making iMac thinner haters

Discussion in 'iMac' started by chinadian1, Oct 23, 2012.

  1. chinadian1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #1
    what's up with the haters on making the iMac thinner?

    you don't carry your TV around. imagine if no-one tried to make TVs thinner...

    i would argue that engineering things to be thinner and lighter is progress

    lighter also means less materials are being used which is better for the environment ...

    thoughts? comments?
     
  2. MacAlien macrumors 6502

    MacAlien

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2012
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    It's not necessarily the thinness or move to that is annoying people, but more they sacrificed a lot of performance of a desktop to do it even downgrading to some extent.
     
  3. macmastersam macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Location:
    Essex, england
    #3
    Indeed. My previous 27" iMac is too bulky to carry, so I leave it on my desk at home and take my MacBook air instead, because there is a difference between desktops and laptops :rolleyes:
     
  4. ffohwx macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Location:
    Fairfield, Ohio
    #4
    I don't even care that the optical drive is gone. My problem is the moving of the SD slot to the back. In my setup, that would be nearly impossible to get to. But I do love the thinness.
     
  5. flynz4 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #5
    Then I suggest... in your setup... to get a remote mounted USB CF adapter. In my setup... it will work fine... so I will use the one in back.

    /Jim
     
  6. chinadian1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #6
    gotcha. so it's the tradeoff for the performance issue. i see that.

    i guess because I am an average user, not a power user, the performance tradeoff for the thinness doesn't impact me as much.

    i could see how pro users could be disappointed.
     
  7. Imaginethe macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    What performace was sacrificed? Apart from the odd going, everything has been upgraded to the current equivalents from the previous generation.
     
  8. chinadian1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #8
    and i have to admit, I was sorta hoping for i7s across the board even tho' i prolly don't need it ...

    I've kept my current mac for about 4 years now and love it, but I'm just out of hard drive space since I bought a new HD video camera ...
     
  9. jon9091 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #9
    I guess some day it will be so thin it will just be a 27" piece of paper you stick to the wall. At that point they can remove all functionality, and finally be at peace. Probably raise the price too. :D
     
  10. chinadian1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #10
    Lol. And we will all pay up the wazoo for it ...

    whaddyagonnado? (shrug)
     
  11. 12dylan34 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2009
    #11
    Thank you! It's basically what could be expected in a spec bump, except with a new design, so I don't think that there's an issue here.
     
  12. metalgear1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    #12
    I don't think questioning the benefits of the "ultra thin design" necessarily makes iMac owners or would be buyers "haters".

    I own a 2011 21.5 iMac and have questioned the benefit of it primarily because most people don't carry their iMacs to work or wish to show people how "thin" their desktop machines are. I think (and I don't pretend to speak for all iMac owners - only myself) thinner and lighter arguments are much more relevant to the iPad and iPhone as they are portable devices.
     
  13. joeysarks macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Detroit
    #13
    Ugh, so thin it took away the option for an Audio In:/ First the MBPr and now iMac, people use that u know. Also only an option for a 5400rpm HDD on the 21 inch model? Is that a heat and space thing, or to add distance between 21 and 27 inch specs?
     
  14. chinadian1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #14
    noted on the word "haters." perhaps that was a poor choice of words. my bad.

    i guess i like the design because of my OCD tendencies ... So even a little thinner seems nice to me especially since my desk is in a public part of the house...

    ----------

    didn't know about the lack of an Audio In. I don't use it, but I could see how that sucks for amateur musicians or film makers ...
     
  15. peeaanuut macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    #15
    I like the design, but im gonna spend 10 minutes every time trying to find that damn SD card slot. As it is right now I have shot my card into the cd drive at least 3 times so I am glad that that is gone.
     
  16. joeysarks macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Detroit
    #16
    Just another attachment I have to buy to record on USB is all. And this is just me but i've never liked the wedge thing in the computer world. Not a fan of the MBAs or the new iMacs. I'd rather have that squared off look like MBPs or older iMacs (or the old cinema displays) That's just purely a cosmetic preference though, looks sexy regardless:)
     
  17. TallManNY macrumors 68040

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #17
    I think folks just didn't want the trade off that comes with thinness. I'm really happy with my 2011 iMac. But I use the optical drive from time to time. And I like that when I bought it it had a really good mobile graphics card. I want to buy Macs and I want as good a graphics card as I can get. This thin design is going to be a limiting factor there for the iMac line and graphics cards. While the Mac Pro line never gets refreshed and is super expensive.
     
  18. lilcosco08 macrumors 65816

    lilcosco08

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Location:
    Dayton
    #18
    You're right, no performance was sacrificed

    What was sacrificed, however, was potential performance. Apple probably could've fit faster components in the iMac had they opted for the bulkier design. Probably run cooler as well
     
  19. chinadian1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #19
    idk ... tough call ... i think i'd rather grope the new iMac than my current 8,1 version ... :D
     
  20. joeysarks macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Detroit
    #20
    I can honestly say I don't miss optical drives at all, and am happy Apple tries to push people out of their comfort zone. Sometimes it's gotta be done to move technology forward. I don't think i've used a cd/dvd in at least a few years now, and am glad to see the wasted space, heat, and weight go:)
     
  21. peeaanuut macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    #21
    i havent poked around much, where was the ram upgrade slots? or are those gone?

    This from their website throws me off
    8GB (two 4GB) of 1600MHz DDR3 memory
    Configurable to 16GB.
    8GB (two 4GB) of 1600MHz DDR3 memory; four user-accessible SO-DIMM slots
    Configurable to 16GB or 32GB.


    so on the 21.5" the slots arent user accessible?
     
  22. fastlanephil macrumors 6502a

    fastlanephil

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    #22
    The 21.5" has to be configured at the factory. The 27" is user upgradable just like the previous one but comes standard with two four gig dims.
     
  23. sukai macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    #23
    Correct, Ithink they are soldered =[
     
  24. peeaanuut macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    #24
    bummer. My 21.5 from late 2011 has all 4 slots. I like th 32gb of ram. Well thats a shame. Would make me want the 27" which I guess is their reasoning.
     
  25. OatmealRocks macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    #25
    Probably? Dude all in one and you are basing your opinion on 'possible' faster components on probably? It is an upgrade to previous.
     

Share This Page