I might have chosen that option, because I have ~190GB total space used on my Fusion drive, so all of it would be accessible at SSD speeds. Since I have my Aperture and iTunes libraries on a NAS, it's not likely that my storage usage will go up significantly in the future. I have 3 external SSD drives, and when I include the price of the required enclosure, the $300 price for the 256GB internal SSD is reasonable.
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.
iMac adds new Flash Storage Options (256/512gb)
- Thread starter zedsdead
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I might have chosen that option, because I have ~190GB total space used on my Fusion drive, so all of it would be accessible at SSD speeds. Since I have my Aperture and iTunes libraries on a NAS, it's not likely that my storage usage will go up significantly in the future. I have 3 external SSD drives, and when I include the price of the required enclosure, the $300 price for the 256GB internal SSD is reasonable.
It is only $50 more than the FD option... not $300.
When you can buy 2TB for under $100... the value of 500GB HDD storage rounds to $0.
/Jim
----------
I have found Aperture performance to be very sensitive to disk latency. Do you really keep your entire library there... or do you just have referenced masters on the NAS?
/Jim
It's referenced, but I'm considering putting it back onto the internal drive. At one point my wife said she wanted access to the pictures to show or send to friends, but it's been much easier for me to save them to SmugMug or Flickr and send her friends a link.
In line.....
with another posts/discussions/predictions. Not so surprised by this Apple announcement. Will be better when and if, flash become stock and not an option in the Apple lineup.....
with another posts/discussions/predictions. Not so surprised by this Apple announcement. Will be better when and if, flash become stock and not an option in the Apple lineup.....
But effectively all the stuff you frequently use will be available at SSD speeds anyway?
flynz4 said:
You make a good point.
Well, I'm guessing they get these drives in pre installed so it costs the same to put any drive in while building it. It just seems like they are charging a lot for "installation" especially for something already installed. If not charging for "installation" then they are just charging way more for the drive.
Last edited:
They always have. Look at history for drive upgrades. Apple has always used a minimal spec drive in all systems (upgradeable or not) and charged around 90 to 100% over the costs.
Their Ram charges are famous at 200-300% and up.
The same holds true for optical drives (even more famous for failures) It was a joke in the day of tower upgrades. You could always just toss the apple product and buy a panasonic DVR for 30 bucks or so that was 4 times better on a bad day.
None of this is news to people who have long history buying the products. The complaints are the same now as they have been for 15-20 years.
Welcome newbies to some very old news.
My only question on this is, is it a blade SSD or is it a 2.5" ssd. Right now I have my 1TB partitioned for time machine and then also windows 7. I have an external ssd via thunderbolt. I would love to get a 256 or even a 512 blade in there if the price was right.
[/COLOR]
Newbie? I'm retired and have been dealing with apple and pc companies since the beginning. I'm very familiar with the apple tax, i was just explaining it to the other person. People on the internet are funny, probably a teenager.
Newbie? I'm retired and have been dealing with apple and pc companies since the beginning. I'm very familiar with the apple tax, i was just explaining it to the other person. People on the internet are funny, probably a teenager.
I agree, I just think that using the price of a bare drive as a comparison point isn't particularly valid, and that's why I asked if anyone knew the price of SSD options in other AIO computers. If Apple charges close to what other companies charge, or if other AIO's don't even have SSD options, then what Apple are doing isn't really out of line.
anyone here with the SSD only option? I'm looking at getting the 2012 iMac myself with 512GB or 768GB SSD, all my stuff is on my Pegasus R4 now so i'd like to go completely silent/cool/mechanical free as possible...of course with the exception of the fan and PSU.
how do you like the SSD Only 2012 iMacs for those that do have them?
how do you like the SSD Only 2012 iMacs for those that do have them?
Have a 512 on order. Funny how it's impossible to find any specs on the new cards. I'll know soon enough.
Lots of us have the 768GB SSDs. There is a post here someplace (search for $1300 SSD Club or something similar).
I use mine for OSX, Aperture 3 library, and full user directories (with the exclusion of iTunes Media and all videos which live on my Pegasus R4)
My machine is best described as "instant".
/Jim