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

Apple Releases Updated iMac Models With 21.5- and 27-Inch LED Screens

erm yey
signature_SmileyFace.jpg
quad core!!!
 
lonefrontranger said:
for the blu-ray complainers, maybe a you should consider the fact that physical media is dying a slow and painful death, egged on by high prices and DRM headaches...
Click to expand...
I would be in favor of downloadable content if the quality was there, but it just plain isn't. All of Apple's "HD" content maxes out at 720p and is highly compressed... it can't hold a candle to Blu-ray. And with these new higher-resolution screens in the 27" model, the video has to be upscaled even further.

Also, the other poster was right; even if the downloadable content was made available at 1080p and at reasonable bitrates, where do you think you're gonna put it? A dual-layer Blu-ray disc (the common format for commercial releases) is 50GB... that means you can put a whopping 10 movies on that 500GB drive (assuming you don't need an operating system). Let's be realistic.

These new updates (27" screen, 16:9 aspect, i7, 16GB of RAM) are all fantastic improvements and have made this new release worthy of being called a "major update," but the lack of Blu-ray capability is a glaring omission that shouldn't be ignored. People are right to call them out on it.

At the very least, consider this... the new Final Cut Studio has Blu-ray burning support built-in and I've been making discs with an external 3rd party drive for almost a year now. Seems silly, then, that Apple's own software supports making Blu-ray content but I can't watch it back on the same machine it was created with? Just nonsense...
 
I bought this the second the Apple Store came up again:

27-inch iMac
Part Number: Z0GF
2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 065-9233
1TB Serial ATA Drive 065-9411
Apple Magic Mouse Z065-8412
8GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x2GB 065-9265
Apple Wireless Keyboard (Danish) and User's Guide (Danish) DK065-9381
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB 065-8981
Country Kit DK065-8447
8x double-layer SuperDrive 065-9410


Delivery: November

Can't wait !! :D
 
hal1984 said:
The Core i5 and i7 are the desktop versions, cause doesn't exists 2'66 ghz core i5 or 2'8 ghz Core i7 in the mobile segment.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors

I think that the CPUs are the Core i7-870 and the Core i5-750. The larger 27 inch body allows for a better heat system.
Click to expand...

I've said this several times. That does not matter. They've put overclocked mobile parts in iMacs before, and they'll do it again.
 
Gloor said:
Again the GPUs suck badly. When will Apple get it that if they want iMac to be family computer too then they need to offer better GPU so its really AiO computer.
Other than that its a great update. UK prices are rip off again but we got used to it anyway.
Now, lets hope for ACD refresh with matte option. I would love to get 30" LED ACD and replace this one :)))
Click to expand...

Agreed. I just don't understand; but I have a feeling I'll always have to live with it. Eh, just makes it that much easier to justify a Mac Pro :)
 
roland.g said:
1. Just so everyone knows. Blu-Ray will not make it. Not even the PS4 will end up having BR. Why? Because DVD had a long time to cement itself in the marketplace and is still extremely cheap. BR discs are not. And by the time they got to the point of lower prices and being fully entrenched in the mainstream they will be beaten to the punch by downloads. On-demand, Netflix boxes/TV integration, and a host of other rising options mean that BR will be skipped in favor of downloadable data. Many of us, myself included, prefer physical media, but like many things, that will change and downloads will get adopted before BR has the chance to fully replace DVD, so it will end up coming up short.
Click to expand...

Just so you know, you couldn't be more wrong. This has got to be by far the most backwards and ill-informed thinking I've read yet. I think you are very very misinformed:

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3564

In a nutshell:

blu-ray up 83% year to date
Digital downloads up 18% year to date

Edit: Oh and PS4 not having blu-ray? Not when the PS3 is doing so much for the format already: http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=3561
 
Eidorian said:
I have a feeling the Core 2 models can. There might be an issue trying it on something using the P55 PCH though.
Click to expand...

If it is just a matter of a few extensions, it might be possible to put them in 10.5 and have it work.
 
hal1984 said:
The Core i5 and i7 are the desktop versions, cause doesn't exists 2'66 ghz core i5 or 2'8 ghz Core i7 in the mobile segment.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i7_microprocessors

I think that the CPUs are the Core i7-870 and the Core i5-750. The larger 27 inch body allows for a better heat system.
Click to expand...
Likely: Standard Core i5 750 & i7 860 at 95W
Unlikely: Power optimized Core i5 750S & i7 860S at 82W
Very Unlikely: Low voltage Xeons
Out of the Blue: Special Clarksfield processors
 
hey,
I just bought an 20" Imac just a week ago online but I was wondering if I could swap it back and buy the new Imac. It's still in the 14-days radius but I did took it out of the package and put all my files and photos on it.
Is there any chance for me to swap it back?
 
Eminemdrdre00 said:
I think the 21.5" iMac is the first Mac that ISN'T overpriced! Its an incredible value at $1199.
Click to expand...

It MAY be a value (incredible is a stretch) for folks who live and breathe Mac...but for PC/Mac folks like myself or PC-only people thinking about trying or switching, the cheapest Mac (a system, not the Mini) is $1200.

Not to bring up the endless debate of Mac Vs. Windows, but a comparablely spec'd PC would be several hundred dollars cheaper. The real battle these days between PC and Mac is the OS. So someone who is very comfortable in Windows is gonna blow $300-$500 MORE for a Mac...because of presumed superior OS experience? I doubt it.

Not knocking the Macs...I really like them...but I was really hoping to buy the wife an iMac for $999 or less. I'm not spending $1200. Sorry Apple. Nice specs but Apple could have given us folks a cheaper, additional option.

-Eric
 
chrmjenkins said:
I've said this several times. That does not matter. They've put overclocked mobile parts in iMacs before, and they'll do it again.
Click to expand...

50% overclock in the Core i7?
Overclock on a phantom-mobile Core i5, when only exists one model and that one is desktop and the specs are the same that Apple announce?
 
SirHaakon said:
I would be in favor of downloadable content if the quality was there, but it just plain isn't. All of Apple's "HD" content maxes out at 720p and is highly compressed... it can't hold a candle to Blu-ray. And with these new higher-resolution screens in the 27" model, the video has to be upscaled even further.

Also, the other poster was right; even if the downloadable content was made available at 1080p and at reasonable bitrates, where do you think you're gonna put it? A dual-layer Blu-ray disc (the common format for commercial releases) is 50GB... that means you can put a whopping 10 movies on that 500GB drive (assuming you don't need an operating system). Let's be realistic.

These new updates (27" screen, 16:9 aspect, i7, 16GB of RAM) are all fantastic improvements and have made this new release worthy of being called a "major update," but the lack of Blu-ray capability is a glaring omission that shouldn't be ignored. People are right to call them out on it.

At the very least, consider this... the new Final Cut Studio has Blu-ray burning support built-in and I've been making discs with an external 3rd party drive for almost a year now. Seems silly, then, that Apple's own software supports making Blu-ray content but I can't watch it back on the same machine it was created with? Just nonsense...
Click to expand...

+1

I have an HD camcorder and would love to burn blu-ray discs to share with my family (everyone in my family now has a blu-ray player and HD television). I guess I could buy an external unit but it means cluttering my desk with another peripheral.
 
Eidorian said:
The Core i7 860 outperforms the Core i7 920.

The iMac is better now at raw CPU action. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not exactly...the 920 is better clock for clock, but the 860 has better "turbo modes." However considering how EASY it is to overclock a 920 (given you have the option which you don't on Mac's) the 920/x58 chipset combo is still the much better choice. You can get 920's to 4ghz pretty easily, and it supports more memory in general as well.

The new i5's and i7's are considered "budget" mainstream chips, and that's what these iMac's have. The 920 bloomfield is a better cpu. But the other stuff is fine for general users.
 
I must say I'm impressed. The upgrades are very nice. The Blu-ray thing does kind of confuse me, but it's no big deal. I think we all know they will eventually offer it. My first thought is about refurb availability of the quad core i7. Since it's a BTO option then the refurb store won't see many, but for those who do get them when they show up it will be sweet. :D
 
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