Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2012 iMac 40% Less Volume???

intz2nu

intz2nu

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 28, 2012
398
40
Read this on Apples site and am not really understanding it. Does this mean the sound volume will be much quieter and have 40% less volume than the earlier generations? Or am I missing something here? cause 40% volume being gone from the newer iMacs is almost half of it's volume. That would softend a whole lot, especially for a Desktop. Last I knew is Desktops were to be louder than notebooks and if the new iMacs have 40% less volume that would be quite crappy when you wanna enjoy movies on it and need to buy external speakers if you wanna hear more sound from it.

Extra external speakers = more money to be spent = more room to be taken up = less desk space = why did I spend so much to get a thinner iMac but lost 40% of sound and an Optical drive which should be standard for ANY and EVERY Desktop machine.

I'm also still trying to figure out if the back (which looks almost like a pillow or 3D Dorito) is thicker or even with the current 2011 Gen iMacs.
 
7e6e1924afa0a31b0ac31ce10c0f604f.jpg


But seriously, no, just no.
 
Last edited:
They mean volume as in volumetric displacement, not loudness of the speakers. As in, it takes up 40% fewer cubic inches than the previous iMac, not as in 40% quieter.
 
Uhmmm yeah Thanks for the sarcasm but it was honestly a serious question as I really didn't understand the whole statement of 40% less volume. But however being that was just cleared up for me great, awesome. Thanks!
 
I was going to try and write something funny, but there's no way I can compete with the OP.
 
intz2nu said:
Read this on Apples site and am not really understanding it. Does this mean the sound volume will be much quieter and have 40% less volume than the earlier generations? Or am I missing something here? cause 40% volume being gone from the newer iMacs is almost half of it's volume. That would softend a whole lot, especially for a Desktop. Last I knew is Desktops were to be louder than notebooks and if the new iMacs have 40% less volume that would be quite crappy when you wanna enjoy movies on it and need to buy external speakers if you wanna hear more sound from it.

Extra external speakers = more money to be spent = more room to be taken up = less desk space = why did I spend so much to get a thinner iMac but lost 40% of sound and an Optical drive which should be standard for ANY and EVERY Desktop machine.

I'm also still trying to figure out if the back (which looks almost like a pillow or 3D Dorito) is thicker or even with the current 2011 Gen iMacs.
Click to expand...

You should buy external speakers...
 
Wow everyone sure wanted to get a joke in there without answering the question.
 
40% less volume ..

"Volume is the quantity of three-dimensional space enclosed by some closed boundary, for example, the space that a substance (solid, liquid, gas, or plasma) or shape occupies or contains.[1] Volume is often quantified numerically using the SI derived unit, the cubic metre. The volume of a container is generally understood to be the capacity of the container, i. e. the amount of fluid (gas or liquid) that the container could hold, rather than the amount of space the container itself displaces." -Wikipedia-

You are welcome.
 
Would be so nice sarcasm

It seems like OP sticking to the story?

I first saw it as a perfect sarcasm, as in questioning why on earth Apple has spent $$$$ on making a small desktop even smaller. What's the point? Why would I want to spend more on slower hardware to save a few fractions of inches behind an already flat screen?!!?!?

I guess that is discussed elsewhere. :confused:
 
You know what, when I was watching the stream of the event, I was doing something else at the same time and only half listening. When I heard Phil Schiller say - "40 percent less volume." I was like - "Why the hell would they... oh, I see what he's talking about."

I gave myself an uppercut afterwards.
 
Uhmm honestly it isn't that I didn't have a clue that the volume was meaning sound. I knew it could have also been most likely due to it being thinned out but when the sarcasm of Phil say **Theres a computer in there** I did think twice on the volume thing, especially due to the fact that the optical drive is of course gone. I figured in my mind what else had to be sacrificed to get things this thin.

So yeah I can't imagine myself ever being that dumb or stupid to think that the volume was pertaining fully with regard to the sound level. My original post/thread was more a question of confirmation of what was running in my mind while thinking what really had to come out of the thing because of it's new thinness and maybe just maybe the volume was much like the optical drive that took a departure as well.
 
intz2nu said:
Read this on Apples site and am not really understanding it. Does this mean the sound volume will be much quieter and have 40% less volume than the earlier generations? Or am I missing something here? cause 40% volume being gone from the newer iMacs is almost half of it's volume. That would softend a whole lot, especially for a Desktop. Last I knew is Desktops were to be louder than notebooks and if the new iMacs have 40% less volume that would be quite crappy when you wanna enjoy movies on it and need to buy external speakers if you wanna hear more sound from it.

Extra external speakers = more money to be spent = more room to be taken up = less desk space = why did I spend so much to get a thinner iMac but lost 40% of sound and an Optical drive which should be standard for ANY and EVERY Desktop machine.

I'm also still trying to figure out if the back (which looks almost like a pillow or 3D Dorito) is thicker or even with the current 2011 Gen iMacs.
Click to expand...
Rumors just rumors new iMacs has not sound at all do you see any space for speakers?
 
intz2nu said:
Uhmm honestly it isn't that I didn't have a clue that the volume was meaning sound. I knew it could have also been most likely due to it being thinned out but when the sarcasm of Phil say **Theres a computer in there** I did think twice on the volume thing, especially due to the fact that the optical drive is of course gone. I figured in my mind what else had to be sacrificed to get things this thin.

So yeah I can't imagine myself ever being that dumb or stupid to think that the volume was pertaining fully with regard to the sound level. My original post/thread was more a question of confirmation of what was running in my mind while thinking what really had to come out of the thing because of it's new thinness and maybe just maybe the volume was much like the optical drive that took a departure as well.
Click to expand...

I salute you for taking the sarcasm on the chin and not disappearing into a black hole like most people would do. Just think of it as a brain fart and move on!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back