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

Next-Generation iMac to Offer Two 'Compelling' New Features?

Treq said:
Hackintoshes are hobby machines and not professional systems.
Click to expand...
Your mileage may vary.

The coveted "Pro" title is paper thin now on the notebooks. Yes, you could always run everything short of Motion from FCS on the MacBook as well. Bear in mind people were doing this ages ago on the PowerPC G4.

Saying that 'X' isn't a professional machine because you spent more money or Apple puts "Pro" on the case just feels like a cover for defending your purchase. You don't need to and any machine with enough patience can be a professional one. Don't procrastinate but if you're doing mission critical tasks either your job pays for your hardware or you write off a Mac Pro as a business expense.

It's time to move on.
 
munkees said:
That is sound disgusting, I hate Linux, ported it once to a mips processor, gave me more respect for BSD. Writing Drivers can be so much fun, very very rewarding.



define professional computer?

on a side note the iMac line is not marked as the Professional computer, yet is used in many business, including my own. I do not have the need to a Mac Pro or it power (yet).
Click to expand...

I agree with you. The entire rant started when someone said the iMac was very close to a professional computer. I said no it was not. That is all.
 
Full of Win said:
Like others have said - eSATA has to be one feature.

Easiest to implement and cheapest to do.
Click to expand...
Don't see eSATA being implemented in the iMac.

Apple has invested in FW. FW800 is the standard except for the MB (FW400) and the MBA (no FW). If anything (which I don't see), we will see faster FW coming out.

Remember, the iMac is the consumer desktop design for Apple.
 
MacRumors said:


AppleInsider reports that the next-generation iMac will see the inclusion of two "compelling" new features, although sources refuse to provide anything more than suggestions as to what those features might be.The report speculates that one of those features may relate to Blu-ray, a technology that Apple CEO Steve Jobs has in the past referred to as a "bag of hurt", although recent licensing changes may result in Apple taking a closer look at bringing the technology to its computers.

The report also echoes previous assertions that Apple is likely to bring price reductions to the next-generation iMac line similar to those seen for its notebooks at WWDC earlier this year. Finally, sources suggest that Apple may be undertaking a redesign of the iMac enclosure, possibly patterned after the 24" LED Cinema Display introduced last October. It is unclear, however, whether such a redesign would be ready for the next-generation iMac or if it would be deployed as part of a subsequent update to the line.

Article Link: Next-Generation iMac to Offer Two 'Compelling' New Features?
Click to expand...

But why BluRay? I'd love to see Apple embrace CBHD given how expensive BluRay is - not only when it comes to movies but also the blank media in NZ alone is around $30 each, with burners being around US$500 each - having had a look at Amazon.

They really need to do something about the cost of BluRay because that is the one reason why I refuse to use it - its expensive, more correctly, it is an unjustifiable expensiveness.
 
I'm going to join the chorus of people saying:

Blu-ray and matte screen options please Apple! Repeat for the BD haters/apathetic: OPTIONS.

Reading this thread it seems there are two distinct groups: those who want Blu-ray and those who don't yet realise they want Blu-ray. :p

No, seriously, how close do you sit to an iMac compared to a TV? The viewing distance is typically so much closer that on a 24 inch screen with >1080p resolution it's a no-brainer that a Blu-ray would look awesome. Especially if you had the option for a matte screen for people who don't like the glossies.

I've rehearsed the and re-read the Blu-ray arguments in many threads, but ignoring the technical and industrial/political arguments again, the one I always com back to is this - it is ridiculous that Steve Jobs can be part of Disney, who release many great Blu-ray disks (Wall-E is one of my favourite BDs - Monsters Inc. also looks fabulous on BD, for example) and yet in his main capacity of selling computers, only his major rivals Microsoft sell an OS that supports playing those movies! It's a farcical, and in my view unsustainable position. At least put the option for playback in the OS and let us buy our own external drives without having to install your main competitor's OS to achieve BD playback.

To use an analogy, it's a little like if Al Gore said 'Apple shouldn't bother with making its computers environmentally friendly, because it's a bag of hurt'. Then went back to making speeches about how we have to save the planet. OK, so maybe that's a little emotive and this is much more trivial by comparison, but the inherent contradiction is what I'm getting at. Jobs seems to happy to be on the board of a company that sells products that only the competitor of his main occupation supports. It's crazy.

Apart from anything, adding a Blu-ray option would mean the opportunity for more profits for Apple - pick a drive, add your margin for those who want to pay it, just like you do for faster hard drives, SSDs or extra Apple-installed RAM. Really, if people will go to the bother of paying extra for the hardware it might be because they're about as interested in downloading a limited selection of inferior 'HD' movies from iTunes as the people who don't want Blu-ray because they don't care about it.

The delay for Blu-ray support on the mac already half past stupid. Please get on with it Apple. Compel me to want a new Mac!!
 
EDIT: THANK YOU for the few smart ones above who got back to the point of this topic. Lets stick to it!!!!!!

Can we all get back to the point of this topic?

Few more ideas for the new imac (add to my list on the last page):

  1. SD card slot
  2. If blu-ray is added, it may a blu-ray reader/writer
  3. Screen sizes will remain the same
  4. Possible smaller screen model at low cost ($700-$950)
 
Detlev_73 said:
My iMac is showing it's age at almost 2 years old; an 800 mHz bus doesn't cut it anymore.
Click to expand...

800 Mhz bus isn't all that bad; I'm sitting on a 1.07Ghz. The problem I have found with MacOS X has more to do with the lack of optimisation when it comes to the CODECs and so forth than anything to do with the hardware being deficient itself.

Its the reason I prefer using XLD with Lame MP3 Encoder over iTunes/Quicktime.
 
Blu-Ray burner?

anyone here taken a thought of a blu-raY BURNER? Would you consider that as an option
 
OS Update

jmpage2 said:
We still need to see evidence of Blu-Ray support in Snow Leopard. So far there is zero evidence of Blu-Ray support in the next generation OS beta loads that have been tested.
Click to expand...

Just because it's not in the beta or the release, doesn't been it couldn't happen in an OS update. It wouldn't be the first time...


Hugh
 
I want to say...

Touch screen

Dual screen pull-out. Apple has integrate it's software with dual screen, so many the new iMac will have dual screen :D You pull it out the side and there you go!
 
we will have to politely disagree on this subject. I am actually a network engineer install and troubleshoot large IP and telephony networks. I have been using computers since VIC-20 and MS is far more work to maintain and support for anyone, IT pro or not. Time spent fixing problems for family and friends on their Windows boxes? 100's of hours over 14 yes. Hours spent fixing the Macs? A handful.

TennisandMusic said:
I've been building PC's for years too, and I'll do one better than MCSE. I'm a software engineer. MCSE is not that hard to get. I understand all of this stuff quite well.

Where are Macs "dominating" any sort of computing field these days?

In case you didn't notice in my last post, I use Macs. I have one windows box that sits there and does nothing because I don't need it. Win 7 is still much faster than Leopard for me though. And it flies at multitasking. Not that I'll use it, but I did try it out for awhile. To suggest that somehow OSX is sooooo superior at multitasking that an iMac would outpace a beefy windows box is completely absurd. It reeks of the whole "fanboy" thing, and certainly not someone who I would hope would know better, being an IT person and all. So yeah, I definitely use OSX and only OSX pretty much, but Windows is still a fine overall OS, and getting snobby about it is just plain stupid. You think people want to try OSX when users act like that?

Your statements regarding driver issues, malware, viruses blah blah is just more FUD. It takes extremely little effort to keep a windows box clean and working well. No one even bothers trying to break a Mac because so few people, like you and me, even use them in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...
 
jmpage2 said:
we will have to politely disagree on this subject. I am actually a network engineer install and troubleshoot large IP and telephony networks. I have been using computers since VIC-20 and MS is far more work to maintain and support for anyone, IT pro or not. Time spent fixing problems for family and friends on their Windows boxes? 100's of hours over 14 yes. Hours spent fixing the Macs? A handful.
Click to expand...

so i could argue that has to do with the users not knowing how to use their computer as opposed to the software. What does being a network engineer have anything to do with applications and layers 5-7? How many of those networks feature Mac exclusive boxes or servers? Also, i don't think i have to remind you of the amount of window's users versus mac users. I think the point they were making is, that an iMac is laptop hardware packaged as a desktop and is not a professional computer. I doubt we would see any studio's doing any heavy lifting using an iMac.
 
Not totally accurate.

At the movies you only get 24 frames per second if I remember correctly. It is worst than that because of frame orientation. There is actually less info than what you see in a 35mm slide.

Not that that really matters here as HD movies, even Blu-Ray, offer up even less information. The biggest problem with Blu-Ray though is that maximum storage is fixed whereas SD is eclipsing that rather quickly. In a world of 32 & 64 GB SD cards the quality of movies can be improved simply by doing less agressive compression. Or we can have longer movies or entire series on on storage device. Frankly I think Blu-Ray will die off quickly once SD is adopted by the studios.


Dave


carmenodie said:
Look, Blu Ray is cool looking but so doggone hyped. At the movies, you are watching 35mm slides at about 30 frames per second. Listen what I said, you are looking at 35mm slides. That is what High Definition has been trying to achieve. Back in the day, the goal was to make television quality like that of 35mm photographs.At the movies you have what high def wants to be. Yes, movies are high def.Hello! And a bad movie like Show Girls was bad no matter what resolution(IMHO). And think about Broadway and off Broadway plays and musicals that have flopped! What is more hi def than natural light hitting your retina?
Bad is bad. So lets get off the freaking Blu Ray gripe wagon.
Click to expand...
 
mixel said:
Well it wouldn't be useful to me in that configuration, I was thinking more of things like dorm rooms and so-on. Having a centrepiece imac that does everything could be pretty useful and be a big space saver. Most people wouldn't bother with a second screen as most* people aren't as fussed about the gloss.

*probably.

I agree the mini is more useful in that role as most people have a much bigger TV already. :) I just think a BD'd up imac is going to be considerably more appealing to a number of audiences than a non-BD one.
Click to expand...

I hadn't considered that.

Target362 said:
For desktops? Not sure about that. but I do know the mouse is in need for a revamp.

but I did find this over on google

2z7ftbn.jpg


nice mock up
Click to expand...

For me to buy it, it'll have to have a full-size, real number pad.
 
TennisandMusic said:
I've been building PC's for years too, and I'll do one better than MCSE. I'm a software engineer. MCSE is not that hard to get. I understand all of this stuff quite well.

Where are Macs "dominating" any sort of computing field these days?

In case you didn't notice in my last post, I use Macs. I have one windows box that sits there and does nothing because I don't need it. Win 7 is still much faster than Leopard for me though. And it flies at multitasking. Not that I'll use it, but I did try it out for awhile. To suggest that somehow OSX is sooooo superior at multitasking that an iMac would outpace a beefy windows box is completely absurd. It reeks of the whole "fanboy" thing, and certainly not someone who I would hope would know better, being an IT person and all. So yeah, I definitely use OSX and only OSX pretty much, but Windows is still a fine overall OS, and getting snobby about it is just plain stupid. You think people want to try OSX when users act like that?

Your statements regarding driver issues, malware, viruses blah blah is just more FUD. It takes extremely little effort to keep a windows box clean and working well. No one even bothers trying to break a Mac because so few people, like you and me, even use them in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...

Macs are "dominating" the Premium end of the market. Those who can afford to go mac, ARE going Mac.

The moment you install antivirus software and ANY 3rd party software in order to keep the OS from falling flat on its face after x-amount of hours, you've already failed. Windows is broken by design. The entire IT industry depends on Windows being perpetually broken. A whole industry has grown up in order to maintain Windows. And it's a vicious cycle because MS is gunning for the bottom-end of the market, ensuring that Windows reamins the dominant OS by virtue of ubiquity (and that's really it) and that it remains the biggest target to begin with. The bottom of the retail pyrmaid is the widest. Cheap and plentiful, and ultimately, crap. MS admitted to their bottom-feeding ways recently when Baldmer cried about losing money because of netbooks. And you saw exactly what MS was about in those failed Laptop Hunter abominations.

It takes "extremely little effort" to keep a Windows box clean . . . provided you know what you're doing and you've gone through the learning curve. It takes ZERO effort to keep OS X "clean." In fact, there is nothing to "keep clean." Unix cleans itself via automatic cron scripts that run regularly. No slowdowns. Nothing to maintain by the user. No tweaking needed. Nothing to scan. No settings to mess with. And what settings there are, are very straightforward.

OS X is meant to be completely maintenance-free. Which is what all consumer tech of this kind should be (and apparently aspires to be, but not always successfully.)

No one even bothers trying to break a Mac because so few people, like you and me, even use them in the grand scheme of things.

"So few people . . . even use them in the 'grand scheme' of things." Except nearly everyone on this site, and a good chunk of the 40 million or so OS X users who USE their Macs as their only computer. What is exactly is the "grand scheme of things"?
 
xIGmanIx said:
so i could argue that has to do with the users not knowing how to use their computer as opposed to the software. What does being a network engineer have anything to do with applications and layers 5-7? How many of those networks feature Mac exclusive boxes or servers? Also, i don't think i have to remind you of the amount of window's users versus mac users. I think the point they were making is, that an iMac is laptop hardware packaged as a desktop and is not a professional computer. I doubt we would see any studio's doing any heavy lifting using an iMac.
Click to expand...

I have MS and Linux certs. I have to know layers 1-7 although 1-4 more so. I am saying that in my personal experience OS X is easierto use and maintain than MS.

I don't consider iMac a pro computer but it is very fast for most users even casual gamers who don't do intense number crunching.

It is proven in tests that OS X is faster at multiple tasking than Vista. Not sure about Win7 but i am running that in boot camp.
 
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