Change my mind: The iMac is outdated.

[maflynn]

My opinions is that much of the Mac line is outdate, whether we're talking about display technology being used in laptops, or how the iMac Pro simply is being beaten in performance by laptops or the design of the iMac has remained unchanged for many many years.

Hopefully, with Ive now gone, we'll get some new designs and a fresh look for the Macs. Less thinner and more functional design. I've said many times, that the iMac does not need to be paper thin, and yet that was the marketing of this design

 

[theluggage]

Most carriers give away free routers with a home internet plan these days.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there (but its also why the Airport argument has its own particular issues and is off-topic in a iMac/xMac discussion).

Apple's unique selling point would be the "just works" factor - which would be very hard to deliver in a home modem/router/wap.

Whenever anybody non-techy asks me what router they should get, I answer "whatever your ISP supplies" because then, although its probably a cheap, gimped router, it's the ISP's job to get it working, and the user interface will probably have the same buttons that the their call centre operator will ask you to press.

...of course, there are plenty of better routers out there for more advanced users, but "more advanced users" are looking for the bells and whistles rather than the "just works" factor that Apple could offer.

...that and not everybody has a cable modem box with an ethernet 'output' which, as I recall, is what the old Airports assumed. Most telephone-network broadband would need an ADSL/VDSL/VDSL2 etc. (with 3G/4G/5G up-and-coming) modem to connect an Airport-style router - most ISPs now seem to provide all-in-one modem/routers (...and in a domestic setting its nice to just have one box and wall-wart) so you'd need multiple models - or users would have to figure out how to put their existing modem/router into 'modem' mode. Then you'd probably have to enter ISP-specific settings... Then you just have work out why the Internet TV package that comes bundled with your broadband doesn't work anymore...

Can. of. Worms.

...add to that that its still essential that Apple stuff works seamlessly with generic home/work WiFi networks and I can see why Apple might prefer to leave the joys of WiFi Routing for Dummies to the ISPs.

 

[Abazigal]

@theluggage You are right that we have probably strayed quite a bit from the main topic here. I guess my overarching point is that Apple is just one company, yet because they own and control the entire ecosystem, people look to them to supply a particular feature or product even if Apple may have zero interest in doing so (be it for time or profit reasons) because no one else can.

 

[jinnyman]

@theluggage You are right that we have probably strayed quite a bit from the main topic here. I guess my overarching point is that Apple is just one company, yet because they own and control the entire ecosystem, people look to them to supply a particular feature or product even if Apple may have zero interest in doing so (be it for time or profit reasons) because no one else can.

Yes. and Apple is also vulnerable to all other companies in making unwise choices. The offtopic subjects are some of their examples. I still believe not offering a consumer headless is one of their mistake.

Consumer computing is ever evolving, and with all the real time streaming boom, people are going more and more with larger sized monitors or multiple monitors doing many things at the same time. If Apple want to lead a new generation of contents war, they gotta introduce a product category that can satisfy such users. Why youtube is a serious trend nowadays? why real time streaming? A new generation is generation of small contents and glass root creaters.

When esports related rumor was revealed, I also questioned its possibility and set it aside. But based on way Apple is going with their emphasis on contents, they cannot ignore most recent trend.

 

[AustinIllini]

The fusion drive is pretty brutal in 2020. My Grandfather just ordered a new iMac and I had to explain to him he wants the SSD which is much more expensive.
[automerge]1578270292[/automerge]

 

[kazmac]

The fusion drive is pretty brutal in 2020. My Grandfather just ordered a new iMac and I had to explain to him he wants the SSD which is much more expensive.
[automerge]1578270292[/automerge]

Just recommended the same to my former supervisor and her sister.

I agree that the iMac is outdated. Yes, I've been using them exclusively for two decades, but I couldn't justify buying a 2019 model for several reasons, so this 2013 is it for me.

I like some of the things HP and Microsoft are doing (I'd be all over a smaller Surface Studio with newer internals and upgradable components in the base.)

 

[AustinIllini]

Just recommended the same to my former supervisor and her sister.

Yeah, he's an 85 year old man.

He had no idea what to buy.

Initially, I ordered him the base model with the 256 GB SSD.

Then I thought about it, and he was okay dropping $2400 bucks, so he got 3.0 6 core with 16 GB of RAM and the half terabyte SSD.

It's a little (a lot) overkill, but he wants to keep it for a long, long time. His current 4 year old iMac is a base 21.5 inch with the fusion drive and it's really bothering him.

 

[CWallace]

I still think Apple's drive over AIO is to sell screen together not some kind of philosophy that AIO is good for consumer.

Well AIO has been the philosophy for the iMac from the beginning, so to expect them to change now...

The fusion drive is pretty brutal in 2020. My Grandfather just ordered a new iMac and I had to explain to him he wants the SSD which is much more expensive.

The 2TB/3TB Fusion Drive still makes sense because that amount of M.2 SSD space is expensive, period. And with 128GB of SSD storage, the OS and commonly-used applications and data should always be on the SSD, anyway, so there should really be no significant performance hit since the data out on the spinner is media, which doesn't really care about speed.

IMO, Apple should just not offer a 1TB Fusion Drive option (even if it has the 128GB SSD again) and only offer it at 2TB/3TB with the 128GB SSD. That way Fusion is clearly defined as something for people who need large local storage for media like music and photos and SSD-only options are for everything else (and for people who have their media on external devices like a NAS).

 

[AustinIllini]

Well AIO has been the philosophy for the iMac from the beginning, so to expect them to change now...




The 2TB/3TB Fusion Drive still makes sense because that amount of M.2 SSD space is expensive, period. And with 128GB of SSD storage, the OS and commonly-used applications and data should always be on the SSD, anyway, so there should really be no significant performance hit since the data out on the spinner is media, which doesn't really care about speed.

IMO, Apple should just not offer a 1TB Fusion Drive option (even if it has the 128GB SSD again) and only offer it at 2TB/3TB with the 128GB SSD. That way Fusion is clearly defined as something for people who need large local storage for media like music and photos and SSD-only options are for everything else (and for people who have their media on external devices like a NAS).

Maybe, but they should flip the pricing all around. The fact is, the fusion drive just isn't good for most applications anymore.

 

[theluggage]

I guess my overarching point is that Apple is just one company, yet because they own and control the entire ecosystem, people look to them to supply a particular feature or product even if Apple may have zero interest in doing so (be it for time or profit reasons) because no one else can.

For some years now, Macs and iDevices have quite happily used the same wired and wireless networks as everything else, - including all the key Internet protocols - so in the case of WiFi routers, someone else can and has done and offers a far greater range and diversity of products than Apple ever could. There's no need for Apple to make WiFi routers. I'd say the same thing about servers, too: not sure why anybody would want to use MacOS on a server when the only advantage it offers over Linux/BSD is a nice GUI and good desktop Apps... (When XServe first came out it had some USPs like PPC architecture and no per-seat license fee, before Linux had really gained commercial respectability). Ditto external mice/keyboards, printers and even, to an extent, displays (although there probably wouldn't be 5k displays without Apple).

In the case of the iMac (and other Macs), though, only Apple can make a Mac - and Mac OS as an all-purpose OS is in danger if there are strategic holes in the hardware line... For such a huge company - and, what, the #4 manufacturer of personal computers - the current Mac line really is a bit of a fragmented mess that seems to be in constant transition (why are there 2 types of 13" MBP and a separate MBA range? why has the 16" been updated and not the 13"? why do the iMacs still feature spinning rust? Why build the Mac Mini into a case form-factor originally designed around a CD drive leaving no space for a GPU or decent internal storage? Will the iMac Pro ever see an update, or will its improved design ever trickle down to the iMac?)

...however, I think the current iMac design is probably the least of Apple's problems - yeah, thinner bezels would be nice (but its still the only thing on the market with a 5k display) and a better adjustable stand (but not at $999 a pop, please!) but the main thing I'd change is make it not an iMac! - I'd like a mid-powered desktop Mac thanks, not a choice between an all-in-one where the screen lives and dies with the computer and a none-in-one Mini with a separate box for the CPU and GPU (with a list of warnings about eGPU compatibility...)

 

[BigBoy2018]

The 2TB/3TB Fusion Drive still makes sense because that amount of M.2 SSD space is expensive, period.

But SATA ssd's are NOT expensive anymore. Apple should 'fuse' their M.2 SSD with a much bigger inexpensive SATA ssd, and then they could charge a lot less and give people a ton more SSD space than they do currently offer, and with performance that would make the current fusion drives look absolutely pathetic.

 

[cube]

Nobody needs Apple displays.

There's an opportunity to make G-SYNC+FreeSync displays (with many normal ports and buttons).

 

[iPadified]

Well assumption on your part, we still don't know if Apple has traded off profit over more user.
I still think Apple's drive over AIO is to sell screen together not some kind of philosophy that AIO is good for consumer.

Also, Apple is known for making some weird choice, and in some cases, Apple is known for failure. Giving up Apple's own display offering for consumer and AirPort, and famous MP 6,1 are some of the examples. Apple opted out of displays and Apple fans back then tried to defend Apple's decision by saying they are trying to focus on the product that matters. Eventually that didn't go well, and LG's ultrafine didn't really got started (mostly due to its poor quality). Look what happened? Apple's now offering XDR. And look at its reception? The same thing can happen with xMac and consumer grade monitor. They won't do it because of profit.

As for Airport, discontinuation of the product will soon bite Apple as IOT is starting to take off. It's going to act as a central hub, and established vendors are already offering the product. Apple seems interested in the field, and I bet that we will soon see a new generation of Airport.

Well I don't have to explain MP 6,1. Apple once thought external modular is the future of computing and innovation. And Apple fans back then were defending that like zealots. We all know how that went.

You see, based on track record, I don't think some of Apple's decision is based on reaslly thought out internal research and vision. Apple's the same corporation like other company that sometimes screw up their decision.

1 You should not compare the LG monitor with the XDR monitor - two different markets and users. Compare a TB display and LG ultrafine monitor. Apple should have had a 1500-2000 USD 5k display similar to the iMac in the lineup long ago for MBP and Mac mini.
2. Airport (and servers etc): All Apple is not realistic, desirable or possible. I have to accept the combined modem and router from the network/phone line prover as millions of others in my country. Where does the airport fit in that context? Not at all. Other examples are that small local servers has been replaced by cloud solutions. Hence there is no market.
3. The 6.1 has always been an iMac Pro in philosophy externally extendable, compact and silent. It later transformed into iMac Pro which seem to have found a user base. If you view the 6.1 as an iMac Pro it was not so bad. Apple bad decision was the removal of the tower in their lineup.

You are right - it has to do with economics and however you count, Apple is a small player in the traditional computer market segment and cannot cover it all. No, they will not cater for customers wanting a tower that they upgrade themself.

A standalone 5k monitor either with a base to slide in a Mac mini or connect to a standalone updated 6.1 (Mac Mini Pro) would be nice and done correctly could replace the iMac as a single cable AIO.

 

[jinnyman]

1 You should not compare the LG monitor with the XDR monitor - two different markets and users. Compare a TB display and LG ultrafine monitor. Apple should have had a 1500-2000 USD 5k display similar to the iMac in the lineup long ago for MBP and Mac mini.
2. Airport (and servers etc): All Apple is not realistic, desirable or possible. I have to accept the combined modem and router from the network/phone line prover as millions of others in my country. Where does the airport fit in that context? Not at all. Other examples are that small local servers has been replaced by cloud solutions. Hence there is no market.
3. The 6.1 has always been an iMac Pro in philosophy externally extendable, compact and silent. It later transformed into iMac Pro which seem to have found a user base. If you view the 6.1 as an iMac Pro it was not so bad. Apple bad decision was the removal of the tower in their lineup.

You are right - it has to do with economics and however you count, Apple is a small player in the traditional computer market segment and cannot cover it all. No, they will not cater for customers wanting a tower that they upgrade themself.

A standalone 5k monitor either with a base to slide in a Mac mini or connect to a standalone updated 6.1 (Mac Mini Pro) would be nice and done correctly could replace the iMac as a single cable AIO.

1. I was pointing out the fact that Apple opted out of display business, and tried 3rd party vendors for Mac. And now they are back with XDR and considering its reception on XDR's "sector", Apple's "consumer grade" display can sell like hotcakes in "consumer" sector. I never tried to compare ultrafine and XDR. They were mentioned as how Apple opted out and opted in different sector. [/puzzled]
2. Airport was mentioned as a possibly critical component in making Apple's homekit in seamless and feature rich fashion. Why take it out of context and argue some random stuff that I wasn't focusing on? Based on the same logic, anything bad can be said about existing Apple product. Whatever Apple's making right now is not 100% perfect in certain sector.
3. MP 6,1 was mentioned as an example that Apple's decision can be bad. End of story. Apple even accept it and trying to repair brand with MP 7,1. I don't have to argue with you. What's with iMac Pro? Nothing relating to my context.

I'm puzzled. You seem you are only looking at the word and not understanding the context of discussion I've had with Abazigal.

 

[Coyote2006]

I've just bought a LG 38" widescreen monitor and I love it. Apple should sell a retina version of it. Together with a Mac that allows 1 GPU cards (with internal TB3 converter), 4 RAM slots and one additional SSD for NvMe drives. GPU, RAM and SSD should be upgradable, CPU needn't be. That should be for MacPro.

 

[nihil0]

I agree that it's outdated, but I think they should stay with the all in one design and push it further to reach the format's potential. At the moment it feels like the iMac is reaching about 75% of the potential of what it could be. Various aspects of the iMac need to be redesigned to modernise it, such as:

- Significantly improved thermal performance which may require a thickening of the chassis so that noise is kept to a minimum and stronger graphics cards can be included without having to be down clocked and so that CPUs can turbo boost to higher levels. If the chassis were thickened it may also allow for higher quality speakers as well. Apple have thickened the chassis in the Mac Pro and given it better speakers, so I would like to see this in the iMac as well.
- A significantly redesigned magic mouse, which offers the same functionality but with much improved ergonomics.
- Improved webcam ~ at least 1080p 60fps, with FaceID included.
- SSD as standard. Even if they kept the fusion drive, the SSD component should be increased to 256Gb.
- 4 thunderbolt ports, so that two 5k monitors can be used. Keep all the other current ports.
- Wifi 6
- Bluetooth 5.0
- Slimmed down bezels, but not so slim that I can't mount a webcam at the top.
- Backlit keyboard.
- The ability to purchase higher end GPU options with lower end CPUs and RAM options. For example, it would have been nice if we could pair an i5, with a Vega 64 without requiring ECC ram as well.
- Further improvements to the 5k screen, such as increasing the refresh rate to 120hz. That would be an incredible advancement and would significantly improve the user experience.
- Height adjustable stand.
- T2 chip for improved security and the ability to watch 4k movies from the TV store.
- Maybe removing the 21inch option and replacing it with a 24inch retina option.

If at least some of the above improvements were made, along with standard technological improvements that always occur such as faster CPUs and faster GPUs, then the iMac would be so much better and would be reaching much more of its potential. It would also keep its simplicity, compactness and user friendliness which is what the iMac does so well.

You have very valid points and I agree with most of them except one - since iMac is mainly consumer/prosumer product, its one selling point is also its design. And I don't see that they would ever thicken the iMac as for example HP AIO which someone posted here earlier. They way I see it is that they will adopt design from iMac Pro - twin coolers and no door for RAM. Maybe thinner bezels since everyone is crying about it.

 

[nosnhojm]

What is an airport going to offer that an ordinary router doesn’t? There are over 900 million iPhones in use today. An airport router might sell a few million units. Most carriers give away free routers with a home internet plan these days. It makes more sense for Apple to make their HomeKit initiative work over any wireless router and have their products handle it on their own end via software, than to confine it to a product with an extremely low install base.

Privacy
Ecosystem Lock-In
Apple Integrations (Siri, Homekit, Shortcuts, ScreenTime)

I agree HomeKit must work with all routers, but that doesn't mean an Apple branded router couldn't provide additional benefits.
[automerge]1578569327[/automerge]
I've had an iMac since 2012, and just purchased a new one last month. I considered a Mac mini and monitor instead, but after playing around with that setup at the Apple Store, I wasn't convinced. The benefits of a modular system are price, customization, and single component obsolescence/replacement; but the integration of the iMac provides cohesion benefits. No mucking around with display compatibilities, display wake-up, resolution scaling, or bandwidth issues from daisy chaining thunderbolt devices. No concern with RF interference; placement of antennas relative to peripherals is static for iMac. No adapters, power strips, cables, etc. needed.

Now I don't think an iMac is right for everyone; we need choices. The iMac was right for me though.

 

[iPadified]

1. I was pointing out the fact that Apple opted out of display business, and tried 3rd party vendors for Mac. And now they are back with XDR and considering its reception on XDR's "sector", Apple's "consumer grade" display can sell like hotcakes in "consumer" sector. I never tried to compare ultrafine and XDR. They were mentioned as how Apple opted out and opted in different sector. [/puzzled]
2. Airport was mentioned as a possibly critical component in making Apple's homekit in seamless and feature rich fashion. Why take it out of context and argue some random stuff that I wasn't focusing on? Based on the same logic, anything bad can be said about existing Apple product. Whatever Apple's making right now is not 100% perfect in certain sector.
3. MP 6,1 was mentioned as an example that Apple's decision can be bad. End of story. Apple even accept it and trying to repair brand with MP 7,1. I don't have to argue with you. What's with iMac Pro? Nothing relating to my context.

I'm puzzled. You seem you are only looking at the word and not understanding the context of discussion I've had with Abazigal.

Oh my, stingy are we? I only have the words to write to reply to and if I misunderstand you, you need be clearer. I reply before reading all the post is thread - sorry.
1. So we basically agree then? A 5k consumer display is lacking in Apple lineup?
2. Adding airport to a setup provided by the internet provider is the same as adding complexity - not good. If you need Airport for Homekit that is not user friendly either.
3. I did not argue that the 6.1 was a good replacement for a tower, did I? Amazing how many that do not get the idea of the iMac Pro/6.1: "Lightweight" workstations in front of servers that do the heavy lifting or mid range computer between a laptop /iMac and tower MP. What is the problem with that?

 

[jinnyman]

Oh my, stingy are we? I only have the words to write to reply to and if I misunderstand you, you need be clearer. I reply before reading all the post is thread - sorry.
1. So we basically agree then? A 5k consumer display is lacking in Apple lineup?
2. Adding airport to a setup provided by the internet provider is the same as adding complexity - not good. If you need Airport for Homekit that is not user friendly either.
3. I did not argue that the 6.1 was a good replacement for a tower, did I? Amazing how many that do not get the idea of the iMac Pro/6.1: "Lightweight" workstations in front of servers that do the heavy lifting or mid range computer between a laptop /iMac and tower MP. What is the problem with that?

You know. I was having a discussion with Abazigal. I really don't know what you are trying to say. You are taking my discussion out of context and looks like looking for a fight. Whatever your misunderstanding, I clarified in my last reply. So peace.

 

[MistrSynistr]

The LOOK definitely is, slightly. Inside, no way, handles all my tasks and more.

 

[retta283]

Honestly I think they should revert to 16:10. I'd introduce a 24" and 30" model with smaller chin and option of black/white border glass and back aluminum. Get rid of Fusion Drives, SSD standard. Thicker unit to enable better cooling and RAM will be replaceable on all models. 1080p iSight camera. Re-introduce audio in port.

 

[ruslan120]

Honestly I think they should revert to 16:10. I'd introduce a 24" and 30" model with smaller chin and option of black/white border glass and back aluminum. Get rid of Fusion Drives, SSD standard. Thicker unit to enable better cooling and RAM will be replaceable on all models. 1080p iSight camera. Re-introduce audio in port.

I think Target Display Mode will be making a comeback in 2020. Apple’s had time to re-engineer the panel’s signals to go through a single connection + Thunderbolt 3 controllers have improved.

With regards to 16:10 completely agreed. Apple even subtly admits that for video editing 5K is great but lacks vertical space with their ads for the Pro Display XDR.

I would rather expand the iMac vertically than spend $6,000 to get more vertical screen real estate (and am working on a “solution” for this, I’ll update this post when it’s ready

 

[theluggage]

but the integration of the iMac provides cohesion benefits. No mucking around with display compatibilities, display wake-up, resolution scaling, or bandwidth issues from daisy chaining thunderbolt devices.

...those are the sort of problems I'd associate with connecting external devices to a laptop, all-in-one or a pointlessly-small-form-factor system (like the Mini) via a limited number of multi-function ports like USB-C/TB3 (a lot of display/sleep problems rooted in USB-C adapters/hubs etc) - not a proper "modular" system with a full-sized GPU (with full sized DisplayPorts), space for M.2., PCIe and/or SATA expansion and plenty of (single-purpose) ports. ...but this thread was about the iMac and the lack of a credible mid-range modular system in Apple's range isn't the iMac's problem.

As an all-in-one, the current iMac is pretty good - sure, the bezels could be smaller, but that would probably come at the expense of cooling/noise (or making the "baby bump" bigger), losing the RAM expansion etc. Plenty of room for improvement, though:

Support for spinning rust and the fusion drive needs to go - Apple managed to bump the 16" MBP to 512GB SSD minimum without raising the price so its time for that to happen across the range. An (accessible) slot for extra M.2 storage would be nice (but obviously ain't gonna happen). Then add a better stand (but not for $999!) or just include the 4 threaded bolt holes needed for VESA (oh, the white heat of technology...)

...and, actually, there's plenty of space on the iMac for a regular DisplayPort output or two so we didn't have to waste one of our restricted number of high-speed I/O ports routing signals from the GPU...

 

[fathergll]

They bought iMacs with the intention of primarily using them as Windows machines? That strikes me as a really odd decision to make. The only way that's cost-competitive is if you factor in the costs of the screens. Even then, it's only cost-competitive as a one-time purchase. Depending on your hardware and display needs, buying a brand new iMac vs. upgrading a computer and keeping the same monitor can quickly become more expensive if going with iMacs after as little as one or two upgrades.

I've heard differing opinions on bootcamp with even some people state bootcamp works as good or better than a PC. In my experience and reading over various user experiences I would say that is false. I've personally experienced and read about users issues all the time with bootcamp...anything from fan issues to UI display to crashes. I'm not saying bootcamp can't be a solid installation for some but there is no way I would ever by a Mac to install Windows as the primary OS and this would be even more so in a work environment.

Side note HP has an updated AIO that is pretty darn nice(at least on paper);

You can customize but for example


31.5" diagonal 4K IPS ZBD HDR 600 micro-edge WLED-backlit with anti-reflection edge-to-edge glass, 450 nits (3840 x 2160)
i7-9700 Processor(8 Core)
32 GB DDR4-2666 SDRAM (2 X 16 GB)
1 TB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (8 GB GDDR6 dedicated)
MSRP: $3115

HP Envy 32 all-in-one PC with built-in wireless charging is an NVIDIA RTX Studio system

HP unveiled a huge new all-in-one PC at CES 2020. The Envy 32 AiO includes a wireless phone charger built into the stand and NVIDIA RTX Studio certification.

www.dpreview.com

 

[iPadified]

You know. I was having a discussion with Abazigal. I really don't know what you are trying to say. You are taking my discussion out of context and looks like looking for a fight. Whatever your misunderstanding, I clarified in my last reply. So peace.

I thought this was an open discussion but apparently not.

My opinions is that much of the Mac line is outdate, whether we're talking about display technology being used in laptops, or how the iMac Pro simply is being beaten in performance by laptops or the design of the iMac has remained unchanged for many many years.

Hopefully, with Ive now gone, we'll get some new designs and a fresh look for the Macs. Less thinner and more functional design. I've said many times, that the iMac does not need to be paper thin, and yet that was the marketing of this design

Well I have not personally listened to a iMac Pro under heavy use such as raytracing for hours but laptops are very noisy and will furthermore not in any way sustain the high burst performance they appear to have in Geekbench. Reports suggest the iMac Pro is nearly silent, also under heavy sustained load (just like 6.1 and apparently the 7.1 machines).

I agree that the iMac does not need to be razor thin but clever design utilising the large metal back side as a heatsink can give some intersting advantages. An iMac Pro cooling solution will suffice for the iMac.