What’s your basis for the assertion that Apple is not making the Macs “the customers” are asking for?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iMac Pro Launched Seven Years Ago Today
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What’s your basis for the assertion that Apple is not making the Macs “the customers” are asking for?
My M4 Pro Mac mini (14-core CPU, 64GB memory, 8TB SSD and 10Gb ethernet) that I will pick up next week has higher performance numbers on paper than my M1 Ultra Mac Studio (128GB ram, a 8TB SSD, 20 -core CPU and 64 -core GPU).
I and another chap have posted in this thread two different third party devices that would allow the user to attach the Mac mini to the Studio Display stand in one case or the back of the Studio display in the other. No CPU box on the desktop with either solution. For all intents and purposes, that assembly has the operational equivalence of an iMac but with the advantage of a replaceable CPU box and reuse of the Studio display.
The M4 iMac will most likely still have the problematic cable (perhaps designed to fail just after the warranty) and the repair charge is over $600.
I and another chap have posted in this thread two different third party devices that would allow the user to attach the Mac mini to the Studio Display stand in one case or the back of the Studio display in the other. No CPU box on the desktop with either solution. For all intents and purposes, that assembly has the operational equivalence of an iMac but with the advantage of a replaceable CPU box and reuse of the Studio display.
The M4 iMac will most likely still have the problematic cable (perhaps designed to fail just after the warranty) and the repair charge is over $600.
Apple is missing the boat here. The Market wants a Pro iMac. Or at the least, a bigger screen than a dinky 24" monitor.
At this point, I have moved onto a 32" monitor, so that is where the next iMac Pro needs to be. It would be an instant buy, but until then, the wallet remains slammed shut.
At this point, I have moved onto a 32" monitor, so that is where the next iMac Pro needs to be. It would be an instant buy, but until then, the wallet remains slammed shut.
It would have been cheaper than a MacPro tower that would have most likely had dual Xeons, multiple SSD slots, PCI expansion and could have been configured with more than 2 GPUs and more RAM. Had the iMac Pro not existed 5 years later it would have fit in that price range minus whatever the 5K screen cost for a single GPU option and about on par for 2 GPUs. Had Apple made a 5K display it would have been the logical step up from the i7/i9 iMac for someone that didn't need or could not justify the price of Mac Pro.
While I've never owned an iMac, I've always found them appealing and appreciated their important position in the Mac line-up and history. This article transported me back to 2017 when the podcasts and blogs were discussing and drooling over the iMac Pro.
The comments to this story are enlightening in several ways, but I'll stick to my first aha moment. As a fan of the iPhone mini, I sometimes feel like there's a high school lunchroom table for me and the other outcasts (like in the movie, Mean Girls), but today I'm finally noticing that iMac fans also have their own lunchroom table.
Empathy addition: I'll move on from my preferred, but no-longer-made device when I'm ready, so just let me enjoy the last of my time with it without telling me to move on and get what you use. See? I get it.
The comments to this story are enlightening in several ways, but I'll stick to my first aha moment. As a fan of the iPhone mini, I sometimes feel like there's a high school lunchroom table for me and the other outcasts (like in the movie, Mean Girls), but today I'm finally noticing that iMac fans also have their own lunchroom table.
Empathy addition: I'll move on from my preferred, but no-longer-made device when I'm ready, so just let me enjoy the last of my time with it without telling me to move on and get what you use. See? I get it.
Last edited:
Their answer to such demand is the mac studio and studio display, which is cheaper and more flexible than the all in one approach. This way you don’t have to throw away a perfectly fine display when the time comes to renew the computer.
Personally, I believe this iMac Pro was the worst computer Apple ever brought out within the last decade. We had about five of them being used at work and three of them decided not to boot up and two of them had drive issue. It could very well be too much heat inside the enclosure and shorten the lifespan. The space gray darker finish wasn't good to look at as well. Correct me if I was wrong, it could be the very first model with a T2 chip.
None of the regular 27-inch iMac we had even with Core i7, Fusion Drive, and higher tier graphics showed any failure.
None of the regular 27-inch iMac we had even with Core i7, Fusion Drive, and higher tier graphics showed any failure.
Which market? I don't see pro.s demanding 'just one cable' for aesthetics reasons, and from a business sense I doubt it makes sense to throw out a high quality display and buy another (albeit built-in) ever 4 - 5 years).
Consumers are price conscious, especially since many of us don't make a lot of money (if any!) from our home systems. Who will pay for what amounts to a base M4 Pro system attached to an Apple Studio Display, for the 27" version?
Now who will pay for what a system with a 32" 6K display built-in would cost? And you can't use it with any future Mac, only what it's built-in with.
It'd be interesting to see a breakdown of where the iMac Pro did sell in the past - consumers vs. professionals, and what sort of professionals.
Ironically, something like the Apple Studio Display (very high-priced, high build quality, high resolution, excellent in-monitor speakers, webcam) makes a lot more sense if you use it over the life of 2 or 3 Mac systems rather than one. I can't see someone buying the equivalent of an ASD every time they buy a new Mac Mini or even Mac Studio.
Why not try a Studio Display + Mac Mini combo? It will be nicer looking, more versatile and more future-proof than any iMac has ever been (except for the G4 iMac on the looks). As a bonus, you won’t see the chin.
I thought it was the best / fastest Mac I had ever had... until it wasn't ... and died much like yours, after less than 5 years, failing to boot and any repair would cost more than a new, faster Mac. Most expensive and shortest-lived computer I ever owned.
Yes, that is pretty much exactly the excuse Apple gave. It was pretty clear within a year that the 2013 Mac Pro was the wrong machine for the Pro market, so why did they wait 6 years to replace it?
I also enjoy anniversary pieces. But do find ones like this sort of similar to celebrating your fifteenth and a half birthday.
I don’t see too many entitled user posts though.
I guess they were talking about the fabled "large iMac" and customers who want a $$$$ display that will be good for the next 10 years - but which can only work with a processor which will be thoroughly obsolete and unsupported by then (but does use 2 fewer cables).
Unless they mean the currently missing-in-action M4 Max Studio (esp. since there was never a M3 Max Studio and the M4 Max chip is already out for MBPs). The Mac Pro and the Studio Ultra are presumably waiting for new better-than-Max chips, which is a bit more understandable. Personally, my M1 Max Studio still takes everything I throw at it so I'm in no hurry - but the M4 Max would be the first really compelling upgrade.
I'd have no complaint if Apple did make a new "large iMac" for those who wanted it as long as it doesn't come at the expense of the other Mac desktops and displays (which seems to have been the problem in the past).
If you have to run Windows, those 2019 iMacs are really pretty sweet machines. I think resale you can get one for under a grand at this point. I've got the extra woofy Vega gpu models powering our CAD workstations & running 128GB of (user upgradable yay) ram. Even the CPU is replaceable on the board should you desire an upgrade or replacement. The NVME-only models still come with the extra SATA & power jack on the board & internal tray, so you can add a second high capacity internal drive afterward with a cable. You can dual, (triple, etc) boot them with everything from Mojave to the latest Mac OS, and I'm pretty sure I saw Win7 on one, but of course Win10 and 11 upgradable, & of course VM's back to the dawn of time via VMware or Parallels (and non-subscription parallels at that). They also work with every Wacom tablet, before the stuttering cursor problem ruined everything in 2020. Great mix of ports, you can even add an external GPU for yet more power, and they're very easy to disassemble & work on.
All the young shiny new models will continue to come and go, but Uncle Steves old MBP17 and the 2019 i9 iMac27's are irreplaceable permanent fixtures in my company, bc they're the equivalent of a well designed, self-contained swiss army knife. Very nice machines.
Still waiting on an iMac to replace it with. Wild
Apple's iMac Pro launched seven years ago today, offering a high-end all-in-one desktop machine to bridge the gap between new Mac Pro models.
In April 2017, Apple uncharacteristically apologised for its approach to the Mac in recent years and pre-announced it was working on a "completely rethought" Mac Pro with a modular design, a new pro-level iMac, and a new high-end external display. At WWDC that year, Apple unveiled the iMac Pro, after years of rumors about a "Pro" iMac. The iMac Pro sought to placate many of Apple's discontented professional Mac users, coming around four years after the launch of the controversial "trashcan" Mac Pro, but two years before the current Mac Pro design, which returned to a modular tower design.
Apple presented the iMac Pro as "the most powerful Mac ever made." It featured 8-, 10-, 14-, or 18-core Intel Xeon processor options, a 5K display, AMD Vega graphics, ECC memory, and 10 Gigabit Ethernet, with a starting price of $4,999. It was also the first Mac to contain a custom T2 chip, as well as the first desktop Mac to be available in Space Gray. While it did not have a slot to easily access the memory like the 27-inch iMac, the processor, memory, and storage were not soldered in place and could easily be removed if the display was disassembled.
In March 2021, Apple announced that it was discontinuing the iMac Pro. By that time, the machine had been surpassed by the 2019 Mac Pro, a significant final update for the 27-inch iMac, and the first Apple silicon Macs. The iMac Pro's position in Apple's product lineup is now effectively held by the Mac Studio and the Studio Display.
Yet after the launch of the 24-inch Apple silicon iMac in April 2021 and the discontinuation of the 27-inch iMac in March 2022, interest in an iMac Pro with a larger display has increased. Bloomberg's Mark Gurman believed that Apple was still "working on a larger-screened iMac aimed at the professional market," a rumor supported by Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, as of 2022. Yet other reports claimed Apple has no plans to release a new high-end iMac at all.
Rumors suggest that a larger-screened iMac that could be positioned as an iMac Pro will launch in 2025. In July 2024, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said that Apple is still exploring a larger iMac, but it is unclear when it could be released. See our full guide for more information.
Article Link: iMac Pro Launched Seven Years Ago Today
Likely because it also spanned the era of mass exodus from desktops to laptops for a large chunk of the professional world (including my end in software) and they were weighing whether it was worth continuing to make a mac pro at all
Yeah just get a Mac and a monitor. It feels like it's harder finding a good monitor than a good computer.
It runs fine so long as you haven't used apps or use cases that is more than a dozen years newer like say 4K or 8K video editing.
Yes it would’ve been cheaper than a tower with those specs, but then why would it make sense to have those specs on the base model? Why not offer the tower with a single CPU / GPU configuration? Apple had done both single and dual processor towers for years.
No, the 2013 Mac Pro wouldn’t have succeeded if sold alongside a full tower Mac Pro, and it wouldn’t have been cheaper either, at least not cheaper than a single processor / single GPU base model tower. It would’ve just been the G4 Cube all over again.
Last edited:
I had an iMac Pro at a past job. It was great at the time, and I loved the darker finish and extra cores and larger GPU when editing video. Later I moved to having a decent iMac plus a 16" MBP for working at home and when traveling. Got tired of using two machines and trying to keep everything updated and in sync.
With how fast the MacBook Pro is nowadays, I've moved past using desktops, for both portable and desktop work. In the 14" MBP, even with a year old M3 Max, I have a powerhouse workstation with 16 cores and 40 GPU cores, 64GB unified memory, and a battery that lasts all day. Even as a high level spec, it was still much cheaper than buying a decently powered desktop and laptop separately. I had considered the Mac Studio, but the Ultra is overkill for any of the work that I will be doing in the next several years, and it's not as convenient to use. Heck of a device, though.
When I really need to power through tasks, I plug my MBP in to the workstation I've setup in my basement studio with a Thunderbolt dock that connects multiple 4K displays. When multitasking is less of a priority or I need to focus on more singular tasks, I'll connect it to a single 4K display at my standing desk upstairs and get some sunlight and fresh air and clear my head. Or I'll go sit on the deck or kick back on the couch with just the MBP itself, which even though it's 14", I have it set to the higher resolution in Display settings which helps a lot, especially since I am near-sighted. Combining that with spaces in macOS makes for a fairly capable and portable multitasking experience.
I hope that someday Apple unveils a cheaper version of the Vision Pro that just plugs into the Mac directly using Thunderbolt over USB-C to add a bunch of virtual external displays. Just keep the R chip and ditch the crap that lets people see your eyes on the front. Could probably lose half the weight and two-thirds of the price. Could also plug into the iPhone or iPad when traveling, over USB-C, to watch movies. With such devices we wouldn't really need large bulky displays anymore, and could more easily bring our displays with us on the go. Just not for the current $3500 price point that has all the bloat. I think Apple could sell a lot more if the standard Vision product was an accessory device that cost $999.
With how fast the MacBook Pro is nowadays, I've moved past using desktops, for both portable and desktop work. In the 14" MBP, even with a year old M3 Max, I have a powerhouse workstation with 16 cores and 40 GPU cores, 64GB unified memory, and a battery that lasts all day. Even as a high level spec, it was still much cheaper than buying a decently powered desktop and laptop separately. I had considered the Mac Studio, but the Ultra is overkill for any of the work that I will be doing in the next several years, and it's not as convenient to use. Heck of a device, though.
When I really need to power through tasks, I plug my MBP in to the workstation I've setup in my basement studio with a Thunderbolt dock that connects multiple 4K displays. When multitasking is less of a priority or I need to focus on more singular tasks, I'll connect it to a single 4K display at my standing desk upstairs and get some sunlight and fresh air and clear my head. Or I'll go sit on the deck or kick back on the couch with just the MBP itself, which even though it's 14", I have it set to the higher resolution in Display settings which helps a lot, especially since I am near-sighted. Combining that with spaces in macOS makes for a fairly capable and portable multitasking experience.
I hope that someday Apple unveils a cheaper version of the Vision Pro that just plugs into the Mac directly using Thunderbolt over USB-C to add a bunch of virtual external displays. Just keep the R chip and ditch the crap that lets people see your eyes on the front. Could probably lose half the weight and two-thirds of the price. Could also plug into the iPhone or iPad when traveling, over USB-C, to watch movies. With such devices we wouldn't really need large bulky displays anymore, and could more easily bring our displays with us on the go. Just not for the current $3500 price point that has all the bloat. I think Apple could sell a lot more if the standard Vision product was an accessory device that cost $999.
Also with the T2 chip and how the internal SSD card was, data recovery was non-existent. The iMac Pro felt slower compared to later loaded 2019/2020 iMac as well. It supports macOS Sequoia which is wild.
What Mac did you upgrade to?
Well, it was the time when Apple lied in every interview to every product.
It was the time, when Apple thought they could rule the world just with the iPhone and Ives design.
Since then they learned. The Laptops have even HDMI again.
Would like to see a larger iMac one day. If it happens, Apple will most likely go the 'Pro' route and make it a much costlier machine. I would like a simple larger screen variant of the 24" iMac.