Why so much hate for the new iMac?

[adildacoolset]

And so is grammar!

I use my ODD at least once a week. That doesn't seem unoften to me. I'm not even a professional that would need to burn data to media to give clients. I simply use it for normal stuff. Playing or ripping CDs, DVDs, and backing up my photo library for off site storage. When the cloud can give me affordable off site storage for the same cost as a spindle of DVDs, we can talk.

Once a week isn't very often. Just the same way you can have portable hard drives for backup that plug I'm, you can have a cheap portable CD drive for using that. That seems to be where apple is going to. And if you don't like it, then, well, you might have to change. The point is that there are some who use their cd drives often, and some who don't. It looks like the latter counts for the majority of users. Apple can't cater for every single person.

And you want affordable cloud storage with high volume. If CDs go, then we can see that stuff advance more quicker, because there will be the need. But as long as CDs are there, you can't really expect fast development. It looks like apple want to push to that era where there is affordable high volume cloud storage.

App,e are already giving things like photo stream, iCloud, iTunes, iTunes Match, which are just the beginning. These services are gradually getting the ability to do the features mentioned above. Remember, GRADUALLY. If CDs go, development, in my opinion, will go faster. In the meantime, an external cd drive will hopefully do the trick

 

[Thunderbird]

not sure if you're serious... Touch screen desktop computers are nothing more but a gimmick, and the overall experience is TERRIBLE. And did you really expect an iMac with blu-ray or HDTV tuners? lol.

Not sure if you read my post. It was about the design options Apple could have implemented (not what I personally expected). Touch screen is something I personally wouldn't have any use for, but I can see how it might make a good collaborative workstation in an office. It's a technology that's improving all the time.

Blu-ray and HDTV tuners are becoming more common on PC all-in-ones. Apple isn't interested in giving people those kind of choices.

You know, I don't use the iSight camera at all. I think that's a gimmick. Does that mean Apple should eliminate that component next? Same with the speakers, maybe get rid of them too in the next redesign. Oh, and the internal power supply, it's taking up too much room, they could shave another inch off the thickness by getting rid of that. Make people go out and buy a separate power brick. While we're at it, that stand has way too big of a footprint as well, time to go. If people need stands, too bad, you can always get a VESA mount. Oh wait, no support for VESA mounting? Too bad.

Apple should just sell the screen and let people buy all the rest of the hardware as external components.

 

[Yebubbleman]

The device is only thin on the edges. The back is almost as thick as the 2011 one. Even then, it has a GTX 680 MX video card which is brilliant. Did anyone want a desktop one? Did they expect one in the 2011 form factor? Is it even possible? And we don't know for sure if it has heating issues. The thin edges make it look sleek, and is still as powerful as one would want in an all in one,

27 inch still has removable ram slots, and we don't know yet for sure if the hard drive can or cannot be upgraded. Only 21 inch users can whine for that.

And why the complaints of the 21 inch version using a 5400 rpm drive? Isn't there a 128Gb SSD which stores the apps and the OS? What noticeable disadvantage would a 5400 rpm drive make?

And the lack of cd drive is a disadvantage– for the minority. Seriously, for most people, CDs are used very unoften. So a cheap external one can do it when needed. And for those who use it a lot, it's a disadvantage. But still for a minority. And I chonestly can't think of a disadvantage of a cheap third party CD drive on a desktop. No one has to lug it around. It's only pulled out of the draw when needed.

I still think its a marvellous machine and an absolute beauty.

As someone who does not yet want to give up the optical drive, I feel substantially stronger about that on a laptop than I do a desktop. For desktops that, for some inexplicably stupid reason, lack the space for an optical drive, I have no problem attaching a USB 5.25" Desktop Tray-load form-factor optical drive as it will perform faster, more reliably, and will be substantially cheaper than the crap they were putting in the iMacs since the iMacs first got slot-load internal optical drives. Yet, I digress.

Here's the reason why there's hate for the new iMac: It's a Mac where form is valued substantially more than function. Look at the people in this thread. Those that praise the iMac are usually prefacing their comments with something about how beautiful it is on the outside. And while externally, it is one of Apple's most magnificent machines, when you bother to take one apart, you begin to realize that it really is their worst designed computer. The heating has historically been bad and it has only gotten progressively worse the thinner they make it. It got so bad that Apple had to repurpose the power pin on the 3.5" SATA drives that sends HDD activity to the HDD LED on PC desktops to be used to report the drive's temperature to the logic board because there was that much of a risk of over-heating. As a result, even if you were able to get a 2011 iMac open, you HAD to replace its internal hard drive with one made by Apple lest you have your fans revved up at full blast and your AHT always reporting failures; aftermarket drives were not an option. Compare this to literally every other Mac (in which you could install SOME form of aftermarket drive) and you see this is atrocious. Even if you are not the type to ever open up your computer, your iMac's hard drive will eventually die, and if you are not under AppleCare, a replacement Apple drive will cost you substantially more and yield you substantially less storage capacity than an aftermarket option. For a desktop machine, this is unforgivable. And really, this was done because they needed that thermal sensor.

The iMac has so many thermal sensors because, 2011 machines and earlier had desktop CPUs, desktop north and south bridge chipset chips, desktop (3.5") hard drives, and GPUs that are only found in thick Gamer Laptop PCs because they generate too much heat to go into mainstream computers like the MacBook Pro or the PC equivalents. Total that up and you have a computer that generates way too much heat for way too thin an enclosure.

Personally, for this reason, and given the speculation that the 2012 21.5" iMac has a 2.5" hard drive and a GPU that is not the type to go in Gamer Laptop PCs, that might be enough to make it reliable enough for me to recommend to friends and family that would be in the market for such a computer. Remove enough heat generating components and the heat problem goes away. The RAM issue is annoying, but is more or less non-existent if the user maxes it out at 16GB at the time of purchase.

Though back to your question about why people are hating on the new iMacs, while I outlined reasons why the new 21.5" iMac could be reliable and viable where it wasn't previously, these are compromises that shouldn't be made on a desktop machine. Period. A desktop should be able to have all of the things that the iMac had in 2011 and then some; with a real desktop video card, with actual expansion and easy access. None of this, remove the glass with suction cups and remove the LCD panel nonsense...that's insanely ridiculous. Who needs that on a desktop and toward what end? Slimness? Sleekness? It's a freakin' desktop! Not an iPod, not an iPhone, not an iPad or even a MacBook Pro! It's a desktop designed to be more powerful than a laptop, not designed to be a stationary laptop in order to accommodate Apple's design anorexia. It is this disappointment that fuels whatever hatred that iMac users have. I myself was a two-time iMac user. And time and time again, I've been disappointed by the inability to upgrade my hard drive without performing a serious tear-down. The fact of the matter is that this 21.5" iMac is meant for people that aren't the type to open their computers, while the 27" iMac is meant for a sect of those people that want to get work done and not care about the inside of the machine. I am not that person. A lot of us are not those people, and really, why should a desktop require us to be that person in order to want it?

Only on the midrange and only as an option. The GPUs only have 512MB on the 21" which will be a pain for gaming going forward. Compared to the last iMac introduced 18 months ago, they are poor value, IMO. The 27" is better and will be beastly with the 680MX but it will be extremely expensive for what it is and outdated by new tech 4 or 5 months later.

Really, to be fair, I think the 21.5" iMac, at this point, is for the 2011 high-end Mac mini customer who, with that machine, got to have a discrete GPU. In most cases, a discrete GPU is better than an IGP even if it's neutered at 512MB of GDDR5.

The 21 iMac is not, and never was, a gaming machine. Any dedicated gamer knows that this isn't the right choice. And for casual gaming, a GT 640M isn't bad.

Hell, for casual gaming, the Intel HD 4000 isn't bad, but there are a lot of people who don't have the luxury of owning a Mac and a PC tower. Some are buying this round of iMacs to be both a good Mac and a good gaming PC (via Boot Camp, if playing a game that doesn't have a native OS X version). Toward that end, the 21.5" iMac is disappointing. Hell, even the 27" iMac is disappointing to a certain degree in this regard. For that kind of money, the kind of PC tower you can build is mind-blowing.

I could care less... much less... about what others think of it.
For me... it's an incredible machine and worth every penny.

I will be buying a new maxed out iMac this December.

Some of the people who post on these forums seem to be immature and whiny about ANY new Apple product. Their arguments are completely benign.

"What's that?"
"Oh I'm terribly sorry to hear that you wanted a ODD on the new iMac."
"I would suggest that you purchase the optional ODD as an alternative."
"Huh? You don't want to?"
"Well there are LOTS of other PC manufacturers out there. Maybe you should give them a shot."
"What's that? You love OSX?"
"Then I would suggest that you purchase the optional ODD as an alternative."
"Huh? You don't want to?"
"Well there are LOTS of other PC manufacturers out there. Maybe you should give them a shot."
"What's that? You love OSX?"

Rinse and repeat ad nauseum...

Some of us love the operating system, are even reliant on it for specific functions, but would prefer not to make the kind of sacrifices that Apple imposes upon us. Retina MBP is rad, but do I really need it to be so thin that my RAM is soldered onboard? The 2012 iMacs look stunning externally, but do I really need it to be so thin that I can't get at the RAM and have to grin and bear a 2.5" drive on the 21.5", and do I really need it to be so thin that I can't have proper heat dissipation or cooling while also enjoying a full desktop GPU. Do I need the design to be so sleek that I can't get easy access to the internals of the machine like I can on an HP Z1 or...dare I say it...a proper desktop? No, I don't. And you don't either.

People are upset because they like Apple designs and the OS but they want a different implementation of the hardware. We're not haters, we're just people who feel like we're making a compromise whether going with Apple or another option when it doesn't have to be that way.

If Apple were as focused on performance and upgrade-ability as they are on design, you might well have the perfect product.

DING DING DING! Seriously guys, this guy just answered the thread. Any ignorance of this post and its point is simply arrogance and ignorance.

I own a 2010 MacBook Pro. Since you said its for all round family use, I'll compare. The MacBook Pro does everything, including casual gaming very well, eve with inferior specs. I even do 3d modelling and its not a problem. I can't really see what is bad about a GT 640M. It's still good

For a "low-end" Mac, it's fine. For the cheapest new Mac you can buy with a discrete GPU, it's plenty. But for a desktop costing $1300, it's lacking. Going from any Mac mini, MacBook, 13" MacBook Pro, or MacBook Air, that GPU is an upgrade, for sure. But again, it's a desktop, and thusly, it shouldn't be so limited.

The only one's that are happy are the ones not buying the 21.5",

Really, I think a majority of the problems that people have with the 21.5" iMac can be solved by ordering it with the Fusion Drive and 16GB of RAM. At that point, for the average user, it's a fine machine. But really, I highly doubt that the heating and thermal problems plaguing the 2009-2011 iMacs are going to be gone with the 2012 27" iMac; if anything they'll be worse as the optical drive wasn't that large, and they slimmed it down THAT much more.

I have only been an Apple user since 2009, so I consider myself a newbie. Yet I see the following unmistakable pattern surrounding every release of a new iMac:

1. For a long time prior to the release, there is vast speculation, wish-listing, and pining about "when is it coming - not soon enough?" and "should I buy - should I wait?"

2. The iMac is released.

3. Roughly half of the postings at MacRumors show great love, and "I am ordering ASAP".

4. Other have of the postings hate it, and give forth various rants, about the deficiencies.

Only after the dust settles can a consensus opinion form. At the moment I am leaning towards ordering the 2011 refurb. But will wait and see.

Really, you have two camps of people responding to posts like this. One, the people that are so in love with the exterior of the design that they overlook the serious flaws with the internal design (though they don't care, they'll never have to deal with it). Two, the people that are informed enough on the problems with the design to have a negative opinion on it. I don't care how much time passes, those people are more or less static.

I used to be on the former camp until I (a) realized that upgrading the hard drive on my Early 2006 20" iMac, an action that would've given me at least two more years of life out of it, would've been a serious pain and (b) started working at an Apple Authorized Service Provider where I got to see more iMacs come in for non-accidental-damage repair than any other Mac and when I got to see first hand just how terrible the internal design of the iMac is compared to the other Macs in Apple's line. I'm hopeful that this new design changes that, but I'm not all that optimistic.

The 21" is for people who don't own screwdrivers. Or at least, care to use them on a computer. That's a much larger population than you expect.

BTW the RAM on that should be as user-upgradable as the HDD; we'll know how easy it is to take apart soon enough. Given that the stock is 8 and it only goes to 16, it's really not that big a deal..

I sort of agree with you, though I sort of don't. You're right that the iMacs are not for people with tools or people who like to open their computer (though opening a 21.5" will likely be no more or less difficult than opening up a 27"). The RAM issue though is annoying for those that don't know to order it with 16GB of RAM at the time of purchase as the time will come alone when they'll need more RAM and it'll either be impossible or really expensive.

I'm getting the 21'' because the 27'' is WAY to big for me and I'm not rich either !

I'd imagine that this is a more common issue than people realize. Had I not inhereted money from a dead relative, at the time, I would've gotten a 17" Early 2006 iMac instead of a 20". Having been able to do that made my machine last me substantially longer than it otherwise would've.

You get a thinner, lighter more sexy machine for almost the same price +-

Also, a cpu upgrade and a huge gpu upgrade from previous models.

Sign me up.

People will never be satisfied and its stupid.

I'm sorry, since when did "thinner" "lighter" and "more sexy" matter on a desktop. This thing is supposed to sit stationary and do my bidding, not give me a freakin' lapdance.

People are unstatisfied because this is a machine that could be so much more than what it is forced to be under the limitations of a "thinner" "lighter" and "more sexy" design. Far be it for us to actually want our $1300+ computer to actually do things and do them well for longer than 3 years.

 

[Yebubbleman]

There are people who bitch about every generation of the iMac:

G3: no floppy drive (ha, take that, optical drive!)
G4: too expensive (due to the new LCD screen)
G5: height not adjustable, no port at front
Intel iMac: hard to reach the internal, can't replace hard drive, etc.

And guess what... each generation sold millions. I can't remember a Mac that Steve Jobs made which had generous expandability, going all the way back to the original Macintosh in 1984. The PowerMac/Mac Pro was the exception in the entire Mac line.

Unibody MacBook Pros are the most accessible Mac ever made, excluding the Power Macs and Mac Pros. Open up the bottom plate and you have access to literally every component. It's more accessible than most PC laptop designs out there even. Really that should be how every computer is, especially a desktop. Really, that's one of the major reasons why many diehard Mac users will never be iMac customers.

oh cmon, if you read my other posts, generaly iMac 2012 is great piece of HW, but what apple did with entry model ist, that they put in ****** 5400 rpm disk and gave u no option to do anything about it... so you must pay premium for more expensive imac just to upgrade hdd - and that is all for much higher price than previous generation - this is simply marketing move, no problems with engineering... and that is what I am bitching around

You do realize that 5400RPM 2.5" drives generate a lot less heat than 7200RPM 2.5" drives and especially less heat than 3.5" drives, right? You do also realize that the 21.5" iMac has always been constrained for heating, causing all sorts of annoying reliability issues as they pertain to heat, right? Just checking.

The move to 2.5" 5400RPM drives is necessary for those obsessed with "thinness" and is offset by those that elect to order it with a Fusion Drive. Annoying that "thinness" be more important than "function", but so it goes. At least this machine has a shot at being more reliable than any 21.5" iMac from 2009 to 2011 ever was.

And no, this is all engineering. Marketing has nothing to do with the options they were limited to, given their design goals.

Either you did not understand or my writing wasnt good enough - I meant that there is no reason to block upgrade for fusion in entry model, as the more expensive 21,5 allows this upgrade...
Yes, great, to get HDD that should be standard in 2012 I have to pay for 27incher

The low-end 21.5" iMac has always been lackluster when it comes to drive options.

Don't "hate" the new iMac as much as I am disappointed in it. Waited way past the usual upgrade cycle for a new model that really isn't much different from a spec bump.

I like the design of the new fused glass front. I like the fact they didn't abandon USB 3.0 for Thunderbolt only.

Other than that, there's not much to get excited about. The removal of the optical drive is too soon IMHO. Making it thinner is absolutely redundant. They could have done so much more with the design, as some PC all-in-ones have done.

I'm with flopticalcube, I'm not liking the direction Apple is going with the iMac line.

The "direction APple is going with the iMac" didn't at all start here. It got bad in late 2005 with the advent of the iSight-equipped iMac G5 and only got progressively worse.

ya, even that. So i honestly don't know why people are so mad. Take a step back, chill out, and think about it. There's really not much else apple could've done.

This is the type of apologist nonsense that is really irksome. Apple could've made the machine THICKER. Or they could've designed a much larger base for the machine inside which the components would live and be easily upgraded. Yes, if they want to pursue this same iMac G5-style design, yeah, this was the only thing left to do, but to say that this was the ONLY direction they could've gone in, is ignorant and wrong.

I agree with the 21" guys. While the 27" has seen a glorious update with the "desktop" 680MX GPU, 32GB user upgradable ram, up to 756GB of SSD or 3TB fusion; the 21" was pretty much downgraded in terms of HDD performance.

Its a - for the 21's but a huge + for the 27's.

The 21.5" iMac will likely be a more reliable iMac given its transition away from heat-generating desktop components. Plus, outfitting it with 16GB of RAM at the time of purchase really doesn't make it all that bad RAM-wise. I worry though about heating in the new 27" model; if they don't resolve that stuff, then this whole redesign was a pointless exercise.

what is so stupid about wanting apple not to downgrade entry model? 2.5 slow hdd?? come on

On the surface, yes, it's disappointing; but they probably had to do it to fix the heating/reliability problems it had. Think about it. Still though, the fact that this sort of thing was required, I'll agree is very disappointing.

I disagree that the optical drive is used 'very unoften' by a minority. Do you or anyone have proof or research study that says the "majority" of Mac/PC users no longer use their optical CD/DVD drives?

People must remember that the so-called "Cloud" is still in its infancy. A little over a year ago, even Apple was reluctant to use the word "cloud", right before it decided to jump into the "cloudy bandwagon", then releasing iCloud only in Summer 2011.

Hence, my point is the "Cloud" is still a fledgeling technology, not a proven medium of storage in terms of accessability, reliability, redundancy, or ubiquity in the same way that CDs and DVD-R/DVD-RAM have proven themselves for many years. At the very least, Apple should have waited another 1 or 2 years before it phased out the built-in optical drive from its iMacs.

NOW.... before someone retorts that we can always buy an external optical drive (Apple sells a nice USB one, I understand)..... PFFFT, because you just failed to comprehend the meaning of an "all-in-one" machine.

Your gripe about the lack of internal ODD in the iMacs is mine in the MacBook Pros going forward. I will say that a USB 5.25" Tray-load form-factor DVD drive is substantially faster and more reliable than that POS in the last iMac ever was...and the drive of which I speak is cheaper than Apple's USB super-drive. Really, it is an all-in-one, but it's also a desktop. Having what is essentially an optical drive upgrade in exchange for it being external really is no biggie.

4. Mindless idiotic repeating of mindless idiotic quotes. "Disposable" rBMP. Anyone calling any Mac "disposable" should be slapped in the face.

The first generation iPad I bought a year ago refurbished when the iPad 2s first came out will no longer run a lot of apps that I use on the regular, nor will it run the latest iOS. Eventually, it will be relegated to something I just use for its built-in apps as I am encouraged to get a new one. Sure, it still functions, but it is designed for me to replace it with a newer one down the road. The same is true for the iPhone, iPod touch and Macs, though is much less extreme from a cost-per-use standpoint. All computers are disposable. No piece of technology is designed with use ten years from now in mind. Anyone buying an rMBP (especially those that don't upgrade it from 8GB of RAM) will eventually not be able to do things needed and will have to buy a new one. That is disposability if I'm not mistaken.

I don't think many people looked at the 2011 iMac and said "I wish it was thinner and lighter"

And even if they did, they really had no practical reason to.

To say the least, I'm more interested of waiting for Apple Thunderbolt Display refresh nowadays. I'm pretty sure it's going to follow the iMac design.

Well it's purely a display (with some simple computing chips for also being a hub), being thinner does not necessarily limiting.
Hopefully it's refreshed with 3x (or even 4) USB 3.0 ports, audio in/out jack, and HDMI input. All for the same $999? Oh what a wet dream of a huge display.

That way I can plug in my gaming tower (or hopefully refreshed MacPro), Macbook Air into one display. One can dream, right

My guess for the Thunderbolt display is, same laminate technology as this new 27" iMac, four USB ports, two Thunderbolt ports, a Gigabit Ethernet port, and a MagSafe 2 cable limiting its charging functionality to only the 2012 MacBook Airs and the retina MacBook Pros.

I seem to gravitate to your opinion on these forums, and was wondering if you wouldn’t mind giving me some advice or what you think would be best. I will be a first time mac owner and I can’t wait to make the change, but after reading these forums, I’m a bit confused about everything.

I will be using my iMac for mainly photo and video editing, I have a photography website as well as a youtube channel. I edit all photos on photoshop cs6 and will be using imovie for video editing. Other than those two, I will use my mac for very basic things like word processing, web browsing, blog posts, etc.
I do have a budget ranging from 1500-1800 but would obviously want to save as much money as possible. Which iMac do you think will best fit my needs? I’m obviously not a power user, but I do a good bit of editing and things like that.
I would also like to get a 4TB external to store my thousands of pictures and videos(not sure if that would matter)

21.5" iMac, spec it on the Apple online store to have 16GB of RAM (so that most of the gripes about non-user-servicable RAM don't apply to you), and a 1TB Fusion Drive. That ought to be plenty and it ought to fit reasonably within your budget.

I don't loose a ton of performance without an OD, in fact I get rid of stuff I never use. If you loose a ton of performance without the OD, then probably you are not a power user, because OD has nothing to do with performance.

Who said the cooling is not decent? Ave you any proof to validate your premise or is just your illuminated guess based on pictures. Geez you can already tell how well the heating is gonna work with just a picture! You must be a genius, why aren't you working at apple.. ok ill stop there.

About your GPU complain, please... tell me how many AIOs have a better GPU? Because an iMac is an AIO you know? Its not a Mac Pro, if you want a real mac desktop get a Mac Pro. You can whine its 2010 Hardware in the Mac Pro section thank you.

And so far no one knows if its a 3.5" drive or not.



No, Apple is know to adopt existent technologies in a usable way and comfortable way that actually makes sense to use? Is that clear?

Touch screen phones were available before the iphone, but why is the iphone an all time best seller? Because it works, thats why people buy Apple.

THe machine has an incredible GPU that no one in this forum even thought about, and believe me we thought a lot. They increased the max ram to 32GB , there is an option for a 756SSD and they even introduced a new drive function.

Who cares if the imac is 1/2 inch as long as it keeps providing that good performance its hardware provides in running a rock stable OS. In the end isn't that why we buy Apple?

Your points are nonsense. What about Desktop components + gamer laptop PC video card - thermal envelope larger to breathe = thermal problems do you not understand? The 2009-2011 iMacs were unreliable and problematic in this regard. Having worked at an Apple Authorized Service Provider they were the number one machine coming in. Now on the 27" they remove a fairly thin component but make it so much thinner, how do you figure they won't have the same problem again. The only one that might not have this problem is the 21.5", and even then, I'll believe it when I stop seeing them come in.

Read up on this stuff, you'll be surprised how much you actually DON'T know.

Really the root of the complaint is that Apple doesn't manufacture a computer with non-server 100% desktop components. My wife opted out of Mac for her primary computer because of that. It will be interesting to see what they do with the 2013 Mac Pro - if it's possible to get it with Ivy Bridge/Haswell rather than Sandy Bridge-E/Ivy Bridge-E, there should be a segment of the market interested in that.

I'm sure there would be, but even that is an unfortunate sacrifice. Xeons are rad and Xeons are what a majority of Mac Pro customers need. Simply switching to a modern Core i7 that blows away Xeons from 2010 is not exactly a straight up upgrade.

This one's getting more attention because it's a total redesign. Last time was just a silent refresh of internals in the same design they'd be using since Fall 2009.

The non-aftermarket hard drive debacle drew some attention last refresh if memory serves.

Yes you can easily open the Z1 Workstation but it's over priced and no cheaper than the equivalent and much better looking iMac.

All all-in-ones are over-priced. Just like all mini-desktops (like the Mac mini) are over-priced. They are both dumb form-factors. Barring that, are you trying to tell us that an easily servicable computer isn't as good as one that isn't but is better looking? Because that's a bunch of bull if ever I've heard it.

 

[bry223]

640m: I'm sorry but since when has a entry level iMac had a High end mobile gpu? Just like last years models (6750/6770). The 640/650 takes on the same progression. Also no one should compare a iMac to other desktop computers, you should be comparing it to other AIOs. Look at the XPS 27, $2000 for a AIO with a 640m, compared to a $2000 27 iMac with a 675MX.

Blu-Ray: Look I own blu rays and a blu ray player, but with such a focus on online content they're collecting dust. Blu Ray is a format that will never take off like DVDs did. Apple knows this and there is no reason at all to support physical media when that's not where the future is headed.

Thin design: What did you expect? Smaller and thinner form factors are becoming more of a focus. Look at the X51 by Alienware for example. As the hardware becomes more efficient on power and heat why would you continue to use a bulky design? It's like putting a motorcycle engine under the hood of a truck.

Only thing I can agree on is the slower HDD, besides that I love the updates all around.

 

[LouieSamman]

Although an iMac is a non-portable device it still is of being a great feature to see the iMac weighing less and being lighter.

I think when it comes to specs such as graphics card, Apple is doing a good job.

I want to have a setup of an iMac for gaming and hardcore computing, iPad for light gaming and consumption apps, iPhone for ultra portable computing for key things.

The iMac isn't a disappointment except the no retina but that will come when Apple is ready.

 

[Fishrrman]

"I highly doubt that the heating and thermal problems plaguing the 2009-2011 iMacs are going to be gone with the 2012 27" iMac; if anything they'll be worse as the optical drive wasn't that large, and they slimmed it down THAT much more."

I believe they could solve at least some of the "heat problems" by moving the power supply outside the back of the iMac. That is, put it into a box that sits on the floor, with removable cords on one side to the iMac, and to the other to the wall outlet.

There's a power cord sticking out from the rear of the iMac anyway, so it's not a cable that can be eliminated just "for looks". And having the power supply as a standalone item makes it very easy to swap in the event of failure.

This would open up more room inside the back of the iMac for ventilation and whatever else they wanted to do in there...

I was disappointed that Apple chose to do exactly the opposite with the Mini, which now crams the PS into the case instead of having it outboard...

 

[FreshApples]

Fresh Apples R Pretty In the Inside As they R on the Outside!!

The Seeds R Great but I agree with jmhart on this bcuz in order to sell a great looking apple that will stay fresh for a awhile is to make three(Nvidia, Intel, and Apple) great seeds come together and shake hands at the same time for launch date to reveil the best thing about the Apple which is the design!!. So Apple has Just surprised us in the efforts in design but the seeds r old in the new imacs. So Apples masterpiece will be in 2013.

 

[Razorhog]

"I highly doubt that the heating and thermal problems plaguing the 2009-2011 iMacs are going to be gone with the 2012 27" iMac; if anything they'll be worse as the optical drive wasn't that large, and they slimmed it down THAT much more."

I believe they could solve at least some of the "heat problems" by moving the power supply outside the back of the iMac. That is, put it into a box that sits on the floor, with removable cords on one side to the iMac, and to the other to the wall outlet.

There's a power cord sticking out from the rear of the iMac anyway, so it's not a cable that can be eliminated just "for looks". And having the power supply as a standalone item makes it very easy to swap in the event of failure.

This would open up more room inside the back of the iMac for ventilation and whatever else they wanted to do in there...

I was disappointed that Apple chose to do exactly the opposite with the Mini, which now crams the PS into the case instead of having it outboard...

Completely agree. The PS creates a lot of heat, and takes up space. This is a desktop computer, why would I care if the PS is on the floor or tucked away somewhere? It's not like I'm going to be moving a desktop computer a lot...

 

[xgman]

Completely agree. The PS creates a lot of heat, and takes up space. This is a desktop computer, why would I care if the PS is on the floor or tucked away somewhere? It's not like I'm going to be moving a desktop computer a lot...

have you ever put your hand behind the PS fan of a Mac Pro? Talk about heat, I had to turn ion the AC in the middle if the winter. The heat from an imac pales in comparison.

 

[Razorhog]

have you ever put your hand behind the PS fan of a Mac Pro? Talk about heat, I had to turn ion the AC in the middle if the winter. The heat from an imac pales in comparison.

Just depends on what you're doing I guess. I'm using a Mac Pro now and the heat from the PS is minimal. On the flip side, I had an iMac PS get hot enough that it felt like you could burn yourself on the back of the computer.

 

[xgman]

Unibody MacBook Pros are the most accessible Mac ever made, excluding the Power Macs and Mac Pros. Open up the bottom plate and you have access to literally every component. It's more accessible than most PC laptop designs out there even. Really that should be how every computer is, especially a desktop. Really, that's one of the major reasons why many diehard Mac users will never be iMac customers.



You do realize that 5400RPM 2.5" drives generate a lot less heat than 7200RPM 2.5" drives and especially less heat than 3.5" drives, right? You do also realize that the 21.5" iMac has always been constrained for heating, causing all sorts of annoying reliability issues as they pertain to heat, right? Just checking.

The move to 2.5" 5400RPM drives is necessary for those obsessed with "thinness" and is offset by those that elect to order it with a Fusion Drive. Annoying that "thinness" be more important than "function", but so it goes. At least this machine has a shot at being more reliable than any 21.5" iMac from 2009 to 2011 ever was.

And no, this is all engineering. Marketing has nothing to do with the options they were limited to, given their design goals.



The low-end 21.5" iMac has always been lackluster when it comes to drive options.



The "direction APple is going with the iMac" didn't at all start here. It got bad in late 2005 with the advent of the iSight-equipped iMac G5 and only got progressively worse.



This is the type of apologist nonsense that is really irksome. Apple could've made the machine THICKER. Or they could've designed a much larger base for the machine inside which the components would live and be easily upgraded. Yes, if they want to pursue this same iMac G5-style design, yeah, this was the only thing left to do, but to say that this was the ONLY direction they could've gone in, is ignorant and wrong.



The 21.5" iMac will likely be a more reliable iMac given its transition away from heat-generating desktop components. Plus, outfitting it with 16GB of RAM at the time of purchase really doesn't make it all that bad RAM-wise. I worry though about heating in the new 27" model; if they don't resolve that stuff, then this whole redesign was a pointless exercise.



On the surface, yes, it's disappointing; but they probably had to do it to fix the heating/reliability problems it had. Think about it. Still though, the fact that this sort of thing was required, I'll agree is very disappointing.



Your gripe about the lack of internal ODD in the iMacs is mine in the MacBook Pros going forward. I will say that a USB 5.25" Tray-load form-factor DVD drive is substantially faster and more reliable than that POS in the last iMac ever was...and the drive of which I speak is cheaper than Apple's USB super-drive. Really, it is an all-in-one, but it's also a desktop. Having what is essentially an optical drive upgrade in exchange for it being external really is no biggie.



The first generation iPad I bought a year ago refurbished when the iPad 2s first came out will no longer run a lot of apps that I use on the regular, nor will it run the latest iOS. Eventually, it will be relegated to something I just use for its built-in apps as I am encouraged to get a new one. Sure, it still functions, but it is designed for me to replace it with a newer one down the road. The same is true for the iPhone, iPod touch and Macs, though is much less extreme from a cost-per-use standpoint. All computers are disposable. No piece of technology is designed with use ten years from now in mind. Anyone buying an rMBP (especially those that don't upgrade it from 8GB of RAM) will eventually not be able to do things needed and will have to buy a new one. That is disposability if I'm not mistaken.



And even if they did, they really had no practical reason to.



My guess for the Thunderbolt display is, same laminate technology as this new 27" iMac, four USB ports, two Thunderbolt ports, a Gigabit Ethernet port, and a MagSafe 2 cable limiting its charging functionality to only the 2012 MacBook Airs and the retina MacBook Pros.



21.5" iMac, spec it on the Apple online store to have 16GB of RAM (so that most of the gripes about non-user-servicable RAM don't apply to you), and a 1TB Fusion Drive. That ought to be plenty and it ought to fit reasonably within your budget.



Your points are nonsense. What about Desktop components + gamer laptop PC video card - thermal envelope larger to breathe = thermal problems do you not understand? The 2009-2011 iMacs were unreliable and problematic in this regard. Having worked at an Apple Authorized Service Provider they were the number one machine coming in. Now on the 27" they remove a fairly thin component but make it so much thinner, how do you figure they won't have the same problem again. The only one that might not have this problem is the 21.5", and even then, I'll believe it when I stop seeing them come in.

Read up on this stuff, you'll be surprised how much you actually DON'T know.



I'm sure there would be, but even that is an unfortunate sacrifice. Xeons are rad and Xeons are what a majority of Mac Pro customers need. Simply switching to a modern Core i7 that blows away Xeons from 2010 is not exactly a straight up upgrade.



The non-aftermarket hard drive debacle drew some attention last refresh if memory serves.



All all-in-ones are over-priced. Just like all mini-desktops (like the Mac mini) are over-priced. They are both dumb form-factors. Barring that, are you trying to tell us that an easily servicable computer isn't as good as one that isn't but is better looking? Because that's a bunch of bull if ever I've heard it.

Well I guess you know better than Apple, only they have the multi-billion dollar company. Look, Imac isn't the only choice in town. Those that feel it's too thin, or too hot, or missing optical etc, aren't forced to buy one.

 

[flopticalcube]

Completely agree. The PS creates a lot of heat, and takes up space. This is a desktop computer, why would I care if the PS is on the floor or tucked away somewhere? It's not like I'm going to be moving a desktop computer a lot...

Its not that relevant really. Modern PSUs are 85-90% efficient so supplying 200W of power only burns 20W in the PSU. Esthetically, it would be unacceptable to Ive to have an outboard supply ala the old mini.

have you ever put your hand behind the PS fan of a Mac Pro? Talk about heat, I had to turn ion the AC in the middle if the winter. The heat from an imac pales in comparison.

That's because the PSU acts as a case exhaust for the Pro. The PSU itself is not really the problem.

 

[xgman]

Just depends on what you're doing I guess. I'm using a Mac Pro now and the heat from the PS is minimal. On the flip side, I had an iMac PS get hot enough that it felt like you could burn yourself on the back of the computer.

To the touch as long as it is within specs should be ok and as long as it doesn't heat the whole room up. I hear what your saying. These boxes and even the macbooks get very hot after a while. Goes with the territory. I used to put sub zero freezers on my overclocked PC's, so I know about heat.

Actually for that matter my fios non-dvr box at idle, is hotter than anything else I own.

----------

That's because the PSU acts as a case exhaust for the Pro. The PSU itself is not really the problem.

No, it produces more heat than it is blowing out of the case. I've had these running outside the case and they do run hot. Not so much the 2010 as the 2008 was unbearable which was exacerbated by the GTX 285 oven of a vid card. Actually come to think of it the vid cards do seem to push the most heat.

 

[flopticalcube]

To the touch as long as it is within specs should be ok and as long as it doesn't heat the whole room up. I hear what your saying. These boxes and even the macbooks get very hot after a while. Goes with the territory. I used to put sub zero freezers on my overclocked PC's, so I know about heat.

Actually for that matter my fios non-dvr box at idle, is hotter than anything else I own.

----------



No, it produces more heat than it is blowing out of the case. I've had these running outside the case and they do run hot. Not so much the 2010 as the 2008 was unbearable which was exacerbated by the GTX 285 oven of a vid card. Actually come to think of it the vid cards do seem to push the most heat.

Thats because SMPS's have improved considerably in the last 4 years. Efficiency is WAY up. Most of the heat is coming from other parts, like that 285. Given that the PSU is more than 50% efficient and that the Pro generates no light (all electrical energy is dissipated as heat), the fan is exhausting mostly case heat.

 

[KaraH]

The optical drive being taken out is not a complete deal breaker for me since I was planning on buying an external blu-ray anyway. What threatens it though is that this was done in pursuit of making that area thinner when it did not need to be. I will find out if I can even use this machine at all when it comes out as I want a real SSD in there (no, not the apple POS) as my boot drive.

If this was an iPad, sure, thin away. For a desktop though? Since it does not even have a VESTA bracket it will not take up less space on my desk. The only thing they did was limit possibilities without adding anything.

 

[atthecross]

the only thing i'm hating about the 27" 2012 is that it's not available yet! Other than that i'm loving it!

----------

The optical drive being taken out is not a complete deal breaker for me since I was planning on buying an external blu-ray anyway. What threatens it though is that this was done in pursuit of making that area thinner when it did not need to be. I will find out if I can even use this machine at all when it comes out as I want a real SSD in there (no, not the apple POS) as my boot drive.

If this was an iPad, sure, thin away. For a desktop though? Since it does not even have a VESTA bracket it will not take up less space on my desk. The only thing they did was limit possibilities without adding anything.

yeah, the optical drive is not a biggy for me, i haven't used my optical drive in i can't remember when. it is kinda strange though

 

[FreshApples]

Heat is always a concern so is electricity bill and AC

I like the fact that people think heat is the only problem in the new imac where custom builts have many problems and yes I know u get more performance for ur buck but my bucks will go to the electricity bill every month and if I was more concern about performance I would waste more on watercooling materials or LN2 if I was that crazy and had no life and lets not forget another piece of furniture in the house waiting to collect money or dust. So quit crying about heat on the new imac and be blessed that they are working hard and tirelessly on keeping a gtx 680mx 122w tdp undercontrol and still have a sleek and beautiful display which apple is well known for so you can upgrade with style not a huge toaster collecting money or dust to make a user happy with it, which is not the direction of the future im looking at, is going.

 

[d0nK]

Well I guess you know better than Apple, only they have the multi-billion dollar company. Look, Imac isn't the only choice in town. Those that feel it's too thin, or too hot, or missing optical etc, aren't forced to buy one.

Most people do know better than Apple when it comes to quite a lot of their decisions. Just look at what they have just done with the iMac, lol - thinner and with a laptop 5400rpm hard drive. Yes, Apple get it wrong and no blind fanboys change that. More profit does not = better products.
As for choice - if you want to use OSX you have no choice (unless you're tech-savy-ish and build a hackintosh).

It's obvious what Apple have done here, they are forcing BTO aggressively for more profit.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Am I missing something here? Apple sell three levels of desktop computer.
Mini - entry level
iMac - mid level
Mac Pro - power user
It seems most people are complaint due to the compromise of components in the iMac. If you need more storage, dedicated GPU, access ability then you need a Mac Pro. Don't moan that this isn't what the iMac is. You do have a choice within the ecosystem of apple

 

[KaraH]

Am I missing something here? Apple sell three levels of desktop computer.
Mini - entry level
iMac - mid level
Mac Pro - power user
It seems most people are complaint due to the compromise of components in the iMac. If you need more storage, dedicated GPU, access ability then you need a Mac Pro. Don't moan that this isn't what the iMac is. You do have a choice within the ecosystem of apple

Yes, you are missing something pretty big! While the pro sounds ideal in theory the reality is it is always underpowered compared to the other hardware available at the time. By the time it gets refreshed it is laughably behind the times and usually the refresh is less than remarkable.

Consider this: it just got a refresh this summer. According to https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Mac_Pro it is a "don't buy".

 

[krzykat]

Just disappointed in the fact that the entry level 21.5 no longer has expandable RAM, as well as the lack of an optical drive. Yes, you can spend more money to get them, but not everyone has unlimited funds. I like my iMac (mid 2010 21.5 model) and it's my first Apple product, but if I needed to get a computer now, I'm not sure I could or would justify the expense of an iMac for what it doesn't include. I upgraded the RAM and now am up to 12, which is probably more than I need, but it was a cheap and easy upgrade I could do myself.

Looking forward to playing with the new iMacs when they finally arrive, but I think it's a good thing I already have one. Not everyone needs a 27 inch display or can afford one or can afford to pay for upgrades or extras upfront.

 

[bteam]

"I highly doubt that the heating and thermal problems plaguing the 2009-2011 iMacs are going to be gone with the 2012 27" iMac; if anything they'll be worse as the optical drive wasn't that large, and they slimmed it down THAT much more."

I believe they could solve at least some of the "heat problems" by moving the power supply outside the back of the iMac. That is, put it into a box that sits on the floor, with removable cords on one side to the iMac, and to the other to the wall outlet.

There's a power cord sticking out from the rear of the iMac anyway, so it's not a cable that can be eliminated just "for looks". And having the power supply as a standalone item makes it very easy to swap in the event of failure.

This would open up more room inside the back of the iMac for ventilation and whatever else they wanted to do in there...

I was disappointed that Apple chose to do exactly the opposite with the Mini, which now crams the PS into the case instead of having it outboard...

Well a psu like that would be big and ugly, but in addition to the advantages you listed they can make it even thinner! The psu seems to take more space than the DVD drive.

It's also a nice profit generator given how overpriced the MagSafe adapters are.

 

[smoking monkey]

I like the fact that people think heat is the only problem in the new imac where custom builts have many problems and yes I know u get more performance for ur buck but my bucks will go to the electricity bill every month and if I was more concern about performance I would waste more on watercooling materials or LN2 if I was that crazy and had no life and lets not forget another piece of furniture in the house waiting to collect money or dust. So quit crying about heat on the new imac and be blessed that they are working hard and tirelessly on keeping a gtx 680mx 122w tdp undercontrol and still have a sleek and beautiful display which apple is well known for so you can upgrade with style not a huge toaster collecting money or dust to make a user happy with it, which is not the direction of the future im looking at, is going.

+1,000,000. The whinging and sooking and moaning and crying is nothing more than a bunch of kids throwing a huge tantrum. And really, it's nothing more than that.

Sure some people have legitimate gripes and have expressed them properly, but many others have sunk to levels I simply can't fathom. It's that World of Warcraft youtube video kid throwing a tantrum all over again.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Yes, you are missing something pretty big! While the pro sounds ideal in theory the reality is it is always underpowered compared to the other hardware available at the time. By the time it gets refreshed it is laughably behind the times and usually the refresh is less than remarkable.

Consider this: it just got a refresh this summer. According to https://buyersguide.macrumors.com//#Mac_Pro it is a "don't buy".

But Tim Cook said there would be a major pro update next year. If I was in the market for a pro, I would wait. The last minor update was just because intel could no longer supply last years chips.