Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Who is going to wait for 2nd gen iMac 27" Retina?

tillsbury said:
Ummm, the point of the retina imac isn't to watch TV....
Click to expand...

You comment is redundant:

Sorry forgive me, i did not realise you were an erudite expert on mac usage and dictate what we must use our macs for :rolleyes:

I for one, if i brought a 5K imac would most likely want to use it for UHD content - a huge plethora of people use there macs for youtube, itunes video, netflixs, amazon instant. Wouldn't it not be logical that if one has a 5k imac that they may possibly use it for viewing UHD ciontent. I am sure some people may not use their mac for this purpose, but i bet the majority do. Yes i realise the imac for some may be limited to: web browsing, emails, 4K photography, CAD, gaming - but my point was that people may use the mac to stream/DL visual content - and i welcome the arrival of mainstream 4k.
 
Last edited:
johnnyturbouk said:
You comment is redundant:

Sorry forgive me, i did not realise you were an erudite expert on mac usage and dictate what we must use our macs for :rolleyes:

I for one, if i brought a 5K imac would most likely want to use it for UHD content - a huge plethora of people use there macs for youtube, itunes video, netflixs, amazon instant. Wouldn't it not be logical that if one has a 5k imac that they may possibly use it for viewing UHD ciontent. I am sure some people may not use their mac for this purpose, but i bet the majority do. Yes i realise the imac for some may be limited to: web browsing, emails, 4K photography, CAD, gaming - but my point was that people may use the mac to stream/DL visual content - and i welcome the arrival of mainstream 4k.
Click to expand...

Not at all. If someone wanted to watch a lot of UHD/4k content, then surely they'd pop down the road and buy a 4k TV? Or even a PC or mac mini and a 4k display?

What I was meaning was that the intended audience of a 5k iMac isn't generally for consuming content, it's for computing -- and making that content. For those people, the higher the resolution the better, without limit. It's already clear that 5k is significantly more useful than 4k for those people who want to create/edit 4k content.
 
I just purchased a refurbished late 2013 iMac, so there will be no upgrades to a retina iMac for me for a minimum of 5 years or more. I have been tired of having PC and windows problems, that I decided to switch. I have always loved how clear and sharp the iMac 27inch screens were in store, it took me a few years to bite the dangling hooks.
When I ordered my iMac, it was $2339 CDN. The day that the new retina iMac was announced, the exact same iMac that I had purchased on apple store went up to $2509. So I don't think the price drops much. :)
 
...

if I stay with the iMac, I will definitely wait. Just played around with one at the Apple store on 5th avenue a little while ago. Gorgeous. It was surprisingly* fast with what I think was the out of the box specs (the standard CPU, 8gb ram, fusion drive and the 2gb AMD GPU), many of the applications opened in very small windows. Even when maximizing.

I'd like to give it a generation or so to see how things pan out. With no sleep, I really could not tell if this was as much a difference for my vision as the rMBPs were (with the rMBP, I noticed the difference right away.)

But the darn thing is lovely.
 
I have a loaded late 2012 iMac that runs perfectly. The new Retina is appealing however haven't seen one yet. I will most likely resist the urge and wait a year till Skylake arrives.
 
tillsbury said:
Not at all. If someone wanted to watch a lot of UHD/4k content, then surely they'd pop down the road and buy a 4k TV? Or even a PC or mac mini and a 4k display?
Click to expand...

1) Not necessarily - 4K TVs are still rather expensive. For what apple is charging - the imac is actually really good value IMHO
2) PCs - yes if you can bear windows OS.
3) The new mac mini look rather lacklustre - would most likely not be an enjoyable experience trying to watch 4k on one of these, even if it is possible (@ full 4K 60hz via TB2), i am not convinced the performance will be flawless, and certainly no match for the 5K Imac.

tillsbury said:
What I was meaning was that the intended audience of a 5k iMac isn't generally for consuming content, it's for computing -- and making that content. For those people, the higher the resolution the better, without limit. It's already clear that 5k is significantly more useful than 4k for those people who want to create/edit 4k content.
Click to expand...

I agree, logically, most people who should buy a 5K imac show be for 'propa' computing, i bet this is not actually the case. Some (like myself) need the pro features, other may just wish to buy this marvel as the first commercially available AIO with 5K; ie future proofing. I myself, don't need a new iamc right now and will be waiting (quite painfully) for the skylake refresh.

tillsbury said:
5k is significantly more useful than 4k for those people who want to create/edit 4k content
Click to expand...
Absolutely,
 
Last edited:
kittiyut said:
*raises hand*

I have a late 2009 (yes 2009!) BTO iMac (2.8 i7). Upgraded the RAM to 16GB, took out the old HD and CD and installed a 500GB SSD and 1TB 7,200rpm drive. Very very happy with the speed and stability (rock solid). Waiting for the 5K to come out but with Broadwell around the corner, I think I'll wait as well.
Click to expand...

I have the exact same 2009 Core i7 2.8 GHz 27 inch iMac and I too replaced the Optical drive with an SSD and created a fusion drive. However, I have been running 32 GB of RAM for almost 3 years now. I routinely use 20-32 GB of RAM with Yosemite. (The file cache inevitably fills up the rest of the RAM). It's a great machine.

I would love the new 5K Retina iMac, however my main concern is that it doesn't have ThunderBolt 3. Therefore I will never be able to hook up anything larger than a 4K display and I'll never be able to use the iMac as a Target Display.

It seems likely that ThunderBolt 3 will be included in the next revision of the Retina iMac. It would follow that there would be a GPU that could support TWO 5K displays, one internal and one external. This would be close the the number of pixels in a single 8K display.

I simply do not want to be held back in the future because of a then relatively slow ThunderBolt 2 port.
 
Georgio said:
If we're lucky it will be sooner than that and with Nvidia back at the helm and affordable flash storage.
Click to expand...
Less than one year between two models, it would be the first time... I don't believe that.
And like you I hope that the next Retina iMac will have a nVidia GPU :)
 
I am on a 3 year update path, corresponds with Applecare, so it will be a while for me to update. This plan lets you not worry about what the next chip down the road is, etc. It is very liberating.

Oh, wait, I have the current iMac!
 
Last edited:
I ordered a retina iMac last week, but then quickly cancelled it after reading some threads here. My PC died a couple months ago and I've been using my 13" MBA as my only computer since. I really want a new computer so I can run Windows 10. My MBA only has 4GB of ram and I'm guessing it would handle emulating Windows well. Thought getting a nice powerful Mac, with plenty of ram, would be the way to go. I just decided that I can wait until the fall or so. That is when Windows 10 should come out. Hopefully the next retina iMac has Intel's Skylake processor and will come out soon after. I can wait a couple months if not.
 
Alesc said:
Less than one year between two models, it would be the first time... I don't believe that.
And like you I hope that the next Retina iMac will have a nVidia GPU :)
Click to expand...

One can live in hope as it wouldn't be a new model as such just a refresh. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back