Apple Announces Lighter, Thinner iMac Models with Fusion Drive

Fusion Drive = a way to cut costs and still make consumers think they are getting something apple-unique.
 
21.5 - no self upgradable ram, base 21.5 no possibility for fussion... 21.5 default 5400rpm disk (WTF)??? and finally, in europe, huge price bump... for me, no way to buy, really dissapointed

dont get me wrong, new imac 27 with fussion disk is probably great machine, but business model pushed by apple kills this machine for me - not upgradable base model, unprecedented prices in europe, fussion as BTO not default, 5400 rpm disk in 21.5 model... this really sucks:(
 
i personally haven't touched a dvd or cd for at least two years now.

sorry for the folks who still rely on those type of medias, but they will slowly fade away i believe.

better start looking for attractive alternatives.

people might not like it but apple shows everyone where times are heading, wether some like it or not.
 
curmudgeon32 said:
You mean out in cold world where very inexpensive external optical drives don't exist?

All they've done is stopped putting the optical drive inside the chassis. They haven't stopped them from existing. Hell, Apple makes a very compact, bus-powered optical drive for just this reason — as a bridge for those buying Airs and Minis (and now iMacs) without optical. For the growing number of people who rarely/never use discs, it's not an issue. For the people (myself included) who still want to rip a CD or have to burn a DVD from time to time, there are plenty of options. I'm still using a FireWire LaCie DVD drive I bought like 5 years ago with my new optical-less Mini. It's not the end of the world.
Click to expand...

Apple plays up the aesthetics of their systems everyday and your answer to what was never a problem is that I should add a sizable usb paper weight to sit next to it?

but it's not that me or anyone else complaining about the lack of the optical means that optical drives don't exist in the open market that's a ridiculous statement. It's why should I pay more to have my system look worse than when the optical was housed in the system.

this is thin for thins-sake in a desktop system it just seems like something that should be there for productivity and media
 
jddar said:
Still, I had hoped when Apple removed the optical drive they would have replaced it with a desktop GPU (and a really good one).
Click to expand...

Sometimes people just don't know what they are talking about - a few facts here:

- the highest iMac GPU option is, right now, the best mobile GPU on Earth (680M);

- it is also the 12th most powerful GPU of all;

- ANY modern desktop GPU would be AT LEAST three times thicker than any optical drive (or the whole iMac for that matter). Therefore, removing the optical would never have helped in that regard.

Are we clear now?
 
rileyes said:
Fusion Drive = a way to cut costs and still make consumers think they are getting something apple-unique.
Click to expand...

cut costs for the customer, yes. i can't afford a 500+GB SSD, but want my OS and most used apps run quickly.

i think apple did a great job considering the needs and affordability of consumers.
 
Thunderbird said:
Epic fail.

It's not a new design, it's just thinner. ...
Click to expand...

With newer, higher-performance components for the most part.

No optical drive
Click to expand...

A no-op for most buyers, and an external drive for those who need one. (and here we share one between three different Macs, as needed. Which turns out to be maybe twice or three times a year, each.

No new stand design
Click to expand...

So? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

No retina display
Click to expand...

At normal working distances, the 27" (and likely the 21") is effectively "retina" as is. Do you *really* want to pay for the retina display in this case?

No upgradability
Click to expand...

Other than memory, what are you likely going to upgrade before the machine is replaced? Even there, third-parties have been offering drive upgrades for "unupgradeable" of various types for quite a while.

For most users, it's not an issue.

No touch screen
Click to expand...

Good!!!

Trying to use a vertical touch screen is a pain in the joints, literally.

You really need a large touch screen? Look at Cintiq's offerings. (The newest ones are actually pretty slick for that use.)

No exterior design change (e.g. same chin)
Click to expand...

Who cares about the chrome trim? Seriously.

No difference in available sizes
Click to expand...

What major market call is there for other sizes in desktop systems? Smaller than around 20" is covered by laptops, bigger than 27" is fading into the single-digit range. It's not like you can't get a larger second display, is it?

This is essentially little more than a spec bump with a thinner screen. I don't need a thinner screen. The only possible appealing feature is the 75% less reflective AG coating.

FAIL.
Click to expand...

YMMV, and almost certainly does, from the majority of potential users.
 
So what chip is in this? Did they upgrade it from the 2011? Would like to see what BTO options are available. With the 27" not out till Dec. is it worth waiting again for the mac pro which is supposed to come out in in early 2013...

edit - just quickly browsed through some of the stuff on apple's website... i think there was a huge oversight in putting the SD slot on the back of the computer... definitely not easy access may as well buy a cheap 10 card reader...
Also no FW800, my job depends on FW800 as i transfer files to and from using FW800 from my employers computer....
 
Last edited:
mariana888 said:
flat screen TVs would also fall in this category then. A TV probably sits on the same stand whether it's an LCD or Plasma or LED, regardless of how thin they are, and yet again people wants thinner and thinner TVs.

Nothing wrong with wanting to make the iMac thinner, it looks amazing.
Click to expand...
Yes there is something wrong because the stand itself is many inches deep. Makes no difference if the panel is thinner, it won't save space. And the old iMac isn't exactly fat either or shabby looking.
 
drummingcraig said:
The new iMac is indeed gorgeous. However I wonder how many folks are aware that the Fusion drive isn't exactly a brand new concept. A quick google search revealed several posts on blogs and social media that were lauding Apple for its "innovation" of the Fusion concept, yet I've had a Momentus XT hybrid drive in my MBP for almost two years.
Click to expand...

Once again Apple takes an known concept and calls it a breakthrough simply by naming it "Fusion" and putting it in a mainstream product. As usual good marketing by Apple.
 
Dagless said:
The new one has a weaker GPU.

Shouldn't they be getting more powerful, not less?
Click to expand...

Stop spreading misinformation, please; new users will appreciate that.

The top option is MUCH better than the top option in 2011- in fact, the 680M is the fastest mobile GPU right now and considerably better than the 6970M; this is the fact that matters for anyone demanding a better graphics/gaming experience on iMac.
 
vandeetz said:
just because you don't use the optical drive doesn't mean others don't.
Click to expand...
Right, but why can't those frequent users use an external drive while the rest of us who left optical behind long ago enjoy a much thinner and lighter computer without legacy devices in it that get used once a year at most? The other way around isn't possible, see.

It's not exactly a modular computer, it's an all-in-one, and anything that goes into an all-in-one better damn well be something that the majority uses frequently. Firewire and optical drive are no longer among those things.
 
majkom said:
21.5 - no self upgradable ram, base 21.5 no possibility for fussion... 21.5 default 5400rpm disk (WTF)??? and finally, in europe, huge price bump... for me, no way to buy, really dissapointed

dont get me wrong, new imac 27 with fussion disk is probably great machine, but business model pushed by apple kills this machine for me - not upgradable base model, unprecedented prices in europe, fussion as BTO not default, 5400 rpm disk in 21.5 model... this really sucks:(
Click to expand...

I was so excited just to see the iMacs finally refreshed - I've been waiting since April. But now it's done it does appear to be all about thinness, and not about performance. I'm wondering if there isn't better value in a quad core mini for the moment - hoping for the Great Leap Forward maybe when chip tech settles down.
 
BRLawyer said:
Sometimes people just don't know what they are talking about - a few facts here:
- the highest iMac GPU option is, right now, the best mobile GPU on Earth (680M);
- it is also the 12th most powerful GPU of all;
- ANY modern desktop GPU would be AT LEAST three times thicker than any optical drive (or the whole iMac for that matter). Therefore, removing the optical would never have helped in that regard.

Are we clear now?
Click to expand...

No, we're not clear now! The optical drive could have been replaced with a desktop GPU instead of mobile had "thinness" not been the priority.
 
Well, at least the new thinner, lighter design will make it easier to haul it back to the shop for repairs. (just looking on the bright side).
 
dashiel said:
The same was said when Apple ditched the floppy. Someone has to move the industry forward, you really think it’s going to be Dell or Acer to ween people off archaic technology?

Beyond that, unlike 1998 when Apple made the decision somewhat blind, they now have an unprecedented database of what their customers do with their computers. They undoubtedly saw optical usage decline, introduced a spearhead (The MacBook Air) measured its adoption rate and projected out when it would be safe to introduce other machines without optical drives. For the N<50% that need optical it’s available, but for the majority of customers they get a more reliable, faster, thinner, cooler (temperature) machine with dollars reserved for optical drives now funneled elsewhere.
Click to expand...

for the most part I agree, but I don't see the optical drive going away unless we are going to use a thumb drive like technology for physical media.

For someone that is a huge film fan I buy blu-ray discs and nothing I have seen from apple in terms of itunes even comes close to matching that quality level through download or streaming services.

I'm not saying this is for everyone, it's just such a cheap part to include that does little in affecting the aesthetic of the machine. we can talk about funneling money toward better specs, but if you're only worried about specs you wouldn't be buying a mac. in reality the money saving was funneled toward making it thinner to each his own i guess
 
Caliber26 said:
I just bought my iMac in January but this new design is a must-have for me. Luckily, Macs have great resell value so my outta pocket expense won't be too bad.

This machine is love at first sight. I cannot wait to meet her in person.
Click to expand...

Apple loves fans like you.

Crazy...........
 
JohnDory said:
I was so excited just to see the iMacs finally refreshed - I've been waiting since April. But now it's done it does appear to be all about thinness, and not about performance. I'm wondering if there isn't better value in a quad core mini for the moment - hoping for the Great Leap Forward maybe when chip tech settles down.
Click to expand...

but, the only probelm i see is that fussion/ssd is not as default option - this makes "recent tech" imac too expensive - you have to pay premium for ssd/fussion and if you want fussion, u cant buy entry model...

sorry apple, but in 2012 computer withous ssd is simply outdated...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top