• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

iMac 2012 Refresh

M

Muvian

n00b
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
10
My computer got hit by lighting a couple days ago, luckily it's covered under the surge protector connected device warranty. I sent them a bill for $2400 and hoping to get an iMac 27" and hoping that the refresh comes soon. What are you guys hoping for in the refresh?

I'm hoping for the following:
Ivy Bridge (hopefully the 3770 as it would keep the top 3.4ghz)
AMD Radeon 7970M
Retina display (would be nice seeing how the rumored macbook pro is getting a 2880x1800 display)
USB3.0
SATA III (would be nice to use SSDs at full speed)

Either way I'm probably going to buy one the only deterrent is the price tag.
 
The current gen iMac's already have SATA III.
Apple is very price sensitive. The top end 27" iMac will be priced in line with current models. I would say that it'll cost $2,200 before updgrades (like SSD, larger HD, more ram on the video card, and more system ram... these are the standard iMac options.)

For a 27" iMac with upgraded video card ram, and top spec CPU, it will probably be around $2,500. Then add in your own SSD, RAM, etc. yourself. To do it via Apple will probably be around $3,200.
 
Ivy Bridge is a given. And if the 7970M is included, it'll be a BTO option on the 27'' iMac, IMO.

I'm curious if Apple is going to preemptively implement 802.11ac. They're about due for an Airport Extreme and Time Capsule refresh anyway.
 
I priced the cpu upgrade and the video card upgrade at $2300, since the memory, hard drive and ssd can be upgraded.
It would be interesting to see if they implement 802.11ac too, I know the standard isn't going official til later and they adopted 802.11n before it was official.
 
The 27 inch iMac with the 7950M/70M 2GB should cost $1999 as it does now with the 6970M, and I expect it to offer a 7970M 4GB as an upgrade option. It'll likely have an Ivy Bridge quad-core 3.1GHz CPU, 4GB 1333MHz or 1600MHz RAM, and a 1TB HDD.

Retina display would be awesome.
 
Come on guys we don't need to turn this into a flame war. There are several reasons why I am buying a mac over building a PC, build quality (aka aluminum and glass), I already own a iPad, iPhone and Apple TV and I am looking to use the iMac as a media server. I have already made the choice to buy an all in one Mac over building a new PC so you're just wasting time trying to convince me otherwise.
 
steelbom said:
The 27 inch iMac with the 7950M/70M 2GB should cost $1999 as it does now with the 6970M, and I expect it to offer a 7970M 4GB as an upgrade option. It'll likely have an Ivy Bridge quad-core 3.1GHz CPU, 4GB 1333MHz or 1600MHz RAM, and a 1TB HDD.

Retina display would be awesome.
Click to expand...

Very likely it is already a retina display.
 
Well right now the display is a 27" 2560x1440 which equals 108.79dpi (109) where as the iPhone is 326 and the new iPad is 264. IF Apple does double the resolution to 5120x2880 it would be more on par with other devices. Then I believe that they would run into the resolution maximum of the video card.
 
I don't think apple will double the resolution of the 27". It does not need to be doubled to be considered retina. Retina just means that the pixels are not visible from a normal viewing distance. I think the 27" is already close to retina. Just my thoughts.
 
wagsrules said:
I don't think apple will double the resolution of the 27". It does not need to be doubled to be considered retina. Retina just means that the pixels are not visible from a normal viewing distance. I think the 27" is already close to retina. Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...

The big question is: "who is Apple trying to cater the 27" iMac (and 27" displays) to?"

Traditionally the iMac and external displays built by Apple have the same resolution(s) and there is a rumor that Apple isn't going to kill the Mac Pro. If Apple wants to produce a solution that would cater to the film industry they would want to make a screen at at least 4k resolution. That would put Apple in a highly competitive position vs very few, very expensive manufacturers (resolution wise, that isn't to say that said monitors would be better at say color, or anything else.)

I'm pretty doubtful that they actually would produce a 4k 27" iMac due to cost, but such a thing would be staggering, and highly disruptive in the movie industry (two things that Apple likes to be known for.)
 
In order to better cater to the film and television industries, Apple does need to produce a display that has a wider color gamut. The current 27" display only hits 83% of the Adobe RGB gamut.

I can certainly see them doing a 4K, wide-gamut Cinema Display. I don't see them working to achieve that for the iMac.
 
wonderfield said:
In order to better cater to the film and television industries, Apple does need to produce a display that has a wider color gamut. The current 27" display only hits 83% of the Adobe RGB gamut.

I can certainly see them doing a 4K, wide-gamut Cinema Display. I don't see them working to achieve that for the iMac.
Click to expand...

As I noted, Apple makes the iMac and external displays the same resolution per size and generation. Although you may be right in the sense that they won't bother to do so with the iMac, it just means they won't bother to do that with external displays either.

I should also mention however that getting the full gamut isn't necessary, good calibration is however. The reasons why it's not necessary, I won't bother to outline here. Suffice it to say, that for smaller production houses that are cost sensitive a 4k display that is 27" at $1200 would be a boon. A 4k resolution 27" iMac with an i7 for $2200 would be game changing. Once again, not saying Apple will do this as I'm not entirely sure it's economically viable, even with Apples ability to wholesale LCDs, so this is all academic anyway.
 
Last edited:
AQ_OC said:
Very likely it is already a retina display.
Click to expand...
I agree.
Muvian said:
Well right now the display is a 27" 2560x1440 which equals 108.79dpi (109) where as the iPhone is 326 and the new iPad is 264. IF Apple does double the resolution to 5120x2880 it would be more on par with other devices. Then I believe that they would run into the resolution maximum of the video card.
Click to expand...
The maximum resolution of the 7970/50 and 7870/50 is 7680x4320 I believe, and I think maybe even the 7770/50 too.
wagsrules said:
I don't think apple will double the resolution of the 27". It does not need to be doubled to be considered retina. Retina just means that the pixels are not visible from a normal viewing distance. I think the 27" is already close to retina. Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...
That depends on your visual acuity and how far you're viewing the display from. With 20/20 vision, you'll need to sit no closer than 31 inches from the display for pixels to be indistinguishable, but at 217 PPI that changes to 15.8 inches.

For my 21.5 inch 1080p display (102 PPI), I'm supposed to sit 33 inches away but I measured my viewing distance and it's only about 20-22 inches. If that was a 2160p display (204 PPI) then that distance would change to 16.5 inches, which means everything will be "retina" for me at around that 20 inch mark. Assuming my visual acuity is 20/20, I'm not sure if it's better or worse tbh.

This site is an easy way to calculate these things, I've found it quite useful: http://bhtooefr.org/displaycalc.htm
 
UnknownSouljer said:
...I'm not entirely sure it's economically viable...
Click to expand...
Apple has a boatload of cash. They have proven over the years that they can do this sort of thing. Ex: iPad 3, 1st Gen iPod Nano (iPod Nano was about the same price as a 4GB flash drive for a short period of time IIRC).
 
Apple's are expensive but they do sure look pretty. Kind of what's missing on a pc. If I had the top money I would get a mac instead of a pc.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
The current gen iMac's already have SATA III.
Apple is very price sensitive. The top end 27" iMac will be priced in line with current models. I would say that it'll cost $2,200 before updgrades (like SSD, larger HD, more ram on the video card, and more system ram... these are the standard iMac options.)

For a 27" iMac with upgraded video card ram, and top spec CPU, it will probably be around $2,500. Then add in your own SSD, RAM, etc. yourself. To do it via Apple will probably be around $3,200.
Click to expand...

Will it be easy to put in your own SSD? I've seen some of the videos online and it looked like a PITA. Do you still need to buy that piece to change up the HDD configuration? I think it was an air-dam or something like that. I'd love to put a $200 M4 in one instead of having to pay 4x that from Apple.
 
QHalo said:
Will it be easy to put in your own SSD? I've seen some of the videos online and it looked like a PITA. Do you still need to buy that piece to change up the HDD configuration? I think it was an air-dam or something like that. I'd love to put a $200 M4 in one instead of having to pay 4x that from Apple.
Click to expand...

Define pain the ass.

See sig.

Adding an additional sata cable is not very quick as you need to pull the logic logic board. I personally love to tinker and had no issues doing this myself. The performance benefits are phenomenal. If you have the extra cash and aren't confident enough about taking this apart, then build to order.

There are good guides on iFixit and I have quite a bit of personal experience opening up the 2011 27". I have opened it up about 5 times in the past few months just changing things around.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
As I noted, Apple makes the iMac and external displays the same resolution per size and generation.
Click to expand...
Historically speaking. Apple has a tendency to buck their own trends pretty frequently, so history is little indication of future products.
 
wonderfield said:
In order to better cater to the film and television industries, Apple does need to produce a display that has a wider color gamut. The current 27" display only hits 83% of the Adobe RGB gamut.

I can certainly see them doing a 4K, wide-gamut Cinema Display. I don't see them working to achieve that for the iMac.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you understand Apple very well. "Cater to"? Apple disrupts industries it enters, it doesn't cater to them. Look at what Apple did to the music industry.

And TV content producers don't want 4K. They just spent millions of dollars on various 720p/1080i/1080p cameras. The providers spent even more making sure they had the bandwidth to transmit HD content. They aren't going to suddenly dump everything. They'll resist 4K until there's overwhelming consumer demand—and right now, the consumer is happy as long as the box says HD.
 
Terpfen said:
Apple disrupts industries it enters
Click to expand...
Oh? You're going to tell me that Xserve disrupted the server industry? That Logic turned the professional audio industry on its head and sent Digidesign scrambling? The Final Cut X was widely well-received by film and television editors for its wide array of features professionals needed of it, and left Avid quaking in their boots?

Let's not be silly here. Apple sometimes is able to push into a market with so much force and gusto that they turn those markets on their head, but that isn't the norm, particularly in professional industries as of late. In order to better market products to film/video professionals, they need to cater to the needs of those professionals by releasing products those professionals want with the features they need. Sometimes they do that. Sometimes they don't, and those products don't reach success.

Terpfen said:
And TV content producers don't want 4K. They just spent millions of dollars on various 720p/1080i/1080p cameras.
Click to expand...
It's absolutely hilarious that you believe 4K cams and 4K production workflows don't have any kind of foothold in the television industry.
 
yeah. aren't the "old" film cameras capable of 10k x 10k resolutions?? (in theaters of course)
 
I believe discussion about the iMac refresh to be on topic in a thread about the iMac refresh.
 
I like iMac's. My sister has had three of them (new one last year), and I've had one (the first LCD aka iLamp).

I'm certified in everything Apple and have been for nearly 2 decades, but since going corporate my focus has been 100% PC since about 2000. Haven't really had much time to play around with Mac's since about 2005. I gave the iLamp to my nephew about 3 years ago.

So word is we may again be providing minor support for Macs. Ok, goody :)

I decided to get an inexpensive one so I could brush up a bit.

I was going to get an iMac. Laptop was not enough hardware for the money (for MY purposes), and I never saw myself owning a Mac Mini.

Ahem....

I ended up buying the iMac Mini 2.5Ghz :)

What a fabulous little box this thing is!

I had a spare 27" Viewsonic Monitor, so I just bought the apple wireless keyboard and magic mouse. Got the trackpad too for the hell of it.

I think I spent all told $1100, no interest for 1 year, at the Apple Store and out I went. That price included the Mac, The mouse, The TouchPad and Parallels 7 and AppleCare.

I spent another $40 or so on Amazon for a Crucial upgrade and it has 8GB of RAM.

Really. This thing is frickin brilliant. I love the thing. It is SOOOO much more Powerful than any Mac I owned back in 'the day' it was hard at first to get my head wrapped around it.

And Parallels? I know not everyone loves Parallels, but it's another frickin genius product.

I've got Windows 7, Windows 8 Release Preview (parallels just released an update to cover it) and Ubuntu on it, and all run just fine with no performance issues.

No optical drive? Who cares. I've got the same 100 stack of blank DVD's I bought in 2005 and less than 3 of them have been used. Same for the 100 stack of blank CD's I have.

And the OS installer is imbedded in the Mini's firmware, which is extremely cool :)

I'm not sure where I was going with this other than to say if you have the mouse, keyboard and monitor, look at the mini. You ain't giving up much!
 
450 said:
Apple has a boatload of cash. They have proven over the years that they can do this sort of thing. Ex: iPad 3, 1st Gen iPod Nano (iPod Nano was about the same price as a 4GB flash drive for a short period of time IIRC).
Click to expand...

That all depends on what it costs to produce a 4K display. Even if they sell it at cost, it doesn't mean that it's economically viable.



wonderfield said:
Historically speaking. Apple has a tendency to buck their own trends pretty frequently, so history is little indication of future products.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this statement. Really what Apple likes to do is create standards, be ahead of the game, and to get others to follow (hence control.) In the case of the iMac and external displays, as far as I know they have NEVER differed the resolution of their external displays as compared to the iMac. This is completely for usability and design purposes.

There is a reason why the iMac and the Thunderbolt display look and act the way they do, because they were designed to be the same height, have the same resolution, and be placed side by side. As long as people with sense in their brains like Johnny Ive are designing the products, this is something that won't change, so long as there are external displays and iMacs.



QHalo said:
Will it be easy to put in your own SSD? I've seen some of the videos online and it looked like a PITA. Do you still need to buy that piece to change up the HDD configuration? I think it was an air-dam or something like that. I'd love to put a $200 M4 in one instead of having to pay 4x that from Apple.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will ever be easy, so long as the back panel is one large piece (a design choice, as the single sheet is stronger and allows them to maximize studs and mounting points on the inside,) unless they make the drives installable from the bottom like the RAM. I ended up having someone else install my M4 for me. I could have done it myself, I've disassembled other Mac products before, but I didn't feel like getting specialty suction cups I'd only use one time (jokes on me, I may buy the cups anyway to tinker around.) Additionally the other problem is that it's impossible for consumers to buy Apple parts. The place I went was able to source the special 2.5" mount required to put in the drive (it doesn't come with the iMac unless you order it with an SSD... maybe they'll add that it in future models, but I doubt it.) I wanted it done right, not interested in the velcro method.



Terpfen said:
And TV content producers don't want 4K. They just spent millions of dollars on various 720p/1080i/1080p cameras. The providers spent even more making sure they had the bandwidth to transmit HD content. They aren't going to suddenly dump everything. They'll resist 4K until there's overwhelming consumer demand—and right now, the consumer is happy as long as the box says HD.
Click to expand...

4K isn't for producing video for consumer displays, it's for those interested in creating films. Although 4k does have uses in the TV industry as the extra resolution allows them to do things like crop (if necessary and only use a section of the frame,) and downsample (like the Arri Alexa which does so with Prores 4-4-4,) Just as another point of reference, there is already a big market for 4k+ cameras, that's why a 4k display would be nice, because right now the only way to view it natively is on some extremely expensive projectors (Sony, NEC, Barco, Christie, and iMax being players in that market.)

Some examples are the Red One (which you may have heard of, because of James Cameron's Avatar,) Red Epic (5K,) Red Scarlet-X (5K,) Dalsa Origin II, Panavision Genesis, etc. I should note that many of these cameras have existed for 5 years or more. The Panavision Genesis as an example is from 2005.


Upcomming 4K camera's include Canon's 1DC & C500, Sony's FS700, Red Dragon (6K,) Sony CineAlta F65, JVC GY-HMQ10, etc.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
In the case of the iMac and external displays, as far as I know they have NEVER differed the resolution of their external displays as compared to the iMac. This is completely for usability and design purposes.
Click to expand...
There have been at least two instances: The first 22" Cinema display (1600x1024) and the 30" display (2560x1600) never had iMac equivalents.
 
They cannot experience it today. That says nothing about tomorrow.

Consumers couldn't experience 2K content back in the late 90's, but that is what films were commonly scanned in at thanks to telecines like the Spirit DataCine. Today, some TV production companies use 4K cameras like the aforementioned RED One and Scarlett and have 4K workflows. Like I said.
 
Announcements should come out next week at WWDC. There are leaked specs on 13"/15" MBP that look legit, but I haven't seen any news on the iMac.
 
No, it will happen at their conference next week, though some specs are leaking out for some of their products.
 
@TechLarry

If you can still return that magic mouse it might be a good idea to do so. it won't be long before you find yourself using it less and less and by all accounts it's not all that great relative to the magic trackpad (which is all sorts of awesome).


If anyone else is considering Parallels there's a really nice software bundle that includes it right now for $50: http://www.mupromo.com/ (available for the next 12 days)
 
A post from May 10th 2012 on GeekBench, showed an entry for a new iMac13,2 which may correspond to the new 27-inch iMac models that will run a quad-core Ivy Bridge processor i7-3770 running at 3.4GHz. This would put this iMac at the higher-end spectrum. Overall, the new iMac received a score of 12,182 which is a bit higher than the 11,500 score of the current high-spec iMac models (higher is better).
 
I heard new mac lines will be officially announced next monday not sure if it's true also some people say leaked information could be fake so...as always nothing's 100% :(
but at least im expecting Retina display on iMacs and Powerbooks
 
senson said:
I heard new mac lines will be officially announced next monday not sure if it's true also some people say leaked information could be fake so...as always nothing's 100% :(
but at least im expecting Retina display on iMacs and Powerbooks
Click to expand...

Apple rumors tend to be wrong about 95% of the time. So there is no point getting expectations up for any particular rumor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top