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.
Need a new 27" iMac - not happy about current choices available
- Thread starter OldCorpse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple could have done a complete redesign with the 16" model if they wanted, using it as the base for a redesign of the 13" (14"?) and the Air, but instead they stayed with the current industrial design.
Like the iMac for desktops, I believe this is what Apple feels a Mac portable should look like - I mean we've had the underlying design arguably since 2008 with the first unibody model - longer even then the current iMac.
Apple has no reason to remove ports from the iMac - there is no lack of space for them and they're all in the back so you don't see them, anyway. I would like the iMac to get two TB3/TB4 controllers like the iMac Pro, however, as I am now mostly using USB-C for compatibility with my MacBook Pro and iPad Pro so USB-A is now an outlier for me and both of my TB3 ports are taken on my 2017 5K.
Well, the 16" Macbook Pro is a bit of an odd release that probably only exists because the 15" was an overpriced, badly designed lemon, with serious keyboard and heat/throttling issues. The main thing it shows up is that Apple need to bring the rest of their range into line by doubling the base SSD storage across the board.
The 8TB option is ridiculously expensive, On a desktop, it is much more likely that you'll have that as external storage, if not on the network. On a sealed, all-in-one desktop its probably a bad idea to have that built into the computer where it can't be accessed if the computer dies. With a laptop, however, if you need 8TB 'on the road' and don't want to have to carry around an external drive, that's the price.
I think the current iMac is a pretty solid, decent value product for what it is. Yes, some people have had screen issues, but there are always occasional faults, sometimes 'bad batches' (also, I think some people get a bit obsessive, go hunting and find 'defects' that they wouldn't have noticed in daily use) - the iMac doesn't seem to have an epidemic of problems the way the MBP did.
The issue with the iMac is that it's an all-in-one desktop with no internal expansion and Apple doesn't offer a credible alternative modular desktop unless you're going to spend $10k or so (even fans of the new Mac Pro admit that the $6k base model only makes sense as a starting point for expansion). The iMac is also great value if you wanted a 27" 5k "pro-sumer" screen (that would otherwise cost you $1200) - not so great if you wanted to pick your own screen.
I've got a 2017 5k iMac and I don't have any issues with it that can't be summarised as "its not a PCIe mini-tower". If you're willing to make that compromise, and your current machine is slowing you down, I wouldn't be too worried about going for a 2019 iMac. There's always the chance that anything you buy will be updated a few months later - but in recent years not every "update" has been an improvement.
I suspect socketed vs. soldered is a choice made by Apple for Apple based on how it helps their internal logistics - e.g. soldered saves space and is cheaper to manufacture in quantity, but Apple have to guess how many of each configuration to make at the point of mainboard manufacture. With sockets, that can be deferred to the point of assembly (and they can even change their mind afterwards if they have an over/under stock, although I suspect that isn't common). Probably quite a complex calculation, and I rather expect that volume of sales is a major factor (I'm sure they make a bucketload more baseline MBPs than they do Minis or iMac Pros).
So, yes, they've gone for sockets in the Mini and iMP, but they haven't lifted a finger to make them easily user replacable in the way that they did with the 27" iMac and previous machines. If you're happy totally disassembling your brand shinly new Mini or iMP on day 1 then good for you, but its not a very sensible option.
I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if the next significant re-design of the iMac keeps the RAM trapdoor.
Why? It's a $5000 specialist display. If you're currently using a $20k certified reference display for pro colour grading (probably a specialist job even in a pro video/graphics house) it may be a steal (if it lives up to expectations) - for the rest of us, its irrelevant.
I think that danger has passed. Although they're probably not coming back for laptops, the iMac Pro, Mac Mini and Mac Pro have all hung on to their ethernet and USB-A ports. Maybe by 2021/22 losing USB-A will be more realistic. Anyway, using a dongle or hub is less of an issue on a desktop than it is with a laptop. That said, just because USB-C isn't going away doesn't mean its not stupid. I'd kill for a couple of DisplayPorts on the iMac so I didn't have to "waste" TB3/USB ports on a non-related function.
This has been a great read-through. I am in the market for a new family computer and eyeing up a 27" iMac. I was hoping the past two years for a form update rather than just function. My feeling is buying now will just mean the new form happens in 2020...like it did with my last year 24" iMac that changed to the 27 the following year. bummed but my 24 iMac lasted a while for me.
I was also hoping for some base SSD and some extra ports in the back. but...if a new update is made, they could remove ports and stop the RAM upgrade door. so perhaps buying now is best for us.
is a Fusion Drive THAT bad? wondering if moving from 1TB-FD to 256-SSD is decent with then adding externals for storage. 256 could be decent enough for the family to use and then we just move music/photos/videos to external and call it a day.
I was also hoping for some base SSD and some extra ports in the back. but...if a new update is made, they could remove ports and stop the RAM upgrade door. so perhaps buying now is best for us.
is a Fusion Drive THAT bad? wondering if moving from 1TB-FD to 256-SSD is decent with then adding externals for storage. 256 could be decent enough for the family to use and then we just move music/photos/videos to external and call it a day.
I usually like to buy stuff as soon as it comes out, but decided to just now buy the 27” 2019 iMac with 512GB SSD. If a redesign happens in 2020 (which I hope it does) I’ll just sell this 1.
I think your idea is good to just go all SSD and use externals if needed. I personally feel comfortable having 1 really good hard drive internally with a good amount of storage than the fusion drive.
Last edited:
When the new iMacs were announce in spring I almost bought but we had other budget plans then. Now this is more a Family holiday gift.
I'm waiting for the next re-design as well. I currently have the late 2014 27". Still runs pretty well, for now. Waiting is hard.
To be clear, I wasn't suggesting the iMac use the actual same display of the XDR monitor...but rather just a similar external housing.
Soldered also probably helps keep the systemboard as low-profile as possible which is/was beneficial for the Air's and MacBook's thinness.
The iMP's lack of user-accessible RAM is due to the expanded cooling system being put in the area where the RAM modules are on the iMac 5K, though admittedly they could have put an access panel on the left-hand side where the RAM is located unless it's too close to the USB/TB ports...
The iMP and Mac Mini's lack of user-accessible RAM (and SSD) is purely due to "user-accessible RAM" not being a priority for Apple back when they started on the design. Instead, their design priority was "design the electronics to fit into Jony Ive's pretty box".
The current 5K iMac followed the exact same design priority and yet we have user-accessible RAM... They could have done away with it when they thinned the chassis with the 2012 model and moved the RAM from the bottom to the back, yet they did not.
And with the 2018 Mac Mini, they didn't make it as easy as it is on the 5K iMac, but they did go back to socketed RAM to allow end-users to replace it if they wish, whereas with the 2014-2017 models the RAM was soldered in.
Apple just invested money in tooling and ramping up production of a new chassis, no matter how much it looks like the old chassis, we’re all going to be enjoying it for the next 4 years, at least. Apple isn’t going to give us a single iteration of this chassis and then redesign it for next year, you have the iMac for all the proof you need, if you doubt my wisdom.
No it didn't - know how you can tell? Read your own post:
...So they could have done away with it, but they didn't. They re-designed the case, but went out of their way to keep the RAM hatch. Ergo, keeping the user-accessible RAM was a design priority for the 2012 iMac.
With the iMac Pro they could have designed it with a RAM hatch, they could have tweaked the mainboard layout to make it possible, they could have re-thought the case design so that the back came off rather than having to cut through glue on the front. They didn't. Ergo 'User upgradeable RAM' wasn't on their list of 'must-haves'.
Pretty sure Apple's current thinking with socketed RAM is along the lines of:
(a) is there space for a socket? If not, solder.
(b) do we expect > N sales to be for upgraded RAM configurations? If yes, sockets rather than guessing how many of each mainboard config we'll sell.
(c) in the quantities we'll be buying, are the specific chips needed for this machine cheaper loose, or in DIMM form? (Ans: if its the same chip that we buy by the metric shedload for MacBook Airs probably 'loose', if they're high-end ECC chips only for the iMac Pro then the DIMMs might be cheaper).
...except slightly more complex.
1) Well, if you don't like the design, I can't say much about that.
2) I think the iMac screen is one of the best available, and by quite some margin. There's almost nothing out there that offers a similar or better package in terms of resolution, ppi, size, colour and contrast. While older ones had some temporary image retention, I haven't seen it on my newer iMacs. It's really hard to beat this display imo. Have you looked at the independent monitors you can buy?
3) There's no such thing as large, top-of-the-line and affordable SSDs, just like you can't have a car that's super fast, great on gas, ultra reliable and very cheap. And you should already know that you'll pay the Apple tax to have Apple's SSDs (which are generally better than most) integrated into an all-in-one machine, come on now. Just suck it up, pay, and enjoy the benefits... they perform great.
4) Again, you already know it's an all-in-one. Of course GPU choices are limited.
5) RAM is still user upgradeable, false complaint.
It's foolish and unrealistic to expect a perfect (by your perspective) product, especially one that gives you the best of both worlds with no tradeoffs (all-in-one & freedom of GPU choice?!). You have to look at what's available, and then choose which set of compromises you can deal with best. It's always been that way, and will likely always be that way.
2) I think the iMac screen is one of the best available, and by quite some margin. There's almost nothing out there that offers a similar or better package in terms of resolution, ppi, size, colour and contrast. While older ones had some temporary image retention, I haven't seen it on my newer iMacs. It's really hard to beat this display imo. Have you looked at the independent monitors you can buy?
3) There's no such thing as large, top-of-the-line and affordable SSDs, just like you can't have a car that's super fast, great on gas, ultra reliable and very cheap. And you should already know that you'll pay the Apple tax to have Apple's SSDs (which are generally better than most) integrated into an all-in-one machine, come on now. Just suck it up, pay, and enjoy the benefits... they perform great.
4) Again, you already know it's an all-in-one. Of course GPU choices are limited.
5) RAM is still user upgradeable, false complaint.
It's foolish and unrealistic to expect a perfect (by your perspective) product, especially one that gives you the best of both worlds with no tradeoffs (all-in-one & freedom of GPU choice?!). You have to look at what's available, and then choose which set of compromises you can deal with best. It's always been that way, and will likely always be that way.
Fair point when thinking about the primary market for the iMac Pro:
1) Businesses who can afford the RAM configuration at purchase from Apple;
2) Businesses with IT departments certified to do RAM upgrades or who have Enterprise Apple Care agreements that include RAM upgrades;
3) Individuals who can afford the RAM configuration at purchase from Apple.
So most iMac Pro customers would buy the RAM they need or have service contracts covering upgrades. As such, the minority who would prefer to do it themselves were such a minority it was not worth the effort of making it possible.
Well, that could be a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy: if you make adding RAM far harder than it was with a regular 5k iMac, Trashcan or Cheesegrater and add the new requirement that it has to be done by a certified Apple service person (it was a documented user upgrade before) and requires specialist tools (guitar picks/pizza cutters) and special parts (new adhesive strips) then far fewer people will be prepared to do it...
However, they may be right for the iMac Pro (esp. since most of the DIY inclined stopped reading at iMac). Also, the iMac Pro may be expensive but at least it has a relatively generous base config with 32GB RAM (more expensive ECC RAM, at that) and 1TB SSD compared to other systems. Given the usual Xeon/Workstation-class-GPU premium, and the inclusion of a 5k screen that you won't get elsewhere its one of Apple's less egregiously priced systems... which is no great help if you wanted a Ryzen mini-tower and a pair of 24" displays...
??? I just posted a couple of days ago. I think it's an interesting discussion and it was quite informative for me - I now understand a little better why Apple made the choices they made. I'd still like thinner bezels all around (especially the "chin"), and I'd still like a bigger SSD as standard. I guess I can compromise on the graphics if the thermal solutions are under pressure.
What about coil whine on these 5k iMacs? Does it appear on them?
How is the graphics performance on these machines? It feels like the new MacBook Pro 16” has great graphics compared to the pro 560X, but I can’t find a comparison to the pro 580X of Vega 48.
I want to buy an iMac, but I don’t like the higher price for ssd and maybe even graphics update, compared to the MacBook Pro 16”
How is the graphics performance on these machines? It feels like the new MacBook Pro 16” has great graphics compared to the pro 560X, but I can’t find a comparison to the pro 580X of Vega 48.
I want to buy an iMac, but I don’t like the higher price for ssd and maybe even graphics update, compared to the MacBook Pro 16”