iMac progress since Steve Jobs died: opinions?

[garirry]

For more storage?

Umm - TONS of people use way more than the 1TB that an SSD allows (don't even start about fusion or HDD garbage please - it's 2015)

Same thing in 2007. They came with 250GB/320GB drives, SSDs were some kind of sorcery at the time, so if you needed more storage, it's external, it's internal upgrade, or it's GTFO.

USB hub & Speakers - The point is why make an "all in one" so thin that you right away need a bunch of crap connected to it to accomplish basic things that could be accomplished internally if the "thin obsession" was toned down?

You didn't read my post well enough. The amount of USB ports was increased (a bit), so if you needed more, you would need a hub, regardless of whether you live in 2007 or 2015. The speakers have massively improved, so the requirement for external sound has been reduced, but for those that need it, you will need external speakers regardless of whether you live in 2007 or 2015.

There's no good argument to make a desktop as "thin as possible" other than pure vanity.

I agree, but they still managed to make it thin while keeping most of its properties intact (well, except the 5400RPM drive, but that's another issue), so it doesn't really matter. Besides, I may be alone on this, but when you have a single huge display, a computer that is thick makes it look fat, while making the computer thinner makes it feel a bit better "psychologically". But regarding that, I'm probably just crazy.

 

[turbineseaplane]

....I'm probably just crazy.

Well, I'll give you that at least.

The iMac just makes a bunch of compromises for no great reason. Looking better from the side is pretty lame reason to hamstring it in so many other ways that are actually relevant.

It's classic "form over function" taken too far. I like and value "thin" on something that gets carried around, but not an all in one desktop computer.

 

[AlifTheUnseen]

That thicker iMac photo also shows how much nicer that thickness is because the ports could be on the side/top/bottom instead of the back where it's impossible to see what you're doing.

The iMac is too thin for no good reason - It doesn't need to be knife thickness at the edges, it's not a portable device.

Well, placing the ports at the back has some clear advantages you're obviously not taking into account - but Apple thinks no less than in total system integration:
- You have to stand up and look behind your screen… this physical exercise will kickstart the health app in your Apple Watch and give you better movement reading at the end of your day --> fitness AND happiness improved
- While standing up, you will bump your head at the lamp, finally giving you enough impetus to act wrt lamp arrangement --> better working environment, hereby improving productivity
- You will discover that smelling residue of a 2-months-old ham sandwich behind that gorgeous screen --> air and microclimate improved

 

[turbineseaplane]

Well, placing the ports at the back has some clear advantages you're obviously not taking into account - but Apple thinks no less than in total system integration:
- You have to stand up and look behind your screen… this physical exercise will kickstart the health app in your Apple Watch and give you better movement reading at the end of your day --> fitness AND happiness improved
- While standing up, you will bump your head at the lamp, finally giving you enough impetus to act wrt lamp arrangement --> better working environment, hereby improving productivity
- You will discover that smelling residue of a 2-months-old ham sandwich behind that gorgeous screen --> air and microclimate improved

lol - touché

 

[JohnSFO]

Also coming from a 2007 24" iMac, which has been a fantastic machine for many years. But I'm still wowed by my new 27" 5K iMac. It's FAST (I added a 512GB SSD) and the screen is gorgeous. I really love the crisp text in documents, and how photos, album art, and videos look so clear. I downloaded HD desktops to show off the screen in the background (I use multiple desktops, so I need lots of photos to rotate). Everything zips along perfectly. With 16GB RAM (instead of the maxed out 4 in the old machine) I can keep all of my programs, documents, and multiple websites open without any slow down. I love the ultra slim design and the black border around the screen gives a nice framing effect. I understand where the thread starter is coming from - the iMac still feels similar in style to its 2007 older sibling, but for me the 2015 WOW comes with the speed boost and stunning screen.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Also coming from a 2007 24" iMac

Haha. I think we could put literally any new machine in front of an 8 year old machine and it should blow the user away.

For comparison, that is literally iPhone 1 to 6s/6s+ (quantum leap)

 

[Macmamamac]

Actually, i think i have to backtrack a bit on my opening remarks after spending a week with the new iMac.

When i wrote this thread i wasn't comparing it directly to my 2007 iMac, and the screen wasn't a 'wow' because i am used to retina screens in other apple devices, so it wasn't a big leap from things i was used to.

However, when comparing it side by side to my old model, i have to say it is a monumental improvement both in terms of speed and overall user experience.

The everyday stuff; emails, browsing etc isn't that much faster, but the screen and improved snappiness certainly do make the everyday stuff a completely fresh experience -- Magic trackpad 2 which i use alongside my Intuos Pro has also really improved how i navigate around.

Speed wise, its wasn't until i got into the Photoshop stuff and compared side by side that i realised just how far things had come. One Photoshop test that took me 45 seconds on the new 5K took a whopping 9 minutes 20 seconds on my old 2007....I was almost in tears as the minutes ticked by on that test! lol

For those coming from older models who are on the fence, i would say definitely upgrade. I only got away with it for so long because my Photoshop work is non-photographic and doesn't require large files, but i didn't realise just how restricted my workflow had become until i finally got the 5k.

So overall i would say the evolution of this machine, apart from design, has been a 'wow', although a delayed 'wow' for me at least.

 

[hifimacianer]

I agree that the actual hunting for the thinnest products isn't the way Apple should go. Especially for a Desktop it doesn't make sense to me. Apple could easily place user accessible harddrives into the actual iMacs with a well designed plug&play mechanism. Just like with the RAM door on the back of the actual 27" iMacs.

A internal DVD or BluRay drive wouldn't be necessary for me, but even that would be possible if the iMac would be a tad thicker.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I agree that the actual hunting for the thinnest products isn't the way Apple should go. Especially for a Desktop it doesn't make sense to me. Apple could easily place user accessible harddrives into the actual iMacs with a well designed plug&play mechanism. Just like with the RAM door on the back of the actual 27" iMacs.

A internal DVD or BluRay drive wouldn't be necessary for me, but even that would be possible if the iMac would be a tad thicker.

Yep - Not only that, it'd be another great up-sell to have an internal Time Machine drive built in that they could gouge people for. Add in another $200 or so for the peace of mind of having backup built in, which of all the gouging they like to do would actually be a useful one!

 

[ohsnaphappy]

Apple is trying to carry on the Steve Jobs legacy for their legacy customers. I think they should give up and redefine the Mac for a new generation. I'll be left behind, it's true, but I think it's better than these legacy machines that don't satisfy.

 

[dogslobber]

OP, there's not much more apple could do with the iMac regardless if Jobs was running the show. AIO computers are very limited in terms of design options. Personally I think they erred in making this as thin as it is. Its a desktop computer that people generally don't move around, there's no reason to make it razor thin. That may not have happened if Jobs was around but we don't know.

Apple have generally run out of ideas nowadays. You see that happen when a company starts paying out dividends. That's what separated Uncle Steve from the other CEOs. He would tell you to get stuffed whereas Tim Cook is too corporate, no matter how hard he tries.

 

[dogslobber]

Maybe the iMac reached its perfect form factor?

No. The 2011 iMac was the pinnacle of design for that computer. The 2012 onwards are regressions.

 

[sunapple]

No. The 2011 iMac was the pinnacle of design for that computer. The 2012 onwards are regressions.

I know what mean, but in my comparison they're the same 'form factor' as in a screen with chin and foot, compared to half a sphere with a neck from the G4. They've just gotten thinner on the sides along with internal changes like the fixed ram.

I actually like how thin the iMac looks from the front even it's an illusion and forced the SD card slot to the back (which I never use). But that's just personal.

 

[dogslobber]

I actually like how thin the iMac looks from the front even it's an illusion and forced the SD card slot to the back (which I never use). But that's just personal.

Agree it's a personal choice. I think the 2011 looks great but 2012+ form didn't appeal to me for whatever reason. Probably it's because I know to get into it there is glue and no internal FRUs. I think that's why I like the iMac 21.5" 2011 version in that I can put 32gb of user RAM in and replacing the HD with an SSD is a cinch. I guess Apple is constant evolution but there are certain points where they present something to each of us which we think is the best.

 

[maflynn]

actually like how thin the iMac looks from the front even it's an illusion and forced the SD card slot to the back (which I never use). But that's just personal.

I'm not saying the iMac is not beautiful. My point about coming out against the design change was that it's unnecessary. The thinner design limits what Apple can do with the innards as well.

From an aesthetics perspective its gorgeous.

 

[sunapple]

I'm not saying the iMac is not beautiful. My point about coming out against the design change was that it's unnecessary. The thinner design limits what Apple can do with the innards as well.

From an aesthetics perspective its gorgeous.

I like to think that the pursuit of thinness leads to new ways of building computers and thus innovation. As if they're forcing themselves to. Maybe in this era it's just been negative things like glue and non-repairability, but things could get better and differences between this generation and the next could be bigger.

It's also part their decision to limit accessibility because the Mac Pro for example shows that it's very possible to access the innards whilst drastically decreasing size.

 

[maflynn]

like to think that the pursuit of thinness leads to new ways of building computers and thus innovation

New does not exactly equate to innovation. Making a desktop computer razor thin really has not upsides, its apple's decision to opt for form over function.

It's also part their decision to limit accessibility because the Mac Pro for example shows that it's very possible to access the innards whilst drastically decreasing size.

Limiting accessibility is basically Apple turning to planned obsolesce. They are basically limiting how much consumers can upgrade the computer at a later day and also restricting what you can actually repair. I find not positives with this move at all.

Referencing the Mac Pro is a good point, because when they rolled that out, many of the intended audience of such a product decried the lack of expandability. The 3,000+ dollar product no longer fit the needs of many professionals looking for such a machine. Spending thousands on a computer and then spending more money on expensive thunderbolt external storage definitely rubbed people the wrong way, especially when the older model had many drive bays to afford the professional many options for expandabiltiy.

 

[Buerkletucson]

New does not exactly equate to innovation. Making a desktop computer razor thin really has not upsides, its apple's decision to opt for form over function.
.

Apple did not make the decision to go with a sleek, modern, thin design iMac by accident or just because they wanted too.
They do it based on what sells and what they believe will sell............Apple does this well and knows how to read the market demands. Much better than most other companies.

Based on the iMacs success I think they've done a mighty fine job of it........they will never please everyone.

 

[penniless]

I'd like to see the bezel size reduce and fit the same screens into a smaller area. It'd be cool to see the Apple logo slowly rotate colors to mimic the original, rainbow Apple logo. More color options for the casing to match the iPhone options.

 

[joema2]

New does not exactly equate to innovation. Making a desktop computer razor thin really has not upsides, its apple's decision to opt for form over function...Limiting accessibility is basically Apple turning to planned obsolesce. They are basically limiting how much consumers can upgrade the computer at a later day and also restricting what you can actually repair. I find not positives with this move at all....

This issue is not new and was debated inside and outside Apple when the first Mac was designed in 1984. Jobs wanted simplicity and felt expansion could be handled via higher speed external interfaces. Burrell Smith who designed the original Mac logic board was always trying to sneak in ways it could be expanded and Jobs was always trying to stamp those out. Fast forward to today and that same philosophy permeates the iMac, nMP, iPhone and iPad design.

Job's zen-like focus on simplicity has certain advantages. E.g, the Apple.com site is very easy to understand and configure a machine, whereas Dell's site is a complicated, confusing mess. Apple has one version of OS X and FCP X vs other companies that have fragmented products with junior, educational, senior, pro, super-pro, etc. versions.

There is a valid argument that internal hardware expansion (whether battery, CPU, GPU, SSD, etc) entails cost, design risk and potentially degrades reliability. You have to provide access ports, slots, etc. This constrains the design and adds space and volume.

In an era of 4k video, not having an internal DVD drive in the iMac is probably the right choice. DVD is only 720x480 and produces 1/6th the resolution of 1080p and 1/24th the resolution of UHD 4k.

I also see the other side about why emphasize extreme thinness on a desktop computer if accepting a little thicker design might enable better expandability, cooling, etc. However the top-spec 2015 iMac 27 does pretty well on a broad range of tasks. It is *much* faster than my 4Ghz Windows PC which has 1TB SSD and an older i7-875K. It is vastly quieter, despite the PC having super-quiet Noctua fans.

So despite the thinness, great progress has been made and is continuing. Even though a thicker iMac might be yet again a little faster or more expandable, the current design is very impressive. Just as in 1984, today when you get an iMac you just have to accept Apple's design approach.

I think it impacts nMP users more significantly since those are so expensive and often have a longer operational deployment in professional use. Look at how many cMP users have upgraded their machines, yet that is not nearly as feasible for the nMP. It will be interesting to see the revised nMP next year and what options exist for current nMP owners.

 

[sunapple]

New does not exactly equate to innovation. Making a desktop computer razor thin really has not upsides, its apple's decision to opt for form over function.

Limiting accessibility is basically Apple turning to planned obsolesce. They are basically limiting how much consumers can upgrade the computer at a later day and also restricting what you can actually repair. I find not positives with this move at all.

Referencing the Mac Pro is a good point, because when they rolled that out, many of the intended audience of such a product decried the lack of expandability. The 3,000+ dollar product no longer fit the needs of many professionals looking for such a machine. Spending thousands on a computer and then spending more money on expensive thunderbolt external storage definitely rubbed people the wrong way, especially when the older model had many drive bays to afford the professional many options for expandabiltiy.

Making everything thinner has its upsides, that's what I'm trying to say. Finding new ways to make computers thinner has lead to better materials, unibody enclosures, energy efficient processors, speaktennas, layered batteries, smaller logic boards and components, laminated screens with better quality, smaller packaging, you name it.

All these changes are very important to mobile computing and while you may not take an iMac with you everywhere you go, it's essentially a laptop structure-wise and making it thinner can lead to progress in other products as well. The weight of the iMac from 20" G5 to 21.5" 2015 has been cut in half which is significant even for a dekstop.

Everything about Apple planning obsolesce or Apple limiting expandability are choices that do not have to be related to making things thinner. Yes, the nMP is not expandable internally, but it's also not glued together. It's been designed to take off the case and access the RAM and, I believe, other parts as well. This could also have been done to the ultra thin iMac if they wanted to, there's always a way.

 

[turbineseaplane]

xYes, the nMP is not expandable internally, but it's also not glued together. It's been designed to take off the case and access the RAM and, I believe, other parts as well.

You're clearly not in the demographic for the Mac Pro - Actual professionals desire way more than "hey maybe we can upgrade the Ram!". nMP is a joke

Regarding your iMac comments - The problem isn't their quest to make things thinner, it's with the initial goals where they literally set out to make it a compromised machine (for its price) from the get go and design with that in mind.

They could make it pretty drop dead sexy thin and still have some usable side ports (as one of a zillion examples). They could also still be designing it to allow VESA mounting without purchasing a completely different iMac model up front (which is another crock of sh**)

 

[26139]

The greatest computer moment I ever had was firing up a 24" 2007 iMac. The combination of OS X ( leopard I think ), which for me was the greatest leap in user experience ever, and the design just made it a 'wow' moment. It was a night and day experience from any other computer I had ever seen or used.

8 years later I have just taken delivery of a ( late 2015) retina iMac and the 'wow' factor just isn't there. Not much has changed. It's almost identical except for screen resolution and speed -- 2 things which are natural technological progressions and not apple related.

The last 'wow' factor I had was when I changed my 2007 iMac HDD to an SSD a couple of years ago -- The speed difference kept the 2007 imac going strong until just a few days ago.

I suppose the question I am asking people, is if they think iMac has stagnated because of technology constraints, or because Steve jobs isn't there anymore?

I ask this question because 8 years before the 2007 aluminium iMac, Apple revolutionised the CRT desktop with their multi coloured 'bulbous' machines ( I owned one ), but 8 years after the 2007 aluminium no revolution has happened in both design or operating system.

What do you use your computer to do? Besides not wowing you, isn't it faster and better at doing what you'd like it to do than it used to be?

 

[turbineseaplane]

What do you use your computer to do? Besides not wowing you, isn't it faster and better at doing what you'd like it to do than it used to be?

Gosh I'd hope it's "faster and better" 8 years later. That's a pretty low bar to set.

 

[MistrSynistr]

I thought the 2012 design was sweet, but now that I look at iMac's they appear dated and are due for a whole redesign of their shell/look/form factor.

I really think they will do this with the 2016 models.