iMac Redesign for 2018?

[MandiMac]

yeah 16gb should be standard on the 27 inch and increase the ssd size of the fusion drive. And FFS don't remove the ram door

I do the darn thing and play devil‘s advocate here.

IF, and I repeat myself, IF we do get the following:

- better cooling system, thus a quieter iMac
- better graphics (like Vega 32 maybe?)
- better CPU (that‘s a given with Coffee Lake and their 6-core setups)
- SSD as a standard on 27-inchers

I would gladly shell out the 200,- for the RAM and give up the RAM door. Because let‘s be honest, before RAM becomes an issue, the graphics card will be.

 

[geromi912]

I do the darn thing and play devil‘s advocate here.

IF, and I repeat myself, IF we do get the following:

- better cooling system, thus a quieter iMac
- better graphics (like Vega 32 maybe?)
- better CPU (that‘s a given with Coffee Lake and their 6-core setups)
- SSD as a standard on 27-inchers

I would gladly shell out the 200,- for the RAM and give up the RAM door. Because let‘s be honest, before RAM becomes an issue, the graphics card will be.

Vega 32, how tragic is that, an iMac desktop through 2019 still weaker than not-even-high-end laptop 1070 max q from 2016.

 

[MadDane]

I would gladly shell out the 200,- for the RAM and give up the RAM door. Because let‘s be honest, before RAM becomes an issue, the graphics card will be.

I think that depends on what you are doing. I am still using a late 2009 27" iMac with an ATI Radeon HD 4850 with a 512 MB. And honestly the graphics card is just fine for what I am doing. I feel like it is the processor, SSD speed, I/O and screen quality that is showing its age the most (for me). Other than general computing (email, surfing etc.) I am using it with the Adobe CS6 suite as well as Lightroom 5.

My iMac shipped with 4GB RAM and I now have 20GB. It has been super nice to be able to upgrade the RAM along the way. I realize that not everyone values the different aspects of a computer. But for me (and a lot of other people around here) the easy access to RAM is very valuable.

 

[_Refurbished_]

yeah 16gb should be standard on the 27 inch and increase the ssd size of the fusion drive. And FFS don't remove the ram door

I’m scared they’re going to remove the RAM door. Getting my iMac this week in case they do a redesign (which is doubtful) and remove access to the RAM. I’m need RAM for my workflow more than I need a faster CPU. I’d rather use the 2017 model and upgrade the RAM myself, then have a faster CPU and have to pay the Apple tax on RAM with the redesign.
[doublepost=1527432414][/doublepost]

Great. New iMac with mid range GPUs from 2 years ago (RX 400 series). True innovation next to Volta and Ampere.

Apple computers will never have state-of-the-art components. You are paying for the experience and ecosystem. Apple’s high profit margins come from using midrange parts that perform well on their platform.

The same practice is used on iOS, which sacrifices RAM for higher profit margins. Luckily Apple (usually) designs their software well enough to handle the limitations of their hardware.

 

[sublunar]

yeah 16gb should be standard on the 27 inch and increase the ssd size of the fusion drive. And FFS don't remove the ram door

If the RAM becomes non removable then I could see 16Gb becoming a base amount on the 27" iMac but by Apple standards that means an increase in price of $200. We already see in the 21.5" iMac that Apple consider 8Gb to be fine in a model where you can't easily increase the RAM.

16Gb is already standard in the 15" MacBook Pro whereas the 13" ones start with 8Gb off the shelf.

 

[DakotaGuy]

As an iMac fan I would love to see an “all new” iMac, but considering the decline of desktop PCs in general you have to wonder if there’s enough ROI left in this product line to warrant a total redesign? It’s very evident over the past 5 years Apple has been shifting most of it’s R&D budget away from the Macs and towards the iPhone, iPad, Watch, HomePod, etc. I don’t think they will discontinue it anytime in the near future, but I’d be shocked (and delighted) if they introduced a completely redesigned model.

 

[mreg376]

If the RAM becomes non removable then I could see 16Gb becoming a base amount on the 27" iMac but by Apple standards that means an increase in price of $200. We already see in the 21.5" iMac that Apple consider 8Gb to be fine in a model where you can't easily increase the RAM.

16Gb is already standard in the 15" MacBook Pro whereas the 13" ones start with 8Gb off the shelf.

Nah. As RAM-greedy as Apple is I would guess that if they do go to base 16GB RAM for the iMac you won't see a price increase because of that alone.

 

[sublunar]

Nah. As RAM-greedy as Apple is I would guess that if they do go to base 16GB RAM for the iMac you won't see a price increase because of that alone.

So you're suggesting that Apple are willing to write off $200 of value without at least meeting the users half way? You're making them out to be more magnanimous than I take them for

Current prices of RAM are quite high at the moment, even with Apple hedging against that. In the latest Apple results call, Luca Maestri said that NAND prices (for SSD) would stabilise by the end of the year - this indicates that prices are challengingly high for the margins that Apple want to make on each Mac.

If they feel the profit to be made over the 12 month life span of a 2018 model is worth it they might go for 16Gb RAM in a 2018 5k iMac but do you think they would swallow a nigh on 10% drop in revenue on each iMac?

I'd say 16Gb RAM may be a functional choice for the top SKU of a 5k iMac but they won't give it away.

 

[mreg376]

So you're suggesting that Apple are willing to write off $200 of value without at least meeting the users half way? You're making them out to be more magnanimous than I take them for

Current prices of RAM are quite high at the moment, even with Apple hedging against that. In the latest Apple results call, Luca Maestri said that NAND prices (for SSD) would stabilise by the end of the year - this indicates that prices are challengingly high for the margins that Apple want to make on each Mac.

If they feel the profit to be made over the 12 month life span of a 2018 model is worth it they might go for 16Gb RAM in a 2018 5k iMac but do you think they would swallow a nigh on 10% drop in revenue on each iMac?

I'd say 16Gb RAM may be a functional choice for the top SKU of a 5k iMac but they won't give it away.

I agree they won't give it away, but their price structure basically always remains the same, only the hardware you get for your money changes, looking all the back to the 1GB that was standard in my 2007 iMac.

 

[sublunar]

I agree they won't give it away, but their price structure basically always remains the same, only the hardware you get for your money changes, looking all the back to the 1GB that was standard in my 2007 iMac.

Price points remaining static is a key Apple marketing feature along with base model, better, and best SKUs. They don't bump big things like storage or RAM that often and when they do they generally keep the price static which represents a massive step-up in value.

However, to get Fusion drive into more SKUs Apple crippled the amount of SSD you get from 128Gb to 24Gb in 2015*. So unless they have cut a sweet deal with Intel to get Coffee Lake chips cheaply, or AMD hand over cheaper 500X GPUs (especially since the 500X seems to be not much of an upgrade on the 2017 500 series) I find it unlikely that Apple would hand over 16Gb of RAM for free.

There's room for manoeuvre by Apple to make changes to list price but bear in mind if they decide that the Coffee Lake iMacs are going to have T2 co-processors (as seen in the iMac Pro and T1 in the MacBook Pro) the price will only be going up. That's when you can package the increase with higher standard RAM and extra cores.

If the iMac range is going further upmarket thanks to more standard RAM, a T2 CPU, and the appearance of the iMac Pro, this could help with an upgraded Mac Mini (Pro) which might be better equipped to fill the (larger) gap. They don't even need to make too many SKUs - just have one fully loaded for $2k (incorporating the T2, 16Gb RAM, 512Gb SSD) and ready to buy off the shelf with BTO extras from Apple.

* One little known fact with the 2014 Mini is that the 1Tb Fusion drive on the top SKU predates the smackdown on the SSD portion of 1Tb drives in 2015 and later iMacs. A 1Tb Fusion drive on the Mini has 128Gb SSD, whereas the 1Tb Fusion on the 2015 and 2017 iMac has just 24Gb SSD.

This represents one benefit of Apple never changing the 2014 spec since October 2014.

We're only a 8 days away from WWDC, I guess we'll soon know the truth of the matter.

 

[geromi912]

I’m scared they’re going to remove the RAM door. Getting my iMac this week in case they do a redesign (which is doubtful) and remove access to the RAM. I’m need RAM for my workflow more than I need a faster CPU. I’d rather use the 2017 model and upgrade the RAM myself, then have a faster CPU and have to pay the Apple tax on RAM with the redesign.
[doublepost=1527432414][/doublepost]
Apple computers will never have state-of-the-art components. You are paying for the experience and ecosystem. Apple’s high profit margins come from using midrange parts that perform well on their platform.

The same practice is used on iOS, which sacrifices RAM for higher profit margins. Luckily Apple (usually) designs their software well enough to handle the limitations of their hardware.

If only they actually “perform well”. 2gb iPhones literally can’t keep apps open in the background at all. My 6s almost always have to reopen mid size apps every time. And how is charging premium prices for some ****** 3 year old GPU excusable when the whole industry is shifting towards GPU computing, machine learning, AR/VR development? Especially not when their software is also a heap of buggy mess as of lately.

 

[_Refurbished_]

If only they actually “perform well”. 2gb iPhones literally can’t keep apps open in the background at all. My 6s almost always have to reopen mid size apps every time. And how is charging premium prices for some ****** 3 year old GPU excusable when the whole industry is shifting towards GPU computing, machine learning, AR/VR development? Especially not when their software is also a heap of buggy mess as of lately.

When I switched to Android I noticed a sharp decrease in OS responsiveness. While iOS does require apps to be reloaded quite often, the OS itself is designed well for 2 - 3 iOS iterations using the included RAM. Apple slowing down older devices is a completely different conversation.

Apple designs computers for consumers, not for an “industry”. They added VR support this year by beefing up their GPU. If anything, GPU options have gotten better due to the reasons you listed.

Apple chooses to outdo the competition with their display technology, as opposed to including a more powerful GPU. A non-power user will benefit more from a high quality display, than a largely unnoticeable bump in GPU power.

 

[mreg376]

I agree with almost everything you said here, and you make sone interesting points. Except that I don't see Apple pushing the iMac towards the iMac Pro either in hardware or price.

 

[EightyTwenty]

So you're suggesting that Apple are willing to write off $200 of value without at least meeting the users half way? You're making them out to be more magnanimous than I take them for

Current prices of RAM are quite high at the moment, even with Apple hedging against that. In the latest Apple results call, Luca Maestri said that NAND prices (for SSD) would stabilise by the end of the year - this indicates that prices are challengingly high for the margins that Apple want to make on each Mac.

If they feel the profit to be made over the 12 month life span of a 2018 model is worth it they might go for 16Gb RAM in a 2018 5k iMac but do you think they would swallow a nigh on 10% drop in revenue on each iMac?

I'd say 16Gb RAM may be a functional choice for the top SKU of a 5k iMac but they won't give it away.

Has Apple ever increased the price of a product as a result of a RAM upgrade?

Between 2011 and 2014, RAM was doubled in the base Mac Mini and that product saw a $100 price cut.

RAM also doubled on the 2017 MacBook Air without a price increase.

 

[xgman]

I wonder if Apple will end the imac pro once (and if) they ever do the new mac pro. I guess it doesn't hurt to have both out for people who like the imac monitor. I almost wish they would eol the imac pro then so the regular imac can tread a little closer to the higher end specs eventually.

 

[mreg376]

I wonder if Apple will end the imac pro once (and if) they ever do the new mac pro. I guess it doesn't hurt to have both out for people who like the imac monitor. I almost wish they would eol the imac pro then so the regular imac can tread a little closer to the higher end specs eventually.

While I think it's unlikely that Apple will end the iMac Pro right after it's been introduced, the better question is what will become of it once a new Mac Pro is released. The iMac Pro is too expensive to be just a display device for the Mac Pro. Maybe they will also release a new cinema display.
If in fact Apple is still going to release a Mac Pro, you have to wonder what they were thinking when they came up with the iMac Pro, whose base price is much higher than the base prices of previous Mac Pros. Find me a "pro" whose going to opt for a $5,000 unexpandable desktop when you can get a Mac Pro, probably for less up front and with expandability. Or are they going to start the Mac Pro at $10,000?? Another Lisa?

 

[EugW]

While I think it's unlikely that Apple will end the iMac Pro right after it's been introduced, the better question is what will become of it once a new Mac Pro is released. The iMac Pro is too expensive to be just a display device for the Mac Pro. Maybe they will also release a new cinema display.
If in fact Apple is still going to release a Mac Pro, you have to wonder what they were thinking when they came up with the iMac Pro, whose base price is much higher than the base prices of previous Mac Pros. Find me a "pro" whose going to opt for a $5,000 unexpandable desktop when you can get a Mac Pro, probably for less up front and with expandability. Or are they going to start the Mac Pro at $10,000?? Another Lisa?

It seems a lot of employers of pro users just buy new machines every 3 years with AppleCare, and never update them. The iMac Pro fits this niche quite well methinks.

In this context I'd expect the Mac Pro with monitor to be more expensive than the iMac Pro, although not even close to twice as expensive, and that the iMac Pro would outsell the Mac Pro.

 

[mreg376]

It seems a lot of employers of pro users just buy new machines every 3 years with AppleCare, and never update them. The iMac Pro fits this niche quite well methinks.

Me would agree, but I'm not sure where you get that, or even what an "employer of pros" is, because if they're employees they're not pros. And if it were true we would see hundreds or thousands of fairly young used Mac Pros flooding the used market regularly, and they ain't there.

 

[Glmnet1]

if they're employees they're not pros

 

[mreg376]

Yeah, maybe that's a bit too general. But when we talk "pros" here I'm usually thinking about video or audio entrepreneurs who put a lot of thought and money into their computer hardware tailored to their individual needs, and who make their living selling their finished work. I usually don't think of pros as employees sitting in an office using machines plucked from the Apple website and configured according to a corporate bean counter...

 

[_Refurbished_]

Me would agree, but I'm not sure where you get that, or even what an "employer of pros" is, because if they're employees they're not pros. And if it were true we would see hundreds or thousands of fairly young used Mac Pros flooding the used market regularly, and they ain't there.

Agreed. I think the iMac Pro is for at-home creative professionals that value its sleek design and powerful configuration. The Mac Pro seems ideal for creative offices that need powerful computers running OSX. It’s much cheaper to buy a Mac Pro every generation and keep your display, than buy iMac Pros for your office every few years. That wouldn’t make financial sense.

 

[c0ppo]

But when we talk "pros" here I'm usually thinking about video or audio entrepreneurs who put a lot of thought and money into their computer hardware tailored to their individual needs, and who make their living selling their finished work.

So what makes video or audio entrepreneurs any different then developers? Or photographers? Or even writers? Or any other category?

They aren't making a living out of selling their finished work? Not 'pro' enough for you?

 

[iPadified]

"Pro" is misused to large degree and emotionally charged. It all comes down to how powerful computers are needed for doing a certain kind of job.

They could give iMac 27 the same cooling as iMP and keep the 21 inch as is. A lineup would be cost sensitive focus (21 inch), powerful (27 inch) and very powerful (iMP).

 

[craigrusse11]

And how is charging premium prices for some ****** 3 year old GPU excusable when the whole industry is shifting towards GPU computing, machine learning, AR/VR development?

because apple are the only company who are making a profit from selling phones, everyone else is either breaking even or at a loss. still, would be nice if they gave a little back, rather than jack the price up to thousand bucks.
[doublepost=1527681972][/doublepost]

"Pro" is misused to large degree and emotionally charged. It all comes down to how powerful computers are needed for doing a certain kind of job.

They could give iMac 27 the same cooling as iMP and keep the 21 inch as is. A lineup would be cost sensitive focus (21 inch), powerful (27 inch) and very powerful (iMP).

Pro is not being mis-used. a xeon cpu, ecc ram and raid ssd is not 'just more powerful' it's true workstation class hardware.

 

[mreg376]

So what makes video or audio entrepreneurs any different then developers? Or photographers? Or even writers? Or any other category?

They aren't making a living out of selling their finished work? Not 'pro' enough for you?

I don't think a developer, photographer or a writer needs a band new Mac Pro every three years.