[wtd]

Just looking at an iPad 2 next to an iMac today, and it struck me that I could see Apple doing away with the optical drive (though I could see the rest happening without this), tapering the edges back, and making the back of the iMac flat. I've taken a fair number of them apart, too, so I can't imagine why this wouldn't work from a internal engineering standpoint.

Am I crazy, or does this seem like a not entirely unlikely scenario?

[Matsu]

It's an unnecessary scenario, but not unlikely. iMac is a very useful AIO design. Lots of people still have to send a disc to lab, because the files are too big to ftp. Sure, consumers don't, but iMac is in use by lots of pros. Having to add stuff to it to maintain basic functionality is kinda stupid. They should be adding a bluray drive, not taking away my CD/DVD. But, I'm ambivalent about it at this point. What I'd really like for the next iMac is a matte aRGB screen option (90% or better), and USB3. I'd be willing to live with a thicker or thinner optical drive-less iMac to get it.

[PB PM]

I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple removed optical drives from all machines, other than the Mac Pro, in the next 18 months. The slim optical drives in modern Macs are slow, and most pro users would be better suited by using a faster external 3.5" unit anyway.

[Robo]

I could easily see Apple introducing a slimmer, optical drive-free iMac in the next few months. I think they'll make it look a lot like a giant iPad: tapered edges, seamless glass front, a white glass option...

Yes, some pros use the iMac, but I don't see Apple really targeting the iMac at pros — so, no matte screen option, sorry. I think they'd go the other way, actually — removing the optical drive and simplifying the design might allow them to drop the price to $999, like how they dropped the price of the optical drive-free Mac mini from $699 to $599.

If you think about it, a desktop like an iMac actually makes a lot of sense as an iPad companion — a large screen when you want it (at your desk), and an ultra-mobile tablet when you're on the go. I could see Apple taking this angle in their marketing.

I used to think that Apple needed to make some sort of major change to keep the iMac relevant, but I was wrong. I think all they need to do is clarify it, just like how all the other iDevices are the same as their original concepts, only clarified. I think Apple's going to streamline it and show us what they think a sealed desktop computing appliance should look like. I'm expecting something a lot like an "iMac Air," and I'm expecting a lot of bitching and moaning ("you mean I can't upgrade the RAM!?") but I'm expecting Apple to not care and to sell a zillion of them.

[Matsu]

Lots of pros use iMacs. My pro photo lab just moved into a newly renovated space. They're one of the few places around that can do everything, fine art inkjet, canvass, piezographic B&W, and chromogenic prints, and do it well. What do they use? iMacs, Dell Screens, and i1 calibration devices. Their FTP site is set up on some Dell boxes in a server closet. At school, we have iMacs. Most of the instructors use iMacs. Some have high end screens attached, some just use the iMac display and don't worry about it.

It's insane for Apple to provide a matte screen option for a laptop which is virtually impossible to calibrate - unless you use it only in the same position in the same environment every single time - then neglect the iMac when it sits at a proper desk and could benefit so much more. Not that gloss and calibration are incompatible, just that if you recognize a laptop user might want the option, it's not difficult to see how much more attractive it would be to the creative enthusiasts and pros buying iMacs.

[GSpotter]

Originally Posted by Matsu Not that gloss and calibration are incompatible, just that if you recognize a laptop user might want the option, it's not difficult to see how much more attractive it would be to the creative enthusiasts and pros buying iMacs.

An iMac is a no-go for me, I'd very much prefer an entry level MacPro / head-less iMac / macMidi or whatever (even though I doubt that Apple will ever build such a machine... )

I see more disadvantages in in integrated monitor than advantages:
- you cannot select the monitor that fits your needs
(e.g. my current monitor has a matte screen, wide gamut display, lots of input methods which I use (HDMI to connect a Bluray player, DisplayPort to connect my company (PC-) notebook, Video to connect an old satellite receiver for the few times I watch TV)
- typically, my update cycles for monitors and computers are asynchronous. So why should I sell a good monitor when I want to upgrade the computer and vice versa?
- If the monitor fails, the whole computer has to be repaired (hopefully you have made a backup in time to an external disk)

[Matsu]

For the most part I agree. I'd really love a Mac Mini with four RAM slots and iMac level video, and let me pick my own display. iMacs though have their own charms, and lots of serious pros have been using them.

[thegeriatric]

Originally Posted by Matsu For the most part I agree. I'd really love a Mac Mini with four RAM slots and iMac level video, and let me pick my own display. iMacs though have their own charms, and lots of serious pros have been using them.

I also agree. As for the Mac mini, maybe your wish will come true in the future one can only hope.

[psmith2.0]

I just set up my sister's new iMac yesterday (they love it, BTW). And it hit me, looking at it through her "newcomer" eyes...the iMac is really just about the perfect solution. It's a no-compromise computer for the masses. I know we all think the optical drive is on the way out (probably is), but for people who still have unripped CDs, DVDs for the kids lying around, etc., it's nice to have it there, built-in. I feel better her getting a current-generation refurb with that drive on it than pushing her to a "new, improved" model later this year that might not have it.

So they all have their place.

Maybe split the line and let the customer choose? An "Air"-inspired take (no optical drive, SSD, thin and "plain" as possible with no Ethernet, FireWire 800, etc.). Sounds nice, actually!



And then a "classic" iMac option, which is pretty much like the current one?

I don't know. That isn't very Apple-like, is it?

As long as they ship the thing with 4GB, I don't think most of the target audience would be bummed about no longer having access to the RAM slots (if they choose to go that route). What I don't want, in 2012 and Mountain Lion on the horizon, is them shipping a 2GB RAM sealed version...that kinda sucks, and I'd like to think Apple wouldn't do that.

[PB PM]

I could see that happening, sort of. 21" model = no bells and whistles, so no optical drive, 4-8GB RAM (BTO), SSD only, super thin. 27" models still have optical drive, but all have 8GB RAM, SSD and HDD by default.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by PB PM I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple removed optical drives from all machines, other than the Mac Pro, in the next 18 months. The slim optical drives in modern Macs are slow, and most pro users would be better suited by using a faster external 3.5" unit anyway.

I didn't know they still made 3.5" optical drives...

[nikstar101]

I think the major thing stopping Apple removing DVD/CD drives from the iMacs is the lack of photoshop and MS Office on the MacApp Store. As these are still two huge names missing from the picture and I am not sure Apple make the jump without them.

Yes there are alternatives but that's like saying there is an alternative to an iPod so I'll get a Zune!!

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Dave I didn't know they still made 3.5" optical drives...

The form factor of the drive itself, not the optical disks.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by PB PM The form factor of the drive itself, not the optical disks.

5.25" ... A standard optical disc has a 4.7" diameter so a 3.5" enclosure is impossible.

[PB PM]

Yikes, it's been too long since I built my last machine, cannot even remember drive sizes.

[Chinney]

Originally Posted by GSpotter An iMac is a no-go for me, I'd very much prefer an entry level MacPro / head-less iMac / macMidi or whatever (even though I doubt that Apple will ever build such a machine... ) I see more disadvantages in in integrated monitor than advantages: - you cannot select the monitor that fits your needs (e.g. my current monitor has a matte screen, wide gamut display, lots of input methods which I use (HDMI to connect a Bluray player, DisplayPort to connect my company (PC-) notebook, Video to connect an old satellite receiver for the few times I watch TV) - typically, my update cycles for monitors and computers are asynchronous. So why should I sell a good monitor when I want to upgrade the computer and vice versa? - If the monitor fails, the whole computer has to be repaired (hopefully you have made a backup in time to an external disk)

Wouldn't the current Mini, fully spec'd out, meet your needs? It is available with a 2.7GHz dual-core i7 and AMD Radeon HD 6630M. I know that is not absolutely top end, but still more than enough for most needs, including photography. Or if that is not enough, you could get a MBP with a 2.4GHz quad-core i7 processor with dual graphics, including a AMD Radeon HD 6770M with 1GB memory, at a pretty reasonable price. The advantage of that is that you would be getting an even faster machine that you can use as a laptop and that you can also use with the monitor of your choice when you are not going mobile. What above that would you really need?

[Matsu]

According to AI, the iMac will feature anti-reflective coatings when redesigned later this year. Let's hope they give it an RGB LED back light and cover the adobe RGB gamut.

[PB PM]

If it had a full Adobe RGB display, you could expect a massive price increase. The current displays are already very close, are they not? (89-90% RGB).

[Matsu]

I think it's something like 102% of standard RGB, and about 70% of Adobe RGB 1998.

I'm not sure it has to be a massive price hike. The guy who runs Fotobox on Queen in Toronto (is pretty knowledgeable about print and screen calibration) says he can calibrate both Apple's and Dell's IPS panels to cover Adobe RGB using an i1. He was giving a presentation and I didn't want to challenge it, just in case either of us was wrong. Also says that they're the same panel, but it's the backlights and LUT that might be the difference...

[psmith2.0]

I posted this in the Mac Pro thread, but it belongs here (I was responding to Matsu's wishlist of new iMac stuff).

I, too, wish they'd make the iMac's hard drive as easily accessible/upgradeable as those on the MacBook Pro and white MacBook.

The reason being, once could go ahead and get an iMac with a traditional spinning disc drive today, but a year or so from now maybe get a good deal on a SSD to replace the stock drive. I don't even care if there's an option to "add to" (I don't need two hard drives). Like the notebooks, I'd be happy to just have the option to do this.

Having spent time with an SSD-based MacBook Air recently, I could tell a difference. And to have that type of performance couple with all the other good things about an entry-level iMac would make for a really nice experience.

I know Apple currently offers these via BTO, but a) not on the $1,199 entry level iMac, and b) if you buy one (any model) through the refurb section, you can't go in and add one. Oh, and c) Apple's typical nutball pricing (currently $500 to install just a 256GB SSD, or $600 for the 256GB SSD in addition to a 1TB traditional drive).

Looking at Crucial and OWC, I see 256GB more in the ~$300 neighborhood, give or take. A year from now, if the iMac once again allowed access to the hard drive (as the iMac G5 did upon its initial release), once could get the stock, affordable model now and then a year or so down the road think about a switch.

The iMac, like the original Mac mini, is so sealed shut that you have to make all your decisions and "future-proofing" on the front end. Often resulting in overbuying or being forced to pay Apple's jacked-up prices for RAM and hard drive upgrade (I know the iMac still allows user access to the RAM, but the original Mac mini definitely made it a challenge.

So I'd love to see a new, redesigned iMac that somehow allowed this. I'd rather have a 256GB SSD than a 1TB traditional hard disc at this point.

How much space savings would the removal of the optical drive cause? To "thin the case", things would have to be reworked and laid out differently, right? Simply removing the optical drive isn't going to do it, is it?

I don't get the push for "thin and sleek" (other than "it just looks good") in a desktop machine. Certainly makes sense on the notebooks, as "thin" also usually means "light". But I don't sit to the side of my iMac as I use it, so it's nothing I constantly observe or fawn over. I'm viewing it straight on, so if it's .5" thick or 6" deep, I don't really care...

[Matsu]

There's a pretty easy fix for that. All they really need to do is taper the back panel to a thin edge and leave the center a bit thicker. Especially for the 27" model, it can be gradual enough that it doesn't look pudgy, just a bit curved.

[psmith2.0]

I can't remember if it's been talked about here, or elsewhere, but will Apple put USB 3.0 on their new releases? Any legal/technical/business reasons why they wouldn't, or couldn't? I'm seeing USB 3 accessories and doo-dads popping up all around now (flash drives, external hard drives, card readers, etc.).

Seems pretty fast.

Or are they throwing all their eggs in the Thunderbolt basket, and will just stick with USB 2.0 for the foreseeable future?

We're right on the cusp, IMO, of a bunch of hardware updates, with the new Intel stuff. And Mountain Lion on the way, too. Just seems like a lot of things might (could) change.

[Matsu]

For me USB3 is a must have. My current machine is 5+ years old. USB2 is available in far greater abundance than any FW device and much cheaper. I suppose I could live with a thunderbolt to USB3 breakout box/dongle, but it's just stupid not to include it if there's an available integrate chipset. So that's the question: is there one?

[PB PM]

Since Intel will have native USB3 on the next gen chipsets I think it is very likely that all new Macs coming out this year will have it. Unless Apple wants to try and shove (force) thunderbolt on people and just continues to include USB2 ports.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Matsu For me USB3 is a must have. My current machine is 5+ years old. USB2 is available in far greater abundance than any FW device and much cheaper. I suppose I could live with a thunderbolt to USB3 breakout box/dongle, but it's just stupid not to include it if there's an available integrate chipset. So that's the question: is there one?

I don't know. I just know Apple's been very USB-friendly since 1998, and went to 2.0 when it hit. I just figured Thunderbolt and USB 3.0 would be the new FireWire + USB...one ridiculously fast for those who need it, the other "fast enough" for regular folks.

Originally Posted by PB PM Since Intel will have native USB3 on the next gen chipsets I think it is very likely that all new Macs coming out this year will have it.

I hope. That would be nice.

I'm gonna wait another couple of months and see what happens with the iMac. While I'm Johnny Refurb around these parts, I also find myself thinking about a new ~$1,000 iMac without an optical drive, perhaps SSD (or at least an easy way to add one down the road, as with the notebooks), USB 3.0 and Lion (or even Mountain Lion) already onboard, along with the latest iLife stuff.

I'm not going to drop one more dime into this current iMac, and the more I mess with a buddy's MacBook Air (and even my sister's current-generation 21.5" iMac with a 500GB 7200rpm drive), I've become hell-bent on never going back to a regular hard drive again, if I can help it. SSD is just too nice...I never realized, but it's really quite a thing.

Everyone assumes it would take a redesign involving visible screws on the rear of the iMac, and the entire panel (or a small part of it) coming off to access the hard drive. But that's not true, and if the iMac is being redesigned around a newer, thinner (no optical drive) design), perhaps they can work it into the bottom, near the RAM, somehow...to where it gets inserted, connectors-first, up into the iMac as was the case with the pre-unibody MacBooks (where you pulled the drive out and there was no ribbon connector...it simply went in one way and you pushed it onto the connectors inside.

If Apple could do that on the next iMac, that would clinch it for me...

That's my "iMac design thought".

[psmith2.0]

Debated on whether or not to start a new thread, but I think this is fine...

Seeing what we did yesterday with the new MacBook Pro - USB 3.0, HDMI, two Thunderbolt Ports, Retina Display, SSD-only storage, the removal of dedicated Ethernet and FireWire ports - how much of that was "necessary for small, thin notebook design/usage" and how much of it points the way to what we might see in a new, redesigned iMac (allegedly slated for 2013).



I assume USB 3.0 is a no-brainer. Beyond that, I have no idea.

Would there be an HDMI port?

They have a larger canvas to work with, designing an iMac...more room to work, spaces aren't so tight and things like thinness and weight aren't as critical as they are on a notebook. So do you think the Ethernet and FireWire ports will remain, or will Apple "go minimum" and just try and pare everything down to four USB 3.0, Thunderbolt and a headphone jack?

What makes sense - or what is doable - on a next-generation iMac vs. a MacBook Pro?

Just things I'm wondering, because now I know that I'll continue with my current (2007-era) iMac for as long as I can until this new, next-generation model is released. So I've got plenty of time to save up, and think about it.

[thegeriatric]

Ethernet and Firewire soo yesterday. Thunderbolt and adapters.

[psmith2.0]

Well that's what I'm getting at. It makes sense on notebooks if they can save the heft/weight. Lots of businesses use iMacs, and they're not always wireless. Would they want to deal with dozens and dozens of adapters (and eat up a Thunderbolt port)?



I don't know, I'm asking. That's the kind of stuff I wonder about...what can be done away with/used adapters for on a notebook might not make sense on a larger desktop that doesn't have the same design concerns.

My dream iMac would just be a thin, sleek 21-24" 16:9 panel with 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, decent graphics (so I can play my bird games...nothing more demanding than that ), about four USB 3.0 ports, a Thunderbolt port for future "what if" and a headphone jack. That's about it.

I think I'd even like the black trim around the display gone and replaced with just silver, like the MacBook Air. And, if possible, less bezel around the display and maybe a skootch less chin (but not gone completely). And I even like how the iMac G5 had "iMac" on the back, although I thought it was too large and a bit gaudy. I think it might look neat screen onto the aluminum, in whatever way they put the Apple logo on the side of the Mac Pro, where it's not just pure white but kinda "ghosted" against the aluminum and it shows up differently viewed from different angles.

[Eugene]

Not sure on HDMI...it would make slightly less sense on an iMac than on a mini or laptop.

However the same reasons do apply. Apple wants to keep the Thunderbolt ports uncluttered by non-Thunderbolt displays. They can no longer use mini-DisplayPort on devices without causing confusion.

[PB PM]

Considering the iMac's thermal requirements I'm not sure it could go that thin. Maybe if you ultra stick low voltage chips in it, the might work. Of course that would kind of kill the appeal of the iMac over the Mac Mini, IMO. After all, the higher end iMac strongly appeals to people who need powerful machines, but not the flexibility of a tower. If the iMac went that direction, I'd just get a Mini and a nice LED LCD.