Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Launching Updated iMacs with Faster Processors Next Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You're not supposed to buy a new computer every time a new one comes out... it should be "buy as needed".
It's fast, it's quiet (works well in a bedroom). Works great for heavy web browsing (to call it a thing), photoshop and office apps (i.e., general-purpose computing), and good enough for writing and compiling code. Fast enough to play 1080p video with enough potential for storage to be a media server. I can leave it plugged in on a shelf above my desk so it won't get dropped and if I spill anything all I lose is the keyboard (compared to a Macbook).
Granted, an iMac could probably suit my purposes but it would cost twice the price at base. Even when considering that I'd still have to buy RAM/HD/keyboard/monitor for the Mini, I'd really only save on the monitor because I'd really need to buy them anyways if I got an iMac (or deal with half the RAM and no SSD/fusion drive).
Disclaimer: I don't do anything particularly taxing to the GPU.
Why all the fuss about Thunderbolt ports upgrading? I have a 2011 iMac, the first with Thunderbolt ports, and still there is virtually NOTHING worthwhile available to plug into them. Ideally an external SSD would be good but to cobble one together is unfeasible. Although USB3 options are already abundantly available. So again the question, what is all the fuss about Thunderbolt ports? Intel have clamped down the tech in such a way that it is virtually dead out of the water for so many years already.
You're not really "supposed" to do anything. Remember that computers are used for recreation as well; entertainment has never really fit well with the logic of "buy as needed".
Anybody who thinks the current 27" display is grainy should try cleaning the nose-prints off the screen, or check that they don't have it set to 'Scaled' mode.
I think one of the main attractions of a 'retina' display is that 'scaled mode' no longer looks like crap, meaning that you can finally adjust the system font/screen furniture size to taste while still getting much of the benefit of the improved resolution.
Some helpful person has done a calculator: http://isthisretina.com
...and there's a longer article here: http://www.tuaw.com/2012/03/01/retina-display-macs-ipads-and-hidpi-doing-the-math/
One big uncertainty is the viewing distance - I think the second site over-estimates this (and acknowledges it). E.g. they give the 17" MBP as '101% retina' at a distance of 26 inches... which is actually about right for mine because I mainly use it on an elevator stand, with a separate keyboard, next to a second monitor, but ludicrous if you're using it as a standalone laptop .
USB3 isn't really known for supporting high resolution displays (high frame rate included). For those that need/want a second display this would be the only option. Also, I suppose if you were to need to use a Raid 0 setup (this sort of thing) for encoding, USB3 would become the bottleneck (at apparently higher CPU usage—I haven't tested this). That being said, Thunderbolt 1 is probably good enough at this point anyways...unless you are attaching more than one of them, at which point you'd probably already have a Mac Pro (or similar). Also, I have heard of external video cards, but question their utility (especially considering the price and lower bandwidth).
That being said, I think they are more looking at 4K than anything since not much else (consumer-wise) can max out USB3 at this point.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
There's a small difference, but not "grainy as hell" difference.
The 27" iMac is almost retina already, by Apple's mathematical definition. All it refers to is the inability to distinguish individual pixels at the standard viewing range of the display. ( http://i.imgur.com/r02s0.png ).
This will obviously vary depending on visual acuity, but 2560x1440 at a normal view range is very nearly inside the curve. There's certainly no need to double the resolution of the screen to achieve it (doing so just makes it easier for developers to scale the UI elements).
So, it's not "absurd" to want a retina iMac, just that the vast majority of discussion on these boards seems to completely misunderstand what it means in the first place, to the point of classing the current displays as "grainy as hell" when in reality they are 90% of the way to being retina screens as they are right now. Hell, sit a few more inches back and they already are.
I'd just like to see Apple go the route of updating on the go SO that when you walk into a store you're getting the latest iteration of iPhone, iPad, iMac, iEtc - in terms of speed boosts etc - man I wish they'd move away from their usual Fall Fanfare of releases.
Really? I would think there has to be SOME touch optimization just for that god awful external touch trackpad to work.
Last edited by a moderator:
when it's a 100 mhz spec bump, do you really think it makes a difference for "entertainment" purposes? You buy as needed. Do you "need" that 100 mhz? No? Don't buy it. Didn't realize it needed to be spelled out.
Text is actually the biggest consideration here, since on a typical (1080p-type) display an individual letter may take up less than 30-40 pixels. While it is perfectly readable already, doubling the resolution would quadruple the pixels available for each individual letter and make everything smoother. For myself, going back and forth from a non-retina iPad to a retina iPad has already made the text seem fairly "grainy" and hard to read in comparison.
Granted this mattered a lot more back when full websites ("desktop version") were displayed, unoptimized, on a comparatively tiny screen (e.g., iPhone). Before retina it was zoom in or you can't read it, now you can read it just fine zoomed out.
Slightly off-topic: I was going to use this screenshot of quotes blown up 10x, but then I noticed the smoothing on OS X kicking in and started to giggle.
We've been telling users this for years, but they just seem hell bent on dropping $3000 for a machine, then 12 months later complaining about how the update is only 0.1 times faster. Even in the high end post and broadcast houses I frequent, they usually only upgrade their top end systems once the warranty is out, and even then only when the system finally has a terminal failure . . . . something that makes it a liability or when the repair just isn't worth the risk.
In many broadcast master control facilities, systems stay at 4 years then are replaced as needed.
When i got my 2011 iMac, I was coming from a circa 2005 Power Mac G5. It was one HELL of an upgrade. Going from a Penryn 17" MBP to a current rMBP was also a huge jump, as was the TBolt SSD drives attached to it.
There are a good deal of hardware options out there for TBolt users that need more than just fast SSDs and external drives. Much of the content creation industry relies on TBolt for I/O boxes that don't choke under the bandwidth demands.
Also, being able to daisy chain 6 devices is nice, considering that USB doesn't daisy chain, and FW800 (the last chain-able interface) would choke after two devices and the bandwidth would decrease dramatically.
In the end, options are always welcomed.
As for new iMacs, bring them on. In another 6-8 months I'll be looking to upgrade my 2011 iMac and have been eyeing a nice compact MacPro system with TBolt drives and just 1 display. I may opt for the iMac again.
I see what you're saying. My iMac certainly isn't "grainy as hell", but there is definitely room for improvement. The icons and text can certainly be sharper, the color saturation can certainly be improved etc.
Just like the Retina display on the 4s versus the 5. The color saturation is much better on the 5/5s than the 4/4s even tho they're all "Retina displays".
So I'm just saying that the display can definitely be improved.
Baby steps across the board likely.
And I am believing thus could be true. I don't think the back to school promo has started in US. Maybe they are going to go together. BTS and a 'silent' bump to computers
----------
Because they wanted WWDC to be the developers conference. Only reason to mention hardware is if developers need to know for coding. Two weeks later is still early enough.
when it's a 100 mhz spec bump, do you really think it makes a difference for "entertainment" purposes? You buy as needed. Do you "need" that 100 mhz? No? Don't buy it. Didn't realize it needed to be spelled out.
Hence why it doesn't fall into the logic of "buy as needed" since none of it is strictly "needed" anyways.
But really it's sad to see people upgrade over such small details. I suppose it's more logical for an iMac where the upgrade might cost you only $100-200 a year after you resell it and buy the slightly newer one (bonus potentially for catching sales). That being said, I doubt the people we are talking about are doing that well (reselling price)... else they may instead just gift the technically "older" model to a niece or the like.
Nah, but now we anticipate it as a possibility and get ourselves all worked up.
Well...I don't, but then again I'm fairly broke atm.