[acmeaudioeng]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Yes... Vewy, vewy qwiet!!!

This is in stark contrast to my G5 iMac. The 2.0 GHz G5 20" was quiet at idle and pretty quiet with light usage, but the fans would rev up moderately under heavy load.

Agreed, I went from the 17" 2 GHz G5 to the 24"... WAY QUIETER!
I purchased the G5 because the Dual 1.42 MDD sounded like a leaf blower under my desk, then I had the leaf blower ON the desk! both of these sucked for recording audio, but the Intel 24" on the other hand, is quieter than the studio monitors that I use! (KRK Rokit8's at 3/4 power, 125+ watts a side)

I assume you used the word "moderately" very loosely. I really don't miss that machine.

[P]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Intel's mobile chipsets don't support more than 2 memory slots. If Apple wanted 4 slots they'd have to use the desktop chipsets with full size DIMMs (but they could still use the mobile processors).

I know that they only support two slots - I simply stated that space in the box is not the limitation.

I was not aware that you could put Merom/Penryn on a 965P chipset. Do you have link to some machine where they have done that?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by P 

I was not aware that you could put Merom/Penryn on a 965P chipset. Do you have link to some machine where they have done that?

I don't know of any based on 965, but there are plenty of motherboards based on 945 and 975X that will accept the mobile Core 2 Duo chips.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by acmeaudioeng 

Agreed, I went from the 17" 2 GHz G5 to the 24"... WAY QUIETER!
I purchased the G5 because the Dual 1.42 MDD sounded like a leaf blower under my desk, then I had the leaf blower ON the desk! both of these sucked for recording audio, but the Intel 24" on the other hand, is quieter than the studio monitors that I use! (KRK Rokit8's at 3/4 power, 125+ watts a side)

I assume you used the word "moderately" very loosely. I really don't miss that machine.

A quiet computer is a wonderful thing, and for me an absolute must.

Regarding the 20" iMac, things must have changed with the iSight. I have the 20" 2.1 Ghz iMac, and it is always quiet, the fans don't come on often.

[P]

Originally Posted by mduell 

I don't know of any based on 965, but there are plenty of motherboards based on 945 and 975X that will accept the mobile Core 2 Duo chips.

Interesting. It doesn't really solve the RAM problem though - the 945 never supported more than 4 gigs, and the 975X-boards, which usually support 8 gigs, seem to be cut down to 4 gigs when using Socket M. Note this one, for instance, that supports 4 slots but still is limited to 4 gigs.

[P]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

A quiet computer is a wonderful thing, and for me an absolute must.

Regarding the 20" iMac, things must have changed with the iSight. I have the 20" 2.1 Ghz iMac, and it is always quiet, the fans don't come on often.

Things gradually improved, partially because Apple managed to improve manufacturing tolerances and partially because the included chips ran cooler in the later models. The first were the noisiest - vibrating fan covers combined with a highly clocked 150 nm Geforce 5200 Ultra. You can improve it a lot by securing any loose parts inside the box.

[Eug]

ThinkSecret: Death knell tolls for 17-inch iMac

Apple's pending iMac update will spell the end of the day for the 17-inch iMac, the most affordable computer in the line. The refreshed iMac, currently on track to arrive by the end of June according to sources, will feature just 20- and 24-inch models.

[Buckaroo]

Originally Posted by red rocket 

What kind of design changes do you guys want to see?

I think they should make the whole thing out of metal, add a sunflower-style neck, make it look like a cross between a cinema display and an XServe. The base will have to be ultra-heavy, to compensate for the already top-heavy design, maybe a solid slab of steel with a few status lights and a power supply.



Won't happen, I suppose.

Didn't we already have this?

[Simon]

No more 17" iMac? Great! That should make way for two nice intros: the 30" iMac and a reasonably upgraded Mac mini.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Buckaroo 

Didn't we already have this?

The dome was a PITA to expand or disassemble. In addition the monitor was firmly attached so there was no screen update path (as with every previous iMac).

What about a solution as in red rocket's drawing with a simpler case design and a standard VESA screen mount? That would allow people to attach any ACD or other VESA compatible screen they like. The base would be easier to disassemble and expand. Apple could still sell it as an AIO with CTO screen size options. Actually with such a design the Mac mini could become a headless downspec'ed version of the standard iMac.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by Simon 

No more 17" iMac? Great! That should make way for two nice intros: the 30" iMac and a reasonably upgraded Mac mini.

The problem here is that a 30" model is not in the rumor radar range yet. Now this is just a rumor and nothing more, but the real problem is the 30" display price. Anyone can remember how much the 23" ACD did cost when the 24" iMac came into light?

Besides, I think Apple would not jump so much in display size in less than one year, but again this is price-related.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Eug 

ThinkSecret: Death knell tolls for 17-inch iMac

Apple's pending iMac update will spell the end of the day for the 17-inch iMac, the most affordable computer in the line. The refreshed iMac, currently on track to arrive by the end of June according to sources, will feature just 20- and 24-inch models.

That's fine so long as it doesn't wipe out the low end price point.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Pierre B. 

Anyone can remember how much the 23" ACD did cost when the 24" iMac came into light?

The 24" iMac was announced in September 2006. At that time IIRC the price of the 23" ACD was $1299 - the 30" ACD currently sells for $1799.

However, the 24" panel Apple is using on the iMac is less expensive than the 23" panel of the ACD which is also why they are expected to switch panels when they update the ACD line.

It's probably a bit early for the 30" iMac now, but if the iMac line continues to exist as the desktop Mac it is today, I'd be surprised if we don't get a 30" iMac model by Summer 2008.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by wallinbl 

That's fine so long as it doesn't wipe out the low end price point.

I doubt we'll see a 20" iMac for $999. Apple has the nasty habit of dropping low-end configs fairly early and taking into account an increase of the entry-level price tag.

[Eug]

AI claims that the death of the Mac mini is imminent. They of course could be dead wrong, but if it were true, perhaps that could signal the birth of a new form factor to replace it.

[Simon]

I was thinking the same thing.

Dropping the mini could also be a sign that Apple will introduce a true 'desktop' Mac. Of course a sleek iMac with a detachable/optional screen could replace the current mini. OTOH such an iMac wouldn't likely cater well to the HEM crowd. Oh well, we'll see.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Actually with such a design the Mac mini could become a headless downspec'ed version of the standard iMac.

Funny that crossed my mind two days before AI claims the Mac mini has been EOL'ed. If the mini is actually canned, do you guys believe Apple will extend the iMac to the low end market?

[ajprice]

No. I've read the 'Mac mini is dead' rumours, and also the iMac 17" is dead rumours. If both those things actually do happen, that leaves a big gap at the bottom end upto $1500 / £1000. So maybe there's a new mac to replace both machines, better spec and expansion than a mini,with no screen. That gives a 3 model desktop range - 1. Low end headless with Core 2 Duo processor. 2. iMac (with Santa Rosa) 20" and bigger, then 3. Mac Pro.

[dale]

Originally Posted by dale 

Okay,

This is my first post for several months...

I think I'm a lot less of a techie that a lot off you guys out there, but here is my $0.02 worth.....

1.) The arrangement of having the innards behind the screen will remain.
2.) I think the new iMac will have a new case material. I suspect they will replace see-through plastic and white backing ,with a very cool ceramic material to better get rid of heat. Possibly in white, black and a very cool dark grey.
3.) I think the sides and the chin will be slimmed significantly, but a small chin will remain to house the aple logo
4.) The stand will raise, swivel and tilt in an inordinately elegant mechanism
5.) A redesigned motherboard will be introduced to make the inside as beautiful as the outside once again
6.) It will offer the same upgrade routes as today.. i.e expansion via USB, Firewire, Bluetooth, ehternet and wireless. You will not see bays to upgrade the HDD, or upgrade the grahics card. This is not what this machine is about.

I suspect a 17 inch may remain, with the option of touch screen, which can be disengaged from its stand mounting to use as a tablet. Yes this means an internal cheargable battery. Think of it as an enormous iPhone (but without the phone part).

To me, changes on this levl would be far more significant that what processor it has. Afterall, the processor is just on part of the computer. The paragraph above could provide a paradigm shift as to how these things are used.

It will be launched with Leopard.

These are my predictions.

I have to say it, the suggestion I made above of a 17" iMac tablet with gesture control doesn't seem too far fetched now after the Microsoft announcement today about "Surface Computing".

Cant see the IR cameras making it into the iMac though - should help keep the cost to something reasonable. You would have to be a pretty hardcore fanboy to want to pay $10K for an iMac, no matter how good its touch screen.

[ESavage]

I am wondering how the graphics card (NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT with 256MB GDDR3 memory) in the new MacbookPros, going to factor into the next IMac.

[Aegis]

I think it bodes well for the iMac. They may have downclocked the 8600M (who knows how much) but at least they had their eye on putting in something significant. Hopefully that focus doesn't change with the iMac update.

[ESavage]

That brings up the question of, How close do you think the next IMac will be to the specs of the new MacbookPro that just came out?

[P]

If it still uses laptop parts, I think the iMac will be essentially identical wrt to the motherboard.

[ESavage]

Originally Posted by P 

If it still uses laptop parts, I think the iMac will be essentially identical wrt to the motherboard.

I give hope that they will be switching to a Desktop CPU

[anthology123]

Can't believe that Apple will go BACK to a base design with a neck holding the monitor. To quote others, "it's been done". Apple designers do not tread out old concepts. If anything, the goal of future iMacs is to look so sleek, it looks like just a monitor on your desk and nothing more. The stand may change depending on the style of the day, but the whole concept of one piece to the point of just a monitor is Apple's goal. The design mentioned above is interesting, but takes valuable desk space, and Apple will not likely go there.

[Dazed]

Since the 15" MBP got LED Back lighting and the 17 didn't, do people think that LED for any imac would be for the smaller screens only ?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Dazed 

Since the 15" MBP got LED Back lighting and the 17 didn't, do people think that LED for any imac would be for the smaller screens only ?

Probably not, since desktop LCDs up to 24" with LED backlights have been announced.

[brokenjago]

I give hope that they will be switching to a Desktop CPU

How will the switch to a desktop CPU if the enclosure is supposed to get smaller?

[tiger]

Originally Posted by Dazed 

Since the 15" MBP got LED Back lighting and the 17 didn't, do people think that LED for any imac would be for the smaller screens only ?

I really don't see LEDs makind that big of the difference, and the 17 Inch MacBook Pros got high resolution displays instead (1900 x 1200)

[ESavage]

Appleinsider today is reporting that the refresh of the will not come at WWDC (link).

In the article:

Unlike a supply-chain pattern that manifested in the weeks and days leading up to Tuesday's MacBook Pro revamp, checks into the availability and channel flow of existing iMac models revealed no disruptions and normal availability. Additionally, high-volume dealers are expecting an uninterrupted stream of iMac shipments for the foreseeable future.

So, if the article is right, the Paris Expo is the next event that they might be out, that would push it to about year since the last update. Lets hope that the article is wrong.

[Biest]

Maybe not the best place to talk about the innards, as has anyone thought about that they might put in the Core 2 Extreme for laptops that is coming out next quarter, supposedly. Yes I know this is predominantly a gaming chip, but still would create a greater difference between the MPB and the iMac

Intel Core 2 Extreme For Gaming Notebooks Coming in Q3

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Biest 

Maybe not the best place to talk about the innards, as has anyone thought about that they might put in the Core 2 Extreme for laptops that is coming out next quarter, supposedly. Yes I know this is predominantly a gaming chip, but still would create a greater difference between the MPB and the iMac

Too expensive.

[dbranham]

Originally Posted by anthology123 

Can't believe that Apple will go BACK to a base design with a neck holding the monitor. To quote others, "it's been done". Apple designers do not tread out old concepts.

Cube --> Mini

Seems like a re-tread to me.

[idyll]

has an apple computer ever gone longer than 6 months without being updated? i doubt they would take a year to update the imacs, no?

[tiger]

Originally Posted by idyll 

has an apple computer ever gone longer than 6 months without being updated? i doubt they would take a year to update the imacs, no?

Well in reality, other than speedbumps the iMacs haven't had a real update in over a year. Same graphics, same drives and no redesign in over 3 years.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by tiger 

Well in reality, other than speedbumps the iMacs haven't had a real update in over a year. Same graphics, same drives and no redesign in over 3 years.

The comment on the 3 years is not exactly correct. The current iMac design is here since the end of August 2004. As for the other comments, what more would you expect to happen than routine updates to keep the line fresh?

[tiger]

Originally Posted by dbranham 

Cube --> Mini

Seems like a re-tread to me.

They should "re-re-tread" and bring back the cube.

[tiger]

Originally Posted by Pierre B. 

The comment on the 3 years is not exactly correct. The current iMac design is here since the end of August 2004. As for the other comments, what more would you expect to happen than routine updates to keep the line fresh?

When the iMac G4's were around, when they got speed bumps they also got other significant updates; such as graphics cards, storage and a few extras, none of which we've seen in the iMacs since they've been out of a year.

[P]

True, they're about due for a new GPU and a new chipset. The difference this time is that the X1600 was the newest midrange card available at the time - not even the 7600GT was out yet. It's not like when they were giving us 5200s and 9600s when the next gen had already been released.

[slugslugslug]

Yesterday:

Originally Posted by ESavage 

Appleinsider today is reporting that the refresh of the will not come at WWDC (link).

Today:
Think Secret claims that a redesigned iMac is, in fact, on track for a WWDC release, with a brushed aluminum enclosure and no 17" model.

Washed-up Rumor Site Deathmatch!

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by slugslugslug 

Washed-up Rumor Site Deathmatch!

That's very funny. One of the few times that the two major rumor sites state exactly opposite estimations.

[Eug]

Suhweet! (If true...)

Since the inception of Intel-based systems in January 2006, the iMac platform has shared many of its internals with the MacBook Pro, meaning the new iMac will surely benefit from the same improvements the MacBook Pro received earlier this week. This includes the implementation of Intel's new Santa Rosa architecture, which features a 20 percent faster front-side bus than the outgoing models and processor speeds up to 2.4GHz.

As previously reported, the 17-inch model will not be included in the new iMac line-up, which will feature models with 20-inch and 24-inch displays only. Prices will drop accordingly on the models with larger displays, which current start at $1,499 for the 20-inch, but they are not expected to match the outgoing 17-inch Mac's $999 entry-level price point.

However, I may not be buying anything at all this time around. I'd like a new 20" for work, but I've got other things to buy now.

[wallinbl]

iMac needs to go with the touchscreen like the iPhone. Would be cool if you could have all the fancy multitouch features right there on your computer.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by wallinbl 

iMac needs to go with the touchscreen like the iPhone. Would be cool if you could have all the fancy multitouch features right there on your computer.

I have zero interest in a touchscreen iMac. I think that would be a major waste of money, and of true interest to a very small population of Mac users.

[lpkmckenna]

I could see a new iMac and new Mac mini, both based on Santa Rosa. That's why the mini took so long to get an update: Apple wanted to sync the MacBook Pro, iMac, and Mac mini lines.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I have zero interest in a touchscreen iMac. I think that would be a major waste of money, and of true interest to a very small population of Mac users.

I don't think it's for you. It's for my wife and my mother. It's for people that suck with computers.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by wallinbl 

I don't think it's for you. It's for my wife and my mother. It's for people that suck with computers.

I don't think it's for anyone at this time.

[Pierre B.]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I have zero interest in a touchscreen iMac. I think that would be a major waste of money, and of true interest to a very small population of Mac users.

True, but maybe not because you and me have zero interest in this. A big screen with touchscreen functionality used to operate such a complex machine like a computer, really defeats its own purpose. Touchscreen cannot take you more far than basic functions, while full functionality on a computer will fast require much more sophisticated and precise input. Not to talk about comfort: ever thought having your arm(s) hanging and trying to do touch manipulations if not all day long, at least for some hours?

[dbranham]

Yeah, the touchscreen idea for a desktop doesn't appeal to me, either. I like to rest my lazy arms on the desk and just work this Mighty Mouse with the least physical effort possible. Constantly having to lift my arms to touch a monitor would get very tiresome very fast.

[dale]

but a touch screen that could be laid flat on a desktop (i.e. tablet) and then put onto a stand and used with a keyboard and mouse. Might be nteresting if it wasn't hugely expensive.