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

Next Apple iMacs with "Striking New Industrial Design"?

Apple Architect said:
Would like to think that a screenless device would arrive between the mini and the pro - but I think it would just cannibalise the Pro market while not pulling enough people from the mini.
Click to expand...

There's more than just the current Mac crowd. There enough potential switchers who don't want an AIO, the Mini is too anemic, and do not follow Apple religiously as put down three grand on a workstation just to get a desktop.
 
k2k koos said:
This does look very cool, but how can you hide it from your boss when surfing adult sites ? 🙂
Click to expand...
You will discover that your boss surf adult sites aswell.😀

can't wait to see what the apple store is updating they've been down for more than an hour now
 
I wonder if the next iMac (or every new mac) will make better use of the isight camera so that you can move the cursor with your eyes (and maybe click by double-blinking?). yes, this is a technology that has been made, but never put into practical use. I saw it way back in the days of TechTV. Just a thought.
 
Apple Architect said:
My own view on the update will be a "evolution" rather than "revolution". Expecting a big change in the screen DPI together with much greater support for HD.

Would like to think that a screenless device would arrive between the mini and the pro - but I think it would just cannibalise the Pro market while not pulling enough people from the mini.
Click to expand...

I agree, "evolution", because there simply no longer appears to be the scope to do that much that's revolutionary with the iMac's design, whilst still maintaining a consumer price. I mean, how many people really want touch screen technology as standard on the entire iMac range, with an increase in price to boot?

But I disagree that a Mac mid-tower would "cannibalise the Pro market". Even in PC land, the best PC manufacturers are now offering AIO PCs & mini PCs in addition to their more popular desktop lines. They think the AIOs & minis may appeal to quite different markets. Also, some PC users are buying laptops as space-saving desktop replacements, partly because they're cheaper than AIOs (certainly in PC land).

The iMacs are great computers; but any gamer considering a switch to Mac, when presented with the current iMac range (particularly the iMac's graphics), will almost certainly go out & buy a PC instead. Who could blame them?

BTW, I'm speaking as one who'll probably always have at least one Mac laptop in my home & who'd certainly buy a Mac mid-tower/screenless device.
 
gregorsamsa said:
The iMacs are great computers; but any gamer considering a switch to Mac, when presented with the current iMac range (particularly the iMac's graphics), will almost certainly go out & buy a PC instead.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

I'm planning on buying a Mac this year once Leopard comes out. And I also plan on an iMac (but am sorta flip flopping between a 24" iMac or a refurb PowerBook and using an external display at home). And I'm also a gamer.

If I want to play games, that's what I have an Wii60 for (Xbox 360 + Wii combo). IMHO PC gaming is not a worthwhile cause anymore, not for me at least. Custom building a computer with 360 or Ps3 specs would cost at least double what the console costs, plus you're left using Windows.

Most switchers on the fence are not going to buy a Mac and expect a gaming experience that rivals a Windows machine; they'll either keep their PC along for gaming or they'll keep their gaming consoles.
 
Custom building a computer with 360 or Ps3 specs would cost at least double what the console costs
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about that, if you leave aside any HDDVD/Blu Ray drives. 🙂
 
AlexisV said:
I'm not sure about that, if you leave aside any HDDVD/Blu Ray drives. 🙂
Click to expand...

Ps3
The above chart is alarming: that US$800 total (which doesn't include actually assembling the PS3)
Click to expand...
Cell estimated at $230, GPU at $70 on their chart.

360
The ATI-made graphics processing unit alone is estimated to cost US$141 (including the RAM) while the IBM Xenon CPU accounts for another US$106.
Click to expand...

Cheaper than I imagined to manufacture, but those wouldn't be costs available to you or me building 1 system. 😉 Retail would probably be 2-2.5x those figures, so I'd say it's safe to assume that cpu + gpu costs for any builder would run $500+ not including optical drives, storage, memory, case etc. 🙂
 
zero2dash said:
Incorrect.

I'm planning on buying a Mac this year once Leopard comes out. And I also plan on an iMac (but am sorta flip flopping between a 24" iMac or a refurb PowerBook and using an external display at home). And I'm also a gamer.

If I want to play games, that's what I have an Wii60 for (Xbox 360 + Wii combo). IMHO PC gaming is not a worthwhile cause anymore, not for me at least. Custom building a computer with 360 or Ps3 specs would cost at least double what the console costs, plus you're left using Windows.

Most switchers on the fence are not going to buy a Mac and expect a gaming experience that rivals a Windows machine; they'll either keep their PC along for gaming or they'll keep their gaming consoles.
Click to expand...

Well, come the day that I can play computer-specific games like Medieval 2: Total War on an Xbox 360, & I'll agree with you. But for now, if I'm spending some serious money on a non-pro desktop computer, the least I expect is to be able to play those type of games at the highest settings.

Perhaps if a new iMac design incorporated greater upgradability, particularly the graphics, then I'd be bowled over. But as things stand, though I'll buy more Mac laptops in future, I consider the current iMacs (excluding the 24") to be lacking in the graphical capability I'd expect from a desktop computer at those prices. - I can but remain only vaguely hopeful that a new iMac (or some other surprise announcement from Apple) may offer me a solution by the time of Leopard's release.
 
gregorsamsa said:
But for now, if I'm spending some serious money on a non-pro desktop computer, the least I expect is to be able to play those type of games at the highest settings.
Click to expand...
And if I'm spending "serious money" on a new computer, I expect it to have two HD tuners to act as a DVR server. My neighbor expects the computer to come with lots of pro audio hardware. My office IT manager wants it stuffed full of eSATA expansion cards to run the stack of swapping backup drives next to it. My mother wants the computer to be the size of a remote control and silent.

Everyone expects different things, and that's why there are lots of computer options. If you're putting together something for gaming, for pro audio, for video editing, for maximum storage, for media center use, or for stylish display, you've got different priorities. One computer can't provide all of them out of the box. Fortunately, there are large numbers of companies out there providing options for everyone. You just have to create priorities. If you want a quiet, low power system, you can't have 4TB of storage or a monster video card. If you want a top of the line gaming rig for a lower price than a Mac Pro, you can't have OS X. If you want an HDTV DVR at the same price, you have to settle for lower overall specs (since two HD tuners alone will set you back about $700 retail).
But as things stand, though I'll buy more Mac laptops in future, I consider the current iMacs (excluding the 24") to be lacking in the graphical capability I'd expect from a desktop computer at those prices.
Click to expand...
If you define "desktop computer" as an empty box with expansion cards, the iMac isn't a desktop computer. If you define it as "only those battery-free computers with high-end graphics," you're cutting out well over two-thirds of the desktops on the market. Given a set of common values shared by all non-portable computers, the iMac fits right in. An iMac certainly matches the performance of any other "desktop computer" for daily use. A better video card just isn't necessary. It'd be nice, and lots of people would get one, but that isn't enough.
 
gregorsamsa said:
Well, come the day that I can play computer-specific games like Medieval 2: Total War on an Xbox 360, & I'll agree with you. But for now, if I'm spending some serious money on a non-pro desktop computer, the least I expect is to be able to play those type of games at the highest settings.
Click to expand...

Then what you're looking for is a Dell XPS or an Alienware and those are both in Mac Pro price ranges, which is geared more for gaming.

iMac is more run-of-the-mill computer pricing, if a tad on the higher side including a better monitor.

You're expecting a Dodge Viper engine in a Dodge Neon chassis at a Dodge Neon price and that ain't gonna happen. Besides, as other people have said...you can upgrade the graphics chipset in the 24" iMac so if you require more power, yes - you have to pay for it. What's so appaling about that? I don't expect to get a GeForce card in a $400 Dell Dimension (which comes with Intel GMA). 😕

Again, you're comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended). No computer Apple makes is geared for serious gaming, and the closest thing is a Mac Pro, which is in a similar price range as an XPS or Alienware (and technically, the Mac Pro will blow the doors off of those computers).
 
If you want a gaming machine, why the hell are you looking at Macs anyway? Macs have never been all that good for gaming. This is why I have a Mac and a Wii. I'm not expecting my Mac to provide the goods in that area, which is why my table is absolutely littered with consoles; yeah, I could emulate my N64/Mega Drive on my Mac, but I don't want to, I've got the real thing sitting right there.
 
freddiecable said:
not directly about iMac:

https://www.macrumors.com/2007/04/06/apple-using-exclusive-3ghz-xeon-from-intel/

but interesting statement:

"We are indeed shipping a 3.0GHz Xeon version [and] expect to see faster gigahertz speeds for our high-end [Core 2] Extreme PCs very soon, too."

Looks like iMac CPUs are going to be update'd very soon...together with new design?
Click to expand...

Not so much. They're talking about the workstation xeon and the desktop version of the Core 2 Duo. The iMac uses the mobile platform, where quad cores aren't even on the roadmap they're so far away. You'll probably see new iMacs (and Macbooks) on the Santa Rosa platform using slightly updated socket P Core 2 Duos late spring.
 
Jarcrew said:
If you want a gaming machine, why the hell are you looking at Macs anyway?
Click to expand...

Because now you can run windows. This should end this disscussion.

I will run OSX for everything I do, except play games. If I want to play some games or whatever, time to boot into windows instead....

I think we need higher end hardware... espically in the video card market.
 
zero2dash said:
Then what you're looking for is a Dell XPS or an Alienware and those are both in Mac Pro price ranges, which is geared more for gaming.

iMac is more run-of-the-mill computer pricing, if a tad on the higher side including a better monitor.

You're expecting a Dodge Viper engine in a Dodge Neon chassis at a Dodge Neon price and that ain't gonna happen. Besides, as other people have said...you can upgrade the graphics chipset in the 24" iMac so if you require more power, yes - you have to pay for it. What's so appaling about that? I don't expect to get a GeForce card in a $400 Dell Dimension (which comes with Intel GMA). 😕

Again, you're comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended). No computer Apple makes is geared for serious gaming, and the closest thing is a Mac Pro, which is in a similar price range as an XPS or Alienware (and technically, the Mac Pro will blow the doors off of those computers).
Click to expand...

No offense at all, but the car comparison here does not fit. It would work better to say a metro, or a stock honda civic, or something with a hundred horse, but to say a neon is a little vague since for about 27 grand you can get a neon dropping 370 horse plus a bunch of upgrades to the shocks and junk. Now I know that isn't viper, I know that it is front wheel drive, and I know that it still isn't going to be ferrari fast, but it will be pretty damn fast. So to compare it to a neon is a little sketchy since a neon can be upgraded (from the manufacturer) to a pretty fast beast ( I don't like ricers so don't start spewing ricing battles; just stating the facts.) unlike the imac. the iMac can be upgraded but not to a damn fast gaming rig.

Looking for a modern muscle car alternative to the new Ford Mustang GT and Pontiac GTO? You'll need power numbers like 355 horsepower, 365 lb-ft of torque, and a price under $30,000 to compete.

But what about a turbocharged front-wheel-drive Dodge Neon weighing less than 3000 pounds with the ability to push well over 20 pounds of boost? Is this a modern muscle car? It definitely is. It's even scary to drive at times, like some of the most bitchin' muscle cars of the 1960s.
Click to expand...

I know you just said neon but it still doesn't fit.

Honestly I'd say an iMac is more so a S2000 or a Mustang (v6) or something like that (though those two don't go together well). I say this because the iMac is great and has some power to give you, but really it only can go so far and that is not that far. Like the s2000 there is just no torque, or like the mustang there is just no horsepower and the car is heavy as crap.

Anyways. Isn't about time to rest the car analogies with the G5 powerbook stories? Anyone vote for that?
 
@BenRoethig
Dont forget this design had a g5 in it. If they drop the 17" then I would think low power desktop cpus are well within the range of possibility (though I think they will wait for 45nm).

@poppe
Comparing the iMac to a mustang is very strange. Your description here sounds just like a maxed out 24" iMac to me.

"...for about 27 grand you can get a neon dropping 370 horse plus a bunch of upgrades to the shocks and junk. Now I know that isn't viper, I know that it is front wheel drive, and I know that it still isn't going to be ferrari fast, but it will be pretty damn fast."

Ferrari fast would be a macpro.
 
I can wait

I need a desktop machine to work with photos. I have been eyeing a 24" iMac, but now I am going to continue usnig my BlackMac C2D untill the upgrade comes out.
 
rkrammes said:
@BenRoethig
Dont forget this design had a g5 in it. If they drop the 17" then I would think low power desktop cpus are well within the range of possibility (though I think they will wait for 45nm).
Click to expand...

The regular G5 models were thicker, heavier, noisy, and unreliable. The iMac is better off using the mobile platform even if it makes it a bit underpowered. Let the iMac do what it does back and return to making a real desktop.
 
Jarcrew said:
If you want a gaming machine, why the hell are you looking at Macs anyway? Macs have never been all that good for gaming. This is why I have a Mac and a Wii. I'm not expecting my Mac to provide the goods in that area, which is why my table is absolutely littered with consoles; yeah, I could emulate my N64/Mega Drive on my Mac, but I don't want to, I've got the real thing sitting right there.
Click to expand...

Yes because it would be so much better to have a Mac and then a Windows computer right next to it.
 
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

they need to hurry up - i was gonna buy one last week until i was told they were due for an update so im being patient and waiting...i NEED THIS IN MY LIFE!!!! NOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
 
poppe said:
Anyways. Isn't about time to rest the car analogies with the G5 powerbook stories? Anyone vote for that?
Click to expand...

YES. I had forgotten about the car analogies but the Powerbook G5 stories are still driving me mad.

"APPLE STORE IS DOWN!"
"It'll be that Powerbook G5 I've been waiting for."

"Rumour: Product releases this tuesday?"
"It's about time! I've been waiting too long for that Powerbook G5!"

Apple's nearly into its third sort of revision with its Intel laptops (CD, C2D, Santa Rosa), the Powerbook jokes aren't funny.

EDIT:
Also, if laptop parts make it run quiter without overheating, I'm all for that.
As long as the screen's a good size, the hard drive has a good capacity and the graphics card can handle everything but hardcore gaming, who cares about the "mobile" CPU?
 
rkrammes said:
@BenRoethig
Dont forget this design had a g5 in it. If they drop the 17" then I would think low power desktop cpus are well within the range of possibility (though I think they will wait for 45nm).

@poppe
Comparing the iMac to a mustang is very strange. Your description here sounds just like a maxed out 24" iMac to me.

"...for about 27 grand you can get a neon dropping 370 horse plus a bunch of upgrades to the shocks and junk. Now I know that isn't viper, I know that it is front wheel drive, and I know that it still isn't going to be ferrari fast, but it will be pretty damn fast."

Ferrari fast would be a macpro.
Click to expand...

I am confused. I wasn't saying a Neon SRT-4 was ferrari fast.... I was saying that it wasn't Ferrari. I used a v6 mustang to compare it to the iMac because the v6 mustang is pretty whimpy and not very fast. But it is fun to drive with and can be fun to take it on the track none the less. It's just not going to perform like a ariel atom, porsche, Ferrari, blah blah blah blah blah. And you can only do so much to the mustang (from the factory) to make it perform better. In fact barely anything. That is why the iMac-car analogy fits better when saying the iMac is more something like a v6 mustang.
 
I need a desktop machine to work with photos. I have been eyeing a 24" iMac, but now I am going to continue usnig my BlackMac C2D untill the upgrade comes out.
Click to expand...

same here, althought I'm waiting until Oct 08 so hopefully by then I'll have a nice quad core iMac with more graphics options!

BluRay burner by late 08' ? sure hope so!
 
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