Analyst Speculates on iMac Delays: Quad vs Dual Core?

[bretm]

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.

Well you're absolutely wrong. When I went from my dual G4 to an intel mac Pro, I very heavily thought about the imac. Why? Because I'm dealing with mostly DV and P2 video. Because I wanted 2 monitors. I already had one flat screen LCD. And since LCDs were a grand or more at the time, buying the less expensive iMac would give me a screen to boot. What it didn't have was the expandability. But what I'm doing would work just fine on fw800 drives.

But in the end, I thought it would look less professional with the iMac, and I didn't want to risk the need for expandability. So I bought the low end MacPro. 2 years later, I still haven't installed a Kona3 or MXO2 or anything. But I do use an internal SATA raid. I could've lived with fw800 drives however.

So it was a tough choice. And I assume some go the other way. Especially if they're not doing high end editing or working with clients.

 

[Daim]

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?

the imac includes a display.. how much is a 24 cinema display? 700?!

 

[eiprol]

I'm with Drake. I've been waiting for a quad core iMac for months. Money set aside... Just waiting for the upgrade to emerge, and I'll pull the trigger.

I'm with all u.


I want to buy an iMac, and I'm trying to wait until a new release...
However, the Wu's article is like saying nothing, it's not clear.

I hope that Apple will surprise us tomorrow with an iMac update... The lastest tuesday of January... It would be great.. And possible.. why not?

If it doesn't happen, I will consider buying an iMac now; I can't wait until April or June....

 

[macall75]

This actually makes a lot of sense on the delays of it, Iam glad I bought my custom build i7, getting it next week, cant wait!, be waiting a long time guys on these new imacs

 

[jbee]

Hurry up

Regardless of what chip goes where the frustrating thing is that the MacPro line is seriously now out of date. I'm working on a fantastic iMac but do not want to purchase the current MacPro to make my video work easier - it might be a few weeks or a month before a new MacPro comes along but to spend say £5000 now on a machine only to find it blown away by new technology in a few weeks would be too painful to bear.

The problem lies in the cost of a MacPro and screen. Previously I've bought a new iMac and not worried about where it sits technology-wise because of the price. Purchasing a hi end system is something that requires a lot more caution.

It is extremely frustrating that Apple are so slow to realise a new MacPro system.

 

[Yamcha]

LIES! It can't be imo.. I find it hard to believe that they can't decide =/. I would go Quad Core on higher end iMacs, and Core 2 Duo @ high Ghz on the low end.. unless Quad Core isn't too expensive then it would be nice to see on the entry iMacs... I think this story is a lie..

 

[Rodus]

I call BS, people buy a Mac Pro because they need the expandability and upgradeability, 2 things the iMac lacks. There's no way that they'd be swayed from the Pro to the iMac because it has a quad core CPU, and Apple knows that.

 

[50548]

Well you're absolutely wrong. When I went from my dual G4 to an intel mac Pro, I very heavily thought about the imac. Why? Because I'm dealing with mostly DV and P2 video. Because I wanted 2 monitors. I already had one flat screen LCD. And since LCDs were a grand or more at the time, buying the less expensive iMac would give me a screen to boot. What it didn't have was the expandability. But what I'm doing would work just fine on fw800 drives.

But in the end, I thought it would look less professional with the iMac, and I didn't want to risk the need for expandability. So I bought the low end MacPro. 2 years later, I still haven't installed a Kona3 or MXO2 or anything. But I do use an internal SATA raid. I could've lived with fw800 drives however.

So it was a tough choice. And I assume some go the other way. Especially if they're not doing high end editing or working with clients.

Thank you, you've just mentioned "expandability" above...and this is why the iMac will NEVER cannibalize with MacPro sales, which are by definition in a pro niche.

Besides, if you were thinking of buying an iMac, it's because you were right in the middle (prosumer, maybe?). In other words: if someone needs a MacPro, it's NOT because it's quad (which is actually a BTO option instead of default), it's because it's expandable.

Wu is BSing big time, and nobody should believe this random rambling of his.

 

[Tallest Skil]

It is extremely frustrating that Apple are so slow to realise a new MacPro system.

E-mail Intel and tell them to make chips faster.

Because Apple has NOTHING to do with it.

 

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I'd actually like to see a quad core as an option for an iMac. I say an option because I just don't really see them moving the entire line to quad core since it will start to encroach on the Mac Pro's territory.

 

[charlituna]

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

someone's forums.

I put trusting a stock analyst to tell us what's going on inside the tech dept of a company on the same shelf as trusting a doctor who hasn't meet much less treated a subject with telling us how sick he is and that he likely has only 6 weeks left to live.

 

[dannyboi83]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5G77 Safari/525.20)

I'd actually like to see a quad core as an option for an iMac. I say an option because I just don't really see them moving the entire line to quad core since it will start to encroach on the Mac Pro's territory.

As people have already said, its expandability that people want, and the pro is still so far ahead of the imac in terms of performance. People buy the pro cos they need it, and imac is not going to be a suitable replacement.

Quad core imac would be nice, especially if there is better graphics than the present lower level imacs.

 

[thoshino]

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

Agreed, if anything one might possibly say "Apple want to make sure power-fetisch users who don't really need a Mac Pro buy one anyway thinking the iMac is too weak" (arguably not a user friendly business plan).

Hands down it would be nice though if there was a desktop-based desktop Mac, especially in regards to the GPU.

 

[Marx55]

What is needed is a Quad Core miniTOWER.

 

[JoshJosh117]

.

 

[craig1410]

Whatever the reasons behind the delays/uncertainty with iMac's of late, this is hurting desktop sales big time! We've already seen the figures for desktop sales down substantially from the year-ago quarter. Although there is some reason to expect the late 2007 quarter to be higher than normal due to the release of the Aluminium iMac, this last quarter has seen a massive swing the other way due to the non-release of the iMac refresh.

I've said before that I think Nvidia issues prevented an earlier release (Oct/Nov 08) and now perhaps Apple are getting close to the lead in to Snow Leopard and thoughts of multi-core. I'd bet they intended to release an Nvidia 9400/9600 based dual core iMac in October and then a quad-core iMac in April/May 2009. Now they are perhaps considering bringing the two releases together, assuming NVidia can supply chips by now...

Just my own analysis on this rather frustrating situation.

I'm actually quite happy with my own Aug '07 Aluminium iMac 2.4G/24" machine but a friend of mine has been waiting since around October when I finally convinced him that an iMac was the way to go and if Apple don't get their skates on then they risk losing a new customer!!

Cheers,
Craig.

ps. Has anyone else noticed that supply of refurbished iMac's in the UK has completely dried up. I can't remember the last time I saw one for sale! Does this mean that nobody is buying new ones hence no returns and no refurbs or does it mean that the refurbs are in such demand that they are being snapped up before I even see them? Either way, it's not good!

 

[Sehnsucht]

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?

Not to mention that nobody in the professional/scientific field wants an integrated display. Most research centers and other professional institutions have most likely already have the huge, fancy IPS displays for graphics work, which I'm presuming they'd like to keep. Right?

 

[Tallest Skil]

Not to mention that nobody in the professional/scientific field wants an integrated display. Most research centers and other professional institutions have most likely already have the huge, fancy IPS displays for graphics work, which I'm presuming they'd like to keep. Right?

They'll need a Mini DisplayPort to DVI/VGA adapter to keep them, but yes.

 

[lazyrighteye]

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.

Wu's a hack.
He knows no more about what Apple is doing than my cat does.
It's annoying that he still gets 'press.'

 

[tirerim]

the imac includes a display.. how much is a 24 cinema display? 700?!

Sure, but you don't need a new display every time you buy a computer. I bought my 20" monitor for something like $500 several years ago as an external display for my PowerBook, then started using it with my Power Mac when I got that. In another couple of years I'll probably get a Mac Pro, and I'll still be able to keep using the same monitor. Thus, I get to spend money on the stuff that changes more quickly (the computer), while the monitor only gets replaced when it actually wears out.

 

[lftrghtparadigm]

The name of this site *is* MacRumors, isn't it?

Yep, that is true.

if it were my site, I'd be mildly concerned with credibility, however.

Arn clearly is not

 

[lftrghtparadigm]

Well you're absolutely wrong. When I went from my dual G4 to an intel mac Pro, I very heavily thought about the imac. Why? Because I'm dealing with mostly DV and P2 video. Because I wanted 2 monitors. I already had one flat screen LCD. And since LCDs were a grand or more at the time, buying the less expensive iMac would give me a screen to boot. What it didn't have was the expandability. But what I'm doing would work just fine on fw800 drives.

But in the end, I thought it would look less professional with the iMac, and I didn't want to risk the need for expandability. So I bought the low end MacPro. 2 years later, I still haven't installed a Kona3 or MXO2 or anything. But I do use an internal SATA raid. I could've lived with fw800 drives however.

So it was a tough choice. And I assume some go the other way. Especially if they're not doing high end editing or working with clients.

The product lines are defined as:

PRO

and

CONSUMER

If you can't figure where you fit in that very simple distinction, thats not Apple's problem. Understanding how much you're job or hobby warrants spending on a computer is the first step. Then figure out if your job or hobby as you describe it...IS in fact a job OR a hobby?

Some of my "hobbies" could easily be considered "Pro" work, where as the work some people do for a living could easily be accomplished on an iBook G4, rather than cutting edge Pro machine on their expense report.

 

[alexbates]

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.

That would be great but I bet it costs a lot more than the Quad-Core since it has the larger cache.

Apple is trying to keep the price of the iMac low so they won't be aiming for the best processor. The best processor should be put in the next Generation of the Mac Pro.

 

[Digital Skunk]

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

the imac includes a display.. how much is a 24 cinema display? 700?!

Better add a four bay eSATA enclosure to the iMac, as well as an extra 5.25" bay for another burner of some kind too.

Yet there's still no way to get more than 4GB/8GB of RAM in an iMac, or more PCI expansion or updated graphics cards.

Not to mention that nobody in the professional/scientific field wants an integrated display. Most research centers and other professional institutions have most likely already have the huge, fancy IPS displays for graphics work, which I'm presuming they'd like to keep. Right?

They'll need a Mini DisplayPort to DVI/VGA adapter to keep them, but yes.

Correct. Many in the professional world already have medium (ACD) to top notch (Eizo/NEC) panels on their desks. If I bought a 30" ACD with my Dual core PowerPC G5 and want to upgrade to a new machine, there's no way in hell I would be purchasing an iMac that can't handle the 30". I am just going to pop out the G5 tower and pop in a Mac Pro and keep on chugging along.

The adaptor thing may piss me off, but that's a hell of a lot better than Apple telling me to get all new Cinema displays.

Some of my "hobbies" could easily be considered "Pro" work, where as the work some people do for a living could easily be accomplished on an iBook G4, rather than cutting edge Pro machine on their expense report.

I think this is where some people really get confused, and try to shove the sort of amorphous word "PRO" in the mix as compared to Apple's lineup.

I think it's more like

"laptop Power"

"More laptop Power"

"Overkill server Power for those that need it" (Mac Pro)

Not that it's bad, as you say, there are a lot of professions that would prefer to have a more stable smooth running machine than $3000 worth of computing power for spreadsheets.

For me and some others, the little notch between laptop and server is where the ????? rest. What if you don't need server power (i.e. Pro photo doesn't really need 8 cores, some wish that it does, and some try to make it seem that way, but it really doesn't unless you are shooting medium format RAWs) but want more than laptop power in an enclosure that has space for upgrading parts to save money in the long run?

 

[MrJingles]

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.

Yeah I'd rather pocket $1200 for later with a quad-core imac for graphic design. Plus, no offense man, but you try and turn every thread into a MacPro "Gainestown" lovefest and it's getting tiresome. Congrats on your thread but not everyone cares.