Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iMac Shipping Times Slip to 3 -5 Days, Fueling Rumors of 'Low-Priced' Model at WWDC

I'd love to see a high-end 32" 4K version and then a stand-alone display in matte to match with two TB2 and three USB3 connections with sufficient power to charge an iPad.

For those of us who have 30" ACDs there is a considerable loss of vertical height going from 1600px to the current 1440px of the 27" version.
 
Yvan256 said:
I still don't see how a 1199$USD iMac could replace a 599$USD Mac mini. Let's say you're a new user and need a keyboard, mouse and monitor, the total for these three items is nowhere near 599$USD.
Click to expand...

If you also have a macbookpro you can use the imac as external screen. This way you get the same as a thunderbolt display AND macmini.
You can use the imac as desktop, start some processes, connect your mbp to have extra screen etc etc

It really does have its purpose.

Not to mention an imac only needs one cable " power" and the macmini+screen at least three "power screen" "power macmini" "connection screen macmini"
 
Totally makes sense because I just bought a new 27 inch model. :rolleyes:

Ah well, I'm still getting a kick ass machine.
 
Wow, I hadn't looked at iMacs for a while, seems a bit pricey for most folk, no wonder their bank balance is so inflated.

Apple really does need a $1K entry level iMac.
 
Nah, not this time. I'm not falling for 'Low-Priced' anything from Apple anymore.
With 4K Retina Displays we could be happy if iMac prices don't go up. :cool:
 
PatriotInvasion said:
I don't think you fully understand the challenges. For one, the "Retina" you are referring to is Apple pixel-doubling an existing resolution such that you get much crisper visuals and higher pixels per inch in exchange for the same screen real estate.

For the iMac, the same process would result in the 21.5" going from 1920x1080 to 3840x2160 (aka the marketing term "4K") and the 27" going from 2560x1440 to 5120x2880 (a resolution >4K and unsupported by any existing mainstream technology). Even if Apple brought both screen sizes to 4K resolution, most high end 4K displays with 60Hz (see Sharp and ASUS...not cheap 30Hz TFT monitors) sell for well over $2,500 for JUST THE DISPLAY. Toss an iMac computer behind it and you now have a machine that would cost >$3,000. Until the cost to produce high end 4K panels comes down, there won't be a Retina/4K iMac because no one would buy it at those price points.
Click to expand...

Gudi said:
Nah, not this time. I'm not falling for 'Low-Priced' anything from Apple anymore.
With 4K Retina Displays we could be happy if iMac prices don't go up. :cool:
Click to expand...

See above.

4K iMacs are a long way off and obviously priced out of main-stream markets.

It seems likely the next iterations of the iMac will have increasingly efficient processors at cheaper price points, thus bringing the base model prices down by $100-200 as in the Air.

I think there is more room to sell previous gen. processors in special models to schools, governments, and overseas markets at even cheaper price points than that.
 
25 Inch Model?

Am I the only one who wishes they got rid of the 21 inch model and had a 23 or 25 inch model as the entry level one? I find 27 inches too big and 21 inches too small. It'd be nice if there was a middle ground option.
 
malexandria said:
Am I the only one who wishes they got rid of the 21 inch model and had a 23 or 25 inch model as the entry level one? I find 27 inches too big and 21 inches too small. It'd be nice if there was a middle ground option.
Click to expand...

Yes, the 24" iMac was the perfect size.
 
4God said:
Could be the rumored low cost entry level iMac but probably more likely to be a Macbook Air or Mac Mini.
Click to expand...

Yeah I can't see them changing the top level iMacs. But they might change the whole lineup in order to ensure software developers are forced to recode their software. I can see them leaving the old iMacs in the lineup just like they did with the non-retina Macbook Pros.
 
I'm still using my 2006 original core duo and its really finding it hard to cope nowadays. Chrome and the like just kill it.

Thus, I'm really hoping for a refresh of some kind :)
 
edk said:
I'm still using my 2006 original core duo and its really finding it hard to cope nowadays. Chrome and the like just kill it.

Thus, I'm really hoping for a refresh of some kind :)
Click to expand...

Wow! And I thought my 2008 Core2Duo was struggling. I can only imagine what you deal with.

I'm buying next week regardless, so I hope there is an update. If only 100mhz bump maybe I can get a '13 model cheaper. If 800 series video card, I'll gets that one.
 
Last edited:
xtwentyseven said:
Wow! And I thought my 2008 Core2Duo was struggling. I can only imagine what you deal with.

I'm buying next week regardless, so I hope there is an update. If only 100mhz bump maybe I can get a '13 model cheaper. If 800 series video card, I'll gets that one.
Click to expand...

for 'normal' computing its been fine. It's got sickbeard running 24/7, lightroom works OK (old old version though), Office is as bad as any version :)

Just in the last year I've seen a huge drop in performance, mostly from Chrome. Oh well, its time to update and join the modern world :)
 
edk said:
for 'normal' computing its been fine. It's got sickbeard running 24/7, lightroom works OK (old old version though), Office is as bad as any version :)

Just in the last year I've seen a huge drop in performance, mostly from Chrome. Oh well, its time to update and join the modern world :)
Click to expand...

Same here. In the last year I've been doing a lot more video editing and I got FCP X (not supported, but runs anyway) and Aperture. Those are really a struggle for it to run. Regular tasks it still handles better than any 6 yr old PC. Mavericks slowed it down quite bit.
 
DTphonehome said:
If they did have an ARM-based iMac at some point, you can bet it would be aimed squarely at the consumer market and definitely not the "Prosumer" or professional market. But I don't see it happening for the iMac anytime soon... an ARM-based Macbook makes sense as one of the primary advantages of ARM is low power consumption and a long battery life, as well as low price. No one cares about desktop power consumption (to a point).
Click to expand...

I'm guessing the first ARM-based Apple "computer" will be a forthcoming MacBook Air.
Maybe even the next generation.
 
Parasprite said:
*cough*
Click to expand...

rvtTljlm.jpg


Wasn't that cool!!!

Cool enough to make you wanne buy a couple, never mind one….. I could go for an updated iMac in one of those colors. Seeing that image once more, reminds me again what a true marketing genius Steve was.
 
Last edited:
satchmo said:
Hmm you may be right.
The banner for WWDC might suggest a re-write for apps to work on ARM...Write the code. Change the world.
Click to expand...

They forgot three words in their new motto:

"By market forces."

Because people are going to have to spend to keep up. Or be left behind. With the usual memes from both sides being slung at each other while real issues remain unaddressed.

And too many people are rightly complaining about having to pay for subscription leases, which cost a heck of a lot more over time... especially when it was glaringly clear that, for example, new versions of Photoshop, Flash, InDesign, et al, were seeing fewer new features per Creative Suite iteration, and how there will be less incentive for adobe to innovate or make anything if all it needs to do is to get customers tethered on a lease leash...
 
How does apple handle situations like this: I just got a new one 1 week ago and if they introduce something brand new and improved I'll one that one?... I know this is what happens with electronics but com one on, one week?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back