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

[Firefly2002]

Oh Christ. I hadn't realized this had degenerated into an argument about things that make absolutely no sense. *sigh*

Transistors dont affect computing directly as much as they used too.

This is honestly the stupidest comment I've ever read on these forums, which is saying something.

Moores law clearly shows that within the next 5 years capacity will make optical disks completely irrelevant

I'm not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not, but if it's not... dear Christ what are you on?

Moore's law a.) Has nothing to do with storage and b.) Couldn't possibly predict the effective utility of portable, swappable, versatile optical disks in comparison to the various form factors and uses of other forms of storage.

Our better understanding of Quantum Physics could let us make Uber disks. With a layer that responds to each spectrum of light. Low energy (Red Lazer) at the bottom. High energy (Violet Lazer) At the top. Then use existing methods of Multi layering to make even more layering.

I'm not pretending to be an expert (or even an amateur enthusiast) of quantum physics, but I don't think that this really has much to do with that area of science. It's normal physics on a very basic level. Just different types of light.

Therfore we could make a disc thats 56 Layers at about 10-20GB each. Thats
1.2TB for something that costs about 5-10 cents to make.

Again not pretending to be an expert, but I imagine there would be a very definite limit for each type of light wave, meaning they would have to be ordered specifically, and some wouldn't be able to be used. 56 layers seems infeasible.

Cute dream though.

Right, Shake. Moore's law says nothing about MHz, it's about transistor count.

Sort of.

Moore's law is giving us (and least those buying PCs) quad core processors for the price of single cores a couple of years ago.

Well technically Moore's hypothesis isn't really giving us anything, it's predicting some of what we see. It's not a law, of course, it's more of a theory... and less of a theory and more of a hypothesis.

You're right though that it's related to transistor count and price.

Computer scientists finally figured out that the simplest way to scale performance was multiple cores, in various combinations of cache and memory architectures. Of course, in the meantime adding additional ALU and FPU units doesn't hurt in the interim until more cores are capable of being taken advantage of. Unfortunately they don't seem to be doing that... they're tacking on more cache for immeasurably small performance gains that negate the die shrink's potential energy conservation.

MHz has hit a wall

No it hasn't

but the transistor count keeps going up, and we're seeing more cores and bigger caches because of that.

No.... lol. Transistor counts go up because of more cache/cores, not the other way around. Either way the cache is a waste. And so is the core count in many cases, most apps can't take advantage of more than two. In fact I'd guess about 90% can't. And probably only about 2% can take more than 4.

Marriage Equality - Have you talked about it with your gay friends, your gay colleagues and your gay relatives?

Only with the Happy Mac.

 

[Target362]

Oh Christ. I hadn't realized this had degenerated into an argument about things that make absolutely no sense. *sigh*


<snip>

DUDE! we were back on topic and you had to get us off by drilling in a argument that ended a while ago (and making it worse too).

 

[Firefly2002]

DUDE! we were back on topic and you had to get us off by drilling in a argument that ended a while ago (and making it worse too).

I'm half asleep

 

[geminidown]

iMac = Apple's Prosumer Machine

I read all the posts on this thread, then stepped away to live my life for a couple hours and came back to an additional 12 pages of replies... Sweet Jeebus! I love us! LOL!

Despite what's inside the iMac, Apple currently trains its employees and supports its shoppers with the iMac being it's hybrid machine, "blurring" the lines between consumer and professional... it may no exactly seem like your grandma's computer or your photographer's machine of choice, but folks both working and shopping at Apple would beg to differ. Not to mention the fact that every machine at Apple stores for demo are preloaded with the entire gamut of Apple software, from student, consumer and pro, to other 3rd party apps that we'd all consider to be pro [CS3 and the like], including the iMac, and such software all seems to run on it just fine. Sure, I don't think most of us would choose the iMac to be our office's or our store's server or main machine, but there are loads of companies and schools who order the iMac by the hundreds. To me, one of those non-techno wizard types like many of you are blessed to be, I am ok with considering the iMac as a machine capable of both uses.

As for the 2 new "compelling" features...

Is the iMac even thick enough to house the mechanics needed for an SD card slot? An SD card is thicker/would go deeper than the alu housing of the current iMac, and considering where the current I/O lineup is, an SD card seems to be too long for the casing, too... unless it sticks out a lot, but then again, I haven't used a new MBP's SD Card Slot yet, so I'd imagine the dozen or so Coronas I've enjoyed this evening are hampering my measuring techniques.

While I understand the glossy/vs matte debate, I also liken it to the method Apple uses to push out old and intro new... I'd consider us to either be in a transition to all glossy, with the option for matte to be a hiccup to quite the complaining for a while, or we're in a move to re-do the lineup again, and reintroduce features currently missed by folks [ie FireWire on the low-end MBP, etc.] I have used both a MBP and an iMac in every type of lighting imaginable, and I have yet to get as upset as most folks on here. I use photograph and video editing software, and have processed printing of larger photos and have yet to be let down. Maybe I'm just in the part of the generation that is still open to change and is ok with progress for the sake of progress?

I could, however, see an SD card slot either in the I/O of an iMac, or somehow replace one of the USB ports on the wired keyboard. That would be nifty.

An aesthetic change could also be in order, perhaps moving closer to the look of the newer display, using an all alu unibody enclosure. I could see the newer display being the first on the road map of moving towards a more transient style computing experience, both for consumers and professionals alike... Perhaps some sort of tablet/netbook-esque machine, coupled with a "gorgeous" display, keyboard with a few I/O built in to compensate a little and seamless wired/wireless syncing and backup...

And of course, there's the side of me that likes to dream.... oh front facing camera on the iPhone, where art thou... LOL.

 

[Firefly2002]

I think the new iMac will have a coffee maker and foot warmer.

 

[Target362]

I'm half asleep

na its all cool man. I know how you fell, I was working all day doing carts

 

[McBeats]

i love macs, but what features should apple add to their devices is a really easy question to answer....

2 features right off the top of my head ---

blu ray (i know they wanna focus on digi downloads and disc technologies like these will eventually die out I believe....but not quite yet, I know I would still take a hard copy of my favorite movies on blu ray than on my itunes. its like mp3s and vinyl, most of us adapted, but many still like 12" artwork they can hold in their hand. and yes, i understand my arguement right there isnt the best cuz, theyre here to make money, and vinyl, well clearly isnt much of a market there. blu ray is not like vinyl...not yet at least.)

hdmi - even 400 dollar laptops got a friggin hdmi input on it (every hp laptop practically has it now), apple sure as hell should have one too. this, unlike blu ray, is an easy decision, every video device should have one going into 2010.

 

[MorphingDragon]

This is honestly the stupidest comment I've ever read on these forums, which is saying something.

Maybe I should proof-read and clarify

Transistor count alone doesn't affect computing power as much as it used to.

I'm not pretending to be an expert (or even an amateur enthusiast) of quantum physics, but I don't think that this really has much to do with that area of science. It's normal physics on a very basic level. Just different types of light.

Wave behaviour or particle physics is classic theory. Because light and the spectra is dealing with Photons, it is classed as Quantum Physics. Yes it is related to that area, The layers would let light pass or reflect depending on the frequency and/or the wavelength of the light wave.

With your reasoning light is just another form of EMR, so I could use Gamma Radiation to send radio signals.

Again not pretending to be an expert, but I imagine there would be a very definite limit for each type of light wave, meaning they would have to be ordered specifically, and some wouldn't be able to be used. 56 layers seems infeasible.

Cute dream though.

CRTs use the same principle, and layered projectors... and printers. That or you could use gratings etc.

Of course they would have to be layered specifically. (Example) You dont put red in front of violet. Then you'd just get black. (100% Absorption). The red layer would absorb all high frequency light and only let low freq. light pass. Because Violet is a high freq. colour. The red light would be useless.


So your printer is just a cute dream... nice.

 

[WeegieMac]

The people who complain about the Gloss screen are hilarious.

There's a LOT of people on here, who have no need for a matte screen, but who jump on the bandwagon and complain about the Gloss screen. If you're a graphic designer or someone who works in digital photography, then fair enough, but come on ... there's people on here who use their Macs for iTunes and using the internet who complain about the Gloss screen.

I personally love the Gloss screen, and I use my Mac for both day-to-day internet/iTunes as well as web design and some digital photography. There's too many people who have read stuff on here, mainly complaints, and being the kind of person they are just need to jump on that bandwagon ... and their only experience is of having a "look" in the Apple Store, and never actually owning one.

 

[WeegieMac]

i hate the chin

I don't notice it on mine, although on the G5 and white Intel iMac's I owned previous I suppose it was noticeable.

I was too busy enjoying the computer to notice.

 

[sushi]

Maybe not anymore though...?

I would suggest that you don't hold your breath.

MHz has hit a wall, but the transistor count keeps going up, and we're seeing more cores and bigger caches because of that.

True.

It's amazing what is contained in a simple CPU these days compared to a few years ago, let alone 10 years ago.

there's people on here who use their Macs for iTunes and using the internet who complain about the Gloss screen.

Some of us prefer a matte screen. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[applevx]

Originally Posted by Shake 'n' Bake
But Apple did ask MS to stop running the ads. That shows significant weakness.

Apple asked because MS were still using outdated MacBook Pro pricing after Apple had dropped their prices. Therefore the ad was incorrect and "misrepresented" Apple's products. I believe Microsoft did change the ad to reflect the current prices.

I don't think it shows weakness on Apples part.

Yeah, agree!

IMHO, Microsoft need Better PR and better view of how to make Ads.

Cause everyone knows that the price of all product especially computer is changing every seconds just like the stock market doing. If Micro$oft tag one price today, they gonna change Ads another day soon for another price. This will be a PR nightmare for focusing on the Price! And that will be a very myopia too.

So, please do some research before release new Ads again, Micro$oft!


------------------------------------
Love Apple as well as my eyes.

 

[yankeedoodle]

Horizontal, convertible iMac!

Until we're all so dumbed down that all we can do is point at things on our shiny screens and grunt (yes I know we're pretty close, but we're not there yet), there is no way that touch screen desktops are ever going to have any practical use or purpose for 99 per cent of the people who use a Mac. It isn't going to happen. Period. Don't even think about it. Forget it, read some philosophy instead. Anything. Anything but think about touch screen desktops. They HAVE NO USE WHATSOEVER.

Touch screen computers have no use as long as they are mounted VERTICALLY (resulting in a gorilla arm...), but why should Apple not equip their new iMacs with a cool new kind of hinge that allows you to swipe the machine into a stable, HORIZONTAL position. When flipping the machine, it will automatically invoke a kind of TouchFinder (similar to FrontRow), an overlay to the real Finder that has been optimised for touchscreen use (larger buttons, etc.)! Imagine sorting your images in iPhoto touch on that gorgeous 24" screen laying almost flat on your desktop! Imagine cropping a video in iMovie touch! And surfing the internet using Safari touch for the new iMac with onscreen overlay keyboard. And if you want to go back to regular use (egg. to write a paper), you just flip the machine into a vertical position again and you will be back in the regular Finder and are using your keyboard and mouse (that were just hidden by the machine in it's horizontal position).

Now, wouldn't that be genious? Toss in BlueRay and -- boom! A killer machine!!

 

[WeegieMac]

The thing that really annoys me about news like this, is the resulting threads in the iMac section.

We're going to be flooded with new threads from people who were ready to buy an iMac and who are now "hanging off", asking every 12 hours if there's been any news on the update and when it's coming.

I remember when the March refresh was done, God it was horrendous.

I replaced my white 17" Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz iMac in March with a 20" 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, so I'm in no hurry to upgrade ... this machine, like my previous two Macs, will be with me for 3/4 years and then be replaced with some lucky family member getting this one.

 

[WeegieMac]

Some of us prefer a matte screen. Is that so hard to understand?

It's perfectly understandable, but the way the "anti-Gloss" brigade go on, and on, and on, and on, and on about the issue is more annoying than rusted sandpaper to the scrotum.

We get it, but the fact remains that unless you're a graphic designer or someone who lives in a glass house, the Gloss screen isn't an issue.

Having used matte screens on the G5 and first Intel iMac's, I couldn't go back now I've used the Gloss display. Yes, that may only be my opinion, but as I said it's more the way that people jump on the bandwagon and moan every, single time a Mac refresh is mentioned.

The hysteria in here at times is painful to read ... there's excitement, and then there's blind, morbid, zealousness.

 

[Interlink]

hmm, one long lost feature i'd like to see in the new imacs is the price tag that don't scare 90% of all the people away...

 

[WeegieMac]

I *was* planning on buying myself a new iMac to replace my white one from 2006 tomorrow. We've got a nice, shiny sales-tax free weekend right now.

But if I can wait just a little bit longer...my new iMac will be even shinier. And possibly get a price drop.

Sigh.

Decisions. Decisions.

See, this is what I was referring to in an earlier post.

If you have the money now, and you want a new iMac, then go out and buy one. The iMac refresh happened only 5 months ago, and there's been no date set for this "update".

If Tallest Skil is to be believed, and he's usually bang on being fair to him, then you're going to spend months sitting on here, asking if there's any more news on the update, any word when it's happening, and hyping yourself up to get nothing more than a couple of hundred MHz more and a better GPU.

The same thing happened back in March on here, and while there are people who simply must own the latest kit, when it comes to Apple, there's simply no point because they "refresh" lines quicker than any other computer manufacturer out there.

If the new Mac available now is good enough for what you need it for, and you've already budgeted for it, I'd say go for it and save yourself months of torment on here.

 

[WeegieMac]

hmm, one long lost feature i'd like to see in the new imacs is the price tag that don't scare 90% of all the people away...

In March, at the last refresh, the change in price between the entry level 20" here in the UK caused absolute mayhem.

One morning it was £782 ... the next day it was £949, and with no major spec increase to speak of aside from the nVidia GPU. Some could argue about DDR3 compared to DDR2, but being honest the difference is negligible.

I was lucky enough to get the £782 model for £612, brand new, thanks to a Corporate Discount but I can see why potential iMac owners could be put off.

For the specification, it's clear the price includes the design and a premium for being able to run Mac OS X. My last iMac, an Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz with 17" screen, 512mb of RAM, and a 160GB Hard Drive cost me £929.00 ... looking back I don't know how I justified it, maybe it was my youth, lol.

 

[WeegieMac]

That AND, they REALLY REALLY REALLY NEED TO MAKE THE IMAC WIDESCREEN!!!

It already is really, really widescreen ... and has been for a number of years.

 

[flopticalcube]

Nothing compelling about Blu-Ray and quad-core. Both have been available for years on PCs and are now standard on some lines. Apple needs to bring back some of the innovation and fresh thinking that made it great in times past.

 

[blueskyrocket]

and supports its shoppers with the iMac being it's hybrid machine, "blurring" the lines between consumer and professional...

And of course, there's the side of me that likes to dream.... oh front facing camera on the iPhone, where art thou... LOL.

All I could wish for is a iMac 30" Pro, talk about a hybrid machine! Accessible drive bays, one a SSD for MacOS, user changeable graphics card (3 options) and I do like your idea of a SD slot for the keyboard (although, all of my gadgets currently use CF cards, they are small enough). I think with the impending "tablet device" a synergy (call it ecosystem if you like) with a built in MiFi card giving average consumers a thought out roadmap for their digital lives. Because Apple designs the whole widget, the possibilities bring about Homer Simpson "dooooohnuts" drooling anticipation

 

[MattInOz]

But Apple did ask MS to stop running the ads. That shows significant weakness. Plus, Apple didn't bother countering with anything noteworthy. I would have done something showing the ease-of-use in OS X, especially in the settings department.

Ummm.... they asked for one Ad to be not shown or updated as it quoted out of date pricing information.

 

[iAlexG]

I best get saving i would love an iMac but i just got my MBP

 

[norwaypianoman]

Blue-ray and projector

Hia folks.

I actually talked to da Stevie-man, and he wispered gently to me:
Blue-ray and projector..

... then he disappeared in the clouds

 

[chaosbunny]

It's perfectly understandable, but the way the "anti-Gloss" brigade go on, and on, and on, and on, and on about the issue is more annoying than rusted sandpaper to the scrotum.

We get it, but the fact remains that unless you're a graphic designer or someone who lives in a glass house, the Gloss screen isn't an issue.

Why isn't it an issue? Because you say so?

It can be an issue for everyone, not just graphic designers etc... some people simply don't like the reflections, there may be some overreacting like you describe, but that doesn't make all people who complain about the glossy screens "hilarious".

I have used my glossy screen 24" iMac for the past 2 years for graphic design etc and while it's not too bad and I have another matte monitor connected to it I most certainly won't buy a glossy screen product again.