not impressed with imac update

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
im not impressed with the imac update very much, i have a few reasons

1.there's no USB 3.0 ,i know its not really a big deal yet, but macs are supposed to be top of the line and ahead of everything else so why not just put one for future development?

2.no change in the video input process, apple didn't add any kind of video resolution scaler so to input video from a non display-port device requires expensive adapters still.(pandering to MBP users again)

3. no HDMI input-simple enough (see above)

4. limited audio functionality.i have a very high end stereo system and i would like to at least use it with my imac sometimes without using a headphone jack!.its way to limited.most pcs have a super audio port or at least something equivalent.


now the speed boost though not very impressive is nice ,and im sure would be good for graphic designers and people using memory intensive programs but is it enoguh to make me want to buy a new imac?

im very happy with my imac ive never had any lag with it and no problems at all.i think i will probably update in 2 to 3 years when the specs on the imac are enough t make me want to buy

opinions?
 

Elysian

macrumors member
Jun 11, 2010
65
0
iMac is a computer. You are looking for a media center. May I suggest a new Apple TV?

Plus you can buy an adapter for HDMI on the iMac.
 

Queso

Suspended
Mar 4, 2006
11,821
7
You have the previous generation iMac and you're bitching the generation that directly replaces it are not enough of an advance? Why the hell are you even worrying about this?
 

zaffle

macrumors member
Feb 14, 2009
52
0
NONE of those things (1-4) were realistic expectations.

i'd like 12-core xeons in the next imac and i'll be unhappy if i don't see them. oh, and the moon on a stick.
 

IndustrialSpace

macrumors 6502a
Dec 31, 2009
696
1
somewhere
This was a very perfunctory refresh. Nothing ground-breaking. Apple has more interest with R&D in the iOS line of products. They don't give much attention to the desktop stuff.
 

Elysian

macrumors member
Jun 11, 2010
65
0
You have the previous generation iMac and you're bitching the generation that directly replaces it are not enough of an advance? Why the hell are you even worrying about this?
NONE of those things (1-4) were realistic expectations.

i'd like 12-core xeons in the next imac and i'll be unhappy if i don't see them. oh, and the moon on a stick.
You know what? I'm pissed that my iMac doesn't make me toast! ****ing Apple, get with the program already! :rolleyes:
 

Hellhammer

Moderator emeritus
Dec 10, 2008
22,164
581
Finland
You shouldn't expect every update to be significant. You have a fully working and still fairly new iMac so you should be just fine. You should be happy that your iMac is still decent and you don't have need to buy one, usually it's vice versa that people are pissed about the new features :rolleyes:
 

Man-Droid

macrumors regular
Aug 27, 2009
187
0
Tampa, Fl
What bothers me is not what the OP wants from his computer, it bothers me that it is expected because it is offered in the PC counterpart. Macs are not PCs. They have never offered the same thing and I doubt they ever will.
 

old-wiz

macrumors G3
Mar 26, 2008
8,315
225
West Suburban Boston Ma
There is a real issue with including HDMI input; HDCP. In order for an iMac to accept full 1080p HDMI input, it would need to be a HDCP compliant device. This requires a lot of software changes that Apple does not want to make. the media studios do not want a full fledged computer being able to read their precious 1080p data and be able to record it to disk.
 

JHorstmann

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2010
47
0
the mini display port

I don't understand what everyone's beef is about that mini display port. Yes, it does suck that the adapter costs 30 dollars (15 [or even 8] if you go generic), but I like that. I like to know that I can use virtually any screen with my iMAC from analog display, S-video, HDMI, VGA, DVI, etc. It's all there. I do think that Apple should at least let you pick one that comes with said devices- but at the same time if a PC had an all in one I doubt they'd have an adapter for anything either.
 

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,292
20
Not impressed with this thread. =p

I don't understand what everyone's beef is about that mini display port. Yes, it does suck that the adapter costs 30 dollars (15 [or even 8] if you go generic), but I like that. I like to know that I can use virtually any screen with my iMAC from analog display, S-video, HDMI, VGA, DVI, etc. It's all there. I do think that Apple should at least let you pick one that comes with said devices- but at the same time if a PC had an all in one I doubt they'd have an adapter for anything either.
Many PCs require adapter to connect to DVI displays
 

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
NONE of those things (1-4) were realistic expectations.

i'd like 12-core xeons in the next imac and i'll be unhappy if i don't see them. oh, and the moon on a stick.
im not saying thats what i was expecting,im just saying its not enough for me to want to upgrade.i never thought i even would.12 would probably never be a option. overheating

You have the previous generation iMac and you're bitching the generation that directly replaces it are not enough of an advance? Why the hell are you even worrying about this?
not bitching, just expressing my thoughts. i just would have liked to see a few minor ithings i noticed the last imac didnt have,like a better video input system.

What bothers me is not what the OP wants from his computer, it bothers me that it is expected because it is offered in the PC counterpart. Macs are not PCs. They have never offered the same thing and I doubt they ever will.
my five year old $300 pc has a super audio port,am i wrong for expecting something better than a heaphone jack?
 

lewis82

macrumors 68000
Aug 26, 2009
1,708
11
Totalitarian Republic of Northlandia
my five year old $300 pc has a super audio port,am i wrong for expecting something better than a heaphone jack?
Yes. [Almost] no one uses something else than the headphone jack or the optical audio port that's hidden inside.

And if you need anything else, chances are you already have bought a Firewire audio interface. EDIT: I'm using "you" in the general meaning, here.
 

JHorstmann

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2010
47
0
im not saying thats what i was expecting,im just saying its not enough for me to want to upgrade.i never thought i even would.12 would probably never be a option. overheating
So, right now I see your problem with the new computer is it requires a 15-30 dollar adapter, doesn't have a technology that is definitely practical, but not widely used and supported, and you can't use a speaker system that it itself would not support an adapter.

Maybe you should get a stereo system with more options instead of harping on Apple (hahaha, i'm just kidding)
 

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
Yes. [Almost] no one uses something else than the headphone jack or the optical audio port that's hidden inside.

And if you need anything else, chances are you already have bought a Firewire audio interface. EDIT: I'm using "you" in the general meaning, here.
well i cant help it people use **** speakers, i have surround sound dolby and i watch movies on my imac,good luck getting a good sound out of the headphone jack.i would expect it from a walmart computer,i dont think its unreasonable to expect it with my imac,i dont want to have to buy a adapter that wouldn't really fit with apples "it just works" slogan now would it.

So, right now I see your problem with the new computer is it requires a 15-30 dollar adapter, doesn't have a technology that is definitely practical, but not widely used and supported, and you can't use a speaker system that it itself would not support an adapter.

Maybe you should get a stereo system with more options instead of harping on Apple (hahaha, i'm just kidding)
i can use my stero with the imac fine,but i cant use higher end cables anymore and it sounds like crap,what a bunch of sheep.

So, right now I see your problem with the new computer is it requires a 15-30 dollar adapter, doesn't have a technology that is definitely practical, but not widely used and supported, and you can't use a speaker system that it itself would not support an adapter.

Maybe you should get a stereo system with more options instead of harping on Apple (hahaha, i'm just kidding)
and idk were your getting 15-20 dollar adapter from ,,the cheapest input modulator on the market for the imacs native resolution is over 200 dollars,why would i want to output to another monitor?
 

Elysian

macrumors member
Jun 11, 2010
65
0
well i cant help it people use **** speakers, i have surround sound dolby and i watch movies on my imac,good luck getting a good sound out of the headphone jack.i would expect it from a walmart computer,i dont think its unreasonable to expect it with my imac,i dont want to have to buy a adapter that wouldn't really fit with apples "it just works" slogan now would it.
Considering you'll be watching movies on your iMac, I doubt you would notice the sound difference coming from the basic audio output vs an optical output.

Second of all, even if you hook up to an HDTV, I still doubt you will be far enough away from that HDTV set since you are hooking it up to your iMac.

To me, it looks like you're looking for a home theatre system. If that's the case, buy an Apple TV. It's got HDMI and Optical Audio Output. Even with an in home theatre system in most houses, you still won't notice much of a difference coming from the normal audio out jack compared to the optical jack. Well, that is unless the room with the home theatre is big and built for it. In that case, people wouldn't be hooking an iMac up to it.

Also, please use multi-quote, your many post in a row is annoying.
 

Nishi100

macrumors 6502a
Mar 27, 2010
867
0
We cannot expect USB 3.0 until 2012 as intel aren't going to add it to their motherboards; however, Apple could add a discrete controller for USB 3.0 but it's unlikely.

Light peak will probably be in the next update, as well as Sandy Bridge, but USB 3.0 is unlikely until 2012...

I agree that HDMI should have been in this update, even the mini has got it! How can the Mac Pro and the iMac not have a HDMI port when the mini has?
 

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
Considering you'll be watching movies on your iMac, I doubt you would notice the sound difference coming from the basic audio output vs an optical output.

Second of all, even if you hook up to an HDTV, I still doubt you will be far enough away from that HDTV set since you are hooking it up to your iMac.

To me, it looks like you're looking for a home theatre system. If that's the case, buy an Apple TV. It's got HDMI and Optical Audio Output. Even with an in home theatre system in most houses, you still won't notice much of a difference coming from the normal audio out jack compared to the optical jack, Well, that is unless the room with the home theatre is big and built for it. In that case, people wouldn't be hooking an iMac up to it.

Also, please use multi-quote, your many post in a row is annoying.
i agree completley the diffrence is nominal i can tell sometimes but it would be nice for them to at least included it,i didnt upgrad for thebigger screen to surf the web.but thats not really mt biggest thing,i just wanted a better video input system,so i didnt have to buy a 200$ adapter
 

Queso

Suspended
Mar 4, 2006
11,821
7
not bitching, just expressing my thoughts. i just would have liked to see a few minor ithings i noticed the last imac didnt have,like a better video input system.
Then your expectations weren't realistic. All signs pointed to this being a speed bump update and nothing more.
 

JHorstmann

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2010
47
0
and idk were your getting 15-20 dollar adapter from ,,the cheapest input modulator on the market for the imacs native resolution is over 200 dollars,why would i want to output to another monitor?
But an adapter is any cheaper for a PC? Oh wait, PC doesn't support that resolution. Dude, get a home theatre system. You're not going to find any other set up that will need any less adapters.
 

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
Then your expectations weren't realistic. All signs pointed to this being a speed bump update and nothing more.
apple knew people were displeased with the mini-display port they could of at least made changes to the scaler options of the hardware.
 

Queso

Suspended
Mar 4, 2006
11,821
7
apple knew people were displeased with the mini-display port they could of at least made changes to the scaler options of the hardware.
Apple obviously thought that so few people were displeased with it that it could wait.
 

Willdta

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 1, 2010
47
0
Florida
But an adapter is any cheaper for a PC? Oh wait, PC doesn't support that resolution. Dude, get a home theatre system. You're not going to find any other set up that will need any less adapters.
dude wtf are you talking about ,im talking about a video input converter for the imac resolution,so i can input dvi to the imac.no pc would need the converter because very few pcs use display-port or are even all in one pcs.i think your confused
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.