FORUMS: list search recent posts

Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 6:52:04 pm

Friday afternoon musing... Seems like Apple should offer this option for the creative market. AFAIK, LG is making Apple's displays and they offer this. So a 34" ultrawide 4K display on an iMac Pro wouldn't seem that far-fetched.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 7:26:42 pm

As a member of the creative market, I'd rather they release another MacPro tower with slots for drives and GPU and IO cards...

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 9:08:43 pm

[Shane Ross] "As a member of the creative market, I'd rather they release another MacPro tower with slots for drives and GPU and IO cards..."

Something like what you see below? Instead of making what you want Apple forced you to opt for a hackintosh. I am a big fan of expansion slots and expansion bays. If Apple did make a generic ATX computer for $1100.00 with a Core i7, GTX 1060 and16 GB of RAM and call it the Mac Basic I bet it would sell a decent amount. I know Apple will not do it because Apple likes to confuse people with their mythical Apple Magic : )







Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 24, 2017 at 12:57:05 am

That's exactly what I did last September, I made one. Biggest issue with that is updates. You have to be very careful about doing them, and sometimes, you might not be able to. Currently I can't update my box to Sierra, so I can download the latest FCX...and that is an issue.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 24, 2017 at 1:34:24 am

[andy patterson] "I know Apple will not do it because Apple likes to confuse people with their mythical Apple Magic"

There is a value to aesthetics to some folks โ˜บ But in all honesty, every Mac I've owned has outlasted any of the PCs I've owned. So I'm willing to pay a bit more. Yet, in reality, if you buy the equivalent name brand PC, you will actually pay less for the Apple product. Building a a DIY machine is fine, but obviously you are forgetting the value of your own labor.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 24, 2017 at 3:47:38 am

[Oliver Peters] "Building a a DIY machine is fine, but obviously you are forgetting the value of your own labor."

I like building my own computer just like some people like building choppers. As far as picking out the parts I usually just get the least expensive RAM module that will work with my system. For the card reader I just got the least expensive. It is all good. A lot of the computer parts and brands are actually made by the same vendor.

I have been using that same case for over 8 years. I never buy all the parts all at once either so it is really super inexpensive for me.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 9:09:39 pm

While I agree with you, I do believe a lot of people will be very happy with the beefed up iMac. I'm currently cutting at a shop with 8 shared systems - 4 iMacs, 2 old MPs, 1 nMP, and 1 Mini. While the expansion capability of the old towers is nice and has led to their longevity, the iMacs are fine. I have a number of things hanging off of the nMP, which makes it a bit messy, but otherwise OK.

I suspect the coming MP will be better as far as expandability is concerned, but I doubt Apple will go with the sort of slots we've seen in the past. In any case, I imagine that will be more of an early 2019 thing.

The reason the wider display on the iMac is of interest is screen real estate. Having 2 x 27" displays side-by-side is a bit too much, so ultra-wide displays are a good alternative if a single screen is too tight. One of the other shops in town has their rooms configured that way and the editors love it.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 9:10:27 pm

I predict the next mpro will be modular, so they can keep selling you upgrades and crossgrades and customizations, without having to actually make a lot of different models.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:32:38 pm

Of course, modular doesn't necessarily mean slots. Upgradeability could just mean ways to change drives, GPUs, CPUs, or RAM. OTOH, it could be composed of building blocks, like the newest RED cameras. Although in my mind, that strikes me as too inelegant for Apple's design sense.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Eric Santiago
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:32:51 pm

I welcome that aspect ratio.
I've been living with Dual Apple 30s for almost 12 years now (a few have died) and would like to move to a single manageable screen.
The split between the Cinemas is a bit annoying for my workflow (1;1 graphics viewing).
Now, of course, I would want something above 4K but with the ability to scale the icons/GUI.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 10:44:21 pm

http://www.businessinsider.com/samsung-qh90-super-ultra-wide-329-monitor-ph...

This is interesting to me. A single monitor capable of showing two 16:9 screens side by side.


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 11:28:51 pm

I believe the modular design will never happen. I know for a fact, that with the current management regime, Apple does not want ANY product to exist for more than 5 years. Authorized repair shops are not allowed to work on hardware that is older than 5 years old. So they can sell you a $300 watch, or a $10,000 non existant Mac Pro, and in 5 years, they don't want ANYONE to work on that Mac Pro if something fails - period.

I am a huge fan of Louis Rossmann and Rossmann Repair Group in NY City, and I find all of his videos very funny on the Mac product line, and Apple's current attitude on repairing Macs. In summary - GIVE US MONEY.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 23, 2017 at 11:46:46 pm

Well, in any hardware company, isn't planned obsolesence assumed? After all, you run out of customers unless the existing customers buy some more product.

Of course, when it comes to Mac expandability, it's third parties who make that money, not Apple, once you get past the initial purchase.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 24, 2017 at 4:00:48 pm

I think the days of an expandable and upgradeable mac are long gone. And if in fact, the new macs are going to have ram hard wired into the board then it's pretty clear that they will expect people to fully upgrade their systems regularly.

One of the many benefits of getting off the Apple train is that I no longer fret about my edit system specs being phased out for a newer and better Apple release.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Canโ€™t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 26, 2017 at 5:53:14 pm

I'm VERY happy on the Mac Train, I've never minded paying the Mac tax in return for the reliability and longevity Macs offer.

A few grand every few years on replacing a whole Mac is well worth it.


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 26, 2017 at 11:37:29 pm

[Steve Connor] "A few grand every few years on replacing a whole Mac is well worth it."

While I'm no longer on the Mac train, I absolutely never understood this part of the objection. I bought gazillions of Macs over the years, and other than adding extra RAM and bigger hard drives to every NEW computer I bought (rather than pay Apple to ship me the max'd out configurations), using this upgradeability as a substitute for buying new computers never crossed my mind. I WANTED the new stuff, because of all the subsystems that aren't easily upgradeable.

One way I know that I'm pretty close to the COW mainstream on this is the lament that Apple is taking too long to deliver new computers. I remember when most folks here were buying new computers every year, then every other year. Who the hell cares about being able to modularly upgrade a 5 year old spine? Forget modules, man. Give me something meaningfully new, give it to me a lot more often, and take my money.

I remember years ago being flabbergasted by how much better each new generation of computers was than the one I'd just bought. I remember repeating Dave Barry's joke that they should have a dumpster outside the door of the computer store that you could dump the computer into on your way to the car. No point in even bringing it home because it was already obsolete. ๐Ÿ˜‚

Well, of course, not anymore. While it's certainly true that Apple's inability to make a compelling case for some of you to leave behind an EIGHT year old computer is a testament to the soundness of that 2009 model, it also speaks to Apple's inability to create unambiguous improvements anymore. It seems like every new release of everything (except maybe the iMac) comes with plenty of prominent reasons to say, "Whoops, another missed opportunity."

That used to definitely NOT be the case. It's easy to see in the archives for our first decade here at the COW -- every new computer from Apple used to be an automatic purchase, even when they were coming a lot more quickly.

So that's my dream scenario. Not modules. Unambiguously compelling new models a lot more often.

Of course, this thread subject contains part of the reason why I haven't been on the Apple train for years. They've got a long way to go just to catch up with well-established technologies and form factors. Mac folks may not care, or may argue vigorously that they don't want 4K touchscreens or wider aspect ratios, or brighter screens, or any of the many other things that represent the state of the art. I do.

Apple used to. It's why I built my business on Macs for over 20 years. It's also now why I can't ever imagine using one again. I'll be as happy as anyone else if they surprise me by just catching up, much less pulling ahead again....but I'll be surprised to be surprised, too. ๐Ÿ˜‚


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 3:07:04 am

[Tim Wilson] " I remember when most folks here were buying new computers every year, then every other year. "

I too remember because I've been making use of the Creative Cow site almost since it's inception (although I'll confess for the first 10 years I was only a lurker.) And one of the fascinating things about the creative cow evolution has been the continually changing attitudes towards the manufacturers of the equipment that we all make use of professionally.

The issues of how to forecast where the industry is headed and which companies will be leading the charge into the future are what make this site so dynamic and relevant. And so it's pretty much anyone's guess where Apple and the mothership are headed.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Canโ€™t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 3:29:01 am

[Tim Wilson] " Mac folks may not care, or may argue vigorously that they don't want 4K touchscreens or wider aspect ratios, or brighter screens, or any of the many other things that represent the state of the art. I do."

I find it odd that people hype up the release of new Apple products. Some people even thank Apple. Why? Do people thank Lenovo, Asus, MSI or Dell every time they add new hardware technology?


[Tim Wilson] "Apple used to. It's why I built my business on Macs for over 20 years. It's also now why I can't ever imagine using one again. I'll be as happy as anyone else if they surprise me by just catching up, much less pulling ahead again....but I'll be surprised to be surprised, too. ๐Ÿ˜‚"

Apple computers work they just are not innovative. OS X is still using a Windows 95 paradigm.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 7:09:23 am

[andy patterson] "Apple computers work they just are not innovative. OS X is still using a Windows 95 paradigm."

No Andy, there's no innovation in Macs (sigh)


Return to posts index


Tom Sefton
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 1:01:49 pm

Red.........obsolescence obsolete!

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Neil Sadwelkar
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 1:55:03 pm

Not a iMacPro, but something like Oliver's original post suggested.
Digital Storm's Aura PC is a 21:9 curved monitor with a PCIe slots inside. Which can take a full length GPU card.

https://www.digitalstorm.com/aura.asp

Not sure I like the curved screen though.



-----------------------------------
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why no 21:9 iMac Pro?
on Jun 27, 2017 at 2:29:56 pm

[Neil Sadwelkar] "Not a iMacPro, but something like Oliver's original post suggested....
Not sure I like the curved screen though."


Sweet. The curved screen tends to eliminate off-axis viewing, although I haven't sat in front of one for real editing. Of course, because it's a single screen layout, the wider aspect works better for Premiere or Media Composer than for FCPX or Resolve. Premiere and MC let you set up user-defined, custom workspaces, so you can reorganize a 2-screen workspace to fit into this space. X or Resolve won't let you use the secondary screen workspace on a single monitor.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]