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
Are the Sandy Bridge Xeons that a new Mac Pro would use even available yet? Pretty sure Mac Pro is stuck in the same boat, waiting for Intel.
It is sad that Apple doesn't have an offering for someone looking for a standalone system that uses standard desktop components. That's actually how my wife ended up with a gaming PC, despite loving her iPhone, iPad, and MBP. There should be something between iMacs and Mac Pros. The Mini's aren't quite up to the task of a serious gamer.
Other reasons to wait are the rumored anti-glare screen and the potential of standard/cheaper SSD options (for people not comfortable taking suction cups to their computer). How compelling those are is up to each individual. For me personally, those possibilities plus the GPU give a good reason to wait.
Agree that coming on here posting "the wait is killing me" isn't terribly productive. And people shouldn't be spending a whole lot of time researching channel inventory unless they're financial analysts covering AAPL stock.
Ok, wow, that's impressive. I would LOVE to be able to open an iMac like that.
As to the raid, Why RAID 2-3 external thunderbolt SSDs when you can get single PCI SSD?
The most expensive RAM you can get from Crucial is $112 for an 8 GB kit. There hasn't been a breakthrough new RAM technology in a while. It's just DDR3 in various speeds.
You're funny, yes SSD but some think it will come on base models which i really doubt, Also screen wise apple will charge it won't be free, just as those waiting for base or just above think they will get "RETINA" display NO Apple will charge for it at first then a few years it will be norm as will SSD but not for now. Just wish some would use common sense!! Not you the ones waiting for New macs thinking they will be packed with over5-6 new things. NOT APPLE WAY
Do people really think NEW IMAC WILL HAVE
Retina as standard
Siri
Better GPU&MINIMAL CPU GAIN
Redesigned
USB 3
Anti reflective
SSD as standard
peace buddy.
----------
If Apple do release a iMac with the specs i mentioned i will gladly take a hit on my 2month old top end iMac with Applecare to 2015 and purchase the new one.
FACT is it's not going to happen, even a redesign iMac won't get me to change.
A redesigned iMac with retina will and that won't be until 1-2 years after a redesign so i'm content. Even then i would wait a few months before purchasing game changing hardware iMacs, Thats just me
Last edited:
They won't release 2 different kinds of screens. They went from all-Matte to all-Gloss, so now I'd expect them to go from all-Gloss to all-antireflective.
On your list..
Retina - not a chance. GPUs and screens aren't ready. Next year. Possibly on MBPs this year.
Siri - not a chance. If they wouldn't do full Siri on an iPad, why would they on an iMac? Might be available as a software update later.
GPU - pretty obvious. Expected AMD 7970m at top-end, which should be ~+30% performance.
CPU - again, pretty obvious. The Ivy Bridge choices are ~+15% performance.
Redesign - doubtful. Maybe a haircut, or a beard trim, but it's still going to look like an iMac.
USB 3 - certainly. With Ivy Bridge they'd have to go out of their way to NOT include it.
Anti-reflective - pretty good chance, based on the rumors circulating. Won't be a paid upgrade if it happens. Will be current gloss screen or this.
SSD as standard - possibly on the high end. At minimum I expect SSD upgrade price to come down. Definitely not standard on the base model.
Also, Touch Screen - not a chance. It's just bad design.
On your list..
Retina - not a chance. GPUs and screens aren't ready. Next year. Possibly on MBPs this year.
Siri - not a chance. If they wouldn't do full Siri on an iPad, why would they on an iMac? Might be available as a software update later.
GPU - pretty obvious. Expected AMD 7970m at top-end, which should be ~+30% performance.
CPU - again, pretty obvious. The Ivy Bridge choices are ~+15% performance.
Redesign - doubtful. Maybe a haircut, or a beard trim, but it's still going to look like an iMac.
USB 3 - certainly. With Ivy Bridge they'd have to go out of their way to NOT include it.
Anti-reflective - pretty good chance, based on the rumors circulating. Won't be a paid upgrade if it happens. Will be current gloss screen or this.
SSD as standard - possibly on the high end. At minimum I expect SSD upgrade price to come down. Definitely not standard on the base model.
Also, Touch Screen - not a chance. It's just bad design.
Yes with kids using mummy's credit card to have latest to go on FACEBOOK AND TWITTER ETC To be fare i'm fine can buy a mac anytime. Still waiting for you to tell me if iMacs will have all what i mentioned. Not to worry you ignorant post says it all.
Keep waiting FACEBOOK won't load any quicker, you do know that right?
----------
You clearly know what you want mate, Glad you for one won't be disappointed as you know certain things won't happen.
Peace
The real truth is that 1) you are correct in that most working pros would have gone out and bought the machine they needed months ago. My university is ordering new machine and I am not telling them to wait for an update. The 12 core Mac Pro that will be on my desk in a month will suffice.
But 2) budget conscience freelancers don't want to drop $4000 on a system that is a year older or more. Now, personally I am on the fence about a totally maxxed out iMac or a moderately equipped quad core Mac Pro, but the Mac Pro update needs to happen before I pull the trigger. No use comparing a twice updated iMac with i7 and Tbolt to a two year old Mac Pro.
Once there is either an updated Mac Pro, or official news of the death of the Mac Pro, then I can make an informed decision about what to do with my $4k which no matter how you slice it isn't a small amount of money to just drop on old tech.
I would never want to RAID and external drives EVER. You'd raid internal SSDs or HDDs. The singe PCI SSDs that are on the market cost a pretty hefty price.
I just hope SSD price comes down, $+500 is too much, let alone only getting 256GB out of it. Still, to future proof the machine and to fully benefit, an ssd really needs to be added. I just don't want to pay $500, really out of the question as of todays models.
On price grounds I would be happy to see a small SSD to give the performance boost, combined with a large capacity hard drive. Speaking to a few people who have done it, you need far less than the 256GB SSD currently available as an iMac option to see almost all the potential benefit for far less cost.
if they make a 512GB SSD for $500 then yes, 256GB for $300 then yes also.
also, hopefully anti glare class means glass still, not matte with no panel cover
worth while gpu bump & lastly
SOON
also, hopefully anti glare class means glass still, not matte with no panel cover
worth while gpu bump & lastly
SOON
I don't think anyone is as delusional to believe the new iMac will feature all of these but 3/6 or 4/6 isn't bad lol.
Will for sure have better GPU & minimal CPU gain
USB 3
Anti reflective
SSD as standard for 27" (maybe)
Looks like you won't be going back to a Mac anytime soon. Although I hope they make the guts more accessible, I doubt they will.
I'm not sure what you mean about "decent VGA", but VGA is a dying technology anyway.
He means a Video Graphics Adaptor, which, in this context, is an archaic way to refer to a GPU or graphics card.
I agree, but I think the reasoning behind making the guts not to accessible rests with the popularity of the laptop. Most consumers and even many pros don't mind not having the guts easy to reach, so save the design issues and close everything off to the layman. Those willing to open up their laptops will have not too much trouble opening their iMacs.
The RAM on both systems are very easy to reach, with the HDD only being easy on the portables. But, it does only take a few more screws to get at the HDD in the iMac.
I know the GPU has been an issue with Macs since the 90s, but I consider the GPU options on the iMac to be adequate save for the fact that it's a mobile unit. I wouldn't mind seeing the Mac Pro get more options other than the stock config, the better stock config, and the $1200 workstation GPU built mainly for Adobe applications.
If the Mac Pro goes, then I do want to see Quadro options and other desktop class boards in the iMac.
I used to build computers for myself when I was younger and I am very comfortable upgrading stuff. I managed to take apart my mini to change one of the HDDs to a SSD recently, but the fact that I would have to muck about with a screen on an iMac puts me off. It's like kryptonite to me.
I would love to see more powerful GPU options in the iMac, but how would they handle the extra TDP and moving that hot air out? Then again, I was reading the other day about some company that is now making fans that are "near silent" so where there is a will, there is way.
Also, there have been some interesting breakthroughs recently in the world of cooling, but I don't think they are ready for the mainstream, yet.
For example:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/11/nanotube_heat_transfer/
Now that you mention it I do remember some having issues with dust getting under the glass cover of the iMac. Hopefully anyone taking one apart would do it in a space that can allow for safe placement and easy cleaning.
I think the cooling is there, the engineering and the will is going to be the question for Apple. If HP can stick any Quadro card in their Z1 I know Apple can do it and still meet their design requirements.
I don't keep up with GPUs as much as I do CPUs and storage but the current 27" iMac's GPU with 2GB of RAM shouldn't be a slouch. intense 3D gaming? I hope it does excellent. High end 3D modeling? I doubt it, but then one in that market wouldn't find much in the Mac ecosystem to meet their needs.
Indeed. And once Macbook Pros get redesigned like the Air and the Mac Pro gets the shaft (if it does), there won't be anything for him to come back to.
Video Graphics Adapter is not the same as GPU.
GPU is the core unit of a VGA.
VGA is the whole device (circuits, capacitors, GPU, VRAM, connectors etc.) doing graphics processing.
"Archaic way" LOL. I forgot that I'm in a Mac forum.
That's a brilliant idea! I'm just floored at that. I'm guessing that's a good bit thicker than the iMac since the body of the two aren't listed for measurement. The depth, which includes the pedestal is 16" on the HP and 8" on the iMac. The $1900 price on the HP is with an i3 (dual core). So the iMac is cheaper with more power in comparison. (Alert the news!!! )Unless something happens, most people don't need in their iMac more than the one time to upgrade the hdd. I doubt that the iMac sees that kind of upgrade UNLESS the Mac Pro is going away or Apple feels like it needs a better and faster way in and out of the iMac like they did with the Mini. I think that was driven by the consumers and the Apple stores having a hard time working on the old model.
I'm hoping for a big upgrade this year. Something that we will all be pleased and excited about. I think 2012 will be a strong showing for Apple and not just with the iPad and iPhone.
Unless something happens, most people don't need in their iMac more than the one time to upgrade the hdd. I doubt that the iMac sees that kind of upgrade UNLESS the Mac Pro is going away or Apple feels like it needs a better and faster way in and out of the iMac like they did with the Mini. I think that was driven by the consumers and the Apple stores having a hard time working on the old model.
I'm hoping for a big upgrade this year. Something that we will all be pleased and excited about. I think 2012 will be a strong showing for Apple and not just with the iPad and iPhone.
I don't know about all the hype. A big year for Apple may just be them making more boat loads of cash in other ventures, not necessarily anything to do with traditional computing.
The two or three things to remember about that HP Z1 is that even though the base model at $1899 has an i3, it's a 3.3GHz i3, and the chassis is far more upgradeable than an iMac with options to add either a 3.5" HDD or two 2.5" HDDs/SSDs yourself . . . without tools.
The HDD and GPU option on the base are stinkers as well, but that's customary when purchasing workstations. No one buys the base unless you intend on doing a lot of customization from the factory.
The high end configuration of the Z1 is the same price round abouts as a maxed out iMac give or take a few GBs. It really goes to show that engineers can only shove so much into an AIO without it looking like trash. But the serviceability and Xeon chips in the Z1 are what makes me a tab bit jealous.