Where are the iMacs?

[Mister Bumbo]

To all the people whining about the extra cost of retina:

Go to the Apple store and configure a non-retina MacBook Pro of the same size to the same internal specs as the Retina MacBook Pro, you'll find that the non-retina with the same specs is 200 dollars more expensive. Then please come back and explain why that is, and no, "Apple ripping people off with BTO options" is not a viable argument.

 

[Roller]

I think that the larger the device and the smaller the number of sales, the fewer the leaked parts stories and rumors there are. iPhones are small and sell in the tens of millions, so we hear about parts months in advance. iMacs and Mac Pros, not so much. Plus, desktop computers are considered sexy any more - they're appliances.

Of course, the above is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but may not be too far off the mark. I'm a bit frustrated, too, since I'm waiting for a replacement iMac.

 

[forty2j]

More proof that apple is a portable computing company and not serious about desktop options.

What proof? I saw mindless blathering.

i understand where youre coming from. the thing is that...umm you see.... i kinda make money off making videos like editing shooting stuff and theres a lot money that i have to turn down because of this.. so not having a proper computer is kinda bad for me at this moment you know..

If you need it for your business and not having it is costing you money, it's stupid not to buy a current model now. You can find one discounted at several locations. You can then sell it later and probably lose no more than $200 on it. How does that compare to the money you're losing by turning down business?

 

[forty2j]

"Apple ripping people off with BTO options" is not a viable argument.

Why not? It's true.

 

[Mister Bumbo]

Why not? It's true.

I meant that if one were to analyze the RMP and break down the costs of each component, the individual values of components according to Apple, where the BTO-options might indicate how much Apple do value these, matter more in such an analyze than assuming it's a rip-off.

The whole concept of the BTO being a rip-off with Apple is based on people assuming that they ask for alot more, percentage-wise, for components as BTO rather than default, giving Apple higher revenue on BTO-components than those by default in base models. Having that in mind together with the fact that all Apple computers are very expensive indicates, in my opinion, little credability for this.

I don't disagree on BTO options being "overly expensive", I'm just saying that if Apple overvalues all of their components, the added costs to BTO-components (which would be more expensive as they are purchased in smaller numbers and requires extra assembly) might not be such a rip-off people claim.

 

[adildacoolset]

I'm willing to bet a future redesign of the iMac will feature soldered on flash storage just like the rMBP and MBAs in a thinner chassis design. Im personally hoping for such a change in the iMac lineup. If Apple doesn't allow for user swappable hard drives now, what makes people think they will in the future?

Just a little rant: I don't buy the "...but it isn't a laptop." argument anymore. Apple's investment in thunderbolt technology means their future (with emphasis on the use of the word, "their") is in high bandwidth external peripheral expansion. Forget that TB will probably never eclipse SATA 3 or any future SATA specs, the rMBP is pure evidence of Apple's direction in the Mac line.

If Cook's words are to be believed, and I think they should, the Mac Pro will be here to stay and will keep offering Pro users that need for internal expandability at the highest bandwidth speeds available. But for iMac and the rest of the Mac lineup? I'd expect in the future that all expandability to be BTO through Apple's online store, or risk it yourself in a DIY/void warranty method (except maybe for memory upgrades...).

I thin the iMac will keep its same chassis. I think we'll see a GTX680M, IVB processors, 8GB-16GB RAM, and the same screen. Any retina/flash memory/ thin chassis variation would probably be separated from the normal, spec-bumped lineup just like the macbook pro. Then again, why do you need a smaller chassis on a desktop?. I'd say it'd be better if they keep the same chassis and upgrade it for more stuff. There is no reason to change the existing one, is there?

 

[iMcLovin]

I don't mind paying buttloads for BTO options. What bothers me is to pay buttloads for an old computer which I'm gonna use day in and day out for the next couple of years.

You pay the extra because you want a powerful machine which also looks awesome. If you need the extra BTO juice and cant afford it, then buy a hackintosh or a cheap pc. If one can't afford the BTO options, well that's too bad, but its not like you are starving or have a bad life because of that. Just choose, sexy hardware or powerful un-sexy hardware - it's a simple option.

 

[Moonjumper]

I believe that particular quote has been walked back. But one would be forgiven for coming to the conclusion that Apple has decided anything that cannot be stuffed into a bag and run on a non-user-replaceable battery is passé.

Not being able to stuff an iMac in a bag is part of the reason for less rumours about it. It is hard to sneak out iMac parts like it is for iPhone.

There have been a few iMac rumours, but it is hard to verify anything without the leaked parts.

If the iMac was only getting an upgrade to the latest chips, I think it would have had a silent release at WWDC. Whatever we get on the iMac, I think it will likely appear alongside the Mountain Lion launch.

 

[odnarbssagib]

Apple not serious

What proof? I saw mindless blathering.



If you need it for your business and not having it is costing you money, it's stupid not to buy a current model now. You can find one discounted at several locations. You can then sell it later and probably lose no more than $200 on it. How does that compare to the money you're losing by turning down business?

Apple is a mobile computing company, not a desktop company. If you're a customer, it would be moronic to pay for the iMac that came out last year right now. And the fact that there is new technology that customers are obviously clamoring for and the company does not meet their needs demonstrates just how Apple is not a serious desktop computer company.

 

[Clix Pix]

I think that we'll see new iMacs when it is time to launch Mountain Lion.....

 

[edry.hilario]

I think that we'll see new iMacs when it is time to launch Mountain Lion.....

lets keep our fingers crossed.. i think i has to be by then, it has to, theres already 400 and something days... i dont know what apple is doing.. i just really want them to release the new iMac and take my money thats the only way that they will take it though so.. LETS HOPE! that there will be a new release along side mountain goat.

 

[forty2j]

Apple is a mobile computing company, not a desktop company.

Based on the fact that the first new computers shipped in 2012 were laptops? By this measure, Sony is a consumer audio/video cloud company.

If you're a customer, it would be moronic to pay for the iMac that came out last year right now.

If you are a consumer with a currently functioning system, and you are faced with the prospect of paying full price, this is true.

If your livelihood depends on having a system that functions better than the one you have now, so you are currently losing money, then this is not true. Doubly so once you realize that there are places you can buy last year's model and not pay full price, and you consider that the resale value of iMacs is such that you hardly lose anything by "renting" one for a couple months.

And the fact that there is new technology that customers are obviously clamoring for and the company does not meet their needs demonstrates just how Apple is not a serious desktop computer company.

Why do you discount the possibility that Apple hasn't released the product because their component suppliers haven't yet provided them with the necessary products to produce a serious desktop?

Now that the 680M has firm shipping dates, the vigil starts. Alienware's M18x ships with 680M on July 3, and M17x ships with 680M on July 19. If we get to July 31 and there's no sign of an iMac, or the iMac that does come has parts that were already readily available, then we can reassess how serious Apple is in the desktop business.

 

[odnarbssagib]

Based on the fact that the first new computers shipped in 2012 were laptops? By this measure, Sony is a consumer audio/video cloud company.



If you are a consumer with a currently functioning system, and you are faced with the prospect of paying full price, this is true.

If your livelihood depends on having a system that functions better than the one you have now, so you are currently losing money, then this is not true. Doubly so once you realize that there are places you can buy last year's model and not pay full price, and you consider that the resale value of iMacs is such that you hardly lose anything by "renting" one for a couple months.



Why do you discount the possibility that Apple hasn't released the product because their component suppliers haven't yet provided them with the necessary products to produce a serious desktop?

Now that the 680M has firm shipping dates, the vigil starts. Alienware's M18x ships with 680M on July 3, and M17x ships with 680M on July 19. If we get to July 31 and there's no sign of an iMac, or the iMac that does come has parts that were already readily available, then we can reassess how serious Apple is in the desktop business.

When was the last time Apple released a new workstation pc with the latest technology?

 

[forty2j]

When was the last time Apple released a new workstation pc with the latest technology?

Think I addressed this elsewhere.

Intel only just figured out how to make Sandy Bridge Xeons. Why would Apple refresh a product to be exactly the same as before, only with slightly higher CPU speeds? They only did it this time because Intel cut off their supply of the other chips.

Up until March, the Xeons in the Mac Pros were still the "latest" architecture for workstations.


And the whole discussion of "why is there no offering with a consumer desktop CPU and GPU" is happening elsewhere.

 

[xgman]

I think that we'll see new iMacs when it is time to launch Mountain Lion.....

Well then July 22 through 29 vacation blackout at Apple stores gives some new hope for something to go with ML. For ML alone seems overkill.

 

[Icaras]

I thin the iMac will keep its same chassis. I think we'll see a GTX680M, IVB processors, 8GB-16GB RAM, and the same screen. Any retina/flash memory/ thin chassis variation would probably be separated from the normal, spec-bumped lineup just like the macbook pro. Then again, why do you need a smaller chassis on a desktop?. I'd say it'd be better if they keep the same chassis and upgrade it for more stuff. There is no reason to change the existing one, is there?

Don't look at me. Look at Apple's history of the iMac, not to mention every product line of the Mac throughout history, except for the Mac Pro, which actually got larger. It gets progressively thinner each redesign. This is Apple's particular design philosophy when it comes to their consumer driven products. Apple is notoriously known to be a company in which their customer base tend to get angry at their design choices. However if they took a similar approach to the marketing of the rMBP and released a thinner retina iMac alongside the current lineup, then there shouldn't be any reason to complain anyway since Apple would ease transitioning (which also would have been a nice idea if they had kept FCP7 when FCPX was released).

I'd like to see a thinner chassis, because I know it's possible and that's how technology just evolves. But in more detail, firstly, I won't miss the ODD. And based on the successes of the Macbook Air, Mac Mini, and what we're seeing early on with the rMBP, I'd say this is quickly becoming a non-issue. Secondly, displays are continuously getting more advanced and thinner, coupled with Apple's new design method for integrating the screen on the rMBP's unibody framework more compactly (for example, getting rid of the glass). And lastly, but surely not least, I will never open up my iMac to perform any custom DIY installations, so just go ahead and solder up that flash storage for me. And as we've witnessed, just these these simple changes alone can free up a ton of space. And may I remind you, that the hard drive in the current iMac is already, technically in the warranty agreement, non-user upgradeable. So absolutely nothing will change for the vast amount of iMac users already. I'm pretty sure the percentage of iMac users who open up their iMacs to swap out hard drives is a very, very tiny percentage of Apple's bottom line. In other words, quite an acceptable loss in comparison to how much Apple could stand to gain in new users.

But if Apple decides to retain the same dimensional space for the iMac, then Apple could also potentially open up more BTO choices for users, given all the new free space relinquished from legacy hardware. Considering the types of possible new BTO choices, if they go this route, I wouldn't mind.

 

[harcosparky]

The title of this thread is hilarious, thanks for the laugh

Even more laughable is the crying from the waiters, and all the comments from the wannabe experts about " Apple is not serious about this or that " and " my OPINIONS proves that Apple is this or that ".

Honestly many of you folks needs to get away from the keyboard, go outside and get a life and live that life.

Some of you carry on worse than a two year old in the candy store after being told NO by mom!

Sheeeeesh!

On the other hand, let me offer you this gift to wipe away your tears ......

 

[odnarbssagib]

If you have this big of a problem when someone criticizes, not a person, but a company, I think you're the one with a problem. They are selling old technology at new technology prices and haven't released a new desktop computer for 400 days. They are more concerned about mobile computing than about desktops.

Even more laughable is the crying from the waiters, and all the comments from the wannabe experts about " Apple is not serious about this or that " and " my OPINIONS proves that Apple is this or that ".

Honestly many of you folks needs to get away from the keyboard, go outside and get a life and live that life.

Some of you carry on worse than a two year old in the candy store after being told NO by mom!

Sheeeeesh!

On the other hand, let me offer you this gift to wipe away your tears ......

Image

 

[Treebs]

More like a kid being told no by
Mom but then she gets candy for your laptop loving brother. I feel cheated that the iMac didn't make the wwdc show. I'm pretty confident that we will see a brand new beautiful design with the release of mountain lion in Mid July. They've already benchmarked their CPUs. I don't see that it would benefit them to test a machine they aren't releasing in the same year. I don't believe any of the 2013 stuff about iMac. Apple needs a new iMac for 3rd quarter earnings. There are many waiting to buy and A

 

[Baphomet]

I think that we'll see new iMacs when it is time to launch Mountain Lion.....

I also think that the new IMacs will be released with Mountain Lion. I don't believe that there will be an IMac with a Retina display, but I keep my fingers crossed... I will wait till End of July, if there is no update I will buy a current one...

 

[Razorhog]

More like a kid being told no by
Mom but then she gets candy for your laptop loving brother. I feel cheated that the iMac didn't make the wwdc show. I'm pretty confident that we will see a brand new beautiful design with the release of mountain lion in Mid July. They've already benchmarked their CPUs. I don't see that it would benefit them to test a machine they aren't releasing in the same year. I don't believe any of the 2013 stuff about iMac. Apple needs a new iMac for 3rd quarter earnings. There are many waiting to buy and A

Release with ML - likely. Brand new beautiful design - not likely.

 

[iSayuSay]

.....
Why do you discount the possibility that Apple hasn't released the product because their component suppliers haven't yet provided them with the necessary products to produce a serious desktop?

Now that the 680M has firm shipping dates, the vigil starts. Alienware's M18x ships with 680M on July 3, and M17x ships with 680M on July 19. If we get to July 31 and there's no sign of an iMac, or the iMac that does come has parts that were already readily available, then we can reassess how serious Apple is in the desktop business.

Talking about supplies on serious desktop product, desktop Radeon 7970 or Geforce GTX680 has been on the market since when?

And super embarassing MacPro update is when?
At least Apple could have some decency to put Radeon 6 or GTX 5 series in it. Update it altogether with MBPs line. But did they?

Why do you discount the possibility that Apple hasn't released the product because they're being more and more hesitant to produce a serious desktop?

I don't blame people for accusing Apple for being not so serious in desktop business. They really are.

 

[NMF]

Just came to say that I'm restarting my iMac and zeroing it out before I sell it to a random craigslist creeper tomorrow. My Retina MacBook Pro is already ordered! God that thing looks amazing!

~~

 

[AlDavis]

iMac upgrade?

Let's figure this out ourself.....
The latest CPU from Intel is the Ivy Bridge processor. Normally for servers is the Xeon CPU and I don't believe that Apple would use the Xeon CPU in the iMacs for the new release. So let's say the Ivy Bridge is it. How can we benefit from the Ivy Bridge?

The iMac owners don't need to use the built-in HD graphic because of the Radeon board. The Radeon board is far more advance than the Ivy Bridge and don't forget that the Trinity from AMD is around the corner. So the only benefit from the Ivy Bridge is the bandwidth which is not a substantial difference than the Sandy Bridge. The Sandy Bridge is more stable when over clocked.

Today, we can purchase an iMac with 1-gig of memory on the Radeon graphic board. To me, this is outstanding to say the least because you can also upgrade the mobo to 16-gigs with a SSD.

Today, the 27" display is simply amazing. We are talking about a 2560 x 1440 resolution display; blue ray is 1920×1080. So take the Retina display and put it side by side the iMac. What are the differences? Can you see the differences immediately? The highly configure iMac today is a beast!

So why wait? A major hardware update can only be a possible new Radeon board (the Trinity) and the Ivy Bridge. Therefore, the only possible upgrade left are features such as a touch screen display. Maybe the large display can be use like an iPad. What company would want to pay extra for their employees? Are those feature necessary for the budget? In other words, how much more is available for the iMacs.

Today, a max-out iMax is all we could ever dream. It can definitely get the job done for all advance applications and it is a gamers dreams come true. So let's not let Apple's marketing strategies upset us. Let's try to stay happy. When I purchased the Mac pro G5-PPC, several months later Apple introduce the new Intel Mac Pros that really pissed-me off! Man...I was pissed! Nobody new nothing. It just hit the market and now, no one support the PPC's: not even Apple.

So I hope everyone can stay calm. If highly configure, the current iMac is a work horse and you cannot go wrong for buying it. If the new iMacs exceed our expectations, we can rest for sure that it will cost much, much more.

 

[Mike Valmike]

So why wait? A major hardware update can only be a possible new Radeon board (the Trinity) and the Ivy Bridge.

And USB3.

And the new faster channel Thunderbolt. And the Nvidia 680 GPU. And an SSD at a price resembling the current market instead of what SSDs cost in spring of 2011. (They're less now.) And and and. And that's not counting speculative stuff like a higher RAM capacity (by modules or by total memory amount supported) and official support for larger HDDs like current 4TB models, etc. It goes on and on.

Just because you bought a 2011 iMac doesn't mean the rest of us are going to pay full ticket today for a 15-month-old device. It's a terrible value, end of story, period. The only logical courses of action at this stage are to wait, to buy an Apple notebook if a user's needs can be met by that, or to ditch Apple and get a PC, whether or not to Hackintosh it. Anyone who suggests someone should buy the current iMac is making a staggeringly stupid suggestion.