M3 iMac Rant

[lowkey]

The iMac was traditionally an entry level all-in-one mainly for children, cashier checkout lines, as a family computer, etc.

The only reason the iMac was given any power is because the 2013 Mac Pro was such a disaster….and it took a whopping 6 years to get a single update….

Now that Apple has the Mac Studio, the iMac has returned to its simple, family friendly, entry level computer roots that Apple likely always intended.

Except it’s super expensive for what you get. Here in Australia it’s $1500 more expensive than the Mac Mini with the same spec.

A 24” monitor ain’t worth that imo.

I was hoping to buy one for my office but will go for a mini with extra ram, SSD and a 32” monitor for less than the price of the iMac.

 

[SpotOnT]

Except it’s super expensive for what you get. Here in Australia it’s $1500 more expensive than the Mac Mini with the same spec.

A 24” monitor ain’t worth that imo.

I was hoping to buy one for my office but will go for a mini with extra ram, SSD and a 32” monitor for less than the price of the iMac.

That is a fair point (although don’t forget the keyboard and mouse that comes with the iMac, but not the Mini. Apple probably charges you a few hundred for those by themselves).

I guess you are paying for the convenience of an all-in-one, complete with matching accessories.

 

[LionTeeth]

The USBC Apple Pencil is a lower cost option. It’s not supposed to be better than the flagship Pencil 2. (It also doesn’t replace Pencil 1–firstly because Pencil 1 is still for sale, and secondly because Pencil 2 is the replacement for Pencil 1. The only reason Pencil 1 is still being sold is because it’s the only Pencil that the 9th Gen iPad is compatible with—but when that iPad is gone, the Pencil 1 will soon follow.)

These iMacs are a step back from the Intel ones in terms of usability? How so? Performance-wise I thought they are supposed to be much better. They are a step down in size from the 27”, but step up from 21”. Color and design is pretty subjective.

Read back your sentence about the Apple Pencil, it’s so fragmented and confusing. Why should there be some “low cost” option? It’s like seeing the Microsoft leak about the mid-gen series x refresh… that comes with a less robust power supply and no disc drive. It’s all downgrades.

The intel iMacs had boot camp, user replaceable ram. Bigger screen, sleek expensive aesthetic. You weren’t SO locked into what you order. These new iMacs are a step back in design and usability. Ok sure maybe faster on thread count. But they’re basically iPads that run macOS. It’s awful.

Not all design is subjective. The new iMacs look like kid toys. Pastel colors, white bezel, minimal connections. The old ones looked like serious designs. Steel grey and black, striking, lots of ports.

The new ones are clearly designed for young startup type that wear glasses with clear frames, don’t do very hard or important work, and don’t know any better. Apple used to represent the Lamborghini of computers. You had an iMac you knew what you were doing. Now it’s just silly childish looking.

 

[GalileoSeven]

That is a fair point (although don’t forget the keyboard and mouse that comes with the iMac, but not the Mini. Apple probably charges you a few hundred for those by themselves).

I guess you are paying for the convenience of an all-in-one, complete with matching accessories.

Pretty much nailed it with the bolded part. The convenience of an all-in-one is pretty much the iMac's only selling point now, given that the 27" is still dead, the existence of comparable (or better equipped) Mac Minis/Mac Studios and the convenience of using those (or an AS Macbook) with a larger/better monitor for a comparable price

 

[Biro]

I too am disappointed with the iMac after years of waiting. I'm giving up waiting for the iMac I wished they made and just gonna settle for this.

Why are you settling? You’re telling Apple they did the right thing. Why are you rewarding them? If there isn’t a Mac alternative that you like well enough, I suggest that you look outside the Apple ecosystem. That’s the only metric the corporate world understands.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Not all design is subjective. The new iMacs look like kid toys. Pastel colors, white bezel, minimal connections. The old ones looked like serious designs. Steel grey and black, striking, lots of ports.

The new ones are clearly designed for young startup type that wear glasses with clear frames, don’t do very hard or important work, and don’t know any better. Apple used to represent the Lamborghini of computers. You had an iMac you knew what you were doing. Now it’s just silly childish looking.

You are either young or have a very short memory. The original iMacs were all sorts of colors, made to be a simple out-of-the-box computer, ready to go for your average person, and not "serious designs". My school and college had tons of them, in all sorts of colors. I still have an Indigo AV g3 model in my basement.

Computer colors don't represent professionals in any way. I'm a professional, in a professional job, and I like bright colors.

As for the type using the new models?...The only place I've seen them in person, outside of an Apple store, was at a scratch and dent furniture store. They had a dozen of them at the counter and around the store.

 

[Apple247]

We are gathered here today to finally get the message: iMac is for elder parents, kids, and salon cash registers. This is NOT the productivity machine you seek, and it never will be.

 

[sammy2066]

And stupid arguments like this make the used M1 iMac market a blessing for buyers. Thank you everybody! Your hate is my gain. 🥰

It's not an argument at all, it's my opinion in black and white.

 

[aParkerMusic]

This was going to be my dream machine after a long time of not upgrading. However, the 8/256GB standard, no USB-C accessories, and still charging extra to have Touch ID and a Magic Trackpad really leave a bad taste in my mouth. It seems they just slapped this thing together within the past month, when they had literally two years of planning available.

It should've been 12/320GB, at least for the base model, and 16/512GB for the mid and upper configurations.

They also, at least, could have lowered the price of RAM and SSD upgrades to $100, and not the current stingy price of $200.

It was going to be your dream machine based on your fantasies, which is a recipe for disappointment.

The reality is that the base configuration is powerful enough for the vast majority of computer users, for many years to come. It seems you may have higher-spec needs. It’s a bummer that you can’t get what you wanted for the base price. But I think you accidentally conflated your desires with reasonable expectations. Apple is not unreasonable for offering this as the base configuration. Your exceptions were possibly unreasonable.

 

[c.s.]

Compared to my 2020 i7 27' iMac with the 5700 XT Pro graphic card, the new iMacs are a joke. No CPU choice, just the standard M3, up to 24GB RAM, still only 2 standard usb ports. At least my iMac is still a pretty decent gaming computer with the possibility to bootcamp.

I don't know what the new iMac is like for gaming and all, but I still have the feeling my current mac is still an overall better machine with the extra ports as well.

Agreed. Still rocking my 27" iMac for full-time graphic design. The only thing that would make me more productive is more screen real estate - diminishing return for processor speed, unless doing video/animation. Hard to believe I paid less than $2500, including 64GB of third-party RAM. The only way to match the specs I need is with a Studio and display for double that price. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Adelphos33]

We are gathered here today to finally get the message: iMac is for elder parents, kids, and salon cash registers. This is NOT the productivity machine you seek, and it never will be.

I see this sentiment a lot, and it seems to be the one of the most inaccurate commonly held sentiments here.

If an M1 MacBook Air with 8GB RAM and a 13" screen is a productivity machine - and no one would doubt that it is - how is an M3 24" desktop not a productivity machine?

I am working on an M1 version right now (while also multitasking by distracting myself on Macrumors)

 

[aParkerMusic]

The thing with Lightning/USB-C is that many people still have an iPhone with Lightning, so it would probably make sense to phase this out slowly. It might probably too much to expect an update for the Keyboard and Mouse with USB-C (illumination and better port position), but even so the new port only makes sense with the new Phone/new iPods etc. Pretty sure Apple will take one or two years until Lightning is finally dead.

Be careful, if you continue to be logical…you will be attacked!

 

[aParkerMusic]

Compared to my 2020 i7 27' iMac with the 5700 XT Pro graphic card, the new iMacs are a joke. No CPU choice, just the standard M3, up to 24GB RAM, still only 2 standard usb ports. At least my iMac is still a pretty decent gaming computer with the possibility to bootcamp.

I don't know what the new iMac is like for gaming and all, but I still have the feeling my current mac is still an overall better machine with the extra ports as well.

Thank you for sharing your perspective, but honestly I don’t think Apple is even considering users like you in the current iMac equation. Get a Studio and use whatever display you want (so you don’t have to complain about the Studio Display), if you need n elevated desktop experience.

the iMac has always generally been the consumer level option (Even if there were more powerful versions at times). Whether or not Apple releases a more powerful all in one some day, I think it’s time to let go of the grudge.

 

[Ethosik]

I see this sentiment a lot, and it seems to be the one of the most inaccurate commonly held sentiments here.

If an M1 MacBook Air with 8GB RAM and a 13" screen is a productivity machine - and no one would doubt that it is - how is an M3 24" desktop not a productivity machine?

I am working on an M1 version right now (while also multitasking by distracting myself on Macrumors)

Because it’s cool to hate on anything these days. Because people want to have 500 browser tabs open and complain all day about it. Because people think pro work ONLY means editing 16k video and needing an 8k display.

You are right though, even the base iMac 24” can do a lot of pro work.

 

[aParkerMusic]

No M3 pro iMac no buy

Get a Mac Studio if you need more power. And you have the pro experience ability to choose your own monitor! Pros love modularity!

 

[joshwithachance]

I don't even know why they even had an entire bit about it at the end of the keynote because literally all they did was replace the M1 chip with the M3 and update the wifi/bluetooth protocols...

 

[Shirasaki]

Not everyone NEEDS more than 8GB RAM.
Not everyone NEEDS more than 128GB storage.
Not everyone NEEDS Touch ID.
Not everyone NEEDS Ethernet.
Not everyone NEEDS USB-A.
Not everyone NEEDS SD card slot.

I guess it’s time for Apple to go back to 2014, offering 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage, remove Touch ID, Ethernet, USB-A and SD Card slot. At least macOS itself demands 4GB so everyone NEEDS 4GB Of RAM.
Wait, what? No one produces 4GB module in large quantity anymore? Same for 64GB NAND flash? What a bummer.
/s

 

[rspeaker]

I've been an Apple user since 2004. As long as I've been buying Macs, they have skimped on RAM and storage capacity. One of the toughest parts working in an Apple Store was trying to get people to buy the "better" or "best" configuration, as the entry-level "good" configuration often didn't have much storage.

We can laugh about huge music collections now, but 2011-2014, it was common for customers to upgrade their MacBook or MacBook Pro, which often had 250GB-500GB hard drives. They all wanted Airs, because they were thin and light and the latest and greatest. But most couldn't afford the SSD upgrades (standard then was 128GB, and I don't recall what the 256GB and 512GB upgrades cost.) A lot of people ended up buying the MD101, the "MacBook Pro" that was 5 lbs, had a spinning HDD, and an optical drive - not because they wanted it, but they had a $1000 budget.

Getting that out of the way... when I bought my M1 MacBook Air, I upgraded to 16GB RAM and 1TB storage. Pricey, yes, but worth it to not be worried about either for years.

When the M1 iMac came out, I ordered the same config: 16GB RAM and 1TB storage. Pricey, yes, but not worried about either.

It may not be a fair comparison, but my 2016 MacBook Pro was a dog of a computer. Fans spinning all the time. Choked with Chrome open, before I loaded any websites. Logic board was replaced twice under warranty and it never got better. I recorded a 4K video, that was about 31GB, on my iPhone XS, and iMovie couldn't import it. I'd get a beachball, and the fans would spin up and the computer would get hot. I left it overnight one time, thinking maybe it just needs time to import the video. 10 hours later, still beachballing, still fans spinning full roar.

When I got my M1 MacBook Air, iMovie imported the video in less than a minute. I sped it up (that's all I wanted to do, speed it up and export it so I could have a much smaller file and delete the regular-speed version,) exported it, and was done in about 15 minutes.

What my "powerful" MacBook Pro couldn't do in 10 hours, my polite little Air did in 15 minutes.

Handbraking videos takes anywhere from 15-120 minutes on my iMac. On my 2016 MacBook Pro, it wasn't uncommon to take 8-24 hours.

Y'all can complain about the iMac being under-powered and expensive, but it cost the same as my 2016 MacBook Pro and is way, way faster. I wish for a few things:

- An option for more than 2TB storage. I know it'd be expensive, because Apple, but I prefer internal storage
- More USB ports. Apple is already comfortable saying the ports are different, evidenced by having 2 Thunderbolt and 2 USB-C ports. I don't think the M1 or M3 can support more USB connections, but I'd really like to have 6-8. (I have the Caldigit Thunderbolt 4 Element Hub, which is nice, but the slightest bump causes it to disconnect. That doesn't happen when I plug the drives into the iMac and there's a small bump to the desk.)

I don't presume Apple will put a Pro or Max chip into the current iMac, maybe for cost reasons, maybe thermal reasons. So I probably won't get more USB ports or internal storage options any time soon.

But I also expect to have this iMac at least 5 more years, so maybe by then. It's an incredible machine that does everything I need.

 

[ger19]

I was hoping to buy one for my office but will go for a mini with extra ram, SSD and a 32” monitor for less than the price of the iMac.

I’m curious your exact setup implied here. My guess is that to make this work, you would not be buying a monitor with the same (or close) resolution, quality as is included with the iMac. I looked at a 32” Dell that was very high resolution and it was $2,500. A 4K non apple monitor is not going to come close to the monitor in the iMac.

 

[Shirasaki]

Which is why the hope for more than 8GB RAM in the entry level was always wishful thinking.

They used to put a spinning hard drive in their cheapest 21" iMac when a simple Fusion Drive would’ve cost them nothing. The upsell is for real. 😧

Apple has been repeatedly testing the absolute lowest bar they can get away with in terms of the base config. Trust me, if 64GB chip is still being produced en masse (I’m talking about in the million), Apple would stick 64GB base storage for a couple more years until macOS itself demands more.

 

[aParkerMusic]

I guess it’s time for Apple to go back to 2014, offering 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage, remove Touch ID, Ethernet, USB-A and SD Card slot. At least macOS itself demands 4GB so everyone NEEDS 4GB Of RAM.
Wait, what? No one produces 4GB module in large quantity anymore? Same for 64GB NAND flash? What a bummer.
/s

An ad absurdum argument. The base configuration Apple offers is not outdated or obsolete. It does not lack ethernet, Touch ID, and is capable of connecting to an SD card slot with an adapter, and also to external storage. So, it’s unclear what you’re trying to say with your comment, can you clarify?

You would like higher specs for the lowest price. That’s fair. i would like to buy a new house for as little as possible. That doesn’t mean I’ll get a new house for $5.

 

[resonate]

Current iMacs are computers for little children. I think that is their target.

 

[LionTeeth]

You are either young or have a very short memory. The original iMacs were all sorts of colors, made to be a simple out-of-the-box computer, ready to go for your average person, and not "serious designs".

Correct, and then they matured. The design matured to the best they’ve done.., and now it’s regressed. It’s sad to see.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Correct, and then they matured. The design matured to the best they’ve done.., and now it’s regressed. It’s sad to see.

I don't consider colors as a regression. Hardware-wise, you could argue that.

It's a sad state that something being colorful deems it for children. When did adults become so f**king boring?

 

[zubikov]

What utter, utter nonsense. The iMac is a staple of the Mac computer line. What some people on here have to try to understand, is that MOST computer users don't want or need loads of power, 'upgradeability', expansion, multiple monitors etc. Those that do are in a very small minority, globally. Very small. And for those there are many options. Why can people not understand this???


So that's fine. Now go and tell that to all those screaming about wanting a 27" or 32" iMac...

I'm typing this on a 2019 iMac 27" i9. That's my 3rd iMac in about two decades, so I understand the allure of a glorious 5K 500nit monitor, a seamlessly-blended performance machine, and a decluttered desk with a shiny metal object that suits all of my work needs. I get it.

But the reality is that Apple's been prioritizing Macbooks and tiny desktop machines by a very wide margin. Just think about it, Apple has unlimited power at their disposal, an ability to fit better thermals, and more physical space in general with the 24" iMac. And yet they purposefully chose to limit the iMac to a M3 processor. Meanwhile the tiny 14" MBP has M3/Pro/Max available. Why would Apple do that? They don't want the real spenders buying iMacs, because they feel like there's a ceiling for what Apple can offer, and what prosumers are willing to pay for it.