Waiting for iMac with Retina Display !

[VTECaddict]

You (I mean I) can see the difference from a meter and even more..

I'm using 22" ISP LG TV/Monitor from a ~100cm (from time to time) and the pixels are more then obvious (especially when you reading)!

I'm retina user from a ~month and I still smile each time I sit in front of my retina 13" MBP It's just AWESOME.

Is that display 1366x768? Most small TVs like that are only 720p.

I have a cheap Acer 21.5" 1920x1080 screen attached to my MBP (so same pixel density as current iMac, just a crappier panel) and at 2 feet (~60cm) I can't resolve the pixels. I have 20/15 vision.

 

[MythicFrost]

I have a cheap Acer 21.5" 1920x1080 screen attached to my MBP (so same pixel density as current iMac, just a crappier panel) and at 2 feet (~60cm) I can't resolve the pixels. I have 20/15 vision.

You sure about that? But regardless, you still should be able to see aliasing -- particularly on text and images.

 

[ka-spot]

Is that display 1366x768? Most small TVs like that are only 720p.

I have a cheap Acer 21.5" 1920x1080 screen attached to my MBP (so same pixel density as current iMac, just a crappier panel) and at 2 feet (~60cm) I can't resolve the pixels. I have 20/15 vision.

Come on!! Mine is 1920x1080 too and it's obvious from that distance!

 

[VTECaddict]

Come on!! Mine is 1920x1080 too and it's obvious from that distance!

how big is your monitor?

 

[Pyromonkey83]

I currently have an rMBP and a 27" iMac, and frankly I have a hard time telling the two apart as of right now. I LOVE my rMBP and the change from my old 2009 MBP to this was awesome for screen clarity, but I cant see going above a 4K display (3960x2160) as necessary. Also, the amount of power being sucked away just to drive that amount of pixels would be mind boggling... Do I think the 780M could do it? Yes. But should it? Mmmm... I dont know.

As long as I could still play my casual games on it though... sounds good to me!

 

[Jambalaya]

Media Centre ? 27inch is excellent as a computer screen but tiny these days for a tv. I have a 2009 Mac Mini connected to to a 50inch HD tv and that works very well as a media centre and in fact as my main computer too either with a standard monitor or with the tv. I'd like an iMac but to use as a work machine, I think waiting for a retina and then spending money on it is pointless as a media device, spend the $'s on a big tv and stream to it via Apple TV

 

[IA64]

So far there is no 27" iMac with retina display so saying anything like " it's gonna look superb whatsoever" is delusional.

Nobody really cares if you can see it or not. Peopleassumption that non-retina = bad; retina = good is far too simplistic.

The 27" iMac screen is almost a retina ( whatever Apple marketing hype named it ) at 2 feets.

iPhone Retina display ~ 326 PPI - typical viewing distance is 10 inches.
iPad (3rd/4th generation/iPad Air) ~ 270 PPi - viewing distance 15 inches.
MacBook Pro with Retina Display 13" ~ 220 PPi - viewing distance 20 inches.

Current iMac 27" screen is ~ 110PPI so unless you're blind enough to sit comfortably closer than 25 inches from the screen, you probably won't notice a difference based on what's stated above.

Yet another comment from the guy with the magnifying glass to look for those pixels from a very short distance.. at the desktop screen..

A 27" screen with say 5120x 2880 pixels would yield characters so small that you would have to sit impractically close to the screen in order to read anything.

I think Apple should forget Retina for a little bit and try focusing on their current display line up due to IR problems and other issues with their displays or better yet find a new source for their current line up because I can only imagine the amount of returns they have gone through, and continuously go through due to people still having issues. Perfect the current so you can prepare and make right or better for the future.

 

[MythicFrost]

I currently have an rMBP and a 27" iMac, and frankly I have a hard time telling the two apart as of right now. I LOVE my rMBP and the change from my old 2009 MBP to this was awesome for screen clarity, but I cant see going above a 4K display (3960x2160) as necessary. Also, the amount of power being sucked away just to drive that amount of pixels would be mind boggling... Do I think the 780M could do it? Yes. But should it? Mmmm... I dont know.

As long as I could still play my casual games on it though... sounds good to me!

Well if they went 3840x2160 on the 21.5 inch iMac and on the 27 inch iMac you'd get a poorer experience on the latter. For a computer display I think around ~200 PPI is the sweet spot, like with the rMBP.

So far there is no 27" iMac with retina display so saying anything like " it's gonna look superb whatsoever" is delusional.

Nobody really cares if you can see it or not. Peopleassumption that non-retina = bad; retina = good is far too simplistic.

The 27" iMac screen is almost a retina ( whatever Apple marketing hype named it ) at 2 feets.

iPhone Retina display ~ 326 PPI - typical viewing distance is 10 inches.
iPad (3rd/4th generation/iPad Air) ~ 270 PPi - viewing distance 15 inches.
MacBook Pro with Retina Display 13" ~ 220 PPi - viewing distance 20 inches.

Current iMac 27" screen is ~ 110PPI so unless you're blind enough to sit comfortably closer than 25 inches from the screen, you probably won't notice a difference based on what's stated above.

How exactly does that make it delusional? It's pretty straight forward, and we even have the rMBP as a living example of how nice a display can look.

The 27 inch iMac isn't anywhere near Retina, but it will be at 210 PPI. The better your vision, the further away you have to sit from the screen for it to look really sharp, and with 20/20 vision (which is not "good" vision) the correct viewing distance for the 27 inch iMac is 33 inches, or 2.5 feet. If you've got great vision (20/10) then you'll have to sit back twice that distance.

Yet another comment from the guy with the magnifying glass to look for those pixels from a very short distance.. at the desktop screen..

A 27" screen with say 5120x 2880 pixels would yield characters so small that you would have to sit impractically close to the screen in order to read anything.

I think Apple should forget Retina for a little bit and try focusing on their current display line up due to IR problems and other issues with their displays or better yet find a new source for their current line up because I can only imagine the amount of returns they have gone through, and continuously go through due to people still having issues. Perfect the current so you can prepare and make right or better for the future.

To whom are you referring? Me?

But that isn't applicable to the iMac because of Hi-DPI in OS X. Same with the rMBP.

 

[Jedi Master]

Second that

You might see a Retina Thunderbolt Display come first.

Right, this be first to match the Mac Pro.

If you have the spare coins pay one, ill wait

Enjoy,
Jed

 

[Yebubbleman]

I'm waiting for retina iMac. Who is with me?

I don't need an iMac, but I always like the design and I'll definitely buy one with retina display just to use it as a media center.

The question is not IF.. it is WHEN.

I'm not alone in this, right?

So... 2014... Feb, Jun or Sep-Oct-Nov?

Since October 2005, new iMac designs come every three revs:

White iMacs 17" and 20" (and 24" in Late 2006):
iMac G5 (iSight) PowerPC 970FX
iMac (Early 2006) (Core Duo) Yonah
iMac (Late 2006) (Core 2 Duo) Merom

Aluminum iMacs (with black back) 20" and 24":
iMac (Mid 2007) - Merom with Santa Rosa
iMac (Early 2008) - Penryn with Santa Rosa
iMac (Early 2009) - Penryn

Aluminum iMacs (with silver back) 21.5" and 27":
iMac (Late 2009) - Penryn/Clarkdale
iMac (Mid 2010) - Clarkdale
iMac (Mid 2011) - Sandy Bridge

Aluminum iMacs (super-thin with no optical drive) 21.5" and 27":
iMac (Late 2012) - Ivy Bridge
iMac (Late 2013) - Haswell

It's safe to say that, unless a retina display is integrated into the current design (which seems unlikely) in time for its last run, it'll wait until 2015 when it is time for a new design.

 

[twingo]

After having used a macbook pro with retina display, it does not make sense to spend money for bigger displays with lower resolution.
I will sell my 30" Dell with 2560x1600 and use the 15" Retina until Apple brings the 4-k screen. I am sure that they will deliver in 2014.

 

[IA64]

After having used a macbook pro with retina display, it does not make sense to spend money for bigger displays with lower resolution.
I will sell my 30" Dell with 2560x1600 and use the 15" Retina until Apple brings the 4-k screen. I am sure that they will deliver in 2014.

You might also want to sell all your FullHD TVs and use your 15" " Retina " until Apple brings the " AppleTV".

I'm so impressed by your attitude to be honest...

 

[ka-spot]

how big is your monitor?

22" 1920x1080

----------

Media Centre ? 27inch is excellent as a computer screen but tiny these days for a tv. I have a 2009 Mac Mini connected to to a 50inch HD tv and that works very well as a media centre and in fact as my main computer too either with a standard monitor or with the tv. I'd like an iMac but to use as a work machine, I think waiting for a retina and then spending money on it is pointless as a media device, spend the $'s on a big tv and stream to it via Apple TV

I have a small room and there is no much space for a big TV, but I'm debating (with myself) 42" TV.. About the iMac... I just like the design... especially the old one I just want to have one and the retina will be a game changer.

Can Apple TV stream HQ 24 bit Audio files without compressing it to 16/44?

 

[petvas]

I have a 2012 27 inch iMac. If you want to pay 6000 for an iMac then wait another 2-4 years. The current screen is awesome. No need to do this.

The current screen is great, I agree, especially the color accuracy and viewing angles. Now add to that a Retina HiDPI display. Imagine how greater the display would be.

 

[Pyromonkey83]

Well if they went 3840x2160 on the 21.5 inch iMac and on the 27 inch iMac you'd get a poorer experience on the latter. For a computer display I think around ~200 PPI is the sweet spot, like with the rMBP.

I agree the current ~200 ppi is perfect for the rMBP, however for a 27" iMac I hardly consider that necessary. I sit over 2 feet from my iMac in order to not have to twist my neck to see the entire screen, possibly even closer to 3. My 15" rMBP however is generally on my lap or right in front of me on a table if I ever use it, and as a result the higher ppi is required. Even now with the 1440p screen I can barely see the pixels, and only if I really look for them. Updating the resolution to 3960x2160 would be wayyyy more than enough for 99% of the population to never be able to see the pixels at a normal sitting distance.

 

[ka-spot]

Anticipate to wait for a long moment. A Retina screen iMac will be years away. The Apple TV SET is coming first. That could be the media center you want. You can actually talk to it and utilize hand gestures to record and also change channels. Rumors say it is coming by the end of 2014.

Nice, but I'll forget what am I waiting for by the end of 2014...

 

[luffytubby]

I think it's not just about 4K monitors coming down in price.

1)We already have several rumors about Apple wanting to cut cost on Imacs by building a plastic version next year. 4K prices would bump it up significantly.

2) It will still take a few years before 4K has become more normal. from cameras that shoot in 4K to content in 4K.
Our HDTVs are still mostly limited to 1080p, the new gaming consoles are 1080p, all the news channels can't output in anything larger. Many peoples internet connections are not fast enough to get 4K on things like facebook and youtube. In those instances 720p is still the sweet spot. We're not even native 1080p.

3) It still takes powerful computers to edit content at 4k. so that also limits it. iMac is not a Mac Pro after all!




I think it will come, but I think it will be more like 2016. Just look at how slow they are wit thunderbolt display. Thunderbolt display - Still USB 2 ports, mediocre speakers and no SD card. LOOL. They dont give a crap. They know it sells on aesthetics

 

[iSayuSay]

Trust me, the 780M is way more powerful than you think

780M is not even as powerful as desktop 680 yet.. So "way more powerful than you think" is a way off statement..

Get your facts straight please?

 

[IA64]

780M is not even as powerful as desktop 680 yet.. So "way more powerful than you think" is a way off statement..

Get your facts straight please?

For a mobile chipset to drive any recent game at native resolution with ultra details and AA off, I can't think of any better card for now.

Facts :

GTX 780M with Core i7-4700MQ


Graphics card Total performance

GeForce GTX 780M Basis (average of 30 games)

GeForce GTX 680M -22%

Radeon HD 7970M -23%

GeForce GTX 770M -29%

GeForce GTX 675MX -39%

GeForce GTX 765M -48%

GeForce GTX 670MX -52%


=================================================

Interesting performance may I say ?

 

[ka-spot]

Is there any info about the Shapr's 32" IGZO price ?

 

[iSayuSay]

For a mobile chipset to drive any recent game at native resolution with ultra details and AA off, I can't think of any better card for now.

Facts :

GTX 780M with Core i7-4700MQ


Graphics card Total performance

GeForce GTX 780M Basis (average of 30 games)

GeForce GTX 680M -22%

Radeon HD 7970M -23%

GeForce GTX 770M -29%

GeForce GTX 675MX -39%

GeForce GTX 765M -48%

GeForce GTX 670MX -52%


=================================================

Image


Interesting performance may I say ?

Yes .. As of right now 780M is the best all around MOBILE card. But saying it has "way more power than you think" is quite a bit exaggeration

It's not even faster than one of last year's fastest desktop card. I have an iMac with 680MX and playing Battlefield 4 on BootCamp with ultra @ 1440p is nearly unbearable (30fps avg with severe lags on heavy scenes).

So if you do the same on 780M that makes it a bit almost nearly unbearable?

Mobile CPU is one thing that has catched up with its desktop silblings and lower power too. But graphic power is still one gimped thing. Screen resolution is getting higher and you can't cramp the fastest GPU yet. Not without 250watt of power it's nit.

 

[MythicFrost]

I agree the current ~200 ppi is perfect for the rMBP, however for a 27" iMac I hardly consider that necessary. I sit over 2 feet from my iMac in order to not have to twist my neck to see the entire screen, possibly even closer to 3. My 15" rMBP however is generally on my lap or right in front of me on a table if I ever use it, and as a result the higher ppi is required. Even now with the 1440p screen I can barely see the pixels, and only if I really look for them. Updating the resolution to 3960x2160 would be wayyyy more than enough for 99% of the population to never be able to see the pixels at a normal sitting distance.

The thing is that everyone's viewing distance and level of vision are different. On top of that, there's more benefit to be had to a display than just not being able to see an individual pixel. Things just keep getting sharper and more realistic.

For a mobile chipset to drive any recent game at native resolution with ultra details and AA off, I can't think of any better card for now.

Facts :

GTX 780M with Core i7-4700MQ


<snip>


=================================================

<image snip>

Interesting performance may I say ?

The 780M is definitely the most powerful mobile GPU at the moment, but it still can't keep up with the GTX 680. The benchmarks you posted that show it scoring less than the 780M were all at low resolutions (even high on notebook check is only 1366x768) but at ultra it was 25 or so percent faster.

 

[ka-spot]

$5500 for 32" IGZO 4K SHAPR Display? So retina iMac with 4K display is ~$7000? So no retina iMac next 5 years (at least) until the prices get normal and there is something new in the horizon? Nice..

I was watching today 55" 4K display from 30 cm and looks AWESOME From two meters is AMAZING to watch movie

 

[phrehdd]

This would be a nice item for Apple to tackle -

Hi resolution monitor or iMac
monitor with larger colour space
monitor that can be properly calibrated for graphics/film/ etc.
HDMI 2 capable or TB2

If ever there was a time that Apple should be pulling out the stops it is now and leapfrog competition given this miserable economy.

 

[MythicFrost]

$5500 for 32" IGZO 4K SHAPR Display? So retina iMac with 4K display is ~$7000? So no retina iMac next 5 years (at least) until the prices get normal and there is something new in the horizon? Nice..

I was watching today 55" 4K display from 30 cm and looks AWESOME From two meters is AMAZING to watch movie

That's retail, not wholesale. And they can only charge that because it's one of the first few 4k displays to be released. Who knows the profit on each one?

Apple would buy wholesale. And they would get a discount for purchasing large quantities.