Makes sense. Cards or mSATA perhaps? I am holding a Crucial 64GB mSATA, and it is not much bigger than an SD Card... The new Drobo 5D is using mSATA to bring this sort of hybrid performance to their new RAID storage.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces Lighter, Thinner iMac Models with Fusion Drive
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Makes sense. Cards or mSATA perhaps? I am holding a Crucial 64GB mSATA, and it is not much bigger than an SD Card... The new Drobo 5D is using mSATA to bring this sort of hybrid performance to their new RAID storage.
Deceptive?
While I do find the design to be beautiful, and too was stunned by the reveal, does anyone else think Apples presentation and current display on their website is deceptive? Notice that most pictures do not reveal the back. Rear or side profile shots can be found, but only when digging deeper into the side. I find this to be very sneaky and would expect more from Apple.
While I do find the design to be beautiful, and too was stunned by the reveal, does anyone else think Apples presentation and current display on their website is deceptive? Notice that most pictures do not reveal the back. Rear or side profile shots can be found, but only when digging deeper into the side. I find this to be very sneaky and would expect more from Apple.
Flash sticks like rMBP. Not 2 x 2.5 drives.
HDD not likely to be upgradable b/c the chin and chassis are now 'fused'. The screen is also fused to the glass. Good luck opening that on your kitchen counter...
OSX determines what goes on SSD and what goes on HDD. This is not in the user's control, unless someone comes up with a hack.
Just as I thought...I will need at least 256 GB of SSD space for both OSX and Windows including all my Apps. In fact as this will be my main working machine I probably have to add a seperate account for my better half so I guess 512 GB it is...But I also need a normal HDD for all the music and pictures...This is actually a huge step backward.
Tell it that the 2012 iMac has a disease. No one thinks anorexia is a good thing, except for Apple apparently.
Man I really thought that my next Mac purchase was going to be a Mac Pro. But now I don't know. This is going to be a tough decision. I like the the fact that the iMac is thinner, but the Mac Pro still has the edge on speed and upgradability.
If the 3TB Fusion cannot manage the space (and I don't see any spec that indicates how much of the 3TB would be available as a quasi-SSD), then how would it work to get the 768GB SSD and go external with HDD? The USB3 and TB units are coming down in price... Too much of a hassle?
I'm guessing it's Apple's proprietary implementation of SSD (though OWC does offer upgrades for the Air) vs. mSATA.
Yeah, in the picture below they show it running without a power cord! Lies! Shenanigans!!!
Wow. That thing looks amazing. I may need to upgrade to the 27"...I have the original 24" Alu iMac and is starting to get pretty bogged down and now looks ancient compared to this. This is an amazing update.
Not worried about having a CD / DVD drive as I never use the one in my 24" anyways, external is the way to go! I used to use the internal one but then it failed, got it fixed and never used it since. It's so much easier and cheaper to just swap out an $80 external drive than have to take this thing apart and install a new one.
Not worried about having a CD / DVD drive as I never use the one in my 24" anyways, external is the way to go! I used to use the internal one but then it failed, got it fixed and never used it since. It's so much easier and cheaper to just swap out an $80 external drive than have to take this thing apart and install a new one.
It's gorgeous and I'm disappointed
I've been lusting after a new iMac for a while, specifically for the flash drive option.
After the initial gasp at how gorgeous the thin new design is, I'm pretty disappointed. No optical drive. Not sure how much faster this machine is - I'll have to wait for the benchmarks. And there's no pricing on the BTO options.
More waiting - darn!
I've been lusting after a new iMac for a while, specifically for the flash drive option.
After the initial gasp at how gorgeous the thin new design is, I'm pretty disappointed. No optical drive. Not sure how much faster this machine is - I'll have to wait for the benchmarks. And there's no pricing on the BTO options.
More waiting - darn!
This is a good point. And the superdrive can be in the box for the 99% of the time you don't need it. So it's all good.
Fail. What a lousy upgrade. The new iMac is still too thick. I'm going to wait until next year, when the new and improved iMac will be at least 25% thinner. I need the extra space because my desk is only three feet deep....
What stupidity that the 21" can't be upgraded with more memory.
Many macs take on a second life when they can be given to someone else, a school perhaps, and it's nice to be able to stuff it with 'then' cheap ram to extend it's value to the new users.
Many macs take on a second life when they can be given to someone else, a school perhaps, and it's nice to be able to stuff it with 'then' cheap ram to extend it's value to the new users.
Not an increase in processor clock speed, but they're still around 10% faster because it's a newer architecture. I don't really care about thinness in a desktop either, though. It looks disproportionate to me now.
I can already see tons of heat releated failures with these. Ouch.
* Crosses fingers for a Mac Pro next year *
* Crosses fingers for a Mac Pro next year *
Yep. The same concept, but most of the 'hybrid' drives only have somewhere in the neighborhood of 4-8 GB of flash attached. Barely enough to cover the OS and a couple apps.
are you serious???? adding/changing RAM is about as difficult as changing the batteries in your magic mouse, except a screw driver is needed to remove the cover (at least on my iMac). so as long as you can operate a screw driver and buy decent quality RAM in the first place, it is very simple.
Even if you use your desktop optical drive with these new iMacs daily, you don't have to leave it on your desk. You can just unplug it and put it in a drawer or on a closet shelf when your not using it. This makes more sense than having one always taking up space inside your iMac or on your desk.
Still, I had hoped when Apple removed the optical drive they would have replaced it with a desktop GPU (and a really good one).
You're NOT missing my point.
Except that it's *not* just a cache, unless you're going to consider your normal HDD 'just a cache'.
I was amped about this with my card about to preorder (I can't yet), but after thinking and reading more about this I'm not sure.
I've always bought the base model for $1199 - always been great for photography and a few light games because I always spent an extra $100 (perhaps less) on double my RAM capacity.
Now they want an extra $100, but gimped the speed of the hard drive. So for $1300, I get a gimped computer. No problem, I was going to go up a model this time around anyway.
So looking at the $1500 model, I STILL get the slow RPM hard drive, but a better GPU (somewhat??). For an extra $250, I can get the hybrid drive. But with technology and my LR/PS/Nik photography software, I was going to opted for 16GB RAM. I'm sure I'm looking at another $250 since Apple won't let me install my own on this model.
I don't think this is worth $2k...
I've always bought the base model for $1199 - always been great for photography and a few light games because I always spent an extra $100 (perhaps less) on double my RAM capacity.
Now they want an extra $100, but gimped the speed of the hard drive. So for $1300, I get a gimped computer. No problem, I was going to go up a model this time around anyway.
So looking at the $1500 model, I STILL get the slow RPM hard drive, but a better GPU (somewhat??). For an extra $250, I can get the hybrid drive. But with technology and my LR/PS/Nik photography software, I was going to opted for 16GB RAM. I'm sure I'm looking at another $250 since Apple won't let me install my own on this model.
I don't think this is worth $2k...
I was surprised to see how thin the sides are, while the front still has the same look (which I like good design doesn't need to be changed).
But on the other hand, who cares if your iMac is that thin? I have the 2011 model which still is very thin. Thin enough at least. I'm working on my iMac while sitting in front of it (duh!) so why would I pay for yet another thinner design? Ok it's an eye-catcher for visitors etc. but I don't care. I expected the black canvas around the screen would be narrower (iPad Mini-ish)... that would be a much nicer design upgrade.
And the SD-cardreader on the back... seriously? I saw it immediately during the presentation and thought instantly "Why didn't they put it on the bottom? Much easier to access + you can still see your SD so you won't forget it + it's narrow enough to fit (bottom pictures of the iMac show multiple holes of which one could be easily an SD-cardreader) + it's barely an inch wide so Apple can't say they just didn't had enough room for it.
For the rest: beautiful machine.
And to those negative responses I read:
good design doesn't need to be changed).But on the other hand, who cares if your iMac is that thin? I have the 2011 model which still is very thin. Thin enough at least. I'm working on my iMac while sitting in front of it (duh!) so why would I pay for yet another thinner design? Ok it's an eye-catcher for visitors etc. but I don't care. I expected the black canvas around the screen would be narrower (iPad Mini-ish)... that would be a much nicer design upgrade.
And the SD-cardreader on the back... seriously? I saw it immediately during the presentation and thought instantly "Why didn't they put it on the bottom? Much easier to access + you can still see your SD so you won't forget it + it's narrow enough to fit (bottom pictures of the iMac show multiple holes of which one could be easily an SD-cardreader) + it's barely an inch wide so Apple can't say they just didn't had enough room for it.
For the rest: beautiful machine.
- Faster, newer CPU's (Ivy Bridge vs. Sandy Bridge)
- Much faster graphics (fastest GPU 2012 iMac (GTX675mx) scores P19000 on 3Dmark Vantage vs. fastest GPU 2011 iMac (HD6970m) scored P14000 on 3Dmark Vantage)
- Intel's Smart Response SSD Caching as Fusion Drive using 128GB SSD
And to those negative responses I read:
- No Retina? Who cares? Do you actually own an iMac? It's pixel pitch is still one of the best out there, if you'd buy an equal monitor it'll cost ya 1000 dollars (Dell Ultrasharp U2711 as reference), and still you want more? Be realistic.
- No optical drive. You could anticipate Apple was going to dump it. Still use one often? I only used it to install Windows and some Windows-games. Get an external drive if you're still attached to it.
- No touch screen. Seriously? Get an iOS device if you want touch apps. Who wants a touch screen on their desktop? Steve Jobs himself said they tested touch screens for desktops and concluded the obvious fact it's only fun for the first few minutes. Your arm get's tired and the screen gets greasy.
No audio input?
So, no audio input? If I can't plug my keyboard into it, why would I bother upgrading to the new iMac?
So, no audio input? If I can't plug my keyboard into it, why would I bother upgrading to the new iMac?