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

Analyst: iMac and MacBook Updates Coming Within Weeks?

More signs of impending updates??
Stores simply wanting to get rid of Leopard stock??
Desparate sales techniques to beat the recession??
Or any combination of these??

:confused:

Here in New Zealand over recent weekends we've had deals and discounts on Apple computers at the big chain stores, which very rarely happens.

One weekend Noel Leeming had 5% off.

Last weekend Harvey Normans had about NZ$150 off and Bond 'n Bond had 30 months interest free financing.

On Thursday, JB Hi-Fi had a new branch opening with about NZ$200 off the cheapest 13" MacBook Pro (maybe other deals in-store).

This weekend Magnum Mac (the closest New Zealand gets to an official Apple Store) are giving away the new model iPod Nano for free with any Mac purchase: MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, iMac, Mac Mini, or Mac Pro.
 
I just visited the Apple homepage and when I clicked on the iMac "buy now", I got this:

title_backsoon1.gif


Does that mean... could it be... :D
 
More sale deals here in New Zealand which included Apple computers. Noel Leemings had 40 months interest free financing this weekend and Dick Smith had $100 off the MacBook Pro.
 
I guess to a lot of people b!tching about the thinner iMac, is that the guy meant thinner as in the aluminium slab at the bottom of the screen becomes smaller.

If they cut down into a Cinema display style screen how would you call that? Fatter? Wider? Longer? Shorter? Obviously a simple way of describing it would be "thinner".
 
Wishlist to become a Mac user

I'd love to buy an iMac as it would fit my desktop and work style perfectly. And the current form factor is very nice. But its got some serious redesign to do.

Forgive, but I'm a power user, so specs are as important as form. So to get a tripped out iMac that would meet my business and home needs, I find currently (sorry, prices are Canadian $):

3.06 GHz Core 2 Duo processor
4GB of RAM (plus an extra $1200 if you want 8GB)
ATI 4850 Graphics processor chip
1TB embedded (can not pull out while repairs are done) hard drive

Without any extras such as software, extended warranty, etc, this alone comes to $2700 ($3900 if you want the extra 4GB memory to bring it to 8)

And to get anywhere near these specs with a MacPro (except for the 8GB RAM), I'm looking at $4200. And that's without any software or monitor.

I understand the use of some mobile parts, and approve if it helps the form factor and economies of scale. I don't try and compare Apple products to other computer products chip for chip.

But when I can walk into any store in Canada and get a straights Intel machine (remember, both use the same types of parts, its the OS and the builder that is different between them) for $1500 with the following comparable specs (using a stock Gateway from a flyer for this, but can build one with same specs for similar price):

i7 920 processor
12GB RAM
NVidia GTX285 graphics card (top of the line)
1TB Hard Drive removable

Add in that I can use my current monitor or get a new one for not more than $200-300 for a good one, and Windows OS is suddenly not such a big issue.

Apple's problem is that its specs are a significant percentage (lets say 40-50%) below the machine I described above and their price is 100% higher. The built in monitor, form factor, OS, etc don't compensate for massive capability and price gap in opposite directions.

I'd think iMacs would be flying off the shelves if they were maybe 40-50% higher in price at most than their equivalent Windows OS cousins (all Intels and SATA hard drives and DDR 2 and DDR 3 RAM, etc in all of them, Apple and Windows OS, remember) and performance specs closed the gap reasonably too.

To cure speculation, I am not an Apple hater. I use an iPhone despite it not being a very good business platform (Apple not listening again, but that's another story for another day), and even if I need Windows for some things in the business world, I'm happy with the idea of things like dual booting. I'm comfortable with technology and making things work. But the price points make Apple computers a luxury item, not a viable option for my business and home needs and enjoyments. To spend nearly $3000 for an iMac or $4000 plus for a MacPro with the same ability as my current computer, let alone upgrading capability, just makes absolutely no sense.

But that's just my opinion. In the meantime, I'm forced to look at moving eventually to a Windows 7 machine for future purchases if I want to upgrade unless the Apple model changes a little. We'll just have to see.
 
Couldn't we see this update around October 14th? Thats when the update for the macbook and cinema display was last year.................................................
 
gr81mgbgt said:
Couldn't we see this update around October 14th? Thats when the update for the macbook and cinema display was last year.................................................
Click to expand...

No one can really say when or if. If I remember correctly, a lot of speculation prior to the event suggested that a media event was going to occur in October some time. Apple being Apple, officially sent out media invitations for the event four to five days beforehand the event - and this was the only official announcement.
 
twolfe81 said:
I'd love to buy an iMac ....
Click to expand...

Let's assume, just for a minute, you are not a troll. Your choice of graphics card in a cheap upgradeable tower case, shows you are a gamer.

In which case, you should buy the $1500 tower and whatever else you fancy and enjoy yourself. When you are immersed in a well crafted alternate reality (fullscreen), the OS you are running is irrelevant, and WinXP with DirectX 9 or Vista/7 with DirectX 10 has some stunning entertainment experiences ready and waiting for you. In full 3D! (*silly glasses and a compatible monitor required.)

You will never, ever, ever, ever, be a contented gamer on a Mac, I know, I've tried - with a Mac Pro too - and even with an upgradeable graphics card slot, and boot camping into windows, you are still cripplingly limited in your choice of Mac Compatible graphics cards, and inadequate (PC) drivers for them too. For instance, Far Cry 2 would not run properly under XP on a Mac with a Mac Compatible 4870, one of only 3 cards my Mac Pro could use.

My solution, and I suggest it to you also, is to consider a mac laptop for non-gaming computing, where the price comparison holds up a little better to other high end laptop brands (i.e. VAIO and maybe HP - but not Gateway or Dell) and then carry on gaming as you currently do - very very very happily. I'm getting a new Win7 machine when it launches, at about the spec and price you quote, I'm looking forward to it.

Your minute is now up. Please don't hijack this thread into a 'Apple Don't Make a Real Desktop for a Cheap Price' thread - 'cause you are right. They don't. Well spotted that man.

The iMac is a computer for people who actually want style over substance - and at that, it excels very well, it fits very well into kitchens, lobbies and foyers in ways the desktop you describe - with boxes and keyboards and monitors and cables everywhere would never do. And you pay for that style, and you pay for it in money, and you pay for it in some performance penalties, and those who desire such things care about neither.

Left 4 Dead kinda rocked though, no? The Car Alarm was my favourite bit.
 
twolfe81 said:
Forgive, but I'm a power user,
Click to expand...

therein lies the rub. the imac was NOT designed for a user like you

so many folks diss on the imac/mac mini as being crap machines. and 90% of those folks are the hard core power user geek types. they say these machines are garbage because they don't work for what said minority wants to do with them.

instead of asking "what is Apple trying to do here, who are they marketing to? and do they fit THAT market"

it's like judging a cheesy ball horror flick as crap because it would never win an Oscar. but guess what, it isn't trying to. it wants to be fun and make box office.

I use an iPhone despite it not being a very good business platform
Click to expand...

again, not the market they are going for. not as the primary. they are going for consumers. not business.

and with several million iphone owners out there, buying hundreds to thousands of consumer oriented apps every day, Apple is probably not going to drastically alter their focus on the iphone anytime soon
 
iSamurai said:
I guess to a lot of people b!tching about the thinner iMac, is that the guy meant thinner as in the aluminium slab at the bottom of the screen becomes smaller.

If they cut down into a Cinema display style screen how would you call that? Fatter? Wider? Longer? Shorter? Obviously a simple way of describing it would be "thinner".
Click to expand...

A "thinner" iMac usually means in depth, front to back.

If you're removing the "chin", then the iMac becomes shorter, top to bottom ... and the 20" iMac would probably look rather silly with a large gap underneath it.
 
emulator said:
what's the point of watching BR on iMacs or laptops or 24" LCDs? Even the 30" cinema display would not be sufficient.
Click to expand...

I agree that it would seem rather useless on an iMac but at least some people might connect their laptop to a TV that is large enough. I doubt we will see BR in the near future though and I for one would not want to pay extra for it.
 
Bonsai71 said:
Let's assume, just for a minute, you are not a troll. Your choice of graphics card in a cheap upgradeable tower case, shows you are a gamer.

In which case, you should buy the $1500 tower and whatever else you fancy and enjoy yourself. When you are immersed in a well crafted alternate reality (fullscreen), the OS you are running is irrelevant, and WinXP with DirectX 9 or Vista/7 with DirectX 10 has some stunning entertainment experiences ready and waiting for you. In full 3D! (*silly glasses and a compatible monitor required.)

You will never, ever, ever, ever, be a contented gamer on a Mac, I know, I've tried - with a Mac Pro too - and even with an upgradeable graphics card slot, and boot camping into windows, you are still cripplingly limited in your choice of Mac Compatible graphics cards, and inadequate (PC) drivers for them too. For instance, Far Cry 2 would not run properly under XP on a Mac with a Mac Compatible 4870, one of only 3 cards my Mac Pro could use.

My solution, and I suggest it to you also, is to consider a mac laptop for non-gaming computing, where the price comparison holds up a little better to other high end laptop brands (i.e. VAIO and maybe HP - but not Gateway or Dell) and then carry on gaming as you currently do - very very very happily. I'm getting a new Win7 machine when it launches, at about the spec and price you quote, I'm looking forward to it.

Your minute is now up. Please don't hijack this thread into a 'Apple Don't Make a Real Desktop for a Cheap Price' thread - 'cause you are right. They don't. Well spotted that man.

The iMac is a computer for people who actually want style over substance - and at that, it excels very well, it fits very well into kitchens, lobbies and foyers in ways the desktop you describe - with boxes and keyboards and monitors and cables everywhere would never do. And you pay for that style, and you pay for it in money, and you pay for it in some performance penalties, and those who desire such things care about neither.

Left 4 Dead kinda rocked though, no? The Car Alarm was my favourite bit.
Click to expand...

a VAIO is not high end, just overpriced. i've supported Dell, Lenovo, HP and Sony laptops for years. Sony is the only i hate with a passion. Sony's are for idiots who think thin and flashy means a good computer
 
willcodejavafor said:
I agree that it would seem rather useless on an iMac but at least some people might connect their laptop to a TV that is large enough. I doubt we will see BR in the near future though and I for one would not want to pay extra for it.
Click to expand...

It's not about watching on an iMac. People might buy their movies in their movies and if they decide to watch it on their computer once in a while, they can have the capability to do so rather than buying a DVD version as well
 
corinhorn said:
A year ago, I would have agreed with you that OpenOffice.org was slow and buggy on the Mac. However, the most recent version of OOo works great for me and I haven't found any need to install MS Office on my Snow Leopard system. And I haven't had any issue sharing my files with MS Office users.
Click to expand...


Actually, I'm going to have revoke my statement about Open Office. See, I only used Neo Office, which sucked. I assumed Open Office would be similar. But I downloaded Open Office today, and it opens up faster than Microsoft Word.

I still hate Neo Office though.
 
Good points, but

Bonsai71 said:
Let's assume, just for a minute, you are not a troll. Your choice of graphics card in a cheap upgradeable tower case, shows you are a gamer...

...The iMac is a computer for people who actually want style over substance - and at that, it excels very well, it fits very well into kitchens, lobbies and foyers in ways the desktop you describe - with boxes and keyboards and monitors and cables everywhere would never do. And you pay for that style, and you pay for it in money, and you pay for it in some performance penalties, and those who desire such things care about neither.
Click to expand...
I agree with a lot of what you wrote and it does apply for serious gamers, you will get more for your money with a special-purposed PC. However, I think you go too far with your point. I have the high end iMac (3.06 + ATI card) from this spring and it is quite a good and fast machine. I play Doom 3 and it is plays VERY well in Win 7 RC with Boot Camp, noticeably faster than my 2 year old HP with a good gaming card. I am not a serious gamer, but neither are most people. Dismissing those who choose an iMac as going for style over substance misses the mark. Yes, I wanted the style and look, but I also like the super quiet machine that is still very fast for everything that 90% of households do. The HP Media Center (Win XP) we used to have here in the office made a lot of noise compared to this iMac and the iMac is noticeably faster. Not to mention, being a smaller and less attractive target for malicious software and web sites is quite substantive. Yes, I payed more for an Apple AIO, but I also got a great performing machine that all members of the family really like and enjoy. The price penalty is the same if you get an AIO from HP or Dell as well, so I wouldn't really call Apple out for that. All the AIOs are expensive.

On the one hand, I agree with you, for a serious gamer, definitely go with a custom PC, not a Mac Pro or any other Apple. I just wouldn't be so dismissive over what is considered "substance". 99% of the market would not notice or care about the performance extremes that serious gamers want. Substance for most people is reliability, features, value, ease of use, good performance, and a nice looking machine.
 
Maserati7200 said:
HELL NO. Open office and neo office are terrible pieces of software! They take sooo long to open and are very laggy and slow while using them. Microsoft Office is a lot better, faster, more responsive and worth the money. Neo office wasn't worth the space on my hard drive -- i deleted it a year ago after a year of using it.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call them terrible when they are free and considering what they can do. Yes, I wasn't crazy about Neo because it did seem slow and crashed a few times on me. The newer Open Office is surprisingly good, however, I would recommend it. It is better than Office 2004 in terms of performance and works pretty well.
 
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