Why not? Give me one good reason why not having SSD to run the OS and other frequently used software would not enhance the package.
The SSD is the one bit of spec I am looking out for on Monday
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What to expect from iMac 2012 - Discussion
- Thread starter Schonert
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why not? Give me one good reason why not having SSD to run the OS and other frequently used software would not enhance the package.
The SSD is the one bit of spec I am looking out for on Monday
I don't disagree with this. Some of the expectations on these boards are clearly setting many for a fall on Monday. Happens every year. People don't even know what they need their computers for. Never mind working backwards from their computing needs to what machine they want to buy to allow them best bang for their buck.
1) You pay a lot more than 20% extra for the 20% speed bump from 7970m to 680m.
2) Apple & Nvidia have a long, checkered history, mostly involving drivers not working well/at all.
Hopefully, Adults will be really pleased
I'm with you on that - however, I really hope price point on iMac BTO will not move up - I've yet to use SSD as somewhat conservative and like tried and tested hardware, which is what a HDD is - I've only had one Mac HDD fail on me, it was a 13G iMac circa 2000 drive that failed after two years, since then only drive to fail on me has been LACIE externals that I now avoid.
However, Apple have had huge issues with LCD big panels on iMac's - in the past 12 months, I've swapped out two new top end i5 27in models for yellow screen issues, went BTO route for added QC and one of these failed after less than 5 months with screen issues, my i5 3.6Ghz LCD was swapped out after 11 months, same apples to my first October 2009 revision iMac at 21.5in - that's a lot of fails all within 12 month timeframes - God knows what would happen with higher Rez monitors.
Still, I'm just an old fart who does not know what he's talking about even though I started with a Mac LCII in 1993 - so nearly 20 years using Apple - basically because I've never been able to get a handle on Windows and too old to try now!
I'm with you on that - however, I really hope price point on iMac BTO will not move up - I've yet to use SSD as somewhat conservative and like tried and tested hardware, which is what a HDD is - I've only had one Mac HDD fail on me, it was a 13G iMac circa 2000 drive that failed after two years, since then only drive to fail on me has been LACIE externals that I now avoid.
However, Apple have had huge issues with LCD big panels on iMac's - in the past 12 months, I've swapped out two new top end i5 27in models for yellow screen issues, went BTO route for added QC and one of these failed after less than 5 months with screen issues, my i5 3.6Ghz LCD was swapped out after 11 months, same apples to my first October 2009 revision iMac at 21.5in - that's a lot of fails all within 12 month timeframes - God knows what would happen with higher Rez monitors.
Still, I'm just an old fart who does not know what he's talking about even though I started with a Mac LCII in 1993 - so nearly 20 years using Apple - basically because I've never been able to get a handle on Windows and too old to try now!
Well, of course, this is under assumption that the price stays approximately the same. If the 680M would entail a mcuh higher price, then, of course I agree with you.
As to the 2) I have been using my MBP with Nvidia graphics quite extensively and never had any problems so far. Actually, a reason to prefer Nvidia is that they sometimes offer their own drivers for OS X, which are usually quite much better than what Apple team delivers. The question is of course, whether they do this for newer cards as well...
It's hard to say how Apple will, umm, bake it into the cost, but the 680M is double the price of the 7970m. This is one theory on the apparent A$200 price hike on the high end 27".
My experience might be colored by the 8800 GS's that went into the 2008 iMacs. Those.. were a catastrophe. It's possible things have improved in recent times, although the 330m in my wife's MBP is also rather miserable (and I mean, far more so in OS X than in Win XP).
Utter tosh
I feel like you're following me around just to disagree with me, even if I happen to mention that the sky is usually blue and grass is usually green. Aren't you the one who has never previously owned a Mac?
No reason to get so exited. I never said that I want to pay more. I just said that if the new iMac has the same price as the current iMac, I would prefer it having a faster GPU. If it adds significantly higher price point, I am more than happy with the 7970M, obviously.
Excellent riposte
I liked your riposte so much that I've given you a thumbs up on the posting - let see what happens Monday, Tuesday in my case as 15hrs ahead of San Francisco.
I liked your riposte so much that I've given you a thumbs up on the posting - let see what happens Monday, Tuesday in my case as 15hrs ahead of San Francisco.
Sorry one does not need to own a Mac to know you're spouting out gibberish
Please, do document for us your knowledge of Apple's relationship with Nvidia. I'm dying to hear your point of view.
Next iMac to look like TB Display
The next iMac won't have a 'chin' and will possibly have a standard SSD in the higher end models.
The next iMac won't have a 'chin' and will possibly have a standard SSD in the higher end models.
I don't mind speculation, after all, that is why we are all on MacRumors, but why do people keep coming out with bold claims as if they have special knowledge.
As for all the people calling for no chin, I hope that is not the case. I really like a chin, would just look like a TV or a generic Dell monitor otherwise.
As for all the people calling for no chin, I hope that is not the case. I really like a chin, would just look like a TV or a generic Dell monitor otherwise.
These New iMacs are made ready to be shipped/sold on Monday/Tuesday. If these iMacs were redesigned/had retina or any significant changes you really think there would be NO leaks on many of the rumours sites? People need to calm down mostly the Newbies. Wish for to much and you will be Majorly disappointed.
Apple will never give you to much in one refresh as they want you to upgrade a few years later either 2 years or when extended AppleCare dies.
Apple will never give you to much in one refresh as they want you to upgrade a few years later either 2 years or when extended AppleCare dies.
Agree
I think we will see ivy bridge across the board
And only the MacBook pro will see small changes in design.
I'm never 100% sure whether to suggest an imac or not given some of its history. This isn't so much an LG problem either. I haven't seen the same scope of issues in other displays with similar LG panels aside from some really old ones. It seems like it's a design issue. If they can't achieve adequate manufacturing consistency, that is a design issue. Their assembly line is what it is. It's most likely influenced by many things including cost and expected yields. I checked the Apple discussion forums, and these complaints come up way too much relative to something like the mac pro. I have a feeling that is my only option yet again.
I've noticed too much of an attraction to bright shiny objects. Lately it's been a desire to purchase the Air whether it's appropriate or not.
Whenever a refresh takes a little longer, one of the blogs always builds it up. They publish and re-publish the same nonsense until people believe it's a leak.
You're just quoting Chris Foresman from Ars Technica.
A retina display isn't X2 the pixel density.
Tim Cook has "doubled down" on secrecy.
A retina by definition is a high enough pixel density so that the eye cannot distinguish individual pixels. The way to do this to maintain the resolution (for obvious reasons) is to double the amount of pixels on each plane, i.e. horizontally and vertically, so imagine if you will a grid of 2x2 (the resolution) and make it 4x4 - doubling the pixels in each direction, quadrupling the total amount of pixels. But retina is still only a fancy word for high density of pixels.
Depends on how you define it. One guy calculated that anything over 2896x1629 would be close enough at 123 ppi. 2560×1440 at 21" is probably enough to count as "Retina". QFHD (which is double 1080p instead of double the current resolution on the 27") is just a logical step up for a 27-30" screen.
9to5 saying in their WWDC round likely NO new iMacs next week. This is why people should buy when they want. Apple has brought this waiting culture that just hurts people. 9to5 mac are funny to they cover all angles to say they was right if 1 of their 5 predictions come true. Lol