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.
Is this the longest Mac refresh in apple history?
- Thread starter Overg
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not even close. The recent Mac Pro "update" came after 685 days. Refer to the Buyer's Guide link at the top of this page.
No, the longest a single iMac model went without update was the first Intel iMac, back in January 2006. It was on the shelves for 583 days before a redesign showed up in August 2007, so we're still about 6 months out from breaking that record.
You clearly weren't around for the G4 debacle back in the 90s where the Mac was stuck at 400mhz because Motorola couldn't scale the processor.
I dont know.. How long were the gaps between the early Macintoshes? I'm guessing they were often quite a lot longer than this? Mactracker would be a good way to find out though.
They've not previously had so many things to keep updated though either, and I imagine there's been quite a lot going on behind the scenes since Cook took the helm. A lot on their plate.
They've not previously had so many things to keep updated though either, and I imagine there's been quite a lot going on behind the scenes since Cook took the helm. A lot on their plate.
It got a Core 2 Duo update in September 2006, two months after the iMac has been upgraded with an Intel CPU. The Aluminium redesign was released in August 2007.
That record has already been broken by another model. Read my post just before yours.
You mean the Mac Pro? I assumed the OP was talking iMac since we are in the iMac forum . . .
No, read my post before his, then maybe if you still feel uncomfortable, read his. After that, read mine again, and feel comfortable again, unless the Scottish spinat cat drank all your whisky and let out a big old fart. Only then you are allowed to leave this thread and join us over at 4chai, not 4chan, where we drink tea in fours, and where we discuss the merits of non-conformism in the modern ages with the means of liberty green as easy lifting experience to convert to blue while stating the obvious in daylight.
What? @simsaladimbamba, surrealism?
I haunt these boards a lot of late, and see both of you here frequently. The detail in your answers and the rapidity which you sometimes provide them amaze me.
But I don't get the above exchange AT ALL. Later.
You don't need to, I was just testing Mister BlueBerry, if he can understand it, as he so profoundly claimed the last time, that he did.
Longest in Apple history? what an exaggeration. Try MacPro to feel what "longest" means
It still pains me to see the days since last refresh count reset for the recent "update". Really the Mac Pro is at 698 days and counting without a refresh!
Adam
As
Someone else mentioned here I was referring to the iMac only. Since we are in the iMac threads.
One thing is clear though, it's not that common for apple to delay the iMac so much.
Well, there was nothing to update the iMac with until the new Intel CPUs came out in May. And the new GPUs came out even later. If I recall correctly, Apple usually upgrades to next gen around 1-3 month after it is released. So we are still within 'safe' limits. Don't forget that Apple is also limited to what is available on the market! The i7 in the iMac is still the fastest (reasonable TDP-wise) CPU from the Sandy Bridge architecture.
Some of the processors offered in the Mac Pro were released in early 2011, but, nevertheless, it's a pretty shoddy state of affairs.
I remember the mac mini, were everyone thought apple would axe the product. But, it got revived and later with a redesign. Seems it still is going strong as a product which many loves ( me included as a media server).
The iMac on the other hand, I think its more sad that gets such a long update cycle, its a product more dependent on up-to-date hardware specs than the mini. In iMac today is more than enough for most users as a professional machine, but since you actually buy a machine which you are going to use to its full extent and pay most likely at least 4x the amount of a mac mini, you want it to have todays hardware. Common Apple, release the god damn update this summer!
The iMac on the other hand, I think its more sad that gets such a long update cycle, its a product more dependent on up-to-date hardware specs than the mini. In iMac today is more than enough for most users as a professional machine, but since you actually buy a machine which you are going to use to its full extent and pay most likely at least 4x the amount of a mac mini, you want it to have todays hardware. Common Apple, release the god damn update this summer!
Huh? The first apple powermac g4 was released mid 1999, as 400, 450 and 500 MHz. It took however 1.5 years for the 533 and 667MHz to arrive, but in-between that apple introduced dual proc, gigabit ethernet and doubled the HD and RAM. Also the 1999 PMG4/400 costed 2499 and the 2000 PM/G4 costed 1599
My last new Mac was the 400Mhz G4 PM (later upgraded with 1.5Gb of RAM, bigger HDDs and faster 1.6Ghz CPU and since then I've only have one other Mac which I bought on eBay 2nd hand, the 2005 G5PM I'm currently using.
I'm so looking forward to a new iMac!
I'm so looking forward to a new iMac!
The laptop line was really the issue for the G4/G5. It's why there are still to this day 'Powerbook G5' jokes whenever new products are about to be released. G5's were put into Macs in 2003, and PowerBooks were still using G4's up until i think 2006 when they made the switch to Intel. Though using 3 year old tech isn't exactly a thing of the past for Apple looking at the 'new' Mac Pro.