Apple Warning Retail Stores of iMac and Mac Mini Supply Constraints?

[aegisdesign]

Am I the only one who doesn't care about Blu-ray?

I would like a spec bump on the mini, to a quad core processor, and maybe a little better GPU.

Nope, I'm totally with you. I've absolutely no use for BlueRay. If I end up paying more because they've added BlueRay, I'll be somewhat annoyed.

On the other hand, if they manage to get a quad core CPU (Core i7 would be nice but I'm not holding my breath) into the Mini then my visa card is out and ready and HP will get that order for the LP2475w matte H-IPS panel monitor I've had my eye on too. I'll not be so upset then with Apple if they manage that and bump the price for a BlueRay drive I won't use at all. I could always take it out and stick a second SATA drive in I suppose.

That would be the perfect setup for me to replace my G5 iMac that I've held onto whilst being underwhelmed by the absolutely fugly shiny screen Intel iMac designs.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Xeon Processor Numbering

Another interesting point is the Xeon processor numbering. We know that Apple has a history of using yet to be announced intel processors, and having Intel create special runs of processors just for Apple. They have done this already on the MacBook Air, iMac, and Mac Pro.

If you look at the newly released Intel Xeon 34XX series. The gaps in the numbers are interesting.

L3426 1.86 GHz
...
X3430 2.4 GHz

The clock on the processor can be set in integer multiples of the base clock of 133 MHz. Notice ...

3426 1.86 GHz
3427 2.0 GHz
3428 2.13 GHz
3429 2.26 GHZ
3430 2.4 GHz

Obviously as clock speed increases so does power, but I'm hoping for the following:
iMac 20" 1.86 GHz Xeon 4GB - Integrated Graphics
iMac 24" 1.86 GHz Xeon 4GB - Integrated Graphics
iMac 24" 2.0 GHz Xeon 4GB - Dedicated Graphics
iMac 24" 2.13 GHz Xeon 8GB - Improved Dedicated Graphics
-BTO - Blu-Ray
-BTO - 2.26 GHz
-BTO - Even Better Graphics

 

[polaris20]

It is also more polite to point out that you don't agree with someone then to post that "they don't know what they are talking about".

This is Mac Rumors. It's filled with patronizing people filled with internet courage.

Never before have I ever seen a forum so filled with dialog that in person would elevate to something potentially ugly.

 

[danielwsmithee]

If the prices are as high as you say, then yes it will be a problem (I anticipated them being noticeably lower).

I just don't see Apple putting a desktop Xeon chip in their iMac and completely different quad core lineup in their Macbook line later on.

All of this, in the end, means that in all likelihood the iMac will continue to be C2D for at least another six months.

It is also more polite to point out that you don't agree with someone then to post that "they don't know what they are talking about".

Sorry I came off too strong. I get overly excited on these tubzzzz

The current chips used in the iMac range from $316 to $530. So the processor price would stay about the same as is currently being used. These chips also include the Northbridge in the processor so the Logic board should be a little cheaper to manufacturer.

I think they can fit a Xeon or Mobile i7 at the current price points or decreased by ~$100, by cutting down their margins a little.

 

[goodcow]

We ordered two high end Mac Mini's, upgraded to the max for our school last week and today I got this E-Mail:

Due to an unexpected delay, we are unable to ship the following item(s)
by the date that you were originally quoted:


Z0FX, MAC MINI CTO
will now ship on or before
Oct 14, 2009

 

[danielwsmithee]

This is Mac Rumors. It's filled with patronizing people filled with internet courage.

Never before have I ever seen a forum so filled with dialog that in person would elevate to something potentially ugly.

Ha, Ha -- I actually live with this type of dialog on a daily basis at work.

 

[jmpage2]

Another interesting point is the Xeon processor numbering. We know that Apple has a history of using yet to be announced intel processors, and having Intel create special runs of processors just for Apple. They have done this already on the MacBook Air, iMac, and Mac Pro.

If you look at the newly released Intel Xeon 34XX series. The gaps in the numbers are interesting.

L3426 1.86 GHz
...
X3430 2.4 GHz

The clock on the processor can be set in integer multiples of the base clock of 133 MHz. Notice ...

3426 1.86 GHz
3427 2.0 GHz
3428 2.13 GHz
3429 2.26 GHZ
3430 2.4 GHz

Obviously as clock speed increases so does power, but I'm hoping for the following:
iMac 20" 1.86 GHz Xeon 4GB - Integrated Graphics
iMac 24" 1.86 GHz Xeon 4GB - Integrated Graphics
iMac 24" 2.0 GHz Xeon 4GB - Dedicated Graphics
iMac 24" 2.13 GHz Xeon 8GB - Improved Dedicated Graphics
-BTO - Blu-Ray
-BTO - 2.26 GHz
-BTO - Even Better Graphics

Daniel,

There is no doubt that any of the new Xeon chips would be a massive upgrade for the iMac. It, to me, is a question of practicality. I don't off hand know what the TDP of the current top spec iMac cpu is but I expect it is 60W.

I could see a move to new display sizes on the iMac (22 and 26 for example) allowing some new work that would allow for a Xeon CPU.

It would require some major new thermal work though as the rumors currently indicate that the new iMac is thinner than the current one.

I would love to see even an i5 chip in the iMac but I'm honestly not holding my breath. Apple is in a tight spot with the Clarksfield pricing (they can probably justify it on a $3000 MBP but not on a $1500 iMac).

 

[La Mont]

Usb 3.0

USB 3.0 for all models plus SD slots for all models, including the mini!

 

[danielwsmithee]

There is no doubt that any of the new Xeon chips would be a massive upgrade for the iMac. It, to me, is a question of practicality. I don't off hand know what the TDP of the current top spec iMac cpu is but I expect it is 60W.

I could see a move to new display sizes on the iMac (22 and 26 for example) allowing some new work that would allow for a Xeon CPU.

The current 3.06 GHz iMac has a TDP of 55W, all the other processors are 45W.

The Xeon L3426 has a TDP of 45W. I assume the clock speed could be increased 1 to 2 steps and stay under 55W.

I do think there will be a redesign to the casing that will make it both thinner on the edges and allow better thermal performance.

I don't want to see a larger display unless the resolution is also increased I hate the 27" displays on the market since the resolution is the same as the 23" and 24" monitors.

 

[brendu]

Im pretty pessimistic about there being too much in the way of upgrades in the new iMac / mac mini. Remember that apple seems to be trying to lower costs, and if that is true, don’t expect too much in the way of blu-ray or processor bumps. I see case redesigns to show that it’s a new model, and a few nice upgrades but nothing major. And I honestly expect apple to completely forgo blu-ray except possibly for final cut with drives available on the mac pro. It competes with their style of digital downloads, just doesn’t make sense from their end. I really believe apple has a lot in store for 2010 and this will be something to keep their sales high in the interim.

Also keep in mind apple has a new connection coming, prob. next year, it is possible they completely skip usb 3.0 in favor of pushing their new platform.

 

[jmpage2]

USB 3.0 for all models plus SD slots for all models, including the mini!

I think two things work against this.

1. There is no Intel Chipset available yet that has an integrated USB 3.0 host controller and I don't see Apple putting in the one chip that was just barely released for USB 3.0 host control on these machines.

2. Apple seems to have a stake in bypassing USB 3.0 and going right to Light Peak late next year which has data rates that humble the new USB spec.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Webstore still shows 24-hour shipping for iMacs...

Unless they are playing with us...

I see the SD slot as a *yawn*...

 

[jmpage2]

Webstore still shows 24-hour shipping for iMacs...

Unless they are playing with us...

I see the SD slot as a *yawn*...

The supply constraint note was sent to the Apple Retail stores, who also have a good supply of iMacs. It is just letting them know that they aren't going to get further shipment so once they run out that is it.

 

[evilcat]

Daniel,

There is no doubt that any of the new Xeon chips would be a massive upgrade for the iMac. It, to me, is a question of practicality. I don't off hand know what the TDP of the current top spec iMac cpu is but I expect it is 60W.

I could see a move to new display sizes on the iMac (22 and 26 for example) allowing some new work that would allow for a Xeon CPU.

It would require some major new thermal work though as the rumors currently indicate that the new iMac is thinner than the current one.

I would love to see even an i5 chip in the iMac but I'm honestly not holding my breath. Apple is in a tight spot with the Clarksfield pricing (they can probably justify it on a $3000 MBP but not on a $1500 iMac).

I concur that we won't see server-grade chips replacing mobile chips in the iMac in the near future.

Apple has backed itself into a corner with its measly Quad-core Mac Pro. Most manufacturers are using dual core chips for their cheap machines and their laptops, but the i7 and Core2Quad are showing up more and more in even the lower priced PCs.

A mobile i5 or i7 would make sense for the iMac or the high end Mini, but they will cannibalize Pro sales... If I could get a quad core mini tomorrow to replace my Quad G5 Power Mac, for around $1,000 I'd snap it up in an instant! Why on earth would I need a Mac Pro other than for video or 3D work? A 9400m can more than capably drive a 30" display in Photoshop.

Also, the new chips use three channels for memory, so we're looking at iMacs with 3/6/12Gb RAM. My PM has 6Gb and flies.

Apple's problem is that they underspecced their new Mac Pros, knowing the processor speed would sell them. But you can get a Lenovo with the same Xeons and put up to 48Gb of memory in there. Against an i7, that quad Mac Pro just doesn't ahve anything to differentiate itself... hell, you can get the Octo Core Pro with 16Gb memory for less than a Quad Pro with 16Gb because they limited the number of slots.

In short, they screwed up the Pro and that means if they want to bring their consumer desktops into line with the rest of the world, they'll have to lose a whole bunch of Pro sales.

 

[jmpage2]

I concur that we won't see server-grade chips replacing mobile chips in the iMac in the near future.

Apple has backed itself into a corner with its measly Quad-core Mac Pro. Most manufacturers are using dual core chips for their cheap machines and their laptops, but the i7 and Core2Quad are showing up more and more in even the lower priced PCs.

A mobile i5 or i7 would make sense for the iMac or the high end Mini, but they will cannibalize Pro sales... If I could get a quad core mini tomorrow to replace my Quad G5 Power Mac, for around $1,000 I'd snap it up in an instant! Why on earth would I need a Mac Pro other than for video or 3D work? A 9400m can more than capably drive a 30" display in Photoshop.

Also, the new chips use three channels for memory, so we're looking at iMacs with 3/6/12Gb RAM. My PM has 6Gb and flies.

Apple's problem is that they underspecced their new Mac Pros, knowing the processor speed would sell them. But you can get a Lenovo with the same Xeons and put up to 48Gb of memory in there. Against an i7, that quad Mac Pro just doesn't ahve anything to differentiate itself... hell, you can get the Octo Core Pro with 16Gb memory for less than a Quad Pro with 16Gb because they limited the number of slots.

In short, they screwed up the Pro and that means if they want to bring their consumer desktops into line with the rest of the world, they'll have to lose a whole bunch of Pro sales.

Apple seems to have made the decision long ago that they won't compete for customer dollars by playing the numbers game (number of cores, number of Ghz, number of RAM, you get the drift) with PC makers.

For Apple the computer is nothing but an appliance to run OS X. They hate talking specs. They like to call the guts of the computer being powered by pixie dust, magic, etc.

This is going to make them vulnerable this holiday season though. The iMac already commands a price premium over similarly equipped PC desktops.

The fact that almost the entire $1000 and up PC lineup will be quad core this holiday season is going to become an attack point against Apple with their dual core offerings.

 

[archer75]

On a mini upgrade i'd like to see HDMI OR 7.1 audio enabled for the mini display port. It's in the display port spec so I know it can do it. Then it would make a great HTPC for me.

Of course a mobile core i7 would be nice. And better graphics than an nvidia 9400m but I just don't know what else they could fit in there that wouldn't overheat.

The imacs could certainly support a mobile core i7 and there are several mobile Nvidia GTX series GPU's now. Then I would hound the wife to let me buy one. I need a high end video card that would last me a few years.

I don't care about blu-ray. All my movies are on my server and streamed to my HTPC now.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Also, the new chips use three channels for memory, so we're looking at iMacs with 3/6/12Gb RAM. My PM has 6Gb and flies.

Only the i7 9XX series have tripple channel memory active. The i5, mobile i7, and i7 8XX series only use two channels of memory.

I agree with you about the Quad Mac Pro though. I'm afraid you might be right but I really hope that the Mac Pro can stand alone as an 8-core workstation, and the iMac can be improved to fill the quad core gap.

I'd love to see a quad core mini tower too but that would decimate both the Mac Pro and the iMac, and it would drive down their margins because it would be directly competing with desktops from Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. The design of the iMac is what differentiates it.

 

[danielwsmithee]

The fact that almost the entire $1000 and up PC lineup will be quad core this holiday season is going to become an attack point against Apple with their dual core offerings.

This is very good point. If Apple doesn't pick up Quad-core now they are really going to perform poorly this holiday season.

 

[jmpage2]

Only the i7 9XX series have tripple channel memory active. The i5, mobile i7, and i7 8XX series only use two channels of memory.

I agree with you about the Quad Mac Pro though. I'm afraid you might be right but I really hope that the Mac Pro can stand alone as an 8-core workstation, and the iMac can be improved to fill the quad core gap.

I'd love to see a quad core mini tower too but that would decimate both the Mac Pro and the iMac, and it would drive down their margins because it would be directly competing with desktops from Dell, HP, Lenovo etc. The design of the iMac is what differentiates it.

Apple holds a commanding slice of the all-in-one desktop market, so I see this latest redesign as a 'circle the wagons' move that might bring things that are more noticeable to consumers such as a larger screen, new enclosure, LED backlighting, maybe even Blu-Ray playback (unlikely but we can wish for it).

Apple doesn't necessarily need a quad core in the iMac to fight off competitors in this market space.

 

[jpine]

Am I the only one who doesn't care about Blu-ray?

I would like a spec bump on the mini, to a quad core processor, and maybe a little better GPU.

For my purposes, Blu-ray is only meaningful if there is a Blu-ray update to DVDSP which is LONG in the tooth.

 

[tri3limited]

I've been lead to believe, from someone very high up the uk apple tree with regards to pro products, that Mac Pro is set for an update in two weeks time. Didn't state what just mentioned that waiting would be a very good idea.

My prediction;
Sort out the Mac Pro Models so there is some kind of structure to the two main lines. Possible minor speed bump and fingers crossed on a few more gpus.
iMacs have no redesign, asides from being slimmed slightly. Speed bumps but still core2duos. Chance of better graphics but I see that as unlikely. Maybe a better CTO nVidia card.
MacBooks and MBPs... Not expecting anything but who knows.
Minis to have speed boosts, doubt it'll be quadcore or xeon for the price of them.

Blu-ray? I say nope... except an internal BDRW as CTO on Mac Pro. Expensive as hell though.

 

[xhambonex]

This is very good point. If Apple doesn't pick up Quad-core now they are really going to perform poorly this holiday season.

You are talking about the company who had a record profit in the first quarter of 2009 during this recession. $1.6 billion in profit and over $10 billion in revenue...yeah they'll do just fine this holiday season.

That aside, I'm just waiting for them to do something new...so basically the tablet. The rest of this stuff isn't exciting but I'm curious to see how this one plays out.

 

[Shivetya]

Apple holds a commanding slice of the all-in-one desktop market, so I see this latest redesign as a 'circle the wagons' move that might bring things that are more noticeable to consumers such as a larger screen, new enclosure, LED backlighting, maybe even Blu-Ray playback (unlikely but we can wish for it).

Apple doesn't necessarily need a quad core in the iMac to fight off competitors in this market space.

Yet the AIO market is no where as large as the rest of the desktop market, let alone laptop markets. I still think Apple has to aim low.

I would not doubt a new entry 20 inch model as low as 799 using nearly the same config as today. They really need to penetrate the under 1k market in the desktop area (minis don't count).

I would hope the top 24 doesn't eclipse 1999.

All in all, I would very much prefer a new Mac Pro lite. Something without the screen but using a smaller enclosure than the current one and relying on consumer grade memory and drives. With the right setup Apple can take a chunk out of the boutique market where gamers reside, let alone geeks

 

[aegisdesign]

There is no doubt that any of the new Xeon chips would be a massive upgrade for the iMac. It, to me, is a question of practicality. I don't off hand know what the TDP of the current top spec iMac cpu is but I expect it is 60W.

IIRC when they introduced the 3.06Ghz it was 55W TDP although they may have now replaced that with a 44W part - http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35431

The i7 mobile quads btw are 45W-55W so bang on for iMac power requirements.

Looking through Mac Mini chips of the past though, it appears the most that's had is a 35W TDP C2D chip so a 45W i7 is perhaps wishful thinking unless they change the case drastically. The current C2Ds are 25W TDP.

 

[mward333]

Advice Needed

This news about the new iMacs comes at a tricky time. Our iMac (in my sig) died late last week. Yesterday the Apple service provider came to our home and was unable to fix the iMac. So he called the Apple technicians and they said that they will send us a brand new iMac in the postal mail. They could not finalize the details by telephone, because their ordering system at Apple was down yesterday.... so the order could not be placed.

We were supposed to hear back from Apple today, but they didn't call us yet.

Maybe this is just a sign of the update to come. Shall I just wait, or shall I call Apple back on the telephone to finalize the details of the replacement?