So it's been exactly double the time since the average refresh?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Kendo, Dec 1, 2012.

  1. Kendo macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    #1
    The past few generations we saw a refresh every 280 days according to the Buyer's Guide. The new iMac was announced after 539 days, but didn't start shipping until after roughly 580 days which is more than double 280.

    If it was going to be double anyway way, why didn't Apple simply refresh the insides of the iMac in January 2012 and then release this iMac in December 2012? It would have kept the the cycle at 280 days, there would still be a processor bump from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge, and you wouldn't have so many sore people waiting.

    Was there ever a theory on why they waited so long?
     
  2. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #2
    Ivy Bridge and the new GPUs weren't ready until April. Still, it would have made an excellent machine to tide people over until Haswell which is really only 5 months away. Very poor timing on Apple's part, IMO. Some of their decisions lately make me SMH.
     
  3. alksion macrumors 68000

    alksion

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles County
    #3
    Calm down. Apple isn't making bad decisions. Just because Intel is suppose to release Haswell in May, doesn't mean Apple will have iMacs in full production by then. Also, if we have to wait for Nvidia 7 series mobile cards, that'll probably be July or August. More than likely, we'll see an iMac refresh in September, almost a year from now.
     
  4. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #4
    I'm perfectly calm, thanks. Apple had an easy win in April and chose not to go with it. I think they wanted to get these iMacs out by summer but the welding process confounded them as it has not been applied to such small-scale items before. Apple previously had Macs ready to go soon after Intel released the processor. Haswell will be much better suited to the new iMac due to its lower TDP. I would suspect the mobile GPUs will be out along the same time as Haswell but maybe not in the top-slot like the 67MX or the 680MX.
     
  5. alksion macrumors 68000

    alksion

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles County
    #5
    I can agree with you that Apple should have silently refreshed the iMacs in April-May with the same form factor as the 09-11's with AMD 7 series and simply waited to have this new design in full production by 2013, but they didn't. Apple is never bleeding edge when it comes to timely refreshes of new components. Because Apple will probably be using Nvidia again, the the 775MX & 780MX probably won't be released like I said until July-August, fitting my September theory quite well.

    Btw, I didn't mean to be rude with telling you to calm down. I'm just tired of so many people on here freaking about the timing of the iMacs. Yes, they took longer than we all would have liked. But they are now here and more beautiful than ever.
     
  6. jmhart macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    #6
    Manufacturing is what is killing Apple lately. Their designs are enough ahead of their time that actually building them in adequate quantities is becoming a problem. What killed them this time with the iMac were unforeseen yield issues with the large laminated screens and if I remember correctly there were also rumors of yield issues with the casing due to the new friction stir welding process.

    Another reason for the wait is that clearly the bulk of their resources are focused on mobile hardware, iOS devices and laptops. They can't manage an iMac refresh on time, but they sure did manage to bring out an iPad refresh after only 6 months--which is very smart by the way with the release of MS Surface tablets. Clearly these companies realize the future of the industry is going to revolve around low power media consumption devices.

    I also think another big factor that's keeping them in the desktop business is that continuing to offer them keeps folks within the Apple ecosystem and away from Windows 8.

    In any case I also suspect since this last iMac release cycle was so drawn out, the Haswell refresh will indeed come sooner than most think it will. The production issues with the new design will be ironed out in a few months and all they'll have to worry about is updating the internals which is easy by comparison. With Haswell slated for March-June 2013 and the first phase of NVidia's 2013 Kepler rumored to be slated for release at Cebit in March, we could easily see the 2013 iMac refresh in as little at 6 months from now.

    I gave up on a timely refresh of the iMac back in August and reluctantly built a mid-tier gaming PC. I've been contemplating selling it and picking up the 27" anyway, but it just doesn't feel like a smart move given the above. By the time I'd actually have it on my desk at the beginning of January, there would be a chance of a refresh only 5 months from then. I'm not paying "latest tech" prices now for processors that (by the time the 27" would actually be on my desk) have been out for 8 months with Haswell only a few months away.

    I also considered picking up a new Mini to sit alongside my new gaming rig, then Apple decides not to make discrete GPUs available *at all* in the Mini.

    So from my perspective as well, I would agree that Apple's made a few questionable calls this year in regards to their desktop line. I sure hope they fare better next year.
     
  7. MacFoodPoisoner, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012

    MacFoodPoisoner macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2012
    #7
    But people are right to freak out when apple goes close to two years without an imac, and they are paying for the imac prices that should be cut by 20% to 40% due to the component price drop, arent' they? That's certainly understandable imho.

    And I beg to differ as to how beautiful they are. To me they would have been beautiful had they opted for a proper ergonomic stand after years of using the same foot, all the more so when said foot, takes away in footprint what thinness provides in space savings. Just innovate a little bit for crying out loud, almost every dime a dozen aio features some ingenuity for ergonomics, we are sick and bloody tired of that foot, and it's not helping the computer FUNCTION any better either, you 'll still have to tilt your head up instead in the most unhealthy position in any computer safe usage manual, and probably not even the 27" imac, let alone the 21.5" (long gone) will allow for a vesa mount...

    To me imac follows the general trend of apple products since Steve's passing (and a while back when he was ill): Very, very underwhelming at best, too heavily reliant on "innovation" from superior components by others, offering too little in terms of ingenuity in their own right, and, what is sadder, with their software too being a major let down: ios stagnating, os x being a mismatch of ill thought ios elements and no real technological advancement (offloaded on the hardware), iwork development close to being abandonware, a ho hum itunes release a month later, siri, maps (good god, when an apple product comes out that no one has bothered to debug to the extent that the statue of liberty is a murky collection of clouds...you know the s. has hit the fun)... they've are at the stage that they can't write a podcast app without littering it with tons of bugs and ill thought design.

    Something isn't right, and sacking Forestall can't solve everything (all the more so, since I am being told that it was more a power move than anything else since Scott apparently, and allegedly, had the habit of sending out emails to his team about Cook's mishandling of apple... anyway makes for nice soap at least.:D)

    And in terms of hardware? A taller iphone of the same design (albeit this time so scratchable, may come out of the box scuffed), a ho hum slimming down (and sealing in with non upgreadability) of the macbook pro with someone else's great display, a new port for the ipad, a new mac pro with 2 year old components and an age old case, crippling the mini in gpu, crippling the 13" pro too... it's all very ho hum and underwhelming, or just plain wrong, they are cruising on their former laurels, Steve is very apparently not there... And litigation, litigation, litigation... Even in the fields that Cook is supposed to be an expert at, operations, you get something like the imac release debacle. :apple:

    Some of their decisions lately, are simply mind bogglingly bad, and pointlessly so. Why would anyone not put a discrete gpu on the mini, when it's on every other $600 notebook these days. When the mini works so well with an external display for cad/design/photo etc? Such a great little device, carrying the great legacy of the historic cube, going super advanced quad core cpu and being crippled with intel's piss poor graphics... Simply mind boggling why they 'd do such a thing. Stick a google exec in there, or any other arch enemy exec, and they still wouldn't do it out of pity for the poor mini...
     
  8. alksion macrumors 68000

    alksion

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles County
    #8
    Have you even used a new iMac yet? I have and I think it's a beautiful piece of machinery. Although that is a subjective take on the iMacs aesthetics, no one is forcing you to stay with Macs.

    Maybe it's time you move to a custom built PC. You can get all the GPU power you like at an affordable price.
     
  9. Sjhonny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Location:
    The land of the cucumbers
    #9
    The mobile line-up nVidia GPUs, wasn't completely out in the open until the iMac got announced. Apple probably expected this, and therefor decided to not release an intermediate, early 2012, spec upgrade, since the necessary parts weren't available.

    Wikpedia look at the release dates.
     
  10. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #10
    The 640M/650M were available in April. The 680M was available at the beginning of June. As excellent as the 680MX looks, they could have added it as a BTO later as they did in previous iMacs.
     
  11. Sjhonny, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012

    Sjhonny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Location:
    The land of the cucumbers
    #11
    Well, then they had a very big performance and price gap between the low and high end iMac. 675mx wasn't released until october.
     
  12. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #12
    They could have used a 660M or 670M, both available in April with the 680M as a BTO. There really was no technical reason for Apple not to have upgraded in Q2. The only things holding them back, I think, was the screen bonding process and/or the stir welding of the body.
     
  13. Sjhonny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Location:
    The land of the cucumbers
    #13
    670m is a rebrand, only about 10% faster then the 660m and lacking most Kepler features + it's still 40nm so it has a higher tdp. They could've went with the 675m, but that was just another rebrand ...

    Also, the 680m came in small supply. I believe it was even a semi-paper launch.
     
  14. jmhart macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    #14
    This only explains waiting until October to release them, it doesn't explain the additional month delay for the 21" nor the additional 2 month delay for the 27". I suspect those additional delays were due to the manufacturing yield difficulties we all heard rumors about leading up the the release announcement.

    The bottom line is that a lot of individual factors compounded to create some seriously bad timing for Apple and I'm sure they'd admit the same if they could. As far as the iMacs go I don't see anything they could have done differently. The Mini situation on the other hand has no reasonable explanation other than Apple wanting to increase their margins on their most affordable desktop machines at their customer's expense. The Intel integrated GPU drivers are causing massive problems for HDMI users. I'm so glad I didn't cave and buy into that fiasco.
     

Share This Page