Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You do realize that Steve Jobs' guiding principles were to MAKE THE MOST MONEY and NOT to make the best computer. The majority of iMac customers (NOT FORUM MEMBERS) do not know about the internals of a computer... They see the slim and shiny iMac and think "now that is a nice computer" when in fact it's a garbage design for anything other than looking good. Apple does not sell to the prosumer anymore but instead to the masses of naive consumers out there. I don't blame them one bit because their making millions of $'s and that's the whole point of a company, but I, as a prosumer, will not be purchasing their ill-designed fashion statement of a "desktop"...

/end rant and Now I'm leaving

What is this BS? Have anything to back that up with? This is soo biased and bunch of misinformation you have posted so far.

Have fun building your custom rig. I don't even know why a custom rig with good graphics is even a fair comparable to an all in one. However you actually think it is reflects how reasonable you are to even compare the two. Also the fact a custom rig would mean you would be using windows exclusively. Not sure about you, one of the perks of an apple computer is well the OS and Windows and not the other way around.
 
I've got a 2007 iMac and I was really thinking of upgrading before today. After seeing today's update, I'm thinking that a trip to the refurb store is smarter for me. Lack of a built-in superdrive is the biggest issue for me. I can't burn my free music downloads of live concerts (ex. Grateful Dead shows on archive.org) for my car or friends. I can't transfer my cd's to itunes with the new machine. I'm sure standalone drives are out there, but I thought the goal of the iMac was to integrate everything into one piece? Seems like it's been sacrificed for thinness and weight in a desktop machine. Not real smart in my book.
 
You can replace it, but not without taking apart the entire machine. Sure, some of us here would be able to do it, but the vast majority of users will not. My dad's 2007 iMac has needed 3 HD replacements since he bought it, each costing hundreds of dollars. If your iMac hard drive dies after more than 2 or 3 years, you're better off just buying a new computer. That ain't right!

----------




Optical drive, native firewire port (replaced with extra USB port), audio line in, second hard drive bay for SSD

Perhaps when iFixit does a teardown there will be more findings. I'm wondering if there is still a free SATA port on the logic board so that OWC can do turnkey upgrades with eSATA ports.
What would you need eSATA if you have Thunderbold?
 
Well, given that every iMac model has been the guts of a laptop bolted under/behind a screen, I highly doubt this will ever change. There simply isn't enough room or power for a desktop-class GPU for example.

----------



We've only just gotten 13" and 15" Retina displays. It'll probably be another couple of years before we get 21.5" and 27" Retina displays, especially given the growing pains that Apple appears to be having with the 15" so far (ghosting, price etc).

Why does Retina cost so much ? Is it the technology that makes Retina display too new?
 
I've got a 2007 iMac and I was really thinking of upgrading before today. After seeing today's update, I'm thinking that a trip to the refurb store is smarter for me. Lack of a built-in superdrive is the biggest issue for me. I can't burn my free music downloads of live concerts (ex. Grateful Dead shows on archive.org) for my car or friends. I can't transfer my cd's to itunes with the new machine. I'm sure standalone drives are out there, but I thought the goal of the iMac was to integrate everything into one piece? Seems like it's been sacrificed for thinness and weight in a desktop machine. Not real smart in my book.

I think the refurb would be a great buy.
 
The new imac looks great. I like the specs aswell. I will be buying one as soon as it is available. The only thing i dont like about it is that there is no ssd standard and the hdd is 5400rpm (on the 21.5").
 
So because you disagree with someone you ask them if they have a disability?

I think YOU have the disability.

You're right, that was juvenile of me. I apologize. I mean't it as comedy, as I thought the OP's comment was out of touch with reality.

Here, let me break it down.

What the @#$! is up with Apple over the last 3 years. They seem incapable of providing honest updates to their hardware. Yes, the case is pretty, but I want to be able to play today's computer games on it. Apple has been steadily falling behind for 3 years now in the hardware realm.

What qualifies as an honest update? I didn't know computers had an honesty factor associated with them. I guess this is a knock on the technical specifications, but I don't know what you would wan't to improve that wouldn't prohibitively increase cost or thermal design requirements.

If you are buying a computer to play computer games, and you are buying a Mac, your problems are two-fold. First, you're getting the best solution for your desired needs; even if your Mac was competitive on price and specs, you would still be running Mac OS X, and the latest games are usually not going to launch for it, with some exceptions. Second, if you do play a lot of games, most games that are released today are console ports, which were designed to run on lower quality hardware before they are ported to the PC, so they will likely play fine on this new iMac.

It's important to use the best solution for the job .Most people who decide that they want to play today's best games at the highest framerates end up buying a gaming PC or building one themselves, and that usually runs you in the range of $1000-$3000 depending on what computer you select or what components you choose.


I have been holding off on buying a Windows machine in the hopes that the iMac would get a decent upgrade, and instead they are offering a nicer LOOKING machine with a slower GPU than the previous model!? This isn't how computer hardware, especially EXPENSIVE, computer hardware is supposed to be upgraded. You don't wait 2+ years to upgrade a product, or in the case of the Mac Pro 900 days if you want to stay at the top of your market. I don't want a Windows machine, but that might be how I spend my money this cycle, gaming is important to me. My old Mac Laptop will do me fine for non-gaming applications.

I think you might have your information mixed up, because the NVIDIA graphics in the upcoming iMac are actually faster than the previous ATI graphics.

Again, I think your expectations are a bit off. I kind of imagine it as a person walking into a Ford dealership and saying "Oh this Ford Fusion is nice, it does everything I need great, great gas mileage, great design, lots of storage space, but it's so rediculous that it can't do a quarter mile time of 10 seconds! HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO RACE PEOPLE WITH THIS!". Seriously, reset your expectations out of what you expect out of a polished consumer product, not something that is custom built to your specific task.

I agree that the Mac Pro update is sad, it really should have been updated by now. I think honestly, Apple is opting to skip this generation of Intel processors due to Intel delivering them late. Unfortunately, AMD is not competing in the high end processor space anymore, so Intel can take their sweet time rolling out Ivy Bridge-E with support for native USB3 and ThunderBolt, which Apple wants.

If gaming is that important to you, you're going to end up with Windows one way or another, unless you buy a console. For your sake, your money will be better spent if you spend it on a Windows computer for gaming. You can use your laptop for everything else, that's what I do and it works quite well.


Who is this new iMac for??? Who is the ideal customer???

If you take a survey of 10 people around you, most people who use their computers use it to browse the internet, check their email, listen to music, and watch videos online, which the iMac can do without breaking a sweat. Some of those people may also do basic content creation of documents, images, movies, or music, which the iMac is great at as well. For most people, which is Apple's target audience with the iMac, the iMac is a perfect fit for them.
 
Last edited:
You do realize that Steve Jobs' guiding principles were to MAKE THE MOST MONEY and NOT to make the best computer. The majority of iMac customers (NOT FORUM MEMBERS) do not know about the internals of a computer... They see the slim and shiny iMac and think "now that is a nice computer" when in fact it's a garbage design for anything other than looking good. Apple does not sell to the prosumer anymore but instead to the masses of naive consumers out there. I don't blame them one bit because their making millions of $'s and that's the whole point of a company, but I, as a prosumer, will not be purchasing their ill-designed fashion statement of a "desktop"...

I think your perspective on the situation is misguided due to your emotions about the subject.

I don't think someone as outwardly passionate as Steve would have spent so much time when he was ill working on different products if he only cared about money. I think he would have likely quit a few years earlier, and spent some of that money if that's all he cared about. As I recall though, the guy fought through multiple illnesses, was at work every day, was up on stage delivering keynotes the best he could even when he was gaunt and had trouble projecting his voice because he seemed to care so much about what he was trying to create. I'm no psychology expert, but that doesn't seem to me like a guy who's only in it for the cash.

I agree with you, most people who Apple targets do not care about the internals of the computer, it catches their eye because of the design and gets them interested in it. Companies all around the world strive to achieve that design with the products that they create, and Apple is one of the best. To go forward and call it a garbage design is short sighted. The iMac may not be the fastest machine out there, but the amount of engineering and care and collaboration that it takes to put those components inside a computer that is as thin and quiet as an iMac, shows a whole different level of beauty that only an engineer could appreciate. Unfortunately some people do not see it that way.

I don't know what it is exactly that you do, or even have any hint, other than you are a "prosumer", whatever that means, but people with a higher level of specific needs usually have trouble with an out of the box computer fitting their exact needs. I think it's probably going to help you out more if you specifically state why the iMac does not work for you, because there might be people out there with potential solutions to alleviate your concerns.
 
I'll tell you why I'm disappointed - NO NEW IMAC.

Everyone on this board lives in APPLE INC la la land, where everything is roses and sunshine.

In the real world, this is what is called a "PAPER LAUNCH."

In the rest of the industry, a paper launch is exactly this - a product preview and announcement, with no actual availability. It exists on paper. Paper launches are usually accompanied by much eye-rolling because a paper launch can mean anything in terms of availability. The important launch is when it actually hits shelves. (cite: see years of the Nvidia and ATI graphics card cold war tactics)

So while I am impressed with some of the specs (mostly the 680MX option - hope its the same as 675M vs 675MX... because wow if is), this is really no different than another highly credible rumor for a product that we should see in December.

It's not a launch.
 
I think your missing the point of the imac there chum.

I actually think I'm in the same boat he is, and I can give some insight maybe.

What I personally want is something relatively powerful, way more powerful than their laptops, but not as ridiculously overpriced as the Mac Pro. Also it has to be a mac.

I'll admit I'm a bit disappointed in the new lineup and am considering used ones now. I might also have considered a low end Mac Pro, but that hasn't been updated since like 2 years ago. I might get a used Mac Pro...
 
You guys are getting a bit confused the 640M is infact slightly faster then the AMD Radeon 6750M.. I even double checked benchmarks..
 
I think your perspective on the situation is misguided due to your emotions about the subject.

I don't think someone as outwardly passionate as Steve would have spent so much time when he was ill working on different products if he only cared about money. I think he would have likely quit a few years earlier, and spent some of that money if that's all he cared about. As I recall though, the guy fought through multiple illnesses, was at work every day, was up on stage delivering keynotes the best he could even when he was gaunt and had trouble projecting his voice because he seemed to care so much about what he was trying to create. I'm no psychology expert, but that doesn't seem to me like a guy who's only in it for the cash.

I agree with you, most people who Apple targets do not care about the internals of the computer, it catches their eye because of the design and gets them interested in it. Companies all around the world strive to achieve that design with the products that they create, and Apple is one of the best. To go forward and call it a garbage design is short sighted. The iMac may not be the fastest machine out there, but the amount of engineering and care and collaboration that it takes to put those components inside a computer that is as thin and quiet as an iMac, shows a whole different level of beauty that only an engineer could appreciate. Unfortunately some people do not see it that way.

I don't know what it is exactly that you do, or even have any hint, other than you are a "prosumer", whatever that means, but people with a higher level of specific needs usually have trouble with an out of the box computer fitting their exact needs. I think it's probably going to help you out more if you specifically state why the iMac does not work for you, because there might be people out there with potential solutions to alleviate your concerns.

Your right... I ranted because I was upset that Apple didn't release my dream xMac desktop. Now its been a couple of hours later and I don't really care. You make good points about Steve and I retract what I said about him, although you must admit... making money is always important when it comes to companies especially one like Apple.

As for what I do with my computer, its not exactly professional yet but I still consider myself a "prosumer" just because I use a large amount of computing power in comparison to most.

I think my REAL issue with the iMac is the price/performance ratio. As much as I like to say it's the design it's not really because your right, from an engineering perspective it is quite impressive and if it offered the same performance as a custom rig I would probably get one solely for OS X. The paying a premium price for less in the gaming department really gets to me especially since I do game a fair bit on my computer.

Nice post btw.. You "pwned" me :eek:
 
I'll tell you why I'm disappointed - NO NEW IMAC.

Everyone on this board lives in APPLE INC la la land, where everything is roses and sunshine.

In the real world, this is what is called a "PAPER LAUNCH."

In the rest of the industry, a paper launch is exactly this - a product preview and announcement, with no actual availability. It exists on paper. Paper launches are usually accompanied by much eye-rolling because a paper launch can mean anything in terms of availability. The important launch is when it actually hits shelves. (cite: see years of the Nvidia and ATI graphics card cold war tactics)

So while I am impressed with some of the specs (mostly the 680MX option - hope its the same as 675M vs 675MX... because wow if is), this is really no different than another highly credible rumor for a product that we should see in December.

It's not a launch.

HI I like to split hairs.
 
You do realize that Steve Jobs' guiding principles were to MAKE THE MOST MONEY and NOT to make the best computer. The majority of iMac customers (NOT FORUM MEMBERS) do not know about the internals of a computer... They see the slim and shiny iMac and think "now that is a nice computer" when in fact it's a garbage design for anything other than looking good. Apple does not sell to the prosumer anymore but instead to the masses of naive consumers out there. I don't blame them one bit because their making millions of $'s and that's the whole point of a company, but I, as a prosumer, will not be purchasing their ill-designed fashion statement of a "desktop"...

/end rant and Now I'm leaving

I think you're on to something. For a user who wants a fashion statement and a status symbol that is also really good computer Apple is the brand to get.

For an advanced user (or gamer) who wants a higher performance, user configurable computer Apple is not the brand to get.

I'm still using a late 2008 MBP whose current hard drive and RAM configuration were not even available at any price when I originally purchased it. Additionally my MP has a Blu-ray drive. For me I'll take configurable over pretty.
 
I've got a 2007 iMac and I was really thinking of upgrading before today. After seeing today's update, I'm thinking that a trip to the refurb store is smarter for me. Lack of a built-in superdrive is the biggest issue for me. I can't burn my free music downloads of live concerts (ex. Grateful Dead shows on archive.org) for my car or friends. I can't transfer my cd's to itunes with the new machine. I'm sure standalone drives are out there, but I thought the goal of the iMac was to integrate everything into one piece? Seems like it's been sacrificed for thinness and weight in a desktop machine. Not real smart in my book.

Yes. Stand alone drives ARE out there. And they are really cheap and work the exact same as the built in superdrive... In fact, they work better.

You can pick one up for 40bucks. Would it be better to have one inside? Personally, with the amount of heat mine gives off, I'm glad they got rid of it. And with the cooler GPU units in the new iMacs we may actually see fewer heat problems with the iMacs.

----------

I'll tell you why I'm disappointed - NO NEW IMAC.

Everyone on this board lives in APPLE INC la la land, where everything is roses and sunshine.

In the real world, this is what is called a "PAPER LAUNCH."

In the rest of the industry, a paper launch is exactly this - a product preview and announcement, with no actual availability. It exists on paper. Paper launches are usually accompanied by much eye-rolling because a paper launch can mean anything in terms of availability. The important launch is when it actually hits shelves. (cite: see years of the Nvidia and ATI graphics card cold war tactics)

So while I am impressed with some of the specs (mostly the 680MX option - hope its the same as 675M vs 675MX... because wow if is), this is really no different than another highly credible rumor for a product that we should see in December.

It's not a launch.

From one monkey to another...

While that's true, we did actually see one on stage and also sites like Cnet are posting videos of the machines working. So it's not really half as bad as you super bolded it to be!

Does it suck they aren't out now? Yep. Bluddy oath it is. I think I'll get an advent calendar and use it for an iMac countdown calendar instead!!!
 
The new iMac checks all my boxes.

What rational, thinking person actually believed that there was a chance in hell that Apple would be able to deliver 21.5", much less 27" retina displays, increase the user serviceability (e.g. easily replaceable HDD's, etc.) or suddenly start using top-end desktop CPU's and GPU's in a new iMac?

What it is: A great evolution of the iMac.

Things it is not (nor should it be):

  • Uber gaming machine
  • Mac Pro replacement
.

Exactly. I wasn't having a go at Apple, more the people moaning. After the initial euphoria I was disappointed. After an hour or two, I asked myself why? The iMac is what was expected, hoped for. I just want to be able to preorder it now!
 
Really, after all these Years as an Apple user it makes me sad that many people are obviously not willing to educate themself.

I do use quite a lot of computers for a living, including several Apple devices (MBP, iPad, iPhone, iMac and I got a Mac Pro in my Office). I do own Apple products because of 2 things: Look and Ease of Use (although Windows 7 offers almost the same now). I do care whats under the hood, but I care less then many others here, still yet it infuriates me how balantly Apple is ripping off people.

1. 5400rpm drive on the 21" Model: Honestly, this is a joke. The price difference if you buy volume (I am in the IT industry) 7200rpm 2.5" drives compared to 5400rpm drives is roughly 20USD per TB. I find it shocking that a "High End" Device, an Apple is clearly stating that their products are the "best" , should not include low end componentes like a crappy 5400rpm drive. We are paying a hefty premium for these devices...and it shouldn´t be that we pay it for the nice look only.
Believe me, 5400 vs 7200....night and day.

2. The argument that many state is that if I want a Mac thats upgradeable or features more potent graphics, go for the Mac Pro.
That is not a valid argument. Mac Pros are basically Workstation/Server Hybrids. They offer Xeon CPUs with ECC memory only....this is not needed by a "professional". All our Developers use Lenovo Workstations with Core i7 and powerful graphics....more than enough. Paying a premium for a Xenon CPU is a waste of money!

I won´t upgrade to the latest iMac for many reasons and will most likely phase out of the Mac world anyway (sorry, but performance wise most of the software that was once a Mac domain runs better now on a PC anyway).
It really infuriates me that they charge us an arm and a leg for mediocre Hardware (and yes, we are talking about a Desktop Computer here that gets notebook internals) and want us to pay a premium for the standard things like RAM, Harddrives, SSD (1k for the 7xxGB SSD), Graphics and offer us what in exchange?

By the way, concerning the usual "xxx gfx card is enough for 1440p gaming"....honestly, we are talking about a 27" high resolution display powered by a crappy mobile gfx card that is meant to power games at a 1600x900 resolution at maximum. If any of you ever played a decent game (Battlefield 3 for example) on native resolution you might notice how crappy it is compared to a PC with a decent 250$ desktop class card in it.

Apple will still sell this stuff like crazy but for my part, I´ve had enough. Even though that I do buy Apple products for the design, sometimes its just plain stupid to make it "slimmer or lighter" anymore. Even my new iPhone 5 feels like a childs toy after they made it 30% ligther.
 
By the way, concerning the usual "xxx gfx card is enough for 1440p gaming"....honestly, we are talking about a 27" high resolution display powered by a crappy mobile gfx card that is meant to power games at a 1600x900 resolution at maximum. If any of you ever played a decent game (Battlefield 3 for example) on native resolution you might notice how crappy it is compared to a PC with a decent 250$ desktop class card in it.

The 680MX is a crappy graphics card? Seriously?!
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/notebook-gpus/geforce-gtx-680mx

:confused:
 
The 680M is anything but crappy. The 680 MX is even more of a beast. I wish people would actually do some homework before posting. The 680 M is currently the fastest benching mobile GPU. It is basically a slightly downclocked version of the desktop GTX 670, if I recall correctly. It is bloody fast. I take my hat off to Apple to see an even faster MX version in the new iMac. I am genuinely surprised.
 
The 680M is anything but crappy. The 680 MX is even more of a beast. I wish people would actually do some homework before posting. The 680 M is currently the fastest benching mobile GPU. It is basically a slightly downclocked version of the desktop GTX 670, if I recall correctly. It is bloody fast. I take my hat off to Apple to see an even faster MX version in the new iMac. I am genuinely surprised.

I know it's not crappy.. Which is why I felt compelled to reply to his post. It's actually based on the desktop 680, which is amazing.

It's a serious upgrade on the the 6970m. And well worth getting.
 
I know it's not crappy.. Which is why I felt compelled to reply to his post. It's actually based on the desktop 680, which is amazing.

It's a serious upgrade on the the 6970m. And well worth getting.

Indeed. I meant that the the 680M is based on the 670. If the 680MX is based on the 680, then I am even more shocked than before. I still have my reservations about cooling, but it clear that Apple is taking the iMac performance quite seriously. It also explains why we've been waiting for so long. The 680MX was not even listed on Nvidia's site yesterday and I can't find any benchmarks.
 
They should have removed the optical drive from the 2011 form-factor and tried to get a desktop-class GPU put into it.
Which desktop class GPU could you have fit in the last generation iMac's profile and gained better performance than the 680MX?

can anyone actually answer that question?

At what part of my statement did I say I had the answer for that? Let me bold and highlight the part of the statement you should have paid more attention to.

Yeah and make it much fatter and like jet noisy.Grow up havent you realise yet that iMac is an all in one machine not an exclusive gaming machine.This seems to be a fantastic computer with high specs capable for every use with a top end GPU but still is thin,beautiful and the most important quiet.
I never asked or stated I wanted it to be a dedicated gaming machine. Apparently having desktop graphics is gaming-exclusive. I'm sorry I missed that memo that stated that was the case.
 
it clear that Apple is taking the iMac performance quite seriously. It also explains why we've been waiting for so long. The 680MX was not even listed on Nvidia's site yesterday and I can't find any benchmarks.

Yes but once again you pay a hefty premium to get something great, all the other options below the 675m are sub par so if you want a genuine AIO that will really do everything under one hood, it is going to cost you an arm and a leg!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.