a guy with a record for being pretty much dead wrong that makes claims that are ripped off of all the rumors sites.
yeah, i'm buying his 'sources'. NOT!
yeah, i'm buying his 'sources'. NOT!
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 to Come in Both Dual-Core and Quad-Core Configs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I really think you should adjust your clock settings... wrong year
(I think you meant two thousand and NINE...)
No he got it right...
It's always easier to predict the past.
There is no 'set' time. But I wouldn't worry. They won't be released today. If the stock notification was due to new models coming today, they would have issued it earlier to resellers and the like.
If a significant update, I think they would also have staged a press event for maximum exposure.
Maybe next week or the week after though. Let's hope so...
I must say I am a little concerned that the image of the "Apple Store" showing the new Mac line-up has been "removed at Apple's request".
If the iMac turns into nothing but a souped up Mac Mini with an Apple Cinema Display bolted alongside it then I will be extremely disappointed. That "redesign" certainly comes across more as a backwards step compared to a sleek all in one design. Although, IF those images are real, could it signal that Apple are now unable to utilise high end compoents (ie: Quad Core) in something as compact as an iMac including display, etc?
And the "starting from $1,799" has me extremely worried ... if the "new iMac" turns out to be real.
If the iMac turns into nothing but a souped up Mac Mini with an Apple Cinema Display bolted alongside it then I will be extremely disappointed. That "redesign" certainly comes across more as a backwards step compared to a sleek all in one design. Although, IF those images are real, could it signal that Apple are now unable to utilise high end compoents (ie: Quad Core) in something as compact as an iMac including display, etc?
And the "starting from $1,799" has me extremely worried ... if the "new iMac" turns out to be real.
Cores (cores)?
I think this reflects the fact that hyper threading is back, and Apple is going to use it in their model pricing... which they have to. This guy is hearing that a 4 core xeon has 8 cores... which it does virtually, and I bet that is the story people are sticking to.
As I discussed in the Pro thread, the 2.66GHz xeon comes in at $150 over the old 2.8 Harpertown. So the mac pro with 2 of them will be around $3299, not $2799. The base model will probably be a single xeon with 4 cores that can do 8 threads, or a 4 (8 virtual) core chip... it looks to the OS like 8 cpu's just like the old ones. Of course it isn't, but it doesn't matter from a price/performance angle.
Apple is going to sell a 4 (8) machine and an 8 (16) machine... and the 4(8) will probably be almost as fast (faster for apps using less than 4 streams) as the old ones until grand central is out... at which point it will haul and be faster all around because it will optimize hyperthreading. I think a quad (8 threads) will be $2499 and dual $1000 BTO. They may go to $2999 with a $600-500 deletion, but that will severely constrain their profit margin compared to the old machines... which they may be willing to do to get them on the market (but I doubt it). They are going to sell quads as octo's because they can hyperthread, he just didn't clarify virtual vs actual cores and neither will Apple, I betcha. That's what he's hearing, and it makes sense.
I think this reflects the fact that hyper threading is back, and Apple is going to use it in their model pricing... which they have to. This guy is hearing that a 4 core xeon has 8 cores... which it does virtually, and I bet that is the story people are sticking to.
As I discussed in the Pro thread, the 2.66GHz xeon comes in at $150 over the old 2.8 Harpertown. So the mac pro with 2 of them will be around $3299, not $2799. The base model will probably be a single xeon with 4 cores that can do 8 threads, or a 4 (8 virtual) core chip... it looks to the OS like 8 cpu's just like the old ones. Of course it isn't, but it doesn't matter from a price/performance angle.
Apple is going to sell a 4 (8) machine and an 8 (16) machine... and the 4(8) will probably be almost as fast (faster for apps using less than 4 streams) as the old ones until grand central is out... at which point it will haul and be faster all around because it will optimize hyperthreading. I think a quad (8 threads) will be $2499 and dual $1000 BTO. They may go to $2999 with a $600-500 deletion, but that will severely constrain their profit margin compared to the old machines... which they may be willing to do to get them on the market (but I doubt it). They are going to sell quads as octo's because they can hyperthread, he just didn't clarify virtual vs actual cores and neither will Apple, I betcha. That's what he's hearing, and it makes sense.
They can't exactly sell a 4/8 core chip (which even with hyperthreading it is) as a 8/16 core chip as (in atleast my opinion) its false advertising and as such apple could get sued for lots of money.
I don't see why they wouldn't (or at least a really fast 65 W dual-core, since those duals are cheaper than quads), unless there were heat problems.
Agreed. I can see late February now as a likely release date.
Although the removal notice could be a fake too.
Has Apple pulled Apple Store leaks before? I'm not sure.
I don't think even the xMac supporters advocated it as a replacement of the iMac (more like an addition to the Mac lineup). Definitely a backwards step. And, if the iMac is just a "Mac" with a Cinema Display, why call it an iMac?
The weird thing is that I think the "Mac" + ACD concept makes sense from a certain point of view (not the xMac POV), but then again the iMac concept also does from a similar point of view.
Probably, although this isn't new (PowerBook G5).
This could be evidence to suggest that the picture is real. Most people are expecting a price drop or similar prices.
+++
I should hope so.. Thick is in..
It's about time too..
I'd shopped on Apple's site and configured a totally maxed-out MacPro,
and when it totaled up, we were talking over $27,000.00..!!!
I said, "forget it!",
and quickly started thinking about that new laptop from India for $10.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article5639463.ece
But, the word "Quad" does something to me..
"QUAD...
Say it LOUD and I hear Steve Jobs Braying...
Say it <soft> and it's almost like Praying..."
+++
Bwhahahahahahahahah Funniest s**t evahhhh!!!
your question begs the question, why does he need it. what is dad doing that is so important for him to have the latest and the greatest technology and makes his just bought imac now totally worthless.
Because if this is just some status thing that Dad, or you on Dad's 'behalf', just has to have the latest and greatest even though its likely no one is going to know that it is 'last year's model' unless you say something, is that really worth the hassle of packing it up, taking it in, picking a new one, fighting with manager over the restocking fee, being without a computer at least one more night so the store techs can clone the old one onto the new 'better' one etc.
Bah!
Again with this guy...
<rant>
C'mon Arn - you, the mods & the macrumors community work way too hard nurturing what I consider the most legit Mac rumor site on the interwebs to have all of that hard work possibly jeopardized/discredited by one individual.
If Wu were just your average contributor in the forums - that's one thing. There, all are welcome to speak their minds, make wacky predictions, state the obvious, lurk, whatever. But regularly sourcing Wu in Front Page articles is totally different. IMHO, doing so (especially considering his consistently deplorable track record) discredits not only himself, but more importantly you, Macrumors, the Mac community, Apple, etc.
Trickle...
Down...
You're better than that.
We're better than that.
If for some reason Wu's illuminating observations must be included on macrumors - and that is an easily debatable "if" - Page 2 (or "Page Wu" - No! No! Just a silly play on words!) might be more appropriate. Again, "if."
</rant>
Again with this guy...
<rant>
C'mon Arn - you, the mods & the macrumors community work way too hard nurturing what I consider the most legit Mac rumor site on the interwebs to have all of that hard work possibly jeopardized/discredited by one individual.
If Wu were just your average contributor in the forums - that's one thing. There, all are welcome to speak their minds, make wacky predictions, state the obvious, lurk, whatever. But regularly sourcing Wu in Front Page articles is totally different. IMHO, doing so (especially considering his consistently deplorable track record) discredits not only himself, but more importantly you, Macrumors, the Mac community, Apple, etc.
Trickle...
Down...
You're better than that.
We're better than that.
If for some reason Wu's illuminating observations must be included on macrumors - and that is an easily debatable "if" - Page 2 (or "Page Wu" - No! No! Just a silly play on words!) might be more appropriate. Again, "if."
</rant>
I can speak to the 'soon' but we will know when it is going to happen. They will call up the media and invite to the Apple Campus just like with the notebooks and ipods. So a few days ahead of time, we'll know that something is about to drop and pocketbooks can be tucked away for a bit longer.
They are not going to just keep mum and suddenly everything has changed. It's not Apple's style unless it's something way tiny like a couple of weeks ago when they decided to bump the ram in the white macbooks to 2GB. that wasn't worry of a huge media to do.
if Apple really did make that request it was likely because the whole thing was fake. by cutting off the circulation of that photograph they are saving their stores a world of hurt when folks come in acting for details about machines that were produced in someone's buttocks.
it is Tuesday morning 8:10 am in California. I just pulled up the Apple Store,even refreshed the page to be sure I was current. nada on new stuff or 'down for maintenance' or any of the other signs they are about to release something on the QT.
stop and think for a moment. does that really sound like Apple. no it doesn't.
I'm pretty sure at their thickest point, the Rev. C iMac G5s were about the same as the current batch of iMacs. The only difference is the current ones are more "pinched" at the corners. Plus the iMac G5s were around when the original iPod nano came out so they definitely were obsessed with thin then.
Umbongo said:
The current iMacs use modified desktop processors and not the mobile version of the 3.06 GHz processor. Therefore, in theory they are significantly cheaper than the mobile processors.
For those of you who want to see Apple's possibilities look here.
Apple could use the slowest, cheapest dual-core Wolfdale they can get their hands on for the low-end. Which is currently the E7400 at 2.8 GHz, 3 MB L2, 1066 MHz ($113). They could for marketing purposes want to underclock/ or use a slower/ different version than that one. Then from there, use the Quad-cores.
Hmm... could be then. I always thought that because the iMac's processors were designated as E8xxx (E8435 is the 3.06 GHz, E8235 is the 2.8 GHz etc.) they were modified desktop ones.
Imac CPUs listed as mobile at Intel
http://www.intel.com/Consumer/Learn/Notebook/core2duo-detail.htm?iid=learn_proc+c2d_notebook
http://www.intel.com/Consumer/Learn/Notebook/core2duo-detail.htm?iid=learn_proc+c2d_notebook
Attachments
hmmm, we do not know the price for these then ... these CPUs never listed in price list pdf from intel (apple/oem exclusive special cpus)
thanks for the links ...
it may also means, there may be special quad core CPUs from intel for Apple/OEM use which we may not know yet, we know the quad core from the price list pdf only