I believe the CPU gap between mobile CPUs and desktop CPUs will increase in the future.
Could be, I guess, although I don't see the thickness increasing too much because 28" may give ≈30% more internal space than the 24" even if the thicknesses were the same. Of course even one of the two (4 RAM slots or 2 HD bays) would be an upgrade over the current iMac.
thats a fair point, that would leave plenty of room for extra RAM
Speculating a bit further, the 20" could have the 9400M, the 24" could have the 9600M (losing the high-end BTO), and the 28" could have the 9800M. So in that case the 28" GPU may not be hotter than the existing 24" 8800M GPU, which would be helpful considering the extra components in the 28".
you reckon?? the 20" with only the 9400M?? oh btw doesnt the 24" top spec have a 8800GS?? or am i just tripping.
Interestingly, the 17" MacBook Pro is slightly thicker than the 15" MacBook Pro and MacBook.
on the panel. I'd say the price could be a bit higher than the high-end 24" iMac. Also it is well speculated that the Mac Pro is likely to increase in price in the next update.
as long as they go to core i7 the price can go as high as it wants
ill be happy!
I knew exactly what I was getting into here, I just hoped it wouldn't be as bad as it was. Moving to windows was not an option, with airport and graphics upgrade options the MacPro was $2500 (without a display add $300-400 for that), Apple canned the affordable variant of the PowerMac/MacPro line, and refuses to let anyone else Mac computers with Mac OS X. So in other words, the options were an underpowered iMac with a 20" screen or exactly the same specs with a 24" screen for $300 more. Getting a CPU faster than 2.4ghz cost $2300 and there was no video card upgrade to speak of in the 24" machines. Its really hard to buy a machine that fits my needs when it no longer exists. I can't snap my fingers and have a Mac based on desktop hardware magically appear.
well, TBH i dont exactly think you should be complaining if you knew what you were getting into. you seem like the kind of person who researches, looks at benchmarks and all that.
Right now just iLife. I was planning to purchase Aperture, Final Cut Express, and logic express, but I found the performance of iPhoto, iMovie, and Garageband to be extremely poor. I have cut back on a lot of things I used to do and was planning to do with this machine.
what?? even my Core Duo (!!!!!) laptop can run iLife without beachballing fine, and its nearly 3 years old! i run FCP and DVD Studio Pro perfectly, yea it takes a while to encode things but it does not freeze and do stuff that your describing. i do some pretty intense things on my MBP, i dont see why your iMac would freeze up.
Get an internship in cupertino or something?
what/who/where is cupertino?? pretty sure i live in australia..
You're right. Unfortunately, the reality is Apple is going to make pretty looking low end machines with little usability under the current. Time for Steve gracefully retire to take care of his health and and put Ive on a shorter leash. Engineers should be the driving force in what hardware is in a computer, not an artist.
the MacMini seems pretty usable to me, sure a lot underpowered but it can still play 1080p rips on your TV (which is what i would use it for if i had one).
Quake 4, which had been on the Mac a year and a half prior was choppy beyond low-medium setting at 800x600 resolution and i even had slow down in Warcraft 3 and the (Q3 based) JKII and JA. My G3 iBook performed better with the AAA title of its day.
are you sure your iMac is ok?? it sounds like its sicks. it shouldnt be performing that bad!!
You might have an unlimited money supply, but I like to get more than 18 months out of my machine. Especially with video files, Apple lowballing the hard-drive size limits the usefulness of this machine. Being able to replace the current 320GB drive with a 640GB (without a desk full of drives or having to remember which drive my files are on) model might extend the life of this piece of...iMac for another year. I don't quite remember a hard drive ever filling up quite this fast.
hahaha do you think i am a "daddys boy" or something?!!? wow thats hilarious. i saved 3 years for my MBP, i didnt get any help from anybody. the reason why i dont have any other computer is because i dont have any money! of course id love a nice MP, or a brand new uni-body, or a nice core i7 hack., but i cant afford anything! i am still using my MBP because its still pretty powerful, albeit i have to do most things one at a time (running FCP and VM's at the same time isnt exactly easy).
just buy an external HD if your running out of space, saves a lot of worry.
[quote[SO-DIMMs and Desktop DIMMs have reached parity on price and performance. The problem with SO-DIMMs is that you don't see too many solutions with 4 or 6 DIMM slots. A second pair of SO-DIMM slots (for the 8-GB max) would be a very welcome improvement.[/quote]
oh fair enough, now we only need to wait for the extra slots to be put in
A large portion of iMac purchasers are teenagers. If we went solely by the lowest common denominator, Apple would only make the white Macbook. Plus, Apple moved us down into this market, we didn't choose to be here.
true, thats a good point.
I know what they were like, the current company bears little resemblance to the company of five years ago. Many product lines have gone away and they've funneled all their efforts on the upper low to lower middle end segment of the market. Innovation has been replaced by style and shoving progressively weaker (comparatively. The current iMac like started out on desktop hardware) machines into smaller spaces. I have some hope they'll start to move the other way by using the 65w SFF quad cores with the next iMac, but I'm not holding my breath.
yes but you know apple, always being innovative. i think that they feel that the mobile platforms performance is starting to be good enough to be near par of the desktop platform.. except its much smaller etcetc ive already listed all that..
Apple doesn't play in the desktop market any more, so like the desktop core 2s, Apple probably won't be using it.
they dont play in the "desktop processor" market, but they still have the MacMini & iMac that can be used as desktop machines, (once they upgrade to the latest processors they will be good
)
I know this very well, but since Apple doesn't make a primary machine that's remotely affordable...
no comment
The traditional low to middle end PowerMac user who has been left high and dry by Apple.
well i guess you'd be used to underpowered machines then wouldnt you?? sounds like you made the right choice.
Using a low, middle, and high end Quadros/ and or FirePro cards in addition to the super high end 5600 instead of consumer Radeon and Geforce cards will not double the price though.
never said anything about the lower end..
I would prefer a single slot Bloomfield MacPro, but would take a desktop based iMac if the design wasn't basically sealed like the current ALU models. The xMac was the theoretical workstation above the PowerMac (x as in server/workstation like the xServe), which is what the MacPro is. Problem is they left the desktop slot to be filled only by the 24" iMac in the process.[/QUOTE]
they left the slot to be filled by the high-end 24" imac is what you should say, its more powerful then the 2.66GHz quad MP in a lot of respects.. why dont you upgrade to that?!?
