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

[MorphingDragon]

The previous iMacs were using Penryn as well. This is 2009 though.

You're going to find Penryn in sub-$500 budget machines. It shouldn't be in an iMac.

No not iMac revisions, C2D in general.

 

[Shanpdx]

It's MXM-like. It's a daughterboard that fits into a mini PCI-Express slot.

The Q8200 would have been fine in the LGA 775 models. It's just painful seeing a dual core in something that expensive. Why did Apple pick up a dead socket?

thanks for the reply.

almost it looks this iMac is stop gap for the next one, sure LGA775 is dead and the market is moving to 1366/1156. why $1699 imac did not have Core i5 (with enough space and fans) is mystery.

the $1999 is great the other models not so sure

 

[Eidorian]

No not iMac revisions, C2D in general.

I see what you mean now. Yes we have Conroe and then Penryn for the main line versions of Core 2.

Those base components in MCM form Core 2 Quad as well.

thanks for the reply.

almost it looks this iMac is stop gap for the next one, sure LGA775 is dead and the market is moving to 1366/1156. why $1699 imac did not have Core i5 (with enough space and fans) is mystery.

the $1999 is great the other models not so sure

Patience for a refurbished model. I think the next iMac update is going to slide the more proper processors down the line to the lower priced models. I've been saying that the $1,699 27" model should have had Core i5 750 to begin with.

 

[Chappers]

Because you incorrectly lumped it in with Win9x.

When you said

viruses, because those sorts of things haven't been an issue since Windows 95

As I mentioned versions of Windows produced by MS "since" Windows 95 - I have not incorrectly grouped them together I didn't even mention NT - I think you're confusing your arguments or misreading deliberately.

Link to the forum?

I'm getting real help there not FUD so nothing personal but I'd rather not.

Head over to AVS and Futuremark. You'll find about 3/4 of a million people who agree with me.

I went to a Windows forum not a home theatre or a benchmarks forum. I'm sure as a member you can link to the 3/4 million people who agree with you. I'm sure there are people who know their Windows stuff there - I just thought I'd go to a dedicated forum.

And, like in countless other threads, you ignore the entire post and the facts.
Apple has multiple warnings on the site, PLUS THE OS ITSELF warns you when you download an application. Don't ignore that again.

There is that small disclaimer - can't see the multiple warnings from Apple. As for ignoring stuff - you ignore:- "Why does Windows demand/recommend that I install Antivirus software (and it keeps doing it until I do)? You appear to know something MS doesn't. I'd get over to some Windows forums (not home theatre ones) and start preaching to Windows users that its all OK, MS got it wrong - you don't need Antivirus software. So what am I ignoring?

Oh and those "demands" in Windows? Yeah, you can turn that off. You can't turn off OS X's warnings.

You talk as if warnings are bad. I don't have a problem with warnings.

Says the one who selectively quotes and deliberately leaves out the facts that prove their entire argument wrong.

What facts have I left out?

Polaris made it personal and we both got blamed.

Of course

 

[mosx]

@ Mosx

Wow man, you're more reliable than the Postman. I could just be a literary fag before my clothes fly out of my closet in a desperate attempt to add colour to this conversation.

But im not, why? Its been 5+ freaken posts. You say the same things 50 bloody times even though completely separate people say otherwise... and give proof! You expand your posts with arbitrary silliness, in a desperate attempt to try crush another person you really couldn't give a hoot about.

I would say more things and what I truly think but this post alone borderlines upon personal attack. If I knew how to blacklist you so I don't have to read your flamboyant attempts at gaining attention...

All I can say is that if you that you need to prove yourself to a bunch of people on the internet you really need to review what on earth you're doing here. If you want to be an "elitist" go over to the nVidia forums, I know a few people that enjoy your kind of one sided conversations about Apple. If you go "Neargh neargh, I won. He stopped because he doesn't know jack". Read my post again!

@Mods, feel free to delete this if you want.

On Topic:

In the last iMacs, they had an LG screen, does anybody know the model of the new ones?

Say whatever you want man. I honestly couldn't care less. I have absolutely nothing to prove by posting here or at any other forum. So say and believe whatever you want. It's your right.

 

[fourcolourblack]

Who wants a hard drive(s) dangling off of the minimalist iMac?

It's sleek and pretty until you want to do anything but use Safari and iTunes.

Minimal is the iMac is, and less cables etc. Don't forget you've still got to plug the thing into the wall. There's one cable.

I don't know about the rest of you but I've got a printer, scanner, network, and external drive cable going into mine. It looks lovely on the surface, but its the usual nightmare of wires underneath the desk. We'll never get away from that, don't forget it!

 

[mosx]

When you said "viruses, because those sorts of things haven't been an issue since Windows 95" and I mentioned various versions of Windows that have have been produced by MS "since" Windows 95 - I have not incorrectly grouped them together.

Say whatever you like, but major virus issues like you, Apple, and other Apple fans claim exist and are a daily problem that can destroy lives are a thing of the very distant past.

I'm getting real help there not FUD so nothing personal but I'd rather not.

So this place doesn't exist then.

I went to a Windows forum not a home theatre and benchmarks forum. I'm sure as a member you can link to the 3/4 million people who agree with you.

Futuremark and AVS (what? too lazy to type either word into google?) are two of the most hardcore Windows PC forums out there. The people at those forums tend to know more about PCs and Windows than Steve Jobs knows about ripping people off.

There is that small disclaimer - can't see the multiple warnings from Apple.

So I take it you're still running Tiger? Any Leopard or Snow Leopard user can see the security warnings. Just download an app and install it. When you go to run it the first time the OS will warn you against it and ask if you're sure you want to run it, just like those UAC warnings in Vista. Except in Vista, you can turn them off.

As for ignoring stuff - why do you ignore, why does Windows demand/recommend that I install Antivirus software (and it keeps doing it until I do) ? You appear to know something MS doesn't.

Like I said, you can turn that off. Are you in Vista or XP? You see the little red shield in the bottom right hand corner? Double click it, click "change the way I'm alerted" (not the exact wording, but close) and choose not to be alerted for anything/uncheck anything. Windows 7 is a similar process, but you have to click the "Action Center" flag.

There you go, no more warnings to install anti-virus.

Now wheres the option in OS X to disable the UAC-style warnings and password prompts?

I'd get over to some Windows forums (not home theatre ones) and start preaching to Windows users that its all OK, MS got it wrong - you don't need Antivirus software.

Microsoft does it for user protection, the same way Leopard and Snow Leopard warn and prompt for passwords, and even have built-in detection against a couple of pieces of malware.

You talk as if warnings are bad. I don't have a problem with warnings.

Good for you. Warnings get in the way for me. If I want to download, install, and run something then thats my business. If something goes wrong I'll deal with it. I don't need the OS to babysit me through the whole process.

What facts have I left out?

Go back and re-read my posts. You'll see. Going on and on about Windows demands for security and ignoring OS X's annoying warnings and password prompts for most of the conversation would be one thing.

Of course

Believe what you want. I personally don't care.

 

[Peace]

Minimal is the iMac is, and less cables etc. Don't forget you've still got to plug the thing into the wall. There's one cable.

I don't know about the rest of you but I've got a printer, scanner, network, and external drive cable going into mine. It looks lovely on the surface, but its the usual nightmare of wires underneath the desk. We'll never get away from that, don't forget it!

Snow Leopard has wireless printing and scanning..2 Cables gone.

Network can use Wireless also..another cable gone.

This leaves 2 cables.
A power cable and a firewire/USB cable for the external drive. Or you can go with a time capsule and lose that cable too.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Say whatever you want man. I honestly couldn't care less.

You say that...
I've been where you've been, I know you do care, otherwise you wouldn't even replied to my post.

I have absolutely nothing to prove by posting here or at any other forum.

You say that, your posts say otherwise.

So say and believe whatever you want. It's your right.

You say that, yet you dont put that into practice yourself.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Snow Leopard has wireless printing and scanning..2 Cables gone.

Network can use Wireless also..another cable gone.

This leaves 2 cables.
A power cable and a firewire/USB cable for the external drive. Or you can go with a time capsule and lose that cable too.

TBH, all thats doing is shifting cables to somewhere else.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

I used to help my family buy computers. Now I just tell them "Buy whatever you want. They're ALL 100 times more power than you need!"

It sure makes my life easier.

I second that - I can't work out why jerkoff Windows users go on about 'specifications' when specifications don't matter squat these days. Most computers are already more powerful than what is required. The iMac is pretty much suitable for 95% of end users with 5% of end users hating it because it doesn't act like some sort of phallic symbol sitting on desk as something to make up for being a puny pencil necked geek.

 

[mosx]

You say that...
I've been where you've been, I know you do care, otherwise you wouldn't even replied to my post.

Like I said, believe whatever you like. You're free to believe whatever you want. Just like the people who still believe the Earth is flat: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/

You say that, your posts say otherwise.

Like I said, believe whatever you want. I really don't care. If you honestly believe I actually care about what you or anyone else here thinks, and that I feel I have something to prove, then you'd fit in perfect over there http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/

You say that, yet you dont put that into practice yourself.

How so? I say and believe what I want. Exactly what I said you should do.

 

[mosx]

I second that - I can't work out why jerkoff Windows users go on about 'specifications' when specifications don't matter squat these days. Most computers are already more powerful than what is required. The iMac is pretty much suitable for 95% of end users with 5% of end users hating it because it doesn't act like some sort of phallic symbol sitting on desk as something to make up for being a puny pencil necked geek.

Most computers are more powerful than what is required?

And what requirements are those?

Who are you to say the iMac is "suitable" for 95% of end users? You know, the PC gaming market is larger than Apple's entire market. The iMac meets no PC gamers requirements. Thats definitely more than "5%". The PC gaming market is largely responsible for the fast hardware we all enjoy today. If not for them overclocking their Celeron 300As back in 1998 and pairing up 2 Voodoo 2s, AMD and Intel never would have gotten into the "speed" war they're in, nor would nvidia and ATI gotten into a competition.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Like I said, believe whatever you like. You're free to believe whatever you want. Just like the people who still believe the Earth is flat: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/

Like I said, believe whatever you want. I really don't care. If you honestly believe I actually care about what you or anyone else here thinks, and that I feel I have something to prove, then you'd fit in perfect over there http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/

Ah hah, its just that type of post that proved my point. Its a self fulfilling prediction, and each time you reply you fulfill it time and time again. You do care and you know it! Aww lets give Mosx some big giant hugs.

BTW, the earth is flat thing is just the icing on the cake.

How so? I say and believe what I want. Exactly what I said you should do.

That went flying right over your head.

You cant seem to accept that other people have their own beliefs. Whenever someone here says something about Mac OSX or Apple that OMG OMG OMG QMFFQB!!! You have the need to "correct" them. TBF its not just you, you're just the most prominent example.

Whatever, after this post you still use anything to avoid answering the question directly.

Anyway I'm going to stop now, before I get booted. D:

On Topic:

I just found out that the scholarship I tried for includes a computer up to $5k of your choice.
WooOo, If i get it, know what I'm getting.

 

[Chappers]

Say whatever you like, but major virus issues like you, Apple, and other Apple fans claim exist and are a daily problem that can destroy lives are a thing of the very distant past.

Does that mean you accept that I didn't group them together wrongly? As for there being no virus issue since Win 95 - sorry but I know you like to try and win an argument but please. I've watched countless IT people have countless problems with viruses on PC's at work and still do. I feel sure that Windows 7 is a great improvement but back since Win 95. I think you're pulling your own chain not just mine . You say that it is only Apple and its fans that make these false claims. However not only does the OS (windows) ask for security software but the Microsoft website has pages called "security essentials" http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/?mkt=en-us http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/ - they even have a security portal. All this for a non-existent threat.
Unless there is a different meaning to essential that I've missed. As I've said before - it seems that MS itself disagrees with you in a big way. I have added the meaning of essential for you.
essential :adjective - absolutely necessary; extremely important :

So this place doesn't exist then.

Of course I got help here too - but I also went to a Windows forum to see what they thought of your advice. That hasn't changed - they are still laughing.

Futuremark and AVS (what? too lazy to type either word into google?) are two of the most hardcore Windows PC forums out there. The people at those forums tend to know more about PCs and Windows than Steve Jobs knows about ripping people off.

Of course I googled them but as always you didn't give direct links and then complain I find the wrong thing. If for a change you actually posted some links to prove what your coming out with (3/4 million people) for a change, then I might read exactly what you want me to read. Come on - just one little link with 3/4 million people backing you up - can't be to difficult. I went and searched those forums - surprise surprise - lots of people asking about antivirus software and lots of very hardcore knowledgeable replies telling people what to get and use. Didn't see anybody handing out advice to not use protection

So I take it you're still running Tiger? Any Leopard or Snow Leopard user can see the security warnings. Just download an app and install it. When you go to run it the first time the OS will warn you against it and ask if you're sure you want to run it, just like those UAC warnings in Vista. Except in Vista, you can turn them off.

No - Leopard here. Mines says - This is an app you downloaded from the internet - are you sure you want to run it - no warning not to run it - does that mean you're not quite telling the truth- although I hear SL does if the package has been modified. Advice/warnings - I'm all for it - it's one of the things that help keep me safe. People spreading FUD about no virus issues since Win 95 which is the bit I laugh at.

Like I said, you can turn that off. Are you in Vista or XP? You see the little red shield in the bottom right hand corner? Double click it, click "change the way I'm alerted" (not the exact wording, but close) and choose not to be alerted for anything/uncheck anything. Windows 7 is a similar process, but you have to click the "Action Center" flag.
There you go, no more warnings to install anti-virus.
Now wheres the option in OS X to disable the UAC-style warnings and password prompts?
Microsoft does it for user protection, the same way Leopard and Snow Leopard warn and prompt for passwords, and even have built-in detection against a couple of pieces of malware.

I really don't have a little shield (XP) - I'm sure one day it will pop up

So Microsoft do recommend antivirus protection for user protection - protection from what - there is no virus issue according to you.

Good for you. Warnings get in the way for me. If I want to download, install, and run something then thats my business. If something goes wrong I'll deal with it. I don't need the OS to babysit me through the whole process.

One warning is hardly baby sitting from any OS. However at least you admit, there might be problems with running stuff without warnings.

Go back and re-read my posts. You'll see. Going on and on about Windows demands for security and ignoring OS X's annoying warnings and password prompts for most of the conversation would be one thing.

I have checked for any facts I've missed - but can't see any. - I didn't miss the fact that OSX gives warning (I've answered that a couple of times at least), you obviously missed my repeated answer. So what did I miss?

Believe what you want. I personally don't care.

Of course

There is still one important hair I'm waiting for you to split but I can wait, I know you will eventually.
I also wonder how long it will take you to find respectable sources to back up your claims? After all it must be difficult to lose 3/4 million people, so finding them again should be easy.

Still waiting its been 7 days now

 

[Corax]

Minimal is the iMac is, and less cables etc. Don't forget you've still got to plug the thing into the wall. There's one cable.

I don't know about the rest of you but I've got a printer, scanner, network, and external drive cable going into mine. It looks lovely on the surface, but its the usual nightmare of wires underneath the desk. We'll never get away from that, don't forget it!

-I have a WiFi All in one Printer/Scanner/Copier
- Also my network is wireless (set-up 802.11N only - 5GHz)
- Network is combined with a wireless external harddisk in 1 device...known as a Time Capsule!!!

So we will get away from that, forget wires!

 

[Evangelion]

Time for new glasses!

Regardless of what you think, 720P is HD, period. Just because it's not the "hardcore EXTREME-HD!" does not mean that it's not HD.

 

[jmpage2]

Minimal is the iMac is, and less cables etc. Don't forget you've still got to plug the thing into the wall. There's one cable.

I don't know about the rest of you but I've got a printer, scanner, network, and external drive cable going into mine. It looks lovely on the surface, but its the usual nightmare of wires underneath the desk. We'll never get away from that, don't forget it!

I've got a network printer, network scanner, network backup, network file share (3.5TB) all hooked up to my iMac. The only wires you see though are ethernet, speaker wires and a couple of USB connections. All neatly tucked into a wiring loom.

 

[jmpage2]

Ah hah, its just that type of post that proved my point. Its a self fulfilling prediction, and each time you reply you fulfill it time and time again. You do care and you know it! Aww lets give Mosx some big giant hugs.

BTW, the earth is flat thing is just the icing on the cake.



That went flying right over your head.

You cant seem to accept that other people have their own beliefs. Whenever someone here says something about Mac OSX or Apple that OMG OMG OMG QMFFQB!!! You have the need to "correct" them. TBF its not just you, you're just the most prominent example.

Whatever, after this post you still use anything to avoid answering the question directly.

Anyway I'm going to stop now, before I get booted. D:

On Topic:

I just found out that the scholarship I tried for includes a computer up to $5k of your choice.
WooOo, If i get it, know what I'm getting.

mosx isn't interested in hugs or anything else. He's here for blood. Probably shorts Apple stock too, which means he's probably living in a cardboard box right about now.

mosx,

What, exactly are you doing in a thread about the new iMacs? You are offering no constructive input into this thread whatsoever. Your contribution consists solely of endless Apple bashing. It is pathetic. Get a life.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Whats wrong with dual Core i7?



Again, whats wrong with dual Core i7? Two CPUs with 4 cores each along with hyper-threading, so you get 16 "logical" cores. Whats wrong with that? Plenty of motherboards out there support two Core i7 chips. You know that the Core i7 and current Xeon are basically the same, right? If you do some research, as I did before making that comment, you're going to find out that the only real benefit to getting a Core i7 Xeon over an actual Core i7 is that you can say you spent the extra money and you can use ECC RAM, which isn't always available to Core i7 depending on the motherboard.

www.google.com is your friend. I found everything I needed there, you go ahead and look yourself. Plenty of dual 1366 boards out there for dual Core i7, with triple channel DDR3 RAM. If you must have Xeon there are the same parts are Apple out there for much less.

I had no idea that core i7 supported dual quads (never built a computer before). I was under the impression that was the only difference between the Xeon and the core i7 - dual processor support.

I'll PM you for some more details!

 

[brasscat]

Yesterday evening I purchased the 3 gig 27" inch and just posted my initial impressions of the new iMac and Super Mouse if interested: https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8693702#post8693702

 

[mjteix]

Again, the Xeon was meant for servers.

Whats wrong with dual Core i7?

Again, whats wrong with dual Core i7? Two CPUs with 4 cores each along with hyper-threading, so you get 16 "logical" cores. Whats wrong with that? Plenty of motherboards out there support two Core i7 chips. You know that the Core i7 and current Xeon are basically the same, right? If you do some research, as I did before making that comment, you're going to find out that the only real benefit to getting a Core i7 Xeon over an actual Core i7 is that you can say you spent the extra money and you can use ECC RAM, which isn't always available to Core i7 depending on the motherboard.

www.google.com is your friend. I found everything I needed there, you go ahead and look yourself. Plenty of dual 1366 boards out there for dual Core i7, with triple channel DDR3 RAM. If you must have Xeon there are the same parts are Apple out there for much less.

Xeon is meant for servers and workstations.

FWIW, the regular Core i7-9xx only has one QPI link (to the chipset) and unlike the 55xx Xeons, it lacks the 2nd QPI link to the other cpu in order to be used in a dual-cpu configuration.

The Core i7-9xx are equivalent to the 35xx Xeons (same speed, same price, one QPI link, +ECC RAM support) and guess what? Xeons 35xx are meant for UNI-processor servers and workstations. ECC RAM is an option, you can use it or not.

With Nehalem, ECC RAM is not a question of motherboard but of cpu since the memory controller in now on the cpu (not on the chipset anymore).

If you had really looked into dual 1366 motherboards, you'd have seen that those use the 55x0 chipset and 55xx Xeons, not Core i7-9xx cpus.

I guess your research was not thorough.

 

[moneyman118]

Two Questions! Please help!

I finally hooked up my new 21.5" imac this morning and Time Capsule is transfering my data.

First question: Can I go from 4GB to 8GB for less money then the $200 Apple is offering? I just called and they said I can bring the iMac in to an Apple store and they would do it at the same cost as they charge online.

Second question: Sorry if this has been answered but can anyone find the Star Trek Wallpaper anywhere. I assume it was a frame capture but someone has to have made one by now!

Thank you and I love my new iMac and the Magic Mouse!

 

[Eidorian]

Minimal is the iMac is, and less cables etc. Don't forget you've still got to plug the thing into the wall. There's one cable.

I don't know about the rest of you but I've got a printer, scanner, network, and external drive cable going into mine. It looks lovely on the surface, but its the usual nightmare of wires underneath the desk. We'll never get away from that, don't forget it!

I have an older iMac Core Duo and I had to plug a USB hub into it to attach all the devices. In my mind it just ruins everything!

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Xeon is meant for servers and workstations.

FWIW, the regular Core i7-9xx only has one QPI link (to the chipset) and unlike the 55xx Xeons, it lacks the 2nd QPI link to the other cpu in order to be used in a dual-cpu configuration.

The Core i7-9xx are equivalent to the 35xx Xeons (same speed, same price, one QPI link, +ECC RAM support) and guess what? Xeons 35xx are meant for UNI-processor servers and workstations. ECC RAM is an option, you can use it or not.

With Nehalem, ECC RAM is not a question of motherboard but of cpu since the memory controller in now on the cpu (not on the chipset anymore).

If you had really looked into dual 1366 motherboards, you'd have seen that those use the 55x0 chipset and 55xx Xeons, not Core i7-9xx cpus.

OK, damn, this is why I don't build computers.

I got another CG artist to email me some specifics about building dual quad Xeon systems, and using the Xeon processors that Apple has (for dual quad) to build it myself, I end up not saving a lot of money in the end. If the difference is even around $700, I don't save money because I would need to switch my software.

It looks like Apple has my business for now!

Although mosx did bring up the refresh rate about the iMac (a possible issue when working in post), I'll know soon enough if that is a problem. I won't buy one of these iMacs without using one first and seeing the display first hand.