Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Mac Desktops > New iMac not until 2013???

New iMac not until 2013??? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2012, 01:25 PM
 
Its not even funny this waiting.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2012, 12:30 AM
 
True, but the new Apple tends to leak big refreshes, and we have seen nothing of a new iMac update.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2012, 07:18 AM
 
Some speculation here : http://www.macrumors.com/2012/08/31/apples-crowded-late-2012-product-introduction-schedule-forced-by-delays-to-imac-and-ipad-mini/
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2012, 08:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by davidflas View Post
...I am strongly considering moving to on from my early 2011 17" MBP because I do a lot of work in Aperture, and am a bit of a digital pack rat when it comes to photos.
I have the same MBP and Aperture rocks on it. I recommend 12-16 GB RAM and replacing the optical drive so you can have SSD + HDD. And using a referenced-originals workflow. When in desktop mode I add an external display, and the two-display setup is very productive.

Unless you intend to no longer be mobile and actually like the iMac's glare display, why lose the MBP? And if you keep the MBP you are forced into a 2-computer workflow which is kludgy in Aperture. Aperture cannot synch a Library among multiple Macs, a huge limitation that makes all two-computer workflows PITA workarounds as well as definitely not "bombproof."

Before the 2011 MBP I used a MBP/MP workflow and it was less than ideal. The one DTR mobile box workflow has been great. I would never go back to the difficulties involved in two-computer workflows just to go to an iMac. IMO the step up from a top MBP is to the real power and versatility of a MP. If Apple added two-computer Library synch to Aperture I would go back to MBP+MP.

My 02.

-Allen
     
davidflas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Boynton Beach, Florida, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 5, 2012, 04:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
I have the same MBP and Aperture rocks on it. I recommend 12-16 GB RAM and replacing the optical drive so you can have SSD + HDD. And using a referenced-originals workflow. When in desktop mode I add an external display, and the two-display setup is very productive.
Unless you intend to no longer be mobile and actually like the iMac's glare display, why lose the MBP? And if you keep the MBP you are forced into a 2-computer workflow which is kludgy in Aperture. Aperture cannot synch a Library among multiple Macs, a huge limitation that makes all two-computer workflows PITA workarounds as well as definitely not "bombproof."
Before the 2011 MBP I used a MBP/MP workflow and it was less than ideal. The one DTR mobile box workflow has been great. I would never go back to the difficulties involved in two-computer workflows just to go to an iMac. IMO the step up from a top MBP is to the real power and versatility of a MP. If Apple added two-computer Library synch to Aperture I would go back to MBP+MP.
My 02.
-Allen
Thank you for reminding me of the glossy display! I have decided to downsize a bit, and just ordered a new non-Retina 15" MBP with anti-glare screen. I like the idea of replacing the optical drive to achieve an HD + SSD configuration, but don't want to do anything to void the warranty. By the time my new MBP is out of warranty, SSDs will hopefully be more affordable. I planning to upgrade to 16GB of RAM since it is so cheap now. How do you feel about the Seagate HD/SSD drives as a stopgap measure? I am thinking about getting one of those.
2.7Ghz 15" Mid 2012 MBP 16GB RAM 7.2k 750GB HD anti-glare display|64GB iPad4 ATT LTE|
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 5, 2012, 05:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by davidflas View Post
How do you feel about the Seagate HD/SSD drives as a stopgap measure? I am thinking about getting one of those.
I installed one for my dad. In my opinion, it makes the 2.5" laptop HDD feel like a speedy 3.5" full size HDD, with certain operations (like bootup) being significantly faster. He is very happy with it, and reported that it feels significantly more speedy. I do suspect that the effect would be smaller on a Mac with sufficient RAM, however, as that is on an old XP laptop laboring under the 32-bit limit - and XP is not particularly efficient at using the RAM for disk cache in any case. OS X is much better at that, and having 16 GB of RAM doesn't hurt either.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 5, 2012, 08:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by davidflas View Post
...just ordered a new non-Retina 15" MBP with anti-glare screen. I like the idea of replacing the optical drive to achieve an HD + SSD configuration, but don't want to do anything to void the warranty.
All Macs - but laptops especially with their by-definition-lame 2.5" HDDs - should be configured with SSD for boot/apps/scratch. The improvement is huge.

It may too late, but I suggest trying to change your order to get the MBP with the Apple SSD. At $100 the 128 GB size SSD from Apple is a very good deal and is plenty of capacity for things that need short latencies (like boot, apps and scratch disks) if you replace the optical drive with a large HDD. You can either change out the optical drive for a third-party HDD when the warranty expires or do it right away (just reinstall the optical if you ever have a warranty issue; most folks do not have warranty problems anyway).

HDD kits for up to 1 TB in the optical drive slot from OWC:
http://eshop.macsales.com/Search/Sea...t=data+doubler

Changing out the optical drive is reasonable to do yourself because there are great videos around. Or OWC will do it for you for a fee.

-Allen
     
davidflas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Boynton Beach, Florida, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 6, 2012, 07:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by SierraDragon View Post
All Macs - but laptops especially with their by-definition-lame 2.5" HDDs - should be configured with SSD for boot/apps/scratch. The improvement is huge.
It may too late, but I suggest trying to change your order to get the MBP with the Apple SSD. At $100 the 128 GB size SSD from Apple is a very good deal and is plenty of capacity for things that need short latencies (like boot, apps and scratch disks) if you replace the optical drive with a large HDD. You can either change out the optical drive for a third-party HDD when the warranty expires or do it right away (just reinstall the optical if you ever have a warranty issue; most folks do not have warranty problems anyway).
HDD kits for up to 1 TB in the optical drive slot from OWC:
http://eshop.macsales.com/Search/Sea...t=data+doubler
Changing out the optical drive is reasonable to do yourself because there are great videos around. Or OWC will do it for you for a fee.
-Allen

I like the idea of an SSD + HD in the optical slot, and will likely do it once the warranty ends. Until then I am planning to stay with my plan of the Seagate hybrid SSD/HD. One side benefit to that, other than cost, is that I will appreciate the speed increase even more, having lived with the slower drive for a while. One side question, do you know why there are no 1TB 7200rpm 2.5" drives?
2.7Ghz 15" Mid 2012 MBP 16GB RAM 7.2k 750GB HD anti-glare display|64GB iPad4 ATT LTE|
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2012, 08:08 AM
 
iMacs soon?

http://www.electronista.com/articles...ter.of.debate/

Of course the article is linked from Faux News...

I was embarrassed to even reference the link. Don't tell my friends.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2012, 09:16 AM
 
Latest rumored reason for the delay was that Apple has begun gluing the display to the glass, like they do on the iPhone, and that that process had some problems.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2012, 10:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Latest rumored reason for the delay was that Apple has begun gluing the display to the glass, like they do on the iPhone, and that that process had some problems.
Where's that rumour from?
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 7, 2012, 12:21 PM
 
I honestly don't remember anymore. I only remember it because of the earlier rumors that the glass was changing to combat reflection issues and because it seemed like a very Apple-like thing to do.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
DarkStarRed
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2012, 04:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
I honestly don't remember anymore. I only remember it because of the earlier rumors that the glass was changing to combat reflection issues and because it seemed like a very Apple-like thing to do.
I believe it's found here: http://macbookpro.macrumors.com/ 3rd paragraph down.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2012, 04:49 AM
 
Ah thx. I actually did see that but totally forgot about it. I wonder how accurate Mr. Kuo's info will turn out to be.
     
Tallest Skil
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: U.S.A. That's close enough.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 8, 2012, 08:39 AM
 
I think we'd all want an Ivy Bridge iMac sooner rather than later, but that old "pushback" rumor makes me believe that a full redesign is in our future. Heck, I suppose even a release this year could mean redesign at this point, given how long it has been since appropriate Ivy Bridge desktop chips were released…

Rather not get my hopes up, though.

EDIT: lol, a signature. How quaint.
2009 Mac Pro: whatever hardware I need
LC575: 12”, 66Mhz Motorola, 64MB RAM, 180MB HDD

Ah, the good old days of signatures.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2012, 05:13 AM
 
From the less-than-perfectly-reliable DigiTimes:

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120910PD208.html?mod=2

Apple's upstream supply chain reportedly started mass shipping new iMac all-in-one PCs and Retina Display 13.3-inch MacBook Pros in September, according to sources from the upstream supply chain.

The sources estimated that the official launch of the Retina Display 13.3-inch MacBook Pro should be in either September or October to target back-to-school demand and the year-end holidays.

As for the iMac, Apple originally planned to release three new models with upgraded panels and CPUs, but due to poor yields of the panels, the mass production of the high-end model, has been postponed, without any launch schedule. The other two models – targeting the mid-range and entry-level segments – saw shipment volumes from the supply chain increase in September.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 10, 2012, 12:55 PM
 
iMac with no chin



Well, not really, but the one thing I hate about iMacs, esp. the bigger ones, is that chin.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 11:04 AM
 
So when is Apple going to sue HP? Never seen a more blatant copy of a design.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 11:36 AM
 
This is a much closer clone, complete with the chin and all.



The HP model at least has all the connectors on the base, and there isn't that annoying chin.
In fact, I think the HP model in some ways is a better design, except that you likely can't use it with a VESA mount.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 12:44 PM
 
OK, we have our new iPhone. Some new iPods as well.

Now where's my ****ing iMac Tim ?!?!?!?!
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 06:53 PM
 
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2012, 02:09 PM
 
Its STILL not funny.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2012, 09:45 AM
 
In the first post the OP said there were rumors of 2013. I've never heard that. Does anyone have any idea where that came from?
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2012, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
In the first post the OP said there were rumors of 2013. I've never heard that. Does anyone have any idea where that came from?
His arse.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2012, 02:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
In the first post the OP said there were rumors of 2013. I've never heard that. Does anyone have any idea where that came from?
They were based on comments that were actually referring to the Mac Pros.
     
shabbasuraj
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2012, 09:22 PM
 
Retina displays on 21.5" and 27" would be cost prohibitive (I think).

My wish list for the next update is 2x thunderbolt, usb3, and upgraded graphics for entire line.

I also wish for Tim to take a hard look at their display line. I mean really... give us something... 21.5" model or new retina displays, or... (a new MacPro, ok I just couldn't help myself with that last one)
blabba5555555555555555555555555555555555555
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 22, 2012, 12:59 PM
 
With Apple's sliding scale of what qualifies as "Retina" based on screen size, I think "Retina" panels for iMacs are viable in terms of manufacturing and cost early next year. Like the RMBP it wouldn't be across the whole line and it would be premium priced. Unlike the iOS devices, there's no need to go to exactly a 2x multiple of the old dimensions since apps are used to all sorts of different resolutions, aspect ratios, and pixel densities.

A 21.5" "Retina" iMac could be 196 dpi or 3675x2065
A 24" "Retina" iMac could be 189 dpi or 3950x2225
A 27" "Retina" iMac could be 183 dpi or 4312x2425
(numbers are all rounded, odd resolutions are unlikely, and other disclaimers)

The current iMacs are 105-110 dpi, so it's only a 66-86% increase, less than than the density increases seen on the iOS devices or the RMBP.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 22, 2012, 01:57 PM
 
196 ppi would be perfect. That's 98 ppi x 2. Nice big text.
     
DarkStarRed
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2012, 12:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by mattyb View Post
Its STILL not funny.
Going by logic of last refresh also last times they intro new iMac this far in the year I assume it'll be October, I hope!
You can also pull the plug on my speculation.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2012, 04:38 AM
 
The last five releases were May, July, October, March, & April.
     
DarkStarRed
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 23, 2012, 11:43 PM
 
Yes October releases of 2005 & 2009, To my knowledge these were the only time iMacs were released end of year.
4 year gap if they do it again it'll be 3 years from 10-09.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2012, 08:10 AM
 
From here, a couple of weeks ago:

Inventory shortfalls suggest iMac refresh around the corner



and



---

Originally Posted by DarkStarRed View Post
Yes October releases of 2005 & 2009, To my knowledge these were the only time iMacs were released end of year.
4 year gap if they do it again it'll be 3 years from 10-09.
1998 - August
2004 - August
2007 - August
2009 - October

But yeah, October would be good for Apple, as it gives some time for the Xmas rush.
     
shabbasuraj
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2012, 08:04 PM
 
I had a dream yesterday that a new iMac was coming in Feb. 2013
blabba5555555555555555555555555555555555555
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 4, 2012, 02:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by shabbasuraj View Post
I had a dream yesterday that a new iMac was coming in Feb. 2013
Your dream = my nightmare.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 5, 2012, 01:22 PM
 
Another week without any word. I'm beginning to get nervous that Apple may be making some larger change to the iMac and/or mini. There was the report a few days ago that they are considering AMD chips--it would be a shame to experiment with the iMac and/or mini in this way--Ivy Bridge works very well. Considering this report and the iMaps fiasco it seems Apple's new motto might be "If it ain't broke, we'll fix it."
     
anthology123
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Palo Alto, CA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 5, 2012, 03:22 PM
 
"Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year," the Apple CEO said in an email that was confirmed authentic by Apple's public relations team to Macworld.

This is the closest thing to a Mac update to happen in 2013. Hard to tell if the response is carefully worded or not. Cook says we're working on SOMETHING, it does not necessarily mean a Mac Pro as we know it. One can only hope that it does.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 5, 2012, 05:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
Another week without any word. I'm beginning to get nervous that Apple may be making some larger change to the iMac and/or mini.
Don't fear change. Embrace it.

There was the report a few days ago that they are considering AMD chips
Not a chance at this point. The switch from PPC to x86 was good because it gave Apple two viable chip sources, but in 2012 AMD isn't so viable any more.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 6, 2012, 09:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by WizOSX View Post
...and the iMaps fiasco it seems Apple's new motto might be "If it ain't broke, we'll fix it."
The iOS6 Apple Maps may or may not qualify as a fiasco from a PR standpoint, we will know when we look back in 6 months. However, iOS5 intentionally-crippled-by-Google Google Maps are broken and badly needed fixing.

iOS 5 Google Maps:

• No vector graphics

• No turn-by-turn

• Often difficult to read text

• Route numbers often made illegible by the street lines

• On my iPhone 4s choppy and slow compared to Apple Maps on iOS6

iOS6 Apple Maps were a very necessary upgrade. One of Apple's main competitors Google was keeping a core function of iOS two years behind Android Maps and allegedly was demanding even more control in future licensing agreements. Apple had to build its own maps, and iOS6 was the time to do it even if it was a bit unfinished. It was time.

Adding a strong competitor to the Google-monopolized maps space is good for everyone, including Google users. Folks piling on Apple as if Apple is somehow harming someone by introducing Apple Maps just fail to get it.

As an actual 4s/iOS5--->4s/iOS6 user I will state unequivocally that iOS6 Apple Maps are a great improvement over the lamed Google Maps in iOS5. Seldom do I jump into a .0 upgrade of anything, but I updated to iOS6 on day 1 and consider iOS6 excellent - especially the Apple Maps!

-Allen

Whoops, I just realized this drifted well off-topic. But I just had to respond...
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 6, 2012, 04:32 PM
 
Thanks, Sierra. Your points were most interesting. I especially agree that Google needs competition in anything that it monopolizes. In addition, so does Apple. The existence of Android forces Apple to keep improving iOS at a much quicker rate. In that sense I hope that Apple doesn't have too much success in the courts against Android but is, instead, forced to "keep competitive." That is good for all of us.

I guess I was thinking of "fiasco" more in the sense that Apple brought iMaps to market before it was fully ready. I was just hoping that they don't experiment too much with the iMac/mini platform since it really is very good right now. It just needs Ivy Bridge, faster Intel processors, much, much more reasonably priced SSDs and the option of dedicated graphics across all possible processor options. Then the platform will be really amazing!
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 7, 2012, 03:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
Not a chance at this point. The switch from PPC to x86 was good because it gave Apple two viable chip sources, but in 2012 AMD isn't so viable any more.
AMD of 2012 is still a much better option than say Motorola was back in the PPC days. Llano, for all of the bad rap it got, was basically comparable to Arrandale, so in time, AMD was a year behind. The desktop Trinity manages to reach the Core i3 dualcore Sandy Bridge - if only because Intel nerfs the i3 by removing turbo - while having much better integrated graphics. AMD is a year or two behind, partially because it's a process node behind - and this is at a time when Intel is performing better than ever, with only a single failure in execution (Auburndale/Havendale) in the last 6 years. If Intel starts stumbling, Apple could conceivably switch to AMD - or to an ARM CPU of its own design. While that stumble doesn't seem likely now, the Haswell presentations shows that Intel sees the need to answer the iPad onslaught with the mainline CPUs rather than revving Atom. It will be interesting to see if they really can stretch an architecture that far without opening up a gap at the top.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 7, 2012, 05:13 AM
 
Agreed that AMD now is still better off speed wise than Motorola was for PPC back then. My point though was that there is no reason in 2012 to go AMD.

I don't know know if the iMac will see a big change soon. I am guessing it will actually, esp. considering how long it has been since the last update, but that change will not include a shift to AMD.

For a form factor change I hope we will see more height adjustability, and better matched pixel densities for OS X. We will also see USB 3, and maybe even 802.11ac.
     
Elmo151
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 7, 2012, 11:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by davidflas View Post
I am in the same boat, I am poised to buy a 27" iMac the moment they are released.
there will be a long line!
It's over 500 days since the last release. Hard to understand what the delay is unless they are doing something very special.

I am thinking about a MBAir with external [non-apple] monitor but can't see any advantages over an iMac /iPad combo
Elmo
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 7, 2012, 11:37 PM
 
In some ways a form factor change is about due. This is a generation with only minimal internal component changes, and the form factor is old enough (and even the face lift is old enough).
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 06:35 AM
 
The white iMac G5 was released in 2004, eight years ago.
The aluminum iMac was released in 2006, six and a half years ago.

So yeah, it's about time for a form factor refresh.
     
WizOSX
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: London, Ontario
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 07:19 AM
 
Almost that bad, but not quite. The white Core 2 Duo appeared Sept. 6, 2006 (I've got one, the last iMac that I bought) and the Aluminum on Aug. 7, 2007. But still that's 5+ years so your point is still well taken!
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 07:27 AM
 
My hope is that the they are delaying the iMacs a bit just to get a modern MP out too. And really no need to change the very effective MP case design in a major way.

Or maybe waiting for anti-glare displays for the iMacs...

-Allen
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 07:28 AM
 
Forgot about that one. I had mistakenly thought all Intel iMacs were aluminum. Thanks for info Wiz.

Sierra, I don't think there would be any good reason to delay an iMac release to get a matching Mac Pro release .
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 11:14 AM
 
Not unless that iMac release was the one with a few goodies to help console the MP users after Apple kills the MP.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2012, 02:14 PM
 
Many graphics content folks like me who _hate_ glossy displays are a big part of the high end in desktop box sales. Trying to force a glossy iMac on the core base that held Apple Mac sales for a long time would really be rude. Even force some of us to other solutions.

And why? How hard can it be to build a modern MP once you have a proven case design?

-Allen
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2012, 12:35 AM
 
I assume that in an MP-less world, we'd get a non-glossy iMac.

The problem about keeping the MP around is testing and support. You have to test every new revision and then support it for years. If the sales numbers for the MP are low, this does not make business sense.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:00 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,