Once they introduce the T2 (or T3 if it is ready by then) it will be extremely unlikely that the SSD will be able to be upgraded even if you remove the screen. That'll be the end of people using off the shelf NVMe and SATA SSDs to upgrade iMacs
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 redesign? [Merged]
- Thread starter SashaDanielle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Once they introduce the T2 (or T3 if it is ready by then) it will be extremely unlikely that the SSD will be able to be upgraded even if you remove the screen. That'll be the end of people using off the shelf NVMe and SATA SSDs to upgrade iMacs
I have a mid 2010 iMac and it is starting to slow down loading webpages etc, especially having multiple open at same time. Webpages with a lot of *things going on in them* slow it right down.
I am wanting to buy another one, but after 9/10 years, do I really want to buy an iMac that looks exactly the same as my old one?
Slimmer bezels would be nice, and/or increase the screen size a little too. Easy to install RAM is a must too. I don’t really care how thin it is because I only view the computer from the front lol. Better heat removal process (can’t think the tech name) would be great too, as they do get roasting hot at the top. SSD’s should be standard by now. Dunno if still DVD players but no need these days. Face ID would be a great addition too...
I am wanting to buy another one, but after 9/10 years, do I really want to buy an iMac that looks exactly the same as my old one?
Slimmer bezels would be nice, and/or increase the screen size a little too. Easy to install RAM is a must too. I don’t really care how thin it is because I only view the computer from the front lol. Better heat removal process (can’t think the tech name) would be great too, as they do get roasting hot at the top. SSD’s should be standard by now. Dunno if still DVD players but no need these days. Face ID would be a great addition too...
Jacob wrote:
"Once they introduce the T2 (or T3 if it is ready by then) it will be extremely unlikely that the SSD will be able to be upgraded even if you remove the screen"
t2 (or t3) will almost certainly come with drive chips SOLDERED to the motherboard.
Like an old song goes:
"No changes may be taken...."
"Once they introduce the T2 (or T3 if it is ready by then) it will be extremely unlikely that the SSD will be able to be upgraded even if you remove the screen"
t2 (or t3) will almost certainly come with drive chips SOLDERED to the motherboard.
Like an old song goes:
"No changes may be taken...."
It's been 7 years since they released iMac with current design and it's time to re-design it asap. Mac desktop is quite poor for low to mid-range under $5000. iMac Pro is already 2 years old without any updates! Gosh...
1. The cooling performance is quite poor because iMac has only one fan to cool both GPU and CPU at once. Since Intel CPU will be much hotter, it's time to re-design the thermal system by putting more fans like iMac Pro. But even iMac Pro has a limitation with the cooling system because of all in one computer's limitation but at least they should put 2 fans with bigger heat sinks.
2. The bezel is quite big and the design itself is old. It would be nice to have a new design like an XDR monitor.
3. AMD has RX 5700 series which can be used for iMac series. A better performance especially for gaming so why not?
4. Can't we have AMD Rzyen series instead of Intel? I seriously don't see any point in using Intel CPU because of its performance. Apple is trying to ditch Intel for sure. Even TB3 can be used on Ryzen.
1. The cooling performance is quite poor because iMac has only one fan to cool both GPU and CPU at once. Since Intel CPU will be much hotter, it's time to re-design the thermal system by putting more fans like iMac Pro. But even iMac Pro has a limitation with the cooling system because of all in one computer's limitation but at least they should put 2 fans with bigger heat sinks.
2. The bezel is quite big and the design itself is old. It would be nice to have a new design like an XDR monitor.
3. AMD has RX 5700 series which can be used for iMac series. A better performance especially for gaming so why not?
4. Can't we have AMD Rzyen series instead of Intel? I seriously don't see any point in using Intel CPU because of its performance. Apple is trying to ditch Intel for sure. Even TB3 can be used on Ryzen.
A used one might but good if you are unsure and want to avoid the depreciation of a new one (they do hold value well, but there is a new-used difference). The only issue is they are better with an SSD, but so few are available with them because they are not a stock option.
A Fusion drive is an OK alternative. I got my iMac used (as a swap for my MacBook Pro) and has a Fusion drive (128GB SSD because it is a 2015 2TB Fusion). I am happy with it (used for Unity, Visual Studio, XCode, Illustrator, Photoshop, Wings 3D, Audacity, Pages, Keynote, and more).
I really hope SSDs come as standard in a new design iMac. Apple are not showing the iMac in the best light for new users who only see what it is capable of with an HDD.
I'm kind of surprised at the absolute lack of rumors about an iMac, even the iMac Pro. I thought for sure we'd hear something. At this rate, there aren't even any rumors about iMacs for 2020. Are the iMacs headed for discontinuation?
Last edited:
For the iMac? Probably not. The iMac Pro doesn't and it is based on the same case design. (The baseline iMac Pro implementation, Apple has also re-used in the non z-height restricted Mac Pro case. So already a track record of moving it to another product if it fits the constraints. )
The T-series is soldered in. But the NAND chips subsection of the effective SSD provisioned through the T2 don't have to be. They already are in one iMac variation already doesn't do it. Little reason why Apple wouldn't just move that down to the iMac from the iMac Pro. It may be just one NAND daughter card blades instead of two on the 21.5" iMac, but for the 27" ... it is the same case dimensions. Why wouldn't it fit?
If Apple bumped the mini up incrementally in volume the Mini could go that way too. But for now the Mini has effectively the same height restrictions the laptops do ( just slightly different drivers of the restriction. Desktop processor needs bigger fan which means more compaction on the logic board in the same fixed in stone case. )
Will that open the upgrade options to random 3rd parties. No. Is Apple going to sell loose NAND blades to random folks. Highly likely no. Will this effectively mean the T2 has to be reset in some authorized method. Probably yes.
the T2 places zero requirements that the NAND chips have to be soldered to the same board.
[automerge]1574444911[/automerge]
At the "cache/tier" SSD capacities that Apple generally uses? No. They are barely effective for the HDD capacities and gaps they are using. That will only dramatically shrink for any decent modern SATA SSD. The smalller speed gap won't work well against the increase in cost.
There are some edge casts where Optane NVMe x4 PCI-e (or better) might might a reasonable dent. But I highly doubt Apple is going to leverage that. ( nor is T-seires going anywhere near that tech.)
Last edited:
I agree with everything you just stated. I don't care what anybody says, I'm waiting for a re-design.
imac & imp bump in 20
imac & imp redesign in 21
I'm sticking with this.
imac & imp redesign in 21
I'm sticking with this.
Both got a bump in Spring 2019. Can only bump the same thing so many times.
The iMac Pro bump is pretty limited ( memory and a GPU option). If can see very early Apple going with Xeon W 2200 updates and adjusting the price on iMac Pro. But by end of 2020 I'd expect something substantive to put a bigger gap between it and the 27" iMac while also putting some value add between it an the Mac Pro above. It can't sit where it is now for another whole year running in place . Given what it is up against in that price point workstation area ... it will take some serious blows down just coasting all the way through 2020.
iMac has similar issues in terms of competition. At least substantive internal design updates. The outside of the case isn't particularly critical.
the Mac Pro will need to move in 2021 so iMac Pro needs to be done.
If the mini moves to a new case in 2020 then the iMac could slide this far case work.
I'm sticking with this.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
Apple should certainly be in for discounts even if they didn't upgrade the Xeon W CPU - the new chips are cheap but they must sure get a similar discount on the existing ones in the iMac Pro if they were choosing not to refresh that.
Such savings could easily help Apple go fully SSD and embrace the iMac Pro cooling design.
There's also a point about 'revolutionary' upgrades. The new 7nm Navi GPUs feeding into the AMD 5500 GPUs are a big improvement over older GPUs but aside from potentially having to drive an external 6k monitor I think higher refresh rates would be the next selling point Apple could drive.
Is Navi enough to drive a display at 120Hz (Pro-Motion) rates? I would call such a change - especially in an iMac Pro - a vast improvement. Obviously it will depend on the availability and price of such a panel - a 5k 120Hz 27" display could be pricey but what about a 4k DCI-P3 HDR 24" display at 120Hz?
Ice Lake S CPUs could similarly prove to be improvements but we have yet to see these emerge and that could be a major stumbling block towards a 1H 2020 iMac release - we might not see a modern replacement until October 2020.
Now I don't know if I should be waiting for an updated iMac that might happen in the spring, or if I should wait another year for a potential revolution with an Arm-based iMac. And do I even want an Arm-based iMac? Will it run Windows on Bootcamp? Right now I'd have to say no. And at first it won't have any native software, probably for a long time. But if I get an Intel-based iMac now, in a couple years it may be obsolete because it's running the old Intel software that no one is developing on for the Mac anymore because Mac went Arm. Maybe I'll just stick with what I got for a few years.
The ARM based iMac isn't particularly creditable. Apple might move some of thier laptop line up over to the Arm solutions they plan to roll out to iPad Pro, but they aren't anywhere near having a complete desktop solution at all.
Much of the handwaving about ARM-Mac is keyed to "Apple dropping Intel" presumptions equating Intel with x86. Those aren't the same thing. (e.g., dump Intel x86 for AMD x86 . in 2020-21 that wouldn't be a performance drop at all ). And for processors that would go into an upper range iMac 27" Apple has nothing. Nor do they probably want to have something in that zone. It is substantially more work for a much smaller space. ( the whole iPad Pro line up runs on just one chip version per generation. And the rest of the iPad line up just gets iPhone "hand me downs". ).
Lots of angst about ARM-iMac is probably wasting lots of time.
Apple should certainly be in for discounts even if they didn't upgrade the Xeon W CPU - the new chips are cheap but they must sure get a similar discount on the existing ones in the iMac Pro if they were choosing not to refresh that. [/quote]
The only good reason for Apple to skip W 2200 is if Apple was going to jump to a W 2300 in ( the 10nm versions coming in the second half of 2020) and had highly limited resources to get out a firmware upgrade. One of Apple's major problems though is that they "don't care about Pros". Leaving the iMac Pro pragmatically comatose for almost 3 years isn't going to help them. Apple's standard practice is that they don't do substantive price drops without some substantive change. Going to W 2200 series would be the fig leaf to lower prices on a aging implementation.
iMac Pro already has SSD only and the cooling design.
Intel is selling their 14nm stuff as fast as they can make it. As get lower down in the line up, I don't think there is going to be a major change. Intel's market ups in the highest -X , Xeon W , and Xeon SP space were huge. Those first two are where most of the costs are coming. A bit less so on the SP. But mainstream Core i the competition impact is going to be lower in terms of dollar amounts. And Apple "rounds up" products to $__99 so they put double digit padding in all the time. So if double digit comes out of a component Apple is just as likely to pocket that as pass it on ( hence keep the trailing 99 on the price point. ). To seriously push Apple end pricing have to get to the third digit to get clear of all that "99" stuff.Except that Apple has just rolled out lower refresh rates ( for 'film' work ) on the new MBP 16" and on the XDR.
"... Refresh rates: 47.95Hz, 48.00Hz, 50.00Hz, 59.94Hz, 60.00Hz "
( some of those are 2x of what film does or some mutliple or variant of equipment in that space).
That is probably something iMac Pro could track to with an spec bump that was more firmware upgrade.
Pro-motion on iPad Pro is more about smoother scrolling of static 2D text/images than in chasing the gaming frame rate (and synchronization ) wars. Apple is unlikely to chase after the latter. So if that is what is pounding the drum here on iMac feature, then it is probably weakly motivated.
the iMac Pro doesn't need to get more pricey. It needs to get more affordable or minimally stay the same (with better stuff). One thing that Apple could do is put a "mere mortal" 6K display in the iMac Pro. ( make the internal volume bigger.), but don't put the XDR on it ( just what the color space have now to keep price controlled). Then they could shift the CPU more to the center and the GPU further to the side since more now . That could enable adding back in the RAM door. ( and perhaps putting a second 10GbE socket on it with more room for that to spread out also to manage thermals. )
What Apple has been doing is lower rates in mac Pro systems; not higher ones.
The problem there is that Apple has historically put barely mid range GPUs on the 21.5 - 24" range systems. Cranking up budge cost sensitive GPUs to 120Hz probably isn't going to work so well.
If drive the standard configuration 24" iMac into the 27" pricing space that is likely to run afoul of the price range segmentation that Apple typically does. And duplicating the iMac Pro with two screen models.... probably isn't going to happen for the same reasons ( i.e., a iMP 24" model coming down to sit on top of the upper 27' price point. )
It doesn't look like there is going to be an Ice Lake S CPU. Perhaps there will be a Tiger Lake S , but most of the Ice Lake era will get covered in the desktop S range by something from Comet Lake ( which is 14nm and same old iGPU. ). Comet Lake S is suppose to get to 10 cores and could be used for a iMac if the thermals hold up. That is another reason why the iMac Pro setup on CPU pricing since it needs to at least keep the same entry price and go to 10 core minimal.
Frankly, Apple switching to AMD for the 2020 iMac upgrades would make at least as much sense as sticking with Intel. Apple should be in now way reigned in by "Ice Lake S" limitations at all for the iMac updates.
From a Tim Cook interview with ABC....What's that behind him?! It's hard to believe it would be out in the open like this, but to my eyes I can't see this as anything but a new iMac? Those definitely aren't the chunker 27" bezels
View attachment 879093
View attachment 879092
From:
https://www.protectiveearth.net/post/31-inch-imac-appears-to-leak-during-tim-cook-abc-interview
View attachment 879093
View attachment 879092
From:
https://www.protectiveearth.net/post/31-inch-imac-appears-to-leak-during-tim-cook-abc-interview
The only good reason for Apple to skip W 2200 is if Apple was going to jump to a W 2300 in ( the 10nm versions coming in the second half of 2020) and had highly limited resources to get out a firmware upgrade. One of Apple's major problems though is that they "don't care about Pros". Leaving the iMac Pro pragmatically comatose for almost 3 years isn't going to help them. Apple's standard practice is that they don't do substantive price drops without some substantive change. Going to W 2200 series would be the fig leaf to lower prices on a aging implementation.
iMac Pro already has SSD only and the cooling design.
Intel is selling their 14nm stuff as fast as they can make it. As get lower down in the line up, I don't think there is going to be a major change. Intel's market ups in the highest -X , Xeon W , and Xeon SP space were huge. Those first two are where most of the costs are coming. A bit less so on the SP. But mainstream Core i the competition impact is going to be lower in terms of dollar amounts. And Apple "rounds up" products to $__99 so they put double digit padding in all the time. So if double digit comes out of a component Apple is just as likely to pocket that as pass it on ( hence keep the trailing 99 on the price point. ). To seriously push Apple end pricing have to get to the third digit to get clear of all that "99" stuff.Except that Apple has just rolled out lower refresh rates ( for 'film' work ) on the new MBP 16" and on the XDR.
"... Refresh rates: 47.95Hz, 48.00Hz, 50.00Hz, 59.94Hz, 60.00Hz "
( some of those are 2x of what film does or some mutliple or variant of equipment in that space).
That is probably something iMac Pro could track to with an spec bump that was more firmware upgrade.
Pro-motion on iPad Pro is more about smoother scrolling of static 2D text/images than in chasing the gaming frame rate (and synchronization ) wars. Apple is unlikely to chase after the latter. So if that is what is pounding the drum here on iMac feature, then it is probably weakly motivated.
the iMac Pro doesn't need to get more pricey. It needs to get more affordable or minimally stay the same (with better stuff). One thing that Apple could do is put a "mere mortal" 6K display in the iMac Pro. ( make the internal volume bigger.), but don't put the XDR on it ( just what the color space have now to keep price controlled). Then they could shift the CPU more to the center and the GPU further to the side since more now . That could enable adding back in the RAM door. ( and perhaps putting a second 10GbE socket on it with more room for that to spread out also to manage thermals. )
What Apple has been doing is lower rates in mac Pro systems; not higher ones.
The problem there is that Apple has historically put barely mid range GPUs on the 21.5 - 24" range systems. Cranking up budge cost sensitive GPUs to 120Hz probably isn't going to work so well.
If drive the standard configuration 24" iMac into the 27" pricing space that is likely to run afoul of the price range segmentation that Apple typically does. And duplicating the iMac Pro with two screen models.... probably isn't going to happen for the same reasons ( i.e., a iMP 24" model coming down to sit on top of the upper 27' price point. )
It doesn't look like there is going to be an Ice Lake S CPU. Perhaps there will be a Tiger Lake S , but most of the Ice Lake era will get covered in the desktop S range by something from Comet Lake ( which is 14nm and same old iGPU. ). Comet Lake S is suppose to get to 10 cores and could be used for a iMac if the thermals hold up. That is another reason why the iMac Pro setup on CPU pricing since it needs to at least keep the same entry price and go to 10 core minimal.
Frankly, Apple switching to AMD for the 2020 iMac upgrades would make at least as much sense as sticking with Intel. Apple should be in now way reigned in by "Ice Lake S" limitations at all for the iMac updates.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with the statement that Apple will need to retain credibility with the professional crowd by not abandoning the iMac Pro for more than 2 years. Certainly, keeping such a thing on sale for 6 years unchanged like the Mac Pro 2013 would be a massive mistake, especially if compounded by keeping the price the same.
The simple thing to do is double the NAND storage or offer better graphics as standard - an effective sales boost without re-engineering.
Apple switching to AMD sounds incredibly unlikely even with Ryzen 3 and Threadripper stuff on the horizon purely on the basis that relative benchmarks would be seriously upset and Apple would need to change every SKU and they only do that sort of thing with form factor changes.
And yes, Apple are just about at the end of an era with both Macbooks and iMacs right now. They'll risk losing Thunderbolt which is a big reason for sticking with Intel even though a royalty free implementation is supposedly opening the door to AMD. Maybe they'll go "USB4" and ditch Thunderbolt?
The 6k screen needing its own cooling solution should stand against putting it into an iMac without a redesign to keep the important computer bits away from the nasty heat.
120Hz (and higher) is common in a lot of gaming monitors, even ones with IPS screens. Obviously Apple won't be considering gamers but Pro-Motion (where the screen becomes more responsive to redraw) could be a better option than simply hitting up ever higher resolution retina displays.
Offering lower fixed refresh rates is a step towards power saving in laptops in my opinion, nice for video editing where refresh rates can exactly match footage which would be hugely useful.
What could be interesting is the use of Catalina's Sidecar feature to allow a compatible Mac to use an iPad as a second screen. That second screen might have Pro-Motion mode if an iPad Pro.
The Navi graphics parts appear to be more than just minor performance bumps, yes they might be forced to do more work driving a 120Hz display, but that's 100% more pixels to shift in a second vs 44% for a 6k panel over a 5k panel at 60Hz.
Apple decide what's 'adequate' for their GPUs - and gaming has never been on the list of things to pay attention to.
My point about what Apple would do with CPU discounts, cheaper NAND, and higher performing node shrunk CPU and GPU is relatively simple - Apple won't reduce prices but will bump specs up. There's the possibility of tariffs that could be absorbed by Apple for a time but in my opinion they should not waste time getting rid of spinning disks in favour of all-SSD lineup.
Now that Intel has announced the W-2200 series, Apple has a CPU upgrade path for the iMac Pro once those units start shipping in volume. Same with improved GPUs now that Navi is starting to see shipping configurations.
I expect cost is what is holding back a 120Hz 5K display. The run rate for LG across the 5K iMac, iMac Pro and UltraFine is probably in the hundreds of thousands so I could see them uninterested in improving the current panel specifications unless Apple was willing to foot the bill - which actually means the end-user would. If that cost is into the three figures, there could be strong push-back.
I expect cost is what is holding back a 120Hz 5K display. The run rate for LG across the 5K iMac, iMac Pro and UltraFine is probably in the hundreds of thousands so I could see them uninterested in improving the current panel specifications unless Apple was willing to foot the bill - which actually means the end-user would. If that cost is into the three figures, there could be strong push-back.
I think that's an underappreciated factor in why Apple has been reluctant to commit to a redesign.
The display business is tough, and very much about economies of scale, and with the limited market of the 5K panel, the numbers don't favor any updates to reduce the size of the bezels and whatnot, or create a new niche panel.
That, combined with the general apathy Apple has shown toward its desktops, has resulted into a series of speed bumps in the carryover chassis.
Even if Apple deigned to do a redesign, I wouldn't expect something radically different than the current form factor. Outside of the iPad Pro 3 and new Mac Pro, they've mostly been very conservative in making small, easy iterations to existing designs, or outright recycling them. The iPhone gets more love, but even it mostly follows tick/tock cycles with more radical changes taking place over greater periods of time.
I think this would make a 24" 4k 120Hz panel interesting to some. Bigger than the 21.5" and more popular than the 27" which would be freed to push more down the 'Pro' path.
Apple could easily re-use the existing form factor by 'going pro' - all SSD, locked in RAM behind a more sophisticated cooling system.
It's frustrating to see Apple doesn't even have SSD as standard for any of it's 27" iMacs. They'll give you a huge 2gb fusion drive but if you want SSD, you have to upgrade.
Its for this very reason (and the dated fat bezels), that I'm holding off on any iMac purchase.
Apple, if you're going to charge a premium for Macs, give us SSD's across the board. It's almost 2020.
The new 2019 iMacs eliminate most of the problems you have except slimmer bezels. There's zero space at the top of the new iMacs for them to get hot. My fans only spin up when I'm rendering 4k footage, and even though it doesn't get hot like the pre-2011 machines did. RAM is still easier than ever to install on the 27", and an SSD is only a $90 upgrade. We aren't going to see Face ID on any desktop computer for a long time. I wouldn't count on an upgrade in 2020. If you need a Mac, buy it now.
I would be very surprised if there was not an upgrade in 2020. Perhaps buying a used 2017 to tide one over before the redesign might make sense if there's truly a need. However sounds to me like @Fried egg on toast would ultimately end up disappointed if they were to now buy a brand new 2019.