Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
^^ I think it’s safe to assume it’s not the same people working on hardware as working on developing entertainment programs.

People are going to find all manner of fictions to rationalize why they didn’t get exactly what they wanted from a company who sees things differently than they do.
 
I really think a 27" model is needed, however it's pretty much confirmed Apple is not interested in having an iMac covering the professional market.
I have mixed feelings about the iMac...
One one hand it has always been a tremendous package and it looks great (especially the apple silicon version), but when it becomes obsolete you have a beautiful screen attached to an unusable computer.
I still think A mac mini or studio with a good display is the better choice for longevity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaytee712
I really think a 27" model is needed, however it's pretty much confirmed Apple is not interested in having an iMac covering the professional market.
Because it already has such options covered. We've been over this time and time again. The iMac began as a 'consumer' device, not a 'pro' machine. That it became popular with pros was because Apple didn't have other options in that market sector. They now have enhanced MacMinis and Mac Studios, to fill that gap. So the iMac has returned to being just a basic 'consumer' device. It is now very unlikely Apple will cannibalise its own sales of Minis and Studios, by bringing out a larger iMac.

If I were in the market for a new Mac right now, I'd definitely be considering a MacMini and Studio Display. However; I now know the iMac is perfect for my needs. So personally, I'm very happy that Apple makes a product that suits my needs, so that I don't have to go and spend more money than I need to.
 
And yet it turns out they are not. Focus is a good thing for Apple, or anyone smaller. They're doing too many things, and importantly the TV market was already saturated and didn't need them—all of the streaming apps from everyone else are available on Apple's platforms. As a company they should have put more focus on Siri, iCloud and hardware, and stop pussyfooting about with TV shows.
But they're winning awards for their TV shows, and driving up subscriptions. Perhaps Netflix should just go back to mailing out DVDs...

If they wanted the living room market they should have focused on gaming for Apple TV hardware, and renamed it Apple Home—the centre of your home (AAA games & streaming apps). And went about it in such a way that those same AAA games would work across Mac too (with a company-wide goal of fixing the glaring Mac gaming problem). Develop a legit first-party controller, to show to developers and users they are finally serious about gaming (while continuing to support other mainstream controllers for those who want them) and a TV hardware version of Apple Home for those who want an all-in-one solution for their living room. Puck version (Apple Home) and a TV version (Apple Home Pro), powered with M and M-Pro chips successively.
I've long thought that a central 'hub' for all home computing needs would be a great idea. So you have one device that has large storage capacity and memory, so you can store all your files and media there (obvs with off-site backup facilities), and can just run whatever displays, tablet etc devices off that. And it does all your music streaming, TV, movie, games etc too. Marvellous. But if any companies are going to make such a thing, you'd bet on Apple being one of them.
 
Does anyone know what the reason is for them not updating the Apple silicone iMac's to 27" or better yet 32"? Are those panels hard to get with supply chain or quality control issues? There should be some objective reason why Apple are dragging their feet this much.
 
Does anyone know what the reason is for them not updating the Apple silicone iMac's to 27" or better yet 32"? Are those panels hard to get with supply chain or quality control issues? There should be some objective reason why Apple are dragging their feet this much.
If you read this thread, you'll learn why.
 
I’ve had a day to process what I saw in Apple’s Oct. 30th presentation as well as the ensuing discussions and howls of outrage. There seems to be more discussion over what didn’t happen than what actually happened. Seems like a lot of people somehow took rumour and speculation as likely fact and now they’re upset over nothing that was actually promised. They’re upset over gossip and assumptions that turned out not to be true.

There were rumours we might see certain products such as an iPad Mini 7 and USB-C accessories for the iMac. But there were also assertions from leakers that no new iPads or anything but MacBook Pros and revised iMac were going to be released. And the moment Apple’s surprise event was announced lots of people chimed in with their fervent wish lists of what they wanted to see in total conflict with was actually likely to be seen. And when their wish lists went unfulfilled we got the expected complaining and vitriol. People are mad because they didn’t get what they wanted despite they had no basis to expect getting it from a company who evidently sees things different than do.


Now the products themselves that were actually released.

We knew we were most likely to get new, or rather upgraded, MacBook Pros. And thats what we got. Glossed over is that Apple has been updating these MacBooks quite a bit since Apple silicon was introduced three years ago. In that time we’ve seen performance improve about 20-50 percent over the initial Apple silicon products. Thats pretty damned good over a 2-3 year period. They have also more clearly delineated the Pro line from the Air line, which is a good thing making things less confusing. The other news with improved performance was the addition of hardware ray shading, dynamic caching and mesh shading which are welcome for those interested in gaming or 3D modelling. This is all good stuff.

The most noticed surprising news was the introduction of a base MacBook Pro to replace the now discontinued odd-ball 13in. MacBook Pro with Touchbar. Touchbar is now dead, but everyone saw that coming so no surprise. Anyway with this new base Pro model it starts off where MacBook Air leaves off—the two product lines are now clearly delineated. Good.

The other item of note was the introduction of a new colour option for the M3 Pro and Mac versions of the MacBook Pro: Space Black, with an anodized finish to cut down on obvious fingerprints. A lot of people are going to drool over this colour. And it’s a new status symbol.

Some confusion over Apple tweaking and jiggling the M3 specs, but thats really no big deal. The automotive industry does it all the time and nobody blinks. All those spec numbers are basically meaningless because what matters is how the hardware performs in the real world. It’s going to be good.

The upgraded iMac has generated the most discussion and anger. The iMac upgrade was pretty much what was expected with the possible exception of no new USB-C accessories. The accessories weren’t really a given and Apple could quietly introduce those down the line, so this is really a non issue.

The real anger isn’t about what the 24 iMac is and Apple’s vision for it, but more over what it isn’t in the minds of many who never liked the redesigned iMac in the first place. A lot of people are pissed because they didn’t get their big screen iMac with an M3 Pro chip, something that wasn’t really on the radar anytime soon if ever. So their disappointment is channeled into everything they don’t like about the existing iMac.

Meanwhile we have an upgraded iMac more powerful than what we had before, with an M3 processor with a new neural engine, hardware ray tracing, more available RAM and no increase in price. Damn, how dare they!

Yeah, there a couple of minor things I would have liked to see. I would have preferred a higher RAM option of 32GB, but it’s not a deal breaker. 24GB with the new M3 will be fine. I would have liked to see the Apple logo returned to the chin. And I might have appreciated some new colour options, but that doesn’t really matter. Everything I liked about the 24 iMac is still there and the hardware is sufficiently upgraded as I hoped.

And, yes, the base model of the iMac at this price point should have higher specs of at least 12 GB RAM and 512 SSD as was vaguely speculated, but I’m not surprised it isn’t.

Overall I think it was a decent presentation and we got some good stuff. Not much to really complain about.

But that won’t stop some.
 
The iMac with M3 is up to 2x faster than the previous iMac, which featured the M1 chip. For those upgrading from an Intel based iMac, Apple says that the new iMac is up to 2.5x faster than previous 27-inch models and 4.5x faster than previous 21.5-inch models.
“Up to” 2.5x faster. Conceivably, if one has the slowest possible intel imac, they would see the max increase in performance. If that’s 2.5x, then what is the performance increase we’d see if on the max-spec 2019/2020 beast?

Admittedly my expectations were unrealistically high for the M3 to be 3x faster than an m1 out of the gate, forgetting that the m2 was only a slight improvement over m1.

24” is a non-starter. I’ll hold out for an m3 ultra in a headless config to drive a full size display.
 
Bottom line: Tim Apple wants to be a meanie.
I'd say he wants to make as much money for Apple as he can -- it's his job after all.

We as users of apple stuff vote for what we want by spending money. I'm just voting no this time around. There's a lot of computers that I'd actually like to own if they fit what I needed, it's not that big a deal.
 
I have a 2014 27” iMac i7 that I’m still happy with. I’m hoping it will stay strong until the next 27” iMac comes around.
They still sell 27" 2020 iMac in the Apple refurbished shop. I'm very happy with mine! I use it more than anything else at home, even though I have a M2 Mini Pro sitting on the same desk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: danbuter
“Up to” 2.5x faster. Conceivably, if one has the slowest possible intel imac, they would see the max increase in performance. If that’s 2.5x, then what is the performance increase we’d see if on the max-spec 2019/2020 beast?

Admittedly my expectations were unrealistically high for the M3 to be 3x faster than an m1 out of the gate, forgetting that the m2 was only a slight improvement over m1.

24” is a non-starter. I’ll hold out for an m3 ultra in a headless config to drive a full size display.
Thats not what was said in the presentation. The M3 is up to 2.5 times faster than the most powerful 21.5 iMac configuration, not the slowest. I have a 2011 21.5 upgrade with an Intel i7 2600S, 500GB RAM and 32GB DDR3 RAM. I don’t know if thats as powerful as a later model 21.5 could be configured, but although I could be wrong I’m pretty sure you couldn’t get 32GB RAM as a built-to-order configuration.

As such I’m confident an M3 iMac with 24GB RAM and 512GB-1TB SSD should smoke my computer without a sweat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThunderSkunk
I mean I justify it in my mind just like you (I bought a M3 iMac last night) but honestly... Apple is the most valuable company in the world and it would have been trivial for them to update the peripherals and would help make the argument of moving to USB-C they have been pushing all year. The fact they didn't is just one of those things that frustrates even long time fans of Apple. I suspect what is really happening is that the late 2024 to mid 2025 launch of M4 will bring a chassis redesigned 24 inch iMac and now once again rumored addition of a 27-32 inch iMac plus new peripherals, perhaps with subtle redesigns (and USB-C).
I think we're just going to be in an awkward "too many cables" situation for a while longer while the Lightning stuff cycles out. The thing was around and in massively widespread use for over a decade, and these things don't happen overnight. Totally agree it's a miss, but I'm FAR more irritated by not getting the M3 version of an iMac 5K. I could really use that extra real estate.
 
I really think a 27" model is needed, however it's pretty much confirmed Apple is not interested in having an iMac covering the professional market.
I have mixed feelings about the iMac...
One one hand it has always been a tremendous package and it looks great (especially the apple silicon version), but when it becomes obsolete you have a beautiful screen attached to an unusable computer.
I still think A mac mini or studio with a good display is the better choice for longevity.
Pretty much my same thought. Although I love it being all in one, less clutter on my desk. You are absolutely right, my 2017 iMac will be getting replaced at this time next year as it will be a pretty screen. It just skirts under getting the job done.
Thats not what was said in the presentation. The M3 is up to 2.5 times faster than the most powerful 21.5 iMac configuration, not the slowest. I have a 2011 21.5 upgrade with an Intel i7 2600S, 500GB RAM and 32GB DDR3 RAM. I don’t know if thats as powerful as a later model 21.5 could be configured, but although I could be wrong I’m pretty sure you couldn’t get 32GB RAM as a built-to-order configuration.

As such I’m confident an M3 iMac with 24GB RAM and 512GB-1TB SSD should smoke my computer without a sweat.
An M1 iMac smokes my 2017 dual core i5. I can only imagine how much better the M3 is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Warped9
Still just freaking 8GB in all three “standard“ configuration. That is indefensible at this point.
Call me crazy, but I hate being locked into the amount of RAM on the system from the point of purchase. You want more memory? New machine time..
 
  • Like
Reactions: danbuter
I want one of these so bad. I can't justify it. I already have an M2 air and M1 Pro (my work machine) but I think they're just nice.
 
8GB on M series chips works fine for literally most people. I feel like you're comparing ram against Windows machines (in which case the number is actually pretty low).
I'm not talking about Windows machines. I have a 2019 iMac with 64GB RAM, and at any one time, 3/4 of this is full. My iMac started out with 32GB when I got it, and when I started needing more, it was an easy upgrade to double that. If this had been a "M" class machine, that would not have been possible (I guess it's kinda moot, as 8GB would have never have been enough to begin with).
 
Damn 40+ is considered older now. I'm 55 I better start picking out my grave site...lol.
Just saying!

There are those of us - I'm one of them - who grew up with desktop computers with a mouse where you stored your 'programs' or 'applications' on your HDD - along with any content that you had, which was run locally.

And that to us is what a computer is.

However, now, you can get all of that in a laptop form:

Technology!

And 'younger' people see their primary computers as touch interface computers, with apps, web apps and their content on the cloud.

No doubt there are babies now who are going to grow up with their view of a computer being something that you wear on your face and interact with via gesture and voice.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Chuckeee
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.