Why cant Apple give us a decent desktop instead of these iMac ?

[Malus120]

I think you are probably right on the performance front, but I disagree on the design side. The G4 iMac was much further ahead relative to the market, and is far better than all the iMacs that followed regarding ergonomics. It was a joy design-wise.

The G4 "iLamp" was indeed a uniquely cool design. And to be fair, at the time the G4 CPU packed a wallop in Altivec (The "Velocity Engine" for those old enough to remember) aware applications . That said, in non altivec aware applications its performance was decidedly less impressive, its GPU was weak, and as cool as the design was, I don't see it working with the monstrous monitors we have today.
I'd love to be proven wrong though.

 

[theitsage]

I think you are probably right on the performance front, but I disagree on the design side. The G4 iMac was much further ahead relative to the market, and is far better than all the iMacs that followed regarding ergonomics. It was a joy design-wise.

I agree. The G4 iMac is the best AIO design. It's both beautiful and functional. I miss Apple of the early 2000s.

 

[OLDCODGER]

If I want an expensive mirror, I'll visit an up-market furniture shop - not a computer shop.

 

[MacStu09]

iMac is surely not aimed at "travelling around" business persons. Have you ever tried to travel with the 5K iMac?

On the other hand, even with the 21" model you can get a desktop computer with two 4K displays, 3.3 GHz quad core i7, 16 GB RAM, I can attach four 20TB hard drives if I have the money, what else do you want?

And it has a headphone jack.

Most likely - a decent graphics card. Everything the iMac offers is at a very "consumer" level in comparison to modern graphics solutions. Also 16gb of ram is pretty limiting. Mac Pro offers: multiple high-end graphics cards, blu-ray, 4 internal drives, as many external drives as you want (easily over 8), up to 96gb of ram (in OSX, more in in linux or windows), all in one case. The iMac and new Mac Pro just don't suit the audience that needs a workhorse computer with expandability.

Honestly, if a computer's going to sit in one location it's entire life (the iMac), just make it expandable and more useful. I will never understand the appeal of the iMac being so thin and limited in expandability. It's a desktop, no matter how slim it gets.

 

[Moonjumper]

The G4 "iLamp" was indeed a uniquely cool design. And to be fair, at the time the G4 CPU packed a wallop in Altivec (The "Velocity Engine" for those old enough to remember) aware applications . That said, in non altivec aware applications its performance was decidedly less impressive, its GPU was weak, and as cool as the design was, I don't see it working with the monstrous monitors we have today.
I'd love to be proven wrong though.

I think the new Surface Studio shows how a computer base and large monitor can work together. If only it had the G4 style arm.

 

[jasnw]

I think the new Surface Studio shows how a computer base and large monitor can work together. If only it had the G4 style arm.

I also think the base-to-monitor link on the Surface Studio looks clunky, but I suspect it is a result of the desire to allow the user to easily transition the monitor to a nearly-flat orientation. I wish the designers would figure out a better way to separate the monitor and "guts" so that the monitor can be easily replaced and the guts easily upgraded. You know, form over fashion (lookin' at YOU, Jon!).

 

[2ilent8cho]

I would love a desktop Mac more like the older Mac Pro. I think the nMP is cool, but at the same time i don't believe it was what pro users wanted and does not cater to that segment well. Since Apple were able to keep the last Mac Pro under wraps and nobody saw it coming, i can hope tomorrow brings a surprise in that area too, especially with how the Mac Pro has been left to rot. A Mac Mini just don't cut it for what i want out of my desktop , so i might end up building a custom PC and popping Linux on it.

 

[NY Guitarist]

Every hardware maker needs a halo product. If Apple kills the Mac Pro, it's time to move on.

That's the crux of the matter, the Mac Pro used to be the halo product for Apple. Used mostly by high end graphics, audio and video professionals it was the computer that buyers wished they could have, but would instead buy an iMac or MacBook, or Mini.

It was a kind of 'race on Sunday, sell on Monday' approach.

Now the iPhone is the 'halo' product that brings buyers into the Apple product world, who will then look at iPad's, Apple Watch, maybe a MacBook, plus services like iTunes, etc.

 

[Washac]

This.

View attachment 667897

Nice reply

 

[phpmaven]

Why cant Apple give us a decent desktop instead of these iMac things and laptop on top of laptop, Apples products are squareley aimed at a certain eschalon of the buying public which is the upwardly mobile traveling around business person, the ordinary person on the street who has some money to spend has been left behind.

Apple please stop making gadgety iphones and watches and ever thinner laptops and ever thinner horrid iMacs etc and return to your roots and make some decent desktops.

I for one know I am on my last Apple laptop and my 2009 Mac Pro will be my last Apple desktop

I don't know about you, but my late 2014 maxed out 5K iMac is the finest PC I have ever owned by a mile. It's a beast. Sure, I'm disappointed that they didn't release an updated iMac today, but this one will serve me well for years to come. My early 2008 Mac Pro is still going strong and is still a great computer.

I think we'll see some iMac and Mac Pro love early next year.