Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Core 2 Duo iMac - Investment in Obsolescence?

J

jodr

macrumors member
Original poster
Jan 18, 2010
46
0
Oh, I like to deliberate.

And as if doing it before the purchase wasn't enough fun, Apple seems to allow me time to third and fourth-guess my decision.

I purchased both a MBP 13", for light portable multimedia and word-processing use - and I couldn't be happier with it, though I know there is an update right around the corner...I needed it. So I'm halfway to utopia.

But as a sturdy, powerhouse desktop - within my computer budget of $2.7k, $1.4 of it remaining after the MBP purchase - I went with the 21.5" iMac. With the most powerful Core 2 Duo processor available, 3.33 ghz, I thought it was a good deal, and I know I can plug it full of up to 16gbs of RAM.

But as I read more and more about these new processors, the i5 and i7, I'm wondering if perhaps I jumped the gun. I'm currently editing video in school, and could really use a machine at home to get my work done - and come Summer, I hope to be doing some work for hire, possibly. So now is a good time to have an editing machine in the home. But it's hard not to feel like I'm getting left in the dust buying a C2Duo machine in 2010. Like, perhaps, I should just stick a 7200 hdd in the MBP, and wait for new iMacs to give me more modern CPU at the same price.

I can still cancel the iMac, it seems. Apple really needs to have a 1-click "lock-in-to-purchase" option for people like me.

Any thoughts on this situation are welcome. I'm not familiar with the iMac refresh cycle, which seems a little stranger than the other Mac lines -- does anybody have a better feel for what's coming up the pike? And am I just getting bowled over by enthusiast hype and marketing?

Also, if you've got the time, what is the meaning of existence?
 
You are getting bowled over by enthusiast hype (not so much marketing, as Apple hasn't marketed anything from the next generation yet).

Nobody really knows that the next update is around the corner... everybody is just guessing.

Nobody knows for sure that the next batch of laptops will have Arrandale chips (the Geekbench benchmark is not really proof of anything). The next generation of laptops may have higher-clocked Core2Duos, with a mid-year Arrandale refresh; the next batch may have Arrandale only on the extreme high-end (that the 6,1 machine is a ,1 doesn't mean it's not the ultra-high-end 17" model) with better Core2Duos along the rest of the line (a-la the current iMacs). The next iMacs may have Arrandale chips in all of them... or they may not.

You can wait FOREVER for the next best machine, because there's always something better coming, at some point. We all really just buy what we're willing to settle for at that particular time.
 
Eidorian said:
It's somewhat annoying to spend so much to get Late 2007 processor performance.
Click to expand...

So don't, then. Simple, no?

The hype I was referring to is all the people "waiting for Arrandale" that know exactly nothing about what is actually going to be in the next generation.
 
if you want up to date, top spec hardware. you avoid Apple..end of story.

the only difference is that with Apple you still pay 'new tech' prices for 'old tech'
 
Eidorian said:
Sadly quad core is mainstream everywhere but at Apple.
Click to expand...

It's mainstream with geeks. The average consumer which makes up most of the computing world doesn't give a rats behind about the latest and greatest processor. They can do quite well with a 2007 Core 2 Duo, and most likely that's overkill for many.
 
I would appreciate Apple sticking with an old but very good processor to keep costs down - but they don't seem to keep prices down as a result, so it kind of bums me out to know the product lines are adopting the new processors so slowly and out of sync. It's hard not to feel slighted with the current processor after watching that Intel i-core demo at CES.
 
HLdan said:
It's mainstream with geeks. The average consumer which makes up most of the computing world doesn't give a rats behind about the latest and greatest processor. They can do quite well with a 2007 Core 2 Duo, and most likely that's overkill for many.
Click to expand...

I agree, but have you checked out a Best Buy lately? Lots of laptops in there with CPU's more advanced than Core 2 Duo. Regardless of whether or not the average user needs it, the mainstream has CPU options that are annoyingly not available in the Apple section.
 
Eidorian said:
Do you have any proof of this?
Click to expand...

Do you have proof that quad has gone "mainstream". Or are we different meanings of "mainstream"? Show me where the average person is using a Quad core machine. So what if most of the manufacturers make Quad Core PC's, it's just not something most people are currently using or even care about. Most people go into a retail store to buy any cheap computer that meets there pocketbook, they aren't looking for Quad Core machines.
 
jodr said:
I would appreciate Apple sticking with an old but very good processor to keep costs down - but they don't seem to keep prices down as a result, so it kind of bums me out to know the product lines are adopting the new processors so slowly and out of sync. It's hard not to feel slighted with the current processor after watching that Intel i-core demo at CES.
Click to expand...

Just a minute, why are you leaving out the iMac 27"? It's one of the first home computers to come with the Core i7. Secondly, CES was just last month. It's now officially 8 months since the last MBP update, give them a chance to release their updates before being so quick to judge. Your point would be valid if they recently updated the MBP's with Core 2 Duo's again, ignoring the Core i products.
 
HLdan said:
Or are we different meanings of "mainstream"?
Click to expand...
What's your definition then?

DannySmurf said:
The fact that netbooks with atoms and notebooks with CULVs are the largest segment of the PC market right now.

How's that?
Click to expand...
I didn't realize the iMac was a portable computer. In addition can you point out Apple's Atom and CULV products?

HLdan said:
Just a minute, why are you leaving out the iMac 27"? It's one of the first home computers to come with the Core i7.
Click to expand...
Bloomfield has been out since November 2008.
 
Eidorian said:
I didn't realize the iMac was a portable computer. In addition can you point out Apple's Atom and CULV products?
Click to expand...

You said quad core is mainstream everywhere but Apple:

Sadly quad core is mainstream everywhere but at Apple.
Click to expand...

The other poster's answer was that quad-cores are mainstream only with geeks.

You asked for proof... the proof is that the largest segment of the PC market (ie, the MAJORITY OF CONSUMER MACHINES) is made up of atoms and CULVs.

I'm raising a 10 year old. He tries the pretend-not-to-remember-the-conversation bit too. It doesn't actually work.
 
DannySmurf said:
You said quad core is mainstream everywhere but Apple:



The other poster's answer was that quad-cores are mainstream only with geeks.

You asked for proof... the proof is that the largest segment of the PC market (ie, the MAJORITY OF CONSUMER MACHINES) is made up of atoms and CULVs.

I'm raising a 10 year old. He tries the pretend-not-to-remember-the-conversation bit too. It doesn't actually work.
Click to expand...

Excellent! Well said! :D
 
I think that the imacs will get icore (dual icore) processors at WWDC, along side the MBP getting icore processors, because, the MBP is getting a performance update, and Apple will not have their notebooks with better processors than their desktops, Apple goes all out icore at WWDC, except the mini, air, and whitebook. This is my final prediction. You still are getting a great machine though congrats OP.
 
Here's a list of the popular serious applications that require more processor than the Core 2 Duo:









That's right. None.

Now, if you are a gamer or you do video editing for your living, or run a couple of other really demanding applications, you might want to step up to a more powerful, faster processor, the Core 2 Duo is probably not the processor for you. In fact, you probably want at least the latest Windoze machine that uses the latest Intel processors and can accommodate the hottest and fastest graphics cards, and has pieces'n'parts you can easily swap out for faster ones.

Hell, I can't even find decent Apple versions of some of the video games from the 1990's I used to play on my PCs... :eek:

But I'm a reasonably happy convert to Apple's computers...even my macbook pro is fast enough for nearly all I do these days, and VMWARE Fusion handles the few Windoze apps I still use for which there are no Apple equvalents.

But I'm a real throwback...the only thing I use my cellphone for is to make phone calls... no iPhone here. :cool:
 
@OP I would no invest in them at this time. They are dated. I would at least get a core i5 It will be alot better in the future then the C2D line.

and if you really need power get a mac pro.
 
09iMac=Fail said:
I agree, but have you checked out a Best Buy lately? Lots of laptops in there with CPU's more advanced than Core 2 Duo. Regardless of whether or not the average user needs it, the mainstream has CPU options that are annoyingly not CURRENTLY available in the Apple section.
Click to expand...

Fixed that. It might be helpful if some of you actually waited rather than decide that there's no Apple hardware with your so-called "mainstream" processors. Apple's notebook line IS due for an update, maybe you might want to wait until the line is updated before you pass judgement.

And let's not go there about what you'll find at BB. In terms of laptops, the first thing I need is a good screen and the majority of PC notebooks, even over a $1000 (Sony Vaio F Series i7) have washed out screens. Completely opposite with the Apple notebooks which have amazing contrast and high color gamut. Screen quality has to come first, maybe some of you don't care about your eyes, I care about mine. The computing power isn't even in the top 5. :p
 
Not to sound like a fanboy, but we're forgetting something here.

Dell/HP etc. may pack more power into a laptop, but that comes with the resulting heat/poor battery life. Apple realizes that a pro machine should get more than 2 hours on battery and shouldn't burn your lap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back