Apple Reportedly Launching Updated iMacs with Faster Processors Next Week

[MH01]

Yes but only when either a) they had new hardware to announce like last year's Mac Pro or, frankly, if there wasn't enough big news in the software side.

This year WWDC was entirely software driven with huge announcements across the board. Their two hour slot was so packed they were blasting by big new features in iOS with just a slide or two. Heck, they even dropped the usual 'here's how the company is doing along with a video of the latest Apple Store' opening. A spec bump iMac just wouldn't have made any sense in that context (and, indeed, would likely have generated negative headlines on the usual ludicrous 'Apple are doomed' lines).

Ultimately the PC industry currently finds itself in a slightly weird position as everyone is waiting on Intel. Broadwell is currently delayed thanks, it seems, to problems with the new 14nm manufacturing process and it's thrown schedules out of whack across the board. We're in the very weird situation of having new motherboards that support Broadwell on sale even though the CPU itself is still months away. As Broadwell is likely to bring significant power / heat improvements it's a reasonable assumption that new designs are built around those improvements so can't just be launched with the current Haswell processors. Hence most companies now putting out slightly speed-bumped versions of older equipment with any new features that they can get (in some cases thanks to being able to use the newer chipsets that should be going with Broadwell).

Actually, the reason they have started announcing hardware cause they pulled out of Macworld . And the reason they did not announce anything this year is cause they had nothing big, not cause the software was so awesome. Just look at WWDC post Macworld to see the hardware they have announced, it's quite major, iPhone 4 being the most impressive.

 

[SchneiderMan]

Apple's Mac spec bumps are such money wasters for existing owners. Hopefully they will release Retina models too.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

I kind of expected one around WWDC. If they're updating the imacs, it will probably come then or maybe not. It's in kind of an odd place. They didn't update the macbook pros even though the cpus are available for a small bump. It would have made some sense if they did that and updated the minis alongside them with the same thing. The chips used in the retina macbook pros are more expensive than the old ones, and I think it has the biggest impact in the $600 model, as the price difference between the old 13" mbp chips and the new ones with iris (not iris pro) graphics is quite significant relative to the retail price of the mini. They do sometimes hold the mini back due to imac updates. As an example of that its last update didn't come until the imac was announced. The updated imacs were not available until December 2012, but the minis became available as soon as imacs were announced. The chips used had been available for several months prior to that, and the macbook pros that came out a couple months prior used the same chips. The chip price disparity and lack of macbook pro refresh are the things that make this one difficult to predict.



If 4K keeps coming down, they could probably get pretty close in pricing and slowly phase the old ones out as they did with the retina macbook pros.

4K is only retina for the 21.5" version. I can see apple releasing 4K for the 27" but it wont' be true retina. I dono what Apple's play is here. They would more readily release retina 15" rmbp first with the old 1200p display. i doubt apple can go about suprising us with a 27" true retina imac without us hearing rumors about the panel existing first.

 

[lostngone]

Ha, can you imagine Phil Schiller coming out on stage and unveiling a 0.1 GHz bump?

On the big screen they would have a 3.3 being crushed by a 3.4. "Can't innovate, my...yeah sorry guys, Intel is behind on their processors. I don't know what else to say. Thanks for coming today."

??? If the rumors are true it is more then just a processor bump.

 

[BvizioN]

Look, I am after iMac actually..... but hey, I should also say: No mac mini? Since everyone around here seem to say it every time something is rumoured to launch.

 

[sprezz]

Call it the iMac Air, with the retina/4k versions hitting the market later this year in fall...

I guess not everyone will want s 32 inch imac, but they'll slowly be decommissioned like the non-retina macbook pros.

 

[DCIFRTHS]

like the MBA's faster? i'd prefer an SSD price decrease than a retina screen. make the quad i7 1TB SSD 27 inch 2500.00 ish.

Agreed. A price drop on the 1TB SSS iMac would push me over the fence.

I'll take Thunderbolt 2 and a faster CPU, but the SSD drives seriously need a price drop...

 

[mrtravel123]

"We have a lot to look forward to in 2014, including some big plans that we think customers are going to love." - Tim Cook

Well, in just 3 weeks half of 2014 will be over. If all we've seen are very minor spec bumps to-date, we'd definitely better make up for it (big time) in the next 6 months. Hopefully it is more than just iOS and OS updates and a watch. I'm eager to see the watch - but many people seem rather "whatever" about it.

I think that Apple fans want retina across the board for starters. Secondly, it's been 595 days since the Mac Mini has been updated. That is just ridiculous. Each major hardware product from Apple should be updated at least 1x per year, even if just a spec bump. To ignore a product like this really makes Apple look like they couldn't care less about a product - or about the loyal customers that are waiting... and waiting... and waiting.

There certainly needs to be something "big" - or else we'll all feel sort of let down. I, for one, will be rather disappointed if Apple doesn't wow us with something later this year.

Let's hope that Tim really does follow through on his "big plans" promise. He's raised expectations... and needs to meet them.

 

[Steve121178]

If this is true, I wonder why they just didn't announce this at WWDC?

Why would they? It's a minor processor update. It's barely worth even putting out a press release.

 

[yangchewren]

"We have a lot to look forward to in 2014, including some big plans that we think customers are going to love." - Tim Cook

Well, in just 3 weeks half of 2014 will be over. If all we've seen are very minor spec bumps to-date, we'd definitely better make up for it (big time) in the next 6 months. Hopefully it is more than just iOS and OS updates and a watch. I'm eager to see the watch - but many people seem rather "whatever" about it.

I think that Apple fans want retina across the board for starters. Secondly, it's been 595 days since the Mac Mini has been updated. That is just ridiculous. Each major hardware product from Apple should be updated at least 1x per year, even if just a spec bump. To ignore a product like this really makes Apple look like they couldn't care less about a product - or about the loyal customers that are waiting... and waiting... and waiting.

There certainly needs to be something "big" - or else we'll all feel sort of let down. I, for one, will be rather disappointed if Apple doesn't wow us with something later this year.

Let's hope that Tim really does follow through on his "big plans" promise. He's raised expectations... and needs to meet them.

Yup, been waiting for Haswell minis so I can recommend a more up to date system to some clients.

 

[Menneisyys2]

No Retina? *yawn*

 

[thekev]

4K is only retina for the 21.5" version. I can see apple releasing 4K for the 27" but it wont' be true retina. I dono what Apple's play is here. They would more readily release retina 15" rmbp first with the old 1200p display. i doubt apple can go about suprising us with a 27" true retina imac without us hearing rumors about the panel existing first.

It depends how you define retina. They previously used a scale that related to whether you could see pixels at a typical viewing distance relative to the screen size. The implementation differed slightly, and I think you're referring to that. In that sense they went with dimensions that were double their prior "standard" resolution in a given screen size to make rendering of things like text easier. 4K would still meet their retina test on a 27", yet it wouldn't be doubled across each dimension from the current standard. I figured if they stuck with 27" they could go by the 16:9 spec and double 1080, giving you 3840x2160, again roughly 4K. They could double what is currently used, but I don't know whether any panels have been released at that specification.

The 3840x2160 thing wouldn't totally contradict past behavior. For example the rmbp doubled each dimension from the standard 15" spec, not starting from the high resolution spec. They only use one panel resolution in the 27" model, but it doesn't mean they couldn't go with a 16:9 4K spec and call it retina, as it would confirm to their original retina criteria.

 

[MacFather]

Deleted.

 

[robeddie]

If this is true, I wonder why they just didn't announce this at WWDC?

Because, as the article explained, it's just a minimal 'stop-gap' update, as they wait for the retina iMacs, which are probably still too far away to announce.

----------

The news of new iMacs has been lingering around for weeks now. At this point, I'll believe it when I see it.

yea, a .1 ghz speed bump and a small price drop is just too 'unbelievable'!!!
I mean, like, how could Apple even pull something that amazing off?!?!?

 

[BeamWalker]

If there is a 4K, I highly doubt that they put 4K panels in across the board. It is more likely that there is a special model - which then would actually justify a proper introduction. Another thing to think off are 4K panel prices at the moment, to put out an iMac with that technology that isn't priced completely insane apple may have to go the TN Panel route. Anything above 4K (like 2880p) is just not an option with todays technology.

It would be nice to have at least Thunderbolt 2 to connect an external 4K Display and next to the cpu bump, a gpu bump to nvidia's 8 series.

 

[lars666]

Why would someone want to waste GPU power on pushing more pixels on an imac? The resolution is fantastic, as is.

If you think you need a retina imac, then you are easily fooled by marketing gimmicks.

All I know is that after switching from my Retina Macbook Pro to my iMac, the iMac screen looks grainy like hell.

 

[wizard]

They had a lot of materiel to cover in the 2 hour keynote at WWDC. I can't imagine them cramming in even more.

this is certainly part of the problem! They didn't even cover everything new for developers

Besides... a processor spec-bump is best suited for a press release announcement... not stage time.

Yep! Nothing new here so no need to waste stage time Frankly I'm not sure Apple is happy with the lack of progress from Intel either

 

[FrozenDarkness]

It depends how you define retina. They previously used a scale that related to whether you could see pixels at a typical viewing distance relative to the screen size. The implementation differed slightly, and I think you're referring to that. In that sense they went with dimensions that were double their prior "standard" resolution in a given screen size to make rendering of things like text easier. 4K would still meet their retina test on a 27", yet it wouldn't be doubled across each dimension from the current standard. I figured if they stuck with 27" they could go by the 16:9 spec and double 1080, giving you 3840x2160, again roughly 4K. They could double what is currently used, but I don't know whether any panels have been released at that specification.

The 3840x2160 thing wouldn't totally contradict past behavior. For example the rmbp doubled each dimension from the standard 15" spec, not starting from the high resolution spec. They only use one panel resolution in the 27" model, but it doesn't mean they couldn't go with a 16:9 4K spec and call it retina, as it would confirm to their original retina criteria.

well the difference is 1080p is NOT standard 27" spec. In fact, you would be hardpressed to find a monitor right now with 1080p 27". If you do, they're probably really cheap because nobody wants it.

The point of retina is to have double the pixels with the same screen real estate. I mean, Apple can release it as is and have 4K on a 27" screen just for the screen real estate, but I doubt that's apple's play. My guess is retina macbook air and imacs next year with a rmbp redesign. this year is mostly software, and iOS

 

[wizard]

The WWDC was all about developers and software.

In the past it is also where new hardware debuts, especially hardware that requires new developer support

 

[dilbert99]

The point of retina is to have

pixels that the eye could not discern at a typical viewing distance...

 

[Thermonuclear]

I doubt that there will be any major improvements to iMac graphics (GPU/resolution/pixel count) which would result in a cannibalization of Mac Pro sales. The Mac Pro has a relatively poor CPU throughput/price ratio, so allowing an iMac to infringe on the Mac Pro's big selling point is not going to happen. Finally, the current 27 inch iMac already offers enough pixels and GPU power for nearly all users, even gamers.

What is going to happen very soon is an update/replacement of Apple's 27 inch T-bolt display with a jump to a 3840x2160 pixel count (Ultra HD) and a larger (32+ inch) diagonal. Apple does not want to continue to lose high margin display sales to third party vendors. Further, much of the hardware for this new display is going to appear in Apple's upcoming super duper television, further amortizing development and manufacturing costs. The big profits will come not from hardware sales, but from the Ultra HD content rental/sales. The couch potato segment of the population must not go unfleeced.

This is not good news for those expecting any significant updates to the Mac Mini as its form factor and price region does not permit the GPU power needed for Ultra HD. The Mac Mini can be a good deal for some consumers, but Apple can and will get a better return on a TV and on the various iGadgets. Apple will avoid having a Mac Mini cut in on TV sales, just like it will avoid having an iMac cut in on Mac Pro sales. If the Mac Mini is to have any future at all, it will come from a lower price point, fewer features, and just maybe a switch from Intel to Apple's ARM CPU.

 

[thekev]

My guess is retina macbook air and imacs next year with a rmbp redesign. this year is mostly software, and iOS

Your predictions are quite realistic.

 

[bigjobby]

The WWDC was all about developers and software.

WWDC history: Apple's product launches from the past 10 years

 

[iZac]

Warning: slightly off topic rant ahead:

It seems Apple is getting China as a 'growth market' all wrong.

Admittedly all I have is my anecdotal evidence rather than a team of highly paid professional market researchers, however in my experience the kind of Chinese consumers that buy Apple products don't want the cheapest option.

As we know, the wealth gap in China along with many developing nations is vast, but the Apple brand is basically seen as a status symbol among the aspirational middle class that can reach this spending bracket. And it's actually cheaper and more useful than buying an LV bag that proves 'they've made it'. Furthermore, the attitude is an ‘all or nothing’ approach and people are acutely aware of their peers impression of them and the ‘luxury’ products they consume. The average (Shanghainese) consumer see's a 5C as an embarrassment that they couldn’t afford the 5S – or that they're too stupid or poorly connected to buy it from Hong Kong where it’s 20% cheaper.

As some anecdotal evidence, in a city of 24 million people, I’ve not seen more than a few dozen people using the 5C and hundreds or thousands using 5/5S. In comparison I went back to London for a week recently and saw more 5C models in that 7 days than I have in nearly a year in Shanghai.

Furthermore the average ‘poor’ family in urban China probably has a lot more cash wealth than an equivalent western family. That’s because the social healthcare is so bad here that families need to save money for potentially massive unforeseen medical bills in the future from inexperienced and incompetent doctors. It's the only reason why the percentage of their salary that they save far exceeds that of Westerners.

Similarly, next to nobody buys Apple desktops in China because they can’t show them off like they can a laptop. In addition they all run Windows anyway because no one will bother to learn how to use OSX and many online transaction and banking websites still require XP to run some some dodgy .exe files.

In closing - a cheap iMac will never sell well in China if there is better Retina model available.

 

[gnasher729]

They'll need an adequate price gap between Retina and these non-Retina's without making the Retina's too expensive, thus these lower prices.

On the MacBook side, the prices were identical (except the first few months for the 13"). That is, if you equipped the non-retina MacBook with the same RAM and SSD drive as the retina MacBook. 15" Retina MBP was actually cheaper than 15" non-retina with same RAM and SSD.