No 2018 iMac?!

[Appleaker]

1. Did I say there would be no new iMac this year? It's a must given the Coffee Lake CPUs. I had been predicting them as soon as March if Apple were refreshing the MacBook Pro quickly. June was the 1 year average refresh date, but now October looks like a tardy update so we expect something special (or something disappointing).

2. Show me the 8 core consumer scale i7 on the Intel site. If you are referring to the Skylake-X/Kaby Lake-X series such as the i7-7820X those are:

a. Being discontinued and don't have integrated GPU with Quicksync which would help with video software exports.
b. Hugely expensive - just look on the Intel site for RRP on CPUs and motherboards. Coffee Lake 8700K+Z370 motherboard is much better value and Apple have probably waited this long to get their hands on the B360 chipset for a further cost saving.
c. Have a TDP of 140W (much more than the Coffee Lake i7s which currently run to 95w) Need a cooling solution not unlike what's in the iMac Pro - which coincidentally is available with an 8 core Xeon not too dissimilar. The extra money spent gets you lots of extra PCIe lanes and therefore Thunderbolt 3 ports so in effect you want an 8 core iMac - it's called the iMac Pro and you can buy NOW.

You want a PC built with KabyLake-X parts? Come back when you've got one under $2k with a 5k screen on it and professional level accoutrements.
[doublepost=1528928846][/doublepost]



No idea mate. According to Macrumors the 20th anniversary of the iMac was in May. It's been and gone. If we're talking about the 'new design' Apple just take the iMac Pro, make it silver, and put a Coffee Lake i7 in it. Job done

If the iMac was just getting a processor swap, and it wasn’t the 20th anniversary, then March would have been plausible. As for the MacBook Pros, March was never an option because that’s not just a processor swap either.

I am obviously not talking about the Kaby Lake X or Skylake X, they are not consumer parts and would never be put into the standard iMac. You seem to think I am talking about a pre-existing 8-core consumer (Coffee Lake) CPU. Of course not, there isn’t one. I suggest you read my posts again. Even the ones where I didn’t mention dates, I said ‘i7s are going 8-core’, not ‘i7s are now 8-core’.

20th anniversary of its reveal was in May, the release was in August. But as I said, the specific month has nothing to do with its scheduling. The fact that it’s the 20th anniversary year is significant however.

 

[EugW]

They are facts but whether you choose to believe me or not is a different matter. Either way, you’ll know whether

If the iMac was just getting a processor swap, and it wasn’t the 20th anniversary, then March would have been plausible. As for the MacBook Pros, March was never an option because that’s not just a processor swap either.

I am obviously not talking about the Kaby Lake X or Skylake X, they are not consumer parts and would never be put into the standard iMac. You seem to think I am talking about a pre-existing 8-core consumer (Coffee Lake) CPU. Of course not, there isn’t one. I suggest you read my posts again. Even the ones where I didn’t mention dates, I said ‘i7s are going 8-core’, not ‘i7s are now 8-core’.

20th anniversary of its reveal was in May, the release was in August. But as I said, the specific month has nothing to do with its scheduling. The fact that it’s the 20th anniversary year is significant however.

Now we know you are just making crap up.

 

[Appleaker]

A new iMac design is pretty unlikely in 2018.


I'd be shocked if the iMacs go 8-core. ie. They won't. They will be 6-core.


For Y series in the Retina 12" MacBooks, Intel has already talked about Amber Lake Y.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12878/intel-discuss-whiskey-lake-amber-lake-and-cascade-lake

They have not been clear on this, but these appear to be 14 nm versions of what was supposed to be Cannon Lake Y.

If that’s you’re opinion then that’s fine, I can’t be bothered to argue at this point. It’ll be a waiting game to see who’s right. All I’ll say is, prepared to be shocked.
[doublepost=1528942648][/doublepost]

Now we know you are just making crap up.

Because I was correcting their misinterpretation of what I said?
Once again, if that’s you’re opinion then that’s fine, I couldn’t care less if you think I’m making it up. At the end of the day, we’ll know from Apple which one of us is wrong and which is right. Then, you can come back and claim that I’m making it up.

 

[mreg376]

Because I was correcting their misinterpretation of what I said?
Once again, if that’s you’re opinion then that’s fine, I couldn’t care less if you think I’m making it up. At the end of the day, we’ll know from Apple which one of us is wrong and which is right. Then, you can come back and claim that I’m making it up.

Actually, no matter what Apple does, you will never be "right," since you never actually knew anything. You're just guessing like everyone else, although you're the only one here passing off your guesses as facts. Even a stopped (analog) clock is "right" twice a day.

 

[tomscott1988]

I think you're expecting Apple to repeat themselves as per their recent and well documented Mac Pro failures. There are probably several reasons behind the delays but those speculations are for another post.

By going to high end Xeon CPUs for the iMac Pro Apple are buying into CPUs with a longer shelf life but potentially longer times between updates. A lot less messing about there. They could easily bump next year's model with FaceID, or faster SSD/Optane, better AMD GPU, and call it a refresh but they won't do what the likes of Dell/HP would do which is cut prices over time.

If they don't cut prices they have to refresh otherwise the product looks stale and customers don't get inclined to buy, even for a halo product like the iMac Pro undoubtedly is. The value isn't entirely in black and white sales figures, it's also in proving that Apple can engineer such a product and sell it. Call it marketing. Steve Jobs certainly would have.

I would say that Apple have asked for one more chance to regain the reputation they have been losing with successive failures to update various professional level products. If professionals ever felt Apple were abandoning iMac Pro or modular Mac Pro without reason it's game over for them. Too many people have invested too much money to be stung again.

You've had bad luck with your RAM that's for sure, but that's not to say that ECC RAM is a bad thing. What's bad is not being able to easily access that RAM to change it when sticks do inevitably go bad.

I thought 9.7" and 12.9" were enough and yet we have a 10.5" iPad Pro. I don't get their logic either having not come close to an iPad Pro so won't comment further other than to say that the 9.7" iPad Pro is discontinued - the 9.7" size is for consumers only with the 12.9" and 10.5" carrying the Pro flag forward.

How many folks have thought that 21.5" too small, while 27" is too large (and expensive?). It could be a way for Apple to try something new in design terms, especially if they felt that a 24" panel could be had cost effectively.

I believe $3k for a fully specified pro level machine on a certain budget is an aim for Apple. They will calculate they have a certain buying market at that scale.

The i7-8700K runs hot as a CPU, and Apple won't overlock it in the iMac. If they use it then they are wasting that extra $100 they spent on an extra 500MHz over the non-K version as that CPU would turbo to almost the same clock speed as the cooler running i7-8700 (non-K).

Apple would then have a 30w TDP budget to make the iMac quieter or more powerful in GPU compute by buying in a better class of GPU - even a VEGA perhaps.

They can choose to do this at this one time because Coffee Lake CPUs have more compute power overall due to extra cores - they couldn't have done it for the 2017 models for example. Or they could warm it over with the i7-8700K which could start to make the base model iMac Pro look poor value if benchmarks get close.

In terms of FaceID beating the laptops to the punch:
1. The required FaceID camera assembly may be too big for the lid of a MacBook Pro unless this is one of the reasons why Apple have delayed the MacBook Pro. TouchID is fine because mobile users touch the keyboard on their laptop. The Touch bar is another thing altogether...
2. FaceID makes more sense in the iMac which can probably accommodate the camera assembly and whose keyboards are generally wireless, TouchID is fine on the laptops which are expensive enough as it is.
3. Nothing got updated this month because I believe Apple will do a simultaneous update again - whenever that is - most of the iMac parts are available and there can only be one major reason for the delay - they want to do it all at once.

I don't think there's anything particularly new looking in the iMac Pro - but in another world it would be the refreshed iMac full stop. The main feature being able to handle hotter CPU and GPU, make them quieter, at the expense of the RAM. For most people that's fine.

Professionals are probably wanting a more modular Mac, some will want to buy bare bones and add over time. I would say that professionals want to be able to replace bad RAM or storage easily without taking it to an Apple Store - no matter how 'convenient' where relatively untrained retail staff could be handling something that cost more than the car they drove to work. Not every professional is their own IT department but I'd expect a machine to allow the replacement of defective RAM or storage without losing access to my machine for more than an hour and without leaving home or the office.

I accept that a one cable monitor solution won't give me a 5k to 8k monitor until Thunderbolt 4 so a 4k monitor would be fine for me. Dell or Eizo sell decent ones. Some makes are probably better than the LG-based efforts that Apple sell.

Valid points but you have to remember that Xeons are expensive and the iMac is a consumer machine. Xeons are meant for reliability not cost/performance. Essentially to implement them the iMac price will soar making it even more niche.

The only product apple has ever cut the price while in production was the Mac Pro and it still isnt enough to get people buying it. Its not in Apples logic to cut prices look at the mac mini... super old exactly the same price.

You have to remember that apple has been trying to kill the pro scene for a long time. The last good update was from 2008 to 2009. Then the 2010 came out and 2 years later the 2012 and was exactly the same machine. Essentially 4 years with no difference to the 2013 mac pro. The 6,1 came around and they tried to reduce the size which im assuming cut production costs, shipping and obviously they were band in Europe for their poor environmental specs. The 6,1 cost more but it was a big big flop. Then 5 years later the iMac Pro because the rest of apples line up is suffering from not having a professional option.

For many pros a macbook pro even in 15" form is a secondary portable machine as they dont come close in sustained performance. The iMacs have never been really powerful desktops just mid range yet still cost up to £4000. If there is no powerhouse which there wasnt for a long time then what do you do? Its just apple rape.

At the end of the day for many including me the iMac Pro is a 2013 mac pro with a screen built in with no option of changing ram or the SSD.... IMO its even worse. The last thing I want is for Apple to replace the dedicated headless mac with a parts bin special iMac pro which wont last as long and they obviously feel no need to support.

In terms of ram, if a chip fails its probable the machine wont boot. With the iMac pro you could have a weeks downtime to get it turned around. Its unacceptable, whereas with a normal machine you pull the stick out keep working, next day a new module and put it in. Job done. Why would you make it more difficult for yourself.

I dont think swapping ram makes you a techie, its the most simple swap on a computer and I dont think people who buy high end machines have no idea how to.

For example my 2010 mac pro was my main machine all the way up to the end of 2016, in that time I had upgraded the CPU, ram, graphics card multiple times, added USB 3, internally it has 22TB of HDDs that means I dont need to have two external raid arrays saving me at least £800. Same with internal graphics options.

It cost me £1899 and probably another £1000 in parts in that 6 years. The drives probably another £500. £3399 in total for a 6 year machine... the value prospect of this machine is off the chart for me. If apple had made another would I have bought another? Most definitely, its apples own fault for not offering another similar machine. They dont need to reinvent the wheel for this sector. Just give people what they want.

The iMac Pro is no more powerful if you compare year vs year if anything the iMac pro is probably slower because tech especially from intel has not improved much at all from 2012 vs 2017. The worst bit they have removed every user serviceable option and if it stopped working because of a stupid issue... I couldn't fix it. Yet its still more expensive and has less functionality.

Thats what pros want, the creative market is a tough one at times and its very competitive. Just having a PCI graphics and HDD options means again the £800 saving on an external raid device and £400 on a graphics card enclosure. £1200 its not small change is it thats a 1/3rd of my total spend on the Mac Pro over a 6 year period. The ability to choose your own monitor too, that 5k is beautiful but even the vega 56 feels sluggish the 64 is the only graphics card that I felt was adequate. Its overkill and gets in the way of productivity and program performance.

Again with features the mac is notorious to get them last because of the volume. Especially the iMac, the volume will be so low compared to the macbook line. No chance the mac will get face ID first although it makes perfect sense. The macbook pro will get it first, because its volume is far higher than any mac desktop.

Apple wont clock the 8770k but what I mean is that its a screamer as it is. Apple must know the issues with the current iMac with how bad the cooling is and really buying anything over the i5 series is a bit of a waste of money as the experience is worse and the added performance lost due to heat and throttling. If they put adequate cooling in the iMac the 8770k would compete very well for 90% of application vs the 8 core Xeon W chip. This would mean a redesign which I cant see happening, regardless that the chassis is the oldest and longest living design in iMac history.

Another issue with the Xeon W is that it basically is the same skylake chip without the extra features which a lot of normal people will benefit from also means a hefty price increase... The only benefit to the Xeon is ECC... but its not necessary and its slower, from my experience it burns itself out with sustained use.

The Xeon is also not interchangeable with normal boards meaning apple needs to design another board if they dont recycle the current one...

Check it out yourself.

At the end of the day with a decent desktop cooling implementation it shouldn't have to use low TDP cpus. The whole situation is BS. Reduced features and far more expensive.

People forget how good value the Mac Pro was and now the standard iMac in similar configs are 2k more and they dont perform as well.

 

[sublunar]

Valid points but you have to remember that Xeons are expensive and the iMac is a consumer machine. Xeons are meant for reliability not cost/performance. Essentially to implement them the iMac price will soar making it even more niche.

The only product apple has ever cut the price while in production was the Mac Pro and it still isnt enough to get people buying it. Its not in Apples logic to cut prices look at the mac mini... super old exactly the same price.

You have to remember that apple has been trying to kill the pro scene for a long time. The last good update was from 2008 to 2009. Then the 2010 came out and 2 years later the 2012 and was exactly the same machine. Essentially 4 years with no difference to the 2013 mac pro. The 6,1 came around and they tried to reduce the size which im assuming cut production costs, shipping and obviously they were band in Europe for their poor environmental specs. The 6,1 cost more but it was a big big flop. Then 5 years later the iMac Pro because the rest of apples line up is suffering from not having a professional option.

For many pros a macbook pro even in 15" form is a secondary portable machine as they dont come close in sustained performance. The iMacs have never been really powerful desktops just mid range yet still cost up to £4000. If there is no powerhouse which there wasnt for a long time then what do you do? Its just apple rape.

At the end of the day for many including me the iMac Pro is a 2013 mac pro with a screen built in with no option of changing ram or the SSD.... IMO its even worse. The last thing I want is for Apple to replace the dedicated headless mac with a parts bin special iMac pro which wont last as long and they obviously feel no need to support.

In terms of ram, if a chip fails its probable the machine wont boot. With the iMac pro you could have a weeks downtime to get it turned around. Its unacceptable, whereas with a normal machine you pull the stick out keep working, next day a new module and put it in. Job done. Why would you make it more difficult for yourself.

I dont think swapping ram makes you a techie, its the most simple swap on a computer and I dont think people who buy high end machines have no idea how to.

For example my 2010 mac pro was my main machine all the way up to the end of 2016, in that time I had upgraded the CPU, ram, graphics card multiple times, added USB 3, internally it has 22TB of HDDs that means I dont need to have two external raid arrays saving me at least £800. Same with internal graphics options.

It cost me £1899 and probably another £1000 in parts in that 6 years. The drives probably another £500. £3399 in total for a 6 year machine... the value prospect of this machine is off the chart for me. If apple had made another would I have bought another? Most definitely, its apples own fault for not offering another similar machine. They dont need to reinvent the wheel for this sector. Just give people what they want.

The iMac Pro is no more powerful if you compare year vs year if anything the iMac pro is probably slower because tech especially from intel has not improved much at all from 2012 vs 2017. The worst bit they have removed every user serviceable option and if it stopped working because of a stupid issue... I couldn't fix it. Yet its still more expensive and has less functionality.

Thats what pros want, the creative market is a tough one at times and its very competitive. Just having a PCI graphics and HDD options means again the £800 saving on an external raid device and £400 on a graphics card enclosure. £1200 its not small change is it thats a 1/3rd of my total spend on the Mac Pro over a 6 year period. The ability to choose your own monitor too, that 5k is beautiful but even the vega 56 feels sluggish the 64 is the only graphics card that I felt was adequate. Its overkill and gets in the way of productivity and program performance.

Again with features the mac is notorious to get them last because of the volume. Especially the iMac, the volume will be so low compared to the macbook line. No chance the mac will get face ID first although it makes perfect sense. The macbook pro will get it first, because its volume is far higher than any mac desktop.

Apple wont clock the 8770k but what I mean is that its a screamer as it is. Apple must know the issues with the current iMac with how bad the cooling is and really buying anything over the i5 series is a bit of a waste of money as the experience is worse and the added performance lost due to heat and throttling. If they put adequate cooling in the iMac the 8770k would compete very well for 90% of application vs the 8 core Xeon W chip. This would mean a redesign which I cant see happening, regardless that the chassis is the oldest and longest living design in iMac history.

Another issue with the Xeon W is that it basically is the same skylake chip without the extra features which a lot of normal people will benefit from also means a hefty price increase... The only benefit to the Xeon is ECC... but its not necessary and its slower, from my experience it burns itself out with sustained use.

The Xeon is also not interchangeable with normal boards meaning apple needs to design another board if they dont recycle the current one...

Check it out yourself.

At the end of the day with a decent desktop cooling implementation it shouldn't have to use low TDP cpus. The whole situation is BS. Reduced features and far more expensive.

People forget how good value the Mac Pro was and now the standard iMac in similar configs are 2k more and they dont perform as well.

Allow me to point out the Xeon E3 v6 family. They are going to be superseded by the Xeon E series (and that class of CPUs were mentioned briefly in the video you embedded) and are basically Kaby Lake CPUs given ECC support and were roughly on the same release schedule as the i7s they were based on. The ones ending in 5 have integrated graphics and clock a smidgeon higher than the equivalent i7 - granted the list price is a bit higher but Apple could secure comparable discounts. The other major limit on these is the number of PCIe lane restricted to 16. Once you dedicate, say, 8 to a GPU you probably only have room for 2 Thunderbolt 3 ports with PCIe SSD, USBs, wifi, bluetooth etc coming out of the PCH on the motherboard connected to the CPU.

If you look at their phone business, you'll see that Apple aren't in the business for volume, they aim for the profit. Their handling of certain other hardware lines seems impenetrably stupid for people brought up on exceptions of Dell where they have new product every 6-9 months, discounts every week, sales every month, but then outlay support for a number of years going forward.

The secrecy is what is killing off a lot of Apple products because professionals can't point to a road map, can't trust if Apple will, on a whim, discontinue the product they just bought and rely on, or leave it on life support for 5 years while Intel release 3 further generations of the components which get ignored.

I completely agree with your complaints about Apple forcing people to buy an eGPU to fit a graphics card or a Thunderbolt enclosure to fit extra storage. I still contend, however, that there isn't enough room in the MacBook Pro to fit the FaceID cameras and sensors and it would require a re-engineering effort which Apple are probably saving for the keyboard and battery in the case of the MacBook Pro.

Remember also that there were rumours of the FaceID cameras being the cause of the initial iPhone X shortages earlier this year and even the existing iMac may not get FaceID because I do feel that the iMac Pro design will eventually take over from the standard 27" iMac.

This is the basis of my assumption that Apple would create a specific Pro model at a different screen size that would incorporate the FaceID camera and it wouldn't be any of the existing models because their designs are now set.

If you're of the school that Apple's modular Mac Pro would accommodate internal storage and standard PCIe graphics cards then why couldn't Apple rebadge a Fractal Design case and put out a professional product very quickly? The fact that they are delaying the Modular Mac Pro until next year is clearly because they are doing something else.

While an internal PCIe x16 double slot for graphics cards plus 4 drive bays would be fantastic I can't see Apple doing that after an effectively a 2 year delay from the initial announcement including many apologies and clarifications. At the very least it'll have a custom motherboard with ARM co-processor on it (like the T2 in the iMac Pro) and you'd expect an external monitor from Apple to come with the FaceID assembly and potentially 120Hz TruMotion like in the iPad Pro on a smaller 4k model (eg 24" 4k iMac Pro?).

I think Apple will stick to their guns and offer a basic model tuned to offer their own levels of silence vs performance. By disallowing user added internal GPU and storage Apple can produce a standard base model tuned to their own specifications. That would probably account for them repeating the trick of using a proprietary M.2 interface for SSD. Any user wanting to add their own GPU or storage needs to spend that extra money on external devices which is disappointing but would be unsurprising for me.

Apple will expect people to go external for everything else. You'd be surprised at how many professionals don't upgrade their own RAM or storage - Apple will have their own figures - but more important is that these professionals in the past would pay for are easier to fit on older models. iMac may be a fraction of laptop sales but they are Apple's premium desktop and attention has to be paid to them.

What have they been waiting for then? PCIe 4.0 and therefore Thunderbolt 4? An 8k panel for a cinema display? A Displayport 1.4 connector?

 

[Lammers]

20th anniversary of its reveal was in May, the release was in August. But as I said, the specific month has nothing to do with its scheduling. The fact that it’s the 20th anniversary year is significant however.

Apple’s celebration of the 20th anniversary of the iMac has already happened.

They don’t do product releases that celebrate product anniversaries. If there is a new iMac design this year (and I don’t see why they would bother) then it will be entirely a coincidence that it’s happening this year.
[doublepost=1529088938][/doublepost]

This years iMacs were never scheduled for WWDC.
Yes, they will be released this year and it’ll be a major update.
It’ll be a separate event, not the September event.

If you don’t believe me then remember that this year is the 20th anniversary of the iMac, then rethink what you’re saying.

Like I’ve already said, Apple have already celebrated the 20th anniversary of the iMac - a short Twitter post from Tim Cook that few paid any attention to. And that’s the entirety of the celebration they think it deserves. The reality is that the number of people that care about the anniversary or are even aware of it is so small as to be irrelevant.

Plus, Apple doesn’t look backwards, they look forward. And they are extremely careful with how they are portrayed - they want to market themselves as innovative and modern - I don’t think they would want to remind the world that the iMac is a 20 year old computer product.

 

[Appleaker]

Apple’s celebration of the 20th anniversary of the iMac has already happened.

They don’t do product releases that celebrate product anniversaries. If there is a new iMac design this year (and I don’t see why they would bother) then it will be entirely a coincidence that it’s happening this year.
[doublepost=1529088938][/doublepost]

Like I’ve already said, Apple have already celebrated the 20th anniversary of the iMac - a short Twitter post from Tim Cook that few paid any attention to. And that’s the entirety of the celebration they think it deserves. The reality is that the number of people that care about the anniversary or are even aware of it is so small as to be irrelevant.

Plus, Apple doesn’t look backwards, they look forward. And they are extremely careful with how they are portrayed - they want to market themselves as innovative and modern - I don’t think they would want to remind the world that the iMac is a 20 year old computer product.

Hold on, you seem to have misinterpreted or exaggerated what I am saying.
You keep rambling on about a Tweet to celebrate the announcement date, when that is entirely irrelavent. I thought youn would have noticed the bolded "year" in the first post you quoted, and then read on to see that I am thinking about the anniversary year rather than the date itself, which is irrelevant.

And I never said they go out of their way to create a new design for an anniversary, thats not true, but that doesn't mean they don't schedule redesigns/significant updates (to a certain degree) to coincide with anniversaries. The iMacs design is usually updated every 4 or so years, you seem to be forgetting that this design is from 2012.

Saying they don't mention anniversaries is entirely untrue.
They have mentioned Mac anniversaries in previous updates, most recently mentioning the 25th anniversary of their notebooks at the October 2016 event. For the 30th anniversary of Mac they went as far as creating a webpage and video to celebrate the occasion (again, the year, not just the date), not to mention the fact that they acknowledged it in the iMac keynote that year, with Phil Schiller describing the 5K iMac as "the perfect fitting to the 30th birthday of Macintosh".

That makes what you're saying about innovative and modern portrayal as absolute nonsense (at least for Macs), or perhaps an exaggeration of the fact that they they don't dwell on talking about anniversaries and old products for similar reasons. But if you're someone who thinks they didn't work on the iPhone X for the 10th anniversary, and it was just a coincidence, then that's what you believe.

 

[Internet Enzyme]

So, given this story https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...screen-apple-watches-later-this-year.2124939/

I’m beginning to reevalute my stance that there will be a new iMac in October. The rumor has no mention of a new iMac this year, and in that ad campaign from a few weeks ago there were exclusively Mac notebooks, with no iMacs.

 

[Lammers]

Hold on, you seem to have misinterpreted or exaggerated what I am saying.
You keep rambling on about a Tweet to celebrate the announcement date, when that is entirely irrelavent. I thought youn would have noticed the bolded "year" in the first post you quoted, and then read on to see that I am thinking about the anniversary year rather than the date itself, which is irrelevant.

And I never said they go out of their way to create a new design for an anniversary, thats not true, but that doesn't mean they don't schedule redesigns/significant updates (to a certain degree) to coincide with anniversaries. The iMacs design is usually updated every 4 or so years, you seem to be forgetting that this design is from 2012.

Saying they don't mention anniversaries is entirely untrue.
They have mentioned Mac anniversaries in previous updates, most recently mentioning the 25th anniversary of their notebooks at the October 2016 event. For the 30th anniversary of Mac they went as far as creating a webpage and video to celebrate the occasion (again, the year, not just the date), not to mention the fact that they acknowledged it in the iMac keynote that year, with Phil Schiller describing the 5K iMac as "the perfect fitting to the 30th birthday of Macintosh".

That makes what you're saying about innovative and modern portrayal as absolute nonsense (at least for Macs), or perhaps an exaggeration of the fact that they they don't dwell on talking about anniversaries and old products for similar reasons. But if you're someone who thinks they didn't work on the iPhone X for the 10th anniversary, and it was just a coincidence, then that's what you believe.

Your argument was that they will launch a redesigned iMac (and not just a routine spec bump) because it’s the 20th anniversary year. I just disagree with that argument. My view is that they will launch a redesigned iMac when sales of the current model are depressed to the extent that they need to launch a redesigned model to reinvigorate sales - and I struggle to imagine that the current iMac design is a limiting factor in iMac sales. So I don’t see why Apple would bother redesigning the iMac this year, 20th anniversary or otherwise. But if they do, my view is that it’s because sales are suffering, not because it’s the anniversary year.

I also continue to believe that Apple would be unlikely to launch a redesigned iMac so soon after launching the iMac Pro with the existing design.

I stand corrected on the anniversary mentions, thanks.

 

[Appleaker]

Your argument was that they will launch a redesigned iMac (and not just a routine spec bump) because it’s the 20th anniversary year. I just disagree with that argument. My view is that they will launch a redesigned iMac when sales of the current model are depressed to the extent that they need to launch a redesigned model to reinvigorate sales - and I struggle to imagine that the current iMac design is a limiting factor in iMac sales. So I don’t see why Apple would bother redesigning the iMac this year, 20th anniversary or otherwise. But if they do, my view is that it’s because sales are suffering, not because it’s the anniversary year.

I also continue to believe that Apple would be unlikely to launch a redesigned iMac so soon after launching the iMac Pro with the existing design.

I stand corrected on the anniversary mentions, thanks.

I think the stronger argument you’ve made is regarding the iMac Pro, although whose to say that’s not getting a redesign. The question with the iMac Pro is whether Apple will continue to refresh it, I think we’ll see a 2018/2019 model but there’s uncertainty beyond that.

But my view in terms of the redesign is based on information from an insider source as well as the fact that from previous schedules, a redesign is 2 years overdue so this makes sense. With a scheduled redesign in the works anyway, Apple would make sure they get it out on the 20th anniversary year. So I’m not saying they realized the 20th anniversary is coming up and decided to do a new design, if they had already introduced a redesign there would be no point in doing that.

With iMacs being the best value Macs you can get, I doubt sales are dipping. While I think it’s unlikely, if the redesign is delayed, it would be for other reasons.

For now, let’s just look forward to October when Apple will finally refresh most of the Mac lineup. I’m excited to see if the iMacs will go 8-core and hoping we see the new Mac mini there (even though it might make more sense to launch alongside the new Mac Pro.

 

[navaira]

my view in terms of the redesign is based on information from an insider source

It's official, Serban is with us again.

 

[fokmik]

Serban is his insider source, not Appleaker
[doublepost=1530368101][/doublepost]i wonder if for apple its hard or what are the draw backs to make that imac LCD with promotion up to 120hz ?!

 

[redheeler]

So, given this story https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...screen-apple-watches-later-this-year.2124939/

That report made no mention of the MacBook Pro as well. Apple should want to refresh both products before the holiday shopping season.

I’m beginning to reevalute my stance that there will be a new iMac in October. The rumor has no mention of a new iMac this year, and in that ad campaign from a few weeks ago there were exclusively Mac notebooks, with no iMacs.

This was the first ad campaign I'd seen Apple do for the Mac in a while, period. Doesn't surprise me that it only focuses on the MacBooks, as those sell more units than Apple's desktop Macs with a higher margin of profit, and issues such as the defective keyboards have tarnished their reputation somewhat.
[doublepost=1530372833][/doublepost]

My view is that they will launch a redesigned iMac when sales of the current model are depressed to the extent that they need to launch a redesigned model to reinvigorate sales - and I struggle to imagine that the current iMac design is a limiting factor in iMac sales.

I have a hard time believing the 2015 MacBook Pro was struggling before Apple decided to redesign it. Rather, it was a case of Apple wanting to be ready for the future before a redesign was strictly necessary, though in my opinion it ended up being a rushed and not well-though-out redesign with a high price tag that definitely turned some customers away.

 

[tomscott1988]

Refreshing a line isn’t about lacking sales that’s a rediculous statement. Otherwise Apple would never do anything... because of all the people who jump on the bandwagon.

 

[Ravenbrook]

I wish we could get a credible leak as to when/what the iMac is doing. I’m in the market for a new computer and can wait a while. Don’t care for a redesign as much as I’d like a boost in CPU performance. I don’t use a computer for a lot, but a faster processor now might get me an extra year or so out of my future machine.

 

[DQ11]

I wish we could get a credible leak as to when/what the iMac is doing. I’m in the market for a new computer and can wait a while. Don’t care for a redesign as much as I’d like a boost in CPU performance. I don’t use a computer for a lot, but a faster processor now might get me an extra year or so out of my future machine.

Same. I've been thinking about getting a new imac for like 3-4 hours a day for a year and a half and I'll have the money in about a month. It'd driving me crazy thinking I might have to wait until October for a refresh, but would really piss me off if we get to that point, and it's actually not being updated until 2019.

The i7-7700k will be more than enough for me, I'm just worried about heat issues and the fan.

 

[EugW]

The i7-7700k will be more than enough for me, I'm just worried about heat issues and the fan.

Then the decision is made. Wait for a 6-core i5. Problem solved.

 

[Internet Enzyme]

Same. I've been thinking about getting a new imac for like 3-4 hours a day for a year and a half and I'll have the money in about a month. It'd driving me crazy thinking I might have to wait until October for a refresh, but would really piss me off if we get to that point, and it's actually not being updated until 2019.

The i7-7700k will be more than enough for me, I'm just worried about heat issues and the fan.

I think that it’s a toss up with the october event.

Serban is his insider source, not Appleaker
[doublepost=1530368101][/doublepost]i wonder if for apple its hard or what are the draw backs to make that imac LCD with promotion up to 120hz ?!

120hz would be fascinating. Having a display controller and gpu that can handle 5k 120hz 4:4:4 ‘10 bit’ P3 gamut 500 nits is quite the ask. Has apple ever sold a computer with a 120hz display? Could be a unique start. I feel as if their entire lineup including iphones should move to a higher refresh rate. Would really create an immediate differentiation from all the other non-apple devices that come at 60hz standard

 

[fokmik]

I think that it’s a toss up with the october event.


120hz would be fascinating. Having a display controller and gpu that can handle 5k 120hz 4:4:4 ‘10 bit’ P3 gamut 500 nits is quite the ask. Has apple ever sold a computer with a 120hz display? Could be a unique start. I feel as if their entire lineup including iphones should move to a higher refresh rate. Would really create an immediate differentiation from all the other non-apple devices that come at 60hz standard

Since apple is calling ipad a computer,they have sold a 120hz computer since last year

 

[tomscott1988]

Current graphics performance isnt great so doubling to 120 isnt going to make a better experience.

If your doing any actual work that 5k display is a limiting factor because as ive said rendering 14mp at 60fps with a 580 is very taxing. Double that and what already feels like a crawl will be like watching paint dry.

At the end of the day heat is always and issue and getting a better than mid range GPU is unlikely. Unless your happy spending 3k on a machine and then another 1k on an external caddy and GPU.

 

[padams35]

The trend for the past 5 refreshes (where over 50% of the iMac lineup was updated):
M2010 to M2011: 10 months
M2011 to L2012: 17 months
L2012 to L2013: 11 months
L2013 to L2015: 25 months
L2015 to M2017: 19 months

Average: 16.5 months (suggesting Late October 2018)
Stdev: 5.5 months (but anything from May-2018 to April-2019 would be 'normal')


With new iMac 2-3 months away at the earliest I wouldn't keep waiting unless you could afford to risk there being no 2018 iMacs (or only a new top or bottom tier model as in 2014). I'll be making the wait, but only because my 2011 doesn't actually need replacing before High Sierra looses support.

 

[Shivetya]

Just waiting on August 15th... 20th anniversary is just a date too good for them to pass up

 

[Appleaker]

The trend for the past 5 refreshes (where over 50% of the iMac lineup was updated):
M2010 to M2011: 10 months
M2011 to L2012: 17 months
L2012 to L2013: 11 months
L2013 to L2015: 25 months
L2015 to M2017: 19 months

Average: 16.5 months (suggesting Late October 2018)
Stdev: 5.5 months (but anything from May-2018 to April-2019 would be 'normal')


With new iMac 2-3 months away at the earliest I wouldn't keep waiting unless you could afford to risk there being no 2018 iMacs (or only a new top or bottom tier model as in 2014). I'll be making the wait, but only because my 2011 doesn't actually need replacing before High Sierra looses support.

You missed out the changing the average to 13.6. But that's irrelevant, we will be seeing iMacs this year, and I would ay it's worth the wait for most people (but it does depend).
[doublepost=1530553334][/doublepost]

Just waiting on August 15th... 20th anniversary is just a date too good for them to pass up

The 20th anniversary year is significant, but the date itself isn't a big deal, especially since the announcement date of the original iMac has passed. But who knows, they could do a celebration page like they did for the Mac anniversary, although that was more significant.

 

[cobracnvt]

With the iMac Pro coming out last Jan, I'm not holding my breath for an iMac refresh this year.