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.
Why are people so mad about the new iMac?
- Thread starter Astralis56
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
An iMac is cheaper!
Once you factor in a similar spec monitor, new keyboard, mouse, you will likely have spent more on an Mini configuration. I certainly did, but I do have a nice LG Ultra 5K for my trouble.
My previous 🖥 was a 2011 fully loaded 27” which is still fab, the M1 knocks its socks off performance wise.
I was going to keep my iMac and use it in target display mode, on buying the mini I discovered that the M1 chip no longer supports this function despite the iMac being compatible.
Last edited:
I've been somewhat mystified by the iMac-bashing. While it might not be perfect, I'm thrilled with the colors and other improvements. It restores a sense of life and vibrancy to Apple's computers. I'd go so far as to say that it is the best iMac they've had in at least a decade.
Some people have complained about value, especially compared to the Mac Mini, the 'baseline' desktop computer. I did a brief bit of research on that.
Assuming the baseline Mac Mini (256GB) and the equivalent iMac (256GB + ports), here's the marketed differences, as best as I can tell:
1) The iMac has a built-in 24-inch "Retina" display, and supports an extra external 6K display, apparently via Thunderbolt. The Mac Mini supports two external displays, one 6K with a Thunderbolt connector, and one 4K via HDMI.
2) The iMac has a HD camera, 1080p.
3) The iMac has a three-mic array, which they claim is 'studio-quality'.
4) The iMac has a 'six-speaker' sound system. To be fair, the Mac Mini page doesn't say that it doesn't have one, but in the absence of further information, it seems reasonable to assume that the iMac's is significantly better.
5) The iMac purchase includes a (color-matching) mouse and keyboard, as well as a power adapter and USB-C to Lightning cable.
6) The iMac has two USB 3.1 ports (type C); the Mac Mini has two type-As.
7) The Mac Mini can have 10GB Ethernet as a configuration option; this doesn't seem to be available for the iMac.
Obviously part of the appeal of the Mac Mini is that you can use your own hardware with it. However, if you're buying things straight from Apple, here's what a Mac Mini setup similar to the iMac would be:
1 Mac Mini - $699.00
1 Magic Mouse 2 (Silver) - $79
1 Innovelis TotalMount Mounting System for Mac Mini (because you don't want it to just sit on the desk) - $34.95
1 LG UltraFine 4K Display - $699.95
1 Magic Keyboard - $99.00
For a total of $1,611.90 (not counting tax)
In this light, the 2nd-level iMac's $1,499 doesn't seem unsatisfactory.
The LG monitor does add several USB ports, and it also includes speakers, mitigating one of the iMac's advantages (assuming the LG monitor's speakers are as good). However, that still leaves you out a camera and a microphone, and considering that I can buy a USB hub with umpteen ports if the included ones aren't sufficient, I think how bad the port situation is said to be is a bit overstated. While I'm not at all happy with Apple's decision to cripple the low-end iMac (or, for that matter, the entire notion of 'low-end' models which are permanently worse), the mid-range situation of two USB 4 + two USB 3.1 ports seems reasonable.
If you're buying all-new stuff, and you strongly prefer to buy things made by Apple or their close partners, the new iMac seems to be a pretty good value to me, especially if you like colors
. It isn't a hyper-powerful machine that blows away Apple's other computers, but that goes back to the line's roots; the original iMac was the 'low-cost' model in the '98 lineup. I suspect this is mostly a case of user expectations (users who like grey and already have all their own equipment, at that) being different from Apple's objectives.
Some people have complained about value, especially compared to the Mac Mini, the 'baseline' desktop computer. I did a brief bit of research on that.
Assuming the baseline Mac Mini (256GB) and the equivalent iMac (256GB + ports), here's the marketed differences, as best as I can tell:
1) The iMac has a built-in 24-inch "Retina" display, and supports an extra external 6K display, apparently via Thunderbolt. The Mac Mini supports two external displays, one 6K with a Thunderbolt connector, and one 4K via HDMI.
2) The iMac has a HD camera, 1080p.
3) The iMac has a three-mic array, which they claim is 'studio-quality'.
4) The iMac has a 'six-speaker' sound system. To be fair, the Mac Mini page doesn't say that it doesn't have one, but in the absence of further information, it seems reasonable to assume that the iMac's is significantly better.
5) The iMac purchase includes a (color-matching) mouse and keyboard, as well as a power adapter and USB-C to Lightning cable.
6) The iMac has two USB 3.1 ports (type C); the Mac Mini has two type-As.
7) The Mac Mini can have 10GB Ethernet as a configuration option; this doesn't seem to be available for the iMac.
Obviously part of the appeal of the Mac Mini is that you can use your own hardware with it. However, if you're buying things straight from Apple, here's what a Mac Mini setup similar to the iMac would be:
1 Mac Mini - $699.00
1 Magic Mouse 2 (Silver) - $79
1 Innovelis TotalMount Mounting System for Mac Mini (because you don't want it to just sit on the desk) - $34.95
1 LG UltraFine 4K Display - $699.95
1 Magic Keyboard - $99.00
For a total of $1,611.90 (not counting tax)
In this light, the 2nd-level iMac's $1,499 doesn't seem unsatisfactory.
The LG monitor does add several USB ports, and it also includes speakers, mitigating one of the iMac's advantages (assuming the LG monitor's speakers are as good). However, that still leaves you out a camera and a microphone, and considering that I can buy a USB hub with umpteen ports if the included ones aren't sufficient, I think how bad the port situation is said to be is a bit overstated. While I'm not at all happy with Apple's decision to cripple the low-end iMac (or, for that matter, the entire notion of 'low-end' models which are permanently worse), the mid-range situation of two USB 4 + two USB 3.1 ports seems reasonable.
If you're buying all-new stuff, and you strongly prefer to buy things made by Apple or their close partners, the new iMac seems to be a pretty good value to me, especially if you like colors
. It isn't a hyper-powerful machine that blows away Apple's other computers, but that goes back to the line's roots; the original iMac was the 'low-cost' model in the '98 lineup. I suspect this is mostly a case of user expectations (users who like grey and already have all their own equipment, at that) being different from Apple's objectives.
Last edited:
Literally the only issue I have is with the White Bezels. Since Mojave, I have had Dark Mode on 24x7 and every single app that I have is configured to its darkest color setting possible.
Considering my specific use case, a thick white bezel wrapped around a mostly dark interface would feel way too claustrophobic for me.
Considering my specific use case, a thick white bezel wrapped around a mostly dark interface would feel way too claustrophobic for me.
I really don't. Why would people get frustrated that Apple is releasing an all-in-one machine for a home user? It's completely silly.
A lot of people seem to forget that this is a two year transition, and we aren't even half-way through yet. Rome wasn't built in a day, as the saying goes.
As ever on the internet, people are too quick to judge and too slow to see the bigger picture. A quick read through the product specifications would answer many questions, but apparently that's too complicated.
It does make reading MR awfully frustrating. It's not a good advertisement for this site, or the people who read it and post on it.
As ever on the internet, people are too quick to judge and too slow to see the bigger picture. A quick read through the product specifications would answer many questions, but apparently that's too complicated.
It does make reading MR awfully frustrating. It's not a good advertisement for this site, or the people who read it and post on it.
I kind of like the new iMacs. The colors are so cheerful, I'd have a problem picking one!
I guess with the pandemic going on, more and more average users/ families probably need to upgrade their laptops or desktops since we're all working from home but don't need anything pro.
I have a feeling the iMacs will sell pretty well.
I guess with the pandemic going on, more and more average users/ families probably need to upgrade their laptops or desktops since we're all working from home but don't need anything pro.
I have a feeling the iMacs will sell pretty well.
I'm not mad about the new iMac, just disappointed. Apple seems to be making no effort to continue on with their innovative, game changing approaches when it comes to their line of computers. I'm currently running from a 27" Late 2012 iMac and see no need to make an upgrade until we have the following provided in a new iMac:
- An M1 processor that is more powerful than their entry level desktop Mac Mini ( they could have at least provided an M1X processor like others have listed).
- More storage, seriously 256GB is pitiful and the 512GB on the top tier is just as harsh. For the amount of dough being paid out for one of these machines the baseline should at least come standard with 512GB and the top tier model with 1TB of SSD storage and have the option to expand up to at least 4TB without spending another $1000+ for it.
- More memory. Again a minimum of 8GB provided with the option to expand up to 16GB. That could be fine for the baseline model but for the top tier we should have seen 16GB as the minimum and have the ability to expand up to at least 32GB or 64GB. Also sucks that Apple has opted to go back to the method of not allowing their customers to upgrade memory themselves, certainly doesn't look like the machine can be opened up without voiding warranty.
- 1080p Camera. They literally just got to this point and it is years behind the times. You are offering a 4.5K retina display on this machine, the least they could offer is a camera that supports 4K imaging.
- No Ethernet Port on the baseline!? Really? This is a baseline standard item that should be included on EVERY computer. Why has Apple also abandoned the 10GB Ethernet Port as an option for the Top Tier model? That would at least provide some future proofing on the machine... but hey I guess they expect us to afford to buy a $1700 machine every year. But wait, they just added this as an option to the Mac Mini... makes no sense at all.
- The dongles... The dongles...
I am frustrated by the new iMac. Not that it is a bad product, but Apple should have delivered more. And this is because:
- Apple only released a replacement for the 21.5-inch version. The 24-inch iMac seems like a downgrade, at least in size, compared to the 27-inch model.
- The iMac has been constantly more powerful than the MacBook Air and the Mac mini. The new iMac does not deliver any additional power, making it look like a Mac mini with an embedded monitor.
- The 13-inch MacBooks and the Mac mini released last year represented a huge leap in power compared to their predecessors. The M1 made the 13-inch MacBooks some of the most powerful laptops in any category (and perhaps the most powerful one). People would expect a similar improvement now with the iMac, and Apple failed to deliver it.
- The fact that even the 11-inch iPad uses the same processor as the iMac contributes to the impression that Apple left too much power on the table, and that the iMac could have been so much more.
- The colors are a nice touch, but the choice is kind of childish. Silver is fine. The blue one looks beautiful, at least to me, and perhaps the green one as well. But yellow, orange, pink, purple... these are not colors expected in a seriously powerful computer. At the same time, there is no choice of black or grey. This makes the iMac, as powerful as it may be, resemble a toy, a product not to be taken too seriously.
- The iMac comes with 8 GB RAM and 256/512 GB storage. Apple has been offering 8 GB as standard in iMacs since 2013. Plus, 256 GB storage on the base model seems too little and no improvement over previous versions.
- People may buy additional RAM or storage, but they will have to disburse additional money on top of the standard product, which is not an optimal solution for customers, especially if they feel that the customize upgrade should have come as standard. Plus, the 24-inch iMac is expected to top at 16 GB RAM, which may not be ideal for some.
This iMac has replaced the old 21.5" so with that in mind it's a good replacement. Hopefully the larger iMacs for pros will have some of the lacking features people talk about later this year. I miss the logo on the chin but it's not a big deal. Don't mind the chin at all since you get best sound from the speakers there. Where else could they put them for best sound? Don't mind the bezels. They're thin enough. Black would be better but I've had all white iMac 17" 2006 and it didn't bother me as I can remember (still have it without using).
Few people seem to talk about the advantage of a power brick outside the iMac. It will be easy to replace if needed instead of having to send the iMac away for service. Also less heat inside the computer and longer life for other components.
I was hoping though for a better GPU option like Vega 20 in the older iMac. 23.5" is enough for me since I currently use iMac 21.5" 2011, but I understand that they just wanted to replace the old 21.5" and better options will come in fall with M2. I just hope that my iMac 2011 will last until then. I was ready to buy but this one is not for me. Looking forward to the big Macs.
Few people seem to talk about the advantage of a power brick outside the iMac. It will be easy to replace if needed instead of having to send the iMac away for service. Also less heat inside the computer and longer life for other components.
I was hoping though for a better GPU option like Vega 20 in the older iMac. 23.5" is enough for me since I currently use iMac 21.5" 2011, but I understand that they just wanted to replace the old 21.5" and better options will come in fall with M2. I just hope that my iMac 2011 will last until then. I was ready to buy but this one is not for me. Looking forward to the big Macs.
It seems that you're not a loyal customer if you're not a "Pro", whatever that is...
I've never seen a product launch in a decade that these forums didn't immediately complain over. Product aimed at a different audience, or product I have no intention on buying = better complain on the internet about how Apple doesn't cater to me. I usually just find other sites to kill time on for the first few days after a new product launch. Too many entitled, too few with any intention to buy anyways.
Colors aside, I quite like the new iMac and for the average consumer, it has more than enough power for them to troll Facebook and watch YouTube videos all day. I'd bet most self-proclaimed "pro" users on this forum could even use it without hiccup. I'll see if fall and the new OS bring out an M1x or M2 chip and then likely buy a 24" to replace my Hackintosh that I'm tired of wasting days on every time I want to update it.
Colors aside, I quite like the new iMac and for the average consumer, it has more than enough power for them to troll Facebook and watch YouTube videos all day. I'd bet most self-proclaimed "pro" users on this forum could even use it without hiccup. I'll see if fall and the new OS bring out an M1x or M2 chip and then likely buy a 24" to replace my Hackintosh that I'm tired of wasting days on every time I want to update it.
I think you tuber reception isn’t overly warm either tbh
even from people who are generally “apple influencers”
even from people who are generally “apple influencers”
Stick around here long enough and you'll see this anytime Apple stakes out a new direction (and, sometimes, when it could do so but chooses not to). People freak out. This seems especially true when Apple updates/changes its consumer-line devices (or accessories, etc.). Some Pro users fret that Apple has lost its focus on their needs, some feel a strange compulsion to tell us how non-Pro devices are "toys" and somehow less legitimate, notwithstanding the entirely different purpose and market for those devices.
I'm old enough to remember the near meltdown many of the "Pro" and "Mac" users had when Apple released the original iPod. You'd think Apple had stopped making Macs altogether from some of the reactions at that time, or that Steve Jobs was a clueless bumbler who knew nothing about what people actually wanted. And yet . . . .
Seriously, all this smartass talk about "it's not for the pros, just for regular consumers" as an excuse for poor design and configuration choices is getting on my nerves. Really.
Last edited:
I don't mind the new design too much. Besides, the flat-panel iMac's gone through several design revisions since it was introduced nearly 17 years ago as the iMac G5. (In fact, the white bezel on the new M1 iMac reminds me of the G5 and early Intel iMacs!) Though I will admit it could use a few more ports, the way the M1 Mac Mini still gives you two "regular" USB-3 ports and an Ethernet connection. But at least the pricier M1 iMacs do give you four ports, i.e. two Thunderbolt 4 and two "regular" USB-C.
Be patient. That looks good on its own, but wouldn't have looked good alongside the other new iMacs. Look for a later addition to the lineup.
How about we not buy straight from Apple. If we instead did our one-stop shopping at say Best Buy...
1 Mac Mini - $699
1 'gaming' mouse - $35 [I think they hold up better than office mice]
1 Monitor stand - $23 [so you can put the mini under the monitor... or just leave it sitting to the side on your desk]
1 LG 24" 4K Display - $299
1 Logitech 2.0 speaker set - $20
1 Logitech K750 wireless solar Mac keyboard - $55
1 webcam - $50
1 4-port USB-C to USB-A hub - $30 [or $15 from Amazon] (webcam, mouse, keyboard eat 3x USB-A ports...)
For a total of $1221.
----------------------------------------
Now that I've gone through the stages of anger, disbelief, and derision (calling the colorful M1 iMac the 'iMac Kiddie') I think I've found my chief complaint: I was expecting better for the iMac brand.
To me desktops are supposed to represent better performance/value than laptops. They are certainly supposed to be a higher performance tier than a 13" ultralight. Otherwise what's the point? Get the laptop and maybe an external display. Sure the iMac has a better display and speakers than the 13" laptops, but I still can't get past the fact that the M1 iMac is 'only' a Macbook Air with a bigger display.
There is no performance advantage over an M1 laptop. (Unless it is secretly overclocked?)
There is no upgradability advantage over an M1 laptop.
There is no price advantage over an M1 laptop.
There is no (or minimal with up-charge) port/connectivity advantage over an M1 laptop.
I don't like it.
Last edited:
1. Price
It's weird to see that the iMac, with the same internals, is $300 more than the MacBook Air. Sure, there's a fan and a bigger brighter screen, but since when has an equivalently specced laptop been cheaper than the desktop version? Twenty odd years ago, the iMac was $1,299, and the comparable PowerBook G3 Mainstreet was $1,999. Now, I don't expect that gap to exist today, but I'm definitely surprised they went with the custom screen and higher price, when an EDU/Institution focused model could easily have shipped with a decent, non-Retina 1080p IPS display for $999... or even $899.
2. Specs
These are, like the 21.5" iMacs that they're replacing, non-upgradeable. In fact, they're even less upgradeable, as the 21.5" models still had the option to upgrade the hard drive, if one were so inclined. A desktop, starting at $1,299, in 2021, equipped with 8GB of RAM, looks under specced at the least, and worst case scenario will underperform badly in a year or two with new OS and software. I understand for an entry level institution focused model, but the midrange, at $1,499, is shameful.
The inclusion of two TB3 and two USB-C ports on the midrange also makes one thing very clear - the M1 likely doesn't have the IO to support four TB3 ports. On the Mac Mini, this was masked as there are only two TB3 ports, with the remainder being USB-A style ports. If Apple couldn't put more TB3 ports in for technical reasons (or reserving that for an M1x), I think Apple ought to have maintained that USB-C/USB-A split on the iMac, as well. A UHS-II SD card slot wouldn't hurt either, especially as the internal drive isn't replaceable.
3. Design
I honestly don't care about the colors, or the bezel, or the chin. No, what I'm disappointed in is the fact that they decided to go in the direction of thinness-above-all. A slightly thicker iMac could have had quite a few possibilities - the one that's top of mind, for me, would be a fan-free model. A thicker heatsink, with 'ventilation shafts' coming out near the top, could allow convection cooling, not unlike the iMac G3s of old. A completely silent iMac would be fantastic for libraries, recording studios, and other instances where even a little bit of fan noise could be distracting or unwelcome. If the M1 can be fan-free in an MBA, it can be fan free in an iMac. A thicker casing would also have allowed for USB-A, as well as a headphone jack that's not on the side - which might be fine for headphones, but a little unsightly if one were to plug in external speakers.
4. Keyboard (personal pet peeve)
This, admittedly, is very much my thing. I don't like the rounded corner keys, and I really, really don't like that the arrows aren't in an inverted-T layout on the non-extended board. The left and right arrows don't even half to be half height - make them 3/4 height. Or put little nubbins on them like the F and J keys. Something that I can use to position my fingers without having to glance down.
---
Those are my major reasons for not liking the iMac. I'll have a need for a mostly sedentary machine in the next few months, but if I can't upgrade a desktop, nor save much money on one, why wouldn't I just grab a laptop and have the portability if needed? The iMac appears to have almost all of the drawbacks of the 13" MBP (too few ports, too little RAM for the price), with few of the benefits of a desktop (higher performance, upgradeable RAM/HDD, lower price).
It's weird to see that the iMac, with the same internals, is $300 more than the MacBook Air. Sure, there's a fan and a bigger brighter screen, but since when has an equivalently specced laptop been cheaper than the desktop version? Twenty odd years ago, the iMac was $1,299, and the comparable PowerBook G3 Mainstreet was $1,999. Now, I don't expect that gap to exist today, but I'm definitely surprised they went with the custom screen and higher price, when an EDU/Institution focused model could easily have shipped with a decent, non-Retina 1080p IPS display for $999... or even $899.
2. Specs
These are, like the 21.5" iMacs that they're replacing, non-upgradeable. In fact, they're even less upgradeable, as the 21.5" models still had the option to upgrade the hard drive, if one were so inclined. A desktop, starting at $1,299, in 2021, equipped with 8GB of RAM, looks under specced at the least, and worst case scenario will underperform badly in a year or two with new OS and software. I understand for an entry level institution focused model, but the midrange, at $1,499, is shameful.
The inclusion of two TB3 and two USB-C ports on the midrange also makes one thing very clear - the M1 likely doesn't have the IO to support four TB3 ports. On the Mac Mini, this was masked as there are only two TB3 ports, with the remainder being USB-A style ports. If Apple couldn't put more TB3 ports in for technical reasons (or reserving that for an M1x), I think Apple ought to have maintained that USB-C/USB-A split on the iMac, as well. A UHS-II SD card slot wouldn't hurt either, especially as the internal drive isn't replaceable.
3. Design
I honestly don't care about the colors, or the bezel, or the chin. No, what I'm disappointed in is the fact that they decided to go in the direction of thinness-above-all. A slightly thicker iMac could have had quite a few possibilities - the one that's top of mind, for me, would be a fan-free model. A thicker heatsink, with 'ventilation shafts' coming out near the top, could allow convection cooling, not unlike the iMac G3s of old. A completely silent iMac would be fantastic for libraries, recording studios, and other instances where even a little bit of fan noise could be distracting or unwelcome. If the M1 can be fan-free in an MBA, it can be fan free in an iMac. A thicker casing would also have allowed for USB-A, as well as a headphone jack that's not on the side - which might be fine for headphones, but a little unsightly if one were to plug in external speakers.
4. Keyboard (personal pet peeve)
This, admittedly, is very much my thing. I don't like the rounded corner keys, and I really, really don't like that the arrows aren't in an inverted-T layout on the non-extended board. The left and right arrows don't even half to be half height - make them 3/4 height. Or put little nubbins on them like the F and J keys. Something that I can use to position my fingers without having to glance down.
---
Those are my major reasons for not liking the iMac. I'll have a need for a mostly sedentary machine in the next few months, but if I can't upgrade a desktop, nor save much money on one, why wouldn't I just grab a laptop and have the portability if needed? The iMac appears to have almost all of the drawbacks of the 13" MBP (too few ports, too little RAM for the price), with few of the benefits of a desktop (higher performance, upgradeable RAM/HDD, lower price).
I'm not mad, but frustrated. I love my iMac - it's incredible value given what you got for the money, factoring in the screen you get which is still top notch.
They have, however, effectively shut prosumers out of this product line. They keep banging on about how powerful the M1 chip is - and I don't disagree, but it's a completely moot point. How many people, these days, who need a high performance CPU can realistically live with 16GB of RAM?
Also - going with thin and light works on a tablet. It works on a laptop. On a desktop? Who cares! You're not looking at the damn thing from the back or side, or carrying it around. And they're still playing silly games with the SSD pricing. £200 to go from 256gb base (which itself is ridiculous) to 512GB? a 512GB NVME SSD costs roughly £50.
I just don't understand who this is marketed at.
Also - there's the (not so) hidden spec decreases. Number of external displays, for example? Halved.
Oh, and why on earth are Apple just not listening to people. People have been moaning about the magic mouse charging solution for years - what they do? New colours! And they fixed the inverted t keyboard layout on the latest MacBook Pros, but then go back to the ridiculous design for this keyboard.
They have, however, effectively shut prosumers out of this product line. They keep banging on about how powerful the M1 chip is - and I don't disagree, but it's a completely moot point. How many people, these days, who need a high performance CPU can realistically live with 16GB of RAM?
Also - going with thin and light works on a tablet. It works on a laptop. On a desktop? Who cares! You're not looking at the damn thing from the back or side, or carrying it around. And they're still playing silly games with the SSD pricing. £200 to go from 256gb base (which itself is ridiculous) to 512GB? a 512GB NVME SSD costs roughly £50.
I just don't understand who this is marketed at.
Also - there's the (not so) hidden spec decreases. Number of external displays, for example? Halved.
Oh, and why on earth are Apple just not listening to people. People have been moaning about the magic mouse charging solution for years - what they do? New colours! And they fixed the inverted t keyboard layout on the latest MacBook Pros, but then go back to the ridiculous design for this keyboard.
Last edited:
Different strokes for different folks (a phrase that dates me, of course).
I had a Lime iMac. It lived in my kids rooms for years.
I tend to paint my walls in shades of white but others go for bolder color choices. It's personal taste. I appreciate that color can be fun, I just prefer a neutral background for the photos and artwork I hang on my walls (rather than choose frames and artwork that compliment the surrounding color).
It was obvious from Apple's marketing at the time that the original iMac was intended for the home market. The original iMac in Bondi Blue was relatively conservative relative to the Strawberry, Grape, Blueberry, Lime, and Tangerine that followed. After that we also saw Graphite (nice and conservative), Indigo, Ruby, Sage, Snow, Blue Dalmatian, and Flower Power. However, once iMac went flat panel colors also went flat - White, Silver, and Space Gray. Until now.
So to me, the immediate message for this model was, "home." Everything about the configuration says it - tech specs as well as appearance. It's ultra-slim profile (for those who want it to be as unobtrusive as possible), the option of colors (for those who want a style/fashion statement). Colors a kid might become passionate about when it's time to buy a new computer. So what? Kids use computers, too (often far better than adults). What's the big deal, so long as there are conservative colors available along with the bold? I'm quite confident that the bold colors will sell in lower numbers. Big Box retailers will likely carry a limited selection of colors. And there are still conservative color choices for offices and schools.
Why complain about the lack of power-user features for a form factor (smaller display iMac) that doesn't sell to power users in the first place? The same has been true about iMac for many years - the most powerful configurations have only been available in 27". As to whether 16 GB RAM is sufficient... that ignores every benchmark and report about the M1 to date.
"Why isn't Apple listening to people?" Really? Which people? This is all about, "People don't know what they want until they see it." Classic Steve Jobs. This is a bold design statement, intended to get the attention of the mass market. The same people who buy colorful iPhones. For the people who DO know what they want...
Your entire argument comes down to disappointment that this isn't a power-user configuration. Power users don't need girly-girl colors. Power users don't care about thinness. Power users need the next-generation processor. Power users want more RAM. Power users want a wall-full of external displays. Power users hate wall warts.... Power users are incredibly hard to satisfy.
I'm waiting for the big-screen iMac. I'll be happy if it includes the next-gen Apple Silicon, although my current needs would be more than satisfied by a lowly M1. If it comes in a choice of colors, I'll probably choose something quite boring.
Unlike some of the people in this discussion, I understood, from the day Apple Silicon was announced, that power user configurations would come later. If you're developing your own silicon you need to build from design to design. Lessons learned building less-demanding machines help push the improvements needed for high end performance. So when they laid out a two-year transition I had no illusions. The biggest, baddest pro configurations would arrive in late 2022. Yet here we are, not even 6 months into that two-year transition, and people are complaining that they don't have the pro configurations they crave.
Hint - the 2022 "pro" Macs will likely be built with CPUs made with TSMC's next-gen, 4nm process. All the whining in the world won't make that happen ahead of schedule.
IMO, it would look tons better if there was no chin. The components could be placed behind the panel without issues. It would look like a big iPad.
Last edited: