That's what one dude keeps saying, but I'm not sure that's accurate.The answer is probably no, at least without a $150-200 adaptor and even then the results may not be too pretty. This thread has more info.
That's what one dude keeps saying, but I'm not sure that's accurate.The answer is probably no, at least without a $150-200 adaptor and even then the results may not be too pretty. This thread has more info.
That's what one dude keeps saying, but I'm not sure that's accurate.
It's not.
I wish you blue ray people would stop complaining and let it go. Jobs said it was a world of hurt. Why would you think that after such a huge redesign they would leave the Blue ray out, only to update it later. I don't see it happening, personally.
So Apple's bottom line is the only thing that matters, and the consumer's opinion is pretty much worthless? Good to know...
I also expect a drop in MAC Pro prices (around $500) and, maybe, a new "MAC Pro Jr" based on the P55 mobo/Core i5 to solve the eternal quest for a mid-range desktop computer (which could be priced around $1,299-1,699)
I also agree that blu-ray is coming on the next revision... but what everyone is #FAILing to note is two VERY important changes in this update:
a) the drop in price for the iMac (the 3.06Ghz was the top version at $2,199, granted with a 24" monitor not a 21.5"); and
b) the fact that not only a quad-core chip was included (that was all the back-and-forth in all the forums the last 30 days) but a DESKTOP version !
Next revision, besides blu-ray, might bring:
I) Standardization behind P55 mobo
- Core i3 to iMac 21.5" (with Core i5 BTO option)
- Core i5 to the low end iMac 27" and ready-to-order Core i7 at high end (with faster i7 BTO option)
II) New integrated/standard graphics solution (Nvidia, ATI or Intel ?)
I also expect a drop in MAC Pro prices (around $500) and, maybe, a new "MAC Pro Jr" based on the P55 mobo/Core i5 to solve the eternal quest for a mid-range desktop computer (which could be priced around $1,299-1,699)
But to play the "waiting" game is hard... I'm eager to jump into the 27" model right now... probably stick with the Core i5 as applications to fully utilize 8 threads are still 12-18 months away at least...
This iMac feels a lot like a transitional model to future features. The previous model owners got majorly shafted in this update though. The refurbished top of the line are killing resale prices.I highly doubt a "Mac Pro Jr.", but I wish you were right.
Can it run Leopard?
Will we see these in stores by this weekend ya think? I need to see this 27in Monster Machine!
This iMac feels a lot like a transitional model to future features. The previous model owners got majorly shafted in this update though. The refurbished top of the line are killing resale prices.
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB420LL/A?mco=MTEyMDAwMzkAs a percentage of original purchase price we will probably see a 10-20% resale bite on the previous generation machines.
Which really isn't that bad. If I was re-selling a nine month old Dell it wouldn't be worth 50% of what I paid for it.
I'm pretty sure I can still get $1000 or more for my 4850 equipped iMac.
They wouldn't have a letterboxed image as their wallpaper...
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB420LL/A?mco=MTEyMDAwMzk
That sounds about right but it the one day price slash was amazing. Apple was riding high on milking the previous models.
The display is what's lowering the margins and it's what most people are going to get behind.Yes, they will see lower profit margins on these new models for the next 12 months, however I think it's a good thing, they are really trying to bring additional value to the iMac line.
In your 2.5 year ago previous post, you was complaining that your lousy HP laptop...spyware...malware..blah blah...AND THAT'S WHY U TURNED YOURSELF TO MAC...what!?
AND NOW...in this post....You was saying that Window is damn safe after Win 95 in this post, but 2.5 years ago when you start using your macbook white, you are so pleased that the Macbook/MacOSX was clean n easy n safe.
You are contradicting yourself.
I'm really sorry for you....you don't enjoy any machine that you use...
I just find it kind of odd that they're playing up the 16x9 aspect ratio of the display when most films are still going to be letterboxed anyway. So the majority of films watched on an iMac will still have black bars. Just an observation of one of their marketing points that is kind of awkward IMO. With the exception of TV shows, movies aren't going to fill that screen.
You know nothing about business do you? Apple knows exactly what they are doing and call me a fanboy all you want but they are doing a lot of things right. If they weren't their products wouldn't be selling. Whether they are making new iMacs on steroids like the new ones intro'd yesterday or whether they are making just pretty machines, their products are selling.
If it's "pretty" alone that sells then that's what Apple should make. Gimme a break dude, no tech company will stay in business if they keep the mentality that legacy styled hardware is what they should be pushing.
Mini towers are fading away. Sony has done away with them, Dell is pushing more laptops these days as most companies are pushing AIO's, such as HP's Touchsmart. How many ads for HP mini towers have you seen lately? HP pushes the kitchen desktop.
Even the geeks on this forum need to get off their high horses and stop pretending that function is way more important to them than form. Everybody buys on form on some level. Most of the world buys form over function. It's no sin.
I just loved when I worked for an electronics store, the customer would come in acting like a "know it all" and pretend that he wanted specific features on his TV or no sale. Afterwards he started looking at the prettier and bigger TV's and completely forgot about the specs he asked for and just bought it. That's they way most people are.
You can do this already, you just can't play back any BD movies you make. Data works fine.I am not as concerned with the watching of movies on my iMac as I am about being able to archive my BD collection, author BD home movies, etc.
Targeted for people who don't use computers as computers but instead expensive media players, its unusable screen makes this another upgrade to skip for people who use computers as computers -- and Apple knows it since they had to work around it so hard to film their advertisement.
you just can't play back any BD movies you make.
Actually, you're wrong.
Microsoft did support HD DVD but never included the option for HD DVD playback out of the box in Windows Vista.
What Microsoft has is "DXVA". It allows the GPU to do ALL of the work for video playback. Windows has "full bitstream decoding" for video, which means the entire video stream is handed off to the GPU and it does ALL of the work to decode it, process it, clean it up, scale it if needed, and display it. In OS X, the GPU is either not used at all or for only certain aspects of video playback.
Thanks to DXVA, blu-ray and HD DVD playback have been available in Windows since the beginning. Back in 2006 you just needed a blu-ray or HD DVD reader along with a GPU that could do the video work and you were in business.
Are you serious? You really think the Core i7 iMac is that good?
I hate to break it to you, but Core i7 has been available for Windows desktop PCs for about a year now. The Core 2 Quad has been in Windows desktop PCs for a couple of years now and the prices are so low that you can basically walk into Walmart and walk out with a Core 2 Quad system for only a few hundred dollars.
Core i5 on a PC is a $199 chip. Core i7 is $279 and $289.
The ATI Radeon 4850 is more than a year old now. A much faster GeForce GTX can be had for less than $200 these days.
And don't even get me started on the screen on Macs. Apple uses edge-lit LED backlit LCDs. So there is NO visual benefit other than instant-on. Apple's screens are so glossy and have much lower color gamut than significantly lower screens, plus 16x9 displays have been the norm for PCs for, again, more than a year now. And, again, they're so glossy they're useless. I have the original unibody MacBook and in certain lighting conditions I can't even use the built-in screen because its so reflective. Just yesterday I was trying to use it. There was no direct light source behind me, just light bouncing off things the way it normally does. I had the screen brightness all the way up and I could still see myself in the screen more than I could see what was actually on screen.
Apple is basically charging $2,000 for something NOW that would have cost you $1,000 a year ago.
Windows 7 is just one component of a whole PC.
I can go buy a Dell, HP, Gateway, Asus, Sony, Toshiba, MSI, etc. PC with a blu-ray drive built-in. Also, thanks to Windows (XP, Vista, 7) supporting DXVA, I can buy a blu-ray drive and watch movies that way. I can't watch blu-ray at all on a Mac out of the box or even without Windows.
Blu-ray should at least be a BTO option for those willing to shell out for it. Hell, Apple could make an extra $100 per machine sold and it wouldn't affect all of you blu-ray haters.
I am not as concerned with the watching of movies on my iMac as I am about being able to archive my BD collection, author BD home movies, etc.
It's not just about trying to use your iMac as a home theater.
Having said all of that, "you blue ray people" includes virtually every single gadget blog and tech news site, all of which have bemoaned the lack of a blu-ray drive in this new iMac. I'm sure Apple gets the message and has to decide how to handle it. Low quality 720P compressed movies and a DVD player are not the answer.