reason for Apple to make a mid-range tower. They just need to add better graphics to the iMacs. And even though some of you want one, there simply isn't enough of you for Apple to consider it.

 

[LaMerVipere]

Duct tape a screenless macbook to a 20 inch display, et voilla, slimmer imac

Pretty much.

 

[~Shard~]

Besides iMac, that's when we will get new Mac Mini and iPods as well....

I'm not so sure about the Mac mini. As I said above, when was the last time you heard anything about it? Almost seems a bit out of place now with the AppleTV. I fear it may turn into another G4 Cube....

 

[paquetja]

I doubt touch screen will ever come for the iMac as a standard option. Here's why:

Picture how people use touch screen devices. They are never in a near-vertical position. Whether it's the transporter controls on Star Trek or an iPhone, the screen is horizontal to tilited about ~20° or so.

Using a vertically oriented touch screen will be even worse for your wrist and finger joints than carpel tunnel from a mouse/keyboard!!!

The more I think about it, the more I agree. Touchscreen is a bad idea in a vertical screen. If they do introduce touchscreen in the iMac, it will be in a very different form factor. Or maybe a USB connected touchpad with a screen? Who knows...all I know is whatever is new, it will be impressive. They seem to be on a roll lately with innovative new products (iphone, isight built in, appletv, etc...) I'm getting one as long as it isn't hideous, and Apple doesn't make hideous things. They have some of the best engineers out there. Now I just have to wait...again...

 

[iSee]

I honestly don't care what the redesign looks like. I'm sure it will be fine with me. I just want the damned thing!!

You aren't a (soon to be former) Gateway exec, are you?

(btw, this is an actual current product, not something they did 10 years ago--I couldn't believe it)

 

[Henri Gaudier]

One whole year for an update!!!!!

So ,,, it looks like one whole year for an update. Doesn't matter what they make it look like .. to me it's what it can do/how much it costs. Probably 2.16 to 2.33 GHz will be about it. We had G5 dual 2.5 GHz chips over 3 years ago. Makes you wonder what the real world differences have really been over those 3 years doesn't it?. I'm sure there will be a majority that will say the Intel would win out but my point is; just how much more can we do now in relationship to what we could do then and then consider does that represent a good return for 3 years. I'd say not.

 

[~Shard~]

Here is the problem with this kind of thinking. Computers are commodities. There is very little that can be "upgraded" anymore. Next gen graphics and memory often have to be upgraded with the motherboard because the technologies change so fast. So, you buy that mid-range tower, but by the time you're ready to upgrade to a new graphics card, the motherboard doesn't support it.

I stopped upgrading my computers about six years ago just for this reason. It's often cheaper and easier just to sell your existing system and buy new; especially if you have a Mac. Mac's keep their value over time much better than PCs. I bought my 24" iMac almost a year ago, and by the time these revisions come along, I will just sell it for only a few hundred less than I paid and buy brand new. Even if I could upgrade the unit I wouldn't bother too; in fact, it would probably cost me more to do so.

There is really no reason for Apple to make a mid-range tower. They just need to add better graphics to the iMacs. And even though some of you want one, there simply isn't enough of you for Apple to consider it.

Excellent points, and I do agree. I think we both agree though that what is key here is for Apple to seriously address the graphics card situation for the iMacs.

And although Macs have high resale value and yes, upgrading frequently doesn't cost a lot in the grand scheme of things, many people simply don't like this model. They don't want to have to go through the hassle of selling their machine, wiping its contents, buying a new one, etc. every year or so. And you still end up paying more each time since you're losing money by reselling (albeit it not a lot). It reminds me in some respects of the car leasing model where owners can simply upgrade their vehicle for a minimal cost every year or two, yet it's almost as if they're "renting" and they never really own anything! I realize it's not the same, but there are similar elements to both models.

Nonetheless, definitely agree with your points in theory.

 

[DTphonehome]

You're assuming that Apple won't make any major changes to stop that from being an issue. Look at their major devices, and how they made elegant improvements on a basic design that totally changes how people use that class of device.

If Apple were to do this, they won't slap a touch screen on the iMac and call it a day. Maybe the new iMac will lay flat on your desk. Who knows?

A 24" diagonal (at least) slab lying on your desk? Who has room for that? Does Apple expect everyone to redesign their desktops for this? And you presumably need a keyboard for data entry, so you need that lying around too. That would be a huge step backwards in usability in exchange for a gimmick. I really don't see the point of a touchscreen iMac. If it stays oriented like todays' iMac, it will be incredibly annoying to use, and Apple knows that and won't bother with a touchscreen. If it sits on your desk it takes up the whole thing and not many people will go for that either.

Sorry, touchscreen hopefuls, just think about how YOU would use a touchscreen iMac, and if that would be such a vast improvement over the current design. Yes, it would be cute for some tasks, but not for most. Do you think Apple is going to make one of their core products so esoteric and out-of-the-target-market? If you so desperately want a touchscreen iMac, there are third parties who make them (trolltouch.com), or you can just get a modbook.

Not. Going. To. Happen.